English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Zendy Plus

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Zendy Tools

Zendy Open

.  Forest disturbance agents, such as wildfire and windthrow, often differ in magnitude and frequency between upland and riparian zones. Riparian forests may be subject to additional disturbance agents that do not affect uplands, including debris flows, floods, bank erosion, and avulsions. Forest harvesting, with or without a streamside buffer, is an additional riparian disturbance agent in managed landscapes. The effects of riparian harvesting on stream habitat and ecology are qualitatively similar to those of wildfire, with the important exception of recruitment of large in-stream wood. For most other disturbance agents, current knowledge is insufficient to assess the degree to which natural disturbance can be emulated via riparian forest harvesting. In particular, the effects of the spatial patterns and frequencies of disturbance on the trajectories and rates of postdisturbance recovery are poorly understood for many landscapes and are complicated by the potential for propagation of effects down the stream network. Broadly based, long-term research on riparian disturbance regimes is needed to provide the scientific basis required for designing strategies for sustainable streamside forest management.

Natural disturbance and forest management in riparian zones: comparison of effects at reach, catchment, and landscape scales