The Impact of Windstorm Disturbance on the Forest Structural Attributes in Oriental Beech-Hornbeam Mixed Stands of Hyrcanian Region

Document Type : Original Research

Authors
H. R. Ahamadi 1
M. Amiri 2
M. Mohammady 3
H. Ravanbakhsh 4
1 Master’s degree in Forestry, Faculty of Desertology, Semnan University, Semnan, Iran.
2 Faculty of Natural Resources, Semnan University, Semnan, Iran
3 Faculty of Natural Resources, Semnan University, Semnan, Iran.
4 Forest Research Division, Research Institute of Forests and Rangelands, Agricultural Research, Education and Extension Organization (AREEO), Tehran, Iran.
10.22034/ecopersia.11.3.227
Abstract
Aims: In this study, the response of individual trees and the stand structure to windstorm damage were investigated in a mixed broad-leaf forest stands located in Darabkola Forest, Sari, northern Iran. A field survey was conducted over an area of 2612 ha of the given stands.

Material & Methods: A full inventory was performed for all trees with diameter at breast height≥ 10cm and all damaged (i.e., snapped, snags, branch loss, broken trunk or uprooted) trees were identified within the study area. Tree height was measured using Laser Distance Meter for trees more than 10 m high and a Clinometer for all trees <10m. The percentage of trees damaged was the dependent variable; but, independent variables included number, mean height (m), total basal area (m2) and volume trees (m3). Independent t-test was performed to compare the mean of trees based on diameter classes. Also, the affection of height on susceptibility to windstorm effects was tested by comparing mean trees height within each class.

Findings: The number of the damaged trees varied with species, ranging from 0.04 % (2 individuals) in Tilia begonifolia Stev to 53.7 % (2709 individuals) in Fagus orientalis L. Among the damaged trees 5054 recorded, 2231 (44.20 %) had been snapped and 787 (15.6 %) uprooted, and 2028 (40.20 %) were snags. Among the species, Fagus orientalis L. (47.7 %), Alnus subcordata C. A. Mey. (19.7 %) and Carpinus betulus L. (18.8 %) were most susceptible to uprooting, whereas Populus caspica Bornm, Quercus castaneifolia C. A. Mey. and Ulmus glabra Huds. were the least susceptible to uprooting. The species differed significantly in their susceptibility to snapping. Trees ≥60cm dbh were more likely to be snapped (78 %) or snags (69 %), whereas trees <60 cm dbh were more presumably to be uprooted (50 %). Also, about one third (33 %) of total trees larger than 60 cm (D.B.H) have showed distinct effects and individual trees >20 m were more commonly uprooted. The number of snapped trees, snags and uprooted trees had a sharp increase in trees taller than 20m.

Conclusion: Our finding showed that Oriental beech and Common hornbeam to be species that were most susceptible to both being snapped and snagged, whereas Caucasian alder had the most uprooting damage among the other species. Overall, features like species, D.B.H, height and height to diameter ratio (H/D.B.H), were intensively related with the type and severity of windstorm damage. The findings showed that windstorms cause substantial structural effects in mixed stands of beech and hornbeam.

Keywords
Stand structure
Natural disturbance
Mixed forest

Subjects

1. Ulbrich U., Leckebusch G.C., Donat M.G. Windstorms, the most costly natural hazard in Europe, in: Boulter S., Palutikof J., Karoly D.J., Guitart D. (Eds.), Natural Disasters and Adaptation to Climate Change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. 2013. pp.109–120. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511845710.015
2. Frelich L.E. Forest dynamics and disturbance regimes: studies from temperate evergreen-deciduous forests. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. 2008. 280 p. https://www.cambridge.org/9780521650823
3. Schelhaas M.J., Nabuurs G.J., Schuck A. Natural disturbances in the European forests in the 19th and 20th centuries. Glob. Change Biol. 2003; 9 (11):1620–1633. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2486.2003.00684.x
4. Peterson C.J. Catastrophic wind damage to North American forests and the potential impact of climate change. Sci. Total Environ. 2000; 262, 287–311. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0048-9697(00)00529-5
5. Papaik M.J., Canham C.D., Latty E.F., Woods K.D. Effects of an introduced pathogen on resistance to natural disturbance: beech bark disease and windthrow. Can. J. For. Res. 2005; 35, 1832–1843. https://doi.org/10.1139/x05-116
6. Johnson E.A., Miyanishi K. Plant Disturbance Ecology. The Process and the Response. Academic Press, San Diego. 2007. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-088778-1.X5000-6
7. Fischer A., Marshall P., Camp A. Disturbances in deciduous temperate forest ecosystems of the northern hemisphere: Their effects on both recent and future forest development. Biodivers. Conserve. 2013; 22, 1863–1893. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-013-0525-1
8. Khodaverdi S., Amiri M., Kartoolinejad D., Mohammadi J. Characteristics of canopy gap in a broad-leaved mixed forest (Case study: District No. 2, Shast-Kalateh Forest, Golestan province). Iran. J. For. Pop. Res. 2018; 26(1): 24-35. https://ijfpr.areeo.ac.ir/article_116138.html
9. Brázdil R., Dobrovolný P., Štekl J., Kotyza O., Valášek H., Jež J. History of Weather and Climate in the Czech Lands VI: Strong Winds. Brno: Masaryk University 2004. 378 pp.
