JOURNAL OF THE SCIENTIFIC AGRICULTURAL SOCIETY OF FINLAND 221 Maataloustieteellinen A ikakauskirja Vol. 49: 221-238, 1977 Yield, vegetation and succession in reserved fields in Central Finland Heikki Hokkanen and Mikko Raatikainen University of Jyväskylä, Department of Biology Vapaudenkatu 4, 40100 Jyväskylä 10 Finland Abstract. 51 reserved fields were studied with the harvest method in Central Finland in 1974. 107 vascular plant taxa were identified, having a total oven-dry green biomass of 273.5 g/m 2 on the average, and a total mean biomass of 1458.1 g/m2 . The amount of the above-ground biomass stays about the same at least for three years after 23 years of increase, whereas the underground biomass increases strongly at least during the first six years, if succession starts after open cultivation. The general tendency in succession at the species level is for the typical weed species of open cultivations to reduce in a few years, and for the species of meadow vegetation to increase both in frequency and abundance. Five vegetation types were distinguished: I) Galeopsis-type, 2) Phleum-type, 3) Anthoxanthum-type, 4) Deschampsia-type, and 5) Elytrigia-type. They can all be placed into a certain succession scheme that is mainly determined by the age, soil and moisture conditions of the reserved field. 1. Introduction Based on the Field Reservation Act (216/1969), about 8 % of the cultivated area in Finland had been reserved by the end of 1974 (Anon. 1975). Research on the productivity, care and effect on the environments of the reserved fields was started in the University of Jyväskylä in 1973. Two papers have already been published on this subject (Törmäläl and Hokkanen 1976, Törmälä and Raatikainen 1976). The purpose of this study is to identify the species composition, yield, vegetation types, and succession of vegetation in reserved fields. The yield and flora of grasslands for hay (= leys) has been thoroughly studied in Finland (e.g. Paatela 1953 a and 1953b, Raatikainen and Raa- tikainen 1975), and numerous works on the flora and vegetation of different types of meadows have been published (e.g. Linkola 1916, 1921, Teräsvuori 1920, Kalela 1939 and Kosonen 1969). Mukula et ai. (1969) have published an extensive study on the weed flora of cereal fields in Finland. Comparable studies on abandoned fields have been made in the USA, by e.g. Golley (1960, 1965), Wiegert and Evans (1964) and Mellinger and McNaughton (1975). https://www.c-info.fi/en/info/?token=mc7DZkbPYLriCWOB.ILl1LKZQ8y5_WvCZnS71yA.UWstJmFoJfoiWC-JK9FDDDPtt4qRNNhE5LwsEWGBzesjdA8Pc6g6v0VkkuZA9jfQoyi5NlSuu1DUL2UbMOq9i-lRMR4MqQrPAL8fGP_PdMkHtEVI5AAD9QB-hWOcpr_GWZXsTCqjHK1_PAq4J5otQoCAu_6SF7wW-D4AYSsKvrxgyYMVX5Nz50Zbi7-Uu7AVG6HIU5IRh-IU-YtZrNDbQmOhhQe-12-0N-Vv7CWNvv_rUv4Hg5SUmQ 222 2. Material and methods 2. 1. Study area The study area consisted of the following communes: Jyväskylä, the rural commune of Jyväskylä, Petäjävesi and Uurainen (about 62° N and 25° E) in Central Finland. 20 reserved farms were selected at random, and from each 2—3 homogenous fields again at random. Thus 51 fields were obtained, which were reserved as follows: 13 in 1969 (= 6th year fields), 5 in 1970, 6 in 1971, 11 in 1972, 10 in 1973 and 6 in 1974 (= Ist year fields). 23 fields had last been on hay or pasture, 10 on oat, 7 on barley, and on wheat, rye, carrot, potato and cabbage 1 each; 6 had been on unknown open cultivation. The moisture of the fields varied so that 16 were classified as dry, 27 as intermediate, and 8 as moist. 35 fields were situated on moraine or sand soils, 7 on silt or clay soils, and 6 on organic soils. 5 fields had been forested, 2 with pine, 2 with birch and 1 with spruce. Herbicides had been used only on one forested field. The reserved fields were often surrounded by forest. The area of clearing, on which the fields were located, was over 50 ha in 3 cases, 10—5O ha in 1 case, s—lo ha in 8 cases, 3 5 ha in 11, I—3 ha in 19 and less than 1 ha in 9 cases. 2. 2. Sampling Samples were taken according to the instructions by Milner and Hughes (1968). From each field 4 points were chosen at random, and from each point a circular sample of 0.25 m 2 was clipped at ground level. The samples were deep-frozen and sorted later by hand. Green parts of the vegetation were sorted according to species, except for mosses (into one group) and Agrostis, Alchemilla and Taraxacum (into genus). About 95 % or more of the Agrostis were A. tenuis. Other species were A. canina, A. stolonifera, A. gigantea and Agrostis hybrids. Above-ground dead plant material (= detritus) was also treated as one group. The samples were air-dried and weighed, and the water content was determined by keeping subsamples at 85° C for two days. The mean water contents of the monocotyledons, dicotyledons and detritus were 5.6% (S. E. 0.1), 7.4% (S. E. 0.1) and 7.0% (S. E. 0.1). The difference between the mono- and dicotyledons was highly significant (t = 13.88***). All given biomass values have been corrected to correspond to oven-dried values. Underground parts of the vegetation were sampled by a soil auger with an area of 150 cm 2 to 20 cm depth, from the midpoints of the clip-plots after clipping. According to Linkola and Tiirikka (1936), more than 90 % of the underground biomass can be expected to be included in the samples. The underground parts of the vegetation were separated from the soil by a sieve set (mesh sizes 10.0, 5.0 and 2.5 mm) and a water jet. The samples were air-dried and weighed, the ash content was determined by keeping the subsamples in a 550° C oven for three days. The mean water content of the samples was 3.3 % (S.E. 0.1) and the ash content 6.7 % (S.E. 0.8). The underground biomasses are expressed in oven-dried weights g/m2 . A total of 184 vegetation samples were cut, equalling 46 m 2. From 5 fields samples could not be taken as they had been mowed earlier. Underground 223 biomasses were sampled also from them so that in all 204 underground samples were taken, equalling 3.06 m 2. The samples were taken on 16—24 July, 1974. According to Törmälä and Raatikainen (1976), the vegetation has by that time already reached its maximum biomass, and no great changes take place for several weeks. The nomenclature of the vascular plants is given according to Lid (1974), and of the mosses according to Nyholm (1954). The following names, however, have been used in sensu lato: Chenopodium album, Chrysanthemum leucant- hemum, Poa pratensis, Polygonum aviculare, Ranunculus acris, R. auricomus, Rumex acetosa, R. acetosella, and Matricaria inodora. 2. 3. Statistical calculations Following methods were used in the calculations 1) table (see Chapman 1976). 2 (ad bc) 2n (a + b) (c + d) (a + c) (b + d)’ wliere a = number of samples, where both species 1 and 2 occur b = » » » » 1 occurs but not 2 c = » » » » 2 occurs but not 1 d = » » » » neither species occur n = total number of samples The significance of the correlation is obtained from standard ficance tables with 1 degree of freedom. 2) Sprensen’s quotient of similarity OS = 100 X , where £(a + b) a = the amount of a species in sample 1 b = the amount of the same species in sample 2 c = the smaller of these two values (a and b) 3) Shannon-Weaver —index for species diversity H“ - 2 (ir) logl (v)' where nj = importance value for each species N = total of importance values The following symbols for the levels of significance are used in all the tests: p* < .05, p** < .01 and p*** < .001. 224 3. Results 3. 1. Species composition and yield Altogether 107 vascular plant taxa were identified from the samples. According to Table 1 the most abundant taxa were Phleum pratense, Agrostis spp., Elytrigia repens, Deschampsia caespitosa and Achillea millefolium, while the most frequent taxa were Agrostis spp., Phleum pratense, Achillea mille- folium, Poa pratensis and Ranunculus repens. The frequency value of 5 taxa exceeded 50 %, 14 taxa exceeded 20 % and 24 taxa 10 %. 14 taxa were present only in one sample. Mosses were identified in some random samples; the most abundant species were Rhytidiadelphus squarrosus and Polytrichum juniperinum, other identified species were Aulacomnium palustre, Pleurozium schreheri, Dicranum scoparium, Brachythecium praelongum, B. populeum and Sphagnum squarrosum. The mean green biomass was 273.5 g/m2 , of which monocotyledons formed 195.5 g/m2 , dicotyledons 77.9 g/m2 , and mosses 0.1 g/m2 . Detritus amounted on the average to 130.3 g/m2 , bringing the total above ground plant material to 403.8 g/m2 . The underground biomass, however, was more than twice that of the above-ground, being 1054.3 g/m2. Thus the total plant material/m 2 was on the average 1458.1 g. The total biomass of the most important weed species all those listed by Mukula (1964) and Raatikainen et ai. (1971) averaged 104.2 g/m2 , and that of the cultivated species (Phleum pratense, Trifolium pratense, T. repens, Fesluca pratensis and Lolium spp. (cf. Raati- kainen and Raatikainen 1975) 89.6 g/m2 . 3. 2. Succession and the effect of environmental factors The effects of the age (as a reserved field) and the previous use of the fields are presented in Table 1 and Figures I—4. In many cases there is a clear difference in the occurrence of the taxa and biomasses according to whether succession has started from open (after open cultivation) or ley (after fields for hay or pastures) vegetation. After ley the total amount of green biomass stays the same or slightly decreases (after the 3rd year r = —0.452*) with time, whereas after open cultivation it first strongly increases, exceeding clearly the yield from fields after ley on the 2nd and 3rd year (t = 2.31*). After this maximum the green biomasses decrease and reach about the same level as in the fields after ley (Fig. la). Fig. lb shows that the described maximum is parctically totally due to the biomass increase in the monocotyledons, since the green biomass of the dicotyledons stays the same or slightly decreases with time. Independently of the previous use, the amount of detritus strongly increases with time (Fig. Ic, r = 0.560***), being significantly greater after ley (r = 0.339*), however. Above-ground biomass reaches its maximum in a few years and then stays about the same in both cases (Fig. Id), whereas the underground biomasses grow clearly with time after open cultivations but not after ley (Fig. le, r = 0.507***). The proportion of monocotyledons of the green biomass remains about the same after ley, but after open cultivation it rises strongly from about 13 % Table 1. Green biomasses (g/m? ) of plant taxa in different classes. O = after open cultivations, I, = after leys, 1—6 = age classes, F % = frequency-% in the whole material, n = number of samples in each class. Oj 02 Og Og Og Og Lj I>g Lg Lg-g Lg AU F % fields Achillea millefolium 27.239.5 17.39.0 4.211.7 2.511.8 25.03.5 10.515.1 66 A. ptarmica 6.5 3.2 4 4 3.1 21.7 10.1 4.0 1.5 31.2 4.8 2.8 7.7 39 Agrostis spp 2.7 70.0 50.9 62.8 16.6 42.3 21.6 39.4 16.7 24.7 48.4 38.0 79 Alchemilla spp 0.0 9.4 14.9 0.9 0.6 0.2 24.2 2.1 4.4 19 Alopecurus geniculutus ______ 0.1 0.0 1 A. pratensis 2.5 0.1 0.2 1 Angelica sylvestris 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.4 1.5 0.0 0.2 6 Anthoxanthum odoratum 2.3 4.7 3.7 0.6 7.4 0.8 1.6 5 Anthriscus sylvestris 2.5 1.3 6.3 0.0 0.6 28 Barbarea vulgaris 0.5 _____ ___ 0.0 1 Betula pubescens _ _ 0.1 1.1 0.1 2 B. verrucosa _ 0.1 _ 0.0 1 Calamagrostis epigcios _____ __ 0.9 0.1 1 Calluna vulgaris _____0.2 _ _ 1.8 0.3 2 Campanula patula 0.1 3.4 1.5 —2. C 0.0 0.6 9 Capsella bursa-pastoris 0.1 ___ 0.0 1 Carex canescens 0.0 _ 5.1 0.0 0.0 0.6 3 C. echinata _ _ _ 0.0 0.2 8.0 _ 0.4 3 C. leporina _ _ _ 5.9 - 1.7 - - - 1.3 1.1 0.9 6 C. nigra 0.0 _ - 46.5 2.8 2.5 3 C. pallescens 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.5 - 0.6 0.1 6 Cerastium fontanum 0.0 1.0 0.2 0.4 0.2 0.3 0.1 2.5 0.2 0.3 0.2 0.6 25 Chamaenerion angustifolium .. 7.4 0,1 _ _ 0.8 0.8 3 Chenopodivm album 1.4 0.0 ___ 0.l 4 Chrysanthemum leucanthemum 0.0 _ _ _ _ _ 0.0 1.0 1 Cirsium arvense 8.9 0.5 13.2 0 7 C.O _ _ _ 2.0 3 C. heterophyllum _____ __ 0.l 0.0 1 C. paluslre 20.3 0.0 0.6 _ _ _ 1.9 2 Deschamsia caespitosa 2.1 36.2 14.9 0.8 27.6 20.9 0.3 51.0 13.5 30.6 18.2 31 Elytrigia repens 3.7 5.9 69.3 0.1 38.5 44.7 0.3 61.6 42.3 86.4 29.4 37.0 30 Epilobium palustre 0.3 _ _ _ _ 0.0 _ _ _ 0.0 1 Equisetum arvense 0.9 0.1 0.2 1.2 0.1 0.2 5 E. fluvialile _ _ _ 0.3 _ 0.0 1 E. palustre _ 0.3 2.3 0.1 0.1 5 E. sylvaticum 0.9 6.9 1.2 0.1 0.2 0.8 0.3 0.1 0.9 14 Erysimum cheiranthoides 0.4 1.6 0.0 0.0 _ _ _ 0.l 4 Festuca pratensis 0.1 0.7 _ _ _ 22.9 0.9 0.1 0.1 2.0 6 F. rubra 4.0 _ 14.8 7.9 19.1 6.5 1.8 8.7 13.4 7.9 7.5 37 Filipendula uimaria _ _ 0.2 1.0 _ _ 0.0 0.1 2 Puntaria officinalis 0.0 _____ ___ 0.0 1 Galeopsis bifida 0.1 0.1 0.8 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 1,6 - 0.2 14 G. speciosa 16.7 1.8 5.1 0.0 0.0 0.1 - 5.0 0.1 2.5 12 Galium palustre 0.1 _ _ _ _ 0.2 _ _ _ 0.0 3 G. uliginosum 0.1 0.1 0.3 0.1 0.6 0.0 0.4 0.1 7 G. vaillantii 0.2 _____ ___ 0.0 1 Geranium sylvaticum _ _ _ _ 0.2 _ _ _ 0.l 2.0 0.3 2 Ceum rivals _ 0.2 0.0 4.6 0.7 3 Gnaphalium sylvaticum _ _ _ _ 0.5 _ _ _ 0.0 1 G. uliginosum 0.1 _____ 0.2 0.0 1 Hieracium pilosella _ _ _ 0.5 0.1 0.0 1 H. umbellatum _ _ _ 3.6 _ 0.4 0.0 1.0 0.5 4 H. vulgatum _ 0.6 0.2 1.2 C. 2 0.1 0.1 0.2 4 Hypericum maculatum _ _ _ i.g 0.9 0.0 1.5 0.3 4 Juncus filiformis _ _ 3.3 _ 5.0 5.8 1.1 1.1 3 Juniperus communis _ _ _ _ 0.0 _ 0.0 1 Knautia arvensis _ _ _ _ 7,0 _ _ _ _ _ _ 0.6 1 I. communis 5.9 ___ ___ c. 5 4 Lathyrus pratensis 0.8 0.8 6.0 0.3 0.2 2.2 5.8 1.8 9 225 Oj Og Og 04 Og Oe I 1 Lg Lg Lg-g I(; Ali F °/t fields Leontodon autumnalis 0.32.7 2.80.3 0.0 3.21.6 0.40.2 1.0 18 Linaria vulgaris 3.2 0.1 1 Lolium perenna 5.0 12.1 1.9 4 Luzula multiflora 0.10.0 0.0 0.2 0.2 0.1 4 L. pallescens - 0.00.0 - 0.0 - 0.00.1 0.10. 1 0.0 4 Matricaria inodora 17.70.4 1.40.0 1.6 5 Myosotis arvensis 0.9 0.0 0.1 2 Phleum ptatense 1.3102.5 176.7108.2 58.223.9 90.699.4 107.429.8 60.877.8 73 Pinus sylvestris 0.0 0.0 1 Plantago major 0.7 0.10.3 0.1 0.1 6 Poa annua 0.0 0.0 1 P. pratensis 1.510.0 1.812.2 2.213.6 5.68.1 4.229.7 12.19.6 61 P. trivialis 0.31.6 0,6 0.2 3 Polygonum aviculare 0.1 0.0 0.0 2 P. convolvulus 0.0 0.0 0.0 1 P. lapathifolium 0.2 ■— 0.0 .1 P. viviparum 0.0 C.O 0.1 0.00.0 2 Patentilla erecta 0.8 0.3 0.7 0.2 4 P. norvegica 0.1 1.6 0.20.1 4 Prunella vulgaris 0.00.5 0.30.5 0.1 C.O 0.0 0 2 0.2 9 Ranunculus acris 0 0 1.12.4 4.20.3 1.70.6 0.88.7 1.30.6 1.2 20 R. auricomus 0.00.2 0.0 1 R. repens 6.55.8 23.03.2 2.51.2 0.95.3 2.00.9 1.4 4,8 53 Rhinanthus minor 0.5 0.1 0.1 4 Rumex acetosa 0.0 0.70.0 0.10.0 1.10.3 0.50.1 0.3 13 R. acetosella - 0.17.4 2.10.2 1.6 - 0.12.3 0.00.3 1.2 17 Rubus arcticus 0.5 0,1 2 R. saxatilis 0.1 _____ ___ 0.0 1 Silene vulgaris 3.0 0.4 1 Sonchus arvensis 13.7 4.5 0.06.1 0.5 1.9 9 Spergula arvensis 1.9 _____ ___ 0.2 4 Stellaria graminea 0.10.1 0.6 0.5 0.10.1 3 S. media 1.3 0.1 0.0 0.1 4 Trifolium pralense 0.715.7 0.525.0 9.20.1 0.83.9 15 T. repens 1.717.4 2.80.0 1.714.8 2.82.3 0.30.0 1.74.0 29 T. spadiceum _ 0.0 _ _ 0.0 1 Taraxacum spp 0.41.8 0.621.0 23.98.9 0.93.1 1.65.2 8.66.7 43 Tussilago farfara 8.30.1 ___„ ___ 0.7 2 Vaccinium myrtillus _ _ _ _ 0.1 0.0 1 Veronica chamaedrys _ 1.52.5 1.4 3.70.2 0.7 6 V. officinalis 0.1 _ _ 0.20.1 0.10.0 4 V. serpyllifolia 0.70.1 _ 0.10.1 0.80.2 0.20.1 0.80.1 0.3 17 Vicia cracca 0.0 5.52.3 2.81.0 1.20.6 2.07.2 5.92.8 19 V. hirsuta 0.1 0.0 1 V. sepium 2.1 0.31.1 0,3 4 Viola arvensis 0.3 0.0 0.10.0 0.0 0.10.0 6 V. canina 0.1 _____ 0.0 1 V. palustris _ 0.0 1.60.3 0.1 0.10.1 7 V. riviniana 0.5 0.0 0.00.3 0.1 3 Musci _ 0.0 0.30.6 1.30.7 0.6 _ 0.01.9 0.6 17 Lichenes _ _ _ _ 0.0 _ 0.0 1 n 16 16 15 16 11 16 8 24 16 16 28 182 226 227 in the Ist year to about 60 —7O % in the following years (Fig. 2). Fig. 3 shows that the proportion of cultivated plant species decreases steadily in the first few years after ley, levelling to about 20 % of the total green biomass. After open cultivation the proportion first rises, reaches the maximum during the 2nd, 3rd and 4th years, and then drops to some 20 %. The amount of weeds is about the same through the years, but significant changes take place within the group after the first year following open cultiva- tion. In the first year the proportion of annual weeds is 60 % of the green weed biomass, it then drops rapidly and stays at about 5 % for some two years levelling to about I—2 % later. After ley the proportion of annual weeds is about 5 % of the weed biomass during the first year, decreasing to I—2 % in the 2nd and the following years. Figure 1. Plant biomasses according to age (lst—6th year reserved fields) and previous use of fields (y =after open cultivations, • = after leys), a) green biomasses b) green biomasses of the monocotyledons (M) and dicotyledons (D) c) detritus d) total above-ground plant mass and e) underground plant mass. A significant decrease with years in the biomass was observed e.g. in the following species: Spergula arvensis, Matricaria inodora, Chenopodium album, Festuca pratensis, Sonchus arvensis, amd Galium uliginosum. Significant in- creases appeared e.g. in the biomasses of Taraxacum spp., Anthoxanthum odoratum, Festuca rubra, Poa pratensis, Carex leporina, Calluna vulgaris, and Campanula patula (Table 1). Fig. 4 shows the values of species diversity indices according to year-classes and previous use, calculated from the green biomasses for each field. Diversity seems to increase with years both after ley and open cultivation, but only in the latter case is the increase significant (r = 0.447*). The effect of previous use on the abundance of species was most marked in the first growing season when significant differences occurred in the abun- dance of Agrostis spp., Trifolium pratense, Festuca rubra, Phleum pratense, Deschampsia caespitosa and Poa pratensis. They were all more abundant after ley. During the strong biomass-maximum (2nd and 3rd years), Ranunculus repens, Galeopsis bifida, G. speciosa and Cerastium fontanum showed a signi- ficantly greater abundance after open cultivations than after leys, subse- quently (4th—6th year fields) only the abundance of Taraxacum spp. was significantly dependent on previous use; it was more abundant after open cultivations. Moisture conditions determined to a significant degree the abundance of many species: Angelica sylvestris, Deschampsia caespitosa, Carex nigra, Galium uliginosum, Equiselum palustre and Patentilla norvegica occurred most abun- dantly on moist fields, whereas Taraxacum spp., Alchemilla spp., Anthoxanthum odoratum, Calluna vulgaris and Hypericum maculatum occurred on the drier fields. The coarseness and humus content of the soil also had a significant effect on the abundance of some species. Angelica sylvestris occurred most abun- Figure 2. Proportion of the monocotyledons of green plant biomass according to age and previous use of the fields. Other data in Fig. 1. Figure 3. Proportion of cul- tivated species of green plant biomass according to age and previous use of the fields. Other data in Fig. 1. Figure 4. Species diversity as a function of age and previous use of the fields. Other data in Fig. 1. 228 229 dantly on coarse mineral soil, Rumex acetosa, Agrostis spp., Geum rivale, and Geranium sylvaticum on fine mineral soil, and Carex nigra, Equisetum paluslre, Deschampsia caespitosa, Juncus filiformis, Carex echinata, Patentilla norvegica, Poa pratensis, and Galium uliginosum occurred most abundantly on peat soils. 3.3. Interspecies relations and vegetation types The table method and the Sprensen’s quotient of similarity method using the green biomasses of each species were used to detect patterns in vegetation. Five different community types were recognized (Figs. 5 and 6); 1) Galeopsis sfieciosa-type (Table 2, Figs. 5 and 6). The characteristic species are Galeopsis speciosa, Sonchus arvensis, Spergula arvensis, Stellaria media, Matricaria inodora, etc. The type is heterogenous (see Fig. 6) and it is possibly divisible into two or more subtypes, e.g. according to the dominance Figure 5. between species. Straight lines: heavy =p <0.001, narrow =p <0.01, dotted =p < 0.05. Curved lines show the boundaries of vegetation types. 1) Galeopsis-type 2) Anthoxanthum-type 3) Deschampsia- type 4) Phleum-type 5) Elytrigia- type. 230 of various species, at present the available data is not sufficient, however. The type is fairly species-poor and the biomass is small. The proportion of dicotyledons was the highest of the described types. Stands of this type occur usually on mineral and sometimes organic soils after open cultivation. 2) Anlhoxanthum odoralum-typo (Table 2, Figs. 5 and 6). The characteristic species are Agrostis tenuis, Achillea millefolium, Taraxacum spp., Anlhoxanthum odoratum and Festuca rubra. This is a fairly species-rich type of mainly older and drier fields than the average, mainly on coarse mineral soils, which have Figure 6. Similarity between sample areas according to Sorensen's quotient of similarity ((,'S), and the representative areas in each vegetation type distinguished with this method. 231 Table 2. The constancy and biomass of species in community types. C = 0.25 m 2 sample areas, B = green biomass g/m2 . constancy-% in Galeopsis A ruhoxanthum Deschampsia Phleum Ely trigt a -type -type "type ‘type -type C% B C% B C % B C % B C% B Galeopsis speciosa 50 16.6 5 0.1 5 0.5 13 0.9 15 2.9 Sonchus arvensis 5C 13.8 5 0.0 13 3.8 7 0.3 Spergula arvensis 50 1.9 _ Stellaria media 50 1.4 2 0.0 4 0.0 Matricaria inodora 38 11.5 6 0.6 Chenopodium album 38 1.4 Lapsana communis 31 5.9 6 0.1 Veronica serpyllifolia . 31 0,7 11 0.3 15 0.1 13 0.1 19 0.4 Viola arvensis 25 0 3 7 0.1 5 0.1 3 0.0 4 0.0 I.eontodon autumnalis 25 0.3 14 0.3 20 1.0 16 1.0 7 0.2 Galeopsis bifida 25 0.2 5 0.0 22 0.1 19 1.0 Erysimum cheiranthoidcs 19 0.4 6 0.0 4 0.0 Polygonum aviculare 19 0.3 ___ __ __ _ Galium uliginosum 19 0.1 2 0.0 5 O.C 6 0.1 Cirsium arvense 13 8.9 2 0.2 3 0.0 Myosotis arvensis 13 0.9 _ Equisetum arvense 13 0.9 7 0.4 5 0.1 7 0.2 Galium vaillantii 13 0.2 Galium palustre 13 0,1 3 0.0 -- Fumana officinalis 13 0.0 ___ __ _ Gnaphalium uliginosum 6 0.1 2 0.1 Capsella bursa-pastoris 6 0.1 ___ __ __ _ Polygonum viviparum 6 0.0 2 0.0 _ Polygonum convolvulus 6 0.0 3 0.0 Chrysanthemum leucanthemum 6 0.0 3 0.0 Agrostis spp 19 2.7 98 56.3 75 52.3 78 20.8 59 4.7 Achillea millefolium 25 27.4 95 24 5 75 11.3 63 14.4 41 2.7 Taraxacum spp 13 0.4 70 12.0 35 2.9 47 10.9 56 7.3 Anthoxanthum odoratum 66 4.9 20 0.1 16 0.4 26 1.6 Festuca rubra 57 18.6 65 7.3 13 1.1 37 7.6 Ranunculus acris 6 0.0 34 2.6 25 0.9 6 0.3 19 0.5 Alchemilla spp 32 8.9 10 1 1 16 1.9 19 0.4 Musci - - 32 0.8 20 2.1 6 0.1 4 0.0 Rumex acetosella 23 1.0 20 1.8 13 0.3 11 0.3 Lathyrus pralensis 16 4.7 10 4.5 13 0.8 Anthriscus sylveslris 16 1.2 3 1.6 4 3.1 Rhinanthus minor 16 0.2 _ Vida sepium 14 1.2 3 0.2 Veronica chamaedtys 14 0.8 6 1.1 Carex pallescens 14 0.3 Prunella vulgaris 6 0.0 14 0.2 10 0.6 6 0.1 4 C.C Hieracium umbellatum 11 1.4 5 0.1 Calluna vulgaris 9 0.3 llypencum maculatum 7 0.8 3 0.0 Luzula pallescens 7 0.1 5 0.1 3 0.0 Einaria vulgaris 5 0.6 _ Knautia arvensis 2 1.9 Hieracium pilosella 2 0.2 Alopecurus geniculatus 2 0.0 Deschampsia caespitosa 25 2,1 16 4.7 90 120.0 25 0.5 4 3.5 Poa pralensis 31 1.5 75 14.0 75 14.2 59 7.5 67 16.6 Achillea ptarmica 25 6.5 45 6.8 65 10.1 25 7.8 22 7.8 Ranunculus repens 44 6.6 57 2.9 65 1.8 53 4.6 26 0.5 Viola palustris 2 0.0 35 0.7 Vida cracca 6 0.0 27 2.7 30 14.2 22 4.1 19 0.7 Trifolium repens 31 1.7 25 2.9 30 2.4 31 1.8 15 0.8 Angelica sylvestris 5 0.0 25 1.3 7 0.2 funcus filiformis 2 1.2 20 5.5 Patentilla norvegica 20 0.4 Carex canescens 6 0.0 15 4.0 3 0.0 Equisetum palustre 13 0.3 15 0.4 Galeopsis Anthoxanthum Deschatnpsia Phleum Elytrigia -type ‘type “type -type -type 0% BC % B C% B C % B C% B Carex leporina 14 2.6 15 2.5 Gem rivale 2 2.3 10 1.4 Carex nigra 10 3.9 Geranium sylvaiicum 2 1.0 10 0.7 4 0.1 Equiselum fluviatiie 10 0.3 Luzula muliiflora 2 0.0 10 0.1 6 0.0 Carex echinata 2 0.0 5 0.1 Cirsium heterophyllum 2 0.0 5 0.1 Filipendula uimaria 2 0.1 5 0.1 Cirsium paluslre 5 0.0 Epilobium paluslre 5 0.0 Ranunculus auricomus 5 0.0 Phleum pratense 19 1.3 80 50.2 90 46.0 97 210.8 59 46.8 Trifolium pratense 19 0.7 14 0.7 5 0.1 34 20.1 -- Equiselum sylvaticum 11 0.1 31 4.1 19 0.8 Cerastium fontanum 1? 0.0 25 0.3 30 0.3 28 0.3 11 0.3 Festuca pratensis 6 0.1 10 0.0 13 5.6 Chamaenerion angustifolium . 5 0.5 13 3.7 Hieracium vulgatum 5 0.4 5 0.0 9 0.4 Flantago major 9 0.1 9 0.1 Poa trivialis 6 0.4 Veronica officinalis 6 0.1 Alopecurus pratensis 3 1.2 4 0.1 Silsne vulgaris 3 1.1 Barbarea vulgaris 3 0.2 Rubus saxatilis 3 0.0 PotentiAa erecta 2 0.1 3 0.0 Vicia hirsuta 3 0.0 Viola canina 3 0.0 Elytrigia repens 19 3.7 30 9.3 5 0.5 6 0.3 93 171.8 Rumex acetosa 18 0.3 10 0.1 3 0.0 22 0.7 Campanula patula 14 0.9 15 0.1 19 1.0 Stellana graminea 6 0.1 2 0.0 4 0.3 Viola riviniana 2 0.2 4 0.0 Total green biomass g/m2 .... 121.8 249.8 316.0 335.2 282.5 Green biomass g/m 2 , monocotyledons 11.4 160.9 256.6 248.7 252.7 Green biomass g/m 2 , dicotyledons 110.4 88.9 59.4 86.5 29.8 Number of vascular plant taxa/m2 18.8 22.2 22.8 18.7 15.2 Number of sample areas 4 11 5 8 7 Number of samples 16 44 20 32 28 232 233 most often been reserved after open cultivation. The proportion of dicotyledons was high. 36 % of the green biomass. 3) Deschampsia caespitosa- type (Table 2, Figs. 5 and 6). The characteristic species are e.g. Deschampsia caespitosa, Achillea ptarmica, Viola palustris, and Juncus filiformis. This is a species-rich type, growing on clearly moister and older fields than the average, most often on organic soils. The total green bio- mass in this type exceeds clearly that of the previous types, owing entirely to the greater biomass of the monocotyledons. 4) Phleum pratense-type (Table 2, Figs. 5 and 6). The characteristic species are Phleum pratense, Trifolium pratense, Equisetum sylvaticum, Festuca pratensis and Chamaenerion angustifolium. This is a fairly species-poor type with the greatest total green biomass, which is mainly due to Phleum pratense with 210.8 g/m2 . The amount of cultivated plants is 69 %of the total green bio- mass, which shows that this type occurs mainly on young fields that have most often been reserved after ley. 5) Elytrigia repens-type (Table 2, Figs. 5 and 6). Elytrigia repens is a clear monodominant in this type, forming 61 % of the total green biomass. This type is very poor in species, and dicotyledons form only 11 %of the total green biomass. It occurs on all kinds of fields, most often on those reserved after ley. These communities can all be ranged into a certain habitat or successional stage. Fig. 7 outlines the succession on reserved fields according to the previous use and moisture conditions of the field. After open cultivations, annual weed communities [Galeopsis- type) prosper during the first growing season, and are soon replaced by Anthoxanthum-, Deschampsia-, or Phleum-comsmxmiies according to the moisture conditions. After leys, the Phleum-type usually dominates, but this usually changes to the Anthoxanthum-type in mineral soil or the Deschampsia- type in organic soil after I—4 years. The Elytrigia-type can form in any field where Elytrigia has previously been abundantly present. The boundaries between the different types are sometimes quite diffuse, and the effect of the previous use of the field disappears after some years and the vegetation changes into the individual plant type that is typical of each habitat. t Figure 7. Succession of plant communities in reserved fields. The left sides of the boxes represent the drier ends, the right sides the wetter ends of the types. The widths of the arrows indicate the most probable directions. 234 4. Discussion 4. 1. Species composition and yield According to Raatikainen and Raatikainen (1975), the average yield from leys in Central Finland is 354,7 g/m2 (air-dried wt, 9 % water content). Teräsvuori (1920) gives some average yields from natural meadows in Ncrth- Savo at the beginning of this century: best waterlogged areas 250—300 (—400) g/m2 , good Deschampsia-meadows 200—250 ( 300) g/m2 , and Ranunculus- Chrysanthemum leucanthemum-mea.dows 100—200 g/m2 . The average yield from meadows in 1908—1912 was about 320 g/m2 . All TeräsvuorPs figures are air-dry weights and the water content may be about 10—20 % (not given). In Tvärminne, Southern Finland, Kosonen (1969) found that the maximum standing crop biomass on a dry coastal meadow varied from 300 to 650 g/m2 (air-dry wt). In Poland, the maximum biomass on two different types of meadows varied between 476—585 g/m2 (Traczyk 1971), and from the USA e.g. the following standing-crop figures for abandoned fields are given: 251—385 g/m2 (Michigan, Golley 1960), 283—494 g/m2 (South Carolina, Odum 1960), 165—283 g/m2 (SE-Michigan, Wiegert and Evans 1964). The average yield from reserved fields in Central Finland (273.5 g/m2 , oven-dried wt) corresponds well with the yields from our best natural meadows, as well as with the figures for abandoned fields from the USA, while it is clearly less than the yield from leys or from more southernly meadows. The floristical similarity between reserved fields and leys is evident if one compares the lists of the most abundant species: the 4 most abundant species on the reserved fields are also among the 5 most abundant species in leys (cf. Raatikainen and Raatikainen 1975). Trifolium pralense, the second in abundance in leys, was only 12th in reserved fields. Distinct differences oc- curred in the biomass-relations of the species, however: Phleum was not so dominant in reserved fields as in leys, and it reduced earlier than in leys; the differences in abundance of the other species were likewise clearer in reserved fields. According to Raatikainen and Raatikainen (1975), the average proportion of cultivated species in leys was 74 %, in reserved fields the figure was 33 %, on the average. The proportions decreased with years, however, so that in sth year leys it was only 41 % and in reserved fields 20 %. The biomass of weeds in reserved fields (104.2 g/m2 oven-dry wt) does not differ significantly from that in cereal fields (78—134 g/m2 , air-dry wt, Mu- kula 1974). There is a significant difference in species composition, however. The only abundant species on reserved fields was Elylrigia repens, whose bio- mass formed over one third of the total weed biomass. It averaged 37.0 g/m2 in reserved fields, 16.6 in cereal fields (Mukula 1974), and 15.3 g/m2 in leys (Raatikainen and Raatikainen 1975). The occurrence of Elytrigia on re- served fields was very uneven; it appeared on relatively few fields, but was usually theu very abundant (the frequency-% of Elytrigia was 30, while the Elytrigia- type occupied 15 % of all fields). According to Mukula et ai. (1969), the most typical weeds in the cereal fields of the study area are some perennial weeds (Deschampsia caespitosa, Ranunculus repens, Leontodon autumnalis and Rumex spp.), and some species typical of Southern Finland (e.g. Tussilago 235 farfara and Sonchus arvensis). The green biomasses of those species were in leys (Raatikainen and Raatikainen 1975)/reserved fields 13.7/18.2, 6.1/4.8, 0.9/1.0, 2.4/1.5, 0.2/0.7 and 0.4/1.9 g/m2 , respectively. In this respect also reserved fields resemble leys very closely. 4. 2. Interspecies relations and vegetation types Two methods were used to distinguish the five communities. Both methods give essentially the same results, since species groups in Fig. 5 correspond very well with the list of typical species for each type in Table 2. Figs. 5 and 6 show also the relations between different types, and that the boun- daries between them are often quite diffuse. For example, according both to Fig. 5 and Table 2, Carex leporina could be easily classified as either an Anthoxanthum-type or a Deschampsia- type-species. Of the communities described, the Deschampsia-type corresponds well with the Deschampsia caespitosa Rumex acetosa- type described by Raa- tikainen and Raatikainen (1964) from edges of fields; Rumex is, however, clearly less represented in the type from reserved fields. This may be partly due to the differences in the geographical distribution of Rumex. Both studies confirm that this type occurs mainly on organic soils. Our Phleum- type corresponds best with the Phleum pratense Trifolium repens-type of Raatikainen and Raatikainen (1964). On reserved fields Trifolium pratense occurs instead of T. repens, due partly to different location, soil types, etc; in this respect our Phleum-type resembles more leys than that of Raatikainen and Raatikainen (1964). The communities on reserved fields greatly resemble those described by Teräsvuori (1920) from natural or semi-cultivated meadcws in North-Savo, especially his Airela caespitosae and Ranunculeta meadows. Our Deschampsia-type corresponds well with his »proper A ira-meadows», and for most of the variants of this type that he describes, a correspondent can also be found on the reserved fields. In fact, several of the meadows that Teräsvuori studied had once been at least semi-cultivated. For all other communities from reserved fields a correspondent can be found on semi- cultivated meadows, except for our Elylrigia- type. The nature of the Elytrigia- type makes it questionable whether it can be classified as an independent association at all. Because of the extreme species-poverty, and the lack of such communities in natural meadows, this type could probably be better defined as a facies of an association. However, the Elytrigia-type is of great practical importance when reserved fields are again cleared for cultivation. 4. 3. Succession Decrease in net productivity with time has been established, apart from this work, also in leys (Paatela 1953a, Raatikainen and Raatikainen 1975) and abandoned fields in the USA (Mellinger and McNaughton 1975). Mel- linger and McNaughton (1975) noticed that the species diversity increased in long terra succession; this could be detected already during the first years of succession in reserved fields. Teräsvuori (1920) noted the effect of previous use of the area on the flora and vegetation of the meadow, and that the 236 differences disappeared after a few years, as they also do in reserved fields. Compared with his results, succession proceeds in abandoned fields practically in the same manner as in reserved fields. Raatikainen and Raatikainen (1975) present information about succession in leys. Species that occur most abundantly in first year leys are weed species of open cultivations, in 1—2 year leys they are perennially cultivated species, and species that are most abundant in 2—4 year leys are perennial weeds. Species that prosper in older leys are usually species that grow in closed meadow vegetation. As causes of succession on abandoned fields Keever (1950) suggests: 1) different life cycles of species and 2) different responses to environmental factors. During the first year species whichaad germinated already in theprevious autumn or early in the spring, spread and grow fast, and the vegetation usually becomes temporarily closed during the first year. Subsequently several other factors start to determine the outlines of succession. According to Paatela and Erviö (1971), there are about 44000 seeds/m 2 in the soil of Finnish fields, and from these the vegetation quickly develops during the first growing season. At that time nutrients are generally abundantly available and so the biomass increases rapidly. After the 3rd year the nutrient content has become reduced (e.g. tied up into detritus and underground parts, whose biomasses increase with time), and the green biomasses have to decrease accordingly. At that time competition between species is directed especially to nutrients and light, which later mainly determine the development of the vegetation in the field. According to Linkola (1935), the competition of the roots is the main factor regulating the growth, development and occurrence of plant species in meadows. This explains also the great gradual increase of the underground biomass in reserved fields. Teräsvuori (1920) states that the basic reason for different meadow types and vegetation zones is the difference in moisture conditions. Regarding the long-term succession, he concludes that all wet and probably also moist mea- dows will, in the long run, turn swampy, the most important moss-species being some Polytrichum and Sphagnum species. The same development may also take place in relatively dry meadows, if the vegetation becomes open for some reason (grazing, cloven-foot traces, etc), and the mosses obtain space where to start and spread. Even the oldest reserved fields in Finland are relatively young meadows so that the spreading of the mosses could not conclusively be detected. However, some fields did show a tendency towards such a development. Acknowledgements. We are grateful to Mr. Timo Törmälä, M. Sc., who took part in the field and laboratory work. The financial support from the National Research Council for Sciences is greatly appreciated. 237 REFERENCES Anon. 1975. Monthly review of agricultural statistics 1; 1 56. Chapman, S. B. 1976. Methods in plant ecology. 536 p. London. Golley, F. B. 1960. Energy dynamics of a food chain of an old field community. Ecol. Monogr. 30. 2: 187-206. » 1965. Structure and function of an old field broomsedge community. Ecol. Monogr. 35: 113-131. Kalela, A. 1939. fiber Wiesen und wiesenartige Pflanzengesellschaften auf der Fischerhalb- insel in Petsamo Lappland. Acta Forest. Fenn. 48, 2: 1—523. Keever, C. 1950. Causes of succession on old fields of the Piedmont, North Carolina. Ecol. Monogr. 20, 3: 229-250. Kosonen, M. 1969. Primary production, composition and seasonal growth rhythm of some dry meadow communities on the south coast of Finland. Comm. Biol. 31, 4; 1 23. Lid, J. 1974. Norsk og svensk flora. 808 p. Oslo. Linkola, K. 1916. Studien iiber den Einfluss der Kultur auf die Flora in den Gägenden nördlich vom Ladogasee I. Acta Soc. F. FI. Fenn. 45, 1:1—VII + 1 429. » 1921. Studien iiber den Einfluss der Kultur auf die Flora in den Gägenden nördlich vom Ladogasee 11. Acta Soc. F. FI. Fenn. 45, 2; 1—491. —» 1935. fiber die Daucr und Jahresklassenverhältnisse des Jugendstadiums bei einigen Wiesenstauden. Acta Forest. Fenn. 42, 2:1—56. —» & Tiirikka, A. 1936. fiber Wurzelsysteme und Wurzelausbreitung der Wiesenpflan- zen auf verschiedenen Wiesenstandorten. Ann. Bot. Soc. ’Vanamo’ 6,6; I —VII + 1-207. Mellinger, M. V. & McNaughton, S. J. 1975. Structure and function of successional vascular plant communities in central New York. Ecol. Monogr. 45: 161 182. Milner, C. & Hughes, R. E. 1968. Methods for the measurement of the primary production of grassland. IBP handbook 6. 70 p. Berkshire. Mukula, J. 1964. Rikkaruohot ja niiden torjunta. 140 p. Helsinki. —» 1974. Weed competition in spring cereal fields in Finland. Forskn. Förs. Lantbr. 25: 585-592. » , Raatikainen, M., Lallukka, R. & Raatikainen, T. 1969. Composition of weed flora in spring cereals in Finland. Ann. Agric. Fenn. 8; 59—110. Nyholm, E. 1954. Illustrated moss flora of Fennoscandia II: 1—6. Musci. 799 p. Lund. Odum, E. P. 1960. Organic production and turnover in old field succession. Ecology 41: 34—49. Paatela, J. 1953 a. Eri ikäisten peltonurmien osuudesta, käytöstä, pintalannoituksesta ja heinäsadoista Suomessa. Summary: On the utilization, fertilizing, and yields of hay of rotation leys in Finland with special reference to the age of ley. Acta Agr. Fenn. 79, 2: 1-60. —» 1953 b. Maamme heinänurmien botaanisesta koostumuksesta. Summary: On the botanical composition of the tarae-hayfields in Finland. Acta Agr. Fenn. 79, 3: 1 128. —» & Erviö, L—R. 1971. Weed seeds in cultivated soils in Finland. Ann. Agric. Fenn. 10: 144-152. Raatikainen, M. & Raatikainen, T. 1964. Kevätviljapeltojen janiiden pientareiden kasveista Laihialla. Summary: Plant species growing on spring cereal fields and their edges at Laihia, Finland. J. Scient. Agric. Soc. Finl. 36: 135 160. » & Raatikainen, T. 1975. Heinänurmien sato, kasvilajikoostumus ja sen muutokset. Summary: Yield, composition and dynamics of flora in grasslands for hay in Finland. Ann. Agric. Fenn. 14:57 191. —» —, Raatikainen, T. & Tinnilä, A. 1971. Rikkakasvit ja niiden torjunta. Kasvinsuoje- luseur. Julk. 46: 1 108. Teräsvuori, K. 1920. Muistiinpanoja Pohjois-Savon »Luonnonniityistä». Referat: Aufzeich- nungen fiber die »naturlichen Wiesen* in Nord-Savo. J. Scient. Agric. Soc. Finl. 4: 1 181. Traczyk, T. 1971. Productivity investigation of two types of meadows in the Vistula valley. I. Geobotanical description and primary production. Ekol. Pol. 19; 93 106. 238 Törmälä, T. & Hokkanen, H. 1976. Pakettipeltojen ja niiden reuna-alueiden linnustosta Keski-Suomessa. Keski-Suomen Linnut 1:44—47. » & Raatikainen, M. 1976. Primary production and seasonal dynamics of the flora and fauna of the field stratum in a reserved field in Middle Finland. J. Scient. Agric. Soc. Finl. 48: 363-385. Wiegert, R. G. & Evans, F. C. 1964. Primary production and the disappearance of dead material on an old field in south-eastern Michigan. Ecology 45: 49 63. Ms received May 9th, 1977. SELOSTUS Pakettipeltojen sato, kasvillisuus ja sen muutokset Keski-Suomessa Heikki Hokkanen ja Mikko Raatikainen Jyväskylän yliopisto. Biologian laitos Tutkimuksen tarkoituksena on selvittää mitä pellon käytön rajoittamisesta annetun lain piiriin kuuluvalla normaalisti hoidetulla ns, pakettipellolla kasvaa ja miten kasvillisuus muuttuu paketointiaikana. Työssä pyritään selvittämään miten pellon käytön rajoittamisesta annettuja säädöksiä on noudatettu rikkakasvittumisen osalta ja mitä tulee ottaa huomioon, kun pake- toituja peltoja otetaan viljeltäviksi. Tutkimuskohteina oli 20 tilan 51 peltolohkoa, jotka poimittiin otannalla Jyväskylästä ja sen ympäristökunnista. Kultakin lohkolta leikattiin sato heinäkuussa 1974 neljältä 0.25 m 3 ;n suuruiselta alalta ja joka alan keskustasta otettiin 150 cm2:n suuruinen näyte kasvien maan- alaisista osista. Näytteissä oli 107 putkilokasvilajia. Maanpäällinen vihreä sato oli keskimäärin 2 735 kg/ha ja koko kasvimateriaalin määrä oli 14 581 kg/ha. Avoviljelysten jälkeen paketoiduilla pel- loilla maanpäällisen kasvimassan määrä kasvoi voimakkaasti noin kahden—kolmen ensimmäi- sen vuoden aikana, mutta pysytteli sen jälkeen suunnilleen samana ainakin kolme vuotta. Maanalaisen kasvimassan määrä kasvoi jatkuvasti ainakin kuuden ensimmäisen vuoden ajan. Nurmen tai laitumen jälkeen paketoiduilla pelloilla kasvimassan määrässä ei tapahtunut muita merkittäviä muutoksia kuin karikkeen määrän selvä kasvu vähintään kuuden ensimmäisen vuoden ajan. Kasvilajistossa iän mukana tapahtuvista muutoksista merkittävimpiä olivat avoviljelysten tyypillisten rikkakasvilajien ja viljeltyjen lajien väheneminen sekä vanhojen nurmien kasvilli- suudessa ja niittykasvillisuudessa esiintyvien lajien runsastuminen. Pakettipelloilta kuvattiin viisi kasvustotyyppiä. Avoviljelysten jälkeen ensimmäisenä ke- sänä vallitsivat pilliketyypin kasvustot, jotka hyvin pian muuttuivat lähinnä kosteus- ja maa- peräolojen mukaisesti joko simake-, nurmilauha- tai timoteityypin kasvustoiksi. Nurmen jäl- keen oli useimmiten timoteityypin kasvustoja. Nämä tavallisesti muuttuivat noin 1—4 vuodessa kuivahkoilla kivennäismailla simaketyypiksi ja kosteilla eloperäisillä mailla nurmilauhatyy- piksi. Pelloilla, joissa aiemmin oli runsaasti juolavehnää, muodostui juolavehnätyypin kasvil- lisuutta. Tulokset osoittavat, että pellonvarauslain alaisten viljelysten haitallinen vesottuminen on estetty tällä tutkimusalueella. Rikkakasvittumisestakaan ei ollut suurta haittaa ympäristön viljelyksille. Viljelemättä olleita aloja viljelykseen otettaessa tulee rikkakasvintorjunta kes- kittää juolavehnäkasvustoihin. Liite 1. Lyijypitoisuudet maa- ja kasvinäytteissä v. 1974 1976 nig/kg k-a (vuosittain kaksi rinnakkaisnäytettä). Paikkakunnat, ks. liite 2. Appendix 1. Lead contents in soil and crop samples in 1974—1976, mglkg d.m. (each year two parallel samples). Localities sec appendix 2. a = Viljelymaa Cultivated soil; b = Metsämaa Forest soil n V^ ly,T: Metsämaa Salaatti Pinaatti Porkkana Puolukka Mustikka Sienet Laidunruoho _ . Koe- ainesta aan ™ Soil $ Forest soil Lettuce Spinach Carrot Lingonberries Blueberries Mushrooms Ley Grass t t" pL c^, a!X Organic 01 Luot'etFT * Luotett- I Luotett - 5 Luotett - * Luotett- 5 Luotett -- * Luotett - * Luotett- 5 Luotett - "nttanJTomPlot Soti type maUer Soti x rajat rajat rajat rajat rajat rajat rajat rajat rajat ponuHng source Sml iyo - o/ rn P J Range Range Range Range Range Range Range Range . (95**%) (95 %) (95 %) (95 %) (95 %> (95 %) (95 %) (95 %) (95 %> 1 a KHt 4.14 5.9 28.4 (16.7- 40.0) 1.90 (1.50- 2.5) 1.26 (0.09-2.42) .35 (0.29- 0.40) 1.91 (1.87-1.95) bHt Mr 9.71 3.7 61.9 (4.62- 198.3) - .10 (0.07-0.12) .25 (0.18- 0.31) 2 aHt Mr 3.72 4.6 583.7 (447.9- 719.4) 198.75 (27.48-424.93) 52.60- (-) 12.75 (9.10-16.30) 2.29 (1.88-2.70) 0.2 bHt Mr 18.64 3.2 1036.2 (716.8-1355.5) 13.96 (3.75-24.17) 2.02 (1.65-2.39) 76.48 (6.62-159.0) 0.3 SrMr = Gravel moraine soil 3 a HHt 4.29 4.2 44.8 (15.7- 73.7) 22.28 (4.69-51.21) 6.56 (-) 5.25 (1.59- 8.91) 3.96 (3.55-4.37) 0.2 HkMr = Sand moraine soil bht Mm 21.02 3.2 25.7 (4.4- 41.8) 1.51 (0.18- 2.83) .54 (.48- .60) 53.27 (38.4 -145.0) 0.2 HtMr =Finesand moraine soil 4 23.3 (20.9 25.6) 3.99 (-) 1.84 (-) .51 (.44- .57) - - 0.8 HsMr = Silt moraine soil 5 - - - 36.3 (30.9- 53.5) 3.08 (2.59- 3.57) 2.92 (2.12-3.72) .98 (0.04- 2.00) - - - - 1.7 Sr = Gravel 6 - 6.5 54.5 (28.6 80.2) 2.49 (1.82- 3.16) 1.47 (0.91-2.02) .63 (0.16- 1.10) - - 2.8 KHk = Coarse sand 8 aHt Mr 8.26 5.1 8.9 (6.3- 11.2) .65 (0.20- 1.34) 1.16 (0.36-1.96) .41 (.11- .71) Tausta-alue HHk = Sand bHt Mr 7.77 4.0 7.0 (5.6- 8.3) .11 (.11) .07 (-) 1.41 (0.59- 2.23) 1.00 (0.43-1.57) Background area KHt and Ht = Finesand 9 aHt Mr 8.37 5.3 8.5 (3.8- 13.0) 1.07 (0.64- 1.48) .75 (0.40-1.10) .46 (.20- .72) 1.31 (0.69-3.31) » HHt = Finer finesand bHt Mr 6.52 3.9 4.6 (3.9- 5.2) .24 (.10- .38) .42 (.07- .91) .80 (0.13- 1.47) - * Hs = Silt 10 - - - 8.7 (6.4- 10.9) 2.49 (1.84- 3.14) 1.02 (0.69-1.35) .36 (.36) - - - - » Mm = Mould soil 11 a HHt 3.85 5.4 39.6 (23.7- 55.5) 1.31 (0.23- 2.38) 2.49 (-) .64 (0.07- 1.21) - - - - 2.0 SMr = Clay moraine soil 12 aHt Mr 12.27 4.4 10.7 (4.5- 12.1) 1.00 (0.70- 1.30) 1.47 (1.39-1.55) .31 (.17- .44) 1.82 (1.53-2.10) 10.0 HtS = Finesand clay bKh 33.65 3.1 24.6 (16.4- 32.7) .14 (.10- .18) .11 (.10- .11) .23 (.09- .37) 10.0 HsS = Silt clay 13 as Hs 3.88 5.5 16.2 (5.1- 27.4) 1.15 (0.78- 1.52) 1.06 (0.28-1.34) .42 (.24- .59) .53 (.50- .55) 20.0 LjS = Mud clay b LCt 65.25 2.8 62.1 (20.4- 103.7) .55 (0.07 1.22) (.18 .05- .30) 2.29 (1.66 6.24) 20.0 Kh = Morhumus 14 aht Hs 4.66 5.4 8.2 (6.4- 9.9) 1.13 (0.75- 1.50) 1.23 (0.37-2.09) .80 (0.18- 1.41) .44 (.32- .56) 30.0 LCt = Ligno Carex peat 16 a KHt 5.28 6.5 187.1 (148.1- 226.0) 6.29 (4.83 - 7.75) 3.65 (2.04 - 5.16) .65 (0.26- 1.03) 1.23 (1.11-1.35) 2 0 ht = finesandy bHt Mr 6.83 3.2 48.4 (3.4 - 93.2) .25 (.14- .35) 1.30 (1.29-1.30) 5.18 (0.02- 10.37) 2.5 hs = silty 17 a KHt 4,24 5.7 9.5 (0.9- 11.7) 1.20 ( 0.66- 1.75) 1.68 (1.53-1.82) .30 (.09- .51) 1.12 (0.11-2.35) 10.0 hk = sandy bht Mm 33.14 3.0 11.6 (3.2- 37.5) .28 (.07- .48) .44 (.27- .60) 3.99 (0.66- 7.32) 10.0 s = clayey 18 a KHt 7.09 6.2 44.7 (6.3- 83,2) 5.46 (1.71- 9.19) 3.07 (2.31-3.83) 1.28 (1.07- 1.49) 1.19 (0.58-1.80) 20.0 b KHt 4.92 5.6 5.0 (3.2- 6.8) .82 (.69- .94) 1.50 (1.42-1.58) 2.92 (1.61- 4.22) 20.0 19 aHk Mr 3.72 4.8 4.7 (0.8- 20,2) 2.12 (0.90- 3.32) 1.67 (0.30-3.63) 2.35 (2.05- 8.35) .44 (.30- .58) 30.0 b - - - - .46 (.05 .87) .24 (.24) .75 (.67 :83) 30.0 20 a - - 7.0 5.9 (1.1- 10.7) 2.08 (1.28- 2.88) .92 (0.49-1.35) .28 (.11- .44) 50.0 21 a KHt 3.00 4.2 1.9 (1.7- 2.1) 4.04 (2.65- 5.43) .66 (0.21- 1.10) 1.37 (1.13-1.61) 3.0 b KHt 9.85 2.9 5.6 (0.2- 11.0) .10 (.08- .12) .10 (.06- .14) .53 (0.03- 1.08) 3.0 22 a KHt 4.55 4.6 5.4 (3.2- 7.6) 11.56 (3.36- 26.48) .72 (0.16- 1.59) .78 (0.08-1.47) 5.0 23 a KHt 6.00 5.9 3.5 (3.3- 3.7) 1.67 (-) - - 63 (.53- .73) 10.0 26 ahk KHt 5.02 4.8 15.4 (13.4- 17.4) 8.33 ( 3.43- 13.23) .44 (.15- .72) 1.21 (1.05-1.37) 1.5 b KHt 4.14 3.8 3.0 (2.4- 3.5) .99 (0.27- 1.70) 1.5 25 a Ht Mr 5.02 4.6 14.6 (4.9- 24.3) 27.42 (16,54- 71.38) - .82 (0.43- 2.06) 1.16 (0.15-2.16) 5.0 b KHt 4.24 3.1 2.6 (2.0- 3.2) .09 ( .06- .11) .69 (0.25- 1.63) 5.0 27 aHt Mr 8.39 4.8 7.1 (7.0- 7.2) 2.18 (1.19- 3.16) .30 (.24- .36) 1.13 {-) 20.0 29 a - - 5.9 6.9 (4.3- 18.1) .54 (.40- .68) .57 (0.07-1.06) .35 (.21- .49) Tausta-alue Background area 30 a - 5.1 4.5 (4.1- 4.9) .65 (.64- .65) .81 (.77- .85) .39 (.28- .49) Kemijärvi, Särkelä 31 aHt Mr 7.40 5.3 3.7 (1.6- 5.7) 1.09 (0.76- 1.41) .80 (0.06- 1.53) .79 (0.11-1.69) Tausta-ahie Background area bht Mm 26 43 3.4 2.9 (2.1 3.7) .17 (.16- .17) .16 (.11- .20) 1.90 (0.68- 4.47) » 32 aH Ht 6.01 5.4 4.7 (4.0- 5.3) 3.58 (0.83- 7.99) .35 (.23- .47) .43 ( .12- .73) » bH Ht 9.79 3.2 8.7 (3.8- 10.3) .30 (.07- .52) .14 (.05- .22) .38 (.02- .79) » 43 a - - 6.8 (2.7- 10.8) 1.11 (0.52- 1.70) 10.0 44 aHt Mr 17.71 6.6 999.7 (412.8-1586.5) 5.50 (3.30- 14.29) .25 (.20- .29) 0.05 45 aHt Mr 6.83 4.8 9.3 (7.9- 10.8) 2.91 (-) 1.74 (0.90- 4.37) .49 (.30- .67) 15.0 bhk Kh 44.50 2.9 16.5 (3.8- 29.1) .21 (.12- .29) .10 (.03- .17) 3.0 46 a Lj S 7.77 4.5 7.8 (4.7- 20.3) 1.44 ( 1.15- 1.72) .09 (-) 0.5 b Kh 68,70 3.2 104.0 (- ) .09 (-) 2.0 47 aLj S 5.95 4.8 21.0 (18.1- 23.8) .89 (0.40- 1.37) .11 (.10- .11) 3.0 bKh 69.40 3.1 84.4 (74.3- 94.4) .15 (-) .09 (-) 3.0 48 aHt Mr 5.43 4.9 13.5 (11.4- 15.5) .31 (.22- .39) .08 (.02- .14) Tausta-alue bHt Mr 5.85 5.1 5.0 (0.1- 9.9) .14 (-) Backround area 49 a KHt 5.54 6.7 3.4 (3.4) 3.86 (3.20- 10.92) .22 (.02- .47) 1.0 bhk KHt 14.29 3.1 13.7 (-) .13 (.08- .17) .07 (.06- .07) .36 (-) 1.0 50 a HHt 4.92 5.2 6.9 (4.8- 8.9) .31 (.31) .15 (.08- .21) 5.0 bHt Mr 12.53 3.8 13.7 (-) .08 (.07- .08) .07 (.07) .18 (-) 5.0 51 a KHt 2,95 4.4 2.5 (2.1- 2.9) .15 (-) .07 (.07) Tausta-alue b .09 (-09) .14 (.03— .30) Background area 52 aHt Mr 227 4.2 4.8 (2.7- 6.8) .42 (.05- .89) 0.1 b HHk 2.97 3.9 7.5 (0.7- 15.6) .09 (.08- .09) .07 (-) 02 Liite 3, Kuparipitoisuudet maa- ja kasvinäytteissä v. 1974 1976, mg/kg k-a. Maalajit ja koepaikat liitteissä 1 ja 2. Appendix 3. Copper contents on soil and crop samples in 1974—1976, in mg/kg d.m. Soil types and test sites, see app. 1 and 2. Koeala Paikkakunta Viljelymaa Metsämaa Salaatti Pinaatti Porkkana Puolukka Mustikka Sienet Ruoho Plot Locality Cultivated soil Forest soil Lettuce Spinach Carrot Lingonberries Blueberries Mushrooms Grass No x x x x xxxx x 1 Helsinki 21.1 (12.7-29.3) 12.1 (4.1-20.0) 14,6 (7.4-36.6) 4.9 (3.2-6.7) 2 Tikkurila 19,1 (17.4-20.7) 13.0 (12.4-13.6) 6.0 (-) 4.0 (1.1-6.8) 17.1 (-) 3 Tikkurila 29.5 (22.3-36.6) 32.5 (-) 5.8 (5.7-5.9) 4 Tikkurila 22.0 (20.2-23.8) 40.8 (-) 13.8 (-) 5.8 (5.8) 5 Tikkurila 37.3 (30.5-44,0) 28.0 (2.8-53.1) 11.0 (8.3-13.6) 4.1 (3.4-4.7) 6 Tikkurila 47.6 (46.2-49.0) 25.3 (24.2-26.3) 10.8 (10.8) 6.9 (4.8-5.9) 16.2 (-) 11.2 (7.9-14.5) 8 Pertunmaa 17.7 (12.7-22.7) 2.1 (1.3- 2.9) 5.5 (-) 4.0 (2.9-4.9) 5,4 (-) 42.1 (1.2-82,9) 5.4 (4.6- 6.2) 9 Punkasalmi 12.1 (8.6-15,4) 3,8 (2.0- 9.5) 6.6 (1.7-11.4) 8.7 (6.4-11.1) 2.3 (2.3) 10 Puumala 16.0 (14.5-17.4) 12.2 (9.3-15.1) 7.3 (6.2- 8.3) 4.1 (2.7-5.4) 11 Tampere 47.8 (41.1-54.5) 8.7 (1.4-13.2) 11.7 (11.6-11.8) 2.9 (2.2-3.5) 12 Tampere 28.3 (27.0-29.5) 6.9 (2.4-11,4) 9.9 (5.1-14.9) 3.1 (2.3-3.9) 13 Säynäjärvi 28.7 (25.6-31.7) 6.2 (4,9- 7.4) 12.8 (10.1-15.5) 3.3 (3.3) 5.4 (-) 14 Orivesi 23.4 (19.9-26.8) 6.0 (5.0- 7.0) 10.3 (9.6-10.9) 16 Oulu 69.9 (59.9-79.9) 12.5 (6.2-18.8) 10.4 (6.9-13.9) 7.1 (6.3- 7.9) 5.0 (3.8-6.2) 5.6 (4.8-6.3) 8.8 (6.3-11.2) 30.5 (21,5-39.4) 15.0 (13.3-16.6) 17 Oulu 10.3 (6.5-14.0) 3.5 (0.4- 7.3) 9.1 (7.9 10.4) 9.8 (8.8-10.8) 4.4 (3.5-5.2) 5.7 (3.6-7.7) 6.8 (5.6- 8.0) 25.2 (17.7-32.7) 5.3 (3.2- 7.3) 18 Haukipudas 13.4 (10.1-16.5) 5.9 (1.0-10.8) 5.5 (5.1- 5,9) 8.3 (1.5-18.0) 4.0 (2.7-54) 4.4 (4.0-4.8) 8.3 (5.2-11.4) 37.9 (22.3-53.4) 6.6 (5.97.2) 19 li 7.3 (5.88.7) 10.2 (5.4-14.8) 5.6 (1.1-10.1) 4.3 (2.8-5.7) 5.5 (5.3-5.7) 7.5 (7.5) 25.0 (24.9-25.1) 7.3 (5.29.3) 20 Olhava 24.7 (2.4-51.8) 5.5 (4.96.1) 5.8 (5.8) 2.2 (1.3-3.0) 5.4 (5,4) 21 Kokkola 4.6 (0.58.7) 8.0 (2.3-13.7) 12.9 (11.3-14.5) 7.1 (4.6-9.5) 4.3 (3.64.9) 22 Kokkola 4.7 (2.27.1) 13.9 (6.8-21.0) 5.6 (5.3-5.8) 8.4 (7.69.2) 23 Lohtaja 4.6 (0.58.7) 10.8 (-) 26 Kokkola 8.9 (6.4-11.3) 4.6 (0.58.7) 9.8 (2.9-22.5) 5,9 (5.8-6.0) 11.4 (8.3-14.4) 25 Kaarlela 7.6 (5.99.2) 10.5 (2.3-18.6) 4.2 (2.5-5.8) 4.9 (3.66.1) 27 Kaustinen 15.2 (6.8-23.5) 7.3 (1.1-16.7) 4.3 (-) 7.9 (-) 29 Salla 12.4 (8.7-16.0) 8.5 (5.6-11.4) 4.7 (3.75.7) 2.8 (1.9-3.6) 30 Kemijärvi 19.0 (10.0-28.0) 4.6 (3.95.2) 2.1 (1.32.9) 3.3 (1.8-4.7) 31 Inari 15.9 (11.0-20.7) 4.3 (1.57.0) 14.4 (9.9-18.9) 4.7 (3.7-5.7) 6.5 (6.1-6.9) 5.5 (4.3-6.7) 21.4 (15,8-26.7) 9.1 (7.6-10.5) 32 Ilomantsi 9.1 (7.8-10.3) 8.7 (6.1-11.3) 6.6 (0.2-12.9) 4.1 (2.9-5.2) 5.7 (-) 24.2 (-) 8.2 (6.1-10.2) 45 Rovaniemi mlk 13.4 (—) 7,1 (5.4 8.7) 5.5 (4.0 —6.9) 4.9 (—) 5.4 (—) 9.6 (8.8 10.4) 46 Raisio 22.0 (17.5-26.4) 12.8 (-) 16.7 (12.4-21.0) 6.7 (-) 47 Raisio 32,6 (25.2-40.1) 11.1 (6.6-15.6) 15.8 (15.5-16.0) 8.0 (7.6-5.4) 5.3 (-) 7.1 (-) 48 Saarijärvi 11.0 (7.3-14.6) 2.4 (0.74.0) 8.7 (7.7- 9,7) 6.9 (6.5-7.3) 4.8 (-) 49 Outokumpu 26,7 (22.6-30.8) 106.3 (-) 16.1 (12.9-19.2) 3.4 (2.3-4.4) 6.2 (5.2-7.2) 6.4 (5.07.8) 159.2 {-) 50 Outokumpu 14.1 (13.4-14.7) 25.9 (-) 15.1 (11.2-18.9) 8.2 (8.2) 5.0 (2.9-7.0) 5.2 (1.39.0) 110.6 (-) 51 Maaninka 8.5 (7.29.7) 7.4 (-) 5.2 (4.1-6.2) 3.7 (1.2-6.1) 4.3 (0.08.5) 52 Maaninka 28.8 (28.7-28.9) 6,3 (4.38.3) 11.3 (11.3) 3.0 (2.1-3.8) 5.7 (-) Liite 2. Kadmiumpitoisuudet maa- ja kasvinäytteissä v. 1974 1976, mg/kg k-a. Maalajit liitteessä 1. Appendix 2. Cadmium contents on soil and crop samples in 1974 1976, mg/kg d.m. Soil types, see appendix 1. Koeala Paikkakunta Koepaikka Viljelymaa Metsämaa Salaatti Pinaatti Porkkana Puolukka Mustikka Sienet Laidunruoho Etäisyy Plot Locality Test site Cultivated soil Forest soil Lettuce Spinach Carrot Lingonberries Blueberries Mushrooms Ley grass Distant No. xxx xxxxx x km 1 Helsinki Viikki .07 (.03- .10) .30 ( 11.- .48) .24 (07- .54) .08 (.01-,17) .14 (.04-.24) 3.0 2 Tikkurila Grönberg .08 (.03- .12) ,41 (.15-.56) .75 (0.33-1,16) .58 (-) ,28 (.09-.47) .07 (-) .12 (.05-.20) 3.52 (0.89-4,51) .11 (.08-,14) 0.2 3 Tikkurila Hera 1 .04 (.03- .05) .10 (.05-,14) 1.00 (0.16-2.65) .26 (-) .22 (.09-.33) .05 (.02-.07) .18 (.05-,30) 1.12 (0.52-2.75) ,15 (.11-.19) 0.2 4 Tikkurila Hera 2 .03 (.01- .05) .37 (-) .30 (-) .17 (.08-.42) 0.8 5 Tikkurila Hera 3 .03 (.02- .03) .12 (.05- .18) .25 (.13- .37) .10 (.02-.18) 1.7 6 Tikkurila Hera 4 .05 (.05) .22 (.40- .69) .07 (.07) .04 (.40) 2.8 8 Pertunmaa Laukkala .06 (.02- .09) .09 (.07-,H) .05 (.02- .08) .04 (.02- .06) .06 (.02-.08) .70 (.43- .97) .08 (.04-.12) Tausta Back- ground 9 Punkasalmi Sorvasranta .05 (.01- .09) .04 (.02-.05) .48 (.15-1.11) .34 (.07-.61) .04 (.01-.08) .06 (.03-.08) 1.05 (.23-1.85) .05 (.02-.07) » 10 Puumala Vanhainkoti .02 (.02) .42 (.35- .48) .10 .07- .12) .05 (.02-.07) * 11 Tampere Messukylä .08 (.04- .11) .38 (.11- .65) .18 .04- .40) .19 (.03-,35) 2.0 12 Tampere Aitolahti .06 (.03- .08) .07 (.05-.09) .38 (.14- .62) .33 .20- .45) .21 (.10-,30) .03 (.02-.03) .03 (.01-.05) 1.64 (.65-2.62) .16 (.03-.28) 10.0 13 Säynäjärvi Lihasula .06 (.03- .08) .09 (.05-, 13) .53 (.02-1.07) .50 .21- .78) .29 (.06-.52) .05 (.02-.08) .06 (.01-,12) 1.80 (.13-3.71) .17 (.07-.27) 20.0 14 Orivesi Somero .07 (.02- .11) .66 (.13-1.18) .43 .04- .82) .23 (.07-.39) .11 (.01-.23) 30.0 16 Oulu Tuira .69 (.09-1.29) .07 (.02-,10) .41 (.18- .03) .18 .02- .38) .06 (.03-.08) .06 (.00-.10) .13 (.08- 17) .56 (.32- .79) .27 (.06-.59) 2.0 17 Oulu Kello .05 (.02- .07) .05 (.02-.07) .18 (.08- .27) .12 .06- .18) .07 (.03-.10) .05 (.01-.11) .15 (.04-.25) .88 (.09-1.65) .21 (.10-.51) 10.0 18 Haukipudas Kauppi .13 (.07- .17) .06 (.04-.08) .96 (.49-1.42) .30 .20- .79) .16 (.05-.25) .04 (.03-.04) .08 (.07-.08) .67 (.41-1.75) .16 (.00-.32) 20.0 19 li Paakkola .03 (.00- .05) .26 (.07- .44) .10 .04- .24) .18 (.02-.36) .11 (.01-.23) .08 (.04-.12) .32 (.06- .70) .10 (.10) 30.0 20 Olhava Jakku .02 (.01- .02) .21 (.06- .47) .07 .02- .11) .03 (.01-.05) 50.0 21 Kokkola Halkokari .04 (.02- .04) .07 (.01-,13) .83 (.03-2.56) .39 (-) .20 (.01-.47) .03 (.02-.03) .10 (.01-.20) .48 (.39- .56) .20 (.11-.28) 3.0 22 Kokkola Friises .03 (.02- .04) .49 (.23-1.22) .13 (.02-.29) .11 (.04-,17) 5.0 23 Lohtaja Sivakkajärvi .04 (.03- .05) .59 (.06- .98) .07 .01- .15) .01 (.01) .08 (.06-,10) 10.0 26 Kokkola Ykspihlaja .06 (.03- .09) .04 (.03-.04) .83 (.24-1.43) .74 .45-1.05) .08 (.08) .25 (.06-.43) 1.5 25 Karleby Säkä .04 (.01- .07) .01 (.01) .47 (.11- .81) .32 .06- .60) .17 (.05-.29) .05 (.03-.07) .44 (.17- .70) .19 (.13-.25) 5.0 27 Kaustinen Kattilakoski .08 (.01- .15) .07 (.07) .26 (.02- .57) .36 .07- .65) .26 (.04-.48) .07 (-) 20.0 29 Salla Kuusela .01 (.01) .19 (.08- .45) .10 .04- .24) .06 (.00-.12) Tausta Back- ground 31 Inari Muddusniemi .10 (.00- .21) .04 (.01-.08) .60 (.28-1.48) .27 (.06-.47) .03 (.03) .06 (.02-.10) .55 (.36- .73) .07 (.06-, 14) » 32 Ilomantsi Maat.oppilaitos .07 (.07) .03 (.01-.05) .68 (.40-1.76) .25 (-) .04 (.00-.08) .04 (.01-.06) 1.06 (.09-2.03) .10 (.05-, 14) » 43 Kemin mlk Väyrynen .02 (.01— .02) .16 (.00— .32) 10.0 44 Helsinki Viikinmäki .55 (.06-1.05) .12 (.07- .13) .05 (.00-.09) 0.05 45 Rovaniemen mlk Kalliomäki .06 (.03- .09) .11 (.08-, 13) .33 (.20- .86) .39 (.36-.41) .02 (.02) .03 (.02-.04) .17 (.03-.31) 15.0 46 Raisio Myllymäki .05 (.03- .07) .04 (-) .19 (.19) .10 (-) .14 (-) 0.5 47 Raisio Vanhainkoti .11 (.11) .16 (.14-,18) .66 (.64- .68) .12 (.07-,16) .06 (-) .07 (-) 3.0 48 Saarijärvi Tarvainen .05 (.01- .09) .03 (.02-.03) .17 (.17) .11 (.09-,17) .02 (-) Tausta Back- ground 49 Outokumpu Kovalainen .07 (.06- .07) .06 (-) .09 (.06- .11) .05 (.01-.11) .02 (.00-.04) .03 (.01-.05) 2.21 (-) 1.0 50 Outokumpu Rissanen .05 (.04- .05) .03 (-) .17 (.14- .19) .17 (.02-.31) .02 (.01-.02) .05 (.00-.08) 2.02 (-) 5.0 51 Maaninka Tuovilanlahti .04 (.04) .07 (-) .13 (.09-.17) .01 (.01) .06 (.04-.08) Tausta Back- ground 52 Maaninka Sinikivi .08 (.06- .10) .05 (.02-.07) .14 (.11- .16) .03 (.03) .02 (-) 0.1 Liite 4. Sinkkipitoisuudet maa- ja kasvinäytteissä vv. 1974 1976, mg/kg k-a. Koepaikat ja maalajit Liitteissä 1 ja 2. Appendix 4. Zinc contents on soil and crop samples in 1974 1976, in mgjkg d.m. Test sites and soil types, see app. 1 and 2. Koeala Paikkakunta Viljelymaa Metsämaa Salaatti Porkkana Puolukka Mustikka Sienet Ruoho Plot Locality Cultivated soil Forest soil Lettuce Carrot Lingonberries Blueberries Mushrooms Grass No. x xx xxxx x 1 Helsinki 44.1 (32.1- 56.1) 27.0 (21.8-32.1) 99.2 (76.5-122.0) 37.1 (28.1- 46.1) 9.7 (7.9-11.3) 119.0 (89.8-148.1) 41.5 (34.3- 48.6) 2 Tikkurila 27.2 (21.6- 32.7) 27.1 (16.1-38.1) 106.3 (89.6-123.0) 65.3 (0.7-131.2) 17.8 (8.2-27.3) 14.3 (9.8-18.7) 107.5 (45.7-169.3) 33.1 (24.5- 41.6) 3 Tikkurila 50.7 (37.4- 64.0) 13.0 (12.0-14.0) 153.1 (137.0-169.2) 33.8 (22.9- 44.6) 16.6 (16.3-16.8) 17.8 (14,7-20.9) 153.2 (125.9-180.4) 23.7 (20.6- 26.8) 8 Pertunmaa 40.2 (26.4- 53.9) 46.3 (44.9-47.7) 55.4 (-) 31.5 (20.6- 42.3) 98,3 (66.0-130.5) 82.1 (35.5-128.6) 9 Punkasalmi 31.3 (31.0- 31.5) 13.3 (3.6-30.2) 72.5 (58.6- 86.4) 55.5 (42.0- 68.9) 16.1 (9.3-22.8) 12.9 (10.0-15.7) 114.3 (107.6-120.9) 39.5 (28.0- 50.9) 11 Tampere 166.6 (115.6- 217.6) 80.2 (-) 42.7 (18.0- 67.4) 12 Tampere 92.7 (82.5- 103.0) 39.8 (35.3-44.2) 126.0 (68.3-183.6) 49.6 (32,1- 67.0) 8.5 (6.8-10.1) 7.1 (4.2-10.0) 103.5 (94.3-112.7) 43.7 (38.7- 48.7) 13 Säynäjärvi 69.8 (65.7- 74.0) 45.0 (41.7-48.2) 71.7 (38.2-105.2) 30.7 (22.3- 39.0) 12.3 (9.4-15.3) 7.2 (6.4- 8.0) 107.0 (77,3-136.6) 36.4 (35.4- 37.4) 14 Orivesi 73.8 (70.9- 76.7) 69.4 (52.7- 86.1) 49.7 (20.9- 78.4) 42.3 (28.6- 56.0) 16 Oulu 918.1 (689.4-1146.7) 42.7 (11.7-73.5) 220.4 (193.1-247.6) 35.8 (27.6- 44.0) 11.30 (8.6-13.9) 47.1 (31.5-62,6) 148.0 (102.1-194.0) 211.6 (197.1-226.1) 17 Oulu 54.2 (2.0110.3) 16.7 (11.9-21.5) 106.1 (62.8-149.2) 32.6 (26.738.4) 20.0 (14.3-25.7) 52.7 (5.9-99.5) 130.2 (102.4-157,8) 39.3 (28.350.3) 18 Haukipudas 142.1 (79.1205.1) 29.7 (5.8-53.6) 676.9 (614.4-739.4) 118.0 (102.5-133.5) 19.1 (12.4-25.8) 29.4 (28.4-30.4) 117.5 (109.1-126.0) 86.8 (73.1-100.5) 19 li 22.8 (22.523.0) 109.2 (80.6-137.7) 48.5 (44.053.0) 18.1 (10.7-25.4) 37.6 (32.4-42.7) 89.9 (40.1-139.5) 52.3 (47.257.4) 21 Kokkola 8.4 (-) 35.1 (21.6-91.8) 137.3 (123,2-151.4) 41.4 (29.553.2) 10.7 (9.9-11.5) 11.1 (10.4-11,7) 98.2 (67.1-129.2) 66.8 (44.189.5) 22 Kokkola 30.3 (16,6- 43.9) 127.7 (50.7-204.6) 53.5 (41,5- 65.5) 45.1 (38.052.2) 23 Lohtaja 21.3 (20.621.9) 112,0 (-) 34.7 (27.841.6) 26 Kokkola 59.5 (36.582.5) 12.9 (2.0-23.7) 71.6 (37.3-105.9) 64.4 (63.365.4) 125.8 (122.7-128.8) 114.5 (96.9-132.1) 25 Kaarlela 48.0 (11.784.3) 5.1 (4.16.1) 128.7 (17.1-274.4) 69.5 (52.786.2) 10.2 (9.3-11.0) 79.1 (70.587.6) 78.7 (62.395.0) 27 Kaustinen 40.1 (29.850.3) 122.9 (120.8-124.9) 42.2 (21.463.0) 61.9 (-) 31 Inari 29.1 (27.830.3) 14.7 (4.9-34.3) 42.8 (42.043.6) 30.8 (18.343.3) 22.3 (20.1-24.5) 14.0 (12.3-15.6) 91.3 (89.493.1) 38.8 (29.847.7) 32 Ilomantsi 32.5 (31.833.1) 99.0 (27.7-170.2) 21.6 (15.827.3) 14.9 (9.7-20.0) 113.6 (-) 56.7 (36.277.1) 44 Helsinki 1301.3 (974.3-1628.2) 147.5 (138.3-156.7) 32.3 (30.833.7) 45 Rovaniemen mlk 64.0 (42.285.7) 29.9 (24.6-35.2) 79.3 (76.282.3) 42.0 (28.155.8) 14.9 (13.9-15.9) 8.7 (4.2-13.1) 50.3 (41.758.9) 46 Raisio 78.3 (74.482.2) 33.6 (-) 82.4 (76.288.5) 24.6 (-) 17,7 (-) 47 Raisio 131.0 (121.8140.1) 40.9 (32.1-49.7) 25.7 (23.727.7) 20.6 (20.221.0) 11.5 (-) 14.4 (-) 48 Saarijärvi 41.0 (40.441.6) 18.7 (11.3-26.2) 81.3 (78.284.3) 29.4 (26.033.0) 9.5 (-) 49 Outokumpu 51.0 (49.752.2) 24.3 (-) 36.2 (31.740.6) 7.4 (7.1 7.6) 10.9 (7.6-14.2) 9.1 (7.5-10.7) 113.0 (-) 50 Outokumpu 54.3 (43.465.1) 44.4 (-) 89.6 (61.8-117.3) 23.2 (20.925.6) 8.4 (7.69.2) 9.6 (7.7-11.4) 87.3 (-) 51 Maaninka 18.8 (17.719.8) 33.4 (-) 19.9 (6.832.9) 8.7 (8.39.1) 8.1 (7.09.1) 52 Maaninka 48.4 (39,8- 57.0) 23.7 (21.4-25.9) 75.8 (70.181.5) 8.4 (8.38.5) 8.3 (-) Liite 5. Elohopeapitoisuudet maa- ja kasvinäytteissä v. 1974 1976, mg/kg k-a. Koepaikat ja maalajit liitteissä 1 ja 2. Appendix 5. Mercury contents in soil and crop samples in 1974—1976, in mg/kg d.m. Test sites and soil types, see app. 1 and 2. Koeala Paikkakunta Viljelymaa Metsämaa Salaatti Pinaatti Porkkana Puolukka Mustikka Sienet Ruoho Plot Locality Cultivated soil Forest soil Lettuce Spinach Carrot Lingonberries Blueberries Mushrooms Grass No. x xxxxxxxx 1 Helsinki .16 (.02- .30) .05 (.00-.12) .03 (-) .04 (.04) 2 Tikkurila .12 (.01- .22) .09 (.08-.09) .07 (.01-.15) .04 (.00-.08) .03 (-) .12 (.03-.20) 3 Tikkurila .13 (.05- .19) .08 (.00-.16) .06 (.03-.08) .05 (.04-.05) .03 (-) .06 (.05 .06) 8 Pertunmaa .12 (.08- .16) .04 (.04) .05 (.01-.09) 9 Punkasalmi .14 (.13- .14) .07 (.06-.07) .06 (.00-, 12) .04 (-) .03 (.30) 11 Tampere .07 (.05- .07) .04 (.02-.06) .02 (.02-.03) 12 Tampere .09 (.05- .13) .06 (.04-.08) .07 (.02-,11) .03 (.01-.05) .05 (.03-.07) .04 (.02-.06) .02 (.00-.04) .06 (.04-.08) 13 Säynäjärvi .10 (.08- .12) .02 (.00-.04) .06 (.05-.06) .05 (-) .04 (.00-.08) 14 Orivesi .09 (.06- .11) .07 (.02-, H) .04 (.04) .05 (.01-.09) 16 Oulu .17 (.15- .20) .05 (.04-.08) .05 (.01-.09) .07 (.05-.07) .05 (.02-,08) .03 (.02-.03) .04 (.04) .02 (.01-.02) .04 (-) 17 Oulu .12 (.07- .15) .04 (.02-.06) .09 (.02-,16) .06 (.04-.08) .08 (.03-,11) .05 (.04-.05) .03 (.02-.03) .04 (.02-.06) 18 Haukipudas .10 (.03- .10) .08 (.02-.14) .08 (.03-.13) .08 (.04-.13) .12 (.06-.21) .07 (.04-.09) .03 (.02-.03) 19 li .10 (.07- .12) .05 (.03 —.08) .06 (.03-,14) .08 (.02-,13) .05 (.04-.05) .03 (.01-.05) 20 Olhava .11 (.07- .15) .11 (.06-, 15) .05 (.03-.07) .14 (.11-. 16) 21 Kokkola .08 (.04- .10) .08 (.07-.08) .08 (.07-.08) .05 (.05) .10 (.02-.16) 22 Kokkola .09 (.06- .10) .12 (-) .10 (.01-.20) .04 (-) 23 Lohtaja .11 (.07- .14) .13 (.00-.25) .05 (.04-.05) .10 (.01-.18) .02 (.02) 26 Kokkola .13 (.10- .15) .07 (.04-.09) .07 (.01-.13) .06 (.06) .09 (.04-,13) 25 Kaadeta .17 (.12- .22) .10 (.03-. 16) .07 (.06-.07) .07 (.03-.11) .05 (-) 27 Kaustinen .10 (.04- .14) .10 (.04-.15) .04 (.02-.06) .07 (.03-,11) .07 (-) 29 Salla .16 (.08- .24) .08 (.02-.14) .08 (.01-.16) .06 (.05-.06) 30 Kemijärvi .11 (.07- .15) .11 (.05-.17) .07 (.02-.11) .21 (.17-.25) 31 Inari .11 (.07- .14) .06 (.01-.10) .10 (.03-,16) .11 (-) .04 (.02-.06) 32 Ilomantsi .11 (.05- .16) .08 (.03-.12) .06 (-) .07 (.01-.17) .06 (.04-.08) 43 Kemin mlk .12 (.05- .18) .06 (.05-.06) 44 Helsinki .86 (.41-1.26) .03 (-) 45 Rovaniemen mlk .05 (.03- .07) .04 (.03-.04) .04 (.00-.08) .03 (-) .06 (.06) 46 Raisio .03 (.03) .04 (-) .03 (.01-.05) .03 (-) .03 (-) 47 Raisio .05 (.01- .09) .05 (.03 —.07) .03 (.02-.03) .02 (.02) .03 (-) 49 Outokumpu .06 (-) .04 (-) .02 (.00-.04) .02 (.02) .08 (.07-.08) .03 (.03) .01 (-) 50 Outokumpu .05 (.05) .03 (.00-.40) .01 (.01) .05 (.04-.05) .03 (.03) .07 (-) Liite 6, Arseenipitoisuudet maa- ja kasvinäytteissä v. 1974 1976, mg/kg k-a. Paikkakunnat ja maalajit, liitteet 1 ja 2. Appendix 6. Arsenic contents in soil and crop samples in 1974 1976, in mg!kg d.m. Test sites and soil types,see app. 1 and 2. Koeala Paikkakunta Viljelymaa Metsämaa Salaatti Pinaatti Porkkana Puolukka Mustikka Sienet Ruoho Plot Locality Cultivated soil Forest soil Lettuce Spinach Carrot Lingonberries Blueberries Mushrooms Grass No. XX xxxxxxx 1 Helsinki 2.60 (2.40-2.80) 0.40 (0.19-0.99) 0.50 (0.30-0,70) 2 Tikkurila 5.65 (4.30-7.00) 8.81 (2.79-14.82) 1.15 (0.27-2.03) 0.60 (0.40-0.80) 0.30 (0.09-0.69) 0.55 (0.26-0.84) 0,71 (0.03-1,38) 0.80 (0.57-2.17) 3 Tikkurila 2.90 (2.90) 1.75 (.08- 3.42) 1.00 (1.00) 0,40 (0.40) 0.20 (0.20) 0.40 (0.01-0.79) 0.95 (0.46-1.44) 0.25 (0.04-0.54) 8 Pertunmaa 1.90 (1.70-2.10) 1.20 (0.81- 1.59) 1.40 (-) 0.70 (0.50-0.90) 0.60 (0.01-1.19) 0.35 (0.14-0.84) 9 Punkasalmi 1.55 (0.62-2.58) 0.65 (0.04- 1.34) 0.30 (0.09-0.69) 0.55 (0.45-0.65) 0.15 (0.05-0.25) 0.40 (0.20-0.60) 0.46 (0.11-0.81) 0.25 (0.04-0,54) 11 Tampere 2.57 (0.51-4.63) 0.87 (0.62-1.11) 0.34 (0.15-0.53) 12 Tampere 3.43 (3.05-3.81) 1.81 (1.52- 2.10) 0.28 (0.08-0.46) 0.58 (0.33-0.82) 0.29 (0.15-0.43) 0.36 (0.35-0.36) 0.24 (0.13-0.61) 0.60 (0.40-0.80) 13 Säynäjärvi 2.33 (1.84-2.82) 1.06 (0.08- 2.04) 1.65 (0.77-2.53) 0.50 (0.11-0.89) 0.28 (0.15-0.35) 0.56 (0.29-0.83) 0.61 (0.19-1.02) 0.35 (0.25-0.45) 14 Orivesi 2.05 (1.77-3.87) 2.05 (1.58- 3.68) 0.40 (0.40) 1.10 (0.27-2.47) 16 Oulu 10.80 (-) 0.81 (0.45- 1.17) 1.46 (0.18-2.73) 0.77 (0.37-1.15) 0.21 (0.12-0.27) 0.55 (0.45-0.65) 0.95 (0.40-1.48) 1.70 (1.11-2.29) 17 Oulu 0.74 (0.60-0.87) 0.62 (0.231.01) 2.68 (0.92-7.26) 0.33 (0.13-0.52) 0.25 (0.15-0.35) 0.35 (0.25-0.45) 0.37 (0.06-0.67) 0.20 (0.19-0.59) 18 Haukipudas 1.55 (1.26-1.84) 2.20 (0.544.94) 1.00 (0.61-1.39) 1.10 (0.32-1.88) 0.15 (0.05-0.25) 0.45 (0.04-0.94) 0.20 (0.20) 0.30 (0.10-0,50) 19 li 0.75 (0.46-1.04) 0.60 (0.40-0.80) 1.00 (0.80-1.20) 0.25 (0.15-0.35) 0.35 (0.25-0.45) 0.30 (0.30) 0.20 (0.19-0.59) 21 Kokkola 1.55 (0.49-2.61) 0.93 (0.521.34) 1,08 (0.16-1.99) 0.95 (0.07-1.83) 0.38 (0.20-0.67) 0.18 (0.15-0,20) 0.35 (0.29-0.41) 0,38 (0.32-0.44) 0.20 (0.20) 22 Kokkola 1.53 (0.14-2.91) 1.05 (0.08-1.72) 2.90 (1.76-7.22) 0.30 (0,30) 23 Lohtaja 1.58 (0.68-2.47) 0.07 (0.00-0.13) 0.99 (0.26-1.64) 0.95 (0.13-2.03) 0.35 (0.25-0.45) 26 Kokkola 1.99 (1.49-2.49) 1.89 (0.423.36) 1.58 (1.04-2.11) 1.50 (0.91-2.09) 0.40 (0.14-1.11) 0.64 (0.37-0.90) 0.20 (0.00-0.40) 25 Kaarlela 2.03 (1.62-2.44) 0.51 (0.380.64) 0.82 (0.06-3.09) 1.25 (0.42-2.92) 0.48 (0.26-1.21) 0.27 (-) 0.47 (0.06-0.87) 0.44 (0.27-0.60) 0.10 (0.10) 27 Kaustinen 3.40 (1.40-5.40) 0.88 (0.431.33) 0.18 (0.05-0.55) 1,75 (1.46-2.04) 0,60 (0.27-0.93) 0.40 (-) 31 Inari 0.95 (0.66-1.24) 0.80 (0.172.17) 0.70 (0.48-1.88) 1.20 (0.76-3.16) 0.15 (0.05-0.25) 0,40 (0.19-0.99) 0.25 (0.04-0.54) 0.15 (0.05-0.25) 32 Ilomantsi 0.95 (0.52-1.42) 0.56 (0.460.66) 0.35 (0.06-0.64) 0.75 (0.33-1.83) 0.20 (0.20) 0.54 (0.27-0.81) 0.66 (0.17-1.49) 0.30 (0.09-0.64) 44 Helsinki 5.70 (3.40-7.90) 0.20 (-) 45 Rovaniemen mlk 2.05 (0.97-3.13) 0.20 (0.20) 0.60 (0.01-1.19) 0.25 (0.15-0.35) 0.20 (-) 0.20 (0.20) 46 Raisio 1.55 (0.91-2.18) 3.30 (-) 0.18 (0.18) 0.31 (-) 0,42 (-) 47 Raisio 2.20 (0.19-4.58) 1.17 (0.991.35) 0.28 (0.21-0.34) 0.18 (0.15-0.20) 0.23 (-) 0.43 (-) 48 Saarijärvi 0.47 (0.43-0.51) 0.53 (0.280.77) 0.90 (0.59-1.20) 0.18 (0.11-0.24) 0.50 (-) 49 Outokumpu 1.10 (0.28-1.92) 1.19 (-) 0.67 (0.54-0.79) 0.09 (0.05-0.23) 0.23 (0.13-0.33) 0.61 (0.34-0.88) 0.49 (-) 50 Outokumpu 0.78 (0.22-1.33) 1.31 (1.211.41) 0.45 (0.40-0.49) 0.21 (0.10-0.31) 0.62 (0,01-1.25) 0.48 (0.29-0.66) 0.43 (-) 51 Maaninka 1.02 (0.69-1,35) 0.11 (-) 0.23 (0.18-0.27) 0.22 (0.11-0.32) 0.33 (0.19-0.47) 52 Maaninka 1.36 (0.78-1.93) 0.51 (0.400.61) 0.51 (0.21-1.22) 0.42 (0.15-0.69) 0.54 (-) Liite 7. Rikkipitoisuudet maa- ja kasvinäytteissä v. 1974 1976, g/kg k-a. Paikkakunnat ja maalajit, liitteet 1 ja 2. Appendix 7. Sulphur contents in soil and crop samples in 1974—1976, in g/kg d.m. Test sites and soil types, see app. I and 2. Koeala Paikkakunta Viljelymaa Metsämaa Salaatti Pinaatti Porkkana Puolukka Mustikka Sienet Ruoho Plot Locality Cultivated soil Forest soil Lettuce Spinach Carrot Lingonberries Blueberries Mushrooms Grass No. xxxx xxxxx 1 Helsinki .46 (.25- .66) 2.73 (2.37-3.09) 3.31 (2.92-3,70) .72 (.52- .92) 2 Tikkurila 1.04 (0.50-1.57) 2.28 (1.32-3.23) 3.52 (-) .62 ( (.62) 3 Tikkurila .28 (.13- .42) 2.48 (-) 3.11 (-) .42 (.29- .54) 4 Tikkurila .46 (.27- .64) 2.00 (-) 2.48 (-) .59 (.24- .93) 5 Tikkurila .25 (.04- .45) 1.52 (1.25-1.79) 2.31 (1.98-2.64) .48 (.48) 6 Tikkurila .66 (.59- .72) 2.62 (2.35-2.89) 3.90 (3.70-4.10) .59 (.52- .65) 8 Pertunmaa .65 (.32- .98) .63 (.42- .83) 1.85 (1.38-2.18) 3.04 (-) .59 (.49- .67) 1.18 (0.91-1.44) 1.51 (0.40-2.61) 9 Punkasalmi .86 (.81- .90) .45 (.12- .78) 4.11 (3.62-4.60) .89 (.83- .95) .47 (-) 1.90 (1.83-1.96) .98 (0.47-1.49) 16 Oulu .43 (.29- .58) 1.29 (0.15-2.41) 2.11 (1.79-2.43) 4.59 (3,03-6,14) .77 (0,39-1.15) .88 (0.52-1.24) 1.91 (1.31-2.50) 2.15 (1,63-2.65) 2.80 (2.35-3.25) 17 Oulu .33 (.24- .40) .60 (.35- .85) 2.05 (1.61-2.49) 2.86 (2.25-3,47) 1.03 (0.79-1.27) .76 (0.51-1.00) 1.75 (0.89-2.61) 2.33 (1.08-3.57) 1.12 (0.87-1.36) 18 Haukipudas .24 (.12- .36) .56 (.53- .58) 2.04 (1.14-2.93) 1.73 (0.38-3.08) .78 (.62- .93) .50 (.46- .54) 1.52 (0.17-2.87) 1.51 (1.46-1.55) 1.34 (0.99-1.69) 19 li .29 (.03- .45) 2.02 (1.64-2.40) 2.59 (1.30-3,87) .75 (.52- .97) .51 (.44- .57) 1.11 (0.02-2.19) 1.47 (1.36-1.57) 1.46 (1.11-1.80) 20 Olhava .10 (.09- .10) 1.17 (1.17) 2.93 (2.19-3.67) .66 (.45- .86) 29 Salla .12 (.03- .30) 1.14 (0.93-1.34) 2.08 (1.40-2.75) .87 (0.66-1.07) 30 Kemijärvi .23 (.29- .37) 1.45 (1.18-1.72) 2.83 (1.75-3.91) .76 (.76) 31 Inari .32 (.03- .52) .43 (.36- .49) 1.00 (0.94-1.15) ,90 (-) 1.16 (0.09-2.40) 1.09 (0.03-2.21) 2.04 (1.69-2.38) 1.52 (1.47-1.56) 32 Ilomantsi .20 (.05- .34) 1.83 (1.76-1.89) 4.42 (1.58-7.25) .62 (0.09-1.15) 43 Kemin mlk .18 (.11- .24) 1.59 (1.18-1.99) 48 Saarijärvi .31 (.26- .35) .22 (.10- .34) 2.18 (2.11-2.24) 1.26 (1.08-1.44) .93 (-) 49 Outokumpu .40 (.26- .54) .48 (-) 2.62 (2.62) 1.42 (1.07-1.76) .95 (0.58-1.32) 1.35 (1.35) 9.38 (-) 50 Outokumpu .45 (.12- .77) .47 (-) 2.24 (2.04-2.44) 1.38 (1.24-1.52) .80 (0.59-1.00) 1.11 (1.04-1.17) 7.59 (-) 51 Maaninka .28 (.25- .30) 1.81 (-) 1.07 (0.87-1.27) .86 (0.39-1.33) 1.18 (0.91-1.44) 52 Maaninka .19 (.19) .42 (.26- .58) 2.43 (2.14-2.71) .90 (0.69-1.10) 1.00 (-)