DOCSLIB.ORG

Pedodiversity of Southern African Drylands

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Pedodiversity of Southern African Drylands Pedodiversity of southern African drylands Dissertation zur Erlangung des Doktorgrades der Naturwissenschaften im Department Geowissenschaften der Universität Hamburg vorgelegt von Andreas Petersen aus Schmalenfelde Hamburg 2008 Als Dissertation angenommen vom Department für Geowissenschaften der Universität Hamburg Auf Grund der Gutachten von Prof. Dr. Günter Miehlich Prof. Dr. Eva Maria Pfeiffer Prof. Dr. Gabriele Broll Hamburg, den 18.6.2008 Prof. Dr. Kay-Christian Emeis Leiter des Departments für Geowissenschaften Content I. Content II. Abbreviations and acronyms III. List of figures IV. List of tables I Content 1 THEMATIC BACKGROUND AND GENERAL AIMS ................................................. 1 1.1 BIODIVERSITY, GLOBAL CHANGE AND ITS UNDERSTANDING..................................................... 2 1.2 THE BIOTA SOUTHERN AFRICA PROJECT.................................................................................. 7 1.3 AIMS OF THIS STUDY .................................................................................................................. 9 2 METHODS APPLIED....................................................................................................... 13 2.1 SAMPLING SCHEME....................................................................................................................13 2.1.1 Overview of sampling strategies in landscape ecology....................................................14 2.1.2 Development of the sampling procedure in the BIOTA project........................................18 2.2 SOIL RELATED FIELD WORK.......................................................................................................23 2.3 LABORATORY ANALYSES ..........................................................................................................25 2.4 DATA PROCESSING ....................................................................................................................28 2.4.1 Laboratory........................................................................................................................28 2.4.2 Satellite data, aerial photographs and digital elevation models (DEM)..........................30 2.5 SOIL CLASSIFICATION................................................................................................................31 3 SOIL INVENTORY AND SOIL VARIABILITY ON STUDIED AREAS .................. 33 3.1 OBSERVATORY 01 (MILE 46) & 02 (MUTOMPO).......................................................................37 3.1.1 Regional overview ............................................................................................................37 3.1.2 Observatory description ...................................................................................................38 3.1.3 Soils ..................................................................................................................................39 3.1.3.1 Main soil units........................................................................................................................... 39 3.1.3.2 Remarks on classification.......................................................................................................... 41 3.1.3.3 Description of reference profiles............................................................................................... 42 3.1.3.4 Discussion of soil properties ..................................................................................................... 46 I Content 3.2 OBSERVATORY 03 (SONOP).......................................................................................................49 3.2.1 Regional overview ............................................................................................................49 3.2.2 Observatory description ...................................................................................................50 3.2.3 Soils ..................................................................................................................................52 3.2.3.1 Main soil units........................................................................................................................... 52 3.2.3.2 Remarks on classification.......................................................................................................... 54 3.2.3.3 Description of reference profiles............................................................................................... 55 3.2.3.4 Discussion of soil properties ..................................................................................................... 58 3.3 OBSERVATORY 04 OMATAKO (TOGGEKRY)..............................................................................63 3.3.1 Regional overview ............................................................................................................63 3.3.2 Observatory description ...................................................................................................65 3.3.3 Soils ..................................................................................................................................66 3.3.3.1 Main soil units........................................................................................................................... 66 3.3.3.2 Remarks on classification.......................................................................................................... 67 3.3.3.3 Description of selected reference profiles ................................................................................. 68 3.3.3.4 Discussion of soil properties ..................................................................................................... 75 3.4 OBSERVATORY 05 (ERICHSFELDE / OTJIAMONGOMBE)............................................................81 3.4.1 Regional overview ............................................................................................................81 3.4.2 Observatory description ...................................................................................................81 3.4.3 Soils ..................................................................................................................................82 3.4.3.1 Main soil units........................................................................................................................... 82 3.4.3.2 Remarks on classification.......................................................................................................... 84 3.4.3.3 Description of selected reference profiles ................................................................................. 85 3.4.3.4 Discussion of soil properties ..................................................................................................... 91 3.5 OBSERVATORY 06 (OKAMBORO) ..............................................................................................95 3.5.1 Regional overview ............................................................................................................95 3.5.2 Observatory description ...................................................................................................95 3.5.3 Soils ..................................................................................................................................96 3.5.3.1 Main soil units........................................................................................................................... 96 3.5.3.2 Remarks on classification.......................................................................................................... 98 3.5.3.3 Description of selected reference profiles ................................................................................. 99 3.5.3.4 Discussion of soil properties ................................................................................................... 102 3.6 OBSERVATORIES 39 (NAREIS) AND 40 (DURUCHAUS) ............................................................104 3.6.1 Regional overview ..........................................................................................................104 3.6.2 Observatory description .................................................................................................104 3.6.3 Soils ................................................................................................................................106 3.6.3.1 Main soil units......................................................................................................................... 106 3.6.3.2 Remarks on classification........................................................................................................ 108 3.6.3.3 Description of selected reference profiles ............................................................................... 109 3.6.3.4 Discussion of soil properties ................................................................................................... 113 II Content 3.7 OBSERVATORIES 10 (GELLAP OST) AND 11 (NABAOS)...........................................................117 3.7.1 Regional overview ..........................................................................................................117 3.7.2 Observatory description .................................................................................................117 3.7.3 Soils ................................................................................................................................118 3.7.3.1
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Basic Soil Science W
    Basic Soil Science W. Lee Daniels See http://pubs.ext.vt.edu/430/430-350/430-350_pdf.pdf for more information on basic soils! [email protected]; 540-231-7175 http://www.cses.vt.edu/revegetation/ Well weathered A Horizon -- Topsoil (red, clayey) soil from the Piedmont of Virginia. This soil has formed from B Horizon - Subsoil long term weathering of granite into soil like materials. C Horizon (deeper) Native Forest Soil Leaf litter and roots (> 5 T/Ac/year are “bio- processed” to form humus, which is the dark black material seen in this topsoil layer. In the process, nutrients and energy are released to plant uptake and the higher food chain. These are the “natural soil cycles” that we attempt to manage today. Soil Profiles Soil profiles are two-dimensional slices or exposures of soils like we can view from a road cut or a soil pit. Soil profiles reveal soil horizons, which are fundamental genetic layers, weathered into underlying parent materials, in response to leaching and organic matter decomposition. Fig. 1.12 -- Soils develop horizons due to the combined process of (1) organic matter deposition and decomposition and (2) illuviation of clays, oxides and other mobile compounds downward with the wetting front. In moist environments (e.g. Virginia) free salts (Cl and SO4 ) are leached completely out of the profile, but they accumulate in desert soils. Master Horizons O A • O horizon E • A horizon • E horizon B • B horizon • C horizon C • R horizon R Master Horizons • O horizon o predominantly organic matter (litter and humus) • A horizon o organic carbon accumulation, some removal of clay • E horizon o zone of maximum removal (loss of OC, Fe, Mn, Al, clay…) • B horizon o forms below O, A, and E horizons o zone of maximum accumulation (clay, Fe, Al, CaC03, salts…) o most developed part of subsoil (structure, texture, color) o < 50% rock structure or thin bedding from water deposition Master Horizons • C horizon o little or no pedogenic alteration o unconsolidated parent material or soft bedrock o < 50% soil structure • R horizon o hard, continuous bedrock A vs.