10. Brázdil R., Hostýnek J., Řezníčková L., Zahradníček P., Tolasz R., Dobrovolný P., Štěpánek P. The variability of maximum wind gusts in the Czech Republic between 1961 and 2014. Int. J. Climatol. 2017; 37, 1961–1978. https://doi.org/10.1002/joc.4827
11. Holmes J.D. Wind Loading of Structures, third edition. CRC Press, Boca Raton. 2015. https://doi.org/10.1201/b18029
12. Seidl R., Schelhaas M. J., Lexer M. J. Unraveling the drivers of intensifying forest disturbance regimes in Europe. Glob. Change Biol. 2011; 17, 2842–2852. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2486.2011.02452.x
13. Seidl R., Schelhaas M. J., Rammer W., Verkerk P. J. Increasing forest disturbances in Europe and their impact on carbon storage. Nat. Clim. Change. 2014; 4, 806–810. https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate2318
14. Hanewinkel M., Cullmann D., Schelhaas, M.J., Nabuurs J.N., Zimmermann N.E. Climate change may cause severe loss in the economic value of European forest land. Nat. Clim. Change. 2013; 3, 203–207. https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate1687
15. Pickett S.T.A., White P.S. The Ecology of Natural Disturbance and Patch Dynamics. Academic Press, Inc., Orlando. 1985. https://doi.org/10.1016/C2009-0-02952-3
16. Attiwill P.M. The disturbance of forest ecosystems: the ecological basis for conservative management. For. Ecol. Manage. 1994; 63:247–300. https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-1127(94)90114-7
17. McCarthy J. Gap dynamics of forest trees: A review with particular attention to boreal forests. Environment Rev. 2001; 9:1–59. https://doi.org/10.1139/a00-012
18. Mihok B., Gálhidy L., Kenderes K., Standovár T. Gap regeneration patterns in a semi-natural beech forest stand in Hungary. Acta Silv. Lign. Hung. 2007; 3, 31–45.
19. Amiri M., Rahmani R., Sagheb-Talebi Kh. 2015. Canopy gaps characteristics and structural dynamics in a natural unmanaged oriental beech (Fagus orientalis Lipsky) stand in the north of Iran. Caspian J. Environ. Sci. 2015; 13(3):259–274. https://cjes.guilan.ac.ir/?_action=articleInfo&article=1376
20. Schaetzl R.J., Johnson D.L., Burns S.F., Small T.W. Tree uprooting: review of terminology, process, and environmental implications. Can. J. For. Res. 1989; 19, 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1139/x89-001
21. Peterson C.J., Pickett S.T.A. Microsite and elevation influences on early forest regeneration after catastrophic wind throw. J. Vegetation Sci. 1990; 1, 657–662. https://doi.org/10.2307/3235572
22. Foster D.R., Boose E.R. Patterns of forest damage resulting from catastrophic wind in Central New England, USA. J. Ecol. 1992; 80, 79–98. https://doi.org/10.2307/2261065
23. Sefidi K; Marvi Mohajer M.R., Mosandel R., Copenheaver C.A. Canopy gaps and regeneration in old-growth Oriental beech (Fagus orientalis Lipsky) stands, northern Iran. For. Ecol. Manage. 2011; 262:1094–1099. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2011.06.008
24. Schütz J.P., Götz M., Schmid W., Mandallaz D. Vulnerability of spruce (Picea abies) and beech (Fagus sylvatica) forest stands to storms and consequences for silviculture. Eur. J. For. Res. 2006; 125, 291–302. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10342-006-0111-0
25. Woods K.D. Intermediate disturbance in a late‐successional hemlock‐northern hardwood forest. J. Ecol. 2004; 92:464-476. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0022-0477.2004.00881.x
26. Khodaverdi S., Amiri M., Kartoolinejad D., Mohammadi J. Canopy gaps characteristics of pure and mixed stands in the Hyrcanian forests of north Iran. Ann. Silvicultural Res. 2019; 43(2): 62-70. https://doi.org/10.12899/asr-1882
27. Vicena I. Jak hniloby působí na snížení odolnosti stromů proti polomům (The effect of wood rot on lower tree resistence to breakages). Lesnická práce. 1992; 71, 177–181.
