Creation of Forest Cultures of Crimean Pine (Pinus pallasiana D. Don) on the Hilly Sands in the Steppe Zone of Russia. P. 76–92

Complete text of the article:

Download article (pdf, 0.7MB )

UDС

630*232.423:630*232.43

DOI:

10.37482/0536-1036-2023-4-76-92

Abstract

Forest crop cultivation of Crimean pine (Pinus pallasiana D. Don) was implemented in 2009–2020 on sandy and sand included soils in the steppe zone of the European part of Russia. During the analysis of the reasons for the low efficiency of reforestation, the authors proposed the hypothesis that the rules of planting recommended for Scots pine relative to the depth of rooting may not be acceptable for Crimean pine. The purpose of the work is to substantiate the necessity and the most optimal value of deepening the root collar of Crimean pine seedlings on hilly sands. Experimental forest cultures were planted in 2017. The depth of the plant collar relative to the soil surface was tested at 0, 2, 4, 6 cm, and until the seedling’s foliated part. The reference group was created by machine cultivation, which required a rooting depth of 6 cm or more. In the case of hand cultivation, the variants with planting depths of 2 and 4 cm had the highest rates of plant survival (94.2–94.6 % in the first year), plant safety (67.0–94.6 % in the fourth year), and their most even distribution over the silvicultural area (variation coefficient (υ) at 6.6–28.8 %). The lack of deepening and very deep planting by 6 cm led to a decrease in plant survival and preservation by 7.6–18.6 % with an increase in the range of the variation coefficient (υ, 10.2–60.6 %). The mechanized planting with a root collar depth over 6 cm gave the lowest number of preserved plants (58.4 % in the first year, 32.7 % in the fourth year), and the greatest range for the variation coefficient (υ, 30.5–70.1 %). An analytical equalization of the density of age dynamics showed that the predicted density would not reach the normative value with low and very deep planting. The established statistically significant differences in the survival rate of forest cultures throughout the observation period (tf = 2.12–4.38> t05 = 2.12–2.45) indicated the expediency of deepening the root collar. The optimal value is 2–4 cm, but until the seedling’s foliated part.

Authors

Tatiana A. Turchina¹*, Doctor of Agriculture, Chief Research Scientist;
ResearcherID: AAT-8537-2020, ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9287-7544
Olga A. Bannikova², Candidate of Agriculture; ResearcherID: ABD-2525-2021, ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0490-8812

Affiliation

¹Research Institute of Agriculture and Ecology of the Arctic within Krasnoyarsk Science Center of the Siberian Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences, ul. Komsomolskaya, 1, Norilsk, Krasnoyarskiy krai, 663302, Russian Federation; tatturchina@mail.ru*
²South European Forest Research Experimental Station that belongs to All-Russian Research Institute for Silviculture and Mechanization of Forestry, ul. Sosnovaya, 59v, stanitsa Veshenskaya, rayon Sholokhovsky, Rostov region, 346270, Russian Federation; olga_kowalewa@mail.ru

Keywords

steppe zone, hilly sands, Scots pine, Crimean pine, seedlings, depth of root collar, forest cultures, survival rate, plant safety

For citation

Turchina T.A., Bannikova O.A. Creation of Forest Cultures of Crimean Pine (Pinus pallasiana D. Don) on the Hilly Sands in the Steppe Zone of Russia. Lesnoy Zhurnal = Russian Forestry Journal, 2023, no. 4, pp. 76–92. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.37482/0536-1036-2023-4-76-92

References

1. Dospekhov B.A. Field Experience Methodology (with the Basics of Statistical Processing of Research Results): A Textbook for University Students on Agronomic Specialties. 6th edition. Moscow, AlyanS Publ., 2011. 350 p. (In Russ.).

2. Zyuz N.S. Pine Crops on the Sand Soils of the South-East. Moscow, Agropromizdat Publ., 1990. 155 p. (In Russ.).

3. Kravchenko V.I., Melnikov A.I. Update in the Development of Hilly Sands. Peredovoy opyt po tekhnologii i kompleksnoy mekhanizatsii lesorazvedeniya v Rostovskoy oblasti. Rostov-on-Don, 1974. pp. 51–63. (In Russ.).

4. Manaenkov A.S., Kostin M.V. Increase in Efficiency of Afforestation in the Southern Steppes of the Country. Lesohozyaystvennaya informatsiya = Forestry Information, 2017, no. 3, pp. 92–102. (In Russ.). http://dx.doi.org/10.24419/LHI.2304-3083.2017.3.08

5. Manaenkov A.S., Surkhaev I.G. Ecological and Meliorative Impact of Pine Crops on Grasslands of Tersko-Kumskoe Interfluve. Izvestiya Nizhnevolzhskogo agrouniversitetskogo kompleksa: nauka i vysshee professionalnoe obrazovanie, 2015, no. 1(37), pp. 42–46. (In Russ.).

6. Ministry of Natural Resources and Ecology of the Rostov Region. Online source. (In Russ.). Режим доступа: https://www.donland.ru/authority/8/ (дата обращения: 23.06.20). 

7. Pentelkina N.V., Pentelkina Yu.S. Stimulating Effect of Zircon on the Growth of Seedlings of Coniferous Introducers. Lesnoy vestnik = Forestry Bulletin, 2002, no. 2, pp. 24–29. (In Russ.).

8. Prokazin N.E., Lobanova E.N., Pentelkina N.V., Kazakov V.I., Ivanjusheva G.I., Sakhanov V.V., Chukarina A.V., Bagaev S.S. Biostimulator and Microfertilizer Impacts on Coniferous Seedlings Growth. Lesohozyaystvennaya informatsiya = Forestry Information, 2013, no. 2, pp. 9–15. (In Russ.).

9. Rodin S.A., Prokazin N.E., Kazakov V.I., Erusalimskiy V.I., Mironov O.V., Bagayev S.S., Krasnobayeva S.Yu., Cheplyanskiy I.Ya., Kharlov I.Yu. Recommendations on the Restoration by Artificial and Combined Methods of Coniferous and Hard-Leaved Young Stocks on the Lands of the Forest Fund (with Basic Technological Maps for the Performance of Work). Pushkino, VNIILM Publ., 2015. 80 p. (In Russ.).

10. Surkhaev I.G. Forest Reclamation of Sands of the Tersko-Kum Interfluve with Pine Crops: Cand. Agric. Sci. Diss. Abs. Volgograd, 2015. 22 p. (In Russ.).

11. Turchina T.A. Technological Aspects of the Effectiveness of Artificial Reforestation on the Sands of the Middle Don. Agroecology, Reclamation and Protective Afforestation: Proceedings of the International Scientific-Practical Conference, Volgograd, 18–20 October 2018. Volgograd, FSC of Agroecology of RAS Publ., 2018, pp. 204–208. (In Russ.).

12. Turchina T.A. Reforestation in the Sands of South-Eastern Russia: Modern Problems and Challenges. Lesohozyaystvennaya informatsiya = Forestry Information, 2019, no. 3, pp. 167–179. (In Russ.). http://dx.doi.org/10.24419/LHI.2304-3083.2019.3.14

13. Turchina T.A., Bannikova O.A. Survival of Crimean Pine Forest Cultures on Central Don Hilly Sands When Using Biologically Active Agents. Trudy of SPbNIILH, 2019, no. 2, pp. 40–58. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.21178/2079-6080.2019.2.40

14. Avanoğlu B., Ayan S., Demircioğlu N., Sivacioğlu A. Kastamonu-Taşköprü Orman Fidanlığı’nda Üretilen Yaşlı Anadolu Karaçamı (Pinus nigra Arnold. subsp. Pallasiana (Lamb.) Holmboe.) Fidanlarının Tse Normlarına Göre Değerlendirilmesi. Sigma Mühendislik ve Fen Bilimleri Dergisi, 2005, no. 2, pp. 73–83. (In Turkish).

15. Bessonova V., Grytsay Z. Content of Plastid Pigments in the Needles of Pinus pallasiana D. Don in Different Forest Growth Conditions of Anti-Erosion Planting. Ekologia, 2018, vol. 37, no. 4, pp. 338–344. https://doi.org/10.2478/eko-2018-0025

16. Çalişkan S., Boydak M. Afforestation of Arid and Semiarid Ecosystems in Turkey. Turkish Journal of Agriculture and Forestry, 2017, no. 41, pp. 317–330. https://doi.org/10.3906/tar-1702-39

17. Deligöz A., Bayar E., Genç M., Karatepe Y., Kırdar E., Cankara F.G. Seasonal and Needle Age-Related Variations in the Biochemical Characteristics of Pinus nigra Subsp. Pallasiana (Lamb.) Holmboe. Journal of Forest Science, 2018, vol. 64, no. 9, pp. 379–386. https://doi.org/10.17221/66/2018-JFS

18. Deligöz A., Cankara F.G. Differences in Physiological and Biochemical Responses to Summer Drought of Pinus nigra Subsp. Pallasiana and Pinus brutia in a Natural Mixed Stand. Journal of Forestry Research, 2020, vol. 31, no. 5, pp. 1479–1487. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11676-018-00876-8

19. Eken O., Oner N. An Assessment of the Important Morphological Properties of Anatolian Black Pine Seedlings in Semiarid Forest Nursery. Fresenius Environmental Bulletin, 2017, vol. 26, no. 6, pp. 4158–4162. Available at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/318393622 (accessed 23.06.20)

20. Korshikov I.I., Ducci F., Terliga N.S., Bychkov S.A., Gorlova E.M. Allozyme Variation of Pinus pallasiana D. Don in Natural Crimean Populations and in Plantations in Technogenously-Polluted Areas of the Ukraine Steppes. Annals of Forest Science, 2004, vol. 61, no. 5, pp. 389–396. https://doi.org/10.1051/forest:2004032

21. Öner N., Eren F. The Comparisons Between Root Collar Diameter and Height Growth of Black Pine (Pinus nigra Arnold.) and Scots Pine (Pinus sylvestris L.) Seedlings in Bolu Forest Nursery. Journal of Applied Biological Sciences, 2008, no. 2(1), pp. 7–12. Available at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/312173177 (accessed 23.06.20)

22. Varelides C., Brofas G., Varelides Y. Provenance Variation in Pinus nigra at Three Sites in Northern Greece. Annals of Forest Science, 2001, vol. 58, no. 8, pp. 893–900. https://doi.org/10.1051/forest:2001103