Long-term effects of plant spacing on the growth and morphometry of <i>Bertholletia excelsa</i>

OLIVEIRA, Rafael Gonçalves de; SOUZA, Alex Soares de; SANTOS, Victor Alexandre Hardt Ferreira dos; LIMA, Roberval Monteiro Bezerra de; FERREIRA, Marciel José

doi:10.1590/1809-4392202003611

Acessibilidade / Reportar erro

Brasil

Español English

sumário « anterior atual seguinte »

Sumário

Agronomy and Forestry • Acta Amaz. 51 (3) • Jul-Sep 2021 • https://doi.org/10.1590/1809-4392202003611 copy

Long-term effects of plant spacing on the growth and morphometry of Bertholletia excelsa

Efeitos de longo prazo do espaçamento de plantio no crescimento e morfometria de Bertholletia excelsa

Authorship SCIMAGO INSTITUTIONS RANKINGS

ABSTRACT

Plant spacing is a potential driver of tree form and yield in forest plantations. However, its effects on the productivity of tree plantations in the Amazon are still little known. This study examined the effects of six spacing regimes (3 x 4, 4 x 4, 4 x 5, 5 x 5, 5 x 6, and 6 x 6 m) on the growth and morphometry of a 20-year-old plantation of Bertholletia excelsa. We observed high, spacing-independent survival (> 70%). For timber production purposes, intermediate and two large spacing regimes tended to higher values of yield components, mainly diameter, biomass, and volume, although some did not differ significantly from the smallest spacing. One of the intermediate spacings (5 x 5 m) tended to higher commercial height. Tree crowns tended to be wider and longer in the larger spacings, which indicates the potential of these regimes for fruit production. Tree crowns exceeded the vital growth space in all spacing regimes, which suggests the need for thinning before the age of 20 years in all spacings to reduce intraspecific competition and increase yield. We estimated that a density of 84 remaining trees per hectare would be necessary to reach an average diameter of 40 cm at the age of 20 years. Thus, B. excelsa had high survival in the tested range of spacing regimes, while the intermediate and the largest spacing regimes led to better tree growth and morphometry.

KEYWORDS:
Brazil-nut tree; silviculture; spacing; growth; productive plantation

Spacing	Trees per plot	Useful trees per plot	Total trees	Total useful trees
3 x 4 m	80	48	160	96
4 x 4 m	64	36	128	72
4 x 5 m	48	24	96	48
5 x 5 m	36	16	72	32
5 x 6 m	30	12	60	24
6 x 6 m	25	9	50	18
TOTAL	283	145	566	290

