Variable corridor thinning – a cost-effective key to provision of multiple ecosystem services from young boreal conifer forests?

References

• Abella SR, Springer JD. 2015. Effects of tree cutting and fire on understory vegetation in mixed conifer forests. For Ecol Manage. 335:281–299. DOI:10.1016/j.foreco.2014.09.009.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Abetz P, Klädtke J. 2002. The Target tree management system. Die Z-Baum-Kontrollmethode. Forstwissensch Centralblatt. 121:73–82. [In English with summary in German]. DOI:10.1046/j.1439-0337.2002.00073.x.
   Google Scholar
• Adamczyk B, Adamczyk S, Kukkola M, Tamminen P, Smolander A. 2015. Logging residue harvest may decrease enzymatic activity of boreal forest soils. Soil Biol Biochem. 82:74–80. DOI:10.1016/j.soilbio.2014.12.017.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ahnlund Ulvcrona, K., Bergström, D. and Bergsten, U. 2017. Stand structure after thinning in 1–2 m wide corridors in young dense stands. Silva Fenn. 51(3):article id 1563. DOI:10.14214/sf.1563.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ahnlund Ulvcrona K, Karlsson K, Ulvcrona T. 2014. Identifying the biological effects of pre-commercial thinning on diameter growth in young Scots pine stands. Scand J For Res. 29:427–435. DOI:10.1080/02827581.2014.919354.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Angelini A, Corona P, Chianucci F, Portoghesi L. 2015. Structural attributes of stand overstory and light under the canopy. Ann Silvic Res. 39:23–31. DOI:10.12899/asr-993.
   Google Scholar
• Attard TM, Bukhanko N, Eriksson D, Arshadi M, Geladi P, Bergsten U, Budarin VL, Clark JH, Hunt AJ. 2018. Supercritical extraction of waxes and lipids from biomass: a valuable first step towards an integrated biorefinery. J Clean Prod. 177:684–698. DOI:10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.12.155.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Backlund I. 2013. Cost-effective cultivation of lodgepole pine for biorefinery applications. PhD Thesis, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Umeå, Sweden, Acta Universitatis agriculturae Sueciae, 1652-6880, 2013:81. ISBN 978-91-576-7900-0.
   Google Scholar
• Bacles CF, Jump AS. 2011. Taking a tree’s perspective on forest fragmentation genetics. Trends Plant Sci. 16:13–18. DOI:10.1016/j.tplants.2010.10.002.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bennett EM, Cramer W, Begossi A, Cundill G, Díaz S, Egoh BN, Geijzendorffer IR, Krug CB, Lavorel S, Lazos E, et al. 2015. Linking biodiversity, ecosystem services, and human well-being: three challenges for designing research for sustainability. Curr Opin Environ Sustain. 14:76–85. DOI:10.1016/j.cosust.2015.03.007.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bergström D. 2009. Techniques and systems for boom-corridor thinning in young dense forests. PhD Thesis, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Umeå, Sweden, Acta Universitatis agriculturae Sueciae, 1652–6880, 2009:87. ISBN 978-91-576-7334-0.
   Google Scholar
• Bergström D, Bergsten U, Nordfjell T. 2010a. Comparison of boom-corridor thinning and thinning from below harvesting methods in young dense Scots pine stands. Silva Fenn. 44:669–679. doi: 10.14214/sf.134
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bergström D, Di Fulvio F. 2014. Comparison of the cost and energy efficiencies of present and future biomass supply systems for young dense forests. Scand J For Res. 29:793–812. DOI:10.1080/02827581.2014.976590.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bergström D, Nordfjell T, Bergsten U. 2010b. Compressing processing and load compression of young Scots pine and birch trees in thinnings for bioenergy. Int J For Eng. 21:31–39. DOI:10.1080/14942119.2010.10702588.
