Journals / Turkish Journal Of Field Crops / 2016 / Cilt: 21 - Sayı: 2

EFFECTS OF DIFFERENT IMPROVEMENT TREATMENTS ON BOTANICAL COMPOSITION AND SEDIMENT MOVEMENT ON GRAZED AND ENCLOSED RANGE SITES

Pages
269–275
Publication Date
2016-12-15
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Also, combined with short term enclosure treatment the other improvement treatments can recommend for rangeland restoration and soil protection.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:This study was carried out on heavily grazed rangelands in Erzurum, during the years 2006-2009, for 4 years period.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Across of four years, fertilization increased the grass proportion, decreased other species proportion and sediment yield in both sites.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Also, combined with short term enclosure treatment the other improvement treatments can recommend for rangeland restoration and soil protection.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2006-2009 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Enclosure · grazing · improvement

Abstract

This study was carried out on heavily grazed rangelands in Erzurum, during the years 2006-2009, for 4 years period. In this study, four treatments that included artificial pasture, oversowing, fertilization and control were applied on grazed and enclosed rangeland sites. A mixture of Crested wheatgrass (Agropyron cristatum), alfalfa (Medicago sativa) and smooth brome (Bromus inermis) was used for rangeland seeding. Ammonium sulfate and Triple Super Phosphate was applied on fertilization plots in sites grazed and enclosed site. Botanical composition was determined by line intercept methods. After each erosive rain event, the amount of soil (sediment) was determined in each plot. Across of four years, fertilization increased the grass proportion, decreased other species proportion and sediment yield in both sites. Under grazing, over sowing increased the grass proportion, and decreased other species proportion. Lower grass, higher legumes, higher other species proportion and higher sediment yield determined in the third year compared to other years in both sites. The enclosed site had higher grass, lower legumes, other species proportion and sediment yield than the grazed one. Results of this study showed fertilization and oversowing treatment can be effective for soil protection in enclosed and grazed rangelands, similar to this study area. Also, combined with short term enclosure treatment the other improvement treatments can recommend for rangeland restoration and soil protection.

🔖

Cite This Article

COSKUN, T., DASCI, M., GULLAP, M. K., COMAKLI, B., YILDIRIM, N., BAKIR, H., BIRHAN, H. (2016). EFFECTS OF DIFFERENT IMPROVEMENT TREATMENTS ON BOTANICAL COMPOSITION AND SEDIMENT MOVEMENT ON GRAZED AND ENCLOSED RANGE SITES. Turkish Journal Of Field Crops, Cilt: 21 - Sayı: 2, 269–275. https://ajindex.com/articles/181013

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (10)

  1. Açıkgöz, E. 2001. Forage crops. Foundation of Strengthen of Uludag University. No: 182. Bursa. Altin, M. 1975. An investigation the effects of Nitrogen, Phosphorus and Potassium fertilizers on yield, crude protein and crude ash ratio and plant species composition of natural meadow and rangeland in Erzurum ecological condition. Ataturk Univ. Yay No: 326, Agr. Fac. No: 159, Res. Series No: 95, Erzurum, 141 s. Altin, M. A. Gokkus and A. Koc, 2005. Pasture-rangeland improvement. T. C. Ministry of Agriculture of Rural Affairs, General Directorate of Agricultural Production and Development, Ankara, 468 p. Altin, M., A. Gokkus and A. Koc. 2011. Meadow-pasture management. T. C. Ministry of Agriculture of Rural Affairs, General Directorate of Agricultural Production and Development, Ankara.
  2. Bakır, Ö. 1985. Meadow and Pasture Improvement. Ankara University, Agric. Fac. Pub. No. 947, Ankara.
  3. Bakoglu, A. 1999. The comparison of some soil and plant characteristics of two different rangeland sites, grazed and ungrazed. Ataturk Univ. Graduate School of Natural and Applied Sciences, Department of Field Crops (Unpublished Ph.D. thesis), Erzurum. Bakoglu, A. A. Koc and A. Gokkus, 1999. Some characteristics of the common plants of range and meadows in Erzurum in relation to lifespan, beginning with the flowering and forage quality. Turkish J. Agric. and Forestry 23(4): 951-957.
  4. Basbag, M., İ. Gül, and V. Saruhan. 1997. Investigation of yield and composition of protected rangeland in Diyarbakir. Turkey II. Field Crops Cong. 22-25 September 1997, Samsun, 499-503.
  5. Beukes, P. C. and R. M. Cowling. 2003. Non-selective grazing impacts on soil properties of the Nama Karoo. J. Range Manage. 56: 547-552.
  6. Canfield, R. H. 1941. Application of the line interception method in sampling range vegetation. J. For. 39: 388-394.
  7. Comakli, B. M. Dasci and A. Koc. 2008. The effects of traditional grazing practices on upland rangeland vegetation and forage quality. Turkish J. Agric. and Forestry 32:259- 265. Comakli, B. T. Oner and M. Dasci. 2012. Changing of the vegetation on rangeland sites with different using history. Iğdır Univ. J. Inst. Sci. & Tech.2(2):75-82.
  8. Delpech, R. 1966. An agronomic application of experimental phytosociology: a contribution to the study of the effect of mineral fertilizer on permanent grasslands in the Seano Valley. Fr. C. R. hebd. Seano. Acad. Agr. Fr. 52(1): 50-60.
  9. Gadzi, K. and N. Sayre, 2009.
  10. Rangeland health and planned grazing, Field Guide. The Quivira Coalitio