Hostname: page-component-669899f699-b58lm Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-04-25T13:32:18.878Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Soil available phosphorous and potassium stocks related to environmental properties, land uses and soils

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 November 2024

Sorina Dumitru ,
Cristian Paltineanu Open the ORCID record for Cristian Paltineanu [Opens in a new window] ,
Olga Vizitiu  and
Horia Domnariu
Sorina Dumitru
Affiliation:
National Research and Development Institute for Soil Science, Agrochemistry and Environment - ICPA, Bucharest, Romania
Cristian Paltineanu*
Affiliation:
National Research and Development Institute for Soil Science, Agrochemistry and Environment - ICPA, Bucharest, Romania
Olga Vizitiu
Affiliation:
National Research and Development Institute for Soil Science, Agrochemistry and Environment - ICPA, Bucharest, Romania
Horia Domnariu
Affiliation:
National Research and Development Institute for Soil Science, Agrochemistry and Environment - ICPA, Bucharest, Romania
*
Corresponding author: Cristian Paltineanu; Email: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Soil available phosphorus (SAP) and potassium (SAK) are indispensable for crops, and their stocks are important for food production needed for a growing global population. This study analysed 991 soil profiles across a large part of Romania covering forestland, grassland and cropland in almost all ecological regions. This study investigated SAP and SAK stocks for different soil depths and characterized their magnitude and variability within land uses under different environmental ecosystems, soil classes and soil types, for a better soil and land management under a temperate-continental climate. Cropland soils present the highest SAP and SAK stocks. Chernozems, Phaeozems and Vertosols possess the highest SAP and SAK stocks in Romania, representing the largest country's pool. Both SAP stocks and SAK stocks are significantly correlated with basic environmental properties, existing direct correlations between SAP, SAK, soil organic carbon (SOC) and total nitrogen (TN) stocks. For all land uses, SAP and SAK stocks correlated significantly and directly with each other, as well as with annual temperature, clay content, pH and sum of base cations, and inversely with altitude, slope and annual precipitation. The best predictive values using multiple regression models and basic environmental driving factors were found for forestland stocks of SAP and SAK, followed by grassland stocks, while the lowest prediction occurred for cropland stocks, probably due to the long-term additional nutrient input performed by farmers in cropland that changed the natural conditions otherwise present in grassland, and especially in forestland. Based on these results some management measures are discussed.

Keywords

croplandforestlandgrasslandland resourcessoil properties
Type
Crops and Soils Research Paper
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 162 , Issue 3 , June 2024 , pp. 201 - 214
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2024. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Akbas, F, Gunal, H and Acir, N (2017) Spatial variability of soil potassium and its relationship to land use and parent material. Soil and Water Research 12, 1–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Andrei, T (2015) Date generale despre agricultura României. Anuarul statistic al României. Available at https://madr.ro/docs/agricultura/agricultura-romaniei-2015.pdfGoogle Scholar
Ballabio, C, Lugato, E, Fernández-Ugalde, O, Orgiazzi, A, Jones, A, Pasquale Borrelli, P, Montanarella, L and Panagos, P (2019) Mapping LUCAS topsoil chemical properties at European scale using Gaussian process regression. Geoderma 355, 113912.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bogunovic, I, Kljak, K, Dugan, I, Grbesa, D, Telak, LJ, Duvnjak, M, Kisic, I, Solomun, MK and Pereira, P (2022) Grassland management impact on soil degradation and herbage nutritional value in a temperate humid environment. Agriculture Basel 12, Article Number 921.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Borlan, Z, Hera, C, Dornescu, D, Kurtinecz, P, Rusu, M, Buzdugan, I and Tănase, G (1994) Fertilitatea şI Fertilizarea Solurilor. Bucureşti: Editura Ceres.Google Scholar
Centeri, C (2022) Effects of grazing on water erosion, compaction and infiltration on grasslands. Hydrology 9, Article Number 34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
de Martonne, E (1926) L'indiced'aridité. Bulletin de l'association de géographes français 9, 3–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dhillon, GS and Van Rees, KCJ (2017) Soil organic carbon sequestration by shelterbelt agroforestry systems in Saskatchewan. Canadian Journal of Soil Science 97, 394–409.Google Scholar
Dhillon, NK, Singh, P and Singh, H (2020) Soil organic carbon, phosphorus and potassium in soils under poplar based agro-forestry in Punjab. International Journal of Current Microbiology and Applied Sciences 9, 1117–1124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dodd, MB, Crush, JR, Mackay, AD and Barker, DJ (2011) The root to more soil carbon under pastures. Proceedings of New Zealand Grassland Association 73, 43–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Domnariu, H, Paltineanu, C, Marica, D, Lacatusu, AR, Rizea, N, Lazăr, R, Popa, GA, Vrinceanu, A and Bălăceanu, C (2020) Influence of soil-texture on nitrate leaching from small-scale lysimeters toward groundwater in various environments. Carpathian Journal of Earth and Environmental Sciences 15, 301–310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fan, J, McConkey, B, Wang, H and Janzen, H (2016) Root distribution by depth for temperate agricultural crops. Field Crops Research 189, 68–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Farr, TG and Kobrick, M (2000) Shuttle radar topography mission produces a wealth of data. Eos Transactions American Geophysical Union 81, 583–585.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fernandez-Ugalde, O, Scarpa, S, Orgiazzi, A, Panagos, P, Van Liedekerke, M, Marechal, A and A, Jones (2022) LUCAS 2018 Soil Module. Presentation of dataset and results. EUR 31144 EN, Publications Office of the EU, Luxembourg. Doi: 10.2760/215013, JRC129926. Project of the JRC, European Soil Data Centre (ESDAC). Available at https://esdac.jrc.ec.europa.eu/projects/lucasGoogle Scholar
Florea, N and Muntenu, I (2012) Sistemul Roman de Clasificare A Solurilor – SRTS. Craiova: Editura SITECH, 230 pp.Google Scholar
Florea, N, Balaceanu, V, Rauta, C and Canarache, A (1987) Methodology of Elaboration of Soil Science Studies. Partea I, II, III. (In Romanian) Bucuresti: Redactia de Propaganda Tehnica Agricola. Bucuresti: ICPA Bucuresti.Google Scholar
Gerzabek, MH, Strebl, F, Tulipan, M and Schwarz, S (2005) Quantification of organic carbon pools for Austria's agricultural soils using a soil information system. Canadian Journal of Soil Science 85, 491–498.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gocke, MI, Don, A, Heidkamp, A, Schneider, F and Amelung, W (2021) The phosphorus status of German cropland-an inventory of top- and subsoils. Journal of Plant Nutrition and Soil Science 184, 51–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grigatti, M, Petroli, A and Ciavatta, C (2023) Plant phosphorus efficiency from raw and composted agro- and bio-waste anaerobic digestates. Journal of Soil Science and Plant Nutrition 23, 3586–3599.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hillel, D (Ed.) (2008) 11-Soil Fertility and Plant Nutrition. Soil in the Environment. San Diego: Academic Press, pp. 151–162. 10.1016/B978-0-12-348536-6.50016-2Google Scholar
IUSS Working Group WRB. (2022). World Reference Base for Soil Resources. International Soil Classification System for Naming Soils and Creating Legends for Soil Maps, 4th Edn. Vienna, Austria: International Union of Soil Sciences (IUSS).Google Scholar
Jakšić, SS, Ninkov, J, Milić, S, Vasin, J, živanov, M, Jakšić, D and Komlen, V (2021) Influence of slope gradient and aspect on soil organic carbon content in the region of niš, Serbia. Sustainability 13, 8332.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jobbagy, EG and Jackson, RB (2000) The vertical distribution of soil organic carbon and its relation to climate and vegetation. Ecological Application 10(2), 423–436. https://doi.org/10.1890/1051-0761(2000)010[0423:TVDOSO]2.0.CO;2CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lacatusu, R (2000) Mineralogia şI Chimia Solului. Iasi: Editura Universităţii Al. I. Cuza Iaşi.Google Scholar
Lacatusu, R, Paltineanu, C, Vrinceanu, A and Lacatusu, AR (2019) Influence of domestic activity on the quality of groundwater and surface water in the rural built-up area of the southern Romanian Danube plain – a case study in the glavacioc catchment. Carpathian Journal of Earth and Environmental Sciences 14, 323–334.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lacatusu, AR, Domnariu, H, Paltineanu, C, Dumitru, S, Vrîceanu, A, Moraru, I, Anghel, A and Marica, D (2024) Influence of some environmental variables on organic carbon and nitrogen stocks in grassland mineral soils from various temperate-climate ecosystems. Environmental and Experimental Botany 217, 105554.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Luna, IRG, Corrêa, MM, Primo, DC, Neto, FCR, da Silva, JPS, Menezes, RSC and de Oliveira Santos, JP (2022) Phosphorus concentrations and stocks in different soil classes, uses and coverages in Agreste pernambucano, Brazil. Investigaciones Geograficas 107, e60477. https://doi.org/10.14350/rig.60477Google Scholar
Mărin, N, Dumitru, M and Sîrbu, C (2022) Evolution of soil phosphorus content in long-term experiments. Scientific Papers. Series A. Agronomy LXV, 103–110.Google Scholar
McBeath, TM, McLaughlin, MJ, Kirby, JK and Armstrong, RD (2012) The effect of soil water status on fertiliser, topsoil and subsoil phosphorus utilisation by wheat. Plant and Soil 358, 337–348.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McDowell, RW, Noble, A, Pletnyakov, P and Haygarth, PM (2023) A global database of soil plant available phosphorus. Scientific Data 10, 125.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Meyer, G, Bell, MJ, Doolette, CL, Brunetti, G, Zhang, Y, Lombi, E and Kopittke, PM (2020) Plant-available phosphorus in highly concentrated fertilizer bands: effects of soil type, phosphorus form, and coapplied potassium. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry 68, 7571–7580.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Muntwyler, A, Panagos, P, Pfister, S and Lugato, E (2024) Assessing the phosphorus cycle in European agricultural soils: looking beyond current national phosphorus budgets. Science of The Total Environment 906, 167143.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
New, M, Lister, D, Hulme, M and Makin, I (2002) A high-resolution data set of surface climate over global land areas. Climate Research 21, 1–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Orgiazzi, A, Ballabio, C, Panagos, P, Jone, A and Fernández-Ugalde, O (2018) LUCAS soil, the largest expandable soil dataset for Europe: a review. European Journal of Soil Science 69, 140–153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Özbek, FS, Leip, A and Van der Velde, M (2016) Phosphorous stock changes in agricultural soils: a case study in Turkey. Nutrient Cycling in Agroecosystems 105, 51–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paltineanu, C, Septar, L, Gavat, C, Chitu, E, Oprita, A, Moale, C, Calciu, I, Vizitiu, O and Lamureanu, G (2016) Characterising root density of peach trees in a semi-arid chernozem to increase plant density. International Agrophysics 30, 67–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paltineanu, C, Nicolae, S, Tanasescu, N, Chitu, E and Ancu, S (2017) Investigating root density of plum and apple trees grafted on low-vigor rootstocks to improve orchard management. Erwerbs-Obstbau 59, 29–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paltineanu, C, Lacatusu, R, Vrinceanu, A and Lacatusu, AR (2020) Organic carbon sequestration and nitrogen content in forest soils versus arable soils within a heavy-clay phaeozem landscape: a Romanian case study. Archives of Agronomy and Soil Science 66, 2026–2038.Google Scholar
Paltineanu, C, Domnariu, H, Marica, D, Lacatusu, AR, Popa, GA, Grafu, I and Neagoe, AD (2021) Fertilizers` leaching from the root system zone – a potential environmental risk for groundwater pollution in coarse and medium-textured soils. Carpathian Journal of Earth and Environmental Sciences 16, 139–150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paltineanu, C, Dumitru, SI and Lacatusu, AR (2022) Assessing land susceptibility for possible groundwater pollution due to leaching – a case study on Romania. Carpathian Journal of Earth and Environmental Sciences 17, 49–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Panagos, P, Köningner, J, Ballabio, C, Liakos, L, Muntwyler, A, Borrelli, P and Lugato, E (2022) Improving the phosphorus budget of European agricultural soils. Science of The Total Environment 853, 158706.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Peel, MC, Finlayson, BL and McMahon, TA (2007) Updated world map of the Köppen-Geiger climate classification. Hydrology and Earth System Sciences 11, 1633–1644.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Potter, P, Ramankutty, N, Bennett, EM and Donner, SD (2010) Characterizing the spatial patterns of global fertilizer application and manure production. Earth Interactions 14, 1–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sharma, J, Goyal, V, Dahiya, R, Kumar, M and Dey, P (2023) Response of long-term application of fertilizers and manure on p pools in inceptisols. Communications In Soil Science And Plant Analysis 54, 1042–1061.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, VH, Tilman, GD and Nekola, JC (1999) Eutrophication: impacts of excess nutrient inputs on freshwater, marine, and terrestrial ecosystems. Environmental Pollution 100, 179–196.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Somavilla, A, Caner, L, da Silva, ICB, dos Santos Rheinheimer, D and Chabbi, A (2022) Phosphorus stock depletion and soil C: n: p stoichiometry under annual crop rotations and grassland management systems over 13 years. Frontiers in Soil Science 2, 863122. https://doi.org/10.3389/fsoil.2022.863122CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vandermoere, S, Van De Sande, T, Tavernier, G, Lauwers, L, Goovaerts, E, Sleutel, S and De Neve, S (2021) Soil phosphorus (P) mining in agriculture – impacts on P availability, crop yields and soil organic carbon stocks. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment 322, 107660.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wang, X, Yu, D, Wang, C, Pan, Y, Pan, J and Shi, X (2018) Variations in cropland soil organic carbon fractions in the black soil region of China. Soil and Tillage Research 184, 93–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wehr, JB, Lewis, T, Dalal, RC, Menzies, NW, Verstraten, L, Swift, S, Bryant, P, Tindale, N and Smith, TE (2020) Soil carbon and nitrogen pools, their depth distribution and stocks following plantation establishment in south east Queensland, Australia. Forest Ecology and Management 457, 117708.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wu, X, Wang, L, An, J, Wang, Y, Song, H, Wu, Y and Liu, Q (2022) Relationship between soil organic carbon, soil nutrients, and land use in Linyi city (east China). Sustainability 14, 13585.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yang, YY, Goldsmith, A, Herold, I, Lecha, S and Toor, GS (2020) Assessing soil organic carbon in soils to enhance and track future carbon stocks. Agronomy-Basel 10, Article Number 1139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ye, XF, Bai, JH, Lu, QQ, Zhao, QQ and Wang, JJ (2014) Spatial and seasonal distributions of soil phosphorus in a typical seasonal flooding wetland of the Yellow River Delta, China. Environmental Earth Sciences 71, 4811–4820.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhang, H, Ouyang, Z, Jiang, P, Li, M and Zhao, X (2022) Spatial distribution patterns and influencing factors of soil carbon, phosphorus, and C:P ratio on farmlands in southeastern China. Catena 216, 106409.CrossRefGoogle Scholar