European Journal of Soil Science, June 1994, 45, 153-157

A new method for the estimation of total dissolved salts in

saturation extracts of soils from electrical conductivity
M . S I M O N , 0. C A B E Z A S , I . G A R C I A & P. M A R T I N E Z
Departamento Edafologia y Quimica Agricola, Universidad de Granada, Granada, Spain

Summary
We have determined electrical conductivity (E,) and total dissolved salts (S ) in saturation extracts
from 39 soil samples from the Baza basin (Province of Granada, south-east Spain). E, ranged from
2.8 to llOdS m-', and S from 2 to 4448 dm-3.
The relationship between S and E , was not linear. When the saturation extracts were diluted with
progressively larger quantities of distilled water and their electrical conductivity calculated (E,,)
with the equation
Eec = (Ed - Ew)f

where Ed and E , are the conductivity of the diluted extract and the distilled water and f is the
dilution factor, the relationship between S and E,, tended to become linear.
The highest linear correlation coefficient relating S (mgdm-3) and E,, (dS m-') was reached
when Ee, values were calculated for dilutions with a conductivity ( E d )between 0.1 and 0.3 dS rn-'
(g,).The regression equation was S = 490 qcwith r2=0.999. This relationship can be used in all
saturation extracts, regardless of the concentration and type of ions present.

Introduction and the total quantity of dissolved salts (S) in saturation

extracts of soil have yielded very different results, depending
It is difficult to predict total dissolved salts from electrical
on the concentration and type of ions present. The values
conductivity measurements for soils with a high content of
reported in the literature for S (mg dm-3) :E, (dS m-') ratios
soluble salts.
in solutions with a maximum conductivity of up to 16 dS m-'
If the temperature and geometry of a cell, through which an
vary between 500 and 1000. The lowest of these are for less
electric current is passed, are fixed, the electrical conductivity
concentrated solutions in which Nat, C1- and HCO; are the
of a solution is a function of the concentration, total charge and
predominant ions (US Salinity Laboratory Staff, 1954; Tanji &
mobility of the ion species. This relationship between ion
Biggar, 1972) and the highest for more concentrated solutions
concentration and electrical conductivity means that the latter
abundant in Ca2+, Mg2+ and SO:- (Tanji & Biggar, 1972;
parameter is highly useful for calculating the total content of
Chang et al., 1983). These results imply that each of the above
salts dissolved in soil extracts (US Salinity Laboratory Staff,
ratios is valid for only a specific concentration and type of
1954; McNeal et al., 1970). The relationship is not completely
soluble salts, and thus has limited application.
linear, however, because electrical conductivity is directly
The aim of this work is to establish an equation relating
related to total charge and ion mobility, and as the
electrical conductivity to total dissolved salts, which would be
concentration increases there is a concomitant decrease in
applicable to any kind of soil-saturation extract, whatever the
both these parameters due to relaxation and electrophoretic
salt concentration or composition.
phenomena and also to the formation of ion pairs (Tanji &
Biggar, 1972; Marion & Babcock, 1976). This last factor
depends in turn upon the type of ions in solution. More ion Materials and methods
pairs are formed with Ca2+, Mg2+ and SO:- than with Na+ Thirty-nine soil samples with different quantitative and
and HCO; (Alzubaidi & Webster, 1983). qualitative salt contents (including layers of saline efflores-
For this reason the numerous attempts that have been made cence) were taken in the province of Granada, south-east
to establish a relationship between electrical conductivity (E,) Spain.
We prepared a saturation extract from each sample (US
Received 30 April 1993; revised version accepted 10 December 1993 Salinity Laboratory Staff, 1954) and determined its electrical

153
154 M . Simon et al.

