Volume 9, Number 1 (October 2021):3063-3072, doi:10.15243/jdmlm.2021.091.3063 ISSN: 2339-076X (p); 2502-2458 (e), www.jdmlm.ub.ac.id
Open Access 3063 Research Article
Effects of land use on soil degradation in Giriwoyo, Wonogiri, Indonesia
Mujiyo1*, Tiara Hardian2, Hery Widijanto1, Aktavia Herawati1
1 Department of Soil Science, Faculty of Agriculture, Universitas Sebelas Maret, Jl. Ir. Sutami No.36A, Surakarta, Indonesia
2 Department of Agrotechnology, Faculty of Agriculture, Universitas Sebelas Maret, Jl. Ir. Sutami No.36A, Surakarta, Indonesia
*corresponding author: [email protected]
Abstract Article history:
Received 23 February 2021 Accepted 20 July 2021 Published 1 October 2021
This study aimed at determining the effect of land use on soil degradation, discovering the indicator as a determinant factor of soil degradation, and providing recommendations for land management to improve soil productivity. This study was conducted in agricultural lands in Giriwoyo, Wonogiri, Indonesia, and the observation indicator adopted by the Indonesian Government Regulation concerning Soil Degradation Control for Biomass Production. The methodology used was survey research with purposive sampling points in 12 land mapping units, and each unit was represented three times. The result showed that the study area was slightly and moderately degraded. Land use significantly affected soil degradation, and the paddy field has the highest degradation in the study area. Soil characteristics as degradation factors in the study area were soil texture, bulk density, and total porosity. Strategy for land management can be made by limiting the use of chemical fertilizers and change the use of chemical fertilizers into compost, to increase soil organic content, and accelerate the availability of nutrients.
Keywords:
land management paddy field soil degradation
To cite this article: Mujiyo, Hardian, T., Widijanto, H. and Herawati, A. 2021.Effects of land use on soil degradation in
Giriwoyo, Wonogiri, Indonesia. Journal of Degraded and Mining Lands Management 9(1):3063-3072, doi:10.15243/jdmlm.2021.091.3063.
Introduction
Wonogiri Regency area has increased a total population, in 2017 was 36,477, and the latest data in 2020 the population was about 38,953 (BPS Wonogiri, 2020). Population growth is increasing the need for food. This encourages farmers and agricultural experts to pushed agriculture production and managed the land with high intensity (Jambak et al., 2017). Yu et al.
(2017) stated that increase production is mostly in two ways, by increasing existed cropping yields or cultivating under a new land.
Harvested yields of paddy on the study area, Giriwoyo District, have been increased from 2,544 hectares in 2014 to 5,967 hectares in 2018. The increasing population had led to the use of land over- exploitation for food production and converted the land from agriculture to non-agricultural (Frasetya et al., 2019). The agriculture sector is very important in
biomass production activities. In general, repeated cultivation results in a decrease in soil quality while carried out without good management (Adejuwon and Ekanade, 1988). Biomass-producing in Giriwoyo is paddy fields, moor, mix plantations, and brushwood.
Arifin (2010) states that forest, monoculture, and mixed agriculture have different physical, chemical, and biological soil characteristics. A crop production increase is mostly adopting more varieties of crops and applying chemicals to boost the productivity yields of the crop (Pellegrini and Fernández, 2018).
Giriwoyo District is a hilly area with 20%
limestone hills. The topography is different from one to another area. Many relevant studies state that land tillages on the upper slopes of a hilly landscape cause soil erosion, and the lower slopes cause soil deposition (Wang et al., 2016). The steep slope increases the loss of soil by erosion. Erosion rises a couple of times
Open Access 3064 following the steepness increases (Herawati et al.,
2018). This condition makes land in the study area vulnerable to land activities because it can affect soil quality and biomass production.
Land use contributes to land degradation as much as greater (Mundia and Aniya, 2006) because physical and chemical properties are sensitives to land use or land cover management (Yao et al., 2010).
Research by Supriyadi et al. (2021) reported that soil quality in the paddy fields lands with organic management has the highest soil organic carbon content compared with inorganic and semi-organic.
Land degradation due to land use causes changes in soil texture and permeability rapidly (Biro et al., 2011).
Different soil management affects processes within the soil, such as soil erosion, leaching of soil nutrients, and nutrient mineralization (Kiflu and Beyene, 2013). In addition, natural soil properties and human activities play an important role in degradation, especially by land use activities and vegetation cover (Guerra et al., 2017). According to Celik (2005), there are differences in soil organic matter content in each different land use. In addition, land use for cultivation has experienced the loss of organic matter as much as at the beginning of cultivation and continuing to experience loss of organic material in subsequent cultivation activities (Bintoro et al., 2017).
Supriyadi et al. (2020) found that organic paddy fields have the highest soil organic carbon content, and their level is significantly different from conventional paddy fields. FAO stated that soil degradation happens while soil capacity is diminishing to provide ecosystem and services by its stakeholders (Krasilnikov et al., 2016). Many indicators have been used to determine the degradation, and the best way is by identifying soil properties (Stocking and Murnaghan, 2000). Plant production will be stunted because of soil degradation (Mujiyo et al., 2020).
