Comparing volume growth in pure and mixed stands of Pinus sylvestris and Quercus pyrenaica

Annals of Forest Science

Volumn 66, Issue 5, 2009, Pages 502-502

  Río, Miren Del ^a,b   Sterba, Hubert ^c  

^a Joint Research Unit   (Sri Lanka)

^b Instituto Nacional de Investigación y Tecnología Agraria y Alimentaria   (Spain)

^c UNIVERSITY OF NATURAL RESOURCES AND LIFE SCIENCES   (Austria)

Author keywords

Density growth relationship; Mixed forest; Pinus sylvestris; Quercus pyrenaica; Volume increment

Indexed keywords

COMPARATIVE STUDY; CONIFEROUS FOREST; DECIDUOUS FOREST; FOREST INVENTORY; FORESTRY PRODUCTION; GROWTH RATE; MIXED FOREST;

PINUS SYLVESTRIS; QUERCUS PYRENAICA;

EID: 70449604671     PISSN: 12864560     EISSN: 1297966X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1051/forest/2009035     Document Type: Article

References (38)

1. Abetz P., 1975. Eine Entscheidungshilfe für die Durchforstung von Fichtenbeständen. Allgemeine Forstzeitschrift 36: 666-668.
2. Assmann E., 1970. The principles of forest yield study, Pergamon Press, Oxford, 506 p.
3. Brown A.H.F., 1992. Functioning of mixed-species stands at Gisburn, N.W. England. In: CannellM.G.R.,Malcon D.C., and Robertson P.A. (Eds.), The ecology of mixed-species stands of trees, Blackwell scientific publications, Oxford, pp. 125-150.
4. Cannell M.G.R., Malcon D.C., and Robertson P.A. (Eds.), 1992. The ecology of mixed-species stands of trees, Blackwell scientific publications, Oxford, 312 p.
5. Frivold L.H. and Frank J., 2002. Growth of mixed birch-coniferous stands in relation to pure coniferous stands at similar sites in South-eastern Norway. Scand. J. For. Res. 17: 139-149.
6. Gil L. and Prada A., 1993. Los pinos como especies básicas de la restauración forestal en el medio mediterráneo. Ecología 7: 113-115.
7. Goulding C.J., 1970. Simulation technique for a stochastic model of growth of Douglas-fir. M.S. thesis, Univ. of B.C., Vancouver, 185 p.
8. ICONA, 1990. Segundo inventario forestal nacional. Explicaciones y métodos 1986-1995, Instituto Nacional para la conservación de la naturaleza, Madrid, 174 p.
9. Inclan R., De la Torre D., Benito M., and Rubio A., 2007. Soil CO2 efflux in a mixed pine-oak forest in Valsain (central Spain). The ScientificWorld J. 7: 166-174.
10. KeltyM.J., 1989. Productivity of new England hemlock/hardwood stands as affected by species composition and canopy structure. For. Ecol. Manage. 28: 237-257.
11. Kelty M.J., 1992. Comparative productivity of monocultures and mixedspecies stands. In: Kelty M.J., Larson B.C., and Oliver C.D. (Eds.), The ecology and silviculture of mixed-species forests, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht (The Netherlands), pp. 125-141.
12. Kennel R., 1965. Untersuchungen über die Leistung von Fichte und Buche im Rein- und Mischbestand. Allgemeine Forst- und Jagdzeitung 136: 149-161 and 173-189.
13. Kira T., Ogawa H., and Sakazaki N., 1959. Intraspecific competition among higher plants. I. Competition-yield-density interrelationship in regularly dispersed populations. J. Inst. Polytechn. Osaka City Univ. D4: 1-16.
14. Langsaeter A., 1941. Om tynning i enaldret granog furuskog Maddel. Det Norske Skogforoksvesen 8: 131-216.
15. Linden M. and Agestam E., 2003. Increment and yield in mixed and monoculture stands of Pinus sylvestris and Picea abies based on an experiment in Southern Sweden. Scand. J. For. Res. 18: 155-162.
