How effective are different protection strategies in promoting the plant diversity of temperate forests in national parks?

Zhengxue Zhu; Stefano Chelli; James L. Tsakalos; Alessandro Bricca; Roberto Canullo; Marco Cervellini; Riccardo Pennesi; Luciano L.M. De Benedictis; Vanessa Cesaroni; Alessandro Bottacci; Giandiego Campetella

doi:10.1016/j.foreco.2025.122602

Back

How effective are different protection strategies in promoting the plant diversity of temperate forests in national parks?

Journal article

Open access

Peer reviewed

How effective are different protection strategies in promoting the plant diversity of temperate forests in national parks?

Zhengxue Zhu, Stefano Chelli, James L. Tsakalos, Alessandro Bricca, Roberto Canullo, Marco Cervellini, Riccardo Pennesi, Luciano L.M. De Benedictis, Vanessa Cesaroni, Alessandro Bottacci, …

Forest ecology and management, Vol.584, 122602

2025

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2025.122602

Files and links (1)

pdf

Published3.63 MBDownload View

CC BY V4.0, Open Access

Abstract

Diversity

Functional richness

Phylogenetic diversity

Protected areas

Specialist species

Species richness

Protected areas are supposed to mitigate the loss of diversity caused by human activities in forests. However, different management strategies applied across protected areas affect diversity in various ways. This study compares the taxonomic, functional, and phylogenetic diversity, and the species composition of understory plants, between sustainably managed forests and strictly protected forests. From temperate beech (Fagus sylvatica L.) forests within the Foreste Casentinesi National Park (Northern Apennine, Italy), we selected 28 quadrats in strictly protected and managed zones. In each quadrat, we recorded the cover abundance of vascular plant species and measured two functional traits (specific leaf area and clonal lateral spread) on the most abundant understory species. We used generalized linear models to test for differences in taxonomic (species richness and the percentage of forest specialist species), functional (functional richness for single and multiple traits), and phylogenetic diversity (mean pairwise distance) between protection zones. Lastly, we evaluated differences in species composition between protection zones using non-metric multidimensional scaling, supported by PERMANOVA and indicator species analyses. Species richness and phylogenetic diversity did not differ between strictly protected and managed zones. Strictly protected forests had a significantly higher percentage of forest specialist species and functional richness of clonal lateral spread than forests allowing sustainable logging. Species composition was significantly different between strictly protected and managed forests; the most important indicator species detected within managed zones were Sanicula europaea and Aremonia agrimonoides, while Veronica montana, Oxalis acetosella, and Salvia glutinosa were indicator species within strictly protected forests. The difference between strictly protected forests and forests managed with sustainable logging is reflected in the proportion of forest specialist species and the diversity of belowground space occupation and resource acquisition strategies. Instead, species richness and phylogenetic diversity do not discriminate between the two protection zones. We suggest incorporating specialist species, functional and compositional diversity metrics into the evaluation framework to guide future conservation and management practices.

Details

Title: How effective are different protection strategies in promoting the plant diversity of temperate forests in national parks?
Authors/Creators: Zhengxue Zhu - School of Biosciences and Veterinary Medicine, Plant Diversity and Ecosystems Management Unit, University of Camerino, Camerino, Italy
Stefano Chelli - Università di Camerino
James L. Tsakalos - Murdoch University, Centre for Terrestrial Ecosystem Science and Sustainability
Alessandro Bricca - Free University of Bozen-Bolzano
Roberto Canullo - School of Biosciences and Veterinary Medicine, Plant Diversity and Ecosystems Management Unit, University of Camerino, Camerino, Italy
Marco Cervellini - Università di Camerino
Riccardo Pennesi - Università di Camerino
Luciano L.M. De Benedictis - Università di Camerino
Vanessa Cesaroni - Università di Camerino
Alessandro Bottacci - Università di Camerino
Giandiego Campetella - Università di Camerino
Publication Details: Forest ecology and management, Vol.584, 122602
Publisher: Elsevier B.V.
Number of pages: 9
Grant note: Parco Nazionale delle Foreste Casentinesi, Monte Falterona e CampignaLIFE MODERn (NEC) Project: LIFE20 GIE/IT/000091 RE. DI. (Reducing risks of Natural Disasters) Consortium
The research was funded by Parco Nazionale delle Foreste Casentinesi, Monte Falterona e Campigna. J.L.T., R.C., M.C., and G.C. were supported by the LIFE MODERn (NEC) Project (LIFE20 GIE/IT/000091) . S.C., Z.Z., G.C., L.L.M.D.B., and R.C. were further supported by the RE. DI. (Reducing risks of Natural Disasters) Consortium.
Identifiers: 991005751329207891
Murdoch Affiliation: Harry Butler Institute
Language: English
Resource Type: Journal article

UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

This output has contributed to the advancement of the following goals:

Source: InCites

Metrics

2 File views/ downloads

32 Record Views

3 Times Cited - Web of Science

InCites Highlights

These are selected metrics from InCites Benchmarking & Analytics tool, related to this output

Collaboration types: Domestic collaboration; International collaboration
Citation topics: 3 Agriculture, Environment & Ecology; 3.40 Forestry; 3.40.86 Plant Communities
Web Of Science research areas: Forestry
ESI research areas: Plant & Animal Science