Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorMapfumo, E.
dc.contributor.authorNaeth, M. A.
dc.contributor.authorBaron, V. S.
dc.contributor.authorDick, A. C.
dc.contributor.authorChanasyk, D. S.
dc.date.accessioned2020-09-18T04:57:24Z
dc.date.available2020-09-18T04:57:24Z
dc.date.issued2002-01-01
dc.identifier.citationMapfumo, E., Naeth, M. A., Baron, V. S., Dick, A. C., & Chanasyk, D. S. (2002). Grazing impacts on litter and roots: Perennial versus annual grasses. Journal of Range Management, 55(1), 16-22.
dc.identifier.issn0022-409X
dc.identifier.doi10.2307/4003258
dc.identifier.doi10.2458/azu_jrm_v55i1_mapfumo
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10150/643620
dc.description.abstractSoil carbon (C) and nitrogen (N) storage in grasslands is a function of litter and root mass production. Research on how annual grasses compare with perennials for above ground and below ground mass production, and contributions to the soil C pool under pasture management is scarce. The objective of this research was to evaluate grazing intensity effects on litter and root mass, C and N pools of perennial grasses, smooth bromegrass (Bromus inermis L.) and meadow bromegrass (Bromus riparius Rhem.), and the annual grass, winter triticale (X Triticosecale Wittmack). Litter mass and C pool for the perennial grasses were greater than those for triticale. Litter C and N pools generally decreased with increased grazing intensity. Root mass was greater for the perennial grasses than for triticale at all grazing intensities. Meadow bromegrass generally produced more root mass than smooth bromegrass. Root C and N pools for triticale were 31 and 27%, respectively, of that for the perennial grasses. Estimated total C contribution (roots and litter) to the resistant soil organic C pool was 1.5 times greater for light compared to heavy grazing. Total C (litter + root) contribution for perennial grasses was 2.7 times greater than that for triticale. Perennial grasses provided a larger litter base and root system that promote greater storage of C in the soil compared with triticale.
dc.language.isoen
dc.publisherSociety for Range Management
dc.relation.urlhttps://rangelands.org/
dc.rightsCopyright © Society for Range Management.
dc.rights.urihttp://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/
dc.subjectcarbon
dc.subjectBromus inermis
dc.subjectBromus riparius
dc.subjecttriticale
dc.subjectautumn
dc.subjectannuals
dc.subjectsown grasslands
dc.subjectroots
dc.subjectroot systems
dc.subjectperennials
dc.subjectAlberta
dc.subjectchemical composition
dc.subjectspring
dc.subjectweight
dc.subjectnitrogen
dc.subjectgrazing intensity
dc.subjectsoil chemistry
dc.subjectplant litter
dc.subjectseasonal variation
dc.subjectannuals
dc.subjectorganic C
dc.subjectperennials
dc.subjecttotal N
dc.subjectsequestration
dc.titleGrazing impacts on litter and roots: Perennial versus annual grasses
dc.typetext
dc.typeArticle
dc.identifier.journalJournal of Range Management
dc.description.collectioninformationThe Journal of Range Management archives are made available by the Society for Range Management and the University of Arizona Libraries. Contact lbry-journals@email.arizona.edu for further information.
dc.eprint.versionFinal published version
dc.description.admin-noteMigrated from OJS platform August 2020
dc.source.volume55
dc.source.issue1
dc.source.beginpage16-22
refterms.dateFOA2020-09-18T04:57:24Z


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Name:
9682-9563-1-PB.pdf
Size:
920.5Kb
Format:
PDF

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record