This article was downloaded by: [University of Victoria]On: 16 December 2014, At: 09:27Publisher: Taylor & FrancisInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH,UK

Journal of Sustainable ForestryPublication details, including instructions forauthors and subscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/wjsf20

Litter Production and NutrientReturn in Bambusa bambosPlantationP. Shanmughavel a , R. S. Peddappaiah b & T.Muthukumar ca Department of Botany , Bharathiar University ,Coimbatore, 641 046, Indiab Agroforestry Division , Institute of Forest Geneticsand Tree Breeding , Coimbatore, 641 002, Indiac Department of Botany , Bharathiar University ,Coimbatore, 641 046, IndiaPublished online: 20 Oct 2008.

To cite this article: P. Shanmughavel , R. S. Peddappaiah & T. Muthukumar (2000)Litter Production and Nutrient Return in Bambusa bambos Plantation, Journal ofSustainable Forestry, 11:3, 71-82, DOI: 10.1300/J091v11n03_04

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1300/J091v11n03_04

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all theinformation (the “Content”) contained in the publications on our platform.However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make norepresentations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness,or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and viewsexpressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, andare not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of theContent should not be relied upon and should be independently verified withprimary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for anylosses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages,

and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly orindirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of theContent.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes.Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan,sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone isexpressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found athttp://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f V

icto

ria]

at 0

9:27

16

Dec

embe

r 20

14

Litter Production and Nutrient Returnin Bambusa bambos Plantation

P. ShanmughavelR. S. PeddappaiahT. Muthukumar

ABSTRACT. From January 1992 to December 1994 we investigatedthe litter production and nutrient cycling behavior of Bambusa bambosplantations of different ages. The annual litter production was 15.4 tha 1, 17 t ha 1, and 20.3 t ha 1 in 4-, 5- and 6-year-old plantations.Litter production was significantly higher compared to other plantationsof similar age. Litter fall had a bimodel pattern with a principal peak inthe winter and another in the late summer in all ages. Of the total annuallitter production, leaf-litter accounted for 58% and twig-litter 42%.With regards to nutrients, the highest concentration of N, P, Ca and Mgwas in leaf litter. On an annual basis, 120, 10, 101, 60 and 66 kg/ha (4year), 141, 13, 121, 72 and 79 kg/ha (5 year) and 184, 16, 183, 91 and96 kg/ha (6 year) of N, P, K, Ca and Mg were returned through litterfall. The maximum amount of all nutrients was returned through leaf-litter and lowest amount through twig-litter. [Article copies available for afee from The Haworth Document Delivery Service: 1-800-342-9678. E-mailaddress: <getinfo@haworthpressinc.com> Website: <http://www.haworthpressinc.com>]

KEYWORDS. Litter, Bambusa bambos, nutrient cycling, bambooplantations

P. Shanmughavel is Research Associate, Department of Botany, Bharathiar Uni-versity, Coimbatore 641 046, India.

R. S. Peddappaiah is Scientist-SD, Agroforestry Division, Institute of ForestGenetics and Tree Breeding, Coimbatore 641 002, India.

T.Muthukumar is Research Associate, Department of Botany, Bharathiar Univer-sity, Coimbatore 641 046, India.

The authors are thankful to Council of Scientific and Industrial Research(C.S.I.R), New Delhi for the award of Senior Research Fellowship.

Journal of Sustainable Forestry, Vol. 11(3) 2000E 2000 by The Haworth Press, Inc. All rights reserved. 71

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f V

icto

ria]

at 0

9:27

16

Dec

embe

r 20

14

JOURNAL OF SUSTAINABLE FORESTRY72

INTRODUCTION

Bamboo is integral to the culture of South and South-East Asia.India has perhaps the world’s richest bamboo resources with about130 species occurring over an area of 10.05 million hectares, about12.8 percent of the total forest area of the country. The bamboo re-sources in their natural habitat are dwindling due to over exploitation,gregarious flowering, shifting cultivation practices and extensive for-est fires (Tewari, 1992). A sustained production can be ensured onlyby extensive bamboo cultivation (Shanmughavel and Francis, 1996).The marginal lands, areas not used for raising agriculture crops can bebrought under bamboo cultivation, in order to neutralize the rapidlywidening mismatch between demand and supply of bamboo resources(Swaminathan, 1980) and maintain an agro-ecological system. Be-sides these benefits, tree plantations are universally known to result inmany positive interactions with the surroundings in which they grow.The soil is influenced greatly by the tree plantations in many waysespecially the production of litter and nutrient cycling. Litter enrichesthe soil with organic matter and essential nutrients. Its accumulationon the surface also check weeds, protects the soil from the erosiveimpact of rain and reduces surface water run-off (Srivastava et al.,1992).Few investigations of litter production and the amount of important

