4.7 Article

Effects of post-fire silviculture practices on Pachyrhinus squamosus defoliation levels and growth of Pinus halepensis Mill.

期刊

FOREST ECOLOGY AND MANAGEMENT
卷 167, 期 1-3, 页码 185-194

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/S0378-1127(01)00718-6

关键词

wild fire; SE Spain; defoliator; Aleppo pine; Curculionidae

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Pinus halepensis Mill. (Aleppo pine) forms dense and extensive stands after frequent fires in SE Spain. Due to the high densities reached by this species after fire, thinning is necessary. Two great fires occurred in SE Spain in August 1994 and natural regeneration stands of P. halepensis were managed in 1999 using several silvicultural treatments (thinning, pruning and scrubbing). The objective was to improve the stands quality and accelerate pine canopy growth. However, since a few years, damages produced by several defoliator species from Pachyrhinus genus (Coleoptera, Curculionidae) have been detected in young treated P. halepensis stands in Spain. To test the intensity of the P. squamosus attack, two post-fire localities submitted to different treatments were selected (Yeste and Calasparra, in SE Spain) corresponding to different climate conditions (dry and semiarid, respectively). Results showed that the most intense defoliation level was recorded in Yeste. Beetles preferentially ate needles from the previous growing season in both localities. Significant differences for defoliation percentage depending on silvicultural treatments were also recorded. Nutritional state of the needles for nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium was similar in both localities showing some relationship with silvicultural treatments. In general, the more intense the silvicultural treatment, the higher defoliation percentage was recorded. Growth pattern was similar in both study sites, reaching bring higher where treatments were more intense. Reduced needle and shoot growth was registered in Calasparra relative to Yeste. (C) 2002 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.

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