4.7 Article

Static and dynamic maximum size-density relationships for mixed trembling aspen and white spruce stands in western Canada

期刊

FOREST ECOLOGY AND MANAGEMENT
卷 289, 期 -, 页码 300-311

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.foreco.2012.09.042

关键词

Maximum size-density relationships; Self-thinning; Static thinning line; Dynamic thinning line; Boreal mixedwoods

类别

资金

  1. Sustainable Forest Management Network, Canada
  2. National Council of Science and Technology and the College of Postgraduates-Mexico

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We examine maximum size-density relationships (MSDR) of pure and mixed stands of trembling aspen (Populus tremuloides Michx.) and white spruce (Picea glauca (Moench) Voss.) in the Boreal Forest Natural Region of Alberta, Canada. Stochastic frontier function regression was used to estimate the MSDR species boundary or static line and mixed models were used to investigate how individual stands self-thin (dynamic thinning line). Effects of age, stand composition, soil nutrient regime and soil moisture regime were also evaluated. A steeper slope was obtained for the dynamic than for the static thinning line, and both MSDR lines slopes are statistically different from the theoretical value proposed by Reineke (1933). The deciduous component (percent of stand total basal area that is deciduous) has a negative effect on the slope and a positive effect on the intercept of the static line. Composition (increasing aspen basal area) also has a negative effect on the intercept of the dynamic line although no effect was detected on the slope. Soil nutrient regime has a positive effect on the intercept and a negative effect on the slope of the dynamic thinning line. Results suggest that local differences such as site quality and stand composition are important factors in determining maximum size-density relationships for these mixedwoods stands and how individual stands develop and self-thin. (C) 2012 Elsevier 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