Tree species composition affects productivity and carbon dynamics of different site types in boreal forests

European Journal of Forest Research

Volumn 133, Issue 2, 2014, Pages 273-286

  Shanin, Vladimir ^a   Komarov, Alexander ^a   Mäkipä, Raisa ^b  

^a INSTITUTE OF PHYSICOCHEMICAL AND BIOLOGICAL PROBLEMS IN SOIL SCIENCE   (Russian Federation)

^b FINNISH FOREST RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (Finland)

Author keywords

Competition; Mixed forest; Scots pine. norway spruce. silver birch; Site fertility

Indexed keywords

BOREAL FOREST; CARBON SEQUESTRATION; COMPETITION (ECOLOGY); CONIFEROUS FOREST; FERTILIZATION (REPRODUCTION); FOREST COVER; NET PRIMARY PRODUCTION; SOIL NUTRIENT;

BETULA PENDULA; CONIFEROPHYTA; PICEA; PICEA ABIES; PINUS SYLVESTRIS;

EID: 84901697160     PISSN: 16124669     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10342-013-0759-1     Document Type: Article

References (89)

1. Bauwe A, Criegee C, Glatzel S, Lennartz B (2012) Model-based analysis of the spatial variability and long-term trends of soil drought at Scots pine stands in northeastern Germany. Eur J Forest Res 131:1013-1024.
2. Bella IE (1971) A new competition model for individual trees. Forest Sci 17:364-372.
3. Bhatti JS, Apps MJ, Jiang H (2002) Influence of nutrients, disturbances and site conditions on carbon stocks along a boreal forest transect in central Canada. Plant Soil 242:1-14.
4. Bobbink R, Hicks K, Galloway J, Spranger T, Alkemade R, Ashmore M, Bustamante M, Cinderby S, Davidson E, Dentener F, Emmett B, Erisman J-W, Fenn M, Gilliam F, Nordin A, Pardo L, De Vries W (2010) Global assessment of nitrogen deposition effects on terrestrial plant diversity: a synthesis. Ecol Appl 20(1):30-59.
5. Bugmann H (2001) A review of forest gap models. Clim Chang 51:259-305.
6. Butterbach-Bahl K, Gundersen P, Ambus P, Augustin J, Beier C, Boeckx P, Dannermann M, Gimenso BS, Kiese R, Kitzler B, Ibrom A, Rees RM, Smith KA, Stevens C, Vesala T, Zechmeister- Boltenstern S (2011) Nitrogen processes in terrestrial ecosystems. In: Sutton MA, Howard CM, Erisman JW, Billen G, Bleeker A, Grennfelt P, van Grinsven H, Grizzetti B (eds) The European nitrogen assessment: sources, effects, and policy perspectives. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 99-125.
7. Bykhovets SS, Komarov AS (2002) A simple statistical model of soil climate with a monthly step. Euras Soil Sci 35(4):392-400.
8. Cajander AK (1926) The theory of forest types. Acta For Fenn 29(3):1-108.
9. Cajander AK (1949) Forest types and their significance. Acta For Fenn 56:1-71.
10. Cardinale BJ, Wright JP, Cadotte MW, Carroll IT, Hector A, Srivastava DS, Loreau M, Weis JJ (2007) Impacts of plant diversity on biomass production increase through time because of species complementarity. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 104(46):18123-18128.
11. Cavard X, Bergeron Y, Chen HYH, Paré D, Laganiére J, Brassard B (2011) Competition and facilitation between tree species change with stand development. Oikos 120:1683-1695.
12. Chertov OG, Komarov AS (1997) SOMM-a model of soil organic matter dynamics. Ecol Model 94:177-189.
13. Chertov OG, Komarov AS, Nadporozhskaya MA, Bykhovets SS, Zudin SL (2001) ROMUL-a model of forest soil organic matter dynamics as a substantial tool for forest ecosystem modelling. Ecol Model 138(1-3):289-308.
14. Coates KD, Canham CD, LePage PT (2009) Above- versus belowground competitive effects and responses of a guild of temperate tree species. J Ecol 97:118-130.
