DOCSLIB.ORG

Impact of Biochar on Plant Productivity and Soil Properties Under a Maize Soybean Rotation on an Alfisol in Central Ohio DISSERT

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Impact of biochar on plant productivity and soil properties under a maize soybean rotation on an Alfisol in Central Ohio DISSERTATION Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University By Ryan Darrell Hottle Graduate Program in Environmental Science The Ohio State University 2013 Dissertation Committee: Rattan Lal, advisor Jay Martin Peter Curtis Berry Lyons Copyrighted by Ryan Darrell Hottle 2013 ABSTRACT Here we investigate the application of biochar to a maize (Zea mays)-soybeans (Glycine max L.) rotation in the U.S. Midwest in order to assess the agronomic impacts and changes to soil physical, chemical and biological properties. Biochar is a carbon- rich co-product of thermal degradation of biomass precursor material, a process called ―pyrolysis,‖ intended for the use as a soil amendment as opposed to combusted for heat or energy. Biochar could offer a sustainable means of generating energy, sequestering atmospheric CO2 (thereby mitigating climate change), and increasing agronomic productivity of crops through soil quality enhancement. At a global scale biochar could sequester >1 Pg C yr-1, thereby substantially helping to mitigate climate change. At present, the majority of long-term field trials using biochar as a soil amendemenMg have focused on highly weathered and degraded soils mainly in the tropics and subtropics. Very little long-term field trials have been conducted on agroecosystems in temperate parts of the world. Our research aimed to fill this void, by conducting a 4- year field experiment (2010-2013) with oak-derived biochar from a slow pyrolysis process at ~425⁰C at three rates (0 Mg ha-1, 5 Mg ha-1 and 25 Mg ha-1) with 100% and ii 50% of nitrogen fertilizer (146 kg ha-1 N and 72 kg ha-1 N, respectively) on a maize - soybean rotation on an Ohio alfisol soil. Variables analyzed included to total above- ground biomass, grain yield, leaf and grain nutrient uptake; soil nutrient storage, moisture capacity, aggregate stability, and greenhouse gas emissions (CO2, CH4, and N2O). Overall, our study revealed mixed results. Biochar did tend to increase above- ground biomass and grain yield in both maize and soybeans with the highest biochar treatment (25 Mg ha-1) having the greatest benefit. The results were only significant in the second year, however, although a general positive trend was found in both the first and second year. In the third year, there was a significant drought which resulted in poor stand germination and highly heterogeneous results over all plots. No significant differences in above ground biomass were detected in 2010 or 2012 when soybeans were grown, although there was a significant increase in the total above-ground biomass and grain yield from maize in 2011. In the first year, total above-ground biomass of soybeans increased 8.2% and 12.8% with application of 5 Mg ha-1 and 25 Mg ha-1 biochar, respectively, although the results were only significant (p<0.10) at the 25 Mg ha-1 level. Maize grain yield decreased by-13 and -12% for the 5 Mg ha-1 and 25 Mg ha- 1, respectively, compared with control in the plots receiving 50% of recommended N fertilizer, but increased by 1% and 18% for the 5 Mg ha-1 and 25 Mg ha-1, respectively, compared with control in plots receiving 100% N fertilizer. The specific surface area of the soil increased significantly with the application of biochar, while cation exchange capacity and pH did not significantly change. Increased available water content and increased plant uptake and assimilation of K and S are hypothesized to be contributing iii factors to observed increases in production at the 100% fertilization level. N immobilization is attributed to decreased production in the treatments receiving 50% N fertilizer. The results indicate the importance of addition of adequate levels of N fertilizer with the application of biochar and reject the hypothesis that biochar may increase nitrogen fertilizer use efficiency at 50% of recommended N levels. The flux of CO2 and CH4 did not significantly differ with application of biochar although consistent trends were found for both gases. Cumulative CO2 emissions tended to increase with the application of biochar. Within the 50% recommended N fertilizer plots, the cumulative CO2 flux over the observation period increased 3.5% and 11.1% with the application of biochar at the 5 Mg ha-1 and 25 Mg ha-1 treatments, respectively, and 8.8% and 9.3%, respectively, within the 100% N fertilizer plots. CH4 showed an opposite pattern—consumption (i.e. negative emissions) was correlated with application of biochar although the results were not significant. CH4 consumption increased by 572.5% and 951.7% from the control within the 100% N fertilizer plots. N2O emissions