Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorMutuku, E.A.
dc.contributor.authorVanlauwe, B.
dc.contributor.authorRoobroeck, D.
dc.contributor.authorBoeckx, P.
dc.contributor.authorCornelis, W.M.
dc.date.accessioned2021-08-02T10:02:21Z
dc.date.available2021-08-02T10:02:21Z
dc.date.issued2021-07-10
dc.identifier.citationMutuku, E.A., Vanlauwe, B., Roobroeck, D., Boeckx, P. & Cornelis, W.M. (2021). Visual soil examination and evaluation in the sub-humid and semi-arid regions of Kenya. Soil and Tillage Research, 213: 105135, 1-17.
dc.identifier.issn0167-1987
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12478/7193
dc.description.abstractSoil quality is indicated by the interaction of physical, chemical and biological soil properties. The importance of physical properties, for example soil structure, lies in the fact that they enhance chemical and biological soil functions. Consequently, periodic assessment of structural quality is an important aspect of soil quality management. Quantitative soil properties can be used as indirect indicator parameters for soil structural changes. However, measuring these properties is not applicable, especially for smallholder farmers who cannot afford to pay for laboratory tests. This study contributes to the validation of visual field assessments by comparing the performance of such methods on ‘tropical’ soils. The study was conducted across two regions with contrasting soil types and land use, in the sub-humid with clay Nitiosl and semi-arid with sandy loam Cambisol locations of Kenya. At both locations, visual methods were tested on soils under cropland and under natural forests (NF). Under the cropland, evaluation sites were selected from researcher and farmer managed sites. Visual scores from visual soil assessment (VSA), visual evaluation of soil structure (VESS) and visual evaluation of soil structure using the core (coreVESS) were correlated with soil physical and chemical properties measured in the laboratory. Under the clay Nitisol, absolute values of Pearson r between VSA scores and laboratory measured soil properties ranged from 0.84 to 0.54, for VESS, they varied between 0.75 and 0.37 while for coreVESS, they ranged from 0.84 to 0.60. For the sandy loam Cambisol, absolute Pearson r values between laboratory measured soil properties and VSA scores ranged from 0.83 to 0.29, the r values were between 0.88 and 0.45 for VESS and between 0.81 and 0.40 for coreVESS. From the obtained correlations, we concluded that the visual methods tested are capable of distinguishing structural quality due to different land use and are therefore suitable for assessing soil structural quality of tropical soils in Africa. Management thresholds were determined using bulk density (BD). The target value for good soil quality (Sq<2) for the Kibugu Nitisol was BD = 0.0012*SOC+0.6476 (r = 0.71; SOC is soil organic carbon), while the trigger and remediation values were 0.93 Mg m−3 (Sq = 2) and 0.99 Mg m−3 (Sq = 3), respectively. In the absence of SOC data, the target mean BD for Sq<2 is 0.79 Mg m−3. For Machang’a Cambisol, the target, trigger and remediation values were 1.48 Mg m−3 (Sq = 2), 1.56 Mg m−3 (Sq = 3) and 1.64 Mg m−3 (Sq = 4), respectively.
dc.description.sponsorshipGhent University
dc.description.sponsorshipVLIR UOS-Global
dc.description.sponsorshipInternational Institute of Tropical Agriculture
dc.format.extent1-17
dc.language.isoen
dc.subjectSoil quality
dc.subjectSoil structure
dc.subjectSoil
dc.subjectEvaluation
dc.subjectTropical soils
dc.subjectChemicophysical properties
dc.titleVisual soil examination and evaluation in the sub-humid and semi-arid regions of Kenya
dc.typeJournal Article
cg.contributor.crpMaize
cg.contributor.crpRoots, Tubers and Bananas
cg.contributor.affiliationGhent University
cg.contributor.affiliationInternational Institute of Tropical Agriculture
cg.coverage.regionAfrica
cg.coverage.regionEast Africa
cg.coverage.countryKenya
cg.coverage.hubCentral Africa Hub
cg.researchthemeNatural Resource Management
cg.identifier.bibtexciteidMUTUKU:2021a
cg.isijournalISI Journal
cg.authorship.typesCGIAR and advanced research institute
cg.iitasubjectAflatoxin
cg.iitasubjectAgronomy
cg.iitasubjectIntegrated Soil Fertility Management
cg.iitasubjectNatural Resource Management
cg.iitasubjectSoil Information
cg.journalSoil & Tillage Research
cg.accessibilitystatusLimited Access
cg.reviewstatusPeer Review
cg.usagerightslicenseCopyrighted; all rights reserved
cg.targetaudienceScientists
cg.identifier.doihttps://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.still.2021.105135
cg.iitaauthor.identifierbernard vanlauwe: 0000-0001-6016-6027
cg.iitaauthor.identifierDries Roobroeck: 0000-0003-3176-4444
cg.futureupdate.descriptionPagination
cg.futureupdate.requiredYes
cg.identifier.issue105135
cg.identifier.volume213


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record