SSSAJ
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


Published online 25 January 2008
Published in Soil Sci Soc Am J 72:442-452 (2008)
DOI: 10.2136/sssaj2007.0075
© 2008 Soil Science Society of America
677 S. Segoe Rd., Madison, WI 53711 USA
This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text Free
Right arrow Full Text (PDF) Free
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Zhao, Y.
Right arrow Articles by Schmidt, M. G.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Zhao, Y.
Right arrow Articles by Schmidt, M. G.
Agricola
Right arrow Articles by Zhao, Y.
Right arrow Articles by Schmidt, M. G.
Related Collections
Right arrow Soil Compaction
Right arrow Forest Soils

Maximum Bulk Density of British Columbia Forest Soils from the Proctor Test: Relationships with Selected Physical and Chemical Properties

Yihai Zhaoa, Maja Krzica,*, Chuck E. Bulmerb and Margaret G. Schmidtc

a Faculty of Forestry, Univ. of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC V6T 1Z4, Canada
b British Columbia Ministry of Forests and Range, Research Branch, Vernon, BC V1B 2C7, Canada
c Dep. of Geography, Simon Fraser Univ., Burnaby, BC V5A 1S6, Canada


Figure 1
View larger version (37K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

 
Fig. 1. Location of 33 study sites in British Columbia. Sites 1–3, 5, and 6 are oil-exploration-disturbed sites; Sites 4, 7, 11, 15–18, and 22–26 are long-term soil productivity study installations; Sites 13, 14, and 19 are long-term landing rehabilitation sites; Sites 20 and 21 are stumping-disturbed sites; Sites 8–10 and 12 are road rehabilitation sites; and Sites 27–33 are provincial park sites.

 

Figure 2
View larger version (11K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

 
Fig. 2. Change of (a) soil bulk density and (b) porosity with water content (W) in the standard Proctor test. The bottom curve in (a) is hypothetical, derived by replacing the particle density of 2.97 with 2.33 Mg m–3.

 

Figure 3
View larger version (18K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

 
Fig. 3. Plasticity of soils from the study areas, showing highly plastic soils with liquid limit >0.50 and soils with moderate and low plasticity (liquid limit <0.50) as plotted on the Casagrande chart. The A-line represents the division between clays (plot on or above the A-line) and silts (plot below the A-line); the U-line refers to the upper limit.

 

Figure 4
View larger version (19K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

 
Fig. 4. Relationships among maximum bulk density (MBD) and clay + silt (fsi = fine silt; msi = medium silt) for (a) all samples, (b) nonplastic samples, (c) moderate and low plastic samples, and (d) highly plastic samples. ***Significant at P < 0.001.

 

Figure 5
View larger version (18K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

 
Fig. 5. Relationships between clay and total C for (a) all samples, (b) nonplastic samples, (c) moderate and low plastic samples, and (d) highly plastic samples. ***Significant at P < 0.001.

 





HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
The SCI Journals Agronomy Journal Crop Science
Journal of Natural Resources
and Life Sciences Education
Vadose Zone Journal
Journal of Plant Registrations Journal of
Environmental Quality
The Plant Genome
Copyright © 2008 by the Soil Science Society of America.