Canopy transpiration of beech forests in Northern Bavaria [Elektronische Ressource] : structure and function in pure and mixed stands with oak at colline and montane sites / vorgelegt von Markus W. T. Schmidt

De
Publié par

Canopytranspirationfeechforestsnorthernavaria –StructureandunctionnureandixedstandsithakatcollineandontaneitesDissertationzurErlangungderDoktorwürde(Dr.rer.nat.)derFakultätfürBiologie,ChemieundGeowissenschaftenderUniversitätBayreuthvorgelegtvonMarkusW.T.SchmidtausDüsseldorfBayreuth,November2007Die vorliegende Arbeit wurde zwischen Februar 1998 und November 2007 amLehrstuhl für Pflanzenökologie der Universität Bayreuth unter Anleitung von HerrnProf.JohnD.Tenhunen(Ph.D.)angefertigt.Vollständiger Abdruck der von der Fakultät für Biologie, Chemie und Geowissen7schaften der Universität Bayreuth genehmigten Dissertation zur Erlangung desakademischenGradeseinesDoktorsderNaturwissenschaften(Dr.rer.nat.).AntragaufZulassungderDissertation:30.November2007WissenschaftlichesKolloquium:15.Februar2008Erstgutachter:Prof.J.D.Tenhunen(Ph.D.)Zweitgutachter:Prof.Dr.E.KomoriTableofcontentsAcknowledgements.................................................................................................. ivAbbreviationsandsymbols..................................................................................... vi1 Introduction ........................................................................................................ 12 Objectives .........................................................................................................
Publié le : mardi 1 janvier 2008
Lecture(s) : 23
Tags :
Source : OPUS.UB.UNI-BAYREUTH.DE/VOLLTEXTE/2008/428/PDF/DISS_MSCHMIDT.PDF
Nombre de pages : 252
Voir plus Voir moins

Canopytranspirationfeechforestsnorthernavaria –
Structureandunctionnureandixedstandsithak
atcollineandontane
ites
Dissertation
zur
Erlangung
der
Doktorwürde
(Dr.
rer.
nat.)
der
Fakultät
für
Biologie,
Chemie
und
Geowissenschaften
der
Universität
Bayreuth
vorgelegt
von
Markus
W.T.
Schmidt
aus
Düsseldorf
Bayreuth,
November
2007Die
vorliegende
Arbeit
wurde
zwischen
Februar
1998
und
November
2007
am
Lehrstuhl
für
Pflanzenökologie
der
Universität
Bayreuth
unter
Anleitung
von
Herrn
Prof.
John
D.
Tenhunen
(Ph.D.)
angefertigt.
Vollständiger
Abdruck
der
von
der
Fakultät
für
Biologie,
Chemie
und
Geowissen7
schaften
der
Universität
Bayreuth
genehmigten
Dissertation
zur
Erlangung
des
akademischen
Grades
eines
Doktors
der
Naturwissenschaften
(Dr.
rer.
nat.).
Antrag
auf
Zulassung
der
Dissertation:
30.
November
2007
Wissenschaftliches
Kolloquium:
15.
Februar
2008
Erstgutachter:
Prof.
J.D.
Tenhunen
(Ph.D.)
Zweitgutachter:
Prof.
Dr.
E.
Komori
Tableofcontents
Acknowledgements.................................................................................................. iv
Abbreviationsandsymbols..................................................................................... vi
1 Introduction ........................................................................................................ 1
2 Objectives ........................................................................................................... 4
2.1. Generalobjectives .................................................................................................................. 4
2.2. Spatiallevelsofstructureconsideredinthestudy ............................................................. 6
2.3. Reviewoftheliterature........................................................................................................... 7
2.3.1. Radial
within7tree
variations
in
wood
anatomy
and
hydraulic
properties .......................... 7
2.3.2. Influence
of
structure
on
whole7tree
water
use............................................................... 13
2.3.3. Effects
of
stand
structure
on
canopy
transpiration
and
conductance ............................. 14
2.4. Hypotheses............................................................................................................................ 16
3 Studysites ........................................................................................................ 18
3.1. Steigerwald ............................................................................................................................ 18
3.2. Fichtelgebirge........................................................................................................................ 21
3.3. Sitecharacteristics ............................................................................................................... 22
4 Methods............................................................................................................. 25
4.1. Measurementsofsapflowwiththethermaldissipationtechnique ................................. 25
4.1.1. Principles
and
conversions............................................................................................. 25
4.1.2. Probe
design .................................................................................................................. 29
4.1.3. Field
installations ............................................................................................................ 29
4.1.4. Sample
trees .................................................................................................................. 30
4.1.5. Accuracy
and
errors ....................................................................................................... 33
4.2. Treeandstandbiometry....................................................................................................... 33
4.3. Sapwoodarea........................................................................................................................ 34ii
4.4. Leafareaindexofthecanopy.............................................................................................. 38
4.4.1. Direct
estimates
of
LAI,
allometric
relationships ............................................................. 38
4.4.2. Semi7direct
estimates
of
LAI,
leaf
area
per
unit
dry
mass .............................................. 39
4.4.3. Indirect
estimates
of
LAI ................................................................................................. 40
4.5. Meteorologicalandsoilmeasurements .............................................................................. 41
5 Results............................................................................................................... 44
5.1. Structuraldriversofcanopytranspiration.......................................................................... 44
5.1.1. Sapwood
area................................................................................................................. 44
5.1.2. Stand
structure ............................................................................................................... 49
5.1.3. Leaf
area
index
and
related
variables
of
tree
and
stand
structure.................................. 53
5.1.3.1. Leafareaperunitdrymass…………………………………………………………...……53
5.1.3.2. Leafareaindex………………………………...…………………………………………….54
5.1.3.3. Leafareatosapwoodarearelationship……………..…………………………………...57
5.2. Atmosphericandsoilconditionsduringtheinvestigatedyears...................................... 60
5.2.1. Steigerwald7sites
Steinkreuz
and
Großebene ............................................................... 60
5.2.2.

