Advertisement

European Journal of Forest Research

, Volume 126, Issue 4, pp 495–506 | Cite as

Biomass production, foliar and root characteristics and nutrient accumulation in young silver birch (Betula pendula Roth.) stand growing on abandoned agricultural land

  • Veiko UriEmail author
  • Krista Lõhmus
  • Ivika Ostonen
  • Hardi Tullus
  • Renal Lastik
  • Merit Vildo
Original Paper

Abstract

The above-ground biomass and production, below-ground biomass, nutrient (NPK) accumulation, fine roots and foliar characteristics of a 8-year-old silver birch (Betula pendula) natural stand, growing on abandoned agricultural land in Estonia, were investigated. Total above-ground biomass and current annual production after eight growing seasons was 31.2 and 11.9 t DM ha−1, respectively. The production of stems accounted for 62.4% and below-ground biomass accounted for 19.2% of the total biomass of the stand. Carbon sequestration in tree biomass reaches roughly 17.5 t C ha−1 during the first 8 years. The biomass of the fine roots (d < 2 mm) was 1.7 ± 0.2 t DM ha−1 and 76.2% of it was located in the 20 cm topsoil layer. The leaf area index (LAI) of the birch stand was estimated as 3.7 m2 m−2 and specific leaf area (SLA) 15.0 ± 0.1 m2 kg−1. The impact of the crown layer on SLA was significant as the leaves are markedly thicker in the upper part of the crown compared with the lower part. The short-root specific area (SRA) in the 30 cm topsoil was 182.9 ± 9.5 m2 kg−1, specific root length (SRL), root tissue density (RTD) and the number of short-root tips (>95% ectomycorrhizal) per dry mass unit of short roots were 145.3 ± 8.6 m g−1, 58.6 ± 3.0 kg m−3 and 103.7 ± 5.5 tips mg−1, respectively. In August the amount of nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium, accumulated in above ground biomass, was 192.6, 25.0 and 56.6 kg ha−1, respectively. The annual flux of N and P retranslocation from the leaves to the other tree parts was 57.2 and 3.7 kg ha−1 yr−1 (55 and 27%), respectively, of which 29.1 kg ha−1 N and 2.8 kg ha−1 P were accumulated in the above-ground part of the stand.

Keywords

Betula pendula Biomass production Below-ground biomass Foliar characteristics NPK use NP retranslocation 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This study was supported by the Estonian Science Foundation grant No 5748 and 6472. We thank Mrs. Ester Jaigma for revising the English text.

References

  1. Bormann BT, Gordon JC (1984) Stand density effects in young red alder plantations: productivity, photosynthate partitioning and nitrogen fixation. Ecology 2:394–402CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Broadmeadow M, Matthews R (2003) Forests, carbon and climate change: the UK contribution. Forestry Comm Inf Note 48:1–12Google Scholar
  3. Daugaviete M, Krūmiņa M, Kâposts V, Lazdiņš A (2003) Farmland afforestation: the plantations of birch Betula pendula Roth. on different soils. Balt Forestry 9(1):2–8Google Scholar
  4. Eissenstat DM, Yanai RD (1997) The ecology of root life span. Adv Ecol Res 27:1–62CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Elowson S (1996) Birch—a high-producing species? In: Perttu K, Koppel A (eds) Short rotation willow coppice for renewable energy and improved environment. Uppsala, pp 107–112Google Scholar
  6. Ferm A (1993) Birch production and utilization for energy. Biomass Bioenergy 4(6):391–404CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Ferm A, Hytönen J, Lilja S, Jylhä P (1994) Effects of weed control on the early growth of Betula pendula established on an agricultural field. Scand J For Res 9:347–359Google Scholar
  8. Ferm A, Markkola A (1985) Nutritional variation of leaves, twigs and buds in Betula pubescens stands during the growing season. Folia Forestalia 613:28 (in Finnish, abstract in English)Google Scholar
  9. Hytönen J, Saarsalmi A, Rossi P (1995) Biomass production and nutrient consumption of short-rotation plantations. Silva Fenn 29(2):117–139Google Scholar
  10. Ingestad T (1971) A definition of optimum nutrient requirements in birch seedlings. Physiol Plantarium 24:118–125CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Ingestad T (1987) New concepts on soil fertility and plant nutrition as illustrated by research on forest trees and stands. Geoderma 40:237–252CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. ISO/CD 15681 Water quality—determination of phosphate and total phosphorus by flow analysis (CFA and FIA)Google Scholar
  13. Johansson T (1999) Biomass equations for determining fractions of pendula and pubecsens birches growing on abandoned farmland and some practical implications. Biomass Bioenergy 16:223–238CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Jõgiste K, Vares A, Sendros M (2003) Restoration of abandoned agricultural fields: ecological and economical considerations of forest regeneration. Forestry 76(2):209–219CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Karlsson A (2002) Site preparation of abandoned fields and early establishment of planted small-sized seedlings of silver birch. New For 23:159–175Google Scholar
  16. Karlsson A, Albrektson A, Forsgren A, Svensson L (1998) An analysis of successful natural generation of downy and silver birch on abandoned farmland in Sweden. Silva Fenn 32(3):229–240Google Scholar
  17. Killingbeck KT (1996) Nutrients in senesced leaves: keys to the search for potential resorption and resorption proficiency. Ecology 77:1716–1727CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Köstler JN, Brückner E, Bibelriether H (1968) Die Wurzeln der Waldbäume. Paul Parey Publishers, Hamburg-Berlin (In German)Google Scholar
  19. Külla T, Lõhmus K (1999) Influence of cultivation method on root grafting in Norway spruce (Picea abies (L.) Karst). Plant Soil 217:91–100CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Lambers H, Chopin S, Pons TL (1998) Plant physiological ecology. Springer, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  21. Leuschner C, Hertel D, Schmid I, Koch O, Muhs A, Hölscher D (2004) Stand fine root biomass and fine root morphology in old-growth beech forests as a function of precipitation and soil fertility. Plant Soil 258:43–56CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Lõhmus K, Lasn R, Oja T (1991) The influence of climatic and soil physical conditions on growth and morphology of Norway spruce roots. In: McMichael BL, Persson H (eds) Plant roots and their environment. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 233–239Google Scholar
  23. Lõhmus K, Mander Ü, Tullus H, Keedus K (1996) Productivity, buffering capacity and resources of grey alder forests in Estonia. In: Perttu K, Koppel A (eds) Short rotation willow coppice for renewable energy and improved environment. Uppsala, pp 95–105Google Scholar
  24. Lõhmus K, Truu M, Truu J, Ostonen I, Vares A, Uri V, Alama S, Kanal A (2006) Functional diversity of culturable bacterial communities in the rhizosphere in relation to fine-root and soil parameters in alder stands on forest, abandoned agricultural, and oil-shale mining areas. Plant Soil 283(1–2):1–10CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Mander Ü, Palang H (1994) Changes of landscape structure in Estonia during the Soviet period. Geo J 33(1):45–64Google Scholar
  26. Mander Ü, Jongman RHG (2000) Consequences of land usechanges. Advances in ecological sciences, vol 5. Wessex Institute of Technology Press, Southampton, BostonGoogle Scholar
  27. Niemisto P (1995) Influence of initial spacing and row-to-row distance on the crown and branch properties and taper of silver birch (Betula pendula). Scand J For Res 10(3):235–244CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Ostonen I, Lõhmus K, Lasn R (1999) The role of soil conditions in fine root ecomorphology in Norway spruce (Picea abies (L.) Karst.). Plant Soil 208:283–292CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Ostonen I, Lõhmus K, Pajuste K (2005) Fine root biomass, production and its proportion of NPP in a fertile middle-aged Norway spruce stand: comparison of soil core and ingrowth core methods. For Ecol Manage 212:264–277CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Perala DA (1990) Regeneration silviculture of birch: a review. For Ecol Manage 32:39–77CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Poorter H, Villar R (1997) The fate of acquired carbon in plants: chemical composition and construction costs. In: Bazzaz FA, Grace J (eds) Plant resource allocation. Academic, New Yark, pp 39–72Google Scholar
  32. Raulo J (1977) Development of dominant trees in Betula pendula Roth. and Betula pubescens Ehrh. Plantations. Comm Inst For Fenn 90(4):1–15Google Scholar
  33. Ruzicka J, Hansen EH (1981) Flow injection analysis. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  34. Saarsalmi A, Palmgren K, Levula T (1992) Biomass production and nutrient consumption Alnus incana and Betula pendula in energy forestry. Folia Forestalia 797:1–29 (in Finnish, summary in English)Google Scholar
  35. Saramäki J, Hytönen J (2004) Nutritional status and development of mixed plantations of silver birch (Betula pendula Roth.) and downy birch (Betula pubescens Ehrh.) on former agricultural soil. Balt For 10(1):2–12Google Scholar
  36. Saveljeva LS (1969) Grafting of tree root systems. Lesnaja Promyslennostj Publisher, USSR (In Russian)Google Scholar
  37. Sutton RF, Tinus RW (1983) Root and root system terminology. For Sci Monogr 24:1–137Google Scholar
  38. Telenius BF (1999) Stand growth of deciduous pioneer tree species on fertile agricultural land in southern Sweden. Biomass Bioenergy 16:13–23CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Tullus H, Mander Ü, Lõhmus K, Keedus K, Uri V (1996) Sustainable Forests Management in Estonia. In: Blinn RC, Thomoson AM (eds) Planning and implementing forest operations to achieve sustainable forests, pp 99–101Google Scholar
  40. Uri V, Tullus H, Lõhmus K (2002) Biomass production and nutrient accumulation in short-rotation grey alder (Alnus incana (L.) Moench) plantation on abandoned agricultural land. For Ecol Manage 161(1–3):169–179CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Vares A, Uri V, Tullus H (2003) Height growth of four fast-growing deciduous tree species on abandoned agricultural lands in Estonia. Balt For 9(1):2–8Google Scholar
  42. Vesterdal L, Ritter E, Gundersen P (2002) Change in soil organic carbon following afforestation of former arable land. For Ecol Manage 169(1–2):137–147CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Vogt K, Persson H (1991) Measuring growth and development of roots. In: Hincley T, Lassoie JP (eds) Techniques and approaches in forest tree ecophysiology. CRC-Press, Boca Raton, FL, pp 477–501Google Scholar
  44. Whittaker RH, Woodwell GM (1968) Dimension and production relations of trees and shrubs in the Brookhaven Forests. Ecology 56(1):1–25CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Yearbook Forest 2005 (2006) Ministry of Environment of Estonia, Tartu (In Estonian and in English)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Veiko Uri
    • 1
    Email author
  • Krista Lõhmus
    • 2
  • Ivika Ostonen
    • 2
  • Hardi Tullus
    • 1
  • Renal Lastik
    • 1
  • Merit Vildo
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of SilvicultureEstonian University of Life Sciences, Institute of Forestry and Rural EngineeringTartuEstonia
  2. 2.Institute of Geography, University of TartuTartuEstonia

Personalised recommendations