Developmental patterns and nutrition impact radiation use efficiency components in southern pine stands

被引:72
作者
Martin, TA [1 ]
Jokela, EJ [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Florida, Sch Forest Resources & Conservat, Gainesville, FL 32611 USA
关键词
aboveground net primary production; basal area; Florida; USA; Pinus elliottii; Pinus taeda; stand development;
D O I
10.1890/03-5262
中图分类号
Q14 [生态学(生物生态学)];
学科分类号
071012 ; 0713 ;
摘要
A number of contemporary forest productivity models use some variation of a growth efficiency (epsilon) approach. Typically, these models predict production (aboveground net primary production, ANPP in units of dry mass biomass per unit of area per unit of time) as the product of two terms: radiation use efficiency (epsilon, in units of dry mass biomass per megajoule of photosynthetically active radiation [PAR] intercepted or absorbed by the plant canopy) and the sum of PAR intercepted or absorbed by the canopy (Phi(par), in units of megajoules per unit of radiation area per unit of time). Predicting productivity in a biologically realistic manner requires an understanding of how model components are affected by natural and anthropogenic environmental factors, as well as other influences such as aging or stand development. We measured or calculated all components of the epsilon model (aboveground woody biomass increment, I-WB; foliage biomass increment, I-FB; aboveground net primary production, ANPP; leaf area index, LAI; Phi(par); and aboveground radiation use efficiency, epsilon(A)) from ages 4 to 18 yr in loblolly and slash pine stands in north-central Florida grown under replicated fertilizer and understory vegetation control treatments that induced a large gradient in soil nutrient availability. Treatments impacted all measured components, which in turn led to strong responses in aboveground radiation use efficiency. Age 6-9 yr epsilon(A), averaged across species, ranged from 0.78 g/MJ to 0.83 g/MJ in treatments receiving fertilizer or vegetation control vs. 0.53 g/MJ in untreated plots. Stand developmental processes modified these responses, however, with epsilon(A), declining by over 40% in treated plots from age 6-9 yr to age 15-16 yr. Variation in epsilon(A) in both species was linked to development of stand basal area (BA), with a positive, linear relationship between e, and BA for values of BA < 18 M-2/ha and a declining, linear relationship for values of BA > 18 M-2/ha. Loblolly pine epsilon(A) was positively correlated with foliar nitrogen concentration, [N]. These data highlight the dynamic nature of epsilon(A) and suggest that both stand developmental and nutritional processes drive changes in ANPP and epsilon(A) in southern pines.
引用
收藏
页码:1839 / 1854
页数:16
相关论文
共 115 条
[1]  
Abrahamson W.G., 1990, P103
[2]  
Albaugh TJ, 1998, FOREST SCI, V44, P317
[3]   An analytical model for estimating canopy transpiration and carbon assimilation fluxes based on canopy light-use efficiency [J].
Anderson, MC ;
Norman, JM ;
Meyers, TP ;
Diak, GR .
AGRICULTURAL AND FOREST METEOROLOGY, 2000, 101 (04) :265-289
[4]   Changes in carbon allocation patterns in spruce and pine trees following irrigation and fertilization [J].
Axelsson, E. ;
Axelsson, B. .
TREE PHYSIOLOGY, 1986, 2 (1-3) :189-204
[5]   Eight-year responses of light interception, effective leaf area index, and stemwood production in fertilized stands of interior Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii var. glauca) [J].
Balster, NJ ;
Marshall, JD .
CANADIAN JOURNAL OF FOREST RESEARCH-REVUE CANADIENNE DE RECHERCHE FORESTIERE, 2000, 30 (05) :733-743
[6]  
Barron-Gafford GA, 2003, FOREST SCI, V49, P291
[7]  
BASKERVILLE G L, 1972, Canadian Journal of Forest Research, V2, P49, DOI 10.1139/x72-009
[8]   Modelling site productivity of Eucalyptus globulus in response to climatic and site factors [J].
Battaglia, M ;
Sands, P .
AUSTRALIAN JOURNAL OF PLANT PHYSIOLOGY, 1997, 24 (06) :831-850
[9]  
Beets PN, 1996, TREE PHYSIOL, V16, P131
[10]   A hypothesis about the interaction of tree dominance and stand production through stand development [J].
Binkley, D .
FOREST ECOLOGY AND MANAGEMENT, 2004, 190 (2-3) :265-271