My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSP06625
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
Backfile
>
6001-7000
>
WSP06625
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 2:23:38 PM
Creation date
10/12/2006 1:46:05 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8149.900
Description
Miscellaneous Small Projects and Project Studies - Holly BMP's
State
CO
Basin
Arkansas
Water Division
2
Date
1/1/3000
Author
Gary Banuelos Paul R
Title
Evaluating The Ability of Three Forage Species to Tolerate High Saline Conditions in Colorado
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
Report/Study
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
17
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />. . <br /> <br />2 <br /> <br />Evaluating the Ability of Three Forage Species to <br />Tolerate High Saline Conditions in Colorado <br /> <br />Objective <br /> <br />The objective of this study is to compare biomass production and chloride accumulation of <br />different forage species, e.g., birdsfoot trefoil and tall fescue, grown under simulated saline soil <br />conditions found at specific sites in Colorado. <br /> <br />Methods and Materials <br /> <br />Salt tolerance, biomass production, and (Cr) accumulation by selected plant species were <br />evaluated from September 27, 1997 to August 12, 1998, under greenhouse conditions in Fresno, <br />California. The plant species were as follows: broad-Ieafbirdsfoot trefoil (Lotus comiculatus cv. <br />Steadfast), narrow-Ieafbirdsfoot trefoil (Lotus glabercv. HMB), and tall fescue (Festuca <br />arundinacea cv. Au Triumph). <br /> <br />The experimental design was a completely randomized block with six replications for each <br />treatment for each of the three species. There were a total of 120 pots used for the greenhouse <br />study. Eighteen liter pots were filled with approximately 10 kg of either "good" or "poor" soil <br />(typical soils of Colorado regions under consideration to poor quality water as a source of <br />irrigation; See Table 1 for soil characteristics for both soils_) <br /> <br />Treatments were as follows for each plant species: <br /> <br />Treatment 1 - <br />u 2- <br /> <br />H 3- <br /> <br />" 4 <br /> <br />" 5 <br /> <br />" 6 <br /> <br />Good soil, good quality irrigation water <br />Good soil, medium quality irrigation water <br />Good soil, poor quality irrigation water <br />Poor soil, good quality irrigation water <br />Poor soil, medium quality irrigation water <br />Poor soil, poor quality irrigation water <br /> <br />See Table 2 for selected chemical parameters for irrigation waters used in study. Treatments <br />receiving poor .quality water received additional salinity with poor II water quality 45 d before <br />termination of study; see Table 2 for composition of this water. <br /> <br />All types of irrigation water were synthetically constructed based on analysis from Colorado water <br />samples sent to the Water Management Research Laboratory (WMRL) from Pueblo River - <br />"good quality water"; Pueblo water well- "medium quality water"; and Arkansas River - "poor <br />quality water"; poor II quality wate; was based on a saltier composition from the Arkansas River. <br />Amounts of water to irrigate were based upon approximated evapotranspiration losses determined <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.