Beech coppice conversion to high forest: results from a 31-year experiment in Eastern Pre-Alps

  • Barbara Mariotti
  • Giorgio Alberti
  • Alberto Maltoni
  • Andrea Tani
  • Pietro Piussi
Original Paper

Abstract

Keymessage

Selective thinning is a more viable method for beech coppice conversion to high forest when compared with thinning from below as it enhances tree growth, reduces mortality of the remaining trees, and allows to obtain stands with a higher mechanical stability and larger crowns.

Context

Beech forests in North-East Italy have been largely managed as coppice. Due to socio-economic changes, a large conversion to high forests program started in the second half of the past century.

Aims

A long-term experiment testing the effects on tree growth and stability of two different conversion methods (thinning from below—method A; selective thinning—method B) was implemented.

Methods

Both silvicultural treatments started in 1979 with a first thinning followed by a second one in 1997. All trees were periodically measured in order to assess mortality, stability, and growth during the period 1979–2010. In 2010, an assessment of stem quality and crown size was also performed.

Results

Both methods were economically viable, but method B acted with a higher intensity both in 1979 and in 1997, thus making the harvest more profitable for the owners. Moreover, method B enhanced tree growth, especially in the period after the first thinning, reduced mortality, and allowed to obtain stands with a higher mechanical stability and with larger crowns.

Conclusion

It would be possible to adopt some of the criteria prescribed with method B in future thinnings over the large areas actually managed with method A, as prescribed by the law.

Keywords

Coppice conversion Beech Thinning Fagus sylvatica 

Notes

Acknowledgements

As the long list of colleagues and collaborators in the Regional Forest Service in Aviano and Pordenone during 30 years would require one whole page, we thank them collectively. We also thank Barbara Vinceti and Rosè Andriollo.