nutrients recycled through the litter in natural and plantation bamboosexist--nutrient cycling of bamboo in natural forests (Seth et al. 1963),bamboo in slash and burn agriculture (Toky and Ramakrishnan 1983),bamboo in successional environments (Rao and Ramakrishnan 1988),bamboo leaf litter decomposition (Fu et al. 1992), bamboo in drytropics (Tripathi and Singh 1994), plantation bamboo (Shanmughaveland Francis 1995), nutrient cycling of bamboo planted with teak(Chandrasekara 1996), nutrient cycling in Javanese bamboo talun-ke-bun system (Mailley et al. 1997)--compared to those for tropical (Rog-ers and Westmann 1979, Cromer et al. 1982) and temperate (Bray andGorham 1964) tree species. The difference in climate and the natureand growth patterns of tropical and sub-tropical tree species interaliarequire carrying out such ecologically important studies. Therefore aninvestigation was conducted to assess litter production and nutrientrecycling characteristics in plantations of Bambusa bambos (L.) Vossin India.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f V

icto

ria]

at 0

9:27

16

Dec

embe

r 20

14

Shanmughavel, Peddappaiah, and Muthukumar 73

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Study Area

The study covered plantations of Bambusa bambos located at Kalli-patty, Tamil Nadu State between latitude 11_ 28i and 12_E and be-tween longitude 76_ 59i and 77_ 47i N at an altitude of 540 m abovemean sea level. This area soil was laterite, red to brown color and andyloam in texture (USDA 1975). Prior to bamboo planting, paddy, maizeand tobacco are cultivated in field. The soil moisture content wasdetermined by drying 10 g fresh soil in a hot-air oven at 150_C for 24h. The pH (7.4 -7.8) was measured on an electric digital pH-meter in a1.5 (w:v) soil water suspension. For N, P and K, the samples were airdried and sieved (0.2 mm). Total N was estimated by the indophenolblue method described by Allen (1974). Potassium was extracted fromthe soil in an ammonium acetate solution (pH = 7) and was measuredwith a digital flame photometer (Systronics-121, India). To obtain thetotal soil nutrient concentrations per hectare, the percentage nutrientcontent was divided by 100 and the result multiplied by 2 million. Onehectare usually contains ca. 2 × 106 kg soil (George and Varghese1990). The maximum soil nitrogen, phosphorus, potassium, calciumand magnesium are 3800, 360, 3600, 1600 and 1800 kg ha 1, respec-tively. The mean temperature is 31_C and the mean annual rainfallabout 600 mm.

Plantation Details

The sampling area (3 hectare) was a pure bamboo plantation stands(Bambusa bambos). Density was 3500, 4000 and 4250 culms/ha in4th, 5th and 6th years, respectively. The mean culm height was 21.8,27.2 and 28.5 m during 4th, 5th, and 6th years. Their correspondingmean diameters at breast height (DBH) at different ages were 4.8, 6.3,and 8.3 cm, respectively.

Litter Determination

Measurements of litter production were conducted from January1992 to December 1994. Average periodic litter-production measure-ments were made using 9 wooden traps. These traps were randomly

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f V

icto

ria]

at 0

9:27

16

Dec

embe

r 20

14

JOURNAL OF SUSTAINABLE FORESTRY74

located in plantations to represent an average of the total area. Eachtrap was 1 m2 and 20 cm depth to allow accumulation of falling litter.These traps were designed such that litter would be retained in thecontainers once it is trapped and the litter within (or) outside the trapwould not get intermixed either by the wind (or) small animals (or)undergo loss from decay due to collection of water within them. Thetraps were fixed about 15-20 cm above ground level by pegs at thecorners. The litter collected in each of the traps was removed atmonthly intervals, except during rainy season when weekly collec-tions were made. Periodically collected litter was brought to the labo-ratory, separated into leaf and twig components and oven-drying at80_C to a constant weight (Fu et al. 1983).

Nutrientent Analysis

A composite litter sample was also taken for the chemical analysis.The oven-dried litter samples were washed with acidulated (0.05 MNH4Cl) water followed by distilled and deionized waters. The sampleswere ground to pass through a 0.5 mm stainless steel sieve beforedigestion.

Nitrogen and Phosphorus

Nitrogen and phosphorus were estimated (Armstrong et al. 1997)using a Technicon Auto analyzer II (Gedko International Ltd., UK).The sample was digested in a Kjeldahl digestion system KT 408(Bonn) at 400_C for 3 hours. One gram sample was digested with 2.5 gK2SO4 and 5 ml H2SO4 made upto 50 ml with distilled water and usedfor analysis of nitrogen and phosphorus.

Potassium, Calcium and Magnesium

The nutrients K, Ca, and Mg were analyzed using an Atomic Ab-sorption Spectrophotometer (Perkin Elmer 5000, USA) after wetdigestion of one gram sample with triple acid mixture (10 ml of conc.HNO3, 4 ml of HClO4 and 1 ml of conc. HCl). The digested sampleswere filtered through Whatmann No. 42 filter paper and made up to100 ml with distilled water. This solution was stored and used foranalysis (Issac and Johnson 1975).

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f V

icto

ria]

at 0

9:27

16

Dec

embe

r 20

14

Shanmughavel, Peddappaiah, and Muthukumar 75

RESULTS

Litter Production per Unit Area

Annual litter production in bamboo increased with successive years(Table 1). Total leaf-litter was 9200 kg-ha 1 (4th year), 10,307 kg-ha 1 (5th year) and 11,833 kg-ha 1 (6th year) and twig-litter was6200 kg-ha 1 (4th year), 7373 kg-ha 1 (5th year) and 8473 kg-ha 1

(6th year). The annual litter production was 15.4 t.ha 1 (4th year),17.6 t.ha 1 (5th year) and 20.3 t.ha 1 (6th year).

Seasonal Fluctuations in Litter Fall

Monthly litter fall in bamboo plantation indicated a bimodel patternwith a principal peak in the winter season (November-February) andanother in the late summer (May-June) in all ages of plantation. Win-ter peak (November-February) returns more litter (3640 kg/ha), where-as summer peak (May-June) returns less litter (2005 kg/ha). The litterfall in winter accounted for a major fraction of the annual litter yield inall ages of plantation. Approximately 40% of the annual litter produc-tion was obtained during winter season.

Nutrient Concentration of Litter

Since there was not much variability in the nutrient concentration oflitter components during different months of the year, the averagevalues were taken into consideration for further investigation. Theaverage nutrient concentrations of litter components of bamboo for allage groups were presented in Table 2. The relative amounts of nutrientelements were found in the order of N, K, Mg, Ca, P in leaf, whereasin twig they are in the order of K, N, Mg, Ca, P.

Nutrient Return

The comparative amounts of N, P, K, Ca and Mg recycled throughthe litter of 6th year were found to be higher than the correspondingquantities through 4th and 5th year plantation (Table 3). The maxi-mum nutrient return was through leaf-litter (60%) and the rest bytwigs (40%) in all age groups of bamboo. Table 4 shows the annualrelease of nutrients through litter fall in different forest ecosystems,including results from the present study as a comparison.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f V

icto

ria]

at 0

9:27

16

Dec

embe

r 20

14

76

TABLE

1.LitterProduction(kg/ha)on

UnitA

reaBasisinBam

busa

Plantations

LITTERCOMPONENTS

4thYEAR

5thYEAR

6thYEAR

MONTHS

LEAF

TWIG

TOTA

LLE

AF

TWIG

TOTA

LLE

AF

TWIG

TOTA

L

Jan.

730

10.5

540

7.5

1270

865

40.5

635

15.0

1500

982

45.0

759

15.0

1741

Feb.

650

11.5

510

10.5

1160

733

28.3

604

13.0

1337

817

30.5

668

13.0

1485

Mar.

560

9.0

530

8.0

1090

655

27.5

639

11.5

1294

710

31.0

693

13.5

1403

Apr.

580

8.5

460

10.5

1040

694

41.8

550

19.5

1244

784

45.8

619

17.0

1403

May

1080

10.7

570

7.4

1650

1138

30.5

658

9.5

1796

1320

33.5

767

9.5

2087

Jun.

925

9.5

540

6.8

1465

974

15.5

632

13.5

1607

1106

18.5

718

10.0

1824

Jul.

575

15.5

460

8.5

1035

697

15.5

552

16.0

1249

809

40.5

635

19.5

1444

Aug.

590

13.5

530

7.6

1120

706

20.5

643

19.2

1349

833

20.5

767

13.0

1600

Sep.

665

14.0

485

9.5

1150

725

30.5

822

30.2

1307

875

25.0

677

14.0

1552

Oct.

585

11.5

450

11.5

1035

671

41.5

548

10.5

1219

759

30.5

627

10.5

1386

Nov.

795

10.5

565

9.0

1360

893

38.9

666

18.4

1559

1023

21.5

776

20.5

1799

Dec.

1465

16.5

560

6.5

2025

1556

42.5

664

21.5

2220

1815

25.0

767

21.0

2582

TOTA

L9200

6200

15400

10307.0

7373.0

17680.0

11833

8473

20306

The

annuallitterproductionwas

estim

ated

inthefieldby

laying

nine

litterplots.The

falling

litterwas

collected

ateverymonthforaperiodofoneyear.Fresh

weightswere

takeninthefieldandsub-samples

intriplicatewas

broughttothelaboratoryandoven

driedat80_C.A

bimodelpattern

oflitterproductionwas

noticed

with

principalpeak

duringDecem

berandanotheroneduringMay.The

leaflitterfoundtobe

higherthan

twiglitter.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f V

icto

ria]

at 0

9:27

16

Dec

embe

r 20

14

Shanmughavel, Peddappaiah, and Muthukumar 77

TABLE 2. Nutrient Concentration in Litter Components (mg g 1)

LITTER COMPONENTS

4th YEAR 5th YEAR 6th YEARNUTRIENTS LEAF TWIG LEAF TWIG LEAF TWIG

N 9.1 5.0 5.8 4.2 9.4 2.0 6.1 5.9 9.7 5.4 8.2 5.4P 0.8 0.5 0.5 4.0 0.9 0.5 0.6 0.1 0.8 0.0 0.8 0.5K 6.3 5.0 7.0 5.4 6.5 1.0 7.3 5.4 9.3 2.7 8.6 1.0Ca 4.5 7.0 3.1 5.1 4.7 5.0 3.3 4.9 4.8 2.4 4.0 3.9Mg 4.7 5.0 3.7 4.1 4.9 5.4 3.9 5.1 5.1 3.0 4.3 1.0

Results are average of three independent observations. Since there was little difference between observations,average values are given. The nutrients were found in the order of N > P > Mg > Ca > P in leaf whereas in twigK > N > Mg > Ca > P.

TABLE 3. Nutrients Return Through Litter Fall (kg/ha)

LITTER COMPONENTS

4th YEAR 5th YEAR 6th YEARNUTRIENTS LEAF TWIG TOTAL LEAF TWIG TOTAL LEAF TWIG TOTAL

N 84 36 120 96 45 141 115 69 184P 7 3 10 9 4 13 9 7 16K 58 43 101 67 54 121 110 73 183Ca 41 19 60 48 24 72 57 34 91Mg 43 23 66 50 29 79 60 36 96

Results are the average of three independent observations. Since there was litter difference between observa-tions, average values are given. The maximum nutrients return was through leaf litter (60%) and the rest by twigs(40%).

DISCUSSION

Amount of total litter fall (leaves and twigs) in the present studywas estimated around 17.8 Mg ha 1 Year 1 which is 6 fold higherthan above ground litter production in Dendrocalamus strictus planta-tion (3.2 Mg ha 1) in India (Seth et al. 1964). Christanty et al. (1996)reported above ground litter fall in 6 year old Giganticholoa spp.around 4.7 Mg ha 1 Year 1. Rozanov and Rozanova (1964) reportedvalues for total above ground litter fall for bamboo plantations as 6.6Mg ha 1 Year 1 under thinned tropical forest and 10.6 Mg ha 1

Year 1 under thinned monsoonal forest which are 2.7 and 1.7 foldlower than in the present study. In addition, the litter fall production of4.2 to 7.2 Mg ha 1 Year 1 for mature bamboo in dry tropical savan-nas is 4.2 to 2.5 fold lower compared to the present study (Tripathi andSingh 1994). The values of the present study are also 4.2 to 28.3 foldhigher and 2.7 to 17.4 fold higher than those observed for 15 and 20

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f V

icto

ria]

at 0

9:27

16

Dec

embe

r 20

14

JOURNAL OF SUSTAINABLE FORESTRY78

TABLE 4. Annual Release of Nutrients (kg/ha 1/yr) Through Litter Fall inDifferent Forest Ecosystems

Forest type & Locality Nitrogen Potassium Phosphorus Calcium Magnesium Source

Spruce (USSR) 52 12 2 48 Soon, 1960Birch (USSR) 66 13 5 54 Smirnova and

Corodentseva1958

Oak (USSR) 59 62 3 86 Mina, 1955Eucalyptus tereticornis 14.2-34.5 -- 8.6-20.8 98.2-334.5 Singh, 1984

(U.P. India) 82 19 11 131 Seth et al.Tectona grandis 46 19 9 77 1963

(U.P. India) 73 39 13 46 --do--Shorea robusta 18 6 0.3 5 --do--

(U.P. India) 46.53 13.61 10.21 56.17 Singh,Pinus spp. (U.P. India) 47.78 16.86 28.81 70.97 K.P. 1968Butea spp. (U.P. India) 40.69 9.0 15.16 52.78 Seth et al.Piecea smithiana 24.45 6.03 7.93 34.93 1963

(H.P. India) --do--Cedrus deodara --do--

(H.P. India) 120.0 101.0 10.0 60.0 66.0 --do--Abies bindrow

(H.P. India) 141.0 121.0 13.0 72.0 79.9Pinus wellichiana

(H.P. India) 184.0 183.0 16.0 91.0 96.0Bambusa bambos plantation

(India) 4 year 120 101 10 60 66 Present study5 year 141 121 13 72 79 Present study6 year 184 183 16 91 96 Present study

year bamboo growing in teak plantations. This may be due to the fastgrowing nature of Bambusa bambos compared to other bamboo spe-cies and confirms the statement of Penfold and Willin (1961) that, thefaster a species grows, the more litter it would produce. The regularincrease in the litter yield with increase in age found in this studyshows continual development of the canopy, which conforms to whatis normally expected in young plantations.Seasonal changes in litter-fall indicate that the winter season ac-

counts for the most annual litter production. This is unlike deciduousplantations (Seth et al. 1964) and Gigantichola (Mailly et al. 1997)where maximum litter yields were during the summer months. Litterfall within a year exhibited a bimodel pattern with a principal accu-mulation peak in the winter and another in the late summer, in all agesof plantations. Similar types of two annual peaks in stands of Phyllos-tachys pubescens were observed by Fu et al. (1988). Leaf fall occurredthroughout the year with maximum during December and May, mini-mum during March in all ages, whereas the maximum leaf fall in other

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f V

icto

ria]

at 0

9:27

16

Dec

embe

r 20

14

Shanmughavel, Peddappaiah, and Muthukumar 79

bamboo species Neohouzeua dulloa and Dendrocalamus hamiltoniioccurred during November-January (Rao and Ramakrishnan 1988).Ghristanty et al. (1996) observed maximum leaf fall during Septemberand October in Gigantichola spp. Lower temperature conditions of thewinter and dryness of the season (Longman and Jenik 1974) may becontributing factors for greater leaf fall during the winter.The percentage contribution of litter components, observed in the

present study, is comparable with that of Bray and Gorham (1964).Branch litter fall equaled 40.26%, 41.70% and 41.73% of the totallitter fall during 4th, 5th and 6th year respectively. This is highercompared to 25% in Dendrocalamus strictus (Seth et al. 1963) andGigantichola spp. (Christanty et al., 1996). The leaf-litter contributed60% and twig-litter 40% at 4th year, whereas in 5th and 6th years, theleaf-litter contributed 58% and twig-litter 42%. This variation in litterproduction coincides with variation in the climate of the locality andgrowing season of the species (Longman and Jenik 1974). In decidu-ous plantations, the contribution of leaf litter to the total litter was76-92%, which is comparatively much higher than bamboo planta-tions, which may be due to the fact that the leaf-litter depends onvarious factors like nature of species (evergreen/moist/dry), nature ofleaves, etc. (George, 1977).Composition of the litter is regarded as a measure of the intrinsic

quality (decomposability) and environmental characteristics of the soiland climate which, in turn, affect the release of the important nutrientelements through decomposition. The nutrient concentration of N, P,K, Ca and Mg in the litter of bamboo increased with age (Table 2). Thehighest concentration of different nutrients in the various living bio-mass components was generally observed in leaf, branch, culm andrhizome. The proportion of nutrient elements were in the order of K,N, Mg, Ca and P except for leaves, where the nutrient elements werefound in the order of N, K, Mg, Ca, P. The nutrient concentration indifferent litter components was lower than the living biomass. Thismay be partly due to translocation and withdrawal of appreciablequantities of nutrients before abscission (Kramer and Kozlowski1960, Grubb and Edwards, 1988). In addition some of the elementsmay be leached out before litter fall. In bamboo, potassium, which ismore readily leachable (Nye and Greenland 1960), was lower in thelitter than in the living biomass. The return of elements to the soilthrough litter fall increased with age in the present study. This is a

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f V

icto

ria]

at 0

9:27

16

Dec

embe

r 20

14

JOURNAL OF SUSTAINABLE FORESTRY80

function of the increase in litter fall with age (Rao and Ramakrishnan1988).The highest concentration of N, P, Ca and Mg was observed in

leaves, while twigs had the highest concentration of K in all ages. Inleaves, among the various nutrients N had the maximum percentagefollowed by K, Ca, Mg and P. These results are in general agreementwith those observed in Eucalyptus globulus (Venkataraman et al.1983), E. hybrid (George 1977) and E. globulus (George and Varghese1990). The elemental concentration in twig decreased in the order ofK, N, Mg, Ca and P.The maximum amount of all nutrients was returned through leaf

litter and minimum by twig litter. Twigs contributed 30 to 39% of allnutrients. Similar results were observed in different forest tree species(Srivastava et al. 1972, George and Varghese 1990). The results of thepresent study indicate that, Bambusa bambos returns substantial quan-tities of N, K, Ca, Mg and P through litter fall. The twig-litter iscollected for various other uses and therefore great drain of nutrientstakes place. The results also point to the necessity of precautionarymeasures to maintain the nutrient status of the soil in these plantations.

REFERENCES

Allen S.E. (1974). Chemical Analysis of Ecological Materials. Black Well, Oxford.Armstrong F.A.J., Sterns C.R. and Strickland J.K.R. (1967). Mineral Component

analysis. Deep Sea. Res. 14:381-389.Bray J.R. and GorhamE. (1964). Litter production in forest of world. Adv. Ecol. Res.

2:101-157.Chandrashekara U.M. (1996). Ecology of Bambusa arundinacea (Retz) Willd.

Growing in Teak plantations of Kerala, India. For. Eol. & Managt. 87:149-162.Christanty L., Mailly D. and Kimmins J.P. (1996). Without bamboo, the land dies;

Biomass, litterfall and soil organic matter dynamics of a Javanese bamboo talun-kebun system. For. Eol. & Managt. 87:75-88.

Cromer R.N. and Williams E.R. (1982). Biomass and nutrient accumulation in aplanted Eucalyptus globulus. Aust. J. Bot 30:265-278.

Fu Maoyi, Fang Mingyu and Xie Jingzhon (1988). Leaf-litter and its decompositionin Bamboo timber stands, In: 99-106. Ramanuja Rao I.V., Gnanaharam R. Cherla,B. Sastry (eds) Bamboos--Current Research, Kerala Forest DevelopmentResearchCentre, Ottawa, Canada.

Fu M., Cao Q., Fang M. and Xie J. (1992). Nutrient cycling in bamboo stands : IINutrient input with through fall and its loss through the run-off of the watershed inpure Phyllostachys Pubescens stands. Forest Research 5:497-505.

George M. (1977). Organic Productivity and Nutrient Cycling in Eucalyptus HybridPlantations. Ph.D. Thesis, Meerut University, Meerut, India.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f V

icto

ria]

at 0

9:27

16

Dec

embe

r 20

14

Shanmughavel, Peddappaiah, and Muthukumar 81

George M. and Varghese G. (1990). Nutrient Cycling in E. globulus plantations. II.Litter production and Nutrients return. Indian Forester. 116:42-48.

Grubb, P.J. and Edwards P.J. (1982). Studies of mineral cycling in a montane rainfor-est in New Guinea III. The distribution of mineral elements in the above ground.Material Ecol. 70:623-648.

