See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/227557214

Soil, Definition, Function, and Utilization of Soil

Chapter · December 2006

DOI: 10.1002/14356007.b07_613.pub2

CITATIONS READS

2 51,655

20 authors, including:

Stephen Nortcliff Claus G. Bannick

University of Reading Umweltbundesamt, Germany
156 PUBLICATIONS   1,790 CITATIONS    17 PUBLICATIONS   243 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

H. Schulte-Bisping N. Litz
Georg-August-Universität Göttingen 29 PUBLICATIONS   181 CITATIONS   
22 PUBLICATIONS   304 CITATIONS   
SEE PROFILE
SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

ISO TC 61 SC 14 WG 4 - Characterization of plastics leaked into the environment (including microplastics) View project

WLC project View project

All content following this page was uploaded by H. Schulte-Bisping on 15 December 2017.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Article No : b07_613
Soil, 1. Definition, Function, and Utilization
of Soil
STEPHEN NORTCLIFF, University of Reading, Department of Soil Science, Reading,
United Kingdom
HERWIG HULPKE, Bayer AG, WV Umweltschutz, Leverkusen, Germany
CLAUS G. BANNICK, Umweltbundesamt, Berlin, Germany
KONSTANTIN TERYTZE, Umweltbundesamt, Berlin, Germany
GERHARD KNOOP, Bayer AG, WV Umweltschutz, Leverkusen, Germany
MICHAEL BREDEMEIER, Universit€at G€ottingen, Forschungszentrum Wald€
okosysteme,
G€ottingen, Germany
HUBERT SCHULTE-BISPING, Universit€at G€ottingen, Institut f€
ur Bodenkunde, G€
ottingen,
Germany
1. Definition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 399
2. Ecological and Political Aspects of Soil
Protection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 401
3. Function and Utilization of Soil . . . . . . . 402
3.1. Soil Ecosystems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 402
3.1.1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 402
3.1.2. Ecological Soil Functions. . . . . . . . . . . . . 405
3.1.2.1. Regulating Functions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 405
3.1.2.2. Habitat Function for Organisms in and upon
the Soil . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 410
3.1.3. Productive Function. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 412
3.1.3.1. Agriculture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 412
1. Definition
Soil is normally considered as the fine earth
which covers land surfaces as a result of the in
situ weathering of rock materials or the accumu-
lation of mineral matter transported by water,
wind, or ice. The distinctive feature of soil is that
to this weathered mineral material is added or-
ganic material. This organic material may be
both living and dead. The dead organic matter
will include little altered and freshly added dead
plant roots and leaf and other plant litter, dead
fauna, and organic material in various stages of
decomposition from little modified relatively
fresh materials to the complex decomposed ma-
terial called humus. It is this mixture of mineral
and organic material which gives the soils their
distinctive characteristics. Across the surface of
the earth there are many different types of soil

2012 Wiley-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim
DOI: 10.1002/14356007.b07_613.pub3
Article with Color Figures
3.1.3.2. Forestry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 413
3.1.4. Other Soil Functions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 414
3.1.4.1. Utilization of Wastes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 414
3.1.4.2. Raw Material Deposits. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 414
3.2. Land Utilization and Soil Destruction
(Statistics) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 415
3.2.1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 415
3.2.2. Land Utilization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 415
3.2.3. Soil Destruction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 416
3.2.4. Forecast . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 417
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 419
which reflect, at least in part, varying combina-
tions of mineral and organic matter and their
differing responses–both separately and often in
complex association–to different environmental
conditions. Indeed soil (and the soil constitu-
ents), together with the plant life it supports, the
rock on which it lies, and the climate it experi-
ences, forms a finely balanced system.
Depending upon the context, the word ‘‘soil’’
may have very different meanings. A simple
definition of soil is the material that plants grow
in and which provides them with physical support,
water, and nutrients. There are other more partic-
ular uses of the term soil. To the engineer, soil is
the finely divided and relatively loose ‘‘rock’’
material at the earth’s surface, and this overburden
is often considered an inconvenience because it
must be removed. The geologist calls this layer the
regolith and geological investigations frequently
400 Soil, 1. Definition, Function, and Utilization of Soil
begin below it. The hydrologist looks on the soil as
if it were a large reservoir storing water to supply
streams and rivers. The most widely held view of
the soil, however, is as a medium for plant growth
and the provision of food and fiber directly or
through the intermediate stage of animals.
Soil is important as a medium for plant growth
and for the support of much animal and human
activity. The soil acts as a reservoir for nutrients
and water providing the plants’ needs for these
requirements throughout their growth. The soil
may also provide an environment for the break-
down and immobilization of materials added to
the surface (in addition to the aforementioned
plant and animal remains) such as fertilizers and
pesticides and waste products such as sewage
sludge, animal wastes and slurries, and com-
posted refuse materials. The soil is a complex
dynamic system in which the interactions of the
biological, chemical, and physical environments
results in the transformation of materials, possi-
bly rendering initially harmful materials less
dangerous and immobilizing others as a result
of the interactions between these added materials
and the organic and inorganic soil constituents.
This immobilization may enable breakdown of
the potentially dangerous materials to less dan-
gerous forms. These interactions and transforma-
tions may be long term, over decades, medium
term over months or years, short term between
individual events such as rainstorms, or almost
instantaneous.
The soil usually consist of a vertical sequence
of layers or horizons differentiated by physical,
chemical, or biological characteristics. This se-
quence of layers is normally described as the soil
profile. Surface horizons are usually character-
ized by accumulations of organic materials as a
result of the addition of plant and animal residues
(it is, however, becoming increasingly apparent
that organic additions in deeper layers from roots
may have a significant role to play in the overall
additions of organic material and in the operation
of the soil processes). Surface horizons with a
mixture of mineral and organic materials are
usually identified as A horizons and may be
further described by the amount and nature of
the organic matter present within the horizon.
Where there is a substantial proportion of organic
material in the surface layer it may be called O
horizon. The A and O horizons are generally
considered the biologically most active part of
Vol. 33
the soil and are also subject to considerable
changes as a result of the weather, being fre-
quently exposed to wetting and drying cycles and
to a wide range of temperatures, which results in
high rates of activity in physical and chemical
processes. Both organic and mineral materials
are transformed in these surface layers and fre-
quently some of the byproducts of these trans-
formations are released and removed to lower
layers within the soil (eluviation). Below the A
horizons usually B horizons are encountered
where the balance shifts from predominantly
biological processes as in the A horizons to
predominantly chemical and physical processes.
Pedologists normally consider this zone to be that
of peak activity of the pedological or soil-form-
ing processes, and it is for this reason that many
of the currently used soil classifications pay
particular attention to the characteristics of the
B horizon in the allocation of soils to classes. The
B horizons are frequently subject to the maxi-
mum intensity of weathering processes and trans-
formations and may also exhibit the accumula-
tion of materials translocated from surface layers
(illuviation) such as clays, organic matter, and
iron and aluminum hydrous oxides. The descrip-
tion of B horizons frequently emphasises the
degree of weathering and the nature of the accu-
mulated materials. The C horizon, below the B, is
the relatively unaltered material from which the
A and B horizons may have developed.
The importance of the incorporation and
breakdown of organic matter and the production
of complex organic materials, as well as the
weathering of mineral materials to produce sec-
ondary products (such as clay minerals) and to
release minerals which may be taken up by plants
or leached out of the system, provides the dis-
tinctive nature of the soil. In particular the large
surface area associated with soil materials and
their ability both to retain and exchange ions
(both those added in fertilizers and those released
during weathering and biological decomposi-
tion) and to absorb water are important properties
which distinguish soil from rock materials.
The soil performs many functions. These
include functions related to natural ecosystems,
agricultural productivity, environmental quality,
soil as source of raw materials and as base for
buildings. Of these the agricultural productivity
function is probably the most widely recognized
and understood. This function of soil is to support
Vol. 33 Soil, 1. Definition, Function, and Utilization of Soil
plant and animal productivity whilst maintaining
or enhancing water and air quality and also
supporting human health and habitation. To per-
form this production function, the soil must be
able to provide the following: a physical, chemi-
cal and biological context suitable for the sur-
vival and development of living organisms; the
conditions for the regulation and partitioning of
water flow, storage and recycling of nutrients and
other elements; conditions to support biological
activity and diversity for plant growth and animal
productivity; an environment to filter, buffer,
degrade, immobilize, and detoxify organic and
inorganic substances; and provide mechanical
support for living organisms and their structures.
This brief list of requirements illustrates the
complex demands placed upon soil if it is to
maintain the productivity which is essential if the
food demands of an ever growing global popula-
tion are to be met. It further illustrates the need to
understand the complex interactions between the
various components within the soil and the inter-
actions with other components of the terrestrial
ecosystems. The productivity functions of soil is
probably the most widely studied and under-
stood, but the soil is increasingly expected to
perform functions related to the maintenance of
environmental quality, such as the filtering of
toxic materials applied to the soil surface. If the
soil is to perform these varied functions effec-
tively and with no reduction in its overall quality
the role of the soil, its components and processes
must be investigated and understood. It must be
ensured that in performing one function the soil’s
ability to perform other functions is not reduced
or removed.
Soil is essential for many human activities. It
is also a basic part of the natural environment.
The development of humans and society since
prehistoric times has been closely linked with an
increasing ability to manage the soil to human
benefit. This progress has been achieved by
adjusting the balance between the soil and its
natural environment. These adjustments have not
always resulted in positive responses and bene-
fits, and there are records throughout history
describing soil destruction as a result of misman-
agement and misuse of the soil, often as a result of
the failure to understand the nature and complex-
ity of the soil – environment relationships. Fu-
ture use of the soil must take account of these
relationships even in a society where we are
401
increasingly able to manipulate our environment.
As yet we know too little either of the nature of
the soil – environment relationships or of the
changes in these relationships and the response
of the soil as the environmental conditions are
changed. It is essential that this potential for
change is acknowledged in any attempts to ma-
nipulate the soil – environment system.
2. Ecological and Political Aspects of
Soil Protection
Soils are complex ecosystems that are strongly
cross-linked to the other environmental compart-
ments (water and air). Because of these linkages
far reaching interactions with the other environ-
mental compartments exist, through which soils
have an important ecological mediator function.
With respect to material transport processes,
soils can be both sources and sinks.
In significant contrast to the other environ-
mental compartments (air, water systems) hu-
mans took possession of soil from early times.
The concept of ‘‘owned land’’, which implies
‘‘possession of soil’’ underlines this fact. In some
languages (e.g., German) land (Land) and soil
(Boden) are often used as synonyms. Soil there-
fore represents the most important resource for
human life in both its material and cultural
aspects. Because soil is possessed as property,
it has long been assumed that special care of the
soil by the state could be dispensed with, since
the soil’s owners would already take care of it.
This assumption may well be true in many cases
for specific forms of use, such as agricultural use.
But less care is felt when the utilization of the soil
does not serve a single aim but several parallel or
even conflicting purposes. Such multiple uses are
typically the result of an increasing density of
human population.
Soil is utilized by exploiting its functions. The
great importance of soils for the existence of
humankind is clearly suggested by the term
‘‘culture’’, which is derived from the Latin word
‘‘colere’’ (to till).
The exploitation of certain soil functions does
not only create benefits but can also cause dam-
age. There are many examples for such conflicts.
Agricultural use as opposed to planned use for
housing or industrialization is a typical conflict of
this type.
402 Soil, 1. Definition, Function, and Utilization of Soil Vol. 33

