case study of soil pollution in india pdf

Information

• Author Services

Initiatives

You are accessing a machine-readable page. In order to be human-readable, please install an RSS reader.

All articles published by MDPI are made immediately available worldwide under an open access license. No special permission is required to reuse all or part of the article published by MDPI, including figures and tables. For articles published under an open access Creative Common CC BY license, any part of the article may be reused without permission provided that the original article is clearly cited. For more information, please refer to https://www.mdpi.com/openaccess .

Feature papers represent the most advanced research with significant potential for high impact in the field. A Feature Paper should be a substantial original Article that involves several techniques or approaches, provides an outlook for future research directions and describes possible research applications.

Feature papers are submitted upon individual invitation or recommendation by the scientific editors and must receive positive feedback from the reviewers.

Editor’s Choice articles are based on recommendations by the scientific editors of MDPI journals from around the world. Editors select a small number of articles recently published in the journal that they believe will be particularly interesting to readers, or important in the respective research area. The aim is to provide a snapshot of some of the most exciting work published in the various research areas of the journal.

Original Submission Date Received: .

• Active Journals
• Find a Journal
• Proceedings Series
• For Authors
• For Reviewers
• For Editors
• For Librarians
• For Publishers
• For Societies
• For Conference Organizers
• Open Access Policy
• Institutional Open Access Program
• Special Issues Guidelines
• Editorial Process
• Research and Publication Ethics
• Article Processing Charges
• Testimonials
• Preprints.org
• SciProfiles
• Encyclopedia

Article Menu

• Subscribe SciFeed
• Recommended Articles
• Google Scholar
• on Google Scholar
• Table of Contents

Find support for a specific problem in the support section of our website.

Please let us know what you think of our products and services.

Visit our dedicated information section to learn more about MDPI.

JSmol Viewer

Soil degradation in india: challenges and potential solutions.

1. Sources of Land Degradation

1.1. Overgrazing, Deforestation and Careless Forest Management

1.2. urban growth, industrialization and mining.

1.3. Natural and Social Sources of land Degradation

1.4. land shortage, land fragmentation and poor economy, 1.5. population increase, 2. agricultural activities leading to land degradation in india, 2.1. low and imbalanced fertilization, 2.2. excessive tillage and use of heavy machinery, 2.3. crop residue burning and inadequate organic matter inputs, 2.4. poor irrigation and water management, 2.5. poor crop rotations, 2.6. pesticide overuse and soil pollution, 3. extent and causes of soil degradation by region.

4. Strategies to Mitigate Land Degradation

4.1. Soil Erosion Control

4.2. Water Harvesting, Terracing and Other Engineering Structures

4.3. Landslide and Minespoil Rehabilitation and River Bank Erosion Control

4.4. Intercropping and Contour Farming

4.5. Subsoiling

4.6. watershed approach, 4.7. participatory resource conservation and management, 4.8. integrated nutrient management and organic manuring.

Click here to enlarge figure

4.9. Reclamation of Acid and Salt Affected Soils and Drainage (Desalinization)

4.10. remediation of as contamination, 4.11. water management and pollution control, 4.12. irrigation management for improving input use efficiency, 4.13. judicious use of distillery effluent, 4.14. reforestation, grassland and horticulture development.

4.15. Vegetative Barriers and Using Natural Geotextiles, Mulching and Diversified Cropping

4.16. Agroforestry

4.17. Conservation Agriculture (CA)

4.18. Intensive Cropping, Diversified Cropping and Integrated Farming Systems

4.19. Disaster (Tsunami) Management

5. conclusions, acknowledgments, author contributions, conflicts of interest, supplementary materials.

