So what are the genetic processes in horizons dominated by vesicular pores? See my recent posting of two simple questions to help address this topic.
You state that organic matter input in horizons dominated by vesicular pores is exceedingly retarded unless it is a component of the original dust being trapped. That may be the case for many such horizons, but not all. However, as you pointed out in your posting, a feedback loop exists between vesicular horizons and vegetation. If a horizon is not dominated by vesicular pores, then organic matter input and eluviation become dominant soil processes. Many surface and subsurface horizons have undergone cyclical changes which leave marks or records of their pedological history. For example, subsurface horizons of many desert soil may have accumulated illuvial clay within B horizons (e.g., Bt) during the Pleistocene. Such horizons may or may not currently be subjected to the process of argilluviation (lessivage). Even if current climatic conditions are now too dry or soil properties too unfavorable for clay illuviation to still occur, the fact that they once occurred is significant and must be recognized. The evidence of prior pedogenesis thus becomes relict instead of current, but it is still important for designation in a genetic horizon. This is especially true if such genetic horizons constitute the diagnostic horizons used for soil classification and interpretations (e.g., an argillic horizon). Surface horizons also have undergone pedogenic processes in the past which may have changed or ceased over time as climate and conditions have changed. Again, if morphological evidence or soil properties remain as records of these prior pedogenic processes, they are still important to the current function of the soil. Your statement that
