Double-Cropping of Pinus sylvestris L. Containerized Seedlings under Short Growing Season Conditions at High Latitudes. С. 50-65

Complete text of the article:

Printed copies of the back issues are available in the editorial office of the journal on application to e-mail: forest@narfu.ru. An electronic version of individual issues and articles can be purchased at Rucont.ru.

UDС

582.475:630*329:581.143.28

DOI:

10.37482/0536-1036-2024-6-50-65

Abstract

The quality of forest crops significantly depends on the characteristics of the planting stock. To obtain high-quality conifer seedlings, the process of container cultivation is used and optimized and a double-cropping mode is introduced. The aim of this study has been to conduct a comparative analysis of one-year-old containerized seedlings of Pinus sylvestris L. according to morphometric parameters under a double-cropping regime under short growing season conditions at high latitudes. The experiment has been carried out in a forest nursery in southern Karelia, Russia. The duration of the first rotation (1rot) has been 146 days, the second one (2rot) – 91 days, the control one (0rot) – 132 days. The following parameters of seedlings have been determined: seedling height (SH, cm), root length (cm), bud length (mm), root collar diameter (RCD, mm), tree dry mass (TDM, g), shoot dry mass (SDM, g), root dry mass (RDM, g) and needle dry mass. The integral quality indices have been assessed, such as: shoot : root dry mass ratio (SRR) = SDM/RDM, sturdiness quotient (SQ) = SH(cm)/RCD(mm) and Dickson Quality Index (DQI) = TDM/(SH + SRR). The lowest values of seedling dry mass have been revealed in the 2rot variant. For all variants, the difference between the mean SQ and DQI values has been statistically significant at the p < 0.05 level. SRR was the lowest in the 1rot seedlings. The high correlation coefficients between the TDM and RCD for all variants confirm the high significance of the latter index. The results indicate the need to adjust the time regime and use additional agricultural practices to obtain high-quality planting stock.

Authors

Elena V. Robonen¹, Research Scientist; ResearcherID: AAD-1958-2019, ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7926-8672
Nadezhda P. Chernobrovkina^1*, Doctor of Biology, Assoc. Prof., Leading Research Scientist; ResearcherID: K-6120-2018, ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9716-003X
Boris V. Raevsky¹, Doctor of Agriculture, Assoc. Prof., Leading Research Scientist; ResearcherID: K-6424-2018, ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1315-8937
Maria I. Zaitseva^2,3, Candidate of Engineering, Assoc. Prof.; ResearcherID: P-2238-2015, ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4209-2815
Karina G. Nelaeva¹, Postgraduate Student, Junior Research Scientist; ResearcherID: GYJ-7223-2022, ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3283-4451

Affiliation

¹Forest Research Institute of the Karelian Research Centre of the Russian Academy of Sciences, ul. Pushkinskaya, 11, Petrozavodsk, 185910, Russian Federation; er51@bk.ru, chernobrovkina50@bk.ru*, borisraevsky@gmail.com, nelaevakg@krc.karelia.ru
²Petrozavodsk State University, prosp. Lenina, 33, Petrozavodsk, 185910, Russian Federation; 2003bk@bk.ru
³Murmansk State Technical University, ul. Sportivnaya, 13, Murmansk, 183010, Russian Federation; 2003bk@bk.ru

Keywords

Pinus sylvestris L., seedling quality, morphometric parameters, quality index, DQI, forest nursery, double-cropping

For citation

Robonen E.V., Chernobrovkina N.P., Raevsky B.V., Zaitseva M.I., Nelaeva K.G. Double-Cropping of Pinus sylvestris L. Containerized Seedlings under Short Growing Season Conditions at High Latitudes. Lesnoy Zhurnal = Russian Forestry Journal, 2024, no. 6, pp. 50–65. https://doi.org/10.37482/0536-1036-2024-6-50-65

References

1. Banach J., Kormanek M., Jaźwiński J. Quality of Scots Pine, European Beech and Pedunculate Oak Grown from Sowing on Soil with Different Compaction Levels. Leśne Prace Badawcze = Forest Research Papers, 2020, vol. 81, no. 4, pp. 167–174. https://doi.org/10.2478/frp-2020-0020
2. Bayala J., Dianda M., Wilson J., Ouédraogo S.J., Sanon K. Predicting Field Performance of Five Irrigated Tree Species Using Seedling Quality Assessment in Burkina Faso, West Africa. New Forests, 2009, vol. 38, pp. 309–322. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11056-009-9149-4
3. Beck E.H., Heim R., Hansen J. Plant Resistance to Cold Stress: Mechanisms and Environmental Signals Triggering Frost Hardening and Dehardening. Journal of Biosciences, 2004, vol. 29, pp. 449–459. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02712118
4. Binotto A.F., Lúcio A.D.C., Lopes S.J. Correlations Between Growth Variables and the Dickison Quality Index in Forest Seedlings. Cerne, 2010, vol. 16, no. 4, pp. 457–464. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0104-77602010000400005
5. Bobushkina S.V. Efficiency Production Methods of Conifers Ball-Rooted Planting Stock in Arkhangelsk Region. Lesnoy vestnik = Forestry Bulletin, 2021, vol. 25, no. 6, pp. 45–54. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.18698/2542-1468-2021-6-45-54
6. Bumgarner M.L., Salifu K.F., Jacobs D.F. Subirrigation of Quercus rubra seedlings: Nursery Stock Quality, Media Chemistry, and Early Field Performance. HortScience, 2008, vol. 43, iss. 7, pp. 2179–2185. https://doi.org/10.21273/HORTSCI.43.7.2179
7. Cain M.D., Barnett J.P. An 8-Year Field Comparison of Naturally Seeded to Planted Container Pinus taeda, with and without Release. Canadian Journal of Forest Research, 1996, vol. 26, no. 7, pp. 1237–1247. https://doi.org/10.1139/x26-138
8. Chang C.Y., Fréchette E., Unda F., Mansfield S.D., Ensminger I. Elevated Temperature and CO2 Stimulate Late-Season Photosynthesis but Impair Cold Hardening in Pine. Plant Physiology, 2016, vol. 172, iss. 2, pp. 802–818. https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.16.00753
9. Colombo S.J. Frost Hardening Spruce Container Stock for Overwintering in Ontario. New Forests, 1997, vol. 13, pp. 449–467. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1006571300025
10. Davis A.S., Jacobs D.F. Quantifying Root System Quality of Nursery Seedlings and Relationship to Outplanting Performance. New Forests, 2005, vol. 30, pp. 295–311. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11056-005-7480-y
11. De La Fuente L.M., Ovalle J.F., Arellano E.C., Ginocchio R. Use of Alternative Containers for Promoting Deep Rooting of Native Forest Species Used for Dryland Restoration: the Case of Acacia caven. iForest – Biogeosciences and Forestry, 2017, vol. 10, pp. 776–782. https://doi.org/10.3832/ifor2101-010
12. Devetaković J.R., Pavlović S., Krinulović L., Kerkez Janković I. Field Performance of Austrian Pine Bareroot Seedlings in Comparision to Seedlings Pattern and Density in the Nursery. Reforesta, 2021, no. 11, pp. 27–35. https://doi.org/10.21750/REFOR.11.03.91
13. Dickson A., Leaf A.L., Hosner J.F. Quality Appraisal of White Spruce and White Pine Seedling Stock in Nurseries. The Forestry Chronicle, 1960, vol. 36, no. 1, pp. 10–13. https://doi.org/10.5558/tfc36010-1
14. Dushimimana C., Magomere T., Mulatya J., Vandenabeele J., Olubayo F., Smagghe G., Werbrouck S.P.O. Variation of Morphological Traits and Quality Indices of Micropropagated Melia volkensii Gürke Clones before Field Planting. Forests, 2022, vol. 13, no. 2, art. no. 337. https://doi.org/10.3390/f13020337
