Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@gmail.com&api_key=61f08fa0b96a73de8c900d749fcb997acc09&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 197
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 197
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 271
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1057
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3175
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
In this study, four types of mixed and plantations were selected according to the rows-mixing proportions (type Ⅰ: 5:3, type Ⅱ: 6:4, type Ⅲ: 5:5, type Ⅳ: 1:1). The see-mingly unrelated biomass models of and were developed for obtaining biomass values, and the difference and composition of carbon storage in each forest layer and ecosystem were analyzed. The results showed that carbon storage of arbor layer in different stand types was 39.86-50.12 t·hm, the carbon storage of arbor layer inⅠ, Ⅱ and Ⅳ was significantly higher than that in type Ⅲ. The carbon storage of understory was 0.10-0.30 t·hm, with that in type Ⅱ being significantly higher than other types. Carbon storage of litter layer was 4.43-6.96 t·hm, with type Ⅱ and Ⅲ being significantly higher than those of the other types. In the soil layer, carbon storage was 34.97-54.66 t·hm. The carbon storage of soil layer in type Ⅱ was significantly greater than those in the other types. At the whole ecosystem level, carbon storage of type Ⅰ-Ⅳ was 90.43, 108.27, 85.83 and 89.92 t·hm, respectively. Type Ⅱ had significantly greater carbon storage than the other types. The arbor layer and soil layer were the major carbon pools in the ecosystem, which accounted for 43.3%-55.7% and 38.7%-50.5% of the total, respectively. Our results suggested that mixing by six rows of and four rows of was better for future planting.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.13287/j.1001-9332.202205.002 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!