Advertisement

European Journal of Forest Research

, Volume 137, Issue 5, pp 643–657 | Cite as

Carbon and nitrogen dynamics along the log bark decomposition continuum in a mesic old-growth boreal forest

  • Ivan Romashkin
  • Ekaterina Shorohova
  • Ekaterina Kapitsa
  • Natalia Galibina
  • Ksenia Nikerova
Original Paper
  • 47 Downloads

Abstract

Narrowing the uncertainties in carbon (C) and nitrogen (N) dynamics during decomposition of coarse woody debris (CWD) can significantly improve our understanding of forest ecosystem functioning. We examined C, N and pH dynamics in the least studied CWD component—tree bark in a 66-year-long decomposition chronosequence. The relative C concentration decreased by ca. 32% in pine bark, increased by ca. 18% in birch bark and remained stable in spruce and aspen bark. Nitrogen increased in bark of all tree species. In conifer bark, it increased along with epixylic succession. Over 45 years, the relative C/N ratio in bark decreased by 63 and 45% for coniferous and deciduous species, respectively. Bark pH did not change. Due to bark fragmentation, the total C and N amounts in bark of individual logs of aspen, birch, pine and spruce decreased at average rates of 0.03, 0.02, 0.26 and 0.05 year−1, and 0.02, 0.02, 0.03 and 0.03 year−1, respectively. At the forest stand level, the total amounts of C and N in log bark were 853 and 21 kg ha−1 or 11.2 and 45.5% of the C and N amounts stored in downed logs and ca. 2.3–3.8 and 2.2–2.4%, respectively, of total C and N amounts stored in forest litter. In boreal forests, decomposing log bark may act as a long-term source of N for wood-inhabiting communities.

Keywords

Deadwood pH Coarse woody debris Decomposition Decay Nutrients 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The research was supported by the Russian Science Foundation (15-14-10023). We cordially thank the staff of Strict Nature Reserve “Kivach” for organizing the fieldwork on the territory. Anna Ruokolainen, Anastasia Mamay, Igor Kazartsev, Aleksey Polevoi and Nikita Baklazhenko helped with the sample plot and log selection and sampling. Helena Kushnevskaya provided the data on epixylic vegetation. Ilkka Vanha-Majamaa and two reviewers gave valuable comments on the manuscript. Carla Burton revised the language.

References

  1. Andersson LI, Hytteborn H (1991) Bryophytes and decaying wood: a comparison between managed and natural forest. Holarct Ecol 14(2):121–130Google Scholar
  2. Barkman JJ (1958) Phytosociology and ecology of cryptogamic epiphytes. Van Gorcum, Assen, p 628Google Scholar
  3. Basilier K, Granhall U, Stenstrom TA (1978) Nitrogen fixation in wet minerotrophic moss communities of a subarctic mire. Oikos 31:236–246CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Berg B (1988) Dynamics of nitrogen (15N) in decomposing Scots pine needle litter. Long term decomposition in a Scots pine forest. VI. Can J Bot 66:1539–1546CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Berg B, McClaugherty C (2003) Plant litter: decomposition, humus formation, carbon sequestration. Springer, BerlinCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bert D, Danjon F (2006) Carbon concentration variations in the roots, stem and crown of mature Pinus pinaster (Ait.). For Ecol Manag 222:279–295CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Boddy L, Watkinson SC (1995) Wood decomposition, higher fungi, and their role in nutrient redistribution. Can J Bot 73(S1):1377–1383CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Busse MD (1994) Downed bole-wood decomposition in lodgepole pine forests of central Oregon. Soil Sci Soc Am J 58:221–227CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Chen H, Harmon ME, Griffiths RP (2001) Decomposition and nitrogen release from decomposing woody roots in coniferous forests of the Pacific Northwest: a chronosequence approach. Can J For Res 31:246–260CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Crawford RL (1981) Lignin biodegradation and transformation. Wiley, New York, p 170Google Scholar
  11. Deineko IP, Faustova NM (2015) Element and group chemical composition of aspen bark and wood. Khimiya rastitel`nogo syir`ya 1: 51–62 (in Russian) Google Scholar
  12. Deineko IP, Deineko IV, Belov LP (2007) Investigation of the chemical composition of pine bark. Khimiya rastitel`nogo syir`ya 1: 19–24 (In Russian) Google Scholar
  13. Dossa GGO, Paudel ECK, Schaefer D, Harrison RD (2017) Factors controlling bark decomposition and its role in wood decomposition in five tropical tree species. Sci Rep 6 Article number: 34153Google Scholar
  14. Downs MR, Mtchener RH, Fry B, Nadelhoffer KJ (1999) Routine measurement of dissolved inorganic 15N in streamwater. Environ Monit Assess 55:211–220CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Dynesius M, Jonsson BG (1991) Dating uprooted trees: comparison and application of eight methods in a boreal forest. Can J For Res 21:655–665CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Ellis BE (1973) Catabolic ring-cleavage of tyrosine in plant cell cultures. Planta 111(2):113–118CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Faustova NM (2002) Chemical composition of bark and wood of aspen Populus tremula L.. Dissertation. St. Petersburg Press, pp 208 (in Russian) Google Scholar
  18. Fedorchuk VN, Neshataev VYu, Kuznetsova ML (2005) Forest ecosystems of the north-western regions of Russia: typology, dynamics, management features. St. Petersburg Press, p 382 (in Russian) Google Scholar
  19. Fedorets NG (2006) Soil diversity and biodiversity in the middle-taiga ecosystem. Karelian Research Centre RAS Press, pp 287 (in Russian) Google Scholar
  20. Fedorets NG, Bahmet ON (2003) Ecological settings of carbohydrate and nitrogen transformations in forest soils. Petrozavodsk. Karelian Research Centre RAS Press, pp 240 (in Russian) Google Scholar
  21. Fedorets NG, Morozova RM, Bakhmet AN, Solodovnikov AN (2006) The soils and soil cover of the Kivach Strict Nature Reserve. Proc Karelian Centre Sci Russ Acad Sci 10:3–34 (in Russian) Google Scholar
  22. Fly SC (1988) Growing plant cell wall: chemical and metabolic analysis. Longman, LondonGoogle Scholar
  23. Foster JR, Lang GE (1982) Decomposition of red spruce and balsam fir boles in the White Mountains of New Hampshire. Can J For Res 12(3):617–626CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Galloway JN, Dentener FJ, Capone DG, Boyer EW, Howarth RW, Seitzinger SP (2004) Nitrogen cycles: past, present, and future. Biogeochemistry 70(2):153–221CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Ganjegunte GK, Condron LM, Clinton PW, Davis MR, Mahieu N (2004) Decomposition and nutrient release from radiata pine (Pinus radiata) coarse woody debris. For Ecol Manag 187:197–211CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Gorshkova TA (2007) Plant cell wall as a dynamic system. Moscow Publ., Nauka, Moscow (in Russian) Google Scholar
