4.7 Article

Growth Response of Norway Spruce (Picea abies [L.] Karst.) in Central Bohemia (Czech Republic) to Climate Change

期刊

FORESTS
卷 14, 期 6, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/f14061215

关键词

climate change; Czech Republic; tree-ring width; temperature; precipitation

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Norway spruce, an important conifer species in Europe, is highly sensitive to climate change. This study shows that precipitation is the main factor affecting the growth of Norway spruce, while temperature has a smaller impact. This has important implications for the growth of Norway spruce at lower altitudes in the Czech Republic.
Norway spruce (Picea abies (L.) Karst.) is a significant conifer tree species in Europe that holds significant economic and ecological value. However, it remains one of the most sensitive to climate change. This study describes the climate-growth relationship, focusing on dendroecology in hilly spruce forests (319-425 m a.s.l.) located in Bohemia, the Czech Republic, during 1950-2018. The results confirmed that the highest radial increment was obtained in locations with higher precipitation (Kostelec), while the lowest growth was observed in locations with lower precipitation (Karlstejn). Tree-ring growth shows very low increments for the years 1964 and 1976 for all plots, and the years with the least growth were confirmed by the negative pointer year analysis. This study confirmed precipitation as the main factor that affects the growth of spruce at lower altitudes. The radial growth for all study sites shows a statistically significant positive correlation with precipitation during the growing season, while no statistically significant values between radial growth and temperature were obtained. This study demonstrates that Norway spruce is affected more by precipitation than temperature, and the results indicate that this conifer is seriously affected by the lack of precipitation at lower altitudes in the Czech Republic, where the species is not native.

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

4.7
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