Comparison of tropical tree plantations with secondary forests of similar age
The structure and dynamics of small plantations of were compared with those of paired secondary forest stands of similar age and growing adjacent to each other under similar edaphic and climatic conditions. The study was conducted in the Luquillo Experimental Forest between 1980 and 1984. Comparisons included a variety of demographic, production, and nutrient cycling characteristics of stands.. Higher root densities and biomass were found in secondary forests as were greater depth of root penetration, higher nutrient concentration in roots, and more microsites where roots grow, than paired plantations. Nutrient retranslocation increased with plantation age. Plantations, particularly pine plantations, produced more litter mass per unit nutrient return than did paired secondary forests. Among the ecosystem parameters measured, nutrients in leaf fall correlated best with differences in soil nutrients across stands. Nutrient concentrations in understory species appeared to be a sensitive indicator of whole—stand nutrient use efficiency. Some of the observations of the study could be attributed to intrinsic differences between small unmanaged plantations and secondary forests, but many could be explained by species differences (i.e., timing of leaf fall), age of plantation (i.e., accumulation of biomass or species), or the relative importance of angiosperms and gymnosperms (i.e., nutritional quality of litter). The study challenges the conventional dogma with respect to differences between plantations and native successional ecosystems and underscores the dangers of generalizing about all tropical tree plantations or all natural tropical forests, or even extrapolating from one sector of the ecosystem to another.
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Texto biblioteca |
| Language: | eng |
| Published: |
Washington, DC Ecological Society of America
1992
|
| Subjects: | PINUS CARIBAEA, SWIETENIA MACROPHYLLA, PLANTACION FORESTAL, BOSQUE SECUNDARIO, BOSQUE TROPICAL, BIODIVERSIDAD, HOJARASCA, FERTILIDAD DEL SUELO, MATERIA ORGANICA DEL SUELO, BIOMASA, MEDICION, ALOMETRIA, MODELOS DE REGRESION, ECUACIONES ALOMETRICAS, BIOMASA AEREA, NUTRIENTES, FOREST PLANTATIONS, SECONDARY FORESTS, TROPICAL FORESTS, BIODIVERSITY, SOIL FERTILITY, SOIL ORGANIC MATTER, BIOMASS, MEASUREMENT, NUTRIENTS, |
| Online Access: | http://orton.catie.ac.cr/repdoc/A11191i/A11191i.pdf https://esajournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.2307/2937169 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| Summary: | The structure and dynamics of small plantations of were compared with those of paired secondary forest stands of similar age and growing adjacent to each other under similar edaphic and climatic conditions. The study was conducted in the Luquillo Experimental Forest between 1980 and 1984. Comparisons included a variety of demographic, production, and nutrient cycling characteristics of stands.. Higher root densities and biomass were found in secondary forests as were greater depth of root penetration, higher nutrient concentration in roots, and more microsites where roots grow, than paired plantations. Nutrient retranslocation increased with plantation age. Plantations, particularly pine plantations, produced more litter mass per unit nutrient return than did paired secondary forests. Among the ecosystem parameters measured, nutrients in leaf fall correlated best with differences in soil nutrients across stands. Nutrient concentrations in understory species appeared to be a sensitive indicator of whole—stand nutrient use efficiency. Some of the observations of the study could be attributed to intrinsic differences between small unmanaged plantations and secondary forests, but many could be explained by species differences (i.e., timing of leaf fall), age of plantation (i.e., accumulation of biomass or species), or the relative importance of angiosperms and gymnosperms (i.e., nutritional quality of litter). The study challenges the conventional dogma with respect to differences between plantations and native successional ecosystems and underscores the dangers of generalizing about all tropical tree plantations or all natural tropical forests, or even extrapolating from one sector of the ecosystem to another. |
|---|