• National Bureau of Soil Survey & Land Use Planning (NBSS&LUP). Soil Map (1:1 Million Scale) ; NBSS&LUP: Nagpur, India, 2004. [ Google Scholar ]
• Dhruvanarayan, V.V.N.; Ram, B. Estimation of soil erosion in India. J. Irrig. Drain. Eng. 1983 , 109 , 419–434. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• NCA. Report of the National Commission on Agriculture. National Commission of Agriculture ; Government of India: New Delhi, India, 1976; pp. 427–472.
• MoA. Indian Agriculture in Brief , 17th ed.Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Ministry of Agriculture, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Ministry of Agriculture and irrigation, Government of India: New Delhi, India, 1978.
• Vohra, B.B. A Policy for Land and Water ; Department of Environment, Government of India: New Delhi, India, 1980; Volume 18, pp. 64–70.
• NWDB. Ministry of Environment and Forests, National Wasteland Development Board Guidelines for Action ; Government of India: New Delhi, India, 1985.
• Bhumbla, D.R.; Khare, A. Estimate of Wastelands in India. Society for Promotion of Wastelands Development ; Allied: New Delhi, India, 1984; p. 18. [ Google Scholar ]
• NRSA. Waste Land Atlas of India ; Government of India Balanagar: Hyderabad, India, 2000.
• MoA. Indian Agriculture in Brief , 20th ed.Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Ministry of Agriculture, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Ministry of Agriculture, Goverment of India: New Delhi, India, 1985.
• MoA. Indian Agriculture in Brief , 25th ed.Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Ministry of Agriculture, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Goverment of India: New Delhi, India, 1994.
• National Bureau of Soil Survey and Land Use Planning (NBSS&LUP). Global Assessment of Soil Degradation (GLASOD) Guidelines ; NBSS&LUP: Nagpur, India, 1994. [ Google Scholar ]
• National Bureau of Soil Survey and Land Use Planning (NBSS&LUP). Annual Report 2005, Nagpur ; NBSS&LUP: Nagpur, India, 2005. [ Google Scholar ]
• Joshi, P.K.; Agnihotri, A.K. An Assessment of the Adverse Effects of Canal Irrigation in India. Ind. J. Agric. Ecol. 1984 , 39 , 528–536. [ Google Scholar ]
• Parikh, K.; Ghosh, U. Natural Resource Accounting for Soil: Towards and Empirical Estimate of Costs of Soil Degradation for India’ ; Discussion Paper No. 1995, 48; Indira Gandhi Institute of Development Research, IDEAS: Mumbai, India, 1995. [ Google Scholar ]
• Joshi, P.K.; Wani, S.P.; Chopde, V.K.; Foster, J. Farmers Perception of Land Degradation: A Case Study. Econ. Polit. Wkly. 1996 , 31 , A89–A92. [ Google Scholar ]
• Srinivasarao, C.H.; Venkateswarlu, B.; Lal, R.; Singh, A.K.; Sumanta, K. Sustainable management of soils of dry land ecosystems for enhancing agronomic productivity and sequestering carbon. Adv. Agron. 2013 , 121 , 253–329. [ Google Scholar ]
• Reddy, V.R. Land degradation in India: Extent, costs and determinants. Econ. Polit. Wkly. 2003 , 38 , 4700–4713. [ Google Scholar ]
• Sharda, V.N.; Dogra, P.; Prakash, C. Assessment of production losses due to water erosion in rainfed areas of India. Indian J. Soil Water Conserv. 2010 , 65 , 79–91. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• NRSA. National Remote Sensing Agency, IRS-Utilisation Programme: Soil Erosion Mapping ; Project Report National Remote Sensing Agency: Hyderabad, India, 1990. [ Google Scholar ]
• ARPU. Agro-Climatic Regional Planning: An Overview ; Agro-Climatic Regional Planning Unit: New Delhi, India, 1990. [ Google Scholar ]
• Sehgal, J.; Abrol, I.P. Soil Degradation in India: Status and Impact ; Oxford and IBH: New Delhi, India, 1994; p. 80. [ Google Scholar ]
• Sahay, K.B. Problems of livestock population. Available online: http://www.tribuneindia.com/2000/20000411/edit.htm (accessed on 20 March 2015).
• Sharma, K.D. Assessing the impact of overgrazing on soil erosion in arid regions at a range of spatial scales. Human impact on erosion and sedimentation. In Proceedings of the International Symposium of the Fifth Scientific Assembly of the International Association of Hydrological Sciences (IAHS), Rabat, Morocco, 23 April–3 May 1997; pp. 119–123.
• MoEF. National Forestry Action Programme of the Ministry of Environment and Forests ; Goverment of India: New Delhi, India, 1999; Volume 1, p. 79.
• Sahu, H.B.; Dash, S. Land degradation due to Mining in India and its mitigation measures. In Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Environmental Science and Technology, Singapore, 26–28 February 2011.
• Anon. Dirty Metal, Mining Communities and Environment, Earthworks ; Oxfam America: Washington, WA, USA, 2006; p. 4. [ Google Scholar ]
• Mythili, M. Intensive Agriculture and Its Impact on Land Degradation. 2013. Available online: http://coe.mse.ac.in/pdfs/coebreifs/Mythili.pdf (accessed on 13 October 2014).
• FAO. Land Degradation in South India; Its Severity, Causes and Effects on People ; World Soil Resources Report; Food and Agriculture Organization: Rome, Italy, 1994; Volume 78, p. 100. [ Google Scholar ]
• Barman, D.; Sangar, C.; Mandal, P.; Bhattacharjee, R.; Nandita, R. Land degradation: Its Control, Management and Environmental Benefits of Management in Reference to Agriculture and Aquaculture. Environ. Ecol. 2013 , 31 , 1095–1103. [ Google Scholar ]
• Royal Commission on Agriculture in India Report ; Agricole Publishing Academy: New Delhi, India, 1928; pp. 75–76.
• Maheswarappa, H.P.; Nanjappa, H.V.; Hegde, M.R.; Biddappa, C.C. Nutrient content and uptake by galangal ( Kaempferia galanga L.) as influenced by agronomic practices as intercrop in coconut ( Cocos nucifera L.) garden. J. Spices Arom. Crops 2011 , 9 , 65–68. [ Google Scholar ]
• Tandon, H.L.S. Assessment of Soil Nutrient Depletion. In Proceedings of the FADINAP Regional Seminar on Fertilization and the Environment, Chiangmai, Thailand, 7–11 September 1992.
• Tandon, H.L.S. Fertilizers in Indian Agriculture—From 20th to 21st Century ; FDCO: New Delhi, India, 2004; p. 240. [ Google Scholar ]
• Prasad, R.N.; Biswas, P.P. Soil Resources of India. In 50 Years of Natural Resource Management ; Singh, G.B., Sharma, B.R., Eds.; Indian Council of Agricultural Research: New Delhi, India, 2000. [ Google Scholar ]
• Hobbs, P.; Sayre, K.; Gupta, R. The role of conservation agriculture in sustainable agriculture. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B 2008 , 363 , 543–555. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• MNRE. Annual Report of the Ministry of New and Renewable Energy ; Government of India: New Delhi, India, 2009.
• NAAS. Management of Crop Residues in the Context of Conservation Agriculture ; Policy Paper No. 58; National Academy of Agricultural Sciences: New Delhi, India, 2012; p. 12. [ Google Scholar ]
• Mandal, D.; Sharda, V.N.; Tripathi, K.P. Relative efficacy of two biophysical approaches to assess soil loss tolérance for Doon Valley soils of India. J. Soil Water Conserv. 2010 , 65 , 42–49. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Srinivasarao, C.H.; Venkateswarlu, B.; Lal, R. Long-term manuring and fertilizer effects on depletion of soil organic stocks under Pearl millet-cluster vean-castor rotation in Western India. Land Degrad. Dev. 2014 , 25 , 173–183. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• CSWCR&TI Vision, 2030 ; Vision 2030 of the Central Soil and water Conservation Research and Training Institute, Allied publisher: Dehradun, India, 2011; pp. 1–46.
• Mandal, K.G.; Hati, K.M.; Misra, A.K.; Bandyopadhyay, K.K.; Tripathy, A.K. Land surface modification and crop diversification for enhancing productivity of a Vertisol. Int. J. Plant Prod. 2013 , 7 , 455–472. [ Google Scholar ]
• Singh, G.; Ram, B.; Narain, P.; Bhushan, L.S.; Abrol, I.P. Soil erosion rates in India. Ind. J. Soil Conserv. 1992 , 47 , 97–99. [ Google Scholar ]
• Sharma, N.K.; Ghosh, B.N.; Khola, O.P.S.; Dubey, R.K. Residue and tillage management for soil moisture conservation in post maize harvesting period under rainfed conditions of north-west Himalayas. Ind. J. Soil Conserv. 2013 , 42 , 120–125. [ Google Scholar ]
• Ghosh, B.N.; Sharma, N.K.; Dadhwal, K.S. Integrated nutrient management and intercropping/cropping system impact on yield, water productivity and net return in valley soils of north-west Himalayas. Ind. J. Soil Conserv. 2011 , 39 , 236–242. [ Google Scholar ]
• Rao, J.V.; Khan, I.A. Research Gaps in Intercropping Systems under Rainfed Conditions in India, an On Farm Survey ; CRIDA: Hyderabad, India, 2003. [ Google Scholar ]
• Pathak, P.; Mishra, P.K.; Rao, K.V.; Wani, S.P.; Sudi, R. Best opt-options on soil and water conservation. In Best Bet Options for Integrated Watershed Management, Proceedings of the Comprehensive Assessment of Watershed Programs in India (ICRISAT. Pantancheru 502 324), Andhra Pradesh, India, 23–27 July 2009; Wani, S.P., Venkateshwarlu, B., Sahrawat, K.L., Rao, K.V., Ramakrishna, Y.S., Eds.; pp. 75–94.
• Rao, K.P.C.; Steenhuis, T.S.; Cogle, A.L.; Srinivasan, S.T.; Yule, D.F.; Smith, G.D. Rainfall infiltration and runoff from an Alfisol in semi-arid tropical India. II. Tilled systems. Soil Tillage Res. 1998 , 48 , 61–69. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Palanisami, K.; Suresh Kumar, D.; Chandrasekharan, B. (Eds.) Watershed Management: Issues and Policies for 21st Century ; Associated Publishing Company: New Delhi, India, 2002; p. 341.
• Joy, K.J.; Parnjpe, S.; Shah, A.; Badigar, S.; Lele, S. Scaling up of watershed development projects in India: learning from the first generation projects. In Proceedings of the Fourth IWMI-Tata Annual Partners Meet, International Water Management Institute, Anand, India, 24–26 February 2005; pp. 133–134.
• Sharda, V.N. Land degradation and watershed management issues in Himalayan region: Status and Strategies. In Workshop on “Mountain Agriculture in Himalayan Region: Status, Constraints and Potential” ; ICAR: Dehradun, India, 2011; pp. 1–22. [ Google Scholar ]
• Adhikari, R.N.; Patil, A.; Raizada, D.; Ramajayam, M.; Prabhavathi, N.; Mondal, B.; Mishra, P.K. Participatory Resource Conservation and Management in Semi-arid India—A Case Study from Netranahalli Watershed (Karnataka) ; Technical Bulletin; Central Soil & Water Conservation Research & Training Institute, Research Centre: Bellary, Karnataka, India, 2013; p. 65. [ Google Scholar ]
• Natarajan, A.; Janakiraman, M.; Manoharan, S.; Kumar, A.K.S.; Vadivelu, S.; Sarkar, D. Assessment of land degradation and its impact on land resources of Sivagangai block, Tamil Nadu, India, 2010. In Land Degradation, and Desertification: Assessment, Mitigation and Remediation ; Zdruli, P., Pagliai, M., Kapur, S., Faz Cano, A., Eds.; Springer Science: Berlin, Germany; pp. 235–252.
• Kundu, S.; Bhattacharyya, R.; Ved-Prakash; Ghosh, B.N.; Gupta, H.S. Carbon sequestration and relationship between carbon addition and storage under rainfed soybean–wheat rotation in a sandy loam soil of the Indian Himalayas. Soil Tillage Res. 2007 , 92 , 87–95. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Bhattacharyya, R.; Prakash, V.; Pandey, S.C.; Kundu, S.; Srivastva, A.K.; Gupta, H.S. Effect of fertilization on carbon sequestration in soybean-wheat rotation under two contrasting soils and management practices in the Indian Himalayas. Aust. J. Soil Res. 2009 , 47 , 592–601. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Bhattacharyya, R.; Kundu, S.; Srivastva, A.K.; Gupta, H.S.; Prakash, V.; Bhatt, J.C. Long term fertilization effects on soil organic carbon pools in a sandy loam soil of the Indian Himalayas. Plant Soil 2011 , 341 , 109–124. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Sharda, V.N.; Sharma, N.K.; Mohan, S.C.; Khybry, M.L. Green manuring for conservation and production in western Himalayas: 2. Effect on moisture conservation, weed control and crop yields. Indian J. Soil Conserv. 1999 , 27 , 31–35. [ Google Scholar ]
• Bhattacharyya, R.; Tuti, M.D.; Bisht, J.K.; Bhatt, J.C.; Gupta, H.S. Conservation tillage and fertilization impacts on soil aggregation and carbon pools in the Indian Himalayas under an irrigated rice-wheat rotation. Soil Sci. 2012 , 177 , 218–228. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Bhattacharyya, R.; Tuti, M.D.; Kundu, S.; Bisht, J.K.; Bhatt, J.C. Conservation tillage impacts on soil aggregation and carbon pools in a sandy clay loam soil of the Indian Himalayas. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 2012 , 76 , 617–627. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Bhattacharyya, R.; Pandey, S.C.; Bisht, J.K.; Bhatt, J.C.; Gupta, H.S.; Titi, M.D.; Mahanta, D.; Mina, B.L.; Singh, R.D.; Chandra, S.; et al. Tillage and irrigation effects on soil aggregation and carbon pools in the Indian sub-Himalayas. Agron. J. 2013 , 105 , 101–112. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Mandal, B.; Majumder, B.; Bandopadhyay, P.K.; Hazra, G.C.; Gangopadhyay, A.; Samantaroy, R.N.; Misra, A.K.; Chowdhuri, J.; Saha, M.N.; Kundu, S. The potential of cropping systems and soil amendments for carbon sequestration in soils under long-term experiments in subtropical India. Global Change Biol. 2007 , 13 , 357–369. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Srinivasarao, C.H.; Ravindra Chary, G.; Venkateswarlu, B.; Vittal, K.P.R.; Prasad, J.V.N.S.; Singh, S.R.S.K.; Gajanan, G.N.; Sharma, R.A.; Deshpande, A.N.; Patel, J.J.; et al. Carbon Sequestration Strategies under Rainfed Production Systems of India ; Central Research Institute for Dryland Agriculture, Hyderabad (ICAR): Hyderabad, India, 2009; p. 102. [ Google Scholar ]
• CSWCR&TI. Annual Report of the Central Soil Water Conservation Research and Training Institute ; CSWCR&TI: Dehradun, India, 2012. [ Google Scholar ]
• Kannan, K.; Khola, O.P.S.; Selvi, V.; Singh, D.V.; Moharnraj, R. Agronomical Management Practices for Higher Productivity, Resource Use Efficiency and Farm Income in Semi-Arid Region-A Case Study in Ayalur Watershed ; Technical Bulletin; Central Soil & Water Conservation Research & Training Institute, Research Centre, Udhagamandalam: Tamil Nadu, India, 2013; p. 20. [ Google Scholar ]
• Sharma, P.D.; Sarkar, A.K. Managing Acid Soils for Enchancing Productivity ; Technical Bulletin; NRM Division, KAB-II, Pusa Campus: New Delhi, India, 2005; p. 23. [ Google Scholar ]
• Fageria, N.K.; Baligar, V.C. Ameliorating soil acidity of tropical Oxisols by liming for sustainable crop production. Adv. Agron. 2008 , 99 , 345–399. [ Google Scholar ]
• Bhat, J.A.; Mandal, B.; Hazra, G.C. Basic slag as a liming material to ameliorate soil acidity in Alfisols of sub-tropical India. Am.-Euras. J. Agric. Environ. Sci. 2007 , 2 , 321–327. [ Google Scholar ]
• Bhat, J.A.; Kundu, M.C.; Hazra, G.C.; Santra, G.H.; Mandal, B. Rehabilitating acid soils for increasing crop productivity through low-cost liming material. Sci. Total Environ. 2010 , 408 , 4346–4353. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Wilson, C.E.; Keisling, T.C., Jr.; Miller, D.M.; Dillon, C.R.; Pearce, A.D.; Frizzell, D.L.; Counce, P.A. Tillage influence on soluble salt movement in silt loam soils cropped to paddy rice. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 2000 , 64 , 1771–1776. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Garg, V.K. Interaction of tree crops with a sodic soil environment: Potential for rehabilitation of degraded environments. Land Degrad. Dev. 1998 , 9 , 81–93. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Bhojvaid, P.P.; Timmer, V.R. Soil dynamics in an age sequence of Prosopis juliflora planted for sodic soil restoration in India. Forest Ecol. Manage. 1998 , 106 , 181–193. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Gupta, R.K.; Rao, D.L.N. Potential of wasteland for sequestering carbon by reforestation. Curr. Sci. 1994 , 66 , 378–380. [ Google Scholar ]
• Gupta, R.K.; Abrol, I.P. Salt-Affected Soils. Their Reclamation and Management for Crop Production ; Lal, R., Stewart, B.A., Eds.; Springer: New York, NY, USA, 1990; pp. 223–288. [ Google Scholar ]
• Dhanushkodi, V.; Subrahmaniyan, K. Soil management to increase rice yield in salt affected coastal soil-a review. Int. J. Res. Chem. Environ. 2012 , 2 , 1–5. [ Google Scholar ]
• Prapagar, K.; Indraratne, S.P.; Premanandharajah, P. Effect of soil amendments on reclamation of saline-sodic soil. Trop. Agric. Res. 2012 , 23 , 168–176. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Bandyopadhyay, A.K. Effect of Lime, Superphosphate, Powdered Oystershell, Rock phosphate and Submergence on Soil Properties and Crop Growth in Coastal Saline Acid Sulphate Soils of Sundarbans. In Proceedings of the International Symposium on Rice Production on Acid Soil of the Tropics, 26–30 June 1989.
• Kumar, R.; Singh, R.D.; Sharma, K.D. Water resources of India. Curr. Sci. 2005 , 89 , 794–811. [ Google Scholar ]
• Moukhtar, M.M.; El-Hakim, M.H.; Abdel-Mawgoud, A.S.A.; Abdel-Aal, A.I.N.; El-Shewikh, M.B.; Abdel-Khalik, M.I.I. Drainage and Role of Mole Drains for Heavy Clay Soils under Saline Water Table, Egypt. In Proceedings of the 9th ICID International Drainage Workshop, Utrecht, The Netherlands, 10–13 September 2003.
• Abdel-Mawgoud, S.A.; El-Shewikh, M.B.; Abdel-Aal, A.I.N.; Abdel-Khalik, M.I.I. Open drainage and moling for desalinization of salty clay soils of Northeastern Egypt. In Proceedings of the 9th International Drainage Workshop, Utrecht, The Netherlands, 10–13 September 2003.
• Mukhopadhyay, D.; Mani, P.K.; Sanyal, S.K. Effect of phosphorus, arsenic and farmyard manure on arsenic availability in some soils of West Bengal. J. Indian Soc. Soil Sci. 2002 , 50 , 56–61. [ Google Scholar ]
• Ghosh, K.; Das, I.; Saha, S.; Banik, G.C.; Ghosh, S.; Maji, N.C.; Sanyal, S.K. Arsenic chemistry in groundwater in the Bengal Delta Plain: Implications in agricultural system. J. Indian Chem. Soc. 2004 , 81 , 1–10. [ Google Scholar ]
• Elliot, P.; Grandner, J.; Allen, D.; Butcher, G. Completion Criteria for Alcoa of Australia Limited Bauxite Mine Rehabilitation. In Proceedings of 3rd International and 21st Annual Minerals Council of Australia Environmental Workshop, Newcastle, Australia, 14–18 October 1996.
• Sharma, R.K.; Babu, K.S.; Chhokar, R.S.; Sharma, A.K. Effect of tillage on termites, weed incidence and productivity of spring wheat in rice-wheat system of North Western Indian plains. Crop Prot. 2004 , 23 , 1049–1054. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Sen, H.S.; Oosterbaan, R.J. Research on Water Management and Control in the Sunderbans, India ; Annual Report; ILRI: Wageningen, The Netherlands, 1992. [ Google Scholar ]
• Ambast, S.K.; Sen, H.S. Integrated water management strategies for coastal ecosystem. J. Indian Soc. Coastal Agric. Res. 2006 , 24 , 23–29. [ Google Scholar ]
• Bandyopadhyay, K.K.; Ghosh, P.K.; Hati, K.M.; Misra, A.K. Efficient utilization of limited available water in wheat through proper irrigation scheduling and integrated nutrient management under different cropping systems in a Vertisol. J. Indian Soc. Soil Sci. 2009 , 57 , 121–128. [ Google Scholar ]
• Biswas, A.K.; Mohanty, M.; Hati, K.M.; Misra, A.K. Soil organic carbon and aggregate stability effects of applied distillery effluents on a vertisol in India. Soil Tillage Res. 2009 , 104 , 241–246. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Grewal, S.S. Agroforestry systems for soil and water conservation in Shivaliks. In Agroforestry in 2000 AD for the Semi-Arid and Arid Tropics ; NRC for Agroforestry: Janshi, India, 1993; pp. 82–85. [ Google Scholar ]
• Ghosh, B.N. Vegetative Barriers for Erosion Control in Western Himalayan Region ; CSWCR&TI: Dehradun, India, 2009; pp. 1–8. [ Google Scholar ]
• Bhattacharyya, R.; Fullen, M.A.; Booth, C.A.; Kertesz, A.; Toth, A.; Kozma, K.Z.; Jakab, G.; Jankauskas, B.; Jankauskiene, G. Effeciveness of biological geotextiles on soil and water conservation in different agro-environments. Land Degrad. Dev. Special Issue 2011 , 22 , 495–504. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Bhattacharyya, R.; Zheng, Y.; Li, Y.; Tang, L.; Panomtarachichigul, M.; Peukrai, S.; Dao, C.T.; Tran, H.C.; Truong, T.T.; Jankauskas, B.; et al. Effects of biological geotextiles on aboveground biomass production in selected agro-ecosystems. Field Crops Res. 2012 , 126 , 23–36. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Fullen, M.A.; Subedi, M.; Booth, C.A.; Sarsby, R.W.; Davies, K.; Bhattacharyya, R.; Kugan, R.; Luckhurst, D.A.; Han, K.; Black, A.W.; et al. Utilizing biological geotextiles: Introduction to the BORASSUS Project and global perspectives. Land Degrad. Dev. Spec. Issue 2011 , 22 , 453–462. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Smets, T.; Poesen, J.; Bhattacharyya, R.; Fullen, M.A.; Subedi, M.; Booth, C.A.; Kertesz, A.; Toth, A.; Szalai, Z.; Jakab, G.; et al. Evaluation of biological geotextiles for reducing runoff and soil loss under various environmental conditions using laboratory and field plot data. Land Degrad. Dev. Special Issue 2011 , 22 , 480–494. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Bhattacharyya, R.; Fullen, M.A.; Booth, C.A. Using palm-mat geotextiles on an arable soil for water erosion control in the UK. Earth Surf. Process. Landforms 2011 , 36 , 933–945. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Bhattacharyya, R.; Fullen, M.A.; Booth, C.A.; Smets, T.; Poesen, J.; Black, A. Using palm mat geotextiles for soil conservation. I. Effects on soil properties. Catena 2011 , 84 , 99–107. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Bhattacharyya, R.; Fullen, M.A.; Davies, K.; Booth, C.A. Use of palm-mat geotextiles for rainsplash erosion control. Geomorph. 2010 , 119 , 52–61. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Bhattacharyya, R.; Fullen, M.A.; Davies, K.; Booth, C.A. Utilizing palm leaf geotextile mats to conserve loamy sand soil in the United Kingdom. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 2009 , 130 , 50–58. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Narain, P.; Singh, R.K.; Sindhwal, N.S.; Joshi, P. Agroforestry for soil and water conservation in the western Himalayan valley region of India. Agrofor. Syst. 1998 , 39 , 191–203. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Mahmud, M.K.; Chowdhury, N.H.; Md-Manjur. Mitigation of soil erosion with Jute geotextile aided by vegetation cover: Optimization of an integrated tactic for sustainable soil conservation system (SSCS). Glob. J. Res. Eng. Civil Struct. Eng. 2012 , 12 , 8–14. [ Google Scholar ]
• Nair, P.K.R. An Introduction to Agro Forestry ; Kluwer Academic Publishers: Dordrecht, The Netherland, 1993. [ Google Scholar ]
• Ramesh, P.; Panwar, N.R.; Singh, A.B.; Ramana, S.; Yadav, S.K.; Shrivastava, R. Status of organic farming in India. Curr. Sci. 2010 , 98 , 1190–1194. [ Google Scholar ]
• Nair, T. India to launch a brave new initiative to save the Critically Endangered Gharial. SPECIES–Mag. Spec. Surv. Comm. 2011 , 21 , 53. [ Google Scholar ]
• Rosenstock, T.S.; Tully, K.L.; Arias Navarro, C.; Neufeldt, H.; Butterbach Bahl, K.; Verchot, L.V. Agroforestry with N2-fixing trees: Sustainable development’s friend or foe? Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustain. 2014 , 6 , 15–21. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Singh, G. The Role of Prosopis in reclaiming high-pH soils and in meeting firewood and forage needs of small farmers. In Prosopis: Semi-Arid Fuelwood and Forage: Tree Building Consensus for the Disenfranchised ; US National Academy of Science: Washington, DC, USA, 1996. [ Google Scholar ]
• Mishra, A.; Sharmaa, S.D.; Pandeyb, R. Amelioration of degraded sodic soil by afforestation. Arid Land Res. Manag. 2004 , 18 , 13–23. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Kaur, B.; Gupta, S.R.; Singh, G. Soil carbon, microbial activity and nitrogen availability in agroforestry systems on moderately alkaline soils in Northern India. Appl. Soil Ecol. 2000 , 15 , 283–294. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Basavaraja, P.K.; Sharma, S.D.; Dhananjaya, B.N.; Badrinath, M.S. Acacia nilotica : A tree species for amelioration of sodic soils in Central dry zone of Karnataka, India. In Proceedings of the 19th World Congress of Soil Science, Soil Solutions for a Changing World, Brisbane, Australia, 1–6 August 2010; pp. 73–76.
• Mishra, A.; Sharma, S.D.; Khan, G.H. Improvement in physical and chemical properties of sodic soil by 3, 6, and 9 year-old plantations of Eucalyptus tereticornis bio-rejuvenation of soil. For. Ecol. Manag. 2003 , 184 , 115–124. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Singh, A.; Kaur, J. Impact of conservation tillage on soil properties in rice wheat cropping system. Agric. Sci. Res. J. 2012 , 2 , 30–41. [ Google Scholar ]
• Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO). “Climate-Smart” Agriculture. Policies, Practices and Financing for Food Security, Adaptation and Mitigation ; FAO: Rome, Italy, 2010; p. 41. [ Google Scholar ]
• Bhattacharyya, R.; Das, T.K.; Pramanik, P.; Ganeshan, V.; Saad, A.A.; Sharma, A.R. Impacts of conservation agriculture on soil aggregation and aggregate-associated N under an irrigated agroecosystem of the Indo-Gangetic Plains. Nutr. Cycl. Agro-Ecosyst. 2013 , 96 , 185–202. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• VPKAS. Annual Report of the Vivekananda Parvatiya Krishi Anusandhan Sansthan ; Vikas Publisher: Almora, India, 2011. [ Google Scholar ]
• Bhattacharyya, R.; Kundu, S.; Pandey, S.; Singh, K.P.; Gupta, H.S. Tillage and irrigation effects on crop yields and soil properties under rice-wheat system of the Indian Himalayas. Agric. Water Manag. 2008 , 95 , 993–1002. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Jat, M.L.; Saharawat, Y.S.; Gupta, R. Conservation agriculture in cereal systems of South Asia: Nutrient management perspectives. Karnataka J. Agric. Sci. 2011 , 24 , 100–105. [ Google Scholar ]
• RWC-CIMMYT. Addressing Resource Conservation Issues in Rice-Wheat Systems of South Asia: A Resource Book ; Rice-wheat consortium for the Indo-Gangetic Plains–International Maize and Wheat Improvement Centre: New Delhi, India, 2003; p. 305. [ Google Scholar ]
• Gathala, M.K.; Ladha, J.K.; Saharawat, H.S.; Kumar, V.; Sharma, P.K. Effect of tillage and crop establishment methods on physical properties of a medium-textured soil under a seven-year rice−wheat rotation. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 2011 , 75 , 1851–1862. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Hobbs, P.R.; Gupta, R.K. Sustainable resource management in intensively cultivated irrigated rice-wheat cropping systems of Indo-Gangetic plains of south Asia: Strategies and options. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Managing Natural Resources for Sustainable Production in 21st Century, New Delhi, India, 14−18 February 2000; Singh, A.K., Ed.; Indian Society of Soil Science: New Delhi, India; pp. 584–592.
• Ladha, J.K.; Kumar, V.; Alam, M.M.; Sharma, S.; Gathala, M.K.; Chandna, P.; Saharawat, Y.S.; Balasubramanian, V. Integrating crop and resource management technologies for enhanced productivity, profitability and sustainability of the rice–wheat system in South Asia. In Integrated Crop and Resource Management in the Rice–Wheat System of South Asia ; Ladha, J.K., Singh, Y., Erenstein, O., Hardy, B., Eds.; IRRI: Los Banos, The Philippines, 2009; pp. 69–108. [ Google Scholar ]
• Das, T.K.; Bhattacharyya, R.; Sudhishri, S.; Sharma, A.R.; Saharawat, Y.S.; Bandyopadhyay, K.K.; Sepat, S.; Bana, R.S.; Aggarwal, P.; Sharma, R.K.; et al. Conservation agriculture in an irrigated cotton–wheat system of the western Indo-Gangetic Plains: Crop and water productivity and economic profitability. Field Crops Res. 2014 , 158 , 24–33. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Jat, M.L.; Gathala, M.K.; Saharawat, Y.S.; Terawal, J.P.; Gupta, R.; Singh, Y. Double no-till and permanent raised beds in maize-wheat rotation of north-western Indo-Gangetic plains of India: Effects on crop yields, water productivity, profitability and soil physical properties. Field Crops Res. 2013 , 149 , 291–299. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Das, T.K.; Bhattacharyya, R.; Sharma, A.R.; Das, S.; Pathak, H. Impacts of conservation agriculture on total soil organic carbon retention potential under an irrigated agro-ecosystem of the western Indo-Gangetic Plains. Eur. J. Agron. 2013 , 51 , 34–42. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Mishra, A.K.; Aggarwal, P.; Bhattacharyya, R.; Das, T.K.; Sharna, A.R.; Singh, R. Least limiting water range for two conservation agriculture cropping systems in India. Soil Tillage Res. 2015 , 150 , 43–56. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Hati, K.M.; Chaudhary, R.S.; Mohanty, M.; Singh, R.K. Impact of conservation tillage on soil organic carbon content, its distribution in aggregate size fractions and physical attributes of Vertisols. In IISS Contribution in Frontier Areas of Soil Research ; Kundu, S., Manna, M.C., Biswas, A.K., Chaudhary, R.S., Lakaria, B.L., Subba Rao, A., Eds.; Indian Institute of Soil Science: Bhopal, India, 2013; pp. 187–200. [ Google Scholar ]
• Jat, R.A.; Wani, S.P.; Sahrawat, K.L. Conservation Agriculture in the Semi-Arid Tropics: Prospects and Problems. Adv. Agron. 2012 , 117 , 191–273. [ Google Scholar ]
• Gathala, M.K.; Kumar, V.; Sharma, P.C.; Yashpal, S.; Saharawat, H.S.; Jat, M.S.; Kumar, A.; Jat, M.L.; Humphreys, E.; Sarma, D.K.; et al. Optimizing intensive cereal-based cropping systems addressing current and future drivers of agricultural change in the northwestern Indo-Gangetic plains of India. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 2013 , 177 , 85–97. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]

© 2015 by the authors; licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

Share and Cite

Bhattacharyya, R.; Ghosh, B.N.; Mishra, P.K.; Mandal, B.; Rao, C.S.; Sarkar, D.; Das, K.; Anil, K.S.; Lalitha, M.; Hati, K.M.; et al. Soil Degradation in India: Challenges and Potential Solutions. Sustainability 2015 , 7 , 3528-3570. https://doi.org/10.3390/su7043528

Bhattacharyya R, Ghosh BN, Mishra PK, Mandal B, Rao CS, Sarkar D, Das K, Anil KS, Lalitha M, Hati KM, et al. Soil Degradation in India: Challenges and Potential Solutions. Sustainability . 2015; 7(4):3528-3570. https://doi.org/10.3390/su7043528

Bhattacharyya, Ranjan, Birendra Nath Ghosh, Prasanta Kumar Mishra, Biswapati Mandal, Cherukumalli Srinivasa Rao, Dibyendu Sarkar, Krishnendu Das, Kokkuvayil Sankaranarayanan Anil, Manickam Lalitha, Kuntal Mouli Hati, and et al. 2015. "Soil Degradation in India: Challenges and Potential Solutions" Sustainability 7, no. 4: 3528-3570. https://doi.org/10.3390/su7043528

Article Metrics

Article access statistics, supplementary material.

Supplementary (PDF, 791 KiB)

Further Information

Mdpi initiatives, follow mdpi.

Subscribe to receive issue release notifications and newsletters from MDPI journals

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW article

Impact of land-use changes on soil properties and carbon pools in india: a meta-analysis.

• 1 Department of Soil Science and Agricultural Chemistry, Bihar Agricultural University, Sabour, India
• 2 ICAR-National Rice Research Institute, Cuttack, India
• 3 International Rice Research Institute-India Office, New Delhi, India
• 4 International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center-India Office, New Delhi, India
• 5 ICAR-Indian Institute of Rice Research, Hyderabad, India
• 6 Uttar Banga Krishi Viswavidyalaya, Coochbehar, India
• 7 ICAR-Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi, India
• 8 CSIRO-Agriculture and Food, Urrbrae, SA, Australia

Land-use changes (LUC), primarily due to deforestation and soil disturbance, are one of the major causes of soil quality degradation and greenhouse gas emissions. Effects of LUC on soil physicochemical properties and changes in soil quality and land use management strategies that can effectively restore soil carbon and microbial biomass levels have been reported from all over the world, but the impact analysis of such practices in the Indian context is limited. In this study, over 1,786 paired datasets (for meta-analysis) on land uses (LUs) were collected from Indian literature (1990–2019) to determine the magnitude of the influence of LUC on soil carbon, microbial biomass, and other physical and chemical properties at three soil depths. Meta-analysis results showed that grasslands (36.1%) lost the most soil organic carbon (SOC) compared to native forest lands, followed by plantation lands (35.5%), cultivated lands (31.1%), barren lands (27.3%), and horticulture lands (11.5%). Our findings also revealed that, when compared to forest land, the microbial quotient was lower in other LUs. Due to the depletion of SOC stock, carbon dioxide equivalent (CO 2 eq) emissions were significantly higher in all LUs than in forest land. Results also showed that due to the conversion of forest land to cultivated land, total carbon, labile carbon, non-labile carbon, microbial biomass carbon, and SOC stocks were lost by 21%, 25%, 32%, 26%, and 41.2%, respectively. Changes in soil carbon pools and properties were more pronounced in surface (0–15 cm) soils than in subsurface soils (15–30 cm and 30–45 cm). Restoration of the SOC stocks from different LUs ranged from a minimum of 2% (grasslands) to a maximum of 48% (plantation lands). Overall, this study showed that soil carbon pools decreased as LUC transitioned from native forestland to other LUs, and it is suggested that adopting crop-production systems that can reduce CO 2 emissions from the intensive LUs such as the ones evaluated here could contribute to improvements in soil quality and mitigation of climate change impacts, particularly under Indian agro-climatic conditions.

1 Introduction

Anthropogenic activities have changed the development of livelihood by altering the land-use changes (LUC) in the past century at a very rapid pace ( Liu et al., 2005a ; 2005b ; Hurtt et al., 2006 ; Liu and Tian, 2010 ; Tian et al., 2014 ). The conversion of forest land (FL) into different land use (LU) systems such as barren land (BL), cultivated land (CL), grassland (GL), horticulture land (HL), and plantation land (PL) has been reported at the rate of 13 million hectares (mha) per year through deforestation ( FAO, 2006 ), and sometimes caused a decline in soil quality, thereby reducing its potential for actual productivity ( Wei et al., 2014 ; Nath et al., 2018 ). Reports from global studies indicated that LUC caused soil degradation resulting from intensive use and uneven terrain coupled with changing climatic conditions ( Palni et al., 1998 ; Abera and Wolde-Meskel, 2013 ; Kumar et al., 2017 ; Kumar et al., 2021 ). This LUC altered the system’s capacity as a carbon source or sink ( Abera and Wolde-Meskel, 2013 ; De Blécourt et al., 2013 ; Guillaume et al., 2015 ; Fan et al., 2016 ; Iqbal and Tiwari, 2016 ). A loss of soil organic carbon (SOC) and biodiversity due to the conversion of FL into different LUs has been well documented ( De Blécourt et al., 2013 ; Ahrends et al., 2015 ; Guillaume et al., 2015 ; Nath et al., 2018 ). Therefore, quantifying the impacts of LUC is critical to better understand the interactions among human activities, climate systems, and ecosystems and to design government policies ( Houghton and Hackler, 2003 ; Tian et al., 2003 ; Arora and Boer, 2010 ).

Detecting the impact of management and LUC in soil carbon pools is likely to be more sensitive than total SOC ( Campbell et al., 1997 ; Padbhushan et al., 2015 ; Padbhushan et al., 2016a ; Padbhushan et al., 2016b ; Rakshit et al., 2018 ; Meetei et al., 2020 ; Padbhushan et al., 2020 ). Soil microbial activity is the central process in the terrestrial carbon cycle. The microbial quotient (MQ) refers to the ratio between microbial biomass carbon (MBC) to SOC, which is used as a measure of ecophysiological status of soil microorganisms ( Anderson and Domsch, 1993 ). The MQ value can also reflect about the quality and nature of microbial activity in the soil. A large number of studies on MQ have shown its importance to evaluate or monitor the influence of short- or long-term changes in soil biological status due to management and other system-level manipulations ( Brookes, 1995 ; Bastida et al., 2008 ; Anderson and Domsch, 2010 ; Padbhushan et al., 2021 ). Soil properties and SOC stocks may be altered due to soil disturbances ( Guo and Gifford, 2002 ; Paul et al., 2002 ). A carbon dioxide equivalent (CO 2 eq) emission is a soil indicator that provides information on the amount of carbon loss from SOC stocks into the atmosphere. Through meta-analysis studies, these parameters have been found to be altered in changing LU systems at a global scale ( DeFries et al., 2002 ; Guo and Gifford, 2002 ; Achard et al., 2004 ; Houghton, 2008 ; Don et al., 2011 ). Therefore, knowledge of soil carbon pools, MQ and CO 2 eq emission helps to understand their impacts in a changing LU system.

India is the world’s second largest populous country and is expected to overtake China by 2025 ( United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs: Population Division, 2019 ). In India, the human population has increased from 200 million to 1,400 million during 1980–2020 and, coupled with economic growth, has brought significant change in LUs ( Tian et al., 2014 ; World Population Prospects: The 2019 Revision United Nations Population Division, 2020 ). Total SOC stocks in India are about 20.67 Pg (soil depth 0–30 cm) and 63.19 Pg (soil depth 0–150 cm) covering a total geographical area of 329 m ha. Figure 1A depicts the SOC stocks in different physiographic regions of India ( Bhattacharyya et al., 2000 ). The data are summarized into five categories, namely, Northern Mountains, The Great Plains, Peninsular India, Peninsular Plateau, and Coastal Plains and Islands representing the different physiographic regions of India. In the soil depth 0–30 cm, maximum and minimum SOC stocks have been recorded in Northern Mountains and Coastal Plains and Islands, respectively, whereas in the soil depth 0–150 cm, maximum and minimum were recorded in Northern Mountains and Peninsular Plateau. The area covered by the different regions is shown in Figure 1A .

FIGURE 1 . (A) Soil carbon stocks in different physiographic regions of India (source: Bhattacharyya et al., 2000 ). (B) Trend of net emissions/removals of CO 2 from forest land (FL), cultivated land (CL), and grassland (GL) (1990–2017) of India ( Y 1 -axis represent CL and GL; Y 2 -axis represent FL), FAO ( http://faostat.fao.org/ ).

Currently, India ranks third with a share of 7% of total CO 2 emissions in the world ( IEA, 2019 ), but ranks 20th in the world for per-capita annual CO 2 emissions, which is approximately 1.94 tons, less than half the global average of 4.8 tons CO 2 ( Ritchie and Roser, 2019 ). The per-capita emissions of CO 2 are lower for India when compared to the other major CO 2 emission contributors of the world (except China). During the period 1880–2020, India has experienced a decline in FL of 18 mha (from 89 mha in 1880 to 71 mha in 2019) and expansion of CL by 49 m ha (from 92 mha in 1880 to 141 mha in 2019) resulted from conversion from FL, GL, and BL into CL ( Tian et al., 2014 ; Bodh, 2019 ). Due to these conversions, a significant reduction in SOC stocks and its impacts on soil quality and ecosystem health have been observed. Supplementary Figure S1 presents the trend for the share of FL and CL systems in the total land area during the period 1990 to 2017. Although the magnitude of change is small, the trends are encouraging, i.e., the FL area has increased from 21.5% to 23.7% while the CL area has decreased from 61.1% to 60.4%. Governmental initiatives in recent years have helped to reduce the rate of deforestation rate in India by reducing deforestation, rectifying deforestation by reforestation, and increasing afforestation by establishing forests in new areas ( Don et al., 2011 ). This is evident from the governments’ effort to increase the area under forests for achieving the long-term target to fetch 33% of total area under FL cover. However, in the past few years, during 2000–2017, net emissions/removals of CO 2 by the FL have increased (from −18 × 10 4 gigatons to −11 × 10 4 gigatons), whereas net emissions/removal of CO 2 of CL and GL remained constant and consistently positive ( Figure 1B ).

A meta-analysis approach has generally been used to assess the magnitude and direction of treatment effects as well as pattern and sources of heterogeneity by combining the findings from several studies under various environmentally and ecologically variable regions ( Hedges et al., 1999 ; Koricheva et al., 2013 ). For example, meta-analysis has been used to derive general conclusions in ecology, biogeographic patterns of biota, carbon, and nitrogen dynamics and climate change effects at global and regional scales ( Treseder, 2008 ; Meiser et al., 2014 ; Liu et al., 2020 ; Porre et al., 2020 ). Similar research was also conducted to quantify the effects of various LUC on the global SOC, soil carbon pools and soil properties through meta-analysis ( Guo and Gifford, 2002 ; Deng et al., 2016 ) but no such investigations to understand the impact of conversion of FL to other LUs were done in an Indian context.

The main aim of this study is to obtain a quantitative assessment of responses in soil properties under Indian climatic and edaphic conditions including soil carbon stocks, microbial biomass, MQ, and CO 2 equivalent emissions, due to conversion of FL to other LUs. This was done through a meta-analysis approach using datasets obtained from published studies carried out in different regions of India. The general hypothesis was that conversion of FL into LUs with varying degrees of disturbance and plant diversity would cause a general decline in SOC stocks along with a decline in soil microbial capacity. Specific goals were to (1) determine the effect of LUC on general soil properties; (2) estimate the effect of LUC on SOC, soil carbon pools, and SOC stocks; (3) determine the relationship between SOC and bulk density (BD) under various LUs; and (4) analyze the variations in MQ and CO 2 eq emission in various LUs in the Indian agroecological context.

2 Materials and Methods

2.1 data sources and collections.

Data on soil physical, chemical, and biological properties, including soil carbon pools, were obtained from studies that evaluated LUC effects in established experiments covering India’s five physiographic regions: Northern Mountains, Great Plains, Peninsular India, Peninsular Plateau, and Coastal Plains and Islands. Figure 2 shows the major soil taxonomic groups of India and the major study sites (31 locations) from which experimental results were obtained from published literature for the meta-analysis. Data were obtained from published research/review articles and theses using unique keywords related to the study’s objectives. The data were compiled following different categories of LUC, e.g., from FL to BL; from FL to CL; from FL to GL; from FL to HL; and from FL to PL. Data didn’t require any specific criteria other than have two minimum LUs including FL. To understand the effect of LUC on soil properties and soil carbon pools, a thorough analysis was conducted on different LU systems in the Indian context (details in Section 2.2) and only studies with a minimum of two LUs and with appropriate sets of soil physical, chemical, and biological parameters were considered as part of the selected studies irrespective of years of study as the magnitude of LUC change would depend on the duration that the LU was implemented (details in Section 2.2). In all studies with comparable LUs in different agroecological regions, FL use systems are native in nature and other LUs are converted from native forest due to human disturbances. Major soil types covered in this study included alluvial soil, black soil, red soil, laterite soil, and arid soil. Over the other LUs (BL, CL, GL, HL, and PL), FL was used as a control treatment. This study also covers the Himalayan zone, the Indo-Gangetic plains, the north-eastern region, and the peninsular region, which represent different subtropical climate regions of India. Specific soil types, taxonomy, management methods, crops and cropping systems, as well as specific trees and grasses were not included in this report.

FIGURE 2 . Different land use systems and taxonomic soil group in India showing location map of major study sites.

2.2 LU Selection and Soil Parameters Considered for the Study

Figure 2 shows the major LU systems present in the different agroecological regions of India. The description of different LUs selected for the assessment of changes in soil carbon in the Indian soils is given in Table 1 . Details of the soil parameter data used in this study and the soil characteristics of various LUs are given in Table 2 and Table 3 .

TABLE 1 . Descriptions of Land uses (LUs) in the study.

TABLE 2 . Soil parameters considered in the study.

TABLE 3 . Soil characteristics of various land uses from the collected studies.

2.3 Data Compilation

Various published literatures (original articles, review papers, and theses) were collected from the period of 1990–2019 and reviewed critically in context to the impact of LUC on soil carbon pools and soil properties in different regions of India with an aim of finding the changes in these soil parameters due to conversion of FL to other LUs. Following a general analysis, data from a replicated studies on different LUs were used, with FL data serving as a control to better understand the impact of LUC on BL, CL, GL, HL, and PL in India. To understand the impact of LUC in various soil depths (0–0.15 m, 0.15–0.30 m, and 0.30–0.45 m), 1,786 paired datasets from 31 major study sites (reflected in Figure 2 ) with multiple LU comparisons including the FL system were analyzed for meta-analysis using MetaWin 2.1 software.

2.4 Meta-Analysis: Method of Analysis Using Diverse Datasets

Two stage-based random effect meta-analyses were used to analyze the database and understand the comparative changes ( Rosenberg et al., 2000 ; Chakraborty et al., 2017 ; Sharma et al., 2019 ). Under this, the effect size (ES) was calculated for individual parameter as the natural log of the response ratio (InR) using the equation as proposed by Hedges et al. (1999) :

Where X T is the average of response variables (SOC, SOC stocks, soil carbon pools, and other soil parameters) of the treatments (LUs), and X C is the average of these variables in FL with control.

In the second stage, combined effect estimate was determined as a weighted mean of the effects estimated in the individual studies. A weighted mean is calculated as

Where N T and N C represent the number of replications for each of the treatments (LUs), in an individual study. If more than one observation was included in a treatment, the weighted are divided by the number of observations from that study. Since the studies were from different soil and environmental conditions and with varying multiple replications, the standard deviation calculated was based on the number of observations with a simple statistical procedure in MS excel. ES from individual studies were then combined using a mixed-effect model to calculate the cumulative effect size and the 95% confidence intervals (CIs) through boot-strapping with 4,999 iterations ( Adams et al., 1997 ). The mixed-effect model is a random-effect meta-analytic model for categorical data ( Rosenberg et al., 2000 ), assuming random variation among studies within a group and fixed variation between groups. The cumulative effect was considered significant if the CIs did not pass over zero. Results were interpreted by back-transformation and presented as change in percentage caused by treatments in relation to control. The comparisons tested for their significance were between FL and different LUs and the meta-analyzed values presented in graphs with statistical significance (for p values < 0.05) marked with an asterisk.

2.5 Linear Model for Correlation Among SOC and BD in Different LUs

Data for SOC and BD within different LUs were log transformed for normalization and analyzed for potential relationships using a general linear regression model ( Nelder and Wedderburn, 1972 ), and the regression equations plus R 2 values are shown in the Figure 8 .

3.1 Impacts on Soil pH

LUC showed positive effects on soil pH for LUs like BL, CL, GL, HL, and PL when compared to FL ( Figure 3A ). For example, soil pH increased significantly for BL (5.0%), CL (6.0%), and HL (5.0%) but found non-significant changes for GL (1.1%) and PL (4.1%) over the FL, which is considered as control for this study. Soil pH showed positive effects for other LUs over the FL for depth-wise data ( Figure 3A ). In the 0–15 cm soil depth, pH increased significantly in CL (6.4%) and HL (5.6%) over the FL, but no significant changes were found for BL, GL, and PL. In the 15–30 cm soil depth, pH increased significantly in CL (6.3%) and HL (4.3%) over the FL but was non-significant for BL, GL, and PL, whereas in soil depth 30–45 cm, pH increased significantly in BL (8.1%), CL (3.7%), and HL (5.2%) over the FL and was non-significant for GL and PL ( Figure 3A ). The depth-wise results of pH were in concurrence to the findings of overall pH except for BL and similarly indicated that conversion of FL towards other LUs could result into increase in soil pH ( Figure 3A ).

FIGURE 3 . Comparisons of soil properties. (A) Soil reaction (pH). (B) Bulk density (BD) and (C) cation exchange capacity (CEC) under various land uses (BL, CL, GL, HL, and PL) with FL based on soil depths (0–15 cm, 15–30 cm, and 30–45 cm). The error bars show 95% confidence intervals (CI), and the difference is significant if it does not pass zero. *indicates significant difference at p -value is less than 0.05. Here, Forest land (FL) is used as control, BL—Barren land, CL—Cultivated land, GL—Grassland, HL—Horticulture land, and PL—Plantation land.

3.2 Impacts on Bulk Density and Cation Exchange Capacity

BD was found to be significantly and positively affected in LUs CL and HL over the FL. The percent increase of BD in BL, CL, GL, HL, and PL was 2.7%, 5.9%, 1.0%, 4.9%, and 5.8%, respectively, when compared with FL ( Figure 3B ); however, the increase was lower in the GL system. BD improved with soil depths, particularly at 0–15 cm; a significant increase of 4.2% (BL), 4.1% (CL), 1.6% (GL), and 4.2% (HL) was observed over the FL. CL and HL showed a consistent increase in BD with increased depth, 6.8% and 4.5% (15–30 cm) and 11.8% and 9.1% (30–45 cm), respectively, which was significant over FL ( Figure 3B ). Others showed a non-significant change. Conversion of FL to GL reduced CEC significantly in particular in the 15–30 cm depth. For example, the percent decrease for GL in CEC was 8.8% over the FL ( Figure 3C ).

3.3 Impacts on Soil Organic Carbon

Negative effects of LUC on SOC were found for LUs like BL, CL, GL, HL, and PL when compared to FL ( Figure 4A ). The SOC decreased significantly for BL (−27.3%), CL (−31.1%), GL (−36.1%), and PL (−35.5%) over the FL considered as control for this study, but changes were non-significant for HL (−11.5%). SOC decreased with soil depth in LUs when compared to FL ( Figure 4A ). In the soil depth 0–15 cm, SOC decreased significantly in BL (−25.5%) and GL (−27.5%) over the FL but changed non-significantly for CL (−21.0%), HL (−17.5%), and PL (−31.1%) in comparison to FL. In soil depth 15–30 cm, SOC decreased significantly in BL (−29.6%), CL (−46.5%), GL (−41.3%), and PL (−40.5%) over the FL. The reduction was higher in soil depth 30–45 cm where SOC decreased significantly in BL (−27.7%), CL (−54.9%), GL (−63.7%), and PL (−36.4%) over the FL. In both soil depths, the observed changes for HL were −12.4% (15–30 cm) and 1.8% (30–45 cm), respectively, and were non-significant. The depth-wise results of SOC were in concurrence to the findings of overall SOC and similarly indicated that conversion of FL towards other LUs would cause a decline in SOC content.

FIGURE 4 . Comparisons of soil properties. (A) Soil organic carbon (SOC), and (B) total carbon (TC) under various land uses (BL, CL, GL, HL, and PL) with FL based on soil depths (0–15 cm, 15–30 cm, and 30–45 cm). The error bars show 95% confidence intervals (CI) and the difference is significant if it does not pass zero. *indicates significant difference at p -value is less than 0.05. Here, Forest land (FL) is used as control, BL—Barren land, CL—Cultivated land, GL—Grassland, HL—Horticulture land, and PL—Plantation land.

3.4 Impacts on Total Carbon

Negative effects of LUC on total carbon (TC) were found for LUs like BL, CL, GL, HL, and PL when compared to FL ( Figure 4B ). TC decreased significantly for BL (−54.3%), CL (−20.8%), GL (−35.0%), HL (−39.6%), and PL (−8.7%) over the FL. Total C decreased with soil depth for other LUs over the FL ( Figure 4B ). In soil depth 0–15 cm, TC decreased significantly in BL (−57.8%), CL (−30.5%), GL (−41.4%), HL (−31.2%), and PL (−20.2%) over the FL. In soil depth 15–30 cm, TC decreased significantly in BL (−39.5%) and GL (−31.6%) over the FL and increased significantly in PL (16.6%). However, TC for CL was not significantly different as compared to FL. In soil depth 30–45 cm, TC decreased significantly in HL (−40.0%) over the FL and increased significantly in PL (14.7%) over the FL ( Figure 4B ).

3.5 Impacts on Labile Carbon and Non-Labile Carbon

Labile carbon (LC) decreased significantly for BL (−34.7%), CL (−24.9%), GL (−35.5%), HL (−33.5%), and PL (−48.9%) over the FL ( Figure 5A ). These results indicated that conversion of FL towards other LUs could readily result into decline in LC content under most conditions. Labile C decreased significantly in the soil depth 0–15 cm in BL (−29.6%), CL (−9.7%), GL (−28.4%), HL (−31.0%), and PL (−46.8%) over the FL. Also, in soil depth 15–30 cm, LC decreased significantly in BL (−37.6%), CL (−45.6%), GL (−55.6%), HL (−31.4%), and PL (−50.0%) over the FL. In soil depth 30–45 cm, LC decreased significantly in BL (−45.9%), CL (−53.8%), GL (−64.6%), HL (−42.8%), and PL (−56.0%) over the FL ( Figure 5A ).

FIGURE 5 . Comparisons of soil carbon pools (SCP). (A) Labile carbon (LC), (B) Non-Labile carbon (NLC), and (C) Microbial Biomass Carbon (MBC) under various land uses (BL, CL, GL, HL, and PL) with FL based on soil depths (0–15 cm, 15–30 cm, and 30–45 cm). The error bars show 95% confidence intervals (CI) and the difference is significant if it does not pass zero. *indicates significant difference at p -value is less than 0.05. Here, Forest land (FL) is used as control, BL—Barren land, CL—Cultivated land, GL—Grassland, HL—Horticulture land, and PL—Plantation land.

Non-labile carbon (NLC) decreased significantly for BL (−32.3%), CL (−32.4%), GL (−35.3%), HL (−34.5%), and PL (−51.5%) over the FL ( Figure 5B ). These results indicated that conversion of FL into other LUs could result into decline in NLC content under most conditions in all soil depths. In soil depth 0–15 cm, NLC decreased significantly in BL (−37.6%), CL (−31.4%), GL (−40.0%), HL (−39.44%), and PL (−54.9%) over the FL. In soil depth 15–30 cm, NLC decreased significantly in CL (−23.8%), GL (−15.6%), and PL (−26.8%) over the FL and increased significantly in HL (4.9%) as compared to FL. The BL was non-significantly changed in this depth. In soil depth 30–45 cm, NLC decreased significantly in BL (−69.5%), CL (−76.4%), GL (−51.0%), HL (−63.0%), and PL (−70.4%) over the FL ( Figure 5B ). In general, the percent decrease in 30–45 cm soil depth was greater than that in 15–30 cm followed by 0–15 cm ( Figure 5B ).

3.6 Impacts on Microbial Biomass Carbon (MBC)

Negative effects of LUC on soil MBC were found for LUs like BL, CL, GL, and HL ( Figure 5C ). For example, MBC levels decreased significantly for BL (−61.3%) and CL (−25.7%) over the FL but changes in GL (−29.5%) and HL (−10.3%) were non-significant. These results indicate that the conversion of FL to other LUs (BL/CL/GL/HL) could result in the decline of MBC content in soils ( Supplementary Figure S2 ).

3.7 Changes in Soil Carbon Stocks (SOC Stocks) by Land-Use Change

LUC impacts on the SOC stocks were seen in all the regions of the country. For example, conversion of FL into LUs such as BL, CL, HL, and PL significantly reduced SOC stocks, whereas no significant change was observed under GL ( Figure 6 ). The percent reduction of SOC stocks in BL, CL, GL, HL, and PL was 34.0%, 41.2%, 1.5%, 33.5%, and 47.9%, respectively, as compared with FL ( Figure 6 ). There was a general trend of reduction in SOC stocks in all LUs. In soil depth 0–15 cm, SOC stocks decreased significantly in BL (−31.9%), CL (−38.3%), HL (−38.0%), and PL (−30.2%) over the FL but no significant change was observed for GL (5.7%) ( Figure 6 ). Similarly, in soil depth 15–30 cm, SOC stocks decreased significantly in BL (−41.4%), CL (−44.6%), HL (−31.2%), and PL (−67.1%) over the FL, but the small change observed for GL (−17.3%) was not significant. Unlike the two top soil depths, in the soil depth 30–45 cm, SOC in GL decreased significantly (−14.2%), whereas the change in HL (−10.3%) was non-significant. There was a significant change in SOC in BL (−35.9%), CL (−47.6%), and PL (−67.2%) over the FL ( Figure 6 ).

FIGURE 6 . Comparisons of soil carbon stocks (SOC stocks) under various land uses (BL, CL, GL, HL, and PL) with FL based on soil depths (0–15 cm, 15–30 cm, and 30–45 cm). The error bars show 95% confidence intervals (CI) and the difference is significant if it does not pass zero. *indicates significant difference at p -value is less than 0.05. Here, Forest land (FL) is used as control, BL—Barren land, CL—Cultivated land, GL—Grassland, HL—Horticulture land, and PL—Plantation land.

3.8 Effect of LUC on Microbial Quotient (MQ) and CO 2 Equivalent Emission

Results for MQ and CO 2 equivalent emission showed significant differences in all LUs compared to FL systems ( Figure 7 ; Supplementary Figure S2 ). MQ values in BL were lowest (0.91 ± 0.28) compared with those observed in other LUs (ranging from 3.31 ± 0.45 to 4.19 ± 0.49), whereas CO 2 equivalent emissions were lower in GL and HL (23 ± 11 and 19 ± 8 Mg ha −1 , respectively) and highest in CL and PL systems (66 ± 12 Mg ha −1 ) compared to FL ( Figure 7 ).

FIGURE 7 . Comparison of microbial quotient (MQ) and CO 2 eq. emissions in various land uses from the collected studies (mean ± standard error). Here, Forest land (FL) is used as control, BL—Barren land, CL—Cultivated land, GL—Grassland, HL—Horticulture land, and PL—Plantation land. Note: PL has no sufficient data for MQ analysis.

3.9 Correlation of SOC With BD in Land Uses

Bulk density (BD) was found to be significant and negatively correlated with SOC in all the LUs at p < 0.05 ( Figure 8 ). The maximum correlation was observed in FL ( R 2 = 0.48**).

FIGURE 8 . Linear regression with the variables of soil organic carbon (SOC) and bulk density (BD) in contrast with six different land uses, with significant difference in R 2 value at p < 0.05. Here, FL, Forest land; BL, Barren land; CL, Cultivated land; GL, Grassland; HL, Horticulture land; PL, Plantation land.

4 Discussion

4.1 changes in soil properties following land-use change.

Deforestation and LUC from FL to different LU production systems with varying anthropogenic activities has been suggested to increase CO 2 and other GHG emissions contributing to climate change ( Lal, 2004 ; Wang et al., 2021 ). Through meta-analysis, this study attempted to determine the impact of LUC on soil properties, particularly SOC and microbial biomass, in the Indian context using datasets representing different agroecological regions. Appropriate number of datasets was used for conducting meta-analysis of soil parameters: soil pH ( n = 155), SOC ( n = 333), BD ( n = 303), and TC ( n = 163). A positive change in soil pH due to changes of LU as observed in our study resonates the earlier work done ( Rabbi et al., 2016 ; Malik et al., 2018 ). The higher positive impact on soil pH in CL followed by HL, BL, PL, and GL could be due to the management practices including application of fertilizers and other soil amendments, irrigation practices, etc. It has been reported that LU intensification in lower pH soils positively affects the pH and leads to SOC loss through increased rate of decomposition from improved microbial growth and activity ( Malik et al., 2018 ). Sharma et al. (2014) recorded higher soil pH in CL than the FL in Indian Himalaya’s foot hill. LUC have an impact on soil properties such as BD. A positive change in BD due to changes of LU was recorded in our study similar to previous reports ( Vidya et al., 2002 ; Meena et al., 2018 ). Lower BD in FL than other LUs could be partly attributed to the higher organic matter (OM) content in the soil, better aggregation resulting in an increase in the volume of micropores, and overall better soil structure ( Materechera and Mkhabela, 1995 ). The highest BD was found in soil depths of 30–45 cm, while the lowest was found in surface soil (0–15 cm), indicating that BD increased with soil depth due to the effects of the overlying soil’s weight ( Vidya et al., 2002 ; Meena et al., 2018 ).

A better understanding of the dynamics and responses in SOC content is vital for detecting and forecasting changes in response to global climate change ( Negi and Gupta, 2010 ). The evidence from the meta-analysis of experimental findings from different agroecological regions indicates a general trend of decline in SOC from the conversion of FL into different LUs. Similar findings for the reduction in SOC when native forest systems were converted into managed agroecosystems have been reported from other regions of the world ( Mayer et al., 2020 ). The heterogeneity associated with various studies considered in this meta-analysis, in terms of environmental, edaphic, and specific management practices, contributed to the differences in the magnitude of effect seen for different LUs. Similar results were reported in the central Himalayan region of Uttarakhand, India ( Kalambukattu et al., 2013 ).

Large annual additions of OM in the form of leaf litter, which are potentially highest in the FL, coupled with lack of tillage/disturbance activities and a slow rate of decomposition would have contributed to higher soil carbon values ( Haynes, 2005 ; Baker et al., 2007 ; Kalambukattu et al., 2013 ). Whereas the lower SOC in other LUs compared to FL could be attributed to the tillage and other disturbance activities, removal of crop residues through burning, grazing, irrigation, etc. affects higher OM decomposition and nutrient mineralization ( Batjes, 1999 ; Ogle et al., 2014 ). Decomposition of OM releases CO 2 into the environment, resulting in a decrease in SOC ( Ramzan et al., 2019 ). In the case of CL systems, crop residue removal, intensive cultivation practices, and increased microbial carbon turnover can increase carbon losses from the soil system ( Lal and Kimble, 1997 ; Yang et al., 2004 ; Baker et al., 2007 ; Smith et al., 2008 ; Sharma et al., 2014 ). The loss of SOC through increased CO 2 levels into the environment is suggested to contribute significantly to the global warming and climate change ( Lal 2004 ; Sanderman et al., 2017 ). Therefore, there is a widespread belief that it is important to store SOC in the terrestrial environment through increased SOC sequestration and reduced losses in order to manage climate change and associated effects on overall ecosystem health. Any attempts to reduce SOC losses through changes in the management in different LUs would help sequester more carbon in terrestrial ecosystems. The study shows that there is scope for improvement of SOC in different LUs (BL/CL/GL/PL/HL) to become carbon equivalent to that in FL systems, i.e., a potential to increase SOC by 27.3% in BL, 31.1% in CL, 36.1% in GL, 35.5% in PL, and 11.5% in HL. This change could be possible through proper management strategies that promote C sequestration in soil. As with our findings, several studies have found a strong and negative association between SOC and BD over the LUC ( Hati et al., 2007 ; Wang et al., 2011 ; Padbhushan et al., 2016a ; Padbhushan et al., 2016b ; Meena et al., 2018 ).

TC content is one of the key indicators of soil quality that has been linked to the long-term addition of organic residues to the soil ( Lemke et al., 2010 ; Yang et al., 2012 ; Padbhushan et al., 2016b ), and it plays an important role in improving other physico-chemical properties of soils. Total C includes all carbon pools, i.e., inorganic carbon, charcoal carbon, and organic carbon (which includes labile carbon pools). While the changes in TC reflect the overall changes in SOC stocks, it may not give true reflection of changes in SOC components that may differentially respond or change due to management in different LUs. Measuring changes in TC content due to LUC has been shown to take longer periods, i.e., decades, compared to the changes that can be seen in the more labile components of SOC ( Lal, 2004 ; Sanderman et al., 2017 ). Over the FL, the TC trend changed from BL < HL < GL < CL < PL (higher negative value to lower negative value). In terms of soil depths, the 0–15 cm soil depth showed the greatest difference in negative value, indicating that changes in TC were greater in the surface soil than the other soil depths due to more litter addition on the undisturbed soil.

It is now well accepted that changes in TC may not be a sensitive indicator for short-term responses on SOC stocks, and carbon sequestration and measurement of SOM composition or soil carbon pools have been suggested as better indicators of changes in soil quality due to LUC ( Gregorich et al., 1994 ; Leifeld and Kögel-Knabner, 2005 ).

4.2 Changes in Soil Carbon Pools and Microbial Quotient (MQ) Following Land-Use Change

Soil carbon pools such as LC, NLC, and MBC were shown to give more useful information about carbon cycling and loss through CO 2 emissions and more sensitive soil-quality parameters for carbon dynamics under different management practices ( Yang et al., 2012 ). PL showed greater loss both for LC and NLC than other LUs used in our study over the FL. This could be due to post burn cultivation in the PL system. Similar results were corroborated by Sahoo et al. (2019) in Mizoram, Northeast India who reported lower LC and NLC in PL than other LUs compared to FL. The negative effects of LUC from FL extended to all the SOC pools including LC pool. Thus, FL systems showed the highest values for SOC pools compared to all the LUs considered in this study. High soil carbon pools (for all the three soil quality parameters) in FL could be attributed to undisturbed litter additions for long periods. In contrast, disturbances caused by cultivation and low additions of OM are reasons for low LC in CL. Consequences are nutrient loss and impacting macroaggregate formation, which result in lowering in soil fertility and quality, including higher BD and soil compaction. In general, LC was more in surface soil than the subsurface soil potentially due to higher amounts of added root biomass and exudation coupled with surface crop residues ( Padre et al., 2007 ; Brar et al., 2013 ; Padbhushan et al., 2015 ).

MBC represents the living component of SOC and is considered to reflect LC levels in soil systems ( Gonzalez-Quiñones et al., 2011 ; Mendoza et al., 2020 ). Soils from FL systems showed the highest amount of MBC levels mostly from the larger amounts of aboveground residues and root biomass ( Holden and Treseder, 2013 ; Kumar et al., 2021 ). MBC can be a sensitive indicator of SOC changes as it has a much faster rate of turnover; hence, trends in MBC have been suggested to predict longer-term trends in SOC ( Gupta et al., 1994 ; Lal, 2004 ; Haynes 2005 ; Padbhushan et al., 2020 ). The lack of carbon inputs from plants would be the primary reason for the lowest MBC in the BL systems. It is well known that the practice of fallowing in cropping lands can cause a significant reduction in MBC and microbial activities ( Sarkar et al., 2020 ). Similarly, the lower value of MBC in CL is attributed to the intensive tillage practice promoting microbial turnover of biologically available soil OM and crop residues and the loss of carbon as CO 2 emissions ( Gougoulias et al., 2014 ; Tiefenbacher et al., 2021 ). There are several individual and meta-analysis studies that reported significant reductions in MBC from conventional tillage practices, in particular when compared to no-till practices ( Roper et al., 2010 ; Zuber and Villamil, 2016 ).

MQ is one of the important derived measures to indicate changes in MBC, potential for microbial carbon turnover, and the general soil quality in different LU systems ( Anderson and Domsch, 1993 ). Unlike the absolute values of microbial biomass, MQ being a ratio avoids the problems from comparing values across soils and systems with different total SOM levels. Results in this study indicate that MQ showed greater effect in BL followed by PL, CL, and GL. The lowest values for MQ coupled with lower SOC in BL suggest that changing FL systems to BL not only reduced the overall SOC stocks but also affected microbial carbon turnover, with an overall decline in soil quality. The general trend of higher MQ values in LUs such as FL and GL suggests the presence of perennial vegetation and/or lower disturbance supporting higher biological activity and associated ecosystem functions. It is suggested that a greater decrease in MQ values, in particular LUs, indicates that soil is being used in an exploitative manner and microbial pools are declining faster than changes in the total SOC ( Sparling, 1997 ).

4.3 Changes in SOC Stocks Following Land-Use Change

LUC-associated fluctuations in SOC stocks have been reported in many agroecological regions from different parts of the world ( Chatterjee et al., 2018 ; Pellikka et al., 2018 ). Also, the conversion of LUs from FL to other LUs leading in lower SOC stocks can result in a decrease in soil quality ( De Blécourt et al., 2013 ; Guillaume et al., 2015 ; Fan et al., 2016 ; Iqbal and Tiwari, 2016 ). Changes in LU from FL to other LUs can serve as a carbon source while also affecting soil characteristics ( Abera and Wolde-Meskel, 2013 ). According to a report, about 350 mha of FL has been transferred to other LUs ( ITTO, 2002 ), resulting in biodiversity loss ( Ahrends et al., 2015 ) and 20–40% SOC storage losses ( De Blécourt et al., 2013 ; Guillaume et al., 2015 ). According to a meta-analysis, when native FL was transformed to PL and CL, SOC stocks decreased by 13%–42% ( Guo and Gifford, 2002 ). Similarly, in this study, LUs had a negative effect on SOC stocks. The absence of deep-rooted trees and fewer canopy covers in this study resulted in lower SOC stocks for PL and HL as compared to FL. Also, SOC content is an indicator of the influence of nature of crops and its management practice. These PL use types undergo regular intercultural operations, which thereby reduces the input of carbon to the soil ( Sahoo et al., 2019 ). The equilibrium between the rate of deposition of photosynthetic materials and the rate of respiration by decomposer microorganisms influences the ability for soils to sequester carbon from the atmosphere ( Mathieu et al., 2015 ). In addition, since root tissue is more resistant to decomposition and mineralization than top soil litters, root-derived carbon has a longer residence period ( Rasse et al., 2005 ).

This meta-analysis study shows that the scope of improvement of SOC stocks in other LUs (BL/CL/GL/PL/HL) to become carbon equivalent to FL can be possible by increasing SOC stocks by 33.5%–41.2% in BL, CL, and HL systems. The level of increase in SOC stocks required was lowest in GL (1.47%) systems and highest in PL. The general trend for the required increase of SOC stocks with depth was similar to the total SOC. However, this change being more in lower depths as compared to surface soil is due to the differences in SOC stocks brought out by LUCs in the subsurface soil over the surface soil. As restoring the lost SOC stocks under different LUs is a difficult job, it is worthwhile to make it possible through management practices. A large amount of atmospheric CO 2 can be restored into the soil, which may help mitigate the problems of climate change. Integration of organic inputs with chemical fertilizer in cultivated soil can be one of the better LU management strategies for restoring carbon in the soil and improving the crop productivity and thus managing soil health and ensuring food security ( Padbhushan et al., 2020 ).

4.4 Effects of SOC on Soil Health and Food Security

Greenhouse gases (GHGs) are the main players to maintain the Earth’s habitable temperature. A small change in their amount in the atmosphere can affect the climatic conditions on Earth. Anthropogenic emissions of CO 2 are likely to increase with increase in human population ( Lelieveld et al., 2019 ). Human led LUC can result in significant exchanges of CO 2 between the soil and air ( Lal, 2004 ). Carbon dioxide equivalent (CO 2 eq) emissions in our study were found to be affected in all the LUs over the FL, suggesting loss in SOC stocks. CL and PL had more SOC stocks lost and added more CO 2 in the atmosphere ( Sahoo et al., 2019 ). Therefore, restoration of carbon in the soil can be one of the options to counteract the effect of climate change and the problems created due to climate change. Since OM plays a multifaceted role in several soil processes ( Gregorich et al., 1994 ), SOC is one of the essential components for sustaining soil health and food security by the maintenance of the production system ( Anantha et al., 2018 ).

The findings in this study show that changes in LU have an effect on not only SOC but also other soil resources. Some studies have found links between SOC and total nitrogen and other parameters, implying that OM turnover has an effect on these variables ( Xu et al., 2019 ). The importance of soil management and carbon storage is becoming more widely recognized. However, due to continued LUC to meet the ever-growing food production needs, maintaining or improving low levels of SOC stocks is a major challenge. This issue can be mitigated by employing proper crop production management strategies that include systems with lower disturbance/tillage practices, retention of crop residues, application of organic manures, and inclusion of perennial crops as part of an integrated system approach.

5 Conclusion

Our study found that LUC had a positive effect on soil pH and BD, while SOC, TC, and soil carbon pools were negatively affected, in comparison with FL systems. The conversion of FL to other LUs resulted in losses of overall SOC stocks and the trends were similar in all the soil carbon pools such as LC, NLC, and MBC. LUC, in general, affected soil carbon pools and soil properties in surface as well as subsurface layers. SOC stocks declined by a minimum of 2% in GL, 42% in CL, and 48% in PL. There was a negative association between SOC and BD in several LUs. Similarly, when compared to FL, MQ and CO 2 eq emissions were negatively impacted in all LUs (BL/CL/GL/HL/PL). Overall, in view of the evidence for the potential impact of LUC on SOC stocks, C turnover, and soil quality, there is an urgent need for sustainable management of current production systems and natural resources that reduce CO 2 emissions and increase soil carbon in LU systems in India.

Data Availability Statement

The original contributions presented in the study are included in the article/ Supplementary Material , further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding authors.

Author Contributions

SS framed the notion and was overall in charge of this manuscript preparation. RP, UK, MK, and PK collected literature, analyzed data, and drafted the manuscript. DR helped in meta-analysis . RK did preparation of map. KA, VG, AK, BP, and AS edited the manuscript. All contributors discussed the outcomes and added to the final document. All authors have studied and approved the in print version of the paper.

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Publisher’s Note

All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors, and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

Acknowledgments

We are grateful to all of the researchers whose contributions are listed in this paper for their assistance in the preparation of this manuscript. We are also grateful to the International Rice Research Institute (IRRI) for providing the necessary funds and facilities. Participation by VG was supported through ACIAR (WAC/2018/164) and Australian Water Partnership (660118.66) project funded by the Australian Government.

Supplementary Material

The Supplementary Material for this article can be found online at: https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fenvs.2021.794866/full#supplementary-material

Supplementary Figure S1 | Trend of share of forest land (FL) in Y1-axis and cultivated land (CL) in Y2-axis area of total land (1990–2017) of India, FAO ( http://faostat.fao.org/ ).

Supplementary Figure S2 | Relationship between microbial biomass carbon (MBC, mg carbon/kg soil) and soil organic carbon (SOC, g carbon/kg soil) from the studies used in the study. Dotted lines indicate microbial quotient (MQ) of 2.5% and 5%.

Abera, G., and Wolde-Meskel, E. (2013). Soil Properties, and Soil Organic Carbon Stocks of Tropical Andosol under Different Land Uses. Open J. Soil Sci. 03, 153–162. doi:10.4236/ojss.2013.33018

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Achard, F., Eva, H. D., Mayaux, P., Stibig, H.-J., and Belward, A. (2004). Improved Estimates of Net Carbon Emissions from Land Cover Change in the Tropics for the 1990s. Glob. Biogeochem. Cycles 18, GB2008. doi:10.1029/2003gb002142

Adams, D. C., Gurevitch, J., and Rosenberg, M. S. (1997). Resampling Tests for Meta-Analysis of Ecological Data. Ecology 78 (4), 1277–1283. doi:10.1890/0012-9658(1997)078[1277:rtfmao]2.0.co;2

Ahrends, A., Hollingsworth, P. M., Ziegler, A. D., Fox, J. M., Chen, H., and Su, Y. (2015). Current Trends of Rubber Plantation Expansion May Threaten Biodiversity and Livelihoods. Glob. Environ. Change 34, 48–58. doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2015.06.002

Anantha, K. C., Majumder, S. P., Padhan, D., BadoleDatta, S. A., Datta, A., Mandal, B., et al. (2018). Carbon Dynamics, Potential and Cost of Carbon Sequestration in Double rice Cropping System in Semi Arid Southern India. J. Soil Sci. Plant Nutr. 18, 1–15. doi:10.4067/s0718-95162018005001302

Anderson, T-H., and Domsch, K. H. (2010). Soil Microbial Biomass: The Eco-Physiological Approach. Soil Biol. Biochem. 42 (12), 2039–2043. doi:10.1016/j.soilbio.2010.06.026

Anderson, T., and Domsch, K. (1993). The Metabolic Quotient for CO2 (qCO2) as a Specific Activity Parameter to Assess the Effects of Environmental Conditions, Such as Ph, on the Microbial Biomass of forest Soils. Soil Biol. Biochem. 25, 393–395. doi:10.1016/0038-0717(93)90140-7

Arora, V. K., and Boer, G. J. (2010). Uncertainties in the 20th Century Carbon Budget Associated with Land Use Change. Glob. Chang. Biol. 16, 3327–3348. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2486.2010.02202.x

Baker, J. M., Ochsner, T. E., Venterea, R. T., and Griffis, T. J. (2007). Tillage and Soil Carbon Sequestration-What Do We Really Know? Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 118 (1-4), 1–5. doi:10.1016/j.agee.2006.05.014

Bastida, F., Zsolnay, A., Hernández, T., and García, C. (2008). Past, Present and Future of Soil Quality Indices: a Biological Perspective. Geoderma 147, 159–171. doi:10.1016/j.geoderma.2008.08.007

Batjes, N. H. (2012). Management options for reducing CO2-concentrations in the atmosphere by increasing carbon sequestration in the soil. Report 410-200-031, Dutch National Research Programme on Global air pollution and Climate Change & Technical Paper 30. Wageningen: International Soil Reference and information Centre .

Google Scholar

Bhattacharyya, T., Pal, D. K., Mandal, C., and Velayutham, M. (2000). Organic Carbon Stocks in Indian Soils and Their Geographical Distribution. Curr. Sci. 79 (5), 655–660. http://www.jstor.org/stable/24105084 .

Bodh, P. C. (2019). Agricultural Situation in India. Available at: https://eands.dacnet.nic.in/PDF/February 2019.pdf (Accessed June 15, 2020).

Brar, B. S., Singh, K., Dheri, G. S., and Balwinder-Kumar, B. (2013). Carbon Sequestration and Soil Carbon Pools in a rice?wheat Cropping System: Effect of Long-Term Use of Inorganic Fertilizers and Organic Manure. Soil Tillage Res. 128, 30–36. doi:10.1016/j.still.2012.10.001

Brookes, P. C. (1995). The Use of Microbial Parameters in Monitoring Soil Pollution by Heavy Metals. Biol. Fertil. Soils 19, 269–279. doi:10.1007/bf00336094

Campbell, C. A., Janzen, H. H., and Juma, N. G. (1997). “Chapter 17 Case Studies of Soil Quality in the Canadian Prairies: Long-Term Field Experiments,” in Soil Quality for Crop Production . Editors E. G. Gregorich, and M. R. Carter (Amsterdam: Elsevier ), 351–397. doi:10.1016/s0166-2481(97)80044-x

Chakraborty, D., Ladha, J. K., Rana, D. S., Jat, M. L., Gathala, M. K., Yadav, S., et al. (2017). A Global Analysis of Alternative Tillage and Crop Establishment Practices for Economically and Environmentally Efficient rice Production. Sci. Rep. 7, 9342. doi:10.1038/s41598-017-09742-9

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Chatterjee, N., Nair, P. K. R., Chakraborty, S., and Nair, V. D. (2018). Changes in Soil Carbon Stocks across the Forest-Agroforest-Agriculture/Pasture Continuum in Various Agroecological Regions: A Meta-Analysis. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 266, 55–67. doi:10.1016/j.agee.2018.07.014

de Blécourt, M., Brumme, R., Xu, J., Corre, M. D., and Veldkamp, E. (2013). Soil Carbon Stocks Decrease Following Conversion of Secondary Forests to Rubber ( Hevea Brasiliensis ) Plantations. PLoS One 8, e69357. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0069357

DeFries, R. S., Houghton, R. A., Hansen, M. C., Field, C. B., Skole, D., and Townshend, J. (2002). Carbon Emissions from Tropical Deforestation and Regrowth Based on Satellite Observations for the 1980s and 1990s. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 99, 14256–14261. doi:10.1073/pnas.182560099

Deng, L., Zhu, G.-Y., Tang, Z.-S., and Shangguan, Z.-P. (2016). Global Patterns of the Effects of Land-Use Changes on Soil Carbon Stocks. Glob. Ecol. Conservation 5, 127–138. doi:10.1016/j.gecco.2015.12.004

Don, A., Schumacherw, J., and Freibauer, A. (2011). Impact of Tropical Land-Use Change on Soil Organic Carbon Stocks – a Meta-Analysis. Glob. Change Biol. 17, 1658–1670. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2486.2010.02336.x

Fan, S., Guan, F., Xu, X., Forrester, D., Ma, W., and Tang, X. (2016). Ecosystem Carbon Stock Loss after Land Use Change in Subtropical Forests in China. Forests 7, 142. doi:10.3390/f7070142

FAO (2006). Available at: http://faostat.fao.org/ (Accessed September 24, 2020).

