Importance of mixedwoods for biodiversity conservation: Evidence for understory plants, songbirds, soil fauna, and ectomycorrhizae in northern forests

Environmental Reviews

Volumn 19, Issue 1, 2011, Pages 142-161

  Cavard, Xavier ^a   Macdonald, S Ellen ^b   Bergeron, Yves ^a   Chen, Han Y H ^c  

^a UNIVERSITÉ DU QUÉBEC EN ABITIBI TÉMISCAMINGUE   (Canada)

^b UNIVERSITY OF ALBERTA   (Canada)

^c LAKEHEAD UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

Author keywords

Birds; Ectomycorrhizae; Gamma diversity; Mixedwoods; Soil fauna; Understory vegetation

Indexed keywords

ECTOMYCORRHIZAE; GAMMA DIVERSITY; MIXEDWOODS; SOIL FAUNA; UNDERSTORY VEGETATION;

BIODIVERSITY; BIRDS; CONSERVATION; PLANTS (BOTANY);

FORESTRY;

BIODIVERSITY; BIRDS; CONSERVATION; FORESTRY; PLANTS;

EID: 84866339865     PISSN: 11818700     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1139/A11-004     Document Type: Article

References (161)

1. Adams, E.M., and Morrison, M.L. 1993. Effects of forest stand structure and composition on red-breasted nuthatches and brown creepers. J. Wildl. Manage. 57(3): 616-629. doi:10.2307/3809292.
2. Alaback, P.B., and Herman, F.R. 1988. Long-term response of understory vegetation to stand density in Picea-Tsuga forests. Can. J. For. Res. 18(12): 1522-1530. doi:10.1139/x88-233.
3. Albani, M., Andison, D.W., and Kimmins, J.P. 2005. Boreal mixedwood species composition in relationship to topography and white spruce seed dispersal constraint. For. Ecol. Manage. 209 (3): 167-180. doi:10.1016/j.foreco. 2005.01.017.
4. Ammer, S., Weber, K., Abs, C., Ammer, C., and Prietzel, J. 2006. Factors influencing the distribution and abundance of earthworm communities in pure and converted Scots pine stands. Appl. Soil Ecol. 33(1): 10-21. doi:10.1016/j. apsoil.2005.09.005.
5. Anderson, J.M. 1978. Inter-habitat and intra-habitat relationships between woodland cryptostigmata species diversity and diversity of soil and litter microhabitats. Oecologia (Berl.), 32(3): 341-348. doi:10.1007/BF00345112.
6. Aubert, M., Bureau, F., Alard, D., and Bardat, J. 2004. Effect of tree mixture on the humic epipedon and vegetation diversity in managed beech forests (Normandy, France). Can. J. For. Res. 34 (1): 233-248. doi:10.1139/x03-205.
7. Aubert, M., Hedde, M., Decaëns, T., Margerie, P., Alard, D., and Bureau, F. 2005. Facteurs contrôlant la variabilité spatiale de la macrofaune du sol dans une hêtraie pure et une hêtraie-charmaie. C. R. Biol. 328(1): 57-74. doi:10.1016/j.crvi.2004.10.008. PMID: 15714880. [In French.]
8. Aubert, M., Margerie, P., Ernoult, A., Decaens, T., and Bureau, F. 2006. Variability and heterogeneity of humus forms at stand level: Comparison between pure beech and mixed beech-hornbeam forest. Ann. Sci. 63(2): 177-188. doi:10.1051/forest:2005110.
9. Augusto, L., Ranger, J., Binkley, D., and Rothe, A. 2002. Impact of several common tree species of European temperate forests on soil fertility. Ann. Sci. 59(3): 233-253. doi:10.1051/forest:2002020.
10. Bagnaresi, U., Giannini, R., Grassi, G., Minotta, G., Paffetti, D., Prato, E.P., and Placidi, A.M.P. 2002. Stand structure and biodiversity in mixed, uneven-aged coniferous forests in the eastern Alps. Forestry, 75(4): 357-364. doi:10.1093/forestry/75.4.357.
11. Barbier, S., Gosselin, F., and Balandier, P. 2008. Influence of tree species on understory vegetation diversity and mechanisms involved - A critical review for temperate and boreal forests. For. Ecol. Manag. 254:1-15. doi:10.1093/forestry/75.4.357.
12. Bartemucci, P., Messier, C., and Canham, C.D. 2006. Overstory influences on light attenuation patterns and understory plant community diversity and composition in southern boreal forests of Quebec. Can. J. For. Res. 36(9): 2065-2079. doi:10.1139/X06- 088.
13. Baxter, J.W., and Dighton, J. 2001. Ectomycorrhizal diversity alters growth and nutrient acquisition of grey birch (Betula populifolia) seedlings in host-symbiont culture conditions. New Phytol. 152 (1): 139-149. doi:10.1046/j.0028-646x.2001.00245.x.
14. Bayne, E.M., Hobson, K.A., and Fargey, P. 1997. Predation on artificial nests in relation to forest type: Contrasting the use of quail and plasticine eggs. Ecography, 20(3): 233-239. doi:10.1111/j.1600-0587.1997.tb00366.x.
15. Bengtsson, J., Nilsson, S.G., Franc, A., and Menozzi, P. 2000. Biodiversity, disturbances, ecosystem function and management of European forests. For. Ecol. Manag. 132(1): 39-50. doi:10.1016/ S0378-1127(00)00378-9.
