Back to all available

Land-use shapes the composition and stability of soil water-stable aggregates in a plateau agro-pastoral ecotone

ecosystem-science
environmental-sciences
soil-science

Abstract

Background. The northeastern Tibetan Plateau is a typical agro-pastoral ecotone that experiences frequent land-use changes. Maintaining stable soil aggregates in this region is key to protecting the environment and supporting food production on the Tibetan Plateau. Nevertheless, comparative data on soil aggregate composition and stability across diverse land-use types and soil depths in this region are currently limited.

Methods. Herein, soil samples from 0–20 cm and 20–40 cm depths were gathered at 52 sites spanning four dominant land-use types in the northeastern Tibetan Plateau: grassland (GL), cropland (CL), orchard (OC), and forest (FR). The composition and stability of soil aggregates were assessed using the wet sieving method.

Results. The results exhibited that silt and clay particles (SC, < 0.053 mm) were the predominant aggregate fraction across all land-use types, followed by microaggregates (MIA, 0.053–0.25 mm), while small macroaggregates (SMA, 0.25–2 mm) and large macroaggregates (LMA, > 2 mm) had relatively low mass proportions. Aggregate stability in the 0–20 cm layer ranked FR > GL > CL > OC, with FR and GL significantly more stable than OC. In the 20–40 cm layer, the highest aggregate stability was found in GL. Except for FR, aggregate stability varied little between different soil layers for other land use types. Aggregate stability is positively associated with the contents of soil organic carbon, total nitrogen, alkali-hydrolyzable nitrogen, and available phosphorus, underscoring the critical role of soil organic matter in regulating soil aggregation.

Conclusions. The findings suggest that land-use type is an essential factor shaping soil structure in the northeastern Tibetan Plateau.

Ask to review this manuscript

Notes for potential reviewers

  • Volunteering is not a guarantee that you will be asked to review. There are many reasons: reviewers must be qualified, there should be no conflicts of interest, a minimum of two reviewers have already accepted an invitation, etc.
  • This is NOT OPEN peer review. The review is single-blind, and all recommendations are sent privately to the Academic Editor handling the manuscript. All reviews are published and reviewers can choose to sign their reviews.
  • What happens after volunteering? It may be a few days before you receive an invitation to review with further instructions. You will need to accept the invitation to then become an official referee for the manuscript. If you do not receive an invitation it is for one of many possible reasons as noted above.
  • PeerJ does not judge submissions based on subjective measures such as novelty, impact or degree of advance. Effectively, reviewers are asked to comment on whether or not the submission is scientifically and technically sound and therefore deserves to join the scientific literature. Our Peer Review criteria can be found on the "Editorial Criteria" page - reviewers are specifically asked to comment on 3 broad areas: "Basic Reporting", "Experimental Design" and "Validity of the Findings".
  • Reviewers are expected to comment in a timely, professional, and constructive manner.
  • Until the article is published, reviewers must regard all information relating to the submission as strictly confidential.
  • When submitting a review, reviewers are given the option to "sign" their review (i.e. to associate their name with their comments). Otherwise, all review comments remain anonymous.
  • All reviews of published articles are published. This includes manuscript files, peer review comments, author rebuttals and revised materials.
  • Each time a decision is made by the Academic Editor, each reviewer will receive a copy of the Decision Letter (which will include the comments of all reviewers).

If you have any questions about submitting your review, please email us at [email protected].