Thesis Compiled

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

BRIS soils are made of marine sand deposits. BRIS is actually an acronym for

Beach Ridges Interspersed with Swales. In Peninsular Malaysia, BRIS soils are found

along the east coast states of Peninsular Malaysia, from Kelantan to Mersing in Johor.

Based on the USDA Soil Taxonomy (Soil Survey Staff, 2006), BRIS soils are classified

into 2 orders, Entisols and Spodosols. Entisols are soils which are characterized by their

young nature. This means the soil have an A/C profile, whereas the B horizon has not

formed yet. Spodosols are soils that have undergone podzolization process to form the

spodic horizon. There are already 24 soil series recognized as BRIS soils in Peninsular

Malaysia (Department of Agriculture, 2003).

Right now, the survey conducted by Soil Survey Section from Department of

Agriculture is only on semi-detailed level. Based on the semi-detailed soil map of the

area, we can perform detailed soil survey in order to get more accurate information of

BRIS soils in that particular area. This soil survey was conducted in Cherating area which

is situated in Mukim Sungai Karang, Kuantan, Pahang. This area was chosen because it

has at least 4 different soil series based on semi-detailed soil map by the Department of

Agriculture. The soil series are Merchang, Jambu, Rudua and Baging series.

1

The distance between survey points for detailed soil survey was 200 m

(Department of Agriculture, 1986) which gave the mapping density of 4 ha per survey

point. The objective of the study was to cover 400 ha. Therefore, the minimum survey

points needed was 100 points. After the survey was completed, soil pit for each soil series

was dug to do profile description. This is for the purpose of soil classification based on

USDA Soil Taxonomy (Soil Survey Staff, 2006). Samples were taken according to the

number of horizon described for analysis. Besides soil classification, soil analysis is

important to study the fertility status of the soils and suitable soil amendments required.

We can also study the soil genesis and the soil forming processes that occurs.

After survey was completed, a detailed soil map was plotted, using GIS

(Geographical Information System) software. From the map, we can get information

about soil series distribution, boundary between soil series and total area covered by each

soil series. Combined with the laboratory analysis, we can determine suitable crops for

the area, problems that occurs, fertility status and proper soil management practices.

2

1.1 The Objectives

The objectives of the study were :

1. To perform a detailed soil survey of the area for future development,

2. To study BRIS soils characteristics such as physical, chemical and mineral properties

for land evaluation and fertility status, and

3. To study the genesis and classification of the BRIS soils.

Research Justification

Malaysia is facing the problem of insufficient land for agriculture sector. Therefore, we

must use all available land resources wisely including marginally suitable soils such as

BRIS soils. By studying the distribution and characteristics of BRIS soils, we can suggest

the suitable crops which can tolerate the soil condition and the proper soil management

required.

3

CHAPTER 2

LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 BRIS Soils

BRIS soils are soils that are developed on beach ridges interspersed with swales,

which consist of 2 sets of parallel beach ridge, and swale. They are found along the east

coast states of Peninsular Malaysia, from Kelantan to Mersing in Johor (Figure 2.1). In

the east coast states of Peninsular Malaysia, especially in Kelantan, these two sets of

beach ridges and swale are separated by a large peat swamp (Figure 2.2). The young

beach ridges and swales are characterised by sandy soils with an A/C profile and which

have not undergone podzolization. The soils of old beach ridges are characterized by

sandy textures, excessive drainage and the presence of spodic horizons. The swale

consists of very heterogeneous soils, which are collectively mapped as Rusila Complex

(Department of Agriculture, 2003). There are 95,371 ha of BRIS soils area in Peninsula

Malaysia (Department of Agriculture, 2007). Some of the BRIS soils area has been

cultivated successfully for tobacco, cashew, roselle and other annual crops (Lim, 2002).

4

Figure 2.1 : Distribution of soil types along coastal areas in Peninsular Malaysia

(source : Department of Agriculture, 2005)

5

Figure 2.2 : Simplified diagram of BRIS soil landscape (source : modified from

Shamshuddin, 1990)

A soil survey describes the characteristics of the soil in the given area, classifies

the soils according to a standard system of classification, plot the boundaries of the soils

on a map, and makes predictions about the behavior of the soils. The different uses of the

soils and how the responses of management affecting it are considered. The information

collected in a soil survey helps in the development of land-use plans and evaluates and

predicts the effects of land use on the environment. (Soil Survey Staff, 1993). A detailed

soil survey is often carried out on a small area for specific purposes, for instance, to

determine the uniformity of soils for fertilizer programs (Paramananthan, 1987).

2.2 Characteristics of BRIS soils

BRIS soils are considered as problem soils for agriculture. According to Lim

(2002), the BRIS areas contain infertile soils which are composed predominantly of inert

6

sand particles. The sandy nature of these soils results in low inherent soil status, poor

nutrient and water holding capacities, excessive drainage, high surface temperatures and

evapotranspiration and a very high moisture stress. The lowlying swales are prone to

flooding during the monsoon. Although some of the BRIS areas have been cultivated

successfully for tobacco, cashews, roselle and other annual crops, they constitute some of

the most under-utilized land in the country.

2.2.1 Physical properties

Texture class of BRIS soils is mostly sand. Faridah and Abdullah (1991), found

that BRIS soil texture is sandy to loamy sand and contains more than 90% sand, while the

percentage of clay is low i.e. less than 10%. According to Shamshuddin (1990), BRIS

soils contain 90.8% sand, 5.8% silt and 3.4 % clay and have single grains structure or

better known as structureless. The consistency of this kind of texture is loose. All these

criteria will make the drainage of the soil excessive. According to drainage classes used

by Department of Agriculture Peninsular Malaysia, this would fall into class 9, i.e. water

removed very rapid from the soils. At 0.1 bar tension, the water holding capability of

Munchong series (Oxisols) in 50 cm depth is 51.6% (volume/volume), while for BRIS

soils in the same depth are only 12.7% (Mohd Zainuri, 1981). The comparisons between

physical characteristics of different BRIS soil series are shown in Table 2.1.

7

Table 2.1 : The physical properties of BRIS soils

Soil Series

Sand (%)

Silt (%) Clay (%)

Depth to

spodic

layerCoarse Medium Fine

Baging 0.56 61.85 35.8 1.54 0.25 -

Rudua 2.38 21.20 71.98 4.11 0.33 0.5-1.0

Rusila 27.04 11.33 27.40 12.32 21.91 -

Rompin 2.70 2.30 94.70 0.10 0.20 -

Rhu Tapai <0.50 20.25 72-75 1-4 <0.50 <0.50

Jambu 33.57 62.15 2.92 1.04 0.32 >1.50

Source : Wahab (1982)

Organic matter content in BRIS soils is differentiated by the presence of spodic

horizon. Entisols which does not have spodic horizon has low organic matter. Spodosols

in the other hand have high organic matter content in their spodic horizon (Bh, Bir or Bs).

2.2.2. Chemical properties

Very low clay content and organic matter in BRIS soils results in low cation

exchange capacity (CEC) of the soil. Therefore, available nutrients for plants are also

low. pH of these soils is around 5 which is relatively normal for soils in Malaysia.

Salinity is not a problem in BRIS soils as this study proves that the electrical conductivity

8

of few series is low. Like CEC, the exchangeable bases of BRIS soils are also low. Table

2.2.1 and 2.2.2 shows chemical characteristics of few BRIS soils.

2.3 Formation of BRIS soils

BRIS soils are formed from marine sediments and can be found mainly along the

coastal states of Peninsular Malaysia (Faridah and Abdullah, 1991). They are at the

elevation between 1 to 5 meters above sea level. The BRIS landscape is common in

Peninsular Malaysia, Sabah and Sarawak. In Peninsular Malaysia, it forms the dominant

landscape in the coastal areas of the east coast states of Peninsular Malaysia, stretching

from Kelantan in the north to Johor in the south. The alternating sandy beach ridges and

swales are found as far inland as 10 km from the present-day coastline. The BRIS

landscape is not extensive and is not well developed along the west coast of Peninsular

Malaysia and is poorly expressed except on the Island of Langkawi.

9

Table 2.2.1 : Chemical properties of BRIS soils

Soil series

Electrical

conductivity

(ds/m)

pHOrganic

carbon (%)

Total nitrogen

(%)C/N ratio

H2O (1:1) CaCl2 (1:2) KCl (1:1)

Rompin 0.01 5.4-5.8 5.2-5.6 5.1-5.5 0.08-0.61 0.010-0.500 8-16

Baging 0.01 4.2-5.0 4.2-4.7 4.1-4.8 0.02-0.11 0.002-0.140 10-20

Rudua 0.01 4.1-5.5 4.0-4.9 4.0-4.8 0.09-5.59 0.010-0.090 5-30

Jambu 0.01 4.5-5.8 4.3-4.9 4.3-4.7 0.07-1.11 0.010-0.025 13-40

Rusila 0.01 4.1-5.2 4.0-4.7 4.1-4.8 0.01-3.80 0.010-0.120 1-30

This data use compiled from Ives (1967), Othman and Carlisle (1986) and Wong (1979)

10

Table 2.2.2 : Chemical properties of BRIS soils (cont.)

Soil series

Exchangeable basesTotal

exchangeable

bases

Extractable

acidityCEC

Base

saturationCa Mg Na K

---------------------------------------------------------cmolc/kg--------------------------------------------------------- %

Rompin 0.05-0.48 0.02-0.54 0.07-0.11 0.03-0.11 1.71-4.80 nd 1.71-4.80 14-26

Baging 0.05-0.60 0.16-0.40 0.01-0.30 0.01-0.40 1.00-5.30 6.0-14.5 1.96-3.74 10-38

Rudua 0.02-1.40 0.01-1.56 0-0.28 0-0.34 0.70-2.20 1.8-334.0 1.52-33.61 1-38

Jambu 0.18-12.4 0.02-0.58 0.02-0.20 0-0.20 1.00-18.60 1.3-162.3 2.30-16.36 1-44

Rusila 0.16-1.20 0.05-1.60 0.10-0.97 0-0.82 0.80-3.60 10.0-339.5 2.55-34.18 1-20

These were summarized from Ives (1967), Othman and Carlisle (1986) and Wong (1979)nd = not determined

11

2.4 Mineralogy

Study by Mohd Zainuri (1981) using X-ray diffraction method showed that the

main mineral present is mica (3.33, 5.0 and 10 Å) in the A horizon of Baging and Rhu

Tapai series. In the A horizon of Jambu Series, quartz (4.26 and 3.33 Å) is the main

mineral. According to Wong (1979), the expected main mineral in BRIS soils is quartz,

followed by feldspars, hornblende, opaque and mica.

2.5 Soil suitability

Soil suitability classification used in Malaysia is based on system developed by

Wong (1986). According to this system, the soils are divided into 5 classes (Table 2.3)

and many subclasses. Soil suitability classes were determined based on the degree of

severity of soil limitations. The degrees of severity are shown in Table 2.4.

Table 2.3 : Description of soil suitability classes

Suitability classes Description

Class 1 Soils without limitation or just minor limitations to plant growth.

Class 2 Soils that have one or more moderate limitations to plant growth.

Class 3 Soils that have one serious limitation to plant growth.

Class 4 Soils that have more than one serious limitation to plant growth.

Class 5 Soils that have at least one very serious limitation to plant growth.

(source : Wong, 1986)

12

Table 2.4 : Degree of severity of soil limitations

Degrees of severity Descriptions

Very serious Limitations that stops plant growth and unsuitable for crop

production.

Serious Limitations that not affect all plants. Only few sensitive plants can

not grow in this type of soil.

Moderate Limitations that only affect few very sensitive plant. For other

plants, this limitation can be overcome with good soil management

practices.

Minor Limitations that only influence few crops. It only affects the yield

but not the plant growth.


The subclasses show the characteristics of soil limitations that classified into nine

factors. The factors are shown in Table 2.5.1 and 2.5.2. There are three level of soil

suitability for crop production. The levels are Suitable (S), Moderately Suitable (M) and

Unsuitable (U). The descriptions of soil-crop suitability levels are shown in Table 2.6.

13

Table 2.5.1 : Soil limitations to plant growth

Symbol Kind of LimitationDegree of Severity

Very Serious Serious Moderate Minor

a Depth to acid sulfate layer

- 0-25 cm (0-10 inches) from soil surface

>25-50 cm (10-20 inches) from soil surface


c Depth to compact layer

0-25 cm (0-10 inches) from soil surface




D

Drainage-

Excessively drained to somewhat excessively drained

- -

d Very poorly drained to somewhat poorly drained

Imperfectly drained to somewhat imperfectly drained

Moderately well drained

G Gradient >200 slope >12-200 slope >6-120 slope >2-60 slope

N

Nutrient imbalance

- Toxicity caused by high content of certain elements

- -

n - - CEC <10 cmol(+)/ kg soil CEC >10-15 cmol(+)/ kg soil

o Thickness of organic horizon

- >125 cm thickness from soil surface

>50-125 cm thickness from soil surface

>25-50 cm thickness from soil surface


14

Table 2.5.2 : Soil limitations to plant growth (cont.)

Symbol Kind of LimitationDegree of Severity

Very Serious Serious Moderate Minor

R

% of rock abundance at ≥ 25 cm layer

>80% from soil surface

>55-80% from soil surface till >50 cm depth

>35-55% from soil surface till >50 cm depth

>15-35% from soil depth till 100 cm depth

r - >80% from 25 cm below soil surface

>75% from 50 cm below soil surface

or>55-80% from 25 cm below soil surface

>80% from 75 cm below soil surface



S Salinity >4 ds/m >2-4 ds/m >1-2 ds/m >0.5-1 ds/m

T

Texture and structure

- Coarse texture and structureless or weak structure

Medium to coarse texture and weak structure

-

t - Fine texture and massive structure, coarse and firm structure

Moderate to fine texture and weak structure

-


15

Table 2.6 : Level of soil-crop suitability

Symbol Description

S Suitable

Soils that did not have any limitation or only have few limitations to crop

growth and yield. Only moderate kind of management needed e.g.:

application of fertilizers and soil amendments.

M Marginally Suitable

Soils that have few limitations which can affect plant growth and

production. High management inputs are needed to get good yield. E.g.:

areas that have poor drainage condition need good drainage system to

overcome the problem.

U Unsuitable

Soils that have serious limitations for plant growth and production. Only

acceptable yield produced with high level of management and huge capital.

E.g.: very steep area or flooding area.


16

CHAPTER 3

MATERIALS AND METHODS

3.1 Location

The study was conducted in Cherating, Mukim Sungai Karang, Kuantan, Pahang

(Figure 3.1 and 3.2). The area is situated at Malaysian RSO coordinate from 451000 mN

to 452800 mN (4o 04’ 44.0” to 4o 05’ 42.7” N) and from 596800 mE to 599400 mE (103o

21’ 58.9” to 103o 23’ 23.1” E). Total area surveyed was about 400 hectares. This area

was chosen because it has at least 4 different soil series based on semi-detailed soil map

from Department of Agriculture Peninsular Malaysia. This area also has good access as it

is close to main road and there is also off road tracks within the survey area.

Figure 3.1 : Location of the study area

17

Figure 3.2 : Topography map of study area (Source : Department of Survey and Mapping

Malaysia, 1992)

3.2 Soil Survey Method

To perform detailed soil survey, the distance between survey points is 200 m, making a

density of 4 hectares per survey point (Figure 3.3). For an area of 400 hectares, at least

100 survey points are needed to complete the detailed soil survey. These survey points

were plotted on a map using Geographical Information System (GIS) software. The

software used was MapInfo Professional 7.0 available at the Department of Land

Management, Faculty of Agriculture, UPM. The plotted coordinates of survey points then

was transferred to handheld Global Positioning System (GPS). The GPS used was

18

Garmin GPSMap 60CSx. To transfer the coordinates from computer to the GPS, Garmin

MapSource software was used. Using the GPS, survey points in the area can be found

easily. At each survey points, soil sample was taken using auger. According to Tables to

the Identification of Soils in Peninsular Malaysia (Department of Agriculture, 2003) in

order to determine the soil series for BRIS soils, 3 main characteristics are used. Those

characteristics are the soil texture, depth to spodic or buried horizon and drainage class. A

soil map was plotted using MapInfo Professional 7.0 software based on the information

get from the survey points.

Figure 3.3 : Location of survey points within study area

19

3.3 Soil Pits

Soil pit or pedon for each soil series was dug after the soil survey was finished. The soil

pit was used to do soil profile description. This is for the purpose of soils taxonomy

classification based on system developed by United States Department of Agriculture

(Soil Survey Staff, 2006). The dimension of the soil pits is about 1.5 m x 1.5 m x 1.5 m.

Features that being described were soil colour, soil texture, soil structure, pedological

features and the boundary between the soil horizons. Samples from each horizon were

taken for laboratory analyses.

3.4 Soil Analyses

3.4.1 Sample Preparation

Soil samples were air-dried for a week. The dried soils then were ground and passed

through 2 mm sieve. This was to separate the soil from gravels and coarse roots.

