Soil scientists have developed different mathematical equations and indices to be able to quantify soil development and to organize soil data. The main objective of the present research was the comparison of different soil development indices (including forms and ratios of iron, magnetic susceptibility, color indices, and modified Harden Index) related to different soils located on Kerman-Baft transect. Eight pedons on different geomorphic surfaces were selected during field studies. All genetic horizons of selected pedons were sampled and routine laboratory analysis performed. Moving from Kerman toward Baft in the studied transect, due to increasing trend of elevation, more humidity was observed. That is why, pedogenic processes were also increased and iron forms and ratios showed this development trend regardless of local conditions. Due to effect of parent material lithology on soil minerogenic magnetic susceptibility, no significant relationship between this property and soil development indices was found. Corelatioon of various forms of Iron with three color indices of Harst, Torent and Alexunder showed that Harst Index was better than the other two indices for the study area. Moreover, since the parent materials of different pedons were not the same, the modified Harden Index was not adopted with soil development trend.
Esfandiarpour Borujeni, I. (2015). Comparsion of different soil development indices along Kerman-Baft transect. Journal of Soil Management and Sustainable Production, 5(2), 1-23.
MLA
Isa Esfandiarpour Borujeni. "Comparsion of different soil development indices along Kerman-Baft transect". Journal of Soil Management and Sustainable Production, 5, 2, 2015, 1-23.
HARVARD
Esfandiarpour Borujeni, I. (2015). 'Comparsion of different soil development indices along Kerman-Baft transect', Journal of Soil Management and Sustainable Production, 5(2), pp. 1-23.
VANCOUVER
Esfandiarpour Borujeni, I. Comparsion of different soil development indices along Kerman-Baft transect. Journal of Soil Management and Sustainable Production, 2015; 5(2): 1-23.