decreased significantly with the application of biochar (p>0.05). N2O emissions decreased by 28.2% and 35.7% with 5 Mg ha-1 and 25 Mg ha-1 biochar added, respectively, compared with the control within plots receiving 100% N fertilizer. Cumulative GWP was dominated by emissions of CO2 followed by N2O and, much less significantly, CH4. The GWP was highest for plots receiving greater quantities of biochar. In the 100% N fertilizer plots GWP was 38,203, 39,778 and 39,560 kg CO2-eq ha-1 yr-1, respectively, for the plots receiving 0, 5, and 25 Mg ha-1 biochar application. Increased CO2 emissions were hypothesized to be the result of an increase in labile C iv from biochar or an increase in microbial decomposition of native C. Decreased N2O emissions were hypothesized to be the result of increased NH4 and NO3 adsorption on biochar surfaces. The application of biochar at the highest rate decreased bulk density significantly by approximately 10% . Available water capacity also changed signficantly with the application of biochar, increasing by approximately 8%. No significant differences were found in soil texture, hydraulic saturated conductivity, penetration resistance or infiltration rate. The specific surface area of the biochar was measured to be 58 m2 g-1. When added to soil, biochar was found to increase overall specific surface area by +12% and +34% with the addition of 5 Mg ha-1 and 25 Mg ha-1 biochar, respectively. Measures of water stable aggregates were significantly different, however, such changes were likely to be the result of highly stable biochar fragments rather than actual soil aggregates although some characteristics of the biochar quasi- aggregates were likely to function much in the same way as naturally occurring soil aggregates. Generally, the results suggest that biochar may have significant benefits to soil quality particularly in regard to soil physical properties including reduced bulk density and increased moisture retention. Biochar may reduce emissions of N2O and increase the consumption of CH4, but this must be examined in terms of the entire emissions profile over time. Although not significant at a p<0.05 confidence level, there was an observed increase in CO2 emissions among plots receiving biochar. This apparent increase in CO2 emissions with biochar application offset total reductions in global warming potential (GWP) from both N2O and CH4 . v DEDICATION Dedicated to my father—scientist, soccer coach, and political thinker—who taught me to think critically and never to give up in spite of the circumstances; my mother—social worker, wonderful parent and general goofster—who would be considered for sainthood if she were only Catholic; and my brother who, in addition to being my fiercest competitor, is also my best friend and partner in all things good. I love you guys. vi ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS First and foremost, I want to extend my appreciation to my advisor, Distinguished University Professor Rattan Lal who not only expanded my knowledge and perspective on the critical issues of the day so much in so little time, but also who provided invaluable moral support. I thank my committee members Dr. Jay Martin, Dr. Peter Curtis, and Dr. Berry Lyons. I want to specifically thank Dr. Richard Moore who, as director of the Environment and Natural Resources Program, helped guide and assist me through the my time at Ohio State University. Dr. Raj Shrestra, Dr. Dr. David Ussiri, Dr. Martin Shipitalo, Dr. Brian Slater, Dr. Nick Basta, Mr. Basant Rimal, and Mr. Franklin ―Sandy‖ Jones. I thank my colleagues and classmates: Dr. Ji Young Jung, Josh Beniston, Nick Stanich, and Josh Kendell. I especially want to single out Mr. Chris Eastman who in addition to being a great research partner has also become a very good friend. vii VITA 2001 ............................................................... Granville High School 2006 ............................................................... B.A. Naropa University 2009 ............................................................... M.A. Columbia University Fields of Study Major Field: Environmental Science viii TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT ........................................................................................................................ ii DEDICATION ................................................................................................................... vi ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS .............................................................................................. vii VITA ................................................................................................................................ viii TABLE OF CONTENTS ..................................................................................................
Recommended publications
  • FAOSTAT-Forestry Definitions

    FAOSTAT-Forestry Definitions

    FOREST PRODUCTS DEFINITIONS General terms FAOSTAT - Forestry JOINT FOREST SECTOR QUESTIONNAIRE Item Item Code Definition code coniferous C Coniferous All woods derived from trees classified botanically as Gymnospermae, e.g. Abies spp., Araucaria spp., Cedrus spp., Chamaecyparis spp., Cupressus spp., Larix spp., Picea spp., Pinus spp., Thuja spp., Tsuga spp., etc. These are generally referred to as softwoods. non-coniferous NC Non-Coniferous All woods derived from trees classified botanically as Angiospermae, e.g. Acer spp., Dipterocarpus spp., Entandrophragma spp., Eucalyptus spp., Fagus spp., Populus spp., Quercus spp., Shorea spp., Swietonia spp., Tectona spp., etc. These are generally referred to as broadleaves or hardwoods. tropical NC.T Tropical Tropical timber is defined in the International Tropical Timber Agreement (1994) as follows: “Non-coniferous tropical wood for industrial uses, which grows or is produced in the countries situated between the Tropic of Cancer and the Tropic of Capricorn. The term covers logs, sawnwood, veneer sheets and plywood. Plywood which includes in some measure conifers of tropical origin shall also be covered by the definition.” For the purposes of this questionnaire, tropical sawnwood, veneer sheets and plywood shall also include products produced in non-tropical countries from imported tropical roundwood. Please indicate if statistics provided under "tropical" in this questionnaire may include species or products beyond the scope of this definition. Year Data are requested for the calendar year (January-December) indicated. 2 Transactions FAOSTAT - Forestry JOINT FOREST SECTOR QUESTIONNAIRE Element Element Code Definition code 5516 Production Quantity Removals The volume of all trees, living or dead, that are felled and removed from the forest, other wooded land or other felling sites.
  • Agroforestry : Fact-Sheet

    Agroforestry : Fact-Sheet

    Agroforestry fact sheet Agroforestry is the mixture of trees and crops in cultivated parcels. It was a traditional system in both tropical and temperate countries before agriculture intensification during the last century. Very recent results show that it may be a key option for the future of modern agriculture, including in temperate countries. 10 years ago, agroforestry was still ignored by farmers, foresters, policy makers of developed coun- tries. But times have changed. Agroforestry is an utmost example of ecological intensification : it in- creases land productivity and offers at the same time many environmental services. A French national scheme for planting half a million hectares of agroforestry during the next 25 years was based on res- ults obtained by INRA, Montpellier. A walnut – wheat agroforestry plot at the Restinclières farm, tree pruning time (left) Monitoring water sap flow through tap roots and superficial roots to document the hydraulic lift on walnut agroforestry trees (right) Increase of productivity with agroforestry The mix of trees and crops is the fundamental principle of agroforestry. INRA researchers showed that the production from one hectare of a walnut/wheat mix is the same as for 1.4 hectares with trees and crops separated. This is a 40% increase in productivity, far better than any other innovation intro- duced by agronomists in the recent past. This is achieved with an optimal 50 to 100 trees/hectare dens- ity, and an appropriate management of the system (tree line orientation, tree pruning regime, winter crops). Agroforestry trees grow very fast, faster than trees in forest plantations. Rightly associated and appropriately managed, trees and annual crops establish a synergy in the use of the vital resources of light, water and soil nutrients.
  • Reforestation: Likely Working on Certification, an Emerg- Nations Secretary-General’S Climate Ing Concept That Sought to Set Third Summit

    Reforestation: Likely Working on Certification, an Emerg- Nations Secretary-General’S Climate Ing Concept That Sought to Set Third Summit

    18 www.taylorguitars.com [Sustainability] arrived in Washington, D.C. in well over a decade, but in 2014 the 1993 and began my professional concept took a twist when govern- career working in environmental ments, private companies, and civil Ipolitics. Anyone involved with interna- society groups signed the New York tional forest policy in the 1990s was Declaration of Forests at the United Reforestation: likely working on certification, an emerg- Nations Secretary-General’s Climate ing concept that sought to set third Summit. The Declaration is a voluntary, from POLITICS to PLANTING party management standards for active non-legally binding pledge to halve the forestry operations. The idea was (and rate of deforestation by 2020, to end still is) that a consumer would choose a it by 2030, and to restore hundreds With Taylor embarking on reforestation efforts product that had an ecolabel over one of millions of acres of degraded land. that did not, if it assured you that the A year later, in 2015, largely due to in Cameroon and Hawaii, Scott Paul explains the product originated from a well-managed pressure from activist organizations, forest. Think Gifford Pinchot meets the literally hundreds of companies involved politics of forest restoration and why Taylor’s Good Housekeeping Seal of Approval. in the Southeast Asian palm oil trade timing might be ideal. The Forest Stewardship Council was announced some sort of new policy. born at this time, and for a decade Looking back at these two events, it’s certification overshadowed much of the fair to say that while lofty words do not global forest policy dialogue.
  • The Rise of Timber Legality Verification to Rescue Indonesia's Forests

    The Rise of Timber Legality Verification to Rescue Indonesia's Forests

    PART II – Chapter 14 Global forest governance to address illegal logging: The rise of timber legality verification to rescue Indonesia’s forests Convening lead author: Erica Pohnan Lead authors: Michael W. Stone and Benjamin Cashore Abstract: The extent of illegal logging in Indonesia is widely acknowledged to be one of the highest in the world, and it remains high despite a multitude of efforts that have been made by the international community to help Indonesia address the problem. However, recent efforts to deal with illegal logging in Indonesia, such as the enactment of a timber legality verification mechanism, have enjoyed widespread support from a variety of stakeholders on a scale previously unseen for efforts to combat global de- forestation. This is because timber legality verification has gained traction in producer countries such as Indonesia by garnering support from a broad coalition of actors motivated by increased access to global timber markets and the promise of achieving environmental goals. We argue that the development of Indonesia’s timber legality assur- ance system (SVLK) and the signing of the EU FLEGT Voluntary Partnership Agreement hold potential for development of durable and effective institutions for reducing illegal logging in Indonesia. If these developments are managed strategically, they can represent a positive development for improved forest governance in Indonesia. Keywords: Governance, Indonesia, Legality Verification, pathways framework, illegal log- ging 14.1 Introduction environmental, economic, and social impacts of the illegal timber trade are still far-reaching. Illegal ndonesia historically has one of the highest rates logging is widely acknowledged to be one of most Iof illegal logging in the world (Seneca Creek As- damaging and egregious cases of forest degradation sociates 2004).
  • Soils Section

    Soils Section

    Soils Section 2003 Florida Envirothon Study Sections Soil Key Points SOIL KEY POINTS • Recognize soil as an important dynamic resource. • Describe basic soil properties and soil formation factors. • Understand soil drainage classes and know how wetlands are defined. • Determine basic soil properties and limitations, such as mottling and permeability by observing a soil pit or soil profile. • Identify types of soil erosion and discuss methods for reducing erosion. • Use soil information, including a soil survey, in land use planning discussions. • Discuss how soil is a factor in, or is impacted by, nonpoint and point source pollution. Florida’s State Soil Florida has the largest total acreage of sandy, siliceous, hyperthermic Aeric Haplaquods in the nation. This is commonly called Myakka fine sand. It does not occur anywhere else in the United States. There are more than 1.5 million acres of Myakka fine sand in Florida. On May 22, 1989, Governor Bob Martinez signed Senate Bill 525 into law making Myakka fine sand Florida’s official state soil. iii Florida Envirothon Study Packet — Soils Section iv Contents CONTENTS INTRODUCTION .........................................................................................................................1 WHAT IS SOIL AND HOW IS SOIL FORMED? .....................................................................3 SOIL CHARACTERISTICS..........................................................................................................7 Texture......................................................................................................................................7
  • Buyers of Timber in Orange County

    Buyers of Timber in Orange County

    Companies that Buy Timber In County: Orange 7/7/2021 COMPANY PHONE, FAX, EMAIL and SPECIES PRODUCTS ADDRESS CONTACT PERSON PURCHASED PURCHASED 360 Forest Products, Inc. PHONE 910-285-5838 S Yellow Pine, E White Pine, Cypress, Standing Timber, Sawlogs, PO Box 157 FAX: 910-285-8009 Ash, Cherry, Red Oak, White Oak, Pulpwood, Poles, Pilings, Cottonwood, Beech, Hickory, Sweetgum, Chips, Chip-n-Saw, Veneer & Wallace, NC 28466 EMAIL: Black/Tupelo Gum, Soft Maple, Hard Plywood Logs or Bolts [email protected] Maple, Walnut, Yellow Poplar Larry Batchelor, President A & P Timber Co, Inc. PHONE 919-554-4597 All Hardwoods, All Softwoods Standing Timber 137 East Fleming Farm Dr FAX: Youngsville, NC 27596 EMAIL: Dwight Payne, Registered Forester All-Woods Timber Company, Inc. PHONE 919-818-5957 S Yellow Pine, All Hardwoods Standing Timber, Sawlogs, 2671 Charlie Long Road FAX: Pulpwood Hurdle Mills, NC 27571 EMAIL: Philip R. Whitfield, President Black Creek Forestry Services, LL PHONE (919)6314064 All Hardwoods, All Softwoods Standing Timber 4920 Raleigh Rd FAX: Benson, NC 27504 EMAIL: [email protected] Dave Hendershott, Owner Blue Chip Wood Products PHONE (919)805-0060 All Hardwoods, All Softwoods Standing Timber, Sawlogs, FAX: Pulpwood , NC EMAIL: [email protected] Bill Baxley Braxton's Sawmill, Inc. PHONE (336)376-6798 S Yellow Pine, Yellow-Poplar, Sweetgum, Standing Timber, Sawlogs 7519 D Lindley Mill Rd FAX: (336)376-8411 Soft Maple, Red Oak, White Oak, Hickory, Ash Graham, NC 27253 EMAIL: Christopher Braxton, President Canfor Southern Pine Graham PHONE (336)376-3130 S Yellow Pine Standing Timber, Sawlogs 4408 Mt Herman Rock Creek Rd FAX: (336)376-5858 Graham, NC 27253 EMAIL: [email protected]; doug.burleson Doug Burleson, Forester This is a list of individuals that purchase standing timber and have requested that their information be posted on the N.C.
  • Course Handout for Introduction to Forest Gardening

    Course Handout for Introduction to Forest Gardening

    COURSE HANDOUT FOR INTRODUCTION TO FOREST GARDENING Complied by Jess Clynewood and Rich Wright Held at Coed Hills Rural Art Space 2010 ETHICS AND PRINCIPLES OF PERMACULTURE Care for the Earth v Care for the people v Fair shares PRINCIPLES Make the least change for the greatest effect v Mistakes are tools for learning v The only limits to the yield of a system are imagination and understanding Observation – Protracted and thoughtful observation rather than prolonged and thoughtless action. Observation is a key tool to re-learn. We need to know what is going on already so that we don’t make changes we will later regret. Use and value diversity - Diversity allows us to build a strong web of beneficial connections. Monocultures are incredibly fragile and prone to pests and diseases – diverse systems are far more robust and are intrinsically more resilient. Relative Location and Beneficial Connections – View design components not in isolation but as part of a holistic system. Place elements to maximise their potential to create beneficial connections with other elements. Multi-functional Design – Try and gain as many yields or outputs from each element in your design as possible. Meet every need in multiple ways, as many elements supporting each important function creates stability and resilience. Perennial systems – minimum effort for maximum gain Create no waste - The concept of waste is essentially a reflection of poor design. Every output from one system could become the input to another system. We need to think cyclically rather than in linear systems. Unmet needs = work, unused output = pollution. Stacking – Make use of vertical as well as horizontal space, filling as many niches as possible.
  • An Investment Primer for Reforestation CARBON REMOVAL, ENVIRONMENTAL and SOCIAL IMPACTS, and FINANCIAL POTENTIAL

    An Investment Primer for Reforestation CARBON REMOVAL, ENVIRONMENTAL and SOCIAL IMPACTS, and FINANCIAL POTENTIAL

    1 An Investment Primer for Reforestation CARBON REMOVAL, ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL IMPACTS, AND FINANCIAL POTENTIAL JANUARY 2020 1 CONTENTS Contents About CREO 2 Terms 3 Executive Summary 4 Background Forestry for Climate 6 Reforestation Investment Potential 9 - Investment Avenues 9 - Costs and Returns 10 Carbon Markets Regulatory Compliance 14 Voluntary 15 Corporate Offsetting 15 Summary 16 Timber and Non-Timber Forest Products Timber 18 Agroforestry 19 Summary 20 Restoration and Conservation Initiatives Direct Revenue Creation 22 Blended Finance 23 Catalytic Capital 24 Summary 24 Moving Forward 25 Appendix A: CREO Modelling Assumptions 26 Appendix B: Carbon Markets 27 Citations 28 2 ABOUT CREO About CREO The CREO Syndicate (“CREO”) is a 501c3 public charity founded by wealth owners and family offices with a mission to address the most pressing environmental challenges of our time affecting communities across the globe—climate change and resource scarcity. By catalyzing private capital and scaling innovative solutions, CREO is contributing to protecting and preserving the environment and accelerating the transition to a sustainable economy for the benefit of the public. CREO works closely with a broad set of global stakeholders, including Members (wealth owners, family offices, and family-owned enterprises), Friends (aligned investors such as pension funds), and Partners (government, not-for-profit organizations and academia), who collaboratively develop and invest in solutions across sectors, asset classes and geographies. CREO’s primary activities include 1) knowledge building; 2) relationship building among like-minded, values-aligned, long-term investors; 3) conducting select research to support the advancement of its mission; and 4) deal origination. 3 TERMS Terms Afforestation (AF): Planting and/or deliberate seeding on land not forested over the last 50 years.
  • Forestry· Wildlife Guidelines to Habitat Management

