Abstract

We used published data from nine sites where nutrient and water optimization studies had been installed in a 2 x 2 factorial design to determine maximum biomass production in response to a simple set of treatments. We tested for site and treatment effects on the relationships between stem, above-ground (stem, branches, foliage) and total (aboveground + roots) biomass production versus intercepted light (light use efficiency, LUE). We also estimated the additional carbon stored as a result of treatment. The sites were located in Australia (Pinus radiata), Brazil (Eucalyptus grandis x urophylla), France (Pinus pinaster), the United States in Georgia and North Carolina (Pinus taeda) and Hawaii (Eucalyptus saligna), Portugal (Eucalyptus globulus), South Africa (E. grandis), and Sweden (Picea abies). We hypothesized that site, treatment and their interaction would significantly affect LUE; however, we rejected our hypothesis because stem, aboveground and total LUE were not affected by site or treatment. The stem, aboveground and total LUE values were 1.21, 1.51, and 0.85 g MJ(-1), respectively. The total LUE value was lower than that for stem and aboveground LUE because a different population was used for the analysis (only five of the nine sites had total production data), and the total LUE relationship had a zero intercept whereas the stem and aboveground LUE relationships had a negative intercept. The average amount of additional carbon that would be stored by the irrigation, fertilization, and fertilization plus irrigation treatments was 3.9, 6.8 and 13.4 Mg CO2 equivalents ha(-1) yr(-1), respectively. These additional carbon storage estimates, based on these research studies with annual nutrient and water applications, were similar to results obtained in operational settings with less intensive nutrient applications. (C) 2016 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Keywords

Carbon; Growth efficiency; Nutrient optimization; Potential productivity

Published in

Forest Ecology and Management
2016, Volume: 376, pages: 333-342
Publisher: ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV

SLU Authors

• Linder, Sune

  • Southern Swedish Forest Research Centre, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences
    

UKÄ Subject classification

Ecology
Forest Science


Publication identifier

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2016.05.031

Permanent link to this page (URI)

https://res.slu.se/id/publ/79958