In the course of this, the use of the soil for taminated sites) for soil protection is that the
nature conservation purposes or as a groundwater actual results of this exploitation often cannot be
reservoir for the production of drinking water can undone. Care must then be taken that this exploi-
be restricted or even endangered. Often, how- tation in the past has no harmful effects for
ever, with cross-linked and complex ecosystems present-day or future uses. The selection of ap-
the conflicting interactions are more complicated propriate uses therefore plays an important part.
and often neither transparent nor easy to under- The precautionary principle, generally important
stand. Nevertheless, when exploiting the soil it in environmental protection, cannot apply here
must always be borne in mind that the benefit since, understandably, actions in the past cannot
from the use of one function can at the same time be cancelled by means of precautionary
be detrimental to the use of another function. Soil measures.
protection is therefore chiefly a task whereby the In the case of contaminated sites, the protec-
utilization of soil functions has to be prudently tion of soil functions can therefore not be man-
selected. The properly targeted management aged by applying the precautionary principle.
of these uses must then be carried out in such Instead, it must be orientated to the reduction or
a way that no unreasonable and unaccepted elimination of risks to soil functions intended for
conflicts of the various intended uses will occur. future utilization.
At the same time the kind of use and its extent
must also be taken into account. The understand-
ing of soil protection as the management of 3. Function and Utilization of Soil
competing claims for use by human beings is
undoubtedly an anthropocentric view. But criti- 3.1. Soil Ecosystems
cism raised against this view frequently fails to
understand that this approach to action implies a 3.1.1. Introduction
large number of optional actions that can extend
from the utilization of one or a few soil functions Pedogenesis–the formation of soil–involves
to the use of all conceivable or available func- interactions between the lithosphere, hydro-
tions. In the limiting case the utilization of any sphere, atmosphere, and biosphere (Fig. 1) [1].
soil function can be entirely dispensed with. The At the earth’s surface, the lithosphere becomes
use can therefore admit the range from ‘‘no the pedosphere under the influence of weathering
functions’’ to ‘‘all.’’ As a result of this, and forces and organisms.
despite the anthropocentric approach, even
extensive ecological requirements are taken into
account. A system designed for the protection of
soil functions consequently offers starting points
for practicable as well as ecologically demanding
measures.
With regard to its utilization and exploitation,
the soil is the memory and archive of these
actions. In this respect, pollutions arising from
earlier uses (contaminated sites) play an impor-
tant part in soil protection. As a result of the
exploitation of soils in the past, restrictions often
arise today on the utilization of some or all soil
functions. Thus a soil that functions as a reservoir
for groundwater regeneration and was contami-
nated in the past cannot be used as a water
protection zone if through this contamination,
owing to displacement processes, concentrations
of contaminants appear in the groundwater mak-
ing it unacceptable for drinking water catchment. Figure 1. The soil in terms of the interaction of various
The problem of exploitations in the past (con- spheres [1]
Vol. 33 Soil, 1. Definition, Function, and Utilization of Soil
Thus soil is a complex, multiphase mixture of
minerals, water, air, and organisms, together with
products of their transformation and degradation.
Depending on the climatic conditions and the
nature of the underlying rocks, widely differing
types of soil can be formed, whereby the rate of
formation depends on how fast the rocks are
weathered in the lower layers and on how rapidly
biomass is degraded in the upper layers.
Lithosphere. The lithosphere is the rock
mantle of the continents and the earth’s surface
beneath the oceans. The soil–the upper, inhab-
ited part of the earth’s crust–is formed from
rocks by weathering, mineralization, decompo-
sition, humification, texture formation, and dis-
placement, under certain conditions (e.g., cli-
mate, leaf fall from vegetation). Weathering is
the chemical, physical, and biological transfor-
mation of inorganic material such as basalt,
granite, gneiss, carbonate, loess, and sand at the
earth’s surface by size reduction, degradation,
transformation, and dissolution. With progres-
sing soil development, the petrogenic starting
materials are increasingly replaced by pedogenic
materials such as clay minerals, which are more
stable at the earth’s surface.
Nine groups of minerals can be distinguished
on the basis of chemical composition [2]:
Class I Elements: metals (Ag, Au, . . . ), metalloids
(As, Sb, . . . ), nonmetals (C, Se, . . . )
Class II Sulfides: galena (PbS), sphalerite (ZnS)
Class III Halides: halite (NaCl), sylvinite (KCl)
Class IV Oxides, hydroxides: corundum (Al2O3), quartz
(SiO2), hematite (Fe2O3)
Class V Carbonates, nitrates, borates: calcite (CaCO3)
Class VI Sulfates, chromates, molybdenates, tungstates:
Class VII
baryte (BaSO4)
Phosphates, arsenates, vanadates: apatite
[Ca5[(F, Cl; OH)/(PO4)3]
Class VIII Silicates: quartz (SiO2)
Class IX Organic compounds
As a result of the various soil-forming factors,
characteristic horizontal layers, known as hor-
izons, are formed, which differ in their biologi-
cal, chemical, and physical properties. At the soil
surface, the horizons contain larger proportions
of organic material (O/A horizons), whereas the
mineral component increases with increasing
depth.
The horizons together make up the solum. The
vertical distribution of the horizons in a two-
403
dimensional cross section through the soil (soil
profile) is the main criterion for classification of
soils.
The smallest, undividable unit of a soil body is
known as a pedon. Neighboring peda of the same
soil type form a polypedon. The properties of the
peda of a polypedon vary only slightly (e.g.,
horizon depth). On a larger scale, polypeda may
be collected together as pedocomplexes.
Atmosphere and Hydrosphere. The spa-
cial arrangement of the voids, the pore system,
and the solid soil components determines the soil
structure. The structures are classified in two
main categories: primary structures and second-
ary structures (aggregates). In primary structures,
aggregation is not apparent, due to uniform bind-
ing forces between the primary particles. Only in
coherent structures are the primary particles
permanently attached, forming a nonorganized
mass, as in humus and clay soils. In secondary
structures, primary particles are bound to one
another far more strongly than to neighboring
groups, thus forming secondary particles. Aggre-
gates such as crumbs (1 – 10 mm) are formed by
aggregation of individual grains. Segregates
form by shrinkage from a coherent bulk. Inter-
particle binding can be by pure adhesion, or by
cementation by mineral precipitates, inorganic
colloids, roots, fungal hyphae, or bacterial slime.
The soil solid phase can be separated into various
particle sizes by classification processes such as
sieving and sedimentation. The mass composi-
tion of the solid phase as a function of particle
size is known as granularity or texture. Particles
>2 mm make up the coarse fragment, and those
<2 mm, the fine earth, which is subdivided into
sand (63 – 2000 mm), silt (2 – 63 mm), and clay
(<2 mm) fractions.
Soil pores are also classified according to size:
large pores (>50 mm), medium pores (0.2 –
50 mm), and fine pores (<0.2 mm). Large pores
bind soil water only weakly and are easily
drained. Medium pores can be penetrated by root
hairs and microorganisms and store capillary
water available to plants. Fine pores bind water
so strongly that it is no longer available to plants.
The soil contains a pore system formed by min-
eral particles generated by weathering. The two
main types of particle packing (see Fig. 2), cubic
loose and hexagonal close packed, influence
various soil processes.
404 Soil, 1. Definition, Function, and Utilization of Soil
Figure 2. Packing of spherical particles [3]
Biosphere. The totality of the ecosystems of
the earth’s crust, in close interaction with the
hydro-, litho-, and atmospheres, makes up the
biosphere. The total organic fraction of the solid
phase of the soil is divided into biomass, which
includes all living organisms (soil flora and
fauna), and the necromass, which contains all
dead organisms and their transformation pro-
ducts. The latter category is derived from both
underground (e.g., roots) and overground sources
(e.g., leaf fall). The degradation products of the
necromass are the humic substances which, de-
pending on their solubility, are divided into the
alkali-insoluble humins and the alkali-soluble
humic acid precursors and humic acids (see
Section 3.1.2.1).
Within their biotope, the soil organisms form
a community known as an edaphon. The edaphon
is divided according to the size and way of life
of the organisms. In the division according to
Figure 3. Classification of soil organisms by size [4]
Vol. 33
morphological size [4] the edaphon is divided
into microflora (bacteria, fungi, algae), micro-
fauna (protozoa), mesofauna (nematoda, rotifera,
tardigradae, mites, and collembola), macrofauna
(annelids, snails, insects and their larvae), and
megafauna (vertebrates); see Figure 3.
The particular living conditions in the soil are
coupled with typical modes of behavior of the
organisms. Thus the group of soil burrowers
(fodient edaphon) is formed mainly of organisms
from the mega- and macrofauna (annelids, in-
sects and their larvae) which generate their own
living environment by burrowing and agitation of
the soil. Serpentine edaphon move through the
pores of the soil (rhizopods, annelids, collem-
bola). They are restricted to open, air-containing
pores and are found mainly in the upper soil
layers. The soil swimmers (natant edaphon) are
adapted to life in the water of the soil. They
include some microflora and the majority of the
mesofauna (rotifera, nematodes, tardigradae).
Bacteria and fungi, which rapidly cover the walls
of pores or enter soil voids belong to the sessile
edaphon [5].
The soil flora and fauna introduce organic
material into the soil system. Almost 100 % of
the elemental composition is accounted for by C,
O, H, N, and S. The central importance of the soil
is due to the fact that fundamental ecological
processes interact there. Thus the soil is an
essential basis for all life processes. Soil func-
tions are summarized in Figure 4.
Vol. 33 Soil, 1. Definition, Function, and Utilization of Soil
Figure 4. Soil functions
From the environmental viewpoint, the most
important functions are the regulating and pro-
ductive functions, known together as ecological
soil functions. Other soil functions include raw
material resources, land for building, recreation-
al areas, and waste disposal.
The filter function is the mechanical retention
of particules and colloids by the soil-pore system.
The buffer function includes the binding of
dissolved substances by absorption and desorp-
tion, the inclusion and release of substances
(including water) by pore spaces, and the in- and
excorporation of substances by soil organisms.
The habitat function is the ability of the soil to
support colonies of organisms within and upon
the soil. This includes the function of the soil as
substrate for higher plants.
The productive function differs from the hab-
itat function in that here the economic exploita-
tion of the biomass is of primary importance.
The other soil functions are mainly or exclu-
sively of anthropogenic nature. Here, the eco-
logical functions are of minor importance com-
pared to the anthropogenic exploitation or are
indirectly exploited, for example, in the degra-
dation or sorption of pollutants. In contrast to the
other soil functions (raw material deposits, build-
ing, recreation, waste disposal), the regulatory
and habitat functions can be defined solely on the
basis of the natural pedological and ecological
properties of the soil, regardless of the use to
which it is put. The productive function can be
distinguished on the basis of both ecological
aspects (habitat for cultivated plants) and so-
cio-economic criteria, since it is directly inter-
linked with agriculture and forestry.
405
3.1.2. Ecological Soil Functions
3.1.2.1. Regulating Functions
The regulating function of the soil depends on the
regulation of natural material and energy cycles.
It includes all material and nonmaterial introduc-
tions to the soil and the process therein which
they initiate.
Filter Function. Filtration is defined as me-
chanical retention of material >100 nm in size
[6]. Filtration occurs during the flow of aqueous
suspension, through the pore systems.
The behavior of the soil water (hydraulic
potential f) is determined by the gravitation
potential z (downwards) and the matrix potential
y (upwards). At equilibrium, these two poten-
tials are equal, i.e., f ¼ (
y) þ (þz) ¼ 0. Ad-
dition of water (e.g., by precipitation) increases
the matrix potential and displaces the equilibri-
um. This infiltration is one of the most important
effects counteracting erosion.
Decreased filter performance can arise
through pore blockage due, for example, to com-
paction or clogging with mud. Pore blockage can
also have deleterious effects on the transforma-
tion and habitat functions (stagnant water, air
deficiency).
Buffer Function. The buffer function en-
compasses the following major areas:
1. Buffering of water balance
2. Buffering of acid inputs
3. Buffering of nutrients and pollutants
406 Soil, 1. Definition, Function, and Utilization of Soil
The buffering of water balance is largely a
result of the ability of soils to store water in pore
spaces by means of capillary forces. Since the
pressure of a liquid (tension) is lower than atmo-
spheric pressure, the liquid rises in a capillary
until hydrostatic equilibrium is attained. The
capillary pressure and hence the height to which
the liquid rises increase with decreasing capillary
diameter.
The water-storage capacity of a soil is char-
acterized by the amount of water that can be
retained for a given value of capillary pressure
(pF characteristic). The pF value is defined as the
logarithm of the negative capillary force (
y), or
the pressure in centimeters water column. Of
particular importance for the habitat and produc-
tive functions is water available to plants, with
pF ¼ 1.8 – 4.2 (exploitable field capacity). For
each soil type, at a given pF value, the quantity of
water that can be retained against the force of
gravity can be determined. The exploitable field
capacity (in mm/dm) for some substrates is given
in the following [7]:
Fine sand 13
Silt 25
Sandy loam 19
Clay 15
Buffering of acid inputs is achieved by various
soil buffer systems, depending on the pH range:
Neutral (6.2 – 8.0) carbon dioxide/
carbonate buffer
Acidic (4.2 – 6.2) exchange buffer
Highly acidic (2.8 – 4.2) aluminum buffer
Buffer systems consist of a weak acid or base
and the corresponding salts, and maintain con-
stant pH within a certain range. All soils are
exposed to acids, both of natural (e.g., absorption
of nutrient ions by plants with release of protons)
and anthropogenic origin (e.g., fertilization, at-
mogenic inputs).
Carbonate-containing soils can buffer protons
by formation of hydrogencarbonate
þ 2þ
CaCO3 þH Ca þHCO

3
After exhaustion of the carbonate buffer,
buffering is performed by the exchange buffer
system, whereby all cations of the mineral and
organic ion exchangers are replaced by protons.
Vol. 33
Below pH 4.2 in the aluminum buffer system,
destruction of the crystal lattice structure and
release of aluminum ions occurs
AlOðOHÞH2 Oþ3Hþ !Al3þ þ3H2 O
The buffering of nutrients and pollutants af-
fects most ecological soil functions. It is made
possible by the presence of organic and inorganic
exchangers, whereby the following adsorption
phenomena can occur:
1. Van der Waals forces: relevant for organic
pollutants, humus
2. Hydrogen bonds: relevant for organic pollu-
tants, mineral surfaces
3. Electron donor – acceptor complexes: rele-
vant for organic pollutants, humus
4. Hydrophobic bonding: relevant for organic
pollutants, humus
5. Ion bonding: relevant for organic pollutants,
inorganic pollutants and nutrients, humus,
clay minerals
6. Covalent bonding: relevant for organic and
inorganic pollutants
For nutrients and inorganic pollutants, ion
formation is the most important process. Ion
exchangers have positive or negative excess
charge, thus binding anions or cations. Sorption
of this type is reversible and an ion-concentra-
tion-dependent equilibrium is established in the
soil solution. The sorption strength depends on
the distance between the bonding partners, which
is largely determined by their hydration shells,
decreasing with increasing distance according to
the Coulomb law P  Q1Q2/r2.
In addition, the strength of sorption increases
with increasing ion charge, which is taken into
account in the Hofmeister ion series of decreas-
ing hydration shell and increasing exchange po-
tential:
Liþ < Naþ < kþ < Rbþ < Csþ
Mg2þ < Ca2þ < Sr2þ < Ba2þ
The input of nutrients and inorganic pollutants
into the soil, their dissolution in soil water,
buffering by adsorption and desorption, uptake
by plants, and loss of eluates can be depicted in
nutrient and pollutant cycles (! Ecology and
Ecotoxicology, Section 2.1.4). The ecological
cycle for heavy metals is shown in Figure 5.
Vol. 33 Soil, 1. Definition, Function, and Utilization of Soil 407

Figure 5. Heavy-metal cycle in the ecosystem [8]

a
Can be used as indicator for accumulation. b Potentially biorelevant. c Momentary biorelevant increase of metal concentra-
tion in the dissolved phase as indicator for biotoxicity and bioacumulation.

