مهندسی زراعی

ارزیابی و مدل‌سازی کیفیت خاک با استفاده از روش تحلیل‌های چندمتغیره (مطالعه موردی: اراضی کشاورزی دیم شهرستان دزپارت)

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

سینا بیگدلی 1
حیدر غفاری 2
مجتبی نوروزی مصیر 3
عبدالامیر معزی 4

1 دانشجوی سابق کارشناسی ارشد، گروه علوم و مهندسی خاک، دانشکده کشاورزی، دانشگاه شهید چمران اهواز، اهواز، ایران

2 استادیار گروه علوم و مهندسی خاک، دانشکده کشاورزی، دانشگاه شهید چمران اهواز، اهواز، ایران

3 دانشیار گروه علوم و مهندسی خاک، دانشکده کشاورزی، دانشگاه شهید چمران اهواز، اهواز، ایران

4 استاد گروه علوم و مهندسی خاک، دانشکده کشاورزی، دانشگاه شهید چمران اهواز، اهواز، ایران

https://doi.org/10.22055/agen.2025.48357.1753
چکیده
امروزه مفهوم کیفیت خاک (SQ) به طور گسترده‌ای برای آگاهی از ظرفیت و محدودیت خاک‌ها در سیستم‌های مختلف محیطی مورد استفاده قرار گرفته است. باتوجه به اهمیت اراضی دیم در تولیدات کشاورزی هدف اصلی این تحقیق مدل‌سازی و کمی‌سازی کیفیت خاک بخشی از اراضی کشاورزی دیم شهرستان دزپارت با استفاده از تحلیل چند متغیره یکپارچه و همچنین تعیین حداقل مجموعه داده‌های موثر می-باشد. تعداد ۱۱۹ نمونه خاک به روش مرکب از عمق 30-0 سانتی‌متری خاک اراضی کشاورزی تهیه شد. نمونه‌ها به آزمایشگاه منتقل و ویژگی‌های شیمیایی-حاصلخیزی و فیزیکی اندازه‌گیری شدند. سپس کیفیت خاک‌ها با استفاده از دو مجموعه داده کل (TDS) و حداقل (MDS) و روش تحلیل-های چندمتغیره با سه شاخص نمرو (NQI)، تجمعی وزنی (IQI) و تجمعی ساده (AQI) تعیین گردید. نتایج آزمون تجزیه مولفه-های اصلی (PCA) حاکی از آن بود که سه مولفه اصلی وجود دارد که در مجموع 78 درصد تغییرات واریانس کل را پوشش می‌دهند. مولفه اول به تنهایی حدود 31 درصد و مولفه دوم و سوم نیز به ترتیب 25 و 12 درصد واریانس کل داده‌ها را بیان کردند. هفت ویژگی شامل نیتروژن زیتوده میکروبی، کربن آلی، هدایت هیدرولیکی اشباع، آب قابل‌استفاده گیاه، میزان شن، pH و EC به عنوان اعضای MDS انتخاب شدند. در مجموعه TDS بیشترین وزن‌ها مربوط به سیلت و شن (به ترتیب با 093/0 و 095/0) و کمترین وزن با مقدار 050/0 به جرم مخصوص ظاهری اختصاص پیدا کرد. در مجموعه MDS، بیشترین وزن مربوط به ماده آلی و سیلت و کمترین وزن مربوط به pH بود. به‌طور کلی، بر اساس دو شاخص AQI و WQI کیفیت خاک منطقه مورد مطالعه در کلاس متوسط قرار گرفتند. اما مقادیر بدست آمده از روش NQI برای کیفیت خاک بیانگر پایین بودن کیفیت خاک منطقه بود. شاخص کیفیت خاک وزنی با مجموعه داده حداقل و تابع غیرخطی (WQI_MDS_NL) به دلیل دارا بودن شاخص حساسیت بیشتر (یا انحراف از معیار بزرگتر) به عنوان مدل برتر انتخاب شد. در نهایت نقشه کیفیت خاک منطقه با استفاده از روش معکوس فاصله وزن‌دار تهیه شد. بر اساس نقشه تهیه شده حدود 53 درصد اراضی منطقه کیفیت خاک متوسط و 47 درصد اراضی کیفیت خاک پایینی دارند.

کلیدواژه‌ها

مجموعه حداقل داده‌ها
شاخص نمورو
تجزیه مولفه های اصلی
درونیابی معکوس فاصله
شخم حفاظتی
موضوعات

عنوان مقاله English

Assessment and modeling of soil quality using multivariate analysis approach (Case study of rainfed agricultural land in Dezpart city)

نویسندگان English

Sina Bigdeli 1
Heidar Ghafari 2
Mojtaba Norouzi Masir 3
Abdolamir Moezzi 4
1 Former MSc.student, Department of Soil Sciences , Faculty of Agriculture, Shahid Chamran University of Ahvaz, Ahvaz, Iran
2 Assistant professor, Department of Soil Sciences, Faculty of Agriculture, Shahid Chamran University of Ahvaz, Ahvaz, Iran
3 Associate Professor, Department of Soil Sciences, Faculty of Agriculture, Shahid Chamran University of Ahvaz, Ahvaz, Iran
4 Professor, Department of Soil Sciences, Faculty of Agriculture, Shahid Chamran University of Ahvaz, Ahvaz, Iran
چکیده English

Introduction: Today, the concept of soil quality (SQ) has been widely used to know the capacity and limitations of soils in different environmental systems. The degree of suitability of land is determined by its capacity to provide services and its flexibility against external conditions. Production of plant biomass is one of the most important functions of soil in relation to food security. The share of dry land in Iran's agricultural production, especially wheat, is very significant. So that in terms of area, about half of the total area of agricultural lands, in terms of volume of production, about 10% of all agricultural products and about 30% of the country's wheat production are related to these lands. Therefore, maintaining the soil quality of these lands is very important. The main goal of this research is to model and quantify the soil quality of part of the rainfed agricultural lands of Dezpart city using integrated multivariate analysis and also to determine the minimum effective data set.

Materials and methods: This study was carried out in a part of the rainfed agricultural area of Dezpart County. First, 119 soil samples were prepared using the composite method from the soil depth of 0-30 cm. Soil sampling was done in a stratified random manner to include all the different geomorphological units. The geographic location of the sampling points was also recorded. The samples were transferred to the laboratory and their chemical-fertility and physical characteristics include reaction (pH), electrical conductivity (EC), organic matter (OM), total nitrogen, available potassium, absorbable phosphorus, calcium carbonate equivalent (CCE), texture, bulk density, mean weight diameter (MWD) of soil aggregates, soil gravel content and cation exchange capacity (CEC) were measured. Then the soil quality was determined using two datasets of total (TDS) and minimum (MDS), and multivariate analysis method. In this method, by using appropriate scoring functions, a score between zero and one was considered for each member of the data set. Also, a weight coefficient was calculated for each member, and finally, the soil quality index, which indicates its degree of desirability, was obtained by three indices including Nemero (NQI), cumulative weighted index (IQI) and simple cumulative index (AQI). Finally, a spatial variation map of soil quality was prepared using the Inverse Distance Weighting (IDW) method in geographic information system (GIS) software.

Results and Discussion: The results of the principal component analysis (PCA) test indicated that there are three main components that cover 78% of the total variance changes. The first component alone accounts for about 41% and the second and third components account for 25% and 12% of the total data variance, respectively. Based on the correlation analysis between soil components and characteristics, five characteristics including organic matter (OM), silt content, gravel, pH and EC were selected as MDS members. Became in the TDS collection, the highest weights related to silt and sand (0.093 and 0.095, respectively) and the lowest weight with 0.050 was assigned to bulk density (BD). In the MDS set, the highest weight was related to organic matter and silt and the lowest weight was related to pH. The soil quality of the region was generally classified as medium based on the two indexes of AQI and WQI. However, the NQI method indicated that the soil quality was low. Among the three selected indices with different functions and data sets, the weighted soil quality index with the minimum data set and nonlinear function (WQI_MDS_NL) was chosen as the superior model due to having a higher sensitivity index (or a larger standard deviation). The spatial soil quality map, which was prepared for this study, showed that approximately 50% of the lands in the region had an average soil quality and 50% had a low soil quality.

Conclusion: Organic matter, silt, pH, gravel and EC are the main characteristics to determine the soil quality of the region. In addition, stability of soil aggregates, bulk density and lime are the most important limiting factors of soil quality in the region. Therefore, it is suggested to use appropriate management practices such as conservation tillage and use of organic fertilizers to improve these characteristics.

