New Forests

, Volume 44, Issue 6, pp 899–918 | Cite as

Effects of edaphic conditions on site quality for Salix purpurea ‘Hotel’ plantations across a large climatic gradient in Canada

  • Joel Ens
  • Richard E. Farrell
  • Nicolas BélangerEmail author


Willow has been identified as a possible species for supplying large quantities of biomass for bioenergy and wood fibers in Canada. However, before site selection occurs, there is a need to know how the soils and climate of the prairies and central regions affect willow productivity. Soil, foliar, and climatic variables were therefore measured along with yields at nine “first rotation” Salix purpurea ‘Hotel’ plantations from central Alberta to southern Ontario. Correlation analysis was used to identify those parameters having the most influence on yields. Relationships between soil and climate and growth were established by regression analysis. The acid–base status of the soil as dictated by bulk elemental composition, in particular the presence of Ca, was found to be the dominant factor affecting productivity (r = 0.967, P < 0.001 total Ca vs. yields) despite large regional differences in climate. From a nutritional standpoint, total soil N (r = 0.743, P = 0.048) and foliar K (r = 0.938, P = 0.009 for sites with adequate moisture) were positively correlated with growth. S. purpurea ‘Hotel’ yields were found to be primarily limited by water availability at the two lowest productivity prairie sites. Soil total Ca concentration, pH and total organic C concentration were all generally correlated with higher yields. Additional deficiencies appeared in the following order of importance: water > N and K > Mg. As a whole, soil properties were the dominant predictors of ‘Hotel’ growth in this study, which suggests that, even at the regional scale, growth was governed in large part by the capacity of soils to retain water and/or nutrients. Climate played a lesser role, except perhaps at two sites which appeared to receive inadequate moisture.


Biomass energy Short rotation intensive culture Fast growth Yields Soil nutrient availability Foliar nutrition Calcium Nitrogen Potassium 


