Dung beetles do not profit from enhanced spatial heterogeneity in production forests: a large-scale forest manipulation experiment
Asch, J.; Scherer-Lorenzen, M.; Pierick, K.; Wild, C.; Rothacher, J.; Müller, J.; Decker, O.; Cesarz, S.; Daume, N.; Buse, J.; Peters, M. K.
Show abstract
O_LICentral European forest management strategies promoting structurally homogeneous closed-canopy forests have led to landscape-level declines in biodiversity and ecosystem multifunctionality. Conservation-targeted management programs aim at reintroducing structural heterogeneity into production forests, however, it is not well understood if species diversity and ecosystem functions generally profit from management promoting heterogeneity in forest structure. By removing and processing mammalian dung remains, dung beetles play an integral role in ecosystem functions in forests. C_LIO_LIIn one of the largest manipulative forest experiments in Central Europe to date, we analysed the effects of enhanced structural heterogeneity in production forests, climate, and mammalian defecation on dung beetle diversity and dung removal rates at the local and landscape level. We assessed communities of dung beetles and dung removal rates on 234 study patches (50 x 50 m) in eleven paired forest landscapes across a climatic gradient in Germany. Forest landscapes were either managed to conserve a homogeneous closed canopy or to create a heterogeneous forest structure with forest patches varying in canopy coverage and dead wood availability. C_LIO_LIWe did not find that more heterogeneously managed forests had higher dung beetle species diversity and dung removal rates. Canopy openings did not increase species turnover but decreased species diversity. C_LIO_LIAlong the climate gradient, dung beetle average biomass and dung removal decreased with increasing temperature. Canopy openings in combination with higher temperatures negatively impacted all abundant dung beetle species, but especially the large species Anoplotrupes stercorosus, comprising > 90% of the total dung beetle biomass. C_LIO_LISynthesis and application: Our results suggest that dung beetles do not profit from management increasing the structural heterogeneity of forests. Due to a restricted climate and habitat niche of the current Central European dung beetle fauna, future warming and openings in forest structure might have negative effects on dung beetles and consequently on the ecosystem services they provide in Central European production forests. C_LI
Matching journals
The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Bark beetles as ecosystem engineers: triggered tree mortality rearranges the assemblage of Tree-related Microhabitats in old-growth coniferous forest 96%
- Eucalyptus cover as the primary driver of native forest bird reductions: evidence from a stand-scale analysis in NW Iberia 96%
- The effect of selective logging on microclimates, arthropod abundance and the foraging behaviour of Eastern Himalayan birds 96%
Similar papers in this journal
- Historical forest disturbance results in variation in functional resilience of seed dispersal mutualisms 95%
- Tree demographic strategies largely overlap across succession in Neotropical wet and dry forest communities 95%
- Seasonal structural stability promoted by forest diversity and composition explains overyielding 94%
Similar papers in this journal
- From taxonomic to functional dark diversity: exploring the causes of potential biodiversity and its implications for conservation 94%
- Fit by design: Developing substrate-specific seed mixtures for functional dike grasslands 93%
- A globally influential area-condition metric is a poor proxy for invertebrate biodiversity 93%
Similar papers in this journal
- Temperature drives variation in flying insect biomass across a German malaise trap network 93%
- Pollinators differentially respond to local and landscape grassland features 93%
- Are plants in sown flower strips suitable for communities of wild bees? Pollination network approach in conservation biology 92%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.