Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-grxwn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-11T01:37:35.149Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Farmer perceptions of soil quality and their relationship to management-sensitive soil parameters

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 December 2007

J.B. Gruver  and
R.R. Weil
J.B. Gruver*
Affiliation:
Department of Environmental Science and Technology, University of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742, USA. Department of Agriculture, Western Illinois University, Macomb, IL 61455-1390, USA.
R.R. Weil
Affiliation:
Department of Environmental Science and Technology, University of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742, USA.
*
*Corresponding author: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

A critical step in the quantification of soil quality (SQ) is the selection of SQ benchmarks. The benchmarks used in this study were SQ ratings made by 32 farmer collaborators representing a range of farming systems, scales of operation and geographic locations in the Mid-Atlantic region of USA. Soils from 45 pairs of sites identified by their farmers as having good and poor SQ were sampled over three seasons and analyzed for 19 soil parameters. Farmer judgments of SQ were based on many factors, most commonly soil organic matter, crop performance, soil water availability and erosion history. Selected individual soil parameters were normalized and integrated into an additive SQ index (SQI). Three additional indices were developed using discriminant analysis. The level of agreement between individual parameters, SQIs and farmer SQ ratings was evaluated using paired t-tests and mean percent difference values. The additive SQI was found to have the highest level of agreement with farmer SQ ratings (P<0.0001), demonstrating that a linear combination of soil parameters can be assembled that is more in agreement with holistic SQ criteria, such as farmer SQ ratings, than individual soil parameters. Extractable C from microwave (MW) sterilized soil (a measure of microbial biomass) was the individual parameter that best agreed with farmer SQ ratings (P<0.0001). Five additional soil C parameters, as well as aggregate stability, also agreed well with farmer SQ ratings (all P values <0.0005). The three parameters with the highest ratio of mean percent difference to coefficient of variation (an indication of parameter reliability) were extractable C from MW sterilized soil, anthrone reactive C and macroaggregate stability (14.2, 7.7 and 3.7, respectively). Mineral fertility parameters (pH, Ca, Ca:Mg ratio, P and K) were not significantly related to farmer SQ ratings (P values >0.05). The strong relationships observed between soil C parameters, soil structural parameters and farmer SQ ratings suggest that efforts to improve SQ in the study region should focus on monitoring and enhancement of soil C and soil structure.

Keywords

soil quality indexfarmer perceptionssoil structuresoil aggregationextractable soil Cmicrobial biomass
Type
Research Article
Information
Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems , Volume 22 , Issue 4 , December 2007 , pp. 271 - 281
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2007

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.)

References

1 Leopold, A. 1939. The farmer as conservationist. In Callicott, J.B. and Freyfogle, E.T. (eds) 1999. Aldo Leopold: For the Health of the Land. (Previously unpublished essays and other writings.) Island Press/Shearwater Books, Washington, DC. p. 161–175.Google Scholar
2 Liebig, M. and Doran, J.W. 1999. Evaluation of farmer's perceptions of soil quality indicators. American Journal of Alternative Agriculture 14:11–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3 Granatstein, D. and Bezdicek, D.F. 1992. The need for a soil quality index: local and regional perspectives. American Journal of Alternative Agriculture 7:12–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4 McCallister, R. and Nowak, P. 1999. Whole soil knowledge and management: a foundation of soil quality. In Lal, R. (ed.) Soil Quality and Soil Erosion. Soil Water Conservation Society, Ankeny, IA. p. 173–193.Google Scholar
5 Bentley, J.W. 1989. What farmers don't know can't help them: the strengths and weakness of indigenous technical knowledge in Honduras. Agriculture and Human Values 6:25–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6 Queiroz, J.S.D. and Norton, B.E. 1992. An assessment of an indigenous soil classification used in the Caatinga region of Caera State, Northeast Brazil. Agricultural Systems 39:289–305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7 Krasilnikov, P.V. and Tabor, J.A. 2003. Perspectives on utilitarian ethnopedology. Geoderma 111:197–215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8 Tabor, J.A. and Hutchinson, C.F. 1994. Using indigenous knowledge, remote sensing and GIS for sustainable development. Indigenous Knowledge and Development Monitor 2(1): 2–6. Available at Web site: http://www.nuffic.nl/ciran/ikdm/2-1/articles/tabor.htmlGoogle Scholar
9 Garlynd, M.J., Kurakov, A.V., Romig, D.E., and Harris, R.F. 1994. Descriptive and analytical characterization of soil quality/health. In Doran, J.W., Coleman, D.C., Bezdicek, D.F. and Stewart, B.A. (eds) Defining Soil Quality for a Sustainable Environment. Special Publication 35. Soil Science Society of America, Madison, WI. p. 159–168.Google Scholar
10 Walter, G., Wander, M., and Bollero, G. 1997. A farmer-centered approach to developing information for soil resource management: the Illinois soil quality initiative. American Journal of Alternative Agriculture 12:64–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11 Romig, D.E., Garlynd, M.J., Harris, R.F., and McSweeney, K. 1995. How farmers assess soil health and quality. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation 50:229–236.Google Scholar
12 Romig, D.E., Garlynd, M.J., and Harris, R.F. 1995. Farmer based assessment of soil quality: a soil health scorecard. In Doran, J.W. and Jones, A.J. (eds) Methods for Assessing Soil Quality. Soil Science Society of America, Madison, WI. p. 39–60.Google Scholar
13 Wander, M.M. and Drinkwater, L.E. 2000. Fostering soil stewardship through soil quality assessment. Applied Soil Ecology 15:61–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
14 Doran, J.W. and Safley, M. 1997. Defining and assessing soil health and sustainable productivity. In Pankhurst, C.E., Doube, B.M., and Gupta, V.V.S.R. (eds) Biological Indicators of Soil Health. CAB International, New York. p. 1–28.Google Scholar
15 Larson, W.E. and Pierce, F.J. 1994. The dynamics of soil quality as a measure of sustainable management. In Doran, J.W., Coleman, D.C., Bezdicek, D.F., and Stewart, B.A. (eds) Defining Soil Quality for a Sustainable Environment. Special Publication 35. Soil Science Society of America, Madison, WI. p. 37–51.Google Scholar
16 Harris, R.F. and Bezdicek, D.F. 1994. Descriptive aspects of soil quality/health. In Doran, J.W., Coleman, D.C., Bezdicek, D.F., and Stewart, B.A. (eds) Defining Soil Quality for a Sustainable Environment. Special Publication 35. Soil Science Society of America, Madison, WI. p. 23–35.Google Scholar
17 Pankhurst, C.E. 1997. Biodiversity of soil organisms as an indicator of soil health. In Pankhurst, C.E., Doube, B.M., and Gupta, V.V.S.R. (ed.) Biological Indicators of Soil Health. CAB International, New York. p. 297–324.Google Scholar
18 Wander, M.M., Walter, G.L., Nissen, T.M., Bollero, G.A., Andrews, S.S., and Cavanaugh-Grant, D. 2002. Soil quality: science and process. Agronomy Journal 94:23–32.Google Scholar
19 Grossman, R.B., Harms, D.S., Seybold, C.A., and Herrick, J.E. 2001. Coupling use-dependent and use-invariant data for soil quality evaluation in the United States. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation 56(1):63–68.Google Scholar
20 Wagenet, R.J. and Hutson, J.L. 1997. Soil quality and its dependence on dynamic physical processes. Journal of Environmental Quality 26:41–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
21 Okey, B.W. 1996. System approaches and properties and agroecosystem health. Journal of Environmental Management 48:87–199.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
22 Rapport, D.J., McCullum, J., and Miller, M.H. 1997. Soil health: its relationship to ecosystem health. In Pankhurst, C.E., Doube, B.M., and Gupta, V.V.S.R. (eds) Biological Indicators of Soil Health. CAB International, New York. p. 29–47.Google Scholar
23 Carter, M.R. 1986. Microbial biomass as in index for tillage-induced changes in soil biological properties. Soil and Tillage Research 7:9–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
24 Weil, R.R., Islam, K.R., Stine, M.A., Gruver, J.B., and Samson-Liebig, S.E. 2003. Estimating active carbon for soil quality assessment: a simplified method for laboratory and field use. American Journal of Alternative Agriculture 18(1):3–17.Google Scholar
25 Karlen, D.L., Wollenhaupt, N.C., Erbach, D.C., Berry, E.C., Swan, J.B., Eash, N.S., and Jordahl, J.L. 1994. Crop residue effects on soil quality following 10 years of no-till corn. Soil and Tillage Research 31:149–167.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
26 Islam, K.R. and Weil, R.R. 1997. Stability of soil quality indices across seasons and regions. Agronomy Abstracts. Annual Meetings of the American Society of Agronomy, Anaheim, CA. p. 215.Google Scholar
27 Nui, M., Murphy, D., Braimbridge, M., Osler, G., Jasper, D., and Abbott, L. 2002. Using power analysis to identify soil quality indicators. 17th World Congress of Soil Science, Bangkok, Thailand, August 14–21 Symposium no. 32. Paper no. 557. Available at Web site: http://www.ldd.go.th/Wcss2002/papers/0557.pdfGoogle Scholar
28 Singh, K.K., Colvin, T.S., Erbach, D.C., and Mughal, A.Q. 1992. Tilth index: an approach to quantifying tilth. Transactions of the American Society of Agricultural Engineers 35:1777–1785.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
29 Buyanovsky, G.A., Kucera, C.L., and Wagner, G.H. 1987. Comparative analyses of carbon dynamics in native and cultivated ecosystems. Ecology 68:2023–2031.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
30 Davidson, E.A. and Ackerman, I.L. 1993. Changes in soil carbon inventories following cultivation of previously untilled soils. Biogeochemistry 20:161–193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
31 Skidmore, E.L., Carestenson, W.A., and Banbury, E.E. 1975. Soil changes resulting from cropping and tillage. Soil Science Society of America Proceedings 39:964–967.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
32 Islam, K.R. and Weil, R.R. 1998. Microwave irradiation of soil for routine measurement of microbial biomass carbon. Biology and Fertility of Soils 27:408–416.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
33 Brink, R.H., Dubach, P., and Lynch, D.L. 1960. Measurement of carbohydrates in soil hydrolyzates with anthrone. Soil Science 89:157–166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
34 Van de Werf, H. and Verstrate, W. 1987. Estimation of active soil microbial biomass by mathematical analysis of respiration curves: calibration of the test procedure. Soil Biology and Biochemistry 19:261–266.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
35 Day, P.R. 1965. Particle fractionation and particle-size analysis. In Black, C.A. (ed.) Methods of Soil Analysis, Part 2, 2nd ed.American Society of Agronomy, Madison, WI. p. 545–567.Google Scholar
36 Islam, K.R. and Weil, R.R. 1998. A rapid microwave digestion method for colorimetric measurement of soil organic carbon. Communications in Soil Science and Plant Analysis 29:2269–2284.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
37 Northeast Coordinating Committee on Soil Testing. 1995. Recommended soil testing procedures for the Northeastern United States. 2nd ed.Northeast Regional Publication. No. 493. Agricultural Experiment Station, University of Delaware, Newark, NJ.Google Scholar
38 Kemper, W.D. and Rosenau, R.C. 1986. Aggregate stability and size distribution. In Methods of Soil Analysis, Part 1. Physical and Mineralogical Methods: Agronomy Monograph no. 9. 2nd ed.Agronomy Society of America—Soil Science Society of America, Madison, WI. p. 425–442.Google Scholar
39 SAS Institute, Inc. 1985. SAS Users Guide: Statistics. Version 5 edition. SAS Institute, Inc., Cary, NC.Google Scholar
40 Conservation Tillage Information Center. 1999. Maryland Tillage Statistics. Available at Web site: http://ingis.acn.ces.purdue.edu:9999/ctic/ctic.html.oldGoogle Scholar
41 Sparling, G.P. 1997. Soil microbial biomass, activity and nutrient cycling as indicators of soil health. In Pankhurst, C.E., Doube, B.M., and Gupta, V.V.S.R. (eds) Biological Indicators of Soil Health. CAB International, New York. p. 97–119.Google Scholar
42 Powlson, D.S. and Jenkinson, D.S. 1981. A comparison of the organic matter, biomass, adenosine triphosphate and mineralizable nitrogen contents of ploughed and direct-drilled soils. Journal of Agricultural Science 97:713–721.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
43 Islam, K.R. and Weil, R.R. 2000. Soil quality indicator properties in mid-Atlantic soils as influenced by conservation management. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation 55:69–78.Google Scholar
44 Eckert, D.J. 1987. Soil test interpretations: basic cation saturation ratios and sufficiency levels. In Brown, J.R. (ed.) Soil Testing: Sampling, Correlation, Calibration and Interpretation. Special Publication 21. Soil Science Society of America, Madison, WI. p. 53–64.Google Scholar
45 Rhoton, F.E. 2000. Influence of time on soil response to no-till practices. Soil Science Society of America Journal 64:700–709.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
46 Tisdall, J.M. and Oades, J.M. 1982. Organic matter and water-stable aggregates in soils. Journal of Soil Science 33:141–164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
47 Low, A.J. 1955. Improvements in the structural state of soils under leys. Journal of Soil Science 6:180–199.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
48 Deluca, T.H. and Keeney, D.R. 1993. Soluble anthrone-reactive carbon in soils: effect of carbon and nitrogen amendments. Soil Science Society of America Journal 57:1296–1300.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
49 Weil, R.R., Lowell, K.A., and Shade, H.M. 1993. Effects of intensity of agronomic practices on a soil ecosystem. American Journal of Alternative Agriculture 8:5–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
50 Wardle, D.A. and Ghani, A. 1995. Why is the strength of relationships between pairs of methods for estimating soil microbial biomass often so variable. Soil Biology and Biochemistry 27(6):821–828.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
51 Franzluebbers, A.J., Haney, R.L., Hons, F.M., and Zuberer, D.A. 1999. Assessing biological soil quality with chloroform fumigation-incubation: why subtract a control? Canadian Journal of Soil Science 79:521–528.CrossRefGoogle Scholar