    Forestry· Wildlife Guidelines to Habitat Management

    11111111~113 0318 r~1~1 mmmr1~1~11~1~r11~11111111 00028. 8449 This document is made available electronically by the Minnesota Legislative Reference Library as part of an ongoing digital archiving project. http://www.leg.state.mn.us/lrl/lrl.asp (Funding for document digitization was provided, in part, by a grant from the Minnesota Historical & Cultural Heritage Program.) FORESTRY· WILDLIFE GUIDELINES ·, TO HABITAT MANAGEMENT 1985 Revision FOREST - --·----·- ~ ... / -T-R A N S I T I 0 N PRAIRIE ·MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES GENERAL CON:rENrS SEr.rION PAGES .EOLICY - WILDLIFE/FORESTRY COORDINATION •••••••••••••••• A-G I - I'NI.'RC.>IXJC'I ION • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 1 - 12 Foreword, Approval, Vegetative Zones and Habitat Evaluation, Vegetative Zone Map II - MANAGEMEN.r IN!'EGRATION BY GENERAL PRACI'ICES •••••••••••• 13 -24 Rationale, Soils Evaluation, Timber Harvest, Reforestation, Tirrber stand Improvement III - MANAGEMENI' IN!'EGRATION BY TIMBER TYPE •••••••••••••••••• 25 - 42 References, Aspen and Paper Birch, Oaks, Northern Hardwoods, Central Hardwoods, Lowland Hardwoods, Conifers, Deforested Areas IV - WILDLIFE PROJECTS FOR HABITAT MANAGEMEN.r IN CONJUN:TION WITH TIMBER MANAGEMENI' •••••••••••••••••• 43 - 54 Wildlife Openings, Roads and Trails, Non­ corrmercial Cover Type Regeneration, Brush Piles, Fruit Trees V - WILDLIFE PROJECTS FOR HABITAT MANAGEMENI' SEPARATE FROM TIMBER MANAGEMENI' ••••••••••••••••••••••• 55 - 60 Browse Regeneration, Agriculture Leases
  • 2004 Native Woodland Conference Abstracts

    2004 Native Woodland Conference Abstracts

    w oodlands OF IRELAND Coillearnacha Dúchasacha IRELAND’S NATIVE WOODLANDS Abstracts of Conference Papers Galway, 8th - 11th September 2004 Editor Cara Doyle w oodlands OF IRELAND Coillearnacha Dúchasacha IRELAND’S NATIVE WOODLANDS Abstracts of Conference Papers Galway, 8th - 11th September 2004 Editor Cara Doyle ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Woodlands of Ireland gratefully acknowledges the funding provided by the Forest Service (Department of Agriculture and Food), the National Parks and Wildlife Service (Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government) and the Heritage Council. We would also like to thank the members of the organisational committee for their support in co-ordinating Ireland’s first major conference on native woodlands including: Dr Orla Fahy and Kevin Collins (Forest Service), Cara Doyle and Dr Declan Little (Woodlands of Ireland), Dr John Cross (National Parks and Wildlife Service) and Dr Sasha van der Sleesen (Sylvan Consulting Ecologists and GMIT). We extend a special thanks to our hosts at the Galway-Mayo Institute of Technology (GMIT), particularly Dr Paddy Walsh, Director of the Forest Management Group and the staff at GMIT for their help in the organisation and running of the conference. Thanks are also due to the conference chairpersons including Diarmuid McAree (Forest Service), Michael Starrett (Heritage Council), Dr Alan Craig (National Parks and Wildlife Service), Dr Eugene Hendrick (COFORD), Dr Philip Mc Ginnity (Marine Institute), Dr Fiona Mulholland (Environment and Heritage Service Northern Ireland) and Kevin Collins (Forest Service). Woodlands of Ireland furthermore wish to convey our gratitude to all those who contributed to the success of the conference including: Joe Gowran, Eoin Donnelly and Niall Millar (Muintir na Coille) for providing a demonstration on traditional wood products using small diameter timber.The Furniture College Letterfrack for providing pieces for exhibition.Andrew St Ledger for providing samples of handcarved furniture.
  • Phosphorus Adsorption of Some Brazilian Soils in Relations to Selected Soil Properties

