The Status of Soil Surveys in Serbia and Montenegro
Nebojsa Protic1, Ljubisa Martinovic2, Bogic Milicic3, Dragi Stevanovic4, Milica Mojasevic4
Department of soil genesis, classification and cartography, Institute of soil science, 11000 Belgrade, Teodora Drajzera 7., Serbia and Monte Negro 2 Department of Agrochemistry and Plant Nutrition, Institute of soil science, 11000 Belgrade, Teodora Drajzera 7, Serbia and Monte Negro 3 Department of Soil Microbiology, Institute of soil science, 11000 Belgrade, Teodora Drajzera 7, Serbia and Monte Negro 4 Faculty of Agriculture, 11000 Zemun, Nemanjina 6, Serbia and Monte Negro

Classification and cartography in Serbia has passed through different phases of development. Most of the research was performed in the period 19651970. The territory of West and North-west Serbia, a part of the drainage basins of the rivers Velika Morava and Mlava, Vojvodina and a part of East Serbia were mapped at scale 1:50,000. There are no reliable data from that period all relating to the precise definition of individual classification units based on the chemical indicators (e.g. adsorption complex of the soil, etc.). After 1972, the research was continued based on the Ohrid (1963 and 1971) and Belgrade (1972) agreements which identified the fundamentals of the methodology for the design of the soil map of Yugoslavia at 1:50,000 scale. Soon after this, the framework classification of soils in Yugoslavia was proposed (Skoric et al., 1973), based either partially or entirely on the concepts valid at that time in Europe (Dudal et al., 1966; Dudal, 1968); Muckenhausen, 1962). Based on the above classification, during the period from the late 1970s to mid 1980s, the cartography of soils in Yugoslavia was intensively conducted. In Serbia in 1983, the financing of this project was stopped, so that even today there are about 700,000ha of unmapped soils (region of South Serbia, borders of the boundary with Macedonia, Bulgaria and Kosovo). Also, during the 1970s the soil map of Kosovo and Metohija at a scale of 1:50,000 was completed (1974), although it had very little in common with the nomenclature and taxonomic units defined by the soil classification in 1973. During 1999-2000, the 1:50,000 scale soil map of Monte Negro was completed, based on the classification of 1985. Table 1 presents the data on the main soil types in Serbia with the areas, and intensity observations (see Figure 1, Soil map of Serbia and Monte Negro and Figure 2, Drainage, infiltration and other properties of the soils of the Danube Basin in Serbia and Monte Negro). The data are based on the analysis of the actual cartographic material, complemented by data from other sources. In order to facilitate international communication and development of the national system of soil classification in Yugoslavia, the Classification of Soils in Yugoslavia by Skoric et al. (1985). Unfortunately, this classification was applied in Serbia only sporadically, because the practice of soil cartography had ceased. Instead of soil cartography, another project, ‘Control of fertility and determination of the contents of dangerous and harmful substances in the soils of the Republic of Serbia’, was undertaken. This research has now been completed on about 3.2 million ha and involves pesticides, heavy metals and microbiological activity.

The Status of Soil Surveys in Serbia and Montenegro. Protic, Martinovic, Milicic, Stevanovic, Mojasevic


typical. verification and monitoring of the Base Plan documents.280.000 ~ 155.000 233.000 572.000 Restrictions (Intensity and type) Unproductive soil Severe restrictions due to excessive filtration. regulation and use.000 538. Protic.000 ~ 17. Martinovic.000 86.000 560. 9 Development of the large scale soil surveys 1996 (Antonovic et al. but the concept of the Base Plan can be extended to the farm level (see Chapter V Data Model Flow Chart of the IS).g.000 ~ 350.brown forest soil(Eutric Cambisol) Dystric brown (Dystric Cambisol) Illimerised soil (Luvisol) Pseudogley (Planosol) Podzol Alluvial soil (Fluvisol) Meadow soil (Humofluvisol) Hydromorphic black earth and Marsh-gley (Humogley. Table 1: Main soil types (ha) and main limitations to use Soil type Lithosol Aeolian sands (Arenosol) Rendzinas Black earth on limestone (Calcomelanosol) Humus-siliceous soil (Ranker) Chernozem (Phaeozem) Smonitza (Vertisol) Brown soil on limestone (Calcocambisol) Eutric brown. 1997). which determines in more detail the content and procedure of passing.000 scale. poor to medium productive soil Severe to medium restrictions Severe restrictions Severe restrictions Without restrictions Moderate restrictions Severe to medium restrictions Moderate restrictions Severe to very severe restrictions Moderate to medium restrictions Moderate to Severe restrictionsconditionally productive soil Severe to very severe restrictions No restrictions to serious restrictionsconditionally can be highly productive soils ~ 760.000 ~ 50..200. The Methodology and the Information System begin with the concept of open systems whereby individual problems. Stevanovic. Regulation and Utilisation’. The outline of the methodology for the production of physical plan documents was finished by midThe Methodology also contains the document ‘Regulation of the Base Plan for Agricultural Land Protection. Mojasevic . Eugley) Solonchak and Solonetz Peaty soil (Histosol) Deposol Area in h 107. are considered within the scope of the conditions and processes in the natural and socio-economic environments. e. Milicic.000 ~510.000 780.000 1.000 ~ 527. together with a number of Instructions and Manuals for the construction and maintenance of the Base Plan for agricultural land protection.000 Severe restrictions Moderate to Severe restrictions Moderate to severe restrictions (unproductive soil) 298 The Status of Soil Surveys in Serbia and Montenegro.000 ~ 3.EUROPEAN SOIL BUREAU ⎯ RESEARCH REPORT NO. soil conservation. The plan was designed for the municipalities at 1:25.000 ~ 2.

