Moose (Alces alces) browsing in young forest stands in central Sweden: A multiscale perspective

Scandinavian Journal of Forest Research

Volumn 21, Issue 3, 2006, Pages 221-230

  Cassing, Gunilla ^a   Greenberg, Larry ^a   Mikusiñski, Grzegorz ^b  

^a KARLSTAD UNIVERSITY   (Sweden)

^b SWEDISH UNIVERSITY OF AGRICULTURAL SCIENCES   (Sweden)

Author keywords

Alces alces; Betula spp.; Browsing; GIS; Landscape; Moose; Multiscale; Populus tremula; Salix caprea; Sorbus aucuparia

Indexed keywords

BIODIVERSITY; LAND USE; REGIONAL PLANNING;

ALCES ALCES; BETULA SPP.; LANDSCAPE; MOOSE; MULTISCALE; SORBUS AUCUPARIA;

FORESTRY;

BIODIVERSITY; FORESTRY; LAND USE; POPULUS TREMULA; SALIX CAPREA;

ALCES ALCES; PINUS SYLVESTRIS;

EID: 33745291234     PISSN: 02827581     EISSN: 16511891     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/02827580600673535     Document Type: Review

References (55)

1. Addicott, J. F., Aho, J. M., Antolin, M. F., Padilla, D. K., Richardsson, J. S. & Soluk, D. A. (1987). Ecological neighborhoods: Scaling environmental patterns. Oikos, 49, 340-346.
2. Andrén, H. & Angelstam, P. (1993). Moose browsing on Scots pine in relation to stand size and distance to forest edge. Journal of Applied Ecology, 30, 133-142.
3. Angelstam, P. (1997). Landscape analysis as a tool for the scientific management of biodiversity. Ecological Bulletins, 46, 140-170.
4. Angelstam, P., Wikberg, P.-E., Danilov, P., Faber, W. E. & Nygren, K. (2000). Effects of moose density on timber quality and biodiversity restoration in Sweden, Finland and Russian Karelia. Alces, 36, 133-145.
5. Anon. (1997). Skogsdata 1995 [Forestry data 1995]. Umeå: Institut för skoglig resurshushållning och geomatik, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences. (In Swedish.)
6. Anon. (1999). SAS/STAT® user's guide (Version 8, Vols. 1-5) [Computer software]. Cary, NC: SAS Institute.
7. Anon. (2000). ArcView 3.2 [Computer software]. Redlands, CA: ESRI.
8. Anon. (2003). The annual statistical yearbook of forestry 2003. Jönköping: National Board of Forestry. (In Swedish with English summary.)
9. Bergqvist, G., Bergstörm, R. & Edenius, L. (2003). Effects of moose (Alces alces) rebrowsing on damage development in young stands of Scots pine (Pinus sylvestris). Forest Ecology and Management, 176, 397-403.
10. Bergström, R. & Bergqvist, G. (1997). Frequencies and patterns of browsing by large herbivores on conifer seedlings. Scandinavian Journal of Forest Research, 12, 288-294.
11. Bergström, R. & Hjeljord, O. (1987). Moose and vegetation interactions in northwestern Europe and Poland. Swedish Wildlife Research, (Suppl.1), 213-228.
12. Bergström, R., Jernelid, H., Lavsund, S., Lundberg, P. & Wallin, K. (1995). Älgttähet-betetstryck-fodertillgång- skogstillstånd-skadenivåer-skaderisker. Slutrapport. Projekt Balanserad Älgstam. Uppsala: Department of Wildlife Ecology, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences. (In Swedish.)
13. Bladh, G. (1995). Finnskogen's landscape and people under four centuries - A study of nature and society change (Research Rep. 95:11). Karlstad: Karlstad University. (In Swedish with English summary.)
14. Broman, E. (2003). Environment and moose population dynamics. Doctoral Dissertation, Göteborg University.
15. Burgess, R. L. & Sharp, D. M. (Eds.) (1981). Forest island dynamics in man-dominated landscapes . New York: Springer.
16. Cederlund, G. (1983). Home range dynamics and habitat selection by roe deer in a boreal area in central Sweden. Acta Theriologica, 28, 443-460.
17. Cederlund, G. & Bergström, R. (1996). Trends in the moose-forest system in Fennoscandia, with special reference to Sweden. In R. M. DeGraaf, & R. I. Miller (Eds.), Conservation of faunal diversity in forested landscapes (pp. 265-281). London: Chapman & Hall.
18. Cederlund, G. & Okarma, H. (1988). Home range and habitat use of adult female moose. Journal of Wildlife Management, 52, 336-343.
19. Cederlund, G. & Sand, H. (1994). Home range size in relation to age and sex in moose. Journal of Mammalogy, 75, 1005-1012.
20. Danell, K. & Ericsson, L. (1986). Foraging by moose on two species of birch when these occur in different proportion. Holarctic Ecology, 9, 79-84.
21. Edenius, L., Bergman, M., Ericsson, G. & Danell, K. (2002). The role of moose as a disturbance factor in managed boreal forests. Silva Fennica, 36, 57-67.
22. Ericsson, G., Edenius, L. & Sundström, D. (2001). Factors affecting browsing by moose (Alces alces) on European aspen (Aspen tremula) in a managed boreal landscape. Ecoscience, 8, 344-349.
23. Essen, P.-A., Ehnström, B., Ericsson, L. & Söjberg, K. (1997). Boreal forests. Ecological Bulletins, 46, 16-47.
24. Fahrig, L. & Merriam, G. (1994). Conservation of fragmented populations. Conservation Biology, 8, 50-59.
25. Franklin, J. & Forman, R. T. T. (1987). Creating landscape patterns by forest cutting: Ecological consequences and principles. Landscape Ecology, 1, 1-18.
26. Gergel, S. E. & Turner, M. G. (Eds.). (2002). Learning landscape ecology: A practical guide to concepts and techniques. New York: Springer.
