||»University of Pannonia (UP)|
|Authors:||Gergely Toth, Tamás Hermann, Tamás Kismányoky, Zoltán Tóth|
|iSQAPERiS editor:||Jane Brandt|
|1. Videos and infographics|
|2. Study site description|
|3. Participation of stakeholders in the iSQAPER research programme|
|4. Research tasks|
|5. Long-term impact of iSQAPER's research programme in the study site|
Please check the translation A Zala megye tanulmányi helyszíne egy rövid videót és egy infografikát készített, amelyben leírta a területet és azt, hogy számos helyben alkalmazott gazdálkodási gyakorlat hogyan javítja a talajminőséget.
A short video and an infographic were made by the Zala County study site team to describe the area and the way in which a number of locally used management practices benefit soil quality.
Please check the translations
»Zala tanulmányi helyszín, Magyarország
»Zala County study site, Hungary
»Zala megyei gazdálkodás
»Land management in Zala County
Please edit this section: update and add a few photos
The case study area is situated within the 5765 km2 Balaton catchment area in western Hungary. The climate is moderately warm, moderately humid, while the number of sunshine hours per year is high. Mean annual temperature of the region of Lake Balaton is about 10 ˚C. The average rainfall (600-700 mm/year) nationally means a medium rainfall zone. The center of the pilot area of 744 km2 has the following coordinates: 46°50'0.99" N, 17° 6'14.68" E. The entire pilot area (744 km2) has available DEM (5x5 m GRID), topographical maps with 0,875 m/pixel accuracy, orthophotos with 0,5 m/pixel accuracy and cadastral maps. There are 1:10 000 scale soil maps available from about 20 000 ha. The main environmental objective being the reduction of pollutants (phosphorus and other plant nutrients) loads of into Lake Balaton, where anthropogenic eutrophication is the main issue of concern. Lake Balaton, with its nearly 600 km2 area, is the largest shallow lake in Middle Europe. The lake and surrounding area form very important natural (ecological, water and landscape) resources and are one of the major target areas of water related recreational tourism in Europe.
Main farming systems and typical agricultural management activities in the study area
Over 37% of the total catchment area is arable land, which is much lower than the national average; while 27% is forest, which exceeds the national average. Some 15% of the land is suitable for grassland management, 5% horticulture, 3% pomiculture, 2% viticulture, 1% for reed management and fish farming. The „Kis-Balaton” nature conservation area, is situated within the Balaton Catchment area. The „Kis-Balaton” wetland habitat is under protection of the Ramsar Convention.
Characteristic soils and soil quality monitoring practice
The distribution of soil types in the area is given in Figure 10. There are several ways to assess soil quality in the case study area. Essentially, the cadastral maps from the case study area contain soil quality information according to the national land evaluation system, namely the „Gold Crown System”. However, a new land evaluation system (D-e-Meter System) has been developed in Hungary which is suitable to use for soil quality assessment in different farming systems within the case study area. The newly developed system applies large scale (1:10 000) digital soil maps, data on soil nutrient status and includes land evaluation algorithms to assess the production potential of agricultural parcels.
Previous research and innovation actions on soil improvement and monitoring
National research and innovation activities:
- GVOP no: 2004-05-0001/3.0 – The possibilities of use of the D-e-Meter land evaluation system in the practices especially on the ecological farming and the Less Favoured Areas
- NKFP no: 4/015/2004 - 4F, Land Quality, Land Evaluation and Sustainable Land Use in the European Union
- NKFP no: 3/004/2001- The D-e-Meter intelligent land evaluation system
International research and innovation activities:
- FP7-ENV-2007-1, DIGISOIL, Integrated system of data collection technologies for mapping soil properties, no: 211523
- FP7-SPACE-2010-1, MYWATER, Merging Hydrologic models and EO data for reliable information on Water, no: 263188
Please complete this table following the example in »Study site 6
The local stakeholders listed in Table 1 were involved throughout the duration of iSQAPER in a number of research tasks including: providing experimental sites for the soil quality assessment and agricultural management practice evaluation; testing and evaluating SQAPP; attending demonstration workshops; and providing venues for and hosting the field visits for an iSQAPER plenary meeting.
Table 1: Local stakeholders involved in the iSQAPER research programme
|Stakeholder type||Locations||Institution||Number and gender M/F||Role|
|Farmers, land managers|
I have pre-filled some of the text for you taking material from the deliverables. So you can orientate yourself, I've indicated in blue which tasks each sub-section relates to. Please feel free to expand the text as necessary (and also include photos).
Soil quality assessment and agricultural management practice evaluation
Covering: Tasks 5.2, 5.3, 6.1, 6.3
Based on WOCAT database (www.wocat.net), iSQAPER selected 18 promising agricultural management practices (AMPs) with potential to improve soil quality (»Agricultural management practices in the iSQAPER study sites). Fourteen examples of a number of these AMPs were identified in the Zala County study site that conformed to the following criteria:
- the promising management practice has been implemented for at least 3 years;
- at least 2 different soil types are represented; and
- at least in 2 different first level Farming Systems (arable, permanent, grazing) are represented.
For each AMP plot, nearby control plots were also identified where the practice has not changed.
Table 2: AMPs identified in the Zala County study site. Climatic region: southern sub-continental
|Plot number||Farming system||Farming system detail||Soil type||AMP general description||AMP number*|
|7.1||Permanent||Vineyards||Cambisols||Leguminous crop; Residue maintenance / Mulching||5-8|
|7.2||Arable||Non irrigated arable land - Cereals; Maize; Oil crops||Luvisols||Manuring & composting; Residue maintenance / Mulching; Crop rotation / Control or change of species composition; measures against compaction||7-8-9-10|
|7.3||Arable||Non irrigated arable land - Cereals; Maize; Oil crops||Cambisols||Min-till; Manuring & composting; Residue maintenance / Mulching; Crop rotation / Control or change of species composition; Cross-slope measure; Measures against compaction||2-7-8-9-10|
|7.4||Permanent||Vineyards||Cambisols||Residue maintenance / Mulching;||8|
|7.5||Arable||Non irrigated arable land - Cereals; Maize; Oil crops||Luvisols||Min-till; Residue maintenance / Mulching; Crop rotation / Control or change of species composition; Measures against compaction||2-8-9-10|
|7.6||Arable||Non irrigated arable land - Cereals; Maize; Oil crops||Cambisols||Min-till;Manuring & composting; Residue maintenance / Mulching; Crop rotation / Control or change of species composition; Measures against compaction||2-8-9-10|
|7.7||Permanent||Vineyards||Cambisols||Manuring & composting; Cross-slope measure||7-11|
|7.8||Arable||Non irrigated arable land - Cereals; Maize; Legumes; Oil crops||Luvisols||Min-till; Leguminous crops; Manuring & composting; Residue maintenance / Mulching; Crop rotation / Control or change of species composition; Measures against compaction; Water diversion and drainage||2-5-7-8-9-10-13|
|7.9||Arable||Non irrigated arable land - Cereals; Maize; Oil crops||Cambisols||Cover crops; Green manure / Integrated soil fertility management; Residue maintenance / Mulching; Crop rotation / Control or change of species composition; Measures against compaction||4-6-8-9-10|
|7.10||Arable||Non irrigated arable land - Cereals; Maize; Oil crops||Cambisols||Min-till; Manuring & composting; Residue maintenance / Mulching; Crop rotation / Control or change of species composition; measures against compaction;||2-7-8-9-10|
|7.12||Arable||Non irrigated arable land - Cereals; Maize; Legumes; Oil crops||Luvisols||Min-till; Leguminous crops; Residue maintenance / Mulching; Crop rotation / Control or change of species composition; Measures against compaction||2-5-8-9-10|
|7.13||Arable||Non irrigated arable land - Cereals; Maize; Oil crops||Cambisols||Min-till; Permanent soil cover / Removing less vegetation cover; Leguminous crops;Manuring & composting; Residue maintenance / Mulching; Crop rotation / Control or change of species composition; Measures against compaction||2-3-5-7-8-9-10|
|7.14||Arable||Non irrigated arable land - Cereals; Maize; Oil crops||Cambisols||Min-till; Permanent soil cover / Removing less vegetation cover; Leguminous crops;Manuring & composting; Residue maintenance / Mulching; Crop rotation / Control or change of species composition; Measures against compaction||2-3-5-7-8-9-10|
*Note: see »Assessing effect of management practices on soil quality - experimental framework for the full list and descriptions of the 18 promising agricultural management practices.
A first field campaign was conducted in 2016 to evaluate the soil quality in each of the paired AMP-control plots, using visual soil assessment methods (»Visual soil and plant quality assesment). The results from this and all the other study sites were combined to determine which AMPs can be shown to have a proven positive effect on soil quality, see »Assessing effect of management practices on soil quality - experimental results.
Those practices that are innovative for Hungary were also described and added to the WOCAT database
Did you take part in the second campaign? Hungary isn't mentioned in Milestone 6.3 so I didn't find any text to extract. However, I've left the Slovenian example in case you can add the information. If you didn't take part, the rest of this section can be deleted
The soil assessment campaign was repeated in 2018 on the two paired plots highlighted in green in Table 2 (6.9: Crop rotation/control or change of species composition and 6.12: Change of grazing intensity level) with laboratory-based measurements added to the visual soil assessments. The aim was to investigate
- how measurements of soil quality parameters obtained from the visual assessments compared to those obtained from laboratory measurements;
- if different AMPs affected different soil quality parameters in different ways;
- and what impact the AMPs had on the principal soil threats.
For details of the assessment analysis methods and the results from this and all study sites see »Impact of promising agricultural management practices.
As a result of this extended analysis, the example of crop rotation/control or change of species composition that was exemplified in Plot 6.9 (which combined organic farming, crop rotation and manuring) was finally selected to demonstrate the positive impact management practice can have on soil quality (see »Demonstrations of recommended agricultural management practices in the study sites).
This practice addresses soil compaction, surface crust formation and organic matter depletion. The control plot consists of diverse crop rotation and conventional system with no organic matter amendment. VSA total scores are slightly higher for the soil under the AMP, where higher soil stability and earthworm counts were observed but in part counterbalanced by a higher topsoil compaction.
SQAPP development, testing and evaluation
Covering: Tasks 5.1, 4.3, 4.4, 6.2, 6.4
Did you do this? If not, delete the section.
Of the 90 stakeholders who took part in the evaluation of the beta version of SQAPP, 23 were from the Ljubljansko polje study site. Participants were asked a series of questions relating to their expectations of SQAPP and the relevance of the soil parameters included in SQAPP, the assessment of soil threats and the suitability of the app's recommendations to their local context. The feedback and comments were combined with those from the other study sites and used in the further development of SQAPP. For details of the responses from all study sites see »Stakeholder feedback and SQAPP development.
Covering: Task 6.4
On 6th June 2019 a demonstration event was organised in the Zala County study site at the University of Pannonia and the Demonstration Farm owned by the university in Karmacs to present the major findings of iSQAPER to stakeholders and to demonstrate farmyard manure application as a management practice of proven benefit to soil quality. The event was attended by around 120 participants.
The results from this demonstration event and those held in the other study sites are summarised in »Demonstrations of recommended agricultural management practices in the study sites.
A leaflet describing the AMP organic amendments - farmyard manure application was prepared to accompany the demonstrations.
Co-development of scenarios of future farm and soil management practices
Did you attend the workshop? If not, delete this section.
Members of the Zala County study site team attended and contributed to the workshop in Madrid on developing scenarios of future farming. The results are presented in »Soil management scenarios.
Please complete this table following the example in »Study site 6
Taking account discussions with the stakeholders and feedback from the various research tasks and events in which they took part, it is anticipated that the iSQAPER research programme could have a lasting legacy in the Zala County study site as indicated in Table 3.
Table 3: Activities in which iSQAPER's research programme could potentially have a lasting impact in the Zala County study site
|Activity||Impact level: 0 - no impact, 1 - barely noticeable to 5 - important visible impact|
|Research results influencing farming practice|
|Uptake of recommended AMPs|
|Regular use of SQAPP|
|Development of new or enhancement of existing stakeholder networks|
|The involvement of new stakeholder types in existing networks|