Abstract
Pinus pinea stands have been identified as one of the target species for agroforestry systems in Europe. Its fruit yield is of importance to the local development, especially in the Mediterranean basin, due to its highly nutritional kernels and its economic value. The objectives of this study were to analyze the relation between pine nut and kernel weight and its efficiencies in relation to cone and tree traits for different stand structures. The statistical analysis was carried out with correlation, multiple correlation analysis, hurdle-gamma regression, principal component and cluster analysis, with a dataset of about 3300 cones collected in four plots and 3 years. The results indicate that pine nut and kernel and its efficiencies depend on stand structure, year and tree characteristics. The principal component analysis and the cluster analysis enabled the identification of four groups of trees related to the pine nut and kernel efficiencies. The higher efficiencies per tree are attained in stands managed for fruit production, increasing with the decrease of the density.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Adhikari B, Lodhiyal N, Lodhiyal LS (2019) Assessment of crop yield, productivity and carbon sequestration in agroforestry systems in Central Himalaya, India. Agrofor Syst 2:281–296. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10457-019-00388-2
Agrimi M, Ciancio O (1994) Le pin pignon (Pinus pinea L.). Silva Mediterranea, Comité des questions forestières méditerranéennes, Larnaca, Chipre
Aryal DR, Gómez-González RR, Hernández-Nuriasmú R, Morales-Ruiz DE (2019) Carbon stocks and tree diversity in scattered tree silvopastoral systems in Chiapas, Mexico. Agrofor Syst 93:213–227. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10457-018-0310-y
Baguskas SA, Still CJ, Fischer DT et al (2016) Coastal fog during summer drought improves the water status of sapling trees more than adult trees in a California pine forest. Oecologia 181:137–148
Bilir N, Prescher F, Lindgren D, Kroon J (2008) Variation in cone and seed characters in clonal seed orchards of Pinus sylvestris. New For 36:187–199. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11056-008-9092-9
Boutheina A, El Aouni MH, Balandier P (2013) Influence of stand and tree attributes and silviculture on cone and seed productions in forests of Pinus pinea L. in northern Tunisia. In: Mutke S, Piqué M, Calama R (eds) Mediterranean stone pine for agroforestry (Options Méditerranéennes: Série A. Séminaires Méditerranéens; n. 105). CIHEAM, FAO, INIA, IRTA, CESEFOR, CTFC, Zaragoza, pp 9–14
Bueis T, Turrión MB, Bravo F et al (2018) Factors determining enzyme activities in soils under Pinus halepensis and Pinus sylvestris plantations in Spain: a basis for establishing sustainable forest management strategies. Ann For Sci 75:34. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13595-018-0720-z
Calama R, Montero G (2007) Cone and seed production from stone pine (Pinus pinea L.) stands in Central Range (Spain). Eur J For Res 126:23–35. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10342-005-0100-8
Calama R, Gordo FJ, Mutke S, Montero G (2008) An empirical ecological-type model for predicting stone pine (Pinus pinea L.) cone production in the Northern Plateau (Spain). For Ecol Manag 255:660–673. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2007.09.079
Calama R, Mutke S, Tomé J et al (2011) Modelling spatial and temporal variability in a zero-inflated variable: the case of stone pine (Pinus pinea L.) cone production. Ecol Model 222:606–618. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2010.09.020
Calama R, Puértolas J, Madrigal G, Pardos M (2013) Modeling the environmental response of leaf net photosynthesis in Pinus pinea L. natural regeneration. Ecol Model 251:9–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2012.11.029
Calama R, Fortin M, Pardos M, Manso R (2017) Modelling spatiotemporal dynamics of Pinus pinea cone infestation by Dioryctria mendacella. For Ecol Manag 389:136–148. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2016.12.015
Cañellas I, Cañadas N, Bachiller A, Montero G (2000) Caracterização química de los piñones de Pinus pinea L. In: Para el sur y centro de España In Actas 1 er Simposio del Pino Piñonero Valladolid. pp 221–226
Castro-García S, Blanco-Roldán GL, Gil-Ribes JA (2012) Vibrational and operational parameters in mechanical cone harvesting of stone pine (Pinus pinea L.). Biosyst Eng 112:352–358. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biosystemseng.2012.05.007
