Visual assessment of soil structure: Evaluation of methodologies on sites in Canada, China and Germany Part I: Comparing visual methods and linking them with soil physical data and grain yield of cereals

Abstract Visual observations of soil structure in the field offer the potential of semi-quantitative information for use in extension and monitoring. The aim of the study was to test the diagnostic value of different visual methods of soil structure assessment in relation to measurements of topsoil physical quality and yield of cereals. Visual methods that emphasized aggregate and pore characteristics were considered and included procedures of Peerlkamp [Peerlkamp, P.K., 1967. Visual estimation of soil structure. In: de Boodt, M., de Leenherr, D.E., Frese, H., Low, A.J., Peerlkamp, P.K. (Eds.), West European Methods for Soil Structure Determination, vol. 2, no. 11. State Faculty Agric. Sci., Ghent, Belgium, pp. 216–223], Diez and Weigelt [Diez, T., Weigelt, H., 1997. Bodenstruktur erkennen und beurteilen. Anleitung zur Bodenuntersuchung mit dem Spaten. Sonderdruck diz agrarmagazin. Bayer. Landesanstalt fuer Bodenkultur und Pflanzenbau, Freising-Muenchen., 2nd ed., 16 pp.], Shepherd [Shepherd, T.G., 2000. Visual Soil Assessment. Volume 1. Field Guide for Cropping and Pastoral Grazing on Flat to Rolling Country. Horizons.mw/Landcare Research, Palmerston North, 84 pp.], Werner and Thaemert [Werner, D., Thaemert, W., 1989. Zur Diagnose des physikalischen Bodenzustandes auf Produktionsflaechen. Arch. Acker-Pflanzenbau Bodenkd., Berlin 33, 729–739], FAO [FAO, 2006. Guidelines for soil description, 4th ed. FAO, Rome, 95 pp.] and the Peerlkamp method, modified by [Ball, B.C., Batey, T., Munkholm, L.J., 2007. Field assessment of soil structural quality—a development of the Peerlkamp test. Soil Use and Management 23, 329–337]. Measurements of soil quality included soil density (DBD), strength (penetrometer resistance, vane shear strength), permeability (initial infiltration rate) and biological activity (earthworm counts). The study was conducted on sites in Canada (Elora), China (Luancheng), and Germany (Dedelow). Soils were loamy and silty textured Haplic Luvisols (Elora, Dedelow) and Haplic Cambisols (Luancheng). Results showed that shape and size of aggregates were quickly recognizable diagnostic features of soil structure. Structure scores of most methods gave similar results after standardizing data. Measured soil physical qualities and crop yields correlated significantly with visual soil structure. Unfavourable visual structure was associated with increased dry bulk density, higher soil strength and lower infiltration rate but correlations were site-specific. Biological features like earthworm or root numbers were less reliable indicators of soil structure than aggregate characteristics. Visual soil structure assessment is a useful diagnostic tool and may indicate soil structure states clearly. Methods should be selected according to site conditions and should include a fast method of the Peerlkamp type.

[1]  B. Kay,et al.  Optimum versus non-limiting water contents for root growth, biomass accumulation, gas exchange and the rate of development of maize (Zea mays L.) , 2006 .

[2]  Warren J. Busscher,et al.  IN SITU STRENGTH, BULK DENSITY, AND WATER CONTENT RELATIONSHIPS OF A DURINODIC XERIC HAPLOCALCID SOIL , 2001 .

[3]  B. Kay,et al.  Linking process capability analysis and least limiting water range for assessing soil physical quality , 2004 .

[4]  L. Müller,et al.  Trafficability and workability of alluvial clay soils in response to drainage status , 1990 .

[5]  M. Shukla,et al.  SOIL QUALITY INDICATORS FOR THE NORTH APPALACHIAN EXPERIMENTALWATERSHEDS IN COSHOCTON OHIO , 2004 .

[6]  Kari Tanderup,et al.  Spatial and temporal effects of direct drilling on soil structure in the seedling environment , 2003 .

[7]  Alvin J. M. Smucker,et al.  Soil aggregate sequestration of cover crop root and shoot-derived nitrogen , 2005, Plant and Soil.

[8]  P. Schjønning,et al.  Mitigation of subsoil recompaction by light traffic and on-land ploughing. II. Root and yield response , 2005 .

[9]  E. Perfect,et al.  Management versus inherent soil properties effects on bulk density and relative compaction , 1997 .

[10]  L. Mueller,et al.  Implications of soil substrate and land use for properties of fen soils in North-East Germany Part III: Soil quality for grassland use , 2007 .

[11]  R. Lal,et al.  Comparison of methods for estimating maximum soil water content for optimum workability , 2003 .

[12]  P. Defossez,et al.  Morphological characterisation of soil structure in tilled fields: from a diagnosis method to the modelling of structural changes over time , 2004 .

[13]  B. C. Ball,et al.  A simple procedure for assessing soil structural, rooting and surface conditions , 2003 .

[14]  C. Cambardella,et al.  Temporal Changes in Small Depth-Incremental Soil Bulk Density , 2000 .

[15]  W. Eckelmann,et al.  Bodenkundliche Kartieranleitung. KA5 , 2006 .

[16]  B. Kay,et al.  Rotation and tillage effects on soil organic carbon sequestration in a typic Hapludalf in Southern Ontario , 2001 .

[17]  Jerzy Lipiec,et al.  A review of the usefulness of relative bulk density values in studies of soil structure and compaction , 2000 .

[18]  R. Horn,et al.  Anisotropy of pore functions in structured Stagnic Luvisols in the Weichselian moraine region in N Germany , 2006 .

[19]  U. Schindler,et al.  Simplifying the evaporation method for quantifying soil hydraulic properties , 2006 .

[20]  Johan Bouma,et al.  Advances in Hydropedology , 2005 .

[21]  T. Batey,et al.  Field assessment of soil structural quality – a development of the Peerlkamp test , 2007 .

[22]  Yanjun Shen,et al.  Measurement of evapotranspiration in a winter wheat field , 2002 .

[23]  B. Kay,et al.  Variation in penetrometer resistance with soil properties: the contribution of effective stress and implications for pedotransfer functions , 2005 .

[24]  D. McKenzie.  Rapid assessment of soil compaction damage I. The SOILpak score, a semi-quantitative measure of soil structural form , 2001 .

[25]  Anthony R. Dexter,et al.  Soil physical quality: Part III: Unsaturated hydraulic conductivity and general conclusions about S-theory , 2004 .

[26]  Keith A. Smith,et al.  Soil and environmental analysis : physical methods , 2000 .

[27]  L. E. Wagner,et al.  Estimating a Proctor Density Curve from Intrinsic Soil Properties , 1994 .