Study

The effects of three regeneration harvest methods on plant diversity and soil characteristics in the southern Appalachians

  • Published source details Elliott K.J. & Knoepp J.D. (2005) The effects of three regeneration harvest methods on plant diversity and soil characteristics in the southern Appalachians. Forest Ecology and Management, 211, 296-317.

Actions

This study is summarised as evidence for the following.

Action Category

Use group-selection harvesting

Action Link
Forest Conservation

Use shelterwood harvesting

Action Link
Forest Conservation
  1. Use group-selection harvesting

    A replicated, controlled study in 1994-2000 in mixed hardwood forest in North Carolina USA (Elliott & Knoepp 2005) found that group-selection harvesting increased the diversity of shrubs and herbaceous plants, but not the density of shrubs and trees. Numbers of shrub species/plot (group-selection: 10; uncut: 4) and diversity (Shannon index) of herbaceous plants (group-selection: 2.2; uncut: 1.8) were higher in group-selection than uncut plots. The density (individuals/ha) of shrubs (group-selection: 28,347; uncut: 21,789) and of trees (group-selection: 742; uncut: 771) was similar between treatments. Three group-selection (0.1–0.2 ha openings, 25% tree-cover removed) and two uncut sites (4.0-6.6 ha) were established in 1994. Monitoring was in 2000 in four plots (20 × 40 m) in each treatment site.

     

  2. Use shelterwood harvesting

    A replicated, controlled study in 1994-2000 in mixed hardwood forest in North Carolina USA (Elliott & Knoepp 2005) found that shelterwood harvest increased the density and the diversity of plants. The density (individuals/ha) of trees (shelterwood: 1,009-1,094; uncut: 771), density of shrubs (shelterwood: 38,269-49,117; uncut: 21,789), number of shrub species/plot (shelterwood: 10; uncut: 4) and diversity (Shannon index) of herbaceous plants (shelterwood: 2.2-2.4; uncut: 1.8) were higher in shelterwood harvest treatments. In 1994, eight sites (4.0-6.6 ha) were each assigned to one of three treatments: three sites of two shelterwood treatments (5 m2/ha and 9 m2/ha residual basal area), and two uncut sites. Monitoring was in 2000 in four plots (20 × 40 m) in each treatment site.

     

Output references
What Works 2021 cover

What Works in Conservation

What Works in Conservation provides expert assessments of the effectiveness of actions, based on summarised evidence, in synopses. Subjects covered so far include amphibians, birds, mammals, forests, peatland and control of freshwater invasive species. More are in progress.

More about What Works in Conservation

Download free PDF or purchase
The Conservation Evidence Journal

The Conservation Evidence Journal

An online, free to publish in, open-access journal publishing results from research and projects that test the effectiveness of conservation actions.

Read the latest volume: Volume 18

Go to the CE Journal

Discover more on our blog

Our blog contains the latest news and updates from the Conservation Evidence team, the Conservation Evidence Journal, and our global partners in evidence-based conservation.


Who uses Conservation Evidence?

Meet some of the evidence champions

Endangered Landscape Programme Red List Champion - Arc Kent Wildlife Trust The Rufford Foundation Save the Frogs - Ghana Bern wood Supporting Conservation Leaders National Biodiversity Network Sustainability Dashboard Frog Life The international journey of Conservation - Oryx British trust for ornithology Cool Farm Alliance UNEP AWFA Butterfly Conservation People trust for endangered species Vincet Wildlife Trust