1996
DOI: 10.1080/02827589609382948
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Influence of local stand basal area on density and growth of regeneration in uneven‐aged Picea abies stands

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
2

Citation Types

3
29
0

Year Published

2005
2005
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 39 publications
(32 citation statements)
references
References 7 publications
3
29
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Thus, the results were inconclusive whether standing volume was a better explanatory variable than the basal area to be used in regeneration studies. However, seedling growth is the response on resource availability determined by the dimension of overstorey trees (Goldberg 1990), and the correlation analyses showed that basal area was uncorrelated with dominant diameter and height in the range of 15-30 m 2 ha -1 , in which most research were carried out (e.g., Lundqvist and Fridman 1996;Eerikäinen et al 2007). Further research is needed to explore the potentials of combined individual tree models (e.g., Hasenauer and Kindermann 2002) and our models to be utilized by forest owners and managers.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Thus, the results were inconclusive whether standing volume was a better explanatory variable than the basal area to be used in regeneration studies. However, seedling growth is the response on resource availability determined by the dimension of overstorey trees (Goldberg 1990), and the correlation analyses showed that basal area was uncorrelated with dominant diameter and height in the range of 15-30 m 2 ha -1 , in which most research were carried out (e.g., Lundqvist and Fridman 1996;Eerikäinen et al 2007). Further research is needed to explore the potentials of combined individual tree models (e.g., Hasenauer and Kindermann 2002) and our models to be utilized by forest owners and managers.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For example, Valkonen and Maguire (2005) showed that overstory density, in terms of basal area (m 2 ha -1 ), was not significantly related to germinant response in their study but was observed to affect the ground vegetation changes. Similarly, Lundqvist and Fridman (1996) concluded that stand basal area was not a significant factor for density and growth of regeneration; Eerikäinen et al (2007) also noted that basal area was not a significant independent variable in their models. Stancioiu and O'Hara (2006) concluded that shading conditions affect Norway spruce regeneration potentials and that spruce tends to outgrow other shade tolerant species in forests with 80-90% of above canopy light and a basal area of less than 15-20 m 2 ha -1 .…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 94%
“…A recent survey to find guidance in a range of different countries on the number of saplings considered to be sufficient did not locate much relevant information that could be used to inform practice in Britain [15]. However, a number of studies of sapling development and mortality have been published [8,[34][35][36][37] and it is clear from these that the survival of a sapling is related to its size and rate of growth, the shade tolerance of the species, site and the impacts of mammals. Models of sapling growth have also been developed [38,39] but an important concern with any regeneration model is availability of data [40].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The main factors involved in natural regeneration can be divided into five groups: seed supply; seedbed conditions; ground flora; animal impacts and stand conditions. However, once a tree has become established there is a subtle change in the balance between these factors with the former three, which are largely related to seed and the substrate, becoming less important for survival and the latter two becoming prominent [8,9]. There is also an additional factor to consider as young trees can become damaged or killed during harvesting [10,11].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For example, Lähde et al (1999) calculated that in mature forests growing on mineral soil sites the total number of understorey Scots pine, Norway spruce and birches (from 50 cm height to 6 cm dbh) averaged 3000 trees/ha in the 1950s (see also Sarvas, 1944;Laiho et al, 2011)]. Plentiful regeneration was measured also later in both Finland (Lähde, 1992a,b;Lähde et al, 1999) and Sweden (Lundqvist, 1993;Lundqvist and Fridman, 1996;Lundqvist and Nilson, 2007). Pukkala et al (2011b) calculated that only 5% of mature Finnish stands had less than 500 understorey trees of pine, spruce and birch per hectare, and 60% of stands had at least 2000 understorey trees at the end of the 1900s.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%