The competition factor in the practice of growing mixed stands with conifers
https://doi.org/10.21266/2079-4304.2024.248.27-42
Abstract
Studies have been conducted in different countries and under different ecological conditions to assess the productivity of mixed stands. The results of these comparative studies show that mixed stands tend to be more productive than pure stands, with optimal combinations of tree species having the greatest effect. This is accomplished by enhancing the growth of the main species and increasing the productivity of several species in a mixed stand. Studies also show that interspecific competition is weaker than intraspecific competition, with the greatest effect.
About the Authors
J. V. Barkan
St.Petersburg State Forest Technical University
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Barkan Juliette V. – PhD student,
194021. Institutskiy per. 5. St. Petersburg
D. E. Raupova
St.Petersburg State Forest Technical University
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Raupova Diana E. – PhD student,
194021. Institutskiy per. 5. St. Petersburg
D. A. Danilov
St.Petersburg State Forestry Technical University;
Leningrad Research Agriculture Institute Branch of Russian Potato Research Centre
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Danilov Dmitry A. – DSc (Agriculture), Professor of Forestry Department, 194021, Institutskiy per. 5. St. Petersburg;
principal researcher of Department of Agrochemistry and Agrolandscapes, 188338. Institutskaya str. 1, Belogorka, Leningrad Region
References
1. Bayer D., Pretzsch H. Reactions to gap emergence: Norway spruce increases growth while European beech features horizontal space occupation – evidence by repeated 3D TLS measurements. Silva Fennica, 2017, vol. 51, no. 5 article 7748.
2. Bielak K., Dudzińska M., Pretzsch H. Mixed stands of Scots pine (Pinus sylvestris L.) and Norway spruce [Picea abies (L.) Karst] can be more productive than monocultures. Evidence from over 100 years of observation of long-term experiments. Forest Systems, 2014, 23(3), pp. 573–589.
3. Bolte A., Villanueva I. Interspecific competition impacts on the morphology and distribution of fine roots in European beech (Fagus sylvatica L.) and Norway spruce (Picea abies (L.) Karst.). Eur. J. Forest Res., 2006, no. 125, рр. 15–26.
4. Bouillet J., Laclau J., de Moraes Gonçalves J.L. et al. Eucalyptus and Acacia tree growth over entire rotation in single- and mixed-species plantations across five sites in Brazil and Congo. Forest Ecology and Management, 2013, vol. 301, рр. 89–101.
5. Cattaneo N., Bravo-Oviedo A., Bravo F. Analysis of tree interactions in a mixed Mediterranean pine stand using competition indices. Eur J. Forest Res., 2018, vol. 137, рр. 109–120.
6. Cortini F., Comeau P.G., Strimbu V.C., Hogg E.H. (Ted), Bokalo M., Huang S. Survival functions for boreal tree species in northwestern North America. Forest Ecology and Management, 2017, vol. 402, рр. 177–185.
7. Danilov D.A., Belyaeva N.V., Ischuk T.A. Determination of competitive interspecific relationships in deciduous and coniferous stands. Forest Engineering Journal, 2014, vol. 4, no. 3 (15), рр. 9–20. (In Russ.)
8. Fang C., Comeau P.G., Harper G.J. Effects of red alder on growth of Douglas-fir and western redcedar in southwestern British Columbia. Forest Ecology and Management, 2019, vol. 434, рр. 244–254.
9. Forrester D.I., Ammer Ch., Annighöfer P.J. et al. Predicting the spatial and temporal dynamics of species interactions in Fagus sylvatica and Pinus sylvestris forests across Europe. Forest Ecology and Management, 2017, vol. 405, рр. 112–133.
10. Ghorbani M., Sohrabi H., Sadati S.E., Babaei F. Productivity and dynamics of pure and mixed-species plantations of Populous deltoids Bartr. ex Marsh and Alnus subcordata C.A. Mey. Forest Ecology and Management, 2018, vol. 409, рр. 890–898.
11. Holmström E., Goude M., Nilsson O., Nordin A., Lundmark T., Nilsson U. Productivity of Scots pine and Norway spruce in central Sweden and competitive release in mixtures of the two species. Forest Ecology and Management, 2018, vol. 429, рр. 287–293.