3.4.2 Particle Size Distribution

This analysis was to determine the percentage of clay, silt and sand in the soil for soil

texture determination. Organic matter was removed from the soil by heating with 30% of

hydrogen peroxide (H2O2). For dissolution of iron and aluminium oxides, 1M

hydrochoric acid (HCl) was used. Sand fraction was seperated by using 50 µm sieve.

20

Dispertion of silt (2 µm – 50 µm) and clay (<2 µm) was done using calgon solution. The

fraction was separated successive sedimentation.

3.4.3 Soil pH

Soil pH was determined both in water and 1M KCl. For pH water, ten grams of soil was

mixed with 25 ml of deionized water in plastic vials. The plastic vials were shaken for

about 1 minute and left standing overnight (24 hours). The next day, the samples were

shaken for a while and after the soil had settled, the pH was determined using calibrated

pH meter. Same method was used for pH KCl.

3.4.4 Exchangeable Al

Five grams of soil was mixed with 50 ml 1N of potassium chloride (KCl) in plastic vials.

The mixture was shaked for 30 minutes. The supernatant was filtered with Whatman no.

42 filter paper. The extractant was analyzed using atomic absorption spectrometer (AAS)

3.4.5 Exchangeable Cations and Cation Exchange Capacity

Ashless floc and a cut of filter paper were put inside leaching tube. Ten grams of

soil was added on the top of filter paper. Then, another cut of filter paper was put on the

top of the soil. The soil was leached using 100 ml of 1N ammonium acetate (NH4OAc),

pH 7.0 for about 6 to 7 hours. The leachate was collected in 100 ml volumetric flask. At

21

the end of leaching, the volume was make up to 100 ml. Ca, Mg, Na, and K were

determined using AAS.

The same soil in the leaching tube was leached using 100 ml of 80% etahnol. The

ethanol lechate was discarded. The soil was leached again this time with 1N potassium

sulphate (K2SO4) for 5 to 6 hours to remove the adsorbed NH4+ ions from the soil

colloidal surface. The leachate was collected in 100 ml volumetric flask. Amount of NH4+

ions which equals the CEC was determined using auto analyser.

3.4.6 Total Nitrogen

One gram of soil and 10 ml of concentrated sulphuric acid (H2SO4) was mixed in

digestion tube (Kjeldahl Method). The mixture was let to stand for 30 minutes with

constant shaking. Then, 0.3 g of sodium thiosulphate (Na2S2O3) were added to the tube

and heated in fumehood till smoke can be observed at the neck of digestion tube. The

tube was cooled down before 1 tablet of Kjeldahl catalyst was added and the digestion

continued till the mixture become grayish white. After the mixture cooled, 5 ml of

deionized water was added. All the mixture then poured in 100 ml volumetric flask. The

digestion tube then, rinsed few times using deionized water and the rinsed solution

poured in the same volumetric flask. Finally, the mixture was filtered with filter paper

and the total N determined using auto analyser.

22

3.4.7 Available P

Available P was determined by the method of Bray and Kurtz. Two grams of soil were

put in test tube. Fourteen ml of extracting solution (0.03N NH4F and 0.1N HCl) were

poured in the test tube. The test tube was closed with parafilm. Then, the test tube was

shaken for about 45 seconds using wrist inversion technique. The extracts were filtered

using whatman no. 42 filter paper into plastic vials. The P was determined using auto

analyser.

3.4.8 Total Carbon

Total carbon was determined using carbon analyser (LeCO).

3.4.9 Micronutrients and Heavy Metals

Five grams of soil were put in conical flask. Then, 25 ml of extracting solution (0.05N

HCl in 0.025N H2SO4) were added in the flask. The flask was covered with parafilm and

shaked using shaker at 180 oscillations per minute for 15 minutes. After that, the

suspensions were filtered through Whatman no. 42 filter paper. Using AAS, the filtrate

can be analysed for Fe, Mn, Zn, Cu, Ni, and Cd.

23

3.4.10 Mineralogical Analysis

Clay and silt from mechanical analysis were taken for X-ray diffraction. Both particles

were mixed together since the clay content is very low i.e. less than 2.1%. X-ray was

conducted using X-ray diffractometer (Philips X’pert Pro).

24

CHAPTER 4

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

4.1. Soil Types

There are 4 soil series found in the study area (Figure 4.1). The soil series are Baging,

Jambu, Merchang and Rhu Tapai series. Merchang series is the most dominant soil series

in this area followed by Jambu, Rhu Tapai and Baging series. The distribution of the soil

series are shown by Figure 4.1 and Table 4.1.

Figure 4.1 : Detailed soil map of the study area

25

Table 4.1 : Legend of soil map

Symbol Soil Series Terrain Area (Ha) %

BGG/1 Baging 1 61.62 15.40

JBU/1 Jambu 1 91.05 22.75

MCG/1 Merchang 1 168.75 42.16

RTI/1 Rhu Tapai 1 78.82 19.69

TOTAL 400.24 100.00

The terrain class in this area is very uniform i.e. only flat terrain. According to

Department of Agriculture (2003), standard terrain classes used in Malaysia are as shown

in Table 4.2.

Table 4.2 : Standard terrain classes used in Malaysia

Terrain Class Slope (0) Topography

1 0-2 Flat

2 2-6 Undulating

3 6-12 Rolling

4 12-20 Hilly

5 20-25 Very hilly

6 25-30 Steep

7 >30 Very steep

(Source : Department of Agriculture, 2003)

26

Soil profile description was done for all the soil series. Samples were taken from each

horizon for analyses. The location of soil pedons are shown in Figure 4.2.

Figure 4.2 : Location of soil pedons

4.2. Soil Physical Properties

4.2.1 Colour

Soil colour is the first indicator when doing soil profile description. There are 2 factors

influencing the soil color i.e. organic matter and iron (Fe) content. Table 4.3 shows that

higher organic matter content results in darker soil colour. Soils with high Fe content

tends to have more brownish colour. This is shown by Table 4.4. In Rhu Tapai series,

27

although Bir horizon has higher Fe content (14.3%) than Bs horizon (7.49%), the colour

of Bs horizon is darker. This is because the organic matter content of Bs is higher

(1.07%) compared to Bir horizon (0.32%)

4.2.2 Texture

Mechanical analysis showed that all soil series have more than 95% of sand and less than

5% clay. According to texture classes used by Department of Agriculture (2003), all the

soil series have sandy texture. The results are shown in Table 4.5.

4.2.3 Structures

Because of the sandy texture, all soil series are structureless or also known as single

grained, except for the spodic horizon in Rhu Tapai Series which has sub-angular blocky

structures. This is because of the accumulation of organic matter and Fe at that horizon

that formed cementation in that horizon.

4.2.4 Consistency

Consistency of all soil series is loose. This is due to the sandy texture of the soil.

However, there is an exception in the spodic horizon in Rhu Tapai Series. The

consistency of this horizon is firm due to the accumulation of organic matter and Fe.

28

Table 4.3 : Soil Colour and Organic Matter contents

Merchang Series Jambu Series Rhu Tapai Series Baging Series

Horizon ColourO. M.

%Horizon Colour

O. M. %

Horizon ColourO. M.

%Horizon Colour

O. M. %

A Dark gray

(10YR 4/1)

0.45 A Dark gray

(10YR 4/1)

0.49 A Gray(10YR

6/1)

0.38 Ap Grayish brown

(10YR 5/2)

1.76

C1 Grayish brown (10YR

5/2)

0.17 E1 Gray(10YR

6/1)

0.16 E Light gray(10YR

7/2)

0.18 C1 Brown (10YR 5/3)

0.61


5/2)

0.07 E2 Light gray

(10YR 7/1)

0.07 Bs Dark yellowish

brown (10YR

3/4)

1.07 C2 Yellowish brown

(10YR 5/6)

0.34

C3 Light gray

(10YR 7/1)

0.05 E3 White(10YR

8/2)

0.03 Bir Yellowish brown (10YR

5/6)

0.32 C3 Brownish yellow

(10YR 6/6)

0.25

C4 Brownish yellow

(10YR 6/6)

0.17

29

Table 4.4 : Soil Colour and Iron (Fe) contents

Merchang Series Jambu Series Rhu Tapai Series Baging Series

Horizon ColourFree iron (%)




A Dark gray

(10YR 4/1)

0.27 A Dark gray

(10YR 4/1)

0.41 A Gray(10YR

6/1)

0.93 Ap Grayish brown

(10YR 5/2)

12.56


5/2)

0.16 E1 Gray(10YR

6/1)

0.38 E Light gray(10YR

7/2)

0.37 C1 Brown (10YR 5/3)

10.99


5/2)

0.11 E2 Light gray

(10YR 7/1)

