Richness of Lichen Species, Especially of Threatened Ones, Is Promoted by Management Methods Furthering Stand Continuity

Lichens are a key component of forest biodiversity. However, a comprehensive study analyzing lichen species richness in relation to several management types, extending over different regions and forest stages and including information on site conditions is missing for temperate European forests. In three German regions (Schwäbische Alb, Hainich-Dün, Schorfheide-Chorin), the so-called Biodiversity Exploratories, we studied lichen species richness in 631 forest plots of 400 m2 comprising different management types (unmanaged, selection cutting, deciduous and coniferous age-class forests resulting from clear cutting or shelterwood logging), various stand ages, and site conditions, typical for large parts of temperate Europe. We analyzed how lichen species richness responds to management and habitat variables (standing biomass, cover of deadwood, cover of rocks). We found strong regional differences with highest lichen species richness in the Schwäbische Alb, probably driven by regional differences in former air pollution, and in precipitation and habitat variables. Overall, unmanaged forests harbored 22% more threatened lichen species than managed age-class forests. In general, total, corticolous, and threatened lichen species richness did not differ among management types of deciduous forests. However, in the Schwäbische-Alb region, deciduous forests had 61% more lichen species than coniferous forests and they had 279% more threatened and 76% more corticolous lichen species. Old deciduous age classes were richer in corticolous lichen species than young ones, while old coniferous age-classes were poorer than young ones. Overall, our findings highlight the importance of stand continuity for conservation. To increase total and threatened lichen species richness we suggest (1) conserving unmanaged forests, (2) promoting silvicultural methods assuring stand continuity, (3) conserving old trees in managed forests, (4) promoting stands of native deciduous tree species instead of coniferous plantations, and (5) increasing the amount of deadwood in forests.

Stereology meets electron tomography: towards quantitative 3D electron microscopy

Stereological tools are the gold standard for accurate (i.e., unbiased) and precise quantification of any microscopic sample. The past decades have provided a broad spectrum of tools to estimate a variety of parameters such as volumes, surfaces, lengths, and numbers. Some of them require pairs of parallel sections that can be produced by either physical or optical sectioning, with optical sectioning being much more efficient when applicable. Unfortunately, transmission electron microscopy could not fully profit from these riches, mainly because of the large depth of field. Hence, optical sectioning was a long-time desire for electron microscopists. This desire was fulfilled with the development of electron tomography that yield stacks of slices from electron microscopic sections. Now, parallel optical slices of a previously unimagined small thickness (2-5 nm axial resolution) can be produced. These optical slices minimize problems related to overprojection effects, and allow for direct stereological analysis, e.g., volume estimation with the Cavalieri principle and number estimation with the optical disector method. Here, we demonstrate that the symbiosis of stereology and electron tomography is an easy and efficient way for quantitative analysis at the electron microscopic level. We call this approach quantitative 3D electron microscopy.

Reprint of "Stereology meets electron tomography: towards quantitative 3D electron microscopy" [J. Struct. Biol. 159 (2007) 443-450]

Stereological tools are the gold standard for accurate (i.e., unbiased) and precise quantification of any microscopic sample. The past decades have provided a broad spectrum of tools to estimate a variety of parameters such as volumes, surfaces, lengths, and numbers. Some of them require pairs of parallel sections that can be produced by either physical or optical sectioning, with optical sectioning being much more efficient when applicable. Unfortunately, transmission electron microscopy could not fully profit from these riches, mainly because of the large depth of field. Hence, optical sectioning was a long-time desire for electron microscopists. This desire was fulfilled with the development of electron tomography that yield stacks of slices from electron microscopic sections. Now, parallel optical slices of a previously unimagined small thickness (2-5nm axial resolution) can be produced. These optical slices minimize problems related to overprojection effects, and allow for direct stereological analysis, e.g., volume estimation with the Cavalieri principle and number estimation with the optical disector method. Here, we demonstrate that the symbiosis of stereology and electron tomography is an easy and efficient way for quantitative analysis at the electron microscopic level. We call this approach quantitative 3D electron microscopy.

Updated method guidelines for cochrane musculoskeletal group systematic reviews and metaanalyses.

The Cochrane Musculoskeletal Group (CMSG), one of 53 groups of the not-for-profit, international Cochrane Collaboration, prepares, maintains, and disseminates systematic reviews of treatments for musculoskeletal diseases. It is important that authors conducting CMSG reviews and the readers of our reviews be aware of and use updated, state-of-the-art systematic review methodology. One hundred sixty reviews have been published. Previous method guidelines for systematic reviews of interventions in the musculoskeletal field published in 2006 have been substantially updated to incorporate methodological advances that are mandatory or highly desirable in Cochrane reviews and knowledge translation advances. The methodological advances include new guidance on searching, new risk-of-bias assessment, grading the quality of the evidence, the new Summary of Findings table, and comparative effectiveness using network metaanalysis. Method guidelines specific to musculoskeletal disorders are provided by CMSG editors for various aspects of undertaking a systematic review. These method guidelines will help improve the quality of reporting and ensure high standards of conduct as well as consistency across CMSG reviews.