Fichtelgebirge7site
Farrenleite ....................................................................................... 70
5.3. Radialwithin4treevariationofxylemsapflowdensityJ .................................................. 75s
5.4. Whole4treewateruseQofFagussylvaticaandQuercuspetraea................................... 93t
5.5. Standwateruse:Canopytranspirationandcanopyconductance................................. 100
6 Discussion ...................................................................................................... 127
6.1. Structuraldriversofcanopytranspiration........................................................................ 127
6.2. XylemsapflowdensityJ ................................................................................................... 134s
6.2.1. Radial
patterns
of
sap
flow
density
J
in
Fagussylvatica.............................................. 134s
6.2.2. Sap
flow
density
J
in
Quercuspetraea ........................................................................ 138s
6.2.3. General
radial
pattern
of
J ........................................................................................... 140s
6.2.4. Effects
of
soil
conditions,
and
seasonal
trends
in
general,
on
radial
patterns
of
J
ins
Fagussylvatica.......................................................................................................................... 143iii
6.3. Whole4treewateruseQ...................................................................................................... 147t
6.3.1. Q
of
European
beech................................................................................................... 147t
6.3.2. Q
of
sessile
oak ........................................................................................................... 151t
6.4. CanopytranspirationE andcanopyconductanceg ..................................................... 157c c
6.4.1. Structural
controls
on
E
and
g .................................................................................... 159c c
6.4.2. Comparison
of
beech
in
the
Steigerwald
and
the
Fichtelgebirge.................................. 166
6.4.3. Comparison
of
beech
and
oak
in
mixed
stands
in
the
Steigerwald .............................. 169
6.4.4. Variation
of
E
of
beech
and
oak
across
Central
Europe.............................................. 176c
7 Conclusions.................................................................................................... 182
7.1. Reviewofhypotheses......................................................................................................... 182
7.2. Futureperspectives ............................................................................................................ 189
8 Summary......................................................................................................... 191
9 Zusammenfassung......................................................................................... 193
10 References ...................................................................................................... 196
11Appendix ......................................................................................................... 222
11.1. Computertomograms(Chapter5.1.1)........................................................................... 222
11.2. Allometricrelationships(Chapter5.1.2) ....................................................................... 225
11.3. Atmosphericdriversanddailysapflowdensity(Chapter5.3)................................... 227
11.4.SeasonalchangeofJ /J (Chapter5.3) ........................................................... 228sdeep s042cm
11.5. Sizeclassesofbeechandoakforupscaling(Chapter5.5) ........................................ 229
11.6. RelationshipsofE andatmosphericdrivers(Chapter5.5)........................................ 230c
11.7. MaximumdailyE ofbeechandoakstands(Chapter6.4.1)....................................... 234c
11.8. SeasonalsumsofE (Chapter6.4.4)............................................................................. 236civ
Acknowledgements
I
am
most
sincerely
grateful
to
Prof.
John
Tenhunen
for
entrusting
me
with
this
topic,
for
his
invaluable,
continuous
support
and
numerous
constructive
discussions.
I
very
much
enjoyed
the
stimulating
atmosphere
at
the
Department
of
Plant
Ecology
and
the
opportunity
to
meet
colleagues
with
diverse
backgrounds
which
broadened
my
views
and
interests.
I
am
very
grateful
for
having
had
the
chance
to
gain
invaluable
experience
through
teaching
assignments,
and
through
planning
and
carrying
out
fieldwork
and
research
projects.
I
am
also
greatly
indebted
to
PD
Dr.
Barbara
Köstner
for
the
in7depth
introduction
to
structure
and
function
in
forest
ecophysiology
and
for
many
of
the
scientific
ideas
presented
here,
for
inspiring
discussions
and
constructive
comments
on
an
earlier
version
of
the
text.
I
am
especially
thankful
to
Dr.
Reiner
Zimmermann
for
sharing
his
invaluable
experience
in
both
the
practical
and
theoretical
aspects
of
sap
flow
and
for
sharing
data
from
the
Fichtelgebirge.
I
am
dearly
indebted
to
Dr.
Dennis
Otieno
for
his
support
in
Bayreuth
and
at
remote
field
sites,
for
many
stimulating
discussions,
and
his
friendship.
I
am
deeply
thankful
to
PD
Dr.
Eva
Falge
for
creating
an
inspiring
atmosphere
at
Plant
Ecology
and
for
always
having
had
time
for
a
question

and
an
answer,
and
to
Stefan
Fleck
for
his
comradeship
during
joint
fieldwork
in
the
early
days,
for
sharing
biometric
data,
and
the
interesting
exchange
of
ideas.
I
am
greatly
thankful
to
Marga
Wartinger
for
her
support
in
the
lab
and
in
the
field
and
for
her
great
companionship
during
countless
field
campaigns
over
the
years.
I
am
grateful
to
Annette
Suske
for
manufacturing
sap
flow
sensors
and
for
introducing
me
to
this
discipline,
for
help
in
the
field
and
in
the
lab;
to
Dr.
Pedro
Gerstberger
for
biometric
data
and
for
creating
maps;
to
Wolfgang
Faltin
for
sharing
biometric
data;
to
Barbara
Scheitler
for
lots
of
help
with
field
and
lab
work;
to
Ralf
Geyer
for
carefully
watching
over
data
safety
and
permanency
and
for
PC
troubleshooting;
and
to
all
the
colleagues
I
have
met
over
the
years
at
Plant
Ecology
for
contributing
to
the
warm
atmosphere.
I
am
grateful
to
Gerhard
Müller
for
invaluable
advice
on
electronic
questions,
for
logger
maintenance
and
help
with
solar
panels
and
the
Hylift,
and
to
Gerhard
Küfner
for
help
with
hardware,
and
to
the
former
BITÖK
(Bayreuth
Institute
for
Terrestrial
Ecosystem
Research,
now
Bayreuth
Center
of
Ecology
and
Environmental
Research,
BayCEER)
for
the
excellent
infrastructure
provided.
My
gratitude
also
extends
to
Prof.
Y.
Kakubari
for
the
scientific
cooperation,
and
Dr.
Mitsumasa
Kubota
for
sharing
his
software
to
calculate
sap
flow
densities.
I
owe
thanks
to
Dr.
André
Granier
for
very
stimulating
discussions,
and
to
PD
Dr.
Gunnar
Lischeid
for
providing
soil
water
and
meteorological
data
from
Steinkreuz.
I
am
grateful
to
the
local
forestry
administration
(formerly
Forstamt
Ebrach),
particularly
to
Revierförster
Geiz
(Oberschwarzach),
for
their
support,
and
to
the
regional
forestry
administration
(formerly
Oberforstdirektion
Oberfranken)
for
access
to
literature
and
to
forestry
economic
plans.
Also
I
am
much
obliged
to
the
Bavarian
State
Institute
of
Forestry
(LWF)
for
meteorological
data
from
their
network
of
forest
climate
stations.
And
last
but
not
least
I
am
most
deeply
indebted
to
my
parents
and
my
own
family
for
their
overwhelming
help
and
the
confidence
they
gave
me,
and
in
particular
Mathilde
and
Claire
who
helped
me
to
put
matters
into
perspective,
and
for
the
sacrifices
they
all
made
over
the
years.
This
work
would
not
have
been
possible
without
the
tremendous
support
from
Iris.v
This
study
was
funded
by
the
Bundesministerium
für
Bildung
und
Forschung
(BMBF),
contracts
PT
BEO

0339476
C
and
D.

Soyez le premier à déposer un commentaire !

17/1000 caractères maximum.