CT-measured macropores as affected by agroforestry and grass buffers for grazed pasture systems

Agroforestry Systems - Tập 79 - Trang 59-65 - 2010
Sandeep Kumar1, Stephen H. Anderson1, Ranjith P. Udawatta1,2, Clark J. Gantzer1
1Department of Soil, Environmental and Atmospheric Sciences, University of Missouri-Columbia, Columbia, USA
2Center for Agroforestry, University of Missouri-Columbia, Columbia, USA

Tóm tắt

Agroforestry and grass buffers have been proposed for improving water quality in watersheds. Soil porosity can be significantly influenced by buffer vegetation which affects water transport and water quality. The objective of the study was to compare differences in computed tomography (CT)-measured macroporosity (>1,000-μm diam.) and coarse mesoporosity (200- to 1,000-μm diam.) parameters for agroforestry and grass buffer systems associated with rotationally grazed and continuously grazed pasture systems. Soils at the site were Menfro silt loam (fine-silty, mixed, superactive, mesic Typic Hapludalf). Six replicate intact soil cores, 76.2 mm diam. by 76.2 mm long, were collected using a core sampler from the four treatments at five soil depths (0–50 cm at 10-cm intervals). Images were acquired using a hospital CT scanner and subsequently soil bulk density and saturated hydraulic conductivity (K sat) were measured after scanning the cores. Image-J software was used to analyze five equally spaced images from each core. Bulk density was 5.9% higher and saturated hydraulic conductivity (K sat) values were five times lower for pasture treatments relative to buffer treatments. For the 0–10 cm soil depth, CT-measured soil macroporosity (>1,000 μm diam.) was 13 times higher for the buffer treatments compared to the pasture treatments. Buffer treatments had greater macroporosity (0.020 m3 m−3) compared to pasture (0.0045 m3 m−3) treatments. CT-measured pore parameters were positively correlated with K sat. The project illustrates benefits of agroforestry and grass buffers for maintaining soil porosity critical for soil water and nutrient transport.

Tài liệu tham khảo

Alshibli KA, Sture S, Costes NC, Frank ML, Lankton MR, Batiste SN, Swanson RA (2000) Assessment of localized deformations in sands using X-ray computed tomography. Geotech Test J 23:274–299 Blake GR, Hartge KH (1986) Bulk density In: Klute A (ed) Methods of soil analysis. Part 1, 2nd edn, Agron Monogr 9. ASA and SSSA, Madison, pp 363–375 Carlson WD, Rowe T, Ketcham RA, Colbert MW (2003) Application of high resolution X-ray computed tomography in petrology meteoritics and palaeontology. In: Mess F, Swennen R, Van Geet M, Jacobs P (eds) Applications of X-ray computed tomography in the geosciences. Geological Society of London, Special Publication, vol 215, pp 7–22 Dosskey MG, Hoagland KD, Brandle JR (2007) Change in filter strip performance over ten years. J Soil Water Conserv 62:21–32 Eynard A, Schumacher TE, Lindstrom MJ, Malo DD (2004) Porosity and pore-size distribution in cultivated Ustolls and Usterts. Soil Sci Soc Am J 68:1927–1934 Gantzer CJ, Anderson SH (2002) Computed tomographic measurement of macroporosity in chisel-disk and no-tillage seedbeds. Soil Tillage Res 64:101–111 Heijs AWJ, Delange J, Schoute JFT, Bouma J (1995) Computed-tomography as a tool for non-destructive analysis of flow patterns in macroporous clay soils. Geoderma 64:183–196 Klute A, Dirksen C (1986) Hydraulic conductivity and diffusivity: laboratory methods. In: Klute A (ed) Methods of soil analysis. Part 1, 2nd edn, Agron Monogr 9. ASA and SSSA, Madison, pp 687–734 Kumar S, Anderson SH, Bricknell LG, Udawatta RP, Gantzer CJ (2008) Soil hydraulic properties influenced by agroforestry and grass buffers for grazed pasture systems. J Soil Water Conserv 63:224–232 Phillips DH, Lannutti JJ (1997) Measuring physical density with X-ray computed tomography. NDT & E International 30:339–350 Pierret A, Capowiez Y, Belzunces L, Moran CJ (2002) 3D reconstruction and quantification of macropores using X-ray computed tomography and image analysis. Geoderma 106:247–271 Rachman A, Anderson SH, Gantzer CJ (2005) Computed-tomographic measurement of soil macroporosity parameters as affected by stiff-stemmed grass hedges. Soil Sci Soc Am J 69:1609–1616 Rasband W (2002) NIH Image. J Research Service Branch, National Institute of Mental Health, National Institute of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA. Available online at http://rsb.info.nih.gov/ij/docs/intro.html (Verified 30 June, 2009) SAS Institute (1999) SAS user’s guide statistics. SAS Inst, Cary Seobi T, Anderson SH, Udawatta RP, Gantzer CJ (2005) Influence of grass and agroforestry buffer strips on soil hydraulic properties for an Albaqualf. Soil Sci Soc Am J 69:893–901 Udawatta RP, Krstansky JJ, Henderson GS, Garrett HE (2002) Agroforestry practices runoff and nutrient loss: a paired watershed comparison. J Environ Qual 31:1214–1225 Udawatta RP, Anderson SH, Gantzer CJ, Garrett HE (2006) Agroforestry and grass buffer influence on macropore characteristics: a computed tomography analysis. Soil Sci Soc Am J 70:1763–1773 Udawatta RP, Anderson SH, Gantzer CJ, Garrett HE (2008a) Influence of prairie restoration on CT-measured soil pore characteristics. J Environ Qual 37:219–228 Udawatta RP, Gantzer CJ, Anderson SH, Garrett HE (2008b) Agroforestry and grass buffer effects on high resolution X-ray CT-measured pore characteristics. Soil Sci Soc Am J 72:295–304