Agriculture Reference
In-Depth Information
Irragric Epipedon......................................................................................................119
Cumulic Epipedon ....................................................................................................120
Fimic Epipedon ........................................................................................................121
Agric Horizon ...........................................................................................................121
The Classification of Anthrosols ....................................................................................................122
Key to Suborders ..................................................................................................................122
Key to Groups of Stagnic Anthrosols ......................................................................122
Key to Groups of Orthic Anthrosols........................................................................122
The Relationship of Anthrosols with Other Soil Orders .....................................................122
Acknowledgment............................................................................................................................123
References ......................................................................................................................................124
INTRODUCTION
The development of soil classiÝcation in China has experienced a long progressive process.
Soil characterization and attempts to group soils appeared in Chinese literature as early as two
thousand years ago. Modern soil classiÝcation began around 1930, and was inÞuenced by early
American experiences. Since the mid-1980s, the Chinese Academy of Science, under the leadership
of the Soil Science Institute at Nanjing, commenced working toward a Chinese Soil Taxonomic
ClassiÝcation system (CSTC or CST). This decision was made for several reasons. First, by then
there were several systematic soil surveys of the country and many detailed soil investigations.
Second, western and international classiÝcations, which had been developed and reÝned since about
1950, had established new concepts and approaches in soil classiÝcation. In preparation for this
effort, several international workshops and meetings were held in China, and Chinese scientists
participated in many similar meetings in other countries.
A Ýrst step in the process was to establish the need for a classiÝcation system. With a land
mass of about 9.6 million km
and a wide range of climatic and topographic conditions, the variety
of soils that exist in the country is immense. International soil classiÝcation systems, such as the
United States Soil Taxonomy (ST), could provide a name for almost all the soils. However, one
fundamental difference between the soil systems in China and in many parts of the world, specif-
ically the United States, is the inÞuence of humans on land. CST felt that almost all other
classiÝcation systems did not emphasize this. We felt strongly that the characteristics of our
cultivated soils were largely determined by the management regimes in previous eons, and that a
classiÝcation system that failed to express this has inherent weakness. For these reasons, it was
decided that although we should incorporate many of the innovations of international systems, the
identity of CST must be maintained with an appropriate emphasis on the speciÝc conditions in
China and the demands of our agricultural and environmental systems.
The First Proposal was distributed in 1991, and this was followed in 1995 by a second Revised
Proposal. The 3rd Edition of the Chinese Soil Taxonomic ClassiÝcation was published in 2001 as
a set of Keys for Ýeld testing. A more detailed monograph describing the rationale and concepts
was distributed earlier in 1999. The English edition of Chinese Soil Taxonomy appeared in 2001.
With the acceptance of CST by the Chinese scientiÝc community, it is now being used in universities
and research institutions. However, it is recognized that the process of developing a classiÝcation
system is dynamic, and a permanent committee has the responsibility to continue testing, modify
and reÝne when necessary, and keep the system as current as possible.
The purpose of this paper is to describe the salient features of CST. For details of the system,
the reader is invited to consult the larger monograph (CSTS, 2001).
2
