Korean Journal of Soil Science and Fertilizer (한국토양비료학회지)

Korean Society of Soil Science and Fertilizer (한국토양비료학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Effects of Fertilizer on Growth, Carbon and Nitrogen Responses of Foliage in a Red Pine Stand

  • Kim, Choonsig (Department of Forest Resources, Gyeongnam National University of Science and Technology) ;
  • Ju, Nam-Gyu (Department of Forest Resources, Gyeongnam National University of Science and Technology) ;
  • Lee, Hye-Yeon (Department of Forest Resources, Gyeongnam National University of Science and Technology) ;
  • Lee, Kwang-Soo (Southern Forest Research Center, Korea Forest Research Institute)
  • Received : 2012.10.02
  • Accepted : 2013.01.09
  • Published : 2013.02.28
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

This study was to examine growth, carbon and nitrogen responses in foliage following forest fertilization in a red pine stand. Two types of fertilizer (N:P:K=113:150:37 kg $ha^{-1}$; P:K=150:37 kg $ha^{-1}$) were applied on late April 2011. Growth, carbon and nitrogen responses of foliage were monitored 3 times (July, September, November) after fertilization. Morphological growth responses (dry mass, leaf area, specific leaf area) with foliage age were not significantly (P > 0.05) affected by fertilizer application, while needle dry mass and leaf area of July were significantly lower in current-year-old than in one-year-old or two-year-old needles of September or November. Carbon concentration and content in foliage was little affected by fertilizer application compared with sampling month or needle age, while the NPK fertilizer produced high nitrogen concentration and content of foliage. The results indicate that nitrogen concentration and content in foliage may serve as an indicator of the nitrogen status by fertilization in a red pine stand.

Keywords

References

  1. Amponsah, I.G., P.G. Comeau, R.P. Brockley, and V.J. Lieffers. 2005. Effects of repeated fertilization on needle longevity, foliar nutrition, effectivse leaf area index, and growth characteristics of lodgepole pine in interior British Columbia, Canada. Can. J. For. Res. 35:440-451. https://doi.org/10.1139/x04-200
  2. Barron-Gafford, G.A., R.E. Will, C. Burkes, B. Shiver, and R.O. Teskey. 2003. Nutrient concentrations and content, their relation to stem growth, of intensively managed Pinus taeda and Pinus elliottii stands of different planting densities. For. Sci. 49: 291-300.
  3. Bert, D. and D. Danjon. 2006. Carbon concentration variations in the roots, stem and crown of mature Pinus pinaster (Ait.). For. Ecol. Manage. 222:279-295. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2005.10.030
  4. Binkley, D. 1986. Forest nutrition management. John Wiley & Sons, New York, USA.
  5. Bauer, G., E-D. Schulze, and M. Mund. 1997. Nutrient contents and concentrations in relation to growth of Picea abies and Fagus sylvatica along a European transect. Tree Physiol. 17:777-786. https://doi.org/10.1093/treephys/17.12.777
  6. Brockley, R.P. 2000. Using foliar variables to predict the response of lodgepole pine to nitrogen and sulphur fertilization. Can. J. For. Res. 30:1389-1399. https://doi.org/10.1139/x00-066
  7. Byun, J.K., Y.S. Kim, M.J. Yi, Y. Son, C. Kim, J.H. Jeong, C.Y. Lee, and Y.H. Jeong. 2006. Growth characteristics of Pinus densiflora, Larix leptolepis, Quercus acutissima, and Betula platyphylla var. japonica seedlings on different fertilizer types and amount. Korean J. For. Measure. 9:132-14. (in Korean)
  8. Garrison, M.T., J.A. Moore, T.M. Shaw, and P.G. Mika. 2000. Foliar nutrient and tree growth response of mixed-conifer stands to three fertilization treatments in northeast Oregon and north central Washington. For. Ecol. Manage. 132:183-198. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-1127(99)00228-5
  9. Gough, C.M., J.R. Seiler, and C.A. Maier. 2004. Short-term effects of fertilization on loblolly pine (Pinus taeda L.) physiology. Plant, Cell and Environ. 27:876-886. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-3040.2004.01193.x
  10. Jeong, J., J.-H. Park, J.-I. Kim, J.-T. Lim, S.-R. Lee, and C. Kim. 2010. Effects of container volumes and fertilization on red (Pinus densiflora) and black pine (Pinus thunbergii) seedlings growth. For. Sci. Tech. 6: 80-86.
  11. Joo, J.S., W.K. Lee, T.H. Kim, C.Y. Lee, I.S Jin, and S.K. Park. 1983. Studies on fertilization in pruning and thinning stands. The Res. Rep. For. Res. Inst., Korea. 30:155-189. (In Korean)
  12. Miller, J.H., H.L. Allen, B.R. Zutter, S.M. Zedaker, and R.A. Newbold. 2006. Soil and pine foliage nutrient responses 15 years after competing-vegetation control and their correlation with growth for 13 loblolly pine plantations in the southern United States. Can. J. For. Res. 36:2412-2425. https://doi.org/10.1139/x06-164
  13. Mugasha, A.G., D.J. Pluth, and S.E. Macdonald. 1999. Effects of fertilization on seasonal patterns of foliar mass and nutrients of tamarack and black spruce on undrained and drained minerotrophic peatland sites. For. Ecol. Manage. 116:13-31. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-1127(98)00458-7
  14. Park, J., C. Kim, J. Jeong, J.K. Byun, Y. Son, and M.J. Yi. 2008. Effect of fertilization on litterfall amounts in a Quercus acutissima stand. J. Korean For. Soc. 97:582-588. (In Korean).
  15. Poorter, H. and R. De. Jong. 1999. A comparison of specific leaf area, chemical composition and leaf construction costs of field plants from 15 habitats differing in productivity. New Phytol. 143:163-176. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1469-8137.1999.00428.x
  16. Sariyildiz, T. and J.M. Anderson. 2005. Variation in the chemical composition of green leaves and leaf litters from three deciduous tree species growing on different soil types. For. Ecol. Manage. 210:303-319. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2005.02.043
  17. SAS Institute Inc. 2003. SAS/STAT Statistical software. Version 9.1. SAS publishing Cary, NC, USA.
  18. Silfverberg, K. and M. Moilanen. 2008. Long-term nutrient status of PK fertilized Scots pine stands on drained peatlands in North-Central Finland. Suo. 59:71-88.
  19. Son, Y., M.H. Lee, N.J. Noh, B.O. Kang, K.O. Kim, M.J. Kim. 2007. Fertilization effects on understory vegetation biomass and structure in four different plantation. J. Korean For. Soc. 96:520-527.
  20. Tausz, M., W. Trummer, A. Wonisch, W. Goessler, D. Grill, M.S. Jiménez, and D. Morales. 2004. A survey of foliar mineral nutrient concentrations of Pinus canariensis at field plots in Tenerife. For. Ecol. Manage. 189: 49-55. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2003.07.034
  21. Weetman, G.F. and C.G. Wells. 1990. Plant analyses as an aid in fertilizing forests. p. 659-690. R.L. Westerman (ed). 3rd ed. In soil testing and plant analysis. SSSA, Wisconsin, USA.
  22. Wilson, P.J., K. Thompson, and J.G. Hodgson. 1999. Specific leaf area and leaf dry matter content as alternative predictors of plant strategies. New Phytol. 143:155-162. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1469-8137.1999.00427.x
  23. Zhang, Q., C. Wang, X. Wang, and X. Quan. 2009. Carbon concentration variability of 10 Chinese temperate tree species. For. Ecol. Manage. 258:722-727. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2009.05.009
  24. Zhang, S., H.L. Allen, and P.M. Dougherty. 1997. Shoot and foliage growth phenology of loblolly pine trees as affected by nitrogen fertilization. Can. J. For. Res. 27:1420-1426. https://doi.org/10.1139/x97-077

Cited by

  1. Growth and Nutrient Status of Foliage as Affected by Tree Species and Fertilization in a Fire-Disturbed Urban Forest vol.6, pp.6, 2015, https://doi.org/10.3390/f6062199
  2. Inorganic nitrogen dynamics of throughfall following fertilization in a red pine stand vol.13, pp.4, 2017, https://doi.org/10.1080/21580103.2017.1394372
  3. Carbon and Nitrogen Resorption of Needles As Affected by Compound Fertilizer in a Red Pine Stand vol.14, pp.3, 2018, https://doi.org/10.1080/21580103.2018.1475308