Effects of soil compaction on soil water availability indicators and some growth characteristics of sugarcane plant

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

Department of Soil Science and Engineering, Faculty of Agriculture, Shahid Chamran University of Ahvaz, Ahvaz, Iran.

10.22059/ijswr.2024.378269.669736

Abstract

 
The present study was conducted to investigate the effects of soil compaction on soil water availability indices and some growth characteristics of sugarcane plants. A total of nine compaction treatments were defined, including three levels of agricultural tools pressure and three levels of soil moisture. Soil samples were collected at the beginning of the growing season from the topsoil and subsoil layers to measure the usual physical properties as well as the indices. Soil water availability indicators including plant available water (PAW), least limiting water range (LLWR) and integral water capacity (IWC) were calculated. The soil moisture curve was measured using a pressure plate and membrane devices and the soil resistance curve was measured using a manual penetrometer in the laboratory. Plant growth indicators included straw collar diameter (D), straw height (H), sheath relative water content (RWC), and shoot weight (Y). The results of ANOVA showed that both the simple effects of compaction factors and interaction effects of compaction  soil moisture on LLWR and IWC indicators in the soil surface layer were significant (p<0.05). The lowest values of LLWR and IWC were observed in the plot with the highest compaction and soil moisture (W3P3), with values of 0.026 and 0.017 cm3.cm-3, respectively. The lowest Y was also observed in the treatment of high compaction and high soil moisture (W3P3), with a value of 38 t. ha-1. It was suggested that the next research should scientifically and accurately determine the optimal value of soil water for each class of soil texture.

Keywords

Main Subjects

EXTENDED ABSTRACT

Introduction

Soil compaction is regarded as a significant form of physical soil degradation, particularly in the context of mechanized cultivation. Soil compaction affects a number of key processes, including the water status of the soil, erosion, the cycle of elements, and finally, plant growth. Additionally, the moisture status of the soil plays a role in determining the compaction ability of the soil. The use of numerous heavy and semi-heavy tools and machines in different stages of planting, growing, and harvesting in sugarcane fields in Khuzestan Province poses a significant risk of soil compaction. It is therefore crucial to understand the impact of soil compaction on soil quality and plant growth in order to achieve sustainable agricultural management.

Material and methods

The present study was conducted to investigate the effects of compaction on soil water availability indicators and some growth characteristics of sugarcane plants. A total of nine compaction treatments were defined, comprising three levels of agricultural tool pressure (low, medium, and high) and three levels of soil moisture (low, optimum, and high). Different levels of tool pressure were applied through the passage of the harvester and the cane carrying basket based on the realities of the sugarcane fields. After the application of the compaction treatments, which were carried out at the time of the harvest, soil samples were taken at the beginning of the growing season from the depths of 0 to 30 cm and 30 to 60 cm to measure the usual physical characteristics as well as the indices. Soil water availability including plant available water (PAW), least limiting water range (LLWR) and integral water capacity (IWC) were obtained. The soil moisture curve was measured using a pressure plate device and the soil resistance curve was measured using a manual penetrometer in the laboratory. Plant growth indicators included straw collar diameter (D), straw height (H), sheath relative water content (RWC), and shoot weight (Y).

Results and discussion

The results of ANOVA showed that both the main effect of compaction factors and their interaction effects on LLWR and IWC index in the soil surface layer were significant (p<0.05). The highest value of LLWR and IWC was observed with values of 0.073 and 0.051 (cm3cm-3), respectively, in the low soil moisture level (W1) and the lowest value in the high soil moisture level (W3). In the subsurface layer, the main effects of compaction factors were not significant on any of the indices. The results of ANOVA for plant indices also showed that the interaction effects of compaction factors on D and Y were significant (P<0.05). The lowest Y of 38 tons per hectare was observed in high pressure (P3) and high soil moisture content (W3) treatments. Correlation test also showed that there is a positive and significant relationship between LLWR indices and Y.

Conclusion

The analysis of the results obtained from the LLWR and IWC indices revealed that soil compaction restricts the sugarcane plant's access to water, thereby reducing its growth and yield. The moisture content of the soil during the operation of agricultural machinery is of great consequence with regard to the degree of soil compaction. Given the simplicity and low cost of soil moisture management and control in comparison to the weight of the machinery, it is recommended that particular attention be paid to this factor and that the optimal and critical limits be determined with precision for each tissue class.

Author Contributions

 Conceptualization, Ghafari H. and Khademalrasoul A. ; methodology, Ghafari H. and Khademalrasoul A. Nazerifar, M. ; software, Ghafari H. ; validation, Ghafari H. and Khademalrasoul A. Nazerifar, M.; formal analysis, Ghafari H. ; investigation, X.X.; Khademalrasoul A. Nazerifar, M.; data curation, Nazerifar, M.; writing—original draft preparation, Ghafari H.; writing—review and editing, Ghafari H. and Khademalrasoul A.; visualization, Ghafari H.; supervision, Ghafari H. and Khademalrasoul A. ; project administration, Ghafari H. and Khademalrasoul A. ; funding acquisition, Ghafari H. and Khademalrasoul A.

Data Availability Statement

Data is available on reasonable request from the authors.

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to express our appreciation and gratitude to Mr. Shaban Zarei, the then Deputy Director of Agricultural Research at the Sugarcane and Related Industries Research and Development Institute, Engineer Sina Latif al-Tojar, as well as Engineer Amin Nasirian, the respected Director of Agriculture and Industry Salman Farsi, and all the people who helped us during this research.

Ethical considerations

The authors avoided data fabrication, falsification, plagiarism, and misconduct.

Conflict of interest

The author declares no conflict of interest.

