Advertisement

Irrigation Science

, Volume 32, Issue 4, pp 283–294 | Cite as

Effects of irrigation using treated wastewater on table grape vineyards: dynamics of sodium accumulation in soil and plant

  • Yishai Netzer
  • Moshe Shenker
  • Amnon SchwartzEmail author
Original Paper

Abstract

The effect of using treated wastewater for irrigation of table grapes (Vitis vinifera cv. Superior Seedless) was studied for six seasons. The experimental vineyard was grown on clay loam soil in a semi-arid area. Treated wastewater (5.83 meq L−1 Na+) with (TWW + F) and without (TWW) fertilizer, and fresh water with fertilizer (FW + F, 2.97 meq L−1 Na+), were each applied at three irrigation levels (80, 60 and 40 % of crop evapotranspiration before harvest). Root zone (0–60 cm soil depth) soil saturated paste extract Na+ concentrations and sodium adsorption ratio (SAR) values fluctuated over the years, but generally decreased in the order TWW > TWW + F > FW + F for each irrigation level. Both Na+ concentrations and SAR values developed faster and to a greater extent at higher irrigation. Adding fertilizer to TWW decreased Na+ and SAR only at the high irrigation level. Na+ concentrations in the trunk wood, bark and xylem sap of the TWW and TWW + F irrigated vines were significantly higher than those in the FW + F-irrigated vines. Leaf petiole Na+ content increased with time and its maximum value in TWW and TWW + F irrigated vines exceeded 6,500 mg kg−1, threefold higher than in FW + F irrigated vines. We conclude that in clay soils under relatively high irrigation, Na+ may pose a greater potential risk to plants and soil rather than Cl or salinity per se. However, significant effects on yield were not recorded during this six-year study probably due to the high salinity tolerance of the ‘Paulsen’ rootstock used in the experiment.

Keywords

Irrigation Water Irrigation Treatment Sodium Adsorption Ratio Table Grape Irrigation Season 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Notes

Acknowledgments

This research was supported by a grant from the Israeli Ministry of Agriculture (Project No. 826-47-02). The authors would like to thank Amram Hazan, Yosi Cohen, Carmit Lifshitz, Idith Dembak, Shiri Naftalyahu, and Tamar Weinberg for their assistance in field and laboratory work.