Milicic. Protic. Mojasevic 299 .EUROPEAN SOIL BUREAU ⎯ RESEARCH REPORT NO. Martinovic. Stevanovic. 9 Figure 1: Soil map of Serbia and Monte Negro The Status of Soil Surveys in Serbia and Montenegro.

Milicic.EUROPEAN SOIL BUREAU ⎯ RESEARCH REPORT NO. Mojasevic . Martinovic. Stevanovic. Protic. 9 Figure 2: Drainage. infiltration and other properties of the soils of the Danube Basin in Serbia and Monte Negro 300 The Status of Soil Surveys in Serbia and Montenegro.

11 3. regulation and utilisation (IS). Vegetation . Appraisal of financial need.9 2. Mojasevic 301 . The following documents must also be provided: 3. Monitoring and execution of the changes of agricultural land. the data from 2. Information system on agricultural land protection.9 to 2. Monitoring of the development of the Base Plan. Milicic.6 2. Instructions for Base Plan.14 is in tabular form. Vegetation. Martinovic. The first five articles of the document are: 1.8 2. evaluation.6 3. The characteristics from 3. The data from 2. Land (soil) protection. Necessary data on the creation of the Base Plan. Procedure of construction.11 2.14 Soil data.1 to 3. Evaluation of the economic efficiency.14 Geology. 9 Structure and Content of Base Plan Documents The Base Plan consists of several documents regulating the important issues relating to the integral system of land management in Serbia.4 2.3 2. Agricultural Base Plan The instructions are an integral part of the foundation of the agricultural Base Plan.2 2.13 2. Land management. utilisation.16 3. 2. etc. Geology (Landform).7 2.3 3.14 are given in the form of thematic maps and the information in item 3. The ‘Regulation of the Base Plan for Agricultural Land Protection. Erosion. Hydrogeographical data. Climate data. 3. Hydrogeography Climate. Expected effect.15 3.5 2. Plant sample. Source of financial resources. Water sample.12 3. its conservation.9 3. Data concerning the cadastre at the parcel level. Horizon data. Data concerning the cadastre at the community level. The Status of Soil Surveys in Serbia and Montenegro.7 3. They can be divided into Instructions for providing the data (11) and Instructions for forming the characteristics of the particular land characteristics.10 2.13 3. 4. Contents of the Base Plan The Contents of the Base Plan section provides details of the structure of the documents of the Base Plan and prescribes the rules that must be adhered to during its use.14 are in the form of digitised geodetic maps. Land (soil) value. The detailed contents of the optimal assembly of information are given separately in the Methodology for the Design of Foundations for Agricultural Base Plan.17 3.8 are given in tabular form. Water. Necessary data The necessary data for producing the land management Base Plan consist of: 2. (14). management. The total number of instructions is 25.4 3.1 to 2.1 3.5 3. Landform. Protic. Air sample. Territorial units. Geodetic data. Pollution.10 3. Optimal assembly of information The optimal information for the description of agricultural land includes the following characteristics: 3.13 are in the form of thematic maps and the data in item 2.1 2. Optimal set of information sufficient for the description of agricultural land. Geomorphology .EUROPEAN SOIL BUREAU ⎯ RESEARCH REPORT NO. Soil sample.19 Proposal of activity plan. Land utilisation.12 2. verification and adoption of the Base Plan. describing the procedures for the production of some parts of the Plan. Regulation and Utilisation’ consists of the following: • • • • • • • • Contents of the Base Plan. Stevanovic.18 3. Soil.2 3.8 3.

protection and monitoring. II Model processing of the IS The IS enables description of the system functions through systems analysis. Technical regulation of the terrain. land can be described by the characteristics of terrestrial units. geodetic-cadastral and cartographic support. Monitoring the effects of land regulation.Attribute (ERA) model. systems analysis starts from the concept that the whole system can be described using only elemental operations or sequences. Information System The information system is created to collect. through the following functions: • • • • • • • Land consolidation reducing erosion risk. land regulation. landform. land protection. the following new concept is also introduced: • • Type of weak entity which depends on another entity or another weak entity.Relationship . 5.Object attribute or linkage value. IV Data Model of the IS (the Object . through the evaluation of hazard. of of of of 302 The Status of Soil Surveys in Serbia and Montenegro. Improvement of physical characteristics soil. The flow charts describe separately the problems of land management. Furthermore. Land regulation function. Technical and biological recultivation soil. such as: 5. irrigation. The general support for management includes the legislative and scientific and technical support. agricultural machines. demography. especially that of geology.1 General support for management. 5. Soil drainage.1 Define and maintain the regulation and standard of management.EUROPEAN SOIL BUREAU ⎯ RESEARCH REPORT NO. store. Systems analysis describes the logic and structure of data flow in the system.Relationship. Stevanovic. through the following functions: • • • Evaluation of suitability for crop production using land use data. regulation measures. The structure of the ERA model is as follows: • Object (entity). Another function of the IS is to: 5. microbiology. creation and distribution of information.linkage model) The model used in IS of Land Space in Serbia is Entity . erosion and pollution characteristics. 9 • Conversion of non-cultivated into cultivated soil.1. In addition to the above well-known concept. followed by their selection and iteration. Land use function. In addition to area characteristics.2 Create and maintain the data on land. Martinovic. Protic. land utilisation. The sub-functions of land regulation are as follows: • • • Evaluation of suitability of land regulation. Milicic. such as: location. as a type completely dependent on another entity. Improvement of chemical characteristics soil. Crop production planning. Land regulation planning. hydrology. The Information system also supports the following functions: Land protection function.1. analyse and present the information on agricultural land. Mojasevic . based on the principle ‘who from’ and ‘towards what’. crop production and the characteristics of vegetation condition. livestock. Improvement of biological characteristics soil. vegetation. Systems analysis is based on the concept of a connection between internal and external parts of the system. especially: 5. soil.2 Create and maintain the data about the land. Monitoring crop production through space time and transfer functions. Type of existential entity. III Data flow chart of the IS The IS also provides the data flow chart. Basic functions of the Information System The Information System (IS) includes several important functions. I.

