Landscaping and performance of some aesthetic plant species in hot, arid conditions of India

Abstract

Establishment of ornamental and aesthetic plants in hot, arid conditions of India is difficult due to the prevailing climatic, edaphic and biotic factors. Effect of turfgrass on the growth of ornamental plants in hot arid conditions has not been studied so far anywhere in the world. A study was conducted on the campus of Arid Forest Research Institute, Jodhpur, India to assess the performance of a few ornamental plant species in combination with turfgrass and without turfgrass with respect to different soil tilling intervals. Growth of plants was better with turfgrass than without turfgrass. We suggest adopting a soil tilling interval of 30 days to achieve optimum growth of ornamental plant species in terms of height and crown diameter. Our results can help reduce labor costs and achieving better landscapes in fewer days in hot urban conditions of Indian sub continent.

Keywords

ornamental plants / soil working interval / Thar Desert / turf grass / urban forestry & urban greenery

References

[1] Attwell K.. Urban land resource and urban planning — case studies from Denmark. Landscape and Urban Planning, 2000, 52: 145-163.

[2] Beard J.B., Green R.L.. The role of turf grasses in environmental protection and their benefits to humans. Journal of Environmental Quality, 1994, 23: 1-16.

[3] Bolitzer B., Netusil N.R.. The impact of open spaces on property values in Portland, Oregon. Journal of Environmental Management, 2000, 59: 185-193.

[4] Bolund P., Hunhammar S.. Ecosystem services in urban areas. Ecological Economics, 1999, 29: 293-301.

[5] Bush J.K., Van Auken O.W.. Growth and survival of Prosopis glandulosa seedlings associated with shade and herbaceous competition. Botanical Gazette, 1990, 151: 234-239.

[6] Chaudhry P., Gupta R.K.. Urban greenery and its sustainable extension strategies in hot arid region of India. International Journal of Sustainable Society, 2010, 2: 146-155.

[7] Cheng G., Xiao D., Wang G.. Characteristics and construction of landscape ecology in arid regions. Chinese Geographical Science, 2000, 10: 13-19.

[8] Dospekhov B.A.. Field Experimentation. 1984, Moscow: Mir Publishers, 352.

[9] Fales S.L., Wakefield R.C.. Effects of turf grass on the establishment of woody plants. Agronomy Journal, 1981, 73: 605-610.

[10] Fang C., Ling D.. Guidance for noise reduction provided by the tree belts. Landscape and Urban Planning, 2005, 71: 29-34.

[11] Hendrickson C. 2008. Evaluation of competition between turf grass and trees in the landscape. All Graduate Theses and Dissertations. Paper 65, Utah State University, US. Available at http://digitalcommons.usu.edu/etd/65.

[12] Jim C.Y., Wendy Y.C.. Ecosystem services and valuation of urban forests in China. Cities, 2009, 26: 187-194.

[13] Johnson A.D., Gerhold H.D.. Carbon storage by urban tree cultivars, in roots and above-ground. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 2003, 2: 65-72.

[14] Konijnendijk CC. 1999. Urban Forestry in Europe: A Comparative Study of Concepts, Policies and Planning for Forest Conservation, Management and Development in an around major European cities. Doctoral dissertation, Research Notes No 90, Faculty of Forestry, University of Joensuu.

[15] Konijnendijk C.C.. Palo M., Uusivuori J., Mery G.. Urban Forestry in Europe. World Forests. 2001, Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 413 424

[16] Luttik J.. The value of trees, water and open space as reflected by house prices in The Netherlands. Landscape and Urban Planning, 2000, 48: 161-167.

[17] McPherson E.G., Simpson J.R.. Air Pollutant uptake by Sacramento’s urban forest. Journal of Arboriculture, 1998, 24: 224-234.

[18] McPherson E.G., Simpson J.R., Peper P.F.. Municipal forest benefits and costs in five US cities. Journal of Forestry, 2005, 103: 411-416.

[19] Nielson A.P., Wakefield R.C.. Competitive effects of turf grass on the growth of ornamental shrubs. Agronomy Journal, 1978, 70: 39-42.

[20] Nowak D.J.. McPherson E.G., Nowak D. J., Rowntree R. A.. Air pollution removal by Chicago’s urban forest. Chicago’s Urban Forest Ecosystems: Results of the Chicago’s Urban Forest Climate Project. 1994, St. Paul, MN: US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, North Central Research Station, 63 81

[21] Pataki D.J., Alig R.J., Fung A.S., Golubiewski N.E., Kennedy C.A., Mc Pherson E.G., Nowak D.J., Pouyat R.V., Lankao P.R.. Urban ecosystems and the North American carbon cycle. Global Change Biology, 2006, 12: 2092-2102.

[22] Potchter O., Goldman D., Kadish D., Iluz D.. The oasis effect in an extremely hot and arid climate: the case of southern Israel. Journal of Arid Environments, 2008, 72: 1721-1733.

[23] Shashua-Bar L., Pearlmutter D., Erell E.. The cooling efficiency of urban landscape strategies in a hot dry climate. Landscape and Urban Planning, 2009, 92: 179-186.

[24] Singh G., Mutha S., Bala N.. Effect of tree density on productivity of a Prosopis cineraria agroforestry system in North Western India. Journal of Arid Environments, 2007, 70: 152-163.

[25] Stier J. 2009. How to grow turf in the shade, Grounds and commercial turf session papers. Department of hortculticulture, University of Wisconsin. Available at http://archive.lib.msu.edu/tic/mitgc/article/1999186.pdf [Retrieved March 20, 2010]

[26] Suleiman M.K., Abdal M.S.. Water availability for the greening of Kuwait. Limnologica Ecology & Management of Inland Waters, 2002, 32: 322-328.

[27] Watson G. 2004. Tree vs Lawn: Uneasy Coexistence. Available at http://www.mortonarb.org/images/stories/pdf/our_work/Tree_vs_Lawn.pdf [Retrieved March 15, 2010]

[28] Wagner R.G., Mohmmed G.H., Noland T.L.. Critical period of interspecific competition for northern conifers associated with herbaceous competition. Canadian Journal of Forestry Research, 1999, 29: 890-897.

[29] Xiao Q.F., McPherson E.G., Simpson J.R.. Rainfall interception by Sacramento’s urban forest. Journal of Arboriculture, 1998, 24: 235-244.