16. Mäkinen H. and Isomäki A., 2004. Thinning intensity and long-term changes in increment and stem form of Norway spruce trees. For. Ecol. Manage. 201: 295-309. (Pubitemid 39308499)
17. Man R. and Lieffers V.J., 1999. Are mixtures of aspen and white spruce more productive than single species stands?. The Forestry Chronicle 75: 505-513.
18. MAPA, 1970. Instrucciones de Ordenación deMontes, 1970. BOE No.36 de 11 de febrero de 1971, Madrid.
19. Marschall J., 1992. Hilfstafeln für die Forsteinrichtung, 5th edition, Österr. Agrarverlag, Wien, 202 p.
20. MMA, 2002. Plan Forestal Español, Ministerio de Medio Ambiente (MMA), Madrid, 134 p.
21. Pretzsch H., 2003. The elasticity of growth in pure and mixed stands of Norway spruce (Picea abies [L.] Karst.) and common beech (Fagus sylvatica L.). J. For. Sci. 49: 491-501.
22. Pretzsch H., 2005. Stand density and growth of Norway spruce (Picea abies (L.) Karst.) and European beech (Fagus sylvatica L.): evidence from long-term experimental plots. Eur. J. For. Res. 124: 193-205. (Pubitemid 41645404)
23. Prodan M., 1959. Umrechnung von Massen in Flächenanteile. Forstarchiv 30: 110-113.
24. Ratkowski D.A., 1983. Nonlinear Regression Modeling. A unified practical approach, Marcel Dekker, Inc., New York and Basel, 276 p.
25. Reineke L.H., 1933. Perfecting a stand density index for even aged forests. J. Agric. Res. 46: 627-638.
26. Río M., Montero G., and Bravo F., 2001. Analysis of diameter-density relationships and self-thinning in non-thinning even-aged Scots pine stands. For. Ecol. Manage. 142: 79-87.
27. Río M., López E., and Montero G., 2006. Manual de gestión para masas procedentes de repoblación de Pinus pinaster Ait, P. sylvestris L. y P. nigra Arn. en Castilla y León, Consejería de Medio Ambiente, Junta de Castilla y León, Valladolid, 102
28. Río M., Calama R., Cañellas I., Roig S., and Montero G., 2008. Thinning intensity and growth response in SW-European Scots pine stands. Ann. For. Sci. 65: 308.
29. Rodríguez-Calcerrada J., Pardos J.A., Gil L., and Aranda I., 2008. Ability to avoid water stress in seedlings of two oak species is lower in a dense forest understory than in a medium canopy gap. For. Ecol. Manage. 255: 421-430.
30. Roig S., Río M., Ruíz-Peinado R., and Cañellas I., 2007. Tipología dasométrica de los rebollares (Quercus pyrenaica Willd.) de la zona centro de la península Ibérica. In: Pinto M., Aldezabal A., Aizpurua A., Albizu I., Barredo A., Mendarte S., and Ruiz R. (Eds.), Los sistemas forrajeros: entre la producción y el paisaje., S.E.E.P., Vitoria, pp. 527-542.
31. Rothe A. and Binkley D., 2001. Nutritional interactions in mixed species forests: a synthesis. Can. J. For. Res. 31: 1855-1870.
32. Ruíz de la Torre J., 1979. Árboles y arbustos de la España peninsular, Sección de Publicaciones de la E.T.S.I.de Montes, Madrid, 512 p.
33. SAS I.I. 2004. SAS/STAT(R) 9.1 User's guide. SAS Inst. Inc.
34. Cary, NC. Speidel G., 1972. Planung im Forstbetrieb, Pail Parey, Hamburg, Berlin, 267 p.
35. Sterba H., 1987. Estimating Potential Density from Thinning Experiments and Inventory Data. For. Sci. 33: 1022-1034.
36. Sterba H., 1998. The precision of species proportion by area when estimated by angle counts and yield tables. Forestry 71: 25-32.
37. Van de Rmeer J., 1989. The ecology of Intercropping, Cambrige University Press, Cambridge, 237 p.
38. Webster C.R. and Lorimer C.G., 2003. Comparative growing space efficency of four tree species in mixed conifer-hardwood forests. For. Ecol. Manage. 177: 361-377.