Journal of Soil Science

and Environmental
Management
Volume 6 Number 10 October 2015
ISSN 2006-9782

Soil
4 Number 6 October 2013
ISSN 2141-2391
 ABOUT JSSEM
The Journal of Soil Science and Environmental Management (JSSEM) is published monthly (one volume per
year) by Academic Journals.

Journal of Soil Science and Environmental Management (JSSEM) is an open access journal that provides rapid
publication (monthly) of articles in all areas of the subject such as Biological control of rot-inducing fungi, Post
harvest losses of rice from harvesting to milling, Genetic variability studies between released varieties of
cassava, Seed borne pathogens on farmer-saved sorghum etc..

The Journal welcomes the submission of manuscripts that meet the general criteria of significance and
scientific excellence. Papers will be published shortly after acceptance. All articles published in JSSEM are peer-
reviewed.

Contact Us

Editorial Office: [email protected]

Help Desk: [email protected]

Website: http://www.academicjournals.org/journal/AJAR

Submit manuscript online http://ms.academicjournals.me/

Editors
Dr. Willie Peijnenburg Prof. Gamal Abdel-Nasser Khalil
RIVM – Laboratory for Ecological Risk assessment Soil Science Dept.
Leiden University, Centre for Environmental College of Food and Agricultural Sciences - King Saud
sciences University
Bilthoven, P.O. BOX 2460 - Riyadh 11451,
The Netherlands. Saudi Arabia.

Dr. Geoffrey Kironchi Dr. Anil vyas

Department of Land Resource Management & Department of Botany,
Agricultural Technology J.N.V. University
University of Nairobi, A-282, Shastri Nagar.
Kenya.
Editorial Board
Dr. Elijah Ohimain Dr. Goswami Shreerup
North Carolina A & T State University, Greensboro P.G. Department of Environmental Science,
Carver Hall Room 207, F.M. University , Gyana Vigyana Vihar,
Department of Natural Resources and Balasore-756020, Orissa,
Environmental Design, India.
School of Agriculture and Environmental Science,
USA. Dr. Tanushree Bhattacharya
Institute of Science and Technology for Advanced
Dr. Mohamed Rashad Abd El-Fattah Studies & Research
Arid Lands Cultivation and Development Research ISTAR, Near V.P. Science College, Motabazar, Vallabh
Institute, Vidyanagar,
Mubarak City for Scientific Research and Anand, Gujarat 388120"
Technology Applications, India.
Egypt.
Dr. Suklayan Chakraborty
Dr. Gamal Abdel-Nasser Khalil V. Patel College of Pure and Applied Scienes,
King Saud University P.O. BOX 2460 – Riyadh India.
11451,
Saudi Arabia. Dr. Ulviyya Samadova
Institute of Soil science and Agrochemistry of
Dr. V. Krishna Murthy Azerbaijan National,
Pes Institute of Technology, Azerbaijan.
Ring Road, BSK III Stage, Bangalore-560 085,
Karnataka State, Dr. Luís Carlos Timm
India. Federal University of Pelotas
Address Campus Universitário s/n – Capão do Leão-
Dr. ANIL VYAS RS,
Brazil.
Department of Botany,
J. N. V. University, A-282, Shastrinagar,
India. Dr. Willie Peijnenburg
RIVM – Laboratory for Ecological Risk assessment
Dr. Anthony O. Ano Leiden University, Centre for Environmental sciences
National Roots and Tubers Research Institute Bilthoven,
Umudike, Umuahia, Abia State, The Netherlands.
Nigeria.
Dr. Dedeke Gabriel Adewumi
Dr Moacir de Souza Dias Junior University of Agriculture, Abeokuta, Ogun State,
Universidade Federal de Lavras (Federal University Nigeria.
of Lavras)
Departamento de Ciência do Solo (Soil Science Dr. M J Singh
Department) Punjab Agricultural University, Punjab
Brazil. India.

Mr. Willis
Dr. Luki Subehi
Ndonesian Institute of Sciences, University of Western Australia
Australia.
Research Centre for Limnology
Cibinong Science Centre 16911 -
Indonesia.
Journal of Soil Science and Environmental Management

Table of Contents: Volume 6 Number 10 October 2015

ARTICLES

Research Articles

Effects of integrating different soil and water conservation measures into

hillside area closure on selected soil properties in Hawassa Zuria District,
Ethiopia 268
Lemma Tiki, Menfes Tadesse and Fantaw Yimer

Effect of lime and goat manure on soil acidity and maize (Zea mays) growth
parameters at Kavutiri, Embu County- Central Kenya 275
Harun Ireri Gitari, Benson Evans Mochoge and Benjamin Oginga Danga

Mapping gully erosion in Abia State, Nigeria using Geographic Information

Systems (GIS) and remote sensing techniques 284
Nnabugwu O. Uluocha and Ibeabuchi Uwadiegwu
 Vol. 6(10), pp. 268-274, October, 2015
DOI 10.5897/JSSEM15.0513
Articles Number: D9CC60955346
ISSN 2141-2391
Journal of Soil Science and Environmental
Copyright ©2015 Management
Author(s) retain the copyright of this article
http://www.academicjournals.org/JSSEM

Full Length Research Paper

Effects of integrating different soil and water

conservation measures into hillside area closure on
selected soil properties in Hawassa Zuria
District, Ethiopia
Lemma Tiki1*, Menfes Tadesse2 and Fantaw Yimer2
1
School of Biodiversity and Natural Resources, Mada Walabu University, P. O. Box 132, Bale-Robe, Ethiopia.
2
School of Natural Resources and Environmental Studies, Wondo Genet College of Forestry and Natural Resources,
Hawassa University, P. O. Box 82, Shashemanne, Ethiopia.
Received 11 July, 2015, Accepted 1 September, 2015

Land degradation is a serious global problem. Pursuant to the alarming environmental degradation, the
government and non-governmental organizations have implemented various land rehabilitation
programs. Among this the predominant one is area closures, through tree-planting and physical
conservation measures such as terracing. This study was designed to investigate the impact of
integrating soil and water conservation (SWC) measures into the area closure on the selected soil
properties based on comparative analysis between closed area with SWC, closed area without SWC and
open grazing land. A total of 30 composite soil samples from 0 to 15 cm depth were collected with 10
replications from each land uses. Soil parameters such as bulk density (BD), soil moisture content
(MC), soil organic matter (SOM), total nitrogen (TN), pH, electrical conductivity (EC) and texture were
analyzed. Data was analyzed statistically by using SPSS software packages. Mean comparison were
made by using Tukey HSD test at P = 0.05. Results showed that higher mean MC, SOM and TN were
recorded under closed area with SWC than closed area without SWC and open grazing while mean EC
and pH were comparatively lower under closed area with SWC. Texture, BD and C/N ratio shows no
significant variation with land uses. These results indicated that integrating SWC measures into area
closure have a potential to improve soil properties. The findings generally suggest that integrating SWC
measures into area closure was found to be the better option to improve physico-chemical conditions
of degraded lands. Additional research was also recommended for practical generalization considering
other variables like vegetation parameters that were not addressed in this study.

Key words: Area closure, soil and water conservation, grazing land, soil, degradation.

INTRODUCTION

Land degradation is a serious global problem, which pasture, forest and woodland that accounts nearly 2
causes the world’s 8.7 billion ha of agricultural land, billion ha (22.5%) have been degraded since 1950

*Corresponding author. E-mail: [email protected], Tel: +251926364035.

Author(s) agree that this article remain permanently open access under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution
License 4.0 International License
 Tiki et al. 269

Figure 1. Map of the study area.

(Buckwell, 2009) and 5 to 10 million ha (0.36 to 0.71% of and thereby reducing the crop yield. At the same time
global arable land) are lost every year to severe rapid run-off would reduce recharge of ground water,
degradation (WEF, 2010). Scherr and Yadav (1996) while siltation affects water reservoirs and lakes as it is
indicated that if such a severe trend of land degradation the upper catchment of Awassa lake. Cultivated lands are
continues, 1.4 to 2.8% of the total agricultural, pasture also affected by wide and deep gullies. Hilly areas are
and forest land will be lost by 2020. severely degraded, rocky outcrops are commonly
Ethiopia has to struggle with numerous socio-economic observed. Consequently the local community faces food
and environmental challenges to achieve sustainable insecurity, shortage of water, forage and fuel wood
development. Land degradation is a typical phenomenon (MoWR, 2009).
in many parts of the country. The expansion of To solve these problems a project known as
agriculture, especially towards the steeper slopes due to “Sustainable Management of Soil, Forest and Water
ever-growing population, has accelerated soil erosion Resources as a pilot model for the rural development in
and land degradation (Daniel, 2002; Descheemaeker et SNNPR, Ethiopia” was imitated by CDA in 2008. The
al., 2006; Menale et al., 2008). In order to address the project aims were oriented on the application of area
problems due soil degradation, biomass scarcity and loss closure to enhance soil protection against water erosion
of biodiversity, the reforestation/afforestation of degraded through biological and physical measures and support
lands is often seen as the most effective rehabilitation water management. Therefore, this study intended to
technique in the tropics in general and Ethiopia in investigate the effect of integrating physical and/or
particular (Mulugeta and Demel, 2004). Among the biological SWC measures into the hillside area closure to
various techniques of rehabilitation used, the restore the degraded area in the Umbulo Kajimma and
predominant one probably is area closures, through tree- Labu Koromo kebeles, Hawassa Zuria District.
planting and physical conservation measures.
Ethiopian highlands in general and Hawassa Zuria in
particular are susceptible to land degradation on account METHODOLOGY
of climate, topography and population pressure. For Description of the study area
centuries, people have exerted large-scale changes on
the hill side landscapes, primarily through deforestation, This study was carried out at Umbulo Kajimma and Labu Koromo
uncontrolled grazing, and agriculture practice. These kebeles in Hawassa Zuria District, in the southern Ethiopia. Umbulo
anthropogenic impacts have resulted in heavy Kajimma kebele and Labu Koromo Kebeles are located in (7° 1’ 45’’
N, 38° 16’30’’ E) and (7° 6’ 30’’ N, 38° 22’45’’ E) (Figure 1). The total
degradation mainly on the hilly landscape of Hawassa population in the area is rural dwellers with a population density of
Zuria. Large scale deforestation on hilly slopes generates 465.5 people/Km2 (MoWR, 2009). In terms of agro-climatic zone,
soil erosion which results in loss of nutrient-rich top soil Hawassa Zuria district falls within dry woina-dega (or mid altitude)
270 J. Soil Sci. Environ. Manage

category. There is no river that flows through the district. The only to 15 cm depth was collected by auger from each corner and the
water resource available is Lake Hawassa, one of the biggest lakes center of the plot. The collected samples from the three sites were
within the rift valley. The mean altitude of the district is 1,700 m mixed thoroughly and separately to form a composite soil 30
above sea level and the annual rainfall ranges between 900 to 1400 samples (3 land use × 10 replication). From each 1 kg of mixed
mm. The rainy season spreads from March through September. samples was taken to Oromia National Soil Laboratory Ziway Soil
Mean annual temperature ranges from 23 to 27°C (EOSA, 2007). Research Center for further analysis. Major live plants materials
Well drained eutric and hablic cambisol are the dominant soil types (roots and shoots) in each sample were separated by hand and
and excessively drained, deep to very deep, medium and course then, soils samples were air dried, and pass through a 2 mm sieve
textured vitric Andosols are also developed on flat to gently for determination of selected soil properties. Particle size analyses
undulating topography and rolling plain. The major landforms were determined by using the Hydrometer method (Gee and
identified in the study area are level plains, rolling plains, hills, Bauder, 1982), soil bulk densities were determined from the oven
elongated escarpments and mountains with slopes ranging from dry (at 105°C for 24 h) mass of soil in the core sampler and volume
level to very steep slopes (0 to 30%) (MoWR, 2009). of the undisturbed soil cores using core sample method (Landon,
The natural vegetation in the area can be described and 1991) and soil moisture content were determined gravimetrically by
characterized in to two distinct categories. The one is dry afro using core sample method. Organic carbon was determined by
montane vegetation occurring at higher altitudes of the hilly slopes. using Walkley-Black method and total nitrogen was determined by
The second vegetation type is the lowland acacia woodlands Kjeldhal Method (Bremmer and Mulvaney, 1982), pH was
occurring at the lower landscape of the hilly sides. Those determined in water suspension with soil to water ratio 1:2.5 by pH
woodlands in the highlands have a remnant tree also of high forest meter and electrical conductivity was determined in water
species which are sparsely available. However, because of high suspension with soil to water ratio 1:2.5 by Conductivity meter
population pressure and extreme land shortage these forests are (Rhoades, 1996).
seriously threated by agricultural conversion and over grazing. The
major woody species dominating the area are acacia species,
Albizia gummifera, Albizia schimperiana, Balanites aegyptiaca, Data analysis method
Croton macrostachyus, Ficus sycomorus, Maytenus undata, Rhus
natalensis are common (Figure 1). Statistical analyses were performed to test the influence of soil and
water conservation measures on soil properties using one-way
ANOVA, and mean comparisons were made using the Tukey HSD
Sampling and data collection method test with p < 0.05. Pearson correlation was also used to correlate
different soil parameters. The analysis was done by statistical
A reconnaissance survey was conducted to get the general software for social science (SPSS) version 17.
overview of the area and to identify the study site containing both
biophysically conserved and non-conserved adjacent areas having
similar histories. According to the information provided by local
elders, 50 years ago the whole hillside was fully covered with forest RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
that has been degraded with time due to lack of ownership. Peoples
of the Hawassa Zuria District and peoples from adjoining district Impacts of soil and water conservation measures on
have exploited the forest for construction, fuel wood and fencing.
Expansion of cultivation land as the number of population increase
soil properties
was also led the residents to clear the forest and to put the area
under severe degradation. The area closure was established 8 Soil physical properties (texture, bulk density and
years ago on some part of the degraded hillside and some part of moisture content)
the hillside is still under severe degradation due to overgrazing.
For the purpose of this research some part of the area closure Sand, silt and clay fractions and soil bulk density showed
and the adjacent open grazing land which have the same slope, soil
parent material and history but with different management
no significant difference with land uses while moisture
intervention were selected. Then, the selected site was categorized content varied significantly (p = 0.0004) with land uses
in to three management units (closed area with SWC, closed area (Table 1). The soil under the three land use types was
without SWC and open grazing land). The open area was included categorized as sandy clay loam textural class. Bulk
for the purpose of comparison as a control. Basically, the sites density was not significantly affected with land uses. This
which were classified as closed area with SWC was (the site closed
may be due to the course textural nature of the soil of the
from interference of animals at which both biological (like
enrichment planting) and structural (like bunds, trench, check dams, study site or may be due to the age of the area closure.
pits, ditches, gabions and ponds) SWC measures were commonly Wolde (2004) found that coarse-textured soil bulk
implemented), while closed area without SWC was (the site which densities were not affected by grazing intensity but, the
was simply closed from the interference of human practice and slight difference found in this study can be explained by
livestock at which there is no management practices) and adjacent their difference in SOM content and compaction due to
open grazing land.
livestock trampling effect. Mulugeta and Karl (2010) and
Yihenew et al. (2009) also reported that soil under non-
Selected soil parameters sampling and measurement conserved treatment was found to exhibit higher soil bulk
density than treatments by SWC structures. The non-
To collect data from each land management units transects were significant difference in texture may be due to the age of
established at a minimum distance of 70 m from each other. Along
the area closure which was five years that can’t make
each transect, a 10 m * 10 m soil sampling plot were set with 50 m
interval. Soil pits were dug at the middle point of each plot to collect significant change on weathering.
undisturbed soil samples by core sampler for bulk density and The findings also indicated that mean soil moisture
moisture content determination. Before digging the pit surface soil 0 content under closed area with SWC (17.65±0.69) was
 Tiki et al. 271

