SOME RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN SOIL TYPE AND USE OF LAND IN SOUTHERN MICHIGAN THESIS F'UB THE DEGREE OF M. S. Ray E. Pasco 1932 III 705 04 Wit/[WWII SOIE RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN SOIL TYPE AND USE OF LAND IN SOUTHERN MICHIGAN by R. E.~EA§29 A THESIS PRESENTED TO THE FACULTY OF THE MICHIGAN STATE COLLEGE OF AGRICULTURE AND APPLIED SCIENCE IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF SCIENCE East Lansing l 9 3 2 SSSSSSS ACKNOWLEDGMENT I wish to express my appreciation for the guidance given by Professor J. O.~Veatch during the course of this study. I also wish to thank Dr. C. E. Millar and other members of the Soils Department for helpful suggestions and criticisms. 103,22 5. INTRODUCTION It is a generally recognized fact that soils differ from each other in productivity and suitability for the growth of different crops. It is reasonable to suppose, therefore, that soil differences influence the utilization of the land to a marked extent. Study of the relationships existing between soil type and land-use should aid in drawing conclusions regarding the best use or combination of uses for a given soil type. Such conclusions may be of value in introducing crops into new areas and in suggesting changes in existing cropping systems to meet changing economic conditions. Unfortunately very few studies of the relationships existing between soil characteristics and land utilization have been made. OBJECT The object of this study is to determine by quantitative methods some of the relationships existing between land use, including use for separate craps, and soil type in southern Michigan and also to determine to what extent natural adaptation has been recognized in the present use of land. -3... REVIEW OF LITERATURE Spillman (10)“L lists a number of factors which influence the suitability of a soil for a crop. These include physical properties, temperature, moisture, and aeration of the soil and the physiological habit of the crop. The chemical and physical nature of natural soil horizons and relative fertility of the soil should be added to this list. Many soil survey reports of the United States Bureau of Chemistry and Soils include notes regarding the adaptation of various crops to the soil types mapped. These notes were nearly all obtained through personal observation by the author of the appearance and apparent yield of the crops and by talking with farmers. Due to the sources of information the findings are incomplete and cannot be specific. Bonsteel (2)'(3) (4) has observed and discussed the crop adaptation of a number of soils in eastern United States. He pointed out a number of instances of soil types being distinctly suited or unsuited for the growth of different crops and told the influence of soil type upon yields of common crops in so far as he could determine. Bennett (1) has discussed the influence of different soils in the southern states upon crops with special reference to ‘ Numbers in parentheses refer to literature cited. -4- cotton. He showed that the yields of cotton tend to vary with the soil type due to differences in fertility, extent of erosion, ease of tillage, and other soil factors. A survey of the literature, however, reveals the fact that there is a dearth of work of quantitative nature regarding soil-crOp adaptation. Kearney (7) reports that, in growing Egyptian cotton in southwestern United States, important variations in yield and vigor due to soil differences have been noted. While carrying on investigations with the nut cr0p in the south Skinner (9) observed some marked variations in yield, size, and quality of pecans grown on different soil types. Wilder‘ (18) found that certain soil characteristics directly influence yield and quality of apples and other tree fruits. Sweet (ll) and Partridge and Veatch (8) have pointed out some effects of different kinds of subsoil upon root growth and penetration and consequent develOpment and vigor of fruit trees. It would be an overwhelming task to conduct experi— ments to determine the most suitable cr0ps for every soil type. It is evident then that some short cut must be used to determine some of these relationships. Davis (6) of the Storrs Agricultural Experiment Station in Connecticut has presented the plan of a study they are conducting to determine the influence of soil -5- type upon dairy farming in the eastern upland of Connecticut. About two hundred farms