European Journal of Forest Research

, Volume 134, Issue 2, pp 247–259 | Cite as

Manipulating seed availability, plant competition and litter accumulation by soil preparation and canopy opening to ensure regeneration success in temperate low-mountain forest stands

Original Paper
First Online:
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:

Abstract

This study aimed at evaluating alternative methods to ensure regeneration success in temperate low-mountain forest stands by (1) estimating the effects of seed availability, competition from the adult stand and from neighbouring vegetation and interaction with the litter layer on seedling density, and by (2) comparing the effects of various silvicultural methods on regeneration success. The experiment was conducted in a monospecific beech (Fagus sylvatica) stand and a mixed silver fir-beech (Abies alba, Fagus sylvatica) stand with contrasted vegetation communities, in north-east France. Different methods of soil preparation, i.e. chemical (herbicide), mechanical (surface hoeing and deep scarification using light-weight machines) and biological (cover crops after surface hoeing) methods, were applied along a canopy opening gradient. After soil preparation (in 2009), vegetation colonisation and tree seedling density were monitored once a year from 2010 to 2013. Results were similar for the two sites. Seedling density the first year indicated a predominant effect of seed availability and soil scarification over potential competitive effects of adult stand and neighbouring vegetation. Despite continuous vegetation colonisation after soil preparation, seedling density remained stable over the 4 years of the experiment. For each of the 4 years, seedling density increased with canopy cover. Seedling density was higher after mechanical soil preparation than after herbicide application. Cover crops (following surface hoeing) appeared as the best method, ensuring both the lowest vegetation colonisation and the highest seedling density.

Keywords

Competition Seed rain Vegetation control Light Tree seedling Scarification 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Notes

Acknowledgments

The authors thank Léon Wehrlen for stimulating discussions, Erwin Thirion and Florian Vast for running the experiment and establishing the database, Vanessa Vilard for data preprocessing, and Xavier Auzuret and Fabien Duez for field work and data collection. This research was funded by the Ministère de l’Agriculture, de l’Agroalimentaire et de la Forêt (MAAF) through the programs E 30/07 and E 16/2011 and by the Office National des Forêts (ONF) through the programs “Maîtrise de la végétation forestière concurrente 2007–2010, and 2011–2014”. The UMR 1092 LERFoB is supported by the French National Research Agency (ANR) through the Laboratory of Excellence ARBRE (ANR-12-LABXARBRE-01).

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Adam B, Benoït JC, Balandier P, Marquier A, Sinoquet H (2006) PiafPhotem—software to threshold hemispherical photographs. UMR PIAF INRA-UBP, Alliance vision, Clermont-ferrandGoogle Scholar
  2. Amm A, Pichot C, Dreyfus P, Davi H, Fady B (2012) Improving the estimation of landscape scale seed dispersal by integrating seedling recruitment. Ann For Sci 69:845–856. doi: 10.1007/s13595-012-0208-1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Ammer C, Balandier P, Bentsen NS, Coll L, Lof M (2011) Forest vegetation management under debate: an introduction. Eur J For Res 130:1–5. doi: 10.1007/s10342-010-0452-6 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Ampoorter E, De Schrijver A, De Frenne P, Hermy M, Verheyen K (2011) Experimental assessment of ecological restoration options for compacted forest soils. Ecol Eng 37:1734–1746. doi: 10.1016/j.ecoleng.2011.07.007 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Balandier P, Collet C, Miller JH, Reynolds PE, Zedaker SM (2006) Designing forest vegetation management strategies based on the mechanisms and dynamics of crop tree competition by neighbouring vegetation. Forestry 79:3–27. doi: 10.1093/forestry/cpi056 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Balandier P, Frochot H, Sourisseau A (2009) Improvement of direct tree seeding with cover crops in afforestation: microclimate and resource availability induced by vegetation composition. For Ecol Manage 257:1716–1724. doi: 10.1016/j.foreco.2009.01.032 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Boyes LJ, Gunton RM, Griffiths ME, Lawes MJ (2011) Causes of arrested succession in coastal dune forest. Plant Ecol 212:21–32. doi: 10.1007/s11258-010-9798-6 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Brunner A (1999) Hemispherical photography and image analysis with hemlMAQE and Adobe® Photoshop® Google Scholar
  9. Clark JS et al (1999) Interpreting recruitment limitation in forests. Am J Bot 86:1–16. doi: 10.2307/2656950 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Comas C, Mateu J (2007) Modelling forest dynamics: a perspective from point process methods. Biom J 49:176–196. doi: 10.1002/bimj.200510268 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. de Chantal M, Leinonen K, Ilvesniemi H, Westman CJ (2003) Combined effects of site preparation, soil properties, and sowing date on the establishment of Pinus sylvestris and Picea abies from seeds. Can J For Res 33:931–945. doi: 10.1139/x03-011 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Dodet M, Collet C, Frochot H, Wehrlen L (2011) Tree regeneration and plant species diversity responses to vegetation control following a major windthrow in mixed broadleaved stands. Eur J For Res 130:41–53. doi: 10.1007/s10342-010-0406-z CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Evans G, Coombe D (1959) Hemispherical and woodland canopy photography and the light climate. J Ecol 47:103–113CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Gaudio N, Balandier P, Marquier A (2008) Light-dependent development of two competitive species (Rubus idaeus, Cytisus scoparius) colonizing gaps in temperate forest. Ann For Sci 65. doi: 10.1051/forest:2007076
  15. Gaudio N, Balandier P, Philippe G, Dumas Y, Jean F, Ginisty C (2011) Light-mediated influence of three understorey species (Calluna vulgaris, Pteridium aquilinum, Molinia caerulea) on the growth of Pinus sylvestris seedlings. Eur J For Res 130:77–89. doi: 10.1007/s10342-010-0403-2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Gégout JC, Rameau JC, Renaux B, Jabiol B, Bar M, Marage D (2008) Les habitats forestiers de la France tempérée—typologie et caractérisation phytoécologique. AgroParisTech-ENGREF, Nancy. 720 ppGoogle Scholar
  17. Granhus A, Hanssen KH, de Chantal M (2008) Emergence and seasonal mortality of naturally regenerated Picea abies seedlings: impact of overstory density and two site preparation methods. New For 35:75–87. doi: 10.1007/s11056-007-9061-8 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Harvey B, Brais S (2002) Effects of mechanized careful logging on natural regeneration and vegetation competition in the southeastern Canadian boreal forest. Can J For Res 32:653–666. doi: 10.1139/x02-006 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Holub SM, Terry TA, Harrington CA, Harrison RB, Meade R (2013) Tree growth ten years after residual biomass removal, soil compaction, tillage, and competing vegetation control in a highly-productive Douglas-fir plantation. For Ecol Manage 305:60–66. doi: 10.1016/j.foreco.2013.05.031 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Klein EK, Bontemps A, Oddou-Muratorio S (2013) Seed dispersal kernels estimated from genotypes of established seedlings: does density-dependent mortality matter? Methods Ecol Evol 4:1059–1069. doi: 10.1111/2041-210x.12110 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Löf M, Welander NT (2004) Influence of herbaceous competitors on early growth in direct seeded Fagus sylvatica L. and Quercus robur L. Ann For Sci 61:781–788. doi: 10.1051/forest:2004075 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Löf M, Dey DC, Navarro RM, Jacobs DF (2012) Mechanical site preparation for forest restoration. New For 43:825–848. doi: 10.1007/s11056-012-9332-x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Manso R, Pardos M, Keyes CR, Calama R (2012) Modelling the spatio-temporal pattern of primary dispersal in stone pine (Pinus pinea L.) stands in the Northern Plateau (Spain). Ecol Model 226:11–21. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2011.11.028 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. McCarthy N, Bentsen NS, Willoughby I, Balandier P (2011) The state of forest vegetation management in Europe in the 21st century. Eur J For Res 130:7–16. doi: 10.1007/s10342-010-0429-5 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Messier C, Doucet R, Ruel JC, Claveau Y, Kelly C, Lechowicz MJ (1999) Functional ecology of advance regeneration in relation to light in boreal forests. Can J For Res 29:812–823. doi: 10.1139/cjfr-29-6-812 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Örlander G, Gemmel P, Hunt J (1990) Site preparation: a Swedish overview. In: FRDA report, vol 105. BC Ministry of Forests, Victoria, Canada, p vi + 62 ppGoogle Scholar
  27. Picard N, Bar-Hen A, Mortier F, Chadoeuf J (2009) Understanding the dynamics of an undisturbed tropical rain forest from the spatial pattern of trees. J Ecol 97:97–108. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2745.2008.01445.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. R Development Core Team (2011) R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, AustriaGoogle Scholar
  29. Reinecke H (2000) Begleitwachsregulierung. Reinecke Forstservice, GöttingenGoogle Scholar
  30. Sefidi K, Mohadjer MRM, Mosandl R, Copenheaver CA (2011) Canopy gaps and regeneration in old-growth Oriental beech (Fagus orientalis Lipsky) stands, northern Iran. For Ecol Manage 262:1094–1099. doi: 10.1016/j.foreco.2011.06.008 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Solarik KA, Lieffers VJ, Volney WJA, Pelletier R, Spence JR (2010) Seed tree density, variable retention, and stand composition influence recruitment of white spruce in boreal mixedwood forests. Can J For Res 40:1821–1832. doi: 10.1139/x10-125 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Thiffault N, Jobidon R (2006) How to shift unproductive Kalmia angustifolia—Rhododendron groenlandicum heath to productive conifer plantation. Can J For Res 36:2364–2376. doi: 10.1139/x06-090 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Thiffault N, Roy V (2011) Living without herbicides in Quebec (Canada): historical context, current strategy, research and challenges in forest vegetation management. Eur J For Res 130:117–133. doi: 10.1007/s10342-010-0373-4 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. van Couwenberghe R, Collet C, Lacombe E, Pierrat JC, Gegout JC (2010) Gap partitioning among temperate tree species across a regional soil gradient in windstorm-disturbed forests. For Ecol Manage 260:146–154. doi: 10.1016/j.foreco.2010.04.013 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. van Couwenberghe R, Collet C, Lacombe E, Gegout JC (2011) Abundance response of western European forest species along canopy openness and soil pH gradients. For Ecol Manage 262:1483–1490. doi: 10.1016/j.foreco.2011.06.049 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Wagner RG, Little KM, Richardson B, McNabb K (2006) The role of vegetation management for enhancing productivity of the world’s forests. Forestry 79:57–79. doi: 10.1093/forestry/cpi057 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Wagner S, Fischer H, Huth F (2011) Canopy effects on vegetation caused by harvesting and regeneration treatments. Eur J For Res 130:17–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Wang BC, Smith TB (2002) Closing the seed dispersal loop. Trends Ecol Evol 17:379–385. doi: 10.1016/s0169-5347(02)02541-7 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Willoughby I, Balandier P, Bentsen NS, Mc Carthy N, Claridge J (2009) Forest vegetation management in Europe: current practice and future requirements. COST Office, Brussels, COST Action E47, 157 ppGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.INRAUMR 1092 LERFoBChampenouxFrance
  2. 2.AgroParisTechUMR 1092 LERFoBNancyFrance
  3. 3.EcoSustain, Environmental Engineering Office, Research and DevelopmentKanfenFrance

Personalised recommendations