Soil Compaction Reduced the Growth of Lodgepole Pine and Douglas-fir Seedlings in Raised Beds after Two Growing Seasons
Growth of lodgepole pine (Pinus contorta Dougl. ex Loud. var. latifolia Engelm.) seedlings after two growing seasons was reduced by medium and high levels of compaction in loamy sand and silt loam soils that received one of three compaction treatments (low = 0.70 relative bulk density [RBD], medium...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Soil Science Society of America journal 2010-11, Vol.74 (6), p.2162-2174 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 2174 |
---|---|
container_issue | 6 |
container_start_page | 2162 |
container_title | Soil Science Society of America journal |
container_volume | 74 |
creator | Bulmer, C.E Simpson, D.G |
description | Growth of lodgepole pine (Pinus contorta Dougl. ex Loud. var. latifolia Engelm.) seedlings after two growing seasons was reduced by medium and high levels of compaction in loamy sand and silt loam soils that received one of three compaction treatments (low = 0.70 relative bulk density [RBD], medium 0.79–0.82 RBD, and high 0.84 RBD). Survival was reduced on the loamy sand, but not on the silt loam. Soil water content was adjusted with irrigation to levels associated with plant water stress (near wilting point), reduced aeration (near 10% air-filled porosity), and intermediate conditions. Lodgepole pine survival on loamy sand was increased at high water content, but was unaffected by water regime on silt loam. For both soil types, the best lodgepole pine growth was observed for the intermediate watering level. The detrimental effects of compaction were consistent across all water regimes. We also evaluated the response of Douglas-fir [Pseudotsuga menziesii var. glauca (Beissn.) Franco] on silt loam and it was similar to lodgepole pine, except that survival was lower on the compacted silt loam, and under dry conditions. For both species, limitations to growth and survival at medium and high compaction levels were consistent with expectations based on the least limiting water range. Our results, however, are also consistent with a continuously declining growth response due to increasing compaction. The RBD was a good predictor of limiting soil conditions for both soil types and species, and substantially reduced survival and growth was observed at RBD levels higher than 0.80. |
doi_str_mv | 10.2136/sssaj2009.0458 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_849465413</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>849465413</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4068-8e3b755f8b0c125099a6d794c95141ddb829a7446138090945f895c7bab269e93</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkc9v0zAYhiMEEmVw5YqFhDilfI5_JD5wGGUboEogsp0tx3E6V27c-UtU7b_HpdUOXLjYkvW8z2vpLYq3FJYVZfITIpptBaCWwEXzrFhQzkQJUtLnxQKYpKVQSrwsXiFuAahQAIvi0EYfyCru9sZOPo7kt-tn63oy3Ttyk-JhuidxIOvYb9w-Bkd--dERM_bka5w3wWA5-ERa5_rgxw0Snw3GYxZ8cT0SM0wukdtD_OvKREYNxhFfFy8GE9C9Od8Xxd311e3qW7n-efN9dbkuLQfZlI1jXS3E0HRgaSVAKSP7WnGrBOW077umUqbmXFLWgALFM6qErTvTVVI5xS6KjyfvPsWH2eGkdx6tC8GMLs6oG664FJyyTL7_h9zGOY35c7qWuZpDDRlaniCbImJyg94nvzPpUVPQxxX00wr6uEIOfDhbDVoThmRG6_EpVTHWsFoeuc8n7uCDe_yPVbeXP6q2PZ756dzz7pQfTNRmk3LHXVsBZUAVSN5I9gf9x6KM</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>762504070</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Soil Compaction Reduced the Growth of Lodgepole Pine and Douglas-fir Seedlings in Raised Beds after Two Growing Seasons</title><source>Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete</source><creator>Bulmer, C.E ; Simpson, D.G</creator><creatorcontrib>Bulmer, C.E ; Simpson, D.G</creatorcontrib><description>Growth of lodgepole pine (Pinus contorta Dougl. ex Loud. var. latifolia Engelm.) seedlings after two growing seasons was reduced by medium and high levels of compaction in loamy sand and silt loam soils that received one of three compaction treatments (low = 0.70 relative bulk density [RBD], medium 0.79–0.82 RBD, and high 0.84 RBD). Survival was reduced on the loamy sand, but not on the silt loam. Soil water content was adjusted with irrigation to levels associated with plant water stress (near wilting point), reduced aeration (near 10% air-filled porosity), and intermediate conditions. Lodgepole pine survival on loamy sand was increased at high water content, but was unaffected by water regime on silt loam. For both soil types, the best lodgepole pine growth was observed for the intermediate watering level. The detrimental effects of compaction were consistent across all water regimes. We also evaluated the response of Douglas-fir [Pseudotsuga menziesii var. glauca (Beissn.) Franco] on silt loam and it was similar to lodgepole pine, except that survival was lower on the compacted silt loam, and under dry conditions. For both species, limitations to growth and survival at medium and high compaction levels were consistent with expectations based on the least limiting water range. Our results, however, are also consistent with a continuously declining growth response due to increasing compaction. The RBD was a good predictor of limiting soil conditions for both soil types and species, and substantially reduced survival and growth was observed at RBD levels higher than 0.80.