Journal of Mountain Science

, Volume 12, Issue 6, pp 1471–1483 | Cite as

Soil atterberg limits and consistency indices as influenced by land use and slope position in Western Iran

  • Zalira Zolfaghari
  • Mohamamd Reza Mosaddeghi
  • Shamsollah Ayoubi
  • Hamid Kelishadi
Article

Abstract

Atterberg limits and consistency indices are used for classifications of cohesive (fine-grained) soils in relation with compaction and tillage practices. They also provide information for interpreting several soil mechanical and physical properties such as shear strength, compressibility, shrinkage and swelling potentials. Although, several studies have been conducted regarding the land use effects on various soil mechanical properties, little is known about the effects of land use and slope positions on Atterberg limits and consistency indices. This study was conducted to investigate the effects of land use and slope position on selected soil physical and chemical properties, Atterberg limits and consistency indices in hilly region of western Iran. Three land uses including dryland farming, irrigated farming and pasture and four slope positions (i.e., shoulder, backslope, footslope, and toeslope) were used for soil samplings. One hundred eleven soil samples were collected from the surface soil (0-10 cm). Selected physical and chemical properties, liquid limit (LL), plastic limit (PL) and shrinkage limit (SL) were measured using the standard methods; and consistency indices including plastic index (PI), friability index (FI), shrinkage index (SI) and soil activity 04 = PI /clay) were calculated. The results showed that irrigated farming significantly increased organic matter content (OM) and OM/clay ratio, and decreased bulk density (pt>) and relative bulk density (рь-геі) as a result of higher biomass production and plant residues added to the soil compared to other land uses. Except for sand content, OM, pt>, cation exchange capacity (CEC) and calcium carbonate equivalent (CCE), slope position significantly affected soil physical and chemical properties. The highest values of silt, OM/clay and CEC/clay were found in the toeslope position, predominantly induced by soil redistribution within the landscape. The use of complexed (COC) - noncomplexed organic carbon (NCOC) concept indicated that majority of the studied soils were located below the saturation line and the OM in the soils was mainly in the COC form. The LL, PI, FI and A showed significant differences among the land uses; the highest values belonged to the irrigated farming due to high biomass production and plant residues returned to the soils. Furthermore, slope position significantly affected the Atterberg limits and consistency indices except for SL. The highest values of LL, PI, SI and A were observed in the toeslope position probably because of higher OM and CEC/clay due to greater amount of expandable phyllosilicate clays. Overall, soils on the toeslope under irrigated farming with high LL and SI and low values of FI need careful tillage management to avoid soil compaction.

Keywords

Land use Slope position Atterberg 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Archer JR (1975) Soil consistency. In: Soil Physical Conditions and Crop Production. Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, Tech. Bull. 29. London: HMSO. pp 289–297.Google Scholar
  2. Arthur E, Schjønning P, Moldrup P, de Jonge LW (2012) Soil resistance and resilience to mechanical stresses for three differently managed sandy loam soils. Geoderma 173-174: 50–60. DOI: 10.1016/j.geoderma.2012.01.007CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Asgarzadeh H, Mosaddeghi MR, Mahboubi AA, et al. (2010) Soil water availability for plants as quantified by conventional available water, least limiting water range and integral water capacity. Plant and Soil 335(1-2): 229–244. DOI: 10.1007/s11104-010-0410-6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Asgarzadeh H, Mosaddeghi MR, Mahboubi AA, et al. (2011) Integral energy of conventional available water, least limiting water range and integral water capacity for better characterization of water availability and soil physical quality. Geoderma 166: 34–42. DOI: 10.1016/j.geoderma.2011.06.009CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Atterberg A (1911) Über die physikalische Bodenuntersuchung und über die Plastizität der Tone [On the investigation of the physical properties of soils and on the plasticity of clays]. Internationale Mitteilungen für Bodenkunde 1: 10–43. (In German)Google Scholar
  6. Ayoubi S, Mokhtari Karchegani P, Mosaddeghi MR, Honarjoo N (2012) Soil aggregation and organic carbon as affected by topography and land use change in western Iran. Soil & Tillage Research 121: 18–26. DOI: 10.1016/j.still.2012.01.011CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bain JB (1971) A plasticity chart as an aid to the identification and assessment of industrial clays. Clay Minerals 9: 1–17. DOI: 10.1180/claymin.1971.009.1.01CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Blanco-Canqui H, Lal R, Owens LB, et al. (2005) Mechanical properties and organic carbon of soil aggregates in the Northern Appalachians. Soil Science Society of America Journal 69: 1472–1481. DOI: 10.2136Zsssaj2004.0356CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Blanco-Canqui H, Lal R, Post M, et al. (2006) Organic carbon influences on soil particle density and rheological properties. Soil Science Society of America Journal 70: 1407–1414. DOI: 10.2136/sssaj2005.0355CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. BSI (British Standards Institution) (2000) British Standard Methods of Test for Soils for Civil Engineering Purposes: Classification Tests. British Standard 1377, BSI, London, UK.Google Scholar
  11. Campbell DJ (2001) Liquid and plastic limits. In: Smith KA, Mullins CE (eds.), Soil and Environmental Analysis, Physical Methods. Dekker Inc.: New York. pp 349–375.Google Scholar
  12. Casagrande A (1932) Research on the Atterberg limits of soils. Public Roads 13: 121–130.Google Scholar
  13. Celik I (2005) Land use effects on organic matter and physical properties of soil in a southern Mediteranian highland of Turkey. Soil & Tillage Research 83: 270–277. DOI: 10.1016/j.still.2004.08.001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Chen X, Zheng H, Zhang W, et al. (2014) Effects of land cover on soil organic carbon stock in a karst landscape with discontinuous soil distribution. Journal of Mountain Science 11(3): 774–781. DOI: 10.1007/s11629-013-2843-xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Coleman JD, Farrar DM, Marsh AD (1964) The moisture characteristics, composition and structural analysis of a red clay soil from Nyeri, Kenya. Gétechnique 14: 262–276.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Das BM (2006) Principles of Geotechnical Engineering. Stamford, CT: Thomson Learning College.Google Scholar
  17. de la Rosa D (1979) Relation of several pedological characteristics to engineering qualities of soil. Journal of Soil Science 30: 793–799. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2389.1979. tb01028.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Dexter AR (2004) Soil physical quality. Part I: theory, effects of soil texture, density, and organic matter, and effects on root growth. Geoderma 120: 201–214. DOI: 10.1016/j.geoderma.2003.09.004CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Dexter AR, Bird NRA (2001) Methods for predicting the optimum and the range of water contents for tillage based on the water retention curve. Soil & Tillage Research 57: 203–212. DOI: 10.1016 0167-1987(00)00154-9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Dexter AR, Czyz EA (2011) Soil crumbling during tillage as a function of soil organic matter content. International Agrophysics 25: 215–221.Google Scholar
  21. Dexter AR, Horn R (1988) Effects of land use and clay content on soil structure as measured by Fracture Surface Analysis. Zeitschrift für Pflanzenernährung und Bodenkunde 151: 325–330. DOI: 10.1002/jpln.19881510511CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Dexter AR, Richard G, Arrouays D, Czyż EA, Jolivet C, Duval O (2008) Complexed organic matter controls soil physical properties. Geoderma 144: 620–627. DOI: 10.1016/j.geo derma.2008.01.022CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Falahatkar S, Hosseini SM, Salman Mahiny A, et al. (2014) Soil organic carbon stock as affected by land use/cover changes in the humid region of northern Iran. Journal of Mountain Science 11(2): 507–518. DOI: 10.1007//11629-013-2645-1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Gee GW, Bauder JW (1986) Particle-size analysis. In: Klute A (ed.), Methods of Soil Analysis. Part 1. Physical and Mineralogical Methods. Agron. Monogr. 9. ASA/SSSA: Madison, WI, USA. pp 383–411.Google Scholar
  25. Green TR, Ahuja LR, Benjamin JG (2003) Advances and challenges in predicting agricultural management effects on soil hydraulic properties. Geoderma 116: 3–27. DOI: 10.1016/S0016-7061(03)00091-0CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Hathaway-Jenkins LJ, Sakrabani R, Pearce B, et al. (2011) A comparison of soil and water properties in organic and conventional farming systems in England. Soil Use and Management 27: 133–142. DOI: 10.1111/j.1475-2743.2011. 00335.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Havaee S, Ayoubi S, Mosaddeghi MR, Keller T (2014) Impacts of land use on soil organic matter and degree of compactness in calcareous soils of central Iran. Soil Use and Management 30: 2–9. DOI: 10.1111/sum.12092CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Havaee S, Mosaddeghi MR, Ayoubi S (2015) In situ surface shear strength as affected by soil characteristics and land use in calcareous soils of central Iran. Geoderma 237-238: 137–148. DOI: 10.1016/j.geoderma.2014.08.016CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Hemmat A, Aghilianategh N, Rezainejad Y, Sadeghi M (2010) Long-term impacts of municipal solid waste compost, sewage sludge and farmyard manure application on organic carbon, bulk density and consistency limits of a calcareous soil in central Iran. Soil & Tillage Research 108: 43–50. DOI: 10.1016/j.still.2010.03.007CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Jones CA (1983) Effect of soil texture on critical bulk densities for root growth. Soil Science Society of America Journal 47: 1208–1211. DOI: 10.2136/sssaj1983.03615995004700060029xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Karchegani PM, Ayoubi S, Mosaddeghi MR, Hoonarjoo N (2012) Soil organic carbon pools in particle-size fractions as affected by slope gradient and land use change in hilly regions, western Iran. Journal of Mountain Science 9: 87–95. DOI: 10.1007/s11629-012-2211-2CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Kelishadi H, Mosaddeghi MR, Hajabbasi MA, Ayoubi S (2014) Near-saturated soil hydraulic properties as influenced by land use management systems in Koohrang region of central Zagros, Iran. Geoderma 213: 426–434. DOI: 10.1016/j. geoderma.2013.08.008CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Keller T, Arvidsson J, Dexter AR (2007) Soil structures produced by tillage as affected by soil water content and the physical quality of soil. Soil & Tillage Research 92: 45–52. DOI: 10.1016/j.still.2006.01.001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Keller T, Dexter AR (2012) Plastic limits of agricultural soils as functions of soil texture and organic matter content. Soil Research 50: 7–17. DOI: 10.1071/SR11174CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Khormali F, Ajami M (2011) Pedogenetic investigation of soil degradation on a deforested loess hillslope of Golestan Province, Northern Iran. Geoderma 167-168: 274–283. DOI: 10.1016/j.geoderma.2011.07.030CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Khormali F, Ajami M, Ayoubi S, et al. (2009) Role of deforestation and hillslope position on soil quality attributes of loess-derived soils in Golestan province, Iran. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 134(3-4): 178–189. DOI: 10.1016/j.agee. 2009.06.017CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Lai R (2004) Agricultural activities and the global carbon cycle. Nutrient Cycling in Agroecosystems 70: 103–116. DOI: 10.io23/B:FRES.ooooo4848o.24274.0tCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Lorenz KR, Lai R, Shipitalod J (2008) Chemical stabilization of organic carbon pools in particle size fractions in no-till and meadow soils. Biology and Fertility of Soil 44: 1043–1051. DOI: 10.1007/S00374-008-0300-8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Mbagwa JSC, Abeh OG (1998) Prediction of engineering properties of tropical soils using intrinsic pedological parameters. Soil Science 163: 93–102. DOI: 10.1097/00010694-199802000-00002CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. McBride RA (2008) Soil consistency and lower plastic limits. In: Carter MR, Gregorich EG (eds.), Soil Sampling and Methods of Analysis, 2nd edition, Chapter ?58, CRC Press, pp 761–769.Google Scholar
