EUROPEAN SOIL BUREAU  RESEARCH REPORT NO. 7

The WRB applied to Argentinian soils: two case studies

ROCA PASCUAL Nuria1 and PAZOS Mabel Susana2 1 Facultad de Biología - Universidad de Barcelona – Spain 2 Facultad de Agronomía – Universidad Nacional del Centro de la Provincia de Buenos Aires – Argentina, Email: [email protected]

Abstract Since 1970, the USDA Soil Taxonomy has been utilized for making and interpreting soil maps in Argentina but few experiences have been made with the use of the World Reference Base for Soil Resources (WRB). This paper discusses the correlation between Soil Taxonomy and WRB in two contrasting areas in Argentina. The inferences that can be drawn from the soil names for transferring the soil knowledge to non-soil scientists are also discussed. The first area is Azul, in central Buenos Aires province with temperate subhumid climate. Continental plains in the North have flat-concave relief with alkaline-hydromorphic soils. The southern part has both sierras and piedmont landscapes with rock outcrops and shallow to deep well drained soils. Land use is rainfed agriculture in deep well drained soils and cattle on shallow or alkaline-hydromorphic soils. The second area is Fray Mamerto Esquiú Department in Catamarca Province located in the Dry Chaco region with dry warm climate. It is a narrow valley with alluvial soils surrounded by sierras with weakly developed soils. About 30 profiles were described and sampled within a soil survey project. Land use is intensive crop production under irrigation in the low river terraces and natural desertic shrublands in the highlands. A previous study of taxotransference of the soil series in Azul Co. from the soil maps at 1:50,000 scale to WRB was utilized. The results were updated checking presence of diagnostic horizons and properties from the pedon descriptions in the map reports. Some uncertainties in the process of taxotransference to WRB result from incomplete profile descriptions. The most overlooked or partially described characteristics are the type of substratum in well drained soils and features associated with wetness in lowland soils. Nevertheless, a rather good correlation is found between soil names at the subgroup level of Soil Taxonomy and soil units in WRB. Fray Mamerto Esquiú presents two well defined areas according to the presence or absence of salinity/alkalinity. In the normal area (non-saline, non-alkaline), the correlation between the results in both systems is rather good. However, in the saline/alkaline area, Soil Taxonomy fails to show in the resulting names at the subgroup level those characteristics which are important for irrigation, namely salinity-alkalinity. It is concluded that the flexibility of WRB with the utilization of qualifiers is more sensitive in reflecting soil characteristics in the soil name when compared with Soil Taxonomy. The emphasis put on soil morphology compared with abundant laboratory data required by ST makes the WRB system suitable for application in areas with rather modest facilities, of which Catamarca Province is a good example. Concurrently, recommendations can be readily drawn from soil names in WRB when transferring the knowledge about soils to non- specialist users such as agronomists and land use planners.

Keywords: Soil Taxonomy, WRB, Soil correlation, Argentina, Pampean soils, alluvial soils Introduction Since 1970, Soil Taxonomy (ST) (Soil Survey Staff, 1999), at that time the 7th Approximation, has been accepted as the soil classification system to be utilised for making and interpreting soil surveys in Argentina. In most cases the system with all of its subsequent revisions until the second edition, has failed to show the uniqueness of the soils in Argentina and particularly those in the Pampean Region (Pazos, 2000). The need for a national soil classification system has been proclaimed (Pazos, 1993) but no further efforts have been made in this sense.

The WRB applied to Argentinian soils: two case studies. Roca Pascual & Pazos. 191 EUROPEAN SOIL BUREAU  RESEARCH REPORT NO. 7

The World Reference Base for Soil Resources (WRB) (ISSS, ISRIC, FAO, 1998) appears as an interesting option for the region. It is a very flexible system with a higher level of reference soil groups and a lower level of adjectives applied as qualifiers, designed as an easy means of communication among scientists. Little experience has been gained in Argentina with the application of WRB (Pazos, 1996; Pazos and Moscatelli, 1998).

