Search

Copyright of Canadian Journal of Zoology is the property of Canadian Science Publishing and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The relationship between forest stand composition in southern interior British Columbia and fluorescent pseudomonad bacteria populations was investigated using seedling bioassays. The objectives of this study were to (i) compare the relative population sizes of fluorescent pseudomonads baited from soils in pure paper birch (Betula papyrifera Marsh.), pure Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii (Mirb.) Franco), and mixed stands of the two species and (ii) determine if fluorescent pseudomonads from these soils have inhibitory effects against the root pathogen Armillaria ostoyae (Romagn.) Herink in vitro. Soil from birch stands supported four times more pseudomonads on seedling baits than soil from Douglas-fir stands, with the mixed stands intermediate. Soil from young stands yielded twice as many rhizosphere pseudomonads as soil from mature stands. Pseudomonad population size was positively correlated with percent cover and density of birch, and negatively correlated with basal area of Douglas-fir, percent cover of Douglas-fir, and carbon/nitrogen ratio of the soil. Greater than 50% of the fluorescent isolates reduced radial growth of A. ostoyae by more than 20% and greater than 90% reduced biomass of the fungus in dual culture tests. Cell-free bacterial culture filtrates added to the growth medium also reduced growth of A. ostoyae. This study provides evidence that paper birch provides a more favorable environment for fluorescent pseudomonads than Douglas-fir and suggests a mechanism by which paper birch can positively influence the susceptibility of managed forest stands to Armillaria root disease. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Reports on the measured rates of decomposition at three sites representing the major mixedwood forest types of British Columbia: (i) boreal forests of white spruce (Picea glauca (Moench) Voss) and trembling aspen (Populus tremuloides Michx.), (ii) coastal forests of Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii (Mirb.) Franco) and red alder (Alnus rubra Bong.), and (iii) a wet interior forest of Douglas-fir, paper birch (Betula papyrifera Marsh.), and lodgepole pine (Pinus contorta Doug. ex Loud.). Mass loss of litter of each species (both pure and in combination with the other species) that was measured in forests of each species to determine (i) if broadleaf litter decomposed faster than needle litter, (ii) if litter decomposed faster in broadleaf or mixedwood forests than in coniferous forests, and (iii) if mixing with broadleaf hastened decomposition of needle litter; Broadleaf litters that decomposed faster than needles during the first year but, thereafter, decomposed more slowly; Litter that tended to decompose faster in the broadleaf forests than in the coniferous forests; No evidence to indicate that the addition of broadleaf litter hastened decomposition of needle litter; Results that indicate that the mixing of needle litter with broadleaf litter is unlikely to hasten decomposition in mixedwood forests of British Columbia.

In 1996 we initiated a study to evaluate several techniques for measuring light under broadleaf canopies. Hourly average photosynthetic photon flux density and percent transmittance were measured 1 m above the ground at four points in each of three canopy densities created by a spacing experiment in a 35-year-old paper birch (Betula papyrifera Marsh.) dominated stand located near Prince George, B.C. At each point, fisheye photographs were taken and LAI-2000 plant canopy analyzer (LAI-2000), spherical densiometer, and competition index (Lorimer'sindex) measurements were made. Percent transmittance measurements onan overcast day (1-h average), transmittance measured over periods of 3 h or longer on a clear day, LAI-2000 diffuse noninterceptance measurements, and gap light index determined from fisheye photographs were strongly correlated with growing season percent transmittance (r2>= 0.96) as was competition index (r2 = 0.928). Concave spherical densiometer measurements and midday percent transmittance measurements on clear days were also well correlated with measured percent transmittance (r2>= 0.89). Estimates of understory light by the LITE model were strongly correlated with growing season percent transmittance. Correlations improved with increasing length of the period simulated (r2 = 0.755 for a point measurement on a clear day; r2 = 0.936 for an entire sunny day;and, r2 = 0.953 for the entire growing season). However, this version of the model underestimated percent transmittance in these spaced birch stands by 34-90%. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Canadian Journal of Forest Research is the property of Canadian Science Publishing and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Canadian Journal of Forest Research is the property of Canadian Science Publishing and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Environmental Reviews is the property of Canadian Science Publishing and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Environmental Reviews is the property of Canadian Science Publishing and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Canadian Journal of Forest Research is the property of Canadian Science Publishing and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Canadian Journal of Forest Research is the property of Canadian Science Publishing and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)