Soil Fertility Mapping PDF

BUREAU OF SOILS AND WATER MANAGEMENT
TECHNICAL PUBLICATION NO. 1

ISSN 1908-9600
SOIL FERTILITY MAPPING

Proceedings of the Seminar-Workshop
on Soil Fertility Mapping
September 20, 2007
Edited by:
Rodelio B. Carating
OIC, Soil Survey Division
Soil Survey Division

Bureau of Soils and Water Management
Elliptical Road, Diliman, Quezon City
January, 2008

TECHNICAL PUBLICATION NO. 1
ISSN 1908-9600
SOIL FERTILITY MAPPING

Proceedings of the Seminar-Workshop
on Soil Fertility Mapping
September 20, 2007
Edited by:
Rodelio B. Carating

January 2008
Editorial Board:
Rodelio Carating, Editor and OIC, Soil Survey Division
Silvino Q. Tejada, Director

Philippines
Copyright December, 2007
Contents
Foreword vii
Acknowledgement .viii
Introduction: The Development of Theoretical Framework
for Soil Fertility Mapping in the Philippines: An Update
On the FCC System by Sanchez, et.al.
Rodelio B. Carating . 1
Paper 1Major Lowland Rice / Corn Soils of the Philippines
and their Characteristics
Clarita D. Bacatio, Leo R. Retamar*, Luisitio F. Costelo, Nilo A. Crucena,
Teresita V. Retamar, and Salvador F. Fabula .... 7
Paper 2Soil Fertility Indicators for Rice
Oscar F. Costelo*, Noemi M. Pascual, Berna G. Pastor, Mario E. Vinluan,
and Nestor T. Merjilla ...19
Paper 3 Soil Contraints to Lowland Rice Production and their Remediation
Raymundo G. Galanta, Ernesto A. Almendral, Bella H. Noceda*,
and Oscar Sanganbayan 25
Paper 4Survey for Soil Fertility Mapping of Paddy Fields: Proposed Protocol
Virgilio A. Castaeda, Carmelita B.Incillo*, Eugenia A. Briones,
Henry L. Noceda ..33
Paper 5The Soil Test Kits
Lauro G. Hernandez, Leovenilda A. Fernandez, Constancia G. Mangao* ..43
Integration: The Quest for a New Paradigm in Soil Fertility Mapping
Rodelio B. Carating ...49
Soil Survey Division News Tidbits .57
DIRECTORS MESSAGE
I would like to congratulate the Soil Survey Division for their successful holding of the Seminar Workshop on Fertility Mapping.
This workshop-seminar lays the foundation for an important banner
program of the Bureau of Soils and Water Management that concerns a very
important aspect of agricultural resource management, specifically the maintenance and restoration of soil fertility. By providing a primary data on the
state of soil fertility, we provide a very critical tool in agricultural development planning. The map outputs from the protocol that you are finalizing will
be an important tool for soil resource managers, soil scientists, policy makers,
and academicians.
Let us not rest on our laurels but move on. I expect to see more outputs from the Soil Survey Division.
Again, my congratulations.
SILVINO Q. TEJADA, CESO IV

Director
vi
Foreword
Soil Fertility Mapping provides a way to interpret soil maps in a manner that is
understandable by the general public, by the local government and national planners, and
more importantly, by the farmers. In brief, this presents in spatial data the results of
laboratory analyses of soil samples taken, already interpreted for specific crop need.
This seems simple enough, but like other agricultural land evaluation methods, it
is easier said than done. Soil interpretations provide numerical and descriptive
information pertaining to a wide range of soil interpretative predictions. What is the
conceptual or philosophical framework behind the rating? What are the important
parameters to be considered and what is the critical value with which to compare the
laboratory results? How is the final fertility rating arrived at? From the data resulting
from the Soil Fertility Mapping, we anticipate alternative management decisions that can
be derived from the soil behavior information. Critical is the recommended soil fertilizer
applications to be able to achieve targeted yield.
The Soil Survey Division is now in the midst of a methodology crisis for soil
fertility mapping. Not that we do not have one, but we inherited a methodology from an
earlier soil fertility mapping project lead by the Laboratory Services Division while Dr.
Nora Inciong was yet its Division Chief. The methodology is simply composite soil
sampling designed for farm-lot size areas. There is nothing wrong with this
methodology. In fact, Ms. Carmelita Incillo in this proceeding elucidates this and
expands the philosophy from farm lot size to an area that encompasses a municipality or
even a province. She is going to implement this procedure in Vintar, Ilocos Norte. Since
the Proceedings editor just assumed the OIC of Soil Survey position, it is difficult to
react and change sampling protocol at a point time the team is ready to leave for field
work.
But this seminar-workshop was conducted to provide light and not to leave the
staff hanging on the best methodology for soil fertility mapping. And in any quest for
scientific methodology, it should rest on appropriate scientific theory or philosophical
framework.
Within the context of soil survey work, the basic philosophy for fertility mapping
follows the Soil Fertility Capability Classification System (FCC) of Sanchez, et. al., but
modified to meet the requirements under the Philippine conditions. And thus, in the
integration of the Proceedings outputs, the Proceedings editor redirects the soil survey
staff back to profile sampling based on soil survey map as the basic methodology for
fertility mapping field work by the Soil Survey Division. This Proceedings is supposed
to provide the manual for soil fertility mapping by Soil Survey Division and is not in
anyway an attempt to discredit composite sampling for study areas bigger than a farm lot
size. What we attempt to come up with is a fertility mapping methodology for Soil
Survey Division.
Rodelio Carating
OIC, Soil Survey Division and Editor
vii
Acknowledgement
The Soil Survey Division acknowledges those who have shared knowledge and
criticisms to complete the different topics presented herein and attain the objectives of
the workshop; likewise we would like to thank those who provided logistics for its realization.
We are indebted to the support provided by Director Silvino Q. Tejada and Assistant Director Wilfredo E. Cabezon of the Bureau of Soils and Water Management and
by Ms. Mercedes Fernando, Chairman of the Agri-Kalikasan Secretariat.
The proceedings of this workshop will serve as a working book for the Soil Survey staff in the implementation of a nationwide project, the Fertility and Fertilizer
Guide Mapping Survey in partnership with the Local Government Units.
viii
Proceedings of the Seminar-Workshop on Soil Fertility Mapping. The Development of Theoretical Framework for Soil Fertility Mapping in the Philippines. Soil Survey Division (1): 16, 2007
The Development of Theoretical Framework

for Soil Fertility Mapping in the Philippines
An Update on FCC System by Sanchez, et. al.
Rodelio B. Carating
Officer-in-Charge, Soil Survey Division
Abstract: The Soil Fertility Capability Classification (FCC) System developed by Pedro A. Sanchez, Cheryl A. Palm, and Stanley W. Buol is an excellent theoretical framework with which to base the soil fertility mapping of
the rice and corn areas of the Philippines. For the information of the Soil
Survey Staff, this is now under version 4. The 2003 updates identifies four
top soil and four subsoil texture types as well as 17 condition modifiers.
The main changes are to include the former h condition modifier (acid but
not Al-toxic) with no major chemical limitations because field experience
has shown little difference between the two and to introduce a new condition
modifier m that denotes organic carbon saturation deficit. Additional modifiers are needed for nutrient depletion, compaction, surface sealing, and other
soil biological attributes but no quantitative threshold values are proposed.
Key words: condition modifier, soil attributes, organic carbon saturation
Introduction
Being assigned as Officer-in-Charge of the Soil Survey Division, although is an
assignment that I would personally wouldnt like, is like coming home. For then, I
would once more devote a part of my time (I will still be concurrently OIC of the Integrated Soil Resources Information Service or ISRIS) doing my first lovesoils, its morphology, genesis, classification. Soil Survey Division, after all, was my first assignment.
So now, we are here on our very first workshop since years ago, possibly, maybe
since Dr. Gina P. Nilo, was your Division Chief. I am certainly grateful for the support
of our Director, Silvino Q. Tejada, of course our Assistant Director Wilfredo E. Cabezon
whom I very much welcome today as our Keynote Speaker, and of course Ms. Mercedes
Fernando of the Agri-Kalikasan Secretariat who is our benefactor and sponsor. I also
welcome our participants and guests to this workshop.
Soil fertility mapping is one of the ways with which to interpret soil survey data.
As such, it follows the basic principles of land evaluation. Well, ISRIS is under Agricultural Land Management Evaluation Division, and you cannot blame me that I will still
talk of my other concurrent position.
Rodelio B. Carating
But going through the papers to be presented today, I am surprised that much has
gone forward since Mr. Alejandro Micosa was still the Chief of Soil Survey Division. I
do remember at that time that for soil fertility mapping, we would talk of Fertility Capability Classification (FCC) developed by Sanchez, et. al. It has been more than 20 years
since it was first introduced, and frankly, I am not updated. But for the information of
everyone, the recent update (Sanchez, et. al., 2003) or the fourth version of the FCC system identifies four topsoil and four subsoil texture types as well as 17 condition modifiers defined to delimit specific soil conditions affecting plant growth with qualitative limits. Although efforts are somewhat hampered by lack of comprehensive data, mapping
the extent of these condition modifiers and soil types offer our policy makers and local
government units an important tool in understanding and managing our soil resources.
The FCC System developed by Sanchez, et.al. remains an important conceptual
framework for the development of soil fertility maps under our Agri-Kalikasan Project.
FCC attributes can be either positive or negative depending on the land use as well as the
temporal and spatial scales of the project area. The purpose of this paper is to update our
Soil Survey Staff on the recent developments in the FCC System to identify attributes
relevant to soil fertility mapping.
Quantitative pedology: entry point
Quantitative pedology is based on Soil Taxonomy (Soil Survey Staff, 1999) and
the parameters measured have been selected as necessary for classifying soils as natural
bodies. Through soil surveys, the pedon data is scaled up to appropriate spatial scales.
Differences in quantitative pedology are important to establish the broad picture of soils
as natural bodies. The limitation of Soil Taxonomy is that it only quantifies permanent
soil attributes considered important for soil classification. The Soil Taxonomy ignores
many inherent or dynamic attributes crucial to plant productivity and important for soil
fertility mapping.
And hence, to overcome this limitation, Sanchez et.al. developed the FCC system
to interpret Soil Taxonomy and additional attributes in a way that is directly relevant to
plant growth. The initial version released about 19751982 was succeeded by a second
version in the period 1985-1986 that included specific interpretations for wetland soils.
A third version released in the period 1989-1990 added a new condition modifier for permafrost and subdivisions of some existing ones. Smith (1989) also developed a thorough
rationale for each FCC class and provided detailed interpretations for tropical food crops,
pastures, and tree crops. An algorithm of this third version was later developed by Yost
et.al. (1997) with software that converts soil profile data into FCC units plus a series of
automatic interpretations and recommendations. (http://www.fao.org/ag/AGL/AGLL/
fcc3/faorep.htm).
FCC was originally conceived as dealing only with inherent soil properties that
are the product of soil genesis and cannot be easily changed with time. FCC considers
The Development of Theoretical Framework for Soil Fertility Mapping in the Philippines
topsoil parameters as well as specific subsoil properties. That is why the FCC system
does not include routine soil tests used for N and P fertilizer recommendations. A reason
is that such soil tests are not very useful in farming systems where fertilizer use is not the
main nutrient input.
The fourth version of FCC
The FCC system consists of two categorical levels. The first categorytype/
substrata typedescribes topsoil and subsoil texture and is expressed in capital letters
(Ssandy throughout; SCsandy topsoil underlain by clayey subsoil, for example) The
second categorycondition modifierconsists of 17 modifiers defined to delimit specific soil conditions affecting plant growth with quantitative limits. Each condition
modifier is expressed as a lower case latter. Superscripts + or - indicate a greater or
lesser expression of the modifier.
The type/substrata types and condition modifiers are the soil attributes in terms
of their capability for plant growth. Several methods are given in order of decreasing
preference and reliability but increasing ease of determination for assessing each attribute, following the quantitative approach of Soil Taxonomy. Condition modifiers were
originally conceived as soil constraints, but these days, the need to scale up from a pedon
(the measured sample) to higher spatial scales has changed the interpretation of some
modifiers as positive attributes.
Each soil has one type/substrata type but can have several condition modifiers.
For example, a soil classified as Caik is clayey, Al-toxic, high P fixer, and low in
weatherable mineral content. The FCC designation for a given soil can be interpreted in
relation to various land uses.
The main changes are to combine the former h condition modifier (acid but not
Al-toxic) with no major constraints because field experience has shown little difference
between the two and to introduce a new condition modifier m that denotes a critical decline in soil organic matter. In addition, we changed the symbol of gravel from an apostrophe () to r, for clarity and uniformity, and move some soil pH limits slightly.
FCC types and substrata type
Table 1. Fertility Capability Classification System, Version 4
FCC class
Symbol
Type: texture is the average of plow

layer or 0-20 cm depth, whichever is
shallower
Sandy topsoil: loamy sands and sands
Substrata type: used if textural

change is encountered within top 50
cm
Definitions and some interpretations
Loamy topsoil: <35% clay but not loamy sand or sand
Clayey topsoil: >35% clay
Organic soils: >12% organic C to a depth of 50 cm or more
Sandy subsoil: texture as in type
Loamy subsoil: texture as in type
Clayey subsoil: texture as in type
Rock or other hard root-restricting layer within 50 cm
R-
As above but layer can be ripped, plowed, or blasted
Rodelio B. Carating
Modifiers related to soil physical properties

Table 2 presents the FCC modifiers in Version 4. Those not relevant to tropical
conditions are already deleted.
Condition
Waterlogging (gley): anaerobic
condition, chemical reduction, denitrification; N2O and CH4 emission
Strong dry season (dry): limits yearround cropping, interrupts pest cycles, Birch effect
Gravel
Slope
Modifier
Aquic soil moisture regime; mottles <2 chroma within 50 cm

for surface and below all A horizons or soil saturated with
water for >60 days in most years
g+
Prolonged waterlogging,soil saturated with water either naturally or by irrigation for 200 days/year with no evidence of
mottles indicative of Fe3+ compounds in the top 50 cm; includes paddy rice soils in which an anaerobic crop cannot be
grown without drainage; continuous chemical reduction can
result in slower soil N mineralization and Zn deficiencies in
rice
Ustic or xeric soil moisture regime: dry >60 days consecutive

days/year but moist >180 cumulative days/year
d+
Aridic or torric soil moisture regime: too dry to grow a crop

without irrigation
r+
10-35%
++
> 35% (by volume) of gravel size coarse fragments (2-25 cm in

diameter) anywhere in the top 50 cm of the soil
r+++
More than 15% rock outcroppings
High erosion risk
Identifying criteria
SC, LC, CR, LR

SR, >30%
Use BSWM-Soil Survey Division slope ranges

Soils with high erodibility due to sharp textural contrasts
Shallow depth ( R ) or steep (>30%) slope
Modifiers related to soil reaction

Table 3 presents the modifiers related to soil reaction.
Condition
Modifier
Sulfidic (cat clays)
pH <3.5 after drying; jarosite mottles with hues 2.5Y or yellower and chromas 6 or more within 60 cm sulfaquents, sulfaquepts, sulfudepts
Aluminum toxicity for most common

crops
>60% Al saturation within 50 cm, or <35% base saturation of

CEC determined by sum of cations at pH 7 within 50 cm,or
<14% base saturation of CEC by sum of cations at pH 8.2
within 50 cm or pH ,5.5 except in orgnaic soils (O)
a-
10-60% Al saturation within 50 cm for extremely acid-sensitive

crops such as cotton
Calcareous (basic reaction): common

Fe and Zn deficiencies
Free CaCO3 within 50 cm
Salinity
>0.4 S m-1 of saturated extract at 25oC
s-
0.2-0.4 S m-1 of saturated extract at 25oC within 1 m
>15% Na saturation of ECEC within 50 cm
Alkalinity
6-15% Na saturation of ECEC within 50 cm
The Development of Theoretical Framework for Soil Fertility Mapping in the Philippines
Modifiers related to soil mineralogy

Table 4 presents the modifiers related to soil mineralogy
Condition
Modifier
Low nutrient capital reserves (K

deficiencies
<10% weatherable minerals in silt and sand fraction within 50

cm, or siliceous mineralogy, or exchangeable K <0.20 cm kg-1
soil, or exchangeable K <2% sum of bases, if sum of bases is
<10 cm kg-1 soil
High P fixation by Fe and Al oxides

(>100 mg kg-1 P added to achieve
adequate soil test levels; Ci soils
have excellent structure but low
water holding capacity; C1 subsoils
retain nitrates
Dithionite-extractable free R2O3: clay ratio is 0.2, or >4% citrate dithionite-extractable Fe in topsoil, or Oxisols and oxic
groups with C type, or hues redder than 5YR and granular
structure
i-
As above but soils have been recapitalized with P fertilizers to

supply long-term P to crops; soil test > 10 mg kg-1 P by Olsen
method
i+
As above; potential Fe toxicity if soils waterlogged for long

time (g+) or adjacent uplands have i modifier
Within 50 cm pH >10 in 1M NaF, or positive to field NaF test,

or andisols and andic subgroups, except vitrands and vitric
great groups and subgroups, or >90% P retention
x-
P retention between 30% and 90%; medium P fixers
Cracking clays (vertic properties);

very sticky plastic clay; severe topsoil shrinking and swelling
>35% clay and >50% of 2:1 expanding clays, or coefficient of

linear expansibility >0.900 or vertisols and vertic groups
High leaching potential (low buffering capacity, low ECEC)
<4 cmol kg-1 soil as ECEC, or <7 cmol kg-1 soil by sum of
cations at pH 7, or ,10 kg-1 soil by sum of cations + Al3+ + H+ at
pH 8.2
Amorphous volcanic (X-ray amorphous); high P fixation by allophane

(>200 mg kg-1 P added to achieve
adequate soil test levels); low N
mineralization rates
Modifier related to soil biological properties (new)

So far, there is only one modifier for soil biological properties:
Condition
Low organic carbon saturation (soil
organic matter depletion, C sequestration potential)
Modifier
<80% total organic C saturation in the topsoil compared with

nearby undisturbed or productive site of the same soil, which is
equal to 100% or <80% 333mM KMnO4-extractable topsoil
organic carbon saturation compared with a nearby undisturbed
or productive site of the same soil, which is equal to 100%
Summary and Conclusion

As I have mentioned when I took over as OIC of Soil Survey Division, I am not
here to rock the boat. I do not intend to change what you have already decidedto
focus the laboratory analyses on organic matter, available phosphorus, extractable potassium, and pH using standard evaluation criteria.
What I am saying is that our soil fertility mapping methodology using composite
soil samples will be good only for five years and afterwards, the map output needs updating. We in Soil Survey Division has a more solid and lasting soil fertility mapping foundation and theoretical framework with our knowledge of Soil Taxonomy than those in the
Rodelio B. Carating
soil fertility disciplines. And hence, instead of just composite sampling for laboratory
analyses of these OM-P-K, we can conduct our regular soil survey output based on our
standard pit and auger borings and come up with SMU-based soil fertility map based on
FCC by Sanchez, et. al.
We should understand that soil classification and mapping is based on solid scientific foundation of the science of soil survey. Unlike classical statistical work where
samples are taken at random, we have purposive sampling in soil survey. Our soil map
outputs are based on statistical mode as measure of central tendencies. Soils as we all
know is a continuum, and in our soil map, there is such thing as a soil concept which is
represented by our soil map legend or soil taxonomic unit that is nothing more than a statistical mode or an abstract concept to represent a map polygon; and there is such thing as
the soil mapping unit which is actually a literal map delineation or the polygon itself.
The soil fertility map coming from Soil Survey Division should not depart from the same
scientific principles used in soil survey.
The soil fertility staff have their own scientific and statistical principles used in
their soil fertility work. We in soil survey have our own methods which is internationally
accepted. This is just a question, why adopt soil fertility mapping practices as done by
the soil fertility people when we in soil survey have our own methodology.
But I just wonder, how many of our Soil Survey staff would be willing to take
the challenge: prepare a soil fertility map based on soil survey principles.
Literature Cited
Soil Survey Staff. 1999. Soil taxonomy, a basic system of soil classification for making
and interpreting soil surveys. USDA Agricultural Handbook, 2nd ed. Natural
Resources Conservation Service, vol. 436. US Department of Agriculture,
Washington. 869 pp.
Sanchez, Pedro A., Cheryl A. Palm, and Stanley W. Buol. 2003. Fertility capability
classification: a tool to help assess soil quality in the tropics. Geoderma 114
(2003) 157185.
Smith, C.W. 1989. The fertility capability classification system (FCC) - 3rd approximation: a technical soil classification system relating pedon characterization data
to inherent fertility characteristics. PhD dissertation, North Carolina State University, Raleigh. 430 pp.
Yost, R.S., Z. C. Li, C. W. Smith, J. Benites, F. Nachtegraele. 1997. Merging Databases and Decision Aids: Linking an Updated Soil Fertility Capability Classification (FCC) with the WISE (World Inventory of Soil Emission Potential) Database, FAO, Rome.
Proceedings of the Seminar-Workshop on Soil Fertility Mapping. Major Lowland Rice/Corn Soils of the
Philippines and their Characteristics. Edited by Rodelio B. Carating, Soil Survey Division (1): 717, 2007
Major Lowland Rice/Corn Soils of the Philippines

and their Characteristics
Clarita D. Bacatio, Leo R. Retamar*, Luisito F. Costelo,
Nilo A. Crucena, Teresita V. Retamar, and Salvador Fabula
Abstract: There are about 2.37 million hectares of lowland rice and corn
lands in the country. About 64 percent and under 45 major soil series are
located in Luzon, about 13 percent falling under 15 major soil series are in
Visayas, and about 23 percent falling under 25 major soil series are located
in Mindanao. The paper discusses the morphological and the physicochemical of the major rice/corn soils.
Key words:
tions
soil series, solum thickness, slickensides , manganese concre-
Introduction
The census of Agriculture and Fisheries (1991) counted about 3.55 million hectares are mainly devoted to rice and corn production out of 4.66 million potentially considered irrigable lands. Approximately, 1.34 million hectares or 29% are already irrigated.
The Philippine Rice Research Institute indicated that farmers have only exploited
about a quarter of its full potential capacity in rice yield. Actual yields average only 3
tons per hectare while potential yield is 12 tons per hectare in spite of numerous interventions and new technologies introduced in rice production. The yield gap is roughly attributed to production constraints which includes:
The yield gap is roughly attributed to production constraints which includes:
a) insect pest and diseases
- 35%
b) inappropriate water management
- 26%
c) inappropriate fertilizer and soil mgt. - 21%
d) weeds
- 9%
e) inappropriate seeds and seedling mgt - 9%
About 2.37 million hectares (or roughly 64 %) of lowland rice/ corn lands which
falls under 45 major soil series are located in Luzon, 0.47 million hectares (13%) fall under 15 major soil series and are located in Visayas, and 0.87 million hectares (23%)
which fall under 25 major soil series are located in Mindanao.
Clarita Bacatio, Leo Retamar, Luisito Costelo, Nilo Crucena, Teresita Retamar, and Salvador Fabula
At present, our major concern in rice/ corn production aside from the threat of
fast reduction of these areas due to conversions into resettlements or other purposes and
other factors is the low soil fertility resulting from intensive cropping and other natural
causes and inappropriate fertilizer and soil management. The need for an updated and
systematic gathering of information and putting in place of necessary interventions, new
technologies and sustained massive advocacy campaign for a sustained optimum rice
production is very timely.
This paper presents some of the important rice and corn soils of the country.
Bantog Soil Series
Location:
Bulacan
Physiography:
Level to nearly
General Description:
Parent material: Recent alluvium, recent coastal
Solum thickness: 100-150 cm
Drainage: Poorly drained
Special Features: Surface crack at 5 to 10cm wide common distinct discontinuous intersecting slickenside; very few soft and hard spherical black Mn concretion
Mineralogy: Very fine, montmorillionitic,
Constraints: Cracks
Fertility: Low to High
Distribution based on old soil maps:
Bantog sandy loam, Ilocos Norte, 106 hectares
Bantog silt loam, Ilocos Norte, 361 hectares
Bantog clay loam, Bulacan, 8,550 hectares
Catanduanes, 5,366 hectares
Ilocos Norte, 2,285 hectares
Iloilo, 1,478 hectares
Isabela, 4,748 hectares
Leyte, 399 hectares
Nueva Ecija, 37,383 hectares
Pampanga, 3,855 hectares
Sulu, 330 hectares
Sub-total 88,888 hectares
Bantog silty clay loam, Ilocos Norte 1,679 hectares
Bantog silty clay, Ilocos Norte, 351 hectares
Bantog clay, Bohol, 1834 hectares
Capiz-Aklan, 25,137 hectares
Ilocos Norte, 1,913 hectares
Mindoro, 2,217 hectares
Misamis Occ., 5,215 hectares
Misamis Or., 5,045 hectares
Surigao, 6,628 hectares
Zamboanga S, 3,438 hectares
Major Lowland Rice/Corn Soils of the Philippines and their Characteristics
Bigaa Soil Series

Location:
Bulacan
Physiography: Broad nearly level slightly dissected alluvial
terraces
General Description
Parent material: Recent alluvium
Drainage: Moderate
Special Features: Fine thin, thick and coarse slickensides; very few to
few
small and
medium soft Mn concretions
Mineralogy: Very fine, montmorillonitic,
Constraints: Cracks
Fertility: Moderate to very high
Bigaa sandy loam, Samar, 1,074 hectares
Bigaa loam, Quezon, 3,584 hectares
Samar, 16,144
Bigaa sandy clay loam, Abra, 3,220 hectares
Bigaa clay loam, Bulacan, 17,550 hectares
La Union, 1,216 hectares
Bigaa silty clay loam, Abra, 519 hectares
Bigaa clay, Abra, 1,630 hectares
Cagayan, 1,024 hectares
10
Butuan Soil Series

Location: Las Navas, Agusan del Sur
Physiography: Level to nearly level
General Description
Parent material: Limestone, shale-sandstone, sandstone, shale-sandstone-limestone
Solum thickness: 100- 120cm
Drainage: Somewhat poorly drained
Special Features: Few small soft iron Mn concretions at the depth of 70 below.
Constraints: None
Mineralogy: Fine
Fertility: Moderate
Butuan loam, Agusan, 74,010 hectares
Butuan clay, Masbate, 19,464 hectares
Candaba Soil Series

Location: Candaba, Pampanga
Physiography: Level to nearly level
General Description
Solum thickness: 90 100 cm
Drainage: Poorly drained
Special Features: Presence of few soft black Mn
concretions
Mineralogy: Very fine, mixed,
Constraints: Poor drainage , flooding and
zinc deficiency
Candaba silt loam, Pampanga, 3,963 hectares
Candaba clay loam, Pampanga, 11,524 hectares
Isabela Soil Series

Location: Negros Occidental
Physiography: Level to nearly level broad alluvial plain
General Description
Parent material: Recent alluvium, old alluvium, recent coastal deposits
Solum thickness: 80-150cm
Drainage: Somewhat poor to poorly
Mineralogy: Fine, montmorillonitic,
Constraints: Cracks at some period
Fertility: High to very high
Distribution based on old soil maps
Isabela sandy loam, Negros Occ., 1,163 hectares
Isabela loam, Agusan, 3,110 hectares
Isabela clay loam, Lanao, 1,855 hectares
Isabela clay, Agusan, 823 hectares
Kalinga-Apayao, 2,138 hectares
Negros Occ., 29,682 hectares
Negros Or., 13,110 hectares
Zamboanga N, 1,250 hectares
Maligaya Soil Series

