Effects of single-tree selection harvesting on hymenopteran and saproxylic insect assemblages in the canopy and understory of northern temperate forests

Abstract

Insects respond to changes in microhabitat caused by canopy disturbance, and thus can be used to examine the ecological impacts of harvesting. Single-tree selection harvesting is the most common silvicultural system used to emulate local small-scale natural disturbance and maintain uneven-aged forest structure in temperate forests. Here, we test for differences in richness, abundance, and composition of hymenopteran and saproxylic insect assemblages at four different taxon levels (selected insect orders; and all hymenopteran families, and braconid subfamilies and morphospecies) between the canopy and understory of unharvested and single-tree selection harvested sites in a northern temperate forest from central Canada. Harvesting had no effect on insect assemblage richness, composition or abundance at the three highest taxon levels (order, family and subfamily). Similarly, richness and abundance at the lowest-taxon level (braconid morphospecies) were similar, although composition differed slightly between unharvested and harvested stands. Insect assemblages were vertically stratified, with generally higher abundance (for Diptera, Hymenoptera, some hymenopteran families and braconid subfamilies) and richness (for braconid morphospecies) in the understory than the canopy. In particular, composition of the braconid morphospecies assemblage showed relatively low similarity between the understory and canopy. Single-tree selection harvesting appears to influence wood-associated insect taxa only subtly through small changes in community composition at the lowest taxon level, and thus is recommended as a conservative approach for managing these northern temperate forests.

Keywords

selection harvesting / insect communities / canopy insects / Jack pine forests / forest management / high-taxon level / insect conservation

References

[1] Atlegrim O., Sjöberj K.. Effects of clear-cutting and single-tree selection harvest on herbivorous insect larvae feeding on bilberry (Vaccinius myrtillus) in uneven aged boreal Picea abies forests. For Ecol Manage, 1996, 87: 139-148.

[2] Basset Y., Aberlenc H.P., Barrios H., Curletti G., Berenger J.M., Vesco J.P., Causse P., Haug A., Hennion A.S., Lesobre L., Marques F., O’Meara R.. Stratification and dial activity of arthropods in a lowland rainforest in Gabon. Biolog J Linnean Soc, 2001, 72: 585-607.

[3] Basset Y, Hammond PM, Barrios H, Holloway JD, Miller SD. 2003. Vertical stratification of arthropod assemblages. In: Arthropods of Tropical Forests. Cambridge University Press, pp. 17–27.

[4] Beaudet M., Messier C.. Variation in canopy openness and light transmission following selection cutting in northern hardwood stands: an assessment based on hemispherical photographs. Agr For Meteorol, 2002, 110: 217-228.

[5] Beaudet M., Messier C., Leduc A.. Understory light profiles in temperate deciduous forests: recovery process following selection cutting. J Ecol, 2004, 92: 328-338.

[6] Bellocq M.I., Smith S.M.. Convergence in arthropod assemblages with various restoration approaches for Canadian deciduous forests. J Insect Cons, 2003, 7: 99-109.

[7] Bouget C.. Short-term effect of windstorm disturbance on saproxylic beetles in broadleaved temperate forests. Part I: Do environmental changes induce a gap effect?. For Ecol Manage, 2005, 216: 15-27.

[8] Deans A.M., Malcolm J.R., Smith S.M., Bellocq M.I.. Edge effects and the responses of aerial insect assemblages to structural retention harvesting in Canadian boreal peatland forests. For Ecol Manage, 2005, 204: 249-266.

[9] Deans A.M., Smith S.M., Malcolm J.R., Crins B., Bellocq M.I.. Hoverflies (Syrphidae) communities respond to varying structural retention following harvesting in Canadian peatland black spruce forests. Environ Entomol, 2007, 36: 308-318.

[10] De Dijn BPE. 2003. Vertical stratification of flying insects in a Surinam lowland rainforest. In: Arthropods of Tropical Forests. Cambridge University Press, pp 110–122.

[11] DeVries P.J., Murray D., Lande R.. Species diversity in vertical, horizontal, and temporal dimensions of a fruit-feeding butterfly community in an Ecuadorian rainforest. Biolog J Linnean Soc, 1997, 62: 343-364.

[12] Doyon F., Gagnon D., Giroux J.F.. Effects of strip and single-tree selection cutting on birds and their habitat in a southwestern Quebec northern hardwood forest. For Ecol Manage, 2005, 209: 101-115.

[13] Finnamore AT, Winchester NN, Behan-Pelletier VM. 1998. Protocols for Measuring Biodiversity: Arthropod Monitoring in Terrestrial Ecosystems. EMAN and Partners Publications.

[14] Goulet H., Huber J.T.. Hymenoptera of the World: An Identification Guide to Families. 1993, Ottawa, Canada: Research Branch, Agriculture Canada

[15] Grissell EE, Schauff ME. 1990. A Handbook of the Families of Nearctic Chalcidoidea (Hymenoptera). The Entomol. Soc. of Washington, D.C.

[16] Hammond H.E.J., Langor D.W., Spence J.R.. Early colonization of Populus wood by saproxylic beetles (Coleoptera). Can J For Res, 2001, 31: 1175-1183.

[17] Hills G.A.. A Ready Reference to the Description of the Land of Ontario and Its Productivity. 1959, Maple, Ontario: Ontario Dept. of Lands and Forests

[18] Huhta V., Karppinen E., Murminen M., Valpas A.. Effect of silvicultural practices upon arthropod, annelid and nematode populations in coniferous forest soil. Ann Zool Fenn, 1967, 4: 87-143.

[19] Katzourakis A., Purvis A., Azmeh S., Rotheray G., Gilbert F.. Macroevolution of hoverflies (Diptera: Syrphidae): the effect of using higher-level taxa in studies of biodiversity, and correlates of species richness. J Evol Biol, 2001, 14: 219-227.

[20] Klimaszewski J., Watt J.C.. Coleoptera: Family-Group Review and Keys to Identification. 1997, Canterbury, N.Z.: Lincoln

[21] Koleff P., Gaston K.J., Lenon J.J.. Measuring beta diversity for presenceabsence data. J Animal Ecol, 2003, 72: 367-382.

[22] LaSalle J., Gauld I.. Hymenoptera: Their diversity, and their impact on the diversity of other organisms. Hymenoptera and Biodiversity. 1993, Wallingford, UK: CAB International

[23] Le Corf J., Marquis R.J.. Differences between understory and canopy in herbivore community composition and leaf quality for two oak species in Missouri. Ecol Entomol, 1999, 24: 46-58.

[24] Lowman M.D., Wittman P.K.. Forest canopies: methods, hypothesis and future directions. Ann Rev Ecol Syst, 1996, 27: 55-81.

[25] Maleque M.A., Maeto K., Ishii H.T.. Arthropods as bioindicator of sustainable forest management, with a focus on plantation forest. Appl Entomol Zool, 2009, 44: 1-11.

[26] Makino S., Goto H., Inoue T., Sueyoshi M., Okabe K., Hasegawa M., Hamaguchi K., Tanaka H., Okochi I.. The monitoring of insects to maintain biodiversity in Ogawa Forest Reserve. Environ Monit Assess, 2006, 120: 477-485.

[27] McAlpine JF, Peterson BV, Shewell GE, Teskey HJ, Vockeroth JR, Wood DM. (Eds). 1981. Manual of Nearctic Diptera. Research Branch, Agriculture Canada. Monograph No. 27 (Vol. 1).

[28] McAlpine JF, Peterson BV, Shewell GE, Teskey HJ, Vockeroth JR, Wood DM. (Eds). 1987. Manual of Nearctic Diptera. Research Branch, Agriculture Canada. Monograph No. 28 (Vol. 2).

[29] Menzel M.A., Carter T.C., Menze J.M., Ford W.M., Chapman B.R.. Effects of group selection silviculture in bottomland hardwoods on the spatial activity patterns of bats. For Ecol Manage, 2002, 162: 209-218.

[30] Moore J.D., Ouimet R., Houle D., Camire C.. Effects of two silvicultural practices on ground beetles (Coleoptera: Carabidae) in a northern hardwood forests, Quebec, Canada. Can J For Res, 2004, 34: 959-968.

[31] Müller J., Othorn T., Pretzsch H.. Long-term effects of logging intensity on structures, birds, saproxylic beetles and wood-inhabitant fungi in stands of European beech Fagus sylvatica L. For Ecol Manage, 2007, 242: 297-305.

[32] Niemelä J.. Invertebrates and boreal forest management. Cons Biol, 1997, 11: 601-610.

[33] Niklas F., Götmark F.. Openness in management: Hands-off vs partial cutting in conservation forests, and the response of beetles. Biolog Cons, 2008, 141: 2010-2321.

[34] Nol E., Douglas H., Crins W.J.. Responses of syrphids, elaterids and bees to single-tree selection harvesting in Algonquin Provincial Park, Ontario. Can Field Nat, 2006, 120: 15-21.

[35] Nyland R.D.. Nyland R.D.. Selection system and its application to uneven-aged northern hardwoods. Proceedings of Managing Northern Hardwoods Silvicultural Symposium. 1987, Syracuse, USA.: State University of New York, College of Environmental Science and Forestry, 49 80

[36] OMNR. 1998. A Silvicultural Guide for the Tolerant Hardwood Forest in Ontario. Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources. Queen’s Printer for Ontario Toronto.

[37] Oosterbroek P.. The Families of Diptera of the Malay Archipelago. 1998, Boston, Koln: Leidon

[38] Pohl G.R., Langor D.W., Spence J.R.. Rove beetles and ground beetles (Coleoptera: Staphylinidae, Carabidae) as indicator of harvesting and regeneration practices in western Canadian foothill forests. Biol Cons, 2007, 137: 294-307.

[39] Shaw M.R., Hochberg M.E.. The neglect of parasitic Hymenoptera in insect conservation strategies: the British fauna as a prime example. J Insect Cons, 2001, 5: 253-263.

[40] Siira-Pietikäinen A., Aimi J., Siitonen J.. Short-term responses to soil microarthropod community to clear felling and alternative forest regeneration methods. For Ecol Manage, 2003, 72: 339-353.

[41] Smith D.M., Larson B.C., Kelty M.J., Aston P.M.S.. The Practice of Silviculture: Applied Forest Ecology. 1997, New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

[42] Storke N.E., Adis J., Didham R.K.. Canopy Arthropods. 1997, London: Chapman & Hall

[43] ter Braak C.J.F., Šmilauer P.. CANOCO reference manual and user’s guide to Canoco for Windows: software for canonical community ordination. 1998, Ithaca, NY: Microcomputer Power

[44] Thompsen F.R., Probst J.R., Raphael M.G.. Impacts of silviculture: overview and management recommendations. Ecology and Management of Neotropical Migrant Birds: A Synthesis and Review of Critical Issues. 1995, NY: Oxford University Press, 201 219

[45] Ulyshen M., Hanula J.L., Horn S., Kilgo J.C., Moorman C.E.. The response of ground beetles (Coleoptera, Carabidae) to selection cutting in a South Carolina bottomland hardwood forest. Biodiversity Cons, 2006, 15: 261-274.

[46] Vance C.C., Kirby K.R., Malcolm J.R., Smith S.M.. Community composition of longhorned beetles (Coleoptera: Cerambycidae) in the canopy and understorey of sugar maple and white pine stands in south central Ontario. Environ Entomol, 2003, 32: 1066-1074.

[47] Vance C.C., Nol E.. Temporal effects of selection logging on ground beetle communities in northern hardwood forests of eastern Canada. Ecoscience, 2003, 10: 49-56.

[48] Vance C.C., Smith S.M., Malcolm J.R., Huber J., Bellocq M.I.. Differences between forest type and vertical strata in the diversity and composition of hymenopteran families and mymarid genera in northeastern temperate forests. Environ Entomol, 2007, 36: 1073-1083.

[49] Werner S.M., Raffa K.F.. Effects of forest management practices on the diversity of ground-occurring beetles in mixed northern hardwood forests of the Great Lake Region. For Ecol Manage, 2000, 139: 135-155.

[50] Wharton R.A.. Bionomics of the Braconidae. Ann Rev Entomol, 1993, 38: 121-143.

[51] Wharton RA, Marsh PM, Sharkey MJ (Eds). 1997. Manual of the New World Genera of the Family Braconidae (Hymenoptera). Special Publication of the International Society of Hymenopterists, No. 1, Washington, DC.

[52] White RE. 1983. A Field Guide to the Beetles of North America. The Peterson Field Guide Series. Houghton, Mifflin Company, Boston.

[53] Willams P.H., Gaston K.J.. Measuring more of biodiversity: Can higher taxon richness predict wholesale species richness?. Biol Cons, 1994, 67: 211-217.