View
182
Download
5
Category
Tags:
Preview:
Citation preview
Research Journal of Agriculture and Biological Sciences, 4(5): 485-499, 2008© 2008, INSInet Publication
Corresponding Author: M.Z. Salem, Soils and Water Use Dept., National Research Center, Cairo, Egypt.
485
Land Suitability for Agricultural of Certain Crops in Al-bostan Area, Egypt
M.Z. Salem, G.W. Ageeb and I.S. Rahim
Soils and Water Use Dept., National Research Center, Cairo, Egypt.
Abstract: Eighteen soil profiles have been chosen to represent production and research station of National
Research Centre, which including El-Emam Malek and El-Esraa and El Mearage farms. The mainmorphological properties of the studied soil profiles were described. The studied soil profiles are classified
to subgroup level according to Key of Soil Taxonomy as Typic Torripsamments. The obtained resultsindicate that the soil texture is sandy, and gravels are found in some soil profiles. Organic matter content
is low and ranged between 0.08-0.92 %. Soil salinity is low and ranges between 0.15-1.64 dS/m. Cation
exchange capacity is low and ranges between 4.2-13.9 meq/100g soil. Calcium carbonate content rangesbetween 1.17-13.34%. Land capability classification of area under investigation is belonging to Class 4,
the limiting factors for agricultural production are gravel percent (G%), available moisture percent(AM%),
exchangeable sodium percent (ESP) and cation exchange capacity(CEC). The studied soils are evaluatedto determine its suitability for growing 12 crops. Data reveal that soil profiles from El Emam Malek and
El-Esraa farms are placed at high suitable (S2) and moderate suitable (S3) for growing crops, while soils
represented by profiles 5 and 6 are placed at non-suitable (S5) for growing crops, the limiting factors foragricultural production are soil texture and exchangeable sodium percent (ESP) in the most of soil profiles.
Key words: Land suitability, Land capability, Remote sensing, Geographic Information System, Al-Bostan area.
INTRODUCTION
Production and research station of NationalResearch Centre, which including El-Emam Malek farm(145 feddans) and El-Esraa and El-Mearage farm (160feddans). The study area lies to the North West of theNile Delta of Egypt between 30° 29 N and 30° 19 E(El-Emam Malek farm) and 30° 30 N to 30° 21 E(El-Esraa and El-Mearage farm) Map (1). The aim ofthe present study is to evaluate land capability andsuitability for growing different crops.
Such work will be useful for agriculturaldevelopment policy of the region under consideration.The climate of the studied area is situated in the desertzone of Egypt which characterized by hot dry summerand warm winter. The maximum air temperature is31.6C° in August, while the minimum air temperatureis 7.4C° in January. The maximum rainfall is 10.30
mm in December, while the minimum rainfall is 0.00in June, July and August. The relative air humidityshows the highest value is 69.7 % in January, whilethe lowest value is 53% in July. The highest windspeed is 21.1km/hr in April . Parent material of the[1]
studied soils is sand deposits. The digital elevationmodel (DEM) is illustrated in Maps 2 and 3, showsthat elevation ranges from 23-48 m A.S.L. at El-EmamMalek farm and 13-42m A.S.L. at El-Esraa and El-Mearage farm.
The main resource of irrigation water at Al-Bostanarea is El-Nubariya canal through Al-Bostan canalexcept for some areas that irrigated by artesian wellswater .[2]
The identified soils of West Nubariya, Egyptaccording to analyzed data from both landsat MSS andSPOT high resolution visible, belong to Entisols andAridisols . Soils of some newly areas in Nubariya[3]
could be classified as: Typic Torripsamments, TypicCalciorthids and Typic Paleorthids . While soils of[4]
West Nubariya classified to, Typic Calciorthids, CalcicGypsiorthids, Cambic Gypsiorthids, Typic Torriorthents,and Lithic Torriorthents . The area extends to cover[5]
seven villages at West Nubariya which represent thefirst stage of reclamation soils classified toHaploclaci-gypsids, Haplocalcids, Petrocalcids andPetrogypsids . Many areas which locate in Nubariya[6]
for sustainable agricultural development through out the
integration of GIS/RS techniques, with link clusteranalysis, classified as, Typic Haplosalids, TypicTorr ips a m m e nt s , Typ ic Ha p logypsids, Typ icCalcigypsids and Typic Haplocalcids . [6]
Designed a computer program (SSCC) based on[7] [8 ]
have been used to determine quantitatively soilsuitability for certain crops and named this method.The concept of SSCC program is to match soilcharacteristics with crops requirements (includesclimatic requirement) the possibility for including more
Res. J. Agric. & Biol. Sci., 4(5): 485-499, 2008
486
Map 1: Location map of the production and research station of National Research Centre, Landsat (ETM 2001)
Map 2: Digital elevation model of El-Emam Malek farm
Res. J. Agric. & Biol. Sci., 4(5): 485-499, 2008
487
Map 3: Digital elevation model of El Esraa and El- Merage farm
crops. The limitations are gravel %, salinity, ESP,
depth and slope. The formula is as follows IS =A.B.C.D.E.F.G.H. The suggested quantitative systems[9]
were more suitable under the Egyptian conditions,
where the results were compatible and added that[10,11]
it could be considered prevailing in the soils of Egypt.
On the other hand reported that the quantitative land[12]
capability classification also worked out following themodified system . The main objectives of land[11]
evaluation are to assess the suitability of different tractsof land for specific alternative forms of rural land
use . 5.46 % of total area of newly reclaimed areas[13]
in Nubariya area high suitable only for olives andmoderately suitable for potato, pepper, onion, garlic,
watermelon, apples, almond, date palms, citrus, grape
and pea . Land capability classification indicated that[4]
soils of West Nubariya belong to class 1(9.34%), class
II (20.74%) and class III (70.10%). Land suitability
classification was carried out for wheat, alfalfa, maizeand watermelon . While land capability classification[14]
of the soils of branch 20 areas of West Nubariya
belong to class I, II, III and IV . Land suitability[6]
evaluation for wheat, maize, citrus and banana
respectively, have been done in the same study.
The changes in soil characteristics and soil qualityunder different land use periods and management
practices (cropping patterns, irrigation systems, water
recourses and quality were compare and analyze
also the study dealt with land capability and land
suitability in sandy soils at El Bostan region,[1 5]
and found that the capability classes of the
investigated area are classes (C3) moderate, (C4)
marginal, while most of the studied soils aremoderately (class 3) to low (class 4) suitable for tested
crops. The main limiting factors in all the studied soils
are soil texture, sodium saturation, salinity, useful depthand carbonate content.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Eighteen soil profiles were chosen to representthe studied area which covering about 305
feddans. Ten soil profiles from El-Emam Malek farm
and eight profiles from El-Esraa and El-Mearagefarm. The profiles were morphologically described .[16]
Fifty five soil samples were collected for the following
analyses; particle size distribution using standardsieving technique , soil moisture constants ,[ 1 7] [ 1 8 ]
hydraulic conductivity in disturbed soil samples , soil [ 19]
reaction (pH) of soil water suspension (1:2.5), EC(dS/m) of soil extract (1:1), soluble cations and anions,
Cation exchange capacity (CEC), calcium carbonate
3content (CaCO %) and gypsum content . [20]
Soil classification was carried out . Land[21]
capability classification was performed on the
study area , while land suitability classification was[22]
Res. J. Agric. & Biol. Sci., 4(5): 485-499, 2008
488
performed using MicroLIES Almagra evaluationmodel . The main soil characteristics considered in[23]
this system as follow: useful depth, texture, drainage,
calcium carbonate content, salinity, sodium saturationand degree of development of the profile.
GIS Database: GIS database of production and
research station soils was established in Arc GIS 9.0
software. The database was started by create a basemaps of the farms, which includes a number of 120
observation points. These points were observed to get
the spot height and geographic position by GPS of thesurface features of the farms. The database include a
set of thematic maps such as location of the farm,
contour lines, surface layout of the farms, location ofthe soil profiles, gravel distribution, alkalinity, salinity,
cation exchange capacity, calcium carbonate distribution
and soil depth. These maps were produced dependupon the attribute data of the observation points and
soil profile analyses. The GIS database includes
detailed description and laboratory analyses of 18 soilprofiles and land suitability for growing 12 crops.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Physical properties: Data in Table (1) show that the
particle size distribution of the studied soil profiles, thesoil texture was sandy, where the sand fraction more
than 94%, with very low percent of clay and siltfractions. The gravels percent ranged between 10 –
90% in El-Emam Malek (profiles 3, 4, 5 and 6), while
it is ranging from 2-24% at El-Esraa and El-Mearagefarms (profiles 12, 13, 14, 15 and 18).
The soil moisture constants presented in Table (2),
the available water (AW%) was low and rangedbetween 5.4-9.9%, of El-Emam Malek farm and 6.7-
10.7 of El-Esraa and El-Mearage farm. This is expected
due to the relatively low clay content and consequentlylow water holding capacity. Soil hydraulic conductivity
(HC) was high values in the study area and ranged
between 14.3-25.1 cm/hr, these high values may beattributed to be sandy texture of the soils.
Chemical Properties: The data presented in Table (3)show that the soil salinity (EC/dS/m) in most profiles
Table 1: Particle size distribution of the studied soil profiles
Profile No. Depth (cm) Gravel % VCS% CS % MS % FS % VFS % Silt+clay % Texture
El-Emam Malek farm
1 0-20 - 2.44 11.12 32.34 34.85 15.73 3.25 Sandy
20-60 - 1.55 10.45 33.32 32.45 18.76 3.47 Sandy
60-150 - 2.21 20.23 40.35 28.35 6.55 2.31 Sandy
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2 0-40 - 14.14 11.27 34.25 32.22 4.89 3.23 Coarse nd
40-150 - 15.22 13.23 28.53 33.45 5.36 4.21 Coarse sand
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3 0-150 10 22.32 19.45 33.45 10.21 7.57 2.32 Coarse sand
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
4 0-30 13 12.34 20.22 30.41 30.22 4.49 2.32 Coarse sand
30-50 18 10.11 8.23 20.31 52.13 5.91 3.31 Fine sand
50-70 95 7.25 10.25 30.22 30.44 18.39 3.45 Sandy
70-150 79 6.35 7.32 28.22 34.2 19.66 4.25 Sandy
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
5 0-50 38 3.45 7.75 30.23 37.22 19.03 2.32 Sandy
50-70 59 1.54 2.75 23.12 54.47 14.37 3.75 Sandy
70-150 - 2.54 8.73 33.24 36.35 14.89 4.25 Sandy
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
6 0-60 40 10.11 13.45 37.21 30.25 5.75 3.23 Sandy
60-150 10 8.72 7.15 21.21 51.24 7.44 4.24 Sandy
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
7 0-70 - 12.57 18.23 32.03 31.23 3.22 2.72 Fine sand
70-150 - 7.53 10.23 30.23 41.02 6.68 4.31 Coarse sand
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
8 0-60 - 10.32 11.24 30.23 38.39 7.47 2.35 Sandy
60-150 - 9.24 10.25 34.23 40.21 2.74 3.33 Sandy
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
9 0-50 - 17.22 6.22 34.32 29.51 10.28 2.45 Sandy
50-93 - 9.25 10.25 37.22 30.21 9.35 3.72 Sandy
93-125 - 6.32 3.25 27.21 50.21 9.19 3.84 Sandy
125-150 - 9.28 11.23 32.11 34.22 8.61 4.55 Fine sand
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
10 0-20 - 16.11 7.35 28.32 32.12 12.89 3.21 Sandy
20-50 - 10.15 11.23 29.22 34.55 11.31 3.45 Sandy
50-120 - 11.55 12.34 30.22 36.12 5.56 4.21 Sandy
120-150 - 10.13 8.21 33.34 37.22 7.32 3.78 Sandy
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Res. J. Agric. & Biol. Sci., 4(5): 485-499, 2008
489
Table 1: Continued
El-Esraa and El-Mearage farm
11 0-30 - 11.13 17.25 30.25 34.21 4.84 2.32 andy30-60 - 12.13 10.4 37.25 32.31 4.8 3.11 Sandy60-90 - 5.32 4.91 28.23 52.33 5.68 3.53 Fine sand90-150 - 7.83 10.11 35.33 33.24 9.28 4.12 Sandy
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------12 0-35 6 11.35 20.22 26.45 33.2 5.55 3.23 Coarse sand
35-65 8 8.75 10.22 30.23 40.11 6.88 3.81 Sandy65-90 14 3.52 7.23 28.22 50.42 6.4 4.21 [Fine sand90-140 - 9.27 10.11 33.21 30.22 13.34 3.85 Sandy
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------13 0-40 9 10.23 11.33 37.22 30.33 8.66 2.23 Sandy
40-80 15 9.23 10.45 38.33 31.23 7.64 3.12 Sandy80-150 10 8.75 11.33 40.11 28.32 7.38 4.11 Sandy
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------14 0-40 5 12.14 18.45 32.23 30.31 4.7 5.17 Sandy
40-65 3 10.32 11.21 35.23 28.31 11.8 3.13 Sandy65-150 3 9.24 10.34 36.24 33.21 6.81 4.15 Sandy
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------15 0-30 7 10.13 13.11 34.22 31.31 8 3.23 Sandy
30-50 2 9.58 10.21 37.22 34.23 4.64 4.12 Sandy50-70 2 5.35 6.21 26.23 53.2 5.46 3.55 Fine sand70-150 24 7.52 5.62 40.24 30.21 12.18 4.23 Sandy
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------16 0-30 - 9.53 10.11 34.33 37.22 6.46 2.35 Sandy
30-50 2 5.63 9.52 26.23 50.21 4.56 3.85 [Fine sand50-110 - 9.53 12.11 34.55 30.22 10.19 3.4 Sandy110-150 - 8.25 9.32 35.32 33.14 9.55 4.42 Sandy
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------17 0-30 - 13.22 14.23 34.32 32.33 3.58 2.32 Sandy
30-70 - 9.32 10.34 35.22 37.33 4.34 3.45 Coarse sand70-110 - 4.56 9.23 24.11 54.32 3.98 3.8 Fine sand110-150 - 5.72 10.22 33.22 34.54 12.07 4.23 Sandy
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------18 0-25 10 10.22 9.32 34.35 30.21 12.55 3.35 Sandy
25-60 15 9.72 10.55 36.23 31.23 8.47 3.8 Sandy
Where: V=very; C= coarse; F= fine; M= medium; S=sand
Table 2: Soil moisture constants of the studied soil profiles
Profile No. Depth (m) SP% Texture FC% WP % AW% HC cm/hr
El-Emam Malek farm
1 0-20 20 Sandy 14.2 6.2 8.0 18.220-60 19 Sandy 14.5 5.4 9.1 17.160-150 20 Sandy 13.1 4.6 8.5 19.5
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------2 0-40 19 Coarse nd 12.8 4.2 8.6 20.5
40-150 20 Coarse sand 13.4 4.5 8.9 20.1-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------3 0-150 21 Coarse sand 14.3 4.4 9.9 18.4-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------4 0-30 28 Coarse sand 14.3 4.4 9.9* 18.4
30-50 25 Fine sand 12.5 4.1 8.4 21.350-70 26 Sandy 12.1 4.3 7.8 20.770-150 28 Sandy 13.2 5.1 8.1 19.3
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------5 0-50 21 Sandy 15.4 7.2 8.2 17.1
50-70 23 Sandy 14.8 5.6 9.1 18.670-150 20 Sandy 15.2 6.7 8.5 16.7
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------6 0-60 16 Sandy 12.6 5.1 7.5 22.4
60-150 21 Sandy 9.5 3.4 6.1 24.7-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------7 0-70 19 Fine sand 11.2 4.3 6.9 22.3
70-150 20 Coarse sand 10.2 4.1 6.1 23.4-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------8 0-60 17 Sandy 9.8 3.7 6.1 25.1
60-150 18 Sandy 13.2 5.2 8.0 21.6------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------9 0-50 21 Sandy 10.1 4.7 5.4 22.5
50-93 19 Sandy 13.5 5.6 7.9 1993-125 22 Sandy 12.5 4.6 7.9 21.5125-150 24 Fine sand 12.2 4.4 7.8 22.3
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Res. J. Agric. & Biol. Sci., 4(5): 485-499, 2008
490
Table 2: Continued10 0-20 24 Sandy 10.6 3.8 6.8 24.1
20-50 22 Sandy 14.3 4.6 9.7 19.550-120 22 Sandy 15.2 5.8 9.4 17.4120-150 22 Sandy 13.7 4.3 9.4 19.3
El-Esraa and El-Mearage farm
11 0-30 15 sandy 4.2 4.2 10 1830-60 17 Sandy 3.9 3.9 9.3 20.160-90 16 Fine sand 3.5 3.5 9.3 21.590-150 25 Sandy 3.3 3.3 9.3 20.7
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------12 0-35 19 Coarse sand 5.7 5.7 9.5 15.2
35-65 20 Sandy 5.6 5.6 10 14.365-90 22 [Fine sand 4.2 4.2 8.1 22.490-140 25 Sandy 4.1 4.1 8.6 23.1
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------13 0-40 22 Sandy 3.5 3.5 9.1 22.8
40-80 20 Sandy 3.8 3.8 9.6 20.480-150 25 Sandy 5.2 5.2 10 14.9
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------14 0-40 20 Sandy 4.2 4.2 8.3 21.5
40-65 22 Sandy 4.4 4.4 8.4 20.865-150 25 Sandy 5.8 5.8 10.3 18.4
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------15 0-30 21 Sandy 4.7 4.7 9.80 16.7
30-50 25 Sandy 5.3 5.3 10 15.250-70 23 Fine sand 5.7 5.7 9.9 14.770-150 28 Sandy 4.8 4.8 10.4 15.5
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------16 0-30 16 Sandy 4.2 4.2 7.7 19.6
30-50 18 [Fine sand 4.6 4.6 7.9 21.450-110 18 Sandy 4.5 4.5 7.9 22.1110-150 22 Sandy 4.8 4.8 8.4 20.8
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------17 0-30 20 Sandy 5.6 5.6 9.6 15.2
30-70 15 Coarse sand 4.2 4.2 9.0 18.970-110 20 Fine sand 4.1 4.1 9.3 19.1110-150 23 Sandy 3.7 3.7 9.1 21.5
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------18 0-25 22 Sandy 3.5 3.5 6.7 22.4
25-60 16 Sandy 4.2 4.2 8.4 20.4Where: SP= saturation percent, FC= field capacity, WP= wilting point, AW= available water, HC= hydraulic conductivity.
Map 4: Soil salinity distribution of El-Emam Malek farm
Res. J. Agric. & Biol. Sci., 4(5): 485-499, 2008
491
Map 5: Soil salinity distribution of El Esraa and El- Merage farm
Table 3: Some chemical properties of the studied soil profiles
Profile Depth O.M. pH EC Ca Gypsum Exch. Cations meq/100g) CEC (meq/ SAR ESP
%No. (cm) % 1:2.5 (dS/m) CO K+ Na+ Mg++ Ca+ 100g soil)3
El-Emam Malek farm
1 0-20 0.61 8.55 0.19 4.68 - 0.5 1.5 2.5 3.5 8.0 1.6 16.25
20-60 0.44 8.36 0.19 5.85 - 0.6 1.3 2.2 3.1 7.2 1.7 15.41
60-150 - 8.6 0.28 4.69 0.12 0.5 1.7 2.6 3.9 8.7 1.7 16.32
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2 0-40 0.53 8.7 0.82 5.85 0.62 0.3 2.5 3.3 4.4 10.5 6.5 23.81
40-150 0.32 8.62 0.26 3.51 0.12 0.5 1.6 2.5 4 8.6 1.3 16.05
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3 0-150 0.14 8.42 0.25 4.68 0.08 0.6 1.7 2.7 3.6 8.6 1.6 11.18
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
4 0-30 0.92 8.43 0.22 5.85 - 0.6 1.5 2 3 7.1 1.5 17.18
30-50 0.46 8.44 0.35 1.17 0.07 0.4 2 2.8 4.2 9.4 1.7 17.02
50-70 0.11 8.62 0.34 2.34 0.09 0.5 2.1 2.6 4 9.2 1.8 18.26
70-150 0.1 8.68 0.25 4.68 0.03 0.3 1.5 2 3.5 7.3 1.6 15.89
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
5 0-50 0.83 8.75 0.27 10.53 0.07 0.4 1.5 2.1 3.8 7.8 1.4 16.03
50-70 0.22 8.75 0.42 4.68 0.09 0.7 2.2 2.9 4.3 10.1 1.9 17.43
70-150 - 8.75 0.21 10.53 0.05 0.5 1.5 1.8 2.9 6.7 1.8 18.81
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
6 0-60 0.3 8.53 0.17 12.87 - 0.4 1 1.1 2 4.5 1.5 19.02
60-150 0.1 9.3 0.38 13.34 0.12 0.6 1.9 3 4 8.5 1.6 18.35
7 0-70 0.62 8.48 0.2 12.87 - 0.4 1.2 1.6 3 5.2 1.5 19.42
70-150 - 8.62 0.15 10.53 - 0.3 1 1.1 2 4.4 1.4 19.1
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
8 0-60 0.77 8.58 0.26 9.36 0.03 0.4 1.5 1.9 3 6.8 1.3 19.26
60-150 0.25 8.41 0.24 4.68 0.02 0.4 1.2 1.3 2.5 5.4 1.4 18.52
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
9 0-50 0.65 8.7 0.2 7.02 - 0.3 1.1 1 1.8 4.2 1.5 21.19
50-93 0.25 9.77 0.28 2.34 0.06 0.5 1.4 2 3.2 6.1 1.4 19.18
93-125 0.1 9.32 0.44 4.68 0.1 0.8 2.6 3.1 4.4 10.9 2.2 19.45
125-150 - 9.11 0.37 3.51 0.08 0.5 1.7 2.2 3.9 8.3 1.5 16.14
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Res. J. Agric. & Biol. Sci., 4(5): 485-499, 2008
492
Table 3: Continued
10 0-20 0.87 8.5 0.43 4.68 0.08 0.7 2.2 2.5 4 9.4 2.0 18.3
20-50 0.27 8.65 0.28 3.51 0.02 0.6 1.4 2.1 3 7.1 1.4 16.06
50-110 0.09 8.62 0.16 4.68 - 0.5 0.9 0.9 1.9 4.2 1.3 17.14
110-135 - 8.79 0.16 3.51 - 0.6 0.8 0.9 2 4.3 1.1 15.12
El-Esraa and El-Mearage farm
11 0-30 0.67 8.28 0.28 3.51 0.03 3.8 2.2 1.4 0.6 8 1.4 15.25
30-60 0.3 8.35 0.25 53.04 0.01 3.2 2 1.5 0.5 7.2 1.6 18.06
60-90 0.2 8.48 0.36 5.85 0.03 4.3 2.9 1.5 0.8 9.5 1.0 13.89
90-150 0.1 8.42 0.42 7.02 0.05 5 3.1 1.6 0.9 10.6 1.0 12.26
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
12 0-35 0.3 8.22 0.5 5.85 0.1 5.1 3.3 1.8 1 11.2 1.2 23.81
35-65 0.2 7.92 1.57 10.53 0.19 5 3.2 2.8 1.5 12.5 3.9 10.72
65-90 0.1 8.48 0.35 7.02 0.06 4 2.7 1.5 0.8 9 1.0 14
90-140 - 8.98 0.49 6.08 0.07 4.3 3.1 2.5 1 10.9 1.8 18.34
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
13 0-40 0.4 8.2 1.05 7.02 0.09 5.3 4 3.5 1.1 13.9 2.5 18.53
40-80 0.2 8.11 1.29 5.85 0.3 5.5 3.3 2.7 1 12.5 2.9 13.28
80-150 - 8.6 0.24 4.68 - 3 2.1 1.5 0.7 7.3 1.5 16.71
14 0-40 0.67 8.59 0.22 4.21 - 2.8 1.9 1.4 0.6 6.7 1.6 17.61
15.52
40-65 0.4 8.57 0.24 9.36 0.01 2.9 2 1.3 0.5 6.7 1.6 16.15
65-150 0.1 8.3 0.22 7.02 - 2.7 1.9 1.3 0.6 6.5 1.5 15.0
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
15 0-30 0.43 8.45 0.25 5.85 0.02 3.0 2.0 1.5 0.7 7.2 1.6 17.36
20-50 0.2 8.4 0.21 9.36 0.6 2.9 1.9 1.4 0.5 5.7 1.6 19.65
50-70 0.11 8.45 0.24 9.83 0.7 3.3 2.5 1.5 0.7 8 1.2 15.88
70-150 - 8.38 0.47 8.19 0.04 4.9 3.3 2.8 0.9 11.5 2.3 17.74
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
16 0-30 0.32 8.36 0.22 5.85 - 2.8 1.7 1.3 0.7 6.5 1.5 17.23
30-50 0.22 8.44 0.18 7.02 - 2.3 1.5 1.2 0.5 5.5 1.7 18.55
50-110 0.12 8.49 0.2 4.68 - 2.5 1.6 1.3 0.6 6 1.5 18.67
110-150 - 8.39 0.27 8.19 0.02 3.1 2.3 1.5 0.7 7.6 1.1 16.84
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
17 0-30 0.43 8.35 0.18 5.85 - 2 1.3 1.2 0.5 5 1.7 20.0
30-70 0.11 8.41 0.2 4.68 - 2.2 1.4 1.2 0.3 5.1 1.7 20.0
70-110 0.09 8.42 0.2 4.21 - 2.2 1.4 1.3 0.4 5.3 1.5 20.2
110-150 0.05 8.12 1.64 12.87 0.08 5.1 3.4 2.7 1.2 12.4 4.0 20.75
25-60 0.08 8.46 0.2 6.32 0.01 2.4 1.7 1.2 0.5 5.8 1.3 7.50
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
18 0-25 0.21 8.27 0.29 5.85 0.03 0.9 1.5 2.8 3.5 8.7 1.3 14.25
25-60 0.08 8.46 0.2 6.23 0.01 0.5 1.2 1.7 2.4 5.8 1.3 18.28
is non-saline and EC values ranged between 0.15
– 1.64 dS/m in the studied soil profiles, Maps (4
and 5). pH value is slightly alkaline to alkaline
and ranged between 7.92 to 9.32 and there is no
specific trend with depth in the studied soil profiles.
Organic matter content (OM %) was very low as
that soil is newly cultivated and organic matter
ranged from 0.08 to 0.92%. The Calcium carbonate
content have wide variation and ranged between1.17
to 13.34 and 3.04 to 12.87 % at El-Emam Malek and
El-Esraa and El-Mearage farms, respectively, Maps
(6, 7). Gypsum content is very low in most studied
profiles and ranged between 0.1-0.7%. Cation exchange
capacity (CEC) is low and ranged between 4.2-10.9
meq/100g soil and 5.0-13.9 meq/100g soil at El-
Emam Malek and El-Esraa and El-Mearage farms,
respectively, Maps (8 and 9), this is due to the
coarse texture and low content of clay and organic
matter. Exchangeable sodium percentage (ESP) value
ranged between 7.5- 23.81, in most soil profiles, Maps
(10 and 11).
Soil Classification: The climatic conditions prevailing
in the studied area, the morphological characteristics of
the studied soil profiles, the physical and chemical
properties of the soils, therefore the studied soil
profiles were classified to Entisols as Typic
Torripsamments .[22]
Land Capability Evaluation: Land capability
evaluation of the studied area was performed .[23]
The outputs from the land evaluation software linked
Res. J. Agric. & Biol. Sci., 4(5): 485-499, 2008
493
Map 6: Calcium carbonate distribution of El-Emam Malek farm
Map 7: Calcium carbonate distribution of El Esraa and El- Merage farm
Res. J. Agric. & Biol. Sci., 4(5): 485-499, 2008
494
Map 8: Cation exchange capacity distribution of El-Emam Malek farm
Map 9: Cation exchange capacity distribution of El Esraa and El- Merage farm
Res. J. Agric. & Biol. Sci., 4(5): 485-499, 2008
495
Map 10: Exchangeable sodium percent distribution of El-Emam Malek farm
Map 11: Exchangeable sodium percent distribution of El Esraa farm
Res. J. Agric. & Biol. Sci., 4(5): 485-499, 2008
496
The main limiting factors for capability classes
of El-Emam Malek and El-Esraa are gravel percentage
(G %), available moisture percent (AM%)exchangeablesodium percent (ESP) and cation exchange capacity
(CEC), Map (12), while the limiting factors for
capability classes of El Esraa farm are available
moisture percent (AM%) exchangeable sodium percent
(ESP) and cation exchange capacity (CEC), Map (13)but these soils may need different management to
recover the productive capability.
Map 12: Limiting factors for land capability class of El-Emam Malek farm
Map 13: Limiting factors for land capability class of El Esraa and El- Merage farm
Res. J. Agric. & Biol. Sci., 4(5): 485-499, 2008
497
to the GIS software (Arc Map 9.0) across a databasefile and different queries were carried out to get thefinal outputted maps. Data reveal that the capability
classes of soil for most studied profiles belonging toclass (C4) Table (4).
Table 4: Capability class of the studied soil profiles
Soil factorsProfile no. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Capability class Limiting factors
A B C D E F G H
El Emam Malek Farm
1 2 4 1 1 1 1 1 3 C4 B, H
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------2 3 4 1 1 1 1 1 3 C 4 A, B, H
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------3 3 4 1 1 2 1 1 3 C 4 A, B, H
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------4 3 4 1 1 4 1 1 3 C 4 A, B, E, H
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------5 3 4 1 1 3 1 1 3 C 4 A, B, E, H
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------6 3 4 1 1 3 1 1 3 C4 A, B, E, H-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
7 2 4 1 1 1 1 1 3 C4 B,H-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
8 2 4 1 1 1 1 1 3 C4 B,H-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
9 2 4 1 1 1 1 1 3 C4 B,H-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
10 3 4 1 1 1 1 1 3 C4 A, B, H
El-Esraa and El-Mearage farm
11 2 4 1 1 1 1 1 3 C4 B,H
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------12 3 4 1 1 2 1 1 3 C4 A, B, H
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------13 2 3 1 1 2 1 1 3 C3 B,H
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------14 2 4 1 1 2 1 1 3 C4 B,H-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
15 2 4 1 1 2 1 1 3 C4 B,H-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
16 2 4 1 1 1 1 1 3 C4 B,H-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
17 2 4 1 1 1 1 1 3 C4 B,H-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
18 4 4 2 3 2 1 1 3 C4 A, B, H
Where: A= Available moisture content (%), B= Cation exchange capacity (meq/100g soil, C= Drainage condition (class), D= Soil depth (cm),E= Gravel %, F= Slope, G= Salinity (EC in dS/m) and H= Exchangeable so d ium p ercent (ESP).Capability class: C1= Excellent for cultivation,
C2= Moderate, C3 = Good, C4 = Poor for cultivation.
Land Suitability Evaluation: Different land suitabilityclasses and indices 12 crops were predicted based onthe matching between land qualities and characteristicsand crop standard requirements using Almagra programthrough MicroLIES evaluation software . Evaluated[23]
crops are wheat, corn, watermelon, potato, soybean,cotton, sunflower, sugar beet, alfalfa, peach, citrus andolive. Data shown in Table (5), indicated that thestudied soil profiles of El-Emam Malek farm aremoderately suitable (S3) for growing crops, while thesoils represented by profiles 5 and 6 are placed at non-
suitable (S5) for growing crops. Soils of El-Esraa andEl-Mearage farm are placed at high suitable (S2) andmoderate suitable (S3) for growing all crops.
The main limiting factors for agriculturalproduction are soil texture and exchangeable sodiumpercentage (ESP) in the most profiles, except soilsrepresented by profile 18; the limiting factors areexchangeable sodium percentage (ESP) and soildepth. The obtained results help the decision makersin defining the optimum agricultural land use in thearea.
Table 5: Land suitability of the studied soil profiles in NRC Farm
crops
Profile no. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Limiting factorsWheat Corn Water Potato Soya Cotton Sun Sugar Alfalfa Peach Citrus Olive
melon bean flower beet
El Emam Malek farm
1 3 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 a, t
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Res. J. Agric. & Biol. Sci., 4(5): 485-499, 2008
498
Table 5: Continued
2 3 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 a, t
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3 3 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 a, t, d
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
4 3 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 a, t, d
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 4 t, d, a
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
6 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 4 t, a
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
7 3 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 a
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
8 3 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 a
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
9 3 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 a
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
10 3 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 a
El-Esraa farm
11 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 2 2 t, a
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
12 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 2 2 t, a
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
13 2 3 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 a
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
14 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 2 2 t, a
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
15 3 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 a, t
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
16 3 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 a, t
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
17 3 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 a, t
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
18 2 3 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 ds, a
Where: suitability class: S1 = optimum suitability, S2= High suitable, S3= Moderate suitable, S 4 = Marginal suitability, S5 = no suitability.
REFERENCES
1. Abdel Azez, A., 1989. Climatology condition in
Western Desert. Encyclopedia of Western DesertResearch Institute, Cairo, Egypt.
2. Osama, R.M., 2004. Integrating GIS, remote
sensing and Modeling for Agricultural landsuitability evaluation at East Wadi El-Natrun,
Egypt.MSc Thesis, Fac.,of Agri. Alex. Univ.
3. Hamdi, H., F.M. Hawela and H.M. El-Khattib,1991. Detection of surface soil variations using
different resolution satellite data. Egypt J. SoilSci., 31(4): 483-488
4. Mohamed, M.S., 1995. Land suitability studies for
proper land use in some newly reclaimed areasusing remote sensing techniques, Egypt. M.Sc.
Thesis, Fac. of Agric., Cairo Univ., Cairo, Egypt.
5. Abdel Mottaleb, M.A., F.M Hawela, I.F.Rashed and M.E. El-Hemely, 1997. Studies on soil
and water resources of El-Nobaria area. I- . Soil
Survey and Classification. Egypt J. Soil Sci.,37(3): 311-323.
6. Morsy, I.M. and H.M. Ramadan, 2002. Integration
GIS/RS techinques with link clustring analysis forland evaluation of branch 20 area, west nubaria,
Egypt. Minufiya J. Agric. Res., 27(4): 1041-1065
7. Abdel-Rahman, S.I. F.B. Labib and M.A. Abdel-Rahman, 1989. Land suitability for certain crops in
the western desert of Egypt. Egypt J. Soil Sci.,
Special Issue 1-12.8. Sys, C., 1985. Land Evaluation. Administration
general de La cooperation and development.
Bruxelles, Belgique.9. Moussa, M.A., 1991. Land suitability evaluation of
El Saff area Eastern Desert Egypt for agriculture
utilization. Ph.D. Thesis, Fac. Agric., ZagazigUniv., Egypt.
10. Storie, R.E., 1964. Handbook of Soil Evaluation.Associated students Bookstorie, University of
California, Berkeley, California.
11. Sys and S.W. Verheye, 1978. An attempt to theevaluation of physical land characteristics for
irrigation according to the FAO framework for
land evaluation. Int.1.Train Cent. Post. Grad. SoilSCi., Ghent. Belgium.
12. El-Hemely, M.E., 1992. A study of the soil and
water resources of El Nobaria Area. Ph.D. Thesis,Fac. Agric., El-Azhar Univ., Egypt.
13. Huizing, H., A. Faarsh and K. Debies, 1995. Land
evaluation (land system evaluation), Lecturenotes for LELU model ITC, Enschede, the
Netherlands.
Res. J. Agric. & Biol. Sci., 4(5): 485-499, 2008
499
14. Ramadan, H.M. and I.M. Morsy, 2001. Applicationof GIS technology in soil survey and land use
system analysis, West Nubaria, Egypt. Minufiya, J.
Agric. Res., 26(50): 1279-1302.15. Ragab, I.M., 2003. Impact of land management
practices on soil quality in sandy soils, El Bostanregion, Egypt. Ph.D. Thesis, Fac.,of Agric. Alex.,
Univ.
16. F.A.O., 1990. Guideline for soil profile description.3 Edition, F.A.O., Rome.rd
17. Folk, R.L., 1974. Petrology of Sedimentary rocks,
Hemphill publishing Company. Austin, Taxes,pp: 94.
18. Klute, A., 1986. Water Retention: Laboratory
methods. Methods of Soil Analysis, A. Klute(ed), Part 12 edition, Agron. Monogr. pp: 635-nd
662, ASA.
19. Klute, A. and Dirksen, C.(1986). Hydraulicconductivity and diffusivity: Laboratory methods.
In Methods of Soil Analysis. Part 1 Agronomy 2nd
edition. ASA and SSSA, Madison, W1. A. Klute(ed), p: 687-734.
20. Black, C.A., D.D. Evans, J.I. Nhite, L.E.Ensminger and F.E. Clark, 1982. ”Methods of Soil
Analysis”. Amr. Soc. Angron. Inc. Madison.
21. Key to Soil Taxonomy, 2003. Soil Survey Staff,E igh t E dition, USDA, Natura l R e sou rce s
Conservation Service, Washington, D,C.22. Siderius, W., 1989. Selective readings in Land
Evaluation. Lecture Note, ITC, En. Schede. The
Netherlands.23. De la Rosa, D., 2000. MicroLIES: Conceptual
Framework Agroecological Land Evaluation. Istituo
de Recursos Naturales Agrobiologia, CSIC, avda.Reina Mercedes 10. 41010 Selvilla, Spain.
Recommended