Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

A plot-level exploratory analysis of European forest based on the results from the BioSoil Forest Biodiversity project

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
European Journal of Forest Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The lack of multi-dimensional data is one of the major gaps which limit the knowledge and the assessment possibilities of European forests. Nowadays, the most extensive and complete data on the European forest statuses are given by National Forest Inventories (NFIs) which provide information about the extent of forest’s resources and their composition and structure. Traditionally, NFIs collect data related to trees, with a limited consideration of other habitat components, such as ground vegetation. This information which goes beyond the mere arboreal component is instead essential for a more complete forest biodiversity assessment. This paper is aimed at introducing the ICP Forests LI-BioDiv database which resulted from BioSoil Forest Biodiversity, a large collaborative European project. This database is organized as a multi-dimensional forest geodatabase that contains forest structure and vegetation records collected in 19 European countries in the period of 2005–2008. The data were acquired from 3311 geocoded plots where several different types of data were gathered: stand-level general information, tree-level data, deadwood, canopy closure and floristic composition. This paper is structured in order to: (1) give a clear overview of the raw data available in the database and to (2) present an elaboration of raw data to calculate simple plot-level forest variables (biomass, deadwood volume, alpha diversity). On the basis of the results we achieved, the LI-BioDiv database appears useful mainly for research purposes aimed at studying cross-relationships between multiple forest variables and not for an operative use for monitoring and assessing European forest. In particular, we hope that this contribution can stimulate scientists to carry out cross-analysis of the database for defining future forest biodiversity indicators that could be introduced into the field protocols of the NFIs in Europe.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1

WGFB (2011), modified

Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Aamlid D, Canullo R, Starlinger F (2007) Assessment of ground vegetation part VIII. In: Manual on methods and criteria for harmonized sampling, assessment, monitoring and analysis of the effects of air pollution on forests. UNECE ICP Forests Programme Co-ordinating Centre, Hamburg

  • Avitabile V, Camia A (2018) An assessment of forest biomass maps in Europe using harmonized national statistics and inventory plots. For Ecol Manag 409:489–498. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.FORECO.2017.11.047

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bilz M, Kell SP, Maxted N, Lansdown RV (2011) European red list of vascular plants. Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg

    Google Scholar 

  • Butchart SHM, Walpole M, Collen B, van Strien A, Scharlemann JPW, Almond REA, Baillie JEM, Bomhard B, Brown C, Bruno J, Carpenter KE, Carr GM, Chanson J, Chenery AM, Csirke J, Davidson NC, Dentener F, Foster M, Galli A, Galloway JN, Genovesi P, Gregory RD, Hockings M, Kapos V, Lamarque JF, Leverington F, Loh J, McGeoch MA, McRae L, Minasyan A, Morcillo MH, Oldfield TEE, Pauly D, Quader S, Revenga C, Sauer JR, Skolnik B, Spear D, Stanwell-Smith D, Stuart SN, Symes A, Tierney M, Tyrrell TD, Vié JC, Watson R (2010) Global biodiversity: indicators of recent declines. Science 328(5982):1164 LP–1168. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1187512

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Canullo R (2016) The ICP Forests level I biodiversity data. In: Michel A, Seidling W (eds) Forest condition in Europe: 2016 Technical report of ICP Forests. Report under the UNECE convention on long - range transboundary air pollution (CL RTAP), bfw—docu edn, BFW Austrian Research Centre for Forests, Vienna, Austria, pp 89–105

  • Chave J, Réjou-Méchain M, Búrquez A, Chidumayo E, Colgan MS, Delitti WBC, Duque A, Eid T, Fearnside PM, Goodman RC, Henry M, Martínez-Yrízar A, Mugasha WA, Muller-Landau HC, Mencuccini M, Nelson BW, Ngomanda A, Nogueira EM, Ortiz-Malavassi E, Pélissier R, Ploton P, Ryan CM, Saldarriaga JG, Vieilledent G (2014) Improved allometric models to estimate the aboveground biomass of tropical trees. Glob Change Biol 20(10):3177–3190. https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.12629

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chirici G, Winter S, McRoberts RE (2011) National forest inventories: contributions to forest biodiversity assessments. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-0482-4

    Google Scholar 

  • Chirici G, McRoberts RE, Winter S, Bertini R, Brändli UB, Asensio IA, Bastrup-Birk A, Rondeux J, Barsoum N, Marchetti M (2012) National forest inventory contributions to forest biodiversity monitoring. For Sci 58(3):257–268. https://doi.org/10.5849/forsci.12-003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Corona P, Chirici G, McRoberts RE, Winter S, Barbati A (2011) Contribution of large-scale forest inventories to biodiversity assessment and monitoring. For Ecol Manag 262(11):2061–2069. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2011.08.044

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Danielewska A, Clarke N, Olejnik J, Hansen K, Vries W, Lundin L, Tuovinen J, Fischer R, Urbaniak M, Paoletti E (2013) A meta-database comparison from various European research and monitoring networks dedicated to forest sites. iForest Biogeosci For 6(1):1–9. https://doi.org/10.3832/ifor0751-006

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duncanson L, Rourke O, Dubayah R (2015) Small sample sizes yield biased allometric equations in temperate forests. Sci Rep 5:17153. https://doi.org/10.1038/srep17153

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • EEA (2006) European forest types categories and types for sustainable forest management reporting and policy. Technical reports, European Environment Agency; technical report no 9/2006

  • EEA (2010) Assessing biodiversity in Europe—the 2010 report. Technical report, EEA report no 5/2010

  • FAO (2017) Voluntary guidelines on National Forest Monitoring. Technical reports, Rome

  • Ferretti M, Fischer R, Mues V, Granke O, Lorenz M (2010) Basic design principles for the ICP Forests Monitoring Networks. Manual Part II. In: Manual on methods and criteria for harmonized sampling, assessment, monitoring and analysis of the effects of air pollution on forests. UNECE ICP Forests Programme Co-ordinating Centre, Hamburg, Germany, p 22

  • Foley JA, DeFries R, Asner GP, Barford C, Bonan G, Carpenter SR, Chapin FS, Coe MT, Daily GC, Gibbs HK, Helkowski JH, Holloway T, Howard EA, Kucharik CJ, Monfreda C, Patz JA, Prentice IC, Ramankutty N, Snyder PK (2005) Global consequences of land use. Science 309(5734):570–574. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1111772

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Forest Europe (2015) State of Europe’s forests 2015. Technical report. In: Ministerial conference on the protection of forests in Europe, Forest Europe Liaison Unit Madrid, Madrid, Spain. http://www.foresteurope.org/docs/fullsoef2015.pdf. Accessed 1 Feb 2016

  • Galluzzi M, Rocchini D, Canullo R, McRoberts RE, Chirici G (2018) Mapping uncertainty of ICP-Forest biodiversity data: from standard treatment of diffusion to density-equalizing cartograms. Ecol Inf. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ECOINF.2018.06.005

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Henry M, Bombelli A, Trotta C, Alessandrini A, Birigazzi L, Sola G, Vieilledent G, Santenoise P, Longuetaud F, Valentini R, Picard N, Saint-André L (2013) GlobAllomeTree: international platform for tree allometric equations to support volume, biomass and carbon assessment. iForest Biogeosci For 6(6):326–330. https://doi.org/10.3832/ifor0901-006

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hiederer R, Durrant T (2010) Evaluation of BioSoil demonstration project—preliminary data analysis. https://doi.org/10.2788/64089

  • Hunter M (1990) Wildlife, forests, and forestry: principles of managing forests for biological diversity. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs

    Google Scholar 

  • ICP (2006) The condition of forests in Europe. 2006 Executive report. Technical report, Federal Research Centre for Forestry and Forest Products, Hamburg, Germany

  • Kalwij JM, Robertson MP, Ronk A, Zobel M, Pärtel M (2014) Spatially-explicit estimation of geographical representation in large-scale species distribution datasets. PLOS ONE 9(1):e85306. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0085306

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Larrieu L, Paillet Y, Winter S, Bütler R, Kraus D, Krumm F, Lachat T, Michel AK, Regnery B, Vandekerkhove K (2018) Tree related microhabitats in temperate and Mediterranean European forests: a hierarchical typology for inventory standardization. Ecol Indic 84:194–207. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ECOLIND.2017.08.051