   Google Scholar
• Binkley D, Campoe OC, Gspaltl M, Forrester DI. 2013. Light absorption and use efficiency in forests: why patterns differ for trees and stands. For Ecol Manage. 288:5–13. DOI:10.1016/j.foreco.2011.11 doi: 10.1016/j.foreco.2011.11.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bohn FJ, Huth A. 2017. The importance of forest structure to biodiversity–productivity relationships. R Soc Open Sci. 4:160521. DOI:10.1098/rsos.160521.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Braat LC, de Groot R. 2012. The ecosystem services agenda: bridging the worlds of natural science and economics, conservation and development, and public and private policy. Ecosyst Serv. 1:4–15. DOI:10.1016/j.ecoser.2012.07.011.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bravo-Oviedo A, Condés S, del Río M, Pretzsch H, Ducey MJ. 2018. Maximum stand density strongly depends on species-specific wood stability, shade and drought tolerance. Forestry. DOI:10.1093/forestry/cpy006.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brockerhoff EG, Barbaro L, Castagneyrol B, Forrester DI, Gardiner B, González-Olabarria JR, Lyver POB, Meurisse N, Oxbrough A, Taki H, et al. 2017. Forest biodiversity, ecosystem functioning and the provision of ecosystem services. Biodiv Cons. 26:3005–3035. DOI:10.1007/s10531-017-1453-2.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Busby PE, Soman C, Wagner MR, Friesen ML, Kremer J, Bennett A, Morsy M, Eisen JA, Leach JE, Dangl JL. 2017. Research priorities for harnessing plant microbiomes in sustainable agriculture. PLoS Biol. 15:e2001793. DOI:10.1371/journal.pbio.2001793.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ceballos G, Ehrlich PR, Dirzo R. 2017. Biological annihilation via the ongoing sixth mass extinction signaled by vertebrate population losses and declines. PNAS. 114:E6089–E6096. DOI:10.1073/pnas.1704949114.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chen L, Yuan Z, Shao H, Wang D, Mu X. 2014. Effects of thinning intensities on soil infiltration and water storage capacity in a Chinese pine-oak mixed forest. Sci World J. Article ID 268157. DOI:10.1155/2014/268157.
   Google Scholar
• Christian DP, Hanowski JM, Reuvers-House M, Niemi GJ, Blake JG, Berguson WE. 1996. Effects of mechanical strip thinning of aspen on small mammals and breeding birds in northern Minnesota, U.S.A. Can J For Res. 26:1284–1294. DOI:10.1139/x26-143.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Coulombe D, Sirois L, Paré D. 2017. Effect of harvest gap formation and thinning on soil nitrogen cycling at the boreal–temperate interface. Can J For Res. 47:308–318. DOI:10.1139/cjfr-2016-0301.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• De Besi M, McCormick K. 2015. Towards a bioeconomy in Europe: national, regional and industrial strategies. Sustainability. 7:10461–10478. DOI:10.3390/su70810461.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Demirbas A. 2005. Potential applications of renewable energy sources, biomass combustion problems in boiler power systems and combustion related environmental issues. Prog Energy Combust Sci. 31:171–192. DOI:10.1016/j.pecs.2005.02.002.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Di Fulvio F, Kroon A, Bergström D, Nordfjell T. 2011. Comparison of energy-wood and pulpwood thinning systems in young birch stands. Scand J For Res. 26:339–349. DOI:10.1080/02827581.2011.568951.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dornelas M. 2010. Disturbance and change in biodiversity. Philos Trans R Soc B Biol Sci. 365:3719–3727. DOI:10.1098/rstb.2010.0295.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Edenius L, Mikusiński G, Witzell J, Bergh J. 2012. Effects of repeated fertilization of young Norway spruce on foliar phenolics and arthropods: Implications for insectivorous birds’ food resources. For Ecol Manage. 277:38–45. DOI:10.1016/j.foreco.2012.04.021.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Edlund J. 2012. Harvesting in the boreal forest on soft ground. Ways to reduce ground damage. Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Faculty of Forest Sciences, Department of Forest Resource Management. Licentiate Thesis, pp. 46. ISBN 978-91-576-9095-1.
   Google Scholar
• Eggers S, Low M. 2014. Differential demographic responses of sympatric Parids to vegetation management in boreal forest. For Ecol Manage. 319:169–175. DOI:10.1016/j.foreco.2014.02.019.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eriksson E. 2006. Thinning operations and their impact on biomass production in stands of Norway spruce and Scots pine. Biomass Bioenergy. 30:848–854. DOI:10.1016/j.biombioe.2006.04.001.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Estavillo C, Pardini R, Rocha PLB. 2013. Forest loss and the biodiversity threshold: an evaluation considering species habitat requirements and the use of matrix habitats. PLoS ONE. 8:e82369. DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0082369.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• European Environmental Agency (EEA). 2017. Climate change, impacts and vulnerability in Europe 2016. An indicator-based report. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union; p. 419. ISBN 978-92-9213-835-6.
