Influence of growth dominance and individual tree growth efficiency on Pinus taeda stand growth. A contribution to the debate about why stands productivity declines
- Autores
- Fernández Tschieder, Ezequiel; Fernandez, Maria Elena; Schlichter, Tomás Miguel; Pinazo, Martín Alcides; Crechi, Ernesto Héctor
- Año de publicación
- 2012
- Idioma
- inglés
- Tipo de recurso
- artículo
- Estado
- versión publicada
- Descripción
- A well recognized pattern during even-aged stands development is the growth decline after reaching a peak. We studied the effect of changes in stand structure, characterized by growth dominance, upon stand growth, stand growth efficiency and tree growth efficiency in thinned and unthinned plots of Pinus taeda. According to the stated hypothesis (Binkley, 2004), stand growth decline would be related to a decrease in growth efficiency of smaller trees due to the increase of growth dominance. Growth dominance in unthinned plots continuously increased with age, although it was very low compared to other genus, particularly Eucalyptus. In thinned plots, growth dominance was even lower and no consistent trend through time was observed. In general large trees were more efficient than small trees in unthinned and thinned plots, however, growth efficiency of both, small and large trees, showed the same pattern with age. Nevertheless, in both treatments, the difference between growth efficiency of smallest and largest trees increased with developing growth dominance because the increasing difference in tree size with age. At stand level lower growth dominance levels did not result in higher stand growth efficiency. Based on the low growth dominance levels, we cannot conclude that increasing growth dominance during stand development can be responsible for its growth decline. Growth dominance appears not to be the cause but the consequence of growth efficiency differentiation between small and large trees of a stand.
Fil: Fernández Tschieder, Ezequiel. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria. Centro Regional Buenos Aires Norte. Estación Experimental Agropecuaria Delta del Paraná; Argentina
Fil: Fernandez, Maria Elena. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina
Fil: Schlichter, Tomás Miguel. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria; Argentina
Fil: Pinazo, Martín Alcides. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria; Argentina
Fil: Crechi, Ernesto Héctor. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria; Argentina - Materia
-
Age-related growth decline
Stand structure
Growth dominance coefficient
Thinning - Nivel de accesibilidad
- acceso abierto
- Condiciones de uso
- https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.5/ar/
- Repositorio
- Institución
- Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas
- OAI Identificador
- oai:ri.conicet.gov.ar:11336/269023
Ver los metadatos del registro completo
id |
CONICETDig_f1397308545b50b7cd4fe2e662fc1ce5 |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:ri.conicet.gov.ar:11336/269023 |
network_acronym_str |
CONICETDig |
repository_id_str |
3498 |
network_name_str |
CONICET Digital (CONICET) |
spelling |
Influence of growth dominance and individual tree growth efficiency on Pinus taeda stand growth. A contribution to the debate about why stands productivity declinesFernández Tschieder, EzequielFernandez, Maria ElenaSchlichter, Tomás MiguelPinazo, Martín AlcidesCrechi, Ernesto HéctorAge-related growth declineStand structureGrowth dominance coefficientThinninghttps://purl.org/becyt/ford/4.1https://purl.org/becyt/ford/4A well recognized pattern during even-aged stands development is the growth decline after reaching a peak. We studied the effect of changes in stand structure, characterized by growth dominance, upon stand growth, stand growth efficiency and tree growth efficiency in thinned and unthinned plots of Pinus taeda. According to the stated hypothesis (Binkley, 2004), stand growth decline would be related to a decrease in growth efficiency of smaller trees due to the increase of growth dominance. Growth dominance in unthinned plots continuously increased with age, although it was very low compared to other genus, particularly Eucalyptus. In thinned plots, growth dominance was even lower and no consistent trend through time was observed. In general large trees were more efficient than small trees in unthinned and thinned plots, however, growth efficiency of both, small and large trees, showed the same pattern with age. Nevertheless, in both treatments, the difference between growth efficiency of smallest and largest trees increased with developing growth dominance because the increasing difference in tree size with age. At stand level lower growth dominance levels did not result in higher stand growth efficiency. Based on the low growth dominance levels, we cannot conclude that increasing growth dominance during stand development can be responsible for its growth decline. Growth dominance appears not to be the cause but the consequence of growth efficiency differentiation between small and large trees of a stand.Fil: Fernández Tschieder, Ezequiel. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria. Centro Regional Buenos Aires Norte. Estación Experimental Agropecuaria Delta del Paraná; ArgentinaFil: Fernandez, Maria Elena. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; ArgentinaFil: Schlichter, Tomás Miguel. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria; ArgentinaFil: Pinazo, Martín Alcides. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria; ArgentinaFil: Crechi, Ernesto Héctor. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria; ArgentinaElsevier Science2012-04info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionhttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501info:ar-repo/semantics/articuloapplication/pdfapplication/pdfapplication/pdfhttp://hdl.handle.net/11336/269023Fernández Tschieder, Ezequiel; Fernandez, Maria Elena; Schlichter, Tomás Miguel; Pinazo, Martín Alcides; Crechi, Ernesto Héctor; Influence of growth dominance and individual tree growth efficiency on Pinus taeda stand growth. A contribution to the debate about why stands productivity declines; Elsevier Science; Forest Ecology and Management; 227; 4-2012; 116-1230378-1127CONICET DigitalCONICETenginfo:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/doi/10.1016/j.foreco.2012.04.025info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/url/https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0378112712002344info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccesshttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.5/ar/reponame:CONICET Digital (CONICET)instname:Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas2025-09-29T10:41:23Zoai:ri.conicet.gov.ar:11336/269023instacron:CONICETInstitucionalhttp://ri.conicet.gov.ar/Organismo científico-tecnológicoNo correspondehttp://ri.conicet.gov.ar/oai/requestdasensio@conicet.gov.ar; lcarlino@conicet.gov.arArgentinaNo correspondeNo correspondeNo correspondeopendoar:34982025-09-29 10:41:23.491CONICET Digital (CONICET) - Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicasfalse |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
Influence of growth dominance and individual tree growth efficiency on Pinus taeda stand growth. A contribution to the debate about why stands productivity declines |
title |
Influence of growth dominance and individual tree growth efficiency on Pinus taeda stand growth. A contribution to the debate about why stands productivity declines |
spellingShingle |
Influence of growth dominance and individual tree growth efficiency on Pinus taeda stand growth. A contribution to the debate about why stands productivity declines Fernández Tschieder, Ezequiel Age-related growth decline Stand structure Growth dominance coefficient Thinning |
title_short |
Influence of growth dominance and individual tree growth efficiency on Pinus taeda stand growth. A contribution to the debate about why stands productivity declines |
title_full |
Influence of growth dominance and individual tree growth efficiency on Pinus taeda stand growth. A contribution to the debate about why stands productivity declines |
title_fullStr |
Influence of growth dominance and individual tree growth efficiency on Pinus taeda stand growth. A contribution to the debate about why stands productivity declines |
title_full_unstemmed |
Influence of growth dominance and individual tree growth efficiency on Pinus taeda stand growth. A contribution to the debate about why stands productivity declines |
title_sort |
Influence of growth dominance and individual tree growth efficiency on Pinus taeda stand growth. A contribution to the debate about why stands productivity declines |
dc.creator.none.fl_str_mv |
Fernández Tschieder, Ezequiel Fernandez, Maria Elena Schlichter, Tomás Miguel Pinazo, Martín Alcides Crechi, Ernesto Héctor |
author |
Fernández Tschieder, Ezequiel |
author_facet |
Fernández Tschieder, Ezequiel Fernandez, Maria Elena Schlichter, Tomás Miguel Pinazo, Martín Alcides Crechi, Ernesto Héctor |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
Fernandez, Maria Elena Schlichter, Tomás Miguel Pinazo, Martín Alcides Crechi, Ernesto Héctor |
author2_role |
author author author author |
dc.subject.none.fl_str_mv |
Age-related growth decline Stand structure Growth dominance coefficient Thinning |
topic |
Age-related growth decline Stand structure Growth dominance coefficient Thinning |
purl_subject.fl_str_mv |
https://purl.org/becyt/ford/4.1 https://purl.org/becyt/ford/4 |
dc.description.none.fl_txt_mv |
A well recognized pattern during even-aged stands development is the growth decline after reaching a peak. We studied the effect of changes in stand structure, characterized by growth dominance, upon stand growth, stand growth efficiency and tree growth efficiency in thinned and unthinned plots of Pinus taeda. According to the stated hypothesis (Binkley, 2004), stand growth decline would be related to a decrease in growth efficiency of smaller trees due to the increase of growth dominance. Growth dominance in unthinned plots continuously increased with age, although it was very low compared to other genus, particularly Eucalyptus. In thinned plots, growth dominance was even lower and no consistent trend through time was observed. In general large trees were more efficient than small trees in unthinned and thinned plots, however, growth efficiency of both, small and large trees, showed the same pattern with age. Nevertheless, in both treatments, the difference between growth efficiency of smallest and largest trees increased with developing growth dominance because the increasing difference in tree size with age. At stand level lower growth dominance levels did not result in higher stand growth efficiency. Based on the low growth dominance levels, we cannot conclude that increasing growth dominance during stand development can be responsible for its growth decline. Growth dominance appears not to be the cause but the consequence of growth efficiency differentiation between small and large trees of a stand. Fil: Fernández Tschieder, Ezequiel. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria. Centro Regional Buenos Aires Norte. Estación Experimental Agropecuaria Delta del Paraná; Argentina Fil: Fernandez, Maria Elena. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina Fil: Schlichter, Tomás Miguel. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria; Argentina Fil: Pinazo, Martín Alcides. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria; Argentina Fil: Crechi, Ernesto Héctor. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria; Argentina |
description |
A well recognized pattern during even-aged stands development is the growth decline after reaching a peak. We studied the effect of changes in stand structure, characterized by growth dominance, upon stand growth, stand growth efficiency and tree growth efficiency in thinned and unthinned plots of Pinus taeda. According to the stated hypothesis (Binkley, 2004), stand growth decline would be related to a decrease in growth efficiency of smaller trees due to the increase of growth dominance. Growth dominance in unthinned plots continuously increased with age, although it was very low compared to other genus, particularly Eucalyptus. In thinned plots, growth dominance was even lower and no consistent trend through time was observed. In general large trees were more efficient than small trees in unthinned and thinned plots, however, growth efficiency of both, small and large trees, showed the same pattern with age. Nevertheless, in both treatments, the difference between growth efficiency of smallest and largest trees increased with developing growth dominance because the increasing difference in tree size with age. At stand level lower growth dominance levels did not result in higher stand growth efficiency. Based on the low growth dominance levels, we cannot conclude that increasing growth dominance during stand development can be responsible for its growth decline. Growth dominance appears not to be the cause but the consequence of growth efficiency differentiation between small and large trees of a stand. |
publishDate |
2012 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2012-04 |
dc.type.none.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501 info:ar-repo/semantics/articulo |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.none.fl_str_mv |
http://hdl.handle.net/11336/269023 Fernández Tschieder, Ezequiel; Fernandez, Maria Elena; Schlichter, Tomás Miguel; Pinazo, Martín Alcides; Crechi, Ernesto Héctor; Influence of growth dominance and individual tree growth efficiency on Pinus taeda stand growth. A contribution to the debate about why stands productivity declines; Elsevier Science; Forest Ecology and Management; 227; 4-2012; 116-123 0378-1127 CONICET Digital CONICET |
url |
http://hdl.handle.net/11336/269023 |
identifier_str_mv |
Fernández Tschieder, Ezequiel; Fernandez, Maria Elena; Schlichter, Tomás Miguel; Pinazo, Martín Alcides; Crechi, Ernesto Héctor; Influence of growth dominance and individual tree growth efficiency on Pinus taeda stand growth. A contribution to the debate about why stands productivity declines; Elsevier Science; Forest Ecology and Management; 227; 4-2012; 116-123 0378-1127 CONICET Digital CONICET |
dc.language.none.fl_str_mv |
eng |
language |
eng |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/doi/10.1016/j.foreco.2012.04.025 info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/url/https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0378112712002344 |
dc.rights.none.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.5/ar/ |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
rights_invalid_str_mv |
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.5/ar/ |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
application/pdf application/pdf application/pdf |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Elsevier Science |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Elsevier Science |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
reponame:CONICET Digital (CONICET) instname:Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas |
reponame_str |
CONICET Digital (CONICET) |
collection |
CONICET Digital (CONICET) |
instname_str |
Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
CONICET Digital (CONICET) - Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
dasensio@conicet.gov.ar; lcarlino@conicet.gov.ar |
_version_ |
1844614444897796096 |
score |
13.070432 |