Irrigation Water Quality, Soil Amendment, and Crop Effects on Sodium Leaching

Download Irrigation Water Quality, Soil Amendment, and Crop Effects on Sodium Leaching

Post on 09-Mar-2017

212 views

Category:

Documents

0 download

Embed Size (px)

TRANSCRIPT

  • This article was downloaded by: [Queensland University of Technology]On: 02 November 2014, At: 01:23Publisher: Taylor & FrancisInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number:1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street,London W1T 3JH, UK

    Arid Land Research andManagementPublication details, including instructions forauthors and subscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/uasr20

    Irrigation Water Quality, SoilAmendment, and Crop Effectson Sodium LeachingJ. W. Bauder & T. A. BrockPublished online: 30 Nov 2010.

    To cite this article: J. W. Bauder & T. A. Brock (2001) Irrigation Water Quality,Soil Amendment, and Crop Effects on Sodium Leaching, Arid Land Research andManagement, 15:2, 101-113, DOI: 10.1080/15324980151062724

    To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15324980151062724

    PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

    Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of allthe information (the Content) contained in the publications on ourplatform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensorsmake no representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy,completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinionsand views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views ofthe authors, and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis.The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and should beindependently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor andFrancis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings,demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoeveror howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, inrelation to or arising out of the use of the Content.

    This article may be used for research, teaching, and private studypurposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution,reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in anyform to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access

    http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/uasr20http://www.tandfonline.com/action/showCitFormats?doi=10.1080/15324980151062724http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15324980151062724

  • and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

    Dow

    nloa

    ded

    by [

    Que

    ensl

    and

    Uni

    vers

    ity o

    f T

    echn

    olog

    y] a

    t 01:

    23 0

    2 N

    ovem

    ber

    2014

    http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditionshttp://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

  • Arid Land Research and Management, 15:101 113, 2001Copyright 2001 Taylor & Francis1532-4982/01 $12.00 .00

    Irrigation Water Quality, Soil Amendment, andCrop E ects on Sodium Leaching

    J. W. BAUDERDepartment of Land Resources and Environmental SciencesMontana State UniversityBozeman, Montana, USA

    T. A. BROCKINEEL Research Center (IRC)Idaho Falls, Idaho, USA

    Due to prolonged irrigation with water of marginal quality, salination of irrigatedsoils in some areas of southeastern Montana has led to a need for better under-standing of the soil and water management alternatives for irrigators. A study wasconducted with Haverson silty clay ( ne-loamy, mixed, calcareous, mesic UsticTorri uvent) to determine the e ect of combinations of chemical amendments,crop species, and irrigation water quality on Na and salt leaching from salt-a ected soils. Amendments included CaSO4, P-CaSO4 and MgCl2; also includedwas a nonamended control treatment. Crops included alfalfa (Medicago sativa L .),barley (Hordeum vulgare L .), sorghum-sudangrass [(Sorghum vulgare Sorghumdrumondii) (sordan)], and a noncropped control. All soil columns (0.15 m 0.5 m)were irrigated with either high Na adsorption ratio (SARadj 16:6), high totaldissolved solids (TDS 1647 mg L 1) water, or low SARadj (1.15), low TDS (747mg L 1) water. Drainage volume, electrical conductivity (EC), SAR, Na ofdrainage water, and Na leaching were monitored over three crop cycles.Irrigation with high SAR-high TDS water increased the soil solution EC to approxi-mately 5.5 dS m1, but did not decrease crop yields relative to irrigation waterhaving SARadj and TDS of 0.37 and 747 mg kg

    1, respectively. Magnesium dis-placed Na on the exchange complex, but the e ects were short-term compared toCaSO4 or P-CaSO4. Amendments increased yields of barley from 14% 27% andalfalfa by 25% but had no e ect on sordan. Columns cropped to barley had 28%greater Na leaching than columns planted to other crops. Noncropped columnsaccumulated the least net soluble salt and Na. Results of this study demonstratethat speci c crop and amendment combinations can signi cantly a ect the e ciencyof saline soil reclamation strategies and impact quality of irrigation return ow.

