Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Diameter of downed woody debris does matter for saproxylic beetle assemblages in temperate oak and pine forests

  • ORIGINAL PAPER
  • Published:
Journal of Insect Conservation Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Deadwood is widely recognized to be an important issue for biodiversity conservation in forest ecosystems. Establishing guidelines for its management requires a better understanding of relationships between woody debris characteristics and associated species assemblages. Although deadwood diameter has been identified as an important factor predicting occurrence of many saproxylic species, the boundary between small and large diameter has not yet been precisely defined. In commercial forests, it is also of critical importance to know which diameter is large enough to host the beetle species associated with large logs in order to ensure cost-effectiveness of biodiversity conservation measures. We investigated the differences in saproxylic beetle assemblages among four different diameter classes of downed woody oak and maritime pine debris, in France. Beetles were sampled using in situ emergence traps. The diameter of deadwood pieces ranged from 1 to 40 cm. No patterns of nestedness associated with the gradient of diameter size were identified for either tree species. More indicator saproxylic species were observed in large logs and branches than in small logs. A clear distinction appeared in assemblage composition around the 5-cm diameter threshold whereas no similar pattern occurred around the 10 cm value, i.e. the classical threshold used in forestry to distinguish fine woody debris from coarse woody debris. For both tree species, the mean body length of beetles increased with the diameter of deadwood suggesting that the quantity of available resources per piece may constitute a limiting factor for large beetle species. This study confirms that not only large deadwood pieces are relevant for saproxylic biodiversity conservation but also the smallest pieces. Therefore, forest managers would be well advised to maintain a high diversity of deadwoods to maintain saproxylic biodiversity.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Alinvi O, Ball JP, Danell K, Hjälten 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 11:99–112. doi:10.1007/s10841-006-9012-2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Almeida-Neto M, Guimaraes P, Guimaraes PR, Loyola RD, Ulrich W (2008) A consistent metric for nestedness analysis in ecological systems: reconciling concept and measurement. Oikos 117:1227–1239

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Araya K (1993) Relationship between the decay types of dead wood and occurrence of lucanid beetles (Coleoptera: Lucanidae). Appl Entomol Zool 28:27–33

    Google Scholar 

  • Bader P, Jansson S, Jonsson BG (1995) Wood-inhabiting fungi and substratum decline in selectively logged boreal spruce forests. Biol Conserv 72:355–362

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bouget C, Brustel H, Nageleisen LM (2005) Nomenclature of wood-inhabiting groups in forest entomology: synthesis and semantic adjustments. CR Biol 328:936–948. doi:10.1016/j.crvi.2005.08.003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bouget C, Brustel H, Zagatti P (2008) The French information system on saproxylic beetle ecology (FRISBEE): an ecological and taxonomical database to help with the assessment of forest conservation status. Terre Vie-Rev Ecol A Supp 10:33–36

    Google Scholar 

  • Brin A, Meredieu C, Piou D, Brustel H, Jactel H (2008) Changes in quantitative patterns of dead wood in maritime pine plantations over time. For Ecol Manag 256:913–921. doi:10.1016/j.foreco.2008.05.042

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brin A, Brustel H, Jactel H (2009) Species variables or environmental variables as indicators of forest biodiversity: a case study using saproxylic beetles in Maritime pine plantations. Ann For Sci 66. doi:10.1051/forest/2009009

  • Brustel H, Van Meer C (1999) Some remarkable elements of the saproxylic entomofauna from Pyrenees and neighbouring regions (Coleoptera). Bull Soc Ent France 104:231–240

    Google Scholar 

  • Clarke KR (1993) Non-parametric multivariate analyses of changes in community structure. Aust J Ecol 18:117–143

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dudley N, Vallauri D (2004) Deadwood-living forests. The importance of veteran trees and deadwood to biodiversity. WWF-World Wide Fund For Nature, Gland

    Google Scholar 

  • Dufrêne M, Legendre P (1997) Species assemblages and indicator species: the need for a flexible asymmetrical approach. Ecol Monogr 67:345–366

    Google Scholar 

  • EEA (2008) European forests—ecosystem conditions and sustainable use. EEA Report, European Environment Agency, Copenhagen

    Google Scholar 

  • Elton CS (1966) The pattern of animal communities. In: Wiley (ed) Dying and dead wood. Wiley, New York, pp 279–305

    Google Scholar 

  • Esaki K (1996) Emergence patterns and host wood diameter preference of seven cerambycid beetle species emerging from Pinus parviflora dead branches. Elytra 24:383–387

    Google Scholar 

  • Ferro ML, Gimmel ML, Harms KE, Carlton CE (2009) The beetle community of small oak twigs in Louisiana, with a literature review of Coleoptera from fine woody debris. Coleopt Bull 63:239–263

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gedminas A, Lynikiene J, Zeniauskas R (2007) Cambio-xylofauna abundance and species diversity of cutting residues in Scots pine and Norway spruce clear-cuts in Lithuania. Biomass Bioenerg 31:733–738. doi:10.1016/j.biombioe.2007.06.010

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gotelli NJ, Colwell RK (2001) Quantifying biodiversity: procedures and pitfall in the measurement and the comparison of species richness. Ecol Lett 4:379–391

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gotelli NJ, Graves GR (1996) Null models in ecology. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Grove SJ (2002) Saproxylic insect ecology and the sustainable management of forests. Ann Rev Ecol Syst 33:1–23. doi:10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.33.010802.150507

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hammond HEJ, Langor DW, Spence JR (2004) Saproxylic beetles (Coleoptera) using Populus in boreal aspen stands of western Canada: spatiotemporal variation and conservation of assemblages. Can J For Res 34:1–19. doi:10.1139/X03-192

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harmon ME, Franklin JF, Swanson FJ, Sollins P, Gregory SV, Lattin JD, Anderson NH, Cline SP, Aumen NG, Sedell JR, Lienkaemper GW, Cromack K, Cummins KW (1986) Ecology of coarse woody debris in temperate ecosystems. Adv Ecol Res 15:133–299

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hayes CJ, DeGomez TE, McMillin JD, Anhold JA, Hofstetter RW (2008) Factors influencing pine engraver (Ips pini Say) colonization of ponderosa pine (Pinus ponderosa Dougl ex. Laws.) slash in Northern Arizona. For Ecol Manag 255:3541–3548. doi:10.1016/j.foreco.2008.02.037

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heilmann-Clausen J, Christensen M (2004) Does size matter? On the importance of various dead wood fractions for fungal diversity in Danish beech forests. For Ecol Manag 201:105–119. doi:10.1016/j.foreco.2004.07.010

    Google Scholar 

  • Hespenheide H (1976) Patterns in the use of single plant hosts by wood-boring beetles. Oikos 27:61–64

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hottola J, Ovaskainen O, Hanski I (2009) A unified measure of the number, volume and diversity of dead trees and the response of fungal communities. J Ecol 97:1320–1328. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2745.2009.01583.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Humphrey J, Stephenson A, Whitfield P, Swailes J (2002) Life in Deadwood: a guide to managing deadwood in Forestry Commission forests. Forest Enterprise, Forestry Commission, Edinburgh

    Google Scholar 

  • Ikeda K (1987) Distribution and habitat segregation of Japanese Platycerus species (Lucanidae). In: Kimoto S, Takeda H (eds) Insect community in Japan. Tokai University Press, Tokyo, pp 93–101

    Google Scholar 

  • Jonsell M, Weslien J, Ehnström B (1998) Substrate requirements of red-listed saproxylic invertebrates in Sweden. Biodivers Conserv 7:749–764

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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 138:89–99. doi:10.1016/j.biocon.2007.04.003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kruys N, Jonsson BG (1999) Fine woody debris is important for species richness on logs in managed boreal spruce forests of northern Sweden. Can J For Res 29:1295–1299

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kuffer N, Senn-Irlet B (2005) Influence of forest management on the species richness and composition of wood-inhabiting basidiomycetes in Swiss forests. Biodivers Conserv 14:2419–2435. doi:10.1007/s10531-004-0151-z

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Langor DW, Hammond HEJ, Spence JR, Jacobs J, Cobb TP (2008) Saproxylic insect assemblages in Canadian forests: diversity, ecology, and conservation. Can Entomol 140:453–474

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nittérus K, Gunnarsson B, Axelsson E (2004) Insects reared from logging residue on clear-cuts. Entomolo Fennica 15:53–61

    Google Scholar 

  • Nordén B, Paltto H (2001) Wood-decay fungi in hazel wood: species richness correlated to stand age and dead wood features. Biol Conserv 101:1–8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nordén B, Ryberg M, Gotmark F, Olausson B (2004) Relative importance of coarse and fine woody debris for the diversity of wood-inhabiting fungi in temperate broadleaf forests. Biol Conserv 117:1–10. doi:10.1016/S0006-3207(03)00235-0

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Økland B (1996) A comparison of three methods of trapping saproxylic beetles. Eur J Entomol 93:195–209

    Google Scholar 

  • Oksanen JF, Blanchet G, Kindt R, Legendre P, O’Hara RG, Simpson GL, Solymos P, Henry M, Stevens H, Wagner H (2008) Vegan: community ecology package. Available from http://CRAN.R-project.org/package=vegan/

  • R Development Core Team (2008) R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R roundation for statistical computing, Vienna, Austria, www.r-project.org

  • Ranius T, Jonsson M (2007) Theoretical expectations for thresholds in the relationship between number of wood-living species and amount of coarse woody debris: a study case in spruce forests. J Nat Conserv 15:120–130. doi:10.1016/j.jnc.2007.02.001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roberts DW (2008) Labdsv: ordination and multivariate analysis for ecology. Available from http://cran.rproject.org/web/packages/labdsv/

  • Schiegg K (2001) Saproxylic insect diversity of beech: limbs are richer than trunks. For Ecol Manag 149:295–304

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schroeder LM, Weslien J, Lindelöw A, Lindhe A (1999) Attacks by bark- and wood-boring Coleoptera on mecanically created high stumps of Norway spruce in the two years fallowing cutting. For Ecol Manag 123:21–30

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Siitonen J (2001) Forest management, coarse woody debris and saproxylic organisms: Fennoscandian boreal forests as an example. Ecol Bull 49:11–41

    Google Scholar 

  • Similä M, Kouki J, Martikainen P (2003) Saproxylic beetles in managed and seminatural Scots pine forests: quality of dead wood matters. For Ecol Manag 174:365–381

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sippola AL, Renvall P (1999) Wood-decomposing fungi and seed-tree cutting: a 40-year perspective. For Ecol Manag 115:183–201

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Soldati F (2007) Coleoptera Tenebrionidae (Alleculinae excluded). Systematic catalogue and atlas—Catalogue systématique et atlas. Société Linnéenne de Bordeaux, Bordeaux

    Google Scholar 

  • Speight MCD (1989) Les invertébrés saproxyliques et leur protection. Conseil de l’Europe, Strasbourg

    Google Scholar 

  • Stokland JN, Tomter SM, Söderberg U (2004) Development of Dead Wood Indicators for Biodiversity Monitoring: Experiences from Scandinavia. In: Marchetti M (ed) Monitoring and Indicators of forest biodiversity in Europe—from ideas to operationality. Florence, Italy

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Meer C (2005) Approche entomologique de la forêt du Lazaret à Anglet (Pyrénées-Atlantiques). Bull Soc linn Bordeaux 33:291–296

    Google Scholar 

  • Wainhouse D (2005) Ecological methods in forest pest management. Oxford University Press, USA

    Google Scholar 

  • Wikars LO, 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 137:304–324

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yee M (2005) The ecology and habitat requirements of saproxylic beetles native to Tasmanian wet eucalypt forests; potential impacts of commercial forestry practices. Dissertation, University of Tasmania

  • Yee M, Yuan ZQ, Mohammed C (2001) Not just waste wood: decaying logs as key habitats in Tasmania’s wet sclerophyll Eucalyptus obliqua production forests: the ecology of large and small logs compared. Tasforests 13:119–128

    Google Scholar 

  • Yee M, Grove SJ, Richardson AM, Mohammed CL (2006) Brown rot in inner heartwood: why large logs support characteristic saproxylic beetle assemblages of conservation concern. In: Grove SJ, Hanula JL (ed) Insect biodiversity and dead wood: proceedings of a symposium for the 22nd International Congress of Entomology, Brisbane, Australia

Download references

Acknowledgments

We are grateful to many colleagues involved in the identification of several beetle families: Pascal Leblanc, Pierre Berger, Thierry Noblecourt, Eric de Laclos, Laurent Schott, Gianfranco Liberti, Marc Tronquet, Patrick Dauphin, Jean-Philippe Tamisier and Bernard Moncoutier. We are also grateful to Lionel Valladares, Charles Ricou, Benoit Nusillard, Carl Moliard and Xavier Pineau for their help with the field and lab work and to James McCarthy and Vicki Moore for their help in editing the English language. We also thank two anonymous reviewers for their comments on the manuscript. Support for this project came from the project RESINE financed by the Groupement d’Intérêt Public ECOFOR.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Toulouse, Purpan Engineering School, 75 voie du T.O.E.C., BP 57611, 31076, Toulouse Cedex 03, France

    Antoine Brin & Hervé Brustel

  2. Institute for Engineering in Agriculture and Environment (Cemagref), Research Unit ‘Forest ecosystems’, Domaine des Barres, 45290, Nogent-sur-Vernisson, France

    Christophe Bouget

  3. INRA, UMR 1202 BIOGECO, Laboratory of Forest Entomology & Biodiversity, 69 route d’Arcachon, 33612, Cestas, France

    Hervé Jactel

  4. University of Bordeaux 1, UMR1202 BIOGECO, 33612, Cestas, France

    Hervé Jactel

Authors
  1. Antoine Brin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Christophe Bouget
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Hervé Brustel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Hervé Jactel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Antoine Brin.

Appendix

Appendix

See Table 5.

Table 5 List of saproxylic beetle species collected per tree species and diameter classes (see Table 1 for the range of values of each diameter class)
Full size table

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Brin, A., Bouget, C., Brustel, H. et al. Diameter of downed woody debris does matter for saproxylic beetle assemblages in temperate oak and pine forests. J Insect Conserv 15, 653–669 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10841-010-9364-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10841-010-9364-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation