We compared the dead wood （DW） conditions of Chesh- meh-sar forest and Sardab forest with different management history, including reserve forest and harvested forest. The First forest took 100% inventory from all th...We compared the dead wood （DW） conditions of Chesh- meh-sar forest and Sardab forest with different management history, including reserve forest and harvested forest. The First forest took 100% inventory from all the available DW. Also dead trees were compared in terms of species, shape, location and quality of fracture in both forests. Volumes of dead wood in Cheshmeh-sar and Sardab forests were 207.47 and 142.74 m3, respectively. Due to this significant difference, impact on the management level was determined. In Cheshmeh-sar forest, 42% of dead trees were standing and 58% were fallen type while in Sardab forest 38.6% were standing and 61.4% fallen. But the difference was not statis- tically significant l^etween them （p = 0.0587）. In terms of quality, dead trees of hard, soft and hollow had the highest frequency, respectively. However, 71.5% of DW was seen as hard dead in Cheshmeh-sar forest while hard dead trees in Sardab forests were 54.2%. Soft quality degree of dead trees which formed in Cheshmeh-sar and Sardab forest were calcu- lated as 26.6% and 43.4% respectively. Also 30% of the dead trees of Sardab forest were eradicated while in Cheshmeh-sar this amount was reduced to 12%. Due to this significant difference （（P=0/018）, it is concluded that the type of management and human interference are affecting the quality of dead trees and makes us to think the human in- terferences could effect on the ecosystem of touched forests.展开更多
文摘We compared the dead wood （DW） conditions of Chesh- meh-sar forest and Sardab forest with different management history, including reserve forest and harvested forest. The First forest took 100% inventory from all the available DW. Also dead trees were compared in terms of species, shape, location and quality of fracture in both forests. Volumes of dead wood in Cheshmeh-sar and Sardab forests were 207.47 and 142.74 m3, respectively. Due to this significant difference, impact on the management level was determined. In Cheshmeh-sar forest, 42% of dead trees were standing and 58% were fallen type while in Sardab forest 38.6% were standing and 61.4% fallen. But the difference was not statis- tically significant l^etween them （p = 0.0587）. In terms of quality, dead trees of hard, soft and hollow had the highest frequency, respectively. However, 71.5% of DW was seen as hard dead in Cheshmeh-sar forest while hard dead trees in Sardab forests were 54.2%. Soft quality degree of dead trees which formed in Cheshmeh-sar and Sardab forest were calcu- lated as 26.6% and 43.4% respectively. Also 30% of the dead trees of Sardab forest were eradicated while in Cheshmeh-sar this amount was reduced to 12%. Due to this significant difference （（P=0/018）, it is concluded that the type of management and human interference are affecting the quality of dead trees and makes us to think the human in- terferences could effect on the ecosystem of touched forests.
