Assessment of river water quality for agricultural

Assessment of river water quality for agricultural irrigation

S. K. Mandal, S. Kole Dutta, S. Pramanik & R. K. Kole

International Journal of Environmental Science and Technology ISSN 1735-1472 Volume 16 Number 1 Int. J. Environ. Sci. Technol. (2019) 16:451-462 DOI 10.1007/s13762-018-1657-3

1 23

Your article is protected by copyright and all rights are held exclusively by Islamic Azad University (IAU). This e-offprint is for personal use only and shall not be selfarchived in electronic repositories. If you wish to self-archive your article, please use the accepted manuscript version for posting on your own website. You may further deposit the accepted manuscript version in any repository, provided it is only made publicly available 12 months after official publication or later and provided acknowledgement is given to the original source of publication and a link is inserted to the published article on Springer's website. The link must be accompanied by the following text: "The final publication is available at link.springer.com”.

1 23

Author's personal copy International Journal of Environmental Science and Technology (2019) 16:451–462 https://doi.org/10.1007/s13762-018-1657-3

ORIGINAL PAPER

Assessment of river water quality for agricultural irrigation S. K. Mandal1 · S. Kole Dutta1 · S. Pramanik1 · R. K. Kole2 Received: 22 July 2016 / Revised: 16 October 2017 / Accepted: 6 February 2018 / Published online: 21 February 2018 © Islamic Azad University (IAU) 2018

Abstract Monitoring was conducted during 2009–2014 in the river Ganga to evaluate water quality for irrigation. Sampling was done every month at four locations in West Bengal, India, viz. Berhampore, Palta, Dakshineswar and Uluberia from two positions (middle of the river and one discharge point) at each location and analysed for different parameters. Electrical conductivity and sodium adsorption ratio of river water during the period were obtained in the range of 0.15–0.88 dS/m and 0.07–2.84 with average of 0.32 dS/m and 0.92, respectively. The pH was in the range of 6.85–8.47 showing an increasing trend over the years. Spatial changes were evident for chloride exhibiting higher mean concentrations (mg/L) at Palta (17.29) and Uluberia (19.02). Significant temporal changes were observed in case of, electrical conductivity, sodium adsorption ratio, sodium, calcium, chloride, sulphate and nitrate, exhibiting higher values during dry seasons than monsoon. The trace elements concentrations were well within the permissible limit for irrigation. Fe, Mn, Zn and Pb were detected in more than 90% of the samples, whereas Cu, Cr, Ni, Cd and F were detected in 70, 71, 58, 25 and 64% samples, respectively. The manganese concentration exceeded the limit in about 60% of detected samples. The dominance pattern of ions was in the order Ca2+ > Na > SO42− > Mg2+ > Cl− > NO3− > B > HCO3− > CO32− and that of trace elements Fe > Mn > Zn > Pb > F > Cr > Cu > Ni > Cd. Keywords Electrical conductivity · Ions · Permissible limit · Sodium adsorption ratio · Trace elements

Introduction The use of water in India for irrigation is the maximum (85%), followed by domestic use (6%), energy development (3%) and industries (6%) (Thatte et al. 2009). The net irrigated area in the Ganga basin constitutes nearly 56.6% of India’s 546,820 km2 of net irrigated area (CWC 2005). The health of water body is assessed using several physical, chemical and biological parameters (APHA 2005). For evaluation of irrigation water quality, emphasis is placed on the chemical and physical characteristics of water. The criteria for evaluating water quality for irrigation purposes Editorial responsibility: Abhishek RoyChowdhury. * S. K. Mandal [email protected] 1

Water Quality Monitoring Laboratory, Directorate of Research, Bidhan Chandra Krishi Viswavidyalaya, Nadia, Kalyani, West Bengal 741235, India

Department of Agricultural Chemicals, Bidhan Chandra Krishi Viswavidyalaya, Nadia, Kalyani, West Bengal 741235, India

2

include the measurement of (1) salinity hazard in terms of electrical conductivity (EC); (2) sodium hazard expressed in terms of sodium adsorption ratio (SAR); (3) Specific ions (viz. sodium, chloride, borate, sulphate and nitrate) that causes ionic imbalance in plants or phytotoxicity; (4) residual sodium carbonate (RSC); and (5) Trace elements’ (Fe, Mn, Zn, Cu, Pb, Cd, Cr, Ni and F) toxicity (Ayers and Westcot 1994; Bauder et al. 2014). Suitability of water for irrigation purposes depends on the effects of some minerals present in the water on soil and plants (Wilcox 1958). The effects of salinity on crops should be distinguished into osmotic and specific salinity effects. A decrease in osmotic potential of the soil solution without corresponding decrease in root water potential reduces water flow from soil to root, thereby restricting water uptake by crop plants and a reduction in crop growth. The specific effects may be through nutrition and through toxicity (Sonneveld and Voogt 2009). Salinity-induced nutritional disorders may result from the effect of salinity on nutrient availability, competitive uptake, transport or partitioning within the plant (Grattan and Grieve 1999). Decreased nitrogen uptake under saline conditions was reported due to interaction between N a+ and NH4+ (Rozeff

13

Vol.:(0123456789)

Author's personal copy 452

International Journal of Environmental Science and Technology (2019) 16:451–462

1995), NO3− and Cl− (Bar et al. 1997). Nutrient deficiencies can also occur in plants when high concentrations of Na+ in the soil reduces the amounts of available K+, Mg2+ and C a2+ (Asch et al. 2000; Hu and Schmidhalter 2005). In addition to osmotic stress, salt sensitivity in citrus was partly related to the specific toxic effects of accumulation of C l−, Na+, B and other ions in leaves (Bernstein 1980). Ca2+, however, exhibited both direct and indirect effects by alleviating specific salinity effects (Cramer 2002; Shabala and Cuin 2008). The sodium or alkali hazard in irrigation water is determined by the absolute and relative concentration of principal cations like calcium, magnesium and sodium. If the proportion of sodium is high, the alkali hazard is high; and conversely, if calcium and magnesium predominate, the hazard is low. The alkali hazard is associated with water infiltration problem. Similar to low salinity, excessive sodium in irrigation water also promotes soil dispersion, structural breakdown and infiltration problem (Brady and Weil 2012). Combinations of SAR and EC were used to predict the permeability hazard of irrigation water (USDA 1954; Ayers and Westcot 1994; CCME 2008). An appropriate salt balance in the root zone and its subsequent leaching is needed to avoid salt accumulation around plant roots and degradation of soil structure (Letey et al. 2011; Skaggs et al. 2012). One of the major problems in contemporary ecology is the path of heavy metals introduced into aquatic environments due to anthropogenic activity (Sekulic and Vertacnikv 1997). The presence of some trace elements and various heavy metals in the irrigation water is important quality criteria as they are resistant to biodegradation and thermodegradation (Bohn et al. 2001). Though some metals like Cu, Fe, Mn, Ni and Zn are essential as micronutrients for life processes in plants and microorganisms, other like Cd, Cr, and Pb have no known physiological activity and have been proved detrimental beyond a certain limit (Marschner 1995). In this context, the suitability of the Hooghly river water was assessed for agricultural irrigation by monitoring EC and SAR values (USDA 1954) and by the specific ions and toxicity levels (FAO 1994).

Date and location of the research From April 2009 to March 2014, four sampling locations (viz. Berhampore, Palta, Dakshineswar and Uluberia) on the Bhagirathi-Hooghly stretch of the river Ganga in West Bengal, India, were assessed.

Materials and methods Water samples from four permanent monitoring stations viz., Berhampore in the north (about 115 km away in the south from Farakka), Palta (about 220 km south from

13

Berhampore), Dakshineswar (about 25 km south from Palta) and Uluberia (about 45 km south from Dakshineswar), a 300km Bhagirathi-Hooghly stretch of the river Ganga in West Bengal (Fig. 1) were collected every month during April 2009–March 2014 at a depth of 1 ft from the surface of water at the midstream of the river and also from the discharge points (located in the same site within 100–300 m from the midstream) namely, one municipal sewage discharge point at Berhampore (24°05.238′N and 88°14.554′E), outfall of DVC canal at Palta (22°48.334′N and 88°21.193′E), the famous bathing ghat at Dakshineswar Kali Temple (22°39.294′N and 88°21.415′E) and agricultural drainage canal at Uluberia (22°28.083′N and 88°07.669′E) in low-tide condition. The latitude and longitude of middle of the river were 24°05.316′N and 88°14.506′E at Berhampore, 22°47.438′N and 88°20.616′E at Palta, 22°39.118′N and 88°21.242′E at Dakshineswar and 22°27.861′N and 88° 06.845′E at Uluberia. The water samples were immediately transported to the laboratory for analysis. The methods followed for analysis of different physicochemical parameters of water have been adopted from APHA (2005). A brief description of analytical methods of basic irrigation water quality parameters is presented in Table 1, and the data were subjected to statistical analysis using SPSS package. The range of other physico-chemical parameters were also recorded for water samples as follows: water temperature (15–35 °C); dissolved oxygen (3.7–10.8 mg/L); biological oxygen demand (1.0–4.6 mg/L); hardness (94–292 mg/L); total coliform bacteria (1800–380,000 cfu/100 mL); and faecal coliform bacteria (600–210,000 cfu/100 mL).

Results and discussion A total of 464 samples were analysed from four locations of the river during 2009–2014. The range and mean values of water quality parameters along the river are presented in Table 2. The pH values were mostly within the permissible limit for agricultural irrigation (Table 2). An increasing trend in pH was observed from upstream to downstream of the river (Table 4) and also over the years (Fig. 2b). The high pH values may be due to high concentration of carbonate and bicarbonate from agricultural drainage (as in Uluberia Agricultural drainage canal), known as alkalinity which causes Ca and Mg ions to form insoluble minerals leaving Na as the dominant ion in solution. This alkaline water could intensify sodic soil conditions (Bauder et al. 2014). Irrigation water with a pH outside the normal range may cause a nutritional imbalance or may contain toxic ions (FAO 1994). The electrical conductivity or salinity values obtained in this study were in the range of 0.15–0.88 dS/m with a mean

Author's personal copy International Journal of Environmental Science and Technology (2019) 16:451–462

453

Fig. 1 Map showing study locations on the river Ganga in West Bengal

of 0.32 dS/m. The electrical conductivity values for water samples were suitable for irrigation purposes as the values were well within the stipulated range ( Na + > S 2− − 3− 2+ − O4 > Mg > Cl > NO3 > BO3 > HCO3− > CO32−. Soil ecosystems and irrigation water are contaminated with heavy metals by human activities, e.g. unrestricted mining, municipal wastes, industrial and automotive emissions, extensive use of agrochemicals (Alloway 1995). About 518.8 million litre per day (MLD) wastewater is discharged untreated into the estuarine part of the river Ganga in West Bengal generated by two class I cities situated on the bank of the river (CPCB 2009). Among the trace elements, out of 464 samples analysed, Fe, Mn and Zn were found in 463 samples; Cu, Pb, Cd, Cr, Ni and F were detected in 325, 422, 116, 327, 270 and 297 samples, respectively. The mean concentration values and range of metals as depicted in Table 2 were compared with prescribed limits for long-term use in irrigation (FAO 1994). Zn, Cu, Pb and Ni were within the prescribed limit, whereas the concentration of Fe, Mn, Cd, Cr and F exceeded the prescribed limit in 16.8, 59.7, 2.2, 14.9 and 0.4% of the detected samples (Fig. 3). Manganese is an essential micronutrient for plant growth, but it is a toxic element when it is present in excess concentration (Millaleo et al. 2010). Manganese toxicity is high in acid soils due to the formation of reduced divalent manganese ions, the most stable and soluble form in the soil environment (Reichman 2002). Plants often seem to take up much more manganese than they require, and excess manganese can be extremely toxic (Pittman 2005). The major sources of manganese include municipal wastewater discharge, discharge from industrial facilities (metallurgical and chemical plants) or as leachate from landfills and soils (Malm et al. 1988; WHO 2004). Spatial and temporal changes were significant for Fe, Mn and F (Table 5). In case of Fe and F, an increasing trend was observed from upstream to downstream of the

13



Fig. 3 Percentage of samples detected and exceeded the recommended limit for metals in river water

% Detected 100.0

99.8

% Exceeded

99.8

% samples

80.0

70.7 59.7

60.0 40.0

25.2

16.8

20.0

14.9 2.2

0.0 Fe

Mn

river as well in the monsoon. The concentration of Pb was also higher during monsoon. In saline soils, the solubility of micronutrients (Fe, Zn, Mn and Cu) is low, and plants grown in these soils often develop deficiencies in these nutrients (Page et al. 1990). Correlation studies showed that no significant effect of pH on trace elements concentration of river water (Table 6). Synergistic effects were significant between Fe and Zn, Fe and Pb, Mn and Pb, and Pb and Cd (r = 0.50 at the 0.01 level), whereas antagonism of Cd and Cr was observed. The Zn showed significant positive correlation with Na+ and negative correlation with Ca2+. Considerable evidence suggests an ameliorating effect of calcium on heavy metal toxicity (Havlin et al. 2005; Mason 2002; Yang and Poovaiah 2003). These correlation studies help to understand the nature of heavy metals and their speciation in the aquatic environment. The year-wise trends of micronutrient elements and toxic metals (Pb, Cd, Cr and Ni) are depicted in Fig. 4. An increasing trend of Mn, Zn, Cu and Ni and a decreasing trend of Fe, Pb, Cr, Cd and F was observed over the years. The dominance pattern of trace elements in river water was in the order Fe > Mn > Zn > P b > F > Cr > Cu > Ni > Cd.

Conclusion

Cd

Cr

The electrical conductivity (EC) and sodium adsorption ratio (SAR) values were suitable for irrigation. The conductivity values were in two groups (C1 and C2) of which about 75% of the samples were of medium-salinity class (C2). Spatial changes in EC were in narrow range, and significant temporal variations were observed in salinity and sodicity parameters giving higher values during dry seasons, which may be due to high rate of evaporation. Significant spatial changes were observed in pH and chloride. The major sources of chloride in river water include agricultural run-off, discharge of industrial and municipal waste water and chlorination of public water supplies. The pH, sodium, SAR, sulphate and nitrate had an increasing trend over the years. The dominant cations were calcium followed by sodium, and dominant anions were sulphate followed by chloride. The trace elements’ concentrations were well within the permissible limits for agricultural irrigation. However, manganese concentration exceeded the limit in more than half of detected samples and can make the water unsuitable for long-term use for irrigation purposes. Year-wise increasing trend of Mn, Zn,

Table 5 Spatial and temporal variation of trace elements in river water Location/ season

Fe (mg/L)

Mn (mg/L)

Zn (mg/L)

Cu (mg/L)

Pb (mg/L)

Cd (mg/L)

Cr (mg/L)

Ni (mg/L)

F (mg/L)

BH PA DK UL W S M

2.416 2.588 2.847 2.883 2.130 2.451 3.557

0.346 0.485 0.428 0.351 0.459 0.338 0.412

0.151 0.136 0.135 0.147 0.166 0.124 0.137

0.017 0.017 0.019 0.018 0.018 0.019 0.016

0.103 0.106 0.099 0.106 0.100 0.068 0.146

0.004 0.003 0.003 0.004 0.005 0.003 0.004

0.048 0.047 0.052 0.053 0.060 0.034 0.057

0.015 0.014 0.013 0.014 0.013 0.018 0.010

0.048 0.087 0.082 0.122 0.066 0.081 0.109

Location: BH: Berhampore, PA: Palta, DK: Dakshineswar, UL: Uluberia; Season: W: Winter, S: Summer, M: Monsoon

13

0.07

0.10*

0.06

Cl−

Na

Ca2+

0.02

B

− 0.01

Cr

0.35**

1

0.21**

0.11*

0.19*

0.46**

0.99**

− 0.11*

0.15**

1

0.01

0.04

0.05

− 0.08

0.17**

0.08

0.10*

0.15**

0.22**

0.13**

− 0.21** − 0.16**

− 0.25** − 0.25**

0.05

− 0.04

0.08

− 0.16** − 0.14** − 0.20**

0.10*

− 0.20** − 0.37**

0.24**

0.30**

0.20**

0.44**

0.34**

0.10*

Na

1 1

Mg2+

− 0.09

− 0.17**

− 0.02

**Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (two tailed)

0.19**

0.11*

0.19**

0.47**

1

SAR

1

NO3−

0.32** − 0.07

0.33** − 0.19**

0.13**

1

SO42− B

0.14**

1 1

CO32−

− 0.03

0.16**

− 0.07

− 0.02

0.06

0.12**

− 0.07

0.08

− 0.13**

0.19**

− 0.03

0.16** − 0.12**

0.01

0.14** − 0.03

0.04

0.12**

− 0.02

0.34**

0.13**

0.32** − 0.14**

− 0.14** − 0.32** − 0.06

0.17**

− 0.10*

− 0.24** − 0.33** − 0.13** − 0.04

0.07

0.09

0.17**

− 0.19** − 0.15** − 0.02

0.01

F

1

− 0.14**

0.03

0.02

0.04

0.14**

0.32**

− 0.19** − 0.13**

− 0.10*

− 0.12** − 0.02

0.13** − 0.06

− 0.18**

1

HCO3−

0.20** − 0.05

− 0.18**

− 0.16**

0.08

0.03

0.10*

− 0.09

0.06

0.24** − 0.42** − 0.45** − 0.14** − 0.15** − 0.17**

0.18**

0.05

(− 0.14** − 0.004

0.07

− 0.11*

− 0.06

− 0.02

− 0.15**

0.15**

− 0.15**

− 0.18**

0.22** − 0.08

− 0.04

0.13** − 0.21**

− 0.43**

Ca2+

*Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (two tailed)

− 0.04

0.09

0.18**

Zn

Cu

Cd

0.001

0.03

Mn

− 0.01

0.13**

0.03

Fe

− 0.01

− 0.01

F

− 0.06

0.12*

0.28**

0.18**

0.34**

− 0.35** − 0.09

Pb

Cl−

0.15** − 0.03

0.33**

0.29**

1

HCO3−

− 0.06

0.13**

0.15**

SO42−

NO3−

0.12*

SAR

CO32−

EC

− 0.14** − 0.13**

0.13**

EC

Mg2+

1

pH

pH

Table 6 Correlation of irrigation water quality parameters and trace elements of river water

1 0.12* 0.07

0.14** 1

Mn

− 0.03 0.28**

0.09 0.03

0.16* 0.09*

0.16** 0.18**

Fe

1

− 0.02

0.04

− 0.05

0.29**

Zn

1

0.01

− 0.01

− 0.03

Cu

1 − 0.05

0.50**

Pb

1

Cr

− 0.11* 1

Cd

Ni

Author's personal copy

International Journal of Environmental Science and Technology (2019) 16:451–462 459

13



Fig. 4 Temporal changes in metal content in river water

(a)

3.50

mg/L

2.80 2.10 Fe

1.40

Mn

Zn

Pb

0.70 0.00 2009-10

(b)

F

2010-11

Cr

2011-12

Cu

2012-13

Ni

2013-14

Cd

0.18

mg/L

0.12

0.06

0.00 2009-10

Cu and Ni and decreasing trend of Fe, Pb, Cr, Cd and F were observed after 5 years. Synergism between Zn and Na, Zn and Fe, Fe and Pb, Mn and Pb, and Pb and Cd and antagonism between Ca and Zn and Cd and Cr have been observed. The sources of the heavy metals in river water are discharge of partially treated or untreated municipal sewage water, intensive crop cultivation in downstream areas of river, erosion and run-off from agricultural land. Therefore, in order

13

2010-11

2011-12

2012-13

2013-14

to maintain quality of river water for irrigation purposes, proper treatment facilities of sewage water are emphasized before it is being discharged into the river to avoid contamination of water by specific ions and toxic heavy metals. Acknowledgements The authors are grateful to the National River Conservation Directorate, Ministry of Environment & Forests, Government of India, for financial assistance. The infrastructural facility provided by Bidhan Chandra Krishi Viswavidyalaya is duly acknowledged.

Author's personal copy International Journal of Environmental Science and Technology (2019) 16:451–462

References Alloway BJ (1995) Heavy metals in soils. Blackie Academic and Professional, Glasgow APHA, American Public Health Association (2005) Standard methods for the examination of water and waste water, 21st edn. APHA, Washington Asch F, Dingkuhn M, Miezan K, Doerffling K (2000) Leaf K/ Na ratio predicts salinity induced yield loss in irrigated rice. Euphytica 113:109–118 Ayers RS (1977) Quality of water for irrigation. J Irrig Drain Div (ASCE) 103(IR2):135–154 Ayers RS, Westcot DW (1994) Water quality for agriculture, irrigation and drainage paper no. 29. Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations, Rome Bar Y, Apelbaum A, Kafkafi U, Goren R (1997) Relationship between chloride and nitrate and its effect on growth and mineral composition of avocado and citrus plants. J Plant Nutr 20:715–731 Bauder TA, Waskom RM, Davis JG (2014) Irrigation water quality criteria. Colorado State University Extension, Fort Collins Berner KE, Berner RA (1996) Global environment: water, air and geochemical cycles. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River Bernstein L (1980) Salt tolerance of fruit crops. USDA Inf Bul 292:9 Bohn HL, McNeal BL, O’Connor GA (2001) Soil chemistry, 3rd edn. Wiley, New York, p 320 Brady NC, Weil RR (2012) The nature and properties of soils, 14th edn. Pearson Prentice Hall, New Jersey CCME, Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment (2008) Canadian water quality guidelines, environment Canada. CCME, Ottawa CPCB, Central Pollution Control Board (2009) Ganga water quality trend. Monitoring of Indian Aquatic Resources Series: MINARS/31/2009–2010 Chen J, Wang F, Meybeck M, He D, Xia X, Zhang L (2005) Spatial and temporal analysis of water chemistry records (1958–2000) in the Huanghe (Yellow River) basin. Glob Biogeochem Cycles 19(3):GB3016. https://doi.org/10.1029/2004gb002325 Cramer G (2002) Sodium–calcium interactions under salinity stress. In: Lauchli A, Luttge U (eds) Salinity: environment-plants-molecules. Springer, Dordrecht, pp 205–227 CWC, Central Water Commission (2005) Water data-complete book. Govt. of India, New Delhi FAO (1994) Water quality for agriculture. Water quality guidelines. Food and Agricultural Organization, Rome Grattan SR, Grieve CM (1992) Mineral element acquisition and growth response of plants grown in saline environments. Agric Ecosyst Environ 38:275–300 Grattan SR, Grieve CM (1999) Salinity-mineral nutrient relations in horticultural crops. Sci Hortic 78:127–157

