Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Planting of different-sized tree transplants on arable soil

  • Research Article
  • Published:
Central European Journal of Biology

Abstract

On the arable land of the Rosovka Stream alluvium in the Czech Republic, a windbreak containing native woody species, was planted within a restoration project. This study evaluates the effect of that planting of three different tree sizes, on the rate of growth. The sizes of transplants employed in this study included small (1.0–1.5 meters tall), medium-sized (2.0–2.5 meters tall) and large (with a trunk circumference of 0.1–0.12 meters). The following native tree species, from the Eurosiberian region, were used: Quercus robur L., Carpinus betulus L., Fraxinus excelsior L., Acer campestre L., Acer pseudoplatanus L., Tilia cordata Mill., and Prunus avium L. Growth rates were monitored over a five-year period. Small transplants had the highest growth; they grew approximately 0.4 meters more than transplants from the other size categories. Our results show that the selection of the size of transplant has a significant impact on development and growth. However, differences in the post-transplant responses of individual species were found.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Caborn J.M., The value of shelterbelts to farming, Agric. Rev., 1957, 2, 14–19

    Google Scholar 

  2. Puri S., Singh S., Khara A., Effect of windbreak on the yield of cotton crop in semiarid regions of Haryana, Agroforest. Syst., 1992, 18, 183–195

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Sun D., Dickinson G.R., A case study of shelterbelt effect on potato (Solanum tuberosum) yield on the Atherton Tablelands in tropical north Australia, Agroforest. Syst., 1994, 25, 141–151

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Sun D., Dickinson G.R., Early growth of six native Australian tree species in windbreaks and their effect on potato growth in tropical northern Australia, Forest Ecol. Manag., 1997, 95, 21–34

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Boldes U., Goldberg A., Marañón Di Leo J., Colman J., Scarabino A., Canopy flow and aspects of the response of plants protected by herbaceous shelterbelts and wood fences, J. Wind. Eng. Ind. Aerod., 2002, 90, 1253–1270

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Marshall J.K., The effect of shelter on the productivity of grasslands and field crops, Field Crop Abstracts, 1967, 20, 1–14

    Google Scholar 

  7. Kort J., Benefits of windbreaks to field and forage crops, Agr. Ecosyst. Environ., 1988, 22–23, 165–190

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Sturrock J.W., Shelter: its management and promotion, Agr. Ecosyst. Environ., 1988, 22–23, 1–13

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Morgan R.P.C., Wind erosion control, In: Morgan R.P.C., Rickson R.J., (Eds.), Slope Stabilization and Runoff Control: A Bioengineering Approach, New York, 1995, 191–220

  10. Armbrust D.V., Bilbro J.D., Relating plant canopy characteristics to soil transport capacity by wind, Agron. J., 1997, 89, 157–162

    Google Scholar 

  11. Veihe A., Hasholt B., Schiøtz I.G., Soil erosion in Denmark: processes and politics, Environ. Sci. Policy, 2003, 6, 37–50

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Foley J.A., DeFries R., Asner G.P., Barford C., Bonan G., Carpenter S.R, et al., Global consequences of land use, Science, 2005, 309, 570–574

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Otte A., Simmering D., Wolters V., Biodiversity at the landscape level recent concepts and perspectives for multifunctional land use, Landscape Ecol., 2007, 22, 639–642

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Nordstrom K.F., Hotta S., Wind erosion from cropland in the USA: A review of problems, solutions and prospects, Geoderma, 2004, 121,157–167

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Boutin C., Jobin B., Bélanger L., Choinière L., Plant diversity in three types of hedgerows adjancet to cropfields, Biodivers. Conserv., 2002, 11, 1–25

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Capel S.W., Design of windbreaks for wildlife in the great plains of North America, Agr. Ecosyst. Environ., 1988, 22–23, 337–347

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Cable T.T., Nonagricultural benefits of windbreaks in Kansas, Great Plains Res., 1999, 9, 41–53

    Google Scholar 

  18. Long A.J., Nair P.K.R., Trees outside forests: Agro-, community, and urban forestry, New Forest., 1999, 17, 145–174

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Lütz M., Bastian O., Implementation of landscape planning and nature conservation in the agricultural landscape — a case study from Saxony, Agr. Ecosyst. Environ., 2002, 92, 159–170

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Webb A.A., Erskine W.D., A practical scientific approach to riparian vegetation rehabilitation in Australia, J. Environ. Manage., 2003, 68, 329–341

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Miyawaki A., Golley F.B., Forest reconstruction as ecological engineering, Ecol. Eng., 1993, 2, 333–345

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Rodwell J., Patterson G., Creating New Native Woodlands, Forest. Comm. Bull., 112. HMSO, London, 1994

    Google Scholar 

  23. Kaiser T., Die potentielle natürliche Vegetation als Planungsgrundlage im Naturschutz, Nat. Landsch., 1996, 71, 435–439, (in German)

    Google Scholar 

  24. Culek M., (Ed.), Biogeografické členění České republiky [Biogeographic regions of the Czech Republic], Enigma, Praha, 1996, (in Czech)

  25. Neuhäuslová Z., (Ed.), Mapa potenciální přirozené vegetace České republiky [Map of Potential Natural Vegetation of the Czech Republic], Academia, Praha, 1998, (in Czech, English summary)

  26. Mikyška R., (Ed.), Geobotanická mapa ČSSR 1. České země [Geobotanical map of the CSSR 1. Czech lands], In: Vegetace ČSSR, ser. A2, Academia, Praha [text], 1968, (in Czech)

  27. Mikyška R., (Ed.), Geobotanická mapa ČSSR 1. České země [Geobotanical map of the CSSR 1. Czech lands], Academia, Praha [maps], 1972, (in Czech)

  28. Klute A., (Ed.), Methods of Soil Analysis, Part 1, Physical and Mineralogical Methods, SSSA, 1986, 5

    Google Scholar 

  29. Gilman E.F., Black R.J., Dehgan B., Irrigation volume and frequency and tree size affect establishment rate, J. Arboricult., 1998, 24, 1–9

    Google Scholar 

  30. Lauderdale D.M., Gilliam C.H., Eakes D.J., Keever G.J., Chappelka A.H., Tree transplant size influences posttransplant growth, gas exchange, and leaf water potential of ‘October Glory’ red maple, J. Environ. Hort., 1995, 13, 178–181

    Google Scholar 

  31. Watson G., Tree size affects root regeneration and top growth after transplanting, J. Arboricult., 1985, 11, 37–40

    Google Scholar 

  32. Watson G.W., Himelick E.B., Root distribution of nursery trees and its relationship to transplanting success, J. Arboricult., 1982, 8, 225–229

    Google Scholar 

  33. Watson G.W., Himelick E.B., Root regeneration of transplanted trees, J. Arboricult., 1982, 8, 305–310

    Google Scholar 

  34. Puértolas J., Gil L., Pardos J.A., Effects of nutritional status and seedling size on field performance of Pinus halepensis planted on former arable land in the Mediterranean basin, Forestry, 2003, 76, 159–168

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Jobidon R., Charette L., Bernier P.Y., Initial size and competing vegetation effects on water stress and growth of Picea mariana (Mill.) BSP seedlings planted in three different environments, Forest. Ecol. Manag., 1998, 103, 293–305

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Gilman E.F., Tree root growth and development. II. Response to culture, management and planting, J. Environ. Hort., 1990, 8, 220–227

    Google Scholar 

  37. Bevington K.B., Castle W.S., Annual root growth pattern of young citrus trees in relation to shoot growth, soil temperature, and soil water content, J. Am. Soc. Hort. Sci., 1985, 110, 840–845

    Google Scholar 

  38. Fare D.C., Gilliam C.H., Ponder H.G., Root distribution of two field-grown Ilex, HortScience, 1985, 10, 1129–1130

    Google Scholar 

  39. Dostálek J., Weber M., Matula S., Petruš J., Koželuhová K., FrantÍk T., et al., Planting of Woody Species in an Agricultural Landscape: a Case Study in the Valová River Floodplain, Acta Pruhoniciana, 2005, 80, 1–65, (in Czech; English summary)

    Google Scholar 

  40. Dostálek J., Weber M., Matula S., Frantík T., Forest stand restoration in the agricultural landscape: The effect of different methods of planting establishment, Ecol. Eng., 2007, 29, 77–86

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Pezeshki S.R., Li S., Shields F.D. Jr., Martin L.T., Factors governing survival of black willow (Salix nigra) cuttings in a streambank restoration project, Ecol. Eng., 2007, 29, 56–65

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Palacios G., Navarro Cerrillo R.M., del Campo A., Toral M., Site preparation, stock quality and planting date effect on early establishment of Holm oak (Quercus ilex L.) seedlings, Ecol. Eng., 2009, 35, 38–46

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Struve D.K., Burchfield L., Maupin C., Survival and growth of transplanted large- and small-caliper red oaks, J. Arboricult., 2000, 26, 162–169

    Google Scholar 

  44. Watson W.T., Influence of Tree Size on Transplant Establishment and Growth, HortTechnology, 2005, 15, 118–122

    Google Scholar 

  45. Löf M., Establishment and growth in seedlings of Fagus sylvatica and Quercus robur: influence of interference from herbaceous vegetation, Can. J. Forest. Res., 2000, 30, 855–864

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Löf M., Thomsen A., Madsen P., Sowing and transplanting of broadleaves (Fagus sylvatica L., Quercus robur L., Prunus avium L., and Crataegus monogyna Jacq.) for afforestation of farmland, Forest. Ecol. Manag., 2004, 188, 113–123

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Zahawi R.A., Establishment and Growth of Living Fence Species: An Overlooked Tool for the Restoration of Degraded Areas in the Tropics, Restor. Ecol., 2005, 13, 92–102

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Silva Tarouca Research Institute for Landscape and Ornamental Gardening, CZ-252 43, Průhonice, Czech Republic

    Jiří Dostálek, Martin Weber & Tomáš Frantík

  2. Faculty of Agrobiology, Food and Natural Resources, Department of Water Resources, Czech University of Life Sciences in Prague, CZ-165 21, Praha 6, Czech Republic

    Svatopluk Matula

  3. Institute of Botany, Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic, CZ-252 43, Průhonice, Czech Republic

    Tomáš Frantík

Authors
  1. Jiří Dostálek
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Martin Weber
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Svatopluk Matula
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Tomáš Frantík
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jiří Dostálek.

About this article

Cite this article

Dostálek, J., Weber, M., Matula, S. et al. Planting of different-sized tree transplants on arable soil. cent.eur.j.biol. 4, 574–584 (2009). https://doi.org/10.2478/s11535-009-0049-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/s11535-009-0049-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation