Data from: A comparison of clearfelling and gradual thinning of plantations for the restoration of insect herbivores and woodland plants

1. Testing restoration methods is essential for the development of restoration ecology as a science. It is also important to monitor a range of taxa, not just plants which have been the traditional focus of restoration ecology. Here we compare the effects on ground flora and leaf-miners, of two restoration practices used when restoring conifer plantations. 2. Two methods of restoration were investigated: clearfelling of plantations and the gradual thinning of conifers over time. Unrestored plantations and native broad-leaved woodlands were also surveyed, these representing the starting point of restoration and the reference community respectively. The study sites consist of two forest types (acidic Quercus woodland and mesotrophic Fraxinus woodland) enabling us to compare the two restoration methods in different habitat types. We use a well-replicated, large-scale study system consisting of 32 woodland plots, each 2 ha in size. 3. There were 179 plant species identified in the plots. Clearfelled plots had greater overall ground flora species richness than other management regimes (thinned, unrestored plantation and native woodland), but the richness of woodland plant species did not differ between clearfelled, thinned, native woodland and unrestored plantation plots. 4. More than 10 000 leaf-miners comprising 122 species were collected. Increased plant species richness was associated with increased leaf-miner species richness under all management regimes except clearfelled plots. 5. Forest type did not affect the response to restoration method, i.e. there was no interaction between management regime and forest type for any of the variables measured. 6. Synthesis and applications. Our results suggest that both the clearfelling and gradual thinning approaches to plantation restoration maintain woodland ground flora species. Either method can be used without detriment to woodland ground flora species richness. However, these methods differed in their effects on the leaf-miner–plant species richness relationship. If increasing invertebrate herbivore species richness is a concern the gradual thinning approach is more appropriate.1. 作为一门学科，恢复生态学（restoration ecology）的发展离不开对修复方法的试验验证。此外，监测多类群的物种动态同样至关重要，而非仅聚焦于恢复生态学传统研究对象——植物。本研究针对针叶林人工林（conifer plantations）修复中常用的两种修复措施，对比其对地表植被（ground flora）与潜叶昆虫（leaf-miners）的影响。2. 本研究设置了两种修复手段开展调查：人工林皆伐（clearfelling）与针叶林逐步疏伐（thinning）。同时还纳入未修复人工林与原生阔叶林地（native broad-leaved woodlands）作为对照，二者分别代表修复起始状态与参照群落（reference community）。研究样地涵盖两种森林类型：酸性栎属（Quercus）林地与中营养型梣属（Fraxinus）林地，借此可对比两种修复方法在不同生境类型下的效果。本研究采用重复度高、大尺度的实验系统，共包含32块面积为2公顷的林地样地（woodland plots）。3. 样地中共鉴定出179种植物。皆伐样地的地表植被总物种丰富度显著高于其余经营措施（management regimes）：疏伐样地、未修复人工林与原生林地，但林地植物物种丰富度在皆伐、疏伐、原生林地与未修复人工林样地间并无显著差异。4. 本研究共采集到超过10000头潜叶昆虫，隶属于122个物种。除皆伐样地外，其余所有经营措施下的植物物种丰富度提升均与潜叶昆虫物种丰富度提升呈显著正相关。5. 森林类型对修复方法的响应无显著影响，即所测量的全部变量中，经营措施与森林类型间均未出现交互效应。6. 综合与应用。本研究结果表明，人工林修复所采用的皆伐与逐步疏伐两种方式，均可维持林地地表植被的物种多样性。两种措施均不会对林地地表植被的物种丰富度造成损害。但二者对潜叶昆虫-植物物种丰富度关联的影响存在差异：若以提升无脊椎草食动物（invertebrate herbivore）物种丰富度为研究目标，则逐步疏伐手段更为适宜。