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


     


Published online 8 January 2009
Published in Agron J 101:184-192 (2009)
DOI: 10.2134/agronj2008.0185
© 2009 American Society of Agronomy
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 Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Burner, D. M.
Right arrow Articles by Belesky, D. P.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Burner, D. M.
Right arrow Articles by Belesky, D. P.
Agricola
Right arrow Articles by Burner, D. M.
Right arrow Articles by Belesky, D. P.
Related Collections
Right arrow Other Forage Crops
Right arrow Agroforestry
Right arrow Forage quality
Right arrow Crop Systems
Right arrow Plant and Environment Interactions
Right arrow Tillage

Effect of Loblolly Pine Root Pruning on Alley Cropped Herbage Production and Tree Growth

D. M. Burnera,*, D. H. Potea and D. P. Beleskyb

a Dale Bumpers Small Farms Research Center, USDA-ARS, 6883 S. State Hwy. 23, Booneville, AR 72927
b USDA-ARS, Appalachian Farming Systems Research Center, 1224 Airport Rd., Beaver, WV 25813


Figure 1
View larger version (57K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

 
Fig. 1. Arrangement of tillage treatments and subplots in one replication. Trees are indicated by symbols (daisy wheel). There were three tree rows sets per replication: three tree rows (1.8 m within row by 2.4 m between rows) and 9.7 m alley. The cultivated plot was 6.7 m wide and separated from northern- and southern-most tree rows by an uncultivated area 1.5 m wide. Horizontal lines indicate subplots (2.2 by 55 m, oriented east-west) designated as north, middle, and south. Symbols (empty circle/cross) indicate approximate location of photosynthetically active radiation (PAR) and topsoil temperature sensors.

 

Figure 2
View larger version (14K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

 
Fig. 2. Mean monthly climatic conditions at a weather station located 1.3 km from the experimental site in 2004 (empty circle) and 2005 (empty square). The long-term mean (filled circle) for air temperature (A) and rainfall (C) was for the period 1971 to 2000 mean from a station located 7.0 km east at Booneville, AR (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, 2002).

 

Figure 3
View larger version (34K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

 
Fig. 3. Mean diurnal soil temperature at 15 cm depth in north (empty triangle), middle (empty square), and south (filled triangle) alley subplots and at an unshaded weather station located 1.3 km from the experimental site (empty circle) during May through September 2004 and 2005.

 

Figure 4
View larger version (22K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

 
Fig. 4. Mean diurnal photosynthetically active radiation (PAR) in north (empty triangle), middle (empty square), and south (filled triangle) alley subplots and at an unshaded weather station located 1.3 km from the experimental site (empty circle) during May through September 2004 and 2005.

 

Figure 5
View larger version (14K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

 
Fig. 5. Diurnal shading of a 10 m-wide alley by an opaque barrier 7.3 or 10.7 m tall (mean height of bordering trees in 2002 and 2005, respectively) on 21 May, 21 July, and 21 Sept. 2002 (empty symbols) and 2005 (filled symbols) at Booneville, AR according to the model of Hooge (2005).

 

Figure 6
View larger version (16K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

 
Fig. 6. Effect of subplot (north, middle, and south) within tillage treatment on mean topsoil water content of loblolly pine alleys. Vertical bars are the standard error of the mean (n = 78). Bars within a tillage treatment having a common letter do not differ (P > 0.05).

 

Figure 7
View larger version (15K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

 
Fig. 7. (A) Effect of year, and (B) effect of tillage on diameter breast height (DBH) and height of loblolly pine. Vertical bars are the standard error of the mean (A: n = 360 and 180, and B: n = 480 and 240 for DBH and height, respectively). Bars within a figure followed by a common capital (DBH) or lowercase letter (height) do not differ (P > 0.05).

 

Figure 8
View larger version (14K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

 
Fig. 8. Effect of year x subplot within tillage treatment on herbage yield of annual ryegrass. Bars within a year and tillage treatment followed by a common letter do not differ (P > 0.05).

 

Figure 9
View larger version (15K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

 
Fig. 9. Effect of year x subplot within tillage treatment on herbage yield of pearl millet. Bars within a year and tillage treatment followed by a common letter do not differ (P > 0.05).

 





HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
The SCI Journals Crop Science Vadose Zone Journal
Journal of Natural Resources
and Life Sciences Education
Soil Science Society of America Journal
Journal of Plant Registrations Journal of
Environmental Quality
The Plant Genome
Copyright © 2009 by the American Society of Agronomy.