Riparian forest buffers in agroecosystems — lessons learned from the Bear Creek Watershed, central Iowa, USA

Schultz, Richard C.; Isenhart, Thomas M.; Simpkins, William W.; Colletti, Joe

doi:10.1007/978-94-017-2424-1_3

Cited by 60 publications

(72 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…, 2006), but this may be related more to the length of time since vegetation establishment than to vegetation type, as others have reported no differences between similar‐aged stands of forest and grasses (Kumar et al. , 2008) and it can take years for improved porosity to develop (Schultz et al. , 2004; Dosskey et al.…”

Section: Influence Of Vegetation Typementioning

confidence: 99%

The Role of Riparian Vegetation in Protecting and Improving Chemical Water Quality in Streams¹

Dosskey¹,

Vidon²,

Gurwick³

et al. 2010

J American Water Resour Assoc

426

263

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Dosskey, Michael G., Philippe Vidon, Noel P. Gurwick, Craig J. Allan, Tim P. Duval, and Richard Lowrance, 2010. The Role of Riparian Vegetation in Protecting and Improving Chemical Water Quality in Streams. Journal of the American Water Resources Association (JAWRA) 46(2):261‐277. DOI: 10.1111/j.1752‐1688.2010.00419.x Abstract: We review the research literature and summarize the major processes by which riparian vegetation influences chemical water quality in streams, as well as how these processes vary among vegetation types, and discuss how these processes respond to removal and restoration of riparian vegetation and thereby determine the timing and level of response in stream water quality. Our emphasis is on the role that riparian vegetation plays in protecting streams from nonpoint source pollutants and in improving the quality of degraded stream water. Riparian vegetation influences stream water chemistry through diverse processes including direct chemical uptake and indirect influences such as by supply of organic matter to soils and channels, modification of water movement, and stabilization of soil. Some processes are more strongly expressed under certain site conditions, such as denitrification where groundwater is shallow, and by certain kinds of vegetation, such as channel stabilization by large wood and nutrient uptake by faster‐growing species. Whether stream chemistry can be managed effectively through deliberate selection and management of vegetation type, however, remains uncertain because few studies have been conducted on broad suites of processes that may include compensating or reinforcing interactions. Scant research has focused directly on the response of stream water chemistry to the loss of riparian vegetation or its restoration. Our analysis suggests that the level and time frame of a response to restoration depends strongly on the degree and time frame of vegetation loss. Legacy effects of past vegetation can continue to influence water quality for many years or decades and control the potential level and timing of water quality improvement after vegetation is restored. Through the collective action of many processes, vegetation exerts substantial influence over the well‐documented effect that riparian zones have on stream water quality. However, the degree to which stream water quality can be managed through the management of riparian vegetation remains to be clarified. An understanding of the underlying processes is important for effectively using vegetation condition as an indicator of water quality protection and for accurately gauging prospects for water quality improvement through restoration of permanent vegetation.

show abstract

Section: Influence Of Vegetation Typementioning

confidence: 99%

The Role of Riparian Vegetation in Protecting and Improving Chemical Water Quality in Streams¹

Dosskey¹,

Vidon²,

Gurwick³

et al. 2010

J American Water Resour Assoc

426

263

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The effectiveness of some agroforestry practices is well documented, such as riparian buffers and silvopastoral grazing systems in reducing non‐point source pollution, and thereby improving water quality 31, 32. The deeper and more extensive tree roots will invariably be able to take up more nutrients from the soil compared with crops with shallower root systems—the so‐called ‘safety‐net’ effect 33.…”

Section: Environmental Services Of Agroforestrymentioning

confidence: 99%

The coming of age of agroforestry

Nair

2007

J Sci Food Agric

139

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The success of modern agricultural and forestry production can be largely attributed to monoculture systems using a few select species. In the drive for maximizing yield and profit, the age-old tradition of using combined farming systems was essentially avoided and in some cases this has resulted in environmental problems such as land and water degradation and increased land clearing. During the last 30 years, however, the positive benefits of agroforestry to the producer and the environment have been increasingly recognized. Combining trees and crops in spatial or temporal arrangements has been shown to improve food and nutritional security and mitigate environmental degradation, offering a sustainable alternative to monoculture production. By providing supportive and complimentary roles with a flexible approach, agroforestry can offer specific social and environmental benefits across a range of landscapes and economies. More research and effort is needed to explore the full potential of agroforestry applications and to fuel awareness. As the plethora of benefits of agroforestry are realized, modern land-use systems are evolving towards a more sustainable and holistic approach to land management.

show abstract

“…Some of the important functions of riparian buffers related to NPS pollution control are filtering and retaining sediment and immobilizing, storing, and transforming chemical inputs from uplands (Schultz et al, 2000). Generally, riparian buffers re‐established on cultivated crop fields consist of combinations of grasses, forbs, shrubs, and trees (Schultz et al, 2004). While these systems have been well documented for their water quality functions, little is known about other ecosystem processes such as their relative greenhouse gas flux.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Methane Flux in Cropland and Adjacent Riparian Buffers with Different Vegetation Covers

Kim

Isenhart

Parkin³

et al. 2010

J of Env Quality

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

While water quality functions of conservation buffers established adjacent to cropped fields have been widely documented, the relative contribution of these re‐established perennial plant systems to greenhouse gases has not been completely documented. In the case of methane (CH4), these systems have the potential to serve as sinks of CH4 or may provide favorable conditions for CH4 production. This study quantifies CH4 flux from soils of riparian buffer systems comprised of three vegetation types and compares these fluxes with those of adjacent crop fields. We measured soil properties and diel and seasonal variations of CH4 flux in 7 to 17 yr‐old re‐established riparian forest buffers, warm‐season and cool‐season grass filters, and an adjacent crop field located in the Bear Creek watershed in central Iowa. Forest buffer and grass filter soils had significantly lower bulk density (P < 0.01); and higher pH (P < 0.01), total carbon (TC) (P < 0.01), and total nitrogen (TN) (P < 0.01) than crop field soils. There was no significant relationship between CH4 flux and soil moisture or soil temperature among sites within the range of conditions observed. Cumulative CH4 flux was −0.80 kg CH4–C ha−1 yr−1 in the cropped field, −0.46 kg CH4–C ha−1 yr−1 within the forest buffers, and 0.04 kg CH4–C ha−1 yr−1 within grass filters, but difference among vegetation covers was not significant. Results suggest that CH4 flux was not changed after establishment of perennial vegetation on cropped soils, despite significant changes in soil properties.

show abstract

Riparian forest buffers in agroecosystems — lessons learned from the Bear Creek Watershed, central Iowa, USA

Cited by 60 publications

References 15 publications

The Role of Riparian Vegetation in Protecting and Improving Chemical Water Quality in Streams¹

The Role of Riparian Vegetation in Protecting and Improving Chemical Water Quality in Streams¹

The coming of age of agroforestry

Methane Flux in Cropland and Adjacent Riparian Buffers with Different Vegetation Covers

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Riparian forest buffers in agroecosystems — lessons learned from the Bear Creek Watershed, central Iowa, USA

Cited by 60 publications

References 15 publications

The Role of Riparian Vegetation in Protecting and Improving Chemical Water Quality in Streams1

The Role of Riparian Vegetation in Protecting and Improving Chemical Water Quality in Streams1

The coming of age of agroforestry

Methane Flux in Cropland and Adjacent Riparian Buffers with Different Vegetation Covers

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

The Role of Riparian Vegetation in Protecting and Improving Chemical Water Quality in Streams¹

The Role of Riparian Vegetation in Protecting and Improving Chemical Water Quality in Streams¹