0.18 Bs Dark yellowish

brown (10YR

3/4)

7.49 C2 Yellowish brown

(10YR 5/6)

10.21

C3 Light gray

(10YR 7/1)

0.24 E3 White(10YR

8/2)

0.57 Bir Yellowish brown (10YR

5/6)

14.30 C3 Brownish yellow

(10YR 6/6)

8.61

C4 Brownish yellow

(10YR 6/6)

9.02

30

Table 4.5 : Result of mechanical analysis

Soil Series

HorizonDepth (cm)

Granulometric Composition (%)

Clay <2 µm

Fine silt 2-20 µm

Coarse silt 20-50 µm

V. fine sand 50-100 µm

Fine sand

100-250 µm

Medium sand 250-500 µm

Coarse sand 500 µm - 2

mmTexture

Merchang A 0-10 0.7 0.0 0.6 0.8 5.7 36.2 56.0 SandC1 10-30 0.1 0.3 0.3 0.4 4.6 34.1 60.2 SandC2 30-70 0.5 0.0 0.3 0.5 6.2 32.2 60.3 SandC3 70-100 0.6 0.0 0.3 0.2 4.0 33.0 61.9 Sand

Jambu A 0-15 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.5 10.0 23.7 64.9 SandE1 15-35 0.5 0.0 0.6 0.9 10.8 29.6 57.6 SandE2 35-70 0.6 0.4 0.3 0.4 7.8 30.5 60.0 SandE3 70-100 0.8 0.1 0.3 0.5 11.9 30.2 56.2 Sand

Rhu Tapai

A 0-10 0.1 2.1 0.3 0.8 46.3 47.0 3.4 SandE 10-45 0.1 1.8 0.2 0.4 37.0 56.0 4.5 SandBs 45-55 0.7 0.0 0.3 0.7 65.5 32.1 0.7 SandBir 55-100 0.8 0.0 0.1 0.4 55.5 42.3 0.9 Sand

Baging Ap 0-10 2.1 0.0 0.3 1.2 84.1 12.2 0.1 SandC1 10-20 1.0 0.0 0.1 0.7 87.1 11.1 0.0 SandC2 20-50 0.9 0.0 0.1 0.9 86.0 12.0 0.1 SandC3 50-75 0.8 0.1 0.2 0.6 78.2 20.1 0.0 SandC4 75-100 0.6 0.0 0.2 1.0 85.1 13.0 0.1 Sand

31

4.3 Soil Chemical Properties

Soil chemical properties are very important in order to evaluate the fertility status of

the soil. The soil chemical properties of the soils are shown in Table 4.6 and 4.7. The

comparisons was done with data by Department of Agriculture (Table 4.8)

32

Table 4.6 : Result of Chemical Analyses

Soil Series Horizon Depth1N NH4OAc cmol (+)/kg soil Base

saturation (%)

Exchangeable Al cmol(+)/kg soilCEC

Exchangeable cationTEB

Ca Mg K NaMerchang A 0-10 1.95 0.08 0.04 0.01 0.03 0.16 8.14 0.25

C1 10-30 0.80 0.04 0.02 0.01 0.03 0.10 12.09 0.28C2 30-70 0.54 0.05 0.01 0.01 0.03 0.10 17.58 0.34C3 70-100 0.22 0.14 0.01 0.01 0.03 0.18 83.46 0.26

Jambu A 0-15 1.96 0.07 0.03 0.01 0.03 0.13 6.82 0.32E1 15-35 0.38 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.03 0.07 17.46 0.28E2 35-70 0.37 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.03 0.06 16.30 0.34E3 70-100 0.29 0.02 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.08 28.41 0.31

Rhu Tapai A 0-10 1.41 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.03 0.07 4.78 0.43E 10-45 0.70 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.03 0.05 7.27 0.47Bs 45-55 7.29 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.03 0.05 0.67 0.52Bir 55-100 2.13 0.00 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.06 2.80 0.52

Baging Ap 0-10 5.18 0.06 0.11 0.04 0.03 0.23 4.54 0.72C1 10-20 2.79 0.01 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.11 3.86 0.66C2 20-50 2.75 0.07 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.13 4.71 0.57C3 50-75 2.46 0.11 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.16 6.58 0.56C4 75-100 2.29 0.04 0.01 0.05 0.03 0.13 5.61 0.64

33

Table 4.7 : Result of Chemical Analyses (cont.)

Soil Series Horizon DepthAvailable P

(ppm)C

(%)N

(%)O. M. (%)

C/N ratio

pH Electrical Conductivity

(dS/m)

Free iron (%)H2O KCl

Merchang A 0-10 1.54 0.26 0.03 0.45 8.70 4.89 3.50 0.131 0.014C1 10-30 1.66 0.10 0.02 0.17 3.98 5.16 3.92 0.107 0.009C2 30-70 1.74 0.04 0.03 0.07 1.51 5.95 5.15 0.082 0.006C3 70-100 1.70 0.03 0.03 0.05 1.02 6.58 6.54 0.140 0.013

Jambu A 0-15 1.58 0.28 0.04 0.49 7.95 4.80 3.49 0.079 0.022E1 15-35 1.71 0.09 0.03 0.16 3.51 5.13 4.07 0.067 0.020E2 35-70 1.55 0.04 0.03 0.07 1.48 5.28 4.45 0.091 0.010E3 70-100 1.57 0.02 0.02 0.03 0.68 5.60 4.58 0.062 0.031

Rhu Tapai A 0-10 1.87 0.22 0.03 0.38 6.35 5.25 4.07 0.078 0.050E 10-45 1.78 0.11 0.03 0.18 3.72 5.35 4.47 0.074 0.020Bs 45-55 2.13 0.62 0.04 1.07 14.49 5.36 4.45 0.083 0.402Bir 55-100 1.70 0.19 0.03 0.32 6.01 5.56 4.65 0.091 0.768

Baging Ap 0-10 1.80 1.02 0.06 1.76 17.99 4.88 3.56 0.171 0.674C1 10-20 1.83 0.35 0.04 0.61 8.04 5.21 4.11 0.128 0.590C2 20-50 1.86 0.20 0.04 0.34 5.60 5.24 4.34 0.110 0.548C3 50-75 1.56 0.15 0.03 0.25 4.85 5.26 4.39 0.093 0.462C4 75-100 1.56 0.10 0.03 0.17 3.16 5.40 4.37 0.114 0.484

34

Table 4.8 : Chemical Properties of a Fertile Soil

Chemical Properties Norm

pH 5.5

Organic Matter (%) >5

N (%) >1

Available P (ppm) >45

K* >1.4

Ca* >4

Mg* >10

Fe* >15

CEC* >20

Base Saturation (%) >75

*cmol(+)/kg soil

(Source : Department of Agriculture, 2005)

4.3.1 pH

Soil pH influences plant growth by controlling the nutrient availability. Most nutrients

are available at pH 5.5. The lowest pH value is 4.8 in the A horizon of Jambu Series.

The highest pH is 6.6 in the C3 horizon of Merchang Series. Overall, the pH values

for these soils are considered good.

35

4.3.2 Exchangeable Bases

Calcium (Ca), magnesium (Mg), and potassium (K) are macronutrients that really

important in plant growth. Based on data from Department of Agriculture (Table 4.8),

the Ca, Mg and K content in these soils are very low.

4.3.3 Cation Exchange Capacity

Generally, the CEC of these soils is low i.e. less than 10 cmol(+)/kg soil. This is

because of the soil texture which is dominated by sand that has no charge. Low

organic matter content also makes CEC low. The highest CEC obtained from the

analysis is from spodic horizon of Rhu Tapai series which is 7.29 cmol(+)/kg soil.

This is because of accumulation of organic matter in that horizon. Low CEC means

that the capacity of the soil to hold nutrients is very low. This makes the soil infertile

for agriculture activities.

4.3.4 Organic Matter

All A horizons of the soil series have higher organic matter content compared with

other horizons, except for the spodic horizon in Rhu Tapai Series. Higher organic

matter content in A horizons is from addition process i.e. decomposition of litter and

dead plant roots in the soil surface. For the spodic horizon (Bs) in Rhu Tapai Series,

the organic matter is high due to the accumulation of organic matter that leached out

from the E horizon. The lowest organic matter content is at E3 horizon in Jambu

Series (0.03%) while the highest is at Ap horizon in Baging Series (1.76%).

36

Department of Agriculture (2005) suggested that the organic matter content of a

fertile soil should be more than 5% (Table 4.8). Therefore, the organic matter content

in these soils is considered low.

