IRRIGATION AND DRAINAGE

Irrig. and Drain. 57: 424–434 (2008)

Published online 26 March 2008 in Wiley InterScience (www.interscience.wiley.com) DOI: 10.1002/ird.377

EVALUATION OF AMELIORATION TREATMENTS AND ECONOMIC ASPECTS

OF USING SALINE–SODIC WATER FOR RICE AND WHEAT PRODUCTION ON
SALT-AFFECTED SOILS UNDER ARID LAND CONDITIONSy

A. GHAFOOR1, G. MURTAZA1*, B. AHMAD2 AND TH. M. BOERS3

1
Institute of Soil and Environmental Sciences, University of Agriculture, Faisalabad, Pakistan
2
Department of Environmental and Resource Economics, University of Agriculture, Faisalabad, Pakistan
3
International Institute for Land Reclamation and Improvement (ILRI), Wageningen, The Netherlands

ABSTRACT
This paper reports the amelioration of saline–sodic soils with gypsum and/or farm manure in a 3-year rice–wheat
rotation at three sites, using saline–sodic waters. The treatments were: (1) irrigation with saline–sodic water
without amendment (control); (2) gypsum at 50% gypsum requirement of soil (G50); (3) farm manure at
25 Mg ha
1 annually before rice (FM); and (4) gypsum at 25% gypsum requirement of soil along with 25 Mg ha
1 of
farm manure (G25 þ FM). Soil salinity/sodicity at all sites decreased, treatment effectiveness order being
G50 > G25 þ FM > FM > control. Crop growth, grain yield and net benefits were found to be directly proportional
to the treatment reclamation effectiveness. For economic yields of rice and wheat crops from saline–sodic soils and
water, gypsum at least at 50% GR once or gypsum at 25% GR once along with 25 Mg FM ha
1 each year are
required. Owing to high net benefit, G50 proved the best treatment at all the sites, the value being the highest for site
2 followed by sites 1 and 3. A high net benefit on farmers’ fields with farmer participation implicitly highlighted
the added advantage of farmers’ skills for agronomic operations since the farmer at site 2 was more skilful.
Copyright # 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
key words: low quality water; salt-affected soils; chemical amendments; grain yields; farm manure; gypsum; soil amelioration; farmer
management skills; net benefit

Received 20 October 2006; Revised 2 October 2007; Accepted 26 October 2007

RÉSUMÉ
Cet article traite de l’amélioration des sols salins-sodiques avec du gypse et/ou du fumier dans une rotation
triennale riz–blé sur trois sites, en utilisant les eaux salines-sodiques. Les traitements sont: (1) irrigation avec de
l’eau saline sans fumier (référence); (2) gypse à 50% des besoins du sol (G50); (3) fumier à 25 Mg ha
1 annuellement
avant le riz (FM), et (4) gypse à 25% des besoins du sol avec 25 Mg ha
1 de fumier (G25 þ FM). La salinité/sodicité
du sol décroı̂t sur tous les sites, l’ordre d’efficacité des traitements étant G50 > G25 þ FM > FM > référence. La
croissance des plantes, le rendement en grain et les bénéfices sont directement proportionnels à l’efficacité du
traitement. Pour obtenir un effet économique sur les récoltes de riz et de blé, il est nécessaire de mettre chaque
année au moins le gypse à 50% GR ou le gypse à 25% et le fumier à 25 Mg ha
1. En raison de son bénéfice net élevé,
G50 est le meilleur traitement sur tous les sites, la valeur la plus haute étant pour le site 2 suivi des sites 1 et 3. Cela
montre l’intérêt de la participation du fermier puisque la fermier du site 2 a une meilleure compétence
agronomique. Copyright # 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

* Correspondence to: G. Murtaza, Institute of Soil and Environmental Sciences, University of Agriculture, Faisalabad-38040, Pakistan.
E-mail: gmsandu@hotmail.com
y
Évaluation des traitements d’amélioration des sols salins-sodiques et aspects économiques pour une production de riz et de blé utilisant de l’eau
salée-sodique en zone sèche.

Copyright # 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

 SALINE–SODIC WATER FOR RICE AND WHEAT IRRIGATION 425

mots clés: eau de mauvaise qualité; sols salés; amendements chimiques; rendements de grain; fumier; gypse; amélioration du sol;
qualifications de gestion du fermier; bénéfice net

