In the WRB 2006 there are some explanations in the definition of its qualifiers, but not for everyone and this explanation is more for giving examples to the same qualifier concept. In the WRB 2014 the thing goes worse in this sense, because there are new concepts and no explanations which link with the general soil-properties background anymore.
So, for giving a better interpretation of a full soil classification, somebody knows if is there any paper or book to make this link between the qualifier and their implications on the soil properties/evolution/management?
WRB is a classification system, it can be use to soil managment but this is the consequence and not the main purpose of the key itself. The classification system permit to "name" soil according to diagnostics horizons and/or material. Hence, some of the qualifier are there to describe and/or helping the understanding of the pedon in it history, pedogenesis, etc...
To answer about managment of the soil, go in Annex 1.
Dear Luis, all qualifers are explain in chapter 5 page 111 in the WRB 2014.
Do you have an example?
You're right. Chapter 5 explains the meaning of all the qualifiers, but no definition have been linked with general profile properties or implications to soil management or soil development (the mains of WRB). That is the reason why I am asking this.
Maybe with some qualifiers one can imagine the links (e.g. Toxic, Natric, Vermic), but with other more no at all (e.g. Nechic, Magnesic, Geoabruptic, Greyzemic, etc.)
WRB is a classification system, it can be use to soil managment but this is the consequence and not the main purpose of the key itself. The classification system permit to "name" soil according to diagnostics horizons and/or material. Hence, some of the qualifier are there to describe and/or helping the understanding of the pedon in it history, pedogenesis, etc...
To answer about managment of the soil, go in Annex 1.
But, according to the same WRB, great part of these diagnosis horizons and materials are based in pedogenesis processes. The qualifier definitions doesn't link with this or other soil characteristics (e.g. soil management).
I think the WRB is not a duplication of the soil description, is an abstraction of soil description and representative soil parameters. I can't see how each qualifier is linked with a representative soil parameter. I can link the qualifiers I have experience, but I think the point is, even if I'm completely new with soil classification, I have to be able to link the classification with pedogenesis or management explanations based of the same soil full-name.
So, as WRB 2014 doesn't have that information, I decided to ask it. I hope I can well-explain my point. Beforehand, thanks for answering me.
Qualifiers permit to give more information on the soil profile, they are either linked to the pedogenesis processes (Cambic, Stagnic, Gleyic, Retic...) or other informations coming from the observation and important in the comprehension of the soil history or morphology , like lithic discontinuity (Ruptic), texture (loamic, siltic,...), colour (Rhodic, Chromic), human intervention (Transportic, Plaggic, Terric).
Exactly, in spite of there are definitions of each qualifier, there are no information about how each qualifier contribute to that comprehension. So, do you know where I can find a longer explanation of each one of the qualifiers?
Jérome already gave the right answers, as I see it. At least at the moment, there is no such text with explanations. For me, the cennexion between qualifiers and their pedogenetic or soil management meaning is clear. It would possibly be easier to help you if you had individual qualifiers you would like to discuss.
Ok. Thank both of you for your answers and patience. I'll be happy asking you by personal messages about the specific qualifiers I have doubt about.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Agriculture
- Soil Science
- Soil