Soil fertility evaluation for urban forests and green spaces in Changchun City

Wei, 周伟 Zhou; Wenjie, 王文杰 Wang; Zhang, Bo; Lu, 肖路 Xiao; Hailiang, 吕海亮 Lü; Xingyuan, 何兴元 He

doi:10.5846/stxb201604180723

Cited by 5 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…First, the seven parameters were standardized to eliminate the difference in magnitudes among the parameters. The calculation formula was as follows:

where P i is the soil fraction fertility coefficient; C i is the attribute determination value; and X a , X b , and X c are the graded standard values of each soil attribute ( Table 4 ) [ 18 ].…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The soil capacity was in the range of 1.14–1.26 g/cm 3 , which is better for the emergence of seedlings and normal root growth because a range greater or smaller than this would have a smaller fertility coefficient after standardization [ 18 ]. Therefore, the standardization of the capacitance was carried out with special treatment.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…where P i is the soil fraction fertility coefficient; C i is the attribute determination value; and X a , X b , and X c are the graded standard values of each soil attribute (Table 4) [18]. Note: X a , X b , and X c are the grading standards for attributes.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Forest Ecosystem Service Trade-Offs/Synergies and System Function Optimization in Karst Desertification Control

Xiong,

Deng,

Zhang

et al. 2023

Plants

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Karst desertification control forests are essential for ecosystem multi functionality, but the trade-offs/synergies are unclear for forest ecosystem services. In order to clarify the trade-offs/synergies, this study was conducted on eight forest communities in a karst desertification control area and was based on vegetation surveys and structural and functional monitoring. It analyzes water holding capacity, species diversity, soil conservation, and carbon storage characteristics and their trade-off/synergies. The results indicate the following: (1) The Cladrastis platycarpa + Cotinus coggygria community (H1) had the highest water holding capacity and species diversity with values of 252.21 t·hm−2 and 2.56, respectively. Soil conservation was highest in the Zanthoxylum bungeanum + Glycine max community (H6), with an index value of 1.56. Carbon storage was the greatest in the Tectona grandis community (H8), at 103.93 t·hm−2. The results of these studies have shown that there are significant differences in different types of forest community ecosystem services. (2) Water holding capacity, species diversity, soil conservation, and carbon storage, all have synergistic relationships, suggesting a trend towards synergistic enhancement between the services. (3) The species diversity of the forest ecosystems was shown to be in a trade-off with carbon storage and soil conservation, which suggests that the services are in competition with each other. To further improve the service capacity of forest ecosystems, the trade-offs between the regulation of forest community structure and function and the improvement of services should be optimized.

show abstract

“…First, the seven parameters were standardized to eliminate the difference in magnitudes among the parameters. The calculation formula was as follows:

where P i is the soil fraction fertility coefficient; C i is the attribute determination value; and X a , X b , and X c are the graded standard values of each soil attribute ( Table 4 ) [ 18 ].…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%