Issac R.A. and Johnson W.C. (1975). Collaborative study of wet and dry techniquesfor the elemental analysis of plant tissue by atomic absorption spectrophotometer.J. Assoc. Agric. Chem. 58:486.

Kramer P.J. and Kozlowski T.T. (1960). Physiology of Trees. McGraw-Hill, NewYork.

Longman K.A. and Jenik J. (1974). Tropical Forests and Its Environment. PergamonPress, London.

Mailly D., Christanty L. and Kimmins J.P. (1997). Without bamboo, the land dies:Nutrient cycling and biogiochemistry of a Javanese bamboo talun-kebun system.For. Eol. Managt. 91:155-173.

Nye P.H. and Greenland D.J. (1960). The soil shifting cultivation. Tech. commun.No.51 Harpenden. Commonw, Bur, Soils.

Penfold A.L. and Willin J.L. (1961). The Eucalyptus. Leonard Hill, Ltd., London.Rogers R.W. and Westmann W.E. (1979). Seasonal nutrient dynamics of litter in

sub-tropical Eucalyptus forest, North stand Broks Island. Aust. J. Bot. 2:60-74.Rao K.S. and Ramakrishnaan P.S. (1988). Leaf-dynamics of two bamboo species in

successional environments in North-East India. Proc. Indian Nat’l Sci. Acad. B.54:63-69.

Rozanov, B.G. and Rozanova I.M. (1964). The biological cycle of nutrient elementsof bamboo in the tropical forest of Burma. Bot. Zh. 49:340-357.

Seth S.K., O.N. Kaul and Gupta A.C. (1963). Some observations on nutrient cycleand return of nutrients in plantations at new forest. Indian Forester 30(2):90-98.

Shanmughavel P. and Francis K. (1996). Biomass and nutrient cycling in bamboo(Bambusa bambos) plantations of tropical areas. Biology & Fertility of Soils23:431-434.

Srivastava P.B.L., O.N. Kaul andMathur H.N. (1992). Seasonal variation of nutrientsin foliage and their return through litter in some plantation ecosystem. Proc.Symp. man made forests in India. Society of Indian Foresters, Dehra Dun.

Swaminathan M.S. (1980). Indian Forestry at the cross roads. Int. Tree Crops J.1:61-67.

Tewari D.N. (1992). A monograph on bamboo. International Book Distributors,Dehra Dun, India.

Toky O.P. and Ramakrishnan, P.S. (1983). Secondary succession following slash andburn agriculture in north eastern India. 2. Nutrient cycling. J. Ecology 71(3):747-758.

Tripathi S.K. and Singh K.P. (1994). Productivity and nutrient cycling in recentlyharvested and mature bamboo savannas in the dry tropics. Journal of AppliedEcology 31:109-124.

United States Department of Agriculture (1975). Soil conservation service. Soil

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f V

icto

ria]

at 0

9:27

16

Dec

embe

r 20

14

JOURNAL OF SUSTAINABLE FORESTRY82

survey Staff, Soil taxonomy: A basic system of soil classification for making andinterpreting soil surveys. USDA. Agric. Hands 436 U.S. Government PrintingOffice, Washington, DC. 754 p.

Venkataraman C.B., Haldorai P. Samraj, S.K. Natatwadmath and Henry C. (1983).Return of nutrients by the leaf litter of blue gum and black wattle plantations ofNilgiris in Tamil Nadu. Indian Forester. 109:370-378.

Received: September 29, 1998Accepted: June 30, 1999

for faculty/professionals with journal subscription recommendationauthority for their institutional library . . .

If you have read a reprint or photocopy of this article, wouldyou like to make sure that your library also subscribes tothis journal? If you have the authority to recommend sub-scriptions to your library, we will send you a free samplecopy for review with your librarian. Just fill out the form below--and makesure that you type or write out clearly both the name of the journal andyour own name and address.

( ) Yes, please send me a complimentary sample copy of this journal:

(please write in complete journal title here--do not leave blank)

I will show this journal to our institutional or agency library for a possiblesubscription.The name of my institutional/agency library is:

NAME:

INSTITUTION:

ADDRESS:

CITY: STATE: ZIP:

Return to: Sample Copy Department, The Haworth Press, Inc.,10 Alice Street, Binghamton, NY 13904-1580

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f V

icto

ria]

at 0

9:27

16

Dec

embe

r 20

14