Comparison of different forest regeneration methods after windthrow
The prosperity of various forest regeneration methods was evaluated on the prepared windthrow area established in 2010 in a previously allochthonous coniferous stand growing in mid-elevations of the Czech Republic. The forest regeneration variants were as follows: (1) "planting" of target...
| Main Authors: | , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences
2014-05-01
|
| Series: | Journal of Forest Science |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://jfs.agriculturejournals.cz/artkey/jfs-201405-0002_comparison-of-different-forest-regeneration-methods-after-windthrow.php |
| _version_ | 1797898774807314432 |
|---|---|
| author | A. Martiník L. Dobrovolný V. Hurt |
| author_facet | A. Martiník L. Dobrovolný V. Hurt |
| author_sort | A. Martiník |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | The prosperity of various forest regeneration methods was evaluated on the prepared windthrow area established in 2010 in a previously allochthonous coniferous stand growing in mid-elevations of the Czech Republic. The forest regeneration variants were as follows: (1) "planting" of target species (Picea abies [L.] Karst.) and Fagus sylvatica (L.), (2) "seeding" of pioneer (non target) species (Betula pendula Roth) and (3) spontaneous "succession". Two years after windthrow the "planting" was evaluated in accordance with the Czech forestry law as regeneration method with sufficient attributes, density (6,000-9,000 indd.ha-1) and regular spatial distribution of target tree species. The "seeding" and "succession" variants showed a insufficient attributes of target tree species - total density ca 3,000 indd.ha-1 (being ca 1,000 indd.ha-1 higher than 20 cm) and irregular distribution across the plot. The non-target species birch on the "seeding" variant showed a high density of plants (131,000 indd.ha-1) being eight times higher than the succession variant. The cost of the regeneration treatment was different between the variants - planting: 5,000-6,000 EUR.ha-1, 1,300 EUR.ha-1, succession: 1,000 EUR.ha-1. Comparing to "planting" the higher diversity of tree species and higher density of non-target species (20,000-134,000 EUR.ha-1) in the "seeding" and "succession" variants promise success for the future, however the real potential of regeneration methods that were used will be clear after long-term observations. |
| first_indexed | 2024-04-10T08:19:32Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-6e91f98841af498d954966055e13fc45 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 1212-4834 1805-935X |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-04-10T08:19:32Z |
| publishDate | 2014-05-01 |
| publisher | Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Journal of Forest Science |
| spelling | doaj.art-6e91f98841af498d954966055e13fc452023-02-23T03:42:32ZengCzech Academy of Agricultural SciencesJournal of Forest Science1212-48341805-935X2014-05-0160519019710.17221/66/2013-JFSjfs-201405-0002Comparison of different forest regeneration methods after windthrowA. Martiník0L. Dobrovolný1V. Hurt2Department of Silviculture, Faculty of Forestry and Wood Technology, Mendel University in Brno, Brno, Czech RepublicDepartment of Silviculture, Faculty of Forestry and Wood Technology, Mendel University in Brno, Brno, Czech RepublicDepartment of Silviculture, Faculty of Forestry and Wood Technology, Mendel University in Brno, Brno, Czech RepublicThe prosperity of various forest regeneration methods was evaluated on the prepared windthrow area established in 2010 in a previously allochthonous coniferous stand growing in mid-elevations of the Czech Republic. The forest regeneration variants were as follows: (1) "planting" of target species (Picea abies [L.] Karst.) and Fagus sylvatica (L.), (2) "seeding" of pioneer (non target) species (Betula pendula Roth) and (3) spontaneous "succession". Two years after windthrow the "planting" was evaluated in accordance with the Czech forestry law as regeneration method with sufficient attributes, density (6,000-9,000 indd.ha-1) and regular spatial distribution of target tree species. The "seeding" and "succession" variants showed a insufficient attributes of target tree species - total density ca 3,000 indd.ha-1 (being ca 1,000 indd.ha-1 higher than 20 cm) and irregular distribution across the plot. The non-target species birch on the "seeding" variant showed a high density of plants (131,000 indd.ha-1) being eight times higher than the succession variant. The cost of the regeneration treatment was different between the variants - planting: 5,000-6,000 EUR.ha-1, 1,300 EUR.ha-1, succession: 1,000 EUR.ha-1. Comparing to "planting" the higher diversity of tree species and higher density of non-target species (20,000-134,000 EUR.ha-1) in the "seeding" and "succession" variants promise success for the future, however the real potential of regeneration methods that were used will be clear after long-term observations.https://jfs.agriculturejournals.cz/artkey/jfs-201405-0002_comparison-of-different-forest-regeneration-methods-after-windthrow.phptarget tree speciespioneer tree speciesplantingseedingsuccession |
| spellingShingle | A. Martiník L. Dobrovolný V. Hurt Comparison of different forest regeneration methods after windthrow Journal of Forest Science target tree species pioneer tree species planting seeding succession |
| title | Comparison of different forest regeneration methods after windthrow |
| title_full | Comparison of different forest regeneration methods after windthrow |
| title_fullStr | Comparison of different forest regeneration methods after windthrow |
| title_full_unstemmed | Comparison of different forest regeneration methods after windthrow |
| title_short | Comparison of different forest regeneration methods after windthrow |
| title_sort | comparison of different forest regeneration methods after windthrow |
| topic | target tree species pioneer tree species planting seeding succession |
| url | https://jfs.agriculturejournals.cz/artkey/jfs-201405-0002_comparison-of-different-forest-regeneration-methods-after-windthrow.php |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT amartinik comparisonofdifferentforestregenerationmethodsafterwindthrow AT ldobrovolny comparisonofdifferentforestregenerationmethodsafterwindthrow AT vhurt comparisonofdifferentforestregenerationmethodsafterwindthrow |