16. Berg, A., Ehnström, B., Gustafsson, L., Hallingback, T., Jonsell, M., and Weslien, J. 1994. Threatened plant, animal, and fungus species in Swedish forests: Distribution and habitat associations. Conserv. Biol. 8(3): 718-731. doi:10.1046/j.1523-1739.1994.08030718.x.
17. Berger, A.L., and Puettmann, K.J. 2000. Overstory composition and stand structure influence herbaceous plant diversity in the mixed aspen forest of northern Minnesota. Am. Midl. Nat. 143(1): 111- 125. doi:10.1674/0003-0031(2000) 143[0111:OCASSI]2.0.CO;2.
18. Bergeron, Y. 2000. Species and stand dynamics in the mixed woods of Quebec's southern boreal forest. Ecology, 81(6): 1500-1516. doi:10.1890/0012- 9658(2000)081[1500:SASDIT]2.0.CO;2.
19. Bergeron, Y., and Dubuc, M. 1989. Succession in the southern part of the Canadian boreal forest. Vegetatio, 79(1-2): 51-63. doi:10.1007/BF00044848.
20. Betts, M.G., Diamond, A.W., Forbes, G.J., Villard, M.A., and Gunn, J.S. 2006. The importance of spatial autocorrelation, extent and resolution in predicting forest bird occurrence. Ecol. Model. 191 (2): 197-224. doi:10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2005.04.027.
21. Bibby, C.J., Aston, N., and Bellamy, P.E. 1989. Effects of broadleaved trees on birds of upland conifer plantations in North Wales. Biol. Conserv. 49(1): 17-29. doi:10.1016/0006-3207(89) 90110-9.
22. Bisbee, K.E., Gower, S.T., Norman, J.M., and Nordheim, E.V. 2001. Environmental controls on ground cover species composition and productivity in a boreal black spruce forest. Oecologia (Berl.), 129 (2): 261-270. doi:10.1007/s004420100719.
23. Brandtberg, P.O., Lundkvist, H., and Bengtsson, J. 2000. Changes in forest-floor chemistry caused by a birch admixture in Norway spruce stands. For. Ecol. Manag. 130:253-264. doi:10.1007/ s10021-008-9180-x.
24. Brassard, B.W., and Chen, H.Y.H. 2008. Effects of forest type and disturbance on diversity of coarse woody debris in boreal forest. Ecosystems (N.Y.), 11(7): 1078-1090. doi:10.1007/s10021-008- 9180-x.
25. Buddle, C.M., Langor, D.W., Pohl, G.R., and Spence, J.R. 2006. Arthropod responses to harvesting and wildfire: Implications for emulation of natural disturbance in forest management. Biol. Conserv. 128(3): 346-357. doi:10.1016/j.biocon.2005.10.002.
26. Canham, C.D., Finzi, A.C., Pacala, S.W., and Burbank, D.H. 1994. Causes and consequences of resource heterogeneity in forests: Interspecific variation in light transmission by canopy trees. Can. J. For. Res. 24(2): 337-349. doi:10.1139/x94-046.
27. Cannell, M.G.R. 1992. The ecology of mixed-species stands of trees. Blackwell Scientific Publications. London, UK. 312 p.
28. Cappuccino, N., Lavertu, D., Bergeron, Y., and Regniere, J. 1998. Spruce budworm impact, abundance and parasitism rate in a patchy landscape. Oecologia (Berl.), 114(2): 236-242. doi:10.1007/s004420050441.
29. Carleton, T.J., and Maycock, P.F. 1980. Vegetation of the boreal forests south of James Bay - non-centered component analysis of the vascular flora. Ecology, 61(5): 1199-1212. doi:10.2307/ 1936838.
30. Carleton, T.J., and Maycock, P.F. 1981. Understorey-canopy affinities in boreal forest vegetation. Can. J. Bot. 59: 1709-1716. doi:10.1139/b82-131.
31. Chen, H.Y.H., and Klinka, K. 2003. Aboveground productivity of western hemlock and western redcedar mixed-species stands in southern coastal British Columbia. For. Ecol. Manag. 184(1-3): 55-64. doi:10.1016/S0378-1127(03)00148-8.
32. Chen, H.Y.H., and Popadiouk, R.V. 2002. Dynamics of North American boreal mixedwoods. Environ. Rev. 10(3): 137-166. doi:10.1139/a02-007.
33. Chen, H.Y.H., Légaré, S., and Bergeron, Y. 2004. Variation of the understory composition and diversity along a gradient of productivity in Populus tremuloides stands of northern British Columbia, Canada. Can. J. Bot. 82(9): 1314-1323. doi:10.1139/ b04-086.
34. Chipman, S.J., and Johnson, E.A. 2002. Understory vascular plant species diversity in the mixedwood boreal forest of western Canada. Ecol. Appl. 12(2): 588-601. doi:10.1890/1051-0761 (2002)012[0588:UVPSDI]2.0.CO;2.
35. Côté, L., Brown, S., Paré, D., Fyles, J., and Bauhus, J. 2000. Dynamics of carbon and nitrogen mineralization in relation to stand type, stand age and soil texture in the boreal mixedwood. Soil Biol. Biochem. 32(8-9): 1079-1090. doi:10.1016/S0038- 0717(00)00017-1.
36. Crawford, R.M.M., Jeffree, C.E., and Rees, W.G. 2003. Paludification and forest retreat in northern oceanic environments. Ann. Bot. (Lond.), 91(2): 213-226. doi:10.1093/aob/mcf185. PMID: 12509342.
