2020PubMedRequires access

[Effects of stand structure on understory biomass of the Quercus spp secondary forests in Hunan Province, China].

Hao‐Hong Chen, X. M. Zhu, Guangyu Zhu, Feihu Liu

Open publisher page 1 citations

Abstract

. There was no significant difference in the biomass of understory shrubs among the five forest types. The biomass of herbage layer in CR was significantly lower than that of the other four forest types. The factors affecting the biomass of understory vegetation varied in different forests types. In CR, biomass of herbaceous layer was negatively correlated with canopy and uniform angle index, whereas total understory biomass was positively correlated with opening degree index. In FF, biomass of shrub layer was negatively correlated with stand canopy density and uniform angle index, while herbaceous biomass and total understory biomass were positively correlated with stand closure. In LDC, herbaceous biomass was positively correlated with the stand aggregation index. In CQR, shrub biomass was negatively correlated with stand mingling index, while herbaceous biomass was positively related with stand density. In CCR, there was no significant correlation between stand structure and understory biomass. To adjust the understory biomass, we should first adjust the horizontal distribution pattern of stand and then adjust the degree of forest cover and tree species structure.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

. There was no significant difference in the biomass of understory shrubs among the five forest types. The biomass of herbage layer in CR was significantly lower than that of the other four forest types. The factors affecting the biomass of understory vegetation varied in different forests types. In CR, biomass of herbaceous layer was negatively correlated with canopy and uniform angle index, whereas total understory biomass was positively correlated with opening degree index. In FF, biomass of shrub layer was negatively correlated with stand canopy density and uniform angle index, while herbaceous biomass and total understory biomass were positively correlated with stand closure. In LDC, herbaceous biomass was positively correlated with the stand aggregation index. In CQR, shrub biomass was negatively correlated with stand mingling index, while herbaceous biomass was positively related with stand density. In CCR, there was no significant correlation between stand structure and understory biomass. To adjust the understory biomass, we should first adjust the horizontal distribution pattern of stand and then adjust the degree of forest cover and tree species structure.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 1 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

. There was no significant difference in the biomass of understory shrubs among the five forest types. The biomass of herbage layer in CR was significantly lower than that of the other four forest types. The factors affecting the biomass of understory vegetation varied in different forests types. In CR, biomass of herbaceous layer was negatively correlated with canopy and uniform angle index, whereas total understory biomass was positively correlated with opening degree index. In FF, biomass of shrub layer was negatively correlated with stand canopy density and uniform angle index, while herbaceous biomass and total understory biomass were positively correlated with stand closure. In LDC, herbaceous biomass was positively correlated with the stand aggregation index. In CQR, shrub biomass was negatively correlated with stand mingling index, while herbaceous biomass was positively related with stand density. In CCR, there was no significant correlation between stand structure and understory biomass. To adjust the understory biomass, we should first adjust the horizontal distribution pattern of stand and then adjust the degree of forest cover and tree species structure.

Key concepts: Understory, Shrub, Biomass (ecology), Herbaceous plant, Canopy, Environmental science, Forestry, Agronomy

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
[Effects of stand structure on understory biomass of the Quercus spp secondary forests in Hunan Province, China]. — Research Paper | ScholarLens