Conservation value and ecosystem service provision of Nothofagus antarctica forests based on phenocluster categories

MARTINEZ PASTUR GUILLERMO; RODRÍGUEZ-SOUILLA JULIÁN; ROSAS YAMINA; POLITI NATALIA; RIVERA LUIS; OLIVERA SILVEIRA EDUARDA; OLAH ASHLEY; PIDGEON ANNA; LENCINAS MARIA VANESA; PERI PABLO

Discover Conservation

Springer

Año: 2025

3004-9784

Remote sensing and landscape modelling improve forest classification proposals. Traditional approach is mainly based on tree species composition, however, recently one proposal combines variables based on forest phenology and climate to characterise functional (cyclic and seasonal greenness information) rather than structural or compositional characteristics of ecosystems (phenoclusters). There are few studies about the correlation between these new modelling and forest classifications based on ground surveys. Our objective was to compare the conservation value (capacity to support more native biodiversity) and provision of ecosystem services of one forest type (Nothofagus antarctica) in Tierra del Fuego and subtypes based on different phenocluster categorizations. We used different available features model outputs standardised and homogenised at 90-m spatial resolution (ecosystem services, potential biodiversity), and ground truth data from 145 stands (soil characteristics, forest structure, animal stocking rate, understory biodiversity). We grouping phenocluster in categories, which were compared using uni- and multivariate analyses. Phenocluster categories allowed sorting the N. antarctica forest type into contrasting subtypes with different characteristics, including (i) cultural, regulating, and provisioning ecosystem services and potential biodiversity at landscape level, (ii) soil organic carbon and nitrogen, (iii) tree dominant height, overstory crown cover, basal area, total volume, and domestic animal stock, and (iv) understory plant richness and cover at stand level. Significant differences were detected in the multivariate analyses (classifications and ordinations) supporting the split of this forest type into four phenocluster subtypes: (i) coastal forests near Atlantic Ocean, (ii) highland forests close to grassland steppe, (iii) ecotone areas associated with N. pumilio and mixed evergreen forests, and (iv) degraded and secondary forests. The information provided by the phenoclusters were directly related to plant understory diversity, where functional proxies were the main explanatory variable for the differences among the studied groups. Our findings allowed to define better management and conservation proposals, e.g. different management strategies for each phenocluster category, or selection of representative forests into a reserve network design based on phenoclusters rather than forest types defined by tree canopy-cover composition.