    [Show full text]
  • Agricultural Soil Compaction: Causes and Management
    October 2010 Agdex 510-1 Agricultural Soil Compaction: Causes and Management oil compaction can be a serious and unnecessary soil aggregates, which has a negative affect on soil S form of soil degradation that can result in increased aggregate structure. soil erosion and decreased crop production. Soil compaction can have a number of negative effects on Compaction of soil is the compression of soil particles into soil quality and crop production including the following: a smaller volume, which reduces the size of pore space available for air and water. Most soils are composed of • causes soil pore spaces to become smaller about 50 per cent solids (sand, silt, clay and organic • reduces water infiltration rate into soil matter) and about 50 per cent pore spaces. • decreases the rate that water will penetrate into the soil root zone and subsoil • increases the potential for surface Compaction concerns water ponding, water runoff, surface soil waterlogging and soil erosion Soil compaction can impair water Soil compaction infiltration into soil, crop emergence, • reduces the ability of a soil to hold root penetration and crop nutrient and can be a serious water and air, which are necessary for water uptake, all of which result in form of soil plant root growth and function depressed crop yield. • reduces crop emergence as a result of soil crusting Human-induced compaction of degradation. • impedes root growth and limits the agricultural soil can be the result of using volume of soil explored by roots tillage equipment during soil cultivation or result from the heavy weight of field equipment. • limits soil exploration by roots and Compacted soils can also be the result of natural soil- decreases the ability of crops to take up nutrients and forming processes.
    [Show full text]
  • Soil As a Huge Laboratory for Microorganisms
    Research Article Agri Res & Tech: Open Access J Volume 22 Issue 4 - September 2019 Copyright © All rights are reserved by Mishra BB DOI: 10.19080/ARTOAJ.2019.22.556205 Soil as a Huge Laboratory for Microorganisms Sachidanand B1, Mitra NG1, Vinod Kumar1, Richa Roy2 and Mishra BB3* 1Department of Soil Science and Agricultural Chemistry, Jawaharlal Nehru Krishi Vishwa Vidyalaya, India 2Department of Biotechnology, TNB College, India 3Haramaya University, Ethiopia Submission: June 24, 2019; Published: September 17, 2019 *Corresponding author: Mishra BB, Haramaya University, Ethiopia Abstract Biodiversity consisting of living organisms both plants and animals, constitute an important component of soil. Soil organisms are important elements for preserved ecosystem biodiversity and services thus assess functional and structural biodiversity in arable soils is interest. One of the main threats to soil biodiversity occurred by soil environmental impacts and agricultural management. This review focuses on interactions relating how soil ecology (soil physical, chemical and biological properties) and soil management regime affect the microbial diversity in soil. We propose that the fact that in some situations the soil is the key factor determining soil microbial diversity is related to the complexity of the microbial interactions in soil, including interactions between microorganisms (MOs) and soil. A conceptual framework, based on the relative strengths of the shaping forces exerted by soil versus the ecological behavior of MOs, is proposed. Plant-bacterial interactions in the rhizosphere are the determinants of plant health and soil fertility. Symbiotic nitrogen (N2)-fixing bacteria include the cyanobacteria of the genera Rhizobium, Free-livingBradyrhizobium, soil bacteria Azorhizobium, play a vital Allorhizobium, role in plant Sinorhizobium growth, usually and referred Mesorhizobium.
    [Show full text]
  • Advanced Crop and Soil Science. a Blacksburg. Agricultural
    DOCUMENT RESUME ED 098 289 CB 002 33$ AUTHOR Miller, Larry E. TITLE What Is Soil? Advanced Crop and Soil Science. A Course of Study. INSTITUTION Virginia Polytechnic Inst. and State Univ., Blacksburg. Agricultural Education Program.; Virginia State Dept. of Education, Richmond. Agricultural Education Service. PUB DATE 74 NOTE 42p.; For related courses of study, see CE 002 333-337 and CE 003 222 EDRS PRICE MF-$0.75 HC-$1.85 PLUS POSTAGE DESCRIPTORS *Agricultural Education; *Agronomy; Behavioral Objectives; Conservation (Environment); Course Content; Course Descriptions; *Curriculum Guides; Ecological Factors; Environmental Education; *Instructional Materials; Lesson Plans; Natural Resources; Post Sc-tondary Education; Secondary Education; *Soil Science IDENTIFIERS Virginia ABSTRACT The course of study represents the first of six modules in advanced crop and soil science and introduces the griculture student to the topic of soil management. Upon completing the two day lesson, the student vill be able to define "soil", list the soil forming agencies, define and use soil terminology, and discuss soil formation and what makes up the soil complex. Information and directions necessary to make soil profiles are included for the instructor's use. The course outline suggests teaching procedures, behavioral objectives, teaching aids and references, problems, a summary, and evaluation. Following the lesson plans, pages are coded for use as handouts and overhead transparencies. A materials source list for the complete soil module is included. (MW) Agdex 506 BEST COPY AVAILABLE LJ US DEPARTMENT OFmrAITM E nufAT ION t WE 1. F ARE MAT IONAI. ItiST ifuf I OF EDuCATiCiN :),t; tnArh, t 1.t PI-1, t+ h 4t t wt 44t F.,.."11 4.