References

Asgarzadeh, H., Mosaddeghi, M. R., & Nikbakht, A. M. (2014). SAWCal: A user-friendly program for calculating soil available water quantities and physical quality indices. Computers and electronics in agriculture, 109, 86-93.
Barzegar, A., Mahmoudi, S. H., Hamedi, F., & Abdolvahabi, F. (2005). Long term sugarcane cultivation effects on physical properties of fine textured soils.  J. Agric. Sci. Technol. (7)و 59-68.
Chen, G., Weil, R. R., & Hill, R. L. (2014). Effects of compaction and cover crops on soil least limiting water range and air permeability. Soil and Tillage Research, 136, 61–69.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.still. 2013.09.004.
da Silva, A. P., & Kay, B. D. (1997). Estimating the least limiting water range of soils from properties and management. Soil Science Society of America Journal, 61(3), 877-883.
da Silva, A.P. Kay, B.D. and Perfect, E. (1994). Characterization of the least limiting water range of soils. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 58, 1775– 1781.
De Lima, R. P., Rolim, M. M., da C. Dantas, D., da Silva, A. R., & Mendonça, E. A. S. (2020). Compressive properties and least limiting water range of plough layer and plough pan in sugarcane fields. Soil Use and Management. doi:10.1111/sum.12601 (https://doi.org/10.1111/sum.12601)
Esteban, D. A. A., de Souza, Z. M., Tormena, C. A., Lovera, L. H., de Souza Lima, E., de Oliveira, I. N., & de Paula Ribeiro, N. (2019). Soil compaction, root system and productivity of sugarcane under different row spacing and controlled traffic at harvest. Soil and Tillage Research, 187, 60-71.
Esteban, D. A. A., de Souza, Z. M., Tormena, C. A., Lovera, L. H., de Souza Lima, E., de Oliveira, I. N., & de Paula Ribeiro, N. (2019). Soil compaction, root system and productivity of sugarcane under different row spacing and controlled traffic at harvest. Soil and Tillage Research, 187, 60-71.
Geneti, D. (2021). Effect of Soil Compaction on Growth, Yield and Quality of Sugarcane (Saccharum Officinarum L.) Crop and It is Management: A Review.
Ghanaati, A., Bahrami, H., & Sheikh Davoodi, M.J. (2011). The evaluation of soil compaction upon mechanized harvesting at different soil water contents on sugarcane fields of Debale Khazaei Agro Industrial in Ahvaz. Agricultural Engineering (Scientific Journal of Agriculture), 33(2), 1-12. Sid. Https://Sid.Ir/Paper/233728/En (In Persian).
Groenevelt, P., Grant, C. & Semetsa, S. (2001). A new procedure to determine soil water availability. Soil Research. 39, 577-598.
Gürsoy, S. (2021). Soil compaction due to increased machinery intensity in agricultural production: its main causes, effects and management. Technology in agriculture, 1-18.
Haghighi Fashi, F., Gorji, M., & Sharifi, F. (2017). Least limiting water range for different soil management practices in dryland farming in Iran. Archives of Agronomy and Soil Science, 63(13), 1814-1822.
Hunsigi, G. (2012). Production of sugarcane: theory and practice (Vol. 21). Springer Science & Business Media.
Kahlon, M. S., & Chawla, K. (2017). Effect of tillage practices on least limiting water range in Northwest India. International Agrophysics, 31(2), 183.
Kazemi, Z., Neyshabouri, M. R., Haghi, D. Z., Asgarzadeh, H., Milani, A. O., Irani, M., & Nasab, A. D. M. (2021). Revisiting integral water capacity on the basis of stomatal conductance at various soil and root length densities in sunflower plant. Agricultural Water Management, 243, 106451.
Kazemi, Z., Neyshabouri, M. R., Zaree Haghi, D., & Asgarzadeh, H. (2018). Computation of integral water capacity using plant green leaf temperature at different soil compaction levels. Iranian Journal of Soil Research, 32(2), 219-229. doi: 10.22092/ijsr.2018.117042 (In Persian).
Kazemi, Z., Neyshabouri, M. R., Zaree Haghi, D., & Asgarzadeh, H. (2018). Computation of Integral Water Capacity Using Plant Green Leaf Temperature at Different Soil Compaction Levels. Iranian Journal of Soil Research, 32(2), 219-229. doi: 10.22092/ijsr.2018.117042
Liu, H., Zhou, H., Lin, C., Li, B., Tian, J., & Yao, L. (2021). Evaluation of tillage effect on maize production using a modified least limiting water range approach. Soil Science Society of America Journal. doi:10.1002/saj2.20321
Lorzadeh, S., Nadian, H., Bakhshandeh, A., Nourmohammadi, G., & Darvish, F. (2002). Effects of different levels of soil compaction on yield, yield components and sucrose in sugarcane cv. CP-48-103, in Khuzestan, Iran. Iranian Journal of Crop Sciences, 4(1), 36–47. Available: Https://Sid.Ir/Paper/57118/En (In Persian).
Mäkinen, H., Kaseva, J., Trnka, M., Balek, J., Kersebaum, K., Nendel, C., Ferrise, R. (2018). Sensitivity of European wheat to extreme weather. Field Crops Research, 222, 209–217.https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.fcr.2017.11.008
