Assessment of Two Soil Fertility Indexes to Evaluate Paddy Fields for Rice Cultivation
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Site Description, Soil Sampling and Measurements, and Descriptive Statistics
2.2. Soil Parametric Fertility Index (SFI-1) Calculation
- I = index of square root method (here as soil parametric fertility index: SFI-1);
- Rmin = the minimum rated criterion;
- A, B, etc. = criteria other than minimum rated criterion.
2.3. Soil Fuzzy Fertility Index (SFI-2) Calculation
- Class 1—low fertility, severe constraint to nutrient uptake and high rice yield (Z < bl).
- Class 2—medium fertility, possible constraint to nutrient uptake and high rice yield (b1 < Z < b2).
- Class 3—high fertility, no constraint to nutrient uptake and high rice yield (Z > b2).
2.4. Validation of Soil Fertility Index
3. Results and Discussion
3.1. Exploratory Analysis of Data
3.2. Soil Limitations to Intensive Rice Cropping
3.3. Soil Fertility Index (SFI-1 and SFI-2)
3.4. Soil Suitability
3.5. Relationship between SFI-1 and SFI-2 and Actual Yield
3.6. Comparison of the Parametric and Fuzzy Methods
4. Conclusions
Acknowledgments
Author Contributions
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Kavitha, C.; Sujatha, M.P. Evaluation of soil fertility status in various agro ecosystems of Thrissur District, Kerala, India. Int. J. Agric. Crop Sci. 2015, 8, 328–338. [Google Scholar]
- Dobermann, A.; Oberthür, T. Fuzzy mapping of soil fertility—A case study on irrigated riceland in the Philippines. Geoderma 1997, 77, 317–339. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Singh, R.P.; Mishra, S.K. Available macro nutrients (N, P, K and S) in the soils of Chiraigaon block of district Varanasi (UP) in relation to soil characteristics. Indian J. Sci. Res. 2012, 3, 97–100. [Google Scholar]
- Rabia, A.H. A GIS based land suitability assessment for agricultural planning in Kilte Awulaelo district, Ethiopia. In Proceedings of the 4th International Congress of ECSSS, Eurosoil 2012 “Soil Science for the Benefit of Mankind and Environment”, Bari, Italy, 2–6 July 2012. [Google Scholar]
- Xia, M.; Zhao, B.Z.; Hao, X.Y.; Zhang, J.B. Soil quality in relation to agricultural production in the North China Plain. Pedosphere 2015, 25, 592–604. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Moran, E.F.; Brondizio, E.S.; Tucker, J.M.; da Silva-Forsberg, M.C.; McCracken, S.; Falesi, I. Effects of soil fertility and land-use on forest succession in Amazonia. For. Ecol. Manag. 2000, 139, 93–108. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Panwar, P.; Pal, S.; Reza, S.K.; Sharma, B. Soil fertility index, soil evaluation factor, and microbial indices under different land uses in acidic soil of humid subtropical India. Commun. Soil Sci. Plan Anal. 2011, 42, 2724–2737. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mbogoni, J.D.J.; Kiwambo, B.J.; Urassa, G.J.; Assenga, S.V. Soil Fertility Appraisal for Enhancing Productivity in Rice-Based Systems of Ruvu Basin, Tanzania; ARI-Mlingano: Tanga, Tanzania, 2011. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Food and Agriculture Organization. A Framework for Land Evaluation; FAO Soils Bulletin, No: 32; FAO: Rome, Italy, 1976; ISBN 92-5-1001 11-1. [Google Scholar]
- Food and Agriculture Organization. Guidelines: Land Evaluation for Irrigated Agriculture; FAO Soils Bulletin, No: 55; FAO: Rome, Italy, 1985; p. 243. ISBN 92-5-102243-7. [Google Scholar]
- Sys, C.; van Ranst, E.; Debaveye, J. Land Evaluation, Part I, Principles in Land Evaluation and Crop Production Calculations; International Training Centre for Post-Graduate Soil Scientists, University Ghent: Gent, Belgium, 1991. [Google Scholar]
- Sys, C.; van Ranst, E.; Debaveye, J. Land Evaluation, Part II: Methods in Land Evaluation. General Administration for Development Cooperation; International Training Centre for Post-Graduate Soil Scientists, University Ghent: Gent, Belgium, 1991. [Google Scholar]
- Ashraf, S.; Normohammadan, B. Qualitative evaluation of land suitability for wheat in Northeast-Iran Using FAO methods. Indian J. Sci. Technol. 2011, 4, 703–707. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ashraf, S. Land suitability evaluation for irrigated barley in Damghan plain, Iran. Indian J. Sci. Technol. 2011, 4, 1182–1187. [Google Scholar]
- Jafarzadeh, A.; Abbasi, G. Qualitative land suitability evaluation for the growth of onion, potato, maize, and alfalfa on soils of the Khalat Pushan research station. Biologia 2006, 61, S349–S352. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shahbazi, F.; Jafarzadeh, A.A. Qualitative evaluative evaluation of land suitability in Khusheh-mehr region of bonab for wheat, barley, alfalfa, onion, sugarbeet and maize. J. Agric. Sci. 2004, 14, 69–86. [Google Scholar]
- Torabi Golsefidi, H. Genesis, Classification and Land Suitability Evaluation of Wetland Soils for Irrigated Rice in Eastern Guilan Province. Ph.D. Thesis, Faculty of Agriculture, Isfahan University of Technology, Isfahan, Iran, 2001. [Google Scholar]
- Liu, W.; Rossi, M. Land Evaluation in Danling County, Sichuan Province, China. In Proceedings of the 26th Course Professional Master Geomatics and Natural Resources Evaluation, Florence, Italy, 23 June 2006; pp. 1–153. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Olaleye, A.O.; Akinbola, G.E.; Marake, V.M.; Molete, S.F.; Mapheshoane, B. Soil in suitability evaluation for irrigated lowland rice culture in southwestern Nigeria: Management implications for sustainability. Commun. Soil Sci. Plant Anal. 2008, 39, 2920–2938. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Boroomand Nasab, S.; Albaji, M.; Landi, A. Qualitative evaluation of land suitability for the major crops in the Shavoor Region, Iran. Crop Res. 2008, 36, 125–132. [Google Scholar]
- Soltani, S.M.; Hanafi, M.M.; Karbalaei, M.T.; Khayambashi, B. Qualitative land suitability evaluation for the growth of rice and off-seasons crops as rice based cropping system on paddy fields of Central Guilan, Iran. Indian J. Sci. Technol. 2013, 6, 5395–5403. [Google Scholar]
- Selassie, Y.G.; Ayalew, G.; Elias, E.; Getahun, M. Soil characterization and land suitability evaluation to cereal crops in Yigossa Watershed, Northwestern Ethiopia. J. Agric. Sci. 2014, 6, 199. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Food and Agriculture Organization. Guidelines on Land Evaluation for Rainfed Agriculture; Soils Bulletin No.52; FAO: Rome, Italy, 1998. [Google Scholar]
- Ayalew, G.; Selassie, Y.G. Land suitability evaluation for cereal and pulse crops using geographical information system in east amhara region, Ethiopia. Res. J. Agric. Environ. Sci. 2015, 4, 141–148. [Google Scholar]
- Food and Agriculture Organization. Guidelines: Land Evaluation for Rain Fed Agriculture; FAO Soils Bulletin, No: 52; FAO: Rome, Italy, 1983; p. 237. ISBN 9251014558. [Google Scholar]
- Goovaerts, P. Geostatistical tools for characterizing the spatial variability of microbiologycal and physico-chemical soil properties. Biol. Fertil. Soils 1998, 27, 315–334. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Oberthür, T.; Dobermann, A.; Neue, H.U. How good is a reconnaissance soil map for agro-nomic purposes? Soil Use Manag. 1996, 12, 33–43. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Elaalem, M. A comparison of parametric and fuzzy multi-criteria methods for evaluating land suitability for olive in Jeffara Plain of Libya. APCBEE Procedia 2013, 5, 405–409. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sharififar, A.; Ghorbani, H.; Sarmadian, F. Soil suitability evaluation for crop selection using fuzzy sets methodology. Acta Agric. Slov. 2016, 107, 159–174. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bagherzadeh, A.; Gholizadeh, A. Qualitative land suitability evaluation by parametric and fuzzy approaches for sugar beet crop in Sabzevar plain, northeast of Iran. Agric. Res. 2016, 5, 277–284. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chaddad, I.; Feng, C.B.; AL-Husni, M.; Zhen, R.J. An application of land suitability evaluation for FTDP: A fuzzy MCDM approach. Int. J. Arab Cult. Manag. Sustain. Dev. 2009, 1, 160–176. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Burrough, P.A.; MacMillan, R.A.; Deursen, W.V. Fuzzy classification methods for determining land suitability from soil profile observations and topography. Eur. J. Soil Sci. 1992, 43, 193–210. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fageria, N.K.; Slaton, N.A.; Baligar, V.C. Nutrient management for improving lowland rice productivity and sustainability. Adv. Agron. 2003, 80, 63–152. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Khush, G.S. Varietal needs for different environments and breeding strategies. In New Frontiers in Rice Research; Muralidharan, K., Siddiq, E.A., Eds.; Directorate of Rice Research: Hyderabad, India, 1993. [Google Scholar]
- Keshavarz, F.; Allahyari, M.S.; Azarmi, Z.; Khayati, M. Effective factors on non-adoption of high producing varieties among rice producers in Guilan province. J. Agric. Ext. Educ. Res. 2011, 3, 99–112. [Google Scholar]
- Soil Survey Staff. Keys to Soil Taxonomy, 9th ed.; USDA-NRCS: Washington, DC, USA, 2003.
- De Datta, S.K.; Samson, M.I.; Kai-Rong, W.; Buresh, R.J. Nitrogen use efficiency and nitrogen-15 balances in broadcast-seeded flooded and transplanted rice. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 1988, 52, 849–855. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Walkley, A.; Black, I.A. An examination of the Degtjareff method for determining soil organic matter, and a proposed modification of the chromic acid titration method. Soil Sci. 1934, 37, 29–38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sys, C.; van Ranst, E.; Debaveye, J. Land Evaluation, Part III: Crop Requirements. General Administration for Development Cooperetion; International Training Centre for Post-graduate Soil Scientists, University Ghent: Gent, Belgium, 1993. [Google Scholar]
- Mongkolsawat, C.; Thirangoon, P.; Kuptawutinan, P. A Physical Evaluation of Land Suitability for Rice. A Methodological Study Using GIS. Available online: https://www.geospatialworld.net/article/a-physical-evaluation-of-land-suitability-for-rice-a-methodological-study-using-gis/ (accessed on 1 September 2009).
- Dengiz, O. Land suitability assessment for rice cultivation based on GIS modeling. Turk. J. Agric. For. 2013, 37, 326–334. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Givi, J. Qualitative Evaluation of Land Suitability for field and fruit crops; Iranian Soil and Water Research Institute: Tehran, Iran, 1997; pp. 1–115. [Google Scholar]
- Dobermann, A.; Fairhurst, T.H. Nutrient Disorders and Nutrient Management; Potash and Phosphate Institute, Potash and Phosphate Institute of Canada and International Rice Research Institute: Singapore, 2000. [Google Scholar]
- Davatgar, N.; Neishabouri, M.R.; Sepaskhah, A.R. Delineation of site specific nutrient management zones for a paddy cultivated area based on soil fertility using fuzzy clustering. Geoderma 2012, 173, 111–118. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Abdulkadir, A. Land Evaluation for Irrigation in Bauchi State. Ph.D. Thesis, Bayero University Kano, Kano, Nigeria, 1986. [Google Scholar]
- Yau, S.L.; Manasseh, E.A.; Sharifai, A.I. Land Evaluation for improved Rice Production in Watari Irrigation Project Kano State, Nigeria. Bayreo J. Pure Appl. Sci. 2014, 7, 116–120. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Land Characteristics | Rating Scale | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| |||||||
Slope (%) | <0.5, 0.5–1 | 1–2 | 2–4 | >4 | |||
Flooding | F0, F11, F12 | F21, F22, F31, F32 | F13, F23, F33, F41, F42, F43 | F14, F24, F34, F44 | F15, F25, F35, F45 | ||
Drainage | imperfect | moderate | Poor, good | Very poor | _ | _ | |
Texture | * | C, SiL, SC, L, SCL, SL | CL, SiCL, Si, LfS, LSm | LcS, fS, Sm, cS | Texture | ||
** | C, SiC, SiCL, CL, Si, SiL, SC, L, SCL, SL | LfS, LSm | LcS, fS, Sm, cS | ||||
Coarse fragment (vol %) | 0 | <3 | 3–15 | 15–35 | _ | >35 | |
Soil depth (cm) | >90 | 90–75 | 75–50 | 50–20 | _ | <20 | |
Apparent CEC | >24 | 24–16 | <16(−) | <16(+) | _ | _ | |
Base saturation (%) | >60 | 80–50 | 50–35 | 35–20 | <20 | _ | |
Sum of basic cations (cmol kg−1) | >6.5 | 6.5–4 | 4–2.8 | 2.8–1.6 | <1.6 | _ | |
pH H2O | 6.5–6.0 | 6.0–5.5 | 5.5–5.0 | 5.0–4.5 | _ | <4.5 | |
6.5–7.0 | 7.0–8.2 | 8.2–8.5 | 8.5–9.0 | _ | >9.0 | ||
Organic carbon (%) | >2 | 2–1.5 | 1.5–0.8 | <0.8 | _ | _ | |
ECe (ds/m) | 0–1 | 1–2 | 2–4 | 4–6 | 6–12 | >12 |
Suitability Class | Intensity of Limitation | Soil Index [16] | Fuzzy Index |
---|---|---|---|
S1 | Highly suitable | 75–100 | 0.75–1 |
S2 | Moderately suitable | 50–75 | 0.50–0.75 |
S3 | Marginally suitable | 25–50 | 0.25–0.50 |
N | not suitable | 0–25 | 0–0.25 |
Soil Properties | b | d |
---|---|---|
Ap horizon (cm) | * 20 | ** 2.5 |
Clay content (%) | * 35 | * 3 |
Organic C (%) | ** 2 | * 0.2 |
CEC (cmol kg−1) | * 20 | * 2 |
pH of paste | ** 6&7 | ** 0.6 |
EC (dS m−1) | ** 2 | ** 0.2 |
Soil Properties | Min | Mean | SD | Max | CV (%) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
pH | 5.49 | 6.63 | 0.52 | 7.53 | 7.92 |
OC (%) | 1.0 | 2.48 | 0.72 | 4.5 | 28.96 |
CEC (cmol kg−1) | 10 | 29.46 | 7.16 | 47 | 24.29 |
EC (dS m−1) | 0.12 | 1.27 | 0.51 | 2.71 | 40.51 |
Clay (%) | 6 | 39.88 | 9.78 | 56 | 24.52 |
Ap (cm) | 10 | 15.98 | 2.36 | 22 | 14.77 |
Suitability Class | Parametric Method (%) | Fuzzy Method (%) |
---|---|---|
S1 | 8 | 27 |
S2 | 90 | 38 |
S3 | 2 | 24 |
N | - | 11 |
© 2017 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Delsouz Khaki, B.; Honarjoo, N.; Davatgar, N.; Jalalian, A.; Torabi Golsefidi, H. Assessment of Two Soil Fertility Indexes to Evaluate Paddy Fields for Rice Cultivation. Sustainability 2017, 9, 1299. https://doi.org/10.3390/su9081299
Delsouz Khaki B, Honarjoo N, Davatgar N, Jalalian A, Torabi Golsefidi H. Assessment of Two Soil Fertility Indexes to Evaluate Paddy Fields for Rice Cultivation. Sustainability. 2017; 9(8):1299. https://doi.org/10.3390/su9081299
Chicago/Turabian StyleDelsouz Khaki, Bahareh, Naser Honarjoo, Naser Davatgar, Ahmad Jalalian, and Hosein Torabi Golsefidi. 2017. "Assessment of Two Soil Fertility Indexes to Evaluate Paddy Fields for Rice Cultivation" Sustainability 9, no. 8: 1299. https://doi.org/10.3390/su9081299