Impact of Stand Density and Tree Social Status on Aboveground Biomass Allocation of Scots Pine <i>Pinus sylvestris</i> L.

Stand density changes due to aging and thinning interventions. At the same time, the social status of trees develops and varies due to different genetic conditions as well as access to nutrients and light. Trees growing in diverse conditions gain their social status in the stand, which, in the end,...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Bogdan Wertz, Mariusz Bembenek, Zbigniew Karaszewski, Wojciech Ochał, Maciej Skorupski, Paweł Strzeliński, Andrzej Węgiel, Piotr S. Mederski
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: MDPI AG 2020-07-01
Series:Forests
Subjects:
Online Access:https://www.mdpi.com/1999-4907/11/7/765
Description
Summary:Stand density changes due to aging and thinning interventions. At the same time, the social status of trees develops and varies due to different genetic conditions as well as access to nutrients and light. Trees growing in diverse conditions gain their social status in the stand, which, in the end, influences their development and biomass allocation. The objective of this research was to discover if stand density or tree social status has an impact on a tree’s aboveground biomass allocation. The study was carried out in five premature and five mature pine stands, growing in the same soil conditions. The selected sample stands had a different growing density, from low to high. In each sample stand, 10 trees were selected to represent a different social status, according to the Schädelin classification. There were 100 trees felled in total (50 in the premature stands and 50 in the mature stands), for which the dry biomass of the stem, living and dead branches, needles, and cones was determined. The results showed that stand density only had an impact on the branches’ biomass fraction but not the stem and foliage fractions, while social status had an impact on all the fractions. Dominant and codominant trees, as well as those with developed crowns, had a smaller share of the stem and higher share of branches in comparison with trees of a lower social status.
ISSN:1999-4907