Productivity of modal forest stands in Ukrainian Polissia depending on the compliance of the main tree species with the native forest type

Yurii Siruk, Iryna Siruk, Vasyl Turko
Received: 29.05.2025 Revised: 03.09.2025 Accepted: 24.09.2025
Retrieved from Vol. 28, No. 10, 2025 Pages: 54-66
Download article Read article

Abstract

The study aimed to assess the composition and mensurational characteristics of near-native and secondary forest stands, compare their mean annual increment with native references, and clarify natural productivity patterns across site conditions. The analysis was based on forest inventory data combined with geoinformation resources. Productivity was assessed by comparing mean increment values and ranking natural productivity scores. The average species composition of compositionally near-native modal stands differed from that of the reference native stands across most forestsite types. In poor and fairly poor site conditions, a higher share of silver birch (Betula pendula Roth) was observed; in fairly rich site conditions, higher proportions of birch (B. pendula) and European hornbeam (Carpinus betulus L.); and in rich site conditions, a suite of native hard- and soft-broadleaved species. Secondary stands showed the following patterns: in poor site conditions they were dominated by jack pine (Pinus banksiana Lamb.) and birch (B. pendula); in fairly poor and fairly rich site conditions by birch (B. pendula); and in rich site conditions by hornbeam (C. betulus), northern red oak (Quercus rubra L.), Scots pine (Pinus sylvestris L.), black alder (Alnus glutinosa (L.) Gaertn.), and birch (B. pendula). The mean increment of modal Scots pine stands exceeded native references by 17-58% in poor site conditions and by 2-48% in fairly poor site conditions, depending on the soil moisture regime, whereas in fairly rich site conditions, modal stands close in composition to native forests fell short by 19-37%, while in rich site conditions the increments were similar. In the most widespread site types in poor, fairly poor, and fairly rich site conditions, modal native stands were more productive than secondary ones; in rich site conditions, however, secondary stands prevailed by 13-16%. The productivity scores of modal stands differed substantially from those of the native reference scales: they were higher in poor and fairly poor site conditions but lower in rich site conditions. The highest natural productivity scores of secondary stands were recorded in fresh and moist rich site conditions and in fresh fairly poor site conditions. The obtained results provided a scientific basis for refining the scales of natural productivity and for typology-based planning of silvicultural measures

Keywords

forest site conditions; mean annual increment; tree species composition; secondary forest stand; native reference stands; productivity assessment scale

  1. Aldea, J., et al. (2021). Species stratification and weather conditions drive tree growth in Scots pine and Norway spruce mixed stands along Europe. Forest Ecology and Management, 481, article number 118697. doi: 10.1016/j. foreco.2021.118697.
  2. Aleksiiuk, I., Hrynyk, H., & Dyak, T. (2019). Application of the Lisovporiadnyk software for management of the forest fund of a forestry enterprise. In Advances in intelligent systems and computing IV (pp. 864-880). Cham: Springer. doi: 10.1007/978-3-030-33695-0_56.
  3. Anadon-Rosell, A., Scharnweber, T., von Arx, G., Peters, R.L., Smiljanićara, M., Weddell, S., & Wilmking, M. (2022). Growth and wood trait relationships of Alnus glutinosa in peatland forest stands with contrasting water regimes. Frontiers in Plant Science, 12, article number 788106. doi: 10.3389/fpls.2021.788106.
  4. Bogdan, S., Šporčić, M., Seletković, Z., & Ivanković, M. (2017). Biomass production of common alder (Alnus glutinosa (L.) Gaertn.) in pure plantations and mixed plantations with willow clones (Salix sp.) in Croatia. Croatian Journal of Forest Engineering, 30(2), 99-112.
  5. Cerný, J., Špulák, O., Kománek, M., Žižková, E., & Sýkora, P.  (2024). Sessile oak (Quercus petraea (Matt.) Liebl.) and its adaptation strategies in the context of global climate change: A review. Central European Forestry Journal, 70(2), 77-94. doi: 10.2478/forj-2024-0012.
  6. del Río, M., et al. (2022). Emerging stability of forest productivity by mixing two species buffers climate variability. Journal of Applied Ecology, 59(11), 2730-2741. doi: 10.1111/1365-2664.14267.
  7. Dukat, P., Ziemblińska, K., Räsänen, M., Vesala, T., Olejnik, J., & Urbaniak, M. (2023). Scots pine responses to drought investigated with eddy covariance and sap flow methods. European Journal of Forest Research, 142, 671-690. doi: 10.1007/s10342-023-01549-w.
  8. Hilmers, T., Mehtätalo, L., Bielak, K., Brazaitis, G., del Río, M., Ruiz-Peinado, R., Schmied, G., Uhl, E., & Pretzsch, H. (2024). Towards resource-efficient forests: Mixing species changes crown biomass allocation and improves growth efficiency. Plants, People, Planet, 6(2), 255-268. doi: 10.1002/ppp3.10562.
  9. Jansons, Ā., Ķēniņa, L., Jaunslaviete, I., & Bičkovskis, K. (2025). Trade-off between forest carbon sink in hemiboreal old-growth stands and wood-based solutions. European Journal of Forest Research, 144, 411-420. doi: 10.1007/s10342-025-01766-5.
  10. Kazimirović, M., Stajić, B., Petrović, N., Ljubičić, J., Košanin, O., Hanewinkel, M., & Sperlich, D. (2024). Dynamic height growth models for highly productive pedunculate oak (Quercus robur L.) stands: Explicit mapping of site index classification in Serbia. Annals of Forest Science, 81, article number 15. doi: 10.1186/s13595-02401231-0.
  11. Lavnyy, V.V., & Matusevych, O.B. (2022). Typological structure and productivity of spruce forests in the Ukrainian Carpathians. Proceedings of the Forestry Academy of Sciences of Ukraine, 24, 66-78. doi: 10.15421/412206.
  12. Lee, D., Siipilehto, J., Miina, J., Niemistö, P., Haapanen, M., Hynynen, J., & Huuskonen, S. (2024). Site index and stand characteristic models for silver birch plantations in southern and central Finland. Forest Ecology and Management, 563, article number 121998. doi: 10.1016/j.foreco.2024.121998.
  13. Linkevičius, E., Šilinskas, B., Beniušienė, L., Aleinikovas, M., & Kliučiūs, A. (2023). The growing dynamic of pure Scots pine stands using different thinning regimes in Lithuania. Forests, 14(8), article number 1610. doi: 10.3390/f14081610.
  14. Lukyanets, V., Rumiantsev, M., Tarnopilska, O., Kobets, O., Musienko, S., Obolonyk, I., Bondarenko, V., & Pozniakova, S. (2022). Distribution, productivity and natural regeneration of black alder (Alnus glutinosa (L.) Gaertn.) in Ukrainian Polissya. Folia Ecologica, 49(2), 137-147. doi: 10.2478/foecol-2022-0016.
  15. Martiník, A., Adamec, Z., Sendecký, M., & Krejza, J. (2024). Comparison of growth, structure and production in stands of naturally regenerated Betula pendula and Populus tremula. Journal of Forest Science, 70(2), 64-78. doi: 10.17221/107/2023-JFS.
  16. Martiník, A., Knott, R., Krejza, J., & Černý, J. (2018). Biomass production of Betula pendula stands regenerated in the region of allochthonous Picea abies dieback. Silva Fennica, 52(5), article number 9985. doi: 10.14214/ sf.9985.
  17. Mikalajūnas, M., Pretzsch, H., Mozgeris, G., Linkevičius, E., Augustaitienė, I., & Augustaitis, A. (2021). Scots pine’s capacity to adapt to climate change in hemi-boreal forests in relation to dominating tree increment and site condition. iForest – Biogeosciences and Forestry, 14(5), 473-482. doi: 10.3832/ifor3703-014.
  18. Musienko, S.I., Rumiantsev, M.N., Lukyanets, V.A., Tarnopilska, O.M., Bondarenko, V.V., & Yushchyk, V.S. (2021). Sondition and productivity of pine plantations in the Forest-steppe part of Kharkiv Region. Scientific Bulletin of UNFU, 31(6), 41-47. doi: 10.36930/40310605.
  19. Nicolescu, V.-N., et al. (2020). Ecology and management of northern red oak (Quercus rubra L. syn. Q. borealis F. Michx.) in Europe: A review. Forestry, 93(4), 481-494. doi: 10.1093/forestry/cpy032.
  20. Pretzsch, H., et al. (2023). Forest growth in Europe shows diverging large regional trends. Scientific Reports, 13, article number 15373. doi: 10.1038/s41598-023-41077-6.
  21. Sabatini, F.M., et al. (2019). Trade-offs between carbon stocks and biodiversity in European temperate forests. Global Change Biology, 25(2), 536-548. doi: 10.1111/gcb.14503.
  22. Snizhko, S., Didovets, I., & Bronstert, A. (2024). Ukraine’s water security under pressure: Climate change and wartime. Water Security, 23, article number 100182. doi: 10.1016/j.wasec.2024.100182.
  23. State Forest Resources Agency of Ukraine. (2025). Retrieved from https://forest.gov.ua/en/agentstvo.
  24. State Specialized Forest Enterprise Forests of Ukraine. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://e-forest.gov.ua/en/aboutsfe-forests-of-ukraine/.
  25. Štefančík, I., & Pástor, M. (2023). Comparison of growth of northern red oak (Quercus rubra L.) and durmast oak (Quercus petraea [Mattusch.] Liebl.) under similar growth conditions. Central European Forestry Journal, 69(3), 133-141. doi: 10.2478/forj-2023-0012.
  26. Terentiev, A., Bala, O., Lakyda, P., & Bondar, H. (2023). Current state and productivity of Scots pine modal stands of the Forest Steppe of Ukraine. Ukrainian Journal of Forest and Wood Science, 14(1), 105-123. doi: 10.31548/ forest/1.2023.105.
  27. Tkach, V.P., Tarnopilska, O.M., & Orlov, O.O. (2024). Types of forest formations of Ukraine in the system of European classifications. Kharkiv: LLC Typography Madrid.
  28. Tullus, T., Lutter, R., Randlane, T., Saag, A., Tullus, A., Rähn, E., Riit, T., Sopp, R., Siller, M.-L., Täll, K., Ots, K., & Kaivapalu, M. (2025). Do silver birch (Betula pendula) and hybrid aspen (Populus tremula × P. tremuloides) plantations on former agricultural land differ from the perspective of biodiversity? New Forests, 56, article number 27. doi: 10.1007/s11056-025-10095-9.
  29. Turkevych, I.V., Medvedev, L.A., Mokshanina, & I.M., Lebedev, E.V. (1973). Methodological guidelines for determining the potential productivity of forest lands and the degree of their effective use. Kharkiv: URIFFM.
  30. Uhl, E., Dieler, J., Pretzsch, H., Stimm, K., Heym, M., & Nagel, R-V. (2022). Long-term productivity of monospecific and mixed oak (Quercus robur L. and Q. petraea (Matt.) Liebl.) stands in Germany: Growth dynamics and the effect of stand structure. European Journal of Forest Research, 141(6), 1059-1074. doi: 10.1007/s10342-02201488-4.
  31. Ukrainian Research Institute of Forestry and Agroforestry. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://forestry.org.ua/.
  32. Ukrderzhlisproekt. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://lisproekt.gov.ua/.
  33. Varnagiryte-Kabašinskienė, I., Stakėnas, V., Mikšys, V., & Kabašinskas, A. (2015). Vertical position of dry mass and elemental concentrations in Pinus sylvestris canopy under different ash-nitrogen treatments. iForest – Biogeosciences and Forestry, 8(6), 838-845. doi: 10.3832/ifor1561-008.
  34. Vospernik, S., et al. (2024). Can mixing Quercus robur and Quercus petraea with Pinus sylvestris compensate for productivity losses due to climate change? Science of the Total Environment, 942, article number 173342. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2024.173342.
  35. Wang, T., Dong, L., & Liu, Z. (2024). Stand structure is more important for forest productivity stability than tree, understory plant and soil biota species diversity. Frontiers in Forests and Global Change, 7, article number 1354508. doi: 10.3389/ffgc.2024.1354508.
  36. Zhezhkun, A.M., Kubrakov, S., Porokhniach, I., Kovalenko, I., & Melnyk, T. (2023). Close-to-nature forestry measures in East Polissia region of Ukraine. South-East European Forestry, 14(1), 15-26. doi: 10.15177/seefor.23-04
Siruk, Yu., Siruk, I., & Turko, V. (2025). Productivity of modal forest stands in Ukrainian Polissia depending on the compliance of the main tree species with the native forest type. Scientific Horizons, 28(10), 54-66. https://doi.org/10.48077/scihor10.2025.54