Back to all available

Effects of land use and soil types on soil quality based on soil carbon management index and aggregate stability in the Upper Awash River Basin, Ethiopia

agricultural-science
environmental-sciences
soil-science
natural-resource-management
environmental-impacts

Abstract

Soil carbon management index (CMI) and aggregate stability (AS) are key indicators of soil quality and sustainability, as they affect soil fertility, nutrient supply, moisture retention, carbon sequestration, and resistance to soil erosion. T his study aimed to assess the interactive effects of land use (LU) and soil type (ST) on soil quality on the basis of the soil CMI and AS in the Melka–Kuntrie watershed of the Upper Awash River Basin, Ethiopia. A total of 36 composite surface soil samples (0–20 cm depth) were collected in triplicate from adjacent forestland (FL), grazing land (GL), and cultivated land (CL) within a watershed dominated by Nitisols, Vertisols, Luvisols, and Leptosols. The samples were analyzed for selected physicochemical properties. The results indicate that the soil properties , especially the soil chemical properties, were significantly affected by LU, ST, and their interaction, whereas ST had no significant effect on the soil aggregates or CMI. Land use had a strong effect (p<0.001) on CMI and AS, with FL having the highest proportion of macroaggregates (55.80%), followed by GL (54.01%) and CL (38.06%). Similarly, the mean CMI was lower in CL (10.72%) and intermediate in GL (36.20%) than in forest soils. There has been a clear correlation between CMI and selected soil properties: a positive and strong correlation with soil pH, total nitrogen (TN), available phosphorus (AvP), potassium (K), cation exchange capacity (CEC), and soil organic carbon (SOC) fractions. A negative correlation was observed between the CMI and the soil bulk density and clay content. This study provides valuable information for soil quality management across land use types and soil reference groups. Considering the strong interactions between soil type and land use type, sustainable soil management practices need to be disaggregated by soil type and under different land use practices; blanket recommendations may not enhance soil quality. Therefore, future studies should include more indicators for indexing soil quality and develop corresponding soil quality maps for precision farming and to make the information more accessible and interpretable for decision-makers.
Ask to review this manuscript

Notes for potential reviewers

  • Volunteering is not a guarantee that you will be asked to review. There are many reasons: reviewers must be qualified, there should be no conflicts of interest, a minimum of two reviewers have already accepted an invitation, etc.
  • This is NOT OPEN peer review. The review is single-blind, and all recommendations are sent privately to the Academic Editor handling the manuscript. All reviews are published and reviewers can choose to sign their reviews.
  • What happens after volunteering? It may be a few days before you receive an invitation to review with further instructions. You will need to accept the invitation to then become an official referee for the manuscript. If you do not receive an invitation it is for one of many possible reasons as noted above.
  • PeerJ does not judge submissions based on subjective measures such as novelty, impact or degree of advance. Effectively, reviewers are asked to comment on whether or not the submission is scientifically and technically sound and therefore deserves to join the scientific literature. Our Peer Review criteria can be found on the "Editorial Criteria" page - reviewers are specifically asked to comment on 3 broad areas: "Basic Reporting", "Experimental Design" and "Validity of the Findings".
  • Reviewers are expected to comment in a timely, professional, and constructive manner.
  • Until the article is published, reviewers must regard all information relating to the submission as strictly confidential.
  • When submitting a review, reviewers are given the option to "sign" their review (i.e. to associate their name with their comments). Otherwise, all review comments remain anonymous.
  • All reviews of published articles are published. This includes manuscript files, peer review comments, author rebuttals and revised materials.
  • Each time a decision is made by the Academic Editor, each reviewer will receive a copy of the Decision Letter (which will include the comments of all reviewers).

If you have any questions about submitting your review, please email us at [email protected].