[Adel M.N., Pourbabaei H., Dey D.C. 2014. Ecological species group–Environmental factors relationships in unharvested beech forests in the north of Iran. Ecological Engineering, 69, 1–7.]Search in Google Scholar
[Augusto L., Dupouey J.L., Ranger J. 2003. Effects of tree species on understory vegetation and environmental conditions in temperate forests. Annals of Forest Science, 60, 823–831.]Search in Google Scholar
[Boulanger V., Baltzinger C., Saïd S., Ballon P., Picard J.F., Dupouey J.L. 2015. Decreasing deer browsing pressure influenced understory vegetation dynamics over 30 years. Annals of Forest Science, 72, 367–378.]Search in Google Scholar
[Chang-Bae Lee C.B., Chun J.H. 2015. Patterns and determinants of plant richness by elevation in a mountain ecosystem in South Korea: area, middomain effect, climate and productivity. Journal of Forestry Research, 26 (4), 905-917. DOI 10.1007/11676-015-0115-z.10.1007/s11676-015-0115-z]Search in Google Scholar
[Chávez V., Macdonald S.E. 2012. Partitioning vascular understory diversity in mixedwood boreal forests: The importance of mixed canopies for diversity conservation. Forest Ecology and Management, 271, 19–26.]Search in Google Scholar
[Clement Ch. 2001. The ecological importance of understory herbaceous plants. The Effects of Land-Use change on the biodiversity of the Highlands Plateau: a Carolina Environmental Program Report, 32–42.]Search in Google Scholar
[Coroi M., Skeffington M.S., Giller P., Smith C., Gormally M., O’Donovan G. 2004. Vegetation diversity and stand structure in streamside forests in the south of Ireland. Forest Ecology and Management, 202, 39–57.]Search in Google Scholar
[Eshaghi Rad J., Banj Shafiei A. 2010. The distribution of ecological species groups in Fagetum communities of Caspian forests: determination of effective environmental factors. Flora, 205 (11), 721–727.10.1016/j.flora.2010.04.015]Search in Google Scholar
[Gilliam F.S. 2007. The ecological significance of the herbaceous layer in temperate forest ecosystems. BioScience, 57 (10), 845–858.]Search in Google Scholar
[Giorgini D., Giordani P., Casazza G., Amici V., Mariotti M.G., Chiarucci A. 2015. Woody species diversity as predictor of vascular plant species diversity in forest ecosystems. Forest Ecology and Management, 345, 50–55.]Search in Google Scholar
[Hardtle W., von Oheimb G., Westphal C. 2005. Relationships between the vegetation and soil conditions in beech and beech-oak forests of northern Germany. Plant Ecology, 177, 113–124.]Search in Google Scholar
[Hermy M., Honnay O., Firbank L., Grashof-Bokdam C., Lawesson J.E. 1999. An ecological comparison between ancient and other forest plant species of Europe, and the implications for forest conservation. Biological Conservation, 91, 9–22.]Search in Google Scholar
[Hosein Ava S., Pir Khezri M. 2011. Evaluation of Quantitative and Quality Characteristics in Some Hazelnut (Corylus avellana L.) Varieties in Karaj Climatic Conditions. Iranian Journal of Seed and Plant Production, 26 (2), 329–342.]Search in Google Scholar
[Jancke O., Dorren L.K.A., Berger F., Fuhr M., Kohl M. 2009. Implications of coppice stand characteristics on the rockfall protection function. Forest Ecology and Management, 259, 124–131.]Search in Google Scholar
[Jolls C.L. 2003. Populations of and threats to rare plants of the herb layer: more challenges and opportunities for conservation biologists. In: The Herbaceous Layer in Forests of Eastern North America (eds.: F.S Gilliam, M.R. Roberts). Oxford University Press, New York.]Search in Google Scholar
[Khuroo A.A., Weber E., Malik A.H., Reshi Z.A., Dar G.H. 2011. Altitudinal distribution patterns of the native and alien woody flora in Kashmir Himalaya, India. Environmental Research, 111, 967–977.]Search in Google Scholar
[Koorem K., Moora M. 2010. Positive association between understory species richness and a dominant shrub species (Corylus avellana) in a boreonemoral spruce forest. Forest Ecology and Management, 260, 1407–1413.]Search in Google Scholar
[Lencinasa M.V., Pastur G.M., Gallo E., Cellini J.M. 2011. Alternative silvicultural practices with variable retention to improve understory plant diversity conservation in southern Patagonian forests. Forest Ecology and Management, 262, 1236–1250.]Search in Google Scholar
[McEwan R.W., Muller R.N. 2011. Dynamics, diversity, and resource gradient relationships in the herbaceous layer of an old-growth Appalachian forest. Plant Ecology, 212, 1179–1191.]Search in Google Scholar
[Mölder A., Streit M., Schmidt W. 2014. When beech strikes back: How strict nature conservation reduces herb-layer diversity and productivity in Central European deciduous forests. Forest Ecology and Management, 319, 51–61.]Search in Google Scholar
[Moraghebi F., Matinizade M., Khanjani Shiraz B. 2010. Mycorrhizal symbiosis hazelnut (Corylus avellana L.) and acid phosphatase activity in two regions suction and Fandoglo. Iranian Journal of Plant and Ecosystem, 6 (24), 13–23.]Search in Google Scholar
[Onaindia M., Mitxelena A. 2009. Potential use of pine plantations to restore native forests in a highly fragmented river basin. Annals of Forest Science, 66 (305), 1–8.]Search in Google Scholar
[Pena L., Amezaga I., Onaindia M. 2011. At which spatial scale are plant species composition and diversity affected in beech forests? Annals of Forest Science, 68, 1351–1362.]Search in Google Scholar
[Reyers B., Van Jaarsveld A.S., Krüger M. 2000. Complementarity as a biodiversity indicator strategy. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 267, 505–513.]Search in Google Scholar
[Scheller R.M., Mladenoff D.J. 2002. Understory species patterns and diversity in old-growth and managed northern hardwood forests. Ecological Applications, 12, 1329–1343.]Search in Google Scholar
[Wulf M., Naaf T. 2009. Herb layer response to broad-leaf tree species with different leaf litter quality and canopy structure in temperate forests. Journal of Vegetation Science, 20, 517–526.]Search in Google Scholar
