Provision with Undergrowth of Mature and Overripe Dark Coniferous Stands in Perm Krai

Complete text of the article:

Download article (pdf, 0.6MB )

UDС

630*23:581.526.426.2

DOI:

10.17238/issn0536-1036.2019.3.32

Abstract

Provision with preliminary generation undergrowth of mature and overripe dark coniferous stands of the Middle Ural taiga forest region was analyzed based on the forest management materials’ data of Krasnovisherskoye forestry (Perm krai). It has been found that dark coniferous stands are represented by spruce, fir, and cedar forests; which occupy 55.3 % of area covered with forest vegetation and 83.7 % of area covered with coniferous stands. Herewith, spruce forests occupy 98.7 % of the total area of dark coniferous stands, fir forests – 1.2 %, and cedar forests – 0.1 %. There are stands of the 5th and elder bonitet classes (65.4 %), 3rd and 4th classes (87.1 %) with the stand density of 0.5–0.7 (67.9 % from the total area) among dark coniferous stands. Spruce stands usually belong to the following types of forest sites (forest growth conditions): C3 (66.2 %), B2 (12.5 %) and B4 (9.7 %). Under the canopy 90.8 % of mature and overripe dark coniferous stands’ area is occupied by coniferous un-dergrowth, while its density exceeds 2.0 thousand pcs/ha on 12.0 % of the area. The maximum provision with undergrowth in the C3 and B4 forest growing conditions is characterized by mature and overripe dark coniferous stands with the relative density of 0.6, and in the A4, B2, B5 and C4 forest growing conditions – 0.5. The latter should be considered in selective logging and methods of reforestation schedule.

Authors

E.A. Vedernikov¹, Postgraduate Student; ResearcherID: H-2642-2019, ORCID: 0000-0002-8249-1143
S.V. Zalesov¹, Doctor of Agriculture, Prof.; ResearcherID: Н-2605-2019, ORCID: 0000-0003-3779-410X
E.S. Zalesova¹, Candidate of Agriculture, Assoc. Prof.; ResearcherID: H-1645-2019, ORCID: 0000-0003-4403-8118
А.G. Маgаsumovа¹, Candidate of Agriculture, Assoc. Prof.; ResearcherID: H-1607-2019, ORCID: 0000-0002-1727-2008
O.V. Tolkach², Doctor of Agriculture; ResearcherID: M-4881-2018, ORCID: 0000-0002-4530-3334

Affiliation

¹Ural State Forest Engineering University, Sibirskiy trakt, 37, Yekaterinburg, 620100, Russian Federation; e-mail: wedernikow2008@yandex.ru, zalesov@usfeu.ru, kaly88@mail.ru, alfyam@rambler.ru
²Botanical Garden of the Ural Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences, ul. 8 Marta, 202a, Yekaterinburg, 620130, Russian Federation; e-mail: tolkach_o_v@mail.ru

Keywords

Middle Ural taiga forest region, dark coniferous stands, preliminary generation undergrowth, provision

For citation

Vedernikov E.A., Zalesov S.V., Zalesova E.S., Маgаsumovа А.G., Tolkach O.V. Provision with Undergrowth of Mature and Overripe Dark Coniferous Stands in Perm Krai. Lesnoy Zhurnal [Forestry Journal], 2019, no. 3, pp. 32–42. DOI: 10.17238/issn0536-1036.2019.3.32

