4.7 Article

Effects of Long-Term Successive Rotations, Clear-Cutting and Stand Age of Prince Rupprecht's larch (Larix principis-rupprechtii Mayr) on Soil Quality

期刊

FORESTS
卷 10, 期 10, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/f10100932

关键词

soil quality; successive planting; generation; stand age; clear-cutting; Larix principis-rupprechtii Mayr

类别

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [31870387]
  2. China Scholarship Council

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A decline in soil quality is a major factor contributing to the degradation of forest ecological function. Vegetation plays a vital role in maintaining soil quality; however, the influence of plantation length on soil quality remains unclear. In this study, we collected soil samples in Northern China using a space-for-time substitution method. Soil were collected from control grassland; a clear-cutting site; 16-year-old (young, first, and second generation), 28-year-old (immature, first, and second generation), and 44-year-old (mature, first generation) Larix principis-rupprechtii Mayr stands in May, July, and September 2016. We measured soil physical and chemical properties, microbial communities, and enzymatic activities. We selected soil bulk density, non-capillary porosity, volume humidity, soil organic carbon and activity of polyphenol oxidase to calculate a soil quality index (SQI) for each site. Our data indicated that clear-cutting greatly decreased soil quality of Larix principis-rupprechtii forests but returning the harvesting residues to the forest floor could reduce the negative impact of clear-cutting on soil quality. The soil quality improved significantly by prolonging the cultivation cycle and it took about 39 years for the first-generation forest to restore soil quality to the level of the control plot. Our study confirms that SQI provides a comprehensive measurement of soil quality with the identification of a minimum data set. Comparing SQI with other soil quality indicators would help us to optimize the method for assessing soil quality.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据