Schall, Peter

[["dc.bibliographiccitation.firstpage","144"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.issue","1"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.journal","Insect Conservation and Diversity"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.lastpage","148"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.volume","14"],["dc.contributor.author","Seibold, Sebastian"],["dc.contributor.author","Hothorn, Torsten"],["dc.contributor.author","Gossner, Martin M."],["dc.contributor.author","Simons, Nadja K."],["dc.contributor.author","Blüthgen, Nico"],["dc.contributor.author","Müller, Jörg"],["dc.contributor.author","Ambarlı, Didem"],["dc.contributor.author","Ammer, Christian"],["dc.contributor.author","Bauhus, Jürgen"],["dc.contributor.author","Fischer, Markus"],["dc.contributor.author","Habel, Jan C."],["dc.contributor.author","Penone, Caterina"],["dc.contributor.author","Schall, Peter"],["dc.contributor.author","Schulze, Ernst‐Detlef"],["dc.contributor.author","Weisser, Wolfgang W."],["dc.date.accessioned","2021-04-14T08:30:04Z"],["dc.date.available","2021-04-14T08:30:04Z"],["dc.date.issued","2021"],["dc.description.abstract","Abstract Reports of major losses in insect biodiversity have stimulated an increasing interest in temporal population changes. Existing datasets are often limited to a small number of study sites, few points in time, a narrow range of land‐use intensities and only some taxonomic groups, or they lack standardised sampling. While new monitoring programs have been initiated, they still cover rather short time periods. Daskalova et al. 2021 (Insect Conservation and Diversity, 14, 1‐18) argue that temporal trends of insect populations derived from short time series are biased towards extreme trends, while their own analysis of an assembly of shorter‐ and longer‐term time series does not support an overall insect decline. With respect to the results of Seibold et al. 2019 (Nature, 574, 671–674) based on a 10‐year multi‐site time series, they claim that the analysis suffers from not accounting for temporal pseudoreplication. Here, we explain why the criticism of missing statistical rigour in the analysis of Seibold et al. (2019) is not warranted. Models that include ‘year’ as random effect, as suggested by Daskalova et al. (2021), fail to detect non‐linear trends and assume that consecutive years are independent samples which is questionable for insect time‐series data. We agree with Daskalova et al. (2021) that the assembly and analysis of larger datasets is urgently needed, but it will take time until such datasets are available. Thus, short‐term datasets are highly valuable, should be extended and analysed continually to provide a more detailed understanding of insect population changes under the influence of global change, and to trigger immediate conservation actions."],["dc.description.sponsorship","ProjektDEAL"],["dc.identifier.doi","10.1111/icad.12467"],["dc.identifier.uri","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gro-2/83090"],["dc.language.iso","en"],["dc.notes.intern","DOI Import GROB-399"],["dc.publisher","John Wiley \\u0026 Sons, Ltd."],["dc.relation.eissn","1752-4598"],["dc.relation.issn","1752-458X"],["dc.rights","This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution‐NonCommercial‐NoDerivs License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non‐commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made."],["dc.title","Insights from regional and short‐term biodiversity monitoring datasets are valuable: a reply to Daskalova et al . 2021"],["dc.type","journal_article"],["dc.type.internalPublication","yes"],["dspace.entity.type","Publication"]]

[["dc.bibliographiccitation.firstpage","850"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.journal","Forest Ecology and Management"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.lastpage","859"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.volume","432"],["dc.contributor.author","Müller, Jörg"],["dc.contributor.author","Boch, Steffen"],["dc.contributor.author","Prati, Daniel"],["dc.contributor.author","Socher, Stephanie A."],["dc.contributor.author","Pommer, Ulf"],["dc.contributor.author","Hessenmöller, Dominik"],["dc.contributor.author","Schall, Peter"],["dc.contributor.author","Schulze, Ernst Detlef"],["dc.contributor.author","Fischer, Markus"],["dc.date.accessioned","2020-12-10T14:24:06Z"],["dc.date.available","2020-12-10T14:24:06Z"],["dc.date.issued","2019"],["dc.identifier.doi","10.1016/j.foreco.2018.10.019"],["dc.identifier.issn","0378-1127"],["dc.identifier.uri","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gro-2/72142"],["dc.language.iso","en"],["dc.notes.intern","DOI Import GROB-354"],["dc.title","Effects of forest management on bryophyte species richness in Central European forests"],["dc.type","journal_article"],["dc.type.internalPublication","yes"],["dspace.entity.type","Publication"]]

[["dc.bibliographiccitation.firstpage","671"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.issue","7780"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.journal","Nature"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.lastpage","674"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.volume","574"],["dc.contributor.author","Seibold, Sebastian"],["dc.contributor.author","Gossner, Martin M."],["dc.contributor.author","Simons, Nadja K."],["dc.contributor.author","Blüthgen, Nico"],["dc.contributor.author","Müller, Jörg"],["dc.contributor.author","Ambarlı, Didem"],["dc.contributor.author","Ammer, Christian"],["dc.contributor.author","Bauhus, Jürgen"],["dc.contributor.author","Fischer, Markus"],["dc.contributor.author","Habel, Jan C."],["dc.contributor.author","Linsenmair, Karl Eduard"],["dc.contributor.author","Nauss, Thomas"],["dc.contributor.author","Penone, Caterina"],["dc.contributor.author","Prati, Daniel"],["dc.contributor.author","Schall, Peter"],["dc.contributor.author","Schulze, Ernst-Detlef"],["dc.contributor.author","Vogt, Juliane"],["dc.contributor.author","Wöllauer, Stephan"],["dc.contributor.author","Weisser, Wolfgang W."],["dc.date.accessioned","2020-12-10T18:10:02Z"],["dc.date.available","2020-12-10T18:10:02Z"],["dc.date.issued","2019"],["dc.identifier.doi","10.1038/s41586-019-1684-3"],["dc.identifier.eissn","1476-4687"],["dc.identifier.issn","0028-0836"],["dc.identifier.uri","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gro-2/73830"],["dc.language.iso","en"],["dc.notes.intern","DOI Import GROB-354"],["dc.title","Arthropod decline in grasslands and forests is associated with landscape-level drivers"],["dc.type","journal_article"],["dc.type.internalPublication","yes"],["dspace.entity.type","Publication"]]

[["dc.bibliographiccitation.artnumber","5"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.issue","1"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.journal","Forest Ecosystems"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.volume","8"],["dc.contributor.author","Simons, Nadja K."],["dc.contributor.author","Felipe-Lucia, María R."],["dc.contributor.author","Schall, Peter"],["dc.contributor.author","Ammer, Christian"],["dc.contributor.author","Bauhus, Jürgen"],["dc.contributor.author","Blüthgen, Nico"],["dc.contributor.author","Boch, Steffen"],["dc.contributor.author","Buscot, François"],["dc.contributor.author","Fischer, Markus"],["dc.contributor.author","Goldmann, Kezia"],["dc.contributor.author","Gossner, Martin M."],["dc.contributor.author","Hänsel, Falk"],["dc.contributor.author","Jung, Kirsten"],["dc.contributor.author","Manning, Peter"],["dc.contributor.author","Nauss, Thomas"],["dc.contributor.author","Oelmann, Yvonne"],["dc.contributor.author","Pena, Rodica"],["dc.contributor.author","Polle, Andrea"],["dc.contributor.author","Renner, Swen C."],["dc.contributor.author","Schloter, Michael"],["dc.contributor.author","Schöning, Ingo"],["dc.contributor.author","Schulze, Ernst-Detlef"],["dc.contributor.author","Solly, Emily F."],["dc.contributor.author","Sorkau, Elisabeth"],["dc.contributor.author","Stempfhuber, Barbara"],["dc.contributor.author","Wubet, Tesfaye"],["dc.contributor.author","Müller, Jörg"],["dc.contributor.author","Seibold, Sebastian"],["dc.contributor.author","Weisser, Wolfgang W."],["dc.date.accessioned","2021-04-14T08:29:56Z"],["dc.date.available","2021-04-14T08:29:56Z"],["dc.date.issued","2021"],["dc.date.updated","2022-07-29T12:18:47Z"],["dc.description.abstract","Abstract\r\n \r\n Background\r\n Forests perform various important ecosystem functions that contribute to ecosystem services. In many parts of the world, forest management has shifted from a focus on timber production to multi-purpose forestry, combining timber production with the supply of other forest ecosystem services. However, it is unclear which forest types provide which ecosystem services and to what extent forests primarily managed for timber already supply multiple ecosystem services. Based on a comprehensive dataset collected across 150 forest plots in three regions differing in management intensity and species composition, we develop models to predict the potential supply of 13 ecosystem services. We use those models to assess the level of multifunctionality of managed forests at the national level using national forest inventory data.\r\n \r\n \r\n Results\r\n Looking at the potential supply of ecosystem services, we found trade-offs (e.g. between both bark beetle control or dung decomposition and both productivity or soil carbon stocks) as well as synergies (e.g. for temperature regulation, carbon storage and culturally interesting plants) across the 53 most dominant forest types in Germany. No single forest type provided all ecosystem services equally. Some ecosystem services showed comparable levels across forest types (e.g. decomposition or richness of saprotrophs), while others varied strongly, depending on forest structural attributes (e.g. phosphorous availability or cover of edible plants) or tree species composition (e.g. potential nitrification activity). Variability in potential supply of ecosystem services was only to a lesser extent driven by environmental conditions. However, the geographic variation in ecosystem function supply across Germany was closely linked with the distribution of main tree species.\r\n \r\n \r\n Conclusions\r\n Our results show that forest multifunctionality is limited to subsets of ecosystem services. The importance of tree species composition highlights that a lack of multifunctionality at the stand level can be compensated by managing forests at the landscape level, when stands of complementary forest types are combined. These results imply that multi-purpose forestry should be based on a variety of forest types requiring coordinated planning across larger spatial scales."],["dc.identifier.citation","Forest Ecosystems. 2021 Jan 27;8(1):5"],["dc.identifier.doi","10.1186/s40663-021-00280-5"],["dc.identifier.purl","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gs-1/17724"],["dc.identifier.uri","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gro-2/83038"],["dc.language.iso","en"],["dc.notes.intern","DOI Import GROB-399"],["dc.notes.intern","Merged from goescholar"],["dc.publisher","Springer Singapore"],["dc.relation.eissn","2197-5620"],["dc.relation.orgunit","Zentrum für Biodiversität und Nachhaltige Landnutzung"],["dc.rights","CC BY 4.0"],["dc.rights.holder","The Author(s)"],["dc.rights.uri","https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"],["dc.subject","Ecosystem processes and services"],["dc.subject","Forest management"],["dc.subject","Structural diversity"],["dc.subject","Tree species composition"],["dc.subject","Trade-offs and synergies"],["dc.subject","Forest productivity"],["dc.title","National Forest Inventories capture the multifunctionality of managed forests in Germany"],["dc.type","journal_article"],["dc.type.internalPublication","yes"],["dc.type.subtype","original_ja"],["dc.type.version","published_version"],["dspace.entity.type","Publication"]]

