2014
DOI: 10.1016/j.agrformet.2013.12.003
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Changes in biogeochemistry and carbon fluxes in a boreal forest after the clear-cutting and partial burning of slash

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

12
72
1

Year Published

2014
2014
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

2
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 77 publications
(85 citation statements)
references
References 65 publications
12
72
1
Order By: Relevance
“…During the CO 2 measurement campaigns, soil in the windthrow areas was on average 4.8 ± 0.7 • C (RW07) and 3.2 ± 0.7 • C (RW00) warmer than in the undisturbed treatment (RC) at Rax and 4.2 ± 0.4 • C (HW09) and 2.9 ± 0.4 • C (HW07) warmer than in the undisturbed treatment (HC) at Höllengebirge (Table 2). Such an increase in soil temperature after stand disturbance is a commonly observed response in forest ecosystems (Payeur-Poirier et al, 2012;Kulmala et al, 2014;Classen et al, 2005;Pumpanen et al, 2004b;Singh et al, 2008;Vanderhoof et al, 2013), driven by the loss of shading by the tree canopy and the subsequently higher insolation at the forest floor. The decreasing temperature difference between windthrow areas and undisturbed stands with increasing time post-disturbance is likely connected to increased shading by the developing ground vegetation.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…During the CO 2 measurement campaigns, soil in the windthrow areas was on average 4.8 ± 0.7 • C (RW07) and 3.2 ± 0.7 • C (RW00) warmer than in the undisturbed treatment (RC) at Rax and 4.2 ± 0.4 • C (HW09) and 2.9 ± 0.4 • C (HW07) warmer than in the undisturbed treatment (HC) at Höllengebirge (Table 2). Such an increase in soil temperature after stand disturbance is a commonly observed response in forest ecosystems (Payeur-Poirier et al, 2012;Kulmala et al, 2014;Classen et al, 2005;Pumpanen et al, 2004b;Singh et al, 2008;Vanderhoof et al, 2013), driven by the loss of shading by the tree canopy and the subsequently higher insolation at the forest floor. The decreasing temperature difference between windthrow areas and undisturbed stands with increasing time post-disturbance is likely connected to increased shading by the developing ground vegetation.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Windthrow can also affect microclimatic variables such as soil temperature and moisture, which are key drivers of SOM decomposition (Davidson et al, 1998;Davidson and Janssens, 2006;Lloyd and Taylor, 1994). Complete or partial removal of the tree layer, and the associated changes in insolation on the ground and transpiration demand on the soil, can lead to altered soil temperature and soil moisture regimes (Payeur-Poirier et al, 2012;Kulmala et al, 2014;Peng and Thomas, 2006;Pumpanen et al, 2004b;Singh et al, 2008). Due to the complex interplay of various rate-limiting factors regarding organic matter decomposition, the overall response of F soil to windthrow depends on many site-and ecosystem-specific factors.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It has been found that it may take 3-10 years for post-fire soil CO 2 efflux recovery [36,37], and the main factors affecting it are the vegetation type, vegetation coverage and post-fire biomass recovery [38,39], which contribute to the formation of new SOM. However, in our study somewhat longer recovery period was observed.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The long-term effects of the burning of slash on the CO 2 and CH 4 fluxes from the soil were quantified by manual chamber measurements from the burned area every two weeks, together with the corresponding measurements from the clear-cut and a control forest (Kulmala et al, 2014). The fluxes were measured every two weeks from early May to the end of November for one year before and for three years after the treatment.…”
Section: Soil and Flux Measurementsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The flux measurements were performed by placing a chamber on a collar inserted into the soil to an approximate depth of 5 cm. Eleven collars were inserted for CO 2 measurement and eight collars were inserted for CH 4 measurement at each site, and one closure took 4 min for CO 2 and 35 min for CH 4 , as described in detail by Kulmala et al (2014) and Pihlatie et al (2013). During 2008-2010, CO 2 fluxes at each site were also measured using an automatic chamber described in detail by Kulmala et al (2010).…”
Section: Soil and Flux Measurementsmentioning
confidence: 99%