Banner
Current IssueEditorial BoardOnline First ArticlesArchive
Current IssueEditorial BoardOnline First ArticlesArchive

volume 43 issue 3 (september 2009) : 180-186

COMPACTABILITY IN RELATION TO TEXTURE AND ORGANIC MATTER CONTENT OF ALLUVIAL SOILS

D
Dinesh Kumar
M
M.L. Bansal
V
V.K. Phogat*
1Department of Soil Science, CCS Haryana Agricultural University, Hisar- 125004, India

  • Submitted|

  • First Online |

  • doi

Cite article:- Kumar Dinesh, Bansal M.L., Phogat* V.K. (2025). COMPACTABILITY IN RELATION TO TEXTURE AND ORGANIC MATTER CONTENT OF ALLUVIAL SOILS. Indian Journal of Agricultural Research. 43(3): 180-186. doi: .

ABSTRACT

There is growing realization that the green revolution technologies have, in general,
resulted in soil compaction and ultimately reduction in soil productivity. The
relationships between soil compactability and a range of soil textural classes and soil
organic matter contents were described. The maximum bulk density, critical water
content and susceptibility of soil to compaction were found to increase with increase
in fineness of soil texture. Sandy soils achieved maximum compaction at relatively
low moisture content. Sand was almost fully compacted in their natural state (94%)
while loam may be compacted to the extent of about 17%. Although the Proctor test
was unable to identify the exact maximum compaction of swelling soil (clay loam)
which may exist in the field but the bulk density of clay loam soil was found to have
increased by 37% upon compaction and subsequent drying. An increase in soil organic
matter was found to reduce the risk of soil compaction at given moisture content.
The clay loam soil was found more sensitive to compaction but the application of
organic matter found to reduce its susceptibility to compaction to a larger extent as
compared to other soils. The study indicated that soil texture specific tests would be
required to determine the correct organic matter level to achieve a target bulk density
to avoid the problem of compaction arising due to mechanized intensive agriculture.

REFERENCES

  1. Anil Kumar (2004). M.Sc. Thesis. CCS Haryana Agricultural University, Hisar, Haryana, India.
  2. Blake G.R. (1965). In: Methods of Soil Analysis, Part 1. Agron.9, (C.A. Black, Chief Ed.), American
  3. Society of Agronomy, Madison, Wisconsin, USA. pp 374-390.
  4. Dharam Pal and Phogat, V.K. (2004). J. Indian Soc. Soil Sci. 52: 202-205.
  5. Diaz-Zorita, M. and Grosso, G.A. (2000). Soil Tillage Res. 54: 121-126.
  6. Felton, G.K. and Ali, M. (1992). Trans. Am. Soc. Agric. Engg. 35: 1153-1160.
  7. Flowers, M.D. and Lal, R. (1988). Soil Tillage Res. 48: 21-35.
  8. Gajri, P.R. et al. (1994). Soil Use Mngment. 10: 15-20.
  9. Gupta, R.K. et al. (2003). In: Improving the Productivity and Sustainability of Rice-Wheat Systems: Issues
  10. and Impact (J.K. Ladha, et al. eds). ASA Special Publication No. 65, American Society of
  11. Agronomy, Crop Science Society of America, Soil Science Society of America, Madison, Wisconsin,
  12. USA. pp 1-25.
  13. Gupta, S.C. et al. (1989). Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 51: 207-212.
  14. Horn, R. (1988). Catena Supplement 11: 53-71.
  15. Horn, R. and Lebert, M. (1994). In: Soil Compaction in Crop Production (B.D. Soane and C. van Ouwerkerk,
  16. Eds.), Elsevier, Amsterdam, Netherlands. pp 45-69.
  17. Howard, R.F. et al. (1981). Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 45: 231-236.
  18. Ismail, I. et al. (1994). Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 58: 193-198.
  19. Ladha, J.K. et al. (2003). In: Improving the Productivity and Sustainability of Rice-Wheat Systems: Issues
  20. and Impact (Ladha J.K., et al. eds.) ASA Special Publication No. 65, American Society of
  21. Agronomy, Crop Science Society of America, Soil Science Society of America, Madison, Wisconsin,
  22. USA. pp 45-76.
  23. Larson, W.E. et al.. (1980). Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 44: 450-457.
  24. McGarry, D. (1993). In: Land Degradation Processes in Australia (McTainsh G.H. and Boughton W.C.,
  25. Eds.), Longman Cheshire Melbourne, Australia. pp 271-305.
  26. McQueen, D.J. and Shepherd, T.G. (2002). Soil Tillage Res. 63: 93-107.
  27. Mosaddeghi, M.R. et al. (2000). Soil Tillage Res. 55: 87-97.
  28. Proctor, R.R. (1933). Engg. News Record. 111: 286-289.
  29. Soane, B.D. (1990). Soil Tillage Res. 16: 179-201.
  30. Soane, B.D. et al. (1981a). Soil Tillage Res. 1: 207-237.
  31. Soane, B.D. et al. (1981b). Soil Tillage Res. 1: 373-400.
  32. Stengel, P. et al. (1984). Soil Tillage Res. 4: 35-53.
  33. Zhang, H. et al. (1997). Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 61: 239-245.
Published In
Indian Journal of Agricultural Research
Article Metrics
Metrics Icon
0
Views
0
Citations
Reviewed By
Share Article
Download Article
In this Article
    Contact us
    Follow us

    volume 43 issue 3 (september 2009) : 180-186

    COMPACTABILITY IN RELATION TO TEXTURE AND ORGANIC MATTER CONTENT OF ALLUVIAL SOILS

    D
    Dinesh Kumar
    M
    M.L. Bansal
    V
    V.K. Phogat*
    1Department of Soil Science, CCS Haryana Agricultural University, Hisar- 125004, India

    • Submitted|

    • First Online |

    • doi

    Cite article:- Kumar Dinesh, Bansal M.L., Phogat* V.K. (2025). COMPACTABILITY IN RELATION TO TEXTURE AND ORGANIC MATTER CONTENT OF ALLUVIAL SOILS. Indian Journal of Agricultural Research. 43(3): 180-186. doi: .

    ABSTRACT

    There is growing realization that the green revolution technologies have, in general,
    resulted in soil compaction and ultimately reduction in soil productivity. The
    relationships between soil compactability and a range of soil textural classes and soil
    organic matter contents were described. The maximum bulk density, critical water
    content and susceptibility of soil to compaction were found to increase with increase
    in fineness of soil texture. Sandy soils achieved maximum compaction at relatively
    low moisture content. Sand was almost fully compacted in their natural state (94%)
    while loam may be compacted to the extent of about 17%. Although the Proctor test
    was unable to identify the exact maximum compaction of swelling soil (clay loam)
    which may exist in the field but the bulk density of clay loam soil was found to have
    increased by 37% upon compaction and subsequent drying. An increase in soil organic
    matter was found to reduce the risk of soil compaction at given moisture content.
    The clay loam soil was found more sensitive to compaction but the application of
    organic matter found to reduce its susceptibility to compaction to a larger extent as
    compared to other soils. The study indicated that soil texture specific tests would be
    required to determine the correct organic matter level to achieve a target bulk density
    to avoid the problem of compaction arising due to mechanized intensive agriculture.

    REFERENCES

    1. Anil Kumar (2004). M.Sc. Thesis. CCS Haryana Agricultural University, Hisar, Haryana, India.
    2. Blake G.R. (1965). In: Methods of Soil Analysis, Part 1. Agron.9, (C.A. Black, Chief Ed.), American
    3. Society of Agronomy, Madison, Wisconsin, USA. pp 374-390.
    4. Dharam Pal and Phogat, V.K. (2004). J. Indian Soc. Soil Sci. 52: 202-205.
    5. Diaz-Zorita, M. and Grosso, G.A. (2000). Soil Tillage Res. 54: 121-126.
    6. Felton, G.K. and Ali, M. (1992). Trans. Am. Soc. Agric. Engg. 35: 1153-1160.
    7. Flowers, M.D. and Lal, R. (1988). Soil Tillage Res. 48: 21-35.
    8. Gajri, P.R. et al. (1994). Soil Use Mngment. 10: 15-20.
    9. Gupta, R.K. et al. (2003). In: Improving the Productivity and Sustainability of Rice-Wheat Systems: Issues
    10. and Impact (J.K. Ladha, et al. eds). ASA Special Publication No. 65, American Society of
    11. Agronomy, Crop Science Society of America, Soil Science Society of America, Madison, Wisconsin,
    12. USA. pp 1-25.
    13. Gupta, S.C. et al. (1989). Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 51: 207-212.
    14. Horn, R. (1988). Catena Supplement 11: 53-71.
    15. Horn, R. and Lebert, M. (1994). In: Soil Compaction in Crop Production (B.D. Soane and C. van Ouwerkerk,
    16. Eds.), Elsevier, Amsterdam, Netherlands. pp 45-69.
    17. Howard, R.F. et al. (1981). Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 45: 231-236.
    18. Ismail, I. et al. (1994). Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 58: 193-198.
    19. Ladha, J.K. et al. (2003). In: Improving the Productivity and Sustainability of Rice-Wheat Systems: Issues
    20. and Impact (Ladha J.K., et al. eds.) ASA Special Publication No. 65, American Society of
    21. Agronomy, Crop Science Society of America, Soil Science Society of America, Madison, Wisconsin,
    22. USA. pp 45-76.
    23. Larson, W.E. et al.. (1980). Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 44: 450-457.
    24. McGarry, D. (1993). In: Land Degradation Processes in Australia (McTainsh G.H. and Boughton W.C.,
    25. Eds.), Longman Cheshire Melbourne, Australia. pp 271-305.
    26. McQueen, D.J. and Shepherd, T.G. (2002). Soil Tillage Res. 63: 93-107.
    27. Mosaddeghi, M.R. et al. (2000). Soil Tillage Res. 55: 87-97.
    28. Proctor, R.R. (1933). Engg. News Record. 111: 286-289.
    29. Soane, B.D. (1990). Soil Tillage Res. 16: 179-201.
    30. Soane, B.D. et al. (1981a). Soil Tillage Res. 1: 207-237.
    31. Soane, B.D. et al. (1981b). Soil Tillage Res. 1: 373-400.
    32. Stengel, P. et al. (1984). Soil Tillage Res. 4: 35-53.
    33. Zhang, H. et al. (1997). Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 61: 239-245.
    In this Article
      Contact us
      Follow us
      Published In
      Indian Journal of Agricultural Research

      Editorial Board

      View all (0)