Toprak kalitesinin değerlendirilmesinde farklı yaklaşımlar

Toprak kalitesi, son 10 yıl içinde toprak biliminde en çok ilgi çeken konulardan biridir. Bu ilgi toprak kalitesi kavramının tanımı ve bu kalitenin ölçülmesinde kullanılacak güvenilir yolların araştırılması üzerine odaklanmıştır. Toprak kalitesinin tanımı üzerine iki kavram vardır. Bunlardan birincisi, toprağın fonksiyonlarına bağlı olarak kapasitesi. İkincisi ise, kullanıma uygunluk. Kapasite, iklim, topografya, bitki Örtüsü ve anamateryalin de dahil olduğu bazı özelliklerin bir fonksiyonudur. Kullanıma uygunluk ise, dinamik bir kavramdır ve insanlar tarafından etkilenen toprak kullanımı ve yönetimi ile ilişkilidir. Toprakların biyokimyasal özellikleri toprak kalitesinin indikatörüdür ve son yıllarda yapılan çalışmalarda yoğun bir şekilde kullanılmaktadır. Ancak, hala biyokimyasal özelliklerin nasıl kullanılacağı konusunda bir fikir birliği bulunmamaktadır. Genellikle biyokimyasal özellikler C, N, P, ve S gibi elementlerin biyolojik döngüsü ile ilgilidir ve bu özellikler hem genel hem de spesifik biyokimyasal özellikleri içerir. Biyokimyasal özellikler, hem bireysel olarak basit göstergeler şeklinde hem de matematiksel kombinasyonlardan veya istatistik programlarının uygulamalarından geliştirilen kompleks eşitliklerin kullanıldığı çeşitli kombinasyonlar halinde kullanılabilir. Biyokimyasal özelliklerin bir toprak kalitesi indikatörü olarak kullanılmasında görülen en büyük problemler, referans değerlerin bulunmaması, bu özelliklerin toprak bozulduğunda zıt tepkiler vermesi ve değerlerin dağılımında görülen bölgesel farklılıklardır. Bu makalede biyokimyasal özelliklerin kullanımındaki bazı eğilimler gözden geçirilmiş ve bazı geleneksel toprak kalitesi ölçüm metotları tartışılmıştır.

Anahtar Kelimeler:

toprak, kalite, toprak özellikleri

Different approaches to ev aluating soil quality

Over the last 10 years soil quality has been one of the topics of greatest interests in soil science. This interest has been focused on defining the concept of soil quality and on searching for reliable ways for evaluating this quality. Soil quality definitions currently follow two concepts. The first is the capacity of the soil to function. The second is fitness for use. Capacity of the soil to function which include climate, topography, vegetation and parent material. Fitness for use is a dynamic concept and relates to soil as influenced by human use and management. Soil biochemical properties are indicators of soil quality and using over the last decade. But there is still no consensus as to how they should be used. Generally biochemical properties related to the biocycles of elements (C, N, P, and S) and these properties include both general biochemical parameters and specific biochemical parameters. Biochemical properties can be used both individually as simple indices, or in combination using complex equations derived from mathematical combinations or the applications of statistical programs. Generally the greatest problems posed by the use of biochemical properties as a soil quality indicators include, lack of reference values, the contradictory behavior shown by these properties when a soil degraded and the regional variations in expression levels. We review the trends in the biochemical properties use and discus some traditional measures of soil quality in this paper.

Keywords:

soil, quality, soil properties,

___

1. Acton, D.F.., And L.J., Gregorich (1995). "Understanding Soil Health," The Health of Our Soils: Toward Sustainable Agriculture in Canada, Acton and Gregorich (eds.).Center for Land and Biological Resources Research, Branch, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Ottowa, Ontario.
2. Alexander, E.B., AND J.C., McLaughlin (1992). "Soil Porosity as an Indicator of Forest and Rangeland Soil Condition (Compaction) and Relative Productivity." Proceedings of the Soil Quality Standards Symposium, San Antonio, Texas, Oct. 1990. Watershed and Air Management Report No. WO-WSA-2. U.S. Dept. Agr., U.S. Forest Service.
3. Anderson, T.H., Domsch, K.H., 1985. Determination of ecophysiological maintenance requirements of soil micro-organisms in a dormant state. Biology and Fertility of Soils 1,81-89.
4. Arshad, M.A., And G.M. Coen (1992). "Characterization of Soil Quality: Physical and Chemical Criteria." American Journal of Alternative Agriculture, Vol.7, Numbers land 2.
5. Bandick, A.K., Dick, R.P.,1999. Field management effects on soil enzyme activities. Soil Biology & Biochemistry 31, 1471-1479.
6. Beck, T., 1984. Methods and applications of soil microbiological analyses at the Landsensanstalt fur Bodenkultur und Pfanzenban (LBB) in Munich for the determination of some aspects of soil fertility, in: Nemes, M.P.,Kiss, S., Papacostea, P., Stefanic, G., Rusan, M. (Eds.), Fifth Symposium on Soil Biology. Roman National Society of Soil Science, Bucharest, pp. 13-20.
7. Bergstrom, D.W., Monreal, CM., King, D.J., 1998. Sensitivity of soil enzyme activities to conservation practices. Soil Science Society of America Journal 62, 1286-1295.
8. Bergstrom, D.W., Monreal, CM., Tomlin, A.D., Miller, J.J., 2000. Interpretation of soil enzyme activities in a comparison of tillage practices along a topographic and textural gradient. Canadian Journal of Soil Science 80, 71-79.
9. Chakrabarti, K., Sarkar, B., Chakraborty, A., Banik,P., Bagchi, D.K., 2000. Organic recycling for soil quality conservation in a sub-tropical plateau re gion. Journal of Agronomy and Crop Science 184, 137-142.
10.Dalal, R.C., 1998. Soil microbial biomass- what do the numbers really mean? Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture 38, 649-665.
11.Dick, R.P., Sandor, J.A., Eash, N.S., 1994. Soil enzyme activities after 1500 years of terrace agriculture in the Colca Valley, Peru. Agriculture , Ecosystems and Environment 50, 123-131.
12.Doran, J.W., 2002. Soils health and global sustainabil-ity: translating science into practice. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 88, 119-127.
13.Doran, J.W., and T.B. Parkin (1994). "Defining and Assessing Soil Quality," Defining Soil Quality for a Sustainable Environment, SSSA Spec. Pub. No. 35, Madison, WI.
14.Doran, J.W., Parkin, T.B., 1996. Quantitative indicators of soil quality: a minimum data set, in: Doran, J.W., Jones, A.J. (Eds.), Methods for Assessing Soil Quality, vol. 49. Soil Science Society of America Special Publication, Madison, pp. 25-37.
15.Doran, J.W., Safley, M., 1997. Defining and assessing soils health and sustainable productivity, in: Pankhurst, C.E., Doube, B.M., Gupta, V.V.S.R. (Eds.), Biological Indicators of Soil Health. CAB International, Wallingford, pp. 1-28.
16.Elliot, E.T., 1994. The potential use of soil biotic activity as an indicator of productivity, in: Pankhurst, C.E., Doube, B.M., Gupta, V.V.S..R., Grace, P.R. (Eds.), Soil Biota: Management in Sustainable Fanning Systems, CSIRO, Melbourne, pp. 250-256.
17.Filip, Z., 2002. International approach to assessing soil quality by ecologically-related biological parameters. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 88, 169-174.
18.Garcia, C, Roldan, A., Hernandez, T., 1997. Changes in microbial activity after abandonment of cultivation in a semiarid Mediterrancean environment. Journal of Environmental Quality 26, 285-291.
19.Hornsby, A.G., And R.G. Brown (1992). "Soil Parameters Significant to Pesticide Fate." Proceedings of the Soil Quality Standards Symposium, San Antonio, Texas, Oct. 1990. Watershed and Air Management Report No. WO-WSA-2. U.S. Dept. Agr., U.S. Forest Service.
20.Jordan, D., Kremer, R.J., Bergfield, W.A., Kim, K.Y., Cacnio, V.N., 1995. Evaluation of microbial methods as indicators of soil quality in historical agricultural fields. Biology and Fertility of Soils 19,297-302.