were selected within the region. A detailed map was made of each farm selected showing degree of s10pe, soil type, fences, and crOp boundaries. Yields from each field and labor and other expenditures on each field are recorded. Records are kept of all items which enter into making an annual financial summary of the farm business. The intention is to carry on these studies for a period of five years or more. By careful com— parison of the data from the various farms it may be possible to determine the optimum balance between farm enterprises for each soil type and to provide a basis for adjustment to changes in prices. In 1926 Crosby (5) published an analysis of crop- soil relationships in the Gilroy region of California. Distinct relationships between soil type and crop distribution were presented by maps and statistical methods. Since the region has been extensively culti— vated for a long period of time Crosby believes that crops unsuited to each soil have been largely replaced, because of economic factors, by crOps better adapted to the soil. On this basis he assumes that the pro— portion of each cr0p on each soil type is a measure of the relative suitability of that or0p for that soil. l5- Crosby mapped in detail the distribution of the various crOps in the Gilroy region. This map was superimposed upon the soil map of the region and the aggregate acreage of each crop on each soil type was determined. These data were compiled in tabular form. The per cent of the acreage of each soil type occupied by each crop was then calculated and these percentages presented in graphical form. Study of these graphs brings out some significant relationships between soil type and crop distribution. Measurements of shoot growth and trunk diameter of French Prune and Sugar Prune trees on different soil types, as indices of relative vigor, support the conclusions regarding adaptation derived from study of the distribution of the two cr0ps. -7- METHODS The region studied is that part of Michigan lying within the Brown Forest Soil region. This is the part of the state south of a line from Bay City to Muskegon that is referred to as southern Michigan. Obviously it was impractical to study in detail the distribution of the crops throughout the whole region, so a method of sampling was decided upon. This sampling invOlved the selection, more or less at random, of strips one-half mile wide extending across certain counties of which the soil map had been completed. One to four such strips were selected in each of the following counties: Eaton, Ingham, Saginaw, St. Clair, - Tuscola, Van Buren, and Washtenaw (Figure l). The selected strips do not approach towns or cities and so represent conditions without immediate urban influence. About one-half of the length of each strip is along roads and one—half through the center of sections or along section lines on which no roads have been constructed. Thisanmangement gives more representative data since the location of a field with reference to a road may influence its use. It was considered that such sampling would be representative of the agricultural land in southern Michigan. ~8- As time permitted during the summers of 1929, 1930, and 1931 detailed maps were made of these strips showing the distribution of crops, pasture, idle land, and forest and brush.‘ The strip maps were compared with the soil map and a table was prepared showing the frequency of occurrence of each land use on each soil type. In this manner data were compiled regarding the utilization of ninety-two soil types. The total number of all instances of the various land uses on the dif- ferent soil types varied from one to over two-thousand. There were too few data concerning many of the soil types to warrant drawing conclusions about their utilization, andin consequence data concerning some of these soils were discarded. In other cases data con; cerning two or more similar soil types were combined, to provide enough data for conclusions about the group. The number of soil types and groups considered was thus reduced from ninety—two to twenty-six. *Note: The field mapping was done by the author with the exception of the strips in Ingham county and part of those in Washtenaw county which were mapped in 1929 by A. J. Baur, Graduate Assistant in Soils, Michigan State College. In addition to the strips, the land- use map prepared under the direction of Dr. K. C. McMurray, Department of Gecgrgphy, University of