مقایسه شاخص‌های کیفیت فیزیکی خاک سطحی و زیرسطحی زیر کشت آفتابگردان و گندم

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 کارشناسی ارشد، گروه علوم خاک، دانشگاه ارومیه

2 دانشیار گروه علوم خاک، دانشگاه ارومیه

چکیده

این پژوهش با هدف ارزیابی شاخص­های کیفیت فیزیکی (SPQ) خاک­های سطحی و زیرسطحی مزارع گندم و آفتابگردان دشت ارومیه انجام شد. از تجزیه مؤلفه­های اصلی (PCA) برای تفکیک تأثیر لایه­های خاک و نوع کشت بر SPQ استفاده شد. نمونه­برداری­ها و اندازه­گیری­ها در دو لایه (خاک سطحی و زیرسطحی) 30 مزرعه (پانزده مزرعه گندم و پانزده مزرعه آفتابگردان) انجام شد. منحنی­های نگهداری آب در خاک و مقاومت فروروی خاک در نمونه­های دست­نخورده به ترتیب با استفاده از دستگاه­های جعبه شن و صفحه فشار، و ریز-فروسنج اندازه­گیری شدند. سپس دامنه رطوبتی با حداقل محدودیت (LLWR)، گنجایش آب انتگرالی (IWC) و شاخص کیفیت فیزیکی خاک دکستر (S) محاسبه شد. تفاوت معنی­داری (p <0.05) بین مقادیر میانگین شاخص­های کیفیت فیزیکی خاک­های سطحی و زیرسطحی وجود داشت. مقادیر چگالی ظاهری نسبی (RBD) خاک­های زیرسطحی بزرگتر از مقادیر آنها در خاک­های سطحی بود. همچنین مقادیر IWC، LLWR، و S خاک­های زیرسطحی بسیار کوچکتر از مقادیر آنها در خاک­های سطحی بود که نشان­دهنده کیفیت فیزیکی ضعیف خاک زیرسطحی در مزارع مورد بررسی است. این یافته می­تواند به دلیل خاک­ورزی رایج با ماشین­های کشاورزی سنگین وزن (به ویژه در شرایط رطوبت زیاد خاک) در دهه­های گذشته باشد که سبب تشکیل کفه شخم در خاک زیرسطحی شده است. بنابراین پیشنهاد می­شود اصلاح سامانه های خاک­ورزی و پایش پیوسته اثر کشت و کار بر SPQ در منطقه انجام گیرد. ارزیابی شاخص­های SPQ مزارع گندم و آفتابگردان، با استفاده از مقایسه میانگین و PCA، نشان داد که مزارع گندم نسبت به مزارع آفتابگردان کیفیت فیزیکی خاک بهتری داشتند. تفاوت سامانه های ریشه­ های دو گیاه و تردد بیشتر انسان در مزارع آفتابگردان می­توانند دلایل اصلی کاهش کیفیت فیزیکی خاک در کشت آفتابگردان در مقایسه با کشت گندم باشند.

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات

عنوان مقاله [English]

Comparison of Physical Quality Indices of Topsoil and Subsoil under Wheat and Sunflower Cultivation

نویسندگان [English]

  • Ayoub Osmani 1
  • Hossein Asgarzadeh 2
  • Farrokh Asadzadeh 2
1 MSc., Department of Soil Science, Urmia University
2 Associate Professor, Department of Soil Science, Urmia University
چکیده [English]

This study was conducted to evaluate the soil physical quality (SPQ) indices of topsoil and subsoil of wheat and sunflower fields in Urmia plain. Principal component analysis (PCA) was used to distinguish the effect of soil layer and cultivation type on SPQ. Soil samplings and measurements were done in two layers (topsoil and subsoil) of 30 agricultural fields (15 wheat fields and 15 sunflower fields). Soil water retention and penetration resistance curves of undisturbed samples were determined using sand box and pressure plate, and micro-penetrometer, respectively. Then, least limiting water range (LLWR), integral water capacity (IWC), and Dexter’s index of soil physical quality (S-value) were calculated. There were significant differences (p < /em><0.05) in the mean values of physical quality indices between the topsoil and subsoil. The relative bulk density (RBD) values of subsoil were bigger than topsoil. Also, the IWC, LLWR, and S values of subsoil were much smaller than those of topsoil, indicating poor physical quality of subsoil layer in the studied fields. This might be related to conventional tillage with heavy machinery, especially under high soil moisture conditions in last decades, which induced some compaction effects in the subsoil. These findings recommend improving of tillage systems and continuous monitoring of cultivation effects on SPQ in the studied area. Evaluating the SPQ indices of wheat and sunflower fields, using the means comparison and PCA, showed that wheat fields had better soil physical quality compared to sunflower fields. The difference of root systems and more human trafficking in the sunflower fields could be the main reasons of lower soil physical quality in sunflower cultivation compared to wheat cultivation.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Least limiting water range
  • Integral water capacity
  • Soil penetration resistance
  • Dexter’s index

