Allometric Biomass, Biomass Expansion Factor and Wood Density Models for the OP42 Hybrid Poplar in Southern Scandinavia

Abstract

Biomass and biomass expansion factor functions are important in wood resource assessment, especially with regards to bioenergy feedstocks and carbon pools. We sampled 48 poplar trees in seven stands with the purpose of estimating allometric models for predicting biomass of individual tree components, stem-to-aboveground biomass expansion factors (BEF) and stem basic densities of the OP42 hybrid poplar clone in southern Scandinavia. Stand age ranged from 3 to 31 years, individual tree diameter at breast height (dbh) from 1.2 to 41 cm and aboveground tree biomass from 0.39 to 670 kg. Models for predicting total aboveground leafless, stem and branch biomass included dbh and tree height as predictor variables and explained more than 97 % of the total variation. The BEF was approaching 2.0 for the smallest trees but declined with increasing tree size and stabilized around 1.2 for trees with dbh >10 cm. Average stem basic density was more than 400 kg m−3 for the smallest trees but declined with increasing tree height and stabilized around 355 kg m−3, at a tree height of about 20 m. Existing biomass functions from the literature all underestimated the measured sample tree biomass. Possible explanations include not only differences in competition among trees in the examined stands and site conditions but also differences in sampling procedures. We observed that basic density increased with height above the ground. This trend may have led to the observed underestimation by existing biomass functions including only few samples from the lower end of the stems.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

References

  1. 1.

    Mantau U, Saal U, Prins K, Steierer F, Lindner M, Verkerk H, Eggers J, Leek N, Oldenburger J, Asikainen A, Anttila P (2010) EUwood -Real potential for changes in growth and use of EU forests. Final Report. Hamburg/Germany, p 160. http://www.egger.com/downloads/bildarchiv/187000/1_187099_DV_Realpotential-changes-growth_EN.pdf

  2. 2.

    EU (2009) Directive 2009/28/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 April 2009 on the promotion of the use of energy from renewable sources and amending and subsequently repealing Directives 2001/77/EC and 2003/30/EC (Text with EEA relevance). http://europa.eu/legislation_summaries/energy/renewable_energy/en0009_en.htm

  3. 3.

    IPCC. Working Group III Report: Mitigation of Climate Change (2007) http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/publications_and_data_reports.shtml#1. Accessed 17 Mar 2014

  4. 4.

    Clifton-Brown JC, Stampfl PF, Jones MB (2004) Miscanthus biomass production for energy in Europe and its potential contribution to decreasing fossil fuel carbon emissions. Glob Chang Biol 10(4):509–18

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. 5.

    Sevel L, Nord-Larsen T, Raulund-Rasmussen K (2012) Biomass production of four willow clones grown as short rotation coppice on two soil types in Denmark. Biomass Bioenerg 46:664–72

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. 6.

    Pellis A, Laureysens I, Ceulemans R (2004) Growth and production of a short rotation coppice culture of poplar I. Clonal differences in leaf characteristics in relation to biomass production. Biomass Bioenerg 27(1):9–19

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. 7.

    Lewandowski I, Clifton-Brown JC, Scurlock JMO, Huisman W (2000) Miscanthus: European experience with a novel energy crop. Biomass Bioenerg 19(4):209–27

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  8. 8.

    Bentsen NS, Felby C (2012) Biomass for energy in the European Union—a review of bioenergy resource assessments. Biotechnol Biofuels 30:5

    Google Scholar 

  9. 9.

    Johansson T, Karacic A (2011) Increment and biomass in hybrid poplar and some practical implications. Biomass Bioenerg 35(5):1925–34

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. 10.

    Nielsen UB (1990) Nogle hurtigtvoksende poppelkloners vækst i Danmark. Statens Forstlige Forsøgsvæsen

  11. 11.

    Nielsen UB, Madsen P, Hansen JK, Nord-Larsen T, Nielsen AT (2014) Production potential of 36 poplar clones grown at medium length rotation in Denmark. Biomass Bioenerg 64:99–109

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. 12.

    Truax B, Gagnon D, Fortier J, Lambert F (2012) Yield in 8 year-old hybrid poplar plantations on abandoned farmland along climatic and soil fertility gradients. For Ecol Manag 267:228–39

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. 13.

    Truax B, Gagnon D, Fortier J, Lambert F (2014) Biomass and volume yield in mature hybrid poplar plantations on temperate abandoned farmland. Forests 5(12):3107–30

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. 14.

    Skovsgaard JP, Nord-Larsen T (2012) Biomass basic density and biomass expansion factor functions for European beech (Fagus sylvatica L.) in Denmark. Eur J For Res 131(5):1637 (vol 131, pg 1035, 2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. 15.

    Skovsgaard JP, Bald C, Nord-Larsen T (2011) Functions for biomass and basic density of stem, crown and root system of Norway spruce (Picea abies (L.) Karst.) in Denmark. Scand J For Res 26:3–20

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. 16.

    Weiner J (2004) Allocation, plasticity and allometry in plants. Perspect Plant Ecol Evol Syst 6(4):207–15

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. 17.

    Ajit DDK, Chaturvedi OP, Jabeend N, Dhyani SK (2011) Predictive models for dry weight estimation of above and below ground biomass components of Populus deltoides in India: development and comparative diagnosis. Biomass Bioenerg 35(3):1145–52

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. 18.

    Johansson T (2002) Increment and biomass in 26-to 91-year-old European aspen and some practical implications. Biomass Bioenerg 23(4):245–55

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. 19.

    Johansson T (2013) Biomass production of hybrid aspen growing on former farm land in Sweden. J For Res 24(2):237–46

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  20. 20.

