Skip to main content

Advertisement

Table 7 Summary of main results of meta-analyses

From: What is the effect of prescribed burning in temperate and boreal forest on biodiversity, beyond pyrophilous and saproxylic species? A systematic review

Outcome and included studies/moderators Unmoderated model outputs Significance of moderator (QM test of moderators and p-value)
Summary effect size CI (lower) CI (upper) p-value Burn frequency Time since burn Forest type Burn season Climate zone
1. Vascular plant richness
 Medium and high validity studies (n = 63) 0.397 0.049 0.744 0.025* QM1 = 1.231 p = 0.267 QM1 = 1.105 p = 0.293 QM2 = 5.598 p = 0.061 QM3 = 1.827 p = 0.609 QM6 = 6.003 p = 0.423
 High validity studies only (n = 11) 0.143 − 0.184 0.377 0.500
2. Non-native vascular plant richness
 Medium and high validity studies (n = 10) 0.386 0.154 0.619 0.001* QM§ = 0.003 p = 0.958 QM1 = 0.001 p = 0.975 NR, all studies coniferous QM2 = 2.232 p = 0.328 QM4 = 2.287 p = 0.683
 High validity studies only (n = 4) 0.317 0.042 0.591 0.024*
3. Herbaceous plant richness
 Medium and high validity studies (n = 22) 0.357 − 0.176 0.891 0.189 QM1 = 0.350 p = 0.554 QM1 = 4.619 p = 0.032* QM2 = 10.167 p = 0.006* QM3 = 2.614 p = 0.455 QM3 = 15.434 p = 0.002*
 Forest type: Broadleaf (n = 9) 0.956 0.495 1.417 < 0.001*
 Forest type: Coniferous (n = 10) 0.372 − 0.270 1.014 0.256
Forest type: mixed (n = 3) NR, only 3 comparisons
High validity studies only (n = 2) NR, only 2 comparisons      
4. Woody plant richness
 Medium and high validity studies (n = 23) − 0.253 − 0.743 0.237 0.312 QM1 = 0.023 p = 0.879 QM1 = 0.138 p = 0.711 QM2 = 0.107 p = 0.948 QM3 = 3.465 p = 0.325 QM3 = 0.474 p = 0.925
 High-validity studies only (n = 3) NR, only 3 comparisons
5. Tree richness
 Medium and high validity studies (n = 13) − 1.035 − 2.095 0.026 0.056 QM1 = 0.404 p = 0.525 QM1 = 0.583 p = 0.463 QM2 = 1.023 p = 0.600 QM2 = 0.958 p = 0.619 QM1 = 0.866 p = 0.352
 High validity studies only (n = 1) NR, only 1 comparison
6. All vascular plant diversity
 Medium and high validity studies (n = 13) − 0.065 − 0.343 0.214 0.649 QM1 = 0.692 p = 0.406 QM1 = 0.303 p = 0.582 QM2 = 1.132 p = 0.568 QM2 = 3.620 p = 0.164 QM6 = 3.857 p = 0.696
 High validity studies only (n = 4) 0.055 − 0.569 0.678 0.863
7. Fungal richness
 Medium and high validity studies (n = 5) − 1.163 − 2.420 0.095 0.070 QM1 = 0.305 p = 0.581 QM1 = 0.065 p = 0.800 NR, all studies coniferous QM1 = 0.008 p = 0.927 QM2 = 0.497 p = 0.780
 High validity studies only (n = 3) NR, only 3 comparisons
8. Bird richness
 Medium and high validity studies (n = 6) − 0.169 − 0.695 0.356 0.528 QM1 = 0.964 p = 0.326 QM1 = 1.764 p = 0.184 QM2 = 1.029 p = 0.598 QM3 = 2.463 p = 0.482 QM2 = 1.789 p = 0.409
 High validity studies only (n = 1) NR, only 1 comparison
9. Beetle richness
 Medium and high validity studies (n = 10) 0.398 − 0.097 0.892 0.115 QM1 = 3.519 p = 0.061 QM1 = 2.080 p = 0.149 QM1 = 0.314 p = 0.575 QM1 = 2.123 p = 0.145 QM2 = 0.615 p = 0.735
 High validity studies only (n = 1) NR, only 1 comparison
  1. NR not run
  2. * Significant at p < 0.05. CI = 95% confidence interval