Saleh Sanjari; Mohammad Hady Farpoor; Majid Mahmoodabadi; Saied Barkhori
Abstract
Introduction Soil classification is a process of showing basic differences among soil classes (5). Different soil classification systems are created for soil classification, but Soil Taxonomy and World Reference Base for Soil Resources (WRB) are among the most favoured systems in the world including ...
Read More
Introduction Soil classification is a process of showing basic differences among soil classes (5). Different soil classification systems are created for soil classification, but Soil Taxonomy and World Reference Base for Soil Resources (WRB) are among the most favoured systems in the world including Iran. This system (WRB) is accepted by soil scientists in the world and Soil Taxonomy has also been used in several countries (7). Each of the two mentioned systems has its own strong and/or weak points to show soil characteristics. However, comparing Soil Taxonomy and WRB for calcareous and gypsiferous soils of central Iran, Sarmast et al. (16) reported that according to specifiers used in WRB, this system could be more efficient than Soil Taxonomy. Various environmental conditions and its fluctuations in Kerman Province caused different soils to be formed in the province. Use of soil moisture and temperature regimes by Soil Taxonomy which is totally neglected by WRB system may emphasize that Soil Taxonomy could provide better results for these soils. That is why the present research was performed to compare Soil Taxonomy and WRB systems in the area of the present research with different climates and to show the efficiency of the two systems to describe selected soil characteristics in Kerman Province. Materials and Methods According to climatic variations, four study sites were selected in Kerman Province. Sites 1 (elevation of < 2000 m asl) and 2 (elevation of >2000 m asl) in Baft and Rabor areas were located in the south west of the province. Moreover, sites 3 (around Jiroft and Anbarabad) and 4 (around Roodbar-e-Jonoob and Ghaleganj) were located at the center and south of the province, respectively (Fig. 1). Table 1 shows the soil moisture and temperature regimes of the areas under study (3). Twenty-five pedons on different geomorphic surfaces were described and one representative pedon on each geomorphic surface (total of 11 representative pedons) were selected (Fig 1). Soil description and sampling performed (18) and the collected samples transferred to the laboratory. It is to be noticed that soil moisture regime in site 3 has changed from ustic to aridic during normal years defined in Soil Taxonomy. Ustic/ hypertermic soil moisture/temperature regimes were reported for soils of Jiroft and Anbarabad according to the soil moisture and temperature map of soils of Iran (3). However, according to the latest climatic data (30 years' data and the concept of normal years as defind in Soil Taxonomy, 2014) used in the NSM Software, the soil moisture regime was estimated as weak aridic. Results and Discussion Histic, mollic, argillic, natric, calcic, anhydritic, and cambic horizons were investigated after field work and laboratory analyses. Results of the study show that addition of new Calcixeralfs, Gypsiustalfs, and Gypsicalcids great groups together with newly added Calcic Natrargids, Calcic Natrustalfs, Gypsic Calciustalfs, Typic Petrogypsids, Anhydritic Haplogypsids, and Angydritic Petrogypsids subgroups to the Soil Taxonomy system from one hand, and addition of anhydrite and hypercalcic qualifiers to WRB from the other hand, cause a higher correlation between the two systems. Besides, climatic fluctuations of the recent years in Jiroft and Anbarabad areas caused a change in the soil moisture regime according to normal years defined in Soil Taxonomy. That is why soil name was changed in Soil Taxonomy system. However, WRB system shows no variation because this system is not related to climatic data. Since anhydritic horizon was added to Soil Taxonomy (2014) system, addition of this horizon is recommended to WRB for better correlation of the two systems as was also suggested by Sarmast et al. (16). Meanwhile, soil names in the WRB system provide more information about characteristics of young soil (including yermic qualifier to show desert pavement) compared to Soil Taxonomy.Conclusion Soil classifications showed that WRB system could describe soil characteristics in the area more efficiently compared to Soil Taxonomy. Climate change caused a variation in soil moisture regime of Jiroft and Anbarabad areas according to normal years of Soil Taxonomy system, which in turn changed soil nomenclature in this system. WRB system is not related to climate that is why soil names were not changed in the above mentioned areas. Besides, WRB system is more efficient to classify gypsiferous soils because gypsum content which is an important factor for management of gypsiferous soils is better focused by WRB. However, lack of anhydritic horizon in the WRB system is a weak point, that is why addition of this horizon was suggested by the authors. It is recommended that soil moisture/temperature regimes of study sites be calculated by softwares using climatic data because the climatic variations of the recent years might have changed the soil moisture/temperature regimes reported in the map of 1998 due to the definition of normal years defind in Soil Taxonomy.
