G. M. Martínez Pastur, Dante Loto, Julián Rodríguez-Souilla, Eduarda M. O. Silveira, J. M. Cellini, P. L. Peri
{"title":"Different Approaches of Forest Type Classifications for Argentina Based on Functional Forests and Canopy Cover Composition by Tree Species","authors":"G. M. Martínez Pastur, Dante Loto, Julián Rodríguez-Souilla, Eduarda M. O. Silveira, J. M. Cellini, P. L. Peri","doi":"10.3390/resources13050062","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Modern forestry systems rely on typologies of forest types (FTs). In Argentina, several proposals have been developed, but they lack unified criteria. The objective was to compare different approaches, specifically focusing on (i) phenoclusters (functional forests based on vegetation phenology variations and climate variables) and (ii) forest canopy cover composition by tree species. We conducted comparative uni-variate analyses using data from national forest inventories, forest models (biodiversity, carbon, structure), and regional climate. We assessed the performance of phenoclusters in differentiating the variability of native forests (proxy: forest structure), biodiversity (proxy: indicator species), and environmental factors (proxies: soil carbon stock, elevation, climate). Additionally, we proposed a simple FT classification methodology based on species composition, considering the basal area of tree species. Finally, we compared the performance of both proposals. Our findings showed that classifications based on forest canopy cover composition are feasible to implement in regions dominated by mono-specific forests. However, phenoclusters allowed for the increased complexity of categories at the landscape level. Conversely, in regions where multi-specific stands prevailed, classifications based on forest canopy cover composition proved ineffective; however, phenoclusters facilitated a reduction in complexity at the landscape level. These results offer a pathway to harmonize national FT classifications by employing criteria and indicators to achieve sustainable forest management and conservation initiatives.","PeriodicalId":37723,"journal":{"name":"Resources","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Resources","FirstCategoryId":"1087","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/resources13050062","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Modern forestry systems rely on typologies of forest types (FTs). In Argentina, several proposals have been developed, but they lack unified criteria. The objective was to compare different approaches, specifically focusing on (i) phenoclusters (functional forests based on vegetation phenology variations and climate variables) and (ii) forest canopy cover composition by tree species. We conducted comparative uni-variate analyses using data from national forest inventories, forest models (biodiversity, carbon, structure), and regional climate. We assessed the performance of phenoclusters in differentiating the variability of native forests (proxy: forest structure), biodiversity (proxy: indicator species), and environmental factors (proxies: soil carbon stock, elevation, climate). Additionally, we proposed a simple FT classification methodology based on species composition, considering the basal area of tree species. Finally, we compared the performance of both proposals. Our findings showed that classifications based on forest canopy cover composition are feasible to implement in regions dominated by mono-specific forests. However, phenoclusters allowed for the increased complexity of categories at the landscape level. Conversely, in regions where multi-specific stands prevailed, classifications based on forest canopy cover composition proved ineffective; however, phenoclusters facilitated a reduction in complexity at the landscape level. These results offer a pathway to harmonize national FT classifications by employing criteria and indicators to achieve sustainable forest management and conservation initiatives.
现代林业系统依赖于森林类型(FT)的划分。在阿根廷,已经提出了一些建议,但缺乏统一的标准。我们的目标是比较不同的方法,特别是侧重于 (i) 表层集群(基于植被物候变化和气候变量的功能林)和 (ii) 按树种划分的林冠覆盖成分。我们利用国家森林资源清查数据、森林模型(生物多样性、碳、结构)和区域气候数据进行了单变量比较分析。我们评估了表簇在区分本地森林(替代物:森林结构)、生物多样性(替代物:指示物种)和环境因素(替代物:土壤碳储量、海拔、气候)的变异性方面的性能。此外,我们还提出了一种基于树种组成的简单森林分类方法,考虑了树种的基部面积。最后,我们比较了两种方案的性能。我们的研究结果表明,在以单一树种森林为主的地区,基于林冠覆盖成分的分类方法是可行的。然而,表层集群允许在景观层面增加分类的复杂性。相反,在以多特异性林分为主的地区,基于森林冠层覆盖成分的分类证明是无效的;然而,表型集群有助于降低景观层面的复杂性。这些结果为采用标准和指标协调国家森林分类提供了一条途径,以实现可持续森林管理和保护倡议。
ResourcesEnvironmental Science-Nature and Landscape Conservation
CiteScore
7.20
自引率
6.10%
发文量
0
审稿时长
11 weeks
期刊介绍:
Resources (ISSN 2079-9276) is an international, scholarly open access journal on the topic of natural resources. It publishes reviews, regular research papers, communications and short notes, and there is no restriction on the length of the papers. Our aim is to encourage scientists to publish their experimental and theoretical research in as much detail as possible. Full experimental and methodical details must be provided so that the results can be reproduced. There are, in addition, unique features of this journal: manuscripts regarding research proposals and research ideas will be particularly welcomed, electronic files or software regarding the full details of the calculation and experimental procedure, if unable to be published in a normal way, can be deposited as supplementary material. Subject Areas: natural resources, water resources, mineral resources, energy resources, land resources, plant and animal resources, genetic resources, ecology resources, resource management and policy, resources conservation and recycling.