World Soil Information states that it is important to study soil degradation in several lands because the degradation is caused by the processes and primarily human-induced within plant production, and its impact is inhibiting land productivity (Bindraban et al., 2012).
Based on the information, it is necessary to identify the actual condition of the land under different land uses. Besides, the Giriwoyo area does not have information about soil degradation. According to Putra and Edwin (2018), information related to soil degradation and land conservation is still rarely studied; a land conservation program is needed to obtain information about land conditions, especially on agricultural land.
Soil degradation information in each land use can be used as a basis for regional development plans by aspects of land sustainability. Besides, it is useful as a guide in controlling agricultural practices and developing a land management strategy in Giriwoyo, Wonogiri.
Materials and Methods Study area
Giriwoyo is located at the coordinates of 7o 58’ 52.82"
- 8o 5’ 27.26" South Latitude, and 110o52’ 0.08" - 111o 1’ 52.19" East Longitude. Giriwoyo has an agricultural area of 8,624.96 hectares, with land use paddy fields, mixed plantations, brushwood, and moor.
Data from BPS Wonogiri biomass production in the study area are paddy, corn, soybeans, peanuts, green beans, and cassava, and mixed plantations are teaks, mahogany, and sengon trees. During the dry season, dry land is converting to planting paddy. Meanwhile, in the agricultural system, the rest of the harvest has not been implemented to reduce the deterioration of soil quality.
The geology of the study area is dominant with limestone and surrounded by mountainous, especially in the southern area, about 20% is limestone hills. The soils are classified as Inceptisols and Mollisols. The slopes range about 0-8%, 9-15%, 16-25%, and 26- 40%. The slope on agricultural land has a different source for the plant, and land on different slopes also has different capacities to produce biomass. The Giriwoyo area is a dry land with a rainfall intensity ranging from 1,750 to 2,250 mm/year, which is classified as low and medium. This region has two climates, namely rain season from October to April and dry season from late April to October. The lowest daily temperature is in the range of 18 oC, and the highest daily temperature is in the range of 35-36 oC.
Land observation and sampling
This study was conducted by survey with a descriptive exploratory approach. The study followed six steps:
(1) Determine Land Map Unit (LMU) as working maps; (2) Field observation and sampling; (3) Laboratory analysis; (4) Categorize soil degradation level; (5) Statistics analysis. A working site sampling using Land Map Units (LMU) was obtained from the overlay of thematic maps (Mujiyo et al., 2016), namely soil type maps, slope maps, rainfall maps, and land use maps, compiled by the GIS ArcView 3.3 application.
Sites sampling was determined by the purposive sampling technique. Samples were taken from 12 land units (Table 4), each land unit was representative of 3 sites, and the total sampling sites were 36 sites.
Samples collected were of two types; crumbs aggregate and compact aggregate (using ring sampler).
In the preparation of laboratory analysis, soil samples were not contaminated by the skin and not exposed to sunlight.
The land observation was carried out by direct field verification and laboratory analysis. In this study, the indicators for determining soil degradation is adopted from the Indonesian Government Regulation concerning soil degradation control for biomass production. Observation indicators consisted of soil properties in physical, chemical, and biological aspects that included solum thickness, surface rock, soil
Open Access 3065 texture, bulk density, total porosity, permeability, pH,
electrical conductivity, redox, and the number of microbes. The classification of soil degradation used a critical threshold value for each indicator.
Laboratory analysis
Sample analysis was conducted at the Soil Physics Laboratory, Soil Chemistry Laboratory, and Soil Biotechnology Laboratory, Faculty of Agriculture, Sebelas Maret University.
Solum thickness and surface rocks were observed directly. Solum thickness was measured by measuring the vertical distance from the soil surface to the rock layer, which limits the flexibility of the development of the root system. Surface rocks were measured by making a 1 x 1 m plot and calculating the rock balance on the ground according to Munsell Soil Color Chart Guide. Stone is a coarse material with a diameter of more than 2 mm.
The texture was measured gravimetrically using the pipette method and calculating the weight ratio of quartzite sand (50-2,000 µm) to silt and clay (<50 µm).
Bulk density was measured gravimetrically in volume units with the ratio of the weight lump of soil content or total volume of soil. Meanwhile, total porosity, bulk density, and density of soil samples were measured using the percentage of pore space present in the soil to the soil volume. The degree of water release was measured by permeability by calculating the speed of water passing through the soil vertically, and the soil sample used was the undisturbed soil in the ring sampler.
The chemical characteristics indicators measured were pH, electrical conductivity and redox. The pH was measured as the actual pH, and the electrical conductivity was measured by conductivity meter, and redox was measured using a digital Redox Meter Tester Pen for oxidation-reduction potential (ORP).
The biological characteristics indicator measured was the number of soil microbes using a platting technique.
Data Analysis
Mapping of soil degradation level used matching and scoring. Soil degradation was obtained by matching and scoring methods for each observation indicator.
Observation data were compared with the standard of soil degradation criteria (Table 1). Then, calculating a ratio number of degraded samples in 1 land unit in each parameter, it named frequency relatives (Table 2) and determining the level of degradation by accumulating scores frequency relatives for each land map unit and grouped according to soil degradation level (Table 3).
Land use effect to soil degradation level was analyzed using analysis of variance (ANOVA) and continued by Duncan Multiple Range Test (DMRT).
The determinant indicators of soil degradation were analyzed using a correlation test to identify soil
properties that have greater effects on soil degradation.
In this case, the recommendation of land management was based on determinant indicators/factors in order to recondition degraded soil properties and to improve soil productivity.
Table 1. Standard criteria of soil degradation for biomass production.
Parameters Critical threshold
Solum thickness < 20 cm
Surface rocks > 40%
Soil texture < 18% colloid; > 80% sand quartzite
Bulk density > 1.4 g/cm3
Total porosity < 30% ; > 70%
Soil permeability <0,7 cm/hour; > 8 cm/hour pH (H2O) 1:2,5 <4.5 ; >8.5 Electrical
conductivity >4.0 mS/cm
Redox < 200 mV
Number of microbes < 102 CFU/g soil
Table 2. Relative frequency score of soil degradation.
Relative frequency of Soil degradation (%)
Score Soil degradation
level
0-10 0 Undegraded
11-25 1 Slightly
degraded
26-50 2 Moderately
degraded
51-75 3 Heavily
degraded
76-100 4 Very heavily
degraded Source: Technical Guide of Mapping Soil Degradation Level for Biomass Production in 2009
Table 3. Soil degradation level based on degradation score accumulation.
Symbol Soil degradation
level Score of soil degradation
N Undegraded 0
R. I Slightly degraded 1-14 R. II Moderately
degraded 15-24
R. III Heavily degraded 25-34 R. IV Very heavily
degraded
35-40 Source: Technical Guide of Mapping Soil Degradation Level for Biomass Production in 2009
Open Access 3066 Table 4. Land unit and sampling point of the study area.
No Land Unit Soil type Slope (%) Rainfall
(mm/year) Land Use
1 Unit1 Inceptisols 0-8% 1,750 Paddy field
2 Unit 2 Inceptisols 0-8% 2,250 Paddy field
3 Unit 3 Inceptisols 9-15% 2,250 Paddy field
4 Unit 4 Inceptisols 16-25% 2,250 Paddy field
5 Unit 5 Inceptisols 9-15% 1,750 Plantation
6 Unit 6 Inceptisols 9-15% 2,250 Plantation
7 Unit 7 Inceptisols 16-25% 2,250 Plantation
8 Unit 8 Inceptisols 26-40% 2,250 Plantation
9 Unit 9 Inceptisols 26-40% 2,250 Brushwood
10. Unit 10 Mollisols 9-15% 1,750 Moor
11. Unit 11 Mollisols 9-15% 2,250 Moor
12. Unit 12 Inceptisols 9-15% 2,250 Moor
Figure 1. Map of the land unit and sampling sites in the study area.
Results and Discussion Soil degradation
The indicator results which have been matched and categorized as degraded or not are presented in Table 5. The study area was categorized in a slight and moderate level of soil degradation, which can be seen in Table 6 on the soil degradation score for each land map unit (Figure 2). The highest score of degradation was paddy fields (18), and the lowest score was mixed plantation land (6) and brushwood (6). The effect of different land use in the study area result showed that land use significantly affected soil degradation in Giriwoyo (F-count = 4.740, p-value = 0.016, n = 36).
The degradation score due to different land uses was further tested by using DMRT. The use of paddy fields had the highest degradation (the average is 15.00).
Other land uses, i.e. moor, mixed plantation, and brushwood, were not significantly different, moor with an average rate of 12.67, and mixed plantation and brushwood with an average rate of 10.67. Paddy fields, moorlands, mixed plantations, and brushwood have different management intensities. Paddy fields are used for rice production one until two times a year. The moorland is used for cassava production in a year in the rainy season, and alternately the land is planted by upland paddy at the end of the rainy season, but it is used for planting legumes crop in the dry season.
Open Access 3067 Table 5. Data observation results and matching to standard soil degradation level threshold.