Variable	Model	Equation	R²_adj	S_y.x	AIC
Volume	Husch	$V = {0.0002}^{n s} + {D B H}^{{2.3514}^{*}}$	0.89	0.13	40.23
	Kopezky-Gehrardt	$V = {- 0.0614}^{n s} + {0.0009}^{*} {D B H}^{2}$	0.90	0.13	39.01
	Hohenadl-Krenm	$V = {0.0461}^{n s} {- 0.0110}^{n s} D B H + {0.0011}^{*} {D B H}^{2}$	0.90	0.13	37.95
	Dissescu-Meyer	$V = {- 0.0067}^{n s} D B H + {0.0010}^{*} {D B H}^{2}$	0.90	0.13	39.79
	Spurr	$V = {0.0019}^{n s} + {0.00004}^{*} {D B H}^{2} H T$	0.94	0.10	59.85
	Schumacher-Hall	$V = {0.00002}^{n s} + {D B H}^{{1.8010}^{}} {H T}^{{1.4410}^{}}$	0.94	0.10	60.57
Aboveground Biomass	Berkhout-Husch	$B I O = {0.3164}^{n s} + {D B H}^{{2.2332}^{*}}$	0.91	102.97	439.78
	Kopezky-Gehrardt	$B I O = {- 53.4102}^{n s} + \emptyset_{1} {D B H}^{{0.7683}^{*}}$	0.92	100.02	438.73
	Hohenadl-Krenm	$B I O = {- 33.9723}^{n s} {- 1.9816}^{n s} D B H + {0.8108}^{*} {D B H}^{2}$	0.91	101.40	440.68
	Schumacher-Hall	$B I O = {0.3893}^{} + {D B H}^{{2.2841}^{}} {H T}^{{- 0.1430}^{n s}}$	0.91	101.81	439.89
	Spurr	$B I O = {42.1438}^{n s} + {0.0411}^{*} {D B H}^{2} H C$	0.78	162.63	473.74
Stem Biomass	Berkhout-Husch	$B I O = {0.3164}^{n s} + {D B H}^{{2.2332}^{*}}$	0.92	71.24	413.27
	Kopezky-Gehrardt	$B F U = {- 31.3634}^{n s} + {0.5780}^{*} {D B H}^{2}$	0.93	69.06	412.06
	Hohenadl-Krenm	$B F U = {- 42.0158}^{n s} + {1.0859}^{n s} D B H + {0.5547}^{*} {D B H}^{2}$	0.93	70.03	414.03
	Schumacher-Hall	$B F U = {0.3519}^{n s} + {D B H}^{{2.1757}^{*}} {H T}^{{- 0.0646}^{n s}}$	0.92	71.90	414.85
	Spurr	$B F U = {35.6730}^{n s} + {0.0315}^{*} {D B H}^{2} H C$	0.82	110.54	445.93
Branch Biomass	Berkhout-Husch	$B F U = {0.0305}^{n s} + {D B H}^{{2.4218}^{*}}$	0.69	42.43	375.95
	Kopezky-Gehrardt	$B F U = {- 17.9814}^{n s} + {0.1513}^{*} {D B H}^{2}$	0.71	41.47	315.34
	Hohenadl-Krenm	$B F U = {- 1.3051}^{n s} {- 1.7000}^{n s} D B H + {0.1877}^{*} {D B H}^{2}$	0.70	41.94	377.12
	Schumacher-Hall	$B F U = {0.0463}^{n s} + {D B H}^{{2.5649}^{*}} {H T}^{{- 0.3417}^{n s}}$	0.70	41.26	374.86
	Spurr	$B F U = {5.5453}^{n s} + {0.0076}^{*} {D B H}^{2} H C$	0.53	53.01	393.03
	Schumacher-Hall (2)	$B F U = {0.0021}^{n s} + {D B H}^{{1.5250}^{}} {D C}^{{2.6220}^{}}$	0.83	31.28	354.92
	Spurr (2)	$B F U = {- 8.1845}^{n s} + {0.0159}^{*} {D B H}^{2} D C$	0.80	34.57	362.25
Leaf Biomass	Berkhout-Husch	$B G A = {0.0017}^{n s} + {D B H}^{2.8621}$	0.74	9.91	271.27
	Kopezky-Gehrardt	$B G A = {- 4.0653}^{n s} + {0.0391}^{*} {D B H}^{2}$	0.73	10.25	274.75
	Hohenadl-Krenm	$B G A = {9.3485}^{n s} {- 1.3675}^{n s} D B H + {0.0684}^{*} {D B H}^{2}$	0.74	10.06	274.29
	Schumacher-Hall	$B G A = {0.0029}^{n s} + {D B H}^{{2.9380}^{*}} {H T}^{{- 0.2942}^{n s}}$	0.74	9.81	277.80
	Spurr	$B G A = {0.9255}^{n s} + {0.0021}^{*} {D B H}^{2} H C$	0.61	12.29	287.78
	Schumacher-Hall (2)	$B G A = {0.0002}^{n s} + {D B H}^{{2.3736}^{}} {D C}^{{1.7744}^{}}$	0.83	7.88	255.66
	Spurr (2)	$B G A = {0.9255}^{n s} + {0.0021}^{*} {D B H}^{2} H C$	0.82	8.33	259.80

Instituto Nacional de Pesquisas da Amazônia Av. André Araujo, 2936 Aleixo, 69060-001 Manaus AM Brasil, Tel.: +55 92 3643-3030, Fax: +55 92 643-3223 - Manaus - AM - Brazil
E-mail: acta@inpa.gov.br

Acompanhe os números deste periódico no seu leitor de RSS

[1] *Corresponding author: mjf.ufam@gmail.com