Influence of microhabitat on bryophyte diversity in Ontario mixedwood boreal forest

Canadian Journal of Forest Research

Volumn 38, Issue 7, 2008, Pages 1867-1876

  Cole, Heather A ^a   Newmaster, Steven G ^a   Bell, F Wayne ^b   Pitt, Doug ^c   Stinson, Al ^d  

^a UNIVERSITY OF GUELPH   (Canada)

^b ONTARIO FOREST RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (Canada)

^c GREAT LAKES FORESTRY CENTRE   (Canada)

^d Canadian Ecology Centre   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

AGRICULTURE; ARSENIC COMPOUNDS; BIODIVERSITY; CONSERVATION;

BOREAL FORESTS; BOREAL MIXEDWOOD; COMMUNITY STRUCTURES; DOWNED WOODY MATERIAL; FOREST BIODIVERSITY; FOREST MANAGEMENT; FOREST STANDS; FREQUENCY ANALYSIS; MICRO HABITAT; MICROHABITATS; MIXED WOODS; NUMBER OF SPECIES; ONTARIO (CO); PLANT DIVERSITY; SPECIES RICHNESS;

FORESTRY;

ABUNDANCE; AGRICULTURAL INTENSIFICATION; BOREAL FOREST; BRYOPHYTE; COMMUNITY STRUCTURE; FOREST MANAGEMENT; MICROHABITAT; SPECIES DIVERSITY; SPECIES EVENNESS; SPECIES RICHNESS;

AGRICULTURE; ARSENIC COMPOUNDS; BIODIVERSITY; CONSERVATION; FORESTRY;

CANADA; NORTH AMERICA; ONTARIO [CANADA];

BRYOPHYTA; BRYOPHYTES;

EID: 47649092078     PISSN: 00455067     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1139/X08-036     Document Type: Article

References (39)

1. Anderson, L.E., Crum, H.A., and Buck, W.R. 1990. List of the mosses of North America north of Mexico. Bryologist, 93: 448-499.
2. Chambers, B.A., and Lee, R.M. 1993. Central Ontario forest ecosystem classification (COFEC) field data collection manual. Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources. Central Ontario Forestry Technical Development Unit, North Bay, Ont.
3. Coleman, B.D. 1981. On random placement and species-area relations. Math. Biosci. 54: 191-215. doi:10.1016/0025-5564(81)90086-9.
4. Colwell, R.K. 2005. EstimateS: statistical estimation of species richness and shared species from samples. Version 7.5. User's Guide. Available from purl.oclc.org/estimates [accessed 25 November 2005].
5. Colwell, R.K., and Coddington, J.A. 1994. Estimating terrestrial biodiversity through extrapolation. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. Ser. B Biol. Sci. 345: 101-118. doi:10.1098/rstb.1994.0091.
6. Colwell, R.K., Mao, C.X., and Chang, J. 2004. Interpolating, extrapolating, and comparing incidence-based species accumulation curves. Ecology, 85: 2717-2727. doi:10.1890/03-0557.
7. Frego, K.A., and Carleton, T.J. 1995. Microsite conditions and spatial pattern in a boreal bryophyte community. Can. J. Bot. 73: 544-551. doi:10.1139/b95-056.
8. Frisvoll, A.A., and Prestø, T. 1997. Spruce forest bryophytes in central Norway and their relationship to environmental factors including modern forestry. Ecography, 20: 3-18. doi:10.1111/j.1600-0587.1997.tb00342.x.
9. Gabriel, R., and Bates, J.W. 2005. Bryophyte community composition and habitat specificity in the natural forests of Terceira, Azores. Plant Ecol. 177: 125-144. doi:10.1007/s11258-005-2243-6.
10. Holm, S. 1979. A simple sequentially rejective multiple test procedure. Scand. J. Stat. 6: 65-70.
11. Horn, H.S. 1966. Measurement of "overlap" in comparison ecological studies. Am. Nat. 100: 419-424. doi:10.1086/282436.
12. Hylander, K., and Dynesius, M. 2006. Causes of the large variation in bryophyte species richness and composition among boreal streamside forests. J. Veg. Sci. 17: 333-346. doi:10.1658/1100-9233(2006)017[0333:COTLVI]2.0. CO;2.
13. Krebs, C.J. 1999. Ecological methodology. 2nd ed. Addison-Wesley Longman Inc., Don Mills, Ont.
14. Kruys, N., and Jonsson, B.G. 1999. Fine woody debris is important for species richness on logs in managed boreal spruce forests of northern Sweden. Can. J. For. Res. 29: 1295-1299. doi:10.1139/cjfr-29-8-1295.
15. Lõhmus, A., Lõhmus, P., and Vellak, K. 2007. Substratum diversity explains landscape-scale co-variation in the species-richness of bryophytes and lichens. Biol. Conserv. 135: 405-414. doi:10.1016/j. biocon.2006.10.015.
16. Mills, S.E., and Macdonald, S.E. 2004. Predictors of moss and liverwort species diversity of microsites in conifer-dominated boreal forest. J. Veg. Sci. 15: 189-198. doi:10.1658/1100-9233(2004)015[0189:POMALS]2.0.CO;2.
17. Newmaster, S.G. 2000. Patterning of bryophyte diversity in temperate rainforests. Ph.D. thesis, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alta.
18. Newmaster, S.G., and Bell, F.W. 2002. The effects of silvicultural disturbances on cryptogam diversity in the boreal-mixedwood forest. Can. J. For. Res. 32: 38-51. doi:10.1139/x01-163.
19. Newmaster, S.G., and Ragupathy, S. 2005. The flora Ontario - integrated botanical information aystem (FOIBIS). OAC Herbarium, Biodiversity Institute of Ontario, University of Guelph, Guelph, Ont. Available from www.uoguelph.ca/ foibis/ [accessed 18 September 2005].
20. Newmaster, S.G., Belland, R.J., Parker, W.C., and Paterson, J.M. 2003. Patterns of bryophyte diversity in humid coastal and inland cedar-hemlock forests of British Columbia. Environ. Rev. 11: S159-S185. doi:10.1139/a03-016.
21. Newmaster, S.G., Vitt, D.H., Belland, R.J., and Arsenault, A. 2005. The ones we left behind: comparing plot sampling and floristic habitat sampling for estimating biodiversity. Divers. Distrib. 11: 57-72. doi:10.1111/j.1366- 9516.2005.00123.x.
22. Newmaster, S.G., Bell, F.W., Roosenboom, C.R., Cole, H.A., and Towill, W.D. 2006. Restoration of floral diversity through plantations on abandoned agricultural land. Can. J. For. Res. 36: 1218-1235. doi:10.1139/X06-021.
23. Newmaster, S.G., Bell, F.W., and Parker, W.C. 2007. Effects of forest floor disturbances by mechanical site preparation on floristic diversity in a central Ontario clearcut. For. Ecol. Manage. 246: 196-207. doi:10.1016/j.foreco.2007.03.058.
24. Ódor, P., and van Hees, A.F.M. 2004. Preferences of dead wood inhabiting bryophytes for decay stage, log size and habitat types in Hungarian beech forests. J. Bryol. 26: 79-95. doi:10.1179/037366804225021038.
25. Økland, T., Rydgren, K., Økland, R.H., Storaunet, K.O., and Rolstad, J. 2003. Variation in environmental conditions, understorey species number, abundance and composition among natural and managed Picea abies forest stands. For. Ecol. Manage. 177: 17-37. doi:10.1016/S0378-1127(02) 00331-6.
26. Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources (OMNR). 2001. Forest management guide for natural disturbance pattern emulation. Version 3.1. OMNR. Queen's Printer for Ontario, Toronto, Ont.
27. Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources (OMNR). 2007. NEBIE plot network - fact sheet [online]. Available from www.mnr.gov.on.ca/en/Business/OFRI/ 2ColumnSubPage/STEL02_165647.html [accessed 17 May 2007].
28. Pharo, E.J., and Beattie, A.J. 2002. The association between substrate variability and bryophyte and lichen diversity in Eastern Australian forests. Bryologist, 105: 11-26. doi:10.1639/0007-2745(2002)105[0011:TABSVA]2.0. CO;2.
29. Roberts, M.R., and Zhu, L. 2002. Early response of the herbaceous layer to harvesting in a mixed coniferous-deciduous forest in New Brunswick, Canada. For. Ecol. Manage. 155: 17-31. doi:10.1016/S0378-1127(01)00544-8.
30. Ross-Davis, A.L., and Frego, K.A. 2002. Comparison of plantations and naturally regenerated clearcuts in the Acadian Forest: forest floor bryophyte community and habitat features. Can. J. Bot. 80: 21-33. doi:10.1139/b01-129.
31. Schmitt, C.K., and Slack, N.G. 1990. Host specificity of epiphytic lichens and bryophytes: A comparison of the Adirondack Mountains (New York) and the Southern Blue Ridge Mountains (North Carolina). Bryologist, 93: 257-274. doi:10.2307/3243509.
32. Söderström, L. 1988. The occurrence of epixylic bryophyte and lichen species in an old natural and managed forest stand in northwest Sweden. Biol. Conserv. 45: 169-178. doi:10.1016/0006-3207(88)90137-1.
33. Stotler, R., and Crandall-Stotler, B. 1977. A checklist of the liverworts and hornworts of North America. Bryologist, 80: 405-428. doi:10.2307/3242017.
34. Studlar, S.M. 1982. Host specificity of epiphytic bryophytes near Mountain Lake, Virginia. Bryologist, 85: 37-50. doi:10.2307/3243139.
35. ter Braak, C.J.F. 1998. Canoco 4. Centre for Biometry, Wageningen, the Netherlands.
36. Turner, P.A.M., and Pharo, E.J. 2005. Influence of substrate type and forest age on bryophyte species distribution in Tasmanian mixed forest. Bryologist, 108: 67-85. doi:10.1639/0007-2745(2005)108[67:IOSTAF]2.0. CO;2.
37. Vitt, D.H., and Belland, R.J. 1997. Attributes of rarity among Alberta mosses: patterns and prediction of species diversity. Bryologist, 100: 1-12.
38. Wikström, P., and Eriksson, L.O. 2000. Solving the stand management problem under biodiversity-related considerations. For. Ecol. Manage. 126: 361-376. doi:10.1016/S0378-1127(99) 00107-3.
39. Zar, J.H. 1984. Biostatistical analysis. 2nd ed. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, N.J.