Meetings

This appendix can be used to take notes from meetings.

24/04/10 - Kick-off

Natalia, David, Geno, Mithila, Sylvain

  • We need to standardise biodiversity variation across sites for comparisons because base diversity will vary biogeographically. Same for logging intensity.
  • We can compare post-logging biodiversity state / trajectory to either prelogging inventories or control plots. In preliminary analyses we wish to do all.
  • ! We need to take care not to overstep with the second group about recovery rates !
  • For that we will focus on biodiversity more in depth including richness, evenness, composition, functional diversity, even phylogenetic diversity?
  • We need to find what we will add to the current literature, so we have a need of review
  • Next tasks are:
    • More literature review, knowing that Mithila is working on a general review (we will use a folder on the drive to share articles and the literature chapter of this book to list relevant references and maybe summarise a bit of ideas)
    • Developing the ideas
    • Developing the data (Sylvain’s suggestion)
    • Learn Git / GitHub / …
  • Newt meeting should be held after the GitHub course. We aim at bimonthly meeting knowing that some month might be more complicated due to holidays.

24/06/04 - Conceptual framework

David, Geno, Mithila, Sylvain

  • David: Disturbing hypotheses in tropical forests by Sheil and Burlsem 2003 = > Intermediate Disturbance Hypotheses (IDH) Fig 1. varying with time, frequency, and size/intesnity + multiple scales and structure but a signle underlying hpothesis
  • David: Molino & Sabatier 2021 => some evidences
  • Mithila: available data for exploration from Lucas, Geno, Géraldine and Irié
  • Geno: Add phylogenetic diveristy and is there a limit of IDH for very rich forest, at least for richness?
  • David: ++ phylogenetic diversity
  • Mithila: meetings every two weeks Tuesday 2 pm CET
  • David: with a precise objective and even if only two of us

24/07/16- Conceptual framework

David, Geno, Verginia, Sylvain

  • recap of the meeting of July 2nd where Mithila shared some figures and how some data do not make sense-more information is needed from the Site PIs, some of the harmonized data are still not in the desired format; maybe an extra step is needed between harmonized and the aggregated data
  • David started to write the framework with support from Geno–> see ideas
  • discussion on what meta data is needed to continue the analysis; To Do: List what meta data is needed and communicate this to the site PIs or other
  • Verginia shared two documents via email from past TmFO meetings; one concerns meta data from sites and the other is a word doc of data analysis for a biodiversity study, the research questions in the protocol can support this analysis
  • start listing the different diversity measures/parameters to take into account for the analysis
  • Research questions can be further expanded to more specific research questions; also include main objectives of the study
  • Sylvan shared paper by Mirabel et al 2020, on what graphs we expect from the analysis, see email with attached paper
  • Geno will or already shared additional data of the data set with Mithila, concerns logging information
  • How to define logging damage, what parameters will be used
  • what will be used relative measure of diversity or absolute measure of diversity?

25/06/25- WK4 D3 Morning

  • area effect exploration with Mbaiki and Paracou
  • time effect exploration with Mbaiki and Paracou
  • test the forest “stability” before logging based on pre-logging community differences between big and small trees (taxonomic and functional composition, wood density for pioneers)
  • discuss validation of H1
  • discuss questioning of H2
  • the fact that Paracou as a strong signal but not Mbaiki point toward not only experimental / methodological issues but also true differences
  • model: null intercept
  • model: quadratic
  • more diversity level order 0, 1, 2
  • explore: plot area, minimum diameter, thinning, experimental set-up in general

26/06/25- WK4 D4 Morning

  • Analyses
    • CESAB data analyst for sensitivity analyses area? timing (frequency and resolution)? and taxonomic resolution? => Toward a methodological paper? (CESAB?)
    • Test forest maturity (Sylvain)
    • Model: nul intercept and quadratic free site or global scale (Sylvain)
    • Diversity: species 0 (Sylvain)
    • Exploring experimental variables link to delta and gamma (also determination levels)
    • Exploring coefficient of variation along phi for delta (all sites?)
    • Quantile quadratic regression of delta vs phiba across sites => do we have more variation at intermediate disturbances
    • Maturity vs. disturbance
      • from harmonized data with pre-logging inventories
      • explore quantiles versus number of trees
      • compute composition differences taxonomic, functional, especially WD
      • estimate the log-normal mod to see other index of disturbance, can we standardise including minimum diameter
      • share with all groups
      • also use controls
  • Writing
    • Messages
      • Some sites supports H1 (time hump), especially in sites with more data and where we are more confident
      • Message for H2 to be built upon results on experimental details, forest maturity test and maybe area sensitivity exploration, taxonomic resolution / identification level
    • Target: more theoretical than applied ecology, for the moment the message is not strong enough for a letter style but we need to see if the message get stronger or not (GCB, JoE)
    • Intro: David draft a plan?
    • M&M: Sylvain
    • Results: Sylvain
    • SI: Sylvain
    • Authors
      • Need to be discussed with the 6 of us
      • Geno & Andes less in favour for leading
      • David opened but time question for leading
      • Sylvain is opened on leading and might have the time needed in the fall
      • Order of circles: working group with section contribution, data & analyses vs. core bioforest, extended, TmFO
      • Let’s see second, third, senior, and co-etc later
      • Let’s continue the discussion in online meeting and keep it open
    • References: most relevant articles in a folder with the draft
    • Timetable
      • Keep whole group regular meetings:
        • fixed dates once a month, second Tuesday of the month (10am Geno, 1pm David, 2pm Sylvain, 7pm Andes)
        • check availability at the previous before
        • in parallel more frequent meetings in subgroups
        • exchanges by emails
        • pre-defined orders of the day
      • Draft for sharing for the 5th Workshop (April)
      • Start the plan and core ideas asap
      • Start drafing in the end of September / October
      • Analyses well advanced by September / October
      • Next meeting 9th of September: new results, introduction draft, & authors
    • Before September:
      • Geno: M&M sections, results figures
      • David: intro draft
      • Sylvain: analyses, M&M, results
      • All: discuss last results (mails)
    • Discussion: later
    • Abstract: later
    • Other papers: methodological, functional diversity, … => put them in the BioForest table