4.7 Article Proceedings Paper

Effects of forest management on soil carbon: results of some long-term resampling studies

期刊

ENVIRONMENTAL POLLUTION
卷 116, 期 -, 页码 S201-S208

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/S0269-7491(01)00252-4

关键词

forest; soil; carbon; harvest; biomass

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The effects of harvest intensity (sawlog, SAW; whole tree, WTH; and complete tree, CTH) on biomass and soil C were studied in four forested sites in the southeastern US (mixed deciduous forests at Oak Ridge, TN and Coweeta, NC; Pinus taeda at Clemson, SC and P. eliottii at Bradford, FL). In general, harvesting had no lasting effects on soil C. However, intensive temporal sampling at the NC and SC sites revealed short-term changes in soil C during the first few years after harvesting, and large, long-term increases in soil C were noted at the TN site in all treatments. Thus, changes in soil C were found even though lasting effects of harvest treatment were not. There were substantial differences in growth and biomass C responses to harvest treatments among sites. At the TN site. there were no differences in biomass at 15 years after harvest. At the SC site, greater biomass was found in the SAW than in the WTH treatment 16 years after harvest, and this effect is attributed to be due to both the N left on site in foliar residues and to the enhancement of soil physical and chemical properties by residues. At the FL site, greater biomass was found in the CTH than in the WTH treatment 15 years after harvest, and this effect is attributed to be due to differences in understory competition. Biomass data were not reported for NC. The effects of harvest treatment on ecosystem C are expected to magnify over time at the SC and FL sites as live biomass increases, whereas the current differences in ecosystem C at the TN site (which are due to the presence of undecomposed residues) are expected to lessen with time. (C) 2001 Published by Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.

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