Abstract
This article presents the effects exerted by the differences in land use on the relationships between soil and vegetation along a topographical gradient (catena). In the study 35 plots (20 m2, with 2 m up and 10 m across the slope) from two transects (forest – 2600 m and field – 1400 m, (with the lowest plot at 209.6 m a.s.l., and the highest at 253.5 m a.s.l. the lowest at 199.7 m a.s.l. and the highest at 230 m a.s.l, respectively) were selected and classified into three groups (depletion, transition, accumulation), depending upon the processes of erosion or accumulation. The analysed variables were following: topographical characteristics, soil parameters, number of vascular plant species, and geobotanical indicators as soil moisture (Fwm), soil acidity (Rwm), nitrogen content in the soil (Nwm) according to Ellenberg (El lenberg et al. 1991), soil humus and organic matter (Hwm) and soil dispersion and aeration (Dwm) according to Zarzycki (Z arzycki et al. 2002). The analyses showed that relationships between hypsometry, soil characteristics and geobotanical indicators were different, depending on land use (forest versus field). Regression models, which were similar for both transects, concern the following pair of variables: soil pH – slope; soil conductivity – elevation; soil moisture – elevation; soil carbon content – elevation; Rwm index – elevation; species number – soil carbon content. The following significant relationships were specific only for the forest transect: C:N ratio – slope and curvature, species number – soil nitrogen content; Rwm index – soil pH. For the field transect the relations between the geobotanical indicators and the properties of the soil are specific like for the pairs: Fwm index – soil moisture, Rwm index – soil moisture and nitrogen content, Hwm index – C:N ratio, Dwm index – nitrogen content. In general, the modifying influence of land use on the values of soil and vegetation parameters is weakly distinguished in the upper parts of both transects, and the most significant on the slopes, within the transition zone. The results of our studies should be useful in modelling of hydrological and geo-chemical relations, especially with respect to small catchment areas, in determination of carbon reserves, as well as in planning of sustainable landscape.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher. Read at the source ↗
The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.
Claims 8
Claim · model-written summary
Relationships between hypsometry, soil characteristics and geobotanical indicators differed between forest and field land use.
Verbatim
e1“number of vascular plant species”
e2“relationships between hypsometry, soil characteristics and geobotanical indicators were different, depending on land use (forest versus field)”
Claim · model-written summary
The modifying influence of land use on soil and vegetation parameters is weakly distinguished in the upper parts of both transects.
Verbatim
e1“number of vascular plant species”
e3“the modifying influence of land use on the values of soil and vegetation parameters is weakly distinguished in the upper parts of both transects”
Claim · model-written summary
The modifying influence of land use on soil and vegetation parameters is most significant on the slopes, within the transition zone.
Verbatim
e1“number of vascular plant species”
e3“the modifying influence of land use on the values of soil and vegetation parameters is weakly distinguished in the upper parts of both transects”
e4“the most significant on the slopes, within the transition zone”
Claim · model-written summary
Significant relationships specific to the forest transect were C:N ratio with slope and curvature, species number with soil nitrogen content, and Rwm index with soil pH.
Verbatim
e1“number of vascular plant species”
e5“The following significant relationships were specific only for the forest transect: C:N ratio – slope and curvature, species number – soil nitrogen content; Rwm index – soil pH”
Claim · model-written summary
Relations between geobotanical indicators and soil properties are specific to the field transect for Fwm, Rwm and Hwm indices.
Verbatim
e1“number of vascular plant species”
e6“For the field transect the relations between the geobotanical indicators and the properties of the soil are specific like for the pairs: Fwm index – soil moisture, Rwm index – soil moisture and nitrogen content, Hwm index – C:N ratio, Dwm index – nitrogen content”
Claim · model-written summary
Relations between geobotanical indicators and soil properties are specific to the field transect for the Dwm index with nitrogen content.
Verbatim
e1“number of vascular plant species”
e6“For the field transect the relations between the geobotanical indicators and the properties of the soil are specific like for the pairs: Fwm index – soil moisture, Rwm index – soil moisture and nitrogen content, Hwm index – C:N ratio, Dwm index – nitrogen content”
Claim · model-written summary
Regression models were similar for both transects for soil pH with slope, soil conductivity with elevation, and soil moisture with elevation.
Verbatim
e1“number of vascular plant species”
e7“Regression models, which were similar for both transects, concern the following pair of variables: soil pH – slope; soil conductivity – elevation; soil moisture – elevation; soil carbon content – elevation; Rwm index – elevation; species number – soil carbon content”
Claim · model-written summary
Regression models were similar for both transects for soil carbon content with elevation, Rwm index with elevation, and species number with soil carbon content.
Verbatim
e1“number of vascular plant species”
e7“Regression models, which were similar for both transects, concern the following pair of variables: soil pH – slope; soil conductivity – elevation; soil moisture – elevation; soil carbon content – elevation; Rwm index – elevation; species number – soil carbon content”