The DOI matches its Crossref record; 50 of the 50 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Impact of Forest Management on Species Richness: Global Meta-Analysis and Economic Trade-Offs
Open accessAbstract
Forests managed for timber have an important role to play in conserving global biodiversity. We evaluated the most common timber production systems worldwide in terms of their impact on local species richness by conducting a categorical meta-analysis. We reviewed 287 published studies containing 1008 comparisons of species richness in managed and unmanaged forests and derived management, taxon and continent specific effect sizes. We show that in terms of local species richness loss, forest management types can be ranked, from best to worse, as follows: selection and retention systems, reduced impact logging, conventional selective logging, clear-cutting, agroforestry, timber plantations, fuelwood plantations. Next, we calculated the economic profitability in terms of the net present value of timber harvesting from 10 hypothetical wood-producing Forest Management Units (FMU) from around the globe. The ranking of management types is altered when the species loss per unit profit generated from the FMU is considered. This is due to differences in yield, timber species prices, rotation cycle length and production costs. We thus conclude that it would be erroneous to dismiss or prioritize timber production regimes, based solely on their ranking of alpha diversity impacts.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
The meta-analysis of response ratios in experimental ecology
Hedges, L. V., Gurevitch, J., & Curtis, P. S. (1999) · Ecology · doi:10.1890/0012-9658(1999)080[1150:tmaorr]2.0.co;2 · Cited by 4,704
Global effects of land use on local terrestrial biodiversity
Newbold, T., Hudson, L. N., Hill, S. L. L., Contu, S., Lysenko, I., Senior, R. A., Börger, L., Bennett, D. J., Choimes, A., Collen, B., et al. (2015) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature14324 · Cited by 4,352
A global synthesis reveals biodiversity loss as a major driver of ecosystem change
Hooper, D. U., Adair, E. C., Cardinale, B. J., Byrnes, J. E. K., Hungate, B. A., Matulich, K. L., Gonzalez, A., Duffy, J. E., Gamfeldt, L., & O’Connor, M. I. (2012) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature11118 · Cited by 2,406
Primary forests are irreplaceable for sustaining tropical biodiversity
Gibson, L., Lee, T. M., Koh, L. P., Brook, B. W., Gardner, T. A., Barlow, J., Peres, C. A., Bradshaw, C. J. A., Laurance, W. F., Lovejoy, T. E., et al. (2011) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature10425 · Cited by 2,147
Self-citationInternational trade drives biodiversity threats in developing nations
Lenzen, M., Moran, D., Kanemoto, K., Foran, B., Lobefaro, L., & Geschke, A. (2012) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature11145 · Cited by 1,238
Averting biodiversity collapse in tropical forest protected areas
Laurance, W. F., Carolina Useche, D., Rendeiro, J., Kalka, M., Bradshaw, C. J. A., Sloan, S. P., Laurance, S. G., Campbell, M., Abernethy, K., Alvarez, P., et al. (2012) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature11318 · Cited by 1,213
Quantifying the biodiversity value of tropical primary, secondary, and plantation forests
Barlow, J., Gardner, T. A., Araujo, I. S., Ávila-Pires, T. C., Bonaldo, A. B., Costa, J. E., Esposito, M. C., Ferreira, L. V., Hawes, J., Hernandez, M. I. M., et al. (2007) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.0703333104 · Cited by 1,176
The fate of Amazonian forest fragments: A 32-year investigation
Laurance, W. F., Camargo, J. L. C., Luizão, R. C. C., Laurance, S. G., Pimm, S. L., Bruna, E. M., Stouffer, P. C., Bruce Williamson, G., Benítez-Malvido, J., Vasconcelos, H. L., et al. (2011) · Biological Conservation · doi:10.1016/j.biocon.2010.09.021 · Cited by 996
PAILLET, Y., BERGÈS, L., HJÄLTÉN, J., ÓDOR, P., AVON, C., BERNHARDT‐RÖMERMANN, M., BIJLSMA, R., DE BRUYN, L., FUHR, M., GRANDIN, U., et al. (2010) · Conservation Biology · doi:10.1111/j.1523-1739.2009.01399.x · Cited by 960
Retention Forestry to Maintain Multifunctional Forests: A World Perspective
Gustafsson, L., Baker, S. C., Bauhus, J., Beese, W. J., Brodie, A., Kouki, J., Lindenmayer, D. B., Lõhmus, A., Pastur, G. M., Messier, C., et al. (2012) · BioScience · doi:10.1525/bio.2012.62.7.6 · Cited by 839
Research works printed but not linked: 10
- Hayes, T. & Ostrom, E. Conserving the World’s Forests: Are Protected Areas the Only Way? Ind. L. J. 38, 595–617 (2005).
- Rosenvald, R. & Lohmus, A. For what, when and where is green-tree retention better than clear-cutting? A review of the biodiversity aspects. For. Ecol. Manage. 255(1), 1–15 (2008). · DOI
- Gustafsson, L., Kouki, J. & Sverdrup-Thygeson, A. Tree retention as a conservation measure in clear-cut forests of northern Europe: a review of ecological consequences. Scand. J. For. Res. 25, 295–308 (2010). · doi:10.1080/02827581.2010.497495
- Falk, K. J., Burke, D. M., Elliott, K. A. & Holmes, S. B. Effects of single-tree and group selection harvesting on the diversity and abundance of spring forest herbs in deciduous forests in southwestern Ontario. For. Ecol. Manage. 255, 2486–2494 (2008). · doi:10.1016/j.foreco.2008.01.033
- Günter, S. M. et al. Silviculture in the tropics. Springer, Freisig (2011). · doi:10.1007/978-3-642-19986-8
- Obidzinski, K. & Chaudhury, M. Transition to timber plantation based forestry in Indonesia: towards a feasible new policy. Int. For. Rev. 11, 79–87 (2009).
- Lammertink, M. A multiple-site comparison of woodpecker communities in Bornean lowland and hill forests. Conserv. Biol. 18, 746–757 (2004). · doi:10.1111/j.1523-1739.2004.00046.x
- Ruslandi, X., Venter, O. & Putz, F. E. Overestimating conservation costs in Southeast Asia. Front. Ecol. Environ. 9, 542–544 (2011). · doi:10.1890/11.wb.030
- Sørensen, T. A method of establishing groups of equal amplitude in plant sociology based on similarity of species content. Biol. Skr. - K. Dan. Vidensk. Selsk. 5, 1–34 (1948).
- Hånell, B., Nordfjell, T. & Eliasson, L. Productivity and costs in shelterwood harvesting. Scand. J. For. Res. 15(5), 561–569 (2000). · doi:10.1080/028275800750173537
Cited by
Liu, C. L. C., Kuchma, O., & Krutovsky, K. V. (2018) · Global Ecology and Conservation · doi:10.1016/j.gecco.2018.e00419 · Cited by 503
Biochar effects on phosphorus availability in agricultural soils: A meta-analysis
Glaser, B., & Lehr, V.-I. (2019) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-019-45693-z · Cited by 486
Effects of habitat disturbance on tropical forest biodiversity
Alroy, J. (2017) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1611855114 · Cited by 331
Transnational corporations and the challenge of biosphere stewardship
Folke, C., Österblom, H., Jouffray, J.-B., Lambin, E. F., Adger, W. N., Scheffer, M., Crona, B. I., Nyström, M., Levin, S. A., Carpenter, S. R., et al. (2019) · Nature Ecology & Evolution · doi:10.1038/s41559-019-0978-z · Cited by 290
Land use change and carbon emissions of a transformation to timber cities
Mishra, A., Humpenöder, F., Churkina, G., Reyer, C. P. O., Beier, F., Bodirsky, B. L., Schellnhuber, H. J., Lotze-Campen, H., & Popp, A. (2022) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/s41467-022-32244-w · Cited by 279
Metadata
- Authors
- Chaudhary, A., Burivalova, Z., Koh, L. P., & Hellweg, S.
- Venue
- Scientific Reports
- Published
- 2016-04-04
- Volume
- 6
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 23954-23954
- ISSN
- 2045-2322 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2414372558
- Cited by
- 391
- References
- 50
- FWCI
- 21.92
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- Licence
- creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 (tdm)
- creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 (vor)
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Impact of Forest Management on Species Richness: Global Meta-Analysis and Economic Trade-Offs. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1038/srep23954
- The paper
- Chaudhary, A., Burivalova, Z., Koh, L. P., & Hellweg, S. (2016). Impact of Forest Management on Species Richness: Global Meta-Analysis and Economic Trade-Offs. Scientific Reports. https://doi.org/10.1038/srep23954
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