Two case studies are presented here from different and contrasting areas (Fig. 1). The first area is Azul Co., Buenos Aires province, in the centre of the Humid Pampa where soil maps are available at the scale of 1:50,000 (INTA, 1974-1997). The second area is Fray Mamerto Esquiú Department in Catamarca province, located in the Dry Chaco region, a less studied area, with soil maps at the scale of 1:500,000, and some semidetailed soil maps from neighbouring areas. In both areas soils are classified according to the WRB and the soil names are compared with those obtained applying ST at the subgroup level. The connotation of both resulting nomenclatures is analysed from the standpoint of non-specialist users of soil information. Materials and methods A previous study of taxotransference (Pazos, 1996) of the soil series present in Azul Co. according to the soil maps 1:50,000 (INTA, 1974-1997) to WRB (ISSS, ISRIC, FAO, 1994) was utilized. The results were updated both to the second edition of ST and WRB (ISSS-ISRIC-FAO, 1998) as follows. First, each soil series present in Azul Co. was reclassified to the subgroup level of ST. As far as possible, all uncertain information in the profile descriptions given in the map reports was checked with the soil survey staff at the Soils Institute of INTA (Gustavo Moscatelli, Ricardo Diaz, personal communication). Finally, the soil series were classified with WRB.

In Fray Mamerto Esquiú department 30 soil profiles were described and sampled within a soil survey project at the scale of 1:20,000. Both ST and WRB were utilized to classify the soils. On samples obtained from each horizon the following analyses were made: pH (water 1:2.5), electrical conductivity and soluble ions in the saturation extract, clay content by the pipette method, organic carbon by Walkley and Black, and CaCO3 by the gas volumetric method. Results and discussion Azul Azul Co., in central Buenos Aires province, has a surface area of 6615 km2. The northern part is formed by continental plains with flat-concave general relief and alkaline and/or hydromorphic soils, with tosca layers (calcareous layer with variable depth, CaCO3 content and hardness) at shallow depths towards the east. The southern part has both sierras and piedmont landscapes with rock outcrops and shallow and very shallow soils as well as deep well drained soils with tosca at variable depth. The average topsoil organic matter content is 55 g kg-1. The climate is temperate humid-subhumid with mean annual rainfall of 900 mm. Rainfed agriculture is the main use of the deep well drained soils, with wheat, maize and soybean as the main crops. Shallow and alkaline and/or hydromorphic soils are utilized for cattle raising.

In Table 1 the soil series described for Azul Co. (INTA, 1974-1997) are listed together with the corresponding subgroup according to ST, the updating to the second edition of ST and the classification with WRB. Many uncertainties were found in the soil profile descriptions. In some cases, dry color was not indicated which hampered the recognition of mollic epipedons and albic horizons. In other cases, the poor description of features associated with wetness made it difficult to assign an aquic soil moisture regime in ST or apply gleyic and stagnic qualifiers in WRB.

The main differences between both subgroups, defined by INTA (1974-1997) and updated ST, are derived from: 1. Changes in ST with the incorporation of new great groups and subgroups. For example: Natrudolls (cf. Santa Paula, Sierra Chica and others), Petrocalcic Paleudolls (cf. Azul, Balcarce and others) and Abruptic Argiudolls (cf. Cobo, Saladillo and El Toro). 2. Names coined by INTA and free application of ST criteria in order to suit local soil peculiarities. For example, Thapto argic Hapludoll and Thapto natric Hapludoll were provided for soils with non-albic E horizons, interpreted as lithologic discontinuities. 3. Lithic Hapludoll, besides naming soils with hard rock within 50 cm from the mineral soil surface, was also utilized for soils with tosca within the same depth.

192 The WRB applied to Argentinian soils: two case studies. Roca Pascual & Pazos. EUROPEAN SOIL BUREAU  RESEARCH REPORT NO. 7

Figure 1. Map of Argentina. 1) Azul Co. in Buenos Aires Province. 2) Fray Mamerto Esquiú Department in Catamarca Province. Provinces shaded in gray.

There is a rather good correlation between great groups in ST and reference soil groups in WRB, viz. Argiudolls and Phaeozems; Argialbolls and Planosols, and Natrudolls, Natraquolls and Natraqualfs with Solonetz.

When moving into lower levels in both systems, the correlation remains rather good but WRB attains a better segregation of well drained soils with tosca in the substratum. Petrocalcic Paleudolls are segregated into Luvic and Haplic Phaeozems, both with tosca phase. The difficulties in the classification of soils with tosca according to ST are extensively discussed by Pazos and Mestelan (2002).

WRB is able to show more accessory properties than ST. For example, exchangeable sodium content above 6 % in Phaeozems (cf. Videla Dorna, Napaleofú and others) and secondary CaCO3 accumulation in Solonetz (cf. Cacharí, Miranda and others). The particular case of tosca in the substratum of Solonetz (cf. Santa Paula, Sierra Chica and others) is not strictly provided in WRB and should carry the petrocalcic qualifier. For this particular case, ST has a petrocalcic subgroup in Natrudolls but not in Natraquolls, giving rise to some inconsistency in the classification of the soils in the lowlands.

The WRB applied to Argentinian soils: two case studies. Roca Pascual & Pazos. 193 EUROPEAN SOIL BUREAU  RESEARCH REPORT NO. 7

Table 1. Soil series in Azul Co. with the corresponding subgroup (INTA, 1974-1997), update to the second edition of ST and classification according to WRB.

Subgroup Soil Series according to ST (1999) WRB (1998) INTA Azul Typic Ad Balcarce Luvic Phaeozem, tosca phase Cinco Cerros Petrocalcic Pd La Delicia Lithic Ad La Alianza Haplic Phaeozem, tosca phase Mar del Plata Tandil Typic Ad Tres Esquinas Typic Ad Blanca Chica Luvic Phaeozem Ea. Santa María Thapto argic Hd Egaña Ea. Aldecoa Aquic Ad Aquic Ad Martín Colman Typic Ab Typic Ab Eutri-albic Planosol Santa Luisa Thapto argic Hd Hyposodi-luvic Phaeozem Videla Dorna Argiaquic Ab Argiaquic Ab Hyposodi-luvic Phaeozem (albic) Napaleufú Bolivar Entic Hd Entic Hd Haplic Phaeozem Sierra de los Padres Lithic Hd Lithic Hd Mollic Leptosol Cobo Saladillo Thapto argic Hd Abruptic Ad Abrupti-luvic Phaeozem El Toro Santa Paula Thapto natric Hd Sierra Chica Petrocalcic Nd Petrocalci-mollic Solonetz Est. Yerbas, La Escocia Typic Nq Tuyutí Monte Typic Na Hypocalcic Solonetz Thapto natric Hd Miranda Ayacucho Hypocalci-mollic Solonetz Gral. Guido Rauch Typic Nq Vichahuel Hypocalci-mollic Solonetz (stagnic) La Nueva Esperanza Santa Rita Typic Nq Cacharí Thapto natric Hd Querandíes Typic Nq Orthicalci-mollic Solonetz (stagnic) Barrer La Francia Stagni-mollic Solonetz (albic) Typic Nb Tandileufú Chelforó Typic Nf Stagni-hypocalcic Solonetz La Paulina Miñana Mollic Nf Typic Nf La Guarida del Zorro Stagnic Solonetz La Emma Typic Nf Stagni-albic Solonetz La María Luisa Mollic Nf

Hd = Hapludoll; Ad = Argiudoll; Nd = Natrudoll; Pd = Paleudoll; Ab = Argialboll; Nb = Natralboll; Nq = Natraquoll; Nf = Natraqualf; Na = Natrudalf

194 The WRB applied to Argentinian soils: two case studies. Roca Pascual & Pazos. EUROPEAN SOIL BUREAU  RESEARCH REPORT NO. 7

Fray Mamerto Esquiú Fray Mamerto Esquiú Department in Catamarca Province belongs to the geologic province of the Pampian Sierras. It is a deep river valley characterized by aeolian and silt and sand alluvial deposits from the Holocene (Blasco et al., 1995) surrounded by the sierras. The climate is arid with temperate winters and warm summers with mean annual rainfall of 364 mm occurring in the summertime. Soil temperature regime is hyperthermic and soil moisture regime is aridic (Van Wambeke, 1981). The natural vegetation, when not modified by agriculture or urban use, corresponds with the typical vegetation of the Dry Chaco (Burkart et al., 1999).

Thirty soil profiles located in the alluvial plain were described and classified (Table 2). Soils are young with secondary CaCO3 accumulations in the subsurface horizons, salinity in the upper horizons decreasing with depth, and organic carbon content irregularly decreasing with depth and remaining high at 1 m depth. Soil materials are finer towards the South.

Table 2 – Soils in Fray Mamerto Esquiú, classified according to Soil Taxonomy and WRB

Soil Taxonomy Profile WRB (ISSS, ISRIC, FAO, 1998) (USDA, 1999) Saline/sodic soils 7 Sodic Calcisol Typic Calciustept 10 Typic Calciustoll Calcari-Salic Fluvisol (Sodic) 11 Oxyaquic Calciustoll 13 Typic Haplustoll Calcari-Humic Fluvisol (Sodic) 4 Oxyaquic Haplustoll 14 Molli-Sodic Solonchak (Sulphatic-Hypocalcic) 15 Oxyaquic Calciustoll 30 Calci-Sodic Solonchak (Sulphatic) 19 Hypercalci-Sodic Calcisol Aeric Halaquept 16 Calcari-Sodic Fluvisol 27 24 Calcari-Mollihumic Fluvisol (Sodic) Typic Calciustoll 25 Molli-Sodic Solonchak (Sulphatic-Calcic) Normal soils 20, 21 Calcaric Regosol Typic Torripsamment 17 23 Typic Torrifluvent 18 Calcaric Fluvisol Typic Calciustoll 26 Torrifluventic Haplustoll 6, 29 1, 3, 22, 28, Fluventic Haplustoll Calcari-Humic Fluvisol 9, 12 5 Torrifluventic Haplustoll 2 Calcari-Mollihumic Fluvisol Oxyaquic Calciustoll 8 Oxyaquic Haplustoll

The regional aridic soil moisture regime is locally modified due to the valley narrowing towards the S which restricts subsurface water drainage. The drainage restriction provokes the raise of the groundwater level which was found between 70 and 100 cm in all studied sites, without causing waterlogging and shifting the soil moisture regime to ustic.

The WRB applied to Argentinian soils: two case studies. Roca Pascual & Pazos. 195 EUROPEAN SOIL BUREAU  RESEARCH REPORT NO. 7

The origin of the salts is not related with groundwater (the electrical conductivity of the river is 0.46 dS/cm at 25ºC), but to aeolian contribution from the North. Laminar deposits of fine material and salts have been described by Da Silva (1983) in San Fernando de Catamarca valley, located N of the study area. The finer texture and higher soil moisture in the lower southern part of the valley give rise to sodic soils with different degree of salinity, while the northern part of the valley presents normal (non-sodic, non-saline) coarse textured soils.

In general, there is no good correlation between both systems. The Fluvisols, widely represented in the area, may correspond to Calciustolls, Haplustolls, Halaquepts, Torrifluvents and Torripsamments. In WRB priority is given to the occurrence of fluvic soil materials, with or without mollic horizon, while ST gives more weight to the occurrence of a mollic epipedon.

In the saline/sodic area, according to WRB, three reference soil groups are described: Fluvisols, Calcisols and Solonchak. The suite of permitted qualifiers allows showing the salic, sodic, sulphatic and/or calcic characteristics of the soil profiles. The resulting soil names are connotative of the geochemical characteristics of the soils that are of great importance in an area where irrigation is a necessary management practise. When applying ST, only two orders are recognized, Mollisols and Inceptisols. The presence of CaCO3 is partially apparent from the soil name, while the saline-sodic character only shows up in the Halaquepts. In ST, many soil names reflect the increased moisture content as a consequence of the groundwater influence on the soil profile.

In a general way it can be said WRB soil names give more information about the soil properties and characteristics than ST. However both nomenclatures are difficult to understand for non-soil scientists. The series names can be handy but they will be meaningful only after an important task of soil knowledge transference from the soil scientist to the users.

The present has no intention to establish an equivalence or correlation between any ST hierarchical level and reference soil groups or soil units in WRB. In fact, those characteristics that do not show up at the subgroup level of ST would probably appear at the lower levels of family and/or series. However, to reach these lower levels in ST more laboratory analyses are needed than those that already provide adequate sensitivity when classifying the soils in this study according to WRB. Conclusions The correlation between Soil Taxonomy and WRB was rather good for the area of zonal and intrazonal soils, namely, Azul Co. In Fray Mamerto Esquiú covered by azonal soils, the different weight given to soil forming processes in both systems, particularly those leading to organic matter accumulation, resulted in a low degree of correlation between both systems.

The flexibility of WRB with the utilization of multiple qualifiers brings out more sensitivity in reflecting soil characteristics in the soil name if compared with Soil Taxonomy. Also, the emphasis put on soil morphology compared with laboratory data makes the system suitable for application in areas with rather modest facilities.

Recommendations can be more readily drawn from soil names in WRB when transferring the knowledge about soils to non-specialist users. Nevertheless, the nomenclature is too complicated in both systems so as to make the knowledge transference task unavoidable. Acknowledgements The first author acknowledges the help received from the Soils Group and Soil Laboratory of Universidad Nacional de Catamarca (Argentina) and the MAE Interuniversity Programme (Spain). The authors gratefully thank Ms. Silvia Mestelan for critically reviewing the manuscript.

196 The WRB applied to Argentinian soils: two case studies. Roca Pascual & Pazos. EUROPEAN SOIL BUREAU  RESEARCH REPORT NO. 7

References Blasco, G.; Caminos, R.L.; Lapido, O.; Lizuaín, A.; Martínez, H.; Nullo, F.; Panza, J.L.; Sacomani, L.; Barber, E.L.; Chipulina, M.A. y Martínez, L.V. 1995. Hoja geológica 2996 - II, San Fernando del Valle de Catamarca. Programa Nacional de Cartas Geológicas de la República Argentina, 1:250.000. Secretaría de Minería de la Nación. Dirección Nacional del Servicio Geológico. Boletín nº 212. Buenos Aires. Burkart, R., N.O. Bárbaro, R.O. Sánchez y D.A. Gómez. 1999. Eco-regiones de Argentina. Secretaría de Recursos Naturales y Desarrollo Sustentable, Buenos Aires. 42 p. Da Silva, H. 1983. Rasgos morfogenéticos de la playa aluvial del Valle de Catamarca. X Congreso Argentino y VIII Latinoamericano de la Ciencia del Suelo. Mar del Plata, Octubre pp. 217-218. INTA. 1974 - 1997. Colección: Cartas de Suelos de la República Argentina. Escala 1:50.000. CIRN, INTA, Buenos Aires. ISSS, ISRIC, FAO. 1994. Draft World Reference Base for Soil Resources. Wageningen/Rome. ISSS, ISRIC, FAO. 1998. World Reference Base for Soil Resources. World Soil Resources Reports Nº 84. FAO UN, Rome, Italy. 88 pp. Pazos, M.S., 1993. La Clasificación de Suelos en la República Argentina: 23 años después. XIV Congreso Argentino de la Ciencia del Suelo, Mendoza, 25 al 29 de octubre. En: Trabajos y Comunicaciones Resumidos, pp. 473-474. Pazos, M.S. 1996. Clasificación de los suelos del Partido de Azul (Provincia de Buenos Aires, Argentina) según la Base Referencial Mundial del Recurso Suelo (ISSS, ISRIC, FAO). Ciencia del Suelo 14:116- 118. Pazos, M.S. 2000. Cambios en los Molisoles desde la 1ª edición (1975) de la Taxonomía de Suelos hasta la 2ª edición (1999). Actas del Taller Soil Taxonomy. Instituto de Suelos C.R.N. INTA Castelar – AACS. 14 y 15 de marzo de 2000. p. 72-82. Pazos, M.S. and Mestelan, S. 2002. Variability of Depth to Tosca in Udolls and Soil Classification, Buenos Aires Province, Argentina. Soil Sci. Soc. of Am.J., accepted for publication. Pazos, M.S. and Moscatelli, G. 1998. The WRB applied to Pampean Soils – Argentina. Proceedings of the XVI World Congress of Soil Science, en CD Rom, Montpellier, Francia, 20 al 26 de agosto de 1998. Symposium 42. SAGyP – INTA. 1990. Atlas de Suelos de la República Argentina. Proyecto PNUD Arg-85/019, Buenos Aires. Dos tomos, 1600 p. 39 mapas. Soil Survey Staff. 1999. Soil Taxonomy. A Basic System of Soil Classification for Making and Interpreting Soil Surveys. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agriculture Handbook Nº 436. Washington D.C. Van Wambeke, A. 1981. Soil moisture and temperature regimes. South America. SMSS Technical Monograph # 2. Cornell University – USDA.

The WRB applied to Argentinian soils: two case studies. Roca Pascual & Pazos. 197