Analysis of the productivity of pine stands in plantations in the Northern Steppe of Ukraine
AbstractThe aim of this work is the comparative analysis of the productivity of Scots pines in pure and mixed plantations with main and accompanying species in the Northern Steppe of Ukraine We analysed the taxation parameters such as height, diameter, stand density, which vary with the age of the stand and composition of the plantation. Within the study area pines grow mainly in pure stands (81.9%). The share of mixed forest stands in the study area is only 18.1%. The analysis of representation of age structure showed the presence of the same proportion of the young age group in pure and mixed stands, the dominant share being taken up by middle-aged monoculture stands, and thus a smaller area taken up by mature and overmature pines. The average stand density per 1 ha in pure stands of all age groups is 17% higher than in mixed stands. The dynamics of variations of such biometric data as average height, diameter and density for the different compositions of Scots pine stands were measured for 14 age classes. The mean heights of the pure and mixed stands are vere close, while the average diameter gradually increased with age, reaching its maximum in overmature plantations. The research results showed that there is an excess of this parameter in the mixed compared with the pure stands. We did not find significant differences between middle age pure and mixed stands in accumulation of stand density. But pure pine stands show a clear tendency to dominate in wood accumulation in all age classes through the period of growth. The greatest difference between pure and mixed stands in the mean stand density was observed for those of middle-age. The average stand density in the pure stands was up to 32% higher than the mixed. The area distribution of Scots pine stands according to productivity was as follows. The largest area for both pure and mixed stands was occupied by trees of quality class I, which took up 54.3% of the total pure pine acreage and 41.9% of the mixed stand acreage. The second position was occupied by quality class II, which occupied 27.6% of total pure pine acreage and 36.6% of mixed stand acreage with the perecentage of total stand density at 23.6% and 35.1% respectively. In general, the value of the average stand density falls as the quality class decreases, and essentially depends on the composition of plantations: in pure stands, it is higher than in mixed. The investigated values of the biometric parameters are statistically significant for both the pure and the mixed stands.
Aakala, T., Fraver, S., D’Amato, A., & Brian, J. (2013). Influence of competition and age on tree growth in structurally complex old-growth forests in northern Minnesota, USA. Forest Ecology and Management, 308, 128–135. >> doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2013.07.057
Balandier, P., Lacointe, A., Le Roux, X., Sinoquet, H., Cruiziat, P., & Le Dizes, S. (2000). SIMWAL: A structural-functional model simulating single walnut tree growth in response to climate and pruning. Annals of Forest Science, 57(5), 571–585. >> doi.org/10.1051/forest:2000143
Barthélémy, D., & Caraglio, Y. (2007). Plant architecture: A dynamic, multilevel and comprehensive approach to plant form, structure and ontogeny. Annals of Botany, 99, 375–407. >> doi.org/10.1093/aob/mcl260
Brassard, B. W., Chen, H. Y. H., Bergeron, Y., & Paré, D. (2011). Differences in the fine root productivity between mixed- and single-species stands. Functional Ecology, 25, 238–246. >> doi.org/10.2307/41319591
Brygadyrenko, V. V. (2014). Influence of soil moisture on litter invertebrate community structure of pine forests of the steppe zone of Ukraine. Folia Oecologica, 41(1), 8–16.
Brygadyrenko, V. V. (2016). Effect of canopy density on litter invertebrate community structure in pine forests. Ekológia (Bratislava), 35(1), 90–102. >> doi.org/10.1515/eko-2016-0007
Bulakhov, V. L., & Pakhomov, O. Y. (2010). Funkcional'na zoologija [Functional zoology]. Dnipropetrovsk University Press, Dnipropetrovsk (in Ukrainian).
Chumachenko, S. I., Korotkov, V. N., Palenova, M. M., & Politov, D. V. (2003). Simulation modelling of long-term stand dynamics at different scenarios of forest management for coniferous–broad-leaved forests. Ecological Modelling, 170(2–3), 345–361. >> doi.org/10.1016/S0304-3800(03)00238-2
Danjon, F., Fourcaud, T., Bert, D. (2005). Root architecture and windfirmness of mature Pinus pinaster Ait. New Phytologist, 168, 387–400. >> doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8137.2005.01497.x
Dufrene, E., Davi, H., Francois, C., Le Mare, G., Le Dantec, V., & Granier, A. (2005). Modelling carbon and water cycles in a beech forest. Part I: Model description and uncertainty analysis on modelled NEE. Ecological Modelling, 185(2–4), 407–436. >> doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2005.01.004
Forrester, D. I. (2014). The spatial and temporal dynamics of species interactions in mixed-species forests: From pattern to process. Forest Ecology and Management, 312, 282–292. >> doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2015.06.044
Forrester, D. I. (2015). Transpiration and water-use efficiency in mixed-species forests versus monocultures: Effects of tree size, stand density and season. Tree Physiology, 35, 289–304. >> doi.org/10.1093/treephys/tpv011
Furdichko, O. І., Gladun, G. B., & Lavrov, V. V., 2006. Lіs u Stepu: Osnovi stalo¬go rozvitku [Forest in the Steppe: The basics of sustainable development]. Osnova, Kiyv (in Ukrainian).
Hulchak, V. P. (ed.) (2011). Osnovni polozhennja organizacii' i rozvytku lisovogo gospodarstva Dnipropetrovs'koi' oblasti [The main provisions of forest orga¬nization and management of Dnipropetrovsk region]. Іrpin, Dnipropetrovsk (in Ukrainian).
Kelty, M. J. (1992). Comparative productivity of monocultures and mixed species stands. In: Kelty, M. J., Larson, B. C., & Oliver, C. D. (Eds.). The ecology and silviculture of mixed-species forests. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, 125–141.
Kilimchuk, N. D., & Korobov, I. A. (1983). Geograficheskie kul'tury sosny oby¬knovennoj na nizhnedneprovskih peskah [Geographic culture of Scots pine on the lower Dnieper sands]. Lesovedenie i Agrolesomelioracija, 65, 29–32 (in Russian).
Lakyda, P. I. (2003). Fitomasa lisiv Ukrai'ny [Phytomass of Ukrainian forests]. Sbruch, Ternopil (in Ukrainian).
Linden, M., & Agestam, E. (2003). Increment and yield in mixed and monoculture stands of Pinus sylvestris and Picea abies based on an experiment in Southern Sweden. Scandinavian Journal of Forest Research, 18, 155–162. >> doi.org/10.1080/02827580310003722
Maire, G., Nouvellon, Y., Christina, M., Ponzoni, F. J., Gonc¸ J. L. M., Bouillet, J. P., & Laclau, J. P. (2013). Tree and stand light use efficiencies over a full rotation of single- and mixed-species Eucalyptus grandis and Acacia mangium plantations. Forest Ecology and Management, 288, 31–42. >> doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2012.03.005
Moroz, K. O., Brygadyrenko, V. V., & Pakhomov, A. Y. (2011). Formirovanije fauny napochvennykh bespozvonochnykh peschanoj terrasy r. Orel’ v uslovijakh pirogennoj sukcessii [Litter invertebrates fauna formation of the sandy terrace of Orel’ river in condition of post-fire succession]. Proceedings of the Azerbaijan Society of Zoology, 3, 423–435 (in Russian).