Group of characteristics as a part of joined object characteristics. Model of data processing. the future of soil research and development has been discussed in the light of protection of land and its management.. The following relational system for general purposes is proposed: • • • • ORACLE. as well as on the objectives presented in the Manual of Procedures. (2000). SQL Server. • • • For the management of spatial data. 1ha 100m x 100m. Protic. 2000). Personnel and organisation support system.000.EUROPEAN SOIL BUREAU ⎯ RESEARCH REPORT NO. which is used in situations when it is necessary to realise the relationship in who participates and also other relationships.000m x 1. R-MAPPER. Antonovic and Protic. Martinovic. Type of mixed entity . INTEGRAPH. UNIX. Model of system openness. 1997. Surface objects. Taking into account the degree of development of SISLC (Information System on Land Cover of Serbia). Mojasevic 303 . Line objects. V Data Model Flow Chart of the IS This part of IS describes the relationship between the objects. 1998. MAPINFO. The Status of Soil Surveys in Serbia and Montenegro. 1 are 10m x 10m. as a mixed dependent entity. 1998). et al. Type of preceding entity. Software or program support system.000m. Georeferenced Soil Database for Europe. Type of existential and identification dependent entity. 1998. geological. Database of IS. 9 • Type of identification dependent entity which cannot be identified with its own attribute. construction of middle and small scale soil maps has focused on harmonisation of the database type and structure. The following operating system is proposed for the workstation: • WINDOWS XP-PROF. Nachtergaele. Soil maps at medium and small scale Since 1985. development & finance These issues are fundamental to setting up the IS. 1. Landsat). These are the sizes: • • • • • 25km2 5.relationship entity. forest and vegetation maps. Hardware. A preliminary phase of basic document consultation. such as: the soil region map at scale 1:5.000. Version 1. aerial photographs and satellite data (SPOT.. DB 2. but the attribute of another entity is used.000m x 5. These documents allow the establishment of a VI Model Resource of the IS The IS model consists of the following elements and principles: • • • • • • • Architecture of IS. SYBASE. the following are proposed: • • • • ARC INFO. and Global and National Soils and Terrain Digital Databases (SOTER). Milicic. A new classification of soils in Yugoslavia was proposed (Antonovic and Protic. DEM. topographic. 1m2 1m x 1m. The software or program support system is based on the following operating systems: • • WINDOWS XP.000m. The most significant results in soil classification were the adoption of the new concepts of international classification: Keys to Soil Taxonomy. Soil Survey Staff. This entity is especially favourable in the aggregation of entities. when entity is time dependent on another entity. 1995. World Reference Base for Soil Resources (WRB). 1998. Stevanovic. • UNIX. 1km2 1. (ESB. VII Implementation.ED. In this way the procedure of making the space discrete is carried out and the characteristics are attributed. Objects are classified according to type and class into: • • • • Dotted (punctual) objects.

Figure 3: GTOPO30 DEM (1kmx1km) [NASA. Figure 3 and Figure 4) and AVHRR satellite images (1. and Figure 6 is the program RastDEM v 1. This includes the extrapolation of the values of a parameter in one area to discrete spatial units with unknown values of the same parameter in another area. Milicic.1km resolution of the basic data model (AVHRR. Region EXTR v 2. 1. A phase of systematic survey (not soil mapping per se) with surface observations and borings in order to improve the delineation and definition of soilscapes and to investigate the soil bodies that occur in a soilscape. which in general correspond to different sets of co-ordinates. to be achieved. i. 4. Tables describing the geometry of soilscapes and soil regions (geometric dataset). is intended for the assessment of the value of DEM data for the given co-ordinates. Figure 5 presents the program Region EXTR v2. soil bodies. Distributed Active Archive Center] 3. 2. to the values that correspond to one set of co-ordinates. 304 The Status of Soil Surveys in Serbia and Montenegro. with geostatistical control of the maps of the wider area of Serbia and Monte Negro. in the analysis of land parts. automatically extracts data from the basic matrix with the given co-ordinate values of the samples in the grid (DEM or AVHRR data model). Martinovic. USGS Data Center. the database contains three types of tables: (i. A spatial organisation model is built with the objects horizon. In this phase. soilscape and soil region. 2. soil body. To achieve this.50m or to a lithic contact if shallower.) Tables describing the properties of horizons.) Tables describing the spatial relations between soil regions. Figure 7 presents an example of the common set of coordinates with the conversion of DEM model into 1.1km x 1. This program extension enables important functions in the data manipulation. Program RastDEM v 1. the Institute of Soil Science in Belgrade has designed two special types of software in Windows.e. A phase of information acquisition to characterise soil bodies.8. i. Protic. This phase and the following phases have not been realised in Serbia. soil profiles (which are to be acquired) will be sampled to a depth of at least 1. (ii. soilscapes and soil regions (semantic dataset). Accordingly. soil bodies and horizons (topological dataset).EUROPEAN SOIL BUREAU ⎯ RESEARCH REPORT NO. The main application of the program is to reduce the sets of different types of soil data. soilscapes. Generation of soil and other thematic maps using DEM (1x1km.1km). Stevanovic.1. The other software.1. The first software. the initial phase includes elaboration of the method and combination with a field survey to define and delineate soilscapes. Since the way of georeferencing differs for each of these components. Mojasevic .1km x 1.8. in this case. gtopo30. 9 pre-zoning of the area in different pedolandscapes. based on the set of known DEM values for the given coordinates.e. NDVI values for the ten day period 20/30 April 1992).

Mojasevic 305 . Martinovic. Milicic. Protic. 9 Figure 4: DEM (Digital model of the terrain) for the region of Serbia and Monte Negro+Country and Municipality boundaries+Hydrography The Status of Soil Surveys in Serbia and Montenegro.EUROPEAN SOIL BUREAU ⎯ RESEARCH REPORT NO. Stevanovic.

9 Figure 5: Program Region EXTR v2.8 Figure 7: DEM + Normalised Difference Vegetation Index. Milicic. Protic. Martinovic.NDVI (April-20/30-1992). Mojasevic .1 Figure 6: Program RastDEM v 1. EOS Land Processes Distributed Active Archive Center (LPDAAC) 306 The Status of Soil Surveys in Serbia and Montenegro. Stevanovic.EUROPEAN SOIL BUREAU ⎯ RESEARCH REPORT NO.

1990. Finke et al. 1996. Unlike in previous papers (Adriano. 1998. In Serbia. 2000. 1998.EUROPEAN SOIL BUREAU ⎯ RESEARCH REPORT NO. 1996). 1991. 1989. 9 Figure 8: Arc table of the vineyard near Jagodina..g. Lark. 2000. 1999. Lark. Budiman et al. Compared to the previously. King and Thomasson. combining the results from these models with spatial soil data aloows the construction of thematic maps (Blum et al. 1994. Proctor et al. McBratney and De Gruijter. Goovaerts.: Austria. Kabata-Pendias. During the project‘.1999. Protic. Jakovljevic et al. Utilisation.. there was also research that contributed to the methodological aspects of the analysis of spatial components (Protic and Protic. financed by the Republic Fund for the Protection. et al. 1992). 2000a. Lagacherie and Voltz. Milicic. In parallel with the assessment of heavy metal concentrations in soils... soils of 869. 1997). Ibanez and De Alba. 2000b. De Gruijter and McBratney. 1988. 1997. 1998). the main difference is that heavy metal threat is regarded as a continuous system in space and time. Serbia In Serbia.... Czech Republic and Slovakia. According to the European Soil Bureau (Bullock. 1984. 1995. 1992. Enhancement and Management of Agricultural Soils in Serbia and the Ministry of Agriculture and Water Management. Protic. McGrath and Loveland.. De Gruijter..000ha in the northern part of central Serbia were sampled and analysed. similar to those reported by (Bell et al. 1977. along with the work on the new soil classification. Sweden and Great Britain. soil susceptibility to erosion (thereby leading to diffuse pollution). Burrough et al. 1998. Burrough. 1999. the study of heavy metals in the soils started in a significant way in early 1992. 2000.. Dobos et al. Groenigen van. Poland. 1996. significant research The Status of Soil Surveys in Serbia and Montenegro. et al.. 2001). Heavy metals in soils are also studied in Hungary. Mojasevic 307 . 1995). contamination and acidification. Models of soil suitability assessment are increasingly being applied for different purposes.. Bourennane et al. Martinovic. 1999. several EU and EFTA countries have study programmes of heavy metals in soils. Germany.. in only two years of research. and Protic. McBratney. Soil inventory and monitoring In the past ten years the study of heavy metal concentrations in soils has been intensified. 1986. 1971. e. Stevanovic. 1975. Huggett... the problem of heavy metals is now being treated increasingly in the framework of Information systems.g. France. 1992. Chlopeck et al. 1993. e. Lagacherie. Protic and Antonovic. 1998. focuses on the risks for plant production and/or effects on animals and humans (Muller. et al. Odeh. 1992. the Netherlands.. Stuczynski et al. Ireland.

Dehydrogenation activity: spectrophotometric method after Lenhard. 1999. 3.Al method.electrometric method. Protic et al. The contents of ten elements were measured: • Cadmium (Cd). thinning method. and • 308 The Status of Soil Surveys in Serbia and Montenegro. chromium (Cr). Total number of fungi. Free nitrogen fixers: Azotobacter spp. Fluorine (F) . Phase IV (400.volumetric method. Protic et al.000ha) of the macro project are ongoing. so that the comparisons are not possible with later results. 9 Figure 9: The Grid of soil sampling (Phase V of Project. Ammonifiers. 1954). 1997. The research was performed in the early nineties in Vojvodina. Vol. modified after Talman (1968).2 million ha. The study will then have covered a total of 2. Mojasevic . 15. Soil samples were analysed for heavy metals and trace elements. Protic et al..Al method. by using solid and liquid nutritive media. lead (Pb) and zinc (Zn) were determined by extraction with HNO3 + H2O2 on AAS (Atomic Newsletter. 1997. Martinovic. Phosphorus ( P2O5).. The following analyses were made to assess the biogenic content of the soil: • • • • • • Total number of micro-organisms.000ha) and phase V (500. Protic et al. 1998. • Humus % ..000ha (10km ). copper (Cu).2 EDTA. 2002). Pochon. Laboratory methods The parameters of soil fertility were determined by the following methods: • • • pH in H2O and nKCl .. No.. method of spontaneous culture and Tchan's method.000ha. Milicic. 1976).. nickel (Ni).EUROPEAN SOIL BUREAU ⎯ RESEARCH REPORT NO. on the agar soil extract (thinning extraction with 1M HCL. (Mojasevic et al. but unfortunately heavy metal determination was done using hydrochloric acid. were sampled and analysed. CaCO3% . 2003) During 2002 another 500 localities (phase III) in. on the Capek medium . Soil sampling The soil was sampled to a depth of 0-25cm in the 2 grid of 1. This quantifies the condition of soils in Serbia. Total number of actinomycetes. 1999. Mojasevic et al.. with 1M sodium sulphate and 0. Stevanovic.6 million ha in central Serbia (Figure 9). • Potassium ( K2O) . 500. this inventory has been completed on about 4. method with silicogel.Kotzman method. Protic. Protic et al. Ashby substrate. Overall. 1997.. 2003. Protic et al. thinning method on Krasiljnikov medium..

Martinovic. 1976). within the scope determined by the samples in a grid 10km2 (1. Aldrin. Differences in the taxonomic classification of the soil.4 DDD. The number of entities (count) at the same time denotes the area of a class in 1. 4. it can be concluded that the soils on serpentine represent a particularly different ecological-edaphic environmentcompared to other soils of the study area. Lack of uniformity of the published cartographic material. Mojasevic 309 . 07960. especially in the construction of medium and small scale soil maps. with the corresponding computer and program support. atrazine (see Figure 12).000ha. method (Kruffel and Egger Co. Considering the relation of dehydrogenase activity and individual classes and the normal distribution for the values of dehydrogenase. Mercury (Hg) and arsenic (As) . The research of microbiological properties confirms the previous conclusions that individual parameters show a very irregular distribution within the analysed datasets.. USA).4 DDT. Stevanovic.16%.377. Moristown. humus about 5. Figure 10. Soil extracts were chromatographed in two ways: by electron capture detector for the detection of organochlorine pesticides and by nitrogen and phosphorus detector for the detection of nitrogen and phosphorus compounds (triazine herbicides and organophosphorus insecticides). It was found that the abundance of fungi is far more stable in the soils than the dehydrogenase activity. terbutrin). No. Different criteria applied in individual periods of work on soil cartography in the definition of the structure of the classification system.J. 15. The extraction was by CO2 in the supercritical state. (Figure 11). it is necessary to organise food production to reduce the risk (e. Conclusion The current state of cartographic research in Serbia is hampered by: • • • • Results of soil analysis methodologies which do not correspond to FAO and WRB criteria. heptachlor. αHCH. while somewhat higher values of the residues of triazine active substances were detected in the soils used for arable crop production.74mg/100g soil.4 DDE. prometrin. etc. heptachlor epoxide. The phases of the project include the determination of the residues of 18 pesticides in the soil (4. simazine. The occurrence of DDT and its metabolites and Lindane g HCH is related to their use in forest protection. Based on the study of the soils in Serbia (the first three Phases of the Project) and the available knowledge of hazardous and harmful substances it can be concluded that food production can be performed without risk on approximately 80% of the analysed area of Serbia. by Therefore it can be concluded that the existing information base needs updating and the classification and cartographic units should be identified based on the accepted methodologies and standards. as follows: the first class (centroid) are the soil samples (entities) with CaCO3 content about the value of 0. diazinon. 3. 20 Whippang Rd. which by their persistence or current application are significant contaminators of the soil.g.37%. In the analysis of the residues of 18 pesticides in the soils. Milicic. the analysis covered the presence of pesticides. Vol. The Project Results The results of the study of soil fertility indicators on 1.000ha (phases I-III).EUROPEAN SOIL BUREAU ⎯ RESEARCH REPORT NO.32mg/100g soil and pHKCl about 5. During Phase III. βHCH. 9 reading by ion-selective electrode.. P2O5 7. lindane. 4. • • Pesticides and other organic pollutants were determined by supercritical extraction (SFE) HP7680A. crop selection) and/or by occasional to continuous control of soil and plant quality. N.000ha) shows that the classes of nutrient supply are formed around different values of centroids. The development of large-scale soil surveys together with the Soil Information System should The Status of Soil Surveys in Serbia and Montenegro. alchlor. extraction with HNO3 + H2O2’ reading on AAS. dieldrin.3. K2O about 25. endrin. On the remaining 20% of the area. by the technique of cold vapours (Atomic Newsletter. γHCH. modified by absolute methanol 5%MeOH and CO2. Boron (B) was determined colorimetrically with curcumine after extraction with hot water (ratio 1:2). there were no unexpected findings.

The Macroproject of the Republic of Serbia ‘Control of soil fertility and the assessment of the content of harmful and hazardous substances in the soils of the Republic of Serbia’ will be completed during the next two years.EUROPEAN SOIL BUREAU ⎯ RESEARCH REPORT NO. Acknowledgement This Report was supported by the funds of the Ministry of Agriculture and Water Management and Ministry of Science. Technology and Development of the Republic of Serbia for which the authors are thankful. and at the level of risk assessment. but also at farm level. Martinovic. More than 90% of the territory in Serbia is now owned by peasants in private holdings. both in the optimisation of production of high quality food. first of all at the municipality level. Protic. In addition. This will facilitate planning and macro spatial analysis. Mojasevic . measures should also be undertaken to reduce soil degradation to the level of sustainability. Stevanovic. 9 be supported as the basis for the introduction of the system of decision making and land management in Serbia. Figure 10: Raster map of soil pHKCl in central Serbia after phase IV of the Project 310 The Status of Soil Surveys in Serbia and Montenegro. Milicic.

39 7.48 36. Protic.55 209 633 306 215 14 Variables pHKCl humus P2О5 К2 0 CаCО3 Count The Status of Soil Surveys in Serbia and Montenegro.27 3.794 21.98 22. 9 Figure 11: Classes (6) of heavy metals separated by aggregation by K-means procedure Cluster Means Clust 1 Clust 2 Clust 3 Clust 4 Clust 5 5. Milicic.39 0.64 6.95 30. Mojasevic 311 .EUROPEAN SOIL BUREAU ⎯ RESEARCH REPORT NO. Stevanovic.20 10.12 17. Martinovic.24 7 5.58 6.45 31.52 2.66 2.236 0.070 1.09 12.36 4.96 3.25 26.891 0.566 4.

Martinovic. Milicic. Protic.EUROPEAN SOIL BUREAU ⎯ RESEARCH REPORT NO. Mojasevic . after Phase III of the Project 312 The Status of Soil Surveys in Serbia and Montenegro. Stevanovic. 9 Figure 12: Raster map of the residues of atrazine in the soils of central Serbia.

. Wageningen. Volume I. and Bruand. Sci. Agricultural research Report 858. Beograd. Dudal.. Classification and Related Methods of Data Analysis. Legend. J.L.H.. M. R. No. 47.H. J. Bell. (1986). B. L. Soil drainage class probability mapping using a soil landscape model. IX Kongres JDPZ. McBratney and Keith. Antonovic. (1996). and Kay. Numerical classification of soil and its application in survey. Improving the kriging of a soil variable using slope gradient as external drift. Gligorije and Protic. Bacon. et al. Stojanovic. M. S-25/97. P. (1988). W. Ljesevic.. Soil survey and soil data in Austria. and Montanarella.. Luxembourg. 4. Eur. Linking digital soil maps and databases to simulation models: functional soil map aggregation in the Netherlands. Montanarella. M. Bullock. and Wagner. De Groot. P. 184pp.000.W.J.J. R. Forms of cadmium. 47.Research Report No. R.J.J. (1999)..J..A. A. J. Procedure The Status of Soil Surveys in Serbia and Montenegro. and Yassoglou. 69-79. p.. Schneider. P.J. L. 1.97-104. Am. Elsevier. Manual of Procedures.A.European Soil Bureau. European Soil Bureau Research Report No. King. UNESCO. P. Geoderma. Miladinovic..EUROPEAN SOIL BUREAU ⎯ RESEARCH REPORT NO.000. De Vries. Definition of soil units for the Soil map of the World. P. L. 6. S. Taksonomija hijerarhijske klasifikacije Jugoslavije. Word Soil resources reports. European Soil Bureau Research Report No. J. Office for the Official Publications of the European Communities.. P. B.. The potential use of DEM aided AVHRR for small-scale soil mapping. (1968). Zemljiste i biljka. 305-320.A. Burrrough.J. Journal of Environmental Quality 25. (1974). A. M. R. Milivojevic. Protic.. 22 3. 6. Paris. Rome. De Gruijter. In: Land Information Systems: Developments for Planning the Sustainable Use of Land Resources. Explanatory text.. and L. J. Soil Sci. Stevanovic. 367-381.E. R.J. Office for the Official Publications of the European Communities. Hack-Ten Broeke.. Trace elements in the terrestrial environment. (1995). Metodologija za izradu Osnova zastite. E.G. King. European Soil BureauResearch Report No. Luxembourg. P. Cunningham.. Rome.F. W. D. (eds). Ibanez. Netherlans.53-69... of Soil Sci. Luxembourg. Antonovic. Spasov. (1999). (1999). Dudal. L. New York. R. European Soil Bureau Research Report No. E. koriscenja i uredjenja poljoprivrednog zemljista. Version 1. Global and National SOils and TERrain Digital Databases (SOTER). Jones. P.. (1989). R. M. (1998). Mojasevic 313 .000. Sevarlic. The relation between cost and utility in soil survey I. M. N. Montanarella. H. Protic. P.1470.A. R.B. lead and zinc in contaminated soils from south west Poland. (1977).H. III. R. 6. Vol. J.. M. Georeferenced Soil Database for Europe.. Hartwich. M. EUR 18092 EN.15-25.. Finke. Soil map of Europe 1:2.. Dudal. Wilson M. In: Soil Resources of Europe. F.. Environ. and Jarvis. (1998). J. Finke. A modified fuzzy K/means method for predictive classification. 155165. 15.. 225-253. FAO/UNESCO.. J. Geoderma 93. Alex. M.and Havens. J. Amsterdam. Micheli. Chlopeck. p. Office for the Official Publications of the European Communities. Dobos. P.G.C. (1996). J. M. 5. Office for the Official Publications of the European Communities. 464-470. and Mc Bratney. P.29-42. W. (1997a). T. Baumgardner. and Buckley. Predlog klasifikacije zemljista Jugoslavije. Luxembourg. (1997b). J. Burrrough. EUR 17729 EN. N. Bullock.and Protic N.T. S.J.J. No 33..D. 473-483. and Kuburic.B. 477-492. Radojevic. M. Budiman. J. Soil Map of the World 1:5.500. Rudic. (1966).. Eckelmann. De Gruijter. A. Heineke. 2000). L. Martinovic. N.. and Oude Voshaar.. 58.A. D.501-507. Soil Sci. M. Blum. M. Novi Sad p. In: Soil Resources of Europe. S. (1999). Bock (Editor).H. FAO-UNESCO. In: H.. p. J. Chery. Springer. Pudoc. Djorovic.A.G. (eds). FAO. Bullock. M. P. Soil. Jugoslovenska autorska agencija. p. W.A. (1992). Montanarella (eds).J. M. Englisch. R. Biehl. Jones... Soc... Jamagne. Soil Resources of Europe: An Overview. Milicic. and Helt. D... Schwarz..A. Jones. EUR 18991 EN. J. Thomasson.. Andric. Comparison of different approaches to the development of pedotransfer functions for water-retention curves. (1971). EUR 18991 EN. Beeckett. 40. Bourennane. A. p. Nelhiebl. 9 References Adriano. Fuzzy mathematical methods for soil and land evaluation. (1998. H. Antonovic.

Ispra. Pedodiversity and scaling laws: sharing Mart_n and ´Rey’s opinion on the role of the Shannon index as a measure of diversity.J. 1.A.. I. p.J. Vitorovic.. World Soil Resources Report. an approach based on the fuzzy kriging variance. Milicic.M.O. Soil Sci. 12. 1-22.O. Geoderma 98. Lagacherie. 9 manuals. (1997). Jakovljevic M. S. Geoderma 98. M. and Chittleborugh.A. p. and Chittleborough. (1975). and De Alba. Designing sampling grids from imprecise information on soil variability.B. P. Soil Sci. United States Department of Agriculture Natural Resources Conservation Service. M. Blackie. Muckenhausen. and other authors. B. (1994). P. J.J. A geostatistical extension of the sectioning procedure for disaggregating soil information to the scale of functional models of soil processes. I. (2000a).. (Schwermetalle): Bodendauerbeobachtungs-Flachen (BDF). A. J. Geoderma. Further results on prediction of soil properties from terrain attributes: heterotopic cokriging and regression-kriging. Spatial prediction of soil properties from landform attributes derived from a digital elevation model. A. J. (1991). Frankfurt/M. Stevanovic.O. (1997).A. Geoderma 13.Stoffbestand des BodensNahrstoffe. Stevanovic D. Pesticidi.. Ibanez. A soil survey procedure using the knowledge on soil pattern of a previously mapped reference area.M.J. Land and Water Development Division Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.. Wilson M. D. D. Eighth Edition. No 1. King. (2000). Bayerische Landesanstalt fur Bodenkultur und Pflancenbau. (1984). 215-226.199200. P. Trace elements in soils and plants. (1996). Mojasevic. 187208. Deckers. Chittleborough. and Thomasson. Boca Roton. I. (2000). Huggett. Nachtergaele.159-175. and Burrough.. R. Eigenschaften und Systematik der Boden der Bundesrepublik Deutschland.. Odeh. Geoderma 65. Mc Grath.P. O. (1992). 597-619. 197-214. D. 283301. J. D. Vol.. JRC. (1998). Geoderma 49. and Voltz. Nutrient Cycling Agroecosyst.. Martinovic. Lark. 35-59. Teil I. Blagojevic S. R. (1995). The Soil Geochemical Atlas of England and Wales. and Protic.. Vol. Spargaaren. Lj. (1962). Elucidation of soil-landform interrelationships by canonical ordination analysis. Milica. Geoderma 97. S. Mc Bratney.J.637-642.. Geoderma 97.EUROPEAN SOIL BUREAU ⎯ RESEARCH REPORT NO. A. Zivkovic. Geoderma 63. Odeh. and Veresbaranji. (1992).W. 50. CRS PressInc. 314 The Status of Soil Surveys in Serbia and Montenegro. Kabata-Pendias. Protic. P. 51-62. Editors Vincent van Engelen and Wen Ting-tiang. and Ahrens.. Florida. Ch. 22pp. A continuum approach to soil classification by modified fuzzy K-means with extragrades. A. E. Krusevac. Keys to Soil Taxonomy By Soil Survey Staff (1998). 95.. Mojasevic. 43. EUR 16393 EN. (1993). (1999).J. and De Gruijter. Ostaci pesticida u zemljistu: Prikaz rezultata projekta Kontrola plodnosti zemljista i utvrdjivanje sadrzaja opasnih i stetnih materija u zemljistima Republike Serbia. The influence of variogram parameters on optimal sampling schemes for mapping by kriging. and McBratney. Mc Bratney. (2000b). R. Lark.J. Serbia. Screening atrazine levels in Serbian soils. M. Predicting soil properties over a region using sample information from a mapped reference area and digital elevation data: a conditional probability approach. Geoderma 67. European Soil Information Policy for Land Management and Soil Monitoring. in teil: 2. (2000).O.P. Mojasevic . F. June 18-20 p. (2000). Soil landscape system: a model of soil genesis. A.B. II Regional Symposium ‘Chemistry and the environment’. Entstehung.51-66. Factorial kriging analysis: a useful tool for exploring the structure of multivariate spatial soil information.J. 345-357. Applied Geochemistry.J. A.B. (1995). Kabata-Pendias. Applied Geochemistry. 89112... Supplementary Issue 2. A. Protic..M. 1-32. Goovaerts..A. Some considerations on methods for spatially aggregating and disaggregating soil information.B. D. Behavioural properties of trace elements in soils. p..A. S. Groenigen van J. Legros. Schadstoffe. P... N. (2003). and Martinovic Lj. Muller. and Loveland. (1992). A. London. I. Lagacherie. 74 Rev. S. Geoderma 96. 3-9. Bericht 10jahriger Laufzeit 1985-1995.B. 43. Mc Bratney. Einfuhrung. Kostic N. 14. 223-236. New developments in soil classification: World Reference Base for Soil Resources. J. Kovacevic. N. J. Mc Bratney. 5-9. Odeh. Factors influencing the distribution of heavy metals in the alluvial soils of the Velika Morava River valley.J.

