No abstract

The effect of soil management and land use change are of interest to the sustainable land management for improving the environment and advancing food security in developing countries. Both anthropogenic changes and natural processes affect agriculture primarily by altering soil quality. This paper reviews and synthesizes the available literatures related to the influence of soil management and land use changes on soil carbon (C) stock in Ethiopia. The review shows that topsoil C stock declines approximately 0-63%, 0-23%, and 17-83% upon land use conversion from forest to crop land, to open grazing, and to plantation, respectively. An increase of 1-3% in soil C stock was observed within 10 years of converting open grazed land to protected enclosures. However, there was a little change in soil C stock below 20 cm depth.There is a large potential of increasing SOC pool with adoption of land restorative measures. Total potential of soil C sequestration with the adoption of restoration measures ranges 0Á066-2Á2 Tg C y À1 on rain-fed cropland and 4Á2-10Á5 Tg C y À1 on rangeland. Given large area and diverse ecological conditions in Ethiopia, research data available in published literature are rather scanty. Therefore, researchable priorities identified in this review are important.

In extensive farmer‐led trials practicing conservation farming (CF) in three regions of Zambia (Mongu: sandy soils; Kaoma: sandy or loamy sand soils; Mkushi: sandy loam or loamy soils), we studied the effects of biochar made of maize cobs (0, 2, and 6 t ha−1 corresponding to 0, 0.8, and 2.5% per basin) at different fertilizer rates of NPK and urea on crop yield of maize (Zea mays) and groundnuts (Arachis hypogaea). Conservation farming in this case combines minimum tillage (how basins), crop rotation and residue retention. For the first time, the effect of biochar on in situ soil nutrient supply rates [determined by buried Plant Root Simulator (PRS™) exchange resins] was studied, as well as the effects of biochar on elemental composition of maize. Effects of 0–10% (w:w) biochar addition on soil physical and soil chemical properties were determined in the laboratory. At all sites there was a consistent positive response in crop yield upon the addition of biochar. However, due to a great variability between farms there were no significant differences in absolute yields between the treatments. In the sandy soils at Mongu, relative yields (i.e., percentage yield with biochar relative to the same fertilizer rate without biochar) of maize grains and maize stover were significantly increased at recommended fertilizer rates (232 ± 60%) and at half the recommended rate (128 ± 6%), respectively. In addition, biochar significantly increased concentrations of K and P in maize stover. In situ soil nutrient supply rates as measured by PRS™‐probes were highly spatially variable with no consistent effects of the different treatments in the three regions. By contrast, the fraction of plant available water (Vol.‐%) significantly increased upon the addition of biochar in all three soils. The increase caused by 10% biochar addition was of factor 2.5 in Mongu (from 4.5% to 11.2%) and 1.2 in both Kaoma (from 14.7% to 18.2%) and Mkushi (from 18.2% to 22.7%). Cation exchange capacity, pH, and exchangeable K significantly increased upon the addition of 10% (w:w) biochar in all three regions with a subsequent increase in base saturation and decrease of available Al3+. Our findings suggest that the addition of biochar in combination with CF might have a positive impact on crop growth and that this positive effect is mainly caused by increases in plant‐available water and decreased available Al.

No abstract

Empirically based models are used worldwide to estimate soil erosion. The Revised Universal Soil Loss Equation (RUSLE) is one such model that has been intensively tested and validated under conditions in the United States. RUSLE estimates average soil loss as a function of five main factors: rainfall erosivity (R), soil erodibility (K), crop management (C), support practice (P), and topographic (LS) factors. This study investigated the application of RUSLE to Mediterranean conditions. The validation and calibration of RUSLE in the study area utilized field plots' soil erosion measurements. The results found the RUSLE soil loss estimation to be three times the actual soil loss (7.8 and 2.6 Mg/ha, for RUSLE and actual measured soil loss, respectively). The difference between the RUSLE factors and the measured factors were responsible for the differences between the soil loss estimation by RUSLE and the measured soil loss. Specifically, the RUSLE K-factor showed three times the magnitude of the measured K-factor, the RUSLE C-factor underestimated the measured C-factor, and the RUSLE P-factor overestimated the measured P-factor by three times. Adjusting the RUSLE factors according to the measured ones increased the model's predictability, whereas the adjusted-RUSLE soil loss estimation underestimated the measured soil loss by 14%. The adjustment of RUSLE, according to the prevailing conditions of the study area, increased the model efficiency three times (0.26 and 0.86 before and after adjustment of the mode, respectively). For more accurate and reliable validation of the RUSLE under the Mediterranean conditions, it is advisable to conduct long-term soil loss experimentation and measurements.