STM Journals Peer-reviewed research from Consortium e-Learning Network

Research & Reviews : Journal of Ecology

Litterfall Dynamics in different Forest Types of Kumaun Himalaya

  1. Richa Sharma
  2. Smita Chaudhry
  3. Neeraj Kumar Sharma

Abstract

Litterfall and forest floor data was collected seasonally from 11 different forest types including degraded forests and 3 plantations in Kumaun Himalaya. Litterfall in different forest types varied from 1.25 t/ha for Degraded sal forest to 6.97 t/ha for High altitude oak forest. Among plantations poplar plantation showed highest litter fall (7.24 t ha-1). Most of the forest types were observed with maximum litterfall during summer season. Temperate Conifer forest was observed with maximum litterfall during rainy season. Among plantations, eucalyptus plantation exhibited maximum litterfall during summer, whereas teak and poplar plantations were recorded with maximum litterfall during winter season. Among different forest types forest floor litter ranged from 2.17 t/ha (for degraded sal forest) to 24.99 t/ha (for pine mixed broadleaf forest). The seasonal pattern of forest floor data exhibited by most of the forest types was: Rainy>summer>winter. Present study on litterfall dynamics constitutes an important parameter for estimating net primary production, carbon uptake and carbon flux in forest area.Keywords: Sal forest, Oak forest, Net Primary Production, Forest Floor, PlantationCite this ArticleRicha Sharma, Smita Chaudhry, Neeraj Kumar Sharma. Litterfall Dynamics in different Forest Types of Kumaun Himalaya. Research & Reviews: Journal of Ecology. 2020; 9(1): 23–30p.

Keywords

References (18)

  1. Fu, C., Yang, W., Tan, B., Xu, Z., Zhang, Y., Yang, J., Ni, X. and Wu, F., 2017. Seasonal Dynamics of Litterfall in a sub - alpine spruce -fir forest on the Eastern Tibetan Plateau: Allometric scaling relationships based on one year of observations. Forests, 8(9), p.314.
  2. Neumann, M., Ukonmaanaho, L., Johnson, J., Benham, S., Vesterdal, L., Novotný, R., Verstraeten, A., Lundin, L., Thimonier, A., Michopoulos, P. and Hasenauer, H., 2018. Quantifying carbon and nutrient input from litterfall in European fore sts using field observations and modeling. Global Biogeochemical Cycles, 32(5), pp.784-798.
  3. Pitman R., A. Bastrup-Birk, B. Nathalie et al. Sampling and Analysis of Litterfall. In book: Manual on methods and criteria for harmonized sampling, assessment, monitoring and analysis of the effects of air pollution on forests. Chapter: 13, Publisher: United Nations Economic Commission for Europe. pp.2-16,2010
  4. Krishna, M.P. and Mohan, M., 2017. Litter decomposition in forest ecosystems: a review. Energy, Ecology and Environment, 2(4), pp.236-249.
  5. Pandey, U. ; Singh, J. S. (1981) A quantitative study of the forest floor, litter fall and nutrient return in an oak -conifer forest in Himalaya. I. Composition and dynamics of forest floor Oecologia Generalis, 2 (1). pp. 49-61.
  6. Chaturvedi O.P. Biomass structure, productivity and nutrient cycling in Pinus 6.61 6.54 1.25 0 6.27 5.76 2.3 0 5.865 1.71 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 SL DSL P DP LAO Total Annual Litterfall (t/ha) Forest Type SL MD DSL P PMB DP LAO DLAO Litterfall Dynamics in different Forest Types of Kumaun Himalaya Sharma et al. RRJoE (2020) 23–30 © STM Journals 2020. All Rights Reserved Page 30 roxburghii forest. Ph.D. Thesis. Kumaun University, Nainital. 1983.
  7. Mehra, M.S., Pathak, P.C. and Singh, J.S., 1985. Nutrient movement in litter fall and precipitation com ponents for Central Himalayan forests. Annals of Botany, 55(2), pp.153-170.
  8. Rawat, Y.S. and Singh, J.S., 1989. Forest floor biomass, litter fall and nutrient return in Central Himalayan oak forests. Vegetatio, 82(2), pp.113-125.
  9. Rawat L. Forest floor dynam ics, litterfall, litter decomposition and nutrient release in a Quercus semecarpifolia Smith. Forest of Kuman Himalaya. Ph.D. Thesis. Kumaun University, Nainital. 1990, pp.49-52
  10. Lodhiyal, L.S., Singh, R.P. and Singh, S.P., 1995. Structure and function of a n age series of poplar plantations in central Himalaya: I Dry matter dynamics. Annals of Botany, 76(2), pp.191-199.
  11. Lodhiyal, N., Lodhiyal, L.S. and Pangtey, Y.P.S., 2002. Structure and function of shisham forests in central Himalaya, India: dry matter dyn amics. Annals of Botany, 89(1), pp.41-54.
  12. Champion H.G, Seth S.K. A revised survey of the forest types of India. Government of India Publication. Delhi, Manager of Publications, e-book,1968
  13. Sharma, R., Chaudhry, S. and Kudrat, M., 2012. Vegetation types an d their relationship with different topographic variables in the Kumaun Himalayan region. International Journal of Ecology & Development, 23(3), pp.60-79.
  14. Jenny, H., Gessel, S.P. and Bingham, F.T., 1949. Comparative study of decomposition rates of organic matter in temperate and tropical regions. Soil science, 68(6), pp.419-432.
  15. Olson, J.S., 1963. Energy storage and the balance of producers and decomposers in ecological systems. Ecology, 44(2), pp.322-331.
  16. Rout, S.K. and Gupta, S.R., 1990. Forest Floor, Lit terfall and Nutrient Return in Subtropical Forest Ecosystems of Siwaliks in Northern India II. Litterfall Pattern and Nutrient Turnover Rates. Flora, 184(6), pp.405-421.
  17. Mbaekwe, E.I., Mackenzie J.A. Mbaekwe, E.I. and Mackenzie, J.A., 2008. The use of a best-fit allometric model to estimate aboveground biomass accumulation and distribution in an age series of teak (Tectona grandis Lf) plantations at Gambari Forest Reserve, Oyo State, Nigeria. Tropical Ecology, 49(2), p.259-270.
  18. Purwanto, R.H. and Oohata, S. , 2002. Estimation of biomass and net primary production in a planted teak forest in Madiun, East Java, Indonesia. Forest Research, Kyoto, 74, pp.59-68. Cite this Article Richa Sharma , Smita Chaudhry, Neeraj Kumar Sharma . Litterfall Dynamics in different Forest Types of Kumaun Himalaya. Research & Reviews: Journal of Ecology. 2020; 9(1): 23–30p.
Support