Ohne Titel

Seite 1

ReviewHumusica 1, article 3: Essential bases–Quick look at the classificationAugusto Zanellaa,⁎, Jean-François Pongeb, Rein de Waalc, Chiara Ferronatod, Maria De Nobilie,Jérôme JuilleretfaUniversity of Padua, ItalybMuséum National d’Histoire Naturelle, Paris, FrancecUniversity of Wageningen, The NetherlandsdUniversity of Bologna, ItalyeUniversity of Udine, ItalyfLuxembourg Institute of Science and Technology, Belvaux, LuxembourgARTICLE INFOKeywords:HumusHumus classificationTerrestrial humus systemsHistic humus systemsAqueous humus systemsPara humus systemsAnthropogenic humus systemsABSTRACTTerms and concepts have been defined in Humusica 1, article 1 and the functioning of humus systems has beendiscussed in Humusica 1, article 2. Here a short overview of the matter, showing humus systems in their en-vironment, is provided for beginners, before makingfield investigations. The present work is intended as a partof thefield manual (HUMUSICA 1 and 2), an illustrated, easy-to-use application tool for humus systems clas-sification, helpful even for not (yet) expert pedologists. The present article gives also a fast look at the classi-fication, sharing Terrestrial, Histic, Aqueous and Para humus systems, every group being defined by its char-acteristics set in synthetic tables, and suggests a step-by-step approach allowing everyone to classify andinvestigate humus systems and forms.Quick look at the classificationDarwin (1881)described thefirst Mull humipedon. He discoveredthat earthworms tilled a grassland soil and could sink boulders,building a true“vegetable mould”. Müller (1889)related humipedon,vegetation and soil, describing thefirst humus forms. In the sameperiod,Dokuchaev (1889)published a famous soil-vegetation zonationin Russia.Hesselmann (1926), Hartmann (1944), Kubiëna (1953), VonMückenhausen (1962), Babel (1971), Delecour and Kindermans (1977)described the morphology and ecology of specialized humus types (theupper part of a soil profile which is enriched in organic matter) incentral Europe. With similar ecological approaches, but in wet en-vironments,Jongerius and Pons (1962)and Levesque et al. (1980)proposed a classification of Histic soil horizons and peats.Jenny (1941)proposed an historical formula relating soil genesis and main ecologicalfactors.Duchaufour (1960)and Scheffer et al. (1982)linked humustypes, pedogenesis and soil classification.Bornebusch (1930), Omodeo(1952), Marcuzzi (1970), Wallwork (1970), Bouché (1972), LeadleyBrown (1978), Bal (1982), Satchell (1983), Clarholm (1985), Ponge(1985), Paoletti (1988), Cluzeau and Fayolle (1988), Martin andMarinissen (1993), Fitter and Garbaye (1994), Bernier and Ponge(1994), Aerts (1997), Brauman (2000), Brown et al. (2000), Cole et al.(2002), Bergand McClaugherty (2003), Van der Heijden et al. (2008),Ponge et al. (2010), Blouin et al. (2013), Cluzeau et al. (2014), Ponge(2015)related ecological groups of soil animals with climatic condi-tions, phytocoenoses, bacteria, fungi, litter biodegradation stages andeven anthropogenic land transformation and agriculture. In parallel,Dell’Agnola and Nardi (1987), Stevenson (1972, 1994), Piccolo (1996,2001)and Kumada, 1988focused on physical, chemical and biologicalproperties of humic components of humipedons. All these researchesand a huge number of synthesis books, such asKillham (1994),Benckiser et al. (1997), Gobat et al. (1998), Lavelle and Spain (2001),Sterner and Elser (2002), Ponge (2003), Coleman et al. (2004), Bardgettet al. (2005), Eldor et al. (2007), Legros (2007), Citeau et al. (2008)andWall et al. (2012), nourished the idea of a more biological/ecologicalconcept of soil. Following the way traced by the pioneers of the topsoilmorpho-functional classification (Darwin, Müller, Dokuchaev, Jenny,Hesselmann, Hartmann, Kubiëna, Babel, Delecour and Kindermans,Jongerius and Pons, Duchaufour, Levesque, Scheffer) a series offieldmanuals were progressively published byToutain (1981), Green et al.(1993a), Green et al. (1993b), Brêthes et al. (1995), Von Nestroy et al.(2000), Zanella et al. (2001), Jabiol et al. (2004), Broll et al. (2006),Van Delft et al. (2007), Jabiol et al. (2008)and Zanella et al. (2006,2009, 2011), in order to enrich soil classifications with main features ofhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.apsoil.2017.05.025Received 9 December 2016; Received in revised form 23 May 2017; Accepted 24 May 2017⁎Corresponding author and not cited author offigures.E-mail addresses:augusto.zanella@unipd.it(A. Zanella),ponge@mnhn.fr(J.-F. Ponge),rein.dewaal@wur.nl(R. de Waal),chiara.ferronato2@unibo.it(C. Ferronato),maria.denobili@uniud.it(M. De Nobili),jerome.juilleret@list.lu(J. Juilleret).Applied Soil Ecology xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx0929-1393/ © 2017 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.Please cite this article as: Zanella, A., Applied Soil Ecology (2017), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.apsoil.2017.05.025

biological horizons.The present classification has been conceived around forest soils, forwhich more information and historical datasets are available, and forsoils of grasslands, pastures and wetland areas, with negligible to stronghuman impact. Originally it was not suited to tilled agro-ecosystems,because tillage periodically destroys the“natural”organization andradically alters the functioning of surface horizons. Recently we con-sidered the possibility to apply our system of classification even toanthropogenic soils, with the purpose of comparing their morpho-functional properties to those of more natural soils. In the long run, thefinal goal might be to decrease the functional distance betweenexploited and natural soils, by comparing them and adjusting propertiesof the former at regular intervals, thereby ensuring the incessancy oftheir ecosystemic functions and a sustainable production of food. Theauthors of this manual propose a classification of anthropogenic Agro(agricultural, modified from natural humus systems) and Technohumus systems (artificial, newly man-made) as a tool for monitoringand managing exploited soils.The humus form classification is based on the sequence and mor-phological characteristics, including morphological evidence of biolo-gical activity, of organic and/or organic-mineral soil horizons observedand described in thefield. In some cases, a few basic chemical data (pH,organic carbon content) are required. A complete set of diagnostic or-ganic and organic-mineral horizons, which are mutually exclusive, isdefined. The classification keys use diagnostic horizons and othercomplementary humipedon (humus profile) or environmental data.These last complementary data are not part of the classification, but canhelp in circumscribing the classified units and understanding their pe-culiar functioning. Every mineral horizon cited in this paper has beenclassified and named using the manual of the Guidelines for SoilClassification (FAO, 2006).The classification consists in a scheme that tries avoiding strictcleavages between soil types, allowing intergrades to be classified. Afirst look at the surface of our planet allows distinguishing:1- well-drained soils (Terrestrial humus systems, potentially forest/shrub/grassland ecosystems);- wet soils (Histic humus systems, potentially forest/shrub oraquatic plants ecosystems; Aqueous, sea tidal zones and sea beds);- intergrades (dry Histic = Epihisto Histic humus systems; wetTerrestrial = Hydro Terrestrial humus systems);- other natural soils (Para humus systems: soil systems strongly in-fluenced by archaea = Archaeo; soil systems strongly influenced byanaerobic bacteria = Anaero; soil systems strongly influenced by li-chens, algae, fungi = Crusto; soil systems strongly influenced bymosses = Bryo; soil systems strongly influenced by fern, grass, ericac-eous root systems = Rhizo; soil systems strongly influenced by organ-isms living in decaying wood = Ligno);- anthropogenic soils (Agro: natural soils transformed for agri-cultural and sylvicultural purposes; Techno: new man-made humussystems).Terrestrial humus systems correspond to humus forms in whichfaunalactivities and decomposition of organic matter are well visibleand occur in aerated conditions, never submersed and/or water-satu-rated, or only for a few days per year (Fig. 1,Table 1). Non hydro-morphic organic (O) and organic-mineral soil horizons (A or AE)characterize these forms.Histic humus systems correspond to humus forms in which faunalactivities and decomposition of organic matter are well visible but areor have been strongly limited and/or influenced by anaerobic condi-tions (Fig. 1,Table 2). They are submersed and/or water-saturated formany months (usually more than 6 months per year). Organic-mineral(anA) or organic (H) soil horizons characterize these forms.Prefixes are used to resolve transitional forms between aerobic(Terrestrial) and anaerobic (Histic) conditions:•Hydro is used as a prefix when some hydromorphic horizons(denoted by the prefix“g”) are present in Terrestrial humus forms,example Hydro Mull, Hydro Eumull, Hydro Dysmoder.•Epihisto is used as a prefix for intergrades between Terrestrial andHistic humus forms when terrestrial hydromorphic horizons (prefix“g”) are combined with Histic horizons (anA and/or H), exampleEpihisto Anmoor, Epihisto Euanmoor, Epihisto Limisaprimoor.Each humus system is composed of 3–4 humus forms listed in thefollowing descriptions of Terrestrial and Histic systems:TERRESTRIAL: Humus systems in which faunal activities and de-composition of organic matter are well visible and occur in aeratedconditions (Fig. 2,Table 1):•Humus system in which faunal activities and decomposition of or-ganic matter are strongly limited by cold and/or acid conditions:MOR (humus forms: Hemimor, Humimor, Eumor);•Humus system in which biological activities and decomposition oforganic matter are moderately limited by low temperature and/oracidity conditions: MODER (humus forms: Hemimoder, Eumoder,Dysmoder);•Humus system in which faunal activities and decomposition of or-ganic matter are weakly or not limited by environmental con-straints: MULL (humus forms: Eumull, Mesomull, Oligomull,Dysmull);•Humus system in which faunal activities and decomposition of or-ganic matter are strongly influenced by seasonally contrasted dry orcold climate conditions: AMPHI (humus forms: Leptoamphi,Eumacroamphi, Eumesoamphi, Pachyamphi);•Humus system in which faunal activities and decomposition of or-ganic matter are strongly limited by mountain climate on calcareoushard substrate (lithopedon): TANGEL (humus forms: Leptotangel,Eutangel, Pachytangel).Terrestrial humus systems and forms are presented in the followingarticles of Humusica 1:•Article 4: Terrestrial–Specific terms and diagnostic horizons;