43 11 2 0 0 7 11 SCIENTIA SILVAE SINICAE Vol143,No111 Nov.,2 0 0 7 3 1 2,3 2 2 3 2 (11 100091 ; 21 100091 ; 31 100102) :, W = a D b 27 250 hm - 2 85123 102160 86174 t hm - 2 ;29 88164 104190 90194 t hm - 2,,, 3,, 3, hm - 2 72137 % 1822 cm ; hm - 2 2026 cm, 90102 % ; 250 hm - 2, 2630 cm, 68127 % : ; ; ; ; ; :S758 :A :1001-7488(2007) 11-0015 - 06 Biomass and Distribution Patterns of Populus xiaohei Plantation in Sandy Land of North China Jiang Zehui 1 Fan Shaohui 2,3 Feng Huixiang 2 Zhang Qun 2 Liu Guanglu 3 Zong Yichen 2 (11 Research Institute of Wood Industry, CAF Beijing 100091 ; 21 Research Institute of Forestry, CAF Beijing 100091 ; 31 International Centre of Bamboo and Rattan Key Laboratory of Bamboo and Rattan, State Forestry Administration Beijing 100102) Abstract : The biomass and distribution of Populus xiaohei plantation with different stand densities and ages were studied by the methods of sampling permanent plot and allometric dimension analysis in sand land of North China. The biomass of plantation with densities of, and 250 tree hm - 2 was measured by the model of W = a D b. The biomass of 27 years old P. xiaohei plantations was 85123,102160 and 86174 t hm - 2, respectively ; While the biomass of 29 years old P. xiaohei plantations was 88164,104190 and 90194 t hm - 2,respectively. Stand biomass had a close correlation with the stand density and the age. It first increased then reduced along with the increase of stand density, but increased along with the increase of stand age. Stand density had the important influence to the biomass distribution of the P. xiaohei organs. The stand density different, the proportion of the organ biomass was different. The proportion of leaf and bark biomass increased along with the increase of stand density, but the proportion of stem, branch and root biomass did not display the obvious regularity along with the increase of stand density. In the three densities of plantations, the proportion of stem biomass was the most, the leaf the least. The biomass distribution of three densities of plantations assumed the normal probability distribution. In plantation with density of tree hm - 2, 72137 per cent of biomass centralized on diameter classes from 18 to 22 cm. 90102 per cent of biomass centralized on classes from 20 to 26 cm in plantations with density of tree hm - 2 ; In plantation with density of 250 tree hm - 2, 68127 per cent of biomass centralized on classes from 26 to 30 cm. Key words : biomass ; distribution patterns ; density ; stand age ; Populus xiaohei ; sandy land of North China ( Populus xiaohei) (,1994), :2006-10 - 08 : (30230420) 3
16 43 CO 2 (Jorg et al.,2003 ;Victoria et al.,2005 ;Long et al., 2004 ;Anna et al.,2000 ;,1997 ;,2003 ;Norby et al.,1999),,, ( Houghtou et al.,2001 ;Liu et al.,1999 ; Baldwin et al.,2001 ; Gower et al.,1997 ; Kurz et al.,1999),, 1 (112 06 E,39 02 N),,,, 715, 134 d, 6 8, 360460 mm 1 0601 400 m,,,,ph 89,1977, 2116 hm 2,,, 1 m 1 m 1 m, 2 211 2004 6, 3 ( 250 hm - 2 ), 25 m 25 m,3, 9,,,2 cm 1 1428 cm 8, 1 2 3 2 3 1,18 2006 7 212,,,105,, ;, 105, 213, ( W) ( D) W = a D b ( ),,, (,1999 ;,2000), 1 1 (,2000) 214, 3 311 1,250 hm - 2 (01641 1),,F,,, 312 27 29,2 (2), 3132 2130 4120 t hm - 2, 27,, 250 hm - 2,
