Logging Effects: Difference between revisions
From WikiDemocracy
Jump to navigationJump to search
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 638: | Line 638: | ||
[https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0006320720308120 by Everton B.P. Miranda 10/20 ScienceDirect] | [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0006320720308120 by Everton B.P. Miranda 10/20 ScienceDirect] | ||
Characterizing wildlife conservation problems is essential to properly inform conservation planning, and requires detailed knowledge on critical life stages, such as reproduction. | Characterizing wildlife conservation problems is essential to properly inform conservation planning, and requires detailed knowledge on critical life stages, such as reproduction. | ||
=====Tree hollows and forest stand structure in Australian warm temperate Eucalyptus forests are adversely affected by logging more than wildfire===== | |||
[https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0378112714007300 by Christopher M. McLean 1/4/15 ScienceDirect] | |||
Ecologically sustainable forest management aims to maintain biodiversity values within managed forest ecosystems. A key habitat component within Australian forest ecosystems are hollow-bearing trees which are crucially important for fauna species requiring tree hollows for diurnal shelter and nesting. The effect of disturbance regimes, in particular logging and fire, on hollow dynamics is poorly understood. The aim of this study was to determine the relationships between logging intensity and fire frequency on hollow abundance and forest stand structural attributes in two different eastern Australian Eucalyptus forest types. | |||