Heavy metals can be bound in the soil in the Dissolved

following ways (R represents a solid/dissolved Aquo complexes, e.g., Cd2þ 2þ
ðaq:Þ , Pbðaq:Þ


inorganic/organic compound, e.g., iron oxide, Inorganic complexes, e.g., AsO3þ 4 , ZnðOHÞ3 ,
clay mineral, humic substance): PbðCO3 Þ2

2 , CdCl
þ

Organic complexes and chelates, e.g., CH3 Hgþðaq:Þ ,

R
Cu
R

The pollutant content of the soil is character-

ized by background values, which are represen-
tative values for the general background content
of a substance or group of substances in the soil.
When statistically determined they can be used
to give the local, regional, or nationwide pollution
Oxides, e.g., As2O3 of the soil. Table 1 lists values based on the
Bound in silicates e.g., tin in Hornblende evaluation of over 16 000 soil samples collected

Table 1. Heavy-metal contents in rural areas for arable land (90th percentile)

Substrate As Cd Cr Cu Hg Ni Pb Sb Zn

Sand 3.0 <0.3 3.0 0.03 <3.0 13 <0.3 14

Sandstone 7.0 0.9 15 0.11 30 75 0.6 43
Loess 9.6 <0.3 149 25 0.16 44 51 1.1 89
Boulder clay 5.4 <0.3 14 0.08 19 32 0.9 76
Marshes
Claystone 10 1.1 27 0.14 74 61 0.6 121
Limestone
Basalt 5.0 0.8 71 0.1 339 49 168
408 Soil, 1. Definition, Function, and Utilization of Soil
Table 2. Priorities of relevant soil pollutants
nationwide in Germany [9–11]. The samples were
collected by a uniform method, and the 50th and
90th percentiles of the heavy-metal content de-
termined for three types of land usage. The shown
values are representative for the rural area.
Soil has to fulfill a buffer function to protect
humans, plants, and groundwater from soil pol-
lutants. Soil pollutants and the corresponding
pathways are listed in Table 2.
Transformation Function. The behavior
of chemical compounds in the pedosphere de-
pends on the properties of the substance, the
location, and in some cases is affected by anthro-
pogenic activities. The transformation function
provides for self-cleaning of the soil. Degrada-
tion and transformation of substance in soil can
occur abiotically (e.g., reactions on mineral sur-
faces, photochemical reactions) or biotically.
One of the most important forces of the self-
cleaning capacity of soils are the microorgan-
isms, which provide the enzymes necessary for
biotic transformation processes. Microorganisms
Vol. 33
use substances that enter the soil as nutrients or
energy sources, whose exploitability increases
with decreasing persistence of the compounds.
After a substance has entered the soil, the micro-
flora require a latent period (lag phase) for the
development of the specific species spectrum
required for its metabolization. This time period
depends on the xenobiotic properties of the
substance. If the substance is introduced more
often, the lag phase becomes shorter and the
persistence decreases. In addition, all processes
that stimulate microbial activity in the soil are
suitable for increasing its metabolic potency.
These include application of organic and inor-
ganic nutrients and cultivation of the soil.
The degradation and transformation of post-
mortal plant and animal material to humic sub-
stance is also attributed to the transformation func-
tion. Humic substances are naturally occurring
biogenic substances with characteristic yellow to
black color, high particle density, and persistence.
Humic substances have been found in materials
that have undergone coalification, such as peat,
liquites, and lignites. The humic substances can
be classified according to their solubility. Humic
substance fractions and their solubility, as deter-
mined by various authors, are as follows:
1. Classification according to SCHEFFER, ULRICH
[12] :
Crenic acids acids, alkali, water, alcohol
Apocrenic acids acids, alkali, water, alcohol
Hymatomelanic acids alkali, alcohol, acid (partially)
Gray humic acids alkali
Brown humic acids alkali
2. Classification according to FLAIG [13] :
Fulvic acids acids, alkali
Hymatomelanic acids alkali, alcohol
Humic acids alkali
Humines insoluble
3. Classification according to SWIFT [14] :
Fulvic Acids acids and alkali
Humic acids alkali
Humines insoluble
In contrast, ZIECHMANN [15] classifies the hu-
mic acid fractions according to their reactivity
Vol. 33
and their ability to undergo further humification
with uptake of oxygen:
Starting materials organic substances
(nonhumic) undergoing humification
lightly colored to colorless
Humic acid reactive fraction, gradually transforming
into humic acid
light brown to brown
Humic acids fraction containing carboxylic acid groups,
phenolic OH group
base-soluble, precipitate in acid
intense brown color
Humines inactive fraction
insoluble
intense brown color
The principle route for the formation of humic
substances is shown in Figure 6. In reality, the
formation mechanism presented here may be far
more complex. This is due firstly to the wide
variety of substance groups that can be involved
in the humification process, and secondly to the
activities of the micro- and macrofauna, which are
responsible not only for producing these sub-
stances but also for mineralization, which com-
petes with humification. Substances produced by
microorganisms during the degradation of organ-
ic matter, as well as partially degraded, but con-
siderably modified, substances, are involved in
the humification process. In contrast to this incor-
poration of degraded biopolymers in a preexisting
humic substance system, it is now being discussed
whether such degraded biopolymers should them-
selves be designated as humic acids.
Degradation and transformation of nutrients
(! Ecology and Environmental Chemistry, Sec-
tion 1.4) is another important transformation
process in soils and also involves microorgan-
isms. Of major importance for the cleansing of
the soil is the degradation and transformation of
pollutants. The microbial degradation of various
groups of chemical substances with ultimate
mineralization is a first-order reaction. This has
Figure 6. Formation of humic substances [15]
HAP ¼ humic acid precursors; HA ¼ humic acid; Hm ¼ humines
Soil, 1. Definition, Function, and Utilization of Soil 409
been shown, among others, for some chlorinated
hydrocarbons, triazine derivatives, organic phos-
phorus compounds, carbamates, thiocarbamates,
thiurams, urea derivatives. Under comparable
conditions, the rate of microbial degradation is
given approximately by
c ¼ e
kt
where c is the concentration of the compounds, t
is time, and k is the mineralization rate.
Plotting log c against t gives a straight line
whose gradient is the mineralization rate k, which
allows predictions of the persistence of the com-
pound under given soil and other environmental
conditions to be made. Strongly sorbent, dry,
low-nutrient soils with relatively low microbial
activity exhibit small gradients, whereas soils in
which the nutrient supply, air and water balance
and hence the microbial activity are optimal give
a steep gradient.
Continuation of the microbial transformation
process in the soil is essential for plant growth
and hence for the existence of animals and hu-
mans. In this context, the question of whether the
increasing production of chemicals in the last few
decades, which has led to intentional or acciden-
tal introduction of intermediate, final, and waste
products into the soil, can seriously affect the
biological functions of the soil, is becoming of
increasing importance.
To investigate this, it is necessary to study the
behavior of numerous chemical substances in the
soil and to elucidate their effects on soil organ-
isms. Depending on their properties, chemical
pollutants can persist in the soil or be degraded.
Thus a distinction can be made between persis-
tent and nonpersistent pollutants. Both groups
can affect soil microorganisms and their activity
in various ways (Fig. 7). Persistent pollutants
accumulate in the soil, acting on the soil micro-
flora either alone or as complexes with clay
minerals, humic acids, and oxides. Nonpersistent
410 Soil, 1. Definition, Function, and Utilization of Soil Vol. 33

Figure 7. Behavior of pollutants in the soil and their interaction with microorganisms [16]

pollutants undergo a decrease in concentration up to 50 %. Field studies have shown that de-
due to chemical or physicochemical, but mainly creasing their numbers decreases the degradation
biological/biochemical processes. If such pro- performance of the soil by up to 40 %. In general,
cesses result in mineralization of the pollutant, single-cell organisms, worms, and anthropods
a detrimental effect on soil microorganisms is each make up one-third of the soil biomass. The
unlikely. However, since complete mineraliza- number of organisms per square meter in the
tion is generally the exception, it can be expected upper 30 cm of the soil is as follows [17]:
in many cases that intermediate degradation
products or the final products of transformation Bacteria 601012
reactions could adversely affect the soil micro- Fungi 109
organisms and their activity. Such effects can Algae 106
change the condition of the total biomass as Single-cell organisms 500106
Threadworms 10106
well as the species composition of the microor- Mites 150 000
ganism population and its mineralization and Collembola 100 000
synthesis activity. White ringworms 25 000
Earthworms 200
Snails 50
3.1.2.2. Habitat Function for Organisms in Spiders 50
and upon the Soil Isopods 50
Millipedes 150
The organic material of the soil consists of 85 % Centipedes 50
Beetles 100
postmortal substance, 10 % plant roots, 4 % bac- Fly larvae 200
teria and fungi, and 1 % soil fauna. Vertebrates 0.001
Figure 8 shows the soil microorganisms and
their important ecological functions.
Bacteria and fungi account for 90 % of degra- Respiration of an organism is a measure of its
dation, while soil animals are responsible for metabolic activity and, therefore, its material
only ca. 10 %. However, soil animals are highly turnover. Protozoa account for 70 % of respira-
effective in accelerating microbial degradation tion–considerably higher than their biomass
and can increase the availability of nutrients by fraction of about one-third. It is not general
Vol. 33 Soil, 1. Definition, Function, and Utilization of Soil
Figure 8. Soil microorganisms and their ecological functions
knowledge that these soil-inhabiting microfauna
produce approximately as much biomass as
earthworms. In the food chain, protozoa repre-
sent an ecologically important link between bac-
teria and small metazoans (e.g., rotifera and
nematoda) and thus exhibit pronounced catalytic
activity towards bacterial processes and reminer-
alization processes in the soil.
Taxonomically, soil protozoans can be divid-
ed into three main groups: small flagellates of
size 3 – 10 mm; 2 mm flat naked amoebas with
diameter 10 – 300 mm and testate amoebas of
size 20 – 200 mm; and ciliates (20 – 300 mm).
Their occurrence is mainly limited to the upper
10 cm of the soil. Due to their small size or flat,
flexible form, flagellates and naked amoebas can
enter even the smallest soil pores ( 2 mm).
In terms of ecological function, biomass (Table 3),
and distribution, the three groups of protozoans
Table 3. Distribution of ‘‘naked’’ protozoa in different soils and in the rhizosphere (numbers given: individuals/g dry matter [18] and, below,
relative biomass fraction (%) calculated according to [19])
Arable soil
Uncultivated soil Rhizosphere
Flagellates 570 – 14 000 1600 – 65 000
4 – 16 8 – 15
Naked amoebas 10 500 – 50 000 18 000 – 181 000
79 – 56 43 – 92
Ciliates 30 – 280 0 – 1750
17 – 29 0 – 41
411
(flagellates, amoebas, and ciliates) can be re-
garded as being of equal importance.
The broad-spectrum activity of pollutants in
soils, in particular their effects on entire colonies
of organisms, has remained largely unregarded,
partly due to the lack of suitable test systems.
Classical laboratory tests (e.g., LC50 values) are
unsuitable for predicting the true toxicity in open
country. To make more accurate predictions for
both existing and new substances, current labo-
ratory tests, which are restricted to a few selected
animal species, generally on standardized sub-
strates, must be extended to further soil animal
species, and additional tests on organisms, or-
gans, single cells, and cell compartments are also
required. Novel test methods based on enzymes
as biomarkers avoid the need for animal tests and
can also be used at sublethal concentrations.
Although such tests provide important ecological
Forest soil, subtropical
Soil (total) Rhizosphere
22 000 – 3 127 000 4000 – 8 231 000
19 – 58 12 – 16
14 800 – 823 000 1100 – 30 750 000
5 – 39 3 – 61
10 – 132 600 280 – 132 600
3 – 76 23 – 84
412 Soil, 1. Definition, Function, and Utilization of Soil
data on the lethal and sublethal action of pollu-
tants, they are not suitable for predicting effects
on species colonies in ecosystems. This informa-
tion can only be obtained by means of field
experiments designed to take into account tem-
poral, spatial, and genetic population variations
in the ecosystem and the varying bio-availability
of pollutants from species to species.
3.1.3. Productive Function
The productive function is the ability of the soil to
act as substrate for cultivated plants (food and
feed plants, renewable resources). Effects on the
productive function are generally assessed in
economic terms, rather than ecologically, since
cultivation in agriculture, forestry, and horticul-
ture is intended to produce a profit. Nevertheless,
a number of ecologic soil functions are affected
by cultivation.
3.1.3.1. Agriculture
Plants obtain their nutrient elements, but also
pollutants, mainly from the soil. The supply of
nutrients is generally typical for the type of soil
and region. However, in modern agriculture ex-
ternal measures are applied to increase the har-
vest: inorganic and organic crop-protection
agents, organic and mineral fertilizers, and utili-
zation of organic and mineral wastes, all of which
can lead to pollution of the soil and can damage
soil functions.
Crop-Protection Agents. The entry of CPA
into the soil as a result of agriculture is a potential
influence on soil function. The CPAs are de-
signed to alter the balance of nature in favor of
the cultivated plants.
The behavior of CPA in soil depends on their
properties, the way in which they are used, and on
local conditions. The soil determines important
properties of the location, especially the hydro-
logical properties.
The amount of CPA applied, the frequency of
application, and the time at which it is applied are
relevant to movement of the agents in the soil and
their potential entry into water systems. The
manner in which a CPA is used affects its degra-
dation, which is faster at the higher temperatures
of spring and summer and leads to a more rapid
Vol. 33
decrease in the amount of CPA present. In au-
tumn and winter degradation is generally slower.
However, general statements valid for all CPAs
cannot be made.
Fertilization and Waste Utilization.
Fertilization and the utilization of waste materi-
als can lead to the introduction of both organic
and inorganic pollutants into the soil. In contrast
to the application of crop-protection agents, this
is an unintentional contamination. The aim of
fertilization, which can include utilization of
waste, is to improve conditions for the growth
of cultivated plants, either by direct action on the
plants themselves or by effecting the soil. The
macronutrients nitrogen, phosphorus, and potas-
sium are the most important for the nutrition of
cultivated plants. Thus in the sustainable devel-
opment of agriculture, both nutrient and pollutant
aspects must be taken into account.
Nutrient Aspect. The high productivity in
countries of Central Europe, compared to aver-
age world harvests, is only attainable by intensive
application of fertilizers. The concept of loca-
tion-specific soil fertility formulated by KLAPP
[20], who defined this as the soil’s own level of
natural, persistent performance which distin-
guishes it from other soils, is not applied in
conventional agriculture. According to KLAPP the
most important aspect is the sustainability: the
long-term ability of the soil to provide all re-
quirements for plants to flourish, that is, to pro-
vide constant or only slowly decreasing harvests
without fertilization. In contrast, in modern agri-
culture, fertilization is regarded as guaranteeing
the nutrient requirement of the plants, taking into
account the nutrients already available in the soil.
The natural productivity of the soil is thus
completely disregarded. In modern agriculture,
the target of fertilization to an extent appropriate
to the requirements of the plants is not met. If a
balance is determined for nitrogen, the result is a
considerable fertilizer excess. The starting point
for sustainable use of the soil should be a nutrient
supply that is appropriate to the needs of the
plants and which avoids an excess in the soil and
release into other environmental compartments.
Furthermore, in intensive agriculture, the pro-
portion of nutrients introduced into organic ma-
terials should be restricted to 60 % of the total
nitrogen requirement. The reference points
Vol. 33 Soil, 1. Definition, Function, and Utilization of Soil
for fertilization planning are the exploitable com-
ponents in the following plant population, which
increase with increasing frequency of utilization
and the amount of organic material utilized (see
Transformation Function). Residual material re-
maining on the field after harvesting must also be
included in the balance, and manure should be
used in preference to external waste materials.
Pollutant Aspect. Mineral fertilizers, organic
fertilizers, and wastes all introduce inorganic and
organic pollutants into the soil and can cause
adverse effects there and in other environmental
compartments. Mineral fertilizers can contain
various amounts of pollutants, depending on the
origin of their raw materials and the production
process used.
The main pollutants entering soils via fertili-
zation are Cd and Cr, and to a lesser extent Pb, Ni,
and As. The Mn, Cu, and Zn contents of fertili-
zers are, with the exception of the high Cu and Zn
content of liquid pig manure, low, lying in the
nutrient element/trace nutrient element range.
Most of the heavy metal load comes from phos-
phate rock and P fertilizers derived therefrom
(super and triple phosphate, partially digested
and soft phosphate rock), Thomas phosphates,
and phosphate-containing multinutrient fertili-
zers. P fertilizers derived from phosphate rock
can exhibit high Cd contents, depending on the
origin of the phosphate rock. Thomas phosphates
have high Cr contents, resulting from the pro-
duction process. The specific quantity of heavy
metals introduced is strongly influenced by the
various land-use and fertilization systems. Ac-
cording to BOYSEN [21], the Cd entry is up to
4.1 g/ha in conventional farming, up to 4.8 g/ha
for meadowland, but only 0.9 g/ha for ecological
agriculture. Data on organic pollutants in ferti-
lizers are not yet available in sufficient quantity.
In terms of quantity, the most important organic
fertilizers are liquid manure, sewage sludge, and
compost.
In Europe only sewage sludge is subject to
EC regulations which set values for heavy me-
tals in sewage sludge and soil. In addition, the
methods of application are specified, allowing
theoretical permissible pollutant loads to be
calculated. For compost, numerous quality
marks exist, whereby the pollutant concentration
is specified. They do not, however, set limits on
quantity. If an average application of 10 t ha
1
413
a
1 is assumed, a cadmium load of 10 – 40 g/ha
can be calculated [22].
However, depending on the region and the
spectrum of discharge or compost starting ma-
terials, these theoretical pollutant loads are not
always fully exploited.
The inputs can be compared to theoretical
outputs, as exemplified below for the Cd and Hg
balance. For the average German wheat harvest
of 5 t ha
1 a
1 and a tolerable Cd content of
0.2 mg Cd/kg dry matter wheat (marketability
criterion), a potential output of ca. 1 g ha
1 a
1
results. The Hg output is 0.3 g ha
1 a
1
(0.06 mg Hg/kg dry matter).
If the values specified e.g., by the Drinking
Water Regulations (Trinkwasserverordnung),
are taken as the tolerable pollution of the leach-
ate, then for the average leachate quantity in
Germany of 200 mm/a (2106 L ha
1 a
1), a
potential Cd output of 10 g ha
1 a
1 and an Hg
output of 2 g ha
1 a
1 result. Thus the potential
outputs are already met by the potential inputs
from the utilization of waste materials alone.
3.1.3.2. Forestry
After agriculture, forestry is the second largest
use of land. In forestry, atmospheric nutrients and
pollutants are of major importance.
The problem of pollution in forestry is exem-
plified by a comparison between Cd inputs and
outputs (in g ha
1 a
1) for a forest soil (spruce
trees, ca. 120 years old) in a mountainous region
of northwest Germany [23]:
Total input 6
Precipitation 2.7
Interception 3.3
Total output 15.3
Leachate 13.5
Crop (trunk wood without bark) 1.8
Thus the mean annual output is 2.5 times
higher than the atmospheric input by precipita-
tion and dry deposition. It is questionable wheth-
er the limit values of the German drinking water
regulations are suitable quality standards for
assessing outputs in the leachate. For a limit
value of 0.005 mg Cd/L water, a leachate flow
of 424 mm/a, and given the requirement that the
leachate water quality must comply with the
drinking water regulations, a tolerable Cd output
414 Soil, 1. Definition, Function, and Utilization of Soil
of 21.2 g ha
1 a
1 can be calculated. This is
considerably higher than the actual leachate out-
put of 13.5 g ha
1 a
1. In analogy to the speci-
fied quality target that the output should not
exceed the input, according to this model calcu-
lation, an additional Cd input of 9.3 g ha
1 a
1
would be possible without exceeding limit values
specified for drinking water.
The fact that for the material balance for
cadmium in this example, the output is more
than twice as high as the input shows that this
soil has already lost its function as a filter medium
for the formation of new groundwater. The mo-
bilization of cadmium accumulated in the forest
soil as a result of acidification demonstrates the
problems that arise when the filter capacity of
the soil is exhausted. The filtration capability of
the soil can only be regarded as undisturbed if the
output (at the background level) is lower than the
current input. If changes in soil properties lead to
release of accumulated materials, then pollution
of the groundwater or of the habitat for organisms
cannot be excluded.
3.1.4. Other Soil Functions
3.1.4.1. Utilization of Wastes
The exploitation of waste is possible in cases
where it is both safe and useful. Benefits to the
soil occur if at least one soil function is improved
without permanent detriment to other natural soil
functions or other environmental compartments.
In the use of organic wastes in agriculture, the
benefits can be assessed in terms of the fertilizer
effect. Utilization of waste should be safe with
regard to nutrients and pollutants. An important
part of the recycling and waste business in Eur-
ope is the material utilization of waste with an
increasing pressure to use wastes in soil-related
applications.
In Germany for example, the distinction be-
tween mineral and organic wastes is defined in
the regulation TA Siedlungsabfall, which ex-
cludes wastes containing >5 % TOC (organic
wastes) from dumps to minimize the pollution of
the leachate associated with the degradation of
organic materials.
Soils should be included under mineral
wastes because the organic matter (up to
30 %) they contain differs strongly from organic
Vol. 33
wastes in type and constitution. They therefore
represent a special case. Organic wastes are
used in agriculture, gardening, and landscaping,
whereby a distinction can be made between
repeated application, mainly in agriculture, and
one-time use, mainly in recultivation and land-
scaping. Mineral wastes are mainly used in
landscaping and in recultivation and building
projects; smaller amounts are utilized in agri-
culture. An exception is soil material, which is
used in considerable amounts for improving soil
functions.
An important criterion for assessing the harm-
lessness of such measures are the background
concentrations of pollutants (see Section
3.1.2.1), which should not be exceeded by the
input pollutant load of organic wastes. In the
utilization of organic wastes, the pollutant load is
the most important factor, since they remain
almost entirely on the surface after mineraliza-
tion of the organic component, contributing to an
increase in the pollutant potential.
In the case of mineral wastes, there is gener-
ally no loss of mass after use in the soil, so that a
different pollution assessment concept must be
used.
The pollutant concentrations in the waste
should not exceed the background concentrations
in the location of use. If the values are compati-
ble, application is possible, since a deterioration
in soil quality with respect to pollutant concen-
tration will not occur. For the application of
mineral wastes that exceed the background
values, eluate investigations must be undertaken,
which indicate whether risks to groundwater
quality are present.
The use of soil material in the topsoil region is
subject to strict requirements for the soil proper-
ties. This is due to the requirements of plants for
water retention capacity, aeration, rootability,
warmability, and nutrient storage capacity. For
this reason, the soil should have similar compo-
sition and properties to that at the site of use.
Poorer soil materials should not be applied to
soils of higher quality.
3.1.4.2. Raw Material Deposits
Soils that act as raw material deposits include
sands for building and clays for ceramic produc-
tion, but the largest areas are taken up by lignite
mining. Other areas that generally require recul-
Vol. 33 Soil, 1. Definition, Function, and Utilization of Soil 415