11 : 17 > > > > ; hm - 2, > > > >, 27 57179 21144 12172 7192 2173 t DensityΠ (tree hm - 2 ) hm - 2,29 58198 22114 12197 8104 2177 t hm - 2 1 Tab. 1 Regression equations in biomass estimation Component Model Coefficient of correlation Trunk W = 01088 D 21173 01812 4 33 Branch W = 01001 D 31013 01811 2 33, 3 > 250 > hm - 2, 27 63134 % 59195 % 56132 %,29 63128 % 60147 % 56122 % ; > 250 > hm - 2,27 20190 % 14192 %8194 %,29 21111 % 14181 %9100 % ; Leaf W = 01002 D 21482 01858 5 33 Bark W = 01004 D 21579 01897 2 33 Root W = 01027 D 21072 01982 3 33 Whole tree W = 01105 D 21274 01883 7 33 Trunk W = 01106 D 21251 01993 0 33 Branch W = 01001 D 31415 01941 8 33 Leaf W = 01057 D 11478 01832 5 33 Bark W = 01096 D 11651 01947 1 33 Root W = 01029 D 21182 01907 2 33 Whole tree W = 01149 D 21295 01980 8 33 Trunk W = 0101 D 21931 01987 9 33 Branch W = 0104 D 21102 01949 2 33 Leaf W = 21501 D 01281 01641 1 33 > 250 Bark W = 01016 D 21159 01998 9 33 > 250 hm - 2 3163 %,27 2166 %2111 %, 33 : P < 0101 9172 % 7172 % Root W = 01293 D 11524 01986 4 33 Whole tree W = 0101 D 31082 01996 5 33 7122 %,29 3164 % 2164 %2103 %, 9174 % 7166 %7118 % ; 250 > > hm - 2,27 15180 % 14136 %12140 %,29 15151 % 14134 %12137 % hm - 2, (27 63134 %,29 63128 %), (27 3163 %,29 3164 %),,, 250 hm - 2,,,,,, DensityΠ (tree hm - 2 ) 250 2 Tab. 2 Biomass distribution of P. xiaohei plantation with different densities and stand ages AgeΠa BiomassΠ(t hm - 2 ) Stem Branch Leaf Bark Root Total 27 54104 7163 3110 8129 12125 85132 29 56109 7197 3123 8164 12171 88164 27 57179 21144 2173 7192 12172 102160 29 58198 22114 2177 8104 12197 104190 27 52100 12194 1184 6126 13170 86174 29 54199 13147 1185 6153 14111 90194 313 31311 27 3,3 27 hm - 2, < 18 cm 17126 %, 1822 cm 72137 %, > 22 cm 10137 % hm - 2 2026 cm, 90102 %, < 20 cm 4139 %, > 26 cmφ 5159 % 250 hm - 2, 2630 cm, 68128 %, < 26 cm 8189 %, > 30 cmφ 22183 % 3, hm - 2,,
18 43,, ; hm - 2,,,,,, ;250 hm - 2,,, DensityΠ (tree hm - 2 ) 3 27 Tab. 3 Biomass allocation among the various DBH classes for 27 years old P. xiaohei plantation Diameter classπcm Tree number Average DBHΠcm Average heightπm Stem Branch BiomassΠkg Leaf Bark 14111610 5 15114 17100 161176 18108 8152 22119 37171 248126 16111810 10 17132 17185 432171 54102 23175 62164 99153 672164 18112010 16 19114 19122 861126 117108 48177 129190 196108 1 353110 20112210 25 21100 19181 1 578152 231171 91194 247110 356107 2 505135 22112410 2 22195 19150 159148 25121 9155 25188 35166 255177 24112610 2 24150 20125 183176 30168 11122 30161 40181 297108 Root Total 18112010 2 19115 17125 163113 47184 8195 25113 36140 281145 20112210 9 21117 17189 920193 304122 46173 133148 204108 1 609143 22112410 8 23114 18144 999184 366107 47137 137141 220121 1 770192 24112610 9 24196 18117 1 332178 532125 59159 175111 292103 2 391175 26112810 0 0100 0100 0100 0100 0100 0100 0100 0100 28113010 1 28120 16100 194190 89166 7193 23180 42135 358165 250 24112610 2 25185 19160 276103 74149 12148 35186 83127 482113 26112810 9 27109 17193 1 426127 370101 56188 178163 402148 2 434127 28113010 4 28188 18105 764169 188110 25174 91114 197117 1 266184 30113210 2 30190 19100 466157 108147 13112 52176 109132 750125 32113410 1 34130 20150 316119 67149 6175 33102 64107 487153 31312 29 4 3 29,27, 27, 27, 27,, 31313,,, 1 27 29,3 27 29,3,29 27, 3 2,27 29, 3, hm - 2 250 hm - 2,,, 1, 250 hm - 2, hm - 2, hm - 2,, 250 hm - 2 4 27,,29 250 hm - 2 27 85123 102160 86174 t hm - 2 ;29 88164 104190 90194 t hm - 2,
11 : 19 DensityΠ (tree hm - 2 ) 4 29 Tab. 4 Biomass allocation among the various DBH classes for 29 years old P. xiaohei plantation Diameter classπcm Tree number Mean DBHΠcm Mean heightπm Stem Branch BiomassΠkg Leaf Bark 14111610 5 15150 17100 170108 19136 9102 23154 39156 261155 16111810 10 17151 17170 443110 55183 24140 64143 101180 689155 18112010 13 19112 19138 697122 94160 39145 105107 158177 20112210 27 20198 19182 1 772110 259197 103120 277132 399177 22112410 3 22197 19117 239158 37189 14134 38188 53156 384125 24112610 2 25115 20125 183176 30168 11122 30161 