{"id":3786,"date":"2019-08-30T09:00:09","date_gmt":"2019-08-30T07:00:09","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/ist.blogs.inra.fr\/afs\/?p=3786"},"modified":"2019-08-29T17:06:41","modified_gmt":"2019-08-29T15:06:41","slug":"polyculture-affects-biomass-production-of-component-species-but-not-total-standing-biomass-and-soil-carbon-stocks-in-a-temperate-forest-plantation","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/ist.blogs.inrae.fr\/afs\/2019\/08\/30\/polyculture-affects-biomass-production-of-component-species-but-not-total-standing-biomass-and-soil-carbon-stocks-in-a-temperate-forest-plantation\/","title":{"rendered":"Polyculture affects biomass production of component species but not total standing biomass and soil carbon stocks in a temperate forest plantation"},"content":{"rendered":"<script type='text\/javascript' src='https:\/\/d1bxh8uas1mnw7.cloudfront.net\/assets\/embed.js'><\/script><p align=\"justify\">Over-yielding of stand biomass did not occur in a tree polyculture comprised of <em>Betula pendula<\/em>, <em>Alnus glutinosa<\/em> and <em>Fagus sylvatica<\/em> selected for contrasting traits. This was due to antagonistic interactions between the component species. Fine root dynamics and soil C stocks were unaffected by species mixture.<\/p>\n<p align=\"justify\"><strong>Context<\/strong> Increasing CO2 fixation in tree biomass through afforestation and forest management actions has potential for cost-effective climate mitigation. The influences of tree mixture on biomass production and subsequent soil C accumulation in polyculture still remain uncertain.<br \/>\n<strong>Aims<\/strong> We studied the polyculture of <em>Alnus glutinosa<\/em> (L.) Gaertn, <em>Betula pendula<\/em> Roth and <em>Fagus sylvatica<\/em> L. in a plantation forest to examine the effectiveness of species mixtures as a tool for increased biomass production and soil C accumulation.<br \/>\n<strong>Methods<\/strong> Tree biomass was estimated by developing species-specific allometric models and 3 years tree measurement. Fine root biomass and production were estimated by root coring and root-mesh methods. The \u2018relative yield of mixture\u2019 approach was used to examine the mixture effect.<br \/>\n<strong>Results<\/strong> In mixture, an additive effect was observed in <em>A. glutinosa<\/em> (13% increase in basal diameter relative to the monoculture); however, there was no overall effect of mixture on total standing biomass due to the suppression of <em>F. sylvatica<\/em> (2.75 g m\u22122 reduction in woody biomass). Fine root biomass production showed no mixture effect. The quantity and quality of soil C (top 0.5 m) was not affected by tree mixture.<br \/>\n<strong>Conclusion<\/strong> We conclude that the contrasting growth responses of the <em>A. glutinosa<\/em>, <em>B. pendula<\/em> and <em>F. sylvatica<\/em> in polyculture resulted in no over-yielding of standing biomass despite the complementary traits of the component species.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Keywords<\/strong><br \/>\nWoody biomass, Root biomass, Tree polyculture, Mixture effect, Soil C<\/p>\n<div class='altmetric-embed' data-badge-type='donut' data-doi='10.1007\/s13595-019-0875-2'  style='float: right; ' ><\/div>\n<p><strong>Open-access Publication<\/strong><br \/>\nAhmed, I.U., Smith, A.R. &amp; Godbold, D.L. Annals of Forest Science (2019) 76: 91. <a href=\"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/s13595-019-0875-2\">https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/s13595-019-0875-2<\/a><\/p>\n<p><strong>Data availability<\/strong><br \/>\nThe datasets generated during and\/or analysed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Over-yielding of stand biomass did not occur in a tree polyculture comprised of Betula pendula, Alnus glutinosa and Fagus sylvatica selected for contrasting traits. This was due to antagonistic interactions between the component species. Fine root dynamics and soil C stocks were unaffected by species mixture. Context Increasing CO2 fixation in tree biomass through afforestation [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":106,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[14,109,15],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-3786","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-article-type","category-open-access","category-research-paper","cat-14-id","cat-109-id","cat-15-id"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/ist.blogs.inrae.fr\/afs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3786","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/ist.blogs.inrae.fr\/afs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/ist.blogs.inrae.fr\/afs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ist.blogs.inrae.fr\/afs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/106"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ist.blogs.inrae.fr\/afs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=3786"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/ist.blogs.inrae.fr\/afs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3786\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/ist.blogs.inrae.fr\/afs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=3786"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ist.blogs.inrae.fr\/afs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=3786"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ist.blogs.inrae.fr\/afs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=3786"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}