Biodiversity and Conservation

, Volume 20, Issue 13, pp 2917–2932 | Cite as

Biodiversity conservation in old-growth boreal forest: black spruce and balsam fir snags harbour distinct assemblages of saproxylic beetles

Original Paper

Abstract

Biodiversity conservation of forest ecosystems strongly relies on effective dead wood management. However, the responses of saproxylic communities to variations in dead wood characteristics remains poorly documented, a lack of knowledge that may impede the development of efficient management strategies. We established the relationship between saproxylic beetles—at the species and community levels—and attributes of black spruce and balsam fir in old-growth boreal forests. The relationship was first evaluated for individual snag bole segments, and then for forest stands. A total of 168 bole sections were collected in summer 2006 along a compositional gradient ranging from black spruce-dominated stands to balsam fir-dominated ones, in a boreal forest dominated by >90-year-old stands. A total of 16,804 beetles belonging to 47 species emerged from bole segments, with 21% of the species being found exclusively in black spruce snags and 36% exclusively in balsam fir snags. Black spruce and balsam fir snags thus contributed differently to forest biodiversity by being inhabited by different saproxylic communities. Wood density was an important attribute in the host-use patterns for several species of saproxylic beetles, but no relationship was found between snag availability within stands and abundance of beetles strongly linked to either black spruce or balsam fir. Our study outlines the relative contribution of tree compositional diversity to saproxylic species, while highlighting the contribution of black spruce and balsam fir to animal diversity in old-growth boreal forests.

Keywords

Biodiversity conservation Dead wood Saproxylic beetles Balsam fir Black spruce Boreal forest 

References

  1. Ali AA, Asselin H, Larouche AC, Bergeron Y, Carcaillet C, Richard PJH (2008) Changes in fire regime explain the Holocene rise and fall of Abies balsamea in the coniferous forests of western Québec, Canada. Holocene 18:693–703CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Alinvi O, Ball JP, Danell K, Hjältén J, Pettersson RB (2007) Sampling saproxylic beetle assemblages in dead wood logs: comparing window and eclector traps to traditional bark sieving and a refinement. J Insect Conserv 11:99–112CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Arnett RH Jr, Thomas MC (2001) American Beetles, Volume 1. Archostemata, Myxophaga, Adephaga, Polyphaga: Staphyliniformia. CRC Press, Boca RatonGoogle Scholar
  4. Arnett RH Jr, Thomas MC, Skelley PE, Frank JH (2002) American Beetles, Volume 2. Polyphaga: Scarabaeoidea through Curculionoidea. CRC Press, Boca RatonCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Berg Å, Bengt E, Gustafsson L, Hallingbäck T, Jonsell M, Weslien J (1994) Threatened plant, animal, and fungus species in Swedish forests: distribution and habitat associations. Conserv Biol 8:718–731CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bergeron Y, Leduc A, Harvey BD, Gauthier S (2002) Natural fire regime: a guide for sustainable management of the Canadian boreal forest. Silva Fenn 36:81–95Google Scholar
  7. Bergeron Y, Drapeau P, Gauthier S, Lecomte N (2007) Using knowledge of natural disturbances to support sustainable forest management in the northern Clay Belt. For Chron 83:326–337Google Scholar
  8. Blais JR (1983) Les forêts de la Côte Nord au Québec sont-elles sujettes aux déprédations par la tordeuse? For Chron 59:17–20Google Scholar
  9. Bouchard M, Pothier D, Gauthier S (2008) Fire return intervals and tree species succession in the North Shore region of eastern Quebec. Can J For Res 38:1621–1633CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bouget C (2005) Short-term effect of windstorm disturbance on saproxylic beetles in broadleaved temperate forests. Part I: do environmental changes induce a gap effect? For Ecol Manag 216:1–14CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Clarke KR (1993) Non-parametric multivariate analyses of changes in community structure. Austr J Ecol 18:117–143CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Colwell RK (2009) EstimateS: Statistical estimation of species richness and shared species from samples. Version 8.2. User’s Guide and application published at: http://purl.oclc.org/estimates
  13. Côté G, Bouchard M, Pothier D, Gauthier S (2010) Linking stand attributes to cartographic information for ecosystem management purposes in the boreal forest of eastern Québec. For Chron 86:511–519Google Scholar
  14. De Grandpré L, Morissette J, Gauthier S (2000) Long-term post-fire changes in the northeastern boreal forest of Quebec. J Veg Sci 11:791–800CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Djupström LB, Weslien J, Schroeder LM (2008) Dead wood and saproxylic beetles in set-aside and non set-aside forests in a boreal region. For Ecol Manag 255:3340–3350CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Dufrêne M, Legendre P (1997) Species assemblages and indicators species: the need for a flexible asymmetrical approach. Ecol Monogr 67:345–366Google Scholar
  17. Esseen P-A, Ehnström B, Ericson L, Sjöberg K (1997) Boreal forests. Ecol Bull 46:16–47Google Scholar
  18. Farrar JL (1995) Trees in Canada. Canadian Forest Service and Fitzhenvy & Whiteside Limited, Markham, CanadaGoogle Scholar
  19. Franc N, Götmark F, Økland B, Nordén B, Paltto H (2007) Factors and scales potentially important for saproxylic beetles in temperate mixed oak forest. Biol Conserv 135:86–98CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Gauthier S, De Grandpré L, Bergeron Y (2000) Differences in forest composition in two boreal forest ecoregions of Quebec. J Veg Sci 11:781–790CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Gibb H, Hjältén J, Ball JP, Atlegrim O, Pettersson RB, Hilszczański J, Johansson T, Danell K (2006) Effects of landscape composition and substrate availability on saproxylic beetles in boreal forests: a study using experimental logs for monitoring assemblages. Ecography 29:191–204CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Gustafsson L, Kouki J, Sverdrup-Thygeson A (2010) Tree retention as a conservation measure in clear-cut forests of northern Europe: a review of ecological consequences. Scand J For Res 25:295–308CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Hammond HEJ, Langor DW, Spence JR (2001) Early colonization of Populus wood by saproxylic beetles (Coleoptera). Can J For Res 31:1175–1183CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Harmon ME, Franklin JF, Swanson FJ, Sollins P, Gregory SV, Lattin JD, Anderson NH, Cline SP, Aumen NG, Sedell JR, Lienkaemper GW, Cromack K Jr, Cummins KW (1986) Ecology of coarse woody debris in temperate ecosystems. Adv Ecol Res 15:133–302CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Hilszczański J, Gibb H, Hjältén J, Atlegrim O, Johansson T, Pettersson RB, Ball JP, Danell K (2005) Parasitoids (Hymenoptera, Ichneumonoidea) of saproxylic beetles are affected by forest successional stage and dead wood characteristics in boreal spruce forest. Biol Conserv 126:456–464CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Hodson J, Fortin D, Bélanger L (2010) Fine-scale disturbances shape space-use patterns of a boreal forest herbivore. J Mammal 91:607–619CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Hunter ML Jr (1990) Wildlife, forests and forestry. Principles of managing forests for biological diversity. Prentice Hall Inc, Englewood CliffsGoogle Scholar
  28. Jacobs JM, Spence JR, Langor DW (2007) Influence of boreal forest succession and dead wood qualities on saproxylic beetles. Agric For Entomol 9:3–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Janssen P, Fortin D, Hébert C (2009) Beetle diversity in a matrix of old-growth boreal forest: influence of habitat heterogeneity at multiple scales. Ecography 32:423–432CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Jonsell M, Weslien J, Ehnström B (1998) Substrate requirements of red-listed saproxylic invertebrates in Sweden. Biodivers Conserv 7:749–764CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Jonsell M, Hansson J, Wedmo L (2007) Diversity of saproxylic beetle species in logging residues in Sweden—comparisons between tree species and diameters. Biol Conserv 138:89–99CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Jonsson BG, Kruys N, Ranius T (2005) Ecology of species living on dead wood—lessons for dead wood management. Silva Fenn 39:289–309Google Scholar
  33. Karjalainen L, Kuuluvainen T (2002) Amount and diversity of coarse woody debris within a boreal forest landscape dominated by Pinus sylvestris in Vienan-salo wilderness, eastern Fennoscandia. Silva Fenn 36:147–167Google Scholar
  34. Laaksonen M, Peuhu E, Várkonyi G, Siitonen J (2008) Effects of habitat quality and landscape structure on saproxylic species dwelling in boreal spruce-swamp forests. Oikos 117:1098–1110CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Lambert RL, Lang GE, Reiners WA (1980) Loss of mass and chemical change in decaying boles of a subalpine balsam fir forest. Ecology 61:1460–1473CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Langor DW, Spence JR (2006) Arthropods as ecological indicators of sustainability in Canadian forests. For Chron 82:344–350Google Scholar
  37. Langor DW, Hammond HEJ, Spence JR, Jacobs JM, Cobb TP (2008) Saproxylic insect assemblages in Canadian forests: diversity, ecology, and conservation. Can Entomol 140:453–474CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Lindhe A, Lindelöw Å (2004) Cut high stumps of spruce, birch, aspen and oak as breeding substrates for saproxylic beetles. For Ecol Manag 203:1–20CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. MacLean DA, Ebert P (1999) The impact of hemlock looper (Lambdina fiscellaria fiscellaria (Guen.)) on balsam fir and spruce in New Brunswick, Canada. For Ecol Manag 120:77–87CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Magurran AE (2004) Measuring biological diversity. Blackwell Publishing, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  41. Martikainen P, Siitonen J, Punttila P, Kaila L, Rauh J (2000) Species richness of Coleoptera in mature managed and old-growth boreal forests in southern Finland. Biol Conserv 94:199–209CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. McCune B, Grace JB (2002) Analysis of ecological communities. MjM Software, Gleneden BeachGoogle Scholar
  43. McCune B, Mefford MJ (1999) PC-ORD. Multivariate analysis of ecological communities, Version 4.0. MjM Software, Gleneden BeachGoogle Scholar
  44. Menard EA (1982) Insects associated with dead elm trees (Ulmus americana Linneaus) in Southern Ontario. M.Sc. Thesis. University of Guelph, Guelph, CanadaGoogle Scholar
  45. Mielke PW Jr, Berry KJ (2001) Permutation methods: a distance function approach. Springer, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  46. Ministère des Ressources naturelles et de la Faune du Québec (2003) Zones de végétation et domaines bioclimatiques au Québec. Gouvernement du Québec, QuébecGoogle Scholar
  47. Müller J, Bütler R (2010) A review of habitat thresholds for dead wood: a baseline for management recommendations in European forests. Eur J For Res 129:981–992CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Økland B, Bakke A, Hågvar S, Kvamme T (1996) What factors influence the diversity of saproxylic beetles? A multiscaled study from a spruce forest in southern Norway. Biodivers Conserv 5:75–100CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Pham AT, De Grandpré L, Gauthier S, Bergeron Y (2004) Gap dynamics and replacement patterns in gaps of the northeastern boreal forest of Quebec. Can J For Res 34:353–364CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Pyle C, Brown MM (1999) Heterogeneity of wood decay classes within hardwood logs. For Ecol Manag 114:253–259CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Rosenvald R, Lõhmus A (2008) For what, when, and where is green-tree retention better than clear-cutting? A review of the biodiversity aspects. For Ecol Manag 255:1–15CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Rowe JS (1972) Forest regions of Canada. Publication No. 1300, Canada Forestry Service, OttawaGoogle Scholar
  53. Ruel J-C (2000) Factors influencing windthrow in balsam fir forests: from landscape studies to individual tree studies. For Ecol Manag 135:169–178CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Saint-Germain M, Drapeau P, Buddle CM (2007) Host-use patterns of saproxylic phloeophagous and xylophagous Coleoptera adults and larvae along the decay gradient in standing dead black spruce and aspen. Ecography 30:737–748CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. SAS Institute Inc. (2004) SAS/STAT 9.1 user’s guide. SAS Institute Inc, CaryGoogle Scholar
  56. Siitonen J (2001) Forest management, coarse woody debris and saproxylic organisms: Fennoscandian boreal forests as an example. Ecol Bull 49:11–41Google Scholar
  57. Siitonen J, Saaristo L (2000) Habitat requirements and conservation of Pytho kolwensis, a beetle species of old-growth boreal forest. Biol Conserv 94:211–220CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Similä M, Kouki J, Martikainen P, Uotila A (2002) Conservation of beetles in boreal pine forests: the effects of forest age and naturalness on species assemblages. Biol Conserv 106:19–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Similä M, Kouki J, Martikainen P (2003) Saproxylic beetles in managed and seminatural Scots pine forests: quality of dead wood matters. For Ecol Manag 174:365–381CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Speight MCD (1989) Saproxylic invertebrates and their conservation. Nature and Environment Series No. 42. Council of Europe Publishing, StrasbourgGoogle Scholar
  61. Sturtevant BR, Bissonette JA, Long JN, Roberts DW (1997) Coarse woody debris as a function of age, stand structure and disturbance in boreal Newfoundland. Ecol Appl 7:702–712CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Sverdrup-Thygeson A, Ims RA (2002) The effect of forest clearcutting in Norway on the community of saproxylic beetles on aspen. Biol Conserv 106:347–357CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Tikkanen OP, Martikainen P, Hyvärinen E, Junninen K, Kouki J (2006) Red-listed boreal forest species of Finland: associations with forest structure, tree species, and decaying wood. Ann Zool Fenn 43:373–383Google Scholar
  64. 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. For Ecol Manag 225:190–199CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Wikars L-O, Sahlin E, Ranius T (2005) A comparison of three methods to estimate species richness of saproxylic beetles (Coleoptera) in logs and high stumps of Norway spruce. Can Entomol 137:304–324CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.NSERC–Université Laval Industrial Research Chair in Silviculture and Wildlife, Département de BiologieUniversité LavalQuébecCanada
  2. 2.Natural Resources CanadaCanadian Forest Service, Laurentian Forestry CentreStn. Sainte-Foy, QuébecCanada

Personalised recommendations