| Literature DB >> 32952452 |
Sabiela Fekad Fentie1, Kehali Jembere1, Endalkachew Fekadu2, Dessale Wasie2.
Abstract
Land use changes have long been considered among many factors responsible for physical and chemical soil degradation. This study was conducted to evaluate land use and land cover (LULC) changes and their cumulative effects over 30 years (from 1989 to 2019) on the current physical and chemical properties of soils inpan> the Tejibara watershed, Ethiopia. Image analysis and LULC classifications were performed usinpan>g ERDAS IMAGINE 2014 and ArcGIS 10.4 software, respectively. For the determination of soil properties, four land use types (natural forest, eucalyptus plantation, cultivated, and grazing lands) and two soil depths (0-20 and 20-40 cm) were used. Triplicate composite soil samples were collected from each land use type and soil depths. For the determination of physical (texture and bulk density) and chemical soil properties such as electrical conductivity (EC), organic matter (OM), total nitrogen (TN), and available phosphorus (AP), standard laboratory procedures were employed. The image analysis results for all of the years studied show that cultivated lands have increased in area at the expense of forest and grazing lands. Silt content, clay content, AP, and pH were significantly affected by land use as the main effect while the interaction effects of soil depth and land use were significant for total N and OM only. The highest (10.1 mg/kg) and the lowest (4.9 mg/kg) AP contents were observed in the forest and the grazing lands, respectively. Soil total N content was highest in the forest lands (0.32%) and lowest in cultivated lands (0.06%). Concerning OM content, the highest (11.0%) and the lowest (0.8%) values were recorded in the forest and cultivated lands, respectively. Generally, this study showed that land use changes have reduced the areal coverage by forest and grazing lands and have negatively affected the soil properties. This implies that land use change without soil fertility measures that are appropriate to the area could cause enhanced land degradation and thereby reduce the productivity of the study area soils.Entities:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32952452 PMCID: PMC7482007 DOI: 10.1155/2020/1479460
Source DB: PubMed Journal: ScientificWorldJournal ISSN: 1537-744X
Figure 1Location map of Tejibara watershed.
Description of satellite images.
| Satellite | Sensor | Date of acquisition | Pixel resolution (m) | No. of bands |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Landsat 5 | TM | 03/10/1989 | 30 | 7 |
| Landsat 5 | TM | 16/11/1999 | 30 | 7 |
| Landsat 5 | TM | 11/11/2009 | 30 | 7 |
| Landsat 8 | OLI | 25/12/2019 | 30 | 11 |
Description of land use and land cover classes.
| Land use/land cover classes | Descriptions |
|---|---|
| Cultivated land | Areas allotted to rainfed and irrigated cultivation, including fallow plots, cultivated land mixed with some bushes, trees, and the scattered rural settlements included within the cultivated fields |
| Forest land | Areas covered by trees forming closed or nearly closed canopies, forest, plantation forest, dense (50–80% crown cover) |
| Grazing land | Areas of land where small grasses are the predominant natural vegetation usually used for grazing |
| Bare land | Areas with little or no “green” vegetation present due to erosion, overgrazing, and crop cultivation |
| Settlement | Areas covered with buildings in rural and urban. It includes commercial, residential, industrial, and transportation infrastructures |
Accuracy assessment matrix for LULC.
| Classification class | Reference class | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Forest | Grass | Cultivated | Bare land | Settlement | Row total | User' accuracy (%) | |
| Forest |
| 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 23 | 100.0 |
| Grass | 0 |
| 6 | 0 | 0 | 42 | 85.7 |
| Cultivated | 0 | 3 |
| 0 | 2 | 61 | 91.8 |
| Bare land | 0 | 2 | 0 |
| 2 | 28 | 85.7 |
| Settlement | 0 | 0 | 1 | 2 |
| 26 | 88.5 |
| Column total | 23 | 41 | 63 | 26 | 27 | 180 | |
| Producers' accuracy (%) | 100 | 87.8 | 88.9 | 92.3 | 85.2 | ||
| Overall accuracy | 90% | ||||||
| Kappa coefficient | 87% | ||||||
Figure 2Land use and land cover in (a) 1989, (b) 1999, (c) 2009, and (d) 2019.
Land use and land cover (LULC) change from 1989 to 2019.
| Land cover type | LULC 1989 | LULC 1999 | LULC 2009 | LULC 2019 | Change in % (1989–2019) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Area (ha) | % of area | Area (ha) | % of area | Area (ha) | % of area | Area (ha) | % of area | ||
| Forest | 1096.3 | 10.9 | 616.5 | 6.1 | 367.2 | 3.7 | 321.2 | 3.2 | −7.7 |
| Cultivated | 4054.1 | 40.4 | 5067.5 | 50.6 | 5566.1 | 55.5 | 5646.8 | 56.3 | 15.9 |
| Grazing | 3719.2 | 37.1 | 2577.2 | 25.7 | 1967.6 | 19.6 | 1937.3 | 19.3 | −17.8 |
| Bare land | 671.0 | 6.7 | 754.5 | 7.5 | 1023.6 | 10.2 | 635.3 | 6.4 | −0.3 |
| Settlement | 485.0 | 4.8 | 1009.9 | 10.1 | 1101.2 | 11.0 | 1484.9 | 14.8 | 10 |
|
| |||||||||
| Total | 10025.6 | 100.0 | 10025.6 | 100.0 | 10025.6 | 100.0 | 10025.6 | 100.0 | |
Main effects of land use and soil depth on selected physical properties of the soils.
| Land use type | Sand (%) | Silt (%) | Clay (%) | STC | BD (g/cm3) | SMC |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Natural forest | 45.1a | 39.6a | 15.3c | Loam | 1.0c | 25.5a |
| Eucalyptus plantation | 33.4b | 35.6ab | 31.0a | Clay loam | 1.4b | 19.2bc |
| Grazing | 45.8a | 33.6b | 20.6bc | Loam | 1.4b | 17.7c |
| Cultivated | 37.1ab | 40.3a | 22.6b | Loam | 1.5a | 23.6ab |
| LSD (0.05) | 11.4 | 5.1 | 7.3 | 0.1 | 5.4 | |
| CV (%) | 22.7 | 10.9 | 26.3 | 8.4 | 20.3 | |
|
| ||||||
|
| ||||||
| 0–20 cm | 43.1 | 36.6 | 20.3 | Loam | 1.2b | 19.9 |
| 20–40 cm | 37.6 | 37.9 | 24.5 | Loam | 1.4c | 23.2 |
| LSD (0.05) | NS | NS | NS | 0.10 | NS | |
| CV (%) | 22.7 | 10.9 | 26.3 | 8.4 | 20.3 | |
Main effect means within a column followed by the same letter are not significantly different from each other at P ≤ 0.05. CV = coefficient of variation; LSD = least significant difference; NS = not significant; STC = soil textural class; BD = bulk density; SMC = soil moisture content.
Mean square (MS) and results of two-way analysis of variance of soil physical properties.
| Physical properties | Land use | Soil depth (cm) | Interaction effects | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| MS | F | P | MS | F | P | MS | F | P | |
| Sand (%) | 220.61 | 2.61 | 0.092ns | 181.5 | 2.15 | 0.164ns | 17.5 | 0.21 | 0.889ns |
| Silt (%) | 61.33 | 3.65 | 0.039 | 10.67 | 0.64 | 0.438ns | 25.77 | 1.54 | 0.249ns |
| Clay (%) | 253.94 | 7.32 | 0.004 | 104.17 | 3.00 | 0.105ns | 25.94 | 0.75 | 0.541ns |
| BD (g/cm3) | 0.269 | 21.93 | 0.0001 | 0.096 | 7.84 | 0.014 | 0.015 | 1.21 | 0.342ns |
| SMC (%) | 80.87 | 4.23 | 0.0252 | 64.059 | 3.35 | 0.089ns | 56.21 | 2.94 | 0.069ns |
Significant at P ≤ 0.05; significant at P ≤ 0.01; ns = not significant; MS = mean square; F = calculated value; P = probability; BD = bulk density.
Mean square (MS) and results of two-way analysis of variance of soil chemical properties.
| Chemical properties | Land use | Soil depth (cm) | Interaction effects | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| MS | F | P | MS | F | P | MS | F | P | |
| pH (H2O) | 0.348 | 11.71 | 0.0004 | 0.0247 | 0.83 | 0.3774ns | 0.0366 | 1.23 | 0.3356ns |
| EC (dS/m) | 0.0074 | 62.66 | 0.0001 | 0.0043 | 36.02 | 0.0001 | 0.0011 | 9.38 | 0.0012 |
| OM (%) | 118.6 | 175.21 | 0.0001 | 20.075 | 29.66 | 0.0001 | 4.615 | 7.33 | 0.0034 |
| TN (%) | 0.075 | 80.21 | 0.0001 | 0.0045 | 4.88 | 0.0444 | 0.0036 | 3.85 | 0.0336 |
| AP (mg/kg) | 3114.72 | 4.00 | 0.0298 | 363.015 | 0.47 | 0.5056ns | 1786.79 | 2.3 | 0.1222ns |
| CEC (cmolc/kg) | 12.409 | 2.82 | 0.0776ns | 0.1998 | 0.05 | 0.8345ns | 3.7954 | 0.86 | 0.4841ns |
| K (cmolc/kg) | 0.953 | 3.04 | 0.064ns | 0.011 | 0.03 | 0.8551ns | 0.542 | 1.73 | 0.2064ns |
Significant at P ≤ 0.05; significant at P ≤ 0.01; ns = not significant; MS = mean square; F = calculated value; P = probability; EC = electrical conductivity; OM = organic matter; TN = total nitrogen; AP = available phosphorus; CEC = cation exchange capacity.
Main effects of land use and soil depth on some chemical properties of the soils.
| Land use types | pH (H2O) | EC (ms/cm) | OM (%) | TN (%) | Av. P (mg/kg) | Ex. K (cmolc/kg) | CEC (cmolc/kg) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Natural forest | 6.5a | 0.10a | 11.0a | 0.32a | 10.1a | 2.2 | 40.4 |
| Eucalyptus plantation | 6.0b | 0.06b | 4.4b | 0.18b | 5.9b | 1.8 | 39.7 |
| Grazing | 6.4a | 0.04c | 2.5c | 0.11c | 4.9b | 1.2 | 37.2 |
| Cultivated | 6.5a | 0.02d | 0.8d | 0.06d | 7.6ab | 1.5 | 38.1 |
| LSD (0.05) | 0.21 | 0.01 | 1.02 | 0.04 | 3.45 | NS | 2.60 |
| CV (%) | 2.7 | 19.2 | 17.5 | 18.2 | 38.9 | 33.6 | 5.4 |
|
| |||||||
|
| |||||||
| 0–20 cm | 6.3 | 0.07a | 5.6a | 0.18a | 7.5 | 1.7 | 38.9 |
| 20–40 cm | 6.4 | 0.04b | 3.8b | 0.15b | 6.8 | 1.6 | 38.8 |
| LSD (0.05) | NS | 0.01 | 0.72 | 0.03 | NS | NS | NS |
| CV (%) | 2.7 | 19.2 | 17.5 | 18.2 | 38.9 | 33.6 | 5.4 |
The main effect means within a column followed by the same letter are not significantly different from each other at P ≤ 0.05. NS = not significant; CV = coefficient of variation; LSD = least significant difference.
Interaction effects of land use and soil depth on selected soil chemical properties.
| Land use types | pH (H2O) | EC (ms/cm) | OM (%) | Total N (%) | Av. P(mg/kg) | CEC(cmolc/kg) | Ex. K(cmolc/kg) | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Soil depth (cm) | ||||||||||||||
| 0–20 | 20–40 | 0–20 | 20–40 | 0–20 | 20–40 | 0–20 | 20–40 | 0–20 | 20–40 | 0–20 | 20–40 | 0–20 | 20–40 | |
| Forest land | 6.5 | 6.5 | 0.14a | 0.07b | 12.9a | 9.1b | 0.35a | 0.29b | 10.9 | 9.3 | 40.9 | 39.8 | 2.03 | 2.3 |
| Eucalyptus plantation | 6.0 | 5.9 | 0.07b | 0.05c | 5.9c | 2.9d | 0.22c | 0.14d | 7.9 | 3.9 | 40.7 | 38.8 | 2.19 | 1.3 |
| Grazing land | 6.3 | 6.5 | 0.05c | 0.04cd | 2.7d | 2.4de | 0.11de | 0.11de | 2.8 | 7.0 | 36.8 | 37.7 | 1.31 | 1.2 |
| Cultivated land | 6.4 | 6.6 | 0.02de | 0.02e | 1.0ef | 0.6f | 0.05f | 0.07ef | 8.5 | 6.7 | 37.4 | 38.8 | 1.23 | 1.7 |
| LSD (0.05) | NS | 0.02 | 1.44 | 0.053 | NS | NS | NS | |||||||
| CV (%) | 2.7 | 19.2 | 17.5 | 18.2 | 38.9 | 5.4 | 33.6 | |||||||
Interaction means within a specific soil parameter followed by the same letter are not significantly different from each other at P ≤ 0.05. CV = coefficient of variation; LSD = least significant difference.