6533b7d2fe1ef96bd125dee8
RESEARCH PRODUCT
Perennial polypores as indicators of annual and red-listed polypores
Janne S. KotiahoMikko MönkkönenMaarit SimiläKaisa JunninenMariko LindgrenMariko LindgrenAnna-liisa YlisirniöJuha SiitonenPertti RenvallJenni HottolaJenni HottolaPanu HalmeReijo PenttiläJari Koukisubject
0106 biological sciencesEcologyPerennial plantbiologyEcology010604 marine biology & hydrobiologyBiodiversityGeneral Decision SciencesVegetation15. Life on landbiology.organism_classification010603 evolutionary biology01 natural sciencesGeographyPolyporeIndicator speciesIndicator valueCoarse woody debrisSpecies richnessEcology Evolution Behavior and Systematicsdescription
Abstract Many polypores are specialized in their requirements for substrate and environment, and they have been suggested to indicate the continuity of coarse woody debris or naturalness of a forest stand. However, the use of polypores as indicators of conservation value is restricted by the temporally limited appearance of annual fruit bodies. We studied whether the species richness of perennial polypores (perennials) can be used to predict the species richness of annual or annual red-listed polypores (annuals). Our data included 1471 separate datasets (sample plots or larger inventoried areas) in different parts of Finland and Russian Karelia, ranging from the southern to northern boreal zone. At the large scale (the whole area) the number of perennials explained about 70% of the variation in the number of annuals, and about 67% in the number of red-listed annuals. A minimum set of 40–60 perennial occurrences gave a reliable estimate on the species richness of annuals, and 60–80 occurrences on the species richness of red-listed annuals. The richness of perennials predicted the richness of annuals and, in particular, richness of red-listed annuals, better than the size of inventoried area. According to our results, perennial polypores can be used as a surrogate for overall polypore species richness in natural and seminatural boreal forests, but the predictive power is weaker in managed forests. In addition, the relationship between the perennial and annual species seems to differ in different vegetation zones, management types and forest types. Due to this variation direct application of the indicator values derived from different vegetation zones and management or forest types are not recommended. Since perennials are easier to identify than annuals, detectable throughout the year, and have much smaller year-to-year variation, their use as an indicator group seems to offer advantages regarding the timing and cost-efficiency of inventories.
year | journal | country | edition | language |
---|---|---|---|---|
2009-03-01 | Ecological Indicators |