28. Everham E.M., Brokaw N.V.L. Forest damage and recovery from catastrophic wind. Bot. Rev. 1996; 62:113–185. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02857920
29. Thom D., Seidl R. Natural disturbance impacts on ecosystem services and biodiversity in temperate and boreal forests. Biol. Rev. 2016; 91, 760–781. https://doi.org/10.1111/brv.12193
30. Lugo A.E. Visible and invisible effects of hurricanes on forest ecosystems: an international review. Austral Ecol. 2008; 33(4). 368-398. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1442-9993.2008.01894.x
31. Kooch Y., Hosseini S.M., Mohammadi J., Hojjati S.M. Effects of uprooting tree on herbaceous species diversity, woody species regeneration status and soil physical characteristics in a temperate mixed forest of Iran. J. Forestry Res. 2012; 23 (1). 81-86. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11676-012-0236-6
32. Mitchell S. J. Wind as a natural disturbance agent in forests: a synthesis. Forestry. 2013; 86, 147–157
33. Orman O; Dobrowolska D., Szwagrzykc J. Gap regeneration patterns in Carpathian old-growth mixed beech forests – Interactive effects of spruce bark beetle canopy disturbance and deer herbivory. For. Ecol. Manage. 2018; 430: 451–459. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2018.08.031
34. Ahmadi H.R. The effect of storm on the composition and structure of forest stands (A Case Study of a Neka Choob Area). M.Sc. thesis of forest sciences. Faculty of Forestry, Semnan University. 2018.
35. Zenner E.K., Peck J.E., Sagheb-Talebi Kh. Patchiness in old‑growth oriental beech forests across development stages at multiple neighborhood scales. European J. For. Res. 2019; 138. 739-752. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10342-019-01203-4
36. Torun P., Altunel A.O. Effects of environmental factors and forest management on landscape-scale forest storm damage in Turkey. Ann. For. Sci. 2020; 77, 39:1-13. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13595-020-00945-1
37. Mataji A; Vahedi A.A. Distribution attributes of natural canopy gaps in the Hyrcanian mixed-oriental beech forests. J. For. Sci. 2021; 67, (8): 367–375. DOI: 10.17221/150/2020-JFS
38. Wang Z., Yang H., Dong B., Zhou M., Ma L., Jia Zh., Duan J. Effects of canopy gap size on growth and spatial patterns of Chinese pine (Pinus tabulaeformis) regeneration. For. Ecol. Manage. 2017; 385: 46-56. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2016.11.022
39. Hale S.E. The effect of thinning intensity on the below-canopy light environment in a Sitka spruce plantation. For. Ecol. Manage. 2003. 179, 341–349. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-1127(02)00540-6
40. Schütz J.Ph. Opportunities and strategies of transforming regular forests to irregular forests. For. Ecol. Manage. 2001; 151:87–94. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2009.11.019
41. Taki H., Inoue T., Tanaka H., Makihara H., Sueyoshi M., Isono M., et al. Responses of community structure, diversity, and abundance of understory plants and insect assemblages to thinning in plantations. For. Ecol. Manage. 2010; 259, 607–613. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2009.11.019
42. Nakamura A., Morimoto Y., Mizutani Y.A. Adaptive management approach to increasing the diversity of a 30-year-old planted forest in an urban area of Japan. Lands Urban Plan. 2005; 70: 291−300. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2003.10.023
43. Dupuy J.M., Chazdon R.L. Interacting effects of canopy gap, understorey vegetation and leaf litter on tree seedling recruitment and composition in tropical secondary forests. For. Ecol. Manage. 2008; 255, 3716–3725. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2008.03.021
44. Sagheb-Talebi Kh., Sajedi T., Yazdian F. Forests of Iran. Research Institute of Forests and Rangelands, For. Res. division. Tech. 2004.
