Forest structure and plant diversity in maritime pine (Pinus pinaster Ait.) stands in central Spain;Estructura forestal y biodiversidad en rodales de pino negral (Pinus pinaster Ait.) en el Sistema Ibérico, España

Investigacion Agraria Sistemas y Recursos Forestales

Volumn 18, Issue 3, 2009, Pages 314-321

  Osorio, L F ^a   Bravo, F ^a   Zaldivar P ^b   Pando, V ^b  

^a UNIVERSIDAD DE VALLADOLID   (Spain)

^b UNIVERSITY OF VALLADOLID   (Spain)

Author keywords

Biodiversity; Pinus pinaster Ait; Spain; Stand structure

Indexed keywords

MICROPYRUM TENELLUM; PINUS PINASTER; VERONICA; VERONICA ARVENSIS;

EID: 75149153473     PISSN: 11317965     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.5424/fs/2009183-01071     Document Type: Article

References (34)

1. ALÍA, R., MARTÍN, R., DE MIGUEL, J., GALERA, R.M., AGÚNDEZ, D., GORDO, J., SALVADOR, L., CATALÁN, G., GIL, L.A., 1996. Regiones de procedencia Pinus pinaster Ait. DGCN, Madrid, Spain.
2. AUBERT M., ALARD D., BUREAU F., 2003. Diversity of plant assemblages in managed temperate forests: a case study in Normandy (France). Forest Ecology and Management. 175, 321-337.
3. BOGINO, S, BRAVO, F., 2008. Growth response of Pinus pinaster Ait. to climatic variables in central Spanish forests Annals of Forest Science 65, 506-518 DOI: 10.1051/forest:2008025.
4. BRAVO F., PESO C DEL., RÍO M DEL., 2002. El inventario forestal nacional elemento clave para la gestión forestal sostenible. Fundación General de la Universidad de Valladolid. Valladolid, 191 pp.
5. BROKAW, N. and R. LENT. 1999. Vertical structure. Pp 373-399. in Hunter, M. L., editor. Maintaining Biodiversi-ty in Forest Ecosystems. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge, U.K.
6. BROSOFSKE K. D., CHEN J., CROW T.R., 2001. Understory vegetation and site factors: implications for a managed Wisconsin landscape. Forest Ecology and Management. 146,75-87.
7. DALE V. H., BEYELER S.C., JACKSON B., 2002. Understory vegetation indicators of anthropogenic disturbance in longleaf at Fort Benning, Georgia, USA. Ecological Indicators 1, 155-170.
8. DALE, M., 1998. Spatial pattern analysis in plant ecology. Cambridge university press, Cambridge, 325 pp.
9. DECOCQ, G., AUBERT, M., DUPONT, F., ALARD, D., SAGUEZ, R., WATTEZ-FRANGER, A., DE FOUCAULT, B., DELELIS-DUSOLLIER, A., BARDAT, J., 2004. Plant diversity in a managed temperate deciduous forest: understorey response to two silvicultural systems. Journal of Applied Ecology 41, 1065-1079.
10. DUQUE, A., SANCHEZ M., CAVALIER J., DUIVENVOORDEN J., MIRAÑA P., MIRAÑA J., MATAPÍ A., 2001. Relación bosque ambiente en el medio Caquetá, Amazonía colombiana. Evaluación de recursos vegetales no maderables de la amazonía noroccidental. Universities Van Amsterdam. pp. 99-128.
11. ELENA-ROSELLÓ R., 1997. Clasificación biogeoclimática de España Peninsular y Balear Madrid: Ministerio de Agricultura, Pesca y Alimentación, Madrid, 100 p.
12. FRANKLIN, J. F., D. R. BERG, D. A. THORNBURGH, and J. C. TAPPEINER 1997. Alternative silvicultural approaches to timber harvesting. In: K.A. Kohm and J. F. Franklin (eds.) Creating a forestry for the 21st century. The science of ecosystem management. Washington, D.C.: Island Press. Pp. 111-139.
13. GONZALEZ-ALDAY J., MARTINEZ-RUIZ, C., BRAVO, F., 2009. Evaluating different harvest intensities over understory plant diversity and pine seedlings, in a Pinus pinaster Ait. natural stand of Spain. Plant Ecology 201, 211-220.