INTRODUCTION
Irrigated agriculture is contributing a significant share to global food and fibre production. However, with pressing
needs of non-agricultural sectors, supplies of good-quality water are falling short of agricultural demands in
water-scarce areas. To overcome this shortage, tubewells are being installed in the Indus Plains, which mostly pump
groundwater of marginal to hazardous quality owing to high levels of electrical conductivity (EC), sodium
adsorption ratio (SAR) and/or residual sodium carbonate (RSC). This practice of low-quality irrigation is expected
to continue and to intensify in less developed, arid and semi-arid regions that already have high population growth
rates and suffer from serious environmental problems (Qadir and Oster, 2004).
Most of the salt-affected areas of the world are characterized by water scarcity with aquifers having
marginal-quality water. In the absence or limited availability of freshwater, some salt-affected areas have been
brought under cultivation by irrigation with saline–sodic waters. Inappropriate and unscientific use of such waters
and soils has complicated the situation. There has been a gradual increase in salinity- and sodicity-induced land and
water degradation in the north-west plains of the Indo-Gangetic basin, the Yellow River basin in China (Gupta and
Abrol, 2000), the Aral Sea basin in Central Asia, which is considered one of the biggest environmental changes
caused by mankind in recent times (Cai et al., 2003) and the Indus Plains of Pakistan (Ghafoor et al., 2002).
Appropriate management of saline-sodic waters and salt-affected soils has been shown to be advantageous for
several reasons (Rhoades, 1982; Minhas, 1996; Oster and Grattan, 2002). For example, the use of high-electrolyte
waters with low concentrations of sodium (Naþ) has shown its usefulness during the initial amelioration phase of
salt-affected soils (Minhas, 1996; Ghafoor et al., 1997, 2004), by favourably affecting the infiltration rate, bulk
density and structure of soils (Oster and Schroer, 1979). Therefore, use of saline–sodic waters and salt-affected soils
for crop production has the potential to save fresh water for good soils, decreasing disposal problems of low-quality
drainage waters, and bringing barren lands into cultivation with the prospects of a contribution to environmental
conservation through carbon sequestration (Lal, 2001), through an increase in farm employment, decreased rural to
urban migration and thus rural poverty alleviation.
The experiment fields were located in the Fourth Drainage Project Area (FDPA). The FDPA lies within the canal
commanded area (CCA) in the Indus Plains under a typical arid climate covering an area of 14  104 ha, of which
about 44% soils are salt-affected and mostly saline–sodic in nature. We report the results of field experiments
carried out for 3 years in the FDPA, Faisalabad, Pakistan. The specific objectives were: (1) to compare the
effectiveness of gypsum with and without farm manure for the productive management of saline–sodic soils, and
(2) to evaluate the applied treatments in terms of their economic feasibility.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Experimental site and treatments
The experiment fields were located in the FDPA (longitude 708 450 to 738 220 E and latitude 318450 N) covering
an area of 14  104 ha in the central part of the Indus Plains, of which 44% area is salt-affected but is mostly (84%)
saline–sodic in nature. The study fields had remained uncultivated owing to salinity and sodicity for the last couple
of decades and are >50 km apart from each other. The 3-year cropping sequence consisted of rice–wheat rotation
(three rice and three wheat crops). Three experiments were laid out in the FDPA on barren, sandy clay loam,
saline–sodic, alluvial soils (Typic Aquisalids) at sites 1 and 2 and on a clay loam soil (Salic Aquic Natrargids) at
site 3. These sites are provided with tile drains. The study area represents Aridisols, which occupy about 36% of the
world’s soils (Buol et al., 1998).
There were four treatments randomized in Randomized Complete Block Design and three replications were
maintained on a permanent layout. In all the treatments, rice–wheat rotation was used and mainly irrigated with
saline–sodic waters (Table I). The experiment plot size was 13.4  29.2 m. The treatments were:

Copyright # 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Irrig. and Drain. 57: 424–434 (2008)
DOI: 10.1002/ird
426 A. GHAFOOR ET AL.

Table I. Water qualitya used during reclamation and growing rice–wheat crops at different experimental sites

Characteristic Unit Site 1 Site 2 Site 3

EC dS m
1 4.52 3.94 2.77

RSC mmolc l
1 14.40 8.98 0.48
SAR (mmol l
1)1/2 28.30 20.10 7.55
SARadj (mmol l
1)1/2 31.63 22.49 8.50

z
Average of 20 analyses during 3-year period of studies.

1. Irrigation with saline–sodic waters (EC 2.2–4.3 dS m
1, SAR 7.8–28.0, SARadj 8.5–31.6, and RSC
0.4–14.6 mmolc l
1) without amendment application (control);
2. Gypsum application at 50% soil gypsum requirement (G50). Gypsum (70% pure and passed through
30-mesh sieve) was added in two splits; 25% before rice (2001) þ 25% before wheat (2001–02) and mixed in
the surface soil with the help of a cultivator;
3. Farm manure application at 25 Mg ha
1 annually before transplanting each of the rice (FM);
4. Gypsum application at 25% soil gypsum requirement once at the start along with farm manure at 25 Mg ha
1
each year before transplanting rice (G25 þ FM).

Experimental procedure
After layout of the experiments, three sub-samples were combined to make soil samples from each plot at 0–0.15
and 0.15–0.3 m depths. Soil bulk density (BD) by following undisturbed core method and steady-state infiltration
rate (IR) by double-ring infiltrometers were measured (Klute, 1986). These measurements were taken during the
months of June and July 2001 before application of treatments. Gypsum and FM (as available with farmers) were
mixed into the surface soil of the respective treatments with the help of a cultivator. Two to three rice seedlings per
hill, 50-day-old rice of CV Supper Basmati, were transplanted without puddling the soils during the third and fourth
weeks of July each year. Puddling (wet soil ploughing and planking) was avoided in order to have relatively better
soil infiltration, although puddling is a common practice among the rice growers in order to maintain submergence
which is considered an ecological requirement of rice cultivars. The nutrients N, P and K were applied at 100, 68
and 38 kg ha
1, respectively. Half the amount of N as urea, and a full dose of P as single superphosphate and K as
potassium chloride were applied at the time of rice transplanting. The remaining half of N was applied in two equal
splits, 30 and 45 days after rice transplanting. Saline–sodic waters from locally installed tubewells (Table I) were
used for irrigation.
After the rice harvest during the third week of July each year, these fields were prepared for sowing of bread
wheat CV ‘Wattan’. Wheat was sown during the second and third weeks of December each year using a drill
and seed rate of 100 kg ha
1, and maintaining 0.2 m row spacing. The nutrients N and P were applied at 100 and
68 kg ha
1, respectively. Half of the amount of N as urea, and a full dose of P as single superphosphate were applied
at the time of sowing. The remaining half of N was applied in two equal splits with the first and third irrigations to
wheat, and crops were harvested during the second week of May each year.
In total, the experimental plots at sites 1 and 2 received 42 irrigations of saline–sodic water and 10 irrigations of
canal water for growing three rice and three wheat crops. At site 3, out of a total of 57 irrigations for these six crops,
50 were with saline–sodic water and 7 with canal water, and each irrigation of about 7.5 cm in depth. Canal water
irrigation was not designed in these studies but happened to apply under certain unavoidable circumstances to save
crops like interruption in electricity supplies and/or mechanical faults in the pumping system. During the first and
second years of the study there was no rainfall, while 135 mm rainfall was recorded during the third year. The crops
in the whole of the plots were harvested at maturity. Rice was threshed manually and wheat was threshed
mechanically to record straw and grain yields.
After the harvest of each crop, three sub-samples were combined to prepare soil samples from each treatment
plot at 0–0.15 and 0.15–0.3 m depths. The soil paste extracts from these soil samples were analysed for ECe by a



CM-40V EC meter, pHs by a Jenco Model 67P pH meter, CO2
3 and HCO3 by titration against standard H2SO4, Cl

Copyright # 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Irrig. and Drain. 57: 424–434 (2008)
DOI: 10.1002/ird
 SALINE–SODIC WATER FOR RICE AND WHEAT IRRIGATION 427

by titration against AgNO3, Ca2þ þ Mg2þ by titration against EDTA solution, and soluble Naþ and Kþ with the
help of a PFP-7 flame photometer (Page et al., 1982). All the soil or water samples were analysed in duplicate each
time. Statistical analysis of data was carried out following Fisher’s Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) technique and
treatment differences were evaluated using the least significant differences (LSD) test (Steel and Torrie, 1980).

Economic evaluation of treatments

In these investigations the total cost included cultivation, seed and seedbed preparation, pesticides where applied,
amendments (gypsum and farm manure), harvesting, threshing, petroleum, oil and lubricants (POL) for tubewells
and labour for amendment incorporation. Gross income was calculated from the support prices of wheat and rice,
while income from straw was that realized by open auction. Net income was calculated as the difference between
gross income and total cost.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Physical characteristics of soils
Physical properties of soil differed non-significantly among treatments at all the three sites. Since the
experimental fields had lain barren for the last more than 25 years, there were minor differences among treatment
plots in a field but differences among sites were considerable, thus the physical properties for whole of a field under
one experiment are presented in Table II. The experiment soils were badly deteriorated with regard to the BD and
IR. The comparison revealed that there was greater variation in IR than BD among sites. Overall, the soil at site 1
was subject to greater deterioration followed by those at sites 3 and 2. Since the improvement in physical properties
is time-dependent, bulk density and IR were again measured after three years at the termination of project in May/
June 2004 to evaluate the effectiveness of treatments.

Table II. Infiltration rate and bulk density of soils at different sites during soil reclamation

Treatment/site Infiltration rate (cm h
1) Bulk density (Mg m
3)

0.10–0.15 m 0.20–0.25 m 0.30–0.35 m

Original soil (July 2001)

Site 1 0.72 1.77 1.76 1.65
Site 2 0.72 1.67 1.74 1.65
Site 3 1.00 1.63 1.80 1.47
After termination of studies (May–June 2004)
Site 1
Control 0.55 (
24)a 1.55 (
12) 1.85 (þ5) 1.73 (þ5)
G50 0.60 (
17) 1.55 (
12) 1.83 (þ4) 1.73 (þ5)
FM 0.45 (
38 1.70 (
4) 1.78 (þ1) 1.73 (þ5)
G25 þ FM 0.75 (þ4) 1.62 (
8) 1.83 (þ4) 1.75 (þ6)
Site 2
Control 0.45 (
38) 1.67 (0) 1.70 (
2) 1.66 (þ1)
G50 0.75 (þ4) 1.60 (
4) 1.71 (
2) 1.61 (
2)
FM 0.60 (
17) 1.56 (
7) 1.77 (þ2) 1.67 (þ1)
G25 þ FM 0.60 (
17) 1.66 (
1) 1.77 (þ2) 1.71 (þ4)
Site 3
Control 1.10 (þ10) 1.61 (
1) 1.64 (
9) 1.75 (þ19)
G50 1.20 (þ20) 1.54 (
6) 1.82 (þ1) 1.78 (þ21)
FM 0.90 (
10) 1.53 (
6) 1.84 (þ2) 1.82 (þ24)
G25 þ FM 1.35 (þ35) 1.59 (
2) 1.81 (þ1) 1.81(þ23)

a
Figures in parentheses indicate per cent increase (þ) or decrease (
) over the respective initial levels.

Copyright # 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Irrig. and Drain. 57: 424–434 (2008)
DOI: 10.1002/ird
428 A. GHAFOOR ET AL.

Bulk density measured after harvesting of the final wheat crop in May 2004 showed non-significant treatment
differences (Table II). There was a decrease in BD within the upper 0.25 m, while it increased below 0.25 m. A
gradual increase in BD with depth could be attributed to a continuous use of high SAR and RSC irrigation waters
from tubewells (Table I), decreased ECe to SAR ratio in the soil solution (Ayers and Westcot, 1985) and removal
of Naþ from upper to lower soil layers causing soil dispersion of the lower layers (Minhas and Gupta, 1993; Qadir
et al., 2002). Owing to its finer texture, the increase in bulk density was relatively more at site 3 than that at sites 1
and 2.
The infiltration rate (IR) decreased at sites 1 and 2 and increased at site 3, but it was still higher than the critical
limit of 0.25 cm h
1 (US Salinity Laboratory Staff, 1954). Owing to the effect of gypsum with or without farm
manure to sustain electrolyte concentration and relatively high ECe to SAR ratio in the soil solution, the IR was
higher with G25 þ FM and G50 than FM or control plots.

Chemical characteristics of soils

The initial levels of ECe ranged from 6 to 31 dS m
1 (Table III). After the harvest of rice in November 2001 (first
crop in the cropping sequence), there was 50% decrease in ECe over the respective initial values at both soil
depths at all the sites, particularly where ECe 8 dS m
1. After the harvest of wheat in May 2004 (sixth crop in the
cropping sequence), the treatments decreased ECe by 70% over the respective initial levels at all the sites. The
value of ECe (dS m
1) in the upper 0.15 m soil layer was maximum for the control (8.3) followed by FM, G25 þ FM
and G50 (4.9) at site 1; FM (3.3) followed by G25 þ FM, control and G50 (2.4) at site 2, and FM (7.0) followed by
control, G50 and G25 þ FM (4.8) at site 3. In general, gypsum application with or without farm manure performed
better to lower ECe owing to better IR (Table II) by sustaining electrolyte concentration and higher ECe: SAR in soil
solution. The decrease in ECe was maximum at site 3 followed by sites 2 and 1 because of relatively better quality of
irrigation water at site 3 compared to the rest of the sites. The treatment differences levelled off with time. This
reflects the significance of soil characterization to formulate any strategy for soil amelioration instead of general
recommendations even for the management of soil ECe, which is considered relatively easy to manage compared
to SAR.
There was relatively less decrease in ECe after wheat than that after the rice crop, which appears mainly because
of the time lapse between the last irrigation and time of soil sampling during the hot months of April and May every
year. High evaporation during this period promotes salt accumulation in surface layers through capillary action
(Armstrong et al., 1996). Similar experiences have been reported by Mahmood et al. (2001) and Murtaza et al.
(2006) in Pakistan and by Rao et al. (1994) in India. In addition, rice is grown under submerged conditions where a
high leaching fraction is implicitly achieved, which helps leach soluble salts to a greater extent than during the
wheat season.
Initially, soil SAR values at site 1 were highest, followed by sites 3 and 2 (Table IV). After harvest of rice in
November 2001, SAR decreased by about 50% at all the sites, which suggested that the higher the initial SAR, the
greater and faster was the decrease in it due to greater probability of Naþ–Ca2þ exchange on the cation exchange
sites (Bresler et al., 1982; Ghafoor, 1999). The greater decrease in soil SAR at site 3 could be associated with
relatively better quality of irrigation water compared to that used on other sites. The value of SAR in the upper
0.15 m soil layer was maximum for the control (47.9) followed by G25 þ FM, FM and G50 (26.0) at site 1; FM
(23.1) followed by control, G25 þ FM and G50 (17.2) at site 2, and FM (28.1) followed by control, G50 and
G25 þ FM (17.9) at site 3. Application of gypsum in two splits at 50% of soil GR ameliorated soil even with the use
of highly saline–sodic waters within a reasonably short time. This is based on the fact that these soils have low
cation exchange capacity (CEC 6–10 cmolc kg
1), for which the optimum concentration of Ca2þ in soil solution has
been found as 8 mmolc l
1 (Hassan, 2004). The Ca2þ in excess of this concentration mainly tends to leach down
without affecting Naþ desorption from the zone of amendment application in soils. In other studies using higher
levels of gypsum application on similar soils, leaching of excess Ca2þ that could not take part in Naþ–Ca2þ
exchange has been reported (Murtaza et al., 1998). Rhoades (1982) concluded that Ca2þ concentration in soil
solution seldom exceeds 15 mmolc l
1 at any rate of gypsum addition to saline–sodic soils under natural field

Copyright # 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Irrig. and Drain. 57: 424–434 (2008)
DOI: 10.1002/ird
 Table III. Effect of amendment application alone and in combination on electrical conductivity of the soils (ECe) at different soil depths

Treatment ECe (dS m
1) at 0–0.15 m soil depth ECe (dS m
1) at 0.15–0.30 m soil depth

Initiala PR1b PW1c PR2 PW2 PR3 PW3 Initial PR1 PW1 PR2 PW2 PR3 PW3

Site 1

Copyright # 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Control 27.4 10.1 (
63)d 9.1 (
67) 8.6 (
69) 9.5 (
65) 5.5 (
80) 8.7 (
68) 16.4 11.5 (
30) 7.9 (
52) 8.0 (
51) 9.7 (
41) 4.1 (
75) 8.7 (
47)
G50 25.3 12.8 (
49) 8.8 (
65) 5.8 (
77) 4.8 (
81) 4.3 (
83) 4.9 (
81) 17.7 11.5 (
35) 7.5 (
58) 6.1 (
66) 5.3 (
70) 4.8 (
73) 4.8 (
73)
FM 20.9 10.2 (
51) 8.1 (
61) 6.5 (
69) 7.6 (
64 4.7 (
78) 6.4 (
69) 20.0 10.0 (
50) 7.3 (
64) 7.2 (
64) 8.1 (
60 4.7 (
76) 6.9 (
66)
G25 þ FM 24.2 12.3 (
49) 10.5 (
57) 10.5 (
57) 9.9 (
59) 5.8 (
76) 6.3 (
74) 13.7 11.1 (
19) 8.0 (
42) 10.5 (
23) 10.5 (
23) 6.0 (
56) 8.4 (
39)
Site 2
Control 8.1 4.0 (
51) 7.2 (
11) 2.2 (
73) 5.7 (
30) 4.0 (
51) 2.6 (
68) 12.1 5.0 (
59) 5.1 (
58) 3.0 (
75) 6.2 (
49) 3.5 (
71) 3.6 (
70)
G50 8.8 3.8 (
57) 8.9 (þ1) 1.7 (
81) 4.6 (
48) 3.3 (
62) 2.4 (
73) 9.9 5.2 (
48) 6.4 (
35) 3.0 (
70) 5.0 (
50) 2.9 (
71) 3.2 (
68)
FM 7.5 4.6 (
39) 10.1 (þ35) 1.8 (
76) 5.6 (
25) 4.6 (
39) 3.3 (
56) 9.0 6.2 (
31) 7.5 (
17) 1.9 (
79) 7.2 (
20) 4.7 (
48) 4.3 (
52)
G25 þ FM 5.7 6.0 (þ5) 9.9 (þ74) 2.7 (
53) 4.6 (
19) 4.8 (
16) 3.0 (
47) 9.1 6.1 (
33) 7.8 (
14) 3.7 (
59) 4.9 (
46) 3.6 (
60) 3.5 (
62)
Site 3
Control 24.1 5.4 (
78) 7.5 (
69) 3.5 (
86) 5.3 (
78) 2.5 (
90) 5.9 (
76) 26.1 4.5 (
83) 7.2 (
72) 2.9 (
89) 3.6 (
86) 2.8 (
89) 5.1 (
80)
G50 38.5 8.2 (
79) 17.6 (
54) 4.4 (
89) 6.0 (
84) 2.6 (
93) 5.8 (
85) 35.2 8.6 (
76) 8.8 (
75) 4.0 (
89) 4.6 (
87) 2.9 (
92) 4.6 (
87)
FM 24.2 9.4 (
61) 11.8 (
51) 5.4 (
78) 6.9 (
72) 3.7 (
85) 7.0 (
71) 22.5 7.9 (
65) 10.7 (
52) 4.8 (
79) 5.2 (
77) 4.1 (
82) 5.9 (
74)
G25 þ FM 30.6 7.4 (
76) 12.2 (
60) 4.7 (
85) 3.8 (
88) 3.0 (
90) 4.8 (
84) 25.7 5.6 (
78) 7.4 (
71) 3.4 (
87) 2.5 (
90) 2.9 (
89) 4.0 (
84)

a
Initial soil electrical conductivity before start of the experiment.
b
PR represents post-rice electrical conductivity of the soil samples collected during year 1 (PR1), year 2 (PR2), and year 3 (PR3).
c
PW represents post-wheat electrical conductivity of the soil samples collected during year 1 (PW1), year 2 (PW2), and year 3 (PW3).
d
Figures in parentheses indicate per cent increase (þ) or decrease (
) over the respective initial electrical conductivity levels.
SALINE–SODIC WATER FOR RICE AND WHEAT IRRIGATION
429

Irrig. and Drain. 57: 424–434 (2008)

DOI: 10.1002/ird
 430

Table IV. Effect of amendment application alone and in combination on sodium adsorption ratio of the soils (SAR) at different soil depths

Treatment SAR at 0–0.15 m soil depth SAR at 0.15–0.30 m soil depth

Initiala PR1b PW1c PR2 PW2 PR3 PW3 Initial PR1 PW1 PR2 PW2 PR3 PW3

Copyright # 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Site 1
Control ‘124.3 65.0 (
48)d 42.0 (
66) 44.3 (
64) 53.5 (
57) 26.4 (
79) 47.9 (
61) ‘73.5 77.3 (þ5) 35.7 (
51) 44.6 (
39) 27.9 (
62) 20.7 (
72) 45.8 (
38)
G50 ‘112.2 56.3 (
50) 43.9 (
61) 28.1 (
75) 24.5 (
78) 21.0 (
81) 26.0 (
77) ‘69.1 63.2 (
8) 33.7 (
51) 33.8 (
51) 28.8 (
58) 23.8 (
66) 20.9 (
70)
FM ‘73.0 50.4 (
31) 33.1 (
55) 31.4 (
57) 32.0 (
56) 22.6 (
69) 33.0 (
55) ‘78.9 59.6 (
24) 27.3 (
65) 35.4 (
55) 33.9 (
57) 18.0 (
77) 38.0 (
52)
G25 þ FM ‘124.9 71.5 (
43) 43.3 (
65) 42.8 (
66) 29.0 (
77) 25.9 (
79) 37.2 (
70) ‘78.1 66.8 (
14) 34.4 (
56) 45.6 (
42) 37.6 (
52) 36.5 (
53) 42.8 (
45)
Site 2
Control ‘42.3 37.5 (
11) 18.8 (
55) 8.7 (
79) 24.4 (
42) 22.5 (
46) 20.2 (
52) ‘44.2 36.1 (
18) 48.6 (þ10) 14.8 (
67) 31.4 (
29) 21.3 (
52) 53.8 (þ22)
G50 ‘53.5 37.6 (
30) 16.7 (
69) 7.9 (
85) 19.3 (
64) 19.7 (
63) 17.2 (
68) ‘46.3 39.3 (
15) 26.3 (
43) 19.5 (
58) 27.3 (
41) 19.3 (
58) 16.3 (
65)
FM ‘54.1 39.9 (
26) 30.6 (
43) 9.6 (
82) 29.5 (
46) 28.8 (
47) 23.1 (
57) ‘42.5 48.2 (þ13) 47.4 (þ12) 13.9 (
67) 38.8 (
9) 17.8 (
58) 29.0 (
32)
G25 þ FM ‘36.6 23.7 (
35) 17.1 (
53) 13.2 (
64) 20.0 (
45) 25.2 (
31) 19.5 (
47) ‘32.2 24.0 (
26) 36.1 (þ12) 21.2 (
34) 24.4 (
24) 18.5 (
43) 20.2 (
37)
Site 3
A. GHAFOOR ET AL.

Control ‘92.7 40.6 (
56) 29.8 (
68) 18.7 (
80) 24.0 (
74) 13.4 (
86) 23.4 (
75) ‘103.5 39.1 (
62) 18.8 (
82) 18.2 (
82) 20.4 (
80) 4.8 (
95) 28.0 (
72)
G50 ‘145.0 36.6 (
75) 20.2 (
86) 18.2 (
87) 19.0 (
87) 11.9 (
92) 20.4 (
86) ‘109.8 47.2 (
57) 26.0 (
76) 23.1 (
79) 25.0 (
77) 8.8 (
92) 25.0 (
77)
FM ‘96.0 42.8 (55) 31.2 (
68) 32.8 (
66) 29.6 (
69) 17.4 (
82) 28.1 (
71) ‘86.2 55.2 (
36) 31.6 (
63) 30.7 (
64) 33.4 (
61) 14.2 (
84 29.1 (
66)
G25 þ FM ‘109.0 26.0 (
76) 14.9 (
86) 14.9 (
86) 14.4 (
87) 10.5 (
90) 17.9 (
84) ‘97.3 41.5 (
57) 15.2 (
84) 17.0 (
83) 11.7 (
88) 6.7 (
93) 20.2 (
79)

a
Initial soil SAR before start of the experiment.
b
PR represents post-rice SAR of the soil samples collected during year 1 (PR1), year 2 (PR2), and year 3 (PR3).
c
PW represents post-wheat SAR of the soil samples collected during year 1 (PW1), year 2 (PW2), and year 3 (PW3).
d
Figures in parentheses indicate per cent increase (þ) or decrease (
) over the respective initial SAR levels.

Irrig. and Drain. 57: 424–434 (2008)

DOI: 10.1002/ird
 SALINE–SODIC WATER FOR RICE AND WHEAT IRRIGATION 431

conditions. However, reclamation of deeper soil layers and to harvest the benefits of topsoil amelioration, further
leaching with fresh water will be better.

Crop growth and yield

Grain filling of the first rice crop failed at site 1 (Table V) and yield at site 3 was very low, while that at site 2
was reasonably good. The poor yields of rice at sites 1 and 3 could be attributed largely to high levels of ECe, which
were above the limits to cause 50% reduction in paddy yield (Ayers and Westcot, 1985), However, rice is relatively
more tolerant to SAR; rather SAR up to 30 is considered an asset to maintain the fields submerged (Ghafoor et al.,
1997, 2002) which is the ecological requirement for good rice production in this region (Ghafoor et al., 2004). In
general, the economic yields of the subsequent wheat and rice crops were improved gradually, because of the
improvement in the chemical characteristics of the soils (Tables III and IV). However, the rice paddy yield
decreased at site 2 compared to the first year because of certain edaphic factors since crop yields are the function of
several factors. The same was observed for the third rice crop at site 3. The paddy yield (kg ha
1) of the third rice
crop (fifth in sequence) was maximum with G25 þ FM (1190) followed by G50, FM and control (796) at site 1; FM
(1190) followed by G25 þ FM, G50 and control (697) at site 2, and G50 (1320) followed by FM, control and
G25 þ FM (835) at site 3. The grain yield (kg ha
1) of the third wheat crop (sixth in sequence) was maximum with
G50 (2510) followed by G25 þ FM, FM and control (1790) at site 1; G50 (2370) followed by control (2330),
G25 þ FM (2240) and FM (2080) at site 2, and control (3330) followed by G25 þ FM, FM and G50 (2720) at site 3.
Although rice proved a better crop to decrease soil ECe and SAR, wheat produced better grain yield than rice. The
growth response of these crops may be attributed to their differential genetic make-up; rice can tolerate higher SAR
levels than wheat, while the reverse is the case for salinity levels (Gupta and Yadav, 1986; Ghafoor et al., 2004).
Gypsum application with or without farm manure (G25 þ FM) resulted in better wheat yield than that of rice.
The infiltration rate with G25 þ FM treatment increased to a greater extent, which was an appropriate condition for
the growth of wheat but not for rice as rice was transplanted without puddling the soils. While rice grows well under
submerged soil conditions, improved infiltration limited this condition, which resulted in alternate wetting and

Table V. Paddy and straw yields of rice, and grain and straw yields of wheat (kg ha
1) during soil reclamation at different sites

Site/treatment Rice 2001 Wheat 2001–02 Rice 2002 Wheat 2002–03 Rice 2003 Wheat 2003–04

Paddy Straw Grain Straw Paddy Straw Grain Straw Paddy Straw Grain Straw

Site 1
Control 00 2 820 272b 445b 00 8b 1 360b 1 910b 796 1 760b 1 790 2 970
G50 00 3 060 2 100a 2 790a 388 892a 3 490a 4 480a 845 3 410a 2 510 3 790
FM 00 2 520 1 110b 1 330b 75 371ab 2 510ab 3 310ab 845 2 530b 2 000 4 510
G25 þ FM 00 2 720 939b 1 330b 52 297ab 2 360ab 2 860ab 1 190 2 150b 2 470 3 890
LSD 1 196NS 431 732 172NS 172 557 785 395NS 460 473NS 1 036NS
Site 2
Control 3 530 7 780 2 570 4 180 1 140 1 960 3 900 5 060 697 2 040 2 330 3 150
G50 3 730 8 200 3 430 5 090 1 760 3 590 4 520 6 280 914 2 490 2 370 3 660
FM 2 690 5 950 2 620 3 950 1 570 3 680 4 180 5 650 1 190 2 770 2 080 3 020
G25 þ FM 3 400 7 480 3 210 4 640 1 010 2 320 4 560 5 880 1 090 2 050 2 240 2 930
LSD 776NS 1 707NS 598NS 781NS 586NS 1 298NS 1 013NS 888NS 323NS 804NS 641NS 616NS
Site 3
Control 149 346 1 510 3 040ab 1 390 2 950 2 840ab 3 320b 991 1 200 3 330a 4 920
G50 445 964 2 250 3 460a 1 470 2 910 3 210a 4 620a 1 320 1 460 2 720b 5 400
FM 198 445 1 880 2 170b 1 270 2 760 2 730b 3 530b 1 110 1 380 2 730b 4 590
G25 þ FM 223 519 2 450 4 100a 1 900 3 890 2 860ab 3 360b 835 1 050 2 770b 5 460
LSD 180NS 410NS 411NS 538 588NS 650NS 191 391 249NS 299NS 219 550NS

Means followed by same letter(s) within a column for each crop year do not differ significantly according to LSD test ( p  0.05).

Significant at p  0.05; NSNon-significant.

Copyright # 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Irrig. and Drain. 57: 424–434 (2008)
DOI: 10.1002/ird
432 A. GHAFOOR ET AL.

drying conditions prevailing. Thus lack of continuous submergence promoted the growth of weeds as well as
leaching of nutrients, and both these factors impacted on rice yield. Earlier such observations were recorded by
Ghafoor et al. (1997) and Mahmood et al. (2001). It was observed that grain size of both crops remained smaller and
the sterility percentage in rice (data not reported) increased, particularly in the control plots at all the sites. The
overall treatment effectiveness for rice and wheat at all sites was in the order of G50 > G25 þ FM > FM > control.
If the reclamation programmes are undertaken on a large scale in developing and agricultural countries like
Pakistan, several other indirect benefits could be attributed. For example, enhanced crop growth with gradual
improvement in salt-affected soils could give an added benefit of cleaning the environment through sequestration
of atmospheric CO2 (Lal, 2001). One mole of CO2 consumed could yield 1.4 g of biomass and consumption of
70 moles of CO2 in photosynthesis, and such a rate of photosynthesis simultaneously effects a net release of
100 moles of O2 (Monteith, 1981). Such considerations make the soil reclamation programmes even more
attractive, environment friendly and cost-effective by providing farm employment, which in turn contributes to
alleviation of rural poverty. With the appreciation in land value, such management of salt-affected soils could help
restrict rural to urban migration of those communities confronted with salt-affected lands and water degradation.
However, the results have proved that with saline and saline–sodic irrigation water, the leaching process of
saline–sodic soils can be started towards reclamation, which effects the saving of canal water.

Treatment evaluation in terms of relative costs and expenditures

The expenditure and income were calculated for the quantities of amendments (i.e. expenses of the additional
treatment) at actual cost but produced at government support prices since the aim is to calculate the cost of making
barren salt-affected soils productive. The cost of crop production even on normal (non-saline and non-sodic) soils is
not favourable to farmers in developing countries including many areas of Pakistan. There is no subsidy provided

Table VI.. Relative income and cost evaluation of various soil amelioration treatments up to wheat 2003–04

Site/treatment Expenditure Gross income Net income

US$ ha
1

Site 1
Control 117 811 694
G50 312 1 776 1 464
FM 257 1 248 991
G25 þ FM 339 1 297 958
Site 2
Control 251 2 308 2 058
G50 380 2 770 2 391
FM 360 2 408 2 048
G25 þ FM 458 2 523 2 065
Site 3
Control 224 1 910 1 686
G50 235 2 131 1 778
FM 260 1 818 1 558
G25 þ FM 385 1 825 1 441
Mean of all sites
Control 197 1 676 1 479
G50 309 2 226 1 878
FM 292 1 825 1 532
G25 þ FM 394 1 882 1 488

Prices: Gypsum at US$0.48 per bag at sites 1 and 2, but US$0.49 per bag at site 3; FM at US$6.69 per trolley of 4 t at all sites; 1 DPL for
broadcasting at US$1.67 per day per 20 bags of gypsum and US$ 2.50 per trolley of FM; Paddy KS282 at US$0.10 per kg and basmati Supper at
US$0.19 per 40 kg; rice straw at US$12.40 per acre and wheat straw at US$0.03 per kg.

Copyright # 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Irrig. and Drain. 57: 424–434 (2008)
DOI: 10.1002/ird
 SALINE–SODIC WATER FOR RICE AND WHEAT IRRIGATION 433

on agricultural inputs by the government of Pakistan. The farm labour by the farmers and their families is also not
calculated in economic evaluations. Other costs on cultural operations being common with all the treatments
(fertilizers, ploughing, weeding, irrigation costs) were not considered, as suggested by CIMMYT (1988).
On the basis of six crops (Table VI), G50 gave maximum net benefit (US$) of 1464 followed by FM (991),
G25 þ FM (958) and control (694) at site 1. At site 2, G50 gave maximum net benefit (US$) of 2391 followed by
G25 þ FM (2065), control (2058) and FM (2048). The highest net income (US$) at site 3 was obtained with G50
(1778) followed by control (1686), FM (1558) and G25 þ FM (1441). The cost of treatments was recovered from
the first two crops at sites 2 and 3, but from the first three crops at site 1. On the basis of all the crops at the three sites,
more income was received from wheat compared to that from rice as the paddy yield was low due to very high ECe
and SAR at the time of transplanting the first rice in July 2001 (Tables III and IV). The initially high ECe and SAR in
July 2001 decreased considerably during the first rice crop, thereby having a favourable effect on the yields of
subsequent crops. On the basis of six crops on all three sites, the highest net benefits (US$) were realized with G50
(1878) followed by FM (1532), G25 þ FM (1488) and the control (1479) rendering gypsum application
cost-effective, farmer-friendly and a viable strategy to sustain the productive management of low-quality soil and
water resources.

CONCLUSIONS
Results show that low-quality groundwater could be successfully used to irrigate rice and wheat crops on
medium-textured saline–sodic soils. Use of agricultural grade gypsum at 50% GR of such soils in two splits has the
potential for soil amelioration and crop productivity. Addition of farm manure along with gypsum proved more
beneficial for wheat than rice. The rice crop proved better for soil amelioration, while wheat yielded better and
contributed more to the net benefits than rice. Although soils have been considerably ameliorated, salinization and
sodication may reoccur, warranting gypsum application after a couple of years of cropping with low-quality waters
to maintain soil productivity, particularly under arid land conditions. Application of gypsum at 50% GR in two
splits proved a viable option for productive utilization of low-quality soils and waters where the management skills
of farmers are always taken for granted. The studies proved that with brackish water, the leaching process of
salt-affected soils can be started to effect the saving of canal water, but only in the initial 1–2 years. However, for
large-scale studies similar to the present one, the effects of brackish water must be checked at the subsoil layers,
particularly below 30 cm depth.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
We are thankful to the National Drainage Programme of Pakistan for funding these studies under the project
‘‘Farmer Participation in Technology Development and Transfer for Using Agricultural Drainage Water for
Growing Grain Crops during Reclamation of Saline–Sodic Soils’’.

REFERENCES

Armstrong ASB, Rycroft DW, Tanton TW. 1996. Seasonal movement of salts in naturally structured saline-sodic clay soils. Agricultural Water
Management 32: 15–27.
Ayers RS, Westcot DW. 1985. Water quality for agriculture. Irrigation and Drainage Paper 29. FAO: Rome.
Bresler E, McNeal BL, Carter DL. 1982. Saline and Sodic Soils: Principles–Dynamics–Modelling. Springer-Verlag: New York.
Buol SW, Hole RD, McCracken RJ, Southond RJ. 1998. Soil Genesis and Classification, 4th edn. Panima Publishing Corporation: New Delhi.
Cai X, McKinney DC, Rosegrant MW. 2003. Sustainability analysis for irrigation water management in the Aral Sea region. Agricultural
Systems 76: 1043–1066.
CIMMYT. 1988. From Agronomic Data to Farmer Recommendations: an Economics Training Manual. Completely revised edition. Mexico, DF.
Ghafoor A. 1999. Concentration of Ca2þ in irrigation water for reclaiming saline-sodic soils. Pakistan Journal of Agriculture Sciences 36:
145–148.

Copyright # 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Irrig. and Drain. 57: 424–434 (2008)
DOI: 10.1002/ird
434 A. GHAFOOR ET AL.

Ghafoor A, Chaudhry MR, Qadir M, Murtaza G, Ahmad HR. 1997. Use of Drainage Water for Crops on Normal and Salt-Affected Soils without
Disturbing Biosphere Equilibrium. International Waterlogging and Salinity Research Institute (IWASRI). Publication No. 176, IWASRI:
Lahore, Pakistan.
Ghafoor A, Qadir M, Murtaza G. 2002. Agriculture in the Indus Plains: sustainability of land and water resources. International Journal of
Agriculture and Biology 4: 429–437.
Ghafoor A, Qadir M, Murtaza G. 2004. Salt-Affected Soils: Principles of Management. Allied Book Centre, Urdu Bazar: Lahore.
Gupta IC, Yadav JSP. 1986. Crop tolerance to saline irrigation waters. Journal of the Indian Society of Soil Science 34: 379–386.
Gupta RK, Abrol IP. 2000. Salinity build-up and changes in the rice–wheat system of the Indo-Gangetic Plains. Experimental Agriculture 36:
273–284.
Hassan W. 2004. Effectiveness of application rate of Ca2þ for the reclamation of different textured saline-sodic soils. MSc thesis, Institute of Soil
and Environmental Sciences, University of Agriculture, Faisalabad.
Klute A. 1986. Methods of Soil Analysis. Part 1. Agronomy 9, Soil Science Society of America, Madison, Wisc.
Lal R. 2001. Potential of desertification control to sequester carbon and mitigate the greenhouse effect. Climatic Change 51: 35–72.
Mahmood K, Nadeem MY, Ibrahim M. 2001. Use of gypsum as an ameliorant of brackish ground water. International Journal of Agriculture and
Biology 3: 308–311.
Minhas PS. 1996. Saline water management for irrigation in India. Agricultural Water Management 30: 1–24.
Minhas PS, Gupta RK. 1993. Using high salinity and SAR waters for crop production – some Indian experiences. In Towards the Rational Use of
High Salinity Tolerant Plants, vol. 2, Leith H, Masoom AAl (eds). Kluwer Academic Publishers: The Netherlands; 423–432.
Monteith JL. 1981. Climatic variation and the growth of crops. Quarterly Journal. Royal Mateorological Society 104: 749–774.
Murtaza G, Ghafoor A, Ranjha AM, Qadir M. 1998. Calcium losses during reclamation of medium textured low CEC saline-sodic soils. Journal
of Arid Land Studies 7S: 175–178.
Murtaza G, Ghafoor A, Qadir M. 2006. Irrigation and soil management strategies for using saline-sodic water in a cotton–wheat rotation.
Agricultural Water Management 81: 98–114.
Oster JD, Grattan SR. 2002. Drainage water reuse. Irrigation and Drainage Systems 16: 297–310.
Oster JD, Schroer FW. 1979. Infiltration as influenced by irrigation water quality. Soil Science Society of America Journal 43: 444–447.
Page AL, Miller RH, Keeney DR. 1982. Methods of Soil Analysis. Part II. ASA Monograph 9. Madison, Wisc.
Qadir M, Oster JD. 2004. Crop and irrigation management strategies for saline-sodic soils and waters aimed at environmentally sustainable
agriculture. Science of the Total Environment 323: 1–19.
Qadir M, Ghafoor A, Murtaza G. 2001. Use of saline-sodic waters through phytoremediation of calcareous saline-sodic soils. Agricultural Water
Management 50: 197–210.
Qadir M, Qureshi RH, Ahmad N. 2002. Amelioration of calcareous saline-sodic soils through phytoremediation and chemical strategies. Soil
Use and Management 18: 381–385.
Rao DLN, Singh NT, Gupta RK, Tyagi NK. 1994. Salinity Management for Sustainable Agriculture. Central Soil Salinity Research Institute:
Karnal; 314 pp.
Rhoades JD. 1982. Reclamation and management of salt-affected soils after drainage. In Proceedings, Soil and Water Management Seminar, 29
November 1982, Lethbridge Alberta, Canada; 123–197.
Steel RGD, Torrie JH. 1980. Principles and Procedures of Statistics, 2nd edn. McGraw-Hill Book Company: New York.
US Salinity Laboratory Staff. 1954. Diagnosis and Improvement of Saline and Alkali Soils. USDA Handbook No. 60. US Government Printing
Office: Washington, DC.

Copyright # 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Irrig. and Drain. 57: 424–434 (2008)
DOI: 10.1002/ird