How Do You Rate This Publication?       

Title:	Herptofaunal species richness responses to forest landscape structure in Arkansas
Author(s):	Loehle, Craig; Wigley, T. Bently; Shipman, Paul A.; Fox, Stanley F.; Rutzmoser, Scott; Thill, Ronald E.; Melchiors, M. Anthony
Date:	2005
Source:	Forest Ecologyand Management 209 (2005) 293-308
Description:	Species accumulation curves were used to study reiationships between herpetofaunal richness and habitat characteristics on four watersheds in Arkansas that differed markedly with respect to management intensity. Selected habitat characteristics were estimated for stands containing the sample points and within buffers with radii of 250. 500 m, and 1 km surrounding the sample polnts. Ricllness of all three herpetofaunal groups (amphibians, reptiles, and all herpetofauna) was greater in hardwood forests than in pine or mixed pine-hardwood. For all three groups, the youngest forest age class had the most species. For amphibians and total herpetofauna, richness declined as stand ages increased. Reptiles had the highest richness at sample points with the lowest class of stand basal area (BA), whereas amphibians were richest at points having the highest BA. In contrast to expectations, there was no effect of distance from water on richness of any taxa; however, we may have had incomplete data on the spatial dktribution of small ponds outside the sample plots because they were not recorded in the GIs data. Results for distance to roads were ambiguous. but with more separation of compared curves as more plots were sampled. a positive influence of road proximity was suggested. There was a positive effect of buffer age diversity at the 75i) m scale for all three herpetofaunal groups. but less so at scales >250 m except for amphibians, which also showed a positive cffect at the 1 km scale. The two most intensively managed watersheds had higher species richness than the two less intensively managed watersheds for reptiles, amphibians, and both groups combined. In this study landscape, where urban lnd agricultural influences were minimal. we did not observe negative impacts of forest management and associated.
	View and Print this Publication (1.29 MB)
Pristine Version:	An uncaptured or "pristine" version of this publication is available. It has not been subjected to OCR (Optical Character Recognition) and therefore does not have any errors in the text. However it is a larger file size and some people may experience long download times. The "pristine" version of this publication is available here: View and Print the PRISTINE copy of this Publication (1.62 MB)
Publication Notes:	We recommend that you also print this page and attach it to the printout of the article, to retain the full citation information. This article was written and prepared by U.S. Government employees on official time, and is therefore in the public domain. Our on-line publications are scanned and captured using Adobe Acrobat. During the capture process some typographical errors may occur. Please contact the SRS Webmaster, srswebmaster@fs.fed.us if you notice any errors which make this publication unuseable.
	Get the latest version of the Adobe Acrobat reader or Acrobat Reader for Windows with Search and Accessibility