   Google Scholar
• Fahlvik N, Ekö PM, Petersson N. 2015. Effects of precommercial thinning strategies on stand structure and growth in a mixed even-aged stand of Scots pine, Norway spruce and birch in southern Sweden. Silva Fenn. 49(3):article id 1302. DOI:10.14214/sf.1302.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fahrig L. 2003. Effects of habitat fragmentation on biodiversity. Annu Rev Ecol Evol Syst. 34:487–515. DOI:10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.34.011802.132419.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fenton NJ, Imbeau L, Work T, Jacobs J, Bescond H, Drapeau P, Bergeron Y. 2013. Lessons learned from 12 years of ecological research on partial cuts in black spruce forests of northwestern Québec. For Chron. 89:350–359. DOI:10.5558/tfc2013-065.
   Google Scholar
• Ferguson SH, Archibald DJ. 2002. The 3/4 power law in forest management: how to grow dead trees. For Ecol Manage. 169:283–292. DOI:10.1016/S0378-1127(01)00766-6.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fernandez-Lacruz R, Di Fulvio F, Athanassiadis D, Bergström D, Nordfjell T. 2015. Characteristics of unthinned biomass-dense forests in Sweden and their location in relation to industry. Silva Fenn. 49(5):article 1377. DOI:10.14214/sf.1377.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fettig CJ, Gibson KE, Munson AS, Negrón JF. 2014. Cultural practices for prevention and mitigation of mountain pine beetle infestations. For Sci. 60:1–14. DOI:10.5849/forsci.13–032.
   Google Scholar
• Fürst C, Luque S, Geneletti D. 2017. Nexus thinking – how ecosystem services can contribute to enhancing the cross-scale and cross-sectoral coherence between land use, spatial planning and policy-making. Int J Biodivers Sci Manage. 13:412–421. DOI:10.1080/21513732.2017.1396257.
   Google Scholar
• Gallant AL, Hansen AJ, Councilman JS, Monte DK, Betz DW. 2003. Vegetation dynamics under fire exclusion and logging in a Rocky Mountain watershed, 1856–1996. Ecol Appl 13:385–403. DOI:10.1890/1051-0761(2003)013[0385:VDUFEA]2.0.CO,2 doi: 10.1890/1051-0761(2003)013[0385:VDUFEA]2.0.CO;2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gebauer R, Volařík D, Urban J, Børja I, Nagy NE, Eldhuset TD, Krokene P. 2011. Effect of thinning on anatomical adaptations of Norway spruce needles. Tree Physiol. 31:1103–1113. DOI:10.1093/treephys/tpr081.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Godsoe W, Jankowski J, Holt RD, Gravel D. 2017. Integrating biogeography with contemporary niche theory. Trends Ecol Evol. 32:488–499. DOI:10.1016/j.tree.2017.03.008.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goudiaby V, Brais S, Grenier Y, Berninger F. 2011. Thinning effects on jack pine and black spruce photosynthesis in eastern boreal forests of Canada. Silva Fenn. 45:595–609. doi: 10.14214/sf.95
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Granström A, Niklasson M. 2008. Potentials and limitations for human control over historic fire regimes in the boreal forest. Philos Trans R Soc B Biol Sci. 363:2351–2356. DOI:10.1098/rstb.2007.2205.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gspaltl M, Bauerle W, Binkley D, Sterba H. 2013. Leaf area and light use efficiency patterns of Norway spruce under different thinning regimes and age classes. For Ecol Manage. 288:49–59. DOI:10.1016/j.foreco.2011.11.044.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gundersen V, Clarke N, Dramstad W, Fjellstad W. 2016. Effects of bioenergy extraction on visual preferences in boreal forests: a review of surveys from Finland, Sweden and Norway. Scand J For Res. 31:323–334. DOI:10.1080/02827581.2015.1099725.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gunn JS, Buchholz T. 2018. Forest sector greenhouse gas emissions sensitivity to changes in forest management in Maine (USA). Forestry. DOI:10.1093/forestry/cpy013.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Holgén P, Mattsson L, Li CZ. 2000. Recreation values of boreal forest stand types and landscapes resulting from different silvicultural systems: an economic analysis. J Environ Manage. 60:173–180. DOI:10.1006/jema.2000.0377.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hood SM, Baker S, Sala A. 2016. Fortifying the forest: thinning and burning increase resistance to a bark beetle outbreak and promote forest resilience. Ecol Appl. 26:1984–2000. DOI:10.1002/eap.1363.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hörnfeldt R, Ingemarson F. 2006. Evaluation of silvicultural practices from a multipurpose perspective. Balt For. 12:82–93.