References

  1. Agassi M, Tarchitzky J, Kern R, Chen Y, Goldstein D, Fizik E (2003) Effects of prolonged irrigation with treated municipal effluent on runoff rate. J Environ Qual 32:1053–1057PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Allen RA, Pereira LS, Raes D, Smith M (1998) Crop evapotranspiration: guidelines for computing crop water requirements. FAO, Rome (FAO Irrigation and Drainage Paper 56)Google Scholar
  3. Avnimelech Y (1993) Irrigation with sewage effluents: the Israeli experience. Environ Sci Technol 27:1278–1281CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Ayers RS, Westcot DW (1985) Water quality for agriculture. FAO Irrig Drain. Pap 29. FAO, RomeGoogle Scholar
  5. Bhardwaj AK, Goldstein D, Azenkot A, Levy GJ (2007) Irrigation with treated wastewater under two different irrigation methods: effects on hydraulic conductivity of a clay soil. Geoderma 140:199–206CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bresler E (1987) Application of a conceptual model to irrigation water requirement and salt tolerance of crops. Soil Sci Soc Am J 51:788–793CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Brooks RH, Bower GA, Reeves RC (1956) The effect of various exchangeable cations upon the physical condition of soils. Soil Sci Soc Am Proc 20:325–327CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Carden DE, Walker DJ, Flowers TJ, Miller AJ (2003) Single-cell measurements of the contributions of cytosolic Na+ and K+ to salt tolerance. Plant Physiol 131:676–683PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Chen Y, Banin A, Borochovitch A (1983) Effect of potassium on soil structure in relation to hydraulic conductivity. Geoderma 30:135–147CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Christensen P (1969) Seasonal changes and distribution of nutritional elements in Thompson Seedless grapevines. Am J Enol Vitic 20:176–190Google Scholar
  11. Cohen A, Fiman D, Kohler N (2012) Effluents collection treatment and use for agriculture irrigation—National Survey—2010. Nature and Parks Authority, Israel. http://www.water.gov.il/Hebrew/ProfessionalInfoAndData/Water-Quality/DocLib1/seker-kolhin-2010.pdf. Accessed 18 Jan 2014 (in Hebrew)
  12. Downton WJS (1977a) Chloride accumulation in different species of grapevine. Sci Hort 7:249–253CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Downton WJS (1977b) Influence of rootstocks on the accumulation of chloride, sodium and potassium in grapevines. Aust J Agric Res 28:879–889CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Downton WJS (1985) Growth and mineral composition of the sultana grapevine as influenced by salinity and rootstock. Aust J Agric Res 36:425–434CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Dudley LM, Ben-Gal A, Shani U (2008) Influence of plant, soil, and water on the leaching fraction. Vadose Zone J 7:420–425CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. FAO (2008) Land and plant nutrition management service. http://www.fao.org/ag/agl/agll/spush. Accessed 26 May 2010
  17. Feigin A, Ravina I, Shalhevet J (1991) Irrigation with treated sewage effluent: management for environmental protection. Springer, Berlin 224 ppCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Fisarakis I, Chartzoulakis K, Stavrakas D (2001) Response of Sultana vines (V. vinifera L.) on six rootstocks to NaCl salinity exposure and recovery. Agric Water Manage 51:13–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Flowers TJ, Yeo AR (1986) Ion relations of plants under drought and salinity. Aust J Plant Physiol 13:75–91CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Francois LE, Mass EV (1994) Crop response and management on salt-affected soils. In: Pessarakli M (ed) Handbook of plant and crop stress. Marcel Dekker, New York, pp 149–181Google Scholar
  21. Franson MAH (1998) Standard methods for the examination of water and wastewater, 20th edn. American Public Health Association, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  22. Fuchs M (2007) Impact of research on water use for irrigation in Israel. Irrig Sci 25:443–445. doi: 10.1007/s00271-006-0050-z CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Garcia M, Charbaji T (1993) Effect of sodium chloride salinity on cation equilibria in grapevines. J Plant Nutr 16:2225–2237CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Greenway H, Munns R (1980) Mechanisms of salt-tolerance in non-halophytes. Ann Rev Plant Physiol 31:149–190CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Groot Obbink J, Alexander DM (1973) Response of six grapevine cultivars to a range of chloride concentrations. Am J Enol Vitic 24:65–68Google Scholar
  26. Inbar Committee (2003) Effluent Standards regulations, ministry of environmental protection, Israel. http://www.sviva.gov.il/InfoServices/ReservoirInfo/DocLib2/Publications/P0301-P0400/P0321.pdf. Accessed 18 Jan 2014 (in Hebrew)
  27. Kfir O, Tal A, Gross A, Adar E (2012) The effect of reservoir operational features on recycled wastewater quality. Resour Conserv Recycl 68:76–87CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Laurenson S, Bolane N, Smith E, Mccarthy M (2012) Review: use of recycled wastewater for irrigating grapevines. Aust J Grape Wine Res 18:1–10CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Levy GJ (2011) Impact of long-term irrigation with treated wastewater on soil-structure stability—The Israeli experience. Isr J Plant Sci 59:95–104CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Maas EV (1990) Crop salt tolerance. In: Tanji KK (ed) Agricultural salinity assessment and management. American Society of Civil Engineers, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  31. Maas EV, Hoffman GJ (1977) Crop salt tolerance-current assessment. J Irrig Drain Div ASCE 103:115–134Google Scholar
  32. Munns R (1993) Physiological processes limiting plant growth in saline soils: some dogmas and hypotheses. Plant Cell Environ 16:15–24CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Munns R (2002) Comparative physiology of salt and water stress. Plant Cell Environ 25:239–250PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Munns R, Guo J, Passioura JB, Cramer GR (2000) Leaf water status controls day-time but not daily rates of leaf expansion in salt-treated barley. Aust J Plant Physiol 27:949–957Google Scholar
  35. Nagarajah S (1992) Soil toxicity in Sunrasia vineyards. Aust Grapegrow Winemak 334:11–14Google Scholar
  36. Netzer Y, Yao C, Shenker M, Bravdo B, Schwartz A (2009) Water use and the development of seasonal crop coefficients for superior seedless grapevines trained to an open-gable trellis system. Irrig Sci 27:109–120CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Page AL, Miller RH, Keeney DR (1982) Methods of soil analysis: chemical and microbiological properties. American Society of Agronomy, MadisonGoogle Scholar
  38. Paranychianakis NV, Angelakis AN (2008) The effect of water stress and rootstock on the development of leaf injuries in grapevines irrigated with saline effluent. Agric Water Manage 95:375–382CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Prior LD, Grieve AM, Slavich PG, Cullis BR (1992) Sodium chloride and soil texture interactions in irrigated field grown sultana grapevines. II. Plant mineral content, growth and physiology. Aust J Agric Res 43:1067–1083CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Rao SN, Mathew PK (1995) Effects of exchangeable cations on hydraulic conductivity of a marine clay. Clays Clay Miner 43:433–437CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Reuter DJ, Robinson JB (1997) Plant analysis—an interpretation manual, 2nd edn. CSIRO, CollingwoodGoogle Scholar
  42. Roland B, Deletic A, Crag A (2000) Techniques for water and wastewater management: a review of techniques and their integration in planning. Urban Water 2:197–221CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Scheierling SM, Bartone CR, Mara DD, Drechsel P (2011) Towards an agenda for improving wastewater use in agriculture. Water Int 36:420–440CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Shani U, Ben-Gal A (2005) Long-term response of grapevines to salinity: osmotic effects and ion toxicity. Am J Enol Vitic 56:148–154Google Scholar
  45. Sharma J, Upadhyay AK (2008) Rootstock effect on Tas-A-Ganesh (Vitis vinifera L.) for sodium and chloride uptake. Acta Hort 786:113–116Google Scholar
  46. Suarez DL, Wood DJ, Lesch SM (2006) Effect of SAR on water infiltration under a sequential rain-irrigation management system. Agric Water Manage 86:150–164CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Tamir G, Shenker M, Heller H, Bloom PR, Fine P, Bar-Tal A (2011) Can soil carbonate dissolution lead to overestimation of soil respiration? Soil Sci Soc Am J 75:1414–1422CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Tamir G, Shenker M, Heller H, Bloom PR, Fine P, Bar-Tal A (2012) Dissolution and re-crystallization processes of active CaCO3 in soil developed on tufa. Soil Sci Soc Am J 76:1601–1613CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Tarchitzky J, Golobati Y, Keren R, Chen Y (1999) Wastewater effects on montmorillonite suspensions and hydraulic properties of sandy soils. Soil Sci Soc Am J 63:554–560CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Tester M, Davenport RJ (2003) Na+ transport and Na+ tolerance in higher plants. Ann Bot 91:503–527PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Yunusa IAM, Walker RR, Blackmore DH (1997) Characterization of water use by Sultana grapevines on their own roots or on Ramsey rootstock drip-irrigated with water of different salinities. Irrig Sci 17:77–86CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Zhang X, Walker RR, Stevens RM, Prior LD (2002) Yield-salinity relationships of different grapevine (Vitis vinifera L.) scion-rootstock combinations. Aust J Grape Wine Res 8:150–156CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.The Robert H. Smith Institute for Plant Science and Genetics in Agriculture, Faculty of Agriculture, Food and EnvironmentThe Hebrew University of JerusalemRehovotIsrael
  2. 2.The Department of Soil and Water Sciences, The Robert H. Smith Faculty of Agriculture, Food and EnvironmentThe Hebrew University of JerusalemRehovotIsrael
  3. 3.Samaria and Jordan Rift Research and Development CenterArielIsrael

Personalised recommendations