4.3.5 Nitrogen

Nitrogen (N) content that considered sufficient for plant growth is 0.2%

(Shamshuddin, 1990), while Department of Agriculture, (2005) suggested that N

content in soil should be more than 1% to consider the soil as a fertile soil (Table 4.8).

Results of analysis shows that the lowest N content is at horizon C1 of Merchang

Series and horizon E3 of Jambu Series (0.025%), while the highest is at Ap horizon in

Baging Series (0.057%). This means that the N content in these soils is very low.

4.3.6 Available P

High organic matter in spodic horizon results in high available P in that horizon

(Shamshuddin, 1990). This explains why the highest available P (2.13 ppm) is found

at Bs horizon in Rhu Tapai Series. Fifteen ppm of available P is considered enough

for plant growth (Shamshuddin, 1990). Department of Agriculture (2005), suggests

that a fertile soil should have more than 45 ppm of available P (Table 4.8). Based on

these two statements, we can conclude that the available P content of these soils is

also very low.

37

4.3.7 Exchangeable Al

Aluminium (Al) is also known as acid metal because it can increase the soil acidity.

To overcome acidity caused by Al, soil pH must be raised to more that 5. This is

because, at pH 5 and above, Al will be precipitated to form gibbsite [Al(OH)3].

Referring to the soil analysis, the exchangeable Al in these soil is low i.e. less than 1

cmol(+)/kg soil. The highest value is 0.723 cmol(+)/kg soil at Ap horizon in Baging

Series while the lowest is 0.246 cmol(+)/kg soil at A horizon in Merchang Series.

This means that Al is not a problem in these soils.

4.3.8 Free Iron

Iron (Fe) is one of the micronutrients for plant growth. However, excessive content of

Fe can also increase the soil acidity. Lowest Fe content is at C2 horizon in Merchang

Series (0.006%) while the highest is at Bir horizon in Rhu Tapai Series (0.768%). Fe

also influences the colour development of soil profile. The relationship between Fe

content and soil colour has been discussed earlier (Section 4.2.1).

4.3.9 Electrical Conductivity

The electrical conductivity or better known as EC measures the salinity of the soil.

For optimal plant growth, the value of EC in soil must be less than 2 dS/m. The

highest EC value recorded for these soils is only 0.17 dS/m. Therefore, salinity is not

a problem in these soils.

38

4.3.10 Micronutrients

Besides Fe, three other micronutrients were also determined. The micronutrients are

manganese (Mn), zinc (Zn) and copper (Cu). Micronutrients are only needed by plants

in small amount. The content of micronutrients in these BRIS soils is low.

4.3.11 Heavy Metals

Four elements of heavy metals (Cd, Cu, Ni, and Zn) were analyzed and compared

with the ‘Malaysian Investigation Level’ (Zarcinas et al., 2004). The results show that

the heavy metals content in these soils do not exceed the ‘Investigation Level’

meaning that the soils are not contaminated. The comparisons between heavy metal

content in the A horizons of the soils with ‘Malaysian Investigation Level’ are shown

in Table 4.9.

Table 4.9 : Comparisons between heavy metals content in A horizons of BRIS soils

with Malaysian Investigation Level

ElementsMerchang

Series

Jambu

Series

Rhu Tapai

Series

Baging

Series

Investigation

Level

mg/kg

Cd 0.0357 0.056 0.054 0.078 0.30

Cu tr 0.013 0.011 0.070 50

Ni 0.0848 0.015 0.089 0.062 45

Zn 0.135 0.152 0.081 0.155 95

*tr : Traced

39

4.4 Soil Mineralogical Properties

X-ray diffraction from top soils (A horizons) were done using silt plus clay as the clay

content of these soils was very low i.e. less than 2.1 %. This sample was dominated

by silt. Therefore, there was no clay minerals such as mica and kaolinite detected. The

x-ray diffactograms are shown in Figure 4.3 to 4.6 while the summary of minerals

presents in the samples is shown in Table 4.10.

Table 4.10 : Type of Minerals present in The A Horizon of BRIS Soils

Soil Series d-spacing (Å) Mineral

Merchang 3.34 Quartz

2.80 Ilmenite

3.45 Anatase

6.87 Feldspar

Jambu 3.33 and 4.38 Quartz

2.80 Ilmenite

6.49 Feldspar

Rhu Tapai 3.34 and 4.25 Quartz

2.80 Ilmenite

6.52 Feldspar

3.45 Anatase

Baging 6.91 and 6.81 Feldspar

3.45 Anatase

3.35 Quartz

40

41

Figure 4.3 : X-ray diffractogram of silt plus clay from the A horizon of Merchang Series

42

Figure 4.4 : X-ray diffractogram of silt plus clay from the A horizon of Jambu Series

43

Figure 4.5 : X-ray diffractogram of silt plus clay from the A horizon of Rhu Tapai Series

44

Figure 4.6 : X-ray diffractogram of silt plus clay from the Ap horizon of Baging Series

45

4.5 Soil Classification

Besides soil classification system used by Department of Agriculture (2003), BRIS soils

can also be classified using USDA Soil Taxonomy (Soil Survey Staff, 2006).

Classification of soils using this system is determine by :

1. Diagnostic surface horizon / epipedon

2. Diagnostic sub-surface horizon

3. Order

4. Suborder

5. Great group

6. Subgroup

7. Classification for family

7.1. Texture class

7.2. Mineralogy

7.3. Soil moisture regime

7.4. Soil temperature regime

4.5.1 Soil Moisture Regime

Malaysia has hot and humid climate and rain almost throughout the year (Malaysian

Meteorological Department). These match the criteria of udic moisture regime which

require the soil not to dry in 90 cumulative days in normal years with well distributed

rain.

4.5.2 Soil Temperature Regime

According to Malaysian Meteorological Department, the mean daily temperatures on

March 2010 were between 26.4ºC and 31.3ºC. Therefore, the soil temperature regime in

Malaysia is isohyperthemic which means the soil temperature is more than 22ºC.

4.5.3 Merchang Series

This soil series has an A/C profile which means it is a young soil. This is because

the B horizon is not formed yet. Therefore, it will fall into order Entisols. Because of the

high water table, this soil matched the criteria of aquic condition. So, the suborder is

Aquent. The texture of Merchang series is sand that is coarser than loamy fine sand and

has less than 35 percent of rock fragment. This matched the criteria of Great Group

Psammaquent. Because this soil did not match any criteria of Psammaquent, the subgroup

is Typic Psammaquent.

Texture class is sand while the mineralogy is siliceous. Therefore, the

classification of Merchang Series according to Soil Taxonomy (Soil Survey Staff, 2006)

is :

Sandy, siliceous, isohyperthemic, Typic Psammaquent

47

4.5.4 Jambu Series

This soil has spodic horizon. But the horizon is below 125 cm from soil surface

i.e. not in the control section. Therefore, it is classified in Order Entisols. Since the

texture of Jambu Series is sand that is coarser than loamy fine sand and less than 35

percent rock fragment, it falls into Suborder Psamment. This soil has 90 percent resistant

minerals i.e. quartz the 0.02 to 2.0 mm in fraction within the particle-size

control section. That made it into Quartzipsamment Great Group. As this

soil did not match any criteria of other Subgroup, it was put in Subgroup Typic

Quartzipsamment.

Texture class is sand and there is no coating. The mineralogy is siliceous.

Therefore, the classification of Jambu Series according to Soil Taxonomy (Soil Survey

Staff, 2006) is :

Uncoated, siliceous, isohyperthemic, Typic Quartzipsamment

4.5.5 Rhu Tapai Series

This soil has spodic horizon within 100 cm from soil surface. So, it falls in order

Spodosols. For suborders, Rhu Tapai Series did not match any criteria. Therefore, it falls

in suborder Orthods. Rhu Tapai Series also did not match any criteria in Great Groups.

48

So, it considered as Haplorthods Great Group. The same situation also happens in

Subgroups level. So, Rhu Tapai Series is put inside Typic Haplorthods Subgroup.

Texture class is sand while the mineralogy is siliceous. Therefore, the

classification of Rhu Tapai Series according to Soil Taxonomy (Soil Survey Staff, 2006)

is :

Sandy, siliceous, isohyperthemic, Typic Haplorthods

4.5.6 Baging Series

This soil is another soil series that has an A/C profile. Therefore, it falls into order

Entisols. Since the texture of Baging Series is sand that is coarser than loamy fine sand

and less than 35 percent rock fragment, it falls into Suborder Psamment. This soil has 90

percent resistant minerals i.e. quartz the 0.02 to 2.0 mm in fraction within the

particle-size control section. That made it into Quartzipsamment Great

Group. As this soil did not match any criteria of other Subgroup, it was put in Subgroup

Typic Quartzipsamment.

Texture class is sand. The mineralogy is siliceous and there are coatings on the

sand surface. So, the Soil Taxonomy (Soil Survey Staff, 2006) for Baging Series is :

Coated, siliceous, isohyperthemic, Typic Quartzipsamment

49

4.6 Soil Genesis

BRIS soils were origin from deposits of sand from sea. Strong sea current removes silt

and clay particles while the sand was left. This is why the soil particles are dominated by

sand. The current is strong in the east coast of Peninsular Malaysia. This is because the

beach is in open sea (South China Sea). The soil forming processes occurs in BRIS soils

are addition, eluviation and podzolization.

4.6.1 Addition

Addition is the process that formed the A horizon in a soil profile. Organic matter is

added to the soil during this process. Example of the organic matter source is the leaf

litter. The leaf litter will decompose and mixed with the soil to form the A horizon with

darker colour and higher organic matter content compared with the other soil horizons.

Table 4.3 shows that the A horizon contains highest organic matter compared to other

horizons except in the Rhu Tapai Series where the highest organic matter content is in the

spodic horizon.

4.6.2 Eluviation

50

Eluviation is defined as the movement of materials out of the soil horizon. The materials

involved are clays, humus or organic matter and sesquioxides. This process will form E

horizon which is basically composed of a light coloured layer of sand. The E horizon is

found in Rhu Tapai and Jambu Series. The eluviation process occurs together with

another process called podzolization.

4.6.3 Podzolization

Podzolization is defined as the process of accumulation of materials that leached out from

E horizon to form the spodic horizon. These materials include clays, organic matter and

sesquioxides. Acidic conditions in tropical region combined with sandy texture of the soil

promote this process. The evidence of this process can be seen clearly in Rhu Tapai

Series profile. This process also occurs in Jambu Series but the spodic horizon is located

below 125 cm of the soil profile.

4.7 Soil Suitability

The soil suitability of the soils for crop growth according to soil-crop suitability

classification (Wong, 1986) is as follows:

4.7.1 Merchang Series

51

The drainage of Merchang Series is class 4 i.e. imperfectly drained. Although the

texture of the soil is 98% sand, the drainage is not become excessive due to the high

water table at the area. As a result, drainage is considered a moderate limitation. Texture

of this soil is a serious limitation as it has coarse texture and structureless. Nutrient

imbalance is also a moderate limitation as the CEC value is less than 10 cmol(+)/kg soil.

These limitations make this soil in class 3 because there is only one serious limitation.

Therefore, the soil-suitability class for this soil is 3T(dn). There are few suitable crops for

this soil based on soil-crop suitability system (Wong, 1986). The suitable crops are

tobacco, vegetables, water melons, and pastures.

4.7.2 Jambu Series

The drainage of this soil is class 9 i.e. excessively drained. Therefore, drainage is

a serious limitation in this soil. The texture also a serious limitation in this soil as it has

coarse texture with no structure or single grained. CEC of this soil is less than 10

cmol(+)/kg soil. So, it is considered as moderate kind of limitation. Two serious

limitations makes the soil falls in class 4. The soil-crop suitability class for this soil is

4DT(n). According to Wong (1986), there is no suitable crop for this land in its original

condition. However, a few crops are considered marginally suitable in this soil. The crops

are coconut, cashew, tobacco, water melons and vegetables.

4.7.3 Rhu Tapai Series

52

The soil drainage class is class 6 i.e. moderately well drained because of the

presence of spodic horizon before 50 cm from soil surface. Therefore, drainage is just a

minor limitation. The spodic horizon is a compacted layer but the consistency is just firm,

not hard. Therefore, the compact layer is not a limitation in this soil. Texture of this soil

is coarse texture and structureless that makes it a serious limitation. The CEC also less

than 10 cmol(+)/kg soil which make it a moderate limitation. This soil is in class 3

because it has only one serious limitation. Therefore, the soil-crop suitability class for

this soil is 3T(n). Wong (1986), suggested that there is no suitable crop for this soil with

the original conditions. However, many crops are considered marginally suitable in Rhu

Tapai series. The crops are tobacco, cashew, coconut, watermelons, vegetables, mango,

starfruit, citrus and pastures.

4.7.4 Baging Series

This soil drainage is class 8 i.e. somewhat excessively drained. Although no

spodic horizon occur in this soil profile, the drainage is considered slightly better than

Jambu Series because the brownish soil color that indicates more clay contents. Drainage

class 8 is a serious limitation to plant growth. The texture of Baging Series is sand so, it is

also considered as serious limitation. The CEC is less than 10 cmol(+)/kg soil which

makes it a moderate limitation. Therefore, the soil-crop suitability class for this soil is

4DT(n). Based on soil-crop suitability system (Wong, 1986) there is no suitable crop for

this soil in its original condition. On the other hand, four crops are identified as

marginally suitable for this soil. The crops are coconut, cashew, tobacco and vegetables.

53

CHAPTER 5

CONCLUSION

BRIS soils are alluvial soils that are formed from marine deposits. It can be

classified into two orders based on USDA Soil Taxonomy. The orders are Entisols and

Spodosols. Entisols are very young soils and no spodic horizon within 125 cm from soil

surface. Spodosols are soils that undergone illuviation and podzolization process that

forms spodic horizon within 125 cm from soil surface. Among 24 soil series that have

been established by Department of Agriculture, four of them (Merchang, Jambu, Rhu

Tapai and Baging Series) are found in the study area. Merchang series dominate the study

area occupying 42.16 %, followed by Jambu series (22.75 %), Rhu Tapai series (19.69

%) and Baging series (15.4%). Only Rhu Tapai series belongs to order Spodosols, while

others are Entisols. The location of soils influences the soil series for example, soils with

spodic horizon can only be found in older beach ridges.

Generally, BRIS soils are not suitable for agriculture. Limitations for plant growth

in BRIS soils can be divided into two categories, physical and chemical properties. The

properties are :

54

Physical properties

Sandy texture with more than 90% sand particles.

Low water holding capacity.

Excessively drained.

High leaching rate.

Flood risk for BRIS soils with spodic horizon.

High evapotranspiration rate makes plant lose water rapidly.

Chemical properties

Very low organic matter content.

Low cation exchange capacity (<10 cmol(+)/kg soil)

Low macro and micronutrients.

Low base saturation.

Low pH.

However, with proper soil management practices and suitable crops BRIS soils

have potential for agriculture production. BRIS soils need more fertilizers compared with

other soils. Fertilizers must be applied frequently but in small quantity at a time. Slow

released fertilizer is very suitable to minimize loss of nutrient through leaching. Organic

fertilizers such as manure and compost also needed in BRIS soils. This can help improve

soil structures, increase water-holding capacity and promotes microorganism activity.

Palm oil mill effluent (POME) is one good example of organic source of fertilizer.

55

Addition of organic matter can also increase the soil CEC. Mulching also needed in BRIS

soils. It can help in reducing water loss through evapotranspiration and cooling the soil

surface. Organic mulch such as rice straw can also increase organic matter in soil.

Efficient irrigation system also needed as water is very critical factor in BRIS soils.

Sprinkler and drip irrigation is very suitable to use.

Choosing suitable crops is important as not all crops can tolerate with the

condition of BRIS soils. Among suitable and marginally suitable crops for BRIS soils are

tobacco, coconut, vegetables, watermelons, pastures, mango, starfruit, citrus and cashew.

With proper soil management and suitable crops, BRIS soils have a high potential in

agriculture production.

56

BIBILIOGRAPHY

Carter, M. R. (1993). Soil Sampling and Methods of Analysis. Canadian Society of Soil

Science. Lewis Publishers

Cawangan Pengurusan Tanah (1993). Panduan Mengenali Siri-siri Tanah Utama di

Semenanjung Malaysia. Jabatan Pertanian Semenanjung Malaysia

Chai, T. B. and Samat, A. (1984). Masalah-masalah Penanaman Gajus di Tanah Bris.

Atek. Pert. 5(2): 178-189.

Department of Agriculture (1986). Metodologi Penyiasatan dan Penilaian Tanah di

Semenanjung Malaysia. Cawangan Pengurusan Tanah Jabatan Pertanian

Department of Agriculture. (2003). Garis Panduan Penyediaan Laporan Kesesuaian

Tanah. Bahagian Pengurusan Tanah, Jabatan Pertanian Semenanjung Malaysia.

Department of Agriculture (2003). Guide to The Use of The Tables to The Identification

of Soils in Peninsular Malaysia. Soil Management Division, Department of

Agriculture.

