首页> 外文期刊>Acta oecologica >Clear-cuts in production forests: From matrix to neo-habitat for butterflies
【24h】

Clear-cuts in production forests: From matrix to neo-habitat for butterflies

机译:生产林中的明确砍伐范围:从基质到蝴蝶的新栖息地

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

Butterfly conservation in Europe is mainly focused on well-defined grassland habitat patches. Such an approach ignores the impact of the surrounding landscape, which may contain complementary resources and facilitate dispersal. Here, we investigated butterfly species richness and abundance in a habitat normally regarded as unsuitable matrix: production forestry clear-cuts. Butterflies were recorded in 48 clear-cuts in southern Sweden differing with regards to the time since clear-cutting and land-use history (meadow or forest based on historical maps from the 1870s). All clear-cuts had been managed as production forests for at least 80-120 years. A total of 39 species were found in clear-cuts of both land-use histories, but clear-cuts with a history as meadow had on average 34% higher species richness and 19% higher abundance than did clear-cuts with a history as forest. No effect of the time since clear-cutting was found, irrespective of land-use history, which was likely due to the narrow timespan sampled (<8 years). The absence of temporal effect suggests that clear-cuts may provide butterflies with valuable resources for 10-15 years. Assuming a 100 year forest rotational cycle, this means that 10-15% of the total forested area are made up by clear-cuts valuable to butterflies, which corresponds to an area about four times as large as that of species-rich semi-natural grasslands. The study illustrates the importance of considering land-use legacies in ecological research and question the landscape-ecological view that clear-cuts make up an unsuitable matrix for butterflies. Moreover, forest conservation management with special attention to land-use history may increase the quality of the landscape, thus facilitating butterfly metapopulation persistence. Given their large area and assets of nectar and host plant resources, clear-cuts must be considered as a butterfly habitat in its own right. Being a man-made environment with short history, we might call it a neo-habitat. (C) 2015 Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.
机译:欧洲的蝴蝶保护主要集中在明确定义的草地栖息地上。这种方法忽略了周围景观的影响,而周围景观可能包含互补资源并有助于分散。在这里,我们调查了通常被视为不合适的基质的栖息地中蝴蝶物种的丰富度和丰度:林业生产的明确依据。瑞典南部有48条清晰记录的蝴蝶,其记录与清晰记录和土地使用历史(基于1870年代历史地图得出的草甸或森林)以来的时间有所不同。至少80-120年间,所有砍伐的土地都作为生产林进行了管理。在这两种土地利用历史的明确地区中共发现39种,但具有草甸历史的明确地区的物种丰富度和丰度平均比具有森林历史的明确地区平均高34% 。不论土地使用历史如何,都没有发现自明确划分以来的时间影响,这很可能是由于采样时间跨度较小(<8年)所致。暂时性影响的缺乏表明明确的方法可能为蝴蝶提供10-15年的宝贵资源。假设森林轮换周期为100年,这意味着森林总面积的10-15%由对蝴蝶有价值的明确部分组成,这相当于物种丰富的半自然面积的四倍。草原。这项研究说明了在生态研究中考虑土地利用传统的重要性,并质疑景观生态学观点,即明确的构成蝴蝶不适合的基质。此外,特别注意土地使用历史的森林保护管理可以提高景观质量,从而促进蝴蝶种群的持久性。鉴于其广阔的面积以及花蜜和寄主植物资源的丰富资源,必须明确地将其视为蝴蝶的栖息地。作为历史悠久的人造环境,我们可以称其为新居住环境。 (C)2015 Elsevier Masson SAS。版权所有。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号