27. Hamilton, G. D., Drysdale, P. D. & Euler, D. L. (1980). Moose winter browsing pattern on clear-cuttings in northern Ontario. Canadian Journal of Zoology, 58, 1412-1416.
28. Heikkilä, R. (1990). Effect of plantation characteristics on moose browsing on Scots pine. Silva Fennica, 24, 341-351.
29. Heikkilä, R. & Härkönen, S. (1993). Moose browsing in young Scots pine stands in relation to forest management. Forest Ecology and Management, 88, 176-186.
30. Hessl, A. (2002). Aspen, Elk, and Fire: The effects of human institutions on ecosystem processes. Bioscience, 52, 1011-1022.
31. Histol, T. & Hjeljord, O. (1993). Winter feeding strategies of migrating and non-migrating moose. Canadian Journal of Zoology, 71, 1421-1428.
32. Hjeljord, O., Hövik, N. & Pedersen, H. (1990). Choice of feeding site by moose during summer, the influence of forest structure and plant phenology. Holarctic Ecology, 13, 281-292.
33. Hobbs, N. T. (1996). Modification of ecosystems by ungulates. Journal of Wildlife Management, 60, 695-713.
34. Hörnberg, S. (2001a). Changes in population density of moose (Alces alces) and damage to forests in Sweden. Forest Ecology and Management, 149, 141-151.
35. Hörnberg, S. (2001b). The relationship between moose (Alces alces) browsing utilisation and the occurrence of different forage species in Sweden. Forest Ecology and Management, 149, 91-102.
36. Hultén, E. (1971). Atlas över växternas utbredning i Norden [Atlas of the distribution of vascular plants in northwestern Europe]. Stockholm: Generalstabens litografiska anstalts förlag. (In Swedish with English summary.)
37. Hunter, M. L. (1990). Wildlife, forests and forestry: Principles of managing forest for biodiversity. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
38. Johnsson, D. H. (1980). The comparison of usage and availability measurements for evaluating resource preference. Ecology, 61, 65-71.
39. Kouki, J., Arnold, K. & Martikainen, P. (2004). Long-term persistence of aspen - a key host for many threatened species - is endangered in old-growth conservation areas in Finland. Journal of Nature Conservation, 12, 41-52.
40. Lavsund, S. (1987). Moose relationships to forestry in Finland, Norway and Sweden. Swedish Wildlife Research, (Suppl. 1), 229-244.
41. Lidicker, W. Z. (1995). Landscape approaches in mammalian ecology. Minneapolis, MN: Minnesota Press, Minneapolis University.
42. Lyly, O. & Saksa, T. (1992). The effect of stand density on moose damage in young Pinus sylvestris stands. Scandinavian Journal of Forest Research, 7, 393-403.
43. Mikusinski, G. & Angelstam, P. (2004). Occurrence of mammals and birds with different ecological characteristics in relation to forest cover in Europe - Do macroecological data make sense? Ecological Bulletins, 51, 265-276.
44. Mikusiński, G., Angelstam, P. & Sporrong, U. (2003). Distribution of deciduous stands in villages located in coniferous forest landscapes in Sweden. Ambio, 32, 520-526.
45. Mysterud, A. (2000). Diet overlap in ruminants in Fennoscandia. Oecologia, 124, 130-137.
46. Mysterud, A., Larsen, P. K., Ims, R. A. & Östbye, E. (1999). Scale dependent trade-offs in foraging by European roe deer (Capreolus capreolus) during winter. Canadian Journal of Zoology, 77, 1486-1493.
47. Nikula, A., Heikkinen, S. & Helle, E. (2004). Habitat selection of adult moose (Alces alces) at two spatial scales in central Finland. Wildlife Biology, 10, 121-135.
48. Nilsson, M., Nilsson, T., Reese, H. & Söderberg, P. (1999). Beskrivning av skogstittståndet i Älvsbyns kommun [Description of the forest condition in Älvsbyn County]. Luleå: Länsstyrelsen Norrbottens län. (In Swedish.)
49. Powell, R. (2000). Animal home range and territories and home range estimators. In L. Boitani, & T. K. Fuller (Eds.), Research techniques in animal ecology: Controversies and consequences (pp. 65-110). New York: Columbia University Press.
50. Reese, H., Nilsson, M., Granqvist Pahlén, T., Hagner, O., Joyce, S., Tingelf, U., et al. (2003). Countrywide estimates of forest variables using satellite data and field data from the national forest inventory. Ambio, 33, 542-548.
51. Senft, R. L., Coughenour, M. B., Bailey, D. W., Rittenhouse, R. L., Sala, O. E. & Swift, D. M. (1987). Large herbivore foraging and ecological hierarchies. BioScience, 37, 789-799.
52. Sweanor, P. & Sandegren, F. (1989). Winter-range philopatry of seasonally migratory moose. Journal of Applied Ecology, 26, 25-33.
53. Turner, M. G. (1989). Landscape ecology: The effect of pattern on process. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics, 20, 171-197.
54. Vivås, J. & Seather, B.-E. (1987). Interactions between a generalist herbivore, the moose (Alces alces) and its food resource: An experimental study of winter foraging behavior in relation to browse availability. Journal of Animal Ecology, 56, 509-520.
55. Wieslander, G. (1936). The shortage of forest in Sweden during the 17th and 18th centuries. Svenska Skogsvårdsförbundets Tidskrift, 34, 593-633 (In Swedish.).