4.7 Article

Carbon balance of a partially harvested mixed conifer forest following mountain pine beetle attack and its comparison to a clear-cut

期刊

BIOGEOSCIENCES
卷 10, 期 8, 页码 5451-5463

出版社

COPERNICUS GESELLSCHAFT MBH
DOI: 10.5194/bg-10-5451-2013

关键词

-

资金

  1. NSERC (Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council) Strategic Grant
  2. NSERC Discovery Grant
  3. Canadian Foundation for Climate and Atmospheric Science (CFCAS)
  4. BC Ministry of Forests, Lands and Natural Resource Operations

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The recent mountain pine beetle (MPB) outbreak has had an impact on the carbon (C) cycling of lodgepole pine forests in British Columbia. This study examines how partial harvesting as a forest management response to MPB infestation affects the net ecosystem production (NEP) of a mixed conifer forest (MPB-09) in Interior BC. MPB-09 is a 70-year-old stand that was partially harvested in 2009 after it had been attacked by MPB. Using the eddy-covariance technique, the C dynamics of the stand were studied over two years and compared to an adjacent clear-cut (MPB-09C) over the summertime. The annual NEP at MPB-09 increased from -108 g C m(-2) in 2010 to -57 g C m(-2) in 2011. The increase of NEP was due to the associated increase in annual gross ecosystem photosynthesis (GEP) from 812 g C m(-2) in 2010 to 954 g C m(-2) in 2011, exceeding the increase in annual respiration (R-e) from 920 g C m(-2) to 1011 g C m(-2) during the two years. During the four month period between June and September 2010, NEP at MPB-09C was -103 g C m(-2), indicating high C losses in the clear-cut. MPB-09 was a C sink during the growing season of both years, increasing from 9 g C m(-2) in 2010 to 47 g C m(-2) in 2011. The increase of NEP in the partially harvested stand amounted to a recovery corresponding to a 26% increase in the maximum assimilation rate in the second year. This study shows that retaining the healthy residual forest can result in higher C sequestration of MPB-attacked stands compared to clear-cut harvesting.

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