    Keywords salinity, gypsum, sodium adsorption ratio, electrical conductivity,soil reclamation

    Abbreviations SAR sodium adsorption ratio, TDS total dissolved solids,EC electrical conductivity, ESP exchangeable sodium percentage, CECcation exchange capacity, WQ1 past irrigation water quality, WQ2 future irri-gation water quality

    Received 19 July 2000; accepted 28 August 2000.Address correspondence to Dr. James W. Bauder, Soil and Water Quality Specialist, Department of

    Land Resources and Environmental Sciences, Leon Johnson Hall, Montana State University, PO Box173120, Bozeman, Montana 59717-3120 , USA. E-mail: jbauder@montana.edu

    101

    Dow

    nloa

    ded

    by [

    Que

    ensl

    and

    Uni

    vers

    ity o

    f T

    echn

    olog

    y] a

    t 01:

    23 0

    2 N

    ovem

    ber

    2014

  • The Powder River drains approximately 34,700 km2 of northeastern Wyoming andsoutheastern Montana. Nearly 4,500 ha in Montana are irrigated with Powder Riverwater. The geology of the basin which Powder River drainage includes some igneousand metamorphic rocks but the vast majority of the basin is underlain by sedimentsof marine origin, including limestone, sandstone, gypsiferous shales, and siltstones.The combination of low precipitation (
  • The columns were then arranged as a 4 4 2 complete factorial, randomizedblock design, with three replications. Main treatments included three crop speciesand a noncropped control, three surface-applied soil amendments and a nontreatedcontrol, and two irrigation water qualities, representing ` past (WQ1) and antici-pated ` future (WQ2) irrigation water qualities. Irrigation water constituents andcriteria were based on historic Powder River water quality data and trends, analyzedand reported by Dalby (1988) and presumed to have a consequence of increasingTDS levels of irrigation water due to upstream oil and natural gas well development.Ionic speciation analyses were performed for the intended water qualities to ensurethat the irrigation waters were not supersaturated with respect to CaCO3. Waterquality of both irrigation sources is summarized in Table 2.

    Amendment treatments included (1) CaSO4 12.9 Mg ha1, (2) P-CaSO4, 12.8

    Mg ha1, (3) MgCl2 10.5 Mg ha1, and (4) no amendment (control). Phospho-

    gypsum consists of 80 99% CaSO4, mineral impurities, and less than 1% PO34

    (Keren and Shainberg 1981). The amendments were applied to the soil surfaceand incorporated by mixing the soil to a depth of 0.1m. These rates were determinedto be needed to reduce the ESP of the preexperiment soil by 7%, i.e., essentiallyreplacing all of the exchangeable Na throughout the length of the columns. Croptreatments included: alfalfa (Medicago sativa L.), var. `Ladak 65 ; barley (Hordeumvulgare L.), var. `Steptoe ; and sorghum-sudangras s [Sorghum vulgare Pers.Sorghum drummondii) (sordan) (Steudel) Millsp. & Chase], var. `Sordan 79 .Sorghum-sudangras s is commonly referred to as sordan.

    Three successive barley crops were grown. Alfalfa and sordan were planted atthe beginning of the experiment and regrowth was repeatedly harvested. All cropswere harvested when barley reached the soft dough stage growth stage 11.2 (Large,

    Amending and L eaching Sodic Soils 103

    TABLE 1 Physical and chemical properties of preexperimentHaverson silty clay

    Property Preexperiment value

    EC 2.47 dS m1

    SAR 5.36Saturation water content 0.68 m3 m3

    Bulk density 1.07 Mg m3

    pH 8.27Exchangeable sodium percentage (ESP) 6.9%Cation exchange capacity (CEC) 24.7 cmolc kg

    1

    Alkalinitya 208 mg kg1

    CaCO3 content 5:2 103 kg kg1

    a Alkalinity measured in the form of HCO3 .

    TABLE 2 Ionic composition and chemical criteria of irrigation water treatments

    Constituent

    TotalWater Ca2 Mg2 Na K Cl HCO3 SO

    24 dissolved

    quality solids ECtreatment mg kg1 dsm1 SAR SARadj pHcmol L

    1

    WQ1 0.50 0.33 0.24 0.03 0.09 0.23 0.77 747 0.97 1.15 2.5 8.3WQ2 0.50 0.40 1.49 0.02 0.55 0.38 1.48 1647 2.21 2.22 16.6 8.5

    Dow

    nloa

    ded

    by [

    Que

    ensl

    and

    Uni

    vers

    ity o

    f T

    echn

    olog

    y] a

    t 01:

    23 0

    2 N

    ovem

    ber

    2014

  • 1954), coinciding with each fth irrigation, for a total of three harvests and 15irrigation events.

    Drainage Water and Posttreatment Soil Analyses

    Water was applied at two-week intervals. The entire study lasted approximately 30weeks beyond initial conditioning of the soil columns and crop establishment.Columns were weighed before each irrigation, and average evapotranspiration wascalculated for each crop to determine the amount of water necessary to achieve thedesired leaching fraction. Each column was individually irrigated, using a supplyreservoir and a drip emitter to provide a constant leaching fraction of approxima