15. Fedotov A.N., Zhigunov A.V. Tge Effect of the Day Length on the Formation of Apical Buds in One-Year-Old Containerized Seedlings of Scots Pine and European Spruce. Izvestia Sankt-Peterburgskoj Lesotehniceskoj Akademii, 2016, iss. 215, pp. 69–80. (In Russ.).
16. Grossnickle S.C., MacDonald J.E. Why Seedlings Grow: Influence of Plant Attributes. New Forests, 2018, vol. 49, pp. 1–34. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11056-017-9606-4
17. Grossnickle S.C. Why Seedlings Survive: Influence of Plant Attributes. New Forests, 2012, vol. 43, pp. 711–738. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11056-012-9336-6
18. Haase D.L., Davis A.S. Developing and Supporting Quality Nursery Facilities and Staff are Necessary to Meet Global Forest and Landscape Restoration Needs. Reforestation, 2017, no. 4, pp. 69–93. https://doi.org/10.21750/REFOR.4.06.45
19. Haase D.L. Understanding Forest Seedling Quality: Measurements and Interpretation. Tree Planters’ Notes, 2008, vol. 52, iss. 2, pp. 24–30.
20. Hubbel K.L., Ross-Davis A.L., Pinto J.R., Burney O.T., Davis A.S. Toward Sustainable Cultivation of Pinus occidentalis Swartz in Haiti: Effects of Alternative Growing Media and Containers on Seedling Growth and Foliar Chemistry. Forests, 2018, vol. 9, no. 7, art. no. 422. https://doi.org/10.3390/f9070422
21. Ivetić V., Grossnickle S., Škorić M. Forecasting the Field Performance of Austrian Pine Seedlings Using Morphological Attributes. iForest – Biogeosciences and Forestry, 2016, vol. 10, pp. 99–107. https://doi.org/10.3832/ifor1722-009
22. Jacobs D.F., Salifu K.F., Seifert J.R. Relative Contribution of Initial Root and Shoot Morphology in Predicting Field Performance of Hardwood Seedlings. New Forests, 2005, vol. 30, pp. 235–251. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11056-005-5419-y
23. Johansson K., Ring E., Högbom L. Effects of Pre-Harvest Fertilization and Subsequent Soil Scarification on the Growth of Planted Pinus sylvestris Seedlings and Ground Vegetation after Clear-Felling. Silva Fennica, 2013, vol. 47, no. 4, art. no. 1016. https://doi.org/10.14214/sf.1016
24. Kolevska D.D., Dimitrova A., Cokoski K., Basova M. Growth and Quality of Pinus nigra (Am.), Pinus sylvestris (L.) and Pinus pinaster (Aiton) Seedlings in Two Container Types. Reforesta, 2020, iss. 9, pp. 21–36. https://dx.doi.org/10.21750/REFOR.9.04.78
25. Köster E., Pumpanen J., Palviainen M., Zhou X., Köster K. Effect of Biochar Amendment on the Properties of Growing Media and Growth of Containerized Norway Spruce, Scots Pine, and Silver Birch Seedlings. Canadian Journal of Forest Research, 2021, vol. 51, no. 1, pp. 31–40. https://doi.org/10.1139/cjfr-2019-0399
26. Landis T.D., Dumroese R.K., Haase D.L. The Container Tree Nursery Manual. Volume 7: Seedling Processing, Storage, and Outplanting. Washington, DC, U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service, Agriculture Handbook 674, 2010. 200 p.
27. Levkoev E., Mehtätalo L., Luostarinen K., Pulkkinen P., Zhigunov A., Peltola H. Development of Height Growth and Frost Hardiness for One-Year-Old Norway Spruce Seedlings in Greenhouse Conditions in Response to Elevated Temperature and Atmospheric CO2 Concentration. Silva Fennica, 2018, vol. 52, no. 3, art. no. 9980. https://doi.org/10.14214/sf.9980
28. Lin K.-H., Wu C.-W., Chang Y.-S. Applying Dickson Quality Index, Chlorophyll Fluorescence, and Leaf Area Index for Assessing Plant Quality of Pentas lanceolata. Notulae Botanicae Horti Agrobotanici Cluj-Napoca, 2018, vol. 47, no. 1, pp. 169–176. https://doi.org/10.15835/nbha47111312