37. Crozier, C.R., and Boerner, R.E.J. 1984. Correlations of understory herb distribution patterns with microhabitats under different tree species in a mixed mesophytic forest. Oecologia (Berl.), 62(3): 337-343. doi:10.1007/BF00384265.
38. Cumming, E.E. 2004. Habitat segregation among songbirds in oldgrowth boreal mixedwood forest. Can. Field Nat. 118: 45-55.
39. Cumming, S.G., Schmiegelow, F.K.A., and Burton, P.J. 2000. Gap dynamics in boreal aspen stands: Is the forest older than we think? Ecol. Appl. 10: 744-759.
40. De Deyn, G.B., Raaijmakers, C.E., van Ruijven, J., Berendse, F., and van der Putten, W.H. 2004. Plant species identity and diversity effects on different trophic levels of nematodes in the soil food web. Oikos, 106(3): 576-586. doi:10.1111/j.0030-1299.2004.
41. .x. De Grandpré, L., Gagnon, D., and Bergeron, Y. 1993. Changes in the understory of canadian southern boreal forest after fire. J. Veg. Sci. 4(6): 803-810. doi:10.2307/3235618.
42. DeBellis, T., Kernaghan, G., Bradley, R., and Widden, P. 2006. Relationships between stand composition and ectomycorrhizal community structure in boreal mixed-wood forests. Microb. Ecol. 52(1): 114-126. doi:10.1007/s00248- 006-9038-8. PMID: 16699911.
43. Deleporte, S., and Tillier, P. 1999. Long-term effects of mineral amendments on soil fauna and humus in an acid beech forest floor. For. Ecol. Manag. 118(1-3): 245-252. doi:10.1016/S0378-1127 (98)00505-2.
44. Douglas, R.B., Parker, V.T., and Cullings, K.W. 2005. Belowground ectomycorrhizal community structure of mature lodgepole pine and mixed conifer stands in Yellowstone National Park. For. Ecol. Manag. 208(1-3): 303-317. doi:10.1016/j.foreco.2004.12.011.
45. Drapeau, P., Leduc, A., Giroux, J.F., Savard, J.P.L., Bergeron, Y., and Vickery, W.L. 2000. Landscape-scale disturbances and changes in bird communities of boreal mixed-wood forests. Ecol. Monogr. 70 (3): 423-444. doi:10.1890/0012-9615(2000)070[0423:LSDACI]2.0.CO;2.
46. Durall, D.M., Gamiet, S., Simard, S.W., Kudrna, L., and Sakakibara, S.M. 2006. Effects of clearcut logging and tree species composition on the diversity and community composition of epigeous fruit bodies formed by ectomycorrhizal fungi. Can. J. Bot. 84(6): 966-980. doi:10.1139/B06-045.
47. Ettema, C.H., and Wardle, D.A. 2002. Spatial soil ecology. Trends Ecol. Evol. 17(4): 177-183. doi:10.1016/S0169-5347(02)02496-5.
48. Ewald, J. 2000. The partial influence of Norway spruce stands on understorey vegetation in montane forests of the Bavarian Alps. Mt. Res. Dev. 20(4): 364-371. doi:10.1659/0276-4741(2000)020 [0364:TPIONS]2.0.CO;2.
49. Fenton, N.J., and Bergeron, Y. 2006. Facilitative succession in a boreal bryophyte community driven by changes in available moisture and light. J. Veg. Sci. 17(1): 65-76. doi:10.1111/j.1654- 1103.2006.tb02424.x.
50. Foley, J.A., DeFries, R., Asner, G.P., Barford, C., Bonan, G., Carpenter, S.R., Chapin, F.S., Coe, M.T., Daily, G.C., Gibbs, H. K., Helkowski, J.H., Holloway, T., Howard, E.A., Kucharik, C.J., Monfreda, C., Patz, J.A., Prentice, I.C., Ramankutty, N., and Snyder, P.K. 2005. Global consequences of land use. Science, 309 (5734): 570-574. doi:10.1126/science.1111772. PMID:16040698.
51. Foster, D.R. 1985. Vegetation development following fire in Picea mariana (black spruce)-Pleurozium forests of south-eastern Labrador, Canada. J. Ecol. 73(2): 517-534. doi:10.2307/2260491.
52. Freedman, B., Woodley, S., and Loo, J. 1994. Forestry practices and biodiversity, with particular reference to the Maritime Provinces of eastern Canada. Environ. Rev. 2: 33-77. doi:10.1139/a94-003.
53. Freemark, K.E., and Merriam, H.G. 1986. Importance of area and habitat heterogeneity to bird assemblages in temperate forest fragments. Biol. Conserv. 36(2): 115-141. doi:10.1016/0006-3207 (86)90002-9.
54. Fries, C., Johansson, O., Pettersson, B., and Simonsson, P. 1997. Silvicultural models to maintain and restore natural stand structures in Swedish boreal forests. For. Ecol. Manag. 94(1-3): 89-103. . doi:10.1016/S0378-1127(97) 00003-0.
55. Gartner, S., and Reif, A. 2004. The impact of forest transformation on stand structure and ground vegetation in the southern Black Forest, Germany. Plant Soil, 264(1-2): 35-51. doi:10.1023/B:PLSO. 0000047751.25915.77.
56. Gartner, S., and Reif, A. 2005. The response of ground vegetation to structural change during forest conversion in the southern Black Forest. Eur. J. For. Res. 124: 221-231.
57. Girard, C., Darveau, M., Savard, J.P.L., and Huot, J. 2004. Are temperate mixedwood forests perceived by birds as a distinct forest type? Can. J. For. Res. 34(9): 1895-1907. doi:10.1139/x04-087.
