UNIT 6 WATER QUALITY FOR

IRRIGATION
Structure
6.1 Introduction
Objectives
6.2 Quality Variation Based on Source of Water
6.3 Soluble Constituents
6.3.1 Maja nad Minor Soluble Conmtuenu
6.3.2 Salinity
6.3.3 Toxicity
6.3.4 Cxemical Analysis of Irrigation Water
6.4 Irrigation Water Quality Standards
6.4.1 Water Quality Rmngs
6.4.2 Variation of Ground Water Quality
6.4.3 Irrigation with Poor Quality Water
6.5 Salinity and Alkalinity of Soils
6.5.1 Effect on Crops
6.5.2 Land Reclamation Methods
6.5.3 Leaching Process
6.'6 Summary
6.7 Key Words
6.8 Answers to SAGS

6.1 INTRODUCTION
The process of planning an irrigation scheme should lake into consideration not only the
quagty of water available for irrigaton but also its suitability for the plants or crops that
are proposed to be irrigated. It may be emphasised that the consideration of related
factors such as texture of soil, its drainage characteristics, salt tolerance characteristics of
the plant, and climatological conditions are equally important while determining the
suitability of water for irrigation in a given area for a given crop.

Objectives
After completing this unit you should be able to :
conduct simple tests on water to determine the suitability for irrigation,
determine the suitability of water for a given crop to be grown at a given
location, and
suggest suitable remedial measures to overcome the deficiency, if any.

6.2 UALITY VARIATION BASED ON SOURCE OF

SATER
Water is drawn for irrigatioq mainly from the following sources
i) Rivers, or canals ,taking off from rivers or reservoirs,
ii) Minor drains and lakes, and
iii) Ground water through open and bore wells.
Generally, quality of river water and of water d a w n from canals is suitable for irrigation.
Many rivers and tributaries of Indo-Gangetic plainsSueknown to carry good quality
imgation water. In some arid regions of Gujarat, a few seasonal rivers show dissolved
salt concentration. However, drainage canals m a command, which may.carry some
irrigation return flows may contain dissolved salts in the form of Nitrates. Groundwater
drawp from both open and bore wells has a highly variable quality based mainly on
n n r l h ~ r r l r n n a n l n o i r am
rli4n&tnlnnirQl l nnrlitinnc r 1 1 9 l i t v v a r i a c h n c a d nn
~rnlnndwotan it^
 -

-
Sail - Water Plant three source groups i;'on~ which it 1s drawn such as :
Relatiomhip ie Irrigatiatioll
a) ground water lrom aridlsem-arid reglons having rainfall less thal500 l~znlper
illmum - pxt>>of Kajasthan, Gujarat and puts of Uttar Pradesh iue exallkp1ples.
b) ground water w i w e quality is influenced by the hydro1c)gical conci~t~onof high
water table caused by river basin imgation. Certain areas of Punjab. H:~ryana
ruld Uttnr Pradsh are salt affected by rise in water table, and hence Uierein the
ground waler IS also affected.
c) coastal regions where fresh water aquifers get salt affected due to sea water
intrusion, and also low lying ponds and lakes get flooded with sea water during
cyclnnic storm. Coromandel coast is an example in point.

6.3 SOLUBLE CONSTITUENTS

Water is the greatest and universal solvent in nature. It dissolves a formidable I ;u1gcbot
substances right lrom the moment a rain drop falls on earth till it joins the sea 1i;~vinp
flown over or under Ihc ground surface. Sea water could not have been hlghly .\i111y
without this powerful phoperty of water.

6.3.1 Major and RZinor Soluble Constituents

The quality of irrigatioa, water is judged by tlle amount of suspended and dihholved
materials it contidlns. Suspentled mater~alsinclude soil particles, seeds, leaves iintl such
othcr debris. Tic qudlty of ~rrigationwater gets greatly influellcecl by its total halt
concentration, rzlativc ploportion ot cations, amount of bicarbonates and ot trace
elements sucli as Boror~.
Cations which are the most common positively charged ions dissolved 111 11-11~at1on water
are Calcium (Ca), Magnesium (Mg), Sodium (Na) and Potassium (K). The most conunon
negatively charged ions (anions) dissolved in irrigation water are : hicarhonirte\ (HCO?)
sulphates (SO4) and chlorides (CI). Other solutes include Carbonate (C03). Nitrate (NO,)
and trace elements like Boron (B). Suspended materia1 less than 50 to 100 nlrcron size are
oi'ten accumulated in chasulels and pipes and are usually removed physically by hlushmg
or dredging.

6.3.2 Salinity
Total concentration of ions in irr~gationwater is usually called salinify. It IS sun] ot ill1 the
lonizzd (dissolved) salts In water without reference to the specific ions present. The
electrical conductivity (EC) of water is often used as a measure of salinity. w the ab111ty
of water to ccinduct electricity is directly related to the number of ions present 111 ~ t 1.1 is
measured as milli-mho per celltimetre (m-inl~o/cm)or decisiemens/metre (dS/m) One
(dS/ln) IS equal to one (111-lnho/cm). dS/m is the SI unit wheareas m-rnho/cm I S ;I
tradiuonally used unlt. Salinity 1s also expressed as concentration (mgn), or p;ul per
nlillion (ppn~).
'Ele primary eri'ect o f salin~tyis to restrict the availability of soil water to tlle pl:oit The
presence of salt in soil water increases the energy needed by plants to remove water trom
soil. Salinity intluences crop physiology and its yield. Physiological process llke cell
enlargement and division, production of proteins and the rate of increase ot pliu~rmass,
are all retarded at high levels of salinity. At extremely high salinity levels, v~sihlc~njury
symptoms like l e g f hurt1 are seen.
Figure 6.1 shows a typical relationship between the energy (bars) with which \ o ~ lIlolds
water and the percentage soil water content for various salt concentrations. I t Inay he seen
that for a given soil water content the plant has to exert itself increasingly harder through
increased energy consulnption to extract water with the increasing salt co1icL'rltr;llloll
Figure 6.2 shows a typical relationship between crop yield (in 5%) and salilllry ot the
irrigation water. When the salinity is below a threshold level, the crop yield 15
independent of salt concentration. This means that the presence of salts does not affect
the crop yield when the salinity does not exceed the threshold value.\Whell the salinity
exceeds this tllreshold value the crop y~elddecreases almost linearly. The salniity at zc>ro
yield level is an estimate of the maximum salinity that a crop can tolerate. Crop ,
production cannot normally be maintained when the salinity exceed the zero yluld value.
 0
0 5 10 15 20
Percent SoiC ~ o i s t u r e
Figure 6.1 : Welaliotrship between Energy (bars)to Hold Soil Water and Percentage
Soil Water at Different S J t Concentration
(Sower :'lm~fltir~n'. Edit. Pair. C. H. et d)

Salinity
Figure 6.2 :Qpical alelation~hipbewecn Crop Yield and Salinity.
(Source :'Snlinity in Immga&dAgriculture: Hoffman et al -
ASAE Monographs)

SAQI
What \ubstances constitute tbe "suspended" and "d~ssolvctl"m;llcrl;,l~
respect~vely,in irrigation water ?

6.3.3 Toxicity
During crop growth dissolved ions are absorbed through the roots along with soil water
. and are uansmitted to plant leaves where they accumulate. When the accumulation of
ions becomes large enough to cause leaf burn (drying of leave tissues), we say that
toxicity tmurs. A chemical alialysis of leaf is often needed to identify the offending toxic
ion.
 - -
Sdl Water Plant
Rd#omhip in Irrigation
The most common plant toxins (phytotoxins) found in natural irrigation waters are
Sodium (Na), Chloridc (CI) and Boron (B). When reclaimed sewage waters are used for
irrigation, these are likely to contain many other phytotoxins.
Sodium and chloride concentrations in irrigation waters that may not cause toxicity
problems in furrow irrigation, may cause toxicity problems in foliar absorption irrigation
methods, such as, sprinkler irrigation, that wet the plant leaves, especially when
temperature is high and humidity is low. Sprinkler irrigated citrus is known to have been
damaged by water even with low concentration of sodium and chloride, though the same
level of concentr:ltion had no toxic effect when it was irrigated by the same water by
furrow or flooding method, in which water does not wet the leaves directly.
Thus, it is seen that salinity and toxicity effects are dependent not only on concentration
levels of the concentrated substances, but also on other factors We, the method of water
application, and weather conditions like temperature and humidity. The other, but minor,
toxic element of concern is Boron, which is contained in a few surface water sources.
6.3.4 Chemical Analysis of Irrigation Water
It is obvious that a chemical analysis of water needs to be carrikd out to assess its
suitability, vis-a-vis, a given crop grown on a given soil. Analypis of irrigation water can
be broadly carried out by methods that are classified into the three categories as indicated
below :
i) Gravimetric Method
This.involves a laborious process. First, the different substances contai~iedin
the water samples are to be separated by mechanical means (filtering,
decanting, centrifuge method, etc.). Then these are weighed separately. The
proportion of each substance with reference to the total sample cat1 then be
calculated.
ii) Volumetric Method
In this method, exact volumes of che/nical solutions (Of standard strengths) are
added to measured parts of the water sample, to bring hbout specific well
established chemical changes - such a volumetric procedure is called trfrbtion.
The titration point at which the indicative chemical chdnge takes place as the
standard solution is being added carefully (in a controlled manner) to Wie water
being analyzed, is the end-point of titration. A few drops pf chemical indlicators
such a phenolphthalein or methyl-orange serve as indicbtors of the end+point
through change of colour. The amount of each of the miperal constituepq being
analyzed m the water sample is estimated directly from the volume of muh of
the corresponding standard solution required.
iii) Colorimetric Analysis
Colorimetric 'analysis is often used for detecting the presence of and measuring
the amount of iron in water. A given volume of water sample is treated with a
chemical reagent, and if iron is present, the colour of the sample chan b

