ArticleNature communications2020
Estimating retention benchmarks for salvage logging to protect biodiversity.
Article in Nature communications, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- What secondary research evidence exists on the effects of forest management after disturbances: a systematic map protocol.Environmental evidence · 2024Article
- Quantifying the impact of key factors on the carbon mitigation potential of managed temperate forests.Carbon balance and management · 2024Article
- Forest restoration in a time of fire: perspectives from tall, wet eucalypt forests subject to stand-replacing wildfires.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2023Article
- Enhancing structural complexity: An experiment conducted in the Black Forest National Park, Germany.Ecology and evolution · 2023Article
- Refining manual annotation effort of acoustic data to estimate bird species richness and composition: The role of duration, intensity, and time.Ecology and evolution · 2022Article
- Small-scale spontaneous dynamics in temperate beech stands as an importance driver for beetle species richness.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Effects of stand types on recreational preferences of society in the Sub-Alpine Zone, northern Turkey.Journal of mountain science · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
30 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Forests are increasingly affected by natural disturbances. Subsequent salvage logging, a widespread management practice conducted predominantly to recover economic capital, produces further disturbance and impacts biodiversity worldwide. Hence, naturally disturbed forests are among the most threatened habitats in the world, with consequences for their associated biodiversity. However, there are no evidence-based benchmarks for the proportion of area of naturally disturbed forests to be excluded from salvage logging to conserve biodiversity. We apply a mixed rarefaction/extrapolation approach to a global multi-taxa dataset from disturbed forests, including birds, plants, insects and fungi, to close this gap. We find that 75 ± 7% (mean ± SD) of a naturally disturbed area of a forest needs to be left unlogged to maintain 90% richness of its unique species, whereas retaining 50% of a naturally disturbed forest unlogged maintains 73 ± 12% of its unique species richness. These values do not change with the time elapsed since disturbance but vary considerably among taxonomic groups.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.