| Literature DB >> 29073278 |
Xiang-Min Fang1,2, Xiu-Lan Zhang1, Ying-Ying Zong1, Yang Zhang1, Song-Ze Wan1, Wen-Sheng Bu1,2, Fu-Sheng Chen1,2.
Abstract
Stand density regulation is an important measure of plantation forest management, andEntities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2017 PMID: 29073278 PMCID: PMC5658083 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0186905
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Stand characteristics in low density and high density Chinese fir plantations (LDCF vs. HDCF) at two sites of subtropical China.
| Density (stems ha−1) | DBH (cm) | Height (m) | Fern cover (%) | Herb cover (%) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fujian | |||||
| LDCF | 1400±94b | 20.9±1.2a | 15.6±0.8 | 82.4±4.0 | 12.6±2.3 |
| HDCF | 2510±128a | 18.2±0.2b | 16.9±0.4 | 80.8±5.3 | 8.6±4.0 |
| Hunan | |||||
| LDCF | 1187±65b | 25.32±1.0a | 16.9±0.6a | 9.0±3.0 | 40.9±12.8 |
| HDCF | 1475±90a | 17.86±0.2b | 10.1±0.5b | 4.4±0.9 | 27.4±12.4 |
Value = Mean±1 standard error. DBH = diameter at breast height. Different letters indicate significant differences between LDCF and HDCF at 0.05 level.
Physiochemical properties in rhizosphere and bulk soils in low density and high density Chinese fir plantations (LDCF vs. HDCF) at two sites of subtropical China.
| pH | OC | TN | C/N | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RS | BS | RS | BS | RS | BS | RS | BS | |
| Fujian | ||||||||
| LDCF | 4.31±0.04 | 4.23±0.04 | 31.13±3.02a | 24.78±1.70 | 0.95±0.12 | 0.82±0.10 | 33.36±1.53 | 30.90±1.98 |
| HDCF | 4.35±0.03 | 4.33±0.01 | 21.68±1.07b | 18.85±2.04 | 0.75±0.08 | 0.56±0.05 | 30.72±5.30 | 33.74±2.04 |
| Hunan | ||||||||
| LDCF | 4.36±0.20 | 4.36±0.21 | 28.07±2.71a | 14.84±1.75a | 1.09±0.07a | 0.69±0.04 | 25.62±1.05 | 21.28±1.52 |
| HDCF | 4.09±0.06 | 4.03±0.03 | 15.99±0.96b | 11.33±1.99b | 0.58±0.02b | 0.50±0.01 | 27.60±1.04 | 19.06±1.54 |
| Variance analysis of | ||||||||
| SD | 0.98 | 0.59 | 4.73 | 21.69 | 0.02 | 2.42 | 3.62 | 46.25 |
| SS | 1.17 | 1.05 | 25.02 | 6.34 | 19.06 | 15.21 | 0.01 | 0.03 |
| SD×SS | 2.19 | 4.10 | 0.37 | 0.42 | 3.55 | 0.33 | 0.66 | 2.01 |
Value = Mean±1 standard error. Different letters indicate significant differences between LDCF and HDCF at 0.05 level. OC: organic carbon. TN: total nitrogen. RS: rhizosphere soil. BS: bulk soil. SD: stand density. SS: study site.
# Significance level of F values
NS not significant
* p < 0.05
** p < 0.01
*** p < 0.001.
Fig 1Phosphorus fractions in rhizosphere and bulk soils in low density and high density Chinese fir plantations (LDCF vs. HDCF) at two sites of subtropical China.
Note: Mean±1 standard error. Different letters indicate significant differences between LDCF and HDCF in rhizosphere or bulk soil at the 0.05 level. SD: stand density. SS: study site. NS not significant, * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001.
Fig 2Total phosphorus and extractable phosphorus in rhizosphere and bulk soils in low density and high density Chinese fir plantations (LDCF vs. HDCF) at two sites of subtropical China.
Note: Mean±1 standard error. Different letters indicate significant differences between LDCF and HDCF in rhizosphere or bulk soil at the 0.05 level. SD: stand density. SS: study site. NS not significant, * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001.
Fig 3Nitrogen and phosphorus concentrations and their stoichiometry in leaves with different ages in low density and high density Chinese fir plantation (LDCF vs. HDCF) at two sites of subtropical China.
Note: Mean±1 standard error. Different small letters indicate significant differences between LDCF and HDCF in leaves of the same age at the 0.05 level. Different capital letters indicate significant differences among leaves of different ages at the 0.05 level. SD: stand density. SS: study site. NS not significant, * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001.
Fig 4Nitrogen and phosphorus concentrations and their stoichiometry in twigs with different ages in low density and high density Chinese fir plantations (LDCF vs. HDCF) at two sites of subtropical China.
Note: Mean±1 standard error. Different small letters indicate significant differences between LDCF and HDCF in twigs of the same age at the 0.05 level. Different capital letters indicate significant differences among twigs of different ages at the 0.05 level. SD: stand density. SS: study site. NS not significant, * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001.
Fig 5Nitrogen and phosphorus concentrations and their stoichiometry in various functional roots in low density and high density Chinese fir plantations (LDCF vs. HDCF) at two sites of subtropical China.
Note: Mean±1 standard error. Different small letters indicate significant differences between LDCF and HDCF in roots of the same age at the 0.05 level. Different capital letters indicate significant differences among roots of different ages at the 0.05 level. SD: stand density. SS: study site. NS not significant, * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001.
Rhizosphere effects of soil phosphorus fractions in low density and high density Chinese fir plantations (LDCF vs. HDCF) at two sites of subtropical China.
| Available P | Labile P | Slow P | Occluded P | Weathered mineral P | Extractable P | Inert P | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fujian | |||||||
| LDCF | 1.09±0.04 | 2.05±0.40a | 1.09±0.10 | 1.36±0.08a | 0.82±0.16 | 1.16±0.10 | 1.02±0.04 |
| HDCF | 1.17±0.16 | 1.35±0.17b | 1.06±0.04 | 1.11±0.04b | 0.95±0.08 | 1.06±0.04 | 1.03±0.01 |
| Hunan | |||||||
| LDCF | 1.06±0.20 | 2.28±0.11a | 1.30±0.11 | 1.24±0.16 | 1.34±0.29 | 1.28±0.13 | 1.12±0.07 |
| aHDCF | 1.08±0.02 | 1.88±0.19b | 1.23±0.13 | 1.13±0.20 | 1.55±0.25 | 1.35±0.17 | 1.21±0.08 |
| Variance analysis of | |||||||
| SD | 0.18 | 5.69 | 3.77 | 0.13 | 3.45 | 2.78 | 6.48 |
| SS | 0.17 | 1.23 | 0.26 | 1.77 | 0.80 | 0.02 | 0.72 |
| SD×SS | 0.05 | 4.58 | 0.03 | 0.27 | 0.34 | 0.44 | 0.57 |
Value = Mean±1 standard error. Different letters indicate significant differences between LDCF and HDCF at 0.05 level. SD: stand density. SS: study site.
# Significance level of F values:
NS not significant
* p < 0.05.
Fig 6Nitrogen and phosphorus resorption efficiencies in leaves and twigs in low density and high density Chinese fir plantations (LDCF vs. HDCF) at two sites of subtropical China.
Note: Mean±1 standard error. Different small letters indicate significant differences between LDCF and HDCF at the 0.05 level. SD: stand density. SS: study site. NS not significant, * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001.