Long-Term Impacts of Commercial Thinning and Nitrogen Fertilization on Lodgepole Pine: A Two-Decade Analysis of Growth and Temporal Dynamics
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Commercial thinning and fertilization are potential silvicultural tools to enhance Alberta’s Forest productivity in an imminent timber supply gap. In 2000, an experiment was initiated in a 68-year-old lodgepole pine stand located in Alberta’s upper foothills, using a 2x6 factorial design. Commercial thinning, removing 50% basal area was carried out at two levels (thinned and unthinned), while nitrogen fertilization was applied at six levels (No fertilizer, 200 kg/ha N Urea + Boron, 200 kg/ha N + blend, 400 kg/ha N + Boron, 400 kg/ha N + blend, and 400 kg/ha N Ammonium nitrate + Boron). Two studies were conducted, utilizing 20 years of post-thinning data, to analyze: a) the individual and combined effects of thinning and fertilization on growth and mortality and b) the temporal growth response to commercial thinning using tree cores. Key findings of the first study were that commercial thinning led to an increase in the cumulative merchantable volume (the volume removed at the time of thinning + the final standing volume) and the proportion of trees suitable for good sawlogs (>20 cm DBH) by 20%. Individual tree DBH was enhanced through thinning and fertilization treatments, both individually and in combination. This indicates that trees subject to both thinning and high fertilization (at 400 kg/ha levels) exhibited the greatest individual growth. From the second study we found the size of individual trees at the time of thinning significantly predicted their subsequent growth for both studies. Smaller trees (10.1-12.5 cm) exhibited a delayed response to thinning within the first 5 years, followed by a slow growth increment. Medium-sized trees (12.5-17.5 cm) displayed an immediate growth response to thinning but declined after 15 years. The largest trees (17.6-20 cm) exhibited a slower growth response, which persisted beyond 15 years. Consequently, commercial thinning and fertilization can serve as a viable management tool to enhance the growth of natural lodgepole pine stands in Alberta. Commercial thinning and fertilization are potential silvicultural tools to enhance Alberta’s Forest productivity in an imminent timber supply gap. In 2000, an experiment was initiated in a 68-year-old lodgepole pine stand located in Alberta’s upper foothills, using a 2x6 factorial design. Commercial thinning, removing 50% basal area was carried out at two levels (thinned and unthinned), while nitrogen fertilization was applied at six levels (No fertilizer, 200 kg/ha N Urea + Boron, 200 kg/ha N + blend, 400 kg/ha N + Boron, 400 kg/ha N + blend, and 400 kg/ha N Ammonium nitrate + Boron). Two studies were conducted, utilizing 20 years of post-thinning data, to analyze: a) the individual and combined effects of thinning and fertilization on growth and mortality and b) the temporal growth response to commercial thinning using tree cores. Key findings of the first study were that commercial thinning led to an increase in the cumulative merchantable volume (the volume removed at the time of thinning + the final standing volume) and the proportion of trees suitable for good sawlogs (>20 cm DBH) by 20%. Individual tree DBH was enhanced through thinning and fertilization treatments, both individually and in combination. This indicates that trees subject to both thinning and high fertilization (at 400 kg/ha levels) exhibited the greatest individual growth. From the second study we found the size of individual trees at the time of thinning significantly predicted their subsequent growth for both studies. Smaller trees (10.1-12.5 cm) exhibited a delayed response to thinning within the first 5 years, followed by a slow growth increment. Medium-sized trees (12.5-17.5 cm) displayed an immediate growth response to thinning but declined after 15 years. The largest trees (17.6-20 cm) exhibited a slower growth response, which persisted beyond 15 years. Consequently, commercial thinning and fertilization can serve as a viable management tool to enhance the growth of natural lodgepole pine stands in Alberta.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».