windbreaks (P = .008; Fig. 12.12). These differences
are most likely due to the preferential use of connected
windbreaks and greater levels of seed dispersal by
fruit-eating birds (see the essays by Nielsen and
DeRosier and by Groom). A seed-trapping study is
underway to examine whether the seed rain is higher
in connected windbreaks.
Although the presence of remnant trees did not
increase the number of forest tree species within
windbreaks, windbreaks with remnant trees had sig-
nificantly greater densities of forest trees than wind-
breaks lacking remnant trees (P = .004; Fig. 12.13). In
windbreaks with remnant trees, the majority of the
forest tree seedlings were concentrated directly be-
neath the remnant tree crowns. Other studies have
shown that forest regeneration may be enhanced un-
der remnant trees, which serve as perch sites for avian
seed-dispersers (McDonnell and Stiles 1983, Guevara
et al. 1986, Guevara and Laborde 1993).
This study suggests that windbreaks can enhance
conservation efforts by serving as habitat for many for-
est tree species. As the trees mature, windbreaks will
more closely resemble forest edge habitat and foster
a greater variety of forest plant and animal species.
Because the location of windbreaks influences the rate
of forest regeneration within windbreaks, they should
be connected to forest fragments and include remnant
trees whenever possible (Harvey 1999).Figure 12.12. (top) Windbreaks
connected to forest fragments
had a significantly higher density
of forest tree seedlings than
nonconnected windbreaks.
Figure 12.13. (left) Windbreaks
with remnant trees had signifi-
cantly higher densities of forest
trees regenerating in them than
windbreaks lacking remnant
trees.451 Conservation Biology