  41. Mokhtari Karchegani P, Ayoubi S, Lu SG, Honaiju N (2011) Use of magnetic measures to assess soil redistribution following deforestation in hilly region. Journal of Applied Geophysics 75: 227–236. DOI: l0.l0l6/j.jappgeo.20ll.07.0l7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Mosaddeghi MR, Hajabbasi MA, Hemmat A, Afyuni M (2000) Soil compatibility as affected by soil water content and farmyard manure in central Iran. Soil & Tillage Research 55: 87–97. DOI: 10.1016/80167-1987(00)00102-1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Mosaddeghi MR, Morshedizad M, Mahboubi AA, et al. (2009) Laboratory evaluation of a model for soil crumbling for prediction of the optimum soil water content for tillage. Soil & Tillage Research 105: 242–250. DOI: 10.1016/j.still.2009. 08.005CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Nelson DW, Sommers LE (1996) Total carbon, organic carbon and organic matter. In: Spark DL, Page AL, Helmke PA, Loeppert PN, Soltanpour PN, Tabatabai MA, Johnson CT, Sumner ME (eds.), Methods of Soil Analysis. Part 3. Chemical Methods. ASA/SSSA: Madison, WI, USA. pp 961–1010.Google Scholar
  45. Odell RT, Thornburn TH, McKenzie LJ (1960). Relationships of Atterberg limits to some other properties of Illinois soils. Soil Science Society of America Proceedings 24: 297–300. DOI: I0.2i36/sssaji960.036i5995002400040025xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. PCA (1992) PCA Soil Primer. (Portland Cement Association: Skokie, IL)Google Scholar
  47. Rhoton FE, Shipitalo MJ, Lindbo DL (2002) Runoff and soil loss from midwestern and southeastern US silt loam soils as affected by tillage practice and soil organic matter content. Soil & Tillage Research 66: 1–11. DOI: 10.1016/S0167-1987(02)00005-3CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Richard HL, Suarez DL (1996) Carbonates and Gypsum. In: Spark DL, Page AL, Helmke PA, et al. (eds.), Methods of Soil Analysis. Part 3. Chemical Methods. ASA/SSSA: Madison, WI, USA. pp 437–474Google Scholar
  49. Ritchi JT, Crum J (1989) Converting soil survey characterization data into IBSNAT crop model input. In: Bouma J, Bregt AK (eds.), Land Qualities in Space and Time. Pudoc, Wageningen. pp 155–167.Google Scholar
  50. Rhoades JD (1982) Cation exchange capacity. In: Page AL, Miller RH, Keeney DR (eds), Methods of Soil Analysis. Part 2. Chemical and Microbiological Properties. 2nd ed. ASA/SSSA: Madison, WI, USA. pp 149–157.Google Scholar
  51. Schwartz RC, Evett SR, Unger PW (2003) Soil hydraulic properties of cropland compared with reestablished and native grassland. Geoderma 116: 47–60. DOI: 10.1016/S0016-7061(03)00093-4CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Seybold CA, Elrashidi MA, Engel RJ (2008) Linear regression models to estimate soil liquid limit and plasticity index from basic soil properties. Soil Science 173: 25–34. DOI: 10.1097/ss.oboi3e3l8l59a5elCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Shaver TM, Peterson GA, Ahuja LR, et al. (2002) Surface soil physical properties after twelve years of dryland no-till management. Soil Science Society of America Journal 66: 1296–1303. DOI: I0.2l36/sssaj2002.l296CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Soane BD, Campbell DJ, Herkes SM (1972) The characterization of some Scottish arable topsoils by agricultural and engineering methods. Journal of Soil Science 23: 93–104. DOI: io.im/j.i365-2389.i972.tboi645.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Soussana JF, Loiseau P, Vuichard N, et al. (2004) Carbon cycling and sequestration opportunity in temperate grassland. Soil Use and Management 20: 219–230. DOI: io.llll/j.1475-2743.2004.tb00362.xsCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Wroth CP, Wood DM (1978) The correlation of index properties with some basic engineering properties of soils. Canadian Geotechnical Journal 15: 137–145. DOI: 10.1139/178-014CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Xie X, Wei F (2013) Soil aggregates and fractal features under different land use types in a frequent debris flow area. Journal of Mountain Science 10(3): 437–444. DOI: 0.1007/SI1629-013-2500-3CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Zolfaghari Z (2014) Predicting Shrinking Behavior of Soils using Artificial Neural Network (ANN) at Landscape Scale in Chelgerd, Chaharmahal-va-Bakhtiari. MSc Thesis. Isfahan University of Technology, Isfahan, Iran, p 170.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Science Press, Institute of Mountain Hazards and Environment, CAS and Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Zalira Zolfaghari
    • 1
  • Mohamamd Reza Mosaddeghi
    • 1
  • Shamsollah Ayoubi
    • 1
  • Hamid Kelishadi
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Soil Science, College of AgricultureIsfahan University of TechnologyIsfahanIran

Personalised recommendations