Comparison of Sampling Methods Used to Evaluate Forest Soil Bulk Density

被引:0
|
作者
Solgi, Ahmad [1 ]
Naghdi, Ramin [1 ]
Labelle, Eric R. [2 ]
Tsioras, Petros A. [3 ]
Salehi, Ali [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Guilan, Fac Nat Resources, Dept Forestry, POB 1144, Sowmeh Sara Guilan, Iran
[2] Tech Univ Munich, Dept Ecol & Ecosyst Management, Hans Carl Von Carlowitz Pl 2, D-85354 Freising Weihenstephan, Germany
[3] Aristotle Univ Thessaloniki, Fac Forestry & Nat Environm, Lab Forest Utilizat, GR-54124 Thessaloniki, Greece
关键词
paraffin sealed clod; rectangular box; sampling method; soil compaction; volumetric ring; COMPACTION; SKIDDER; SYSTEM;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
S7 [林业];
学科分类号
0829 ; 0907 ;
摘要
The objective of this study was to compare forest soil bulk density values obtained through conventional sampling methods such as the volumetric ring (VR: diameter 5 cm, length 10 cm) and paraffin sealed clod (PSC), with a variation of the VR, where rectangular boxes (RB) of four different dimensions were used. Sampling transects were established on a machine operating trail located in a beech (Fagus oriental is Lipsky) stand in Northern Iran. At each transect, three soil samples were collected at three different locations. Samples from different methods were spaced by a 50 cm distance to avoid direct interactions. The soil class of our study area was Combisols according to the WRB classification with a clay texture. Soil bulk density differed significantly between the three sampling methods. The lowest values were obtained with the RB (average 1.25 g cm(-3)), followed by the VR (average 1.40 g cm(-3)), and lastly the PSC (average 1.52 g cm(-3)). The values obtained with four variations of the RB method ranged from 1.22 to 1.28 g cm(-3) and were not found significantly different. When soil bulk density was calculated after the removal of the weight and volume of roots included in the samples, the values were determined to be higher than before but with the same range of magnitude. The lowest coefficient of variation was found for RB4 (CV=2.3%), while the highest values were observed for VR and RB1 (CV=5.7%).
引用
收藏
页码:247 / 254
页数:8
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] SAMPLING ATRIPLEX BLADDERS - A COMPARISON OF METHODS
    BRECKLE, SW
    FREITAS, H
    REIMANN, C
    PLANT CELL AND ENVIRONMENT, 1990, 13 (08): : 871 - 873
  • [22] A new soil core sampler for determination bulk density in soil profile
    Prikner, P
    Lachnit, E
    Dvorák, E
    PLANT SOIL AND ENVIRONMENT, 2004, 50 (06) : 250 - 256
  • [23] Effect of harvesting and haulage equipment on soil bulk density
    Behraven, HR
    INTERNATIONAL SOCIETY OF SUGAR CANE TECHNOLOGISTS, VOL II, PROCEEDINGS, 2001, : 308 - 311
  • [24] Critical soil bulk density for soybean growth in Oxisols
    Sato, Michel Keisuke
    de Lima, Herdjania Veras
    de Oliveira, Pedro Daniel
    Rodrigues, Sueli
    INTERNATIONAL AGROPHYSICS, 2015, 29 (04) : 441 - 447
  • [25] Different responses in bulk density and saturated hydraulic conductivity to soil deformation by logging machinery on a Ferralsol under native forest
    Schack-Kirchner, H.
    Fenner, P. T.
    Hildebrand, E. E.
    SOIL USE AND MANAGEMENT, 2007, 23 (03) : 286 - 293
  • [26] Methods for the assessment of soil deformation in forest stands: interrelationships and ecological relevance
    Weltecke, Katharina
    Gaertig, Thorsten
    ALLGEMEINE FORST UND JAGDZEITUNG, 2011, 182 (9-10): : 187 - 204
  • [27] A comparison of sampling designs in a Hainan tropical rain forest
    Yu, S. X.
    Chan, H. S. Y.
    Chung, K. W.
    COMMUNITY ECOLOGY, 2000, 1 (01) : 81 - 87
  • [28] A comparison of sampling designs in a Hainan tropical rain forest
    S. X. Yu
    H. S. Y. Chan
    K. W. Chung
    Community Ecology, 2000, 1 : 81 - 87
  • [29] Determination of relative soil density through a pedotransfer function of maximum bulk density
    Marcolin, Clovis Dalri
    Klein, Vilson Antonio
    ACTA SCIENTIARUM-AGRONOMY, 2011, 33 (02): : 349 - 354
  • [30] Calibration of an on-line sensor for measurement of topsoil bulk density in all soil textures
    Quraishi, Mohammed Z.
    Mouazen, Abdul M.
    SOIL & TILLAGE RESEARCH, 2013, 126 : 219 - 228