بررسی تغییرات مکانی برخی ویژگی‌های خاک و عملکرد گل محمدی (مطالعه موردی شهرستان بردسیر، استان کرمان)

نوع مقاله : مقالات پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 دانشگاه شهرکرد

2 دانشگاه ولی عصر (عج) رفسنجان

چکیده

وجود تغییرات مکانی در خصوصیات خاک امری بدیهی به­شمار می­رود، با این حال درک از دلایل و منشأ این تغییـرات کامـل نیست. پژوهش حاضر با هدف بررسی تغییرپذیری مکانی ویژگی­های خاک و عملکرد گل محمدی در دو مزرعه معروف (مزارع نگار و گلزار) با ویژگی­های متفاوت اقلیمی و توپوگرافی در شهرستان بردسیر انجام شد. برای نیل به اهداف مطالعه، در هر یک از مزارع تعداد 100 نمونه خاک و محصول برداشت شد. پس از اندازه­گیری ویژگی­های خاک و ویژگی­های گیاهی، با استفاده از روش زمین آماری کریجینگ اقدام به پهنه­بندی ویژگی­های خاک و گل محمدی گردید. تجزیه نیم­تغییرنماها نشان داد که تمامی متغیرهای بررسی شده در هر دو مزرعه دارای ساختار مکانی قوی و متوسط می­باشند. دامنه تأثیر تغییرنماها در مزرعه نگار از 16/122 متر برای عملکرد گل محمدی تا 46/218 متر برای سیلت و در مزرعه گلزار از 1/115 متر برای پتاسیم قابل استفاده تا 228 متر برای نیتروژن کل در تغییر است. نتایج نشان دادند که ویژگی­های عملکرد گیاه و ویژگی­های خاک حتی در مقیاس­های کوچک دارای وابستگی مکانی هسـتند. نقشه­های کریجینگ نشان می­دهند که الگو و پراکنش ویژگی­های خاک حتی درون یک مزرعهمی­تواند بسیار متفاوت باشد؛ هرچند که مقایسه الگوی مکانی برخی ویژگی­های خاک مانند ماده آلی و نیتروژن کل با الگوی مکانی ویژگی­های گیاه و ابعاد مزارع مطابقت نشان داد. این امر نشان‌دهنده آن است که تغییرپذیری ویژگی­های مزبور عمدتاً تحت مدیریت زارعین قرار گرفته است و برای رعایت بهینه مصرف عناصر غذایی بایستی میـزان مصرف نهاده­ها توسط مدیران مزرعه مورد بازنگری قرار گیرد.

کلیدواژه‌ها


عنوان مقاله [English]

Assessment of the Spatial Variability of some Soil Characteristics and Yield of Rosa damasceneea Mill (Case Study: Bardsir City, Kerman Province)

نویسندگان [English]

  • Morteza Bahmani 1
  • jahangard Mohammadi 1
  • Isa Esfandiarpour Boroujeni 2
  • Hamidreza Mottaghian 1
  • Keramatollah Saeidi 1
1 Shahrekord university
2 Vali-e-Asr Univ. of Rafsanjan
چکیده [English]