12. Houtmeyers S., Brunner A. Thinning responses of individual trees in mixed stands of Norway spruce and Scots pine. Scandinavian Journal of Forest Research, 2020, vol. 35, no. 7, рр. 351–366.
13. Lu H., Mohren G.M.J., Del Río M., Schelhaas M-J., Bouwman M., Sterck F.J. Species Mixing Effects on Forest Productivity: A Case Study at Stand-, Species- and Tree-Level in the Netherlands. Forests, 2018, vol. 9 no. 11, р. 713.
14. Mina M., del Río M., Huber M.O., Thürig E., Rohner B. The symmetry of competitive interactions in mixed Norway spruce, silver fir and European beech forests. J. Veg Sci., 2018, 29, рр. 775–787.
15. Orellana E., Vanclay J.K. Competition and dominance between angiosperms and Araucaria angustifolia (Bert.) O. Kuntze in the Atlantic Forest in southern Brazil. Forest Ecology and Management, 2018, vol. 425, рр. 119–125.
16. Pothier D. Relationships between patterns of stand growth dominance and tree competition mode for species of various shade tolerances. Forest Ecology and Management, 2017, vol. 406, рр. 155–162. Pretzsch H., Dieler J., Seifert T. et al. Climate effects on productivity and resource-use efficiency of Norway spruce (Picea abies [L.] Karst.) and European beech (Fagus sylvatica [L.]) in stands with different spatial mixing patterns. Trees, 2012, vol. 26, pp. 1343–1360.
17. Quiñonez-Barraza G., Zhao D., De Los Santos Posadas H.M. et al. Considering neighborhood effects improves individual dbh growth models for natural mixedspecies forests in Mexico. Annals of Forest Science, 2018, vol. 75, p. 78.
18. Rewald B., Leuschner C. Belowground competition in a broad-leaved temperate mixed forest: pattern analysis and experiments in a four-species stand. Eur. J. Forest Res., 2009, no. 128, pp. 387–398.
19. Seidel D., Leuschner C., Müller A. et al. Crown plasticity in mixed forests– Quantifying asymmetry as a measure of competition using terrestrial laser scanning. Forest Ecology and Management, 2011, vol. 261, no. 11, pp. 2123–2132.
20. Sevko O.A., Pupenko A.V. The influence of the spatial structure of pine and birch stands on the taxation parameters of pine trees. Proceedings of the BSTU. Series 1: Forestry, Nature Management and Processing of Renewable Resources, 2017, no. 2 (198), pp. 37–42. (In Russ.)
21. Tchichelle S.V., Mareschal L., Koutika L., Epron D. Biomass production, nitrogen accumulation and symbiotic nitrogen fixation in a mixed-species plantation of eucalypt and acacia on a nutrient-poor tropical soil. Forest Ecology and Management, 2017, vol. 403, pp. 103–111.
22. Thorpe H.C., Astrup R., Trowbridge A., Coates K.D. Competition and tree crowns: A neighborhood analysis of three boreal tree species. Forest Ecology and Management, 2010, vol. 259, no. 8, pp. 1586–1596.
23. Yan Y., Xia M., Fan S., Zhan M., Guan F. Detecting the Competition between Moso Bamboos and Broad-Leaved Trees in Mixed Forests Using a Terrestrial Laser Scanner. Forests, 2018, vol. 9, no. 9, р. 520.
24. You Y., Huang X., Zhu H. et al. Positive interactions between Pinus massoniana and Castanopsis hystrix species in the uneven-aged mixed plantations can produce more ecosystem carbon in subtropical China. Forest Ecology and Management, 2018, vol. 410, pp. 193–200.
Review
For citations:
Barkan J.V., Raupova D.E., Danilov D.A. The competition factor in the practice of growing mixed stands with conifers. Izvestia Sankt-Peterburgskoj lesotehniceskoj akademii. 2024;(248):27-42. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.21266/2079-4304.2024.248.27-42
Views:
91
Email this article 