Comparisons of Growth and Carbon Reserve between Stump Grafting Stand and Planting Stand

LI Guo-hui; WU Li-juan; ZHANG You-yan; DANG Hong-zhong; WU Xiao-li; ZHOU Ze-fu; LIU zhi-ren; ZHANG Meng

The leaf nutrient, biomass and carbon reserve of 9-year-old Populus×euramericana cv. ‘74/76’ stump grafting stand with 26-year-old P.×xiaozhuanica W.Y.Hsu et Liang cv.‘Popularis’as rootstock, 26-year-old P.×xiaozhuanica W.Y.Hsu et Liang cv.‘Popularis’ and 9-year-old P.×euramericana cv. ‘74/76’ planting stands were compared. The result showed that the average increment and the annual average increment of stump grafting stand were greater than the two planting stands. The total nitrogen content in leaves of stump grafting stand was the highest, and it was 1.26 times and 1.05 times as much as that of the planting stands of Populus×xiaozhuanica W.Y.Hsu et Liang cv.‘Popularis’ and P.×euramericana cv. ‘74/76’ separately. The total phosphorus content of stump grafting stand was 1.3 times as much as that of planting stand of 26-year-old P.×xiaozhuanica W.Y.Hsu et Liang cv.‘Popularis’, but there was little difference between stump graftin stand and planting stand of 9-year-old P.×euramericana cv. ‘74/76’. The total potassium of stump grafting stand was 46.6% and 95.8% lesser than that of the planting stands of P.×xiaozhuanica W.Y.Hsu et Liang cv.‘Popularis’ and P.×euramericana cv. ‘74/76’. The biomass of aerial parts and the biomasses of trunk, branches and leaves of stump grafting stand were 1.84, 1.80, 1.76, and 3.00 times as much as that of planting stand of P.×euramericana cv. ‘74/76’ separately. The total root biomass of the stump grafting stand was 1.42 times and 7.68 times as much as that of planting stands of 26-year-old P.×xiaozhuanica W.Y.Hsu et Liang cv.‘Popularis’ and 9-year-old P.×euramericana cv. ‘74/76’. There was an obvious advantage in carbon reserve from all the parts of the stump grafting stand and the carbon sequestration capacity was the highest, which was 2.66 times and 1.62 times as much as that of planting stands of 26-year-old P.×xiaozhuanica W.Y.Hsu et Liang cv.‘Popularis’ and 9-year-old P.×euramericana cv. ‘74/76’. These showed that the stump grafting stand had more advantages than planting stands.

1. Institute of Desertification Studies, Chinese Academy of Forestry, Beijing 100091, China

2. Beijing Daxing Forestry Station, Beijing 102600, China

Received Date: 2013-02-01

Abstract: The leaf nutrient, biomass and carbon reserve of 9-year-old Populus×euramericana cv. ‘74/76’ stump grafting stand with 26-year-old P.×xiaozhuanica W.Y.Hsu et Liang cv.‘Popularis’as rootstock, 26-year-old P.×xiaozhuanica W.Y.Hsu et Liang cv.‘Popularis’ and 9-year-old P.×euramericana cv. ‘74/76’ planting stands were compared. The result showed that the average increment and the annual average increment of stump grafting stand were greater than the two planting stands. The total nitrogen content in leaves of stump grafting stand was the highest, and it was 1.26 times and 1.05 times as much as that of the planting stands of Populus×xiaozhuanica W.Y.Hsu et Liang cv.‘Popularis’ and P.×euramericana cv. ‘74/76’ separately. The total phosphorus content of stump grafting stand was 1.3 times as much as that of planting stand of 26-year-old P.×xiaozhuanica W.Y.Hsu et Liang cv.‘Popularis’, but there was little difference between stump graftin stand and planting stand of 9-year-old P.×euramericana cv. ‘74/76’. The total potassium of stump grafting stand was 46.6% and 95.8% lesser than that of the planting stands of P.×xiaozhuanica W.Y.Hsu et Liang cv.‘Popularis’ and P.×euramericana cv. ‘74/76’. The biomass of aerial parts and the biomasses of trunk, branches and leaves of stump grafting stand were 1.84, 1.80, 1.76, and 3.00 times as much as that of planting stand of P.×euramericana cv. ‘74/76’ separately. The total root biomass of the stump grafting stand was 1.42 times and 7.68 times as much as that of planting stands of 26-year-old P.×xiaozhuanica W.Y.Hsu et Liang cv.‘Popularis’ and 9-year-old P.×euramericana cv. ‘74/76’. There was an obvious advantage in carbon reserve from all the parts of the stump grafting stand and the carbon sequestration capacity was the highest, which was 2.66 times and 1.62 times as much as that of planting stands of 26-year-old P.×xiaozhuanica W.Y.Hsu et Liang cv.‘Popularis’ and 9-year-old P.×euramericana cv. ‘74/76’. These showed that the stump grafting stand had more advantages than planting stands.

