Simplifying the Determination of Aggregate Stability Indicators of Mollisols

Aggregate stability (AS) is a very sensitive soil physical health indicator. The complexity of its determination discourages frequent monitoring. We hypothesized that a reduction of steps to determine AS would yield good AS indicators. We evaluated 196 samples from a range of Mollisols from sandy- t...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Communications in Soil Science and Plant Analysis 2020-02, Vol.51 (4), p.481-490
Main Authors: García, Gisela Vanesa, Tourn, Santiago Néstor, Roldán, María Florencia, Mandiola, Mariana, Studdert, Guillermo Alberto
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Aggregates
change of macroaggregate mass
change of mean weight diameter
Clay
Environmental monitoring
Indicators
Macroaggregate mass
mean weight diameter
Soil
Soil stability
Soil testing
Soils
Submerging
Surface layers
Testing laboratories
Wetting
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Aggregate stability (AS) is a very sensitive soil physical health indicator. The complexity of its determination discourages frequent monitoring. We hypothesized that a reduction of steps to determine AS would yield good AS indicators. We evaluated 196 samples from a range of Mollisols from sandy- to clay-loam surface texture from the southeastern Buenos Aires province, Argentina. Six AS indicators were evaluated: aggregate mean weight diameter (MWD) after capillary wetting (CW) (MWD CW ), MWD after sudden immersion in water (VW) (MWD VW ), change of MWD (ΔMWD), remnant mass of macroaggregates (MAm) after CW (MAm CW ), MAm after VW (MAm VW ), and change of MAm between VW and CW (ΔMAm VW-CW ). Determining ΔMWD requires six sievings, MWD requires three, ΔMAm VW-CW requires two, and MAm requires only one. Indicators after CW (MWD CW and MAm CW ) were not good AS indicators. Likewise, those determined as a difference between CW and VW (ΔMWD and ΔMAm VW-CW ) failed to distinguish contrasting AS situations making them unfeasible as universal AS indicators. However, MAm VW explained 99% of MWD VW variability and adequately distinguished among AS situations. With only one sieving, a good indicator of AS could be obtained, and this would encourage the adoption by soil testing laboratories and frequent soil physical health monitoring by farmers.
ISSN:0010-3624
1532-2416
1532-4133
DOI:10.1080/00103624.2020.1717513