4.4 Article

Effects of substrate availability and competing vegetation on natural regeneration of white spruce on logged boreal mixedwood sites

期刊

CANADIAN JOURNAL OF FOREST RESEARCH
卷 48, 期 4, 页码 324-332

出版社

CANADIAN SCIENCE PUBLISHING, NRC RESEARCH PRESS
DOI: 10.1139/cjfr-2017-0307

关键词

natural regeneration; white spruce; substrate; seedling survival; competing vegetation; forest management

类别

资金

  1. Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada through the Sustainable Forest Management Network of Centres of Excellence
  2. Weyerhaeuser and Daishowa-Marubeni International

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Given a seed source, the quality of available substrates is a key factor in determining the success of white spruce (Picea glauca (Moench) Voss) natural regeneration. We examined the influence of substrate and competing vegetation on survival and growth of natural regeneration of white spruce up to 4 years following harvesting in deciduous- dominated upland boreal mixedwood sites. Feather moss, thick soil surface organic layers, litter, and solid wood were poor substrates for establishment. Early successional mosses establishing on mineral soil, thin organics, and rotten wood were generally favourable microsites but were not highly available on postharvest sites. Mineral soil substrates were not as suitable as expected, likely because on a postlogged site, they are associated with unfavourable environmental characteristics (e.g., low nutrient availability, exposure). There was some evidence that survival and growth of seedlings were improved by surrounding vegetation in the first years, but heavy competing vegetation had a negative impact on older seedlings. Burial by aspen litter greatly increased seedling mortality, especially when combined with a brief period of submergence due to heavy spring snowmelt. The results provide insight into conditions under which natural regeneration could be an option for establishing white spruce following harvesting of deciduous- dominated boreal mixedwood forests.

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

4.4
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