INFLUENCE OF SITE PREPARATION ON SOIL MOISTURE AND …

amp

INFLUENCE OF SITE PREPARATION ON SOIL MOISTURE AND

WEED COMFETITION IN SEMI-ARID TREE PLANTING

BY

ADEL AL-QURASHI

A Thesis submitted to the Graduate School

in partial fulfillment of the requirements

for the Degree

Master of Science

Major Subject Horticulture

New Mexico State University

Las Cruces New Mexico

December 1997

Influence of Site Preparation on Soil Moisture and Weed Competition in Semi-Arid

Tree Planting a thesis prepared by Adel Al-qurashi in partial fulfillment of the

requirements for the degree Master of Science has been approved and accepted by

m rJiLTimomYJ~ Dean of the Graduate School

Chair of the Examining Committee

Date

Committee in charge

Dr John T Harrington Chair

Dr James T Fisher

Dr Leigh Murray

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I wish to extend my thanks to my parents my wife and children my family

especially my brother Ibrahim for encouraging and supporting me as I worked

toward completing my graduate degree Also I wish to thank the Government of

Saudi Arabia for providing me with a scholarship and financial support during my

post-graduate education

A special thanks is given to Patrick Glass and Aladdin who were so generous

with their time and knowledge and who helped me tremendously with my research

A special thanks to my friend and advisor Dr John Harrington for all ofhis

support patient and encouragement He is a dedicated researcher and I learned much

from him Also I would like to thank Dr Leigh Murray for her advice and being a

member of my committee

I have a very special thank you for Dr James Fisher who has been a special

person to me during this period of my life He is patient friendly and encouraged me

to excel at my chosen profession

VITA

August 30 1966 - Born at Taif Saudia Arabia

1987 - Graduated from Al-Fasil High School Taif Saudi Arabia

1992 - Bachelor of Science in Arid Land Agriculture King Abdulaziz University

JeddahSaudiArabia

1992 - Teaching Assistant (Demonstrator) at Arid Land Agriculture Department

Jeddah Saudi Arabia

1995-1997 - Graduate Student New Mexico State University

PROFESSIONAL AND HONORAQRY SOCIETIES

Gamma Sigma Delta - National Agriculture Honorary

FIELD OF STUDY

Major Field Horticulture

ABSTRACT


WEED COMPETITION IN SEMI-ARID PLANTING

BY

ADEL DUIF ALLAH AL-QURASHI

Master of Science in Horticulture


Las Cruces New Mexico 1997

John T Harrington Chair

A site preparation technique utilizing a synthetic weed barrier and rainfall

harvesting has shown promise in establishing trees in semi-arid area with only one

irrigation at time of planting The objectives of this experiment were to detennine the

effect of two site preparation techniques v-ditch (rainfall harvesting) and synthetic

weed barrier alone and in combination on soil moisture and temperature in the root

zone of target trees A secondary objective was to evaluate the efficacy of these site

preparation treatments on weed control two years after treatment imposition

The planting was located at the New Mexico State University Los Lunas

Agriculture Science Center The planting site was irrigated once with 15 cm ofwater

from a flood irrigation system Seedling survival and height were measured for

Arizona cypress (Cupressus arizonica) Soil moisture content was measured for each

site preparation treatment at nine loci beneath the treatments for seven weeks

following irrigation Soil and air temperature were also measured throughout the

duration (34 days) of this study Competing vegetation w~ measured at the end of

the soil moisture sampling period by using the line intercept method

The low power of the experimental design and high variability within treatments

resulted in the failure to find significant (alpha = 005) differences in seedling

survival and soil moisture even though over twomiddotfold differences existed Two-year

height improved as site preparation intensity increased Site preparation treatments

did not alter crown or soil temperature Even though no significant differences were

detected the observed improved survival growth and soil moisture retention indicate

the combination ofrainfall harvesting and weed barrier is sufficient to established

windbreak in the Middle Rio Grande Valley

TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF TABLES ~ ix

LIST OF FIGURES x

INTRODUCTION 1

LITERATURE REVIEW 4

Tree Establishment in Semi-Arid Lands 4

Site Preparation 5

Rainfall Harvesting 6

Mulches 7

Agriculture in the Middle Rio Grande Region 10

Arizona Cypress 12

MATERIAL AND METHODS 13

Study Site 13

Site Preparation Treatments 13

Plant Measurements 14

Soil Moisture Measurements 14

Soil and Air Temperature Measurement 16

Competing Vegetation Measurements 16

RESULTS 19

Survival and Growth 19

Soil Moisture 19

Crown and Soil Temperatures 34

Weed Competition 37

DISCUSSION 56

CONCLUSION 61

LITERATURE CITED 62

APPENDIX Pressure Potential Equation 68

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1 Temperature probe locations used in the study 18

Table 2 Analysis ofvariance table for two-year survival percent ofArizona Cypress seedling under four site preparation treatments in Los Lunas NM 20

Table 3 Analysis ofvariance table for two-year height of Arizona Cypress seedling under four site preparation treatments in Los Lunas NM 22

Table 4 Analysis ofvariance table for weed coverage along the edge ofsite preparation treatments in Los Lunas NM 49

Table 5 Analysis ofvariance table for weed coverage 50 cm from the center of site preparation treatments in Los Lunas NM 50

Table 6 Analysis ofvariance table for weed coverage along the center of site preparation treatments in Los Lunas NM 51

Table 7 Mean value for weed coverage along the center of site preparation Treatments in Los Lunas NM52

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1 The effect of site preparation on 2 years survival ofArizona cypress 21

Figure 2 The effect of site preparation on 2 years height ofArizona cypress 23

Figure 3 Change in soil moisture potential at loci 1 from 0 to 34 days after last irrigation for the four site preparation treatments 24



Figure 6 Change in soil moisture potential at loci 4 from 0 to 34 days after last irrigation for the four site preparation treatments 27middot






Figure 12 Graphic (fill) ofdry-down patterns for all giving loci over the duration of the study 33

Figure 13 Daily high and low temperature in the ambient air and in the crown of Arizona cypress seedling growing in control plots 35

Figure 14 Daily high and low temperature in the ambient air and in the crown ofArizona cypress seedling growing in V -ditch and weed barrier plots middot 36

x

Figure 15 Daily high and low temperature 1 cm below the soil surface of Arizona cypress seedling growing in control plots 39

Figure 16 Daily high and low temperature 1 cm below the soil surface of Arizona cypress seedling growing in V -ditch plots 40

Figure 17 Daily high and low temperature 1 cm below the soil surface of Arizona cypress seedling growing in weed barrier plots 41

Figure 18 Daily high and low temperature 1 cm below the soil surface of Arizona cypress seedling growing in V -ditch and weed barrier plots 42







Figure 25 Percent coverage for Salsoa Sporobolus aeroides and other plant coverage along the edge of site preparation treatments averaged across all three blocks 53

Figure 26 Percent coverage for Salsoa kali Sporobolus aeroides and other plant coverage 50 cm from the center of the site preparation treatments averaged across all three blocks 54

Figure 27 Percent coverage for Salsoa kaU Sporobolus aeroides and other plant coverage along the center of the site preparation treatments averaged across all three blocks 55

xi

INTRODUCTION

Arid and semi-arid lands are defined as a place where the amount of available

water for normal crop growth and development is small (White 1960) with an

average annual rainfall ofless than 200 mm and between 200 and 500 mm

respectively (West 1983) Arid and semi-arid lands comprise approximately 35 of

the earths land surface (Walton 1969) and support a population of 850 million people

(Nierenberg 1995) The increase in demand for food and fiber production has

necessitated dependence upon arid and semi-arid land surfaces to satisfy the needs of

the expanding world population

The harsh dry climates in arid and semi-arid areas inhibit plant growth and

development Much ofNew Mexicos agricultural areas are in arid and semi-arid

areas Even under these challenging climatic regimes agriculture contributes

significantly to the economy ofNew Mexico New Mexico has 13500 farms in

operation which cover forty-four million acres not including 222 million acres of

BLM and Forest Service land which is leased to both farmers and ranchers (USDA

1995) In 1996 the total amount ofcash crops grown in the state was estimated to be

$511567000 (USDA 1996)

Further compounding the limitations of semi-arid climate on plant growth in

the United States are the highly erodible soils associated with 30 million hectares of

agricultural regions such as the Great Plains (Skujins 1991) In New Mexico for

example over 340000 hectares of soil eroded in a seven month period from

November 1983 through May 1984 (Huszar and Piper 1986) In some areas ofthe

state including Albuquerque and Las Cruces soil loss by wind erosion is estimated to

be 2727 kilograms per hectare per year (Huszar and Piper 1986)

Wind erosion presents challenges to agricultural production in the State of

New Mexico A potential solution to reduce soil erosion is establishment of perennial

plant covers and trees Two approaches exist to incorporate trees into agricultural

enterprises trees as a fruit or nut crop and establishing trees as windbreaks to reduce

wind effects on soil surface Pistachio (Pistacia vera) and pecan (Carya illinoensis)

are nut tree species being used for crop production by New Mexico farmers

Originally from central Asia pistachio trees appeal to growers because they are

adaptable to both climate and soil in the southern area of New Mexico (Crane and

Maranto 1988 Herrera 1997) Pecans have become a major crop in the state and in

1995 orchards produced 2041166 tons of pecans (USDA 1995) Arizona cypress

(Cupressus arizonca) and eldarica pine (Pinus brutia var eldarica) have also been

used in the southern half of the state as windbreaks to reduce soil erosion

Increasing demands on a finite quantity of irrigation water have resulted in

many agriculture enterprises failing to utilize tree crops or windbreaks as a means of

reducing wind erosion A site preparation technique utilizing a synthetic weed barrier

and rainfall harvesting has shown promise in establishing trees in semi-arid areas with

only one irrigation at time of planting (Maiers 1997) The windbreak technique has

been evaluated for evergreen species and also shows promise in applications using

fruit and nut trees The preliminary effects on seedling survival and growth are now

being monitored but little infonnation exists on the effect of using a synthetic weed

2

barrier and rainfall harvesting on soil moisture and temperature in the root zone of the

trees

The objectives of this study were to evaluate the effect of two site-preparation

techniques v-ditch (rainfall harvesting) and synthetic weed barrier alone and in

combination on soil moisture and temperature in the root zone oftarget trees A

secondary objective was to evaluate the efficacy ofthese site preparation treatments

on weed control two years after treatment imposition

LITERATURE REVIEW

Tree Establishment in Semi-Arid Regions

Precipitation data for Los Lunas NM indicates that the average annual rainfall

measured over a period of 38 years (1957-1994) was 225 cm (Hooks 1996) with

most falling during the growing season April through mid October (Hooks 1996)

However rainfall was variable ranging from 132 cm to 380 cm during this period

(Hooks 1996) It is recommended that transplanting should be done during the

growing season (April through October 15) when 70 of the annual precipitation

falls (Hooks 1996) Monthly precipitation data support transplanting during this

window of time II when rainfall is at maximum for the year Transplanting outside of

this window of time will subject seedling to severe transplant shock in terms of

inadequate soil moisture

Moisture stress is the main cause of transplant shock Transplant shock may

occur ifroot-to-soil contact is not reestablished and the plant is unable to take up

water (Haase and Rose 1993) Symptoms of transplant shock in conifers are bottle

brushing browning loss of needles and cessation of growth (Haase and Rose 1993)

In another study by Hallgren and Helms (1988) symptoms such as reduction of

internode elongation was induced by moisture stress Data supports a 6-12 water

content with normal root volume resulted in a reduction ofnew terminal and lateral

length ofneedles (Haase and Rose 1990) Both these studies support the assumption

that adequate soil moisture content is necessary to deter seedling transplant shock

4

Site Preparation

The objective of site preparation is to manipulate the planting site to improve

the survival and growth of tree seedlings by reducing or eliminating site limitations

In most cases site preparation is used to reduce competition for light or improve the

soil-water relation on the site Site preparation can be mechanical or chemical or a

combination of the two Proper site preparation is instrumental for plantation

establishment Planting failure has been attributed to poor site preparation before

planting and site management neglect after (Rasmussen 1990)

The efficacy of site preparation is a function of the site intensity of treatment

and the plant material being established (McClain and Lavender 1989 McMinn 1981

Fisher and Montano 1977) In semi-arid plantings improving soil moisture

availability is the primary objective ofmost site preparation efforts Eliminating or

reducing competing vegetation is often effective in improving soil moisture reserves

(Westwood 1993 lobiden 1990) This can be achieved several ways including the

use ofherbicides or physical barriers such as mulches or through repeated tillage

operations Site preparation technique can also increase the amount ofmoisture

stored in the soil Most often this is achieved through mechanical rainfall harvesting

techniques A third means of improving soil moisture status through site preparation

is by improving water infiltration into the soil This is often achieved mechanically

by repeated surface crust disturbance such as rototilling or disking Patterson et al

(1990) evaluated pecan tree growth using the influence of both chemical and cultural

weed control Four weed control treatments mowing disking grass control only

5

and total control were used and Patterson et al (1990) found that disking was as

effective as total control These latter techniques are considered standard operating

protocol prior to irrigation of pecan orchards in Mesilla Valley

Rainfall Harvesting

One site preparation technique used in arid and semi-arid regions and in areas

prone to droughts during the growing season is using rainfall harvesting Rainfall

harvesting involves manipulation of the soil surface around a seedling to concentrate

precipitation towards the rhizophere of the seedling This technique has been shown

to be effective in areas prone to droughts during the growing season Lantagne and

Burger (1987) used a v-blade and disc to build a rainfall harvesting system in the

Southern Piedmont which resulted in improved growth and survival of transplanted

seedlings Stafford et al (1985) used shear v-blade and disc to capture more rainfall

during periods of seedling establishment when rainfall was scarce This technique

proved to be most cost effective especially in retaining nutrients which proved to be

a significant factor in enhancing loblolly pine (Pinus taeda) seedling growth (Stafford

et al 1985) In the Thal Desert ofPakistan (average rainfall 180-200 mm) one meter

slopes inverted on either side of a planting trench (03 m wide x 03 m deep) proved

to be the best system to use under dry regions conditions (Suleman 1992) In

heavier soils a linear v-ditch system improved survival and early growth ofArizona

cypress and eldarica pine in the Pecos Valley of Southeastern New Mexico (Maiers et

al 1997) This technique in conjunction with a synthetic weed barrier is currently

the recommended technique for establishing windbreaks in the Southwestern United

6

r

States (Brown et al 1992) The combination of these two treatments has improved

conifer establishment in several New Mexico agricultural regions (Maiers 1997)

Rainfall harvesting is ideally suited to areas with heavier soils prone to large

episodic rain events This type of climate is common in many ofNew Mexicos

agricultural regions The scalping effect of most rainfall harvesting techniques also

eliminates much of the competing vegetation thereby making niore soil moisture

available to the seedling However little information exists on the effect of rainfall

harvesting on soil moisture and temperature in the rooting zone of the seedling

Mulches

Mulching or covering the soil around a tree seedling is also an effective site

preparation technique in arid and semi-arid areas Mulches can be either organic or

inorganic materials such as rocks or synthetic fabrics Organic mulches (rice straw

pecan hulls pine bark etc) have the advantage of improving soil tilth and releasing

nutrients into the soil or they decompose Inorganic mulches have the advantage of

persistence which can be important in maintaining the influence of the mulch for a

greater duration thereby reducing the need for reapplication (Herrera 1996)

An ideal mulch is one which eliminates competing plant growth while still

permitting gas exchange and moisture infiltration Mulches improve soil moisture

status in several ways Mulches can reduce competing vegetation - weeds compete

more aggressively with plants for soil moisture nutrients and light especially during

the establishment phase of the crop (Lee 1994) As a result plant growth and yield

are reduced if weeds are not controlled (Spedding 1981 Tivy 1990) Plastic mulches

7

absorb most photosynthetically active radiation in the 400 to 700 nm range They

also transmit a large portion ofnear-infrared radiation Weeds are controlled under

these mulches due to the photosynthetically active radiation being blocked and near-

infrared radiation transmitted (Maurer and Frey 1991 Loy and Wells 1989) In

micropropagated raspberry (Rubus fruticosus L) plant establishment black

polyethylene mulch had a significant effect in complete weed control during the

establishment phase straw mulch did not suppress most annual and perennial weed

species during this study (Trinka and Pritts 1992)

Mulches also improve soil moisture retention by reducing evaporation of

moisture from the soil surface to the atmosphere (Fereres and Goldhamer 1991)

Black and Greb (1961) stated that plastic mulch frequently increased plant growth in

nonirrigated regions They reduced evaporation of soil moisture as well as increased

water-use efficiency by the plant as compared with bare soil (Black and Greb 1961

Borland and Weinstein 1989) Maintaining adequate soil moisture and fertility during

the growing season is necessary for successful seedling establishment rvan Sambeek

et al 1995) Lack of weed control decreased soil moisture potential more rapidly in

plots covered with dense vegetation The use of plastic film allowed soil moisture

potential to decline more slowly than in the other treatments rvan Sambeek et al

1995) In a study by Mbagwu (1991) it was reported that on bare plots soil moisture

reserve depleted by 642 on straw plots 577 on black plastic mulch plots

369 and on white plastic mulch plots 20

8

Mulches can also improve soil moisture by preventing crusting and improving

infiltration into the soil With the absence ofcultivation and a low amount of

compaction even thin mulches allow the structure of the soil to improve and increase

the infiltration rate This will allow a more uniform distribution ofwater and less soil

erosion (Harris 1992) Tindall et al (1991) found that water infiltration was

improved with the use of both organic and plastic mulches as compared to bare soil

For example plastic mulches will reduce the impact of rainfall and sprinklers on the

surface of the soil and disperse their impact which results in more moisture

infiltration

Depending on the mulch material soil temperature may be either raised or

lowered by the presence of a mulch Most organic mulches absorb incoming solar

radiation and actually cool the soil beneath them However soil temperature beneath

the mulch is a function ofmulch moisture content and mulch thickness In synthetic

mulches color plays an important role in determining the effect of mulch on soil

temperature Clear polyethylene mulches and row covers are currently being used as

a means ofpest control in many bareroot nurseries (Hildebrand 1989) This practice

developed in the Middle East is commonly referred to as soil solarization The clear

film acts as a greenhouse film allowing the high energy shortwave radiation in but

preventing the long-wave reradiation from passing skyward This results in the soil

absorbing the energy associated with the light thus heating the soil Opaque and

colored synthetic mulches may also heat the soil Dark colored and black mulches

can readily absorb solar radiation and heat up significantly in areas ofhigh solar

9

radiation such as the Southwest United States It has been suspected by several

investigators that dark mulches can absorb enough heat to effect tree survival (Maiers

1997 McDonald et al 1994) Black mulch acts as an efficient absorption material for

ultraviolet visible and infrared wavelengths of incoming solar radiation (Loy et al

1989) Due to the thermal conductivity of the soil which is related to moisture

content a large portion of the energy absorbed by the black plastic is transferred to

the soil by the process ofconduction (Loy et al 1989) It was found that when the

temperature of the soil was measured a difference as high as 2degC was found between

the loosely covered and the tightly covered black plastic mulch used to cover the soil

(Loy 1989 Ham et al 1993 Lamont 1996)

Splittstoesser and Brown (1991) stated that under black mulch soil

temperatures increased 10-15degC above those of bare soil Temperature beneath black

polyethylene mulch were 4degC warmer than bare soil (Loy and Wells 1990) Mean

soil temperatures under black mulch decreased with depth (Lopushinsky and Beebe

1976)

Agriculture in the Middle Rio Grande Region

In 1540 the Spanish explorer Coronado documented Indians using irrigation

methods in the middle Rio Grande Valley to grow corn and beans Today the

population is concentrated along the Rio Grande in an area approximately six

kilometers wide and forty-two kilometers long Most of the area is used as range

10

land Also the main irrigated crops grown are alfalfa and permanent pasture Smaller

farms grow com barley wheat sorghum chile lettuce and fruit orchards

The Los Lunas area is a physiographic trough (Rio Grande graben) which is

fifty-four kilometers wide and bordered by the Manzano Mountains on the east and

the Lucero uplift on the west A majority of soils in Los Lunas were formed by a

variety of alluvial deposits Some of these alluvium deposits were altered by wind

which results in carbonate deposits Other types of soil contain weathered basalt

granite schist limestone sandstone and shale and alluvium deposits (Pease et al

1975) Due to course changes of the Rio Grande the soil tends to be a complex

combination ofsand silt and clay This area has an arid climate and most of the

winter moisture comes from the Pacific Ocean while summer moisture comes from

the Gulf of Mexico This area has clear sunny weather and low relative humidity

three-fourths of the daylight hours Surface winds are controlled by the topography

of the valley with stronger winds late in the winter and in the spring which can cause

periods of blowing dust (Pease et al 1975)

Los Lunas is situated at an elevation of 1475 meters and the average annual

rainfall of 18-25 centimeters which falls during the growing season from April

through October 15th Seventy-seven percent ofannual rainfall occurs during the

growing season (Hooks 1996 Pease et al 1975)

11

Arizona Cypress

Long (1977) stated that the genus Cupressus has shown characteristics which

are promising afforestation plantings in both arid and semi-arid areas Arizona

cypress is drought resistant once it is established and can be grown in alkaline soils

Arizona cypress is found in both the canyons and mountains of southeast and central

Arizona and southwest New Mexico and is found at an elevation of between 1200 and

2000 meters (Tidestrom and Kittell 1941) Traditionally the genus Cupressus has

been used for landscaping and Christmas trees and more importantly for erosion

control and windbreaks (Young and Young 1992)

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Study Site

This study utilized an experimental windbreak planting established in Los

LUIlas New Mexico The planting site was part of a state-wide windbreak

establishment project conducted in 1994 and 1995 (Maiers 1997) The original study

examined the influence ofdifferent site preparation techniques and stock sizes of

container grown Arizona cypress (Cupressus arizonica) and eldarica pine (Pinus

brutia var eldarica) Only those treatment combinations involving the largest (656

ml Deepot Steuwe and Sons Corvalis OR) Arizona cypress were used in the present

study

This study was conducted at the New Mexico State University - Los Lunas

Agricultural Science Center in Los Lunas New Mexico (latitude 34deg46 longitude

106deg45) Average annual precipitation ranges from 22 to 25 cm (Hooks 1996) The

soil of the planting site is a loamy sand (872 sand 46 silt 82 clay Maiers

1997) Average monthly soil temperature ranges from 33degC in January to 29degC in

July (Hooks 1996) The site was leveled using a laser level prior to the initial

planting in 1995 The site was initially dominated by sagebrush (Artemesia fllifolia)

Site Preparation Treatments

Four site preparation treatments were monitored in this study These

treatments included an undisturbed control a shallow V -ditch a synthetic weed

barrier and a combination of the V-ditch treatment with the weed barrier laid over the

V -ditch The V -ditch treatment makes use of a shallow trench two meters wide The

13

base of the V is one meter in from each edge of the trench The V -ditch treatment

was installed using a blade on the back of a fann tractor

The weed barrier consists of a tightly woven synthetic burlap which allows for

water penetration and prevents weed growth To accommodate the seedling slits

were cut into the weed barrier All seedlings were planted one meter in from the edge

of all site preparation treatments All treatments were two meters wide and 15 meters

longs

The current study began on June 201997 and ran through August 11997 On

the first day of the study the entire plot was irrigated with a minimum of 15 cm of

water from a flood irrigation system The experimental design was randomize

complete block design with three blocks

Plant Measurement

Seedling height was measured from the ground to the tallest growing tip of the

established Arizona cypress seedlings remaining in the study Height was measured

to the nearest centimeter using a meter stick Seedling height and survival were

measured only for those seedlings planted as 656 ml Deepots Height and survival

data were analyzed using analysis ofvariance (PROC GLM SAS Institute 1990)

Treatment separation was done using the LSD means separation procedure (PROC

GLM SAS Institute 1990)

Soil Moisture Measurement

Soil moisture content was measured for each site preparation treatment at

three depths at three points relative to the center of the site preparation treatment

14

The three points relative to the center were 0 30 and 60 cm from the center of the

treatment At each point samples were taken from depths of 10 20 and 30 cm This

sampling design generated a grid ofnine soil moisture measurement per site

preparation treatment per block Soil samples were taken using a bucket sand auger

removed from the auger and placed into pre-weighed ointment cans Lids were

immediately placed onto the cans following filling with samples Cans were then

transported to the laboratory where they were weighed to the nearest milligram using

a top loading balance Lids were then removed and the cans containing the samples

were placed into a drying oven at 105degC for 24 hours or until a constant weight was

achieved Samples were then removed from the oven and placed on a laboratory

bench until they cooled to room temperature and were reweighed as described above

Soil water content (w) was calculated as the mass ofwater per unit mass of dry soil

using the following equation

mass of wet soil - mass of dry soil W = -------------------------------------------shy

mass of dry soil

Soil moisture content was measured twice weekly throughout the duration of

this study (34 days) Measurement ofsoil moisture was terminated due to heavy

rainfall prior to the eleventh sample date No other appreciable (gt 5 mm)

precipitation occurred prior to this rain episode

To prevent sample contamination with backfill sampling was conducted using

both sides of the treatment On alternating days samples were taken from opposite

sides of the treatment Samples were taken at 20 cm intervals along the axis of the

15

treatment The final sample (tenth sample date) was located approximately two

meters from the initial sample point Upon reviewing the data this technique was

found to be sufficient in minimizing sample contamination A total of twelve samples

had to be discarded due to contamination

Soil water content was then converted to soil moisture pressure potential by

using a pressure release technique (Klute 1986 Smith and Mullins 1991) Appendix

1 contains the three pressure release equations for the three soil moisture sampling

blocks used in this study Due to the low power of this sampling design only

swnmary data (mean and standard error) are presented

Soil and Air Temperature Measurements

Soil and air temperatures were measured throughout the duration of this study

using remote data loggers (Optic StowAway Temp Onset Computer Corporation

Pocasset MA) Data loggers were programmed to record temperature every hour

Due to limited availability ofdata loggers the entire study could not be monitored

Therefore only portions of two of the three blocks were measured Data logger

locations are provided in Table 1 Due to the restricted sampling design only

summary temperature data are presented

Competing Vegetation Measurements

At the end of the soil moisture sampling period competing vegetation was

measured using a line intercept method (Phillips 1959) This technique involved

suspending a ten-meter string along the long axis of a site preparation treatment The

string was subdivided into one meter increments The string was suspended 30 cm

16

off of the soil surface The distance a plant crown intercepted the line was recorded

to the nearest centimeter Three transects were taken for each treatment by block

combination The three transects were the center of the treatment 50 cm from the

center and on the edge of the treatment Weed competition data was analyzed using

analysis ofvariance (PROC GLM SAS Institute 1990) Treatment separation was

done using the Bonferroni means separation procedure (PROC GLM SAS Institute

1990)

Table 1 Temperature probe locations used in the study

ITreatment Location Blocks i

middot Control Plat crown 1

Control

Control

1 cm below soil surface


12

12 i

Control 38 cm below soil surface 1

Weed Barrier 1 cm below soil surface 12

Weed Barrier i

23 cm below soil surface 1

V-ditch 1 cm below soil surface 12 I

V-ditch

V -ditch Weed Barrier




Plat crown



12

1

12

12

I

I

I I

V -ditch Weed Barrier 38 cm below soil surface 1

RESULTS

Survival and Growth

Two-year survival was not influenced by site preparation treatment (Table 2

Figure 1) Two-year height was influenced by site preparation treatment (Table 3)

Two-year height improved as site preparation intensity increased (Figure 2)

Seedlings growing in the combined V -ditch and weed barrier treatment had two-year

heights greater than either treatment alone and two times the height of seedlings

growing in the control treatment The two intermediate site preparation treatments

had two-year heights exceeding control seedlings in excess of 52 (Figure 2)

