کد مقاله | کد نشریه | سال انتشار | مقاله انگلیسی | نسخه تمام متن |
---|---|---|---|---|
6364128 | 1623010 | 2015 | 13 صفحه PDF | دانلود رایگان |
We classify soils to group our knowledge, increase our understanding, and communicate results. I have analyzed how soil classification and factor and soil property naming have been used in journal papers between 1975 and 2014. There is an exponential increase in the use of Taxonomy and WRB but the increase in the number of soil science papers is much faster than the use of Soil Taxonomy and WRB. The percentage of papers with soil classification information was highest in Geoderma (34%). The soil biology journals had soil classification in only 6% of their papers. Soil Taxonomy seems to be more frequently included particularly in journals from the USA, whereas FAO-Unesco and WRB are more frequently used in European journals. Soils in dry areas (Aridisols, Calcisols, Gypsisols) seem to be under-researched, whereas Spodosols (Podzols), Vertisols, Anthrosols, Chernozems, and Luvisols seem over-represented. Soil factor and property naming (e.g. "agricultural soil", "sandy soil") increase faster than the use of Soil Taxonomy and WRB. Temperate and boreal soil is commonly used in Soil Biology and Biochemistry which also tops the number of papers with forest soil, "agricultural soil", "upland soil", "wetland soil", and "valley soil". The more geologically oriented journals use parent material terms like "alluvial soils" and "granite soils". Color soil naming is common in some Chinese (black soil, red soil) and Canadian journals (Brown soil). Problems of soil classification are related to technical issues of soil classification, the adoption of the system, and the lack of instructions in soil science journals. A lack of soil classification in our papers makes transfer of information, data and results difficult.
Journal: Geoderma Regional - Volume 5, August 2015, Pages 127-139