Table 3 Silvicultural and ecological characteristics of the analyzed 295 study sites
From: Success factors for high-quality oak forest (Quercus robur, Q. petraea) regeneration
Factors | Number of study sites / values | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Â | Yes | No | Â | Â |
Forest development goal reached (expert opinion) | 163 | 132 | Â | Â |
Tillage and mounding | 104 | 191 | Â | Â |
Young growth tending/pre-commercial thinning | 199 | 96 | Â | Â |
Fencing | 245 | 50 | Â | Â |
Presence of canopy trees | 118 | 177 | Â | Â |
Preceding land-use type | Oak stand | Not oak stand | Â | Â |
| Â | 134 | 161 | Â | Â |
Landscape context | Low mountain range | Lowland | Â | Â |
| Â | 122 | 173 | Â | Â |
Regeneration method | Natural regeneration | Planting | Natural regeneration and planting | Seeding |
| Â | 11 | 257 | 22 | 5 |
Water supply status | Dry soils | Fresh soils | Periodically moist/wet soils | Moist/wet soils |
| Â | 59 | 121 | 72 | 43 |
Nutrient supply status | Eutrophic soils | Mesotrophic soils | Oligotrophic soils | Â |
| Â | 45 | 230 | 20 | Â |
| Â | Minimum | Mean | Maximum | Â |
Stand size (ha) | 0.1 | 1.8 | 17 | Â |
Stand age (years) | 2 | 12.7 | 20 | Â |
Canopy layer cover (%) | 0 | 9.5 | 85 | Â |
Cover of competitive weeds (%) | 0 | 1.1 | 100 | Â |
Cover of competitive grass (%) | 0 | 19.0 | 100 | Â |
Cover of competitive bracken (%) | 0 | 1.8 | 100 | Â |
Cover of competitive shrubs (%) | 0 | 12.4 | 100 | Â |