Effect of Gypsum on the Reclamation and

(1)

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

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

1

Institute of Environment & Development Studies, Bundelkhand University, Jhansi 284128, India

2

School of Environment and Sustainable Development, Central University of Gujarat, Gandhinagar, 382030, India *Corresponding Author: Email: archanasingh416@gmail.com

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 improves the physical and chemical properties of soil and crop productivity. Experiment was conducted in a sodic soil at a farmer's field in Raebareli district of Uttar Pradesh, India. The field was irrigated with moderately saline but highly brackish water. The treatment 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). The addition 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 and water quality (Griffiths et al., 2010).

(2)

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 also measured 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 determination of 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

(3)

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

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 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, Sand micronutrients

(4)

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 1

Where, 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.

(5)

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, Neilson R, 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

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. Ecological Restoration, 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: 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). Carbon dynamics of sodic and saline soils following gypsum and organic material additions: A laboratory incubation. Applied Soil Ecology, 14: 29-40.

(6)

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 highly calcareous saline-sodic soil in Uttar Pradesh, India.