15. Davidson EA, Janssens IA (2006) Temperature sensitivity of soil carbon decomposition and feedbacks to climate change. Nature 440:165-173.
16. Forrester DI, Kohnle U, Albrecht AT, Bauhus J (2013) Complementarity in mixed-species stands of Abies alba and Picea abies varies with climate, site quality and stand density. For Ecol Manag 304:233-242.
17. Gamfeldt L, Snäll T, Bagchi R, Jonsson M, Gustafsson L, Kjellander P, Ruiz-Jaen MC, Fröberg M, Stendah J, Philipson CD, Mikusiński G, Andersson E, Westerlund B, Andrén H, Moberg F, Moen J, Bengtsson J (2013) Higher levels of multiple ecosystem services are found in forests with more tree species. Nat Commun 4. doi:10.1038/ncomms2328.
18. Gatzuk LE, Smirnova OV, Vorontsova LI, Zaugolnova LB, Zhukova LA (1980) Age state of plants of various growth forms: a review. J Ecol 68:675-696.
19. Grabarnik P, Särkka A (2009) Modelling the spatial structure of forest stands by multivariate point processes with hierarchical interactions. Ecol Model 220:1232-1240.
20. Hansson K, Olsson BA, Olsson M, Johansson U, Kleja DB (2011) Differences in soil properties in adjacent stands of Scots pine, Norway spruce and silver birch in SW Sweden. For Ecol Manag 262:522-530.
21. Hartmann H (2011) Will a 385 million year-struggle for light become a struggle for water and for carbon? How trees may cope with more frequent climate change-type drought events. Glob Chang Biol 17(1):642-655.
22. Hättenschwiler S, Gasser P (2005) Soil animals alter plant litter diversity effects on decomposition. P Natl Acad Sci USA 102(5):1519-1524.
23. Hättenschwiler S, Tiunov AV, Scheu S (2005) Biodiversity and litter decomposition in terrestrial ecosystems. Annu Rev Ecol Evol Syst 36:191-218.
24. Hector A (1998) The effect of diversity on productivity: detecting the role of species complementarity. Oikos 82(3):597-599.
25. Hobbie SE, Eddy W, Buyarski ChR, Adair EC, Ogdahl ML, Weisenhorn P (2012) Response of decomposing litter and its microbial community to multiple forms of nitrogen enrichment. Ecol Monogr 82(3):389-405.
26. Holmgren M, Scheffer M (2010) Strong facilitation in mild environments: the stress gradient hypothesis revisited. J Ecol 98:1269-1275.
27. Hotanen J-P, Nousiainen H, Mäkipää R, Reinikainen A, Tonteri T (2008) Metsätyypit-opas kasvupaikkojen luokitteluun [Forest types-guide to the classification of habitats]. Metsäkustannus, Helsinki, 192 p (In Finnish)
28. Huang J, Tardif JC, Bergeron Y, Denneler B, Berninger F, Girardin MP (2010) Radial growth response of four dominant boreal tree species to climate along a latitudinal gradient in the eastern Canadian boreal forest. Glob Chang Biol 16(2):711-731.
29. Hynynen J, Repola J, Mielikäinen K (2011) The effect of species mixture on the growth and yield of mid-rotation mixed stands of Scots pine and silver birch. For Ecol Manag 262:1174-1183.
30. Ilvesniemi H, Pumpanen J, Duursma R, Hari P, Keronen P, Kolari P, Kulmala M, Mammarella I, Nikinmaa E, Rannik U, Pohja T, Siivola E, Vesala T (2010) Water balance of a boreal Scots pine forest. Boreal Environ Res 15(4):375-396.
31. Ilvessalo Y, Ilvessalo M (1975) Suomen metsätyypit metsiköiden luontalsen kehitys-ja puuntuotto-kyvyn valossa [The forest types of Finland in the light of natural development and yield capacity of forest stands]. Acta Forestalia Fennica 144:1-101 (Finnish with English summary)
32. Jõgiste KA (2000) Basal area increment model for Norway spruce in mixed stands in Estonia. Scand J For Res 15(1):97-102.
33. Kelty MJ (1992) Comparative productivity of monocultures and mixed species stands. In: Kelty MJ (ed) The ecology of mixed species forests. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, pp 125-141.
34. Kelty MJ (2006) The role of species mixtures in plantation forestry. For Ecol Manag 233(2-3):195-204.
35. Komarov AS, Shanin VN (2012) Comparative analysis of the influence of climate change and nitrogen deposition on carbon sequestration in forest ecosystems in European Russia: simulation modelling approach. Biogeosciences 9(11):4757-4770.
36. Komarov AS, Chertov OG, Zudin SL, Nadporozhskaya MA, Mikhailov AV, Bykhovets SS, Zudina EV, Zoubkova EV (2003a) EFIMOD 2-the system of simulation models of forest growth and elements cycles in forest ecosystems. Ecol Model 170:373-392.
37. Komarov AS, Palenova MM, Smirnova OV (2003b) The concept of discrete description of plant ontogenesis and cellular automata models of plant populations. Ecol Model 170:427-439.
38. Komarov AS, Chertov OG, Nadporozhskaya MA, Mikhailov AV, Bykhovets SS, Zudin SL, Priputina IV, Larionova AA, Grabarnik PYa, Zubkova EV, Zudina EV, Shanin VN, Andrienko G, Andrienko N, Martynkin AV, Mohren GMJ, Abakumov EV, Lukjanov AM, Kubasova TS, Bhatti J, Shaw S, Apps M, Bobrovsky MV, Khanina LG, Smirnov VE, Glukhova EM (2007) Modelirovanie dinamiki organicheskogo veshchestva v lesnykh ekosistemakh [Modelling Organic Matter Dynamics in Forest Ecosystems]. Nauka Publishing, Moscow, 380 p (Russian with English summary)
39. Kuzyakov Y, Friedel JK, Stahr K (2000) Review of mechanisms and quantification of priming effects. Soil Biol Biochem 32:1485-1498.
40. Laasasenaho J (1982) Taper curve and volume functions for pine, spruce and birch. Commun Inst For Fenn 108:1-74.
41. Lagergren F, Lindroth A (2002) Transpiration response to soil moisture in pine and spruce trees in Sweden. Agr For Meteorol 112:67-85.
42. Larocque GR, Bhatti JS, Gordon AM, Luckai N, Wattenbach M, Liu J, Peng C, Arp PA, Liu S, Zhang CF, Komarov A, Grabarnik P, Sun J, White T (2008) Chapter eighteen uncertainty and sensitivity issues in process-based models of carbon and nitrogen cycles in terrestrial ecosystems. In: Jakeman AJ, Voinov AA, Rizzoli AE, Chen SH (eds) Developments in integrated environmental assessment: environmental modelling, software and decision support, vol 3, pp 307-327. doi:10.1016/S1574- 101X(08)00618-2.
43. LeBauer DS, Treseder KK (2008) Nitrogen limitation of net primary productivity in terrestrial ecosystems is globally distributed. Ecology 89:371-379.
44. Légaré S, Paré D, Bergeron Y (2004) The responses of black spruce growth to an increased proportion of aspen in mixed stands. Can J For Res 34:405-416.
45. Leps J (2005) Diversity and ecosystem function. In: Van Der Maarel E (ed) Vegetation ecology. Blackwell Publishing, Oxford, pp 199-237.
46. Lindén M, Agestam E (2003) Increment and yield in mixed and monoculture stands on Pinus sylvestris and Picea abies based on an experiment in southern Sweden. Scand J For Res 18(2):155-162.
47. Liu J, Ashton PS (1995) Individual-based simulation models for forest succession and management. For Ecol Manag 73:157-175.
48. Loreau M (1998) Separating sampling and other effects in biodiversity experiments. Oikos 82(3):600-602.
49. Loreau M, Hector A (2001) Partitioning selection and complementarity in biodiversity experiments. Nature 412:72-76.
50. Martínez-Vilalta J, López BC, Adell N, Badiella L, Ninyerola M (2008) Twentieth century increase of Scots pine radial growth in NE Spain shows strong climate interactions. Glob Chang Biol 14(2):2868-2881.
51. Mielikäinen K (1980) Manty-koivusekametsikoiden rakenne ja kehitys [Structure and development of mixed pine and birch stands]. Commun Inst For Fenn 99(3):1-82 (Finnish with English summary)
52. Mielikäinen K (1985) Koivusekoituksen vaikutus kuusikon rakenteeseen ja kehitykseen [Effect of an admixture of birch on the structure and development of Norway spruce stands]. Commun Inst For Fenn 133:1-79 (Finnish with English summary)
53. Morén A-S, Lindroth A, Flower-Ellis J, Cienciala E, Mölder M (2000) Branch transpiration of pine and spruce scaled to tree and canopy using needle biomass distributions. Trees 14:384-397.
54. Morin X, Fahse L, Scherer-Lorenzen M, Bugmann H (2011) Tree species richness promotes productivity in temperate forests through strong complementarity between species. Ecol Lett 14:1211-1219.
55. Norris MD, Avis PG, Reich PB, Hobbie SE (2013) Positive feedbacks between decomposition and soil nitrogen availability along fertility gradients. Plant Soil 367:347-361.
56. Oliver CD, Larson BC (1996) Forest stand dynamics. Wiley, New York 544 p
57. Olsson BA, Hansson K, Persson T, Beuker E, Helmisaari H-S (2012) Heterotrophic respiration and nitrogen mineralisation in soils of Norway spruce, Scots pine and silver birch stands in contrasting climates. For Ecol Manag 269:197-205.
58. Paquette A, Messier C (2011) The effect of biodiversity on tree productivity: from temperate to boreal forests. Global Ecol Biogeogr 20:170-180.
59. Piñeiro G, Perelman S, Guerschman JP, Paruelo JM (2008) How to evaluate models: observed vs. predicted or predicted vs. observed? Ecol Model 216:316-322.
60. Porte A, Bartelink HH (2002) Modelling mixed forest growth: a review of models for forest management. Ecol Model 150:141-188.
61. Pretzsch H (2010) Forest dynamics, growth and yield: from measurement to model. Springer, Berlin, p 664.
62. Pretzsch H, Schütze G (2009) Transgressive overyielding in mixed compared with pure stands of Norway spruce and European beech in Central Europe: evidence on stand level and explanation on individual tree level. Eur J For Res 128:183-204.
63. Pretzsch H, Grote R, Reineking B, Rötzer T, Seifert S (2008) Models for forest ecosystem management: a European perspective. Ann Bot 101:1065-1087.
64. Pretzsch H, Block J, Dieler J, Dong PH, Kohnle U, Nagel J, Spellmann H, Zingg A (2010) Comparison between the productivity of pure and mixed stands of Norway spruce and European beech along an ecological gradient. Ann For Sci 67(712):1-12.
65. Pretzsch H, Bielak K, Block J, Bruchwald A, Dieler J, Ehrhart H-P, Kohnle U, Nagel J, Spellmann H, Zasada M, Zingg A (2013) Productivity of mixed versus pure stands of oak (Quercus petraea (Matt.) Liebl. and Quercus robur L.) and European beech (Fagus sylvatica L.) along an ecological gradient. Eur J For Res 132(2):263-280.
66. Pukkala T, Vettenranta J, Kolström T, Miina J (1994) Productivity of mixed stands of Pinus sylvestris and Picea abies. Scand J For Res 9:143-153.
67. Rewald B, Leuschner C (2009) Belowground competition in a broadleaved temperate mixed forest: pattern analysis and experiments in a four-species stand. Eur J For Res 128:387-398.
68. Shanin VN, Komarov AS, Mikhailov AV, Bykhovets SS (2011) Modelling carbon and nitrogen dynamics in forest ecosystems of Central Russia under different climate change scenarios and forest management regimes. Ecol Model 222:2262-2275.
69. Shanin VN, Komarov AS, Khoraskina YuS, Bykhovets SS, Linkosalo T, Mäkipää R (2013) Carbon turnover in mixed stands: modelling possible shifts under climate change. Ecol Model 251:232-245.
