I read the Geoderma articles Dr Dan Yaalon referenced. The others are not in our center library. I still question if salts more soluble than gypsum can meet the Soil Taxonomy definition of ""cemented""
Our definition of cemented is explained in the Agriculture Handbook No. 19 Soil Survey Manual 1993 p 173-175. http://www.statlab.iastate.edu/soils/ssm/gen_cont.html To be considered cemented a 2.5 by 2.5 cm cube of air-dried material is submerged in water for at least 1 hour. The degree of cementation is determined from the tables on page 174 and 175 from this wet sample after the hour of soaking. All degrees of cemented materials are considered as ""cemented"" in Soil Taxonomy.
Do you know if the ""petrosalic"" horizons you described would pass this test?
Many of the diagnostic horizons of Soil Taxonomy are not mutually exclusive. It is possible for a petrocalcic horizon to also be a petrogypsic horizon. Some gypsic (or possibly petrogypsic) horizons are also a salic horizon.
We have not done any slake test on any ""petrosalic"" horizons, but even if the salty horizon failed to slake in water, we would want to be sure the cementing agent were not the less soluble carbonates and gypsum. Horizons that are both cemented with gypsum (> 5% by wt) and meet salic criteria would be both a petrogypsic and salic horizon in Soil Taxonomy.
