English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

HOUŠKOVÁ KATEŘINA, MAUER OLDŘICH: Eff ect of the density of transplants in reforestation on the morphological quality of the above-ground part of European beech (Fagus sylvatica L.) six years a er planting. Acta Universitatis Agriculturae et Silviculturae Mendelianae Brunensis, 2013, LXI, No. 6, pp. 1703–1713 Quality of the above-ground part of European beech planted at diff erent densities and spacing patterns for the purpose of artifi cial forest regeneration was monitored 3, 4 and 6 years a er planting. The initial numbers of beech transplants were 5,000 pcs.ha−1, 10,000 pcs.ha−1, 15,000 pcs.ha−1 and 20,000 pcs.ha−1. The spacing pattern of transplants was either square or rectangular nearly in all variants: 1.4 × 1.4 m, 2 × 1 m, 1 × 1 m, 0.8 × 0.8 m, 1 ×0.65 m, 0.7 × 0.7 m and 1 × 0.5 m. Conclusions following out from the research are as follows: 1. neither the chosen density of transplants nor their spacing pattern had an essential infl uence on the a er-planting loss or damage of trees; 2. through the planting of larger-diameter transplants it is possible to achieve canopy closure more rapidly as well as faster growth of the plantation; these beech plants keep the edge in growth and quality even 6 years a er planting; 3. the higher is the beech plantation density, the less individuals occur in such a plantation with inappropriate stem form; 4. beech plants of the worst quality were found on plots with the lowest initial density of transplants (5,000 and 10,000 pcs.ha−1), yet the number of promising trees was suffi cient even there. Thus, none of the experimental numbers of transplants per hectare or spacing arrangements of the European beech transplants can be claimed as inappropriate; however, further monitoring of the plots is necessary. European beech, artifi cial regeneration, density of plantations, spacing pattern of transplants, morphological quality of the above-ground part of trees European beech is a woody species, which used to dominate the natural tree species composition in the Czech Republic. However, it had to give place mainly to spruce through management measures, and its share dropped to less than a fi h of the original representation (Collective, 2010). Towards the end of the last century, an emphasis began to be put on the sustainable development and on the principles of near-natural forest management, mainly due to the health problems of spruce stands, and the share of beech stands or mixed stands with the dominant beech started to grow. The current species’ representation is 7.3 %, which is still a low level. The desired share is 18 % and for a comparison, the natural representation of beech is 40 % (Collective, 2010). Taking into account the expected further increase of beech in the species composition of our forests, it is necessary to consider not only the natural regeneration of its stands, which is relatively easily feasible (Indruch, 1985) and o en applied in practical use, but also with its artifi cial introduction into forest stands, in which it is missing now (Samec, 1995; Bartoš and Souček, 2010 etc.). The artifi cially established stands can bring the same profi t and quality as the stands established by other methods (Krahl–Urban, 1963). 1704 Kateřina Houšková, Oldřich Mauer Artifi cial regeneration of all tree species permanently deals with the issue of minimal (resp. optimal) hectare numbers of seedlings and transplants at planting. The question of how many plants per area unit constitutes a longterm dispute between economic and biological aspects of forest regeneration. The rapid increase of hectare numbers in the 1950s (up to 17,000 in beech) resulted in the Czech lands from the use of the low-diameter planting stock (Mráček, 1965; Lokvenc, 1980; Mráček, 1989; Bartoš and Souček, 2010). Compared with the abroad, higher numbers of transplants per hectare were used in our country (Mráček, 1965). The increasing lack of labour force and eff orts to enhance economic eff ectiveness not only in reforestation but also in the subsequent management and tending of plantations led to re-evaluation of the number of transplants (Lokvenc, 1980) and the density of transplants at planting began to decrease. At the end of the 1960s, the hectare number for European beech stabilized around 10,000 individuals per hectare (Mráček, 1989). Today, the Decree No. 139/2004 Coll. stipulates to plant beech on fertile sites at a minimum number of 9,000 pcs.ha−1 and on other sites at 8,000 pcs.ha−1; in the case that the beech is used as a reinforcing and soil-improving species, the densities are to be 5,000 pcs.ha−1 on fertile sites and 4,000 pcs.ha−1 on the other sites). An opinion appears recently, however, that the reduction of the number of transplants has gone so far that highquality assortments cannot be achieved without pruning in a monoculture (moreover with 20 % of permitted loss during the stand establishment). Experiments with the spacing of European beech have brought ambiguous results. Many experts advise a higher initial density of transplants as optimal. For example, Botev et al. established research plots in Bulgaria with diff erent initial densities of transplants ranging from 40,000 to 4,444 pcs.ha−1. A er 13 years of regeneration, the best results were recorded on a plot with the initial density of beech transplants 13,333 pcs.ha−1 (Botev and Rendakov, 1988). Later it appeared, however, that the beech trees achieved good quality and volume on the other plots, too, and the authors subsequently specifi ed more precisely their recommendation as 12,000– 16,000 pcs.ha−1 (Botev, 1989) and a er 16 years of regeneration to 10,000–20,000 pcs.ha−1 (Stiptsov and Botev, 1994). Klein (1983) arrived at similar conclusions. His initial density of beech transplants was 3,300–40,000 pcs. ha−1 and he recommended 10,000–20,000 pcs.ha−1 (optimum 16,000–20,000 pcs.ha−1). Trauboth (1984) arrived at an optimum initial number of beech transplants 15,000 pcs.ha−1. Muhle and Kappich (1979) established research plots with the artifi cial regeneration of beech by planting 6,000–20,000 pcs. ha−1 and confi rmed that the best quality beech occurred at a denser spacing. Similarly, Jeschke (1977) described a successful regeneration of beech with the initial planting density of 16,750 pcs.ha−1 with poplars planted between the rows (4.5 × 4.5m) to protect the beech transplants against frost. Krahl–Urban (1963) and Tyshkevich (1976) found a density of 10,000 pcs.ha−1 as an optimal amount of beech transplants. On the other hand, many experts mention as suffi cient much lower numbers of transplants per hectare. For example, Heukamp (1999) presents data on the establishment of a beech stand in Garderen (Netherlands) in 1880 at a low number of beech transplants – 1,470 pcs.ha−1, showing a good quality. He maintains that there are more stands in Germany and Netherlands established by planting beech at a low amount, which are of good or suffi cing quality. Freist (1980) evaluated a 31-year old beech stand established by planting transplants at 2 × 1 m (5,000 the age of 29 years. He found out that the growth of beech at a relatively low density (3,297 pcs. ha−1) excelled the tabular yield for the given site. He pointed out, however, that the required quality of future trees would call for a frequent and regular elimination of poor-quality individuals. These conclusions led some experts to investigate a lower limit for the number of beech transplants at planting. For example, Guner et al. (2010) in Turkey studied the infl uence of the initial density of European beech on the aboveand underground biomass of a 25-year old stand while comparing stands with a higher (7,143 pcs.ha−1) and lower (2,500 pcs.ha−1) initial density. The stand with the higher density achieved better results. Leder and Weihs (2000) studied the growth and quality of 8-year old beeches planted under Scots pine shelters of varied densities. The spacing pattern of beech plants was 4×1 m (2,500 pcs.ha−1), 1.5 × 1 m (6,667 pcs. ha−1), 4 × 0.5 m (5,000 pcs.ha−1) and 2 × 1 m (5,000 pcs.ha−1). The largest beech trees were recorded on the plot with 5,000 pcs.ha−1 (2 × 1 m) while the trees with the largest diameter were found on the plot with the initial density of transplants 2,500 pcs.ha−1 (4 × 1 m). Thanks to early canopy closure and self-cleaning, the best quality showed the beech planted on the 2 × 1 m plot. In the Czech Republic, the Research Institute of Forest and Game Management in Opočno has been testing diff erent planting densities of beech – 10,000 pcs.ha−1 (1.5 × 1.5 m) and 2,500 pcs.ha−1 (2×2 m). Bartoš and Souček (2010) summarized the hitherto results of this experiment a er 14 years from its establishment as follows: “The eff ect of spacing and diff erent competition starts to show on the stem quality and branchiness. Due to higher competition, beech plants spaced 1×1m have a higher proportion of high-quality individuals and a lower proportion of the poorest quality individuals. Diff erences in the stem quality are still not demonstrable in other spacing patterns. The infl uence of spacing shows in the character of branching; a higher share of smalldiameter branches at 1 × 1 m and 1.15 × 1.15 m may show on the stem quality in the future. At this stage of development, however, beech plants growing at 1.5 × 1.5 m and 2 × 2 m cannot be considered of distinctly worse quality. The character of stem Eff ect of the density of transplants in reforestation on the morphological quality of the above-ground part 1705 and crown quality will gradually change with the increasing stand age and mutual competition.” The authors suppose, nevertheless, that their results will incline in the future rather to the opinions of Šindelář et al. (2004) who consider a severe reduction of transplants per hectare as illogical and not suffi ciently substantiated. This work aims at identifying the infl uence of diff erent densities at planting European beech (5,000 pcs.ha−1, 10

acta universitatis agriculturae et silviculturae mendelianae brunensis

Effect of the density of transplants in reforestation on the morphological quality of the above-ground part of European beech (Fagus sylvatica L.) six years after planting