scholarly journals Die klimatische Trockengrenze häufiger Baumarten hängt vom Bodennährstoffstatus ab

2018 ◽  
Vol 169 (6) ◽  
pp. 323-331
Author(s):  
Karl H. Mellert ◽  
Roberto Canullo ◽  
Tobias Mette ◽  
Daniel Ziche ◽  
Axel Göttlein

The climatic drought limit of common tree species depend on soil nutrient status In forest ecology, there is a huge experience in the ecological amplitude of tree species, which is commonly represented in so-called ecograms. However, the ecogram axes are purely qualitatively described and scaled. In the study presented here, we try to specify the drought limit in the ecogram for the ten most abundant and economically important tree species in Germany (Norway spruce, Scots pine, silver fir, European beech, pedunculate oak, sessile oak, sycamore maple, European elm, hornbeam and common ash) using generalized regression models. We use data on the occurrence of the tree species and on the soil of about 3300 plots of the second German forest soil condition survey (BZW II), combined with data from the ICP Forests Level I program (BioDiv and BioSoil) from 13 neighboring European countries as well as climate data from WorldClim. The focus is on the question to what extent the drought limit of the tree species depends on the soil nutrient status. As a predictor of nutrient status, we chose the base saturation type (BT) already introduced in practice. The warmth factor was included as Growing Degree Days, the water balance as climatic water balance in the forest vegetation period (KWB). The drought limit could be specified for all tree species except elm and pedunculate oak. It was found that not only in known nutrient-sensitive tree species (sycamore, ash, hornbeam), the drought limit depends on the BT, but also in beech and spruce. In the case of sycamore as an example of a nutrient-sensitive species, the dry climate limit on strongly acidic soils (BT 5) is already reached at a KWB of 20 l/m2, on base-rich (BT 1 and 0) only at a KWB of −150 l/m2. In beech, too, the drought limit on acidic soils has been reached more quickly than on base-rich sites (BT 5: −40 l/m2, BT 0: −120 l/m2). In contrast, the reaction of spruce is reversed (BT 5: −50 l/m2, BT 0: 10 l/m2). For pine, sessile oak and fir, the drought limit is independent of the base type and is −230 l/m2 (Scots pine), −150 l/m2 (sessile oak) and 0 l/m2 (silver fir). The drought limit specified by BT is a helpful quantity, especially in view of climate change, as it makes it possible to better estimate the potential of the different tree species.

2008 ◽  
Vol 318 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 47-61 ◽  
Author(s):  
Catherine L. Cardelús ◽  
Michelle C. Mack ◽  
Carrie Woods ◽  
Jennie DeMarco ◽  
Kathleen K. Treseder

1999 ◽  
Vol 29 (1) ◽  
pp. 95-105 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lars Vesterdal

Mass loss and nutrient release from decomposing foliage litter of beech (Fagus sylvatica L.) and Norway spruce (Picea abies (L.) Karst.) were studied at three sites along a soil fertility gradient. The influence of soil type on initial litter quality and on decomposition was separated by reciprocal transplantation of litter among soil types using the litterbag technique. Decomposition of beech litter was influenced by both initial litter quality and incubation site. Mass loss in beech litter was positively influenced by soil nutrient status. Decomposition of Norway spruce litter was not affected by initial litter quality, and the positive influence of a nutrient-rich soil environment on decomposition was weak. Nutrient release in litters of both tree species was greatly affected by soil type through its influence on initial litter quality, as nutrient release was positively related to initial nutrient concentrations. Nutrient release was less affected through the soil environment, as it only influenced release of some nutrients, and the differences were not consistently related to soil nutrient status or mass loss. The influence of soil type on decomposition differed among the two tree species, suggesting that it may be more significant in species that produce relatively higher quality litter.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document