Free access
Issue
Ann. For. Sci.
Volume 62, Number 7, November 2005
Page(s) 761 - 770
DOI http://dx.doi.org/10.1051/forest:2005068
References of Ann. For. Sci. 62 761-770
  1. Akaike H., Information theory as an extension of the maximum likelihood principle, in: Petrov B.N., Csaki F. (Eds.), Second Symposium on Information Theory, Akademiai Kiai, Budapest, 1973, pp. 267-281.
  2. André F., Ponette Q., Comparison of biomass and nutrient content between oak (Quercus petraea) and hornbeam (Carpinus betulus) trees in a coppice-with-standards stand in Chimay (Belgium), Ann. For. Sci. 60 (2003) 489-502 [EDP Sciences] [CrossRef].
  3. Augusto L., Ranger J., Ponette Q., Rapp M., Relationships between forest tree species, stand production and stand nutrient amount, Ann. For. Sci. 57 (2000) 313-324 [EDP Sciences] [CrossRef].
  4. Austin M.P., Spatial prediction of species distribution: An interface between ecological theory and statistical modelling, Ecol. Model. 157 (2002) 101-118 [CrossRef].
  5. Austin M.P., Meyers J.A., Current approaches to modelling the environmental niche of eucalyptus: implication for management of forest biodiversity, For. Ecol. Manage. 85 (1996) 95-106 [CrossRef].
  6. Austin M.P., Cunningham R.B., Fleming P.M., New approaches to direct gradient analysis using environmental scalars and statistical curve-fitting procedures, Vegetatio 55 (1984) 11-27 [CrossRef].
  7. Bartoli C., Étude écologique sur les associations forestières de la Haute-Maurienne, Ann. Sci. For. 23 (1966) 432-761.
  8. Becker M., Le Goff N., Diagnostic stationnel et potentiel de production, Rev. For. Fr. 40 (1988) 29-43.
  9. Benichou P., Le Breton O., Prise en compte de la topographie pour la cartographie des champs pluviométriques statistiques, Météorologie 7 (1987) 23-34.
  10. Bergmeier E., Dimopoulos P., Fagus sylvatica forest vegetation in Greece: Syntaxonomy and gradient analysis, J. Veg. Sci. 12 (2001) 109-126.
  11. Bolliger J., Kienast F., Zimmermann N.E., Risks of global warming on montane and subalpine forests in Switzerland - a modeling study, Reg. Environ. Change. 1 (2000) 99-111 [CrossRef].
  12. Bonneau M., Evolution of the mineral fertility of an acidic soil during a period of ten years in the Vosges mountains (France). Impact of humus mineralisation, Ann. For. Sci. 62 (2005) 253-260 [EDP Sciences] [CrossRef].
  13. Brêthes A., Brun J.J., Jabiol B., Ponge J.F., Toutain F., Classification of forest humus forms: a French proposal, Ann. Sci. For. 52 (1995) 535-546.
  14. Brunet J., Falkengren-Grerup U., Tyler G., Pattern and dynamics of the ground vegetation in south Swedish Carpinus betulus forests: Importance of soil chemistry and management, Ecography 20 (1997) 513-520.
  15. Cachan P., Étude bioclimatique du Massif Vosgien, Bull. E.N.S.A.I.A. Nancy 16 (1974) 1-45.
  16. Cajander A.K., The theory of forest types, Acta For. Fenn. 29 (1926) 1-108.
  17. De Martonne E., Une nouvelle fonction climatologique: l'indice d'aridité, Météorologie 2 (1926) 449-458.
  18. Diekmann M., Ecological behaviour of deciduous hardwood trees in Boreo-nemoral Sweden in relation to light and soil conditions, For. Ecol. Manage. 86 (1996) 1-14 [CrossRef].
  19. Diekmann M., Species indicator values as an important tool in applied plant ecology: A review, Basic Appl. Ecol. 4 (2003) 493-506 [CrossRef].
  20. Diekmann M., Falkengren-Grerup U., A new species index for forest vascular plants: development of functional indices based on mineralization rates of various forms of soil nitrogen, J. Ecol. 86 (1998) 269-283 [CrossRef].
  21. Duchaufour P., Pédologie et groupes écologiques. I. Rôle du type d'humus et du pH, Bull. Ecol. 20 (1989) 1-6.
  22. Duchaufour P., Pédologie et groupes écologiques. II. Rôle des facteurs physiques : aération et nutrition en eau, Bull. Ecol. 20 (1989) 99-107.
  23. Duchaufour P., Toutain F., Apport de la pédologie à l'étude des écosystèmes, Bull. Ecol. 17 (1985) 1-9.
  24. Elgersma A.M., Dhillion S.S., Geographical variability of relationships between forest communities and soil nutrients along a temperature-fertility gradient in Norway, For. Ecol. Manage. 158 (2002) 155-168 [CrossRef].
  25. Ellenberg H., Vegetation ecology of Central Europe, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1988.
  26. Ellenberg H., Weber H.E., Düll R., Wirth V., Werner W., Paulißen D., Zeigerwerte von Pflanzen in Mitteleuropa, 1992.
  27. Falkengren-Grerup U., Brunet J., Quist M.E., Sensitivity of plants to acidic soils exemplified by the forest grass Bromus benekenii, Water Air Soil Pollut. 85 (1995) 1233-1238 [CrossRef].
  28. Ferris R., Peace A.J., Humphrey J.W., Broome A.C., Relationships between vegetation, site type and stand structure in coniferous plantations in Britain, For. Ecol. Manage. 136 (2000) 35-51 [CrossRef].
  29. Gégout J.-C., Étude des relations entre les ressources minérales du sol et la végétation forestière dans les Vosges, thèse de l'Université de Nancy I, Nancy, 1995, 215 p.
  30. Gégout J.-C., Houllier F., Canonical correspondance analysis for forest site classification. A case study, Ann. Sci. For. 53 (1996) 981-990.
  31. Gégout J.-C., Coudun C., Brisse H., Bergès L., Comportement écologique des espèces forestières vis-à-vis du climat et du sol en France: application à l'évaluation des charges critiques d'acidité et d'azote, Rapport final de la convention de recherche ADEM/ENGREF n° 9962003, ENGREF, Nancy-France, 2002, 51 p.
  32. Gégout J.-C., Coudun C., Bailly G., Jabiol B., EcoPlant: A forest site database linking floristic data with soil and climatic variables, J. Veg. Sci. 16 (2005) 257-260.
  33. Gensac P., Les forêts d'épicéa de Tarentaise. Recherche de différents types de Pessières, Rév. Gén. Bot. 74 (1967) 425-528.
  34. Graae B.J., Heskjaer V.S., A comparison of understorey vegetation between untouched and managed deciduous forest in Denmark, For. Ecol. Manage. 96 (1997) 111-123 [CrossRef].
  35. Guisan A., Zimmermann N.E., Predictive habitat distribution models in ecology, Ecol. Model. 135 (2000) 147-186 [CrossRef].
  36. Hagen-Thorn A., Armolaitis K., Callesen I., Stjernquist I., Macronutrients in tree stems and foliage: a comparative study of six temperate forest species planted at the same sites, Ann. For. Sci. 61 (2004) 489-498 [EDP Sciences].
  37. Härdtle W., Von Oheimb G., Westphal C., The effects of light and soil conditions on the species richness of the ground vegetation of deciduous forests in northern Germany (Schleswig-Holstein), For. Ecol. Manage. 182 (2003) 327-338 [CrossRef].
  38. Iverson L.R., Prasad A.M., Predicting abundance of 80 tree species following climate change in the eastern United States, Ecol. Monogr. 68 (1998) 465-485.
  39. Klinka K., Wang Q., Carter R.E., Relationships among humus forms, forest floor nutrient properties, and understory vegetation, For. Sci. 36 (1990) 564-581.
  40. Lahti T., Understorey vegetation as an indicator of forest site potential in southern Finland, Acta For. Fenn. 246 (1995) 2-69.
  41. Landolt E., Ökologische zeigerwerte zur Schweizer flora, Veröff. Geobot. Inst. ETH, Zürich, 1977.
  42. Lawesson J.E., Oksanen J., Niche characteristics of Danish woody species as derived from coenoclines, J. Veg. Sci. 13 (2002) 279-290.
  43. Leathwick J.R., Austin M.P., Competitive interactions between tree species in New Zealand's old growth indigenous forests, Ecology 82 (2001) 2560-2573.
  44. Lebreton J.D., Chessel D., Prodon R., Yoccoz N., L'analyse des relations espèces-milieu par l'analyse canonique des correspondances. I. Variables de milieu quantitatives, Acta Oecol. 9 (1988) 53-67.
  45. Lenihan J.M., Ecological response surfaces for North American boreal tree species and their use in forest classification, J. Veg. Sci. 4 (1993) 667-680.
  46. Mathsoft I., S-Plus 2000, Programmer's Guide, MathSoft, Inc., Seattle, 1999.
  47. Mayer H., Waldbau auf sociologisch-ökologischer Grundlage, Gustav Fisher, Stuttgart, Germany, 1992.
  48. Mccullagh P., Nelder J.A., Generalized linear models, Chapman & Hall, London, UK, 1989.
  49. Mckenzie D., Peterson D.W., Peterson D.L., Thornton P.E., Climatic and biophysical controls on conifer species distributions in mountain forests of Washington State, USA, J. Biogeogr. 30 (2003) 1093-1108.
  50. Michalet R., Gandoy C., Joud D., Pages J.P., Choler P., Plant community composition and biomass on calcareous and siliceous substrates in the northern French Alps: Comparative effects of soil chemistry and water status, Arct. Antarct. Alp. Res. 34 (2002) 102-113.
  51. Michalet R., Rolland C., Joud D., Gafta D., Callaway R.M., Associations between canopy and understory species increase along a rainshadow gradient in the Alps: habitat heterogeneity or facilitation? Plant Ecol. 165 (2002) 145-160.
  52. Michalet R., Cadel G., Joud D., Pache G., Pautou G., Richard L., Synthèse phytoécologique des forêts de l'arc alpin, Ecologie 29 (1998) 99-104.
  53. Nieppola J., Understorey plants as indicators of site productivity in Pinus sylvestris L. stands, Scand. J. For. Res. 8 (1993) 49-65.
  54. Nieppola J., Carleton T.J., Relations between understorey vegetation, site productivity, and environmental factors in Pinus sylvestris L. stands in southern Finland, Vegetatio 93 (1991) 52-72.
  55. Ohmann J.L., Spiess T.A., Regional gradient analysis and spatial pattern of woody plant communities of Oregon forests, Ecol. Monogr. 68 (1998) 151-182.
  56. Pagès J.P., Pache G., Joud D., Magnan N., Michalet R., Direct and indirect effects of shade on four forest tree seedlings in the French Alps, Ecology 84 (2003) 2741-2750.
  57. Prodon R., Lebreton J.-D., Breeding avifauna of a Mediterranean succession: the holm oak and cork oak series in the eastern Pyrénées. 1. Analysis and modelling of the structure gradient, Oikos 37 (1981) 21-38.
  58. Rameau J.-C., Mansion D., Dumé G., Flore forestière française. Guide écologique illustré. Tome 2 : Montagnes, Institut pour le Développement Forestier, Paris, 1993.
  59. Rameau J.-C., Mansion D., Dumé G., Timbal J., Lecointe A., Dupont P., Keller R., Flore forestière française. Guide écologique illustré. Tome 1 : Plaines et collines, Institut pour le Développement Forestier, Paris, 1989.
  60. Roche P., Tatoni T., Médail F., Relative importance of abiotic and land use factors in explaining variation in woody vegetation in a French rural landscape, J. Veg. Sci. 9 (1998) 221-228.
  61. Rol R., Contribution à l'étude de la répartition du sapin (Abies alba Mill.), Ann. Éc. Natl. Eaux For. 7 (1937) 1-68.
  62. Sverdrup H., Warfvinge P., The effect of soil acidification on the growth of trees, grass and herbs as expressed by the (Ca+Mg+K)/Al ratio, Lund University, Department of Chemical Engineering, Lund-Sweden, 1993, 108 p.
  63. Ter Braak C.J.F., Canonical correspondence analysis: a new eigenvector technique for multivariate direct gradient analysis, Ecology 67 (1986) 1167-1179.
  64. Ter Braak C.J.F., Barendregt L.G., Weighted averaging of species indicator values: its efficiency in environmental calibration, Math. Biosci. 78 (1986) 57-72 [CrossRef].
  65. Ter Braak C.J.F., Looman C.W.N., Weighted averaging, logistic regression and the Gaussian response model, Vegetatio 65 (1986) 3-11 [CrossRef].
  66. Ter Braak C.J.F., Prentice I.C., A theory of gradient analysis, Adv. Ecol. Res. 18 (1988) 271-317.
  67. Thornthwaite C.W., Mather J.R., Instructions and tables for computing potential evapotranspiration and the water balance, Publications in Climatology 10 (1957) 183-311.
  68. Wang G.G., White spruce site index in relation to soil, understory vegetation, and foliar nutrients, Can. J. For. Res. 25 (1995) 29-38.
  69. Wang G.G., Use of understory vegetation in classifying soil moisture and nutrient regimes, For. Ecol. Manage. 129 (2000) 93-100 [CrossRef].
  70. Wartenberg D., Ferson F., Rohlf F., Putting things in order: A critique of detrended correspondence analyses, Am. Nat. 129 (1987) 434-448 [CrossRef].
  71. Weber-Blasschke G., Claus M., Rehfuess K.E., Growth and nutrition of ash (Fraxinus exelsior L.) and sycamore (Acer pseudoplatanus L.) on soils of different base saturation in pot experiments, For. Ecol. Manage. 167 (2002) 43-56 [CrossRef].
  72. Wilson S.M., Pyatt D.G., Malcolm D.C., Connolly T., The use of ground vegetation and humus type as indicators of soil nutrient regime for an ecological site classification of British forests, For. Ecol. Manage. 40 (2001) 101-116.