There is a notable difference between theinfiltration rate curve from the Control plot and theinfiltration rate curves from Castanopsis argentea and
Michelia montana. Infiltration rate, is observed to be higher with Castanopsis argentea and Michelia montanacompared to the Control plot. This is because in
the Control plot,the impact energy of water dropscause surface sealingand crust formation, reducing evolution of infiltration rate and producing higher runoff.
Comparing the infiltration curves determined in bothCastanopsis argentea and Michelia montana plots, there is a notable increase in the infiltration rate inthe
second case, especially for durations of less than 50-60 min, implying that changes in soilsurface conditions are related in this study to a greater contribution
oforganic matter by the leaves and roots of both Castanopsis argentea and Michelia montana species. Their contribution is discussed from view points of
mineral cycling. The stable woody structures of Castanopsiss argentea and Michelia montana provide various habitats for microbes, animals, and their slow
decay rates contribute to conservative mineral cycling due to continuous breaking of solid physicochemical properties Seastedt and Crossley, 1984. These
pathways combine to introduce increased amounts of carbon, nitrogen, and phosphorus into the soil community and promote rainfallinfiltration into the soil
and reduces overland flow velocities, thus diminishing the soil erosion potentialRegüés and Torri, 2002. However, contribution of these three major
categories of inputs from the canopy occurs with differences among tree species, and even among canopy layers Heatwole et al. 1997. Michelia montana with
upward sloping branches and dense foliage is likely to release more litterfall than Castanopsis argentea.
V. CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION
5.1 Conclusion
Based on the results mentioned above,significant positive correlations were found between soil conservation parameters and tree architecture Stone and Petit
models. The relative correlation of each variable demonstrated that throughfall and runoff are far more important than rainfall and stemflow for explaining the
variation in soil erosion. Stemflow for Castanopsis argentea 4.73 mm was slightly smaller than
stemflow for Michelia montana 6.20 mm. The values of throughfall indicate 657.82 and 640.91 mm for Castanopsis argentea and Michelia montana
respectively. Runoffmeasuredwas
49.32, 15.74
and 10.87
mmfor theControl,Castanopsis argentea andMichelia montana,respectively. Soil loss was
quantified in 1.98, 0.82 and 0.76 ton ha
-1
year
-1
for the Control, Castanopsis argentea and Michelia montanarespectively. The Infiltration rate is observed to be
higher with Michelia montanacompared to Castanopsis argentea. These results show that Michelia montana is better than Castanopsis argentea to be developed
in soil and water conservation.
5.2 Suggestion
Wesuggest that more attention be directed to the position and form of individualtree architecturemodels in studies of soil erosion. Such information is
important because it providesa more precise picture on how or in what manner rainfallis received and distributed within an ecosystem.
REFERENCES
Ackerly DD, Bazzaz FA. 1995. Seedling crown orientation and interception of diffuse radiation in tropical forest gaps. Ecology 76:1134-1146.
Aththorick TA 2000. Pengaruh Arsitektur Pohon Model Massart dan Rauh Terhadap Aliran Batang. Curahan Tajuk. Aliran Permukaan dan Erosi di Hutan
Pendidikan Gunung Walat Sukabumi.[Disertasi]. Bogor: Program Pasca Sarjana IPB.
Bautista S, Mayor AG, Bourakhouadar J, Bellot J. 2007. Plant spatial pattern predicts hillslope runoff and erosion in a semiarid Mediterranean landscape.
Ecosystems 10:987-998. Bhatt R, Khera KL. 2006. Effect of tillage and mode of straw mulch application
on soil erosion in the submontaneous tract of Punjab, India. Soil Till. Res. 881- 2:107-115.
Blanco H, Lal R. 2008. Principles of Soil Conservation and Management. USA: Springer.
Bruijnzeel LA. 2004. Hydrological functions of tropical forests: not seeing the soil for the trees? Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 104:185-228.
Bruijnzeel LA. 2004. Hdrological functions of tropical forests: not seeing the soil for the trees?Agr Eco Env 104:185-228.
Bongers F, Sterck FJ. 1998. Architectureand development of rainforest trees: responsesto lightin dynamics oftropical communities. Blackwell Science 125-
162. Chazdon RL. 1985. Leaf display, canopy structure and light interceptionof two
understory palm species. Am JBotany 72:1493-1502. Chen L, Huang Z, Gong J, Fu B, Huang Y. 2007. The effect of land
covervegetation on soil water dynamic in the hilly area of the loess plateau, China. Catena 70:200-208.
De Baets S, Poensen J, Knapen A, Barbera GG, Navaro JA. 2007. Root characteristics of representative Mediterranean plant species and their erosion-
reducing potential during concentrated runoff. PlantSoil 294:169-183. Duran-Zuazo VH. 2004. Impact of vegetation cover on runoff and soil erosion at
hillslope scale in lanjaron. Spain. Env 24:39-48. Durian ZVH, Francia MJR, Rodriguez CRP, Martinez RA, Carceles BR. 2006.
Soil-erosion and runoff prevention by plant covers in a mountainous area SE Spain: implications for sustainable agriculture. Environmentalist.26:309-319.
Francia JR, Duran ZVH, Martinez RA. 2006. Environmental impact from mountainous olive orchards under different soil-management systems. Sci.
Total Environ. 358:46-60. [FAO] Food and Agriculture Organization. 2010.The Global Forest Resources
Assessment
.
FAO Forestry Paper 163.Rome, Italy: FAO.
Fisher JB. 1986. Branching patterns and angles in trees. In: Givnish TJ. ed. On the economy of plant form and function. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,
493-523. Fisher JB, Hibbs DE. 1982. Plasticity of tree architecture : specific and ecological
variations found in Aubreville‟s model. American Journal of Botany. 69: 690- 702.
Gerten D, Schaphoff S, Haberlandt U, Lucht W, Sitch S. 2004. Terrestrial vegetation and water balance-hydrological evaluation of a dynamic global
vegetation model. Journal of hydrology. 286:249-270. Halle´ F. 1986. Modular growth in seed plants.Philosophical Transactions of the
Royal Societyof London 313:77-87. Halle´F, Oldeman RAA, Tomlinson PB.1978. Tropical trees and forests: an
architectural analysis. Berlin: Springer-Verlag. Heatwole H, Lowman MD, Donovan C. 1997. Phenology of leaf-flushing and
macroarthropod abundances in canopies of Eucalyptus saplings. Selbyana 18: 200-214.
Herwitz SR. 1986. Infiltration-excess caused by stemflow in a cylone-prone tropical rainforest. EarthSurface Processes and Landforms 11:401
–412. Heyne K. 1987. Tumbuhan berguna Indonesia II.Badan Penelitian Pengembangan
Kehutanan. [ICHE] International Conference on Hydroscience and Engineering.Sep10-13,
2000. Philadelphia, USA. Iskandar. 2003. Teknik budidaya Cempaka sebagai usaha Peningkatan Pendapatan
Masyarakat. Tekno DAS. Balai Penelitiandan Pengembangan Teknologi Pengelolaan DAS Indonesia Bagian timur.Makasar.
Jollife IT. 1986. Principal Component Analysis. New York: Springer-Verlag. KellerR. 1994. Neglected vegetative charactersin field identfication at the
supraspecific levelin woody plants: phyllotaxy, serial buds, syllepsisand architecture. Botanical J Linnean Society 116:33-51.
KimminsJP. 1997. Forest Ecology. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall. Kusumandari A, Mitchell B. 1997. Soil erosion and sediment yield forest and
agroforestry areas in West Java, Indonesia. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation 376:52-5.
Martawijaya A, Kartasudjana I, Mandang YI, Prawira SA. 1989. Atlas Kayu Indonesia. Badan Litbang Kehutanan Departemen Kehutanan.
Martinez RA, Durian ZVH, Francia JR. 2006. Soil erosion and runoff response to plant-cover strips on semi-arid slopes SE Spain. Land Degrad. Dev. 171:1-
11. McJannet D, Wallace J, Reddell P. 2007. Precipitation interception in Australian
tropical rainforests: Measurement of stemflow, throughfall and cloud interception. Hydrological Processes 21:1692-1702.
Mueller-Dombois D, Ellenberg H. 1974. Aims and Methods of Vegetation Ecology. New York: J Wiley.
NavarJ, Carlyle-Moses D, Martinez MA. 1999. Interception loss from the Tamaulipan Matorral Thornscrub of north-eastern Mexico: an application of
the gash analytical interception loss model. JArid Env41:1-10. Oldeman SD, Stott DE,
O‟Neil MK. 2003. Soil erosion prediction using RUSLE for central kenyan highland conditions. Agr. Ecosyt Env 97:295-308.
Oyen LPA, Xuan D. 1999.Plant Respource of South East Asian. No.19. Essensial oil Plants. PROSEA, Bogor.
Parker GG. 1983. Throughfall and stemflow in the forest nutrient cycle. New York: Academic Press.
Pearcy RW, Yang W. 1996. A three-dimensional crown architecture model for assessment of light capture and carbon gain byunderstory plants. Oecologia
108: 1-12. Pet E. 1964. Rubiaceae Africanae XIII. Le mode de ramification chez certaines
Rubiacees et sa signification pour la systematique. Bull. Jard.Botan. Etat Bruxelles 34 : 527-535.
Pimentel D. 2006. Soil erosion: A food and environmental threat. Env Develop Sust 8:119-137.
Regües D, Torri D. 2002. Rainfall kinetics energy effect on physical properties dynamics
and crusting
of a
clayey bare
soil. Cuaternario
y Geomorfología16:57-71.
Robinson DF. 1996. A symbolic framework forthe description of tree architecture models. Botanical Journal of the Linnean Society 121:243
–61. Room PM, Maillette I, Hannan JS. 1994. Module and metamer dynamics and
virtual plants. Advances on ecological research 25: 105-157. Schmidt FH, Ferguson JHA.1951. Tipe Curah Hujan berdasarkan Periode Kering
dan Basah. Jawatan meteorologi dan geofisika, penerjemah, Jakarta: Badan Meteorologi. Terjemahan dari: Rainfall Type Base on Wet and Dry Period
Ratios for Indonesian and Western New Guinea.
Seastedt TR, CrossleyDA.1984. The influence of arthropods on ecosystems. Bioscience 34:157-161.
Stone BC. 1970. Morphological studies in pandanaceae. The „„coniferoid‟‟ habit in pandanus.Sect. Acanthostyla. Bull.Torrey. Botan. Club 97: 144-149.
Swank WT, Waide JB, Crossley DA, Todd RL. 1981. Insect defoliation enhances nitrate export from forest ecosystems. Oecologia 51:297-299.
Vásquez-Méndez R, Ventura-Ramos E, Oleschko K.
2010.
Soil erosion and runoff in different vegetation patches from semiarid Central Mexico. Catena
80:162-169.
Windsor DM. 1990. Climate and Moisture Variability in a Tropical Forest: Long- term Records from Barro Colorado Island, Panama. Washington: Smithsonian
Institution Press. Xu X, Ma K, Fu B, Song C. 2008. Influence of three plant species with different
morphologies on water runoff and soil loss in a dry-warm river valley, SW China. Forest Eco Manag 256:656-663.
Zuazo VHD et al. 2009. Soil conservation measures in rainfed olive orchards in south-eastern Spain:Impacts of plant strips on soil water dynamics. Pedosphere
194:453-464.
APPENDIX