کلیدواژه‌ها English

Conservation Tillage
Food Security
Inverse distance weighting
Nemero Index
Soil Functions

  1. References

    1. Abdel-Fattah, M. K., Mohamed, E. S., Wagdi, E. M., Shahin, S. A., Aldosari, A. A., Lasaponara, R., and Alnaimy, M. A. 2021. Quantitative evaluation of soil quality using Principal Component Analysis: The case study of El-Fayoum depression Egypt. Sustainability, 13(4), 1824. DOI: 3390/su13041824
    2. Abdellatif, M.A., El Baroudy, A.A., Arshad, M., Mahmoud, E.K., Saleh, A.M., Moghanm, F.S., Shaltout, K.H., Eid, E.M. and Shokr, M.S. 2021. A GIS-based approach for the quantitative assessment of soil quality and sustainable agriculture. Sustainability, 13(23), p.13438. https://doi.org/10.3390/su132313438 
    3. Abuzaid, A. S., Mazrou, Y. S., El Baroudy, A. A., Ding, Z., and Shokr, M. S. 2022. Multi-Indicator and geospatial based approaches for assessing variation of land quality in arid agroecosystems. Sustainability, 14(10), 5840. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14105840
    4. Andrews, S. S., Karlen, D. L., and Cambardella, C. A. 2004. The soil management assessment framework: a quantitative soil quality evaluation method. Soil Science Society of America Journal, 68(6), 1945-1962.
    5. Azarneshan, S., khormali, F., sarmadian, F., kiani, F., and Eftekhari, K. 2018. Soil Quality Evaluation of Semi-arid and Arid Lands in Qazvin Plain, Iran. Water and Soil, 32(2), 359-374. doi: 10.22067/jsw.v32i2.65408 (In Persian). https://doi.org/10.22067/jsw.v32i2.65408
    6. Azlan, A., Aweng, E. R., and Ibrahim, C. O. 2011. The correlation between total organic carbon (TOC), organic matter and water content in soil collected from different land use of Kota Bharu, Kelantan.
    7. Bahmani, M., Mohammadi, J., Esfandiyarpoor, E., and Mottaghian, H. 2019. Assessing and Mapping of Integrated and Nemero Soil Quality Indices and their Relationship with Rose Yield (A Case Study: Bardsir, Kerman Province). Journal of Soil Management and Sustainable Production, 9(3), 1-23. (In Persian) doi: 22069/EJSMS.2020.15608.1838
    8. Bhunia, G. S., Shit, P. K., and Maiti, R. 2018. Comparison of GIS-based interpolation methods for spatial distribution of soil organic carbon (SOC). Journal of the Saudi Society of Agricultural Sciences, 17(2), 114-126. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jssas.2016.02.001
    9. Bo, Y., Zhu, Q., Bao, Y., Zhao, W., Zhao, Y., and Zhang, H. 2015. A comparative study on three methods of soil quality evaluation of microtopography in the semi-arid Loess Plateau, China. Journal of Environmental Biology, 36(1), 325.
    10. Bünemann, E.K., Bongiorno, G., Bai, Z., Creamer, R.E., De Deyn, G., De Goede, R., Fleskens, L., Geissen, V., Kuyper, T.W., Mäder, P. and Pulleman, M. 2018. Soil quality–A critical review. Soil biology and biochemistry, 120, pp.105-125. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soilbio.2018.01.030
    11. Csomós, E., Héberger, K., and Simon-Sarkadi, L. 2002. Principal component analysis of biogenic amines and polyphenols in Hungarian wines. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry, 50(13), 3768-3774.
    12. de Andrade Barbosa, M., de Sousa Ferraz, R. L., Coutinho, E. L. M., Neto, A. M. C., da Silva, M. S., Fernandes, C., and Rigobelo, E. C. 2019. Multivariate analysis and modeling of soil quality indicators in long-term management systems. Science of the Total Environment, 657, 457-465. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.11.441
    13. de Paul Obade, V., Lal, R., and Moore, R. 2014. Assessing the accuracy of soil and water quality characterization using remote sensing. Water resources management, 28, 5091-5109. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11269-014-0796-7
    14. Karlen, D.L. and Stott, D.E. 1994. A framework for evaluating physical and chemical indicators of soil quality. Defining soil quality for a sustainable environment, 35, pp.53-72.
    15. El Behairy, R. A., El Arwash, H. M., El Baroudy, A. A., Ibrahim, M. M., Mohamed, E. S., Kucher, D. E., and Shokr, M. S. 2024. How Can Soil Quality Be Accurately and Quickly Studied? A Review. Agronomy, 14(8), 1682. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy14081682
    16. Gorji, M., Kakeh, J., and AliMohammadi, A. 2018. Quantitative soil quality assessment in different land uses at some Parts of south eastern of Qazvin. Iranian Journal of Soil and Water Research, 48(5), 941-950. doi: 22059/ijswr.2017.127498.667256
    17. Govaerts, B., Sayre, K. D., and Deckers, J. 2006. A minimum data set for soil quality assessment of wheat and maize cropping in the highlands of Mexico. Soil and tillage research, 87(2), 163-174. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.still.2005.03.005
    18. Hashemi, M., Gholamalizadeh Ahangar, A., Bameri, A., Sarani, F., and Hejazizadeh, A. 2016. Survey and Zoning of Soil Physical and Chemical Properties Using Geostatistical Methods in GIS (Case Study: Miankangi Region in Sistan). Water and Soil, 30(2), 443-458. ((In Persian) doi: 10.22067/jsw.v30i2.25950
    19. Heydari, P., Hojati, S., Enayati, N., and Raiat Pishe, A. 2017. Effect of land use change on C stock and some biological characteristics of soils in parts of Rakaat watershed, east of Khuzestan province. Iranian Journal of Range and Desert Research, 24(1), 181-192. (In Persian) doi: 10.22092/ijrdr.2017.109859
    20. Jalhoum, M. E., Abdellatif, M. A., Mohamed, E. S., Kucher, D. E., and Shokr, M. 2024. Multivariate analysis and GIS approaches for modeling and mapping soil quality and land suitability in arid zones. Heliyon, 10(5). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e27577 
    21. Jilkova, V., and Frouz, J. 2010. Changes in soil chemistry in the surroundings of wood ant (Formica polyctena) nests. 19th World Congress of Soil Science, Soil Solutions for a Changing World. – 6 August 2010, Brisbane, Australia. Published on DVD.
    22. Jolliffe, I. T., and Cadima, J. 2016. Principal component analysis: a review and recent developments. Philosophical transactions of the royal society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences, 374(2065), 20150202. DOI: 1098/rsta.2015.0202
    23. Kamali, K., Zehtabian, G., Mesbahzadeh, T., Arabkhedri, M., Shohab Arkhazloo, H., and Moghadamnia, A. 2021. Determining the Most Effective Properties to Evaluate Soil Quality of Agriculture Lands in Mohammadshahr Plain of Karaj. Water and Soil, 35(2), 251-266. (In Persian). doi: 10.22067/jsw.2021.15005.0
    24. Karamizadeh, S., Abdullah, S. M., Manaf, A. A., Zamani, M., and Hooman, A. 2013. An overview of principal component analysis. Journal of Signal and Information Processing, 4(3), 173-175.
    25. Karlen D.L., D.E. Stott, 1994. A framework for evaluating physical and chemical indicators of soil quality, Defin. Soil Qual. Sustain. Environ. 35 53–72.
    26. Legaz, B.V., De Souza, D.M., Teixeira, R.F., Antón, A., Putman, B. and Sala, S. 2017. Soil quality, properties, and functions in life cycle assessment: an evaluation of models. Journal of Cleaner Production, 140, pp.502-515. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.05.077
    27. Lenka, N. K., Meena, B. P., Lal, R., Khandagle, A., Lenka, S., and Shirale, A. O. 2022. Comparing four indexing approaches to define soil quality in an intensively cropped region of Northern India. Frontiers in Environmental Science, 10, 865473. https://doi.org/10.3389/fenvs.2022.865473
    28. Li, X., H. Li, L. Yang, Y. Ren, 2018. Assessment of soil quality of croplands in the corn belt of northeast China, Sustainability 10 248. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10010248

     https://ideas.repec.org/a/ gam/jsusta/v10y2018i2011p2248-d127552

    1. Liu, Z., Han, J., Sun, Z., Chen, T., Hou, Y., Lei, N., Dong, Q., He, J. and Lu, Y. 2019. Long-term effects of different planting patterns on greenhouse soil micromorphological features in the North China Plain. Scientific Reports, 9(1), p.2200. DOI: 1038/s41598-019-38499-6
    2. Margesin, R., Schinner, F. and Wilke, B.M. 2005. Determination of chemical and physical soil properties.
    3. Masto, R. E., Chhonkar, P. K., Singh, D., and Patra, A. K. 2008. Alternative soil quality indices for evaluating the effect of intensive cropping, fertilisation and manuring for 31 years in the semi-arid soils of India. Environmental monitoring and assessment, 136, 419-435. DOI: 1007/s10661-007-9697-z
    4. Mukherjee, A. and Lal, R. 2014. Comparison of soil quality index using three methods. PloS one, 9(8), p.e105981. doi: 1371/journal.pone.0105981
    5. Nabiollahi, K., Golmohamadi, F., Taghizadeh-Mehrjardi, R., Kerry, R., and Davari, M. 2018. Assessing the effects of slope gradient and land use change on soil quality degradation through digital mapping of soil quality indices and soil loss rate. Geoderma, 318, 16-28. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoderma.2017.12.024
    6. Nieder, R., Benbi, D.K. and Reichl, F.X., 2018. Soil quality and human health, in: Nieder, R., Benbi, D.K. and Reichl, F.X. (ed.), Soil components and human health, Springer, Netherlands, Dordrecht, , pp. 1–34.
    7. Özkan, B., Dengiz, O. and Turan, İ.D. 2020. Site suitability analysis for potential agricultural land with spatial fuzzy multi-criteria decision analysis in regional scale under semi-arid terrestrial ecosystem. Scientific Reports, 10(1), p.22074. doi: 10.1038/s41598-020-79105-4
    8. Papan P., and Moradi Nasab V. 2021. Qualitative assessment of land suitability for sesame in Izeh plain. 17th Iranian Soil Science Congress. 18 October 2021, Alborz, Karaj, Iran.
    9. Pawar, A. B., Kumawat, C., Verma, A. K., Meena, R. K., Raza, M. B., Anil, A. S., and Trivedi, V. K. 2017. Threshold limits of soil in relation to various soil functions and crop productivity. International Journal of Current Microbiology and Applied Sciences, 6, 2293-2302. https://doi.org/10.20546/ijcmas.2017.605.256
    10. Qi, Y., Darilek, J. L., Huang, B., Zhao, Y., Sun, W., and Gu, Z. 2009. Evaluating soil quality indices in an agricultural region of Jiangsu Province, China. Geoderma, 149(3-4), 325-334. DOI: 10.1016/j.geoderma.2008.12.015
    11. Ramezani, F., Jafari, S., Salavati, A., and Khalilimoghaddam, B. 2016. Study the Soil Quality Changes Indicators Using Nemoro and Integrated Quality Index Models in Some Khuzestan’s Soils. Water and Soil, 29(6), 1629-1639. (In Persian) doi: 10.22067/jsw.v29i6.35514.
    12. Rocha Junior, P.R., Andrade, F.V., Mendonça, E.S., Donagemma, G.K., Fernandes, R.B.A., Bhattharai, R., Kalita, P.K. 2017. Soil, water, and nutrient losses from management alternatives for degraded pasture in Brazilian Atlantic rainforest biome. Science of the Total Environment,. 583, 53–63. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2016.12.187
    13. Sainju, U. M., and Liptzin, D. 2022. Relating soil chemical properties to other soil properties and dryland crop production. Frontiers in Environmental Science, 10, 1005114. https://doi.org/10.3389/fenvs.2022.1005114
    14. Samie Khoshk Estalkhi, F., Yaghmaeian Mahabadi, N., Abrishamkesh, S., and Maslahatjou, A. 2024. Evaluation of Scoring and Weighting Methods for Soil Characteristics to Determine Soil Quality in Different Land Uses. Iranian Journal of Soil Research, 37(4), 355-375. (In Persian) doi: 10.22092/ijsr.2024.361794.700
    15. Sarmadian, F., and Taghi zadeh Mehrjerdi, R. 2010. A Comparison of Interpolation Methods for Preparing Soil Quality Maps: Case study: (Agricultural Faculty Experimental Field). Iranian Journal of Soil and Water Research, 40(2). (In Persian) doi: 1001.1.2008479.1388.40.2.8.2
    16. Selmy, S. A., Al-Aziz, S. H. A., Jiménez-Ballesta, R., García-Navarro, F. J., and Fadl, M. E. 2021. Soil quality assessment using multivariate approaches: a case study of the dakhla oasis arid lands. Land, 10(10), 1074. https://doi.org/10.3390/land10101074
    17. Sepehya, S., Mehta, D., Kumar, A., Sharma, R., Sharma, D., and Sharma, A. 2024. Concept and Assessment Methodology of Soil Quality: A Review. International Journal of Plant and Soil Science, 36(5), 164–172. https://doi.org/10.9734/ijpss/2024/v36i54513
    18. Shahbazi, K., Marzi, M., Mohammadi, M. H., Asadi, H., Fathi Garlidani, A., Hashemi, Nesb Zavareh, K.S., Toloi, R., Beheshti, M., Avizhgan, A., Cheraghi, M. 2024. Methods of Soil Analysis: Sampling, Chemical, and Physical Methods. Soil and Water Research Institute of IranISBN: 978-622-6705-36-3. (In Persian)
    19. Shohab Arkhazloo, H., Emami, H., Haghnia, G., and Karimi, A. 2011. Determining most important properties for soil quality indices of agriculture and range lands in a some parts of southern Mashhad. Water and Soil, 25(5). (In Persian) doi: 10.22067/jsw.v0i--.11256
    20. Shukla, M. K., Lal, R., and Ebinger, M. 2004. Soil quality indicators for the north Appalachian experimentalwatersheds in coshocton Ohio. Soil Science, 169(3), 195-205. DOI: 10.1097/01.ss.0000122523.03492.79
    21. Taghipour, M., Yaghmaeian Mahabadi, N., and Shabanpour, M. 2023. Assessment of soil quality indices using multivariate analysis in different land uses (case study: Tootkabon, Guilan province). Agricultural Engineering, 46(3), 251-271. (In Persian)

    doi: 10.22055/agen.2023.44957.1684

    1. Tesfahunegn, G. B. 2014. Soil quality assessment strategies for evaluating soil degradation in Northern Ethiopia. Applied and Environmental Soil Science, 2014(1), 646502. DOI: 10.1155/2014/646502
    2. Vasu, D., Singh, S.K., Ray, S.K., Duraisami, V.P., Tiwary, P., Chandran, P., Nimkar, A.M. and Anantwar, S.G. 2016. Soil quality index (SQI) as a tool to evaluate crop productivity in semi-arid Deccan plateau, India. Geoderma, 282, pp.70-79. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoderma.2016.07.010
    3. Yaghmaeian Mahabadi, N., Fayyaz, H., Sabouri, A., and Shirinfekr, A. 2021. Comparison of Soil Quality Evaluation Methods and Their Relationships with Tea Yield in West Guilan Province. Iranian Journal of Soil Research, 34(4), 435-450. (In Persian) doi: 10.22092/ijsr.2021.351656.551
    1. Alidoust, E., Afyuni, M., Hajabbasi, M. A., and Mosaddeghi, M. R. 2019. Application of multivariate statistical methods for evaluating soil quality indices in Lordegan semiarid region. Applied Soil Research, 7(3), 192-206. . (In Persian)
    2. Zahirnia, A., Matinfar, H., and Bahrami, H. 2020. Investigation of parameters affecting soil quality under saline and semi-saline conditions (case study of south and southwest of Khuzestan province). Agricultural Engineering, 43(3), 405-423. (In Persian) doi: 10.22055/agen.2020.33820.1569
    1. Zhou, W., Han, G., Liu, M., and Li, X. 2019. Effects of soil pH and texture on soil carbon and nitrogen in soil profiles under different land uses in Mun River Basin, Northeast Thailand. Peer-reviewed journal, 7, e7880. doi: 7717/peerj.7880
مهندسی زراعی
دوره 48، شماره 1
فروردین
بهار 1404
صفحه 56-35

صفحه اصلی

ارسال مقاله

همکاران اجرایی

اعضای هیات تحریریه

اصول اخلاقی انتشار مقاله

راهنمای نویسندگان

هزینه های بررسی مقاله

داوران

تماس با ما