Post on 13-Dec-2015
transcript
Effects of Intensive Fertilization on the Growth of Interior Spruce
Presentation to:Interior Fertilization Working GroupFebruary 5/13 (revised March 4/13)
Typical pattern of growth response following “conventional” fertilizationType 1 response
Age
Tot
al s
tand
vol
ume
(m3/h
a)
Fertilize
Unfertilized
“Conventional” fertilization (Type 1)
Typical pattern of growth response following “conventional” fertilizationType 1 response
Age
Tot
al s
tand
vol
ume
(m3/h
a)
Fertilize
Unfertilized
“Conventional” fertilization (Type 1)
Typical pattern of growth response following “intensive” fertilizationType 2 response
Age
Tot
al s
tand
vol
ume
(m3/h
a)
Unfertilized
“Conventional” fertilization (Type 1)
Fertilize
“Intensive” fertilization (Type 2)
0
25
50
75
100
125
150
175
200
0 5 10 15
Years following trial establishment
Tot
al s
tand
vol
ume
(m3/h
a)
Control
Fertilized
Effects of yearly fertilization on the growth of Norway spruce in northern Sweden from Bergh et al. (2005)
Relationship between stem wood production and light interception by forest canopy
Absorbed sunlight during the growing season (GJ/m2)
Ste
m v
olum
e pr
oduc
tion
(m3 /h
a/yr
)
How can light interception be maximized?
How can light interception be maximized?
Increase the length of the growing season
How can light interception be maximized?
Increase the length of the growing season
Increase the amount of leaf area
How can light interception be maximized?
Increase the length of the growing season
Increase the amount of leaf area
Leaf area is strongly influenced by nutrient availability
Relationship between annual volume growth and leaf area
Leaf area index (m2/m2)
Vol
ume
grow
th (
m3 /h
a/yr
)
Relationship between annual volume growth and leaf area
Leaf area index (m2/m2)
Vol
ume
grow
th (
m3 /h
a/yr
)
Current
Relationship between annual volume growth and leaf area
Leaf area index (m2/m2)
Vol
ume
grow
th (
m3 /h
a/yr
)
Current
Potential
“Maximum Productivity” fertilization researchEP 886.13
Objectives determine the effects of different regimes and
frequencies of repeated fertilization on the growth and development of young, managed interior spruce and lodgepole pine forests
“Maximum Productivity” fertilization researchEP 886.13
Objectives determine the effects of different regimes and
frequencies of repeated fertilization on the growth and development of young, managed interior spruce and lodgepole pine forests
document the long-term effects of intensive, repeated fertilization on above- and below-ground timber and non-timber resources
Interior spruce study sites
Crow Creek
SBSmc2
10 years old, planted
Interior spruce study sites
Crow Creek SBSmc2
10 years old, planted
Lodi Lake
SBSwk1
11 years old, planted
Interior spruce study sites
Crow Creek SBSmc2
10 years old, planted
Lodi Lake SBSwk1
11 years old, planted
Hand Lake
SBSmk1
14 years old, planted
Treatments
Control
N+B
N+S+B
“Complete blend”
Optimum Nutrition 1 (1.3%N)
Optimum Nutrition 2 (1.6%N)
every 6 years
0.6
0.8
1.0
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Year
Fo
liar
N (
%)
Control ON1 ON2
Foliar nitrogen by treatment and year Crow Creek (Brockley 2010)
0.6
0.8
1.0
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
2.0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Year
Fol
iar
N (
%)
Control ON1 ON2
Foliar nitrogen by treatment and year Lodi Lake (Unpubl. data)
0.6
0.8
1.0
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Year
Fo
liar
N (
%)
Control ON1 ON2
Foliar nitrogen by treatment and year Hand Lake (Brockley unpubl.)
Foliar nitrogen by treatment and yearCrow Creek (Brockley 2010)
0.0
0.4
0.8
1.2
1.6
2.0
2.4
0 1 3 6 7 9 12
Year
Fol
iar
N (
%)
Control NSB
Foliar nitrogen by treatment and yearLodi Lake (Unpubl. data)
0.0
0.4
0.8
1.2
1.6
2.0
2.4
0 1 3 6 7 8 12
Year
Fol
iar
N (
%)
Control NSB
18-year tree height increment by treatmentCrow Creek (Unpubl. data)
47%40%29%30%
17%
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
Control NB NSB Comp ON1 ON2
Treatment
He
igh
t in
cre
me
nt (
m/tr
ee
)13- to 18-year
7- to 12-year
1- to 6-year
a
bc
12-year tree height increment by treatmentLodi Lake (Unpubl. data)
Control NB NSB Comp ON1 ON20
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
a
14% 18% 16% 20%34%
7- to 12-year1- to 6-year
Treatment
Hei
ght
incr
emen
t (m
/tre
e)
cb
18-year stand volume increment by treatmentCrow Creek (Unpubl. data)
247%
168%
110%123%
65%
0
50
100
150
200
250
Control NB NSB Comp ON1 ON2
Treatment
Vol
ume
incr
emen
t (m
3/h
a) 13- to 18-year
7- to 12-year
1- to 6-year
a
b
c
12-year stand volume increment by treatmentLodi Lake (Unpubl. data)
204%
136%
70%67%55%
a
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
Control NB NSB Comp ON1 ON2
Treatment
Vol
ume
incr
emen
t (m
3/h
a)7- to 12-year1- to 6-year
b
c
0
25
50
75
100
125
150
175
200
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18
Years following establishment
Sta
nd v
olum
e (m
3/h
a)
Control
18-year stand volume development by treatment Crow Creek (Unpubl. data)
0
25
50
75
100
125
150
175
200
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18
Years following establishment
Sta
nd v
olum
e (m
3/h
a)
Control
NB
18-year stand volume development by treatment Crow Creek (Unpubl. data)
0
25
50
75
100
125
150
175
200
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18
Years following establishment
Sta
nd v
olum
e (m
3/h
a)
Control
NB
NSB
Complete
18-year stand volume development by treatment Crow Creek (Unpubl. data)
0
25
50
75
100
125
150
175
200
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18
Years following establishment
Sta
nd v
olum
e (m
3/h
a)
Control
NB
NSB
Complete
ON1
18-year stand volume development by treatment Crow Creek (Unpubl. data)
0
25
50
75
100
125
150
175
200
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18
Years following establishment
Sta
nd v
olum
e (m
3/h
a) Control
NB
NSB
Complete
ON1
ON2
18-year stand volume development by treatment Crow Creek (Unpubl. data)
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Years following establishment
Sta
nd v
olum
e (m
3/h
a)
Control
12-year stand volume development by treatment Lodi Lake (Unpubl. data)
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Years following establishment
Sta
nd v
olum
e (m
3/h
a)
Control
NB
12-year stand volume development by treatment Lodi Lake (Unpubl. data)
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Years following establishment
Sta
nd v
olum
e (m
3/h
a)
Control
NB
NSB
Complete
12-year stand volume development by treatment Lodi Lake (Unpubl. data)
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Years following establishment
Sta
nd v
olum
e (m
3 /ha) Control
NB
NSB
Complete
ON1
12-year stand volume development by treatment Lodi Lake (Unpubl. data)
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Years following establishment
Sta
nd v
olum
e (m
3 /ha) Control
NBNSB
Complete
ON1ON2
12-year stand volume development by treatment Lodi Lake (Unpubl. data)
020406080
100120140160180200
0 5 10 15
Years following establishment
Sta
nd v
olum
e (m
3/h
a)
Control
Effects of yearly fertilization on the growth of Norway spruce in northern Sweden from Bergh et al. (2005)
020406080
100120140160180200
0 5 10 15
Years following trial establishment
Sta
nd v
olum
e (m
3/h
a)
Control
Fertilized
Effects of yearly fertilization on the growth of Norway spruce in northern Sweden from Bergh et al. (2005)
Effects of 20 years of annual fertilization on the growth of Norway spruce in central SwedenTamm (1991)
305%296%
199%
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
Control N1PK N2PK N3PK
Treatment
Sta
nd v
olum
e (
m3/h
a)
But …
12-year tree height increment by treatmentHand Lake (Unpubl. data)
Control NB NSB Comp ON1 ON20
2
4
6
8
10
a 3% 1%11% 12% 12%
7- to 12-year1- to 6-year
Treatment
Hei
ght
incr
emen
t (m
/tre
e)
ba
12-year stand volume increment by treatmentHand Lake (Unpubl. data)
38%33%
25%19%13%
a
0
25
50
75
100
125
150
175
200
Control NB NSB Comp ON1 ON2
Treatment
Vol
ume
incr
emen
t (m
3/h
a) 7- to 12-year
1- to 6-year ab
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Years following establishment
Sta
nd v
olum
e (m
3/h
a)
Control
12-year stand volume development by treatment Hand Lake (Unpubl. data)
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Years following establishment
Sta
nd v
olum
e (m
3/h
a)
Control
NB
12-year stand volume development by treatment Hand Lake (Unpubl. data)
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Years following establishment
Sta
nd v
olum
e (m
3/h
a)
Control
NB
NSB
Complete
12-year stand volume development by treatment Hand Lake (Unpubl. data)
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Years following establishment
Sta
nd v
olum
e (m
3 /ha) Control
NB
NSB
Complete
ON1
12-year stand volume development by treatment Hand Lake (Unpubl. data)
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Years following establishment
Sta
nd v
olum
e (m
3 /ha) Control
NBNSB
Complete
ON1ON2
12-year stand volume development by treatment Hand Lake (Unpubl. data)
Relationship between annual volume growth and leaf area
Leaf area index (m2/m2)
Vol
ume
grow
th (
m3 /h
a/yr
)
Current
Relationship between annual volume growth and leaf area
Leaf area index (m2/m2)
Vol
ume
grow
th (
m3 /h
a/yr
)
Current
Potential
Leaf area index by treatment at year 12Crow Creek (Brockley 2010)
268%
176%
95%93%84%
0
1
2
3
4
5
Control NB NSB Comp ON1 ON2
Treatment
Leaf
are
a in
dex
(m2/m
2)
12-year stand volume increment by treatmentCrow Creek (Brockley 2010)
284%
196%
123%130%
77%
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
Control NB NSB Comp ON1 ON2
Treatment
Vol
ume
incr
emen
t (m
3/h
a)
Leaf area index by treatment at year 9Hand Lake (Unpubl. data)
42%38%35%
20%12%
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
Control NB NSB Comp ON1 ON2
Treatment
Leaf
are
a in
dex
(m2 /m
2 )
12-year stand volume increment by treatmentHand Lake (Unpubl. data)
38%33%25%19%
13%
0
25
50
75
100
125
150
175
200
Control NB NSB Comp ON1 ON2
Treatment
Vol
ume
incr
emen
t (m
3/h
a)
Effects of frequency of fertilization on the growth of Norway spruce in central Sweden – 5-year resultsBergh et al. (2008)
48%
83%91%
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
Control F1 F2 F3
Treatment
Sta
nd v
olum
e (
m3/h
a) F1 – 75-100 kg N every yearF2 – 125-150 kg N every 2 yearsF3 – 150-180 kg N every 3 years
Summary of results to date
Young, nutrient deficient Sx plantations apparently respond well to repeated fertilization
Summary of results to date
Young, nutrient deficient Sx plantations apparently respond well to repeated fertilization
Potentially large effects on rotation length or harvest volume
Summary of results to date
Young, nutrient deficient Sx plantations apparently respond well to repeated fertilization
Potentially large effects on rotation length or harvest volume
Magnitude of gains directly related to frequency of application
Modelling the effects of repeatedly fertilizing interior spruce
Age of unfertilized and fertilized stands at minimum operability (e.g., 200 m3/ha merchantable volume)
Modelling the effects of repeatedly fertilizing interior spruce
Age of unfertilized and fertilized stands at minimum operability (e.g., 200 m3/ha merchantable volume)
Merchantable volume of unfertilized and fertilized stand at a given stand age (e.g., 20 years in future)
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 550
50100150200250300350400450500
Unfertilized
Fertilized
Stand age
Me
rch
an
tab
le v
olu
me
(m
3/h
a))
39 years 48 years
96 m3/ha
Modelled effects of fertilization at 5-year intervals
SI=20Fertilize every 5 years, starting @ age 2050% total volume response per fertilization
Fertilize
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 550
50100150200250300350400450500
Unfertilized
Fertilized
Stand age
Me
rch
an
tab
le v
olu
me
(m
3/h
a))
37 years 48 years
140 m3/ha
Modelled effects of fertilization at 5-year intervals
SI=20Fertilize every 5 years, starting @ age 2075% total volume response per fertilization
Fertilize
Cautionary Notes
Repeated fertilization may negatively impact:
Wood quality
Cautionary Notes
Repeated fertilization may negatively impact:
Wood quality Forest health
Cautionary Notes
Repeated fertilization may negatively impact:
Wood quality Forest health Non-timber values (e.g., understory,
water, wildlife)
Cautionary Notes
Repeated fertilization may negatively impact: Wood quality Forest health Non-timber values (e.g., understory, water, wildlife)
Future competition mortality may reduce net volume gains
Cautionary Notes
Repeated fertilization may negatively impact: Wood quality Forest health Non-timber values (e.g., understory, water, wildlife)
Future competition mortality may reduce net volume gains
Only short-term (18-yr) local data available
Cautionary Notes
Repeated fertilization may negatively impact: Wood quality Forest health Non-timber values (e.g., understory, water, wildlife)
Future competition mortality may reduce net volume gains
Only short-term (18-yr) local data available
All stands are not equally responsive
Cautionary Notes
Repeated fertilization may negatively impact: Wood quality Forest health Non-timber values (e.g., understory, water, wildlife)
Future competition mortality may reduce net volume gains
Only short-term (18-yr) local data available
All stands are not equally responsive
Small number of research trials
Recommended approach
Proceed cautiously with repeated fertilization every 4-6 years on select SBS sites
Recommended approach
Proceed cautiously with repeated fertilization every 4-6 years on select SBS sites
Site/stand attributes young (15-25 yrs) broadcast burned N deficient (<1.1% N)
Recommended approach
Proceed cautiously with repeated fertilization every 4-6 years on select SBS sites
Site/stand attributes young (15-25 yrs) broadcast burned N deficient (<1.1% N)
Apply N at ~175 kg/ha
Recommended approach
Proceed cautiously with repeated fertilization every 4-6 years on select SBS sites
Site/stand attributes Young (15-25 yrs) Broadcast burned N deficient (<1.1% N)
Apply N at ~175 kg/ha
Apply other nutrients (S, B) as needed (every 2nd application?)
Recommended approach
Proceed cautiously with repeated fertilization every 4-6 years on select SBS sites
Site/stand attributes Young (15-25 yrs) Broadcast burned N deficient (<1.1% N)
Apply N at ~175 kg/ha
Apply other nutrients (S, B) as needed (every 2nd application?)
Monitor foliar nutrients, forest health and water quality
Recommended approach
Proceed cautiously with repeated fertilization every 4-6 years on select SBS sites
Site/stand attributes Young (15-25 yrs) Broadcast burned N deficient (<1.1% N)
Apply N at ~175 kg/ha
Apply other nutrients (S, B) as needed (every 2nd application?)
Monitor foliar nutrients, forest health and water quality
Continue measurement and re-treatment of existing research trials