Micgigan, of Williamston township, Ingham county, was use . _9d SOIL DESCRIPTIONS The following soil descriptions are brief and give only a few of the more important characteristics of each type studied in this work. Detailed descrip— tions are available in the soil survey reports pre- pared by the Soils Section of Michigan State College and the United States Department of Agriculture, Bureau of Chemistry and Soils, and in publications of the Michigan Agricultural Experiment Station. MIAMI LOAM: Miami loam is a well drained soil with undulating to hilly topography developed from heavy calcareous till. The cultivated surface is a loam in texture; the B horizon is a brownish, blocky, heavy clay; and the C horizon is grey till clay. The A and B horizons are medium to strongly acid and the C is alkaline. Miami loam is quite fertile and is well suited to the growth of general farm crops, hay, and pasture. MIAMI SILT LOAM: .Miami silt loam differs from Miami loam in having a silt loam cultivated surface soil, a heavier texture throughout the profile, and in having somewhat smoother topography. The fertility and crop adaptation is about the same as for Miami loam. HILLSDALE LOAM: Hillsdale loam is a well drained soil developed from sandy clay till and has an undu— -10- lating to hilly topography. The loamy A horizon is underlain by a yellowish sandy clay B horizon which in turn is underlain by grey clayey parent material, with occasional pockets of sand or gravel. The soil is acid to depths of two to three feet. Hillsdale loam is medium in fertility and is adapted to the pro- duction of general farm crops, hay, and pasture. CONOVER LOAM: Conover loam has a higher content of moisture and organic matter than the Miami and Hillsdale loams and the B horizon is mottled to some extent. Conover loam is very fertile. Under adequate drainage conditions it is well suited to beans, sugar beets, corn, small grains, hay, and pasture. NAPPANEE GROUP: The Nappanee group of soils includes the loam, silt loam, and silty clay loam types of Nappanee together with Crosby loam and Jeddo silty clay loam. These soils are alike in that they are heavy soils developed under intermediate or intermittent drainu age and have a tight, impervious, dull grey horizon in the profile. These soils are slow in drying in the spring, are difficult to till and are difficultly pervioua to roots. These soils are well suited for the growth of timothy, pasture, and small grains, but are not suitable for the profitable production of corn or other culti— vated crops. -11- BROOKSTON TYPES: The Brookston types consist primarily of the loam with lesser amounts of the silt loam and clay loam. The Brookston soils are level, heavy, till soils developed under poor natural drain- age. The surfaces of these soils are high in organic matter and are neutral to alkaline in reaction. There is some mottling in the B horizon. These soils are very fertile and well suited for the growth of pasture, beans, beets, corn, and chicory. After adequate drain- age they are suited for the production of the small grains, alfalfa, sweet clover, and a number of special crops as cabbages and cucumbers. WISNER AND THOMAS TYPES: The Wiener and Thomas types are quite similar to Brookston except that these soils occur under such poor drainage conditions that the carbonates present in the parent material have not been leached from the surface soil. The predomi- nating textural class is the clay loam but the loam is quite common. These soils are possibly more fertile than Brookston and are adapted to the same crOps. However it is often quite difficult to obtain suf- ficient drainage for the growth of grains and alfalfa. COLOMA SAND: Coloma sand is a soil developed from rolling to hilly morainic sand. The soil has no conspicuous profile development due to the absence of -12- the finer soil fractions. It is acid, low in organic matter, droughty, and subject to erosion. It is not well suited to pasture, hay, the grains, or other farm crops. Where market conditions are favorable this soil can be used to advantage for early truck crops and com— _ mercial orchards. BELLEFONTAINE SANDY LOAM: Bellefontaine sandy loam is developed from rolling to hilly, morainic, sandy, and gravelly material. A very pronounced, compact sandy clay B horizon is present. The A and B horizons are acid but the parent material contains lime carbonate. The soil is low in organic matter and subject to erosion but is more retentive of moisture than Coloma sand. Where the topography permits and erosion has not been too severe this soil is adapted to the growth of commercial orchards, early truck crOps, small fruits, potatoes, and, to a limited extent, small grains. HILLSDALE SANDY LOAM: Hillsdale sandy loam is devel- Oped from light textured, undulating to hilly, morainic material. There is a weak develOpment of the B horizon characteristic of Hillsdale loam. The soil is acid to depths often exceeding five feet and the surface is low in organic matter. The fertility of this soil is relatively low. It is adapted to the same crops as is Bellefontaine sandy loam. FOX TYPES: The Fox types include Fox sandy loam with minor areas of Fox fine sandy loam and Fox loam. I‘l -13... These soils are derived from well drained, level to slightly undulating, gravelly outwash—plain material. These soils have a pronounced reddish sandy clay B horizon similar to that of Bellefontaine sandy loam. The surface is low in organic matten and acid. These soils are low to medium in fertility and are suitable for the production of early truck, potatoes, grapes, small fruits, small grains, and to a limited extent, the common farm crops. BRONSON TYPES: The Bronson types consist of the loam and minor areas of the loamy fine sand. These soils differ from the Fox types in having an impervious substratum at relatively shallow depths. This sub- stratum retards water movements and causes some mottling in the lower part of the profile. These soils are less droughty than Fox and have more organic matter in the surface, consequently they are better suited to general farm crops, hay, and pasture. BRADY TYPES: The Brady types include Brady loam and some Brady fine sandy loam. These soils differ from Fox in that they exist under intermediate drainage conditions which results in more organic matter in the surface, less reddish color and more mottling in the B horizon, and a nearly neutral reaction in the upper layers. The Brady soils are quite fertile and adapted for the growth of general farm cr0ps, hay, and pasture, but are -14- not well adapted to fruit production. GILFORD GROUP: The Gilford group of soils include Gilford loam and some Gilford fine sandy loam, together with minor areas of Macomb loam and Macomb fine sandy loam. These soils differ from Brady in that they exist under poor drainage conditions, are alkaline throughout the profile, have a high organic content, and a grey unoxidized B horizon. These soils compare favorably with Brookston in fertility and adaptation but are much more easily drained because of the pervious substratum. BRIDMAN SAND: Bridgman sand is derived from wind- blown sand. It occurs as prominent, narrow ridges about the margins of the present and glacial Great Lakes. Little profile development has taken place other than some oxidation at and near the surface. This soil is subject to both wind and water erosion. It is ex- tremely infertile, droughty, acid, and low in organic matter. It is unsuited to agricultural use. PLAINFIELD TYPES: The Plainfield types are well drained soils developed from level, outwash-plain sand. No conspicuous profile develOpment has taken place because of a lack of the finer soil fractions. The upper two or four feet is oxidized more than the lower layers. These soils are acid, infertile, droughty, and low in organic matter. Where market conditions per- -15- mit, these soils can be used for grapes, small fruits, early truck cr0ps, and potatoes, but are not adapted for growth of grains or pasture. OTTAWA LOAMY FINE SAND: Ottawa loamy fine sand differs from the Plainfield types in that it has an impervious substratum at relatively shallow depths. This causes a slight mottling in the lower layers and causes the soil to be less droughty. This soil is low to intermediate in natural fertility but is some— what more suitable for grains than is Plainfield and is also suited for the production of the cr0ps listed for Plainfield. BERRIEN FINE SANDY LOAM: Berrien fine sandy loam is an intermittently drained soil derived from shallow sandy deposits upon a clay substratum. The surface is medium in organic content, is acid, and approximates a sandy loam in texture. The subsurface layers are rusty brown in color with yellowish and greyish mottling in- creasing with depth. This soil varies in fertility with the degree of oxidation and texture but in general is medium fertile and suitable for the production of general