Soil Moisture

The initial irrigation completely wetted all loci evaluated in the study (Figures

3 - 12) Aliloci in all site preparation treatments remained moist through the fourth

collection date or 13 days into the dry down period The upper three loci loci 1 4

and 7 began to show signs of drying by the fifth collection date or day 17 into the dry

down period in all but the V -ditch weed barrier combined treatment (Figures 3 6 9)

The most intensive site preparation treatment the combination of V -ditch and weed

barrier did not show signs of appreciably (gt03 Mpa) drying until 24 days after the

last irrigation (Figure 12) The second tier of loci (20 cm below the surface) began

drying down much slower with the V -ditch treatment alone appearing to dry down

faster than the other two site preparation treatments and the control However it was

not until the eighth collection period or 27 days into the dry-down period that any

appreciable drying occurred in the V -ditch alon treatment

19

Table 2 Analysis of variance table for 2-year survival percent ofArizona Cypress seedlings under four site preparation treatments in Los Lunas NM

Source df Sums of Sguares Fvalue PrgtF N 0

Block 2 31667 032 07365 Site Prep 3 382500 259 01379 Error 6 295000 Corrected Total II 709167

100

80

~ 60-m gt ~

J 40(JJ

20

o

Figure

1

1

I

Control V-Ditch Weed V-Ditch

Barrier Weed Barrier

Treatment

1 The effect of site preparation on 2-year (percent) survival of Arizona cypress (Cupressus arizonica) (mean plusmnSE)

21

Table 3 Analysis of variance table for 2-year height of Arizona Cypress seedlings under four site preparation treatments in Los Lunas NM

Source df Sums ofSguares F value PrgtF N N Block 2 11896 033 07334

Site Prep 3 4497360 8234 00001 Block x Site Prep 6 109237 031 09285 Error 61 3562874 Corrected Total 72 8204704

140

120

100

--E

-0 80

c C)

CD 60 J J

40

20

0 Control

j

V-Ditch Weed Barrier

Treatment

t


Figure 2 The effect of site preparation on 2-year height growth of Arizona cypress (Cupressus arizonica) (mean + SE)

23

--

2

-m 0shy

i

J ()

() 1 0

i

o

c=J Control ~ V-ditch ~ Weed Barrl~r I8888B8 V-ditch + Weed Barrier MD - Missing Data

MO~~ll 3 6 10 13 17 20 24 27 31 34

Days After Irrigation

Figure 3 Chang~s in soil moisture potential at loci 1 (60 em from treatment center 10 em depth) from 0 to 34 days after last irrigation for the four site preparation treatments evaluated in this study (mean + 1 SE)

tv VI

-(U Q

~-~ J tn

Control ~ Vcfitch ~ Weed Barrier

2 J ~ Vcfitch + Weed Barrier

tn 1 ~ a

o I P= -1 nzrnr JifN ~ I If9 I ~ I fR I ~ I fI8 3 6 10 13 17 20 24 27 31 34


Figure 4 Changes in soil moisture potential at loci 2 (60 em from treatment center 20 em depth) from 0 to 34 days after last irrigation for the four site preparation treatments evaluated in this study (mean + 1 SE)

N 0

-ca a ~-~ J U)

f=J Control ~ V-ditch ~ Weed Barrier

2 -I IIllB8 V-ditch + Weed Barrier

U) 1 ~ a

o I -r= ~ ~ ItpEI Iqmt I~ 1qst8 I~ 3 6 10 13 17 20 24 27 31 34


Figure 5 Changes in soil moisture potential at loei 3 (60 em from treatment center 30 em depth) from 0 to 34 days after last irrigation for the four site preparation treatments evaluated in this study (mean + 1 SE)

N -J

- as c E-e J (f)

cJ Control ~ V-ditch ~ Weed Barrier

2 -I all8BB8 V-ditch + Weed Barrier MD - Missing Data

~ 1 a

o I ~pm I IAfC I fISI ~ I fS1 I ~ I ~ I fU I ~ 3 6 10 13 17 20 24 27 31 34


Figure 6 Changes in soil moisture potential at loci 4 (30 cm from treatment center 10 cm depth) from 0 to 34 days after last irrigation for the four site preparation treatments evaluated in this study (mean + 1 SE)

N 00

-m Q

iE-~ J

Control ~ V-ditch ~ Weed Barrier

2 -I1l8lISBI V-ditch + Weed Barrier

m ~ 1

D

o I -P=shy 12fih I flI I ~ I ~ I ~ I FfII I ff I ~ 3 6 10 13 17 20 24 27 31 34



N 0

-m a ~ -

~

r=J Control ~ V-ditch ~ Weed Barrier

2 -I ml8B8 V-ditch + Weed Barrier

J rn rn ~ 1 a

o I shy r CrrfV I ~ I JIIi (INKlI

3 6 10 13 17 20 24 27 31 34



II I

w o

rJ Control ~ V-ditch ~ Weed Barrier

2 -l ~ V-ditch + Weed Barrier

-~ lE-~ J gJ ~ 1

Dshy

_TIII

o I --r= rnf= ampfD I tfR I poundfill ~ I f4iI I ~ IpoundfI IQI 3 6 10 13 17 20 24 27 31 34


Figure 9 Changes in soil moisture potential at loci 7 (center of treatment 10 em depth) from 0 to 34 days after last irrigation for the four site preparation treatments evaluated in this study (mean + 1 SE)

w

C=J Control ~ V-ditch ~ Weed Barrier

2 -I1B8lB88 V-ditch + Weed Barrier

-~ 5-shy l f) f)

1 a

o I jiIF I I flIII I Vf VfD I nttJl4 I I P I 4

3 6 10 13 17 20 24 27 31 34


Figure 10 Changes in soil moisture potential at loci 8 (center of treatment 20 cm depth) from 0 to 34 days after last irrigation for the four site preparation treatments evaluated in this study (mean + 1 SE)

W N

(=J Control ~ V-ditch ~ Weed Barrier

2 -I ~ V-ditch + Weed Barrier

-m Q ~- l f) f)

1 a

o I = I - r 0 F I1zti I~ I~ ~ I~ I~ IfPII 3 6 10 13 17 20 24 27 31 34



tJ tJ

I ~ ~

- ~ -----~ -~

-----shy

Control 27 Days After Ir(igation

V-ditch _ xgt~ sect ___~_ io

i =-

w ier __ bull__ ~~ii

--shy --shy

Control

_ 00 - 03 Mpa _ 04middot06 Mpa

07 - 09 Mpa IIIIII 10 shy 12 Mpa

cJ 13 - 15 Mpa cJ gt 150 Mpa

Figure 12 Graphic (fill) display ofdry down patterns for all nine loci over the duration of the study The seedling would be located at the upper right

comer ofeach grid

Only on the last collection date or 34 days since the last irrigation that any

appreciable drying occurred in the second tier loci of the control plots Soil drying

never exceeded 03 Mpa in the second or third tier loci in the weed barrier alone or

combined V -ditch and weed barrier treatments In the control and weed barrier

treatments alone the lowest tier of loci (30 cm) were not dried below 03 Mpa

Drying in the upper loci began at the two periphery loci (loci 1 and 7) and

moved inward toward loci 4 This drying trend was most rapid in the two

intermediate site preparation treatments (Figure 12) This pattern ofdrying started at

collection date 5 with the exception of the combined V-ditch and weed barrier

treatment where the trend began 7 days later At the seventh collection date when

signs ofappreciable drying (at loci 7) in the most intensive treatment were beginning

the other two site preparation treatments and control had appreciable drying in all the

loci in the upper tier (Figures 3 6 9 12)

Crown and Soil Temperatures

No differences occurred in daily low temperatures in the crowns ofArizona

cypress seedlings growing in the control and V -ditch weed barrier treatments (Figures

13 14) The daily high temperature was consistently 1 to 2degC higher in the control

seedling versus the tree growing in the combined V -ditch and weed barrier treatment

The seedlings in the combined V -ditch and weed barrier treatment had daily high

temperatures going from 38degC at the beginning of the study to around 40degC at the end

of the study The

34

shy0 Q-~ l-as Q) 0 E ~

50~------------------------------------------~

40

30

20

10 -shy Minimum Crown -0- Maximum Crown ---- Minimum Air -9- Maximum Air

O~--~----~~----~----~----~----~------~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0gt-co N co ft 0 N 2 0 s s- - rco 0 0 0 0 0 0

Calendar Date

Figure 13 Daily high and low temperatures in the ambient air and in the crown of Arizona cypress (Cupressus arizonica) seedlings growing in control plots

35

50~----------------__________________________~

40

~- 30 ~ I-lt0 Q) Co

20E Q) r

10 - Minimum Crown -ltgt- Maximum Crown -shy Minimum Air -shy Maximum Air

O~--~----~------~----~----~----~----~~ ~ 0) ~ ~ ~ ~-(0 (II co It 0 ~ i2 0

~ ~ - -(0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Calendar Date

Figure 14 Daily high and low temperatures in the ambient air and in the crown of Arizona cypress (Cupressus arizonica) growing in V-ditch amp weed barrier plots

36

control seedlings averaged about 40degC throughout the study with greater day to day

fluctuations than for the other seedlings

In all four site preparation treatments soil temperature at the soil surface

increased as the dry-down period progressed (Figures 15 16 17 18) Again the daily

low temperatures did not differ among the three site preparation treatments and

controL The weed barrier alone treatment had daily high temperatures comparable to

control whereas the V -ditch alone and combined V -ditch and weed barrier

treatments were consistently cooler than either the control or weed barrier alone

treatment

As was expected daily temperature fluctuation was small at the 23 cm depth

Almost no difference laquo10degC) occurred in either the daily high or low soil

temperatures among treatments at this level (Figures 19 20 2122) The same trend

occurred at the 32 cm level with no difference in daily high or daily low temperature

between the control and the V-ditch weed barrier combination treatment (Figures 23

24)

Weed Competition

Site preparation treatments did not effect weed coverage along the edge of the

treatments nor 50 cm from the center of the treatments (Tables 45) The combined

weed barrier and V -ditch treatment did result in significantly less weed coverage

along the center axis of the site preparation treatment (Tables 6 7) The two

treatments alone did not reduce weed coverage relative to control along this center

axis The majority of the weed competition in all transects was Salsoa kali and

37

Sporobolus aeriodes (Figures 25 26 27) The relative proportion of these two

species increased within treatments containing weed barrier in the two internal

transects (Figures 26 27) This was due to the crowns of these two species growing

over the top of these treatments not through them

38

50

45

40 0 -()- 35 l 30 (0 Q) 25 c E Q) 20 I shy

150 Cf)

10

5

0

- Minimum Daily Temperature Block 1 --0shy Maximum Daily Temperature Block 1 - bull Minimum Daily Temperature Block 2 - Daily Maximum Temperature Block 2

Ol ~ Ol Ol - lt0 ~ N ~ - CiS qo ~ 2 ~ 2 ~-

Ol

~~ 0 0 0 -0 0 0

Calendar Date

Figure 15 Daily high and low temperatures 1 cm below the soil surface of Arizona cypress (Cupressus arizonica) seedlings growing in control plots

39

50

45

40 0 -() 35

G) l-to G) c E ~ 0 fJ)

30

25

20

15

10

5

0

- Minimum Daily Temperature Block 1 -- Maximum Daily Temperature Block 1 - - Minimum Daily Temperature Block 2 - Daily Maximum Temperature Block 2

CJ) CJ) ~ (l) ~ ~ N ~- - co oq- ~- C 52 0 shyto (l) C0 C

0 0 - - 0 ~ 0 0

Calendar Date

Figure 16 Daily high and low temperatures 1 cm below the soil surface of Arizona cypress (Cupressus arizonica) seedlings growing in V-ditch plots

40

50

45

40 0shy

35pound ~ 30l

~ CI) 25 Co E CI) 20 tshy

150 en

10

5

0

- Minimum Daily Temperature Block 1 -- Maximum Daily Temperature Block 1 - bull Minimum Daily Temperature Block 2 -- Daily Maximum Temperature Block 2

S en enmiddot S en en lt0 (J Ci3 qo C5 g SO SO ~ ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0

Calendar Date

Figure 17 Daily high and low temperatures 1 em below the soil surface of Arizona cypress (Cupressus arizonica) seedlings growing in weed barrier plots

41

50

45

40 0 --Q 35 l 30a ~ 25amp E 20 ~ middot0 15 (J)

10

middot5

0

-- Minimum Daily Temperature Block 1 -- Maximum Daily Temperature Block 1 - bull Minimum Daily Temperature Block 2 -- Daily Maximum Temperature Block 2

S r-- r-- r-shy10 S r--

N S ltllco St ltI SS2 C3S2 I shy~ I- r-- N0 0 0 ~ 0 0

Calendar Date

Figure 18 Daily high and low temperatures 1 cm below the soil sUrface of Arizona cypress (Cupressus arizonica) seedlings growing in V-ditch and weed barrier plots

42

50

45

40 Cl -()- 35 e J 30 ~ ltII 25 c E 20 0 15 en

10

5

0

~ ~~~~8a=e--=--~ -~ea

v

- Minimum Daily Temperature Block 1 -- Maximum Daily Temperature Block 1 - bull Minimum Daily Temperature Block 2 - Daily Maximum Temperature Block 2

en ~ ti Ii S eniI~

II) ~ Q Q

~ S2 t Q -Q ~ Q Q

Calendar Date


43

- Minimum Daily Temperature Block 1 --- Maximum Daily Temperature Block 1 - bull Minimum Daily Temperature Block 2 -- Daily Maximum Temperature Block 2 Ol $ S

N S - co~ ~ ~ S (0 52 52 0 N0 0 - ~ 0 0 shy0

Calendar Oate

Daily high and low temperatures 23 cm below the soil sUrface of Arizona cypress(Cupressus arizonica) seedlings growing in V-ditch plots

44

50

45

40 Q -U 35- 30-e co Q) 25

~ 20E 1515

en 10

5

0

- Minimum Daily Temperature - Maximum Daily Temperature

Calendar Date

Figure 21 Daily high and low temperatures 23 cm below the soil surface of Arizona cypress (Cupressus arizonica) seedlings growing in weed barrier plots

45

50

45

40 0 -()- 35 tIs 30-e CI) 25 Q

E 20 ~

15=a ()

10 - Minimum Daily Temperature Block 1

5 Maximum Daily Temperature Block 1-0shy

- bull Minimum Daily Temperature Block 2 0 -- Daily Maximum Temperature Block 2

i (l) i i

Cl i ire ~ itlt0 ca S2 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ ~0 ~ 0 0 0 0

Calendar Date

Figure 22 Daily high and low temperatures 23 cm beow the soil surface of Arizona cypress (Cupressus arizonica) seedlings growing in V-ditch and weed barrier plots

46

0 -U-~ 2 nI Q) Q E ~ g C)

50

45

40

35

30

25

20

15

10

5

0

_ 0-0-0- 0-0-0 bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull ~ ~ -- ~ - -------O~-_t

- Minimum Daily Temperature --- Maximum Daily Temperature

Calendar Date

Figure 23 Daily high and low temperatures 38 cm below the soil surface of Arizona Cypress (Cupressus arizonica) seedlings growing in control plots

47

50

45

-- 40 0 ()- 35 ~ J 30 (1l 25 0 E 20 ~

15 en 0

10

5

0

bull

-- Minimum Daily Temperature

- Maximum Daily Temperature 0) Oi $ -0) 0) 0)

N (0 0)

CO t S2 0 - ~ - CO 0 0 t t0 -0 0 - 0 0

Calendar Date

Figure 24 Daily high and low temperatures 38 cm below the soil surface of Arizona Cypress (Cupressus

arizonica) seedlings growing in V-ditch and weed barrier plots

48

Table 4 Analysis of variance table for weed coverage along the edge of site preparation treatments in Los Lunas NM

Source df Sums of Sguares F value Prgt F ~ 0

Block 2 157152 111 03900Site Prep 3 164140 077 05514Error 6 426277 Corrected Total 11 747570

Table 5 Analysis of variance table for weed coverage 50 cm from the center of site preparation treatments in Los Lunas NM

Source df Sums of Squares F value PrgtF v 0

Block 2 109274 067 05466 Site Prep 3 757266 309 01113 Error 6 440273 Corrected Total 11 1356812

Table 6 Analysis ofvariance table for weed coverage along the center of site preparation in Los Lunas NM

Source df Sums of Sguares F value Prgt F VI- Block 2 244116 280 01382

Site Prep 3 1435510 1099 00075 Error 6 261350 Corrected Total II 1940977

Table 7 Mean value for weed coverage along the center ofsite preparation treatment in Los Lunas NM Treatment not covered by the letter are different at alpha = 005

Treatment Mean Coverage () LSD Results

Control V-Ditch Weed Barrier V-Ditch amp Weed Barrier

10427 8407 3517 2013

A A B

B B

52

120-------------------------------------------~cJ Sasoa kali GSSl Sporobous aeroides

100 E2Zd Other spp

-f-c 80 o

0

~

~ 60 o (J tJ) Q)0 40 Q) Q

en 20

Control V-clitch Weed Barrier

Site Preparation Treatment

V-clitch Weed Barrier

Figure 25 Percent coverage for Sasoa kali Sporobous aeroides and other plant coverage along the edge of the site preparation treatments averaged across a three blocks

53

120~==~~__________________________________~

cJ Sasoa kali ISSSl Sporobolus aeroides

100 E2ZJ Other spp

-~-c 80 o

0= ~

~ 60 o () en ~ 40

8 (J)

20

Control V-ditch Weed Barrier


V-ditch Weed Barrier

Figure 26 Percent coverage for Sasoa kali Sporobous aeroides and other plant coverage 50 cm from the center of the site preparation treatments averaged across all three blocks

54

120~~~~~__________________________________~


100 fZZI Other spp

-~ shyr 80 2shyiii o ~ 60 o

() til

~ 40

8 en 20

Control V-clitch Weed V-ditch Barrier Weed Barrier


Figure 27 Percent coverage for Sasoa kali Sporobous aeroides and other plant coverage along the center of the site preparation treatments averaged across all three blocks

55

-DISCUSSION

In the present study none ofthe site preparation treatments evaluated

improved two-year survival of Arizona cypress Even though there appeared to be

over a two-fold improvement in survival for the combined V -ditch and weed barrier

treatment relative to the control the overall variability among the blocks prevented

detection ofthis difference In previous studies using plastic mulches mulches have

been shown to improve survival (Lopushinski and Beebe 1976) However the 30

improvement in survival due to the weed barrier alone treatment in this study was

twice the survival improvement found in the same treatment by Loupushinski and

Beebe (1976) Others have found a lack of detectable difference in survival when

comparing plastic film mulches to untreated controls (Van Sambeek et al 1995

Traux and Gagnon 1993 McDonald et al 1994)

Studies using scalping or mechanical vegetation removal have found these

techniques to improve early two-year survival (Capo-Arteaga and Newton 1991)

However the wide range ofvariability between blocks resulted in the inability of the

over 30 improvement in survival to be significant However mechanical andor

chemical removal ofcompeting vegetation has been shown to be a factor in

improving survival of seedlings planted in dry sites (Capo-Arteaga and Newton

1991)

The improvement in two-year height growth as site preparation intensity

increased in the present study is similar to that reported by others Using a black

plastic (polyethylene) mulch improved the height growth ofbutternut (Juglans

56

cinerea L) bur oak (Quercus macrocarpa Michx) and white ash (Fraxinus

americana L Traux and Gagnon 1993) Similar improvements in growth have been

reported for other deciduous and evergreen species (VanSambeek et al 1995

McDonald et al 1994) Authors have attributed this improvement to several

environmental modifications resulting from the site preparation used including

improved nutrition (Traux and Gagnon 1993) improved moisture availability

(VanSambeek et al 1995 Fleming et al 1994 1996 Parfett et al 1980) and

improved root zone temperature before and after the growing season (Davies 1975)

Only the top two tiers of soil loci monitored in this study had any appreciable

drying over the course of the study In the case of the second tier of soil (20 cm

below the surface) this drying occurred only in the control and V -ditch alone

treatment on the last three sampling periods Only the most intensive site preparation

treatment the V -ditch weed barrier combined treatment appeared to delay surface

(l0 cm) soil drying in this study However the two site preparation treatments

applied independently did not forestall surface drying relative to the control

treatment While most reported studies show that use of a plastic mulch will improve

soil moisture no studies have examined the dry down scenario in either the absence

ofadditional moisture or in a semi-arid environment as was done in this study

In most reported studies illustrating the benefit of plastic mulches in retention

of soil moisture the material evaluated is a solid polyethylene sheet (VanSambeek et

al 1995 Fleming et al 1994 1996 Parfett et al 1980) In the present study a woven

(porous) polyethylene material was used Appleton et al (1990) using the same

57

material found the fabric reduced soil moisture deficit relative to bare soil However

two important differences exist between the two studies First the reference point for

soil moisture measurement used in the Appleton et al (1990) study would have been

located in the second tier of loci in the present study where difference were just

beginning to become evident after 4 weeks Secondly the value reported in the

Appleton et al study was a season long average Had the rain which occurred 35

days into the present study been delayed we expect the curves of soil moisture which

were beginning to diverge would have continued to at an increasing rate

The pattern of dry down regardless of time of initiation seen in all three site

preparation treatments and the control treatment may have been caused by the

associated or adjacent weed competition A likely explanation has to do with the

build up of weed competition at the edges of the weed barrier treatments or within the

V -ditch treatment The weeds growing along the edge of the weed barrier treatment

were larger in stature than individuals of the same species growing in the control and

V -ditch treatments (personal observations) This phenomenon has been reported by

others (Traux and Gagnon 1993 Davies 1988a 1988b) The weed population

adjacent to the treated area may have extended root systems growing under the weed

barrier layer on the soil surface This root mass would result in the depletion of the

water in this portion of the soil This theory is also supported by the pattern of soil

depletion moving in from the edges towards the center of this upper tier of soil

(Figure 12) The depletion from the center would be resulting from the seedlings and

58

associated weeds growing through fabric openings made for the trees at the time of

planting

The large variability within each loci by treatment for a given sampling time

is likely due to the nature of the sampling procedure The systematic sampling

procedure was adhered to regardless of the presence ofvegetation This may have

resulted in some loci being sampled directly under a plant in one or two blocks while

the other sample or samples may have been under minimal influence of a plant This

could result in the large fluctuations in soil moisture observed in this study

While published reports exist that solid black polyethylene plastic mulches

increase the soil temperature beneath the mulch (Loy and Wells 1990) others have

reported no differences in soil temperature using these mulches (Tonn and Graham

1982 Trinka and Pritts 1992) In the present study using a woven weed barrier no

differences were detected in the canopy of the seedling or the soil beneath the weed

barrier or V -ditch treatment The same lack ofsoil temperature effect has been

documented in Virginia using the same weed barrier (Appleton et al 1990)

While no differences in weed canopy coverage occurred along the edges of

the site preparation treatments there was a noticeable increase in the stature of the

weeds growing along the two weed barrier containing treatments The weeds

growing in the two weed barrier containing treatments were noticeably taller and

broader in stature This resulted in the failure to detect differences between the site

preparation treatments along the transect 50 cm from the center of the treatment No

weeds were growing through the weed barrier however the large crowns of the

59

weeds growing along the edge grew over this area of the treatment resulting in

measurable canopy coverage In some instances this was also the case along the

transect going down the center of the treatment However along this transect weeds

growing out of the holes cut for the seedlings were also detectable In the V -ditch

weed barrier treatment the larger seedlings appeared to out compete the weeds and

the weed stature was lower than in the weed barrier alone treatment

CONCLUSIONS

This study a continuation of Richard Maiers original project on tree

establishment in semi-arid regions has illustrated that proper site preparation and

rainfall harvesting can improve trees growth in such areas While this study was

unable to detect significant difference in soil moisture profiles beneath the site

preparation treatment it appears that the combination of the V -ditch and weed barrier

treatments may improve soil moisture reserves in a prolonged drought The effect of

the two site preparation treatments alone while showing improved growth appeared

to lose soil moisture at a rate comparable to untreated controls

There appears to be no effect of using synthetic weed barrier on the

temperature immediately above or below the weed barrier in the present location

The effect of the weed barrier in controlling competing vegetation may be negating to

a certain extent by the enhancement ofplant growth along the edge of the treatment

r

LITERATURE CITED

Appleton BL Derr JF and Ross BB 1990 The effect of various landscape weed control measures on soil moisture and temperature and tree root growth J Arboriculture 16 264-268

Black AL and Greb BW 1961 Nitrate accumulation in soils covered with plastic mulch Agronomy Journal pp 366

Borland J and Weinstein G 1989 Mulch Is it always beneficial Grounds Maintenance pp II-IS

Brown D Brockman H and Houck MJ 1992 In Society ofAmerican Foresters 1992 National Convention October 1992 Richmond Virginia pp 260-264

Capo-Arteaga M and Newton M 1991 Survival and growth of five species of Pinus seedlings after different approaches to competition control bridging studies between Oregon and Mexico New Forests S219-238

Crane JC and Maranto J 1988 Pistachio production Cooperative Extension University of California Division of Agriculture and Natural Resources Publication 2279

Davies JW 1975 Progress in Biometeorology Div C Vol I Swets and Zeitlinger BV Amsterdam 379-389

Davies RJ 1988a Sheet mulching as an aid to broadleaved tree establishment I The effectiveness of various synthetic sheets compared Forestry 61 89-IOS

ij 1 i

Davies RJ 1988b Sheet mulching as an aid to broadleaved tree establishment II Comparison ofvarious sizes ofblack polythene mulch and herbicide treated spot Forestry 61 107-124

Fereres E and Goldhamer DA 1991 Plastic mulch increases cotton yield reduces need for preseason irrigation California Agriculture 4S(3) pp 2Sshy28

Fisher JT and Montano JM 1977 Establishment of tree plantation in northern New Mexico In Proceedings of the 29th Annual Meeting Forestry Committee Great Plains Agricultural Council June 1977 Albuquerque NM pp 167-178

62

Fleming RL Black TA and Eldridge NR 1994 Effects of site preparation on root zone soil water regimes in high-elevation forest clearcuts Forest Ecology and Management 68 173-188

Fleming RL Black TA and Adams RS 1996 Site preparation effects on Douglas-fir and lodgepole pine water relations following planting in a pinegrass-dominated clearcut Forest Ecology and Management 83 47-60

Haase DL and Rose R 1990 Moisture stress and root volume influence transplant shock Preliminary results General Technical Report Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experimental Station (200) pp 201-206

Haase DL and Rose R 1993 Soil moisture stress induces transplant shock in stored and unstored 2+0 Douglas-Fir seedlings ofvarying root volumes Forest Science 39(2) pp 275-294

Hallgren SW and Helms JA 1988 Control ofheight growth components in seedlings of California red and white fir by seed source and water stress Can J For Res Vol 18 pp 521-529

Ham J M Kluitenberg GJ and Lamong WJ 1993 Optical properties of plastic mulches affect the field temperature regime J Amer Soc Hort Sci 118(2) pp188-193

Harris R W 1992 Arboriculture New Jersey Prentice Hall Career amp Technology PP 674

Herrera El 1996 Mulches for gardens and landscapes (Rev) Cooperative Extension Service Guide H-121 New Mexico State University Las Cruces NM

Herrera E 1997 Rev Growing pistachios in New Mexico Cooperative Extension Service Circular 532 College of Agriculture and Home Economics New Mexico State University Las Cruces

Hildbrand D M 1989 A review of soil solar heating in western forest nurseries in TDlandis ed Proc Intermountain forest nursery association Agul4-18 1989 Bismarck ND pp 49-51

Hooks R F 1996 Thirty-eight years ofclimatological data 1957-1994 Agricultural Experiment Station Research Report 711 New Mexico State University Las Cruces NM

