Do different logging strategies influence the abundance of epiphytic chlorolichens?

  • Published source details Hilmo O., HYTTEBORN H. & HOLIEN H. (2005) Do different logging strategies influence the abundance of epiphytic chlorolichens?. The Lichenologist, 37, 543-553.


This study is summarised as evidence for the following.

Action Category

Log/remove trees within forests: effects on non-vascular plants

Action Link
Forest Conservation
  1. Log/remove trees within forests: effects on non-vascular plants

    A controlled study in 1995-2001 in boreal forest in Norway (Hilmo, Hytteborn & Holien 2005) found that logging decreased cover and abundance of lichens. For Cavernularia hultenii, cover and abundance (number of lichen branches/m branch length) were lower in sites that were thinned by cutting few relatively large gaps (cover: 2.4%; abundance: 2.6) than in sites that were thinned by cutting a large number of relatively small gaps (cover: 4.2%; abundance: 5.5). Cover and abundance were the highest in unthinned sites (cover: 6.2%; abundance: 8.4). For Platismatia glauca cover (large gaps: 22.6%; small gaps: 30.4%; unthinned: 29.1%) and abundance (large gaps: 9.1; small gaps: 13.3; unthinned: 13.8) were lower in large gaps sites than in small gaps and unthinned sites. For Norwegian ragged lichen Platismatia norvegica cover (3.0-3.7%) and abundance (0.6-0.9) were similar between treatments.  A 100 ha area was divided into large gaps (three clearcuts of 150 × 150 m), small gaps (23 clearcuts of 50 × 50 m) and unthinned sections. Logging was applied in 1995-1996. Lichens were monitored in 2001 on 110 trees (>40 cm diameter at breast height): 45 in each logging treatment and 20 in the unlogged section.


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 20

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 Bat Conservation InternationalPeople trust for endangered speciesVincet Wildlife Trust