Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorBurner, Ryan C.
dc.contributor.authorBirkemoe, Tone
dc.contributor.authorStephan, Jörg G.
dc.contributor.authorDrag, Lukas
dc.contributor.authorMuller, Jörg
dc.contributor.authorOvaskainen, Otso
dc.contributor.authorPotterf, Mária
dc.contributor.authorSkarpaas, Olav
dc.contributor.authorSnall, Tord
dc.contributor.authorSverdrup-Thygeson, Anne
dc.date.accessioned2021-03-17T13:52:33Z
dc.date.available2021-03-17T13:52:33Z
dc.date.issued2021
dc.identifier.citationBurner, R. C., Birkemoe, T., Stephan, J. G., Drag, L., Muller, J., Ovaskainen, O., Potterf, M., Skarpaas, O., Snall, T., & Sverdrup-Thygeson, A. (2021). Choosy beetles : How host trees and southern boreal forest naturalness may determine dead wood beetle communities. <i>Forest Ecology and Management</i>, <i>487</i>, Article 119023. <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2021.119023" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2021.119023</a>
dc.identifier.otherCONVID_51951740
dc.identifier.urihttps://jyx.jyu.fi/handle/123456789/74675
dc.description.abstractWood-living beetles make up a large proportion of forest biodiversity and contribute to important ecosystem services, including decomposition. Beetle communities in managed southern boreal forests are less species rich than in natural and near-natural forest stands. In addition, many beetle species rely primarily on specific tree species. Yet, the associations between individual beetle species, forest management category, and tree species are seldom quantified, even for red-listed beetles. We compiled a beetle capture dataset from flight intercept traps placed on Norway spruce (Picea abies), oak (Quercus sp.), and Eurasian aspen (Populus tremulae) trees in 413 sites in mature managed forest, near-natural forest, and clear-cuts in southeastern Norway. We used joint species distribution models to estimate the strength of associations for 368 saproxylic beetle species (including 20 vulnerable, endangered, or critical red-listed species) for each forest management category and tree species. Tree species on which traps were mounted had the largest effect on beetle communities; oaks had the most highly associated beetle species, including most of the red-listed species, followed by Norway spruce and Eurasian aspen. Most beetle species were more likely to be captured in near-natural than in mature managed forest. Our estimated associations were compatible – for many species – with categorical classifications found in several existing databases of saproxylic beetle preferences. These quantitative beetle-habitat associations will improve future analyses that have typically relied on categorical classifications. Our results highlight the need to prioritize conservation of near-natural forests and oak trees in Scandinavia to protect the habitat of many red-listed species in particular. Furthermore, we underline the importance of carefully considering the species of trees on which traps are mounted in order to representatively sample beetle communities in forest stands.en
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf
dc.languageeng
dc.language.isoeng
dc.publisherElsevier
dc.relation.ispartofseriesForest Ecology and Management
dc.rightsCC BY 4.0
dc.subject.otherColeoptera
dc.subject.otherindicator species
dc.subject.otherjoint species distribution models (JSDMs)
dc.subject.othernear-natural forest
dc.subject.otherred-listed species
dc.subject.othersaproxylic beetles
dc.titleChoosy beetles : How host trees and southern boreal forest naturalness may determine dead wood beetle communities
dc.typearticle
dc.identifier.urnURN:NBN:fi:jyu-202103172013
dc.contributor.laitosBio- ja ympäristötieteiden laitosfi
dc.contributor.laitosDepartment of Biological and Environmental Scienceen
dc.contributor.oppiaineEkologia ja evoluutiobiologiafi
dc.contributor.oppiaineEcology and Evolutionary Biologyen
dc.type.urihttp://purl.org/eprint/type/JournalArticle
dc.type.coarhttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_2df8fbb1
dc.description.reviewstatuspeerReviewed
dc.relation.issn0378-1127
dc.relation.volume487
dc.type.versionpublishedVersion
dc.rights.copyright© 2021 the Authors
dc.rights.accesslevelopenAccessfi
dc.relation.grantnumber326309
dc.subject.ysoeliöyhteisöt
dc.subject.ysokovakuoriaiset
dc.subject.ysometsäekosysteemit
dc.subject.ysouhanalaiset eläimet
dc.subject.ysolahopuut
dc.subject.ysotalousmetsät
dc.subject.ysobiodiversiteetti
dc.subject.ysoluonnonmetsät
dc.subject.ysoindikaattorilajit
dc.format.contentfulltext
jyx.subject.urihttp://www.yso.fi/onto/yso/p4636
jyx.subject.urihttp://www.yso.fi/onto/yso/p6734
jyx.subject.urihttp://www.yso.fi/onto/yso/p4996
jyx.subject.urihttp://www.yso.fi/onto/yso/p4718
jyx.subject.urihttp://www.yso.fi/onto/yso/p17211
jyx.subject.urihttp://www.yso.fi/onto/yso/p19196
jyx.subject.urihttp://www.yso.fi/onto/yso/p5496
jyx.subject.urihttp://www.yso.fi/onto/yso/p14250
jyx.subject.urihttp://www.yso.fi/onto/yso/p27568
dc.rights.urlhttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
dc.relation.datasethttps://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4475536
dc.relation.doi10.1016/j.foreco.2021.119023
dc.relation.funderResearch Council of Finlanden
dc.relation.funderSuomen Akatemiafi
jyx.fundingprogramJoint International Project, AoFen
jyx.fundingprogramKV-yhteishanke, SAfi
jyx.fundinginformationThis research was funded through the 2017–2018 Belmont Forum and BiodivERsA joint call for research proposals, under the BiodivScen ERA-Net COFUND programme, for “BioESSHealth: Scenarios for biodiversity and ecosystem services acknowledging health”, and with the funding organizations NFR (grant no. 295621), Formas (grant no. 2018-2435), and DLR.
dc.type.okmA1


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

CC BY 4.0
Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as CC BY 4.0