the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Soil quality dynamics across a landslide profile from intact slopes to displaced material and bedrock
Abstract. Landslides modify soil systems by disrupting pedogenic processes, altering physical structure, and redistributing chemical constituents. To assess these effects and address key knowledge gaps, this study examines soil quality dynamics along a geomorphological transect crossing intact slopes, displaced landslide material, and parent substrate in the Transylvanian Basin. A suite of physico-chemical, together with magnetic parameters, considered herein as a previously underutilized yet promising proxy for soil degradation, was analysed to identify the soil properties most affected by landsliding, test for statistically significant contrasts between disturbed and undisturbed soils, and determine the most reliable indicators of soil degradation. Magnetic properties showed the clearest diagnostic response: mass-specific and frequency-dependent susceptibility were markedly reduced within the landslide, reflecting the removal or mixing of magnetically enriched horizons. Landslide-affected soils exhibited higher bulk density, lower organic matter, elevated electrical conductivity, and homogenized clay patterns compared with intact profiles. These results demonstrate that landslides profoundly alter soil composition and structure, and highlight magnetic susceptibility, organic matter, and electrical conductivity as robust indicators for assessing disturbance severity. The findings provide a comprehensive framework for evaluating soil degradation in landslide-prone environments.
- Preprint
(1012 KB) - Metadata XML
- BibTeX
- EndNote
Status: open (until 08 Apr 2026)
-
RC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2025-6303', Anonymous Referee #1, 08 Feb 2026
reply
-
AC1: 'Reply on RC1', Ramona Bălc, 27 Feb 2026
reply
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement.
-
RC2: 'Reply on AC1', Anonymous Referee #1, 27 Feb 2026
reply
Thank you for taking my comments and suggestions into consideration. However, I do not currently have access to the revised version of the document.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-6303-RC2 -
AC2: 'Reply on RC2', Ramona Bălc, 28 Feb 2026
reply
Thank you very much for your follow-up and for your helpful comments and suggestions. I appreciate your thorough review.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-6303-AC2
-
AC2: 'Reply on RC2', Ramona Bălc, 28 Feb 2026
reply
-
RC2: 'Reply on AC1', Anonymous Referee #1, 27 Feb 2026
reply
-
AC1: 'Reply on RC1', Ramona Bălc, 27 Feb 2026
reply
Viewed
| HTML | XML | Total | BibTeX | EndNote | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 169 | 110 | 18 | 297 | 14 | 18 |
- HTML: 169
- PDF: 110
- XML: 18
- Total: 297
- BibTeX: 14
- EndNote: 18
Viewed (geographical distribution)
| Country | # | Views | % |
|---|
| Total: | 0 |
| HTML: | 0 |
| PDF: | 0 |
| XML: | 0 |
- 1
General comments
The manuscript presents an interesting characterization of landslide effects on soil properties. The limitations of the study are clearly and appropriately described in the methodology section.
Regarding the methodology, I suggest including data from forested or protected areas as reference sites to compare soil quality against a more stable and well-defined reference condition, or alternatively, using appropriate reference data from the literature.
The statistical analysis is very basic, relying solely on a one-factor ANOVA. Given the limited number of soil properties, applying multivariate analyses such as PCA or clustering may be challenging; however, the authors could explore alternative statistical approaches to strengthen the interpretation of the results.
The discussion section requires revision, as it is currently more theoretical than directly supported by the presented data. For example, in the statement “Bulk density emerged as a particularly robust indicator, with higher values consistently recorded in degraded or landslide-affected areas. High values of bulk density indicate compaction due to mechanical disturbance, sediment displacement, or livestock trampling.”contribution of livestock trampling is introduced without supporting evidence from this study. The authors should clarify whether animal-induced compaction can reasonably be considered comparable to landslide-induced compaction in this context, or restrict the interpretation to processes directly supported by their data.
Specific comments