4.5 Article

Morphological plasticity of regeneration subject to different levels of canopy cover in mixed-species, multiaged forests of the Romanian Carpathians

期刊

TREES-STRUCTURE AND FUNCTION
卷 20, 期 2, 页码 196-209

出版社

SPRINGER HEIDELBERG
DOI: 10.1007/s00468-005-0026-2

关键词

Abies alba; Fagus sylvatica; morphological plasticity; multiaged stands; Picea asbies; selection systems

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Morphological plasticity was studied for advanced regeneration trees in different light environments of the mountainous, mixed-species forests in the Carpathian Mountains of Romania. The primary species in these mixtures were very shade tolerant silver fir (Abies alba Mill.) and European beech (Fagus sylvatica L.), and midtolerant Norway spruce (Picea abies (L.) Karst). Seedlings/saplings of these species were selected for measurements in different stands from two different geographical locations. Various morphological traits (specific leaf area, live crown ratio, crown width to length ratio, terminal to lateral ratio, number of internodal shoots, number of shoots in terminal whorl, stem symmetry, stem orientation, stem forking) for each regenerating tree were measured during summers of 2001 and 2002. Percentage of above canopy light and stand basal area measures were used to assess the available growing space for each seedling/sapling. Regression relationships were developed for the different morphological indicators as a function of these two variables. All species adapted their morphology along the gradient in light and basal area. Spruce seemed to be less adapted to low light conditions than both fir and beech. However, no significant differences in terms of shade tolerance were detected using the above indicators. In really dense stand conditions (less than 20% above canopy light and stand basal area above 36 m(2) ha(-1)), probability for stem forking in beech increased. In open, all three species adapted their morphology for vigorous growth. Under such conditions, spruce was better adapted than fir.

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

4.5
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