Advertisement

Plant and Soil

, Volume 364, Issue 1–2, pp 39–54 | Cite as

Wildfire and forest harvest disturbances in the boreal forest leave different long-lasting spatial signatures

  • Miren LorenteEmail author
  • William F. J. Parsons
  • Eliot J. B. McIntire
  • Alison D. Munson
Regular Article

Abstract

Aims

Natural disturbances leave long-term legacies that vary among landscapes and ecosystem types, and which become integral parts of successional processes at a given location. As humans change land use, not only are immediate post-disturbance patterns altered, but the processes of recovery themselves are likely altered by the disturbance. We assessed whether short-term effects on soil and vegetation that distinguish wildfire from forest harvest persist over 60 years after disturbance in boreal black spruce forests, or post-disturbance processes of recovery promote convergence of the two disturbance types.

Methods

Using semi-variograms and Principal Coordinates of Neighbour Matrices, we formulated precise, a priori spatial hypotheses to discriminate spatial signatures following wildfire and forest harvest both over the short- (16–18 years) and long-term (62–98 years).

Results

Both over the short- and the long-term, wildfire generated a wide spectrum of responses in soil and vegetation properties at different spatial scales, while logging produced simpler patterns corresponding to the regular linear pattern of harvest trails and to pre-disturbance ericaceous shrub patches that persist between trails.

Conclusions

Disturbance by harvest simplified spatial patterns associated with soil and vegetation properties compared to patterns associated with natural disturbance by fire. The observed differences in these patterns between disturbance types persist for over 60 years. Ecological management strategies inspired by natural disturbances should aim to increase the complexity of patterns associated with harvest interventions.

Keywords

Black spruce boreal forest Ecosystem management Forest disturbance Land-use legacies Spatial modelling 

Notes

Acknowledgements

We gratefully acknowledge support from the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC Discovery grant to A.D. Munson; NSERC Strategic grant to A.D. Munson, C.M. Preston, R.L Bradley and J.W. Shipley). We thank E. Allard, A. Beaumont, S. Boivin-Chabot, and M. Vachon for their help with fieldwork.

Supplementary material

11104_2012_1331_MOESM1_ESM.doc (223 kb)
ESM 1 (DOC 223 kb)