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liang J, Crowther TW, Picard N, Wiser S, Zhou M, Alberti G, Schulze ED, McGuire AD, Bozzato F, Pretzsch H, De-Miguel S, Paquette A, Hérault B, Scherer-Lorenzen M, Barrett CB, Glick HB, Hengeveld GM, Nabuurs GJ, Pfautsch S, Viana H, Vibrans AC, Ammer C, Schall P, Verbyla D, Tchebakova N, Fischer M, Watson JV, Chen HYH, Lei X, Schelhaas MJ, Lu H, Gianelle D, Parfenova EI, Salas C, Lee E, Lee B, Kim HS, Bruelheide H, Coomes DA, Piotto D, Sunderland T, Schmid B, Gourlet-Fleury S, Sonké B, Tavani R, Zhu J, Brandl S, Vayreda J, Kitahara F, Searle EB, Neldner VJ, Ngugi MR, Baraloto C, Frizzera L, Bałazy R, Oleksyn J, Zawiła-Niedźwiecki T, Bouriaud O, Bussotti F, Finér L, Jaroszewicz B, Jucker T, Valladares F, Jagodzinski AM, Peri PL, Gonmadje C, Marthy W, O’Brien T, Martin EH, Marshall AR, Rovero F, Bitariho R, Niklaus PA, Alvarez-Loayza P, Chamuya N, Valencia R, Mortier F, Wortel V, Engone-Obiang NL, Ferreira LV, Odeke DE, Vasquez RM, Lewis SL, Reich PB (2016) Positive biodiversity-productivity relationship predominant in global forests. Science 354(6309):aaf8957

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lorenz M, Becher G, Mues V, Fischer R, Becker R, Calatayud V, Dise N, Krause GHM, Sanz M, Ulrich E (2005) Forest condition in Europe: 2005 Technical report of ICP Forests. Report under the UNECE convention on long-range transboundary air pollution (CLRTAP). Technical report, BFH-documentation, Federal Research Centre for Forestry and Forest Products, Germany

  • MCPFE (2002) Improved pan-European indicators for sustainable forest management. Technical report. MCPFE Liaison Unit, Vienna

  • MCPFE (2007) State of Europe’s Forests 2007. The MCPFE report on sustainable forest management in Europe. Technical report. http://www.foresteurope.org/documentos/state_of_europes_forests_2007.pdf

  • McRoberts RE, Winter S, Chirici G, Hauk E, Pelz DR, Moser WK, Hatfield MA (2008) Large-scale spatial patterns of forest structural diversity. Can J For Res 38(3):429–438. https://doi.org/10.1139/X07-154

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McRoberts RE, Tomppo E, Schadauer K, Vidal C, Ståhl G, Chirici G, Lanz A, Cienciala E, Winter S, Smith WB (2009) Harmonizing national forest inventories. J For 107(4):179–187. https://doi.org/10.1093/jof/107.4.179

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Michel A, Seidling W (eds) (2016) Forest condition in Europe: 2016 Technical report of ICP forests. Report under the UNECE convention on long-range transboundary air pollution (CLRTAP). BFWDokumentation 23/2016. BFW Austrian Research Centre for Forests, Vienna

  • Michel A, Seidling W (eds) (2017) Forest condition in Europe: 2017 Technical report of ICP forests. Report under the UNECE convention on long-range transboundary air pollution (CLRTAP). BFWDokumentation 24/2017. BFW Austrian Research Centre for Forests, Vienna

  • Mura M, McRoberts RE, Chirici G, Marchetti M (2016) Statistical inference for forest structural diversity indices using airborne laser scanning data and the k-nearest neighbors technique. Remote Sens Environ 186:678–686. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.RSE.2016.09.010

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Noss RF (1990) Indicators for monitoring biodiversity: a hierarchical approach. Conserv Biol 4(4):355–364

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Puletti N, Giannetti F, Chirici G, Canullo R (2017) Deadwood distribution in European forests. J Maps 13(2):733–736. https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.5427286

