CHAPTER conditioned over periods of time”(Negi;2000). The

CHAPTER7: CHARACTERIZATION OF SOIL PROPERTIES  7.1INTRODUCTION:The material in which theplants grow is known as Soil, which has been derived from the Latin word”Solum”. Soil is defined as, an independent body in nature with a uniquemorphology from the surface down to the parent material as expressed by thesample profiles (Tan; 1995).

The study of soil is known as the ‘Pedology'(pedos means earth) or ‘Edaphology’ (edaphos means soil). Soil may also bedefined as the part of the earth crust in which humus is present (Shukla andChandel; 1991). Soil can also be defined as  “A dynamic natural body on the surface ofearth, in which plants grow composed of materials and organic materials andliving forms.

Best services for writing your paper according to Trustpilot

Premium Partner
From $18.00 per page
4,8 / 5
4,80
Writers Experience
4,80
Delivery
4,90
Support
4,70
Price
Recommended Service
From $13.90 per page
4,6 / 5
4,70
Writers Experience
4,70
Delivery
4,60
Support
4,60
Price
From $20.00 per page
4,5 / 5
4,80
Writers Experience
4,50
Delivery
4,40
Support
4,10
Price
* All Partners were chosen among 50+ writing services by our Customer Satisfaction Team

”                                                                                      Or  “The collection of natural bodies, occupyingparts of the earth’s surface that support plants, and that have properties dueto the integrated effect of climate and living matter acting upon parentmaterial, as conditioned over periods of time”(Negi;2000).The origin of soils, theirposition as the boundary between the lithosphere and the biosphere ,and theirpeculiar structure and composition, which make them so different from othernatural bodies, means that they must be treated as a complicated biogeochemicalsystem (Victorova;1986)Sacred forests play a unique role in soilconservation. Due to rapid litter decomposition rate, nutrient release into thesoil of these forests is very high. The soil itself has little nutrients tosupport the large biomass of the sacred grove. The knowledge of climatic conditions and forest soilof any region help to understand the growth, reproduction, and composition offorest vegetation. The innermost theory for ecology is that climate exerts thedominant control on the spatial distribution of the major vegetation types on aglobal scale, while on a smaller scale, the contribution of secondary factorssuch as soil type or topography are important as well (Woodward, 1987,Whittaker, 1975). Numerous studies have attempted to correlate climaxvegetation and soils (Daubenmire and Daubenmire 1968; Daubenmire 1979; Tisdaleand Bramble-Brodahl 1983, Sexton 1986; Neiman 1988; Jensen et al.,  1990; Celine et al.

, , 2017). In addition, the soiland vegetation have a complex interrelation because they develop together overa long period. Soil analysis shows the forest types and plant density of anyarea because the different species of plants need different types of soils. Theselective absorption of nutrient elements by different plant species and theircapacity to return them to the soil brings about changes in soil properties(Singh et al.

,  1986). Presence of plant elements in soil would give goodinformation towards the knowledge of nutrient cycling and bio-chemical cycle inthe soil–plant ecosystem (Pandit and Thampan 1988, Binkley and Giardina 1998).Moreover, different tree species can differ significantly in their influence onsoil properties as well as soil fertility (Augusto et al.,  2002). Theproperties of the soil are the important factor for the growth of the plants.Among them, the most important factor is soil fertility, i.e.

, the essentialnutrients available in the soil, for the growth of plants. Soil as a stable andrenewable resource is a foundation of organisms’ survival. It is considered asa part of an ecosystem, having specific properties and varying from one regionto another. Some of these properties including the percentage of nitrogen,phosphorus, potassium, soil acidity, soil salinity, and pH affect vegetationcover in an ecosystem (Zarinkafsh, 1987).

The sporadic successes in correlatingclimate and soils with vegetation appear to be locally significant, but are notapplicable elsewhere. Johnson and Simon (1987) had some success in broadrelational correlations. The forest of Garhwal region of central Himalaya hasvast variations in the climate, topography, and soil conditions, which form avery complex ecosystem.  Since, thevegetation zones in the Garhwal region clearly reflect edaphic and climaticvariations (Bhatta 1981; Bhatt and Purohit 2009) and at the same time theknowledge of physical and chemical properties of soils and climatic conditionsof different forest types of temperate region of Garhwal and Kumaun region regionof central Himalaya is meagre (Upreti etal.

