Windthrow hazard modelling in boreal forests of black spruce and jack pine

Canadian Journal of Forest Research - Tập 35 Số 11 - Trang 2655-2663 - 2005
Jean-Gabriel Elie, Jean‐Claude Ruel

Tóm tắt

In this study we compare the mechanical resistance of black spruce (Picea mariana (Mill.) BSP) and jack pine (Pinus banksiana Lamb.) and quantify the effect of species, forest cover type, and soil conditions on tree stability. To measure tree resistance to an applied load, 85 trees were pulled over using a cable and winch system. Predictive equations for the maximum turning moment that a tree can withstand (Mc) were developed with stem mass, and the other factors were used as explanatory variables. The presence of jack pine within the stand negatively affected black spruce resistance. In mixed stands, Mc was significantly influenced by the interaction between tree species and soil type. Jack pine was the only species with significantly lower resistance when grown on shallow and stony soils, which are likely to restrict root development. Black spruce resistance was not affected by soil conditions. Preliminary calculations of critical wind speeds required to cause damage using an adaptation of the ForestGALES model were much lower than those previously published for black spruce.

Từ khóa


Tài liệu tham khảo

Achim A., 2005, For. Ecol. Manage., 204, 35, 10.1016/j.foreco.2004.07.072

Blackburn P., 1988, Forestry, 61, 29, 10.1093/forestry/61.1.29

Blackwell P.G., 1990, Forestry, 63, 73, 10.1093/forestry/63.1.73

Coutts M.P., 1983, Plant Soil, 71, 171, 10.1007/BF02182653

Coutts M.P., 1986, Forestry, 59, 173, 10.1093/forestry/59.2.173

Cremer K.W., 1982, N.Z. J. For. Sci., 12, 244

Fraser A.I., 1962, Forestry, 35, 117, 10.1093/forestry/35.2.117

Gardiner B.A., 1997, Forestry, 70, 233, 10.1093/forestry/70.3.233

Gardiner B., 2000, Ecol. Model., 129, 1, 10.1016/S0304-3800(00)00220-9

Mayhead G.J., 1973, Agric. Meteorol., 12, 123, 10.1016/0002-1571(73)90013-7

Meunier S., 2002, Can. J. For. Res., 32, 642, 10.1139/x01-212

Mitchell S.J., 1995, For. Chron., 71, 446, 10.5558/tfc71446-4

Moore J.R., 2000, For. Ecol. Manage., 135, 63, 10.1016/S0378-1127(00)00298-X

Morgan J., 1994, Tree Physiol., 14, 49, 10.1093/treephys/14.1.49

Papesch A.J.G., 1997, N.Z. J. For. Sci., 27, 188

Peltola H., 1993, Silva Fenn., 27, 99

Peltola H., 1999, Can. J. For. Res., 29, 647, 10.1139/x99-029

Petty J.A., 1985, Forestry, 58, 75, 10.1093/forestry/58.1.75

Petty J.A., 1981, Forestry, 54, 115, 10.1093/forestry/54.2.115

Ruel J.-C., 1989, For. Chron., 65, 107, 10.5558/tfc65107-2

Ruel J.-C., 1995, For. Chron., 71, 434, 10.5558/tfc71434-4

Ruel J.-C., 2000, For. Chron., 76, 329, 10.5558/tfc76329-2

Savill P.S., 1983, For. Abstr., 44, 473

Schaetzl R.J., 1989, Can. J. For. Res., 19, 1, 10.1139/x89-001

Silva G., 1998, Can. J. For. Res., 28, 123

Smith V.G., 1987, Can. J. For. Res., 17, 1080, 10.1139/x87-166