Thickness and Weight Variability of Birch Bark along the Trunk Length

Complete text of the article:

Download article (pdf, 0.7MB )

UDС

630*2

DOI:

10.17238/issn0536-1036.2019.2.32

Abstract

Due to the special properties birch bark finds wide application in construction, pharmacology, medicine, cosmetology and other branches of economy. The study object is downy birch (Betula pubescens Ehrh.). The stand composition consist of 5 birches, 3 aspens, 2 alders and 1 spruce; the average trunk diameter is 21.5 cm; the average stand height is 22.5 m; the relative density is 0.7; the bonitet is II; the stem wood stock is 220 m3/ha. The research purpose is to determine the variability of birch bark parameters along the trunk length depending on trunk diameter and tree age. Nine model birch trees from the different diameter classes were sawn for the detailed analysis. At the height of 0.3, 1.3, 2.0 m and then every 2.0 m the disk shaped samples with thickness of 2–3 cm were sawn out the tree trunk. The freshsawn disks were weighed; after that the bitch bark upper layer was separated and weighted, then the same was done with phloem. All fractions were dried up to the air dry condition and weighed again. According to the results of the second weighing, the humidity of the samples and the content of bark, birch bark upper layer, and phloem were determined in the total weight of a sample. It has been established that thickness, weight, and humidity of phloem and birch bark upper layer vary in trunk height with certain regularity. The maximum content of phloem and birch bark upper layer for all model trees is found in the upper third of a trunk, in the crown; 16–21 and 4–7 %, respectively; little less than in butt. The minimum content of these fractions is typical for the branchless part of a trunk; the share of phloem is 7–9 %, the share of birch bark upper layer is 2–3 %. The mass and thickness of bark expectedly decrease from the butt to the top; however, there are some exceptions for the samples taken at branch points, especially at the points of thick branches attachment. In these areas thickness and mass of butt are always greater in comparison with the areas below or above the trunk. On average, the share of phloem is 3.45 % from the tree mass; the share of birch bark upper layer is 12.41 %. The humidity of phloem and bitch bark varies in height of the trunk. Herewith, the obtained patterns are similar to the change of mass and thickness of these fractions. The highest humidity of phloem and birch bark upper layer is found in the crown area; the lowest humidity is found in the clear stem of a trunk. In all cases, the phloem humidity is higher than that of wood and birch bark upper layer; 147.0; 131.2 and 105.8 %, respectively. It was also shown that the lower the age of model trees, the higher the humidity of birch bark upper layer and phloem. The obtained data allow us to determine more accurately the volume of bark and birch bark upper layer stock. It is possible to estimate more accurately the share of birch bark upper layer and bark from the total weight of the trunk, in view of their humidity in general.
For citation: Gryazkin A.V., Belyaeva N.V., Danilov D.A., Vandzhurak G.V., Hung Vu Van. Thickness and Weight Variability of Birch Bark along the Trunk Length. Lesnoy Zhurnal [Forestry Journal], 2019, no. 2, pp. 32–39. DOI: 10.17238/issn0536-1036.2019.2.32

Authors

A.V. Gryazkin, Doctor of Biological Sciences, Professor C-6699-2018, 0000-0002-7901-2180
N.V. Belyaeva, Doctor of Agricultural Sciences, Professor W-2629-2017, 0000-0001-8673-2824
D.A. Danilov, Doctor of Agricultural Sciences, Professor
G.V. Vandzhurak, Postgraduate Student
Vu Van Hung, Postgraduate Student

Affiliation

Saint-Petersburg State Forest Technical University, Institutskiy per., 5, Saint Petersburg, 194021, Russian Federation; е-mail: lesovod@bk.ru

Keywords

downy birch, trunk diameter, tree age, bark, birch bark upper layer

For citation

Gryazkin A.V., Belyaeva N.V., Danilov D.A., Vandzhurak G.V., Hung Vu Van. Thickness and Weight Variability of Birch Bark along the Trunk Length. Lesnoy Zhurnal [Forestry Journal], 2019, no. 2, pp. 32–39. DOI: 10.17238/issn0536-1036.2019.2.32

