The Relationship between Integral Water Capacity (IWC) Index and some Soil Physical Properties in Khorasan-Razavi Province

آب و خاک

Article 8, Volume 30, Issue 4 - Serial Number 48, September 2016, Pages 1192-1201   

Document Type: Research Article

DOI: 10.22067/jsw.v30i4.47544

Authors

Mehdi Zangiabadi¹; manoochehr gorji^* ; Mehdi Shorafa¹; Saeed Khavari Khorasani²; Saeed Saadat³

¹University of Tehran

²Assistant Professor of Khorasan-Razavi Agricultural & Natural Resources Research and Education Centre

³Soil & Water Research Institute, Karaj

Abstract

Introduction: Soil is the main source of water retention and availability for plant uptake. The supplement of water is completely dependent on soil physical properties. The soils with higher values of available water are generally more productive because they can supply adequate moisture to plants during the intervals between irrigation or rainfall events. Generally according tothe spatial and temporal distribution of precipitation, Iran has an arid climate in which most of the relatively low annual precipitation falls from October through April. Thus, water deficiency along with the lack of organic carbon in the soil justifies the necessity of studying the soil, water and plant relationships that may improve the efficiency of water consumption in agricultural practices. For that reason, this research was conducted to investigate the relationship between some soil physical properties and Integral Water Capacity (IWC) index as one of the soil physical quality indices.
Materials and Methods: This study was conducted in Torogh Agricultural and Natural Resources Research Station in Khorasan-Razavi province, north-eastern Iran during 2013-2014. This station is located in south-east of Mashhad city with a semi-arid climate, annual precipitation of 260 mm and mean air temperature of 13.5 °C. The soil was classified in Entisols and Aridisols with a physiographic unit of alluvial plain that generally had medium to coarse textures in topsoil. Thirty points with different soil textures and organic carbon contents were selected as experimental plots. In order to measure different properties of the soil, two soil cores (8 cm diameter × 4 cm length cylinder for bulk density and 5 cm diameter × 5.3 cm length cylinder for sandbox measurements) and one disturbed soil sample (for other measurements) were collected from 0-30 cm depth of each plot. After conducting required laboratory analysis and field measurements using standard methods, the soil moisture curve parameters (RETC program), Porosity (POR), Air Capacity (AC), Relative Field Content (RFC) and Integral Water Capacity (IWC) index, were calculated. In this regard, integration calculations were done by Mathcad Prime 3 software. Finally, the relationship between the measured properties and IWC index were analyzed using Pearson correlation coefficient and stepwise multiple linear regression by SAS (9.1) statistical software.
Results and Discussion: Laboratory analysis results showed that the soil texture classes of samples were loam (40%), silt loam (23%), silty clay loam (17%), clay loam (13%), and sandy loam (7%). On average, very fine sand particles were dominant between five size classes of sand and the lowest values were devoted to very coarse sand particles. Soil porosity and air capacity calculation results indicated that on average bulk soil porosity (PORt) and bulk soil air capacity (ACt) were 0.46 and 0.20 (cm3cm-3), respectively. According to the results, RFC of 60% of studied soil samples were lower than 0.6, 7% were higher than 0.7 and only 33% were between 0.6-0.7 (optimal range). IWC index calculations were resulted in 0.13-0.25 (cm3cm-3) in different soil textures. The highest IWC were related to Loam and Clay Loam textures, respectively. Statistical analyses indicated that there were no significant relationship between soil particles (sand, silt and clay) and organic carbon content with IWC index. The factors of soil bulk density and RFC were negatively correlated with IWC index that means decreasing the soil bulk density and RFC would lead to the reduction of the effects of water uptake limitation factors by increasing the values of weighting functions (IWC calculations), and improvement of soil physical quality. High significant (P < 0.001) positive correlation coefficients were observed between IWC index and the factors of soil PORt, ACt and soil matrix air capacity (ACf) in this study. Multiple regression analysis results showed that IWC index could be estimated by the factors of ACt and PORt with the determination coefficient of 0.63. The partial determination coefficients indicated that ACt factor accounted for 50% and PORt accounted for 13% of IWC index variations.
Conclusion: The results indicated that in medium to coarse-textured soils, IWC index could be estimated using the bulk soil air capacity (ACt) and bulk soil porosity (PORt) factors that are derived from soil volumetric water content at saturation and field capacity points.

Keywords

Air capacity; Integral water capacity; Physical index; porosity; Relative field capacity

References

1- Aparicio V., and Costa J.L. 2007. Soil quality indicators under continuous cropping systems in the Argentinean Pampas. Soil & Tillage Research, 96: 155–165.

2- Asgarzadeh H., Mosaddeghi M.R., Mahboubi A.A., Nosrati A., and Dexter A.R. 2010. Soil water availability for plants as quantified by conventional available water, least limiting water range and integral water capacity. Plant Soil, 335: 229–244.

3- Da Silva A.P., and Kay B.D. 1997. Estimating least limiting water range of soils from properties and management. Soil Science Society of American Journal, 61: 877–883.

4- Da Silva A.P., and Kay B.D. 2004. Linking process capability analysis and least limiting water range for assessing soil physical quality. Soil & Tillage Research, 79: 167–174.

5- Da Silva A.P., Kay B.D., and Perfect E. 1994. Characterization of the least limiting water range of soils. Soil Science Society of American Journal, 58: 1775–1781.

6- Groenevelt P.H., Grant C.D., and Semetsa S. 2001. A new procedure to determine soil water availability. Australian Journal of Soil Research, 39: 577–598.

7- Hao X., Ball B.C., Culley J.L.B., Carter M.R., and Parkin G.W. 2007. Soil density and porosity. p. 743-760. In: Carter M.R., and Gregorich E.G. (ed.) Soil Sampling and Methods of Analysis. 2nd ed. Canadian Society of Soil Science. Taylor and Francis.

8- Imaz M.J., Virto I., Bescansa P., Enrique A., Ugalde O.F., and Karlen D.L. 2010. Soil quality indicator response to tillage and residue management on semi-arid mediterranean cropland. Soil & Tillage Research, 107:17–25.

9- Kroetsch D., and Wang C. 2007. Particle size distribution. p. 713–725. In: Carter M.R., and Gregorich E.G. (ed.) Soil Sampling and Methods of Analysis. 2nd ed. Canadian Society of Soil Science. Taylor and Francis.

10- Letey J. 1985. Relationship between soil physical properties and crop production. Advanced Soil Science, 1: 277–294.

11- Reynolds W.D., and Clarke Topp G. 2007. Soil water desorption and imbibition: tension and pressure techniques. p. 981-997. In: Carter M.R., and Gregorich E.G. (ed.) Soil Sampling and Methods of Analysis. 2nd ed. Canadian Society of Soil Science. Taylor and Francis.

12- Reynolds W.D., Drury C.F., Tan C.S., Fox C.A., and Yang X.M. 2009. Use of indicators and pore volume-function characteristics to quantify soil physical quality. Geoderma, 152: 252– 263.

13- Reynolds W.D., Drury C.F., Yang X.M., Fox C.A., Tan C.S., and Zhang T.Q. 2007. Land management effects on the near-surface physical quality of a clay loam soil. Soil & Tillage Research, 96: 316–330.

14- Reynolds W.D., Drury C.F., Yang X.M., and Tan C.S. 2008. Optimal soil physical quality inferred through structural regression and parameter interactions. Geoderma, 146:466– 474.

15- Sahebjame A.A. 2002. The precise detailed study of soil and land classification of Torogh (Khorasan-Razavi) agricultural research station. Final report, 1146. Soil and Water Research Institute. (in Persian)

16- Skjemstad J.O., and Baldock J.A. 2007. Total and organic carbon. p. 225-237. In: Carter M.R., and Gregorich E.G. (ed.) Soil Sampling and Methods of Analysis. 2nd ed. Canadian Society of Soil Science. Taylor and Francis.

17- Ugalde O.F., Virto I., Bescansa P., Imaz M.J., Enrique A., and Karlen D.L. 2009. No-tillage improvement of soil physical quality in calcareous, degradation-prone, semiarid soils. Soil & Tillage Research, 106: 29–35.