Soil Health Analysis, Set. Группа авторов

      Preface

      This two‐volume series on Soil Health was written and edited during a very unique time in global history. Initiated in 2017, it was intended to simply be an update for the “Blue” and “Green” soil quality books entitled Defining Soil Quality for a Sustainable Environment and Methods for Assessing Soil Quality that were published by the Soil Science Society of America (SSSA) in the 1990s. In reality, the project was completed in 2020 as the United States and world were reeling from the Covid‐19 coronavirus pandemic, wide‐spread protest against discriminatory racial violence, and partisan differences between people concerned about economic recovery versus protecting public health.

      Many factors have contributed to the global evolution of soil health as a focal point for protecting, improving, and sustaining the fragile soil resources that are so important for all of humanity. Building for decades on soil conservation principles and the guidance given by Hugh Hammond Bennett and many other leaders associated with those efforts, soil health gradually is becoming recognized by many different segments of global society. Aligned closely with soil security, improving soil health as a whole will greatly help the United Nations (UN) achieve their Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Consistent with soil health goals, the SDGs emphasize the significance of soil resources for food production, water availability, climate mitigation, and biodiversity (Bouma, 2019).

The paradox of completing this project during a period of social, economic, and anti‐science conflicts associated with global differences in response to Covid‐19, is that the pandemic’s impact on economic security and life as many have known it throughout the 20th and early 21st centuries is not unique. Many of the same contentious arguments could easily be focused on humankind’s decisions regarding how to use and care for our finite and fragile soil resources. Soil conservation leaders such as Hugh Hammond Bennett (1881–1960), “Founder of Soil Conservation,” W. E. (Bill) Larson (1921–2013) who often stated that soil is “the thin layer covering the planet that stands between us and starvation,” and many current conservationists can attest that conflict regarding how to best use soil resources is ancient. Several soil science textbooks, casual reading books, and other sustainability writings refer to the Biblical link between soil and humankind, specifically that the very name “Adam” is derived from a Hebrew noun of feminine gender (adama) meaning earth or soil (Hillel, 1991). Furthermore, Xenophon, a Greek historian (430–355 BCE) has been credited with recording the value of green‐manure crops, while Cato (234–149 BCE) has been recognized for recommending the use of legumes, manure, and crop rotations, albeit with intensive cultivation to enhance productivity. At around 45 CE, Columella recommended using turnips (perhaps tillage radishes?) to improve soils (Donahue et al., 1971). He also suggested land drainage, application of ash (potash), marl (limestone), and planting of clover and alfalfa (N fixation) as ways to make soils more productive. But then, after Rome was conquered, scientific agriculture, the arts, and other forms of culture were stymied.

      Advancing around 1500 yr, science was again introduced into agriculture through Joannes Baptista Van Helmont’s (1577–1644 CE) experiment with a willow tree. Although the initial data were misinterpreted, Justice von Liebig (1803–1873 CE) eventually clarified that carbon (C) in the form of carbon dioxide (CO₂) came from the atmosphere, hydrogen and oxygen from air and water, and other essential minerals to support plant growth and development from the soil. Knowledge of soil development, mineralogy, chemistry, physics, biology, and biochemistry as well as the impact of soil management (tillage, fertilization, amendments, etc.) and cropping practices (rotations, genetics, varietal development, etc.) evolved steadily throughout the past 150 yr. SO, what does this history have to do with these 21st Century Soil Health books?

First, in contrast to the millennia throughout which humankind has been forewarned regarding the fragility of our soil resources, the concept of soil health (used interchangeably with soil quality) per se, was introduced only 50 yr ago (Alexander, 1971). This does not discount outstanding research and technological developments in soil science such as the physics of infiltration, drainage, and water retention; chemistry of nutrient cycling and availability of essential plant nutrients, or the biology of N fixation, weed and pest control. The current emphasis on soil health in no way implies a lack of respect or underestimation of the impact that historical soil science research and technology had and have for solving problems such as soil erosion, runoff, productivity, nutrient leaching, eutrophication, or sedimentation. Nor, does it discount contributions toward understanding and quantifying soil tilth, soil condition, soil security, or even sustainable development. All of those science‐based accomplishments have been and are equally important strategies designed and pursued to protect and preserve our fragile and finite soil resources. Rather, soil health, defined as an integrative term reflecting the “capacity of a soil to function, within land use and ecosystem boundaries, to sustain biological productivity, maintain environmental quality, and promote plant animal, and human health” (Doran and Parkin, 1994), is another attempt to forewarn humanity that our soil resources must be protected and cared for to ensure our very survival. Still in its infancy, soil health research and our understanding of the intricacies of how soils function to perform numerous, and at times conflicting goals, will undoubtedly undergo further refinement and clarification for many decades.

      Second, just like the Blue and Green books published just twenty years after the soil health concept was introduced, these volumes, written after two more decades of research, continue to reflect a “work in progress.” Change within the soil science profession has never been simple as indicated by Hartemink and Anderson (2020) in their summary reflecting 100 yr of soil science in the United States. They stated that in 1908, the American Society of Agronomy (ASA) established a committee on soil classification and mapping, but it took 6 yr before the first report was issued, and on doing so, the committee disbanded because there was no consensus among members. From that perspective, progress toward understanding and using soil health principles to protect and preserve our fragile soil resources is indeed progressing. With utmost gratitude and respect we thank the authors, reviewers, and especially, the often‐forgotten technical support personnel who are striving to continue the advancement of soil science. By developing practices to implement sometimes theoretical ideas or what may appear to be impossible actions, we thank and fully acknowledge all ongoing efforts. As the next generation of soil scientists, it will be through your rigorous, science‐based work that even greater advances in soil health will be accomplished.

      Third, my co‐authors and I recognize and acknowledge soil health assessment is not an exact science, but there are a few principles that are non‐negotiable. First, to qualify as a meaningful, comprehensive assessment, soil biological, chemical, and physical properties and processes must all be included. Failure to do so, does not invalidate the assessment, but rather limits it to an assessment of “soil biological health”, “soil physical health”, “soil chemical health”, or some combination thereof. Furthermore, although some redundancy may occur, at least two different indicator measurements should be used for each indicator group (i.e., biological, chemical, or physical). To aid indicator selection, many statistical tools are being developed and evaluated to help identify the best combination of potential measurements for assessing each critical soil function associated with the land use for which an evaluation is being made.

There is also no question that any soil health indicator must be fundamentally sound from all biological, chemical, physical and/or biochemical analytical