Small Woodland Owners' Group

Growth factors...

Topics that don't easily fit anywhere else!

Postby Kentish Man » Tue Jan 12, 2010 3:53 pm

Many factors are clearly important in tree growth - climate, weather, light, soil, pests, etc, but I'm wondering particularly about the order of importance of some of the factors, particularly in the realm of coppice wood.


Which is more important in determining how fast a tree will mature from scratch - soil or light? I know they are both important, but which is more important? For example will a tree in good quality soil, but poor light grow better than a tree in poor quality soil, but good light? Let's just say for argument's sake the tree is a sweet chestnut and they are planted at the same time from the same stock in the two scenarios and all other aspects are the same (weather, precipitation, etc).


Kentish Man
 
Posts: 78
Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2009 4:52 pm

Postby jillybean » Tue Jan 12, 2010 4:44 pm

light.


jillybean
 
Posts: 229
Joined: Fri Apr 24, 2009 6:35 pm

Postby tracy » Tue Jan 12, 2010 5:51 pm

Light!


tracy
 
Posts: 1313
Joined: Wed Feb 06, 2008 6:30 pm

Postby Kentish Man » Tue Jan 12, 2010 6:20 pm

Light?!



Thanks!


Kentish Man
 
Posts: 78
Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2009 4:52 pm

Postby DaveTaz » Tue Jan 12, 2010 7:17 pm

Can you really separate the two - if growing from scratch?

If the soil is inadequate it won't grow strong enough roots and is therefore more likely to perish.

Light is more significant once the tree has an established root structure - think photosynthesis!


DaveTaz
 
Posts: 96
Joined: Fri Jul 11, 2008 10:54 am

Postby Kentish Man » Tue Jan 12, 2010 7:32 pm

I'm not even going to mention airplants (OK, OK, they are not trees, I know!), but I've not heard of a plant yet that doesn't require some form of light...


Perhaps you are right DaveTaz - one without the other is impossible to judge, but once established, light is the more important.


Kentish Man
 
Posts: 78
Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2009 4:52 pm

Postby DaveTaz » Tue Jan 12, 2010 8:09 pm

How would things work out if you had your two sweet chestnut as described and one was put in complete darkness and the other had it's soil removed, which would last longest?


The soil is there to provide nutrients and minerals and the all important water and air combination, although some species have adapted to life in extreme conditions


DaveTaz
 
Posts: 96
Joined: Fri Jul 11, 2008 10:54 am

Postby Kentish Man » Tue Jan 12, 2010 8:44 pm

That is doubtlessly true taken to extremes, but we diverge somewhat from my intial fact finding mission, so perhaps I should rephrase my question slightly:



'Are poorer quality soils with brighter light levels more productive when growing trees such as sweet chestnut, than richer soils with poorer light intensities (given all other aspects of the environment, make-up, etc, are the same)?'.


Kentish Man
 
Posts: 78
Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2009 4:52 pm

Postby jillybean » Tue Jan 12, 2010 8:59 pm

yes. Light. most woodland is on poor soil, good soils were used for arable. its wet or poor or rocky and there are trees that thrive in those conditions.


jillybean
 
Posts: 229
Joined: Fri Apr 24, 2009 6:35 pm

Postby wood troll » Tue Jan 12, 2010 9:03 pm

Maybe another rephrase of the question....

If a tree had good light and poor soil it would be standing alone. If it had good soil and poor light it would be overshadowed and in competition with other trees. Bit of a chicken and egg one there Kentish Man!

wood troll


wood troll
 
Posts: 92
Joined: Fri Aug 07, 2009 12:00 pm

Next

Return to General

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests