Peat soils: Genesis and classification

  • Published on

  • View

  • Download


  • 699

    ISSN 1064-2293, Eurasian Soil Science, 2006, Vol. 39, No. 7, pp. 699704. Pleiades Publishing, Inc., 2006.Original Russian Text L.I. Inisheva, 2006, published in Pochvovedenie, 2006, No. 7, pp. 781786.

    INTRODUCTIONPeat soils consist of 5095% organic substances;

    they are excessively moistened. These features deter-mine their polyfunctional nature. Botanists and geobot-anists study the specific features of bog vegetation onpeat soils and the climatic characteristics of the periodof the peat accumulation based on the stratigraphy ofpeat deposits, and they define peat soils as bogs. Geol-ogists explore peat reserves for industrial purposes andconsider peat bogs as peat fields (economic deposits).Hydrologists study the hydrological regime of bogs anddetermine them as water bodies. Foresters study bogsfrom the position of improving the quality class of for-est stands and call them forest bogs. Soil scientistsstudy peat soils as agricultural highly fertile soils. Eachspecialist has his or her own purposes and methods ofstudying peat soils, but they study the same object.Over the long-term period of the studies, a great bodyof data on peat bogs has been accumulated, their impor-tant biospheric role was proved, and trends in the fieldof their conservation and rational use were determined[18]. However, the essence of the peat formation mech-anism and the place of peat soils in the classificationsystem (and in soil science on the whole) remain uncer-tain. Therefore, the aim of this work is to draw theattention of soil scientists to this problem.

    According to Dokuchaev [6],

    It is impossible toagree with the statement that a natural soil is identicalto a plow layer. However, it is still more difficult to givethe name soil to any rock just because it occurs onthe land and humans got the idea to grow some crop onit. Until the rock does not change to a certain depth dueto the joint action of water, air, and organisms, it is notsoil, it remains only rock

    Even in the soil classificationof 1886, Dokuchaev distinguished the class of typicalpeat bogs with their entire profile down to the mineral

    rock. According to Efimov [7], many scientists, in par-ticular, Glinka, Williams, Vilenskii, and Kravkov, sup-ported Dokuchaevs opinion. In 1937, Gerasimov [4]was the first to divide the whole peat profile into peatsoil and peat-forming rock; the peat-forming rockbeing a material substrate for the peat soil. These viewshave been widely reflected in the work by Skrynnikova[24]. According to this authors definition, a peat soil isthe upper peat layer to the depth of distributing the mainmass of plant roots, which is aerated periodically, and itis a place where plant falloff is decomposed and high-molecular organic compounds are formed. The deeperpeat layers cannot be called soil, since soil-formingprocesses are not recorded there and peat itself is pre-served. This layer was determined to be an organogenicrock. At that time, scientists accepted this notion of peatsoils as an evident one. Thus, 1-m-thick high-moor peatsoil was differentiated into the upper straw-colored orbrown-yellow T1 horizon of sphagnum residues, the T2horizon of brown peat with well visible plant residues,which graded into the T3 layer of dark brown peat.

    The notion of active and nonactive layers (accordingto other authors, functioning and nonfunctioning, oracrotelm and cathotelm) appears partly owing to thehydrologists studying bogs [3, 1012, 19, 20, 22]. Theyassociated this notion with the state of the water regime.It is also known that the boundary between the activeand inert layers is considered as conventional to somedegree. For instance, our investigations showed thatSerdobolskiis gradation accepted for the redox condi-tions [23] was unsuitable for peat profiles, and Eh = 0 mVwas used for a more correct determination of theboundary between its layers [13]. Such a choice madeit possible to hypothesize and prove that, in the naturalsoils, the active layer was much thicker than that pro-posed by Ivanov on the basis of the mean annual mini-


    Peat Soils: Genesis and Classification

    L. I. Inisheva

    Siberian Research Institute of Peat, Siberian Division, Russian Academy of Agricultural Sciences,ul. Gagarina 3, Tomsk, 634050 Russia

    Received December 9, 2004


    This paper considers three topical problemsthe definition of peat soils as naturalhistorical for-mations and the estimation of their profile thickness, the analysis of the genesis of organic soils, and the prin-ciples of the classification of peat soils. Based on the experimental data of long-term studies, it was concludedthat peat soils may include the whole peat layer and the upper horizons of the surface mineral soil. The organicand mineral parts of the natural structures were found to be a genetically homogeneous soil profile, which hasthe same history of development. The upper layer of the peat soils should be considered as the horizon reflectingthe contemporary stage of the soil formation. A hierarchy of peat soils is analyzed for developing their classi-fication.



  • 700


    Vol. 39

    No. 7



    mal level of the bog water when analyzing the anaero-bicaerobic conditions within the whole peat profile.According to studies of other researchers [8, 16], theorganic matter content and the hydromorphic featuresof peat soils determine their stability to their obligatoryanaerobiosis.

    Specialists in amelioration were also interested inthe 1-m-thick layer, since the rate of drainage was, as arule, limited by this depth. It is quite possible that thementioned circumstances became the reason forexpanding Skrynnikovas concept of peat bogs. Whatactually happens is that such a definition imperfectlyreflects the substantivefunctional and geneticevolu-tionary features of peat soils.

    The authors results and the materials of otherresearchers make it possible to consider that a source ofmineral nutrition for peat-forming bog plants is thewaterlogged mineral substrate (mineral soil). Theinvestigations of oligotrophic soils in the southern taigasubzone of Western Siberia [14] have revealed theirmesotrophic character due to the elevated contents ofcalcium, magnesium, and some other biogenic ele-ments in the oligotrophic part of the soil profile, wherethe mineral nutrients are supplied only with atmo-spheric precipitation. However, these elements werecontained in great amounts in the underlying ancientsoil and migrated following the accumulating peatlayer. The main amount of ash elements accumulates inpeat at the initial stage of its formation, when theirsource is a mineral substrate; in the case considered, itwas calcareous clays. The roots of peat-forming plantsconsumed calcium from this layer. Thus, the redistribu-tion of elements within the profile of these peat soils ischaracterized by the decrease in their concentrationstoward the top layers. As a result, in the territory stud-ied, oligotrophic peat soils with features characteristicof the mesotrophic type of peat formation have devel-oped. Previously, this process was called the biogenicmigration of elements, and it was described by Bakh-nov [1]. The same arguments were also true for the ironcontent, since the territory investigated was located inan area of iron ore deposits. Thus, the ancient soilexposed to waterlogging serves as the soil-formingrock in respect to the developing soil, and a closegenetic connection remains between them in the future.

    The formation of the peat profile in terms of themigration of elements within the soil profile (the soil-forming process) is considered below. The migration ofelements toward the parent rocks in peat soils is consid-ered to be weak because of their high water-holdingcapacity and weak filtration of water. This fact is truefor the soils developing in the area even now. However,the nonuniform topography of the bog causes the redis-tribution of gravitational water within bog bodiesresulting in the formation of autonomous, transitional,and transaccumulative geochemical microlandscapes[15]. The water overflow takes place down the peat pro-

    file and upward within the bog bodies and is determinedby specific features of the soil-forming process.

    In this connection, let us consider peat soil as a sub-aqueous genetically in situ system. According to Tar-gulian [26], the specific properties of the soil are dis-played when it is considered as a surface-planetary,exogenic, polydisperse, multiphase system with a solidsubstrate; it is a bioabiotic, bioproductive, and sub-aerial system that has formed and is functioning in situ.In this case, the soil formation is the accumulation ofresidual products of functioning in the solid, liquid, andgaseous phases. The in situ infiltration processes pene-trate into the deep layers of the rock and transform themin situ without transportation of the main rock mass andthe newly formed products. In mineral soils, the pre-vailing direction of the latter processes is a downwardone due to gravitation forces, whereas peat soilsdevelop upward due to the accumulation of peat. There-fore, the upper layer of peat soils corresponds to thepresent-day environment and reflects the current devel-opmental phase. The lower layers represent the previ-ous stages of the soil development. All the argumentsmentioned above attest that peat soil is an in situ sub-aqueous system with a minus sign (developed upward).The ancient mineral soil is the layer of the biolithos-phere that was formed under the conditions of long-term and permanent excessive moistening under hydro-philous vegetation. As a rule, the upper part of this layeris gleyed and acts as a soil-forming material for the peatsoil growing upward. It is also a zone of functioningflows of matter and energy resulting in the developmentof a peat soil, the properties of which are firstly deter-mined by the botanical composition of the peat. Thepeat soil is composed of layers whose thicknessdepends on the homogeneity of the botanical composi-tion of peat. Thus, the notion of a peat soil includes thewhole peat profile and the upper mineral horizons of theancient mineral soil. The organic and mineral parts ofpeat soils are regarded as a substantive and functionalsystem representing a genetically integrated soil profilereflecting its own history of development. The upper 1-m-thick horizon of peat soils would be more properlyconsidered as a part of the soil profile reflecting the cur-rent stage of soil formation with more intense biochem-ical processes. Moreover, the deeper horizons are alsobiochemically active. The studies carried out on the oli-gotrophic bogs showed that fungal spores, actinomyce-tal mycelium, and bacteria were present within thewhole 3-m-deep profile of the peat soils. The fungalmycelium was found in the soil profile up to a depth of70100 cm [5]. If the bacterial population decreasedgradually with depth, the density of the fungal sporesand actinomycetal mycelium was frequently higher inthe deeper layer of the peat profile. This statement isbased on particular examples (Table 1).

    The peat profile (point 3) is of the marshy type, andit is composed (from the bottom to top) of a low-mirehorse-tail and sedge peat layer of 1 m thick and a tran-sitional woodysphagnum (0.5 m thick) layer overlain


    Vol. 39

    No. 7



    by thick (1.5 m) raised-bog peat (

    Sphagnum magellani-cum


    S. fuscum

    ) layers. The profile at point 5 (2.5 m)is composed of sedge and woodysedge peat (1.5 m)underlain by transitional


    (0.4 m) and high-moor sphagnum peat layers. Themicroscopic fungi are distributed within the profilerather evenly. In the 0.5-m layer, the share of fungiaveraged 35% of the total number of micromycetes; inthe 100- to 300-cm horizon, it averaged 27%.

    The results of the long-term studies on the enzy-matic activity showed that it was determined by thepresence of microbiological and plant enzymes andreflected more fully the biochemical activity of the peatsoils. In the high-moor peat soils, an elevated invertaseactivity was recorded only in the upper 1-m-thick layer;the other enzymes were distributed more evenly withinthe profile (Table 2). In the low-moor peat soils, theenzymatic activity increased (according to the activityof the catalase, the polyphenol oxidase, and the nitrate

    reductase) in the 0- to 25-cm layer; with depth (even inthe 75- to 100-cm layer), it decreased. Thus, the bio-chemical processes took place in the deep layers of thepeat soils, but the biochemical characteristics of theselayers differed from those of the upper ones.

    The given viewpoint is supported by the changes inthe chemical composition of the peat along the profilesof peat soils. In the same kinds of peat, the concentra-tions of water-soluble and easily hydrolyzable com-pounds were shown to decrease with depth, and that ofhumic acids increased [21]. These phenomena couldnot be accidental, since they took place due to the trans-formation of easily hydrolyzable compounds. This factemphasizes once more that, under the anaerobic condi-tions, the chemical composition of the peat-formingsubstrate continues to change. In the deep peat layers,instead of the microbiological processes proceedingunder aerobic conditions (mainly hydrolysis), otherbiochemical processes promote the organic compounds

    Table 1.

    The limits of the variation for the number of microscopic fungi (A), fungal biomass (B), and the carbon content (C)in the oligotrophic peat

    ObjectA, mg/kg B, kg/m


    C, %

    The depth of the peat deposit, cm

    50 100 300 50 100 300 50 100 300

    3 28 1021 1314 0.050.1 0.20.4 0.30.5 0.21 0.40.8 0.10.25 226 530 1136 0.050.7 0.20.9 0.51.2 0.23 0.32 0.31

    Table 2.

    The enzymatic activity of virgin peat soils


    Botanical composition Invertase










    High-moor peat soils, the middle taiga2575 Sphagnumwaterlogged 65.92 0.63 0.00 4.94 3.5275125


    44.32 0.42 0.62 4.91 5.26125150


    24.41 0.71 0.93 3.60 4.37150175


    22.37 0.22 0.49 3.73 7.01175200


    17.24 0.56 1.81 3.63 5.89200225 Transitional woody


    27.50 0.44 3.41 4.80 4.70Low-moor peat soils, the southern taiga subzone

    025 Woody 74.45 3.30 1.33 19.33 4.6975100


    37.56 0.90 0.67 8.09 3.85150175 Woodysedge 49.15 0.78 0.61 5.41 2.03225250 Sedge 33.75 0.87 0.99 7.88 13.03


    mg of glucose per 1 g for 4 h.


    ml of O


    per 1 g for 2 min.


    mg of 1.4 n-quinone per 1 g for 30 min.


    mg of reduced per 1 g for 24 h.


    mg of reduced per 1 g for 24 h.



  • 702


    Vol. 39

    No. 7



    transformation toward their humification. The aerobicand anaerobic microorganisms are different in their cat-alytic and thermodynamic action, as well as the charac-ter of the decomposing of the organic matter. Therefore,the primary decomposition of the dead peat-formingplants (mainly, of mosses) is performed by abundantfungi dwelling in the upper layer. With the depth, underdeveloping anaerobic conditions, the fungi give way toyeasts and bacteria that continue to slowly but steadilydecompose the peat organic matter [5, 9, 21]. Thus,using the hypothesis of the fast termination of the peatformation in the upper biologically active layer of thepeat profile, one cannot explain the increase in thehumic acid content and in the carbon concentration inthese acids with depth, as well as the synthesis of bitu-men.

    All the peat layers that have passed the stage of bogsoil formation contain microorganisms and nutrients ofbiogenic origin, and they are potentially fertile. Anexample is the worked out peat deposits that representfull-value agricultural lands (by their biological proper-ties). Their fertility is determined by the botanical com-position of the peat that is turned out on the surface anddoes not depend on the depth of the exposed layer.

    The biological activity of peat at different depthswas studied in experiments on the kinetics of theorganic matter decomposition. Samples were taken ofhigh-moor and low-moor peat. Sample 1 is


    peat from a depth of 0.75 m (degree of peatdecomposition 10%, ash content 4.4%), and sample 2 is

    Sphagnum fuscum

    peat from a depth of 1.75 m (10%decomposed, ash content 7.8%) representing the high-moor peat. Sample 3 is low-moor sedge peat (15%decomposed, ash content 7.8%) from a depth of 0.75 m,and sample 4 is low-moor sedge peat from a depth of3.5 m (25% decomposed, ash content 7.3%) (figure).The same kind of peat is mineralized more intensely if

    it is located more closely to the surface and, conse-quently, has a higher content of nutrients available formicroorganisms. However, this difference is obviousonly for the high-moor peat. In the low-moor peat soils,it was insignificant, although the depth of the samplingwas different (0.75 and 3.5 m). The results obtainedshowed that biochemical processes proceeded activelyin the peat at any depth and that it was rather fertile. Theupper layer of the peat soils should be considered morecorrectly as the part of the soil profile at the currentstage of soil formation. The intensity and character ofthe biochemical processes are determined by the botan-ical composition of the peat composing the profile ofpeat soils.

    One can say that the organic profile of peat soilsdoes not always change with depth, i.e., biochemicalprocesses weakly develop within it. There are thick (ofmany meters) layers of weakly humified sphagnumpeat where the biochemical processes are hindered dueto the presence of antisepticsphenol-containing hard-eners and antioxidants. Therefore, the oxidation pro-cesses within the peat profile are inhibited (the peatmineralization is retarded even in the tropics and in peatenriched with ash elements). Nevertheless, within thispeat layer, biochemical processes proceed as evidencedby the presence of the microflora there.

    A 12-m-thick peat profile was studied. In the 0- to25-cm layer and at a depth of 12 m, the number of bac-teria was 44.52

    3.34 and 2.97

    0.16 billion/g, respec-tively. The length of the actinomycetal mycelium was412.83

    57.15 m/g and 68.83

    3.7 m/g, respectively,whereas the fungal spores amounted to 58.58

    27.23and 6.23

    1.39 million/g, respectively. The particulari-ties mentioned do not indicate the inert biochemicalprocesses. The latter proceed and vary in compliancewith the changing environmental conditions. The samefeature is also characteristic of the mineral soils. Forinstance, an excessive iron content in a soil determinesthe properties that permit us to classify the soil at thelevel of soil species or subspecies.

    The forms of soil formation are naturalhistoricalcategories, the evolution of which are considered as asingle genetically related process of the successivedevelopment of hydrozemic, atmozemic, andlithozemic soil formation [2]. Each soil formationdeveloped does not vanish; it appears and it continuedto develop within the previous one. The age of the mostancient underwater soils is 3 billion years, that ofbogged and lithozemic soils is 400 million and 6070 million years, respectively. Thus, on the Earth, alongwith lithozemic soils, underground and bogged soilsare also spread. Presently, the area of the latter contin-ues to increase.

    From the aforesaid, the history of bog soil isreflected in the stratigraphy of the peat profile, and theunderlying mineral substrate is an ancient soil trans-formed by waterlogging. The peat profile (the stratigra-phy of the peat thickness) along with the mineral sub-




    emission, mg/day per 100 g40









    Days of experiment4 9 14 24 2919 34 44 544939 59


    The influence of the depth on the intensity of the peatdecomposition: (


    ) high-moor peat, 0.75 m; (


    ) high-moorpeat, 1.75 m; (


    ) low-moor peat, 0.75 m; and (


    ) low-moorpeat, 3.5 m.


    Vol. 39

    No. 7



    strate and soil-forming processes represent a peat soil.The upper layer of the peat soil should be considered asa part of the profile corresponding to the current stageof the soil formation. In the theory of the peat-formingprocess, the main attention should be paid to the prob-lems of the transformation of the peat-forming plantsinto peat; the origin and transformation of the organicand mineral peat components; the accumulation, thetransformation, and the migration of substances withinthe peat profile; and revealing the forms of their accu-mulation and migration. These soils need special atten-tion, since every fifth hectare of the Russian land fundis represented by peat soil.

    The existing notions of peat soil as an active layer ofthe peat profile have been reflected in the modern clas-sification of these soils [17]. Since this problem isworth special discussion, we shall outline only somepaths for the further work in this direction.

    Peat soils consist of plant residues. Therefore, it ismore correct to investigate and classify them from thebotanical standpoint. There are interesting works in thefield of bog and peat land sciences that are known in theworld. They may be used in the solution of this prob-lem. The botanical composition of peat means the inte-gral combination of all the fossil tissues, on the basis ofwhich an initial phytocenosis and its genesis might beclarified. The name of the kind of peat is given accord-ing to the predominant peat-forming plant revealed (inpercent). For instance, if the contents of sphagnum, cot-ton-grass, and wood residues in peat are 70, 20, and10%, respectively, its name will be cotton-grasssphag-num peat. The degree of decomposition and ash contentare also determined, since these characteristics are asimportant as the botanical composition of peat.

    For instance, peat is considered to be oligotrophic asit is formed by plants representing vegetation of the oli-gotrophic type (the admixture of plants of the eutrophictype is less than 5%). Eutrophic peat is composed ofplants representing vegetation of the eutrophic type (theadmixture of oligotrophic plants is less than 5%). Thespecies composition of all the peat-forming plants isknown. The characteristic features of peat types shouldbe described and identified on the basis of their botani-cal composition. Computer-based processing of thedata may be used [25].

    The whole peat deposit should also be clearly iden-tified. A low-moor peat deposit is a peat land that isfully or half composed of low-moor peat, and the thick-ness of the layers consisting of high-moor peat does notexceed 0.5 m [25, p. 21]. This definition is correct,since any peat profile of any thickness (including a peatlayer with a thickness of up to 1 m) may contain high-moor, low-moor, and transitional kinds of peat. Theorder of peat soils should include transitional, ormesotrophic, types of peat soils, since they really existand are worthy of a position in the peat classificationequal to that of the high-moor and low-moor types ofpeat. As an example, 70% of the Vasyugan bog (5 mil-

    lion ha) is occupied by peat soils of the transitionaltype. The soil subtypes are distinguished according tothe presence of wood residues in the peat. The residuespresent reflect the moisture conditions and indirectlyindicate the botanical composition of the peat. Then,each peat type may be subdivided into three subtypes:woody, grass, and moss. The genus level may corre-spond to the kind of peat (for instance, cotton-grasssphagnum), since this characteristic clearly reflects theproperties of the peat organic matter. However, the peattransformation and its resistance to this process aredetermined precisely by the botanical composition ofthe peat. Undoubtedly, the classification of peat soilsneeds further correction.


    1. V. K. Bakhnov,

    Biochemical Aspects of Bog Formation

    (Nauka, Novosibirsk, 1986) [in Russian].2. V. K. Bakhnov,

    Soil Formation (A Glance to the Pastand the Present)

    (Nauka, Novosibirsk, 2000) [in Rus-sian].

    3. P. K. Vorobev, Studying Physical Parameters of theActive Horizon of Undrained Bogs, Tr. GGI, No. 126,6569 (1965).

    4. D. A. Gerasimov, Principles of the Classification, Pros-pecting, and Mapping of Peat Fields, Pochvovedenie,No. 10, 643646 (1937).

    5. A. V. Golovchenko, T. G. Dobrovolskaya, and L. I. Ini-sheva, Structure and Reserves of Microbial Biomass inOligotrophic Peatlands of Northern Taiga in WesternSiberia, Pochvovedenie, No. 12, 14681473 (1992).

    6. V. V. Dokuchaev, Analysis of the Main Soil Classifica-tions, in

    Selected Works (18461903)

    (Moscow, 1954),p. 209 [in Russian].

    7. V. N. Efimov,

    Peat Soils and Their Fertility

    (Agro-promizdat, Leningrad, 1986) [in Russian].

    8. F. R. Zaidelman,

    Regime and Reclamation of Water-logged Soils

    (Kolos, Moscow, 1975) [in Russian].9. T. G. Zimenko,

    Microbiological Processes in ReclaimedPeatlands of Byelorussia and Their Purposeful Regula-tion

    (Nauka i Tekhnika, Minsk, 1977) [in Russian].10. K. E. Ivanov, Water Exchange in Bog Landscapes

    (Gidrometeoizdat, Leningrad, 1975) [in Russian].11. K. E. Ivanov, Study of Water Permeability of the Upper

    Horizons of Bog Massifs, Tr. GGI, No. 39, 5059(1953).

    12. K. E. Ivanov, Filtration in the Surface Layer of Promi-nent Bog Massifs, Meteorol. Gidrol., No. 2, 4659(1948).

    13. L. I. Inisheva, T. V. Dementeva, and N. G. Inishev,Hydrothermal and Redox Conditions in the ActiveLayer of Olygotrophic Bogs, in Problems in the Geog-raphy of Siberia (Tomsk, 2001), No. 24, pp. 183189 [inRussian].

    14. L. I. Inisheva and N. G. Inishev, Elements of Water Bal-ance and Hydrochemical Characteristic of OligotrophicBogs in the Southern Taiga Subzone of Western Siberia,Vodn. Resur.


    (4) 410417 (2001) [Water Resour.


    (4), 371377 (2001)].

  • 704


    Vol. 39

    No. 7



    15. L. I. Inisheva, N. V. Yudina, N. G. Inishev, and A. V. Go-lovchenko, Distribution of Organic Compounds in theSystem of Geochemically Conjugated Mire Land-scapes, Geokhimiya, No. 2, 19 (2005) [Geochem. Int.


    (2), 168176 (2005)].16. I. S. Kaurichev, G. G. Latfulina, and V. I. Savich, Vari-

    ation of the Redox Buffering Properties of Soils fromSeasonal Dynamics Data, Dokl. Timiryazevsk. SKh.Akad., No. 208, 3742 (1975).


    Classification System of Russian Soils

    (Moscow, 2000)[in Russian].


    Concept of the Conservation and Rational Use of PeatBogs in Russia

    (Tomsk, 2005) [in Russian].19. V. D. Lopatin, Hydrological Significance of High

    Moors, Vestn. Leningr. Univ., No. 2, 3749 (1949).20. K. P. Lundin,

    Water Properties of Peat Fields

    (Urozhai,Minsk, 1964) [in Russian].

    21. V. E. Rakovskii and L. V. Pigulevskaya,

    Chemistry andGenesis of Peat

    (Nedra, Moscow, 1978) [in Russian].22. V. V. Romanova,

    Hydrophysics of Bogs

    (Gidrometeoiz-dat, Leningrad, 1961) [in Russian].

    23. I. P. Serdobolskii, Dynamics of Redox Conditions inChernozemic Soils of the Kamennaya Steppe, in Prob-lems of the Grassland Agriculture (Urozhai, Moscow,1953), Vol. 2, pp. 208218 [in Russian].

    24. I. N. Skrynnikova, History of Study, Principles of Clas-sification and Systematics of Bog Soils in the USSR,Pochvovedenie, No. 4, 3750 (1954).


    Reference Book on Peat

    (Nedra, Moscow, 1982) [in Rus-sian].


    V. O. Targulian, Soil As the Surface Shell of a Bio-spheric Planet, in Ecology and Soils: Selected Lecturesof the VIIIIX All-Russian Schools (19981999)

    (Pol-teks, Moscow, 1999), pp. 923 [in Russian].


View more >