40181 297108 Root Total 18112010 2 19135 17125 166198 49155 9109 25156 37124 288142 20112210 7 21102 17175 704160 230165 35196 102159 156122 22112410 9 22194 18117 1 103179 400121 52164 152146 243125 24112610 9 25100 18122 1 338163 536107 59175 175165 293127 26112810 1 26160 19150 170189 73145 7128 21161 37128 310151 28113010 1 28160 16100 201118 94108 8110 24136 43167 371139 250 24112610 0 0100 0100 0100 0100 0100 0100 0100 0100 26112810 9 27121 18103 1 444172 373146 56195 180134 405122 28113010 5 28178 18120 945139 233138 32114 113105 245119 30113210 3 30187 18190 697106 162128 19167 78193 163169 32113410 0 0100 0100 0100 0100 0100 0100 0100 0100 34113610 1 35150 20150 349172 72155 6182 35157 67152 532117 1 Fig. 1 Diameter class distribution of tree number and biomass in P. xiaohei plantation with different ages and densities hm - 2 250 hm - 2, (2004), 208 hm - 2 625 hm - 2, 5716 t hm - 2 112187 t hm - 2, hm - 2, 82183 t hm - 2 ; (2006), 570 hm - 2 667 hm - 2,10 58145 t hm - 2 11199 t hm - 2,, hm - 2,,, ( Kellomaki S,1986),,,29 27, (2002)
20 43,,, 1119911612 t hm - 2 (, 2003 ;,2006), 5716201193 t hm - 2 (,2001 ;,2004),,, (,2004), 3, (2001) ( Fokienia hodginsii) hm - 2 72137 % 1822 cm ; hm - 2 2026 cm, 90102 % ;250 hm - 2, 2630 cm, 68127 %,,,, 3,,,,,. 2006.., (2) :9-11,,,. 2003. -.,39 (6) :1-7,. 2002...,15 (1) :54-60,. 2000..,36 ( ) :19-27,,. 2004.., (sp1) :43-47,,,. 2004..,32 (3) :53-58,. 2001..,12 (6) :806-810,,,. 2001..,36 ( 1) :120-124,. 1994.. :,,,. 1999..,6 :63-67,,. 1997..,25 (5) :53-56 Anna A S,Diane L M,Steven A. 2000. Competition between native Populus deltoids and invasive Tamarix ramosissima and the implications for reestablishing flooding disturbance. Conservation Biology,14(6) :1744-1754 Baldwin J R,Burkhart H E,Westfall J M, et al. 2001. Linking growth and yield and process models to estimate impact of environmental changes on growth of loblolly pine. Forest Science,47 (1) :77-82 Gower S T,Vogel J G,Norman J M, et al. 1997. Carbon distribution and aboveground net primary production in aspen,jack pine,and black spruce stands in Saskatchewan and Manitoba,Canada. Journal of Geophysical Research,102 (D24) :29-41 Houghtou J T,Ding Y, Griggs D J, et al. 2001. Climate change 2001 in the Scientific Basis. Cambridge :Cambridge University Press,994 Jorg K,Ilka H,Carsten M, et al. 2003. Elevated pco 2 affects N2metabolism of young poplar plants ( Populus tremula P. sufficient N2supply. New Phytologist,157 :68-81 alba) differently at deficient and Kellomaki S. 1986. A model for the relationship between branch number and biomass in Pinus sylvestris crowns and the effect of crown shape and stand density on branch and stem biomass. Scandinavian Journal of Forest Research,1 :455-472 Kurz W A,Apps M J. 1999. A 702year retrospective analysis of carbon fluxes in the Canadian forest sector. Ecological Applications,9 (2) :526-547 Liu J,Chen J M,Cihlar J, et al. 1999. Net primary productivity distribution in the BOREAS study region from a process model using satellite and surface data. Journal of Geophysical Research,104 (D22) :735-354 Long S P,Ainsworth E A,Rogers A, et al. 2004. Rising atmospheric carbon dioxide :Plant FACE the future. Annual Review of Plant Biology,55 :591-628 Norby R J,Wullschleger S D,Gunderson C A, et al. 1999. Tree responses to rising CO 2 in field experiments :implications for the future forest. Plant,Cell & Environment,22 :683-714 Victoria E W,Carl J B,Xin2Guang Zhu, et al. 2005. Gross primary production is stimulated for tree Populus species grown under free2air CO 2 enrichment from planting through canopy closure. Global Change Biology,11 :644-656 ()