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rondeux J, Bertini R, Bastrup-Birk A, Corona P, Latte N, McRoberts RE, Ståhl G, Winter S, Chirici G (2012) Assessing deadwood using harmonized national forest inventory data. For Sci 58(3):269–283. https://doi.org/10.5849/forsci.10-057

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simpson D, Fagerli H, Hellsten S, Knulst JC, Westling O (2006) Comparison of modelled and monitored deposition fluxes of sulphur and nitrogen to ICP-forest sites in Europe. Biogeosciences 3(3):337–355 arXiv:hal-00297566

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Tomppo E, Gschwantner T, Lawrence M, McRoberts R (eds) (2010) National forest inventories–pathways for common reporting. Springer, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Travaglini D, Fattorini L, Barbati A, Bottalico F, Corona P, Ferretti M, Chirici G (2013) Towards a sampling strategy for the assessment of forest condition at European level: combining country estimates. Environ Monit Assess 185(4):3255–3268. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-012-2788-5

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • UN-ECE, United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (1994) Manual on methods and criteria for harmonised sampling, assessment, monitoring and analysis of the effects of air pollution on forests. BFH, Hamburg

    Google Scholar 

  • UN-ECE UNECfE (1998) Protection of forests against atmospheric pollution: European programme for the intensive monitoring of forest ecosystems—basic documents for the implementation of the intensive monitoring programme of forest ecosystems in Europe

  • Vidal C, Lanz A, Tomppo E, Schadauer K, Gschwantner T, di Cosmo L, Robert N (2008) Establishing forest inventory reference definitions for forest and growing stock: a study towards common reporting. Silva Fennica 42:2. https://doi.org/10.14214/sf.255

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • WGFB (2011) The BioSoil forest biodiversity manual, version 1.0/1.1/1.1A. In: Joint Research Centre – Institute for Environment and Sustainability (ed) Evaluation of BioSoil demonstration project: forest biodiversity. Publications Office of the European Union, chap The BioSoi, pp 81–102. https://doi.org/10.2788/84823

  • Winter S, Chirici G, McRoberts RE, Hauk E, Tomppo E (2008) Possibilities for harmonizing national forest inventory data for use in forest biodiversity assessments. For Int J For Res 81(1):33–44. https://doi.org/10.1093/forestry/cpm042

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We acknowledge Hayley McKelvey for having performed the language editing.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Marta Galluzzi.

Additional information

Communicated by Arne Nothdurft.

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Appendices

Appendix A

Information about dataset table is presented below, including detailed descriptions of all attributes within the tables. Each attribute in a table is listed with its abbreviated name followed by a description of the attribute. Attributes that are coded include a list of the codes and their meanings. The attribute called “quality” has been defined for easily filtering the necessary data for each data type.

Common attributes to all data type:

  • id_unique progressive number that identified the rows;

  • survey_year year when the surveys were carried out;

  • code_country number that identifies the country (Table 1);

  • code_plot number that identifies the plot;

  • index links “code_country” and “code_plot” to the unique plot record;

  • bd_subplot (only for level I): subplot number where the diameters were recorded. Code 1—subplot with a radius of 3.09 m (30 \(\hbox {m}^2\)). Code 2—subplot with a radius of 11.28 m (400 \(\hbox {m}^2\)). Code 3—subplot with a radius of 25.24 m (2000 \(\hbox {m}^2\)).

Specific attributes to GPL dataset:

  • Latitude

  • Longitude

  • gps_elevation values of elevation;

  • code_orientaion Code 1—North. Code 2—North-east. Code 3—East. Code 4—South-east. Code 5—South. Code 6—South-west. Code 7—West. Code 8—North-west. Code 9—Flat.

  • Slope

  • Code_preuse previous land use. Code 1—Forested more than 300 years. Code 2—Forested more than 100 years. Code 3—Forested for 25–100 years ago. Code 4—Forested in the past 25 years. Code 5—No information.

  • Code_stand_actual Code 1—Planted. Code 2—Seeded. Code 3—Natural regeneration. Code 4—Mixed. Code 9—Unknown.

