Skip Navigation

Forestry 2003 76(2):149-158; doi:10.1093/forestry/76.2.149
© 2003 by Institute of Chartered Foresters
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (4)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Müller, K.H.
Right arrow Articles by Wagner, S.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Fine root dynamics in gaps of Norway spruce stands in the German Ore Mountains

K.H. Müller1 and S. Wagner1

1 Institute of Silviculture and Forest Protection, Dresden University of Technology, Pienner Str. 8, 01737 Tharandt, Germany

Horizontal distribution of fine root density and fine root biomass net production were studied in six gaps and adjacent stands of pure Norway spruce using soil cores and in-growth cores. A statistical based model that does not require identifying the specific tree to each fine root was used to predict fine root distribution. This method calibrates fine root biomass functions of single trees by comparing fine root distributions with tree distributions via a least squares fit analysis. The variation of fine root density increases from 100 per cent within the stand to 250 per cent in gaps. The greatest root expansion distances regarding single tree positions were found in 35-year-old stands and in larger gaps. In-growth cores and root change maps based on model predictions show corresponding net growth rates. Net growth rates of fine root biomass differ significantly with distance to the gap edge ({alpha}-value of 0.10) with maximum values occurring in a circular strip 2.2 m from the gap edge. Our findings indicate that gaps with an average diameter <15 m should probably not be artificially regenerated because of rapid, below-ground gap closure.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.