2008
DOI: 10.1016/j.foreco.2007.09.038
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Influence of tree species on understory vegetation diversity and mechanisms involved—A critical review for temperate and boreal forests

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

29
565
4
19

Year Published

2011
2011
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

2
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 747 publications
(645 citation statements)
references
References 127 publications
29
565
4
19
Order By: Relevance
“…458 m a.s.l., where beech is considered more abundant and competitive than at lower altitudes. Similar ecological behaviour has been known for other tree species forming temperate and boreal forests (Augusto et al 2003;Tjoelker et al 2007;Barbier et al 2008;Ellenberg and Leuschner 2010).…”
Section: Interspecific Competition By Beechsupporting
confidence: 74%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…458 m a.s.l., where beech is considered more abundant and competitive than at lower altitudes. Similar ecological behaviour has been known for other tree species forming temperate and boreal forests (Augusto et al 2003;Tjoelker et al 2007;Barbier et al 2008;Ellenberg and Leuschner 2010).…”
Section: Interspecific Competition By Beechsupporting
confidence: 74%
“…The understory light availability during the period of full foliage of beech stands is very low (van Eimern 1984), which suppresses the occurrence of light-demanding understory species which coincide in their vegetative phase with the development of the beech foliage. On the other hand, the admixture of other canopy tree species increases towards the margins of the vertical distribution of beech stands and higher canopy heterogeneity enables better light transmission to the understory (Barbier et al 2008) and/or faster litter decomposition rates compared to pure beech stands (e.g. Lorenz et al 2004;Jacob et al 2010).…”
Section: Interspecific Competition By Beechmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In 2012, seedling emergence was higher under the medium 25-30 m 2 ha −1 stand basal area and was favoured by being inside shrub cover, whereas in 2013, there were no significant effects of basal area or shrub condition on emergence. Light on the forest floor is a direct consequence of canopy structure and stand/shrub density (Catovsky and Bazzaz 2000;Balandier et al 2006b;Barbier et al 2008); a high light level may increase soil temperature and climate demand, thus decreasing accordingly soil moisture by increasing soil evaporation, as recorded in this particularly difficult conditions under the lowest tree canopy cover (Table 2). Soil temperature and humidity are likely to be the two main drivers of germination and seedling emergence under field conditions (Lee et al 2004;Castro et al 2005;Del Cerro et al 2009).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In contrast, the significantly higher trade-offs between UPD and AGC in the semiarid than those in the semi-humid areas may be caused by a weak competitive relationship. This may be partly due to the constraint of shading effects of trees on the understory vegetation (Barbier et al 2008;February et al 2013). Therefore, AGC sequestration outcompeted the development of UPD in the dry ecosystems.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%