4.7 Article

Terrestrial laser scanning reveals differences in crown structure of Fagus sylvatica in mixed vs. pure European forests

期刊

FOREST ECOLOGY AND MANAGEMENT
卷 405, 期 -, 页码 381-390

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.foreco.2017.09.043

关键词

Crown volume; Crown expansion; Crown allometry; Morphological plasticity; Productivity gradient

类别

资金

  1. COST (European Cooperation in Science and Technology) Action FP1206 EuMIXFOR
  2. French National Research Agency through the Laboratory of Excellence ARBRE [ANR-12-LABXARBRE-01]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Competition with neighboring trees of different species can affect crown size and shape. However, whether intra-specific differences in crown characteristics in mixed stands compared to pure stands are dependent on site conditions remains poorly understood. We used terrestrial laser scanning (TLS) to examine the differences in Fagus sylvatica crown characteristics at four sites, each of which contained pure stands of F. sylvatica and their mixture with Pinus sylvestris. These sites covered the area where the mixture occurs in Europe from south to north, representing a gradient of F. sylvatica productivity, defined as the mean increment of annual volume growth in pure F. sylvatica stands. Despite the large range in productivity, F. sylvatica trees in mixtures had larger crowns regardless of site conditions, with a higher proportion of their crown volume in the lower canopy compared to trees in pure stands. Larger crown volumes were related to higher live crown ratios and greater crown expansion, depending on the site. The magnitude of the mixing effect was variable among the crown characteristics evaluated, but overall our findings provide evidence that for a given species combination and density, the effect of mixture increased in the two most productive sites. TLS-derived novel crown metrics revealed that the mixing effect was affected by productivity, which was not captured by traditionally measured crown variables.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据