Comparison of Sampling Methods Used to Evaluate Forest Soil Bulk Density

The objective of this study was to compare forest soil bulk density values obtained through conventional sampling methods such as the volumetric ring (VR: diameter 5 cm, length 10 cm) and paraffin sealed clod (PSC), with a variation of the VR, where rectangular boxes (RB) of four different dimensions were used. Sampling transects were established on a machine operating trail located in a beech (Fagus orientalis Lipsky) stand in Northern Iran. At each transect, three soil samples were collected at three different locations. Samples from different methods were spaced by a 50 cm distance to avoid direct interactions. The soil class of our study area was Combisols according to the WRB classification with a clay texture. Soil bulk density differed significantly between the three sampling methods. The lowest values were obtained with the RB (average 1.25 g cm), followed by the VR (average 1.40 g cm), and lastly the PSC (average 1.52 g cm). The values obtained with four variations of the RB method ranged from 1.22 to 1.28 g cm and were not found significantly different. When soil bulk density was calculated after the removal of the weight and volume of roots included in the samples, the values were determined to be higher than before but with the same range of magnitude. The lowest coefficient of variation was found for RB4 (CV=2.3%), while the highest values were observed for VR and RB1 (CV=5.7%).

[1]  J. E. Pilotto,et al.  QUALITATIVE AND QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS OF SOIL SAMPLES BY COMPUTERIZED TOMOGRAPHY , 2005 .

[2]  B. D. Soane,et al.  Soil compaction in crop production , 1994 .

[3]  A. Najafi,et al.  Assessing Site Disturbance Using Two Ground Survey Methods in a Mountain Forest , 2010 .

[4]  P. E. Rieke,et al.  Soil Bulk Density Analysis in Three Dimensions by Computed Tomographic Scanning , 1982 .

[5]  Peter Pan,et al.  British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data , 2010 .

[6]  T. Kozlowski Soil Compaction and Growth of Woody Plants , 1999 .

[7]  Gerrit H. de Rooij,et al.  Methods of Soil Analysis. Part 4. Physical Methods , 2004 .

[8]  D. R. Freitag Methods of measuring soil compaction , 1971 .

[9]  Eric R. Labelle,et al.  Soil Compaction Caused by Cut‐to‐Length Forest Operations and Possible Short‐Term Natural Rehabilitation of Soil Density , 2011 .

[10]  A. Najafi,et al.  Soil disturbance following four wheel rubber skidder logging on the steep trail in the north mountainous forest of Iran , 2009 .

[11]  R. Sands,et al.  Compaction of forest soils. A review , 1980 .

[12]  Hannes Flühler,et al.  Compaction of agricultural and forest subsoils by tracked heavy construction machinery , 2004 .

[13]  Y. Kalra,et al.  METHODS MANUAL FOR FOREST SOIL AND PLANT ANALYSIS , 1991 .

[14]  L. Pires,et al.  The use of gamma ray computed tomography to investigate soil compaction due to core sampling devices , 2004 .

[15]  R. VanRemortel,et al.  Comparison of clod and core methods for determination of soil bulk density , 1993 .

[16]  Widianto,et al.  Assessing soil compaction with two different methods of soil bulk density measurement in oil palm plantation soil , 2013 .

[17]  R. Naghdi,et al.  Soil Compaction and Porosity Changes Caused During the Operation of Timberjack 450C Skidder in Northern Iran , 2015 .

[18]  B. Frey,et al.  Compaction of forest soils with heavy logging machinery affects soil bacterial community structure , 2009 .

[19]  Ramin Naghdi,et al.  Effects of Skidder on Soil Compaction, Forest Floor Removal and Rut Formation , 2016 .

[20]  G. Botta,et al.  Traffic alternatives for harvesting soybean (Glycine max L.) : Effect on yields and soil under a direct sowing system , 2007 .

[21]  L. Pires,et al.  Soil bulk density evaluation by conventional and nuclear methods , 2005 .

[22]  Hervé Rey,et al.  Architecture and development of the oil-palm (Elaeis guineensis Jacq.) root system , 1997, Plant and Soil.

[23]  Philippe Duchaufour Manual de edafología , 1987 .