70. Shvidenko AZ, Schepaschenko DG, Nilsson S, Buluy YuI (2006) Tables and models of growth and productivity of forests of major forest forming species of Northern Eurasia (standard and reference materials). Ministry of Natural Resources of the Russian Federation, Federal Agency of Forest Management, Moscow
71. Smirnova OV, Bobrovskii MV (2001) Tree ontogeny and its reflection in the structure and dynamics of plant and soil covers. Russ J Ecol 32(3):159-163.
72. Smirnova OV, Chistyakova AA, Zaugolnova LB, Evstigneev OI, Popadiouk RV, Romanovsky AM (1999) Ontogeny of a tree. Bot J St-Petersburg 84(12):8-20.
73. Smolander A, Kitunen V (2011) Comparison of tree species effects on microbial C and N transformations and dissolved organic matter properties in the organic layer of boreal forests. Appl Soil Ecol 49:224-233.
74. Sterba H, Blab A, Katzensteiner K (2002) Adapting as individual tree growth model for Norway spruce (Picea abies L. Karst.) in pure and mixed species stands. For Ecol Manag 159:101-110.
75. Stoll P, Weiner J (2000) A neighbourhood view of interactions among individual plants. In: Dieckmann U, Law R, Metz JAJ (eds) The geometry of ecological interactions: simplifying spatial complexity. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 11-27.
76. Talbot JM, Allison SD, Treseder KK (2008) Decomposers in disguise: mycorrhizal fungi as regulators of soil C dynamics in ecosystems under global change. Funct Ecol 22:955-963.
77. Tamm CO (1991) Nitrogen in terrestrial ecosystems. Springer, Berlin 115 p
78. Tamminen P (1991) Kangasmaan ravinnetunnusten ilmaiseminen ja viljavuuden alueellinen vaihtelu Etelä-Suomessa [Expression of soil nutrient status and regional variation in soil fertility of forested sites in southern Finland]. Folia Forestalia 777:1-40 (Finnish with English summary)
79. Thelin G, Rosengren U, Callesen I, Ingerslev M (2002) The nutrient status of Norway spruce in pure and in mixed-species stands. For Ecol Manag 160(1-3):115-125.
80. Thomas RQ, Bonan GB, Goodale CL (2013) Insights into mechanisms governing forest carbon response to nitrogen deposition: a model-data comparison using observed responses to nitrogen addition. Biogeosciences 10:3869-3880.
81. Thorpe HC, Astrup R, Trowbridge A, Coates KD (2010) Competition and tree crowns: a neighborhood analysis of three boreal tree species. For Ecol Manag 259:1586-1596.
82. Tilman D, Reich PB, Knops J, Wedin D, Mielke T, Lehman C (2001) Diversity and productivity in a long-term grassland experiment. Science 294:843-845.
83. Tuomi M, Vanhala P, Karhu K, Fritze H, Liski J (2008) Heterotrophic soil respiration-comparison of different models describing its temperature dependence. Ecol Model 211:182-190.
84. Venäläinen A, Tuomenvirta H, Pirinen P, Drebs A (2005) A basic Finnish climate data set 1961-2000-description and illustrations. Finnish Meteorological Institute, reports no. 5, 27 p
85. Vitousek PM, Howarth RW (1991) Nitrogen limitation on land and in the sea: how can it occur? Biogeochemistry 13:87-115.
86. Weiner J (1990) Asymmetric competition in plant populations. Trends Ecol Evol 5:360-364.
87. Wunderlich S, Schulz C, Grimmeisen W, Borken W (2012) Carbon fluxes in coniferous and deciduous forest soils. Plant Soil 357:355-368.
88. Zhao D, Borders B, Wilson M, Rathbun SL (2006) Modeling neighborhood effects on the growth and survival of individual trees in a natural temperate species-rich forest. Ecol Model 196:90-102.
89. Zianis D, Muukkonen P, Mäkipää R, Mencuccini M (2005) Biomass and stem volume equations for tree species in Europe. Silva Fennica Monographs, vol 4, 63 p 286