Competition-density effect of tree organs in Acacia auriculiformis stands

Abstract

The competition-density (C-D) effects for mean mass for tree, stem, branch and leaf were analyzed in Acacia auriculiformis stands. Mean tree mass-density and mean organ mass-density were well explained by the C-D equation of tree and the C-D equation of tree organ, respectively. An equation describing the relationship between mean leaf area u and density was formulated that fit the u-data well. The relationship between mean tree mass w and the ratio of each organ to mean tree mass (w _o/w) was examined. With increasing w, the stem mass ratio w _S/w increased, whereas the branch mass ratio w _B/w and the leaf mass ratio w _L/w decreased. The yield difference between the lowest-density stand and the high-density stand became greater with stand growth. However, the yield of the mid-density stand was slightly lower than the yield of the high-density stand during the experimental period. To produce the most desirable combination of demanding individual-tree size and relative high stem yield, the mid-density is recommended as proper planting density for future management of A. auriculiformis stands.

Keywords

Acacia auriculiformis / C-D effect / Leaf area / Ratio of organ mass to tree mass / Tree organ / Stand yield

References

[1] Alcorn PJ, Pyttel P, Bauhus J, Smith RGB, Thomas D, James R, Nicotra A. Effects of initial planting density on branch development in 4-year-old plantation grown Eucalyptus pilularis and Eucalyptus cloeziana trees. For Ecol Manag, 2007, 252: 41-51.

[2] Azad MS, Manik MR, Hasan MS, Matin MA. Effect of different pre-sowing treatments on seed germination percentage and growth performance of Acacia auriculiformis. J For Res, 2011, 22(2): 183-188.

[3] Baldwin VC Jr, Peterson KD, Clark A, Ferguson RB, Strub MR, Bower DR. The effects of spacing and thinning on stand and tree characteristics of 38-year-old Loblolly Pine. For Ecol Manag, 2000, 137: 91-102.

[4] Bleasdale JKA. The relationship between the weight of a plant part and total weight as affected by plant density. J Hortic Sci, 1967, 42: 51-58.

[5] Bleasdale JKA, Nelder JA. Plant population and crop yield. Nature, 1960, 188: 342.

[6] Burkes EC, Will RE, Barron-Gafford GA, Teskey RO, Shiver B. Biomass partitioning and growth efficiency of intensively managed Pinus taeda and Pinus elliottii stands of different planting densities. For Sci, 2003, 49(2): 224-234.

[7] Das DK, Alam MK. Trees of Bangladesh, 2001, Chittagong: The Art Press.

[8] Farazdaghi H, Harris PM. Plant competition and crop yield. Nature, 1968, 217: 289-290.

[9] Gilbert IR, Seavers GP, Jarvis PG, Smith H. Photomorphogenesis and canopy dynamics. Phytochrome-mediated proximity perception accounts for the growth dynamics of canopies of Populus trichocarpa ×  deltoides ‘Beaupre’. Plant Cell Environ, 1995, 18: 475-497.

[10] Hagihara A, Yokota T, Ogawa K. Allometric relations in hinoki Chamaecyparis obtuse (Sieb. et Zucc.) Endl.). Bull Nagoya Univ For, 1993, 12: 11-29.

[11] Harper JL. Population Biology of Plant, 1977, London: Academic Press.

[12] Henskens FL, Battaglia M, Cherry ML, Beadle CL. Physiological basis of spacing effects on tree growth and form in Eucalyptus globules. Trees, 2001, 15: 365-377.

[13] Hossain MK, Islam SA, Zashimuddin M, Tarafdar MA, Islam QN. Growth and biomass production of some Acacia and Eucalyptus species in degraded sal forest areas in Bangladesh. Indian For, 1997, 123(3): 211-217.

[14] Hozumi K. Interactions among Higher Plants, 1973, Tokyo: Kyouritsu-Shuppan (in Japanese)

[15] Hozumi K, Shinozaki K. Kira T. Logistic theory of plant growth. Plant Ecology (2), 1960, Tokyo: Kokinn-Shoinn 272 304 (in Japanese)

[16] Kint V, Hein S, Campioli M, Muys B. Modelling self-pruning and branch attributes for young Quercus robur L. and Fagus sylvatica L. trees. For Ecol Manag, 2010, 260: 2023-2034.

[17] Kira T, Ogawa H, Sakazaki N. Intraspecific competition among higher plant. I. Competitiom-yield-density interrelationship in regularly dispersed populations. J Inst Polytech Osaka City Univ Ser D, 1953, 4: 1-16.

[18] Kira T, Ogawa H, Hozumi K. Intraspecific competition among higher plant. V. Supplementary notes on the C-D effect. J Inst Polytech Osaka City Univ Ser D, 1956, 7: 1-14.

[19] Knowe SA, Hibbs DE. Stand structure of young red alder as affected by plant density. For Ecol Manag, 1996, 82: 69-85.

[20] Litton CM, Ryan MG, Tinker DB, Kni DH. Belowground and aboveground biomass in young post-fire lodgepole pine forests of contrasting tree density. Can J For Res, 2003, 33: 351-363.

[21] Nelder JA. New kinds of systematic designs for spacing experiments. Biometrics, 1962, 18: 283-307.

[22] Ogawa H, Kira T (1977) Methods of estimating forest biomass. In: Shidei T, and Kira T (eds. Primary Production of Japanese Forests). University of Tokyo Press, Tokyo, pp 15–25/35–36

[23] Prasad JVNS, Korwar GR, Rao KV, Mandal UK, Rao GR, Srinivas I, Venkateswarlu B, Rao SN, Kulkarni HD. Optimum stand density of Leucaena leucocephala for wood production in Andhra Pradesh, Southern India. Biomass Bioenergy, 2011, 35: 227-235.

[24] Ritchie GA. Evidence for red:far red signaling and photomorphogenic response in Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii) seedlings. Tree Physiol, 1997, 17: 161-168.

[25] Scott W, Meade R, Leon R, Hyink D, Miller R. Planting density and tree-size relations in coast Douglas-fir. Can J For Res, 1998, 28: 74-78.

[26] Shinozaki K, Kira T. Intraspecific competition among higher plants. VII. Logistic theory of the C-D effect. J Inst Polytech Osaka City Univ Ser D, 1956, 7: 35-72.

[27] Vandermeer J. Plant competition and the yield-density relationship. J Theor Biol, 1984, 109: 393-399.

[28] Watkinson AR. Density-dependence in single-species populations of plants. J Theor Biol, 1980, 83: 345-357.

[29] Watkinson AR. Yield-density relationships: the influence of resource availability on growth and self-thinning in populations of Vulpia fasciculata. Ann Bot, 1984, 53: 469-482.

[30] Weiner J, Thomas SC. Competition and allometry in three species of annual plants. Ecology, 1992, 73: 648-656.

[31] Weiner J, Berntson GM, Thomas SC. Competition and growth form in a woodland annual. J Ecol, 1990, 78: 459-469.

[32] Will RE, Narahari NV, Shiver BD, Teskey RO. Effects of planting density on canopy dynamics and stem growth for intensively managed loblolly pine stands. For Ecol Manag, 2005, 205: 29-41.

[33] Woodruff DR, Bond BJ, Ritchie GA, Scott W. Effects of stand density on the growth of young Douglas-fir trees. Can J For Res, 2002, 32: 420-427.

[34] Xu L, Diao YG, Li XM, Lin XG, Zhnag AH. Study on the effect of density adjustment of Leucaena leucocephala planations in Jing sha Dry-hot Valley. J Green Sci Technol, 2014 16–17 6 19 (in Chinese)

[35] Xue L. The mean tree mass–stand density index relationship for forest stands in China. Scand J For Res, 2014, 29(7): 664-668.

[36] Xue L, Hagihara A. Growth analysis of the self-thinning stands of Pinus densiflora Sieb. et Zucc. Ecol Res, 1998, 13: 183-191.

[37] Xue L, Hagihara A. Growth analysis on the competition-density effect in Chinese fir (Cunninghamia lanceolata) and Masson pine (Pinus massoniana) stands. For Ecol Manag, 2001, 150: 331-337.

[38] Xue L, Hagihara A. Growth analysis on the C-D effect in self-thinning Masson pine (Pinus massoniana) stands. For Ecol Manag, 2002, 165: 249-256.

[39] Xue L, Hagihara A. Density effects on tree organs in self-thinning Pinus densiflora Sieb. et Zucc. stands. Ecol Res, 2008, 23: 689-695.

[40] Xue L, Hagihara A. Self-thinning lines of organs and aboveground parts based on allometric relationships in overcrowded Pinus densiflora stands. Ecol Res, 2012, 27(1): 15-21.

[41] Xue L, Pan L, Zhang R, Xu PB. Density effects on the growth of self-thinning Eucalyptus urophylla stands. Trees, 2011, 25: 1021-1031.

[42] Xue L, Jacobs DF, Zeng SC, Liu B, Yang ZY, Gu SH. Relationship between aboveground biomass allocation and stand density index in Populus ×  euramericana stands. Forestry, 2012, 85(5): 611-619.

[43] Xue L, Hao YT, Li QJ, Hou XL. Self-thinning lines and allometric relation in Chinese fir (Cunninghamia lanceolata) stands. J For Res, 2015, 26(2): 281-290.