+ Site Statistics
+ Search Articles
+ Subscribe to Site Feeds
EurekaMag Most Shared ContentMost Shared
EurekaMag PDF Full Text ContentPDF Full Text
+ PDF Full Text
Request PDF Full TextRequest PDF Full Text
+ Follow Us
Follow on FacebookFollow on Facebook
Follow on TwitterFollow on Twitter
Follow on Google+Follow on Google+
Follow on LinkedInFollow on LinkedIn

+ Translate

Beetles living in open deciduous forests prefer different tree species than those living in dense forests

Entomologisk Tidskrift 113(1-2): 1-11
Beetles living in open deciduous forests prefer different tree species than those living in dense forests
Habitat selection of threatened (according to Swedish national red data list) nemoral and boreo-nemoral forest-living beetles (and, as comparison, snails) are discussed. An analysis of their preferences regarding choice of tree species, degree of openness (i.e., whether the organisms prefer shaded or light-exposed trees) and degree of dampness of the forests is presented. More than 60% of the threatened beetles prefer forests with light-exposed trees to dense forests, while 1/4 prefer dense to open. In contrast, more than 2/3 of the snails prefer dense forests and remaining 1/3 are indifferent to degree of openness. There was a marked difference in preference of openness due to which tree species the beetles are adapted to live with. 70% of beech-living species prefer dense, shaded forests, while ca. 1/4 prefer open forests. Among beetles living with oak and other deciduous tree species except beech 70% prefer open forests, 16% dense and some 11% are indifferent. In general beech-living beetles also prefer more damp forests than oak-living do. These adaptations to different forest structures probably result from different affects on the forest by grazing megaherbivores, now mainly extinct. Differences in light permeability of beech canopy (low during summertime) contra other deciduous trees (higher, with better development undergrowth vegetation), altitude occurrence (at least during pleistocene the beech has to a large degree been restricted to mountains, while oak-dominated forests have grown in low-land), ability to grow on thin soils (higher in oak than in beech), fire inclination and fire resistance, may have initiated the process. The observations have implications for nature conservation and management of forests.

(PDF 0-2 workdays service: $29.90)

Accession: 002308766

Related references

Communities of ground-living spiders in deciduous forests Does tree species diversity matter?. Biodiversity and Conservation 17(5): 1267-1284, 2008

Quantifying habitat requirements of tree-living species in fragmented boreal forests with Bayesian methods. Conservation Biology 23(5): 1127-1137, 2009

The species composition and diversity of tree dwelling beetles in deciduous oak and evergreen forests in central japan relationship between the diversity index and sample size. Ecological Research 1(3): 269-278, 1986

Effect of drainage on arthropods living in the soil of deciduous forests in Byelorussian Polesye.. 1979

Mechanistic models for tree seed dispersal by wind in dense forests and open landscapes. Seed dispersal and frugivory: ecology, evolution and conservation Third International Symposium Workshop on Frugivores and Seed Dispersal, Sao Pedro, Brazil, 6-11 August 2000: 69-82, 2002

Influence of age, size and isolation of forests on beetles living in dead wood. Faunistisch-Oekologische Mitteilungen 8(7-8): 259-281, 2004

A comparative analysis of the structure of Neuropteroidea communities of tree canopies in linden-oak-hornbeam forests, light oak forests, mixed coniferous forests and pine forests. Fragmenta Faunistica (Warsaw) 40(10-15): 127-168, 1997

Beetles in forests with planted exotics and native tree species. Forst und Holz 50(7): 214-217, 1995

Nutrient concentration in leaf litter of ten important tree species of deciduous forests at Varanasi. Trop. Ecol., Varanasi. 10: 1, 83-95, 1969

Studies on root system of important tree species in dry deciduous teak forests of Sagar (M.P.). Indian Journal of Forestry 7(3): 171-177, 1984