Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Hardpan in skeletal soils: Statistical approach to determine its depth in a cherry orchard plot

  • Published:
Biologia Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Skeletal soils are not suitable for agriculture, and often are allocated to marginal uses such as cherry orchards for timber production. These require some agricultural practices (irrigation, soil tillage or weed control) which can contribute to the development of a hardpan. Compacted layers can adversely affect timber production, so subsoiling works are required. This study examined the effect of six years of tillage on hardpan formation in a skeletal soil by means of mechanical impedance measurements with a dynamic penetrometer cone (dynamic cone test), a method that is quick and easy to use, but can suffer from interference by stones. Mechanical impedances along the soil profile were measured in four plots differing in tillage (with or without) and drip irrigation (with or without) treatments. Exploratory data analysis together with statistical inference techniques related to linear general models were applied. The presence of a transitional layer on top of the hardpan is suggested in the non-tilled plot and soil depth that can be explored easily by roots has increased by 20 cm.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

Explore related subjects

Discover the latest articles and news from researchers in related subjects, suggested using machine learning.

References

  • Alaoui A., Lipiec J. & Gerke H.H. 2011. A review of the changes in the soil pore system due to soil deformation: A hydrodynamic perspective. Soil Till. Res. 115–116: 1–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arocena J.M. 2000. Cations in solution from forest soils subjected to forest floor removal and compaction treatments. Forest Ecol. Manage. 133: 71–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Athapaththu A.M.R.G. & Tsuchida T. 2014. Characterization of inherent random heterogeneity of weathered granite. Int. J. of GEOMATE 7. 1025–1032.

    Google Scholar 

  • Batey T. 2009. Soil compaction and soil management: a review. Soil Use Manage. 25: 335–345.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Batey T. & Mc Kenzie D.C. 2006. Soil compaction: identification directly in the field. Soil Use Manage. 22: 123–131.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bengough A.G. & Mullins C.E. 1990. Mechanical impedance to root growth: A review of experimental techniques and rootgrowth responses. J. Soil Sci. 41: 341–358.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bengough A.G. & Young I.M. 1993. Root elongation of seeding peas through layered soil of different penetration resistance. Plant Soil 149: 129–139.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burroughs P.A., Bouma J. & Yatesc S.R. 1994. The state of the art in pedometrics. Geoderma 62: 311–326.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chaigneau L., Gourves R. & Boissier D. 2000. Compaction control with a dynamic cone penetrometer. Proc. of Int. Workshop on Compaction of Soils, Granulates and Powders, Innsbruck, pp. 103–109.

    Google Scholar 

  • Csorba S., Raveloson A., Toth E., Nagy V. & Farkas C. 2014. Modelling soil water content variations under drought stress on soil column cropped with winter wheat. J. Hydrol. Hydromech. 62: 269–276.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gibbs R.J. & Reid J.B. 1988. A conceptual model of changes in soil structure under different cropping systems. Adv. Soil Sci. 8: 123–149.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gourvès R. & Barjot R. 1995. Le penetromètre dynamique leger Panda. Comptes rendus, 11ème congrès Europeen de Mecanique des Sols et des Travaux de Fondations. Copenhague, vol 3, pp. 83–88.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gregory P.J. 2006. Plant Roots: Growth, Activity and Interaction with Soils. Blackwell, Oxford, 340 pp.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Grubbs F.E. 1969. Procedure for detecting outlying observations in samples. Technometrics 11: 1–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gysi M., Ott A. & Flühler H. 1999. Influence of single passes with high wheel load on a structured, unploughed sandy loam soil. Soil Till. Res. 52: 141–151.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hĺkansson I. & Reeder R.C. 1994. Subsoil compaction by vehicles with high axial load-extent, persistence and crop response. Soil Till. Res. 29: 277–304.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hamza M.A. & Anderson W.K. 2005. Soil compaction in cropping systems: A review of the nature, causes and possible solutions. Soil Till. Res. 82: 121–145.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hillel D. 1980. Fundamentals of Soil Physics. Academic Press, New York, 415 pp.

    Google Scholar 

  • ITG. 1993. Mapa geológico de España. Escala 1:50.000. Mataró. Segunda serie. IGME, Madrid, 25 pp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Horn R. & Peth S. 2009. Soil structure formation and management effects on gas emission. Biologia 64: 449–453.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Kaufmann M., Tobias S. & Schulin R. 2009. Development of the mechanical stability of a restored soil during the first 3 years of re-cultivation. Soil Till. Res. 103: 127–136.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Langton D.D. 1999. The Panda lightweight penetrometer for soil investigation and monitoring material compaction. Ground Engng. 32: 33–37.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mapfumo E., Chanasyk D.S., Naeth M.A. & Baron V.S. 1998. Forage growth and yield components as influenced by subsurface compaction. Agron. J. 90: 805–812.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Minitab Inc. 2007. Minitab Statistical Software, Release 15 for Windows, State College, Pennsylvania. Minitab®is a registered trademark of Minitab Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mosaddeghi M.R., Mahboubi A.A. & Safadoust A. 2009. Shortterm effects of tillage and manure on some soil physical properties and maize root growth in a sandy loam soil in western Iran. Soil Till. Res. 104: 173–179.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Öpik H. & Rolfe S. 2005. The Physiology of Flowering Plants. Cambridge University Press, 376 pp.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Pagliai M. 1998. Changes of pore system following soil compaction, pp. 186–196. In: Van den Akker J.J.H., Arvidsson J., Horn R. (eds). Proceedings of the 1st Workshop of the Concerted Action on Subsoil Compaction. Experience with the Impact and Prevention of Subsoil Compaction in the European Community, Part 2, 28–30. May. 1998. Wageningen.

    Google Scholar 

  • Passioura J.B. 2002. Soil conditions and plant growth. Plant Cell Environ. 25: 311–318.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schoenholtza S.H., Van Miegroetb H. & Burgerc J.A. 2000. A review of chemical and physical properties as indicators of forest soil quality: challenges and opportunities. Forest Ecol. Manage. 138: 335–356.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Topp G.C., Reynolds W.D., Cook F.J., Kirby J.M. & Carter M.R. 1997. Physical attributes of soil quality, pp. 21–58. In: Gregorich E.G. & Carter M.R. (eds). Soil Quality for Crop Production and Ecosystem Health, Elsevier Science Publ. Amsterdam.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Tracy R.S., Black C.R., Roberts J.A. & Mooney S.J. 2011. Soil compaction: a review of past and present techniques for investigating effects on root growth. J. Sci. Food Agric. 91. 1528–1537.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Unger P.W. & Kaspar T.C. 1994. Soil compaction and root growth: A review. J. Agron. 86: 759–766.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • USDA–NRC. 2004. Soil Survey Laboratory. Methods Manual. Soil Survey Investigations Report, No. 42. Version 4.0, 700 pp.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work was financially supported by the Spanish Government under the MICINN - AGL2010–2012 project (sub-program AGR). The authors are grateful to Dr Núria Cañameras for facilitating access to the cone penetrometer, and thank the anonymous reviewers for valuable useful comments.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ramon Josa.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Josa, R., Ginovart, M., Mas, M.T. et al. Hardpan in skeletal soils: Statistical approach to determine its depth in a cherry orchard plot. Biologia 70, 1433–1438 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1515/biolog-2015-0169

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/biolog-2015-0169

Key words