Decomposition rates of surface and buried forest-floor material

Prescott, Cindy E.; Reid, Anya M.; Wu, Shuyao; Nilsson, Marie‐Charlotte

doi:10.1139/cjfr-2016-0533

Cited by 13 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Overall, three times as much C in deadwood was lost as gained with harvesting in our forests. This shift would likely reduce habitat structure for cavity nesting birds and mammals (Aitken and Martin, 2004), alter rates of decomposition (Lassauce et al, 2011;Prescott et al, 2017), and decrease the richness of saproxylic species, which account for a considerable part of biodiversity in forests and play key roles in decomposition and nutrient cycling (Lassauce et al, 2011). Deadwood also plays important roles in providing nurse sites for regeneration of plants and tree seedlings, structure for reducing erosion and regulating stream flow, and cycling of nutrients and water (Franklin et al, 1987;Harmon et al, 2004).…”

Section: Secondary Aboveground C Stocksmentioning

confidence: 99%

Harvest Intensity Effects on Carbon Stocks and Biodiversity Are Dependent on Regional Climate in Douglas-Fir Forests of British Columbia

Simard

Roach

Defrenne

et al. 2020

Front. For. Glob. Change

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Secondary Aboveground C Stocksmentioning

confidence: 99%

Harvest Intensity Effects on Carbon Stocks and Biodiversity Are Dependent on Regional Climate in Douglas-Fir Forests of British Columbia

Simard

Roach

Defrenne

et al. 2020

Front. For. Glob. Change

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…After incorporation, litter is decomposed by soil fauna and microbes (Prescott, Reid, Wu, & Nilsson, ; Seitz et al, ). The decomposition rate varies substantially depending on litter species, chemical constituents, and environmental conditions (i.e., temperature and moisture) (Cornelissen, ; Djukic et al, ; Facelli & Pickett, ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Soil loss: Effect of plant litter incorporation rate under simulated rainfall conditions

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Plant litter can control land degradation by increasing soil organic matter and decreasing soil erosion by covering the soil surface or being incorporated into topsoil. However, the effect of litter incorporation on soil erosion is not clear. This study aimed to investigate the effect of litter incorporation into topsoil on interrill erosion. The poorly decomposed litter was collected from the field and incorporated into topsoil (5 cm) at six rates (ranging from 0 to 0.5 kg m −2 ). Laboratory rainfall (80 mm hr −1 ) experiments were conducted under five slope gradients (ranging from 9% to 47%).The results showed that the soil loss rates declined exponentially with increase in litter incorporation rate on slope gradients between 9% and 36%. However, on slope gradient of 47%, litter incorporation caused an increase in the soil loss rate. The efficiency of litter incorporation in controlling soil loss varied from −21.7% to 40.5% with a mean of 10.8%. It decreased linearly with the slope gradient (R 2 = 0.34). The decrease can be explained by two simultaneous but opposite effects: the effect of preventing erosion and that of promoting erosion. The former was induced by decreases in the effective erosive force of raindrop and overland flow exerted on soil, and soil erodibility, along with increases in sediment interception. The latter was caused by rapid saturation of the surface soil and concentrated overland flow. The results demonstrate the complexity of the effect of litter incorporation on soil erosion and can improve our understanding of litter in soil loss control.

show abstract

“…This difference likely have feedback on litter decomposition as suggested by Almagro and Martínez‐Mena (), who found that the changes in erosion processes (erosion, transport, and deposition) caused a varying rate of litter decomposition due to soil and litter redistribution and the altered circumstances. The above mentioned differences in infiltration and soil loss are also helpful to explain the difference in litter decomposition rate between litter covering and litter incorporation treatments as shown by Prescott, Reid, Wu, and Nilsson ().…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 90%

Comparison of the effects of litter covering and incorporation on infiltration and soil erosion under simulated rainfall

Wang

Zhang

Zhu

et al. 2020

Hydrological Processes

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Plant litter can either cover on soil surface or be incorporated into top‐soil layer in natural ecosystems. Their effects on infiltration and soil erosion are likely quite different. This study was performed to compare the effects of litter covering on soil surface and being incorporated into top‐soil layer on infiltration and soil erosion under simulated rainfall. Four litter types (needle‐leaf, broad‐leaf, brush, and herb) were collected from fields and applied to cover on soil surface or to be incorporated into top‐soil layer (5 cm) at the same rate (0.2 kg/m2). The simulated rainfalls (40 and 80 mm/hr) were run at two slope angles (10° and 20°). The results showed that the mean infiltration rate of litter covering treatment was 1.4 times as great as that of litter incorporated. Litter covering enhanced infiltration via protecting surface from soil sealing. Whereas, litter incorporation affected infiltration by its water repellency. Soil erosion of litter incorporated treatment was 5.4 times as large as that of litter covered treatment, which was attributed to the changes in surface litter coverage and soil erosion resistance. Litter type affected soil erosion through the variations in litter coverage and litter morphology. For litter covering treatment, litter coverage can explain the major variance of soil loss on the slopes. Whereas, for litter incorporated treatment, both the influences of litter coverage and litter length on soil erosion resistance were considered necessary to well explain the variance of soil loss. The results also showed that the benefits of litter to control soil erosion declined with rainfall intensity and slope gradient for both covering and incorporated treatments. The results of this study are helpful to understand the mechanisms of litter influencing hydrological and erosion processes on hillslopes.

show abstract

Decomposition rates of surface and buried forest-floor material

Cited by 13 publications

References 26 publications

Harvest Intensity Effects on Carbon Stocks and Biodiversity Are Dependent on Regional Climate in Douglas-Fir Forests of British Columbia

Harvest Intensity Effects on Carbon Stocks and Biodiversity Are Dependent on Regional Climate in Douglas-Fir Forests of British Columbia

Soil loss: Effect of plant litter incorporation rate under simulated rainfall conditions

Comparison of the effects of litter covering and incorporation on infiltration and soil erosion under simulated rainfall

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About