References

1. Debkov N.М. Silvicultural Assessment of Formation Natural Potential of Target Forest Plantations from Undergrowth in the Southern Taiga of Western Siberia: Cand. Agric. Sci. Diss. Abs. Moscow, 2013. 21 p.
2. Luganskiy N.A., Zalesov S.V., Luganskiy V.N. Silviculture. Yekaterinburg, USFEU Publ., 2010. 432 р.
3. Opletaev A.S., Chermnykh A.I., Kirshbaum A.R. Provision of Overmature Stands with Preliminary Generation Undergrowth in Chelyabinsk Region. Uspekhi sovremennogo estestvoznaniya [Advances in Current Natural Sciences], 2017, no. 7, pp. 42–46.
4. Order of the Ministry of Natural Resources and Ecology of the Russian Federation on June 29, 2016, no. 375 “On the Approval of Reforestation Rules”: Registered at the Ministry of Justice on November 15, 2016, no. 44342. Available at: http: //www.consultant.ru/document/cons_doc_LAW_207285/ (accessed 20.12.18).
5. Fomin V.V., Zalesov S.V., Magasumova A.G. Methods of Tree Stands Density As-sessment of Agricultural Land Reforestation with the Use of Satellite Images with High Spatial Resolution. Agrarnyj vestnik Urala [Agrarian Bulletin of the Urals], 2015, no. 1(131), pp. 25–29.
6. Tsvetkov V.F. Forest Biogeocenosis. Arkhangelsk., 2004. 268 p.
7. Tsvetkov V.F. Reforestration: Nature, Regularities, Estimation, Forecast. Arkhangelsk, ASTU Publ., 2008. 212 p.
8. Chmyr A.F. Smooth Succession of Spruce Forests’ Generations in the Russian Boreal Zone. Saint Petersburg, SPbNIILH Publ., 2001. 127 p.
9. Aguilar-Amuchastegui N., Henebry G.M. Assessing Sustainability Indicators for Tropical Forests: Spatio-Temporal Heterogeneity, Logging Intensity, and Dung Beetle Communities. Forest Ecology and Management, 2007, vol. 253, iss. 1–3, pp. 56–67. DOI: 10.1016/j.foreco.2007.07.004
10. Allen C.D., Macalady A.K., Chenchouni H., Bacheletd D., McDowell N., Ven-netier M., Kitzberger T., Rigling A., Breshears D.D., Hogg E.H., Gonzalez P., Fensham R., Zhang Zh., Castro J., Demidova N., Lim J.-H., Allard G., Running S.W., Semerci A., Cobb N. A Global Overview of Drought and Heat-Induced Tree Mortality Reveals Emerging Climate Change Risks for Forests. Forest Ecology and Management, 2010, vol. 259, iss. 4, pp. 660–684. DOI: 10.1016/j.foreco.2009.09.001
11. Fomin V.V., Zalesov S.V., Popov A.S., Mikhailovich A.P. Historical Avenues of Research in Russian Forest Typology: Ecological, Phytocoenotic, Genetic, and Dynamic Classifications. Canadian Journal of Forest Research, 2017, vol. 47, no. 7, pp. 849–860. DOI: 10.1139/cjfr-2017-0011
12. Gamfeldt L., Snäll T., Bagchi R., Jonsson M., Gustafsson L., Kjellander P., Ruiz-Jaen M.C., Fröberg M., Stendahl J., Philipson Ch.D., Mikusiński G., Andersson E., Wester-lund B., Andrén H., Moberg F., Moen J., Bengtsson J. Higher Levels of Multiple Ecosystem Services Are Found in Forests with More Tree Species. Nature Communications, 2013, vol. 4, article no. 1340. DOI: 10.1038/ncomms2328
13. Jactel H., Nicoll B.C., Branco M., Gonzalez-Olabarria J.R., Grodzki W., Lång-ström B., Moreira F., Netherer S., Orazio Ch., Piou D., Santos H., Schelhaas M.J., Tojic K., Vodde F. The Influences of Forest Stand Management on Biotic and Abiotic Risks of Damage. Annals of Forest Science, 2009, vol. 66, iss. 7, article no. 701. DOI: 10.1051/forest/2009054
14. Martin P.J., Browne-Clayton S., Taylor G. A Results-Based System for Regulat-ing Reforestation Obligations: Some Developments in 2003. The Forestry Chronicle, 2004, vol. 80, no. 2, pp. 201–208. DOI: 10.5558/tfc80201-2
15. Millar C.I., Stephenson N.L. Temperate Forest Health in an Era of Emerging Mega-disturbance. Science, 2015, vol. 349, iss. 6250, pp. 823–826. DOI: 10.1126/science.aaa9933
16. Verheyen K., Vanhellemont M., Auge H., Baeten L., Baraloto Ch., Barsoum N., Bilodeau-Gauthier S., Bruelheide H., Castagneyrol B., Godbold D., Haase J., Hector A., Jactel H., Koricheva J., Loreau M., Mereu S., Messier Ch., Muys B., Nolet Ph., Paquette A., Parker J., Perring M., Ponette Q., Potvin C., Reich P., Smith A., Weih M., Scherer-Lorenzen M. Contributions of Global Network of Tree Diversity Experiments to Sustainable Forest Plantations. Ambio, 2016, vol. 45, iss. 1, pp. 29–41. DOI: 10.1007/s13280-015-0685-1

Received on October 01, 2018