• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

用于评估肯尼亚纳罗克县卡卡亚-埃桑布尔姆布尔集水区三种不同土地利用类型下可持续性状况的土壤质量指数(SQI)。

Soil quality index (SQI) for evaluating the sustainability status of Kakia-Esamburmbur catchment under three different land use types in Narok County, Kenya.

作者信息

Damiba Wendyam Arsene Flavien, Gathenya John Mwangi, Raude James Messo, Home Patrick Gathogo

机构信息

Civil Engineering Department (Environment, Arid and Semi-Arid Lands (ASAL)), Pan African University-Institute for Basic Sciences Technology and Innovation (PAUSTI), Jomo Kenyatta University of Agriculture and Technology (JKUAT), P.O. Box 62000-00200, Nairobi, Kenya.

Soil, Water and Environmental Engineering Department, Jomo Kenyatta University of Agriculture and Technology (JKUAT), P.O. Box 62000-00200, Nairobi, Kenya.

出版信息

Heliyon. 2024 Feb 5;10(5):e25611. doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e25611. eCollection 2024 Mar 15.

DOI:10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e25611
PMID:38434348
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10907516/
Abstract

Land and water degradation caused by soil erosion and climate change pose major environmental threats, particularly in agricultural watersheds. Soil erosion in a catchment leads to low crop yields due to declining soil quality (SQ), productivity and sustainability. However, very few studies have been done to assess soil health in Kenya, and none in Narok County. Thus, the aim of this study was to evaluate the soil sustainability status in Kakia-Esamburmbur catchment, based on the identification of key indicators (IKI) from a large dataset (LDS) of 23 indicators, across three land use types designated as grass land (GL), crop land (CL) and forest land (FL). To achieve the stated objective, two soil quality indexing methods were employed: the Additive Soil Quality Index (A-SQI) using the LDS; and the Weighted Soil Quality Index (W-SQI) using Principal Component Analysis (PCA) as a reduction tool to obtain the IKI set. The results show that at a depth of 20 cm, the catchment's soils characteristics did not differ significantly. The two methods (A-SQI and W-SQI) resulted in FL having the highest SQI mean values (0.61, 0.57), followed by CL (0.59, 0.55), while the lowest SQI mean value was recorded in GL (0.58, 0.53). Additionally, the sensitivity analysis showed W-SQI as the most sensitive and superior method in the evaluation of SQI changes due to its high sensitivity and coefficient of variation (CV), at 2.25 and >12 %, respectively. Among the ten IKI, CEC made the greatest contribution to SQ (18.68 %), followed by BD (15.61 %), BIR (14.71 %), Mg (14.26 %), MBN (8.30 %), MBC (8.26 %), Sand (6.77 %), Moisture (5.75 %), TOC (5.16 %), and PMN (2.63 %). The findings show that the catchment belongs to the "medium" category of SQ. The IKI can help save time and reduce the cost of intensive lab works for temporal assessment and monitoring of the effects of different land use on SQ.

摘要

土壤侵蚀和气候变化导致的土地与水体退化构成了重大环境威胁,在农业流域尤其如此。集水区的土壤侵蚀会因土壤质量(SQ)、生产力和可持续性下降而导致作物产量降低。然而,肯尼亚评估土壤健康的研究极少,纳罗克县尚无此类研究。因此,本研究的目的是基于从23项指标的大型数据集(LDS)中识别关键指标(IKI),评估卡卡亚 - 埃桑布尔姆布尔集水区的土壤可持续性状况,该数据集涵盖三种指定的土地利用类型,即草地(GL)、耕地(CL)和林地(FL)。为实现既定目标,采用了两种土壤质量指数方法:使用LDS的加法土壤质量指数(A - SQI);以及使用主成分分析(PCA)作为降维工具来获取IKI集的加权土壤质量指数(W - SQI)。结果表明,在20厘米深度处,集水区的土壤特性无显著差异。两种方法(A - SQI和W - SQI)得出的结果是,林地的SQ平均值最高(0.61, 0.57),其次是耕地(0.59, 0.55),而草地的SQ平均值最低(0.58, 0.53)。此外,敏感性分析表明,W - SQI在评估SQ变化方面是最敏感且更优的方法,因为其敏感性和变异系数(CV)分别高达2.25和>12%。在十个IKI中,阳离子交换量(CEC)对土壤质量的贡献最大(18.68%),其次是容重(BD,15.61%)、生物可利用性指数(BIR,14.71%)、镁(Mg,14.26%)·、微生物生物量氮(MBN,8.30%)、微生物生物量碳(MBC,8.26%)、砂粒(Sand,6.77%)、水分(Moisture,5.75%)、总有机碳(TOC,5.16%)和潜在矿化氮(PMN,2.63%)。研究结果表明,该集水区属于土壤质量的“中等”类别。IKI有助于节省时间并降低密集实验室工作的成本,用于不同土地利用对土壤质量影响的时间评估和监测。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/b66e/10907516/2c723ebe4b32/gr13.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/b66e/10907516/81cd1d5557d9/gr1.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/b66e/10907516/b229290fff97/gr2.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/b66e/10907516/a72d406adb09/gr3.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/b66e/10907516/1010ca3e29cb/gr4.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/b66e/10907516/b0c6b22d3cf8/gr5.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/b66e/10907516/f40bf6aa5eee/gr6.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/b66e/10907516/1ff4c35f9cbc/gr7.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/b66e/10907516/ea19c8703d9f/gr8.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/b66e/10907516/c522aa0154b8/gr9.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/b66e/10907516/1f6ed90a57a0/gr10.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/b66e/10907516/72e010229c4b/gr11.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/b66e/10907516/64bbb2633bad/gr12.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/b66e/10907516/2c723ebe4b32/gr13.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/b66e/10907516/81cd1d5557d9/gr1.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/b66e/10907516/b229290fff97/gr2.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/b66e/10907516/a72d406adb09/gr3.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/b66e/10907516/1010ca3e29cb/gr4.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/b66e/10907516/b0c6b22d3cf8/gr5.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/b66e/10907516/f40bf6aa5eee/gr6.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/b66e/10907516/1ff4c35f9cbc/gr7.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/b66e/10907516/ea19c8703d9f/gr8.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/b66e/10907516/c522aa0154b8/gr9.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/b66e/10907516/1f6ed90a57a0/gr10.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/b66e/10907516/72e010229c4b/gr11.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/b66e/10907516/64bbb2633bad/gr12.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/b66e/10907516/2c723ebe4b32/gr13.jpg

相似文献

1
Soil quality index (SQI) for evaluating the sustainability status of Kakia-Esamburmbur catchment under three different land use types in Narok County, Kenya.用于评估肯尼亚纳罗克县卡卡亚-埃桑布尔姆布尔集水区三种不同土地利用类型下可持续性状况的土壤质量指数(SQI)。
Heliyon. 2024 Feb 5;10(5):e25611. doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e25611. eCollection 2024 Mar 15.
2
Selecting the minimum data set and quantitative soil quality indexing of alkaline soils under different land uses in northeastern China.选择中国东北地区不同土地利用方式下碱性土壤的最小数据集和定量土壤质量指数。
Sci Total Environ. 2018 Mar;616-617:564-571. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.10.301. Epub 2017 Nov 16.
3
Forest conservation mediating soil quality relationship with diversity of various plant layers in the biosphere of Arasabran, Iran.伊朗阿拉萨布兰生物圈中,森林保护对土壤质量与各植物层多样性之间的关系起到调节作用。
Sci Total Environ. 2024 Jun 10;928:172475. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2024.172475. Epub 2024 Apr 16.
4
Comparison of soil quality index using three methods.三种方法下土壤质量指数的比较。
PLoS One. 2014 Aug 22;9(8):e105981. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0105981. eCollection 2014.
5
Evaluating quality of soils formed on basement complex rocks in Kaduna State, northern Guinea savanna of Nigeria.评估尼日利亚几内亚草原北部卡杜纳州基岩上发育的土壤的质量。
Environ Monit Assess. 2021 Jun 5;193(7):383. doi: 10.1007/s10661-021-09157-0.
6
Spatiotemporal variations in the soil quality of agricultural land and its drivers in China from 1980 to 2018.1980年至2018年中国农用地土壤质量的时空变化及其驱动因素
Sci Total Environ. 2023 Sep 20;892:164649. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2023.164649. Epub 2023 Jun 2.
7
Soil quality assessment of coastal salt-affected acid soils of India.印度沿海盐渍酸化土壤的质量评估。
Environ Sci Pollut Res Int. 2020 Jul;27(21):26221-26238. doi: 10.1007/s11356-020-09010-w. Epub 2020 May 2.
8
Soil Quality Indexing Strategies for Evaluating Sugarcane Expansion in Brazil.巴西甘蔗种植扩张评估的土壤质量指标策略
PLoS One. 2016 Mar 3;11(3):e0150860. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0150860. eCollection 2016.
9
[Comprehensive evaluation of soil quality of different land use types on the northeastern margin of the Qinghai-Tibet Plateau, China].[中国青藏高原东北缘不同土地利用类型土壤质量综合评价]
Ying Yong Sheng Tai Xue Bao. 2022 Dec;33(12):3279-3286. doi: 10.13287/j.1001-9332.202212.016.
10
Comparative assessment of soil quality dynamics using SQI modelling approach: a study in rice bowl of West Bengal, India.利用土壤质量指数(SQI)建模方法对土壤质量动态进行比较评估:印度西孟加拉邦稻米产区的一项研究
Environ Monit Assess. 2024 May 22;196(6):567. doi: 10.1007/s10661-024-12697-w.

引用本文的文献

1
Use of Water Quality Index and Pesticides-Related Human Health Risk Assessment for Evaluating the Surface Water Sustainability Status of the Kakia-Esamburmbur Agricultural Watershed, Narok County, Kenya.利用水质指数和与农药相关的人类健康风险评估来评估肯尼亚纳罗克县卡卡亚-埃桑布尔姆布尔农业流域地表水的可持续性状况。
Geohealth. 2025 Mar 27;9(4):e2024GH001169. doi: 10.1029/2024GH001169. eCollection 2025 Apr.

本文引用的文献

1
Revisiting soil texture analysis: Practices towards a more accurate Bouyoucos method.重新审视土壤质地分析:迈向更精确的鲍尤科斯法的实践
Heliyon. 2022 May 12;8(5):e09395. doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e09395. eCollection 2022 May.
2
Soil health indicators for Central Washington orchards.华盛顿中部果园的土壤健康指标。
PLoS One. 2021 Oct 28;16(10):e0258991. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0258991. eCollection 2021.
3
Sustainable development goal 2: Improved targets and indicators for agriculture and food security.可持续发展目标 2:改进农业和粮食安全的目标和指标。
Ambio. 2019 Jul;48(7):685-698. doi: 10.1007/s13280-018-1101-4. Epub 2018 Sep 28.
4
A method for modeling the effects of climate and land use changes on erosion and sustainability of soil in a Mediterranean watershed (Languedoc, France).一种模拟气候和土地利用变化对地中海流域(法国朗格多克)土壤侵蚀及可持续性影响的方法。
J Environ Manage. 2015 Mar 1;150:57-68. doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2014.10.034. Epub 2014 Nov 25.
5
Comparison of soil quality index using three methods.三种方法下土壤质量指数的比较。
PLoS One. 2014 Aug 22;9(8):e105981. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0105981. eCollection 2014.
6
Soil erosion, climate change and global food security: challenges and strategies.土壤侵蚀、气候变化和全球粮食安全:挑战与对策。
Sci Prog. 2014;97(Pt 2):97-153. doi: 10.3184/003685014X13994567941465.