58. Gjerde, I., and Saetersdal, M. 1997. Effects on avian diversity of introducing spruce Picea spp plantations in the native pine Pinus sylvestris forests of western Norway. Biol. Conserv. 79(2-3): 241- 250. doi:10.1016/S0006-3207(96)00093-6.
59. Haeussler, S., Bartemucci, P., and Bedford, L. 2004. Succession and resilience in boreal mixedwood plant communities 15-16 years after silvicultural site preparation. For. Ecol. Manag. 199: 349- 370.
60. Haila, Y. 1994. Preserving ecological diversity in boreal forests - ecological background, research, and management. Ann. Zool. Fenn. 31: 203-217.
61. Hansen, R.A. 2000. Effects of habitat complexity and composition on a diverse litter microarthropod assemblage. Ecology, 81(4): 1120- 1132. doi:10.1890/0012-9658(2000)081[1120:EOHCAC]2.0.CO;2.
62. Hansen, R.A., and Coleman, D.C. 1998. Litter complexity and composition are determinants of the diversity and species composition of oribatid mites (Acari: Oribatida) in litterbags. Appl. Soil Ecol. 9(1-3): 17-23. doi:10.1016/S0929-1393(98) 00048-1.
63. Hart, S.A., and Chen, H.Y.H. 2006. Understory vegetation dynamics of North American boreal forests. Crit. Rev. Plant Sci. 25(4): 381- 397. doi:10.1080/07352680600819286.
64. Hart, S.A., and Chen, H.Y.H. 2008. Fire, logging, and overstory affect understory abundance, diversity, and composition in boreal forest. Ecol. Monogr. 78(1): 123-140. doi:10.1890/06-2140.1.
65. Hill, S.B., Mallik, A.U., and Chen, H.Y.H. 2005. Canopy gap disturbance and succession in trembling aspen dominated boreal forests in northeastern Ontario. Can. J. For. Res. 35(8): 1942- 1951. doi:10.1139/x05-126.
66. Hobson, K.A., and Bayne, E. 2000. Breeding bird communities in boreal forest of western Canada: Consequences of "unmixing" the mixedwoods. Condor, 102(4): 759-769. doi:10.1650/0010-5422 (2000)102[0759:BBCIBF]2.0.CO;2.
67. Hooper, D.U., Bignell, D.E., Brown, V.K., Brusaard, L., Dangerfield, J.M., Wall, D.H., Wardle, D.A., Coleman, D.C., Giller, K.E., Lavelle, P., Van der Putten, W.H., De Ruiter, P.C., Rusek, J., Silver, W.L., Tiedje, J.M., and Wolters, V. 2000. Interactions between aboveground and belowground biodiversity in terrestrial ecosystems: Patterns, mechanisms, and feedbacks. Bioscience, 50 (12): 1049-1061. doi:10.1641/0006-3568(2000)050[1049: IBAABB]2.0.CO;2.
68. Horton, T.R., and Bruns, T.D. 1998. Multiple-host fungi are the most frequent and abundant ectomycorrhizal types in a mixed stand of Douglas fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii) and bishop pine (Pinus muricata). New Phytol. 139(2): 331-339. doi:10.1046/j.1469- 8137.1998.00185.x.
69. Jaccard, P. 1901. Distribution de la flore alpine dans le bassin des Drames et dans quelques régions voisines. Bull. Soc. Vaud. Sci. Nat. 37: 241-272.
70. Jactel, H., Goulard, M., Menassieu, P., and Goujon, G. 2002. Habitat diversity in forest plantations reduces infestations of the pine stem borer Dioryctria sylvestrella. J. Appl. Ecol. 39(4): 618-628. doi:10.1046/j.1365-2664. 2002.00742.x.
71. Jactel, H., Menassieu, P., Vetillard, F., Gaulier, A., Samalens, J.C., and Brockerhoff, E.G. 2006. Tree species diversity reduces the invasibility of maritime pine stands by the bast scale, Matsucoccus feytaudi (Homoptera: Margarodidae). Can. J. For. Res. 36(2): 314-323. doi:10.1139/x05-251.
72. Jakel, A., and Roth, M. 2004. Conversion of single-layered Scots pine monocultures into close-to-nature mixed hardwood forests: Effects on parasitoid wasps as pest antagonists. Eur. J. For. Res. 123: 203- 212.
73. Jansson, G. 2002. Scaling and habitat proportions in relation to bird diversity in managed boreal forests. For. Ecol. Manag. 157(1-3): 77-86. doi:10.1016/S0378-1127(00)00660-5.
74. Jansson, G., and Andren, H. 2003. Habitat composition and bird diversity in managed boreal forests. Scand. J. For. Res. 18(3): 225- 236. doi:10.1080/02827580308622.
75. Johnson, G.A.M., and Freedman, B. 2002. Breeding birds in forestry plantations and natural forest in the vicinity of Fundy National Park, New Brunswick. Can. Field Nat. 116: 475-487.
76. Jokimaki, J., and Huhta, E. 1996. Effects of landscape matrix and habitat structure on a bird community in northern Finland: A multi-scale approach. Ornis Fenn. 73: 97-113.
77. Jones, M.D., Durall, D.M., Harniman, S.M.K., Classen, D.C., and Simard, S.W. 1997. Ectomycorrhizal diversity on Betula papyrifera and Pseudotsuga menziesii seedlings grown in the greenhouse or outplanted in single-species and mixed plots in southern British Columbia. Can. J. For. Res. 27(11): 1872-1889. doi:10.1139/cjfr-27-11-1872.
78. Jonsson, L.M., Nilsson, M.C., Wardle, D.A., and Zackrisson, O. 2001. Context dependent effects of ectomycorrhizal species richness on tree seedling productivity. Oikos, 93(3): 353-364. doi:10.1034/j.1600-0706.2001.930301.x.
79. Kaneko, N., and Salamanca, E.F. 1999. Mixed leaf litter effects on decomposition rates and soil microarthropod communities in an oak-pine stand in Japan. Ecol. Res. 14(2): 131-138. doi:10.1046/j. 1440-1703.1999.00292.x.
80. Kaneko, N., Sugawara, Y., Miyamoto, T., Hasegawa, M., and Hiura, T. 2005. Oribatid mite community structure and tree species diversity: A link? Pedobiologia (Jena), 49(6): 521-528. doi:10.1016/j.pedobi.2005.06.004.
81. Kelty, M.J. 1992. Comparative productivity of monocultures and mixed-species stands. In The ecology and silviculture of mixedspecies forests. Edited by M.J. Kelty, B.C. Larson, and C.D. Oliver. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht. pp. 125-141.
82. Kembel, S.W., and Dale, M.R.T. 2006. Within-stand spatial structure and relation of boreal canopy and understorey vegetation. J. Veg. Sci. 17(6): 783-790. doi:10.1111/j.1654-1103.2006.tb02501.x.
83. Kennedy, P.G., Izzo, A.D., and Bruns, T.D. 2003. There is high potential for the formation of common mycorrhizal networks between understorey and canopy trees in a mixed evergreen forest. J. Ecol. 91(6): 1071-1080. doi:10.1046/j.1365-2745.2003.00829.x.
84. Kernaghan, G. 2005. Mycorrhizal diversity: Cause and effect? Pedobiologia (Jena), 49(6): 511-520. doi:10.1016/j.pedobi.2005.05.007.
85. Kernaghan, G., Widden, P., Bergeron, Y., Légaré, S., and Paré, D. 2003. Biotic and abiotic factors affecting ectomycorrhizal diversity in boreal mixed-woods. Oikos, 102(3): 497-504. doi:10.1034/j. 1600-0706.2003.12415.x.
86. Kirk, D.A., and Hobson, K.A. 2001. Bird-habitat relationships in jack pine boreal forests. Forest Ecology and Management, 147(2- 3): 217-243. doi:10.1016/S0378-1127(00)00465-5.
87. Kirk, D.A., Diamond, A.W., Hobson, K.A., and Smith, A.R. 1996. Breeding bird communities of the western and northern Canadian boreal forest: Relationship to forest type. Can. J. Zool. 74(9): 1749-1770. doi:10.1139/z96-193.
88. Koricheva, J., Vehvilainen, H., Riihimaki, J., Ruohomaki, K., Kaitaniemi, P., and Ranta, H. 2006. Diversification of tree stands as a means to manage pests and diseases in boreal forests: Myth or reality? Can. J. For. Res. 36(2): 324-336. doi:10.1139/x05-172.
89. Kranabetter, J.M., Hayden, S., and Wright, E.F. 1999. A comparison of ectomycorrhiza communities from three conifer species planted on forest gap edges. Can. J. Bot. 77(8): 1193-1198. doi:10.1139/ cjb-77-8-1193.
90. Kuuluvainen, T. 2002. Natural variability of forests as a reference for restoring and managing biological diversity in boreal Fennoscandia. Silva Fenn. 36: 97-125.
91. Lamb, D., Erskine, P.D., and Parrotta, J.A. 2005. Restoration of degraded tropical forest landscapes. Science, 310(5754): 1628- 1632. doi:10.1126/science.1111773. PMID:16339437.
92. Lecomte, N., Simard, M., Bergeron, Y., Larouche, A., Asnong, H., and Richard, P.J.W. 2005. Effects of fire severity and initial tree composition on understorey vegetation dynamics in a boreal landscape inferred from chronosequence and paleoecological data. J. Veg. Sci. 16(6): 665-674. doi:10.1111/j.1654-1103.2005. tb02409.x.
93. Légaré, S., Bergeron, Y., Leduc, A., and Paré, D. 2001. Comparison of the understory vegetation in boreal forest types of southwest Quebec. Can. J. Bot. 79(9): 1019-1027. doi:10.1139/cjb-79-9- 1019.
94. Légaré, S., Paré, D., and Bergeron, Y. 2004. The responses of black spruce growth to an increased proportion of aspen in mixed stands. Can. J. For. Res. 34(2): 405-416. doi:10.1139/x03-251.
95. Légaré, S., Bergeron, Y., and Paré, D. 2005a. Effect of aspen (Populus tremuloides) as a companion species on the growth of black spruce (Picea mariana) in the southwestern boreal forest of Quebec. For. Ecol. Manag. 208: 211-222. doi:10.1016/j.foreco. 2004.12.004.
96. Légaré, S., Paré, D., and Bergeron, Y. 2005b. Influence of aspen on forest floor properties in black spruce-dominated stands. Plant Soil, 275(1-2): 207-220. doi:10.1007/s11104-005-1482-6.
97. Lindo, Z., and Visser, S. 2004. Forest floor microarthropod abundance and oribatid mite (Acari: Oribatida) composition following partial and clear-cut harvesting in the mixedwood boreal forest. Can. J. For. Res. 34(5): 998-1006. doi:10.1139/x03-284.
98. MacArthur, R., and Macarthur, J.W. 1961. On bird species diversity. Ecology, 42(3): 594-598. doi:10.2307/1932254.
99. MacDonald, G.B. 1995. The case for boreal mixedwood management: An Ontario perspective. For. Chron. 71:725-734. doi:10.1016/S0378-1127(03)00148-8.
100. MacDonald, S.E., and Fenniak, T.E. 2007. Understory plant communities of boreal mixedwood forests in western Canada: Natural patterns and response to variable-retention harvesting. For. Ecol. Manage. 242(1): 34-48. doi:10.1016/j.foreco.2007.01.029.
101. MacDonald, G.B., and Thompson, D.J. 2003. Responses of planted conifers and natural hardwood regeneration to harvesting, scalping, and weeding on a boreal mixedwood site. For. Ecol. Manage. 182(1-3): 213-230. doi:10.1016/S0378-1127(03)00047-1.
102. Machtans, C.S., and Latour, P.B. 2003. Boreal forest songbird communities of the Liard Valley, Northwest Territories, Canada. Condor, 105(1): 27-44. doi:10.1650/0010-5422(2003)105[27: BFSCOT]2.0.CO;2.
103. MacPherson, D.M., Lieffers, V.J., and Blenis, P.V. 2001. Productivity of aspen stands with and without a spruce understory in Alberta's boreal mixedwood forests. For. Chron. 77: 351-356. doi:10.1016/ S0378-1127(03)00148-8.
104. Man, R.Z., and Lieffers, V.J. 1999. Are mixtures of aspen and white spruce more productive than single species stands? For. Chron. 75: 505-513. doi:10.1016/S0378-1127(03)00148-8.
105. Martin, T.E. 1993. Nest predation among vegetation layers and habitat types: Revising the dogmas. Am. Nat. 141(6): 897-913. doi:10.1086/285515. PMID:19425994.
106. Massicotte, H.B., Molina, R., Luoma, D.L., and Smith, J.E. 1994. Biology of the ectomycorrhizal genus, Rhizopogon. 2. Patterns of host-fungus specificity following spore inoculation of diverse hosts grown in monoculture and dual culture. New Phytol. 126(4): 677-690. doi:10.1111/j.1469-8137.1994.tb02962.x.
107. Massicotte, H.B., Molina, R., Tackaberry, L.E., Smith, J.E., and Amaranthus, M.P. 1999. Diversity and host specificity of ectomycorrhizal fungi retrieved from three adjacent forest sites by five host species. Can. J. Bot. 77(8): 1053-1076. doi:10.1139/ cjb-77-8-1053.
108. Mazur, K.M., Frith, S.D., and James, P.C. 1998. Barred owl home range and habitat selection in the boreal forest of central Saskatchewan. Auk., 115: 746-754.
109. Messier, C., Parent, S., and Bergeron, Y. 1998. Effects of overstory and understory vegetation on the understory light environment in mixed boreal forests. J. Veg. Sci. 9(4): 511-520. doi:10.2307/ 3237266.
110. Mielikainen, K., and Hynynen, J. 2003. Silvicultural management in maintaining biodiversity and resistance of forests in Europe-boreal zone: case Finland. J. Environ. Manage. 67(1): 47-54. doi:10.1016/S0301-4797(02)00187-1. PMID:12659803.
111. Migge, S., Maraun, M., Scheu, S., and Schaefer, M. 1998. The oribatid mite community (Acarina) of pure and mixed stands of beech (Fagus sylvatica) and spruce (Picea abies) of different age. Appl. Soil Ecol. 9(1-3): 115-121. doi:10.1016/S0929-1393(98)00065-1.
112. Murray, K.J., Tenhunen, J.D., and Nowak, R.S. 1993. Photoinhibition as a control on photosynthesis and production of sphagnum mosses. Oecologia (Berl.), 96(2): 200-207. doi:10.1007/BF00317733.
113. Nantel, P., and Neumann, P. 1992. Ecology of ectomycorrhizal- basidiomycete communities on a local vegetation gradient. Ecology, 73(1): 99-117. doi:10.2307/1938724.
114. Nieppola, J.J., and Carleton, T.J. 1991. Relations between understorey vegetation, site productivity, and environmental factors in Pinus sylvestris L. stands in southern Finland. Vegetatio, 93: 57-72.
115. Økland, R.H. 2000. Understorey vegetation development in North Finnish Picea forests after disturbance: Re-analysis of Siren's data. J. Veg. Sci. 11(4): 533-546. doi:10.2307/3246583.
116. Paré, D., and Bergeron, Y. 1996. Effect of colonizing tree species on soil nutrient availability in a clay soil of the boreal mixedwood. Can. J. For. Res. 26(6): 1022-1031. doi:10.1139/x26-113.
117. Perry, D.A., Amaranthus, M.P., Borchers, J.G., Borchers, S.L., and Brainerd, R.E. 1989. Bootstrapping in ecosystems. Bioscience, 39 (4): 230-237. doi:10.2307/1311159.
118. Peters, V.S., MacDonald, S.E., and Dale, M.R.T. 2005. The interaction between masting and fire is key to white spruce regeneration. Ecology, 86(7): 1744-1750. doi:10.1890/03-0656.
119. Peters, V.S., Macdonald, S.E., and Dale, M.R.T. 2006. Patterns of initial versus delayed regeneration of white spruce in boreal mixedwood succession. Can. J. For. Res. 36(6): 1597-1609. doi:10.1139/X06-020.
