Advertisement

New Forests

pp 1–23 | Cite as

Clues to wood quality and production from analyzing ring width and density variabilities of fertilized Pinus taeda trees

  • Daigard Ricardo Ortega RodriguezEmail author
  • Mario Tomazello-Filho
Article
  • 49 Downloads

Abstract

Tree growth and wood density are influenced by forest management. Nevertheless, few studies have evaluated their variability responses to fertilizer treatments at inter-annual, inter-tree and stand-production levels. Therefore, the annual ring width (RW) and density (RD) of sixty 17-year-old-Pinus taeda trees fertilized with six doses of composted pulp-mill sludge (CPMS) were analyzed. Ten trees for each treatment were felled and from which wood discs were taken at different trunk heights. The annual RW and RD were provided by X-ray microdensitometry, synchronized and the trunk basic specific gravity (SGB) and biomass calculated. The effects of CPMS treatments were explored using interaction of variables RW and RD with cambial age, diameter, trunk SGB and biomass production. Trees treated with CPMS grow faster, increasing their biomass (up to 108%), presenting lower wood density values (significant up to the 6th year) and reaching the mature wood later than untreated trees. Furthermore, the potential use of RW and RD in allometric equations showed good accuracy to predict trunk SGB and biomass. Altogether, our results indicated that ring width and density revealed the impacts of fertilization treatment on wood quality and production. Our study also provides useful information for forest managers on the fertilization monitoring process.

Keywords

Allometric equation Biomass production Early-age fertilization Loblolly pine Tree-ring microdensity 

Notes

Acknowledgements

We thank the Wood Anatomy and Tree-Ring Laboratory (LAIM) of the Department of Forest Sciences at Luiz de Queiroz College of Agriculture (ESALQ), University of Sao Paulo (USP). We thank to EMBRAPA-Centro Nacional de Florestas, for the experimental help, especially researchers Antonio Bellote and Guilherme Andrade. This work was supported by the Post-Graduate Program of Forest Resources (ESALQ-USP, Brazil) and CAPES, Brazil (Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior do Governo do Brasil, Finance Code 001), for the fellowship financial support. We are also grateful to Renata Siqueira Melo of the Departament of Forest Sciences (ESALQ-USP) for the preparation of the study area map. We finally thank the editor and two anonymous reviewers for improving the manuscript.