colouf is then compared with the standard mixtures of water having d&~r$
h o w n concentrations of iron, which are treated with the same reagent resulting
in a set of san~pleswith different shades of colour.
It has earlier been mentioned that the sum of all ionized dissolved salts in water
determines the salinity level and that the electrical conductivity'(~~) stated usually in
terms of m-mhoslcm, is ;I simple measure of salinity. The pH value of natural water (or
soil) is a measure of its alkalinily or acidity. More specifically stated, it is measure of thk
hydrogen ion-concentration in water. Water molecules (H20 or HOH) have a mild
tendency to break down into ions. Ions which are atoms or grougs of atoms carrying
positive (H+) or negative (hydroxyl OH-) charge are formed when water molecules
breaks down. In distilled water, the number of H ions formed is such that their
concentration is expressed by a pH value of 7. Mathematically, this is the logarithm, to
the base 10, of the reciprocal of the hydrogen ion concentration in pure water. Thus,
pH = 7 indicates a neutral water, that is neither acidic nor alkaline. A pH of 7.5 to 8.0
usually indicates the presence of carbonates of calcium (Ca) or magnesium (Mg). and a
pH of 8.5 and above usually ipdicates appreciable exchangeable sodiuni (Na): hence
indicating alkalinity.
Equivalent weight of an element or radical is its combining capacity with hydrogen. It is
the weight in gram of an ion or a compound that combines with or replaces one gram of Nnter Qudity for
Inigation
hydrogen and is given by the following basic relationship in Chemistry :

Equivalent Weight =
Atomic Weight ...
Valency

Equivalent weight of certain commonly encounted elements or radicals are computed

below :
Atomic Weight of Nu
Equivalent weight of Sodium, Na =
Valency

40
Equivalent weight of cau = 1 = 20

39.1 -
K+= -
Equivalent wight of - 39.1
1

Equivalent weight of c1-= -

35'46 - 35.46
1
96
Equivalent weight of S04-- = -- = 48
2
Milli-equivalent weight is 111000th of the equivalent weight, and i s designated as 'meq'.
Concentration of any dissolved substance is expressed as parts per million (by weight),
and designates as 'ppm' and also mgll of water numerically. Since the properties of
irrigation water and soil-water extract are closely related, the analysis of properties of
irrigation water and the properties of soil-water extracts is of great relevance. Following
relationshtps may be used for the evaluation of total salt concentration, from the value of
EC irrm-mho/cm.
Following information is useful in practical applications (James, et al, 1982, "Modern
Irrigated Soils", John Wiley & Sons, NY, 1982) :
i) Salt concentration in mgA or pprn = 640 x EC in m-mholcm
ii) Total cation concentration in meqA = 10 x EC 1x1 m-mholcm (This is valid
upto to EC = 5 m-mholcm at 25OC).
iii) Osmotic pressure in atmospheres = 0.36 x EC in m-mho/cm.
Following examples serve to illustrate the use of some chemical properties of irrigation
water.
Example 6.1
Express 1170 pprn sodium chloride (NaCl) salt concentration in terms of meqll.
Solution
Equivalent weight of Na : 23
Equivalent weight of C1 : 35.46
:. Equivalent weight of NaCl : 58.46

Salt concentration (rmqA) = = - 20

Example 6.2
Salt concentration of a sample is measured as 10 m-mholcm. Express this in ppm.
Solution
Concentration of salt in pprn = 640 x EC m-mholcm

= 6400 pprn
 -
Soil -Water Plant
Relationskip in Irrigation 6.4 IRRIGATION WATER QUALITY STANDARDS
Soil-plant-water complex has to have an optimum balance between its three constituents.
Given a soil matrix for a given a o p , water has to have its quality parameters conforming
to set standards, or it requires appropriate management practice.

6.4.1 Water Quality Ratings

In the earlier discussion, we have seen that salinity effects are dependent not only m the
salt concentration levels in irrigation water, but also on other factors like soil
composition, soil texture, water application method and weather conditions like
temperature and humidity. Thus, US Soil Sal~nityLaboratory (USSSL) standards md
classification would not be quite suitable to Indian conditions, as in India waters of I
greater salinity levels t h d the highest limits proposed by USSSL have bee11 used
successfully in some areas of Haryana and Rajasthan. Table 6.1 gives the Water Quality
Ratings as per Central Soil Salinity Research Institute, Karnal (India).
Table 6.1 : Water Quality Ratings (CSSRI, Karnal, 1972)

Nature of Soil Cmp Type Safe Max. limit of

EC in i n - m h k c

1) Deep black soil and alluvial soil, with clay Semi tolerant 1.5
nlore than 30%)and soil 1110deratelydrained
Tolerant 7.0

2) Heavy textured soils with clay 20 to Semi tolerant 2.0

30%; well hailled internally, and with good
surface drainage system Tolerant 4.0

3) Mediunl textured soils with clay 10 to 20%, Semi tolerant 4.0

well drained intenlally and with good
surface drainage system. Tolerant 6.0

4) Light textured soils with clay less than Semi tolerant 6.0
- 10%; excellel~tinternal and surface
drai~~age Tolerant 8.0

It is a useful guide to match soil, crop, and salt level for better results.

6.4.2 Variation of Ground Water Quality

Ground water salinity is considerably influenced by climatic conditions. Salinity
increases during summer and significantly decreases during and after monsoon clue to
dilution caused by rainwater. The degree of variation in salinity depends on the depth of
water table and the infiltration capacity of soil.

6.4.3 Irrigation with Poor Quality Water

In situations where the use of poor quality water is inevitable, one or more o f tllt:
followhig irrigation management practices may be followed :
i) Improvenwnt by cuiding Gypsum
By adding hydrated calcium sulphate (CaS04 . 2H20), known as gypsum, to
irrigation water containing bicarbonates and carbonates in favourable
Ca : Na ratio (or SAR), one can cause tlie harmful constituerlt to preclp~tate.
However, the cost and the method of applicatton of gypsum have then own
Imnport,mce; the remedy should be economically viable and treatecl water should
be uniformly applied. Further, the addition of gypsum not only to tlie poor
quality water but also to the alkali soil is preferable where the so11 is also of
poor qual~ty.
~ i ) Salt Tolerant Crops
Salt tolerance is the ability of the plant to tolerate salt concentration In the root
zone. If EC of the saturation extract EC, of the soil is less b a n 2 nl-nlholcm. the
effeci on the growth and yield IS negligible. When EC, IS 4 ~n-n;ho/an,the
yield of sensitive crops drops down. Most tield crops are affccted when ECe 1s
between 4 to 8 m-mhotcm. When ECe is between 8 and 16, only htgh salt
tolerant crops would grow. Very few crops grow when the ECe value i s above
16 m-mhotcm.
 Table 6.2 gives few crops that are classit~edaccorti;ng lo U;\,!r sai: toierxlce. W:~ierQuality l o r
Irrigation
Table 6.2 :Relative Salt ToLerni,ce $6C7rops
-- - -- . - - -- ---
7 I 7
'roler,uicc
- --------
Crops Tolerant Semi-Tolerant
- -
Fidd Crops Barley Klce
Sugar-beet Sor-ghuru( J o w a ~ ) 1 Ben ai gram
Tobacco Bajra (MiIleth) I ((!?ham)
Mustard Maize Pea (Mutrer)
cotton Red gram (Arhai >
Wheat Green gram (Mocmri
Sugarcane Sunflower
Castor
Fndder Lucerne (AlS:~lfa) 1
Sorghum
Maize +--.
I
Vegetables Beetroot
Spinach ('al~hage 1i
I
Ca~rot ! I
Onion
Pea
I( Cucunll~rr
Pu'rnpLio

Fruits
I)ate palm
--I
1
~

Crape
Bitter g~)ur!l
Po~~~egranzLe J
i
1

I
1 Guava
Mango
Barlanu
Pear Ii
Apple
Orange
I
Len1011 i
Apricot
L --L.I-
Jrat:l:
iii) Irrigation Management
While irrigating tvitll poor quality waler, accumulatiia~of :;;:its increases with
fi~renessof soil texture (Rcfer also (6.1) first colua~m.nanlely nature of
Soil). So, it is rleccssary that t l ~ concentzalion
e 01' salinity a t Lhe root zone is kept
to a rninirllum. For this purpose the quantity of waicr and liequency of
irriyatinn are st? adjusted, thzt they vr~ould.:'atisfy tllv icaching requirement of
:soil salts apart from meeting tlle consuj~~plive ust:: 01p1mLs.

6.5 SALINITY AND ALKALINLTY QF SOILS

Salinity and Alkalinity : These terms have e;rrlier bean disc tjsscd in the context of
propext'cs of irrigation water. They are equally relevant in lIic co:itcx: of properties of
soils ;~lscr,since it is through the soil matrix that irrigation watci 1s suppiied to the roots of
plants, tllus ~nfluulcingttie growt11 and yicld of plants. For n hcuer understanding, the
follow~ngsoil-watet related lcrrns are deflnetl .
Saturtltion Ettrcrcr : This is the soluti!;n extraclcd I'rorll Lhc s:nl 31 111 s.!il?ra"l:ifi
percentage. 9

Cnrion E~c.h(m,reCnpncity (CEC) : The total quantlty of caLion. ~?;t::ch the sdll can
absorb by ca111)nexchange. is usually expressed as rnillcq~ia~aIr~~~;x
j-rt-r i00 gnl.

Exchangecfile Sodiunt F'ercentugc. (ESP) : It is the degree of sali!rnllon c,l' G k coil which
cm he effectively exchnngcd with sodium and is expressed as.
Exchangeable Sodium (meq per 1002111 -- o f SI 1::.
ESP = lu9
Cation exchangc capacity (~neqper 100 gm cd soil)
,- >(
. . . (6.2)
Saline Soil : A soil which has EC of the saturatiorl extract (ECe) more than 4 m-rnho/cm
at 25OC. ESP less than 15. and pH of the standard paste usually less than 8.5.
Alkalirtij (or Sodic*)Soil : A soil that contains sufficient excl~nngeahlcsodium to interfere
 - -
Soil Water Plant with the plant growth. ESP of 15 is the lower limit and the pH of the saturated paste is
Relationship in Irrigation
higher than 7, say between 8.5 and 10, and EC less than 4 m-mholcm.
Salinc-Alkaline Soil : A soil with EC of saturation extract greater than 4 m-mnhoslcm, and
ESP greater than 15 and pH of saturated paste may be 8.5 or slightly more.
Sodium Absorption Ratio (SAR) : It is the ratio used to express the relathe activity of
sodium ions in exchange reactions with the soil, and is defined as :

SAR = -
+ ?
$(Cuff
NU+
MR /2
(m-moln) "
in which ionic concentrrtions are expressed as meqA. I

Based on the value of EC and SAR, soils ate classified into four categories such as :
i) Noml
ii) Saline
iii) Sodic or Alkaline
iv) Salhl:-alhline1Saline-sodic
Table 6.3 gives the usual ranges of the values of EC and SAR and the soil classification.
Table 6 3 :Classification of Soil by EC and SAR
(Cuenca, Richard H., 'Irrigation System Design')
Criteria EC (m-mholcm) SAR
Normal <4 < 13
Saline >4 < 13
SodicIAlkaline 14 > 13
Saline-alkaline >4 > 13
Example 6.3
A soil sample was analysed, giving the following results :
EC = 2.53 m-rnholcm

Compute SAR of the soil. *

Solution
Using Equation (6.3). we can write :
21.5
sAR=7mmr=m=
21'5 19.55 (m-mol / I)'"

Example 6.4
Analysis of 5 gm of a soil sample showed that the concentration of exchangeable
cations is 1.25 m.eq/l and that of exchangeable sodium is 0.8 m.eqn. Estimate CEC
and ESP.
Solution
Total exchangeable cations in 100 gm of soil :
1 25
-x100 = 25
5

:. CEC = 25 m.eql100 gm of soil

Exchangeahle Na in~100gm of soil : \

 Water Quality for
1*ation

Exchangeable Nain 100 gm --l6 x 100=64%

ESP = Total exchangeable catiomin 100 grn - 25
s%: (2 2 . ~.
..
, !..,j$:;:~i<>
1;; 7 ~ii::7,~f~!t!l~~ ~ ~ :)il(j
~ ~*.~i(:::)j!:)j&'
~ j f y( > I' jrrig&(i(ji$iV;;{<F ;ili<lSi.)l.i

6.5.1 Effect on Crops

Tbe effect of salinity and alkalinity of irrigation water on the crops grown may be
summarised as follows :
i) Increase in osmotic pressure in soil water (solution), and hence, fall in the yield,
9 ii) . accumulation of certain toxic ions in concentration in plant tissues, and
iii) alteration of plant-mineral nutritional characteristics.
Table 6.4 through 6.8 depict the fall in yield that occurs in various crops (that are
' ibportant for India) due to using water that h;u increased salinity.
1) Rice
Rice crop is shost sensitive to salinity during early seedling stage. 'lbe n'Mhlre
plant has higher tolerance. The effects of salinity are :delayed flowering,
smaller grain size, and lower yield of both grain and straw. Table 6.4 gives the
variation qf yield of rice with salinity or EC of water.
In Rke with EC
Table 6.4 :YIeld ~ a i a t l o n

