Predicting individual tree growth of high-value timber species in mixed conifer-broadleaf forests in northern Japan using long-term forest measurement data

2020 ◽  
Vol 25 (4) ◽  
pp. 242-249
Author(s):  
Kyaw Thu Moe ◽  
Toshiaki Owari
2010 ◽  
Vol 40 (5) ◽  
pp. 843-849 ◽  
Author(s):  
John B. Bradford ◽  
Anthony W. D’Amato ◽  
Brian J. Palik ◽  
Shawn Fraver

Growth dominance is a relatively new, simple, quantitative metric of within-stand individual tree growth patterns, and is defined as positive when larger trees in the stand display proportionally greater growth than smaller trees, and negative when smaller trees display proportionally greater growth than larger trees. We examined long-term silvicultural experiments in red pine ( Pinus resinosa Ait.) to characterize how stand age, thinning treatments (thinned from above, below, or both), and stocking levels (residual basal area) influence stand-level growth dominance through time. In stands thinned from below or from both above and below, growth dominance was not significantly different from zero at any age or stocking level. Growth dominance in stands thinned from above trended from negative at low stocking levels to positive at high stocking levels and was positive in young stands. Growth dominance in unthinned stands was positive and increased with age. These results suggest that growth dominance provides a useful tool for assessing the efficacy of thinning treatments designed to reduce competition between trees and promote high levels of productivity across a population, particularly among crop trees.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kane Winslow Russell ◽  
Robert A. York

Abstract Background In the wake of increasingly frequent and severe wildfires in California, artificial regeneration and density management facilitate prompt reforestation and the rapid growth of large, fire-resistant trees. Young plantations are particularly prone to high-severity wildfire effects, suggesting the implementation of fuel reduction treatments in the early stages of stand development. The extent to which density management (i.e., thinning) and fuels management (i.e., prescribed fire) can work together is uncertain given their potentially conflicting effects on tree and stand level growth. We investigated how four different treatments – mastication, mastication plus herbicide, two prescribed burns, and mastication plus two burns – affected individual and stand-level growth versus fuel loads in mixed-conifer plantations during young stand development in the north-central Sierra Nevada, California, USA. Results The mastication plus herbicide treatment maximized individual tree growth, especially for white fir and incense-cedar, but fuel loads doubled after five years without the use of fire. The mastication only treatment resulted in a 151% increase in fuel loads over the same period, and individual tree growth was comparable to the burn only and mastication plus burn treatments. The burn only treatment greatly decreased fuel loads but also resulted in low relative stand growth. The mastication plus burn treatment prevented fuel accumulation and generally did not slow down individual tree growth. In addition, stand growth occurred at a rate similar to that of the mastication plus herbicide treatment. Conclusions Mastication followed by repeated prescribed burning could be a viable management strategy to reduce wildfire hazard without sacrificing growth in young mixed-conifer stands that are entering a vulnerable stage of fire risk. Mastication in combination with herbicide may grow trees to a large, fire-resistant size more quickly, but does not address fuel buildup. The use of fire alone can effectively reduce fuels while not substantially impacting individual tree growth, but stand growth may decline relative to mastication and herbicide.


2019 ◽  
Vol 65 (6) ◽  
pp. 784-795
Author(s):  
Jeffrey S Ward ◽  
Jessica Wikle

AbstractSix study areas were established in 80–125-year-old upland oak stands on average sites to compare stand and individual tree growth response following two active treatments (B-level thinning, crop tree) with an unmanaged control. Initial stocking of 104 percent was reduced to 62 percent and 60 percent on the B-level and crop-tree-management plots, respectively. Approximately 7,200 board feet per acre (International ¼) were harvested on the actively managed plots with upland oaks accounting for 81 percent of pre- and 86 percent of residual stand. Eleven-year diameter and volume growth of oak sawtimber trees was greater on actively managed plots. Growth response increased with degree of release and was maintained for the length of the study. Because of the increased individual tree growth of oaks in response to release, stand volume growth of oak sawtimber did not differ between treatments. In contrast to an 11-year decline of poletimber stocking on unmanaged plots, poletimber stocking increased on managed plots as diameter growth increased in response to partial release. This may increase difficulty of regenerating oak in the future. For those mature red oak stands where traditional regeneration prescriptions will not be implemented or will be delayed, commercial harvests can be conducted without compromising stand volume growth of oak.


1995 ◽  
Vol 25 (1) ◽  
pp. 69-80 ◽  
Author(s):  
P.W. West ◽  
G.H.R. Osier

The factors determining individual tree growth response are examined during the 4 years following thinning in experiments in even-aged, 8- or 12-year-old regrowth Eucalyptusregnans F. Muell. forest at two sites in southern Australia. At one site, a vigorous understorey dominated by a sedge developed after the thinning. At that site, light-use efficiency by the trees was unaffected by thinning and the aboveground biomass production by the trees in the thinned stand was substantially less than that in the unthinned stand. At the other site, little understorey developed, light-use efficiency by trees in the thinned stand was greater than that in the unthinned stand, and aboveground biomass production was unaffected by thinning even though the leaf weight of the thinned stand was far below that of the unthinned stand. Where the understorey developed, it was concluded that it competed successfully with the trees for water, thereby reducing production in the thinned stand when compared with the unthinned stand. The individual tree growth response that occurred in the thinned stand at that site appeared to be due soley to the extra light available to individual trees following the canopy opening. Where the understorey did not develop, it was concluded that individual tree growth response was due not only to the extra light available to individual trees but also to the increased availability of belowground resources, most probably soil water. Application of a pre-existing stand growth model suggested that at that site the tendency for increased growth resulting from extra water availability in the thinned stand was just balanced by decreased growth due to lower radiation absorption by the reduced canopy, so that net production was unaffected by thinning.


2001 ◽  
Vol 154 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 261-276 ◽  
Author(s):  
Julian C. Fox ◽  
Peter K. Ades ◽  
Huiquan Bi

1992 ◽  
Vol 22 (5) ◽  
pp. 660-666 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul C. Van Deusen

A number of recent studies have shown reduced stand-level and individual-tree growth in natural loblolly pine (Pinustaeda L.) stands in the southeastern United States. This study uses increment cores from dominant and codominant trees to determine if individual-tree growth has changed from 1915 to 1985. The cores are grouped for comparison by first sorting on the basis of median stand age and then further sorting these groups of cores by individual-tree age. These trees experienced increasing basal area increments from the mid-1940s into the mid-1970s, after which growth rates returned to preincrease levels. These data support recent findings of growth reductions, but also indicate previously unreported growth increases preceding the growth decreases. These and supplemental permanent plot data suggest that stand dynamics is a viable hypothesis for explaining these growth trends.


2007 ◽  
Vol 126 (3) ◽  
pp. 473-473
Author(s):  
J. Schröder ◽  
H. Röhle ◽  
D. Gerold ◽  
K. Münder

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document