Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 201

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Interacting Factors Driving a Major Loss of Large Trees with Cavities in a Forest Ecosystem

Open access
Lindenmayer, David B., Blanchard, Wade, McBurney, Lachlan, Blair, David, Banks, Sam, Likens, Gene E., Franklin, Jerry F., Laurance, William F., Stein, John A. R., Gibbons, Philip·2012·PLoS ONE

Abstract

Large trees with cavities provide critical ecological functions in forests worldwide, including vital nesting and denning resources for many species. However, many ecosystems are experiencing increasingly rapid loss of large trees or a failure to recruit new large trees or both. We quantify this problem in a globally iconic ecosystem in southeastern Australia--forests dominated by the world's tallest angiosperms, Mountain Ash (Eucalyptus regnans). Tree, stand and landscape-level factors influencing the death and collapse of large living cavity trees and the decay and collapse of dead trees with cavities are documented using a suite of long-term datasets gathered between 1983 and 2011. The historical rate of tree mortality on unburned sites between 1997 and 2011 was >14% with a mortality spike in the driest period (2006-2009). Following a major wildfire in 2009, 79% of large living trees with cavities died and 57-100% of large dead trees were destroyed on burned sites. Repeated measurements between 1997 and 2011 revealed no recruitment of any new large trees with cavities on any of our unburned or burned sites. Transition probability matrices of large trees with cavities through increasingly decayed condition states projects a severe shortage of large trees with cavities by 2039 that will continue until at least 2067. This large cavity tree crisis in Mountain Ash forests is a product of: (1) the prolonged time required (>120 years) for initiation of cavities; and (2) repeated past wildfires and widespread logging operations. These latter factors have resulted in all landscapes being dominated by stands ≤72 years and just 1.16% of forest being unburned and unlogged. We discuss how the features that make Mountain Ash forests vulnerable to a decline in large tree abundance are shared with many forest types worldwide.

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 · 10.1371/journal.pone.0041864

Cites

5 of 5 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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

Cites

Show all 5 references

Cited by

See all 201

Metadata

Authors
Lindenmayer, D. B., Blanchard, W., McBurney, L., Blair, D., Banks, S., Likens, G. E., Franklin, J. F., Laurance, W. F., Stein, J. A. R., & Gibbons, P.
Venue
PLoS ONE
Published
2012-10-05
Volume
7
Issue
10
Pages
e41864
ISSN
1932-6203 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2104678230
Cited by
201
References
5
FWCI
13.40
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
gold

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: Interacting Factors Driving a Major Loss of Large Trees with Cavities in a Forest Ecosystem. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1371/journal.pone.0041864
The paper
Lindenmayer, D. B., Blanchard, W., McBurney, L., Blair, D., Banks, S., Likens, G. E., Franklin, J. F., Laurance, W. F., Stein, J. A. R., & Gibbons, P. (2012). Interacting Factors Driving a Major Loss of Large Trees with Cavities in a Forest Ecosystem. PLoS ONE. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0041864

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.