Table 4. Breakdown of areas under mining law [24]
Lignite mining districts, ha
Rhenish Central German Lausatia
Total area used 24 500 46 900 48 999
Area subjected to recultivation 15 600 22 000 24 655
Operated area 8 900 24 900 24 344
tivation are the slagheaps from salt, ore, and coal
mining dumps and military training areas. All of
these lack a plant-supporting upper layer and
have lost the natural soil functions.
Table 4 compares the three main lignite min-
ing areas in Germany.
Especially in the former German Democratic
Republic, there are a large number of areas still to
be recultivated. In the Land Brandenburg alone,
as of 1994, the total area affected by open-cast
mining of lignite was 50 000 ha. About half of
this has so far been rendered reusable. The re-
cultivation of devastated and mined areas is
intended to restore or improve the natural soil
function. This includes building up a plant-
bearing soil layer in sufficient quality and depth.
Other targets are:
1. Increasing the content of organic substances
in the topsoil
2. Introduction of plant nutrients
3. Regulation of the pH value
4. Stimulation of soil life
At the same time, deterioration of soil func-
tion due to pollution input, addition of inappro-
priate nutrients, and compaction must be
avoided.
ed sites (see ! Soil, 2. Damage and Soil Pollu-
tion, Section 2.4) are discussed [27, 28], soil
erosion (! Soil, 2. Damage and Soil Pollution,
Section 1.2), soil salination, and desertification
in other parts of the earth progress unabatedly.
Many thousands of hectares of cultivated land
are lost each year through erosion, salination, and
desertification. Thus, in 1975 the soil of half of
the Indian subcontinent, 150106 ha, was seri-
ously affected. In the United States in 1975,
erosion had made nearly 40106 ha unusable
for agricultural cultivation [26]. In Argentina in
1980, 22106 ha, nearly 16 % of the cultivated
land, had been destroyed by wind erosion. In the
1970s – 1990s, according to estimates, the farm-
ers lost 480109 t of topsoil, which equals the
entire topsoil of India [29]. These few examples
should prove the seriousness of the problem of
soil destruction.
3.2.2. Land Utilization
Table 5 shows a breakdown by continents with
regard to the land area and its use [30].
In the following, the land utilization and land
use are considered in more detail for the Federal
Republic of Germany, as an example of an indus-
trialized country. Figure 9 shows the land use
distribution in the Federal Republic of Germany
in 1994. Settlement and traffic areas, which are
composed of residential and office buildings,
industrial facilities, administrative and education-
al establishments, as well as roads, sports fields
and airfields, cemeteries and parks, in 1994
occupied about 12 % [31]. For comparison, in
1950, the proportion of residential, industrial, and

3.2. Land Utilization and Soil Table 5. Land area and use (in 106 ha; source [30])

Destruction (Statistics) Land Arable Permanent Forest

area land incl. pasture
3.2.1. Introduction permanent
crops

The consumption and destruction of soils, i.e., Africa 2963 211 900 650
the destruction of the surface soil or of the topsoil North and Central 2144 272 349 549
America
[25], is one of the biggest ecological problems of South America 1753 127 516 886
the world. The soil is the basis for food produc- Asia 3098 573 1110 548
tion and will remain so in future [26]. While in the Europe 2260 304 183 1039
highly developed and industrialized countries Oceania 849 54 413 198
World 13 067 1541 3472 3870
problems of soil acidification and of contaminat-
 416 Soil, 1. Definition, Function, and Utilization of Soil
color
fig
Figure 9. Land use in the Federal Republic of Germany
(source: [31])
traffic land was 7.2 %. Figure 10 [32] shows the
daily change in the years 1981 to 1985.
The settlement area in Germany increases by
ca. 105 ha daily [33].
3.2.3. Soil Destruction
Proceeding on another scale than the sealing of
land mentioned above are the destruction of soil
by erosion, salination, desertification, and des-
truction of forests.
In the frequently very labile ecosystems in
the non-industrialized countries, where 80 % of
the world population growth occurs, industrial
methods of agriculture lead much more quickly
to the destruction of the valuable topsoil. In the
subtropics and tropics, this leads rapidly, be-
Figure 10. Daily change in land use from 1981 to 1985 in hectares (source: [32])
Vol. 33
cause of erosion, to the expansion of dry areas
and desertification after a short phase of meager
yields [34].
Erosion. Erosion by wind or water plays the
most important part in soil destruction. World-
wide, 25 000106 t of soil are washed away by
water erosion every year [38]. The extent of
erosion is shown in Tables 6 and 7.
Chinese soil scientists estimate that in their
country since the 1960s almost 10 % of the arable
land has been lost through erosion and desertifi-
cation [40]. In the United States in the last 200
years about one-third of the surface soil has been
destroyed by erosion [41].
At the 7th Conference of the International
Soil Conservation Organization in 1992 in
Sydney, the following figures were reported by
the project for the worldwide estimation of soil
degradation: Between the 57th degree of latitude
South and the 72nd degree of latitude North,
164106 ha, i.e., 15 % of the earth’s surface,
show more or less strong signs of degradation.
In addition, 295106 ha, corresponding approx-
imately to the size of India, have to be classed
as highly degraded. About 124106 ha of these
are in African and 106106 ha in Asian
countries [35].
Chemical Degradation. The agricultural
lands rendered usable by artificial irrigation are
threatened, after some time of use, by salination.
Table 7 shows the significant proportion of soil
areas degraded by salination [35–37].
Vol. 33 Soil, 1. Definition, Function, and Utilization of Soil 417

Table 6. Estimates of global rates of soil erosion and likely future trends (source [39])

Region Soil erosion by water Soil erosion by wind

Area, Denudation Dissolved Future Area, Future

106 ha rate2, mm/a load, 106 t/a trends* 106 ha trends*

Africa 227 0.023 201 þ 186 þ

Asia 441 0.153 1592 þ 222 þ
South America 123 0.067 603 þ 42

Central America 46 0.055** 758** þ 5

North America 60 0.055** 758** þ/
35

Europe 114 0.032 425 þ/
42 þ/

Oceanica 83 0.39 293 þ 16 þ
World 1094 0.079 3872 þ 548 þ
*
þ ¼ Increased risks;
¼ decreased risks;
**
total value for Central America and North America

Table 7. Extent of human-induced soil degradation for the main types In the late 1970s the United Nations estimated
of soil degradation (106 ha, source [37])
the risk that non-desert land will become desert
Types of degradation Light Moderate Strong/ Total as follows:
extreme

Water erosion 343 527 224 1094 50 % desertification of non-desert land in Africa
Wind erosion 269 254 26 549 32 % desertification in Asia
Chemical degradation 93 103 43 239 19 % desertification in South America [48].
Loss of nutrients 52 63 20 135
Salinization 35 20 21 76
Contamination 4 17 1 22 The Sahara alone expanded in the 50 years
Acidification 2 3 1 6 before 1977 by 650 000 km2 [42].
Physical degradation 44 27 12 83
Total 749 911 305 1965 Forests. The felling of trees in forests leads
indirectly to the destruction of soil. Through the
felling of trees the soil is often exposed to erosion
by wind or water.
Two further aspects of chemical degradation, More than 5106 ha of the tropical rain forest
i.e., contamination and acidification of soils, are wiped out each year to bring land into culti-
are closely related to anthropogenic industrial vation. Since 1970, farmers and ranchers in South
pollution. While their total extent is relatively America have converted more than 20106 ha of
small compared to the areas influenced by the wet tropical forests into cattle pasture [43].
other chemical degradation processes, there are The global current annual change of forest
numerous ‘‘hot spots’’ with severe problems in cover is depicted in Figure 11 [44]. According to
the heavily industrialized regions. this estimation, forest land is dramatically
With respect to area, loss of nutrients is the shrinking in South America (particularly Brazil),
most important chemical degradation process. Central Africa, Southeast Asia and the Pacific
Nutrient losses result from current or historical Area, and in Russia. Rates of losses in the affect-
overexploitation of soils by non-sustainable cul- ed regions range from 100 000 to several million
tivation methods. hectares per year. There is no indication that
deforestation trends have been halted or reversed
Desertification. About 25 % of the earth’s in those affected regions (see time series on
surface is subject to the spread of deserts and Amazon deforestation in [45]).
every sixth human being is affected [42]. Every
year, about 6106 ha of pastureland become
desert [43]. The deserts have in this way expand- 3.2.4. Forecast
ed by 120106 ha from 1970 to 1990. This
corresponds to a greater land area than is culti- The amount of soil available on the globe cannot
vated in China today [47]. be increased, whereas the human population is
 418 Soil, 1. Definition, Function, and Utilization of Soil Vol. 33

color
fig
Figure 11. Average annual change of forest per country (source: [44])

still increasing at a rate of 2 % or more annually in
developing countries. Pressure on the resource
soil is highly related to population growth. A
map of the number of inhabitants per hectare
agricultural land is shown in Figure 12 [30, 46].
It illustrates that pressure on the soil will be
highest, where human population is already high
and growing fast, while the area of cultivated
land cannot be increased much further. A dra-
matic situation of almost continental extent ex-
ists in entire South East Asia. Some countries in
Africa exhibit the same constellation of factors.
In South America the situation is still less dra-
matic, because along with an intense population
growth, the cultivation of land is increasing at the
expense of a loss of forests.
Currently (2001) there are no indications of
a major turn in the trend of increasing soil