120. Pielou, E.C. 1975. Ecological diversity. John Wiley & Sons, New York. 165 p.
121. Pitkänen, S. 2000. Effect of tree stand and site variables on alpha diversity of ground vegetation in the forests of Northern Karelia. J. Environ. Manage. 58(4): 289-295. doi:10.1006/jema.2000.0332.
122. Prescott, C.E., Zabek, L.M., Staley, C.L., and Kabzems, R. 2000. Decomposition of broadleaf and needle litter in forests of British Columbia: influences of litter type, forest type, and litter mixtures. Can. J. For. Res. 30(11): 1742-1750. doi:10.1139/cjfr-30-11-1742.
123. Pretzsch, H. 2003. Diversity and productivity of forests. Allg. Forst Jagdztg. 174: 88-98.
124. Qian, H., Klinka, K., Okland, R.H., Krestov, P., and Kayahara, G.J. 2003. Understorey vegetation in boreal Picea mariana and Populus tremuloides stands in British Columbia. J. Veg. Sci. 14: 173-184.
125. Ramovs, B.V., and Roberts, M.R. 2003. Understory vegetation and environment responses to tillage, forest harvesting, and conifer plantation development. Ecol. Appl. 13(6): 1682-1700. doi:10.1890/02-5237.
126. Read, D.J. 1991. Mycorrhizas in ecosystems. Experientia, 47(4): 376-391. doi:10.1007/BF01972080.
127. Reich, P.B., Bakken, P., Carlson, D., Frelich, L.E., Friedman, S.K., and Grigal, D.F. 2001. Influence of logging, fire, and forest type on biodiversity and productivity in southern boreal forests. Ecology, 82(10): 2731-2748. doi:10.1890/0012-9658(2001)082 [2731:IOLFAF]2.0.CO;2.
128. Riegel, G.M., Miller, R.F., and Krueger, W.C. 1995. The effects of aboveground and belowground competition on understory species composition in a Pinus ponderosa forest. For. Sci. 41: 864-889.
129. Riihimäki, J., Kaitaniemi, P., Koricheva, J., and Vehviläinen, H. 2005. Testing the enemies hypothesis in forest stands: The important role of tree species composition. Oecologia (Berl.), 142(1): 90-97. doi:10.1007/s00442- 004-1696-y. PMID: 15322903.
130. Robichaud, I., and Villard, M.A. 1999. Do Black-throated Green Warblers prefer conifers? Meso- and micro-habitat use in a mixedwood forest. Condor, 101(2): 262-271. doi:10.2307/ 1369989.
131. Rodewald, A.D., and Yahner, R.H. 2001. Influence of landscape composition on avian community structure and associated mechanisms. Ecology, 82(12): 3493-3504. doi:10.1890/0012-9658(2001)082[3493:IOLCOA]2.0.CO;2.
132. Rumberger, M.D., Munzenberger, B., Bens, O., Ehrig, F., Lentzsch, P., and Huttl, R.F. 2004. Changes in diversity and storage function of ectomycorrhiza and soil organoprofile dynamics after introduction of beech into Scots pine forests. Plant Soil, 264(1-2): 111- 126. doi:10.1023/B:PLSO.0000047793.14857.4f.
133. Saetre, P. 1999. Spatial patterns of ground vegetation, soil microbial biomass and activity in a mixed spruce-birch stand. Ecography, 22 (2): 183-192. doi:10.1111/j.1600-0587.1999.tb00467.x.
134. Saetre, P., Saetre, L.S., Brandtberg, P.-O., Lundkvist, H., and Bengtsson, J. 1997. Ground vegetation composition and heterogeneity in pure Norway spruce and mixed Norway spruce - birch stands. Can. J. For. Res. 27(12): 2034-2042. doi:10.1139/cjfr-27- 12-2034.
135. Saetre, P., Brandtberg, P.O., Lundkvist, H., and Bengtsson, J. 1999. Soil organisms and carbon, nitrogen and phosphorus mineralisation in Norway spruce and mixed Norway spruce - Birch stands. Biol. Fertil. Soils, 28(4): 382-388. doi:10.1007/s003740050508.
136. Scheu, S., Albers, D., Alphei, J., Buryn, R., Klages, U., Migge, S., Platner, C., and Salamon, J.A. 2003. The soil fauna community in pure and mixed stands of beech and spruce of different age: trophic structure and structuring forces. Oikos, 101(2): 225-238. doi:10.1034/j.1600-0706.2003.12131.x.
137. Schieck, J., and Song, S.J. 2006. Changes in bird communities throughout succession following fire and harvest in boreal forests of western North America: literature review and meta-analyses. Can. J. For. Res. 36(5): 1299-1318. doi:10.1139/X06-017.
138. Seastedt, T.R. 1984. The role of microarthropods in decomposition and mineralization processes. Annu. Rev. Entomol. 29(1): 25-46. doi:10.1146/annurev. en.29.010184.000325.
139. Simard, S.W., Molina, R., Smith, J.E., Perry, D.A., and Jones, M.D. 1997. Shared compatibility of ectomycorrhizae on Pseudotsuga menziesii and Betula papyrifera seedlings grown in mixture in soils from southern British Columbia. Can. J. For. Res. 27: 331- 342. doi:10.1139/x96-186.
140. Smith, B., and Wilson, J.B. 1996. A consumer's guide to evenness indices. Oikos, 76(1): 70-82. doi:10.2307/3545749.
