Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
Type of publication: research article
Type of publication (PDB): Straipsnis Clarivate Analytics Web of Science / Article in Clarivate Analytics Web of Science (S1)
Field of Science: Ekologija ir aplinkotyra / Ecology and environmental sciences (N012)
Author(s): Sabatini, Francesco Maria;Keeton, William S;Lindner, Marcus;Svoboda, Miroslav;Verkerk, Pieter Johannes;Bauhus, Juergen;Bruelheide, Helge;Burrascano, Sabina;Debaive, Nicolas;Duarte, Ines Marques;Garbarino, Matteo;Grigoriadis, Nikolaos;Lombardi, Fabio;Mikolas, Martin;Meyer, Peter;Motta, Renzo;Mozgeris, Gintautas;Nunes, Leonia;Odor, Peter;Panayotov, Momchil;Ruete, Alejandro;Simovski, Bojan;Stillhard, Jonas;Svensson, Johan;Szwagrzyk, Jerzy;Tikkanen, Olli-Pekka;Vandekerkhove, Kris;Volosyanchuk, Roman;Vrska, Tomas;Zlatanov, Tzvetan;Kuemmerle, Tobias
Title: Protection gaps and restoration opportunities for primary forests in Europe
Is part of: Diversity and Distributions. Hoboken : Wiley-Blackwell, 2020, vol. 26, iss. 12
Extent: p. 1646-1662
Date: 2020
Keywords: Biodiversity conservation;Conservation priorities;Gap analysis;Old-growth forest;Primary forest;Potected areas;Protection gap;Restoration opportunities;Strict protection;Virgin forest
Abstract: Aims: Primary forests are critical for forest biodiversity and provide key ecosystem services. In Europe, these forests are particularly scarce and it is unclear whether they are sufficiently protected. Here we aim to: (a) understand whether extant primary forests are representative of the range of naturally occurring forest types, (b) identify forest types which host enough primary forest under strict protection to meet conservation targets and (c) highlight areas where restoration is needed and feasible. Location: Europe. Methods: We combined a unique geodatabase of primary forests with maps of forest cover, potential natural vegetation, biogeographic regions and protected areas to quantify the proportion of extant primary forest across Europe's forest types and to identify gaps in protection. Using spatial predictions of primary forest locations to account for underreporting of primary forests, we then highlighted areas where restoration could complement protection. Results: We found a substantial bias in primary forest distribution across forest types. Of the 54 forest types we assessed, six had no primary forest at all, and in twothirds of forest types, less than 1% of forest was primary. Even if generally protected, only ten forest types had more than half of their primary forests strictly protected. Protecting all documented primary forests requires expanding the protected area networks by 1,132 km2 (19,194 km2 when including also predicted primary forests). Encouragingly, large areas of non-primary forest existed inside protected areas for most types, thus presenting restoration opportunities. Main conclusion: Europe's primary forests are in a perilous state, as also acknowledged by EU's “Biodiversity Strategy for 2030.” Yet, there are considerable opportunities for ensuring better protection and restoring primary forest structure, composition and functioning, at least partially. We advocate integrated [...]
Affiliation(s): Miškų ir ekologijos fakultetas
Vytauto Didžiojo universitetas
Appears in Collections:1. Straipsniai / Articles
Universiteto mokslo publikacijos / University Research Publications

Files in This Item:
marc.xml16.69 kBXMLView/Open

MARC21 XML metadata

Show full item record
Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats
Export to Other Non-XML Formats

CORE Recommender

Citations 5

checked on Apr 24, 2021

Page view(s)

checked on May 1, 2021


checked on May 1, 2021

Google ScholarTM



This item is licensed under a Creative Commons License Creative Commons