Fig 1.
Location of the study sites.
Table 1.
Microhabitat typology.
Table 2.
Distribution of the data by genus and Diameter at Breast Height (DBH) classes.
Genera in grey were excluded from the main analyses due to an insufficient number of occurrences of dead trees; in this case, only living trees were analysed (see S1 Fig). ash: Fraxinus excelsior; beech: Fagus sylvatica; chestnut: Castanea sativa; fir: Abies alba; hornbeam: Carpinus betulus; larch: Larix decidua; maple: Acer spp., oak: Quercus spp.; pine: Pinus spp.; poplar: Populus spp.; and spruce: Picea abies.
Fig 2.
Relationship between number of microhabitats (N microhabitats per tree) and Diameter at Breast Height (DBH, cm) by genera (beech: Fagus sylvatica; fir: Abies alba; oak: Quercus spp., pine: Pinus spp. and spruce: Picea abies) and living status (living vs. dead standing trees).
Lines represent estimates from generalized mixed effect models with a Poisson error distribution and plot nested in site as a random effect. Ribbons show the 95% confidence intervals of the mean. For this representation, pH and elevation were held constant (mean values in our data set).
Table 3.
Percentage of difference in number of microhabitats between living and dead trees for a mean Diameter at Breast Height (DBH = 44 cm) calculated as [(Microhabitats dead trees–Microhabitats living trees) / (Microhabitats dead trees + Microhabitats living trees)] x 100.
An * indicates a significant (p<0.05) difference based on post-hoc Tukey tests for a mean DBH. Values close to -100 correspond to cases where microhabitats were quasi-absent on dead trees (resp. 100 for living trees). Figures in brackets are absolute values for dead and living trees respectively. Beech: Fagus sylvatica; fir: Abies alba; oak: Quercus spp.; pine: Pinus spp.; and spruce: Picea abies.
Fig 3.
Relationship between occurrence of woodpecker feeding holes and Diameter at Breast Height (DBH, cm) by genera (beech: Fagus sylvatica; fir: Abies alba; oak: Quercus spp., pine: Pinus spp. and spruce: Picea abies) and living status (living vs. dead standing trees).
Lines represent estimates from generalized mixed effect models with a binomial error distribution. Ribbons show the 95% confidence interval of the mean. For this representation, pH and elevation were held constant. See S2 Fig, for all microhabitat types.