Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Spatial heterogeneity of soil properties in areas under elephant-grass short-duration grazing system

  • Published:
Plant and Soil Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Soil properties can be changed by several factors, such as plant roots and animal trampling. The identification of spatial heterogeneity of these properties depends on the sampling scale. This study was developed to test the hypothesis that soil chemical and physical properties beneath elephant-grass plants are different from those between them. The research was carried out in a soil classified as Kandiudalfic Eutrudox. Forty-eight soil samples were collected from 0-10 cm depth (24 beneath plants and 24 between plants). The following properties were measured: pH, organic matter, S, available P, K, Ca and Mg exchangeable, sum of bases, cation exchange capacity, base saturation percentage, dry-aggregate distribution, bulk density and soil penetration resistance. Statistical analyses (t test) indicated that there were no significant differences in soil chemical properties in relation to spatial position. However, significant differences were observed in soil physical properties, with higher values of bulk density and soil resistance to penetration between the plants than beneath the plants.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Allmaras R R, Burwell W B, Voorhees W B and Larson W E 1965 Aggregate size distribution in the row zone of tillage experiments. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. Proc. 29, 645–650.

    Google Scholar 

  • Azenegashe O A, Allen V and Fontenot J 1997 Grazing sheep and cattle together or separately: effect on soil and plants. Agron. J. 89, 380–386.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blake G R and Hartge K H 1986 Bulk Density. In Methods of Soil Analysis. Part 1: Physical and Mineralogical Methods. Ed. A Klute. pp. 363–375. SSSA, Madison.

    Google Scholar 

  • Braunack M V and Dexter A R 1989a Soil aggregation in the seedbed: a review. I. Properties of aggregates and beds of aggregates. Soil Till. Res. 14, 259–279.

    Google Scholar 

  • Braunack M V and Dexter A R 1989b Soil aggregation in the seedbed: a review. II. Effect of aggregate sizes on plant growth. Soil Till. Res. 14, 281–298.

    Google Scholar 

  • Busscher W J 1990 Adjustment of flat-tipped penetrometer resistance data to a common water content. Am. Soc. Agric. Eng. 3, 519–524.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chanasyk D S and Naeth MA 1995 Grazing impacts on bulk density and soil strength in the foothills fescue grasslands of Alberta, Canada. Can. J. Soil Sci. 24, 551–557.

    Google Scholar 

  • da Silva A P, Kay B D and Perfect E 1994 Characterization of the least limiting water range. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 58, 1775–1781.

    Google Scholar 

  • da Silva A P, Kay B D and Perfect E 1997 Management versus inherent soil properties effects on bulk density and relative compaction. Soil Till. Res. 44, 81–93.

    Google Scholar 

  • Derner J D, Briske D D and Boutton T W 1997 Does grazing mediate soil carbon and nitrogen accumulation beneath C4, perennial grasses along an environmental gradient? Plant Soil 19, 147–156.

    Google Scholar 

  • Douglas J T 1994 Responses of perennial forage crops to soil compaction. In Soil Compaction in Crop Production. Eds B D Soane and B D Van Ouwerkerk. pp 343–364. Elsevier, Amsterdam.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gallardo M, Turner N C and Ludwig C 1994 Water relations, gas exchange and abscisic acid content of Lupinus cosentinii leaves in response to drying different proportions of the root system. J. Expt. Bot. 45, 909–918.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gardner W R 1956 Representation of soil aggregate-size distribution by a logarithmic-normal distribution. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. Proc. 20, 151–153.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glinski J and Lipiec J 1990 Soil Physical Conditions and Plant Roots. 250p. CRC. Press, Florida.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goss M J 1987 The specific effects of roots on the regeneration of soil structure. In Soil Compaction and Regeneration. pp. 145–155. Eds G Monnier M J. Goss and A. A. Balkema, Netherlands.

  • Gupta S C, Sharma P P and Defranchi S A 1989 Compaction effects on soil structure. Adv. Agron. 42, 311–338.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haynes R J and Williams P H 1993 Nutrient cycling and soil fertility in the grazed pasture ecosystem. Adv. Agron. 49, 119–199.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoffmann C and Jungk A 1995 Growth and phosphorus supply of sugar beet as affected by soil compaction and water tension. Plant Soil 176, 15–25.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hook P B, Burke I C and Lauenroth WK 1991 Heterogeneity of soil and plant N and C associated with individual plants and openings in North American shortgrass steppe. Plant Soil 138, 247–256.

    Google Scholar 

  • Horn R, Taubner H, Wuttke M and Baumgartl T 1994 Soil physical properties related to soil structure. Soil Till. Res. 30, 187–216.

    Google Scholar 

  • Horn R, Domzal H, Slowinska-Jurkiewicz A and Ouwerkerk C van 1995 Soil compaction processes and their effects on the structure of arable soils and the environment. Soil Till. Res. 35, 23–36.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jackson R B and Caldwell M M 1993 The scale of nutrient heterogeneity around individual plants and its quantification with geostatistics. Ecology 74, 612–614.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kelly R H, Burke I C and Lauenroth W K 1996 Soil organic matter and nutrient availability responses to reduced plant inputs in shortgrass steppe. Ecology 77, 2516–2527.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klute A 1986 Water Retention: Laboratory Methods. In Methods of Soil Analysis. Part 1: Physical And Mineralogical Methods. Ed. A Klute. pp 635–660. SSSA, Madison.

    Google Scholar 

  • Letey J 1985 Relationship between soil physical properties and crop production. Adv. Soil Sci. 1, 277–294.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lipiec J and Stepniewski W 1995 Effects of soil compaction and tillage systems on uptake and losses of nutrients. Soil Till. Res. 35, 37–52.

    Google Scholar 

  • Manley J T, Schuman G E, Reeder J D and Hart R H 1995 Rangeland soil carbon and nitrogen responses to grazing. J. Soil Water Cons. 50, 294–298.

    Google Scholar 

  • Murphy W M, Barreto A D, Silman J P and Dindal D L 1995 Cattle and sheep grazing effects on soil organisms, fertility and compaction in a smooth-stalked meadowgrass-dominant white clover sward. Grass Forr. Sci. 50, 191–194.

    Google Scholar 

  • Neter J, Wasserman W and Kutner M H 1989 Applied Linear Regression Models. 2nd ed. Ed. R Irwin. Homewood, IL.

  • Perfect E, Kay B D, Ferguson J A, da Silva A P and Denholm K A 1993 Comparison of functions for characterizing the dry aggregate size distribution of tilled soil. Soil Till. Res. 28, 123–139.

    Google Scholar 

  • Proffitt A P B, Bendotti S and McGarry D 1995 A comparison between continuous and controlled grazing on a red duplex soil. I. Effects on soil physical characteristics. Soil Till. Res. 35, 199–210.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rendig V V and Taylor H M 1989 Principles of Soil-Plant Interrelationships. McGraw-Hill Publ., New York. 275p.

    Google Scholar 

  • Robinson D 1994 The responses of plants to non-uniform supplies of nutrients. New Phytol. 127, 635–674.

    Google Scholar 

  • SAS Institute Inc. 1991 SAS/STAT Procedure Guide for Personal Computers. Vers. 5 ed. SAS Institute Inc. Cary, NC.

    Google Scholar 

  • Saunders WMH 1984 Mineral composition of soil and pasture from areas of grazed paddocks, affected and unaffected by dung and urine. New Zealand J. Agric. Res. 27, 405–412.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schlesinger W H, Reynolds J F, Cunningham g L, Huenneke L F, Jarrell W M, Virginia R A and Whitford W G 1990 Biological feedback's in global desertification. Science 247, 1043–1047.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schlesinger W H, Raikes J A, Hartley A E and Cross A F 1996 On the spatial pattern of soil nutrients in desert ecosystems. Ecology 77, 364–374.

    Google Scholar 

  • Semmel H, Horn R, Hell U, Dexter A R and Schulze E D 1990 The dynamics of soil aggregate formation and the effect on soil physical properties. Soil Tech. 3, 113–129.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shierlaw J and Alston A M 1984 Effect of soil compaction on root growth and uptake of phosphorus. Plant Soil 77, 15–28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Soane B D and Ouwerkerk C van 1995 Implications of soil compaction in crop production for the quality of the environment. Soil Till. Res. 35, 5–22.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stephenson G R and Veigel A 1987 Recovery of compacted soil on pastures used for winter cattle feeding. J. Range Manage. 40, 46–48.

    Google Scholar 

  • Taylor H M and Burnett E 1964 Influence of soil strength on root growth habits of plants. Soil Science 98, 174–180.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tisdall J M and Oades J M 1982 Organic matter and water-stable aggregate in soils. J. Soil Sci. 33, 141–163.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Haveren B B 1983 Soil bulk density as influenced by grazing intensity and soil type on a shortgrass prairie site. J. Range Manage. 36, 586–588.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Raij B 1998 Bioavailable tests: Alternatives to standard soil extractions. Commun. Soil Sci. Plan. 29, 1553–1570.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vepraskas M J 1994 Plant Response Mechanisms to Soil Compaction. In Plant Environment Interactions. Ed. R Wilkinson. pp 263–287. Books in Soils, Plant And the Environment, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vinton M A and Burke I C 1995 Interactions between individual plant species and soil nutrient status in shortgrass steppe. Ecology 76, 1116–1133.

    Google Scholar 

  • Warren S D, Nevill M B, Blackburn WH and Garza N E 1986 Soil response to trampling under intensive rotation grazing. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 50, 1336–1341.

    Google Scholar 

  • Willatt ST and Pullar D M 1983 Changes in soil physical properties under grazed pastures. Aust. J. Soil Res. 22, 343–348.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wraith J M and Wright C K 1998 Soil water and root growth. Hortscience 33, 951–959.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhang J and Kirkham M B 1995 Water relations of water-stressed, split-root C4 (Sorghum Bicolor, Poaceae) and C3 (Helianthus Annuus, Asteraceae) plants. Amer. J. Bot. 82, 1220–1229.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zobec T M and Popham T W 1990 Dry aggregate size distribution of sandy soils as influenced by tillage and precipitation. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 54, 198–204.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors
  1. S. Imhoff
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. A. Pires da Silva
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. C.A. Tormena
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Imhoff, S., Pires da Silva, A. & Tormena, C. Spatial heterogeneity of soil properties in areas under elephant-grass short-duration grazing system. Plant and Soil 219, 161–168 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1004770911906

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1004770911906

Search

Navigation