Location: Nueva Ecija
Physiography: Level to nearly level broad alluvial plain
General Description
Special Features: Few thin slickensides
Mineralogy: Very fine, montmorillonitic
Constraints: Poor drainage
Fertility: Moderate to high
Maligaya silt loam, Nueva Ecija, 9,729 hectares
Maligaya sandy clay loam, Abra, 3,180 hectareas
Maligaya clay loam, Laguna, 4,656 hectares
Nueva Vizcaya, 8,355 hectares
Zamboanga N, 438 hectares
11
12
Quingua Soil Series

Location: Bulacan
Physiography: Level to nearly level upper river terrace/levees
General Description
Parent material: Recent alluvium, recent coastal
deposits
Drainage: Well drained
Special Features: Very few to few patches
of clay skin in between ped faces
Mineralogy: Fine, mixed
Constraints: None
Quingua sand, Nueva Ecija, 5,025 hectares
Quingua sandy loam, Bulacan, 3,750 hectares
Cavite, 876 hectares
Laguna, 2,038 hectares
Rizal, 2,220 hectares
Quingua silt loam, Agusan, 4,391 hectares
Bulacan, 20,850 hectares
Camarines S, 620 hectares
Misamis Occ, 1,918 hectares
Quezon, 7,168 hectares
Zambales, 7,767 hectares
Quingua loam, Mindoro, 2,615 hectares
Sulu, 420 hectares
Quingua sandy clay loam, Quezon, 2,270 hectares
Quingua clay loam, Cagayan, 39,172 hectares
Palawan, 8,200 hectares
Samar, 6,983 hectares
Sulu, 4,730 hectares

Quingua silty clay loam, Bontoc, 500 hectares
Sulu, 3,361 hectares
Quingua silty clay, Mindoro, 4,948 hectares
Quingua clay, Mindoro, 6,457 hectares
Tagulod Series
Location: Bulacan
Physiography: Level to nearly level broad alluvial terrace
General Description
Special Features: Common thin slickensides
Mineralogy: Fine, mixed,
Constraints: None
Fertility: Low to high
Distribution based on updated soil map of Bulacan
Tagulod clay, 0-1% slope, 995 hectares
Tagulod clay, 0-1% slope, slightly flooded, 7,360 hectares
Tagulod clay, 0-1% slope, moderately flooded, 2,200 hectares
Tagulod clay, 1-3% slope, 2,651.3 hectares
13
14
San Fernando Soil Series

Location:
Bulacan
Physiography: Broad alluvial plain
General Description
Drainage: Poor to very poorly drained
Special Features: Few to common continuous
slickendsides
Mineralogy: Fine, mixed,
Constraints: Cracks
San Fernando sandy loam, Ilocos N, 404 hectares
San Fernando clay loam, Ilocos N, 2,370 hectares
San Fernando silty clay, Ilocos N, 701 hectares
San Fernando clay, Cagayan, 6,438 hectares
Ilocos N, 9,384 hectares
San Manuel Soil Series

Location: Bulacan
Physiography: Nearly level river terraces
General Description
Parent material: Old alluvium, recent alluvium, recent coastal deposits
Drainage: Well drained
Mineralogy: Fine loamy, mixed
Constraints: Slight to moderate flooding
Fertility: Moderate to high
San Manuel undifferentiated, Leyte, 10,623 hectares
San Manuel sand, Ilocos N, 170 hectares
Pangasinan, 8,852 hectares
San Manuel loamy sand, Mindoro, 1,148 hectares
San Manuel sandy loam, Abra, 795 hectares
Bataan, 234 hectares
Cotabato, 1,125 hectares
Ifugao, 284 hectares

Leyte, 5,671 hectares
Marinduque, 2,219 hectares
Misamis Occ, 108 hectares
Negros Occ, 2,218 hectares
Negros Or, 4,370 hectares
Pangasinan, 42,026 hectares (fine sandy loam)
Quezon, 2,150 hectares
Sulu, 152 hectares
Zamboanga S, 500 hectares (gravelly phase)
San Manuel silt loam, Bontoc, 125 hectares
Bukidnon, 4,756 hectares
Camarines S, 9,964 hectares
Ilocos S, 27,056 hectares
Lanao, 7,421 hectares
Tarlac, 15,466 hectares
San Manuel loam, Agusan, 21,727 hectares
Antique, 3,565 hectares
Camarines N, 75 hectares
Cotabato, 4,375 hectares (gravelly phase)
Cotabato, 41,250 hectares
Kalinga-Apayao, 135 hectares
Misamis Or, 13,463 hectares
15
16
Negros Occ, 14,146 hectares

Negros Or, 5,380 hectares
San Manuel sandy clay loam, Abra, 4,532 hectares
Ilocos N, 446 hectares
San Manuel clay loam, Agusan, 22,368 hectares
Camarines N, 20,469 hectares
Catanduanes, 1,375 hectares
Palawan, 27,250 hectares
San Manuel silty clay loam, Cotabato, 41,875 hectares
Davao, 134, 855 hectares
Ilocos N, 914 hectares
San Manuel silty, Ilocos N, 1,488 hectares
San Manuel clay, Agusan, 1,647 hectares
A San Manuel Series landscape.
17

Understanding the geography of soil series is important in mapping soil fertility.
We need to know how extensive the soil and their inherent fertility. This paper focuses
on the major rice and corn soils of the country and their major characteristics. San
Manuel Series is most extensive in the country and covers 1,080,726 hectares. Quingua
Series is another extensive rice and corn soils, and covers 373,693 hectares throughout
the country. Bantog Series covers 142,812 hectares.
We hope these baseline data would give our Soil Survey staff who will be conducting soil fertility mapping an initial input in the fertility assessment.
18
Proceedings of the Seminar-Workshop on Soil Fertility Mapping. Soil Fertility Indicators for Rice. Edited
by Rodelio B. Carating, Soil Survey Division (1): 1924, 2007
Soil Fertility Indicators for Rice

Oscar F. Costelo*, Noemi M. Pascual, Berna G. Pastor,
Mario E. Vinluan, and Nestor T. Merjilla
Abstract: As we are conducting soil fertility mapping, this paper focuses

on soil fertility indicators considered of importance for the growing of rice.
These are pH, organic matter, available phosphorus, extractable potassium,
and zinc. The paper also discusses the criteria for the evaluation of these
parameters.
Key words: limiting factors, nutrient availability, toxicity, deficiency
Introduction
The soil is the foundation of our agricultural system. Crop production is dependent on the quality of the soil. The soil provides the physical, chemical, and biological
processes required to sustain most terrestrial plant and animal life. The soil regulates
water flow from rainfall and acts as buffer between production activities and the environment by facilitating the cycling and decomposition of organic wastes and nutrients, as
well as the degradation of nitrates, pesticides, and other toxic substances.
Many processes affect crop performance but relatively few contribute to the attainment of a balanced soil system. While it is true that fertility testing to assess nutrient
balance is essential, and in fact the subject of this paper, lest we forget that in the end,
biological activity (like presence of earthworms) is the best measure of soil fertility.
Of course, we will not produce earthworm density map nor soil respiration map.
A quantitative evaluation of the native fertility in soils interprets the capacity of the soil
to provide plants with nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium. And the potential supply of
these can be estimated from a set of chemical properties. The actual uptake of each nutrient is estimated, taking into account the potential supply of the other nutrients. Subsequently, when the level is considered below optimum, a nutrient limited yield is determined.
And thus, it is important to know that while we in soil survey will be able to provide spatial data on these fertility indicators, the appropriateness of soil management
technologies is an essential element to maintain soil fertility and productivity on longterm basis.
Oscar Costelo, Noemi Pascual, Berna Pastor, Mario Vinluan, and Nestor Merjilla
20
The soil pH
The soil pH is closely linked to the concept of the acidity and alkalinity. Technically, soil pH is quite misleading since what we actually measure is the pH of the soil
water. Soil pH is an important consideration for farmers because many plant and soil
life forms prefer either an acidic or an alkaline condition. In addition, some diseases tend
to thrive when the soil is acidic or alkaline, and that pH affects the availability of nutrients in the soil. And this is what we want to consider in this paper.
Most of the essential elements in the soil have optimal availability at pH 5.5 to
7.5. At pH below 5.0, the structure of heavy clay soils deteriorates and iron, aluminum,
and manganese become more soluble resulting to toxicity to some crops. In addition,
calcium, magnesium phosphorus become less available and many organisms do not
thrive at such acidic condition.
On the other hand, at pH above 7.5, calcium and magnesium are more abundant,
molybdenum is also available. Phosphorus and other elements like iron, manganese,
copper, zinc, and boron are insoluble resulting to unavailable form.
Evaluation criteria:
pH evaluation
Very low
Soil pH
Soil condition
Disorders
<3.5
Acid sulfate soil

Iron toxicity
Low in organic matter Phosphorus deficiency
High in iodine
Iodine toxicity combined w/ phosphorus deficiency
Low
3.6-5.4
High in manganese
Manganese toxicity interacted with
Low in bases with sul- phosphorus deficiency
fate application
Imbalance of nutrients associated
with hydrogen sulfide toxicity
Medium
5.6-6.7
Within optimal range
High
6.8-8.5
High in calcium
Phosphorus, iron & zinc deficiencies
Presence of sodium
These are salt-affected soils
Very high
>8.6
Organic matter
Organic matter is one of the composition of the soils, in addition to minerals,
water, and living organisms. It is derived from plants and animals such as leaf litter in
forests. When it decays to the point it is no longer recognizable, it is called soil organic
matter. When organic matter has broken down into a stable humic substances that resist
further decomposition, it is called humus. Chemically, humus represents a a mixture of
21
decomposed or altered products of carbohydrates, proteins, fats, resins, wax and other
similiar substances. These complex compounds are gradually decomposed by soil organisms into simple mineral salts, carbon dioxide, water, organic acids, ammonia, methane
and free nitrogen, depending upon the initial composition of the organic matter. Thus,
soil organic matter comprises all of the organic matter in the soil exclusive of the
undecayed material.
Organic matter though forming a small part of mineral soils plays a vital role in
the productivity and conditioning of soils. it serves as source of food for soil bacteria and
fungi which are responsible for converting complex organic materials into simple substances readily used by the plants. The intermediate products of decomposition of fresh
organic matter help to increase the physical condition of the soil. The addition of organic
matter also improves the working quality or friability of the soil. In association with clay
and calcium, it helps to form the aggregates of soil particles to produce the 'crumb structure'. Applied in adequate quantity organic matter serves as a mulch.
In paddy soils, organic matter is the substrate for anaerobic microbial activity; and consequently, in addition to oxygen depletion, the main cause of the
characteristic changes in redox potential and pH. Inorganic nitrogen release during anaerobic decomposition is higher during the first week of submergence than
under aerobic conditions. Nitrogen release occurs at higher C/N ratios under anaerobic conditions, but redemineralization of immobilized N is slower. For paddy
soils, the optimum organic matter content for maximum rice yields seems to be
4-5% depending on the rate of N fertilization. It should be noted that except in a
few localized areas in the hilly region, the organic matter content in most of the
cultivated soils rarely exceeds 1 percent.
For lowland rice, 1% of OM is sufficient. In acid soils, 2% is necessary and

>8%, may lead to toxic concentration of H2SO4, manganese and ferrous iron especially
after long period of saturation and anaerobic condition.
Available phosphorus
Phosphorus is a major plant nutrient essential in root, flower and fruit development, and strengthening of rice straws. And thus, we have phosphorus deficiency problems reported in well-weathered Oxisols and Ultisols because of strong acidic reactions
and abundance of AL3+ and Fe 3+.
Rice removes about 2 to 3 kg phosphorus for 1 mg of grain produced (Timsina
and Connor, 2001; Saleque et.al., 2001). Although the requirement for phosphorus is
much less than that for nitrogen in rice, its continuous removal exploits the phosphorus
reserve in the soil. And hence, the need for fertilizer or manure application.
Phosphorus availability in the soil is linked to the presence of amorphous hy-
22
drated Fe and Al oxides since this tends to fix P. Highly weathered or acidic soils fix
large amount of phosphorus.
The availability of phosphorous is pH dependent. A pH range from 6.5 7.5 is
usually best. At pH 5.5, aluminum and iron phosphates dominate over the more soluble
calcium phosphates. At pH 8.0, the solubility of calcium phosphate decreases and PO4
levels become deficient.
Many studies also show that high of phosphate will depress the rate of zinc uptake to the extent that zinc deficiency may occur. Phosphorus my also reduce the translocation of zinc within the plants.
Phosphorus deficiency symptoms appear in the lower part of the plant resulting
in decreased leaf number, decreased blade length, reduced panicles per plant, reduced
seeds per panicle, and reduced filled seeds. Flooding rice soils generally moderates the
pH towards neutral pH condition, thus promoting the availability of soil phosphorus
(Aide and Picker, 1996). However, the effect of this in terms of rice growth may not be
appreciated in acid clay soils high in active iron ions.
Generally, we can rate available phosphorus (Olsen) in soils as follows: (1)
low<2 ppm, (2) medium2.19.9 ppm; and (3) high>10 ppm.
Extractable potassium
Like phosphorus and nitrogen, potassium is a major plant nutrient and important
to be considered in fertility mapping. Potassium promotes panicle development in rice,
and impacts grain fill. It also promotes tillering, spikelet fertility, nutrient uptake of nitrogen and phosphorus, leaf area and leaf longevity, root elongation and thickness. It
also has profound effect in increasing resistance to diseases and insects. By increasing
stem strength and producing healthy leaves, plants benefit from increased pest tolerance.
In addition, potassium is important for starch formation and for translocation of
sugar; essential for tube formation and development of kernels; and encourages the assimilation of CO2. The level of potassium in plant influences the assimilation of nitrate
into protein and thus, is believed to influence the uptake of nitrate.
Potassium deficiency is characterized by chlorosis (yellowing) along the leaf
margins followed by scorching and browning of the tips of the older leaves. The symptoms gradually progress inward. The crops also suffer from slow and stunted growth.
Extractable potassium using hot method at >151 ppm is considered adequate in
soils; 76-150 level is considered moderate; while <75 is deficient.
Zinc
Since our concern is rice, our discussions would not be complete without a topic
23
on zinc.
There are four factors that condition the availability of zinc in the soil: (1) pH
zinc is generally available to plants in acidic soils although zinc deficiencies do not occur
on all alkaline soils; (2) phosphorus levelzinc deficiency is observed more frequently
in high phosphate soils; (3) organic matter contentzinc deficiency is observed on soils
high in organic matter, especially those that result from treatment of animal manures; and
(4) adsorption by clay mineralsnumerous studies have shown that zinc is absorbed by
various clay minerals and by the carbonates of calcium and magnesium.
Soils with <50 ppm zinc is considered very low and 20n kg ZnSO4 is recommended. At levels 0.51 1.15 ppm, zinc is low and 10 kg ZnSO4 is recommended. Zinc
levels at 1.164.8 ppm is medium and about 5 kg ZnSO4 is medium and the recommendation is 5 kg ZnSO4. Soil zinc levels at 4.81 to 20.0 ppm is high or optimal and no zinc
application is recommended.
Fertility Factor
Adequate
Moderate
Deficient
Organic matter (% OM)
>4.6
2.14.5
<2
Available P (ppm), Olsen method
>10
2.1 9.9
<2
Extractable K (ppm) Hot method
>151
76-150
<75
High
Medium
Low
5.66.7
5.64.6
>6.8*
<4.5*
pH Factor
pH (H2O, 1:1 soil-water suspension)
*pH 4.5 and 6.8 is considered problem soils for rice
Table 1 presents the summary of the discussionsgeneral guidelines for soil

fertility rating of rice soils:
Soil Fertility Rating
Number and Intensity of the Fertility Limiting Factors
Very High
All factors are adequate. No factor is at deficient level and none of the
factors is moderate.
High
No factor is at deficient level and only one factor is rated moderate.

Or one factor is at deficient level but none of the others is moderate.
Moderate
Only one factor is at deficient level and the other factors are moderate.
Low
Only one factor is moderate and the rest are deficient. Or half of the
factors are moderate and half are deficient.
Very Low
All the factors are at deficient level.
24
Table 2 is the general guideline on soil fertility rating following the number and
intensity of the limiting factors:
It can be seen that we generally use the principles of land evaluation when rating
the soils for soil fertility mapping. The presence of just one limiting factor affects the
over all rating.
Literature cited
Aide, Michael and Jennifer Picker. 1996. Potassium and phosphorus nutrition in rice. In
Research Update, University of Missouri, College of Agriculture, Columbia,
Missouri.
Saleque, M.A., M.J. Abedin, Z.U. Ahmed, M. Hasan, and G.M. Panaullah. 2001. Influences of phosphorus deficiency on the uptake of nitrogen, potassium, calcium,
magnesium, sulfur, and zinc in lowland rice varieties. J. Plant Nutr. 24:1621
1632.
Timsina, J., and D. J. Connor. 2001. Productivity management of rice-wheat cropping
systems: Issues and challenges. Field Crop Res. 69:93-132
Proceedings of the Seminar-Workshop on Soil Fertility Mapping. Soil constraints to rice and their remediation. Edited by Rodelio B. Carating, Soil Survey Division (1): 2532, 2007
Soil Constraints to Lowland Rice Production

and their Remediation
Raymundo G.Galanta, Ernesto A. Almendral, Bella H. Noceda*,
Oscar Sanganbayan
Abstract: Ordinarily, soil constraints in lowland rice production are nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium deficiency. Salinity and alkalinity problem
including acid sulfate are considered also as soil constraints in some lowland areas of the country. There are also reports of zinc and sulfur deficiency as well as boron toxicity in some lowland areas. Areas that are subject to waterlogging and deep and prolonged flooding is another constraint.
Drought which is a recurring event in the climatic system that is dictated by
a water supply and demand phenomenon and simply defined as the lack of
sufficient water supply to meet requirement is now considered a problem.
Remediation practices for these soil constraints have been enumerated.
Key words: soil constraints, salinity, alkalinity, acid sulfate soils, drought
Introduction
The soil constraints to sustained rice production in the lowland areas limits the farmers to produce satisfactory yields due to increased management inputs. These
limitations can be attributed to the poor inherent physical and chemical properties of the
soils. The respective inherent physical and chemical characteristics of these problem
soils reflect their restrictions on agricultural production. If these problem soils are improperly used and mismanaged, it will continue to degenerate. Under worst scenario, any
sustained soil management will no longer be economical.
Part 1Soil constraints to lowland rice production
Ordinarily, soil constraints in lowland rice production are nitrogen, phosphorus
and potassium deficiency. Salinity and alkalinity problem including acid sulfate are considered also as soil constraints in some lowland areas of the country. There are also reports of zinc and sulfur deficiency as well as boron toxicity in some lowland areas. Areas that are subject to waterlogging and deep and prolonged flooding is another constraint. Drought which is a recurring event in the climatic system that is dictated by a
water supply and demand phenomenon and simply defined as the lack of sufficient water
supply to meet requirement is now considered a problem.
26
Raymundo Galanta, Ernesto Almendral, Bella Noceda, Oscar Sanganbayan
Nitrogen Deficiency
Nitrogen deficiency is the most common deficiency of rice soils. Nitrogen deficiency in rice during early growth results in yellow to yellowish green leaves and stunted
and spindly growth. When deficiency occurs at a later stage, yellowing occurs first on
older leaves.
Phosphorus Deficiency
Phosphorus deficiency occurs in soils with <5 ppm Olsen P. Reports indicated
that it is perhaps the most important limiting nutritional factor in highly weathered acid
tropical soils, and in some Vertisols. Phosphorus deficiency is also associated with zinc
and iron deficiency, salinity and alkalinity on Vertisols. Phosphorus, however, is more
available in flooded soils than in dryland soils.
Phosphorus deficiency in rice is characterized by: stunted growth; low tillering;
short, narrow, erect leaves and a dull green discoloration of the plants. Old leaves turn
purple and dry.
Potassium Deficiency
Potassium is not commonly limiting in Philippines soils. Cases of potassium
deficiency are generally reported in sandy and coarse-textured soils as well as from
boggy and peat soils.
Saline Soils
Soils which contain sufficient salt (chiefly chlorides and sulfate of sodium, calcium, and magnesium) to impair plant growth is called saline soil. In the country, saline
soils are associated with alluvial soils in deltas, estuaries, and low lying coastal areas,
subject to inundation by sea water.
Problems related to saline soils are deficiencies of N, P, and Zn. Fe toxicity and
P deficiency are common in acid saline soils while N, P, Zn and Cu deficiencies, and toxicity of organic substances are mostly found in coastal peat soils.
The symptoms of salt injury in rice include whitening of tips and drying of older
leaves. At very high salinity levels, growth is severely retarded, the plant wilts and dries
up.
Alkaline Soils
Soils containing sufficient exchangeable sodium to impair growth of crop plants
is considered alkaline soils. Alkaline soils normally contain more than 15 percent exchangeable sodium has a pH of 8.5 11.0, contains free sodium carbonate or bicarbon-
Soil Constraints to Lowland Rice and their Remediation
27
ate, calcium carbonate, and high concentrations of water-soluble silica. They are likewise deficient in nitrogen and phosphorus. Alkaline soils have their clay fraction and
organic matter dispersed, thus, these soils are sticky when wet and hard when dry, have
very poor hydraulic conductivity and poor internal drainage.
Problems associated with alkaline soils include: toxicity of sodium carbonate, or
exchangeable sodium, high pH, deficiencies of calcium, iron and zinc, boron toxicity,
oxygen deficiency when wet, osmotic stress due to high content of salts, mechanical impedance to root development, and restriction of water supply to roots by low hydraulic
conductivity.
Rice suffering from alkali injury is stunted in growth, shows reddish brown discoloration, scorching of the older leaves, and finally may die.
Acid Sulfate Soils
Acid sulfate soils are the extremely acid soils derived from marine sediments and
are high in pyrites and poor in bases. Generally, pH of these soils is less than 4.0. The
acidity is due to the presence of sulfuric acid and iron and aluminum sulfates. They are
nearly neutral in reaction when submerge but become extremely acid and lethal to crop
plants when drained and dried. Clay pH is from 3.5 4 and characterized by the presence of yellow jarosite mottles. Organic carbon content varies from 1.5 to 18%. Cation
exchange capacity (CEC) is 10 25 meq/100g. Water-soluble sulfate and aluminum contents of surface soils may be as much as 0.2% and 150 ppm, respectively. Their available
nitrogen and phosphorus are low.
Growth-limiting factors for wetland rice in acid sulfate soils include: aluminum
toxicity until the pH has risen to 4.5, iron toxicity, phosphorus deficiency, and hydrogen
sulfide toxicity.
Boron Toxicity
Boron toxicity is considered a hazard to crop production in coastal soils and in
volcanic areas. The critical limits for boron toxicity are 5 ppm available B in the soil, 2
ppm B in soil solution, and 25 ppm in plants.
Boron toxicity in rice is characterized by yellowing of the leaf tips, followed by
the appearance of dark brown elliptical blotches along the leaf edges which later turn
brown and finally die. Vegetative growth is not seriously depressed unless the toxicity is
severe.
Zinc Deficiency
Zinc deficiency is the most common nutritional deficiency of lowland rice next
to N and P deficiency. It is a growth-limiting factor in calcareous soils, sodic soils, vol-
28
canic ash soils, scraped soils, sandy soils, and regardless of pH, in continuously wet soils.
Thus, most waterlogged soils maybe classified as zinc-deficient soils.
Reports cited that zinc deficiency increases because of the removal of large
amounts of zinc by high-yielding potential varieties, replacement of the acid fertilizer
ammonium sulfate by urea, increased use of phosphatic fertilizers and double and triple
cropping of lowland rice.
Wetland rice soils that are zinc deficient are likely to have one or more of the
following characteristics: high pH, high organic matter, prolonged waterlogging, a Mg/
Ca ratio of >1, high available P content, high available silica content, low available zinc
content (<1 ppm), low total zinc content.
It is often observed in rice that two to four weeks after sowing or transplanting,
the midrib of the emerging leaf is chlorotic especially at the base if zinc is deficient.
Also, the brown spots appear first on the older leaves and later on the emerging leaf. The
spots enlarge, coalesce, and give the leaves a brown color. Tillering and growth are retarded or suppressed. Many reports indicated that when zinc deficiency is severe, the
plants die; if it is milder or moderate, the plant recovers but maturity is delayed and
yields are reduced.
Sulfur Deficiency
Sulfur deficiency is reported to occur in light textured soils, low in organic matter, continuously submerged, low total S content, and high content of allophanes or oxides.
Observed sulfur deficiency symptoms in rice include yellowing of youngest
leaves followed by yellowing of the older leaves, stunted growth, and reduced tillering.
In contrast to nitrogen deficiency which causes yellowing of older leaves, sulfur deficiency affects the whole plants.
Poorly Drained Soils
Poorly drained soils are waterlogged some of the time or all of the time in a year.
They are located in the coastal plains, alluvial plains, river basins and flood plains or
inland swamps and marshes. They are characterized by high contents of reducing materials, Fe 2+ , H2 S, organic acid which are harmful to crop growth.
Beside drainage problem, poorly drained areas have their own limitation mainly
due to their original material(parent materials) from basic to acid, texture ranging from
sandy to clayey.
In the swampy waterlogged areas, farmers meet difficulties in cultivation. An
example are the farmers in Maguindanao of Southern Mindanao whose farms are waterlogged or under prolonged submergence.
29
Drought (El Nio)

The emerging climate phenomenon attributed to the increasing recurrence cycle
of El Nio, seasonal aridity or seasonal extreme dryness was considered as the primary
basis for the acknowledgment of desertification in the tropical countries like Philippines.
It is recognized that drought which is influenced by climate change create a detrimental impact leading to a chain of events, including loss of prime lands for the production of food.
Climatological studies showed that major drought events in the Philippines are
associated with El Nio occurrences or warm episodes in the central and eastern equatorial Pacific. Four major drought events in the Philippines that occurred in the 20th century: 1982-83, 1986-87, 1989-93 and 1997-98
Seasonal aridity is exacerbated by the increasing incidence of El Nio, which is
now occurring at a two to three year cycle from previous five-year interval. The water
stress periods in the seasonally arid/semi arid areas are extended to four to nine months
depending on the intensity of drought or El Nio dry spell (six to nine months).
Mean daily temperature in these areas ranges from 30 to 35C which is higher
than any parts of the Philippines, induces depletion of soil organic matter and significant
water loss through evapotranspiration.
On the other hand, because of El Nio recurrence, water shortage occurred in
major dams of the country. The most serious was in the El Nio year 1997-1998, where
the water level in the Angat dam fell below critical levels forcing national authorities to
stop delivery of irrigation water to some 25,000 hectares of irrigated lands in Bulacan
and Pampanga.
Part 2Remedial measures or management to avert soil constraints

to rice production
Nitrogen Deficiency
Application of nitrogen fertilizer is the most common practice to ameliorate nitrogen deficiency.
Phosphorus Deficiency
Large amounts of phosphorus-containing fertilizer maybe required to produce a
good crop response.
30
Potassium Deficiency
Potassium is usually applied during the final land preparation. In some cases,
potassium topdressing can also correct observed deficiency. Potassium chloride and complete fertilizers are the most common sources of potassium for lowland rice.
Saline Soils
Reclamation of saline soils is generally done by first preventing the influx of salt
water and leaching out the soil. In farms that are regularly inundated by sea water, farmers plant older seedling of rice (at least 30 days old) which can tolerate better saline water. Likewise, farmers time transplanting of seedlings during periods when saline water
intruding into the paddies could easily be drained. Saline water brought by rising tide
maybe trapped in the paddy field and prevented from draining out to the river by rushing
flood waters coming from the inland as induced by the heavy downpour.
In Indonesia, to reduce or minimize salinization in potential salt source areas is
carried out through leaching the salt by sweet irrigation water. However this method is
not practical in the dry areas due to lack of water resources. Therefore salt tolerant varieties maybe the best choice.
In Taiwan, the practice is flooding the soils and then planting with rice. Another
is by natural leaching combined with underground drainage system.
Alkaline soils
To reclaim alkali soil requires replacement of exchangeable sodium by calcium
and removal of the displaced sodium by leaching. The usual practice is to spread gypsum, incorporate it with the soil, level the soil, and submerge it continuously or intermittently to a depth of about 10 cm. The sodium is leached by a drainage system.
Acid Sulfate Soils
Reclamation measures depend on the degree of water control. Where water is
available, the soils are kept continuously flooded or saturated to prevent acidification. If
water is limiting, the soils are drained and leached to remove the acid materials. The soils
are then limed and fertilized with nitrogen and phosphorus. Rice maybe grown in the wet
season.
Boron Toxicity
Reclamation of boron toxic soils is done by leaching of the granulated soil with
low boron containing water.
31
Zinc Deficiency
Studies have shown that zinc deficiency in wetland rice can be alleviated or
averted by one or more of the following measures that involve zinc addition or crop and
soil management. They include: soils application, seed treatment, nursery treatment,
seedling treatment, foliar sprays, using zinc-efficient varieties, water management, crop
rotation and organic manuring.
In Taiwan, application of zinc material, such as zinc sulfate or zinc oxide, had a
significant effect on the growth and yield of rice plants.
Sulfur Deficiency
Sulfur deficiency can be alleviated by applying elemental S, ammonium sulfate,
potassium sulfate, single superphosphate, or gypsum in correct amounts.
Poorly Drained Soils
Farmers like the Maguindanaos of Southern Mindanao, whose farms are waterlogged or under prolonged submergence, plant lowland rice and practice zero tillage or if
available, use carabao-drawn implements such as moldboard plow and tooth-pegged harrow cultivation.
Drought (El Nio)
The Presidential Task Force on El Nio serves as the coordinating body for the
formulation of comprehensive action plan to mitigate the adverse effects of seasonal aridity in the country. This action plan is categorized into three namely: a) Farmers Initiatives b) Institutional Efforts and c) Policy/Legislative Efforts.
A. Farmers Initiatives- The following are farmers appropriate technologies and
indigenous knowledge and practices during El Nio occurrence:
1. Use of herbal pesticide/botanical spray to control drought-induced diseases and pests thriving in trees/plants
2. Weeding is not done during El Nio to conserve water
3. Irrigation is done when there is no wind to preserve moisture. Water easily evaporates in the presence of wind during dry season
B. Institutional Efforts
1. Creation of the Presidential Task Force on El Nio
-
Cloud-seeding/rain making operations

Information, education, communication campaign
Research and Development
32
Transfer of appropriate technologies/interventions such as

seeds, fertilizers, small farm reservoirs, and small water impounding projects
Individual shallow tube wells were installed in individual
farmers field to augment irrigation in lowland areas
2. Approval of the National Integrated Research, Development and Extension

Agenda and Program and Operationalizing the National Soil and Water
Resources RDE Network
3.Awareness programs on the character and impact of drought
4. Promotion of soil and water conservation measures
C. Policy/Legislative Efforts
Legislations include the Agriculture and Fisheries Modernization Act
(AFMA), Balanced Fertilization Strategy (BFS), National Integrated Protected
Areas System and Environmental Impact Assessment
References
Alcalde, C. B. 1993. The Major Problem Soils of the Philippines. Bureau of Soils and
Water Management, unpublished monograph.
Badayos,R. B. 1990. Lowland rice soils in the Philippines, their characteristics and
classification in relation to productivity.
Badayos, R. B. 1990. Soil Taxonomy and Soil Related Constraints to Major Agricultural
Production Systems in the Philippines. In Seminar Proceedings on Soil Science
and Agricultural Technology in the Philippines. Bureau of Soils and Water
ManagementJapan International Cooperation Agency.
Bureau of Soils and Water Management. 2004. The Philippine National Action Plan To
Combat Desertification, Land Degradation, Drought and Poverty
Soekardi, M. 1993. Management of Problem Soils in Indonesia. In 3rd International Forum on Soil Taxonomy and Sustainable Land Management in the Philippines.
Bureau of Soils and Water ManagementPCARRDBAR.
Moncharoen, L. 1993. Management of Problem Soils in Thailand.b In 3rd International
Forum on Soil Taxonomy and Sustainable Land Management in the Philippines.
Bureau of Soils and Water ManagementPCARRDBAR.
Shin-Tuan Wang and Zueng-Sang Chen, 1993. Management of Problem Soils in Taiwan.
In 3rd International Forum on Soil Taxonomy and Sustainable Land Management in the Philippines. Bureau of Soils and Water ManagementPCARRD
BAR.
Proceedings of the Seminar-Workshop on Soil Fertility Mapping. Survey for soil fertility mapping. Edited
Survey for Soil Fertility Mapping of Paddy Fields:

Proposed Protocol
Virgilio A. Castaeda, Carmelita B. Incillo*, Eugenia A. Briones
Henry L. Noceda
Abstract: In support of the Agri-Kalikasan Project of the Department of

Agriculture, soil fertility mapping of rice areas has been conducted with the
objective of coming up with Fertilizer Guide Map. Soil fertility mapping is
conducted as a collaborative project with the Local Government Unit as
well as with the Department of Agriculture Regional Field Unit (DA-RFU).
This paper consolidates the protocol for coming up with the Soil Fertility
Map.
Key words: composite sampling, homogenous slope, physiographic unit
Part 1The Project Proposal

Rationale
Crop yield in general, are the result of the inherent fertility of the soil. Continuous cropping without replenishment of the nutrients of the soil inevitably depletes the
natural soil fertility. Mans strife for sustainable agriculture made a big leap to introduce
organic agriculture in order to improve soil chemical and physical characteristics that had
been lost because of misuse and abuse. Organic agriculture serves as an alternative way
to bring back the natural condition of the soil. The manner by which we handle the problem now will determine our food sufficiency in the future. The introduction of the High
Yielding Varieties is the response of scientists to cope up with the food requirement of
the populace. Parallel with the High Yielding Varieties is the high requirements on the
use of chemical fertilizers that have been used for over three decades. Observations however, confirm that high yielding varieties are big absorbents of soil nutrients.
In support to the Agri-Kalikasan project of the Department of Agriculture, the
Bureau of Soils and Water Management has put its initiative in implementing the Tipid
Abono and the Modified Rapid Composting projects aiming to promote organic based
agriculture program with the use of combined organic and inorganic fertilizers for sustained production ensuring long term soil productivity and in harmony with nature. The
projects also advocate for the conversion and utilization of farm waste into beneficial
organic form to ease up farmers on the burden brought about by the increase in price of
oil base fertilizers and chemicals.
34
Virgilio Castaeda, Carmelia Incillo, Eugenia Briones, Henry Noceda
To further support the full implementation of these projects and in collaboration

with the Local Government Units and the Department of Agriculture Regional Field
Units, the Bureau of Soils and Water Management has come up with an additional activity that will ultimately benefit the local planners, investors and the farmers. The activity
will be the formulation of the Fertilizer Guide Map and Updated Soil Fertility Map for
site- specific rice production areas. The updated Soil Fertility Map will provide information as to the inherent fertility of the soils while the Fertilizer Guide Map provides the
information as to how many bags of fertilizers are needed to supplement the required
nutrients of specific crop in a given type of soil.
Objectives
1. To assist local government units (Provincial and Municipal Level) in coming up with
a soil based data and maps needed in the formulation of municipal and or provincial
Agriculture development plan;
2. Assess the current level of macro elements (pH, OM, N, P, and K, including Zinc)
and provide necessary recommendation on the fertilizer usage as against rice crop
requirements for specific production areas in major rice producing provinces;
3. To produce both the updated Soil Fertility Map and Fertilizer Guide Map at 1:50,
000 scale (Provincial and Municipal Level) in digital form to assist local planners
and decision makers and farmers.
Approach and Methodology
1. Pre-survey Phase
a. Preparations of materials and acquisition of all relevant information regarding the
project
b. Preparation of base map and working sheets
c. Coordination with the Local Government Unit Officials on matters regarding logistic
supports
2. Survey Phase
a. Conduct reconnaissance survey to determine the accessibility of the area and identification of tentative soil sampling points;
b. Identification/validation and delineation of soil mapping unit boundaries base on the
existing soil series/types;
c. Collect one composite soil sample (about 30 cm depth) from twenty five (25) hectares taken from at least ten (10) sampling points if homogenous in slope, soil type
and flooding class;
d. Collect at least one composite soil sample from representative physiographic units if
the area is heterogeneous and an area of less than 25 hectares;
e. Plotting of composite soil sample sites on the map/working sheet.
Survey for Soil Fertility Mapping of Paddy Fields: Proposed Protocol
35
3. Post Survey Phase

a. Preparation of soil samples for submission to the nearest soils laboratory for analysis of pH, OM, N, P and K;
i.
thoroughly mixed, quartering done twice to produce one (1) kilo of composite soil sample
ii. air drying
iii. pulverization
iv. sieving
v. labelling
b. Composite soil samples with field pH of less than 4.5 and more than 6.8 shall be submitted to the Soil Laboratory Services Division, Bureau of Soils and Water Management, Quezon City for the analysis of iron, manganese, calcium, magnesium, sodium, sulfur and zinc;
c. Consolidation/tabulation, correlation and interpretation of soil data laboratory results;
d. Finalization of Updated Soil Fertility Map and Fertilizer Guide Map (1:50, 000) provincial level and municipal level;
e.
Presentation of outputs (maps and report)

Expected outputs
1. Updated Soil Fertility Map (1:50, 000) municipal/provincial level

2. Fertilizer Guide Map (1:50, 000) municipal/provincial level
3. Soil fertility report
Manpower Requirements
1. For the conduct of the survey at municipal level (all from BSWM)
- 2 Technical staff
- 1 Cartographer
2. For the conduct of the survey at provincial level (all from BSWM)
- Soil and Water Area Coordinator (SWAC)
- 2 Technical staff
- 1 Cartographer
- 1 Laboratory staff
- 1 Driver
36
Institutional arrangement
Since the BSWM has no existing office within the Department of Agriculture in
the region, the implementation of the project shall be in collaboration with the Regional
Field Units of the DA (DA, RFU) and with the Provincial and Municipal level government (LGUs). Coordination with the RFUs and the Local Government Units will be
highly prioritized.
The implementation scheme is through Memorandum of Agreement which could
be in tri-partite (BSWM-DA RFU- Local Government Units) and two party systems
(BSWM DA - RFU) or (BSWM - Local Government Units).
Funding source
The project shall be implemented and financed through Agri-Kalikasan funds
from BSWM, GMA rice program of the DA- RFU and the Agriculture Development
fund from the Provincial/Municipal Levels. The funds will be administered by each party
concerned and shall be utilized only for the purpose of implementing the project. A budgetary plan shall be formulated where all the counterpart funds are stipulated and will
form part of the project document.
Period of implementation
A work plan and period/time of implementation shall be formulated, presented
and must be mutually approved by all parties concern and involved in the project implementation.
Part 2Standard Operating Procedures for Soil Fertility Mapping

1. Materials and Equipments
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
g.
h.
i.
j.
k.
l.
Soil Map
Land Use Map
Land Management Unit Map
Slope Map
Flooding Map
Topographic Map (1:50 000)
Double Blade Shovel and Spade
Pail
Bolo
2 x 2 meters vinyl/plastic
Plastic sampling bag
Auger
37
2. Pre-determine tentative soil unit boundaries using different maps as references.

3. Pre-determine soil fertility sampling points
a. If the land use, soil types, slope, and flooding class is homogenous; collect
one composite soil fertility sample from twenty five (25) hectares taken from
ten (10) sampling points.
b. If the area is heterogeneous and less than twenty-five hectares; collect the
composite soil fertility sample from a representative physiographic unit
taken from five (5) sampling points.
c. Locate and plot on the working sheep map the observation site or composite
soil sampling site.
4. How to collect soil fertility samples for analysis
a. Prepare the shovel, spade, pail, bolo, auger, 2 x 2 meters vinyl/plastic an
plastic soil sample bag;
b. Validation or pre-determine soil sampling points, then scrape the soil
surface of about 5 centimeters thick to remove the stone, rubbish, trash,
grasses and other debris;
c. Using the shovel, push it sown the top soil to a depth of about 20 centimeters
and get a slice of soil sample approximately 2 centimeters thick and 10 centimeters wide than place this in a container or pail, repeat this procedure until
you reach the desired sampling points;
d. Spread the 2 x 2 vinyl/plastic, pour together the collected soil samples rom
the different sampling points than mixed thoroughly using the spade and
quartering done twice to produce one (1) kilo of composite soil sample.
e. Plot the composite soil sampling site on the map.
f. Preparation of soil samples for submission to the nearest Soil Laboratory Services for Soil analysis.
1.
2.
3.
4.
Air drying
Pulverization
Sieving (2 x 2 mm)
Proper labeling (consecutive numbering, barangay, municipality, date of sampling)
5. Communication for the submission of soil samples to the
soils laboratory must indicate the desired analysis and methods to be use.
38
g. Desired Laboratory analyses are pH (H20 1:1), organic matter (%), available
phosphorus (ppm) and extractable potassium (ppm).
h. Composite soil samples with pH of less than 4.5 and more than 6.8 shall be
submitted to the Soil Laboratory Services Division, Bureau of Soils and Water Management, Quezon City for the analysis of Iron, Manganese Calcium,
Magnesium, Sodium, Sulfur and Zinc.
5. Consolidation and compilation of soil data results
a. For Soil Fertility Map
a.1. Compilation of the soil data results for the pH (H20 1:1), organic matter
(OM %), available phosphorus (ppm), and extractable potassium (ppm)
a.2.
Standard criteria for evaluation of single element:

Organic Matter (OM %)
Low
Medium
High
<2
2 4.5
> 4.5
Available phosphorus (ppm Olsen Method)

Low
Medium
High
<2
2.1 9.9
> 10
Extractable Potassium (ppm Hot method)

Low
Medium
High
< 75
76 150
> 150
pH (H20 1:1 soil water suspension)

Very low
Low
Medium
High
Very high
*
< 3.5
3.6 5.4
5.6 6.7
6.8 8.5*
>8.6 *
pH <4.5 and 6.8 is a problem soil for rice.
39
a.3. Guidelines on soil fertility rating based on the intensity of the limiting factors.
Soil Fertility Rating
Number and Intensity of the Fertility Limiting Factors
Very High
All factors are adequate. No factor is at deficient level and none of the
factors is moderate.
High
No factor is at deficient level and only one factor is rated moderate.

Or one factor is at deficient level but none of the others is moderate.
Moderate
Only one factor is at deficient level and the other factors are moderate.
Or two factors at deficiency level; no moderate.
Low
Only one factor is moderate and the rest are deficient. Or half of the
factors are moderate and half are deficient.
Very Low
All the factors are at deficient level.
b. Example / illustration on fertility mapping

b.1 Sample data
Composite
Soil Sample
No.
pH
OM
(%)
P
(ppm)
K
(ppm)
Fertility
Level
High
Adequate
Adequate
Adequate
Very high
High
Adequate
Adequate
Adequate
Very high
High
Adequate
Adequate
Moderate
High
High
Deficient
Adequate
Adequate
High
Medium
Deficient
Moderate
Moderate
Moderate
Medium
Moderate
Deficient
Moderate
Moderate
Medium
Deficient
Deficient
Moderate
Low
Medium
Deficient
Deficient
Deficient
Low
Low
Deficient
Deficient
Deficient
Very low
10
Low
Deficient
Deficient
Deficient
Very low
40
b.2 Illustration of sampling points for soil fertility mapping

1
5
6
10
9
3
10
10
10
5
1
2
5
7
3
6
4
7
1
4
5
7
10
2
6
8
10
1
9
2
10
10
3
8
7
10
10
7
4
8
9
10
1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10 = sampling points
1 = composite soil sampling site
b.3 Sample initial draft, soil fertility map
LEGEND:
Map Code
F1
F2
F3
F4
F5
Description
Fertility level 1
Fertility level 2
Fertility level 3
Fertility level 4
Fertility level 5
=
=
=
=
=
Very high
High
Moderate
Low
Very low
41
b.4 Sample soil fertility map as final output
b.5 Development of Fertilizer Guide Map:

1. Correlation and Interpretation of soil data results for organic matter (OM), phosphorous (P), potassium (K) and zinc (Zn if deficient)
2. Superimposed the Soil Fertility Map, Soil Map, Land Use Map,
Slope Map and Flooding Map for the validation of soil unit
boundary and nutrient deficient to a given type of soil.
Fertilizer
Guide
Map Code
Equivalent Fertilizer Matter

Wet Season (bags/ha)
F2N
High fertility with

nitrogen deficient
F2p
High fertility with

phosphorus deficient
*Use leaf color chart
Mode of Application
Description
5 - organic fertilizer
3 - 14-14-14
6 - 16-20-0
1.5 - 46-0-0
Dry Season (bags/ha)

5362-
Organic Fertilizer
14-14-14
16-20-0
46-0-0
First Application
Broadcast the required
fertilizer during the last
harrowing of the field
Second* Application
Topdressing Urea
(panicle initiation stage)
before harvest
42
Proceedings of the Seminar-Workshop on Soil Fertility Mapping. Soil Analysis Using Soil Test Kits. Edited
Soil Analysis Using Soil Test Kits

Lauro G. Hernandez, Leovenilda A. Fernandez,
and Constancia G. Mangao*
Abstract: The Bureau of Soils and Water Management has developed the
Soil Text Kit (STK) to be able to qualitatively analyze soil pH, nitrogen,
phosphorus, and potassium. The Rapid Soil Test Kit (RST) was also developed to qualitatively test for magnesium, calcium, zinc, and the lime requirements of acidic soils. These are not only very useful to the farmers but
also to the soil surveyors because they can immediately diagnose the fertility status of the soils of the area being surveyed.
Key words: Soil Test Kit (STK), Rapid Soil Test Kit (RST), indicator dye,
color chart, composite samples
Introduction
Analysis by the Soil Test Kit is a quick method of evaluating the fertility
of a soil. It involves chemical analyses that measure the amount of nutrients in the soil
that are available to the plant. Results are interpreted and used as a basis in making a
recommendation on the right kind and amount of fertilizer for a particular crop when
grown in the soil being tested.
The SOIL TEST KIT is a complete package of soil testing. It uses simple colorimetric chemical analyses in which chemical reagents are made to react with a soil sample
in a test tube to give a characteristic color depending on the amount of available nutrients
in the soil. The colors produced are then matched with a standard color chart which rates
whether the soil is low, medium, or high in available nitrogen, phosphorus or potassium.
Also determined in similar manner is soil pH or acidity.
The SOIL TEST KIT is cheap, quick, handy and easy to use. It does not require
sophisticated laboratory instruments and specialized training for the user. Soil testing
can be done right in the field and results are obtained within the hour. It is, therefore,, a
useful tool to farmers and extension workers who, oftentimes, need immediate answer to
the question of what kind and amount of fertilizer to use for a crop grown in a particular
soil.
The SOIL TEST KIT is a small box 19 cm x 11 cm x 11 cm, weighing about 1
kg. It contains chemical reagents, procedure and color charts, tables of fertilizer recom-
44
Lauro G. Hernandez, Leovenilda A.Fernandez, Constancia G. Mangao
mendation for various crops, and procedure for proper soil sampling technique. It is a
product of research from the Department of Soil Science, University of the Philippines at
Los Baos in cooperation with the National Food and Agricultural Council.
The Bureau of Soils and Water Management (BSWM) produces the Soil Test Kit
for analysis of soil pH, nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium. This is referred to as the
STK. Another set of soil test kit is referred to as the RST or the Rapid Soil Test Kit.
This is used for the qualitative analysis of soil magnesium, calcium, zinc, and the lime
requirements of acidic soils.
Reminders on the Use and Care of the Soil Test Kit
Important Reminders on the Use and Care of the Soil Test Kit:
1. Analyze or test only soil samples that are properly collected.
2. Avoid contamination. Use only the test tube designated for the element being analyzed. For example, use test tube labeled N for testing nitrogen, K for potassium, P
for phosphorus and pH for soil pH.
3. Use clean and preferably dry test tube.
4. Do not interchange droppers and caps. To avoid this, immediately put back the dropper or cap into the corresponding bottle after each use. Always keep bottles tightly
covered.
5. Do not smoke during soil sampling or analysis.
6. The chemicals are corrosive and poisonous. Avoid inhalation or contact with your
skin or clothing.
7. Keep the test kit away from the reach of children. Store it in cool and dry place.
8. When chemical reagents run out, refills can be bought at the Bureau of Soils and Water Management or a designated refill center at nominal cost.
Reminders on soil sampling
The main objective of soil sampling is to collect a small amount of soil sample
weighing about one half kg that will represent the soil in a large area, e.g., one hectare
Figure 1. The Soil Test Kit (STK) and the Rapid Soil Test Kit (RST).
45
furrow slice that weighs about 2 million kg. Since only a small amount of soil sample is
used in chemical analysis and results are projected for a large quantity of soil, the accuracy of soil testing depends largely on proper soil sampling.
Using the most common farm tools and materials such as shovel or spade, knife
or trowel, small pail and plastic bags, the following are steps on proper soil sampling
technique:
1. Prepare the following: pail, spade, bolo, plastic bags.
2. Divide the farm area according to the kind of crops grown or to be grown,
type of soil (sandy, clayey, or loamy) and topography (level, sloping, or
hilly). Collect soil samples separately from the different soil unit areas and
place them in separate containers.
3. Brush away stone, rubbish, trash or grass on the surface of the soil. Using a
spade, push it down the surface or topsoil to a depth of 25 centimeters in a
slightly slanting position (as in V) and get a slice of soil sample 2 cm
thick. Using a knife, trim the slice of soil to a bar 34 cm wide. Place this
sample in a container.
4. Get similar samples at random from as many as ten sites and mix them in a
container.
5. Get a composite soil sample of about 1 kg to represent the soil unit area. A
soil unit area is any section of the farm where the soil type, its topography
and vegetation are more or less similar. For areas to be devoted to orchard,
for instance a citrus orchard, get subsoil samples from below the 25 cm down
from where the topsoil sample was taken. A composite subsoil sample is
also required for fruit trees or permanent crops.
6. Air-dry the samples by spreading them on clean paper or plastic sheets under
the shade or indoor areas. Be sure to avoid contaminating the samples and
keep them away from dirt or foreign matters specially cigarette ash. Divide
the representative soil samples into four. Remove soil samples 1 and 3 and
retain soil samples 2 and 4. Repeat the process four times until you obtain
one kilogram.
7. When air-dried, get at least 1 kg from each composite soil sample and place
it separately in a cloth or plastic bag. One kilo air-dried sample is equivalent
to about 3 cans of condensed milk container full of soil.
8. Label the bags properly and have them analyzed using the Soil Test Kit.
The soil pH
The soil pH is a measure of the degree of acidity or alkalinity. A pH of 7 is neutral. The lower the pH ( below 7) the more acidic the soil is. On the other hand, the
higher the pH (above 7) the soil becomes more alkaline.
It is important to know the pH of a soil because the availability of most nutrient
elements for plant growth and occurrence of toxicities of elements is related to soil pH.
46
Most plant nutrients are in readily available form at soil pH ranging from 5.5 to 7.0
hence, most plants prefer to grow within this range. However, nutritional disorders usually appear when pH values become higher or lower. The following shows the nutritional disorders observed in relation to soil pH.
Soil pH
Disorder
Lower than 5.0
Deficiencies of phosphorus, calcium, magnesium, potassium

and molybdenum
Toxicities of aluminum, iron and manganese
Higher than 7.5
Deficiencies of phosphorus, potassium, iron and zinc

Toxicity of boron
The productivity of either highly acidic or highly alkaline soils can be improved using anyone or combination of the following measures:
1. Use plant species/varieties that are tolerant to either highly acidic or highly alkaline soil reaction.
2. Application of lime for acidic soils.
3. Application of gypsum and leaching the soil with good quality water for saline
(salt affected) alkaline soils.
4. Application of fertilizer containing the possible
For lowland rice, if the soil pH is 7.5 or greater the soil is deficient in zinc and either
of the following is recommended:
1. dipping the roots of rice seedling in 2-4% zinc oxide suspension.
2. Mixing with a portion of fertilizer at basal application, 5 kg zinc sulfate per hectare.
To know the soil pH using STK, a CPR solution is first used. The range of this
dye indicator is only from pH 5.06.0. To determine if the soil has higher pH, BTB is
used; or BCG solution to determine if the soil has lower pH.
Using the STK and RST for qualitative soil analyses
There is an easy to follow step by step procedure on how to analyze for the elements in the STK (nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium) and in the RST (magnesium and
calcium). The nitrogen and phosphorus procedures require color matching of the resulting mix of soil and chemicals with a standard color chart provided in the STK. The potassium test is indicated by a cloudy yellowish layer for sufficient level.
For the RST, magnesium sufficiency is characterized by presence of white gelatinous precipitate. Calcium sufficiency is indicated by presence of white precipitate or
turbidity of the resulting soil solution.
47
Using the table of fertilizer recommendation

After knowing whether the soil is low, medium or high in available nitrogen,
phosphorus, and potassium, the tables of Fertilizer Recommendation for Different Crops
should be consulted to find the right amount and kind of fertilizer to use. Tables 1 to 3
are fertilizer recommendations for vegetables, fruit trees and plantation crops, and field
crops, respectively, based on analysis by the Soil Test Kit. Table 4 and 5 give the
equivalent amount of fertilizer materials for those crops usually fertilized on per plant or
per hill basis. In addition, Table 6 gives the equivalent weights of fertilizer materials if
one uses containers commonly found in the farm to measure the amount of fertilizer to
apply.
It is important to emphasize that the result of soil testing is not the sole basis of
fertilizer recommendation. Other factors such as the cost of fertilizer in relation to anticipated price of the product, expected yield, plant response to higher rates of fertilization, climatic conditions and other risk factors in crop production should be considered
by the farmer in formulating the right kind and amount of fertilizer to use. Examples on
how to make a fertilizer recommendation is as follows:
Case 1
Suppose that chemical analyses using the Soil Test Kit indicate that the soil is
low in nitrogen, medium in phosphorus and sufficient in potassium. The crop to be fertilized is ampalaya.
Consulting Table 1 for ampalaya, the fertilizer recommendation for nitrogen
which is low in the soil is 60-120 kg N/ha, for phosphorus which is medium is 30-90 kg
P2O5 ha while there is no need to apply potassium since the soil is sufficient in this nutrient element. Note that for nitrogen, the farmer could choose any amount from 60 to
120 kg N/ha. It is at this point that the farmer should consider the other factors
(mentioned previously) in addition to the result of soil analysis in deciding the final
amount of fertilizer (but within the 60-120 kg N/ha) to use. For instance, if conditions
are such that fertilizers are expensive, market price of ampalaya is low and native variety
(which is not very responsive to fertilizer) is used, it is better for the farmer to select 60
kg N/ha because the risk of lower returns is greater. Similarly, he should choose the
lower rate 30 kg P2O2/ha limit for phosphorus fertilizer.
If the 60 kg N + 30 kg P2O5/ha fertilizer rate is finally chosen, the equivalent
amount in terms of fertilizer material per hill is 14.3 ammonium sulfate and 8.3 g superphosphate as shown in Table 4.
If one uses tansan (softdrinks cap) in measuring the amount of fertilizer to apply
per hill, then by consulting Table 6 the amount of fertilizer ammonium sulfate is equal to
14.3 7.4 = 1.9 or 2 tansans (heaping) per hill. Similarly, the 8.3 g solophos is equiva-
48
lent to 2 tansans heaping full (8.34 = 2.1 or 2) or solophos per hill. Hence, the final fertilizer application is 2 tansans (heaping) full of ammonium sulfate and 2 tansans
(heaping) full of solophos per hill of ampalaya.
Case 2
Suppose that the results of soil analysis using Soil Test Kit indicate that a lowland soil is medium in available soil nitrogen, high in phosphorus and low in potassium.
If rice is to be planted during the dry season then by consulting Table 3, the fertilizer recommendation for rice during the dry season is any amount within the range of 45 to 75
lg N/ha for nitrogen, o to 20 kg P2O5/ha for phosphorus and 30 to 60 kg K2O/ha for
phosphorus and 30 to 60 kg K2O/ha for potassium. If a high yielding variety is to be
planted, the farm is fully irrigated, control of pest and diseases is adequate and high yield
level is expected , the farmer should choose fertilizer rates closer to the upper limit for
each of the nutrient element, e.g. 75 kg N, 20 kg P2O5 and 60 kg K2O per hectare.
If urea (45-0-0), solophos (0-20-0) and muriate of potash (0-0-60) are to be used
as the fertilizer materials the selected fertilizer rate of 75 kg N + 20 kg P2O5 + 60 kg
K2O per hectare is equivalent to:
75/.45 = 166 kg or 3-1/3 bags of urea per hectare
20/20 = 100 kg or 2 bags of solophos per hectare
60/.60 = 100 kg or 2 bags of muriate of potash per hectare
(Note that 1 bag of fertilizer weighs 50 kg)
However, if the variety to be used is not high yielding or not responsive to higher
rates of fertilization, and there are uncertainties as to the adequacy of irrigation, control
of pest and diseases, etc. hence, the yield are expected to be low. Since the risk of lower
returns is high in this situation the farmer should therefore decide on applying the lower
limits of 45 kg N, O kg P2O5 and 30 kg K2O per hectare which is equivalent to 2 bags of
urea and 1 bag muriate of potash.
Proceedings of the Seminar-Workshop on Soil Fertility Mapping. Integration: The Quest for a New Paradigm in Soil Fertility Mapping, Soil Survey Division (1): 4955, 2007
Integration:
The Quest for a New Paradigm
In Soil Fertility Mapping
Rodelio B. Carating
Abstract: Soil fertility mapping based on soil map and using soil profile
sampling is advocated for areas that involve hundreds if not thousands of
hectares. Composite sampling is developed for farm lot areas. Extending
this methodology to cover the whole municipality is tedious, laborious, and
the map output is only good for a few years because of the dynamic system
of the topsoil. The same profile sampling methodology can also be used for
geostatistical analysis through computer-assisted interpolation (kriging) to
come up with isarithmic map of the soil fertility factor if one desires to dispense with the soil map as the basis of delineation.
Key words: profile sampling, composite sampling, kriging, interpolation
Introduction
As we come to a close of this seminar workshop, and listening to all the presentations, there is a clear major issue that we need to resolve.
I have presented earlier the fact that fertility mapping, as far as Soil Survey Division is concerned, should be based on a solid theoretical framework, and that theoretical
framework has been with us for decades, and is now on its fourth edition. I am of course
referring to the Fertility Capability Classification (FCC) by Sanchez, et.al. Those of us
who are familiar with FCC knows that we are talking here of a profile sampling methodology.
Then as a climax to this session, Ms. Incillo presented fertility mapping based on
composite sampling methodology. We will do this for Ms. Incillos fertility mapping
project that is ready to commence in Vintar, Ilocos Sur. It will also be done for Bukidnon fertility mapping.
We in Soil Survey Division, pride ourselves with our map outputs decades and
decades ago, even those completed before the Second World War, telling our clients
who want soil data that these pre-world war maps are still usable today because soils,
although dynamic, they follow geological timespan and not human lifespan. We even
50
Rodelio B. Carating
have the gall to show people our updated soil map of Cavite done in the 90s (1:50,000
scale) compared with the original reconnaissance soil map of Cavite (1:75,000 scale)
done decades earlier and they could hardly see any difference. Of course with soil map
of Bulacan, there will be differences because of new soil series developed and the big
difference in map scale from 1:250,000 (old soil map) to 1:50,000 (new soil map).
The New Paradigm in Soil Fertility Mapping
At any rate, back to our fertility mapping methodology. I have already mentioned earlier as a starting point to this workshop that we let soil fertility people do their
composite sampling for their soil fertility mapping. We in Soil Survey Division have our
own fertility mapping methodology, and that is profile sampling. I do remember while
Offie Gonzales was yet at Soil Survey Division, she would really devote time to compute
weighted average of the laboratory results for each of the soil profiles we collected. If
this was done before, and I am quite sure is being done today, I see no reason why it
should not be done when you changed the title of your survey from soil survey and classification to soil fertility survey.
So what is the new paradigm for soil fertility mapping I am espousing? Simply
have the soil fertility map be based on soil map. First of all, this will reduce the number
of your sample collection. No need to collect 10 composite samples for every 25 hectares. And this even assumes those 25 hectares are uniform. In soil map-based fertility
mapping, only one profile sample per soil mapping unit is required. And you can have
the check auger borings taken at random, the number of which depends on what you actually see in the field. Of course you dig pits and get as many samples as there are layers.
When the laboratory results are released, you compute for the weighted average. And
here is the catch: since we also analyze in the laboratory the subsoil, our map output will
be usable not only for five years, but even for ten years or more. The subsoil contributes
to the nutrient supply of the topsoil, and it represents a more stable soil fertility data
source than the more dynamic topsoil.
The area of your soil mapping unit varies. Thus, we do not have a fix protocol
similar to 10 composite samples for every 25 hectares. As soil surveyors, you know
when the soil changes. It may be the same soil series but there is a change in flooding
class or erosion class or slope class; and hence the need to take a separate sample for
laboratory analysis.
Because we base the soil fertility map on the soil map, when you come to the
field, you have already a prepared map, which like any soil survey work, you need to
validate in the course of field work. In short, there is already a working hypothesis.
Unlike in the fertility mapping by composite sampling methodology, you dont grope in
the dark. You dont enter a site not knowing where is the delineation.
I am sure the immediate reaction to profile sampling as against composite sampling is that we are doing soil survey work. Of course, because we belong to Soil Survey
Integration: The Quest for New Paradigm in Soil Fertility Mapping
51
Division! But instead of doing soil survey for soil classification mapping, we are doing
soil survey for soil fertility mapping. And with profile sampling for fertility mapping, we
are able to validate the soil series or the soil taxonomic classification as well.
Addressing the issue of soil variability
The composite sampling proponents would easily argue that given a computerassisted spatial analysis softwares, it would be easy to map spatial variability because the
sampling points are provided as point data in the map. They might argue, how about for
profile samplingwill this be possible?
This issue has been addressed by Danny Guinto and yours truly way back in the
1990s using GEOSTAT softwares and with the soil survey and classification of Cavite
province as sample data. I think Tess Retamar was involved in this project while the spatial variability study of the Quirino techno-demo farms involved Mario Vinluan, Lita Incillo and Bella Noceda. I will discuss the Quirino project later on.
But the Cavite geostatistical study showed that as long as we have minimum of
20 profile sampling points, we can dispense with the soil map delineation as the basis of
our soil fertility mapping and let the computer do the isarithmic mapping of the soil fertility parameter under consideration. As long as our data are reliable, we can let the computer do the isarithmic mapping for us; and even come up with the complementary standard deviation map. It is just a matter of manually analyzing the semi-variogram and
letting the computer do the kriging process. The spatial distribution of the soil fertility
factor under consideration is automatically produced. GIS softwares such as ILWIS provide for kriging processes as long as our data points are more than sufficient for interpolation to proceed.
So if you are considering spatial variability of the fertility factors, I think this is
just an important note that when we do our profile samplingconsider your auger boring
samples to be submitted for laboratory analysis as individual sample points to be treated
equally as your pit digging samples. Since these are check borings, I know many do not
bother to get samples for laboratory analyses. You either have them analyzed as layers;
but since these are check borings for fertility mapping, you can mix them as equivalent to
a composite sample. Personally, I go for layer by layer analysis and computing for the
weighted average rather than analyzing as a composite sample. The reason is simple:
our pit profile samples are similarly analyzed layer by layer and the weighted average is
computed. When the computer therefore performs kriging operation, it deals only with
weighted average data.
Now to answer the question, what happened to the Quirino geostatistical project?
It was actually a farm lot size study area, only one hectare; grid sampling was intensive at
20 m x 20 m. The analysis involved not only the macro elements but also micro elements. With hundreds of samples analyzed in the laboratory collected at grid method,
how come the computer would not permit kriging? This is illogical.
52
Rodelio B. Carating
Actually, the answer was in the wide standard deviation we got. I dont have the
exact data with me, but just as an example, for Cu data for instance, the lowest analysis
we got was something like 9 ppm and the highest was something like 980 ppm. The rest
of the hundreds of samples lie in-between, obviously too wide spread that even if we
asked the computer to cull the data outliers, still the standard deviation was wide enough.
I think the next lowest data I got for Cu for something like 52 ppm. So even if I cull
these data outliers, the computer still refuses to krige.
We had the samples re-analyzed at the laboratory and still we got similar data. It
should be noted that it was grid sampling. We had no control if Bella for instance got a
soil sample that previously had an animal dung which explained for the very high analysis of the soil fertility factor and she got into another site which was a pathway or the
planting distance and this had not had any fertilizer treatment whatsoever which explained for the very low resulting analysis. So dont assume that because you have hundreds of data in an area, interpolation is seemingly easy as what Ms. Incillo presented
today in her paper. Not only is the composite sampling not appropriate for soil survey
that involves hundreds if not thousands of hectares, interpolating the data between sampling points is going to be extremely difficult especially if the standard deviation is very
high. Believe me, soil fertility mapping based on soil map and using profile sampling is
still the best methodology, not only in terms of accuracy but also in terms of speed, to
accomplish the task we have at hand.
Of course this is not to discourage Ms. Incillo that her methodology is workable
but difficult to accomplish because its theoretical framework is based on a farm-scale soil
sampling method. But you know, Vintar, Ilocos Norte is our first soil fertility mapping
project this year. I am not surprised it follows the methodology of the Laboratory Services Division years earlier, as they initiated an earlier fertility mapping project. We are
dealing not with farm lot sizes but with landscapes, municipalities, and hundreds if not
thousands of hectares. We are Soil Survey Division. We will therefore conduct soil fertility mapping according to soil survey procedures.
Reflecting on our soil fertility map the issue of farm variability
I am surprised that as soil surveyors you are asking how soil fertility maps based
on soil maps can reflect the variability of Farm A whose owner is wealthy enough to afford fertilizers and that of adjacent Farm B who is so poor that he doesnt have any fertilizer input in his farm. You argue as if composite sampling can reflect this.
First of all, the map scale will dictate if the variability of soil fertility between
farms can be reflected or not. Unfortunately at our map scale of 1:50,000, it cannot be
reflected. We are a national soil resource mapping agency. We do not put farm boundaries in our map outputs. While we do mapping at higher than 1:50,000 to reflect farm
variability, this is however, considered Special Soil Investigations. You mean to say that
composite sampling methodology will enable you to reflect this soil fertility variability
between Farmer A and Farmer B? My answer is no, not at our map scale output.
53
Secondly, even if we increase our map scale to 1:25,000 or even 1:10,000, the
fertility variability between Farmer A and Farmer B is not going to be gradient despite
what the best computer-assisted interpolation method would eventually show. The truth
is, it is abrupt. The soil fertility as we move from Farmer A to Farmer B abruptly
changes. If you show me a gradient map, that is an inaccurate map for sure. Dont tell
me as you do your fertility mapping, you will also conduct socio-economic profiling of
the farming community to determine their rate of fertilization so that it can be correlated
with the soil fertility of their farm? We are Soil Survey Division not Agricultural Land
Management Evaluation Division (ALMED). The mapping of the ability of Farmer A to
purchase fertilizers as against that of Farmer B is beyond our mandate. If we want to
include the farmers ability to purchase fertilizers as part of the soil fertility map, we
might as well give fertility mapping to ALMED. As OIC of Soil Survey Division, I
would have nothing of it. I wonder why you want life to be complicated. Soil fertility
mapping is complicated enough and I am not ready to add parameters specially if this is
outside our Soil Survey mandate.
This brings me to my third point. What you want to ultimately accomplish is not
just a soil fertility map but also a fertilizer recommendation map. That is fine, but let us
stick to what it really isa fertilizer recommendation map. We cannot dictate to the
farmers how much fertilizers to use; and this would require a fertility recommendation
map at every farm level every cropping season. This is what precision agriculture is all
about. But we do not have funds for a nationwide precision agriculture. We are a national mapping agency and what we provide is benchmark data. A farmer with good soil
management sense would have his soils analyzed every start of cropping season for a
truly judicious use of fertilizers. Our soil fertility map will tell him where does his farm
stands. A soil survey output is no different from those of television rating surveys or
social weather surveys. If they say Eat Bulaga is the most watched noontime show
based on surveys, and if you watch it, then you are part of the general public. If not, you
are an exception to the rule. That is all. So if Soil Survey Division says your farm is fertile enough, but the laboratory analysis shows that it is no longer fertile, it is not only an
issue of updating your fertilizer recommendation. It is also an issue of introspection why
your farm soil is depleted despite the Soil Survey Divisions assessment that where your
farm soil belongs to is fertile. Perhaps it is about time to look at the intensity of cropping
or other soil fertility management practices that cause fertility depletion or decline. Our
soil fertility map does not tell if Farmer A is rich enough to afford fertilizer inputs or
Farmer B is poor that he cant afford such. What we provide is benchmark data. Fertilizer input is not all that our soil fertility map is all about. There are other stories to tell if
it is a soil survey-based soil fertility map.
Addressing the quality of soil fertility maps
The last topic I would like to discuss in this integration is the quality of our map
outputs. Of course, I can only address this issue if we assume we do fertility mapping
based on soil survey methods and using profile sampling. I do not know how reliable is
the methodology of composite sampling designed for farm-lot sizes being extended to
54
Rodelio B. Carating
hundreds of hectares to cover a municipality, much more a congressional district or a

province.
Poor accuracy of soil information remains a major issue that every soil surveyor
needs to look into. We have to make sure that boundaries of map delineations are comparable with ground truth. We do recognize that this is an inherently difficult situation
most specially for soil mapping because of general anisotropy of soils and the very fact
that the soil is a continuum.
The sources of error in field survey are: (1) age of secondary data, (2) the map
scale, (3) density of observations, (4) accessibility of remote uplands, hillylands, and
highlands, and (4) measurement errors.
The eminent J. A. Zinck (1990), in his Soil Survey: Epistomology of a Vital
Discipline discussed that the response capacity of soil survey rests on four basic pillars:
(1) solid concepts, (2) improved methods, (3) innovative techniques, and (4) creative applications.
Solid concept. Soil survey is an application field of one of the seven main
branches into which soil science is subdivided. It includes soil genesis, classification,
and cartography. This branch of soil science is often called pedology. Despite being an
application discipline, they form scientific basis solid enough to generate an acceptable
quality level of soil information.
An example we can cite is that of Bheshem Ramlal and Kate Beard on alternate
paradigm on mixed variation based Information System for representing soils data and
soil quality information. Another example is the use of geostatistical techniques, originally developed for the mining industry, but eventually applied in the environmental and
soil survey activities. Even in theoretical framework, there are advances in soil survey to
meet the challenge of data quality. But much of these can only be applied with modern
equipment and technologies, yet to make debut appearance in the Philippines. Perhaps
we will have another workshop just on advances in soil survey to be able to discuss these
new paradigms in soil survey work.
Improved methods. The main objective of soil survey is to gather data and generate information on soils, their genesis, properties, distribution, behavior, and potential
uses. On the international scene, soil survey was able to develop its own set of tools and
equipment for more precise observation of soil profile in the field.
For instance, Hengl and Rossiter (2003) developed supervised landform classification to enhance and replace photo interpretation in semi-detailed soil survey.
Innovative techniques. Data acquisition is not limited to field observation alone.
As discussed earlier, a soil surveyor comes to the field with a tentative or preliminary
soil map usually prepared from secondary data which includes not only old soil surveys
55
but also topographic maps and aerial photos. Remote sensed data are now available, and
aside from satellite images, a soil surveyor can also utilize ground penetrating radar
(GPR), and Video Image Analysis (VIA).
Creative applications. Soil survey developed as one of the agricultural sciences
but soil survey information is no longer just limited to agricultural and engineering land
use purposes. Soil survey data is now an important component in environmental sciences, architecture and landscape planning, urban development, hazard and calamity
management.
So there is much work ahead of us, most specially for the year 2008. Vintar,
Ilocos Norte is just going to be the first. Many more are coming. The fertility mapping
of Vintar will teach you many lessons; and I wouldnt be surprised you will have many
questions.
The whole basis of our confusion is to attempt to do precision agriculture with
our soil fertility map outputs. Such kind of work and the attendant procedures is good
for farm-level soil fertility mapping. We are extending into hundreds and thousands of
hectares an objective and a procedure developed for soil fertility mapping at farm level.
Precision agriculture is a type of work beyond our soil survey mandate as a national soil
resource mapping agency. We do not conduct farm level soil surveys, unless it is a Special Soil Investigation. Precision agriculture requires time series data and a detailed level
of soil survey which we cannot provide. We do not have the manpower nor the funds.
No wonder, Buddy Fabula had difficulty convincing officials when he broached this fertility mapping project to his assigned area because the DA-RFU (or was it the LGU?)
was doing exactly the same fertility mapping at 1:1 composite sample per hectare ratio as
against our 1:25. He just couldnt answer how our map output would compete for reliability and usability against their map outputs.
There is only one thing I will tell you. Go back to soil survey work. This is
where you are most familiar. Dont thread on unfamiliar grounds. This is what this
workshop is all about. You are groping in darkness. You want to know how you would
do your fertility mapping. There is only one answer. Since we are Soil Survey Division,
we will do it, the soil survey way.
Literature cited
Zinck, J. A. 1990. Soil survey: epistemology of a vital discipline. ITC Journal: 19904: 335-351. Zincks inaugural address as Professor of Soil Survey at ITC.
56
57
Soil Survey Division News Tidbits

Carating is Soil Survey OIC
I dont intend to rock the boat, a brief but emphatic statement of the installed
Officer-in-Charge of the Soil Survey Division, Mr. Rodelio B. Carating.
An official leave was filed by the Chief of Soil Survey Division, Mr. Dominciano D. Ramos, Jr., effective September 3, 2007. There
were worries, excitement, apprehensions among the Soil Survey staff as to will be assigned as the OIC. Each one named
names but everybody in the end was wrong. On that fateful
September 3, Bureau of Soils and Water Management Director, Silvino Q. Tejada, named Mr. Carating. The feelings of
a few were rocked, some were happy, and others shut their
mouth and waited for developments because it was not fair to
make a pre-judgment. Those who were enthusiastic to work
were hopeful for changes and more actions to happen.
Mr. Carating reported to duty the next day, September 4. His first course of action was to meet the Soil Survey
staff and know the on-going and proposed activities for the
remaining months of the year. Being the leader now and
maybe sensitive to know his environment, Mr. Carating assured that his term ends as
OIC when the Chief reports for duty. I am here because I was assigned and I dont intend to rock the boat, he stated. He will be in the Division to continue what were
started, to support, to coach, and perhaps to start something new.
I myself didnt know what to expect but what I learned is that different managers
have different styles of management. As he continued to speak, he slowly won my enthusiasm to work. He gave words of support and this was proven when he initiated a
workshop for one of the proposed projects on soil fertility mapping. This became the
whistle blow for everybody to work together to successfully mount the workshop, September 20. It was a successful and productive day as everyone worked harmoniously.
Tiny as he is, but he is a man who can make mountains and act like a bullet train.
So, Soil Survey staff, let us move on and get loud while resources are favorable for us!
Welcome, Sir!
Gene A. Briones
58
Soil Survey Activities (fourth quarter, 2007):

Vintar, Ilocos Norte Soil Fertility Mapping. Ms. Lita Incillo and Ms. Eugenia
Briones lead Soil Survey staff for fertility mapping of Vintar. The survey is on a costsharing scheme with the local government. Ilocos Norte of course is known as the birthplace of Pres. Ferdinand E. Marcos. Agriculture is the main livelihood of the people and
garlic is the principal cash crop. The province also grows rice, corn, legumes, root crops,
tobacco, and a variety of fruits and vegetables. Vintar consists of 33 barangays and an
area of 624.85 km2. The population is placed at 29,031.
Bukidnon Soil Fertility Mapping. Nestor Merjilla leads the team to conduct
fertility mapping of the rice soils of Bukidnon. The landlocked province is an agricultural economy. In addition to rice, the province is a major producer of corn, sugar, coffee, rubber, pineapple, tomato, cutflowers, cassava, and other fruits and vegetables. It is
also a major producer of chickens, hogs, and cattle.
Alicia, Zamboanga Sibugay Soil Resources Survey for Sustainable Development. Mario E. Vinluan handles the multi-disciplinary soil resources survey of Alicia in
the Zamboanga Peninsula with Paolo Suministrado assisting as cartographer. The major
crops grown in the area are rice, corn, coconut, rubber, fruit trees, vegetables, tobacco,
coffee, cacao, and root crops.
Cagayan and Ilocos Norte Goal 1 Soil and Land Resources Evaluation and
Suitability Classification. Raymundo Galanta and Ernesto Almendral are part of another multi-disciplinary team involved in the survey of Pagudpod, Ilocos Norte and Cagayan Valley (Ballesteros, Abulig, Pamplona, Sanchez Mira, Sta. Praxedes, Claveria, and
Alacapan) for agribusiness development, specifically suitability assessment for the growing of coconut for biofuels.
Special Soil Investigations (fourth quarter, 2007):

GSIS Compound, Macapagal Avenue, Pasay City. Luisito Costelo assists in
the soil survey and mapping for landscape development of the GSIS property in the reclaimed area.
Romblon State College Campus. Leo Retamar, Noemi Pascual, and Paolo Suministrado conducted detailed soil survey and classification. Map outputs are those for
soils, slope, erosion, flooding, erosion, and suitability rating of ten crops.
Agrarian Reform CommunityItalian Grant. Virgilio Castaeda participated in the validation of DAR areas in Sarangani, Maguindanao and Lanao del Sur for
agricultural development funding by the Italian government.
Other requests. Ernesto Almendral conducted ocular inspection of proposed
SWIP in Bgy. Dianawan, Ma. Aurora Province while Raymundo Galanta and Teresita
Retamar assisted in the Community-Based Watershed Project in Sta. Maria, Ilocos Sur.
Republic of the Philippines

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Silvino Q. Tejada
Director
Wilfredo E. Cabezon
Assistant Director
THE SOIL SURVEY DIVISION

Office of the Chief
1.
Rodelio B. Carating
2.
Ligaya H. Ison
3.
Gina M. Alberto
4.
Paolo Suministrado
5.
Eugenia A. Briones
Officer-In-Charge
Administrative Aide IV
Cartographer I
Cartographer I
Information Systems Research III (Detailed)
Aerial Photo Interpretation Section

1.
Querubin Navero
2.
Noemi M. Pascual
3.
Berna G. Pastor
4.
Mario E. Vinluan
5.
Nestor T. Merjilla
-
Supervising Agriculturist
Agriculturist II
Agriculturist II
Agriculturist II
Agriculturist II
Soil Productivity Rating Section

1.
Raymundo G. Galanta
2.
Ernesto G. Almendral
3.
Bella H. Noceda
4.
Oscar C. Sanganbayan
5.
Sharon de Vera
Senior Agriculturist
Agriculturist II
Agriculturist II (Detailed)
Agriculturist II ( on study leave)
Soil Classification and Correlation Section

1.
Virgilio A. Castaeda Supervising Agriculturist
2.
Henry E. Noceda
3.
Carmelita B. Incillo
Agriculturist II
Soil Survey and Interpretation Section
1.
Clarita D. Bacatio
2.
Leo R. Retamar
3.
Luisito F. Costelo
4.
Salvador A. Fabula
5.
Teresita V. Retamar
6.
Nilo A. Crucena
-
Agriculturist II
Agriculturist II
Agriculturist II
Agriculturist II

Soil Fertility Mapping PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Soil Fertility Mapping PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

BUREAU OF SOILS AND WATER MANAGEMENT

TECHNICAL PUBLICATION NO. 1

SOIL FERTILITY MAPPING

Soil Survey Division

BUREAU OF SOILS AND WATER MANAGEMENT

SOIL FERTILITY MAPPING

Soil Survey Division

Soil Survey Division

SILVINO Q. TEJADA, CESO IV

The Development of Theoretical Framework

Type: texture is the average of plow

Sandy topsoil: loamy sands and sands

Substrata type: used if textural

Definitions and some interpretations

Loamy topsoil: <35% clay but not loamy sand or sand

Clayey topsoil: >35% clay

Organic soils: >12% organic C to a depth of 50 cm or more

Sandy subsoil: texture as in type

Loamy subsoil: texture as in type

Clayey subsoil: texture as in type

Rock or other hard root-restricting layer within 50 cm

As above but layer can be ripped, plowed, or blasted

Modifiers related to soil physical properties

Aquic soil moisture regime; mottles <2 chroma within 50 cm

Ustic or xeric soil moisture regime: dry >60 days consecutive

Aridic or torric soil moisture regime: too dry to grow a crop

> 35% (by volume) of gravel size coarse fragments (2-25 cm in

More than 15% rock outcroppings

High erosion risk

SC, LC, CR, LR

Use BSWM-Soil Survey Division slope ranges

Modifiers related to soil reaction

Sulfidic (cat clays)

Aluminum toxicity for most common

>60% Al saturation within 50 cm, or <35% base saturation of

10-60% Al saturation within 50 cm for extremely acid-sensitive

Calcareous (basic reaction): common

Free CaCO3 within 50 cm

>0.4 S m-1 of saturated extract at 25oC

0.2-0.4 S m-1 of saturated extract at 25oC within 1 m

>15% Na saturation of ECEC within 50 cm

6-15% Na saturation of ECEC within 50 cm

Modifiers related to soil mineralogy

Low nutrient capital reserves (K

<10% weatherable minerals in silt and sand fraction within 50

High P fixation by Fe and Al oxides

As above but soils have been recapitalized with P fertilizers to

As above; potential Fe toxicity if soils waterlogged for long

Within 50 cm pH >10 in 1M NaF, or positive to field NaF test,

P retention between 30% and 90%; medium P fixers

Cracking clays (vertic properties);

>35% clay and >50% of 2:1 expanding clays, or coefficient of

High leaching potential (low buffering capacity, low ECEC)

Amorphous volcanic (X-ray amorphous); high P fixation by allophane

Modifier related to soil biological properties (new)

<80% total organic C saturation in the topsoil compared with

Summary and Conclusion

Major Lowland Rice/Corn Soils of the Philippines

soil series, solum thickness, slickensides , manganese concre-

Major Lowland Rice/Corn Soils of the Philippines and their Characteristics

Bigaa Soil Series

Butuan Soil Series

Candaba Soil Series