Welcome to International Network for Natural Sciences | INNSpub

A comparative evaluation of soil pH of different land use classes from district Gilgit, Pakistan

Research Paper | July 1, 2016

| Download 6

Gul Sanam, Erum Abbas, Farhana, Aliya Jabeen, Tika Khan

Key Words:

J. Bio. Env. Sci.9( 1), 376-380, July 2016


JBES 2016 [Generate Certificate]


Soil pH is an important factor for desirable crop productions. However, due to soil amendments it is changing and negatively impacting on agricultural produce and production. A total of 162 samples tested from three different land use classes (agriculture, barren and commercial) collected from four valleys of district Gilgit in Gilgit-Baltistan province of Pakistan. Different valleys and land use classes surveyed revealed a differential scope of pH level. However, in general entire soils are alkaline and pH ranges from 8.35 – 9.03 (average 8.65). Similarly, agriculture and barren lands in Gilgit town, Danyor and Sultanabad show relatively close affinity (average 8.52 and 8.62 respectively) as compared to Oshikhandas (average 9.02 and 9.03). Continuous unplanned use of chemical fertilizers and commercial wastes are continuously influence soil pH in the area which need a regular follow-up by the Government agriculture department. At the moments, farmers are totally ignorant about soil health status and such a technique or facility to monitor these parameters to optimize their agricultural productivity. Present study provides a baseline for future studies and caution for relevant departments to look into issues related to soil health. Study is unique and conducted for the first time from the area.


Copyright © 2016
By Authors and International Network for
Natural Sciences (INNSPUB)
This article is published under the terms of the Creative
Commons Attribution Liscense 4.0

A comparative evaluation of soil pH of different land use classes from district Gilgit, Pakistan

Anonymous. 2013. Soil. The Encyclopedia of Earth. Retrieved from Website. Retrieved from http://www. eoearth.org/view/article/156081/ on February 2016.

Anonymous. 2016a. Soil pH for Field Crops. Cornell University Cooperative Extension. Retrieved from Website retrieved from http://www.nnyagdev .org/PDF /SoilpH.pdf on 22nd February 2016.

Anonymous. 2015b. Soil. Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. Retrieved from Website retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/ wiki/Soil on February 2016.

Hussain E, Khan B, Lencioni V, Mumtaz S, Ali F. 2012. Stream macro-invertebrate assemblages in the Bagrot Valley of Central Karakoram National Park, Pakistan. Records Zoological Survey of Pakistan 21, 60-64.

Mullen R. 2004. Soil pH and Nutrient Availability. C.O.R.N Newsletter No. 2004-24, Agriculture and Natural Resources, OSU Extension, ATI, OARDC, College of Food, Agriculture, and Environmental Sciences, Ohio State USA.

Schulte EE,Walsh LM, Kelling KA, Bundy LM, Bland WL, Wolkowki RP, Sturgul SJ. 2005. Management of Wisconsin soils. Soil acidity and liming. Fifth Edition 49-51.

Williston HL, La Fayette R. 1978. Species suitab-ility and pH of soils in southern forests. USDA Forest Service. Southeastern Area, state and Private Forestry. Forest Management Bulletin 4p.

Zain FO. 2010. A Socio-Political Study of Gilgit Baltistan Province. Pakistan Journal of Social Sciences (PJSS). Vol 30, No. 1, 181-190.