Determination of the Effect of Different Organic Fertilizers Applications on Soil Quality Using the SMAF Model

Abstract

Soil is an essential resource for terrestrial life. That’s why it is vital to use it without causing any harm to its ecological and economic functions. This current study was carried out to investigate the effect of different organic materials (farmyard manure, vermicompost, leonardite, rose pulp, biochar, biogas waste, seaweed) on soil quality using the SMAF model in Isparta province, which has a semi-arid ecological characteristic. Thirteen soil quality indicators were used to determine the physical, chemical, and biological soil quality of the SMAF model. In this study, twelve indicators were used, which were: bulk density, aggregate stability, available water content, water-filled pore space, organic carbon, pH, electrical conductivity, sodium adsorption ratio, available potassium and phosphorus, microbial biomass carbon, and ßeta-Glucosidase enzyme activity. In general, the applied organic wastes had a positive effect on the quality characteristics of the soils. The lowest quality was determined in the control (50%) and seaweed (51%) applications, while the highest quality increase was determined in the rose pulp application (60%) and vermicompost application (56%). Other applications did not cause significant changes according to SMAF scoring. The most important effects of low quality scores were determined as biological quality indicators. According to the results obtained, organic waste application for sustainable soil management has an important place in increasing the physical, chemical, and biological soil quality properties of agricultural soils, especially in the arid and semi-arid areas of our country, as well as increasing the general soil quality index values.

Keywords

• Organic fertilizer
• SMAF model
• Soil quality

Farklı Organik Atık Uygulamasının Toprak Kalitesi Üzerine Etkisinin SMAF Modeli ile Belirlenmesi

Öz

Toprak, karasal yaşam için önemli bir kaynaktır. Bu nedenle toprakları, ekolojik ve ekonomik işlevlerinden herhangi bir zarar vermeden kullanmak hayati önem taşımaktadır. Bu çalışma, yarı kurak ekolojik özelliğe sahip Isparta ilinde SMAF modeli kullanılarak farklı organik materyallerin (ahır gübresi, vermikompost, leonardit, gül posası, biyokömür, biyogaz atığı, deniz yosunu) toprak kalitesi üzerine olan etkisini araştırmak amacıyla gerçekleştirilmiştir. SMAF toprakların fiziksel, kimyasal ve biyolojik toprak kalitesinin yanı sıra genel toprak kalitesinin ortaya konulmasında on üç adet toprak kalite indikatörü kullanılmaktadır. Bu çalışmada ise hacim ağırlığı, agregat stabilitesi, su dolu gözenek hacmi, yarayışlı su içeriği, organik karbon, pH, elektriksel iletkenlik, sodyum adsorpsiyon oranı, yarayışlı potasyum ve fosfor, mikrobiyal biyokütle karbonu ve βeta-Glukosidaz enzim aktivitesinden oluşan on iki indikatör kullanılmıştır. Uygulanan organik atıkların geneli, toprakların kalite özellikleri üzerinde olumlu etkide bulunmuş olup, en düşük kalite, kontrol (% 50) ve deniz yosunu (% 51) uygulaması ile belirlenirken en yüksek kalite artışı gül posası uygulaması (% 60) ile vermikompost uygulamasında (% 56) belirlenmiştir. Diğer uygulamalar SMAF skorlamalarına göre önemli değişimlere neden olmamıştır. Kalite skorlarındaki düşüklüğün en önemli etkisi biyolojik kalite indikatörleri olarak belirlenmiştir. Elde edilen sonuçlara göre, özellikle ülkemizin kurak ve yarı kurak alanlarında dağılım gösteren düşük veya orta seviyede bulunan tarım topraklarının, toprak fiziksel, kimyasal ve biyolojik toprak kalite özelliklerinin yanı sıra genel toprak kalite indeks değerlerinin yükseltilmesinde sürdürülebilir bir toprak yönetimi için organik atık uygulamasının önemli bir yer aldığı görülmektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Organik atık
• SMAF modeli
• Toprak kalitesi

References

1. Alaboz, P., Işıldar, A. A., Müjdeci, M., & Şenol, H. (2017). Effects of different vermicompost and soil moisture levels on pepper (Capsicum annuum) grown and some soil properties. Yuzuncu Yıl University Journal of Agricultural Sciences 27, 30-36.
2. Alaboz, P., Demir, S., Dengiz, O., & Öz, İ. (2021). Effect of biogas waste applications on soil moisture characteristic curve and assessment of the predictive accuracy of the Van Genuchten model. Eurasian Journal of Soil Science 10(2), 142-149.
3. Andrews, S. S., Karlen, D., & Cambardella, C. A. (2004). The soil management assessment framework: a quantitative soil quality evaluation method. Soil Science Society of America Journal 68, 1945-1962.
4. Arcak S, Kütük, A. C., Haktanır, K., & Çaycı, G. (1997). The effects of tea wastes on soil enzyme activity and nitrification. Journal of Engineering Sciences 3(1), 261-266.
5. Blake, G. R., & Hardge. K. H. (1986). Methods of Soil Analysis. Bulk Density, Part1. 2nd Ed. Agronomy 9. ASA and SSSA, Madison. pp. 363-375.
6. Burt. R. (Ed.). (2014). Soil survey field and laboratory methods manual. United States Department of Agriculture. Natural Resources Conservation Service. National Soil Survey Center. Natural Resources Conservation Service. Kellog Soil Survey Laboratory.
7. Chaudhari, P. R., Ahire, D. V., Chkravarty, M., & Maity, S. (2014). Electrical conductivity as a tool for determining the physical properties of Indian soils. Int. J. Sci. Res. Publ, 4(4).
8. De la Rosa, D., Anaya-Romero, M., Diaz-Pereira, E., Heredia, N., & Shahbazi, F. (2009). Soilspecific agro- ecological strategies for sustainable land use – A case study by using MicroLEIS DSS in Sevilla Province (Spain), Land Use Policy 26, 1055–1065

9. Dengiz, O. (2020). Soil quality index for paddy fields based on standard scoring functions and weight allocation method. Archives of Agronomy and Soil Science 66(3), 301-315. Doi: 10.1080/03650340.2019.1610880.
10. Doran, J. W. (2002). Soil health and global sustainability: translating science into practice. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment 88(2), 119-127.
11. Ekberli, İ., & Dengiz, O. (2016). Bazı inceptisol ve entisol alt grup topraklarının fizikokimyasal özellikleriyle isısal yayınım katsayısı arasındaki regresyon ilişkilerin belirlenmesi. Toprak Su Dergisi 5(2), 1-10.
12. Gliński, J., Horabik, J., & Lipiec, J. (Eds.). (2011). Encyclopedia of agrophysics (pp. 264-267). Berlin, Germany: Springer. Gugino, B. K., Abawi, G. S., Idowu, O. J., Schindelbeck, R. R., Smith, L. L., Thies, J. E., Wolfe, D. W. & Van Es, H. M. (2009). Cornell soil health assessment training manual. Cornell University College of Agriculture and Life Sciences.
13. Kemper, W. D., & Rosenau, R. C. (1986). Aggregate stability and size distribution. In: Klute A, editor. Methods of soil analysis. Part 1. Physical and mineralogical methods. Madison, WI. p 425-42.
14. Klute, A., 1986. Water Retention: Laboratory Methods. Methods of Soil Analysis. Part1. 2nd Ed. Agronomy 9. Am. Soc. Agron., 635-660, Madison.
15. Kuzucu, M. (2019). Effects of organic fertilizer application on yield, soil organic matter and porosity on kilis oil olive variety under arid conditions. Eurasian Journal of Forest Science 7(1), 77-83.
16. Meteoroloji Genel Müdürlüğü (MGM), (2021). Erişim tarihi: 20.10.2021. http://www. mgm.gov.tr/ veridegerlendirme/yillik-toplam-yagis verileri .aspx #sfU.
17. Mueller, L., Schindler, U., Behrendt, A., Eulenstein, F., Dannowski, R., Schlindwein, S. L., & Shepherd, T.G., (2007). Smolentseva, E., Rogasik, J., The Muencheberg Soil Quality Rating (SQR). Field Manual for Detecting and Assessing Properties and Limitations of Soils for Cropping and Grazing, Draft, Nov., 102 pp.
18. Müjdeci, M., Demircioğlu, A. C., & Alaboz, P. (2020). The effects of farmyard manure and green manure applications on some soil physical properties. Yüzüncü Yıl Üniversitesi Tarım Bilimleri Dergisi 30(1), 9-17.
19. Negiş, H., & Şeker, C. (2019). Improving Soil Quality Card For Soil Sustainability in Konya, Turkey. 6th International Conference on Sustainable Agriculture and Environment October 3-5, 2019, City of KONYA – TURKEY. Proceedings Book, Pages 183-185.
20. Olsen, S. R., Cole, C. V., Watanabe, F. S., & Dean, L. A. (1954). Estimation of available phosphorus in soils by extraction with sodium bicarbonate US Dept. Agric. Cric. 939.
21. Öhlinger, R. (1993). Bestimmung des Biomasse-Kohlenstoffs mittels Fumigation-Exstraktion. In:Schinner, F., Öhlinger, R., Kandler, E. & Margesin, R. (eds.). Bodenbiologische Arbeitsmethoden. 2. Auflage. Springer Verlag. Berlin, Heidelberg.
22. Özenç, N., Özenç, D. B., & Çaycı, G. (2006). Effects of Hazelnut husk compost, peat, farmyard, and chicken manure on soil organic matter and N nutrition and hazelnut yield. 18 th international soil meeting (ism) on soil sustaining life on earth, managing soil and technology, 22-26 May, 2006, Şanlıurfa, Turkey.
23. Pacci, S., Kaya, N. S., Dengiz, O., & Turan, İ. D. (2021).Van Havzası İçerisinde Yer Alan Mera Arazilerinde SMAF Modeli Kullanılarak Toprak Kalitesinin Değerlendirilmesi. Anadolu Tarım Bilimleri Dergisi 36(2), 301-316.
24. Şeker, C., Özaytekin, H. H., Negiş, H., Gümüş, İ., Dedeoğlu, M., Atmaca, E., & Karaca, Ü. (2017). Assessment of soil quality index for wheat and sugar beet cropping systems on an entisol in Central Anatolia. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment 189(4), 135.
25. Şenol, H., Alaboz, P., Demir, S., & Dengiz, O. (2020). Computational intelligence applied to soil quality index using GIS and geostatistical approaches in semiarid ecosystem. Arabian Journal of Geosciences 13(23), 1-20.
26. 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. S.S.S.of America Inc. Publisher, Madison,Wisconsin pp159-164.
27. Wu, L., Jiang, Y., Zhao, F., He, X., Liu, H., & Yu, K. (2020). Increased organic fertilizer application and reduced chemical fertilizer application affect the soil properties and bacterial communities of grape rhizosphere soil. Scientific Reports 10(1), 1-10.