Soil water availability and temperature dynamics after one‐time heavy cattle trampling and land imprinting

Roundy, Bruce A.; Winkel, Von K.; Khalifa, Hamdi; Matthias, A. D.

doi:10.1080/15324989209381296

Cited by 15 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Bare-soil drying front rates measured in this study (3.58 cm day" 1 ) are faster than those reported by Roundy et al (1992; 2.2 cm day" 1 ) for a sandy loam soil in the desert grassland after summer rainfall. Litter-and gravel-covered soil had similarly rapid drying fronts once the surface 1-3 cm dried to -1.5 MPa (Figure 4).…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 80%

“…In the summers of 1990 and 1991, soil temperatures were measured at 1, 2, 3, 5, 9, and 13 cm depths with copper-constantan thermocouples in plastic pipettes described by Roundy et al (1992) on one replicate of surface cover treatments. Temperatures were also measured with thermocouples buried beneath bare soil at 20, 30, and 60 cm.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Mulches are most effective in reducing soil water loss during the initial stage of drying when evaporation is mainly limited by available solar energy at the soil surface (Hanks & Ashcroft, 1980). Whether mulches or other seedbed modifications result in long enough periods of available water to make a difference in seedling establishment is dependent on evaporative demand, rainfall patterns, and germination rates (Roundy et al, 1992;Roundy, 1994).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Surface soil water loss after summer rainfall in a semidesert grassland

Roundy¹,

Abbott²,

Livingston³

1997

Arid Soil Research and Rehabilitation

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Surface soil water contents were analyzed for bare and litter-or gravel-covered soils for 20 drying periods after summer rainfall in southeastern Arizona. Water contents were measured every minute by fiberglass cells calibrated for the sandy-loam soil, and 30-to 60-min averages were stored by microloggers. Water loss to equivalent matric potentials of -1.5 MPa for bare surface soils (1-3 cm) was fast (1.2 ± 0.5 days), moderate (2.6 ± 0.9 days), or slow (5.9 ± 1.4 days) when the upper 15 cm of soil at the start of the drying period had 13.3, 27.1, and 36.1 cm of water, respectively. Those water contents are near saturation and near field capacity for slow and moderate drying rates, respectively. For fast drying rates, water content was near field capacity at 1-3 cm but dry below 8 cm. Litter or gravel mulches increased the time of surface soil water availability by 0.7 to 1.9 days for fast and moderate drying periods, respectively. Drying from the surface down into the soil profile averaged 3.6 cm day -1 . Short summer rainstorms may germinate warm-season grasses which will desiccate if subsequent rainfall is not persistent enough to maintain surface water availability and allow adventitious root development. Estimates of time that the drying front reaches the depth of seminal roots of warm-season grasses were used to suggest rain-rainless day patterns that might result in seedling mortality. Sowing during the summer rainy season when the probability of these patterns is minimal may increase revegetation success. High correlation of available water periods with meterological variables suggests that soil water dynamics could be accurately estimated using physically based models, and may permit more detailed modeling of seedling establishment.

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 80%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Surface soil water loss after summer rainfall in a semidesert grassland

Roundy¹,

Abbott²,

Livingston³

1997

Arid Soil Research and Rehabilitation

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Heavy trampling increased seedling emergence of 1 of 4 grasses in a wet year, all 4 in a moderately wet year, and none of the 4 in a dry year (Winkel and Roundy 199 1). Heavily trampled soils took up water faster than untrampled soils immediately after trampling, but took up less water later in the season (Roundy et al 1992). Light trampling was approximately 10 hoofprints per m*, or 0.1 of the area trampled as calculated by the method outlined above.…”

Section: Hoof Actionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Grazing Systems, Pasture Size, and Cattle Grazing Behavior, Distribution and Gains

Hart¹,

Bissio²,

Samuel³

et al. 1993

Journal of Range Management

142

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Reduced pasture size and distance to water may be responsible for the alleged benefits of intensive time-controlled rotation grazing systems. We compared cattle gains, activity, distance traveled, and forage utilization on a time-controlled rotation system with eight 2&a pastures, on two 24-ha pastures grazed continuously (season-long), and on a 207-ha pasture grazed continuously, all stocked at the same rate. Utilization on the 207-ha pasture, but not on the 24ha pastures, declined with distance from water. At distances greater than 3 km from water in the 207-ha pasture, utgization was significantly less than on adjacent 24ha pastures, at distances of 1.0 to 1.6 km from water. Cows on the 2071a pasture travelled farther (6.1 km/day) than cows on the 24ha rotation pastures (4.2 km/day), which travelled farther than cows on the 24ha continuously grazed pastures (3.2 km/day). Grazing system, range site, slope, and weather had minimal effects on cow activity patterns. Gains of cows and calves were less on the 207-ha pasture (0.24 and 0.77 kg/day, respectively) than on the 24ha rotation pastures or 24-ha continuously grazed pastures (0.42 and 0.89 kg/da, respectively), with no differences between the latter. Calculated "hoof action" on the rotation pastures was less than that demonstrated to increase seed burial and seedling emergence. Intensive rotation grazing systems are unlikely to benefit animal performance unRss they reduce pasture size and distance to water

show abstract

“…Treatments include mulching, which decreases evaporation from the soil surface and may increase infiltration by slowing surface water movement, and chiseling, which increases infiltration and percolation and aerates the soil (Winkel & Roundy 1991; Winkel et al 1991; Montalvo et al 2002). Seed germination may also be enhanced by imprinting, a method in which small depressions are pressed into the soil to provide microcatchment sites for moisture and organic matter accumulation (Winkel & Roundy 1991; Roundy et al 1992; Dixon 1995). Addition of fertilizer may also be helpful to restore natural nutrient cycles (Anderson & Ostler 2002).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Native Plant Regeneration on Abandoned Desert Farmland: Effects of Irrigation, Soil Preparation, and Amendments on Seedling Establishment

Banerjee

Gerhart

Glenn

2006

Restoration Ecology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Direct seeding methods to revegetate abandoned farmland were tested at a desert site west of Phoenix, Arizona. Native seeds were broadcast onto plots prepared by mulching, imprinting, chiseling, and fertilizing with phosphorous in a split-plot design. Each main plot was split into subplots that were not irrigated, irrigated with saline (3.25 dS/m) well water, or irrigated and hand weeded of Salsola iberica. Native seeds germinated poorly on all treatments, and three annual exotic weeds (Brassica nigra, S. iberica, and Schismus spp.) dominated the plots. None of the main plot treatments (mulching, imprinting, chiseling, or fertilizing) had a significant effect on seed germination or canopy cover. Irrigation increased plant cover on plots, but weeds dominated the cover (<4% native species, up to 50% weeds). Near the end of the second growing season a seed bank study was conducted in the greenhouse. Undisturbed desert soil had relatively few weed seeds and more native plant seeds than the disturbed agricultural soil samples, which had few viable native seeds and were dominated by Schismus spp., B. nigra, and S. iberica. The results illustrate the difficulty of establishing native plants on abandoned desert farmland due to the dominance of weedy species, the presence of salts in the soil, and the lack of adequate soil moisture in the treatments without supplemental irrigation.

show abstract

Soil water availability and temperature dynamics after one‐time heavy cattle trampling and land imprinting

Cited by 15 publications

References 11 publications

Surface soil water loss after summer rainfall in a semidesert grassland

Surface soil water loss after summer rainfall in a semidesert grassland

Grazing Systems, Pasture Size, and Cattle Grazing Behavior, Distribution and Gains

Native Plant Regeneration on Abandoned Desert Farmland: Effects of Irrigation, Soil Preparation, and Amendments on Seedling Establishment

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About