مراجع

  1. عسگرزاده، ح. و مصدقی، م.ر. 1392. پیشنهاد و ارزیابی یک روش آزمایشگاهی برای تعیین سریع کمیت­های مختلف آب قابل استفاده خاک برای گیاه. تحقیقات کاربردی خاک. جلد .1 شماره 1: 73-56.
  2. Arvidsson, J., and I. Håkansson. 1996. Do effects of soil compaction persist after ploughing? Results from 21 long-term field experiments in Sweden. Soil and Tillage Research, 39, 175–197.
  3. Asgarzadeh, H., Mosaddeghi, M.R., Mahboubi, A.A., Nosrati, A., and A.R. Dexter. 2010. Soil ‎water availability for plants as quantified by conventional available water, least limiting ‎water range and integral water capacity. Plant and Soil, ‎335 (1-2), 229–244.
  4. Asgarzadeh, H., Mosaddeghi, M.R., Mahboubi, A.A., Nosrati, A., and A.R. Dexter. 2011. Integral energy of conventional available water, least limiting water range and integral water capacity for better characterization of water availability and soil physical quality. Geoderma, 166, 34–42.
  5. Asgarzadeh, H., Mosaddeghi, M.R., and A.M. Nikbakht. 2014. SAWCal: a userfriendly program for calculating soil available water quantities and physical quality indices. Comput Electron Agric 109:86–93.
  6. Berisso, F.E., Schjønning, P., Keller, T., Lamandé, M., Etana, A., de Jonge, L.W., Iversen, B.V., Arvidsson, J., and J. Forkman. 2012. Persistent effects of subsoil compaction on pore size distribution and gas transport in a loamy soil. Soil and Tillage Research, 122, 42–51.
  7. Blake, G.R., and K.H. Hartge. 1986. Bulk density. In: Klute, A (Ed.), Methods of Soil Analysis: Part l – Physical and Mineralogical Methods, second ed. ASA/SSSA, Monograph 9, Madison, WI, pp. 374–380.
  8. Cherubin, M.R., Karlen, D.L., Cerri, C.E., Franco, A.L., Tormena, C.A., Davies, C.A., and C.C. Cerri. 2016. Soil quality indexing strategies for evaluating sugarcane expansion in Brazil. PloS one, 11(3): 0150860.
  9. Dexter, A.R. 2004a. Soil physical quality; Part I. Theory, effects of soil texture, density, and organic matter, and effects on root growth. Geoderma, 120, 201–214.
  10. Dexter, A.R. 2004b. Soil physical quality; Part II. Friability, tillage, tilth and hard-setting. Geoderma, 120, 215–225.
  11. Dexter, A.R. 2004c. Soil physical quality; Part III: Unsaturated hydraulic conductivity and general conclusions about S-theory. Geoderma, 120, 227–239
  12. Dexter, A.R., Czyż, E.A., and O.P. Gaţe. 2007. A method for prediction of soil penetration resistance. Soil Tillage Research. 93, 412–419.
  13. Da Silva, A.P., Kay, B.D., and E. Perfect. 1994. Characterization of the least limiting water range of soils. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J.,58(6), 1775-1781.
  14. Etana, A., Larsbo, M., Keller, T., Arvidsson, J., Schjønning, P., Forkman, J., and N. Jarvis. 2013. Persistent subsoil compaction and its effects on preferential flow patterns in a loamy till soil. Geoderma, 192, 430–436.
  15. Gee, G.W., and D. Or. 2002. Particle-size analysis. In: Dane, J.H., Topp, G.C. (Eds.): Methods of Soil Analysis. Part 4. SSSA Book Series No. 5. SSSA, Madison, WI. pp. 255–293.
  16. Groenevelt, P., Grant, C., and S. Semetsa. 2001. A new procedure to determine soil water availability. Soil Research, 39(3), 577-598.
  17. Håkansson, I. 1990. A method for characterizing the state of compactness of the plough layer. Soil and Tillage Research, 16, 105–120.
  18. Jones, C.A. 1983. Effect of soil texture on critical bulk densities for root growth. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J., 47, 1208– 1211.
  19. Jones, R.J.A., Spoor, G., and A.J. Thomasson. 2003. Vulnurability of subsoils in Europe to compaction; a preliminary analysis. Soil and Tillage Research, 73, 131–143.
  20. Kasap, A., and M. Coskun. 2006. Sunflower Yields and Energy Consumption as Affected by Tillage Systems. Asian Journal of Plant Sciences, 5(1), 37-40.
  21. Kazemi, Z., Neyshabouri, M.R., Haghi, D.Z., Asgarzadeh, H., Milani, A.O., Irani, M., and A.D.  Mohammadi Nasab. 2021. Revisiting integral water capacity on the basis of stomatal conductance at various soil and root length densities in sunflower plant. Agricultural Water Management, 243, 106451.
  22. Khalifezadeh Koureh, H., Asgarzadeh, H., Mosaddeghi, M.R., and H. Khodaverdiloo. 2020. Critical values of soil physical quality indicators based on vegetative growth characteristics of spring wheat (Triticum aestivum L.). Journal of Soil Science and Plant Nutrition, 20, 493–506.
  23. Langeroodi, A.R.S. 2015. Sunflower and soil response to seven years of tillage, residue management and nitrogen fertilizer. Turkish Journal of Field Crops. 20(2), 194-202.
  24. Letey, J., Stolzy, L.H., and W.D. Kemper. 1967. Soil aeration. In: Hagan, R.M., Haise, H.R., Edminster, T.W. (Eds.). Irrigation of Agricultural Lands. Agron. Monog 11. ASA, Madison, W, pp. 941– 949.
  25. Olness, A., Clapp, C., Liu, R., and A.J. Palazzo. 1998. Biosolids and their effects on soil properties. Handbook of Soil Conditioners. Marcel Dekker, New York, NY, 141-165.
  26. Reynolds, W.D., Bowman, B.T., Drury, C.F., Tan, C.S., and X. Lu. 2002. Indicators of good soil physical quality: density and storage parameters. Geoderma, 110, 131–146.
  27. Reynolds, W.D., Drury, C.F., Tan, C.S., Fox, C.A., and X.M. Yang. 2009. Use of indicators and pore volume-function characteristics to quantify soil physical quality. Geoderma. 152: 252–263.
  28. Reynolds, W.D, Drury, C.F., Yang, X.M. and C.S. Tan. 2008. Optimal soil physical quality inferred through structural regression and parameter interactions. Geoderma, 146, 466–474.25.
  29. Rhoades, J.D. 1996. Salinity: electrical conductivity and total dissolved solid. In: Sparks et al. (Eds.). Methods of Soil Analysis. Part 3. Chemical Methods. ASA/SSSA Madison, Wisconsin, USA. pp: 417–436.
  30. Topp, G.C., Reynolds, W.D., Cook, F.J., Kirby, J.M., and M.R. Carter. 1997. Physical attributes of soil quality. In: Gregorich, E.G., and M.R. Carter. (Eds.), Soil Quality for Crop Production and Ecosystem Health. Developments in Soil Science, vol. 25. Elsevier, New York, NY. pp. 21–58.
  31. 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.
  32. Zink, A., Fleige, H., and R. Horn. 2011. Verification of harmful subsoil compaction in loess soils. Soil and Tillage Research, 114, 127–134.
پژوهش های خاک
دوره 34، شماره 3
آذر 1399
صفحه 373-386

فایل ها

هم رسانی

ارجاع به این مقاله

آمار