University of California

Establishment and succession of vegetation on different soil horizons


Jesse D. Sinclair
Arthur W. Sampson

Authors Affiliations

Jesse D. Sinclair was Assistant Forest Ecologist, U. S. Forest Service; Arthur W. Sampson was Associate Professor of Forestry and Plant Ecologist in the Experiment Station.

Publication Information

Hilgardia 5(7):155-174. DOI:10.3733/hilg.v05n07p155. January 1931.

PDF of full article, Cite this article


Abstract does not appear. First page follows.

Vegetation and Soil Profile

It has long been recognized that different plant species occupy rather distinct soil profiles.(4),(6) Typically, species of the first herb stage inhabit soil profiles where the upper stratum has been removed or where the edaphie conditions of the upper stratum have been altered by biotic influences.(3) In incipient stages of erosion the second herb stage is in evidence. When erosion has not proceeded beyond the norm and the soil profile is mature, climax species usually predominate.

This investigation was initiated for the purpose of studying the behavior of seral activities upon areas where the soil profile had been disturbed in varying degrees. The specific points investigated were: (1) the influence of soil horizons A, B, and C, as delineated by Glinka(3) and others, on the rate of growth of certain annual plants which dominate early successional stages, compared to certain perennial herbs recognized as stable or climax in grassland communities; (2) the comparative plant development in soil horizons A, B, and C; (3) the time of seed maturity in the respective soil horizons of extensive soil series of the state; (4) the water requirements of plants developed in the different soil horizons; and (5) the differences in growth and in water requirements in soils naturally packed as compared with those artificially packed.

Literature Cited

[1] Alway Frederick J. The organic matter of the soil. III. On the productivity of humus from manures. Soil Science. 1927. 3(1):1-34. 8 figs

[2] Conrad John P., Veihmeyer F. J. Root development and soil moisture. Hilgardia. 1929. 4:113-134. 3 figs DOI: 10.3733/hilg.v04n04p113 [CrossRef]

[3] Glinka K. Die Typenden Bodenbild├╝ng. 1924. Berlin: Verlag von Gebr├╝der Borntraeger. 358p. 65 figs.

[4] Hanson H., Smith F. Some types of vegetation in relation to the soil profile in northern, Colorado. Jour. Amer. Soc. Agronomy. 1928. 20(2):142-151. 5 figs DOI: 10.2134/agronj1928.00021962002000020007x [CrossRef]

[5] McCool M. M., Weldon M. D. The effect of soil type and fertilization on the composition of the expressed cell sap of plants. Jour. Amer. Soc. Agronomy. 1928. 20:778-792.

[6] Sampson Arthur W. Plant succession in relation to range management. U. S. Dept. Agr. Bul. 1919. 791:1-76. 26 figs

[7] Sampson Arthur W., Chase Agnes. Range grasses of California. California Agr. Exp. Sta. Bul. 1927. 430:1-94. 77 figs DOI: 10.5962/bhl.title.58971 [CrossRef]

[7] Sampson Arthur W., Weyl Leon H. Range preservation and its relation to erosion control on western grazing lands. U.S. Dept. Agr. Bul. 1928. 675:1-35. 8 figs

[9] Shantz H. L., Briggs Lyman J. The wilting coefficient for different plants and their direct determination. U.S. Dept. Agr. Bul. 1912. 230:1-83. 9 figs

Sinclair J, Sampson A. 1931. Establishment and succession of vegetation on different soil horizons. Hilgardia 5(7):155-174. DOI:10.3733/hilg.v05n07p155
Webmaster Email: sjosterman@ucanr.edu