Table 1. Mean values (±SEM) of selected soil physical properties of 0 to 15 cm soil depth at different land uses.

Soil parameter
Land use 3
Sand (%) Clay (%) Silt (%) BD (g/cm ) MC (%)
Open grazing 55.33(±2.290)a 34(±2.309)a 10.67(±0.989)a 1.053(±0.049)a 11.422(±0.897)b
Closed without SWC 54.33(±2.092)a 37(±1.528)a 8.67(±0.667)a 1.024(±0.031)a 13.562(±0.951)b
a a a a a
Closed with SWC 51.33(±1.978) 38.67(±1.520) 10(±0.730) 0.927(±0.029) 17.65(±0.692)
P-Value 0.405 0.2193 0.2363 0.0729 0.0004**
** Significantly different at the 0.01 level; Bulk density (BD); soil moisture content (MC).

higher than under closed area without SWC (13.56±0.95) with SWC were higher than the contents under closed
and open grazing land (11.42±0.9) which may be a result area without SWC but mean SOM and TC under closed
of water conservation structures which reduces runoff area with and without SWC were higher than in adjacent
and evaporation and increases infiltration and soil grazing land which may be due to the higher
moisture content (Stroosnijder and Hoogmoed, 2004). accumulation of organic materials as a result of increased
Other studies also showed that soil water content is a plant biomass. SWC practices can bring current land use
factor that can be affected by land use type because of systems to a higher above and below ground biomass
changes produced in infiltration, surface runoff, and (and hence SOC) level by enhancing better ground
evaporation (Zhai et al., 1990; Demir et al., 2007). It may cover. Stroosnijder and Hoogmoed (2004) also reported
also be due to higher organic matter content in closed that the rainwater conserved through SWC structures is
area with SWC which is positively and significantly used for higher biomass production which in turn
correlated with soil moisture content. Overgrazing and increases the organic matter content in the soil through
trampling by cattle and other unsustainable land litter and root decomposition. Dereje et al. (2003)
management practices have resulted in the expansion of reported similar result that inputs from the vegetation can
degraded landscapes with a sealed surface soil that have a positive impact on the organic carbon
impedes water infiltration and reduces the moisture concentrations into the soil system. A study conducted by
content as a result of exposure of the soil to the sun Wolde et al. (2007) shows soil organic matter and soil
emanated from the reduced ground cover (Mando et al., nutrients under area closure are significantly different
2001; Maitima et al., 2009). Morgan (2005) also showed compared to the adjacent free grazing lands. Studies by
that the loss of vegetation due to overgrazing increases Yihenew et al. (2009) and Kebede et al. (2011) on crop
the rate of run off and erosion and decreases the amount field also reported that the non-conserved fields had
of water in the soil. lower SOC as compared to the conserved fields with
different conservation measures. Mulugeta et al. (2005a,
b) supported this result by reporting the decrease in
Soil chemical properties vegetation cover and disturbance of the natural
ecosystem have caused wide spread soil degradation,
The total nitrogen (p = 0.0002), soil organic matter (p = with an attendant decline in concentrations of soil organic
0.0139) and total carbon (p = 0.0139) were varied matter (SOM). Dereje et al. (2003) indicated that
significantly with land uses. The mean TN, SOM and TC temporal change in vegetation diversity and richness
were higher under closed area with and without SWC from lower to higher degree can change SOM
than in under adjacent open grazing land. The carbon to concentration through the enhanced sediment trapping
nitrogen ratio (C/N) did not show significant difference efficiency. Similar results were reported by
with land uses (Table 2). The electrical conductivity (EC) Descheemaeker et al. (2006) in Tigray. The studies by
and pH shows significant difference (p = 0.0285) and (p = Wolde and Veldkamp (2005) in Tigray on a semiarid
0.0332), respectively, with land uses and the mean EC continental climate indicated significant improvement in
and pH under closed area with SWC were lower than in SOM and in total N an area closed for 5 years.
open grazing land while no significant difference (p > Lal and Bruce (1999) also generally indicated
0.05) was observed between closed area with and technologies for restoration of degraded soils by
without SWC and also between closed area without SWC establishing ecological-based vegetation cover, using
and open grazing land (Table 2). SOM, TN, TC and soil appropriate soil and water conservation measures,
moisture content were positively correlated with each adopting water harvesting measures, enhancing nutrient
other. EC and pH also have significantly positive recycling mechanisms, and controlling stocking rate.
correlation (p = 0.01) with each other while negatively Adoption of these management practices increases the
correlated with TC, SOM and TN (Table 3). SOC stock through creating conducive medium for
The mean SOM and TC contents under closed area increasing above ground biomass and enhancing its
272 J. Soil Sci. Environ. Manage

Table 2. Mean values (±SEM) of selected soil chemical properties of 0 to 15 cm soil depth at different land uses.

Soil parameter
Land use
TC SOM TN C/N EC pH
Open grazing 0.593(±0.207)b 1.022(±0.357)b 0.071(±0.003)b 8.123(±2.521)a 0.207(±0.037)a 7.86(±0.205)a
a a a a ab ab
CA without SWC 1.251(±0.161) 2.155(±0.277) 0.150(±0.006) 8.264(±0.923) 0.176(±0.031) 7.48(±0.188)
CA with SWC 1.387(±0.158)a 2.391(±0.273)a 0.138(±0.017)a 10.387(±0.919)a 0.093(±0.008)b 7.11(±0.144)b
P-value 0.0139* 0.0139* 0.0002** 0.5622 0.0285* 0.0332*
**Significantly different at the 0.01 level; * significantly different at the 0.05 level. Electro conductivity (EC) in (mmhos /cm), Total nitrogen (TN) in (%), Total carbon (TC) in (%), Soil organic matter (%)
and carbon to nitrogen ratio (C/N).

humification (Singh and Lal, 2005). TN (Girma, 1998). The most evident impact of the same time they reported that poor water
The overall total nitrogen (TN) was higher under grazing is the removal of a major part of above infiltration can lead to poor drainage, water
closed area with SWC than in soil under closed ground biomass by livestock that decreases the logging, and increased EC.
area without SWC. Mean TN under closed area input of aboveground litter to the soil. Any
with and without SWC was higher compared to reduction in litter inputs may have important
the content under adjacent grazing land. The consequences for soil nutrient conservation and Conclusion
lower TN under open grazing land was due to cycling (Shariff et al., 1994).
lower organic matter content. Total N showed a The soil pH and EC under closed area with The result of the study indicated that soil
significant correlation with SOM (+0.75, p  0.01) SWC were significantly lower than the soil under parameters MC, SOM, TN, EC and pH show
(Table 3). Study by Kumlachew and Tamrat open grazing land which may be the result of significant difference (p<0.05) while texture, BD
(2002) also reported that the total nitrogen content relatively higher organic matter content in the and C/N ratio showed no significant variations
of the soil in different communities vary with the closed area with SWC that increase H+ in the soil with land uses. The soil properties in the area
amount of organic matter. Mulugeta and Karl that resulted into increase in soil acidity and closure with SWC improving in some measured
(2010) also reported that the land with physical reduces pH values. FAO (2005) showed that parameters such as moisture content, total
SWC measures have high total nitrogen as important chemical properties of soil organic nitrogen, soil organic matter, pH, EC as compared
compared to the non-conserved land. Million matter are due to the weak acidic nature of to closed area without SWC and open grazing
(2003) found that the mean total N content of the humus. The higher EC under open grazing land land. Therefore, even if simple area closure
terraced site were higher than the average total N may be as a result of higher evaporation rate that without SWC can be an effective method to
contents in the corresponding non-terraced sites. increase soil salinity level. This finding was rehabilitating degraded hillsides incorporating
As carbon to nitrogen ratio (C/N) is an index of supported by Seifi et al. (2010) report in that an SWC measures is the preferable way to speed up
nutrient mineralization and immobilization where increasing concentration of electrolytes (salts) like rehabilitation period. Generally, ecological
by low C/N ratio indicates higher rate of calcium salt (calcium carbonate) in soil will rehabilitation/restoration can be an urgent and
mineralization (Brady and Weil, 2002), rate of soil dramatically increase soil EC. Corwin and Lesch essential measure to solve the wide spread land
organic matter mineralization is lower under (2005) also showed that in arid climates, plant degradation problems in Ethiopia. The present
closed area with SWC. In addition, the lower C residue and mulch help soils to remain wetter and study also clearly indicated that to improve
inputs because of less biomass C return on free thus allow seasonal precipitation to be more ecological components like soil it is more essential
grazing lands caused the reduction of SOM and effective in leaching salts from the surface and at to incorporate different SWC measures in to the
 Tiki et al. 273

Table 3. Correlation between selected soil properties.

TC SOM TN C/N EC PH Clay BD MC

TC 1
SOM 1.0(**) 1
TN 0.751(**) 0.751(**) 1
C/N 0.677(**) 0.677(**) 0.058 1
EC -0.667(**) -0.667(**) -0.412 -0.525(*) 1
PH -0.666(**) -0.666(**) -0.574(*) -0.361 0.829(**) 1
Clay 0.422 0.422 0.197 0.444 -0.390 -0.445 1
BD -0.625(**) -0.625(**) -0.517(*) -0.410 0.594(**) 0.601(**) -0.068 1
MC 0.563(*) 0.563(*) 0.578(*) 0.209 -0.519(*) -0.525(*) 0.187 -0.786(**) 1
Number of observation N= 30, ** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level. * Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level.

area closure to foster the rehabilitation of degraded lands. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The authors would like to thank the Ethiopian Ministry of

RECOMMENDATIONS Education for giving support for this study and special
thanks to Czech Republic Development Agency and
The present study has made the following recommends Mendel University for their financial support. Finally, the
which could be helpful for the success of area closures authors would like to thank the anonymous reviewers for
as a means of rehabilitating degraded areas: their valuable feedback which helped to improve this
publication.
(i) Protecting the open degraded areas from interference
of local people and animal grazing is the good option to
REFERENCES
assist the improvement soil physical and chemical
properties. Brady NC, Weil RR (2002). The Nature and Properties of Soils, 13 Ed.
th

(ii) Since carbon losses are related with loss of vegetation Prentice Hall Inc., New Jersey, USA. P. 960.
cover and soil erosion, management interventions that Bremmer JM, Mulvaney CS (1982). Nitrogen-Total In: Page, A. L.,
Miller, R. H., Keeney, D. R. (Eds.), Methods of Soil Analysis, part 2.
slow or reverse these processes can simultaneously Chemical and microbiological properties, 2 ed. Am. Soc. Agron.
achieve carbon sequestration. Area closure, thus, can be 9:595-624.
the good option to increase the stock of carbon in the soil Buckwell A (2009). Raise task force on public goods from private land.
and have the potentials of involving in carbon trading as a Rise rural investment support for
Europe,http://www.agriculture.gov.ie/media/migration/agrifoodindustr
new forest valuation for sustainable natural resource y/food harvest2020
management. /foodharvest2020/submissionsreceived/Rise%20Task%20Force.pdf
(iii) As SWC practices including area closure could (Accessed: Sep 26, 2011).
protect and improve land resource, decrease sediment in Corwin DL, Lesch SM (2005). Apparent soil electrical conductivity
measurements in agriculture. Comput. Electron. Agric. 46:11-43.
downstream areas including lake Hawassa and improve Daniel D (2002). Soil and Water Conservation Techniques and
hydrological condition and water quality of rivers, reduce Strategies for Food Security and Poverty Alleviation, 12th ISCO
disastrous flood and water logging, which could protect Conference Beijing, pp. 358-365.
safety of lives and property through improvement of Demir M, Makineci E, Yilmaz E (2007). Harvesting impact on
herbaceous understory, forest floor and top soil properties on skid
ecological conditions governmental and NGOs road in a beech (Fagus orientalis Lipsky) stand. Environ. Biol.
(especially, Lake Hawassa stakeholders) should give due 28:427-432.
attention to rehabilitate the whole hillside areas of the Dereje A, Oba G, Weladji RB, Coloman JE (2003). An assessment of
catchment. Restoration of Biodiversity in Degraded high Mountain grazing lands
in northern Ethiopia. NORAGRIC, Centre for International
(iv) Additional research is needed to more understand the Environment and Development Studies, the Agricultural University of
interactive relationships among landscape positions, soil Norway, A ° s, Norway. Land Degrad. Dev. 14:25-38.
nutrients, management interventions, land uses and its Descheemaeker K, Nyssen J, Poesen J, Mitiku H, Muys B, Raes D,
history since vegetation and soil attributes depend on Moeyersons J, Deckers J (2006). Soil and water conservation
through forest restoration in exclosures of the Tigray highlands. J.
those factors. Drylands 1(2):118-133.
EOSA (Ethio-Organic Seed Action) (2007). Baseline Survey of Dendi,
Awassa Zuria and Hetosa Districts of Ethiopia, Ethio-organic seed
Conflict of Interest action in collaboration with center for genetic resources, the
Netherlands.
FAO (Food and Agricultural Organization) (2005). The importance of
The authors have not declared any conflict of interest. soil organic matter, Key to drought-resistant soil and sustained food
274 J. Soil Sci. Environ. Manage

production. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Mulugeta L, Karltun E, Olsson M (2005b). Assessing soil chemical and
Rome. physical property responses to deforestation and subsequent
Gee GW, Bauder JW (1982). Particle size analysis. pp. 383-411. In: A. cultivation in smallholders farming system in Ethiopia. Agric. Ecosyst.
klute (ed.) method of soil analysis: part 1. Physical and mineralogical Environ. 105:373-386.
methods. ASA Monograph Number 9. Mulugeta L, Karltun E, Olsson M (2005a). Soil organic matter dynamics
Girma T (1998). Effect of cultivation on physical and physical properties after deforestation along afarm field chronosequence in southern
of a vertisol in Middle Awash Valley, Ethiopia. Commun. Soil Sci. highlands of Ethiopia. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 109:9-19.
Plant Anal. 29:287-295. Rhoades JD (1996). Electrical conductivity and total dissolved solids. In:
Kebede W, Awdenegest M, Fantaw Y (2011). Effects of level soil bunds Sparks D.L. (ed.): Methods of Soil Analysis. Chemical methods. Soil
and stone bunds on soil properties and its implications for crop Sci. Soc. Am. Madison, pp. 417-437.
production: the case of Bokole watershed, Dawuro zone, Southern Scherr SJ, Yadav SN (1996). Land degradation in the developing world:
Ethiopia. Agric. Sci. 2(3):357-363. Implications for food, agriculture, and the environment to 2020, Food,
Kumlachew Y, Tamrat B (2002). Plant Community Analysis and Ecology Agriculture and the Environment Discussion Paper 14, International
of Afromontane and Transitional Rainforest Vegetation of Food Policy Research Institute, Washington, D.C., U.S.A.
Southwestern Ethiopia. SINET: Ethiop. J. Sci. 25(2):155-175. Seifi MR, Alimardani R, Sharifi A, Akram A (2010). Using Apparent Soil
Lal R, Bruce JP (1999). The potential of world crop land to sequester Electrical Conductivity to Improve Agricultural Yield in Iran. Res. J.
Carbon and mitigate the greenhouse effect. Environ. Sci. Policy Appl. Sci. Eng. Technol. 2(5):499-503.
2:177-185. Shariff AR, Biondini ME, Grygiel CE (1994). Grazing intensity effects on
Landon JR (1991). Booker Tropical Soil Manual. A handbook for Soil litter decomposition and soil nitrogen mineralization. J. Range.
Survey and Agricultural Land Evaluation in Tropics and Sub Tropics. Manage. 47:444-449.
Longman Scientific and Technical Publishers, New York, pp. 106-156 Singh BR, Lal R (2005). The potential of soil carbon sequestration
Maitima JM, Mugatha SM, Reid RS, Gachimbi LN, Majule A, Lyaruu H, through improved management practices in Norway. Environ. Dev.
Pomery D, Mathai S, Mugisha S (2009). The linkages between land Sustain. 7:161-184.
use change, land degradation and biodiversity across East Africa. Stroosnijder L, Hoogmoed W (2004). The contribution of soil & water
Afr. J. Environ. Sci. Technol. 3(10):310-325. conservation to carbon sequestration in semi-arid Africa. Bull. Res.
Mando A, Brussaard L, Stroosnijder L, Brown GG (2001). Managing Erosion 23:528-539.
termites and organic resources to improve soi1 productivity in the WEF (World Economic Forum) (2010). Biodiversity and business risk-A
Sahel. FAO, Rome, Italy, P. 7. global risks network briefing. A briefing paper for participants
h://www.fao.or~/landandwater/agll/soilbiod/cases/caseA2.pdf. engaged in biodiversity-related discussions at the World Economic
Menale K, John P, Mahmud Y, Gunnar K, Elias M (2008). The Role of Forum Davos-Klosters Annual Meeting, Cologny/Geneva,
Soil Conservation on Mean Crop Yield and Variance of Yield: Switzerland.
Evidence from the Ethiopian Highlands, Environment for Wolde M (2004). Impacts of land use changes on soil nutrients and
Development Discussion Paper Series. erosion in Tigray, Ethiopia. Thesis Submitted in partial fulfillment of
Million A (2003). Characterization of Indigenous Stone bunding (Kab) the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in International
and its effect on crop yield and soil productivity at Mesobit-Gedba, and Tropical forestry.
North Showa Zone of Amhara Region. Thesis, Alemaya University. Wolde M, Veldkamp E (2005). Impact of Land Use Changes on Soil
rd
Morgan RPC (2005). Soil Erosion and Conservation. 3 (Ed), Blackwell Nutrients and Erosion in Tigray, Ethiopia. A paper presented on
Science Ltd., ISBN 1-4051-1781-8, pp. 161-168. International conference on Agricultural and Research for
MoWR (Ministry of Water Resources) (2009). Rift Valley Lakes Basin Development. Suttgart-Hohenheim, Germany October 11-13, 2005.
Integrated Resources Development Master Plan Study Project. Wolde M, Veldkamp E, Mitiku H, Nyssen J, Muys B, Kindeya G (2007).
Phase 3: Draft Report J. Lake Hawassa Sub-Basin Integrated Effectiveness of exclosures to restore degraded soils as a result of
Watershed Management Feasibility Study. Hal crow Group Limited overgrazing in Tigray, Ethiopia. J. Arid Environ. 69(2):270-284.
and Generation Integrated Rural Development consultants Vol. 1, 3 & Yihenew G, Tadele A, Mitiku H, Yamoah C (2009). Lessons from
4. upstream soil conservation measures to mitigate soil erosion and its
Mulugeta D, Karl S (2010). Assessment of integrated soil and water impact on upstream and downstream users of the Nile River.
conservation measures on key soil properties in South Gonder, International Water Management Institute, pp. 170-183.
North-Western Highlands of Ethiopia. Soil Sci. Environ. Manage. Zhai R, Kachanoski RG,Voroney RP (1990). Tillage effects on the
1(7):164-176. spatial and temporal variation of soil water. Soil Sci. Soc. Am.
Mulugeta L, Demel T (2004). Restoration of native forest flora in the 54:186-192.
degraded high lands of Ethiopia: Constraints and opportunities.
SINET: Ethiop. J. Sci. 27:75-90.
 Vol. 6(10), pp. 275-283, October, 2015
DOI 10.5897/JSSEM15.0509
Articles Number: FA9BA8255355
ISSN 2141-2391
Journal of Soil Science and Environmental
Copyright ©2015 Management
Author(s) retain the copyright of this article
http://www.academicjournals.org/JSSEM

Full Length Research Paper

Effect of lime and goat manure on soil acidity and

maize (Zea mays) growth parameters at Kavutiri, Embu
County- Central Kenya
Harun Ireri Gitari, Benson Evans Mochoge* and Benjamin Oginga Danga
Department of Agricultural Resource Management, Kenyatta University, P. O. Box 43844-00100, Nairobi, Kenya.
Receive 23 June, 2015, Accepted 1 September, 2015

A greenhouse pot experiment was conducted to determine the effect of agricultural lime and goat
manureon soil acidity and maize growth parameters using soils from Kavutiri-Embu County. Nitrogen
and phosphorus fertilizers at the rates of 50 and 70 kg ha-1, respectively, and goat manure at three rates
(0, 5 and 10 mg ha-1) and agricultural lime (CaCO3) at six rates (0, 2.5, 5, 7.5, 10, and 12.5 mg ha-1) were
used for the study. The pot experiment was arranged in a complete randomised design and replicated
three times. Maize, variety H513as test crop, was grown for a period of 8 weeks. The results were
measured on maize crop parameters (plant heights, root lengths and dry matter biomass) and soil
parameters (soil pH and exchangeable acidity). All the biophysical data generated were subjected to
analysis of variance (ANOVA) and the difference between the treatments means separated using the
Fischer’s least significant difference at 5% probability level. Linear correlation analyses were done
using the Microsoft Excel 2010. Results generally showed that soil acidity decreased with increasing
levels of manure and lime. The treatment with 12.5 Mg ha-1 of lime and 10 Mg ha-1 of manure had the best
reducing effect on soil acidity and better maize yield performances reflected in the highest pH (6.3),
highest root length (41.3 cm), plant height (150.3 cm) and dry biomass weight (755.4 kg ha-1) obtained.

Key words: Acid soil, agricultural lime, manure, maize productivity andpot experiment.

INTRODUCTION

Soil acidity is a major yield limiting factor for crop limit crop growth and yield as well as soil productivity in
production worldwide. Land area affected by acidity is highly weathered soils of humid and sub-humid regions of
estimated at 4 billion hectares, representing the world due to deficiency of essential nutrient elements
approximately 30% of the total ice-free land area of the (Akinrinade et al., 2006).
world (Sumner and Noble, 2003). In the tropics, In Kenya, acid soils cover about 13% of total land area
substantial weathering of soils over millennia has resulted and are distributed widely in the croplands of central and
in the leaching of crop nutrient bases (mainly K, Mg and western Kenya regions, covering over one million
Ca) followed by their replacement by H, Al, Mn cations hectares under maize, legume, tea and coffee crops,
which have contributed to acid related stresses on crop grown by over 5 million smallholder farmers (Gudu et al.,
production (Okalebo et al., 2009). Acid infertility factors 2007). Crop production is low and declining on such acid

*Corresponding author. E-mail: [email protected]

Author(s) agree that this article remain permanently open access under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution
License 4.0 International License
276 J. Soil Sci. Environ. Manage

soils and particularly where acid forming fertilizers, such 0°25΄S and longitude 37°30΄E with annual mean temperature of
as di-ammonium phosphate (DAP) and other ammonia 18°C and total annual rainfall ranging from 1200 to 1400 mm.
These soils are classified as Ando-humic Nitisols (Jaetzold et al.,
fertilizers have been applied continuously to already
2007) and are sandy-clay in texture. Soil samples from the top 0 to
acidified soils over years (Nekesa, 2007). As these soils 20 cm were collected from a farmer’s field at Kavutiri for laboratory
suffer in multi-nutrient deficiencies, application of mineral analysis and pot experiment. The sampled soils from different
fertilizers has become mandatory to increase crop yields. points were thoroughly mixed to get one representative composite
However, mineral fertilizers are commonly scarce, costly; sample. The composite sample was used for pot experiment and for
having imbalanced nutrition and their use could physical chemical soil characterisation. However, for physical and
chemical analyses, the soil samples were air dried, ground and
exacerbate the problem of soil acidity (Oguike et al., sieved to pass through a 2 mm sieve.
2006; Nottidge et al., 2006). The practice of liming acid The soil samples were analysed for soil texture, pH, organic
soils is not common in Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA), carbon, total N, extractable P, exchangeable Ca, Mg, Na and K,
probably because of limited knowledge onlime usage and and cation-exchange capacity. Soil texture was determined by the
its effectiveness, availability and high hauling costs of Bouyoucos hydrometer method as outlined by Okalebo et al.
(2002), soil pH was measured electrometrically in a 1:2.5 soil-water
liming materials (Okalebo et al., 2009).
suspension (McLean, 1982), organic carbon was determined by the
Continuous cropping using incorrect fertilizer types has modified Walkley-Black method (Nelson and Sommers,1982), total
intensified soil chemical degradation of arable lands nitrogen by the Micro Kjeldahl method (Bremner and Malvaney,
resulting in reduced capacity of soils to produce crops 1982) whereas soil exchangeable bases were extracted using
sustainably (Nandwa, 2003; Ayuke et al., 2007; Mugendi Mehlich-3 (M-3) procedures (Mehlich, 1984; Bolland et al., 2003).
et al., 2007). According to Kisinyo et al. (2005), The extractable P was determined by Bray 1 Method (Bray and
Kurtz, 1945). Cation exchange capacity was determined by the
continuous cropping has led to development of soil ammonium-acetate saturation method (Thomas, 1982). The initial
acidity which is a major constraint to maize production on soil physico-chemical properties are summarised in Table 1.
tropical soils due to toxic levels of aluminium (Al) and the
concomitant phosphorus (P) deficiency that hinder plant
growth. Chemical analytical characteristics of goat manure and
agricultural lime
The Fertilizer Use Recommendation Project (FURP)
carried out between 1986 and 1991 by Kenyan The manure samples used were sourced from farmers around
Government in the rain-fed areas of the country, Kavutiri area. The samples were air dried until a constant weight
established area-specific and crop-specific fertiliser was obtained. The dried manure samples were then ground and
recommendations for various agro-ecological zones passed through 2 mm sieve. The samples were analysed for P, K,
Na, Ca and Mg using the dry ashing method as explained by Kalra
(KARI, 1994, Mochoge, 1992). Mochoge (1992) and Maynard (1991). The chemical analytical results for these
established that 29% of the trial sites which included samples are summarized in Table 2.
quite a number from central Kenya and specifically
Kavutiri area could not give conclusive fertiliser
recommendations due to high soil acidity that affected the Analysis of lime nutrient content
performance of most crops. Maize crop for example could The standard method of analyzing CaCO3 equivalent as described
not grow more than 100cm high. Kanyanjua et al. (2002), by Ryan et al. (2001) was used for lime analysis. Table 3 shows the
carried a liming study on some of these acid soils (pH lime analytical results. The lime was found to be rich in calcium
4.6) from central Kenya and came up with fertilizer and carbonate (35.2%) but slightly poor in Magnesium oxide (17.1%).
lime recommendations for the soils. The rates, however,
they recommended were rather high that most resource Design and set up of greenhouse pot experiments
poor farmers in the region cannot afford to purchase. Due
to high cost of fertilizers and other farm inputs, The pot experiments were conducted at the Departmentof Plant
and Microbial sciences greenhouse, Kenyatta University. Soil
management of acid infertility soils still remains a major
quantities of 4 kg were weighed from the composite soil samples
challenge to smallholder subsistence farmers in the area collected from the field and put into each pot. The experiment had
and Sub-Saharan Africa at large. Hence theneed of 18 treatments from the combination of three levels of manure (0, 5
searching for alternative ways and means of addressing and 10 Mg ha-1) and six levels of lime (0, 2.5, 5, 7.5, 10, and 12.5
soil acidity challenges (Makokha et al., 2001; Kimani et Mg ha-1) which were thoroughly mixed with the soil (Table 4). The
al., 2007). The main objective of this work, therefore, was treatments were replicated three times and were arranged in three
rows in a Complete Randomised Design (CRD). The spacing
to determine the combined effect of lime and manure on between the rows was 0.75 m while between pots in a row was
soil acidity improvement and maize productivity. 0.5m. This was to mimic the field spacing such that one hectare
could hold 26600 pots with two maize plants. The locations of pots
in the greenhouse were rotated regularly to minimize the effect of
MATERIALS AND METHODS variations in ambient light and temperatures. Phosphorus (P2 O5)
using triple super phosphate (TSP) fertilizer at the rate of 50 kg ha-
1
The research was carried out for a period of eight weeks in a and nitrogen (N) using calcium ammonium nitrate (CAN) fertilizer
greenhouse pot experiment using soils from Kavutiri. Kavutiri is at the rate of 70 kg ha-1 were applied. CAN was top-dressed at the
located in agro-climatic zone I at an altitude of 1700m above sea 4th week after planting. The test crop was maize (Zea mays, variety
level (Jaetzold et al., 2007) on the eastern slopes of Mount Kenya, H513). Three seeds were sownper pot and thinned to two after
representing the acid soils of central Kenya. It is found at latitude emergence.
 Mochoge et al. 277

Table 1. Initial soil physico-chemical properties of Kavutiri soils used in the study (0 to 20 cm).

Parameter Sample 1 Sample 2 Mean

pH(water) (1 :2) 4.12 4.30 4.21
Exchangeable acidity (me %) 2.8 2.6 2.7
-1
Extractable P (Mg kg ) 1.09 1.21 1.15
Exchangeable K (me %) 0.6 0.5 0.55
Exchangeable Na (me %) 0.4 0.4 0.4
Exchangeable Ca (me %) 3.6 3.0 3.3
Exchangeable Mg (me %) 1.2 0.9 1.05
Base saturation (%) 24 23 23.5
CEC (me %) 23.6 23.2 23.4
Total N (%) 0.13 0.14 0.135
Organic C (%) 1.4 1.6 1.5
Sand % 48 49 48.5
Silt % 8 7 7.5
Clay % 44 44 44
Texture class Sandy Clay Sandy Clay Sandy Clay

Table 2. Chemical analysis of goat manure.

Fertility index pH(water) P (%) K (%) Na (%) Ca (%) Mg (%) DM (%) OC (%) Total N (%) C:N (ratio)
6.82 0.12 0.95 1.28 0.9 0.34 95.4 25.4 1.94 13.1

Table 3. Chemical analysis for agricultural lime used in the study.

Parameter Total nutrient content (%)

Calcium carbonate (CaCO3 ) 35.2
Magnesium oxide (MgO) 17.1

Maize plant data collection for analysis acidity (Hp) are presented in Table 5. Treatment with
th th 10Mgha-1 manure and 12.5Mgha-1lime (M3 L6) recorded
Maize data collection was carried out at 4 and 8 week after
planting (WAP). One of the two plants from each pot was randomly
the highest pH value of 6.3 which translates to a 49.6%
selected at the 4th week while the remaining plant at the 8th week increase from the initial level value of 4.21 (Table 1).
after planting for analysis. The plant height was measured from the There was a gradual pH decrease as lime and manure
soil level to the tip of the youngest leaf. At the 8th week, the pots levels decreased to the lowest value (4.4) in treatment
were split open and soil carefully separated from the fibrous roots to -1
with no manure but with 2.5Mg ha lime (M1L2). This
retrieve the roots. The average length of the roots from the main value was still slightly higher than the control treatment
stock was then measured in centimetres using a ruler. Lastly, all the
shoots and roots materials were chopped into small pieces, placed
(4.1) value which had declined by 3.1% from the initial
in sampling brown paper bags No. 10 and oven dried at 50°C for 48 value of pH 4.21. The pH from the various treatments
h. Their dry weight were recorded in grams per pot and converted decreased in the order of: M3L6 > M1L6 > M2 L6> M3 L5>
to kg/ha by multiplying by 53200 (total number of maize plants per M2L4> M2L5> M3 L4> M1L5> M2L3> M3L3> M2L2> M3L2>
ha). M1L4>M3L1,while exchangeable acidity (Hp) decreased
with increase in lime and manure levels in the order of:
M1L1> M1L2> M1L3> M1L4> M1L5> M2L1> M1L6> M2L2>
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION M2L3> M2L4> M2L5> M3 L1> M3L2> M2L6> M3L3> M3L4 =
M3L5 = M3L6 (Table 5). Treatments; M3L4, M3L5, and M3L6,
Effects of the amendments on soil acidity had the lowest Hp value of 0.1 for each. A gradual
increase in Hp was noticed as lime and manure
Results of soil potential hydrogen (pH) and exchangeable decreased to the highest value of 2.8 in the control
278 J. Soil Sci. Environ. Manage

Table 4. Treatment combinations and their actual rates as applied per pot in greenhouse experiment.

Treatment Treatment Actual amount applied/pot

Description
No. code Manure(g) Lime(g)
1 M1 L1 Control (No Manure and Lime) 0 0
2 M1 L2 Manure (0 Mg ha-1)+ Lime (2.5 Mg ha-1) 0 5.0
-1 -1
3 M1 L3 Manure (0 Mg ha )+ Lime (5.0 Mg ha ) 0 10.0
4 M1 L4 Manure (0 Mg ha )+ Lime (7.5 Mg ha-1)
-1
0 15.0
-1 -1
5 M1 L5 Manure (0 Mg ha )+ Lime (10.0 Mg ha ) 0 20.0
6 M1 L6 Manure (0 Mg ha )+ Lime (12.5 Mg ha-1 )
-1
0 25.0
-1 -1
7 M2 L1 Manure (5 Mg ha )+ Lime (0 Mg ha ) 188 0
-1 -1
8 M2 L2 Manure (5 mg ha )+ Lime (2.5 Mg ha ) 188 5.0
9 M2 L3 Manure (5 Mg ha )+ Lime (5.0 Mg ha-1 )
-1
188 10.0
-1 -1
10 M2 L4 Manure (5 Mg ha )+ Lime (7.5 Mg ha ) 188 15.0
-1 -1
11 M2 L5 Manure (5 Mg ha )+ Lime (10.0 Mg ha ) 188 20.0
-1 -1
12 M2 L6 Manure (5 Mg ha )+ Lime (12.5 Mg ha ) 188 25.0
-1 -1
13 M3 L1 Manure (10 Mg ha )+ Lime (0 Mg ha ) 376 0
-1 -1
14 M3 L2 Manure (10 Mg ha )+ Lime ( 2.5 Mg ha ) 376 5.0
-1 -1
15 M3 L3 Manure (10 Mg ha )+ Lime (5.0 Mg ha ) 376 10.0
16 M3 L4 Manure (10 Mg ha-1)+ Lime (7.5 Mg ha-1) 376 15.0
17 M3 L5 Manure (10 Mg ha-1)+ Lime (10.0 Mg ha-1) 376 20.0
18 M3 L6 Manure (10 Mg ha-1)+ Lime ( 12.5 Mg ha-) 376 25.0

Table 5. Mean Soil potential hydrogen (pH) and exchangeable acidity (Hp) at the end of 8 weeks after planting (WAP).

Treatment Treatment pH (H2O) % Change from the Hp (me %) % Change from the
No. Code 8 WAP initial value(4.21) 8 WAP initial value (2.7)
1 M1 L1 c 4.1f - 3.1 2.8a 7.7
2 M1 L2 4.4f 3.6 1.4b -46.2
3 M1 L3 4.7f 11.9 1.3c -50.0
4 M1 L4 5.1e 21.6 1.1d -57.7
5 M1 L5 5.4d 19.7 1.0e -61.5
6 M1 L6 6.0b 15.9 0.8f -69.2
7 M2 L1 4.9e 26.6 1.0e -61.5
8 M2 L2 5.3d e 29.5 0.8f -69.2
9 M2 L3 5.4d 36.3 0.7g -73.1
10 M2 L4 5.7c 35.9 0.5h -80.8
11 M2 L5 5.7c 42.0 0.4i -84.6
12 M2 L6 6.0b 19.2 0.2k -92.3
13 M3 L1 5.0e 23.8 0.4i -84.6
14 M3 L2 5.2d e 28.7 0.3j -88.5
15 M3 L3 5.4d 34.7 0.2k -92.3
16 M3 L4 5.7c 34.7 0.1l -96.2
bc l
17 M3 L5 5.8 38.0 0.1 -96.2
a l
18 M3 L6 6.3 49.6 0.1 -96.2
S.E.D - 0.118 - 0.042 -
L.S.D5% - 0.238 - 0.084 -
P-Value - < 0.001 - < 0.001 -
Means with different letter(s) along the same column are statistically different at P= 0.05.

treatment (M1L1) as shown in Table 5. In all the treatments except control, pH progressively
 Mochoge et al. 279

Table 6. Mean plant height and dry matter (DM) weight at 4 and 8 weeks after planting (WAP).

Plant height (cm) DM weight

Treatment Treatment
4 WAP 8 WAP 4 WAP 8 WAP
No. code
(cm) (cm) (g/plant) (kg/ha) (g/plant) (kg /ha)
1 M1 L1 © 34.0 j
89.7h 1.2 i
63.8 6.7 k
356.4
i g h j
2 M1 L2 39.0 115.0 1.8 95.8 7.4 393.7
h
3 M1 L3 42.0 116.3f 2.3g 122.4 7.9i 420.3
gh f f h
4 M1 L4 44.0 119.0 2.7 143.6 8.4 446.9
gh e f g
5 M1 L5 45.0 124.3 2.9 154.3 9.0 478.8
6 M1 L6 47.3fg 124.0e 2.9f 154.3 9.0g 478.8
fg
7 M2 L1 47.0 126.3e 2.8f 149.0 8.9h 473.5
ef d e g
8 M2 L2 49.0 132.7 3.4 180.9 9.4 500.1
de cd
9 M2 L3 51.3 135.7 3.3e 175.6 9.9f 526.7
d bc d f
10 M2 L4 53.3 139.0 3.7 196.8 10.3 548.0
cd b d e
11 M2 L5 56.3 140.7 3.9 207.5 11.3 601.2
cd c d d
12 M2 L6 54.7 136.7 4.0 212.8 11.9 633.1
13 M3 L1 55.3c 139.3bc 3.9d 207.5 11.9d 633.1
bc
14 M3 L2 58.3 141.3b 4.3c 228.8 12.4c 659.7
a
15 M3 L3 61.3 143.7b 4.7b 250.0 13.0b 691.6
ab
16 M3 L4 62.3 146.3ab 4.7b 250.0 13.8a 734.2
a
17 M3 L5 63.7 150.3a 5.0a 266.0 14.2a 755.4
ab
18 M3 L6 61.0 148.7a 5.1a 271.3 14.1a 750.1
S.E.D - 1.746 1.771 0.104 - 0.243 -
L.S.D5% - 3.542 3.591 0.219 - 0.493 -
P-Value - <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 - <0.05 -
*Means with different letter(s) along the same column are statistically different at P=0.05.

increased while the Hp decreased with increase in carboxyl, phenolic and enolic functional groups as
manure and lime application.This could be attributed to proposed by Wong et al. (1998).These substances are
the reduction of Al3+ions concentration in soil solution and formed during decomposition processes and are
in exchangeable sites as a result of Ca in lime and relatively stable against further decomposition.Their
manure effect on the reduction of Al ions in the soil capacity to consume H+ therefore, controls their buffer
solution. This increase of pH with manure application characteristics and their ability to neutralize soil acidity.
agrees with the findings of Egball (2002), Mucheru (2003) This finding agrees also with the findings of Mokolobate
and Summer(1997) who reported that addition of organic and Haynes (2002) who reported rise of pH after use of
manures to acid soils lead toan increase in soil pH, lime and manure as amendments in acid soils.
decrease of Al ions in soil solution and thereby improve
soil conditions for plant growth.
The rise in pH and reduction of soil exchangeable Effect on plant height
acidity can also be associated with the presence of basic
2+ 2+
cations (Ca and Mg ) (Fageria et al., 2007) and anions Table 6 presents the results of plant height and dry
-2
(CO3 ) in these liming materials that are able to react matter. Analyses of variance indicated that there was
with H+ ionsfrom exchange sites to form H2O + CO2. significant difference (P <0.05) between treatments. It
+ -1
Cations occupy the space left behind by H on the was observed that treatment with 10Mg ha manure and
-1
exchange sites leading to rise in pH. The change in soil 10Mg ha lime (M3L5)recorded the highest plant heights
pH with time concurs with the findings by Fageria (2001a) both at 4thand 8th WAP of 63.7 and 150 cm, respectively
who reported that significant chemical changes could whereas the control treatment recorded 34.0 and 89.7cm
take place within 4–6 weeks after applying liming as measured in 4th and 8th WAP, respectively, which were
materials if a soil has sufficient moisture. significantly (P <0.05) the lowest heights of the
The rise of soil pH through addition of manure could experiment. The order in which plant heights decreased
have been caused by the consumption of H+ due to according to treatments was:
humic-type substances which have a large number of M3L5>M3L6>M3L4>M3L3>M3L2>M2L5>M3L1>M2L4>M2L6>M2
280 J. Soil Sci. Environ. Manage

L3>M2L2>M2L1>M1L5>M1L6>M1L4>M1 L3>M1L2>M1L1. system in the field that soil acidity negatively affected the
root branching and root length of maize crop.
The increase in plant height and dry matter weight with
Effect on dry matter decrease in soil acidity can be attributed to improved
efficient use of plant nutrients and their availability as a
The dry matter of the maize as shown in Table 6 result of enhanced root system by liming (Fageria et al.,
indicates that the control treatment (M1L1) had the lowest 2004). Lime and P interactions are highly associated with
dry matter weight of 1.2 and 6.7g per plant at 4th and 8th soil acidity that limit root growth and proliferation, and
WAP, respectively which corresponds to 63.8 and 356.4 nutrient uptake. This could have been the reason for poor
kg ha-1,respectively. There was generally significant performance in the control (M1L1) treatment in this study.
(P<0.05) increase of dry matter with increase levels of Aluminium ions absorbed by roots can also precipitate
manure and lime in the order of: root-absorbed P and hinder its subsequent translocation
M1L1<M1L2<M1L3<M1L4<M2L1<M1L5<M1L6<M2L2<M2L3<M2 to plant tops (Mora et al., 2005)
L4<M2L5<M2L6<M3L1<M3L2<M3L3<M3L4<M3L5 <M3L6.The The significant increases in maize growth with
-
highest dry matter weight in week 8 was 755.4 kg ha application of lime and farmyard manure observed in this
1 -1
obtained by treatment with 10.0Mg ha manure and 10.0 study could be attributed to the readily available N and P
Mg ha-1 lime while in week 4,the highest weight was nutrients supplied in the fertilizers applied and the
271.3Mg ha-1and was obtained by treatment M3L6 favourable environment created by the manure and Ca
(10.0Mg ha-1 manure and 12.5 Mg ha-1 lime). from the lime. Tejada et al. (2006) reported that manure
is a good amendment on soil that requires P and N to
produce high yields.
Effect on root length The control treatment had the lowest maize biomass
yield probably because of low available nitrogen due to
Mean root lengths as influenced by lime and manure low mineralization in this acid soil, and fixation of P thus
application are presented in Table 7. It was observed that making it unavailable for plant uptake. Poor performance
root length significantly (P<0.05) increased with increase could also be attributed to Al saturation. Yamoah et al.
in inputs from one level to the other. Treatment M3L6 had (1996) attributed 44% reduction in maize yield to acidity
the longest roots averaging 41.3 cm, a significant in soils.
difference of 555.5% longer that of control (6.3 cm). The Liming acid soils result in the release of P for plant
order of root lengthsin terms of treatments from the uptake; an effect often referred to as ‘‘P spring effect’’of
longest to the shortest was as follows: M3L6 > M3L5 > M3L3 lime (Bolan et al., 2003). Bolan et al. (2003) reported that
> M3L4 > M3L2 > M3L1 > M2L6 > M2L5 > M2L4> M2L3 > M2L2 in soils high in exchangeable acidity, liming could
> M1L6 > M1L5 > M1L4 > M1L3 > M1L2> M1L1. increase plant P uptake by decreasing Al, rather than by
increasing P availability per se. This also improves root
growth which alleviates Al toxicity by allowing a greater
Relationship between maize growth parameters and volume of soil to be explored. At the same time, liming
soil acidity indices creates a better environment for the release of P and
decrease of soil acidity. Onwuka et al. (2009) reported
The relationship between soil pH and maize growth that with the application of 2, 4, 6 and 8 mega grams per
parameters (dry matter and plant height) are shown in hectare of CaCO3, the soil pH was increased from 5.02 to
Figure 1a. A highly significant and positive correlation 8.04 while from western Kenya, it was reported that
was observed between soil pH and the maize growth agricultural lime (Gudu et al., 2007) and Minjingu
parameters. Dry matter showed a high correlation of r2 phosphate rock (Okalebo et al., 2009) significantly raised
=0.622 with pH changes in soil while that of plant height soil pH and maize yields. Dierolf et al. (1997) had earlier
2
with pH was r =0.7244. found out that application of lime to maize allowed the
In Figure1b, plant height had a negative linear roots of maize to move up to 15 to 30 cm of depth in an
correlation with soil Hp (r2 = -0.9517) while that between acid soil. When the plant roots are increased, it will
dry matter and Hp was also high and negative with a translate to the aerial biomass increase and that could be
2 -1
coefficient of determination (r ) of -0.7588. the reason why the treatment with 10Mg ha manure and
-1
In Figure 2, the relationship between soil acidity indices 12.5Mg ha limein this study gave both the highest roots
and root length is shown. Root length was found to have length and biomass yield.
a positive linear correlation with soil pH (r2 = 6598) The positive correlation of soil pH with the maize
(Figure 2a) and a negative non- linear relationship with growth parameters implies that as the pH increased, the
2
Hp (r = -0.969) (Figure 2b).The correlation study showed growth parameters also increased. Le Van et al. (1994)
that soil acidity indices affect maize root differently. This stated that as the exchangeable acidity is reduced, the
trend agrees with Comin et al. (2006) who observed in plant roots performance is enhanced and nutrient uptake
their work effects of soil acidity on the adventitious root is improved, and thus becomes more effective in
 Mochoge et al. 281

Table 7. Mean plant root length at 8 weeks after planting (WAP).

Treatment Treatment Treatment Treatment

Root length (cm) Root length (cm)
No. code No. code
1 M1 L1 © 6.3j 10 M2 L4 30.0d
i d
2 M1 L2 9.3 11 M2 L5 31.7
h c
3 M1 L3 13.3 12 M2 L6 34.3
h c
4 M1 L4 14.7 13 M3 L1 35.3
g bc
5 M1 L5 17.7 14 M3 L2 37.0
fg
6 M1 L6 19.0 15 M3 L3 38.0b
7 M2 L1 20.0f 16 M3 L4 38.0b
8 M2 L2 23.3e 17 M3 L5 39.7a
e a
9 M2 L3 27.0 18 M3 L6 41.3
S.E.D - 1.030 S.E.D - 1.030
L.S.D5% - 2.090 L.S.D5% - 2.090
P-value - < 0.05 P-value - < 0.05
*Means with different letter(s) along the same column are statistically different at P=0.05.

16 200
Dry matter weight

Height = 22.964*pH + 10.094

Plant height (cm)

r² = 0.7244 160
12
g/plant

120
8
DM = 3.3361*pH - 7.1259 80
4 r² = 0.6226 40

0 0
3 3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5 6 6.5
Soil pH
DM /Plant Height/Plant
(a)
16 200
Dry matter weight

Plant height (cm)

12 Height = -22.165*Hp + 147.87 150
g/plant

r² = -0.9517
8 100
DM = -3.1014*Hp + 12.802
4 50
r² = -0.7588
0 0
Hp
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3
DM /Plant Height/Plant
(b)
Figure 1: Relationship between maize growth parameters (dry matter weight and plant height)
Figure 1. Relationship between maize growth parameters (dry matter weight and plant height) and soil Hp
at 8 weeks after planting WAP. (a) pH and (b) Hp.

increasing plant yield parameters. application of manure and lime to acid soils has a
profound influence on soil pH, exchangeable acidity and
consequently on maize biomass yield. In light of these
Conclusion findings, it is evident that combining 10 Mg ha-1 of
manure and 12.5 Mg ha-1 of agricultural lime could be
This greenhouse pot experiment study reveals that more effective in reducing soil acidity, hence enhancing
282 J. Soil Sci. Environ. Manage

Root length (cm) 50 Length= 16.264 pH - 59.624 Length = 6.7061Hp2 - 32.308Hp + 43.708
R² = 0.6598 40 R² = -0.969
40
30
30
20
20

10 10

0 0
4 5 6 7 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3
pH Hp
(a) (b)
Figure 2. Relationship between maize root length and soil acidity indices: (a) pH and (b) Hp at 8 weeks after planting WAP.

maize growth. Thus, the acid soils of Kavutiri- Central chemical and microbiological properties, pp. 595-624.
Kenya need manure in combination with lime to improve Comin JJ, Barloy J, Hallaire V, Zanette F, Miller PRM (2006). Effects of
aluminium on the adventitious root system aerial biomass and grain
their soil chemical properties and consequently their yield of maize grown in the field and in a rhizotron. Exp. Agric.
productivity. This would be a promising alternative in 42(3):351-366.
developing more affordable acid soil management Dierolf TS, Arya LM, Yost RS (1997). Water and Cation movement in an
strategy. Indonesian Ultisol. Agron. J. 89:572-579.
Egball B (2002). Soil properties as influenced by phosphorus and
Nitrogen Based manure and compost applications. Agron. J. 94:128-
135.
Conflict of Interest Fageria NK, Baligar VC, Zobel RW (2007). Yield, Nutrient uptake and
Soil chemical properties as influenced by liming and Boron
application in a No-tillage system. Commun. Soil Sci. Plant Anal.
There is no any conflict of interest with the authors. 38(8):1637-1652.
Fageria NK (2001a). Effect of liming on upland rice, common bean,
corn, and soybean production in ceradosoil. Pesquisa Agropecuária
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Brasileira 36:1419-1424.
Fageria NK, Castro EM, Baligar VC (2004). Response of upland rice
genotypes to soil acidity. In: Wilson et al, (eds). The Red Soils of
We appreciate the kind permission by the Kenyatta China: Their Nature, Management and Utilization. pp. 219-237.
University Department of Plant and Microbial Sciences to Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht.
use their Departmental greenhouseand laboratory Gudu SO, Okalebo JR, Othieno CO, Kisinyo PO, Obura PA, Ligeyo DO
(2007). Improving P acquisition and Al tolerance of plants.Presented
facilities for this study. More so, we thank the staff at at the France workshop, October, 2007.
National Agricultural Research Laboratories (NARL) for Jaetzold R, Schmidt H, Hornet ZB, Shisanya CA (2007). Farm
helping in some soil samples analyses. Management Handbook of Kenya. Natural Conditions and Farm
Information. 2nd Edition. Vol. 11/ C. Eastern Province. Ministry of
Agriculture/GTZ, Nairobi, Kenya.
Kalra YP, Maynard DG (1991). Methods manual for forest soil and plant
REFERENCES analysis.For. Can., Northwest Reg., North. For.Cent., Edmonton,
Alberta. Inf. Rep. NOR-X-319.
Akinrinade EA, Iroh I, Obigbesan GO, Hilger T, Romheld G, Neumann Kanyanjua SM, Ireri L, Wambua S, Nandwa SM (2002). Acidic soils in
G (2006). Response of cowpea varieties to phosphorus supply on an Kenya. KARI Technical Paper No 11, P. 28.
acidic alumi-haplic-Acrisol from Brazil. Niger. J. Soil Sci. 16:115-120. KARI- Kenya Agricultural Research Laboratories. (1994). Fertiliser Use
Ayuke FO, Karanja NK, Bunyasi SW (2007). Evaluating effect of Recommendations for the various districts. Nairobi,Kenya, pp. 1-24.
mixtures of organic resources on nutrient release patterns and uptake Kiman SK, Esilaba AO, Odera MM, Kimenye L, Vanlauwe B, Bationo A
by maize. In: Bationo et al, (eds). Advances in integrated soil fertility (2007). Effects of organic and mineral sources of nutrients on maize
management in Sub-Saharan Africa: Challenges and Opportunities. yields in three districts of Central Kenya. In: Bationo, et al (eds).
© 2007 Springer pp. 833-844. Advances in integrated soil fertility management in Sub-Saharan
Bolan NS, Adriano DC, Curtin D (2003). Soil acidification and liming Africa: Challenges and Opportunities, pp. 353-357.
interactions with nutrient and heavy metal transformation and bio- Kisinyo PO, Othieno CO, Okalebo JR, Kilpsat MJ, Serema AK, Obiero
availability. .Adv. Agron. 78:215-272. DO (2005). Effects of lime and phosphorus application on early
Bolland MD, Allen DG, Walton KS (2003). Soil testing for phosphorus: growth of Leucaenain acid soils. Conference Proceedings. 7:1233-
Comparing the Mehlich 3 and Colwell procedures for soils of South- 1236.
Western Australia. Aust. J. Soil Res. 41:1185-1200. Le Van H, Kuraishi S, Sakurai N (1994). Aluminium induced rapid root
Bray RH, Kurtz LT (1945). Determination of total organic and available inhibition and changes in cell-wall components of squash Seedlings.
forms of phosphorus in soils. Soil Sci. 39:39-45. Plant Physiol. 106:971-976.
Bremner JM, Mulvaney CS (1982). Methods of soil analysis, part 2 Makokha S, Kimani SK, Mwangi W, Verkuijl H, Musembi F (2001).
 Mochoge et al. 283

Determinants of fertilizer and manure use for maize production in Sumner ME, Noble AD (2003). Soil acidification: The world story. In:
Kiambu District, Kenya.International Maize and Wheat Improvement Rengel. Z, (eds). Handbook of Soil Acidity, pp. 1-28. Marcel Dekker,
Center (CIMMYT), Mexico, D.F. and Kenya Agricultural Research New York.
Institute (KARI-NARL), Nairobi. Tejada M, Herna´ndez MT, Garcı´a C (2006). Application of two organic
McLean EO (1982). Soil pH and Lime requirements. Agronomy 9:199- amendments on soil restoration: effects on the soil biological
223. properties. J. Environ. Qual. 35:1010-1017.
Mehlich A (1984). Mehlich-3 soil test extractant: a modification of Thomas GW (1982). Exchangeable cations. In: Methods of soil
Mehlich-2 extractant. Commun. Soil Sci. Plant Anal. 15:1409-1416. analysis. Part 2.2nd edition. (Eds. A.L. Page, R.H. Miller and D.R
Mochoge BO (1992). Fertilizer trial Result of Maize and Maize–Bean Keeney) ASA. SSSA. Monograph.No.9. Madison. Wisconsin, USA,
intercrop trials in Kenya.CIAT Africa Workshop Series No. 21. pp. 159-165.
Mokolobate MS, Haynes RJ (2002). Comparative liming effect of four Wong MTF, Nortcliff S, Swift RS (1998). Method for determining the
organic residues applied. Biol. Fertil. Soils 35:79-85. acid ameliorating capacity of plant residue compost, urban waste
Mora ML, Demanet R, Vistoso E, Gallardo F (2005). Influence of compost, farmyard manure and peat applied to tropical soils.
sulphate concentration in mineral solution on ryegrass grown at Commun. Soil Sci. Plant Anal. 29:2927-2937.
different pH and aluminium levels. J. Plant Nutr. 28:1117-1132. Yamoah C, Ngueguim M, Ngong C, Dias DKW (1996). Reduction of P
Mucheru MW (2003). Exploring Nitrogen replenishment options for fertilizer requirements using lime and mucuna on high P sorption soils
improving soil productivity in sites with varied soil fertility status in the of North West Cameroon. Afr. Crop Sci. J. 4: 441-451.
Central highlands of Kenya. Thesis submitted to Kenyatta University,
Kenya.
Mugendi DM, Mucheru-Muna M, Mugwe J, Kung’u JB, Bationo A
(2007). Improving food production using ‘best bet’ soil fertility
technologies in the Central Highlands of Kenya. In: Bationo et al.
(eds). Advances in integrated soil fertility management in Sub-
Saharan Africa: Challenges and Opportunities, pp. 345-351.
Nandwa SM (2003). Perspective on soil fertility in Africa. In: Gichuru et
al, (eds). Soil fertility management in Africa: A regional perspective.
Academic Science Publishers, Nairobi, Kenya, pp. 1-51.
Nekesa AO (2007). Effect of Minjingu phosphate rock and agricultural
lime in relation to maize, groundnut and soybean yields on acid soils
of western Kenya. M. Phil Thesis. Moi University Eldoret, Kenya. P.
79.
Nelson DW, Sommers LE (1982).Total carbon, organic carbon and
organic matter. In: Miller et al. (eds). Methods of soil analysis, Part 2.
Am. Soc. Agron. 9:539-579.
Nottidge DO, Ojeniyi SO, Asawalam DO (2006). Effect of levels of wood
ash on soil chemical properties in an acid Utisol of Southeastst
Nigeria. Niger. J. Soil Sci. 16:109-114.
Oguike PC, Chukwu GO, Njoku NC (2006). Physico-chemical properties
of a Haplic Acrisol in Southeastern Nigeria amended with rice mill
waste and NPK fertilizer. Proceedings of the 30th Annual Conference
th
of the Soil Science Society of Nigeria, 5th - 9 December, 2006, held
at University of Agriculture, Markudi, pp. 38-45.
Okalebo JR, Gathua KW, Woomer PL (2002). Laboratory methods of
soil and plant analyses: A working manual -Secord edition.TSBF-
CIAT and SACRED Africa. Nairobi, Kenya.
Okalebo JR, Othieno CO, Nekesa AO, Ndungu-Magiroi KW, Kifuko-
Koech MN (2009). Potential for agricultural lime on improved soil
health and agricultural production in Kenya. Afr. Crop Sci. Conf.
Proc. 9:339-341.
Onwuka MI, Osodeke VE, Ano AO (2009). Use of Liming Materials to
Reduce Soil Acidity and Affect Maize (Zea mays L) Growth
Parameters in Umudike, Southeast Nigeria. Prod. Agric. Technol.
5(2):386-396. Publication of Nasarawa State University, Keffi.
Ryan J, George E, Rashid A (2001). Soil and Plant Analysis Laboratory
Manual. Second edition. Jointly published by international Center for
Agricultural Research in the dry areas (ICARDA) and the National
Agricultural Research Centre (NARC), pp. 46-48.
 Vol. 6(10), pp. 284-300, October, 2015
DOI 10.5897/JSSEM15.0510
Articles Number: CAE058E55361
ISSN 2141-2391
Journal of Soil Science and Environmental
Copyright ©2015 Management
Author(s) retain the copyright of this article
http://www.academicjournals.org/JSSEM

Full Length Research Paper

Mapping gully erosion in Abia State, Nigeria using

Geographic Information Systems (GIS) and remote
sensing techniques
Nnabugwu O. Uluocha* and Ibeabuchi Uwadiegwu
Department of Geography, University of Lagos, Lagos, Nigeria.
Received 25 June, 2015; Accepted 5 August, 2015

Soil erosion is of major concern in Abia State, Nigeria. This study adopts a combination of Geographic
Information Systems (GIS) and Remote Sensing as a tool to study and map soil erosion menace in Abia
State. For this research, several datasets that represent climate, soil, geology, topographic and
anthropogenic factors were used as the basic requirements for environmental modeling of soil loss
using Universal Soil Loss Equation (USLE) for 1986 and 2003. The results show that 1082.58 tons/acres
were lost in 1986 and 1120.59 tons/acres in 2003 in the study area. Also, a negative correlation was
found to exist between soil loss and NDVI (Normalized difference vegetation index) value. Soil erosion
vulnerability index map as well as risk prone areas maps was produced. This study shows the
integration of GIS with remote sensing as an efficient and effective tool in the study and mapping of soil
erosions.

Key words: Geographic Information Systems (GIS), Soil erosion, normalized difference vegetation index
(NDVI), mapping, Abia State.

INTRODUCTION

Soil erosion is an ecological issue of great concern in the Soil erosion is a dynamic geomorphic event operating on
southeastern part of Nigeria in general and Abia State in the landscape (Ojo and Johnson, 2010). In spite of
particular. Erosion problems arise mainly from natural technological advancement, erosion menace still remains
causes but their extent and severity are increasingly a major problem in Nigeria (especially in South Eastern
being attributed to man's ignorance and unintentional Nigeria). The yearly heavy rainfall has very adverse
actions (Enabor and Sagua, 1988). According to Ofomata impacts altering existing landscape and forms. Such
(2009), soil erosion, which is simply a systematic removal landforms create deep gullies that cut into the soil. The
of soil, including plant nutrients, from the land surface by gullies spread and grow until the soil is removed from the
the various agents of denudation occurs in several parts sloping ground. Soil erosion when formed expand rapidly
of Nigeria under different geological, climatic and soil coupled with exceptional storm or torrential rain down the
conditions. stream by head-ward erosion gulping up arable lands,

*Corresponding author. E-mail: [email protected], [email protected], Tel: +234-8023172089.

Author(s) agree that this article remain permanently open access under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution
License 4.0 International License
 Uluocha and Uwadiegwu 285

economic trees, homes, lives, and sacking of families and horizon.

