Articles containing the keyword 'soils'

Forest ecosystems may accumulate large amounts of nitrogen in the biomass and in the soil organic matter. However, there is increasing concern that deposition of inorganic nitrogen compounds from the atmosphere will lead to nitrogen saturation; excess nitrogen input does not increase production. The aim of this study was to determine the long-term changes caused by nitrogen input on accumulation of nitrogen in forest soils and in ground vegetation.

The fertilization experiments used in this study were established during 1958–1962. They were situated on 36- to 63-year-old Scots pine (Pinus sylvestris L.) and Norway spruce (Picea abies (L.) Karst.) stands of different levels of fertility. The experiments received nitrogen fertilization 5–7 times over a 30-year period, and the total input of nitrogen was 596–926 kg/ha.

Nitrogen input increased the amount of organic matter in the humus layer and the nitrogen concentration in the organic matter. Furthermore, the total amount of nutrients (N, P, K, Ca and Mg) bound by the humus layer increased due to the increase in the amount of organic matter. However, nitrogen input decreased the biomass of ground vegetation. The nitrogen concentration of the plant material on the nitrogen-fertilized plots was higher than on the control plots, but the amount of nutrients bound by ground vegetation decreased owing to the drastic decrease in the biomass of mosses. Ground vegetation does not have the potential to accumulate nitrogen, because vegetation is dominated by slow-growing mosses and dwarf shrubs which do not benefit from nitrogen input.

• Mäkipää, E-mail: rm@mm.unknown

It was examined whether the present site classification method, and especially its applicability to site productivity estimation, could be improved in upland Scots pine (Pinus sylvestris L.) forests in Southern Finland by developing a classification key based on Two-way Indicator Species Analysis (TWINSPAN), and/or by inclusion of soil texture, stoniness and the humus layer depth more closely in the classification method. TWINSPAN clusters (TW) explained 71%, and forest site types (FST) 64% of the variation in site index (SI) (H₁₀₀). When soil texture (TEXT) was added to the regression model, the explanatory power increased to 82% (SI = TW + TW * TEXT) and to 80% (SI = FST + FST * TEXT), respectively. Soil texture alone explained 69% of the variation in site index. The influence of stoniness on site index was significant (P <0.05) on sorted medium sand soils and on medium and fine sand moraine soils. The thickness of the humus layer (2–6 cm) was not significantly (P=0.1) related to site index.

It is suggested that the proposed TWINSPAN classification cannot replace the present forest site type system in Scots pine stands in Southern Finland. However, the TWINSPAN key may be used to aid the identification of forest types. The observation of dominant soil texture within each forest type is recommended.

The PDF includes an abstract in Finnish.

• Nieppola, E-mail: jn@mm.unknown

Mechanical site preparation (MSP) is a common practice that precedes the planting of Norway spruce (Picea abies (L.) H. Karst.) in Nordic forests. Mounding has become the most used method in spruce planting in recent years. This study examined the effects of different mounding treatments (spot and ditch mounding, inversion, unprepared control with or without herbicide application) and a mechanical vegetation control (MVC) treatment done 3–4 years after planting on the post-planting growth of spruce container seedlings and their development to saplings during the first 11–13 years on two forest till soils in central Finland, one on flat terrain and other on a southwest slope. On these fine-textured soils the spot and ditch mounding methods favoured spruce saplings development. Inversion and unprepared plots showed weakest growth. On the site with flat terrain, 11 years post planting, spruce saplings were 78–144 cm (38–80%) taller and their breast height diameters were 11–13 mm (60–74%) thicker for ditch or spot mounding than for inversion or herbicide treatment. On the site with sloped terrain the differences were minor between the MSP treatments. MVC improved spruce height growth on sites which did not have intensive MSP, especially on control saplings planted on unprepared soil in herbicide and inversion treatments. On the flat terrain, MVC reduced the density of resprouts to be removed later in pre-commercial thinning. As a conclusion, spot or ditch mounding favoured the growth of spruce over inversion especially on flat terrain with fine-textured soil.

• Uotila, Natural Resources Institute Finland (Luke), Natural resources, Juntintie 154, FI-77600 Suonenjoki, Finland E-mail: karri.uotila@luke.fi
• Luoranen, Natural Resources Institute Finland (Luke), Natural resources, Juntintie 154, FI-77600 Suonenjoki, Finland https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6970-2030 E-mail: jaana.luoranen@luke.fi
• Saksa, Natural Resources Institute Finland (Luke), Natural resources, Juntintie 154, FI-77600 Suonenjoki, Finland https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1776-2357 E-mail: timo.saksa@luke.fi
• Laine, Metsä Forest, Revontulenpuisto 2, FI-02100 Espoo, Finland https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6448-8274 E-mail: tiina.laine@metsagroup.com
• Heiskanen, Natural Resources Institute Finland (Luke), Natural resources, Juntintie 154, FI-77600 Suonenjoki, Finland https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0549-835X E-mail: juha.heiskanen@luke.fi

Cable yarding is a general solution for load handling on sites not accessible to ground-based machinery, and is typically associated with steep terrain. On flat terrain, such conditions can primarily be found on soft or wet soils, most frequently encountered in Central and Northern European countries. Today, changed environmental and market conditions may offer an unprecedented opportunity to the actual implementation of cable yarding on flat terrain in commercial operations. The study goal was to collect cable yarder manufacturers experience regarding the use and adaption of cable yarding technology on flat terrain. European manufacturers of cable yarding technology were interviewed about customer experience, particular challenges, adaptation potential, future potential and main hurdles for the expansion of cable yarding on flat terrain. Almost all manufacturers have received requests for flat-terrain yarding technology solutions, primarily from Germany. Temporal or permanent inaccessibility, regulatory or environmental reasons were the most frequent motivation for considering cable yarding technology. Installation was considered particularly challenging (clearance, stable anchoring). Potential adaptations included higher towers, artificial anchors, mechanized bunching before extraction and un-guyed yarder-systems. An artificial, highly mobile, self-anchoring tail spar was considered the most useful adaptation. While concerned about limited profitability and qualified labour shortage, most manufacturers demonstrated a positive or neutral view concerning the expansion of cable yarding on flat terrain. However, cable yarding is not considered to be cost-competitive wherever ground-based systems can be employed and cable yarding is not subsidized.

• Erber, University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences Vienna, Department of Forest and Soil Sciences, Institute of Forest Engineering, Peter Jordan Strasse 82, 1190 Vienna, Austria https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1606-5258 E-mail: gernot.erber@boku.ac.at
• Spinelli, CNR-IBE Consiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche-Istituto per la BioEconomia, Via Madonna del Piano 10, Sesto Fiorentino, Firenze, I-50019, Italy; AFORA, University of the Sunshine Coast, Locked Bag 4, Maroochydore, QLD, Australia https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9545-1004 E-mail: spinelli@ivalsa.cnr.it

• Saarsalmi, Finnish Forest Research Institute, P.O. Box 18, FI-01301 Vantaa, Finland E-mail: anna.saarsalmi@metla.fi
• Tamminen, Finnish Forest Research Institute, P.O. Box 18, FI-01301 Vantaa, Finland E-mail: pekka.tamminen@metla.fi
• Kukkola, Finnish Forest Research Institute, P.O. Box 18, FI-01301 Vantaa, Finland E-mail: mikko.kukkola@metla.fi

• Muukkonen, Finnish Forest Research Institute, P.O. Box 18, FI-01301 Vantaa, Finland E-mail: petteri.muukkonen@metla.fi
• Mäkipää, Finnish Forest Research Institute, Unioninkatu 40 A, FI-00170 Helsinki, Finland E-mail: rm@nn.fi
• Laiho, Department of Forest Ecology, P.O. Box 24, FI-00014 University of Helsinki, Finland E-mail: rl@nn.fi
• Minkkinen, Department of Forest Ecology, P.O. Box 24, FI-00014 University of Helsinki, Finland E-mail: km@nn.fi
• Vasander, Department of Forest Ecology, P.O. Box 24, FI-00014 University of Helsinki, Finland E-mail: hv@nn.fi
• Finér, Finnish Forest Research Institute, P.O. Box 68, FI-80101 Joensuu, Finland E-mail: lf@nn.fi

• Hytönen, Finnish Forest Research Institute, Kannus Research Station, P.O. Box 44, FIN-69101 Kannus, Finland E-mail: jyrki.hytonen@metla.fi

• Sah, Department of Biology, Kathmandu University, Dhulikhel, Nepal E-mail: ssah@wlink.com.np
• Dutta, Institute of Forestry, Tribhuvan University, Pokhara, Nepal E-mail: icd@nn.np
• Haque, Institute of Forestry, Tribhuvan University, Pokhara, Nepal E-mail: msh@nn.np