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0361-5995</identifier><identifier>ISSN: 1435-0661</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1435-0661</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.2136/sssaj2009.0458</identifier><identifier>CODEN: SSSJD4</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Madison: Soil Science Society</publisher><subject>Agronomy. Soil science and plant productions ; Biological and medical sciences ; bulk density ; Constraining ; Earth sciences ; Earth, ocean, space ; Evergreen trees ; Exact sciences and technology ; forest trees ; Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology ; Greenhouse gases ; Growing season ; Loam soils ; Loams ; loamy sand soils ; Loamy sands ; Moisture content ; Pine ; Pine trees ; Pinus contorta ; Porosity ; Productivity ; Pseudotsuga menziesii ; raised beds ; Sand ; seedling growth ; Seedlings ; Silt loam ; silt loam soils ; Silts ; Soil (material) ; soil air ; Soil compaction ; soil pore system ; Soil science ; Soil types ; Soil water ; soil water content ; Soils ; species differences ; Surficial geology ; Survival ; tree mortality ; Trees ; Water content ; Water stress ; Wilting ; Wilting point</subject><ispartof>Soil Science Society of America journal, 2010-11, Vol.74 (6), p.2162-2174</ispartof><rights>Soil Science Society of America</rights><rights>2015 INIST-CNRS</rights><rights>Copyright American Society of Agronomy Nov/Dec 2010</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4068-8e3b755f8b0c125099a6d794c95141ddb829a7446138090945f895c7bab269e93</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4068-8e3b755f8b0c125099a6d794c95141ddb829a7446138090945f895c7bab269e93</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.2136%2Fsssaj2009.0458$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.2136%2Fsssaj2009.0458$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,1411,27901,27902,45550,45551</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&idt=23383768$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Bulmer, C.E</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Simpson, D.G</creatorcontrib><title>Soil Compaction Reduced the Growth of Lodgepole Pine and Douglas-fir Seedlings in Raised Beds after Two Growing Seasons</title><title>Soil Science Society of America journal</title><description>Growth of lodgepole pine (Pinus contorta Dougl. ex Loud. var. latifolia Engelm.) seedlings after two growing seasons was reduced by medium and high levels of compaction in loamy sand and silt loam soils that received one of three compaction treatments (low = 0.70 relative bulk density [RBD], medium 0.79–0.82 RBD, and high 0.84 RBD). Survival was reduced on the loamy sand, but not on the silt loam. Soil water content was adjusted with irrigation to levels associated with plant water stress (near wilting point), reduced aeration (near 10% air-filled porosity), and intermediate conditions. Lodgepole pine survival on loamy sand was increased at high water content, but was unaffected by water regime on silt loam. For both soil types, the best lodgepole pine growth was observed for the intermediate watering level. The detrimental effects of compaction were consistent across all water regimes. We also evaluated the response of Douglas-fir [Pseudotsuga menziesii var. glauca (Beissn.) Franco] on silt loam and it was similar to lodgepole pine, except that survival was lower on the compacted silt loam, and under dry conditions. For both species, limitations to growth and survival at medium and high compaction levels were consistent with expectations based on the least limiting water range. Our results, however, are also consistent with a continuously declining growth response due to increasing compaction. The RBD was a good predictor of limiting soil conditions for both soil types and species, and substantially reduced survival and growth was observed at RBD levels higher than 0.80.</description><subject>Agronomy. Soil science and plant productions</subject><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>bulk density</subject><subject>Constraining</subject><subject>Earth sciences</subject><subject>Earth, ocean, space</subject><subject>Evergreen trees</subject><subject>Exact sciences and technology</subject><subject>forest trees</subject><subject>Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology</subject><subject>Greenhouse gases</subject><subject>Growing season</subject><subject>Loam soils</subject><subject>Loams</subject><subject>loamy sand soils</subject><subject>Loamy sands</subject><subject>Moisture content</subject><subject>Pine</subject><subject>Pine trees</subject><subject>Pinus contorta</subject><subject>Porosity</subject><subject>Productivity</subject><subject>Pseudotsuga menziesii</subject><subject>raised beds</subject><subject>Sand</subject><subject>seedling growth</subject><subject>Seedlings</subject><subject>Silt loam</subject><subject>silt loam soils</subject><subject>Silts</subject><subject>Soil (material)</subject><subject>soil air</subject><subject>Soil compaction</subject><subject>soil pore system</subject><subject>Soil science</subject><subject>Soil types</subject><subject>Soil water</subject><subject>soil water content</subject><subject>Soils</subject><subject>species differences</subject><subject>Surficial geology</subject><subject>Survival</subject><subject>tree mortality</subject><subject>Trees</subject><subject>Water content</subject><subject>Water stress</subject><subject>Wilting</subject><subject>Wilting point</subject><issn>0361-5995</issn><issn>1435-0661</issn><issn>1435-0661</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2010</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>8G5</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>GUQSH</sourceid><sourceid>M2O</sourceid><recordid>eNqFkc9v0zAYhiMEEmVw5YqFhDilfI5_JD5wGGUboEogsp0tx3E6V27c-UtU7b_HpdUOXLjYkvW8z2vpLYq3FJYVZfITIpptBaCWwEXzrFhQzkQJUtLnxQKYpKVQSrwsXiFuAahQAIvi0EYfyCru9sZOPo7kt-tn63oy3Ttyk-JhuidxIOvYb9w-Bkd--dERM_bka5w3wWA5-ERa5_rgxw0Snw3GYxZ8cT0SM0wukdtD_OvKREYNxhFfFy8GE9C9Od8Xxd311e3qW7n-efN9dbkuLQfZlI1jXS3E0HRgaSVAKSP7WnGrBOW077umUqbmXFLWgALFM6qErTvTVVI5xS6KjyfvPsWH2eGkdx6tC8GMLs6oG664FJyyTL7_h9zGOY35c7qWuZpDDRlaniCbImJyg94nvzPpUVPQxxX00wr6uEIOfDhbDVoThmRG6_EpVTHWsFoeuc8n7uCDe_yPVbeXP6q2PZ756dzz7pQfTNRmk3LHXVsBZUAVSN5I9gf9x6KM</recordid><startdate>201011</startdate><enddate>201011</enddate><creator>Bulmer, C.E</creator><creator>Simpson, D.G</creator><general>Soil Science Society</general><general>Soil Science Society of America</general><general>American Society of Agronomy</general><scope>FBQ</scope><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7ST</scope><scope>7T7</scope><scope>7X2</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88I</scope><scope>8AF</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FG</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8G5</scope><scope>ABJCF</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AEUYN</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ATCPS</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BGLVJ</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>BKSAR</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>L6V</scope><scope>M0K</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>M2P</scope><scope>M7S</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>PATMY</scope><scope>PCBAR</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PTHSS</scope><scope>PYCSY</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>R05</scope><scope>S0X</scope><scope>SOI</scope><scope>KR7</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201011</creationdate><title>Soil Compaction Reduced the Growth of Lodgepole Pine and Douglas-fir Seedlings in Raised Beds after Two Growing Seasons</title><author>Bulmer, C.E ; Simpson, D.G</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c4068-8e3b755f8b0c125099a6d794c95141ddb829a7446138090945f895c7bab269e93</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2010</creationdate><topic>Agronomy. Soil science and plant productions</topic><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>bulk density</topic><topic>Constraining</topic><topic>Earth sciences</topic><topic>Earth, ocean, space</topic><topic>Evergreen trees</topic><topic>Exact sciences and technology</topic><topic>forest trees</topic><topic>Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology</topic><topic>Greenhouse gases</topic><topic>Growing season</topic><topic>Loam soils</topic><topic>Loams</topic><topic>loamy sand soils</topic><topic>Loamy sands</topic><topic>Moisture content</topic><topic>Pine</topic><topic>Pine trees</topic><topic>Pinus contorta</topic><topic>Porosity</topic><topic>Productivity</topic><topic>Pseudotsuga menziesii</topic><topic>raised beds</topic><topic>Sand</topic><topic>seedling growth</topic><topic>Seedlings</topic><topic>Silt loam</topic><topic>silt loam soils</topic><topic>Silts</topic><topic>Soil (material)</topic><topic>soil air</topic><topic>Soil compaction</topic><topic>soil pore system</topic><topic>Soil science</topic><topic>Soil types</topic><topic>Soil water</topic><topic>soil water content</topic><topic>Soils</topic><topic>species differences</topic><topic>Surficial geology</topic><topic>Survival</topic><topic>tree mortality</topic><topic>Trees</topic><topic>Water content</topic><topic>Water stress</topic><topic>Wilting</topic><topic>Wilting point</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Bulmer, C.E</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Simpson, D.G</creatorcontrib><collection>AGRIS</collection><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>Industrial and Applied Microbiology Abstracts (Microbiology A)</collection><collection>Agricultural Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Science Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>STEM Database</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Technology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Research Library (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Materials Science & Engineering Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Sustainability</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Agricultural & Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Technology Collection</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Earth, Atmospheric & Aquatic Science Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Engineering Collection</collection><collection>Agricultural Science Database</collection><collection>Research Library</collection><collection>Science Database</collection><collection>Engineering Database</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Environmental Science Database</collection><collection>Earth, Atmospheric & Aquatic Science Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>Engineering Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>University of Michigan</collection><collection>SIRS Editorial</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>Civil Engineering Abstracts</collection><jtitle>Soil Science Society of America journal</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Bulmer, C.E</au><au>Simpson, D.G</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Soil Compaction Reduced the Growth of Lodgepole Pine and Douglas-fir Seedlings in Raised Beds after Two Growing Seasons</atitle><jtitle>Soil Science Society of America journal</jtitle><date>2010-11</date><risdate>2010</risdate><volume>74</volume><issue>6</issue><spage>2162</spage><epage>2174</epage><pages>2162-2174</pages><issn>0361-5995</issn><issn>1435-0661</issn><eissn>1435-0661</eissn><coden>SSSJD4</coden><abstract>Growth of lodgepole pine (Pinus contorta Dougl. ex Loud. var. latifolia Engelm.) seedlings after two growing seasons was reduced by medium and high levels of compaction in loamy sand and silt loam soils that received one of three compaction treatments (low = 0.70 relative bulk density [RBD], medium 0.79–0.82 RBD, and high 0.84 RBD). Survival was reduced on the loamy sand, but not on the silt loam. Soil water content was adjusted with irrigation to levels associated with plant water stress (near wilting point), reduced aeration (near 10% air-filled porosity), and intermediate conditions. Lodgepole pine survival on loamy sand was increased at high water content, but was unaffected by water regime on silt loam. For both soil types, the best lodgepole pine growth was observed for the intermediate watering level. The detrimental effects of compaction were consistent across all water regimes. We also evaluated the response of Douglas-fir [Pseudotsuga menziesii var. glauca (Beissn.) Franco] on silt loam and it was similar to lodgepole pine, except that survival was lower on the compacted silt loam, and under dry conditions. For both species, limitations to growth and survival at medium and high compaction levels were consistent with expectations based on the least limiting water range. Our results, however, are also consistent with a continuously declining growth response due to increasing compaction. The RBD was a good predictor of limiting soil conditions for both soil types and species, and substantially reduced survival and growth was observed at RBD levels higher than 0.80.</abstract><cop>Madison</cop><pub>Soil Science Society</pub><doi>10.2136/sssaj2009.0458</doi><tpages>13</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0361-5995 |
ispartof | Soil Science Society of America journal, 2010-11, Vol.74 (6), p.2162-2174 |
issn | 0361-5995 1435-0661 1435-0661 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_849465413 |
source | Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete |
subjects | Agronomy. Soil science and plant productions Biological and medical sciences bulk density Constraining Earth sciences Earth, ocean, space Evergreen trees Exact sciences and technology forest trees Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology Greenhouse gases Growing season Loam soils Loams loamy sand soils Loamy sands Moisture content Pine Pine trees Pinus contorta Porosity Productivity Pseudotsuga menziesii raised beds Sand seedling growth Seedlings Silt loam silt loam soils Silts Soil (material) soil air Soil compaction soil pore system Soil science Soil types Soil water soil water content Soils species differences Surficial geology Survival tree mortality Trees Water content Water stress Wilting Wilting point |
title | Soil Compaction Reduced the Growth of Lodgepole Pine and Douglas-fir Seedlings in Raised Beds after Two Growing Seasons |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-02T07%3A29%3A10IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Soil%20Compaction%20Reduced%20the%20Growth%20of%20Lodgepole%20Pine%20and%20Douglas-fir%20Seedlings%20in%20Raised%20Beds%20after%20Two%20Growing%20Seasons&rft.jtitle=Soil%20Science%20Society%20of%20America%20journal&rft.au=Bulmer,%20C.E&rft.date=2010-11&rft.volume=74&rft.issue=6&rft.spage=2162&rft.epage=2174&rft.pages=2162-2174&rft.issn=0361-5995&rft.eissn=1435-0661&rft.coden=SSSJD4&rft_id=info:doi/10.2136/sssaj2009.0458&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E849465413%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=762504070&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true |