14. GORDILLO E., (2002). Metodología para la caracterización de la biodiversidad en el inventario forestal nacional. En el inventario Forestal Nacional, elemento clave para la Gestión Forestal Sostenible. Bravo, F.; Del Río, M. y Del Peso, C. (eds). Fundación General de la Universidad de Valladolid, pp. 37-55.
15. GRIFFIS K.L., CRAWFORD J.A., WAGNER M.R., MOIR W.H., 2001. Understory response to management treatments in northern Arizona ponderosa pine forests. Forest Ecology and Management 146, 239-245.
16. HEDMAN C.W., GRACE S.L., KING S.E., 2000. Vegetation composition and structure of southern coastal plain pine forest: an ecological comparison. Forest Ecology and Management 134, 223-247.
17. HIROAKI, T.I., SHIN-ICHI, T., HIURA, T. 2004 Exploring the relationships among canopy structure, stand productivity, and biodiversity of temperate forest ecosystems. Forest Science 50(3):342-355
18. KENKEL NC., JUHASZ-NAGY P., PODANI J., 1989. On sampling procedures in population and community ecology. Vegetatio, 83, 195-207.
19. MACARTHUR, R.H., MACARTHUR, J.W., 1961. On bird species diversity. Ecology 42:594-598
20. MAGNUSSEN S., BOYLE T.J.B., 1995. Estimating sample size for inference about Shannon-Weaver and Simpson indices of species diversity. Forest Ecology Management. 78,71-84.
21. MILLER T.R., BASINGER M.A AND ROBERTSON P.A., 2000. Composition and structure of planted and native Pinus echinata Mill. stands in Southwestern Illinois. State Academy of Science. 93 (2), 99-113.
22. MONTES, F., RIO, M. DEL, CAÑELLAS, I., 2003. Indices de diversidad estructural en masas forestales. Investigación Agraria: Sistemas y Recursos Forestales 12(1): 159-176.
23. NAUMBURG E., DEWALD L.E., 1999. Relationships between Pinus ponderosa forest structure, light characteristics, and understory graminoid species presence and abundance. Forest Ecology and Management 124, 205-215.
24. NEUMANN M., STARLINGER F., 2001. The significance of different indices for stand structure and diversity in forest. Forest Ecology and Management. 145, 91-106.
25. NORTH, M., CHEN, J., SMITH, G., KRAKOWIAK, L., FRANKLIN, J.F., 1996. Initial response of understory plant diversity and overstory tree diameter growth to a green tree retention harvest. Northwest Science 70:24-34.
26. OINANDIA M., DOMINGUEZ I., ALBIZU I., GARBISU C., AMEZAGA I., 2004. Vegetation diversity and vertical structure as indicators of forest disturbance. Forest Ecology and Management. 195, 341-354.
27. PALMER W.W., 2003. Ordination methods for ecologists. Internet-published, available at hpp/www.carex.osunx.vcc.okstate.edu. [Consulted: 5 December 2004].
28. PEÑA S.R., 1998. Estadística, modelos y métodos. Vol 2. Modelos lineales y series temporales. Alianza Editorial, Madrid, 745 pp.
29. PITKANEN S., 1997. Correlation between stand structure and ground vegetation: an analytical approach. Plant Ecology. 131, 109-126.
30. SAS. INS. SAS/STAT,(1999). Useŕs guide. SAS institute Inc., Cary, NC, and 808 pp.
31. SCARASCIA-MUGNOZZA, G., OSWALD, H., PIUSSI, P., RADOGLOU, K., 2000. Forests of the Mediterranean region: gaps in knowledge and research needs. Forest Ecology and Management 132, 97-109.
32. SPIES T.A., 1998. Forest structure: a key to the ecosystem. Northwest Science, Vol 72, special issue 2, 34-39.
33. STATSOFT INC., (1995). Statistic for windows (computer program manual), Statsoft, Inc., Tulsa, Ok, 424 pp.
34. TER BRAAK C.J.F., 1986. Canonical correspondence analysis: a new eigenvector technique for multivariate direct gradient analysis. Ecology 67, 1167-1179.