Mc Garry, D., & Sharp, G. (2003). A rapid, immediate, farmer-usable method of assessing soil structure condition to support conservation agriculture. Conservation agriculture: environment, farmers experiences, innovations, socio-economy, policy, 375-380.
Mehrdadian, A.R., Asoodar, M.A., & Abasi, F. (2012). Effect of sugarcane harvest machinery traffic on soil compaction in south west of Khuzestan. Agricultural Engineering (Scientific Journal of Agriculture), 34(2), 1-14. Sid. Https://Sid.Ir/Paper/233766/En (In Persian).
Mondal, S., & Chakraborty, D. (2023). Root growth and physiological responses in wheat to topsoil and subsoil compaction with or without artificial vertical macropores. Heliyon, 9(8), e18834.
Monjezi, N., & Marzban, A. (2022). Investigation of the Effect of Optimizing Ratooning Operation at Different Speeds on Soil Physical Properties of Sugarcane Fields. Journal of Soil Management and Sustainable Production, 12(1), 121-139.
Moradi, F., KhaliliMoghadam, B., Jafari, S., & Ghorbani Dashtaki, S. (2014). Long-term effects of mechanized cultivation on some soil physical properties in some khozestan sugarcane agro-industries. Water and Soil, 27(6), 1153-1165. doi: 10.22067/jsw.v0i0.33121 (In Persian).
Nawaz, M.F., Bourrie, G., & Trolard, F., (2013). Soil compaction impact and modelling. A review. Agron. Sustainable Develop. 33 (2), 291–309. https://doi.org/10.1007/ s13593-011-0071-8.
Neyshabouri, M.R., Kazemi, Z., Oustan, S. & M. Moghaddam. (2014). PTFs for predicting LLWR from various soil attributes including cementing agents. Geoderma, 226, 179-187.
O’Sullivan, M. F., & Simota, C. (1995). Modelling the environmental impacts of soil compaction: a review. Soil and Tillage Research, 35(1-2), 69–84. doi:10.1016/0167-1987(95)00478-B
Osmani, A., Asgarzadeh, H., & Asadzadeh, F. (2020). Comparison of Physical Quality Indices of Topsoil and Subsoil under Wheat and Sunflower Cultivation. Iranian Journal of Soil Research, 34(3), 373-386. doi: 10.22092/ijsr.2020.343111.531
Pandey, B. K., Huang, G., Bhosale, R., Hartman, S., Sturrock, C. J., Jose, L., & Bennett, M. J. (2021). Plant roots sense soil compaction through restricted ethylene diffusion. Science, 371(6526), 276-280.
Peltonen-Sainio, P., Jauhiainen, L., Trnka, M., Olesen, J. E., Calanca, P., Eckersten, H., & Kozyra, J. (2010). Coincidence of variation in yield and climate in Europe. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 139, 483–489.
Reichert, J. M., Da Silva, V. R., & Reinert, D. J. (2004). Soil moisture, penetration resistance, and least limiting water range for three soil management systems and black beans yield. In 13th International Soil Conservation Organisation Conference–Brisbane, July (pp. 1-4).
Safadoust, A., Feizee, P., Mahboubi, A. A., Gharabaghi, B., Mosaddeghi, M. R., & Ahrens, B. (2014). Least limiting water range as affected by soil texture and cropping system. Agricultural Water Management, 136, 34-41.
Wakgari, T. (2021). Long term sugarcane cultivation effect on selected physical and hydraulic properties of soils at three Ethiopian sugarcane estates. American Journal of Plant Biology, 6(3), 60-72.
Wang, X., Feng, Y., & Yu, L. (2020). Sugarcane/soybean intercropping with reduced nitrogen input improves crop productivity and reduces carbon footprint in China, Science of the Total Environment, 719, 137517. https://doi.org/10.1016/ j. scitotenv.2020.137517.
Wang, Y., Zhang, Z., Guo, Z., Zhang, Y., Zhang, P., Xiao, X., & Peng, X. (2024). Soil physical stresses beyond the dynamic least limiting water range determine crop yields in wheat-maize system in a Vertisol. Field Crops Research, 312, 109396.
Wilson, M. G., Sasal, M. C., & Caviglia, O. P. (2013). Critical bulk density for a Mollisol and a Vertisol using least limiting water range:: Effect on early wheat growth. Geoderma, 192, 354-361.
Yousefi, Z., Kolahi, M., Majd, A., & Jonoubi P. (2018). Effect of cadmium on morphometric traits, antioxidant enzyme activity and phytochelatin synthase gene expression (SoPCS) of Saccharum officinarum var. cp48- 103 in vitro. Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf. 157, 472- 481.
Yu, C., Mawodza, T., Atkinson, B. S., Atkinson, J. A., Sturrock, C. J., Whalley, R., & Mooney, S. J. (2024). The effects of soil compaction on wheat seedling root growth are specific to soil texture and soil moisture status. Rhizosphere, 29, 100838.
Zangiabadi, M., gorji, M., Shorafa, M., Keshavarz, P., & Saadat, S. (2017). The relationship between integral energy (EI) of different soil moisture ranges and S-index in medium to coarse-textured soils. Water and Soil, 31(2), 386-398. doi: 10.22067/jsw.v31i2.53472 (In Persian).
Zou, G., Sands, R., Buchan, G. & Hudson, I. (2000). Least limiting water range: A potential indicator of soil physical quality of forest soil. Aust. J. Soil Res. 38, 947.
Iranian Journal of Soil and Water Research
Volume 55, Issue 10
December 2024
Pages 1787-1801

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics