2014
DOI: 10.1134/s1067413614050099
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Organic carbon fluxes in the system soil-phytocenosis of bilberry-sphagnum spruce forest in the middle taiga zone of the Komi republic

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2016
2016
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 9 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 3 publications
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Siberian spruce stands out as one of the best carbon accumulators, particularly in the middle taiga spruce stands, where carbon accumulation reaches 85.48 tons per hectare, with 95% of the carbon concentrated in Siberian spruce trees [6].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Siberian spruce stands out as one of the best carbon accumulators, particularly in the middle taiga spruce stands, where carbon accumulation reaches 85.48 tons per hectare, with 95% of the carbon concentrated in Siberian spruce trees [6].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…That said, N is an important limiting factor for vegetation growth, especially in cold temperate and boreal forests, where N addition significantly increases primary productivity and carbon uptake. Many research groups have conducted large-scale studies of carbon and nitrogen contents in various components of forest biogeocenosesterrestrial and underground biomass fractions, soil, atmospheric deposition, soil water, and others [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8]. However, the carbon and nitrogen contents in various components of representative northern taiga forests of the Murmansk region remain poorly studied.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It is empirically demonstrated that a larger sampling area is necessary for a stand‐scale estimate of DOM necromass with high spatial variability (Yoneda, 1982). For example, leaf litter and FWD are considered to have relatively lower spatial variability than that of CWD and were often sampled with plots ≥1–5 m 2 (Kavvadias et al, 2001; Kuznetsov & Bobkova, 2014; Ugawa et al, 2012), whereas CWD is considered to have higher spatial variability and was often surveyed with plots ≥100 m 2 or along lines ≥10 m (Iwashita et al, 2013; Kissing & Powers, 2010; Palace et al, 2012; Pedlar et al, 2002). Insufficient sampling effort or arrangement may lead to an incorrect estimate of DOM necromass and, consequently, R stand estimate (Chambers et al, 2001; Gough et al, 2007; Jomura et al, 2007; Liu et al, 2006; Olson, 1963; Uchida et al, 2005).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%