   Google Scholar
• Huuskonen S, Hynynen J. 2006. Timing and intensity of precommercial thinning and their effects on the first commercial thinning in Scots pine stands. Silva Fenn. 40(4):article id 320. DOI:10.14214/sf.320.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jacobson S, Kukkola M, Mälkönen E, Tveite B. 2000. Impact of whole-tree harvesting and compensatory fertilization on growth of coniferous thinning stands. For Ecol Manage. 129:41–51. DOI:10.1016/S0378-1127(99)00159-0.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jundén L, Bergström D, Servin M, Bergsten U. 2013. Simulation of boom-corridor thinning using a double-crane system and different levels of automation. Int J For Engin. 24:16–23. DOI:10.1080/14942119.2013.798131.
   Google Scholar
• Jurgensen M, Tarpey R, Pickens J, Kolka R, Palik B. 2012. Long-term effect of silvicultural thinnings on soil carbon and nitrogen pools. Soil Sci Soc Am J. 76:1418–1425. DOI:10.2136/sssaj2011.0257.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Karlsson L, Nyström K, Bergström D, Bergsten U. 2015. Development of Scots pine stands after first biomass thinning with implications on management profitability over rotation. Scand J For Res. 30:416–428. DOI:10.1080/02827581.2015.1023351.
   Google Scholar
• Keeling EG, Sala A, DeLuca TH. 2006. Effects of fire exclusion on forest structure and composition in unlogged ponderosa pine/Douglas-fir forests. Forest Ecol Manag. 237:418–428. DOI:10.1016/j.foreco.2006.09.064.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kishchuk BE, Morris DM, Lorente M, Keddy T, Sidders D, Quideau S, Thiffault E, Kwiaton M, Maynard D. 2016. Disturbance intensity and dominant cover type influence rate of boreal soil carbon change: A Canadian multi-regional analysis. For Ecol Manage. 381:48–62. DOI:10.1016/j.foreco.2016.09.002.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kolb TE, Agee JK, Fulé PZ, McDowell NG, Pearson K, Sala A, Waring RH. 2007. Perpetuating old ponderosa pine. For Ecol Manage. 249:141–157. DOI:10.1016/j.foreco.2007.06.002.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kuuluvainen T, Tahvonen O, Aakala T. 2012. Even-aged and uneven-aged forest management in boreal Fennoscandia: a review. Ambio. 41:720–737. DOI:10.1007/s13280-012-0289-y.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• La Notte A, D’Amato D, Mäkinen H, Paracchini ML, Liquete C, Egoh B, Geneletti D, Crossman ND. 2017. Ecosystem services classification: a systems ecology perspective of the cascade framework. Ecol Indic. 74:392–402. DOI:10.1016/j.ecolind.2016.11.030.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leopold LB, Clarke FE, Hanshaw BB, Balsley JR. 1971. A procedure for evaluating environmental impact. USGS Circular 645. Washington, DC; 13 p.
   Google Scholar
• Loboda TV, Chen D. 2017. Spatial distribution of young forests and carbon fluxes within recent disturbances in Russia. Global Change Biol. 23:138–153. DOI:10.1111/gcb.13349.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lu D, Wang GG, Yu L, Zhang T, Zhu J. 2018. Seedling survival within forest gaps: the effects of gap size, within-gap position and forest type on species of contrasting shade-tolerance in Northeast China. Forestry. DOI 10.1093/forestry/cpy007.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lundmark H, Josefsson T, Östlund L. 2017. The introduction of modern forest management and clear-cutting in Sweden: Ridö State Forest 1832–2014. Eur J For Res. 136:269–285. DOI:10.1007/s10342-017-1027-6.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Magagnotti N, Spinelli R, Güldner O, Erler J. 2012. Site impact after motor-manual and mechanised thinning in Mediterranean pine plantations. Biosyst Eng. 113:140–147. DOI:10.1016/j.biosystemseng.2012.07.001.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mäkipää R, Linkosalo T, Komarov A, Mäkelä A. 2015. Mitigation of climate change with biomass harvesting in Norway spruce stands: are harvesting practices carbon neutral? Can J For Res. 45:217–225. DOI:10.1139/cjfr-2014-0120.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Martín JA, Witzell J, Blumenstein K, Rozpedowska E, Helander M, Sieber T, Gil L. 2013. Resistance to Dutch elm disease reduces xylem endophytic fungi presence in elms (Ulmus spp). PLoS ONE. 8:e56987. DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0056987.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Messier C, Parent S, Bergeron Y. 1998. Effects of overstory and understory vegetation on the understory light environment in mixed boreal forests. J Veg Sci. 9:511–520. DOI:10.2307/3237266.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MA). 2005. Ecosystems & human well-being: synthesis. Washington (DC): Island Press.
