Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorLoehle, Craigen_US
dc.contributor.authorWigley, T. Bentlyen_US
dc.contributor.authorShipman, Paulen_US
dc.contributor.authorFox, Stanleyen_US
dc.contributor.authorRutzmoser, Scotten_US
dc.contributor.authorThill, Ronalden_US
dc.contributor.authorMelchiors, M. Anthonyen_US
dc.date.accessioned2006-08-28T20:02:30Zen_US
dc.date.available2006-08-28T20:02:30Zen_US
dc.date.issued2005-05-02en_US
dc.identifier.citationForest Ecology and Management 209N3 (2005) 293-308en_US
dc.identifier.issn0378-1127en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/1850/2524en_US
dc.description.abstractSpecies accumulation curves were used to study relationships between herpetofaunal richness and habitat characteristics on four watersheds in Arkansas that differed markedly with respect to management intensity. Selected habitat characteristics were estimated for stands containing the sample points and within buffers with radii of 250, 500 m, and 1 km surrounding the sample points. Richness of all three herpetofaunal groups (amphibians, reptiles, and all herpetofauna) was greater in hardwood forests than in pine or mixed pine–hardwood. For all three groups, the youngest forest age class had the most species. For amphibians and total herpetofauna, richness declined as stand ages increased. Reptiles had the highest richness at sample points with the lowest class of stand basal area (BA), whereas amphibians were richest at points having the highest BA. In contrast to expectations, there was no effect of distance from water on richness of any taxa; however, we may have had incomplete data on the spatial distribution of small ponds outside the sample plots because they were not recorded in the GIS data. Results for distance to roads were ambiguous, but with more separation of compared curves as more plots were sampled, a positive influence of road proximity was suggested. There was a positive effect of buffer age diversity at the 250 m scale for all three herpetofaunal groups, but less so at scales >250 m except for amphibians, which also showed a positive effect at the 1 km scale. The two most intensively managed watersheds had higher species richness than the two less intensively managed watersheds for reptiles, amphibians, and both groups combined. In this study landscape, where urban and agricultural influences were minimal, we did not observe negative impacts of forest management and associated activities, and local habitat heterogeneity created by silviculture often had a positive effect on herpetofaunal species richness.en_US
dc.description.sponsorshipThe project was funded by a grant from the National Commission on Science for Sustainable Forestry. We thank the USDA Forest Service, Weyerhaeuser Company, and the National Council for Air and Stream Improvement for providing funding and logistical support during earlier phases of the study.en_US
dc.format.extent37365 bytesen_US
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdfen_US
dc.language.isoen_USen_US
dc.publisherElsevier: Forest Ecology and Managementen_US
dc.subjectHabitaten_US
dc.subjectHerpetofaunaen_US
dc.subjectSpecies richnessen_US
dc.titleHerpetofaunal species richness responses to forest landscape structure in Arkansasen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.identifier.urlhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2005.02.007


Files in this item

FilesSizeFormatView

There are no files associated with this item.

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record