2010
DOI: 10.1007/s10342-010-0362-7
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The estimation of aboveground biomass and nutrient pools of understorey plants in closed Norway spruce forests and on clearcuts

Abstract: The estimation model PhytoCalc allows a nondestructive quantification of dry weight and nutrient pools of understorey plants in forests by using the relationship between species biomass, cover and mean shoot length. The model has been validated with independent samples in several German forest types and can be a useful tool in forest monitoring. However, in open areas within forests (e.g. clearcuts), the current model version underestimates biomass and produces unreliable nutrient pool estimations. Thus, tissu… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

1
19
0
1

Year Published

2012
2012
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

1
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 23 publications
(21 citation statements)
references
References 47 publications
1
19
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…To estimate understorey biomass, the mean shoot length of each species with a cover higher than 5% was additionally recorded. For each of these species, shoot lengths were measured on five randomly selected individuals by elongating the shoots as described in Heinrichs, Bernhardt‐Römermann, and Schmidt (). From the three species with the highest abundances, a subsample of the non‐woody above‐ground biomass was taken for nutrient analyses.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…To estimate understorey biomass, the mean shoot length of each species with a cover higher than 5% was additionally recorded. For each of these species, shoot lengths were measured on five randomly selected individuals by elongating the shoots as described in Heinrichs, Bernhardt‐Römermann, and Schmidt (). From the three species with the highest abundances, a subsample of the non‐woody above‐ground biomass was taken for nutrient analyses.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Total understorey biomass was estimated non‐destructively via the PhytoCalc model (Bolte, Czajkowski, Bielefeldt, Wolff, & Heinrichs, ; Heinrichs et al, ), comprising allometric equations to estimate biomass based on cover and shoot length data (Equation ). The coefficients of these allometric equations ( a g , b g and c g ) were calibrated and validated for 13 morphological growth forms and eight tree and shrub species commonly found in the understorey of temperate forests (Bolte et al, ; Heinrichs et al, ).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This is in line with a broad-scale vegetation assessment at the same sites and in the same years published by Heinrichs and Schmidt (2009). We estimated the above-ground dry mass and the concentration of main nutritional elements of each ground vegetation species using the model PhytoCalc (Bolte et al 2002), amended by correction factors of Heinrichs et al (2010). PhytoCalc allows a non-destructive estimation of dry mass and nutrient content of ground vegetation by using the relationship between species biomass, cover and mean shoot length.…”
Section: Ground Vegetation Assessmentsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…PhytoCalc allows a non-destructive estimation of dry mass and nutrient content of ground vegetation by using the relationship between species biomass, cover and mean shoot length. It was initially developed for closed forests, but the correction factor of Heinrichs et al (2010) made it applicable also to clear cut areas. Finally, total dry mass and total content of nutrients per square meter were obtained as sums across the species.…”
Section: Ground Vegetation Assessmentsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Total herb layer (THL) cover is estimated in many NFIs (Tomppo et al 2010;Chirici et al 2011) and methods exist to estimate plant biomass based on their cover (e.g. Welch et al 2007;Schulze et al 2009;Heinrichs et al 2010). However, these methods require cover estimates of individual morphological groups and height estimates (e.g.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%