Hopp til hovedinnholdet

Publikasjoner

NIBIOs ansatte publiserer flere hundre vitenskapelige artikler og forskningsrapporter hvert år. Her finner du referanser og lenker til publikasjoner og andre forsknings- og formidlingsaktiviteter. Samlingen oppdateres løpende med både nytt og historisk materiale. For mer informasjon om NIBIOs publikasjoner, besøk NIBIOs bibliotek.

2021

Til dokument

Sammendrag

Aims Understanding fine-grain diversity patterns across large spatial extents is fundamental for macroecological research and biodiversity conservation. Using the GrassPlot database, we provide benchmarks of fine-grain richness values of Palaearctic open habitats for vascular plants, bryophytes, lichens and complete vegetation (i.e., the sum of the former three groups). Location Palaearctic biogeographic realm. Methods We used 126,524 plots of eight standard grain sizes from the GrassPlot database: 0.0001, 0.001, 0.01, 0.1, 1, 10, 100 and 1,000 m2 and calculated the mean richness and standard deviations, as well as maximum, minimum, median, and first and third quartiles for each combination of grain size, taxonomic group, biome, region, vegetation type and phytosociological class. Results Patterns of plant diversity in vegetation types and biomes differ across grain sizes and taxonomic groups. Overall, secondary (mostly semi-natural) grasslands and natural grasslands are the richest vegetation type. The open-access file ”GrassPlot Diversity Benchmarks” and the web tool “GrassPlot Diversity Explorer” are now available online (https://edgg.org/databases/GrasslandDiversityExplorer) and provide more insights into species richness patterns in the Palaearctic open habitats. Conclusions The GrassPlot Diversity Benchmarks provide high-quality data on species richness in open habitat types across the Palaearctic. These benchmark data can be used in vegetation ecology, macroecology, biodiversity conservation and data quality checking. While the amount of data in the underlying GrassPlot database and their spatial coverage are smaller than in other extensive vegetation-plot databases, species recordings in GrassPlot are on average more complete, making it a valuable complementary data source in macroecology.

Sammendrag

Soil surfactants are applied to alleviate soil water repellency (SWR). The ability of surfactants to improve turfgrass quality under dry conditions is well documented, but less information exists about their role in situations with water surplus. Our objective was to study responses to monthly application of the surfactant Qualibra (20 L ha–1) under dry and wet conditions on a sand-based green covered with creeping bentgrass. Dry conditions implied irrigation to field capacity (FC) once a week (FC1) in 2014 (a year with warm and dry weather from May through July) and deficit irrigation to 60% of FC once a week (DEF1) in 2015 (May through July cool and wet). Wet conditions implied excessive irrigation twice a week (EX2) with 50% more water than needed to replenish FC. The surfactant decreased the average soil water content of the surface 7.5 cm of the root zone from 0.193 to 0.168 m3 m–3 in 2014 and from 0.191 to 0.171 m3 m–3 in 2015. In 2015, the reduction in SWC was stronger with EX2 than with DEF1 irrigation, and this was accompanied by less organic matter accumulation on plots receiving EX2 irrigation. The surfactant reduced the water drop penetration time (WDPT) regardless of irrigation treatments, but improved turfgrass quality only with DEF1 irrigation in 2015. A harder playing surface due to Qualibra was not observed in 2014 and only at one out of six observations with EX2 irrigation in 2015. We conclude that surfactants imply various benefits depending on water supply.

Til dokument

Sammendrag

Formålet med denne rapporten har vært å undersøke: 1) Hva er viktig for potetdyrkere i drifta deres? 2) Hvordan tar de beslutninger om planteverntiltak? 3) Hvordan bruker og vurderer potetdyrkere VIPS? 4) Hvordan skiller de potetdyrkerne som bruker VIPS seg fra de som ikke bruker VIPS? 5) Hvordan vurderer potetdyrkere rammevilkårene for plantevern? og 6) Hva er viktig for framtida til norsk potetproduksjon?....