What are the effects of even-aged and uneven-aged forest management on boreal forest biodiversity in Fennoscandia and European Russia? A systematic review

Table 13 Summary of the meta-analysis results

Exposure	Comparator	Overall effect	Forest dependent species	Open habitat species	Taxa	Years since harvesting	Deadwood
Species richness
Uneven-aged forest	Young even-aged forest		++	–
	Retention			–			na
	Mature even-aged forest	++				*	na
Young even-aged forest	Retention		na	na			na
Young even-aged forest	Mature even-aged forest		–	++	**	**
Uneven-aged forest	Natural forest				*		na
Even-aged forest	Natural forest	–	–			**
Abundance
Uneven-aged forest	Young even-aged forest	++	+	–			*
	Retention			–			na
	Mature even-aged forest			+	**	**	na
Young even-aged forest	Retention		na	na	na	na
Young even-aged forest	Mature even-aged forest		–		**		na
Uneven-aged forest	Natural forest	+					na
Even-aged forest	Natural forest

Top row shows outcome variable and effect modifiers. Excludes intensity of harvesting, whose influence on overall effect sizes was tested only for uneven-aged forest. Key: ++ significantly more species/individuals in the exposure, – significantly more species/individuals in the comparator, ± marginally significant effect. For taxa, years since harvesting, and deadwood ** denotes significant influence and * marginally significant influence on effect sizes. Empty cells denote no effect and na is used when effect could not be tested for the lack of data

ISSN: 2047-2382