Advertisement

Biodiversity & Conservation

, Volume 5, Issue 1, pp 75–100 | Cite as

What factors influence the diversity of saproxylic beetles? A multiscaled study from a spruce forest in southern Norway

  • Bjørn Økland
  • Alf Bakke
  • Sigmund Hågvar
  • Torstein Kvamme
Papers

The diversity in different groups of obligate saproxylic beetles was related to ecological variables at three levels of spatial scale in mature spruce-dominated forest. The variables were connected to: (i) decaying wood, (ii) wood-inhabiting fungi, (iii) the level of disturbance, (iv) landscape ecology, and (v) vegetational structure. Several strong relationships were found at medium (1 km2) and large scales (4 km2), while only weak relationships were found at a small scale (0.16 ha; 1 ha=104 m2). This may be explained by the local variations in habitat parameters and the high mobilities of many beetle species. Factors connected to decaying wood and wood-inhabiting fungi were clearly the most important factors at all scale levels. In particular, the variables diversity of dead tree parts, number of dead trees of large diameter and number of polypore fungi species increased the species richness of many groups and increased the abundance of many species. Eight species were absent below a certain density of decaying wood per 1 or 4 km2. Former extensive cutting was a negative factor at large scale, probably because of decreasing recolonization with increasing distance to the source habitats. Thinning reduced the diversity of species associated with birch. The development of guidelines favouring the diversity of saproxylic beetles are discussed below.