, , 2016). Therefore, to study adequate theoretical and practicalknowledge of climatic, various forest soils, and the complex relationshipbetween the lives of various plants of the forest is necessary to study.However, the present study was undertaken to understand the effects of climaticvariables and the soil properties in relation to the forest structure indifferent forest types of moist temperate Taknaur reserve forest of UttarkashiForest Division of Central Himalaya, India.7.2 Result and discussion   7.2.1Soil Physical properties ofsacred forest:   Thesand percentage ranged from 14.

90 to 73.49.The percentage of sand was maximumin sacred Ratwali forest at 61-90cm depth and minimum in sacred Thal kedarforest at 0-10 cm depth. The Silt percentage ranged 15.82 to 34.71, maximum insacred Betal forest at 61-90 cm depth and minimum in sacred Ratwali forest at61-90cm depth. The sacred Thal kedar had maximum clay percentage viz.

53.16 at0-10cm depth and sacred Ratwali forest had minimum percentage viz. 10.69 at61-90cm depth.

Sacred Thal kedar forest had maximum moisture content (37.16) at0-10cm depth and sacred Pasupatinath nath forest had minimum moisture contendviz. 18.29 at 31-60cm depth. Maximum Water holding capacity recorded in sacred Thalkedar forest (68.74) at 0-10 cm depth while minimum in sacred Ratwali forest(31.24) at 31-60 cm depth. Maximum bulk density recorded in sacred Ratwaliforest (1.

34 g/cm3) at 61-90cm depth and minimum recorded in sacredPasupatinath forest (1.20 g/cm3) at 0-10cm depth. Sacred Thal kedarforest had maximum porosity (54.85) at 0-10cm depth while sacred Ratwali foresthad minimum porosity (48.59) at 61-90cm depth (Table 7.1 fig 7.1-7.

7).7.2.2 Soil Physicalproperties of Non- sacred forest:   Thesand percentage ranged from 30.73 to 56.20.The percentage of sand was maximumin Non- sacred Betal forest at 61-90cm depth and minimum in Non- sacred Kalikaforest at 61-90 cm depth.

The Silt percentage ranged 22.2 to 39.51, maximum in non-sacredKalika forest at 61-90 cm depth and minimum in non-sacred Thal kedar forest at31-60cm depth. The Non- sacred Chamunda forest had maximum clay percentage viz.39.3 at 0-10cm depth and Non- sacred Pasupatinath forest had minimum percentageviz. 14.

68 at 31-60cm depth. Non- sacred Ratwali forest had maximum moisturecontent (18.72) at 61-90 cm depth and Non- sacred Ratwali forest had minimummoisture contend viz. 7.51 at 0-10cm depth. Maximum Water holding capacityrecorded in non-sacred Kalika forest (54.34) at 0-10 cm depth while minimum in non-sacredPasupatinath forest (22.

0) at 31-60 cm depth. Maximum bulk density recorded in Non-sacred Ratwali forest (1.43 g/cm3) at 61-90cm depth and minimumrecorded in Non- sacred Pasupatinath forest (1.30 g/cm3) at 0-10cmdepth. Non- sacred Thal kedar forest had maximum porosity (50.

63) at 0-10cmdepth while Non- sacred forest Ratwali had minimum porosity (44.80) at 61-90cmdepth. (Table 7.2, Fig 7.1-7.7).

7.2.3 Soil Chemicalproperties of sacred forest:   ThepH ranged from 5.4 to 7.4 recorded maximum in sacred Ratwali forest at 0-10cmdepth and minimum in sacred Betal forest at 61-90cm depth. The organic matterpercentage ranged 1.8 to 3.86, maximum in sacred Kalika forest at 0-10 cm depthand minimum in sacred Pasupatinath forest at 61-90cm depth.

The sacred Kalikaforest had maximum carbon percentage (2.24%) at 0-10cm depth and sacred Pasupatinathforest had minimum percentage (1.05%) at 61-90cm depth.

Sacred Pasupatinathforest had maximum available nitrogen (326kg/h) at 0-10cm depth and minimum(200kg/h) at 31-60cm depth. Maximum potassium recorded in sacred Kalika forest(0.025) at 0-10 cm depth while minimum in sacred Thal kedar forest (0.001) at61-90 cm depth. Maximum phosphorus recorded in Sacred Ratwali forest (0.014) at0-10cm depth and minimum recorded in Sacred Thal kedar forest (0.003) at61-90cm depth.

(Table 7.3, Fig 7.8-7.13).7.2.4 Soil Chemicalproperties of Non- sacred forest:   ThepH ranged from 4.8 to 7.

5 recorded maximum in Non- sacred Kalika forest at31-60cm depth and minimum in Non- sacred Chamunda forest at 11-30cm depth. Theorganic matter percentage ranged 1.14 to 3.76, maximum in non-sacred Betalforest at 0-10 cm depth and minimum in non-sacred Ratwali forest at 61-90cmdepth. The Non- sacred Betal forest had maximum carbon percentage (2.19%) at0-10cm depth and Non- sacred Ratwali forest had minimum percentage (0.66%) at61-90cm depth.

Non- sacred Pasupatinath forest had maximum available nitrogen(250.8 kg/h) at 0-10cm depth and minimum in Non- sacred Thal kedar forest(134.4kg/h) at 31-60cm depth. Maximum potassium recorded in non-sacred Betalforest (0.009) at 0-10 cm depth while minimum in non-sacred Pasupatinath forest(0.001) at 61-90 cm depth.

Maximum phosphorus recorded in Non- sacred Kalikaforest (0.014) at 11-30cm depth and minimum recorded in Non- sacred Ratwaliforest (0.001) at 31-60cm depth (Table 7.4, Fig 7.8-7.13).7.

2.5 Correlation7.2.5.1 Kalika sacred and Non- sacred forest: In Kalika sacred and Non- sacred forest moisturecontent and organic matter showed maximum correlation (at significant level0.01) .Organic matter showed maximum positive correlation with sixphysicochemical properties i.e.

, Clay, Porosity, Moisture content, Carbon,Potassium and Nitrogen while negatively correlate with Silt and Bulk density(Table 7.5).7.2.5.2 Chamunda sacred and Non- sacred forest:  In Chamunda Devisacred and Non- sacred forest Porosity, Carbon, Organic matter and Nitrogen showedmaximum correlation (at significant level 0.

01) with physicochemicalproperties. Porosity is positively correlate with eight properties (Moisturecontent, pH, Carbon, Potassium, organic matter Nitrogen and Phosphorus) whilenegatively correlate with two properties (Silt and bulk density).Carbon ispositively correlated with eight properties (Clay, porosity, Moisture content,pH, Potassium, Organic matter, Nitrogen and Phosphorus) and negativelycorrelated with two properties (Silt and Bulk density). Organic matterpositively correlated with eight properties (Clay, Porosity, Moisture content,pH, Carbon, Potassium, Nitrogen, and Phosphorus) and negatively correlates withsilt and Bulk density. Nitrogen is positively correlates with eight properties(Clay, Porosity, Moisture content, pH, carbon, Potassium, organic matter, andPhosphorus) and negatively correlates with silt and Bulk density (Table 7.6).

7.2.5.

3 Kanalichina sacred and non-sacred forest: In Kanalichina sacred and non-sacred forest, Sand,and porosity showed maximum correlation (at significant level 0.01) withphysicochemical properties. Sand positively correlate with two properties (Bulkdensity and pH) while negatively correlate with ten properties (Silt, Clay,Porosity, Moisture content, Water holding capacity, Carbon, Potassium, Organicmatter, Nitrogen and phosphorus). Porosity showed positive correlation witheight properties (Silt, Clay, Moisture content, Water holding capacity, Carbon,Potassium, Nitrogen and Phosphorus) and negatively correlate with sand and Bulkdensity (Table 7.

7).7.2.5.4 Pasupatinath sacred and Non- sacred forest: In Pasupatinath sacred and Non- sacred forest Clay showedmaximum positive correlation (at significant level 0.01) with eight properties(Porosity, Moisture content, pH, Carbon, Potassium, Organic matter, Nitrogenand phosphorus) and negatively correlate with three properties (Sand, Silt andClay) (Table 7.8). 7.

2.5.5  Ratwalisacred and Non- sacred forests: In Ratwali sacred and Non- sacred forest Porosity showed maximum positivecorrelation (at significant level 0.01) with eight properties (Clay, Moisturecontent, pH, Carbon, Potassium, Organic matter, Nitrogen and phosphorus) andnegative correlation with Bulk density and Silt. Nitrogen positively correlatedwith eight properties (Clay, Porosity, Moisture content, pH, Carbon, potassium,Organic matter and phosphorus) and negatively correlated with Silt and Bulkdensity (Table 7.9).7.