HTML

Reference (17)

[1]	谢涛,王明慧,郑阿宝,等.苏北沿海不同林龄杨树林土壤活性有机碳特征[J].生态学杂志,2012,31(1):51-58
[2]	陈亮.杨树伐根嫁接繁育更新技术[J].林业实用技术,2007(1):17-18
[3]	付玉东,高晓萍,周闯.伐根嫁接三倍体毛白杨更新技术与效益评价[J].内蒙古林业调查设计,2007,30(5):27-28
[4]	吴丽娟,于凌霄,贾素萍,等.伐根嫁接杨树林根系分布特征[J].林业资源管理,2012(3):113-118
[5]	吴丽娟,贾素苹,宋继琴,等.杨树伐根嫁接亲和力研究[J].山西林业科技,2012,41(2):25-27
[6]	王洪岩,王文杰,邱岭,等.兴安落叶松林生物量、地表枯落物量及土壤有机碳储量随林分生长的变化差异[J].生态学报,2012,32(3):833-843
[7]	杨晓菲,鲁绍伟,饶良懿,等.河南省西平县杨树人工林碳贮量及其分配特征研究[J].林业资源管理,2010(2):38-42
[8]	谢涛,王明慧,郑阿宝,等.苏北沿海不同林龄杨树林土壤活性有机碳特征[J].生态学杂志,2012,31(1):51-58
[9]	崔鸿侠,唐万鹏,胡兴宜,等.杨树人工林生长过程中碳储量动态[J].东北林业大学学报,2012,40(2):47-49,60
[10]	陈军.杨树人工林地上生物量和碳储量研究[D].北京:北京林业大学,2007
[11]	陈乐蓓.两种不同经营模式下杨树生物量及土壤碳储量的空间变异[J].安徽农业大学学报,2010,37(1):122-125
[12]	Fang J, Chen A, Peng C,et al. Changes in forest biomass carbon storage in China between 1949 and 1998[J].Science,2001, 292:2320-2322
[13]	Ni J.Net primary productivity in forests of China: scaling-up of national inventory data and comparison with model predictions[J].Forest Ecology and Management,2003,176:485-495
[14]	Nabuurs G T, Paivinen R, Sikkema R, et al. The role of European forests in the global carbon cycle[J].Biomass and Bioenergy, 1997, 13:345-358
[15]	Patenaude G L, Briggs B D J, Milne R, et al. The carbon pool in a British semi-natural woodland[J].Forestry,2003,75(5):109-119
[16]	唐罗忠,生原喜久雄,黄宝龙,等.江苏省里下河地区杨树人工林的碳储量及其动态[J].南京林业大学学报:自然科学版,2004,28(2):1-6
[17]	Kawahara T, Kanazawa Y, Sakurai S. Biomass and net production of man-made forests in the Philippines[J].Journal of the Japan Forestry Society,1981,63(9):320-327

Comparisons of Growth and Carbon Reserve between Stump Grafting Stand and Planting Stand

Abstract

References

Proportional views

通讯作者: 陈斌, bchen63@163.com

Proportional views