  27. Granhall U, Hofsten AV (1976) Nitrogenase activity in relation to intracellular organisms in Sphagnum mosses. Physiol Plant 36:88–94CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Grodzińska K (1982) Monitoring of air pollutants by mosses and tree bark. In: Steubing L, Jager HJ (eds) Monitoring of air pollutants by plants. Dr. W. Junk Publishers, The Hague, pp 33–42Google Scholar
  29. Gundale MJ, Gustafsson H, Nilsson MC (2009) The sensitivity of nitrogen fixation by a feathermoss–cyanobacteria association to litter and moisture variability in young and old boreal forest. Can J For Res 39:2542–2549CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Gustafsson L, Eriksson I (1995) Factors of importance for the epiphytic vegetation of aspen Populus tremula with special emphasis on bark chemistry and soil chemistry. J Appl Ecol 32:412–424CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Hafner SD, Groffman PM (2005) Soil nitrogen cycling under litter and coarse woody debris in a mixed forest in New York State. Soil Biol Biochem 37(11):2159–2162CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Hammel KE (1997) Fungal degradation of lignin. In: Cadisch G, Giller KE (eds) Plant litter quality and decomposition. CAB-International, Wallingford, pp 33–46Google Scholar
  33. Harkin JM, Rowe JW (1971) Bark and its possible uses. USDA Forest Service Research Note, FPL 091. USDA, Forest Service, Forest Products Laboratory, Madison, pp 56Google Scholar
  34. Harmon ME, Franklin JF, Swanson FJ, Sollins P, Gregory SV, Lattin JD, Anderson NH, Cline SP, Aumen NG, Sedell JR, Lienkaemper GW, Cromack K Jr, Cummins KW (1986) Ecology of coarse woody debris in temperate ecosystems. Adv Ecol Res 15:133–302CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Harmon ME, Sexton J, Caldwell BA, Carpenter SE (1994) Fungal sporocarp mediated losses of Ca, Fe, K, Mg, Mn, N, P, and Zn from conifer logs in the early stages of decomposition. Can J For Res 24:1883–1893CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Harmon ME, Fasth B, Woodall C, Sexton J (2013) Carbon concentration of standing and downed woody detritus: effects of tree taxa, decay class, position, and tissue type. For Ecol Manag 291:259–267CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Hauck M (2011) Site factors controlling epiphytic lichen abundance in northern coniferous forests. Flora 206:81–90CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Hendrickson OQ (1991) Abundance and activity of N2 fixing bacteria in decaying wood. Can J For Res 21:1299–1304CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Herrmann S, Prescott CE (2008) Mass loss and nutrient dynamics of coarse woody debris in three Rocky Mountain coniferous forests: 21 year results. Can J For Res 38:125–132CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Hicks WT, Harmon ME, Myrold DD (2003) Substrate controls on nitrogen fixation and respiration in woody debris from the Pacific Northwest, USA. For Ecol Manag 176:25–35CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Higuchi T (1985) Biosynthesis of lignin. In: Higuchi T (ed) Biosynthesis and biodegradation of wood components. Academic Press, Tokyo, pp 141–160CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Hölttä T, Kurppa M, Nikinmaa E (2013) Scaling of xylem and phloem transport capacity and resource usage with tree size. Front Plant Sci 4:496CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  43. Irzhigitova DM, Korchikov ES (2011) Some chemical characteristics of tree bark as a substrate for lichen`s developing (in Krasnosamarsky forest as an example). Vestnik SanSU 5(86):144–152 (in Russian) Google Scholar
  44. Jansová I, Soldán Z (2006) The habitat factors that affect the composition of bryophyte and lichen communities on fallen logs. Preslia 78:67–86Google Scholar
  45. Jia-bing W, De-xin G, Shi-jie H, Mi Z, Chang-jie J (2005) Ecological functions of coarse woody debris in forest ecosystem. J For Res 16(3):247–252CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Johnson CE, Siccama TG, Denny EG, Koppers MM, Vogt DJ (2014) In situ decomposition of northern hardwood tree boles: decay rates and nutrient dynamics in wood and bark. Can J For Res 44(12):1515–1524CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Kaye JP, Hart SC (1997) Competition for nitrogen between plants and soil microorganisms. Trends Ecol Evol 12:139–143CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. Kazartsev I, Shorohova E, Kapitsa E, Kushnevskaya E (2018) Decaying Picea abies log bark hosts diverse fungal communities. Fungal Ecol 33:1–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Kazimirov NI, Morozova RM (1973) Biological cycle of nutrients in spruce forests of Karelia. Leningrad Press, Nauka, Moscow (in Russian) Google Scholar
  50. Kazimirov NI, Volkov AD, Zyabchenko SS, Ivanchenko AL (1977) Nutrients and energy exchange in pine forests of European North. Leningrad Press, Moscow (in Russian) Google Scholar
  51. Kazimirov NI, Morozova RM, Kulikova VN (1978) Organic matter and nutrient flows in birch forest of middle taiga forest zone. Leningrad Press, Nauka, Moscow (in Russian) Google Scholar
  52. Klavina D, Pennanen T, Gaitnieks T, Velmala S, Lazdins A, Lazdina D, Menkis A (2016) The ectomycorrhizal community of conifer stands on peat soils 12 years after fertilisation with wood ash. Mycorrhiza 26(2):153–160CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  53. Korbukova IV (1996) Features of the chemical composition of inner and outer bark of Pinus sylvestris L. Dissertation. St. Petersburg Press (in Russian)Google Scholar
  54. Krankina ON, Harmon ME (1995) Dynamics of the dead wood carbon pool in Northwestern Russian boreal forests. Water Air Soil Pollut 82:227–238CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Krankina ON, Harmon ME, Griazkin AV (1999) Nutrient stores and dynamics of woody detritus in a boreal forest: modeling potential implications at the stand level. Can J For Res 29:20–32CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Kravchenko IK, Doroshenko EV (2003) Nitrogen-fixing activity in peat soils from a raised bog. Microbiology 72:111–116PubMedGoogle Scholar
  57. Kushnevskaya H, Shorohova E (2018) Presence of bark influences the succession of cryptogamic wood-inhabiting communities on conifer fallen logs. Folia Geobot 53:175–190CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Kushnevskaya H, Mirin D, Shorohova E (2007) Patterns of epixylic vegetation on spruce logs in late successional boreal forests. For Ecol Manag 250(1–2):25–33CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Laiho R, Prescott CE (1999) The contribution of coarse woody debris to carbon, nitrogen and phosphorus cycles in three Rocky Mountain coniferous forests. Can J For Res 29:1592–1603CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Laiho R, Prescott CE (2004) Decay and nutrient dynamics of coarse woody debris in northern coniferous forests: a synthesis. Can J For Res 34:763–777CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Lamlom SH, Savidge RA (2003) A reassessment of carbon content in wood: Variation within and between 41 North American species. Biomass Bioenergy 25:381–388CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. LeBauer DS, Tresender KK (2008) Nitrogen limitation of net primary productivity in terrestrial ecosystems is globally distributed. Ecology 89:371–379CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  63. Leppänen SM, Salemaa M, Smolander A, Mäkipää R, Tiirola M (2013) Nitrogen fixation and methanotrophy in forest mosses along a N deposition gradient. Environ Exp Bot 90:62–69CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Liski J, Perruchoud D, Karjalainen T (2002) Increasing carbon stocks in the forest soils of Western Europe. For Ecol Manag 169:159–175CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Lombardi F, Cherubini P, Tognetti R, Cocozza C, Lasserre B, Marchetti M (2013) Investigating biochemical processes to assess deadwood decay of beech and silver fir in Mediterranean mountain forests. Ann For Sci 70:101–111CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Lu M, Zhou XH, Luo YQ, Yang YH, Fang CM (2011) Minor stimulation of soil carbon storage by nitrogen addition: a meta-analysis. Agric Ecosyst Environ 140:234–244CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Martin RE, Gray GR (1971) pH of southern Pine Barks. Forest Prod J 2:3Google Scholar
  68. Means JE, MacMillan PC, Cromack K Jr (1992) Biomass and nutrient content of Douglas-fir logs and other detrital pools in an old-growth forest, Oregon, U.S.A. Can J For Res 22:1536–1546CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Merrill W, Cowling EB (1965) Effect of variation in nitrogen content of wood on rate of decay. Phytopathology 55:1067–1068Google Scholar
  70. Moroni MT, Morris DM, Shaw C, Stokland JN, Harmon ME, Fenton NJ, Merganicová K, Mergani J, Okabe K, Hagemann U (2015) Buried wood: a common yet poorly documented form of deadwood. Ecosystems 18:605–628CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Morozova RM (1991) Mineral content of forest plants in Karelia. Petrozavodsk Press, Petrozavodsk (in Russian) Google Scholar
  72. Noll L, Leonhardt S, Arnstadt T, Hoppe B, Poll C, Matzner E, Hofrichter M, Kellner H (2016) Fungal biomass and extracellular enzyme activities in coarse woody debris of 13 tree species in the early phase of decomposition. For Ecol Manag 378:181–192CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. O’Connell MM, Bentley MD, Campbell CS, Cole JW (1988) Betulin and lupeol in bark from four white-barked birches. Phytochemistry 27:2175–2176CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Ódor P, van Hees AFM (2004) Preferences of dead wood inhabiting bryophytes for decay stage, log size and habitat types in Hungarian beech forests. J Bryol 26:79–95CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Palviainen M, Finér L (2015) Decomposition and nutrient release from Norway spruce coarse roots and stumps: a 40-year chronosequence study. For Ecol Manag 358:1–11CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Palviainen M, Finér L, Laiho R, Shorohova E, Kapitsa E, Vanha-Majamaa I (2010) Carbon and nitrogen release from decomposing Scots pine, Norway spruce and silver birch stumps. For Ecol Manag 259:390–398CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Philpott TJ, Prescott CE, Chapman WK, Grayston SJ (2014) Nitrogen translocation and accumulation by a cord-forming fungus (Hypholoma fasciculare) into simulated woody debris. For Ecol Manag 315:121–128CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Polubojarinov OI (1976) The density of wood Moscow press. Lesnya promyshlennoct, pp 160 (in Russian) Google Scholar
  79. Polubojarinov OI, Sorokin AM (1997) Physical characteristics of pine bark and its components. Lesnoj zhurnal 3:70–74 (in Russian) Google Scholar
  80. Preston CM, Trofymov JA, Niu J, Fyfe CA (1998) 13CPMAS-NMR spectroscopy and chemical analysis of coarse woody debris in coastal forests of Vancouver Island. For Ecol Manag 111:51–68CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Preston CM, Trofymow JA, Nault JR (2012) Decomposition and change in N and organic composition of small-diameter Douglas-fir woody debris over 23 years. Can J For Res 42:1153–1167CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Putna S, Mezaka A (2014) Preferences of epiphytic bryophytes for forest stand and substrate in North-East Latvia. Folia Cryptog Estonia Fasc 51:75–83CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Richards BN (1987) The microbiology of terrestrial ecosystems. Longman Scientific & Technical, Longman Group, UK Limited, EssexGoogle Scholar
  84. Rinne KT, Rajala T, Peltoniemi K, Chen J, Smolander A, Mäkipää R (2017) Accumulation rates and sources of external nitrogen in decaying wood in a Norway spruce dominated forest. Funct Ecol 31:530–541CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. Rudneva EN (1983) Forest-vegetative properties of taiga surface-gley soils of bilberry spruce forests. In: Kozlovskaya LS, Morozova RM (eds) Influence of economic measures on forest soils of Karelia. Petrozavodsk press, Petrozavodsk, pp 35–77 (in Russian)Google Scholar
  86. R Core Team (2017) R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing. Vienna, Austria. https://www.r-project.org/
  87. Santesson R, Moberg R, Nordin A, Tönsberg T, Vitikainen O (2004) Lichenforming and lichenicolous fungi of Fennoscandia. Museum of Evolution, Uppsala University, UppsalaGoogle Scholar
  88. Shaw RG, Mitchell-Olds T (1993) ANOVA for unbalanced data: an overview. Ecology 74(6):1638–1645CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. Shorohova E, Kapitsa E (2014) Influence of the substrate and ecosystem attributes on the decomposition rates of coarse woody debris in European boreal forests. For Ecol Manag 315:173–184CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. Shorohova E, Kapitsa E (2016) The decomposition rate of non-stem components of coarse woody debris (CWD) in European boreal forests mainly depends on site moisture and tree species. Eur J For Res 135(3):593–606CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. Shorohova E, Shorohov A (2001) Coarse woody debris dynamics and stores in a boreal virgin spruce forest. Ecol Bull 49:129–137Google Scholar
  92. Shorohova E, Kapitsa E, Kazartsev I, Romashkin I, Polevoi A, Kushnevskaya H (2016) Tree species traits are the predominant control on the decomposition rate of tree log bark in a mesic old-growth boreal forest. For Ecol Manag 377:36–45CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  93. Skonieczna J, Małek S, Polowy K, Węgiel A (2014) Element content of Scots pine (Pinus sylvestris L.) stands of different densities. Drewno 57(192):77–87Google Scholar
  94. Skorokhodova SB (2008) The climate of “Kivach” Reserve. Proc Natl Nat Reserve Kivach 4:3–34Google Scholar
  95. Sollins P, Grier C, McCorison F, Cromack K Jr, Fogel R, Fredriksen R (1980) The internal element cycles of an old-growth Douglas-fir ecosystem in western Oregon. Ecol Monogr 50(3):261–285CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. Sollins P, Cline SP, Verhoeven T, Sachs D, Spycher G (1987) Patterns of log decay in old-growth Douglas-fir forests. Can J For Res 17:1585–1595CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  97. Ståhl G, Ringvall A, Fridman J (2001) Assessment of coarse woody debris: a methodological overview. Ecol Bull 49:57–70Google Scholar
  98. Stängle SM, Weiskittel AR, Dormann CF, Brüchert F (2016) Measurement and prediction of bark thickness in Picea abies: assessment of accuracy, precision and sample size requirements. Can J For Res 46(1):39–47CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  99. Staxäng B (1969) Acidification of bark of some deciduous trees. Oïkos 20:224–230Google Scholar
  100. Sundberg B, Ericsson A, Little CHA, Näsholm T, Gref R (1993) The relationship between crown size and ring width in Pinus sylvestris L. stems: dependence on indole-3-acetic acid, carbohydrates and nitrogen in the cambial region. Tree Physiol 12:347–362CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  101. Swift MJ, Heal OW, Anderson JM (1979) Decomposition in terrestrial ecosystems. University of California Press, Berkeley, p 509Google Scholar
  102. Táborská M, Přívětivý T, Vrška T, Ódor P (2015) Bryophytes associated with two tree species and different stages of decay in a natural fir-beech mixed forest in the Czech Republic. Preslia 87:387–401Google Scholar
  103. Tetioukhin SV, Minayev VN, Bogomolova LP (2004) Forest Mensuration and inventory: reference book for the North Western Russia. FTA Publ, St. Petersburg (in Russian) Google Scholar
  104. Vedernikov DN, Shabanova NY, Roshchin VI (2010) Change in the chemical composition of inner and outer bark of Betula pendula Roth. (Betulaceae) depending on tree height. Khimiya rastitel`nogo syr`ya 2: 43–48 (in Russian) Google Scholar
  105. Warren JM, Allen HL, Booker FL (1999) Mineral nutrition, resin flow and phloem phytochemistry in loblolly pine. Tree Physiol 19:655–663CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  106. Woodwell GM, Whittaker RH, Houghton RA (1975) Nutrient concentrations in plants in the Brookhaven oak-pine forest. Ecology 56:318–332CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  107. Yatskov M, Harmon ME, Krankina ON (2003) A chronosequence of wood decomposition in the boreal forests of Russia. Can J For Res 33:1211–1226CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  108. Zaehle S, Dalmonech D (2011) Carbon–nitrogen interactions on land at global scales: current understanding in modelling climate biosphere feedbacks. Curr Opin Env Sust 3:311–320CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  109. Zhou L, Dai L, Gu H, Zhong L (2007) Review on the decomposition and influence factors of coarse woody debris in forest ecosystem. J For Res 18:48–54CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  110. Zimmerman JK, Pulliam WM, Lodge DJ (1995) Nitrogen immobilization by decomposing woody debris and the recovery of tropical wet forest from hurricane damage. Oikos 72:314–322CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Forest Research Institute of the Karelian Research CentreRussian Academy of SciencePetrozavodskRussia
  2. 2.Saint-Petersburg State Forest Technical UniversitySaint-PetersburgRussia
  3. 3.Natural Resources Institute Finland (Luke)HelsinkiFinland

Personalised recommendations