4.8 Article

Direct and indirect disturbance impacts in forests

期刊

ECOLOGY LETTERS
卷 24, 期 6, 页码 1225-1236

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/ele.13741

关键词

Forest; interactions; logging; microbial; SEM; soil; wildfire

类别

资金

  1. Bioplatforms Australia
  2. Australian Commonwealth Government through the National Collaborative Research Infrastructure Strategy
  3. Mycological Society of America
  4. Paddy Pallin Foundation
  5. Ecological Society of Australia's: Holsworth Wildlife Fund
  6. Centre of Biodiversity Analysis

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study investigated the direct and indirect effects of major disturbances in a temperate forest ecosystem, with human disturbances shown to have greater adverse impacts on the ecosystem compared to natural disturbances. Indirect disturbance effects accounted for 43% of total disturbance effects, with some amplifying or partially mitigating direct effects.
Human and natural disturbances are key drivers of change in forest ecosystems. Yet, the direct and indirect mechanisms which underpin these changes remain poorly understood at the ecosystem level. Here, using structural equation modelling across a 150+ year chronosequence, we disentangle the direct and indirect effects of major disturbances in a temperate forest ecosystem. We show that wildfires, logging and post-fire (salvage) logging can affect plant and microbial communities and abiotic soil properties both directly and indirectly through plant-soil-microbial interactions. We quantified 68 direct and indirect disturbance effects across these components, with the majority resulting in ecosystem-wide adverse effects. Indirect disturbance effects accounted for 43% of total disturbance effects, with some amplifying or partially mitigating direct disturbance effects. Overall, human disturbances were associated with more negative effects than natural disturbances. Our analyses provide novel insights into the multifaceted dynamics of forest disturbances and the mechanisms which underpin their relative impacts.

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

4.8
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