Aboveground Stand Phytomass in Experimental Cultures of Lodgepole Pine in Syktyvkar Forestry of the Komi Republic. C. 31-43

Complete text of the article:

Download article (pdf, 1.2MB )

UDС

630*232.11

DOI:

10.37482/0536-1036-2023-6-31-43

Abstract

The purpose of this work is to evaluate and comparatively analyze the above ground phytomass of lodgepole pine (Pinus contorta Dougl.) and Scots pine (Pinus sylvestris L.) in experimental cultures. The results of studies of experimental cultures of lodgepde pine in Syktyvkar forestry of the Komi Republic are presented. The cultures were established by planting 2-year-old seedlings in spring 2006 on a pine clear-cut in 2004 with the area of 1 ha. Pine seedlings of local origin were used for control. The aboveground phytomass of both species was assessed using the model tree method. Moisture content and absolute dry matter content of phytomass components were determined. For the majority of phytomass fractions of lodgepde pine the dry matter content is higher than that of common pine. The weight of model trees of Scots pine in absolutely dry state ranges from 3 to 17 kg, lodgepde pine – from 4 to 27 kg depending on the diameter. Regression analysis of data on model trees was carried out. It is shown that the allometric (steppe) equation can be used to calculate the total aboveground phytomass and the mass of most of its fractions. The exception is the mass of dry branches, for which allometric dependence on trunk diameter was not found. The weight of phytomass in freshly cut condition is 21 t/ha for Scots pine, 32 t/ha for lodgepde pine, and 8.1 and 12.5 t/ha in absolutely dry condition, respectively. The structure of aboveground phytomass of the studied species is quite similar, except for needles, the share of which is higher in lodgepde pine than in Scots pine. The weight of almost all components of lodgepde pine phytomass, except for dry twigs, is 20–50 % higher compared to Scots pine. The total aboveground phytomass of lodgepde pine in cultures at a planting density of 2.5 t/ha is 1.5 times higher than that of Scots pine. The obtained results are necessary for replenishment of the database on productivity and in the future for estimation of carbon deposition by artificial plantations.

Authors

Tatiana A. Pristova*, Candidate of Biology, Research Scientist; ResearcherID: Р-9788-2015, ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8266-8113
Aleksey L. Fedorkov, Doctor of Biology, Leading Research Scientist; ResearcherID: С-8811-2009, ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7800-7534
Alexander B. Novakovsky, Candidate of Biology, Research Scientist; ResearcherID: P-9739-2015, ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4105-7436

Affiliation

Institute of Biology of Komi Scientific Centre of the Ural Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences, ul. Kommunisticheskaya, 28, Syktyvkar, 167982, Russian Federation; pristova@ib.komisc.ru*, fedorkov@ib.komisc.ru, novakovsky@ib.komisc.ru

Keywords

lodgepole pine, forest plantations, aboveground phytomass, phytomass components, regression analysis, Komi Republic

For citation

Pristova T.A., Fedorkov A.L., Novakovsky A.B. Aboveground Stand Phytomass in Experimental Cultures of Lodgepole Pine in Syktyvkar Forestry of the Komi Republic. Lesnoy Zhurnal = Russian Forestry Journal, 2023, no. 6, pp. 31–43. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.37482/0536-1036-2023-6-31-43

References

1. Babich N.A., Klevtsov D.N., Evdokimov I.V. Zonal Patterns of Changes in the Phytomass of Pine Plantations. Arkhangelsk, Northern (Arctic) Federal University Publ., 2010. 140 p. (In Russ.).
2. Babich N.A., Merzlenko M.D. Biological Productivity of Forest Plantations. Arkhangelsk, AGTU Publ, 1998. 89 p. (In Russ.).
3. Babich N.A., Merzlenko M.D., Evdokimov I.V. Phytomass of Pine and Spruce Plantations in the European Part of Russia. Arkhangelsk, 2004. 112 p. (In Russ.).
4. Bobkova K.S., Galenko E.P., Zaboeva I.V., Torlopova N.V., Ivasishina N.A., Kuzin S.N., Martinuk Z.P., Zagirova S.V., Tuzhilkina V.V., Robakidze E.A., Senkina S.N., Mazura N.S., Kupriyanova E.B., Melehina E.N. Bioproduction Process in the Forest Ecosystems of the North. Saint Peterburg, Nauka Publ., 2001. 278 p. (In Russ.).
5. Gytiy L.N., Fedorkov A.L. Experimental Plantations of Longepole Pine in the Syktyvkar Forestry in the Komi Republic. Lesnoy Zhurnal = Russian Forestry Journal, 2016, no. 1, pp. 48–54. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.17238/issn0536-1036.2016.1.48
6. Demidova N.A., Durkina T.M., Gogoleva L.G., Demidenko S.A., Bykov Yu.S., Paramonov A.A. Growth, and Development of a Lodgepole Pine (Pinus contorta Loud. Var latifolia S. Wats) in the Northern Boreal Forest. Proceedings of the Saint Petersburg Forestry Research Institute, 2016, no. 2, pp. 45–59. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.21178/2079-6080.2016.2.42
7. Drozdov Yu.I. Lodgepole Pine Plantations in the Cultures of the European part of Russia. Forestry Information, 2002, no. 9, pp. 21–23. (In Russ.).
8. Kofman G.B. Growth and Shape of Trees. Novosibirsk, Nauka Publ., 1986. 211 p. (In Russ.).
9. Melekhov I.S. Introduction of Coniferous Trees in Forestry. Lesovedenie = Russian Journal of Forest Science, 1984, no. 6, pp. 72–78. (In Russ.).
10. Moskalev A.A., Novakovsky A.B. Statistical Methods in Ecology using R, Statistica, Excel and SPSS. Syktyvkar, SSU Publ., 2014. 197 p. (In Russ.).
11. Raevsky B.V., Pekkoev A.N. Prospects for Growing Lodgepole Pine in Southern Karelia. Innovations and Technologies in Forestry–2013: Materials of the III International Conference Scientific and Practical conference. Saint Peterburg, 2013. Part 2, pp. 180–190. (In Russ.).
12. Usoltsev V.A. Biological Productivity of Forests of Northern Eurasia: Methods, Database and its Applications. Ekaterinburg, Ural Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences Publ., 2007. 636 p. (In Russ.).
13. Usoltsev V.A., Zalesov S.V. Methods for Determining the Biological Productivity of Plantings. Yekaterinburg, USFU Publ., 2005. 147 p. (In Russ.).
14. Utkin A.I., Ifanova M.G., Ermolova L.S. Primary Biological Productivity of Common Pine Plantations in the Vladimir Region. Lesovedenie = Russian Journal of Forest Science, 1981, no. 4, pp. 19–27. (In Russ.).
15. Fedorkov A.L., Gutiy L.N. The State of Experimental Plantations of Lodgepole Pine in the Komi Republic. Vestnik instituta biologii Komi nauchnogo centra Ural’skogo otdeleniya Rossijskoj Akademii Nauk = Bulletin of Institute of biology of the Komi Research Center of the Ural Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences, 2017, no. 2, pp. 25–31. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.31140/j.vestnikib.2017.2(200).5
16. Fedorkov A.L., Turkin A.A. Experimental Plantations of Lodgepole Pine in the Komi Republic. Lesovedenie = Russian Journal of Forest Science, 2010, no. 1, pp. 70–74. (In Russ.).
17. Feklistov P.A., Biryukov S.Yu., Fedyaev A.L. Comparative Ecological and Biological Features of Lodgepole and Common pine in The Northern Subzone of the European Taiga. Arkhangelsk, AGTU Publ., 2008.118 p. (In Russ.).
18. Elais T.S. North American trees: Determinant. Novosibirsk, Geo Publ., 2014. 959 p. (In Russ.).
19. Backlund I., Bergsten U. Biomass Production of Dense Direct-Seeded Longepole Pine (Pinus contorta) at Short Rotation Periods. Silva Fennica, 2012, vol. 46, no. 4, pp. 609–623. https://doi.org/10.14214/sf.914
20. Baskerville G.L. Use of Logarithmic Regression in the Estimation of Plant Biomass. Canadian Journal of Forest Research, 1972, vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 49–53. https://doi.org/10.1139/x72-009
21. Elfving B., Ericsson T., Rosvall O. The Introduction of Lodgepole Pine for Wood Production in Sweden – a Review. Forest Ecology and Management, 2001, vol. 141, iss. 1-2, pp. 15–29. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-1127(00)00485-0
22. Elfving B., Ulvcrona K.A., Egnell G. Biomass Equations for Lodgepole Pine in Northern Sweden. Canadian Journal of Forest Research, 2017, vol. 47, no. 1, pp. 89–96. https://doi.org/10.1139/cjfr-2016-0131
23. Fedorkov A., Gutiy L. Performance of Lodgepole Pine and Scots Pine in Field Trials Located in North-West Russia. Silva Fennica, 2017, vol. 51, no. 1. 10 p. https://doi.org/10.14214/sf.1692
24. Manning G.N., Massie M.R.C., Rudd J. Metric Single-Tree Weight Tables for the Yukon Territory. Environment Canada, Canadian Forestry Service, Pacific Forest Research Centre, Victoria, B.C., Inf. Rep. BC-X-250. 1984. 170 p.
25. Nilsson P., Cory N. Skogsdata, Аktuella Uppgifter om de Svenska Skogarna från Riksskogstaxeringen. Forestry Statistics, Umeå, Sveriges Lantbruksuniversitet, 2010. 119 p. (In Swedish).
26. Repola J. Biomass Equations for Scots Pine and Norway Spruce in Finland. Silva Fennica, 2009, vol. 43, no. 4, pp. 605–624. https://doi.org/10.14214/sf.184
27. Varmola M., Salminen H., Rikala R., Kerkela M. Survival and Early Development of Lodgepole pine. Scandinavian Journal of Forest Research, 2000, vol. 15, iss. 4, pp. 410–423. https://doi.org/10.1080/028275800750172619
28. Zhigunov A.V., Butenko O.Y. Estimating the Growth of 20-to 26-year-old Lodgepole Pine Plantations in the Leningrad Region of Russia. Folia Forestalia Polonica, 2019, vol. 61, iss. 1, pp. 58–63.