...
首页> 外文期刊>Journal of Ecosystems and Management >Evidence supporting the need for a common soil monitoring protocol
【24h】

Evidence supporting the need for a common soil monitoring protocol

机译:支持通用土壤监测协议的证据

获取原文
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       

摘要

Many public land management agencies monitor forest soils for levels of disturbance related to management activities. Although several soil disturbance monitoring protocols based on visual observation have been developed to assess the amount and types of disturbance caused by forest management, no common method is currently used on National Forest lands in the United States. We present data on relative soil disturbance based on harvest system from National Forests throughout Montana and Idaho. Because each National Forest uses its own method for data collection, we developed a common, well-defined visual class system for analyses based on the existing soil monitoring data that accurately normalized disparate classifications. Using this common system, we detected differences in soil disturbance between the ground-based and overhead harvest systems; however, no site attributes (slope, aspect, soil texture, etc.) affected soil disturbance levels. The individual National Forest was the most important factor explaining differences among harvest units. The effect of National Forest may be explained by different forest types, soils, harvest practices, or administrative procedures, but the most likely explanation is differences among the various qualitative classification approaches to soil disturbance monitoring. Althoughthis analysis used a large data set, our inability to correlate disturbance with site characteristics and the differences between monitoring methods points to the need for common terms and comparable guidelines for soil disturbance monitoring.
机译:许多公共土地管理机构监视森林土壤中与管理活动有关的干扰程度。尽管已经开发了几种基于视觉观察的土壤扰动监测方案来评估森林经营造成的扰动的数量和类型,但是目前在美国的国家林地上没有使用通用的方法。我们基于蒙大拿州和爱达荷州国家森林的采伐系统,介绍了相对土壤扰动的数据。由于每个国家森林都使用自己的方法进行数据收集,因此我们基于现有的土壤监测数据开发了一个通用的,定义明确的视觉分类系统进行分析,这些数据可以准确地对不同的分类进行归一化。使用这个通用系统,我们发现了地面和高架收割系统之间土壤扰动的差异。但是,没有站点属性(坡度,纵横比,土壤质地等)影响土壤干扰水平。单个国家森林是解释收获单位之间差异的最重要因素。国家森林的影响可以用不同的森林类型,土壤,采伐方式或行政程序来解释,但是最可能的解释是土壤扰动监测的各种定性分类方法之间的差异。尽管此分析使用了大量数据集,但我们无法将干扰与站点特征相关联,并且监测方法之间的差异表明需要通用术语和类似的土壤干扰监测指南。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号