Journal of Ecology and Environment

The Ecological Society of Korea (한국생태학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Relationship between Plant Species Covers and Soil Chemical Properties in Poorly Controlled Waste Landfill Sites

  • Kim, Kee-Dae (Department of Environmental Education, Korea National University of Education) ;
  • Lee, Eun-Ju (School of Biological Sciences, Seoul National University)
  • Published : 2007.02.28
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

The relationships between the cover of herbaceous species and 15 soil chemical properties (organic carbon contents, total N, available P, exchangeable K, Na, Ca and Mg, HCl-extractable Cd, Cr, Cu, Fe, Mn, Ni, Pb and Zn) in nine poorly controlled waste landfill sites in Korea were examined by correlation analysis and multiple regression equations. Species showed different patterns of correlation between their cover values and soil chemical properties. The cover of Ambrosia artemisiifolia var. elatior, Aster subulatus var. sandwicensis and Erechtites hieracifolia were negatively correlated with the contents of Fe, Mn and Ni within landfill soils. Total cover of all species in quadrats was positively correlated with the contents of Cd and negatively correlated with the contents of Mn and Fe from stepwise regression analysis with 15 soil properties. Canonical correspondence analysis demonstrated that the distribution of native and exotic plants on poorly controlled landfills was significantly influenced by the contents of Na and Ca in soils, respectively.

Keywords

References

  1. Amacher MC. 1996. Nickel, cadmium, and lead. In: Methods of soil analysis, Part 3, Chemical Methods (Sparks DL, Ed). American Society of Agronomy, Inc. and Soil Science Society of America, Inc., Madison, Wisconsin, pp 739-768
  2. Barbour MG, Burk JH, Pitts WD, Gilliam FS, Schwartz MW. 1999. Terrestrial plant ecology. Addison Wesley Longman, Inc., Menlo Park
  3. Bartlett RJ, James BR. 1996. Chromium. In: Methods of soil analysis, Part 3, Chemical Methods (Sparks DL, Ed). American Society of Agronomy, Inc. and Soil Science Society of America, Inc., Madison, Wisconsin, pp 683-701
  4. Bashkin M, Stohlgren TJ, Otsuki Y, Lee M, Evangelista P, Belnap J. 2003. Soil characteristics and plant exotic species invasions in the Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument, Utah, USA. Appl Soil Ecol 22: 67-77 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0929-1393(02)00108-7
  5. Bradshaw AD, Chadwick MJ. 1980. The Restoration of Land: The Ecology and Reclamation of Derelict and Degraded Land. Blackwell Scientific Publication, London
  6. Brenner JM. 1996. Nitrogen-total. In: Methods of soil analysis, Part 3, Chemical Methods (Sparks DL, Ed). American Society of Agronomy, Inc. and Soil Science Society of America, Inc., Madison, Wisconsin, pp 1085-1121
  7. Bungard RA, Daly GT, Mcneil DL, Jones AV, Morton JD. 1997. Clematis vitalba in a New Zealand native forest remnant: does seed germination explain distribution? New Zeal J Bot 35: 525- 534 https://doi.org/10.1080/0028825X.1987.10410176
  8. Chapman GP. 1996. The biology of grasses. CAB International, London
  9. Curtis JJ, McIntosh RP. 1951. An upland forest continuum in the prairie forest border region of Wisconsin. Ecology 32: 476-496 https://doi.org/10.2307/1931725
  10. Darlington A. 1969. Ecology of refuse tips. Heinemann Educational Books Ltd., London
  11. Ewing K. 2002. Mounding as a technique for restoration of prairie on a capped landfill in the Puget Sound lowlands. Restor Ecol 10: 289-296 https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1526-100X.2002.09976.x
  12. Gambrell RP. 1996. Manganese. In: Methods of soil analysis, Part 3, Chemical Methods (Sparks DL, Ed.). American Society of Agronomy, Inc. and Soil Science Society of America, Inc., Madison, Wisconsin, pp 665-682
  13. Goldsmith FB, Harrison CM, Morton AJ. 1986. Description and analysis of vegetation. In: Methods in Plant Ecology (Moore PD, Chapman SB, eds.), Blackwell Scientific Publications, Oxford, pp 437- 524
  14. Guofan L, Tingxiu D. 1991. Mathematical model of the relationship between nitrogen-fixation by black locust and soil conditions. Soil Biol Biochem 23: 1-7 https://doi.org/10.1016/0038-0717(91)90155-D
  15. Helmke PA. 1996. Lithium, potassium, ubidium, and cesium. In: Methods of soil analysis, Part 3, Chemical Methods (Sparks DL, Ed). American Society of Agronomy, Inc. and Soil Science Society of America, Inc., Madison, Wisconsin, pp 551-574
  16. Hernández AJ, Adarve MJ, Gil A, Pastor J. 1999. Soil salination from landfill leachates: Effects on the macronutrient content and plant growth of four grassland species. Chemosphere 38: 1693-1711 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0045-6535(98)00367-1
  17. Jose S, Gillespie AR, George SJ, Kumar BM. 1996. Vegetation responses along edge-to-interior gradients in a high altitude tropical forest in peninsular India. Forest Ecol Manage 87: 51-62 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-1127(96)03836-4
  18. Kabata-Pendias A, Pendias H. 1992. Trace elements in soils and plants. CRC Press, Boca Raton
  19. Kim K-D. 2001. Vegetation structure and ecological restoration of the waste landfills in Seoul metropolitan area (PhD dissertation), Seoul National University, Seoul
  20. Kim K-D, Lee E-J, Cho K-H. 2004. The plant community of Nanjido, a representative nonsanitary landfill in South Korea: implications for restoration alternatives. Water Air Soil Poll 154: 167-185 https://doi.org/10.1023/B:WATE.0000022965.15050.09
  21. KMA (Korea Meteorological Administration). 1995-2000. Korean Annual Weather Report. Korea Meteorological Administration, Seoul
  22. Koo B-H, Kang J-S, Chang K-S. 1999. A study of soil characteristics in coastal reclaimed areas for planting ground treatment. Korean J Environ Ecol 13: 89-95
  23. Kuo S. 1996. Phosphorus. In: Methods of soil analysis, Part 3, Chemical Methods (Sparks DL, Ed). American Society of Agronomy, Inc. and Soil Science Society of America, Inc., Madison, Wisconsin, pp 869-919
  24. Lee TB. 1985. Illustrated Flora of Korea. Hyangmunsa, Seoul
  25. Lehmann C, Rebele F. 2002. Successful management of Calamagrostis epigejos (L.) Roth on a sandy landfill site. J Appl Bot 76: 77-81
  26. Leone IA, Flower FB, Arther JJ, Gilman EF. 1979. Plant damage from sanitary refuse landfill gases. In: Environmental Pollution and Toxicology: Proceedings of International Symposium, New Delhi. pp 215-221
  27. Loeppert RL, Inskeep WP. 1996. Iron. In: Methods of soil analysis, Part 3, Chemical Methods (Sparks DL, Ed). American Society of Agronomy, Inc. and Soil Science Society of America, Inc., Madison, Wisconsin, pp 639-664
  28. Nelson DW, Sommers LE. 1996. Total carbon, organic carbon, and organic matter. In: Methods of soil analysis, Part 3, Chemical Methods (Sparks DL, Ed). American Society of Agronomy, Inc. and Soil Science Society of America, Inc., Madison, Wisconsin, pp 961-1010
  29. Park S-H. 1995. Colored illustrations of naturalized plants of Korea. Ilchokak, Seoul
  30. Park S-H. 1998. Study on naturalized plants of the Nanjido in Seoul. Nature Conserv 101: 40-48
  31. Park S-H. 2001. Colored illustrations of naturalized plants of Korea (Appendix). Ilchokak, Seoul
  32. Proctor J, Woodwell SRJ. 1975. The ecology of serpentine soils. Adv Ecol Res 9: 255-384 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2504(08)60291-3
  33. Rebele F, Lehmann C. 2002. Restoration of a landfill site by spontaneous and directed succession, Berlin, Germany. Restor Ecol 10: 340-347 https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1526-100X.2002.01026.x
  34. Reed ST, Martens DC. 1996. Copper and zinc. In: Methods of soil analysis, part 3, Chemical Method, (Sparks DL, Ed). American Society of Agronomy, Inc. and Soil Science Society of America, Inc., Madison, Wisconsin, pp 703-722
  35. Sabre M, Holl KD, Lyons RE, Cairns Jr. J. 1997. Potential use of wildflower species for landfill restoration in Southwestern Virginia. HortTechnology 7: 383-387
  36. SAS Institute. 1985. SAS/STAT guide for personal guide. SAS Institute Inc., Cary
  37. Shanker AK, Cervantes C, Loza-Tavera H, Avudainayagam S. 2005. Chromium toxicity in plants. Environ Int 31: 739-753 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2005.02.003
  38. Simmons E. 1999. Restoration of landfill sites for ecological diversity. Waste Manage Res 17: 511-519 https://doi.org/10.1177/0734242X9901700617
  39. Sokal RR, Rohlf FJ. 1995. Biometry. W. H. Freeman and company, New York
  40. Suarez DL. 1996. Beryllium, magnesium, calcium, strontium, and barium. In: Methods of soil analysis, Part 3, Chemical Methods (Sparks DL, Ed). American Society of Agronomy, Inc. and Soil Science Society of America, Inc., Madison, Wisconsin, pp 575-601
  41. ter Braak CJF, Smilauer P. 1998. CANOCO reference manual and user's guide to canoco for windows: Software for canonical community ordination. Microcomputer Power, Ithaca
  42. Walker LR, del Moral R. 2003. Primary succession and ecosystem rehabilitation. Cambridge University Press, New York
  43. Wong MH, Cheung KC, Lan CY. 1992. Factors related to the diversity and distribution of soil fauna on Gin Drinkers' Bay Landfill, Hong Kong. Waste Manage Res 10: 423-434 https://doi.org/10.1177/0734242X9201000505
  44. Wong M-H, Yu C-T. 1989. Monitoring of Gin Drinkers' bay landfill, Hong Kong II. Gas contents, soil properties, and vegetation performance on the side slope. Environ Manage 13: 753-762 https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01868314

Cited by

  1. The response of plants growing in a landfill in the Philippines towards cadmium and chromium and its implications for future remediation of metal-contaminated soils vol.38, pp.2, 2015, https://doi.org/10.5141/ecoenv.2015.014