Abstract
There is a lack of experimental studies comparing the forest production of mixed tree species stands and monocultures. As a case study, in 1994 an experiment was established in an afforestation landscape in southern Sweden with 66 plots: 18 planted with single tree species (including most native Swedish trees, plus Populus and Larix hybrids) and 48 with various non-replicated mixtures. Fifteen years after planting, stand growth did not differ significantly between the mixtures and the monocultures. However, the monocultures did exhibit a higher variation in growth levels relative to the moderate but comparatively consistent growth levels exhibited by the mixtures; particularly those comprised of more than two species. A specific analysis of mixtures containing either the tree species Picea abies or Quercus robur and their corresponding monocultures demonstrated the importance of the tree species admixed as a determinant of production outcomes early in the rotation. In the case of P. abies, tree species mixtures tended to reduce production, whereas in the case of Q. robur, mixtures tended to increase production. In addition no consistent differences in the mean height and mean diameter growth of P. abies and Q. robur between mixtures and monocultures were detected. A major conclusion is that adding more than two species did not increase stand volume growth.
Highlights
Mixed forests have several widely recognized advantages over monocultures, including greater resilience (Bolte et al 2009, Hantsch et al 2013, Hulvey et al 2013), biodiversity (Felton et al 2010)and aesthetic appeal
The standard deviation was considerably lower in mixed stands (52.8 m3 ha-1) than in monocultures (85.2 m3 ha-1), as standing volumes in monocultures, mixtures with two species and mixtures with >2 species ranged from 9 to 279 m3, 11 to 280 m3 ha-1, and 53 to 161 m3 ha-1, respectively
Production was very high in mixed hybrid aspen-Norway spruce and hybrid larch-Norway spruce stands, and very low in mixed wild cherry-European ash and European ash-wild maple stands
Summary
Mixed forests have several widely recognized advantages over monocultures, including greater resilience (Bolte et al 2009, Hantsch et al 2013, Hulvey et al 2013), biodiversity (Felton et al 2010)and aesthetic appeal. Mixed forests have several widely recognized advantages over monocultures, including greater resilience (Bolte et al 2009, Hantsch et al 2013, Hulvey et al 2013), biodiversity (Felton et al 2010). Few experimental studies have compared production rates in mixed stands and monocultures. Pretzsch et al (2010, 2013) found that Norway spruce and oak species had complementary relationships with European beech in mixed forest experimental plots spread across a wide nutrient-richness gradient in Central Europe, as mean productivity was ca. 20% higher in the mixed stands than in the monocultures. Few experimental studies have compared production rates in mixed stands and monocultures. Pretzsch et al (2010, 2013) found that Norway spruce and oak species had complementary relationships with European beech in mixed forest experimental plots spread across a wide nutrient-richness gradient in Central Europe, as mean productivity was ca. 20% higher in the mixed stands than in the monocultures.
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
