Muestra métricas de impacto externas asociadas a la publicación. Para mayor detalle:
| Indexado |
|
||
| DOI | 10.5849/FORSCI.14-207 | ||
| Año | 2015 | ||
| Tipo | artículo de investigación |
Citas Totales
Autores Afiliación Chile
Instituciones Chile
% Participación
Internacional
Autores
Afiliación Extranjera
Instituciones
Extranjeras
The effects of tillage, vegetation control, and fertilizer treatments applied at stand establishment of Pious radiata D. Don. at three sites (Sand, Clay, and Ash) in Chile were examined 10 years after planting. Selected sites were typical of sites that routinely received tillage as a normal part of site preparation operations in Chile. At each site, we used four blocks of a split plot design with whole plots testing tillage effects (none or subsoiling + bedding) and subplots testing a factorial combination of vegetation control (none or 2-year banded) and fertilization (boron at establishment or nitrogen, phosphorus, and boron at establishment + nitrogen, phosphorus, potassium, and boron after 2 years). We estimated the main effect growth responses, determined response types (Type A, B, C, D), and calculated main effect volume growth age shifts for each site. Vegetation control increased volume growth 7-99% through 10 years (Type A, B, or (responses), which resulted in volume age shifts of 3.4, 1.3, and 1.0 years for the Sand, Clay, and Ash sites, respectively. Fertilization increased volume growth at the Clay site (14%, Type A) and decreased volume growth at the Ash site (6%, Type D), with volume age shifts of 1.0 and 1.0 years for the Sand and Clay sites, respectively. Tillage increased survival at the Sand site and decreased height growth at the Ash site (4%, Type D) with volume age shifts of 0.9 and 0.1 years for the Sand and Ash sites, respectively. Vegetation control likely ameliorated water (Sand and Clay sites) and light (Ash site) limitations that were critical for improved growth. Fertilization addressed secondary nutrient limitations, especially on the Clay site. Tillage provided little benefit, likely because the sites were well drained and soil bulk density was not at a level where limitations to root growth would be found. When determining which treatments to apply, managers should have an understanding of what resources may be limiting and select the appropriate treatment to ameliorate those limitations in the most cost-effective manner. For sites similar to those in this study, vegetation control would likely ameliorate resource limitations in a cost-effective manner.
| Ord. | Autor | Género | Institución - País |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Albaugh, Timothy J. | Hombre |
VIRGINIA POLYTECH INST & STATE UNIV - Estados Unidos
|
| 2 | Álvarez, José | Hombre |
Weyerhaeuser Co - Estados Unidos
|
| 3 | RUBILAR-PONS, RAFAEL ALEJANDRO | Hombre |
Universidad de Concepción - Chile
|
| 4 | Fox, Tom | Hombre |
VIRGINIA POLYTECH INST & STATE UNIV - Estados Unidos
|
| 5 | Allen, Howard Lee | Hombre |
ProFor Consulting - Estados Unidos
|
| 6 | Stape, Jose L. | Hombre |
N Carolina State Univ - Estados Unidos
|
| 7 | Mardones, O. | Hombre |
| Fuente |
|---|
| Departamento de Silvicultura, Facultad de Ciencias Forestales, Universidad de Concepcion |
| Department of Forest Resources and Environmental Conservation at Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University |
| Department of Forestry and Environmental Resources at North Carolina State University |
| Virginia Agricultural Experiment Station |
| Program McIntire Stennis of the National Institute of Food and Agriculture, US Department of Agriculture |
| Agradecimiento |
|---|
| We appreciate support from Forest Productivity Cooperative members and especially Forestal Mininco for their role in the establishment and management of the trials central to this publication. We gratefully acknowledge the support provided by the Department of Forest Resources and Environmental Conservation at Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, the Departamento de Silvicultura, Facultad de Ciencias Forestales, Universidad de Concepcion, and the Department of Forestry and Environmental Resources at North Carolina State University. Funding for this work was provided in part by the Virginia Agricultural Experiment Station and the Program McIntire Stennis of the National Institute of Food and Agriculture, US Department of Agriculture. The use of trade names in this paper does not imply endorsement by the associated agencies of the products named nor criticism of similar ones not mentioned. |