From tree to stand-level structural complexity — Which properties make a forest stand complex?

Agricultural and Forest Meteorology

Volumn 278, Issue , 2019, Pages

  Seidel, Dominik ^a   Ehbrecht, Martin ^a   Annighofer P ^a   Ammer, Christian ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF GÖTTINGEN   (Germany)

Author keywords

Forest structure; Fractal analysis; Hainich national Park; LiDAR; Scaling; Tree architecture

Indexed keywords

BIODIVERSITY; BROAD-LEAVED FOREST; COMPLEXITY; DATA PROCESSING; DATA SET; FOREST MANAGEMENT; FRACTAL ANALYSIS; LASER METHOD; LIDAR; SAMPLING; STAND STRUCTURE;

GERMANY; HAINICH NATIONAL PARK; NORTH AMERICA; THURINGIA;

EID: 85070536971     PISSN: 01681923     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.agrformet.2019.107699     Document Type: Article

References (43)

1. Acker, S.A., Sabin, T.E., Ganio, L.M., McKee, W.A., Development of old-growth structure and timber volume growth trends in maturing Douglas-fir stands. For. Ecol. Manage. 104 (1998), 265–280.
2. Alados, C.L., Pueyo, Y., Navas, D., Cabezudo, B., Gonzalez, A., Freeman, D.C., Fractal analysis of plant spatial patterns: a monitoring tool for vegetation transition shifts. Biodivers. Conserv. 14 (2005), 1453–1468.
3. Cianelli, L., Chan, K., Bailey, K.M., et al. Nonadditive effects of the environment on the survival of a large marine fish population. Ecology 85 (2004), 3418–3427.
4. Ehbrecht, M., Schall, P., Ammer, C., Seidel, D., Quantifying stand structural complexity and its relationship with forest management, tree species diversity and microclimate. Agric. For. Meteorol. 242 (2017), 1–9.
5. Ehbrecht, M., Schall, P., Ammer, C., Fischer, M., andSeidel, D., Effects of structural heterogeneity on the diurnal temperature range in temperate forest ecosystems. For. Ecol. Manage. 432 (2019), 860–867.
6. Ellison, A.M., Bank, M.S., Clinton, B.D., Colburn, E.A., Elliott, K., Ford, C.R., et al. Loss of foundation species: consequences for the structure and dynamics of forested ecosystems. Front. Ecol. Environ. 3 (2005), 479–486.
7. Filotas, E., Parrott, L., Burton, P.J., Chazdon, R.L., Coates, K.D., Coll, L., Haeussler, S., Martin, K., Nocentini, S., Puettmann, K.J., Putz, F.E., Simard, S.W., Messier, C., Viewing forests through the lens of complex systems science. Ecosphere 5:1 (2014), 1–23.
8. Frech, A., Leuschner, C., Hagemeier, M., Hölscher, D., Neighbor-dependent canopy dimensions of ash, hornbeam, and lime in a species-rich mixed forest (Hainich National Park, Thuringia). Forstwiss. Cent. 122 (2003), 22–35.
9. Gadow, K., Zhang, C.Y., Wehenkel, C., Pommerening, A., Corral-Rivas, J., Korol, M., et al. Forest structure and diversity. Pukkala, T., Gadow, K., (eds.) Continuous Cover Forestry., 23, 2012, Springer Science+Business Media B.V, Dordrecht, 29–83 Managing forest ecosystems.
10. Gustafsson, L., Baker, S.C., Bauhus, J., Beese, W.J., Brodie, A., Kouki, J., Lindenmayer, D.B., Lõhmus, A., Martínez Pastur, G., Messier, C., Neyland, M., Palik, B., Sverdrup-Thygeson, A., Volney, W.J.A., Wayne, A., Franklin, J.F., Retention forestry to maintain multifunctional forests: a world perspective. Bioscience 62 (2012), 633–645, 10.1525/bio.2012.62.7.6.
11. Juchheim, J., Annighöfer, P., Ammer, C., Calders, K., Raumonen, P., Seidel, D., How management intensity and neighborhood composition affect the structure of beech (Fagus sylvatica L.) trees. Trees 31:5 (2017), 1723–1735.
12. Juchheim, J., Ammer, C., Schall, P., Seidel, D., Canopy space filling rather than conventional measures of structural heterogeneity explains productivity of beech stands. For. Ecol. Manage. 395 (2017), 19–26.
13. Hackenberg, J., Morhart, C., Sheppard, J., Spiecker, H., Disney, M., Highly accurate tree models derived from terrestrial laser scan data: a method description. Forests 5:5 (2014), 1069–1105.
14. Hackenberg, J., Spiecker, H., Calders, K., Disney, M., Raumonen, P., SimpleTree—an efficient open source tool to build tree models from TLS clouds. Forests 6:11 (2015), 4245–4294.
15. Hackenberg, J., Wassenberg, M., Spiecker, H., Sun, D., Non destructive method for biomass prediction combining TLS derived tree volume and wood density. Forests 6:4 (2015), 1274–1300.
16. Hardiman, B.S., Gough, C.M., Halperin, A., Hofmeister, K.L., Nave, L.E., Bohrer, G., et al. Maintaining high rates of carbon storage in old forests: a mechanism linking canopy structure to forest function. For. Ecol. Manage. 298 (2013), 111–119.
17. Kint, V., Robert, D.W., Noël, L., Evaluation of sampling methods for the estimation of structural indices in forest stands. Ecol. Modell. 180 (2004), 461–476.
18. Knohl, A., Schulze, E.D., Kolle, O., Buchmann, N., Large carbon uptake by an unmanaged 250-year-old deciduous forest in Central Germany. Agric. For. Meteorol. 118 (2003), 151–167.
19. Kovács, B., Tinya, F., Ódor, P., Stand structural drivers of microclimate in mature temperate mixed forests. Agric. For. Meteorol. 234–235 (2017), 11–21.
20. Lindenmayer, D.B., Franklin, J.F., Conserving Forest Biodiversity: A Comprehensive Multiscaled Approach. 2002, Island Press, Washington.
21. Larocque, G.R., (eds.) Ecological Forest Management Handbook, 2016, CRC Press, Boca Raton, Fl., USA 603 p. Lindenmayer, D.B., Franklin, J.F. (2002). Conserving forest biodiversity: A comprehensive multiscaled approach. Island Press, Washington.
22. Lindenmayer, D.B., Margules, C.R., Botkin, D.B., Indicators of biodiversity for ecologically sustainable forest management. Conserv. Biol. 14 (2000), 941–950.
23. Mandelbrot, B.B., The Fractal Geometry of Nature. 1977, W.H. Freeman Company, N.Y., USA.
24. Mayr, E., Das Ist Biologie – Die Wissenschaft Des Lebens. 2000, Spektrum Akademischer Verlag Heidelberg, Berlin p. 403.
25. Mölder, I., Diversity and Tree Neighborhood Effects on the Growth Dynamics of European Beech and the Stand Seed Bank in Temperate Broad-leaved Forests of Variable Tree Diversity. Dissertation. 2009, Georg August University of Goettingen, Goettingen 83 p.
26. Mund, M., Carbon Pools of European Beech Forests ( ) Under Different Silvicultural Management. 256 p, 2004.
27. Messier, C., Puettmann, K.J., Coates, K.D., (eds.) Managing Forests as Complex Adaptive Systems: Building Resilience to the Challenge of Global Change, 2013, Routledge.
28. Neill, A.R., Puettmann, K.J., Managing for adaptive capacity: thinning improves food availability for wildlife and insect pollinators under climate change conditions. Can. J. For. Res. 43 (2013), 428–440.
29. Neumann, M., Starlinger, F., The significance of different indices for stand structure and diversity in forests. For. Ecol. Manage. 145 (2001), 91–106.
30. Piboule, A., Krebs, M., Esclatine, L., Hervé, J.-C., Computree: a collaborative platform for use of terrestrial lidar in dendrometry. International IUFRO Conference MeMoWood, 2013.
31. Pommerening, A., Approaches to quantifying forest structures. Forestry 75 (2002), 305–324.
32. Pretzsch, H., Biber, P., Uhl, E., Dauber, E., Long-term stand dynamics of managed spruce–fir–beech mountain forests in Central Europe: structure, productivity and regeneration success. Forestry 88 (2015), 407–428.
33. Ribe, R.G., In-stand scenic beauty of variable retention harvests and mature forests in the U.S. Pacific Northwest: the effects of basal area, density, retention pattern and down wood. J. Environ. Manage. 91 (2009), 245–260.
34. Sarkar, N., Chaudhuri, B.B., An efficient differential box-counting approach to compute fractal dimension of image. IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. 24:1 (1994), 115–120.
35. Schall, P., Schulze, E.-D., Fischer, M., Ayasse, M., Ammer, C., Relations between forest management, stand structure and productivity across different types of Central European forests. Basic Appl. Ecol. 32 (2018), 39–52.
36. Seidel, D., A holistic approach to determine tree structural complexity based on laser scanning data and fractal analysis. Ecol. Evol., 8(1), 2018.
37. Seidel, D., Leuschner, C., Müller, A., Krause, B., Crown plasticity in mixed forests - quantifying asymmetry as a measure of competition using terrestrial laser scanning. For. Ecol. Manage. 261:11 (2011), 2123–2132.
38. Seidel, D., Schall, P., Gille, M., Ammer, C., Relationship between tree growth and physical dimensions of Fagus sylvatica crowns assessed from terrestrial laser scanning. iForest — Biogeosci. For. 8 (2015), 735–742.
39. Shi, S., Nuccio, E.E., Shi, Z.J., He, Z., Zhou, J., Firestone, M.K., The interconnected rhizosphere: high network complexity dominates rhizosphere assemblages. Ecol. Lett. 19:8 (2016), 926–936.
40. Silvennoinen, H., Alho, J., Kolehmainen, O., Pukkala, T., Prediction models of landscape preferences at the forest stand level. Landsc. Urban Plan. 56 (2001), 11–20.
41. Van Der Meersschaut, D., Vandekerkhove, K., Development of a stand-scale forest biodiversity index based on the State Forest inventory. Hansen, M., Burk, T., (eds.) Integrated Tools for Natural Resources Inventories in the 21st Century., 1998, USDA, Boise, Idaho, 340–349.
42. Wood, S.N., Fast stable restricted maximum likelihood and marginal likelihood estimation of semiparametric generalized linear models. J. R. Stat. Soc. Ser. B 73 (2011), 3–36.
43. Wood, S.N., Generalized additive models. An Introduction With R, 2nd ed, 2017, Chapman & Hall/CRC, Boca Raton.