Keywords

saproxylic Coleoptera spruce forest spatial scale conservation 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Albrechts, L. (1991) Die Bedeutung des toten Holzes im Wald. Forstw. Cbl. 110, 106–13.Google Scholar
  2. Ås, S. (1993) Are habitat islands islands? Woodliving beetles (Coleoptera) in deciduous forest fragments in boreal forest. Ecography 16, 219–28.Google Scholar
  3. Bell, S., McCoy, E.D. and Mushinsky, H.R. (1991) Habitat Structure. London: Chapman and Hall.Google Scholar
  4. Bhattacharyya, G.K. and Johnson, R.A. (1977) Statistical Concepts and Methods. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  5. Biström, O. and Vaïsänen, R. (1988) Ancient-forest invertebrates of the Pyhän-Häkki national park in Central Finland. Acta Zool. Fennica 185, 1–69.Google Scholar
  6. Børset, O. (1986) Skogskiøtsel [Forest management] Volume II. Oslo: Landbruksforlaget.Google Scholar
  7. Brakefield, P.M. (1991) Genetics and the conservation of invertebrates. In The scientific Management of Temperate Communities for Conservation (I.F., Spellerberg, F.B., Goldsmith and M.G., Morris eds) pp. 45–79. Oxford: Blackwell Scientific Publications.Google Scholar
  8. Bredesen, B., Røsok, Ø., Aanderaa, R., Gaarder, G., Økland, B. and Haugan, R. (1994) Vurdering av Indikatorarter for Kontinuitet, Granskog i Øst-Norge [Evaluation of indicator species on continuity]. Oslo: Naturvernforbundet, Oslo and Akershus rapport 1994–1. (In Norwegian with an English summary.)Google Scholar
  9. Chandler, D. (1987) Species richness and abundance of Pselaphidae (Coleoptera) in an old-growth and 40-years-old forests in New Hampshire. Can. J. Zool. 65, 608–15.Google Scholar
  10. Chandler, D. (1991) Comparison of slime-mold and fungus feeding beetles (Coleoptera) in an old-growth and 40-years-old forests in New Hampshire. Coleopt. Bull. 45, 239–56.Google Scholar
  11. Chandler, D. and Peck, S.B. (1992) Diversity and seasonality of leiodid beetles (Coleoptera: Leiodidae) in an old-growth and a 40-years-old forest in New Hampshire. Environ. Entomol. 21, 1283–93.Google Scholar
  12. Ehnström, B. and Waldén, H.W. (1986) Faunavård i skogbruket. Del 2—Den lägre faunan. Skogsstyrelsen: Jönköping. (In Swedish with an English summary.)Google Scholar
  13. Ehnström, B., Gärdenfors, U. and Lindelöw, Å. (1993) Swedish Red List of Invertebrates. Uppsala: Databanken för hotade arter. (In Swedish with an English abstract.)Google Scholar
  14. Esseen, P.-A., Ehnström, B., Ericson, L. and Sjöberg, K. (1992) Boreal forests—the focal habitats of Fennoscandia. In Ecological Principles of Nature Conservation. Applications in temperate and boreal environments (L., Hansson) pp. 252–325. London: Elsevier Applied Science.Google Scholar
  15. Fremstad, E. and Elven, R. (1987) Enheter for vegetasjonskartlegging i Norge. Økoforsk utredning 1. Trondeim: Norsk Institute for Naturforskning.Google Scholar
  16. Freund, J.E. (1992) Mathematical Statistics. London: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  17. Fry, R. and Lonsdale, D. (1991) Habitat Conservation for Insects—a neglected green issue. Middlesex: The Amateur Entomologists' Society.Google Scholar
  18. Gauslaa, Y. (1994) Lobaria pulmonaria, an indicator of species-rich forests of long ecological continuity. Blyttia 3, 119–28.Google Scholar
  19. Gutowski, J.M. (1986) Species composition and structure of the communities of longhorn beetles (Col., Cerambycidae) in virgin and managed stands of Tilio-Carpinetum stachyetosum association in Bialowieza Forest (NE Poland). J. Appl. Ent. 102, 380–91.Google Scholar
  20. Haila, Y., Hanski, I.K., Niemelä, J., Puntilla, P., Raivio, S. and Tukia, H. (1994) Forestry and the boreal fauna: matching management with natural forest dynamics. Ann. Zool. Fennici 31, 187–202.Google Scholar
  21. Hanski, I. (1991) Single species metapopulation dynamics: concepts, models and observations. Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 42, 17–38.Google Scholar
  22. Hanski, I. and Gilpin, M. (1991) Metapopulation dynamics: brief history and conceptual domain. Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 42, 3–6.Google Scholar
  23. Harding, P.T. and Alexander, K.N.A. (1994) The use of saproxylic invertebrates in selection and evaluation of areas of relic forests in pasture-woodlands. Brit. J. Entomol. Nat. Hist. 7, 7–26.Google Scholar
  24. Harrison, S. (1991) Local extinction in a metapopulation context: an empirical evaluation. Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 42, 73–88.Google Scholar
  25. Heliövaara, K. and Väisänen, R. (1984) Effects of modern forestry on northwestern European forest invertebrates: A synthesis. Acta For. Fenn. 189, 1–32.Google Scholar
  26. Hilt, M. and Ammer, U. (1994) Totholzbesiedelnde Käfer im wirtschaftswald-Fichte und Eiche im Vergleich. Forstw. Cbl. 113, 245–55. (In German with an English summary.)Google Scholar
  27. Hoel, T. (1993) Foryngelsedynamikk og bestandsutvikling i naturskog av gran. Raudsjø Naturreservat, Akershus. Thesis, Inst. for skogfag, NLH, Ås, Norway. (In Norwegian.)Google Scholar
  28. Høiland, K. and Bendiksen, E. (1992) Problems concerning lignicolous fungi in boreal forests in Norway. In Conservation of Fungi in Europe (E., Arnolds and H., Kreisel eds) pp. 51–7. Greifald: Ernst-Moritz-Arndt-Universität.Google Scholar
  29. Hunter, M.L.Jr (1990) Wildlife, forests, and forestry. Principles of managing forests for biological biodiversity. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  30. Johnson, C.G. (1969) Migration and Dispersal of Insects, London: Methuen.Google Scholar
  31. Kaila, L., Martikainen, P., Punttila, P. and Yakovlev, E. (1994) Saproxylic beetles (Coleoptera) on dead birch trunks decayed by different polypore species. Ann. Zool. Fennici 31, 97–107.Google Scholar
  32. Koch, K. (1989–1992) Die Käfer Mitteleuropas Ökologie I–III. Krefeld: Goecke and Evers. 095Google Scholar
  33. Kotliar, N.B. and Wiens, J.A. (1990) Multiple scales of patchiness and patch structure: a hierarchical framework for the study of heterogeneity. Oikos 59, 253–60.Google Scholar
  34. Linder, P. and Östlund, L. (1992) Changes in the boreal forests of Sweden 1870–1991. Svensk Bot. Tidskr 86, 199–215. (In Swedish with an English summary.)Google Scholar
  35. Martikainen, P., Kaila, L., Punttila, P. and Siitonen, J. (1994) Metsän käsittelyn vaikutus lahopuuhyönteisten esiintymiseen suomen ja venäjän karjalassa. Metsäntutkimuslaitoksen 482, 97–104. (In Finnish with an English summary.)Google Scholar
  36. Miljøverndepartementet (1992) Om FN-konferansen om Miljø og Utvikling i Rio de Janeiro. Oslo: St.meld. 13.Google Scholar
  37. Möller, G. (1994) Alt-und Totholzlebensräume. Ökologie, Gefährdungs-situation, Schutzmassnahmen. Beitr. Forstwirtsch. u. Landsch. ökol. 28, 7–15.Google Scholar
  38. Naeem, S. and Colwell, R.K. (1991) Ecological consequences of heterogeneity of consumable resources. In Ecological Heterogeneity (J., Kolasa and S.T.A., Pickett eds) pp. 225–55. London: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
  39. Nilsson, S.G., Bengtsson, J. and Ås, S. (1988) Habitat diversity or area per se? Species richness of woody plants, carabid beetles and land snails on islands. J. Anim. Ecol. 57, 685–704.Google Scholar
  40. Økland, B. (1994) Mycetophilidae (Diptera), an insect group vulnerable to forestry practices? A comparison of clearcut, managed and semi-natural spruce forests in southern Norway. Biodiver. Conserv. 3, 68–85.Google Scholar
  41. Økland, R.H. (1990) Vegetation ecology: theory, methods and applications with reference to Fennoscandia. Sommerfeltia suppl. 1, 1–233.Google Scholar
  42. Palm, T. (1951) Die Holz-und Rinden-käfer der nord-schwedischen Laubbäume. Medd. från Statens Skogforskn.-inst. Bd. 40, nr. 2. (In German.)Google Scholar
  43. Palm, T. (1959) Die Holz-und Rinden-käfer der süd-und mittelschwedischen Laubbäume. Opuscula Entomologica Suppl. XVI, Lund. (In German.)Google Scholar
  44. Pfarr, U. and Schrammel, J. (1991) Fichten-Totholz im Spannungsfeld zwischen Naturschutz und Forstschutz. Fortsw. Cbl. 110, 128–34.Google Scholar
  45. Rankin, M.A., McAnelly, M.L. and Bodenhamer, J.E. (1986) The oogenesis-flight syndrome revisited. In Insect Flight: dispersal and migration (W., Danthanarayana ed.) pp. 27–48. Berlin: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
  46. Rassi, P., Kaipiainen, H., Mannerkoski, I. and Ståhls, G. (1991) Report on the monitoring of threatened animals and plants in Finland. Helsinki: Ministry of the Environment.Google Scholar
  47. Rauh, J. and Schmitt, M. (1991) Metodik und Ergebnisse der Totholzforschung in Naturwaldreservaten. Forstw. Cbl. 110, 114–27.Google Scholar
  48. Schmitt, M. (1992) Buchen-Totholz als Lebensraum für xylobionte Käfer. Waldhygiene 19, 97–191.Google Scholar
  49. Siitonen, J. (1994) Decaying wood and saproxylic Coleoptera in two old spruce forests: a comparison based on two sampling methods. Ann. Zool. Fennici 31, 89–95.Google Scholar
  50. Siitonen, J. and Martikainen, P. (1994) Occurrence of rare and threatened insects living on decaying Populus tremula: A comparison between Finnish and Russian Karelia. Scand. J. For. Res. 185–91.Google Scholar
  51. Silfverberg, H. (1979) Enumeratio Coleopterum Fennoscandiae et Daniae. Helsinki: Helsingfors Entomologiska Bytesförening.Google Scholar
  52. Sokal, R.R. and Rohlf, J. (1981) Biometry (2nd edn). New York: W.H. Freeman.Google Scholar
  53. Solbreck, C. (1978) Migration, diapause, and direct development as alternative life histories in a seed bug Neacoryphus bicrucis. In The Evolution of Insect Migration and Diapause, pp. 195–217. Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  54. Stevens, G.C. (1986) Dissection of the species-area relationship among wood-boring insects and their host plants. Am. Nat. 128, 35–46.Google Scholar
  55. Størkersen, Ø.R. (1992) Norwegian Red List. DN-rapport 1992–6. Trondheim: Directorate of Nature Management. (In Norwegian with and English summary.)Google Scholar
  56. Syrjänen, K., Kalliola, R., Puolasmaa, A. and Mattsson, J. (1994) Landscape structure and forest dynamics in subcontinental Russian European taiga. Ann. Zool. Fennici 31, 19–34.Google Scholar
  57. Väisänen, R., Biström, O. and Heliövaara, K. (1993) Sub-cortical Coleoptera in dead pines and spruces: is primeval species composition maintained in managed forests? Biodiver. Conserv. 2, 95–113.Google Scholar
  58. Weisberg, S. (1985) Applied Linear Regression, 2nd edn. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  59. Wiens, J.A. (1989) Spatial scaling in ecology. Functional Ecology 3, 385–97.Google Scholar
  60. Wilding, N., Collins, N.M., Hammond, P.M. and Webber, J.F. (1989) Insect-Fungus Interactions. London: Academic Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Chapman & Hall 1996

Authors and Affiliations

  • Bjørn Økland
    • 1
  • Alf Bakke
    • 1
  • Sigmund Hågvar
    • 1
  • Torstein Kvamme
    • 1
  1. 1.Norwegian Forest Research InstituteÅsNorway

Personalised recommendations