Sundseth, K. & Creed, P. Natura 2000: Protecting Europe’s Biodiversity (Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, 2008).
Wilk, T., Jujka, M., Krogulec, J. & Chylarecki, P. Important Bird Areas of International Importance in Poland (OTOP, 2010).
European Commission. Report on the Status of and Trends for Habitat Types and Species Covered by the Birds and Habitats Directives for the 2007–2012 Period as Required Under Article 17 of the Habitats Directive and Article 12 of the Birds Directive (European Commission DG Environment, 2015).
Birds Directive. Council Directive 79/409/EEC on the Conservation of Wild Birds. http://www.jncc.gov.uk/page-1373 (1979).
Butler, S. J., Boccaccio, L., Gregory, R. D., Vorisek, P. & Norris, K. Quantifying the impact of land-use change to European farmland bird populations. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 137, 348–357. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2010.03.005 (2010).
Google Scholar
Gregory, R. D., Skorpilova, J., Vorisek, P. & Butler, S. An analysis of trends, uncertainty and species selection shows contrasting trends of widespread forest and farmland birds in Europe. Ecol. Indic. 103, 676–687. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2019.04.064 (2019).
Google Scholar
European Commission. The Interpretation Manual of European Union Habitats (European Commission DG Environment, 2007).
Tews, J. et al. Animal species diversity driven by habitat heterogeneity/diversity: The importance of keystone structures. J. Biogeogr. 31, 79–92. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.0305-0270.2003.00994.x (2004).
Google Scholar
Bujoczek, M., Rybicka, J. & Bujoczek, L. Effects of disturbances in a subalpine forest on its structural indicators and bird diversity. Ecol. Indic. 112, 106126. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2020.106126 (2020).
Google Scholar
van Galen, L. G., Jordan, G. J. & Baker, S. C. Relationships between coarse woody debris habitat quality and forest maturity attributes. Conserv. Sci. Pract. 1, e55. https://doi.org/10.1111/csp2.55 (2019).
Google Scholar
Paillet, Y. et al. The indicator side of tree microhabitats: A multi-taxon approach based on bats, birds and saproxylic beetles. J. Appl. Ecol. 55, 2147–2159. https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2664.13181 (2018).
Google Scholar
Basile, M. et al. What do tree-related microhabitats tell us about the abundance of forest-dwelling bats, birds, and insects?. J. Environ. Manag. 264, 110401. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2020.110401 (2020).
Google Scholar
Wesołowski, T. Lessons from long-term hole-nester studies in a primeval temperate forest. J. Ornithol. 148, 395–405. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10336-007-0198-1 (2007).
Google Scholar
Maziarz, M. & Broughton, R. K. Breeding microhabitat selection by Great Tits Parus major in a deciduous primeval forest (Białowieża National Park, Poland). Bird Study 62, 358–367. https://doi.org/10.1080/00063657.2015.1050994 (2015).
Google Scholar
Van der Hoek, Y., Gaona, G. V. & Martin, K. The diversity, distribution and conservation status of the tree-cavity nesting birds of the world. Divers. Distrib. 23, 1120–1131. https://doi.org/10.1111/ddi.12601 (2017).
Google Scholar
McElhinny, C., Gibbons, P., Brack, C. & Bauhus, J. Forest and woodland stand structural complexity: Its definition and measurement. For. Ecol. Manag. 218, 1–24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2005.08.034 (2005).
Google Scholar
Holmes, R. T., Bonney, R. E. & Pacala, S. W. Guild structure of the Hubbard Brook bird community: A multivariate approach. Ecology 60, 512–520. https://doi.org/10.2307/1936071 (1979).
Google Scholar
Lain, E. J., Haney, A., Burris, J. M. & Burton, J. Response of vegetation and birds to severe wind disturbance and salvage logging in a southern boreal forest. For. Ecol. Manag. 256, 863–871. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2008.05.018 (2008).
Google Scholar
Larrieu, L. et al. Tree related microhabitats in temperate and Mediterranean European forest: A hierarchical typology for inventory standarization. Ecol. Indic. 83, 194–207. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2017.08.051 (2018).
Google Scholar
Zielewska-Büttner, K., Heurich, M., Müller, J. & Braunisch, V. Remotely sensed single tree data enable the determination of habitat thresholds for the three-toed woodpecker (Picoides tridactylus). Remote Sens. 10, 1972. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs10121972 (2018).
Google Scholar
Mikusiński, G., Gromadzki, M. & Chylarecki, P. Woodpeckers as indicators of forest bird diversity. Conserv. Biol. 15, 208–217 (2001).
Google Scholar
Wesołowski, T. & Rowiński, P. The breeding behaviour of the Nuthatch Sitta europaea in relation to natural hole attributes in a primeval forest. Bird Study 51, 143–155. https://doi.org/10.1080/00063650409461346 (2004).
Google Scholar
Barbaro, L. et al. Hierarchical habitat selection by Eurasian Pygmy Owls Glaucidium passerinum in oldgrowth forests of the southern French Prealps. J. Ornithol. 157, 333–342. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10336-015-1285-3 (2016).
Google Scholar
Basile, M., Balestrieri, R., de Groot, M., Flajšman, K. & Posillico, M. Conservation of birds as a function of forestry. Ital. J. Agron. 11, 42–48 (2016).
Harestad, A. S. & Keisker, D. G. Nest tree use by primary cavity-nesting birds in south central British Columbia. Can. J. Zool. 67, 1067–1073. https://doi.org/10.1139/z89-148 (1989).
Google Scholar
Walankiewicz, W., Czeszczewik, D., Mitrus, C. & Bida, E. Znaczenie martwych drzew dla zespołu dzięciołów w lasach liściastych Puszczy Białowieskiej. Notatki Ornitol. 43, 61–71 (2002).
Czeszczewik, D. & Walankiewicz, W. Natural nest sites of the Pied Flycatcher Ficedula hypoleuca in a primeval forest. Ardea 91, 221–230 (2003).
Kosiński, Z. & Kempa, M. Density distribution and nest−sites selection of woodpeckers Picidae in managed forest of western Poland. Pol. J. Ecol. 55, 519–533 (2007).
Zawadzka, D. & Zawadzki, G. Charakterystyka drzew gniazdowych dzięcioła czarnego w Puszczy Augustowskiej. Sylwan 161, 1002–1009 (2017).
Urban, D. L. & Smith, T. M. Microhabitat pattern and the structure of forest bird communities. Am. Nat. 133, 811–829. https://doi.org/10.1086/284954 (1989).
Google Scholar
Piechnik, Ł, Kurek, P., Ledwoń, M. & Holeksa, J. Both natural and anthropogenic microhabitats and fine-scale habitat features of managed forest can affect the abundance of the Eurasian Wren. For. Ecol. Manag. 456, 117695. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2019.117695 (2020).
Google Scholar
Sefidi, K., EsfandiaryDarabad, F. & Azaryan, M. Effect of topography on tree species composition and volume of coarse woody debris in an Oriental beech (Fagus orientalis Lipsky) old growth forests, northern Iran. iForest 9, 658. https://doi.org/10.3832/ifor1080-008 (2016).
Google Scholar
Oettel, J. et al. Patterns and drivers of deadwood volume and composition in different forest types of the Austrian natural forest reserves. For. Ecol. Manag. 463, 118016. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2020.118016 (2020).
Google Scholar
Bashta, A. T. V. Biotope distribution and habitat preference of breeding bird communities in alpine and subalpine belts in the Tatra and Babia Gora Mts. (Southern Poland). Berkut 14, 145–161 (2005).
Bouvet, A. et al. Effects of forest structure, management and landscape on bird and bat communities. Environ. Conserv. 43, 148–160. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0376892915000363 (2016).
Google Scholar
Dellinger, R. L., Wood, P. B., Keyser, P. D. & Seidel, G. Habitat partitioning of four sympatric thrush species at three spatial scales on a managed forest in West Virginia. Auk 124, 1425–1438. https://doi.org/10.1093/auk/124.4.1425 (2007).
Google Scholar
Leidinger, J. et al. Formerly managed forest reserves complement integrative management for biodiversity conservation in temperate European forests. Biol. Conserv. 242, 108437. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2020.108437 (2020).
Google Scholar
Basile, M., Mikusiński, G. & Storch, I. Bird guilds show different responses to tree retention levels: A meta-analysis. Glob. Ecol. Conserv. 18, e00615. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gecco.2019.e00615 (2019).
Google Scholar
Müller, J. & Bütler, R. A review of habitat thresholds for dead wood: A baseline for management recommendations in European forests. Eur. J. For. Res. 129, 981–992. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10342-010-0400-5 (2010).
Google Scholar
Kajtoch, Ł, Figarski, T. & Pełka, J. The role of forest structural elements in determining the occurrence of two specialist woodpecker species in the Carpathians, Poland. Ornis Fenn. 90, 23–40 (2013).
Rodrigues, A. S. & Brooks, T. M. Shortcuts for biodiversity conservation planning: The effectiveness of surrogates. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst. 38, 713–737 (2007).
Google Scholar
Hunter, M. Jr. et al. Two roles for ecological surrogacy: Indicator surrogates and management surrogates. Ecol. Indic. 63, 121–125. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2015.11.049 (2016).
Google Scholar
NFI. Wielkoobszarowa inwentaryzacja stanu lasu. Wyniki za okres 2009–2013 (Biuro Urządzania Lasu i Geodezji Leśnej, 2014).
CRFOP. Centralny Rejestr Form Ochrony Przyrody. http://crfop.gdos.gov.pl/CRFOP/ (2020).
GDOS. Generalna Dyrekcja Ochrony Środowiska. https://www.gdos.gov.pl/dane-i-metadane (2020).
BDL. Bank Danych o Lasach. https://www.bdl.lasy.gov.pl/portal (2020).
Qgis 3.10. QGIS Geographic Information System. http://www.qgis.org (QGIS Association, 2020).
ME. Instrukcja wykonywania wielkoobszarowej inwentaryzacji stanu lasu (Typescript of the Ministry of the Environment, 2010).
Talarczyk, A. National forest inventory in Poland. Balt. For. 20, 333–341 (2014).
Standard Data Form. Instrukcja wypełniania Standardowych Formularzy Danych. http://natura2000.gdos.gov.pl (2012).
Balestrieri, R. et al. A guild-based approach to assessing the influence of beech forest structure on bird communities. For. Ecol. Manag. 356, 216–223. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2015.07.011 (2015).
Google Scholar
Ameztegui, A. et al. Bird community response in mountain pine forests of the Pyrenees managed under a shelterwood system. For. Ecol. Manag. 407, 95–105. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2017.09.002 (2017).
Google Scholar
Czeszczewik, D. et al. Effects of forest management on bird assemblages in the Bialowieza Forest, Poland. iForest Biogeosci. For. 8, 377–385. https://doi.org/10.3832/ifor1212-007 (2015).
Google Scholar
Czuraj, M. Tablice miąższości kłód odziomkowych i drzew stojących (PWRiL, 1990).
Oramus, M. Breeding habitat of wren (Troglodytes troglodytes) in lower mountain zone forests in Gorce National Park. Master thesis (University of Agriculture in Krakow, Faculty of Forestry, Department of Forest Biodiversity 2017).
Statistica 13 software. Dell Statistica (data analysis software system), version 13. software.dell.com (2016).
Ćosović, M., Bugalho, M. N., Thom, D. & Borges, J. G. Stand structural characteristics are the most practical biodiversity indicators for forest management planning in Europe. Forests 11, 343. https://doi.org/10.3390/f11030343 (2020).
Google Scholar
Morán-López, R., Cortés Gañán, E., Uceda Tolosa, O. & Sánchez Guzmán, J. M. The umbrella effect of Natura 2000 annex species spreads over multiple taxonomic groups, conservation attributes and organizational levels. Anim. Conserv. https://doi.org/10.1111/acv.12551 (2019).
Google Scholar
Lindenmayer, D. B., Franklin, J. F. & Fischer, J. General management principles and a checklist of strategies to guide forest biodiversity conservation. Biol. Conserv. 131, 433–445. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2006.02.019 (2006).
Google Scholar
Gruber, B. et al. “Mind the gap!”—How well does Natura 2000 cover species of European interest?. Nat. Conserv. 3, 45–62. https://doi.org/10.3897/natureconservation.3.3732 (2012).
Google Scholar
Kukkala, A. S. et al. Matches and mismatches between national and EU-wide priorities: Examining the Natura 2000 network in vertebrate species conservation. Biol. Conserv. 198, 193–201. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2016.04.016 (2016).
Google Scholar
Donald, P. F. et al. International conservation policy delivers benefits for birds in Europe. Science 317, 810–813. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1146002 (2007).
Google Scholar
Nilsson, L., Bunnefeldb, N., Perssonc, J., Žydelisd, R. & Månssona, J. Conservation success or increased crop damage risk? The Natura 2000 network for a thriving migratory and protected bird. Biol. Conserv. 236, 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2019.05.006 (2019).
Google Scholar
Winter, S. et al. The impact of Natura 2000 on forest management: A socio-ecological analysis in the continental region of the European Union. Biodivers. Conserv. 23, 3451–3482. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-014-0822-3 (2014).
Google Scholar
Zisenis, M. Is the Natura 2000 network of the European Union the key land use policy tool for preserving Europe’s biodiversity heritage?. Land Use Policy 69, 408–416. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2017.09.045 (2017).
Google Scholar
Bashta, A. T. V. Breeding bird community of monocultural spruce plantation in the Skolivski Beskids (the Ukrainian Carpathians). Berkut 8, 9–14 (1999).
Baláž, M. & Balážová, M. Diversity and abundance of bird communities in three mountain forest stands: Effect of the habitat heterogeneity. Pol. J. Ecol. 60, 629–634 (2012).
Puletti, N. et al. A dataset of forest volume deadwood estimates for Europe. Ann. For. Sci. 76, 68. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13595-019-0832-0 (2019).
Google Scholar
Nappi, A., Drapeau, P. & Leduc, A. How important is dead wood for woodpeckers foraging in eastern North American boreal forests?. For. Ecol. Manag. 346, 10–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2015.02.028 (2015).
Google Scholar
Raphael, M. & White, M. Use of snags by cavity-nesting birds in the Sierra Nevada. Wildl. Monogr. 86, 3–66 (1984).
Bujoczek, L., Bujoczek, M. & Zięba, S. How much, why and where? Deadwood in forest ecosystems: The case of Poland. Ecol. Indic. 121, 107027. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2020.107027 (2021).
Google Scholar
Lešo, P., Kropil, R. & Kajtoch, Ł. Effects of forest management on bird assemblages in oak-dominated stands of the Western Carpathians-Refuges for rare species. For. Ecol. Manag. 453, 117620. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2019.117620 (2019).
Google Scholar
De Zan, L. R., de Gasperis, S. R., Fiore, L., Battisti, C. & Carpaneto, G. M. The importance of dead wood for hole-nesting birds: A two years study in three beech forests of central Italy. Isr. J. Ecol. Evol. 63(1), 19–27. https://doi.org/10.1080/15659801.2016.1191168 (2017).
Google Scholar
Wilk, T., Bobrek, R., Pępkowska-Krol, A., Neubauer, G. & Kosicki, J. Z. The Birds of the Polish Carpathians—Status, Threats, Conservation (OTOP, 2016).
Jonsson, B. G. et al. Dead wood availability in managed Swedish forests–Policy outcomes and implications for biodiversity. For. Ecol. Manag. 376, 174–182. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2016.06.017 (2016).
Google Scholar
Lõhmus, A. Do Ural owls (Strix uralensis) suffer from the lack of nest sites in managed forests?. Biol. Conserv. 110, 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0006-3207(02)00167-2 (2003).
Google Scholar
Tanona, M. & Czarnota, P. Natural disturbances of the structure of Norway spruce forests in Europe and their impact on the preservation of epixylic lichen diversity: A review. Ecol. Quest. 30, 1–17. https://doi.org/10.12775/EQ.2019.024 (2019).
Google Scholar
Repel, M., Zámečník, M. & Jarčuška, B. Temporal changes in bird communities of wind-affected coniferous mountain forest in differently disturbed stands (High Tatra Mts., Slovakia). Biologia 75, 1931–1943. https://doi.org/10.2478/s11756-020-00455-5 (2020).
Google Scholar
Přívětivý, T. et al. How do environmental conditions affect the deadwood decomposition of European beech (Fagus sylvatica L.)?. For. Ecol. Manag. 381, 177–187. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2016.09.033 (2016).
Google Scholar
Wichmann, G. Habitat use of nightjar (Caprimulgus europaeus) in an Austrian pine forest. J. Ornithol. 145, 69–73. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10336-003-0013-6 (2004).
Google Scholar
Müller, D., Schröder, B. & Müller, J. Modelling habitat selection of the cryptic Hazel Grouse Bonasa bonasia in a montane forest. J. Ornithol. 150, 717–732. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10336-009-0390-6 (2009).
Google Scholar
Storch, I. Habitat and survival of capercaillie Tetrao urogallus nests and broods in the Bavarian Alps. Biol. Conserv. 70, 237–243. https://doi.org/10.1016/0006-3207(94)90168-6 (1994).
Google Scholar
Swenson, J. E. The ecology of Hazel Grouse and management of its habitat. Naturschutzreport 10, 227–238 (1995).
Drapeau, P., Nappi, A., Imbeau, L. & Saint-Germain, M. Standing deadwood for keystone bird species in the eastern boreal forest: Managing for snag dynamics. For. Chron. 85, 227–234. https://doi.org/10.5558/tfc85227-2 (2009).
Google Scholar
Mikusiński, G. et al. Is the impact of loggings in the last primeval lowland forest in Europe underestimated? The conservation issues of Białowieża Forest. Biol. Conserv. 227, 266–274. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2018.09.001 (2018).
Google Scholar
Dufour-Pelletier, S., Tremblay, J. A., Hébert, C., Lachat, T. & Ibarzabal, J. Testing the effect of snag and cavity supply on deadwood-associated species in a managed boreal forest. Forests 11, 424. https://doi.org/10.3390/f11040424 (2020).
Google Scholar
Pirovano, A. R. & Zecca, G. Black Woodpecker Dryocopus martius habitat selection in the Italian Alps: Implications for conservation in Natura 2000 network. Bird Conserv. Int. 24, 299–315. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0959270913000439 (2014).
Google Scholar
Source: Ecology - nature.com
