Nitrogen content in the soil was significantly highly positively correlated with Organic matter(r = 0.989, P = 0.000). Bulk density was negatively correlated with pH (r = 0.459), Nitrogen (r = 0.137) and Phosphorus (r = 0.447). There was a significant difference in the bulk density (P = 0.001) among the farms depending on the type of trees on the land. Farms
under coffee monocrop had least bulk density (1.162 Mg/m3) compared to farms with coffee and tree agroforestry systems whose bulk density ranged between 1.267–1.298 Mg/m3). Bulk density significantly increased (P = 0.001) with increase in soil depth. We also found out that bulk density was significantly higher (P = 0.001) on farms with Robusta coffee compared to those with
Arabica coffee. For both Arabica and Robusta coffee, the agroforestry farms had higher organic carbon than coffee monocrop farms (Fig. 2). Overall, SOC under Arabica- and Robusta- coffee agroforestry system was higher by 2.627 and 3.331 tC/ha compared to farms with no trees respectively. Robusta coffee farms had higher soil organic carbon at all depth compared to Arabica coffee (Fig. 3). The results indicate that there are significant (P = 0.001)differences in soil organic carbon between coffee agroforestry farms and coffee monocrop farms. We also observed significant (P = 0.003) differences in SOC between farms with Arabica and Robusta coffee. Robusta coffee farms had higher soil organic carbon compared to Arabica coffee farms. Soil organic carbon did not significantly differ along depth. There was relatively more
organic carbon found in the top 0–15 cm compared to 15–30 cm. There was a significant interaction (P = 0.000) between type of coffee and presence or absence of trees on farm (Table 2). An interaction plot was drawn to display this result (Fig. 4). It shows that soil organic carbon was higher under a mixture of, fruit trees, non-fruit trees and Robusta coffee than when those tree species were under Arabica coffee. Robusta coffee Agroforestry systems with non-fruit tree species had relatively higher SOC compared to other cropping systems. Arabica coffee stores more SOC when intercropped with fruit trees than Robusta coffee when integrated with the same trees. Under the coffee monocrop, Robusta coffee stores more SOC than Arabica coffee (Fig. 3). The results from the graph indicate the SOC is influenced by type of coffee and the type of trees present on farm.
Nitrogen content in the soil was significantly highly positively correlated with Organic matter(r = 0.989, P = 0.000). Bulk density was negatively correlated with pH (r = 0.459), Nitrogen (r = 0.137) and Phosphorus (r = 0.447). There was a significant difference in the bulk density (P = 0.001) among the farms depending on the type of trees on the land. Farmsunder coffee monocrop had least bulk density (1.162 Mg/m3) compared to farms with coffee and tree agroforestry systems whose bulk density ranged between 1.267–1.298 Mg/m3). Bulk density significantly increased (P = 0.001) with increase in soil depth. We also found out that bulk density was significantly higher (P = 0.001) on farms with Robusta coffee compared to those withArabica coffee. For both Arabica and Robusta coffee, the agroforestry farms had higher organic carbon than coffee monocrop farms (Fig. 2). Overall, SOC under Arabica- and Robusta- coffee agroforestry system was higher by 2.627 and 3.331 tC/ha compared to farms with no trees respectively. Robusta coffee farms had higher soil organic carbon at all depth compared to Arabica coffee (Fig. 3). The results indicate that there are significant (P = 0.001)differences in soil organic carbon between coffee agroforestry farms and coffee monocrop farms. We also observed significant (P = 0.003) differences in SOC between farms with Arabica and Robusta coffee. Robusta coffee farms had higher soil organic carbon compared to Arabica coffee farms. Soil organic carbon did not significantly differ along depth. There was relatively moreorganic carbon found in the top 0–15 cm compared to 15–30 cm. There was a significant interaction (P = 0.000) between type of coffee and presence or absence of trees on farm (Table 2). An interaction plot was drawn to display this result (Fig. 4). It shows that soil organic carbon was higher under a mixture of, fruit trees, non-fruit trees and Robusta coffee than when those tree species were under Arabica coffee. Robusta coffee Agroforestry systems with non-fruit tree species had relatively higher SOC compared to other cropping systems. Arabica coffee stores more SOC when intercropped with fruit trees than Robusta coffee when integrated with the same trees. Under the coffee monocrop, Robusta coffee stores more SOC than Arabica coffee (Fig. 3). The results from the graph indicate the SOC is influenced by type of coffee and the type of trees present on farm.
การแปล กรุณารอสักครู่..
