2020
DOI: 10.1016/j.foreco.2020.118169
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Recovery and allocation of carbon stocks in boreal forests 64 years after catastrophic windthrow and salvage logging in northern Japan

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
7
0
2

Year Published

2021
2021
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

3
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 17 publications
(10 citation statements)
references
References 38 publications
(55 reference statements)
0
7
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…We selected the post-windthrow management schemes (NS, SL, SL_S, SL_P(As) and SL_P(Pg)) and topographical features as the explanatory variables in Model 2 (Table 4, Model 2; average canopy tree height derived using the gamma distribution error with the inverse link function; number of canopy trees derived using the gamma distribution error with log link function; forest cover ratio derived using the Gaussian distribution after the arcsin transformation (arcsin(x^2)); and LAI derived using the gamma distribution error with the inverse link function). We eliminated the average canopy tree height in 1977 from the explanatory variables when choosing the post-windthrow management schemes (NS, SL, SL_S, SL_P(As) and SL_P(Pg)) as one of the explanatory variables because stand development was suggested by Hotta et al (2020) to restart from "bare land" following scarification, thus thoroughly destroying advanced seedlings. We thus considered the limited influence caused by the average canopy tree height in 1977 after scarification.…”
Section: Factors Influencing Forest Structure Recovery 30 Years After...mentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…We selected the post-windthrow management schemes (NS, SL, SL_S, SL_P(As) and SL_P(Pg)) and topographical features as the explanatory variables in Model 2 (Table 4, Model 2; average canopy tree height derived using the gamma distribution error with the inverse link function; number of canopy trees derived using the gamma distribution error with log link function; forest cover ratio derived using the Gaussian distribution after the arcsin transformation (arcsin(x^2)); and LAI derived using the gamma distribution error with the inverse link function). We eliminated the average canopy tree height in 1977 from the explanatory variables when choosing the post-windthrow management schemes (NS, SL, SL_S, SL_P(As) and SL_P(Pg)) as one of the explanatory variables because stand development was suggested by Hotta et al (2020) to restart from "bare land" following scarification, thus thoroughly destroying advanced seedlings. We thus considered the limited influence caused by the average canopy tree height in 1977 after scarification.…”
Section: Factors Influencing Forest Structure Recovery 30 Years After...mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The consequences of these actions might last for 60 years (Morimoto et al 2019). These practices also reduce the carbon stocks following catastrophic windthrow events (Hotta et al 2020), potentially aggravating climate change in return. Soil scarification aims to remove organic-rich soil layers, which contain pathogens, and understory vegetation, which inhibits tree regeneration.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The carbon stock of live trees due to thinning was compensated for by the fast growth in pioneer broadleaf species during the first several decades after the management [41]. This suggests that white birch may succeed in larch as the dominant species of these stands in the long term.…”
Section: Effect Of Thinning On Carbon Densitymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Moreover, removing fallen logs facilitates deer foraging on planted and naturally regenerating saplings (Jonášová et al, 2010;Moriya et al, 2012;Götmark and Kiffer, 2014) because fallen logs prevent deer from accessing disturbed areas (de Chantal and Granström, 2007;Smit et al, 2012). These two impacts define the initial vegetation recovery process, which determines the future forest structure (Fischer and Fischer, 2012;Morimoto et al, 2019;Hotta et al, 2020).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%