References

  1. Albaugh TJ, Allen HL, Dougherty PM et al (1998) Leaf area and above-and belowground growth responses of loblolly pine to nutrient and water additions. For Sci 44:317–328Google Scholar
  2. Albaugh TJ, Allen HL, Dougherty PM, Johnsen KH (2004) Long term growth responses of loblolly pine to optimal nutrient and water resource availability. For Ecol Manag 192:3–19.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2004.01.002 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Albaugh TJ, Allen HL, Fox TR (2006) Individual tree crown and stand development in Pinus taeda under different fertilization and irrigation regimes. For Ecol Manag 234:10–23.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2006.05.074 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Antony F, Schimleck LR, Hall DB et al (2011) Modeling the effect of midrotation fertilization on specific gravity of loblolly pine (Pinus taeda L.). For Sci 57:145–152.  https://doi.org/10.1093/forestscience/57.2.145 Google Scholar
  5. Antony F, Schimleck LR, Daniels RF et al (2015) Whole-tree bark and wood properties of loblolly pine from intensively managed plantations. For Sci 61:55–66.  https://doi.org/10.5849/forsci.12-030 Google Scholar
  6. Auty D, Achim A, Macdonald E et al (2014) Models for predicting wood density variation in Scots pine. Forestry 87:449–458.  https://doi.org/10.1093/forestry/cpu005 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Auty D, Achim A, Macdonald E et al (2016) Models for predicting clearwood mechanical properties of Scots pine. For Sci 62:403–413.  https://doi.org/10.5849/forsci.15-092 Google Scholar
  8. Babst F, Bouriaud O, Papale D et al (2014) Above-ground woody carbon sequestration measured from tree rings is coherent with net ecosystem productivity at five eddy-covariance sites. New Phytol 201:1289–1303.  https://doi.org/10.1111/nph.12589 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Borders BE, Will RE, Markewitz D et al (2004) Effect of complete competition control and annual fertilization on stem growth and canopy relations for a chronosequence of loblolly pine plantations in the lower coastal plain of Georgia. For Ecol Manag 192:21–37.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2004.01.003 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bouriaud O, Teodosiu M, Kirdyanov AV, Wirth C (2015) Influence of wood density in tree-ring-based annual productivity assessments and its errors in Norway spruce. Biogeosciences 12:6205–6217.  https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-12-6205-2015 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Cancino J (2006) Dendrometría Básica. Universidad de Concepción, ConcepciónGoogle Scholar
  12. Cardoso JD, Biscaia EA, Doetzer AM et al (2013) Influence of spacing regimes on the development of loblolly pine (Pinus taeda L.) in Southern Brazil. For Ecol Manag 310:761–769CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Chave J, Andalo C, Brown S et al (2005) Tree allometry and improved estimation of carbon stocks and balance in tropical forests. Oecologia 145:87–99.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00442-005-0100-x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Chave J, Réjou-Méchain M, Búrquez A et al (2015) Improved allometric models to estimate the aboveground biomass of tropical trees. Glob Change Biol 20:3177–3190.  https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.12629 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Clark A, Borders BE, Daniels RF (2004) Impact of vegetation control and annual fertilization on properties of loblolly pine wood at age 12. For Prod J 54:90–96Google Scholar
  16. Courbet F, Houllier F (2002) Modelling the profile and internal structure of tree stem. Application to Cedrus atlantica (Manetti) François. Ann For Sci 59:63–80.  https://doi.org/10.1051/forest CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Dahlen J, Auty D, Eberhardt TL (2018) Models for predicting specific gravity and ring width for loblolly pine from intensively managed plantations, and implications for wood utilization. Forests 9:292.  https://doi.org/10.3390/f9060292 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Daniels RF, Clark AI (2006) Quantifying and predicting wood quality of loblolly and slash pine under intensive forest management. Final technical reportGoogle Scholar
  19. Daniels RF, He R, Clark AI, Souter RA (2002) Modeling wood properties of planted Loblolly pine from pith to bark and stump to tip. In: Proceedings of 4th workshop connection between forest resources and wood quality: modelling approaches and simulation software. Br Columbia, pp 1–4Google Scholar
  20. Dobner M, Huss J, Tomazello Filho M (2018) Wood density of loblolly pine trees as affected by crown thinnings and harvest age in southern Brazil. Wood Sci Technol 52:465–485.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00226-017-0983-9 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Eberhardt TL, Samuelson LJ (2015) Collection of wood quality data by X-ray densitometry: a case study with three southern pines. Wood Sci Technol 49:739–753.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00226-015-0732-x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. EMBRAPA (2006) Sistema brasileiro de classificação de solos, 2nd edn. Empresa Brasileira de Pesquisa Agropecuária, Rio de JaneiroGoogle Scholar
  23. FAO (2013) GlobAllomeTree-Assessing volume, biomass and carbon stocks of trees and forests. www.globallometree.org. Accessed 19 Feb 2015
  24. Ferraz AV, Momentel LT, Poggiani F (2016) Soil fertility, growth and mineral nutrition in Eucalyptus grandis plantation fertilized with different kinds of sewage sludge. New For 47:861–876.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11056-016-9549-1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Fox TR, Allen HL, Albaugh TJ et al (2007) Tree nutrition and forest fertilization of pine plantations in the southern United States. South J Appl For 31:5–11Google Scholar
  26. Guller B, Isik K, Cetinay S (2012) Variations in the radial growth and wood density components in relation to cambial age in 30-year-old Pinus brutia Ten. at two test sites. Trees Struct Funct 26:975–986.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00468-011-0675-2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Hackenberg J, Wassenberg M, Spiecker H, Sun D (2015) Non destructive method for biomass prediction combining TLS derived tree volume and wood density. Forests 6:1274–1300.  https://doi.org/10.3390/f6041274 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Hietz P, Valencia R, Joseph Wright S (2013) Strong radial variation in wood density follows a uniform pattern in two neotropical rain forests. Funct Ecol 27:684–692.  https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2435.12085 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. IBA (2016) Brazilian Tree Industry 2016: a report of the Brazilian Tree Industry, 100Google Scholar
  30. Ingestad T, Agren G (1991) The influence of plant nutrition on biomass allocation. Ecol Appl 1:168–174.  https://doi.org/10.2307/1941809 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. IPEF (2012) Pesquisadores do IPEF e FPC visitam ensaios de silvicultura clonal de Pinus taeda em Santa Catarina. IPEF Notícias 218:10Google Scholar
  32. Jacquin P, Longuetaud F, Leban JM, Mothe F (2017) X-ray microdensitometry of wood: a review of existing principles and devices. Dendrochronologia 42:42–50.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dendro.2017.01.004 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Jordan L, Clark A, Schimleck LR et al (2008) Regional variation in wood specific gravity of planted loblolly pine in the United States. Can J For Res 38:698–710.  https://doi.org/10.1139/X07-158 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Jozsa LA, Middleton GR (1994) A discussion of wood quality attributes and their practical implications. Forintek Canada Corp, VancouverGoogle Scholar
  35. Kohler SV, Koehler HS, Filho AF et al (2015) Evolution of assortment of Pinus taeda stands located at Paraná and Santa Catarina States. Floresta 45:545–554.  https://doi.org/10.5380/rf.v45i3.35746 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Love-Myers KR, Clark A, Schimleck LR et al (2009) Specific gravity responses of slash and loblolly pine following mid-rotation fertilization. For Ecol Manag 257:2342–2349.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2009.03.031 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Martin TA, Jokela EJ (2004) Stand development and production dynamics of loblolly pine under a range of cultural treatments in north-central Florida USA. For Ecol Manag 192:39–58.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2004.01.004 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Mora CR, Allen HL, Daniels RF, Clark A (2007) Modeling corewood–outerwood transition in loblolly pine using wood specific gravity. Can J For Res 37:999–1011.  https://doi.org/10.1139/X06-250 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Moreno-Fernández D, Hevia A, Majada J, Cañellas I (2018) Do common silvicultural treatments affect wood density of Mediterranean montane pines? Forests 9:80.  https://doi.org/10.3390/f9020080 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Mörling T (2002) Evaluation of annual ring width and ring density development following fertilisation and thinning of Scots pine. Ann For Sci 59:29–40.  https://doi.org/10.1051/forest:2001003 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Návar J (2009) Allometric equations for tree species and carbon stocks for forests of northwestern Mexico. For Ecol Manag 257:427–434.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2008.09.028 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Nyakuengama JG, Downes GM, Ng J (2002) Growth and wood density responses to later-age fertilizer application in pinus radiata. IAWA J 23:431–448CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Picard N, Saint-André L, Henry M (2012) Manual for building tree volume and biomass allometric equations: from field measurement to prediction, 1st edn. FAO, RomeGoogle Scholar
  44. Pollet C, Henin J-M, Hébert J, Jourez B (2017) Effect of growth rate on the physical and mechanical properties of Douglas-fir in western Europe. Can J For Res 47:1056–1065.  https://doi.org/10.1139/cjfr-2016-0290 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Pompa-García M, Venegas-González A (2016) Temporal variation of wood density and carbon in two elevational sites of Pinus cooperi in relation to climate response in northern Mexico. PLoS ONE.  https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0156782 Google Scholar
  46. Rodrigues CM, Francisco A, Bellote J, Dedecek RA (2005) Nutrition and productivity alterations in the Pinus taeda L. caused by cellulose residue application. Bol Pesq Fl Colombo 51:131–143Google Scholar
  47. Rosada de Oliveira I, Peres Chagas M, Bouillet JP et al (2017) Effect of tree spacing on growth and wood density of 38-year-old Cariniana legalis trees in Brazil. South For 1:8.  https://doi.org/10.2989/20702620.2017.1393741 Google Scholar
  48. Sakagami H, Matsumura J, Oda K, Kamala FD (2013) Wood density and growth ring structure of Pinus patula planted in Malawi, Africa. IAWA J 34:61–70.  https://doi.org/10.1163/22941932-00000006 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Salvo L, Leandro L, Contreras H et al (2017) Radial variation of density and anatomical features of Eucalyptus nitens trees. Wood Fiber Sci 49:1–11Google Scholar
  50. Sattler DF, Finlay C, Stewart JD (2015) Annual ring density for lodgepole pine as derived from models for earlywood density, latewood density and latewood proportion. For Syst 88:622–632.  https://doi.org/10.1093/forestry/cpv030 Google Scholar
  51. Silva PH, Poggiani F, Libardi LP, Natal A (2013) Fertilizer management of eucalypt plantations on sandy soil in Brazil: initial growth and nutrient cycling. For Ecol Manag 301:67–78.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2012.10.033 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Sousa VB, Louzada JL, Pereira H (2016) Age trends and within-site effects in wood density and radial growth in Quercus faginea mature trees. For Syst 25:1–9.  https://doi.org/10.5424/fs/2016251-08411 Google Scholar
  53. Sullivan TP, Sullivan DS (2016) Acceleration of old-growth structural attributes in lodgepole pine forest: tree growth and stand structure 25 years after thinning. For Ecol Manag 365:96–106.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2016.01.029 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Taki S, Nobori Y, Caceres MLL (2014) Method for estimation of stem carbon fixation of Japanese black pine by combining stem analysis and soft X-ray densitometry. J For Res 19:226–232.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10310-012-0382-x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Tasissa G, Burkhart HE (1998) Juvenile-mature wood demarcation in loblolly pine trees. Wood Fiber Sci 30:119–127Google Scholar
  56. Tomazello M, Brazolin S, Chagas MP et al (2008) Application of X-ray technique in nondestructive evaluation of eucalypt wood. Maderas Cienc y Tecnol 10:139–149.  https://doi.org/10.4067/S0718-221X2008000200006 Google Scholar
  57. Valinger E, Elfving B, Mörling T (2000) Twelve-year growth response of Scots pine to thinning and nitrogen fertilisation. For Ecol Manag 134:45–53.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-1127(99)00244-3 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Wassenberg M, Montwé D, Kahle HP, Spiecker H (2014) Exploring high frequency densitometry calibration functions for different tree species. Dendrochronologia 32:273–281.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dendro.2014.07.001 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. West PW (2014) Growth rates and wood quality. Growing plantation forests. Springer International Publishing, Cham, pp 25–44CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Williamson GB, Wiemann MC (2010) Measuring wood specific gravity…correctly. Am J Bot 97:519–524.  https://doi.org/10.3732/ajb.0900243 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Young MJ, Johnson JE, Thiel DA (1993) Effects of paper mill sludge and weed control on competing vegetation and growth of young red pine. New For 7:345–361.  https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00036754 Google Scholar
  62. Yu M, Cheng X, He Z et al (2014) Longitudinal variation of ring width, wood density and basal area increment in 26-year-old loblolly pine (Pinus taeda) trees. Tree-Ring Res 70:137–144.  https://doi.org/10.3959/1536-1098-70.2.137 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Zianis D, Muukkonen P, Makiapaa R, Mencuccini M (2005) Biomass and stem volume equations for tree species in EuropeGoogle Scholar
  64. Zobel BJ, van Buijtenen JP (2012) Wood variation: its causes and control, 2nd edn. Springer, New YorkGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Forest Resource, Luiz de Queiroz College of AgricultureUniversity of São PauloPiracicabaBrazil

Personalised recommendations