Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 476

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

The relationship between forest management and amphibian ecology: a review of the North American literature

deMaynadier, Phillip G., Hunter Jr., Malcolm L.·1995·Environmental Reviews

Abstract

Questions about the compatibility of forest harvesting practices and conservation of biological diversity are largely driven by concerns that habitat quality for many species may be degraded in intensively managed forest landscapes. We review the literature on relationships between common forest harvesting practices and the distribution and abundance of amphibians, a group that has attracted considerable attention in recent years because of their potential ecological importance in forest ecosystems and because of reports of widespread population declines. Clear-cut harvesting generally has negative short-term impacts on local amphibian populations, especially salamanders. An analysis of the results of 18 studies that examined the effects of clear-cutting on amphibians yielded a 3.5-fold median difference in abundance of amphibians on controls over clear-cuts. However, research on the influence of forest age suggests that the long-term effects of forest harvesting on amphibians are variable, and for many species these effects can be mitigated if regeneration practices leave adequate microhabitat structure intact. In contrast, long-term effects can be significant in forest plantations, which are often associated with intensive site preparations and stand management practices that modify levels of coarse woody debris and other microhabitats. Other forest practices reviewed for their effect on amphibians include prescribed fire, logging roads, and streamside harvesting. We discuss problems commonly encountered in the experimental design and measurement of forest amphibian populations, including a notable lack of pretreatment data, and outline several aspects of amphibian–forestry relationships in need of further research. Management recommendations relevant to conserving upland and riparian zone amphibian habitat during forest harvesting are offered.Key words: amphibians, clear-cutting, coarse woody debris, forest management, logging roads, plantations, prescribed fire, riparian, succession.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1139/a95-012

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Cited by

See all 476

Metadata

Authors
deMaynadier, P. G., & Hunter Jr., M. L.
Venue
Environmental Reviews
Published
1995-07-01
Volume
3
Issue
3-4
Pages
230-261
ISSN
  • 1181-8700 (ISSN-L)
  • 1208-6053
OpenAlex
W2090525789
Cited by
476
References
0
FWCI
4.23
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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: The relationship between forest management and amphibian ecology: a review of the North American literature. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1139/a95-012
The paper
deMaynadier, P. G., & Hunter Jr., M. L. (1995). The relationship between forest management and amphibian ecology: a review of the North American literature. Environmental Reviews. https://doi.org/10.1139/a95-012

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.