Turkish Journal of Agriculture and Forestry (TURK J AGRIC FOR)

Publisher: Türkiye Bilimsel ve Teknik Araştırma Kurumu

Journal description

Turkish Journal of Agriculture and Forestry Sciences is published 6 times a year.

Current impact factor: 0.93

Impact Factor Rankings

2015 Impact Factor Available summer 2016
2014 Impact Factor 0.929
2013 Impact Factor 0.914
2012 Impact Factor 0.731
2011 Impact Factor 0.703
2010 Impact Factor 0.675
2009 Impact Factor 0.648
2008 Impact Factor 0.479
2007 Impact Factor 0.422

Impact factor over time

Impact factor

Additional details

5-year impact 0.98
Cited half-life 6.90
Immediacy index 0.24
Eigenfactor 0.00
Article influence 0.21
Website Turkish Journal of Agriculture and Forestry website
Other titles Turkish journal of agriculture and forestry (Online), Turkish journal of agriculture and forestry, Turkish journal of agriculture and forestry, Türk tarım ve ormancılık dergisi
ISSN 1300-011X
OCLC 56728983
Material type Document, Periodical, Internet resource
Document type Internet Resource, Computer File, Journal / Magazine / Newspaper

Publications in this journal

  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The thinning of stream buffer zones (SBZs) is gaining popularity as a silvicultural management practice in order to reduce the risk of wildfire and insect hazard, provide economic return, and improve the effectiveness of SBZs. In this study, streamflow over a 1-year period was monitored at 2 small paired watersheds (treated vs. reference). The short-term impacts of a partial cutting within a SBZ as well as the relative effects of pastoral, forested, and clearcut areas on changes in downstream hydrology were examined. Upstream pastoral areas had a higher water yield than downstream forested sections during the no-harvest (calibration) period of 6 months. The partial cut (about 50% of the basal area) within the SBZ changed the hydrologic pattern by remarkably increasing the water yield on the treated downstream sections during the 6-month-long postharvest period. The harvest operation also caused an increase in direct runoff at 2 downstream sections, WT2 and WT3 (~200% and ~100%, respectively). No significant changes were observed in the water yield pattern of the control watershed. Because harvested areas within the SBZs constitute a fraction of the monitored sub-watersheds and only partial harvesting (~50% of the basal area) was implemented, the observed increase in flow at the treated downstream sections (100% and 250%, respectively) is unprecedented. The partial harvesting within the SBZs also resulted in a significantly flashier hydrological system. Because silvicultural treatments are part of regular, repeated management operations, these short term (in this study, 6-month-long) but substantial changes in water yield, direct runoff, and flashiness could have important implications for water quality, water resources, and downstream biota.
    Turkish Journal of Agriculture and Forestry 08/2015; 39(5):764-774. DOI:10.3906/tar-1408-115