Authors: Zoltán, László; Tanács, Eszter;Standovár, Tibor;

The examination of biodiversity at the multiscale level requires too many resources, so proxy indicators from other (e.g. forestry) databases are commonly applied. Considering the spatial scale and methodological differences, the appropriate application of indicators from different monitoring systems may be questionable without indicator validation. The results of the MAES-HU forest condition assessment (based on the Hungarian NFD - National Forestry Database) were compared with finer scale data. We applied the MAES-HU scoring system on the fine-scale database and we validated some MAES-HU indicators. The MAES-HU scoring was similar to the fine-scale score results in the case of tree species composition indicators, however, it was different for structural indicators. The NFD contains averaged values with sub-compartments as spatial units, which resulted in discrepancies in the structural indicators. This highlights the potential loss of important conservation-related information. We suggest integrating some key conservation indicators into NFD monitoring, so the involvement of other databases becomes unnecessary. The validation of structural indicators showed that old and large-diameter trees indicate more xylophil microhabitats and the presence of large-diameter standing dead trees. Our study highlights that applying indicators as proxies requires the full knowledge of monitoring methods and validated indicator-indicandum relationships.