Root Nutrition, Photosynthesis, and Net Primary Production in Tree Stands of the genus Picea at the Organism Level within the Range in Russia. P. 38–50

Complete text of the article:

Download article (pdf, 0.6MB )

UDС

502.2:574.3/9:581.1/5/9:582.475.2:631.811:630*161.32:911.52

DOI:

10.37482/0536-1036-2023-1-38-50

Abstract

A complex retrospective ecological and physiological analysis of the tabular data on the dry weight of stands of the genus Picea growing from the Northwest to the Russian Far East was carried out. Ecological and physiological indicators are calculated per an organism (conditional tree of average weight). Biological productivity (BP, times) was determined by the relative increase in the average dry weight of a tree in adjacent age periods. Quantitative data of mineral productivity (MP, mg/m²/per day) were found by the method of VM. Lebedev, and the net productivity of photosynthesis (NPPh, g/m²/per day) was calculated according to A.A. Nichiporovich at the organism level in stands of each age period in the range from 10–30 to 120–210 years. In all regions, there was a decrease in the element uptake by trees with age: nitrogen (N) by 14.9–93.7, phosphorus (P) by 18.7–119.9 and potassium (K) by 15.4–134.4 times. A sharp decrease in the element uptake continued until the age of 50–60 years, after which it stabilized at an extremely low level. The decline in the root uptake activity resulted in a 2.88–14.0 and 1.64–2.60-fold drop in NPPh and BP, respectively. The correlation between N, P and K uptake with NPPH and BP was highly positive in all zones. Within Russia in 30, 60, 90, and 120-year-old stands differences in the values of net primary production (NPP, g/m² of nutrition area) reached 5.0, 4.7, 4.6, and 5.2 times, respectively, and net mineral productivity by nitrogen (NMP(N), g/m² of nutrition area) reached 4.0, 4.3, 4.8, and 4.6 times, respectively. The correlation between these two indicators was described as highly positive. The correlation between the amount of nitrogen uptaken by spruce roots and the efficiency of its use in forming a unit of biomass was highly negative in all regions. The center of the Russian Plain and the Middle Volga region were the best regions for the growth of spruce plants, while the Krasnoyarsk and Khabarovsk (north) Krais were the worst.

Authors

Valentin M. Lebedev¹, Doctor of Agriculture, Prof.; ResearcherID: M-8699-2019, ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3316-854X
Evgenij V. Lebedev^1*, Doctor of Agriculture, Assoc. Prof.; ResearcherID: G-9445-2019, ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5824-6981
Vladimir N. Sorokopudov², Doctor of Agriculture, Prof.; ResearcherID: B-1520-2018, ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0133-6919
Maxim V. Larionov^3–6, Doctor of Biology, Leading Research Scientist, Prof.;
ResearcherID: N-8885-2016, ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0834-2462

Affiliation

¹Nizhny Novgorod State Agricultural Academy, prosp. Gagarina, 97, Nizhny Novgorod, 603107, Russian Federation; proximus39@mail.ru, proximus77@mail.ru*
²All-Russian Scientific Research Institute of Medicinal and Aromatic Plants, ul. Grina, 7, Moscow, 117216, Russian Federation; sorokopud2301@mail.ru
³Russian State Agrarian University – Moscow Timiryazev Agricultural Academy, ul. Timiryazevskaya, 49, Moscow, 127550, Russian Federation; m.larionow2014@yandex.ru
⁴Russian State Social University, ul. Vil’gel’ma Pika, 4, str. 1, Moscow, 129226, Russian Federation
⁵State University of Management, Ryazanskiy prosp., 99, Moscow, 109542, Russian Federation
⁶State University of Land Use Planning, ul. Kazakova, 15, Moscow, 105064, Russian Federation

Keywords

Piceа, dry weight of stands, mineral nutrition, photosynthesis, net primary production, organism level, ontogenesis, Russia

For citation

Lebedev V.M., Lebedev E.V., Sorokopudov V.N., Larionov M.V. Root Nutrition, Photosynthesis, and Net Primary Production in Tree Stands of the Genus Picea at the Organism Level Within the Range in Russia. Lesnoy Zhurnal = Russian Forestry Journal, 2023, no. 1, pp. 38–50. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.37482/0536-1036-2023-1-38-50

References

1. Babich N.A., Merzlenko M.D., Evdokimov I.V. Phytomass of Pine and Spruce Crops in the European Part of Russia. Arkhangelsk, ASTU Publ., 2004. 112 p. (In Russ.).

2. Besschetnov V.P., Lebedev E.V. Photosynthesis and Biological Productivity of Forest-Forming Species of the Volga-Vyatka Region. Actual Problems of Forestry and Rational Use of Resources of the Nizhny Novgorod Region. Nizhny Novgorod, NNSAA Publ., 2002, pp. 107–116. (In Russ.).

3. Blintsov I.K., Asyutin P.F. Patterns of Spatial Distribution of Spruce and Pine Root Systems in Highly Productive Coniferous Forests of the BSSR. Lesovedeniye i lesnoye khozyaystvo, 1983, iss. 18, pp. 11–17. (In Russ.).

4. Varaksin G.S., Polyakov V.I., Lyuminarskaya M.A. Biological Productivity of Spruce Crops in Central Siberia. Lesnaya taksatsiya i lesoustroystvo, 2006, no. 1(36), pp. 24–28. (In Russ.).

5. Vakhmistrov D.B., Vorontsov V.A. Plant Selectivity is not Aimed at Maximizing Plant Growth. Fiziologiya rastenij = Russian Journal of Plant Physiology, 1997, vol. 44, no. 3, pp. 404–412. (In Russ.).

6. Geographical Encyclopedic Dictionary: Geographical Names. Moscow, Sovetskaya entsiklopediya Publ., 1983. 528 p. (In Russ.).

7. Konovalov V.N., Zarubina L.V. Transport, Distribution and Consumption of Pine and Spruce 14C-Assimilates in Northern Phytocenoses Under Different Illumination and Nitrogen Nutrition. Lesnoy Zhurnal = Russian Forestry Journal, 2020, no. 4, pp. 77–94. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.37482/0536-1036-2020-4-77-94

8. Kurnaev S.F. Plant Zoning of the USSR. Moscow, Nauka Publ., 1973. 203 p. (In Russ.).

9. Lavrichenko V.M. The Ratio of Nutrients in Plants as a Species Genotypic Concept. Vestnik sel’skokhozyaystvennoy nauki, 1971, no. 7, pp. 129–134. (In Russ.).

10. Lebedev V.M. Determination of the Active Surface and Mineral Productivity of the Root System of Fruit and Berry Crops. Methods of Research and Variation Statistics in Scientific Fruit Growing: Proceedings of the International Scientific Practical Conference, Michurinsk, March 25–26 1998. Vol. 2. Michurinsk, MSAA Publ., 1998, pp. 39–42. (In Russ.).

11. Lebedev V.M., Lebedev E.V. Comparative Determination of the Forest Species Productivity. Unconventional and Rare Plants, Natural Compounds and Prospects for Their Use: Proceedings of the International Symposium. Belgorod, Politerra Publ., 2006, vol. 1, pp. 213–216. (In Russ.).

12. Lebedev V.M., Lebedev E.V. Morphological, Functional, and Physiological Features of Active Roots of Forest-Forming Species in the Volga-Vyatka Region. Agrohimia = Agricultural Chemistry, 2011, no. 4, pp. 38–44. (In Russ.).

13. Lebedev E.V. Influence of Tree Stand Density on Mineral Nutrition and Biological Productivity of Norway Spruce in Its Ontogenesis. Izvestia Orenburg State Agrarian University, 2012, no. 6(38), pp. 34–38. (In Russ.).

14. Lebedev E.V. Biological Productivity and Mineral Nutrition of Spruce in the Ontogeny in Northern Europe. Izvestia Sankt-Peterburgskoj Lesotehniceskoj Akademii, 2012, iss. 199, pp. 4–13. (In Russ.).

15. Merzlenko M.D., Shestakova E.Yu. Biological Productivity of Artificial Spruce Young Stands. Nauchnyye trudy MGUL, 1992, iss. 257, pp. 38–45. (In Russ.).

16. Muromtsev I.A. The Active Part of the Root System of Fruit Plants. Moscow, Kolos Publ., 1969. 247 p. (In Russ.).

17. Nakvasina E.N., Demina N.A. Ecological Stability of Geographical Races of Spruce. Vestnik of Northern (Arctic) Federal University. Series “Natural Sciences”, 2014, no. 2, pp. 61–70. (In Russ.).

18. Nichiporovich A.A. On the Methods of Recording and Studying Photosynthesis as a Yield Factor. Trudy Instituta Fiziologii Rasteniy AN SSSR, 1955, vol. 10, pp. 210–249. (In Russ.).

19. Potemkin O.N., Rudikovskiy A.V., Potemkina O.V. Polymorphism of Morphological Characteristics of the Subgenus Picea (Pinaceae) in the Eastern Regions of Habitation. Flora and Vegetation of Asian Russia, 2012, no. 2(10), pp. 19–26. (In Russ.).

20. Pridacha V.B. The N:P:K Ratio as a Homeostatic Indicator of the Functional State of Coniferous Plants in Different Environmental Conditions: Cand. Biol. Sci. Diss. Abs. Petrozavodsk, 2002. 24 p. (In Russ.).

21. Suvorova G.G., Shcherbatyuk A.S., Yan’kova L.S., Kopytova L.D. Maximal Photosynthesis Intensity in Siberian Spruce and Siberian Larch in Near-Baikal Region. Lesovedenie = Russian Journal of Forest Science, 2003, no. 6, pp. 58–65. (In Russ.).

22. Usol’tsev V.A. Phytomass of Northern Eurasia Forests: Standards and Elements of Geography. Yekaterinburg, UB RAS Publ., 2002. 763 p. (In Russ.).

23. Feklistov P.A., Filippov B.Yu., Bolotov I.N., Kononov O.D., Torbik D.N. Transitive Zones in Wood Ecosystems of Northern Taiga. Vestnik Pomorskogo universiteta of Series “Natural and Exact Sciences”, 2011, no. 4, pp. 102–105. (In Russ.).

24. Tsel’niker Yu. L., Korzukhin M.L., Semenov S.M. Model Analysis of Latitudinal Distribution of Forest Species in Russia. Lesovedenie = Russian Journal of Forest Science, 2010, no. 2, pp. 36–45. (In Russ.).

25. Shan’gina N.P., Feklistov P.A. Needle Surface Area Index of Spruce Undergrowth Under Maternal Canopy. Environmental Problems of the Arctic and Northern Territories: Interuniversity Collection of Academic Papers. Ed. by P.A. Feklistov. Iss. 14. Arkhangelsk, NArFU Publ., 2011, pp. 33–37. (In Russ.).

26. Begon M., Harper J.L., Townsend C.R. Ecology: Individuals, Populations and Communities. Wiley-Blackwell, 1996. 1068 p.

27. Dymond C.C., Neilson E.T., Stinson G., Porter K., MacLean D.A., Gray D.R., Campagna M., Kurz W.A. Future Spruce Budworm Outbreak May Create a Carbon Source in Eastern Canadian Forests. Ecosystems, 2010, vol. 13, pp. 917–931. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10021-010-9364-z

28. Garcia O. A Parsimonious Dynamic Stand Model for Interior Spruce in British Columbia. Forest Science, 2011, vol. 57, iss. 4, pp. 265–280. https://doi.org/10.1093/forestscience/57.4.265

29. Hlásny T., Barka I., Roessiger J., Kulla L., Trombik J., Sarvašová Z., Bucha T., Kovalčík M., Čihák T. Conversion of Norway Spruce Forests in the Face of Climate Change: A Case Study in Central Europe. European Journal of Forest Research, 2017, vol. 136, iss. 5-6, pp. 1013–1028. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10342-017-1028-5

30. Houle D., Richard P.J.H., Ndzangou S.O., Richer-Laflèche M. Compositional Vegetation Changes and Increased Red Spruce Abundance During the Little Ice Age in a Sugar Maple Forest of North-Eastern North America. Plant Ecology, 2012, vol. 213, iss. 6, pp. 1027–1035. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11258-012-0062-0

31. Kozak I., Chłódek D., Zawadzki A., Kozak H., Potaczała G. Symulacja przebudowy drzewostanów świerkowych W Bieszczadach za pomocą modelu FORKOME = Conversion Simulation of Spruce Stands in the Bieszczady Mountains with the Aid of FORKOME Model. Leśne Prace Badawcze, 2007, no. 2, pp. 7–26. (In Pol.).

32. Mund M., Kummetz E., Hein M., Bauer G.A., Schulze E.-D. Growth and Carbon Stocks of a Spruce Forest Chronosequence in Central Europe. Forest Ecology and Management, 2002, vol. 171, iss. 3, pp. 275–296. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-1127(01)00788-5

33. O’Connell K.E.B., Gower S.T., Norman J.M. Comparison of Net Primary Production and Light-Use Dynamics of Two Boreal Black Spruce Forest Communities. Ecosystems, 2003, vol. 6, pp. 236–247. https://doi.org/10.1007/PL00021510

34. Pretzsch H., Dieler J., Seifert T., Rötzer T. Climate Effects on Productivity and Resource-Use Efficiency of Norway Spruce (Picea abies [L.] Karst.) and European Beech (Fagus sylvatica [L.]) in Stands with Different Spatial Mixing Patterns. Trees, 2012, vol. 26, pp. 1343–1360. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00468-012-0710-y

35. Suvorova G.G., Oskorbina M.V., Kopytova L.D., Yan’kova L.S., Popova E.V. Seasonal Changes in Photosynthetic Activity and Chlorophylls in the Scots Pine and Siberian Spruce with Optimal or Insufficient Moistening. Contemporary Problems of Ecology, 2011, vol. 4, iss. 6, pp. 626–633. https://doi.org/10.1134/S1995425511060105

36. Tange T. Emulating Natural Disturbances: The Role of Silviculture in Creating Even-Aged and Complex Structures in the Black Spruce Boreal Forest of Eastern North America. Journal of Forest Research, 2010, vol. 15, iss. 1, p. 81. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10310-009-0178-9