Explore the vast range of titles available.

All papers published in this volume have been reviewed through processes administered by the Editors. Reviews were conducted by expert referees to the professional and scientific standards expected of a proceedings journal published by IOP Publishing.• Type of peer review: Single Anonymous• Conference submission management system: Morressier• Number of submissions received: 26• Number of submissions sent for review: 25• Number of submissions accepted: 25• Acceptance Rate (Submissions Accepted / Submissions Received × 100): 96.2• Average number of reviews per paper: 2• Total number of reviewers involved: 23• Contact person for queries:Name: Fifi Gus DwiyantiEmail: fifi_dwiyanti@apps.ipb.ac.idAffiliation: Department of Silviculture, Faculty of Forestry and Environment, IPB University

Așa că a început cu ceea ce americanii con-sideră ca find părinții fondatori. Documen-tarea unui asemenea demers științifc este grea, pentru că, pe de o parte, autorul nu a avut șansa unui interviu direct cu fecare per-sonalitate în parte, iar pe de altă parte infor-mația la care a avut acces nu a fost totdeauna la prima mână. Poate că motoul cel mai potrivit pentru acest prim volum ar f spusa lui Nae Ionescu, adresată mai tinerilor colegi: „Să mergeți în succes cel puțin la fel de mult pe cât am mers noi în eșec\". Volumul este foarte bine documentat iar autorul a avut o idee strălucită de a împleti, într-o manieră „ecosistemică\", povestea ide-lor despre pădure cu poveștile celor ce au generat respectivele idei. În biografa fecărei personalități evocate sunt inserate și o serie de informații tehnice ce ajută cititorul să înțeleagă mai evoluția ad-ministrației silvice, atât pentru pădurile publi-ce cât și pentru cele private. Iată un citat ce demonstrează acest har: „Așa cum monahii au lucrat pentru a înălța lăcașuri sfnte, simboluri ale conectării cu divinul, în mijlocul frumuseții naturii, la fel și acești silvicultori, pionieri în acest domeniu deosebit de important, au depus eforturi consi-derabile pentru a proteja și conserva pădurile noastre, oferind un cadru vital pentru viață și pentru sănătatea ecosistemelor.\" Deși autorul a depus un efort considerabil în munca de documentare, i-au scăpat totuși câte-va personalități marcante, ce se regăsesc în text sub forma unor citări: prof. Vintilă Stinghe și prof. Teodor Bălănică (ce a făcut pușcărie pentru că a spus că în pădure se respiră un aer mai moral), „tandemul\" Constantin Traci și Eugen Costin, ce au lăsat ca moștenire o amplă rețea de suprafețe experimentale de durată în ame-liorarea terenurilor degradate, frații Laurențiu și Mircea Petrescu, ce au excelat în îngrijirea arboretelor și protecţia pădurilor, dr. Radu Dis-sescu, frații Ilie și Paul Decei, dr. Sorin Armă-șescu, autorul primelor tabele de producție în România, și mulți alții.

This section contains all the presentation abstracts from the “Silviculture & Forest Ecology” track of the 2015 Society of American Foresters National Convention, held November 3-7 in Baton Rouge, Louisiana.

This section contains all the presentation abstracts from the “USFS National Silviculture Workshop” track of the 2015 Society of American Foresters National Convention, held November 3-7 in Baton Rouge, Louisiana.

This section contains all the poster abstracts from the “Silviculture & Forest Ecology” track of the 2015 Society of American Foresters National Convention, held November 3-7 in Baton Rouge, Louisiana.

This section contains all the presentation abstracts from the “Silviculture” track of the 2015 Society of American Foresters National Convention, held November 3-7 in Baton Rouge, Louisiana.

Following this modest beginning, the southern pine silviculture research and demonstration program that started 80 years ago at the CEF continues to this day, although no longer in this structure-within a couple of years, a more permanent headquarters facility was constructed a quarter-mile south of this location.

With an increasing pressure on forested landscapes, conservation areas may fail to maintain biodiversity if they are not supported by the surrounding managed forest matrix. Worldwide, forests are managed by one of two broad approaches—even‐ and uneven‐aged silviculture. In recent decades, there has been rising public pressure against the systematic use of even‐aged silviculture (especially clear‐cutting) because of its perceived negative esthetic and ecological impacts. This led to an increased interest for uneven‐aged silviculture. However, to date, there has been no worldwide ecological comparison of the two approaches, based on multiple indicators. Overall, for the 99 combinations of properties or processes verified (one study may have evaluated more than one property or process), we found nineteen (23) combinations that clearly showed uneven‐aged silviculture improved the evaluated metrics compared to even‐aged silviculture, eleven (16) combinations that showed the opposite, and 60 combinations that were equivocal. Furthermore, many studies were based on a limited study design without either a timescale (44 of the 76) or spatial (54 of the 76) scale consideration. Current views that uneven‐aged silviculture is better suited than even‐aged silviculture for maintaining ecological diversity and processes are not substantiated by our analyses. Our review, by studying a large range of indicators and many different taxonomic groups, also clearly demonstrates that no single approach can be relied on and that both approaches are needed to ensure a greater number of positive impacts. Moreover, the review clearly highlights the importance of maintaining protected areas as some taxonomic groups were found to be negatively affected no matter the management approach used. Finally, our review points to a lack of knowledge for determining the use of even‐ or uneven‐aged silviculture in terms of both their respective proportion in the landscape and their spatial agency. We reviewed 76 papers worldwide that compared the two approaches regarding their effects on species/structural diversity and ecological processes. Current views that uneven‐aged silviculture is better suited than even‐aged silviculture for maintaining ecological diversity and processes are not substantiated by our analyses.

The article contains all presentation abstracts from the Silviculture and Forest Ecology track of the 2012 Society of American Foresters National Convention.