4.3 Article

The reclamation of bracken-dominated pastures in Bulgaria using asulam and fertilizers

期刊

GRASS AND FORAGE SCIENCE
卷 56, 期 2, 页码 131-137

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1046/j.1365-2494.2001.00258.x

关键词

herbage production; nitrogen; phosphorus; potassium; competition; weed control; legumes; grassland

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Bracken (Pteridium aquilinum) is a major weed of considerable economic concern in upland pastures in Bulgaria and elsewhere in Europe. Between 1993 and 1998, a field experiment was carried out to rest methods for restoring productive meadows. Initially, spraying asulam (4.8 kg a.i. ha(-1)) was used ro control the bracken on the sire; this was achieved in terms of reduced frond densities and a higher level of grassland establishment. This grassland was dominated by Vicia cassubica and the perennial grasses Agrostis vulgaris, Dactylis glomerata, Festuca rubra. Holcus lanatus and Poa pratensis. After 2 years, a fertilizer addition experiment was started with four treatments (no fertilizer; addition of phosphorus: addition of nitrogen and phosphorus: addition of nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium. The phosphorus and potassium fertilizers were applied annually in the early spring at 80 kg of P ha(-1) year(-1) and 50 kg of K ha(-1) year(-1), and nitrogen was added at the start of grass growth at 60 kg of N ha(-1) year(-1). Ar the same time, a twice-yearly hay-cutting regime was implemented. Fertilizer addition increased both the quantity and the quality of the resulting grassland. The herbage dry matter was increased by at least a factor of two depending on fertilizer combination, and there was an increase in grass and legume cover and a decrease in both weed cover and bracken recovery. However, although bracken recovery was inversely related to grassland production, there was a consistent increase in bracken density across all treatments between 1997 and 1998, suggesting that increasing herbage biomass merely delays bracken recovery. The implications of these findings are discussed.

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

4.3
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