Table 1. Electrical conductivity (&), com-

Ionic cornposition/rnmol,dm-3
- position and total dissolved salts (S) of soil-
& ?,
saturation extracts
Soil /dSm-' HCO; C1- SO:- Ca2+ Mg2+ Na+ K+ /gdm-3
1 29.3 nd" 35.0 489 18.5 40.0 475 2.5 36.6
2 50.6 1.0 307 875 24.4 153 1027 11.5 79.4
3 80.0 nd 1322 1206 28.5 822 1671 23.4 154.7
4 52.8 0.9 565 925 30.0 543 915 9.9 93.1
5 15.1 2.0 60.0 267 23.0 206 105 4.2 20.6
6 38.5 2.0 292 1106 34.5 92 1 439 15.1 86.1
7 47.5 1.9 467 1638 34.4 1431 64 1 18.3 128.8
8 50.2 2.0 560 201 1 28.5 1776 759 20.6 156.9
9 39.4 35.0 1123 5897 16.4 4030 3021 26.3 444.8
10 33.6 11.7 217 796 32.0 608 384 5.1 63.7
11 47.0 2.0 470 1243 34.6 1020 659 9.6 105.1
12 32.1 nd 296 519 33.0 428 357 3.8 49.6
13 54.8 nd 620 1552 32.5 1316 824 10.9 132.5
14 2.79 2.7 0.2 31.8 25.1 9.9 0.3 0.8 2.33
15 2.93 2.7 1.o 35.6 23.5 15.5 0.7 1.0 2.63
16 3.32 3.3 0.8 46.3 23.3 25.1 1.9 1.2 3.31
17 4.12 1.9 2.3 68.9 20.0 48.1 5.4 0.6 4.63
18 5.16 1.6 4.1 86.0 22.1 55.1 15.5 0.3 5.85
19 4.70 1.5 6.5 66.9 20.4 35.4 20.0 0.2 4.84
20 4.64 3.8 11.1 57.1 23.0 40.3 7.6 2.4 4.58
21 12.3 2.9 85.0 161 26.9 145 73.1 6.5 15.2
22 22.3 1.7 180 399 28.5 337 21 1 10.8 35.6
23 36.3 2.3 395 804 31.5 724 439 17.3 72.9
24 41.2 2.9 520 862 39.4 822 523 14.5 83.4
25 20.5 10.5 160 303 28.9 259 186 10.3 29.3
26 35.1 5.8 400 548 33.0 55 1 359 21.8 57.3
27 47.4 4.1 64 1 1151 34.1 1118 639 22.7 108.1
28 54.4 4.7 810 1388 34.1 1381 790 16.3 131.9
29 43.1 nd 979 4853 21.6 4112 1670 35.6 357.8
30 49.9 2.0 1071 4527 21.0 398 1 1588 38.1 342.2
31 55.7 1.o 581 3539 10.0 2837 1275 22.4 255.4
32 50.6 3.7 709 4067 26.5 3454 1275 26.9 293.5
33 55.9 1.5 900 2854 33.0 2632 1136 28.8 228.9
34 55.3 1.3 54 1 2916 9.1 2795 927 15.4 215.3
35 6.23 0.2 34.0 61.0 33.0 37.8 31.0 1.o 6.01
36 91.6 nd 1820 154 80.1 70.7 1855 1.3 117.1
37 83.7 nd 1619 69.6 38.4 55.9 1588 1.5 98.8
38 110.3 nd 248 1 154 89.9 85.5 2423 2.5 154.0
39 72.5 nd 1382 99.1 130 41.1 1275 2.8 86.3
b d = not detected.

conductivity (E,) and total dissolved salts (S ). Each saturation
extract was then diluted to increasingly large distilled-
water: soil-extract ratios (10, 25, SO, lo2, 2.5 x lo2, s x lo2,
lo3, 2.5 x lo3, 5 x lo3 and lo4) and the electrical conductivity
of each dilution ( E d ) was determined. From the electrical-
conductivity value of the diluted sample and that of the
distilled water (E,,,), we calculated new electrical-conductivity
values (E,J for each of the soil extracts via the equation
Eec = ( E d - &)f
wheref is the dilution factor of the distilled-water : soil-extract
ratio in each dilution. The value of E, was 26 x dS m-'.
The saturation extracts and their respective dilutions were
kept at 25°C and their electrical conductivity was measured
with a Crison 522 conductivimeter with a standard conductiv-
ity cell (approximate constant 1 cm-'). Calcium and magne-
sium were determined by atomic-absorption spectroscopy, and
potassium and sodium by flame photometry. Carbonates and
bicarbonates were titrated with H2S04, using phenolphthalein
and methyl orange, respectively, as indicators, and chlorides
were titrated with AgN03 (Reitemeier, 1943). The sulphates
(1) were precipitated as BaS04 (US Salinity Laboratory Staff,
1954). The values of S were derived from these data by
summation.
 Estimating salt content from electrical conductivity I55

Results and discussion A €3

The E, values obtained ranged from 2.8 to 1lOdS m-’, and S 38ntb.04, C0.061
from 2 to 444 g dmP3 (Table 1). The types of salt present 100
l2’I 360
varied. In the extracts where E,<3dS m-’, Ca2+ and SO$-
were the predominant ions, accounting for more than 70% of
80 -
37 0 I
S. In the extracts where E, ranged from 3 to 10 dS m-l, Mg2+, 3O (0.49)[0.911
-
I 390 I
Ca2+ and SO;- were predominant; the [Mg2+]: [Ca2’] ratio E
(rnm~l,dm-~)was between 1.1 and 2.5. In the extracts where 60-
\
E, > 10 dS m-’, Mg2+,Na+, SO:- and C1- were predominant; Lu“
the [Mg2+]: “a+] ratio (mmol, dm-3) was between 0.04 and 40 -
I
6, and the [SO$-] : [Cl-] ratio (mmol, d m 3 ) between 0.04 and
i
16.

The relationship between E, and S

When E , was regressed against S, the data corresponded
reasonably well to a third-order polynomial regression S / g dnr3
equation:
E, = -0.97 + 0.90s - 3.67 x 10-3S2 + 4.15 x lOP6S3, Fig. 1. Relationship between the electrical conductivity (E,) and total
dissolved salts (S) in soil-saturation extracts. The [Mg2+]: “a+]
ratios for some soil samples appear in parentheses, and the
R2 = 0.78. (2) [SO:-] : [el-]ratio in brackets.
Two clearly different sectors can be discerned in this curve
(Fig. 1). In sector A (S up to an approximate value of 170g 400 7
dm-3), there is a positive relationship between S and E,. In
sector B (S> 170g dm-3), the relationship between the two
parameters is inverse. These results clearly show that E, does
not increase linearly with S, and this could be attributed to ion 300
pairing and decreased mobility of ions.
-
A comparison of soil extracts having similar S values (Fig. I
E
1) shows that those with high ratios of [Mg2+]:“a+] (in 200
parentheses) and [SO$-] : [Cl-] [in brackets] usually had the
lowest conductivity values, indicating that Mg2+ and SO:-
have a greater tendency to form ion pairs than Na+ and C1-
(Alzubaidi & Webster, 1983; Timpson & Richardson, 1986).
This tendency is confirmed by a multiple regression between
the E, and the ion concentration, in mmol, dm-3, of Mg2+ and
-d
Na+ in Equation (3), and of SO$- and C1- in Equation (4). The 1
I

- I
LL

I 1

influence of Na+ on the E, values is almost 700 times greater 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000
than that of Mg2+, and that of C1- almost 500 times that of f

.,
so:-.
Fig. 2. Evolution of the electrical conductivity calculated from diluted
E, = 20.14 + 3.16 x 10-’[Mg2+] + 2.18 x 10-2[Na+], soil-saturation extracts (EeJ with the dilution factor 0 for soil-
saturation extracts with different electrical conductivities (&). E,,
R2 = 0.489 (3) (soil 3) = 88.7 + 73.8 Iogf, r2 = 0.993; 0,
E,, (soil 26) =41.7 + 27.5 logf,
r2=0.971; 0,E,, (soil 5)=10.5+14.610g ,f, r2=0.945; A,E,,
E, = 16.06 + 8.69 x lO-’[[SO~-] + 4.21 x 10-2[C1-], (soil 18)=6.9+2.4logf, r2=0.897.

R2 = 0.834. (4)
Relationship between E,, and S
When the saturation extracts are diluted with increasing
quantities of distilled water the E,, values rise steeply at first
(Fig. 2), and reach higher values as the E, value increases.
Furthermore, as the soil extracts are increasingly diluted, the
curves relating E,, values to S increase in slope and gradually
straighten, changing from cubic to parabolic (Fig. 3). This
clear tendency towards a linear relationship with increased
dilution indicates an advantage in diluting the saturation
extracts.
156 M . Simon et al.

Eeccf= lo3) = 20.648 + 0.102[Mg2+]+ 0.1 18[Nat],

-1
loool
800

Ee,(f= lo4) = 17.824 + 0.135[Mg2+] + 0.136[Na+],

R2 = 0.995 (7)

E 600
cn R' = 0.996 (8)
73
\

Lu"
400 Eeccf= 10) = 14.336 + O.O26[SOi-] + O.O89[C1-],
R' = 0.981 (9)
200
Eec(f= 10') = 18.427 + 0.057[SOip]+ 0.124[Cl-],
0
0 I00 200 300 400
R' = 0.990 (10)
S / g dm-3
Fig. 3. Relationship between the electrical conductivity of soil- E,,(f= lo3) = 13.466 + O.O99[SOi-] + 0. 149[CIp],
saturation extracts (&), the electrical conductivity calculated from
diluted soil-saturation extracts (Eec) and total dissolved salts (S). The R2 = 0.995 (1 1)
curve labelled E, is the same as in Fig. 1 but is flattened by the change
in scale.
0 , E,,(f'= lo4)= -1.37+2.53S-9.40~ 10p4S2,R2=0.998;
Ee,cf= lo4) = 11.490 + O.l32[SO;-] + 0.158[Clp],

.,
A, E,,(f'=103)=3.66+2.11S-1.03x 10-3S2, R2=0.993;
a,

0,
E,,(f'=102)=-0.23+1.97 S - 3 . 9 2 ~ 10-3S2+4.24x 10-6S3,
R2 =0.991;
E,,(f=lO)= -0.65+1.40S-3.80~ 10-3S2+4.43~
R2 = 0.954;
E,= -0.97+0.90S-3.67 x 10-3S2+4.15x 10-6S3,R2=0.778.
10-6S3,
R'
Nevertheless, even at very high dilutions (f= lo4), the
= 0.996.

relationship between S and E,, was not exactly linear (Fig. 3)

and the data points consistently showed a curvature as ion-pair
formation increased with salt concentration (Alzubaidi &
(12)

Webster, 1983; Timpson & Richardson, 1986).

Another advantage in using calculated conductivities (E,,) is
A linear relationship between E , and S can be obtained if,
the reduction in the variation caused by the nature and
instead of using fixed dilution ratios for all extracts, the
behaviour of the ions present in the solution. In fact, as noted
dilution ratio was always selected in such a way that the final
above with respect to the relationship between E, and S (Fig.
conductivity of the diluted extract (Ed)fell within a moderately
I), the scatter of the data points outside the curve seems to be
narrow range. Optimum results (Gc)were obtained when the
due mainly to differences in the [Mg'+]: "a+] and
conductivity of the diluted extracts ranged from 0.1 to 0.3 dS
[SO!-] : [Cl-] ratios. Figure 3 also shows that the correlation
m-'. Under these conditions the relationship between E*, and
coefficient is higher as the dilution increases. The multiple
S was linear, the correlation coefficient was very high and
regression equations between the E,, values for each dilution
errors did not increase with salt concentration (Equation 13):
and the ion concentration, in mmol, dm-3, of Mg" and Na+
(Equations 5-8), and of SO!- and C1- (Equations 9-12),
clearly show that the regression coefficients for Mg'+ and Table 2. Approximate dilution factors
Na+, and for SO$- and C1-, tend both to increase and to (distilled-water :soil-extract ratio) necessary
equalize with increased dilutions; at the same time. for reaching a conductivity of the diluted
correlation coefficient also increases. extract (Ed)within the range 0.1-0.3 dS m-'

Ee,cf= 10) = 20.037 + 0.027[Mg2+]+ 0.058[Na+], E, (dS m-') Dilution factor

2.8-3 25
3-5 50
R' = 0.965
5-10 100
10-20 250
Eeccf= 10') = 25.867 + 0.060[MgZf]+ 0.086[Na+], 20-35 500
35-55 1000-5000
55-80 2500- 5000
R2 = 0.983

EZ, = 0.756 + 2.025S, r2 = 0.999. (13)
The optimum E d range (0.1-0.3 dS m-'), though narrow, is
nevertheless wide enough that the preparation of diluted
extracts is quite simple. The values of E, can be used as a
guide for selecting the dilution ratio (Table 2); however, if E,
is above 35dS m-', the relation between E, and S is so
uncertain (Fig. 1) that the final conductivity of the diluted
extract is the only reliable guide.
These results provide a new equation for calculating the
total salt content, S, of saturation extracts. Given that when E$,
is zero, S is also zero, the regression line should pass through
the origin, and the regression equation would be:
S = 490E a,
with r2 = 0.9994, and S expressed in mg dm-3 and qcin dS
m-'. If S is expressed in mmol, dm-3, the regression equation
would be:
S = 16.03Eac, r2 = 0.9997.
These equations can be used in all saturation extracts,
regardless of the concentration and type of ions present.
Conclusions
In the present work a new method to calculate the total salt
content, S, of saturated extracts has been proposed. This method
consists of diluting the saturation extract until its electrical
conductivity (Ed) has a value of between 0. I and 0.3 dS m-',
from which qccan be calculated using the equation:
Estimating salt content from electrical conductivity 15 1
where E, is the electrical conductivity of the distilled water
used for the dilutions, and f is the dilution factor.
For the saturation extract, S (mg dniP3) is then calculated
using the equation
S = 490E&.
References
Alzubaidi, A. & Webster, G.R. 1983. Ion pairs in a Solonetzic soil.
Canadian Journal of Soil Science, 63, 479-484.
Chang, C., Sommerfeldt, T.G., Carefoot, J.M. & Schaalje, G. B. 1983.
Relationships of electrical conductivity with total dissolved salts
and cation concentration of sulfate-dominant soil extracts.
Canadian Journal of Soil Science, 63, 79-86.
Marion, G.M. & Babcock, K.L. 1976. Predicting specific conductance
and salt concentration in dilute aqueous solutions. Soil Science,
122, 181-187.
McNeal, B.L., Oster, J.D. & Hatcher, J.J. 1970. Calculation of
electrical conductivity from solution composition data as an aid to
in-situ estimation of soil salinity. Soil Science, 110, 405-414.
Reitemeier, R.F. 1943. Semimicroanalysis of saline soil solutions.
Industrial and Engineering Chemistry, 15, 393-402.
Tanji, K.K. & Biggar, J.W. 1972. Specific conductance model for
natural waters and soil solutions of limited salinity levels. Water
Resources Research, 8, 145-153.
Timpson, M.E. & Richardson, J.L. 1986. Ionic composition and
distribution in saline seeps of southwestern North Dakota, U.S.A.
Geoderma, 37,295-305.
US Salinity Laboratory Staff. 1954. Diagnosis and Improvement of
Saline and Alkali Soils, Handbook 60. US Department of
Agriculture, Washington, DC.