FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W3091895089> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W3091895089 endingPage "106066" @default.
• W3091895089 startingPage "106066" @default.
• W3091895089 abstract "The study focused on the attractiveness of mulches (consisting of the addition of a layer material to the soil surface) and their efficiency to promote recolonization by pedofauna of isolated and degraded areas. The experimental study was set up in the former coal mining area of Northern France. This area is particularly disturbed and fragmented by land-use change, urbanization, industry, intensive agriculture and metal pollution. To examine the movements of pedofauna, four kinds of mulches were applied: (i) Ramial Chipped Wood (RCW), (ii) chopped Miscanthus, (iii) dead leaves and (iv) wheat straw as well as plastic sheeting, a material often used in green spaces. A negative control consisted in soil without mulch addition. The experimental set-up consisted of a set of 18 bands of mulch (6 m long x 0.5 m width x 8 cm thick, i.e. a volume of 0.04 m3 per band) installed on three adjacent plots on a surface area which stretch on 4400 m2: (i) plot F1, a mixed plantation, (ii) plot M consisted of three rows of maples (both considered to be the reservoir of biodiversity) and (iii) plot BF, an ash plantation (with lower biodiversity). Faunistic communities of soil present within the mulches were monitoring using pitfall traps for four months (April to July), at a rate of eight surveys for each of the 90 traps installed, i.e. 720 samples. Different life traits and indices of diversity were studied, more specifically on carabid beetles. The main objective of the study was first to check whether mulches could or not reconnect different planted plots in a peri-urban landscape highly modified by human activities. The second aim was to find which type of mulch had the best efficiency in the recovery of the connectivity between plots. The last questions were which type of zoological groups could be favoured by the use of mulches and which benefits for ecosystem functioning. The main hypotheses of this study were: (i) Organic mulches would act as dispersal corridors and refuge zones to the soil organisms; (ii) organic mulches would be attractive to many organisms with various ecological needs. This study highlighted the potential benefits of using the mulching technique to support ecological connectivity in disturbed environment since this method highlighted the presence of individuals with different diets (saprophagous, predators, phytophagous and so forth), small and large size species which do not have the same dispersal capacities as well as species that are more dependent on forest environments and others that depend on more open environments. The study concluded that organic mulches are more favourable to pedofauna than soil without mulch or plastic sheeting. With regard to organic mulches, no difference was noted, either in terms of cumulative abundance or monthly monitoring. However, for carabids, it should be noted that dead leaves and wheat straw have higher specific richness than Miscanthus and RCW." @default.
• W3091895089 created "2020-10-15" @default.
• W3091895089 creator A5000733613 @default.
• W3091895089 creator A5002186613 @default.
• W3091895089 creator A5007813370 @default.
• W3091895089 creator A5024883686 @default.
• W3091895089 creator A5031557283 @default.
• W3091895089 creator A5031848123 @default.
• W3091895089 date "2020-12-01" @default.
• W3091895089 modified "2023-09-23" @default.
• W3091895089 title "Comparison of the interest of four types of organic mulches to reclaim degraded areas: a field study based on their relative attractiveness for soil macrofauna" @default.
• W3091895089 cites W1593123075 @default.
• W3091895089 cites W171717939 @default.
• W3091895089 cites W1977202285 @default.
• W3091895089 cites W1979259407 @default.
• W3091895089 cites W1980720942 @default.
• W3091895089 cites W1987650700 @default.
• W3091895089 cites W1995945789 @default.
• W3091895089 cites W2007292647 @default.
• W3091895089 cites W2015100402 @default.
• W3091895089 cites W2022092015 @default.
• W3091895089 cites W2023971874 @default.
• W3091895089 cites W2032329059 @default.
• W3091895089 cites W2036307218 @default.
• W3091895089 cites W2038188680 @default.
• W3091895089 cites W2044084913 @default.
• W3091895089 cites W2052216734 @default.
• W3091895089 cites W2059950940 @default.
• W3091895089 cites W2061886304 @default.
• W3091895089 cites W2064544023 @default.
• W3091895089 cites W2082438342 @default.
• W3091895089 cites W2084188536 @default.
• W3091895089 cites W2084378158 @default.
• W3091895089 cites W2087189381 @default.
• W3091895089 cites W2090940909 @default.
• W3091895089 cites W2092549843 @default.
• W3091895089 cites W2094552873 @default.
• W3091895089 cites W2095888235 @default.
• W3091895089 cites W2100523117 @default.
• W3091895089 cites W2106230701 @default.
• W3091895089 cites W2114858866 @default.
• W3091895089 cites W2119567434 @default.
• W3091895089 cites W2126100153 @default.
• W3091895089 cites W2129657193 @default.
• W3091895089 cites W2133953481 @default.
• W3091895089 cites W2152429537 @default.
• W3091895089 cites W2164904834 @default.
• W3091895089 cites W2171478599 @default.
• W3091895089 cites W2174584751 @default.
• W3091895089 cites W2204028369 @default.
• W3091895089 cites W2310130676 @default.
• W3091895089 cites W2463243528 @default.
• W3091895089 cites W2526492671 @default.
• W3091895089 cites W25662516 @default.
• W3091895089 cites W2575273149 @default.
• W3091895089 cites W2589460972 @default.
• W3091895089 cites W2775225322 @default.
• W3091895089 cites W2802937136 @default.
• W3091895089 cites W2922028436 @default.
• W3091895089 cites W4248030970 @default.
• W3091895089 cites W4297575392 @default.
• W3091895089 doi "https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoleng.2020.106066" @default.
• W3091895089 hasPublicationYear "2020" @default.
• W3091895089 type Work @default.
• W3091895089 sameAs 3091895089 @default.
• W3091895089 citedByCount "3" @default.
• W3091895089 countsByYear W30918950892022 @default.
• W3091895089 countsByYear W30918950892023 @default.
• W3091895089 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W3091895089 hasAuthorship W3091895089A5000733613 @default.
• W3091895089 hasAuthorship W3091895089A5002186613 @default.
• W3091895089 hasAuthorship W3091895089A5007813370 @default.
• W3091895089 hasAuthorship W3091895089A5024883686 @default.
• W3091895089 hasAuthorship W3091895089A5031557283 @default.
• W3091895089 hasAuthorship W3091895089A5031848123 @default.
• W3091895089 hasBestOaLocation W30918950891 @default.
• W3091895089 hasConcept C115540264 @default.
• W3091895089 hasConcept C130217890 @default.
• W3091895089 hasConcept C159390177 @default.
• W3091895089 hasConcept C159750122 @default.
• W3091895089 hasConcept C175092762 @default.
• W3091895089 hasConcept C18903297 @default.
• W3091895089 hasConcept C20529654 @default.
• W3091895089 hasConcept C205649164 @default.
• W3091895089 hasConcept C2776475172 @default.
• W3091895089 hasConcept C2779587293 @default.
• W3091895089 hasConcept C39432304 @default.
• W3091895089 hasConcept C6557445 @default.
• W3091895089 hasConcept C86803240 @default.
• W3091895089 hasConceptScore W3091895089C115540264 @default.
• W3091895089 hasConceptScore W3091895089C130217890 @default.
• W3091895089 hasConceptScore W3091895089C159390177 @default.
• W3091895089 hasConceptScore W3091895089C159750122 @default.
• W3091895089 hasConceptScore W3091895089C175092762 @default.
• W3091895089 hasConceptScore W3091895089C18903297 @default.
• W3091895089 hasConceptScore W3091895089C20529654 @default.
• W3091895089 hasConceptScore W3091895089C205649164 @default.
• W3091895089 hasConceptScore W3091895089C2776475172 @default.

• next