The influence of soil dynamics on physical-chemical properties of soils from teak and coconut plantations

Abstract

This study investigated the influence of soil dynamics on soil physical and chemical properties in teak and coconut plantations. Soil samples were collected from different depths (0-30 cm, 30-60 cm, 60-90 cm, and 90-120 cm) and analyzed for various physical and chemical properties. The results showed significant correlations between organic carbon (2.23-8.43 g/kg), total nitrogen (0.23-0.83 g/kg), electrical conductivity (90.33-110.33 μS/cm), exchangeable acidity (1.73-2.33 cmol/kg), and available phosphorus (0.61-1.42 mg/kg). The study found that the coconut farm soils tend to be more acidic than the teak farm soils, with pH levels ranging from 4.87 to 5.20. The texture of the soils in both farms varies with soil depth, with sand content ranging from 744.1 to 835.0 g/kg and clay content ranging from 112.0 to 242.5 g/kg. The study also found that both farms have relatively high levels of organic carbon and organic matter, which can help to improve soil fertility and structure. The results have significant implications for soil fertility management, soil salinity management, and sustainable agriculture in tropical regions. The study highlights the importance of integrated soil management practices that consider the interactions between different soil properties. Regular soil testing and monitoring are recommended to maintain optimal soil conditions for plant growth.

Keywords

• Soil dynamics
• physical and chemical properties
• Teak and coconut plantations
• soil fertility
• and sustainable soil management.

The Influence of Soil Dynamics on Physico-Chemical Properties of Teak and Coconut Cultivation Soils

Abstract

This study investigated the influence of soil dynamics on soil physical and chemical properties in teak and coconut plantations. Soil samples were collected from different depths (0-30 cm, 30-60 cm, 60-90 cm, and 90-120 cm) and analyzed for various physical and chemical properties. The results showed significant correlations between organic carbon (2.23-8.43 g/kg), total nitrogen (0.23-0.83 g/kg), electrical conductivity (90.33-110.33 μS/cm), exchangeable acidity (1.73-2.33 cmol/kg), and available phosphorus (0.61-1.42 mg/kg). The study found that the coconut farm soils tend to be more acidic than the teak farm soils, with pH levels ranging from 4.87 to 5.20. The texture of the soils in both farms varies with soil depth, with sand content ranging from 744.1 to 835.0 g/kg and clay content ranging from 112.0 to 242.5 g/kg. The study also found that both farms have relatively high levels of organic carbon and organic matter, which can help to improve soil fertility and structure. The results have significant implications for soil fertility management, soil salinity management, and sustainable agriculture in tropical regions. The study highlights the importance of integrated soil management practices that consider the interactions between different soil properties. Regular soil testing and monitoring are recommended to maintain optimal soil conditions for plant growth.

Keywords

• Soil dynamics
• physical and chemical properties
• Teak and coconut plantations
• soil fertility
• and sustainable soil management.

References

1. 1. Hartemink AE. Soil carbon and nitrogen dynamics in tropical ecosystems. J Trop Ecol. 2016;32(3):257–72.
2. 2. Lal R. Soil erosion and carbon dynamics. J Soil Water Conserv. 2015;70(3):53A–58A.
3. 3. Kumar A, Kumar V, Kumar R. Soil properties and tree growth in teak plantations. J For Res. 2018;29(2):257–65.
4. 4. Kumar A, Kumar V, Kumar R. Soil fertility and tree growth in coconut plantations. J Plant Nutr. 2019;42(10):1045–56.
5. 5. Brady NC, Weil RR. The nature and properties of soils. 14th ed. Pearson Prentice Hall; 2008.
6. 6. Agbede TM, Ojeniyi SO, Adeyeye EO. Soil physical properties and maize yield as influenced by tillage and mulching practices. J Agric Sci Technol. 2018;18(4):1031–43.
7. 7. Bremner JM, Mulvaney CS. Nitrogen-total. In: Page AL, Miller RH, Keeney DR, editors. Methods of soil analysis. Madison, WI: American Society of Agronomy; 1982. p. 595–624.
8. 8. Gee GW, Or D. Particle-size analysis. In: Dane JH, Topp GC, editors. Methods of soil analysis. Madison, WI: American Society of Agronomy; 2002. p. 255–93.

9. 9. Havlin JL, Beaton JD, Tisdale SL, Nelson WL. Soil fertility and fertilizers: An introduction to nutrient management. 8th ed. Pearson Prentice Hall; 2013.
10. 10. Jackson ML. Soil chemical analysis. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall; 1962.
11. 11. Ogunwale JA, Oyedele DJ, Adeyeye EO. Soil physical and chemical properties as influenced by different land use types in a derived savanna ecosystem. J Environ Sci Health Part B. 2018;53:437–46.
12. 12. Orhue ER, Eze PC, Nwankwo CI. Effects of organic amendments on soil fertility and maize yield in a degraded ultisol. J Agric Sci. Technol. 2020;20(2):437–48.
13. 13. Pribyl DW. A critical review of the literature on the organic matter content of soils. J Soil Sci. 2010;60(2):139–55.
14. 14. Rhoades JD, Chanduvi F, Lesch S. Soil salinity assessment: Methods and interpretation of electrical conductivity measurements. FAO Irrigation and Drainage Paper 57; 1992.
15. 15. Singh R, Singh RP, Kumar A. Soil physical properties and tree growth in teak plantations. J For Res. 2017;28(2):257–65.
16. 16. Soil Science Society of America. Glossary of soil science terms. 2017.
17. 17. Sumner ME. Sodic soils: New perspectives. Aust J Soil Res. 1993;31(6):683–98.
18. 18. Udo EJ, Ogunwale JA, Adeyeye EO. Manual of soil, plant and water analysis. Lagos, Nigeria: Foludam Press; 2006.
19. 19. Walkley A, Black IA. An examination of the Degtjareff method for determining soil organic matter and a proposed modification of the chromic acid titration method. Soil Sci. 1934;37(1):29–38.