Study

The effects of scarification and shelterwood treatments on naturally regenerated seedlings in southern Sweden

  • Published source details Karlsson M. & Nilsson U. (2005) The effects of scarification and shelterwood treatments on naturally regenerated seedlings in southern Sweden. Forest Ecology and Management, 205, 183-197.

Actions

This study is summarised as evidence for the following.

Action Category

Use shelterwood harvest instead of clearcutting

Action Link
Forest Conservation

Use soil scarification or ploughing to enhance germination

Action Link
Forest Conservation
  1. Use shelterwood harvest instead of clearcutting

    A replicated, study in 1993-2000 in temperate forest in Sweden (Karlsson & Nilsson 2005) found that shelterwood harvesting increased the density of some tree species and decreased the cover of grasses compared with clearcutting. Density (seedlings/ha) of Scots pine Pinus sylvestris (shelterwood: 18,500-23,000; clearcut: 3,000-6,500) and Norway spruce Picea abies (shelterwood: 17,000-20,000; clearcut: 2,500-3,000) was higher in shelterwood while density of birch Downy birch Betula pubescens and Silver birch B. pendula was similar between treatments (3,500-8,500 seedlings/ha). Cover of grasses (shelterwood: 19-20%; clearcut: 32-35%) was lower in shelterwood while cover of herbs (5-11%) and dwarf-shrubs (12-18%) was similar. In 1993-1995 two shelterwood (cutting 40% of volume) and two clearcut treatment plots (0.4 ha) were established in each of eight sites. Data were collected in 2000.

     

  2. Use soil scarification or ploughing to enhance germination

    A replicated, controlled study in 1993-2000 in temperate forest in Sweden (Karlsson & Nilsson 2005) found that mechanical soil scarification increased the cover of herbaceous plants; increased the density of young Scots pine Pinus sylvestris, downy birch Betula pubescens and silver birch B. pendula after shelterwood logging; increased pine but decreased birch density after clearcutting; did not affect the density of Norway spruce Picea abies seedlings or the cover of grasses and dwarf shrubs. Density of pine seedlings was higher following scarification in both shelterwood (scarification: 23,000; control: 18,000 seedlings/ha) and clearcut sites (scarification: 6,500; control: 3,000). Birch density was higher in scarification plots in shelterwood sites (scarification: 18,000; control: 3,000) and higher in control plots in clearcut sites (scarification: 7,000; control: 15,000). The density of spruce seedlings was similar between treatments in both shelterwood (17,000-20,000) and clearcut sites (2,500-3,000). Cover of herbaceous plants was higher in scarification plots in both shelterwood (scarification: 9; control: 5%) and clearcut sites (scarification: 11; control: 9%). Cover of grasses and dwarf-shrubs was similar between treatments in both shelterwood (scarification: 19-20; control: 16-18%) and clearcut plots (scarification: 32-35; control 11-12%). Scarification and control treatments were established in each of eight shelterwood (40% of tree volume cut) and eight clearcut plots (0.4 ha). Scarification treatment was applied in 1994-1996, two to14 months after cutting. Data were collected in 2000.

     

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