Research Article | Published: 01 December 2010

Effect of tree plantation on composition, standing biomass and diversity of ground vegetation on sodic land of North-East region of Uttar Pradesh

A. K. Saxena and O. P. Rao

Indian Journal of Forestry | Volume: 33 | Issue: 4 | Page No. 599-608 | 2010
DOI: https://doi.org/10.54207/bsmps1000-2010-N062SW | Cite this article

Abstract

The structure,composition, yield and diversity of ground vegetation under eight  tree plantations on sodic wasteland were compared among each other and with an adjacent open stand. The communities were floristically distinct   from   each other on different stands. However, the community on open stand was relatively more similar with the communities under Eucalyptus tereticornis and Acacia catechu plantation stands than with other stands. The herbage yield was lowest on open stand and it was higher under Acacia auriculiformis and Casuarina equisetifolia plantation stands. The contribution of grasses to the total herbage yield was maximum (98%) on open stand and minimum (27%) under C. equisetifolia plantation stand. Herbage yield in the present study also indicated an inverse relationship with soil ESP and pH, thus suggesting that on improving the sodic level of the soil, the herbage yield also increased. Shannon – Wiener diversity was lower, while concentration of dominance was higher for ground vegetation on open stand than any of the plantation stand. Among the plantation stands, diversity was higher under A. catechu, E. tereticornis and Terminalia arjuna plantation stands than under other plantation stands. Diversity tended to show a positive relation with the herbage yield, whereas the relationships between diversity and soil ESP and pH were negative. Dominance-diversity curves for all the herbaceous communities fit the geometric series. Single species dominance is more pronounced in the community on open stand than the communities under tree plantation stands.

Keywords

Tree plantations, Sodic wastelands, Grasses, soil, Sodic level, Dominance-diversity curves, Herbaceous communities

Access Options

250/-

Buy Full Access in HTML Format

Instant access to the full article.

Get access to the full version of this article. Buy Full Access in HTML Format

References

1. Abrol, I.P. (1986). Fuel and forage production from salt affected wastelands in India. Reclam. & Reveg. Res., 5: 65-74.  

Google Scholar

2. Bradshaw, A.D. (1983). The reconstruction of ecosystems. J. Applied Ecol., 20: 1-7.  https://doi.org/10.2307/2403372

3. Chaturvedi, O.P. and Saxena, A.K. (1992). Composition, yield and diversity of grazing-land vegetation under chir pine forest in central Himalaya. Range Mgmt. and Agroforestry, 13: 97-106.  

4. Chaturvedi, O.P.; Saxena, A.K. and Singh, J.S. (1988). Structural and functional analysis of grazingland under pine forest in central Himalaya. Acta Oecologica (Oecol. Gener.), 9: 167-178

Google Scholar

5. Dagar, J.C.; Singh, Gurbachan and Singh, N.T. (2001). Evaluation of forest and fruit trees used for rehabilitation of semiarid alkali-sodic soils in India. Arid Land Res. & Manage., 15: 115-133.  https://doi.org/10.1080/15324980151062742

Google Scholar

6. Dunn, G.M.; Lowe, K.F.; Taylor, D.W. and Bowdler, T.M. (1994). Early tree and pasture growth in an agroforestry system evaluating Albizia lebbeck, Casuarina cunninghamiana and Eucalyptus maculata in South-East Queensland. Tropical Grasslands, 28: 170-181.  

Google Scholar

7. Dutta, R.K. and Agrawal, M. (2005). Development of ground vegetation under exotic tree plantations on restored coal mine spoil land in a dry tropical region of India. J. Environ. Biol., 26: 645-652.    

Google Scholar

8. Evenson, W.E.; Brotherson, J.D. and Wilcox, R.B. (1980). Relationship between environment and vegetational parameters for understory and open area communities. Great Basin Naturalist, 40: 167-174.

Google Scholar

9. Garg, V.K. and Jain, R.K. (1992). Influence of fuelwood trees on sodic soils. Can. J. For. Res., 22: 729-735.   https://doi.org/10.1139/x92-098

Google Scholar

10. Hairiah, K, Sulistyani, H., Suprayogo, D., Widianto, Purnomosidhi, P., Widodo, R.H. and Van Noordwijk, M. (2006). Litter layer residence time in forest and coffee agroforestry systems in Sumberjaya, West Lampung. For. Ecol. & Manage., 224: 45-57. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2005.12.007

Google Scholar

11. Jackson, M.L. (1958). Soil Chemical Analysis. Prentice-Hall Inc., New Jersey, pp. 498. 

12. Jaccard, P. (1912). The distribution of the flora in the alpine zone. New Phytol., 11: 37-50.   https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8137.1912.tb05611.x

Google Scholar

13. Leigh, E. (1965). On the relation between productivity, diversity and stability of a community. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. (USA), 53: 77-78.  https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.53.4.777

Google Scholar

14. McNaughton, S.J. (1968). Structure and function in California grasslands. Ecology, 49: 962-972.   https://doi.org/10.2307/1936547

Google Scholar

15. Misra, R. (1968). Ecology Work Book. Oxford and IBH Publ. Co., New Delhi pp. 244

16. Pandey, P.K.; Bisht, A.P.S. and Sharma, S.C. (1988). Comparative vegetation analysis of some plantation ecosystems. Indian Forester, 114: 379-389

Google Scholar

17. Rana, B.S.; Rao, O.P. and Singh, B.P. (2001) Biomass production in 7 year old plantations of Casuarina equisetifolia on sodic soil. Trop. Ecol., 42: 207-212

Google Scholar

18. Rana, B.S.; Saxena, A.K.; Rao, O.P. and Singh, B.P. (2007). Nutrient return to the soil through litterfall under certain tree plantations on sodic wastelands in northern India. J. Trop. For. Sci., 19: 141-149.

Google Scholar

19. Sah, V.K. and Saxena, A.K. (1990). Variation in structure, biomass and species diversity of grazinglands in Garhwal Himalaya. Range Mgmt. and Agroforestry, 11: 115-121.

Google Scholar

20. Saxena, A.K.; Srivastava, D.K. and Singh, B.P. (1997). Variation in growth and litter accumulation in certain plantations on salt-affected wasteland. J. Tree Sci., 16: 9-14

21. Scanlan, J.C. and Burrows, W.H. (1990). Woody overstorey impact on herbaceous understorey in Eucalyptus spp. communities in Central Queensland. Australian J. Ecol., 15: 191-197.   https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1442-9993.1990.tb01527.x

Google Scholar

22. Shannon, C.E. and Wiener, W. (1963). The Mathematical Theory of Communication. University Illinois Press, Urbana, pp. 117.

Google Scholar

23. Simpson, E.H. (1949). Measurement of Diversity. Nature, 163: 688.  https://doi.org/10.1038/163688a0

Google Scholar

24. Singh, Gurbachan and Dagar, J.C. (2005). Greening sodic lands: Bichhian Madel. Technical Bulletin No. 2/2005, CSSRI, Karnal, pp. 51

25. Singh, G.; Singh, N.T.; Dagar, J.C.; Singh, H. and Sharma, V.P. (1997). An evaluation of agriculture, forestry and Agroforestry practices in a moderately alkali soil in Northwestern India. Agroforestry Systems, 37: 279-295. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1005873804862

Google Scholar

26. Singh, J.S. (1967). Seasonal Variation in Composition, Plant Biomass and Net Community Production in the Grassland at Varanasi. Ph.D. Thesis, BHU, Varanasi.

Google Scholar

27. Singh, J.S. (1969). Influence of biotic disturbance on the preponderance and interspecific association of two common forbs in the grasslands at Varanasi, India. Trop. Ecol., 10: 59-71

Google Scholar

28. Singh, R.K. and Singh, I.S. (1987). Plantation on Wastelands. Bulletin, NDUAT, Faizabad, pp. 32

29. Singh, R.K., Singh, I.S., Dwivedi, P. N., Vaish, R.D. and Singh, R. (1990). Rehabilitation of wastelands: an integrated approach. In : Verma, J.P. and Verma, A. (eds.), Technology Blending and Agrarian Prosperity. Melhotra Publ. House, New Delhi, pp. 31-45.   

Google Scholar

30. Snedecor, G.W. and Cochran, W.G. (1969). Statistical Methods. Oxford and IBH Publ. Co., New Delhi, pp. 593

31. Tyagi, N.K. (2004). Soil sodicity: a global overview. In: Rathore, R.S.; Singh, G.N and Tiwari, V.K. (eds.), Souvenir; International Conference on Sustainable Management of Sodic Lands. UPCAR, Lucknow, India, pp. 1-5.    

32. Verma, R.K., Shadangi, D.K., Kunhikannan, C. and Totey, N.G. (1999). Impact of plantations in degraded land on diversity of ground flora, soil microflora and fauna and chemical properties of soil. Trop. Ecol., 40: 191-197.   

Google Scholar

33. Wali, M.K. (1987). The structure, dynamics and rehabilitation of drastically disturbed ecosystem. In: Khoshoo, T.N. (ed.), Perspectives in Environmental Management. Oxford Publication, New Delhi, pp. 163-183.    

Google Scholar

34. Walkley, A.J. and Black, I.A. (1934). Estimation of soil organic carbon by the chromic acid titration method. Soil Sci., 37: 29-38.    https://doi.org/10.1097/00010694-193401000-00003

35. Walker, B.H. and Knoop, W.T. (1987). The response of the herbaceous layer in a dystrophic Burkea africana savannah to increased levels of nitrogen, phosphate and potassium. J. Grassland Soc. of South-Africa, 4: 314.   https://doi.org/10.1080/02566702.1987.9648065

Google Scholar

36. Whittaker, R.H. (1965). Dominance and diversity in land plant communities. Science, 147: 250-260.    https://doi.org/10.1126/science.147.3655.250

Google Scholar

About this article

How to cite

Saxena, A.K. and Rao, O.P., 2010. Effect of tree plantation on composition, standing biomass and diversity of ground vegetation on sodic land of North-East region of Uttar Pradesh. Indian Journal of Forestry, 33(4), pp.599-608. https://doi.org/10.54207/bsmps1000-2010-N062SW

Publication History

Manuscript Published on 01 December 2010

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content: