Effect of Gypsum on the Reclamation and Soil Chemical Properties in Sodic Soils of Raebareli District, Uttar Pradesh

8/10/2019 Effect of Gypsum on the Reclamation and Soil Chemical Properties in Sodic Soils of Raebareli District, Uttar Pradesh

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/effect-of-gypsum-on-the-reclamation-and-soil-chemical-properties-in-sodic-soils 1/6

International Journal of Scientific Research in Environmental Sciences, 2(12), pp. 429-434, 2014

Available online at http://www.ijsrpub.com/ijsres

ISSN: 2322-4983; ©2014; Author(s) retain the copyright of this article

http://dx.doi.org/10.12983/ijsres-2014-p0429-0434

429

Full Length Research Paper

Effect of Gypsum on the Reclamation and Soil Chemical Properties in Sodic Soils of

Raebareli District, Uttar Pradesh

Archana Singh1*

, Jitendra Kumar Singh1,2

1Institute of Environment & Development Studies, Bundelkhand University, Jhansi 284128, India2School of Environment and Sustainable Development, Central University of Gujarat, Gandhinagar, 382030, India

*Corresponding Author: Email: [email protected]

Abstract. Soil sodicity is a significant environmental problem and has its negative impact on human health and agricultural

sustainability. So, the current research was set out to investigate the effectiveness of gypsum as an amendment which improvesthe physical and chemical properties of soil and crop productivity. Experiment was conducted in a sodic soil at a farmer's fieldin Raebareli district of Uttar Pradesh, India. The field was irrigated with moderately saline but highly brackish water. Thetreatment of gypsum granule sizes (1 – 10 mm) were Control (No gypsum), Gypsum @ 100% GR in one splits and Gypsum @100% GR in two splits. In the present study an attempt was made to find out the improvement of micronutrients and chemical properties of soil in Gypsum amended soils. The effect of Gypsum application significantly improved the soil chemical properties by reducing the EC and pH.

Keywords: Sodic soil, soil properties, reclamation, gypsum application.

1. INTRODUCTION

Increasing soil salinity and sodicity are serious

worldwide land degradation issues, and may be even

increase rapidly in the future (Wong et al., 2009). The

problem of salt affected soils is pronounced in the

many Indogangetic plains, arid and semiarid regions

of the world and increasingly threatening agricultural

expansion and productivity. It is estimated that 1.5

billion hectare of lands, all over the world, are salt-

affected (Yuan et al., 2010). Salinity induced land

degradation is one of the major obstacles to

sustainable agricultural production in many arid and

semi-arid regions of the world (Bossio et al., 2007). In

India, about 6.9 million hectares of sodic soils are

found of which 1.63 million hectares occurs in Uttar

Pradesh only (Pandey et al., 2011) which is the largest

area found in any single state in the country. Only a

negligible portion of soils in UP is saline, the bulk

suffering from alkalinity, associated with excess of

available sodium, poor porosity, low nutrient content,

indifferent drainage and high water-table. The

excessive salt accumulation adversely affects soil

physical and chemical properties, as well as

microbiological processes (Lakhdar et al, 2009). Theaddition of gypsum alone or combination with either

organic material or bioinaculants and effect of

conventional tillage has been investigated for

reclamation of sodic soils and enhances crop

production (Rai et al., 2010; Singh et al., 2014).Commonly, sodic and saline – sodic soils display

structural problems like slaking, swelling, dispersion

of clay, and surface crusting. Such problems may

impede water and air movement, decrease plant

available water, reduce nutrient availability, root

penetration and seedling emergence, and increase

runoff and erosion potential (Suarez, 2001; Qadir and

Schubert, 2002). Major part of Raebareli soils is sodic

and in these soils crop cultivation without any

modification, becomes very difficult. Maintaining and

restoring the quality of soil is one of the great

challenges of our time. Soil fertility is one of the vital

features controlling yields of the crops. Soil

characterization in relation to evaluation of fertility

status of the soils of an area or region is an vital aspect

in context of sustainable agriculture production. Soil

fertility changes and the nutrient balances are taken as

key indicators of soil quality (Jansen et al., 1995). Soil

is a vital natural resource which performs key role in

environment, economic and social functions. It is non-

renewable within human time scales. High quality

soils not only produce better food and fibre, but also

help establish natural ecosystems and enhance air andwater quality (Griffiths et al., 2010).

The objective of the present study was to assess the

effect of gypsum on the reclamation and improvement

of soil chemical properties in sodic soils of Raebareli,



Singh and Singh

Effect of Gypsum on the Reclamation and Soil Chemical Properties in Sodic Soils of Raebareli District, Uttar Pradesh

430

Uttar Pradesh. In the present study an attempt was

made to find out the improvement of micronutrients

and chemical properties of soil in gypsum amended

soils.

2. MATERIAL AND METHODS

2.1. Description of the study area

The district Raibareli is irregular in shape but fairly

compact. It forms a part of the Lucknow division of

Utter Pradesh state of India and lies between 25°49'

and 26°36' North latitude and 100°41' and 81°34' East

longitude. The field experiment was conducted in

2010 – 2011 and located in and around Unchahar block

of Raibareli district. The study area covered three

selected sites namely Jamunapur (control site),

Sawaya Dhani (site-I with Gyp @ 100 % GR One

split) and Shahabad, (site-II with Gyp @ 100 % GR

two split) villages (Figure 1). Climate is semi arid and

is characterized by average rainfall of 923 mm with

mean maximum and minimum temperature of 44.20C

and 2.30C, respectively. Loamy sand, sandy loam,

clay loam and silt loam soils are found in the district.

The selections of one control site i.e. without gypsum

application whereas another two sites i.e. site-I and

site-II are amendment with gypsum. Ground water is

the main source of irrigation (about 70%). The

principal crops grown in these areas are rice, wheat,

barley, and summer vegetables.

Fig. 1: Location of the Raebareli district in Uttar Pradesh and the study areas

2.2. Sampling and Analysis

Soil samples were collected from the depth of 0-15 cm

from the two agricultural lands amended with gypsum

and one agricultural land without gypsum amended

served as control. Soil samples were air dried, ground

to pass through 2 mm sieve and stored in plastic bags

before analysis. The physicochemical properties as

well as different micronutrients of the gypsum

amended soil and also from control soil samples were

measured by standard methods. The soil pH was

estimated by pH metry in the saturation paste as

described by McNeal, 1982 (1:1 suspension). In the

same suspension electrical conductivity was alsomeasured using conductivity meter. Soil organic

carbon was estimated by Walkley – Black (1934),

available phosphorous was determined by Olsen’s

method, available potassium estimated by leaching the

soil with in ammonium acetate and the determinationof potassium by using flame photometer as per the

standard method, available nitrogen was estimated by

Kjeldhal method. Available micronutrients and heavy

metals were estimated as per procedure described by

Lindsay and Norwell (1978).

2.3. Statistical analysis

The study of correlation reduces the range of

uncertainty associated with decision making. The

correlation co-efficient 'r' was calculated using the

equation (Adak and Purohit, 2001).




431

Where, X and Y represents two different

parameters, N= Number of total observation

The interrelationship studies between different

variables are very helpful tools in promoting research

quality and opening new frontiers of knowledge.

3. RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

3.1. Physicochemical characteristics and available

micronutrient level in sodic soil

The average results of the Gypsum amended soil

samples and control soil (without gypsum) were

analyzed for various physicochemical parameters

including micronutrients quantification are presented

in table 1 and matrix of correlation among different

parameters of soil are shown in tables 2, 3 and 4. The

improved quality of soil resources depends on the

management of the gypsum application.

Table 1: Soil chemical characteristics of the control site and reclaimed Site (I & II)

Soil

Properties

Control Site Gyp @ 100 % GR One split Site

I

Gyp @ 100 % GR Two split Site

II

Range Mean Range Mean Range Mean

pH 10.58-10.72 10.66±0.05 9.09-9.24 9.19±0.06 8.80-9.15 9.00±0.15

EC 1.98-2.12 2.07±0.42 0.64-0.77 0.7±0.05 0.50-0.83 0.68±0.12

OC (%) 0.09-0.18 0.14±0.03 0.34-0.45 0.41±0.04 0.16-0.32 0.25±0.06

N (kg/ha) 256.54-265.63 261.99±4.07 772.10-794.62 785.9±9.31 465.73-476.83 471.97±4.39 P (kg/ha) 3.92-4.864 4.5±0.36 8.84-9.13 9±0.13 26.12-27.38 27±0.51

K (kg/ha) 704.76-709.35 706.5±1.71 534.00-545.00 540±4.00 482.76-498.43 495±6.85 S (kg/ha) 3.95-5.43 4.9±0.58 4.80-4.95 4.9±0.06 9.50-10.20 9.8±0.25

Fe (ppm) 21.43-21.66 21.54±0.09 165.43-175.71 168.88±4.17 50.50-62.12 56.33±4.26

Cu (ppm) 1.11-2.04 1.65±0.34 3.21-3.43 3.34±0.08 2.93-3.55 3.3±0.24

Zn (ppm) 0.70-1.24 0.88±0.27 0.71-1.10 0.87±0.14 1.58-1.83 1.7±0.11

Mn (ppm) 31.22-31.47 31.33±0.10 30.93-31.78 31.56±0.36 26.23-27.10 26.54±0.34

The data represents the mean value of five replicates ± standard deviation.

Whereas, EC = Electrical conductivity, OC = Organic carbon, N = Available Nitrogen, P = Available Phosphorus, K= Available Potassium, S= Available

Sulphur , Fe= Iron, Cu= Copper , Zn= Zinc and Mn= Manganese.

3.2. Effect of gypsum on fertility status of soil after

harvesting wheat crops

3.2.1. pH and EC

Soil having more than 8.5 pH is indicating of soil

sodicity. PH and EC regulate most of the biological

processes and biochemical reactions. In present study,

highly sodic land control site soil the average pH

observed 10.66 and experimental site-I and site-II

having average pH 9.19 and 9.00 respectively (Table – 1) after using gypsum and organic amendment. The

pH decrease in gypsum treated soil may be due to the

replacement of exchangeable Na+

during Na+-Ca

2+

exchange and subsequent leaching. Reduction in sodic

soil electrical conductivity (EC) due to gypsum

amendments has also been reported by Rai et al.,

(2010). Electrical conductivity of control soil was

higher as compared to reclaimed soils, which is the

function of the ions present in soil.

3.2.2. Organic carbon

In the present investigation range of organic carbon

has been recorded 0.09 to 0.18% at control site, 0.34

to 0.45% and 0.16 to 0.32% were found in site I and

site II respectively (Table – 1). Increased organic

carbon content was noted by the treatments with the

gypsum amendments in the site I and site II which is

the highly sodic soils. Increased organic carbon

content due to gypsum amendments in soil has also

been reported and thus helped to improve soil

structure.

3.2.3. Available-N, P, K, S and micronutrients

The data presented in table 1 indicated that theapplication of gypsum significantly influenced the soil

available macronutrients such as N, P, K, S and

micronutrients (Fe, Cu, Zn and Mn). The saline sodic

soils have low to very low content of nitrogen and

phosphorus and high to very high content of available

K (Deshmukh, 2014). The results indicated that

considerable improved (increased) in soil available

nitrogen from 261.99 to 785.9 and 471.97 kg/ha.

Available phosphorous from 4.5 to 9.00 and

27.00kg/ha and sulphur content from 4.9 to 4.9 and

9.8kg/ha was observed in the gypsum treatment in site

I and site II. Whereas potassium in soil indicated thatremarkably reduction from 706.5 to 540.00 and

495.00kg/ha was found due to gypsum treatment in

site I and site II respectively. Availability of



Singh and Singh


432

Micronutrients (Fe, Cu, Zn and Mn) more or less also

improved due to gypsum application. The availability

of all nutrients in soil remarkably improved due to

application of gypsum was also observed by Akbari et

al. (2003).

3.3. Correlation among chemical quality

parameters of Sodic Soil

The high positively correlated values were found

between S and P (0.964), Cu and S (0.933) in control

site, N and PH (0.978), N and EC (0.939) in site I, Fe

and N (0.973), N and EC (0.905) in site II While the

high negatively correlated values were found between

S and K (-0.898), Cu and S (-0.899) in the site II.

The pH and EC are positively correlated with all

parameters except Zn in site I, S in site II whereas in

control site pH and EC is negatively correlated with

most of the parameters. Mn, Cu and Fe are positively

correlated with most of the parameters in all sites.

However, Organic carbon, N, P is positively

correlated with all parameters in control sites and

positively correlated with most of the parameters in

site I and site II.

Table 2: Correlation matrix for various physicochemical parameters of soil at control Site

pH EC OC N P K S Fe Cu Zn Mn

pH 1

EC -0.344 1

OC -0.272 -0.568 1

N -0.192 -0.590 0.840 1

P -0.016 -0.009 0.605 0.646 1

K 0.440 -0.131 0.261 0.517 0.825 1

S -0.174 -0.085 0.678 0.791 0.965** 0.771 1

Fe 0.373 -0.694 0.746 0.492 0.461 0.354 0.384 1

Cu 0.148 -0.203 0.652 0.696 0.975** 0.870 0.933* 0.607 1

Zn 0.083 -0.499 0.602 0.128 0.052 -0.221 -0.027 0.815 0.149 1

Mn 0.291 0.256 0.140 0.254 0.861 0.894* 0.741 0.229 0.831 -0.206 1

Table 3: Correlation matrix for various physicochemical parameters of soil at Site-I


pH 1

EC 0.883* 1

OC 0.292 0.48 1

N 0.978** 0.939* 0.464 1

P 0.743 0.427 -0.194 0.640 1

K 0.567 0.247 0.159 0.483 0.408 1

S 0.264 0.363 -0.427 0.230 0.428 0.403 1

Fe 0.204 0.049 0.193 0.232 0.573 -0.104 0.173 1

Cu 0.788 0.589 -0.301 0.661 0.705 0.552 0.408 -0.164 1

Zn -0.677 -0.405 -0.196 -0.602 -0.433 -0.983** 0.403 0.159 -0.650 1

Mn 0.954* 0.758 0.194 0.895* 0.703 0.768 0.080 0.038 0.853 -0.854 1

Table 4: Correlation matrix for various physicochemical parameters of soil at Site-II


pH 1

EC 0.778 1

OC 0.678 0.465 1

N 0.632 0.905* 0.490 1

P 0.771 0.938* 0.716 0.904* 1

K 0.740 0.809 0.864 0.766 0.956 1

S -0.492 -0.627 -0.739 -0.494 -0.792 -0.898* 1

Fe 0.492 0.800 0.513 0.973** 0.855 0.745 -0.488 1

Cu 0.310 0.565 0.731 0.621 0.783 0.868 -0.899* 0.698 1

Zn 0.008 0.281 -0.336 -0.074 0.096 0.034 -0.310 -0.205 0.014 1

Mn 0.716 0.798 0.036 0.660 0.567 0.347 -0.086 0.482 -0.044 0.290 1Where, EC = Electrical conductivity, OC = Organic carbon, N = Available Nitrogen, P = Available Phosphorus, K= Available Potassium, S = Available

Sulphur, Fe = Iron, Cu = Copper, Zn = Zinc and Mn = Manganese.

**Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).*Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).




433

4. CONCLUSIONS

In the present study, the experimental soil was

calcareous and saline-sodic with alkaline in reaction.

The effect of gypsum application significantly

improved the physiochemical properties of sodic soils

by reducing the EC and pH and improving crop

productivity yielded satisfactory results. Therefore,

gypsum application in split doses could be regarded as

effective and useful for the management of salt-

affected soils. Gypsum application at 100% soil GR

with one split and two split, significantly increased the

yield of crop as well as chemical properties of the soil

as compared with control (without gypsum

application) soil. Therefore, it is recommended that

farmers apply the coarse gypsum (1 – 10 mm) at the

rate of 100% GR to reclaim sodic soil.

REFERENCE

Adak MD, Purohit KM (2001). Status of surface and

ground water quality of Mandiakudar Part III:

Correlation coefficient and regression

equations. Poll Res., 20(2): 227-232.

Akbari KN, Karan F, Qureshi FM, Patel VN (2003).

Effect of micronutrients, sulphur and gypsum

on soil fertility and yield of mustard in red loam

soils of Mewar (Rajasthan). Indian J. Agric.

Res., 37(2): 94-99.Bossio D, Critchley W, Geheb K, Van Lynden G,

Mati B (2007). Conserving land protecting

water. In Comprehensive Assessment of Water

Management in Agriculture: Water for Food,

Water for Life, Molden D (ed). Stylus

Publishing, LLC: Sterling, VA. pp. 551 – 584.

Deshmukh K (2014). Effect of Gypsum on the

Chemistry of Saline-Sodic Soils of Sangamner

Area, Ahmednagar District, Maharashtra, India.

Athens: ATINER'S Conference Paper Series,

No: ENV2014-1197.

Griffiths BS, Ball BC, Daniell TJ, Hallett PD, NeilsonR, Wheatley RE, Osler G, Bohanec M (2010).

Integrating soil quality changes to

arableagricultural systems following organic

matter addition or adoption of a ley-arable

rotation. Appl. Soil Ecol., 46(1): 43-53.

Jansen DM, Stoorvogel JJ, Shipper RA (1995). Using

sustainability indicators in agricultural land use

analysis: An example from Costa Rica. Neth. J.

Agr. Sci., 43(1): 61-82.

Lakhdar A, Rabhi M, GhnayaT, Montemurro F, Jedidi

N, Abdelly C (2009). Effectiveness of compost

use in salt-affected soil. Journal of Hazardous

Materials, 171: 29-37.

Lindsay WL, Norvell WA (1978). Development of a

DTPA soil test for zinc, iron, manganese, and

copper. Soil Science Society of America

Journal, 42: 421 – 428.

McNeal EO (1982). Soil pH and lime requirement. In:

Page AL, Miller RH, Keeney DR (Eds.),

Methods of Soil Analysis Part 2. Chemical and

Microbiological Properties. ASA Inc. SSSA

Inc. Publishers, NY, USA, pp. 199 – 224.

Pandey VC, Singh K, Singh B, Singh RP (2011). New

approaches to enhance eco-restoration

efficiency of degraded sodic lands: critical

research needs and future prospects. EcologicalRestoration, 29: 322 – 325.

Qadir M, Schubert S (2002). Degradation processes

and nutrient constraints in sodic soils. Land

Degrad Dev., 13: 275 – 294.

Rai TN, Rai KN, Prasad SN, Sharma CP, Mishra SK,

Gupta BR (2010). Effect of organic

amendments, bioinaculants and gypsum on the

reclamation and soil chemical properties in

sodic soil of Etawah. Journal of soil and water

conservation, 9 (3): 197-200.

Singh K, Mishra AK, Singh B, Singh RP, Patra DD

(2014). Tillage effects on crop yield and physicochemical properties of sodic soils. Land

Degradation & Development, (In Press). DOI:

10.1002/ldr.2266

Suarez DL (2001). Sodic soil reclamation: Modeling

and field study. Aust J Soil Res., 39: 1225 –

1246.

Walkley A, Black IA (1934). An examination of the

Degtjareff method for determining organic

carbon in soils: Effect of variations in digestion

conditions and of inorganic soil constituents.

Soil Sci., 63: 251-263.

Wong VNL, Dala RC, Greene RSB (2009). Carbondynamics of sodic and saline soils following

gypsum and organic material additions: A

laboratory incubation. Applied Soil Ecology,

14: 29-40.

Yuan JF, Feng G, Ma HY, Tian CY (2010). Effect of

nitrate on root development and nitrogen uptake

of Suaedaphysophora under NaCl salinity.

Pedosohere, 20(4): 536-544.



Singh and Singh


434

Archana Singh holds a M.Sc. in Biotechnology (2010) from the department of biotechnology,Kanpur University. She received M.Phil. degree in Environment science from Bundelkhand

University, Jhansi, India in 2011. She is interested in the research on Reclamation of highlycalcareous saline-sodic soil in Uttar Pradesh, India.

Jitendra Kumar Singh is doing Ph.D. in the School of Environment and Sustainable Development(SESD), Central University of Gujarat, India. He Completed his M.Phil. M.Sc. in EnvironmentScience from Bundelkhand University, Jhansi, India. He published more than 05 research paperswith national and International journal.

Documents

Effect of Gypsum on the Reclamation and Soil Chemical Properties in Sodic Soils of Raebareli District, Uttar Pradesh