45. Sagheb-Talebi Kh., Sajedi T., Pourhashemi M. Forests of Iran. A treasure from the past, a hope for the future. Springer, Plant and Vegetation. 2014. https://doi10.1007/978-94-007-7371-4
46. Müller J., Sagheb-Talebi Kh., Thorn S. Protect Iran’s ancient forest from logging. Science. 2017. 355, 919–919. DOI: 10.1126/science.aam8810
47. Ghomi Avili A., Akbarinia M., Hossieni S.M., Talebian M.H., Dieter Knapp H. Effect of Environmental Factors on Natural Regeneration of Beech Stands in the Hyrcanian Forests (Case Study: Kojoor Forest, Namkhaneh District of Kheyroud Forests). ECOPERSIA 2020; 8(3). 133-138. http://ecopersia.modares.ac.ir/article-24-38478-en.html
48. Kooch Y., Rostayee F., Hosseini S.M. Soil Quality Indices in Pure and Mixed Forest Stands of Southern Caspian Region. ECOPERSIA 2015; 3(2) 987-1001. http://ecopersia.modares.ac.ir/article-24-7194-en.html
49. Anonymous. Forestry plan, Department of Natural Resources and Watershed management in Golestan Province. Forests, Range and Watershed Management Organization, Iran. 2008.
50. Kooch Y., Zoghi Z. Comparison of soil fertility of Acer insigne, Quercus castaneifolia, and Pinus brutia stands in the Hyrcanian forests of Iran. Chin. J. Appl. Environ Biol. 2014; 20 (5): 899-905.
51. Jafari M. Investigation and analysis of climate change factors in Caspian Zone forests for last fifty years. Iranian J. For. Pop. Res. 2008; 16 (2): 314-326. https://ijfpr.areeo.ac.ir/article_108098.html
52. Runkle J.R. Patterns of disturbance in some old-growth mesic forests of Eastern North-America. Ecology 1982; 63:1533–1546. https://doi.org/10.2307/1938878
53. Veblen T.T. Tree regeneration responses to gaps along a transandean gradient. Ecology. 1989; 70: 541–543. https://www.jstor.org/stable/1940197
54. Runkle J.R. Guidelines and sample protocol for sampling forest gaps. USDA, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station, GTR 283, Portland. 1992. https://doi.org/10.2737/PNW-GTR-283
55. Clinton B.D., Boring L.R., Swank W.T. Regeneration patterns in canopy gaps of mixed-oak forests of the southern Appalachian Highlands: influences of topographic position and evergreen understory. Am. Midl. Nat. 1994; 132, 208–319. https://www.jstor.org/stable/2426587
56. Najel T.A., Svoboda M., Ruugani T., Diaci J. Gap regeneration and replacement patterns in an old-growth Fagus–Abies forest of Bosnia–Herzegovina. Plant Ecol. 2010; 208:307–318. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11258-009-9707-z
57. Petritan A.M., Nuske R.S., Petritan I.C., Tudose N.C. Gap disturbance patterns in an old-growth sessile oak (Quercus petraea L.)-European beech (Fagus sylvatica L.) forest remnant in the Carpathian Mountains, Romania. For. Ecol. Manage. 2013; 308:67–75. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2013.07.045
58. Hart J.L., Grissino-Mayer H.D. Gap-scale disturbance processes in secondary hardwood stands on the Cumberland Plateau, Tennessee, USA. Plant Ecol. 2009; 201, 131–146. https://www.jstor.org/stable/40305627
59. Rentcha J. S., Schulerb T. M., Gregory J., Nowackic G. J., Beanea N. R., Fordd W. M. Canopy gap dynamics of second-growth red spruce-northern hardwood stands in West Virginia. For. Ecol. Manage. 2010; 260: 1921–1929. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2010.08.043
60. Marquis D.A. Controlling light in small clear cuttings. USDA Forest Service Research Paper, NE-39. 1965. 16 p. https://fs.usda.gov/research/treesearch/3856
61. Dey D. The ecological basis for oak silviculture in Eastern North America. In: McShea, W.J., Healy, W.M. (Eds.), Oak Forest Ecosystems. Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore. 2002; 60–79.
62. Eshagh Nimvari A., Ravanbakhsh H., Amiri M., Kianian M.K. Snow damage to tree species and its relationship with environmental variables in the Hyrcanian lowland Forests, Iran. Iranian J. For. Pop. Res. 2020; 27 (4). 485-497. https://ijfpr.areeo.ac.ir/article_121352.html.
63. Kilpeläinen A., Gregow H., Strandman H., Kellomaki S., Venäläinen A., Peltola H. Impacts of climate change on the risk of snow-induced forest damage in Finland. Clim. Change. 2010; 99:193–209. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-009-9655-6
64. Mataji A., Babaie-Kafaki S., Kiadaliri H. Spatial pattern of regeneration gaps in managed and unmanaged stands in natural Beech (Fagus orientalis) forests. Iranian J. For. Pop. Res. 2007; 16(1):149–157. https://ijfpr.areeo.ac.ir/article_108125.html?lang=en
65. Zeibig A., Diaci J., Wagner S. Gap disturbance patterns of a Fagus sylvatica virgin forest remnant in the mountain vegetation belt of Slovenia. For. Snow Landscape Res. 2005; 79:69–80. https://www.dora.lib4ri.ch/wsl/islandora/object/wsl:15450
66. Kenderes K., Mihok B., Standovár T. Thirty years of gap dynamics in a central European beech forest reserve. Forestry 2008; 81:111–123. https://doi.org/10.1093/forestry/cpn001
67. Orman O., Dobrowolska D. Gap dynamics in the Western Carpathian mixed beech old-growth forests affected by spruce bark beetle outbreak. Eur. J. Forest Res. 2017; 136(3):1–11. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10342-017-1054-3
68. Pedersen B.S., Howard J.L. The influence of canopy gaps on overstory tree and forest growth rates in a mature mixed-age, mixed-species forest. For. Ecol. Manage. 2004; 196: 351−366. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2004.03.031
69. Whitmore T.C. Canopy gaps and the two major groups of forest trees. Ecology 1989; 70:536–538. https://doi.org/10.2307/1940195
70. Yamamoto S., Nishimura N. Canopy gap formation and replacement pattern of major tree species among development stages of beech (Fagus crenata) stands, Japan. Plant Ecol. 1999; 140:167–176. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1009713002039
71. Amanzadeh B., Pourmajidian M.R., Shagheb-Talebi Kh., Hojati S.M. Impact of Canopy Gap Size on Plant Species Diversity and Composition in Mixed Stands (Case study: Reserve Area, District No. 3 Asalem Forests). For. Wood Prod. 2015; 68(2). 287–301. https://jfwp.ut.ac.ir/article_54829.html
72. Delfan Abazari B., Sagheb-Talebi Kh., Namiranian M. 2004- Regeneration gaps and quantitative characteristics of seedlings in different development stages of undisturbed beech stands (Kelardasht, Northern Iran). Iranian J. For. Pop. Res. 2004; 12(2). 302–306. https://ijfpr.areeo.ac.ir/article_109295.html?lang=en
73. Kucbel S., Jaloviar P., Saniga M., Vencurik J., Klimas V. Canopy gaps in an old-growth fir-beech forest remnant of Western Carpathians. European J. For. Res. 2010; 129:249–259. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10342-009-0322-2
74. Najel T.A., Svoboda M., Ruugani T., Diaci J. Gap regeneration and replacement patterns in an old-growth Fagus–Abies forest of Bosnia–Herzegovina. Plant Ecol. 2010. 208:307–318. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11258-009-9707-z
75. Firm D., Nagel T.A., Diaci J. Disturbance history and dynamics of an old-growth mixed species mountain forest in the Slovenian Alps. For. Ecol. Manage. 2009; 257:1893–1901. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2008.09.034
76. Kulakowski D., Seidl J., Holeksa T., Kuuluvainen T., Nagel T.A., Panayotov M., Svoboda M., Thorn S., Vacchiano G., Whitlock C., Wohlgemuth T., Bebi P. A walk on the wild side: Disturbance dynamics and the conservation and management of European mountain forest ecosystems. For. Ecol. Manage. 2017; 388 (15):120-131. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2016.07.037
77. Sagheb-Talebi Kh., Delfan- Abazari B., Namiranian M. Regeneration process in natural uneven-aged Caspian beech forests. Swiss For. J. 2005. 156 (12):477–480. https://doi.org/10.3188/szf.2005.0477
78. Yamamoto S.I. Forest gap dynamics and tree regeneration. J. For. Res. 2000. 5:223–229. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02767114
ECOPERSIA
Volume 11, Issue 3 - Serial Number 45
September 2023
Pages 227-240