Shaghayegh Havaee; Ardavan Kamali; Norair toomanian
Abstract
Introduction: Sustainable management of natural resources is one of the main goals of land use planning and is quite complicated due to various interactions in any given ecosystem. Therefore soil as the bed for interactions of main ecosystem components can be a good indicator candidate as the main requirements ...
Read More
Introduction: Sustainable management of natural resources is one of the main goals of land use planning and is quite complicated due to various interactions in any given ecosystem. Therefore soil as the bed for interactions of main ecosystem components can be a good indicator candidate as the main requirements of sustainable land use management. Soil classification is a valuable technique for transferring a large set of data along with soil history and is a necessary tool for zoning and soil management plans. This indicates efficiency and potential of classification for showing inner and outer soil properties and stimulating for achieving the best possible soil classification system. Among various existing soil classifications, the World Reference Base for Soil Resources (WRB) as an international soil classification system and USDA Soil Taxonomy (STus) are more globally accepted and applied. In both systems soil orders are similar and their classifications are based on acceptable rules. However each one of them has its own characteristics and reflects its potentials. Also the relationship between soil and landscape and the necessity of sustainable nature management convert soil classification to a tool which is essential for appropriate management decisions about utilization and conservation of natural resources. This study was conducted to investigate the efficiency of Soil Taxonomy and WRB for classification of developed soils of Zayandeh-rud River’s upper terrace.
Materials and Methods: This study applied on the current pathway of Zayandeh-rud River. Several pedons were studied in a semi-detailed scale study. Finally, four different pedons were selected. Routine physical and chemical analyses Selected physicochemical properties of the soil samples were determined according to the Soil Survey Laboratory Manual and soils were classified according to Soil Taxonomy (2014) and WRB (2015) systems. Argillic (Argic), and Cambic diagnostic horizons were investigated after field and laboratory work.
Results: Based on both field and lab studies, for these soil pedons due to lithologic discontinuity, presence or absence of Cambic horizon and accumulated clay horizon, four different sequence of horizons are realizable. Calceric matrix of soil pedons is also another prominent property of them. Due to aridity condition of the region and presence of Argilic horizon based on STus, all soil pedons were classified in great group of Haplargids. According to WRB, all pedons considered as reference group of Luvisols. As the results show, the difference between these two systems of classification was originated at family level for STus and qualifiers for WRB. In fact the difference is due to environmental qualifiers and intrinsic soil profile propertie. STus is performing better than WRB indefining the environmental conditions. Such pattern reflects the climate conditions in any given soil name. Moisture regime (Aridic) at order level (Argids) and temperature conditions (Thermic) at family level have been realized for all soil pedons. However WRB not only at first level but also for second level of classification (qualifiers) was not able to indicate. On the other hand this study results showed that main qualifiers have enhanced WRB efficiency compared to STus and was also able to define the variety of horizon sequences. STus did not show such potential even at family level and all four soils were classified under one name.
Based on the findings of the research, using qualifiers and little laboratory data requirement by WRB caused this system to be more successful than Soil Taxonomy to describe internal attributes in the pedons. WRB was more flexible in reflecting described properties in soil nomenclature. But WRB was not able to reflect soil variability in this semi-detailed study, completely. Also results showed that Soil Taxonomy couldcharacterize environmental properties of soils using soil moisture and temperature regimes. On the other hand, the presence or absence of Cambic diagnostic horizon in the four pedons can indicate a difference in their evolutionary pathway, but the presence or absence of Cambic horizon has been disregard in the names of both systems.
Conclusion: The efficiency of each system is vary according to the aims of soil survey, and both systems have advantages and disadvantages in relation to displaying the internal features and the soil environment. The WRB was more succeed than STUS in displaying variety of the characteristics of developed soils in this study, due to its advantages such as Clayic, Cutanic, Ochric, Ruptic, Endocalcaric and also requires less laboratory data. On the other hands, WRB is facing a serious challenge to management objectives related to climatic conditions and vegetation. Therefore, it can be concluded that purpose and scale of a study affects the efficiency of Soil Taxonomy and WRB classification systems to describe soil properties.
R. Karimi; M.H. Salehi; Z. Mosleh
Abstract
Nowadays, changing the rangelands to agriculture and garden is common. To investigate the impact of land use change on the soils type and clay mineralogy, four land uses including rangeland with poor vegetation, agricultural land, new and old apple orchards were selected in Safashahr area, Fars province. ...
Read More
Nowadays, changing the rangelands to agriculture and garden is common. To investigate the impact of land use change on the soils type and clay mineralogy, four land uses including rangeland with poor vegetation, agricultural land, new and old apple orchards were selected in Safashahr area, Fars province. In each land use, three soil profiles were excavated and described and one profile was considered as representative. After required physical and chemical analyses, they were classified according to Soil Taxonomy (ST) and the World Reference Base for Soil Resources (WRB). Selected surface and subsurface samples were also collected for clay mineralogy studies. Results showed that changing land use did not have significant effect on soil type and clay minerals and all soils consist of mica, chlorite, smectite, kaolinite and mixed layer minerals. Results demonstrated that ST is more efficient compared to WRB to classify the studied soils.
