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 ISI Web of Science (3) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Kulmatiski, A. Articles by Larson, B. C. Search for Related Content PubMed Articles by Kulmatiski, A. Articles by Larson, B. C. GeoRef GeoRef Citation Agricola Articles by Kulmatiski, A. Articles by Larson, B. C. Related Collections Soil Organic Matter Biogeochemical Processes Forest Soils

Landscape Determinants of Soil Carbon and Nitrogen Storage in Southern New England

^a Dep. Biology and Ecology Center, Utah State University, Logan, UT 84322
^b School of Forestry and Environmental Studies, Yale University, 370 Prospect Street, New Haven, CT 06511
^c USDA-Natural Resources Conservation Service, Storrs, CT 06268, USA

View larger version (51K): [in a new window]   Fig. 1. Mean C and N storage (±1 SE) in the forest floor (FF) and mineral soil (0–15 cm) stratified by six forest types (Pine = pine, Hw = hardwood, Ok = oak, PO = pine/other, HH = hemlock hardwood, Hm = hemlock) at the Yale-Myers Forest, Connecticut, USA. Bars in the same depth strata with different lower case letters are significantly different. Letters above the bars indicate differences in total storage (FF–15 cm).

View larger version (48K): [in a new window]   Fig. 2. Mean C and N storage (±1 SE) in the forest floor (FF) and mineral soil (0–15 cm) stratified by soil series (C = Charlton; n = 25, H = Hinckley; n = 3, P = Paxton; n = 19, W = Woodbridge; n = 9) at the Yale-Myers Forest, Connecticut, USA. Bars in the same depth strata with different lower case letters are significantly different. Letters above the bars indicate differences in total storage (FF–15 cm).

View larger version (45K): [in a new window]   Fig. 3. Mean C and N storage (±1 SE) in four soil depths stratified by topographic classes at the Yale-Myers Forest, Connecticut, USA. Four topographic classes were ascribed to areas that were >0.1 ha in size. Carbon storage varied by topographic class in the 0- to 3-, 3- to 6-, 6- to 15-, and FF- to 15-cm depths. In the figure Top = top of slope (n = 8), Mid = middle of slope (n = 15), Bot = bottom of slope (n = 12), Var = variable slope (n = 21).

View larger version (18K): [in a new window]   Fig. 4. Regression tree analyses for forest floor and mineral soil to 15 cm (FF–15 cm) at the Yale-Myers Forest, Connecticut, USA for (a) C storage (kg m–2) and (b) N storage (g m–2). Explanatory variables used were stand composition (Cover), topography (Topo), and soil series (Soil). Each branch is labeled with the level of the explanatory variable that defines that branch, where Hw = hardwood, Hm = hemlock, HH = hemlock and hardwood, Pine = pine, PO = pine and other forest species, Oak = oak, top = top of slope, mid = midslope, bot = bottom of slope, var = variable slope, C = Charlton soil series, H = Hinckley soil series, P = Paxton soil series, and W = Woodbridge soil series. For example, the first split in Fig. 4a places all data defined by a Hw, Oak, or Pine forest composition type in the subset of data on the left of the split. The value in each oval represents the mean storage estimate (±1 SE) for the treatment combinations shown in the preceding branches of the tree. Similarly, the value in each ‘T’ in the tree represents the mean storage estimate for the levels of the classification listed in the previous branch. For example, plots with Hw, Oak, and Pine forest composition types stored 5.2 kg m–2. The length of each branch is proportional to the ratio of the sum of squares explained by that split and is shown as a percentage in parentheses in the body of each branch.