4.6 Article

Effects of Postfire Salvage Logging on Deadwood-Associated Beetles

Journal

CONSERVATION BIOLOGY
Volume 25, Issue 1, Pages 94-104

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1523-1739.2010.01566.x

Keywords

biological diversity; coarse woody debris; Coleoptera; saproxylic insects; deadwood; forest fire; forest management; Coleoptera

Funding

  1. Sustainable Forest Management Network
  2. Foothills Model Forest Chisholm-Dogrib Fire Research Initiative
  3. ACA Biodiversity Challenge Grants Program
  4. Canadian Forest Service
  5. Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
  6. Weyerhaeuser Company Canada

Ask authors/readers for more resources

In Canada and the United States pressure to recoup financial costs of wildfire by harvesting burned timber is increasing, despite insufficient understanding of the ecological consequences of postfire salvage logging. We compared the species richness and composition of deadwood-associated beetle assemblages among undisturbed, recently burned, logged, and salvage-logged, boreal, mixed-wood stands. Species richness was lowest in salvage-logged stands, largely due to a negative effect of harvesting on the occurrence of wood- and bark-boring species. In comparison with undisturbed stands, the combination of wildfire and logging in salvage-logged stands had a greater effect on species composition than either disturbance alone. Strong differences in species composition among stand treatments were linked to differences in quantity and quality (e.g., decay stage) of coarse woody debris. We found that the effects of wildfire and logging on deadwood-associated beetles were synergistic, such that the effects of postfire salvage logging could not be predicted reliably on the basis of data on either disturbance alone. Thus, increases in salvage logging of burned forests may have serious negative consequences for deadwood-associated beetles and their ecological functions in early postfire successional forests.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available