J. For. Sci., 2015, 61(2):62-71 | DOI: 10.17221/101/2014-JFS

Canopy closure altered biomass allocation in young spruce standOriginal Paper

B. Konôpka1,2, J. Pajtík1,2, R. Maruąák2
1 National Forest Centre - Forest Research Institute Zvolen, Zvolen, Slovak Republic
2 Faculty of Forestry and Wood Sciences, Czech University of Life Sciences Prague, Prague, Czech Republic

Growth intensity of particular tree components is controlled by a variety of factors and as a consequence, biomass allocation also changes over time. Since allocation of biomass controls the carbon regime in a forest stand, tree standing stock and biomass structure (with regards to tree components) was estimated in young Norway spruce (Picea abies) stand based on repetitive tree sampling and allometric equations (modelled for 2009 and 2013). Large differences were found between the two models in the contribution of the tree components to above-ground biomass. Between the years 2009 and 2013, below-ground to above-ground biomass ratio dropped from 0.36 to 0.23 and short-lived to long-lived tree part ratio from 0.65 to 0.25. At the same time, the stand possibly reached maximum standing stock of both needles and fine roots. It is concluded that for biomass allocation estimates in young stands, not only stand-specific but also time-specific allometric relations should be constructed and implemented. Further, there appears to be a canopy closure threshold beyond which there is biomass allocation different from the status in sparse young spruce stands.

Keywords: tree allometry, repetitive sampling, tree components, Picea abies, carbon sequestration and cycling