References

1. Abaturov Yu.D., Zvorykina K.V., Il’yushenko A.F. Types of Birch Forests in the Central Part of the Southern Taiga. Moscow, Nauka Publ., 1982. 156 p.
2. Veprikova E.V., Tereshchenko E.A., Chesnokov N.V., Kuznetsov B.N. Utilization of Outer Birch Bark for Sorption Materials Produce. Zhurnal Sibirskogo federal’nogo universiteta. Khimiya [Journal of Siberian Federal University. Chemistry], 2012, vol. 5, no. 2, pp. 178–188.
3. Vinokurova R.I., Troshkova I.Yu. Variability of Betulin and Suberin Accumulation in Birch Bark of Betula Pendula Roth Depending on Geographical Zoning. Lesnoy Zhurnal [Forestry Journal], 2008, no. 3, pp. 126–130.
4. Gorobets A.I. Non-Wood Forest Products. Fundamentals of Wood Chemical Industries. Voronezh, VGLTA Publ., 2012. 82 p.
5. Gryazkin A.V., Smirnov A. P. Non-Wood Forest Products: Educational Textbook. Saint Petersburg, Polytechnic University Publ., 2008. 417 p.
6. Demakov Yu.P., Smykhov A.Ye., Denissov S.A. Structure and Dynamics of Birch Forests of Mari El. Vestnik Mariyskogo gosudarstvennogo tekhnicheskogo universiteta. Seriya: Les. Ekologiya. Prirodopol’zovaniye. [Vestnik of Mari State Technical University. Series: Forest. Ecology. Nature Management], 2009, no. 1, pp. 5–18.
7. Denisov S.A. Formational Structure Dynamics of Birch Forests in View of Its Ontogenesis in Various Edatopes in Volga Region. Vestnik Mariyskogo gosudarstvennogo tekhnicheskogo universiteta. Seriya: Les. Ekologiya [Vestnik of Mari State Technical Uni-versity. Series: Forest. Ecology. Nature Management], 2009, no. 3, pp. 13–27.
8. Zagreyev V.V., Sukhikh V.I., Shvidenko A.Z., Gusev N.N., Moshkalev A.G. All-Union Standards for Forest Valuation, 1992.
9. Ligostayeva J.V. Pharmacognostic Study of Birch Bark and Prospects of Its Use in Medicine: Cand. Pharm. Sci. Diss. Abs. Samara, 2015. 24 p.
10. Rad’kova E.A. Integrated Ecological and Hygienic Evaluation of Birch Bark Processing: Cand. Med. Sci. Diss. Abs. Saint Petersburg, 2007. 24 p.
11. Dehelean C.A., Şoica C., Ledeţi I., Aluaş M., Zupko I., Gǎluşcan A., Cinta-Pinzaru S., Munteanu M. Study of the Betulin Enriched Birch Bark Extracts Effects on Human Carcinoma Cells and Ear Inflammation. Chemistry Central Journal, 2012, vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 1–9. DOI: 10.1186/1752-153X-6-137
12. Fulvio F.D., Kroon A., Bergström D., Nordfjell T. Comparison of Energy-Wood and Pulpwood Thinning Systems in Young Birch Stands. Scandinavian Journal of Forest Research, 2011, vol. 26, iss. 4, pp. 339–349. DOI: 10.1080/02827581.2011.568951
13. Gryazkin A.V., Beliaev V.V., Beliaeva N.V., Petrik V.V., Kuznetsov E.N., Shakhov A.G. The Logging Waste as Inexhaustible Resource for Alternative Energy. Thermal Science, 2017, vol. 21, iss. 2, рр. 1135–1142. DOI: 10.2298/TSCI150306047G
14. Laszczyk M. Triterpentrockenextrakt aus Birkenkork (Betula alba cortex). Pforzheim, 2007. 157 p.
15. Sami A., Taru M., Salme K., Jari Y.-K. Pharmacological Properties of the Ubiquitous Natural Product Betulin. European Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences, 2006, vol. 29, iss. 1, pp. 1–13. DOI: 10.1016/j.ejps.2006.04.006
16. Skuterud R., Dietrichson J. Budburst in Detached Birch Shoots (Betula pendula) of Different Varieties Winter-Stored in Darkness at Three Different Temperatures. Silva Fennica, 1994, vol. 28, no. 4, pp. 233–241. DOI: 10.14214/sf.a9176
17. Taipale H.Т., Lapinjoki S.P. Use of Evaporative Light-Scattering Mass Detection in HPLC of Triterpenes in the Bark Resin of Betula Species. Phytochemical Analysis, 1991, vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 84–86. DOI: 10.1002/pca.2800020209

Received on July 23, 2018