The DOI matches its Crossref record; 72 of the 72 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Canopy space filling and tree crown morphology in mixed-species stands compared with monocultures
Open accessAbstract
Mixed-species forest stands are well explored in their favourable ecological, economical, and socio-economical functions and services compared with pure stands, but still poorly understood in their structure and functioning. Canopy structure and tree morphology affect the environmental conditions within the stand, the tree growth, and by this most forest functions and services. Here, I review how canopy structure and crown morphology in mixed stands can differ from pure stands and how this depends on the selection of tree species and interactions between them. The focus is on the macrostructure of canopy and crowns derived from the trees’ positions, their convex crown hulls, and their space filling with branches. In mixed canopies the sum of the crown projection area, but not the ground coverage by crowns, mostly exceeds pure stands due to multiple crown overlaps. The interspecific differences in crown shape and allometric scaling cause a ‘selection effect’ when complementary species are combined. In interspecific environment furthermore ‘true mixing effects’ like intraspecific shifts in size, shape, and inner space filling of crowns may occur. The much denser and more plastic canopy space filling in mixed stands may increase light interception, stand density, productivity, and growth resilience to disturbances. I discuss the relevance of interspecific interactions for forest management, model building, and theory development and draw perspectives of further research into stand canopy and crown structure.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Gotelli, N. J., & Colwell, R. K. (2001) · Ecology Letters · doi:10.1046/j.1461-0248.2001.00230.x · Cited by 6,420
A General Model for the Origin of Allometric Scaling Laws in Biology
West, G. B., Brown, J. H., & Enquist, B. J. (1997) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.276.5309.122 · Cited by 5,016
Indicators for Monitoring Biodiversity: A Hierarchical Approach
NOSS, R. F. (1990) · Conservation Biology · doi:10.1111/j.1523-1739.1990.tb00309.x · Cited by 3,151
Larcher, W. (1980) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-642-96545-6 · Cited by 3,038
Larcher, W. (2003) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-662-05214-3 · Cited by 1,719
Vandermeer, J. H. (1989) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511623523 · Cited by 1,697
Higher levels of multiple ecosystem services are found in forests with more tree species
Gamfeldt, L., Snäll, T., Bagchi, R., Jonsson, M., Gustafsson, L., Kjellander, P., Ruiz-Jaen, M. C., Fröberg, M., Stendahl, J., Philipson, C. D., et al. (2013) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/ncomms2328 · Cited by 1,477
Asymmetry, Developmental Stability, and Evolution
Møller, A. P., & Swaddle, J. P. (1997) · doi:10.1093/oso/9780198548959.001.0001 · Cited by 1,272
Mechanisms determining the degree of size asymmetry in competition among plants
Schwinning, S., & Weiner, J. (1998) · Oecologia · doi:10.1007/s004420050397 · Cited by 1,059
PAILLET, Y., BERGÈS, L., HJÄLTÉN, J., ÓDOR, P., AVON, C., BERNHARDT‐RÖMERMANN, M., BIJLSMA, R., DE BRUYN, L., FUHR, M., GRANDIN, U., et al. (2010) · Conservation Biology · doi:10.1111/j.1523-1739.2009.01399.x · Cited by 960
Cited by
Mayer, M., Prescott, C. E., Abaker, W. E. A., Augusto, L., Cécillon, L., Ferreira, G. W. D., James, J., Jandl, R., Katzensteiner, K., Laclau, J.-P., et al. (2020) · Forest Ecology and Management · doi:10.1016/j.foreco.2020.118127 · Cited by 748
A Review of Processes Behind Diversity—Productivity Relationships in Forests
Forrester, D. I., & Bauhus, J. (2016) · Current Forestry Reports · doi:10.1007/s40725-016-0031-2 · Cited by 641
Liu, C. L. C., Kuchma, O., & Krutovsky, K. V. (2018) · Global Ecology and Conservation · doi:10.1016/j.gecco.2018.e00419 · Cited by 503
Spatial complementarity in tree crowns explains overyielding in species mixtures
Williams, L. J., Paquette, A., Cavender-Bares, J., Messier, C., & Reich, P. B. (2017) · Nature Ecology & Evolution · doi:10.1038/s41559-016-0063 · Cited by 459
Jucker, T., Bouriaud, O., Avacaritei, D., & Coomes, D. A. (2014) · Ecology Letters · doi:10.1111/ele.12382 · Cited by 320
Metadata
- Authors
- Pretzsch, H.
- Venue
- Forest Ecology and Management
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2014-09
- Volume
- 327
- Pages
- 251-264
- ISSN
- 0378-1127 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2056871211
- Cited by
- 613
- References
- 72
- FWCI
- 34.21
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Canopy space filling and tree crown morphology in mixed-species stands compared with monocultures. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.foreco.2014.04.027
- The paper
- Pretzsch, H. (2014). Canopy space filling and tree crown morphology in mixed-species stands compared with monocultures. Forest Ecology and Management. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2014.04.027
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
