Post on 18-Dec-2015
transcript
Forests, fungi, and small mammals: the impact of fire and
forest thinning on truffle production and consumption
Marc Meyer and Malcolm NorthMarc Meyer and Malcolm NorthUSFS PSW Research StationUSFS PSW Research Station
Sierra Nevada Research CenterSierra Nevada Research CenterDavis, CaliforniaDavis, California
Douglas KeltDouglas KeltDepartment of Wildlife, Fish, & Department of Wildlife, Fish, &
Conservation BiologyConservation BiologyUniversity of California, DavisUniversity of California, Davis
?
Study Questions:
What effect does burning and What effect does burning and mechanical thinning have on the mechanical thinning have on the forest ecosystem?forest ecosystem?
Study Questions:
What effect does burning and What effect does burning and mechanical thinning have on the mechanical thinning have on the forest ecosystem?forest ecosystem?
Does combining treatments (fire + Does combining treatments (fire + thinning) have a greater impact thinning) have a greater impact than burning alone?than burning alone?
ectomycorrhizal fungi
small mammals
fruiting bodies (truffles)provide a major food
source
ectomycorrhizal fungi
small mammals
fruiting bodies (truffles)provide a major food
source
dispersal offungal spores
ectomycorrhizal fungi
small mammals
fruiting bodies (truffles)provide a major food
source
dispersal offungal spores
foresttrees
TeakettleExperimental
Forest
Experimental forestboundary
Stream
Teakettle Experimental Forest
200 m
•18 plots total
•Plots 4 ha in area
•Plots represent replicate stands
Teakettle Experimental Design(n = 3 per treatment; 6 treatments total)
No Burn Burn
No Thin
Light Thin(understory)
Heavy Thin (overstory)
light thin only light thin & burn
heavy thin only heavy thin & burn
control burn only
Truffle sampling (2002-2003):
9 grid points per plot in 3 x 3 grid (50 m 9 grid points per plot in 3 x 3 grid (50 m spacing, 50 m buffer)spacing, 50 m buffer)
truffle sampling (4 mtruffle sampling (4 m22 plots) at all grid plots) at all grid points - 100 mpoints - 100 m22 per plot per season per plot per season
2 seasons of sampling for 2 years2 seasons of sampling for 2 years Frequency, species richness, and biomass of Frequency, species richness, and biomass of
trufflestruffles
Truffle consumption Lodgepole chipmunks (Lodgepole chipmunks (Tamias speciosusTamias speciosus) )
sampled June-August 2002-2003 at truffle sampled June-August 2002-2003 at truffle grid pointsgrid points
microhistological analysis of chipmunk microhistological analysis of chipmunk dietsdiets frequency of truffle consumptionfrequency of truffle consumption generic richness of truffles in dietgeneric richness of truffles in diet
Truffles
MANOVA results for effect of thinning & burning on truffle production
Dependent variable
Factor F df P
MANOVA BurnThinB × T
6.5824.0180.848
3,226,446,44
0.0020.0030.068
Truffle frequency 2002-03Vertical bars denote 0.95 confidence intervals
No thin Light thin Heavy thin-1.0
-0.5
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
4.0
4.5
Lo
g1
0(%
truffle
freq
ue
ncy)
No burn
Truffle frequency 2002-03Vertical bars denote 0.95 confidence intervals
No thin Light thin Heavy thin-1.0
-0.5
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
4.0
4.5
Lo
g10
(% tru
ffle fre
qu
en
cy)
Burn No burn
Truffle biomass 2002-03Vertical bars denote 0.95 confidence intervals
No thin Light thin Heavy thin-0.6
-0.4
-0.2
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
1.2
1.4
Lo
g1
0(tru
ffle b
iom
ass, g
/ha
)
No burn
Truffle biomass 2002-03Vertical bars denote 0.95 confidence intervals
No thin Light thin Heavy thin-0.6
-0.4
-0.2
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
1.2
1.4
Lo
g1
0(tru
ffle b
iom
ass, g
/ha
)
Burn No burn
Truffle consumption
MANOVA results for effect of burning & thinning on truffle consumption
Dependent variable
Factor F df P
MANOVA BurnThinB × T
15.6534.7860.570
2,214,422,21
0.0010.0030.686
2002-03 Diet frequency for T. speciosusVertical bars denote 0.95 confidence intervals
No thin Light thin Heavy thin30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
% fre
qu
en
cy of tru
ffles in
die
t
No burn
2002-03 Diet frequency for T. speciosusVertical bars denote 0.95 confidence intervals
No thin Light thin Heavy thin30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
% fre
qu
en
cy of tru
ffles in
die
t
Burn No burn
2002-03 Diet data for T. speciosus
Vertical bars denote 0.95 confidence intervals
no thin light thin heavy thin0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
log
10(#
of tru
ffle g
en
era
in d
iet)
NO BURN
2002-03 Diet data for T. speciosus
Vertical bars denote 0.95 confidence intervals
no thin light thin heavy thin0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
log
10(#
of tru
ffle g
en
era
in d
iet)
BURN NO BURN
MANOVA comparisons in burned + thinned vs. burned only
Dependent variable F df P
Truffle production
Truffle consumption
4.990
9.069
3,22
2,21
0.009
0.001
Conclusions: Significant reduction in truffle production Significant reduction in truffle production
& consumption following burning or & consumption following burning or thinningthinning
Conclusions: Significant reduction in truffle production Significant reduction in truffle production
& consumption following burning or & consumption following burning or thinningthinning
Plots pre-treated with thinning prior to Plots pre-treated with thinning prior to burning had lower truffle production & burning had lower truffle production & consumption than plots burned onlyconsumption than plots burned only
Management implications:
Current forest management policy in the Current forest management policy in the Sierra Nevada (i.e. Sierra Nevada Forest Sierra Nevada (i.e. Sierra Nevada Forest Plan Amendment 2001) uses combined thin Plan Amendment 2001) uses combined thin & burn treatments for fuel reduction& burn treatments for fuel reduction
Management implications:
Current forest management policy in the Current forest management policy in the Sierra Nevada (i.e. Sierra Nevada Forest Sierra Nevada (i.e. Sierra Nevada Forest Plan Amendment 2001) uses combined thin Plan Amendment 2001) uses combined thin & burn treatments for fuel reduction& burn treatments for fuel reduction These combined treatments have a These combined treatments have a
substantial impact on truffle production substantial impact on truffle production & consumption& consumption
Management implications:
Current forest management policy in the Current forest management policy in the Sierra Nevada (i.e. Sierra Nevada Forest Sierra Nevada (i.e. Sierra Nevada Forest Plan Amendment 2001) uses combined thin Plan Amendment 2001) uses combined thin & burn treatments for fuel reduction& burn treatments for fuel reduction These combined treatments have a substantial These combined treatments have a substantial
impact on truffle production & consumptionimpact on truffle production & consumption
Long-term data neededLong-term data needed
Acknowledgments
USFS PSW Research Lab USFS Forest Health Technology Enterprise
Grant, Joint Fire Science Program Grant, NIGMS IMSD Fellowship, UC Graduate Opportunity Fellowships
Sarah Reed, Blake Meneken, Jamie Burke, Kerry Byrne