4.0 Article

Growth responses of Norway spruce (Picea abies (L.) Karst.) to the climate in the south-eastern part of the eskomoravska Upland (Czech Republic)

期刊

GEOCHRONOMETRIA
卷 39, 期 2, 页码 149-157

出版社

SCIENDO
DOI: 10.2478/s13386-012-0003-7

关键词

the Ceskomoravska Upland; Norway spruce; precipitation; temperature; tree ring

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The research was conducted in selected 80- to 110-year-old spruce stands in the south-eastern part of the eskomoravska Upland at altitudes from 350 m a.s.l. to 465 m a.s.l. The regional standard tree-ring chronology shows very low increments for years 1974, 1976 and 1992. After 1992, there is a sharp rise in increments with a climax in 1997. Afterwards, increments gradually decrease, reaching minima in 2003 and 2008. The years with low increments were also confirmed by the analysis of negative pointer years when over 80% of the analysed trees responded by a sharp decrease in increment, mainly in years 1976 and 1992. We can usually find values of monthly precipitation or monthly temperature average which can explain or help explain these falls in the radial growth. The correlations of diameter increments with average monthly precipitation gain only positive statistically significant values, namely for the months of May, June, July and August of the particular year. The correlations of diameter increments with average monthly temperatures gain only negative statistically significant values, namely for the months of June, July and September of the previous year and January and August of the particular year. In the examined area there is a significant negative correlation between average temperatures and monthly precipitation in July, August and September. The results of the habitual diagnostics show that with respect to the climatic conditions the health condition of the monitored stands is relatively good. On average, the defoliation does not exceed the values ascertained in different territories of the Czech Republic.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.0
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据