[["dc.bibliographiccitation.firstpage","266"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.issue","7632"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.journal","Nature"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.lastpage","269"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.volume","540"],["dc.contributor.author","Goßner, Martin M."],["dc.contributor.author","Lewinsohn, Thomas M."],["dc.contributor.author","Kahl, Tiemo"],["dc.contributor.author","Grassein, Fabrice"],["dc.contributor.author","Boch, Steffen"],["dc.contributor.author","Prati, Daniel"],["dc.contributor.author","Birkhofer, Klaus"],["dc.contributor.author","Renner, Swen C."],["dc.contributor.author","Sikorski, Johannes"],["dc.contributor.author","Wubet, Tesfaye"],["dc.contributor.author","Arndt, Hartmut"],["dc.contributor.author","Baumgartner, Vanessa"],["dc.contributor.author","Blaser, Stefan"],["dc.contributor.author","Blüthgen, Nico"],["dc.contributor.author","Börschig, Carmen"],["dc.contributor.author","Buscot, Francois"],["dc.contributor.author","Diekötter, Tim"],["dc.contributor.author","Jorge, Leonardo Ré"],["dc.contributor.author","Jung, Kirsten"],["dc.contributor.author","Keyel, Alexander C."],["dc.contributor.author","Klein, Alexandra-Maria"],["dc.contributor.author","Klemmer, Sandra"],["dc.contributor.author","Krauss, Jochen"],["dc.contributor.author","Lange, Markus"],["dc.contributor.author","Müller, Jörg"],["dc.contributor.author","Overmann, Jörg"],["dc.contributor.author","Pašalić, Esther"],["dc.contributor.author","Penone, Caterina"],["dc.contributor.author","Perović, David"],["dc.contributor.author","Purschke, Oliver"],["dc.contributor.author","Schall, Peter"],["dc.contributor.author","Socher, Stephanie A."],["dc.contributor.author","Sonnemann, Ilja"],["dc.contributor.author","Tschapka, Marco"],["dc.contributor.author","Tscharntke, Teja"],["dc.contributor.author","Türke, Manfred"],["dc.contributor.author","Venter, Paul Christiaan"],["dc.contributor.author","Weiner, Christiane N."],["dc.contributor.author","Werner, Michael"],["dc.contributor.author","Wolters, Volkmar"],["dc.contributor.author","Wurst, Susanne"],["dc.contributor.author","Westphal, Catrin"],["dc.contributor.author","Fischer, Markus"],["dc.contributor.author","Weisser, Wolfgang W."],["dc.contributor.author","Allan, Eric"],["dc.date.accessioned","2017-09-07T11:54:45Z"],["dc.date.available","2017-09-07T11:54:45Z"],["dc.date.issued","2016"],["dc.description.abstract","Land-use intensification is a major driver of biodiversity loss. Alongside reductions in local species diversity, biotic homogenization at larger spatial scales is of great concern for conservation. Biotic homogenization means a decrease in $\\betaehBdiversity (the compositional dissimilarity between sites). Most studies have investigated losses in local ($\\alpha$)-diversity and neglected biodiversity loss at larger spatial scales. Studies addressing $\\betaehBdiversity have focused on single or a few organism groups (for example, ref. 4), and it is thus unknown whether land-use intensification homogenizes communities at different trophic levels, above- and belowground. Here we show that even moderate increases in local land-use intensity (LUI) cause biotic homogenization across microbial, plant and animal groups, both above- and belowground, and that this is largely independent of changes in $\\alphaehBdiversity. We analysed a unique grassland biodiversity dataset, with abundances of more than 4,000 species belonging to 12 trophic groups. LUI, and, in particular, high mowing intensity, had consistent effects on $\\betaehBdiversity across groups, causing a homogenization of soil microbial, fungal pathogen, plant and arthropod communities. These effects were nonlinear and the strongest declines in $\\betaehBdiversity occurred in the transition from extensively managed to intermediate intensity grassland. LUI tended to reduce local $\\alphaehBdiversity in aboveground groups, whereas the $\\alphaehBdiversity increased in belowground groups. Correlations between the $\\betaehBdiversity of different groups, particularly between plants and their consumers, became weaker at high LUI. This suggests a loss of specialist species and is further evidence for biotic homogenization. The consistently negative effects of LUI on landscape-scale biodiversity underscore the high value of extensively managed grasslands for conserving multitrophic biodiversity and ecosystem service provision. Indeed, biotic homogenization rather than local diversity loss could prove to be the most substantial consequence of land-use intensification."],["dc.identifier.doi","10.1038/nature20575"],["dc.identifier.gro","3150097"],["dc.identifier.pmid","27919075"],["dc.identifier.uri","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gro-2/6827"],["dc.language.iso","en"],["dc.notes.status","public"],["dc.notes.submitter","chake"],["dc.relation.issn","0028-0836"],["dc.relation.orgunit","Abteilung Ökosystemmodellierung"],["dc.title","Land-use intensification causes multitrophic homogenization of grassland communities"],["dc.type","journal_article"],["dc.type.internalPublication","yes"],["dc.type.peerReviewed","no"],["dc.type.subtype","original_ja"],["dspace.entity.type","Publication"]]

[["dc.bibliographiccitation.firstpage","39"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.journal","Basic and Applied Ecology"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.lastpage","52"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.volume","32"],["dc.contributor.author","Schall, Peter"],["dc.contributor.author","Schulze, Ernst-Detlef"],["dc.contributor.author","Fischer, Markus"],["dc.contributor.author","Ayasse, Manfred"],["dc.contributor.author","Ammer, Christian"],["dc.date.accessioned","2020-12-10T14:22:30Z"],["dc.date.available","2020-12-10T14:22:30Z"],["dc.date.issued","2018"],["dc.identifier.doi","10.1016/j.baae.2018.02.007"],["dc.identifier.issn","1439-1791"],["dc.identifier.uri","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gro-2/71641"],["dc.language.iso","en"],["dc.notes.intern","DOI Import GROB-354"],["dc.title","Relations between forest management, stand structure and productivity across different types of Central European forests"],["dc.type","journal_article"],["dc.type.internalPublication","yes"],["dspace.entity.type","Publication"]]

[["dc.bibliographiccitation.firstpage","1363"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.issue","7"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.journal","Journal of Applied Ecology"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.lastpage","1375"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.volume","57"],["dc.contributor.affiliation","Heinrichs, Steffi; 1Silviculture and Forest Ecology of the Temperate Zones University of Göttingen Göttingen Germany"],["dc.contributor.affiliation","Ammer, Christian; 1Silviculture and Forest Ecology of the Temperate Zones University of Göttingen Göttingen Germany"],["dc.contributor.affiliation","Ayasse, Manfred; 2Institute of Evolutionary Ecology and Conservation Genomics University of Ulm Ulm Germany"],["dc.contributor.affiliation","Boch, Steffen; 3Biodiversity and Conservation Biology Swiss Federal Research Institute WSL Birmensdorf Switzerland"],["dc.contributor.affiliation","Buscot, François; 5Department of Soil Ecology UFZ‐Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research Halle‐Saale Germany"],["dc.contributor.affiliation","Fischer, Markus; 4Institute of Plant Sciences University of Bern Bern Switzerland"],["dc.contributor.affiliation","Goldmann, Kezia; 5Department of Soil Ecology UFZ‐Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research Halle‐Saale Germany"],["dc.contributor.affiliation","Overmann, Jörg; 7Leibniz‐Institute DSMZ ‐ German Collection of Microorganisms and Cell Cultures GmbH Braunschweig Germany"],["dc.contributor.affiliation","Schulze, Ernst‐Detlef; 8Max‐Planck Institute for Biogeochemistry Jena Germany"],["dc.contributor.affiliation","Sikorski, Johannes; 7Leibniz‐Institute DSMZ ‐ German Collection of Microorganisms and Cell Cultures GmbH Braunschweig Germany"],["dc.contributor.affiliation","Weisser, Wolfgang W.; 9Terrestrial Ecology Research Group Department of Ecology and Ecosystem Management School of Life Sciences Weihenstephan Technische Universität München Freising Germany"],["dc.contributor.affiliation","Wubet, Tesfaye; 5Department of Soil Ecology UFZ‐Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research Halle‐Saale Germany"],["dc.contributor.affiliation","Gossner, Martin M.; 9Terrestrial Ecology Research Group Department of Ecology and Ecosystem Management School of Life Sciences Weihenstephan Technische Universität München Freising Germany"],["dc.contributor.author","Schall, Peter"],["dc.contributor.author","Heinrichs, Steffi"],["dc.contributor.author","Ammer, Christian"],["dc.contributor.author","Ayasse, Manfred"],["dc.contributor.author","Boch, Steffen"],["dc.contributor.author","Buscot, François"],["dc.contributor.author","Fischer, Markus"],["dc.contributor.author","Goldmann, Kezia"],["dc.contributor.author","Overmann, Jörg"],["dc.contributor.author","Schulze, Ernst‐Detlef"],["dc.contributor.author","Sikorski, Johannes"],["dc.contributor.author","Weisser, Wolfgang W."],["dc.contributor.author","Wubet, Tesfaye"],["dc.contributor.author","Gossner, Martin M."],["dc.contributor.editor","Mori, Akira"],["dc.date.accessioned","2021-04-14T08:26:38Z"],["dc.date.available","2021-04-14T08:26:38Z"],["dc.date.issued","2020"],["dc.date.updated","2022-02-09T13:21:57Z"],["dc.description.abstract","Abstract Forest management greatly influences biodiversity across spatial scales. At the landscape scale, combining management systems that create different stand properties might promote biodiversity due to complementary species assemblages. In European beech forests, nature conservation and policy advocate a mixture of unmanaged (UNM) forests and uneven‐aged (UEA) forests managed at fine spatial grain at the expense of traditionally managed even‐aged shelterwood forests (EA). Evidence that such a landscape composition enhances forest biodiversity is still missing. We studied the biodiversity (species richness 0D, Shannon diversity 1D, Simpson diversity 2D) of 14 taxonomic groups from bacteria to vertebrates in ‘virtual’ beech forest landscapes composed of varying shares of EA, UEA and UNM and investigated how γ‐diversity responds to landscape composition. Groups were sampled in the largest contiguous beech forest in Germany, where EA and UEA management date back nearly two centuries, while management was abandoned 20–70 years ago (UNM). We used a novel resampling approach that created all compositional combinations of management systems. Pure EA landscapes preserved a maximum of 97.5% γ‐multidiversity (0D, 1D) across all taxa. Pure and mixed UEA/UNM landscapes reduced γ‐multidiversity by up to 12.8% (1D). This effect was consistent for forest specialists (1D: −15.3%). We found only weak complementarity among management systems. Landscape composition significantly affected γ‐diversity of 6–9 individual taxa, depending on the weighting of species frequencies with strongest responses for spiders, beetles, vascular plants and birds. Most showed maximum diversity in pure EA landscapes. Birds benefited from UNM in EA‐dominated landscapes. Deadwood fungi showed highest diversity in UNM. Synthesis and applications. Our study shows that combining fine‐grained forest management and management abandonment at the landscape scale will reduce, rather than enhance, regional forest biodiversity. We found an even‐aged shelterwood management system alone operating at intermediate spatial scales and providing stands with high environmental heterogeneity was able to support regional biodiversity. However, some taxa require certain shares of uneven‐aged and unmanaged forests, emphasizing their general importance. We encourage using the here presented resampling approach to verify our results in forest landscapes of different composition and configuration across the temperate zone."],["dc.description.abstract","Our study shows that combining fine‐grained forest management and management abandonment at the landscape scale will reduce, rather than enhance, regional forest biodiversity. We found an even‐aged shelterwood management system alone operating at intermediate spatial scales and providing stands with high environmental heterogeneity was able to support regional biodiversity. However, some taxa require certain shares of uneven‐aged and unmanaged forests, emphasizing their general importance. We encourage using the here presented resampling approach to verify our results in forest landscapes of different composition and configuration across the temperate zone. image"],["dc.description.sponsorship","Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100001659"],["dc.description.sponsorship","Schweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen Forschung http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100001711"],["dc.identifier.doi","10.1111/1365-2664.13635"],["dc.identifier.eissn","1365-2664"],["dc.identifier.issn","0021-8901"],["dc.identifier.uri","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gro-2/82026"],["dc.language.iso","en"],["dc.notes.intern","DOI Import GROB-399"],["dc.relation.eissn","1365-2664"],["dc.relation.issn","0021-8901"],["dc.rights","This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited."],["dc.title","Can multi‐taxa diversity in European beech forest landscapes be increased by combining different management systems?"],["dc.type","journal_article"],["dc.type.internalPublication","yes"],["dspace.entity.type","Publication"]]

[["dc.bibliographiccitation.artnumber","73"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.issue","1"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.journal","Forests"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.volume","10"],["dc.contributor.author","Heinrichs, Steffi"],["dc.contributor.author","Ammer, Christian"],["dc.contributor.author","Mund, Martina"],["dc.contributor.author","Boch, Steffen"],["dc.contributor.author","Budde, Sabine"],["dc.contributor.author","Fischer, Markus"],["dc.contributor.author","Müller, Jörg"],["dc.contributor.author","Schöning, Ingo"],["dc.contributor.author","Schulze, Ernst-Detlef"],["dc.contributor.author","Schmidt, Wolfgang"],["dc.contributor.author","Weckesser, Martin"],["dc.contributor.author","Schall, Peter"],["dc.date.accessioned","2019-07-09T11:50:48Z"],["dc.date.available","2019-07-09T11:50:48Z"],["dc.date.issued","2019"],["dc.description.abstract","Tree species diversity can positively affect the multifunctionality of forests. This is why conifer monocultures of Scots pine and Norway spruce, widely promoted in Central Europe since the 18th and 19th century, are currently converted into mixed stands with naturally dominant European beech. Biodiversity is expected to benefit from these mixtures compared to pure conifer stands due to increased abiotic and biotic resource heterogeneity. Evidence for this assumption is, however, largely lacking. Here, we investigated the diversity of vascular plants, bryophytes and lichens at the plot (alpha diversity) and at the landscape (gamma diversity) level in pure and mixed stands of European beech and conifer species (Scots pine, Norway spruce, Douglas fir) in four regions in Germany. We aimed to identify compositions of pure and mixed stands in a hypothetical forest landscape that can optimize gamma diversity of vascular plants, bryophytes and lichens within regions. Results show that gamma diversity of the investigated groups is highest when a landscape comprises different pure stands rather than tree species mixtures at the stand scale. Species mainly associated with conifers rely on light regimes that are only provided in pure conifer forests, whereas mixtures of beech and conifers are more similar to beech stands. Combining pure beech and pure conifer stands at the landscape scale can increase landscape level biodiversity and conserve species assemblages of both stand types, while landscapes solely composed of stand scale tree species mixtures could lead to a biodiversity reduction of a combination of investigated groups of 7 up to 20%."],["dc.description.sponsorship","Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft"],["dc.identifier.doi","10.3390/f10010073"],["dc.identifier.purl","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gs-1/16004"],["dc.identifier.uri","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gro-2/59834"],["dc.language.iso","en"],["dc.notes.intern","Merged from goescholar"],["dc.publisher","MDPI"],["dc.relation.eissn","1999-4907"],["dc.rights","CC BY 4.0"],["dc.rights.uri","https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0"],["dc.subject.ddc","570"],["dc.title","Landscape-Scale Mixtures of Tree Species are More Effective than Stand-Scale Mixtures for Biodiversity of Vascular Plants, Bryophytes and Lichens"],["dc.type","journal_article"],["dc.type.internalPublication","yes"],["dc.type.version","published_version"],["dspace.entity.type","Publication"]]

