2010
DOI: 10.1016/j.foreco.2010.01.036
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Interaction of gap age and microsite type for the regeneration of Picea abies

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

3
26
0

Year Published

2011
2011
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

1
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 26 publications
(29 citation statements)
references
References 44 publications
3
26
0
Order By: Relevance
“…This is probably the main reason why the variation between the two sites is small. In addition, there was no increase in mortality of saplings on the logs in disturbed area, as expected (Kathke, Bruelheide 2010). This is probably because during bark beetle …”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 79%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…This is probably the main reason why the variation between the two sites is small. In addition, there was no increase in mortality of saplings on the logs in disturbed area, as expected (Kathke, Bruelheide 2010). This is probably because during bark beetle …”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 79%
“…In the undisturbed site, Eustaška, the amount of light exposure should be considerably lower due to the dense stand conditions of the parent stand and could affect the growth rate. However, stands in these subalpine spruce forests allow for continuous sapling growth because the canopy in these forests is not fully closed allowing sufficient light to penetrate to the logs for successful sapling development and regeneration (Kathke, Bruelheide 2010). Improvement of light conditions in disturbed sites does not have an immediate effect on the height growth of saplings and it can take several years for the post-disturbance conditions to take effect (Metslaid et al 2005).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Many references can be found about regeneration processes and conditions (Kathke and Bruelheide, 2010;Barja et al, 2009;Maltez-Mouro et al, 2009;Kabrick et al, 2008;Darabant et al, 2007;Oliver, 2007;Bolte and Villanueva, 2006;Paluch, 2005;Oliver, 2003;Rozas, 2002;Page et al, 2001;Burschel et al, 1992) as well as to stand diversity analysis (Ruprecht et al, 2010;Graz, 2004;Pommerening, 2006;Pommerening, 2002;Pretzsch, 1998).…”
Section: Regeneración En Bosques Mixtos En La Serra Da Lousamentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Š amonil et al (2010) point out in their review that the proportion of the area covered by pit-and-mound complexes, and the often implicitly linked increased radiation levels, can hardly be related to the disturbance regime in terms of wind force. Many storm-induced microsites, especially dead wood (Zielonka 2006;Kathke and Bruelheide 2010), but in some cases also more stabilized pits and mounds (DeLong et al 1997), become available for regeneration only several years to decades after formation, to some extent decoupling light availability from substrate availability (Kathke and Bruelheide 2010). The focus of most studies on gaps and light conditions, combined with the often overlooked longevity of storm-induced microsites, implies that the role of the latter in providing suitable, well-located establishment sites may have been recently underestimated (e.g.…”
Section: Regeneration Strategiesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The focus of most studies on gaps and light conditions, combined with the often overlooked longevity of storm-induced microsites, implies that the role of the latter in providing suitable, well-located establishment sites may have been recently underestimated (e.g. in Kathke and Bruelheide 2010). Also, several unexpected findings point in the direction of factors other than radiation, such as substrate suitability, nutrient availability, below-ground competition, and regeneration strategy (e.g.…”
Section: Regeneration Strategiesmentioning
confidence: 99%