Size-growth relationship, tree spatial patterns, and tree-tree competition influence tree growth and stand complexity in a 160-year red pine chronosequence

Abstract Extended rotations have been suggested as a strategy for balancing timber production and ecological objectives. By lengthening the period of stand development, extended rotations may increase tree size inequality and other elements of structural complexity, thus reducing the disparity between managed and old-growth stands. A potential limitation of extended rotations is the tradeoff between reduced stand-level productivity and greater large-tree growth that typically occurs with stand age. The mechanisms driving this tradeoff have not been fully explored. To fill this knowledge gap, we investigated the size-growth relationship (SGR), tree spatial patterns, and tree-tree competition along an established 160-yr chronosequence of 19 single-cohort, unthinned red pine (Pinus resinosa) stands in northern Minnesota, USA. We analyzed SGR, a stand-level metric used to estimate the relative efficiency with which different sized trees utilize available resources, to assess how the relationship between tree size and growth changed over an extended period of stand development. We performed spatial analysis to examine whether tree spatial clustering, a criterion of structural complexity, increased with stand age. We modeled individual-tree biomass increment to test whether competition along the chronosequence was size-symmetric (access of individual trees to resources is directly proportional to size) or size-asymmetric (larger trees suppress the growth of smaller individuals by preempting resources), and how SGR, tree spatial patterns, and competition together influenced individual-tree growth. We found low SGR (i.e., disproportionately slow growth of larger trees compared to smaller trees) across the chronosequence, a finding that contrasts with hypothesized models of SGR during stand development but is consistent with previous research on pine-dominated systems. Tree spatial patterns trended towards clustering with stand age, indicating higher structural complexity over time. In agreement with our SGR findings, competition across the chronosequence was size-symmetric, suggesting that competition reduced individual-tree growth while maintaining relative size equality. Individual-tree biomass increment was strongly dependent on tree size, with the growth of small trees appearing relatively less affected by competition. Differences in SGR did not translate into individual-tree growth, and tree spatial clustering was associated with reduced growth, especially in larger trees. Our results indicate that disproportionately slow large-tree growth and size-symmetric competition throughout stand development may delay the emergence of stand structural complexity in extended rotation red pine stands. Silvicultural treatments may be required to promote stand structural complexity and increase large crop-tree growth.

[1]  J. Metsaranta,et al.  A fifty-year reconstruction of annual changes in the spatial distribution of Pinus banksiana stands: does pattern fit competition theory? , 2008, Plant Ecology.

[2]  M. G. Ryan,et al.  Patterns of growth dominance in forests of the Rocky Mountains, USA , 2006 .

[3]  H. Pretzsch,et al.  The dependency of the size-growth relationship of Norway spruce (Picea abies [L.] Karst.) and European beech (Fagus sylvatica [L.]) in forest stands on long-term site conditions, drought events, and ozone stress , 2011, Trees.

[4]  Jacob Weiner,et al.  Mechanisms determining the degree of size asymmetry in competition among plants , 1998, Oecologia.

[5]  Russell V. Lenth,et al.  Least-Squares Means: The R Package lsmeans , 2016 .

[6]  T. Cordonnier,et al.  The Gini index brings asymmetric competition to light , 2015 .

[7]  J. N. Hool,et al.  A Basal Area Ratio Predictor of Loblolly Pine Plantation Mortality , 1979 .

[8]  J. Speer.  Fundamentals of Tree Ring Research , 2010 .

[9]  D. Pothier.  Relationships between patterns of stand growth dominance and tree competition mode for species of various shade tolerances , 2017 .

[10]  J. Metsaranta,et al.  Patterns of inter-annual variation in the size asymmetry of growth in Pinus banksiana , 2010, Oecologia.

[11]  Jürgen Bauhus,et al.  Silviculture for old-growth attributes , 2009 .

[12]  B. Palik,et al.  A Revised Managers Handbook for Red Pine in the North Central Region , 2015 .

[13]  J. Foster,et al.  Looking for age-related growth decline in natural forests: unexpected biomass patterns from tree rings and simulated mortality , 2014, Oecologia.

[14]  John B. Bradford,et al.  Age-related patterns of forest complexity and carbon storage in pine and aspen–birch ecosystems of northern Minnesota, USA , 2010 .

[15]  G. Quinn,et al.  Experimental Design and Data Analysis for Biologists , 2002 .

[16]  Harvey Alexander,et al.  Creating a forestry for the 21st century the science of ecosystem management , 1998 .

[17]  F. Smith,et al.  Wood Production Efficiency and Growth Dominance in Multiaged and Even-Aged Ponderosa Pine Stands , 2014 .

[18]  Phillip B. Gibbons,et al.  Forest and woodland stand structural complexity: Its definition and measurement , 2005 .

[19]  Scott D. Roberts,et al.  Linkages between silviculture and ecology: examination of several important conceptual models , 2004 .

[20]  J. Stape,et al.  Neighborhood uniformity increases growth of individual Eucalyptus trees , 2013 .

[21]  H. Pretzsch,et al.  Size-symmetric versus size-asymmetric competition and growth partitioning among trees in forest stands along an ecological gradient in central Europe , 2010 .

[22]  J. N. Long,et al.  Utah State University From the SelectedWorks of James Long 2010 The influence of compositional and structural diversity on forest productivity , 2017 .

[23]  Michael J Plank,et al.  On the growth of locally interacting plants: differential equations for the dynamics of spatial moments. , 2013, Ecology.

[24]  D. Binkley.  A hypothesis about the interaction of tree dominance and stand production through stand development , 2004 .

[25]  David R. Anderson,et al.  Model selection and multimodel inference : a practical information-theoretic approach , 2003 .

[26]  Steward T. A. Pickett,et al.  Space-for-Time Substitution as an Alternative to Long-Term Studies , 1989 .

[27]  W. Stiell,et al.  Growth of Clumped vs. Equally Spaced Trees , 1982 .

[28]  B. Palik,et al.  The long-term effects of silvicultural thinning and partial cutting on soil compaction in red pine (Pinus resinosa Ait.) and northern hardwood stands in the northern Great Lakes Region of the United States , 2008 .

[29]  S. Fraver,et al.  Examining the influences of tree-to-tree competition and climate on size-growth relationships in hydric, multi-aged Fraxinus nigra stands , 2016 .

[30]  M. G. Ryan,et al.  Factors controlling Eucalyptus productivity: How water availability and stand structure alter production and carbon allocation , 2010 .

[31]  James N. Long,et al.  Assessment of growing stock in uneven-aged stands , 1990 .

[32]  M. M. Moore,et al.  108 years of change in spatial pattern following selective harvest of a Pinus ponderosa stand in northern Arizona, USA , 2009 .

[33]  R. Ceulemans,et al.  Underlying effects of spatial aggregation (clumping) in relationships between plant diversity and resource uptake , 2006 .

[34]  Franco Biondi,et al.  Decadal-scale dynamics at the Gus Pearson Natural Areas: evidence for inverse (a)symmetric competition? , 1996 .

[35]  Eliot J. B. McIntire,et al.  Distinguishing Microsite and Competition Processes in Tree Growth Dynamics: An A Priori Spatial Modeling Approach , 2007, The American Naturalist.

[36]  R. Holmes.  Computer-Assisted Quality Control in Tree-Ring Dating and Measurement , 1983 .

[37]  H. Pretzsch,et al.  Analyzing size-symmetric vs. size-asymmetric and intra- vs. inter-specific competition in beech (Fagus sylvatica L.) mixed stands , 2014 .

[38]  T. Aakala,et al.  Influence of competition and age on tree growth in structurally complex old-growth forests in northern Minnesota, USA , 2013 .

[39]  H. Leite,et al.  Increasing stand structural heterogeneity reduces productivity in Brazilian Eucalyptus monoclonal stands , 2016 .

[40]  S. Fraver,et al.  Structure and development of old-growth, unmanaged second-growth, and extended rotation Pinus resinosa forests in Minnesota, USA , 2013 .