    [Show full text]
  • Dynamics of Carbon 14 in Soils: a Review C
    Radioprotection, Suppl. 1, vol. 40 (2005) S465-S470 © EDP Sciences, 2005 DOI: 10.1051/radiopro:2005s1-068 Dynamics of Carbon 14 in soils: A review C. Tamponnet Institute of Radioprotection and Nuclear Safety, DEI/SECRE, CADARACHE, BP. 1, 13108 Saint-Paul-lez-Durance Cedex, France, e-mail: [email protected] Abstract. In terrestrial ecosystems, soil is the main interface between atmosphere, hydrosphere, lithosphere and biosphere. Its interactions with carbon cycle are primordial. Information about carbon 14 dynamics in soils is quite dispersed and an up-to-date status is therefore presented in this paper. Carbon 14 dynamics in soils are governed by physical processes (soil structure, soil aggregation, soil erosion) chemical processes (sequestration by soil components either mineral or organic), and soil biological processes (soil microbes, soil fauna, soil biochemistry). The relative importance of such processes varied remarkably among the various biomes (tropical forest, temperate forest, boreal forest, tropical savannah, temperate pastures, deserts, tundra, marshlands, agro ecosystems) encountered in the terrestrial ecosphere. Moreover, application for a simplified modelling of carbon 14 dynamics in soils is proposed. 1. INTRODUCTION The importance of carbon 14 of anthropic origin in the environment has been quite early a matter of concern for the authorities [1]. When the behaviour of carbon 14 in the environment is to be modelled, it is an absolute necessity to understand the biogeochemical cycles of carbon. One can distinguish indeed, a global cycle of carbon from different local cycles. As far as the biosphere is concerned, pedosphere is considered as a primordial exchange zone. Pedosphere, which will be named from now on as soils, is mainly located at the interface between atmosphere and lithosphere.
    [Show full text]
  • Biological Soil Crust Community Types Differ in Key Ecological Functions
    UC Riverside UC Riverside Previously Published Works Title Biological soil crust community types differ in key ecological functions Permalink https://escholarship.org/uc/item/2cs0f55w Authors Pietrasiak, Nicole David Lam Jeffrey R. Johansen et al. Publication Date 2013-10-01 DOI 10.1016/j.soilbio.2013.05.011 Peer reviewed eScholarship.org Powered by the California Digital Library University of California Soil Biology & Biochemistry 65 (2013) 168e171 Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect Soil Biology & Biochemistry journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/soilbio Short communication Biological soil crust community types differ in key ecological functions Nicole Pietrasiak a,*, John U. Regus b, Jeffrey R. Johansen c,e, David Lam a, Joel L. Sachs b, Louis S. Santiago d a University of California, Riverside, Soil and Water Sciences Program, Department of Environmental Sciences, 2258 Geology Building, Riverside, CA 92521, USA b University of California, Riverside, Department of Biology, University of California, Riverside, CA 92521, USA c Biology Department, John Carroll University, 1 John Carroll Blvd., University Heights, OH 44118, USA d University of California, Riverside, Botany & Plant Sciences Department, 3113 Bachelor Hall, Riverside, CA 92521, USA e Department of Botany, Faculty of Science, University of South Bohemia, Branisovska 31, 370 05 Ceske Budejovice, Czech Republic article info abstract Article history: Soil stability, nitrogen and carbon fixation were assessed for eight biological soil crust community types Received 22 February 2013 within a Mojave Desert wilderness site. Cyanolichen crust outperformed all other crusts in multi- Received in revised form functionality whereas incipient crust had the poorest performance. A finely divided classification of 17 May 2013 biological soil crust communities improves estimation of ecosystem function and strengthens the Accepted 18 May 2013 accuracy of landscape-scale assessments.
    [Show full text]
  • Progressive and Regressive Soil Evolution Phases in the Anthropocene
    Progressive and regressive soil evolution phases in the Anthropocene Manon Bajard, Jérôme Poulenard, Pierre Sabatier, Anne-Lise Develle, Charline Giguet- Covex, Jeremy Jacob, Christian Crouzet, Fernand David, Cécile Pignol, Fabien Arnaud Highlights • Lake sediment archives are used to reconstruct past soil evolution. • Erosion is quantified and the sediment geochemistry is compared to current soils. • We observed phases of greater erosion rates than soil formation rates. • These negative soil balance phases are defined as regressive pedogenesis phases. • During the Middle Ages, the erosion of increasingly deep horizons rejuvenated pedogenesis. Abstract Soils have a substantial role in the environment because they provide several ecosystem services such as food supply or carbon storage. Agricultural practices can modify soil properties and soil evolution processes, hence threatening these services. These modifications are poorly studied, and the resilience/adaptation times of soils to disruptions are unknown. Here, we study the evolution of pedogenetic processes and soil evolution phases (progressive or regressive) in response to human-induced erosion from a 4000-year lake sediment sequence (Lake La Thuile, French Alps). Erosion in this small lake catchment in the montane area is quantified from the terrigenous sediments that were trapped in the lake and compared to the soil formation rate. To access this quantification, soil processes evolution are deciphered from soil and sediment geochemistry comparison. Over the last 4000 years, first impacts on soils are recorded at approximately 1600 yr cal. BP, with the erosion of surface horizons exceeding 10 t·km− 2·yr− 1. Increasingly deep horizons were eroded with erosion accentuation during the Higher Middle Ages (1400–850 yr cal.
    [Show full text]
  • Anatomy of a Sub-Cambrian Paleosol in Wisconsin
    Anatomy of a Sub-Cambrian Paleosol in Wisconsin: Mass Fluxes of Chemical Weathering and Climatic Conditions in North America during Formation of the Cambrian Great Unconformity L. Gordon Medaris Jr.,1,* Steven G. Driese,2 Gary E. Stinchcomb,3 John H. Fournelle,1 Seungyeol Lee,1,4 Huifang Xu,1,4 Lyndsay DiPietro,2 Phillip Gopon,5 and Esther K. Stewart6 1. Department of Geoscience, University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin 53706, USA; 2. Department of Geosciences, Terrestrial Paleoclimatology Research Group, Baylor University, Waco, Texas 76798, USA; 3. Department of Geosciences and Watershed Studies Institute, Murray State University, Murray, Kentucky 42071, USA; 4. NASA Astrobiology Institute, University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin 53706, USA; 5. Department of Earth Sciences, University of Oxford, South Parks Road, Oxford OX1 3AN, United Kingdom; 6. Wisconsin Geological and Natural History Survey, Madison, Wisconsin 53705, USA ABSTRACT A paleosol beneath the Upper Cambrian Mount Simon Sandstone in Wisconsin provides an opportunity to evaluate the characteristics of Cambrian weathering in a subtropical climate, having been located at 207S paleolatitude 500 My ago. The 285-cm-thick paleosol resulted from advanced chemical weathering of a gabbroic protolith, recording a total mass loss of 50%. Weathering of hornblende and plagioclase produced a pedogenic assemblage of quartz, chlorite, kaolinite, goethite, and, in the lowest part of the profile, siderite. Despite the paucity of quartz in the protolith and 40% removal of SiO2 from the profile, quartz constitutes 11%–23% of the pedogenic mineral assemblage. Like many other Precambrian and Cambrian paleosols in the Lake Superior region, the paleosol experienced potassium metasomatism, now con- taining 10%–25% mixed-layer illite-vermiculite and 5%–44% potassium feldspar.
    [Show full text]
  • Soil Crusts Structural Soil Crusts Are Relatively Thin, Dense, Somewhat Continuous Layers of Non-Aggregated Soil Particles on the Surface of Tilled and Exposed Soils
    Indicator Test Function USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service P F W Soil Quality Indicators Soil Crusts Structural soil crusts are relatively thin, dense, somewhat continuous layers of non-aggregated soil particles on the surface of tilled and exposed soils. Structural crusts develop when a sealed-over soil surface dries out after rainfall or irrigation. Water droplets striking soil aggregates and water flowing across soil breaks aggregates into individual soil particles. Fine soil particles wash, settle into and block surface pores causing the soil surface to seal over and preventing water from soaking into the soil. As the muddy soil surface dries out, it crusts over. Left: Note the surface crust on this soil. The field was in tall fescue sod for 11 years. It was cleared and plowed using conventional Structural crusts range from a few tenths to as thick as two tillage methods. Photo courtesy Bobby Brock, USDA NRCS (retired). Right: Collected from a no-till field in Georgia’s Southern inches. A surface crust is much more compact, hard and Piedmont, good structure and aggregation are evident in the soil on brittle when dry than the soil immediately beneath it, the right. The same soil formed a structural crust under which may be loose and friable. Crusts can be described by conventional tillage. Note the sunlight reflectance of the crusted their strength, or air-dry rupture resistance. soil. Photo courtesy James E. Dean, USDA NRCS (retired). Soil crusting is also associated with biological and Dynamic - Management activities that deplete soil chemical factors. A biological crust is a living community organic matter and leave soil bare, smooth and exposed to of lichen, cyanobacteria, algae, and moss growing on the the direct impact of water droplets increase soil dispersion, soil surface that bind the soil together.
    [Show full text]
  • Sustaining the Pedosphere: Establishing a Framework for Management, Utilzation and Restoration of Soils in Cultured Systems
    Sustaining the Pedosphere: Establishing A Framework for Management, Utilzation and Restoration of Soils in Cultured Systems Eugene F. Kelly Colorado State University Outline •Introduction - Its our Problems – Life in the Fastlane - Ecological Nexus of Food-Water-Energy - Defining the Pedosphere •Framework for Management, Utilization & Restoration - Pedology and Critical Zone Science - Pedology Research Establishing the Range & Variability in Soils - Models for assessing human dimensions in ecosystems •Studies of Regional Importance Systems Approach - System Models for Agricultural Research - Soil Water - The Master Variable - Water Quality, Soil Management and Conservation Strategies •Concluding Remarks and Questions Living in a Sustainable Age or Life in the Fast Lane What do we know ? • There are key drivers across the planet that are forcing us to think and live differently. • The drivers are influencing our supplies of food, energy and water. • Science has helped us identify these drivers and our challenge is to come up with solutions Change has been most rapid over the last 50 years ! • In last 50 years we doubled population • World economy saw 7x increase • Food consumption increased 3x • Water consumption increased 3x • Fuel utilization increased 4x • More change over this period then all human history combined – we are at the inflection point in human history. • Planetary scale resources going away What are the major changes that we might be able to adjust ? • Land Use Change - the world is smaller • Food footprint is larger (40% of land used for Agriculture) • Water Use – 70% for food • Running out of atmosphere – used as as disposal for fossil fuels and other contaminants The Perfect Storm Increased Demand 50% by 2030 Energy Climate Change Demand up Demand up 50% by 2030 30% by 2030 Food Water 2D View of Pedosphere Hierarchal scales involving soil solid-phase components that combine to form horizons, profiles, local and regional landscapes, and the global pedosphere.
    [Show full text]
  • Biological Soil Crust Rehabilitation in Theory and Practice: an Underexploited Opportunity Matthew A
    REVIEW Biological Soil Crust Rehabilitation in Theory and Practice: An Underexploited Opportunity Matthew A. Bowker1,2 Abstract techniques; and (3) monitoring. Statistical predictive Biological soil crusts (BSCs) are ubiquitous lichen–bryo- modeling is a useful method for estimating the potential phyte microbial communities, which are critical structural BSC condition of a rehabilitation site. Various rehabilita- and functional components of many ecosystems. How- tion techniques attempt to correct, in decreasing order of ever, BSCs are rarely addressed in the restoration litera- difficulty, active soil erosion (e.g., stabilization techni- ture. The purposes of this review were to examine the ques), resource deficiencies (e.g., moisture and nutrient ecological roles BSCs play in succession models, the augmentation), or BSC propagule scarcity (e.g., inoc- backbone of restoration theory, and to discuss the prac- ulation). Success will probably be contingent on prior tical aspects of rehabilitating BSCs to disturbed eco- evaluation of site conditions and accurate identification systems. Most evidence indicates that BSCs facilitate of constraints to BSC reestablishment. Rehabilitation of succession to later seres, suggesting that assisted recovery BSCs is attainable and may be required in the recovery of of BSCs could speed up succession. Because BSCs are some ecosystems. The strong influence that BSCs exert ecosystem engineers in high abiotic stress systems, loss of on ecosystems is an underexploited opportunity for re- BSCs may be synonymous with crossing degradation storationists to return disturbed ecosystems to a desirable thresholds. However, assisted recovery of BSCs may trajectory. allow a transition from a degraded steady state to a more desired alternative steady state. In practice, BSC rehabili- Key words: aridlands, cryptobiotic soil crusts, cryptogams, tation has three major components: (1) establishment of degradation thresholds, state-and-transition models, goals; (2) selection and implementation of rehabilitation succession.
    [Show full text]
  • Soil Salinity in Agricultural Systems: the Basics
    Soil Salinity in Agricultural Systems: The Basics Jeffrey L. Ullman Agricultural & Biological Engineering University of Florida Strategies for Minimizing Salinity Problems and Optimizing Crop Production In-Service Training, Hastings, FL March 26, 2013 What is salt? What is Salt? . Salts are more than just sodium chloride (NaCl) . Salts consist of anions and cations . In terms of soil and irrigation water these generally include: Cations Anions Sodium Na+ Chlorides Cl- 2+ 2- Magnesium Mg Sulfates SO4 2+ 2- Calcium Ca Carbonates CO3 - Bicarbonates HCO3 What is Salt? . Other salts in agriculture + Potassium (K ) - Nitrate (NO3 ) Boron (B) • Often as boric acid (H3BO3, often written as B(OH)3) • Can form salts such as sodium borate (borax; Na2B4O7) Photo: Georgia Agriculture What is Salt? H O(l) NaCl(s) 2 Na+(aq) + Cl-(aq) (aq) indicates that Na+ and Cl- are hydrated ions Sodium sulfate Magnesium carbonate Source: Averill and Eldredge (2007) Types of Salts Some common salts NaCl Sodium chloride Table salt (halite) CO 2- 3 KCl Potassium chloride Muriate of potash Na+ 2- NaHCO3 Sodium bicarbonate Baking soda (nahcolite) SO4 - Cl CaSO4 Calcium sulfate Gypsum + K CaCO3 Calcium carbonate Calcite 2+ Ca MgSO Magnesium sulfate Epsom salt (epsomite) Mg2+ 4 K2SO4 Potassium sulfate Sulfate of potash (arcanite) HCO - 3 Glauber’s salt (thenardite Na SO Sodium sulfate 2 4 and mirabilite) Gypsum Calcite Thenardite Sources of Salt . Dissolution of parent rock material . Irrigation water . Saline groundwater . Fertilizers . Manure . Seawater intrusion Photo: J. Ullman Saline Soils . Accumulation of salts known as salination . Can occur in diverse types of soil with different physical, chemical and hydrologic properties Photo: USDA-NRCS Saline Soils .
    [Show full text]