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

This Article Abstract Full Text Free Full Text (PDF) Free Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in ISI Web of Science Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (23) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Franzluebbers, A.J. Articles by Wilkinson, S.R. Search for Related Content PubMed Articles by Franzluebbers, A.J. Articles by Wilkinson, S.R. Agricola Articles by Franzluebbers, A.J. Articles by Wilkinson, S.R. Related Collections Structure and Properties Soil Fertility and Productivity Other Soil Management

Bermudagrass Management in the Southern Piedmont USA

I. Soil and Surface Residue Carbon and Sulfur

USDA-ARS, J. Phil Campbell Sr. Natural Resource Conservation Center, 1420 Experiment Station Road, Watkinsville, GA 30677-2373

View larger version (64K): [in a new window]   Fig. 1. Soil bulk density at depths of 0 to 2, 2 to 4, and 4 to 6 cm as affected by harvest strategy (averaged across fertilization strategies) during spring sampling events of the first 4.5 yr of management. Bars with a different letter within a sampling event and within a soil depth indicate significance at P 0.1

View larger version (61K): [in a new window]   Fig. 2. Soil bulk density at depths of 0 to 2, 2 to 4, 4 to 6, and 0 to 6 cm as affected by spring and fall sampling (averaged across fertilization and harvest strategies) during the first 5 yr of management. Error bars are standard errors of means (n = 36)

View larger version (26K): [in a new window]   Fig. 3. Relationship between soil bulk density and soil organic C concentration. Data are from 0- to 2-cm depth from each of the fertilization and harvest strategies during 1994 to 1998

View larger version (44K): [in a new window]   Fig. 4. Soil organic C depth distribution as affected by fertilization and harvest strategies during the first 5 yr of management. Horizontal bars originating at the left vertical axis indicate LSD at P = 0.1 to separate all combinations of fertilization and harvest strategies within a soil depth

View larger version (28K): [in a new window]   Fig. 5. Soil organic C content at depths of 0 to 2, 2 to 4, and 4 to 6 cm as affected by harvest strategy (averaged across fertilization strategies) during the first 4 yr of management. Soil organic C sequestration values are for each of the soil depths and different letters within a soil depth indicate significance at P 0.1

View larger version (35K): [in a new window]   Fig. 6. Carbon stock in soil at a depth of 0 to 6 cm, in surface residue, and in soil plus residue as affected by harvest strategy (averaged across fertilization strategies) during the first 5 yr of management. Vertical bars are LSD at P = 0.1 to separate means among harvest strategies within a year. Carbon sequestration values are based on linear regression for each of the system components (i.e., soil, residue, and soil + residue). Different letters following C sequestration rates within a soil–residue component indicate significance at P 0.1