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 PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Udawatta, R. P. Articles by Garrett, H. E. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Udawatta, R. P. Articles by Garrett, H. E. Agricola Articles by Udawatta, R. P. Articles by Garrett, H. E. Related Collections Ecosystem Management Ecosystem Restoration Best Management Practices

Influence of Prairie Restoration on CT-Measured Soil Pore Characteristics

^a Center for Agroforestry, School of Natural Resources, Univ. of Missouri, Columbia, MO 65211
^b Dep. of Soil, Environmental and Atmospheric Sciences, School of Natural Resources, Univ. of Missouri, Columbia, MO 65211

View larger version (142K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Fig. 1. Typical 2500 mm2 area scan images of native prairie, restored prairie, Conservation Reserve Program (CRP), and corn–soybean rotational treatments at four scan depths (middle scan is shown) in a selected profile. Air-filled pores are in red, solid areas in gray, and manganese concretions in white.

View larger version (22K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Fig. 2. Mean soil bulk density (A) and saturated hydraulic conductivity (B) for native prairie (NP), restored prairie (RP), Conservation Reserve Program (CRP), and corn–soybean rotational (CS) treatments (n = 6). The bar or number indicate LSD (0.05) values (bulk density and Ksat of the NP treatment for the 40–50 cm depth zone were 1.15 Mg m–3 and 18.6 mm h–1, respectively).

View larger version (27K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Fig. 3. Number of computed tomography (CT)-measured pores (A) and macropores (B) for native prairie (NP), restored prairie (RP), Conservation Reserve Program (CRP), and corn–soybean rotational (CS) treatments by depth (n = 6). Bars indicate LSD (0.05) values (average number of pores and number of macropores of the NP treatment for the 40–50 cm depth zone were 57 and 14, respectively).

View larger version (25K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Fig. 4. Computed tomography (CT)-measured macroporosity (A) and mesoporosity (B) for native prairie (NP), restored prairie (RP), Conservation Reserve Program (CRP), and corn–soybean rotational (CS) treatments by depth (n = 6). Bars indicate LSD (0.05) values (average CT-measured macroporosity and mesoporosity of the NP treatment for the 40–50 cm depth zone were 0.010 and 0.005 m3 m–3, respectively).

View larger version (13K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Fig. 5. Pore circularity values for native prairie (NP), restored prairie (RP), Conservation Reserve Program (CRP), and corn–soybean rotational (CS) treatments by depth (n = 6). The bar indicates the LSD (0.05) value (average circularity of the NP treatment for the 40–50 cm depth zone was 0.91).

View larger version (14K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Fig. 6. Fractal dimension of computed tomography (CT)-measured macroporosity for native prairie (NP), restored prairie (RP), Conservation Reserve Program (CRP), and corn–soybean rotational (CS) treatments by depth (n = 6). The bar indicates the LSD (0.05) value (average fractal dimension of the NP treatment for the 40–50 cm depth zone was 1.336).