Environmental Monitoring and Assessment

, Volume 39, Issue 1–3, pp 485–492 | Cite as

Effects of decaying wood on eluviation, podzolization, acidification, and nutrition in soils with different moisture regimes

  • G. J. Kayahara
  • K. Klinka
  • L. M. Lavkulich
Soil Moisture Regime and Site Evaluation


One possible impact of large accumulations of decaying wood on forest sites is an increase in (1) eluviation, podzolization and acidification of, and (2) leaching and loss of nutrients from, the soil directly under decaying wood. As an exploratory investigation, we sampled soils beneath forest floors with and without large accumulations of decaying wood (lignic and algnic forest floors respectively) on three soil moisture regimes. Nine sites were located, three in each of central British Columbia, east Vancouver Island, and east of Vancouver. Among the moist sites, there were no differences in Ae horizon thickness between the alignic and lignic forest floors. However, the Ae horizon was thicker beneath the lignic forest floors (mean 4.2 cm) compared to the alignic forest floors (mean 0.7 cm) in slightly dry and fresh sites. Lignic and alignic forest floors differed (p<0.01) in pH, total C, total N, mineralizable N, available S, available P, extractable Mg, K and Ca, lipids, C in fraction B (soluble polysaccharide fraction), C in humic acid, C in fulvic acid, and polyphenol C in fulvic acid for all soil moisture regimes. There were no significant differences in the measures of nutrients or indicators of podzolization as measured by organically complexed Fe and Al, the total non-crystalline Fe and Al, and the poorly crystalline Fe and Al, in the underlying 10 cm of the Bf horizon between the two substrates regardless of the soil moisture regime. Further investigations are needed to establish the relationships between soil productivity and the observed soil chemical measures.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Agriculture Canada Expert Committee on Soil Survey: 1987, ‘The Canadian system of soil classification’ (2nd edition), Publ. No. 1646, Agric. Can., Ottawa, Ontario, 164 pp.Google Scholar
  2. BallardT.M. and CarterR.E.: 1986, ‘Evaluating forest stand nutrient status’, Land Manage. Rep. No. 20, Ministry of Forests, Victoria, British Columbia, 60 pp.Google Scholar
  3. BlumeH.P. and SchwertmannU.: 1969, ‘Genetic evaluation of profile distribution of aluminum, iron, and manganese oxides’, Soil Sci. Soc. Amer. Proc. 33, 438–444.Google Scholar
  4. DixonJ.B. and WeedS.B. (eds.): 1989, Minerals in Soil Environments, Soil Sci. Soc. Amer., Madison, Wisconsin, 1244 pp.Google Scholar
  5. Green, R.N., Trowbridge R.L., and Klinka, K.: 1993, ‘Towards a taxonomic classification of humus forms’, For. Sci. Monograph 29, 49 pp.Google Scholar
  6. HarmonM.E., FranklinJ.F., SwansonF.J., SollinsP., GregoryS.V., LattinJ.D., AndersonN.H., ClineS.P., AumenN.G., SedellJ.R., LienkaemperG.W., CromackK.Jr. and CumminsK.W.: 1986, ‘Ecology of coarse woody debris in temperate ecosystems’, Adv. Ecol. Res. 15, 133–302.Google Scholar
  7. KlinkaK., WangQ. and CarterR.E.: 1990, ‘Relationships among humus forms, forest floor nutrient properties, and understory vegetation’, For. Sci. 36, 564–581.Google Scholar
  8. KlinkaK., WangQ. and KayaharaG.J.: 1994, ‘Quantitative characterization of nutrient regimes in some boreal forest soils’, Can. J. Soil Sci. 74, 29–38.Google Scholar
  9. Klinka, K., Lavkulich, L.M., Wang, Q., and Feller, M.C.: 1996, ‘Influence of decaying wood on chemical properties of forest floors and surface mineral horizons: a pilot study’, Annales des Sciences Forestières (in press).Google Scholar
  10. KrajinaV.J.: 1969, ‘Ecology of forest trees in British Columbia’, Ecol. West. North Amer. 1, 1–17.Google Scholar
  11. LoweL.E.: 1974, ‘A sequential extraction procedure for studying the distribution of organic fraction in humus layers’, Can. J. For. Res. 4, 446–454.Google Scholar
  12. LoweL.E.: 1975, ‘Fractionation of acid-soluble components of soil organic matter using polyvinylpyrrolidone’, Can. J. Soil Sci. 55, 119–126.Google Scholar
  13. LoweL.E. and KlinkaK.: 1981, ‘Forest humus in the Coastal Western Hemlock biogeoclimatic zone of British Columbia in relation to forest productivity and pedogenesis’, Research Note No. 89, B.C. Ministry of Forests, Victoria, British Columbia, 83 pp.Google Scholar
  14. MaserC., TarrantR.F., TrappeJ.M. and FranklinJ.F. (eds.): 1988, ‘From the forest to the sea: a story of fallen trees’, Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-229, US Dep. Agric., For. Serv., Pac. Northwest For. Exp. Sta., Portland, Oregon, 153 pp.Google Scholar
  15. McKeagueJ.A., DeConinckF. and FanzmeierD.P.: 1983, ‘Spodosols’, In: L.P.Wilding, N.E.Smeck and F.F.Hall (eds.), Pedogenesis and Soil Taxonomy. II. Soil Orders, Elsevier, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, pp. 217–252.Google Scholar
  16. MeidingerD. and PojarJ. (eds.): 1991, ‘Ecosystems of British Columbia’, Special Report Series 6, B.C. Ministry of Forests, Victoria, British Columbia, 330 pp.Google Scholar
  17. PojarJ., KlinkaK., and MeidingerD.V.: 1987, ‘Biogeoclimatic ecosystem classification in British Columbia’, For. Ecol. Manage. 22, 119–154.Google Scholar
  18. RossG.J. and WangC.: 1993, ‘Extractable Al, Fe, Mn, and Si’, In: M.R.Carter (ed.), Soil Sampling and Methods of Analysis, Lewis Publishers, Boca Raton, Florida, pp. 239–246.Google Scholar
  19. Seidl, M.T.: 1985, The role of fallen trees in an old-growth forest’, In: R. Molina (ed.), Proc. 6th N.A. Conf. Mycorrhizae, Bend, Oregon, 274 pp.Google Scholar
  20. SokalR.R. and RohlfF.J.: 1981, Biometry: The Principles and Practice of Statistics in Biological Research, W.H. Freeman and Company, New York, 859 pp.Google Scholar
  21. VanCleveK., OliverL., SchlentnerR., ViereckL.A., and DyrnessC.T.: 1983, ‘Productivity and nutrient cycling in taiga forest ecosystems’, Can. J. For. Res. 13, 747–766.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1996

Authors and Affiliations

  • G. J. Kayahara
    • 1
  • K. Klinka
    • 1
  • L. M. Lavkulich
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Forest SciencesUniversity of British ColumbiaVancouverCanada
  2. 2.Department of Soil ScienceUniversity of British ColumbiaVancouverCanada

Personalised recommendations