| Literature DB >> 31712743 |
Zeyong Lei1, Dongwei Yu2, Fengyan Zhou3, Yansong Zhang2, Deliang Yu2, Yanping Zhou2, Yangang Han2.
Abstract
The change of soil organic carbon and its influencing factors after afforestation in sandy land should be taken into account. Here, the factors would be revealed which would influence the SOC dynamics to a depth of 100 cm during the development of Mongolian pine plantations in Horqin sandy land, northeast China. The chronosequence method was used to quantify the change of SOC in vertical distribution and influencing factors following conversion grassland to Pinus sylvestris var. mongolica forest in semi-arid sandy land, northeast China. Then the traditional statistical approaches were used to assessed the influence of the identified factors. Stand age played a major role in SOC dynamics. It took 38 years for SOC in 0-10 cm layer to recover to its initial level after afforestation, and 46 years for 10-20 cm layer. SOC accumulation increased with the age of Mongolian pine plantation. Over-mature forest fully embodied the advantage of SOC accumulation. In addition, the changes of SOC in 0-10 cm layer were also affected by TN, TP, TK and soil moisture, and those below 10 cm soil layers were related to the effects of TN, TP, TK, BD and CS.Entities:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31712743 PMCID: PMC6848129 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-019-52945-5
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Figure 1Location of the study area within Zhanggutai Town, Zhangwu County of Liaoning Province, China.
Survey results for the sample plots, F stands for flat terrain site type, S.U. stands for slight undulate terrain.
| Plot number | Stand age (yrs) | Stand density (plants per hectare) | Average tree height (m) | DBH (cm) | Site type |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 13 | 975 | 3.36 | 7.17 | F |
| 2 | 13 | 1625 | 3.66 | 7.27 | F |
| 3 | 13 | 1175 | 3.44 | 6.67 | F |
| 4 | 13 | 625 | 3.33 | 7.43 | F |
| 5 | 13 | 1425 | 3.82 | 7.36 | F |
| 6 | 25 | 1075 | 8.01 | 12.40 | S.U. |
| 7 | 25 | 1175 | 7.80 | 13.09 | S.U. |
| 8 | 25 | 500 | 7.40 | 15.79 | S.U. |
| 9 | 25 | 1725 | 6.73 | 11.23 | S.U. |
| 10 | 25 | 1250 | 10.23 | 14.79 | S.U. |
| 11 | 25 | 775 | 7.55 | 14.51 | S.U. |
| 12 | 44 | 475 | 9.81 | 21.09 | S.U. |
| 13 | 44 | 400 | 9.45 | 20.67 | S.U. |
| 14 | 44 | 450 | 10.34 | 21.84 | S.U. |
| 15 | 44 | 450 | 10.45 | 21.83 | S.U. |
| 16 | 44 | 450 | 9.70 | 21.89 | S.U. |
| 17 | 56 | 400 | 12.91 | 22.22 | F |
| 18 | 56 | 300 | 12.43 | 23.65 | F |
| 19 | 56 | 525 | 12.27 | 20.48 | F |
| 20 | 56 | 450 | 13.38 | 21.80 | F |
SOC stepwise regression analysis (only factors with significant correlations are listed, 0 < VIF < 10 denotes there is no collinearity, where VIF is Variance Inflation Factor).
| Soil layer (cm) | Affecting factor | Coefficient estimate | SD |
| VIF |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0–10 | Stand age | 0.928 | 0.151 | <0.001 | 4.277 | 0.925 |
| TK | −0.502 | 0.106 | <0.001 | 2.113 | ||
| TP | −0.430 | 0.100 | 0.001 | 1.890 | ||
| TN | −0.392 | 0.133 | 0.011 | 3.329 | ||
| Soil moisture | 0.197 | 0.089 | 0.044 | 1.498 | ||
| 10–20 | Stand age | 0.830 | 0.221 | 0.002 | 5.535 | 0.877 |
| TP | −0.687 | 0.171 | 0.001 | 3.333 | ||
| CS | −0.373 | 0.120 | 0.008 | 1.644 | ||
| TN | −0.295 | 0.112 | 0.020 | 1.431 | ||
| 20–40 | TK | 0.735 | 0.326 | 0.039 | 3.073 | 0.446 |
| BD | 0.714 | 0.206 | 0.003 | 1.229 | ||
| 40–60 | CS | −0.550 | 0.197 | 0.012 | 1.000 | 0.302 |
| 60–80 | TN | −0.664 | 0.253 | 0.020 | 1.615 | 0.447 |
| 80–100 | Stand age | 1.041 | 0.160 | <0.001 | 1.511 | 0.729 |
| CS | −0.344 | 0.150 | 0.036 | 1.332 | ||
| TP | −0.317 | 0.142 | 0.040 | 1.189 |
Figure 2Vertical distribution of SOC variation. (a) 13 yrs, (b) 25 yrs, (c) 44 yrs, (d) 56 yrs.
Figure 3The relationship between the SOC variation and stand age. After the establishment of Pinus sylvestris var. mongolica forests, the SOC in the 0–100 cm soil layers were significantly correlated with stand age.
Stepwise regression analysis of soil influencing factors (only factors with significant correlations are listed, 0 < VIF < 10 denotes there is no collinearity, where VIF is Variance Inflation Factor).
| Soil layer (cm) | Soil properties | Affecting factor | Coefficient estimate | SD |
| VIF |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0–10 | TK | SOC | −0.589 | 0.143 | 0.001 | 1.668 | 0.805 |
| CS | 0.402 | 0.139 | 0.011 | 1.590 | |||
| W | 0.312 | 0.114 | 0.015 | 1.070 | |||
| TP | Stand age | 1.512 | 0.243 | <0.001 | 3.850 | 0.769 | |
| SOC | −1.245 | 0.223 | <0.001 | 3.230 | |||
| TN | −0.582 | 0.216 | 0.017 | 3.031 | |||
| TK | −0.472 | 0.203 | 0.035 | 2.675 | |||
| TN | Stand age | 1.250 | 0.271 | <0.001 | 5.636 | 0.805 | |
| SOC | −0.620 | 0.265 | 0.033 | 5.393 | |||
| TP | −0.517 | 0.188 | 0.015 | 2.717 | |||
| CS | −0.408 | 0.149 | 0.015 | 1.715 | |||
| W | SOC | 1.133 | 0.328 | 0.004 | 3.230 | 0.500 | |
| TK | 0.893 | 0.299 | 0.009 | 2.675 | |||
| Stand age | −0.800 | 0.358 | 0.041 | 3.850 | |||
| 10–20 | TP | Stand age | 0.985 | 0.122 | <0.001 | 1.537 | 0.845 |
| SOC | −0.706 | 0.123 | <0.001 | 1.565 | |||
| CS | −0.395 | 0.103 | 0.001 | 1.090 | |||
| CS | TP | −0.929 | 0.182 | <0.001 | 1.594 | 0.667 | |
| W | −0.804 | 0.184 | <0.001 | 1.628 | |||
| SOC | −0.409 | 0.147 | 0.013 | 1.042 | |||
| TN | Stand age | 0.636 | 0.237 | 0.016 | 1.537 | 0.417 | |
| 20–40 | TK | Stand age | −1.187 | 0.125 | <0.001 | 1.927 | 0.878 |
| W | −0.534 | 0.136 | 0.001 | 2.275 | |||
| SOC | 0.237 | 0.108 | 0.045 | 1.436 | |||
| BD | TP | −0.733 | 0.142 | <0.001 | 1.233 | 0.740 | |
| TN | −0.588 | 0.132 | <0.001 | 1.063 | |||
| TK | −0.561 | 0.146 | 0.001 | 1.302 | |||
| 40–60 | CS | W | −0.384 | 0.189 | 0.046 | 1.521 | 0.623 |
| 60–80 | TN | TK | 0.811 | 0.220 | 0.002 | 1.606 | 0.550 |
| TP | 0.696 | 0.245 | 0.012 | 1.998 | |||
| SOC | −0.393 | 0.182 | 0.048 | 1.109 | |||
| 80–100 | CS | TK | 0.539 | 0.139 | 0.001 | 1.214 | 0.746 |
| Stand age | 0.467 | 0.158 | 0.009 | 1.575 | |||
| W | −0.404 | 0.151 | 0.017 | 1.443 | |||
| TP | pH | 0.570 | 0.194 | 0.009 | 1.000 | 0.325 |