جستجوی مقالات مرتبط با کلیدواژه « سامانه رده بندی » در نشریات گروه « کشاورزی »

 Soil classification is the systematic categorization of soils based on distinguishing soil characteristics, aiding in the comprehension of soil properties through soil surveys, and establishing suitable strategies for effective soil utilization and management. One of the main reasons for creating soil classification systems is to identify the differences in important soil characteristics for management purposes. Globally, Soil Taxonomy (ST) and the World Reference Base for soil resources (WRB) are widely used for soil classification. However, these two classification systems have varying criteria which can pose difficulties when exchanging classification results. After years of intensive worldwide testing and data collection, new versions of the ST and WRB systems have been released. In its current state, ST has a strong hierarchy with six categorical levels: order, suborder, great group, subgroup, family, and series (Soil Survey Staff, 2022), while the WRB has a flat hierarchy with only two categorical levels: reference soil groups and soil units (IUSS Working Group WRB, 2022). Several scientists have endeavored to evaluate the merits and demerits of these soil classification systems and offer recommendations for their enhancement. The arid and semi-arid regions located in the western and southwestern parts of Kohgiluyeh and Boyerahmad Province, distinguished by their considerable diversity in parent materials, topography, climate, and land use, present an excellent opportunity for scrutinizing and contrasting the effectiveness of soil classification systems. Remarkably, no prior research has delved into this subject in this specific geographical area. Consequently, this research aims to compare the effectiveness of the ST and WRB systems in characterizing soil attributes. Furthermore, it seeks to analyze the alterations that these two systems have undergone during an eight-year period, spanning from 2014 to 2022.

This study was conducted in the western and southwestern regions of Kohgiluyeh and Boyerahmad Province, specifically in the divisions of Gachsaran, Basht, Choram and Kohgiluyeh. A total of 26 soil profiles were excavated, described, and sampled based on aerial photos, satellite images, topographical and geological maps, as well as field observations. These profiles were selected following the soil description guide provided by the Department of Soil Conservation of the US Department of Agriculture. Subsequently, after reviewing the preliminary results and aligning with the research objectives, 12 representative soil profiles were chosen for further analysis. Soil samples were collected from all genetic horizons and transferred to the laboratory. After air-drying, the samples were passed through a two-millimeter sieve and the routine physical and chemical analyses were conducted, including soil texture, pH, electrical conductivity (EC), calcium carbonate equivalent (CCE), organic carbon, cation exchange capacity (CEC), and gypsum analyses. For mineralogical studies, soil clay minerals were separated and identified using standard methods. Additionally, soil thin sections were prepared from intact soil samples of selected soil horizons and examined under a polarizing microscope. Finally, the soil profiles were classified based on the criteria outlined in Soil Taxonomy (2022) and WRB (2022).

Soil Taxonomy and WRB, as the two most popular classification systems, aim to encompass as manysoil characteristics as possible. According to the ST classification, the soils were classified into four orders: Entisols, Inceptisols, Alfisols, and Mollisols. In the WRB system, they were grouped into seven reference soil groups: Regosols, Flovisols, Luvisols, Cambisols, Kastanosems, Gypsysols and Glysols. The results revealed that WRB was significantly more effective in describing the characteristics of the studied soils. One of the key advantages of this two-level system is its flexibility, allowing for the inclusion of additional principal and supplementary qualifiers to cover all essential soil characteristics. Moreover, in many cases, WRB exhibits better prioritization compared to ST. For example, the presence of gypsic, combic, calcic horizons, as well as fluvic and gley properties, can allocate the soil to the reference groups of Gypsisols, Cambisols, Calsisols, Fluvisols, and Gleysols, respectively. However, a limitation of the WRB system is the absence of mineralogical information in soil classification. Enhancing this classification system's quality and making it more appealing to planners could be achieved by incorporating suitable mineralogical attributes for the reference groups or criteria that express soil fertility conditions with relatively straightforward measurements. In addition, it is proposed to add three subgroups to ST: Gypsic Haplustalfs, Fluventic Gypsiustepts and Cambic Haplustolls. Similarly, following the WRB model, it is recommended to introduce a qualifier in ST to indicate the presence of lithological discontinuity. Regarding the WRB system, suggestions include adding qualifiers such as "Cutanic" to gypsisols with clay films, "hypercalcic" to reference groups of Kastanozems and Luvisols with a calcic horizon comprising more than 50% of calcium carbonate, and "aridic" for better expression of soil characteristics with Aridic-Ustic moisture regimes.

The results of this research demonstrated that WRB is more effective in describing the conditions and characteristics of the studied soils. The WRB system, through its diverse set of qualifiers, is capable of representing field conditions more efficiently. However, it is suggested that the surveyors have the freedom to select an appropriate qualifier from the list provided by WRB without limitation, which can enhance its success in practical applications. Furthermore, it is recommended that both classification systems be used to categorize soils, not only to evaluate their efficiency for the soils in other regions but also to gain a comprehensive understanding of their suitability for different contexts.

Increasing demand for an international classification system as a unique language in soil science has caused development of different classification systems. Soil classification is a useful tool for understanding and managing soils. In recent decades, the role of human in soil formation has become a matter of great concern among soil scientists. Human is now considered as a soil-forming factor and anthrosolization is recognized as a soil-forming process that consists of a collection of geomorphic and pedological processes resulting from human activities. Industrial developments, mines and their activities and intensive agriculture led to soil changes in urban areas. One of the important missions of soils classification is to identify important properties which have effect on management purposes. In recent years, the importance of human impact on soil properties considered in soil classification systems like American Soil Taxonomy (2014) and World Reference Base (2015) and some revisions and changes have been made in this regard. In this study, the efficiency of American Soil Taxonomy and WRB soil classification systems soils were compared to describe the pollution of soils to heavy metals in Lenjanat region of Isfahan, Iran.
Agricultural lands located in Lenjanat region of Isfahan province were selected as the study area. Lenjanat is an industrial region in which intensive agriculture surrounded by different industries like steel and cement making factories and lead mining. Agricultural lands which consisted of five soil map units (Khomeini Shahr, Nekooabad, Isfahan, Lenjan and Zayandehroud) were selected and 400 topsoil samples were randomly collected. Six soil profiles were excavated in each map unit (totally 30 soil profiles) and after describing soil, the classification of soils was determined in the field. Then, representative pedons were chosen for each unit and routine soil morphological, physical and chemical properties were determined using common methods. Finally, the soil profiles were classified according to criteria of Soil Taxonomy up to family level and (WRB) at the second level. The amount of heavy metals was studied in some agricultural crops of the region and livestock muscles in the region. Total Cd and Pb were extracted from the soil samples using concentrated HNO3. Cadmium and lead of plant samples were prepared according to the procedure of Dry-ashing. Heavy metals were extracted by 3 N HCl. The metal contents of soil and plant samples were determined by flame atomic absorption spectrometry (FAAS). Descriptive statistics including mean, variance, maximum, minimum, and coefficient of variation (CV) were calculated using STATISTICA 6.0 software.
According to WRB (2015) classification, the soils were classified as 3 reference groups: Cambisols, Gleysols and Calcisols. The soils were also categorized as Aridisols and Inceptisols in Soil Taxonomy system. In this study, the environmental standards based on Swiss Federal Office of Environmental, Forest and Landscape were used for the threshold values of heavy metals pollution in the soils (VBBo). The results also indicate that the amount of cadmium in most of the soil samples was higher than the threshold limit. The amount of lead in soils was below the threshold limit. The results also indicated that all the crops had a lead average higher than the maximum of tolerance. The average of lead in cow and sheep livestock was also above Iran and Europe Union’s permissible limit. Despite American soil taxonomy classification system in the last version has a class (Anthraltic, Anthraquic, Anthrodensic, Anthropic) to show human impacts on soils at family level, it could not show the contamination of soils to heavy metals. However, WRB soil classification system defined qualifier “toxic” (Anthrotoxic, Ecotoxic, Phytotoxic, Zootoxic) which can be used in these conditions. Both systems had serious shortcomings to show poor drained soils in this area. Defining the Aquids suborder for Aridiosols in American Soil Taxonomy and revision of the definition of Gleysols, Anthrosols and also aquic conditions in WRB soil classification system are highly recommended.
The results indicated that WRB soil classification system could explain the soils pollution and also their effects on human health for the studied soils. Definition of some quantitative sub qualifiers for toxic can be useful to improve the efficiency of WRB for classifying polluted soils. Incorporating some criteria for pollution hazards in American Soil Taxonomy should be considered in early future.