  • Code_manage_intensity Code 1—Unmanaged (no evidence). Code 2—Management (evidence but for more than 10 years ago). Code 3—Managed (within the last 10 years). Code 9—Unknown.

  • Code_manage_type_bd Code 1—High forest—Femelschlag. Code 2—High–Small groups. Code 3—High forest (uneven aged)—Plenterwald. Code 4—High forest (other). Code 5—Young/Medium forest (under development to high forest). Code 6—Coppice without standards. Code 7—Coppice with standards. Code 8—Other.

  • Code_dw_rem Removal of coarse woody debris. Code 1—Yes, all stems and main branches have been removed. Code 2—Yes, stems and main branches have been removed. Code 3—No, stems and main branches are lying in the forest. Code 4—Partly, some stems and main branches have been removed, others still present. Code 5—Unknown. Code 6—Introduced. Code 7—Presence of accumulation (branches have been stacked in piles or in rows).

  • Code_treemix Pattern of tree mixture. Code 1—Intimate (different tree species are mixed throughout the stand). Code 2—Non-intimate (different trees occur in clusters). Code 3—No mixture.

  • Code_meanage_bd mean age of stand. Code 1—0–20 years. Code 2—21–40 years. Code 3—41–60 years. Code 4—61–80 years. Code 5—81–100 years. Code 6—101–120 years. Code 7—> 120 years. Code 8—Irregular stands. Code 9—Unknown.

  • Code_fencing fancing of the plot. Code 1—Fenced. Code 2—Not Fenced. Code 3—Fenced in parts.

  • Code_forest_type_bd code in accordance with EEA (2006).

Specific attributes to DBH dataset:

  • tree_number number that identified the tree inside each plots;

  • dw_dbh values of diameters (cm);

  • code_tree_status Code 1—standing living tree. Code 2—standing dead tree. Code 3—lying dead tree;

  • code_tree_species number that identifies the tree species;

  • quality attribute to filter data availability. Code 1—Fields holding "diameter”, "code_tree_status” and "code_tree_species” (D > 10 cm). Code 2—Fields holding "diameter” , "code_tree_species” and does not contain "code_tree_status”(D > 10 cm). Code 3—Fields holding "diameter”, "code_tree_status” and does not contain "code_tree_species” (D > 10 cm). Code 4—Fields holding "diameter”, "code_tree_status” and "code_tree_species” (3 \(\le\) D \(\le\) 10 cm). Code 5—Fields holding "diameter”, "code_tree_species” and does not contain "code_tree_status” (3 \(\le\) D \(\le\) 10 cm). Code 6—Fields holding "diameter”, "code_tree_status” and does not contain "code_tree_species” (3 \(\le\) D \(\le\) 10 cm). Code 999—Unclassified or incorrect data;

  • code_decay deadwood decomposition is assigned in 5 decay classes according to Hunter (1990). Code 1—No evidence of decay. Code 2—Solid wood. Less than 10 % changed structure due to decomposition. The wood is solid at its surface. The wood is attacked only to a very mall degree by wood decomposing organisms. Code 3—Slightly decayed. 10–25% of the wood has a changed structure due to decomposition. This can be assessed by sticking the wood with a harp object. Code 4—Decomposed wood 26–75% of the wood is soft to very soft. Code 5—Very decomposed wood. 76%–100% of the wood is soft.

Specific attributes to deadwood (DWD) dataset:

  • deadwood_id number that identified the wood inside each plots;

  • dw_type existing classification based on type of deadwood detected. Code 1—Coarse woody debris (D > 10 cm). Includes stems, limbs, branches lying on the ground. Code 2—Fine woody debris (5 cm < D < 10 cm). Includes small wood pieces. Code 3—Snag (height > 1.3 m and DBH > 10 cm). Standing deadwood without branches. Code 4—Stump (height <1.3 m and  D  at cut > 10 cm). Stump is a snag below breast height. Code 5—Other. All cases with values falling outside the above mentioned definitions or undefined. (e.g.: values < 5 cm for diameter with code = 2 or unsolvable code or definition conflicts). Code 9—Special cases. Threshold values, erroneously not defined in the old manual (i.e.: D = 10 cm, D = 5 cm, DBH = 10 cm, height = 1.3 m);

