J. For. Sci., 2013, 59(11):436-446 | DOI: 10.17221/56/2013-JFS

Foliage and fine roots in terms of growth efficiency - a comparison between European beech and Norway spruce at early growth stagesOriginal Paper

B. Konôpka1,2, J. Pajtík1,2
1 National Forest Centre - Forest Research Institute in Zvolen, Zvolen, Slovak Republic
2 Faculty of Forestry and Wood Sciences, Czech University of Life Sciences Prague, Prague, Czech Republic

The quantification of stems (under- and overbark), foliage and fine roots in 14-year-old stands of European beech and Norway spruce grown on the same site were evaluated. Therefore, 60 trees of each species were sampled, dry masses of stems and foliage were established and expressed by allometric equations with stem diameter as an independent variable. The spruce allocated a much larger portion of biomass into the foliage than beech. The equations on a tree level were constructed also for specific leaf area and one-sided projected leaf area. Moreover, the quantity and morphological characteristics of fine roots in both stands were surveyed through soil coring. While standing stocks of fine roots were similar in the stands of both tree species, significant interspecies differences occurred in morphological properties of roots. Growth efficiency, expressing annual stem production on a variety of foliage and fine root parameters was calculated. The largest differences, specifically fivefold in favour of spruce, were found in growth efficiency based on a number of root tips.

Keywords: allometric equations; fine root morphology; leaf area; stem diameter; stem mass production; interspecies differences

Published: November 30, 2013  Show citation

ACS AIP APA ASA Harvard Chicago Chicago Notes IEEE ISO690 MLA NLM Turabian Vancouver
Konôpka B, Pajtík J. Foliage and fine roots in terms of growth efficiency - a comparison between European beech and Norway spruce at early growth stages. J. For. Sci. 2013;59(11):436-446. doi: 10.17221/56/2013-JFS.
Share...
Download citation
  • BibTeX (.bib)
  • Bookends (.ris)
  • EasyBib (.ris)
  • EndNote (.enw)
  • EndNote 8 (.xml)
  • ISI WoS (.isi)
  • Medlars (.medlars)
  • Mendeley (.ris)
  • MODS (.xml)
  • Papers (.ris)
  • RefWorks (.txt)
  • RefManager (.ris)
  • RIS (.ris)
  • MS Word (.xml)
  • Zotero (.ris)
    • Open full article