color
fig
Figure 12. Capita per hectare agricultural land (source: [30, 46])
Vol. 33 Soil, 1. Definition, Function, and Utilization of Soil
consumption and destruction. However, this
trend cannot be continued arbitrarily long into
the future, because the resource consumed is
finite, and methods of enhancing yield from a
given area of soil are limited. Critical ranges of
soil consumption are attained in many parts of the
world (Fig. 11). The only way out of this dilem-
ma seems to be the stabilization of human po-
pulations plus improved, sustainable methods of
soil utilization.
References
1 C. Bosch in D. Rosenkranz, G. Bachmann, G. Einsele, H.-
M. Harreß (eds.): Bodenschutz, Erich Schmidt Verlag,
Berlin 1988, p. 1480.
2 H. Strunz: Mineralogische Tabellen 3, 7th ed., Akade-
mische Verlagsgesellschaft Egeestu. Portig., Leipzig 1970.
3 C. Ahl et al.: Aspekte und Grundlagen der Bodenkunde,
Eigenverlag, G€ottingen 1994.
4 V. Wolters: ‘‘Boden€okologische Aspekte der Freisetzung
gentechnisch ver€anderter Organismen,’’ UBA-Texte 20/
93 (1993) 182 – 196.
5 N. Knauer, D. Trautz: ‘‘B€oden als Lebensraum von
Organismen,’’ in H. P. Blume (ed.): Handbuch des Bod-
enschutzes: Boden€ okologie und Bodenbelastung; vorbeu-
gende und abwehrende Schutzmaßnahmen, Ecomed Ver-
lag, Landsberg/Lech 1990, pp. 59 – 70.
6 H.-P. Blume: Handbuch des Bodenschutzes, ecomed, 2nd
ed., Landsberg 1990.
7 AG Bodenkunde: Bodenkundliche Kartieranleitung, 3rd
ed., E. Schweitzerbart’sche Verlagsbuchhandlung, Stutt-
gart 1982.
8 S. K. Gupta, F. X. Stadelmann, F. X. H€ani, A. Rudaz:
‘‘Interrelation of Cd-Ion Concentrations and the Growth
and Activities of Microorganisms in two Growth Media.’’
Toxicol. Environ. Chem. 8 (1984) 173 – 184.
9 R. Hindel, W. Fleige: ‘‘Schwermetalle in B€oden der
Bundesrepublik Deutschland – geogene und anthropo-
gene Anteile,’’ UBA-Texte 10/91 (1991).
10 M. Gruppe, H. Kuntze: ‘‘Bodenuntersuchungen im Be-
reich des UBA-Meßnetzes als Bestandsaufnahme zur
Beweissicherung von Umweltver€anderungen,’’ UBA-
Texte 60/93 (1993).
11 R. Hindel et al.: ‘‘Kartiertechnisches Konzept zur fl€achen-
haften Erfassung von Schwermetallgehalten in B€oden,’’
UBA-Texte, in press.
12 F. Scheffer, B. Ulrich: Humus und Humusd€ ungung, Enke
Verlag, Stuttgart 1960.
13 W. Fleig, H. Beutelspacher, E. Rietz in J. E. Gieseking
(ed.): Soil Components, vol. 1, Springer Verlag, New
York 1975, pp. 1 – 211.
14 R. S. Swift in G. R. Aiken, D. U. McKnight, R. L.
Wershaw, P. McCarthy (eds.): Humic substances in Soil,
Sediment and Water, J. Wiley & Sons, New York 1985,
pp. 387 – 408.
419
15 W. Ziechmann: Huminstoffe, Verlag Chemie, Weinheim,
Germany 1980.
16 Z. Filip: ‘‘Bodenorganismen und ihre Aktivit€aten als
Anzeiger €okologisch bedeutender Auswirkungen anthro-
pogener Bodenbelastungen,’’ in: Tagungsbericht-Sympo-
sium mit osteurop€ aischen Staaten ‘‘Untersuchungsmetho-
den, Bewertungsmaßst€ abe und staatliche Regelungen f€ ur
den Bodenschutz’’, BMU, 1993, pp. 47 – 56.
17 Verband der Chemischen Industrie (ed.): Chemie und
Umwelt: Boden, VCI, 1987, 28 pp.
18 J. D. Stout, S. S. Bamforth, J. D. Lousier: ‘‘Protozoa,’’ in:
Methods of Soil Analysis 2—Chemical and Microbiolog-
ical Properties, American Society of Agronomy, Madi-
son, Wis., 1982.
19 E. Aescht, W. Foissner: ‘‘Effects of Mineral and Organic
Fertilizers on the Microfauna in a HighAltitude Reaffor-
estation Trial,’’ Biol, Fertil. Soils (1992) 17 – 24.
20 E. Klapp: Lehrbuch des Acker- und Pflanzenbaus, Paul
Parey, Hamburg 1958.
21 P. Boysen: ‘‘Schwermetalle und andere Schadstoffe in
D€ungemitteln,’’ UBA-Texte 55/92 (1992) .
22 C. Bannick, Mitt. Dtsch. Bodenk. Ges. 73 (1994) 23 –26.
23 R. Schulz: ‘‘Vergleichende Betrachtung des Schwerme-
tallhaushaltes verschiedener Wald€okosysteme Nord-
deutschlands,’’ Ber. Forschungszentr. Wald€ okosysteme/
Waldsterben der Universit€ at G€ottingen 32 (1987) 1 – 27.
24 M. Abo-Radi, H. Meyer-Steinbrenner, Wasser Boden 46
(1994) 58 – 65.
25 DIN 4047, part 3, Landwirtschaftlicher Wasserbau, Be-
griffe, Beuth Verlag, Berlin 1985.
26 FAO, Guidelines for Control of Soil Degradation, Rome
1983.
27 D. Rosenkranz, G. Einsele, H.-M. Harreß (eds.):
Bodenschutz, supplement, Erich Schmidt Verlag, Berlin
1988.
28 Der Rat der Sachverst€andigen f€ur Umweltfragen: Altlas-
ten, Sondergutachten, Stuttgart, Dec. 1989.
29 L. Brown: State of the World, W. W. Norton, New York -
London 1991.
30 FAO — Food and Agriculture Organization of the United
Nations: FAOSTAT, Land Use. Computerized Informa-
tion Series. FAO, Rome, 2004; http://faostat.fao.org/.
31 German Advisory Council on GlobalChange (ed.): World
in transition. The threat to soil, Economica-Verlag, Bonn
1997.
32 Bundesanstalt f€ur Landeskunde und Raumordnung,
quoted in VCI (ed.): Chemie und Umwelt: Boden,
1986, p. 7.
33 Umweltbundesamt: Reduzierung der Fl€acheninanspruch-
nahme durch Siedlung und Verkehr – Materialienband.
Berlin 2003. http://www.umweltbundesamt.org/fpdf-l/
2587.pdf.
34 Bundesminister f€ur Forschung und Technologie: Unsere
Erde im Wandel, Bonn 1993.
35 L. Brown: State of the World 1990, W. W. Norton, New
York - London 1990.
36 E. Fleischhauer: ‘‘Menschen sch€utzen ihr Land,’’ Umwelt
1 (1993) 25 – 27.
 420 Soil, 1. Definition, Function, and Utilization of Soil
37 L. R. Oldeman: Global extent of soil degradation. IS-
RIC-annual report 1990 – 1992, Wageningen 1992,
pp. 19 – 39.
38 FAO, Protect and Produce – Putting the Pieces Together,
Rome 1992, p. 5.
39 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)
(ed.): Climate Change 1995 — Impacts, Adaptations and
Mitigation of Climate Change: Scientific technical Anal-
yses. Contribution of Working Group II to the second
Assessment Report of the Intergovermental Panel on
Climate Change, University Press, Cambridge – New
York 1996.
40 R. W. Arnold, Iszabocs, V. O. Targulian (eds.): Global
Soil Change, Laxenburg 1990, p. 78.
41 Entsorgungspraxis 3 (1993) 169.
42 FAO, The Conservation and Rehabilitation of African
Land, an International Scheme, ARC/90/4, p. 9.
43 L. Brown: Zur Lage der Welt 1987/88, World Watch
Institute, Washington, D.C., S. Fischer Verlag, Frankfurt/
Main 1987, p. 93.
44 FAO – Food and Agriculture Organization of the United
Nations: State of the World’s Forest. FAO, Rome 1997,
p. 200.
45 http://www.mongabay.com/brazil_deforestation.htm;
All figures derived from official National Institute of
Space Research (NIPA) data.
46 UNFPA (ed.): Weltbev€ olkerungsbericht 1996. Welt im
Wandel: Bev€ olkerung, Entwicklung und die Zukunft der
Stadt, UNO-Verlag, Bonn 1996.
47 G. O. Barney (Study director); prepared by the Council of
Environmental Quality and the Department of the State,
The Global 2000 Report to the President of the U.S.
Entering the 21st Century, vol. 1: The Summary Report,
Pergamon Press, New York 1980.
48 B. Roberts: ‘‘The Health of the World’s Land: A
Perspective,’’ 7th ISCO Conference Sydney, Proc.,
vol. 1, 1992.
View publication stats
Vol. 33
Further Reading
A. Bhandari et al. (eds.): Remediation Technologies for Soils
and Groundwater, American Society of Civil Engineers,
Reston, VA 2007.
N. C. Brady, R. R. Weil: The Nature and Properties of Soils,
14th ed., Pearson Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ
2008.
P. S. Hooda (ed.): Trace Elements in Soils, Blackwell Pub.,
Hoboken NJ 2010.
P. C. Kearny, D. R. Shelton, W. C. Koskinen: ‘‘Soil Chemistry
of Pesticides’’, Kirk Othmer Encyclopedia of Chemical
Technology, 5th edition, John Wiley & Sons, Hoboken,
NJ, online DOI: 10.1002/0471238961.19150912110501
18.a01.
N. L. Nemerow, F. J. Agardy, J. A. Salvato: Environmental
Engineering - Water, Wastewater, Soil and Groundwater
Treatment and Remediation, 6th ed., Wiley, Hoboken, NJ
2009.
P. Patnaik: Handbook of Environmental Analysis, 2nd ed.,
Taylor & Francis, Boca Raton, FL 2010.
E. A. Paul (ed.): Soil Microbiology, Ecology and Biochemis-
try, 3rd ed., Academic Press, Boston 2007.
R. C. Prince: ‘‘Bioremediation’’, Kirk Othmer Encyclopedia
of Chemical Technology, 5th edition, John Wiley & Sons,
Hoboken, NJ, online DOI: 10.1002/0471238961.02091
51816180914.a01.pub2.
K. R. Reddy, C. Cameselle (eds.): Electrochemical Remedi-
ation Technologies for Polluted Soils, Sediments and
Groundwater, Wiley, Hoboken, NJ 2009.
R. K. Sinha, D. Valani, S. Sinha: Microremediation, Phytor-
emediation, and Vermiremediation Biotechnologies for
Contaminated Lands and Soil, Nova Science Publishers,
Hauppauge, NY 2010.
G. Sposito: The Chemistry of Soils, 2nd ed., Oxford
University Press, Oxford 2008.