Emami, H. (2012). Investigating the Sustainability Situation of Agricultural Soils in Karaj Plain. , 26(3), 245-254. doi: 10.22092/ijsr.2012.126403
Hojat Emami. "Investigating the Sustainability Situation of Agricultural Soils in Karaj Plain". , 26, 3, 2012, 245-254. doi: 10.22092/ijsr.2012.126403
Emami, H. (2012). 'Investigating the Sustainability Situation of Agricultural Soils in Karaj Plain', , 26(3), pp. 245-254. doi: 10.22092/ijsr.2012.126403
Emami, H. Investigating the Sustainability Situation of Agricultural Soils in Karaj Plain. , 2012; 26(3): 245-254. doi: 10.22092/ijsr.2012.126403

Investigating the Sustainability Situation of Agricultural Soils in Karaj Plain

پژوهش های خاک
Volume 26, Issue 3, December 2022, Pages 245-254    PDF (281.4 K)
Document Type: Research Paper
DOI: 10.22092/ijsr.2012.126403
Author
Hojat Emami*
Assistant professor of soil science Dept. Ferdowsi university of Mashhad
Abstract
Physical, chemical, and biological characteristics of soils are considered for studying soil quality, which has high importance for evaluating the degradation or improvement of lands. The soil quality of 140 samples in Karaj plain (Iran) was evaluated by using cumulative rating (CR) and Sustainability Index (SI) approaches. Some soil attributes such as, organic carbon percent (OC), mean weight diameter of aggregates (MWD), the slope of retention curve at inflection point (Sgi index), plant available water content (AWC), aeration porosity (Fa), acidity (pH), electrical conductivity (ECe), and sodium absorption ratio (SAR) of saturated paste extraction, soil texture, relatively field capacity (RFC), and bulk density (Bd) were measured for all 140 soil samples. SI for each sample was determined according to Sgi index, Fa, Bd, MWD, AWC, and OC. Relative weighing factor (RFC) was calculated for all attributes to determine CR. Then, sustainability situation of each sample was determined based on summation of RFC values. The results of SI approach showed that 62.14 % of the studied soils had unsustainable quality for use as agricultural land. In the studied soils, only 2.14 % had sustainable situation based on CR approach, 37.86 % will be sustained if more inputs or proper management are applied (such as returning the plant residues, reducing the tillage operatons, and modern irrigation methods) and 60 % were unsustainable for agricultural purposes. Thus, it seems that special management practices are necessary for the studied regions, which are located in arid and semi- arid area.
Keywords
Sustainability Index; Cumulative rating; Soil quality; Soil management
References
  1. امامی، ح.، شرفا، م.، نیشابوری، م.ر. و لیاقت، ع.ا. 1387. برآورد شاخص کیفیت فیزیکی خاک با استفاده از ویژگی­های زود‌یافت خاک در تعدادی از خاکهای شور و آهکی. مجله تحقیقات آب و خاک ایران. 39 (1): 39-46.
  2. امامی، ح.، نیشابوری، م.ر.، شرفا، م. و لیاقت، ع.ا. 1386. تعیین شاخص کیفیت فیزیکی خاک با استفاده از پارامترهای معادله ون­گن­اختن و توابع انتقالی در تعدادی از خاکهای آهکی و شور سدیمی. دهمین کنگره علوم خاک ایران. کرج، ایران.
  3. بای بوردی، م. 1379. اصول مهندسی آبیاری، رابطه آب و خاک. جلد اول. انتشارات دانشگاه تهران. چاپ هفتم. ص 709.
  4. برزگر، ع.ا. 1380. مبانی فیزیک خاک. انتشارات دانشگاه شهید چمران. چاپ اول. ص252.
  5. سالاردینی، ع.ا. 1374. حاصلخیزی خاک. انتشارات دانشگاه تهران. چاپ پنجم. ص.440.
  6. شهاب آرخازلو، ح.، حق نیا، غ.ح.، امامی، ح. و کریمی کارویه، ع.ر. 1390. بررسی تاثیر شاخص­های کیفیت خاک بر فرسایش­پذیری خاک­های کشاورزی و مرتع. دوازدهمین کنگره علوم خاک ایران. تبریز، ایران.
  7. علیزاده، ا. 1380. رابطه آب و خاک و گیاه. انتشارات آستان قدس رضوی. چاپ دوم. ص353.
  8. Allmaras, R.R., V.A. Fritz., F.L. PFLEGER., and S.M. Copeland. 2002. Impaired internal drainage and Aphanomyces euteiches root rot of pea caused by soil compaction in a fine-textured soil. Soil and Tillage Research. 1740:1-12.
  9. Denef, K., J. Six., H. Bossuyt., S.D. Frey., E.T. Elliott., R. Merckx., and K. Paustian. 2001. Influence of dry–wet cycles on the interrelationship between aggregate, particulate organic matter, and microbial community dynamics. Soil Biology Biochemi. 33:1599–1611.
  10. Dexter A.R. 2004. Soil physical quality. Part I: Theory, effects of soil texture, density, and organic matter, and effects on root growth. Geoderma, 120:201-214.
  11. Drury, C.F., T.Q. Zhang, and B.D. Kay. 2003. The non-limiting and least limiting water range for soil nitrogen mineralization. Soil Science Society of America Journal. 67:1388-1404.
  12. Gomez A.A., D.E.S. Kelly, J.K. Syers, and K.J. Coughlan. 1996. Measuring sustainability of agricultural systems at farm level, pp. 401-410. In: Doran J.W. and Jones A.J., Eds. Methods for assessing soil quality. SSSA Special Publication Number 49, Soil Science Society of America, INC., Madison, WI.
  13. Govaerts, B. Sayre, K.D., and Deckers, J. 2006. A minimum data set for soil quality assessment of wheat and maize cropping in the highlands of Mexico. Soil & Tillage Research, 87:163–174.
  14. Gregorich, E.G., Carter, M.R., Doran, J.W., Pankhurst, C.E., and Dwyer, L.M. 1997. Biological attributes of soil quality. In: Gregorich, E.G., Carter, M.R. (Eds.), Soil Quality for Crop Production and Ecosystem Health. New York, NY, pp. 81–114.
  15. Lal R. 1994. Soil Methods and guidelines for Sustainable use of soil and water resources in the tropics. Soil Management Support System, USDA,-NRCS. Washington, DC.
  16. Lal, R., 1993. Tillage effects on soil degradation, soil resilience, soil quality and sustainability. Soil & Tillage Research, 27:1–8.
  17. Lal, R., D. Mokma, and B. Lowery. 1999. Relation between soil quality and erosion, pp. 237–258, In: R. Lal, (ed.), Soil quality and soil erosion. Soil and Water Conservation Society, Ankeny, IO.
  18. Reynolds W.D., C.F. Drury, C.S. Tan, C.A. Fox, and X.M. Yang. 2009. Use of indicators and pore volume function characteristics to quantify physical quality. Geoderma, 152: 252-263.
  19. Reynolds, W.D., B.T. Bowman., C.F. Drury., C.S. Tan., and X. Lu. 2002. Indicators of good soil physical quality: density and storage parameters. Geoderma. 110:131-146.
  20. Shukla M.K., R. Lal, and M. Ebinger. 2004. Soil quality indicators for reclaimed mine soils in southeastern Ohio. Soil Sci. 169:133–142.
  21. Shukla, M.K., Lal, R., Ebinger, M. 2006. Determining soil quality indicators by factor analysis. Soil & Tillage Research, 87:194–204.
  22. Silva, A.P., and B.D. Kay. 1996. The sensitivity of shoot growth of corn to the least limiting water range of soils. Plant and Soil. 184: 323-329.
  23. Singh M.J. and K.L. Khera. 2009. Physical indicators of soil quality in relation to soil erodibility under different land uses. Arid Land Research and Management, 23:152-167.
  24. Topp, G.C., W.D. Reynolds., F.J. Cook., J.M. Kirby., and M.R. Carter. 1997. Physical attributes of soil quality. In: Gregorich, E.G., Carter, M.R. (Eds.), Soil Quality for Crop Production and Ecosystem Health. Developments in Soil Science. 25: 21– 58.
  25. Van Genuchten, M.Th. 1980. A closed-form equation for predicting the hydraulic conductivity of unsaturated soils. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 44:892–898.
  26. Van Genuchten, M.Th., Leij, F.J., and Yates, S.R. 1990. The RETC Code for Quantifying the Hydraulic Functions of the Unsaturated Soils. Res. Rep. 6002-91065. USEPA, Ada, OK.
  27. Wallace, A., and R.E. Terry. 1998. Soil conditioners, soil quality and soil sustainability. In: Wallace, A., Terry, R.E. (Eds.), Handbook of Soil Conditioners. Marcel Dekker, New York, NY, pp. 1 – 41.

 

Statistics
Article View: 361
PDF Download: 357


counter
Journal management system. designed by sinaweb