Effects of thinning intensity on carbon storage of Larix olgensis plantation ecosystem.
-
摘要: 以三江平原丘陵区佳木斯市孟家岗林场的长白落叶松人工幼龄林(17年生)为对象,设置5种长期、多次、不同强度的间伐试验:2次高强度间伐(L1,35.6%~43.4%)、2次中强度间伐(L2,23.1%~24.3%)、3次中强度间伐(L3,15.3%~23.8%)、4次低强度间伐(L4,5.8%~17.1%)和对照(CK,历次间伐时仅移出枯立木)。通过5种处理后幼龄林生长至成熟林时(56年生)生态系统各组分碳储量调查,结合1974—2013年历次间伐木和枯死木碳储量,从枯死木、间伐木和成熟林活立木生物量碳、土壤碳、生态系统碳分配和林分累计固碳量方面,评价长期间伐对落叶松人工林碳储量的影响。间伐不仅能够明显降低成熟林累计枯死木生物量碳,由CK处理的40.3 t/hm2降低至8.3(3.1~14.1)t/hm2,而且能够提供32.8(21.9~50.1)m3/hm2的间伐材和10.4(6.9~13.8)t/hm2的生物量碳用作生物质燃料。间伐虽然降低成熟林枯枝落叶层碳储量(比CK降低14.8%),但能增加矿质土壤碳储量(比CK提高5.6%),尤其是L3处理后矿质土壤碳储量明显增加(比CK提高15.5%);间伐没有改变成熟林活立木生物量碳和生态系统碳储量分配特征(林分尺度活立木生物量碳中树干、树根、树枝、树皮和树叶比例依次为67.7%~68.7%、17.5%~18.0%、6.8%~7.0%、4.8%~4.9%和2.2%~2.3%。生态系统碳储量中活立木、0~30 cm矿质土壤层、枯枝落叶层、枯立木、灌木层和草本层所占比例依次为69.7%~72.0%、24.7%~27.7%、1.5%~2.2%、0~1.3%、0.1%~1.3%和0.1%~0.2%);但能提高地下碳储量(活立木和枯立木树根+矿质土壤层+枯枝落叶层+灌木层+草本层)占生态系统碳储量比例(间伐为40.5%~42.4%,CK为40.0%),降低树干、树枝和树皮之和所占比例(间伐为56.0%~57.9%,CK为58.3%),维持针叶比例恒定(1.6%)。成熟林主伐时,仅利用干材而枝桠留地时,能使活立木生物量碳的26.5%~27.4%留存于林地(CK为27.7%),而将枝桠随树干一起移出系统时,能使活立木碳储量的19.7%~20.3%(CK为20.5%)、生态系统碳储量的42.1%~44.0%(CK为41.7%)留存于系统。落叶松幼龄林(17年生)多次间伐后至成熟林时(56年生)活立木生物量碳、生态系统碳储量和林分累计固碳量能够恢复至CK相近似水平,分别仅比CK降低1.7%(-4.3%~1.5%)、1.7%(-5.9%~1.4%)和1.1%(-4.0%~0.8%),L3和L4处理,尤其是L4处理在上述指标方面甚至高于CK 处理1.5%、1.4%和0.8%。5.8%~23.8%的3~4次中、低强度抚育间伐至成熟林时既可提供间伐材和生物质燃料又能维持高的活立木生物量碳、生态系统碳储量和林分累计固碳量。Abstract: A long-term thinning experiment in Korean larch (Larix olgensis) plantation of Mengjiagang Forest Farm of Kiamusze in hilly area of Sanjiang Plain, northeastern China, was conducted to identify the effects of thinning on biomass carbon (dead and live biomass), soil carbon (forest floor and mineral soil), total ecosystem carbon storage and accumulative carbon sequestration (dead tree +thinned tree+ ecosystem carbon storage). Two harvesting scenarios (stem-only vs. whole-tree harvesting) were assessed in terms of carbon export. The study site was a 56-year-old larch plantation, where five thinnings of different intensities and frequencies were applied: 2 times heavy (35.6%-43.4%) thinning (L1), 2 times moderate (23.1%-24.3%) thinning (L2), 3 times moderate (15.3%-23.8%) thinning (L3), 4 times light (5.8%-17.1%) thinning (L4) and unthinned (CK, only harvesting dead biomass). The five thinning interventions involved whole-tree harvesting of thinned and dead trees (entire removal of slash and stem). The results revealed difference between the unthinned and thinned plots as regards the total dead wood debris, the former containing 40.3 t/ha, in the case of thinned plots, 8.3 t/ha (range 3.1-14.1). The energy wood (logging residues) and timber production by thinning were 10.4 t/ha (range 6.9-13.8) and 32.8 m3/ha(rang 21.9-50.1), respectively. Although the forest floor carbon pool was susceptible to loss (14.8% lower than CK), the mineral soil carbon pool could be enhanced by thinning (5.6% higher than CK), particularly in L3 plot (15.5% higher than CK). Thinning could not change the allometric relationships of living tree biomass carbon pool (proportions of wood-stem, root, branch, bark and foliage to the retained living tree biomass carbon pool were 67.7%-68.7%, 17.5%-18.0%, 6.8%-7.0%, 4.8%-4.9% and 2.2%-2.3%, respectively) and total ecosystem carbon pool (proportions of retained living trees, 0-30 cm mineral soil, forest floor, dead standing tree, shrub layer and herb layer to the total ecosystem carbon storage were 69.7%-72.0%, 24.7%-27.7%, 1.5%-2.2%, 0-1.3%, 0.1%-1.3% and 0.1%-0.2%, respectively), but increase the proportion of belowground carbon (roots of live and standing dead trees+0-30cm mineral soil+forest floor+shrub+herb) to the total ecosystem carbon storage (40.5%-42.4%, 40.0% for CK), and decrease the proportion of aboveground carbon (stem+branch+bark; 56.0%-57.9%, 58.3% for CK). Stem-only harvesting of old growth plantation could leave 26.5%-27.4% of living biomass carbon (27.7% for CK), whole-tree harvesting could leave19.7%-20.3% of living biomass carbon (20.5% for CK), and 42.1%-44.0% of ecosystem carbon (41.7% for CK). The averaged values of retained tree biomass, ecosystem carbon storage and stand accumulative carbon sequestration of thinned old growth larch plantations (56-year-old) were of similar levels with CK, and only 1.7% (-4.3%-1.5%), 1.7%(-5.9%-1.4%) and 1.1%(-4.0%-0.8%) lower than CK, respectively, but in the L3 and L4 plots, particularly in the L4 plot, the above indexes were 1.5%, 1.4%, and 0.8% higher than CK, respectively. Our results indicated that 3 and 4 times light or moderate (5.8%-23.8%) thinning not only supplies energy wood and timber production, but also does not alter the retained tree biomass, total ecosystem carbon content and stand accumulative carbon sequestration of old growth larch plantation, suggesting the sustainability of these silvicultural treatments.
-
Keywords:
- Korean larch /
- thinning /
- biomass /
- soil carbon /
- carbon storage /
- carbon allocation /
- carbon sequestration
-
-
[1] DWYER J M, FENSHAM R, BUCKLEY Y M. Restoration thinning accelerates structural development and carbon sequestration in an endangered Australian ecosystem[J] . Journal of Applied Ecology, 2010,47(3): 681-691.
[1] LIU G H, FU B J, FANG J Y. Carbon dynamics of Chinese forests and its contribution to global carbon balance[J] . Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2000,20(5):732-740.
[2] SUN Y J, ZHANG J, HAN A H, et al. Biomass and carbon pool of Larix gmelini young and middle age forest in Xing'an Mountains, Inner Mongolia[J] . Acta Ecologica Sinica,2007, 27(5):1756-1762.
[2] NUNERY J S, KEETON W S. Forest carbon storage in the northeastern United States: net effects of harvesting frequency, post-harvest retention, and wood products[J] . Forest Ecology and Management, 2010,259(1): 1363-1375.
[3] POWERS M, KOLKA R, PALIK B, et al. Long-term management impacts on carbon storage in Lake States forests[J] . Forest Ecology and Management, 2011,262(3):424-431.
[3] JU W Z, WANG X J, SUN Y J. Age structure effects on stand biomass and carbon storage distribution of Larix olgensis plantation[J] . Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2011, 31(4):1139-1148.
[4] CLARKE N, GUNDERSEN P, JNSSON-BELYAZID U, et al. Influence of different tree-harvesting intensities on forest soil carbon stocks in boreal and northern temperate forest ecosystems[J] . Forest Ecology and Management, 2015,351 (1):9-19.
[4] YIN M F, ZHAO L, CHEN X F, et al. Carbon storage maturity age of Larix olgenisis and L. kaempferi[J] . Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 2008,19(12): 2567-2571.
[5] ALAM A, KILPELAINEN A, KELLOMAKI S. Impacts of initial stand density and thinning regimes on energy wood production and management-related CO2 emissions in boreal ecosystems[J] . European Journal of Forest Research, 2012,131(3): 655-667.
[5] JIA Z K, GONG N N, YAO K, et al. Effects of thinning intensity on the growth and biomass of Larix principis-rupprechtii plantation in Saihanba, Hebei Province[J] . Journal of Northeast Forestry University, 2012,40(3):5-7,31.
[6] WANG M, LI F R, JIA W W, et al. Dynamic change of carbon storage for larch plantation in Heilongjiang Province[J] . Bulletin of Botanical Research,2013, 33(5):623-628.
[6] RUIZ-PEINADO R, BRAVO-OVIEDO A, LPEZ-SENESPLEDA E, et al. Do thinnings influence biomass and soil carbon stocks in Mediterranean maritime pinewoods [J] . European Journal of Forest Research, 2013,132(2):253-262.
[7] VARGAS R, ALLEN E B, ALLEN M F. Effects of vegetation thinning on above-and belowground carbon in a seasonally dry tropical forest in Mexico[J] . The Journal of Tropical Biology and Conservation, 2009,41(3):302-311.
[7] SUN Z H, JIN G Z, MU C C. On the long-term productivity maintenance of monoculture Larix olgensis larch timber forest in northeastern China[M] . Beijing: Science Press,2009.
[8] NAVE L E, VANCE E D, SWANSTON C W, et al. Harvest impacts on soil carbon storage in temperate forests[J] . Forest Ecology and Management, 2010,259(1): 857-866.
[9] WANG W F, PENG C H, KNEESHAW D D, et al. Modeling the effects of varied forest management regimes on carbon dynamics in jack pine stands under climate change[J] . Canadian Journal of Forest Research, 2013,43(5):469-479.
[10] THUMBER C, EASTAUGH C S, HASENAUER H. A thinning routine for large-scale biogeochemical mechanistic ecosystem models[J] . Forest Ecology and Management, 2014,320(1): 56-69.
[11] 刘国华,傅伯杰,方精云.中国森林碳动态及其对全球碳平衡的贡献[J] .生态学报,2000,20(5):732-740. [12] 孙玉军,张俊,韩爱惠,等.兴安落叶松(Larix gmelini)幼中龄林的生物量与碳汇功能[J] .生态学报, 2007,27(5):1756-1762. [13] 巨文珍,王新杰,孙玉军.长白落叶松林龄序列上的生物量及碳储量分配规律[J] .生态学报,2011,31(4):1139-1148. [14] 殷鸣放,赵林,陈晓非,等.长白落叶松与日本落叶松的碳储量成熟龄[J] .应用生态学报,2008,19(12):2567-2571. [15] 贾忠奎,公宁宁,姚凯,等.间伐强度对塞罕坝华北落叶松人工林生长进程和生物量的影响[J] .东北林业大学学报,2012,40(3):5-7,31. [16] 王蒙,李凤日,贾炜炜,等.黑龙江省落叶松人工林碳储量动态研究[J] .植物研究,2013,33(5):623-628. [17] 孙志虎,金光泽,牟长城.长白落叶松人工林长期生产力维持的研究[M] .北京:科学出版社, 2009. [18] BARITZ R, SEUFERT G, MONTANARELLA L, et al. Carbon concentrations and stocks in forest soils of Europe[J] . Forest Ecology and Management,2010,260(3):262-277.
[19] KURTH V J, D’AMATO A W, PALIK B J, et al. Fifteen-year patterns of soil carbon and nitrogen following biomass harvesting[J] . Soil Science Society of America Journal, 2014,8(2): 624-633.
[20] PAN Y, BIRDSEY R A, FANG J, et al. A large and persistent carbon sink in the world’s forests[J] . Science, 2011,333:988-993.
[21] ESWARAN H, BERG E V D, REICH P. Organic carbon in soils of the world[J] . Soil Science Society of America Journal, 1993,57(1):192-194.
[22] BATJES N H. Mitigation of atmospheric CO2 concentrations by increased carbon sequestration in the soil[J] . Biology Fertility of Soils, 1998,27(3):230-235.
[23] JANDL R, LINDNER M, VESTERDAL L, et al. How strongly can forest management influence soil carbon sequestration [J] . Geoderma, 2007,137(3): 253-268.
[24] GRAND S, LAVKULICH L M. Effects of forest harvest on soil carbon and related variables in Canadian spodosols[J] . Soil Science Society of America Journal, 2012,76(5): 1816-1827.
[25] HOOVER C M. Management impacts on forest floor and soil organic carbon in northern temperate forests of the US[J] . Carbon Balance and Management, 2011,6(1):17-24.
[26] GOODALE C L, APPS M J, BIRDSEY R A, et al. Forest carbon sinks in the northern hemisphere[J] . Ecological Applications, 2002, 12(3):891-899.
[27] VESTERDAL L, ELBERLING B, CHRISTIANSEN J R, et al. Soil respiration and rates of soil carbon turnover differ among six common European tree species[J] . Forest Ecology and Management, 2012,264(1):185-196.
[28] JOHNSON D W, CURTIS P S. Effects of forest management on soil C and N storage: meta analysis[J] . Forest Ecology and Management, 2001,140(1):227-238.
[29] ROIG S, RIO M, CANELLAS I, et al. Litter fall in Mediterranean Pinus pinaster Ait. stands under different thinning regimes[J] . Forest Ecology and Management,2005,206(1): 179-190.
[30] BLANCO J A, IMBERT J, CASTILLO F J. Influence of site characteristics and thinning intensity on litterfall production in two Pinus sylvestris L. forests in the western Pyrenees[J] . Forest Ecology and Management, 2006, 237(1): 342-352.
[31] SLODICAK M, NOVAK J, SKOVSGAARD J P. Wood production, litter fall and humus accumulation in a Czech thinning experiment in Norway spruce (Picea abies (L.) Karst.) [J] . Forest Ecology and Management, 2005,209(1): 157-166.
[32] DINCA L C, SPARCHEZ G H, DINCA M, et al. Organic carbon concentrations and stocks in Romanian mineral forest soils[J] . Annals of Forest Research, 2012,55(2):229-241.
[33] VESTERDAL L, RAULUND-RASMUSSEN K. Forest floor chemistry under seven tree species along a soil fertility gradient[J] . Canadian Journal of Forest Research, 1998, 28(11):1636-1647.
[34] CALLESEN I, LISKI J, RAULUND-RASMUSSEN K, et al. Soil carbon stores in Nordic well-drained forest soils: relationships with climate and texture class[J] . Global Change Biology, 2003,9(3): 358-370.
[35] ZHAO D H, KANE M, TESKEY R, et al. Impact of management on nutrients, carbon, and energy in aboveground biomass components of mid-rotation loblolly pine (Pinus taeda L.) plantations[J] . Annals of Forest Science, 2014,71(8): 843-851.
[36] VESTERDAL L, DALSGAARD M, FELBY C, et al. Effects of thinning and soil properties on accumulation of carbon, nitrogen and phosphorus in the forest floor of Norway spruce stands[J] . Forest Ecology and Management, 1995, 77(1):1-10.
[37] JONARD M, MISSON L, PONETTE Q. Long-term thinning effects on the forest floor and the foliar nutrient status of Norway spruce stands in the Belgian Ardennes[J] . Canadian Journal of Forest Research, 2006,36(10): 2684-2695.
[38] SKOVSGAARD J P, STUPAK I, VESTERDAL L. Distribution of biomass and carbon in even-aged stands of Norway spruce (Picea abies (L.) Karst.): a case study on spacing and thinning effects in northern Denmark[J] . Scandinavian Journal of Forest Research, 2006, 21(6): 470-488.
[39] TVEITE B, HANSSEN K H. Whole-tree thinnings in stands of Scots pine (Pinus sylvestris) and Norway spruce (Picea abies):short-and long-term growth results[J] . Forest Ecology and Management, 2013,298(1): 52-61.
[40] DEWAR R, CANNELL M G R. Carbon sequestration in the trees, products and soils of forest plantations: an analysis using UK examples[J] . Tree Physiology, 1992,11(1): 49-71.
[41] THORNLEY J H M, CANNELL M G R. Managing forests for wood yield and carbon storage: a theoretical study[J] . Tree Physiology, 2000,20(7):477-484.
[42] HAWTHORNE S N D, LANE P N J, BREN L J, et al. The long term effects of thinning treatments on vegetation structure and water yield[J] . Forest Ecology and Management, 2013,310(1):983-993.
[43] HERAS J D L, MOYA D, LO＇PEZ-SERRANO F R, et al. Carbon sequestration of naturally regenerated Aleppo pine stands in response to early thinning[J] . New Forests, 2013,44: 457-470.
[44] ALFARO-SANCHEZ R,LOPEZ-SERRANO F R, RUBIO E, et al. Response of biomass allocation patterns to thinning in Pinus halepensis differs under dry and semiarid Mediterranean climates[J] . Annals of Forest Science, 2015,72(5): 595-607.
[45] BAGDON B, HUANG C H. Carbon stocks and climate change: management implications in Northern Arizona ponderosa pine forests[J] . Forests, 2014,5(4): 620-642.
[46] MARTIN J L, GOWER S T, PLAUT J, et al. Carbon pools in a boreal mixedwood logging chronosequence[J] . Global Change Biology, 2005,11(11): 1883-1894.
[47] BRADFORD J B, FRAVER S, MILO A M, et al. Effects of multiple interacting disturbances and salvage logging on forest carbon stocks[J] . Forest Ecology and Management, 2012,267(1): 209-214.
[48] WARD C, POTHIER D, PARE D. Do boreal forests need fire disturbance to maintain productivity[J] . Ecosystems, 2014,17(6): 1053-1067.
[49] ALAM A, KELLOMAKI S, KILPELAINEN A, et al. Effects of stump extraction on the carbon sequestration in Norway spruce forest ecosystems under varying thinning regimes with implications for fossil fuel substitution[J] . Global Change Biology Bioenergy, 2013,5(4): 445-458.
[50] POWERS M D, KOLKA R K, BRADFORD J B, et al. Carbon stocks across a chronosequence of thinned and unmanaged red pine (Pinus resinosa) stands[J] . Ecological Applications, 2012,22(4): 1297-1307.
[51] PYORALA P, KELLOMKI S, PELTOLA H. Effects of management on biomass production in Norway spruce stands and carbon balance of bioenergy use[J] . Forest Ecology and Management, 2012,275(1): 87-97.
计量
- 文章访问数: 2205
- HTML全文浏览量: 269
- PDF下载量: 83
下载:
