Responses of Bark Beetle

JAPB186_proof ■ 4 October 2016 ■ 1/5

Journal of Asia-Paciﬁc Biodiversity xxx (2016) 1e5

55 HOSTED BY Contents lists available at ScienceDirect 56 57 Journal of Asia-Paciﬁc Biodiversity 58 59 60 journal homepage: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/japb 61 62 63 Original article 64 65 1 Responses of bark beetle (Coleoptera: Curculionidae: Scolytinae) 66 2 67 3 community structure to green-tree retention in pine tree forest from 68 4 Korea 69 5 70 6 a b a,c a,d a 71 7 Q14 Da-Som Kim , Sang Wook Park , Seung Jin Roh , Jun Hyoung Jeon , Tae- Hee Yoo , 72 a e a,* 8 Hyun-Kyung Yoon , Hyun-Seop Kim , Bong-Kyu Byun 73 9 a Department of Biological Science and Biotechnology, Hannam University, Daejeon 34054, South Korea 74 10 b Q1 Research Institute of Forest Insects Diversity, Hwaseong 18379, South Korea 75 11 c Gyeryongsan Natural History Musemum, Gongju 32626, South Korea 76 d 12 Microbiological Resouce Center, Korea Research Institute of Bioscience and Biotechnology, Jeong-eup 56212, South Korea 77 e Forest Practice Research Center, Korea Forest Research Institute, Pocheon 11185, South Korea 13 78 14 79 15 80 article info abstract 16 81 17 82 18 Article history: This study was aimed to investigate the response of bark beetle community structure to green-tree Received 29 August 2016 83 19 retention in a Korean pine tree forest between 2013 and 2015. Five types of retention methods were Received in revised form evaluated to investigate the effect on insect community structure at various sites in Keunjeogol, Sam- 84 20 8 September 2016 cheok, and Gangwon-do. Lindgren funnel traps were installed to collect insects from July to August, over 85 21 Accepted 13 September 2016 a 3-year period. Overall, 690 individuals and 29 species of Scolytinae were collected, with populations of 86 Available online xxx 22 insects appearing to gradually increase by each year of the study. Results of the insect community 87 23 analysis showed that most survey sites presented a higher diversity than the control site annually except 88 24 Keywords: bark beetles in 2015. This study can be used as a baseline dataset for the long-term study of early changes in insect 89 25 green-tree retention community in response to green-tree retention in forests. 90 26 initial response Copyright Ó 2016, National Science Museum of Korea (NSMK) and Korea National Arboretum (KNA). 91 27 pine tree forest Production and hosting by Elsevier. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http:// 92 creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/). 28 93 29 94 30 95 31 96 32 97 33 Introduction There have been several studies on the effects of clear-cutting 98 34 and green-tree retention on forests in North America and Europe, 99 35 Green-tree retention is a method of managing forests by but there are few studies of the effects on insects, such as arthro- 100 36 retaining live trees and snags following timber harvest (Rosenvald pods, which play a signiﬁcant role in biological diversity composi- 101 37 Q2 and Lohmus 2008; Vanha-Majarnaa and Jalonen 2001; Franklin tion (Huhta et al 1967; McIver et al 1992; Niemela et al 1993; 102 38 et al 1997; Aubry et al 1999; Beese et al 2003; Halaj et al 2009). Hoekstra et al 1995; Koivula et al 2002; Moore et al 2002; Siira- 103 39 Clear-cutting results in not only a lack of old trees and forest re- Pietikamen et al 2003; Halaj et al 2008, 2009). Among insect Q3 104 40 sources such as woody debris, but also reduced populations of taxa, the effects on assemblages of carabid beetles have been 105 41 forest taxa and so forth (Haila 1994; Heliövaara and Väisänen 1984; relatively well studied, resulting in carabids being regarded as in- 106 42 Esseen et al 1992, 1997; Berg et al 1994; Enoksson et al 1995; Fries dicators of environmental change and habitat quality (Fainio and 107 43 et al 1997; Koivula et al 2002). Green-tree retention is a method of Niemelä et al 2000; Pihlaja et al 2006). Q4 108 44 maintaining forest biodiversity, and is commonly used in North In Korea, there have been several recent studies of vegetation 109 45 America and Europe (Halpern and Raphael 1999; Rosenvald and fauna in the initial phase after retention harvests were conducted: 110 46 Lõhmus 2008; Jeon et al 2014). Jeon et al (2014) studied insect fauna in designated regeneration Q5 111 47 forests for a baseline of comparative analysis of insect diversity, and 112 48 Roh et al (2015) conducted a study of coleopteran insect commu- 113 49 * Corresponding author. Tel.: þ82 42 629 8892; fax: þ82 42 629 8750. nities in a green-tree retention forest. 114 50 E-mail address: [email protected] (B.-K. Byun). In this study, we investigated the changing patterns in the 115 Peer review under responsibility of National Science Museum of Korea (NSMK) and 51 Scolytinae communities of green-tree retention forests over a 3- 116 Korea National Arboretum (KNA). 52 117 53 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.japb.2016.09.007 118 54 pISSN2287-884X eISSN2287-9544/Copyright Ó 2016, National Science Museum of Korea (NSMK) and Korea National Arboretum (KNA). Production and hosting by Elsevier. 119 This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

Please cite this article in press as: Kim D-S, et al., Responses of bark beetle (Coleoptera: Curculionidae: Scolytinae) community structure to green-tree retention in pine tree forest from Korea, Journal of Asia-Paciﬁc Biodiversity (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.japb.2016.09.007 JAPB186_proof ■ 4 October 2016 ■ 2/5

2 DS Kim et al. / Journal of Asia-Paciﬁc Biodiversity xxx (2016) 1e5

1 year period. This will provide the baseline dataset for a future study each survey site. Bottles of 100 mL ethanol were attached to the 66 2 of the effects of green-tree retention on insect diversity after forest traps to attract the insects, and antifreeze was applied in the 67 3 regeneration. collection container to prevent captured insects from rotting. The 68 4 collected insects were identified and listed according to the 69 5 Materials and methods “Checklist of insects from Korea” (ESK and KSAE 1994) and “Insects 70 6 of Korea” (Park et al 2012). 71 7 Survey sites and period 72 8 73 Analysis of insect community 9 The study sites are located in a pine tree forest (5.5 ha) in 74 10 75 Keunjeogol, Samcheok, Gangwon-do, Korea. A survey was con- Insect communities were recorded per type of retention over 11 76 ducted every year in July and August from 2013 to 2015 (Table 1). the 3-year period, and analyzed using diversity, abundance, even- 12 fi 77 The survey site was divided into ve areas, each with a different ness, and dominance indexes. Q6 13 method of retention (see Roh et al 2015). For convenience, these 78 14 areas were designated with the letters “A” to “E”: a seed-tree cut- 79 15 ting area (A), a group seed-tree area (B), a strip clear-cutting area (C, 80 Table 4. Number of individuals of Scolytinae by Lindgren funnel trap from five 16 ¼ 81 width 40 m), a patch clear-cutting area (D, diameter 40 m), and a survey sites in 2015. 17 control area (E). 82 18 No. Species A B C D E Total 83 19 Survey methods 1 Platypus lewisi Blandford 1 1 84 20 2 Platypus koryoensis (Murayama) 1 1 2 85 21 3 Hylastes parallelus Chapuis 1 1 86 In order to survey the community structure of Scolytinae, in- 4 Anisandrus maiche (Eggers) 5 5 5 15 22 sects were collected every year from 2013 to 2015, using Lindgren 5 Cnetus mutilatus (Blandford) 63 16 3 14 6 102 87 23 funnel traps installed every year in July, and after 50 days in August. 6 Xyleborinus attenuatus (Blandford) 2 1 3 88 24 In the five survey sites, two Lindgren funnel traps were installed at 7 Xyleborinus saxeseni (Ratzeburg) 1 1 89 25 8 Ambrosiodmus rubricollis Eichhoff 3126 90 9 Ambrosiodmus lewisi Blandford 7 3 10 26 91 10 Xyleborus seriatus Blandford 1 1 27 92 Table 1. Survey period of the installation and collection dates in this study. 11 Euwallacea validus (Eichhoff) 1 1 28 12 Cyclorhipidion pelliculosum (Eichhoff) 3 3 93 29 Year Installation date Collection date 13 Cyclorhipidion bodoanum (Reitter) 2 2 94 30 14 Xylosandrus crasiussculus 3 4 2211 95 2013 July 13 August 27 (Motschulsky) 31 2014 July 9 August 29 15 Xyleborus sp.1 114 7 35 21 1 178 96 32 2015 July 4 August 29 16 Hypothenemus eruditus Westwood 2 2 97 33 17 Scolytoplatypus tycon Blandford 0 98 34 18 Scolytoplatypus sp.1 6 4 3 1 14 99 19 Xyleborus pfeili (Ratzeburg) 0 35 Table 2. Number of individuals of Scolytinae by Lindgren funnel trap from five 100 20 Xylosandrus brevis (Eichhoff) 0 Q12 survey sites in 2013. 36 21 Xylosandrus germanus (Blandford) 19 6 5 5 35 101 37 No. Species A B C D E Total Total 228 44 47 49 20 388 102 38 103 1 Scolytoplatypus sp. 1 Near mikado 9884231 39 2 Scolytus frontalis Olivier 1 1 Table 5. Number of species and individuals of Scolytinae from five survey sites from 104 40 3 Cryphalus fulvus Niijima 2 3 5 2013 to 2015. 105 41 4 Hylastes parallelus Chapuis 1 1 106 Year Sites 42 5 Hylurgops interstitialis (Chapuis) 1 1 107 6 Xyleborus rubricollis Eichhoff 1 1 2 43 A B C D E Total 108 7 Xyleborinus saxeseni (Ratzeburg) 1 1 44 8 Xyleborus sp. Near muticus 55212 Sp. In. Sp. In. Sp. In. Sp. In. Sp. In. Sp. In. 109 45 9 Xyleborus sp. Near japonicus 112013 2 15 3 10 6 20 5 11 2 3 10 64 110 46 10 Xyleborus mutilatus Blandford 6 3 9 2014 10 148 8 34 5 32 8 22 2 2 13 238 111 47 Total 20 10 20 11 3 64 2015 14 228 8 44 5 47 7 49 8 20 18 388 112 48 In. ¼ individuals; Sp. ¼ species. 113 49 114 50 Table 3. Number of individuals of Scolytinae by Lindgren funnel trap from five 115 survey sites in 2014. 51 116 52 No. Species A B C D E Total 117 53 1 Xyleborus validus Eichhoff 1 1 118 54 2 Scolytoplatypus tycon Blandford 1 1 119 55 3 Cyclorhipidion bodoanus (Reitter) 7 1 1 6 15 120 56 4 Xyleborus lewisi Blandford 1 1 2 121 5 Xyleborus seriatus Blandford 1 1 57 6 Hylurgops interstitialis (Chapuis) 1 1 122 58 7 Xyleborinus saxeseni (Ratzeburg) 1 1 2 123 59 8 Xylosandrus germanus (Blandford) 8 4 2 4 18 124 60 9 Xyleborus mutilatus Blandford 29 3 1 1 34 125 10 Xylosandrus crasiussculus 9158 32 61 (Motschulsky) 126 62 11 Anisandrus maiche (Eggers, 1942) 4 6 1 11 127 63 12 Scolytoplatypus sp.1 9 2 1 12 128 64 13 Xyleborus sp.1 79 2 14 13 108 129 Total 148 34 2 22 32 238 65 Figure 1. Diversity and abundance indexes of Scolytinae from 2013 to 2015. 130

DS Kim et al. / Journal of Asia-Paciﬁc Biodiversity xxx (2016) 1e5 3

1 66 2 67 3 68 4 69 5 70 6 71 7 72 8 73 9 74 10 75 11 76 12 77 13 78 14 79 15 80 16 81 17 82 18 83 19 84 20 Figure 2. Diversity and abundance indexes of Scolytinae by survey areas. A, Seed-tree cutting area. B, Group seed-tree area. C, Strip clear-cutting area (width ¼ 40 m). D, Clear- 85 cutting in patches area (width ¼ 40 m). E, Control area. 21 86 22 87 Diversity index 23 88 Shannon and Weaver (1949) diversity index (H0) 24 P 89 H0 ¼ e ((n /N) log2(n /N)) 25 i i 90 Abundance index (R0) 26 91 R0 ¼ S e 1/log10 N 27 92 Evenness index (E) 28 93 E ¼ H0/log10 S 29 94 Dominance index (D ) 30 i 95 D ¼ n /N 100 31 i i 96 32 97 33 Results 98 34 99 35 Survey of Scolytinae 100 36 101 37 Over the course of this study, 690 individuals and 29 species of 102 38 Scolytinae were collected from Lindgren funnel traps. The number 103 39 of insects collected increased every year with 64 individuals and 10 104 40 species in 2013 (Table 2), 238 individuals and 13 species in 2014 105 41 (Table 3), and 388 individuals and 21 species in 2015 (Table 4). 106 42 The results by survey site in 2013 were as follows: 15 in- 107 43 dividuals and two species in the seed-tree cutting area, 10 in- 108 44 dividuals and three species in the group seed-tree area, 20 109 45 individuals and six species in the strip clear-cutting area, 11 in- 110 46 dividuals and five species in the patch clear-cutting area, and 111 47 three individuals and two species in the control area. Of all the 112 48 retention methods, the highest number of individuals and spe- 113 49 cies were observed in the patch clear-cutting area. In 2014, the 114 50 seed-tree cutting area performed the best, with 148 individuals 115 51 and 10 species, whereas other site results were as follows: 34 116 52 individuals and eight species in the group seed-tree area; 32 117 53 individuals and five spices in the strip clear-cutting area; 22 in- 118 54 dividuals and eight species in the patch clear-cutting area; and 119 55 two individuals and two species in the control area. All results of 120 56 the survey in 2014 were generally higher than those of the pre- 121 57 vious year and the control area. In 2015, 228 individuals and 14 122 58 species were collected in the seed-tree cutting area, 44 in- 123 59 dividuals and eight species in the group seed-tree area, 47 in- 124 60 dividuals and five species in the strip clear-cutting area, 49 125 61 individuals and seven species in the patch clear-cutting area, and 126 62 20 individuals and eight species in the control area. In the final 127 63 year, the seed-tree cutting area performed the best, with all sites 128 64 collecting more individuals and species than in 2013 and 2014 Figure 3. Diversity and abundance indexes of Scolytinae from 2013 to 2015. A, Seed- 129 tree cutting area. B, Group seed-tree area. C, Strip clear-cutting area (width ¼ 40 m). 65 (Table 5). D, Clear-cutting in patches area (width ¼ 40 m). E, Control area. 130

4 DS Kim et al. / Journal of Asia-Paciﬁc Biodiversity xxx (2016) 1e5

1 Table 6. Dominance index and evenness index for Scolytinae from ﬁve survey sites from 2013 to 2015. 66 2 67 3 Year Sites 68 4 A B C D E Total 69 5 DI EI DI EI DI EI DI EI DI EI DI EI 70 6 71 2013 60 2.236 80 1.339 40 1.963 36.3 2.1 66.7 2.114 48.4 1.573 7 2014 53.378 1.496 44.118 1.853 100 2.303 63.636 1.493 40.625 1.995 45.378 1.563 72 8 2015 50 1.298 36.364 1.979 74.468 1.275 42.857 1.782 30 2.046 45.876 1.326 73

9 DI ¼ dominance index; EI ¼ evenness index. 74 10 75 11 76 Insect community analysis higher than in the control area. The results of this study reflect 12 77 those of previous studies, showing that insect communities are 13 78 The yearly insect community diversity indexes were 1.573 in improved by green-tree retention (Roh et al 2015). 14 79 2013, 1.741 in 2014, and 1.665 in 2015, with the highest diversity The aim of this study was to observe the response of Scolytinae 15 80 Q7 recorded in 2014 (Figures 1 and 2). By type of retention, diversity to green-tree retention, as a basis for a long-term study of initial 16 81 indexes in 2013 were as follows: 0.673 in the seed tree cutting area; changes in insect community in green-tree retention forest. The 17 82 0.639 in the group seed-tree area; 1.527 in the strip clear-cutting results of this study can be used as baseline data of additional 18 83 area; 1.468 in the patch clear cutting area; and 0.637 in the con- research for efficient forest management generally suffering from 19 84 trol area. The strip clear-cutting area had the highest diversity, insufficient research. 20 85 being more than 2.3 times that of the control area (Figure 3A). In 21 86 2014, diversity indexes were calculated to be 1.496 in the seed-tree Uncited reference 22 87 cutting area, 1.674 in the group seed-tree area, 1.395 in the strip 23 88 clear-cutting area,1.349 in the patch clear-cutting area, and 0.693 in Fainio and Niemela, 2004. 24 Q13 89 the control area. Among these, the highest diversity was recorded 25 90 in the group seed-tree area, which was 2.4 times higher than that in 26 Acknowledgments 91 the control area (Figure 3B). Diversity indexes in 2015 were 1.488 in 27 92 the seed-tree cutting area, 1.787 in the group seed-tree area, 0.891 28 The present study was supported by the Forest Practice Research 93 in the strip clear-cutting area, 1.506 in the patch clear-cutting area, 29 Center, Korea Forest Research Institute (Project No. SC 0400-2012- 94 and 1.848 in the control area. In 2015, the control area had the 30 01). We also thank Mr Yeon Sangyeon of the Department of Bio- 95 highest diversity of all the survey sites (Figure 3C). 31 logical Science and Biotechnology, Hannam University, for his help 96 The yearly abundance indexes were 4.983 in 2013, 5.049 in 2014, fi 32 in eld collection. 97 and 6.567 in 2015, increasing an average of 1.2 times every year. 33 98 Compared across survey sites, abundance indexes increased grad- 34 Appendix 1. List of Scolytinae collected in this study from 2013 99 ually every year in the seed-tree cutting area, the group seed-tree 35 to 2015. Q9,11 100 area, and the control area, but not in the strip clear-cutting area Q10 36 101 and the patch clear-cutting area. The highest abundance recorded 37 102 was 5.513 in the seed-tree cutting area in 2015. 38 103 The dominant species were Scolytoplatypus cf. mikado in 2013 39 104 with 31 individuals, and Xyleborus sp. 1 in both 2014 and 2015 with 40 Species A B C D E Total 105 108 and 178 individuals, respectively (Table 6). 41 1 Ambrosiodmus lewisi Blandford 7 3 10 106 42 2 Ambrosiodmus rubricollis Eichhoff 3 1 2 6 107 3 Anisandrus maiche (Eggers) 9 11 1 5 26 43 Discussion 4 Cnetus mutilatus (Blandford) 63 16 3 14 6 102 108 44 5 Cryphalus fulvus Niijima 2 3 5 109 45 Scolytinae are known to play important roles in forest ecosys- 6 Cyclorhipidion bodoanum (Reitter) 9 1 1 6 17 110 46 tems by decomposing wood and providing resources for forest 7 Cyclorhipidion pelliculosum (Eichhoff) 3 3 111 8 Euwallacea validus (Eichhoff) 1 1 47 species (Wermelinger 2004; Toivanen et al 2009). 112 9 Hylastes parallelus Chapuis 1 1 2 48 In the present study, the number of species and individuals of 10 Hylurgops interstitialis (Chapuis) 1 1 2 113 49 Scolytinae in green-tree retention forest increased yearly. The 11 Hypothenemus eruditus Westwood 2 2 114 50 control area had the lowest number of individuals every year 12 Platypus koryoensis (Murayama) 1 1 2 115 51 from 2013 to 2015. In the seed-tree cutting area in 2014 and 13 Platypus lewisi Blandford 1 1 116 14 Scolytoplatypus sp.1 Near mikado 9 884231 52 2015, the number of species and individuals were the highest 15 Scolytoplatypus sp.1 15 6 1 3 1 26 117 53 among the survey sites because of the presence of the dominant 16 Scolytoplatypus tycon Blandford 1 1 118 54 species, Xyleborus sp. 1. The genus Xyleborus feeds mainly on 17 Scolytus frontalis Olivier 1 1 119 55 Quercus spp., which constituted the highest number of species in 18 Xyleborinus attenuatus (Blandford) 2 1 3 120 19 Xyleborinus saxeseni (Ratzeburg) 2 2 4 56 survey site vegetation regeneration (Jeon et al 2014). Both di- 121 20 Xyleborus lewisi Blandford 1 1 2 57 versity and abundance indexes were highest in the strip clear- 21 Xyleborus mutilatus Blandford 35 3 3 1 1 43 122 58 cutting area in 2013 and the patch clear-cutting area in 2014. 22 Xyleborus rubricollis Eichhoff 1 1 2 123 59 In 2015, the diversity index was highest in the control area; 23 Xyleborus seriatus Blandford 1 1 2 124 60 however, the result needs to be reevaluated because of the low 24 Xyleborus sp. Near japonicus 11 125 25 Xyleborus sp. Near muticus 55212 61 number of species. 26 Xyleborus sp. 1 193 9 49 34 1 286 126 62 The dominant species, Xyleborus sp. 1, in the seed-tree cutting 27 Xyleborus validus Eichhoff 1 1 127 63 area, the strip clear-cutting area, and the patch clear-cutting area 28 Xylosandrus crasiussculus (Motschulsky) 12 19 10 2 43 128 64 seems to have affected and distorted the result. In the present 29 Xylosandrus germanus (Blandford) 27 10 7 9 53 129 Total 396 88 89 92 25 690 65 study, generally all community indices in retention sites appeared 130

DS Kim et al. / Journal of Asia-Paciﬁc Biodiversity xxx (2016) 1e5 5

1 References Hoekstra JM, Bell RT, Launer AE, Murphy DD. 1995. Soil arthropod abundance in 37 2 coast redwood forest: effect of selective timber harvest. Environmental Ento- 38 mology 24:246e252. Aubry KB, Arnaranthus MP, Halpern CB, et al. 1999. Evaluating the effects of varying 3 Huhta V, Karppinen E, Nurminen M, Val pas A. 1967. Effect of silvicultural practices 39 levels and patterns of green-tree retention: experimental design of the DEMO upon arthropod, annelid and nematode populations in coniferous forest soil. 4 study. Northwest Science 73:12e26. 40 Annales Zoologici Fennici 4:87e143. 5 Beese WJ, Dunsworth BG, Zielke K, et al. 2003. Maintaining attributes of old- 41 Jeon JH, Roh SJ, Shin SB, et al. 2014. Insect fauna of the scheduled regeneration growth forests in coastal B.C. through variable retention. Forestry Chronicle 6 forests in Samcheok, Gangwon-do, Korea in summer. Journal of Asia-Paciﬁc 42 79:570e578. 7 Biodiversity 7:e72ee75. 43 Berg Å, Ehnström B, Gustaffsson L, et al. 1994. Threatened plant, animal, and fungus Koivula M, Kukkonen J, Niemela J. 2002. Boreal carabid-beetle (Coleoptera, Cara- 8 species in Swedish forests: distribution and habitat associations. Conservation 44 bidae) assemblages along the clear-cut originated succession gradient. Biodi- Biology 8:718e731. 9 versity & Conservation 11:1269e1288. 45 The Entomological Society of Korea (ESK) and Korean Society of Applied Ento- 10 McIver JD, Parsons GL, Moldenlce AR. 1992. Litter spider succession after clear- 46 mology (KSAE). 1994. Check list of insects from Korea. Seoul: Konkuk University cutting in a western coniferous forest. Canadian journal of Forest Research 22: 11 Press. 47 984e992. 12 Enoksson B, Angelstam P, Larsson K. 1995. Deciduous forest and resident birds: the 48 Moore J, Ouimet R, Camire C, et al. 2002. Effects of two silvicultural practices on soil problem of fragmentation within a coniferous forest landscape. Landscape 13 fauna abundance in a northern hardwood forest. Quebec. Canada. Canadian 49 Ecology 10:267e275. Journal of Soil Science 82:105e113. 14 Esseen PA, Ehnström B, Ericson L, et al. 1992. Boreal forestsdthe focal habitats of 50 Niemela J, Langer D, Spence JR. 1993. Effects of clear-cut harvesting on boreal 15 Fennoscandia. In: Hansson L, editor. Ecological principles of nature conservation. 51 ground beetle assemblages in western Canada. Conservation Biology 7:551e561. London: Elsevier. 16 Park KT, Kwon YJ, Park JK, et al. 2012. Insects of Korea. Seoul: Geobook. 52 Esseen PA, Ehnström B, Ericson L, et al. 1997. Boreal forests. Ecological Bulletin 46: Pihlaja M, Koivula M, Niemela J. 2006. Responses of boreal carabid beetle assem- 17 16e47. 53 blages (Coleoptera, Carabidae) to clear-cutting and top-soil preparation. Forest 18 Fainio J, Niemela J. 2004. Ground beetles (Coleoptera: Carabidae) as bioindicators. 54 Ecology and Management 222:182e190. Q8 Biodiversity and Conservation 12:487e506. 19 Roh SJ, Son JD, Jeon JH, et al. 2015. Initial change of Coleopteran insect community 55 Franklin JF, Berg DR, Thornburgh DA, et al. 1997. Alternative silvicultural approaches affected by anthropogenic disturbances within pine tree forest. Korean Journal 20 to timber harvesting: variable retention harvest systems. In: Kohm KA, 56 of Environment Ecology 29:539e551. 21 Franklin JF, editors. Creating a forestry for the 21st century: the science of 57 Rosenvald R, Lõhmus A. 2008. For what, when, and where is green-tree retention ecosystem management. Washington, DC: Island Press. 22 better than clear-cutting? A review of the biodiversity aspects. Forest Ecology 58 Fries C, Johansson O, Pettersson B, et al. 1997. Silvicultural models to maintain and 23 and Management 255:1e15. 59 restore natural stand structures in Swedish boreal forests. Forest Ecology and Shannon CE, Weaver W. 1949. The mathematical theory of communication. Urbana, 24 Management 94:89e103. 60 IL: Univ of Illinois. Haila Y. 1994. Preserving ecological diversity in boreal forests. Annales Zoologici 25 Siira-Pietikainen A, Hairni J, Siitonen J. 2003. Short-term responses of soil macro- 61 Fennici 31:203e217. 26 arthropod community to clear felling and alternative forest regeneration 62 Halaj J, Halpern CB, Yi H. 2008. Responses of litter-dwelling spiders and carabid methods. Forest Ecology and Management 172:339e353. 27 beetles to varying levels and patterns of green-tree retention. Forest Ecology and 63 Toivanen T, Liikanen V, Kotiaho JS. 2009. Effects of forest restoration treatments on 28 Management 225:887e900. 64 the abundance of bark beetles in Norway spruce forests of southern Finland. Halaj J, Halpern CB, Yi H. 2009. Effects of green-tree retention on abundance and 29 Forest Ecology and Management 257:117e125. 65 guild composition of corticolous arthropods. Forest Ecology and Management Wermelinger B. 2004. Ecology and management of spruce bark beetle Ips 30 258:850e859. 66 typographusda review of recent research. Forest Ecology and Management 202: 31 Halpern CB, Raphael MG. 1999. Special issue on retention harvests in Northwestern 67 67e82. forest ecosystems: The Demonstration of Ecosystem Management Options 32 Vanha-Majarnaa I, Jalonen L. 2001. Green tree retention in Fennoscandian forestry. 68 (DEMO) Study. Northwest Sci 73:1e2. Scandinavian journal of Forest Research Supplement 3:79e90. 33 Heliövaara K, Väisänen R. 1984. Effects of modern forestry on northwestern Euro- 69 34 pean forest invertebrates: a synthesis. Acta Forestalia Fennica 189:1e32. 70 35 71 36 72