   Google Scholar
• Miller JD, Sumarah MW, Adams GW. 2008. Effect of a rugulosin-producing endophyte in Picea glauca on Choristoneura fumiferana. J Chem Ecol. 34:362–368. DOI:10.1007/s10886-007-9412-0.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moghaddas EEY, Stephens SL. 2008. Mechanized fuel treatment effects on soil compaction in Sierra Nevada mixed-conifer stands. For Ecol Manage. 255:3098–3106. DOI:10.1016/j.foreco.2007.11.011.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moore BA, Allard G. 2011. Abiotic disturbances and their influence on forest health. A review. Forest Health and Biosecurity Working Papers FBS/35E. FAO, Rome, Italy. [accessed 2018-05-21] Available from: http://www.fao.org/docrep/014/am664e/am664e00.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Mori AS, Lertzman KP, Gustafsson L. 2017. Biodiversity and ecosystem services in forest ecosystems: a research agenda for applied forest ecology. J Appl Ecol. 54:12–27. DOI:10.1111/1365-2664.12669.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Müller M, Valjakka R, Suokko A, Hantula J. 2001. Diversity of endophytic fungi of single Norway spruce needles and their role as pioneer decomposers. Mol Ecol. 10:1801–1810. DOI:10.1046/j.1365-294X.2001.01304.x.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Muscolo A, Bagnato S, Sidari M, Mercurio R. 2014. A review of the roles of forest canopy gaps. J For Res. 25:725–736. DOI:10.1007/s11676-014-0521-7.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nave LE, Vance ED, Swanston CW, Curtis PS. 2010. Harvest impacts on soil carbon storage in temperate forests. For Ecol Manage. 259:857–866. DOI:10.1016/j.foreco.2009.12.009.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Newcombe G. 2011. Endophytes in forest management: four challenges. In: Pirttilä AM, Frank AC, editors. Endophytes of forest trees: biology and applications. Dortrecht: Springer; p. 251–262. ISBN 978-94-007-1598-1.
   Google Scholar
• Nilsson U, Agestam E, Ekö P-M, Elfving B, Fahlvik N, Johansson U, Karlsson K, Lundmark T, Wallentin C. 2010. Thinning of Scots pine and Norway spruce monocultures in Sweden – effects of different thinning programmes on stand level gross- and net stem volume production. Studia Forestalia Suecia. 219:46. ISSN 0039-3150, ISBN 978-91-86197-76-6.
   Google Scholar
• O’Hara KL, Ramage BS. 2013. Silviculture in an uncertain world: utilizing multi-aged management systems to integrate disturbance. Forestry. 86:401–410. DOI:10.1093/forestry/cpt012.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Omari K, MacLean DA. 2015. Do biomass removal and structure-enhancing treatments influence deadwood characteristics following commercial thinning in spruce plantations in New Brunswick, Canada? Can J For Res. 45:1407–1418. DOI:10.1139/cjfr-2014-0381.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pan Y, Chen JM, Birdsey R, McCullough K, He L, Deng F. 2011. Age structure and disturbance legacy of North American forests. Biogeosciences. 8:715–732. DOI:10.5194/bg-8-715-201 doi: 10.5194/bg-8-715-2011
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Picchio R, Neri F, Petrini E, Verani S, Marchi E, Certini G. 2012. Machinery-induced soil compaction in thinning two pine stands in central Italy. For Ecol Manage. 285:38–43. DOI:10.1016/j.foreco.2012.08.008.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pommerening A. 2002. Approaches to quantifying forest structures. Forestry. 75:305–324. DOI:10.1093/forestry/75.3.305.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pretzsch H. 1997. Analysis and modeling of spatial stand structures. Methodological considerations based on mixed beech-larch stands in lower Saxony. For Ecol Manage. 97:237–253. DOI:10.1016/S0378-1127(97)00069-8.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Puettmann KJ, Coates KD, Messier C. 2009. A critique of silviculture: managing for complexity. Washington (DC): Island Press; 189 p. ISBN 978-1597261463.
   Google Scholar
• Puettmann KJ, Messier C, Coates KD. 2014. Managing forests as complex adaptive systems. Introductory concepts and applications. In: Messier C, Puettmann KJ, Coates KD, editors. Managing forests as complex adaptive systems: building resilience to the challenge of global change. Oxford (UK): Routledge Taylor & Francis; p. 3–16. ISBN 978-0415519779.
   Google Scholar
• Pülzl H, Kleinschmit D, Arts B. 2014. Bioeconomy - an emerging meta-discourse affecting forest discourses? Scand J For Res. 29:386–393. DOI:10.1080/02827581.2014.920044.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Renken RB, Gram WK, Fantz DK, Richter SC, Miller TJ, Ricke KB, Russell B, Wang X. 2004. Effects of forest management on amphibians and reptiles in Missouri Ozark forests. Conserv Biol. 18:174–188. doi: 10.1111/j.1523-1739.2004.00312.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Röder J, Bässler C, Brandl R, Dvořak L, Floren A, Goßner MM, Gruppe A, Jarzabek-Müller A, Vojtech O, Wagner C, Müller J. 2010. Arthropod species richness in the Norway spruce (Picea abies (L.) Karst.) canopy along an elevation gradient. For Ecol Manage. 259:1513–1521. DOI:10.1016/j.foreco.2010.01.027.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rossman AK, Halpern CB, Harrod RJ, Urgenson LS, Peterson SW, Bakker JD. 2018. Benefits of thinning and burning for understory diversity vary with spatial scale and time since treatment. For Ecol Manage. 419–420:58–78. DOI:10.1016/j.foreco.2018.03.006.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rydberg D, Falck J. 1998. Designing the urban forest of tomorrow: pre-commercial thinning adapted for use in urban areas in Sweden. Arbor J. 22:147–171. DOI:10.1080/03071375.1998.9747201.
   Google Scholar
• Rytter L, Andreassen K, Bergh J, Ekö P-M, Kilpeläinen A, Lazdina D, Muiste P, Nord-Larsen T. 2014. Land areas and biomass production for current and future use in the Nordic and Baltic countries. Nordic Energy Research Reports, pp. 6–13; [Accessed 2018-05-21] Available from: http://www.nordicenergy.org/publications/.
   Google Scholar
• Rytter L, Andreassen K, Bergh J, Ekö P-M, Kilpeläinen A, Lazdina D, Muiste P, Nord-Larsen T. 2015. Availability of biomass for energy purposes in Nordic and Baltic countries – land areas and biomass amounts. Balt For. 21:375–390.
   Google Scholar
• Rytter L, Ingerslev M, Kilpeläinen A, Torssonen P, Lazdina D, Löf M, Madsen P, Muiste P, Stener L-G. 2016. Increased forest biomass production in the Nordic and Baltic countries – a review on current and future opportunities. Silva Fenn. 50(5):article id 1660. DOI:10.14214/sf.1660.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sängstuvall L, Bergström D, Lämås T, Nordfjell T. 2012. Simulation of harvester productivity in selective and boom-corridor thinning of young forests. Scand J For Res. 27:56–73. DOI:10.1080/02827581.2011.628335.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schmiegelow FKA, Mönkkönen M. 2002. Habitat loss and fragmentation in dynamic landscapes: avian perspectives from the boreal forest. Ecol Appl. 12:375–389. DOI:10.1890/1051-0761(2002)012[0375:HLAFID]2.0.CO,2.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sing L, Metzger MJ, Paterson JS, Ray D. 2018. A review of the effects of forest management intensity on ecosystem services for Northern European temperate forests with a focus on the UK. Forestry. 91:151–164. DOI:10.1093/forestry/cpx042.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Skovsgaard J-P. 2009. Analysing effects of thinning on stand volume growth in relation to site conditions: a case study for even-aged Sitka spruce (Picea sitchensis (Bong.) Carr.). Forestry. 82:87–104. DOI:10.1093/forestry/cpn047.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Song H-S, Lee S-H. 2017. Effects of wind and tree density on forest fire patterns in a mixed-tree species forest. For Sci Technol. 13:9–16. DOI:10.1080/21580103.2016.1262793.