461

Gupta IC (1990) Use of saline water in agriculture. A study of arid and semi-arid zones in India. Revised edition. Oxford and IBH Publishing, New Delhi Havlin JL, Tisdale SL, Nelson WL, Beaton JD (2005) Soil fertility and fertilizers: an introduction to nutrient management, 7/E. Prentice Hall, New York Hopkins BG, Horneck DA, Stevens RG, Ellsworth JW, Sullivan DM (2007) Managing irrigation water quality for crop production in the Pacific Northwest. Oregon State University, PNW 579-E Hu Y, Schmidhalter U (2005) Drought and salinity: a comparison of their effects on mineral nutrition of plants. J Plant Nutr Soil Sci 168:541–549 Letey J, Hoffman GJ, Hopmans JW, Grattan SR, Suarez D, Corwin DL, Corwin DL, Oster JD, Wu L, Amrhein C (2011) Evaluation of soil salinity leaching requirement guidelines. Agric Water Manag 98:502–506 Maas EV (1984) Salt tolerance of plants. In: Christie BR (ed) The Handbook of plant science in agriculture. CRC Press, Boca Raton Malm O, Pfeiffer WC, Fiszman M, Azcue JM (1988) Transport and availability of heavy metals in the Paraiba do Sul-Guandu River system, Rio de Janeiro State, Brazil. Sci Total Environ 75:201–209 Marschner H (1995) Mineral nutrition of higher plants. Academic press, London Mason CF (2002) Biology of freshwater pollution, 4th edn. Prentice Hall, New Jersey Millaleo R, Reyes-Diaz M, Ivanov AG, Mora ML, Alberdi M (2010) Manganese as essential and toxic elements for plants: transport, accumulation and resistance mechanism. J Soil Sci Plant Nutr 10(4):476–494 Page A, Chang A, Adriano D (1990) Deficiencies and toxicities of trace elements. Agric Salin Assess Manag 71:138–160 Pittman J (2005) Managing the manganese: molecular mechanisms of manganese transport and homeostasis. New Phytol 167:733–742 Reichman SM (2002) “The responses of plants to metal toxicity: a review focusing on copper, manganese and zinc”, AMEEF paper 14. Australian Minerals and Energy Environment Foundation, Melbourne Rhoades JD (1993) Practice to control salinity in irrigated soils. Tasks Veg Sci 28:379–387 Rozeff N (1995) Sugarcane and salinity—a review paper. Sugarcane 5:8–19 Sekulic B, Vertacnikv A (1997) Comparison of anthropological and “natural” input of substances through waters into Adriatic, Baltic and Black Sea. Water Res 31:3178 Shabala S, Cuin TA (2008) Potassium transport and plant salt tolerance. Physiol Plant 133:651–669 Skaggs TH, Suarez DL, Goldberg S, Shouse PJ (2012) Replicated lysimeter measurements of tracer transport in clayey soils: effects of irrigation water salinity. Agric Water Manag 110:84–93

13



Sonneveld C, Voogt W (2009) Plant nutrition of greenhouse crops. Springer, New York. ISBN 9048125316 Stallard RF, Edmond JM (1983) Geochemistry of the Amazon River— the influence of the geology and weathering environment on the dissolved load. J Geophys Res 88:9671–9688 Thatte CD, Gupta AC, Baweja ML (2009) Water resources development in India. Indian National Committee on Irrigation and Drainage, New Delhi USDA (1954) Diagnosis and improvement of saline and alkaline soils, vol 60. United States Department of Agriculture Handbook, Washington USEPA (1999) National primary drinking water regulations. http:/www.epa.gov/OGWD/hfacts.html Waggott A (1969) An investigation of the potential problem of increasing boron concentration in rivers and water courses. Water Res 3:749–765

13

WHO World Health Organization (2004) Manganese and its compounds: environmental aspects, vol 63. Concise International Chemical Assessment Document, Geneva. http://www.who.int/ ipcs/publications/cicad/cicad63_rev_1.pdf Wilcox LV (1958) Determining the quality of irrigation water. Agric Inf Bull 197:1–6 Yang T, Poovaiah BW (2003) Calcium/calmodulin-mediated signal network in plants. Trends Plant Sci 8:505–512 Zhang SR, Lu XX, Higgitt DL, Chen CTA, Sun HG, Han JT (2007) Water chemistry of the Zhujiang (Pearl River): natural processes and anthropogenic influences. J Geophys Res 112:F01011. https ://doi.org/10.1029/2006JF000493