Costa R, Evaristo I, Batista D et al (2008) Condução de povoamentos de Pinheiro manso e características nutricionais do pinhão. Instituto Nacional dos Recursos Biológicos, I.P. INRB, I.P., Olhão
Cubbage F, Balmelli G, Bussoni A et al (2012) Comparing silvopastoral systems and prospects in eight regions of the world. Agrofor Syst 86:303–314. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10457-012-9482-z
De-Dios-García J, Pardos M, Calama R (2015) Interannual variability in competitive effects in mixed and monospecific forests of Mediterranean stone pine. For Ecol Manag 358:230–239. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2015.09.014
del Campo AD, Navarro Cerrillo RM, Hermoso J, Ibáñez AJ (2007) Relationships between site and stock quality in Pinus halepensis Mill. reforestation on semiarid landscapes in eastern Spain. Ann For Sci 64:719–731. https://doi.org/10.1051/forest:2007052
den Herder M, Moreno G, Mosquera-Losada RM et al (2017) Current extent and stratification of agroforestry in the European Union. Agric Ecosyst Environ 241:121–132. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2017.03.005
Eichhorn MP, Paris P, Herzog F et al (2006) Silvoarable systems in Europe—past, present and future prospects. Agrofor Syst 67:29–50. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10457-005-1111-7
Eugenio M, Lloret F (2006) Effects of repeated burning on Mediterranean communities of the northeastern Iberian Peninsula. J Veg Sci 17:755–764. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1654-1103.2006.tb02499.x
Evaristo I, Tenreiro R, Costa R (2008) Characterisation of biometric parameters and fatty acids content of Pinus pinea L. pine nuts of Portuguese populations. Silva Lusit 16:1–19
Evaristo I, Batista D, Correia I et al (2010) Chemical profiling of Portuguese Pinus pinea L. nuts. J Sci Food Agric 90:1041–1049. https://doi.org/10.1002/jsfa.3914
Ford MM, Zamora DS, Current D et al (2019) Impact of managed woodland grazing on forage quantity, quality and livestock performance: the potential for silvopasture in Central Minnesota, USA. Agrofor Syst 93:67–79. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10457-017-0098-1
Ganatsas P, Thanasis G (2010) Pinus halepensis invasion in Pinus pinea habitat in Strofylia forest (Site of NATURA 2000 network), southern Greece. J Nat Conserv 18:106–117. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jnc.2009.04.006
Ganatsas P, Tsakaldimi M, Thanos C (2008) Seed and cone diversity and seed germination of Pinus pinea in Strofylia Site of the Natura 2000 Network. Biodivers Conserv 17:2427–2439. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-008-9390-8
Gonçalves AC, Pommerening A (2012) Spatial dynamics of cone production in Mediterranean climates: a case study of Pinus pinea L. in Portugal. For Ecol Manag 266:83–93. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2011.11.007
Gonçalves AC, Dias AB, Afonso A et al (2016) Mechanical versus manual harvest of Pinus pinea cones. Biosyst Eng 143:50–60. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biosystemseng.2016.01.004
Gonçalves AC, Afonso A, Pereira DG, Pinheiro A (2017) Influence of umbrella pine (Pinus pinea L.) stand type and tree characteristics on cone production. Agrofor Syst 91:1019–1030. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10457-016-9975-2
Goubitz S, Werger MJA, Shmida A, Ne’eman G (2002) Cone abortion in Pinus halepensis: the role of pollen quantity, tree size and cone location. Oikos 97:125–133. https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0706.2002.970113.x
Haymes KL, Fox GA (2012) Variation among individuals in cone production in Pinus palustris (Pinaceae). Am J Bot 99:640–645. https://doi.org/10.3732/ajb.1100339
Johnson RA, Wichern DW (2007) Applied multivariate statistical analysis, 6th edn. Pearson Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle River
Jose S (2009) Agroforestry for ecosystem services and environmental benefits: an overview. Agrofor Syst 76:1–10. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10457-009-9229-7
Jose S, Gillespie AR, Pallardy SG (2004) Interspecific interactions in temperate agroforestry. Agrofor Syst 61:237–255. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:AGFO.0000029002.85273.9b
Jose S, Walter D, Kumar BM (2019) Ecological considerations in sustainable silvopasture design and management. Agrofor Syst 93:317–331. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10457-016-0065-2
Liu Y, Li Y, Song J et al (2018) Geometric morphometric analyses of leaf shapes in two sympatric Chinese oaks: Quercus dentata Thunberg and Quercus aliena Blume (Fagaceae). Ann For Sci 75:90. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13595-018-0770-2
López-Santiago JG, Casanova-Lugo F, Villanueva-López G et al (2019) Carbon storage in a silvopastoral system compared to that in a deciduous dry forest in Michoacán, Mexico. Agrofor Syst 93:199–211. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10457-018-0259-x
Manso R, Pukkala T, Pardos M et al (2014) Modelling Pinus pinea forest management to attain natural regeneration under present and future climatic scenarios. Can J For Res 44:250–262. https://doi.org/10.1139/cjfr-2013-0179
Mayoral C, Pardos M, Sánchez-González M et al (2016) Ecological implications of different water use strategies in three coexisting mediterranean tree species. For Ecol Manag 382:76–87. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2016.10.002
Miah MG, Islam MM, Rahman MA et al (2018) Transformation of jackfruit (Artocarpus heterophyllus Lam.) orchard into multistory agroforestry increases system productivity. Agrofor Syst 92:1687–1697. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10457-017-0118-1
Montero GG, Martinez F, Alía R et al (2004) El Pino piñonero (Pinus pinea L.) en Andalucía: ecología, distribución y selvicultura. Consejeria de médio Ambiente. Junta de Andalucia, Seville
Mutke S, Gordo J, Gil L (2005a) Variability of Mediterranean stone pine cone production: yield loss as response to climate change. Agric For Meteorol 132:263–272. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agrformet.2005.08.002
Mutke S, Sievänen R, Nikinmaa E et al (2005b) Crown architecture of grafted stone pine (Pinus pinea L.): shoot growth and bud differentiation. Trees 19:15–25
Mutke S, Calama R, González-Martínez SC et al (2012) Mediterranean stone pine: botany and horticulture. Hortic Rev 39:153–201
Nasri N, Triki S (2007) Les protéines de réserve du pin pignon (Pinus pinea L.). C R Biol 330:402–409
Nergiz C, Dönmez İ (2004) Chemical composition and nutritive value of Pinus pinea L. seeds. Food Chem 86:365–368. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2003.09.009
Nerlich K, Graeff-Hönninger S, Claupein W (2013) Agroforestry in Europe: a review of the disappearance of traditional systems and development of modern agroforestry practices, with emphasis on experiences in Germany. Agrofor Syst 87:475–492. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10457-012-9560-2
Noland TL, Parker WC, Morneault AE (2006) Natural variation in seed characteristics of Eastern White Pine (Pinus strobus L.). New For 32:87–103. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11056-005-4169-1
Orefice J, Smith RG, Carroll J et al (2019) Forage productivity and profitability in newly-established open pasture, silvopasture, and thinned forest production systems. Agrofor Syst 93:51–65. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10457-016-0052-7
Ortiz O, Ojeda G, Espelta JM, Alcañiz JM (2012) Improving substrate fertility to enhance growth and reproductive ability of a Pinus halepensis Mill. afforestation in a restored limestone quarry. New For 43:365–381. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11056-011-9286-4
Owens JN, Fernando D (2007) Pollination and seed production in western white pine. Can J For Res 37:260–275. https://doi.org/10.1139/x06-220
Owens JN, Kittirat T, Mahalovich MF (2008) Whitebark pine (Pinus albicaulis Engelm.) seed production in natural stands. For Ecol Manag 255:803–809. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2007.09.067
Pang K, Van Sambeek JW, Navarrete-Tindall NE et al (2019a) Responses of legumes and grasses to non-, moderate, and dense shade in Missouri, USA. II. Forage yield and its species-level plasticity. Agrofor Syst 93:25–38. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10457-017-0068-7
Pang K, Van Sambeek JW, Navarrete-Tindall NE et al (2019b) Responses of legumes and grasses to non-, moderate, and dense shade in Missouri, USA. I. Forage yield and its species-level plasticity. Agrofor Syst 93:11–24. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10457-017-0067-8
Pantera A, Burgess PJ, Losada RM et al (2018) Agroforestry for high value tree systems in Europe. Agrofor Syst 92:945–959. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10457-017-0181-7
