排序方式： 共有3条查询结果，搜索用时 0 毫秒
1
1.
A. V. Maltsev V. P. Kalinichenko S. A. Shatokhin A. V. Udalov 《Russian Agricultural Sciences》2013,39(1):66-69
Standard and ecologically correct agronomy system of corn based of modern soil processing devices studied. The influence of different soil processing on agrophysical properties and humus content of chernozem common revealed. 相似文献
2.
Specific structural and dynamic parameters of communities from various ecological and trophic groups of microorganisms and algae in the litter of artificial tree stands were studied using the example of the Staro-Berdyansky Forest in the steppe zone of Ukraine. The composition of the communities was shown to vary by seasons and depend on the forest-forming woody species. In spring, in all the litters, the maximal number of actinomycetes and aminotrophs was recorded; in the leaf litter, the number of phosphate-mobilizing organisms was also the largest. In summer, the development of cellulolytic organisms, ammonifiers, and nitrogen-fixers was intensified; in autumn, the number of micromycetes and oligotrophic organisms decreased. The composition of dominants, the species richness of algae and their abundance also varied by seasons. Representatives of the Chlorophyta division predominated. The highest species richness of algae was characteristic of the spring litter samples, and their number, for the spring and autumn ones. The positive correlation was established between the numbers of micromycetes and oligotrophs, micromycetes and algae. The negative correlation was found between the numbers of micromycetes and actinomycetes, cellulose-decompose bacteria and algae in the litters. 相似文献
3.
Valentin Golosov Alexander Koiter Maxim Ivanov Kirill Maltsev Artyom Gusarov Aidar Sharifullin Irina Radchenko 《Journal of Soils and Sediments》2018,18(12):3388-3403
Purpose
Forest–steppe and the southern forest ecotones of European Russia (ER) are the most productive agricultural areas in Russia. Both climate and land use changes have occurred within the ER during last 30 years. These changes can lead to changes in the timing, magnitude, and spatial distribution of soil erosion rates on cultivated lands. The objective of this research was to assess the trends in soil erosion rates since the 1960s for two agricultural regions of ER.Materials and methods
Rates of soil erosion were estimated for two time windows (1963–1986 and 1986–2015) within the two agricultural regions. Both regions are characterized by a high proportion of cropland (>?60%), and within each region, one river basin and one 1st–3rd-order agricultural catchment were selected for a detailed assessment of soil erosion rates. Erosion models and visual interpretation of satellite images were used for the evaluation of the erosion rates for the river basins. Sediment budget assessments, 137Cs dating, geomorphologic mapping, and erosion models were used for the evaluation of the sediment redistribution for the two time windows in agricultural catchments.Results and discussion
At the river basin scale, the mean annual erosion rate did not change in the western part of forest–steppe ecotone; however, there was a weak negative trend in the mean annual erosion rate for the eastern part of the southern forest ecotone. A large negative trend in the erosion rate was found for both small agricultural catchments. In all cases, the reduction in the erosion rates was mainly associated with a decrease of surface runoff during snowmelt, as a result of an increase in both the air and soil temperatures during winter season. The soil loss reduction during snowmelt was counteracted by an equal increase in rainfall erosion due to increase of rainfall intensity in western part of forest–steppe ecotone.Conclusions
Reduction of surface runoff during spring snowmelt was the main reason the erosion rates declined on cultivated lands within the forest–steppe and southern forest ecotones of ER. Evaluation of ephemeral gully erosion rate was not incorporated into State Hydrological Institute erosion model used for the evaluation of the soil losses during snowmelt. This has led to an underestimation of the total soil losses for the 1963–1986 time window for all study sites.
1