Same, but different: similar states of forest structure in temperate mountain regions of Europe despite different social-ecological forest disturbance regimes

IF 4 2区 环境科学与生态学 Q1 ECOLOGY
Ana Stritih, Cornelius Senf, Tobias Kuemmerle, Catalina Munteanu, Lasha Dzadzamia, Jernej Stritih, Dragan Matijašić, Owen Cortner, Rupert Seidl
{"title":"Same, but different: similar states of forest structure in temperate mountain regions of Europe despite different social-ecological forest disturbance regimes","authors":"Ana Stritih, Cornelius Senf, Tobias Kuemmerle, Catalina Munteanu, Lasha Dzadzamia, Jernej Stritih, Dragan Matijašić, Owen Cortner, Rupert Seidl","doi":"10.1007/s10980-024-01908-x","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Context</h3><p>Ecosystem services provided by mountain forests are critically linked to forest structure. Social-ecological disturbance regimes (i.e., the rate, frequency, and patch size distribution of disturbances driven by interacting natural and anthropogenic processes) and land use affect forest structure, but their specific impacts are not fully understood.</p><h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Objectives</h3><p>We examine how differences in disturbance regimes affect patterns of forest structure across three European mountain ranges with similar vegetation types but different land-use histories: the European Alps, the Carpathians, and the Caucasus.</p><h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Methods</h3><p>We related data on horizontal and vertical forest structure, measured by spaceborne lidar (GEDI), with Landsat-derived information on forest disturbances (1986–2020) and topographic, climatic, and anthropogenic predictors.</p><h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Results</h3><p>We found similar social-ecological disturbance regimes in the Alps and Carpathians (average annual disturbance rates of 0.34% and 0.39%, respectively, and median patch size &lt; 0.5 ha), yet much lower disturbance rates and patch sizes in the Caucasus (0.08% yr<sup>−1</sup> and &lt; 0.2 ha). Despite different disturbance regimes, we found similar patterns of forest structure. Two alternative states emerged consistently across all mountain ranges: a tall and closed-canopy state in 74–80% of forests and a low and open-canopy state (&lt; 50% canopy cover) in the rest. While forest structure responded consistently to abiotic drivers such as topography and climate, its association with anthropogenic pressures differed between mountain ranges. Stand-replacing disturbances played an important role in the Carpathians, while forest structure in the Caucasus was related to proximity to settlements, reflecting local forest use.</p><h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Conclusions</h3><p>Different social-ecological contexts in mountain regions can produce markedly different forest disturbance regimes. Despite these differences, similar states of forest structures emerge, suggesting strong attractors of structure in temperate mountain forests.</p>","PeriodicalId":54745,"journal":{"name":"Landscape Ecology","volume":"69 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Landscape Ecology","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10980-024-01908-x","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Context

Ecosystem services provided by mountain forests are critically linked to forest structure. Social-ecological disturbance regimes (i.e., the rate, frequency, and patch size distribution of disturbances driven by interacting natural and anthropogenic processes) and land use affect forest structure, but their specific impacts are not fully understood.

Objectives

We examine how differences in disturbance regimes affect patterns of forest structure across three European mountain ranges with similar vegetation types but different land-use histories: the European Alps, the Carpathians, and the Caucasus.

Methods

We related data on horizontal and vertical forest structure, measured by spaceborne lidar (GEDI), with Landsat-derived information on forest disturbances (1986–2020) and topographic, climatic, and anthropogenic predictors.

Results

We found similar social-ecological disturbance regimes in the Alps and Carpathians (average annual disturbance rates of 0.34% and 0.39%, respectively, and median patch size < 0.5 ha), yet much lower disturbance rates and patch sizes in the Caucasus (0.08% yr−1 and < 0.2 ha). Despite different disturbance regimes, we found similar patterns of forest structure. Two alternative states emerged consistently across all mountain ranges: a tall and closed-canopy state in 74–80% of forests and a low and open-canopy state (< 50% canopy cover) in the rest. While forest structure responded consistently to abiotic drivers such as topography and climate, its association with anthropogenic pressures differed between mountain ranges. Stand-replacing disturbances played an important role in the Carpathians, while forest structure in the Caucasus was related to proximity to settlements, reflecting local forest use.

Conclusions

Different social-ecological contexts in mountain regions can produce markedly different forest disturbance regimes. Despite these differences, similar states of forest structures emerge, suggesting strong attractors of structure in temperate mountain forests.

Abstract Image

同中有异:欧洲温带山区森林结构状态相似,但社会生态森林干扰机制不同
背景山地森林提供的生态系统服务与森林结构密切相关。社会生态干扰机制(即我们研究了干扰机制的差异如何影响欧洲阿尔卑斯山脉、喀尔巴阡山脉和高加索山脉这三个植被类型相似但土地利用历史不同的山脉的森林结构模式。方法我们将空间激光雷达(GEDI)测量的水平和垂直森林结构数据与大地遥感卫星获取的森林干扰信息(1986-2020 年)以及地形、气候和人为预测因子联系起来。结果我们发现阿尔卑斯山脉和喀尔巴阡山脉的社会生态干扰机制相似(年平均干扰率分别为 0.34% 和 0.39%,中位斑块面积为 0.5 公顷),但高加索地区的干扰率和斑块面积要低得多(年平均干扰率为 0.08% 和 0.2 公顷)。尽管扰动机制不同,但我们发现了类似的森林结构模式。在所有山脉中都出现了两种可供选择的状态:74-80%的森林处于高大和郁闭树冠状态,其余森林处于低矮和开阔树冠状态(树冠覆盖率为 50%)。虽然森林结构对地形和气候等非生物驱动因素的反应是一致的,但其与人为压力的关系却因山脉而异。在喀尔巴阡山脉,立地重置干扰起着重要作用,而高加索地区的森林结构则与是否靠近居民点有关,这反映了当地的森林使用情况。尽管存在这些差异,但却出现了类似的森林结构状态,这表明温带山区森林结构具有很强的吸引力。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Landscape Ecology
Landscape Ecology 环境科学-地球科学综合
CiteScore
8.30
自引率
7.70%
发文量
164
审稿时长
8-16 weeks
期刊介绍: Landscape Ecology is the flagship journal of a well-established and rapidly developing interdisciplinary science that focuses explicitly on the ecological understanding of spatial heterogeneity. Landscape Ecology draws together expertise from both biophysical and socioeconomic sciences to explore basic and applied research questions concerning the ecology, conservation, management, design/planning, and sustainability of landscapes as coupled human-environment systems. Landscape ecology studies are characterized by spatially explicit methods in which spatial attributes and arrangements of landscape elements are directly analyzed and related to ecological processes.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信