Abstract

This study was done in Morogoro and Mbeya regions of Tanzania to classify and characterize their respective soils. Representative pedons (SUARAT-P1 and UYOLE-P1) were dug and described using FAO guidelines clarifying morphological features, physico-chemical properties and genesis. The representative pedons were geo-referenced using Global Positioning System (GPS) receiver. A total of nine (9) genetic soil horizons were identified from both sites and samples from each horizon collected for physical and chemical analyses. Soils from both sites were very deep and topsoil moist colors ranged from hue of 7.5YR to 10YR with chroma of less than 3 in SUARAT-P1 and UYOLE-P1 pedons. Soil structure ranged from strong fine crumbs in topsoils to medium coarse sub-angular blocks in subsoils of SUARAT-P1 while UYOLE-P1 had weak fine sub-angular blocks in topsoils and subsoils. The SUARAT-P1 had sandy clay (SC) texture in topsoil and clay texture in subsoil while UYOLE-P1 had sandy loam (SL) in topsoil and sand clay loam (SCL) in subsoil. Soil reaction were slightly acid to very strongly acid in SUARAT-P1 (pH 6.54 - 4.46) whereas UYOLE-P1 were slightly acid to neutral in subsoil horizons (pH 6.35 – 7.32). Organic carbon ranged from very low to low (0.12- 0.95%) in SUARAT-P1 and from very low to medium (0.47 – 1.5%) in UYOLE-P1. Nitrogen levels were very low to low (0.05 - 0.12%) in both sites whereas available P ranged from low (0.30 mg kg-1) to medium (8.55 mg kg-1) in both pedons. CEC of SUARAT-P1 was medium ranging from 12.4 to 23.2 cmol(c) kg-1, whereas UYOLE-P1 was medium to high (15 – 34 cmol(c) kg-1). In SUARAT-P1, topsoil BS was high (> 50%) and low (< 50%) in the subsoil while UYOLE-P1 registered high BS throughout its profile depth. As diagnostic horizons for soil classification, the SUARAT-P1 had an ochric epipedon overlying a kandic horizon and classified according to USDA Soil Taxonomy as Typic Kandiustults, while UYOLE-P1 had an ochric epipedon over a cambic horizon and was named as Andic Dystrudepts corresponding respectively to Haplic Lixisols and Eutric Andic Cambisols in the WRB for Soil Resources. The results have indicated that, studied soils are less fertile with possible reconstitution through land and crop managements which include but not limited to no-tilling or conservation tillage, manuring and proper fertilizer application; residue retention, possible fallowing, liming for potential buffering of soil pH especially at SUARAT-P1 and crop rotation and intercropping with leguminous crops.

Highlights

  • Soils are characteristically differing in their level of fertility and other related chemical and physical aspects depending on locality and their natural evolution [1]

  • Soil Taxonomy (ST) defines soil as “a natural body that is formed by solid particles, Said Hamadi Mohamed et al.: Pedological Characterization and Classification of Selected Soils of Morogoro and Mbeya Regions of Tanzania natural gases and liquid materials that occur on the land surface, occupying space, and is portrayed by one or both of the following: layers and, or horizons, that are distinguishable from the initial material as a result of additions, losses, transfers, and transformations of energy and matter or the ability to support rooted plants in a natural environment [4]

  • Pedon UYOLE-P1 had a coarser texture characterized by a sandy loam topsoil overlying sand clay loam to sandy loam/loamy sand subsoil

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Soils are characteristically differing in their level of fertility and other related chemical and physical aspects depending on locality and their natural evolution [1]. For example soils originating from volcanic ash materials have high anion retention capacity and humus-rich horizons [2]. Kalala et al [3] reported other soils in Kilombero Valley which developed from alluvial materials deposited by floods during rainy seasons behaving differently. Formation of soils is essentially contributed by several important factors: the native parent materials, climate, topography, biological components and time [3]. Their influence on soil types varies from one location to another and depends on accumulated individual interaction of each factor [5]

Methods
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call