Evolution of phenolic compounds and humic substances in different forest soils of aspromonte (Southern Italy) under different tree species

Fresenius Environmental Bulletin

Volumn 7, Issue 3-4, 1998, Pages 197-202

  Muscolo, A ^a   Sidari, M ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY MEDITERRANEA OF REGGIO CALABRIA   (Italy)

Author keywords

Forest soil; Hormone like effect; Humic substances; Litter; Phenolic compounds

Indexed keywords

FOREST SOIL; HUMIC SUBSTANCE; PHENOLIC COMPOUND; VEGETATION TYPE;

ITALY, CALABRIA, ASPROMONTE;

FAGUS SYLVATICA; PINUS CALABRICA; PINUS LARICIO;

EID: 0031939791     PISSN: 10184619     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (19)

1. Swift M. J., Heal O. W. and Anderson J. M (1979). Decomposition in Terrestrial Ecosystem. Blackwell Scientific, Oxford.
2. Fogel R. and Cromack K. Jr. (1977). Effect of habitat and substrate quality on douglas-fir litter decomposition in western Oregon. Can. J. Bot. 55, 1632-1640.
3. Seastedt T.R. (1984) The role of microarthropods in decomposition and mineralization processes Ann. Rev. of Entom. 29, 25-46.
4. Kogel I., Hempfling R., Zech W., Hatcher P. G. and Schulten H.R. (1988). Chemical composition of the organic matter in forest soils: 1. Forest litter, 146, 124-136.
5. Schnitzer M and Khan S.K. (1972) Humic Substances in the Environment. Dekker, New York.
6. Kuiters A. T. and Sarink H.M. (1986). Leaching of phenolic compounds from leaf and needle litter of several deciduous and coniferous trees. Soil Biol. Biochem. 18, 475,480.
7. Bouyoucos G. J. (1962). Hydrometer method improved for making particle-size analyses of soils. Agron. J. 54, 464-465.
8. Walkley A. and Black I.A. (1934). An examination of the Degtjareff method for determining soil organic matter and a proposed modification of the chromic acid titration method. Soil Sci. 37,:29-38.
9. Soil Survey Staff (1992). Key to Soil Taxonomy.Agency for International Development USDA and Soil Management Support Services. SMSS Technical Monograph no. 19, Pocahontas Press, Inc. Blacksburg, Virginia.
10. Kaminsky R. and Muller W. H. (1978). A recommendation against the use of alkaline soil extractions in the study of allelopathy. Plant and soil, 49, 641-645.
11. Box J.D. (1983) Investigation of the Folin-Ciocalteau reagent for the determination of polyphenolic substances in natural waters. Water Res. 17, 511-525.
12. Kuiters A. T. and Denneman C. A. J. (1987). Water-soluble phenolic substances in soils under several coniferous and deciduous tree species. Soil Biol. Biochem. 19, 765-769.
13. Malcolm R. E. and Vaughan D. (1979a). Effects of humic acid fractions on invertase activities in plant tissues. Soil Biol. Biochem. 11, 65-72
14. Pflug W. and Ziechmann W. (1981). Inhibition of malate dehydrogenase by humic acids. Soil Biol. Biochem., 13, 293-299.
15. Vaughan D., Malcolm R.E. and Ord B.G. (1985). Influence of humic substances on biochemical processes in plant. In: D. Vaughan and R.E. Malcolm (Eds), Soil Organic Matter and Biological Activity. M. Njihoff/Dr. W. Junk Publishers, Dordrecht, pp 77-108.
16. Whitehead D.C., Dibb H. and Hartley R.D. (1982). Phenolic compounds in soil as influenced by the growth of different plant species. J. of Appl. Ecol. 19, 529-538.
17. Davies R. I., Coulson C. B. and Lewis D. A. (1964). Polyphenols in plant, humus and soil- IV Factors leading to increase in biosynthesis of polyphenol in leaves and their relationship to mull and mor formation. J. of Soil Sci., 15, 310-318.
18. DeKock P. C. and Vaughan D. (1975). Effects of some chelating and phenolic substancs on the growth of excised pea root segments. Planta, 126, 187-195.
19. Horsley S. B. (1977). Allelopathic interference among plants II. Physiological modes of action. Proceedings Fourth North American Forest Biology Workshop, 1976, pp. 93-136. Eds. Wilcox H. E. and Hamer A. Syracuse University Press, Syracuse, New York.