Land Use
Parameter
Solum thickness (cm) Surface rocks (%)
Texture
Bulk density (g/cm3) Total porosity (%) Permeability (cm/hour) pH (H2O) Electrical conductivity (mS/cm) Redox (mV) Number of microbes (CFU/g soils)
Colloid Sand
Paddy field
70 2 10.79* 89.20* 1.56* 19.13* 3.98 7.01 0.19 3.95* 8.15 x 107 40 2 12.04* 87.95* 1.02 49.18 5.38 6.13 0.16 4.03* 1.65 x 107 40 2 53.13 46.87 1.18 43.67 1.33 6.98 0.17 4.04* 8.7 x 107 Paddy
field
70 1 73.58 26.41 1.20 47.59 0.66* 6.2 0.11 5.06* 5.1 x 107 30 2 16.93* 83.06* 1.52* 10.46* 3.98 6.33 0.10 4.54* 9.3 x 107 110 1 13.89* 86.10* 1.63* 23.98* 3.32 6.47 0.09 5.03* 8.25 x 107 Paddy
field
84 3 61.83 38.16 1.87* 37.48 0.43* 6.15 0.18 5.2* 5.2 x 107 65 1 37.71 62.28 0.97 56.66 2.65 6.47 0.15 5.14* 4.2 x 107 73 1 51.60 48.39 1.02 55.29 0.50* 5.83 0.21 5.39* 11 x 107 Paddy
field
114 2 67.15 32.84 1.97* 16.12* 0.66* 6.21 0.09 5.26* 12.1 x 107 95 2 34.70 65.29 1.92* 22.42* 1.66 6.59 0.15 5.54* 0.8 x 107 80 1 63.79 36.20 1.93* 21.38* 0.56* 6.4 0.12 5.18* 7.8 x 107 Mixed
Plantation
70 5 31.99 68.01 0.84 61.21 5.01 6.77 0.11 2.31* 10.1 x 106 80 5 77.28 22.71 1.01 46.05 0.27* 7.48 0.25 2.25* 8.1 x 106 80 6 60.23 39.76 1.08 47.22 2.99 6.87 0.21 2.3* 0.4 x 106 Mixed
Plantation
85 3 58.43 41.56 1.65* 39.88 0.56* 6.75 0.18 4.27* 6.1 x 106 40 30 51.47 48.52 1.49* 28.37* 0.66* 7.99 0.29 4.4* 0.8 x 106 37 50* 42.29 57.70 1.86* 17.49* 1.66 7.96 0.33 4.52* 0.4 x 106 Mixed
Plantation
90 7 38.03 61.96 1.58* 23.75* 3.98 7.5 0.16 2.42* 9.7 x 106
85 3 28.00 72 1.35 41.89 4.85 7.09 0.16 2.31* 1.1 x 106
60 7 53.38 46.62 0.81 63.14 0.66* 6.71 0.15 3.01* 2.9 x 106 Mixed
Plantation
76 50* 18.52 81.47* 1.62* 28.40* 3.65 7.12 0.19 3.48* 14.2 x 106 68 30 32.80 67.2 1.46* 33.65 2.95 6.61 0.20 3.25* 1.1 x 106 66 30 26.96 73.03 1.92* 16.61* 4.12 6.36 0.10 3.64* 3.5 x 106 Brush
wood
35 40 40.26 59.73 1.22 39.77 3.65 8.32 0.30 3.77* 3.5 x 106 100 40 30.12 69.87 1.27 43.19 5.58 6.41 0.10 3.86* 0.9 x 106 40 50* 25.06 74.93 1.05 46.21 4.98 7.97 0.35 4.19* 3 x 106 Moor
24 1 76.27 23.72 1.26 37.32 0.23* 7.55 0.24 1.8* 5.4 x 106 39 1 39.15 60.84 1.45* 26.51* 0.66* 6.33 0.13 2.26* 5.6 x 106 36 1 53.72 46.27 1.62* 19.90* 0.37* 8.12 0.25 2.88* 2.6 x 106 Moor
80 30 41.82 58.17 1.65* 20.24* 1.00 7.18 0.13 2.77* 6.7 x 106 60 30 41.29 58.70 1.62* 19.75* 0.33* 7.64 0.17 2.06* 11.3 x 106 75 20 27.01 72.98 1.71* 19.65* 0.69* 7.54 0.21 2.84* 17.9 x 106 Moor
81 5 34.91 65.08 1.12 41.87 0.33* 6.86 0.16 4* 3.4 x 106
87 5 57.27 42.72 1.50* 34.65 0.27* 6.42 0.12 4.07* 9 x 106 89 3 45.10 54.89 1.02 58.09 1.33 7.31 0.20 3.92* 8.6 x 106 Note: symbol (*) means the data belong to degraded criteria.
Intensive agricultural practices are carried out for food production. The dominant indicators causing soil degradation tested using a correlation test were texture (p <0.05), bulk density (p <0.05), and total soil porosity (p <0.01). Bulk density, which describes soil compaction, was mostly found in paddy fields, moorlands, and mixed plantations. Conventional agricultural practices can cause soil compaction because of synthetic and mineral fertilizers without returning organic matter after the harvest. Repeated use of chemical fertilizers for years during land cultivation causes compaction of soil aggregate (Massah and Azadegan, 2016). The quality of soil physical properties in dry paddy fields such as texture, bulk density, total porosity and permeability decrease
by continuous management paddy fields have a very high weight of sand texture. The porous structure in sandy soil is a high retention capacity; it also resembles the semi-permeable structure (Ajayi and Horn, 2017).
Paddy fields in the study area have a dominant sand texture, which makes them difficult to hold nutrients.
In addition, the paddy fields have the highest bulk density value of 1.97 g/cm3. The compaction of soil on the top layer can reduce yields up to 38% (Nawaz et al., 2013). Soil compaction problems can occur due to natural phenomena, as well as agricultural practices.
Fabiola et al. (2003) explained that drying soil is one of the causes. The land characteristics in the study area have relatively low annual rainfall intensity, so the soil does not have sufficient moisture.
Open Access 3068 Table 6. Scoring measurements of the soil degradation level.
Land Parameter Total Soil degradation Symbol Limiting factor
Unit 1 2 3.1 3.2 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 scoring level
Unit1 0 0 3 3 2 2 0 0 0 4 0 14 Slightly degraded R.I Texture, bulk density, total porosity, and redox.
Unit 2 0 0 3 3 3 3 2 0 0 4 0 18 Moderately degraded R.II Texture, bulk density, total porosity, permeability, and redox
Unit 3 0 0 0 0 2 0 3 0 0 4 0 9 Slightly degraded R.I Bulk density, permeability, and redox
Unit 4 0 0 0 0 4 4 3 0 0 4 0 15 Moderately degraded R.II Texture, bulk density, total porosity, permeability, and redox
Unit 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 4 0 6 Slightly degraded R.I Permeability, and redox
Unit 6 0 2 0 0 4 3 3 0 0 4 0 16 Moderately degraded R.II Surface rocks, bulk density, permeability, total porosity, and redox
Unit 7 0 0 0 0 2 2 2 0 0 4 0 10 Slightly degraded R.I Bulk density, total porosity, permeability, and redox.
Unit 8 0 2 0 2 4 3 0 0 0 4 0 15 Moderately degraded R.II Surface rocks, texture, bulk density, total porosity, and redox
Unit 9 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 6 Slightly degraded R.I Surface rocks, and redox
Unit 10 0 0 0 0 3 3 4 0 0 4 0 14 Slightly degraded R.I Surface rocks, bulk density, total porosity, permeability, and redox.
Unit 11 0 0 0 0 4 4 3 0 0 4 0 15 Moderately degraded R.II Bulk density, total porosity, and redox.
Unit 12 0 0 0 0 2 0 3 0 0 4 0 9 Slightly degraded R.I Bulk density, permeability, and redox.
Remark: 1) Solum thickness, 2) Surface rocks, 3.1) Soil colloid, 3.2) Sand, 4) Bulk density, 5) Total porosity, 6) permeability, 7) pH, 8) Electrical conductivity, 9) Redox, 10) Number of microbes.
Open Access 3069 Evans and Geerken (2004) reported that soil
degradation in dryland areas is significantly affected by human activities, water pollutants and involved by the annual rainfall factor of the area. Irrigation system management is also poor due to lacking water sources.
Dregne (2002) stated that irrigation is one of the main aspects of determining soil degradation. In dry land, poor irrigation conditions will cause the soil to be of poor quality and toxic to plants (Widodo et al., 2019).
In addition, Tarigan et al. (2019) stated that under soil drought stress reducing photosynthesis and inhibits the total synthetic metabolism of the plant. In addition, the characters in water release of the sandy texture itself are higher compared to the clay texture (Raper, 2005), and high bulk density makes the pore space percentage is less and ineffective for water flow to roots while the soils were saturated quite badly (Aimrun et al., 2004).
According to Osuji et al. (2010), agriculture practices
can change the properties of the soil porosity in different ways. Soil total porosity affects water movement and soil infiltration.
Moorland has a higher degradation rate than mixed plantations and brushwood lands. Moorland is planted with seasonal crops, such as corn, cassava, beans, and vegetable crops. Upland rice is planted on dry land at least once a year. The most degraded characteristics in moorland were bulk density, total porosity, and permeability. The moorland is periodically processed for food production and has been using chemical fertilizers intensively. Soil compaction causes the use of chemical fertilizers over time (Sun et al., 2015). Moorland is also degraded in the ability of the soil to pass water (permeability), which was less than 0.7 cm/hour. It shows the speed of water that seeps into the soil is very slow due to the difficult ability of the soil to pass water.
Figure 2. Map of soil degradation in the study area.
In the agriculture and forestry fields, soil permeability is the key to hydrological properties (Vergani and Graf, 2015). Mixed plantations and brushwood lands have lower degradation than paddy fields and moorland. Mixed plantations and brushwood have no different cropping. It was planted with annual crops such as sengon, teak, mahogany, but brushwood is cropped with undergrowth woods (shrubs) but is not much managed for agricultural production. It can be seen in the indicators observed results (Table 5), while mixed plantation and brushwood were filled with
rocks on the soil surface, at several sites, they have large rocks buried within the ground. The land use of mixed plantations and brushwood in the study area were located on steep slopes, but it has good natural characteristics, and its conditions decreased the land degradation (El Kateb et al., 2013). In addition, the pH of their varies greatly from one site to another, in the range of 6.36 to 8.32. They are not managed intensively, and soil degradation occurs due to erosion by water or wind. A reduction in soil pH indicates that erosion has occurred from time to time (Adugna and
Open Access 3070 Alemu, 2017). Meanwhile, agricultural land which has
been used intensively (paddy fields and moor) has a predominantly acidic soil characteristic. This is similar to the study of Sun et al. (2015), which showed that soil treated with chemical fertilizer had lower pH at 5.42 (acidic), and compared to soil without fertilizer (control) which had a pH of 7.00 (neutral) and soil treated with a combination of chemical fertilizer and organic fertilizer, which had a pH of 6.89.
The other chemistry indicator, electrical conductivity, was categorized as non-salinity, ranging from 0.09 mS/cm to 0.35 mS/cm. The redox value was too low, ranging from 1.8 mV to 5.54 mV. Although each land use has an impact on physical and chemical properties, the soil health in the study area is still relatively good. The total number of microbes reached 107 CFU/g in paddy fields and 106 CFU/g in moorland and mixed plantations. Microbes in the soil play a role in soil fertility by associating with plant roots, increasing nutrient availability, and promoting plant growth. Stagnari et al. (2014) stated that a high microbial population plays a significant role in processes that occur in the soil, such as improving soil aggregates and mineralization of nitrogen, phosphorus and minimizing soil degradation due to chemical pesticides.
Land management strategy
Land degradation can be done by carrying out management based on sustainability, with the aim of avoiding and reducing the level of degradation (Cowie et al., 2018).Recommendations that can be applied to control soil texture, high bulk density, and total porosity in study areas include limiting the use of chemical fertilizers and using organic fertilizers. Land with organic management brings soil better and takes it a long time (Supriyadi et al., 2021). The addition of compost and biochar increases soil holding water capacity and soil mesopores and micropores (Jones et al., 2010). The research results of Guo et al. (2016) indicated that the application of more organic fertilizer and less chemical fertilizer significantly decreased soil bulk density observed at the depths of 0-10 cm and 10- 20 cm. Blanchet et al. (2016) showed that the organic amendments from plant residues and manure could maintain soil organic carbon at a high level, ranging from 2 to 6%. This indicates that organic matter can be used to increase soil organic content in agricultural land. Organic fertilizers that have good quality and C/N ratio will easily decompose to accelerates the availability of nutrients for plants (Mujiyo et al., 2018).
Conclusion
Soil degradation in Giriwoyo was categorized into slight and moderate levels. Land use significantly affected soil degradation. Paddy fields had higher degradation than moor, mixed plantations, and brushwood lands. Paddy fields have been fertilized
intensively by synthetic and mineral NPK fertilizers without returning nutrients or soil organic matter after harvest. The soil indicators that determine soil degradation in Giriwoyo were soil texture, bulk density, and total porosity. Soil degradation in paddy fields was caused by repeated cultivation and the high intensity of the use of chemical fertilizers.
Recommendations to improve soil productivity is by limiting the use of chemical fertilizers and using organic fertilizers.
Acknowledgements
The research was supported under research grant PNBP Universitas Sebelas Maret 2019-2020. The authors thanked the survey team, Ahmad Norri, Widhi Larasati, Fajar Eko, Yosua Yoga, and Restu Prastiningtyas, for their participation.
References
Adejuwon, J.O. and Ekanade, O. 1988. A comparison of soil properties under different land use types in a part of the Nigerian cocoa belt. Catena 15(3-4):319-331, doi:10.1016/0341-8162(88)90054-9.
Adugna, O. and Alemu, D. 2017. Evaluation of brushwood with stone check dam on gully rehabilitation. Journal
CleanWAS 1(2):10-13,
doi:10.26480/jcleanwas.02.2017.10.13.
Aimrun, W., Amin, M.S.M. and Eltaib, S.M. 2004. Effective porosity of paddy soils as an estimation of its saturated hydraulic conductivity. Geoderma 121(3-4):197-203, doi:10.1016/j.geoderma.2003.11.010.
Ajayi, A.E. and Horn, R. 2017. Biochar-induced changes in soil resilience: effects of soil texture and biochar dosage.
Pedosphere 27(2):236-247, doi:10.1016/S1002- 0160(17)60313-8.
Arifin, M. 2010. Study of physical properties of soil and various land uses in relation to estimating soil erosion.
Jurnal Pertanian Maperta XII(2):111-115 (in Indonesian).
Bindraban, P.S., van der Velde, M., Ye, L., van den Berg, M., Materechera, S., Kiba, D.I., Tamene, L., Ragnarsdóttir, K.V., Jongschaap, R., Hoogmoed, M., Hoogmoed, W., van Beek, C. and van Lynden, G. 2012.
Assessing the impact of soil degradation on food production. Current Opinion in Environmental
Sustainability 4(5):478-488,
doi:10.1016/j.cosust.2012.09.015.
Bintoro, A., Widjajanto, D. and Isrun. 2017. Physical characteristics of the soil on several land uses in Beka Village, Marawola District, Sigi Regency. e-Jurnal Agrotekbis 5(4):423-430 (in Indonesian).
Biro, K., Pradhan, B., Buchroithner, M. and Makeschin, F.
2011. Land use/land cover change analysis and its impact on soil properties in the northern part of Gadarif Region, Sudan. Land Degradation and Development 24(1):90-102, doi:10.1002/ldr.1116.
Blanchet, G., Gavazov, K., Bragazza, L. and Sinaj, S. 2016.
Responses of soil properties and crop yields to different inorganic and organic amendments in a Swiss conventional farming system. Agriculture, Ecosystems
and Environment 230:116-126,
doi:10.1016/j.agee.2016.05.032.
Open Access 3071 BPS Wonogiri. 2020. Wonogiri in Figure 2020. Central
Bureau of Statistics, Wonogiri Regency (in Indonesian).
Celik, I. 2005. Land-use effects on organic matter and physical properties of soil in a southern Mediterranean highland of Turkey. Soil and Tillage Research 83(2):270-277, doi:10.1016/j.still.2004.08.001.
Cowie, A.L., Orr, B.J., Castillo Sanchez, V.M., Chasek, P., Crossman, N.D., Erlewein, A., Louwagie, G., Maron, M., Metternicht, G.I., Minelli, S., Tengberg, A.E., Walter, S. and Welton, S. 2018) Land in balance: the scientific conceptual framework for land degradation neutrality. Environmental Science and Policy
79(October 2017):25-35,
doi:10.1016/j.envsci.2017.10.011.
Dregne, H.E. 2002. Land degradation in the dryland. Arid Land Research and Management 16(2):99-132, doi:10.1080/153249802317304422.
El Kateb, H., Zhang, H., Zhang, P. and Mosandl, R. 2013.
Soil erosion and surface runoff on different vegetation covers and slope gradients: A field experiment in Southern Shaanxi Province, China. Catena, 105: 1-10, doi:10.1016/j.catena.2012.12.012.
Evans, J. and Geerken, R. 2004. Discrimination between climate and human-induced dryland degradation.
Journal of Arid Environments 57(4):535-554, doi:10.1016/S0140-1963(03)00121-6.
Fabiola, N., Giarola, B., Da Silva, A.P., Imhoff, S. and Dexter, A.R. 2003. Contribution of natural soil compaction on hardsetting behavior. Geoderma 113(1- 2):95-108, doi:10.1016/S0016-7061(02)00333-6.
Frasetya, B., Suriadikusumah, A., Haryanto, R. and Hidayat, C. 2019. A new approach of soil degradation assessment for biomass production in Subang District West Java Province. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science 393(1), doi:10.1088/1755- 1315/393/1/012075.
Guerra, A.J.T., Fullen, M.A., Jorge, M. do C.O., Bezerra, J.F.R. and Shokr, M.S. 2017. Slope processes, mass movement and soil erosion: a review. Pedosphere 27(1):27-41, doi:10.1016/S1002-0160(17)60294-7.
Guo, L., Wu, G., Li, Y., Li, C., Liu, W., Meng, J., Liu, H., Yu, X. and Jiang, G. 2016. Effects of cattle manure compost combined with chemical fertilizer on topsoil organic matter, bulk density and earthworm activity in a wheat-maize rotation system in Eastern China. Soil and
Tillage Research 156:140-147,
doi:10.1016/j.still.2015.10.010.
Herawati, A., Suntoro, Widijanto, H., Pusponegoro, I., Sutopo, N.R. and Mujiyo. 2018. Soil degradation level under particular annual rainfall at Jenawi District- Karanganyar, Indonesia. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Sciences 129:012010, doi:10.1088/1755-1315/129/1/012010.
Jambak, M.K.F.A., Baskoro, D.P.T. and Wahjunie, D.E.
2017. Characteristics of soil physical properties in conservation tillage systems (case study: Cikabayan experimental gardens). Buletin Tanah dan Lahan 1(1):44-50 (in Indonesian).
Jones, B.E.H., Haynes, R.J. and Phillips, I.R. 2010. Effect of amendment of bauxite processing sand with organic materials on its chemical, physical, and microbial properties. Journal of Environmental Management 91(11):2281-2288, doi:10.1016/j.jenvman.2010.06.013.
Kiflu, A. and Beyene, S. 2013. Effects of different land use systems on selected soil properties in South Ethiopia.
Journal of Soil Science and Environmental Management 4(5):100-107, doi:10.5897/jssem2013.0380.
Krasilnikov, P., Makarov, O., Alyabina, I. and Nachtergaele, F. 2016. Assessing soil degradation in northern Eurasia.
Geoderma Regional 7(1):1-10,
doi:10.1016/j.geodrs.2015.11.002.
Massah, J. and Azadegan, B. 2016. Effect of chemical fertilizers on soil compaction and degradation.
Agricultural Mechanization in Asia, Africa, and Latin America 47(1):1-8.
Mujiyo, Rahayu, Ustiatik, R. and Anggrahini, D.S. 2016.
Mapping of soil degradation potency in paddy field Wonogiri, Indonesia. Sains Tanah – Journal of Soil Science and Agroclimatology 13(1):25-30, doi:10.15608/stjss.
Mujiyo, Sumarno, Sudadi, and Murti, R.W. 2020.
Assessment of soil degradation in Pitu District, Ngawi Regency. Journal of Degraded and Mining Lands Management 7(2):2049-2057, doi:10.15243/jdmlm.
2020.072.2049.
Mujiyo, Sumarno, Suryono, and Sutopo, N.R. 2018.
Application of microbial enriched organic fertilizer in plant nurseries. PRIMA: Journal of Community Empowering and Service 2(2):44-49 (in Indonesian).
Mundia, C.N. and Aniya, M. 2006. Dynamics of land use/cover changes and degradation of Nairobi City, Kenya. Land Degradation and Development 17(1):97- 108, doi:10.1002/ldr.702.
Nawaz, M.F., Bourrié, G. and Trolard, F. 2013. Soil compaction impact and modelling. A review. Agronomy for Sustainable Development 33(2):291-309, doi:10.1007/s13593-011-0071-8.
Osuji, G.E., Okon, M.A., Chukwuma, M.C. and Nwarie, I.I.(2010. Infiltration characteristics of soils in Owerri, Imo State, Southeastern Nigeria under four selected land uses. World Journal of Agricultural Sciences 6(3):322- 326, doi:10.9734/asrj/2018/v1i3686.
Pellegrini, P. and Fernández, R.J. 2018. Crop intensification, land use, and on-farm energy-use efficiency during the worldwide spread of the green revolution. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 15(1):201717072, doi:10.1073/pnas.1717072115.
Putra, M.P. and Edwin, M. 2018. Analysis of soil degradation status on dry land in Kampung Jawa Hamlet Kabo Jaya, Sangatta. Jurnal Pertanian Terpadu 6(2):
109-120, doi:10.36084/jpt..v6i2.172 (in Indonesian).
Raper, R.L. 2005. Agricultural traffic impacts on soil.
Journal of Terramechanics 42(3-4):259-280, doi:10.1016/j.jterra.2004.10.010.
Stagnari, F., Perpetuini, G., Tofalo, R., Campanelli, G., Leteo, F., Vella, U. Della, Schirone, M., Suzzi, G. and Pisante, M. 2014. Long-term impact of farm management and crops on soil microorganisms assessed by combined DGGE and PLFA analyses. Frontiers in
Microbiology 5(DEC):1-9,
doi:10.3389/fmicb.2014.00644.
Stocking, M. and Murnaghan, N. 2000. Land Degradation - Guidelines for Field Assessment. Overseas Development Group.
Sun, R., Zhang, X.X., Guo, X., Wang, D. and Chu, H. 2015.
Bacterial diversity in soils subjected to long-term chemical fertilization can be more stably maintained with the addition of livestock manure than wheat straw.
Soil Biology and Biochemistry 88:9-18, doi:10.1016/j.soilbio.2015.05.007.
Supriyadi, Pratiwi, M.K., Minardi, S, and Prastiyaningsih, N.L. 2020. Carbon organic content under organic and conventional paddy field and its effect on biological activities (a case study in Pati Regency, Indonesia.
Open Access 3072 Caraka Tani: Journal of Sustainable Agriculture
35(1):108-116, doi:10.20961/carakatani.v35i1.34630.
Supriyadi, Vera, I.L.P. and Purwanto. 2021. Soil quality at rice fields with organic, semi-organic and inorganic management in Wonogiri Regency, Indonesia. Caraka Tani: Journal of Sustainable Agriculture 36(2):259-269, doi:10.20961/carakatani.v36i2.42556.
Tarigan, P.L., Tohari, and Suryanto, P. 2019. Physiological response of upland rice varieties to furrow with organic matter on agroforestry system with kayu putih (Melaleuca leucadendra L.). Caraka Tani: Journal of Sustainable Agriculture 34(2):223-231, doi:10.20961/carakatani.v34i2.29786.
Vergani, C. and Graf, F. 2015. Soil permeability, aggregate stability and root growth: a pot experiment from a soil bioengineering perspective. Ecohydrology 9(5):830-832, doi:10.1002/eco.1686.
Wang, Y., Zhang, J.H., Zhang, Z. and Jia, L.Z. 2016. Impact of tillage erosion on water erosion in a hilly landscape.
Science of the Total Environment 551-552(9):522-532, doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2016.02.045.
Widodo, T., Budiastuti, M.T.S. and Komariah. 2019. Water quality and pollution index in the Grenjeng River, Boyolali Regency, Indonesia. Caraka Tani: Journal of Sustainable Agriculture 34(2):150-161, doi:10.20961/carakatani.v34i2.29186.
Yao, M.K., Angui, P.K.T., Konaté, S., Tondoh, J.E., Tano, Y., Abbadie, L. and Benest, D. 2010. Effects of land use types on soil organic carbon and nitrogen dynamics in mid-west Côte d'Ivoire. European Journal of Scientific Research 40(2):211-222.
Yu, Q., Wu, W., You, L., Zhu, T., van Vliet, J., Verburg, P.H., Liu, Z., Li, Z., Yang, P., Zhou, Q. and Tang, H.
2017. Assessing the harvested area gap in China.
Agricultural Systems 153:212-220, doi:10.1016/j.agsy.2017.02.003.