References

  1. Amorini E, Fabbio G (1995) Ricerche sull’“invecchiamento dei cedui”: riflessioni sul trattamento di conversione. Ital For e Mont 46:193–204Google Scholar
  2. Amorini E, Fabbio G, Bertini G (2010) Dinamica del ceduo oltre turno e avviamento ad alto fusto dei cedui di faggio. Risultati del protocollo Germano Gambi sull’Alpe di Catenaia (Arezzo). Ann Cent Ric Selvic 36:151–172Google Scholar
  3. Amorini E, Gambi G (1977) Il metodo dell’invecchiamento nella conversione dei cedui di faggio. Ann Ist Sper Selvic 8:23–42Google Scholar
  4. Andriollo R, Azzalini A, Ceschel A, Gogliani P, Piussi P, Stiavelli S (1987) Tagli di avviamento all’altofusto in cedui di faggio del Friuli occidentale. Ann. Accad. Ital. di Sci. For. 36Google Scholar
  5. Becagli C, Bertini G, Di Salvatore U, Fabbio G, Fabrizio F, Salvati L (2016) Monitoring managed forest structure at the compartment-level under different silvicultural heritages: an exploratory data analysis in Italy. J Sustain For 35:234–250. doi: 10.1080/10549811.2016.1154472 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Boncina A, Kadunc A, Robic D (2007) Effects of selective thinning on growth and development of beech ( Fagus sylvatica L.) forest stands in south-eastern Slovenia. Ann For Sci 64:47–57. doi: 10.1051/forest:2006087 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Canellas I, Del Rio M, Roig S, Montero G (2004) Growth response to thinning in Quercus pyrenaica Willd coppice stands in Spanish central mountain. Ann For Sci:61Google Scholar
  8. Ciancio O, Corona P, Lamonaca A, Portoghesi L, Travaglini D (2006) Conversion of clearcut beech coppices into high forests with continuous cover: a case study in central Italy. For Ecol Manag 224:235–240. doi: 10.1016/j.foreco.2005.12.045 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Coppini M, Hermanin L (2007) Restoration of selective beech coppices: a case study in the Apennines (Italy). For Ecol Manag 249:18–27. doi: 10.1016/j.foreco.2007.04.035 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Cutini A, Chianucci F, Giannini T, Manetti MC, Salvati L (2015) Is anticipated seed cutting an effective option to accelerate transition to high forest in European beech (Fagus sylvatica L.) coppice stands? Ann For Sci 72:631–640. doi: 10.1007/s13595-015-0476-7 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Del Favero R (2004) I boschi delle regioni alpine italiane. CLEUP, PadovaGoogle Scholar
  12. Del Favero R, Bortoli P, Dreossi G, Lasen C, Vanone G (1998) La vegetazione forestale e la selvicoltura nella regione Friuli Venezia Giulia. Regione Autonoma Friuli Venezia Giulia. Direzione Regionale delle Foreste, Servizio SelvicolturaGoogle Scholar
  13. Emanuelsson U (2009) The rural landscapes of Europe. Formas, StockholmGoogle Scholar
  14. Ferretti, F., Sboarina, C., Tattoni, C., Vitti, A., Zatelli, P., Geri, F., Pompei, E., Ciolli, M., 2016. The 1936 Italian Kingdom Forest Map reviewed: a dataset for landscape and ecological research.Google Scholar
  15. Gasparini, P., Tabacchi, G., 2011. L’Inventario Nazionale delle Foreste e dei serbatoi forestali di Carbonio INFC 2005. Secondo inventario forestale nazionale italiano. Metodi e risultati. Ministero delle Politiche Agricole, Alimentari e Forestali; Corpo Forestale dello Stato. Consiglio per la Ricerca e la Sperimentazione in Agricoltura, Unità di ricerca per il Monitoraggio e la Pianificazione Forestale. Edagricole-Il Sole 24 ore, BolognaGoogle Scholar
  16. Hahn, K., Fanta, J., 2001. Contemporary beech forest management in Europe. Working Report 1.Google Scholar
  17. Hasenauer H (2006) Sustainable forest management. Growth models for Europe. Springer Berlin, HeidelbergCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hofmann A (1963) La converesione dei cedui di faggio. Ann Accad Ital di Sci For 12:145–164Google Scholar
  19. La Marca O (1999) Elementi di dendrometria. Patron Editore, BolognaGoogle Scholar
  20. Leibundgut, H., 1978. Die Waldpflege. P. Haupt.Google Scholar
  21. Mattioli W, Ferrari B, Giuliarelli D, Mancini L, Portoghesi L, Corona P (2015) Conversion of mountain beech coppices into high forest: an example for ecological intensification. Environ Manag. doi: 10.1007/s00267-015-0549-2
  22. McGrath MJ, Luyssaert S, Meyfroidt P, Kaplan JO, Bürgi M, Chen Y, Erb K, Gimmi U, McInerney D, Naudts K, Otto J, Pasztor F, Ryder J, Schelhaas M-J, Valade A (2015) Reconstructing European forest management from 1600 to 2010. Biogeosciences 12:4291–4316. doi: 10.5194/bg-12-4291-2015 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Nocentini S (2009) Structure and management of beech ( Fagus sylvatica L.) forests in Italy. iForest - Biogeosciences For 2:105–113. doi: 10.3832/ifor0499-002 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Piovesan G, Hermanin L, Schirone B (1995) Considerazioni sulla crescita e lo sviluppo di un ceduo matricinato di faggio (Fagus sylvatica L.) di età avanzata. Ital For e Mont 50:404–424Google Scholar
  25. Piussi P, Alberti G (2015) Selvicoltura generale: boschi, società e tecniche colturali. Compagnia delle Foreste, ArezzoGoogle Scholar
  26. Pretzsch H (2005) Stand density and growth of Norway spruce (Picea abies (L.) karst.) and European beech (Fagus sylvatica L.): evidence from long-term experimental plots. Eur J For Res 124:193–205. doi: 10.1007/s10342-005-0068-4 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Schaedelin, W., 1942. Die Durchforstung als Auslese- und Veredelungsbetrieb hoechster Wertleistung. Bern-Leipzig.Google Scholar
  28. Van Calster H, Baeten L, De Schrijver A, De Keersmaeker L, Rogister JE, Verheyen K, Hermy M (2007) Management driven changes (1967–2005) in soil acidity and the understorey plant community following conversion of a coppice-with-standards forest. For Ecol Manag 241:258–271. doi: 10.1016/j.foreco.2007.01.007 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© INRA and Springer-Verlag France 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Dipartimento di Gestione Sistemi Agrari, Alimentari e ForestaliUniversità di FirenzeFlorenceItaly
  2. 2.Dipartimento di Scienze Agroalimentari, Ambientali ed AnimaliUniversità di UdineUdineItaly
  3. 3.CNR-IBIMETFlorenceItaly

Personalised recommendations