LAND CAPABILITY, DEGRADATION STATUS AND PEDODIVERSITY OF A FOREST PEDOSITE IN, ABIA STATE, NIGERIA

  • 0 Review(s)

Product Category: Projects

Product Code: 00009811

No of Pages: 106

No of Chapters: 1-5

File Format: Microsoft Word

Price :

₦5000

  • $

ABSTRACT

A detailed soil survey of 1.8ha forest pedosite at Michael Okpara University of Agriculture, Umudike (MOUAU), Umuahia, Abia State, Nigeria, was conducted to evaluate land capability, degradation status and pedodiversity of the site. Rigid grid method of soil survey was adopted at a scale of 1: 10 000. Datas obtained were analyzed using descriptive statistics. The soil samples were carried to the laboratory to analysis its physical and chemical properties. Three profile pits were dug measuring 1m x 2m, its depth ranged 0.40 -1.50 m Results showed that two soil mapping units FPMOUAUI and FPMOUAU II were identified. Mapping unit FPMOUAU I (0.25ha) is well drained, shallow (≤ 50 cm deep), gravelly and is located on an elevation ranging from 103 – 108 m above sea level. Mapping unit FPMOUAU II (1.55ha)is deep (> 100 cm deep), imperfectly drained, and found on a lower landscape (≤ 103 m above sea level) to mapping unit FPMOUAU I. Using silt-clay ratio as an index of degradation, the soils are degraded ranging from 0.17 – 0 5 and 0.12 – 1 8 for mapping units FPMOUAU I and FPMOUAU II, respectively. At the epipedon, the soils are strongly to moderately acid (pH{H20}4.9 – 5.8), medium to high in organic matter (2.27 – 5.8 %), low to high in total N (0.07 – 0.34 %), low to high in available P (14 – 29 mg/kg) and medium in exchangeable K (0.24 – 0.33 cmol/ kg). The soils are classified as Lithic Udorthents (USDA); Eutric Loamic Regosols (WRB) for mapping unit FPMOUAU I and Typic Paleudalfs (USDA); Stagnic Loamic Luvisols (WRB) for mapping unit FPMOUAU II. The pedosite is arable land belongs to Land Capability Class II. However, land capability unit for mapping unit FPMOUAU I is Class IIs based on shallowness of the soils and Class IIw for mapping unit FPMOUAU II due to imperfect drainage. The Shannon entropy was 0.65 and evenness was 0.69, while the Simpson’s dominance index was 0.05 indicating that the soils are not homogeneous. I recommend that the need to apply soil conservation measures such as construction of an embankment at the upper part of the forest pedosite to reduce run off into the pedosite causing its degradation beyond expectation. The land capability classification has generated data to assist in the choice of appropriate trees (shallow – rooted and deep - rooted) for afforestation programme. The heterogeneity of the site as further revealed by the pedodiversity is a vital soil information to aid in the management of the forests.





TABLE OF CONTENTS

Title Page                                                                                                                    i

Declaration                                                                                                                 ii

Certification                                                                                                               iii

Dedication                                                                                                                  iv

Acknowledgements                                                                                                    v

Table of Contents                                                                                                       vi

List of Tables                                                                                                              x

Lists of Figures                                                                                                           xi

List of Plates                                                                                                               xii

Abstract                                                                                                                      xiii

 

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION                                                                            1

1.1       Background of the Study                                                                                1

1.2       Statement of the Problem                                                                               3

1.3       Justification of the Study                                                                                4

1.4       Objectives of Study                                                                                        4

 

CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW                                                               5

2.1       Land Capability Classification                                                                       5

2.1.1    Modification of land capability classification                                                7

2.1.2    Criteria for placing soils in capability classes                                                            8

2. 2      Land Capability Studies in Ikwuano Local Government Area (LGA) 8

2.3       The Concept of Pedodiversity                                                                        10

2.3.1    Measurement of pedodiversity                                                                       14

2.3.1.1 Shannon’s entropy or diversity index (H)                                                      14

2.3.1.2 Maximum diversity                                                                                        15

2.3.1.3 Evenness (E)                                                                                                   15

2.3.1.4 Simpson’s dominance index (Gini index) (D)                                                16

2.3.1.5 Gini-Simpson’s diversity index (G)                                                               16

2.3.2    Importance of pedodiversity                                                                           16

2.4       Pedosites                                                                                                         17

2.4.1    Forest Pedosite                                                                                               17

2.4.1.1 Criteria used to evaluate forest soils as a pedosite                                         17

2.5       Forests                                                                                                             18

2.5.1    Importance and benefits of forests in an environment                                   19

2.5.2    Major Forest Hazards                                                                                     19

2.5.3    Tropical forest vegetation characteristics                                                      20

2.6       Forest Soils                                                                                                     20

2.6.1    Forest soils and agricultural soils                                                                   21

2.6.2    Characteristics of forest soils                                                                         21

2.6.2.1 Morphological and physical properties of tropical forest soils                        21

2.6.2.2 Chemical properties of tropical forest soils                                                    22

2.7       Degradation of Tropical Soils                                                                        23

CHAPTER 3: MATERIALS AND METHODS                                                    25

3.1       Description of the Study Area                                                                                    25

3.1.1    Location                                                                                                          25

3.1.2    Climate                                                                                                           25

3.1.3    Vegetation                                                                                                      27

3.1.4    Geology, geomorphology and parent material                                               27

3.2       Field Method                                                                                                  28

3.2.1    Detailed Soil Study                                                                                         28

3.3       Laboratory Analyses                                                                                       31

3.3.1    Soil sample preparation                                                                                  31

3.3.2    Physical analyses                                                                                            31

3.3.2.1 Particle size distribution                                                                                 31

3.3.2.2 Gravimetric moisture content                                                                         32

3.3.2.3 Saturated hydraulic conductivity                                                                   33

3.3.2.4 Bulk density determination (b)                                                                     34

3.3.2.5 Total porosity (Pt)                                                                                           34

3.3.2.7 Micro porosity (Pmi)                                                                                       34

3.3.3    Chemical analyses                                                                                          35

3.3.3.1 Soil pH                                                                                                            35

3.3.3.2 Exchangeable acidity (hydrogen (H+) and aluminium (Al3+)                         35

3.3.3.3 Total Exchangeable Bases (TEB)                                                                   35

3.3.3.4 Percentage Base Saturation (BS)                                                                    35

3.3.3.5 The Effective Cation Exchange Capacity (ECEC)                                         36

3.3.3.6 Organic carbon                                                                                               36

3.3.3.7 Total nitrogen                                                                                                 36

3.3.3.8 Available phosphorus                                                                                                 37

3.4      Land Evaluation Method                                                                                37

3.4.1    Land Capability Classification                                                                       37

3.5       Degradation of the Forest Pedosite                                                                39

3.6       Statistical Analysis                                                                                         41

3.7       Soil Classification                                                                                          41

3.8       Pedodiversity                                                                                                  41

3.8.1    Shannon’s entropy or diversity index (H)                                          41

3.8.2    Maximum diversity (Hmax)                                                                             42

3.8.3    Evenness (E)                                                                                                   42

3.8.4    Simpson’s dominance index (D)                                                                    43

3.8.5    Gini-Simpson’s diversity Index (G)                                                               43

CHAPTER 4: RESULTS AND DISCUSSION                                                      45

4.1       Soil Mapping Units                                                                                         45

4.1.1    Morphological properties of the soil mapping units                                      45

4.1.2    Physical properties of the soil mapping units                                                 49

4.1.3    Chemical properties of forest pedosite                                                           54

4.1.4    Degradation status of the soils                                                                        60

4.1.5   Soil classification of FOPED I                                                                                                                                                            62

4.1.6    Soil Classification of FOPED II                                                                     64

4.2       Land Capability Classification                                                                       65

4.3       Pedodiversity of the Forest Pedosite                                                              67

 

CHAPTER 5: SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS     69

5.1       Summary                                                                                                        69

5.2       Conclusion                                                                                                      70

5.3       Recommendations                                                                                          70

            References                                                                                                     

            Appendix                                                                                                       


 



LIST OF TABLES

PAGE

3.1:       Land Capability Classification System-General guidelines                                   38

3.2       Rating of Soil Degradation Based on Silt: Clay Ratio                                   40

3.3:      Interpretation of  Pedodiversity Ratings                                                         44

4.1:      Morphological Properties of the Forest Pedosite                                           48

4.2:      Physical Properties of the Soils                                                                      50

4.3:      Summary of the Physical Properties of the Forest Pedosite at 0 – 30 cm  51

4.4:      Chemical properties of the Forest Pedosite                                                    55

4.5:      Statistical Summary of Chemical Properties Forest Pedosite at 0 –             30 cm Depth                                                                                                              56

4.6:      Degradation Status of the Forest Pedosite                                                      61

4.7:      Soil Classification of the Forest Pedosite                                                       63

4.8:      Pedodiversity indices of the Forest Pedosite                                                  68

 




 

LIST FIGURES

PAGE

2.1:      Pedodiversity: reasons for preservation of a pedological heritage                        11

2.2:      Relationships between pedodiversity, biodiversity, landform diversity,

            lithodiversity, climate diversity, hydrodiversity and land use diversity          12

3.1:      Map of the Study Area                                                                                   26

3.2:      Schematic diagram showing auger soil sampling points                                            (Points X= Grid points where auger samples were taken)                          30

 

4.1:      Land Capability Map                                                                                     66

 




 

LIST OF PLATES

PAGE

 

  A:      Shallow soil of Pedon 1                                                                                  85

  B:      Pedon 3 with its distinct horizon                                                                    88

 

 

 

 

 

 


 

 

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION


1.1       BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY

A land capability classification produced from a detailed soil survey is a vital tool to help land users to make meaningful decisions about the use of their land to optimize returns and avoid environmental degradation. Land capability classification is a broad grouping of soils based on their limitations as a guide to assess suitability of the land for arable crops, grazing and forestry (Dent and Young, 1981). Consequently, it is one of the ways to interpret soil survey data correctly in order to guarantee good land use planning. Against this background, Akamigbo (1999) advised that Nigeria should evolve a land use policy for the 21st century using land capability classification as a tool. Land use policy involves a body of laws whether legislative, executive, administrative directives and specific commitments of government to enhance rural life and reduce poverty through sustainability in agriculture and maintenance of environmental harmony, among others. It aids judicious application of inputs to achieve sustainable soil management decisions, to enhance agro - technology transfer, and overall agricultural development. . Consequently, it is a sustainable land management strategy because the system of land capability classification requires that every hectare of land be used in accordance with its capability and limitations. It is designed to emphasize the hazards in different kinds of soils. It is a general soil interpretation based primarily on physical factors of soil, site, climate, for general agriculture. Jenny (1941)

Land degradation is a growing problem in many countries. Land degradation implies loss or impairment of soil, water or productivity potential. According to Adegeye and Omonona (1999) and Chukwu et al. (2012) land degradation involves the decline in productivity as a result of the impoverishment and depletion of vegetative cover, exposure of the soil to wind and water erosion, reduction of soil organic matter and nutrient content, and deterioration of soil structure and its capacity to retain water. The authors identified soil erosion as the rampant forms of land degradation in Nigeria. Sheet erosion is most serious in Nigeria and it is normally a natural slow process which occurs on a land which is not dead flat, which has a soil cover and which receives rainfall high enough to produce run-off (Adegeye and Omonona, 1999). Chukwu et al. (2012) in a land capability classification of Ikwuano LGA, Abia State, included Umudike within which the forest pedosite falls, under land capability unit class IIen, where low nutrient reserve and soil (sheet) erosion are major limitations to productivity.

Pedodiversity is credited to Alex McBratney who coined the terminology in 1992. The word ‘pedodiversity’ is a combination of both the Greek word ‘pedo’ and English word ‘diversity’. While ‘pedo’ means soils (Buol et al., 1997), diversity means the state or fact of being diverse, different, variety or multi-formity (Gaston, 2000).The concept of diversity has been widely used in ecological studies, although mainly for the biotic component. Pedodiversity is a way of measuring soil variation (McBratney, 1992) usually using taxa from well-accepted international soil classification systems (Ibáñez et al., 1995; Guo et al., 2003; Phillips and Marion, 2005).  It is a quantitative expression of the patterns of soil distribution, the soil type, and its extent in an area (Florea, 1998). Notwithstanding, the difficulties of concepts of individuals and species for soil, soil scientists have pragmatically adapted the concept of biodiversity and used species richness, abundance, and Shannon's index as indices for measuring it.

The term forest is defined by the Forestry Commission (2011) as a land largely covered with trees (defined as land under stands of trees with a canopy cover of at least 20%), whether in large tracts (generally called forests) or smaller areas known by a variety of terms including woods, copses, spinneys or shelterbelts. Forest sites house numerous ancient monuments and other cultural and historical remains (Svensson, 2005) as their soils are a repository of environment and cultural information. Costantini (1999) defined pedosite as a geo-referenced soil or site (forest) having cultural heritage, that is, a soil exposure or a soil-scape where an extraordinary cultural interest has been recognized.

1.2       STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEMS

Persistent food insecurity and failure of agriculture to supply adequate quantities of raw materials to industries are common issues in developing economies. This is attributed to many factors, among which is soil resource illiteracy. The OFAR (1984, 1985) identified poor knowledge of soil as a major problem hindering agricultural development in Umuahia Agricultural Zone. This is not a surprise as similar observations have been made in most parts of Nigeria and Africa. Chukwu et al. (2013) Some of the reasons for this situation are related to lack of soil survey reports of most rural communities and Local Government Areas (LGAs) where food and fiber production take place. Also, the scales of most national soil surveys are at reconnaissance level such that pedological information about rural communities is virtually non-existent.

Available information has shown that the land capability of the soil-scape where the forest reserve in the university is located is not known. Consequently, there is a dearth of information about the limitations or hazards inherent in the site and opportunities for alternative land use options the site can be put. This information is necessary for land use planning especially in the university environment. Pedodiversity studies are novel in Nigeria, especially in the south-eastern agro-ecological zone. As a quantitative expression of the patterns of soil distribution and its extent in an area, there is paucity of information on the forest pedosite (reserve) at the Michael Okpara University of Agriculture, (MOUA), Umudike. Baseline data of the forest pedosite are necessary to explain the diversity of the naturally occurring tree species in the forest as it will aid forest management especially afforestation programmes.

1.3       JUSTIFICATION OF THE STUDY

  Land capability classification can give an insight into the reasons behind the dominance of tree species in the forest pedosite. The study will ascertain, for the first time, the distribution of soil individuals in the forest. Since there is a dearth of information on land capability classification and pedodiversity of this forest pedosite, it becomes expedient, at this time, to undertake a study of for the purpose of enhancing soil information system about the area. From the foregoing it makes the study necessary and justified.


1.4       OBJECTIVES OF STUDY

The main objective of this study was to assess the land capability asses state of degradation and pedodiversity of the forest pedosite at MOUA, Umudike. The specific objectives are;

i.      delineate soils of the forest pedosite at MOUA,Umudike

ii.     characterize and classify the soils of the forest pedosite.

iii.   provide land capability classification of the forest pedosite.

iv.   ascertain the pedodiversity of soils in the pedosite.

 

Click “DOWNLOAD NOW” below to get the complete Projects

FOR QUICK HELP CHAT WITH US NOW!

+(234) 0814 780 1594

Buyers has the right to create dispute within seven (7) days of purchase for 100% refund request when you experience issue with the file received. 

Dispute can only be created when you receive a corrupt file, a wrong file or irregularities in the table of contents and content of the file you received. 

ProjectShelve.com shall either provide the appropriate file within 48hrs or send refund excluding your bank transaction charges. Term and Conditions are applied.

Buyers are expected to confirm that the material you are paying for is available on our website ProjectShelve.com and you have selected the right material, you have also gone through the preliminary pages and it interests you before payment. DO NOT MAKE BANK PAYMENT IF YOUR TOPIC IS NOT ON THE WEBSITE.

In case of payment for a material not available on ProjectShelve.com, the management of ProjectShelve.com has the right to keep your money until you send a topic that is available on our website within 48 hours.

You cannot change topic after receiving material of the topic you ordered and paid for.

Ratings & Reviews

0.0

No Review Found.

Review


To Comment


Sold By

ProjectShelve

7984

Total Item

Reviews (31)

  • Anonymous

    5 days ago

    This is so amazing and unbelievable, it’s really good and it’s exactly of what I am looking for

  • Anonymous

    2 weeks ago

    Great service

  • Anonymous

    1 month ago

    This is truly legit, thanks so much for not disappointing

  • Anonymous

    1 month ago

    I was so happy to helping me through my project topic thank you so much

  • Anonymous

    1 month ago

    Just got my material... thanks

  • Anonymous

    1 month ago

    Thank you for your reliability and swift service Order and delivery was within the blink of an eye.

  • Anonymous

    1 month ago

    It's actually good and it doesn't delay in sending. Thanks

  • Anonymous

    1 month ago

    I got the material without delay. The content too is okay

  • Anonymous

    1 month ago

    Thank you guys for the document, this will really go a long way for me. Kudos to project shelve👍

  • Anonymous

    1 month ago

    You guys have a great works here I m really glad to be one of your beneficiary hope for the best from you guys am pleased with the works and content writings it really good

  • Anonymous

    1 month ago

    Excellent user experience and project was delivered very quickly

  • Anonymous

    2 months ago

    The material is very good and worth the price being sold I really liked it 👍

  • Anonymous

    2 months ago

    Wow response was fast .. 👍 Thankyou

  • Anonymous

    2 months ago

    Trusted, faster and easy research platform.

  • TJ

    2 months ago

    great

  • Anonymous

    2 months ago

    My experience with projectselves. Com was a great one, i appreciate your prompt response and feedback. More grace

  • Anonymous

    2 months ago

    Sure plug ♥️♥️

  • Anonymous

    2 months ago

    Thanks I have received the documents Exactly what I ordered Fast and reliable

  • Anonymous

    2 months ago

    Wow this is amazing website with fast response and best projects topic I haven't seen before

  • Anonymous

    2 months ago

    Genuine site. I got all materials for my project swiftly immediately after my payment.

  • Anonymous

    2 months ago

    It agree, a useful piece

  • Anonymous

    2 months ago

    Good work and satisfactory

  • Anonymous

    2 months ago

    Good job

  • Anonymous

    2 months ago

    Fast response and reliable

  • Anonymous

    2 months ago

    Projects would've alot easier if everyone have an idea of excellence work going on here.

  • Anonymous

    2 months ago

    Very good 👍👍

  • Anonymous

    2 months ago

    Honestly, the material is top notch and precise. I love the work and I'll recommend project shelve anyday anytime

  • Anonymous

    2 months ago

    Well and quickly delivered

  • Anonymous

    3 months ago

    I am thoroughly impressed with Projectshelve.com! The project material was of outstanding quality, well-researched, and highly detailed. What amazed me most was their instant delivery to both my email and WhatsApp, ensuring I got what I needed immediately. Highly reliable and professional—I'll definitely recommend them to anyone seeking quality project materials!

  • Anonymous

    3 months ago

    Its amazing transacting with Projectshelve. They are sincere, got material delivered within few minutes in my email and whatsApp.

  • TJ

    5 months ago

    ProjectShelve is highly reliable. Got the project delivered instantly after payment. Quality of the work.also excellent. Thank you