[["dc.bibliographiccitation.firstpage","439"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.issue","3"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.journal","Diversity & Distributions"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.lastpage","453"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.volume","27"],["dc.contributor.author","Bae, Soyeon"],["dc.contributor.author","Heidrich, Lea"],["dc.contributor.author","Levick, Shaun R."],["dc.contributor.author","Gossner, Martin M."],["dc.contributor.author","Seibold, Sebastian"],["dc.contributor.author","Weisser, Wolfgang W."],["dc.contributor.author","Magdon, Paul"],["dc.contributor.author","Serebryanyk, Alla"],["dc.contributor.author","Bässler, Claus"],["dc.contributor.author","Schäfer, Deborah"],["dc.contributor.author","Schulze, Ernst‐Detlef"],["dc.contributor.author","Doerfler, Inken"],["dc.contributor.author","Müller, Jörg"],["dc.contributor.author","Jung, Kirsten"],["dc.contributor.author","Heurich, Marco"],["dc.contributor.author","Fischer, Markus"],["dc.contributor.author","Roth, Nicolas"],["dc.contributor.author","Schall, Peter"],["dc.contributor.author","Boch, Steffen"],["dc.contributor.author","Wöllauer, Stephan"],["dc.contributor.author","Renner, Swen C."],["dc.contributor.editor","Barnes, Andrew"],["dc.date.accessioned","2021-04-14T08:24:04Z"],["dc.date.available","2021-04-14T08:24:04Z"],["dc.date.issued","2020"],["dc.identifier.doi","10.1111/ddi.13204"],["dc.identifier.uri","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gro-2/81151"],["dc.language.iso","en"],["dc.notes.intern","DOI Import GROB-399"],["dc.relation.eissn","1472-4642"],["dc.relation.issn","1366-9516"],["dc.title","Dispersal ability, trophic position and body size mediate species turnover processes: Insights from a multi‐taxa and multi‐scale approach"],["dc.type","journal_article"],["dc.type.internalPublication","yes"],["dspace.entity.type","Publication"]]

[["dc.bibliographiccitation.artnumber","e0218741"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.issue","7"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.journal","PLOS ONE"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.volume","14"],["dc.contributor.author","Schäfer, Deborah"],["dc.contributor.author","Prati, Daniel"],["dc.contributor.author","Schall, Peter"],["dc.contributor.author","Ammer, Christian"],["dc.contributor.author","Fischer, Markus"],["dc.date.accessioned","2019-08-05T11:54:39Z"],["dc.date.available","2019-08-05T11:54:39Z"],["dc.date.issued","2019"],["dc.description.abstract","Many studies have analysed the effect of browsing by large herbivores on tree species but far fewer studies have studied their effect on understorey shrubs and herbs. Moreover, while many studies have shown that forest features and management intensity strongly influence understorey vegetation, the influence of such variation on the effect of large-herbivore exclusion is not known."],["dc.identifier.doi","10.1371/journal.pone.0218741"],["dc.identifier.pmid","31291260"],["dc.identifier.purl","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gs-1/16332"],["dc.identifier.uri","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gro-2/62287"],["dc.language.iso","en"],["dc.notes.intern","Merged from goescholar"],["dc.relation.eissn","1932-6203"],["dc.relation.issn","1932-6203"],["dc.rights","CC BY 4.0"],["dc.title","Exclusion of large herbivores affects understorey shrub vegetation more than herb vegetation across 147 forest sites in three German regions"],["dc.type","journal_article"],["dc.type.internalPublication","yes"],["dc.type.version","published_version"],["dspace.entity.type","Publication"]]