   Google Scholar
• Spinelli R, Lombardini C, Magagnotti N. 2014. The effect of mechanization level and harvesting system on thinning cost and impact under Mediterranean forest conditions. Silva Fenn. 48(1):1003. DOI:10.14214/sf.1003.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Spinelli R, Magagnotti N, Nati C. 2010. Benchmarking the impact of traditional small-scale logging systems used in Mediterranean forestry. For Ecol Manage. 260:1997–2001. DOI:10.1016/j.foreco.2010.08.048.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tarpey RA, Jurgensen MF, Palik BJ, Kolka RK. 2008. The long-term effects of silvicultural thinning and partial cutting on soil compaction in red pine (Pinus resinosa Ait.) and northern hardwood stands in the northern Great Lakes Region of the United States. Can J Soil Sci. 88:849–857. DOI:10.4141/CJSS08001.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thibodeau L, Raymond P, Camiré C, Munson AD. 2000. Impact of precommercial thinning in balsam fir stands on soil nitrogen dynamics, microbial biomass, decomposition, and foliar nutrition. Can J For Res. 30:229–238. DOI:10.1139/x99-202.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thompson ID, Baker JA, Ter-Mikaelian M. 2003. A review of the long-term effects of post-harvest silviculture on vertebrate wildlife, and predictive models, with an emphasis on boreal forests in Ontario, Canada. For Ecol Manage. 177:441–469. DOI:10.1016/S0378-1127(02)00453-X.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tyrväinen L, Silvennoinen H, Kolehmainen O. 2003. Ecological and aesthetic values in urban forest management. Urban For Urban Green. 1:135–149. DOI:10.1078/1618-8667-00014.
   Google Scholar
• Valinger E, Lundqvist L, Bondesson L. 1993. Assessing the risk of snow and wind damage from tree physical characteristics. Forestry. 66:249–260. DOI:10.1093/forestry/66.3.249.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Verschuyl J, Riffell S, Miller D, Wigley TB. 2011. Biodiversity response to intensive biomass production from forest thinning in North American forests – a meta-analysis. For Ecol Manage. 261:221–232. DOI:10.1016/j.foreco.2010.10.010.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vesterdal L, Clarke N, Sigurdsson BD, Gundersen P. 2013. Do tree species influence soil carbon stocks in temperate and boreal forests? For Ecol Manage. 309:4–18. DOI:10.1016/j.foreco.2013.01.017.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vierling LA, Vierling KT, Adam P, Hudak AT. 2013. Using satellite and airborne LiDAR to model woodpecker habitat occupancy at the landscape scale. PLoS ONE. 8:e80988. DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0080988.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Willms J, Bartuszevige A, Schwilk DW, Kennedy PL. 2017. The effects of thinning and burning on understory vegetation in North America: a meta-analysis. For Ecol Manage. 392:184–194. DOI:10.1016/j.foreco.2017.03.010.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wilson DS, Puettmann KJ. 2007. Density management and biodiversity in young Douglas-fir forests: challenges of managing across scales. For Ecol Manage. 246:123–134. DOI:10.1016/j.foreco.2007.03.052.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Witzell J, Martín JA. 2018. Endophytes and forest health. In: Endophytes of forest trees: biology and applications. 2nd ed. Springer International Publishing AG. ISBN 978-3-319-89832-2. (in press).
   Google Scholar
• Witzell J, Martín JA, Blumenstein K. 2014. Ecological aspects of endophyte-based biocontrol of forest diseases. In: Verma VC, Gange AC, editors. Advances in endophytic research. New Delhi: Springer; p. 321–333. DOI:10.1007/978-81-322-1575-2_17.
   Google Scholar
• Wolfslehner B, Linser S, Pülzl H, Bastrup-Birk A, Camia A, Marchetti M. 2016. Forest bioeconomy – a new scope for sustainability indicators. From Science to Policy 4. European Forest Institute.
   Google Scholar
• York R, Keller R, Thomson A. 2015. Thinning treatments had minimal effect on soil compaction in mixed-conifer plantations. Calif Agr. 69:157–163. DOI:10.3733/ca.v069n03p157.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhang J, Webster J, Young DH, Fiddler GO. 2016. Effect of thinning and soil treatments on Pinus ponderosa plantations: 15-year results. For Ecol Manage. 368:123–132. DOI:10.1016/j.foreco.2016.03.021.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar