Eva SALAMON-ALBERT, Agnes CSİSZAR, Dénes BARTHA

Functional fingerprinting estimates renewal opportunities for tree species in a mixed Turkey oak forest

Maintaining and managing trees with different ecological plasticity under climate conditions aggravated by short-term variability are major challenges for foresters. Our aims were to investigate species-specific ecophysiological responses of canopy trees in a mixed Turkey oak forest during their early-phase regeneration. We measured plant carbon and water exchange with portable IRG A equipment under natural field conditions (canopy gap) and in a climate-controlled (standardized) environment. We analyzed variability and differences in plant gas exchange in relation to important abiotic site parameters and the species. Assimilation, stomata] conductance, and intrinsic water use were applied as calibrating parameters for plant functional fingerprinting to detect carbon-towater response performance of the saplings. The most favorable water economy during summer and seasonal maximum in carbon uptake during fall evolved as common response characteristics of the species in canopy gaps. Sessile oak (Quercus petraea) was found to be a water-regulated species due to the highest relative ratio of intrinsic water-use efficiency. In contrast, Turkey oak (Q. cerris) and manna ash (Fraxinus ornus) were identified as carbon-driven species presenting a gradual increase in assimilation during their seasonal dynamics. Consequently, we can predict a delayed regeneration of sessile oak and progressive growth of manna ash and Turkey oak in the renewing canopy compared to the initial forest stand. European hornbeam (Carpinus betulus) and wild service tree (Sorbus torminalis) certainly remain as accessory elements due to their unfavorable carbon input ratio and poor water use economy. Explored knowledge on carbon-to-water response behavior of these forest-forming trees can provide a novel contribution to afforestation practices in adaptive forest management.

Keywords:

Carbon sequestration, canopy gap regeneration mixed forest trees, functional fingerprinting, water use,

PDF

___

Bednorz L, 2018, IFOREST, V11, P72, DOI 10.3832/ifor2347-010
Bobiec A, 2018, LANDSCAPE ECOL, V33, P513, DOI 10.1007/s10980-018-0619-y
Boratynski A, 1996, ENZYKLOPADIE HOLZGEW, P1
BREDA N, 1993, ANN SCI FOREST, V50, P571, DOI 10.1051/forest:19930606
Brezina I., 2011, Journal of Forest Science (Prague), V57, P359, DOI 10.17221/12/2011-JFS
Caudullo G, 2016, EUROPEAN ATLAS FORES, P100
Danielewicz W., 2016, Folia Forestalia Polonica. Series A, Forestry, V58, P147
De Rigo D, 2016, EUROPEAN ATLAS FORES, P74
Deligoz A, 2018, TURK J AGRIC FOR, V42, P114, DOI 10.3906/tar-1709-29
Di Filippo A, 2010, ANN FOREST SCI, V67, DOI 10.1051/forest/2010031
Duda M., 2013, Acta Scientiarum Polonorum - Silvarum Colendarum Ratio et Industria Lignaria, V12, P5
Durkovic J, 2014, PLANT BIOLOGY, V16, P908, DOI 10.1111/plb.12150
Elek Z, 2018, SCI REP-UK, V8, DOI 10.1038/s41598-018-35159-z
EPRON D, 1993, NEW PHYTOL, V125, P381, DOI 10.1111/j.1469-8137.1993.tb03890.x
Field C. B., 1989, Plant physiological ecology: field methods and instrumentation., P209
Gortan E, 2009, TREE PHYSIOL, V29, P529, DOI 10.1093/treephys/tpn053
Gotmark F, 2014, PLANT ECOL, V215, P1067, DOI 10.1007/s11258-014-0365-4
Hemery GE, 2010, FORESTRY, V83, P65, DOI 10.1093/forestry/cpp034
Kalapos T, 2003, PLANT BIOSYST, V137, P73, DOI 10.1080/11263500312331351351
Kevey B, 2008, TILIA 14, P342 .
Kiorapostolou N, 2019, TREE PHYSIOL, V39, P234, DOI 10.1093/treephys/tpy095
Kollar T., 2017, Acta Silvatica & Lignaria Hungarica, V13, P25
Lof M, 2018, DYNAMICS SILVICULTUR, P103 .
Madera P, 2013, DENDROBIOLOGY, V69, P59, DOI 10.12657/denbio.069.007
Madera P, 2012, DENDROBIOLOGY, V68, P63 .
Martinez-Vilalta J, 2002, OECOLOGIA, V133, P19, DOI 10.1007/s00442-002-1009-2
Muscolo A, 2014, J FORESTRY RES, V25, P725, DOI 10.1007/s11676-014-0521-7
Nicolescu VN, 2009, BODENKULTUR, V60, P35
Petit G, 2016, TREE PHYSIOL, V36, P1310, DOI 10.1093/treephys/tpw069
Purina L, 2015, RES RURAL DEV, P29 .
Pyttel P, 2013, TREES-STRUCT FUNCT, V27, P1609, DOI 10.1007/s00468-013-0908-7
Rasmussen Kristine Kjorup, 2007, Dendrochronologia, V25, P3, DOI 10.1016/j.dendro.2007.01.002
Salamon-Albert E, 2018, TURK J BOT, V42, P701, DOI 10.3906/bot-1806-44
Saniga M, 2014, IFOREST, V7, P324, DOI 10.3832/ifor0996-007
Sansone D, 2018, DYNAMICS, P185, DOI DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-91953-9_6
Schute G., 2001, Forst und Holz, V56, P11
Sebastiano S, 2017, MEDITERRANEAN IDENTI, P263
Taylor SO, 2003, PLANT ECOL, V167, P71, DOI 10.1023/A:1023975026261
Thomas PA, 2017, J ECOL, V105, P1806, DOI 10.1111/1365-2745.12857
Tinya F, 2020, FOREST ECOL MANAG, V459, DOI 10.1016/j.foreco.2019.117810
Tognetti R, 2007, TREE PHYSIOL, V27, P1741, DOI 10.1093/treephys/27.12.1741
VALENTINI R, 1995, PLANT CELL ENVIRON, V18, P631, DOI 10.1111/j.1365-3040.1995.tb00564.x
Welk E, 2016, EUROPEAN ATLAS FORES, P180
Zhu JJ, 2014, J FORESTRY RES, V25, P501, DOI 10.1007/s11676-014-0489-3