Above-ground net primary productivity in young stands of beech and spruce

Abstract

One of the expected consequences of climate change and its inherent phenomena to forest ecosystems is the gradual modification of their tree species composition (i.e. expansion of resistant species instead of less resistant ones). Climate change accompanied with increasing temperatures and a lack of precipitations may present a threat especially to spruce stands in the European part of the temperate zone. European beech is one of the possible forest tree species which might replace the potentially endangered spruce. In this paper, we observed, by using a combination of continual measurements and destructive whole-tree sampling, standing stocks of above-ground biomass (i.e. stem, branches, and foliage) and its annual net primary productivity (NPP) in naturally regenerated young stands of beech and spruce. We intentionally selected a site where the changing climate conditions are better suited to the ecological demands of beech rather than spruce (the species is dominant in the observed area). We recorded only small differences in the standing stock of stems of the beech, if based on tons per ha. However, this is in favor of spruce if based on cubic meters per ha. The largest difference between the species was found for the standing stock of foliage, spruce retained three times the biomass of beech. Also, beech allocated more carbohydrates to stem than spruce. On the other hand, we estimated nearly the same production of foliages and branches in both stands.

Quantifying carbon in dead and living trees; a case study in young beech and spruce stand over 9 years

“…Hence, the biomass (carbon) increased more in the beech than in the spruce stand that might be related not only to the inter-specific contrasts in the growth rates but also to the differences in their stand and site properties. In fact, also our previous study (Pajtík et al 2013) conducted in young beech and spruce stands grown at the identical sites indicated larger net primary productivity of beech than spruce. The difference occurred mainly due to the higher amount of assimilates allocated intobeech stems.…”

“…At the same time, we found much higher mortality rate in spruce than in beech young stands that was explained not only by different light conditions under the canopy but also by contrasting ecological properties of these species. Although our previous study Pajtík et al 2013) showed the results on biomass allocation and net primary productivity in developing young beech and spruce stands, we did not estimate either the amount of carbon sequestrated in tree biomass or the carbon flux realised via aboveground litter fall from living trees and body of died trees.…”

“…Previously we showed much higher contribution of foliage to total biomass in spruce young stands than in beech young stands (Pajtík et al 2013). On the other hand, the contributions of their foliage to net primary productivity were very similar.…”

Production potential of photosynthesis in forest ecosystems of the low mountain Pokuttya (Ukrainian Carpathians)

“…Це зумовлено відносною збалансованістю речовинного обігу між фітоценозом і ґрунтом, чого немає в антропогенно трансформованих екосистемах, до яких періодично вносять органічні та мінеральні добрива, додатково зрошують або осушують, а також регулярно вилучають із них частину біомаси. NPP лісових біогеоценозів залежить, головним чином, від видового складу деревостанів та їх біометричних характеристик: віку едифікаторних ценопопуляцій, абсолютної повноти, запасу та приросту стовбурної деревини та біомаси загалом (Tretjak and Chernevij, 2011;Pajtík et al, 2013;Vasylyshyn et al, 2014). Вирішальне значення має площа деревостанів сучасного біогеоценотичного покриву.…”

Biomass allocation in natural regeneration of Fagus sylvatica and Picea abies trees in Italian Alps

“…in Chile show R 2 aj values between 0.80 and 0.95. In addition, Pajtík et al (2013) showfor the allometric equations for expressing above-ground biomass on the basis of the diameter -a R 2 of 0.990 in reference to Norway spruce stem and a R 2 of 0.989 for the European beech stem in Slovakia. In the present study, the equation parameters show a high signifi cance level for both species (p < 0.001) and the Residual Standard Error (RSE) ranges between 0.66 and 0.77.…”