4.7 Article

Edge effect of low-traffic forest roads on bird communities in secondary production forests in central Europe

期刊

LANDSCAPE ECOLOGY
卷 25, 期 7, 页码 1113-1124

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10980-010-9487-9

关键词

Biodiversity; Bird assemblages; Czech Republic; Edge effect; Habitat fragmentation; Landscape structure; Point count method

资金

  1. Faculty of Environmental Sciences, Czech University of Life Sciences in Prague

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Worldwide forests fragmentation has lead to a massive increase of habitat edges, creating both negative and positive impacts on birds. While busy highways dissecting forested areas create edges which are known to reduce bird densities due to the disturbing effect of noise, the impacts of logging forest roads with low traffic volumes have rarely been studied. In this study, we compared species richness and similarity of canopy, cavity and shrub guilds of birds along low-traffic forest roads, in forest interior, and at forest edges in secondary forests in central Europe, where the forests have passed through extensive changes toward uniformly compact growths dominated by production conifers. Although we found tree diversity as positively affecting bird richness across all habitats, the bird richness along forest roads was higher than in forest interior but lower than along forest edges. The shrub guild of birds along forest roads resembled this guild along forest edges while canopy and cavity guilds at the roads were more similar to these guilds in forest interior. Forest interior had the highest probability for some guild to be absent. We conclude that low-traffic roads lead to increase of habitat heterogeneity in structurally poor forests and attract birds due to additional habitat attributes-including better light conditions-that are scarce in forest interior. Therefore, broader support for higher structural diversification of uniform plantations in central European production forests would benefit bird communities inhabiting these areas.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据