"Biofunctool": a framework to assess the impact of agricultural practices on soil quality based on soil functions
The assessment of soil quality is a concern that has been widely developed in the literature over the last twenty years. According to Karlen et al. (1997), the soil quality can be defined as the “the capacity of the soil to function”. However, most indicators of the soil quality are based on the evaluation of soil characteristics rather than soil functions. This leads to some discrepancies such as the high productivity of some tropical soils despite their status of “poor soil” conferred by these indicators. Kibblewhite et al. (2008) proposed a theoretical framework to study soil functions related to the major ecosystem services. This framework underlines the need to consider the interactions between soil physico-chemical properties and its biological activity. Based on this concept, we aimed at developing a set of functional soil indicators to assess three central soil functions: carbon transformation, nutrient cycling and soil structure maintenance. We intend to integrate all indicators within the “Biofunctool” package, i.e. a set of easy, cost, time-effective in situ measurements to assess the soil functions. The Biofunctool package is currently being developed in the context of rubber plantations in Thailand. It will be then tested in a plantation network along a gradient of pedo-climatic and agronomic conditions. In each situation, Biofunctool measurements will be completed with soil biota diagnosis in order to better link soil functions and biological assemblages. The approach and outputs developed will be used to evaluate the impact of agricultural practices on agro-ecosystem performances and sustainability. Biofunctool framework will thus potentially complete existing one, such as the regional agronomic diagnosis (Doré et al., 2008) or the Life Cycle Assessment.
Main Authors: | , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Format: | conference_item biblioteca |
Language: | eng |
Published: |
INRA
|
Subjects: | P35 - Fertilité du sol, P34 - Biologie du sol, P33 - Chimie et physique du sol, U30 - Méthodes de recherche, F08 - Systèmes et modes de culture, |
Online Access: | http://agritrop.cirad.fr/584945/ http://agritrop.cirad.fr/584945/1/ECOS2016_Thoumazeau%20et%20al.pdf |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
Summary: | The assessment of soil quality is a concern that has been widely developed in the literature over the last twenty years. According to Karlen et al. (1997), the soil quality can be defined as the “the capacity of the soil to function”. However, most indicators of the soil quality are based on the evaluation of soil characteristics rather than soil functions. This leads to some discrepancies such as the high productivity of some tropical soils despite their status of “poor soil” conferred by these indicators. Kibblewhite et al. (2008) proposed a theoretical framework to study soil functions related to the major ecosystem services. This framework underlines the need to consider the interactions between soil physico-chemical properties and its biological activity. Based on this concept, we aimed at developing a set of functional soil indicators to assess three central soil functions: carbon transformation, nutrient cycling and soil structure maintenance. We intend to integrate all indicators within the “Biofunctool” package, i.e. a set of easy, cost, time-effective in situ measurements to assess the soil functions. The Biofunctool package is currently being developed in the context of rubber plantations in Thailand. It will be then tested in a plantation network along a gradient of pedo-climatic and agronomic conditions. In each situation, Biofunctool measurements will be completed with soil biota diagnosis in order to better link soil functions and biological assemblages. The approach and outputs developed will be used to evaluate the impact of agricultural practices on agro-ecosystem performances and sustainability. Biofunctool framework will thus potentially complete existing one, such as the regional agronomic diagnosis (Doré et al., 2008) or the Life Cycle Assessment. |
---|