  • code_dw_species number that identifies the group of tree species. Code 1—deciduous, code 2—conifer, code 3—unknown;

  • diameter values of diameters (cm);

  • dw_length values of length of woody debris (m);

  • code_decay deadwood decomposition is assigned in 5 decay classes according to Hunter (1990), see DBH dataset code decay;

  • quality attribute to filter data availability. Code 1—Fields holding “diameter”, ““dw_length”, “code_dw_species” and “code_decay” (CWD). Code 2—Fields holding “diameter”, “dw_length”, “code_dw_species” and does not contain “code_decay” (CWD). Code 3—Fields holding “diameter”, “code_dw_species”, “code_decay” and does not contain “dw_length” (CWD). Code 4—Fields holding “diameter”, “dw_length”, “code_decay” and does not contain “code_dw_species” (CWD). Code 5—Fields holding “diameter”, “dw_length”, “code_dw_species” and “code_decay” (FWD). Code 6—Fields holding “diameter”, “dw_length”, “code_decay” and does not contain “code_dw_species” (FWD). Code 7—Fields holding “diameter”, “dw_length”, “code_dw_species” and does not contain “code_decay” (FWD). Code 8—Fields holding “diameter”, “code_dw_species”, “code_decay” and does not contain “dw_length” (FWD). Code 999—Unclassified or incorrect data.

Specific attributes to canopy (CAN) dataset:

  • code_canopy code that identified the average percentage of canopy cover. Code 1—open sky. Code 2—1–25%. Code 3—25–50%. Code 4—50–75%. Code 5—> 75%;

  • n_tree_layer number of distinct tree layer. Code 1—one layer (one dominant tree layer). Code 2—two layers (dominant tree layer plus 1 sublayer). Code 3—three layers (dominant plus two sublayers). Code 4—more than three layers. Code 5—no tree layer;

  • n_trees number of trees in the plot;

  • quality attribute to filter data availability. Code 1—Fields holding “code_canopy”, “n_tree_layer” and “n_trees”. Code 2—Fields holding “code_canopy”, “n_tree_layer” and does not contain the “n_trees”. Code 3—Fields holding “code_canopy” and does not contain the “n_tree_layer” and “n_trees”. Code 4—Fields holding “code_canopy”, “n_trees” and does not contain the “n_tree_layer”. Code 999—Unclassified or incorrect data.

Specific attributes to ground vegetation (GVG) dataset:

  • code_species number that identifies the species;

  • code_layer_surface code of layers where vegetation was evaluated. Code 1—tree layer (only ligneous and all climbers) > 5 m height, code 2—shrub layer (only ligneous an all climbers) > 0.5 m height, code 3—herb layer (all non-ligneous and ligneous < 0.5m height), code 4—moss layer (i.e. terricolous bryophytes and lichens), code 5—lower Shrubs, code 6—upper Shrubs;

  • cover percentage of coverage of the species;

  • quality attribute to filter data availability. Code 1—Fields holding “code_species” and “cover”. Code 2—Fields holding “code_species” and does not contain “cover” and “code_layer_surface”. Code 3—Fields holding “code_species”, “cover” and “code_layer_surface”. Code 4—Fields holding “code_species”, “code_layer_surface” and does not contain “cover”;

  • class Field refers to “code_species”. Code S, “code_species” identified the species. Code G, “code_species” identified the genus.

Appendix B

See Figs. 9, 10 and 11).

Fig. 9
figure 9

Basal area (\(\hbox {m}^2\)\(\hbox {ha}^{-1}\)) from the ICP Forests LI-BioDiv dataset

Fig. 10
figure 10

CAN data available from the ICP Forests LI-BioDiv dataset and canopy cover variation

Fig. 11
figure 11

Type of GVG data available from the ICP Forests LI-BioDiv dataset

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Galluzzi, M., Giannetti, F., Puletti, N. et al. A plot-level exploratory analysis of European forest based on the results from the BioSoil Forest Biodiversity project. Eur J Forest Res 138, 831–845 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10342-019-01205-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10342-019-01205-2

Keywords

Navigation