View/Open - ResearchSpace - University of KwaZulu-Natal
View/Open - ResearchSpace - University of KwaZulu-Natal
View/Open - ResearchSpace - University of KwaZulu-Natal
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
Soil sampling and analysis<br />
The first number <strong>of</strong> the assessment has a value from 1 to 3; 1 being non-saline, 2<br />
potentially saline and 3 saline. The second number has a value from 4 to 6; 4 being<br />
non-sodic, 5 potentially sodic and 6 sodic. A sodic soil is defined as a soil with a low<br />
soluble salt content and a high exchangeable sodium percentage (ESP), with a usual<br />
ESP > 15 (SOIL CLASSIFICATION WORKING GROUP, 1991). A code 1,4 soil is<br />
described as suitable for irrigation, a code 2,5 soil as poorly drained and not suitable<br />
for irrigation and a code 3,6 soil as not suitable for irrigation.<br />
A pH test and a water content test were done on both samples. The pH <strong>of</strong> three<br />
different replicate samples was measured. Soil was mixed 1:1 (v/v) with water and<br />
homogenized with a stirrer apparatus. After about an hour the soil samples were<br />
vacuum filtered through Whatman No.1 filter papers and their pH was measured. The<br />
water content was calculated by weighing the soil, placing the soil in a drying oven<br />
set at 110°C and then subtracting the mass after no weight loss could be observed<br />
from the initial weight.<br />
3.3 RESULTS<br />
The colour <strong>of</strong> the two samples suggests that the drainage conditions <strong>of</strong> sample 1 is<br />
superior to that <strong>of</strong> sample 2 (DONAHUE et al., 1983) (Figure 3.1). Sample 1 also had<br />
more leaf and root material than sample 2, suggesting that it has more organic<br />
matter, and therefore a higher nutrient content, than sample 2 (DONAHUE et al.,<br />
1983). It is notable that sample 2 appears more aggregated and dense.<br />
94