These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.
3. Lower alpha, higher beta, and similar gamma diversity of saproxylic beetles in unmanaged compared to managed Norway spruce stands. Gran O PLoS One; 2022; 17(7):e0271092. PubMed ID: 35802717 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Burning of logged sites to protect beetles in managed boreal forests. Toivanen T; Kotiaho JS Conserv Biol; 2007 Dec; 21(6):1562-72. PubMed ID: 18173480 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. What does a threatened saproxylic beetle look like? Modelling extinction risk using a new morphological trait database. Hagge J; Müller J; Birkemoe T; Buse J; Christensen RHB; Gossner MM; Gruppe A; Heibl C; Jarzabek-Müller A; Seibold S; Siitonen J; Soutinho JG; Sverdrup-Thygeson A; Thorn S; Drag L J Anim Ecol; 2021 Aug; 90(8):1934-1947. PubMed ID: 33942309 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Can rove beetles (Staphylinidae) be excluded in studies focusing on saproxylic beetles in central European beech forests? Parmain G; Bouget C; Müller J; Horak J; Gossner MM; Lachat T; Isacsson G Bull Entomol Res; 2015 Feb; 105(1):101-9. PubMed ID: 25434278 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. An experimental test of the habitat-amount hypothesis for saproxylic beetles in a forested region. Seibold S; Bässler C; Brandl R; Fahrig L; Förster B; Heurich M; Hothorn T; Scheipl F; Thorn S; Müller J Ecology; 2017 Jun; 98(6):1613-1622. PubMed ID: 28317111 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Trait-environment interactions of saproxylic beetles as a guide to biodiversity conservation strategies. Bergmark P; Hjältén J; Svensson J; Neumann W; Hekkala AM J Environ Manage; 2024 Jun; 360():121080. PubMed ID: 38733839 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Effects of landscape design of forest reserves on Saproxylic beetle diversity. Bouget C; Parmain G Conserv Biol; 2016 Feb; 30(1):92-102. PubMed ID: 26084716 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Conservation value of low-productivity forests measured as the amount and diversity of dead wood and saproxylic beetles. Hämäläinen A; Strengbom J; Ranius T Ecol Appl; 2018 Jun; 28(4):1011-1019. PubMed ID: 29446863 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Wood-inhabiting beetles in low stumps, high stumps and logs on boreal clear-cuts: implications for dead wood management. Andersson J; Hjältén J; Dynesius M PLoS One; 2015; 10(3):e0118896. PubMed ID: 25756871 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Saproxylic and non-saproxylic beetle assemblages in boreal spruce forests of different age and forestry intensity. Stenbacka F; Hjältén J; Hilszczański J; Dynesius M Ecol Appl; 2010 Dec; 20(8):2310-21. PubMed ID: 21265460 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Micro and macro-habitat associations in saproxylic beetles: implications for biodiversity management. Hjältén J; Stenbacka F; Pettersson RB; Gibb H; Johansson T; Danell K; Ball JP; Hilszczański J PLoS One; 2012; 7(7):e41100. PubMed ID: 22848432 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Forest management strategy affects saproxylic beetle assemblages: A comparison of even and uneven-aged silviculture using direct and indirect sampling. Joelsson K; Hjältén J; Gibb H PLoS One; 2018; 13(4):e0194905. PubMed ID: 29634728 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Fire and green-tree retention in conservation of red-listed and rare deadwood-dependent beetles in Finnish boreal forests. Hyvärinen E; Kouki J; Martikainen P Conserv Biol; 2006 Dec; 20(6):1711-9. PubMed ID: 17181806 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Habitat-tree protection concepts over 200 years. Mölder A; Schmidt M; Plieninger T; Meyer P Conserv Biol; 2020 Dec; 34(6):1444-1451. PubMed ID: 32281122 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Effects of reforestation practices on Staphylinid beetles (Coleoptera: Staphylinidae) in Southwestern China forests. Luo TH; Yu XD; Zhou HZ Environ Entomol; 2013 Feb; 42(1):7-16. PubMed ID: 23339781 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Chapter 4. Susceptibility of sharks, rays and chimaeras to global extinction. Field IC; Meekan MG; Buckworth RC; Bradshaw CJ Adv Mar Biol; 2009; 56():275-363. PubMed ID: 19895977 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Toward quantification of the impact of 21st-century deforestation on the extinction risk of terrestrial vertebrates. Tracewski Ł; Butchart SH; Di Marco M; Ficetola GF; Rondinini C; Symes A; Wheatley H; Beresford AE; Buchanan GM Conserv Biol; 2016 Oct; 30(5):1070-9. PubMed ID: 26991445 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]