Skip Navigation

Forestry 1995 68(1):11-24; doi:10.1093/forestry/68.1.11
© 1995 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 Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by BUSSOTTI, F.
Right arrow Articles by MECCI, A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Forest condition in Tuscany (Central Italy). Field surveys 1987–1991

F. BUSSOTTI1, E. CENNI2, M. FERRETTI2, A. COZZI2, L. BROGI3 and A. MECCI3

1Department of Plant Biology, University of Florence Piazzale delle Cascine 28, I-50144 Firenze, Italy
2 Linnaea Ambiente, Via G. Sirtori 37, 1-50137 Firenze, Italy
3Department of Agriculture and Forests Servizio 58, Regione Toscana, 1-50100 Firenze, Italy

Between 1987 and 1991 four surveys on the condition of forests in Tuscany (Central Italy) were carried out. The results, relating to 2275 trees in 111 sampling plots, show that the overall percentage of damaged trees (defined by the EC regulation 1696/87) increased between 1987–88 (51.4±5.4 per cent; 54.0±5.6 per cent) and 1990–91 (67.0±6.2 per cent; 64.0±6.1 per cent). The percentage of moderately and severely damaged trees also displayed an upward trend. The most severely affected species appeared to be Pinus pinea (a Mediterranean conifer, 96.7 per cent damaged trees) and Fagus sylvatica (a mountain broadleaf, 87.1 per cent damaged trees). Crown condition appeared to deteriorate with decreases in mean annual rainfall and where stand conditions are poor (thin soil, steep slopes). The findings suggest the possibility of an interaction between several different stress factors, some of which seem to be linked to local and stand conditions (exposure, silviculture, soil fertility), while others seem to be connected with long-term variations, such as changes in environmental parameters like precipitation. The actual role of background and/or local pollution can be neither demonstrated nor excluded on the basis of the present results.

Received 5 November 1993.
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.