    Zabek LM, Prescott CE (2006) Biomass equations and carbon content of aboveground leafless biomass of hybrid poplar in Coastal British Columbia. For Ecol Manag 223(1–3):291–302

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. 21.

    www.dmi.dk. Danmarks meteologiske institut (2014) Danmarks meteologiske institut

  22. 22.

    www.smhi.se. Sveriges meteologiske og hydrologiske institut (2014) Sveriges meteologiske og hydrologiske institut

  23. 23.

    Binkley F (2013) The ecology and management of forest soils

    Google Scholar 

  24. 24.

    Skovsgaard JP (2004) Forest measurements. Encycloped For Sci 2:550–566

    Google Scholar 

  25. 25.

    Olesen PO (1970) The water displacement method. Tree Improve 3:1–23

    Google Scholar 

  26. 26.

    Sprugel DG (1983) Correcting for bias in log-transformed allometric equations. Ecology 64(1):209–10

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. 27.

    Fang S, Xue J, Tang L (2007) Biomass production and carbon sequestration potential in poplar plantations with different management patterns. J Environ Manag 85(3):672–9

  28. 28.

    Kraft G (1884) Zur Lehre von den Durch Forstungen. Schlagstellungen und Lichtungshieben

    Google Scholar 

  29. 29.

    Nord-Larsen T, Nielsen AT (2014) Biomass, stem basic density and expansion factor functions for five exotic conifers grown in Denmark. Scand J For Res: 1–19

  30. 30.

    Kort J, Turnock R (1998) Carbon reservoir and biomass in Canadian prairie shelterbelts. Agrofor Syst 44(2–3):175–86

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. 31.

    Goldsmith LJ, Hocker HW (1978) Preliminary small-tree above-ground biomass tables for 5 northern hardwoods. New Hamp Aes Res Rep 68:1–30

    Google Scholar 

  32. 32.

    Tuskan GA, Rensema TR (1992) Clonal differences in biomass characteristics, coppice ability, and biomass prediction equations among 4 populus clones grown in Eastern North-Dakota. Can J Forest Res 22(3):348–54

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. 33.

    Fortier J, Truax B, Gagnon D, Lambert F (2012) Hybrid poplar yields in Quebec: implications for a sustainable forest zoning management system. For Chron 88(4):391–407

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. 34.

    Fortier J, Gagnon D, Truax B, Lambert F (2010) Biomass and volume yield after 6 years in multiclonal hybrid poplar riparian buffer strips. Biomass Bioenerg 34(7):1028–40

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. 35.

    Ceulemans R, Deraedt W (1999) Production physiology and growth potential of poplars under short-rotation forestry culture. For Ecol Manag 121(1–2):9–23

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. 36.

    Ceulemans R, Jiang XN, Shao BY (1995) Growth and physiology of one-year-old poplar (Populus) under elevated atmospheric CO2 levels. Ann Bot 75(6):609–17

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  37. 37.

    Ceulemans R, Scarasciamugnozza G, Wiard BM, Braatne JH, Hinckley TM, Stettler RF et al (1992) Production physiology and morphology of populus species and their hybrids grown under short rotation 1. Clonal comparisons of 4-year growth and phenology. Can J Forest Res 22(12):1937–48

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. 38.

    Laureysens I, Bogaert J, Blust R, Ceulemans R (2004) Biomass production of 17 poplar clones in a short-rotation coppice culture on a waste disposal site and its relation to soil characteristics. For Ecol Manag 187(2–3):295–309

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. 39.

    Al Afas N, Marron N, Van Dongen S, Laureysens I, Ceulemans R (2008) Dynamics of biomass production in a poplar coppice culture over three rotations (11 years). For Ecol Manag 255(5–6):1883–91

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. 40.

    Pliura A, Yu QB, Zhang SY, MacKay J, Perinet P, Bousquet J (2005) Variation in wood density and shrinkage and their relationship to growth of selected young poplar hybrid crosses. For Sci 51(5):472–82

    Google Scholar 

  41. 41.

    Pliura A, Zhang SY, Bousquet J, MacKay J (2006) Age trends in genotypic variation of wood density and its intra-ring components in young poplar hybrid crosses. Ann For Sci 63(7):673–85

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. 42.

    Headlee WL, Zalesny RS, Hall RB, Bauer EO, Bender B, Birr BA et al (2013) Specific gravity of hybrid poplars in the North-Central Region, USA: within-tree variability and site x genotype effects. Forests 4(2):251–69

  43. 43.

    Jyske T, Makinen H, Saranpaa P (2008) Wood density within Norway spruce stems. Silva Fenn 42(3):439–55

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. 44.

    Repola J (2006) Models for vertical wood density of Scots pine, Norway spruce and birch stems, and their application to determine average wood density. Silva Fenn 40(4):673–85

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We thank the Danish Strategic Research Council (the BIORESOURCE project) and Nordic Energy Research (the ENERWOODS project) and HedeDanmark A/S for funding. Personal thanks to Christian Mørk Hansen for indispensable help in field work and Rita Razauskaite for her patient laboratory work.

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Anders Taeroe.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Taeroe, A., Nord-Larsen, T., Stupak, I. et al. Allometric Biomass, Biomass Expansion Factor and Wood Density Models for the OP42 Hybrid Poplar in Southern Scandinavia. Bioenerg. Res. 8, 1332–1343 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12155-015-9592-3

Download citation

Keywords

  • Forest carbon pools
  • Populus
  • BEF
  • Stem basic density
  • Aboveground biomass
  • Bioenergy