63

Huszar DC and Piper SC 1986 Estimating the off-site of wind erosion in New Mexico Journal of Soil and Water Conservation 41(6) pp 414-416

Jobidon R 1990 Short-term effect of three mechanical site preparation methods in species diversity Tree Planters Notes 41(4) pp 39-42

Klute A (Ed) 1986 Methods ofsoil analysis Part 1 Agronomy pp 404-408

Lamont WJ Jr 1996 What are the components ofa plasticulture vegetable system HortTechnology 6(3) pp150-154

Lantagne DO and Burger JA 1987 Comparison of site preparation methods for weed control in loblolly pine (Pinus taeda) plantations Weed Science 35590-593

Lee R D 1994 Weed management in pecans Cooperative Extension Service Guide H-632 New Mexico State University Las Cruces NM

Long RV 1977 Desert Forestry Potential in Nevada - Phase 1 In proceedings of the 29th Annual Meeting - Forestry Committee Great Plains Agricultural Council June 1997 Albuquerque New Mexico pp95-100

Lopushinsky W and Beebe T 1976 Effect of black polyethylene mulch on survival of Douglas-Fir seedlings soil moisture content and soil temperature Tree Planters Notes Summer 197617

Loy B Lindstrom J Gordon S Rudd D and Wells O 1989 Theory and development ofwavelength selective mulches Proceedings of the National Agricultural Plastics Conference pp 193-197

Loy B and Wells O 1989 IRT mulch High-tech at ground level American Vegetable Grower pp 14-17

Loy B and Wells O 1990 Effect ofIRT mulches on soil temperature early vegetative development in muskmelon and weed growth National Agricultural Plastics Congress Vol 22 pp 19-27

Maiers RP 1997 The Development ofEfficient Dryland Systems for Establishment of Windbreaks in Aird and Semi-Arid regions Thesis New Mexico State University Las Cruces NM

64

MaiersRP Harrington JT and Fisher JT 1997 Container stock type and site preparation effects on establishments of eldarica pine and Arizona cypress in arid and semi-arid plantings In fifth international conference on desert development Texas Tech University Lubbock TX August 12-17 1996 (In Press)

Maurer F and B Frey 1991 Benefits of wavelength-selective mulch Amer Veg Grower 3965-66

Mbagwu JSC 1991 Influence ofdifferent mulch materials on soil temperature soil water content and yield of three cassava cultivars J Sci Food Agric pp 569-577

McClain KM and Lavender DP 1989 Tissue water relations and survival of conditioned conifer seedlings during drought stress In proceedings of the Tenth North American Forest Biology Workshop July 1988 Vancouver BC pp 177-185

McDonald PM Fiddler GO and Harrison HR 1994 Mulching to regenerate a harsh site effect on Douglas-fir seedlings forbs grasses and ferns Res Paper PSW-RP-222 Albany CA Pacific Southwest Research Station Forest Service US Department ofAgriculture 10 p

McMinn R G 1981 Root growth capacity and field performance ofvarious types and sizes of white spruce stock following outplanting in the central interior of British Columbia Canadian Forest Research Center pp38-4l

Nierenberg WA 1995 Encyclopedia of Environmental Biology Vol 1 New York Academic Press463-465

Parfett RI Stinchcombe GR and Stott KG 1980 The establishment and growth ofwindbreak trees in polyethylene mulch straw mulch and herbicide maintained bare soil In Proc 1980 British Crop Protection Conference Pp 739 -746

Patterson MG Wehtje G and Goff WD 1990 Effects ofweed control and irrigation on the growth of young pecans Weed Technology Vol 4 pp892-894

Pease DS Diebold CH Roath AJ and Stevenson A 1975 Soil Survey of Valencia County New Mexico Eastern Part US Dept Agr pp 112-121

Phillips EA 1959 Methods of Vegetation Study Holt Rinehart and Winston Inc New York 107 pp

65

Rasmussen D middot1990 No Need for Renovation-Management is the Answer A Windbreak Renovation Workshop October 1990 Hutchinson Kansas pp 42-50

SAS Language Referance 1990 Version 6 First Edition SAS Institute IncCary NCUSA 1042 pp

Skujins J 1991 Semiarid Lands and Deserts Soil Resource and Reclamation New York Marcel Dekker Inc668 pp

Smith K A and Mullins C E (Eds) 1991 Soil Analysis Physical Methods New York Marcel Dekker Inc

Spedding CRW 1981 Vegetable Production on Small Farms Overseas Bristol Great Britain J W Arrowsmith Ltd

Splittstoesser WE and Brown JE 1991 Current Changes in Plasticulture for Crop Production Department ofHorticulture University of Illinois Urbana and Department ofHorticulture Auburn University Alabama

Stafford CW Torbert JL and Burger JA 1985 An evaluation of site preparation methods for loblolly pine regeneration on the Piedmont Paper presented at Southern Silvicultural Research Conference Atlanta Georgia

Suleman S 1992 Comparison ofRainwater Harvesting Systems for Increasing Forage in Arid Rangelands ofPakistan PhD dissertation New Mexico State University Las Cruces NM

Tidestrom I and Kittel SJ 1941 A Flora of Arizona and New Mexico The Catholic University of America Press Wasa NC

Tindall JA Beverly RB and Radcliffe DE 1991 Mulch effect on soil properties and tomato growth using micro-irrigation Agron J Vol 83 pp 1028-1034

Tivy J 1990 Agricultural Ecology Longman Scientific amp Technical London pp 99-102

Tonn JR and Graham RT 1982 The effect of brush competition and plastic mulch on moisture stress of planted Douglas-fir USDA For Ser Res Note INT-230 3pp

66

Traux B and Gagnon D 1993 Effects of straw and black plastic mulching on the initial growth and nutrition of butternut white ash and bur oak Forest Ecology and Management 57 17 - 27

Trinka DL and Pritts MP 1992 Micropropagated raspberry plant establishment responds to weed control practice row cover use and fertilizer placement J Amer Soc Hort Sci 117(6) pp 874-880

United States Department ofAgriculture 1995 New Mexico Agricultural Statistics 1995 70 pages

United States Department of Agriculture 1996 New Mexico Agricultural Statistics 1996

Van Sambeek JW Preece JE Huetteman CA and Roth PL 1995 Use of plastic films for weed control during field establishment ofmicropropagated hardwoods 10th Central Hardwood Forest Conference pp496-506

Walton K 1969 The Arid Zones Chicago Aldine Publishing Company pp 1-17

West NE 1983 Ecosystems of the World 5 - Temperate Deserts and Semi-Deserts New York Oxford

Westwood NM 1993 Temperate Zone Pomology Portland Oregon Timber Press pp 159-177

White GF 1960 Alternative uses oflimited water supplies In Arid Zone Research - XVIII - The Problems of the Arid Zone Proceedings of the Paris Symposium Oberthur France Imprimeries pp 411-421

Young JA and Young CG 1992 Cupressus L In Seeds ofWoody Plants in North America Timber Press Inc

67

APPENDIX A PRESSURE POTENTIAL EQUATION

a

Where

H = pressure head in Mpa

as = saturated moisture content

a= -moisture content

m = I-lin

n = fitting parameter

tX = air entry potential

Block parameters for pressure potential equation

Block as a m n tX 1 0350 0148 0237 1306 16319 2 0330 0156 0242 1320 9918 3 0274 0120 0228 1295 15000

68

1 1 [(0350)om -1]13ii

Block 1 H= 0148 16319

l 1 [( 0330) 0242 -1] 1320

H- 0156Block 2 9918

1 1

[( 0274) 0228 -1] 1295

H= 0120Block 3 15000

Influence of Site Preparation on Soil Moisture and Weed Competition in Semi-Arid

Tree Planting a thesis prepared by Adel Al-qurashi in partial fulfillment of the

requirements for the degree Master of Science has been approved and accepted by

m rJiLTimomYJ~ Dean of the Graduate School

Chair of the Examining Committee

Date

Committee in charge

Dr John T Harrington Chair

Dr James T Fisher

Dr Leigh Murray

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT















VITA




JeddahSaudiArabia


Jeddah Saudi Arabia




FIELD OF STUDY


ABSTRACT



BY





























TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF TABLES ~ ix

LIST OF FIGURES x

INTRODUCTION 1

LITERATURE REVIEW 4


Site Preparation 5


Mulches 7


Arizona Cypress 12


Study Site 13






RESULTS 19


Soil Moisture 19


Weed Competition 37

DISCUSSION 56

CONCLUSION 61

LITERATURE CITED 62


LIST OF TABLES








LIST OF FIGURES















x














xi

INTRODUCTION
















$511567000 (USDA 1996)




























2


trees






LITERATURE REVIEW





















4

Site Preparation






















5




Rainfall Harvesting



















6

r









Mulches














7






















8









infiltration














9















1976)






10




















11

Arizona Cypress










Study Site








study













13







longs





Plant Measurement











14















mass of dry soil








15























16







1990)




Control

Control



12

12 i



Weed Barrier i



V-ditch





Plat crown



12

1

12

12

I

I

I I


RESULTS

Survival and Growth








Soil Moisture













19




100

80

~ 60-m gt ~

J 40(JJ

20

o

Figure

1

1

I



Treatment


21




140

120

100

--E

-0 80

c C)

CD 60 J J

40

20

0 Control

j


Treatment

t



23

--

2

-m 0shy

i

J ()

() 1 0

i

o


MO~~ll 3 6 10 13 17 20 24 27 31 34



tv VI

-(U Q

~-~ J tn



tn 1 ~ a




N 0

-ca a ~-~ J U)



U) 1 ~ a




N -J

- as c E-e J (f)



~ 1 a




N 00

-m Q

iE-~ J



m ~ 1

D




N 0

-m a ~ -

~



J rn rn ~ 1 a


3 6 10 13 17 20 24 27 31 34



II I

w o



-~ lE-~ J gJ ~ 1

Dshy

_TIII




w



-~ 5-shy l f) f)

1 a


3 6 10 13 17 20 24 27 31 34



W N



-m Q ~- l f) f)

1 a




tJ tJ

I ~ ~

- ~ -----~ -~

-----shy



i =-


--shy --shy

Control





comer ofeach grid





















of the study The

34


50~------------------------------------------~

40

30

20



Calendar Date


35

50~----------------__________________________~

40

~- 30 ~ I-lt0 Q) Co

20E Q) r


O~--~----~------~----~----~----~----~~ ~ 0) ~ ~ ~ ~-(0 (II co It 0 ~ i2 0

~ ~ - -(0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Calendar Date


36









treatment






24)

Weed Competition







37





38

50

45

40 0 -()- 35 l 30 (0 Q) 25 c E Q) 20 I shy

150 Cf)

10

5

0


Ol ~ Ol Ol - lt0 ~ N ~ - CiS qo ~ 2 ~ 2 ~-

Ol

~~ 0 0 0 -0 0 0

Calendar Date


39

50

45

40 0 -() 35


30

25

20

15

10

5

0



0 0 - - 0 ~ 0 0

Calendar Date


40

50

45

40 0shy

35pound ~ 30l


150 en

10

5

0



Calendar Date


41

50

45

40 0 --Q 35 l 30a ~ 25amp E 20 ~ middot0 15 (J)

10

middot5

0


S r-- r-- r-shy10 S r--


Calendar Date


42

50

45

40 Cl -()- 35 e J 30 ~ ltII 25 c E 20 0 15 en

10

5

0

~ ~~~~8a=e--=--~ -~ea

v


en ~ ti Ii S eniI~

II) ~ Q Q

~ S2 t Q -Q ~ Q Q

Calendar Date


43


N S - co~ ~ ~ S (0 52 52 0 N0 0 - ~ 0 0 shy0

Calendar Oate


44

50

45

40 Q -U 35- 30-e co Q) 25

~ 20E 1515

en 10

5

0


Calendar Date


45

50

45

40 0 -()- 35 tIs 30-e CI) 25 Q

E 20 ~

15=a ()




i (l) i i

Cl i ire ~ itlt0 ca S2 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ ~0 ~ 0 0 0 0

Calendar Date


46

0 -U-~ 2 nI Q) Q E ~ g C)

50

45

40

35

30

25

20

15

10

5

0



Calendar Date


47

50

45

-- 40 0 ()- 35 ~ J 30 (1l 25 0 E 20 ~

15 en 0

10

5

0

bull



N (0 0)

CO t S2 0 - ~ - CO 0 0 t t0 -0 0 - 0 0

Calendar Date



48













10427 8407 3517 2013

A A B

B B

52


100 E2Zd Other spp

-f-c 80 o

0

~

~ 60 o (J tJ) Q)0 40 Q) Q

en 20





53

120~==~~__________________________________~


100 E2ZJ Other spp

-~-c 80 o

0= ~

~ 60 o () en ~ 40

8 (J)

20





54

120~~~~~__________________________________~


100 fZZI Other spp


() til

~ 40

8 en 20




55

-DISCUSSION


















1991)




56























57






















58


planting





















59







CONCLUSIONS













r

LITERATURE CITED









ij 1 i




62












63













64












65













66











67


a

Where




m = I-lin




Block as a m n tX 1 0350 0148 0237 1306 16319 2 0330 0156 0242 1320 9918 3 0274 0120 0228 1295 15000

68

1 1 [(0350)om -1]13ii

Block 1 H= 0148 16319

l 1 [( 0330) 0242 -1] 1320

H- 0156Block 2 9918

1 1

[( 0274) 0228 -1] 1295

H= 0120Block 3 15000

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT















VITA




JeddahSaudiArabia


Jeddah Saudi Arabia




FIELD OF STUDY


ABSTRACT



BY





























TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF TABLES ~ ix

LIST OF FIGURES x

INTRODUCTION 1

LITERATURE REVIEW 4


Site Preparation 5


Mulches 7


Arizona Cypress 12


Study Site 13






RESULTS 19


Soil Moisture 19


Weed Competition 37

DISCUSSION 56

CONCLUSION 61

LITERATURE CITED 62


LIST OF TABLES








LIST OF FIGURES















x














xi

INTRODUCTION
















$511567000 (USDA 1996)




























2


trees






LITERATURE REVIEW





















4

Site Preparation






















5




Rainfall Harvesting



















6

r









Mulches














7






















8









infiltration














9















1976)






10




















11

Arizona Cypress










Study Site








study













13







longs





Plant Measurement











14















mass of dry soil








15























16







1990)




Control

Control



12

12 i



Weed Barrier i



V-ditch





Plat crown



12

1

12

12

I

I

I I


RESULTS

Survival and Growth








Soil Moisture













19




100

80

~ 60-m gt ~

J 40(JJ

20

o

Figure

1

1

I



Treatment


21




140

120

100

--E

-0 80

c C)

CD 60 J J

40

20

0 Control

j


Treatment

t



23

--

2

-m 0shy

i

J ()

() 1 0

i

o


MO~~ll 3 6 10 13 17 20 24 27 31 34



tv VI

-(U Q

~-~ J tn



tn 1 ~ a




N 0

-ca a ~-~ J U)



U) 1 ~ a




N -J

- as c E-e J (f)



~ 1 a




N 00

-m Q

iE-~ J



m ~ 1

D




N 0

-m a ~ -

~



J rn rn ~ 1 a


3 6 10 13 17 20 24 27 31 34



II I

w o



-~ lE-~ J gJ ~ 1

Dshy

_TIII




w



-~ 5-shy l f) f)

1 a


3 6 10 13 17 20 24 27 31 34



W N



-m Q ~- l f) f)

1 a




tJ tJ

I ~ ~

- ~ -----~ -~

-----shy



i =-


--shy --shy

Control





comer ofeach grid





















of the study The

34


50~------------------------------------------~

40

30

20



Calendar Date


35

50~----------------__________________________~

40

~- 30 ~ I-lt0 Q) Co

20E Q) r


O~--~----~------~----~----~----~----~~ ~ 0) ~ ~ ~ ~-(0 (II co It 0 ~ i2 0

~ ~ - -(0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Calendar Date


36









treatment






24)

Weed Competition







37





38

50

45

40 0 -()- 35 l 30 (0 Q) 25 c E Q) 20 I shy

150 Cf)

10

5

0


Ol ~ Ol Ol - lt0 ~ N ~ - CiS qo ~ 2 ~ 2 ~-

Ol

~~ 0 0 0 -0 0 0

Calendar Date


39

50

45

40 0 -() 35


30

25

20

15

10

5

0



0 0 - - 0 ~ 0 0

Calendar Date


40

50

45

40 0shy

35pound ~ 30l


150 en

10

5

0



Calendar Date


41

50

45

40 0 --Q 35 l 30a ~ 25amp E 20 ~ middot0 15 (J)

10

middot5

0


S r-- r-- r-shy10 S r--


Calendar Date


42

50

45

40 Cl -()- 35 e J 30 ~ ltII 25 c E 20 0 15 en

10

5

0

~ ~~~~8a=e--=--~ -~ea

v


en ~ ti Ii S eniI~

II) ~ Q Q

~ S2 t Q -Q ~ Q Q

Calendar Date


43


N S - co~ ~ ~ S (0 52 52 0 N0 0 - ~ 0 0 shy0

Calendar Oate


44

50

45

40 Q -U 35- 30-e co Q) 25

~ 20E 1515

en 10

5

0


Calendar Date


45

50

45

40 0 -()- 35 tIs 30-e CI) 25 Q

E 20 ~

15=a ()




i (l) i i

Cl i ire ~ itlt0 ca S2 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ ~0 ~ 0 0 0 0

Calendar Date


46

0 -U-~ 2 nI Q) Q E ~ g C)

50

45

40

35

30

25

20

15

10

5

0



Calendar Date


47

50

45

-- 40 0 ()- 35 ~ J 30 (1l 25 0 E 20 ~

15 en 0

10

5

0

bull



N (0 0)

CO t S2 0 - ~ - CO 0 0 t t0 -0 0 - 0 0

Calendar Date



48













10427 8407 3517 2013

A A B

B B

52


100 E2Zd Other spp

-f-c 80 o

0

~

~ 60 o (J tJ) Q)0 40 Q) Q

en 20





53

120~==~~__________________________________~


100 E2ZJ Other spp

-~-c 80 o

0= ~

~ 60 o () en ~ 40

8 (J)

20





54

120~~~~~__________________________________~


100 fZZI Other spp


() til

~ 40

8 en 20




55

-DISCUSSION


















1991)




56























57






















58


planting





















59







CONCLUSIONS













r

LITERATURE CITED









ij 1 i




62












63













64












65













66











67


a

Where




m = I-lin




Block as a m n tX 1 0350 0148 0237 1306 16319 2 0330 0156 0242 1320 9918 3 0274 0120 0228 1295 15000

68

1 1 [(0350)om -1]13ii

Block 1 H= 0148 16319

l 1 [( 0330) 0242 -1] 1320

H- 0156Block 2 9918

1 1

[( 0274) 0228 -1] 1295

H= 0120Block 3 15000

VITA




JeddahSaudiArabia


Jeddah Saudi Arabia




FIELD OF STUDY


ABSTRACT



BY





























TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF TABLES ~ ix

LIST OF FIGURES x

INTRODUCTION 1

LITERATURE REVIEW 4


Site Preparation 5


Mulches 7


Arizona Cypress 12


Study Site 13






RESULTS 19


Soil Moisture 19


Weed Competition 37

DISCUSSION 56

CONCLUSION 61

LITERATURE CITED 62


LIST OF TABLES








LIST OF FIGURES















x














xi

INTRODUCTION
















$511567000 (USDA 1996)




























2


trees






LITERATURE REVIEW





















4

Site Preparation






















5




Rainfall Harvesting



















6

r









Mulches














7






















8









infiltration














9















1976)






10




















11

Arizona Cypress










Study Site








study













13







longs





Plant Measurement











14















mass of dry soil








15























16







1990)




Control

Control



12

12 i



Weed Barrier i



V-ditch





Plat crown



12

1

12

12

I

I

I I


RESULTS

Survival and Growth








Soil Moisture













19




100

80

~ 60-m gt ~

J 40(JJ

20

o

Figure

1

1

I



Treatment


21




140

120

100

--E

-0 80

c C)

CD 60 J J

40

20

0 Control

j


Treatment

t



23

--

2

-m 0shy

i

J ()

() 1 0

i

o


MO~~ll 3 6 10 13 17 20 24 27 31 34



tv VI

-(U Q

~-~ J tn



tn 1 ~ a




N 0

-ca a ~-~ J U)



U) 1 ~ a




N -J

- as c E-e J (f)



~ 1 a




N 00

-m Q

iE-~ J



m ~ 1

D




N 0

-m a ~ -

~



J rn rn ~ 1 a


3 6 10 13 17 20 24 27 31 34



II I

w o



-~ lE-~ J gJ ~ 1

Dshy

_TIII




w



-~ 5-shy l f) f)

1 a


3 6 10 13 17 20 24 27 31 34



W N



-m Q ~- l f) f)

1 a




tJ tJ

I ~ ~

- ~ -----~ -~

-----shy



i =-


--shy --shy

Control





comer ofeach grid





















of the study The

34


50~------------------------------------------~

40

30

20



Calendar Date


35

50~----------------__________________________~

40

~- 30 ~ I-lt0 Q) Co

20E Q) r


O~--~----~------~----~----~----~----~~ ~ 0) ~ ~ ~ ~-(0 (II co It 0 ~ i2 0

~ ~ - -(0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Calendar Date


36









treatment






24)

Weed Competition







37





38

50

45

40 0 -()- 35 l 30 (0 Q) 25 c E Q) 20 I shy

150 Cf)

10

5

0


Ol ~ Ol Ol - lt0 ~ N ~ - CiS qo ~ 2 ~ 2 ~-

Ol

~~ 0 0 0 -0 0 0

Calendar Date


39

50

45

40 0 -() 35


30

25

20

15

10

5

0



0 0 - - 0 ~ 0 0

Calendar Date


40

50

45

40 0shy

35pound ~ 30l


150 en

10

5

0



Calendar Date


41

50

45

40 0 --Q 35 l 30a ~ 25amp E 20 ~ middot0 15 (J)

10

middot5

0


S r-- r-- r-shy10 S r--


Calendar Date


42

50

45

40 Cl -()- 35 e J 30 ~ ltII 25 c E 20 0 15 en

10

5

0

~ ~~~~8a=e--=--~ -~ea

v


en ~ ti Ii S eniI~

II) ~ Q Q

~ S2 t Q -Q ~ Q Q

Calendar Date


43


N S - co~ ~ ~ S (0 52 52 0 N0 0 - ~ 0 0 shy0

Calendar Oate


44

50

45

40 Q -U 35- 30-e co Q) 25

~ 20E 1515

en 10

5

0


Calendar Date


45

50

45

40 0 -()- 35 tIs 30-e CI) 25 Q

E 20 ~

15=a ()




i (l) i i

Cl i ire ~ itlt0 ca S2 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ ~0 ~ 0 0 0 0

Calendar Date


46

0 -U-~ 2 nI Q) Q E ~ g C)

50

45

40

35

30

25

20

15

10

5

0



Calendar Date


47

50

45

-- 40 0 ()- 35 ~ J 30 (1l 25 0 E 20 ~

15 en 0

10

5

0

bull



N (0 0)

CO t S2 0 - ~ - CO 0 0 t t0 -0 0 - 0 0

Calendar Date



48













10427 8407 3517 2013

A A B

B B

52


100 E2Zd Other spp

-f-c 80 o

0

~

~ 60 o (J tJ) Q)0 40 Q) Q

en 20





53

120~==~~__________________________________~


100 E2ZJ Other spp

-~-c 80 o

0= ~

~ 60 o () en ~ 40

8 (J)

20





54

120~~~~~__________________________________~


100 fZZI Other spp


() til

~ 40

8 en 20




55

-DISCUSSION


















1991)




56























57






















58


planting





















59







CONCLUSIONS













r

LITERATURE CITED









ij 1 i




62












63













64












65













66











67


a

Where




m = I-lin




Block as a m n tX 1 0350 0148 0237 1306 16319 2 0330 0156 0242 1320 9918 3 0274 0120 0228 1295 15000

68

1 1 [(0350)om -1]13ii

Block 1 H= 0148 16319

l 1 [( 0330) 0242 -1] 1320

H- 0156Block 2 9918

1 1

[( 0274) 0228 -1] 1295

H= 0120Block 3 15000

ABSTRACT



BY





























TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF TABLES ~ ix

LIST OF FIGURES x

INTRODUCTION 1

LITERATURE REVIEW 4


Site Preparation 5


Mulches 7


Arizona Cypress 12


Study Site 13






RESULTS 19


Soil Moisture 19


Weed Competition 37

DISCUSSION 56

CONCLUSION 61

LITERATURE CITED 62


LIST OF TABLES








LIST OF FIGURES















x














xi

INTRODUCTION
















$511567000 (USDA 1996)




























2


trees






LITERATURE REVIEW





















4

Site Preparation






















5




Rainfall Harvesting



















6

r









Mulches














7






















8









infiltration














9















1976)






10




















11

Arizona Cypress










Study Site








study













13







longs





Plant Measurement











14















mass of dry soil








15























16







1990)




Control

Control



12

12 i



Weed Barrier i



V-ditch





Plat crown



12

1

12

12

I

I

I I


RESULTS

Survival and Growth








Soil Moisture













19




100

80

~ 60-m gt ~

J 40(JJ

20

o

Figure

1

1

I



Treatment


21




140

120

100

--E

-0 80

c C)

CD 60 J J

40

20

0 Control

j


Treatment

t



23

--

2

-m 0shy

i

J ()

() 1 0

i

o


MO~~ll 3 6 10 13 17 20 24 27 31 34



tv VI

-(U Q

~-~ J tn



tn 1 ~ a




N 0

-ca a ~-~ J U)



U) 1 ~ a




N -J

- as c E-e J (f)



~ 1 a




N 00

-m Q

iE-~ J



m ~ 1

D




N 0

-m a ~ -

~



J rn rn ~ 1 a


3 6 10 13 17 20 24 27 31 34



II I

w o



-~ lE-~ J gJ ~ 1

Dshy

_TIII




w



-~ 5-shy l f) f)

1 a


3 6 10 13 17 20 24 27 31 34



W N



-m Q ~- l f) f)

1 a




tJ tJ

I ~ ~

- ~ -----~ -~

-----shy



i =-


--shy --shy

Control





comer ofeach grid





















of the study The

34


50~------------------------------------------~

40

30

20



Calendar Date


35

50~----------------__________________________~

40

~- 30 ~ I-lt0 Q) Co

20E Q) r


O~--~----~------~----~----~----~----~~ ~ 0) ~ ~ ~ ~-(0 (II co It 0 ~ i2 0

~ ~ - -(0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Calendar Date


36









treatment






24)

Weed Competition







37





38

50

45

40 0 -()- 35 l 30 (0 Q) 25 c E Q) 20 I shy

150 Cf)

10

5

0


Ol ~ Ol Ol - lt0 ~ N ~ - CiS qo ~ 2 ~ 2 ~-

Ol

~~ 0 0 0 -0 0 0

Calendar Date


39

50

45

40 0 -() 35


30

25

20

15

10

5

0



0 0 - - 0 ~ 0 0

Calendar Date


40

50

45

40 0shy

35pound ~ 30l


150 en

10

5

0



Calendar Date


41

50

45

40 0 --Q 35 l 30a ~ 25amp E 20 ~ middot0 15 (J)

10

middot5

0


S r-- r-- r-shy10 S r--


Calendar Date


42

50

45

40 Cl -()- 35 e J 30 ~ ltII 25 c E 20 0 15 en

10

5

0

~ ~~~~8a=e--=--~ -~ea

v


en ~ ti Ii S eniI~

II) ~ Q Q

~ S2 t Q -Q ~ Q Q

Calendar Date


43


N S - co~ ~ ~ S (0 52 52 0 N0 0 - ~ 0 0 shy0

Calendar Oate


44

50

45

40 Q -U 35- 30-e co Q) 25

~ 20E 1515

en 10

5

0


Calendar Date


45

50

45

40 0 -()- 35 tIs 30-e CI) 25 Q

E 20 ~

15=a ()




i (l) i i

Cl i ire ~ itlt0 ca S2 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ ~0 ~ 0 0 0 0

Calendar Date


46

0 -U-~ 2 nI Q) Q E ~ g C)

50

45

40

35

30

25

20

15

10

5

0



Calendar Date


47

50

45

-- 40 0 ()- 35 ~ J 30 (1l 25 0 E 20 ~

15 en 0

10

5

0

bull



N (0 0)

CO t S2 0 - ~ - CO 0 0 t t0 -0 0 - 0 0

Calendar Date



48













10427 8407 3517 2013

A A B

B B

52


100 E2Zd Other spp

-f-c 80 o

0

~

~ 60 o (J tJ) Q)0 40 Q) Q

en 20





53

120~==~~__________________________________~


100 E2ZJ Other spp

-~-c 80 o

0= ~

~ 60 o () en ~ 40

8 (J)

20





54

120~~~~~__________________________________~


100 fZZI Other spp


() til

~ 40

8 en 20




55

-DISCUSSION


















1991)




56























57






















58


planting





















59







CONCLUSIONS













r

LITERATURE CITED









ij 1 i




62












63













64












65













66











67


a

Where




m = I-lin




Block as a m n tX 1 0350 0148 0237 1306 16319 2 0330 0156 0242 1320 9918 3 0274 0120 0228 1295 15000

68

1 1 [(0350)om -1]13ii

Block 1 H= 0148 16319

l 1 [( 0330) 0242 -1] 1320

H- 0156Block 2 9918

1 1

[( 0274) 0228 -1] 1295

H= 0120Block 3 15000












TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF TABLES ~ ix

LIST OF FIGURES x

INTRODUCTION 1

LITERATURE REVIEW 4


Site Preparation 5


Mulches 7


Arizona Cypress 12


Study Site 13






RESULTS 19


Soil Moisture 19


Weed Competition 37

DISCUSSION 56

CONCLUSION 61

LITERATURE CITED 62


LIST OF TABLES








LIST OF FIGURES















x














xi

INTRODUCTION
















$511567000 (USDA 1996)




























2


trees






LITERATURE REVIEW





















4

Site Preparation






















5




Rainfall Harvesting



















6

r









Mulches














7






















8









infiltration














9















1976)






10




















11

Arizona Cypress










Study Site








study













13







longs





Plant Measurement











14















mass of dry soil








15























16







1990)




Control

Control



12

12 i



Weed Barrier i



V-ditch





Plat crown



12

1

12

12

I

I

I I


RESULTS

Survival and Growth








Soil Moisture













19




100

80

~ 60-m gt ~

J 40(JJ

20

o

Figure

1

1

I



Treatment


21




140

120

100

--E

-0 80

c C)

CD 60 J J

40

20

0 Control

j


Treatment

t



23

--

2

-m 0shy

i

J ()

() 1 0

i

o


MO~~ll 3 6 10 13 17 20 24 27 31 34



tv VI

-(U Q

~-~ J tn



tn 1 ~ a




N 0

-ca a ~-~ J U)



U) 1 ~ a




N -J

- as c E-e J (f)



~ 1 a




N 00

-m Q

iE-~ J



m ~ 1

D




N 0

-m a ~ -

~



J rn rn ~ 1 a


3 6 10 13 17 20 24 27 31 34



II I

w o



-~ lE-~ J gJ ~ 1

Dshy

_TIII




w



-~ 5-shy l f) f)

1 a


3 6 10 13 17 20 24 27 31 34



W N



-m Q ~- l f) f)

1 a




tJ tJ

I ~ ~

- ~ -----~ -~

-----shy



i =-


--shy --shy

Control





comer ofeach grid





















of the study The

34


50~------------------------------------------~

40

30

20



Calendar Date


35

50~----------------__________________________~

40

~- 30 ~ I-lt0 Q) Co

20E Q) r


O~--~----~------~----~----~----~----~~ ~ 0) ~ ~ ~ ~-(0 (II co It 0 ~ i2 0

~ ~ - -(0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Calendar Date


36









treatment






24)

Weed Competition







37





38

50

45

40 0 -()- 35 l 30 (0 Q) 25 c E Q) 20 I shy

150 Cf)

10

5

0


Ol ~ Ol Ol - lt0 ~ N ~ - CiS qo ~ 2 ~ 2 ~-

Ol

~~ 0 0 0 -0 0 0

Calendar Date


39

50

45

40 0 -() 35


30

25

20

15

10

5

0



0 0 - - 0 ~ 0 0

Calendar Date


40

50

45

40 0shy

35pound ~ 30l


150 en

10

5

0



Calendar Date


41

50

45

40 0 --Q 35 l 30a ~ 25amp E 20 ~ middot0 15 (J)

10

middot5

0


S r-- r-- r-shy10 S r--


Calendar Date


42

50

45

40 Cl -()- 35 e J 30 ~ ltII 25 c E 20 0 15 en

10

5

0

~ ~~~~8a=e--=--~ -~ea

v


en ~ ti Ii S eniI~

II) ~ Q Q

~ S2 t Q -Q ~ Q Q

Calendar Date


43


N S - co~ ~ ~ S (0 52 52 0 N0 0 - ~ 0 0 shy0

Calendar Oate


44

50

45

40 Q -U 35- 30-e co Q) 25

~ 20E 1515

en 10

5

0


Calendar Date


45

50

45

40 0 -()- 35 tIs 30-e CI) 25 Q

E 20 ~

15=a ()




i (l) i i

Cl i ire ~ itlt0 ca S2 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ ~0 ~ 0 0 0 0

Calendar Date


46

0 -U-~ 2 nI Q) Q E ~ g C)

50

45

40

35

30

25

20

15

10

5

0



Calendar Date


47

50

45

-- 40 0 ()- 35 ~ J 30 (1l 25 0 E 20 ~

15 en 0

10

5

0

bull



N (0 0)

CO t S2 0 - ~ - CO 0 0 t t0 -0 0 - 0 0

Calendar Date



48













10427 8407 3517 2013

A A B

B B

52


100 E2Zd Other spp

-f-c 80 o

0

~

~ 60 o (J tJ) Q)0 40 Q) Q

en 20





53

120~==~~__________________________________~


100 E2ZJ Other spp

-~-c 80 o

0= ~

~ 60 o () en ~ 40

8 (J)

20





54

120~~~~~__________________________________~


100 fZZI Other spp


() til

~ 40

8 en 20




55

-DISCUSSION


















1991)




56























57






















58


planting





















59







CONCLUSIONS













r

LITERATURE CITED









ij 1 i




62












63













64












65













66











67


a

Where




m = I-lin




Block as a m n tX 1 0350 0148 0237 1306 16319 2 0330 0156 0242 1320 9918 3 0274 0120 0228 1295 15000

68

1 1 [(0350)om -1]13ii

Block 1 H= 0148 16319

l 1 [( 0330) 0242 -1] 1320

H- 0156Block 2 9918

1 1

[( 0274) 0228 -1] 1295

H= 0120Block 3 15000

TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF TABLES ~ ix

LIST OF FIGURES x

INTRODUCTION 1

LITERATURE REVIEW 4


Site Preparation 5


Mulches 7


Arizona Cypress 12


Study Site 13






RESULTS 19


Soil Moisture 19


Weed Competition 37

DISCUSSION 56

CONCLUSION 61

LITERATURE CITED 62


LIST OF TABLES








LIST OF FIGURES















x














xi

INTRODUCTION
















$511567000 (USDA 1996)




























2


trees






LITERATURE REVIEW





















4

Site Preparation






















5




Rainfall Harvesting



















6

r









Mulches














7






















8









infiltration














9















1976)






10




















11

Arizona Cypress










Study Site








study













13







longs





Plant Measurement











14















mass of dry soil








15























16







1990)




Control

Control



12

12 i



Weed Barrier i



V-ditch





Plat crown



12

1

12

12

I

I

I I


RESULTS

Survival and Growth








Soil Moisture













19




100

80

~ 60-m gt ~

J 40(JJ

20

o

Figure

1

1

I



Treatment


21




140

120

100

--E

-0 80

c C)

CD 60 J J

40

20

0 Control

j


Treatment

t



23

--

2

-m 0shy

i

J ()

() 1 0

i

o


MO~~ll 3 6 10 13 17 20 24 27 31 34



tv VI

-(U Q

~-~ J tn



tn 1 ~ a




N 0

-ca a ~-~ J U)



U) 1 ~ a




N -J

- as c E-e J (f)



~ 1 a




N 00

-m Q

iE-~ J



m ~ 1

D




N 0

-m a ~ -

~



J rn rn ~ 1 a


3 6 10 13 17 20 24 27 31 34



II I

w o



-~ lE-~ J gJ ~ 1

Dshy

_TIII




w



-~ 5-shy l f) f)

1 a


3 6 10 13 17 20 24 27 31 34



W N



-m Q ~- l f) f)

1 a




tJ tJ

I ~ ~

- ~ -----~ -~

-----shy



i =-


--shy --shy

Control





comer ofeach grid





















of the study The

34


50~------------------------------------------~

40

30

20



Calendar Date


35

50~----------------__________________________~

40

~- 30 ~ I-lt0 Q) Co

20E Q) r


O~--~----~------~----~----~----~----~~ ~ 0) ~ ~ ~ ~-(0 (II co It 0 ~ i2 0

~ ~ - -(0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Calendar Date


36









treatment






24)

Weed Competition







37





38

50

45

40 0 -()- 35 l 30 (0 Q) 25 c E Q) 20 I shy

150 Cf)

10

5

0


Ol ~ Ol Ol - lt0 ~ N ~ - CiS qo ~ 2 ~ 2 ~-

Ol

~~ 0 0 0 -0 0 0

Calendar Date


39

50

45

40 0 -() 35


30

25

20

15

10

5

0



0 0 - - 0 ~ 0 0

Calendar Date


40

50

45

40 0shy

35pound ~ 30l


150 en

10

5

0



Calendar Date


41

50

45

40 0 --Q 35 l 30a ~ 25amp E 20 ~ middot0 15 (J)

10

middot5

0


S r-- r-- r-shy10 S r--


Calendar Date


42

50

45

40 Cl -()- 35 e J 30 ~ ltII 25 c E 20 0 15 en

10

5

0

~ ~~~~8a=e--=--~ -~ea

v


en ~ ti Ii S eniI~

II) ~ Q Q

~ S2 t Q -Q ~ Q Q

Calendar Date


43


N S - co~ ~ ~ S (0 52 52 0 N0 0 - ~ 0 0 shy0

Calendar Oate


44

50

45

40 Q -U 35- 30-e co Q) 25

~ 20E 1515

en 10

5

0


Calendar Date


45

50

45

40 0 -()- 35 tIs 30-e CI) 25 Q

E 20 ~

15=a ()




i (l) i i

Cl i ire ~ itlt0 ca S2 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ ~0 ~ 0 0 0 0

Calendar Date


46

0 -U-~ 2 nI Q) Q E ~ g C)

50

45

40

35

30

25

20

15

10

5

0



Calendar Date


47

50

45

-- 40 0 ()- 35 ~ J 30 (1l 25 0 E 20 ~

15 en 0

10

5

0

bull



N (0 0)

CO t S2 0 - ~ - CO 0 0 t t0 -0 0 - 0 0

Calendar Date



48













10427 8407 3517 2013

A A B

B B

52


100 E2Zd Other spp

-f-c 80 o

0

~

~ 60 o (J tJ) Q)0 40 Q) Q

en 20





53

120~==~~__________________________________~


100 E2ZJ Other spp

-~-c 80 o

0= ~

~ 60 o () en ~ 40

8 (J)

20





54

120~~~~~__________________________________~


100 fZZI Other spp


() til

~ 40

8 en 20




55

-DISCUSSION


















1991)




56























57






















58


planting





















59







CONCLUSIONS













r

LITERATURE CITED









ij 1 i




62












63













64












65













66











67


a

Where




m = I-lin




Block as a m n tX 1 0350 0148 0237 1306 16319 2 0330 0156 0242 1320 9918 3 0274 0120 0228 1295 15000

68

1 1 [(0350)om -1]13ii

Block 1 H= 0148 16319

l 1 [( 0330) 0242 -1] 1320

H- 0156Block 2 9918

1 1

[( 0274) 0228 -1] 1295

H= 0120Block 3 15000


Weed Competition 37

DISCUSSION 56

CONCLUSION 61

LITERATURE CITED 62


LIST OF TABLES








LIST OF FIGURES















x














xi

INTRODUCTION
















$511567000 (USDA 1996)




























2


trees






LITERATURE REVIEW





















4

Site Preparation






















5




Rainfall Harvesting



















6

r









Mulches














7






















8









infiltration














9















1976)






10




















11

Arizona Cypress










Study Site








study













13







longs





Plant Measurement











14















mass of dry soil








15























16







1990)




Control

Control



12

12 i



Weed Barrier i



V-ditch





Plat crown



12

1

12

12

I

I

I I


RESULTS

Survival and Growth








Soil Moisture













19




100

80

~ 60-m gt ~

J 40(JJ

20

o

Figure

1

1

I



Treatment


21




140

120

100

--E

-0 80

c C)

CD 60 J J

40

20

0 Control

j


Treatment

t



23

--

2

-m 0shy

i

J ()

() 1 0

i

o


MO~~ll 3 6 10 13 17 20 24 27 31 34



tv VI

-(U Q

~-~ J tn



tn 1 ~ a




N 0

-ca a ~-~ J U)



U) 1 ~ a




N -J

- as c E-e J (f)



~ 1 a




N 00

-m Q

iE-~ J



m ~ 1

D




N 0

-m a ~ -

~



J rn rn ~ 1 a


3 6 10 13 17 20 24 27 31 34



II I

w o



-~ lE-~ J gJ ~ 1

Dshy

_TIII




w



-~ 5-shy l f) f)

1 a


3 6 10 13 17 20 24 27 31 34



W N



-m Q ~- l f) f)

1 a




tJ tJ

I ~ ~

- ~ -----~ -~

-----shy



i =-


--shy --shy

Control





comer ofeach grid





















of the study The

34


50~------------------------------------------~

40

30

20



Calendar Date


35

50~----------------__________________________~

40

~- 30 ~ I-lt0 Q) Co

20E Q) r


O~--~----~------~----~----~----~----~~ ~ 0) ~ ~ ~ ~-(0 (II co It 0 ~ i2 0

~ ~ - -(0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Calendar Date


36









treatment






24)

Weed Competition







37





38

50

45

40 0 -()- 35 l 30 (0 Q) 25 c E Q) 20 I shy

150 Cf)

10

5

0


Ol ~ Ol Ol - lt0 ~ N ~ - CiS qo ~ 2 ~ 2 ~-

Ol

~~ 0 0 0 -0 0 0

Calendar Date


39

50

45

40 0 -() 35


30

25

20

15

10

5

0



0 0 - - 0 ~ 0 0

Calendar Date


40

50

45

40 0shy

35pound ~ 30l


150 en

10

5

0



Calendar Date


41

50

45

40 0 --Q 35 l 30a ~ 25amp E 20 ~ middot0 15 (J)

10

middot5

0


S r-- r-- r-shy10 S r--


Calendar Date


42

50

45

40 Cl -()- 35 e J 30 ~ ltII 25 c E 20 0 15 en

10

5

0

~ ~~~~8a=e--=--~ -~ea

v


en ~ ti Ii S eniI~

II) ~ Q Q

~ S2 t Q -Q ~ Q Q

Calendar Date


43


N S - co~ ~ ~ S (0 52 52 0 N0 0 - ~ 0 0 shy0

Calendar Oate


44

50

45

40 Q -U 35- 30-e co Q) 25

~ 20E 1515

en 10

5

0


Calendar Date


45

50

45

40 0 -()- 35 tIs 30-e CI) 25 Q

E 20 ~

15=a ()




i (l) i i

Cl i ire ~ itlt0 ca S2 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ ~0 ~ 0 0 0 0

Calendar Date


46

0 -U-~ 2 nI Q) Q E ~ g C)

50

45

40

35

30

25

20

15

10

5

0



Calendar Date


47

50

45

-- 40 0 ()- 35 ~ J 30 (1l 25 0 E 20 ~

15 en 0

10

5

0

bull



N (0 0)

CO t S2 0 - ~ - CO 0 0 t t0 -0 0 - 0 0

Calendar Date



48













10427 8407 3517 2013

A A B

B B

52


100 E2Zd Other spp

-f-c 80 o

0

~

~ 60 o (J tJ) Q)0 40 Q) Q

en 20





53

120~==~~__________________________________~


100 E2ZJ Other spp

-~-c 80 o

0= ~

~ 60 o () en ~ 40

8 (J)

20





54

120~~~~~__________________________________~


100 fZZI Other spp


() til

~ 40

8 en 20




55

-DISCUSSION


















1991)




56























57






















58


planting





















59







CONCLUSIONS













r

LITERATURE CITED









ij 1 i




62












63













64












65













66











67


a

Where




m = I-lin




Block as a m n tX 1 0350 0148 0237 1306 16319 2 0330 0156 0242 1320 9918 3 0274 0120 0228 1295 15000

68

1 1 [(0350)om -1]13ii

Block 1 H= 0148 16319

l 1 [( 0330) 0242 -1] 1320

H- 0156Block 2 9918

1 1

[( 0274) 0228 -1] 1295

H= 0120Block 3 15000

LIST OF TABLES








LIST OF FIGURES















x














xi

INTRODUCTION
















$511567000 (USDA 1996)




























2


trees






LITERATURE REVIEW





















4

Site Preparation






















5




Rainfall Harvesting



















6

r









Mulches














7






















8









infiltration














9















1976)






10




















11

Arizona Cypress










Study Site








study













13







longs





Plant Measurement











14















mass of dry soil








15























16







1990)




Control

Control



12

12 i



Weed Barrier i



V-ditch





Plat crown



12

1

12

12

I

I

I I


RESULTS

Survival and Growth








Soil Moisture













19




100

80

~ 60-m gt ~

J 40(JJ

20

o

Figure

1

1

I



Treatment


21




140

120

100

--E

-0 80

c C)

CD 60 J J

40

20

0 Control

j


Treatment

t



23

--

2

-m 0shy

i

J ()

() 1 0

i

o


MO~~ll 3 6 10 13 17 20 24 27 31 34



tv VI

-(U Q

~-~ J tn



tn 1 ~ a




N 0

-ca a ~-~ J U)



U) 1 ~ a




N -J

- as c E-e J (f)



~ 1 a




N 00

-m Q

iE-~ J



m ~ 1

D




N 0

-m a ~ -

~



J rn rn ~ 1 a


3 6 10 13 17 20 24 27 31 34



II I

w o



-~ lE-~ J gJ ~ 1

Dshy

_TIII




w



-~ 5-shy l f) f)

1 a


3 6 10 13 17 20 24 27 31 34



W N



-m Q ~- l f) f)

1 a




tJ tJ

I ~ ~

- ~ -----~ -~

-----shy



i =-


--shy --shy

Control





comer ofeach grid





















of the study The

34


50~------------------------------------------~

40

30

20



Calendar Date


35

50~----------------__________________________~

40

~- 30 ~ I-lt0 Q) Co

20E Q) r


O~--~----~------~----~----~----~----~~ ~ 0) ~ ~ ~ ~-(0 (II co It 0 ~ i2 0

~ ~ - -(0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Calendar Date


36









treatment






24)

Weed Competition







37





38

50

45

40 0 -()- 35 l 30 (0 Q) 25 c E Q) 20 I shy

150 Cf)

10

5

0


Ol ~ Ol Ol - lt0 ~ N ~ - CiS qo ~ 2 ~ 2 ~-

Ol

~~ 0 0 0 -0 0 0

Calendar Date


39

50

45

40 0 -() 35


30

25

20

15

10

5

0



0 0 - - 0 ~ 0 0

Calendar Date


40

50

45

40 0shy

35pound ~ 30l


150 en

10

5

0



Calendar Date


41

50

45

40 0 --Q 35 l 30a ~ 25amp E 20 ~ middot0 15 (J)

10

middot5

0


S r-- r-- r-shy10 S r--


Calendar Date


42

50

45

40 Cl -()- 35 e J 30 ~ ltII 25 c E 20 0 15 en

10

5

0

~ ~~~~8a=e--=--~ -~ea

v


en ~ ti Ii S eniI~

II) ~ Q Q

~ S2 t Q -Q ~ Q Q

Calendar Date


43


N S - co~ ~ ~ S (0 52 52 0 N0 0 - ~ 0 0 shy0

Calendar Oate


44

50

45

40 Q -U 35- 30-e co Q) 25

~ 20E 1515

en 10

5

0


Calendar Date


45

50

45

40 0 -()- 35 tIs 30-e CI) 25 Q

E 20 ~

15=a ()




i (l) i i

Cl i ire ~ itlt0 ca S2 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ ~0 ~ 0 0 0 0

Calendar Date


46

0 -U-~ 2 nI Q) Q E ~ g C)

50

45

40

35

30

25

20

15

10

5

0



Calendar Date


47

50

45

-- 40 0 ()- 35 ~ J 30 (1l 25 0 E 20 ~

15 en 0

10

5

0

bull



N (0 0)

CO t S2 0 - ~ - CO 0 0 t t0 -0 0 - 0 0

Calendar Date



48













10427 8407 3517 2013

A A B

B B

52


100 E2Zd Other spp

-f-c 80 o

0

~

~ 60 o (J tJ) Q)0 40 Q) Q

en 20





53

120~==~~__________________________________~


100 E2ZJ Other spp

-~-c 80 o

0= ~

~ 60 o () en ~ 40

8 (J)

20





54

120~~~~~__________________________________~


100 fZZI Other spp


() til

~ 40

8 en 20




55

-DISCUSSION


















1991)




56























57






















58


planting





















59







CONCLUSIONS













r

LITERATURE CITED









ij 1 i




62












63













64












65













66











67


a

Where




m = I-lin




Block as a m n tX 1 0350 0148 0237 1306 16319 2 0330 0156 0242 1320 9918 3 0274 0120 0228 1295 15000

68

1 1 [(0350)om -1]13ii

Block 1 H= 0148 16319

l 1 [( 0330) 0242 -1] 1320

H- 0156Block 2 9918

1 1

[( 0274) 0228 -1] 1295

H= 0120Block 3 15000

LIST OF FIGURES















x














xi

INTRODUCTION
















$511567000 (USDA 1996)




























2


trees






LITERATURE REVIEW





















4

Site Preparation






















5




Rainfall Harvesting



















6

r









Mulches














7






















8









infiltration














9















1976)






10




















11

Arizona Cypress










Study Site








study













13







longs





Plant Measurement











14















mass of dry soil








15























16







1990)




Control

Control



12

12 i



Weed Barrier i



V-ditch





Plat crown



12

1

12

12

I

I

I I


RESULTS

Survival and Growth








Soil Moisture













19




100

80

~ 60-m gt ~

J 40(JJ

20

o

Figure

1

1

I



Treatment


21




140

120

100

--E

-0 80

c C)

CD 60 J J

40

20

0 Control

j


Treatment

t



23

--

2

-m 0shy

i

J ()

() 1 0

i

o


MO~~ll 3 6 10 13 17 20 24 27 31 34



tv VI

-(U Q

~-~ J tn



tn 1 ~ a




N 0

-ca a ~-~ J U)



U) 1 ~ a




N -J

- as c E-e J (f)



~ 1 a




N 00

-m Q

iE-~ J



m ~ 1

D




N 0

-m a ~ -

~



J rn rn ~ 1 a


3 6 10 13 17 20 24 27 31 34



II I

w o



-~ lE-~ J gJ ~ 1

Dshy

_TIII




w



-~ 5-shy l f) f)

1 a


3 6 10 13 17 20 24 27 31 34



W N



-m Q ~- l f) f)

1 a




tJ tJ

I ~ ~

- ~ -----~ -~

-----shy



i =-


--shy --shy

Control





comer ofeach grid





















of the study The

34


50~------------------------------------------~

40

30

20



Calendar Date


35

50~----------------__________________________~

40

~- 30 ~ I-lt0 Q) Co

20E Q) r


O~--~----~------~----~----~----~----~~ ~ 0) ~ ~ ~ ~-(0 (II co It 0 ~ i2 0

~ ~ - -(0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Calendar Date


36









treatment






24)

Weed Competition







37





38

50

45

40 0 -()- 35 l 30 (0 Q) 25 c E Q) 20 I shy

150 Cf)

10

5

0


Ol ~ Ol Ol - lt0 ~ N ~ - CiS qo ~ 2 ~ 2 ~-

Ol

~~ 0 0 0 -0 0 0

Calendar Date


39

50

45

40 0 -() 35


30

25

20

15

10

5

0



0 0 - - 0 ~ 0 0

Calendar Date


40

50

45

40 0shy

35pound ~ 30l


150 en

10

5

0



Calendar Date


41

50

45

40 0 --Q 35 l 30a ~ 25amp E 20 ~ middot0 15 (J)

10

middot5

0


S r-- r-- r-shy10 S r--


Calendar Date


42

50

45

40 Cl -()- 35 e J 30 ~ ltII 25 c E 20 0 15 en

10

5

0

~ ~~~~8a=e--=--~ -~ea

v


en ~ ti Ii S eniI~

II) ~ Q Q

~ S2 t Q -Q ~ Q Q

Calendar Date


43


N S - co~ ~ ~ S (0 52 52 0 N0 0 - ~ 0 0 shy0

Calendar Oate


44

50

45

40 Q -U 35- 30-e co Q) 25

~ 20E 1515

en 10

5

0


Calendar Date


45

50

45

40 0 -()- 35 tIs 30-e CI) 25 Q

E 20 ~

15=a ()




i (l) i i

Cl i ire ~ itlt0 ca S2 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ ~0 ~ 0 0 0 0

Calendar Date


46

0 -U-~ 2 nI Q) Q E ~ g C)

50

45

40

35

30

25

20

15

10

5

0



Calendar Date


47

50

45

-- 40 0 ()- 35 ~ J 30 (1l 25 0 E 20 ~

15 en 0

10

5

0

bull



N (0 0)

CO t S2 0 - ~ - CO 0 0 t t0 -0 0 - 0 0

Calendar Date



48













10427 8407 3517 2013

A A B

B B

52


100 E2Zd Other spp

-f-c 80 o

0

~

~ 60 o (J tJ) Q)0 40 Q) Q

en 20





53

120~==~~__________________________________~


100 E2ZJ Other spp

-~-c 80 o

0= ~

~ 60 o () en ~ 40

8 (J)

20





54

120~~~~~__________________________________~


100 fZZI Other spp


() til

~ 40

8 en 20




55

-DISCUSSION


















1991)




56























57






















58


planting





















59







CONCLUSIONS













r

LITERATURE CITED









ij 1 i




62












63













64












65













66











67


a

Where




m = I-lin




Block as a m n tX 1 0350 0148 0237 1306 16319 2 0330 0156 0242 1320 9918 3 0274 0120 0228 1295 15000

68

1 1 [(0350)om -1]13ii

Block 1 H= 0148 16319

l 1 [( 0330) 0242 -1] 1320

H- 0156Block 2 9918

1 1

[( 0274) 0228 -1] 1295

H= 0120Block 3 15000














xi

INTRODUCTION
















$511567000 (USDA 1996)




























2


trees






LITERATURE REVIEW





















4

Site Preparation






















5




Rainfall Harvesting



















6

r









Mulches














7






















8









infiltration














9















1976)






10




















11

Arizona Cypress










Study Site








study













13







longs





Plant Measurement











14















mass of dry soil








15























16







1990)




Control

Control



12

12 i



Weed Barrier i



V-ditch





Plat crown



12

1

12

12

I

I

I I


RESULTS

Survival and Growth








Soil Moisture













19




100

80

~ 60-m gt ~

J 40(JJ

20

o

Figure

1

1

I



Treatment


21




140

120

100

--E

-0 80

c C)

CD 60 J J

40

20

0 Control

j


Treatment

t



23

--

2

-m 0shy

i

J ()

() 1 0

i

o


MO~~ll 3 6 10 13 17 20 24 27 31 34



tv VI

-(U Q

~-~ J tn



tn 1 ~ a




N 0

-ca a ~-~ J U)



U) 1 ~ a




N -J

- as c E-e J (f)



~ 1 a




N 00

-m Q

iE-~ J



m ~ 1

D




N 0

-m a ~ -

~



J rn rn ~ 1 a


3 6 10 13 17 20 24 27 31 34



II I

w o



-~ lE-~ J gJ ~ 1

Dshy

_TIII




w



-~ 5-shy l f) f)

1 a


3 6 10 13 17 20 24 27 31 34



W N



-m Q ~- l f) f)

1 a




tJ tJ

I ~ ~

- ~ -----~ -~

-----shy



i =-


--shy --shy

Control





comer ofeach grid





















of the study The

34


50~------------------------------------------~

40

30

20



Calendar Date


35

50~----------------__________________________~

40

~- 30 ~ I-lt0 Q) Co

20E Q) r


O~--~----~------~----~----~----~----~~ ~ 0) ~ ~ ~ ~-(0 (II co It 0 ~ i2 0

~ ~ - -(0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Calendar Date


36









treatment






24)

Weed Competition







37





38

50

45

40 0 -()- 35 l 30 (0 Q) 25 c E Q) 20 I shy

150 Cf)

10

5

0


Ol ~ Ol Ol - lt0 ~ N ~ - CiS qo ~ 2 ~ 2 ~-

Ol

~~ 0 0 0 -0 0 0

Calendar Date


39

50

45

40 0 -() 35


30

25

20

15

10

5

0



0 0 - - 0 ~ 0 0

Calendar Date


40

50

45

40 0shy

35pound ~ 30l


150 en

10

5

0



Calendar Date


41

50

45

40 0 --Q 35 l 30a ~ 25amp E 20 ~ middot0 15 (J)

10

middot5

0


S r-- r-- r-shy10 S r--


Calendar Date


42

50

45

40 Cl -()- 35 e J 30 ~ ltII 25 c E 20 0 15 en

10

5

0

~ ~~~~8a=e--=--~ -~ea

v


en ~ ti Ii S eniI~

II) ~ Q Q

~ S2 t Q -Q ~ Q Q

Calendar Date


43


N S - co~ ~ ~ S (0 52 52 0 N0 0 - ~ 0 0 shy0

Calendar Oate


44

50

45

40 Q -U 35- 30-e co Q) 25

~ 20E 1515

en 10

5

0


Calendar Date


45

50

45

40 0 -()- 35 tIs 30-e CI) 25 Q

E 20 ~

15=a ()




i (l) i i

Cl i ire ~ itlt0 ca S2 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ ~0 ~ 0 0 0 0

Calendar Date


46

0 -U-~ 2 nI Q) Q E ~ g C)

50

45

40

35

30

25

20

15

10

5

0



Calendar Date


47

50

45

-- 40 0 ()- 35 ~ J 30 (1l 25 0 E 20 ~

15 en 0

10

5

0

bull



N (0 0)

CO t S2 0 - ~ - CO 0 0 t t0 -0 0 - 0 0

Calendar Date



48













10427 8407 3517 2013

A A B

B B

52


100 E2Zd Other spp

-f-c 80 o

0

~

~ 60 o (J tJ) Q)0 40 Q) Q

en 20





53

120~==~~__________________________________~


100 E2ZJ Other spp

-~-c 80 o

0= ~

~ 60 o () en ~ 40

8 (J)

20





54

120~~~~~__________________________________~


100 fZZI Other spp


() til

~ 40

8 en 20




55

-DISCUSSION


















1991)




56























57






















58


planting





















59







CONCLUSIONS













r

LITERATURE CITED









ij 1 i




62












63













64












65













66











67


a

Where




m = I-lin




Block as a m n tX 1 0350 0148 0237 1306 16319 2 0330 0156 0242 1320 9918 3 0274 0120 0228 1295 15000

68

1 1 [(0350)om -1]13ii

Block 1 H= 0148 16319

l 1 [( 0330) 0242 -1] 1320

H- 0156Block 2 9918

1 1

[( 0274) 0228 -1] 1295

H= 0120Block 3 15000

INTRODUCTION
















$511567000 (USDA 1996)




























2


trees






LITERATURE REVIEW





















4

Site Preparation






















5




Rainfall Harvesting



















6

r









Mulches














7






















8









infiltration














9















1976)






10




















11

Arizona Cypress










Study Site








study













13







longs





Plant Measurement











14















mass of dry soil








15























16







1990)




Control

Control



12

12 i



Weed Barrier i



V-ditch





Plat crown



12

1

12

12

I

I

I I


RESULTS

Survival and Growth








Soil Moisture













19




100

80

~ 60-m gt ~

J 40(JJ

20

o

Figure

1

1

I



Treatment


21




140

120

100

--E

-0 80

c C)

CD 60 J J

40

20

0 Control

j


Treatment

t



23

--

2

-m 0shy

i

J ()

() 1 0

i

o


MO~~ll 3 6 10 13 17 20 24 27 31 34



tv VI

-(U Q

~-~ J tn



tn 1 ~ a




N 0

-ca a ~-~ J U)



U) 1 ~ a




N -J

- as c E-e J (f)



~ 1 a




N 00

-m Q

iE-~ J



m ~ 1

D




N 0

-m a ~ -

~



J rn rn ~ 1 a


3 6 10 13 17 20 24 27 31 34



II I

w o



-~ lE-~ J gJ ~ 1

Dshy

_TIII




w



-~ 5-shy l f) f)

1 a


3 6 10 13 17 20 24 27 31 34



W N



-m Q ~- l f) f)

1 a




tJ tJ

I ~ ~

- ~ -----~ -~

-----shy



i =-


--shy --shy

Control





comer ofeach grid





















of the study The

34


50~------------------------------------------~

40

30

20



Calendar Date


35

50~----------------__________________________~

40

~- 30 ~ I-lt0 Q) Co

20E Q) r


O~--~----~------~----~----~----~----~~ ~ 0) ~ ~ ~ ~-(0 (II co It 0 ~ i2 0

~ ~ - -(0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Calendar Date


36









treatment






24)

Weed Competition







37





38

50

45

40 0 -()- 35 l 30 (0 Q) 25 c E Q) 20 I shy

150 Cf)

10

5

0


Ol ~ Ol Ol - lt0 ~ N ~ - CiS qo ~ 2 ~ 2 ~-

Ol

~~ 0 0 0 -0 0 0

Calendar Date


39

50

45

40 0 -() 35


30

25

20

15

10

5

0



0 0 - - 0 ~ 0 0

Calendar Date


40

50

45

40 0shy

35pound ~ 30l


150 en

10

5

0



Calendar Date


41

50

45

40 0 --Q 35 l 30a ~ 25amp E 20 ~ middot0 15 (J)

10

middot5

0


S r-- r-- r-shy10 S r--


Calendar Date


42

50

45

40 Cl -()- 35 e J 30 ~ ltII 25 c E 20 0 15 en

10

5

0

~ ~~~~8a=e--=--~ -~ea

v


en ~ ti Ii S eniI~

II) ~ Q Q

~ S2 t Q -Q ~ Q Q

Calendar Date


43


N S - co~ ~ ~ S (0 52 52 0 N0 0 - ~ 0 0 shy0

Calendar Oate


44

50

45

40 Q -U 35- 30-e co Q) 25

~ 20E 1515

en 10

5

0


Calendar Date


45

50

45

40 0 -()- 35 tIs 30-e CI) 25 Q

E 20 ~

15=a ()




i (l) i i

Cl i ire ~ itlt0 ca S2 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ ~0 ~ 0 0 0 0

Calendar Date


46

0 -U-~ 2 nI Q) Q E ~ g C)

50

45

40

35

30

25

20

15

10

5

0



Calendar Date


47

50

45

-- 40 0 ()- 35 ~ J 30 (1l 25 0 E 20 ~

15 en 0

10

5

0

bull



N (0 0)

CO t S2 0 - ~ - CO 0 0 t t0 -0 0 - 0 0

Calendar Date



48













10427 8407 3517 2013

A A B

B B

52


100 E2Zd Other spp

-f-c 80 o

0

~

~ 60 o (J tJ) Q)0 40 Q) Q

en 20





53

120~==~~__________________________________~


100 E2ZJ Other spp

-~-c 80 o

0= ~

~ 60 o () en ~ 40

8 (J)

20





54

120~~~~~__________________________________~


100 fZZI Other spp


() til

~ 40

8 en 20




55

-DISCUSSION


















1991)




56























57






















58


planting





















59







CONCLUSIONS













r

LITERATURE CITED









ij 1 i




62












63













64












65













66











67


a

Where




m = I-lin




Block as a m n tX 1 0350 0148 0237 1306 16319 2 0330 0156 0242 1320 9918 3 0274 0120 0228 1295 15000

68

1 1 [(0350)om -1]13ii

Block 1 H= 0148 16319

l 1 [( 0330) 0242 -1] 1320

H- 0156Block 2 9918

1 1

[( 0274) 0228 -1] 1295

H= 0120Block 3 15000























2


trees






LITERATURE REVIEW





















4

Site Preparation






















5




Rainfall Harvesting



















6

r









Mulches














7






















8









infiltration














9















1976)






10




















11

Arizona Cypress










Study Site








study













13







longs





Plant Measurement











14















mass of dry soil








15























16







1990)




Control

Control



12

12 i



Weed Barrier i



V-ditch





Plat crown



12

1

12

12

I

I

I I


RESULTS

Survival and Growth








Soil Moisture













19




100

80

~ 60-m gt ~

J 40(JJ

20

o

Figure

1

1

I



Treatment


21




140

120

100

--E

-0 80

c C)

CD 60 J J

40

20

0 Control

j


Treatment

t



23

--

2

-m 0shy

i

J ()

() 1 0

i

o


MO~~ll 3 6 10 13 17 20 24 27 31 34



tv VI

-(U Q

~-~ J tn



tn 1 ~ a




N 0

-ca a ~-~ J U)



U) 1 ~ a




N -J

- as c E-e J (f)



~ 1 a




N 00

-m Q

iE-~ J



m ~ 1

D




N 0

-m a ~ -

~



J rn rn ~ 1 a


3 6 10 13 17 20 24 27 31 34



II I

w o



-~ lE-~ J gJ ~ 1

Dshy

_TIII




w



-~ 5-shy l f) f)

1 a


3 6 10 13 17 20 24 27 31 34



W N



-m Q ~- l f) f)

1 a




tJ tJ

I ~ ~

- ~ -----~ -~

-----shy



i =-


--shy --shy

Control





comer ofeach grid





















of the study The

34


50~------------------------------------------~

40

30

20



Calendar Date


35

50~----------------__________________________~

40

~- 30 ~ I-lt0 Q) Co

20E Q) r


O~--~----~------~----~----~----~----~~ ~ 0) ~ ~ ~ ~-(0 (II co It 0 ~ i2 0

~ ~ - -(0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Calendar Date


36









treatment






24)

Weed Competition







37





38

50

45

40 0 -()- 35 l 30 (0 Q) 25 c E Q) 20 I shy

150 Cf)

10

5

0


Ol ~ Ol Ol - lt0 ~ N ~ - CiS qo ~ 2 ~ 2 ~-

Ol

~~ 0 0 0 -0 0 0

Calendar Date


39

50

45

40 0 -() 35


30

25

20

15

10

5

0



0 0 - - 0 ~ 0 0

Calendar Date


40

50

45

40 0shy

35pound ~ 30l


150 en

10

5

0



Calendar Date


41

50

45

40 0 --Q 35 l 30a ~ 25amp E 20 ~ middot0 15 (J)

10

middot5

0


S r-- r-- r-shy10 S r--


Calendar Date


42

50

45

40 Cl -()- 35 e J 30 ~ ltII 25 c E 20 0 15 en

10

5

0

~ ~~~~8a=e--=--~ -~ea

v


en ~ ti Ii S eniI~

II) ~ Q Q

~ S2 t Q -Q ~ Q Q

Calendar Date


43


N S - co~ ~ ~ S (0 52 52 0 N0 0 - ~ 0 0 shy0

Calendar Oate


44

50

45

40 Q -U 35- 30-e co Q) 25

~ 20E 1515

en 10

5

0


Calendar Date


45

50

45

40 0 -()- 35 tIs 30-e CI) 25 Q

E 20 ~

15=a ()




i (l) i i

Cl i ire ~ itlt0 ca S2 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ ~0 ~ 0 0 0 0

Calendar Date


46

0 -U-~ 2 nI Q) Q E ~ g C)

50

45

40

35

30

25

20

15

10

5

0



Calendar Date


47

50

45

-- 40 0 ()- 35 ~ J 30 (1l 25 0 E 20 ~

15 en 0

10

5

0

bull



N (0 0)

CO t S2 0 - ~ - CO 0 0 t t0 -0 0 - 0 0

Calendar Date



48













10427 8407 3517 2013

A A B

B B

52


100 E2Zd Other spp

-f-c 80 o

0

~

~ 60 o (J tJ) Q)0 40 Q) Q

en 20





53

120~==~~__________________________________~


100 E2ZJ Other spp

-~-c 80 o

0= ~

~ 60 o () en ~ 40

8 (J)

20





54

120~~~~~__________________________________~


100 fZZI Other spp


() til

~ 40

8 en 20




55

-DISCUSSION


















1991)




56























57






















58


planting





















59







CONCLUSIONS













r

LITERATURE CITED









ij 1 i




62












63













64












65













66











67


a

Where




m = I-lin




Block as a m n tX 1 0350 0148 0237 1306 16319 2 0330 0156 0242 1320 9918 3 0274 0120 0228 1295 15000

68

1 1 [(0350)om -1]13ii

Block 1 H= 0148 16319

l 1 [( 0330) 0242 -1] 1320

H- 0156Block 2 9918

1 1

[( 0274) 0228 -1] 1295

H= 0120Block 3 15000


trees






LITERATURE REVIEW





















4

Site Preparation






















5




Rainfall Harvesting



















6

r









Mulches














7






















8









infiltration














9















1976)






10




















11

Arizona Cypress










Study Site








study













13







longs





Plant Measurement











14















mass of dry soil








15























16







1990)




Control

Control



12

12 i



Weed Barrier i



V-ditch





Plat crown



12

1

12

12

I

I

I I


RESULTS

Survival and Growth








Soil Moisture













19




100

80

~ 60-m gt ~

J 40(JJ

20

o

Figure

1

1

I



Treatment


21




140

120

100

--E

-0 80

c C)

CD 60 J J

40

20

0 Control

j


Treatment

t



23

--

2

-m 0shy

i

J ()

() 1 0

i

o


MO~~ll 3 6 10 13 17 20 24 27 31 34



tv VI

-(U Q

~-~ J tn



tn 1 ~ a




N 0

-ca a ~-~ J U)



U) 1 ~ a




N -J

- as c E-e J (f)



~ 1 a




N 00

-m Q

iE-~ J



m ~ 1

D




N 0

-m a ~ -

~



J rn rn ~ 1 a


3 6 10 13 17 20 24 27 31 34



II I

w o



-~ lE-~ J gJ ~ 1

Dshy

_TIII




w



-~ 5-shy l f) f)

1 a


3 6 10 13 17 20 24 27 31 34



W N



-m Q ~- l f) f)

1 a




tJ tJ

I ~ ~

- ~ -----~ -~

-----shy



i =-


--shy --shy

Control





comer ofeach grid





















of the study The

34


50~------------------------------------------~

40

30

20



Calendar Date


35

50~----------------__________________________~

40

~- 30 ~ I-lt0 Q) Co

20E Q) r


O~--~----~------~----~----~----~----~~ ~ 0) ~ ~ ~ ~-(0 (II co It 0 ~ i2 0

~ ~ - -(0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Calendar Date


36









treatment






24)

Weed Competition







37





38

50

45

40 0 -()- 35 l 30 (0 Q) 25 c E Q) 20 I shy

150 Cf)

10

5

0


Ol ~ Ol Ol - lt0 ~ N ~ - CiS qo ~ 2 ~ 2 ~-

Ol

~~ 0 0 0 -0 0 0

Calendar Date


39

50

45

40 0 -() 35


30

25

20

15

10

5

0



0 0 - - 0 ~ 0 0

Calendar Date


40

50

45

40 0shy

35pound ~ 30l


150 en

10

5

0



Calendar Date


41

50

45

40 0 --Q 35 l 30a ~ 25amp E 20 ~ middot0 15 (J)

10

middot5

0


S r-- r-- r-shy10 S r--


Calendar Date


42

50

45

40 Cl -()- 35 e J 30 ~ ltII 25 c E 20 0 15 en

10

5

0

~ ~~~~8a=e--=--~ -~ea

v


en ~ ti Ii S eniI~

II) ~ Q Q

~ S2 t Q -Q ~ Q Q

Calendar Date


43


N S - co~ ~ ~ S (0 52 52 0 N0 0 - ~ 0 0 shy0

Calendar Oate


44

50

45

40 Q -U 35- 30-e co Q) 25

~ 20E 1515

en 10

5

0


Calendar Date


45

50

45

40 0 -()- 35 tIs 30-e CI) 25 Q

E 20 ~

15=a ()




i (l) i i

Cl i ire ~ itlt0 ca S2 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ ~0 ~ 0 0 0 0

Calendar Date


46

0 -U-~ 2 nI Q) Q E ~ g C)

50

45

40

35

30

25

20

15

10

5

0



Calendar Date


47

50

45

-- 40 0 ()- 35 ~ J 30 (1l 25 0 E 20 ~

15 en 0

10

5

0

bull



N (0 0)

CO t S2 0 - ~ - CO 0 0 t t0 -0 0 - 0 0

Calendar Date



48













10427 8407 3517 2013

A A B

B B

52


100 E2Zd Other spp

-f-c 80 o

0

~

~ 60 o (J tJ) Q)0 40 Q) Q

en 20





53

120~==~~__________________________________~


100 E2ZJ Other spp

-~-c 80 o

0= ~

~ 60 o () en ~ 40

8 (J)

20





54

120~~~~~__________________________________~


100 fZZI Other spp


() til

~ 40

8 en 20




55

-DISCUSSION


















1991)




56























57






















58


planting





















59







CONCLUSIONS













r

LITERATURE CITED









ij 1 i




62












63













64












65













66











67


a

Where




m = I-lin




Block as a m n tX 1 0350 0148 0237 1306 16319 2 0330 0156 0242 1320 9918 3 0274 0120 0228 1295 15000

68

1 1 [(0350)om -1]13ii

Block 1 H= 0148 16319

l 1 [( 0330) 0242 -1] 1320

H- 0156Block 2 9918

1 1

[( 0274) 0228 -1] 1295

H= 0120Block 3 15000

LITERATURE REVIEW





















4

Site Preparation






















5




Rainfall Harvesting



















6

r









Mulches














7






















8









infiltration














9















1976)






10




















11

Arizona Cypress










Study Site








study













13







longs





Plant Measurement











14















mass of dry soil








15























16







1990)




Control

Control



12

12 i



Weed Barrier i



V-ditch





Plat crown



12

1

12

12

I

I

I I


RESULTS

Survival and Growth








Soil Moisture













19




100

80

~ 60-m gt ~

J 40(JJ

20

o

Figure

1

1

I



Treatment


21




140

120

100

--E

-0 80

c C)

CD 60 J J

40

20

0 Control

j


Treatment

t



23

--

2

-m 0shy

i

J ()

() 1 0

i

o


MO~~ll 3 6 10 13 17 20 24 27 31 34



tv VI

-(U Q

~-~ J tn



tn 1 ~ a




N 0

-ca a ~-~ J U)



U) 1 ~ a




N -J

- as c E-e J (f)



~ 1 a




N 00

-m Q

iE-~ J



m ~ 1

D




N 0

-m a ~ -

~



J rn rn ~ 1 a


3 6 10 13 17 20 24 27 31 34



II I

w o



-~ lE-~ J gJ ~ 1

Dshy

_TIII




w



-~ 5-shy l f) f)

1 a


3 6 10 13 17 20 24 27 31 34



W N



-m Q ~- l f) f)

1 a




tJ tJ

I ~ ~

- ~ -----~ -~

-----shy



i =-


--shy --shy

Control





comer ofeach grid





















of the study The

34


50~------------------------------------------~

40

30

20



Calendar Date


35

50~----------------__________________________~

40

~- 30 ~ I-lt0 Q) Co

20E Q) r


O~--~----~------~----~----~----~----~~ ~ 0) ~ ~ ~ ~-(0 (II co It 0 ~ i2 0

~ ~ - -(0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Calendar Date


36









treatment






24)

Weed Competition







37





38

50

45

40 0 -()- 35 l 30 (0 Q) 25 c E Q) 20 I shy

150 Cf)

10

5

0


Ol ~ Ol Ol - lt0 ~ N ~ - CiS qo ~ 2 ~ 2 ~-

Ol

~~ 0 0 0 -0 0 0

Calendar Date


39

50

45

40 0 -() 35


30

25

20

15

10

5

0



0 0 - - 0 ~ 0 0

Calendar Date


40

50

45

40 0shy

35pound ~ 30l


150 en

10

5

0



Calendar Date


41

50

45

40 0 --Q 35 l 30a ~ 25amp E 20 ~ middot0 15 (J)

10

middot5

0


S r-- r-- r-shy10 S r--


Calendar Date


42

50

45

40 Cl -()- 35 e J 30 ~ ltII 25 c E 20 0 15 en

10

5

0

~ ~~~~8a=e--=--~ -~ea

v


en ~ ti Ii S eniI~

II) ~ Q Q

~ S2 t Q -Q ~ Q Q

Calendar Date


43


N S - co~ ~ ~ S (0 52 52 0 N0 0 - ~ 0 0 shy0

Calendar Oate


44

50

45

40 Q -U 35- 30-e co Q) 25

~ 20E 1515

en 10

5

0


Calendar Date


45

50

45

40 0 -()- 35 tIs 30-e CI) 25 Q

E 20 ~

15=a ()




i (l) i i

Cl i ire ~ itlt0 ca S2 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ ~0 ~ 0 0 0 0

Calendar Date


46

0 -U-~ 2 nI Q) Q E ~ g C)

50

45

40

35

30

25

20

15

10

5

0



Calendar Date


47

50

45

-- 40 0 ()- 35 ~ J 30 (1l 25 0 E 20 ~

15 en 0

10

5

0

bull



N (0 0)

CO t S2 0 - ~ - CO 0 0 t t0 -0 0 - 0 0

Calendar Date



48













10427 8407 3517 2013

A A B

B B

52


100 E2Zd Other spp

-f-c 80 o

0

~

~ 60 o (J tJ) Q)0 40 Q) Q

en 20





53

120~==~~__________________________________~


100 E2ZJ Other spp

-~-c 80 o

0= ~

~ 60 o () en ~ 40

8 (J)

20





54

120~~~~~__________________________________~


100 fZZI Other spp


() til

~ 40

8 en 20




55

-DISCUSSION


















1991)




56























57






















58


planting





















59







CONCLUSIONS













r

LITERATURE CITED









ij 1 i




62












63













64












65













66











67


a

Where




m = I-lin




Block as a m n tX 1 0350 0148 0237 1306 16319 2 0330 0156 0242 1320 9918 3 0274 0120 0228 1295 15000

68

1 1 [(0350)om -1]13ii

Block 1 H= 0148 16319

l 1 [( 0330) 0242 -1] 1320

H- 0156Block 2 9918

1 1

[( 0274) 0228 -1] 1295

H= 0120Block 3 15000

Site Preparation






















5




Rainfall Harvesting



















6

r









Mulches














7






















8









infiltration














9















1976)






10




















11

Arizona Cypress










Study Site








study













13







longs





Plant Measurement











14















mass of dry soil








15























16







1990)




Control

Control



12

12 i



Weed Barrier i



V-ditch





Plat crown



12

1

12

12

I

I

I I


RESULTS

Survival and Growth








Soil Moisture













19




100

80

~ 60-m gt ~

J 40(JJ

20

o

Figure

1

1

I



Treatment


21




140

120

100

--E

-0 80

c C)

CD 60 J J

40

20

0 Control

j


Treatment

t



23

--

2

-m 0shy

i

J ()

() 1 0

i

o


MO~~ll 3 6 10 13 17 20 24 27 31 34



tv VI

-(U Q

~-~ J tn



tn 1 ~ a




N 0

-ca a ~-~ J U)



U) 1 ~ a




N -J

- as c E-e J (f)



~ 1 a




N 00

-m Q

iE-~ J



m ~ 1

D




N 0

-m a ~ -

~



J rn rn ~ 1 a


3 6 10 13 17 20 24 27 31 34



II I

w o



-~ lE-~ J gJ ~ 1

Dshy

_TIII




w



-~ 5-shy l f) f)

1 a


3 6 10 13 17 20 24 27 31 34



W N



-m Q ~- l f) f)

1 a




tJ tJ

I ~ ~

- ~ -----~ -~

-----shy



i =-


--shy --shy

Control





comer ofeach grid





















of the study The

34


50~------------------------------------------~

40

30

20



Calendar Date


35

50~----------------__________________________~

40

~- 30 ~ I-lt0 Q) Co

20E Q) r


O~--~----~------~----~----~----~----~~ ~ 0) ~ ~ ~ ~-(0 (II co It 0 ~ i2 0

~ ~ - -(0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Calendar Date


36









treatment






24)

Weed Competition







37





38

50

45

40 0 -()- 35 l 30 (0 Q) 25 c E Q) 20 I shy

150 Cf)

10

5

0


Ol ~ Ol Ol - lt0 ~ N ~ - CiS qo ~ 2 ~ 2 ~-

Ol

~~ 0 0 0 -0 0 0

Calendar Date


39

50

45

40 0 -() 35


30

25

20

15

10

5

0



0 0 - - 0 ~ 0 0

Calendar Date


40

50

45

40 0shy

35pound ~ 30l


150 en

10

5

0



Calendar Date


41

50

45

40 0 --Q 35 l 30a ~ 25amp E 20 ~ middot0 15 (J)

10

middot5

0


S r-- r-- r-shy10 S r--


Calendar Date


42

50

45

40 Cl -()- 35 e J 30 ~ ltII 25 c E 20 0 15 en

10

5

0

~ ~~~~8a=e--=--~ -~ea

v


en ~ ti Ii S eniI~

II) ~ Q Q

~ S2 t Q -Q ~ Q Q

Calendar Date


43


N S - co~ ~ ~ S (0 52 52 0 N0 0 - ~ 0 0 shy0

Calendar Oate


44

50

45

40 Q -U 35- 30-e co Q) 25

~ 20E 1515

en 10

5

0


Calendar Date


45

50

45

40 0 -()- 35 tIs 30-e CI) 25 Q

E 20 ~

15=a ()




i (l) i i

Cl i ire ~ itlt0 ca S2 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ ~0 ~ 0 0 0 0

Calendar Date


46

0 -U-~ 2 nI Q) Q E ~ g C)

50

45

40

35

30

25

20

15

10

5

0



Calendar Date


47

50

45

-- 40 0 ()- 35 ~ J 30 (1l 25 0 E 20 ~

15 en 0

10

5

0

bull



N (0 0)

CO t S2 0 - ~ - CO 0 0 t t0 -0 0 - 0 0

Calendar Date



48













10427 8407 3517 2013

A A B

B B

52


100 E2Zd Other spp

-f-c 80 o

0

~

~ 60 o (J tJ) Q)0 40 Q) Q

en 20





53

120~==~~__________________________________~


100 E2ZJ Other spp

-~-c 80 o

0= ~

~ 60 o () en ~ 40

8 (J)

20





54

120~~~~~__________________________________~


100 fZZI Other spp


() til

~ 40

8 en 20




55

-DISCUSSION


















1991)




56























57






















58


planting





















59







CONCLUSIONS













r

LITERATURE CITED









ij 1 i




62












63













64












65













66











67


a

Where




m = I-lin




Block as a m n tX 1 0350 0148 0237 1306 16319 2 0330 0156 0242 1320 9918 3 0274 0120 0228 1295 15000

68

1 1 [(0350)om -1]13ii

Block 1 H= 0148 16319

l 1 [( 0330) 0242 -1] 1320

H- 0156Block 2 9918

1 1

[( 0274) 0228 -1] 1295

H= 0120Block 3 15000




Rainfall Harvesting



















6

r









Mulches














7






















8









infiltration














9















1976)






10




















11

Arizona Cypress










Study Site








study













13







longs





Plant Measurement











14















mass of dry soil








15























16







1990)




Control

Control



12

12 i



Weed Barrier i



V-ditch





Plat crown



12

1

12

12

I

I

I I


RESULTS

Survival and Growth








Soil Moisture













19




100

80

~ 60-m gt ~

J 40(JJ

20

o

Figure

1

1

I



Treatment


21




140

120

100

--E

-0 80

c C)

CD 60 J J

40

20

0 Control

j


Treatment

t



23

--

2

-m 0shy

i

J ()

() 1 0

i

o


MO~~ll 3 6 10 13 17 20 24 27 31 34



tv VI

-(U Q

~-~ J tn



tn 1 ~ a




N 0

-ca a ~-~ J U)



U) 1 ~ a




N -J

- as c E-e J (f)



~ 1 a




N 00

-m Q

iE-~ J



m ~ 1

D




N 0

-m a ~ -

~



J rn rn ~ 1 a


3 6 10 13 17 20 24 27 31 34



II I

w o



-~ lE-~ J gJ ~ 1

Dshy

_TIII




w



-~ 5-shy l f) f)

1 a


3 6 10 13 17 20 24 27 31 34



W N



-m Q ~- l f) f)

1 a




tJ tJ

I ~ ~

- ~ -----~ -~

-----shy



i =-


--shy --shy

Control





comer ofeach grid





















of the study The

34


50~------------------------------------------~

40

30

20



Calendar Date


35

50~----------------__________________________~

40

~- 30 ~ I-lt0 Q) Co

20E Q) r


O~--~----~------~----~----~----~----~~ ~ 0) ~ ~ ~ ~-(0 (II co It 0 ~ i2 0

~ ~ - -(0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Calendar Date


36









treatment






24)

Weed Competition







37





38

50

45

40 0 -()- 35 l 30 (0 Q) 25 c E Q) 20 I shy

150 Cf)

10

5

0


Ol ~ Ol Ol - lt0 ~ N ~ - CiS qo ~ 2 ~ 2 ~-

Ol

~~ 0 0 0 -0 0 0

Calendar Date


39

50

45

40 0 -() 35


30

25

20

15

10

5

0



0 0 - - 0 ~ 0 0

Calendar Date


40

50

45

40 0shy

35pound ~ 30l


150 en

10

5

0



Calendar Date


41

50

45

40 0 --Q 35 l 30a ~ 25amp E 20 ~ middot0 15 (J)

10

middot5

0


S r-- r-- r-shy10 S r--


Calendar Date


42

50

45

40 Cl -()- 35 e J 30 ~ ltII 25 c E 20 0 15 en

10

5

0

~ ~~~~8a=e--=--~ -~ea

v


en ~ ti Ii S eniI~

II) ~ Q Q

~ S2 t Q -Q ~ Q Q

Calendar Date


43


N S - co~ ~ ~ S (0 52 52 0 N0 0 - ~ 0 0 shy0

Calendar Oate


44

50

45

40 Q -U 35- 30-e co Q) 25

~ 20E 1515

en 10

5

0


Calendar Date


45

50

45

40 0 -()- 35 tIs 30-e CI) 25 Q

E 20 ~

15=a ()




i (l) i i

Cl i ire ~ itlt0 ca S2 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ ~0 ~ 0 0 0 0

Calendar Date


46

0 -U-~ 2 nI Q) Q E ~ g C)

50

45

40

35

30

25

20

15

10

5

0



Calendar Date


47

50

45

-- 40 0 ()- 35 ~ J 30 (1l 25 0 E 20 ~

15 en 0

10

5

0

bull



N (0 0)

CO t S2 0 - ~ - CO 0 0 t t0 -0 0 - 0 0

Calendar Date



48













10427 8407 3517 2013

A A B

B B

52


100 E2Zd Other spp

-f-c 80 o

0

~

~ 60 o (J tJ) Q)0 40 Q) Q

en 20





53

120~==~~__________________________________~


100 E2ZJ Other spp

-~-c 80 o

0= ~

~ 60 o () en ~ 40

8 (J)

20





54

120~~~~~__________________________________~


100 fZZI Other spp


() til

~ 40

8 en 20




55

-DISCUSSION


















1991)




56























57






















58


planting





















59







CONCLUSIONS













r

LITERATURE CITED









ij 1 i




62












63













64












65













66











67


a

Where




m = I-lin




Block as a m n tX 1 0350 0148 0237 1306 16319 2 0330 0156 0242 1320 9918 3 0274 0120 0228 1295 15000

68

1 1 [(0350)om -1]13ii

Block 1 H= 0148 16319

l 1 [( 0330) 0242 -1] 1320

H- 0156Block 2 9918

1 1

[( 0274) 0228 -1] 1295

H= 0120Block 3 15000

r









Mulches














7






















8









infiltration














9















1976)






10




















11

Arizona Cypress










Study Site








study













13







longs





Plant Measurement











14















mass of dry soil








15























16







1990)




Control

Control



12

12 i



Weed Barrier i



V-ditch





Plat crown



12

1

12

12

I

I

I I


RESULTS

Survival and Growth








Soil Moisture













19




100

80

~ 60-m gt ~

J 40(JJ

20

o

Figure

1

1

I



Treatment


21




140

120

100

--E

-0 80

c C)

CD 60 J J

40

20

0 Control

j


Treatment

t



23

--

2

-m 0shy

i

J ()

() 1 0

i

o


MO~~ll 3 6 10 13 17 20 24 27 31 34



tv VI

-(U Q

~-~ J tn



tn 1 ~ a




N 0

-ca a ~-~ J U)



U) 1 ~ a




N -J

- as c E-e J (f)



~ 1 a




N 00

-m Q

iE-~ J



m ~ 1

D




N 0

-m a ~ -

~



J rn rn ~ 1 a


3 6 10 13 17 20 24 27 31 34



II I

w o



-~ lE-~ J gJ ~ 1

Dshy

_TIII




w



-~ 5-shy l f) f)

1 a


3 6 10 13 17 20 24 27 31 34



W N



-m Q ~- l f) f)

1 a




tJ tJ

I ~ ~

- ~ -----~ -~

-----shy



i =-


--shy --shy

Control





comer ofeach grid





















of the study The

34


50~------------------------------------------~

40

30

20



Calendar Date


35

50~----------------__________________________~

40

~- 30 ~ I-lt0 Q) Co

20E Q) r


O~--~----~------~----~----~----~----~~ ~ 0) ~ ~ ~ ~-(0 (II co It 0 ~ i2 0

~ ~ - -(0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Calendar Date


36









treatment






24)

Weed Competition







37





38

50

45

40 0 -()- 35 l 30 (0 Q) 25 c E Q) 20 I shy

150 Cf)

10

5

0


Ol ~ Ol Ol - lt0 ~ N ~ - CiS qo ~ 2 ~ 2 ~-

Ol

~~ 0 0 0 -0 0 0

Calendar Date


39

50

45

40 0 -() 35


30

25

20

15

10

5

0



0 0 - - 0 ~ 0 0

Calendar Date


40

50

45

40 0shy

35pound ~ 30l


150 en

10

5

0



Calendar Date


41

50

45

40 0 --Q 35 l 30a ~ 25amp E 20 ~ middot0 15 (J)

10

middot5

0


S r-- r-- r-shy10 S r--


Calendar Date


42

50

45

40 Cl -()- 35 e J 30 ~ ltII 25 c E 20 0 15 en

10

5

0

~ ~~~~8a=e--=--~ -~ea

v


en ~ ti Ii S eniI~

II) ~ Q Q

~ S2 t Q -Q ~ Q Q

Calendar Date


43


N S - co~ ~ ~ S (0 52 52 0 N0 0 - ~ 0 0 shy0

Calendar Oate


44

50

45

40 Q -U 35- 30-e co Q) 25

~ 20E 1515

en 10

5

0


Calendar Date


45

50

45

40 0 -()- 35 tIs 30-e CI) 25 Q

E 20 ~

15=a ()




i (l) i i

Cl i ire ~ itlt0 ca S2 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ ~0 ~ 0 0 0 0

Calendar Date


46

0 -U-~ 2 nI Q) Q E ~ g C)

50

45

40

35

30

25

20

15

10

5

0



Calendar Date


47

50

45

-- 40 0 ()- 35 ~ J 30 (1l 25 0 E 20 ~

15 en 0

10

5

0

bull



N (0 0)

CO t S2 0 - ~ - CO 0 0 t t0 -0 0 - 0 0

Calendar Date



48













10427 8407 3517 2013

A A B

B B

52


100 E2Zd Other spp

-f-c 80 o

0

~

~ 60 o (J tJ) Q)0 40 Q) Q

en 20





53

120~==~~__________________________________~


100 E2ZJ Other spp

-~-c 80 o

0= ~

~ 60 o () en ~ 40

8 (J)

20





54

120~~~~~__________________________________~


100 fZZI Other spp


() til

~ 40

8 en 20




55

-DISCUSSION


















1991)




56























57






















58


planting





















59







CONCLUSIONS













r

LITERATURE CITED









ij 1 i




62












63













64












65













66











67


a

Where




m = I-lin




Block as a m n tX 1 0350 0148 0237 1306 16319 2 0330 0156 0242 1320 9918 3 0274 0120 0228 1295 15000

68

1 1 [(0350)om -1]13ii

Block 1 H= 0148 16319

l 1 [( 0330) 0242 -1] 1320

H- 0156Block 2 9918

1 1

[( 0274) 0228 -1] 1295

H= 0120Block 3 15000






















8









infiltration














9















1976)






10




















11

Arizona Cypress










Study Site








study













13







longs





Plant Measurement











14















mass of dry soil








15























16







1990)




Control

Control



12

12 i



Weed Barrier i



V-ditch





Plat crown



12

1

12

12

I

I

I I


RESULTS

Survival and Growth








Soil Moisture













19




100

80

~ 60-m gt ~

J 40(JJ

20

o

Figure

1

1

I



Treatment


21




140

120

100

--E

-0 80

c C)

CD 60 J J

40

20

0 Control

j


Treatment

t



23

--

2

-m 0shy

i

J ()

() 1 0

i

o


MO~~ll 3 6 10 13 17 20 24 27 31 34



tv VI

-(U Q

~-~ J tn



tn 1 ~ a




N 0

-ca a ~-~ J U)



U) 1 ~ a




N -J

- as c E-e J (f)



~ 1 a




N 00

-m Q

iE-~ J



m ~ 1

D




N 0

-m a ~ -

~



J rn rn ~ 1 a


3 6 10 13 17 20 24 27 31 34



II I

w o



-~ lE-~ J gJ ~ 1

Dshy

_TIII




w



-~ 5-shy l f) f)

1 a


3 6 10 13 17 20 24 27 31 34



W N



-m Q ~- l f) f)

1 a




tJ tJ

I ~ ~

- ~ -----~ -~

-----shy



i =-


--shy --shy

Control





comer ofeach grid





















of the study The

34


50~------------------------------------------~

40

30

20



Calendar Date


35

50~----------------__________________________~

40

~- 30 ~ I-lt0 Q) Co

20E Q) r


O~--~----~------~----~----~----~----~~ ~ 0) ~ ~ ~ ~-(0 (II co It 0 ~ i2 0

~ ~ - -(0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Calendar Date


36









treatment






24)

Weed Competition







37





38

50

45

40 0 -()- 35 l 30 (0 Q) 25 c E Q) 20 I shy

150 Cf)

10

5

0


Ol ~ Ol Ol - lt0 ~ N ~ - CiS qo ~ 2 ~ 2 ~-

Ol

~~ 0 0 0 -0 0 0

Calendar Date


39

50

45

40 0 -() 35


30

25

20

15

10

5

0



0 0 - - 0 ~ 0 0

Calendar Date


40

50

45

40 0shy

35pound ~ 30l


150 en

10

5

0



Calendar Date


41

50

45

40 0 --Q 35 l 30a ~ 25amp E 20 ~ middot0 15 (J)

10

middot5

0


S r-- r-- r-shy10 S r--


Calendar Date


42

50

45

40 Cl -()- 35 e J 30 ~ ltII 25 c E 20 0 15 en

10

5

0

~ ~~~~8a=e--=--~ -~ea

v


en ~ ti Ii S eniI~

II) ~ Q Q

~ S2 t Q -Q ~ Q Q

Calendar Date


43


N S - co~ ~ ~ S (0 52 52 0 N0 0 - ~ 0 0 shy0

Calendar Oate


44

50

45

40 Q -U 35- 30-e co Q) 25

~ 20E 1515

en 10

5

0


Calendar Date


45

50

45

40 0 -()- 35 tIs 30-e CI) 25 Q

E 20 ~

15=a ()




i (l) i i

Cl i ire ~ itlt0 ca S2 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ ~0 ~ 0 0 0 0

Calendar Date


46

0 -U-~ 2 nI Q) Q E ~ g C)

50

45

40

35

30

25

20

15

10

5

0



Calendar Date


47

50

45

-- 40 0 ()- 35 ~ J 30 (1l 25 0 E 20 ~

15 en 0

10

5

0

bull



N (0 0)

CO t S2 0 - ~ - CO 0 0 t t0 -0 0 - 0 0

Calendar Date



48













10427 8407 3517 2013

A A B

B B

52


100 E2Zd Other spp

-f-c 80 o

0

~

~ 60 o (J tJ) Q)0 40 Q) Q

en 20





53

120~==~~__________________________________~


100 E2ZJ Other spp

-~-c 80 o

0= ~

~ 60 o () en ~ 40

8 (J)

20





54

120~~~~~__________________________________~


100 fZZI Other spp


() til

~ 40

8 en 20




55

-DISCUSSION


















1991)




56























57






















58


planting





















59







CONCLUSIONS













r

LITERATURE CITED









ij 1 i




62












63













64












65













66











67


a

Where




m = I-lin




Block as a m n tX 1 0350 0148 0237 1306 16319 2 0330 0156 0242 1320 9918 3 0274 0120 0228 1295 15000

68

1 1 [(0350)om -1]13ii

Block 1 H= 0148 16319

l 1 [( 0330) 0242 -1] 1320

H- 0156Block 2 9918

1 1

[( 0274) 0228 -1] 1295

H= 0120Block 3 15000









infiltration














9















1976)






10




















11

Arizona Cypress










Study Site








study













13







longs





Plant Measurement











14















mass of dry soil








15























16







1990)




Control

Control



12

12 i



Weed Barrier i



V-ditch





Plat crown



12

1

12

12

I

I

I I


RESULTS

Survival and Growth








Soil Moisture













19




100

80

~ 60-m gt ~

J 40(JJ

20

o

Figure

1

1

I



Treatment


21




140

120

100

--E

-0 80

c C)

CD 60 J J

40

20

0 Control

j


Treatment

t



23

--

2

-m 0shy

i

J ()

() 1 0

i

o


MO~~ll 3 6 10 13 17 20 24 27 31 34



tv VI

-(U Q

~-~ J tn



tn 1 ~ a




N 0

-ca a ~-~ J U)



U) 1 ~ a




N -J

- as c E-e J (f)



~ 1 a




N 00

-m Q

iE-~ J



m ~ 1

D




N 0

-m a ~ -

~



J rn rn ~ 1 a


3 6 10 13 17 20 24 27 31 34



II I

w o



-~ lE-~ J gJ ~ 1

Dshy

_TIII




w



-~ 5-shy l f) f)

1 a


3 6 10 13 17 20 24 27 31 34



W N



-m Q ~- l f) f)

1 a




tJ tJ

I ~ ~

- ~ -----~ -~

-----shy



i =-


--shy --shy

Control





comer ofeach grid





















of the study The

34


50~------------------------------------------~

40

30

20



Calendar Date


35

50~----------------__________________________~

40

~- 30 ~ I-lt0 Q) Co

20E Q) r


O~--~----~------~----~----~----~----~~ ~ 0) ~ ~ ~ ~-(0 (II co It 0 ~ i2 0

~ ~ - -(0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Calendar Date


36









treatment






24)

Weed Competition







37





38

50

45

40 0 -()- 35 l 30 (0 Q) 25 c E Q) 20 I shy

150 Cf)

10

5

0


Ol ~ Ol Ol - lt0 ~ N ~ - CiS qo ~ 2 ~ 2 ~-

Ol

~~ 0 0 0 -0 0 0

Calendar Date


39

50

45

40 0 -() 35


30

25

20

15

10

5

0



0 0 - - 0 ~ 0 0

Calendar Date


40

50

45

40 0shy

35pound ~ 30l


150 en

10

5

0



Calendar Date


41

50

45

40 0 --Q 35 l 30a ~ 25amp E 20 ~ middot0 15 (J)

10

middot5

0


S r-- r-- r-shy10 S r--


Calendar Date


42

50

45

40 Cl -()- 35 e J 30 ~ ltII 25 c E 20 0 15 en

10

5

0

~ ~~~~8a=e--=--~ -~ea

v


en ~ ti Ii S eniI~

II) ~ Q Q

~ S2 t Q -Q ~ Q Q

Calendar Date


43


N S - co~ ~ ~ S (0 52 52 0 N0 0 - ~ 0 0 shy0

Calendar Oate


44

50

45

40 Q -U 35- 30-e co Q) 25

~ 20E 1515

en 10

5

0


Calendar Date


45

50

45

40 0 -()- 35 tIs 30-e CI) 25 Q

E 20 ~

15=a ()




i (l) i i

Cl i ire ~ itlt0 ca S2 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ ~0 ~ 0 0 0 0

Calendar Date


46

0 -U-~ 2 nI Q) Q E ~ g C)

50

45

40

35

30

25

20

15

10

5

0



Calendar Date


47

50

45

-- 40 0 ()- 35 ~ J 30 (1l 25 0 E 20 ~

15 en 0

10

5

0

bull



N (0 0)

CO t S2 0 - ~ - CO 0 0 t t0 -0 0 - 0 0

Calendar Date



48













10427 8407 3517 2013

A A B

B B

52


100 E2Zd Other spp

-f-c 80 o

0

~

~ 60 o (J tJ) Q)0 40 Q) Q

en 20





53

120~==~~__________________________________~


100 E2ZJ Other spp

-~-c 80 o

0= ~

~ 60 o () en ~ 40

8 (J)

20





54

120~~~~~__________________________________~


100 fZZI Other spp


() til

~ 40

8 en 20




55

-DISCUSSION


















1991)




56























57






















58


planting





















59







CONCLUSIONS













r

LITERATURE CITED









ij 1 i




62












63













64












65













66











67


a

Where




m = I-lin




Block as a m n tX 1 0350 0148 0237 1306 16319 2 0330 0156 0242 1320 9918 3 0274 0120 0228 1295 15000

68

1 1 [(0350)om -1]13ii

Block 1 H= 0148 16319

l 1 [( 0330) 0242 -1] 1320

H- 0156Block 2 9918

1 1

[( 0274) 0228 -1] 1295

H= 0120Block 3 15000















1976)






10




















11

Arizona Cypress










Study Site








study













13







longs





Plant Measurement











14















mass of dry soil








15























16







1990)




Control

Control



12

12 i



Weed Barrier i



V-ditch





Plat crown



12

1

12

12

I

I

I I


RESULTS

Survival and Growth








Soil Moisture













19




100

80

~ 60-m gt ~

J 40(JJ

20

o

Figure

1

1

I



Treatment


21




140

120

100

--E

-0 80

c C)

CD 60 J J

40

20

0 Control

j


Treatment

t



23

--

2

-m 0shy

i

J ()

() 1 0

i

o


MO~~ll 3 6 10 13 17 20 24 27 31 34



tv VI

-(U Q

~-~ J tn



tn 1 ~ a




N 0

-ca a ~-~ J U)



U) 1 ~ a




N -J

- as c E-e J (f)



~ 1 a




N 00

-m Q

iE-~ J



m ~ 1

D




N 0

-m a ~ -

~



J rn rn ~ 1 a


3 6 10 13 17 20 24 27 31 34



II I

w o



-~ lE-~ J gJ ~ 1

Dshy

_TIII




w



-~ 5-shy l f) f)

1 a


3 6 10 13 17 20 24 27 31 34



W N



-m Q ~- l f) f)

1 a




tJ tJ

I ~ ~

- ~ -----~ -~

-----shy



i =-


--shy --shy

Control





comer ofeach grid





















of the study The

34


50~------------------------------------------~

40

30

20



Calendar Date


35

50~----------------__________________________~

40

~- 30 ~ I-lt0 Q) Co

20E Q) r


O~--~----~------~----~----~----~----~~ ~ 0) ~ ~ ~ ~-(0 (II co It 0 ~ i2 0

~ ~ - -(0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Calendar Date


36









treatment






24)

Weed Competition







37





38

50

45

40 0 -()- 35 l 30 (0 Q) 25 c E Q) 20 I shy

150 Cf)

10

5

0


Ol ~ Ol Ol - lt0 ~ N ~ - CiS qo ~ 2 ~ 2 ~-

Ol

~~ 0 0 0 -0 0 0

Calendar Date


39

50

45

40 0 -() 35


30

25

20

15

10

5

0



0 0 - - 0 ~ 0 0

Calendar Date


40

50

45

40 0shy

35pound ~ 30l


150 en

10

5

0



Calendar Date


41

50

45

40 0 --Q 35 l 30a ~ 25amp E 20 ~ middot0 15 (J)

10

middot5

0


S r-- r-- r-shy10 S r--


Calendar Date


42

50

45

40 Cl -()- 35 e J 30 ~ ltII 25 c E 20 0 15 en

10

5

0

~ ~~~~8a=e--=--~ -~ea

v


en ~ ti Ii S eniI~

II) ~ Q Q

~ S2 t Q -Q ~ Q Q

Calendar Date


43


N S - co~ ~ ~ S (0 52 52 0 N0 0 - ~ 0 0 shy0

Calendar Oate


44

50

45

40 Q -U 35- 30-e co Q) 25

~ 20E 1515

en 10

5

0


Calendar Date


45

50

45

40 0 -()- 35 tIs 30-e CI) 25 Q

E 20 ~

15=a ()




i (l) i i

Cl i ire ~ itlt0 ca S2 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ ~0 ~ 0 0 0 0

Calendar Date


46

0 -U-~ 2 nI Q) Q E ~ g C)

50

45

40

35

30

25

20

15

10

5

0



Calendar Date


47

50

45

-- 40 0 ()- 35 ~ J 30 (1l 25 0 E 20 ~

15 en 0

10

5

0

bull



N (0 0)

CO t S2 0 - ~ - CO 0 0 t t0 -0 0 - 0 0

Calendar Date



48













10427 8407 3517 2013

A A B

B B

52


100 E2Zd Other spp

-f-c 80 o

0

~

~ 60 o (J tJ) Q)0 40 Q) Q

en 20





53

120~==~~__________________________________~


100 E2ZJ Other spp

-~-c 80 o

0= ~

~ 60 o () en ~ 40

8 (J)

20





54

120~~~~~__________________________________~


100 fZZI Other spp


() til

~ 40

8 en 20




55

-DISCUSSION


















1991)




56























57






















58


planting





















59







CONCLUSIONS













r

LITERATURE CITED









ij 1 i




62












63













64












65













66











67


a

Where




m = I-lin




Block as a m n tX 1 0350 0148 0237 1306 16319 2 0330 0156 0242 1320 9918 3 0274 0120 0228 1295 15000

68

1 1 [(0350)om -1]13ii

Block 1 H= 0148 16319

l 1 [( 0330) 0242 -1] 1320

H- 0156Block 2 9918

1 1

[( 0274) 0228 -1] 1295

H= 0120Block 3 15000




















11

Arizona Cypress










Study Site








study













13







longs





Plant Measurement











14















mass of dry soil








15























16







1990)




Control

Control



12

12 i



Weed Barrier i



V-ditch





Plat crown



12

1

12

12

I

I

I I


RESULTS

Survival and Growth








Soil Moisture













19




100

80

~ 60-m gt ~

J 40(JJ

20

o

Figure

1

1

I



Treatment


21




140

120

100

--E

-0 80

c C)

CD 60 J J

40

20

0 Control

j


Treatment

t



23

--

2

-m 0shy

i

J ()

() 1 0

i

o


MO~~ll 3 6 10 13 17 20 24 27 31 34



tv VI

-(U Q

~-~ J tn



tn 1 ~ a




N 0

-ca a ~-~ J U)



U) 1 ~ a




N -J

- as c E-e J (f)



~ 1 a




N 00

-m Q

iE-~ J



m ~ 1

D




N 0

-m a ~ -

~



J rn rn ~ 1 a


3 6 10 13 17 20 24 27 31 34



II I

w o



-~ lE-~ J gJ ~ 1

Dshy

_TIII




w



-~ 5-shy l f) f)

1 a


3 6 10 13 17 20 24 27 31 34



W N



-m Q ~- l f) f)

1 a




tJ tJ

I ~ ~

- ~ -----~ -~

-----shy



i =-


--shy --shy

Control





comer ofeach grid





















of the study The

34


50~------------------------------------------~

40

30

20



Calendar Date


35

50~----------------__________________________~

40

~- 30 ~ I-lt0 Q) Co

20E Q) r


O~--~----~------~----~----~----~----~~ ~ 0) ~ ~ ~ ~-(0 (II co It 0 ~ i2 0

~ ~ - -(0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Calendar Date


36









treatment






24)

Weed Competition







37





38

50

45

40 0 -()- 35 l 30 (0 Q) 25 c E Q) 20 I shy

150 Cf)

10

5

0


Ol ~ Ol Ol - lt0 ~ N ~ - CiS qo ~ 2 ~ 2 ~-

Ol

~~ 0 0 0 -0 0 0

Calendar Date


39

50

45

40 0 -() 35


30

25

20

15

10

5

0



0 0 - - 0 ~ 0 0

Calendar Date


40

50

45

40 0shy

35pound ~ 30l


150 en

10

5

0



Calendar Date


41

50

45

40 0 --Q 35 l 30a ~ 25amp E 20 ~ middot0 15 (J)

10

middot5

0


S r-- r-- r-shy10 S r--


Calendar Date


42

50

45

40 Cl -()- 35 e J 30 ~ ltII 25 c E 20 0 15 en

10

5

0

~ ~~~~8a=e--=--~ -~ea

v


en ~ ti Ii S eniI~

II) ~ Q Q

~ S2 t Q -Q ~ Q Q

Calendar Date


43


N S - co~ ~ ~ S (0 52 52 0 N0 0 - ~ 0 0 shy0

Calendar Oate


44

50

45

40 Q -U 35- 30-e co Q) 25

~ 20E 1515

en 10

5

0


Calendar Date


45

50

45

40 0 -()- 35 tIs 30-e CI) 25 Q

E 20 ~

15=a ()




i (l) i i

Cl i ire ~ itlt0 ca S2 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ ~0 ~ 0 0 0 0

Calendar Date


46

0 -U-~ 2 nI Q) Q E ~ g C)

50

45

40

35

30

25

20

15

10

5

0



Calendar Date


47

50

45

-- 40 0 ()- 35 ~ J 30 (1l 25 0 E 20 ~

15 en 0

10

5

0

bull



N (0 0)

CO t S2 0 - ~ - CO 0 0 t t0 -0 0 - 0 0

Calendar Date



48













10427 8407 3517 2013

A A B

B B

52


100 E2Zd Other spp

-f-c 80 o

0

~

~ 60 o (J tJ) Q)0 40 Q) Q

en 20





53

120~==~~__________________________________~


100 E2ZJ Other spp

-~-c 80 o

0= ~

~ 60 o () en ~ 40

8 (J)

20





54

120~~~~~__________________________________~


100 fZZI Other spp


() til

~ 40

8 en 20




55

-DISCUSSION


















1991)




56























57






















58


planting





















59







CONCLUSIONS













r

LITERATURE CITED









ij 1 i




62












63













64












65













66











67


a

Where




m = I-lin




Block as a m n tX 1 0350 0148 0237 1306 16319 2 0330 0156 0242 1320 9918 3 0274 0120 0228 1295 15000

68

1 1 [(0350)om -1]13ii

Block 1 H= 0148 16319

l 1 [( 0330) 0242 -1] 1320

H- 0156Block 2 9918

1 1

[( 0274) 0228 -1] 1295

H= 0120Block 3 15000

Arizona Cypress










Study Site








study













13







longs





Plant Measurement











14















mass of dry soil








15























16







1990)




Control

Control



12

12 i



Weed Barrier i



V-ditch





Plat crown



12

1

12

12

I

I

I I


RESULTS

Survival and Growth








Soil Moisture













19




100

80

~ 60-m gt ~

J 40(JJ

20

o

Figure

1

1

I



Treatment


21




140

120

100

--E

-0 80

c C)

CD 60 J J

40

20

0 Control

j


Treatment

t



23

--

2

-m 0shy

i

J ()

() 1 0

i

o


MO~~ll 3 6 10 13 17 20 24 27 31 34



tv VI

-(U Q

~-~ J tn



tn 1 ~ a




N 0

-ca a ~-~ J U)



U) 1 ~ a




N -J

- as c E-e J (f)



~ 1 a




N 00

-m Q

iE-~ J



m ~ 1

D




N 0

-m a ~ -

~



J rn rn ~ 1 a


3 6 10 13 17 20 24 27 31 34



II I

w o



-~ lE-~ J gJ ~ 1

Dshy

_TIII




w



-~ 5-shy l f) f)

1 a


3 6 10 13 17 20 24 27 31 34



W N



-m Q ~- l f) f)

1 a




tJ tJ

I ~ ~

- ~ -----~ -~

-----shy



i =-


--shy --shy

Control





comer ofeach grid





















of the study The

34


50~------------------------------------------~

40

30

20



Calendar Date


35

50~----------------__________________________~

40

~- 30 ~ I-lt0 Q) Co

20E Q) r


O~--~----~------~----~----~----~----~~ ~ 0) ~ ~ ~ ~-(0 (II co It 0 ~ i2 0

~ ~ - -(0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Calendar Date


36









treatment






24)

Weed Competition







37





38

50

45

40 0 -()- 35 l 30 (0 Q) 25 c E Q) 20 I shy

150 Cf)

10

5

0


Ol ~ Ol Ol - lt0 ~ N ~ - CiS qo ~ 2 ~ 2 ~-

Ol

~~ 0 0 0 -0 0 0

Calendar Date


39

50

45

40 0 -() 35


30

25

20

15

10

5

0



0 0 - - 0 ~ 0 0

Calendar Date


40

50

45

40 0shy

35pound ~ 30l


150 en

10

5

0



Calendar Date


41

50

45

40 0 --Q 35 l 30a ~ 25amp E 20 ~ middot0 15 (J)

10

middot5

0


S r-- r-- r-shy10 S r--


Calendar Date


42

50

45

40 Cl -()- 35 e J 30 ~ ltII 25 c E 20 0 15 en

10

5

0

~ ~~~~8a=e--=--~ -~ea

v


en ~ ti Ii S eniI~

II) ~ Q Q

~ S2 t Q -Q ~ Q Q

Calendar Date


43


N S - co~ ~ ~ S (0 52 52 0 N0 0 - ~ 0 0 shy0

Calendar Oate


44

50

45

40 Q -U 35- 30-e co Q) 25

~ 20E 1515

en 10

5

0


Calendar Date


45

50

45

40 0 -()- 35 tIs 30-e CI) 25 Q

E 20 ~

15=a ()




i (l) i i

Cl i ire ~ itlt0 ca S2 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ ~0 ~ 0 0 0 0

Calendar Date


46

0 -U-~ 2 nI Q) Q E ~ g C)

50

45

40

35

30

25

20

15

10

5

0



Calendar Date


47

50

45

-- 40 0 ()- 35 ~ J 30 (1l 25 0 E 20 ~

15 en 0

10

5

0

bull



N (0 0)

CO t S2 0 - ~ - CO 0 0 t t0 -0 0 - 0 0

Calendar Date



48













10427 8407 3517 2013

A A B

B B

52


100 E2Zd Other spp

-f-c 80 o

0

~

~ 60 o (J tJ) Q)0 40 Q) Q

en 20





53

120~==~~__________________________________~


100 E2ZJ Other spp

-~-c 80 o

0= ~

~ 60 o () en ~ 40

8 (J)

20





54

120~~~~~__________________________________~


100 fZZI Other spp


() til

~ 40

8 en 20




55

-DISCUSSION


















1991)




56























57






















58


planting





















59







CONCLUSIONS













r

LITERATURE CITED









ij 1 i




62












63













64












65













66











67


a

Where




m = I-lin




Block as a m n tX 1 0350 0148 0237 1306 16319 2 0330 0156 0242 1320 9918 3 0274 0120 0228 1295 15000

68

1 1 [(0350)om -1]13ii

Block 1 H= 0148 16319

l 1 [( 0330) 0242 -1] 1320

H- 0156Block 2 9918

1 1

[( 0274) 0228 -1] 1295

H= 0120Block 3 15000


Study Site








study













13







longs





Plant Measurement











14















mass of dry soil








15























16







1990)




Control

Control



12

12 i



Weed Barrier i



V-ditch





Plat crown



12

1

12

12

I

I

I I


RESULTS

Survival and Growth








Soil Moisture













19




100

80

~ 60-m gt ~

J 40(JJ

20

o

Figure

1

1

I



Treatment


21




140

120

100

--E

-0 80

c C)

CD 60 J J

40

20

0 Control

j


Treatment

t



23

--

2

-m 0shy

i

J ()

() 1 0

i

o


MO~~ll 3 6 10 13 17 20 24 27 31 34



tv VI

-(U Q

~-~ J tn



tn 1 ~ a




N 0

-ca a ~-~ J U)



U) 1 ~ a




N -J

- as c E-e J (f)



~ 1 a




N 00

-m Q

iE-~ J



m ~ 1

D




N 0

-m a ~ -

~



J rn rn ~ 1 a


3 6 10 13 17 20 24 27 31 34



II I

w o



-~ lE-~ J gJ ~ 1

Dshy

_TIII




w



-~ 5-shy l f) f)

1 a


3 6 10 13 17 20 24 27 31 34



W N



-m Q ~- l f) f)

1 a




tJ tJ

I ~ ~

- ~ -----~ -~

-----shy



i =-


--shy --shy

Control





comer ofeach grid





















of the study The

34


50~------------------------------------------~

40

30

20



Calendar Date


35

50~----------------__________________________~

40

~- 30 ~ I-lt0 Q) Co

20E Q) r


O~--~----~------~----~----~----~----~~ ~ 0) ~ ~ ~ ~-(0 (II co It 0 ~ i2 0

~ ~ - -(0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Calendar Date


36









treatment






24)

Weed Competition







37





38

50

45

40 0 -()- 35 l 30 (0 Q) 25 c E Q) 20 I shy

150 Cf)

10

5

0


Ol ~ Ol Ol - lt0 ~ N ~ - CiS qo ~ 2 ~ 2 ~-

Ol

~~ 0 0 0 -0 0 0

Calendar Date


39

50

45

40 0 -() 35


30

25

20

15

10

5

0



0 0 - - 0 ~ 0 0

Calendar Date


40

50

45

40 0shy

35pound ~ 30l


150 en

10

5

0



Calendar Date


41

50

45

40 0 --Q 35 l 30a ~ 25amp E 20 ~ middot0 15 (J)

10

middot5

0


S r-- r-- r-shy10 S r--


Calendar Date


42

50

45

40 Cl -()- 35 e J 30 ~ ltII 25 c E 20 0 15 en

10

5

0

~ ~~~~8a=e--=--~ -~ea

v


en ~ ti Ii S eniI~

II) ~ Q Q

~ S2 t Q -Q ~ Q Q

Calendar Date


43


N S - co~ ~ ~ S (0 52 52 0 N0 0 - ~ 0 0 shy0

Calendar Oate


44

50

45

40 Q -U 35- 30-e co Q) 25

~ 20E 1515

en 10

5

0


Calendar Date


45

50

45

40 0 -()- 35 tIs 30-e CI) 25 Q

E 20 ~

15=a ()




i (l) i i

Cl i ire ~ itlt0 ca S2 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ ~0 ~ 0 0 0 0

Calendar Date


46

0 -U-~ 2 nI Q) Q E ~ g C)

50

45

40

35

30

25

20

15

10

5

0



Calendar Date


47

50

45

-- 40 0 ()- 35 ~ J 30 (1l 25 0 E 20 ~

15 en 0

10

5

0

bull



N (0 0)

CO t S2 0 - ~ - CO 0 0 t t0 -0 0 - 0 0

Calendar Date



48













10427 8407 3517 2013

A A B

B B

52


100 E2Zd Other spp

-f-c 80 o

0

~

~ 60 o (J tJ) Q)0 40 Q) Q

en 20





53

120~==~~__________________________________~


100 E2ZJ Other spp

-~-c 80 o

0= ~

~ 60 o () en ~ 40

8 (J)

20





54

120~~~~~__________________________________~


100 fZZI Other spp


() til

~ 40

8 en 20




55

-DISCUSSION


















1991)




56























57






















58


planting





















59







CONCLUSIONS













r

LITERATURE CITED









ij 1 i




62












63













64












65













66











67


a

Where




m = I-lin




Block as a m n tX 1 0350 0148 0237 1306 16319 2 0330 0156 0242 1320 9918 3 0274 0120 0228 1295 15000

68

1 1 [(0350)om -1]13ii

Block 1 H= 0148 16319

l 1 [( 0330) 0242 -1] 1320

H- 0156Block 2 9918

1 1

[( 0274) 0228 -1] 1295

H= 0120Block 3 15000







longs





Plant Measurement











14















mass of dry soil








15























16







1990)




Control

Control



12

12 i



Weed Barrier i



V-ditch





Plat crown



12

1

12

12

I

I

I I


RESULTS

Survival and Growth








Soil Moisture













19




100

80

~ 60-m gt ~

J 40(JJ

20

o

Figure

1

1

I



Treatment


21




140

120

100

--E

-0 80

c C)

CD 60 J J

40

20

0 Control

j


Treatment

t



23

--

2

-m 0shy

i

J ()

() 1 0

i

o


MO~~ll 3 6 10 13 17 20 24 27 31 34



tv VI

-(U Q

~-~ J tn



tn 1 ~ a




N 0

-ca a ~-~ J U)



U) 1 ~ a




N -J

- as c E-e J (f)



~ 1 a




N 00

-m Q

iE-~ J



m ~ 1

D




N 0

-m a ~ -

~



J rn rn ~ 1 a


3 6 10 13 17 20 24 27 31 34



II I

w o



-~ lE-~ J gJ ~ 1

Dshy

_TIII




w



-~ 5-shy l f) f)

1 a


3 6 10 13 17 20 24 27 31 34



W N



-m Q ~- l f) f)

1 a




tJ tJ

I ~ ~

- ~ -----~ -~

-----shy



i =-


--shy --shy

Control





comer ofeach grid





















of the study The

34


50~------------------------------------------~

40

30

20



Calendar Date


35

50~----------------__________________________~

40

~- 30 ~ I-lt0 Q) Co

20E Q) r


O~--~----~------~----~----~----~----~~ ~ 0) ~ ~ ~ ~-(0 (II co It 0 ~ i2 0

~ ~ - -(0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Calendar Date


36









treatment






24)

Weed Competition







37





38

50

45

40 0 -()- 35 l 30 (0 Q) 25 c E Q) 20 I shy

150 Cf)

10

5

0


Ol ~ Ol Ol - lt0 ~ N ~ - CiS qo ~ 2 ~ 2 ~-

Ol

~~ 0 0 0 -0 0 0

Calendar Date


39

50

45

40 0 -() 35


30

25

20

15

10

5

0



0 0 - - 0 ~ 0 0

Calendar Date


40

50

45

40 0shy

35pound ~ 30l


150 en

10

5

0



Calendar Date


41

50

45

40 0 --Q 35 l 30a ~ 25amp E 20 ~ middot0 15 (J)

10

middot5

0


S r-- r-- r-shy10 S r--


Calendar Date


42

50

45

40 Cl -()- 35 e J 30 ~ ltII 25 c E 20 0 15 en

10

5

0

~ ~~~~8a=e--=--~ -~ea

v


en ~ ti Ii S eniI~

II) ~ Q Q

~ S2 t Q -Q ~ Q Q

Calendar Date


43


N S - co~ ~ ~ S (0 52 52 0 N0 0 - ~ 0 0 shy0

Calendar Oate


44

50

45

40 Q -U 35- 30-e co Q) 25

~ 20E 1515

en 10

5

0


Calendar Date


45

50

45

40 0 -()- 35 tIs 30-e CI) 25 Q

E 20 ~

15=a ()




i (l) i i

Cl i ire ~ itlt0 ca S2 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ ~0 ~ 0 0 0 0

Calendar Date


46

0 -U-~ 2 nI Q) Q E ~ g C)

50

45

40

35

30

25

20

15

10

5

0



Calendar Date


47

50

45

-- 40 0 ()- 35 ~ J 30 (1l 25 0 E 20 ~

15 en 0

10

5

0

bull



N (0 0)

CO t S2 0 - ~ - CO 0 0 t t0 -0 0 - 0 0

Calendar Date



48













10427 8407 3517 2013

A A B

B B

52


100 E2Zd Other spp

-f-c 80 o

0

~

~ 60 o (J tJ) Q)0 40 Q) Q

en 20





53

120~==~~__________________________________~


100 E2ZJ Other spp

-~-c 80 o

0= ~

~ 60 o () en ~ 40

8 (J)

20





54

120~~~~~__________________________________~


100 fZZI Other spp


() til

~ 40

8 en 20




55

-DISCUSSION


















1991)




56























57






















58


planting





















59







CONCLUSIONS













r

LITERATURE CITED









ij 1 i




62












63













64












65













66











67


a

Where




m = I-lin




Block as a m n tX 1 0350 0148 0237 1306 16319 2 0330 0156 0242 1320 9918 3 0274 0120 0228 1295 15000

68

1 1 [(0350)om -1]13ii

Block 1 H= 0148 16319

l 1 [( 0330) 0242 -1] 1320

H- 0156Block 2 9918

1 1

[( 0274) 0228 -1] 1295

H= 0120Block 3 15000















mass of dry soil








15























16







1990)




Control

Control



12

12 i



Weed Barrier i



V-ditch





Plat crown



12

1

12

12

I

I

I I


RESULTS

Survival and Growth








Soil Moisture













19




100

80

~ 60-m gt ~

J 40(JJ

20

o

Figure

1

1

I



Treatment


21




140

120

100

--E

-0 80

c C)

CD 60 J J

40

20

0 Control

j


Treatment

t



23

--

2

-m 0shy

i

J ()

() 1 0

i

o


MO~~ll 3 6 10 13 17 20 24 27 31 34



tv VI

-(U Q

~-~ J tn



tn 1 ~ a




N 0

-ca a ~-~ J U)



U) 1 ~ a




N -J

- as c E-e J (f)



~ 1 a




N 00

-m Q

iE-~ J



m ~ 1

D




N 0

-m a ~ -

~



J rn rn ~ 1 a


3 6 10 13 17 20 24 27 31 34



II I

w o



-~ lE-~ J gJ ~ 1

Dshy

_TIII




w



-~ 5-shy l f) f)

1 a


3 6 10 13 17 20 24 27 31 34



W N



-m Q ~- l f) f)

1 a




tJ tJ

I ~ ~

- ~ -----~ -~

-----shy



i =-


--shy --shy

Control





comer ofeach grid





















of the study The

34


50~------------------------------------------~

40

30

20



Calendar Date


35

50~----------------__________________________~

40

~- 30 ~ I-lt0 Q) Co

20E Q) r


O~--~----~------~----~----~----~----~~ ~ 0) ~ ~ ~ ~-(0 (II co It 0 ~ i2 0

~ ~ - -(0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Calendar Date


36









treatment






24)

Weed Competition







37





38

50

45

40 0 -()- 35 l 30 (0 Q) 25 c E Q) 20 I shy

150 Cf)

10

5

0


Ol ~ Ol Ol - lt0 ~ N ~ - CiS qo ~ 2 ~ 2 ~-

Ol

~~ 0 0 0 -0 0 0

Calendar Date


39

50

45

40 0 -() 35


30

25

20

15

10

5

0



0 0 - - 0 ~ 0 0

Calendar Date


40

50

45

40 0shy

35pound ~ 30l


150 en

10

5

0



Calendar Date


41

50

45

40 0 --Q 35 l 30a ~ 25amp E 20 ~ middot0 15 (J)

10

middot5

0


S r-- r-- r-shy10 S r--


Calendar Date


42

50

45

40 Cl -()- 35 e J 30 ~ ltII 25 c E 20 0 15 en

10

5

0

~ ~~~~8a=e--=--~ -~ea

v


en ~ ti Ii S eniI~

II) ~ Q Q

~ S2 t Q -Q ~ Q Q

Calendar Date


43


N S - co~ ~ ~ S (0 52 52 0 N0 0 - ~ 0 0 shy0

Calendar Oate


44

50

45

40 Q -U 35- 30-e co Q) 25

~ 20E 1515

en 10

5

0


Calendar Date


45

50

45

40 0 -()- 35 tIs 30-e CI) 25 Q

E 20 ~

15=a ()




i (l) i i

Cl i ire ~ itlt0 ca S2 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ ~0 ~ 0 0 0 0

Calendar Date


46

0 -U-~ 2 nI Q) Q E ~ g C)

50

45

40

35

30

25

20

15

10

5

0



Calendar Date


47

50

45

-- 40 0 ()- 35 ~ J 30 (1l 25 0 E 20 ~

15 en 0

10

5

0

bull



N (0 0)

CO t S2 0 - ~ - CO 0 0 t t0 -0 0 - 0 0

Calendar Date



48













10427 8407 3517 2013

A A B

B B

52


100 E2Zd Other spp

-f-c 80 o

0

~

~ 60 o (J tJ) Q)0 40 Q) Q

en 20





53

120~==~~__________________________________~


100 E2ZJ Other spp

-~-c 80 o

0= ~

~ 60 o () en ~ 40

8 (J)

20





54

120~~~~~__________________________________~


100 fZZI Other spp


() til

~ 40

8 en 20




55

-DISCUSSION


















1991)




56























57






















58


planting





















59







CONCLUSIONS













r

LITERATURE CITED









ij 1 i




62












63













64












65













66











67


a

Where




m = I-lin




Block as a m n tX 1 0350 0148 0237 1306 16319 2 0330 0156 0242 1320 9918 3 0274 0120 0228 1295 15000

68

1 1 [(0350)om -1]13ii

Block 1 H= 0148 16319

l 1 [( 0330) 0242 -1] 1320

H- 0156Block 2 9918

1 1

[( 0274) 0228 -1] 1295

H= 0120Block 3 15000























16







1990)




Control

Control



12

12 i



Weed Barrier i



V-ditch





Plat crown



12

1

12

12

I

I

I I


RESULTS

Survival and Growth








Soil Moisture













19




100

80

~ 60-m gt ~

J 40(JJ

20

o

Figure

1

1

I



Treatment


21




140

120

100

--E

-0 80

c C)

CD 60 J J

40

20

0 Control

j


Treatment

t



23

--

2

-m 0shy

i

J ()

() 1 0

i

o


MO~~ll 3 6 10 13 17 20 24 27 31 34



tv VI

-(U Q

~-~ J tn



tn 1 ~ a




N 0

-ca a ~-~ J U)



U) 1 ~ a




N -J

- as c E-e J (f)



~ 1 a




N 00

-m Q

iE-~ J



m ~ 1

D




N 0

-m a ~ -

~



J rn rn ~ 1 a


3 6 10 13 17 20 24 27 31 34



II I

w o



-~ lE-~ J gJ ~ 1

Dshy

_TIII




w



-~ 5-shy l f) f)

1 a


3 6 10 13 17 20 24 27 31 34



W N



-m Q ~- l f) f)

1 a




tJ tJ

I ~ ~

- ~ -----~ -~

-----shy



i =-


--shy --shy

Control





comer ofeach grid





















of the study The

34


50~------------------------------------------~

40

30

20



Calendar Date


35

50~----------------__________________________~

40

~- 30 ~ I-lt0 Q) Co

20E Q) r


O~--~----~------~----~----~----~----~~ ~ 0) ~ ~ ~ ~-(0 (II co It 0 ~ i2 0

~ ~ - -(0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Calendar Date


36









treatment






24)

Weed Competition







37





38

50

45

40 0 -()- 35 l 30 (0 Q) 25 c E Q) 20 I shy

150 Cf)

10

5

0


Ol ~ Ol Ol - lt0 ~ N ~ - CiS qo ~ 2 ~ 2 ~-

Ol

~~ 0 0 0 -0 0 0

Calendar Date


39

50

45

40 0 -() 35


30

25

20

15

10

5

0



0 0 - - 0 ~ 0 0

Calendar Date


40

50

45

40 0shy

35pound ~ 30l


150 en

10

5

0



Calendar Date


41

50

45

40 0 --Q 35 l 30a ~ 25amp E 20 ~ middot0 15 (J)

10

middot5

0


S r-- r-- r-shy10 S r--


Calendar Date


42

50

45

40 Cl -()- 35 e J 30 ~ ltII 25 c E 20 0 15 en

10

5

0

~ ~~~~8a=e--=--~ -~ea

v


en ~ ti Ii S eniI~

II) ~ Q Q

~ S2 t Q -Q ~ Q Q

Calendar Date


43


N S - co~ ~ ~ S (0 52 52 0 N0 0 - ~ 0 0 shy0

Calendar Oate


44

50

45

40 Q -U 35- 30-e co Q) 25

~ 20E 1515

en 10

5

0


Calendar Date


45

50

45

40 0 -()- 35 tIs 30-e CI) 25 Q

E 20 ~

15=a ()




i (l) i i

Cl i ire ~ itlt0 ca S2 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ ~0 ~ 0 0 0 0

Calendar Date


46

0 -U-~ 2 nI Q) Q E ~ g C)

50

45

40

35

30

25

20

15

10

5

0



Calendar Date


47

50

45

-- 40 0 ()- 35 ~ J 30 (1l 25 0 E 20 ~

15 en 0

10

5

0

bull



N (0 0)

CO t S2 0 - ~ - CO 0 0 t t0 -0 0 - 0 0

Calendar Date



48













10427 8407 3517 2013

A A B

B B

52


100 E2Zd Other spp

-f-c 80 o

0

~

~ 60 o (J tJ) Q)0 40 Q) Q

en 20





53

120~==~~__________________________________~


100 E2ZJ Other spp

-~-c 80 o

0= ~

~ 60 o () en ~ 40

8 (J)

20





54

120~~~~~__________________________________~


100 fZZI Other spp


() til

~ 40

8 en 20




55

-DISCUSSION


















1991)




56























57






















58


planting





















59







CONCLUSIONS













r

LITERATURE CITED









ij 1 i




62












63













64












65













66











67


a

Where




m = I-lin




Block as a m n tX 1 0350 0148 0237 1306 16319 2 0330 0156 0242 1320 9918 3 0274 0120 0228 1295 15000

68

1 1 [(0350)om -1]13ii

Block 1 H= 0148 16319

l 1 [( 0330) 0242 -1] 1320

H- 0156Block 2 9918

1 1

[( 0274) 0228 -1] 1295

H= 0120Block 3 15000







1990)




Control

Control



12

12 i



Weed Barrier i



V-ditch





Plat crown



12

1

12

12

I

I

I I


RESULTS

Survival and Growth








Soil Moisture













19




100

80

~ 60-m gt ~

J 40(JJ

20

o

Figure

1

1

I



Treatment


21




140

120

100

--E

-0 80

c C)

CD 60 J J

40

20

0 Control

j


Treatment

t



23

--

2

-m 0shy

i

J ()

() 1 0

i

o


MO~~ll 3 6 10 13 17 20 24 27 31 34



tv VI

-(U Q

~-~ J tn



tn 1 ~ a




N 0

-ca a ~-~ J U)



U) 1 ~ a




N -J

- as c E-e J (f)



~ 1 a




N 00

-m Q

iE-~ J



m ~ 1

D




N 0

-m a ~ -

~



J rn rn ~ 1 a


3 6 10 13 17 20 24 27 31 34



II I

w o



-~ lE-~ J gJ ~ 1

Dshy

_TIII




w



-~ 5-shy l f) f)

1 a


3 6 10 13 17 20 24 27 31 34



W N



-m Q ~- l f) f)

1 a




tJ tJ

I ~ ~

- ~ -----~ -~

-----shy



i =-


--shy --shy

Control





comer ofeach grid





















of the study The

34


50~------------------------------------------~

40

30

20



Calendar Date


35

50~----------------__________________________~

40

~- 30 ~ I-lt0 Q) Co

20E Q) r


O~--~----~------~----~----~----~----~~ ~ 0) ~ ~ ~ ~-(0 (II co It 0 ~ i2 0

~ ~ - -(0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Calendar Date


36









treatment






24)

Weed Competition







37





38

50

45

40 0 -()- 35 l 30 (0 Q) 25 c E Q) 20 I shy

150 Cf)

10

5

0


Ol ~ Ol Ol - lt0 ~ N ~ - CiS qo ~ 2 ~ 2 ~-

Ol

~~ 0 0 0 -0 0 0

Calendar Date


39

50

45

40 0 -() 35


30

25

20

15

10

5

0



0 0 - - 0 ~ 0 0

Calendar Date


40

50

45

40 0shy

35pound ~ 30l


150 en

10

5

0



Calendar Date


41

50

45

40 0 --Q 35 l 30a ~ 25amp E 20 ~ middot0 15 (J)

10

middot5

0


S r-- r-- r-shy10 S r--


Calendar Date


42

50

45

40 Cl -()- 35 e J 30 ~ ltII 25 c E 20 0 15 en

10

5

0

~ ~~~~8a=e--=--~ -~ea

v


en ~ ti Ii S eniI~

II) ~ Q Q

~ S2 t Q -Q ~ Q Q

Calendar Date


43


N S - co~ ~ ~ S (0 52 52 0 N0 0 - ~ 0 0 shy0

Calendar Oate


44

50

45

40 Q -U 35- 30-e co Q) 25

~ 20E 1515

en 10

5

0


Calendar Date


45

50

45

40 0 -()- 35 tIs 30-e CI) 25 Q

E 20 ~

15=a ()




i (l) i i

Cl i ire ~ itlt0 ca S2 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ ~0 ~ 0 0 0 0

Calendar Date


46

0 -U-~ 2 nI Q) Q E ~ g C)