Gonzalez-Quiñones, V., Stockdale, E. A., Banning, N. C., Hoyle, F. C., Sawada, Y., Wherrett, A. D., et al. (2011). Soil Microbial Biomass - Interpretation and Consideration for Soil Monitoring. Soil Res. 49 (4), 287. doi:10.1071/sr10203

Gougoulias, C., Clark, J. M., and Shaw, L. J. (2014). The Role of Soil Microbes in the Global Carbon Cycle: Tracking the Below-Ground Microbial Processing of Plant-Derived Carbon for Manipulating Carbon Dynamics in Agricultural Systems. J. Sci. Food Agric. 94 (12), 2362–2371. doi:10.1002/jsfa.6577

Gregorich, E. G., Carter, M. R., Angers, D. A., Monreal, C. M., and Ellert, B. H. (1994). Towards a Minimum Data Set to Assess Soil Organic Matter Quality in Agricultural Soils. Can. J. Soil Sci. 74, 367–385. doi:10.4141/cjss94-051

Guillaume, T., Damris, M., and Kuzyakov, Y. (2015). Losses of Soil Carbon by Converting Tropical forest to Plantations: Erosion and Decomposition Estimated by δ 13 C. Glob. Change Biol. 21, 3548–3560. doi:10.1111/gcb.12907

Guo, L. B., and Gifford, R. M. (2002). Soil Carbon Stocks and Land Use Change: A Meta Analysis. Glob. Chang Biol. 8, 345–360. doi:10.1046/j.1354-1013.2002.00486.x

Gupta, V., Roper, M., Kirkegaard, J., and Angus, J. (1994). Changes in Microbial Biomass and Organic Matter Levels during the First Year of Modified Tillage and Stubble Management Practices on a Red Earth. Soil Res. 32, 1339–1354. doi:10.1071/sr9941339

Hati, K. M., Swarup, A., Dwivedi, A. K., Misra, A. K., and Bandyopadhyay, K. K. (2007). Changes in Soil Physical Properties and Organic Carbon Status at the Topsoil Horizon of a Vertisol of central India after 28 Years of Continuous Cropping, Fertilization and Manuring. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 119, 127–134. doi:10.1016/j.agee.2006.06.017

Haynes, R. J. (2005). Labile Organic Matter Fractions as central Components of the Quality of Agricultural Soils: An Overview. Adv.Agron. 85, 221–268. doi:10.1016/s0065-2113(04)85005-3

Hedges, L. V., Gurevitch, J., and Curtis, P. S. (1999). The Meta-Analysis of Response Ratios in Experimental Ecology. Ecology 80, 1150–1156. doi:10.1890/0012-9658(1999)080[1150:tmaorr]2.0.co;2

Holden, S. R., and Treseder, K. K. (2013). A Meta-Analysis of Soil Microbial Biomass Responses to forest Disturbances. Front. Microbiol. 4, 1–17. doi:10.3389/fmicb.2013.00163

Houghton, R. A. (2008). “Carbon Flux to the Atmosphere from Land-Use Changes: 1850– 2005,” in TRENDS: A Compendium of Data on Global Change, Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center (Oak Ridge, TN, U.S.A: Oak Ridge National Laboratory, U.S. Department of Energy ). Available at: https://cdiac.ess-dive.lbl.gov/trends/landuse/houghton/houghton.html (Accessed May 15, 2020).

Houghton, R. A., and Hackler, J. L. (2003). Sources and Sinks of Carbon from Land-Use Change in China. Glob. Biogeochem. Cycles 17 (2), 1034. doi:10.1029/2002gb001970

Hurtt, G. C., Frolking, S., Fearon, M. G., Moore, B., Shevliakova, E., Malyshev, S., et al. (2006). The Underpinnings of Land-Use History: Three Centuries of Global Gridded Land-Use Transitions, wood-harvest Activity, and Resulting Secondary Lands. Glob. Chang. Biol. 12 (7), 1208–1229. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2486.2006.01150.x

International Energy Agency (2019). Available at: https://www.iea.org/reports/global-energy-co2-status-report-2019 (Accessed May 23, 2020).

Iqbal, S., and Tiwari, S. C. (2016). Soil Organic Carbon Pool under Different Land Uses in Achanakmar Amarkantak Biosphere Reserve of Chhattisgarh, India. Curr. Sci. 110, 771–773. http://www.jstor.org/stable/24907957

ITTO (2002). ITTO Guidelines for the Restoration, Management and Rehabilitation of Degraded and Secondary Tropical Forests. Policy Development Series 13. ITTO, Yokohama. Available at: https://www.cifor.org/library/1175/itto-guidelines-for-the restoration management-and rehabilitation-of-degraded-and-secondary-tropical-forests/ISBN: 4-902045-01-X (Accessed August 28, 2020).

Kalambukattu, J. G., Singh, R., Patra, A. K., and Arunkumar, K. (2013). Soil Carbon Pools and Carbon Management index under Different Land Use Systems in the Central Himalayan Region. Acta Agriculturae Scand. Section B - Soil Plant Sci. 63 (3), 200–205. doi:10.1080/09064710.2012.749940

Koricheva, J., Gurevitch, J., and Mengersen, K. (2013). Handbook of Meta-Analysis in Ecology and Evolution . Princeton: Princeton University Press .

Kumar, A., Padbhushan, R., Singh, Y. K., Kohli, A., and Ghosh, M. (2021). Soil Organic Carbon under Various Land Uses in Alfisols of Eastern India. Indian J. Agril. Sci. 91 (7), 975–979.

Kumar, U., Shahid, M., Tripathi, R., Mohanty, S., Kumar, A., Bhattacharyya, P., et al. (2017). Variation of Functional Diversity of Soil Microbial Community in Sub-Humid Tropical Rice-Rice Cropping System under Long-Term Organic and Inorganic Fertilization. Ecol. Indicators 73, 536–543. doi:10.1016/j.ecolind.2016.10.014

Lal, R., and Kimble, J. M. (1997). Conservation Tillage for Carbon Sequestration. Nutr. Cycling Agroecosyst. 49, 243–253. doi:10.1023/a:1009794514742

Lal, R. (2004). Soil Carbon Sequestration in India. Climatic Change 65, 277–296. doi:10.1023/b:clim.0000038202.46720.37

Leifeld, J., and Kögel-Knabner, I. (2005). Soil Organic Matter Fractions as Early Indicators for Carbon Stock Changes under Different Land-Use? Geoderma 124 (1), 143–155. doi:10.1016/j.geoderma.2004.04.009

Lelieveld, J., Klingmüller, K., Pozzer, A., Burnett, R. T., Haines, A., and Ramanathan, V. (2019). Effects of Fossil Fuel and Total Anthropogenic Emission Removal on Public Health and Climate. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 116 (15), 7192–7197. doi:10.1073/pnas.1819989116

Lemke, R. L., VandenBygaart, A. J., Campbell, C. A., Lafond, G. P., and Grant, B. (2010). Crop Residue Removal and Fertilizer N: Effects on Soil Organic Carbon in a Long-Term Crop Rotation experiment on a Udic Boroll . Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 135, 42–51. doi:10.1016/j.agee.2009.08.010

Liu, J., Tian, H. Q., Liu, M., Zhuang, D., Melillo, J. M., and Zhang, Z. (2005a). China's Changing Landscape during the 1990s: Large-Scale Land Transformations Estimated with Satellite Data. Geophys. Res. Lett. 32, L02405. doi:10.1029/2004gl021649

Liu, J., Liu, M., Tian, H., Zhuang, D., Zhang, Z., Zhang, W., et al. (2005b). Spatial and Temporal Patterns of China's Cropland during 1990-2000: An Analysis Based on Landsat TM Data. Remote Sensing Environ. 98, 442–456. doi:10.1016/j.rse.2005.08.012

Liu, M., and Tian, H. (2010). China's Land Cover and Land Use Change from 1700 to 2005: Estimations from High-Resolution Satellite Data and Historical Archives. Glob. Biogeochem. Cycles 24, GB3003. doi:10.1029/2009gb003687

Liu, W., Zhou, P., Chen, K., Ye, Z., Liu, F., Li, X., et al. (2020). Efficacy and Safety of Antiviral Treatment for COVID-19 from Evidence in Studies of SARSCoV-2 and Other Acute Viral Infections: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. CMAJ. 192 (27), E734–E744. doi:10.1503/cmaj.200647

Malik, A. A., Puissant, J., Buckeridge, K. M., Goodall, T., Jehmlich, N., Chowdhury, S., et al. (2018). Land Use Driven Change in Soil pH Affects Microbial Carbon Cycling Processes. Nat. Commun. 9 (1), 3591. doi:10.1038/s41467-018-05980-1

Materechera, S. A., and Mkhabela, T. S. (1995). Microbial Biomass in Agricultural Top Soils after 6 Years of Bare Fallow. Biol. Fertil. Soils 19, 129–134.

Mathieu, J. A., Hatté, C., Balesdent, J., and Parent, É. (2015). Deep Soil Carbon Dynamics Are Driven More by Soil Type Than by Climate: A Worldwide Meta-Analysis of Radiocarbon Profiles. Glob. Change Biol. 21, 4278–4292. doi:10.1111/gcb.13012

Mayer, M., Prescott, C. E., Abaker, W. E. A., Augusto, L., Cécillon, L., Ferreira, G. W. D., et al. (2020). Tamm Review: Influence of forest Management Activities on Soil Organic Carbon Stocks: A Knowledge Synthesis. For. Ecol. Manage. 466, 118127. doi:10.1016/j.foreco.2020.118127

Meena, V. S., Mondal, T., Pandey, B. M., Mukherjee, A., Yadav, R. P., Choudhary, M., et al. (2018). Land Use Changes: Strategies to Improve Soil Carbon and Nitrogen Storage Pattern in the Mid-Himalaya Ecosystem, India. Geoderma 321, 69–78. doi:10.1016/j.geoderma.2018.02.002

Meetei, T. T., Kundu, M. C., and Devi, Y. B. (2020). Long-Term Effect of Rice-Based Cropping Systems on Pools of Soil Organic Carbon in Farmer's Field in Hilly Agroecosystem of Manipur, India. Environ. Monit. Assess. 192, 209. doi:10.1007/s10661-020-8165-x

Meiser, A., Bálint, M., and Schmitt, I. (2014). Meta-Analysis of Deep-Sequenced Fungal Communities Indicates Limited Taxon Sharing Between Studies and the Presence of Biogeographic Patterns. New Phytologist. 201 (2), 623–635. doi:10.1111/nph.12532

Mendoza, B., Béjar, J., Luna, D., Osorio, M., Jimenez, M., and Melendez, J. R. (2020). Differences in the Ratio of Soil Microbial Biomass Carbon (MBC) and Soil Organic Carbon (SOC) at Various Altitudes of Hyperalic Alisol in the Amazon Region of Ecuador. F1000Res 9, 443. doi:10.12688/f1000research.22922.1

Nath, A. J., Brahma, B., Sileshi, G. W., and Das, A. K. (2018). Impact of Land Use Changes on the Storage of Soil Organic Carbon in Active and Recalcitrant Pools in a Humid Tropical Region of India. Sci. Total Environ. 624, 908–917. doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.12.199

Negi, S. S., and Gupta, M. K. (2010). Soil Organic Carbon Store under Different Land Use Systems in Giri Catchment of Himachal Pradesh. Indian Forester 136 (9), 1147.

Nelder, J. A., and Wedderburn, R. W. M. (1972). Generalized Linear Models. J. R. Stat. Soc. Ser. A (General) 135 (3), 370–384. doi:10.2307/2344614

Ogle, S. M., Adler, P. R., Breidt, F. J., Del Grosso, S., Derner, J., Franzluebbers, A., et al. (2014). “Chapter 3: Quantifying Greenhouse Gas Sources and Sinks in Cropland and Grazing Land Systems,” in Quantifying Greenhouse Gas Fluxes in Agriculture and Forestry: Methods for Entity‐Scale Inventory . Editors M. Eve, D. Pape, M. Flugge, R. Steele, D. Man, M. Riley‐Gilbertet al. (Washington, DC: Technical Bulletin Number 1939. Office of the Chief Economist, U.S. Department of Agriculture ), 606.

Padbhushan, R., Das, A., Rakshit, R., Sharma, R. P., Kohli, A., and Kumar, R. (2016b). Long-Term Organic Amendment Application Improves Influence on Soil Aggregation, Aggregate Associated Carbon and Carbon Pools under Scented Rice-Potato-Onion Cropping System after the 9th Crop Cycle. Commun. Soil Sci. Plant Anal. 47 (21), 2445–2457. doi:10.1080/00103624.2016.1254785

Padbhushan, R., Rakshit, R., Das, A., and Sharma, R. P. (2015). Assessment of Long-Term Organic Amendments Effect on Some Sensitive Indicators of Carbon under Subtropical Climatic Condition. The Bioscan 10 (3), 1237–1240.

Padbhushan, R., Rakshit, R., Das, A., and Sharma, R. P. (2016a). Effects of Various Organic Amendments on Organic Carbon Pools and Water Stable Aggregates under a Scented rice-potato-onion Cropping System. Paddy Water Environ. 14 (4), 481–489. doi:10.1007/s10333-015-0517-8

Padbhushan, R., Sharma, S., Kumar, U., Rana, D. S., Kohli, A., Parmar, B., et al. (2021). Meta-analysis Approach to Measure Effect of Integrated Nutrient Management on Crop Performance, Microbial Activity and Carbon Stocks in Indian Soils. Front. Environ. Sci. 9, 724702. doi:10.3389/fenvs.2021.724702

Padbhushan, R., Sharma, S., Rana, D. S., Kumar, U., Kohli, A., and Kumar, R. (2020). Delineate Soil Characteristics and Carbon Pools in Grassland Compared to Native Forestland of India: A Meta-Analysis. Agronomy 10, 1969. doi:10.3390/agronomy10121969

Palni, L. M. S., Maikuri, R. K., and Rao, K. S. (1998). “Conservation of the Himalayan Agroecosystem: Issues and Priorities,” in Technical Paper-V in Eco Regional Cooperation for Biodiversity Conservation in the Himalaya (New York: United Nation Development Programme ), 253–290.

Paul, K. I., Polglase, P. J., Nyakuengama, J. G., and Khanna, P. K. (2002). Change in Soil Carbon Following Afforestation. For. Ecol. Manage. 168, 241–257. doi:10.1016/s0378-1127(01)00740-x

Pellikka, P. K. E., Heikinheimo, V., Hietanen, J., Schäfer, E., Siljander, M., and Heiskanen, J. (2018). Impact of Land Cover Change on Aboveground Carbon Stocks in Afromontane Landscape in Kenya. Appl. Geogr. 94, 178–189. doi:10.1016/j.apgeog.2018.03.017

Porre, R. J., van der Werf, W., De, D., Gerlinde, B., Stomph, T. J., and Hoffland, E. (2020). Is Litter Decomposition Enhanced in Species Mixtures? A Meta-Analysis. Soil Biol. Biochem. 145, 107791. doi:10.1016/j.soilbio.2020.107791

Rabbi, S. M. F., Tighe, M., Delgado-Baquerizo, M., Cowie, A., Robertson, F., Dalal, R., et al. (2015). Climate and Soil Properties Limit the Positive Effects of Land Use Reversion on Carbon Storage in Eastern Australia. Sci. Rep. 5 (1), 17866. doi:10.1038/srep17866

Rakshit, R., Das, A., Padbhushan, R., Sharma, R. P., Sushant, S., and Kumar, S. (2018). Assessment of Soil Quality and Identification of Parameters Influencing System Yield under Long-Term Fertilizer Trial. Jour. Indian Socie. Soil Scie. 66, 166–171. doi:10.5958/0974-0228.2018.00021.x

Ramzan, S., ZahoorAhmad, I. P., Ashraf, I., Wani, M. A., and Rasool, R. (2019). Effect of Agricultural Land-Use on Carbon Sequestration in Soils. Biol. Forum Inter. J. 11 (1), 117.

Rasse, D. P., Rumpel, C., and Dignac, M. F. (2005). Is Soil Carbon Mostly Root Carbon? Mechanisms for a Specific Stabilization. Plant Soil 269, 341–356. doi:10.1007/s11104-004-0907-y

Ritchie, H., and Roser, M. (2019). CO 2 and Greenhouse Gases Emissions. Published online at Our World In Data.org. Available at: [Online Resource] https://ourworldindata.org/co2-and-other-greenhouse-gas-emissions .

Roper, M. M., Gupta, V. V. S. R., and Murphy, D. V. (2010). Tillage Practices Altered Labile Soil Organic Carbon and Microbial Function without Affecting Crop Yields. Soil Res. 48, 274–285. doi:10.1071/sr09143

Rosenberg, M. S., Adams, D. C., and Gurevitch, J. (2000). MetaWin Statistical Software for Meta-Analysis Version 2.0 . Sunderland, MA: Sinauer Associates .

Sahoo, U. K., Singh, S. L., Gogoi, A., Kenye, A., and Sahoo, S. S. (2019). Active and Passive Soil Organic Carbon Pools as Affected by Different Land Use Types in Mizoram, Northeast India. PLoS One 14 (7), e0219969. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0219969

Sanderman, J., Hengl, T., and Fiske, G. J. (2017). Soil Carbon Debt of 12,000 Years of Human Land Use. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 114, 9575–9580. doi:10.1073/pnas.1706103114

Sarkar, S., Skalicky, M., Hossain, A., Brestic, M., Saha, S., Garai, S., et al. (2020). Management of Crop Residues for Improving Input Use Efficiency and Agricultural Sustainability. Sustainability 12 (23), 9808. doi:10.3390/su12239808

Sharma, S., Padbhushan, R., and Kumar, U. (2019). Integrated Nutrient Management in Rice-Wheat Cropping System: An Evidence on Sustainability in the Indian Subcontinent through Meta-Analysis. Agronomy 9, 71. doi:10.3390/agronomy9020071

Sharma, V., Hussain, S., Sharma, K. R., and Arya, V. M. (2014). Labile Carbon Pools and Soil Organic Carbon Stocks in the Foothill Himalayas under Different Land Use Systems. Geoderma 232-234, 81–87. doi:10.1016/j.geoderma.2014.04.039

Smith, P., Martino, D., Cai, Z., Gwary, D., Janzen, H., Kumar, P., et al. (2008). Greenhouse Gas Mitigation in Agriculture. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B 363, 789–813. doi:10.1098/rstb.2007.2184

Sparling, G. P. (1997). “Soil Microbial Biomass, Activity and Nutrient Cycling as Indicators of Soil Health,” in Biological Indicators of Soil Health . Editors C. E. Pankhurst, B. M. Doube, and V. V. S. R. Gupta (Wallingford, UK: CAB International ), 97–119.

Tian, H., Banger, K., Bo, T., and DadhwalDadhwal, V. K. B. (2014). History of Land Use in India during 1880-2010: Large-Scale Land Transformations Reconstructed from Satellite Data and Historical Archives. Glob. Planet. Change 121, 78–88. doi:10.1016/j.gloplacha.2014.07.005

Tian, H. Q. (2003). Regional Carbon Dynamics in Monsoon Asia and its Implications for the Global Carbon Cycle. Glob. Planet. Chang. 37 (3–4), 201–217. doi:10.1016/s0921-8181(02)00205-9

Tiefenbacher, A., Sandén, T., Haslmayr, H.-P., Miloczki, J., Wenzel, W., and Spiegel, H. (2021). Optimizing Carbon Sequestration in Croplands: A Synthesis. Agronomy 11 (5), 882. doi:10.3390/agronomy11050882

Tirol-Padre, A., Ladha, J. K., Regmi, A. P., BhandariandNubushi, A. L. I. K., and Inubushi, K. (2007). Organic Amendments Affect Soil Parameters in Two Long-Term Rice-Wheat Experiments. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 71, 442–452. doi:10.2136/sssaj2006.0141

Treseder, K. K. (2008). Nitrogen Additions and Microbial Biomass: A Meta-Analysis of Ecosystem Studies. Ecol. Lett. 11 (10), 1111–1120. doi:10.1111/j.1461-0248.2008.01230.x

United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs: Population Division (UNDESA) (2019). Available at: https://www.un.org/en/development/desa/population/index.asp (Accessed June 27, 2020).

Vidya, K. R., Hareesh, G. R., Rajanna, M. D., Sringeswara, A. N., Balakrishna, G., Balakrishna, A. N., et al. (2002). Changes in Microbial Biomass C, N and P as Influenced by Different Land-Uses. Myforest 38, 323–328.

Wang, F., Harindintwali, J. D., Yuan, Z., Wang, M., Wang, F., Li, S., et al. (2021). Technologies and Perspectives for Achieving Carbon Neutrality. The Innovation 2, 100180. doi:10.1016/j.xinn.2021.100180

Wang, S., Liu, J., Zhang, C., Yi, C., and Wu, W. (2011). Effects of Afforestation on Soil Carbon Turnover in China's Subtropical Region. J. Geogr. Sci. 21, 118–134. doi:10.1007/s11442-011-0833-x

Wei, X., Shao, M., Gale, W., and Li, L. (2014). Global Pattern of Soil Carbon Losses Due to the Conversion of Forests to Agricultural Land. Sci. Rep. 4, 4062. doi:10.1038/srep04062

World Population Prospects: The 2019 Revision United Nations Population Division (2020). Last update in UN data: 2019/06/17. Available at: http://data.un.org/Data.aspx?q=india&d=PopDiv&f=variableID%3a12%3bcrID%3a356 .

Xu, S., Liu, X., Li, X., and Tian, C. (2019). Soil Organic Carbon Changes Following Wetland Cultivation: a Global Meta-Analysis. Geoderma 347, 49–58. doi:10.1016/j.geoderma.2019.03.036

Yang, X., Ren, W., Sun, B., and Zhang, S. (2012). Effects of Contrasting Soil Management Regimes on Total and Labile Soil Organic Carbon Fractions in a Loess Soil in China. Geoderma 177-178, 49–56. doi:10.1016/j.geoderma.2012.01.033

Yang, Z., Singh, B. R., and Sitaula, B. K. (2004). Fractions of Organic Carbon in Soils under Different Crop Rotations, Cover Crops and Fertilization Practices. Nutrient Cycling in Agroecosystems 70, 161–166. doi:10.1023/b:fres.0000048479.30593.ea

Zuber, S. M., and Villamil, M. B. (2016). Meta-analysis Approach to Assess Effect of Tillage on Microbial Biomass and Enzyme Activities. Soil Biol. Biochem. 97, 176–187. doi:10.1016/j.soilbio.2016.03.011

Keywords: land-use change, soil carbon pools, microbial quotient, meta-analysis, India

Citation: Padbhushan R, Kumar U, Sharma S, Rana DS, Kumar R, Kohli A, Kumari P, Parmar B, Kaviraj M, Sinha AK, Annapurna K and Gupta VVSR (2022) Impact of Land-Use Changes on Soil Properties and Carbon Pools in India: A Meta-analysis. Front. Environ. Sci. 9:794866. doi: 10.3389/fenvs.2021.794866

Received: 14 October 2021; Accepted: 20 December 2021; Published: 07 March 2022.

Reviewed by:

Copyright © 2022 Padbhushan, Kumar, Sharma, Rana, Kumar, Kohli, Kumari, Parmar, Kaviraj, Sinha, Annapurna and Gupta. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

*Correspondence: Sheetal Sharma, [email protected] ; Rajeev Padbhushan, [email protected] ; Upendra Kumar, [email protected]

Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

• DOI: 10.1007/978-981-10-4274-4
• Corpus ID: 132780284
• Soil Pollution - An Emerging Threat to Agriculture
• J. Saha , R. Selladurai , +3 authors Ashok K. Patra
• Published 19 April 2017
• Agricultural and Food Sciences, Environmental Science, Economics

87 Citations

Consequences of anthropogenic disturbance on variation of soil properties and food security: an asian story, lead contamination and its dynamics in soil–plant system, pollution indices and sources appointment of heavy metal pollution of agricultural soils near the thermal power plant, stressful environments and sustainable soil management: a case study of kafr el-sheikh, egypt, sustainable soil quality management for enhancing crop productivity in tribal areas of central india: a case study, reuse of poor-quality water for sustainable crop production in the changing scenario of climate, impact of long-term application of sewage on soil and crop quality in vertisols of central india, impact assessment of textile effluent on health and microbiota of agricultural soil in bhagwanpur (uttarakhand), india, soils and humans, environmental nanoremediation under changing climate, 685 references, integrated management of polluted soils for enhancing productivity and quality of crops, long-term impact of irrigation with sewage effluents on heavy metal content in soils, crops and groundwater : a case study, the use of bio-energy crops (zea mays) for 'phytoattenuation' of heavy metals on moderately contaminated soils: a field experiment., soil contamination due to heavy metals from an industrial area of surat, gujarat, western india, potential fly-ash utilization in agriculture:a global review, impact of irrigation with as rich groundwater on soil and crops: a geochemical case study in west bengal delta plain, india, utilization of municipal organic wastes in agriculture: where do we stand, where will we go, the environmental consequences of adopting conservation tillage in europe: reviewing the evidence, changes in soil quality indicators under long-term sewage irrigation in a sub-tropical environment, role of phosphate fertilizers in heavy metal uptake and detoxification of toxic metals., related papers.

Showing 1 through 3 of 0 Related Papers

• News, Stories & Speeches
• Get Involved
• Structure and leadership
• Committee of Permanent Representatives
• UN Environment Assembly
• Funding and partnerships
• Policies and strategies
• Evaluation Office
• Secretariats and Conventions
• Asia and the Pacific
• Latin America and the Caribbean
• New York Office
• North America
• Climate action
• Nature action
• Chemicals and pollution action
• Digital Transformations
• Disasters and conflicts
• Environment under review
• Environmental law and governance
• Extractives
• Fresh Water
• Green economy
• Ocean, seas and coasts
• Resource efficiency
• Sustainable Development Goals
• Youth, education and environment
• Publications & data

Global Assessment of Soil Pollution

Soil pollution is a chemical degradation process that consumes fertile soils, with implications for global food security and human health. Soil pollution hampers the achievement of Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), including achieving zero hunger, ending poverty, ensuring healthy lives and human well-being, halting and reversing land degradation and biodiversity loss, and making cities safe and resilient. Most contaminants originate from human activities and enter into the environment because of unsustainable production chains, consumption patterns or inappropriate waste disposal practices.

In May 2018, FAO and its Global Soil Partnership (GSP), the World Health Organization (WHO), the Secretariat of the Basel, Rotterdam and Stockholm Convention and the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) organized the Global Symposium on Soil Pollution (GSOP18) to bring together science and policy to understand the status, causes, impacts and solutions to soil pollution. The Outcome document of the symposium, ‘ Be the solution to soil pollution ’ paved the way to the implementation of a coordinated set of actions to # StopSoilPollution .

This report considers both point source contamination and diffuse pollution, and detail also the risks and impacts of soil pollution on human health, the environment and food security, without neglecting soil degradation and the burden of disease resulting from exposure to polluted soil.

The Global Assessment of Soil Pollution report and its Summary for Policy makers will be launched on 4th June are a response to this request and as part of the World Environment Day celebrations and the launch of the UN Decade on Ecosystem Restoration. This report and its summary, coordinated by the FAO’s GSP, the ITPS, and UNEP, are the product of an inclusive process involving scientists from all regions.

• Nature Action

© 2024 UNEP Terms of Use Privacy   Report Project Concern Report Scam Contact Us

•    Home

The present investigation deals with the assessment of pollution status along the wetland of Thane Creek, which has been subjected to a lot of pollution from the Asia’s biggest Thane—Belapur Industrial Complex located at the south of Mumbai harbor along the west coast of India. This paper advocates habitat conservation and ecological studies with special reference to the physico-chemical characteristics and heavy metal pollution in the soil along the creek area. In the present investigation, the pH, electrical conductivity, bulk density, alkalinity and chlorinity values recorded were observed to be high during dry seasons and low during rainy season. The soil samples were also analyzed for their heavy metal contents like nickel, zinc, cadmium, copper, iron, arsenic and mercury. It was observed that, the concentration of these heavy metals increases gradually in dry seasons, followed by sharp decrease during rainy season. These heavy metals have a marked effect on the aquatic flora and fauna which through bio magnification enter the food chain and ultimately affect the human beings as well. The present experimental data on heavy metal pollution in soil samples collected along Kalwa bridge of Thane Creek points out to the need of regular monitoring of water resources and further improvement in the industrial waste water treatment methods. If the present conditions continue for a long period, the creek may soon become ecologically inactive.

Soil Pollution , Heavy Metal Content , Physico-Chemical Characteristics , Metallic Contaminants , Flame Atomic Absorption Spectrophotometer , Bioaccumulation , Food Chain

Share and Cite:

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

•   Articles
•   Archive
•   Indexing
•   Aims & Scope
•   Editorial Board
•   For Authors
•   Publication Fees

Journals Menu  

• Open Special Issues
• Published Special Issues
• Special Issues Guideline
• E-Mail Alert
• JEP Subscription
• Publication Ethics & OA Statement
• Frequently Asked Questions
• Recommend to Peers
• Recommend to Library
• History Issue

Copyright © 2024 by authors and Scientific Research Publishing Inc.

This work and the related PDF file are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License .

• Journals A-Z

About SCIRP

• Publication Fees
• For Authors
• Peer-Review Issues
• Special Issues
• Manuscript Tracking System
• Subscription
• Translation & Proofreading
• Volume & Issue
• Open Access
• Publication Ethics
• Preservation
• Privacy Policy

• Español (Spanish)
• Français (French)
• Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
• Brasil (Portuguese)
• हिंदी (Hindi)

Mongabay Series: Conserving Agro-biodiversity

[Commentary] Soil degradation in India spells doom for millions

• Most states are affected by soil degradation. The worst are Punjab, Haryana, Gujarat, Maharashtra, Andhra Pradesh and Telangana. Restoring damaged soil takes decades.
• Measures like sustainable agriculture, scientific disposal of wastes, reforestation, and strict implementation of pollution laws are likely solutions.
• Unless there is political will to address the problem, the situation will get worse.
• The views in the commentary are that of the author.

While India races ahead with dreams of how it will emerge as a leader in the world, little attention is being paid to the massive degradation of soil. It is a serious issue as India is an agricultural economy , and if not corrected and repaired, it could lead to disastrous consequences impacting food security and the livelihoods of millions.

According to the National Bureau of Soil Survey and Land Use Planning, 146.8 million hectares , around 30% of the soil in India is degraded. Of this, around 29% is lost to the sea, 61% is transferred from one place to another, and 10% is deposited in reservoirs.

Despite large-scale soil degradation, food production has increased due to technological inputs, and now India is the second largest producer of farm produce. While today, the country is self-sufficient in food production, it will have to import food in the years to come if its soil continues to degrade, especially considering that India, with just 2.4% of the world’s land area, has 18% of the world’s population to feed.

As India is an agricultural economy, it survived global recessionary trends . This itself should tell policymakers how important soil is for the country.

Degradation of soil leads to damaging effects on the economy, environment, food security, and health. It requires urgent policy intervention, public involvement in mitigation, and a combination of technological, regulatory, and educational initiatives to tackle the problem.

The government’s move to introduce soil health cards for farmers should help, but most farmers either do not know of it or have never taken advantage of it. Implementation of free soil testing for farmers has to be more proactive. It will give us crucial data for carving the right strategy.

How does soil get degraded?

While India celebrated the Green Revolution, which created huge rice and wheat bowls, pulses, and vegetables, we ignored what it did to our land. Overuse of chemical pesticides and fertilisers poisoned our fields and crops. The soil lost its natural nutrients, becoming toxic and contaminated. Excess fertilisers increased nitrate in the soil. Excessive farming led to the water table collapsing as bore wells went deeper and deeper every year. For political convenience, most states provided free water to farmers, resulting in careless over-irrigation and the depletion of precious water resources.

Rattan Lal, a professor of soil science at the Ohio State University, awarded the World Food Prize in 2020, told Mongabay India, “The Green Revolution increased food production from 50 million tonnes to 300 million tonnes, but soil degradation followed.”

Since the 20th century, soil degradation has accelerated due to man-made factors like mining, deforestation, overgrazing, monoculture farming, excessive tillage, and the use of chemical fertilisers and pesticides.

India is the largest producer and user of pesticides, too. Overusing pesticides has destroyed millions of hectares of soil in India. “A healthy soil suppresses diseases and pests, and as it helps plants develop more immunity, which will not require pesticides,” points out Rattan Lal.

Rapid urbanisation, development projects, and population growth have also played significant roles in soil degradation. Untreated sewage and industrial waste are released into rivers that feed agriculture. The toxic water with heavy metals further degraded the soil. Then, natural factors like droughts, landslides, and floods exacerbated the problem.

Brahma S. Dwivedi, member of the Agricultural Scientists Recruitment Board (ASRB) and former director of the National Bureau of Soil Survey and Land Planning, told Mongabay India, “We can stop man-made degradation caused by abuse of technology and exploitative agriculture. We must judiciously use land, reduce pesticides and chemical fertilisers, stop tillage with heavy equipment, and overuse water. It takes centuries to revive the soil. In the fifties, we used 16% of organic nutrients to enrich the soil, while 84% were from chemical fertilisers. Today, 94% of nutrients come from inorganic fertilisers and only 7% from organic sources. The grain is meant for us, and the residue is meant to be ploughed back into the soil.”

Ashok K. Singh, director of the Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi, points out, “The carbon level in our soil depleted due to intensive inorganic agricultural practices. We need to restore soil’s physical, chemical, and biological health for sustainable agriculture.”

“Biomass has to be returned to the soil to regain its health. We must help farmers translate science into action where they focus on restoring environmental quality and not increase production with chemical fertilisers,” Lal from Ohio State University said.

Mining also worsens the degradation. “The disastrous effects of opencast mining underline how it degrades land so rapidly. It disturbs the water table, contaminates soil, destroys flora and fauna, and contaminates soil and water. The waste produced is often not disposed of scientifically,” says activist Vijay Dhasmana, who is trying to restore degraded mines in Gurugram.

In the over-enthusiasm to industrialise, many states do not enforce pollution laws. Many industries take fields at a much higher rate than a farmer can ever get out of his land in a year, so toxic effluent can be dumped into it.

Read more: Natural farming methods help the ‘climate-smart’ villages of MP brave climate impacts

A study in Netranahalli in Karnataka found soil erosion could be reduced by improving groundwater levels, regenerating water, making changes in cropping and land use patterns, and involving communities in the conservation and management of soil. Without connecting and convincing people, soil conservation will not happen. Points out Lal, “India has a strong scientific culture that can restore soil, water, and air quality. But for that to happen, there has to be a strong political will to translate science into action. Policies should work towards compensating and rewarding those restoring soil health.”

Dwivedi from ASRB points out that a deficiency of micronutrients in soil, like zinc, sulphur, manganese, iron, and copper, was not there fifty years ago. But now it is apparent, which is an indication of soil degradation. If these micronutrients are added, the cost of farming increases. Unless farmers are helped, the movement to rejuvenate soil will not happen.

Most farmers in India have small land holdings. Battling poverty, they manage to stave off hunger throughout the year. Increasingly, agriculture is becoming an unattractive proposition. Many small farmers are moving away to work as daily wage labourers in urban India. So, government assistance is a significant factor if they have to be pulled into soil conservation programmes.

Experiments of the Indian Council of Agricultural Research (ICAR) in the last 50 years have shown that in the long-term, balanced use of fertiliser produces better results. Also, using organic and inorganic fertilisers is better than just using chemical ones. Balanced use of fertilisers showed that soil was not destroyed in the long term, and yields increased.

There are no easy solutions to the complicated problem degraded soil. But, there are ways that can help to rejuvenate farmlands. For example, integrated watershed management with the help of check dams, terracing of land, and contour farming as it will decrease runoff, cutting down on crops that need lots of water, building bunds to stop runoff soil during monsoons, and minimum use of pesticides and chemical fertilisers.

Villages have several options of degradable waste like grasses, dung, household vegetable waste, weeds, and crop residues, which can be composted to prepare good-quality fertilisers for poor farmers. Village communities, with little help from the government, can make it happen. It will also clean up villages scattered with garbage.

Artificial Intelligence (AI) can also help arrest soil degradation. As suicides by farmers were increasing due to crop losses, two students at the Chennai campus of Vellore Institute of Technology used AI to detect crop pests through thermal imaging. Labelled as Kishan Know , this technology is easily affordable.

Pesticides destroy a large part of Indian soil. India has about 5.8 million cotton farmers, most of them with small land holdings. They take loans to buy pesticides and do not know how much to use, so they end up overusing it, thinking more of it would eliminate the pests faster. Only around 2% of the sprayed pesticides fall on the plant. The rest falls on the soil, destroying its natural nutrients and insects essential to the ecosystem.

The AI-powered early warning system is now available to help farmers protect their crops. The AI algorithm identifies and counts the pests captured in a trap in a day. It then determines the extent of infestation and advises the farmer to spray or not. This information can be shared with neighbouring farmers who do not have a smartphone.

Though there are over 10,000 soil testing laboratories in India, farmers are not using them as much as they should, as there is no awareness. Soil testing is free, with the government bearing the cost. A soil testing and fertiliser recommendation meter developed by the Indian Agricultural Research Institute is now commercially available that village panchayats can easily buy to help farmers test the soil.

Environmentalist and food activist Vandana Shiva told Mongabay India that ensuring our villages return to ecological, regenerative, and organic agriculture was the only way to stop soil degradation. “We have to reverse this insane urbanisation and put soil at the centre of our thinking.”

Quoting the Vedas, she said, “In this handful of soil is your future. Take care of it; it will take care of you. Destroy it, and it will destroy you.”

The author is a senior journalist and Adjunct Professor at Symbiosis Institute of Media and Communication, Pune.

Banner image: Concrete structures occupy cropland. Rapid urbanisation, development projects, and population growth have also played important roles in soil degradation. Photo by Arun Kumar S./Wikimedia Commons.

Special series

Wetland champions.

• [Commentary] Wetland champions: Promise from the grassroots
• The story of Jakkur lake sets an example for inclusive rejuvenation projects
• Welcome to Tsomgo lake: Please don’t litter
• Managing waste to save the wetlands of Himachal Pradesh

Environment And Health

• Hopscotch to heat watch: How climate change is impacting summer play
• What’s killing the buzz? A look into urban fumigation
• Air pollution deaths spotlight need for health-based air quality standards
• As cities become megacities, their lanes are losing green cover

Almost Famous Species

• Baby snakes with toxic traits
• Misinformation about Russell’s viper stokes incidents of snake killing in Assam
• [Book review] A know-it-all book on the cat with black ears
• Himalayan pikas wait for weather cues to make winter plans

• A blooming tale of transformation
• [Video] Flowers of worship sow seeds of sustainability
• Rising above the waters with musk melon
• Saving India’s wild ‘unicorns’ 

India's Iconic Landscapes

• Changing patterns in precipitation and temperature affect Kashmir’s ecosystem
• Long-term monitoring of Himalayan glaciers essential to assess their health
• [Book review] Chronicle of an ‘ecocide’ foretold
• [Explainer] How does habitat fragmentation impact India’s biodiversity hotspots?

Beyond Protected Areas

• Indus river dolphins in troubled waters
• Mugger crocodiles may be physiologically stressed in disturbed habitats

Conserving Agro-biodiversity

• [Commentary] Challenges in scaling natural farming with bio-input resource centres
• [Commentary] Green Credit Rules: Death by trees?
• High temperatures lead to decline in coconut production, spiked prices
• Kashmiri willow steps up to the crease and swings for recognition

Just Transitions

• India’s hard-to-abate sectors are not walking the talk on their renewable energy goals, report finds
• Ruling on mining taxation empowers states, worries industry
• Coal mining degraded 35% of native land cover in India’s central coal belt
• Slow progress hinders Bihar’s solar street light initiative

Impact of Open Dumping Site on Groundwater Quality in Silchar City, Assam, India

• Published: 03 September 2024
• Volume 235 , article number  659 , ( 2024 )

Cite this article

• Mausam Kumar Paul   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-2948-1317 1 ,
• Mithra Dey 1 &
• Chandra Sharma 2  

Solid waste management is a burning issue that requires special attention and consideration in developing countries. In most cities and towns, it has become a public health concern due to uncontrolled dumping that has caused degradation of the natural environment. Therefore, the present study assessed the impact of dump yards on the surrounding environment by conducting physicochemical and biological analysis of groundwater and leachate samples and comparing it with control sites located at Silchar town of Assam, India. The result demonstrated that a large number of organic materials and inorganic salt leached to the surrounding environment by the decomposition of waste at open dumping site which significantly pollutes the groundwater sources of nearby areas. The sample site S5 recorded the highest value of WQI (100.78). Contamination of Total Coliform and E. Coli bacteria were recorded in the range of 96–2116 CFU/100 ml and 0–2466 CFU/100 ml respectively in sample sites. However, in control sites, coliform bacteria were found in the range of 8–43 CFU/100 ml and E. coli bacteria was found to be absent in all the control sites. The mean concentrations of Pb (8.94 mg L −1 ), Mn (19.12 mg L −1 ) and Ni (6.38 mg L −1 ) in the dump yards were found above the maximum permissible limit of EPA US, 1986; however, the concentrations of Cu (4.05 mg L −1 ) and Cd (0.45 mg L −1 ) were within the permissible limit. Hence, there is a need for proper scientific planning and management of waste disposal for the protection of our surrounding environment.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Subscribe and save.

• Get 10 units per month
• Download Article/Chapter or eBook
• 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
• Cancel anytime

Price includes VAT (Russian Federation)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Rent this article via DeepDyve

Institutional subscriptions

Explore related subjects

• Environmental Chemistry

Data Availability

All the data generated or analysed during this are included in this article.

Code Availability

Not applicable.

Abarikwu, S. O., Iserhienrhien, B. O., & Badejo, T. A. (2013). Rutin-and selenium-attenuated cadmium-induced testicular pathophysiology in rats. Human & Experimental Toxicology, 32 (4), 395–406.

Article   Google Scholar  

Agu, K. C., Orji, M. U., Onuorah, S. C., Egurefa, S. O., Anaukwu, C. G., Okafor, U. C., Nsikak, N.S. & Anyaegbunam, B. C. (2014). Influence of Solid Waste Dumps Leachate on Bacteriological and Heavy Metals Contamination of Ground Water in Awka. American Journal of Life Scince Researches, 2 (4), 450–457.

American Public Health Association, (APHA). (2005). Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater, 15th Eds American Public Health Association, Washington, DC, USA.

Anilkumar, A., Sukumaran, D., & Vincent, S. G. T. (2015). Effect of municipal solid waste leachate on groundwater quality of Thiruvananthapuram District, Kerala. India. Applied Ecology and Environmental Sciences, 3 (5), 151–157.

Google Scholar  

Aziz, S. Q., Aziz, H. A., Yusoff, M. S., Bashir, M. J., & Umar, M. (2010). Leachate characterization in semi-aerobic and anaerobic sanitary landfills: A comparative study. Journal of Environmental Management, 91 (12), 2608–2614.

Babu, B. S. (2016). Comparative study on the spatial interpolation techniques in GIS. International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research, 7 (2), 550–554.

Bhat, R. A., Dar, S. A., Dar, D. A., & Dar, G. (2018). Municipal Solid Waste Generation and current Scenario of its Management in India. International Journal of Advance Research in Science and Engineering, 7 (2), 419–431.

Brown, R. M., McClelland, N. I., Deininger, R. A., & O’Connor, M. F. (1972). A water quality index—crashing the psychological barrier. Indicators of environmental quality (pp. 173–182). Springer.

Bundela, P. S., Sharma, A., Pandey, A. K., Pandey, P., & Awasthi, A. K. (2012). Physicochemical analysis of groundwater near municipal solid waste dumping sites in Jabalpur. International Journal of Plant, Animal and Environmental Sciences, 2 (1), 217–222.

Census of India. (2011). District Census Handbook: Cachar District. Registrar General of India.file:///C:/Users/Administrator/Downloads/DH_2011_1817_PART_A_DCHB_CACHAR.pdf

Central Ground Water Board (North Eastern Region Ministry of Water Resoueces). (2013). Ground Water Information Booklet Cachar District , Assam. https://www.cgwb.gov.in/old_website/District_Profile/Assam/Cachar.pdf

Choudhury, M., Jyethi, D. S., Dutta, J., Purkayastha, S. P., Deb, D., Das, R., & Bhattacharyya, K. G. (2021). Investigation of groundwater and soil quality near to a municipal waste disposal site in Silchar, Assam, India. International Journal of Energy and Water Resources, 6 (1), 11.

Dharmarathne, N., & Gunatilake, J. (2013). Leachate characterization and surface groundwater pollution at municipal solid waste landfill of Gohagoda, Sri Lanka. International Journal of Scientific and Research Publications, 3 (11), 1–7.

FAO. (2007). Coping with Water Scarcity: Challenge of the Twenty-First century . UN Water.

Farombi, E. O., Akintunde, J. K., Nzute, N., Adedara, I. A., & Arojojoye, O. (2012). Municipal landfill leachate induces hepatotoxicity and oxidative stress in rats. Toxicology and Industrial Health, 28 (6), 532–541.

Genchi, G., Carocci, A., Lauria, G., Sinicropi, M. S., & Catalano, A. (2020). Nickel: Human health and environmental toxicology. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 17 (3), 679.

Gohain, S. B., & Bordoloi, S. (2021). Impact of municipal solid waste disposal on the surface water and sediment of adjoining wetland Deepor Beel in Guwahati, Assam, India. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 193 (5), 1–19.

Gupta, A. (2004). Drinking Water Quality in Barak Valley, Assam, North East India: Prioritizing management options. In Proceedings of the 2nd APHW Conference, 1 , 621–627.

Haile, M. Z., Mohammed, E. T., & Gebretsadik, F. D. (2019). Physicochemical characterization of municipal solid waste in Sawla town, Gofa Zone, Ethiopia. J ournal of Applied Sciences and Environmental Management, 23 (11), 2023-2029.

Hettiarachchi, H., Meegoda, J. N., & Ryu, S. (2018). Organic waste buyback as a viable method to enhance sustainable municipal solid waste management in developing countries. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 15 (11), 2483.

Kamboj, N., & Choudhary, M. (2013). Impact of solid waste disposal on groundwater quality near Gazipur dumping site, Delhi, India. Journal of Applied and Natural Science, 5 (2), 306–312.

Laner, D., Crest, M., Scharff, H., Morris, J. W., & Barlaz, M. A. (2012). A review of approaches for the long-term management of municipal solid waste landfills. Waste Management, 32 (3), 498–512.

Marshall, R. E., & Farahbakhsh, K. (2013). Systems approaches to integrated solid waste management in developing countries. Waste Management, 33 (4), 988–1003.

Mekonnen, M. M., & Hoekstra, A. Y. (2016). Four billion people facing severe water scarcity. Science Advances, 2 (2), e1500323.

Mekonnen, B., Haddis, A., & Zeine, W. (2020). Assessment of the effect of solid waste dump site on surrounding soil and river water quality in Tepi town, Southwest Ethiopia. Journal of Environmental and Public Health, 2020 , 1.

Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs, Government of India. (2020). Swachh Survekshan: World’s largest urban sanitation survey. https://www.ss2022.sbmurban.org/assets/pdf/ss2020_report.pdf

Mor, S., Ravindra, K., Dahiya, R. P., & Chandra, A. (2006). Leachate characterization and assessment of groundwater pollution near municipal solid waste landfill site. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 118 (1), 435–456.

Muhammad, A. M., & Zhonghua, T. (2014). Municipal solid waste and its relation with groundwater contamination in Lahore, Pakistan. Research Journal of Applied Sciences, Engineering and Technology, 7 (8), 1551–1560.

Nartey, V. K., Hayford, E. K., & Ametsi, S. K. (2012). Assessment of the impact of solid waste dumpsites on some surface water systems in the Accra Metropolitan Area, Ghana. Journal of Water Resource and Protection, 4 (08), 605.

Obasi, P. N., & Akudinobi, B. B. (2020). Potential health risk and levels of heavy metals in water resources of lead–zinc mining communities of Abakaliki, southeast Nigeria. Applied Water Science, 10 (7), 1–23.

Ogunleye, A. B., & Akinneye, J. O. (2019). The Bacteriological Assessment of Two Dumpsites in the City of Akure, Ondo State, Nigeria. International Journal of Research and Scientific Innovation, 6 (4), 78–83.

Pandey, P. K., Kass, P. H., Soupir, M. L., Biswas, S., & Singh, V. P. (2014). Contamination of water resources by pathogenic bacteria. AMB Express, 4 (1), 1–16.

Paul, S., Choudhury, M., Deb, U., Pegu, R., Das, S., & Bhattacharya, S. S. (2019). Assessing the ecological impacts of ageing on hazard potential of solid waste landfills: A green approach through Verm technology. Journal of Cleaner Production, 236 , 117643.

Rawat, M., Ramanathan, A. L., & Kuriakose, T. (2013). Characterisation of municipal solid waste compost (MSWC) from selected Indian cities—a case study for its sustainable utilisation. Journal of Environment Protection, 4 (2), 163–171.

Reinhart, R. D., & Grosh, C. J. (1998). Analysis of Florida Municipal Solid Waste Landfill Leachate Quality, Report #97–3 . Florida Center for Solid and Hazardous Waste Management.

Richey, A. S., Thomas, B. F., Lo, M. H., Famiglietti, J. S., Swenson, S., & Rodell, M. (2015). Uncertainty in global groundwater storage estimates in a Total Groundwater Stress framework. Water Resources Research, 51 (7), 5198–5216.

Saha, J. K., Panwar, N., & Singh, M. V. (2010). An assessment of municipal solid waste compost quality produced in different cities of India in the perspective of developing quality control indices. Waste Management, 30 (2), 192–201.

Saidu, M. (2011). Effect of refuse dumps on groundwater quality. Advances in Applied Science Research, 2 (6): 595–599.

Sharma, K. D., & Jain, S. (2019). Overview of municipal solid waste generation, composition, and management in India. Journal of Environmental Engineering, 145 (3), 04018143.

Trivedy, R. K., & Goel, P. K. (1984). Chemical and biological methods for water pollution studies . Environmental publications.

USEPA, (1999). US. Environmental protection agency. Screening level ecological risk assessment protocol for hazardous waste combustion facilities (Vol 3. Appendix E: Toxicity reference values). EPA 530-D99–001C.

World Health Organisation (WHO). (2011). Guidelines for Drinking-water Quality (4th ed.). World Health Organisation.

Yogendra, K., & Puttaiah, E. T. (2008). Determination of water quality index and suitability of an urban waterbody in Shimoga Town, Karnataka. In Proceedings of Taal2007: The 12th World Lake Conference, 342 , 346.

Zohoori, M., & Ghani, A. (2017). Municipal solid waste management challenges and problems for cities in low-income and developing countries. International Journal of Applied Science and Engineering Application, 6 (2), 39–48.

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to acknowledge the Indian Institute of Technology, Bombay (IIT, Bombay) and the Indian Council of Agricultural Research, Jorhat (ICAR, Jorhat) for providing atomic absorption facilities.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Ecology and Environmental Science, Assam University Silchar, Silchar, India

Mausam Kumar Paul & Mithra Dey

Environment Management Division, Directorate of Extension, Indian Council Of Forestry Research and Education (ICFRE), Dehradun, India

Chandra Sharma

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mausam Kumar Paul .

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval, consent to participants, consent to publish, conflicts of interest.

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher's note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Paul, M.K., Dey, M. & Sharma, C. Impact of Open Dumping Site on Groundwater Quality in Silchar City, Assam, India. Water Air Soil Pollut 235 , 659 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11270-024-07434-5

Download citation

Received : 09 October 2022

Accepted : 11 August 2024

Published : 03 September 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s11270-024-07434-5

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Solid waste
• Groundwater
• Water pollution
• Water quality index
• Heavy metal
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

Urban Pollution in India

• October 2018
• In book: Urban Pollution: Science and Management (pp.341)
• Publisher: Wiley-Blackwell

• Indian Agricultural Research Institute

• Indian Grassland and Fodder Research Institute

Abstract and Figures

Discover the world's research

• 25+ million members
• 160+ million publication pages
• 2.3+ billion citations

• Ishani Mishra

• Shri Krishna Tewari

• Ashok Kumar Singh
• Gajender Kumar Sharma

• ENVIRON MONIT ASSESS
• Sutapa Bhattacharjee

• M. Carmen Morillo

• César García-Aranda
• Estibaliz Martínez

• Monika J. Kulshrestha

• D. K. Aswal

• Gautam Geeta
• ATMOS ENVIRON

• Heidi Vreeland
• James J. Schauer

• Michael H. Bergin
• M.N.V. Prasad

• Nivedita Kaul
• CURR SCI INDIA

• Recruit researchers
• Join for free
• Login Email Tip: Most researchers use their institutional email address as their ResearchGate login Password Forgot password? Keep me logged in Log in or Continue with Google Welcome back! Please log in. Email · Hint Tip: Most researchers use their institutional email address as their ResearchGate login Password Forgot password? Keep me logged in Log in or Continue with Google No account? Sign up