Content uploaded by Virgil Vlad
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Virgil Vlad on Jan 09, 2017
Content may be subject to copyright.
SOIL SCIENCE no. 2, 2015, vol. XLIX
Romanian National Society of Soil Science – SNRSS
5-th Commission of the SNRSS – Soil Genesis, Classification and Mapping
Working Group on the Romanian System of Soil Taxonomy
PROTOCOL
FOR ADOPTING THE UPGRADES
OF THE ROMANIAN SYSTEM OF SOIL TAXONOMY1
V. Vlad
National Research and Development Institute for Soil Science, Agrochemistry and
Environment – ICPA Bucharest,
61 Mărăşti Blvd., sector 1, 011464, Bucharest, e-mail: virgilvlad@yahoo.com
1. THE PURPOSE AND OBJECT OF THE PROTOCOL
1.1. The present "Protocol for adopting the upgrades of the Romanian
System of Soil Taxonomy", hereinafter called "the Protocol", establishes the set
of agreed rules that must be followed to adopt and implement the upgrades of
the Romanian System of Soil Taxonomy (SRTS) in order to be improved and
evolutionarily developed.
1.2. The SRTS, as defined by the official documents (Munteanu & Florea,
2009; Florea & Munteanu, 2012; Vlad et al., 2014)2, has reached a satisfying
maturity stage, so that requirements of radical changes are not expected in the
relatively near future. However, there are enough causes that determine to occur
needs for improving and developing the SRTS:
- discovering some particular soils or soil behaviours in certain
conditions or uses (older or newer) that were not known when
developing the current versions of the SRTS;
- accumulation of new knowledge and experience on the behaviour and
genetic evolution of soils by the community of soil scientists in
Romania;
SOIL SCIENCE
2015, vol. XLIX, no. 2, p. 43-54
1 Adopted by the Working Group on the Romanian System of Soil Taxonomy in
December 5, 2015.
Acknowledgements: N. Florea, Daniela Raducu, M. Mihalache et al., for reviewing the
manuscript.
2 Florea N., Munteanu I. (2012). Sistemul Român de Taxonomie a Solurilor - SRTS,
Ediþia 2012. Ed.Sitech, Craiova, 206 p.
Munteanu I., Florea N. (2009). Ghid pentru descrierea în teren a profilului de sol şi a
condiţiilor de mediu specifice. Ed. Sitech, Craiova, 230 p.
Vlad V., Florea N., Toti M., Mocanu V. (2014). Corelarea sistemelor de clasificare a
solurilor SRCS şi SRTS. Sistemul SRTS+. Ed. Sitech, Craiova, 191 p.
43
44
SOIL SCIENCE no. 2, 2015, vol. XLIX
SOIL SCIENCE no. 2, 2015, vol. XLIX
44
- issuing new versions of the international soil classification/taxonomy
systems, with which the SRTS must be correlated.
1.3. The Protocol refers to "soil" as defined by Florea & Munteanu (2012): "a
natural body resulting from the combined action of the assembly of factors of soil
genesis on the superficial part of the terrestrial crust, having its own organization
and features reflected in the sequence of horizons called soil profile". Also, the
Protocol refers to the "nonsoil" as a conventional generalisation of the concept of
soil, as defined by Vlad et al. (2014): "any superficial part of the terrestrial crust
that does not meet the definition criteria of the soil: buildings, industrial
constructions, roads, water, bare rocks and other such land areas". The
description of the nonsoils is usually reduced to their essential characteristics, to
the extent that there are needs to be highlighted them in soils maps.
1.4. The main purposes of the SRTS are:
- systematisation of the knowledge on soil;
- ensuring the possibility of developing good interpretations for the soil
use management based on the descriptions using the SRTS;
- ensuring an efficient and unitary means of communication between the
soil specialists, as well as between them and other specialists and
practitioners in related domains;
- ensuring an efficient and unitary means of soil characterisation for the
inventories, monitoring, maps, databases and geographical information
systems concerning different soils.
1.5. In order to accomplish the purposes stated in the section 1.4, the SRTS
aims at an optimal balance between the theoretical foundation of soil
classification/taxonomy (soil genesis, interrelations between genetic factors and
processes) and the practice approach taking into account the soil quantitative
characteristics/features that provide important interpretations for the management
of the soil uses.
1.6. The upgrades of the SRTS taken into consideration in the Protocol
cover all components of the SRTS, namely:
a) Indicators for soil/land characterisation;
b) Diagnostic elements (characters/features) for soil classification:
- soil diagnostic horizons: main horizons, associate horizons, special
horizons, including the secondary morphological characteristics of
horizons;
- soil diagnostic properties, soil diagnostic characters and other soil
diagnostic elements;
- soil diagnostic materials;
c) Taxonomic units/categories of soil and nonsoil:
i. hierarchical taxonomic units/categories of high level:
- soil/nonsoil classes,
- soil/nonsoil types,
- soil/nonsoil subtypes;
ii. hierarchical taxonomic units/categories of low level:
45
SOIL SCIENCE no. 2, 2015, vol. XLIX
SOIL SCIENCE no. 2, 2015, vol. XLIX
45
- soil/nonsoil varieties,
- soil/nonsoil species,
- soil/nonsoil families,
- soil/nonsoil variants;
iii. complementary taxonomic units/categories of low level:
- environmental (land) conditions,
- modes of association of soils and nonsoils.
The upgrades may refer to the defining the taxonomic categories of
soil/nonsoil, as well as to the defining the taxonomic units (taxa) inside the
taxonomic categories.
d) Taxonomic elements of soil and nonsoil:
- soil/nonsoil qualifiers (used for defining the de soil/nonsoil subtypes);
- specifiers of soil characteristics (which may be combined with soil
qualifiers to form certain soil subtypes or certain taxonomic
units/elements of low level);
- low taxonomic level qualifiers of soil and nonsoil:
. soil particular characteristics (used for defining most of soil varieties);
. qualifiers of low taxonomic level for defining some soil varieties (other
than the soil particular characteristics) and the species, families and
variants of soil/nonsoil;
. complementary qualifiers of low taxonomic level for defining the
environmental conditions and the modes of association of soils and
nonsoils.
1.7. The following types of SRTS upgrades are taken into consideration in
the Protocol:
a) adding a new taxonomic unit (taxon) or a new taxonomic/diagnostic
element or a new characterization indicator of soil/nonsoil;
b) removing an existing taxon or taxonomic/diagnostic element
ofsoil/nonsoil;
c) subdividing an existing taxon or taxonomic/diagnostic element or
characterization indicator of soil/nonsoil;
d) modifying an existing taxon or taxonomic/diagnostic element or
characterization indicator of soil/nonsoil in order to improve its definition
without modifying its scope;
e) modifying an existing taxon or taxonomic/diagnostic element or
characterization indicator of soil/nonsoil in order to improve its definition
with modifying its scope (only in special cases).
2. THE OBJECTIVES OF THE SRTS UPGRADES
2.1. The SRTS to fulfil all the qualities required for the systems of
taxonomy/classification of soils, namely:
a) to be simple and easy to use (simplicity);
46
SOIL SCIENCE no. 2, 2015, vol. XLIX
SOIL SCIENCE no. 2, 2015, vol. XLIX
46
b) to be easily applied to the diversity of the existing soils in Romania, to
the diversity of soil uses and to the diversity of communication needs in
the soil and soil-related domains (flexibility);
c) to cover the whole typology of the existing soils in Romania, respectively
the full range of values of the characterisation indicators of the existing
soils in Romania (completeness);
d) to fully accomplish all the purposes of a system of
taxonomy/classification of soils (functionality);
e) to ensure that the taxonomic settings are reproducible, i.e. not
dependent on subjective interpretations of soil specialists (robustness);
f) to use a clear terminology/nomenclature, having clear and unambiguous
definitions (clearness).
2.2. The SRTS to provide as complete and relevant as possible information
necessary for elaborating as consistent as possible interpretations for making as
specific and detailed as possible decisions concerning the management of the soil
uses (present or foreseen for the future).
2.3. The SRTS to provide as complete as possible descriptions both for soil
profiles and for soil typological spatial units, having in view that taxonomic status is
used in the definition of the soil map legends also.
2.4. The SRTS to provide all the relevant information needed for
communication both in the scientific domain and in the practical uses, as well as
for the databases of soil resources (including for soil geographical information
systems, soil inventories and soil monitoring).
2.5. The upgraded (new) SRTS version to be compatible with the previous
versions in use, i.e. ensuring the possibility that the previous versions simply,
easily and completely correlate with the new version, including the correlation
concerning the soil databases.
2.6. The SRTS to provide the possibility of advanced computing of the soil
descriptions, e.g. conversion of the taxonomic information into soil databases
(including geographical information systems), automatic processing of soil
descriptions, automatic taxonomy/classification and soil digital mapping.
2.7. To bring the SRTS closer to the international systems of soil
taxonomy/classification, primarily to the "World Reference Base for Soil
Resources" (WRB) system - mandatory in the European Union.
2.8. The SRTS to be correlated with the taxonomy/classification systems of
the related domains (such as the geological classification system, etc.).
3. THE PRINCIPLES FOR DEFINING THE SRTS UPGRADES
3.1. The definition of the taxonomic categories/units/elements must highlight
their specific features/characteristics and rely on the similarities concerning both
the soil features/characteristics and the soil behaviour reflected in
interpretations/predictions for users.
The taxonomic categories/units/elements of high level must be defined
mainly based on the soil primary genetic features (determined by soil primary
47
SOIL SCIENCE no. 2, 2015, vol. XLIX
SOIL SCIENCE no. 2, 2015, vol. XLIX
47
genetic factors/processes) having great powers of generalisation and only by
exception based on soil parent materials of special importance.
The taxonomic categories/units/elements of low level must be defined based
on other soil genetic features that influence significantly the primary ones and/or
based on other important features and must include significant characters with
distinct effects, allowing interpretations, predictions and/or variants relevant for the
management of the soil uses.
The soil specific characters may vary independently of each other and their
importance depends also on the combination of them, so it is necessary the
diagnostic characters for the taxonomic units/elements of low level to be defined
as specific as possible.
3.2. The elements of differentiation between taxonomic categories and
between taxonomic units (taxa) must be soil intrinsic
features/characteristics/attributes (soil genetic horizons, soil properties and soil
parent materials, as well as their diagnostic attributes/characteristics) that are
observable and measurable in field (or that are safety and unequivocally
determinable from such attributes/characteristics) or determined by laboratory
analyses.
The soil diagnostic attributes/characteristics must be defined on quantitative
bases and as little as possible on qualitative bases (to avoid qualitative
formulations in definitions). The genetic processes must be avoided as such in the
definition of the diagnostic elements1 to the extent in which their identification
depends on the inferences/interpretations/subjectivity of soil specialists.
3.3. The soil taxonomic diagnosis must be expert-independent: it must can
be correctly and completely carried out and must can be reproducible by other soil
specialists without requiring experts having particularly high
specialisation/expertise.
3.4. In a taxon or a taxonomic/diagnostic element each class defined for the
diagnostic characteristics/indicators must determine significantly-distinct effects on
the management of the soil practical uses and/or on the soil/land behaviour in
validated theoretical models.
Also, the differences between the classes defined for the diagnostic
characteristics/indicators must be significantly higher than the margins of possible
errors in measurement/observation/assessment.
3.5. The definition of the taxonomic categories must exclude overlapping
their scopes and also each taxonomic category must include a set of disjunctive
canon taxa (mutually-exclusive: the definition scope of a taxon does not overlap
the definition scope of any other taxon in the set).
1 Although soil genesis is fundamental in soil taxonomy and soil survey, it is not suitable to
be directly as such used in soil taxonomy, but only indirectly through the results of the
pedogenetic processes. Generally the pedogenetic processes are not directly measurable,
since the soil specialists may have relatively different opinions on them, so that the soil
taxonomic diagnosis is affected by the level/accuracy of the soil specialists' knowledge. In
the same time the knowledge on pedogenesis may change with the evolution of the soil
science.
48
SOIL SCIENCE no. 2, 2015, vol. XLIX
SOIL SCIENCE no. 2, 2015, vol. XLIX
48
The canon taxa set of each taxonomic category must cover the whole
typology of soils known in Romania, respectively the full range of the values of the
indicators characterising the known soils in Romania.
3.6. The soil taxonomic categories/units/elements must be independent of
the types of soil use: defining the criteria of differentiation between soil taxa must
ensure that the basic taxonomic status of a soil does not change by cultivating the
soil or by other non-radical anthropogenic interventions on the soil.
3.7. The definitions of the SRTS entities (diagnostic elements, taxonomic
categories/units/elements) must be independent of the soil uses so as to make
correct interpretations for different uses of soil. (Example: it is necessary avoid to
use indicator ratings like "weak/strong" and the like, which may have different
meaning from one soil use to another; a given value of a diagnostic
indicator/character may have a little effect on certain soil use and a powerful effect
on another).
3.8. The definitions of the SRTS entities (diagnostic elements, taxonomic
categories/units/elements) must be clear/unambiguous, in case of need as
unambiguous algorithms, so that the soil descriptions and the interpretation of
those descriptions can be computerised: automatic taxonomy, other different
automatic classifications, automatic converting of taxonomic information into
databases or geographical information systems, automatic processing of soil
descriptions to develop interpretations for different soil uses and the like.
3.9. A SRTS upgrade must be as tight-localized (delimited/focused) as
possible within the SRTS so as not to induce any changes or to induce as little and
small as possible changes in the rest of the system (in other taxonomic
categories/units/elements, respectively in other diagnostic elements).
The SRTS upgrades inducing changes in the scopes of entities (taxonomic
categories/units/elements and diagnostic elements) must be defined only in very
special cases (having a particularly important/relevant impact in practice and
theory)1.
The parts added to or removed from old entities must can be described by
unchanged old qualifiers and/or new qualifiers.
3.10. The definitions of the taxonomic units/elements and diagnostic
elements must use diagnostic characteristics/indicators of soil/land whose
assessment does not require excessively complex and costly measurements
and/or analyses.
1 It is a general considered opinion that SRTS-2012/2012+ reached a satisfactory degree
of maturity and in the relatively near future there are not necessary large-scale changes to
radically modify the meaning and structure of the taxonomic categories/units/elements
and the diagnostic elements – changes that would create great difficulties both in their
implementation for the SRTS use and in the correlation of the SRTS previous versions with
the new version (including in the conversion of databases).
49
SOIL SCIENCE no. 2, 2015, vol. XLIX
SOIL SCIENCE no. 2, 2015, vol. XLIX
49
3.11. The new and modified indicators of soil/land characterization
introduced by the SRTS upgrades and the methods of measurement/analysis of
these indicators must be those provided by the international classification system
WRB. In the absence of provisions of the WRB on the indicators and methods of
measurement/analysis involved by the SRTS upgrades, the international
provisions - if any - will directly apply in the order: the ISO standards, the
provisions of the USC (Universal Soil Classification) system, the FAO Guidelines
for Soil Description, the ISRIC World Soil Information guidelines (SOTER, etc.),
the US Soil Taxonomy, other existing provisions on soil classification/taxonomy.
Exceptions to this principle may be accepted in very special cases only.
3.12. The terminology (nomenclature) used by the SRTS must ensure the
distinction between entities (between taxonomic units/elements, respectively
between diagnostic elements) by using traditional terms and, in their absence,
terms both easily-assimilable into everyday language (words short and easy to
pronounce) and mnemonic regarding the main concepts of the respective entities.
The terms must be precise in order to avoid both the confusion with other
terms and the multiple-interpretable connotations.
The terms must have the same meanings when they are in any different
combinations with other terms.
4. THE DOCUMENTATION OF THE SRTS UPGRADES
A separate documentation for each separate proposal of SRTS upgrade
must be elaborated. It must contain the following chapters/subchapters, adapted
according to the case:
4.1. The purpose in brief of the proposed SRTS upgrade and the causes in
brief that determined to make the proposal.
4.2. The description of the proposed SRTS upgrade:
4.2.1. the full description of all the details of the required updates in the
SRTS specifications (Munteanu & Florea, 2009; Florea & Munteanu, 2012; Vlad et
al., 2014): changes of the taxon, changes in the involved taxonomic elements
(high/low level qualifiers, specifiers, complementary qualifiers), changes in the
involved diagnostic elements (genetic horizons, diagnostic properties and/or
materials) and any other implications;
4.2.2. the full description of all the details (all taxonomic categories, including
complementary ones and including both all field data and all analytical data) of a
representative pedon (soil profile) or of more different representative pedons (as
the case) in the two situations: before and after the implementation of the
proposed SRTS upgrade;
4.2.3. the description of the changes in the specific interpretations for the
management of the main soil uses and in the validated theoretical models of
soil/land;
4.2.4. the description of the solution for the equivalency of the modified old
entities with unchanged old entities or new entities of the SRTS after the proposed
upgrade implementation.
4.3. The localisation and geographical delimitation of the estimated
territories to be characterised by SRTS entities modified by the proposal:
50
SOIL SCIENCE no. 2, 2015, vol. XLIX
SOIL SCIENCE no. 2, 2015, vol. XLIX
50
4.3.1. the localisation and geographical delimitation (including specifying
area) of the estimated territories in Romania of the soil homogeneous units and of
the possibly soil complex units (soil associations) at the scale 1:50.000, that are
characterised by SRTS entities modified by the proposal;
4.3.2. the statistically-estimated variability of the soil
features/characteristics/attributes involved in the definition of the entity
modifications in Romania (e.g. frequency of value classes of the soil/land
characterization indicators involved in the proposed modifications).
4.4. The complete and detailed argumentation of the necessity of the
proposed SRTS upgrade:
4.4.1. the practical relevance (concerning the interpretations for the
management of the soil uses) and the relevance in validated theoretical models of
soil/land;
4.4.2. the significant differences between the modified entities and the
entities having close definition concerning the soil behaviour in soil uses;
4.4.3. the advantages and disadvantages of the implementation of the
proposed SRTS upgrade;
4.4.4. other pros/cons of the implementation of the proposed SRTS upgrade;
4.4.5. other information;
4.4.6. discussion/comments.
4.5. The list of the references mentioned in the documentation.
5. THE PROCEDURE FOR ADOPTING THE SRTS UPGRADES
To be adopted and implemented, each separate proposal of SRTS upgrade
must pass the following successive steps:
5.1. Sending the documentation of the proposed SRTS upgrade to the
Working Group on the SRTS (GL-SRTS).
5.2. Exchanging the analyses, opinions and conclusions between the
members of the GL-SRTS on the proposed SRTS upgrade.
5.3. Supplementing the documentation of the proposed SRTS upgrade (with
arguments and/or additional data, etc.) by the authors of the proposal at the
request of the GL-SRTS, if that is considered to be necessary; in specific cases a
collaboration between the authors of the proposal and other specialists may be
organised in order to complete the documentation of the proposal.
5.4. Consulting certain well-known soil specialists with high expertise in the
domain concerning the proposed upgrade and/or specialists involved in the soil
uses related to the upgrade, if the GL-SRTS considers that is necessary.
5.5. Applying the proposed SRTS upgrade in some few experimental cases,
if the GL-SRTS considers that is necessary for the final decision making on
adopting the upgrade.
5.6. Making the decision by the GL-SRTS on the adoption of the proposed
upgrade, by applying the following rules:
5.6.1. A SRTS upgrade is adopted by the GL-SRTS members by vote by
absolute majority (> 67% of the number of the group members); the votes may be
51
SOIL SCIENCE no. 2, 2015, vol. XLIX
SOIL SCIENCE no. 2, 2015, vol. XLIX
51
expressed directly in a meeting of adopting or may be transmitted electronically by
e-mail;
5.6.2. A SRTS upgrade is adopted if it meets all the following conditions:
5.6.2.1. it contributes to the increase of the degree of achievement by the
SRTS of its objectives specified in the Chapter 2 of the Protocol;
5.6.2.2. it complies with all the principles specified in the Chapter 3 of the
Protocol;
5.6.2.3. the minimum aggregated area of the estimated territories in
Romania of the soil homogeneous units described with the new entities to be
greater than 100 ha or of those of the soil complex units (associations of soils) at
the scale 1:50,000 described with the new entities to be greater than 500 ha;
Note: Adopted or not, the proposal of SRTS upgrade may be published by
the authors in the SNRSS's journal "Ştiinţa Solului / Soil Science" or in other
publications.
5.7. Approval by the General Meeting of the Vth Commission of the SNRSS –
Soil Genesis, Classification and Mapping, by a simple majority, of the SRTS
upgrade adopted by the GL-SRTS, on the basis of its report.
5.8. Implementation in Romania by the National Research and Development
Institute for Soil Science, Agrochemistry and Environment Protection - ICPA
Bucharest of the approved SRTS upgrade, by "Notes of upgrading the SRTS",
which are communicated to the significant users.
5.9. Publication and implementation in Romania by the National Research
and Development Institute for Soil Science, Agrochemistry and Environment
Protection - ICPA Bucharest of a new version of the SRTS that includes the
upgrades approved in a suitable period of time, in coordination with the ongoing
national programs of soil survey, inventory and monitoring.
REFERENCES
1. Blume H.-P., Schad P., 2015 – 90 years of soil classification of the IUSS.
www.iuss.org, IUSS Bulletin 126, p. 38-45.
2. Bockheim J.G., Gennadiyev A.N., Hammer R.D., Tandarich J.P., 2005 – Historical
development of key concepts in pedology. Geoderma, 124, p. 23-36.
3. Cârstea S., 2010 – Pedogeographogenetic and pedomorphogenetic concepts in soil
surveys. IUSS Bulletin, no. 116, May 2010, p. 14-16.
4. Finke P., Hartwich R., Dudal R., Ibàñez J., Jamagne M., King D., Montanarella L.,
Yassoglou N., 2001 – Georeferenced Soil Database for Europe: Manual of Procedures
Version 1.1. EC, JRC, European Soil Bureau, Scientific Committee, Research Report
No. 5, EUR 18092 EN, 172 p.
5. Florea N., 2004 – Clasificarea şi taxonomia solurilor şi sistematizarea pedopeisajelor.
Factori şi Procese Pedogenetice din Zona Temperată, Serie nouă, ISSN 1582-4616,
vol. 3, p. 27-36.
6. Florea N., Munteanu I., 2012 – Sistemul Român de Taxonomie a Solurilor – SRTS,
Ediţia 2012. Ed.Sitech, Craiova, 206 p.
7. Golden M., Micheli E., Ditzler C., Eswaran H., Owens P., Zhang G., McBratney A.,
Hempel J., Montanarella L., Schad P., 2010 – Time for a Universal Soil Classification.
Proceedings of the 19-th World Congress of Soil Science, Symposium 1.4.1.
Classification and information demand, p. 48-51, Brisbane, Australia, DVD.
52
SOIL SCIENCE no. 2, 2015, vol. XLIX
SOIL SCIENCE no. 2, 2015, vol. XLIX
52
8. Hartemink A.E., 2015 – The use of soil classification in journal papers between 1975
and 2014. Geoderma Regional, 5, 2015, p. 127-139.
9. Hempel J., Micheli E., Owens P., McBratney A., 2013 – Universal Soil Classification
System Report from the International Union of Soil Sciences Working Group. Soil
Horizons, 2013, doi: 10.2136/sh12-12-0035, 6 p.
10. Ibáñez J.J., 2005a – WRB Key Rationale Discussion Forum. Summary of Conclusions.
IUSS, WRB Core Group, FAO, Internet discussion groups, WRB-
keyrationale@dgroups.org, 11 p.
11. Ibáñez J.J., 2005b – Compendium WRB Key Rationale Discussion Forum. IUSS, WRB
Core Group, FAO, Internet discussion groups, WRB-keyrationale@dgroups.org, 60 p.
12. IUSS-WG-WRB, 2014 – World Reference Base for Soil Resources 2014. International
soil classification system for naming soils and creating legends for soil maps.
IUSS/FAO, IUSS Working Group WRB, World Soil Resources Reports no.106, FAO,
Roma, 190 p.
13. IUSS-WG,. 2015 – Activities of IUSS Working Groups for IYS. International Union of
Soil Sciences, www.iuss.org, IUSS Bulletin 126, p. 15-17.
14. Krasilnikov P., Ibanez Marti J-J., Arnold R.W., Shoba S. (eds.), 2009 – A Handbook of
Soil Terminology, Correlation and Classification. Earthscan, London, 440 p.
15. Krasilnikov P., Arnold R.W., Ibanez J-J., 2010 – Soil classifications: Their origin, the
state-of-the-art and perspectives. Proceedings of the 19-th World Congress of Soil
Science, Symp. 1.4.2, p. 19-22, Brisbane, Australia, DVD.
16. Micheli E., Nachtergaele F.O., Jones R.J.A., Montanarella L. (eds.), 2002 – Soil
Classification 2001. European Soil Bureau Research Report No.7, EUR 20398 EN,
Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, Luxembourg, 258 p.
17. Micheli E., Lang V., Owens P., Hempel J., McBratney A., 2014a – Approaches to
define the elements of a Universal Soil Classification System. The 20-th World
Congress of Soil Science, Jeju, Korea, WG9, DVD.
18. Micheli E., Fuchs M., Lang V., Szegi T., Dobos E., 2014b – The Method of
development and structure of the Modernized Hungarian Soil Classification System.
The 20-th World Congress of Soil Science, Jeju, Korea, C1.4-2, DVD.
19. Munteanu I., Florea N., 2009 – Ghid pentru descrierea în teren a profilului de sol şi a
condiţiilor de mediu specifice. ICPA Bucureşti, MAPDR, Ed. Sitech, Craiova, 230 p.
20. Nachttergaele F.O., 2002 – New developments in soil classification: the World
Reference Base for Soil Resources. Quatorzième réunion du Sous-Comité ouest et
centre africain de corrélation des sols (Abomey, Bénin, Oct.2000), World Soil
Resources Reports no. 98, FAO, Rome, 2002, p. 13-28.
21. Nikiforova A., Fleis M., Borisov M., 2014 – World soil classification, the systems
approach and multiscale GIS mapping. The 20-th World Congress of Soil Science,
Jeju, Korea, C1.4-2, DVD.
22. Pazos M.S., 2012 – Suggestions for the Universal Soil Classification System. In
Report on the 4-th Conference for Soil Classification, International Union of Soil
Sciences, www.iuss.org, IUSS Soil Classification Newsletter 3, Spring 2012, p. 5.
23. Rossiter D.G., 2001 – Principles of Classification. Lecture Notes. International Institute
for Aerospace Survey and Earth Sciences (ITC), Enschede, the Netherlands, 10 p.
24. Smith G.D., 1986 – The Guy Smith interviews: rationale for concepts in Soil
Taxonomy. Edited by T.R. Forbes. USDA, Soil Conservation Service, SMSS Technical
Monograph No. 11, 272 p.
53
SOIL SCIENCE no. 2, 2015, vol. XLIX
SOIL SCIENCE no. 2, 2015, vol. XLIX
53
25. USDA-SSS, 1999 – Soil Taxonomy: A basic system of soil classification for making
and interpreting soil surveys, Second edition. Soil Survey Staff, USDA-NRCS,
Agriculture Handbook 436, Washington DC, 869 p.
26. USDA-SSS, 2014 – Keys to Soil Taxonomy, 12-th edition. Soil Survey Staff, USDA,
Natural Resources Conservation Services, Washington DC, 360 p.
27. Vlad V., Florea N., Toti M., Mocanu V., 2014 – Corelarea sistemelor de clasificare a
solurilor SRCS şi SRTS. Sistemul SRTS+. Ed. Sitech, Craiova, 191 p.
28. Vlad V., Florea N., Toti M., Mocanu V., 2015 – Method of correlation of the current
Romanian soil classification system SRTS-2012 with the previous systems SRCS-
1980 and SRTS-2003. The SRTS-2012+ system. Research Journal of Agricultural
Science, vol. 47, nr. 3, p. 173-183.
