Free access
Issue
Ann. For. Sci.
Volume 67, Number 8, December 2010
Article Number 805
Number of page(s) 11
Section Original articles
DOI http://dx.doi.org/10.1051/forest/2010041
Published online 07 October 2010
  • Aber J.,Neilson R.P.,McNulty S.,Lenihan J.M.,Bachelet D., and Drapek R.J., 2001. Forest processes and global environmental change: Predicting the effects of individual and multiple stressors. Bioscience 51: 735–751. [CrossRef]
  • Bartelink H., 1998. Simulation of growth and competition in mixed stands of Douglas-fir and beech. Ph.D. thesis Wageningen University, Wageningen, The Netherlands.
  • Boisvenue C. and Running S.W., 2006. Impacts of climate change on natural forest productivity – evidence since the middle of the 20th century. Glob. Change Biol. 12: 862–882. [CrossRef]
  • Bolte A. and Villanueva I., 2006. Interspecific competition impacts on the morphology and distribution of fine roots in European beech (Fagus sylvatica L.) and Norway spruce (Picea abies (L.) Karst.). Eur. J. For. Res. 125: 15–26. [CrossRef]
  • Breda N.,Huc R.,Granier A., and Dreyer E., 2006. Temperate forest trees and stands under severe drought: a review of ecophysiological responses, adaptation processes and long-term consequences. Ann. For. Sci. 63: 625–644. [CrossRef] [EDP Sciences]
  • Bugmann H., Grote R., Lasch P., Lindner M., and Suckow F., 1997. A new forest gap model to study the effects of environmental change on forest structure and functioning. In: Mohren G.M.J., Kramer K., and Sabaté S. (Eds.), Impacts of global change on tree physiology, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, The Netherlands.
  • Burkhart H. and Tham A., 1992. Predictions from growth and yield models of the performance of mixed-species stands. In: Cannel M., Malcolm D., and Robertson P. (Eds.), The ecology of mixed-species stands of trees, Blackwell, Oxford.
  • Cruiziat P.,Cochard H., and Améglio T., 2002. Hydraulic architecture of trees: main concepts and results. Ann. For. Sci. 59: 723–753. [CrossRef] [EDP Sciences]
  • Del Río M. and Sterba H., 2009. Comparing volume growth in pure and mixed stands of Pinus sylvestris and Quercus pyrenaica. Ann. For. Sci. 66: 502. [CrossRef] [EDP Sciences]
  • De Visser P.H.B.,Beier C.,Rasmussen L.,Kreutzer K.,Steinberg N.,Bredemeier M.,Blanck K.,Farrell E.P., and Cummins T., 1994. Biological response of five forest ecosystems in the EXMAN project to input changes of water, nutrients and atmospheric loads. For. Ecol. Manage. 68: 15–29. [CrossRef]
  • Dittmar C.,Zech W., and Elling W., 2003. Growth variations of Common beech (Fagus sylvatica L.) under different climatic and environmental conditions in Europe – a dendroecological study. For. Ecol. Manage. 173: 63–78. [CrossRef]
  • Feliksik E. and Wilczynski S., 2004. Dendroclimatological regions of Douglas fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii Franco) in western Poland. Eur. J. For. Res. 123: 39–43. [CrossRef]
  • Gerstengarbe F. and Werner P., 2005. Simulationsergebnisse des regionalen Klimamodells STAR. In: Wechsung F., Becker A., and Gräfe P. (Eds.), Auswirkungen des globalen Wandels auf Wasser, Umwelt und Gesellschaft im Elbegebiet, Weißenseeverlag, Berlin, Germany.
  • Hall S.J. and Marchand P.J., 2010. Effects of stand densitiy on ecosystem properties of subalpine forests in the southern Rocky Mountains, USA. Ann. For. Sci. 67: 102. [CrossRef]
  • Haxeltine A. and Prentice I.C., 1996a. A general model for the light-use efficiency of primary production. Funct. Ecol. 10: 551–561. [CrossRef]
  • Haxeltine A. and Prentice I.C., 1996b. BIOME3: An equilibrium terrestrial biosphere model based on ecophysiological constraints, resource availability, and competition among plant functional types. Glob. Biogeochem. Cycles 10: 693–709. [CrossRef]
  • Hendriks C.M.A. and Bianchi F., 1995. Root density and root biomass in pure and mixed forest stands of Donglas-fir and Beech. Neth. J. Agric. Sci. 43: 321–331.
  • Hermann R.K. and Lavender D.P., 1999. Douglas-fir planted forests. New For. 17: 53–70. [CrossRef]
  • Jansen J., Sevenster J., and Faber P., 1996. Obsprengsttabellen voor belangrijke boomsorten in Nederland. Landbouwuniversiteit Wageningen, Wageningen, The Netherlands.
  • Kelty M. and Cameron I., 1994. Ecological principles of production differences between monociultures and mixtures. In: Costa M.P.D. and Preuhsler T. (Eds.), Mixed stands: research plots, measurements and results, models, Instituto Superior de Agronomia, Lisboa, Portugal.
  • Kint V.,Lasch P.,Lindner M., and Muys B., 2009. Multipurpose conversion management of Scots pine towards mixed oak-birch stands-A long-term simulation approach. For. Ecol. Manage. 257: 199–214. [CrossRef]
  • Korol R.L.,Running S.W., and Miller K.S., 1995. Incorporating intertree competition into an ecosystem model. Can. J. For. Res. 25: 413–424. [CrossRef]
  • Lasch P.,Badeck F.W.,Suckow F.,Lindner M., and Mohr P., 2005. Model-based analysis of management alternatives at stand and regional level in Brandenburg (Germany). For. Ecol. Manage. 207: 59–74. [CrossRef]
  • Lebourgeois F., 2007. Climatic signal in annual growth variation of silver fir (Abies alba Mill.) and spruce (Picea abies Karst.) from the French permanent plot network (RENECOFOR). Ann. For. Sci. 64: 333–343. [CrossRef] [EDP Sciences]
  • Leuschner C. and Hertel D., 2003. Fine root biomass of temperate forests in relation to soil acidity and fertility, climate, age and species. Prog. Bot. 64: 405–438.
  • Lindner M.,Sievanen R., and Pretzsch H., 1997. Improving the simulation of stand structure in a forest gap model. For. Ecol. Manage. 95: 183–195. [CrossRef]
  • Mäkelä A.,Landsberg J.,Ek A.R.,Burk T.E.,Ter-Mikaelian M.,Agren G.I.,Oliver C.D., and Puttonen P., 2000a. Process-based models for forest ecosystem management: current state of the art and challenges for practical implementation. Tree Physiol. 20: 289–298.
  • Mäkelä A.,Sievanen R.,Lindner M., and Lasch P., 2000b. Application of volume growth and survival graphs in the evaluation of four process-based forest growth models. Tree Physiol. 20: 347–355.
  • Nakicenovic N., Alcamo J., Davis G., Vries B.D., Fenhann J., Gaffin S., Gregory K., Grübler A., Jung T., Kram T., Rovere E.L., Michaelis L., Mori S., Morita T., Pepper W., Pitcher H., Price L., Riahi K., Roehrl A., Rogner H., Sankovski A., Schlesinger M., Shukla P., Smith S., Swart R., Rooijen S.V., Victor N., and Dadi Z., 2000. IPCC Special Report Emission Scenarios. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom.
  • Oosterbaan A., Berg C.V.D., and Olsthoorn A., 1999. Monitoring competition in young mixed plantations with broad-leaved tree species: a case study. In: Olsthoorn A., Bartelink H., Gardiner J., Pretzsch H., Hekhuis H., and Franc A. (Eds.), Management of mixed-species forest: silviculture abd economics. DLO Institute for Forestry and Nature research (IBN-DLO), Wageningen, The Netherlands.
  • Riek W. and Stähr F., 2004. Eigenschaften typischer Waldböden im Nordostdeutschen Tiefland unter besonderer Berücksichtigung des Landes Brandenburg. Landesforstanstalt Eberswalde, Eberswalde, Germany.
  • Schmid I., 2002. The influence of soil type and interspecific competition on the fine root system of Norway spruce and European beech. Basic Appl. Ecol. 3: 339–346. [CrossRef]
  • Stout D. and Sala A., 2003. Xylem vulnerability to cavitation in Pseutotsuga menziesii and Pinus ponderosa from contrasting habitats. Tree Physiol. 23: 43–50. [PubMed]
  • Suckow F.,Badeck F.,Lasch P., and Schaber J., 2001. Nutzung von Level-II-Beobachtungen für Test und Anwendung des Sukzessionsmodells FORESEE. Beiträge für Forstwirtschaft und Landschaftsökologie 35: 84–87.
  • Tiktak A. and Bouten W., 1990. Soil hydrological system characterization of the two ACIFORN stands using monitoring data and the soil hydrological model “SWIF”. Dutch priority programme on acidification, Wageningen, The Netherlands.
  • Tiktak A., and Bouten W., 1994. Soil-water dynamics and long-term water balances of a Douglas-fir stand in the Netherlands. J. Hydrol. 156: 265–283. [CrossRef]
  • Tiktak A., Konsten C., Maas R.V.D., and Bouten W., 1988. Soil chemistry and physics of two Douglas-fir stands affected by acid atmospheric deposition on the Veluwe, the Netherlands. Dutch priority programme on acidification, Wageningen, The Netherlands.
  • Van den Hurk B., Tank A., Lederink G., Ulden A.V., Oldenborgh G.V., Katsman C., Brink H.V.D., Keller F., Bessembinder J., Burgers G., Komen G., Hazeleger W., and Drijhout S., 2006. Climate change scenarios 2006 for the Netherlands. KNMI (Royal Dutch Meteorological Institute), de Bilt, The Netherlands.
  • Van der Werf G.,Sass-Klaassen U., and Mohren G.M.J., 2007. The impact of the 2003 summer drought on the intra-annual growth pattern of beech (Fagus sylvatica L.) and oak (Quercus robur L.) on a dry site in the Netherlands. Dendrochronologia 25: 103–112. [CrossRef]
  • Verkaik E., Moraal L., and Nabuurs G., 2009. Potential Impacts of climate change on Dutch forests – Mapping the risks. In, Alterra-report, Wageningen, p. 84.