Annals of Forest Science

, 76:68 | Cite as

A dataset of forest volume deadwood estimates for Europe

  • Nicola PulettiEmail author
  • Roberto Canullo
  • Walter Mattioli
  • Radosław Gawryś
  • Piermaria Corona
  • Janusz Czerepko
Data Paper


Key message

ICP-Forests relies on a representative pan-European network based on a 16 × 16 km grid-net covering around 6,000 plots. Dead wood volumes for 3,243 plots, related to 19 European Countries, are presented in this data paper as a result of harmonised sampling procedure, and under compliance with FAIR Data Principles. Dataset access is at . Associated metadata are available at .


Deadwood decay classes Stand management Stand age European Forest Types ICP Forests monitoring programme 



The presented derivate aggregated database is based on four original datasets (GPL, THT, DWD, and DBH) as archived into the collaborative ICP Forests database, at the Programme Co-ordinating Centre (PCC) of UNECE ICP Forests in Eberswalde, Germany. Access to these data can be requested via the official project homepage ( Under the menu “Plots and data - data requests”, the data request form is provided. The requesting part has to provide an abstract on the scientific purpose and approach to PCC, which will be evaluated by the ICP Forests, and the expected delivery data will be communicated after a couple of weeks. The evaluation was based on data that are part of the UNECE ICP Forests PCC Collaborative Database (see Particularly, data from 19 countries (see § Methods), were used in the analyses. Data evaluation was co-financed by a scholarship fund of the Forest Research Institute (IBL), Poland.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest.


  1. Barbati A, Marchetti M, Chirici G, Corona P (2014) European Forest Types and Forest Europe SFM indicators: tools for monitoring progress on forest biodiversity conservation. For Ecol Manag 321:145–157. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bastrup-Birk A, Neville P, Chirici G, Houston T (2008) Biosoil forest Biodiversity field manual. In: Coenen S, Sioen G, Roskams P (Eds) Demonstratieproject Biosoil - biodiversiteit in de internationale proefvlakken van het bosvitaliteitsmeetnet (Forest Focus - Biosoil Demonstration Project/Level I Forest Biodiversity Module) INBO.R.2008.52: 45-70 Instituut voor Natuur- en Bosonderzoek, Brussel ISSN: 1782-9054. Available in file “Excerpt from BE Demonstratieproject_biosoil_2008.pdf” at
  3. Canullo R (2016) The ICP-Forests Level I biodiversity data. A harmonized data source and baseline for plant species and structural diversity on European forest ecosystems. In: Michel A, Seidling W (eds): Forest condition in Europe: 2016 Technical Report of ICP-Forests. Report under the UNECE Convention on Long-Range Transboundary Air Pollution (CLRTAP). BFW-Dokumentation 23: 89-105. Vienna: BFW Austrian Research Centre for Forests. ISBN 978-3-902762-65-8Google Scholar
  4. Corona P (2018) Communicating facts, findings and thinking to support evidence-based strategies and decisions. Ann Silvicultural Res 42:1–2. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Corona P, Blasi C, Chirici G, Facioni L, Fattorini L, Ferrari B (2010) Monitoring and assessing old-growth forest stands by plot sampling. Plant Biosystems 144:171–179. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. EEA (2006). European forest types categories and types for sustainable forest management reporting and policy. Technical report, Eur Environ Agency; Technical report No 9/2006, 114 pp.Google Scholar
  7. Ferretti M, Fischer R (eds) (2013) Forest monitoring: methods for terrestrial investigations in Europe with an overview of North America and Asia, vol 12. Developments in Environmental Science, Oxford, p 536Google Scholar
  8. Fleck S, Cools N, De Vos B, Meesenburg H, Fischer R (2016) The Level II aggregated forest soil condition database links soil physicochemical and hydraulic properties with long-term observations of forest condition in Europe. Ann For Sci 73:945–957. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Hauβmann T, Fischer R (2004) The Forest Monitoring Programme of ICP-Forests – a contribution to biodiversity monitoring. In: Marchetti M (ed) Monitoring and indicators of forest biodiversity in Europe – from ideas to operationality, vol 51, pp 413–419Google Scholar
  10. Hunter ML (1990) Wildlife, forests, and forestry: principles of managing forests for biological diversity. Prentice and Hall, Englewood Cliffs, p 270Google Scholar
  11. Lassauce A, Paillet Y, Jactel H, Bouget C (2011) Deadwood as a surrogate for forest biodiversity: meta-analysis of correlations between deadwood volume and species richness of saproxylic organisms. Ecol Indic 11(5):1027–1039. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Lombardi F, Marchetti M, Corona P, Merlini P, Chirici G, Tognetti R, Burrascano S, Alivernini A, Puletti N (2015) Quantifying the effect of sampling plot size on the estimation of structural indicators in old-growth forest stands. For Ecol Manag 346(15):89–97. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Puletti N, Giannetti F, Chirici G, Canullo R (2017) Deadwood distribution in European forests. J Maps 13(2):733–736. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Puletti N, Canullo R, Mattioli W, Gawrys Radosław, Corona P, Czerepko J (2018) Forest deadwood in Europe Version 4 Zenodo. [Dataset]
  15. Rondeux J, Bertini R, Bastrup-Birk A, Corona P, Latte N, McRoberts RE, Ståhl G, Winter S, Chirici G (2012) Assessing deadwood using harmonized national forest inventory data. For Sci 58:269–283. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Seibold S, Bässler C, Brandl R, Gossner MM, Thorn S, Ulyshen MD, Müller J (2015) Experimental studies of dead-wood biodiversity - a review identifying global gaps in knowledge. Biol Conserv Volume 191, November 2015: 139–149. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Ståhl G, Cienciala E, Chirici G, Lanz A, Vidal C, Winter S, McRoberts RE, Rondeux J, Schadauer K, Tomppo E (2012) Bridging national and reference definitions for harmonizing forest statistics. For Sci 58(3):214–223. http:/ CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Wilkinson MD, Dumontier M, Aalbersberg IJ, Appleton G, Axton M, Baak A, Blomberg N, Boiten JW, da Silva Santos LB, Bourne PE, Bouwman J, Brookes AJ, Clark T, Crosas M, Dillo I, Dumon O, Edmunds S, Evelo CT, Finkers R, Gonzalez-Beltran A, Gray AJG, Groth P, Goble C, Grethe JS, Heringa J, Hoen PAC, Hooft R, Kuhn T, Kok R, Kok J, Lusher SJ, Martone ME, Mons A, Packer AL, Persson B, Rocca-Serra P, Roos M, van Schaik R, Sansone SA, Schultes E, Sengstag T, Slater T, Strawn G, Swertz MA, Thompson M, van der Lei J, van Mulligen E, Velterop J, Waagmeester A, Wittenburg P, Wolstencroft K, Zhao J, Mons B (2016) The FAIR Guiding Principles for scientific data management and stewardship. Scientific Data 3:160018. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  19. Zell J, Kändler G, Hanewinkel M (2009) Predicting constant decay rates of coarse woody debris—a meta-analysis approach with a mixed model. Ecol Model 220(7):904–912. CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© INRA and Springer-Verlag France SAS, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Consiglio per la ricerca in agricoltura e l’analisi dell’economia agraria (CREA), Research Centre for Forestry and WoodArezzoItaly
  2. 2.School of Biosciences and Veterinary Medicine - Plant Diversity and Ecosystems Management unitUniversity of CamerinoCamerinoItaly
  3. 3.Department of Environmental Science, Botany & Ecology SectionUniversity of CamerinoCamerinoItaly
  4. 4.Forest Research Institute (IBL)RaszynPoland

Personalised recommendations