Effect of the choice. Jones. Luxembourg.J. V. Zemljiste i biljka. kind. Mrvic. p. and Zannetti. FAO. 49.J. Moskovljevic.367-381. Regist..J. 88pp. Luxembourg. Protic. C. 2. Montanarella and B. Vol 2. Beograd. koriscenje i ocuvanje zemljista. R.A. Risk assessment and mapping the potentially toxic and harmful effect of long-term acidification of soil in the central part of Serbia. No 127. G. Ed. 46.J.. Protic. D. N. World Soil Resource Reports 84. Vol. 50. Montanarella. B. Teorijske osnove i oblici koriscenja multivarijante (klaster) numericke analize podataka u klasifikaciji zemljista.J. J. H. No 3. Sweden.A.A..EUROPEAN SOIL BUREAU ⎯ RESEARCH REPORT NO. Development and Application of Computer Techniques to Environmental Studies. M. World Reference Base For Soil Resources (WRB). Forming the georeferenced soil database. (1997). No 1. Rome.. Zemljiste i biljka. (1990). S. N. (2002). G. Thomasson. Yugoslavia. Beograd.203207.. (1998).J. Eckelmann. W. Protic. p. Lj. Stevanovic.. France. Vol. Martinovic. Jones. and Djinovic. J.. (1998).. N. Zemljiste i biljka. A contribution to inverse-distant method as a step towards a cartographs research freedom. 321-328. L. (1997). 16th World Congress of soil Science.H. Kostic. Protic. Skoric. and Ciric. European Soil Bureau Research Report No.. M. Klasifikacija tala Jugoslavije (Classification of Soils of Yugoslavia). (eds). N. and Mrvic. p. S. 4. Zemljiste i biljka. P. 1-15. T. Risk assessment of plant production based on soil-water relationships: Example of the Timok Basin. No. the base for development of management system on the concept of sustainable development.. 39-58. p... No. JDPZ. Computational Mechanics Publication. Martinovic. D. N.A.J. and Ciric. Novi Sad. M. EUR 17729 EN. Izbor metode numericke analize podataka kod kartiranja stanja plodnosti zemljista sa posebnim osvrtom na hijerarhijske. A. and Terelak.. Vol. H.. Jones. In: Land Information Systems: Developments for Planning the Sustainable Use of Land Resources. (2001).163-172. Mrvic.Zemljiste i biljka.. Protic. nehijerarhijske i ordinacione tehnike. Beograd. M. R. (1998). J. Lj. and Protic. IMACS/IFAC 3rd International Symposium on Mathematical Modelling and Simulation in Agricultural and Bio-Industries. D. In: Land Information Systems: Developments for Planning the Sustainable Use of Land Resources. Southampton.523-530. European Soil Bureau Research Report No. 4. (1985). A. (1973). and number of variables in the hierarchical form of numerical analysis on the interpretability of maps of heavy metals and trace elements.. (1997).1. Soil mapping and reflecting on the problems of selecting soil classification methods. Martinovic. Symb No 25. N. Pepper. Siddons. P.. Filipovski. Heavy metal content in the soils of the north part of central Serbia.. Pauly. Bulajic. 38. and Stevanovic. Skoric. Neural computing approach to soil monitoring systems in Poland.N. Office for the Official Publications of the European Communities. Protic. p. N. (2000).E.N. Uredjenje. Z. H. Protic. and Buckley. 129. and Moskovljevic.. P. No. Vol. 46.. and Keay. vol. N. Stevanovic. Heineke. L. ISRIC and ISSS. 79-92.. (1998). V. A. 1. Possibility of formalizing the procedure of compiling soil pollution maps from viewpoint of production of “healthy food”..No. 219-234.. J. (1999). Protic. Bulajic. Protic. Eckelmann. J. Jakovljevic... Uppsala. Office for the Official Publications of the European Communities. Brebbia. Protic. and Jakovljevic.. R. Z.486493. V. WIT Press Boston. C. Zemljiste i biljka. and Vesna.. Buckley (eds). Heineke. Vol. Mojasevic 315 . Thomasson. and Protic. Filipovski.A. 51. M. Martinovic. Beograd. N.A. A. Moskovljevic.W. Klasifikacija zemljista Jugosalvije (Classification of Soils of Yugoslavia). The Status of Soil Surveys in Serbia and Montenegro. 9 Proctor. J. Milicic.L. W. LandIS-a Land Information System for the UK. G. M. 1. Stuczynski. EUR 17729 EN. and Antonovic. Protic. (1998). N. A. Scient. Montpellier. Bellamy.

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful