Journal Home > Volume 5 , Issue 1
Forest Ecosystems 2018, 5(1): 4 https://doi.org/10.1186/s40663-017-0127-6
Research | Open Access | Issue | Published: 11 February 2018

Tree species richness enhances stand productivity while stand structure can have opposite effects, based on forest inventory data from Germany and the United States of America

Show Author's Information Laura Zeller1 ( ),  Jingjing Liang2,  Hans Pretzsch1
Center of Life and Food Sciences Weihenstephan, Technical University of Munich, Hans-Carl-von-Carlowitz-Platz 2, 85354 Freising, Germany
Division of Forestry and Natural Resources, Davis College of Agriculture, Natural Resources & Design, West Virginia University, 340 Percival Hall, Morgantown, WV 26506-6108, USA
Keywords:
Big data, Climate, Overyielding, Tree size heterogeneity, Tree species mixing, BiodiversityɃproductivity relationship
Cite this article:
Zeller L, Liang J, Pretzsch H. Tree species richness enhances stand productivity while stand structure can have opposite effects, based on forest inventory data from Germany and the United States of America. Forest Ecosystems, 2018, 5(1): 4. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40663-017-0127-6
Download citation
EndNote(RIS)
BibTeX

395

Views

5

Downloads

Citations

36

Crossref

N/A

WoS

37

Scopus

1

CSCD

Abstract Full text About this article
Background

In recent studies, mixed forests were found to be more productive than monocultures with everything else remaining the same.

Methods

To find out if this productivity is caused by tree species richness, by a more heterogeneous stand structure or both, we analyzed the effects of forest structure and tree species richness on stand productivity, based on inventory data of temperate forests in the United States of America and Germany.

Results

Having accounted for effects such as tree size and stand density, we found that: (Ⅰ) tree species richness increased stand productivity in both countries while the effect of tree size heterogeneity on productivity was negative in Germany but positive in the USA; (Ⅱ) productivity was highest at sites with an intermediate amount of precipitation; and (Ⅲ) growth limitations due water scarcity or low temperature may enhance structural heterogeneity.

Conclusions

In the context of forest ecosystem goods and services, as well as future sustainable forest resource management, the associated implications would be:

● Tree species richness is vital for maintaining forest productivity.

● As an optimum amount of precipitation is accompanied by the highest productivity, changes in climatic conditions should be considered when planning.

● Resource limitations enhance structural heterogeneity, which in turn can have positive or negative effects on stand productivity.

Furthermore, we discuss the difficulties encountered when analyzing different national forest inventories and large data sets.


menu
Abstract
Full text
Outline
About this article

Tree species richness enhances stand productivity while stand structure can have opposite effects, based on forest inventory data from Germany and the United States of America

Show Author's information Laura Zeller1 ( ), Jingjing Liang2, Hans Pretzsch1
Center of Life and Food Sciences Weihenstephan, Technical University of Munich, Hans-Carl-von-Carlowitz-Platz 2, 85354 Freising, Germany
Division of Forestry and Natural Resources, Davis College of Agriculture, Natural Resources & Design, West Virginia University, 340 Percival Hall, Morgantown, WV 26506-6108, USA

Abstract

Background

In recent studies, mixed forests were found to be more productive than monocultures with everything else remaining the same.

Methods

To find out if this productivity is caused by tree species richness, by a more heterogeneous stand structure or both, we analyzed the effects of forest structure and tree species richness on stand productivity, based on inventory data of temperate forests in the United States of America and Germany.

Results

Having accounted for effects such as tree size and stand density, we found that: (Ⅰ) tree species richness increased stand productivity in both countries while the effect of tree size heterogeneity on productivity was negative in Germany but positive in the USA; (Ⅱ) productivity was highest at sites with an intermediate amount of precipitation; and (Ⅲ) growth limitations due water scarcity or low temperature may enhance structural heterogeneity.

Conclusions

In the context of forest ecosystem goods and services, as well as future sustainable forest resource management, the associated implications would be:

● Tree species richness is vital for maintaining forest productivity.

● As an optimum amount of precipitation is accompanied by the highest productivity, changes in climatic conditions should be considered when planning.

● Resource limitations enhance structural heterogeneity, which in turn can have positive or negative effects on stand productivity.

Furthermore, we discuss the difficulties encountered when analyzing different national forest inventories and large data sets.

Keywords: Big data, Climate, Overyielding, Tree size heterogeneity, Tree species mixing, BiodiversityɃproductivity relationship

References(70)

Ammer C (2008) Converting Norway spruce stands with beech - a review of arguments and techniques. Austr J Forest Sci 125:3-26
Google Scholar

Binkley D (1984) Importance of size-density relationships in mixed stands of douglas-fir and red alder. For Ecol Manag 9:81-85
DOI Google Scholar
BMEL - Bundesministerium for Ernährung und Landwirtschaft (2014) Der Wald in Deutschland. Ausgewählte Ergebnisse der dritten Bundeswaldinventur, Berlin

Bohn FJ, Huth A (2017) The importance of forest structure to biodiversity-productivity relationships. The Royal Society. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsos.160521
DOI Google Scholar

Boivenue C, Running S (2006) Impacts of climate change on natural forest productivity - evidence since the middle of the 20th century. Glob Chang Biol 12:862-882
DOI Google Scholar

Bourdier T, Cordonnier T, Kunstler G, Piedallu C, Lagarrigues G, Courbaud B (2016) Tree size inequality reduces forest productivity: an analysis combining inventory data for ten European species and a light competition model. PLoS One 11:e0151852
DOI Google Scholar

Boyden S, Binkley D, Stape JL (2008) Competition among eucalyptus trees depends on genetic variation and resource supply. Ecology 89:2850-2859
DOI Google Scholar

Caspersen JP, Vanderwel MC, Cole WG, Purves DW (2011) How stand productivity results from size- and competition-dependent growth and mortality. PLoS One 6:e28660
DOI Google Scholar

Chen HYH, Klinka K (2003) Aboveground productivity of western hemlock and western redcedar mixed-species stands in southern coastal British Columbia. For Ecol Manag 184:55-64
DOI Google Scholar
Chertov O (2010) Impact of temperature increase and precipitation alteration at climate change on forest productivity and soil carbon in boreal forest ecosystems in Canada and Russia: simulation approach with the EFIMOD model. In: Rodriguez-Morales A, Risquez A, Echezuria L (eds) Impact of climate change on health and disease in Latin America. InTech Open Access Publisher, Londonhttps://doi.org/10.5772/9814
DOI
Crawley MJ (2007) The R book. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd, Chichester, UK

Danescu A, Albrecht AT, Bauhus J (2016) Structural diversity promotes productivity of mixed, uneven-aged forests in southwestern Germany. Oecologia 182:319-333
DOI Google Scholar
R Development Core Team (2008) R: A language and environment for statistical computing, Vienna. http://www.R-project.org. Accessed 15 July 2017
Dieler J (2013) Biodiversität und Waldbewirtschaftung - Auswirkungen auf Artenvielfalt, Strukturdiversität und Produktivität. Tagungsband der Sektion Ertragskunde, DVFFA, pp 25-34

Dieler J, Uhl E, Biber P, Müller J, Rötzer T, Pretzsch H (2017) Effect of forest stand management on species composition, structural diversity, and productivity in the temperate zone of Europe. Eur J Forest Res. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10342-017-1056-1
DOI Google Scholar
Dolanc CR, Safford HD, Thorne JH, Dobrowski SZ (2014) Changing forest structure across the landscape of the sierra Nevada, CA, USA, since the 1930s. Ecosphere 5: art101https://doi.org/10.1890/ES14-00103.1
DOI

Edgar CB, Burk TE (2001) Productivity of aspen forests in northeastern Minnesota, U.S.A., as related to stand composition and canopy structure. Can J For Res 31:1019-1029
DOI Google Scholar

Fick SE, Hijmans RJ (2017) WorldClim 2: new 1-km spatial resolution climate surfaces for global land areas. Int J Climatol 21:455
DOI Google Scholar
Friend AD, Woodward FI (1990) Evolutionary and ecophysiological responses of mountain plants to the growing season environment. In: Fitter A, Macfadyen A, Begon M (eds) Advances in ecological research, vol 20. Academic Press, New York, pp 59-124https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2504(08)60053-7
DOI
Gamfeldt L, Snäll T, Bagchi R, Jonsson M, Gustafsson L, Kjellander P, Ruiz-Jaen MC, Froberg M, Stendahl J, Philipson CD, Mikusinski G, Andersson E, Westerlund B, Andren H, Moberg F, Moen J, Bengtsson J (2013) Higher levels of multiple ecosystem services are found in forests with more tree species. Nat Commun 4: 1340https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms2328
DOI
Global Forest Biodiversity Initiative (2016) People, nature, world, diversity. http://www.gfbinitiative.org/. Accessed 15 July 2017

Gustafson EJ, Miranda BR, De Bruijn AMG, Sturtevant BR, Kubiske ME (2017) Do rising temperatures always increase forest productivity? Interacting effects of temperature, precipitation, cloudiness and soil texture on tree species growth and competition. Environm Model Software 97:171-183
DOI Google Scholar

Hakkenberg CR, Song C, Peet RK, White PS, Rocchini D (2016) Forest structure as a predictor of tree species diversity in the North Carolina piedmont. J Veg Sci 27:1151-1163
DOI Google Scholar
Henning P (2016) Die Bundeswaldinventur in der Geodateninfrastruktur des Thünen-Instituts. https://bwi.info/Download/de/BWI-Basisdaten/ThuenenGDI/BundeswaldinventurInDerGeodateninfrastrukturDesThuenenInstitutes.pdf. Accessed 15 July 2017

Ishii HT, Tanabe S, Hiura T (2004) Exploring the relationships among canopy structure, stand productivity, and biodiversity of temperate forest ecosystems. For Sci 50:342-355
Google Scholar

Jacob M, Leuschner C, Thomas FM (2010) Productivity of temperate broad-leaved forest stands differing in tree species diversity. Ann Forest Sci 67:503
DOI Google Scholar

Kelty MJ (2006) The role of species mixtures in plantation forestry. For Ecol Manag 233:195-204
DOI Google Scholar

Knoke T, Ammer C, Stimm B, Mosandl R (2008) Admixing broadleaved to coniferous tree species: a review on yield, ecological stability and economics. Eur J Forest Res 127:89-101
DOI Google Scholar

Liang J, Crowther TW, Picard N, Wiser S, Zhou M, Alberti G, Schulze ED, McGuire AD, Bozzato F, Pretzsch H, de-Miguel S, Paquette A, Herault B, Scherer-Lorenzen M, Barrett CB, Glick HB, Hengeveld GM, Nabuurs GJ, Pfautsch S, Viana H, Vibrans AC, Ammer C, Schall P, Verbyla D, Tchebakova N, Fischer M, Watson JV, HYH C, Lei XD, Schelhaas MJ, Lu HC, Gianelle D, Parfenova EI, Salas C, Lee E, Lee B, Kim HS, Bruelheide H, Coomes DA, Piotto D, Sunderland T, Schmid B, Gourlet-Fleury S, Sonke B, Tavani R, Zhu J, Brandl S, Vayreda J, Kitahara F, Searle EB, Neldner VJ, Ngugi MR, Baraloto C, Frizzera L, Balazy R, Oleksyn J, Zawila-Niedzwiecki T, Bouriaud O, Bussotti F, Finer L, Jaroszewicz B, Jucker T, Valladares F, Jagodzinski AM, Peri PL, Gonmadje C, Marthy W, O'Brien T, Martin EH, Marshall AR, Rovero F, Bitariho R, Niklaus PA, Alvarez-Loayza P, Chamuya N, Valencia R, Mortier F, Wortel V, Engone-Obiang NL, Ferreira LV, Odeke DE, Vasquez RM, Lewis SL, Reich PB (2016) Positive biodiversity-productivity relationship predominant in global forests. Science 354:aaf8957
DOI Google Scholar

Liang J, Zhou M, Tobin PC, McGuire AD, Reich PB (2015) Biodiversity influences plant productivity through niche-efficiency. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 112:5738-5743
DOI Google Scholar

Lindenmayer D, Messier C, Sato C (2016) Avoiding ecosystem collapse in managed forest ecosystems. Front Ecol Environ 14:561-568
DOI Google Scholar

Lokers R, Knapen R, Janssen S, van Randen Y, Jansen J (2016) Analysis of big data technologies for use in agro-environmental science. Environm Model Software 84:494-504
DOI Google Scholar

Luu TC, Binkley D, Stape JL (2013) Neighborhood uniformity increases growth of individual eucalyptus trees. For Ecol Manag 289:90-97
DOI Google Scholar

McIntyre PJ, Thorne JH, Dolanc CR, Flint AL, Flint LE, Kelly M, Ackerly DD (2015) Twentieth-century shifts in forest structure in California: denser forests, smaller trees, and increased dominance of oaks. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 112(5):1458-1463
DOI Google Scholar
MCPFE (1993) Resolution HI: general guidelines for the sustainable management of forests in Europe. Proceedings of the 2nd ministerial conference on the protection of forests in Europe, Helsinki. http://www.foresteurope.org/docs/MC/MC_helsinki_resolutionH1.pdf. Accessed 2 Jan 2018

Morin X, Fahse L, de Mazancourt C, Scherer-Lorenzen M, Bugmann H (2014) Temporal stability in forest productivity increases with tree diversity due to asynchrony in species dynamics. Ecol Lett 17:1526-1535
DOI Google Scholar
O'Connell BM, LaPoint EB, Turner JA, Ridley T, Pugh SA, Wilson AM, Waddell KL, Conkling BL (2014) FIA database description and user guide for phase 2: version: 6.0.1. https://www.fia.fs.fed.us/library/database-documentation/current/ver60/FIADB%20User%20Guide%20P3_6-0-1_final.pdf. Accessed 2 Jan 2018

Oliver CD (1980) Forest development in North America following major disturbances. For Ecol Manag 3:153-168
DOI Google Scholar

Paillet Y, Bergès L, Hjältén J, Odor P, Avon C, Bernhardt-Römermann M, Bijlsma RJ, De Bruyn L, Fuhr M, Grandin U, Kanka R, Lundin L, Luque S, Magura T, Matesanz S, Meszaros I, Sebastia MT, Schmidt W, Standovar T, Tothmeresz B, Uotila A, Valladares F, Vellak K, Virtanen R (2010) Biodiversity differences between managed and unmanaged forests: meta-analysis of species richness in Europe. Conserv Biol J Soc Conserv Biol 24:101-112
DOI Google Scholar

Paquette A, Messier C (2011) The effect of biodiversity on tree productivity: from temperate to boreal forests. Glob Ecol Biogeogr 20:170-180
DOI Google Scholar

Pretzsch H (2005) Stand density and growth of Norway spruce (Picea abies (L.) Karst.) and European beech (Fagus sylvatica L.): evidence from long-term experimental plots. Eur J Forest Res 124:193-205
DOI Google Scholar
Pretzsch H (2009) Forest dynamics, growth and yield: from measurement to model. Springer, Berlinhttps://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-88307-4
DOI

Pretzsch H, Biber P (2016) Tree species mixing can increase maximum stand density. Can J For Res 46:1179-1193
DOI Google Scholar

Pretzsch H, Biber P, Schütze G, Uhl E, Rötzer T (2014) Forest stand growth dynamics in Central Europe have accelerated since 1870. Nat Commun 5:4967
DOI Google Scholar

Pretzsch H, Biber P, Uhl E, Dauber E (2015) Long-term stand dynamics of managed spruce-fir-beech mountain forests in Central Europe: structure, productivity and regeneration success. Forestry 88:407-428
DOI Google Scholar

Pretzsch H, del Río M, Ammer C, Avdagic A, Barbeito I, Bielak K, Brazaitis G, Coll L, Dirnberger G, Drossler L, Fabrika M, Forrester D, Godvod K, Heym M, Hurt V, Kurylyak V, Lof M, Lombardi F, Matovic B, Mohren F, Motta R, den Ouden J, Pach M, Ponette Q, Schutze G, Schweig J, Skrzyszewski J, Sramek V, Sterba H, Stojanovic D, Svoboda M, Vanhellemont M, Verheyen K, Wellhausen K, Zlatanov T, Bravo-Oviedo A (2015) Growth and yield of mixed versus pure stands of Scots pine (Pinus sylvestris L.) and European beech (Fagus sylvatica L.) analysed along a productivity gradient through Europe. Eur J Forest Res 134:927-947
DOI Google Scholar
Pretzsch H, Dieler J, Rötzer T (2012) Principles of growth partitioning between trees in forest stands under stress. In: Matyssek R, Schnyder H, Osswald W, Ernst D, Munch JC, Pretzsch H (eds) Growth and Defence in plants. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin Heidelberg, pp 311-329https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-30645-7_14
DOI
Pretzsch H, Forrester DI, Bauhus J (2017) Mixed-species forests: ecology and management. Springer, Berlin, p 653https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-54553-9
DOI
Puettmann KJ, Coates KD, Messier C (2009) A critique of silviculture: managing for complexity. Island Press, Washington DC

Puettmann KJ, Wilson SM, Baker SC, Donoso PJ, Drössler L, Amente G, Harvey BD, Knoke T, Lu Y, Nocentini S, Putz FE, Yoshida T, Bauhus J (2015) Silvicultural alternatives to conventional even-aged Forest management - what limits global adoption? Forest. Ecosystems 2:8
DOI Google Scholar

Reineke LH (1933) Perfecting a stand-density index for even-aged forests. J Agricult Res 46:627-638
Google Scholar

Schall P, Gossner MM, Heinrichs S, Fischer M, Boch S, Prati D, Jung K, Baumgartner V, Blaser S, Böhm S, Buscot F, Daniel R, Goldmann K, Kaiser K, Kahl T, Lange M, Müller J, Overmann J, Renner SC, Schulze ED, Sikorski J, Tschapka M, Türke M, Weisser WW, Wemheuer B, Wubet T, Ammer C (2017) The impact of even-aged and uneven-aged forest management on regional biodiversity of multiple taxa in European beech forests. J Appl Ecol 109:17495
DOI Google Scholar

Schröter D, Cramer W, Leemans R, Prentice IC, Araújo MB, Arnell NW, Bondeau A, Bugmann H, Carter TR, Gracia CA, de la Vega-Leinert AC, Erhard M, Ewert F, Glendining M, House JI, Kankaanpaa S, Klein RJT, Lavorel S, Lindner M, Metzger MJ, Meyer J, Mitchell TD, Reginster I, Rounsevell M, Sabate S, Sitch S, Smith B, Smith J, Smith P, Sykes MT, Thonicke K, Thuiller W, Tuck G, Zaehle S, Zierl B (2005) Ecosystem service supply and vulnerability to global change in Europe. Science (New York, NY) 310:1333-1337
DOI Google Scholar

Silva LCR, Anand M, Leithead MD (2010) Recent widespread tree growth decline despite increasing atmospheric CO2. PLoS One 5:e11543
DOI Google Scholar

Silva Pedro M, Rammer W, Seidl R, Roxburgh S (2017) Disentangling the effects of compositional and structural diversity on forest productivity. J Veg Sci 28:649-658
DOI Google Scholar

Soares AAV, Leite HG, Souza AL, Silva SR, Lourenço HM, Forrester DI (2016) Increasing stand structural heterogeneity reduces productivity in Brazilian eucalyptus monoclonal stands. For Ecol Manag 373:26-32
DOI Google Scholar
The Montréal Process (2015) Criteria and indicators for the conservation and sustainable Management of Temperate and Boreal Forests. http: www.mpci.org. Accessed 15 July 2017

Toledo M, Poorter L, Peña-Claros M, Alarcón A, Balcázar J, Leaño C, Licona JC, Llanque O, Vroomans V, Zuidema P, Bongers F (2011) Climate is a stronger driver of tree and forest growth rates than soil and disturbance. J Ecol 99:254-264
DOI Google Scholar

Uhl E, Biber P, Ulbricht M, Heym M, Horváth T, Lakatos F, Gál J, Steinacker L, Tonon G, Ventura M, Pretzsch H (2015) Analysing the effect of stand density and site conditions on structure and growth of oak species using Nelder trials along an environmental gradient: experimental design, evaluation methods, and results. Forest Ecosyst 2:17
DOI Google Scholar

Vilà M, Carrillo-Gavilán A, Vayreda J, Bugmann H, Fridman J, Grodzki W, Haase J, Kunstler G, Schelhaas M, Trasobares A (2013) Disentangling biodiversity and climatic determinants of wood production. PLoS One 8:e53530
DOI Google Scholar

Wang J, Cheng Y, Zhang C, Zhao Y, Zhao X, von Gadow K (2016) Relationships between tree biomass productivity and local species diversity. Ecosphere. https://doi.org/10.1002/ecs2.1562
DOI Google Scholar

Way DA, Oren R (2010) Differential responses to changes in growth temperature between trees from different functional groups and biomes: a review and synthesis of data. Tree Physiol 30:669-688
DOI Google Scholar

Wohlgemuth T (2015) Climate change and tree responses in central European forests. Ann Forest Sci 72:285-287
DOI Google Scholar

Wood SN (2011) Fast stable restricted maximum likelihood and marginal likelihood estimation of semiparametric generalized linear models. J Roy Stat Soc (B) 73:3-36
DOI Google Scholar
UN General Assembly (1987) Our common future. Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development.
Wu C, Hember RA, Chen JM, Kurz WA, Price DT, Boisvenue C, Gonsamo A, WM J (2014) Accelerating forest growth enhancement due to climate and atmospheric changes in British Colombia, Canada over 1956-2001. Sci Rep 4: 4461https://doi.org/10.1038/srep04461
DOI

Yang Y (2005) Factors affecting forest growth and possible effects of climate change in the Taihang Mountains, northern China. Forestry 79:135-147
DOI Google Scholar

Zeide B (2001) Thinning and growth: a full turnaround. J Forest 99:20-25
Google Scholar
Zuur AF (2009) Mixed effects models and extensions in ecology with R (statistics for biology and health). Springer, New Yorkhttps://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-87458-6
DOI

Żywiec M, Muter E, Zielonka T, Delibes M, Calvo G, Fedriani JM (2017) Long-term effect of temperature and precipitation on radial growth in a threatened thermo-Mediterranean tree population. Trees-Struct Funct 31:491-501
DOI Google Scholar
Publication history
Copyright
Acknowledgements
Rights and permissions

Publication history

Received: 21 July 2017
Accepted: 20 December 2017
Published: 11 February 2018
Issue date: March 2018

Copyright

© The Author(s) 2018.

Acknowledgements

Acknowledgements

This study has been supported in parts by the BiodivERsA project, "GreenFutureForests" (#01LC1610B), the FORD project Biotip (#01LC1716D) promoted by the German Aerospace Center (DLR) and the Federal Ministry of Education and Research, the project Sumforest - REFORM Risk Resilient Forest Management (#2816ERA02S), and by the West Virginia University, and the USDA McIntire-Stennis Funds WVA00126. We thank the Global Forest Biodiversity Initiative for establishing the data standards and collaborative framework. The first and third authors also thank the Bavarian State Ministry of Nutrition, Agriculture, and Forestry for permanent support of the project W 07 "Long-term experimental plots for forest growth and yield research" (#7831-22209-2013).

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.

Return