Index of biodiversity potential (IBP) versus direct species monitoring in temperate forests

2022 | journal article; research paper. A publication with affiliation to the University of Göttingen.

Jump to: Cite & Linked | Documents & Media | Details | Version history

Cite this publication

​Index of biodiversity potential (IBP) versus direct species monitoring in temperate forests​
Zeller, L.; Baumann, C.; Gonin, P.; Heidrich, L.; Keye, C.; Konrad, F. & Larrieu, L. et al.​ (2022) 
Ecological Indicators136 art. S1470160X22001637​.​ DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2022.108692 

Documents & Media

Main article1.22 MBAdobe PDF

License

Usage license

Details

Authors
Zeller, Laura; Baumann, Charlotte; Gonin, Pierre; Heidrich, Lea; Keye, Constanze; Konrad, Felix; Larrieu, Laurent; Meyer, Peter; Sennhenn-Reulen, Holger ; Müller, Jörg; Ammer, Christian 
Abstract
Effects of forest management on forest biodiversity have received increasing attention in both research and forestry practice. Despite advances in technology, monitoring of biodiversity remains time and cost-intensive and requires specific taxonomic expertise. In forest management, however, there is increasing interest and need to integrate biodiversity monitoring into forest inventories efficiently to estimate the potential effects of forest management on biodiversity. Forest management systems can differ greatly depending on management goals and the intensity and frequency of the applied silvicultural interventions. To identify management effects on biodiversity, an estimation of biodiversity using forest structural attributes may be a reasonable approach. Forest structure can – compared to conventional species-based monitoring - easily be captured during forest inventories and does not require specific taxonomic expertise. The IBP (Index of Biodiversity Potential) is a composite index aiming to provide practitioners with an efficient tool for estimating biodiversity at the local level. We recorded the IBP on 147 plots in three regions of Germany, where detailed biodiversity monitoring had been conducted. This study quantified the relationship between changes in the IBP scores and changes in species richness for 13 taxonomic groups. To determine this, we analyzed estimated relationships between the IBP and species richness using a count regression model. We found positive estimated relationships with species richness of birds, fungi, true bugs, lichens, and moths in at least 3 of 5 examined forest types. However, for spiders, bats, carabids, necrophagous and saproxylic beetles, either no relationship with the IBP or estimated relationships with only one forest type were found. Changes in scores for the IBP’s factors number of vertical layers, large living trees, tree-related microhabitats, and proportion of gaps correlated with changes in the measured species richness in many cases. Even though the IBP is generally not adequate to predict actual presence or precise number of species, it can be utilized to depict a forest stand’s potential in terms of species richness. Due to its easy and time-efficient application, it could be a useful proxy used in combination with species-based monitoring approaches.
Issue Date
2022
Journal
Ecological Indicators 
Organization
Fakultät für Forstwissenschaften und Waldökologie ; Burckhardt-Institut ; Abteilung Waldbau und Waldökologie der gemäßigten Zonen 
ISSN
1470-160X
Language
English
Sponsor
Open-Access-Publikationsfonds 2022

Reference

Citations


Social Media