Download presentation
Presentation is loading. Please wait.
Published byRoland Black Modified over 9 years ago
1
Fertilizing Interior Forests: the scientific basis (and some informed speculation) Rob Brockley B.C. Ministry of Forests and Range Kalamalka Forestry Centre Vernon, BC
2
Why fertilize?
4
l Every tree to be harvested in the next 40-60 years is in the ground today
5
Why fertilize? l Every tree to be harvested in the next 40-60 years is in the ground today l Forest fertilization is a proven silvicultural treatment for accelerating the operability of established stands without sacrificing harvest volume
6
Why fertilize? l Every tree to be harvested in the next 40-60 years is in the ground today l Forest fertilization is a proven silvicultural treatment for accelerating the operability of established stands without sacrificing harvest volume l Fertilization can be used strategically to impact the amount and timing of future harvest
7
How fertilization mitigates MPB mortality Conceptual Harvest volume Area age class distribution years from now2500 MPB mortality area
8
How fertilization mitigates MPB mortality Conceptual Area age class distribution years from now2500 MPB mortality area l Fertilizing 30- to 70-year-old stands (blue) can increase harvest volumes 20–40 years from now Harvest volume
9
How fertilization mitigates MPB mortality Conceptual Harvest volume Area age class distribution years from now2500 MPB mortality area l Fertilizing 30- to 70- year-old stands (blue) can increase harvest volumes 20–40 years from now l Fertilizing 15- to 30-year-old stands (yellow) can increase harvest volumes 40–70 years from now
10
Fertilization research in the BC interior l Lodgepole pine
11
Fertilization research in the BC interior l Lodgepole pine ~ 70 screening trials
12
Fertilization research in the BC interior l Lodgepole pine ~ 70 screening trials ~ 50 area-based trials
13
Relative 6-year BA response following N fertilization Relative cumulative frequency distribution (n=46)
18
BA response following N and N+S fertilization Relative cumulative frequency distribution (n=26) N N+S
19
BA response following N and N+S fertilization Relative cumulative frequency distribution (n=26) N N+S
20
BA response following N and N+S fertilization Relative cumulative frequency distribution (n=26) N N+S
21
BA response following N and N+S fertilization Relative cumulative frequency distribution (n=26) N N+S
22
BA response following N and N+S fertilization Relative cumulative frequency distribution (n=26) N N+S
23
BA response following N and N+S fertilization Relative cumulative frequency distribution (n=26) N N+S
24
BA response following N and N+S fertilization Relative cumulative frequency distribution (n=26) N N+S
25
Effect of N and N+S fertilization on 6-year volume response of lodgepole pine in north-central B.C. EP 886.01 (n=8)
27
Effect of N and N+S fertilization on 6-year volume response of lodgepole pine in south-central B.C. EP 886.01 (n=7)
29
6-year relative BA response vs. initial foliar N
30
6-year relative BA response vs. initial foliar SO 4
31
Lodgepole pine foliar boron concentration Relative cumulative frequency distribution (n=58)
35
Effects of N and B fertilization on foliar B concentration EP 886.05 critical value
36
Effects of N and B fertilization on foliar B concentration EP 886.05 critical value
37
Fertilization research in the BC interior l Lodgepole pine ~ 70 screening trials ~ 50 area-based trials l Douglas-fir
38
Fertilization research in the BC interior l Lodgepole pine ~ 70 screening trials ~ 50 area-based trials l Douglas-fir 5 screening trials
39
Fertilization research in the BC interior l Lodgepole pine ~ 70 screening trials ~ 50 area-based trials l Douglas-fir 5 screening trials 6 area-based trials
40
Fertilization research in the BC interior l Lodgepole pine ~ 70 screening trials ~ 50 area-based trials l Douglas-fir 5 screening trials 6 area-based trials l Interior spruce
41
Fertilization research in the BC interior l Lodgepole pine ~ 70 screening trials ~ 50 area-based trials l Douglas-fir 5 screening trials 6 area-based trials l Interior spruce 14 screening trials
42
Fertilization research in the BC interior l Lodgepole pine ~ 70 screening trials ~ 50 area-based trials l Douglas-fir 5 screening trials 6 area-based trials l Interior spruce 14 screening trials 12 area-based trials
43
Douglas-fir fertilization research
44
l 5 screening trials (SBS, ICH)
45
Effects of individual and combined applications of N and “complete mix” fertilizer on 1 st year needle mass of Douglas-fir EP 886.08 (n=5)
47
Effects of individual and combined applications of N and “complete mix” fertilizer on 1 st year foliar N/S ratio in Douglas-fir EP 886.08 (n=5) critical level
48
Effects of individual and combined applications of N and “complete mix” fertilizer on 1 st year foliar N/S ratio in Douglas-fir EP 886.08 (n=5) critical level
49
Douglas-fir fertilization research l 5 screening trials (SBS, ICH) l 6 area-based trials (ICH)
50
Douglas-fir fertilization research l 5 screening trials (SBS, ICH) l 6 area-based trials (ICH) 19-34 years
51
Douglas-fir fertilization research l 5 screening trials (SBS, ICH) l 6 area-based trials (ICH) 19-34 years SI 24-29 m @ 50 years
52
Effect of N and N+S fertilization on 9-year stand volume increment of Douglas-fir EP 886.01 (n=5)
54
Foliar N/S ratio by treatment and year EP 886.01 (Douglas-fir; n=5) critical level
55
Foliar N/S ratio by treatment and year EP 886.01 (Douglas-fir; n=5) critical level
56
Effect of N and N+S fertilization on 9-year stand volume increment of Douglas-fir EP 886.01 Inst. #25
57
Effect of N and N+S fertilization on 9-year stand volume increment of Douglas-fir EP 886.01 Inst. #28
58
Effect of N and N+S fertilization on 9-year stand volume increment by initial foliar N class
59
Other relevant studies
60
Site and stand characteristics of the Inland NW Douglas-fir fertilizer installations (n=94) Moore et al. (1991)
61
Effects of fertilization on relative 6-year volume response of Douglas-fir Inland Northwest (Moore et al. 1991)
62
Effect of N fertilization on 6-year gross volume increment of Douglas-fir in the Inland NW Moore et al. (1991)
63
6-year net basal area response following N fertilization by N application rate and foliar K status (from Mika and Moore 1990) Poor Good Foliar K status
64
6-year net basal area response following N fertilization by N application rate and foliar K status (from Mika and Moore 1990) Poor Good Foliar K status
65
6-year net volume response following N fertilization by foliar K status (from Brockley 2006) Poor (n=1)Good (n=5) Foliar K status
66
Root tip phenolic:sugar concentration ratios in Douglas-fir seedlings supplied with different amounts of N and K (from Shaw et al. 1998)
67
Interior spruce fertilization research
69
Effects of broadcast burning on foliar N status of white spruce plantations in the B.C. interior Curran and Ballard (1990)
70
Interior spruce fertilization research l 14 screening trials (SBS, ICH, ESSF)
71
Effects of individual and combined applications of N and “complete mix” fertilizer on 1 st year needle mass of interior spruce (n=10) Swift and Brockley (1994)
73
Effects of individual and combined applications of N and “complete mix” fertilizer on 1 st year foliar N/S ratio in interior spruce (n=10) Swift and Brockley (1994) critical level
74
Effects of individual and combined applications of N and “complete mix” fertilizer on 1 st year foliar N/S ratio in interior spruce (n=10) Swift and Brockley (1994) critical level
75
Effect of fertilization on 3-year height increment of young Engelmann spruce in the ESSF dc (Brockley 1992) Year 3 Year 2 Year 1
77
Interior spruce fertilization research l 14 screening trials (SBS, ICH, ESSF) l 9 area-based “conventional” trials (SBS, ICH, ESSF)
78
Interior spruce fertilization research l 14 screening trials (SBS, ICH, ESSF) l 9 area-based “conventional” trials (SBS, ICH, ESSF) 19 to 30 years
79
Interior spruce fertilization research l 14 screening trials (SBS, ICH, ESSF) l 9 area-based “conventional” trials (SBS, ICH, ESSF) 19 to 30 years SI 18-24 m @ 50 years
80
Effect of N and N+S fertilization on 9-year stand volume increment of interior spruce EP 886.01 (n=5)
81
Foliar N/S ratio by treatment and year EP 886.01 (spruce; n=5) critical level
82
Foliar N/S ratio by treatment and year EP 886.01 (spruce; n=5) critical level
83
Effect of N and N+S fertilization on 9-year stand volume increment of interior spruce EP 886.01 Inst. #27 (ESSFwc4, SI 18)
84
Effect of N and N+S fertilization on 9-year stand volume increment of interior spruce EP 886.01 Inst. #29 (ICHmc2, SI 18)
85
Effect of N and N+S fertilization on 9-year stand volume increment of interior spruce EP 886.01 Inst. #21 (ICHmm, SI 23)
86
Effect of N and N+S fertilization on 9-year stand volume increment of interior spruce EP 886.01 Inst. #22 (ICHwk1, SI 24)
87
Effect of N and N+S fertilization on 9-year stand volume increment of interior spruce EP 886.01 Inst. #20 (SBSmc2, SI 19)
88
Foliar B concentration by treatment and year EP 886.01 Inst. #20 critical level
89
Effect of N and N+S fertilization on 9-year stand volume increment by initial foliar N class
90
Interior spruce fertilization research l 14 screening trials (SBS, ICH, ESSF) l 9 area-based “conventional” trials (SBS, ICH, ESSF) 19 to 34 years SI 24-29 m @ 50 years l 3 area-based “maximum productivity” trials (SBS)
91
Interior spruce fertilization research l 14 screening trials (SBS, ICH, ESSF) l 9 area-based “conventional” trials (SBS, ICH, ESSF) 19 to 34 years SI 24-29 m @ 50 years l 3 area-based “maximum productivity” trials (SBS) 9 to 13 years
92
Effects of “single” vs. “repeated” fertilization Single fertilization Unfertilized Fertilize
93
Effects of “single” vs. “repeated” fertilization Single fertilization Unfertilized Multiple fertilization Fertilize
94
Treatments l Control l N+B l N+S+B l “Complete blend” l Optimum Nutrition 1 (1.3%N) l Optimum Nutrition 2 (1.6%N) every 6 years
95
Control Fall 2001 ON 2 Fall 2001
96
EP 886.13 Inst. #3 (Crow Creek) Spruce (SBSmc2)
97
EP 886.13 Inst. #3 (Crow Creek) Spruce (SBSmc2)
98
EP 886.13 Inst. #3 (Crow Creek) Spruce (SBSmc2)
99
EP 886.13 Inst. #5 (Lodi Lake) Spruce (SBSwk1)
100
EP 886.13 Inst. #5 (Lodi Lake) Spruce (SBSwk1)
101
EP 886.13 Inst. #5 (Lodi Lake) Spruce (SBSwk1)
102
EP 886.13 Inst. #1 (Sheridan Creek) Lodgepole pine (SBSdw2)
103
EP 886.13 Inst. #1 (Sheridan Creek) Lodgepole pine (SBSdw2)
104
EP 886.13 Inst. #1 (Sheridan Creek) Lodgepole pine (SBSdw2)
105
Other relevant studies
106
Effect of N fertilization on 5-year stand volume increment of white spruce in Alberta (n=3) Krause et al. (1982)
107
Effect of N and N+K fertilization on 10-year stand volume increment of 35-year-old white spruce Gagnon et al. (1976)
108
Effect of repeated fertilization on 5-year tree BA increment of 70-year-old white spruce van Cleve and Zasada (1976)
109
Norway spruce fertilization response (m 3 /ha) Northern Sweden (from Pettersson 2001)
110
Effects of fertilization on the white pine weevil
111
Pissodes strobi
112
White pine weevil damage by treatment EP 886.13 Installation #5 (Lodi Lake) vanAkker et al. (2005)
113
Effect of repeated fertilization on 9-year height increment of young interior spruce EP 886.13 Inst. #5 (Lodi Lake) 7- to 9-year 4- to 6-year 1- to 3-year
114
White pine weevil damage by treatment EP 886.13 Installation #9 (Hand Lake) L. vanAkker et al. (2005)
115
Summary
116
Douglas-fir
117
Summary Douglas-fir l stands in the ICH generally respond well to N fertilization
118
Summary Douglas-fir l stands in the ICH generally respond well to N fertilization l best responses (20-25 m 3 /ha or 30% over 9 years) are associated with low foliar N (< 1.15%)
119
Summary Douglas-fir l stands in the ICH generally respond well to N fertilization l best responses (20-25 m 3 /ha or 30% over 9 years) are associated with low foliar N (< 1.15%) l no apparent relationship between growth response and SI
120
Summary Douglas-fir l stands in the ICH generally respond well to N fertilization l best responses (20-25 m 3 /ha or 30% over 9 years) are associated with low foliar N (< 1.15%) l no apparent relationship between growth response and SI l little evidence of improved growth when S is combined with N in fertilizer prescriptions
121
Summary Douglas-fir l stands in the ICH generally respond well to N fertilization l best responses (20-25 m 3 /ha or 30% over 9 years) are associated with low foliar N (< 1.15%) l no apparent relationship between growth response and SI l little evidence of improved growth when S is combined with N in fertilizer prescriptions l additional area-based trials are needed in other BEC zones (SBS) and in older stands (> 40 years)
122
Summary Douglas-fir l stands in the ICH generally respond well to N fertilization l best responses (20-25 m 3 /ha or 30% over 9 years) are associated with low foliar N (< 1.15%) l no apparent relationship between growth response and SI l little evidence of improved growth when S is combined with N in fertilizer prescriptions l additional area-based trials are needed in other BEC zones (SBS) and in older stands (> 40 years) l effects of repeated fertilization need to be documented
123
Summary Interior spruce
124
Summary Interior spruce l fertilization response is more variable and, on average, smaller than D-fir
125
Summary Interior spruce l fertilization response is more variable and, on average, smaller than D-fir l best responses (20-25 m 3 /ha or 30-40% over 9 years) are associated with low foliar N (< 1.1%) and SI < 20
126
Summary Interior spruce l fertilization response is more variable and, on average, smaller than D-fir l best responses (20-25 m 3 /ha or 30-40% over 9 years) are associated with low foliar N (< 1.1%) and SI < 20 l smallest growth responses are associated with highest SI (> 23)
127
Summary Interior spruce l fertilization response is more variable and, on average, smaller than D-fir l best responses (20-25 m 3 /ha or 30-40% over 9 years) are associated with low foliar N (< 1.1%) and SI < 20 l smallest growth responses are associated with highest SI (> 23) l little evidence of improved growth when S is combined with N in fertilizer prescriptions
128
Summary Interior spruce l fertilization response is more variable and, on average, smaller than D-fir l best responses (20-25 m 3 /ha or 30-40% over 9 years) are associated with low foliar N (< 1.1%) and SI < 20 l smallest growth responses are associated with highest SI (> 23) l little evidence of improved growth when S is combined with N in fertilizer prescriptions l B deficiencies (< 10 ppm) may limit growth response to N and NS fertilization on some SBS sites
129
Summary Interior spruce l fertilization response is more variable and, on average, smaller than D-fir l best responses (20-25 m 3 /ha or 30-40% over 9 years) are associated with low foliar N (< 1.1%) and SI < 20 l smallest growth responses are associated with highest SI (> 23) l little evidence of improved growth when S is combined with N in fertilizer prescriptions l B deficiencies (< 10 ppm) may limit growth response to N and NS fertilization on some SBS sites l planted spruce is apparently very well suited to “high input” silviculture
130
Summary Interior spruce l fertilization response is more variable and, on average, smaller than D-fir l best responses (20-25 m 3 /ha or 30-40% over 9 years) are associated with low foliar N (< 1.1%) and SI < 20 l smallest growth responses are associated with highest SI (> 23) l little evidence of improved growth when S is combined with N in fertilizer prescriptions l B deficiencies (< 10 ppm) may limit growth response to N and NS fertilization on some SBS sites l planted spruce is apparently very well suited to “high input” silviculture l additional area-based trials are needed on N deficient sites in several BEC zones (ICH, ESSF, SBS) and in older stands (> 40 years)
Similar presentations
© 2025 SlidePlayer.com. Inc.
All rights reserved.