141. Smith, J.E., Molina, R., and Perry, D.A. 1995. Occurence of ectomycorrhizas on ericaceous and coniferous seedlings grown in soils from the Oregon coast range. New Phytol. 129(1): 73-81. doi:10.1111/j.1469-8137.1995. tb03011.x.
142. Spence, J.R. 2001. The new boreal forestry: Adjusting timber management to accommodate biodiversity. Trends Ecol. Evol. 16 (11): 591-593. doi:10.1016/S0169-5347(01)02335-7.
143. Spiecker, H. 2003. Silvicultural management in maintaining biodiversity and resistance of forests in Europe-temperate zone. J. Environ. Manage. 67(1): 55-65. doi:10.1016/S0301-4797(02) 00188-3. PMID:12659804.
144. Sulkava, P., and Huhta, V. 1998. Habitat patchiness affects decomposition and faunal diversity: a microcosm experiment on forest floor. Oecologia (Berl.), 116(3): 390-396. doi:10.1007/ s004420050602.
145. Tonteri, T. 1994. Species richness of boreal understorey forest vegetation in relation to site type and successional factors. Ann. Zool. Fenn. 31: 53-60.
146. Uotila, A., and Kouki, J. 2005. Understorey vegetation in sprucedominated forests in eastern Finland and Russian Karelia: Successional patterns after anthropogenic and natural disturbances. For. Ecol. Manage. 215(1-3): 113-137. doi:10.1016/j. foreco.2005.05.008.
147. van Oijen, D., Feijen, M., Hommel, P., den Ouden, J., and de Waal, R. 2005. Effects of tree species composition on within-forest distribution of understorey species. Appl. Veg. Sci. 8(2): 155- 166. doi:10.1658/1402-2001(2005) 008[0155:EOTSCO]2.0.CO;2.
148. Veinotte, C., Freedman, B., Maass, W., and Kirstein, F. 2003. Comparison of the ground vegetation in spruce plantations and natural forest in the Greater Fundy Ecosystem, New Brunswick. Can. Field Nat. 117: 531-540.
149. Wallwork, J.A. 1983. Oribatids in forest ecosystems. Annu. Rev. Entomol. 28(1): 109-130. doi:10.1146/annurev.en.28.010183.000545.
150. Wardle, D.A., Yeates, G.W., Williamson, W., and Bonner, K.I. 2003. The response of a three trophic level soil food web to the identity and diversity of plant species and functional groups. Oikos, 102 (1): 45-56.
151. Wardle, D.A., Bardgett, R.D., Klironomos, J.N., Setala, H., van der Putten, W.H., and Wall, D.H. 2004. Ecological linkages between aboveground and belowground biota. Science, 304(5677): 1629- 1633. doi:10.1126/science.1094875. PMID:15192218.
152. Wardle, D.A., Yeates, G.W., Barker, G.M., and Bonner, K.I. 2006. The influence of plant litter diversity on decomposer abundance and diversity. Soil Biol. Biochem. 38(5): 1052-1062. doi:10.1016/ j.soilbio.2005.09.003.
153. Welsh, D.A., and Lougheed, S.C. 1996. Relationships of bird community structure and species distributions to two environmental gradients in the northern boreal forest. Ecography, 19(2): 194-208. doi:10.1111/j.1600-0587.1996. tb00168.x.
154. Whelan, C.J., and Maina, G.G. 2005. Effects of season, understorey vegetation density, habitat edge and tree diameter on patch-use by bark-foraging birds. Funct. Ecol. 19(3): 529-536. doi:10.1111/j. 1365-2435.2005.00996.x.
155. Whittaker, R.H. 1972. Evolution and measurement of species diversity. Taxon, 21(2-3): 213-251. doi:10.2307/1218190.
156. Wikström, P., and Eriksson, L.O. 2000. Solving the stand management problem under biodiversity-related considerations. For. Ecol. Manage. 126(3): 361-376. doi:10.1016/S0378-1127(99)00107-3.
157. Willson, M.F., and Comet, T.A. 1996a. Bird communities of northern forests: Ecological correlates of diversity and abundance in the understory. Condor, 98(2): 350-362. doi:10.2307/1369153.
158. Willson, M.F., and Comet, T.A. 1996b. Bird communities of northern forests: Patterns of diversity and abundance. Condor, 98(2): 337- 349. doi:10.2307/1369152.
159. Wilson, M.W., Pithon, J., Gittings, T., Kelly, T.C., Giller, P.S., and O'Halloran, J. 2006. Effects of growth stage and tree species composition on breeding bird assemblages of plantation forests. Bird Study, 53(3): 225-236. doi:10.1080/00063650609461437.
160. Work, T.T., Shorthouse, D.P., Spence, J.R., Volney, W.J.A., and Langor, D. 2004. Stand composition and structure of the boreal mixedwood and epigaeic arthropods of the Ecosystem Management Emulating Natural Disturbance (EMEND) landbase in northwestern Alberta. Can. J. For. Res. 34(2): 417-430. doi:10.1139/x03-238.
161. Young, L., Betts, M.G., and Diamond, A.W. 2005. Do Blackburnian Warblers select mixed forest? The importance of spatial resolution in defining habitat. For. Ecol. Manage. 214(1-3): 358-372. doi:10. 1016/j.foreco.2005.04.022.