valuable properties that are worth millions of naira Abia State experiences a high annual rainfall (about
(Umudu, 2008). 2000 mm mean/year) with corresponding high discharge
In this research, a combination of GIS and remote of water as runoff that encourages soil erosion. It has a
sensing techniques was adopted as an approach to study peak period between July and September. Rainfall
soil erosion in Abia State. The research seeks to events have been found to be highly correlated to erosion
establish correlation between Normalized Difference in all the representative land surface types (Jimoh, 2005).
Vegetation Index (NDVI) and soil loss. The aim is to
explore the possibility of using NDVI as a proxy for
indirect measurement of soil erosion. This method MATERIALS AND METHODS
involves a quantitative remote sensing study of soil In this research GIS coupled with the remote sensing technique
erosion. By utilizing a Landsat ETM+ and Thematic was adopted to achieve the stated aim and objectives. The primary
Mapper (TM 5) imagery, this study was aimed at data include SRTM DEM of Abia State. Also collected were certain
introducing much more simple and handy combinatorial relevant existing maps of the state relating to vegetation/land use,
method to retrieve some biophysical parameters so as to population data, geology, rainfall, administrative map, and soil map.
The maps were printed and published by the State Ministry of
examine the soil erosion changes in Abia State. The
Lands, Survey and Urban Planning, Umuahia, Abia State (2010).
remote sensing technique has often proved to be a The population data was collected from the National Population
veritable tool for modelling and estimating some Commission (NPC) office in Umuahia, Abia State (2011). The
biophysical parameters. For instance, recently remote secondary data include information on rainfall distribution from
sensing was successfully used to estimate January to December (1972-2010). The rainfall data was collected
evapotranspiration in the Tajan catchment area of Iran from the Meteorological Department, National Root Crop Research
Institute (NRCRI), Umudike, Umuahia (2010).
using MODIS images (Rahimi et al., 2015). Available maps were scanned, converting paper map to
Specifically, the objectives of the present study are: digital/raster image. The scanned maps were georeferenced and
digitized in ArcGIS 9.3 software environment. Feature extraction for
1. To estimate amount of soil loss to erosion in tons per Aster DEM and Elevation were also done using ArcGIS software.
acre per year. The bands 4, 5 and 7 of the acquired Landsat ETM, TM, and MSS
2. To determine the land use types in Abia State from imagery were enhanced using histogram equalization. The image
was already rectified to a common UTM coordinate system
1986 to 2003. (WGS84), and then radiometrically corrected. The rectified image
3. To determine the impact of vegetal cover in soil was used in the creation of color composite map; a False Color
erosion process using NDVI. Composite (FCC) was adopted for this research using bands 4, 5,
4. To develop erosion vulnerability index for the State. and 7. In this research supervised classification was used. The
5. To develop a risk index and determine possible homogeneous representative samples of the different surface cover
types (information classes) of interest (known as training area) were
affected towns in the State for mitigation purposes.
identified on the imagery. The selection of appropriate training
areas was based on the researchers’ familiarity with the
geographical area and their knowledge of the actual surface cover
The study area types present in the imagery. Maximum likelihood classification
(MLC) method was used with remote sensing image data using
Idrisi (R15).
The study area is Abia State, which is one of the 36 The Universal Soil Loss Equation (USLE), which is a
states in Nigeria. It lies between latitudes 4°45' and 6° mathematical model used to describe soil erosion processes
00’North and longitudes 7°00' and 8°09'East. The State is (Wischmeier et al,. 1960, 1978), was used to derive soil loss in Abia
located east of Imo State and shares common State. USLE was used in ArcGIS 9.3 (using Arc tool box)
boundaries with Anambra, Enugu and Ebonyi States to environment to calculate the soil erosion index for the study area
(i.e. Abia State). A model was developed that executed the USLE
the North-West, North and North-East respectively. To
formula using data from the study area (Figure 2). USLE is an
the East and South-East, it is bounded by Cross River empirical model and its formula is given as:
and Akwa Ibom States and by Rivers State to the South.
It occupies a landmass of 5,833.77 square kilometers A=RLSKCP (1)
(Figure 1). Abia State comprises of seventeen (17) Local
Government Areas (LGAs). Where: A = average annual soil loss in tons per acre, R = rainfall
and runoff erosivity factor, L = slope length factor, S = slope
The rock system and geological history of this area are steepness factor, K = soil erodibility factor,C = cover and
due to events that took place during the Mesozoic and management factor, and P = supporting and conservation practices
Cenozoic eras respectively. Her geological structure is factor.
divided into three namely, upper coal measure, false- In general, the USLE model estimates soil erosion by rain drop
bedded sand stones, and lower coal measure. The upper impact and surface runoff.
coal measure formation is the largest geological
formation in this region. It comprises mainly of coarse Runoff erosivity (R) index
grains, alternating sediments of grey sands, dark shale
which contains sands of impure coal in place of vertical R is the rainfall and runoff erosivity index which is given as:
286 J. Soil Sci. Environ. Manage

Figure 1. Map of Abia State, Nigeria.

R = EI30/100. and flow accumulation of the study area were computed using
ArcGIS tools. The equation used for computing slope length is:
EI for a given rainstorm equals the product: total storm energy (E)
multiplied by the maximum 30-min intensity (I30), E is the kinetic (DEM>Flow Direction>Flow Accumulation*Cell size / 22.13)0.4 (2)
energy in the rainfall and I30 is in inches per hour. R depends on
the amount of raindrop energy and rainfall intensity.

Slope steepness factor

Slope length factor
S factor is the slope steepness factor. This is the steepness of the
L factor is the slope length factor. Slope length determines the area of study. As a rule, the greater the slope steepness the more
concentration of water. Therefore, the greater the length of slope of erosion that can be expected. DEM data for Abia State was used to
a field the greater the concentration of water and run off. A DEM of compute the S factor in ArcGIS 9.3. The equation used to compute
the study area was used as the source data, and then flow direction the slope steepness is:
 Uluocha and Uwadiegwu 287

Figure 2. USLE Flow Chart adopted for this research.

(DEM > Slope > * 3.14 / 180 > sin slope / 0.0869)1.3 (3) up area) and water were obtained from literature review (Roose,
1977). Based on the above, C factor was created for
Slope steepness factor (S) was then multiplied with the length agricultural/vegetation land use, and land use/land cover type for
factor (L) to derive the LS factor, which is the topographic factor of 1986 and 2003.
Abia State.

Supporting and conservation practices factor

Soil erodibility factor
P factor is the supporting practices factor. These are the erosion
K factor is the soil erodibility factor. This is an estimate of the ability control practices such as contouring, strip cropping, terracing etc.
of soils to resist erosion, based on the physical characteristics of as well as land management practices that reduce soil erosion. The
each soil. It depends on soil structure, texture and composition. In P-factor is the ratio of soil loss under the given condition to soil loss
this project, K factor is based on values established in literature. A from up-and-down-slope farming as observed in the study area.
high K factor indicates a lower water infiltration rate thus more Therefore it is a value between 0 and 1for each land use type in
prone to erosion. K factor was derived from tables provided by Abia State. A field trip to carry out ground truthing revealed that
Roose (1977). there were no measurable conservation measures in the study
area.

Cover and management factor

Derivation of normalized difference vegetation index (NDVI)
Cover and management factor (C factor) indicates the influence of
cropping systems and management variables on soil erosion. This The normalized difference vegetation index (NDVI) is a simple
factor depends on four sub factors: Prior land use, canopy cover, numerical indicator that can be used to analyze remote sensing
soil surface cover and surface roughness. The C factor for Abia measurements, to ascertain whether the target being observed
State was obtained from two sources. C factors for Agriculture (land contains live green vegetation or not (Jensen, 2007; Rouse et al.,
use), barren ground, primary and secondary forests, urban (Build- 1973). The NDVI is calculated as follows:
 288 J. Soil Sci. Environ. Manage

Table 1. Soil erosion classification index for Abia State.

Code Index class Class range

1 Severe >200
2 High 200-100
3 moderate 100-50
4 Low 50-25
5 Very Low <25

Table 2. Land use/land cover, soil loss and NDVI in Abia State in 1986.

Soil Loss (Ton/Acres)

Land use/land cover Area (km2) Area (%) NDVI Scale NDVI
MIN MAX MEAN
Farmland 2402.054 43.69 0.00 1051.32 24.14 0.14 116.16
Built-Up Area 143.289 2.6 0.00 456.92 29.68 0.08 107.06
Bare Ground 514.405 9.35 0.00 1082.58 48.93 0.07 109.60
Secondary Forest 2297.833 41.8 0.00 503.01 9.22 0.18 119.13
Primary Forest 104.076 1.9 0.00 39.38 1.10 0.23 120.64
Water Bodies 5.318 0.096 0.00 4.57 1.35 -0.08 88.48
Wetlands 29.725 0.54 0.00 152.81 4.00 0.21 123.78

NDVI 
 nir   red (4) into 7 categories namely, built-up areas, farmland
 nir   red (agricultural), primary forested land, secondary forested
land, bare ground, wetlands and water bodies. The
Where:  nir : Spectral reflectance measurements acquired in the images were taken in December and February when
near-infrared regions, and active agricultural activities in the study area are virtually
 red : Spectral reflectance measurements acquired in the red non-existent. Tables 2 and 3 show the distribution of land
use/land, soil loss, and NDVI for Abia State in 1986 and
regions.
The NDVI value is transformed from -1 to 1 into an 8 bit (0-255) 2003 respectively. Change analysis was conducted on
value image. The scale value was used in statistical analysis using each of the LU/LC categories. The results obtained
correlation model. showed that farm land in the study area was about
2402.05 km2 in 1986 but by 2003 this had reduced to
791.42 km2. On the other hand, while built-up area was
Correlation model
143.289 km2 in 1986 (covering 3%) it increased to
The Pearson Product Moment Correlation model was used to 1791.314 km2 in 2003 (covering 33%). The wetland
determine relationship between soil erosion loss and NDVI value. witnessed a loss from 84.729 km2 in 1986 to 29.725 km2
The correlation model is expressed as follows. in 2003. Bare ground areas experienced a 12% (674.235
2
km ) increase in 2003 over the 1986 figure (514.405
km2). Secondary forest in the study area was about
Risk assessment
2297.83 km2 in 1986 but it was reduced to 2045.45 km2 in
Risk = H * V (5) 2003. Primary forest increased marginally from 104.076
2 2
km (2%) in 1986 to 105.358 km in 2003. A decrease in
2
H = Hazard, and V = Vulnerability the area of water bodies was experienced from 5.318 km
The soil erosion risk was determined from Equation (5) and the 2
in 1986 to 4.16 km in 2003.
values obtained were reclassified into five classes using ArcGIS
software based on the criteria stated in Table 1.
Figure 3 shows the distribution of land use/land cover
change in the study area from 1986 to 2003. Figures 4
and 5 show land use/land cover of Abia State for 1986
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION and 2003, respectively.

Analysis of land use/land covers change

Soil loss estimation
For the purpose of land use/land cover (LU/LC) change
analysis, features on the Landsat images were classified In this study all factors of the USLE model (R, K, SL, C,
 Uluocha and Uwadiegwu 289

Table 3. Land use/land cover, soil loss and NDVI in Abia State in 2003.

2 Soil loss (Ton/Acres)

Land use/land cover Area (Km ) Area (%) NDVI Scale NDVI
MIN MAX MEAN
Farmland 791.42 14.46 0.00 928.72 13.64 0.16 116.90
Built-Up Area 1791.314 32.58 0.00 584.86 33.46 0.08 101.09
Bare Ground 674.235 12.26 0.00 1120.59 36.46 0.10 104.95
Secondary Forest 2045.451 37.21 0.00 538.90 9.59 0.19 120.44
Primary Forest 105.358 1.91 0.00 626.60 11.92 0.21 118.61
Water Bodies 4.193 0.07 0.00 707.93 26.87 -0.11 106.44
Wetlands 84.729 1.54 0.00 73.75 1.62 0.23 123.81

Figure 3. The land use/land cover change from 1986 to 2003.

and P) were integrated to estimate soil loss (with a mean value 48.9331ton/acres) in 1986, and in
(ton/acres/year) for the study area due to erosion. 2003, 1120.59 ton/acres (with a mean value 36.46
Modeling erosion-induced soil loss using the land ton/acres) was lost to soil erosion in the State.
use/land cover type (as C factor) in the study area and The value for secondary forest was found to be
the value ranges from 0 to 1,082.58 ton/acre in 1986 and 503.009 ton/acres (with a mean value of 9.21ton/acres) in
0 to 1,120.59ton/acre in 2003 (Figures 6 and 7). Soil loss 1986 and 538.903 ton/acres (with a mean value of
for various land use/land cover was computed for the 9.58ton/acres) in 2003. Primary forest experienced an
study area. For farmlands, in 1986 about 1051.32ton/acre increase in soil loss from 39.38 ton/acres (in 1986) to
(with a mean value of 24.14 ton/acre) was lost to soil 626.60 ton/acres (in 2003). For wetlands, 152.80
erosion and 928.72 ton/acres (with a mean value of ton/acres (with a mean value of 3.99 ton/acres) in 1986
13.639 ton/acre) in 2003. For built-up areas 584.863 and 73.75 ton/acres (with a mean value of 4 ton/acres) in
ton/acres (with a mean value of 33.46 ton/acre) was lost 2003 were lost to soil erosion in the area. Figure 8 shows
in 2003 and 456.921 ton/acres (with a mean value soil erosion estimation map for each land use type in the
29.6803 ton/acre) in 1986. Bare ground being the most study area.
vulnerable to soil loss experienced 1082.58 ton/acres Also, still using the land use/land cover type (as C
290 J. Soil Sci. Environ. Manage

Figure 4. Land use/land cover map for Abia State for 1986.

factor) to model soil erosion, soil loss estimation was tons/acres in 2003. Isuikwuato ranks second with 568.45
determined for each Local Government Area (LGA) in tons/acres in 1986 and 594.65 tons/acres in 2003. In
Abia State, for both 1986 and 2003 (Table 4). From the Ohafia, 544.89 ton/acres was lost in 1986 and 538.90
result of the analysis done, Umu-Nneochi has the highest ton/acres was lost in 2003. Bende experienced an
value of 1082.58 tons/acres in 1986 and 1120.59 increase in soil loss from 525.73 ton/acres (in 1986) to
 Uluocha and Uwadiegwu 291

Figure 5. Land use/land cover map for Abia State for 2003.

547.54 ton/acres (in 2003). In Ikwuano, 154.98 ton/acres Mapping soil erosion vulnerability
and 164.27 ton/acres was lost to soil erosion in 1986 and
2003 respectively. Soil loss values in the Abia State for The soil erosion vulnerability of Abia State was analyzed
each land use type are shown in Tables 2 and 3. and mapped based on the criteria developed. As shown
292 J. Soil Sci. Environ. Manage

Figure 6. Soil erosion estimation for Abia State for1986.

in Table 6, 7% (120,501 acres) of the State is vulnerable 20% (284,349.99 acres). In the State 27% (148,929.42
to severe soil erosion while 13% (195,493 acres) is acres) is affected by low soil erosion while 33% of the
covered by high soil erosion. The tendency of the State remaining parts of the State experience very low level of
being affected by moderate form of soil erosion is just soil erosion. Figure 9 shows the distribution of soil
 Uluocha and Uwadiegwu 293

Figure 7. Soil erosion estimation for Abia State for 2003.

erosion vulnerability in the State. analyzed using Landsat-7 ETM+ and TM 5 imagery.
NDVI values range from 1 to -1. The value 1(high)
represents pixels covered by substantial proportion of
Analysis of vegetation density (NDVI) healthy vegetation while -1(low) represents pixels
covered by non-vegetated surface including water,
The normalized difference vegetation index (NDVI) was manmade features, bare soil, and dead or stressed
294 J. Soil Sci. Environ. Manage

Figure 8. The distribution of soil loss in Abia State from 1986 to 2003.

Table 4. Soil loss (Tons/Acre) for each Local Government Area in

Abia State.

Local government Soil Loss 1986 Soil Loss 2003

name (Tons/Acre) (Tons/ Acre)
Aba North 269.19 266.73
Aba South 219.09 224.01
Arochukwu 242.64 258.44
Bende 525.73 547.54
Ikwuano 154.98 164.27
Isiala Ngwa North 258.56 262.37
Isiala Ngwa South 140.6 154.39
Isukwuato 568.45 594.65
Oboma Ngwa 298.6 371.89
Ohafia 544.89 538.90
Osisioma Ngwa 232.6 236.86
Ugwunagbo 142.23 138.57
Ukwa East 208.31 222.41
Ukwa West 194.83 185.30
Umu-Nneochi 1082.58 1120.59
Umuahia North 412.95 720.89
Umuahia South 304.67 304.22

vegetation. NDVI value was scaled to 8 bit image to NDVI values are contained in Tables 3 and 4. As shown
remove negative values for easy analysis in SPSS. The in the two tables, forested areas had the highest NDVI
 Uluocha and Uwadiegwu 295

Figure 9. Areas covered by each vulnerability index class.

Table 5. Regression equations and co-efficient of correlation for

Abia State in 1986 and 2003.

Year Regression equation R R2

1986 Y=28.262 - 0.101X 0.070 0.005
2003 Y=184.155 - 1.459X 0.976 0.953

value while built-up areas had the lowest. This was due land cover has, the lower the soil loss. Thus, it is clear
to urban development whereby natural vegetation is from this result that changes in land use/land cover affect
removed and replaced by non-evaporating and non- soil loss. Regression equations and co-efficient of
transpiring surfaces such as metal, asphalt and concrete. correlation values are tabulated in Table 5.
Figures 10 and 11 show NDVI of the study area from
1986 to 2003.
Modelling soil erosion risk and affected communities
in Abia State
Correlation analysis between NDVI and soil loss
Risk in the context of this paper means the expected
The relationship between soil loss and NDVI was degree of soil loss due to potentially damaging erosion
investigated for each land cover type through correlation phenomenon within a given time. Soil erosion risk was
analysis. It is apparent from the figures obtained that determined by calculating its intensity across the study
surface temperature values tend to negatively correlate area. The results obtained were used to rate the various
with NDVI values for all land cover types. These communities on the level of their proneness to soil
correlations can be visualized by plotting the erosion risk.
corresponding mean surface temperature values for all Soil erosion risk was determined by multiplying the
land cover types against the NDVI. The regression hazard by vulnerability. The risk index and area coverage
graphs of the study area from 1986 to 2003 are shown in was determined for the State and is presented in Table 1.
Figures 12 and 13. A spatial query analysis was conducted on the database
The negative correlation between soil loss estimation to provide some useful information necessary to
and NDVI clearly indicates that the higher the biomass a understand the phenomenon of soil erosion risk in the
 296 J. Soil Sci. Environ. Manage

Table 6. Soil loss (Ton/Ha) and risk rate of towns affected by soil erosion in Abia State.

Risk rate
Severe High Moderate Low Very Low
Town name Soil loss Town name Soil loss Town name Soil loss Town name Soil loss Town name Soil loss
UmuOru 915.23 UraNtaUmuarandu 447.39 UmuUvo 269.33 Umuoru 89.21 Umuzomgbo 21.24
UmuNwaNwa 878.39 Amaokwe-Elu 527.7 UmuUhie 267.84 UmuomayiUku 135.75 Umuozuo 25.91
UmuKalika 858.16 UmuOmei 607.69 Umuosu 173.94 UmuOkohia 124.06 Umuosi 5.93
UmuIroma 1053.11 UmuOkoroUku 386.78 UmuosoOnyoke 231.82 UmuOcha 55.19 Umuokpe 8.73
Umuasua 839.61 UmuOko 334.58 Umuopia 272.36 Umunachi 90.66 Umuokorola 5.5
Owaza 1325.88 UmuOjimaOgbu 311.14 Umuokoro 231.84 UmuMba 138.65 UmuOhia 23.18
OnichaNgwa 925.86 Umuode 554.36 UmuOkahia 185.76 UmuEzeUku 106.59 UmuOcham 8.43
Okwu 864.89 UmuObiakwa 349.86 UmuohuAzueke 245.29 UmuDosi 90.66 Umumba 49.84
OhuhuNsulu 1152.95 UmuNkpe 469.29 Umuodo 234.11 UmuAla 135.75 UmuIkuUko 25.91
OhafiaIfigh 819.43 UmuNkiri 305.63 Umuocheala 156.27 UmuAjuju 135.75 Umuemenike 9.43
NdiUdumaUkwu 971.95 Umuihi 630.21 Umuobiala 151.09 Umuada 90.66 Umuellem 6.57
NdiOrieke 1455.25 Umuhu 542.45 UmuNta 218.41 Ubani 54.64 Umu Awa 0
MgbedeAla 751.25 Umuezu 379.09 Umunekwu 243.81 Ubaha 124.06 Umuakwu 6.57
Ekenobizi 1101.37 UmuevuOloko 491.33 Umulehi 275.39 Ovuoku 58.93 Umuabia 6.14
Asaga 821.5 Umueteghe 345.28 Umuko 190.19 Okpo 64.13 UmuAbayi 5.93
Amuzukwu 1154.74 UmuEnyere 425.16 UmuEzegu 272.36 Okoko 105.78 UkwaNkasi 7.37
Amiyi 797.79 Umuchiakuma 429.36 UmuEgwu 211.4 OkahiaUga 88.35 Ugbo 4.45
AmaUru 1200.78 Umuawa 336.5 Umudike 156.27 OgoOmerenama 113.61 OzuAkoli 9.64
AmaUke 1093.34 Umuarughu 349.11 Umuanyi 260.14 Oduenyi 60.14 Onuasu 0
Amanta 1556.38 Umuanya 352.91 Obor 251.29 Obiohia 51.57 Okwe 4.95
Akoli 1029.01 Umuamachi 309.45 Umuchima 216.91 Amuma 93.69 Okpuala 30.3
Abala 1371.49 Amaoku 478.8 Umu Aro 216.91 Obinto 79.66 Okopedi 16.99
Umuakwu 713.38 UmuAkpara 468.65 Oboro 209.46 Obieze 92.83 Okon 45.63
Umuopara 680.7 UmuAja 561.47 Obuohia 242.86 Obete 106.59 Okoloma 5.93
Uturu 1060.8 Umuahia 374.44 UmuAkwuAmeke 222.71 Egbelu 119.13 Ndiachinivu 6.32

study area. Spatial queries were used to there are twelve (12) communities in the State Ohuhu-Nsulu (1152.95 tons/ha), Ekenobizi
determine risk prone areas (Towns) for different with the highest values of soil loss (≥1000 (1101.37 tons/ha), Amauke (1093.34), Uturu
index classes in the study area. The communities tons/ha) and severe erosion risk. The (1060.8 tons/ha), Umuiroma (1053.11 tons/ha),
were classified into severe, high, moderate, low communities are Amanta (1556.38 tons/ha), and Akoli (1029.01 tons/ha).
and very low risk prone areas. The towns in Abia Ndiorieke (1455.25 tons/ha), Abala (1371.49 Overall, the results reveal that 40% of the State
State affected by soil erosion and the level of risk tons/ha), Owaza (1325.88 tons/ha), Amauru experiences severe form of soil erosion. About
are presented in Table 6. As Table 6 indicates, (1200.78 tons/ha), Amuzukwu (1154.74 tons/ha), 32% experience high soil erosion; 17.51%
 Uluocha and Uwadiegwu 297

Figure 10. NDVI map of Abia State for 1986.

experience soil erosion moderately, while only 1% of the is obvious that several communities in Abia State stand
State is affected by very low erosion. From the results, it the risk of significantly losing their lands, infrastructure,
298 J. Soil Sci. Environ. Manage

Figure 11. NDVI map of Abia State for 2003.

crops, rich natural resources and even lives to soil Conclusion

erosion, if appropriate and effective control measures are
not put in place. Primarily, this research presents a methodology for GIS-
 Uluocha and Uwadiegwu 299

Figure 12. Correlation between NDVI and soil loss in Abia State for 1986.

Figure 13. Correlation between NDVI and soil loss in Abia State for 2003.

based soil erosion risk assessment in Abia State, Nigeria, parameters, expert judgment, as well as the relationship
with relatively little basic information available. The study between amount of soil loss and NDVI as an indicator to
relied heavily on historical data, natural and human evaluate soil loss magnitude and risk intensity. The
300 J. Soil Sci. Environ. Manage

methodology adopted in this study can equally be Roose EJ (1977). Application of the universal soil loss Equation of
Wischmeier and Smith in West Africa, Greenland DJ, Lal R (Eds) Soil
replicated in areas or circumstances where there is little Conservation and Management in the Humid tropics, John Wiley and
or no basic measurement or data for the direct study of Son ltd, Printed in Great Britain by William Clowe and Sons, Ltd,
soil erosion. The study of vulnerable areas and risk London, Beccles and Colchester.
effects of soil erosion hazards is very helpful for Rouse JW Jr, Haas RH, Schell JA, Deering DW (1973). Monitoring the
determining the effect of certain mitigation measures, for vernal advancement and retrogradation (green wave effect) of natural
vegetation, Prog. Rep. RSC 1978-1, Remote Sensing Center, Texas
which a cost-benefit analysis can be carried out. This A&M Univ., College Station, nr. E73-106393, 93. (NTIS No. E73-
type of information allows moving away from the 106393).
“response-only” approach to disaster management, which Umudu M (2008). Residence flees as erosion eats up Anambra
Community. In: The Nation Newspaper, Monday, October 20, 2008.
has been endemic throughout the developing world, to
Vintage Press Ltd, Lagos.
one which incorporates prevention and reduction Western CJV, Montoya L, Boerboom L, Elena CB (2000). Multi-Hazard
(Westen et al., 2010). Risk Assessment Using GIS In Urban Areas: A Case Study for The
City of Turrialba, Costa Rica, International Institute for
Geoinformation Science and Earth Observation(ITC), Enschede, The
Netherlands, Universidad de Costa Rica, San Jose, Costa Rica
Conflict of Interest [Online] Available: www.adpc.net/audmp/rllw/themes/th1-westen.pdf.
(Accessed September 5, 2014).
The authors have not declared any conflict of interest. Wischmeier WH, Smith DD (1960). A universal soil loss estimating
equation to guide conservation farm planning. Proc. 7th Int. Congr.
Soil Sci. Soc. 1:418-425.
Wischmeier WH, Smith D (1978). Predicting rainfall erosion losses: a
REFERENCES guide to conservation planning. USDA-ARS Agriculture Handbook
No. 537, Washington DC. P. 58.
Enabor EE, Sagau VO (1988). Ecological Disasters in Nigeria: Soil
Erosion (An Introduction) in Sagamu VO, Enabor EE, Ofomata GEK,
Ologe KO, Oyebande L. (Eds) Ecological Disasters in Nigeria: Soil
Erosion (Federal Ministry of Science and Technology, Lagos).
Jensen JR (2007). Remote Sensing of the environment: An earth
nd
resources.2 edition, Pearson Prentice hall, Pearson education, Inc.
New Jersey.
Jimoh HI (2005). Tropical Rainfall Events on Erosion Rate in Rapidly
Developing Urban Areas in Nigeria. Singapore J. Trop. Geogr.
26(1):77-80.
Ministry of Lands, Survey and Urban Planning (2010). Town Planning
Department, Master Plan of Old defunct Imo State, 1984.
National Population Commission (NPC) (2011). 2006 National
Population Census, [Online] Available: www.population.gov.ng/
th
(Accessed in 8 October, 2011).
National Root Crop Research Institute (NRCRI) (2010). Meteorological
Laboratory, Meteorological Department, Umudike.
Ofomata GEK (2009). Soil Erosion in Nigeria: The Views of a
Geomorphologist. [Online] Available:
www.nuc.edu.ng/nucsite/File/.../No%207%20Inaugral%20Lecture.pd.
Accessed October 5, 2014).
Ojo AD, Johnson O (2010). Erosion problems in a Nigerian rural
community. J. Sustain. Dev. Africa, 12(1).
Rahimi S, Sefidkouhi MAG, Raeini-Sarjaz M, Valipour M (2015).
Estimation of actual evapotranspiration by using MODIS images (a
case study: Tajan catchment). Arch. Agron. Soil Sci. 61(5):695-709.
Journal of Soil Science
and Environmental
Management

Related Journals Published by Academic Journals

■ Journal of Plant Breeding and Crop Science

■ African Journal of Agricultural Research
■ Journal of Horticulture and Forestry
■ International Journal of Livestock Production
■ International Journal of Fisheries and Aquaculture
■ Journal of Cereals and Oilseeds
■ Journal of Soil Science and Environmental Management
■ Journal of Stored Products and Postharvest Research