Introduction: The importance and the presence of spatial variability in soil properties is inevitable, however, the understanding of causes and sources of the variability is not complete. Spatial variation of soil attributes can affect the quality and quantity of plants. Investigation of the soil variability at the small scale can be evaluated by classic statistics and geospatial statistics. The present study was conducted to investigate the spatial variability of yield characteristics of rose (Rosa Damasceneea Mill) and soil characteristics in two main cultivated fields of rose (Negar- Golzar) with different climatic and topographic characteristics located in Bardsir city, Kerman Province.
Materials and Methods: In order to achieve the objectives of the present study, 100 soil and plant samples were collected from each farm. The soil samples were taken from 0 to 25 cm depth and analyzed. The measured soil properties at each location were including fragment, clay, silt, sand, and organic matter contents, CEC, calcium carbonate equivalent, EC, pH, total nitrogen, available phosphorus, and available potassium. Moreover, some plant characteristics (yield, plant height, and plant crown diameter) were measured at each point. Then, maps of soil properties and plant induces were prepared using Geoeas, Variowin, and surfer software. Descriptive statistics were applied using Statistica software (version 20). Kolmogorov-Smirnov test was also used to test the tolerance of variables distribution.
Results and Discussion: The results of Kolmogorov-Smirnov test showed that all characteristics of the plant and soil in both farms follow the normal distribution. Statistical analysis showed that coefficient of variation of soil properties was as follows: total nitrogen (54.47%) and pH (3.16%) in Negar farm, and EC (46.09%) and pH (35.3%) in Golzar farm. The variability of nutrients in both farms had similar trends, so that total nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium have the highest to lowest coefficients of variation, respectively. Analysis of variograms indicated that all of the variables in both fields have a strong and moderate spatial variability. Ranges for variograms were from 122.16m (for yield) to 218.46 m (for silt) in Negar farm and from 115.1m (for available K) to 228 m for (total nitrogen) in Golzar unit. The distribution conditions and spatial variations of the soil properties in the study area were not uniform due to variation of the range of the variograms. The results also showed that the yield characteristics of the rose with some soil characteristics have a closer spatial relationship. About this, in the Negar farm, the range of the rose flower yield was close to the clay, available potassium and calcium carbonate contents. In the Golzar farm, the range of rose flower yield was close to the range of clay, silt, fragments and available phosphorus contents. The spatial correlation ratio showed that all plant characteristics including plant yield, plant height and plant diameter had a strong spatial correlation in the Golzar farm, and all characteristics of the soil were in the medium spatial correlation. Also, in the Negar farm, the product yield characteristics were in a strong spatial correlation class, and all other characteristics were in the medium spatial correlation. Kriging maps showed that soil characteristics and product yield in the study area had spatial distribution. The similarity of the spatial distribution pattern of some variables was one of the important features that these maps showed.
Conclusion: The results of this study showed the characteristics of plant yield and soil characteristics have a moderate to strong spatial dependency even in small scales. Kriging maps illustrated that the pattern and distribution of soil properties even within a farm can be varied. However, the spatial pattern of some soil characteristics such as organic matter and total nitrogen with the spatial pattern of plant characteristics and the dimensions of the farms showed conformity. This indicates that the variability of these characteristics is mainly under the management of farmers, and in order to optimize the use of nutrients, inputs should be re-evaluated by farm managers. In general, the results of this study indicated geostatistical method can be used to recognize of control factors of plant production and use its information in order to improve management.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Spatial variability
  • Geostatistics
  • Variograms
  • Kriging
1. Afshar H., Salehi M.H., Mohammadi J., and Mehnatkesh A. 2009. Spatial variability of soil properties and irrigated wheat yield in a quantitative suitability map, a case study: Shahr-e-Kian area, Chaharmahal va Bakhtiari Province, Journal of Water and Soil 23(1): 161-172. (In Persian with English abstract)
2. Al-Kanani T., Mackenzi A.F., and Ross G.J. 1984. Potassium status of some Quebec soils: K release by nitric acid and sodium tetraphenylboron as related to particle size and mineralogy, Canadian Journal Soil Science 64: 99-106.
3. Ayoubi Sh., Mohammad Zamani S., and Khormali F. 2007. Prediction total N by organic matter content using some geostatistic approaches in part of farm land of Sorkhankalateh, Golestan Province, Journal of Agricultural Sciencesand Natural Resources 14(4): 23-33.
4. Bameri A., Khormali F., Kiani F., and Dehghani A.A. 2012. Spatial variability of soil organic carbon on different slope positions of loess hillslopes in Toshan area, Golestan Province, Journal of Soil and Water Conservation 19(2): 43-60. (In Persian with English abstract)
5. Baxter S.J., Oliver M.A., and Gaunt J. 2003. A geostatistical analysis of the spatial variation of soil mineral nitrogen and potentially available nitrogen within an arablefield, Precision Agriculture 4: 213–226.
6. Baxter S.J., and Oliver M.A. 2005. The spatial prediction of soil mineral N and potentially available N using elevation, Geoderma 128: 325–339.
7. Beckett P.H.T., and Webster R. 1971. Soil variability: a review, Soil Fertility 34: 1-15.
8. Bocchi S., Castrignano A., Fornaro F., and Maggiore T. 2000. Application of factorial kriging for mapping soil variation at field scale, European Journal of Agronomy 13: 295-308.
9. Bremner J.M., and Mulvaney C.S. 1982. Total nitrogen. PP. 595-624. In: A. L. Page (Ed.), Methods of Soil Analysis. Agron. No. 9, Part 2: Chemical and Microbiological Properties, 2nd ed., Am. Soc. Argon., Madison, WI, USA.
10. Cambardella C.A., Moorman T.B., Parkin T.B., Karlen D.L., Turco R.F., and Konopka A.E. 1994. Field scale variability ofsoil properties in Central Iowa soils, Soil Science Society of America Journal 58: 1501-1511.
11. Chang W.E., You B.A., Yun J.N., Zang F., and Xio L.U. 2009. Spatial variability of soil chemical properties in the reclaiming marine foreland to Yellow sea of China, Agricultural Sciences in China 8(9): 1103–1111.
12. Cheng X., An S., Chen J., and Li B. 2006. Spatial relationships among species above-ground biomass, N, P in degraded grasslandin Ordos Plateau, Journal of Arid Environment 30: 75-88.
13. Dixson W.J., and Massey S.J. 1985. Introduction to statistical analysis, 4th edition. Mc Graw Hill book Company.
14. Foroughifar H., Jafarzadah A.A., Torabi Gelsefidi H., Aliasgharzadah N., Toomanian N., and Davatgar N. 2010. Spatial variations of surface soil physical and chemical properties on different landforms of Tabriz plain, Journal of Soil and Water Science 21(3): 1-21. (In Persian with English abstract)
15. Gee W., and Bauder J.W. 1986. Particle size analysis. In: Klute A (Eds.), Method of soil analysis. Part 1. SSSA. Madison. Wisconsin pp. 383-411.
16. Golden Software. 2002. Surfer for Windows. Version 8, Golden Software Inc., Golden Co., USA.
17. Goovarets P. 1997. Geostatistics for Natural Resources Evaluation, Oxford Univ. Press, UK.
18. Habashi H., 2007. Relationship soil properties and spatial pattern of trees and groups of trees in mixed Beech in the Shastkalate mixed Fagetum o Gorgan. PhD thesis of Forestry. Tarbiat Modarres University. 139 Pp. (In persian with English abstract)
19. Hasani pak A.A. 1998. Geostatistical, Tehran University Press, 314 Pp. (In Persian)
20. Hashemi M., Gholamalizadeh Ahangar A., Bameri A., Sarani F., and Hejazizadeh A. 2015. Survey and Zoning of Soil Physical and Chemical Properties Using Geostatistical Methods in GIS (Case Study: Miankangi Region in Sistan), Journal of Water and Soil 30(2): 443-458. (In Persian with English abstract)
