Changes with age in the main factors of the post-fire birch tree stand competition in relation to the siberian stone pine undergrowth

The competition of birch stands in low-mountain forests of the eastern macroslope of the Middle Urals in relation to the undergrowth of Siberian stone pine (Pinus sibirica Du Tour) is considered based on the microecosystem approach. The work was carried out using indices of light (Ilsc), root (Irsc) and integral competition of the stand (Irlsc) in post-fire berry-green moss birch forests of 13, 32 and 70 years of age, which are elements of one genetic  series of development of a potential Siberian stone pine forest. In a 13-year-old young birch forest with almost complete solar radiation and a weak relationship (R² = 0.23) with Ilsc, the main factor determining the growth and development of the Siberian stone pine undergrowth is the competition of the stand for soil nutrition, expressed by a relatively close (R² = 0.66) negative relationship of the average vertical growth of the undergrowth with Irsc. In a 32-year-old middleaged birch forest, a joint, almost identical, influence of the factors of light (R² = 0.62) and root (R² = 0.52) competition on the growth of the Siberian stone pine undergrowth is observed. In a mature 70-year-old birch forest, the main factor influencing the growth of Siberian stone pine undergrowth is light competition, expressed by a close (R² = 0.77) relationship with Ilsc, and no relationship was found with root competition. Such changes are probably related to the adaptive capacity and soil nutrition of the Siberian stone pine undergrowth characteristics and to changes in the degree  of saturation of the upper soil horizon with organic compounds formed during the decomposition of forest litter during the development of a post-fire birch forest.

1. Aref'yeva Z. N. Vliyaniye ognya na nekotoryye biokhimicheskiye protsessy v lesnykh pochvakh // Trudy In-ta biologii UF AN SSSR. Ufa: In-t biologii UF AN SSSR. 1963. Vyp. 36. s. 39–55.

2. Belov L. A., Zalesova Ye. S., Zalesov S. V., Kartashova T. Yu., Timerbulatov F. T. Opyt pereformirovaniya proizvodnykh myagkolistvennykh nasazhdenij v korennye kedrovniki // Vestnik Buryatskoj gosudarstvennoj sel'skokhozyaystvennoj akademii. 2019. Vol. 56, No 3. S. 87–91. DOI: 10.34655/bgsha.2019.56.3.013.

3. Bekh I. A., Vorob’yev V. N. Potentsial’nyye kedrovniki. Problemy kedra. Tomsk, SO RAN, In-t ekologii prirodnykh kompleksov – filial in-ta lesa im. V. N. Sukachyova. 1998. Vyp. 6. 123 s.

4. Debkov N. М., Panyovin V. S. Otsenka estestvennogo vozobnovleniya kedra sibirskogo pod pologom lesa i na vyrubkakh v srednej tajge Zapadnoj Sibiri // Vestnik Povolzhskogo gosudarstvennogo tekhnologicheskogo universiteta. Les. Ekologiya. Prirodopol`zovanie. 2018. No. 4(40). S. 5–20. DOI: 15350/2306-2827.2018.4.5.

5. Zavarzin V. V., Gemonov A. V., Lebedev A. V., Gradusov V. M. Osobennosti potchvennykh uslovij proizrastsniya kedra sibirskogo // Prirodoobustroystvo. 2019. No. 5. S. 124–130. DOI: 10.34677/1997-6011/2019-5-124-130.

6. Kirsanov V. A. Formirovaniye i razvitiye kedrov- nika zelenomoshno-yagodnikovogo na Severnom Urale // Vosstanovitel’naya i vozrastnaya dinamika lesov na Urale i v Zaural’ye. Sverdlovsk : AN SSSR UNTs, 1976. S. 104–112.

7. Kirsanov V. A., Petrov M. F. Ob otnoshenii kedra sibirskogo k intensivnosti osveshcheniya // Lesovedeniye. 1972, No. 5. S. 89–91.

8. Kovalyov A. P., Alekseenko A. Yu., Lashina E. V., Kachanova T. G. Osobennosti rubok ukhoda v khvojnoshirokolistvennykh lesakh Dal`nego Vostoka // Agrarnyj vestnik Primor`ya. 2020. No. 4(20). S. 47–52.

9. Kolobov A. N. Modelirovaniye prostranstvennovremennoj dinamiki drevesnykh soobshchestv: individual`no-orientirovannyj podkhod // Lesovedeniye. 2014. No. 5. S. 72–82.

10. Konovalova M. E., Danilina D. M., Nazimova D. I. Formirovaniye kedrovnikov rubkami ukhoda v chernevom poyase Zapadnogo Sayana // Lesovedeniye. 2017. No. 5. S. 16–27. DOI: 10.7868/S0024114817050023.

11. Nikolayeva S. A., Bekh I. A., Savchuk D. A. Otsenka etapov vosstanovitel’no-vozrastnoj dinamiki temnokhvojno-kedrovykh lesov po dendrokhronologi- cheskim dannym (na primere Ket’-Chulymskogo Mezhdurech’ya) // Vestnik Tomskogo gos. un-ta. Biologiya. 2008. № 3(4). S. 180–185.

12. Sannikov S. N. Ekologiya i geografiya estestvennogo vozobnovleniya sosny obyknovennoj. Moscow : Nauka, 1992. 257 s.

13. Sannikov S. N., Sannikova N. S. Les kak podzemno-somknutaya dendrotsenoekosistema // Sibirskij Lesnoj Zhurnal. 2014. No 1. S. 25–34.

14. Sannikova N. S. Mikroekosistemnyj analiz tsenopopulyatsij drevesnykh rastenij Ekaterinburg : Nauka, UrO RAN, 1992. 65 p.

15. Sannikova N. S., Lokosova E. I. Mikroekosistemnyj analiz strukturno-funktsional`nykh svyazei v lesnykh biogeotsenozakh // Geneticheskie i ekologicheskie issledovaniya v lesnykh ekosistemakh. Ekaterinburg : UrO RAN, 2001. S. 73–94.

16. Sannikova N. S., Sannikov S. N., Petrova I. V., Mishchikhina Y. D., Cherepanova O. E. Faktory drevostoya-ehdifikatora: kolichestvennyj analiz i sintez // Ecologya. No. 6, 2012. S. 1–7.

17. Sedykh V. N. Dinamika ravninnykh kedrovykh lesov Sibiri. Novosibirsk : Nauka, 2014. 232 s.

18. Smolonogov E. P., Zalesov S. V. Ekologo-lesovodstvennye osnovy organizatsii i vedeniya khozyajstva v kedrovykh lesakh Urala i Zapadno-Sibirskoj ravniny. Ekaterinburg : ULTI, 2002. 186 s.

19. Sudachkova N. E., Rastorgueva E. Ya., Kolovskiy R. A. Fiziologiya podrosta kedra. Moscow : Nauka, 1967. 123 s.

20. Tantsyrev N. V. Nachal’naya faza formirova- niya poslepozharnykh gornykh kedrovnikov na Severnom Urale // Khvojnye borealnoj zony. 2022. Т. XL, № 5. S. 395–403. DOI: 10.53374/1993-0135-2022-6-395-403.

21. Tantsyrev N. V., Andreev G. V. Vliyanie konkurentsii materinskogo drevostoya na rost podrosta kedra sibirskogo na osnovnykh tipakh substrata // Vestnik Buryatskoj gosudarstvennoj sel'skokhozyaystvennoj akademii im. V. R. Filippova. 2020. No. 2(59). S. 145–153. DOI: 10.34655/bgsha.2020.59.2.020.

22. Tantsyrev N. V., Andreev G. V. Osnovnye faktory razvitiya podrosta kedra sibirskogo pod pologom proizvodnogo sosnyaka // Vestnik Povolzhskogo gosudarstvennogo tekhnologicheskogo universiteta. Les. Ekologiya. Prirodopol`zovanie. 2020. No. 4(48). S. 22–30. DOI:10.25686/2306-2827.2020.4.22.

23. Tantsyrev N. V., Andreev G. V. Vliyanie konkurentsii drevostoya na vozobnovlenie i rost podrosta kedra sibirskogo v bereznyake // Vestnik Povolzhskogo gosudarstvennogo tekhnologicheskogo universiteta. Les. Ekologiya. Prirodopol`zovanie. 2021. No. 2(50). S. 13–22. DOI: 10.25686/2306-2827.2021.2.13.

24. Tarasov P. A., Ivanov V. A., Ivanova G. A., Bezkorovajnaya I. N. Postpirogennaya dinamika agrokhimicheskikh pokazatelej peschanykh podzolov v sosnyakakh yuzhnoj tajgi // Khvojnye borealnoj zony. 2023. T. XLI, No. 2. S. 162–175. DOI: 10.53374/1993-0135-2023-2162-175.

25. Terinov N. N., Andreeva E. M., Zalesov S. V., Luganskij N. A., Magasumova A. G. Vosstanovleniye elovykh lesov: teoriya, otechestvennyj opyt i metody resheniya // Izvestiya vysshikh uchebnykh zavedenij. Lesnoj Zhurnal. 2020. No. 3(375). S. 9–23. DOI: 10.37482/0536-1036-2020-3-9-23.

26. Shanin V. N., Rocheva L. K., Shashkov M. P., Ivanova N. V., Moskalenko S. V., Burnasheva E. R. Osobennosti prostranstvennogo raspredeleniya biomassy kornej nekotorykh drevesnykh vidov (Picea abies, Pinus sylvestris, Betula sp.) // Izvestiya RAN. Seriya biologicheskaya. 2015. No. 3. S. 316–325.

27. Fraver S., D’Amato A., Bradford J. B., Jonsson B. G., Jonsson M., Esseen P. A. Tree growth and competition in an old-growth Picea abies forest of boreal Sweden: influence of tree spatial patterning // Journal of Vegetation Science. 2014. Vol. 25. P. 374–385.

28. Kalliokoski T. Root system traits of Norway spruce, Scots pine, and silver birch in mixed boreal forests: an analysis of root architecture, morphology, and anatomy: Diss. Diss. Forestales. Vol. 121. Vantaa : Finnish For. Res. Inst., 2011. 65 p.

29. Laganiиre J., Parй D., Bradley R. L. How does a tree species influence litter decomposition? Separating the relative contribution of litter quality, litter mixing and forest floor conditions // Can. J. For. Res. 2010. Vol. 40. P. 465–475.

30. Vesterdal L., Elberling B., Christiansen J. R. et al. Soil respiration and rates of soil carbon turnover differ among six common European tree species // For. Ecol. Manage. 2012. Vol. 264. P. 185–196.