Arthropod-Plant Interactions

, Volume 1, Issue 3, pp 175–185 | Cite as

Line thinning enhances diversity of Coleoptera in overstocked Cryptomeria japonica plantations in central Japan

  • M. Abdul Maleque
  • Hiroaki T. Ishii
  • Kaoru Maeto
  • Shingo Taniguchi
Article

Abstract

We evaluated the effectiveness of line thinning, a new silvicultural technique, toward restoring diversity of Coleoptera in overstocked Cryptomeria japonica D. Don plantations in central Japan. We compared the abundance of some common Coleoptera families between line-thinned stands and adjacent unthinned stands in two plantations: low-elevation Sugi site (4 years since thinning) and high-elevation Kuchiotani site (6 years since thinning). Many bettle families comprising various functional groups such as plant feeders, wood borers, rotten wood feeders, root feeders, fungus feeders, dung feeders, and scavengers were more abundant in the line-thinned stands than in the unthinned stands. Furthermore, some important families were missing from the unthinned stands. There were strong positive relationships between Coleopteran abundance and understory vegetation. Our results suggest that line thinning may potentially increase biodiversity in overstocked C. japonica plantations by restoring important ecological processes such as food-web interactions (pollination, predation, herbivory, decomposition, parasitism, etc.), and habitat conditions.

Keywords

Arthropods Biodiversity Ecosystem management New forestry Silviculture 

Introduction

Conservation and restoration of biodiversity has become an important objective of forest management in recent years (Lindenmayer et al. 1998; Lachat et al. 2006). Dobson et al. (2006) warn that losses of ‘trophic diversity’ cause ‘trophic collapse’ in nature, which ultimately cause losses of biodiversity and ecosystem services. Biodiversity conservation is especially important in areas where risks of species extinction are high (Burton et al.1992). Land areas covered by mono-specific plantation forests are increasing worldwide, where biodiversity may be declining owing to lack of habitat attributes needed to support many species (Lindenmayer and Franklin 2003; Ishii et al.2004). Sustainable silvicultural systems that also aim to restore biodiversity in plantation forests are being developed in many countries (Larsen 1995; Khom and Franklin 1997; Progar et al.1999; Halpern et al.1999; Kerr 1999; Aubry et al.2004; Nagaike 2006; Maleque et al.2006b). However, the effectiveness of these new silvicultural treatments toward biodiversity conservation is still to be tested (Halpern and McKenzie 2001; Nelson and Halpern 2005; Halpern et al.2005).

In Japan, more than 40% of the forested areas are plantations planted after the Second World War to meet the growing demand of the lumber industry (Ishiyama 1998). These even-aged commercial plantations mainly include Cryptomeria japonica D. Don (Japanese cedar), Chamaecyparis obtuse Endl. (Japanese cypress), and Larix kaempferi Lamb. (Japanese larch) trees, where C. japonica plantations alone constitute half of the plantation area. Most of these plantations have reached commercial harvesting age (40–60 years), but many have remained unmanaged for several years due to high labor costs and low wood value in the country. Lack of management has resulted in overstocked stands with very dark forest floor conditions, supporting low diversity of understory plants (Ito et al.2003, 2006).

The Japanese government recognizes that loss of biological diversity, more specifically loss of endemic plant and animal species from the mountainous regions is a major concern (Forestry Agency of Japan 2004). Recent studies have demonstrated that biodiversity can be restored in the plantations through adequate management (Nagaike 2002; Ito et al.2003, 2006; Kodani 2006). Most studies, however, investigated diversity of understory plants and did not consider diversity of other organisms. Recently, Maleque et al. (2006a) proposed that arthropod community structure reflects overall biodiversity conditions of forest ecosystems and thus, can be used to assess the effectiveness of various ecosystem management techniques. Abundance and diversity of plant-dwelling arthropods increase with increasing diversity of plant communities (Parmenter and MacMahon 1987; Parmenter et al.1991; Siemann et al.1999; Moir et al.2005; Inada et al. 2006). However, it is still unclear whether or not this has a cascading effect on overall biodiversity. In addition, important ecological processes that promote biodiversity in plantation forests after management applications are still to be explored (Nagaike 2000, 2006; Maleque et al. 2006a).

In this study, we used Coleoptera to assess the effectiveness of a new silvicultural technique, line thinning, toward restoring biodiversity in C. japonica plantations. The Coleoptera is the largest order of organisms and accounts for 40% of all insects, including many functionally important groups (Lawrence et al.1999; Arnett Jr 2000; Grimaldi and Engel 2005). For example, plant feeders, predators, root feeders, wood borers, fungus feeders, rotten wood feeders, dung feeders, and many other beetle taxa have been described (Kurosawa et al.1998; Lawrence et al.1999; Uéno et al.1999; Hayashi et al.2002; Grimaldi and Engel 2005; summarized in Table 1). Because of their functional diversity, many researchers have used beetle communities to compare ecosystem conditions between natural versus plantation forests, as well as to evaluate the impact of forest management on biodiversity (e.g., Maeto et al.2002; Ohsawa 2004, 2005). Beetles have also been used to evaluate biodiversity of agricultural systems (Shah et al.2003). Here, we define biodiversity as the number of families of Coleoptera captured in a forest stand, because patterns identified at the family level often correspond to patterns at the species level (Marcos et al. in press).
Table 1

Ecological functions of some common Coleoptera families used in this studya

Families

Common names

Functional groups

Food habits

01.

Cantharidae

Soldier beetles

Predators

Larvae predate on soft-bodied insects and adults feed on nectar and pollen

02.

Carabidae

Ground beetles

Predators

Larvae and adults predate on small insects and other animals

03.

Cerambycidae

Long-horned beetles

Wood borers/rotten wood feeders

Larvae bore into moist-wood, various species of trees and shrubs, and adults feed on nectar and pollen, sometimes foliage

04.

Chrysomelidae

Leaf beetles

Plant feeders

Larvae feed on leaves, stems, and plant roots and adults feed on leaves, stems, and flowers

05.

Curculionidae

Weevils

Plant feeders

Larvae and adults feed on plant parts and seeds

06.

Elateridae

Click beetles

Root feeders

Larvae feed on plant roots and adults feed on nectar

07.

Erotylidae

Fungus beetles

Fungus feeders

Larvae and adults feed on fungi

08.