  1. Abrahamson LP, Volk TA, Kopp RF, White EH, Ballard JL (2002) Willow biomass producer’s handbook (Revised). SUNY-ESF, SyracuseGoogle Scholar
  2. Adegbidi HG, Briggs RD, Volk TA, White EH, Abrahamson LP (2003) Effect of organic amendments and slow-release nitrogen fertilizer on willow biomass production and soil chemical characteristics. Biomass Bioenerg 25:389–398CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Alriksson A, Eriksson HM (1998) Variations in mineral nutrient and C distribution in the soil and vegetation compartments of five temperate tree species in NE Sweden. For Ecol Manage 108:261–273CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Arevalo CBM, Bhatti JS, Chang SX, Sidders D (2011) Land use change effects on ecosystem carbon balance: from agricultural to hybrid poplar plantation. Agric Ecosys Environ 141:342–349CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Argus GW (1997) Infrageneric classification of Salix (Salicaceae) in the New World. Syst Bot Monogr 52:1–121CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bélanger N, Paré D, Bouchard M, Daoust G (2004) Is the use of trees with superior growth a threat to soil nutrient availability? A case study with Norway spruce. Can J For Res 34:560–572CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bhardwaj AK, Zenone T, Jasrotia P, Robertson GP, Chen J, Hamilton SK (2011) Water and energy footprints of bioenergy crop production on marginal lands. GCB Bioenergy 3:208–222CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Birkeland PW (1999) Soils and geomorphology. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  9. Cao Y, Lehto T, Repo T, Silvennoinen R, Pelkonen P (2011) Effects of planting orientation and density of willows on biomass production and nutrient leaching. New Forest 41:361–377CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Cardias Williams F, Thomas T (2006) Some key issues concerning current poplar production and future marketing in the United Kingdom. New Forest 31:343–359CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Chen HYH, Klinka K, Kabzems RD (1998) Site index, site quality, and foliar nutrients of trembling aspen: relationships and predictions. Can J For Res 28:1743–1755CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Christensen BT, Johnston AE (1997) Chapter 18 Soil organic matter and soil quality—Lessons learned from long-term experiments at Askov and Rothamsted. Dev Soil Sci 25:399–430CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Cornelissen JHC, Werger MJA, Castro-Díez P, van Rheenen JWA, Rowland AP (1997) Foliar nutrients in relation to growth, allocation and leaf traits in seedlings of a wide range of woody plant species and types. Oecologia 111:460–469CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. DesRochers A, Thomas BR (2003) A comparison of pre-planting treatments on hardwood cuttings of four hybrid poplar clones. New Forest 26:17–32CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Devine WD, Harrington CA, DeBell DS (2010) Intra-annual growth and mortality of four Populus clones in pure and mixed plantings. New Forest 39:287–299CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Ens JE, Farrell RE, Bélanger N (2013) Early effects of afforestation with willow (Salix purpurea, ‘Hotel’) on soil carbon and nutrient availability. Forests 4:137–154CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Environment Canada (2011) Canadian Climate Normals 1971–2000. Available at Accessed May 11, 2011
  18. Guidi W, Piccioni E, Bonari E (2008) Evapotranspiration and crop coefficient of poplar and willow short-rotation coppice used as vegetation filter. Bioresour Technol 99:4832–4840CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Hamel B, Bélanger N, Paré D (2004) Productivity of black spruce and Jack pine stands in Quebec as related to climate, site biological features and soil properties. For Ecol Manage 191:239–251CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Havlin JL, Beaton JD, Tisdale SL, Nelson WL (2005) Soil fertility and fertilizers: an introduction to nutrient management, 7th edn. Prentice Hall, New JerseyGoogle Scholar
  21. Hendershot WH, Lalande H, Duquette M (2007) Ion exchange and exchangeable cations. In: Carter MR, Gregorich EG (eds) Soil sampling and methods of analysis, 2nd edn. CRC Press, Boca Raton, pp 197–206Google Scholar
  22. Hogg EH, Brandt JP, Kochtubajda B (2005) Factors affecting interannual variation in growth of western Canadian aspen forests during 1951-2000. Can J For Res 35:610–622CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Jones JBJ (1998) Plant nutrition manual. CRC Press, Boca RatonGoogle Scholar
  24. Juice SM, Fahey TJ, Siccama TG, Driscoll CT, Denny EG, Eagar C, Cleavitt NL, Minocha R, Richardson AD (2006) Response of sugar maple to calcium addition to northern hardwood forest. Ecology 87:1267–1280CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Kalra YP, Maynard DG (1999) Methods manual for forest soil and plant analysis. Canadian Forest Service, Northern Forestry Centre, EdmontonGoogle Scholar
  26. Kobe RK, Pacala SW, Silander JA, Canham CD (1995) Juvenile tree survivorship as a component of shade tolerance. Ecol Applic 5:517–532CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Kopinga J, van den Burg J (1995) Using soil and foliar analysis to diagnose the nutritional status of urban trees. J Arboric 21:17–24Google Scholar
  28. Kopp RF, Smart LB, Maynard CA, Isebrands JG, Tuskan GA, Abrahamson LP (2001a) The development of improved willow clones for eastern North America. For Chron 77:287–292Google Scholar
  29. Kopp RF, Abrahamson LP, White EH, Volk TA, Nowak CA, Fillhart RC (2001b) Willow biomass production during ten successive annual harvests. Biomass Bioenerg 20:1–7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Kroetsch D, Wang C (2008) Particle size distribution. In: Carter MR, Gregorich EG (eds) Soil sampling and methods of analysis, 2nd edn. CRC Press, Boca Raton, pp 713–726Google Scholar
  31. Labrecque M, Teodorescu TI, Daigle S (1998) Early performance and nutrition of two willow species in short-rotation intensive culture fertilized with wastewater sludge and impact on the soil characteristics. Can J For Res 28:1621–1635CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Ledin S, Willebrand E (eds) (1995) Handbook on how to grow short rotation forests. Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Department of Short Rotation Forestry, UppsalaGoogle Scholar
  33. Lindroth A, Båth A (1999) Assessment of regional willow coppice yield in Sweden on basis of water availability. For Ecol Manage 121:57–65CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. McKenney DW, Yemshanov D, Fox G, Ramlal E (2004) Cost estimates for carbon sequestration from fast growing poplar plantations in Canada. For Policy Econ 6:345–358CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. McNulty SG, Swank WT (1995) Wood δ13C as a measure of annual basal area growth and soil water stress in a Pinus strobus forest. Ecology 76:1581–1586CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Mengel K (2007) Potassium. In: Barker AV, Pilbeam DJ (eds) Handbook of plant nutrition. CRC Press, Boca Raton, pp 91–120Google Scholar
  37. Mitchell CP, Stevens EA, Watters MP (1999) Short-rotation forestry: operations, productivity and costs based on experience gained in the UK. For Ecol Manage 121:123–136CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Moukoumi J, Farrell R, Van Rees K, Hynes R, Bélanger N (2012) Intercropping Caragana arborescens with Salix miyabean to satisfy nitrogen demand and maximize growth. BioEnerg Res 5:719–732CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Nelson AS, Saunders MR, Wagner RG, Weiskittel AR (2012) Early stand production of hybrid poplar and white spruce in mixed and monospecific plantations in eastern Maine. New Forest 43:519–534CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Padbury G, Waltman S, Caprio J, Coen G, McGinn S, Mortensen D, Nielsen G, Sinclair R (2002) Agroecosystems and land resources of the Northern Great Plains. Agron J 94:251–261CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Pinno BD, Bélanger N (2011) Estimating trembling aspen productivity in the boreal transition ecoregion of saskatchewan using site and soil variables. Can J Soil Sci 91:661–669CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Pinno BD, Paré D, Guindon L, Bélanger N (2009) Predicting productivity of trembling aspen in the Boreal Shield ecozone of Quebec using different sources of soil and site information. For Ecol Manage 257:782–789CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Pinno BD, Thomas BR, Bélanger N (2010) Predicting the productivity of a young hybrid poplar clone under intensive plantation management in northern Alberta, Canada using soil and site characteristics. New Forest 39:89–103CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Post BW, Curtis RO (1970) Estimation of northern hardwood site index from soils and topography in the Green Mountains of Vermont. Vermont Agric Exp Sta Bull 664:1–17Google Scholar
  45. Régnière J (1996) Generalized approach to landscape-wide seasonal forecasting with temperature-driven simulation models. Environ Entomol 25:869–881Google Scholar
  46. Régnière J, Bolstad P (1994) Statistical simulation of daily air temperature patterns Eastern North America to forecast seasonal events in insect pest management. Environ Entomol 23:1368–1380Google Scholar
  47. Richards JH, Fung K-I (1969) Atlas of Saskatchewan. University of Saskatchewan, SaskatoonGoogle Scholar
  48. Schroeder WR (1988) Planting and establishment of shelterbelts in humid severe-winter regions. Agric Ecosys Environ 22–23:441–463CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Simon M, Zsuffa L, Burgess D (1990) Variation in N, P, and K status and N efficiency in some North American willows. Can J For Res 20:1888–1893CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Soil Classification Working Group (1998) The Canadian system of soil classification, 3rd edn. NRC Research Press, OttawaGoogle Scholar
  51. Stewart GR, Turnbull MH, Schmidt S, Erskine PD (1995) 13C natural abundance in plant communities along a rainfall gradient: a biological integrator of water availability. Aust J Plant Physiol 22:51–55CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Taylor WP (1934) Significance of extreme or intermittent conditions in distribution of species and management of natural resources with a restatement of Liebig’s Law of Minimum. Ecology 15:374–379CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Thiffault E, Paré D, Bélanger N, Munson A, Marquis F (2006) Harvesting intensity at clear-felling in the boreal forest. Soil Sci Soc Am J 70:691–701CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Ung CH, Bernier PY, Raulier F, Fournier RA, Lambert MC, Régnière J (2001) Biophysical site indices for shade tolerant and intolerant boreal species. For Sci 47:83–95Google Scholar
  55. Volk TA, Verwijst T, Tharakan PJ, Abrahamson LP, White EH (2004) Growing fuel: a sustainability assessment of willow biomass crops. Front Ecol Environ 2:411–418CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Wang JY (1960) A critique of the heat unit approach to plant response studies. Ecology 41:785–790CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Joel Ens
    • 1
  • Richard E. Farrell
    • 1
  • Nicolas Bélanger
    • 2
    • 3
    Email author
  1. 1.Department of Soil ScienceUniversity of SaskkatchewanSaskatoonCanada
  2. 2.Téluq, Université du QuébecMontrealCanada
  3. 3.Centre d’étude de la forêtUniversité du Québec à MontréalMontrealCanada

Personalised recommendations