    Phosphorus Adsorption of Some Brazilian Soils in Relations to Selected Soil Properties

    Open Journal of Soil Science, 2015, 5, 101-109 Published Online May 2015 in SciRes. http://www.scirp.org/journal/ojss http://dx.doi.org/10.4236/ojss.2015.55010 Phosphorus Adsorption of Some Brazilian Soils in Relations to Selected Soil Properties Valdinar Ferreira Melo1*, Sandra Cátia Pereira Uchôa1, Zachary N. Senwo2*, Ronilson José Pedroso Amorim3 1Department of Soil and Agricultural Engineering, Federal University of Roraima, Boa Vista, Brazil 2Department of Biological & Environmental Sciences, Alabama A&M University, Huntsville, USA 3Agronomy, Federal University of Roraima, Boa Vista, Brazil Email: *[email protected], *[email protected] Received 3 April 2015; accepted 17 May 2015; published 20 May 2015 Copyright © 2015 by authors and Scientific Research Publishing Inc. This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution International License (CC BY). http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ Abstract A major nutritional problem to crops grown in highly weathered Brazilian soils is phosphorus (P) deficiencies linked to their low availability and the capacity of the soils to fix P in insoluble forms. Our studies examined factors that might influence P behavior in soils of the Amazon region. This study was conducted to evaluate the maximum phosphate adsorption capacity (MPAC) of the soils developed from mafic rocks (diabase), their parent materials and other factors resulting in the formation of eutrophic soils having A chernozemic horizon associated with Red Nitosols (Alfisol) and Red Latosols (Oxisol) of the Amazonian environment. The MPAC was determined in triplicates as a function of the remnant P values. The different concentrations used to determine the MPAC allowed maximum adsorption values to be reached for all soils.
  • Diagnostic Horizons

    Diagnostic Horizons

    Exam III Wednesday, November 7th Study Guide Posted Tomorrow Review Session in Class on Monday the 4th Soil Taxonomy and Classification Diagnostic Horizons Epipedons Subsurface Mollic Albic Umbric Kandic Ochric Histic Argillic Melanic Spodic Plaggen Anthropic Oxic 1 Surface Horizons: Mollic- thick, dark colored, high %B.S., structure Umbric – same, but lower B.S. Ochric – pale, low O.M., thin Histic – High O.M., thick, wet, dark Sub-Surface Horizons: Argillic – illuvial accum. of clay (high activity) Kandic – accum. of clay (low activity) Spodic – Illuvial O.M. accumulation (Al and/or Fe) Oxic – highly weathered, kaolinite, Fe and Al oxides Albic – light colored, elluvial, low reactivity Elluviation and Illuviation Elluviation (E horizon) Organic matter Clays A A E E Bh horizon Bt horizon Bh Bt Spodic horizon Argillic horizon 2 Soil Taxonomy Diagnostic Epipedons Diagnostic Subsurface horizons Moisture Regimes Temperature Regimes Age Texture Depth Soil Taxonomy Soil forming processes, presence or Order Absence of major diagnostic horizons 12 Similar genesis Suborder 63 Grasslands – thick, dark Great group 250 epipedons High %B.S. Sub group 1400 Family 8000 Series 19,000 Soil Orders Entisols Histosols Inceptisols Andisols Gelisols Alfisols Mollisols Ultisols Spodosols Aridisols Vertisols Oxisols 3 Soil Orders Entisol Ent- Recent Histosol Hist- Histic (organic) Inceptisol Incept- Inception Alfisol Alf- Nonsense Ultisol Ult- Ultimate Spodosol Spod- Spodos (wood ash) Mollisol Moll- Mollis (soft) Oxisol Ox- oxide Andisol And- Ando (black) Gelisol