References

  1. Bellier E, Monestiez P, Durbec JP, Candau JN (2007) Identifying spatial relationships at multiple scales: principal coordinates of neighbour matrices (PCNM) and geostatistical approaches. Ecography 30:385–399Google Scholar
  2. Bennett JN, Prescott CE (2004) Organic and inorganic nitrogen nutrition of western red cedar, western hemlock and salal in mineral N-limited cedar-hemlock forests. Oecologia 141:468–476Google Scholar
  3. Bloom AJ, Mallik AU (2004) Indirect effects of black spruce (Picea mariana) cover on community structure and function in sheep laurel (Kalmia angustifolia) dominated heath of eastern Canada. Plant Soil 265:279–293CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bond-Lamberty B, Brown KN, Goranson C, Gower ST (2006) Spatial dynamics of soil moisture and temperature in a black spruce boreal chronosequence. Can J For Res 36:2794–2802CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Borcard D, Legendre P (2002) All-scale spatial analysis of ecological data by means of principal coordinates of neighbour matrices. Ecol Model 153:51–68CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Brais S, Camiré C (1992) Keys to soil moisture regime evaluation for northwestern Quebec. Can J For Res 22:718–724CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Brown PM, Kaufmann MR, Shepperd WD (1999) Long-term, landscape patterns of past fire events in a montane ponderosa pine forest of central Colorado. Landsc Ecol 14:513–532CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Burnham KP, Anderson DR (2002) Model selection and multimodel inference: a practical information-theoretic approach. Springer, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  9. Castells E (2008) Indirect effects of phenolics on plant performance by altering N cycling: another mechanism of plant-plant negative interactions. In: Zang RS, Mallik AU, Luo SM (eds) Allelopathy in sustainable agriculture and forestry. Springer, New York, pp 137–156CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Chamberlin T (1965) The method of multiple working hypotheses. Science 148:754–759Google Scholar
  11. Clark DF, Kneeshaw DD, Burton PJ, Antos JA (1998) Coarse woody debris in sub-boreal spruce forests of west-central British Columbia. Can J For Res 28:284–290CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Cottam G, Curtis J (1956) The use of distance measures in phytosociological sampling. Ecology 37:451–460CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Cressie N (1985) Fitting variogram models by weighted least squares. Math Geol 17:563–586CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Damman AWH (1971) Effect of vegetation changes on the fertility of a Newfoundland forest site. Ecol Monogr 41:253–270CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. DeLong SC, Kessler WB (2000) Ecological characteristics of mature forest remnants left by wildfire. For Ecol Manag 131:93–106CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Dray S (2006a) packfor. R package version 0.0-7. http://biomserv.univ-lyon1.fr/~dray/software.php
  17. Dray S (2006b) spacemakeR: spatial modelling. R package version 0.0-3. http://biomserv.univ-lyon1.fr/~dray/software.php
  18. Dray S, Legendre P, Peres-Neto P (2006) Spatial modelling: a comprehensive framework for principal coordinate analysis of neighbour matrices (PCNM). Ecol Model 196:483–493CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Dutilleul P (1993) Spatial heterogeneity and the design of ecological field experiments. Ecology 74:1646–1658CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Eberhart KE, Woodward PM (1987) Distribution of residual vegetation associated with large fires in Alberta. Can J For Res 17:1207–1212CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Ehrenfeld JG, Zhu W, Parsons WFJ (1995) Above- and below-ground characteristics of persistent forest openings in the New Jersey Pinelands. Bull Torrey Bot Club 122:298–305CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Esser K (2001) Progress in botany. Springer, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  23. Fajardo A, McIntire JB (2007) Distinguishing microsite and competition processes in tree growth dynamics: an a priori spatial modeling approach. Am Nat 169:647–661PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Foster D, Swanson F, Aber J, Burke I, Brokaw N, Tilman D, Knapp A (2003) The importance of land-use legacies to ecology and conservation. Bioscience 53:77–88CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Fraterrigo JM, Turner MG, Pearson SM, Dixon P (2005) Effects of past land use on spatial heterogeneity of soil nutrients in Southern Appalachian forests. Ecol Monogr 75:215–230CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Gauthier S, Vaillancourt M-A, Leduc A, De Grandpré L, Kneeshaw DD, Morin H, Drapeau P, Bergeron Y (2008) Aménagement écosystémique en forêt boréale. Presses de l’Université du Québec, MontrealGoogle Scholar
  27. Greene DF, Zasada JC, Sirois L, Kneeshaw D, Morin H, Charron I, Simard M-J (1999) A review of the regeneration dynamics of North American boreal forest tree species. Can J For Res 29:824–839CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Grumbine RE (1994) What is ecosystem management? Conserv Biol 8:27–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Harvey B, Brais S (2002) Effects of mechanized careful logging on natural regeneration and vegetation competition in the southeastern Canadian boreal forest. Can J For Res 32:653–666CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Isaaks EH, Srivastava RM (1989) An introduction to applied geostatistics. Oxford University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  31. Joanisse GD, Bradley RL, Preston CM, Munson AD (2007) Soil enzyme inhibition by condensed litter tannins may drive ecosystem structure and processes: the case of Kalmia angustifolia. New Phytol 175:535–546Google Scholar
  32. Joanisse GD, Bradley RL, Preston CM, Bending GD (2009) Sequestration of soil nitrogen as tannin-protein complexes may improve the competitive ability of sheep laurel (Kalmia angustifolia) relative to black spruce (Picea mariana). New Phytol 181:187–198PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Jones CG, Lawton JH, Shachak M (1994) Organisms as ecosystem engineers. Oikos 69:373–389CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Journel AJ, Huijbregts (1978) Mining statistics. Academic, LondonGoogle Scholar
