Journal of Mountain Science

, Volume 6, Issue 2, pp 107–112 | Cite as

Historical development in soil micromorphological imaging

  • A. R. Mermut


The book “micropedolog” by Kubieana and a large number of publications has induced many people to practice soil micromorphology. Quantification of the soil fabric and its components was a major challenge. The use of the image analyses in soil science was a breakthrough. Attempts to make soil thin sections go back to the beginning of the 20th century. Microscopic techniques and recently high resolution electron microscope and use of computer assisted imaging techniques enabled the in vitro study of soils in three dimensional levels. It is now possible to store and process massive amounts of data. Micromorphological concepts and techniques are applied in paleopedological, ecological, and archaeological studies. The aim of this work was to examine soil micromorphological imaging in historical perspective.


Soil micromorphology quantification imaging techniques history 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Bisdom, E. B. A. (ed.) 1981. Submicroscopy of Soils and Weathered Rocks. PODOC, Wageningen, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
  2. Brewer, R. 1964. Fabric and Mineral Analysis of the Soils. John Wiley and Sons Inc., New York.Google Scholar
  3. Brewer, R. 1976. Fabric and Mineral Analysis of the Soils. Robert E. Kriger Public. Co., Huntingdon, New York.Google Scholar
  4. Bullock, P., Fedoroff, N., Jongerius, A., Stoops, G., Tursina, T., Babel, U. 1985. Handbook for Soil Thin Section Description. Waine Research Publications, Wolverhampton, UK.Google Scholar
  5. Thomas R. Elliot, T. R. and Heck, R. J. 2007. A Comparison of Optical and X-ray CT Technique for Void Analysis in Soil Thin Section. Geoderma Volume 141(1–2): 60–70.Google Scholar
  6. Eswaran, H., and Joseph, K.T. 1974. Pyrite and its Oxidation Products in an Acid-sulfate Soil MARDI. Res. Bull. 20: 50–57.Google Scholar
  7. Eswaran, H., Stoops, G. 1979. Surface Textures of Quartz in Tropical Soils. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 43: 420–424.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. FitzPatrick, E.A. 1984. Micromorphology of Soils. Chapman and Hall Ltd., London, UK.Google Scholar
  9. Glab, T. 2007. Application of İmage Analysis for Soil Macropore Characterization According to Pore Diameter Int. Agrophysics 21: 61–66.Google Scholar
  10. Jongerius, A., Heinzberger, G. 1975. Methods in Soil Micromorphology, a Technique for the Preparation of Large Thin Section. Soil Survey Papers, vol. 10, Soil Survey Institute, Wageningen, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
  11. Jongerius et, A., Schoonderbeek, D., Jager, A. 1972. The Application of Quantimet 720 in Soil Micromorphology. Microscope 20: 243–254.Google Scholar
  12. Jongerius, A. and Rutherford, G. K. 1979. Glossary of Soil Micromorphology: English, French, German, Spanish and Russian / edited by A. Jongerius and G. K. Rutherford. Wageningen Centre for Agricultural Publishing and Documentation.Google Scholar
  13. Kapur, S., Mermut, A. Mermut, Stoops, G. (eds.) 2008. New Trends in Soil Microscopy. Springer Verlag Berlin.Google Scholar
  14. Kubiena, W. 1938. Micropedology. Collegiate Press, Ames Iowa.Google Scholar
  15. Marcelino, V. Cnudde, S., Van Steeland, T. and Caro, F. 2007. An Evaluation of 2D-image Analysis Techniques for Measuring Soil Microporosity. European Journal of Soil Science 133–140.Google Scholar
  16. Mermut, A. R., Protz, R, and Bisdom, E. B. A. 1990. Application of Imager Analyis at Microscopic and Submicroscopic Levels in Soil Science. 14th International Congress of Soil Sciernce Transections, Kyoto, Japan 12–18 August 1990 Volume VII: Commission VII, VII-232–VII-237.Google Scholar
  17. Mermut, A.R. and Norton, L. D. (eds.), 1992. Digitization, Processing and Quantitative Interpretation of Image Analysis in Soil Science and Related Areas. Geoderma Special Issue, Vol.53 (no.3/4): 179–418.Google Scholar
  18. Miedema, R. Mermut, A. R. 1990. Soil Micromorphology: An Annotated Bibliography 1968–1986. CAB International, Wallingford, Oxen, OX10 8DE, UK.Google Scholar
  19. Monga, O. 2007. Defining and Computing Stable Representations of Volume Shapes from Discrete Trace Using Volume Primitives: Application to 3D image analysis in soil science. Elsevier Science Direcrt Image Vision Computing 25 (2007) 1134–1153.Google Scholar
  20. Protz, R., Shipitalo, M.J., Mermut, A.R., Fox, C.A. 1987. Image Analyses Of Soils — Present and Future. Geoderma 40: 115–125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Protz, R., Sweeney, S.J. 1992. An Application of Spectral Image Analyses to Soil Micromorphology. 1 Methods of analyses. Geoderma 53: 275–287.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Smart, P., Tovey, N.K. 1982. Electron Microscopy of Soils and Sediments — Techniques. Oxford Univ. Press, Oxford.Google Scholar
  23. Soil Survey Staff. 1975. Soil Taxonomy. A Basic System of Soil Classification for Making and Interpreting Soil Surveys. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Handbook No. 436Google Scholar
  24. Stoops, G. Dalvigne, J. 1990. Morphology of Mineral Weathering and Neoformation. II Neoformations. In Douglas, L. A. (ed.), Soil Micromorphology: A Basic and Applied Science, Proceedings of the 8th Inter. Working Meting on Soil Micromorphology, San Antonio, Texas, July 1988, Elsevier Amsterdam.Pp. 483–500.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Stoops, G. 2003. Achievements in Micromorphology Special Issue Catena 54, issue 3.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Science Press, Institute of Mountain Hazards and Environment, CAS and Springer-Verlag GmbH 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • A. R. Mermut
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Soil ScienceUniversity of SaskatchewanSaskatoonCanada

Personalised recommendations