Landform Analysis, Vol. 17: 125–130 (2011)

Genetic interpretation of micromorphological features of gullyloess-soil deposits (case study: Kolonia Celejów, E Poland)

Przemysław Mroczek, Jan RodzikFaculty of Earth Sciences and Spatial Management, Maria Curie-Skłodowska University, Lublin, Poland,e-mail: przemyslaw.mroczek@umcs.pl

Abstract: Five complex soil profiles in gully system on Nałeczów Plateau (E Poland) were examined. They represent theloess sediments modified by soil processes and postpedogenic transformations. Two examined profiles represent naturaland mature Luvisols with diagnostic illuvial horizon (Bt argillic) developed on the edge of plateau geomorphologic level andin the relict valley bottom. The other soil profiles reflects postpedogenic soil degradation, redeposition and secondary accu-mulation (deluvia, colluvia and/or proluvia). Record of these processes are the micromorphological features created bylithological processes (=primary loess and secondary pedoliths) or by pedogenesis (mainly bioturbation, illuviation, de- andrecalcification). The important group of microfeatures are pedorelicts which clearly confirm genetic dependences ofpedoliths (deluvia and proluvia) and soils developed in situ and located in higher hypsometric levels in the catchment.

Keywords: gully erosion, loess, pedogenesis, soil degradation, micromorphology

Introduction

Micromorphological method is mainly used inpedology to describe the soil processes and specifythe typology of soils (e.g. Bullock et al. 1985; Stoops2003). Therefore, its main role is evidence the indi-vidual and specific microforms created by definitesoil process or the group of microfeatures which re-flect the multi-stage evolution of soil cover. For thisreason, micromorphology has found wide applica-tion in studies of polygenetic sediments and soils, inparticular the Quaternary loess-paleosol sequences(e.g. Kemp 1999, 2001, Mroczek 2008).

Usually, very complex nature – like describedabove – have gully sediments filling the bottoms,slopes and fossil piping channels or forming the ac-cumulation layers next to the erosion edges. Theirprimary location is commonly associated with de-graded and redeposited layers originally situated inhigher geomorphologic areas in the catchment.Finally, their homogeneity impedes the indication ofprimary sources of gully sediments, especially inclastic materials filling the bottoms as so-calledproluvia. However, the use of micromorphology inresearch of redeposited sediments enable to indicate

the alimentation sources through the identificationof specific older and relict microfeatures created bylitho- and pedogenic processes. These microformsallowed to detail the genesis and specify the ways andcharacter of transport (e.g. Mroczek 2008).

Materials and methods

The selection of the study areas was based on pre-vious field works and on earlier studies in the west-ern part of northwest part of Lublin Upland (e.g.Rodzik & Zgłobicki 2000; Rodzik et al. 2009). Thearea is located in Nałęczów Plateau, adjacent to theVistula River valley (Fig. 1). The main surface rocksare loess and loess-like sediments (max. thickness 30m), where the relative relief reaches up to 90 m andthe average density of the gully network – ca. 2.5km km–2.

Micromorphological analyses were conducted infour loess-soil profiles located within the gullies dis-secting the system of dry valleys in the KoloniaCelejów on the Nałęczów Plateau (Rodzik et al.2009). The examined exposures differ mostly in theirgeomorphological situation, degree of soil develop-

125

ment, and kind of possible postpedogenetic transfor-mations (Fig. 2). Soil horizons were described usingthe terms outlined by Reuter (2000). Soil profiles de-scription is as follows:– profile 1: Buried Luvisol with the profile

1Adel-2fA-2fAEet-2fBt-2fC-2fCca, developed inthe top of loess remnant (deluvial loess) in the es-carpment of gully dissecting the valley bottom;

– profile 2: Initial deluvial soil with the profileAdel1-Cdel1-Cdel2, developed on the gully bot-

tom and accessible in a dissection of proluvial de-posit cover;

– profile 3: Tripartite deluvial-colluvial sequencewith the profile 1Adel-2Bt-3C, accessible in thegully escarpment, in the inactive suffusion kettledissecting the valley slope;

– profile 4: Truncated and buried Luvisol with theprofile 1Adel-2fBt1-2fBt2-2fC-2fCca, accessiblein the gully escarpment, in the reactivated suffu-sion kettle dissecting the valley slope;

126

Przemysław Mroczek, Jan Rodzik

Fig. 1. Location of the Kolonia Celejów on western part of Nałęczów Plateau (A) and soil profiles in the gully, mentioned inthe study (B)

Fig. 2. Examined soil profiles: A – buried Luvisol in the escarpment of gully, B – initial deluvial soil in gully bottom, C – tri-partite deluvial-colluvial sequence in the gully escarpment, D – truncated and buried Luvisol in the reactivated suffusionkettle, E – sequence of soil deluvia in the reactivated suffusion kettle

– profile 5: Sequence of soil deluvia with the profileAdel-ABtdel-BtCdel-Cdel filling the reactivatedsuffusion kettle (opposite the profile 4).The undisturbed samples were collected using

standard (80×60×40 mm) Kubiena tins for safetransport back to laboratory for impregnation withcrystic resin. The technique adopted the approach ofLee & Kemp (1992) and Mroczek (2008) to produceapproximately 30-micron thick thin sections (7×5cm2). More than 30 thin sections were analysed un-der plane and polarized light. Samples were de-scribed using the terms outlined by Bullock et al.(1985) and Stoops (2003).

Results and conclusions

Micromorphological analyses (see Table 1) en-able us to draw the following genetic conclusions:1. The mature soils (profiles 1 and 4) belonging to

Brownearths type contain preserved and ratherwell developed Bt horizon with features of argicdiagnostic endopedon. Illuvial clay coatings andinfillings in channels and pore space are its repre-sentative and diagnostic microfeatures;

2. The products of redeposition of soil horizons oc-cur as the infilling of suffusion kettle (profile 5)and as deluvia (so-called agricultural diamictons,profiles 3, 4 and 5). This fact is mainly evidencedby pedorelict features of these deposits (accord-ing to Fedoroff & Goldberg 1982 and vide classifi-cation proposed by Mroczek 2008). From amongall distinguished micromorphological features,the following belong to pedorelicts: illuvialpapules and angular Fe and Fe-Mn nodules, andsimilarly looking amorphous pieces of charcoal,Their primary soil origin is confirmed by opticalfeatures and size resembling the forms occurringin situ, as well as pebble-like shape indicatingrounding of primary microforms during theirredeposition (rather short transport);

3. The Bt horizon of mature soil (profile 3) was re-deposited en bloc without additional deforma-

tion. Micromorpho-logical record confirms itsilluvial origin and lack of connection with theoverlying epipedon 1Adel (diamicton) and un-derlying endopedon 3C (primary loess). This ho-rizon can be recognized as typical colluviacomposed exclusively of material from theBt-argic soil horizon.

Proluvia covering the modern bottom of gully(profile 2) are the products of redeposition of pri-mary loess and soils developed on it, which weretransported at longer distance and more mixed (ho-mogenized) than the materials mentioned above.This fact is unambiguously indicated by pedorelictfeatures, which are considerably more rarely foundand individual microforms have smaller diameters,as well as by the occurrence of lithogenic carbonatemicroforms (microsparite and sparite crystals.

The conducted analyses enable us to evidence therecord of natural postglacial pedogenesis in the formof Luvisol profiles with the diagnostic Bt-argic soilhorizon in plateau-slope and valley bottom posi-tions. Their age is older than that of gully system.The complex of micromorphological features distin-guished in the C horizon (parent material) of thesesoils has remarkably lithogenic nature so they devel-oped on primary loess.

Pedorelict features of the redeposited sedimentsindicate their alimentation sources. Moreover, theyevidence a gradual obliteration of pedogenic fea-tures with the transport length. These features en-able us to reconstruct the sequence of events: sedi-mentation pedogenesis degradationtransport deposition, with partially still preservedtheir soil nature.

Acknowledgements

The investigations were supported by ScientificGrant of Ministry of Science and Higher Education(Poland) no. KBN 2 P04E 05330.

127

Genetic interpretation of micromorphological features of gully loess-soil deposits (case study: Kolonia Celejów, Poland)

Tab

le1.

Mic

rom

orph

olog

ical

reco

rdof

soil

prof

ilesi

nK

olon

iaC

elej

ówca

tchm

ent;

the

freq

uenc

yof

feat

ures

isre

cord

edin

num

bero

fdot

s:on

e(

)mar

ksi

ngle

,and

four

)co

mm

on p

rese

nce;

the

diam

eter

s ar

e in

mic

rons

; mic

rost

ruct

ures

: m –

mas

sive

, ch

– ch

anne

l, f –

fiss

ure;

car

bona

tes:

M –

mic

rite

, Ms

– m

icro

spar

ite, S

– s

pari

te

Soilhorizons

Microstructers

Cal

citic

mic

rofe

atur

esC

lay

& d

ust m

icro

feat

ures

Fe

mic

rofo

rms

Fe-

Mn

mic

rofo

rms

Org

anic

mat

erE

xcre

men

tscalciticb-fabric

crystals

coat

ings

infil

lings

clay

mcr

ofor

ms

dusty-claymicrofeatures

nodu

les

ferrousbackground

ypocoatings

nodu

les

pseudomorphwithhypocoating

cells

char

coal

s

single

looseinfllings

hypocoatings

insidechannels

insidefissures

insidechannels

insidefissures

continuouscoatings

continuousinfillings

deformed

papules

withsharpboundries

iffuse

withring

ithsharpboundries

diffuse

withhypocoating

aggregates

withstructure

amorphic

withstructure

amorphic

Prof

ile 1

: Bur

ied

Luv

isol

1Ade

lm

-ch

500

400

1000

1000

800

1000

2fA

ch-m

400

1000

1000

1000

2fA

Eet

ch80

040

040

050

0nn

n10

00

2fB

tch

-f30

010

0010

0050

050

050

0

2fC

ch-m

Ms

MM

400

500

400

500

2fC

cach

-mS

MM

MM

M40

020

050

060

070

0

Prof

ile 2

: Ini

tial d

eluv

ial s

oil

Ade

l1m

-fM

,M

s, S

MM

M20

050

030

030

010

030

010

030

050

0

Cde

l1m

-ch

M,

Ms,

SM

100

300

100

100

300

300

200

100

Cde

l2m

M,

Ms,

S10

030

020

020

0

128

Przemysław Mroczek, Jan Rodzik

129

Genetic interpretation of micromorphological features of gully loess-soil deposits (case study: Kolonia Celejów, Poland)

Prof

ile3:

Tri

part

itede

luvi

al-c

ollu

vial

sequ

ence

1Ade

lm

-ch

Ms,

S50

060

080

080

010

0010

00

2Bt

ch-f

700

1000

500

3Cch

-mS

MM

M10

0080

060

0

Prof

ile4:

Tru

ncat

edan

dbu

ried

Luv

isol

1Ade

lch

-f40

050

050

010

0010

0015

00

2fB

t1ch

-f10

0011

0070

0

2fB

t2ch

-f10

0080

060

0

2fC

ch-m

Ms

400

2fC

cam

-ch

Ms,

SM

MM

600

500

Prof

ile5:

Sequ

ence

ofso

ilde

luvi

a

Ade

lm

-ch

Ms,

SM

MM

500

500

500

400

1000

1000

1000

AB

tdel

m-c

hM

s,S

500

500

500

1000

1000

BtC

del

m-c

hM

s,S

M,M

s,S

800

600

600

1000

1000

Cde

lm

-ch

SS

S40

050

050

050

080

0

References

Bullock S., Fedoroff N., Jongerius A., Stoops G. &Turisna T., 1985. Handbook for Soil Thin SectionDescription, Waine Research Publ., Wolverhamp-ton, England.

Fedoroff N. & Goldberg P., 1982. Comparative mi-cromorphology of the two late Pleistocenepaleosols (in the Paris Basin). Catena 9: 227–251.

Lee J. & Kemp R.A., 1992. Thin section of unconsoli-dated sediments and soils: a recipe. Thin SectionLaboratory, Sediment Analysis Suite, GeographyDepartment, Royal Holloway, University of Lon-don, Egham.

Kemp R.A., 1999. Micromorphology of loess-pa-leosol sequences: a record of paleoenvirnamentalchange. Catena 35: 179–196.

Kemp R.A., 2001. Pedogenic modification of loess:significance for palaeoclimatic reconstructions.Earth-Science Reviews 54: 145–156.

Mroczek P., 2008. Interpretacja paleogeograficznacech mikromorfologicznych neoplejstoceńskich sek-wencji lessowo-glebowych. Wydawnictwo UMCS,Lublin: 131 pp.

Reuter G., 2000. A logical system of paleopedolo-gical terms. Catena 41: 93–109.

Rodzik J., Furtak T. & Zgłobicki W., 2009. The im-pact of snowmelt and heavy rainfall runoff on ero-sion rates in a gully system, Lublin Upland, Poland.Earth Surf. Proces. Landforms 34: 1938–1950.

Rodzik J. & Zgłobicki W., 2000. Wpływ układu pólna rozwój wąwozu lessowego. In: Radwan, S. &Lorkiewicz, Z. (eds.) Problemy ochrony i użytkowa-nia obszarów wiejskich o dużych walorach przyrod-niczych. Wydawnictwo UMCS, Lublin: 257–261.

Stoops G., 2003. Guidelines for Analysis and Descrip-tion of Soil and Regolith Thin Sections. Publishedby Soil Science Society of America. Madison, Wis-consin, USA: 176 pp.

130

Przemysław Mroczek, Jan Rodzik