ArticlePloS one2022
Lower alpha, higher beta, and similar gamma diversity of saproxylic beetles in unmanaged compared to managed Norway spruce stands.
Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Strong anthropogenic pressures on global forests necessitate that managed forests be evaluated as habitat for biodiversity. The complex pattern of habitat types created in forestry systems is ideal for analyses through the theoretical framework of alpha (local), gamma (total) and beta (compositional) diversity. Here I use saproxylic beetles, a species-rich threatened group, to compare four Norway spruce-dominated habitats representative of the boreal forest landscape of northern Europe: unmanaged semi-natural stands, nature reserves, unthinned middle-aged production stands and commercially thinned production stands. The beetles (in total 38 085 individuals of 312 species), including red-listed ones and three feeding guilds (wood consumers, fungivores and predators) were studied in 53 stands in central-southern Sweden, in two regions with differing amounts of conservation forest. Alpha diversity of saproxylic, but not red-listed, beetles was higher in the thinned stands than in the semi-natural stands, and did not differ for the other forest types. Beta diversity of saproxylic beetles was higher in unmanaged semi-natural stands than in the other forest types, but species composition did not differ noticeably. Furthermore, red-listed saproxylic beetles had higher gamma diversity in unmanaged semi-natural stands in the region with more conservation forest, but not in the one with less such forest. The local factors dead wood volume and dead wood diversity did not influence alpha diversity of beetles, but increasing canopy openness had a minor negative influence on saproxylic and red-listed beetles. While the local scale (alpha diversity) indicates the potential for managed forests to house many saproxylic beetle species associated with spruce forests in this boreal landscape, the larger scales (beta and gamma diversity) indicate the value of unmanaged forests for the conservation of the entire saproxylic beetle fauna. These results show the importance of analyses at multiple levels of diversity (alpha, beta, gamma) for identifying patterns relevant to conservation.
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.