Effect of zeolite in improving the chemical properties of sandy and loamy soils

Journal of Research in Ecology

Journal of Research in Ecology

ISSN No: Print: 2319 –1546; Online: 2319– 1554

An International Scientific Research Journal

Original Research

Effect of zeolite in improving the chemical properties of sandy and loamy soils Authors: Sarah Naim Abdel-Hassan and Abdul Mohsin Abdullah Radi Institution: Soil and Water Resource, Agriculture College, Al-Muthanna University, Iraq.

Corresponding author: Sarah Naim Abdel-Hassan

ABSTRACT: This study was conducted in the field of Agriculture college, Al-Muthanna University at the winter season 2016-2017, to study the effect of zeolite mineral on the chemical properties of sand. Six levels of natural zeolite metal 0, 0.2, 0.4, 0.6, 0.8 and 1%, were used with two levels of decomposed animal organic matter at 0.2 and 0.4%, in two different soil cultures (sandy and loamy) to study. Zeolite was mixed with the organic matter and 10 Kg of soil in an anvil capacity 15-25 Kg to reach the size 6*2*2 m. The chemical fertilizer NPK was mixed with soil and zeolite according to the fertilizer recommendation of the wheat crop. For all the treatments, the wheat seeds were planted by the Maxibak class on 15/11/2016 and harvested on 15/4/2017. The results showed that the added zeolite led to the rise in the sandy and loamy soils reaction degree and lowering in the electrical conductivity rates and dissolved salts in both soils which increased zeolite mineral adding rate that contributed the rising of the rate of cation exchange capacity and NPK during growth period in the soil. The sandy soil response significantly improved the level of 1% zeolite with 0.4% organic matter. The results showed that the addition rate of zeolite was associated with the rate of soil organic matter.

Keywords: Zeolite, Chemical properties, Sandy and loamy soils.

Article Citation: Sarah Naim Abdel-Hassan and Abdul Mohsin Abdullah Radi Effect of zeolite in improving the chemical properties of sandy and loamy soils Journal of Research in Ecology (2018) 6(2): 2053-2066 Dates: Received: 02 July 2018 Web Address: http://ecologyresearch.info/ documents/EC0605.pdf Journal of Research in Ecology An International Scientific Research Journal

Accepted: 07 Aug 2018

Published: 21 Sep 2018

This article is governed by the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/ licenses/by/4.0), which gives permission for unrestricted use, non-commercial, distribution and reproduction in all medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

2053-2066| JRE | 2018 | Vol 6 | No 2

www.ecologyresearch.info

Abdel-Hassan and Radi, 2018 soil with the minerals led to increased plant growth,

INTRODUCTION Zeolite is a natural (and industrial) mineral

seed production and dry matter to improve of nitrogen

formed by a change occurring in volcanic rocks rich in

efficiency use in soil (Bernardi et al., 2011). Najaf-

glass by their interaction with seawater at a high base

inezhad et al. (2014) noted that biochemical and mor-

reaction and temperature between 27-55°C (Badillo-

phological changes and low protein content in fodder

Almaraz et al., 2003). Woodford (2009) showed that

plant due to soil moisture and water stress were treated

zeolite mineral (aluminosilicates) contains a high per-

with the addition of zeolite to soil which increased soil

centage of aluminum and attracts non-polar particles

moisture, reduced water stress and increased the rate of

when it is high in silica. All types of zeolite have a three

large and small feed nutrients in soil. The addition of

-dimensional structure in a tetrahedron system that is

zeolite to soil had improved chemical properties, in-

3+

harmonized in ions Si4 and Al . This correlation arised

creased ion exchangeability and soil fertility (Polat et

from a negative charge in the case of equilibrium with

al., 2004). Wul and Liu (2008) showed that zeolite re-

the positive charge of the moving cations inside it

duced the high loss of nitrogen (40-70 %) and phospho-

(Jakkula, 2005). Zeolite effectively increased the phos-

rus (80-90 %) and potassium (50-70 %) in arid and semi

phorus ratio of phosphate rocks, increase the efficiency

-arid areas and contributed to improve the properties of

of nitrogen and potassium fertilizers and to improve

chemical soils and fertility. This study was aimed to

plant growth and yield (Al-Busaidi et al., 2008). It is

determine the effect of adding zeolite on the chemical

non-toxic to soil by increasing the biomass of bacteria

properties of sand and loamy soil in arid and semi-arid

when it is added to the soil (Chander and Joergensen,

conditions at southern Iraq.

2002). The cellulite characterized by a high cation exchange capacity when it is added to coarse sandy soil, it

MATERIALS AND METHODS

gets increased at a higher rate than soft soil texture

The experiment was carried out at Agriculture

(Ippolito et al., 2011). It improved the properties of de-

college station Al-Muthanna University (476° 31’ 45E

graded soils by increasing their water retention, nutrient

and 205° 12’ 31N), for two silt loam and sandy witches

balance, fertilizer efficiency, growth and productivity of

under the category torriorthents. The treatments includ-

field crops, geotechnical crops (Ge et al., 2010).

ed six levels of zeolite mineral (0. 0.2, 0.4, 0.6, 0.8 and

Rabai et al. (2013) explained that the mixing of

1 %), with two level of animal organic matter (0.2 and

urea with zeolite led to reduce it and improve the effi-

0.4 %) for two type of soils (sandy and loamy), with

ciency of urea nitrogen. The mineral prevents excess

three replicates for each. Soil collected from two sites

ammonium loss and works slowly on the soil (Torma et

where no zeolite or fertilizer was used previously and

al., 2014). It also contributed to reduce the process of

soil samples were taken randomly for each site and then

nitrification near the roots to enter ammonium ion with-

mixed quotes to the lab - For a sample vehicle of depth

in the metal gaps (Vilcek et al., 2013). The zeolite in-

0-30 cm and transferred to the laboratory to complete

creases the absorption rate of manganese, ammonium,

the examination of physical and chemical properties.

iron and magnesium by 90% in the soil (Afrous and

Soil was aerobic dried and softened by a polyethylene

Goudarzi, 2015). Khan et al. (2008) pointed that the

hammer and passed from a sieve diameter sieve 2 mm,

increase of plant height with increasing the amount of

then took a sample vehicle to estimate some chemical

mineral added to the soil due to the gradual release of

soil properties according to Bremner (1965) and Jack-

nutrients from the mineral cavities, the mixing of the

son (1958) in Table 1 and 2. The chemical properties of

2054

Journal of Research in Ecology (2018) 6(2): 2053-2066

Abdel-Hassan and Radi, 2018 S. No 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24

Table 1. Physical and chemical properties of the soil studied before planting Sandy soil Silty loam Unit Adjective 7.12 7.10 pH 3.47 3.80 dSm-1 EC 2.3 9.32 Mol. Kg-1 C. CEC 4 6 g.kg-1 Organic matter 300 340 g.kg-1 Lime 5.27 6.33 mmol.L-1 Bicarbonate 16.62 18.8 mmol.L-1 Calcium 4.61 5.70 mmol.L-1 Magnesium 3.7 8.10 mmol.L-1 Sodium 7.50 8.73 mmol.L-1 Chloride 8.22 10.1 mmol.L-1 Sulphates 0.32 0.28 mmol.L-1 Boron 2.65 2.60 mg.m-3 Partial density 1.6 1.3 mg.m-3 Bulk density 39.62 50 % Porosity

Prepared ions

Soil separators

Nitrogen Phosphorus Zinc Manganese Potassium Clay Silt Sand Texture

0.002 16.12 0.203 1.263 14.3

0.003 19.12 0.148 1.384 30.2

mg.kg-1 mg.kg-1 mg.kg-1 mg.kg-1 mg.kg-1

42

222

g.kg-1

32 932 Sandy

672 112 Silty Loam

the soil were estimated before planting and some traits

Richards (1954). Chlorides (Cl-1) were estimated by

were studied after the harvest. The exchange capacity

titration with silver nitrate (AgNO3) 0.05 N by the

was estimated to be saturated with sodium (1 M) and

method of Jackson (1958) sulphates (SO4-2) were esti-

ammonium (1 M). Measurement of cations and dis-

mated accessing the turbidity using barium chloride

+2

+2

solved ions of calcium (Ca ) and magnesium (Mg ) by

(BaCl2.2H2O) using spectrophotometer type Biochrom

the method of titration with EDTA-Na2 (0.01N) as per

(Libra S5) at 470 nm. The degree of soil reaction in

+1

Jackson (1958). Potassium (K ) and sodium were esti-

suspension 1: 1 (soil: water) was measured using a pH-

mated using flame photometer (Jackson, 1958), carbon

meter model (PTR 79). According to Jackson (1958) the

(CO3-2) and bicarbonate (HCO3-1) by H2SO4 titration

electrical conductivity (Ec) was measured in separated

(0.01 M) using orange methyl detector according to

1:1 ratio using conductivity bridge and were estimated

S. No 1 2 3

Table 2. Some physical and chemical properties of mineral zeolite Partial density Bulk density Porosity CEC pH EC (dsm-1) (Mg m-3) (Mg m-3) )%( (C.Mol.kg-1) 7.3 2.21 1.0 0.09 91 73.6 Distribution of sizes of mineral (microns) More than 4750-2360 2360-1000 4752 14.44% 39.11% 25.11%

1222-622

622-322

322-125

125-75

16.13%

0.65%

3.23%

1.12%

Journal of Research in Ecology (2018) 6(2): 2053-2066

Less than 75 0.21% 2055

Abdel-Hassan and Radi, 2018 Table 3. Effect of zeolite on the degree of reaction (pH) Type of soil Level of organic Average of Rate of organic Average matter (%) zeolite matter Sandy Loamy 0.2 7.20 7.35 7.28 0.2% 7.19 7.65 0.4 7.05 7.15 7.10 Average 7.13 7.25 0.2 0.2 7.30 7.45 7.38 0.4% 7.29 7.46 0.4 7.15 7.25 7.20 Average 7.23 7.35 0.4 0.2 7.45 7.55 7.50 Soil rate 7.43 7.45 0.4 7.30 7.40 7.35 Average 7.38 7.48 0.2 7.60 7.75 7.68 Sandy 0.6 7.60 7.45 0.4 7.45 7.60 7.53 Average 7.53 7.68 0.2 7.75 8.05 7.90 Loamy 0.8 7.80 7.66 0.4 7.55 7.85 7.70 Average 7.65 7.95 1 0.2 7.95 8.45 8.20 8.05 0.4 7.75 8.05 7.90 Average 7.85 8.25 Rate of less Zeolite Organic matter Type of Zeolite× Organic matter N.S significant 2.272 2.242 soil difference 2.242 2.25 Zeolite ×Type of soil Organic matter× Zeolite× Type of soil× Organic Type of soil N.S matter N.S 2.121

Level of zeolite (%) 2

by method sedimentation using acetone (Richards,

after mixed with the level of zeolite mineral parasites

1954). Nitrogen was extracted by potassium chloride

and organic matter ratios for each treatment. Ten seeds

solution (2 standards), using microcaldale according to

of the maxipak wheat plant, an economic crop were

the method described by Page et al. (1982). Extraction

planted in each pot, and seedlings were reduced to four

of phosphorus was done in sodium bicarbonate solution

after 10 days of planting for each pot to maintain mois-

(pH=8.5) and colour development was measured using

ture content nearer to the field capacity and to compen-

ammonium molybdenum solution and ascorbic acid as a

sate moisture loss due to evaporation. In a weighted

reducing factor estimated using spectrophotometer fol-

method, crop processing was carried out by weeding

lowing the methods of Watanabe and Olsen (1965).

and pest control until the end of the experiment and the

Available potassium was extracted by ammonium ace-

major nutrients were added: e.g. nitrogen in the form of

tate solution (1 standard) and estimated using flame

urea. In the first batch payments 1.1 g before planting

photometer Page et al. (1982). Plastic pot with a capaci-

and in the second batch 1.1 g after planting for forty

ty of 10 Kg depth and 25 cm for mineral levels (0 and

days. The phosphorus was added in the form of P 2O5 (3

0.2 %) for zeolite and plastic pot with a capacity of 15

g) before planting and potassium was added in the form

Kg depth 28 cm for mineral levels (0.4 and 0.6 %) zeo-

of potassium sulphate (1 g) before planting. At the final

lite. Plastic pot with a capacity of 20 Kg depth 32 cm

maturity stage, the plant was harvested in 15/4/2017,

for mineral levels (0.8 and 1 %) zeolite and the bottom

carried out the experiment factorial in pots 6x2x2 in a

of the pot was filled with 300 g of fine gravel (less than

Complete Random Design (CRD) with three replicates

4 mm) with the addition of cotton fabric to prevent soil

per transaction and distributed in a random manner. The

leakage. 10 Kg of the two soils were added on each pot

chemicals properties of the soil such as interaction de-

2056

Journal of Research in Ecology (2018) 6(2): 2053-2066

Abdel-Hassan and Radi, 2018 gree, electrical conductivity, cation exchange capacity,

crease in the soil interaction with the percentage in-

available nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium were ana-

crease of added metal. In the sandy soil, it increased

lyzed using standard protocols. Results were statistically

from 7.13 to 7.23, 7.38, 7.53, 7.65 and 7.85 when the

analyzed by the analysis of variance and ‘t’ test using

level of soil additive was increased from 0, 0.2, 0.4, 0.6,

SPSS Statistical Package for Social Science and the

0.8 and 1 % respectively. Although the effect of organic

least significant difference according to AL-Rawee and

matter shows reduction of the reaction degree, as rec-

Khalaf (2000).

orded in the comparison treatment of sandy soil 7.20 at the level of 0.2% organic matter and 7.05 at the level of

RESULTS

0.4% organic material, but raising the levels of zeolite

Interaction degree

to 1% has raised the values of the degree of interaction

Table 3 shows the significant increase in zeolite

in both the sandy and loamy soils. Same table noted a

as the values of the reaction degree increased slightly by

significant difference between the soil types in the val-

increasing the level of the added metal in both sandy

ues of the degree of interaction as the general average

and loamy soils. The highest value of the interaction of

was7.45 for sandy and 7.66 for loamy soils.

sandy soil was 7.85 and 7.65 at the level of addition of

Electrical conductivity (dSm-1)

1% and 0.8% zeolite, 8.25 and 7.95 in the mixed soil

Table 4 shows a significant decrease in the val-

when comparing these values with the control treatment,

ues of electrical conductivity with increasing levels of

(0% zeolite) it is 7.13 for the sandy soil and 7.25 for the

addition of the metal for both sandy and loamy soil. In

mixed soil. The metal increases this trait in both the

the sandy soils, the electrical conductivity values in the

sandy and loamy soils. The same table shows the in-

control treatment were 3.35 dSm-1 and decreased to 2.63

Table 4. Effect of zeolite in electrical conductivity (dSm-1) Type of soil Level of organic Average matter (%) Sandy Loamy 0.2 3.85 4.80 4.33 0.4 2.85 4.25 3.55 Average 3.35 4.53 0.2 0.2 3.20 4.05 3.63 0.4 2.05 3.65 2.85 Average 2.63 3.85 0.4 0.2 2.45 3.35 2.90 0.4 1.25 3.05 2.15 Average 1.85 3.20 0.2 1.65 2.55 2.10 0.6 0.4 0.80 2.30 1.55 Average 1.23 2.43 0.2 0.85 1.85 1.35 0.8 0.4 0.45 1.40 0.93 Average 0.65 1.63 1 0.2 0.55 1.00 0.78 0.4 0.20 0.55 0.38 Average 0.78 0.38 Rate of least Zeolite Organic matter Type of significant 2.298 2.257 soil difference 2.257 2.25 Zeolite × Type of soil Organic matter× Type of soil 0.081 2.142

Level of zeolite (%) 2

Journal of Research in Ecology (2018) 6(2): 2053-2066

Average of Zeolite 3.94

Rate of organic matter 0.2% 2.51

3.24

0.4% 1.92

2.53

Soil rate 1.68

1.83

Sandy 2.73

1.14

Loamy

0.58 Zeolite × Organic matter 0.140 Zeolite× Type of soil× Organic matter 0.198 2057

Abdel-Hassan and Radi, 2018 Table 5. Effect of zeolite in cation exchange capacity (C.Mol.Kg -1) Type of soil Level of zeolite Level of organic Average of Rate of organic Average (%) matter (%) zeolite matter Sandy Loamy 2 0.2 2.54 9.67 6.10 0.2% 6.95 29.53 0.4 3.84 11.7 7.80 Average 3.19 10.71 0.2 0.2 10.80 18.87 14.83 0.4% 15.20 31.29 0.4 11.72 19.43 15.57 Average 11.26 19.15 0.4 0.2 25.85 30.42 28.13 Soil rate 28.57 0.4 25.88 32.15 29.01 Average 25.86 31.28 0.2 33.66 38.85 36.25 Sandy 0.6 36.84 27.24 0.4 35.17 39.69 37.43 Average 34.41 39.27 0.2 38.31 43.36 40.84 Loamy 0.8 42.13 0.4 41.38 45.48 43.43 33.38 Average 39.84 44.42 1 0.2 47.22 54.80 51.01 52.17 0.4 50.51 56.17 53.34 Average 48.86 55.48 Value of least Zeolite Organic matter Type of Zeolite × Organic matter significant 2.829 2.482 soil N.S difference 2.482 2.25 Zeolite ×Type of soil Organic matter× Type of Zeolite× Type of soil× Organic mat1.172 soil N.S ter N.S dSm-1 at the level of addition of 0.2% zeolite and then

level of 0.4% organic material, but the addition of zeo-

gradually decreased with the addition of the 1% mineral

lite metal has reduced these values to 1.00 and 0.55 at

to 0.38 dSm-1. Zeolite had an effect in reducing this

the level of organic matter addition at 0.2% and 0.4%,

quality in both sandy and loamy soils. As there is a

respectively. The values of the electrical conductivity of

quick response to the EC with different percentages of

both soil levels are lower at 0.4% organic matter than at

mineral added in sandy soils, it decreased from 3.35 to

0.2% organic matter, indicating the importance of in-

-1

2.63, 1.85, 1.23, 0.65 and 0.38 dSm when raising metal

creasing the organic matter ratio with zeolite in reducing

added to soil from 0 to 0.2, 0.4, 0.6, 0.8 and 1%, respec-

soil salinity. There were significant differences between

tively. The loamy soils decreased from 4.53 dSm-1 to

the two soil in the values of electrical conductivity as

-1

3.85, 3.20, 2.43, 1.63, 0.78 dSm when the metal was

the mean of the sandy soil was 1.68 dSm-1 and the mix-

upgraded from 0 to 0.2, 0.4, 0.6, 0.8 and 1%, respective-

ture showed 2.73 dSm-1.

ly. Although there was a significant effect of the organic

Cation exchange capacity (C.Mol.Kg-1)

matter in reducing the values of electrical conductivity,

Table 5 shows that the mixing of zeolite with

the control treatment of sandy soil showed 3.85 at the

sandy soils resulted in an increase in the exchange ca-

level of 0.2% organic matter and decreased to 2.85

pacity of sandy soils to 11.26, 25.86 and 34.41 C.Mol.

when raising the level of organic matter to 0.4%, but

Kg-1 for metal levels of 0.2, 0.4 and 0.6% respectively

raising the levels of added zeolite metal has reduced the

with the control treatment having 3.19 C.Mol.Kg -1 to

values of electrical conductivity at both levels of sandy

whereas the loamy soil had 19.15, 31.28 and 39.27

soils. In loamy soil, as for the control treatment, it was

C.Mol.Kg-1 for the same levels respectively, compared

4.80 at the level of 0.2% organic matter and 4.25 at the

to the control, which recorded the lowest average of

2058

Journal of Research in Ecology (2018) 6(2): 2053-2066

Abdel-Hassan and Radi, 2018 Table 6. Effect of zeolite in available nitrogen (mg.kg -1) Type of soil Level of organic Average matter (%) Sandy Loamy 0.2 0.04 0.03 0.04 0.4 0.22 0.29 0.26 Average 2.13 0.16 0.2 0.2 7.20 16.28 11.74 0.4 7.89 16.80 12.34 Average 7.54 16.54 0.4 0.2 8.08 17.29 12.69 0.4 8.85 17.82 13.33 Average 8.46 17.56 0.2 9.16 18.49 13.83 0.6 0.4 9.78 19.43 14.60 Average 9.47 18.96 0.2 10.07 19.42 14.74 0.8 0.4 10.69 20.06 15.37 Average 10.38 19.74 1 0.2 11.06 20.32 15.69 0.4 11.88 22.17 17.02 Average 21.24 11.47 Value of least Zeolite Organic matter Type of significant 2.452 2.336 soil difference 2.336 2.25 Zeolite × Type of soil Organic matter × Type 2.562 of soil N.S

Level of zeolite (%) 2

Average of zeolite 0.15

Rate of organic matter 0.2% 11.47

12.04

0.4% 12.14

13.01

Soil rate

14.21

Sandy 7.91

15.06

Loamy 15.70

16.36 Zeolite × Organic matter N.S Zeolite × Type of soil× Organic matter N.S

10.71 C.Mol.Kg-1. Moreover, the addition of zeolite to

in the soil with the increase in the amount of organic

the soil increases the values of cation exchange capaci-

matter added was noted. The largest difference in the

ty. The addition of zeolite with 0.8% and 1% zeolite for

values of available nitrogen was recorded in the level of

sandy soil gave the highest increase of 39.84 and 48.86

1% zeolite, 11.06 mg.kg-1 at the level of organic matter

C.Mol.Kg-1 and the loamy soil had 44.42 and 55.48

at 0.2% and rose to 11.88 mg.kg-1 in the level of 0.4%

C.Mol.Kg-1 respectively for the same levels.

organic matter indicating the importance of adding zeo-

-1

lite with organic matter in raising the values of available

Available nitrogen (mg.kg ) Table 6 shows a significant effect of zeolite in

nitrogen in sandy soils. The nitrogen values in both the

raising the nitrogen values in both the soil after harvest.

soils were higher at 0.4% of organic matter at an aver-

In loamy soil the nitrogen content was significantly

age of 12.14% and 0.2% at organic matter addition, the

higher than the sandy soil. The doubling of the amount

average was with an average of 11.47 mg.kg-1 at all lev-

of organic matter added showed significant differences

els of addition of zeolite metal, indicating the im-

in the ratio of nitrogen uptake in both soil and increase

portance of increasing the organic addition of available

with increasing the percentage of organic matter added.

nitrogen when treated with zeolite metal.

The mixing of zeolite with sandy soils resulted in an

Available phosphorus (mg.kg-1)

increase in the post-harvest nitrogen ratio after a signifi-1

cant increase from 130 mg.kg in comparison to 7.54, 8.46, 9.47, 10.38 and 11.47 mg.kg

-1

Table 7 shows that the sandy soil was significantly higher than the loamy soil on average phosphorus

when lifting the

content after harvest. The doubling of the amount of

metal levels from 0.2 and 0.4, 0.6, 0.8 and 1%, respec-

organic matter added showed significant differences in

tively. The increase in the amount of available nitrogen

the ratio of phosphorus available in both soil with sig-

Journal of Research in Ecology (2018) 6(2): 2053-2066

2059

Abdel-Hassan and Radi, 2018 Table 7. Effect of zeolite in available phosphorus (mg.kg -1) Type of soil Level of organic Average matter (%) Sandy Loamy 0.2 3.20 5.40 4.30 0.4 3.85 4.95 4.40 Average 3.53 5.18 4.35 0.2 0.2 9.20 12.70 10.95 0.4 9.85 13.00 11.43 Average 9.53 12.85 11.19 0.4 0.2 9.75 13.50 11.63 0.4 10.20 13.70 11.95 Average 9.98 13.60 11.79 0.2 10.70 14.30 12.50 0.6 0.4 10.80 14.50 12.65 Average 10.75 14.40 12.58 0.2 11.40 15.60 13.50 0.8 0.4 11.90 15.95 13.93 Average 11.65 15.78 1 0.2 12.15 16.35 14.25 0.4 12.45 16.60 14.53 Average 16.48 14.39 12.30 Value of least Zeolite Organic matter Type of significant 2.3732 2.2154 soil difference 2.2154 2.25 Zeolite × Type of soil Organic matter× Type of 2.5276 soil N.S

Level of zeolite (%) 2

Average of zeolite 4.35

Rate of organic matter 0.2% 11.19

11.19

0.4% 11.48

11.79

Soil rate

12.58

Sandy 9.62

13.71

Loamy 13.05

14.39 Zeolite × Organic matter N.S Zeolite × Type of soil× Organic matter N.S

nificant effect of the interaction between zeolite and soil

showed 5.40 at 0.2% organic matter and 4.95 mg.kg -1 at

texture. The zeolite mixing with the soil had a signifi-

0.4% organic matter. Zeolite has raised these values to

cantly increased phosphorus values. The highest aver-

16.35 mg.kg-1 and 16.60 mg.kg-1 at is 0.2% and 0.4%

age phosphorus in the sandy soil was 12.30 mg.kg -1 at

organic matter respectively.

-1

the level of 1% zeolite and 16.48 mg.kg in the mixed soil. A comparison of these values with control treat-1

Available potassium (mg.kg -1) Table 8 shows a significant effect of zeolite in

-1

raising the available potassium values in all soil types, a

for loamy soils showing the role of the metal in increas-

significantly higher values in loamy soils when com-

ing the phosphorus uptake in soil. A gradual increase of

pared with sandy soils in the average potassium content.

phosphorus with increased zeolite added to sandy soils

The doubling of the amount of organic matter added has

ment of 3.53 mg.kg for sandy soils and 5.18 mg.kg

-1

from 9.53 to 9.98, 10.75, 11.65 and 12.30 mg.kg when

shown significant differences in the rate of available

the added zeolite increased from 0.2, 0.4, 0.6, 0.8 and

potassium in soil types. It increased the proportion of

1% respectively was added. The results showed a signif-

organic matter added, as well as a significant effect of

icant effect of the organic matter in raising the values of

the interaction between zeolite and soil texture and a

available phosphorus, as in the control treatment of

significant effect of the interaction of other factors were

sandy soil showing 3.20 mg.kg-1 at 0.2% organic matter

noted. In the sandy soils, it is higher than 1%, with an

-1

and 3.85 mg.kg at 0.4% organic matter. Raising phos-

average of 103.00 mg.kg-1, and the levels of 0.2, 0.4, 0.6

phorus values at both levels of sandy soil more, double

and 0.8% of zeolite had averages of 64.75, 74.00, 86.00

the effect of organic matter in the comparison sample

and 102.00 mg.kg-1, respectively. Zeolite increase led to

significantly. In the loamy soil as for control treatment it

the increase of available potassium. The level of 1%

2060

Journal of Research in Ecology (2018) 6(2): 2053-2066

Abdel-Hassan and Radi, 2018 Table 8. Effect of zeolite in available potassium (mg.kg -1) Type of soil Level of zeolite Level of organic Average of Rate of organic Average (%) matter (%) zeolite matter Sandy Loamy 2 0.2 35.50 62.50 49.00 0.2% 55.50 79.25 0.4 56.00 68.00 62.00 Average 45.75 65.25 55.50 0.2 0.2 62.50 73.50 68.00 0.4% 70.13 92.42 0.4 67.00 77.50 72.25 Average 64.75 75.50 70.13 0.4 0.2 72.50 76.00 74.25 Soil rate 76.13 0.4 75.50 80.50 78.00 Average 74.00 78.25 76.13 0.2 86.00 92.00 89.00 Sandy 0.6 89.88 83.13 0.4 86.00 95.50 90.75 Average 86.00 93.75 89.88 0.2 99.50 116.50 108.00 Loamy 0.8 110.25 0.4 104.50 120.50 112.50 88.54 Average 102.00 118.50 1 0.2 100.50 120.50 110.50 113.13 0.4 105.50 126.00 115.75 Average 123.25 113.13 103.00 Value of least Zeolite Organic matter Type of Zeolite × Organic matter significant 3.856 2.226 soil N.S difference 2.226 2.25 Zeolite × Type of soil Organic matter× Type of Zeolite× Type of soil× Organic mat5.453 soil N.S ter N.S zeolite had the highest mean soil level of 123.25 -1

gree may be due to the high adsorption of base cations

mg.kg , exceeding all levels of sandy and loamy soil

by the ion exchange sites of the mineral which is con-

followed by 0.8% zeolite with an average of 118.50

sistent with Ajirloo et al. (2013). This phenomenon was

-1

mg.kg . The increase in the amount of available potas-

repeated in the mixed soil as the values of the reaction

sium with the increase in the amount of organic matter

level increased at the end of the experiment. The

added showed the largest difference in the available

increase in the level of the mineral added to the soil may

potassium value at the level of 1% zeolite, as it is

be due to the direct effect of the zeolite metal base or

-1

100.50 mg.kg at the level of 0.2% organic matter and

the adsorption of alkaline elements in the soil and rais-

rose to 105.50 mg.kg-1 at the level of 0.4% organic mat-

ing the values of their reaction. The values of the reac-

ter. It is noted that the level of 0.4% organic matter,

tion level for both soil levels are less at 0.4% organic

-1

which scored an average of 92.42 mg.kg , while the

matter than at the level of 0.2% organic matter even at

record level of 0.2% organic matter had less average of

all levels of addition of zeolite metal, indicating the

-1

79.25 mg.kg , considering for the effect of soil texture

importance of increasing the percentage of organic mat-

on the potassium content, the loamy soil was signifi-

ter added to soil when treated with zeolite. However, the

cantly higher with an average of 88.54 mg.kg

-1

and

sandy soil with a mean average of 83.13 mg.kg -1.

extent of the increase in the loamy soil is higher than the sandy soils due to the washing of basal elements in the sandy soils higher than the rate of the loamy soil.

DISCUSSION Interaction degree A significant increase in zeolite in reaction deJournal of Research in Ecology (2018) 6(2): 2053-2066

Electrical conductivity (dSm-1) The differences in electrical conductivity are due to the ability of the metal to balance the salt in the 2061

Abdel-Hassan and Radi, 2018 soil. It is an effective way to remove salts from the soil

of the metal. Increase in the total number of reciprocal

due to its effective role in increasing soil porosity and

sites and change the exchange capacity values were

thus increasing the water movement downwards and

associated with the charges on the internal and external

carrying the salts, and thereby reducing its concentration

surfaces of the metal crystals as well as the density of

in the soil solution. The zeolite absorbs potassium ions

these charges on the specific surfaces of the metal. This

more than sodium ions and thus reduces the adsorption

result is consistent with Ippolito et al. (2011). The sig-

properties of sodium ions and decreases their concentra-

nificant increase in the exchange capacity values when

tion in the soil solution by washing. Zeolite can be use-

mixing the metal with the soil may be due to the effect

ful to reduce the negative effects of high salinity in soil

of the high cationic exchange capacity of zeolite with

(Ghorbani and Babaei, 2008). The extent of the decrease

the less interchangeable mineral soil parts as it was in-

in sandy soils is more than that of the mixed soil when

creased after soil mixing with zeolite. Similar results

treated with zeolite. The reason may be due to the in-

were obtained by Sangeetha and Baskar (2016). The

creased dilution of salts in the soil solution due to in-

results showed a convergence in the values of the ex-

creased moisture content of the soil with increased min-

change capacity of the soil with the ratios of organic

eralization, which is consistent with Ajirlo et al. (2013)

matter. The addition of zeolite resulted in increased

who pointed that one of the important properties of zeo-

CEC values especially at the level of addition of 1%

lite is to capture water and cation and reduce salt con-

zeolite for both soil. In addition, the organic content

centration in the soil solution leading to great reduction

increases the cation exchange capacity values of both

in the values of electrical conductivity. There is a signif-

soils due to the increase of the charged sites in the soil

icant effect of interaction between zeolite and soil tex-

(Ali and Shaker 2016).

ture. Due to different soil texture and different levels of

Available nitrogen (mg.kg-1)

metal and due to the high water retention ability of the

The process of zeolite sand soil mixing in-

mineral, the concentration of salts reduce in the soil

creased nitrogen values after harvest. Zeolite may im-

solution. There is also a significant effect of the interac-

prove nutrient use, particularly NO3 and NH4 and in-

tion between zeolite and organic matter due to the dif-

crease nitrogen uptake (Polat et al., 2004; Tamer et al.,

ference in the reaction of the electrical conductivity of

2014). Zeolite acts as a slow ammonium ion editor in

the organic matter by the levels of the added metal. In

the soil and reduces the loss of nitrogen by washing,

addition, there is a significant effect of the interaction

especially in sandy soils and reducing the ammonia vol-

between organic material and soil type in electrical con-

atility by the metal's ability to reduce the process of

ductivity. Indicating the importance of zeolite in the

denitrification (Manolov, 2000). It also reduces ammo-

efficiency of washing salts from the soil and reduce the

nia volatilization in the of urea when mixing fertilizer

values of electrical conductivity of the soil when treated

with zeolite in sandy and calcareous soils (Latip et al.,

with organic matter.

2011; Sartbaeva et al., 2006). The amount of available -

-1

Cation exchange capacity ( C.Mol.Kg )

nitrogen in the soil continues to increase with the in-

The addition of less concentration of zeolite

crease of the added zeolite. The treatment of 0.8 and

resulted in a small increase in the values of the recipro-

1% zeolite is superior to the rest of the treatments, indi-

cal capacity while raising the value of the metal to more

cating the importance of the metal in maintaining the

than 0.8% gave a great leap in the values of the ex-

nitrogen in the soil and the continued readiness of the

change capacity of the soil because of the high capacity

plant. High-value nitrogen retention in soil due to the

2062

Journal of Research in Ecology (2018) 6(2): 2053-2066

Abdel-Hassan and Radi, 2018 addition of zeolite metal may be due to ammonium ad-

when needed gradually Giuseppe et al. (2016) indicat-

sorption on zeolite surfaces and maintenance from

ing the importance of zeolite in raising the values of

washing with irrigation water or volatilization (Latip et

phosphorus in sandy soils, improving soil fertility and

al., 2011). Available nitrogen values in all types of soil

increasing nutrient retention when mixing zeolite with

were at highest levels of organic matter and at all levels

chemical fertilizers and soils (Kavoosi, 2007). The in-

of zeolite, indicating the importance of increasing the

crease in loamy soil due to the mixing of zeolite metal

organic addition of ready-made nitrogen when treating

with chemical fertilizer significantly affects the soil

soils with zeolite metal, although there is no significant

content of the ions and increases its readiness due to the

difference between the addition of organic matter to the

cation exchange properties and adsorption of zeolite

physical and chemical soil properties such as ventila-

metal (Supapron et al., 2002). The available phosphorus

tion, permeability and cation exchange capacity

values for both soil levels are higher at 0.4% organic

(Saralidze and Bakhtadze, 1989). The increase of avail-

matter and at all levels of metal addition, indicating the

able nitrogen in the soil with the increase of organic

importance of increasing the proportion of organic mat-

matter results in containing the crystals of zeolite metal

ter when treated with zeolite mineral (Kavoosi, 2007).

on small internal channels to protect the ammonium

The increase in the availability of phosphorus values in

ions from excessive nitrate entering these channels and

loamy soil due to increase of moisture content in soils

protect it from nitrification bacteria because of the small

compared to sandy soils, microbiology, clustering sta-

volume of channels that does not allow the bacteria to

bility and high surface area has resulted in higher phos-

enter into metal channels (Brady and Ray, 2002). The

phorus concentrations in these soils (Najafinezhad et al.,

significant effect of the interaction between zeolite and

2014). Available phosphorus increase can be attributed

soil texture has been observed, which has led to an in-

to its addition with urea. Zeolite reserves phosphorus

crease in the nitrogen values in both soils by varying

and is phased out when the plant is needed, an important

levels of the added metal and its effect on increasing

feature of zeolite metal in phasing up phosphorus in soil

nutrient uptake (Palanivell et al., 2015). The mainte-

(Abdi et al., 2010).

nance of nitrogen is highly preferred in the soil of the

Available potassium (mg.kg -1)

study. It gives an indication of the role of the metal in

Potassium increases with increase in zeolite

processing the nitrogen of the cultivated plant, and

levels due to the effect of zeolite in increasing the soil

maintaining its readiness throughout the experiment

content of potassium for its high cation exchange capac-

period, which is positively reflected on the vegetative

ity and high adsorption of positive cations. It acts as a

growth and the yield of the wheat grown in these soils

fertilizer store and is gradually prepared in soil (MarĂ­a-

(Gairley et al., 2015).

RamĂ­rez et al., 2011; Bagdasarov et al., 2004). It is pos-1

sible that zeolite is highly selective for potassium be-

The increase of phosphorus with the increase in

cause of the porous composition of the metal and the

the percentage of zeolite added to the sandy soil due to

high ability to maintain the ready-made potassium and

the variation of the release of phosphorus by the crystals

gradually release it to the soil solution (Cairo et al.,

of the metal and concurrently with the levels of addition

2017), cation efficiency exchange in and out of zeolite

as the metal collects the phosphorus ions within the

crystals due to the silicate-dense silicate structure,

channels and reduce loss of filtration, and release and

which is given by open cavities in the form of channels

increase the phosphorus solubility to the soil solution

filled with water molecules and cations such as potassi-

Available phosphorus (mg.kg )

Journal of Research in Ecology (2018) 6(2): 2053-2066

2063

Abdel-Hassan and Radi, 2018 um which are interchangeable (Gairley et al., 2015;

ri Y and Irshad M. 2008. Effects of zeolite on soil nu-

Jakkuala, 2005). The high level of organic matter in-

trients and growth of barley following irrigation with

creases the efficiency of organic matter in increasing the

saline water. Journal of Plant Nutrition, 31(7): 1159-

stability of soil complexes and increase the exchange

1173.

capacity of soil and moisture content, which positively reflected on the soil content (nutrients). The superiority of the loamy soil may be due to the increase in the proportion of clay minerals in the soil mixed with the sandy soils, thus increasing the susceptibility of the mixed soil towards water retention, nutrient uptake, clustering sta-

Ali NADS and Shaker AWAR. 2016. Soil and organic fertilization and their role in sustainable agriculture.

Department to combat desertification. College of Agriculture. Baghdad University. Ministry of Higher Education and Scientific Research.

bility, and pore size. The small pores act as a reservoir

AL-Rawee KM and Khalaf AA. 2000. Design and

of water and a source of dissolved nutrients (Omar,

analysis of agricultural experiments. The Ministry of

1980).

higher education and scientific research. University of Al Mosul. National Library institution for printing and

CONCLUSION The application of zeolite decreased the concentration of salts in the soil, increase cation exchange capacity and increased the availability of essential nutrients in the soil (NPK), as well as the application of zeolite increased the degree of soil reaction to rates close to alkalinity.

publishing. 488 p.

Badillo-Almaraz V, Trocellier P and Dávila-Rangel I. 2003. Adsorption of aqueous Zn (II) species on synthetic zeolites. Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research Section B: Beam Interactions with Materials and Atoms, 210(1): 424-428.

Bagdasarov VR, Kazachenko AA, Rustambekov

REFERENCES

MK, Uspenskij BG, Kuznetsova VV and Efremov

Abdi GH, Khosh-Khui M and Eshghi S. 2010. Effect

EN. 2004. Prolonged-activity nitrogen-zeolite fertiliz-

of natural zeolite on growth and flowering of strawberry

er. Efremov EN, Russia.

(Fragaria× ananassa Duch.). International Journal of Agricultural Research, 5(9): 799-804.

Bernardi ACDC, Souza GB, Polidoro JC, Renato P, Paiva PRP and Monte MBM. 2011. Yield, quality

Afrous A and Goudarzi S. 2015. The effect of differ-

components, and nitrogen levels of silage corn fertilized

ent types of zeolite on drain water volume and nitrate

with urea and zeolite. Communications in Soil Science

leaching under tomato cultivated. Journal of Scientific

and Plant Analysis, 42(11): 1266-1275.

Research and Development, 2(1): 56-58.

Bremner JM. 1965. Inorganic forms of nitrogen. In

Ajirloo GS, Jadid AP, Nasirtabrizi MH and Man-

Black CA, Evans DD, White JL, Ensminger E and

soor SR. 2013. Effect of zeolite application on soil puri-

Clark FE, Eds. Methods of Soils Analysis. Part 2.

fication and some chemical properties of soil (case

Agronomy No. 9. American Society of Agronomy,

study). Technical Journal of Engineering and Applied

Madison, WI, 1179–1237 p.

Sciences, 3: 970-974 .

Al-Busaidi A, Yamamoto T, Inoue M, Eneji AE, Mo2064

Brady NC and Ray R. 2002. The nature and properties of soils, 13th Pearson education (Singapore) Pte. Ltd. Journal of Research in Ecology (2018) 6(2): 2053-2066

Abdel-Hassan and Radi, 2018 Indian Branch, FIE. Patparagonj, Delhi, India, 482: 621-

Jackson ML. 1958. Soil chemical analysis. Prentice-

624.

Hall, Inc. Englewood Cliffs. 521 p.

Cairo CP, Joaquin MDA, Pedro TA, Bladimir DM,

Jakkula VS. 2005. Synthesis of zeolites and their appli-

Rafael JC and Oralia RL. 2017. Effects of zeolite and

cation as soil amendments to increase crop yield and

organic fertilizers on soil quality and yield of Sugar-

potentially act as controlled release fertilizers. Ph. D

cane. Australian Journal of Crop Science, 11(06): 733-

Thesis submitted to University of Wolverhampton, 1-

738.

273.

Chander K and Joergensen RG. 2002. Decomposition

Kavoosi M. 2007. Effects of zeolite application on rice

14

of C labelled glucose in a Pb-contaminated soil reme-

yield, nitrogen recovery, and nitrogen use efficiency.

diated with synthetic zeolite and other amendments. Soil

Journal of Communications in Soil Science and Plant

Biology and Biochemistry, 34(5): 643-649.

Analysis, 38(1-2): 69-76.

Di Giuseppe D, Faccini B, Melchiorre M, Ferretti G,

Khan H, Khan AZ, Khan R, Matsue N and Henmi T.

Coltorti M, Ciuffreda G and Zago A. 2016. Yield and

2008. Zeolite application affects vegetative phenology

quality of maize grown on a loamy soil amended with

of determinate and indeterminate soybean grown on

natural chabazite zeolitite. EQA-International Journal

Allophanic soil. International Journal of Agricultural

of Environmental Quality, 17(1): 35-45.

Research, 3(2): 148-154.

Helal Gayerly, Samer Bregle, Muhamad Manhal Al

Latip BAB, Nik Muhamad HA, Osumanu J, Make

Zubi, Yahya Ramadan, Khaled Al Shebli, Amira Al

and Franklin RK. 2011. Ammonia volatilization from

Hafez and Mayada Fattoum. 2015. The effect of natu-

urea at different levels of zeolite. International Journal

ral syrian zeolite on the availability of some minerals in

of the Physical Sciences, 6(34): 7717-7720.

the soil and productivity of wheat and cotton in gypsum soils. Syrian Journal of Agricultural Research, 2(2).

Ge G, Li Z, Fan F, Chu G, Hou Z and Liang Y. 2010.

Soil biological activity and their seasonal variations in response to long-term applications of organic and inorganic fertilizers. Plant and Soil, 326(1): 31-44.

Manolov I. 2000. Recultivation of zeolite substrates. Bulgarian Journal of Agricultural Science, 6(1): 33-38.

María-Ramírez A, Osuna-Ceja ES and LimónOrtega A. 2011. Two sources of zeolite as substitutes of nitrogen fertilizer for wheat (Triticum aestivum) pro-

Ghorbani H and Babaei AA. 2008. The effects of nat-

duction in Tlaxcala, Mexico. Tropical and Subtropical

ural zeolite on ions adsorption and reducing solution

Agroecosystems, 13(3): 533-536.

electrical conductivity Na and K solutions. International Meeting on Soil Fertility Land Management and Agroclimatology, 947-955.

Najafinezhad H, Sarvestani ZT, Sanavy SAM and Naghavi H. 2014. Effect of irrigation regimes and application of barley residue, zeolite and superabsorbent

Ippolito JA, Tarkalson DD and Lehrsch GA. 2011.

polymer on forage yield, cadmium, nitrogen and some

Zeolite soil application method affects inorganic nitro-

physiological traits of corn and sorghum. International

gen, moisture, and corn growth. Soil Science, 176(3):

Journal of Biosciences, 5(3): 234-245.

136-142.

Journal of Research in Ecology (2018) 6(2): 2053-2066

Omar, Fattah Ali .1980. Effect of microbes on organic 2065

Abdel-Hassan and Radi, 2018 residues, glucose and nitrogen on the composition and

fertilizer on the change of phycical and chemical prop-

Soil aggregate stability in water. Master Thesis, Faculty

erties on lat ya soil series for sugar cane. In Proceedings

of Agriculture, Mosul University.

of the 17th WCSS Symposium, 1897-1903 p.

Page AL, Miller RH and Keeney DR. 1982. Methods

Tamer NH. 2006. Synthesis and characterization of

of soil analysis. Part 2. Chemical and microbiological

zeolite Beta. Middle East Technical University, Thesis,

properties. American Society of Agronomy. In Soil Sci-

July 2006, 80 p.

ence Society of America, 1159 p.

Torma S, Vilcek J, Adamisin P, Huttmanova E and

Palanivell P, Ahmed OH, Susilawati K and Ab

Hronec O. 2014. Influence of natural zeolite on nitro-

Majid MN. 2015. Mitigating ammonia volatilization

gen dynamics in soil. Turkish Journal of Agriculture

from urea in waterlogged condition using clinoptilolite

and Forestry, 38: 739-744.

zeolite. International Journal of Agriculture and Biology, 17(1): 149-155.

Vilcek J, Torma S, Adamisin P and Hrone O. 2013.

Nitrogen sorption and its release in the soil after zeolite

Polat E, Karaca M, Demir H and Onus AN. 2004.

application. Bulgarian Journal of Agricultural Science,

Use of natural zeolite (clinoptilolite) in agricul-

19(2): 228-234.

ture.

Journal

of

Fruit

and

Ornamental

Plant

Research, 12(1): 183-189.

Watanabe FS and Olsen SR. 1965. Test of an ascorbic acid method for determining phosphorus in water and

Rabai KA, Haruna AO and Kasim S. 2013. Use of

NaHCO3 extracts from soil 1. Soil Science Society of

formulated nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium com-

America Journal, 29(6): 677-678.

pound fertilizer using clinoptilolite zeolite in maize (Zea mays L.) cultivation. Emirates Journal of Food and Agriculture, 25: 713-722.

Woodford C. 2009. Zeolites. Retrieved on 28 September

2015.

Available

and alkali soils. USDA Handbook No. 60. 160 p.

Wul and Liu M. 2008. Preparation and properties of chitosan-coated NPK compound fertilizer with con-

Sangeetha C and Baskar P. 2016. Zeolite and its po-

trolled-release

tential

Polymers, 72(2): 240-247.

in

http://

www.explainthatstuff.com/zeolites.html.

Richards LA. 1954. Diagnosis and improvise of saline

uses

from:

agriculture:

A

critical

and

water-retention.

Carbohydrate

review. Agricultural Reviews, 37(2): 101-108.

Saralidze AS and Bakhtadze RD. 1989. Optimization of physical properties of substrate in transitional rotation. Soviet Agricultural Sciences, 5: 26-29.

Sartbaeva A, Wells SA, Treacy MMJ and Thorpe MF. 2006. The flexibility window in zeolites. Nature Materials, 5(12): 962-965.

Supapron JU, Pitayakon LI, Kamalapa WA and Touchamon PA. 2002. Effect of zeolite and chemical 2066

Submit your articles online at ecologyresearch.info Advantages

     

Easy online submission Complete Peer review Affordable Charges Quick processing Extensive indexing You retain your copyright

submit@ecologyresearch.info www.ecologyresearch.info/Submit.php.

Journal of Research in Ecology (2018) 6(2): 2053-2066