Lycidae

Lycid beetles

Wood/plant feeders

Larvae feed on bark and leaves, and adults feed on nectar, flower, and plants

09.

Mordellidae

Tumbling flower beetles

Plant/rotten wood feeders

Larvae feed on rotting wood, fungi, or the pith of stems, and adults feed on pollen

10.

Nitidulidae

Sap beetles

Fungus feeders

Larvae feed on fungi, corn ears, waste onion piles, food material in contact with the soil, and adults feed on cracked and damaged fruits

11.

Oedemeridae

Pollen feeding beetles

Root/fungus feeders

Larvae feed on rootlets and fungal rhizomes, and adults feed on pollen

12.

Scarabaeidae (Scarabaeinae and Aphodiinae)

Scarab beetles

Dung feeders

Larvae and adults feed on carrion, dung, skin, and feathers

13.

Scarabaeidae (excluding Scarabaeinae and Aphodiinae)

Scarab beetles

Plant/rotten wood feeders

Larvae feed on roots, rotting wood, and decaying organic material in the ground, and adults feed on leaves, pollen, and flowers

14.

Scolytidae

Bark beetles

Wood borers

Larvae and adults bore into stressed or damaged plants

15.

Staphylinidae

Rove beetles

Predators

Larvae and adults predate on insects, and they feed on plants, fungi, and excrement

16.

Tenebrionidae

Darkling beetles

Scavengers

Larvae and adults feed on plant parts and stored grains

aInformation adopted after Kurosawa et al. (1998); Lawrence et al. (1999); Uéno et al. (1999); Hayashi et al. (2002); Grimaldi and Engel (2005)

Line thinning is a form of variable retention commercial harvesting that is being practiced more and more widely in Japan (Fig. 1). It aims to conserve biodiversity as well as to increase timber production. In this type of thinning, 3–5 m wide linear stand sections are harvested parallel to the mountain slope and often perpendicular to the forest roads, retaining 5–12 m wide stand sections. Line thinning is less labor intensive and more efficient for timber extraction than conventional single-tree thinning methods, especially on steep slopes where most plantation forests in Japan are located. In addition to its economic viability, line thinning creates microclimatically heterogeneous understory habitat conditions (Taniguchi 2003), which contribute to increasing understory plant diversity (Clinton 2003; McKenzie et al. 2000). In this study, we compared Coleoptera community structure between thinned and unthinned stands in two overstocked C. japonica plantations in central Japan to evaluate the effectiveness of line thinning toward biodiversity restoration.
Fig. 1

Photographs of the experimental stands in the two Cryptomeria japonica plantations, northern Hyogo Prefecture, central Japan: (a) sectional view of the line-thinned stand in Sugi, 4 years after thinning hosting many understory plants dominated by annuals and perennials, (b) sectional view of the unthinned stand in Sugi hosting very few understory plants, (c) sectional view of the line-thinned stand in Kuchiotani, 6 years after thinning hosting many understory plants dominated by woody plants, and (d) sectional view of the unthinned stand in Kuchiotani hosting few understory plants

Materials and methods

Study sites

The study was conducted in two C. japonica plantations located at two different elevations: ‘Sugi site’ in Kanzaki Town (low-elevation: 350 m asl, 35°24′N, 134°56′E) and ‘Kuchiotani site’ in Kami Town (high-elevation: 700 m asl, 35°47′N, 134°50′E). Both sites are located in northern Hyogo Prefecture, central Japan. Mean annual temperature and mean annual precipitation are, respectively, 16.3°C and 1,487 mm for Sugi and 14.5°C and 1,947 mm for Kuchiotani. Both sites experience monsoon climate with a rainy season from June to July with ∼20–25 rainy days. The surrounding landscape matrix of the two sites is very different. The Sugi area is dominated by plantation forests covering more than 80% of the forested landscape of Kanzaki Town. In contrast, the Kuchiotani area is dominated by natural forests comprising primary and secondary cool-temperate deciduous forests.

Treatment applications

Research plots in the Sugi site are located on a southeast-facing slope (mean inclination = 25°). The stand was line-thinned in 2000, when the stand age had reached 35 years. The intensity of thinning was ∼25% of the total number of trees. Number of lines was twelve and thinning width was 3 m, with a length of 120 m each. Retention width was 9 m. Tower yarder was used for removing cut stems. The treatment plot (15 × 50 m2) included one line-thinned section and one retained section. The control plot (20 × 20 m2) was established in an adjacent unthinned stand on the same slope.

Research plots in the Kuchiotani site are located on a south-facing slope (mean inclination = 12°). The stand was line-thinned in 1998, when the stand age had reached 39 years. The intensity of thinning was ∼29% of the total number of trees. Number of lines was five and thinning width was 3.6 m, with a length of 65 m each. Retention width was 5.4 m. Swing yarder was used for removing cut stems. The treatment plot (20 × 30 m2) included two line-thinned sections and two retained sections. The control plot (20 × 30 m2) was established in an adjacent unthinned stand on the same slope. Maleque et al. (2007) give a detailed description of the study site and research plots.

Sampling, identification and grouping of Coleoptera

The study was carried out during April through October 2004. In April 2004, Townes-type white Malaise traps (height × width × length = 120 × 100 × 150 cm3, Morpho, Czech Republic) were set up in each stand to capture arthropods. In each site, eight traps were set up in the treatment plot (four each in the thinned and retained sections) and four traps were set up in the control plot. Traps were set up at random positions in each plot. Collection bottles (500 ml) were filled with propylene glycol for preserving trapped insect samples for each collection interval in the field. Arthropod samples were collected at 14–20-day intervals from mid-April through the first week of October. In Sugi site, sampling had to be discontinued after the third week of August due to typhoon damage.

After each collection, the arthropod samples were carried to the laboratory and preserved in 70% ethanol solution. We extracted all Coleoptera from the arthropod samples and identified common Coleoptera families based on identification keys (Kurosawa et al.1998; Lawrence et al.1999; Uéno et al.1999; Hayashi et al.2002). We assigned each family to functional groups based on larval feeding habits (Table 1). Because the feeding habit of dung-feeding Scarabaeidae (Scarabaeinae and Aphodiinae) is different from that of other Scarabaeidae, dung-feeding Scarabaeidae was considered separately.

Biomass and species richness of understory plants

In order to determine the biomass and species richness of understory plants, we harvested the aboveground parts of all vascular plants in 2 × 2 m2 quadrats near each Malaise trap in September, 2004. We took care to cause minimal disturbance to vegetation surrounding the Malaise trap so as not to affect subsequent insect sampling. We chose to collect plant samples in September after growth of most annual plants had been completed and plant biomass was at its maximum, although some early senescing plants may have been missed.

The harvested plant samples were brought to the laboratory for identification and biomass determination. After sorting to species, the plant samples were oven-dried to constant weight to determine dry mass. Biomass (dry mass) and species richness (total number of species) of understory plants were determined for the thinned and retained sections of the treatment plot as well as for the control plot as the average of the four quadrats.

Statistical analyses

Abundance of Coleoptera and biomass and species richness of understory plants showed positively skewed distributions. Therefore, the data were log transformed to normalize the variance. The total number of Coleoptera captured during the study period was compared among treatments (thinned section, retained section and control) using one-way ANOVA considering each trap as replicate samples within each treatment. The seasonal abundance pattern of common families was compared among treatments using two-way ANOVA with treatment and collection date as the two main effects. Multiple comparisons among the means were evaluated by Tukey’s test.

The total number of Coleoptera captured during the study period was analyzed in relation to biomass and species richness of understory plants using regression analysis. Similarly, the total number of Coleopteran functional groups (i.e., plant feeders, plant/rotten wood feeders, wood borers, and predators) captured during the study period was analyzed in relation to biomass and species richness of understory plants using regression analysis.

The experimental unit of this study is the forest stand, of which we have only two replicates due to logistical reasons. As a consequence, we were only able to conduct statistical tests comparing treatment versus control within each stand by considering traps as replicates. Thus, our results should be interpreted with caution when drawing conclusions regarding the effects of line thinning on Coleopteran abundance.

Results

Response of Coleoptera and understory vegetation to line thinning

In Sugi, the total number of Coleoptera captured during the study period was 104.8–128.6% greater in the treatment plot than in the control plot, although the difference was not significant (F2,11 = 1.31, P = 0.318) (Table 2). In Kuchiotani, the total number of Coleoptera captured during the study period was 91.9–130.8% greater in the treatment plot than in the control plot (F2,11 = 15.81, P = 0.002). In both sites, biomass and species richness of understory plants was greater in the thinned and retained sections of the treatment plot than in the control plot (Sugi: F2,9 = 12.02, P2,9 = 0.003 and F2,9 = 31.82, P < 0.001; Kuchiotani: F2,9 = 7.80, P = 0.011 and F2,9 = 7.57, P = 0.012 for biomass and species richness, respectively).
Table 2

Abundance of important beetles (Coleoptera) in the line-thinned stand and unthinned stand of two Cryptomeria japonica plantations in northern Hyogo Prefecture, central Japan

Study site

Treatments

Number per trap (mean ± SD)

Difference with control (%)

Sugi

 

Thinned section

170.0 (±128.2) a

104.8

Retained section

189.8 (±107.4) a

128.6

Control plot

83.0 (±41.0) a

Kuchiotani

 

Thinned section

405.7 (±69.8) a

130.8

Retained section

337.3 (±64.9) a

91.9

Control plot

175.8 (±32.2) b

Common letters denote no significant difference between treatments for each site (Tukey’s HSD, P > 0.05)

Response of Coleopteran families to line thinning

In Sugi, we identified 15 Coleopteran families in the thinned and retained sections and 14 families (excluding Cantharidae) in the control plot (Table 3). In general, abundance of the plant-feeding Chrysomelidae, Curculionidae, wood/plant-feeding Lycidae, scavenger Tenebrionidae, root/fungus-feeding Oedemeridae, and root-feeding Elateridae was higher in the thinned and retained sections of the treatment plot than in the control plot. Abundance of the plant/rotten wood-feeding Scarabaeidae was highest in the thinned section, intermediate in the retained section, and lowest in the control plot. Abundance of the plant/rotten wood-feeding Mordellidae tended to be greater in the thinned and retained sections of the treatment plot than in the control plot, although there was no significant difference among them. Abundance of the wood-boring Cerambycidae was highest in the thinned section, intermediate in the retained section, and lowest in the control plot. Similar to plant/root-feeding families, abundance of the predatory Carabidae and Staphylinidae was higher in the thinned and retained sections of the treatment plot than in the control plot. The family Cantharidae was not captured from the control plot. Abundance of the predatory Cantharidae, fungus-feeding Erotylidae and Nitidulidae, dung-feeding Scarabaeidae (Scarabaeinae and Aphodiinae), and wood-boring Scolytidae could not be compared among treatments due to very small sample size. Abundance of most families varied with collection date except for the plant-feeding Chrysomelidae, scavenger Tenebrionidae, and predatory Staphylinidae. There was no interaction between treatment and seasonal abundance pattern for all families (F14,72 = 0.18–1.06; P = 0.404–1.00).
Table 3

Abundance (number of individuals captured per trap) of some common Coleopteran families in Sugi

Families

Functional groups

Number of individuals per trap (±SD)a

Treatment

Date

Thinned

Retained

Control

F2,72

P

F7,72

P

Cantharidae

Pr

1.5 (±1.7)

1.3 (±0.5)

0

Carabidae

Pr

8.3 (±5.4) a

5.0 (±0.8) ab

1.5 (±1.3) b

8.59

<0.001

2.19

0.045

Cerambycidae

WB/RW

18.5 (±19.1) ab

20.5 (±17.0) a

7.3 (±6.4) b

5.92

0.004

6.79

<0.001

Chrysomelidae

Pl

6.5 (±6.5) ab

10.0 (±6.2) a

2.3 (±3.9) b

7.80

0.001

0.71

0.662

Curculionidae

Pl

18.5 (±15.3) a

27.3 (±17.5) a

11.3 (±6.2) b

3.99

0.023

9.62

<0.001

Elateridae

R

21.3 (±14.5) ab

25.8 (±17.0) a

13.3 (±10.5) b

4.12

0.020

3.15

0.006

Erotylidae

F

1.0 (±1.4)

3.0 (±1.2)

1.5 (±0.6)

Lycidae

W/Pl

18.8 (±15.6) a

16.0 (±6.1) ab

6.5 (±3.7) b

3.95

0.024

6.61

<0.001

Mordellidae

Pl/RW

34.3 (±32.1) a

27.3 (±19.6) a

22.5 (±4.9) a

1.66

0.197

8.21

<0.001

Nitidulidae

M

1.5 (±1.0)

3.8 (±2.4)

2.0 (±0.8)

Oedemeridae

R/F

13.0 (±10.4) a

6.3 (±5.9) ab

3.8 (±3.5) b

5.36

0.007

27.72

<0.001

Scarabaeidaeb

D

2.5 (±2.5)

3.3 (±1.3)

1.5 (±1.7)

Scarabaeidaec

Pl/RW

7.0 (±3.4) b

20.0 (±14.9) a

3.8 (±2.2) b

13.75

<0.001

3.30

0.004

Scolytidae

WB

0.8 (±0.5)

1.8 (±1.3)

0.8 (±0.5)

Staphylinidae

Pr

5.5 (±3.1) ab

7.0 (±5.3) a

1.8 (±2.4) b

3.29

0.043

1.81

0.099

Tenebrionidae

S

11.3 (±8.1) a

11.8 (±5.3) a

3.5 (±2.1) b

5.78

0.005

1.20

0.317

aCommon letters denote no significant difference between treatments (Tukey’s HSD, > 0.05)

bScarabaeinae and Aphodiinae

cExcluding Scarabaeinae and Aphodiinae

Pr predators, WB wood borers, RW rotten wood feeders, Pl plant feeders, R root feeders, F fungus feeders, W wood feeders, D dung feeders, S scavengers

In Kuchiotani, we identified 15 families in the retained section and 14 families (excluding dung-feeding Scarabaeidae) in the thinned section and control plot (Table 4). Abundance of the plant-feeding Chrysomelidae, Curculionidae, wood/plant feeding Lycidae, and root-feeding Elateridae was highest in the thinned section, intermediate in the retained section, and lowest in the control plot. Abundance of the scavenger Tenebrionidae tended to be greater in the thinned and retained sections of the treatment plot than in the control plot. Similarly, abundance of the plant/rotten wood-feeding Mordellidae and Scarabaeidae was higher in the thinned and retained sections of the treatment plot than in the control plot. Abundance of the wood-boring Cerambycidae was highest in the thinned section, intermediate in the retained section, and lowest in the control plot, although the wood-boring Scolytidae was similar among the thinned section, retained section and control plot. Abundance of the fungus-feeding Erotylidae and Nitidulidae was higher in the thinned and retained sections of the treatment plot than in the control plot. Similar to plant/root-feeding families, abundance of the predatory Carabidae, Staphylinidae, and Cantharidae was higher in the thinned and retained sections of the treatment plot than in the control plot. The dung-feeding Scarabaeidae was not captured from the control plot. Abundance of the root/fungus-feeding Oedemeridae and dung-feeding Scarabaeidae could not be compared among treatments due to very small sample size. Abundance of most families varied with collection date except for predatory Carabidae, Cantharidae, and fungus-feeding Erotylidae. There was no interaction between treatment and seasonal abundance pattern for all families (F18,80 = 0.39–1.19, P = 0.290–0.987).
Table 4

Abundance (number of individuals captured per trap) of some common Coleopteran families in Kuchiotani

Families

Functional groups

Number of individuals per trap (±SD)a

Treatment

Date

Thinned

Retained

Control

F2,80

P

F9,80

P

Cantharidae

Pr

7.0 (±2.0) a

2.5 (±2.5) b

2.3 (±2.9) b

4.61

0.013

1.41

0.199

Carabidae

Pr

9.3 (±1.5) ab

11.3 (±4.8) a

3.8 (±3.4) b

3.79

0.027

1.50

0.164

Cerambycidae

WB/RW

16.3 (±13.7) a

11.3 (±4.4) ab

5.8 (±3.2) b

4.31

0.017

3.85

<0.001

Chrysomelidae

Pl

35.3 (±17.2) a

23.0 (±8.1) ab

14.0 (±3.7) b

3.47

0.036

10.03

<0.001

Curculionidae

Pl

64.0 (±18.2) a

57.5 (±11.9) ab

35.3 (±10.9) b

6.81

0.002

19.90

<0.001

Elateridae

R

42.0 (±12.5) a

30.5 (±8.4) ab

15.0 (±4.3) b

5.89

0.004

14.40

<0.001

Erotylidae

F

8.0 (±2.6) a

5.5 (±3.1) a

0.8 (±1.0) b

8.98

<0.001

1.39

0.206

Lycidae

W/Pl

21.0 (±17.3) a

16.8 (±7.5) ab

8.5 (±4.7) b

3.38

0.039

11.38

<0.001

Mordellidae

Pl/RW

78.0 (±65.0) ab

84.5 (±36.4) a

37.3 (±28.2) b

8.49

<0.001

10.83

<0.001

Nitidulidae

F

13.0 (±1.7) a

10.5 (±2.6) ab

4.0 (±2.6) b

5.05

0.009

3.21

0.002

Oedemeridae

R/F

2.5 (±1.7)

0.8 (±1.0)

0.5 (±0.6)

Scarabaeidaeb

D

0

0.3 (±0.5)

0

Scarabaeidaec

Pl/RW

47.7 (±28.2) a

38.5 (±14.1) ab

18.0 (±7.9) b

4.02

0.022

11.07

<0.001

Scolytidae

WB

8.0 (±6.6) a

2.3 (±1.9) a

5.8 (±7.5) a

0.83

0.441

3.18

0.002

Staphylinidae

Pr

34.0 (±19.2) a

22.3 (±9.1) a

11.8 (±6.8) b

6.92

0.002

3.77

0.001

Tenebrionidae

S

20.0 (±9.5) a

20.0 (±5.0) a

13.3 (±6.3) a

1.61

0.207

6.41

<0.001

aCommon letters denote no significant difference between treatments (Tukey’s HSD, > 0.05)

bScarabaeinae and Aphodiinae

cExcluding Scarabaeinae and Aphodiinae

Pr predators, WB wood borers, RW rotten wood feeders, Pl plant feeders, R root feeders, F fungus feeders, W wood feeders, D Dung feeders, S Scavengers

Response of Coleoptera to understory vegetation

In both sites, the total number of understory vascular plant species was greater in the thinned stand than in the unthinned stand (Fig. 2). In Sugi, 37 and 31 plant species were found in the thinned and retained sections, respectively, of the thinned stand. In contrast, only seven species were found in the unthinned stand. In Kuchiotani, 40 and 41 plant species were found in the thinned and retained sections, respectively, of the thinned stand. In contrast, only 29 species were found in the unthinned stand. Examples of woody plants present in the thinned stand at Sugi included many early successional species such as shrubs (e.g., Clerodendron trichotomum Thunb., Deutzia crenata Sieb. et Zucc., Vaccinium hirtum Thunb.), vines (e.g., Sinomenium diversifolium Diels, Wistaria brachybotrys Sieb. et Zucc.) and one deciduous tree [Aphananthe aspera (Thunb.) Planch.]. In contrast, only two shade-tolerant shrub species (Eurya japonica Thunb., Pieris japonica D.Don) were found in the unthinned stand at Sugi.
Fig. 2

Abundance of Coleoptera (common beetles) in relation to biomass (a), and species richness (b) of understory plants in the two Cryptomeria japonica plantations in northern Hyogo Prefecture, central Japan (note varied x-axis range). Triangular symbols indicate Sugi site and circular symbols indicate Kuchiotani site. Symbolpatterns indicate sample quadrats in the thinned (open) and retained (shaded) sections of the treatment plot and in the control plot (filled)

We found strong across-site positive relationships between biomass and species richness of understory plants and abundance of Coleoptera (Fig. 2). In addition, abundance of most Coleopteran functional groups was positively correlated with biomass and species richness of understory plants, in both sites (Fig. 3). Correlations were stronger for biomass than for species richness. Plant feeders (Chrysomelidae, Curculionidae, and Elateridae) and predators (Carabidae, Staphylinidae) were positively correlated with both biomass and species richness of understory plants. Wood borers (Cerambycidae, Scolytidae) were positively correlated with biomass only. Plant/rotten wood feeders (Mordellidae, Scarabaeidae) were not correlated with either biomass or species richness of understory plants.
Fig. 3

Abundance of Coleopteran functional groups in relation to biomass and species richness of understory plants in the two Cryptomeria japonica plantations in northern Hyogo Prefecture, central Japan. Plant feeders (Chrysomelidae and Curculionidae), plant/rotten wood feeders (Mordellidae and Scarabaeidae excluding Scrabaeinae and Aphoniinae), wood borers (Cerambycidae and Scolytidae), predators (Cantharidae, Carabidae, and Staphilinidae). Triangular symbols indicate Sugi site and circular symbols indicate Kuchiotani site. Symbolpatterns indicate sample quadrats in the thinned (open) and retained (shaded) sections of the treatment plot and in the control plot (filled). Note varied x-axis and y-axis ranges

Discussion

Our results show that line thinning increased the abundance and diversity of Coleoptera in the two C. japonica plantations. We found strong across-site positive relationships between abundance of Coleoptera and understory vegetation. Several studies have found positive associations between arthropod abundance and understory vegetation (e.g., Ohsawa 2004; Murray et al.2006). Thinning creates more sun-exposed understory conditions and can increase biomass, diversity, and cover of understory plants, if applied with sufficient time intervals to allow development of understory vegetation (e.g., Smith et al.1997; Kerr 1999; Thomas et al.1999; Griffis et al.2001; Clinton 2003). Arthropods respond relatively quickly to thinning and subsequent recovery of understory vegetation. For example, Ohsawa (2005) found higher abundance of Curculionidae in the middle-aged (21–45 years old) larch (L. kaempferi Lamb.) plantations only 1.5–2.5 years after thinning in the central mountainous region of Japan. Germain et al. (2005) found higher abundance of generalist carabid beetles only 2 years after logging in Canada. Our study sites were 4 and 6 years since thinning, which was shown to be sufficient for restoration of both plant and arthropod communities. Our estimates indicate that standing volume will recover to pre-thinning values in ca. 10 years (Maleque 2006). The results of this study suggest that this may be a good thinning interval for maintaining biodiversity in the plantation.

Many authors have used functional groups to evaluate arthropod diversity (e.g., Kennedy and Southwood 1984; Stork 1987; Memmott et al.2000; Vanderwel et al.2006). We evaluated the responses of Coleopteran families where each family represented one or more functional groups (Tables 3, 4). Most Coleopteran families increased in abundance in response to thinning. Plant-feeding Chrysomelidae, Curculionidae, root-feeding Elateridae, wood/plant feeding Lycidae, scavenger Tenebrionidae, wood-boring Cerambycidae, plant/rotten wood-feeding Scarabaeidae, all of which directly or indirectly depend on plants for food (Siemann 1998; Lawrence et al.1999; Weisser and Siemann 2004), increased in abundance in the thinned stands. The presence of more understory vegetation in the thinned stands may also have contributed to greater abundance of flower-visiting adults of Chrysomelidae, Curculionidae, Scarabaeidae, and Cerambycidae, which are attracted to floral fragrance (Maeto and Fukuyama 1995; Maeto et al.2002). Predatory Carabidae, which tend to be more abundant and diverse where herb and shrub cover contribute to increasing prey abundance (Magura et al.2000; Jukes et al.2001; Magura et al.2001, 2002), were more abundant in the line-thinned stand. The line-thinned stand also supported more individuals of predatory Staphylinidae. Although we believe that most of the insects captured in this study were resident in each stand, some may have been transient individuals moving through the stand. We contend that both resident and transient insects contribute to biodiversity because their presence reflects use of the stand by diverse insect groups.

In contrast to the thinned stands, the unthinned stands in both sites supported much lower abundance of beetle families. The lack of understory vegetation in the unthinned stands resulted in lack of palatable broad-leaf litter for decomposers. Magura et al. (2005) found that the distribution and abundance of Carabidae increased with increasing broad-leaf litter on the forest floor in the Norway spruce (Picea abies) plantations. In addition, organic acids produced by decomposing conifer litter may be deleterious to many plant and animal communities (Arnett Jr 2000; Kerr 1999).

Coleopteran abundance increased more markedly in response to biomass of understory plants than to species richness. In addition, most Coleopteran functional groups (excluding plant/rotten wood feeders) increased more markedly in response to biomass of understory plants than to species richness. The amount of understory vegetation is an important factor contributing to Coleopteran diversity, although plant species richness can be important for colonization by truly plant-feeding insects (Brown and Hyman 1986; Johnson and Agrawal 2006). Our results suggested that ‘structural diversity’ (sensu Southwood et al.1979) is more important for colonization by Coleoptera than ‘taxonomic diversity.’ Understory plants are the primary determinants of spatiotemporal heterogeneity on the forest floor (Clinton 2003). Because understory vegetation provides food and shelter for various arthropod species, arthropod abundance and diversity are correlated with abiotic and biotic factors created by understory vegetation (Nakamura et al.1970; Lattin 1993; Dabrowska-Prot 1999; Ikeda et al.2005). For example, favorable ground temperatures and higher abundance of foods provided by understory plants have positive impacts on the distribution and abundance of Carabidae (Magura et al.2004, 2005). In natural environments, temperatures exert great influence on developmental rates of insect communities, i.e., the higher the temperature the faster the developmental rates of insect communities within certain ranges (Pedigo 1996). In all types of habitats, the survival rate of immature insects is an important determinant of the abundance of insect communities (Ikeda et al.2005). We found that daytime temperatures were, on average, 1.8°C higher throughout the study period in the thinned stand than in the unthinned stand (Maleque 2006). In addition to greater availability of food and habitat attributes, higher temperatures in the thinned stand may have contributed to increasing growth rate and survival of immature insects (‘grubs’) of Coleoptera. We inferred that establishment of a structurally diverse understory plant community after line thinning provided heterogeneous understory conditions for arthropods in the thinned stands with respect to habitat, food sources and microclimate (Hammond and Miller 1998; Tanabe et al.2001; Oxbrough et al.2005; Ikeda et al.2005).

At a larger spatial scale, biodiversity conditions of managed forests and other human-influenced ecosystems are influenced by the surrounding landscape pattern (Kerr 1999; Hunter 2002; Nagaike 2002; Cook et al.2006; Kodani 2006; Sakai et al.2006). The Kuchiotani site, which included more natural forests in the surrounding landscape, supported more understory plants (Fig. 2) and twice the abundance of Coleoptera than the Sugi site (Table 2). Natural forests surrounding the Kuchiotani site are likely to function as seed sources for understory vegetation and source habitats for Coleoptera emmigration. Additional factors such as longer time since thinning, wider thinning width, and cooler, more humid climate probably contributed to increasing biodiversity in the Kuchiotani site. In contrast, the Sugi site may lack seed sources and source habitats due to the high percentage of plantation forests in the region. Our results suggested that spatiotemporal variations including landscape-level factors might potentially influence the success of biodiversity restoration.

This study suggests that, in addition to its economic viability (Taniguchi 2003), line thinning is a potentially effective ecosystem management technique for biodiversity restoration in overstocked C. japonica plantations. By creating heterogeneous understory conditions, line thinning increased understory plant biomass, which in turn contributed to enhancing arthropod diversity (Maleque et al.2007). Our results suggested that restoration of ecological processes, such as food-web interactions (pollination, predation, herbivory, decomposition, parasitism, etc.) and habitat preferences, is an important factor contributing to biodiversity of arthropod communities. Ecosystem management techniques should aim to enhance important ecological processes in order to restore biodiversity effectively.

Notes

Acknowledgments

We thank the students and faculty of the Laboratory of Forest Resources, Kobe University for their help with field work and discussion. We also thank the forestry unions of Kanzaki and Kami towns for permission to use the study sites. The Japanese Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports and Technology supported the first author and the Academic Research Grant of the Japan Forest Technology Assoc. supported this study. Voucher specimens from this study were deposited in a collection at the Hyogo Museum of Humans and Nature.

References

  1. Arnett Jr RH (2000) American insects. A handbook of the insects of America North of Mexico. CRC Press LLC, Boca Raton, FLGoogle Scholar
  2. Aubry KB, Halpern CB, Maguire DA (2004) Ecological effects of variable-retention harvests in the northwestern United States: the DEMO study. Forest Snow Landsc Res 78:119–137Google Scholar
  3. Brown VK, Hyman PS (1986) Successional communities of plants and phytophagous Coleoptera. J Anim Ecol 74:963–975Google Scholar
  4. Burton PJ, Balisky AC, Coward LP, Cumming SG, Kneeshaw DD (1992) The value of managing for biodiversity. Forestry Chron 68:225–237Google Scholar
  5. Clinton BD (2003) Light, temperature, and soil moisture responses to elevation, evergreen understory, and small canopy gaps in the southern Appalachians. Forest Ecol Manage 186:243–255CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cook WM, Yao J, Foster BL, Holt RD, Patrick LB (2006) Secondary succession in an experimentally fragmented landscape: community patterns across space and time. Ecology 86:1267–1279CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Dabrowska-Prot E (1999) Effects of spruce forest degradation on abundance and diversity of the biocenoses. Research synthesis. Pol J Ecol 47:465–476Google Scholar
  8. Dobson A, Lodge D, Alder J, Cumming GS, Keymer J, McGlade J, Mooney H, Rusak JA, Sala O, Wolters V, Wall D, Winfree R, Xenopoulos MA (2006) Habitat loss, trophic collapse, and the decline of ecosystem services. Ecology 87:1915–1924PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Forestry Agency of Japan (2004) Annual report on trends of forest and forestry—fiscal year 2003 (in Japanese). Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries of Japan, TokyoGoogle Scholar
  10. Germain MS, Larrivée M, Drapeau P, Fahrig L, Buddle CM (2005) Short-term response of ground beetles (Coleoptera: Carabidae) to fire and logging in a spruce-dominated boreal landscape. Forest Ecol Manage 212:118–126CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Griffis KL, Crawdord JA, Wagner MR, Moir WH (2001) Understory response to management treatments in northern Arizona ponderosa pine forests. Forest Ecol Manage 146:239–245CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Grimaldi D, Engel MS (2005) Evolution of insects. Cambridge University Press. NY, USA, pp 357–406Google Scholar
  13. Halpern CB, Evans SA, Nelson CR, McKenzie D, Liguori DA (1999) Response of forest vegetation to varying levels and patterns of green-tree retention: an overview of a long-term experiment. Northwest Sci 73:27–44Google Scholar
  14. Halpern CB, McKenzie D (2001) Disturbance and post-harvest ground conditions in a structural retention experiment. Forest Ecol Manage 154:215–225CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Halpern CB, McKenzie D, Evans SA, Maguire DA (2005) Initial responses to varying levels and patterns of green-tree retention. Ecol Appl 15:175–195CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hammond PC, Miller JC (1998) Comparison of the biodiversity of Lepidoptera within three forested ecosystems. Ann Entomol Soc Am 91:323–328Google Scholar
  17. Hayashi M, Morimoto K, Kimoto S (2002) The Coleoptera of Japan in color, vol 4. Hoikusha Publishing Co., Ltd., Osaka, JapanGoogle Scholar
  18. Hunter MD (2002) Landscape structure, habitat fragmentation, and the ecology of insects. Agric Forest Entomol 4:159–166CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Ikeda H, Homma K, Kubota K (2005) Biotic and abiotic factors affecting the structures of ground invertebrate communities in Japanese cedar dominant forests. Eurasian J Forest Res 8:1–13Google Scholar
  20. Inada T, Yunomura S, Maeto K (2006) The influence forest management on the assemblage of longicorn beetles. J Jpn Foresty Soc 88:446–455 (in Japanese, with English summary)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Ishii HT, Tanabe S, Hiura T (2004) Exploring the relationships among canopy structure, stand productivity and biodiversity of temperate forest ecosystems. Forest Sci 50:342–355Google Scholar
  22. Ishiyama Y (1998) Forestry for the people, new trends in Japanese forestry policy. Look Jpn 44:4–9Google Scholar
  23. Ito S, Ishigami S, Mizoue N, Buckley GP (2006) Maintaining plant species composition and diversity of understory vegetation under strip-clearcutting forestry in conifer plantations in Kyushu, southern Japan. Forest Ecol Manage 321:234–241CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Ito S, Nakagawa M, Buckley GP, Nogami K (2003) Species richness in sugi (Cryptomeria japonica D. Don) plantations in southern Kyushu, Japan: the effects of stand type and age on understory trees and shrubs. J Forest Res 8:49–57CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Johnson MTJ, Agrawal AA (2006) Plant genotype and environment interact to shape a diverse arthropod community on evening primose (Oenothera biennis). Ecology 86:874–885CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Jukes MR, Peace AJ, Ferris R (2001) Carabid beetle communities associated with coniferous plantations in Britain: the influence of site, ground vegetation and stand structure. Forest Ecol Manage 148:271–286CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Kennedy CEJ, Southwood TRE (1984) The number of species of insects associated with British trees. J Anim Ecol 53:455–478CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Kerr G (1999) The use of silvicultural systems to enhance the biological diversity of plantation forests in Britain. Forestry 72:191–205CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Khom KA, Franklin JF (1997) Creating a forestry for the 21st century: the science of ecosystem management. Island Press, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  30. Kodani J (2006) Species diversity of broad-leaved trees in Cryptomeria japonica plantations in relation to the distance from adjacent broad-leaved forests. J Forest Res 11:267–274CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Kurosawa Y, Hisamatsu S, Sasaji H (1998) The Coleoptera of Japan in color, vol 3. Hoikusha Publishing Co., Ltd., Osaka, JapanGoogle Scholar
  32. Lachat T, Attignon S, Djego J, Goergen G, Nagel P, Sinsin B, Peveling R (2006) Arthropod diversity in Lama forest reserve (South Benin), a mosaic of natural, degraded and plantation forests. Biodivers Conserv 15:3–23CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Larsen JB (1995) Ecological stability of forests and sustainable Silviculture. Forest Ecol Manage 73:85–96CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Lattin JD (1993) Arthropod diversity and conservation in old-growth northwest forests. Am Zool 33:578–587Google Scholar
  35. Lawrence JF, Hastings AM, Dallwitz MJ, Paine TA, Zurcher EJ (1999) Beetles of the World: a key and information system for families and subfamilies. CD-ROM, Version 1.0 for MS-Windows. CSIRO Publishing, Melbourne, VICGoogle Scholar
  36. Lindenmayer DB, Franklin JF (2003) Conserving forest biodiversity. Island Press, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  37. Lindenmayer DB, Margules CR, Botkin DB (1998) Indicators of biodiversity for ecologically sustainable forest management. Conserv Biol 14:941–950CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Maeto K, Fukuyama K (1995) Selective attraction of flower-visiting beetles (Coleoptera) to floral fragrance chemicals in a tropical rain forest. Jpn J Entomol 63:851–859Google Scholar
  39. Maeto K, Sato S, Miyata H (2002) Species diversity of longicorn beetles in humid warm-temperate forests: the impact of forest management practices on old-growth forest species in southwestern Japan. Biodivers Conserv 11:1919–1937CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Magura T (2002) Carabids and forest edge: spatial pattern and edge effect. Forest Ecol Manage 157:23–37CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Magura T, Elek Z, Tóthmérész B (2002) Impacts of non-native spruce reforestation on ground beetles. Eur J Soil Biol 38:291–295CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Magura T, Tóthmérész B, Bordán ZS (2000) Effects of nature management practice on carabid assemblages (Coleoptera: Carabidae) in a non-native plantation. Biol Conserv 93:95–102CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Magura T, Tóthmérész B, Elek Z (2004) Effects of leaf-litter addition on carabid beetles in a non-native Norway spruce plantation. Acta Zool Acad Scitentiarum Hung 50:9–23Google Scholar
  44. Magura T, Tóthmérész B, Elek Z (2005) Impacts of leaf-litter addition on carabids in a conifer plantation. Biodivers Conserv 14:475–491CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Magura T, Tóthmérész B, Molnar T (2001) Forest edge and diversity: carabids along forest-grassland transects. Biodivers Conserv 10:287–300CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Maleque MA (2006) The importance of line thinning toward fulfilling biodiversity objectives in Japanese cedar (Cryptomeria japonica D. Don) plantations, central Japan. Ph.D. thesis, Graduate School of Science and Technology, Kobe University, Japan, pp 13–25Google Scholar
  47. Maleque MA, Ishii HT, Maeto K (2006a) The use of arthropods as indicators of ecosystem integrity in forest management. J Forestry 104:113–117Google Scholar
  48. Maleque MA, Ishii HT, Maeto K, Taniguchi S (2006b) Management of insect biodiversity in Japanese cedar (Cryptomeria japonica D. Don) plantations in central Japan. Eurasian J Forest Res 9:29–36Google Scholar
  49. Maleque MA, Ishii HT, Maeto K, Taniguchi S (2007) Line thinning fosters the abundance and diversity of understory Hymenoptera (Insecta) in Japanese cedar (Cryptomeria japonica D. Don) plantations. J Forest Res 12:14–23CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Marcos AL, Bragança1 MAL, Schoereder JH, Zanuncio JC, Zanuncio TV, Leite GLD, Serrão JE (In press) Hymenoptera diversity in a landscape dominated by an eucalyptus plantation. Agric Forest EntomolGoogle Scholar
  51. McKenzie D, Halpern CB, Nelson CR (2000) Overstory influences on herb and shrub communities in mature forests of western Washington, USA. Can J For Res 30:1655–1666CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Memmott J, Martinez ND, Cohen JE (2000) Predators, parasitoids and pathogens: species richness, trophic generality and body sizes in a natural food web. J Anim Ecol 69:1–15CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Moir ML, Brennan KEC, Koch JM, Majer JD, Fletcher MJ (2005) Restoration of a forest ecosystem: the effects of vegetation and dispersal capabilities on the reassembly of plant-dwelling arthropods. Forest Ecol Manage 217:294–306CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Murray TJ, Dickinson KJM, Barratt BIP (2006) Associations between weevils (Coleoptera: Curculionoidea) and plants, and conservation values in two tussock grasslands, Otago, New Zealand. Biodivers Conserv 15:123–137CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Nagaike T (2000) A review of ecological studies on plant species diversity in plantation ecosystems. J Jpn Forestry Soc 82:407–416 (In Japanese with English abstract)Google Scholar
  56. Nagaike T (2002) Differences in plant species diversity between conifer (Larix kaempfri) plantations and broad-leaved (Quercus crispula) secondary forests in central Japan. Forest Ecol Manage 168:111–123CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Nagaike T (2006) Special feature: ecology and management of conifer plantations in Japan: control of tree growth and maintenance of biodiversity. J Forest Res 11:215–216CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Nakamura Y, Fujikawa T, Yamauchi K, Tamura H (1970) Distribution and dynamics of some forest soil animals in Hokkaido. J Jpn Forestry Soc 52:80–88 (in Japanese with English abstract)Google Scholar
  59. Nelson CR, Halpern CB (2005) Edge-related responses of understory plants to aggregated retention harvest in the Pacific Northwest. Ecol Appl 15:196–209CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Ohsawa M (2004) Species richness of Cerambycidae in larch plantations and natural broad-leaved forests of the central mountainous region of Japan. Forest Ecol Manag 189:375–385CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Ohsawa M (2005) Species richness and composition of Curculionidae (Coleoptera) in a conifer plantation, secondary forest, and old-growth forest in the central mountainous region of Japan. Ecol Res 20:632–645CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Oxbrough AG, Gittings T, O’Halloran J, Giller PS, Smith GF (2005) Structural indicators of spider communities across the forest plantation cycle. Forest Ecol Manage 212:171–183CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Parmenter RR, MacMahon JA (1987) Early successional patterns of arthropod recolonization on reclaimed strip mines: the ground-dwelling beetle fauna (Coleoptera). Environ Entomol 16:168–177Google Scholar
  64. Parmenter RR, MacMahon JA, Gilbert CAB (1991) Early successional patterns of arthropod recolonization on reclaimed Wyoming strip mines: The Grasshoppers (Orthoptera: Acrididae) and allied Faunas (Orthoptera: Gryllacrididae, Tettigoniidae). Environ Entomol 20:135–142Google Scholar
  65. Pedigo LP (1996) Entomology and pest management. Prentice-Hall of India Private Limited, New Delhi, India, pp 167–201Google Scholar
  66. Progar RA, Schowalter TD, Work T (1999) Arboreal invertebrate responses to varying levels and patterns of green-tree retention in Northwest forests. Northwest Sci 73:77–86Google Scholar
  67. Sakai A, Hirayama T, Oshioka S, Hirata Y (2006) Effects of elevation and postharvest disturbance on the composition of vegetation established after the clear-cut harvest of conifer plantations in southern Shikoku, Japan. J Forest Res 11:253–265CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Shah PA, Brooks DR, Ashby JE, Perry JN, Woiwod IP (2003) Diversity and abundance of the coleopteran fauna from organic and conventional management systems in southern England. Agric Forest Entomol 5:51–60CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Siemann E (1998) Experimental tests of effects of plant productivity and diversity on grassland arthropod diversity. Ecology 79:2057–2070CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Siemann E, Haarstad J, Tilman D (1999) Dynamics of plant and arthropod diversity during old field succession. Ecography 22:406–414CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Smith DM, Larson BC, Metthew JK, Ashton PMS (1997) The practice of silviculture: applied forest ecology. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  72. Southwood TRE, Brown VK, Reader PM (1979) The relationships of plant and insect diversities in succession. Biol J Linn Soc 12:327–348Google Scholar
  73. Stork NE (1987) Guild structure of arthropods from Bornean rain forest trees. Ecol Entomol 12:69–80Google Scholar
  74. Tanabe SI, Toda MJ, Vinokurova AV (2001) Tree shape, forest structure and diversity of drosophilid community: comparison between boreal and temperate birch forests. Ecol Res 16:369–385CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Taniguchi S (2003) A case study of practicing the line-thinning with the help of high-efficiency forestry machines. Appl Forest Sci 12:181–184 (in Japanese)Google Scholar
  76. Thomas SC, Halpern CB, Falk DA, Liguori DA, Austin KA (1999) Plant diversity in managed forests: understory responses to thinning and fertilization. Ecol Appl 9:864–879CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Uéno SI, Kurosawa Y, Satô M (1999) The Coleoptera in Japan in color, vol 2. Hoikusha Publishing Co., Ltd., Osaka, JapanGoogle Scholar
  78. Vanderwel MC, Malcolm JR, Smith SM, Islam N (2006) Insect community composition and trophic guild structure in decaying logs from eastern Canadian pine-dominated forests. Forest Ecol Manage 225:190–199CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Weisser WW, Siemann E (2004) Insects and ecosystem function. Springer, BerlinGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • M. Abdul Maleque
    • 1
  • Hiroaki T. Ishii
    • 1
  • Kaoru Maeto
    • 2
  • Shingo Taniguchi
    • 3
    • 4
  1. 1.Graduate School of Science and TechnologyKobe UniversityKobeJapan
  2. 2.Faculty of AgricultureKobe UniversityKobeJapan
  3. 3.Forestry Technology InstituteHyogo Prefectural Technology Center for Agriculture, Forestry and FisheriesAsagoJapan
  4. 4.Faculty of AgricultureUniversity of the RyukyusOkinawaJapan

Personalised recommendations