  35. Kohm KA, Franklin JF (1997) Creating a forestry for the 21st century. The science of ecosystem management. Island Press, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  36. Kraus TEC, Dahlgren RA, Zasoski RJ (2003) Tannins in nutrient dynamics of forest ecosystems – a review. Plant Soil 256:41–66Google Scholar
  37. Laberge-Pelletier C (2007) L’environnement des éricacées des forêts de l’est du Québec. M.Sc. thesis, Université Laval, Québec, QC, CanadaGoogle Scholar
  38. Legendre P, Fortin M-J (1989) Spatial pattern and ecological analysis. Vegetatio 80:107–138CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Legendre P, Legendre L (1998) Numerical ecology (2nd ed.). Elsevier Science BV, Amsterdam, NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
  40. Mallik AU (2003) Conifer regeneration problems in boreal and temperate forests with ericaceous understorey: role of disturbance, seedbed limitation and keystone species change. Crit Rev Plant Sci 22:341–366.Google Scholar
  41. McIntire EJB (2004) Understanding natural disturbance boundary formation using spatial data and path analysis. Ecology 85:1933–1943CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. McIntire EJB, Fajardo A (2009) Beyond description: the active and effective way to infer processes from spatial patterns. Ecology 90:46–56PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. McRae DJ, Duchesne LC, Freedman B, Lynham TJ, Woodley S (2001) Comparisons between wildfire and forest harvesting and their implications in forest management. Environ Rev 9:223–260CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. MRNQ (1994) Une stratégie: aménager pour mieux protéger les forêts. Ministère des Ressources Naturelles du Québec, Direction des programmes forestiers, Charlesbourg, QC, CanadaGoogle Scholar
  45. NRC (2008) Forest fire in Canada. Available at: http://cwfis.cfs.nrcan.gc.ca (accessed 27 August 2008)
  46. Peterson EB (1965) Inhibition of black spruce primary roots by a water-soluble substance in Kalmia angustifolia. For Sci 11:473–479Google Scholar
  47. R Development Core Team (2004) R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing. (http://R-project.org). Vienna, Austria
  48. Ribeiro PJ Jr, Diggle PJ (2001) geoR: a package for geostatistical analysis. R-NEWS 1:15–18Google Scholar
  49. Robertson GP, Huston MA, Evans FC, Tiedje JM (1988) Spatial variability in a successional plant community: patterns of nitrogen availability. Ecology 69:1517–1524CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Rowe JS (1972) Forest regions of Canada. Canadian Forestry Service. Departmental Publication 1300, Ottawa, ON, CanadaGoogle Scholar
  51. Saetre P (1999) Spatial patterns of ground vegetation, soil microbial biomass and activity in a mixed spruce-birch stand. Ecography 22:183–192CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Saucier JP, Grondin P, Robitaille A, Gosselin J, Morneau C, Richard PJH, Brisson J, Sirois L, Leduc A, Morin H, Thiffault E, Gauthier S, Lavoie C, Payette S (2009) Écologie forestière. In: O.d.i.f.d. (ed) Manuel de Foresterie. Éditions MultiMondes, Québec, QC, Canada, pp. 165–316Google Scholar
  53. Simard M, Lecomte N, Bergeron Y, Bernier PY, Pare D (2007) Forest productivity decline caused by successional paludification of boreal soils. Ecol Appl 17:1619–1637PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Smith CK, Coyea MR, Munson AD (1998) Nitrogen and phosphorus release from humus and mineral soil under black spruce forests in Central Quebec. Soil Biol Biochem 30:1491–1500CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Smithwick EAH, Mack MC, Turner MG, Chapin FS III, Zhu J, Balser TC (2005) Spatial heterogeneity and soil nitrogen dynamics in a burned black spruce forest stand: distinct controls at different scales. Biogeochemistry 76:517–537CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Soil Classification Working Group (1998) The Canadian system of soil classification, 3rd edn. Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada Publication 1646, OttawaGoogle Scholar
  57. Thiffault N, Titus BD, Munson AD (2004) Black spruce seedlings in a Kalmia-Vaccinium association: microsite manipulation to explore interactions in the field. Can J For Res 34:1657–1668CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Thorpe HC, Thomas SC, Caspersen JP (2008) Tree mortality following partial harvests is determined by skidding proximity. Ecol Appl 18:1652–1663PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Titus BD, Sidhu SS, Mallik AU (1995) A summary of some studies on Kalmia angustifolia L.: a problem species in Newfoundland forestry. Natural Resources Canada, Canadian Forest Service, Information Report N-X-296, St. John’s, NL, CanadaGoogle Scholar
  60. Turner MG, Gardner RH, O’Neill RV (2001) Landscape ecology in theory and practice. Springer, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  61. Van Cleve K, Viereck LA (1981) Forest succession in relation to nutrient cycling in the boreal forest of Alaska. In: West DC, Shugart HH, Botkin DB (eds) Forest succession: concepts and application. Springer, New York, pp 185–211CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Walker JF, Stevens DR (1947) Pulpwood skidding with horses. Efficiency of technique. Canadian Pulp and Paper Association and Pulp and Paper Research Institute of Canada, Montreal, QC, CanadaGoogle Scholar
  63. Walker LR, Willig MR (1999) An introduction to terrestrial disturbances. In: Walker LR (ed) Ecosystems of disturbed ground. Elsevier Science, Amsterdam, pp 1–16Google Scholar
  64. Waring SA, Bremner JM (1964) Ammonium production in soil under waterlogged conditions as an index of nitrogen availability. Nature 201:951–952CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Yarborough DE, Hanchar JJ, Skinner SP, Ismail AI (1986) Weed response, yield, and economics of hexazinone and nitrogen use in lowbush blueberry production. Weed Sci 34:723–729Google Scholar
  66. Zhu H, Mallik AU (1994) Interactions between Kalmia and black spruce: isolation and identification of allelopathic compounds. J Chem Ecol 20:407–421CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Miren Lorente
    • 1
    Email author
  • William F. J. Parsons
    • 2
  • Eliot J. B. McIntire
    • 1
  • Alison D. Munson
    • 1
  1. 1.Centre for Forest ResearchUniversité LavalQuébecCanada
  2. 2.Département de BiologieUniversité de SherbrookeSherbrookeCanada

Personalised recommendations