Pardos M, Calama R, Climent J (2009) Difference in cuticular transpiration and sclerophylly in juvenile and adult pine needles relates to the species-specific rates of development. Trees 23:501–508. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00468-008-0296-6
Parker WC, Noland TL, Morneault AE (2013) Comparative mast seed production in unmanaged and shelterwood white pine (Pinus strobus L.) stands in central Ontario. New For 44:613–628. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11056-013-9366-8
Pasalodos-Tato M, Pukkala T, Calama R et al (2016) Optimal management of Pinus pinea stands when cone and timber production are considered. Eur J For Res 135:607–619
R Core Team (2016) R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna
Rajora OP, Mosseler A, Major JE (2002) Mating system and reproductive fitness traits of eastern white pine (Pinus strobus) in large, central versus small, isolated, marginal populations. Can J Bot 80:1173–1184. https://doi.org/10.1139/b02-105
Redmond MD, Weisberg PJ, Cobb NS et al (2016) A robust method to determine historical annual cone production among slow-growing conifers. For Ecol Manag 368:1–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2016.02.028
Reisner Y, de Filippi R, Herzog F, Palma J (2007) Target regions for silvoarable agroforestry in Europe. Ecol Eng 29:401–418. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoleng.2006.09.020
Rodrigues A, Silva G, Casquilho M et al (2014) Linear mixed modelling of cone production for Stone Pine in Portugal. Silva Lusit 22:1–27
Saraiva I (1997) O pinhão. Litexa Editora, Lda., Lisboa
Sheskin DJ (2007) Handbook of parametric and nonparametric statistical procedures. Chapman & Hall, Boca Raton
Sirois L (2000) Spatiotemporal variation in black spruce cone and seed crops along a boreal forest - tree line transect. Can J For Res 30:900–909. https://doi.org/10.1139/x00-015
SNIRH (2007) Sistema Nacional de Informação de Recursos Hidrológicos. In: Agência Port. do Ambient. Gov. Port. Ministério do Ambient. Ordenam. do Territ. e Energ. http://snirh.pt/. Accessed 15 Jul 2019
Taye ZM, Martínez-Peña F, Bonet JA et al (2016) Meteorological conditions and site characteristics driving edible mushroom production in Pinus pinaster forests of Central Spain. Fungal Ecol 23:30–41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.funeco.2016.05.008
Turner MG, Turner DM, Romme WH, Tinker DB (2007) Cone production in young post-fire Pinus contorta stands in Greater Yellowstone (USA). For Ecol Manag 242:119–126. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2006.12.032
Ugese FD, Baiyeri PK, Mbah BN (2010) Agroecological variation in the fruits and nuts of shea butter tree (Vitellaria paradoxa C.F. Gaertn.) in Nigeria. Agrofor Syst 79:201–211. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10457-009-9261-7
Wright SP (1992) Adjusted p-values for simultaneous inference. Biometrics 48:1005–1013
Zlotin RI, Parmenter RR (2008) Patterns of mast production in pinyon and juniper woodlands along a precipitation gradient in central New Mexico (Sevilleta National Wildlife Refuge). J Arid Environ 72:1562–1572. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaridenv.2008.02.021
Zuur AF, Ieno EN (2016) Beginner’s guide to zero-inflated models with R. Highland Statistics Limited, Newburgh
Acknowledgements
The authors are thankful to all members of the Pinus pinea project team, to Companhia Agrícola do Monte Novo, Comonte S.A., Sociedade de Agricultura de Grupo Bicha and Filhos and to the Autoridade Florestal Nacional where trials were settled, to the team that carried out the laboratory work. The work was financed by PROGRAMA AGRO 200 (Project AGRO/200/2001: ‘‘Colheita mecânica da pinha (Pinus pinea L.)’’). This work is funded by National Funds through FCT - Foundation for Science and Technology under the Project UIDB/05183/2020 (MED) and UID/MAT/04674/2019 (CIMA). The authors acknowledge two anonymous reviewers for their comments.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Publisher's note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Afonso, A., Gonçalves, A.C. & Pereira, D.G. Pinus pinea (L.) nut and kernel productivity in relation to cone, tree and stand characteristics. Agroforest Syst 94, 2065–2079 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10457-020-00523-4
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10457-020-00523-4