farm crops, hay, and pasture. BERRIEN LOAMY FINE SAND: Berrien loamy fine sand differs from Berrien fine sandy loam in being lighter in texture, lower in organic matter, more acid and often is noticeably podsolized. This soil is medium to low -15- in fertility and is adapted in some cases for the production of truck and special crops, rather than of the grain crops and pasture. SAUGATUCK AND ALLENDALE TYPES: Saugatuck sand is a sandy, ground-water podsol with a strongly poda solized A3 and a pronounced ortstein. Saugatuck is developed from sands having a permanent water table twelve to twenty four inches beneath the surface. The soil is acid throughout the profile, low in organic matter, and low in fertility. The ortstein tends to inhibit water movements and root penetration which causes alternate conditions of excessive moisture and drought. Allendale loamy fine sand is considered with Saugatuck in this study since it differs from Saugatuck only in that the ortstein of Allendale rests directly upon a clay substratum. These soils, due to their unfavorable profile characteristics, are unsuited for the production of grains, clover, and tree fruits, but when drainage is adequate, small fruits, timothy, and some truck crops do very well. GRANBY TYPES: The Granby types include Granby loamy fine sand and Granby fine sandy loam. These soils are developed from poorly drained alkaline sands. The surface contains large amounts of organic matter and rests directly upon grey water—soaked sand. After ' proper drainage the Granby types produce good corn, -17- beans, hay, and pasture. Grains do not do well because of lodging. Without adequate drainage pasture is the only profitable crop. NEWTON TYPES: The Newton types differ from the Granby types in being acid rather than alkaline, having organic matter that possibly is not so well decomposed, and in being somewhat less fertile. In some of the earlier soil mapping, however, this distinction was not recognized. Also some of the Newton mapped is loamy at the surface and is a moderately productive soil. GRIFFIN TYPES: The Griffin types include Griffin '1oam, Griffin fine sandy loam, and Griffin silt loam. These soils are derived from recent, poorly drained alluvium. They are high in organic matter, neutral to alkaline, quite fertile, and subject to overflow. They are excellent pasture soils but are not suited to cropping unless some means is resorted to for the prevention of flooding and to previde drainage. BURNED MUCK: Burned muck refers to those areas which once were shallow accumulations of muck but which recently have been partially or entirely burned off. The substratum in most cases is calcareous clay which is dense and in- tractable. The burning has dissipated the organic matter and left an ash high in electrolytes. Beets are one of the few crops resistant enough to the electrolytes to be -18- profitably grown. Unless extraordinary care is taken in building up these soils they become unfavorable to crop growth for several years succeeding burning. CARLISLE MUCK: Carlisle muck is a well decom- posed, alkaline to neutral, black muck derived from woody material. Without drainage it provides excellent pasture. After adequate drainage it is unexcelled for the production of mint, celery, onions, and a number of other special cross, but less well adapted to the upland crops. ’ RIFLE PEAT: Rifle peat is an acid, woody, organic soil that is not very well decomposed so the surface is coarse, brownish and shallow resting upon fibrous, felty material. It is often much more difficult to drain than Carlisle muck and often requires more care in cropping and fertilizer practices. Under proper care it is adapted to the same crops as is Carlisle muck and produces about as good crops, after a few years of cultivation. -19- PRESENTATION OF DATA The frequency of occurrence of each land—use on each soil type or group is presented in Table l. The per cent frequency, or percentage of the total instances of occurrence, of each land—use on each soil type or group was then calculated (Table 2) and presented in graphs (Figures 2—19). Factors which influence the distribution of forest and brush and idle land may be entirely dif- ferent from those influencing crOp distribution so the per cent frequencies of these land-uses were cal- culated upon different bases. The per cent frequency of pasture and of the various crOps on each soil was calculated using the total number of instances of "land in use" as 100 per cent. Land in use is the total frequency of all crops plus pasture. Per cent frequency of land in use and idle land was cal— culated using "total cleared" as 100 per cent. ITotal cleared is the sum of land in use and idle land. The per cent frequency of total cleared and forest and brush was calculated using tht total frequency for the soil as 100 per cent. . Frequency of occurrence, rather than acreage, was used as a means of comparing the utilization of the various soils for two reasons. First, frequency of -20- occurrence is considered as true a measure of adaptation as aggregate acreage because each occurrence is a re- flection of one farmer's judgment in regard to the prOper selection of a crOp for that soil. Secondly, the amount of labor necessary to accurately planimeter all the material used would take up more time than was avail— able for this study. Per cent frequency is used as a means of comparing the relative importance of each land use on the different soil types to bring the data to a comparative basis because of the varying areas of the different soil types. In order to determine how closely frequency agrees with acreage, the total frequency of each land—use in Eaton county was determined and compared with the 1930 United States Census acreage figures for that county. Using total frequency and total land in farms respectively as 100 per cent the percentage of each land—use was calculated for comparison (Table 3). The per cent frequencies of forest and brush, timothy—clover, corn, beans, and barley are somewhat larger, and the per cent frequency of pasture is somewhat smaller than the cor—I responding per cent acreage. Although in a few cases there is a wide difference between acreage and frequency it is probably safe to state that, in general, frequency is prOportional to -21- acreage. The crop maps in Eaton county were made in 1930 while the 1930 census figures are on the 1929 crop. This may account for some of the differences. Most of the variations are due to differences in average sizes of areas of the different land-uses. For instance, the large number of small, brushy ponds and woodlots which are classed as forest and brush makes the per cent frequency twice that of per cent acreage. when nobtox to ESQ 3.3 htox coo. \o nuotoxoS \o Kin: uS NB 2.2.: nfiomhx 6.3 btcx ox 5%be S 919 ion . \ 03$ \ x h. \ I N‘\ \\ N h». \h. § § Nx Ox h: )N Q Q \ Q M. Q Q\ Q\ N x a: Q\ MM. WW wN O\ sew \\ w\ h. \h. .58 «833 to! 855.3% 82. gob ,, . was 5}? yUNMWSUI 38.. {33:21 £3 x3 SSS sea Ease I§g 5/1fl4/ ”nu/9 : Ion ((3,103 x M? In]?! us 95. q/,,/ qwe 9 «no.4 § {Be got? to ESQ 8.: h:&. too» \0 Mutuauuxx “532‘ uS nxsoot- august .93 .ot& on She? c.‘ 3.3 how; .N {qu .. 2 u. t u. 3 oz. 3 E ImElimtuo 2 an we 3 t .3 3. 3 Stew g 35a .- its: Bat-em- EQ {SS-I as x}. 3‘2: g It?! #0.». $13 QZ‘N mm; may; woe»)— , $533110: - ’fia Land-Use % Acreage 1 Frequency Total land in.farms 100.0 100.0 Forest and brush 6.0 12.9 Cleared ----- 87.1 Idle 4.6 2.7 Land in use 77.3 84.3 Pasture 23.4 15.5 Timothy-clover 10.6 13.3 Alfalfa 2.7 3.4 Sweet clover .2 .4 Corn 7.7 11.8 Beans 7.2 12.3 Beets .14 .3 Special crops & truck .7 1.3 Oats 7.2 10.7 Barley 1.9 1.9 Wheat 11.2 11.0 Rye .3 .1 Catch cr0ps .05 .02 Orchards .5 .5 Other land in" farms 7.0 ---- Table 3. A comparison of per cent frequency with per cent acreage in Eaton County, Michigan. ~ .77. LUC! 'CNIJ-‘Pf IVA 'ir-mr-m‘ 37,213" - I I . l ‘ - u — J _ - - 1. [ILA/Illa ALKi-SAA 09A 1 vronp oscom A LEONA (NI/c .Ion 2 5 I . I 0 ' Ari/INS!!! “Ix/7WD M Mum—u MOGEMW Llosr‘o - MA: ON lu—l—jt- |-—:C£OLA (LA—8L! .-l01.' AM My ARINAJC— . |1HUDO 0 [ANA lNLWm-J- ”(COSTA 718474.]! I MIDLAND lsA ! SA NIIAC SKEG .IAIONI':A'-. LN lGRAL—IT—% 7707‘ K!" APII’R WNISII; or Y'AWA Cl- [mu SW" “‘33! .LJTC A ' . OAKLAND moons ALL £6A~ BAR/9r [rd/v; [If/~63. LIFAumoo lcTi_L—IHOW'I 1!: WASH btmw !!M— N! —J— —L —l_ _L-_... FZyU/e— /. 5 how/my m red the approx/ a/e lacaf/on of #72 s #405 mapped for /and- use. MICHIGAN STATE COLLEGE I'I‘IIJ'III'I I I I'I1ll‘ 1"- I . . . h I 1 n . , 1.. . ‘ . . . . 1. . I_ _ v . _ I ll. _ . o '. lof- v.0 I u T .00900'1 . ‘19,) 1.;3-‘3‘4 A. _ _ .. \_. ., . ‘ .. I '5. II. bl u ..‘ I. avl... .‘-‘ ~OOO’OOA . t. L .0+o. _.,, O ‘fIO‘QC. __‘_ o _ In P. .. . h . n . ,|.. .A 1 II... . v ’17»; .un T. LIV”. v . . . C . . I. ., .. _L.4 . I I. O , \I‘nnr.’|.: I. :5. . .(n . , a .l . 11 O. .l I_ . . oot-———$—.‘-. O“-009- ‘11 r9110— DEPARTM ENT 0' MATHEMATICS.