2017
DOI: 10.2136/sssaj2016.09.0303
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Harvesting Douglas-fir Stands Shifts Soil Microbial Activity and Biogeochemical Cycling

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

1
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 6 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 58 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Harvest methods typically included ground‐based mechanical tree‐cutting and ground‐based shovel yarding. Note that the delay between initial sampling and harvest is 18 mo to 2 yr (all of 2011 calendar year) to allow ample time to collect other pre‐harvest measurements and facilitate associated studies (see McGinnis et al, 2014; Danielson et al, 2017). All stands received a site‐preparation herbicide spray, according to normal local operational procedures, between July and September 2012.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Harvest methods typically included ground‐based mechanical tree‐cutting and ground‐based shovel yarding. Note that the delay between initial sampling and harvest is 18 mo to 2 yr (all of 2011 calendar year) to allow ample time to collect other pre‐harvest measurements and facilitate associated studies (see McGinnis et al, 2014; Danielson et al, 2017). All stands received a site‐preparation herbicide spray, according to normal local operational procedures, between July and September 2012.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%