1 / 23

Effects of Experimental Burning and Thinning on Soil Respiration and Belowground Characteristics

Effects of Experimental Burning and Thinning on Soil Respiration and Belowground Characteristics. Soung-Ryoul Ryu 1 , Amy Concilio 1 , Jiquan Chen 1 , Deborah Neher 1 , Siyan Ma 1 and Malcolm North 2

zlata
Télécharger la présentation

Effects of Experimental Burning and Thinning on Soil Respiration and Belowground Characteristics

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Effects of Experimental Burning and Thinning on Soil Respiration and Belowground Characteristics Soung-Ryoul Ryu1, Amy Concilio1, Jiquan Chen1, Deborah Neher1, Siyan Ma1 and Malcolm North2 1Department of EEES, University of Toledo, Toledo, OH2Department of Environmental Horticulture, University of California-Davis, Davis, CA

  2. Objectives • Is there relationship between soil respiration and root biomass? • The relationship is the same under thinning and burning ? • What controls root biomass ? • The driving factor is the same between treatments? • What affects soil respiration rate ? • Any effects from thinning and burning ?

  3. Available Nutrient Soil Chemical Factors Heterotrophic Respiration (Rh) Root Respiration (Ra) Soil Respiration Soil Climatic Factors Litter Layer Soil Organic Matter Soil Carbon

  4. Site Description • Teakettle Experimental Forest • 1300ha of area, located in Sierra National Forest on the west side of the Sierra Nevada range of California. • Altitude: 1980 ~ 2590 m • Precipitation: 1250mm/year, mostly in the form of snow • Mean air temperature: 1°C(January ) and 14.5°C(July)

  5. Plot Preparation • Eighteen plots (4 ha each) were prepared using variogram and cluster analysis (North et al. 2002). • California spotted owl (CASPO) thinning, and shelterwood thinning were applied between August 2000 and Summer of 2001 • Prescribed burning followed November 2001 • Transects (1m spaced) developed at • Burn-CASPO (BC), Burn-Shelterwood (BS), Burn only (BN), Unburn-CASPO (UC), Unburn-Shelterwood (US), and Control (UN) plots

  6. Field Measurement • Soil respiration rate (SRR; gCO2 hr-1 m-2): a portable infrared gas analyzer (EGM-2 Environmental Gas Monitor, PP Systems, UK) • Soil temperature at 10cm depth (Ts; ˚C): using a digital thermometer simultaneously with SRR measurement. • Soil moisture (Ms; %): Time Domain Reflectometry (TDR) within 0~10cm depth in mineral soil. • Litter depth (LD) • Measured at least every other week during the growing season of 2002

  7. Field Measurement • Total nitrogen (TN) and total carbon (TC) content in soil: using CN analyzer (Carlo Erba NA 1500 Series 2) • pH: soil:H2O = 1:2 • Fine root biomass (<2mm; FR) and coarse root biomass (>2mm & <2cm; CR) • Soil samples were collected during June 25 to July 3, 2002

  8. Effect of burning and thinning on the soil chemistry

  9. Effect of burning and thinning on the microclimate

  10. Effect of burning and thinning on the Root Biomass

  11. Soil Respiration and Root Biomass • SRR = f (FR010, FR1020, CR010, CR1020)

  12. Previous Results • Lee and Jose (2003) found significant (α=0.05) correlation between SRR and fine root production • Populus deltoides 0.64 • Pinus taeda 0.54 • Pregitzer et al. (2003) showed that root N concentration explained 70% of variance in SRR

  13. FR and Belowground Characteristics FR010

  14. FR and Belowground Characteristics FR1020

  15. Path Analysis – SRR

  16. Conclusions • Root biomass explained variance in SRR better in burned plots • Need for N analysis? • Factors affecting fine root biomass changed by treatments • At 0~10 cm Mostly climate factors – not clear; test w/ direct factors only • At 10~20cm Burned plots – climate factors/ unburned – nutrient factors • SRR and Belowground characteristics Unburn – Climate factors / Burn only – LD / Burn and cut – Root biomass

  17. Acknowledgements • Joint Fire Science Program • Teakettle Experimental Forest • Forest Service • LEES Lab, Dept of EEES, University of Toledo • A lot of helpers for the data collection

  18. Questions? Any suggestions are welcome!If you are interested, you are welcome to get involved in this paper.

  19. TN TC CN pH (box-whisker with Anova) ab ab a ab b ab ab ab a ab ab b c b ab ab ab a a a b a a a

  20. SRR Ms Ts LD ab a bc bc ab c c c c ab a b a a b b a c c c c b a ab

  21. 0~10 cm FR CR 010 1020 b b ab b ab a a a a a a a 10~20 cm c bc abc bc a ab b ab ab b ab a

  22. Extra data • This forest has three major patches, • closed canopy by mixed conifer (CC), • Ceanothus cordulatus Kellogg. shrub dominant areas (CECO) • open canopy (OC). • CC, OC, and CECO occupy the 67.7, 13.4, and 4.7% of the entire study forest respectively (North et al. 2002). • Major conifer species includes Abies concolor Lindl. ex Hildebr, A. magnifica A. Murr, Pinus lambertiana Douglas, P. jefreyi Grev. and Balf, and Calocedrus decurrens (Torr.) Florin (North et al. 2002). • Soils are classified as Xerumbrepts and Xeropsamments (North et al. 2002).

More Related