Piotto, D. (2008). A meta-analysis comparing tree growth in monocultures and mixed plantations. Forest Ecology and Management, 255, 781–786. >> doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2007.09.065
Pretzsch, H., Bauerle, T., Häberle, K. H., Matyssek, R., Schütze, G., & Rötzer, T. (2016). Tree diameter growth after root trenching in a mature mixed stand of Norway spruce (Picea abies [L.] Karst) and European beech (Fagus sylvatica [L.]). Trees, 30(5), 1761–1773. >> doi.org/10.1007/s00468-016-1406-5
Pretzsch, H., Block, J., Dieler, J., Dong, P. H., Kohnle, U., Nagel, J., Spellmann, H., & Zingg, A. (2010). Comparison between the productivity of pure and mixed stands of Norway spruce and European beech along an ecological gradient. Annals of Forest Science, 67, 1–12. >> doi.org/10.1051/forest/2010037
Pretzsch, H., Forresterb, D., & Rötzer, T. (2015). Representation of species mixing in forest growth models. Ecological Modelling, 313, 276–292. >> doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2015.06.044
Pretzsch, H., del Río, M., Ammer, C., Avdagic, A., Barbeito, I., Bielak, K., Brazaitis, G., Coll, L., Dirnberger, G., Drössler, L., Fabrika, M., Forrester, D. I., Godvod, K., Heym, M., Hurt, V., Kurylyak, V., Löf, M., Lombardi, F., Matović, B., Mohren, F., Motta, R., den Ouden, J., Pach, M., Ponette, Q., Schütze, G., Schweig, J., Skrzyszewski, J., Sramek, V., Sterba, H., Stojanović, D., Svoboda, M., Vanhellemont, M., Verheyen, K., Wellhausen, K., Zlatanov, T., & Bravo-Oviedo, A. (2015). Growth and yield of mixed versus pure stands of Scots pine (Pinus sylvestris L.) and European beech (Fagus sylvatica L.) analysed along a productivity gradient through Europe. European Journal of Forest Research, 134(5), 927–947. >> doi.org/10.1007/s10342-%20015-0900-4
Pretzsch, H., & Schütze, G. (2016). Effect of tree species mixing on the size structure, density, and yield of forest stands. European Journal of Forest Research, 135(1), 1–22. >> doi.org/10.1007/s10342-015-0913-z
Rio, M., Condes, S., & Sterba, H. (2013). Mixing effect on volume growth of Fagus sylvatica and Pinus sylvestris is modulated by stand density. Forest Ecology and Management, 292, 86–95. >> doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2012.12.013
Rio, M., & Sterba, H. (2009). Comparing volume growth in pure and mixed stands of Pinus sylvestris and Quercus pyrenaica. Annals of Forest Science, 66, 1–11. >> doi.org/10.1051/forest/2009035
Rothe, A., & Binkley, D. (2001). Nutritional interactions in mixed species forests: A synthesis. Canadian Journal of Forest Research, 31, 1855–1870. >> doi.org/10.1139/x01-120
Toigo, M., Vallet, P., Tuilleras, V., Lebourgeois, F., Rozenberg, P., Perret, B., Courbaud, S., & Perot, S. (2015). Species mixture increases the effect of drought on tree ring density, but not on ring width, in Quercus petraea–Pinus sylvestris stands. Forest Ecology and Management, 135, 73–82. >> doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2015.02.019
Tsvetkova, N. M., Pakhomov, O. Y., Serdyuk, S. M., & Yakyba, M. S. (2016). Biologichne riznomanittja Ukrajiny. Dnipropetrovs'ka oblast'. Grunty. Meta¬ly u gruntah [Bіological diversity of Ukraine. The Dnipropetrovsk region. Soils. Metalls in the soils]. Lira, Dnipropetrovsk (in Ukrainian).
Shanin, V., Komarov, A., & Mäkipää, R. (2014). Tree species composition affects productivity and carbon dynamics of different site types in boreal forests. European Journal of Forest Research, 133(2), 273–286. >> doi.org/10.1007/s10342-013-0759-1
Schmid, I., & Kazda, M. (2002). Root distribution of Norway spruce in monospecific and mixed stands on different soils. Forest Ecology and Management, 159, 37–47. >> doi.org/10.1016/S0378-1127(01)00708-3
Sidel'nik, N. A. (1977). Osnovnye principy sozdanija lesnyh kul'tur v uslovijah Stepi [Basic principles of creating the forest cultures in conditions Steppe]. Voprosy Stepnogo Lesovedenija i Ohrany Prirody, 69–74 (in Russian).
Webster, C. R., & Lorimer, C. G. (2003). Comparative growing space efficiency of four tree species in mixed conifer-hardwood forests. Forest Ecology and Management, 177, 361–377. >> doi.org/10.1016/S0378-1127(02)00394-8