Estimation of Biomass Increase and CUE at a Young Temperate Scots Pine Stand Concerning Drought Occurrence by Combining Eddy Covariance and Biometric Methods

Abstract

The accurate estimation of an increase in forest stand biomass has remained a challenge. Traditionally, in situ measurements are done by inventorying a number of trees and their biometric parameters such as diameter at the breast height (DBH) and height; sometimes these are complemented by carbon (C) content studies. Here we present the estimation of net primary productivity (NPP) over a two years period (2019–2020) at a 25-year-old Scots pine stand. Research was based on allometric equations made by direct biomass analysis (tree extraction) and carbon content estimations in individual components of sampled trees, combined with a series of stem diameter increments recorded by a network of band dendrometers. Site-specific allometric equations were obtained using two different approaches: using the whole tree biomass vs DBH (M1), and total dry biomass-derived as a sum of the results from individual tree components’ biomass vs DBH (M2). Moreover, equations for similar forest stands from the literature were used for comparison. Gross primary productivity (GPP) estimated from the eddy-covariance measurements allowed the calculation of carbon use efficiency (CUE = NPP/GPP). The two investigated years differed in terms of the sum and patterns of precipitation distribution, with a moderately dry year of 2019 that followed the extremely dry 2018, and the relatively average year of 2020. As expected, a higher increase in biomass was recorded in 2020 compared to 2019, as determined by both allometric equations based on in situ and literature data. For the former approach, annual NPP estimates reached ca. 2.0–2.1 t C ha−1 in 2019 and 2.6–2.7 t C ha−1 in 2020 depending on the “in situ equations” (M1-M2) used, while literature-derived equations for the same site resulted in NPP values ca. 20–30% lower. CUE was higher in 2020, which resulted from a higher NPP total than in 2019, with lower summer and spring GPP in 2020. However, the CUE values were lower than those reported in the literature for comparable temperate forest stands. A thorough analysis of the low CUE value would require a full interpretation of interrelated physiological responses to extreme conditions.