The Effect of Forest Management Options on Forest Resilience to Pathogens
Invasive pathogens threaten the ability of forests globally to produce a range of valuable ecosystem services over time. However, the ability to detect such pathogen invasions—and thus to produce appropriate and timely management responses—is relatively low. We argue that a promising approach is to...
| Main Authors: | , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Frontiers Media S.A.
2020-02-01
|
| Series: | Frontiers in Forests and Global Change |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://www.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/ffgc.2020.00007/full |
| _version_ | 1818323939681632256 |
|---|---|
| author | Michaela Roberts Michaela Roberts Michaela Roberts Christopher A. Gilligan Adam Kleczkowski Adam Kleczkowski Nick Hanley Nick Hanley A. E. Whalley John R. Healey |
| author_facet | Michaela Roberts Michaela Roberts Michaela Roberts Christopher A. Gilligan Adam Kleczkowski Adam Kleczkowski Nick Hanley Nick Hanley A. E. Whalley John R. Healey |
| author_sort | Michaela Roberts |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Invasive pathogens threaten the ability of forests globally to produce a range of valuable ecosystem services over time. However, the ability to detect such pathogen invasions—and thus to produce appropriate and timely management responses—is relatively low. We argue that a promising approach is to plan and manage forests in a way that increases their resilience to invasive pathogens not yet present or ubiquitous in the forest. This paper is based on a systematic search and critical review of empirical evidence of the effect of a wide range of forest management options on the primary and secondary infection rates of forest pathogens, and on subsequent forest recovery. Our goals are to inform forest management decision making to increase forest resilience, and to identify the most important evidence gaps for future research. The management options for which there is the strongest evidence that they increase forest resilience to pathogens are: reduced forest connectivity, removal or treatment of inoculum sources such as cut stumps, reduced tree density, removal of diseased trees and increased tree species diversity. In all cases the effect of these options on infection dynamics differs greatly amongst tree and pathogen species and between forest environments. However, the lack of consistent effects of silvicultural systems or of thinning, pruning or coppicing treatments is notable. There is also a lack of evidence of how the effects of treatments are influenced by the scale at which they are applied, e.g., the mixture of tree species. An overall conclusion is that forest managers often need to trade-off increased resilience to tree pathogens against other benefits obtained from forests. |
| first_indexed | 2024-12-13T11:20:40Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-3df6d31fd496454c9cad8619a3a33d77 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 2624-893X |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-12-13T11:20:40Z |
| publishDate | 2020-02-01 |
| publisher | Frontiers Media S.A. |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Frontiers in Forests and Global Change |
| spelling | doaj.art-3df6d31fd496454c9cad8619a3a33d772022-12-21T23:48:29ZengFrontiers Media S.A.Frontiers in Forests and Global Change2624-893X2020-02-01310.3389/ffgc.2020.00007480727The Effect of Forest Management Options on Forest Resilience to PathogensMichaela Roberts0Michaela Roberts1Michaela Roberts2Christopher A. Gilligan3Adam Kleczkowski4Adam Kleczkowski5Nick Hanley6Nick Hanley7A. E. Whalley8John R. Healey9Social, Economic and Geographical Sciences Group, James Hutton Institute, Aberdeen, United KingdomDepartment of Geography and Sustainable Development, University of St Andrews, St Andrews, United KingdomSchool of Natural Sciences, Bangor University, Bangor, United KingdomDepartment of Plant Sciences, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United KingdomDepartment of Mathematics and Statistics, University of Strathclyde, Glasgow, United KingdomFaculty of Natural Sciences, University of Stirling, Glasgow, United KingdomDepartment of Geography and Sustainable Development, University of St Andrews, St Andrews, United KingdomInstitute of Biodiversity, Animal Health and Comparative Medicine, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, United KingdomWarwick Business School, University of Warwick, Coventry, United KingdomSchool of Natural Sciences, Bangor University, Bangor, United KingdomInvasive pathogens threaten the ability of forests globally to produce a range of valuable ecosystem services over time. However, the ability to detect such pathogen invasions—and thus to produce appropriate and timely management responses—is relatively low. We argue that a promising approach is to plan and manage forests in a way that increases their resilience to invasive pathogens not yet present or ubiquitous in the forest. This paper is based on a systematic search and critical review of empirical evidence of the effect of a wide range of forest management options on the primary and secondary infection rates of forest pathogens, and on subsequent forest recovery. Our goals are to inform forest management decision making to increase forest resilience, and to identify the most important evidence gaps for future research. The management options for which there is the strongest evidence that they increase forest resilience to pathogens are: reduced forest connectivity, removal or treatment of inoculum sources such as cut stumps, reduced tree density, removal of diseased trees and increased tree species diversity. In all cases the effect of these options on infection dynamics differs greatly amongst tree and pathogen species and between forest environments. However, the lack of consistent effects of silvicultural systems or of thinning, pruning or coppicing treatments is notable. There is also a lack of evidence of how the effects of treatments are influenced by the scale at which they are applied, e.g., the mixture of tree species. An overall conclusion is that forest managers often need to trade-off increased resilience to tree pathogens against other benefits obtained from forests.https://www.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/ffgc.2020.00007/fulltree diseaseepidemiologyforestrypathogensilvicultureforest management |
| spellingShingle | Michaela Roberts Michaela Roberts Michaela Roberts Christopher A. Gilligan Adam Kleczkowski Adam Kleczkowski Nick Hanley Nick Hanley A. E. Whalley John R. Healey The Effect of Forest Management Options on Forest Resilience to Pathogens Frontiers in Forests and Global Change tree disease epidemiology forestry pathogen silviculture forest management |
| title | The Effect of Forest Management Options on Forest Resilience to Pathogens |
| title_full | The Effect of Forest Management Options on Forest Resilience to Pathogens |
| title_fullStr | The Effect of Forest Management Options on Forest Resilience to Pathogens |
| title_full_unstemmed | The Effect of Forest Management Options on Forest Resilience to Pathogens |
| title_short | The Effect of Forest Management Options on Forest Resilience to Pathogens |
| title_sort | effect of forest management options on forest resilience to pathogens |
| topic | tree disease epidemiology forestry pathogen silviculture forest management |
| url | https://www.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/ffgc.2020.00007/full |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT michaelaroberts theeffectofforestmanagementoptionsonforestresiliencetopathogens AT michaelaroberts theeffectofforestmanagementoptionsonforestresiliencetopathogens AT michaelaroberts theeffectofforestmanagementoptionsonforestresiliencetopathogens AT christopheragilligan theeffectofforestmanagementoptionsonforestresiliencetopathogens AT adamkleczkowski theeffectofforestmanagementoptionsonforestresiliencetopathogens AT adamkleczkowski theeffectofforestmanagementoptionsonforestresiliencetopathogens AT nickhanley theeffectofforestmanagementoptionsonforestresiliencetopathogens AT nickhanley theeffectofforestmanagementoptionsonforestresiliencetopathogens AT aewhalley theeffectofforestmanagementoptionsonforestresiliencetopathogens AT johnrhealey theeffectofforestmanagementoptionsonforestresiliencetopathogens AT michaelaroberts effectofforestmanagementoptionsonforestresiliencetopathogens AT michaelaroberts effectofforestmanagementoptionsonforestresiliencetopathogens AT michaelaroberts effectofforestmanagementoptionsonforestresiliencetopathogens AT christopheragilligan effectofforestmanagementoptionsonforestresiliencetopathogens AT adamkleczkowski effectofforestmanagementoptionsonforestresiliencetopathogens AT adamkleczkowski effectofforestmanagementoptionsonforestresiliencetopathogens AT nickhanley effectofforestmanagementoptionsonforestresiliencetopathogens AT nickhanley effectofforestmanagementoptionsonforestresiliencetopathogens AT aewhalley effectofforestmanagementoptionsonforestresiliencetopathogens AT johnrhealey effectofforestmanagementoptionsonforestresiliencetopathogens |