EC of Sail Extract EC ofIrri ation Water % Reduction in Yield

(m-mbdcm) (m-Adcm)

3 .o 2.0 0

3.8 216 10

5.1 3.4 25

7.2 4.8 50
 -
'MIWater - Llant 2) Sugar beet
Rclntkn~bip
in Irrigation
Table 6.5 : Yield Variation in Sugar-beet with E(:

EC of Soil Extract EC of Idgation Water % Reduction in Yield

(m-mhdcm) (m-mholcm)
-
7.0 4.7 0

It may be seen that sugar-beet has a relatively higher tolerallce to si~linitytllzi

rice as shown in Table 6.4.
3) Wheat
Table 6.6. :Yield Variation in Wheat with EC
(After Avers and Westcot, FAO)

EC of Irrigation Water % Eeduction ia Yielcl

(m-mhdcm)

According to FAO, wheat is considered more tolerent to exch:ulycaFI~~

sr~diu111,
under non saline conditions and can withstand ESP of 40 to 60.
4) Maize
Table 6.7 :Yield Variation in Maize wit11 EC

EC of Irrigation Wnty
(m-mhdc~n)
1
I
% Reduction in Yirlcl
-,I
I

0 I

It is appropriate to compare the performance of various crops o v r r a w~clc~

range of EC,to get a comparative idea about their respective rolcl iu1r.e ro
salinity, as is done in Table 6.8.
Table 6.8 :A Comparison of Performance of Varioti\
Field Crops with Salinity
-- - -.-- -- -. . ---
I
EC of Irrigation Water Percentage Reduction in Yield 1
---i
(m-mho/cm)
Rice
I
Sugar-beet / Wheat
I
----T------
Mairc
-- C'itn15
:2 - -4
1

It is obvious that Citrus, out of above five crops, is the most tcdel iult
 SAQ 5
List out any three effe~-tsof salinity/alk:;'i~iit!, 01' soil w:Wr on irr~g:~li:il
irljps.

SAQ 6
Wtth the help of Table 6.8. place. in ortler 01 loleriuncc to S ~ I ~ I I ~\v,~li'r.
L' 111,:

- following field crops : Rice. Maize. Wheal

6.5.2 Land Reclamation Methods

The processes involved in improving saline as well as alkaline soils to bring them to
ncxmal productive conditions, constitute land reclamation methods. Choice of a suitable
process depends, for a given set of conditions, on the following factors :
i) classification of soil (Refer Table 6.3),
ii) quality of irrigation water,
iii) tcxture and drainage characteristics of soil, and
iv) topography of the land.
Temporary rkclamation methods include, removal of salt crust. if any, from the soil
surface. deep ploughing and neutralizing the effect of salts present by adding other salts.
Permanent reclamatitw methods, which are more expensive and time consuming. include
lowering the water table (if it is harmfully high), improving the rate of infiltration,
leaching of soils along with adequate subsurface drainage, soil treatment by replacing
excessive sotliunl (Na) salts by calcium (Ca) salts like gypsuln (CaS04), and finally by
suitable irrigation practices.
Reclamation of saline soils is ~elativelyeasy when compared to that of saline-alkali soils,
if necessary drainage is ensured. The simplest procedure i~lvolvesHooding the fields,
with ridges ,uldlevees at the boundaries, ,and draining the floc,clecl water through
subsurtace drainage positioned below the roo: zone which would carry the dissolved salts
, from the root zoue, towards the tile drains. This process of washing down the excess salts
I
is called lenc'hin,o. l l ~ efficiency
e (or the success) of the leaching process depends on the
I quality of and the quantity of water used. and the permeability of soil. Leaching nny be
N continued even during cropping period.
I Generiilly. alkaline 'soils have low per111eabilit.yand require rcplacemznt of excessive
I
I
exchangcablr sodium (Na) by calcium (Ca). In this case, the Nif ions are leached down
to lower layers only slowly. Clieap sources o f cnlciu~n(Ca) or Miiglesium (Mg) salts,
I such as ca1ciu111chloride, ~nag~lesium chloride or calcium sulphate (gypsum), is an
advantage. Table (6.9j gives the effect of gypsum on the yield of few crops, as arrived at
I by some studies at Central Soil Salinity Research Institute (CSSRI).
I
I
I Table 6.9 :Effect of Gypsum on the Yield of Some Crops (CSSKI, Karnal)
I

Ii Gypsum
(tonnesha)
Grain Yield (quintalslha)
i 1 Paddy Wheat Rarley
S d :Water .'nmt Reclanation of saline-alkali soils can be done in two stages as described below :
Relationship in Irrigation
i) Leach out the excessive salts that give an EC 6 to 8 m-mho/cm,
ii) Remove excessive exchangeable Na by gypsum.
+

At both these stages, adequate drainage is necessary to wash down both the excess salts
and the released Na +

6.5.3 Leaching Process

The fraction of water, infiltraing into the soil, that passes through the root zone is termed
as leaching fraction, (LF). Mathematically, we can write :
LF = [Id /Di = (D; - &Ci7C)/
Di . . . (6.4)

in which, Dd is depth of drainage water (cm), Di the depth of water infiltrated ill r cm).
and ETr is the loss of water in evapotranspiration of the crop (cm).
If la, is the infiltration rate in cnl per day, and cia,, is the irrigation water applietl In
cmlday, we can write for time period, ti :
Di = la, ti
or, I)i = ciV t; ,whichever is less . . , (6.5)

.'. W; = 1-(ET,/laVti), or 1-ETr/dapti . . . (6.6)

Let ECi,,, is electrical conductivity of irrigation water, EC, is electrical conducrivity of

soil extract, and ECd is electrical conductivity of drainage water. In salinity manapeingnt,
for allowable yield reduction, it is assumed @at ECd = EC, , and LF is written as :

It is also assunled herein that the entire root zone is characterised by a ul~ltorlnsalt
concentration, which is constant over the period of time, ti . Ayers and Westcot (FAO).
have worked out a formula, to overcome any inappropriateness in the assumption laildt:
above, such as :

Exa:qple 6.5
For the following data :
ECiw = 3.2 ~-m&i)/cin (saline)

ECd = ECe for allowable yield reduction

Soil infiltration for loam = 1.3 cmhour

Frequency of Irrigation = 10 days
compute LF by two methods :
Solution
a) Using Equation (6.7), we have :
 Water Quality for:
Also Irrigation

22'2 cm
ti = = 17.1 hours
1.3 cm/h
In a ten days cycle, 17.1 hours of imgaion is required.
c It is assumed that the salt content is uniform over the depth and over tl~eentire
period.
b) Using Ayers and Wescot (FAO) method':
3.2 m-mholcm 3'2 - 0.15
LF = -
((5 x 5) - 3.2) m-mho/cm 21.8
wl~ereasLF in 0.64 inthe first method wherein it is assumed that the salt content
is uniform over the depth and over #e entire period.

Now

1av [ 1. --- - 3.0 cni -. 9.4 cm

0.35
9.4 cnl
.'. ti =
1.3 (cm/h)
= 7.2 hours

i.e., 7.2 hours in a 10 day cycle.

6.6 SUMMARY
1n this iinit we have studied the salient quality parameters of irrigation water and the soil
watepthat influence various aspects of plant life. We have also classifi~dsoil and water
quality paranieters into different categories such that the suitability of water for the
growth of a crop, and measures to be adopted for the reclamation of soils can be assessed.
s
6.7 KEY WORDS
Salinity : Amount of salts contained in a sample of water.
Alkalinity : Amount of alkaline substances (like, caustic soda and
ammonia etc.) in a sampe of water.
Leaching : The process of removing soluble matter from soil by the
action of percolating water.
Soil Amendment : It refers to the reclamation of soil (by the methods that are
available) to bring it to normal productive conditions.
Ion : An electricallj charged particle (positively or negatively)
resulting from the breakdown of atoms through a solution
I in water.

6.8 ANSWERS TO SAQs

SAQ 1
~ u s ~ e i l d ematerials
d in irrigation water include soil particles, seeds, leaves, and
debri. Material less than 50 to 100 microns size is deposited in channels and pipes
and can be removed by dredging and flushing. Dissolved materials that are
significant from irrigation point of view are cations of calcium, hgnesium,
scdium and potassium; and anions like bicarbonates, sulphates and chlorides.
 -
Sdl Water - Plant SAQ 2
Rehimuhipin lrripation
Salinity is the sum total of all ionized dissolved salts in water without r.efert.nce to
the specific ions present, whereas if pH value is more than 8.5 it is cirllccl itn
alkaline soil. Salinity is lneasured by ,electrical conductivity (EC), the i~rlitbeing
m-mhoslcm. If, for a sanple EC > 4, then it is saline, and if EC = 4 it rx oat saline.
However, for a sample to be saline as well as alkaline, its EC > 4 an0 exclaur~geable
sodium (Na) percentage, ESP > 15 and pH of soil, water is to be 8.5 or lalore.
SAQ 3
'
There is relationship between crop yield (as a relative percentage) antl \alinity
When the salinity is below a "Threshold value, the crop yield is inclcpe~lde~ll ot
salt concentratlcm. This means that the presence of salts does not al lccl the crop
yield while salinity remains below the "Threshold".
SAQ 4
Eyuivalent weight of K + = 39.1

Equivalent weight of C1- = 35.5

:. Equivalent weight of KC1 = 74.6

Salt concentration in m.ey/l = D l l m-- l a @

eq. wt 74.6
= 13.40 m.e@
SAQ 5
i, Conczntration of certain salts (especially exchangeable N, ions prest'llt 111
+

water) leads to'inc~easein osmotic pressure in saltwater and retlirccs the

evapotranspiration rate. This reduces the yield.
ii) +.
accumulation of certain toxic ions (e.g., N, Boron (B)) in high conct.ntratlon
in plant tissues may lead to "leaf burn", or drying of leaf tissues.
iii) alteration of plant mineral nutritional characteristics.
SAQ 6
In the order of increasing tolerance to sdidity we have : wheat, rice imcl nlaize; it
may be mentioned that for a small change in salinity level there is laryrr fall in
yield.
 W;ltcl. Qunlity for ,
Irrigation

",Wiley Eastern Ltd., 1993.

A. K., "History qfHydrology7',Am. Elsevier, N . Y., 1970.
les, Joseph E.. "Phpicnl (mdGeorc.chnic:aal Properties qf SoiD", McGraw Hill,

Barah, B. C,. "Trruiitional Water Harvesting System9 -An Ecological Econornir:

Surv~?vl',
New Age Inteniational Publications, 1996.
5) Cllow, V. I.: Maidment, D. K.; iu~dMays, L. W., "Applied Hydrology", McGraw Hill
Int. Edn., 1988.
6) Cueuca, Richard H., "Irrigation System Design -An Engineering Approach",
Prentice Hall, 1989.
7) Diksllit. G. S.. et al, "Tunk Irrigation in Karnutnk(r - A Historical Survey", Gandhi
Sal~ityaSangli, B angalore.
8) Fein, Jay S.; and Stephens, Pamela L. (Ed), g monsoon,^", John Wiley and Science,

9) Goldell.. C. R,; McEvoy, J; and Ricllerson, P. J. (Eds), "Environmental Quality of

W(ztc!~-
I)ove/opment", Freeman and Co., 1973.
10) Kxaith, K. R., "Ground WaterAs,~essmc?nt,
I)eveloyr~lc?nt
anclMunagc!ment".
12) Lohani. B . N.: "Environnzentnl Qualitv-Managert~c?flt",
South Asian Publishers, New
Delhi, 1984.
13) Michael. A. M.. "Irrigation Tl~c~ory
and Prtlctice", Vikas Publishing House, Pvt. Ltd.,

14) Ortolano, L., "Environmental Planning and Decision Making", John wiley and Sons,
New York. 1984.
15) Raghuuath, H. M., "Ground W(1ter7',(2nd Ed.), Wiley Easten1 Ltd.
16) Rao, K. L., "lndiu 's W(zrerWetllth", (.)fieatLongnm, 1975.
17) Rauclkivi, A. J., "H~drc~rogv", Pegamon Press, 1979.
18) Singh. Vijay P., "Elarlentan, Hvdrologv", Prentice Hall of India, 1992.
19) Straliler, "lntroriucrion ro Phpicnl Geography", John Wiley, 1970.
20) Singh, V. P., "Hvdmlogic Svsterrrs. Rninfall RunoflModelling, Watershed Modelling",
,
Vol. I and 11, Preutice Hall, 1989.
21) Toddl D. K.. *'(;rnunrlWater Hydrologv", John Wiley and Sons, 1980.
22) Tlionlimn and Muellei;"Frinciple,~qf Wawr Qualify Modelling nnd Conrrol", Harper
aid Row. New York, 1987.
lrrtrtion Equution", Jour. of Hydrology, V d . 58,
1982, pp. 383 - 387.
24) Wilson, H. M., "Irrigation in India", Trans. ASCE, Vol. 23, 1890, pp 217.
25) Walker, WYIIIIR.: Skogertne, Gaylord, V., " S u f l i 1rriga.rion Theory and Pracrice",
Prenticc Hall, 1987.
26) "Sut:ct~s.~fr~l
Irrigution Planning, Mrzntrge?nent",Food ,and Agriculture Organisation of
U. N.. 1W)K.
27) James, D. W.: Hanks K. J.; and Jurirak J. H., "Modern Irrigated Soils", John Wiley,
New York, 19x2.
Tt?chnologv",Vol. ,I and 11, CRC Press: Finkel, H. J. (Ed).
28) ''H(rrldl)ook (?t'lrri~rrtion
29) "Ynr:ket Rook on Mctcr- 1)ccta";Statistics Directorate (Central Water Commission),
April. 1902.
30) "Hrmribook ofAgricultre", ICAR, M a y , 1992.