2.5.6 Thal kedar sacred and Non- sacred forest: In Thal kedar sacred and Non- sacred forestPhosphorus showed maximum positive correlation (at significant level 0.01) withseven physicochemical properties (Silt, Porosity, Moisture content, carbon,Potassium, Organic matter and Nitrogen) and negatively correlate with Sand andBulk density (Table 7.

10).7.2.6 CLUSTER ANALYSIS 7.

2.6.1 Kalikasacred and non-sacred forest: Based on cluster analysis site 1 is divided into V clusters. ClusterI (2 sites viz. Sk4, NsK3), Cluster II (2 sites viz. NsK1, NsK2), ClusterIII (1 site viz. NsK4), Cluster IV (2 sites viz.

sK2, sK3) and ClusterV (1 site viz. sK1) (Fig 7.14).7.2.

6.2 Chamundasacred and Non- sacred forest: Cluster analysis divided sites in V clusters. Cluster I (2 sitesviz. NsC2, NsC3), Cluster II (2 sites viz.

NsC1, sC4), Cluster III (1site viz. NsC4), Cluster IV (2 sites viz. sC2, sC3) and Cluster V(1 site viz. sC1) (Fig 7.15).7.2.

6.3 Ratwalisacred and Non- sacred forest: Cluster analysis divided sites in IV clusters. Cluster I (3sites viz. NsR2, NsR3, NsR4), Cluster II (2 sites viz. sR4, NsR1), ClusterIII (2 site viz. sR2, sR3), Cluster IV (1 sites viz. sR1) (Fig 7.16)7.

2.6.4. Pasupatinath sacred and Non- sacred forest: Cluster analysisdivided sites in IV clusters.

Cluster I (3 sites viz. NsP2, NsP3 andNsP4), Cluster II (2 sites viz. sP3, sP4), Cluster III (2 site viz.sP2, NsP1), Cluster IV (1 sites viz. sP1) (Fig 7.17).7.

2.6.5 Betalsacred and Non- sacred forest: Cluster analysis divided sites in IV clusters. Cluster I (3 sites)Cluster II (one site) Cluster III (two sites) Cluster IV (two sites). ClusterI:    sB2, NsB1, sB3, Cluster II: sB1,Cluster III: NsB3, NsB4, Cluster IV: sB4, NsB2 (Fig 7.18).7.

2.6.6 ThalKedar sacred and non-sacred forest: Cluster analysis divided sites in V clusters.

Cluster I (2 sites viz.sT2, sT3), Cluster II (1 sites viz. sT1), Cluster III (2 site viz.NsT3, NsT4), Cluster IV (2 sites viz. NsT1, NsT2), Cluster V (1site viz.

sT4) (Fig 7.19).7.2.6.7 Cluster dendrogram within sixSacred forests Pithoragarh: Cluster analysis showed VIIclusters.

Cluster I (5 sites viz. sC1, sC3, sK4, sB4, sT4), Cluster II (3 sites viz. sC4, sP3, sP4), Cluster III (6 sites viz. sB2, sT2, sP2, sB3, sC1, sT3), Cluster IV (3 sites viz. sK2, sK3, sR3), Cluster V (1 site viz. sR4), Cluster VI (2 sites viz.

sR1,sP1) and Cluster VII (4 sites viz. sk1, sB1, sR2, sT1) (Fig 7.20).7.2.6.8 Cluster dendrogram within six Non-sacred forests Pithoragarh: Cluster analysis showed VIclusters.

Cluster I (5 sites viz. NsK2, NsB2, NsK3, NsK1, NsR2), Cluster II (3 sites viz. NsP1, NsB1,NsR1), Cluster III (2 sites viz. NsT3, NsT4), Cluster IV (3 sites viz. NsC4, NsP4, NsP3), Cluster V (5site viz.

NsR4, NsB2, NsR3, NsB3, NsT1)and Cluster VI (6 sites viz. NsC2, NsC3, NsT2, NsP2, NsK4, NsC1) (Fig 7.21).7.2.

6.9 Cluster dendrogram within Sacredand Non- sacred forests Pithoragarh: Cluster analysis showedVI clusters. Cluster I (13 sites viz. NsK2, NsB2, sK4 NsK3, sC2 , sC3, sB4,NsR2, NsR4, NsB4, NsR3, NsB3, NsT1,), Cluster II (9 sites viz. sP4,NsT2, NsC2, NsC3, NsP2, sC4, sP3, NsK4, NsC1), Cluster III (5 sites viz.

NsT3,NsT4, NsC4, NsP4,  NsP3), Cluster IV (6 sites viz. sR1, sP1, sk1, sB1, sR2, sT1), Cluster V (3 site viz. sK2, sR3, sR4), Cluster VI (12 sites viz. NsK1, sP2, sC1, sB3, sT3, sT4, sB2,sT2,  NsP1,  NsB1, NsR1, sK3) (Fig 7.22).

7.2.7Factor analysis and observation plot: Principal componentanalysis for sand depict that sites viz. sR, NsR, sP, NsP, sB, NsB and sT werepositively significant at lower most depth 61-90 cm, while other sites anddepths were weakly significant.

For silt four sites ( sK, NsK, sC and NsC) werepositivly significant at 61-90 cm depth, and for clay nine sites (sK, sC, NsC, sR, sP, NsP, sB, NsB and sT) werepositively significant at 0-10 cm depth while for soil moisture content andwater holding capacity four sites(sK, NsC, NsT, sT and NsK, sC, sP, sTrespectively) were strongly influenced at 0-10 cm depth.(Fig 7.24-27)      PCA forpH showed positive significance of six sites (sR, sC, sP, NsP, sB and NsT) at0-10cm and 11-30 cm depth while for potassium and phosphorous nine sites (NsR,NsP, NsB, NsT, sT, sC, sK, sB and sR) and seven sites (sC, sR, NsP, sB, sT, NsTand NsK) showed positive significance at 0-10 and 11-30 cm depth respectively (Fig7.28-30). 7.

2.8Correspondence analysis: Correspondence analysis showeddispersal of physiochemical properties and sites in asymmetric and symmetricplots. Based on asymmetric plot sacred and non-sacred sites are separated onboth sides of plot while physicochemical parameters are clustered at centre ofplot.       On thebasis of symmetric plot sacred and Non- sacred sites were separated, while Non-sacred sites viz. NsC1,NsB1, NsK1 and NsR1 shoed clustering with sacred sitesand sacred sites viz. sP4, sC4, sC3, sB4, sP3 and sK4 showed clustering with Non-sacred sites. Physicochemical properties such as sand, silt, BD, and porosityshowed correlation with non-sacred sites while clay, MC, WHC, OM, K, and Pshowed correlation with sacred sites.

(Fig 7.31 a, b)    7.2.

9  Agglomerative hierarchical cluster (AHC): Onthe basis of Physicochemical properties sites were differentiated in threeclasses viz. Class 1 (sK1,  sR1, sR2,  sP1,  sB1 and sT1), Class 2 (sK2, sK3,NsK1, SC1, sR3, sR4, NsR1, sP2, NsP1, sB2, sB3, NsB1,  sT2,  sT3 and sT4) and Class 3 (sK4 NsK2NsK3 NsK4 SC2 SC3 SC4 NsC1, NsC2, NsC3, NsC4, NsR2, NsR3, NsR4, sP3, sP4, NsP2,NsP3, NsP4, sB4, NsB2, NsB3, NsB4, NsT1, NsT2, NsT3 and NsT4). Observationdepict that class 1 had six sacred sites only while in class 2 total fifteensites were included out of which four sites were Non- sacred rest were sacredsites and  in class 3 total twenty sevensites were included out of which seven were sacred sites rest were Non- sacredsites.

(Fig 7.32) 7.2.10K-mean clustering: On the basis of  K -mean cluster for sacred forests physicochemicalproperties classified in five classes viz.

Class1: pH, OM, C, K, P and BD,  Class 2: N,  Class 3Sand, Silt and MC, Class 4: Clay andClass 5: WHC and Porosity, While forNon- sacred forests  K- mean cluster showedfive classes viz. Class 1: pH, OMand MC, Class 2: C, K, P and BD, Class 3: N, Class 4: Sand and Porosity,  Class 5: Silt, Clay and WHC.(Fig 7.33a,b)

x

Hi!
I'm Morris!

Would you like to get a custom essay? How about receiving a customized one?

Check it out