Soil deformation and its recovery in logging trails of drained boreal peatlands

Abstract

Forestry-drained peatlands occupy approximately 15 million ha in boreal and temperate zones. In Finland, they represent almost one-fourth of the total forest area. They are subjected to the same harvesting operations as upland forests. Although the soil deformation caused by timber harvesting is well documented in upland forests, the knowledge on the soil disturbance induced by the harvesting machinery on peat soils is still lacking. To address this, we collected soil samples from six peatland sites that were thinned using a harvester–forwarder combination. Peat samples were taken from the trails formed by the machinery and outside the trails to a depth of 10 cm. To assess the recovery of soil properties after the disturbance, we sampled sites along a chronosequence with respect to time since harvesting. Soil deformation under the machinery appeared to increase the bulk density and field capacity of peat and decrease its total porosity; however, disturbed plots and control plots started to resemble each other in their soil properties within 15 years. The results imply that peat soil is sensitive to disturbance but has a high recovery potential.

Effect of subsoil tillage during pipeline construction activities on near‐term soil physical properties and crop yields in the right‐of‐way

“…As an inevitable consequence, installation of underground pipelines implicates extensive soil disturbance with adverse effects on soil physical properties through soil compaction and mixing of topsoil and subsoil because of construction right‐of‐way (ROW) activities (Naeth, McGill, & Bailey, 1987; Shi, Xiao, Wang, & Chen, 2014; Yu et al., 2010). Machinery‐induced excessive soil compaction reduces crop yield (Bell, 2010; Lowery & Schuler, 1991; Raper, Reaves, Shaw, van Santen, & Mask, 2005; Soon, Rice, Arshad, & Mills, 2000) through increases in soil bulk density and soil strength (Cambi et al., 2015; Kumar, Chen, Sadek, & Rahman, 2012; Lepilin, Laurén, Uusitalo, & Tuittila, 2019; Raper et al., 2005).…”

“…through increases in soil bulk density and soil strength (Cambi et al, 2015;Kumar, Chen, Sadek, & Rahman, 2012;Lepilin, Laurén, Uusitalo, & Tuittila, 2019;Raper et al, 2005).…”

How mounds are made matters: seismic line restoration techniques affect peat physical and chemical properties throughout the peat profile

“…A common cause of seismic line disturbance after the initial creation is human use for recreational activities (Dabros et al, 2018). Without further disturbance, compacted peat has been shown to recover naturally within 15 years after disturbance (Lepilin et al, 2019). SC3 and BR1 seismic lines are all at least 34 years old at the time of sampling, allowing for many years of peat volume recovery.…”

Comment on bg-2021-259

“…Water retention characteristic is a fundamental soil property that links soil structure to water and aeration dynamics, redox conditions, and many accompanying biogeochemical processes (Bachmann and van der Ploeg, 2002;Lepilin et al, 2019). Soil water retention in the low suction range (0-10 kPa), which represents the filling and emptying of macropores (Perret et al, 1999), is strongly influenced by soil structure and pore size distribution (Hillel, 1998).…”

“…Pore characteristics have been earlier described by pore size distribution derived from the water retention characteristic (Laine-Kaulio, 2011;Lepilin et al, 2019) or by tortuosity indices derived from air permeability measurements (Laurén, 1997), both methods assuming homogeneous and isotropic soil structure (Beckwith et al, 2003). However, the CH 4 production and transport cannot be fully understood without considering the three-dimensional (3D) pore network structures in peat.…”