Volume 4, Issue 2 (9-2025)
jfer 2025, 4(2): 38-49 |
Back to browse issues page
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Habashi H, Shahrdami A, Rahmani R, Rafiee Jazi F. (2025). Effects of the Shelterwood System on Changes in Aboveground Biomass of Beech Forest Trees. jfer. 4(2), : 4
URL: http://yujs.yu.ac.ir/jzfr/article-1-144-en.html
URL: http://yujs.yu.ac.ir/jzfr/article-1-144-en.html
, hashem@gau.ac.ir
Abstract: (135 Views)
Background and objectives: The Hyrcanian forests play a crucial role in carbon storage, soil and water conservation, and climate change mitigation. Previous studies on the silvicultural management of these forests have mainly focused on estimating stand volume and structural characteristics, while the impacts of different management regimes—particularly the shelterwood system—on aboveground biomass, as a key indicator of carbon sequestration, remain unclear. The main objective of this study was to quantify and analyze the effects of shelterwood management treatments on tree quantitative characteristics and aboveground biomass in the beech (Fagus orientalis Lipsky) forests of Kelardasht, northern Iran.
Materials and methods: The research was conducted in Compartment 5 of the Kelardasht forest management plan. Five management treatments were selected: control, shelterwood, partial shelterwood, shelterwood with improvement cutting, and unmanaged (outside the management plan). In each treatment, five 0.5-hectare plots were randomly established. Diameter at breast height (DBH), total height, and stem height were measured, and tree volume was calculated. Aboveground biomass was estimated using tree volume, wood specific gravity, and FAO expansion factors. Data were analyzed using one-way ANOVA and independent t-tests.
Results: Mean DBH and total height were significantly higher in unmanaged treatments (control and outside the management plan) than in managed ones. The control treatment had the highest aboveground biomass (613.58 t ha⁻¹), whereas the complete shelterwood treatment had the lowest (272.56 t ha⁻¹), representing a 56% reduction compared to the control. The partial shelterwood and shelterwood with improvement cutting treatments had mean values of 417.13 and 273.61 t ha⁻¹, respectively. These patterns were consistent with structural indices such as stand volume and total height; even-aged stands resulting from complete shelterwood had lower biomass, while uneven-aged structures in partial shelterwood and control treatments performed better.
Conclusion: The findings suggest that the partial shelterwood method is a suitable option for the mid-elevation forests of Kelardasht, as it combines considerable economic benefits with biomass levels closest to the control treatment, while maintaining the advantages of uneven-aged forest structures. For the first time, this study demonstrates that prolonging the shelterwood regeneration period can lead to the formation of natural, uneven-aged stands that exhibit features of sustainable forests, with important implications for enhancing carbon sequestration in these valuable Hyrcanian ecosystems.
Materials and methods: The research was conducted in Compartment 5 of the Kelardasht forest management plan. Five management treatments were selected: control, shelterwood, partial shelterwood, shelterwood with improvement cutting, and unmanaged (outside the management plan). In each treatment, five 0.5-hectare plots were randomly established. Diameter at breast height (DBH), total height, and stem height were measured, and tree volume was calculated. Aboveground biomass was estimated using tree volume, wood specific gravity, and FAO expansion factors. Data were analyzed using one-way ANOVA and independent t-tests.
Results: Mean DBH and total height were significantly higher in unmanaged treatments (control and outside the management plan) than in managed ones. The control treatment had the highest aboveground biomass (613.58 t ha⁻¹), whereas the complete shelterwood treatment had the lowest (272.56 t ha⁻¹), representing a 56% reduction compared to the control. The partial shelterwood and shelterwood with improvement cutting treatments had mean values of 417.13 and 273.61 t ha⁻¹, respectively. These patterns were consistent with structural indices such as stand volume and total height; even-aged stands resulting from complete shelterwood had lower biomass, while uneven-aged structures in partial shelterwood and control treatments performed better.