21. Jafarian Z., Arzani H., Jafari M., Kalarestaghi A., Zahedi G.H., and Azarnivand H. 2009. Spatial distribution of soil properties using geostatistical methods in Rineh Rangelands, Journal of Iranian Rangeland 3(3): 107-120. (In Persian with English abstract)
22. Jianbing Wu., Boucher A., and Zhang T. 2008. A SGeMS code for pattern simulation of continuous and categorical variables: FILTERSIM, Computers and Geosciences 4(12): 1863-1876.
23. Johnson R.M., Downer R.G., Bradow J.M., Bauer P.J., and Sadler E.J. 2002. Variability in Cotton Fiber Yield, Fiber Quality, and Soil Properties in a Southeastern Coastal Plain, Agron. Journal 94: 1305–1316.
24. Karlen D.L., Sadler E.J., and Busschaer W.J. 1990. Crop yield variation associated with coastal plain soil map units, Soil Sci. Soc. Am. Journal 54: 859-865.
25. Kooch Y., Hosseini Mohammadi S.M., and Hojjati S.M. 2012. An Investigation in to Spatial Structure of Soil Characteristics in a Beech Forest Stand Using Geostatistical Approach, Journal Science and Technology of Agriculture and Natural Resource of Water and Soil Science 16(60): 239-250. (In Persian with English abstract)
26. McBratney A.B., Mendonca M.L., and Minasny B. 2003. On digital soil mapping, Geoderama 117: 3-52.
27. Miller M.P., Singer M.J. and Nielson D.R. 1988. Spatial variability of wheat yield and soil properties on complex hills, Soil Sci. Soc. Am. Journal 52: 1133-1141.
28. Mohammadi J. 2001. Review of the Geostatistical principles and its application in Soil Science, Journal of Soil and Water 15: 99-121.
29. Mohammadi J. 2006. Pedometer (Spatial Statistics), Second volume, published by Pelk, 240 pages. (In Persian)
30. Mohammad Zamani S., Ayoubi Sh., and Khormali F. 2007. Investigation of spatial variations of soil characteristics and wheat yield in a part of Agricultural Lands of SorkhanKelate, Golestan Province. Journal Science and Technology of Agriculture and Natural Resource of Water and Soil Science 11(40): 79-91. (In Persian with English abstract)
31. Neal M., Khademi H., and Hajabbasi M.A. 2004. Response of soil quality indicators and their spatial variability to land degradation in central Iran. Applied Soil Ecology 27: 221-232.
32. Nelson D.W., and Sommers L.E. 1982. Total carbon, organic carbon, and organic matter, p. 539-579. In: A. L. Page (Ed.) Methods of Soil Analysis Part 2. 2nd ed. Agron. Monogr 9. ASA and SSSA, Madison, WI.
33. Olsen S.R., and Sommers L.E. 1982. Phosphorus. PP. 403-430. In: A. L. Page (Ed.), Methods of soil analysis, Agron. No. 9, Part2: Chemical and Microbiological Properties, 2nd ed., Am. Soc. Agron., Madison, WI, USA.
34. Ovalls F.A., and Collins M.E. 1988. Variability of northwest Florida soils by principle component analysis, Soil Sci.Soc.Am. Journal 52: 143-1435.
35. Page A., Miller R., and Keeney D. 1982. Methods of Soil Analysis.2th ed. Part2: Chemical and biological properties. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. Inc. publisher.
36. Pcerri C.E., Bernoux M., and Chaplot V. 2004. Assessment of soilproperty spatial variation in an Amazon Pasture, Geodrama 123: 51-68.
37. Rogowski A.S., and Wolf J.K. 1994. Incorporating variability into soil map unit delineations, Soil Sci.Soc.Am. Journal 58: 163-174.
38. Shukla M.K., Lal R., and Ebinger M. 2004. Principal component analysis for predicting corn biomass and grain yield, Soil Science 169: 215-224
39. Vieira S.R., and Paz Gonzalez A. 2003. Analysis of the spatial variability of crop yield and soil properties in small agricultural plots, Bragantia, Campinas 62: 127-138.
40. Webster R., and Oliver M.A. 2001. Geostatistics for environmental scientists. John Wiley and Sons, Ltd., Chichester, UK. 271p.
41. Yaron D. 1981. Salinity in Irrigation Water Resources, Dekker, New York.
42. Zhang C.S., and McGrath D. 2004. Geostatistical and GIS analysis on soil organic carbon concentrations in grassland of southeastern Ireland from two different periods, Geoderma 119: 261-275.
43. Zhang X.Y., Sui Y.Y., Zhang X.D., Meng K., and Herbert S.A. 2007. Spatial variability of nutrient properties in black soil of northeast China, Pedosphere 17: 19-29.