[41]  Adrian Baddeley,et al.  Spatial Point Patterns: Methodology and Applications with R , 2015 .

[42]  M. M. Moore,et al.  108 years of change in spatial pattern following selective harvest of a Pinus ponderosa stand in northern Arizona, USA: 108 years of change in spatial pattern following selective harvest of a Pinus ponderosa stand , 2009 .

[43]  John Aitchison,et al.  The Statistical Analysis of Compositional Data , 1986 .

[44]  R. LarocqueGuy,et al.  Competition theory — science and application in mixed forest stands: review of experimental and modelling methods and suggestions for future research , 2013 .

[45]  Thorsten Wiegand,et al.  Spatial patterns and competition of tree species in a Douglas-fir chronosequence on Vancouver Island , 2006 .

[46]  F. Raulier,et al.  Canadian national tree aboveground biomass equations , 2005 .

[47]  P. J. Clark,et al.  Distance to Nearest Neighbor as a Measure of Spatial Relationships in Populations , 1954 .

[48]  Pieter A. Zuidema,et al.  Does biomass growth increase in the largest trees? Flaws, fallacies and alternative analyses , 2017 .

[49]  F. He,et al.  Spatial point-pattern analysis for detecting density-dependent competition in a boreal chronosequence of Alberta , 2009 .

[50]  Jerry F. Franklin,et al.  Spatial Aspects of Structural Complexity in Old-Growth Forests , 2004, Journal of Forestry.

[51]  Klaus J. Puettmann,et al.  A Critique of Silviculture: Managing for Complexity , 2008 .

[52]  S. Fraver,et al.  A new method for evaluating forest thinning: growth dominance in managed Pinus resinosa stands , 2010 .

[53]  R. Motta,et al.  Temporal variability of size-growth relationships in a Norway spruce forest: the influences of stand structure, logging, and climate , 2012 .

[54]  Michael J. Papaik,et al.  Neighborhood analyses of canopy tree competition along environmental gradients in New England forests. , 2006, Ecological applications : a publication of the Ecological Society of America.

[55]  Robert J. Pabst,et al.  Rate of tree carbon accumulation increases continuously with tree size , 2014, Nature.

[56]  Per‐Anders Esseen,et al.  Tree growth and competition in an old‐growth Picea abies forest of boreal Sweden: influence of tree spatial patterning , 2014 .

[57]  D. Pothier,et al.  Long-term changes in stand growth dominance as related to resource acquisition and utilization in the boreal forest , 2017 .

[58]  H. Muller‐Landau,et al.  The Effects of Density, Spatial Pattern, and Competitive Symmetry on Size Variation in Simulated Plant Populations , 2001, The American Naturalist.

[59]  William R. Wykoff,et al.  A Basal Area Increment Model for Individual Conifers in the Northern Rocky Mountains , 1990, Forest Science.

[60]  Jiquan Chen,et al.  Spatially nonrandom tree mortality and ingrowth maintain equilibrium pattern in an old-growth Pseudotsuga-Tsuga forest. , 2014, Ecology.

[61]  M. G. Ryan,et al.  The Brazil Eucalyptus Potential Productivity Project: Influence of water, nutrients and stand uniformity on wood production , 2010 .

[62]  N. C. Kenkel,et al.  Pattern of Self‐Thinning in Jack Pine: Testing the Random Mortality Hypothesis , 1988 .

[63]  A. D’Amato,et al.  Growth, yield, and structure of extended rotation Pinus resinosa stands in Minnesota, USA , 2010 .

[64]  Ronald M. Lanner,et al.  On the insensitivity of height growth to spacing , 1985 .

[65]  D. Binkley,et al.  Tree-Level Patterns of Lodgepole Pine Growth and Leaf Area in Yellowstone National Park: Explaining Anomalous Patterns of Growth Dominance Within Stands , 2015, Ecosystems.

[66]  J. HilleRisLambers,et al.  Spatial aspects of tree mortality strongly differ between young and old-growth forests. , 2015, Ecology.