2007
DOI: 10.1016/j.foreco.2007.01.053
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Carbon, nitrogen and phosphorus leaching after site preparation at a boreal forest clear-cut area

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

4
80
0

Year Published

2011
2011
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
8
2

Relationship

2
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 98 publications
(84 citation statements)
references
References 30 publications
4
80
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The results are in line with previous studies indicating that inorganic N output occurs predominantly as NO 3 -N rather than NH 4 -N and that most of the leached N from boreal clear-cut forests is organic N (Grip 1982;Lamontagne et al 2000;Löfgren et al 2009, Table 4). The increases in stream water NO 3 -N concentrations and loads in C34 could result from higher deposition loads due to the lack of N retention by tree canopy (Piirainen et al 2002), greater snow accumulation on clear-cut areas (Varhola et al 2010), reduced nutrient uptake by trees and understory vegetation (Piirainen et al 2002;Finér et al 2003;Palviainen et al 2004Palviainen et al , 2005Palviainen et al , 2007, and increased nitrification in the litter layer and soil (Paavolainen and Smolander 1998;Smolander et al 2000Smolander et al , 2001Piirainen et al 2007). NO 3 -N is poorly retained in the soil by sorption and can easily be leached to ground and surface waters after clear-cutting (Ahtiainen 1990;Rosén et al 1996;Kubin 1998;Kreutzweiser et al 2008).…”
Section: Discussion Differences Between Catchmentsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The results are in line with previous studies indicating that inorganic N output occurs predominantly as NO 3 -N rather than NH 4 -N and that most of the leached N from boreal clear-cut forests is organic N (Grip 1982;Lamontagne et al 2000;Löfgren et al 2009, Table 4). The increases in stream water NO 3 -N concentrations and loads in C34 could result from higher deposition loads due to the lack of N retention by tree canopy (Piirainen et al 2002), greater snow accumulation on clear-cut areas (Varhola et al 2010), reduced nutrient uptake by trees and understory vegetation (Piirainen et al 2002;Finér et al 2003;Palviainen et al 2004Palviainen et al , 2005Palviainen et al , 2007, and increased nitrification in the litter layer and soil (Paavolainen and Smolander 1998;Smolander et al 2000Smolander et al , 2001Piirainen et al 2007). NO 3 -N is poorly retained in the soil by sorption and can easily be leached to ground and surface waters after clear-cutting (Ahtiainen 1990;Rosén et al 1996;Kubin 1998;Kreutzweiser et al 2008).…”
Section: Discussion Differences Between Catchmentsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Hydrological issues and biological and chemical processes in the water are influenced by activities such as harvesting and fertilization. These ordinary forest operations tend to affect the water quality negatively compared with the status of unmanaged land [56,57]. According to the E.U.…”
Section: Water Biodiversity and Cultural Heritagementioning
confidence: 99%
“…DOM exports are large because peatlands are in close hydrological contact with receiving watercourses, peat C storage is large, organic matter decomposition is incomplete due to the anaerobic conditions, and the peat contains few compounds that can retain C such as iron and aluminium (Domisch et al 2000;Kalbitz et al 2000;Freeman et al 2001). In mineral soil sites, C that is leached from organic layer is effectively retained on iron-and aluminium-rich mineral soil layers even after disturbances such as clear-cutting and soil preparation (Piirainen et al 2007) and eventually a large proportion of organic matter they contain are mineralized into CO 2 . The amounts of TOC, DON and DOP in streams and lakes have been shown to be significantly related to soil type with higher TOC, DON and DOP export from peatland dominated catchments in comparison with forest dominated upland catchments (Willett et al 2004;Kortelainen et al 2006).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%