Comparison of different forest regeneration methods after windthrow

被引:1
|
作者
Martiník, A. [1 ]
Dobrovolný, L. [1 ]
Hurt, V. [1 ]
机构
[1] Department of Silviculture, Faculty of Forestry and Wood Technology, Mendel University in Brno, Zemědělská 3, 613 00 Brno, Czech Republic
关键词
Seed - Population distribution;
D O I
10.17221/66/2013-jfs
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
The prosperity of various forest regeneration methods was evaluated on the prepared windthrow area established in 2010 in a previously allochthonous coniferous stand growing in mid-elevations of the Czech Republic. The forest regeneration variants were as follows: (1) planting of target species (Picea abies [L.] Karst.) and Fagus sylvatica (L.), (2) seeding of pioneer (non target) species (Betula pendula Roth) and (3) spontaneous succession. Two years after windthrow the planting was evaluated in accordance with the Czech forestry law as regeneration method with sufficient attributes, density (6,000-9,000 indd·ha-1) and regular spatial distribution of target tree species. The seeding and succession variants showed a insufficient attributes of target tree species - total density ca 3,000 indd·ha-1 (being ca 1,000 indd·ha-1 higher than 20 cm) and irregular distribution across the plot. The nontarget species birch on the seeding variant showed a high density of plants (131,000 indd·ha-1) being eight times higher than the succession variant. The cost of the regeneration treatment was different between the variants - planting: 5,000-6,000 EUR·ha-1, 1,300 EUR·ha-1, succession: 1,000 EUR·ha-1. Comparing to planting the higher diversity of tree species and higher density of non-target species (20,000-134,000 EUR·ha-1) in the seeding and succession variants promise success for the future, however the real potential of regeneration methods that were used will be clear after long-term observations.
引用
收藏
页码:190 / 197
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] Forest Regeneration Patterns Differ Considerably between Sites with and without Windthrow Wood Logging in the High Tatra Mountains
    Konopka, Bohdan
    Seben, Vladimir
    Merganicova, Katarina
    FORESTS, 2021, 12 (10):
  • [42] Hillslope runoff in relation to methods of forest regeneration
    Sach, Frantisek
    REPORTS OF FORESTRY RESEARCH-ZPRAVY LESNICKEHO VYZKUMU, 2006, 51 (03): : 184 - 194
  • [43] The sensitivity of SAR backscatter to forest windthrow gaps
    Green, RM
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF REMOTE SENSING, 1998, 19 (12) : 2419 - 2425
  • [44] Streamflow response to catastrophic windthrow and forest recovery in subalpine spruce forest
    Rajwa-Kuligiewicz, Agnieszka
    Bojarczuk, Anna
    JOURNAL OF HYDROLOGY, 2024, 634
  • [45] Comparison of extraction methods for recovery of extracellular β-glucosidase in two different forest soils
    Masciandaro, Grazia
    Macci, Cristina
    Doni, Serena
    Maserti, Bianca Elena
    Leo, A. Calvo-Bado
    Ceccanti, Brunello
    Wellington, Elizabeth
    SOIL BIOLOGY & BIOCHEMISTRY, 2008, 40 (09): : 2156 - 2161
  • [46] Comparison of different methods for fitting nonlinear mixed forest models and for making predictions
    Yang, Yuqing
    Huang, Shongming
    CANADIAN JOURNAL OF FOREST RESEARCH, 2011, 41 (08) : 1671 - 1686
  • [47] Comparison of different resuscitation methods for newborn calves after dystocia
    Homberg, Julia
    Sendag, Sait
    Koca, Davut
    Cetin, Nebi
    Wehrend, Axel
    TIERAERZTLICHE PRAXIS AUSGABE GROSSTIERE NUTZTIERE, 2023, 51 (04): : 202 - 210
  • [48] Trembling Aspen Stand Response 15 Years after Windthrow, Salvage Harvesting, and Forest Renewal
    Man, Rongzhou
    Rice, Mya
    FORESTS, 2022, 13 (06):
  • [49] SUPERFICIAL THROMBOPHLEBITIS AFTER INTRAVENOUS THERAPY - COMPARISON OF INCIDENCE AFTER DIFFERENT METHODS
    ALKAN, M
    GEFFEN, Z
    CRISTAL, N
    HAEMOSTASIS, 1982, 12 (1-2) : 47 - 47
  • [50] The effects of windthrow on forest insect communities: a literature review
    Bouget, C
    Duelli, P
    BIOLOGICAL CONSERVATION, 2004, 118 (03) : 281 - 299