HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Web of Science (18) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Page-Dumroese, D. S. Articles by Mroz, G. D. Search for Related Content PubMed Articles by Page-Dumroese, D. S. Articles by Mroz, G. D. GeoRef GeoRef Citation Agricola Articles by Page-Dumroese, D. S. Articles by Mroz, G. D.

Comparison of Methods for Determining Bulk Densities of Rocky Forest Soils

Rocky Mountain Research Station, 1221 S. Main, Moscow, ID 83843

Martin F. Jurgensen and Glenn D. Mroz

School of Forestry and Wood Products, Michigan Technological Univ., Houghton, MI 49931

*Corresponding author (ddumroes{at}forest.moscowfsl.wsu.edu).

ABSTRACT

Measurement of forest soil bulk density is often hampered by coarse fragments. In this study, five methods to determine total and fine bulk density and coarse-fragment content of a rocky forest soil in western Montana were evaluated. Two methods of core sampling (small and large diameter cylinders), two methods of soil excavation and volume determination (water and polyurethane foam), and a nuclear source moisture gauge were tested at two depths (0–10 cm and 10–20 cm) on a soil with a 35% slope and 45% rock content. In the surface 10 cm, total and fine soil bulk density values were greatest from the nuclear gauge. The two excavation techniques gave similar results. Volumetric rock-fragment content calculations using the small diameter cylinder were significantly lower than those using the other methods. At the 10- to 20-cm depth, all methods except the large diameter cylinder gave comparable results for total soil bulk density. The small diameter core method gave the highest estimate of fine bulk density at this depth. All methods are easy to use. Soil excavation using the polyurethane foam for volume determinations is the simplest method and has low standard errors.

This paper was written and prepared by U.S. Government employees on official time, and therefore is in the public domain and not subject to copyright.

Received for publication January 16, 1998.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				T. H. DeLuca and V. Archer Forest soil quality standards should be quantifiable Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, July 1, 2009; 64(4): 117A - 123A. [PDF]

				V. Bagarello and A. Sgroi Testing Soil Encasing Materials for Measuring Hydraulic Conductivity of a Sandy-Loam Soil by the Cube Methods Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J., June 18, 2008; 72(4): 1048 - 1057. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				Y. Zhao, M. Krzic, C. E. Bulmer, and M. G. Schmidt Maximum Bulk Density of British Columbia Forest Soils from the Proctor Test: Relationships with Selected Physical and Chemical Properties Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J., January 25, 2008; 72(2): 442 - 452. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				K. R. Brye, T. L. Morris, D. M. Miller, S. J. Formica, and M. A. Van Eps Estimating Bulk Density in Vertically Exposed Stoney Alluvium Using a Modified Excavation Method J. Environ. Qual., September 1, 2004; 33(5): 1937 - 1942. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				R. B. Harrison, A. B. Adams, C. Licata, B. Flaming, G. L. Wagoner, P. Carpenter, and E. D. Vance Quantifying Deep-Soil and Coarse-Soil Fractions: Avoiding Sampling Bias Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J., September 1, 2003; 67(5): 1602 - 1606. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				A. Kulmatiski, D. J. Vogt, T. G. Siccama, and K. H. Beard Detecting nutrient pool changes in rocky forest soils Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J., July 1, 2003; 67(4): 1282 - 1286. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]