Handbook of field sampling for multi-taxon biodiversity studies in European forests
Creators: name: Burrascano, Sabina
name: Trentanovi, Giovanni
name: Paillet, Yoan
name: Heilmann-Clausen, Jacob
name: Giordani, Paolo
name: Bagella, Simonetta
name: Bravo-Oviedo, Andrés
name: Campagnaro, Thomas
name: Campanaro, Alessandro
name: Chianucci, Francesco
name: De Smedt, Pallieter
name: García-Mijangos, Itziar
name: Matošević, Dinka
name: Sitzia, Tommaso
name: Aszalós, Réka
name: Brazaitis, Gediminas
name: Cutini, Andrea
name: D'Andrea, Ettore
name: Doerfler, Inken
name: Hofmeister, Jeňýk
name: Hošek, Jan
name: Janssen, Philippe
name: Kepfer Rojas, Sebastian
name: Korboulewsky, Nathalie
name: Kozák, Daniel
name: Lachat, Thibault
name: Lõhmus, Asko
name: Lopez, Rosana
name: Mårell, Anders
name: Matula, Radim
name: Mikoláš, Martin
name: Munzi, Silvana
name: Nordén, Björn
name: Pärtel, Meelis
name: Penner, Johannes
name: Runnel, Kadri
name: Schall, Peter
name: Svoboda, Miroslav
name: Tinya, Flóra
name: Ujházyová, Mariana
name: Vandekerkhove, Kris
name: Verheyen, Kris
name: Xystrakis, Fotios
name: Ódor, Péter
Publisher: name: Elsevier
Year: 2021
Subjects: Biodiversity Field methods Multi-taxon Indicators Sampling protocol Forest stand structure

description: Forests host most terrestrial biodiversity and their sustainable management is crucial to halt biodiversity loss. Although scientific evidence indicates that sustainable forest management (SFM) should be assessed by monitoring multi-taxon biodiversity, most current SFM criteria and indicators account only for trees or consider indirect biodiversity proxies. Several projects performed multi-taxon sampling to investigate the effects of forest management on biodiversity, but the large variability of their sampling approaches hampers the identification of general trends, and limits broad-scale inference for designing SFM. Here we address the need of common sampling protocols for forest structure and multi-taxon biodiversity to be used at broad spatial scales. We established a network of researchers involved in 41 projects on forest multi-taxon biodiversity across 13 European countries. The network data structure comprised the assessment of at least three taxa, and the measurement of forest stand structure in the same plots or stands. We mapped the sampling approaches to multi-taxon biodiversity, standing trees and deadwood, and used this overview to provide operational answers to two simple, yet crucial, questions: what to sample? How to sample? The most commonly sampled taxonomic groups are vascular plants (83% of datasets), beetles (80%), lichens (66%), birds (66%), fungi (61%), bryophytes (49%). They cover different forest structures and habitats, with a limited focus on soil, litter and forest canopy. Notwithstanding the common goal of assessing forest management effects on biodiversity, sampling approaches differed widely within and among taxonomic groups. Differences derive from sampling units (plots size, use of stand vs. plot scale), and from the focus on different substrates or functional groups of organisms. Sampling methods for standing trees and lying deadwood were relatively homogeneous and focused on volume calculations, but with a great variability in sampling units and diameter thresholds. We developed a handbook of sampling methods (SI 3) aimed at the greatest possible comparability across taxonomic groups and studies as a basis for European-wide biodiversity monitoring programs, robust understanding of biodiversity response to forest structure and management, and the identification of direct indicators of SFM.