4.7 Article

Trees increase soil organic carbon and nutrient availability in temperate agroforestry systems

期刊

AGRICULTURE ECOSYSTEMS & ENVIRONMENT
卷 247, 期 -, 页码 98-111

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.agee.2017.06.018

关键词

Alley cropping; Soil organic carbon; Soil fertility; Temperate agroforestry; Poplar

资金

  1. Flanders Innovation AMP
  2. Entrepreneurship (VLAIO), an agency of the Flemish Government [135068]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Agroforestry systems (AFS) have a large potential to deliver a wide range of ecosystem services (ES). In field and crop management, changes to factors such as regulatory ES delivery are rarely taken into account, in part due to the paucity of detailed quantification of how trees affect biophysical field characteristics. This is especially true for arable systems in temperate climates. We have therefore assessed the influence of rows of trees of varying size on the prevailing soil characteristics in arable AFS. Spatial variability of soil organic carbon, acidity and nutrient status (N, P, K, Ca, Mg and Na) of the plough layer were analysed on a set of 17 arable agroforestry fields comprising 6 young ( <5 years) alley cropping fields and 11 fields bordered by a row of trees of moderate to older age (15-47 years) in Belgium. Significantly higher soil organic carbon and soil nutrient concentrations of N, P, K, Mg and Na were observed in the vicinity of trees in field boundaries, most likely resulting from the input of tree litter and nutrient-enriched throughfall water (for K and Na). Observed increases were strongly related to the distance from the tree row, resulting in a gradual change in soil conditions up to at least 30 m into the field. No significant effects of distance from the tree rows on soil characteristics were found in the young alley cropping fields. These results highlight the potential of middle-aged to mature tree rows to increase soil organic carbon stocks and nutrient availability for the agricultural crop in AFS.

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