Conclusion: The findings suggest that the partial shelterwood method is a suitable option for the mid-elevation forests of Kelardasht, as it combines considerable economic benefits with biomass levels closest to the control treatment, while maintaining the advantages of uneven-aged forest structures. For the first time, this study demonstrates that prolonging the shelterwood regeneration period can lead to the formation of natural, uneven-aged stands that exhibit features of sustainable forests, with important implications for enhancing carbon sequestration in these valuable Hyrcanian ecosystems.
Article number: 4
References
1. Ameray, A., Bergeron, Y., Valeria, O., Montoro Girona, M. & Cavard, X. 2021. Forest carbon management: A review of silvicultural practices and management strategies across boreal, temperate and tropical forests. Current Forestry Reports, 7(4): 245-266.
2. Bouriaud, O., Don, A., Janssens, I.A., Marin, G. & Schulze, E.D. 2019. Effects of forest management on biomass stocks in Romanian beech forests. Forest Ecosystems, 6(1): 19 [DOI:10.1186/s40663-019-0180-4]
3. Bradley, R.L., Titus, B.D. & Hogg, K. 2001. Does shelterwood harvesting have less impact on forest floor nutrient availability and microbial properties than clearcutting? Biology and fertility of soils, 34(3): 162-169. [DOI:10.1007/s003740100389]
4. Brown, S.A.N.D.R.A. & Lugo, A.E. 1992. Aboveground biomass estimates for tropical moist forests of the Brazilian Amazon. Interciencia. Caracas, 17(1): 8-18.
5. Castaño-Santamaría, J., Barrio-Anta, M. & Álvarez-Álvarez, P. 2013. Potential above ground biomass production and total tree carbon sequestration in the major forest species in NW Spain. International Forestry Review, 15(3): 273-289. [DOI:10.1505/146554813807700083]
6. Castaño-Santamaría, J., Uhl, E., Biber, P., Müller, J., Rötzer, T. & Pretzsch, H., 2017. Effect of forest stand management on species composition, structural diversity, and productivity in the temperate zone of Europe. European Journal of Forest Research, 136(4): 739-766. [DOI:10.1007/s10342-017-1056-1]
7. Dobrosavljević, J., Kanjevac, B. & Marković, Č. 2025. Microclimate Shifts and Leaf Miner Community Responses to Shelterwood Regeneration in Sessile Oak Forests. Forests, 16(5):739. [DOI:10.3390/f16050739]
8. Duncker, P.S., Barreiro, S.M., Hengeveld, G.M., Lind, T., Mason, W.L., Ambrozy, S., & Spiecker, H. 2012. Classification of forest management approaches: a new conceptual framework and its applicability to European forestry. Ecology and Society, 17(4) [DOI:10.5751/ES-05262-170451]
9. Hassanzad Navroodi, I. & Seyedzadeh, H. 2013. Effects of shelterwood method on some important forest stands features in Shafarood district nine of Guilan. Iranian Forests Ecology, 1(2):.41-56. [In Persian]
10. Li, P., Liu, X., Wang, C., Lu, Y., Luo, L., Tao, L., Xiao, T. & Liu, Y. 2024. The Carbon Storage of Reforestation Plantings on Degraded Lands of the Red Soil Region, Jiangxi Province, China. Forests, 15(2): 320. [DOI:10.3390/f15020320]
11. Luyssaert, S., Hessenmöller, D., von Lüpke, N., Kaiser, S. & Schulze, E.D. 2011. Quantifying land use and disturbance intensity in forestry, based on the self‐thinning relationship. Ecological Applications, 21(8): 3272-3284. [DOI:10.1890/10-2395.1]
12. Mason, W.L., Diaci, J., Carvalho, J. & Valkonen, S. 2022. Continuous cover forestry in Europe: usage and the knowledge gaps and challenges to wider adoption. Forestry: An International Journal of Forest Research, 95(1): 1-12. [DOI:10.1093/forestry/cpab038]
13. Naudts, K., Chen, Y., McGrath, M.J., Ryder, J., Valade, A., Otto, J. & Luyssaert, S. 2016. Europe's forest management did not mitigate climate warming. Science, 351(6273): 597-600. [DOI:10.1126/science.aad7270]
14. Navar, J. 2009. Allometric equations for tree species and carbon stocks for forests of northwestern Mexico. Forest ecology and Management, 257(2): 427-434.
16. Pokhrel, N., Timilsina, S., Awasthi, N., Adhikari, A., Adhikari, B., Ayer, S. & Bhatta, K.P. 2024. Implications of irregular shelterwood system on regeneration and species diversity of Sal (Shorea robusta Gaertn. f.) forest in Nepal. Heliyon, 10(1). [DOI:10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e23156]
17. Poudel, A., Ayer, S., Joshi, R., Gautam, J., Timilsina, S., Khadka, K., Bhatta, K.P. & Maharjan, M. 2024. Effect of the irregular shelterwood system on soil organic carbon stock and soil quality of Shorea robusta Gaertn. f. forest in Nepal. Heliyon, 10(15). [DOI:10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e35441]
18. Pourazimi, M. 2016. Estimation and comparison of forest land carbon storage in unmanaged and managed stands of Dr. Bahramnia forestry plan using LIDAR, radar and aerial digital camera data. Gorgan University of Agricultural Sciences and Natural Resources. Thesis, 177 p. (In Persian)
19. Pretzsch, H., Biber, P., Schütze, G. & Bielak, K. 2014. Changes of forest stand dynamics in Europe. Facts from long-term observational plots and their relevance for forest ecology and management. Forest Ecology and Management, 316: 65-77. [DOI:10.1016/j.foreco.2013.07.050]
20. Pussinen, A., Karjalainen, T., Mäkipää, R., Valsta, L. & Kellomäki, S. 2002. Forest carbon sequestration and harvests in Scots pine stand under different climate and nitrogen deposition scenarios. Forest Ecology and management, 158(1-3): 103-115. [DOI:10.1016/S0378-1127(00)00675-7]
21. Ranatunga, K., Keenan, R.J., Wullschleger, S.D., Post, W.M. & Tharp, M.L. 2008. Effects of harvest management practices on forest biomass and soil carbon in eucalypt forests in New South Wales, Australia: Simulations with the forest succession model LINKAGES. Forest Ecology and Management, 255(7): 2407-2415.
23. Raymond, P. & Bédard, S. 2017. The irregular shelterwood system as an alternative to clearcutting to achieve compositional and structural objectives in temperate mixedwood stands. Forest Ecology and Management, 398: 91-100. [DOI:10.1016/j.foreco.2017.04.042]
24. Reyes, G., Brown, S., Chapman, J. & Lugo, A.E. 1992. Wood densities of tropical tree species. USDA Forest Service, General Technical Report SO-88, Southern Forest Experiment Station, New Orleans, Louisiana, USA. 32p. [DOI:10.2737/SO-GTR-088]
25. Rezaei Sangdehi, S.M.M., Moslemi, S.M. & Tafazoli, M. 2017. Comparing the forest quantitative and qualitative characteristics following a period of forestry plan implementation (Case study: Watershed 65, Jojadeh zone of Farim Company, Mazandaran province). Iranian Journal of Forest and Poplar Research, 24(4): 723-713. [In Persian]
26. Trerise, B., Keeton, W.S., Sousa-Silva, R. & Searle, E.B. 2025. The irregular shelterwood silviculture system and managing for stand complexity from a North American perspective. Forest Ecology and Management, 585: 122667. [DOI:10.1016/j.foreco.2025.122667]
27. Vosoughian, A. & Shojaei Shimi, A. 2017. Structure and regeneration of forest trees in harvested and unharvested stands (Case study: Darabkola Forest, Sari). Iranian Journal of Natural Ecosystems, 7 (4): 69-82.
28. Zhou, L., Wang, S., Kindermann, G., Yu, G., Huang, M., Mickler, R., Kraxner, F., Shi, H. & Gong, Y. 2013. Carbon dynamics in woody biomass of forest ecosystem in China with forest management practices under future climate change and rising CO2 concentration. Chinese Geographical Science, 23(5): 519-536. https:/doi.org/10.1007/s11769-013-0622-9
Send email to the article author
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |
