{"id":4684,"date":"2021-03-01T14:02:53","date_gmt":"2021-03-01T13:02:53","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/ist.blogs.inrae.fr\/afs\/?p=4684"},"modified":"2021-03-01T09:26:46","modified_gmt":"2021-03-01T08:26:46","slug":"number-and-height-of-unbrowsed-saplings-are-more-appropriate-than-the-proportion-of-browsed-saplings-for-predicting-silvicultural-regeneration-success","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/ist.blogs.inrae.fr\/afs\/2021\/03\/01\/number-and-height-of-unbrowsed-saplings-are-more-appropriate-than-the-proportion-of-browsed-saplings-for-predicting-silvicultural-regeneration-success\/","title":{"rendered":"Number and height of unbrowsed saplings are more appropriate than the proportion of browsed saplings for predicting silvicultural regeneration success"},"content":{"rendered":"<script type='text\/javascript' src='https:\/\/d1bxh8uas1mnw7.cloudfront.net\/assets\/embed.js'><\/script><p><strong><a href=\"https:\/\/ist.blogs.inrae.fr\/afs\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2021\/03\/Hagen-2021.png\"><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"alignnone size-medium wp-image-4687 alignright\" src=\"https:\/\/ist.blogs.inrae.fr\/afs\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2021\/03\/Hagen-2021-227x300.png\" alt=\"\" width=\"227\" height=\"300\" srcset=\"https:\/\/ist.blogs.inrae.fr\/afs\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2021\/03\/Hagen-2021-227x300.png 227w, https:\/\/ist.blogs.inrae.fr\/afs\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2021\/03\/Hagen-2021-640x846.png 640w, https:\/\/ist.blogs.inrae.fr\/afs\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2021\/03\/Hagen-2021.png 741w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 227px) 100vw, 227px\" \/><\/a>Key message<\/strong><\/p>\n<p align=\"justify\">The browsing level of oak (<em>Quercus petraea<\/em> and <em>Quercus robur<\/em>) and fir (<em>Abies alba<\/em>) provided only a rough estimate of the expected regeneration success. Thus, it cannot be recommended as a standard measurement to predict forest development, unless the number of saplings and the height of those saplings are considered.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Abstract<\/strong><\/p>\n<p align=\"justify\"><strong>Context<\/strong> Browsing by large herbivores may affect regeneration success and forest development, with an impact that lasts for decades.<br \/>\n<strong>Aims<\/strong> Whether the browsing level of a tree species can be used in forestry as a standard measure to assess whether the target values (for instance regeneration success) of highly selected tree species, such as oak (<em>Quercus petraea<\/em> (Mattuschka) Liebl., <em>Quercus robur<\/em> (L.)) and fir (<em>Abies alba<\/em> (Mill.)), will be reached is unclear and need specification.<br \/>\n<strong>Methods<\/strong> In this study, 985 sampling plots (10 m2) in Southern Germany (Baden-W\u00fcrttemberg) containing browsed and unbrowsed oak and fir-saplings were analysed. Both the browsing level and a measure of the expected regeneration success that considered not only the sapling density but also different height classes (\u2264 20 cm; 21\u201350 cm; 51\u2013130 cm) were calculated.<br \/>\n<strong>Results<\/strong> The use of the browsing level as a proxy for the expected regeneration success was statistically only partly justified. For fir the relationship between browsing level and expected regeneration success became even weaker for a new indicator variable which considers two height classes rather than one class for saplings exceeding 50 cm (51\u201380 cm and 81\u2013130 cm).<br \/>\n<strong>Conclusion<\/strong> According to these results, the browsing level cannot be recommended as a standard measurement and\/or predictor of damage, unless the number of saplings and the height of those saplings are considered. Thus, in efforts to mitigate conflicts between foresters and hunters, a measurement is needed that addresses the successful establishment of a sufficient number of trees despite browsing, rather than the browsing of trees alone.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Keywords<\/strong><br \/>\nOak; Fir; Roe deer; Damage<\/p>\n<div class='altmetric-embed' data-badge-type='donut' data-doi='10.1007\/s13595-021-01034-7'  style='float: right; ' ><\/div>\n<p><strong>Publication<\/strong><br \/>\nHagen, R., K\u00fchl, N., Hanewinkel, M. et al. Number and height of unbrowsed saplings are more appropriate than the proportion of browsed saplings for predicting silvicultural regeneration success. Annals of Forest Science 78, 21 (2021). <a href=\"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/s13595-021-01034-7\">https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/s13595-021-01034-7<\/a><\/p>\n<p><strong>For the read-only version of the full text:<\/strong><br \/>\n<a href=\"https:\/\/rdcu.be\/cfZgu\">https:\/\/rdcu.be\/cfZgu<\/a><\/p>\n<p><strong>Data availability<\/strong><br \/>\nThe datasets generated and\/or analysed during the current study are available in the Zenodo repository, <a href=\"http:\/\/doi.org\/10.5281\/zenodo.4435940\">http:\/\/doi.org\/10.5281\/zenodo.4435940<\/a><\/p>\n<p><strong>Handling Editor<\/strong><br \/>\nAndreas Bolte<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Key message The browsing level of oak (Quercus petraea and Quercus robur) and fir (Abies alba) provided only a rough estimate of the expected regeneration success. Thus, it cannot be recommended as a standard measurement to predict forest development, unless the number of saplings and the height of those saplings are considered. Abstract Context Browsing [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":109,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[14,110,109,15],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-4684","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-article-type","category-data-in-repository","category-open-access","category-research-paper","cat-14-id","cat-110-id","cat-109-id","cat-15-id"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/ist.blogs.inrae.fr\/afs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4684","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/ist.blogs.inrae.fr\/afs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/ist.blogs.inrae.fr\/afs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ist.blogs.inrae.fr\/afs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/109"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ist.blogs.inrae.fr\/afs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=4684"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/ist.blogs.inrae.fr\/afs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4684\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/ist.blogs.inrae.fr\/afs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=4684"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ist.blogs.inrae.fr\/afs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=4684"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ist.blogs.inrae.fr\/afs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=4684"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}