29. Luis V.C., Peters J., González-Rodríguez A., Jimenez M., Morales D. Testing Nursery Plant Quality of Canary Island Pine Seedlings Grown under Different Cultivation Methods. Phyton, Annales Rei Botanicae, 2004, vol. 44, no. 2, pp. 231–244.
30. Luoranen J., Pikkarainen L., Poteri M., Peltola H., Riikonen J. Duration Limits on Field Storage in Closed Cardboard Boxes before Planting of Norway Spruce and Scots Pine Container Seedlings in Different Planting Seasons. Forests, 2019, vol. 10, no. 12, art. no. 1126. https://doi.org/10.3390/f10121126
31. Mochalov B.A., Bobushkina S.V. Silvicultural Production as a Basis for Continuity of Forest Management. Lesnoy Zhurnal = Russian Forestry Journal, 2021, no. 4, pp. 80–96. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.37482/0536-1036-2021-4-80-96
32. Olivo V.B., Buduba C.G. Influencia de Seis Sustratos en el Crecimiento de Pinus ponderosa Producido en Contenedores bajo Condiciones de Invernáculo = Influence of Six Substrates in Pinus ponderosa Grown in Containers under Greenhouse Conditions. Bosque, 2006, vol. 27, no. 3, pp. 267–271. (In Span.). https://doi.org/10.4067/S0717-92002006000300007
33. Örlander G., Gemmel P., Hunt J. Site Preparation: A Swedish Overview. FRDA Report (Victoria, B.C.), 1990, no. 105, 62 p.
34. Pinto J.R., Dumroese R.K., Davis A.S., Landis T.D. Conducting Seedling Stocktype Trials: A New Approach to an Old Question. Journal of Forestry, 2011, vol. 109, iss. 5, pp. 293–299. https://doi.org/10.1093/jof/109.5.293
35. Robonen E.V., Chernobrovkina N.P., Egorova A.V., Zaitseva M.I., Nelaeva K.G. Morphometric Criteria for Assessing the Containerized Conifers Seedlings Quality. Lesnoy Zhurnal = Russian Forestry Journal, 2023, no. 5, pp. 42–57. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.37482/0536-1036-2023-5-42-57
36. Shi W., Grossnickle S.C., Li G., Su S., Liu Y. Fertilization and Irrigation Regimes Influence on Seedling Attributes and Field Performance of Pinus tabuliformis Carr. Forestry, 2019, vol. 92, iss. 1, pp. 97–107. https://doi.org/10.1093/forestry/cpy035
37. Thippawan S., Chowtiwuttakorn K., Pongpattananurak N., Kraichak E. Allometric Models to Estimate the Biomass of Tree Seedlings from Dry Evergreen Forest in Thailand. Forests, 2023, vol. 14, no. 4, art. no. 725. https://doi.org/10.3390/f14040725
38. Thompson B.E. Seedling Morphological Evaluation – What You Can Tell by Looking. Proceedings of Workshop on Evaluating Seedling Quality: Principles, Procedures, and Predictive Abilities of Major Tests. Corvallis, OR Оregon State University, Forest Research Laboratory, 1985, pp. 59–71.
39. Tsakaldimi M., Ganatsas P., Jacobs D.F. Prediction of Planted Seedling Survival of Five Mediterranean Species Based on Initial Seedling Morphology. New Forests, 2013, vol. 44, pp. 327–339. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11056-012-9339-3
40. Vieira L.M., Gomes E.N., Brown T.A., Constantino V., Zanette F. Growth and Quality of Brazilian Pine Tree Seedlings as Affected by Container Type and Volume. Ornamental Horticulture, 2019, vol. 25, no. 3, pp. 276–286. https://doi.org/10.1590/2447-536x.v25i3.2059
41. Zhigunov A.V., Danilov D.A., Neverovsky V.Yu., Enders O.O. Planting Stock for the Creation of Tree Plantations on Post-Agrogenic Lands. Aktualnye problemy lesnogo kompleksa, 2016, no. 44, pp. 96–100. (In Russ.).
42. Zhigunov A.V., Mochalov B.A., Sokolov A.I., Saksa T., Sved J., Nerg J. Fundamentals of Container Tree Seedling Production. St. Petersburg, Suonenjoki: St. Petersburg Forestry Research Institute, METLA, 2011. 28 p. (In Russ.).
43. Zhigunov A.V. Theory and Practice of Growing Containerized Seedlings. St. Petersburg, 2000. 293 p. (In Russ.).