Have a personal or library account? Click to login

Using FORDRY model to forecast transformation of Norway spruce (Picea abies (L.) Karst.) stands in Nadsyansky Regional Landscape Park (Ukrainian Carpathians)

Open Access
|Sep 2021

References

  1. Bałazy, R. 2020. Forest dieback process in the Polish mountains in the past and nowadays – literature review on selected topics. Folia Forestalia Polonica, Series A – Forestry, 62 (3), 184–198. DOI: 10.2478/ ffp-2020-0018
  2. Botkin, D.B. 1993. Forest Dynamics: An Ecological Model. Oxford University Press, Oxford, New York, USA.
  3. Brzeziecki, B. 1999.Tree stand ecological model: rules of construction, parameterization, examples of use (in Polish). Ph.D. thesis, SGGW, Warszawa.
  4. Bugmann, H. 1997. An efficient method for estimating the steady-state species composition of forest gap models. Canadian Journal of Forest Research, 27, 551–556.
  5. Bugmann, H. 2001. A review of forest gap models, Climatic Change, 51, 259–305.
  6. Debrynuk, Yu.M. 2011. Dieback of the spruce forests: causes and consequences (in Ukrainian). Scientific Bulletin of UNFU, 21 (16), 32–38.
  7. Fabrika, M., Vaculčiak, T. 2009. Modelling natural disturbances in tree growth model SIBYLA. In: Bioclimatology and natural hazards (eds. K. Strelcova et al.). Springer Science, 155–165.
  8. Frazer, G.W., Canham, C.D., Lertzman, K.P. 2000. Gap Light Analyzer (GLA), Version 2.0: Image processing software to analyze true-colour, hemispherical canopy photographs. Bulletin Ecological Society of America, 81, 191–197.
  9. Golubets, M.A. 1978. Spruce forests in the Ukrainian Carpathians (in Russian). Naukovaja Dumka, Moscow.
  10. Hanewinkel, M., Pretzsch, H. 2000. Modelling the conversion from even-aged to uneven-aged stands of spruce (Picea abies L . K arst.) with a distance-dependent growth simulator. Forest Ecology and Management, 134 (1/3), 55–70.
  11. IPCC. 2007. Climate Change 2007: Synthesis report. Contribution of Working Groups I, II and III to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (eds. Core Writing Team, R.K. Pachauri, A. Reisinger). Geneva, Switzerland.
  12. Kozak, I., Perzanowski, K., Kucharzyk, S., Przybylska, K., Zięba, S., Frąk, R., Bujoczek, L. 2014. Perspectives for the application of computer models in forest dynamics forecasting in Bieszczadzki National Park (Poland). Ekológia (Bratislava), 33 (1), 16–25. DOI: 10.2478/eko-2014-0003
  13. Lavnyy, V., Schnitzler, G. 2014. Conversion felling in the secondary spruce stands experiences in Germany (in Ukrainian). Proceedings of the Forestry Academy of Sciences of Ukraine, 12, 73–78.
  14. Parpan, V.I. et al. 2014. Forest management peculiarities in secondary spruce (Picea abies (L.) H. Karst.) stands of the Ukrainian Carpathians (in Ukrainian). Proceedings of the Forestry Academy of Sciences of Ukraine, 12, 178–185.
  15. Prescott, C.E. 2002. The influence of the forest canopy on nutrient cycling. Tree Physiology, 22, 1193–1200.
  16. Pretzsch, H., Block, J., Dieler, J. 2010. Comparison between the productivity of pure and mixed stands of spruce and European beech along an ecological gradient. Annals of Forest Science, 67, 712–723.
  17. Schütz, J.P., Gotz ,M., Schmid, W., Mandallaz, D. 2006. Vulnerability of spruce (Picea abies) and beech (Fagus sylvatica) forest stands to storms and consequences for silviculture. European Journal of Forest Research, 125, 291–302.
  18. Sharma, R.P., Vacek, Z., Vacek, S., Jansa, V., Kučera, M. 2017. Modelling individual tree diameter growth for Norway spruce in the Czech Republic using a generalized algebraic difference approach. Journal of Forest Science, 63, 227–238.
  19. Shparyk, Y.S. 2014. Form diversity and the health condition of spruce (Picea abies (L.) Karst.) in the main forest types of the Ukrainian Carpathians (in Ukrainian). Forestry and Forest Melioration, 125, 87–96.
  20. Shparyk, Y.S. 2017. Economic results of spruce forests’ decline in the Ukrainian Carpathians (in Ukrainian). Proceedings of the Forestry Academy of Sciences of Ukraine, 15, 129–139. DOI: 10.15421/411717
  21. Shparyk, Y.S. 2019. Ecological results of spruce forests’ decline in main forest types of the Ukrainian Carpathians (in Ukrainian). Proceedings of the Forestry Academy of Sciences of Ukraine, 18, 145–153. DOI: 10.15421/411915
  22. Šmudla, R. 2004. Utilisation of mathematical models and growth simulators for creating forest management plans and planning the tending felling. Journal of Forest Science, 50, (8), 374–381.
  23. Stoiko, S. 1999. Ukrainian Part of the Trilateral East Carpathians Biosphere Reserve. In: The East Carpathians Biosphere Reserve. Poland/Slovakia/ Ukraine (eds. A. Breymeyer et al.). Polish MAB Committee, Warsaw, Poland, 48–61.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/ffp-2021-0019 | Journal eISSN: 2199-5907 | Journal ISSN: 0071-6677
Language: English
Page range: 183 - 194
Submitted on: Nov 25, 2020
Accepted on: Apr 27, 2021
Published on: Sep 19, 2021
Published by: Forest Research Institute
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services
Publication frequency: 4 times per year

© 2021 Ihor Kozak, Taras Parpan, Yuriy Shparyk, Myroslava Mylenka, Iryna Kozak-Balaniuk, published by Forest Research Institute
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 License.