    References

    1. Barna M. (2004): Adaptation of European beech (Fagus sylvatica L.) to different ecological conditions: leaf area size variation. Polish Journal of Ecology, 52: 35-45.
    2. Bolan N.S. (1991): A critical review of the role of mycorrhizal fungi in the uptake of phosphorus by plants. Plant and Soil, 134: 189-207. Go to original source...
    3. Brunner I., Godbold D.L. (2007): Tree roots in a changing world. Journal of Forest Research, 12: 78-82. Go to original source...
    4. Closa I., Irigoyen J.J., Goicoechea N. (2012): Microclimatic conditions determined by stem density influence leaf anatomy and leaf physiology of beech (Fagus sylvatica L.) growing within stands that naturally regenerate from clear-cutting. Trees, 24: 1029-1043. Go to original source...
    5. Gersonde R.F., O'Hara K.L. (2005): Comparative tree growth efficiency in Sierra Nevada mixed-conifer forests. Forest Ecology and Management, 219: 95-108 Go to original source...
    6. Gspalt M., Bauerle W., Binckley D., Sterba H. (2013): Leaf area and light use efficiency patterns of Norway spruce under different thinning regimes and age classes. Forest Ecology and Management, 288: 49-59. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    7. Helmisaari H.S., Makkonen K., Kellomäki S., Valtonen E., Mälkönen E. (2002): Below- and aboveground biomass, production and nitrogen use in Scots pine in eastern Finland. Forest Ecology and Management, 165: 317-326. Go to original source...
    8. Jack B.S., Sheffield M.C.P., McConville D.J. (2002): Comparison of growth efficiency of mature longleaf and slash pine trees. General Technical Reports, 48: 81-85.
    9. Kantor P., Šach F., Černohous V. (2009): Development of foliage biomass of young spruce and beech stands in the mountain water balance research area. Journal of Forest Science, 55: 51-62. Go to original source...
    10. Kayama M., Kitaoka S., Wang W., Choi D., Koike T. (2007): Needle longevity, photosynthetic rate and nitrogen concentration of eight spruce taxa planted in northern Japan. Tree Physiology, 27: 1585-1593. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    11. Konôpka B., Takáčová E. (2010): Effects of liming and NPK-fertilization on the soil and fine roots in a Norway spruce stand, Nízke Tatry Mts. Ekológia (Bratislava), 29: 28-39.
    12. Konôpka B., Pajtík J., Moravčík M., Lukac M. (2010): Biomass partitioning and growth efficiency in four naturally regenerated forest tree species. Basic and Applied Ecology, 11: 234-243. Go to original source...
    13. Konôpka B., Pajtík J., Šebeň V., Bošeľa M., Máliš F., Priwitzer T., Pavlenda P. (2013a): The Research Site Vrchslatina - an experimental design and the main aims. Lesnícky časopis - Forestry Journal, 59: 203-213. Go to original source...
    14. Konôpka B., Pajtík J., Maľová M. (2013b): Fine root standing stock and production in young beech and spruce stands. Lesnícky časopis - Forestry Journal, 59: 163-171. Go to original source...
    15. Kozlowski T.T, Pallardy S.G. (1997): Physiology of Woody Plants. San Diego, Academic Press: 411.
    16. Kucbel S., Jaloviar P., Špišák J. (2011): Quantity, vertical distribution and morphology of fine roots in Norway spruce stands with different stem density. Plant Root, 5: 46-55. Go to original source...
    17. Litton C.M., Raich J.W., Ryan M.G. (2007): Carbon allocation in forest ecosystems. Global Change Biology, 13: 2089-2109. Go to original source...
    18. Marklund L.G. (1987): Biomass Functions for Norway Spruce (Picea abies L. Karts.) in Sweden. Umeå, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences: 27.
    19. Milla R., Reich P.B., Niinemets U., Castro-Díez P. (2008): Environmental and developmental controls on specific leaf area are little modified by leaf allometry. Functional Ecology, 22: 565-576. Go to original source...
    20. Ostonen I., Püttsepp Ü., Biel C., Alberton O., Bakker M.R., Löhmus K., Majdi H., Metcalfe J.D., Olsthoorn A.F.M., Pronk A.A., Vanguelova E., Weih M., Brunner I. (2007): Specific root length as an indicator of environmental change. Plant Biosystems, 141: 426-442. Go to original source...
    21. Pajtík J., Konôpka, B., Lukac M. (2008): Biomass functions and expansion factors in young Norway spruce (Picea abies [L.] Karst) trees. Forest Ecology and Management, 256: 1096-1103. Go to original source...
    22. Pajtík J., Konôpka B., Lukac M. (2011): Individual biomass factors for beech, oak, and pine in Slovakia: a comparative study in young naturally regenerated stands. Trees, 25: 277-288. Go to original source...
    23. Poorter H., Niklas K.J., Reich P.B., Oleksyn J., Poot P., Mommer L. (2012): Biomass allocation to leaves, stems and roots: meta-analyses of interspecific variation and environmental control. New Phytologist, 193: 30-50. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    24. Reich P.B., Walters M.B., Ellsworth D.S., Vose J.M., Volin J.C., Gresham Ch., Bowman W.D. (1998): Relationships of leaf dark respiration to leaf nitrogen, specific leaf area and leaf life-span: a test across biomes and functional groups. Oecologia, 114: 471-482. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    25. Smit A.L., Bengough A.G., Engels C., van Noordwijk M., Pellerin S., van de Geijn S.C. (2000): Root Methods. A Handbook. Berlin, Springer-Verlag: 587. Go to original source...
    26. Wirth C., Schumacher J., Schulze E.D. (2004): Generic biomass functions for Norway spruce in Central Europe - a meta-analysis approach toward prediction and uncertainty estimation. Tree Physiology, 24: 121-139. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    27. Zha T., Wang K.Y., Ryppö A., Kellomäki S. (2002): Impact of needle age on the responses of respiration in Scots pine to long-term elevation of carbon dioxide concentration and temperature. Tree Physiology, 22: 1241-1248. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...

    This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY NC 4.0), which permits non-comercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original publication is properly cited. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.


    Return to the content