21.Karlen, D.L., Mausbach, M.J., Doran, J.W., Cline, R.G., Harris, R.F., Schuman, G.E., 1997. Soil qualitiy: a concept, definition, and framework for evaluation. Soil Science Society of America Journal 61,,4-10.
22.Klein, D.A., Sorensen, D.L., Redente, E.F., 1985. Soil enzymes: a predictor of reclamation potential and progress, in: Tate, R.L., Klein, D.A. (Eds.), Soil Reclamation Processes. Microbiological Analyses and Applications. Marcel Dekker, New York, pp. 273-340.
23.Lajudie, J., Pochon, J.,1956. Studies on the proteolytic activity of soils. Transactions of the VI International Soil Science Congress, part C. International Soil Science Society, Paris, pp. 271-273.
24.Langer,U., Gunther, T., 2001. Effects of alkaline dust deposits from phosphate fertilizer production on microbial biomass and enzyme activities in grassland soils. Environmental Pollution 112. 321-327.
25.Moureaux, C, 1957. Biochemical test on some Mada-gascarian soils. Memories de I'lnstitut des Sciences de Madagascar 8, 225-241.
26.Mullen, M.D., Melhom, C.G., Tyler, D.D., Duck, B.N., 1998. Biological and biochemical soil properties in no-till corn with different cover crops. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation 53, 219-224.
27.Nannipieri, P., Ceccanti, B., Grego, S., 1990. Ecological significance of biological activity in soil, in: Bollag, J.M., Stotzky, G. (Eds.), Soil Biochemistry, vol. 6. Marcel Dekker, New York, pp. 293-355.
28.Nortcliff, S., 2002. Standardisation of soil quality attributes. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 88, 161-168.
29.Olander, L.P., Vitousek, P.M., 2000. Regulation of soil phospatase and chitinase activity by N and P availability. Biogeochemistry 49, 175-190.
30.Olson, K.R. (1992). "Soil Physical Properties as a Measure of Cropland Productivity." Proceedings of the Soil Quality Standards Symposium, San Antonio, Texas, Oct. 1990. Watershed and Air Management Report No. WO-WSA-2. U.S. Dept. Agr., U.S. Forest Service.
31.Pankhurst, C.E., Hawke, B.G., McDonald, H.J., Kirby, C.A., Buckerfield, J.C., Michelsen, P., O'Brien, K.A., Gupta, V.V.S.R., Doube, B.M., 1995. E valuation of soil biological properties as potential bioindicators of soil health. Australin Journal of Experimental Agriculture 35, 1015-1028.
32.Parr, J.F., R.I Papendick, S.B. Horner, and R.E. Meyer (1992). "Soil Quality: Attributes and Relationship to Alternative and Sustainable Agriculture." American Journal of Alternative Agriculture, Vol. 7, Numbers 1 and 2.
33.Pascual, A., Garcia, C, Hernandez, T., 1999. Lasting microbiological and biocheminal effects of the addition of municipal solid waste to an arid soil. Biology and Fertility.of Soils 30, 1-6.
34.Pierce, F.J., and W.E. Larson (1993). "Developing Criteria to Evaluate Sustainable Land Management," Proceedings of the Eighth International Soil Management Work-shop: Utilization of Soil Survey Information for. Sustainable Land Use, J.M. Kimble (ed.). U.S. Dept. Agr.,Soil Cons. Serv., Lincoln, NE. May.
35.Saviozzi, A., Levi-Minzi, R., Cardelli, R., Riffaldi, R., 2001. A comparison of soil quality in adjacent cultivated, forest and native grassland soils. Plant and Soil 233, 251-259.
36.Schaffer, A., 1993. Pesticide effects on enzyme activities in the soil ecosystem, in: Bollag, J.M., Stotzky, G. (Eds.), Soil Biochemistry, vol. 8. Marcel Dekker, New York, pp. 273-340.
37.Sojka, R.E., Upchurch, D.R., 1999. Reservations regarding the soil quality concept. Soil Science Society of America Journal 63, 1039-1054.
38.Stefanic, G., 1994. Biological definition, quantifying method and agricultural, interpretation of soil fertility. Romanian Agriculture Research 2, 107-116.
39.Vance, N.C., Entry, J.A., 2000. Soil properties important to the restoration of a Shasta red barrens in the Siskiyou Mountains. Forest Ecology and Management 138, 427-434.
40.Vesterby, M., and K.S. Krupa (1993). "Effects of Urban Land Conversion on Agriculture." Urbanization and Development Effects on the Use of Natural Resources, E. Thunberg and J. Reynold, eds. Southern Rural Development Center and Farm Foundation.SRDC No. 169.)
41.Visser, S., Parkinson, D., 1992. Soil biological criteria as indicators of soil quality: soil microorganisms. American Journal of Alternative Agriculture 7,33-37.
42.Yakovchenk, V.I., Sikora, L.J., Rauffman, D.D., 1996. A biologically based indicator of soil quality. Biology and Soils 21, 245-251.