4.7 Article

Using a modified soil quality index to evaluate densely tilled soils with different yields in Northeast China

Journal

ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE AND POLLUTION RESEARCH
Volume 26, Issue 14, Pages 13867-13877

Publisher

SPRINGER HEIDELBERG
DOI: 10.1007/s11356-018-3946-2

Keywords

Densely tilled soil; Soil properties; Minimum data set; Soil quality index; Critical limit

Funding

  1. National Key Research and Development Program of China [2016YFD0300801, 2016YFD0300103]
  2. Special Fund for Agro-scientific Research in the Public Interest [201503116]
  3. National Science Foundation of China [31700560]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Northeastern China has long-term densely tilled soils that supply approximately 20% of the annual total national grains. There are very few reports on the agricultural soil quality subjecting to the predatory tillage. Here, the soil quality index (SQI) of a brunisolic soil was calculated using the minimum data set (MDS) and integrated quality index (IQI). The topsoil layer was divided into plow layer (11.9 +/- 1.9cm) and plow pan (11.4 +/- 2.6cm) in fields of high yields (HYB), medium yields (MYB), and low yields (LYB). Our results showed that the MDS of the topsoil layer only contained chemical indicators. The bulk density (BD), as one of the most important soil quality indicators, was found of no significant differences in the topsoil layers. In different layers (i.e., the topsoil layer, plow layer, and plow pan), the value of SQI presented a consistent tendency of HYB > MYB > LYB (p < 0.05). The correlation between SQI and yield was higher in the plow layer (0.60) and plow pan (0.63) than the topsoil layer (0.47). This further verified the reasonability of using soil stratification for SQI calculation. Our findings indicate the potential of using soil quality assessments to examine soil productivity (e.g., fertilizer deficiency) in crop lands with soil stratification.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available