Carbon pool dynamics after variable retention harvesting in Nothofagus pumilio forests of Tierra del Fuego

Ecological Processes

Table 2 Comparisons for the main stand characteristics used for modelling of the carbon content: (i) simple ANOVAs considering primary unmanaged forests (PF) and stands under variable retention harvesting (VRH), and (ii) multiple ANOVAs considering different retention types in harvested stands (AG: aggregated retention; DR: dispersed retention) and years after harvesting (YAH) as main factors

	Treatment	Level	DH	SQ	BA	MBA	SBA	TOBV	DTOBV	CWD	SBD	OM	FIR	WBS	LUP	DUP
(i)	Forest types	PF	21.34	3.27	54.71b	49.29b	< 0.01a	567.65b	56.15b	276.12a	0.53	20.92	6.78	2.77	0.51a	0.21a
		VRH	22.34	2.93	23.24a	21.54a	0.82b	258.62a	28.84a	496.89b	0.50	25.27	8.99	3.67	1.58b	1.14b
		F	2.24	2.40	141.2	86.71	10.66	63.26	8.17	14.03	0.14	1.80	3.14	3.16	42.51	15.39
		p	0.143	0.130	<0.001	< 0.001	0.002	< 0.001	0.007	< 0.001	0.715	0.188	0.084	0.083	< 0.001	< 0.001
(ii)	A: Retention types	AG	22.53	2.93	50.40b	45.60b	< 0.01a	556.20b	39.54	285.18a	0.47	25.07	7.65	3.12	0.71a	0.13a
		DR	22.26	2.94	12.53a	12.05a	1.15b	141.17a	24.62	580.45b	0.51	25.34	9.52	3.89	1.92b	1.54b
		F	0.17	< 0.01	137.53	67.39	12.87	125.19	1.67	16.24	0.72	0.01	1.50	1.46	32.70	35.80
		p	0.683	0.951	< 0.001	< 0.001	0.001	< 0.001	0.206	< 0.001	0.403	0.935	0.230	0.237	< 0.001	< 0.001
	B: YAH	2	22.71	2.84	34.63	34.63	< 0.01	398.89	21.51ab	434.13	0.70b	18.41a	11.39	4.65	1.19	0.82ab
		4	23.84	2.50	32.19	30.00	0.15	371.14	28.30ab	256.73	0.29a	30.61ab	11.19	4.57	1.59	0.54a
		9	21.39	3.22	28.06	16.81	1.08	288.24	66.26b	440.31	0.21a	41.99b	5.37	2.20	1.56	1.89b
		12	21.66	3.13	31.88	31.13	0.44	343.93	34.59ab	507.07	0.69b	15.90a	7.38	3.02	1.06	0.23a
		18	22.38	2.97	30.56	31.56	1.20	341.23	9.73a	525.82	0.56b	19.10a	7.60	3.10	1.16	0.70a
		F	1.78	1.55	0.44	2.30	2.30	0.98	2.71	1.68	18.40	9.20	2.34	2.30	1.07	5.76
		p	0.159	0.213	0.777	0.082	0.082	0.432	0.049	0.180	< 0.001	< 0.001	0.078	0.081	0.388	0.002
	Interactions AxB	F	0.64	0.47	0.34	0.45	2.31	0.12	2.11	1.54	0.88	0.77	1.34	1.36	3.29	4.60
	Interactions AxB	p	0.640	0.754	0.849	0.775	0.081	0.975	0.104	0.215	0.487	0.554	0.279	0.270	0.024	0.005

DH: dominant height (m), SQ: site quality, BA: basal area of living trees (m² ha⁻¹), MBA: mature trees basal area (m² ha⁻¹), SBA saplings basal area (m² ha⁻¹), TOBV: total over bark volume of living trees (m³ ha⁻¹), DTOBV: dead tree total over bark volume (m³ ha⁻¹), CWD: coarse woody debris (m³ ha⁻¹), SBD: soil bulk density (t m⁻³), OM: soil organic matter (%), FIR: fine roots (kg m⁻³ soil), WBS: wood and bark in soil (kg m⁻³ soil), LUP: live understory plants (dry weight t ha⁻¹), and DUP: dead understory plants (dry weight t ha⁻¹)
F: Fisher test; p: probability. Different letters show significant differences in means using Tukey tests at p < 0.05