Published: February 28, 2015  Show citation

ACS AIP APA ASA Harvard Chicago Chicago Notes IEEE ISO690 MLA NLM Turabian Vancouver
Konôpka B, Pajtík J, Maruąák R. Canopy closure altered biomass allocation in young spruce stand. J. For. Sci. 2015;61(2):62-71. doi: 10.17221/101/2014-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. Baskerville G.L. (1972): Use of logarithmic regression in the estimation of plant biomass. Canadian Journal of Forest Research, 49: 49-53. Go to original source...
    2. Bernier P.Y., Lamhamedi M.S., Simpon D.G. (1995): Shoot: root ratio is of limited use in evaluating the quality of container conifers stock. Tree Planters Notes, 46: 102-106.
    3. Brunner I., Bakker M.R., Björk R.G., Hirano Y., Lukac M., Aranda X., Børja, I., Eldhuset T.D., Helmisaari H.S., Jourdan C., Konôpka B., López B.C., Miguel Pérez C., Persson H., Ostonen I. (2013): Fine-root turnover rates of European forests revisited: an analysis of data from sequential coring and ingrowth cores. Plant and Soil, 362: 357-372. Go to original source...
    4. Cienciala E., Černý M., Tatarinov F., Apltauer J., Exnerová Z. (2006): Biomass functions applicable to Scots pine. Trees, 20: 483-495. Go to original source...
    5. Claveau Y.C., Messier P.G., Comeau J., Coates K.D. (2002): Growth and crown morphology responses of boreal conifer seedlings and saplings with contrasting shade tolerance to a gradient of light and height. Canadian Journal of Forest Research, 23: 458-468. Go to original source...
    6. Dowell R.C., Gibbins D., Rhoads J.R., Pallardy S.G. (2009): Biomass production physiology and soil carbon dynamics in short-rotation-grown Populus deltoides and P. deltoides × P. nigra hybrids. Forest Ecology and Manegement, 257: 134-142. Go to original source...
    7. Dutca I., Abrudan I.V., Stancioiu P.T., Blujdea V. (2010): Biomass conversion and expansion factors for young Norway spruce (Picea abies (L.) Karst.) trees planted on non-forest lands in Eastern Carpathians. Notuale Botanicae Horti Agrobotanici Cluj-Napoca, 38: 286-292.
    8. Enqusit B.J., Niklas K.J. (2002): Global allocation rules for patterns of biomass partitioning in seed plants. Science, 295: 1517-1520. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    9. Harris R.W. (1992): Root: shoot ratios. Journal of Arboriculture, 18: 39-42. Go to original source...
    10. Helmisaari H.S., Makkonen K., Kellomäki S., Valtonen E., Mälkönen E. (2002): Below- and above-ground biomass, production and nitrogen use in Scots pine in eastern Finland. Forest Ecology and Management, 165: 317-326. Go to original source...
    11. Kantola A., Mäkelä A. (2006): Development of biomass proportions in Norway spruce (Picea abies [L.] Karst.). Trees, 20: 111-121. Go to original source...
    12. King J.S., Giardina C.P., Pregitzer K.S., Friend A.L. (2007): Biomass partitioning in red pine (Pinus resinosa) along a chronosequence in the Upper Peninsula of Michigan. Canadian Journal of Forest Research, 37: 93-102. Go to original source...
    13. 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...
    14. Konôpka B., Pajtík J., ©ebeň V., Boąeµa M., Málią F., Priwitzer T., Pavlenda P. (2013): The Research Site Vrchslatina - an experimental design and the main aims. Lesnícky časopis - Forestry Journal, 59: 203-213. Go to original source...
    15. Kroon H., Visser W.J.W. (2003): Root Ecology. Ecological Studies, Heidelberg, Springer-Verlag: 400. Go to original source...
    16. Lehtonen A., Mäkipää R., Heikkinen J., Sievänen R., Liski J. (2004): Biomass expansion factors (BEF) for Scots pine, Norway spruce and birch according to stand age for boreal forests. Forest Ecology and Management, 188: 211-224. 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. Luo Y., Wang Z., Zhang X., Booth T.H., Lu F. (2012): Root: shoot ratios across China's forests: Forest type and climatic effects. Forest Ecology and Management, 269: 19-25. Go to original source...
    19. Lutz J.A., Halpern C.B. (2006): Tree mortality during early stand development: a long-term study of rates, causes, and consequences. Ecological Monographs, 76: 257-275. Go to original source...
    20. Makita N., Hirano Y., Mizoguchi T., Finér L., Kanazawa Y. (2011): Very fine roots respond to soil depth: biomass allocation, morphology, and physiology in broad-leaved temperate forest. Ecological Research, 26: 95-104. Go to original source...
    21. Marklund L.G. (1987): Biomass functions for Norway spruce (Picea abies L. Karst.) in Sweden. Umeå, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences: 27.
    22. Metslaid M., Illison T., Vicente M., Nikinmaa E., Jogiste K. (2005): Growth of advance regeneration of Norway spruce after clear-cutting. Tree Physiology, 25: 793-801. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    23. Olesinski J., Lavigne M.B., Krasowski M.J. (2011): Effect of soil moisture manipulations on fine root dynamics in a mature balsam fir (Abies balsamea L. Mill.) forest. Tree Physiology, 31: 339-348. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    24. Ostonen I., Lohmus K., Pajuste K. (2005): Fine root biomass, production and its proportion of NPP in a fertile middleaged Norway spruce forest: Comparison of soil core and ingrowth core methods. Forest Ecology and Management, 212: 264-277. Go to original source...
    25. 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...
    26. 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...
    27. Poorter H., Nagel O. (2000): The role of biomass allocation in the growth response of plants to different levels of light, CO2, nutrients and water: a quantitative review. Australian Journal of Plant Physiology, 27: 595-607. Go to original source...
    28. Seidl R., Rammer W., Bellos P., Hochbichler E., Lexer M.J. (2010): Testing generalized allometries in allocation modeling within an individual-based stimulation framework. Trees, 24: 139-150. Go to original source...
    29. Schall P., Lödige Ch., Beck M., Ammer Ch. (2012): Biomass allocation to roots and shhots is more sensitive to shade and drought in European beech than in Norway spruce seedlings. Forest Ecology and Management, 266: 246-253. Go to original source...
    30. Schmidt-Vogt H. (1977): Die Fichte. Band I. Taxomomie Verbre-Band I. Taxomomie - Verbreitung - Morphologie Ökologie - Waldgesellschaften. Hamburg-Berlin, Verlag Paul Parey: 647.
    31. Skovsgaard J.P., Bald C., Nord-Larsen T. (2011): Functions for biomasss and basic denisty of stem, crown and root system of Norway spruce (Picea abies (L.) Karst.) in Denmark. Scandinavian Journal of Forest Research, 26: 3-20. Go to original source...
    32. Vogt K.A., Vogt D.J., Moore E.E., Fatuga B.A., Redlin M.R., Edmonds R.L. (1987): Conifer and angiosperm fine-root biomass in relation to stand age and site productivity in Douglas-fir forests. Journal of Ecology, 75: 857-870. Go to original source...
    33. Waring R., Schlesinger W.H. (1985): Forest Ecosystems: Concepts and Management. Orlando, Academic Press: 340.
    34. West P.W. (2009): Tree and Forest Measurement. Dordrecht, Springer: 190. Go to original source...
    35. Wirth C., Schumacher J., Schulze E.D. (2004): Generic biomass functions for Norway spruce in Central Europe - a meta-analyses approach toward prediction and uncertainty estimation. Tree Physiology, 24: 121-139. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    36. Wullschleger S.D., Yin T.M., DiFazio S.P., Tschaplinski L.E., Gunter L.E., Davis M.F., Tuskan G.A. (2005): Phenotypic variation in growth and biomass distribution for two advanced-generation pedigrees of hybrid poplar. Canadian Journal of Forest Research, 35: 1779-1789. Go to original source...
    37. Xiao C.W., Yuste J.C., Janssens I.A., Roskams P., Nachtergale L., Carrara A., Sanchez B.Y., Ceulemans R. (2003): Aboveand belowground biomass and net primary production in a 73-year-old Scots pine forest. Tree Physiology, 23: 505-516. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    38. Yuste J.C., Konôpka B., Janssens I.A., Coenen K., Xiao C.W., Ceulemans R. (2005): Contrasting net primary productivity and carbon distribution between neighboring stands of Quercus robur and Pinus sylvestris. Tree Physiology, 25: 701-712. 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