4.1 Article

Soil fertility evolution and landscape dynamics in a Mediterranean area: a case study in the Sant Llorenc Natural Park (Barcelona, NE Spain)

期刊

AREA
卷 41, 期 2, 页码 129-138

出版社

WILEY-BLACKWELL PUBLISHING, INC
DOI: 10.1111/j.1475-4762.2008.00858.x

关键词

landscape dynamic; human disturbance; abandoned and active agricultural fields; soil alterations; Mediterranean areas; last century scale processes

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The cartography of land covers was used to study fertility and soil evolution in a mountainous Mediterranean area during the anthropocene period ( Crutzen P J 2002 Geology of mankind Nature 415 23). The aim was to determine changes in fertility as agricultural lands were abandoned in the 14 000 hectare area that constitutes Sant Llorenc del Munt Natural Park in a pre-coastal Catalan mountain range (north-eastern Iberian Peninsula). The analysis of land covers using vegetation maps, orthorectified images and aerial photography has allowed us to differentiate six vegetation groups: holm-oak wood, pine grove, oak wood, scrub, active agricultural fields and abandoned agricultural fields. The anthropic covers over the past 100 years were subdivided into five categories: active fields and those abandoned over four time periods. Study variables include field shape (concave, convex, flat), orientation (north, south) and slope (ranging from 12O to 24O). The parameters used for the physical-chemical soil analysis included organic material, phosphorous and potassium; fertility was classified based on groups, types and classes. The results indicate that even when the visual appearance of certain landscapes is similar, the edaphic characteristics may be very different. Changes induced by human disturbance share this phenomenon. Therefore, land management should be considered globally, taking into account vegetation, soils and water as interdependent factors, since it is their interaction that produces landscape and most affects its evolution over time.

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

4.1
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