DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

The effect of soil heterogeneity and container length on the growth of Populus euramericana in a greenhouse study

  • Rahman, Afroja (Department of Environment & Forest Resources, Chungnam National University) ;
  • Meng, Loth (Department of Environment & Forest Resources, Chungnam National University) ;
  • Han, Si Ho (Department of Environment & Forest Resources, Chungnam National University) ;
  • Seo, Gi Chun (VERMIFARM) ;
  • Jung, Mun Ho (Mine Reclamation Corporation) ;
  • Park, Byung Bae (Department of Environment & Forest Resources, Chungnam National University)
  • Received : 2017.08.17
  • Accepted : 2018.04.18
  • Published : 2018.06.30

Abstract

Soil characteristics along with various container lengths have an important role in the early survival rate and growth of seedlings by influencing the seedling quality. This experiment was conducted to investigate the effect of container length and different soil mixtures on the growth of poplar in a greenhouse. Two types of soil, homogeneous vs. heterogeneous, were used along with two container lengths (30 vs. 60 cm). The heterogeneous soil was made by dividing 50% vermiculite from a mixture of 25% vermicompost and 25% nursery soil in volume. For the homogeneous soil, the above three soil types were mixed together. Populus euramericana clone cuttings were planted in late April, and then, the growth height, root collar diameter (RCD) and biomass were measured in August. The height of the poplar was not significantly affected by container length and soil type, but the RCD was significantly affected by soil type. Leaf and root biomass was higher at the long container than at the short container for both soil treatments, but stem biomass was lower at the heterogeneous soil than at the homogeneous soil treatment. Root to shoot biomass ratio was higher at the heterogeneous soil treatment than at the homogeneous soil treatment by 12%. In conclusion, heterogeneous soil along with a long container is suitable to increase the carbon allocation into the root.

Keywords

References

  1. Bremner JM. 1996. Nitrogen-total. In Methods of Soil Analysis Part 3-Chemical Methods edited by Sparks DL, Page AL, Helmke PA, Loeppert RH. pp. 1085-1121. Soil Science Society of America, American Society of Agronomy, Madison, WI, USA.
  2. Burdett AN. 1983. Quality control in the production of forest planting stock. The Forestry Chronicle 59:132-138. https://doi.org/10.5558/tfc59132-3
  3. Cain ML, Subler S, Evans JP, Fortin MJ. 1999. Sampling spatial and temporal variation in soil nitrogen availability. Oecologia 118:397-404. https://doi.org/10.1007/s004420050741
  4. Carlson WC. 1986. Root system considerations in the quality of loblolly pine seedlings. Southern Journal of Applied Forestry 10:87-92.
  5. Chapin FS. III. 1980. The mineral nutrition of wild plants. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 11:233-260. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.es.11.110180.001313
  6. Climent J, Chambel MR, Pardos M, Lario F, Villar-Salvador P. 2011. Biomass allocation and foliage heteroblasty in hard pine species respond differentially to reduction in rooting volume. European Journal of Forest Research 130:841-850. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10342-010-0476-y
  7. Cox MS. 2001. The Lancaster soil test method as an alternative to the Mehlich 3 soil test method1. Soil Science 166:484-489. https://doi.org/10.1097/00010694-200107000-00006
  8. Dominguez-Lerena S, Sierra NH, Manzano IC, Bueno LO, Rubira JP, Mexal JG. 2006. Pot characteristics influence Pinus pinea seedling development in the nursery and field. Forest Ecology and Management 221:63-71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2005.08.031
  9. Drew MC, Saker LR. 1978. Nutrient supply and the growth of the seminal root system in barley. III. Compensatory increases in growth of lateral roots, and the rates of phosphate uptake in response to a localized supply of phosphate. Journal of Experimental Botany 29:435-451. https://doi.org/10.1093/jxb/29.2.435
  10. Fransen B, de Kroon H, Berendse F. 2001. Soil nutrient heterogeneity alters competition between two perennial grass species. Ecology 82:2534-2546. https://doi.org/10.1890/0012-9658(2001)082[2534:SNHACB]2.0.CO;2
  11. Granato TC, Raper JR CD. 1989. Proliferation of maize (Zea mays L.) roots in response to localized supply of nitrate. Journal of Experimental Botany 40:263-275. https://doi.org/10.1093/jxb/40.2.263
  12. Gross KL, Pregitzer KS, Burton AJ. 1995. Spatial variation in nitrogen availability in three successional plant communities. Journal of Ecology 1995:357-367.
  13. Hobbs SD, Lavender DP, Wearstler KA. 1982. Performance of container-grown Douglas-fir on droughty sites in southwest Oregon, pp. 373-378. In Scarratt JB, Glerum C and Plexman CA, (Eds) Proceedings, Canadian Containerized Tree Seedling Symposium. Department of Environment, Canadian Forestry Service, Great Lakes Forest Research Center, Sault Ste. Marie, Ontario, Canada.
  14. Hodge A. 2004. The plastic plant: Root responses to heterogeneous supplies of nutrients. New phytologist 162:9-24. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8137.2004.01015.x
  15. Hutchings MJ, de Kroon H. 1994. Foraging in plants: The role of morphological plasticity in resource acquisition. Advances in Ecological Research 25:159-238.
  16. Jackson RB, Caldwell MM. 1993. The scale of nutrient heterogeneity around individual plants and its quantification with geostatistics. Ecology 74:612-614. https://doi.org/10.2307/1939320
  17. Jackson RB, Canadell J, Ehleringer JR, Mooney HA, Sala OE, Schulze ED. 1996. A global analysis of root distributions for terrestrial biomes. Oecologia 108:389-411. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00333714
  18. Jacobs DF, Goodman RC, Gardiner ES, Salifu KF, Overton RP, Hernandez G. 2012. Nursery stock quality as an indicator of bottomland hardwood forest restoration success in the lower Mississippi river alluvial valley. Scandinavian Journal of Forest Research 27:255-269. https://doi.org/10.1080/02827581.2011.628948
  19. Kim CH, Choi JM. 2016. Influence of pre-planting application of dolomite at various rates in coir-dust containing root media on the growth of red-leaf lettuce. Korean Journal of Agricultural Science 43:176-185. https://doi.org/10.7744/kjoas.20160020
  20. Kozlowski TT, Davies WJ. 1975. Control of water balance in western hemlock seedlings from various dormancy induction transplanted trees. Arboriculture 1:1-10.
  21. Kuo S. 1996. Phosphorus. In Methods of Soil Analysis Part 3 - Chemical Methods edited by Sparks DL, Page AL, Helmke PA, Loeppert RH. pp. 869-919. Soil Science Society of America, American Society of Agronomy, Madison, WI, USA.
  22. Leskovar DI, Cantliffe DJ and Stoffella PJ. 1990. Root growth and root-shoot interaction in transplants and direct seeded pepper plants. Environmental and Experimental Botany 30:349-354. https://doi.org/10.1016/0098-8472(90)90047-8
  23. McCreary DD and Duryea ML. 1985. OSU vigor test: Principles, procedures, and predictive ability. Methods of Soil and Plant Analysis. In Im JN, editor. 2000. pp. 1-202. National Institute of Agricultural Science and Technology, RDA, Suwon, Korea.
  24. Nelson DW, Sommers LE. 1996. Total Carbon, Organic Carbon, and Organic Matter. In Methods of Soil Analysis Part 3 - Chemical Methods edited by Sparks DL, Page AL, Helmke PA, Loeppert RH. pp. 961-1010. Soil Science Society of America, American Society of Agronomy, Madison, WI, USA.
  25. NeSmith DS, Duval JR. 1998. The effect of container size. HortTechnology 8:495-498.
  26. Pande A, Pandey P, Kaushik S. 2017. Co-inoculation of Burkholderia cepacia and Alcaligenes aquatilis enhances plant growth of maize (Zea mays) under green house and field condition. Korean Journal of Agricultural Science 44:196-210.
  27. Poorter H, Buhler J, van Dusschoten D, Climent J, Postma JA. 2012a. Pot size matters: A meta-analysis of the effects of rooting volume on plant growth. Functional Plant Biology 39:839-850. https://doi.org/10.1071/FP12049
  28. Poorter H, Niklas KJ, Reich PB, Oleksyn J, Poot P, Mommer L. 2012b. Biomass allocation to leaves, stems and roots: Meta-analyses of interspecific variation and environmental control. New Phytologist 193:30-50. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8137.2011.03952.x
  29. Rietveld WJ. 1989. Transplanting stress in bareroot conifer seedlings: Its development and progression to establishment. Northern Journal of Applied Forestry 6:99-107.
  30. Ritchie GA. 1984. Assessing seedling quality. In Forestry nursery manual: Production of bareroot seedlings. pp. 243-259. Springer, Hague, Netherlands.
  31. Robinson D. 1994. The responses of plants to non-uniform supplies of nutrients. New Phytologist 127:635-674. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8137.1994.tb02969.x
  32. Robinson D, van Vuuren MM. 1998. Responses of wild plants to nutrient patches in relation to growth rate and life-form.Variation in plant growth. pp. 237-257. Backhuys, Leiden, Netherlands.
  33. Robbins NS, Pharr DM. 1988. Effect of restricted root growth on carbohydrate metabolism and whole plant growth of Cucumis sativus L. Plant Physiology 87:409-413. https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.87.2.409
  34. Ryel RJ, Caldwell MM, Manwaring JH. 1996. Temporal dynamics of soil spatial heterogeneity in sagebrush-wheatgrass steppe during a growing season. Plant and Soil 184:299-309. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00010459
  35. Sands R. 1984. Transplanting stress in radiata pine. Australian forest research 14:67-72.
  36. Sinclair TR, Horie T. 1989. Leaf nitrogen, photosynthesis, and crop radiation use efficiency: A review. Crop Science 29:90-98. https://doi.org/10.2135/cropsci1989.0011183X002900010023x
  37. Sumner ME, Miller WP. 1996. Cation exchange capacity and exchange coefficients. Methods of Soil Analysis Part 3-Chemical Methods 1996:1201-1229.
  38. Timmis R. 1980. Stress resistance and quality criteria for tree seedlings: analysis, measurement and use. New Zealand Journal of Science 10:21-53.
  39. Tonutti P, Giulivo C. 1990. Effect of available soil volume on growth of young kiwi plants (1). Acta Horticulturae 282:283-290.
  40. Walkley A, Black IA. 1934. An examination of the Degtjareff method for determining soil organic matter and a proposed modification of the chromic acid titration method. Soil Science 37:29-38. https://doi.org/10.1097/00010694-193401000-00003