57

Department of Agriculture (2005). Asas Kesuburan Tanah. Nota Syarahan Kursus

Kesuburan Tanah. 5-8 Sept 2005. PLPP Besut (Tidak diterbitkan)

Department of Agriculture. (2007). Pengurusan Tanah Bris Untuk Pertanian. Teknotani,

No. TT16/07.06/15R. Kementerian Pertanian dan Industri Asas Tani.

Department of Survey and Mapping Malaysia (1992). Peta Topografi Pasir Gajah Siri

L7030 Lembar 4361. Direktorat Pemetaan Negara Malaysia

Faridah, H. A. and Abdullah, D. (1991). Tanah Bris : Ciri, Halangan dan Pengurusan.

Risalah Pertanian, Bil. 21c. Jabatan Pertanian Semenanjung Malaysia. Kuala

Lumpur

Ives, D. W. (1967). Reconnaissance Soil Survey of Southeast Pahang. Malayan Soil

Survey Report No. 4. Soil Science Division, Ministry of Agriculture

Lim J. S. (2002). National Report for the UNCCD Implementation: Combating Land

Degradation and Promoting Sustainable Land Management in Malaysia.

Available: http://www.unccd.int/cop/reports/asia/national/2002/malaysia-eng.pdf.

Last accessed 10 March 2010.

58

Malaysian Meteorological Department (2010). 10 - Day Agromet Bulletin Weather

Review for Agricultural Users of Malaysia 1st – 10th March 2010. Available:

http://www.met.gov.my/pdf/agromet/ab_4_1.pdf. Last accessed 20 March 2010.

Mohd Zainuri, S. (1981). Study of Selected Coastal Sandy Soils from Peninsular

Malaysia. M. Sc. Thesis, RUG., Ghent, Belgium

Othman, A. B. and V. W. Carlisle. (1986). Characterization and Classification of Bris

Soils Occuring in Peninsular Malaysia. Soil and Crop Science Society of Florida,

Proceedings Vol. 46 p. 123-128.

Paramananthan, S. (1987). Field Legend for Soil Surveys in Malaysia. Penerbit Universiti

Pertanian Malaysia.

Shamshuddin, J. (1990). Sifat dan Pengurusan Tanah di Malaysia. Dewan Bahasa dan

Pustaka, Kuala Lumpur.

Shamshuddin, J. and Nik Mokhtar Nik Wan (1985). Panduan Asas Analisis Mineralogi

dan Mikromorfologi Tanah. Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka. Kuala Lumpur

Soil Resource Management and Conservation Division (2009). Soil Correlation 1/2009

Endau, Johor. Department of Agriculture, Ayer Hitam.

59

Soil Survey Staff (1993). Soil Survey Manual. United States Department of Agriculture.

Soil Survey Staff (2006). Keys to Soil Taxonomy 10th Ed. United States Department of

Agriculture Natural Resource Conservation Service.

Wahab, A. N. (1992). Problems of BRIS Soils. Teknologi Pertanian MARDI. 3(1): 81-91

Wong, I.F.T. (1986). Soil-Crop Suitability Clasification for Peninsular Malaysia.

Bahagian Pengurusan Tanah, Jabatan Pertanian.

Wong, N. C. (1979). Micromorphology, mineralogy and humification properties in some

sandy soils in Kuantan area, Malaysia. Unpublished M. Sc. Thesis, State

University of Ghent, Belgium

Yaacob, O. and Shamshuddin, J. (1982). Sains Tanah. Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka. Kuala

Lumpur

Zarcinas, B. A., Fauziah, C. I., McLoughlin, M. J. and Cozen, G. (2004). Heavy Metals

in Soil and Crops in Southeast Asia 1. Peninsular Malaysia. Environ. Geochem.

and Health, 26: 343-357.

60

APPENDICES

61

APPENDIX 1

Pictures in study area

Landscape of Merchang Series

62

High water table in Merchang Series

Landcape of Jambu Series

63

Landscape of Rhu Tapai Series

Flooded area of Rhu Tapai Series during rainy season

64

Landscape of Baging Series

APPENDIX 2

65

(Source : Soil Survey Staff, 2006)

APPENDIX 3

66

Calculations of Analytical Data

Total Exchangeable Bases (TEB) = ∑ of Ca, Mg, K and Na

Base Saturation (%) = TEB / CEC x 100

Organic Matter (%) = % Carbon x 1.724

Carbon / Nitrogen ratio (C/N ratio) = %C / %N

APPENDIX 4

PEDON 1

67

A. GENERAL INFORMATION

1. Map Sheet No. : 4361

2. RSO Coordinates : 598112 mE,

451048 mN

3. Location : Cherating, Kuantan

4. Elevation :7 m.a.s.l.

5. Date : 14 January 2010

6. Author : Wan Mohd Rusydan

7. Land Use : Shrubs

8. Soil Series : Merchang

9. Drainage : Imperfectly drained

10. Parent Material : Marine Sand / BRIS

11. Landform & Topography : Flat

B. PROFILE DESCRIPTION

Horizonation Depth (cm) Description

A 0-10 Dark gray (10YR 4/1); fine sand; structureless; loose;

many fine, medium and coarse roots; clear smooth

boundary.

C1 10-30 Grayish brown (10YR 5/2); medium sand; structureless;

loose; few fine and medium roots; diffuse boundary

C2 30-70 Grayish brown (10YR 5/2); medium sand; structureless;

loose; very few fine roots; clear smooth boundary

C3 70-100 Light gray (10YR 7/1); coarse sand; structureless; loose

C. MECHANICAL AND CHEMICAL DATA

Horizon Depth Granulometric Composition (%) Texture

68

Clay <2 µm

Fine silt

2-20 µm

Co. silt 20-50 µm

V. fine sand

50-100 µm

Fine sand 100-250 µm

Med. sand 250-500 µm

Co. sand 500

µm - 2 mm

A 0-10 0.7 0.0 0.6 0.8 5.7 36.2 56.0 SandC1 10-30 0.1 0.3 0.3 0.4 4.6 34.1 60.2 SandC2 30-70 0.5 0.0 0.3 0.5 6.2 32.2 60.3 Sand

C370-100

0.6 0.0 0.3 0.2 4.0 33.0 61.9 Sand

Horizon1N NH4OAc cmol (+)/kg soil Base

saturation (%)

Exc. Al cmol(+)/kg

soilCECExchangeable cation

TEBCa Mg K Na

A 1.95 0.08 0.04 0.01 0.03 0.16 8.14 0.25C1 0.80 0.04 0.02 0.01 0.03 0.10 12.09 0.28C2 0.54 0.05 0.01 0.01 0.03 0.10 17.58 0.34C3 0.22 0.14 0.01 0.01 0.03 0.18 83.46 0.26

HorizonAvailable P (ppm)

C % N %O. M.

%C/N ratio

pH Elec. Cond. dS/m


A 1.54 0.26 0.03 0.45 8.70 4.89 3.50 0.131 0.014C1 1.66 0.10 0.02 0.17 3.98 5.16 3.92 0.107 0.009C2 1.74 0.04 0.03 0.07 1.51 5.95 5.15 0.082 0.006C3 1.70 0.03 0.03 0.05 1.02 6.58 6.54 0.140 0.013

HorizonMn Zn Cu Ni Cd

mg/LA 0.030 0.135 0.000 0.0848 0.0357C1 0.007 0.144 0.269 0.0147 0.0413C2 0.012 0.367 1.497 0.0211 0.0490C3 0.008 0.259 1.034 0.0309 0.0476

APPENDIX 5

PEDON 2

69




451653 mN


4. Elevation : 9 m.a.s.l.




8. Soil Series : Jambu

9. Drainage : Excessively drained





A 0-15 Dark gray (10YR 4/1); fine sand; structureless; loose; few

fine, medium and coarse roots; clear smooth boundary.

E1 15-35 Gray (10YR 6/1); fine sand; structureless; loose; very few

fine roots; diffuse boundary

E2 35-70 Light gray (10YR 7/1); fine sand; structureless; loose;

diffuse boundary

E3 70-100 White (10YR 8/2); fine sand; structureless; loose



70

Clay <2 µm

Fine silt

2-20 µm

Co. silt 20-50 µm

V. fine sand

50-100 µm



Co. sand 500

µm - 2 mm

A 0-15 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.5 10.0 23.7 64.9 SandE1 15-35 0.5 0.0 0.6 0.9 10.8 29.6 57.6 SandE2 35-70 0.6 0.4 0.3 0.4 7.8 30.5 60.0 Sand

E370-100

0.8 0.1 0.3 0.5 11.9 30.2 56.2 Sand


saturation (%)

Exc. Al cmol(+)/kg


TEBCa Mg K Na

A 1.96 0.07 0.03 0.01 0.03 0.13 6.82 0.32E1 0.38 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.03 0.07 17.46 0.28E2 0.37 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.03 0.06 16.30 0.34E3 0.29 0.02 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.08 28.41 0.31


C % N %O. M.

%C/N ratio

pH Elec. Cond. dS/m


A 1.58 0.28 0.04 0.49 7.95 4.80 3.49 0.08 0.02E1 1.71 0.09 0.03 0.16 3.51 5.13 4.07 0.07 0.02E2 1.55 0.04 0.03 0.07 1.48 5.28 4.45 0.09 0.01E3 1.57 0.02 0.02 0.03 0.68 5.60 4.58 0.06 0.03


mg/LA 0.146 0.152 0.013 0.015 0.056E1 0.013 0.060 0.004 0.025 0.057E2 0.004 0.051 0.041 0.000 0.058E3 0.004 0.042 0.013 0.039 0.064

APPENDIX 6

PEDON 3

71




451292 mN






8. Soil Series : Rhu Tapai

9. Drainage : Moderately well drained





A 0-10 Gray (10YR 6/1); fine sand; structureless; loose; many

fine, medium and coarse roots; clear smooth boundary.

E 10-45 Light gray (10YR 7/2); fine sand; structureless; loose; few

fine roots; abrubt smooth boundary

Bs 45-55 Dark yellowish brown (10YR 3/4); hard spodic layer;

clear, smooth boundary

Bir 55-100 Yellowish brown (10YR 5/6); fine sand; structureless;

loose.



72

Clay <2 µm

Fine silt

2-20 µm

Co. silt 20-50 µm

V. fine sand

50-100 µm



Co. sand 500

µm - 2 mm

A 0-10 0.0 2.2 0.3 0.8 46.3 47.0 3.4 SandE 10-45 0.1 1.8 0.2 0.4 37.0 56.0 4.5 SandBs 45-55 0.7 0.0 0.3 0.7 65.5 32.1 0.7 Sand

Bir55-100

0.8 0.0 0.1 0.4 55.5 42.3 0.9 Sand


saturation (%)

Exc. Al cmol(+)/kg


TEBCa Mg K Na

A 1.41 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.03 0.07 4.78 0.43E 0.70 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.03 0.05 7.27 0.47Bs 7.29 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.03 0.05 0.67 0.52Bir 2.13 0.00 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.06 2.80 0.52


C % N % O. M. %C/N ratio

pH Elec. Cond. dS/m


A 1.87 0.22 0.03 0.38 6.35 5.25 4.07 0.08 0.05E 1.78 0.11 0.03 0.18 3.72 5.35 4.47 0.07 0.02Bs 2.13 0.62 0.04 1.07 14.49 5.36 4.45 0.08 0.40Bir 1.70 0.19 0.03 0.32 6.01 5.56 4.65 0.09 0.77


mg/LA 0.023 0.081 0.011 0.089 0.054E 0.006 0.046 0.022 0.090 0.065Bs 0.033 0.058 0.050 0.107 0.073Bir 0.018 0.061 0.089 0.075 0.066

APPENDIX 7

PEDON 4

73




451204 mN





7. Land Use : Cleared land

8. Soil Series : Baging

9. Drainage : Somewhat excessively

drained





Ap 0-10 Grayish brown (10YR 5/2); fine sand; structureless; loose;

many, medium and coarse roots; diffuse boundary.

C1 10-20 Brown (10YR 5/3); fine sand; structureless; loose; many,

fine and medium roots; diffuse boundary

C2 20-50 Yellowish brown (10YR 5/6); fine sand; structureless;

loose; few, fine and meduium roots; clear, smooth

boundary

C3 50-70 Brownish yellow (10YR 6/6); fine sand; structureless;

loose; very few, fine roots; diffuse boundary.

C4 70-100 Brownish yellow (10YR 6/6); fine sand; structureless;

74

loose.


Horizon Depth

Granulometric Composition (%)

TextureClay <2 µm

Fine silt

2-20 µm

Co. silt 20-50 µm

V. fine sand

50-100 µm



Co. sand 500

µm - 2 mm

Ap 0-10 2.1 0.0 0.3 1.2 84.1 12.2 0.1 SandC1 10-20 1.0 0.0 0.1 0.7 87.1 11.1 0.0 SandC2 20-50 0.9 0.0 0.1 0.9 86.0 12.0 0.1 SandC3 50-75 0.8 0.1 0.2 0.6 78.2 20.1 0.0 Sand

C475-100

0.6 0.0 0.2 1.0 85.1 13.0 0.1 Sand


saturation (%)

Exc. Al cmol(+)/kg


TEBCa Mg K Na

Ap 5.18 0.06 0.11 0.04 0.03 0.23 4.54 0.72C1 2.79 0.01 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.11 3.86 0.66C2 2.75 0.07 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.13 4.71 0.57C3 2.46 0.11 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.16 6.58 0.56C4 2.29 0.04 0.01 0.05 0.03 0.13 5.61 0.64


C % N %O. M.

%C/N ratio

pH Elec. Cond. dS/m


Ap 1.80 1.02 0.06 1.76 17.99 4.88 3.56 0.17 0.67

75

C1 1.83 0.35 0.04 0.61 8.04 5.21 4.11 0.13 0.59C2 1.86 0.20 0.04 0.34 5.60 5.24 4.34 0.11 0.55C3 1.56 0.15 0.03 0.25 4.85 5.26 4.39 0.09 0.46C4 1.56 0.10 0.03 0.17 3.16 5.40 4.37 0.11 0.48


mg/LAp 0.130 0.155 0.070 0.062 0.078C1 0.035 0.117 0.132 0.124 0.077C2 0.030 0.121 0.361 0.109 0.071C3 0.112 0.230 0.952 0.083 0.079C4 0.561 tr tr 0.063 tr

*tr (traced)

76

TABLE 7 : IDENTIFICATION OF SOILS DEVELOPED ON BEACH RIDGES AND RELATED DEPOSITS

TEXTURE CLASSDEPTH TO SPODIC/ BURIED HORIZON

DRAINAGE CLASS

VERY POOR

0

SOMEWHATVERY POOR

1

POOR

2

SOMEWHATPOOR

3

IMPERFECT

4

SOMEWHATIMPERFECT

5

MODERATELYWELL

6

WELL

7

SOMEWHATEXCESSIVE

8

EXCESSIVE

9

VERY FINE> 60% Clay

S

M LUBOK ITEK/B

D

FINE33-60% Clay

S

M CHENERING/B/gr NERUS/B PENAGA/o

D

FINE LOAMY

18-35% Clay

S

M NIBONG/ /B

D PERMATANG SENENG

COARSE LOAMY

<18% Clay

S

M IBAI/s/f

D MELAWI/f+ RESAM

+ BAKONG

SANDY<10% Clay

S RHU TAPAI/s

M MERCHANG/B/o RUDUA/sCERATING/wULAR/o

D KERPAH/f/ (Strong Brown)FIKRI (Brown, med sand)

+BEOH (Light Greyish Brown)+ PERMATANG TIMBUL (Brown, co & med sand)

ROMPIN/r+ PAUHBAGING

JAMBU/e

Prefixes and Suffixes used with Soil Series Name: Parent Materials (origin deposits) SOIL SERIES NAME/Sand Fraction/Others Features

Parent Materials (Origin Deposits) Sand Fraction Others FeaturesS = Shallow (0-50 cm) + = on old beach ridge f=Fine sand B = buried M = Moderate deep (50-100 cm) r = riverine influence o = enriched with illuviated humus D = Deep D = Deep(>100) w = wavy fragmental spodicAll soils are ‘Young Beach Ridge’ unless otherwise specified; soils on old beach ridges s = spodic are indicated by a ‘t’ in front of the soil services name written in italic. Soil influenced e = eluvial by riverine alluvium are indicated by latter ‘r’ after he soil series gr = gravellyAll soils consist of medium and coarse sand fraction except those indicating with ‘f’

Note1. The term "Rusila Complex" is used to describe complicated soil complexes which are found in the swales and which cannot be mapped as individual series even at detailed soil mapping.2. Hardness of the spodic horizon is considered at phase level i.e either hard (H), soft (S) or a mixture of hard and soft (HS). Example (i) Rudua/s/H (Rudua Series, hard spodic horizon); (ii) Rudua/s/S (Rudua Series, soft spodic horizon); (iii) Rudua/s/HS (Rudua Series with a mixture of hard and soft spodic materials in the same horizon). These of these 3 phases can be upgraded to soil series at a later when their occurrence and distribution become significant.

77

SOIL MANAGEMENT DIVISION DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTUREKUALA LUMPUR17/02/2003

Documents

Thesis Compiled