Peter Schall

Adaptive forest management in central Europe: Climate change impacts, strategies and integrative concept

Abstract Climatic warming may lead to increased or decreased future forest productivity. However, more frequent heat waves, droughts and storms and accompanying pathogen attacks are also expected for Europe and are considered to be increasingly important abiotic and biotic stress factors for forests. Adaptive forestry can help forest ecosystems to adapt to these new conditions in order to achieve management goals, maintain desired forest ecosystem services and reduce the risks of forest degradation. With a focus on central Europe, this paper presents the following management strategies: (1) conservation of forest structures, (2) active adaptation, and (3) passive adaptation. The feasibility and criteria for application of the different strategies are discussed. Forest adaptation may entail the establishment of “neonative” forests, including the use and intermixing of native and non-native tree species as well as non-local tree provenances that may adapt better to future climate conditions. An integrative adaptive management concept is proposed that combines (1) species suitability tests and modelling activities at the international scale, (2) priority mapping of adaptation strategies at the national to regional scale, and (3) implementation at the local scale. To achieve this, an international experimental trial system is required to test suitable adaptive measures throughout Europe and worldwide.

Positive biodiversity-productivity relationship predominant in global forests.

Global biodiversity and productivity The relationship between biodiversity and ecosystem productivity has been explored in detail in herbaceous vegetation, but patterns in forests are far less well understood. Liang et al. have amassed a global forest data set from >770,000 sample plots in 44 countries. A positive and consistent relationship can be discerned between tree diversity and ecosystem productivity at landscape, country, and ecoregion scales. On average, a 10% loss in biodiversity leads to a 3% loss in productivity. This means that the economic value of maintaining biodiversity for the sake of global forest productivity is more than fivefold greater than global conservation costs. Science, this issue p. 196 Global forest inventory records suggest that biodiversity loss would result in a decline in forest productivity worldwide. INTRODUCTION The biodiversity-productivity relationship (BPR; the effect of biodiversity on ecosystem productivity) is foundational to our understanding of the global extinction crisis and its impacts on the functioning of natural ecosystems. The BPR has been a prominent research topic within ecology in recent decades, but it is only recently that we have begun to develop a global perspective. RATIONALE Forests are the most important global repositories of terrestrial biodiversity, but deforestation, forest degradation, climate change, and other factors are threatening approximately one half of tree species worldwide. Although there have been substantial efforts to strengthen the preservation and sustainable use of forest biodiversity throughout the globe, the consequences of this diversity loss pose a major uncertainty for ongoing international forest management and conservation efforts. The forest BPR represents a critical missing link for accurate valuation of global biodiversity and successful integration of biological conservation and socioeconomic development. Until now, there have been limited tree-based diversity experiments, and the forest BPR has only been explored within regional-scale observational studies. Thus, the strength and spatial variability of this relationship remains unexplored at a global scale. RESULTS We explored the effect of tree species richness on tree volume productivity at the global scale using repeated forest inventories from 777,126 permanent sample plots in 44 countries containing more than 30 million trees from 8737 species spanning most of the global terrestrial biomes. Our findings reveal a consistent positive concave-down effect of biodiversity on forest productivity across the world, showing that a continued biodiversity loss would result in an accelerating decline in forest productivity worldwide. The BPR shows considerable geospatial variation across the world. The same percentage of biodiversity loss would lead to a greater relative (that is, percentage) productivity decline in the boreal forests of North America, Northeastern Europe, Central Siberia, East Asia, and scattered regions of South-central Africa and South-central Asia. In the Amazon, West and Southeastern Africa, Southern China, Myanmar, Nepal, and the Malay Archipelago, however, the same percentage of biodiversity loss would lead to greater absolute productivity decline. CONCLUSION Our findings highlight the negative effect of biodiversity loss on forest productivity and the potential benefits from the transition of monocultures to mixed-species stands in forestry practices. The BPR we discover across forest ecosystems worldwide corresponds well with recent theoretical advances, as well as with experimental and observational studies on forest and nonforest ecosystems. On the basis of this relationship, the ongoing species loss in forest ecosystems worldwide could substantially reduce forest productivity and thereby forest carbon absorption rate to compromise the global forest carbon sink. We further estimate that the economic value of biodiversity in maintaining commercial forest productivity alone is

Interannual variation in land-use intensity enhances grassland multidiversity

166 billion to

How to quantify forest management intensity in Central European forests

490 billion per year. Although representing only a small percentage of the total value of biodiversity, this value is two to six times as much as it would cost to effectively implement conservation globally. These results highlight the necessity to reassess biodiversity valuation and the potential benefits of integrating and promoting biological conservation in forest resource management and forestry practices worldwide. Global effect of tree species diversity on forest productivity. Ground-sourced data from 777,126 global forest biodiversity permanent sample plots (dark blue dots, left), which cover a substantial portion of the global forest extent (white), reveal a consistent positive and concave-down biodiversity-productivity relationship across forests worldwide (red line with pink bands representing 95% confidence interval, right). The biodiversity-productivity relationship (BPR) is foundational to our understanding of the global extinction crisis and its impacts on ecosystem functioning. Understanding BPR is critical for the accurate valuation and effective conservation of biodiversity. Using ground-sourced data from 777,126 permanent plots, spanning 44 countries and most terrestrial biomes, we reveal a globally consistent positive concave-down BPR, showing that continued biodiversity loss would result in an accelerating decline in forest productivity worldwide. The value of biodiversity in maintaining commercial forest productivity alone—US

Land-use intensification causes multitrophic homogenization of grassland communities.

166 billion to 490 billion per year according to our estimation—is more than twice what it would cost to implement effective global conservation. This highlights the need for a worldwide reassessment of biodiversity values, forest management strategies, and conservation priorities.

Site adapted admixed tree species reduce drought susceptibility of mature European beech

Significance Land-use intensification is a major threat to biodiversity. So far, however, studies on biodiversity impacts of land-use intensity (LUI) have been limited to a single or few groups of organisms and have not considered temporal variation in LUI. Therefore, we examined total ecosystem biodiversity in grasslands varying in LUI with a newly developed index called multidiversity, which integrates the species richness of 49 different organism groups ranging from bacteria to birds. Multidiversity declined strongly with increasing LUI, but changing LUI across years increased multidiversity, particularly of rarer species. We conclude that encouraging farmers to change the intensity of their land use over time could be an important strategy to maintain high biodiversity in grasslands. Although temporal heterogeneity is a well-accepted driver of biodiversity, effects of interannual variation in land-use intensity (LUI) have not been addressed yet. Additionally, responses to land use can differ greatly among different organisms; therefore, overall effects of land-use on total local biodiversity are hardly known. To test for effects of LUI (quantified as the combined intensity of fertilization, grazing, and mowing) and interannual variation in LUI (SD in LUI across time), we introduce a unique measure of whole-ecosystem biodiversity, multidiversity. This synthesizes individual diversity measures across up to 49 taxonomic groups of plants, animals, fungi, and bacteria from 150 grasslands. Multidiversity declined with increasing LUI among grasslands, particularly for rarer species and aboveground organisms, whereas common species and belowground groups were less sensitive. However, a high level of interannual variation in LUI increased overall multidiversity at low LUI and was even more beneficial for rarer species because it slowed the rate at which the multidiversity of rare species declined with increasing LUI. In more intensively managed grasslands, the diversity of rarer species was, on average, 18% of the maximum diversity across all grasslands when LUI was static over time but increased to 31% of the maximum when LUI changed maximally over time. In addition to decreasing overall LUI, we suggest varying LUI across years as a complementary strategy to promote biodiversity conservation.

Adaptive Forest Management: A Prerequisite for Sustainable Forestry in the Face of Climate Change

Existing approaches for the assessment of forest management intensity lack a widely accepted, purely quantitative measure for ranking a set of forest stands along a gradient of management intensity. We have developed a silvicultural management intensity indicator (SMI) which combines three main characteristics of a given stand: tree species, stand age and aboveground, living and dead wooden biomass. Data on these three factors are used as input to represent the risk of stand loss, which is a function of tree species and stand age, and stand density, which is a function of the silvicultural regime, stand age and tree species. Consequently, the indicator consists of a risk component (SMIr) and a density component (SMId). We used SMI to rank traditional management of the main Central European tree species: Norway spruce (Picea abies [Karst.] L.), European beech (Fagus sylvatica L.), Scots pine (Pinus sylvestris L.), and oak (Quercus robur L. and Quercus petraea L.). By analysing SMI over their whole rotation period, we found the following ranking of management intensity: oak<beech<pine≪spruce. Additionally, we quantified the SMI of actual research plots of the German Biodiversity exploratories, which represent unmanaged and managed forest stands including conifer forests cultivated outside their natural range. SMI not only successfully separate managed from unmanaged forests, but also reflected the variability of forest management and stand properties across the entire sample and within the different management groups. We suggest using SMI to quantify silvicultual management intensity of stands differing in species composition, age, silvicultural system (even-aged vs. uneven-aged), thinning grade and stages of stand conversion from one stand type into another. Using SMI may facilitate the assessment of the impact of forest management intensity on biodiversity in temperate forests.

Species-specific and generic biomass equations for seedlings and saplings of European tree species

Land-use intensification is a major driver of biodiversity loss. Alongside reductions in local species diversity, biotic homogenization at larger spatial scales is of great concern for conservation. Biotic homogenization means a decrease in β-diversity (the compositional dissimilarity between sites). Most studies have investigated losses in local (α)-diversity and neglected biodiversity loss at larger spatial scales. Studies addressing β-diversity have focused on single or a few organism groups (for example, ref. 4), and it is thus unknown whether land-use intensification homogenizes communities at different trophic levels, above- and belowground. Here we show that even moderate increases in local land-use intensity (LUI) cause biotic homogenization across microbial, plant and animal groups, both above- and belowground, and that this is largely independent of changes in α-diversity. We analysed a unique grassland biodiversity dataset, with abundances of more than 4,000 species belonging to 12 trophic groups. LUI, and, in particular, high mowing intensity, had consistent effects on β-diversity across groups, causing a homogenization of soil microbial, fungal pathogen, plant and arthropod communities. These effects were nonlinear and the strongest declines in β-diversity occurred in the transition from extensively managed to intermediate intensity grassland. LUI tended to reduce local α-diversity in aboveground groups, whereas the α-diversity increased in belowground groups. Correlations between the β-diversity of different groups, particularly between plants and their consumers, became weaker at high LUI. This suggests a loss of specialist species and is further evidence for biotic homogenization. The consistently negative effects of LUI on landscape-scale biodiversity underscore the high value of extensively managed grasslands for conserving multitrophic biodiversity and ecosystem service provision. Indeed, biotic homogenization rather than local diversity loss could prove to be the most substantial consequence of land-use intensification.

Phylogenetic and functional traits of ectomycorrhizal assemblages in top soil from different biogeographic regions and forest types.

Some forest-related studies on possible effects of climate change conclude that growth potential of European beech (Fagus sylvatica L.) might be impaired by the predicted increase in future serious drought events during the growing season. Other recent research suggests that not only multiyear increment rates but also growth resistance and recovery of beech during, respectively, after dry years may differ between pure and mixed stands. Thus, we combined dendrochronological investigations and wood stable isotope measurements to further investigate the impact of neighborhood diversity on long-term performance, short-term drought response and soil water availability of European beech in three major geographic regions of Germany. During the last four decades, target trees whose competitive neighborhood consisted of co-occurring species exhibited a superior growth performance compared to beeches in pure stands of the same investigation area. This general pattern was also found in exceptional dry years. Although the summer droughts of 1976 and 2003 predominantly caused stronger relative growth declines if target trees were exposed to interspecific competition, with few exceptions they still formed wider annual rings than beeches growing in close-by monocultures. Within the same study region, recovery of standardized beech target tree radial growth was consistently slower in monospecific stands than in the neighborhood of other competitor species. These findings suggest an improved water availability of beech in mixtures what is in line with the results of the stable isotope analysis. Apparently, the magnitude of competitive complementarity determines the growth response of target beech trees in mixtures. Our investigation strongly suggest that the sensitivity of European beech to environmental constrains depends on neighborhood identity. Therefore, the systematic formation of mixed stands tends to be an appropriate silvicultural measure to mitigate the effects of global warming and droughts on growth patterns of Fagus sylvatica.

Drivers of nitrogen leaching from organic layers in Central European beech forests

Since Europe appears to be more affected by climate change than the global average, novel concepts for the adaptation of forest and forestry to future climate and site conditions are urgently needed in order to maintain a sustainable use of forest resources. In Central Europe, extreme weather events like heat waves, drought, and storms, which may increase in frequency and intensity, as well as raised activity of biotic agents, are thought to put a high level of disturbance pressure on forests. Based on recent studies and conceptual papers, we introduce a concept for adaptive forest management in Central Europe including various options for (1) perpetuation of forest structures, (2) active adaptation, and (3) passive adaptation. The feasibility of this concept in forest planning is discussed in light of examples from Bavaria (Germany) and southern Sweden.