50

45

40

35

30

25

20

15

10

5

0



Calendar Date


47

50

45

-- 40 0 ()- 35 ~ J 30 (1l 25 0 E 20 ~

15 en 0

10

5

0

bull



N (0 0)

CO t S2 0 - ~ - CO 0 0 t t0 -0 0 - 0 0

Calendar Date



48













10427 8407 3517 2013

A A B

B B

52


100 E2Zd Other spp

-f-c 80 o

0

~

~ 60 o (J tJ) Q)0 40 Q) Q

en 20





53

120~==~~__________________________________~


100 E2ZJ Other spp

-~-c 80 o

0= ~

~ 60 o () en ~ 40

8 (J)

20





54

120~~~~~__________________________________~


100 fZZI Other spp


() til

~ 40

8 en 20




55

-DISCUSSION


















1991)




56























57






















58


planting





















59







CONCLUSIONS













r

LITERATURE CITED









ij 1 i




62












63













64












65













66











67


a

Where




m = I-lin




Block as a m n tX 1 0350 0148 0237 1306 16319 2 0330 0156 0242 1320 9918 3 0274 0120 0228 1295 15000

68

1 1 [(0350)om -1]13ii

Block 1 H= 0148 16319

l 1 [( 0330) 0242 -1] 1320

H- 0156Block 2 9918

1 1

[( 0274) 0228 -1] 1295

H= 0120Block 3 15000




Control

Control



12

12 i



Weed Barrier i



V-ditch





Plat crown



12

1

12

12

I

I

I I


RESULTS

Survival and Growth








Soil Moisture













19




100

80

~ 60-m gt ~

J 40(JJ

20

o

Figure

1

1

I



Treatment


21




140

120

100

--E

-0 80

c C)

CD 60 J J

40

20

0 Control

j


Treatment

t



23

--

2

-m 0shy

i

J ()

() 1 0

i

o


MO~~ll 3 6 10 13 17 20 24 27 31 34



tv VI

-(U Q

~-~ J tn



tn 1 ~ a




N 0

-ca a ~-~ J U)



U) 1 ~ a




N -J

- as c E-e J (f)



~ 1 a




N 00

-m Q

iE-~ J



m ~ 1

D




N 0

-m a ~ -

~



J rn rn ~ 1 a


3 6 10 13 17 20 24 27 31 34



II I

w o



-~ lE-~ J gJ ~ 1

Dshy

_TIII




w



-~ 5-shy l f) f)

1 a


3 6 10 13 17 20 24 27 31 34



W N



-m Q ~- l f) f)

1 a




tJ tJ

I ~ ~

- ~ -----~ -~

-----shy



i =-


--shy --shy

Control





comer ofeach grid





















of the study The

34


50~------------------------------------------~

40

30

20



Calendar Date


35

50~----------------__________________________~

40

~- 30 ~ I-lt0 Q) Co

20E Q) r


O~--~----~------~----~----~----~----~~ ~ 0) ~ ~ ~ ~-(0 (II co It 0 ~ i2 0

~ ~ - -(0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Calendar Date


36









treatment






24)

Weed Competition







37





38

50

45

40 0 -()- 35 l 30 (0 Q) 25 c E Q) 20 I shy

150 Cf)

10

5

0


Ol ~ Ol Ol - lt0 ~ N ~ - CiS qo ~ 2 ~ 2 ~-

Ol

~~ 0 0 0 -0 0 0

Calendar Date


39

50

45

40 0 -() 35


30

25

20

15

10

5

0



0 0 - - 0 ~ 0 0

Calendar Date


40

50

45

40 0shy

35pound ~ 30l


150 en

10

5

0



Calendar Date


41

50

45

40 0 --Q 35 l 30a ~ 25amp E 20 ~ middot0 15 (J)

10

middot5

0


S r-- r-- r-shy10 S r--


Calendar Date


42

50

45

40 Cl -()- 35 e J 30 ~ ltII 25 c E 20 0 15 en

10

5

0

~ ~~~~8a=e--=--~ -~ea

v


en ~ ti Ii S eniI~

II) ~ Q Q

~ S2 t Q -Q ~ Q Q

Calendar Date


43


N S - co~ ~ ~ S (0 52 52 0 N0 0 - ~ 0 0 shy0

Calendar Oate


44

50

45

40 Q -U 35- 30-e co Q) 25

~ 20E 1515

en 10

5

0


Calendar Date


45

50

45

40 0 -()- 35 tIs 30-e CI) 25 Q

E 20 ~

15=a ()




i (l) i i

Cl i ire ~ itlt0 ca S2 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ ~0 ~ 0 0 0 0

Calendar Date


46

0 -U-~ 2 nI Q) Q E ~ g C)

50

45

40

35

30

25

20

15

10

5

0



Calendar Date


47

50

45

-- 40 0 ()- 35 ~ J 30 (1l 25 0 E 20 ~

15 en 0

10

5

0

bull



N (0 0)

CO t S2 0 - ~ - CO 0 0 t t0 -0 0 - 0 0

Calendar Date



48













10427 8407 3517 2013

A A B

B B

52


100 E2Zd Other spp

-f-c 80 o

0

~

~ 60 o (J tJ) Q)0 40 Q) Q

en 20





53

120~==~~__________________________________~


100 E2ZJ Other spp

-~-c 80 o

0= ~

~ 60 o () en ~ 40

8 (J)

20





54

120~~~~~__________________________________~


100 fZZI Other spp


() til

~ 40

8 en 20




55

-DISCUSSION


















1991)




56























57






















58


planting





















59







CONCLUSIONS













r

LITERATURE CITED









ij 1 i




62












63













64












65













66











67


a

Where




m = I-lin




Block as a m n tX 1 0350 0148 0237 1306 16319 2 0330 0156 0242 1320 9918 3 0274 0120 0228 1295 15000

68

1 1 [(0350)om -1]13ii

Block 1 H= 0148 16319

l 1 [( 0330) 0242 -1] 1320

H- 0156Block 2 9918

1 1

[( 0274) 0228 -1] 1295

H= 0120Block 3 15000

RESULTS

Survival and Growth








Soil Moisture













19




100

80

~ 60-m gt ~

J 40(JJ

20

o

Figure

1

1

I



Treatment


21




140

120

100

--E

-0 80

c C)

CD 60 J J

40

20

0 Control

j


Treatment

t



23

--

2

-m 0shy

i

J ()

() 1 0

i

o


MO~~ll 3 6 10 13 17 20 24 27 31 34



tv VI

-(U Q

~-~ J tn



tn 1 ~ a




N 0

-ca a ~-~ J U)



U) 1 ~ a




N -J

- as c E-e J (f)



~ 1 a




N 00

-m Q

iE-~ J



m ~ 1

D




N 0

-m a ~ -

~



J rn rn ~ 1 a


3 6 10 13 17 20 24 27 31 34



II I

w o



-~ lE-~ J gJ ~ 1

Dshy

_TIII




w



-~ 5-shy l f) f)

1 a


3 6 10 13 17 20 24 27 31 34



W N



-m Q ~- l f) f)

1 a




tJ tJ

I ~ ~

- ~ -----~ -~

-----shy



i =-


--shy --shy

Control





comer ofeach grid





















of the study The

34


50~------------------------------------------~

40

30

20



Calendar Date


35

50~----------------__________________________~

40

~- 30 ~ I-lt0 Q) Co

20E Q) r


O~--~----~------~----~----~----~----~~ ~ 0) ~ ~ ~ ~-(0 (II co It 0 ~ i2 0

~ ~ - -(0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Calendar Date


36









treatment






24)

Weed Competition







37





38

50

45

40 0 -()- 35 l 30 (0 Q) 25 c E Q) 20 I shy

150 Cf)

10

5

0


Ol ~ Ol Ol - lt0 ~ N ~ - CiS qo ~ 2 ~ 2 ~-

Ol

~~ 0 0 0 -0 0 0

Calendar Date


39

50

45

40 0 -() 35


30

25

20

15

10

5

0



0 0 - - 0 ~ 0 0

Calendar Date


40

50

45

40 0shy

35pound ~ 30l


150 en

10

5

0



Calendar Date


41

50

45

40 0 --Q 35 l 30a ~ 25amp E 20 ~ middot0 15 (J)

10

middot5

0


S r-- r-- r-shy10 S r--


Calendar Date


42

50

45

40 Cl -()- 35 e J 30 ~ ltII 25 c E 20 0 15 en

10

5

0

~ ~~~~8a=e--=--~ -~ea

v


en ~ ti Ii S eniI~

II) ~ Q Q

~ S2 t Q -Q ~ Q Q

Calendar Date


43


N S - co~ ~ ~ S (0 52 52 0 N0 0 - ~ 0 0 shy0

Calendar Oate


44

50

45

40 Q -U 35- 30-e co Q) 25

~ 20E 1515

en 10

5

0


Calendar Date


45

50

45

40 0 -()- 35 tIs 30-e CI) 25 Q

E 20 ~

15=a ()




i (l) i i

Cl i ire ~ itlt0 ca S2 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ ~0 ~ 0 0 0 0

Calendar Date


46

0 -U-~ 2 nI Q) Q E ~ g C)

50

45

40

35

30

25

20

15

10

5

0



Calendar Date


47

50

45

-- 40 0 ()- 35 ~ J 30 (1l 25 0 E 20 ~

15 en 0

10

5

0

bull



N (0 0)

CO t S2 0 - ~ - CO 0 0 t t0 -0 0 - 0 0

Calendar Date



48













10427 8407 3517 2013

A A B

B B

52


100 E2Zd Other spp

-f-c 80 o

0

~

~ 60 o (J tJ) Q)0 40 Q) Q

en 20





53

120~==~~__________________________________~


100 E2ZJ Other spp

-~-c 80 o

0= ~

~ 60 o () en ~ 40

8 (J)

20





54

120~~~~~__________________________________~


100 fZZI Other spp


() til

~ 40

8 en 20




55

-DISCUSSION


















1991)




56























57






















58


planting





















59







CONCLUSIONS













r

LITERATURE CITED









ij 1 i




62












63













64












65













66











67


a

Where




m = I-lin




Block as a m n tX 1 0350 0148 0237 1306 16319 2 0330 0156 0242 1320 9918 3 0274 0120 0228 1295 15000

68

1 1 [(0350)om -1]13ii

Block 1 H= 0148 16319

l 1 [( 0330) 0242 -1] 1320

H- 0156Block 2 9918

1 1

[( 0274) 0228 -1] 1295

H= 0120Block 3 15000




100

80

~ 60-m gt ~

J 40(JJ

20

o

Figure

1

1

I



Treatment


21




140

120

100

--E

-0 80

c C)

CD 60 J J

40

20

0 Control

j


Treatment

t



23

--

2

-m 0shy

i

J ()

() 1 0

i

o


MO~~ll 3 6 10 13 17 20 24 27 31 34



tv VI

-(U Q

~-~ J tn



tn 1 ~ a




N 0

-ca a ~-~ J U)



U) 1 ~ a




N -J

- as c E-e J (f)



~ 1 a




N 00

-m Q

iE-~ J



m ~ 1

D




N 0

-m a ~ -

~



J rn rn ~ 1 a


3 6 10 13 17 20 24 27 31 34



II I

w o



-~ lE-~ J gJ ~ 1

Dshy

_TIII




w



-~ 5-shy l f) f)

1 a


3 6 10 13 17 20 24 27 31 34



W N



-m Q ~- l f) f)

1 a




tJ tJ

I ~ ~

- ~ -----~ -~

-----shy



i =-


--shy --shy

Control





comer ofeach grid





















of the study The

34


50~------------------------------------------~

40

30

20



Calendar Date


35

50~----------------__________________________~

40

~- 30 ~ I-lt0 Q) Co

20E Q) r


O~--~----~------~----~----~----~----~~ ~ 0) ~ ~ ~ ~-(0 (II co It 0 ~ i2 0

~ ~ - -(0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Calendar Date


36









treatment






24)

Weed Competition







37





38

50

45

40 0 -()- 35 l 30 (0 Q) 25 c E Q) 20 I shy

150 Cf)

10

5

0


Ol ~ Ol Ol - lt0 ~ N ~ - CiS qo ~ 2 ~ 2 ~-

Ol

~~ 0 0 0 -0 0 0

Calendar Date


39

50

45

40 0 -() 35


30

25

20

15

10

5

0



0 0 - - 0 ~ 0 0

Calendar Date


40

50

45

40 0shy

35pound ~ 30l


150 en

10

5

0



Calendar Date


41

50

45

40 0 --Q 35 l 30a ~ 25amp E 20 ~ middot0 15 (J)

10

middot5

0


S r-- r-- r-shy10 S r--


Calendar Date


42

50

45

40 Cl -()- 35 e J 30 ~ ltII 25 c E 20 0 15 en

10

5

0

~ ~~~~8a=e--=--~ -~ea

v


en ~ ti Ii S eniI~

II) ~ Q Q

~ S2 t Q -Q ~ Q Q

Calendar Date


43


N S - co~ ~ ~ S (0 52 52 0 N0 0 - ~ 0 0 shy0

Calendar Oate


44

50

45

40 Q -U 35- 30-e co Q) 25

~ 20E 1515

en 10

5

0


Calendar Date


45

50

45

40 0 -()- 35 tIs 30-e CI) 25 Q

E 20 ~

15=a ()




i (l) i i

Cl i ire ~ itlt0 ca S2 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ ~0 ~ 0 0 0 0

Calendar Date


46

0 -U-~ 2 nI Q) Q E ~ g C)

50

45

40

35

30

25

20

15

10

5

0



Calendar Date


47

50

45

-- 40 0 ()- 35 ~ J 30 (1l 25 0 E 20 ~

15 en 0

10

5

0

bull



N (0 0)

CO t S2 0 - ~ - CO 0 0 t t0 -0 0 - 0 0

Calendar Date



48













10427 8407 3517 2013

A A B

B B

52


100 E2Zd Other spp

-f-c 80 o

0

~

~ 60 o (J tJ) Q)0 40 Q) Q

en 20





53

120~==~~__________________________________~


100 E2ZJ Other spp

-~-c 80 o

0= ~

~ 60 o () en ~ 40

8 (J)

20





54

120~~~~~__________________________________~


100 fZZI Other spp


() til

~ 40

8 en 20




55

-DISCUSSION


















1991)




56























57






















58


planting





















59







CONCLUSIONS













r

LITERATURE CITED









ij 1 i




62












63













64












65













66











67


a

Where




m = I-lin




Block as a m n tX 1 0350 0148 0237 1306 16319 2 0330 0156 0242 1320 9918 3 0274 0120 0228 1295 15000

68

1 1 [(0350)om -1]13ii

Block 1 H= 0148 16319

l 1 [( 0330) 0242 -1] 1320

H- 0156Block 2 9918

1 1

[( 0274) 0228 -1] 1295

H= 0120Block 3 15000

100

80

~ 60-m gt ~

J 40(JJ

20

o

Figure

1

1

I



Treatment


21




140

120

100

--E

-0 80

c C)

CD 60 J J

40

20

0 Control

j


Treatment

t



23

--

2

-m 0shy

i

J ()

() 1 0

i

o


MO~~ll 3 6 10 13 17 20 24 27 31 34



tv VI

-(U Q

~-~ J tn



tn 1 ~ a




N 0

-ca a ~-~ J U)



U) 1 ~ a




N -J

- as c E-e J (f)



~ 1 a




N 00

-m Q

iE-~ J



m ~ 1

D




N 0

-m a ~ -

~



J rn rn ~ 1 a


3 6 10 13 17 20 24 27 31 34



II I

w o



-~ lE-~ J gJ ~ 1

Dshy

_TIII




w



-~ 5-shy l f) f)

1 a


3 6 10 13 17 20 24 27 31 34



W N



-m Q ~- l f) f)

1 a




tJ tJ

I ~ ~

- ~ -----~ -~

-----shy



i =-


--shy --shy

Control





comer ofeach grid





















of the study The

34


50~------------------------------------------~

40

30

20



Calendar Date


35

50~----------------__________________________~

40

~- 30 ~ I-lt0 Q) Co

20E Q) r


O~--~----~------~----~----~----~----~~ ~ 0) ~ ~ ~ ~-(0 (II co It 0 ~ i2 0

~ ~ - -(0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Calendar Date


36









treatment






24)

Weed Competition







37





38

50

45

40 0 -()- 35 l 30 (0 Q) 25 c E Q) 20 I shy

150 Cf)

10

5

0


Ol ~ Ol Ol - lt0 ~ N ~ - CiS qo ~ 2 ~ 2 ~-

Ol

~~ 0 0 0 -0 0 0

Calendar Date


39

50

45

40 0 -() 35


30

25

20

15

10

5

0



0 0 - - 0 ~ 0 0

Calendar Date


40

50

45

40 0shy

35pound ~ 30l


150 en

10

5

0



Calendar Date


41

50

45

40 0 --Q 35 l 30a ~ 25amp E 20 ~ middot0 15 (J)

10

middot5

0


S r-- r-- r-shy10 S r--


Calendar Date


42

50

45

40 Cl -()- 35 e J 30 ~ ltII 25 c E 20 0 15 en

10

5

0

~ ~~~~8a=e--=--~ -~ea

v


en ~ ti Ii S eniI~

II) ~ Q Q

~ S2 t Q -Q ~ Q Q

Calendar Date


43


N S - co~ ~ ~ S (0 52 52 0 N0 0 - ~ 0 0 shy0

Calendar Oate


44

50

45

40 Q -U 35- 30-e co Q) 25

~ 20E 1515

en 10

5

0


Calendar Date


45

50

45

40 0 -()- 35 tIs 30-e CI) 25 Q

E 20 ~

15=a ()




i (l) i i

Cl i ire ~ itlt0 ca S2 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ ~0 ~ 0 0 0 0

Calendar Date


46

0 -U-~ 2 nI Q) Q E ~ g C)

50

45

40

35

30

25

20

15

10

5

0



Calendar Date


47

50

45

-- 40 0 ()- 35 ~ J 30 (1l 25 0 E 20 ~

15 en 0

10

5

0

bull



N (0 0)

CO t S2 0 - ~ - CO 0 0 t t0 -0 0 - 0 0

Calendar Date



48













10427 8407 3517 2013

A A B

B B

52


100 E2Zd Other spp

-f-c 80 o

0

~

~ 60 o (J tJ) Q)0 40 Q) Q

en 20





53

120~==~~__________________________________~


100 E2ZJ Other spp

-~-c 80 o

0= ~

~ 60 o () en ~ 40

8 (J)

20





54

120~~~~~__________________________________~


100 fZZI Other spp


() til

~ 40

8 en 20




55

-DISCUSSION


















1991)




56























57






















58


planting





















59







CONCLUSIONS













r

LITERATURE CITED









ij 1 i




62












63













64












65













66











67


a

Where




m = I-lin




Block as a m n tX 1 0350 0148 0237 1306 16319 2 0330 0156 0242 1320 9918 3 0274 0120 0228 1295 15000

68

1 1 [(0350)om -1]13ii

Block 1 H= 0148 16319

l 1 [( 0330) 0242 -1] 1320

H- 0156Block 2 9918

1 1

[( 0274) 0228 -1] 1295

H= 0120Block 3 15000




140

120

100

--E

-0 80

c C)

CD 60 J J

40

20

0 Control

j


Treatment

t



23

--

2

-m 0shy

i

J ()

() 1 0

i

o


MO~~ll 3 6 10 13 17 20 24 27 31 34



tv VI

-(U Q

~-~ J tn



tn 1 ~ a




N 0

-ca a ~-~ J U)



U) 1 ~ a




N -J

- as c E-e J (f)



~ 1 a




N 00

-m Q

iE-~ J



m ~ 1

D




N 0

-m a ~ -

~



J rn rn ~ 1 a


3 6 10 13 17 20 24 27 31 34



II I

w o



-~ lE-~ J gJ ~ 1

Dshy

_TIII




w



-~ 5-shy l f) f)

1 a


3 6 10 13 17 20 24 27 31 34



W N



-m Q ~- l f) f)

1 a




tJ tJ

I ~ ~

- ~ -----~ -~

-----shy



i =-


--shy --shy

Control





comer ofeach grid





















of the study The

34


50~------------------------------------------~

40

30

20



Calendar Date


35

50~----------------__________________________~

40

~- 30 ~ I-lt0 Q) Co

20E Q) r


O~--~----~------~----~----~----~----~~ ~ 0) ~ ~ ~ ~-(0 (II co It 0 ~ i2 0

~ ~ - -(0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Calendar Date


36









treatment






24)

Weed Competition







37





38

50

45

40 0 -()- 35 l 30 (0 Q) 25 c E Q) 20 I shy

150 Cf)

10

5

0


Ol ~ Ol Ol - lt0 ~ N ~ - CiS qo ~ 2 ~ 2 ~-

Ol

~~ 0 0 0 -0 0 0

Calendar Date


39

50

45

40 0 -() 35


30

25

20

15

10

5

0



0 0 - - 0 ~ 0 0

Calendar Date


40

50

45

40 0shy

35pound ~ 30l


150 en

10

5

0



Calendar Date


41

50

45

40 0 --Q 35 l 30a ~ 25amp E 20 ~ middot0 15 (J)

10

middot5

0


S r-- r-- r-shy10 S r--


Calendar Date


42

50

45

40 Cl -()- 35 e J 30 ~ ltII 25 c E 20 0 15 en

10

5

0

~ ~~~~8a=e--=--~ -~ea

v


en ~ ti Ii S eniI~

II) ~ Q Q

~ S2 t Q -Q ~ Q Q

Calendar Date


43


N S - co~ ~ ~ S (0 52 52 0 N0 0 - ~ 0 0 shy0

Calendar Oate


44

50

45

40 Q -U 35- 30-e co Q) 25

~ 20E 1515

en 10

5

0


Calendar Date


45

50

45

40 0 -()- 35 tIs 30-e CI) 25 Q

E 20 ~

15=a ()




i (l) i i

Cl i ire ~ itlt0 ca S2 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ ~0 ~ 0 0 0 0

Calendar Date


46

0 -U-~ 2 nI Q) Q E ~ g C)

50

45

40

35

30

25

20

15

10

5

0



Calendar Date


47

50

45

-- 40 0 ()- 35 ~ J 30 (1l 25 0 E 20 ~

15 en 0

10

5

0

bull



N (0 0)

CO t S2 0 - ~ - CO 0 0 t t0 -0 0 - 0 0

Calendar Date



48













10427 8407 3517 2013

A A B

B B

52


100 E2Zd Other spp

-f-c 80 o

0

~

~ 60 o (J tJ) Q)0 40 Q) Q

en 20





53

120~==~~__________________________________~


100 E2ZJ Other spp

-~-c 80 o

0= ~

~ 60 o () en ~ 40

8 (J)

20





54

120~~~~~__________________________________~


100 fZZI Other spp


() til

~ 40

8 en 20




55

-DISCUSSION


















1991)




56























57






















58


planting





















59







CONCLUSIONS













r

LITERATURE CITED









ij 1 i




62












63













64












65













66











67


a

Where




m = I-lin




Block as a m n tX 1 0350 0148 0237 1306 16319 2 0330 0156 0242 1320 9918 3 0274 0120 0228 1295 15000

68

1 1 [(0350)om -1]13ii

Block 1 H= 0148 16319

l 1 [( 0330) 0242 -1] 1320

H- 0156Block 2 9918

1 1

[( 0274) 0228 -1] 1295

H= 0120Block 3 15000

140

120

100

--E

-0 80

c C)

CD 60 J J

40

20

0 Control

j


Treatment

t



23

--

2

-m 0shy

i

J ()

() 1 0

i

o


MO~~ll 3 6 10 13 17 20 24 27 31 34



tv VI

-(U Q

~-~ J tn



tn 1 ~ a




N 0

-ca a ~-~ J U)



U) 1 ~ a




N -J

- as c E-e J (f)



~ 1 a




N 00

-m Q

iE-~ J



m ~ 1

D




N 0

-m a ~ -

~



J rn rn ~ 1 a


3 6 10 13 17 20 24 27 31 34



II I

w o



-~ lE-~ J gJ ~ 1

Dshy

_TIII




w



-~ 5-shy l f) f)

1 a


3 6 10 13 17 20 24 27 31 34



W N



-m Q ~- l f) f)

1 a




tJ tJ

I ~ ~

- ~ -----~ -~

-----shy



i =-


--shy --shy

Control





comer ofeach grid





















of the study The

34


50~------------------------------------------~

40

30

20



Calendar Date


35

50~----------------__________________________~

40

~- 30 ~ I-lt0 Q) Co

20E Q) r


O~--~----~------~----~----~----~----~~ ~ 0) ~ ~ ~ ~-(0 (II co It 0 ~ i2 0

~ ~ - -(0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Calendar Date


36









treatment






24)

Weed Competition







37





38

50

45

40 0 -()- 35 l 30 (0 Q) 25 c E Q) 20 I shy

150 Cf)

10

5

0


Ol ~ Ol Ol - lt0 ~ N ~ - CiS qo ~ 2 ~ 2 ~-

Ol

~~ 0 0 0 -0 0 0

Calendar Date


39

50

45

40 0 -() 35


30

25

20

15

10

5

0



0 0 - - 0 ~ 0 0

Calendar Date


40

50

45

40 0shy

35pound ~ 30l


150 en

10

5

0



Calendar Date


41

50

45

40 0 --Q 35 l 30a ~ 25amp E 20 ~ middot0 15 (J)

10

middot5

0


S r-- r-- r-shy10 S r--


Calendar Date


42

50

45

40 Cl -()- 35 e J 30 ~ ltII 25 c E 20 0 15 en

10

5

0

~ ~~~~8a=e--=--~ -~ea

v


en ~ ti Ii S eniI~

II) ~ Q Q

~ S2 t Q -Q ~ Q Q

Calendar Date


43


N S - co~ ~ ~ S (0 52 52 0 N0 0 - ~ 0 0 shy0

Calendar Oate


44

50

45

40 Q -U 35- 30-e co Q) 25

~ 20E 1515

en 10

5

0


Calendar Date


45

50

45

40 0 -()- 35 tIs 30-e CI) 25 Q

E 20 ~

15=a ()




i (l) i i

Cl i ire ~ itlt0 ca S2 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ ~0 ~ 0 0 0 0

Calendar Date


46

0 -U-~ 2 nI Q) Q E ~ g C)

50

45

40

35

30

25

20

15

10

5

0



Calendar Date


47

50

45

-- 40 0 ()- 35 ~ J 30 (1l 25 0 E 20 ~

15 en 0

10

5

0

bull



N (0 0)

CO t S2 0 - ~ - CO 0 0 t t0 -0 0 - 0 0

Calendar Date



48













10427 8407 3517 2013

A A B

B B

52


100 E2Zd Other spp

-f-c 80 o

0

~

~ 60 o (J tJ) Q)0 40 Q) Q

en 20





53

120~==~~__________________________________~


100 E2ZJ Other spp

-~-c 80 o

0= ~

~ 60 o () en ~ 40

8 (J)

20





54

120~~~~~__________________________________~


100 fZZI Other spp


() til

~ 40

8 en 20




55

-DISCUSSION


















1991)




56























57






















58


planting





















59







CONCLUSIONS













r

LITERATURE CITED









ij 1 i




62












63













64












65













66











67


a

Where




m = I-lin




Block as a m n tX 1 0350 0148 0237 1306 16319 2 0330 0156 0242 1320 9918 3 0274 0120 0228 1295 15000

68

1 1 [(0350)om -1]13ii

Block 1 H= 0148 16319

l 1 [( 0330) 0242 -1] 1320

H- 0156Block 2 9918

1 1

[( 0274) 0228 -1] 1295

H= 0120Block 3 15000

Documents

INFLUENCE OF SITE PREPARATION ON SOIL MOISTURE AND …