Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Assessment of soil quality index for wheat and sugar beet cropping systems on an entisol in Central Anatolia

  • Published:
Environmental Monitoring and Assessment Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The sustainable use of agricultural lands is significantly affected by the implemented management and land processing methods. In sugar beet and wheat cropping, because the agronomic characteristics of plants are different, the tillage methods applied also exhibit significant variability. Soil quality concept is used, as a holistic approach to determining the effects of these applications on the sustainable use of soil. Agricultural soil quality evaluation is essential for economic success and environmental stability in rapidly developing regions. At present, a variety of methods are used to evaluate soil quality using different indicators. This study was conducted in one of the most important irrigated agriculture areas of Çumra plain in Central Anatolia, Turkey. In the soil under sugar beet and wheat cultivation, 12 soil quality indicators (aggregate stability (AS), available water capacity (AWC), surface penetration resistance (PR0–20), subsurface penetration resistance (PR20–40), organic matter (OM), active carbon (AC), potentially mineralizable nitrogen (PMN), root health value (RHV), pH, available phosphorus (AP), potassium (K), and macro-micro elements (ME) (Mg, Fe, Mn, and Zn)) were measured and scored according to the Cornell Soil Health Assessment (CSHA) and the Soil Management Assessment Framework (SMAF). The differences among 8 (AS, AWC, PR0–20, PR20–40, AC, PMN, AP, and ME) of these 12 soil quality characteristics measured in two different plant cultivation were found statistically significant. The result of the soil quality evaluation with scoring function in the examined area revealed a soil quality score of 61.46 in the wheat area and of 51.20 in the sugar beet area, which can be classified as medium and low, respectively. Low soil quality scores especially depend on physical and biological soil properties. Therefore, improvement of soil physical and biological properties with sustainable management is necessary to enhance the soil quality in the study area soils.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Acton, D., & Gregorich, L. (1995). Understanding soil health. The health of our soils: toward sustainable agriculture in Canada., 5–10.

  • Adeyolanu, O. D., Are, K. S., Oluwatosin, G. A., Ayoola, O. T., & Adelana, A. O. (2013). Evaluation of two methods of soil quality assessment as influenced by slash and burn in tropical rainforest ecology of Nigeria. Archives of Agronomy and Soil Science, 59(12), 1725–1742.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Andrews, S. S., & Carroll, C. R. (2001). Designing a soil quality assessment tool for sustainable agroecosystem management. Ecological Applications, 11(6), 1573–1585.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Andrews, S. S., Karlen, D. L., & Cambardella, C. A. (2004). The soil management assessment framework. Soil Science Society of America Journal, 68(6), 1945–1962.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Bal, L., Şeker, C., & Gümüş, İ. E. (2011). Kaymak Tabakası Oluşumuna Fiziko-Kimyasal Faktörlerin Etkileri. Selçuk Tarım Bilimleri Dergisi, 25(3), 96–103.

    Google Scholar 

  • Benintende, S., Benintende, M., Sterren, M., Saluzzio, M., & Barbagelata, P. (2015). Biological variables as soil quality indicators: effect of sampling time and ability to classify soils by their suitability. Ecological Indicators, 52, 147–152.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Birkás, M., Jolánkai, M., Gyuricza, C., & Percze, A. (2004). Tillage effects on compaction, earthworms and other soil quality indicators in Hungary. Soil and Tillage Research, 78(2), 185–196.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blair, G. J., Lefroy, R. D., & Lisle, L. (1995). Soil carbon fractions based on their degree of oxidation, and the development of a carbon management index for agricultural systems. Crop and Pasture Science, 46(7), 1459–1466.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cambardella, C., Moorman, T., Andrews, S., & Karlen, D. (2004). Watershed-scale assessment of soil quality in the loess hills of southwest Iowa. Soil and Tillage Research, 78(2), 237–247.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Craig, A., & Arlene, J. (2002). Soil quaity field tools: experi-ences of USDA-NRCS soil quality institilte. Agronomy Journal, 94, 33–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • D’Hose, T., Cougnon, M., De Vliegher, A., Vandecasteele, B., Viaene, N., Cornelis, W., et al. (2014). The positive relationship between soil quality and crop production: A case study on the effect of farm compost application. Applied Soil Ecology, 75, 189–198.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Meester, T. (1970). Soils of the Great Konya Basin, Turkey. Agric. Res. Rep, 740, 290.

  • Doran, J. W., & Jones, A. J. (1996). Methods for assessing soil quality: Soil Science Society of America Inc.

  • Doran, J. W., & Parkin, T. B. (1994). Defining and assessing soil quality. Defining soil quality for a sustainable environment(definingsoilqua), 1–21.

  • Eyüpoğlu, F. (1999). Türkiye topraklarının verimlilik durumu: TC Başbakanlık Köy Hizmetleri Genel Müdürlüğü.

  • FAO (1990). Micronutrient assessment at the country level p 1–208: An international study (Ed., M. Sillanpa). FAO Soil Bulletin 63. Published by FAO, Rome.

  • Gee, G., & Bauder, J. (1986). Particle-size analysis In: Klute, A.(ed) Methods of soil analysis, Part 1. American society of Agronomy. Inc., Ma.

  • Govaerts, B., Sayre, K. D., & Deckers, J. (2006). A minimum data set for soil quality assessment of wheat and maize cropping in the highlands of Mexico. Soil and Tillage Research, 87(2), 163–174.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gugino, B. K., Abawi, G. S., Idowu, O. J., Schindelbeck, R. R., Smith, L. L., Thies, J. E., et al. (2009). Cornell soil health assessment training manual: Cornell University College of Agriculture and Life Sciences.

  • Güçdemir, İ. (2006). Türkiye gübre ve gübreleme rehberi. Tarım ve Köyişleri Bakanlığı, Tarımsal Araştırmalar Genel Müdürlüğü, Toprak ve Gübre Araştırma Enstitüsü Müdürlüğü, Ankara.

  • Kacar, B. (2009). Toprak analizleri: Nobel Yayın Dağıtım.

  • Karlen, D., Andrews, S. S., Wienhold, B. J., & Zobeck, T. M. (2008). Soil quality assessment: past, present and future. Electronic Journal of Integrative Biosciences, 6(1), 3–14.

    Google Scholar 

  • Karlen, D., Ditzler, C. A., & Andrews, S. S. (2003). Soil quality: why and how? Geoderma, 114(3), 145–156.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Karlen, D., Gardner, J., & Rosek, M. (1998). A soil quality framework for evaluating the impact of CRP. Journal of Production Agriculture, 11(1), 56–60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Karlen, D., Mausbach, M., Doran, J., Cline, R., Harris, R., & Schuman, G. (1997). Soil quality: a concept, definition, and framework for evaluation (a guest editorial). Soil Science Society of America Journal, 61(1), 4–10.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Karlen, D., Stott, D., Cambardella, C., Kremer, R., King, K., & McCarty, G. (2014). Surface soil quality in five midwestern cropland conservation effects assessment project watersheds. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 69(5), 393–401.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Karlen, D., Wollenhaupt, N. C., Erbach, D., Berry, E., Swan, J., Eash, N. S., et al. (1994). Crop residue effects on soil quality following 10-years of no-till corn. Soil and Tillage Research, 31(2), 149–167.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klingebiel, A., & Montgomery, P. (1961). Land-capability classification. In Soil conservation service, Agricultural handbook. No. 210. Washington DC: US Department of Agriculture.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klute, A. (1986). Water retention: laboratory methods. Methods of soil analysis: part 1—physical and mineralogical methods(methodsofsoilan1), 635–662.

  • Larson, W. E., & Pierce, F. J. (1994). The dynamics of soil quality as a measure of sustainable management. In: Doran, J. W. (Ed.), Defining Soil Quality for a Sustainable Environment. Soil Science Society of America Special Publication No. 35. Madison: Soil Science Society of America and American Society of Agronomy, pp. 37–51.

  • Liebig, M., Tanaka, D., & Wienhold, B. J. (2004). Tillage and cropping effects on soil quality indicators in the northern Great Plains. Soil and Tillage Research, 78(2), 131–141.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lindsay, W., & Norvell, W. (1969). Development of a DTPA micronutrient soil test. In Agron. Abstr, 84, 1–11.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meester, T. d. (1970). Soils of the Great Konya Basin, Turkiye: Wageningen: Pudoc, Centre for Agricultural Publishing and Documentation.

  • Meester, T. d. (1971). Highly calcareous lacustrine soils in the Great Konya Basin, Turkey. Pudoc, Wageningen, The Netherlands.

  • Nael, M., Khademi, H., & Hajabbasi, M. (2004). Response of soil quality indicators and their spatial variability to land degradation in Central Iran. Applied Soil Ecology, 27(3), 221–232.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nakajima, T., Lal, R., & Jiang, S. (2015). Soil quality index of a crosby silt loam in central Ohio. Soil and Tillage Research, 146, 323–328.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Olsen, S., Sommers, L., & Page, A. (1982). Methods of soil analysis. Part 2. Agron. Monogr, 9, 403–430.

  • Ozgoz, E., Gunal, H., Acir, N., Gokmen, F., Birol, M., & Budak, M. (2013). Soil quality and spatial variability assessment of land use effects in a typic haplustoll. Land Degradation & Development, 24(3), 277–286.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pierce, F. J., & Larson, W. (1993) Developing criteria to evaluate sustainable land management. In Proceedings of the Eighth International Soil Management Workshop: Utilization of Soil survey Information for Sustainable Land Use (pp. 7–14)

  • Rashidi, M., Seilsepour, M., Ranjbar, I., Gholami, M., & Abbassi, S. (2010). Evaluation of some soil quality indicators in the Varamin region, Iran. World Applied Sciences Journal, 9(1), 101–108.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Sacco, D., Moretti, B., Monaco, S., & Grignani, C. (2015). Six-year transition from conventional to organic farming: effects on crop production and soil quality. European Journal of Agronomy, 69, 10–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Seybold, C., Mausbach, M., Karlen, D., & Rogers, H. (1997). Quantification of soil quality. Soil processes and the carbon cycle, 387–404.

  • Şeker, C., & Işıldar, A. (2000). Tarla trafiğinin toprak profilindeki gözenekliliğe ve sıkışmaya etkisi. Turkish Journal of Agriculture and Forestry, 24, 71–77.

    Google Scholar 

  • Şeker, C., & Karakaplan, S. (1999). Relationships of modulus of rupture to soil properties in Konya plain. Turkish Journal of Agriculture and Forestry, 23(2), 183–190.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wright, A. F., & Bailey, J. S. (2001). Organic carbon, total carbon, and total nitrogen determinations in soils of variable calcium carbonate contents using a Leco CN-2000 dry combustion analyzer. Communications in Soil Science and Plant Analysis, 32(19–20), 3243–3258.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Yakowitz, D., Stone, J., Lane, L., Heilman, P., Masterson, J., Abolt, J., et al. (1993). A decision support system for evaluating the effects of alternative farm management systems on water quality and economics. Water Science and Technology, 28(3–5), 47–54.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Yao, R.-J., Yang, J.-S., Zhang, T.-J., Gao, P., Yu, S.-P., & Wang, X.-P. (2013). Short-term effect of cultivation and crop rotation systems on soil quality indicators in a coastal newly reclaimed farming area. Journal of Soils and Sediments, 13(8), 1335–1350.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This study was taken from a research project supported by TUBITAK (Scientific and Technological Research Council of Turkey, Project No.: TOVAG 112O314) and Selcuk University (S.U.) BAP Office (Coordinating Office of Scientific Research Projects, Project No.: 09201086). The authors would like to thank “the TUBITAK and S.U.-BAP staffs”.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Agriculture Faculty, Department of Soil Science and Plant Nutrition, Selcuk University, 42079, Konya, Turkey

    Cevdet Şeker, Hasan Hüseyin Özaytekin, Hamza Negiş, İlknur Gümüş, Mert Dedeoğlu, Emel Atmaca & Ümmühan Karaca

Authors
  1. Cevdet Şeker
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Hasan Hüseyin Özaytekin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Hamza Negiş
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. İlknur Gümüş
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Mert Dedeoğlu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Emel Atmaca
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Ümmühan Karaca
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Hamza Negiş.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Şeker, C., Özaytekin, H.H., Negiş, H. et al. Assessment of soil quality index for wheat and sugar beet cropping systems on an entisol in Central Anatolia. Environ Monit Assess 189, 135 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-017-5848-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-017-5848-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation