Field-scale Spatial Variability of Electrical Conductivity of the Inland, Salt-affected Soils of Northeast Thailand

Porntip PHONTUSANG; Roengsak KATAWATIN; Krirk PANNANGPETCH; Rattana LERDSUWANSRI; Sununtha KINGPAIBOON; Kitti WONGPICHET

doi:10.48048/wjst.2018.3474

Authors

Porntip PHONTUSANG Department of Plant Science and Agricultural Resources, Faculty of Agriculture, Khon Kaen University, Khon Kaen 40002
Roengsak KATAWATIN Ground Water Research Center, Khon Kaen University, Khon Kaen 40002
Krirk PANNANGPETCH Department of Plant Science and Agricultural Resources, Faculty of Agriculture, Khon Kaen University, Khon Kaen 40002
Rattana LERDSUWANSRI Department of Mathematics and Statistics, Faculty of Science and Technology, Thammasat University, Rangsit Campus, Pathumthani 12121
Sununtha KINGPAIBOON Department of Agricultural Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Khon Kaen University, Khon Kaen 40002
Kitti WONGPICHET Department of Agronomy, Faculty of Agriculture, Ubon Ratchathani University, Ubon Ratchathani 34190

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.48048/wjst.2018.3474

Keywords:

Salt-affected soils, electrical conductivity, spatial variability, geostatistics, Northeast Thailand

Abstract

Salt-affected soil maps for Northeast Thailand focus on the percentage of salt crusts. Investigation was done to find the field-scale spatial variability of the electrical conductivity of saturation extract (EC_e) in salt-affected areas (percentage salt crusts: very severely = class 1; severely = class 2, and moderately = class 3). Two study sites were selected for each class (n = 6). Soil samples (n = 100) were collected at each site using stratified, systematic, unaligned sampling, and analyzed for EC_e. Variations in EC_e were assessed using basic statistics and geostatistics. At the field-scale, in every class, the best-fit semivariogram model generated was satisfactory (R² > 0.8). Interpretation from the relevant model parameters (i.e., nugget, sill, and effective range), together with the interpolated (kriged) maps, demonstrated that the characteristics of spatial variability of soil EC_e were inconsistent, even between different sites of the same salt-affected soil class. In general, various degrees of small-scale variation were observed, very high variation of EC_e was common, spatial dependence was strong to moderate, while the spatial distribution pattern was in distinctive patches. The size of patches depended on the effective range at each site. This study also revealed that the class 1 areas were entirely, very strongly saline (EC_es range, 56.70 and 433.00 dS·m^-1), whereas the areas of class 3 were non-saline to moderately saline (range, 0.11 - 5.26 dS·m^-1). Class 2 areas were much more complex; the soils varied from non-saline to very strongly saline (range, 0.16 - 49.00 dS·m^-1). Information on the nature and characteristics in the spatial variability of soil EC_e is useful for developing strategies for management of salt-affected soils in precision agriculture in this region.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

References

S Arunin. Saline Soils in Thailand (in Thai). Land Development Department, Bangkok, Thailand, 1996, p. 1-3.

R Katawatin and S Sukchan. Mapping soil salinity and soil erosion in Thailand with emphasis on computer-assisted techniques. Pedologist 2012; 55, 343-54.

S Sukchan. Salt-Affected Soil Map of Thung Kula Ronghai at 1:50,000 Scale (in Thai). Office of Soil Survey and Land Use Planning, Bangkok, Thailand, 2005, p. 12-4.

S Jansom, R Katawatin and K Pannangpetch. Some important chemical properties of salt-affected soils in Khon Kaen province (in Thai). Khon Kaen Agr. J. 2012; 40, 259-63.

S Jansom, R Katawatin and K Pannangpetch. Variability of electrical conductivity, sodium adsorption ratio, and soil reaction in salt affected areas in Northeast Thailand. In: Proceedings of the 1st Asean Plus Three Graduate Research Congress, Chiang Mai, Thailand. 2012, p. ST317-ST322.

PA Burrough and RA Mcdonell. Principles of Geographical Information Systems. Oxford University Press, London, UK, 1998, p. 17-33.

IT Department. ILWIS 3.0 Academic User’s Guide. International Institute for Aerospace Survey and Earth Sciences, Enschede, Netherland, 2001, p. 417-56.

J Li and A Heap. A Review of Spatial Interpolation Methods for Environmental Scientists. Geoscience Australia, Canberra, Australia, 2008, p. 4-25.

AV Bilgili. Spatial assessment of soil salinity in the Harran Plain using multiple kriging techniques. Environ. Monit. Assess. 2013; 185, 777-95.

L Mabit and C Bernard. Assessment of spatial distribution of fallout radionuclides through geostatistics concept. J. Environ. Radioact. 2007; 97, 206-19.

M Oliver and R Webster. A tutorial guide to geostatistics: Computing and modelling variograms and kriging. Catena 2014; 113, 56-69.

F Yang, G Zhang, X Yin and Z Liu. Field-scale spatial variation of saline-sodic soil and its relation with environmental factors in western Songnen Plain of China. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2011; 8, 374-87.

M Emadi, M Baghernejad, M Emadi and M Maftoun. Assessment of some soil properties by spatial variability in saline and sodic soils in Arsanjan plain, Southern Iran. Pak. J. Biol. Sci. 2008; 11, 238-43.

B Cemek, M GÜLer, K KiliÇ, Y Demir and H Arslan. Assessment of spatial variability in some soil properties as related to soil salinity and alkalinity in Bafra plain in northern Turkey. Environ. Monit. Assess. 2007; 124, 223-34.

L Pozdnyakova and R Zhang. Geostatistical analyses of soil salinity in a large field. Precis. Agr. 1999; 1, 153-65.

IOA Odeh and A Onus. Spatial analysis of soil salinity and soil structural stability in a semiarid region of New South Wales, Australia. J. Environ. Manag. 2008; 42, 265-78.

CA Cambardella and DL Karlen. Spatial analysis of soil fertility parameters. Precis. Agr. 1999; 1, 5-14.

G Phrek. Drivers of Change in Thai Agriculture: Implications for Development and Policy in the New Millennium. In: GB Thapa, PK Viswanathan, JK Routray and MM Ahmad (eds.). Agricultural Transition in Asia: Trajectories and Challenges. Asian Institute of Technology, Bangkok, Thailand, 2010, p. 101-42.

J Kawasaki and S Herath. Impact assessment of climate change on rice production in Khon Kaen province, Thailand. J. Int. Soc. Southeast Asian Agr. Sci. 2011; 17, 14-28.

CT Garten, S Kang, DJ Brice, CW Schadt and J Zhou. Variability in soil properties at different spatial scales (1m-1km) in a deciduous forest ecosystem. Soil Biol. Biochem. 2007; 39, 2621-7.

D Michot, C Walter, I Adam and Y Guéro. Digital assessment of soil-salinity dynamics after a major flood in the Niger River valley. Geoderma 2013; 207-208, 193-204.

M Mitsuchi, P Wichaidit and S Jeungnijnirund. Outline of Soils of the Northeast Plateau, Thailand: Their Characteristics and Constraints. Agricultural Development Research Center in Northeast Thailand, Khon Kaen, Thailand, 1986, p. 24-40.

Soil Survey Staff. Soil Taxonomy-A Basic System of Soil Classification for Making and Interpreting Soil Surveys. Agriculture Handbook no. 436, 2nd ed. Washington DC, USA, 1999, p. 1-872.

Office of Soil Survey and Land Use Planning. Characteristics and Properties of Established Soil Series in the Northeast Region of Thailand (in Thai). Land Development Department, Bangkok, Thailand, 2005, p.16-67.

P Wichaidit. Report on Survey and Studies of Salt-affected Soils: Khon Kaen Province (in Thai). Soil Survey and Classification Section, Land Development Department, Bangkok, Thailand, 1995, p. 1-20.

United States Salinity Laboratory Staff. Diagnosis and Improvement of Saline and Alkali Soils: Handbook No. 60. United States Department of Agriculture, Washington DC, USA, 1954, p. 83-8.

R Webster and MA Oliver. Geostatistics for Environmental Scientists (Statistics in Practice). John Wiley & Son, UK, 2001, p. 10-31.

K Johnston, JMV Hoef, K Krivoruchko and N Lucas. Using ArcGIS Geostatistical Analyst. Esri Redlands, California, USA, 2001, p. 306.

A Marchetti, C Piccini, R Francaviglia and L Mabit. Spatial distribution of soil organic matter using geostatistics: A key indicator to assess soil degradation status in central Italy. Pedosphere 2012; 22, 230-42.

Gamma Designed Software. Geostatistics for the Environmental Sciences. Gamma Design Software, Plainwell, Michigan, USA, 2008, p. 1-158.

R Webster. Quantitative Spatial analysis of Soil in the Field. In: BA Stewart (ed.). Advances in Soil Science. Springer, New York, USA, 1985, p. 1-70.

I Clark and WV Harper. Practical Geostatistics 2000. Geostokos (Ecosse), Scotland, 2007, p. 216-22.

GP Robertson. GS+: Geostatistics for the Environmental Sciences. Gamma Design Software, Michigan, Plainwell, USA, 2008, p. 52-9.

CA Cambardella, TB Moorman, TB Parkin, DL Karlen, JM Novak, RF Turco and AE Konopka. Field-scale variability of soil properties in central Iowa soils. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 1994; 58, 1501-11.

AA Eldeiry and LA Garcia. Evaluating the performance of ordinary kriging in mapping soil salinity. J. Irrig. Drain. Eng. 2012; 138, 1046-59.

Q Zhu and HS Lin. Comparing ordinary kriging and regression kriging for soil properties in contrasting landscapes. Pedosphere 2010; 20, 594-606.

BP Umali, DP Oliver, S Forrester, DJ Chittleborough, JL Hutson, RS Kookana and B Ostendorf. The effect of terrain and management on the spatial variability of soil properties in an apple orchard. Catena 2012; 93, 38-48.

J Triantafilis and SM Buchanan. Mapping the spatial distribution of subsurface saline material in the Darling River valley. J. Appl. Geophys. 2010; 70, 144-60.

EH Isaaks and RM Srivastava. An Introduction to Applied Geostatistics. Oxford University Press, New York, USA, 1989, p. 273-322.

RJ Yao, JS Yang, P Gao, HB Shao, GM Liu and SP Yu. Comparison of statistical prediction methods for characterizing the spatial variability of apparent electrical conductivity in coastal salt-affected farmland. Environ. Earth Sci. 2014; 71, 233-43.

EJ Plaster. Soil Science and Management. Clifton Park, New York, USA, 2013, p. 269-72.

LG Wilding. Soil Spatial Variability: Its Documentation, Accommodation and Implication to Soil Surveys. In: DR Nielsen and J Bouma (eds.). Soil Spatial Variability Proceedings of a Workshop of the ISSS and the SSA, Las Vegas PUDOC, Wageningen, Netherland, 1985, p. 166-94.

M Duffera, JG White and R Weisz. Spatial variability of southeastern US coastal plain soil physical properties: Implications for site-specific management. Geoderma 2007; 137, 327-39.

TG Mueller, NB Pusuluri, KK Mathisa, PL Cornelius, RI Barnhisel and SA Shearer. Map quality for ordinary and inverse distance weighted interpolation. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 2004; 68, 2042-7.

TP Robertson and G Metternicht. Testing the performance o spatial interpolation techniques for mapping soil properties. Comput. Electron. Agr. 2006; 50, 97-108.

N Puengpana, T Subhasaram, P Patcharapreecha, K Miura and H Wada. Impermeable layers in salt affected sandy soils in northeast Thailand. J. Sci. Soc. Thailand 1990; 16, 77-88.

B Topark-ngarm. Saline Soils in Northeast Thailand (in Thai). Khon Kaen University, Khon Kaen, Thailand, 2006, p. 1-263.

F López-Granados, M Jurado-Expósito, S Atenciano, A García-Ferrer, MS Orden and L García-Torres. Spatial variability of agricultural soil parameters in southern Spain. Plant Soil 2002; 246, 97-105.