A. nepalensis.
Our estimates of stands biomass across the basal area gradient
demonstrated that tree biomass increased with the basal area of stands.
Meanwhile, our results revealed present biomass estimation (10.02-284.48
Mg ha-1) was on the range recorded by earlier work on
the oak forest in central Himalaya. Tree biomass carbon storage of AMOM,
AMR and AMOO stands (228.05, 237.5, 284.48 Mg ha-1respectively) were same as other central Himalayan oak forests, while
tree biomass carbon storage of AER, APDF and ALR stands (10.02, 148.28,
134.96 Mg ha-1 respectively) were much lower than the
central Himalaya oak forest(Rawat& Singh 1988; Adhikari et al., 1995;
Sharma et al., 2011). We found AMOM, AMR, and AMOO stand had, on
average, higher biomass carbon than other stands, supporting our
hypothesis that suggests A. nepalensis abundance is a key driver
of biomass storage in the central Himalaya forest. However, despite that
studies stands may fellow multiple succession pathways, our study
suggests that succession trajectory may have a strong effect on total
biomass carbon storage (Gough et al., 2016). In the present study, the
aboveground biomass storage/belowground biomass storage ratio increased
with a stand basal area this indicates that below ground carbon storage
positively correlated to the basal area. Understory vegetation (shrubs,
herbs) biomass carbon not increased with a basal area of stands but
litter biomass carbon increased with stand basal area. The understory
vegetation (shrubs and herbs) biomass carbon ranged from 2.11-3.26 Mg
ha-1, which is the same as reported for the central
Himalayan oak forest (Rawat& Singh 1988; Adhikari et al., 1995). Litter
biomass carbon ranged from 0.32-3.56 Mg ha-1 were
close to reported values for oak forest litter biomass in the central
Himalayan forest (Rawat & Singh 1988; Adhikari et al., 1995; Joshi &
Garkoti 2020).