Abstract

BackgroundForest harvesting changes forest habitat and impacts forest dependent species. Uneven-aged management is often considered better for biodiversity than even-aged management, but there is an ongoing discourse over the benefits and disadvantages of different silvicultural systems. This systematic review contributes to the public discussion and provides evidence for policy making by synthesising current evidence on impacts of even-aged and uneven-aged forest management on biodiversity in boreal forests of Fennoscandia and European Russia. In this review even-aged and uneven-aged forest management are compared directly to each other as well as to natural forest to provide a broad basis for public discussion.MethodsBoth peer-reviewed and grey literature were searched in bibliographical databases, organizational webpages and internet search engines in English, Finnish, Swedish and Russian. Articles were screened for relevance by their title/abstract and again by full text. The inclusion of studies was assessed against pre-defined criteria published in an a priori protocol. A narrative synthesis and meta-analysis were conducted to describe the evidence base and to compare species richness and abundance between differently managed forests. The influence of habitat specialism, taxon, years since harvesting, deadwood availability and harvesting intensity on species richness and abundance were also tested.Review findingsSearching identified 43,621 articles of which 137 articles with 854 studies had independent data and were included in the narrative synthesis. Of those, 547 studies were included in the meta-analysis. The most studied taxa were arthropods, vascular plants, bryophytes, fungi, and lichens. Results showed that forests with less disturbance (uneven-aged and mature even-aged) host more forest dependent species than young even-aged forests (< 80 years old) although the difference was only marginally significant for mature even-aged forests (> 80 years old). Uneven-aged forest had similar number of species and individuals than natural forest whereas even-aged forest had less species than natural forest. Open habitat species and their individuals were more numerous in young even-aged forests and forests undergone retention harvest. Effect sizes found were mostly large indicating strong and uniform impact of forest management based on species’ habitat preferences. In addition to habitat specialism, years since harvest explained some of the differences found in species richness and abundance due to increase of open habitat species in the early successional stages and forest dependent species in late successional stages. Taxon had limited explanatory power.ConclusionsHabitat preferences determine species’ response to different harvesting methods and the magnitude of effect is large. Less disturbance from harvesting is better for forest dependent species whereas opposite is true for open habitat species. Uneven-aged and mature even-aged forests (> 80 years old) are important to maintain biodiversity in boreal forests. However, the results also highlight that natural forests are needed to ensure the future of forest dependent species in Fennoscandia and European Russia. Given that a broader set of biodiversity aspects are to be protected, best overall biodiversity impacts for a variety of species at landscape level can be achieved by ensuring that there is a mosaic of different forests within landscapes.

Highlights

  • Forest harvesting changes forest habitat and impacts forest dependent species

  • Less disturbance from harvesting is better for forest dependent species whereas opposite is true for open habitat species

  • The results highlight that natural forests are needed to ensure the future of forest dependent species in Fennoscandia and European Russia

Read more

Summary

Methods

This review follows methods described in the a priori systematic review protocol [33]. Five most relevant review-articles that were excluded at full text stage (Additional file 4). Colandr is developed for conducting systematic reviews and it utilizes artificial intelligence to sort articles by their relevance based on former decisions of the screeners to include or exclude articles. Critical appraisal of study validity was based on study design, sampling, accounting for potential effect modifiers and data analysis methods as these were deemed by the review team to be key variables related to reliability and generalisability of study findings The criteria relate both to internal validity (risk of bias and confounding factors) and external validity (generalisability) of results. At the beginning of the critical appraisal, a consistency check was conducted with 100 studies included after full-text screening. None of the study subjects were categorised into more than one category

Conclusions
Background
Study design
Study design Sampling
Literature type Academic or grey literature
Review conclusions
Findings
Forest Europe
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call