Biodiversity & Conservation

, Volume 12, Issue 1, pp 73–85 | Cite as

Diversity and composition of carabids during a forestry cycle

  • Tibor Magura
  • Béla Tóthmérész
  • Zoltán Elek
Article

Abstract

Carabids (Carabidae, Coleoptera) were studied for 2 yearsto explore changes in their diversity and composition during a forestry cycle inthe Hungarian Mountain Range. Native beech forest was clear-cut and replantedwith Norway spruce. Recently planted (5 years old), young (15years old), middle-aged (30 years old) and old spruceplantations (50 years old) were studied using pitfall traps. Ourresults showed that the species richness of carabids was significantly lower inthe plantations than in the native beech forest. Species composition washomogeneous in the beech forest. β-Diversity of the 15–30year old plantations was also low, and it increased slightlytowards ageing. Heterogeneity of the species composition of the 5year old plantation was higher than that of the others, whichreflected the patchiness of the young plantation. The main tendencies of thecompositional changes were as follows. Deciduous forest specialists decreasedsignificantly in abundance in the plantations; they appeared in highabundance only in the beech forest. Species characteristic of open habitatsincreased remarkably in abundance in the recently established plantation.Multiple linear regression between the diversity of carabids and of 12environmental variables shows that the pH and compaction of the soil, and thecover of leaf litter had a significant effect in determining diversity ofcarabids.

Beech forest β-Diversity Environmental variables Forest management Indicator species Norway spruce plantation Species richness 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Baars M.A. 1979. Catches in pitfall traps in relation to mean densities of carabid beetles. Oecologia 41: 25–46.Google Scholar
  2. Baguette M. and Gerard S. 1993. Effects of spruce plantations on carabid beetles in southern Belgium. Pedobiologia 37: 129–140.Google Scholar
  3. Bedford S.E. and Usher M.B. 1994. Distribution of arthropod species across the margins of farm woodlands. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 48: 295–305.Google Scholar
  4. Bird S., Coulson R.N. and Crossely D.A. 2000. Impacts of silvicultural practices on soil and litter arthropod diversity in a Texas pine plantation. Forest Ecology and Management 131: 65–80.Google Scholar
  5. Butterfield J. 1997. Caraboid community succession during the forestry cycle in conifer plantations. Ecography 20: 614–625.Google Scholar
  6. Butterfield J. and Benitez Malvido J. 1992. Effect of mixed-species tree planting on the distribution of soil invertebrates. In: Cannell M.G.R., Malcolm D.C. and Robertson P.A. (eds), The Ecology of Mixed-Species Stands of Trees. Blackwell, London, pp. 255–265.Google Scholar
  7. Butterfield J., Luff M.L., Baines M. and Eyre M.D. 1995. Carabid beetle communities as indicators of conservation potential in upland forests. Forest Ecology and Management 79: 63–77.Google Scholar
  8. Day K.R. and Carthy J. 1988. Changes in carabid beetle communities accompanying a rotation of Sitka spruce. Agricultural Ecosystems and Environment 24: 407–415.Google Scholar
  9. Digweed S.C., Currie C.R., Carcamo H.A. and Spence J.R. 1995. Digging out the digging-in effect of pitfall traps: influences of depletion and disturbance on catches of ground beetles (Coleoptera: Carabidae). Pedobiologia 39: 561–576.Google Scholar
  10. Dufrêne M. and Legendre P. 1997. Species assemblages and indicator species: the need for a flexible asymmetrical approach. Ecological Monographs 67: 345–366.Google Scholar
  11. Elek Z., Magura T. and Tóthmérész B. 2001. Impacts of non-native spruce plantation on carabids.Web Ecology2: 32–37.Google Scholar
  12. Eyre M.D., Luff M.L. and Rushton S.P. 1990. The ground beetle (Coleoptera, Carabidae) fauna of intensively managed agricultural grasslands in northern England and southern Scotland. Pedobiologia 34: 11–18.Google Scholar
  13. Fahy O. and Gormally M. 1998. A comparison of plant and carabid beetle communities in an Irish oak woodland with a nearby conifer plantation and clearfelled site. Forest Ecology and Management 110: 263–273.Google Scholar
  14. Ings T.C. and Hartley S.E. 1999. The effect of habitat structure on carabid communities during the regeneration of a native Scottish forest. Forest Ecology and Management 119: 123–136.Google Scholar
  15. Legendre P. and Legendre L. 1998. Numerical Ecology. Elsevier, Amsterdam.Google Scholar
  16. Lindroth C.H. 1985–1986. The Carabidae (Coleoptera) of Fennoscandia and Denmark. E.J. Brill / Scandinavian Science Press, Leiden, the Netherlands.Google Scholar
  17. Loreau M. 1987.Vertical distribution of activity of carabid beetles in a beach forest floor. Pedobiologia 30: 173–178.Google Scholar
  18. Loreau M. 1988. Determinants of the seasonal pattern in the niche structure of a forest carabid community. Pedobiologia 31: 75–87.Google Scholar
  19. Loreau M. 1992. Species abundance patterns and the structure of ground-beetle communities. Annales Zoologici Fennici 28: 49–56.Google Scholar
  20. Loreau M. 1994. Ground beetles in a changing environment: determinants of species diversity and community assembly. In: Boyle T.J. and Boyle C.E.B. (eds), Biodiversity, Temperate Ecosystems and Global Change. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, pp. 77–98.Google Scholar
  21. Lövei G. and Sunderland K.D. 1996. Ecology and behavior of ground beetles (Coleoptera: Carabidae). Annual Review of Entomology 41: 231–256.Google Scholar
  22. Luff M.L., Eyre M.D. and Rushton S.P. 1992. Classification and prediction of grassland habitats using ground beetles (Coleoptera, Carabidae). Journal of Environmental Management 35: 301–315.Google Scholar
  23. Mader H.J. 1986. The succession of carabid species in a brown coal mining area and the influence of afforestation. In: den Boer P.J., Luff M.L., Mossakowski D. and Weber F. (eds), Carabid Beetles. Their Adaptations and Dynamics. Gustav Fischer, Stuttgart, Germany, pp. 497–508.Google Scholar
  24. Magura T., Tóthmérész B. and Bordan Zs. 1997. Comparison of the carabid communities of a zonal oak-hornbeam forest and pine plantations. Acta Zoologica Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae 43: 173–182.Google Scholar
  25. Magura T., Tóthmérész B. and Bordan Zs. 2000a. Effects of nature management practice on carabid assemblages (Coleoptera: Carabidae) in a non-native plantation. Biological Conservation 93: 95–102.Google Scholar
  26. Magura T., Tóthmérész B. and Molnar T. 2000b. Spatial distribution of carabids along grass–forest transects. Acta Zoologica Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae 46: 1–17.Google Scholar
  27. Magura T., Tothmeresz B. and Molnar T. 2001a. Edge effect on carabids along forest–grass transects. Web Ecology 2: 7–13.Google Scholar
  28. Magura T., Tóthmérész B. and Molnar T. 2001b. Forest edge and diversity: carabids along forestgrassland transects. Biodiversity and Conservation 10: 287–300.Google Scholar
  29. Mátyás Cs. 1996. Forestry Ecology. Mezögazda Kiadó, Budapest, Hungary, (in Hungarian).Google Scholar
  30. Molnár T., Magura T., Tóthmérész B. and Elek Z. 2001. Ground beetles (Carabidae) and edge effect in oak-hornbeam forest–grassland transects. European Journal of Soil Biology 37: 297–300.Google Scholar
  31. Müller J.K. 1987. Period of adult emergence in carabid beetles: an adaptation for reducing competition? Acta Phytopathologica et Entomologica Hungarica 22: 409–415.Google Scholar
  32. Niemelä J. 1990. Effect of changes in the habitat on carabid assemblages in a wooded meadow on the Aland Islands. Notulae Entomologicae 69: 169–174.Google Scholar
  33. Niemelä J. 1999. Management in relation to disturbance in the boreal forest. Forest Ecology and Management 115: 127–134.Google Scholar
  34. Niemelä J. and Spence J.R. 1994. Distribution of forest dwelling carabids (Coleoptera): spatial scale and the concept of communities. Ecography 17: 166–175.Google Scholar
  35. Niemelä J., Haila Y. and Punttila P. 1996. The importance of small-scale heterogeneity in boreal forests: variation in diversity in forest-floor invertebrates across the succession gradient. Ecography 19: 352–368.Google Scholar
  36. Niemela J., Langor D. and Spence J.R. 1993. Effects of clear-cut harvesting on boreal ground-beetle assemblages (Coleoptera: Carabidae) in western Canada. Conservation Biology 7: 551–561.Google Scholar
  37. Niemelä J., Haila Y., Halme E., Pajunen T. and Punttila P. 1992a. Small-scale heterogeneity in the spatial distribution of carabid beetles in the southern Finnish taiga. Journal of Biogeography 19: 173–181.Google Scholar
  38. Niemelä J., Spence J.R. and Spence D.H. 1992b. Habitat associations and seasonal activity of groundbeetles (Coleoptera, Carabidae) in central Alberta. The Canadian Entomologist 124: 521–540.Google Scholar
  39. Niemelä J., Spence J.R., Langor D., Haila Y. and Tukia H. 1994. Logging and boreal ground-beetle assemblages on two continents: implications for conservation. In: Gaston K.J., New T.R. and Samways M.J. (eds), Perspectives on Insect Conservation. Intercept, Andover, UK, pp. 29–50.Google Scholar
  40. Niemelä J., Haila Y., Halme E., Lahti T., Pajunen T. and Punttila P. 1988. The distribution of carabid beetles in fragments of old coniferous taiga and adjacent managed forest. Annales Zoologici Fennici 25: 107–119.Google Scholar
  41. Niemela J., Kotze J., Ashworth A., Brandmayr P., Desender K., New T. et al. 2000. The search for common anthropogenic impacts on biodiversity: a global network. Journal of Insect Conservation 4: 3–9.Google Scholar
  42. Paje F. and Mossakowski D. 1984. pH-preferences and habitat selection in carabid beetles. Oecologia 64: 41–46.Google Scholar
  43. Rushton S.P., Eyre M.D. and Luff M.L. 1990. The effects of management on the occurrence of some carabid species in grassland. In: Stork N.E. (ed.), The Role of Ground Beetles in Ecological and Environmental Studies. Intercept, Andover, UK, pp. 209–216.Google Scholar
  44. Samways M.J. 1994. Insect Conservation Biology. Chapman & Hall, London, 358 pp.Google Scholar
  45. Sergeeva T.K. 1994. Seasonal dynamics of interspecific trophic relations in a carabid beetle assemblage. In: Desender K., Dufrene M., Loreau M., Luff M.L. and Maelfait J.-P. (eds), Carabid Beetles: Ecology and Evolution. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, the Netherlands, pp. 367–370.Google Scholar
  46. Sokal R.R. and Rohlf F.J. 1981. Biometry. Freeman, New York.Google Scholar
  47. Spence J.R., Langor D.W., Niemela J., Carcamo H.A. and Currie C.R. 1996. Northern forestry and carabids: the case for concern about old-growth species. Annales Zoologici Fennici 33: 173–184.Google Scholar
  48. Šustek Z. 1981. Influence of clear cutting on ground beetle (Coleoptera, Carabidae) in a pine forest. Communicationes Instituti Forestalis 12: 243–254.Google Scholar
  49. Šustek Z. 1984. Carabidae and Staphylinidae of two forest reservations and their reactions on surround-ing human activity. Biologia 39: 137–162.Google Scholar
  50. Szyszko J. 1983. State of Carabidae (Col.) fauna in fresh pine forest and tentative valorisation of this environment. Treatises and Monographs 28: 1–80.Google Scholar
  51. Szyszko J. 1986. Dynamics of population size and development of the carabid fauna of pine stands on poor sandy soils (facts and suppositions). In: den Boer P.J., Luff M.L., Mossakowski D. and Weber F. (eds), Carabid Beetles. Their Adaptations and Dynamics. Gustav Fischer, Stuttgart, Germany, pp. 331–341.Google Scholar
  52. Szyszko J. 1987. How can the fauna of Carabidae be protected in managed pine forest? Acta Phytopathologica et Entomologica Hungarica 22: 293–303.Google Scholar
  53. Thiele H.U. 1977. Carabid Beetles in Their Environments. Springer, Berlin, Germany.Google Scholar
  54. Tóthmérész B. 1998. On the characterization of scale-dependent diversity. Abstracta Botanica 22: 149–156.Google Scholar
  55. Werner S.M. and Raffa K.F. 2000. Effects of forest management practices on the diversity of groundoccurring beetles in mixed northern hardwood forests of the Great Lakes Region. Forest Ecology and Management 139: 135–155.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • Tibor Magura
  • Béla Tóthmérész
  • Zoltán Elek

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations