Entisol ordosuna ait bir arazide bazı toprak özelliklerinin değişiminin belirlenmesi

Topraklar, doğal süreçler ve amenajman uygulamalarının farklı mekansal ve zamansal ölçeklerde etkilerinin sonucu değişkenliğe sahiptirler. Bu çalışmanın amacı daha önce detaylı temel toprak haritası hazırlanmış Entisol ordosuna ait bir arazide bazı toprak özelliklerinin değişimini ve haritalama üniteleri arasındaki farklılıkları ortaya koymaktır. Bu amaçla dört farklı haritalama ünitesini içine alan 400x800 m boyutlarında bir alandan örnekleme yapılmıştır. Toplam 512 toprak örneği 25x25m grid örnekleme düzeniyle 0-30 cm derinlikten alınmıştır. Varyasyon katsayısı değerlerine göre en yüksek değişkenlik gösteren toprak özelliği organik madde, en düşük ise toprak pH’sidir. Tüm alanda normal dağılım gösteren tek toprak özelliği değişebilir K’dır. Çalışma alanı haritalama ünitelerine bölündüğünde normal dağılım gösteren toprak özelliği sayısı artmıştır. ANOVA ve LSD test sonuçlarına göre, kil içeriği bakımından tüm harita üniteleri birbirinden farklıdır. Gerçek ortalamanın %10’u hata seviyesinde en çok 54 ile organik madde, en az ise 1 örnek ile toprak pH ‘sı için gereklidir. Tüm özellikler birlikte değerlendirildiğinde çalışma alanını temsil için 25 örnek gereklidir.

Anahtar Kelimeler:

Entisol, toprak pH'sı, toprak özellikleri, toprak değişkenliği, toprak tipi, toprak tipi (genetik), varyans analizi, toprak kimyasal özellikleri

Determination of the variability of some soil properties on an field classified as Entisol

Soils have variations resulting from natural processes and management practices affected in different spatial and tem- poral scales. The aims of this study are to introduce the variability of some soil properties and exhibit the differences of soil mapping units (classified as Entisol) in an area having a detailed soil survey report. Soil samples were collected within an area of 400x800 m including four different soil mapping units. Soil samples, total of 512, were collected with a 25x25 m grid sampling design from 0-30 cm depth. Organic matter was the most variable and soil pH was the least variable soil properties based on coefficient of variation values. Exchangeable K was the only property exhibited normal distribution within whole study area. The number of soil properties with normal distribution was increased when the study area was divided into soil mapping units. The results of ANOVA and LSD test, showed that soil mapping units were significantly different from each other in clay content. In the study area 54 soil samples were required for organic matter and 1 soil sample was for soil pH to estimate average values in 10% error within true mean. All soil properties studied were considered together, 25 soil samples were required to represent the whole study area.

Keywords:

Entisols, soil pH, soil properties, soil variability, soil types, soil types (genetic), analysis of variance, soil chemical properties,

PDF

___

Ameyan, O., 1986. “Surface Soil Variability of a Map Unit On Niger River Alluvium” Soil. Sci. Soc. Am. J. 50: 1289-1293
Brejda, J.J., Moorman, T. B., Smith, J.L., Karlen, D.L, Allan, D.L.ve Dao, T.H., 2000. “Distribu- tion and Variability of Surface Soil Properties at a Regional Scale” Soil. Sci. Soc. Am. J. 64: 974-982
Brown, R.B.ve Huddleston, J.H., 1991. “Presentation of Statistics Data on Map Units to The User”. In Spatial Variabilities of Soil And Landform. SSSA Special Pub.No:28
Brubaker, ST., 1989. “Evaluating Soil Variability As Related to Landscape Position Using Different Statistical Methods”. PhD Thesis Texas A&M University, 217 Pp
Brubaker, S.C.ve Hallmark, C.T.,1991. “A Comparison of Statistical Methods for Evaluating Map Unit Composition”. In: Spatial Variabilities of Soils And Landforms. Mausbach, M.J. And Wilding, L.P.(Ed.) Soil Sci. Soc. America, Inc, Madison Wisconsin, USA
Cambardella, C.A. ve Karlen , L.D. 1999. “Spatial Analysis of Soil Fertility Parameters”. Precision Agriculture 1:5-14
Castrignsno, A., Giuglisrini, L., Risaliti, L.ve Martinelli N., 2000. “Study of Spatial Relationships Among Some Soil Physico-Chemical Properties of a Field in Central Italy Using Multivariate Geostatistics”. Geoderma, 97: 39-60
Di, H.J, Trangmar„B.B. ve Kemp, R.A, 1989. “Use of Geostatistics in Designing Sampling Strategies For Soil Survey”. Soil Sci.Soc. Am.J. 53:1163-1167
Durak, A, 1991 “Yeşilırmak Havzası Büyük Toprak Gruplarının Toprak Taksonomisi ve FAO/UNESKO Dünya Toprak Haritası Lejandına Göre Sınıflandırılması” C.U Zir.Fak. Der. 7:63-69.
Edmonds, W.J.ve Lentner, M, 1987. “Soil Series Differentiae Selected by Discriminate Analysis Based on Ranks” Soil Sci.Soc. Am J. 51:716-721
Edmonds, W.J, Rector, D.D, Wilson, N.O. ve Arnold, T.L, 1988. “Evaluation Of Relationship Between Oak Site Indices and Properties of Selected Dystrochrepts” Soil Sci.Soc. Am J. 52:204-209
Erşahin, S. 1999. “Alüviyal Bir Tarlada Bazı Fiziksel ve Kimyasal Toprak Özelliklerinin Uzaysal (Spatial) Değişkenliğinin Belirlenmesi” S.Ü. Ziraat Faküktesi Dergisi. 13 (19):34-41
ESRİ, 2001. ARCGIS 8.1 Environmental System Research Institute. Redland CA,USA
Gee, G.W. ve Bouder, J. W, 1986. “Partide Size Analysis” ImA.Clute (Edit.) Methods of Soil Analysis . Part I Agronomy No:9 Am. Soc. of Agron. Madison,Wisconsin, USA
Goderya, F.S, 1998. “Field Scale Variations in Soils Properties For Spatially Variable Controk A Re- view” Journal of Soil Contamination 7(2):243-264
Hendershot, W.H, Lalande, H. ve Duquette, M, 1993. “Soil Reaction and Exchangeable Acidity” In Soil Sampling And Methods of Analysis. Carter M.R.(Ed) Canadian Society of Soil Science, CRC Pres Inc. Boca Raton, Florida.USA
Jansen, I. J. ve Arnold, R.W, 1976. “Defining Ranges of Soil Characteristics” Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 40:89-92
Janzen, H.H, 1993. "Soluble Salts in Soil Sampling And Methods of Analysis" Carter M.R.(Ed) Ca- nadian Society of Soil Science, CRC Press Inc. Boca Raton, Florida.USA
Kaçar, B, 1994. “Bitki ve Toprağın Kimyasal Analiz- leri III Toprak Analizleri” Ankara Üni. Zir. Fak. Eğitim Araştırma Geliştirme Vakfı Yayınları No.3
Mulla, D.J.ve McBratney, A.B, 2000. “Soil Spatial Variability” A-321-A-351, In: Handbook of Soil Science, Malcolm E. Sumner (Ed. In Chief) CRS Press
Nelson, D.W. ve Sommers, L.E, 1982. “Methods of Soil Analysis” Part 2. Chemical and Microbi- ological Properties, Page, A.L, Miller, R.H. Keeney, D.R.(Ed) 2nd Edition. SSSA Inc. Publisher, Madison,Wisconsin
Nordt, L.C, Jacob, J.S.ve Wilding, L.P,1991. “Quantifying Map Unit Composition for Quality Control in Soil Survey” In: Spatial Variabilities of Soils And Landforms. Mausbach, M.J. ve Wilding, L.P.(Ed.) SSSA, Inc, Madison Wisconsin, USA
Ott, R. L., 1993. “An Introduction to Statistical Methods and Data Analysis” Fourth Edition, Duxbury Press, Belmont, California
Parkin, T.B.ve Robinson, J.A. 1992. “Analysis of Lognormal Data”. Advances Soil Sci. 20:193-235.
Parkin, T.B.ve Robinson, J.A. 1994. “Statistical Treatment of Microbial Data”. In: Weaver , R.W. Et Al. (Ed) Methods of Soil Analysis Part 2 SSSA Book Ser. 5 Madisom, WI
Parkin, T.B., Meisinger, J.J., Chester, S.T., Starr, J.L.ve Robinson, J.A., 1988. “Evaluating of Sta- tistical Methods for Lognormally Distributed Variables”. Soil Sci.Soc. Am J. 52:323-329
Rogowski, A. S. ve Wolf, K.J., 1994. “Incoporation Variability into Soil Map Unit Delineation” Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 58:163-174
Soil Survey Staff, 1983. “National Soil Handbook” U.S. Gov. Print Office Washington DC
SPSS, 2000. SPSS For Windows. Student Version. Release 10.0.9 SPSS Inc USA
Starr, J.L., Parkin/T.B.ve Meisinger, J.J., 1992. “Sample Size Consideration in The Determination Of Soil Nitrate”, Soil Sci. Soc. Am.J. 56:1824-1830
Starr, J.L., Parkin/T.B.ve Meisinger, J.J., 1995. “Influence of Sample Size on Chemical and Physical Soil Measurement”. Soil Sci. Soc. Am.J 56:1824-1830
Thomas, G.W., 1982. “Methods of Soil Analysis,” Part 2. Chemical and Microbiological Properties, Page,A.L., Miller, R.H. Keeney, D.R.(Ed) 2nd Edition. SSSA Inc. Publisher, Madison,Wisconsin
Trangmar, B.B., Yost, R.S.ve Uehara, G., 1985. “Aplication of Geostatistics to Spatial Studies of Soil Properties”. Advances in Argon. 38:45-94
Wilding, L.P., Bouma, J.ve Goss, D.W., 1994. “Impact of Spatial Variability on Interpretative Modelling” In: Quantitative Modelling of Soil Forming Processes R.B. Bryant ve Arnold R.W. (Ed.) SSSA Special Publication Number 39, SSSA,Inc. Madison Wisconsin,USA
Yıldız, H., 1997. “Tokat Meyvecilik Üretme İstasyo- nu Topraklarının Detaylı Etüd ve Haritalanması” Gaziosmanpaşa Üniversitesi, Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Yüksek Lisans Tezi. 70 S. Tokat
Young, F.J., Hammer, R.D.ve Williams, F., 1998 “Evaluating Central Tendency and Variance of Soil Properties within Map Units” Soil Sci. Soc. Am.J. 62:1640-1646.
Young, F.J., Hammer, R.D., Larsen, D., 1999. “Frequency Distribution of Soil Properties on a Loess-Mantled Mussouri Watershed” Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 63:178-185.