changes in properties of vineyard red brown earths under
TRANSCRIPT
L;;;.:
rj'i:P.iJr
Changes in properties of v¡neyard Red Brown Earths
under long-term drip irrigation, combined w¡th vary¡ng
water qualities and gypsum application rates
Thesis submitted to The University of Adelaide
in fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of
Doctor of Philosophy
by
LOUISE JAYNE CLARK
Soil and Land Systems
School of Earth and Environmental Sciences
The University of Adelaide, Waite Campus
October, 2OO4
I dedicate this thesis to my grandmother (Nan)
Nora Theresa Clark
(1 s/4/1 9 0 8-2 o/1 2/2 o oo)
Table of Contents
Acknowledgments tx
Summary xi
Chapter 1. lntroduction and Background ........... ............... 1
1.1.1. Significance 1
1.1.2. Objectives
1.2. Features and Properties of Red Brown Earths..... .................4
1.2.1. Texture contrast profile 6
1.2.2. Composition........... I
1.2.3. Soil Physical Properties........... 11
1.2.4. Soil Chemical Properties .12
13
4
1.2.6. Summary.... 14
1.3. lrrigation and Water Quality. ................. 15
1.3.1. lrrigation in Australia
1.3.2. Quality of lrrigation Water...
1.3.3. lnfluence of lrrigation Method on Soil
15
.17
.20
.221.3,4. Summary
1.4. lmpact of Saline lrrigation Water on Soil .....,.......22
23
1.4.2. Soil sodicity 25
1 .4.3. lmpact of lrrigation on Red Brown Earths..
1.5. Vitis vinifera as an irrigated crop ......... 30
1.5.1. Effects of lrrigation on VrTr,s vinifera 30
1.5.2. Effects of Salinity on Vitis vinifera.... 31
1.5.3. Effects of Sodícity on VrTrs vinifera....
1.6. Methods to prevent or remediate soil degradation caused by saline
drip irrigation.........
1.6.1. Leaching
1.6.2. Gypsum Application..............
1.6.3. Modifiedcropping
1.6.4. Increased organic matter.....
Chapter 2. Site Description, Properties and Soil Glassification 40
40
29
32
34
34
34
36
37
2.1.2. Location and general description
2.1.3. Geology and geomorphology..,...
2.1.4. Climate
40
46
49
2.2. Soils 52
u
2.2.1. Barossa 52
2.2.2. Mclaren Vale
2.3. Pedogenic processes...........
2.3.2. Parent Material
2.3.3. Climate
2.3.4. Time
2.3.5. Carbonate Formation
Ghapter 3. General Methods .............59
3.2. Soil sampling and gypsum application............. ...59
3.2.1. Paired Sites (Chapter 5) 59
3.2.2. Seasonal Changes in Soil Properties (Chapters 6, 7 and 8).......,......61
3.3. LaboratoryAnalyses 65
55
55
55
56
56
56
57
3.3.1. Physical Analyses......
3.3.2. Chemical Analyses....
65
67
Ghapter 4. Regolith Processes 70
4.1.1. Formulae for loss and gains of constituents during pedogenesis...... 71
4.1.2. Soil Formation Calculations.. 71
4.2. Methods 72
4.2.1. Sample Preparation.
4.2.2. ElementalChemistry
4.2.3. lnductively Coupled Plasma (lCP)
4.2.4. Material Analysed
iii
72
73
73
74
4.2.5. Mass balance formulae.
4.3. Results and Discussion
4.3.1. Concentration of major elements in soil..............
4.3.2. Selection of parent material
4.3.3. Loss and gain calculations.
4.3.4. Geochemistry of Non-lrrigated and lrrigated Sites
4.3.5. Carbonate-rich samp|es......,,...
4.4. Conclusions
Chapter 5. lmpact of Long-term lrrigation on Soil Properties ........ 88
5.2. Materials and Methods 89
5.3. Results and Discussion 90
5.3.1. Classification
5.3.2. Morphological Properties.,.,..... 91
5.3.3. Physical Properties 92
5.3.4. ChemicalProperties 97
Ghapter 6. lrrigation with Bore Water in the Barossa Valley: Effects of
Gypsum Application 106
6.2. Methods 107
6.3. Results 107
6.3.1. Non-lrrigated Site 108
6.3.2. Bore Water without Gypsum
74
77
77
78
79
83
87
87
90
ty
110
6.3.3. Bore Water - Gypsum 4 tonnes/hectare......,i,............. .... 1 13
6,3.4. Bore Water- Gypsum 8 tonnes/hectare...... .... 116
6.4. Conclusions ........... .............. 118
Chapter 7. lrrigation with Mains Water in the Barossa Valley: Effects of
Gypsum Application............. .....124
7.2. Methods 125
7.3. Results 125
7.3.1. Mains Water without Gypsum
7.3.2. Mains Water - Gypsum 4 tonnes/hectare.....
'125
127
7.3.3. Mains Water - Gypsum 8 tonnes/hectare. 129
7.4. Conclusions 131
Ghapter 8. lrrigation with Bore Water in McLaren Vale..... ............ 136
8.3. Results 137
8.3.1. Non-lrrigated.. 138
8.3.2. Bore water with long-term gypsum application 139
8.4. Conclusions 141
Ghapter 9. Ghanges in Soil Solution Ghemistry............. ...............144
9.2. Methods 146
9.2.1. Suction cup design, installation and testing...
v
146
9.2.2. Sample collection from suction cups and laboratory analysis.......... 150
9.3. Results and Discussion ......152
9.3.1. Pore Water Chemistry with Bore Water lrrigation .,.......... 153
9.3.2. Pore Water Chemistry with Mains Water lrrigation .......... 159
9.3.3. Comparison of Soil Solution to Saturation Extract Composition ...... 162
9.4. Conclusions 169
Ghapter 10. Changes in Redox Potential ...179
10.3. Results and Discussion 183
10.3.1
10.3.2
10.3.3
10.3.4
Bore water without gypsum application
Bore water with application of gypsum 4 tonnes/hectare..
Mains water without gypsum application
Mains water wíth application of gypsum 4 tonnes/hectare
186
187
.. 188
189
10.4. Conclusions 190
Chapter 11. Forecasting soil properties using a 2D computer model ....192
11.2.1, The TRANSMIT Model
11.2.2. Soil Profile
11.2.3. Soil Physical Data...
11.2.4. Salt Transport and Accumulation
11.2.5. Weather and Crop
193
194
195
197
198
vt
1 1 .2.6. lrrigation..,..... 200
11.3. Simulations and Data Obtained........ .. 200
11.4. Results and Discussion .-----201
11.4.1. Distribution of salts through the soil profile.....
11.4.2. Seasonal Variations in Salt Content
202
209
11.5. Conclusions........... 215
Ghapter 12. General Discussion and Recommendations 218
12.1. General Discussion............. -218
12.1.1. f mplications and Recommendations .'....-."""" 222
12.2. Recommendations for Future Research ............225
References............. .........228
Appendix A: Climatic data for field sites....... ......'........ 255
Appendix B: Morphological description of non-irrigated and irrigated soil
profile in the Barossa Valley. .............. 259
Appendix G: Saturation Extract Data,... ........262
Appendix D: Soil Solution Data........ .......".."287
Appendix E: Saturation Extract versus Soil Solution Data .....'... 296
Appendix F: Soil Redox Potential (Eh) Prior to Averaging...'.......'............. 300
Appendix G: Barossa Valley lrrigation Water Composition......'.................302
Appendix H: Saturation Extracts for Barossa Valley Control Site............. 305
Appendix I: Oral Presentations........ ............. 306
Appendix J; Publications....... .'..'... 308
vn
Statement
This work contains no material which has been accepted for the award of any other degree
or diploma in any university or other tertiary institution. To the best of my knowledge and
belief, this thesis contains no material previously published or written by another person,
except where due reference is made in the text.
I give consent to this copy of my thesis, when deposited in the University library, being
available for loan and photocopying
Louise Jayne Clark
vlu
Acknowledgments
Firstly I would like to thank my supervisors, I am grateful for their support, expertise and
constructive criticism. Initially, when I went 'walk-about' they provided me with time and
support to heal, which was much appreciated.
Dr Rob Fitzpatrick: Whenever I doubted the relevance of this project or the belief in
myself to achieve, Rob inspired and encouraged me with his enthusiasm. His helpful
advice and constant encouragement allowed the development of this project.
Dr Rob Murcay: Offered excellent supervision and assistance throughout the course of this
work, I appreciate the time and effort given.
Dr Mike McCartþ: Provided constant support and advice, particularly regarding
viticultural knowledge and industry relevance.
Dr John Hutson: Although I was unfamiliar with LEACHM when commencing this work,
John was patient and provided valuable discussions in all facets of LEACHM.
Dr David Chittleborough: For providing helpful advice, suggestions and guidance
p articularl y regardin g micromorpholo gy and geochemical work.
Special thanks to Shannon Pudney, for meaningful discussions, advice, sharing of
knowledge and friendship.
I gratefully acknowledge the financial support from the CRC for Viticulture (CRCV) for
both research conducted and support to visit other researchers and viticultural regions. I
am also grateful to the Australian Soil Science Society Inc. (ASSSI) and The University of
Adelaide for travel assistance to enable me to present my research at an Australian
(ASSSD and an international (WCSS) conference.
I am grateful to the following people for their support and advice in the laboratory and
field: Colin Rivers, Adrian Beech, John Gouzos, Kirsten Kienzler, Jon Varcoe, Mark
Raven, Mark Fntz, Marian (Swanny) Skwarnecki, Warren Hicks and Kirsty Tinker-
Casson.
tx
My personal thanks to Maree and Kelly (enduring friendship), Michaela (constant
encouragement), Sam (laughs, roof and encouragement to push the boundaries), Kirsten
(Hudsons and dispersion), Sylvia, Marta and Maria (for raising my awareness), Uswah
(amazing conversations), Carolyn and Kerry (lunches), Therese (advice and
understanding), Shane (muffins and roof), Jon (field, lab and pub) and Ph.D. students with
the CRCV and Discipline of Soil and Land Systems. Special thanks to Heather Waddy and
Edwina Reid, without the specialist knowledge, care and rehabilitation provided I have no
doubt the recovery achieved would have been longer and less successful, I owe my current
quality of life to you both.
Thanks to my family, particularly my parents, brother (Richard) and sister in-law (Kim),
who've given support and love throughout this research. Finally, I would like to thank Ben
who has endured so much and returned love and encouragement while I finished this work.
x
Summary
Irrigation water of poor quality can have deleterious effects on soils. However, the effect
of drip irrigation on seasonal and long term (e.g. over 50 years) changes in soil chemical
properties is poorly understood, complicated by the two-dimensional water flow patterns
beneath drippers. Field and laboratory experiments were conducted, along with computer
modelling, to evaluate morphological and physio-chemical changes in a typical Barossa
Valley Red Brown Earth (Palexeralf, Chromosol or Lixisol) when drip irrigated under
various changing management practices. This work focused on the following two
management changes: (i) switching from long-term irrigation with a saline source to less
saline water and (ii) gypsum (CaSO¿) application.
A literature review (Chapter 1) focuses on the distribution, features, properties and
management of Red Brown Earths in the premium viticultural regions of the Barossa
Valley and Mclaren Vale, South Australia. The effects of irrigation method and water
quality on the rate and extent of soil deterioration are emphasised. The review also
discusses the irrigation of grapes (Vitis viniþra) and summarises previous research into the
effect of sodicity and salinity on grape and wine characteristics. This chapter shows the
importance of Red Brown Earths to Australian viticulture, but highlights their
susceptibility to chemical and physical degradation. Degradation may be prevented or
remediated by increasing organic matter levels, applying gypsum, modifying cropping and
through tillage practices such as deep ripping.
Chapter 2 provides general information on the two study sites investigated, one in the
Barossa Valley and the other at Mclaren Vale. Local climate, geology, geomorphology
and soils are described.
XT
Chapter 3 details laboratory, field and sampling methods used to elucidate changes in soil
chemical and physical properties following irrigation.
The genesis of the non-irrigated Red Brown Earth in the Barossa Valley is described in
Chapter 4, and is inferred from geochemical, soil chemical, layer silicate and carbonate
mineralogical data. Elemental gain and loss calculations showed 42 %o of original parent
material mass was lost during the formation of A and A2 horizons, while the Btl andBt2
horizons gained 50 Vo of original parent material mass. This is consistent with substrate
weathering and illuviation of clay from surface to lower horizons. The depth distributions
of all major elements were similar; the A horizon contained lower amounts of major
elements than the remainder of the profile, indicating this region was intensely weathered.
This chapter also compares the non-irrigated site to the adjacent irrigated site (separated by
10 m) to determine if the sites are pedogenically identical and geochemical changes from
irrigation. Many of the differences between the non-irrigated and irrigated sites appear to
be correlated with variations in quartz, clay, Fe oxide and carbonate contents, with little
geological variation between the sample sites.
In Chapter 5 morphological, chemical and physical properties of a non-irrigated and
irrigated Red Brown Earth in the Barossa Valley are compared. Alternating applications of
saline irrigation water (in summer) and non-saline rain water (in winter) have caused an
increase in electrical conductivity (ECse), sodium adsorption ratio (SAR), bulk density (p6)
and pH. This has resulted in enhanced clay dispersion and migration. Impacts on SAR
and p6 are more pronounced at points away from the dripper due to the presence of an
argillic horizon, which has greatly influenced the variations in these soil properties with
)cu
depth and distance from the dripper. Dispersion and migration of clay were promoted by
alternating levels of EC, while SAR remained relatively constant, resulting in the
formation of a less permeable layer in the Bt1 horizon. Clay dispersion (breakdown of
micro-aggregate structure) was inferred from reduced numbers of pores and voids,
alterations in colouring (an indication that iron has changed oxidation state) and increased
bulk density (up to 307o). Eleven years of irrigation changed the soil from a Calcic
Palexeralf (non-irrigated) to an Aquic Natrixeralf (inigated) (Soil Survey Staff, 1999).
These results, combined with data from Chapter 4, were used to develop a mechanistic
model of soil changes with irrigation.
Chapters 6, 7 and 8 describe field experiments conducted in the Barossa Valley and
Mclaren Vale regions. This data shows seasonal and spatial variations in soil saturation
extract properties (ECr", SAR'", Nar" and Car"). At the Barossa Valley site (Chapter 6)
non-irrigated soils had low ECr., SARse, Nâse and Car" values throughout the sampling
period. The irrigated treatments included eleven years of drip irrigation with saline water
(2.5 dS/m) and also gypsum application at0,4 or 8 tonneslhectare in 2001 and 2002. Salts
in the profile increased with gypsum application rate, with high levels occurring mid-
winter 2002 piror to rainfall leaching salts. SAR has declined with gypsum application,
particularly in the A horizon and at 100 cm from the dripper in the Btl horizon; this has the
potential to reflocculate clay particles and improve soil hydraulic conductivity.
Chapter 7 presents further results from the Barossa Valley site, this treatment had been
irrigated for 9 years with saline water (2.5 dS/m) prior to switching to a less saline water
source (0.5 dS/m). The soil also received gypsum at 0, 4 or 8 tonnes/hectare in 2001 and
2002. It was found that the first few years are critical when switching to a less saline water
source. EC declines rapidly, but SAR requires a number of years, depending on
)ctLt
conditions, to decline, resulting in a period during which the Bt1 horizon may become
dispersed. Gypsum application increased the ECr" but not to the EC* levels of soil
irrigated with saline water.
Chapter 8 examines soil chemical properties of a Mclaren Vale vineyard, irrigated with
moderately saline water (1.2 dS/m) since 1987 and treated with gypsum every second year
since establishment. This practice prevented the SAR (<8) rising and a large zone of the
soil profile (20 to 100 cm from dripper) has a high calcium level (>5 mmol/L). However,
irrigation caused the leaching of calcium beneath the dripper in both the A and B horizons
(0 to 20 cm from dripper) (< 4 mmol/L).
Chapters 9 and 10 interpret and discuss results from continuous monitoring of redox
potential (Eh) and soil solution composition in the Barossa Valley vineyard, irrigated with
saline or non-saline water, and gypsum-treated at 0 and 4 tonnes/hectare.
Soil pore water solution (Chapter 9) collected by suction cups is compared to results
obtained in chapters 6 and 7. The soil has extended zones and times of high SAR and low
EC. This was particularly evident in the upper B horizon, where the SAR of the soil
remained stable throughout the year while the EC was more seasonally variable with EC
declining during the winter months. The A horizon does not appear to be as susceptible to
clay dispersion (compared to the B horizon) because during periods of low EC the SAR
also declines, which may be due to the low CEC (low clay and organic matter content) of
this horizon.
Chapter 10 presents redox potentials (Eh) measured using platinum redox electrodes
installed in the A, A2 and Btl horizons to examine whether Eh of the profile varies with
irrigation water quality and gypsum application. Saline irrigation water caused the B
horizon to become waterlogged in winter months, while less saline irrigation water caused
xtv
a perched watertable to develop, due to a dispersed Btl horizon. Application of gypsum
reduced the soil Eh particularly in the A2 horizon (+500 to +50 mV) during winter. Thus
redox potential can be influenced by irrigation water quality and gypsum applications.
Chapter 11 incorporated site data from the Barossa Valley non-irrigated site into a
predictive mathematical model, TRANSMIT, a2D version of LEACHM. This model was
used to predict zones of gypsum accumulation during long-term irrigation (67 years).
When applied over the entire soil surface, gypsum accumulated at 60 to 90 cm from the
dripper in the B horizon; higher application rates caused increased accumulation. When
applied immediately beneath the irrigation dripper, gypsum accumulated in a 'column'
under the dripper (at 0 to 35 cm radius from the dripper), with very little movement away
from the dripper. Also, the zone of accumulation of salts from high and low salinity
irrigation water was investigated. These regions were found to be similar, although
concentrations were significantly lower with low salinity water. In low rainfall years salts
accumulated throughout the B horizon (35 - 150 cm), while in periods of high rainfall (and
leaching) the A, A2 and Btl horizons (0 - 60 cm) were leached, although at greater depths
(80 - 150 cm) salt concentrations remained high.
Chapter 12 summarises results and provides an understanding of soil processes in drip
irrigated soils to underpin improved management options for viticulture. This study
combines results from redox and soil solution monitoring, mineralogy, elemental gains and
losses, and seasonal soil sampling to develop a mechanistic model of soil processes, which
was combined with computer modelling to predict future properties of the soil. Major
conclusions and recommendations of this study include:
xv
- Application of saline irrigation water to soil then ameliorated with gypsum - The
first application of gypsum was leached by the subsequent irrigation from extended
regions of the soil. As Na continues to enter the system via irrigation water,
gypsum needs to be regularly applied. Otherwise calcium will be leached through
the soil and SAR increases.
- Application of non-saline irrigation water to soil then ameliorated with gypsum -
The soil was found to only require one application at 8 tons/ha as this reduced SAR
sufficiently. As less salt is entering the soil, subsequent gypsum applications can
be at a lower rate or less frequently than required for saline irrigation water.
- Gypsum applied directly beneath the dripper systems distributes calcium to a
naffow region of the soil, while large regions of the soil require amelioration (high
SAR) and are not receiving calcium. Therefore, gypsum application through the
drip system or only beneath the dripper should be combined with broad acre
application.
- A range of methods to sample vineyards is recommended for duplex soils,
including the use of saturation extracts, sampling time, sampling location (distance
from dripper) and depth of sampling.
This work is critical for vineyard management and may be applicable to other Australian
viticulture regions with Red Brown Earths.
xvt
Chapter 1. lntroduction and Background
1.1. lntroduction
1.1.1. Significance
Extensive areas of Australia suffer from salt affected soils, although regionally these vary
in proportion and distribution. Northcote and Skene (1972) estimated the extent of salt-
affected soils in Australia to be about 337o of the total land area; of this 28Vo were sodic
soils and 5% saline soils. The area has expanded since this original estimate (Loveday,
1988) mainly from secondary salinisation, which has been caused by clearing of high
water-use perennial vegetation and the increased usage of irrigation water, both of which
have led to a rise in saline groundwater levels. Moreover, some of the sources of irrigation
water are themselves saline and thus pose an additional threat beyond the hydrological
changes imposed by land management. One example where these processes are having an
effect is in the viticulture industry, which is spread over a variety of soil types, landscapes
and climatic zones (Fitzpatrick et a1.,1992). Many of these soil types are saline or sodic,
either from natural processes or from secondary salinisation and are commonly prone to
waterlogging, and grapevine productivity is well below potential (Fitzpatrick et a1.,1992;
Cass ¿f al., 1996). Just how widespread is the occurrence of sodicity in Australian soils
has been identified recently by several authors (e.g. Taylor, 1983; Fitzpatrick et al., 1992;
Bui et aI., 1998; Cass, 2002), but waterlogging and salinity have been recognised for many
years (Fitzpatrick et al., t992;Bui et a1.,1998).
The impact of soil properties on wine production and the management of soil to enhance
production has been discussed by many authors including Northcote (1988), White (2003),
I
Seguin (1986), Lanyon et aI. (20O4) and Rawson (2002). Generally, Vitis viniþra is best
suited to soils that are well-drained, of neutral to slightly alkaline pH, low salt content and
free of waterlogging (Northcote, 1988). However, few soils exhibit these ideal
characteristics and much research has been conducted on the impact of specific soil
properties on vine production, for example: (i) Soil structure and texture: Cass (1998a,b);
Cass ¿t al. (1998); Cass and Maschmedt (1998a,b); Saayman (1977); (ii) Soil compaction
and strength: Van Huyssteen (1983); Myburgh et al. (1996); Kienzler (2001); (iii) Erosion
of vineyard soils: Louw and Bennie (1992); Loughran et al. (1986); I-oughran et al.
(1992); (iv) Soil chemical properties: Conradie and Saayman (1989); Robinson (1992);
Failla et al. (1993); (v) Soil temperature: Gladstone (1992); Myburgh and Moolman
(1993); McNab and Dick (1995).
Soil sodicity and salinity are considered to impact strongly on grape quality and yield in
Australian vineyards, consequently some research has been undertaken on these soil
degradation processes (e.9. McCarthy, 1976; Stevens and Harvey, 1990; Dowley, 1995;
Cass ef aI., 1996; Stevens et al., 1999; Rawson, 2002; 'Wheaton et a1.,2002). However,
these researchers did not investigate two-dimensional variations in soil properties with
distance from the dripper. Results were averaged or else limited to one location in relation
to the dripper. Dowley (1995) sampled soils beneath the dripper and at mid-dripper and
mid-row positions, but, owing to limited sampling points in the soil profiles, a t\ryo-
dimensional model of physio-chemical changes was unable to be developed. McCarthy
(1916) sampled 50, 100 and 150 cm from the dripper and showed salt movement with drip
irrigation. Because the closest sampling to the dripper was 50 cm it was difficult to
determine soil chemical and physical changes in the region of highest root density directly
beneath the dripper. But it was shown that application of water through drippers may
2
cause soil properties to vary with distance from the dripper. Consequently, the objective in
this study is to focus on two-dimensional soil chemical, physical and mineralogical
changes, particularly in zones of accumulation and leaching of salts and cations, with
seasonal changes in water source (irrigation or rainfall).
The use of gypsum to remediate and to prevent the formation of sodic soils is widely
recognised (e.9. Oster, 1982; Oster and Jayawardane, 1998; Qadir et a\.,2001) and used in
drip-irrigated vines. However, the movement of calcium and sulphate ions arising from
gypsum application under drip irrigation is poorly understood and little progress has been
made towards understanding the interactions between seasonal water fluxes and ion
mobility. It is unclear the accumulation of reaction products from gypsum application
varies with drip irrigation compared to other inigation methods, and whether the calcium
ions reach the regions of highest sodicity. The aim of this thesis is to examine interactions
between saline drip irrigation, soil properties, gypsum and the effect of switching to a less
saline water source. The purpose of this research is not to discuss the relationship between
wine quality and soils but to understand the chemical and physical processes in Red Brown
Eafth soils (Rtsh,; Stace et a1.,19ó8) when irrigated with saline water in order to develop
better management strategies.
The RBE classification has been used in this research as it encompasses a broadly defined
soil group, which is recognised and heavily utilised in the viticulture industry. More recent
soil classification systems such as the Australian Soil Classification (Isbell, 1996) or Soil
Taxonomy (Soil Survey Staff, 1999) split RBE into a number of sub-categories. However,
in this chapter the distribution, features, morphological, chemical, and physical properties
and management of RBE with reference to those occurring in the premium viticultural
3
regions of the Barossa Valley and Mclaren Vale in South Australia (Figure 2-I) are briefly
reviewed. As well, the effects of irrigation method and water quality on the rate and extent
of physical-chemical soil deterioration are emphasised. The review also briefly discusses
the irrigation of vineyards (Vltis viniftra) and summarises previous research on the impacts
of sodicity, salinity and high soil strength on grape and wine characteristics. The
importance of RBE to Australian viticulture is demonstrated as is their susceptibility to
chemical and physical degradation. Soil degradation may be prevented or remediated by
increasing organic matter levels, applying gypsum, modifying cropping and through tillage
practices such as deep ripping - these methods will be discussed.
1.1.2. Objectives
Field and laboratory experiments were conducted, along with computer modelling, to:
1. Quantify morphological and physico-chemical changes in a typical Barossa Valley
RBE when drip irrigated.
2. Determine soil property changes after switching from a long-term saline irrigation
water source (2.2 - 3.5 dS/m) to less saline water (0.3 - 0.5 dS/m).
3. Investigate the efficacy of gypsum (CaSO¿) applications in ameliorating damage
caused by saline irrigation.
4. Determine zones of calcium accumulation (gypsum reaction products) following
gypsum application under drip irrigation.
1.2. Features and Propert¡es of Red Brown Earths
Many researchers, such as Piper (1938), Oertel and Giles (1967), Oertel (1914),
Chittleborough and Oadcs (1979), Oades et al. (1981) and Hubble et al. (1983) havc
investigated and reviewed the properties and formation of RBE (Palexeralf (Soil Survey
4
Staff, L999); Chromosol (Isbell, 1996); Lixisol (FAO, 1998); a Non-restrictive duplex soil
with well structured top soil (Maschmedt et al., 2OO2)) in Australia. The dominant feature
of RBE across Australia is the marked texture contrast between A and B horizons (Stace er
al., 1968; Northcote, 1981) with the B horizon often classified as argillic, that is, a horizon
with high clay content compared to the A horizons, caused by clay illuviation (known as
duplex soils). Other features (Hubble et al., 1983) include: (i) a 82 horizon of mainly
uniform colour (red, reddish brown or brown); (ii) bleaching of the A2 horizon (E in Soil
Taxonomy); (iii) prismatic structure in the upper part of the B horizon; (iv) carbonate
present at depth as soft segregations or hard nodules; (v) mineralogy dominated by illite;
(vi) acid to neutral topsoil and alkaline subsoil; (vii) naturally low organic matter and
phosphorus; and (viii) a range of salinity and/or sodicity.
RBE are prevalent throughout Australia (Figure 1-1). For example, in the Adelaide region
they make up >60Vo of the total area (Stephens et aI., 1945; Blackburn and Baker, 1953;
Northcote et al., 1954; French et al., 1968; Taylor et aI., 1974). These soils are used
widely for agricultural production (wheat, improved pastures and irrigated horticulture)
and are one of the most significant soils for viticulture (Northcote, 1983). This is
particularly true in the premium grape-growing district of the Barossa Valley, where
naturally-occurring RBE are the most cofiìmon soil type, consisting mainly of non-sodic
soils, although a small area of sodic RBE is present with a bleached A2honzon (Northcote
et a1.,1954). The ability of vineyards in this region to produce premium quality grapes is
partially because of particular chemical and physical properties of RBE. These properties
may also affect how the soil resists modification by management practices such as drip
irrigation with saline water. Such modification of soils may reduce the quality of grapes.
The important features of the RBE of Barossa Valley and Mclaren Vale will be discussed
5
in the next section, whereas their susceptibility to degradation will be discussed in later
sections
Figure 1-I Dístrtbufion of texture contrast soíls, with weak or without A2 horizons (fromHubble et aL, 1983). Note: Includes RBE, desert loams ønd non-cøIcíc brown soils.
1.2.1. Texture contrast profile
Australian RBE have a sharp texture contrast between the A (or A2) and B horizons (ø.g.
Green, 1966; Brewer, 1968; Oertel, 1974; Chittleborough and Oades, 1980a,b;
Chittleborough, 1981). The ratio of clay contents in the A (or A2) and B horizons can vary
between I:2 and 1:10 (Hubble et aL, 1983). There are a number of proposed mechanisms
for the formation of the strong texture boundary of these soils for example: (i) sedimentary
layering (Walker, 1962; Sleeman, L964; Oertel and Giles, 1966; Firman, 1969); (11) in situ
clay formation (Oertel, 196I; Oertel and Giles, 1967; Brewer, 1968); (iii) differential
weathering (Simonson,1949; Stace et aI., 1968); and (iv) dispersion, translocation and
accumulation of clay (Chittleborough and Oades, 1980a,b; Chittleborough, 1981;
Fitzpatrick and Chittleborough, 2002).
6
ô
s
Þ
+:3
"r;,
^
irv ã
ar
aü '4
(
I
¡l
ê
î-ùt'
ff̂l
A RBE in Urrbrae, South Australia was intensively studied by Chittleborough and Oades
(1979,1980a,b) with particular emphasis on degree of weathering and clay translocation as
determined through geochemical ratios. This work also involved the re-interpretation of
previously published data and the authors concluded that previous hypotheses of soil
formation of RBE involving sedimentary layering (Firman, 1969) and weathering (Oertel,
1961) may be incorrect. Because geochemical ratios were consistent throughout the
Urrbrae RBE profile it was suggested that the high clay content of the B horizon was a
result of illuviation of fine clay through the profile rather than weathering of primary
minerals in the B horizon. Because this theory is favoured for the formation of RBE in the
Barossa Valley, further discussion of factors affecting clay movement is needed.
Factors affecting clay movement in Red Brown Earths
The illuviation of clay is influenced by both physical and chemical factors, with the
amount and rate of clay movement influenced by quality, amount and rate of water moving
through a profile; particle-size of the clay fraction; chemical reactions; nature of cations;
and organic matter quantity and type. Deposition of clay is influenced by the slowing of
percolating solution, either due to uptake of water by dry soil or swelling of clods close to
voids; alteration of the illuviated colloids causing reduced solubility and precipitation in
the B horizon; flocculation of clay particles in the B horizon because of the presence of
iron oxides; pH variations that may increase the activity of aluminium ions; and the
presence of chelating agents.
Formation of RBE is favoured by the periodic supply of water for translocation and
accumulation of clay (Chittleborough, 1981). Xeric and ustic moisture (Soil Survey Staff,
7
1999) regimes provide ideal conditions for an argillic horizon formation (Chittleborough,
1981; Torrent, 1995). However, the magnitude of clay translocation is dependent on the
amount of water moving through the profile as this affects the amount of clay moving into
the soil solution @ixit et a1.,1975). Clays tend to disperse at high flow velocities, but
settle as the velocity decreases (Buurman et al., 1998). Therefore the application of
additional water, of any quality, will affect clay mobility and hence soil formation.
The movement of soil colloids depends strongly on the size of colloids (Noack et aI.,
2000). Finer colloid suspensions have been found to leach through soil more rapidly than
suspensions of coarser colloids (Sehgal et al., 1976; Noack et al., 2000). The coarser
particles are trapped by the soil matrix, whereas only limited interaction between the soil
matrix and fine particles occurs (Noack et a1.,2000).
Depending on the cations present in solution, dispersion or flocculation of clay may be
favoured, thereby influencing clay illuviation. However, Noack et al. (2O00) found that
cations on the exchange complex had only a small effect on the (-potential, although the
effect \ryas more apparent for finer grained clays. Calcium is more likely to interact with
clay particles than sodium, a fact attributed to the higher valency of calcium and
consequent stronger interaction with the negatively charged surface of the clay. Sodium-
clay had a greater negative charge than calcium-clay and this resulted in finer sodium-clay
being more mobile than calcium-clay. Noack et aI. (2000) found little difference between
the (-potential of the calcium and sodium-clay for coarser clays. Therefore, the
development of sodic soils by application of saline water may increase clay movement and
result in the blockage of pores and voids.
I
Organic matter tends to increase the negative charge of particles, and thereby enhance clay
mobility (Dixit et a1.,1975). However, once organic matter begins to decay and pH values
decrease, clay immobilisation and accumulation are favoured (Dixit et al., 1975). A
decrease in pH may arise from the dissociation of edge hydroxyl groups on clay minerals,
that may increase colloidal negative charge and CEC (Ross, 1989).
Critical management options for þrture contrasf so/s
Many RBE B horizons have moderate coarse blocky or prismatic structure (Hubble et aI.,
1983), which is partially due to low biological activity and intense weathering and leaching
of profiles. Many B horizons also have a narrow water range in which they are friable.
The presence of the strong texture contrast between the A (or A2) and B horizons causes
management problems, such as waterlogging as compared with soils with more uniform
texture profiles. These differences are caused by differences in hydraulic conductivity
between the uniform and texture contrast profiles.
1.2.2. Composition
Organic Matter Content
Organic matter content in RBE soils usually ranges from <0.5 to 2.57o (Oades, 1981),
depending mainly on management variables such as crop rotation, cultivation history and
plant growth. Vineyards traditionally have low organic matter input, because the soil
beneath the vines remains bare. However, organic matter in the mid-row is usually slightly
higher because of the annual cover crop, which is often slashed and left on the soil surface.
Organic matter is the major binding agent in the A horizon ancl largely determines
water-stability of aggregates. Williams and Lipsett (1961) found that with heavy cropping
9
management systems, organic matter is rapidly depleted and therefore provides less
stability to aggregates. Un-cropped soils and those which have only been cropped for a
short period are able to maintain good soil structure and supply sufficient nitrogen due to
relatively high levels of organic matter (Williams, 1981).
Layer Silicate Mineralogy
RBE across Australia have varying mineralogy, although soils from a region or within a
profile have been found to be very similar (Radoslovich, 1958). RBE of southern Australia
and arid regions are dominated by layer silicates of illitic and kaolinitic mineralogy,
although RIM (randomly interstratified material) is present in varying smaller amounts
(Nonish and Pickering, 1983). Illites are clay-size (< 2¡tm fraction) micas with a 2:1
structure the unit layers of which are held together by potassium ions that balance the
negative charge from isomorphous substitution (Norrish and Pickering, 1983). However,
many are deficient in structural potassium and thus have increased cation exchange
capacity (CEC) (Radoslovich, 1958), that may account for potassium being available in
some RBE (Norrish and Pickering, 1983). In these RBE the fine grained illite has a low
K2O content and high CEC (Norrish and Pickering, 1983).
Illite is more susceptible to dispersion than other clay types, for example kaolinite
(Summer et aI., 1998) and smectite (Alperovitch et al., 1985) because, at water contents
lower than saturation, swelling of the clay layers silicates and incomplete separation of the
clay particles can occur. Work on an Australian illitic subsoil (Willalooka) showed the
dispersion characteristics of the soil to be similar to montmorillonite (Quirk, 1955),
although coarser-grained illites are more easily dispersed than the Willalooka illite
(Emerson and Chi, 1977). Other minerals in RBE soils have not been studied in much
10
detail, although quartz, feldspar, smectitie, calcite (Turchenek and Oades, 1979), goethite
and hematite (Norrish and Pickering, 1983) have been identified.
1.2.3. Soil Physical Properties
The physical properties of RBE were reviewed by Greacen (1981) who showed that water
storage capacity varies with the soil texture of the A horizon (120 to 190 mm/m in sandy
loams; 200 to 240 mmlm in fine sandy loams; 130 to 230 mmlm in loams; 120 to 220
mm/m in sandy clay loams). He also discussed the infiltration of water into RBE, as an
important function of soil water balance and one which is extremely reliant on soil
structure. In cultivated RBE surface sealing reduces infiltration because of aggregate
slaking, which is difficult to prevent because the soil is low in organic matter and
biological activity, while having a fine sandy texture with poor aggregate stability
(Cockroft and Martin, 1981).
The drainage of a RBE profile is dependent on a number of factors, but most importantly
the hydraulic conductivity, which affects the infiltration, evaporation, hydraulic resistance
to water uptake by plants, limits soil water storage and drainage (Greacen, 1981). The
saturated hydraulic conductivity (K0) of RBE is variable, but an average of I.2 m/day for
the A horizon and 0.4 mlday for the B horizon of southern wheatland soils. The
distribution of these values was found to be bimodal in the A horizon (with modes at 2.5
and 0.3 m/day), but homogeneous in the B horizon. This was attributed to cyclical changes
of the A horizon from crop rotations (Greacen, 1981), which may be improved with
application of organic matter or gypsum (Section L6.2). A further comparison of a range
of RBE determined the satnratecl hydraulic conductivity of the B horizon rleclined for sodic
profiles (Marshall, 1958). Therefore, the relatively low hydraulic conductivity of the B
II
horizon may cause problems with irrigation. For example, if water is applied every 5 to 10
days the soil will develop a perched v/ater table, after prolonged irrigation or rain
(Cockroft and Martin, 1981). Hydraulic conductivity is further reduced by machine traffic
because RBE are susceptible to compaction, which will result in reduced water penetration,
aeration and root growth.
1.2.4. Soil Chemical Properties
The chemical properties of RBE were reviewed by Williams (1981) and a summary is in
provided in Table 1-1. The pH of RBE in Australia is normally acid to neutral in the A
horizon, neutral to alkaline in the B horizon and the C horizon is more alkaline than the B
horizon (Williams, 1981). Calcium carbonate content varies greatly between profiles but
normally the A, A2 and Bl horizons lack calcium carbonate, the B2 contains variable
levels and the C horizon normally contains calcium carbonate (Williams, 1981). Because
RBE are often illitic the CEC is normally moderate to low (Williams, 1981). The CEC of
the B horizon of RBE ranges from 20 to 80 meq/100g, with most in the 30 to 60 meq/100g
range (Radoslovich, 1958). This is also the case in South Australia where the CEC of the
B horizon ranges from 22 to 48 meq/100g, whereas the A horizon is 6 to 43 meq/100g.
The base saturation is normally greater than 60Vo in the A horizon and fully saturated in the
Bt horizon (Williams, 1981). The exchange complex is dominated throughout by calcium
and magnesium; these ions account for 70 to 807o of the total (Williams, 1981). However,
in the 82 horizon sodium often accounts for 6 to 20Vo of the exchangeable ions. Although
calcium dominates in the A horizon, magnesium may often be higher at depth (Williams,
1981).
12
Table I-I Common soil chemicøl propertìes of Australian Red Brown Ea.rths (fromWillinms,l98l)
A horizon B horizon C horizon
pH acid to neutral
carbonate lacking
CEC (meq/100g) 6 to 43 (SouthAustralia)
neutral to alkaline
82 contains variable levels
20 to 80 (range for Australia)30 to 60 (most Australian soils)
22to 48 (South Australia)
calcium and magnesium 70 to807o of total ions
B2 horizon - sodium oftenaccounts for 6 to 2O7o of
exchanseable ions
more alkaline thanB horizon
present, butvariable
magnesiummaybehigher than other
horizons
base saturation greater than 60Vo fully saturated in the Bt
exchangecomplex
calciumdominates
A pristine (non-farmed) RBE does not supply adequate levels of phosphorus for plants
(Williams, 1981). RBE under irrigation have few nutritional problems because in
traditional farming fertiliser is applied, which provides phosphorus, nitrogen and sulfur
(Cockroft and Martin, 1981). Chemical properties vary widely, depending on soil forming
factors and management practices (such as fertiliser application). Nitrogen is strongly
correlated with organic matter content (Williams, 1981). Trace elements are rarely
deficient in RBE and soluble salts and chloride are low, except in the B2 horizon
(Williams, 1981).
1.2.5. Soil Biology
Many authors have shown the benefit of organic matter and high populations of soil mico-
organisms (e.9. Greenland et aI., 1962; Beckwith, 1963; Barrow, 1969; Ladd and Butler,
1970; Allison, 1973). The B horizon of RBE has low biological activity, due to the lower
root volume supporting fewer soil animals and microbes (Cockroft and Martin, 1981). The
A horizon is more important, because of the restriction of roots to the A and upper B
I3
horizons (Cockroft and Martin, 1981); this is due to the high mechanical strength of the B
horizon. The cultivation of the B horizon may improve root growth, however immediately
below the modified soil root growth is unaltered (Olsson et a1.,1980).
Soil fauna are critical to incorporate organic matter for the stabilization of the soil.
However, irrigated Red-Brown Earths contain low populations of earthworms (Tisdall,
1978), partly from the absence of high quality food and also because frequent drying
events during summer cause earthworms to remain dormant. It has been observed that the
most active period is spring, but if the soil is maintained in a moist condition with spray
irrigation and with a continual food source (straw mulch), high earthworm populations
develop (Tisdall, 1978). According to Cockroft and Martin (1981) it is critical to keep the
A horizon moist to enable plant roots, earthworms and micro-organisms to be active and to
achieve full production potential.
1.2.6. Summary
RBE profiles are characterised by a texture contrast; a clay fraction of illite and kaolin; and
a susceptibility to dispersion because of the low organic matter and high CEC. Because of
the prevalence of these soils throughout Australia, they have been widely used for
agriculture, particularly for grape production in the Barossa Valley where saline
groundwater is used for irrigation. Research is required to determine: (i) the extent of
damage to these soils as a result of this type of management and (ii) management options
to remediate or prevent further damage to these fragile soils.
14
1.3. lrrigation and Water Quality
1.3.1. lrrigation in Australia
Healthy root systems, and therefore soils more suitable to grapevine production, require
sufficient water, low mechanical resistance, optimum temperature and pH and no toxic
substances (e.9. Richards, 1983). However, some soils do not supply sufficient water
throughout the year for agricultural production. Availability of water to vines is a critical
management issue, because if soil water is insufficent to meet vine requirements, reduced
yields and quality may occur from water stress, particularly if this stress occurs during the
growth cycle of the vine. During flowering, water stress may lead to abscission and
desiccation of flowers (Hardie and Considine, 1976). Furthermore, during the weeks
following flowering, cell division and enlargement of young berries may be severely
restricted and impact on reduced yield (McCarthy, I997b; Yan Zyl, 1984). Prior to
harvest, incomplete fruit ripening may occur, which may lead to stuck fermentations
during wine production in which yeast is unable to convert some sugar to alcohol (Hardie
and Considine, 1976; Van Huyssteen and Weber, 1980). Irrigation allows further control
in water supply to grapevines and prevents either too little or too much water during the
growing season (Gladstone, 1992). Excess water normally causes an increase in vegetative
growth of vines leading to poor berry quantity and quality. Consequently, the amount and
timing of irrigation must be controlled. This has led to the development of deficit
irrigation (e.9. McCarthy,Ig9Ta), which was originally imposed to maximise fruit biomass
while achieving a prescribed sugar concentration for alcoholic fermentation. Due to the
reduced water application at specific times this also improved water use efficiency, which
was originally considered a secondary positive attribute and not perceived as the motive
for adoption of cleficit irrigation (Kriedemann and Goodwin, 2003). However, the use and
availability of water resources will be affected in the future by a combination of financial
\1
15
realities, environmental factors and ethical sensibilities with predictions that water use
efficiency will need to improve further (Kriedemann and Goodwin, 2003). Therefore
deficit irrigation, either regulated deficit irrigation (RDÐ or partial rootzone drying (PRD),
will be further adopted not only for the control of vegetative vigour but also for improved
water-use efficiency (Kriedemann and Goodwin, 2003).
In the Barossa Valley vineyards, supplementary irrigation commenced in the 1970's to
improve water supply for grapevines and increase production (Hallows and Thompson,
1995). This has lead to almost 707o of Barossa Valley vineyards pumping groundwater for
irrigation (Cobb, 1986). However, many viticultural regions in Australia, including the
Barossa Valley, do not have access to large volumes of high quality groundwater for
irrigation (e.9. Myburgh et aI., 1996). Furthermore, salinity levels of groundwater in most
regions are variable, but commonly approach the upper limit for optimum irrigation of
grapevines. In the Barossa Valley the salinity levels of the groundwater are generally
increasíng across the entire region (Cobb, 1986). Saline irrigation water combined witÈ-\
unsuitable management practices and high levels of water application are resulting in
increased soil salinity and sodicity for many vineyard soils in Australia (Cass et a1.,1996;
Dowley, 1995). Chloride and sodium concentrations in berry juice are strongly correlated
with root zone soil solution composition (Sas and Stevens, 1998). Consequently, the
development of saline and sodic soils has a major impact on grape and wine production in
Australia. For example, wines containing more than 606 mgtL of chloride are unable to be
sold on the domestic market (Sas and Stevens, 1998). The presence of saline and sodic
soils also compromises the sustainability of vineyards (Cass et al., 1996) with deteriorating
physio-chemical and biological properties (Shainberg and Oster, 1978). This also has
t
\
16
deleterious off-site impacts, resulting in possible damage to the extended environment such
as poor stream water quality (e.9. Sadeh and Ravina, 2000).
1.3.2. Quality of lrrigation Water
The major quality concern for irrigation water in Australia is the presence of dissolved
salts, normally NaCl, but also including salts containing magnesium, calcium, potassium,
sulphate, carbonate and bicarbonate. As NaCl is often the dominant salt, particularly for
this study, a conversion factor of EC (dS/m) x 670 = TDS (mgll.) was used throughout the
research. The presence of these salts in many Australian irrigation water is due to their
accumulation in soils over a long period of time (1.e. since the Tertiary period) (e.g. Taylor,
1983). Saline and sodic soils of low fertility have formed and in many landscapes salt has
leached to the groundwater. As water resources become limited, the use of inferior water
is becoming more prevalent, especially with groundwater containing high salt levels.
Without proper management, extensive use of this groundwater will inevitably degrade soil
resources in viticultural regions (Cass et a\.,1996).
The immediate impacts on grapevines irigated with water of poor quality are reduced
water uptake and even toxic effects of ions on shoot growth and yield. These
considerations and those of sustainable soil use are reflected in the main criteria for water
quality, which are: (i) salt concentration; (ii) sodicity, used to measure the possible impact
of dissolved sodium on the soil; (iii) concentration of bicarbonate and carbonate; and (iv)
presence of toxic elements, such as boron. These water quality factors will be discussed
further.
Ijl.t
J
17
Salt Concentration
The major problem with salts in irrigation water is the effect on plant growth, through the
osmotic effect on roots and the concentration of sodium and chloride in cells (the effect of
salinity on vines is further discussed in Section I.5.2. Over 667o of groundwater resources
in Australia are considered to contain >500 mgil solids (0.78 dS/m) (Rengasamy and
Olsson, 1993). However such groundwater is still used for irrigation in many regions
including most grape and vegetable growing regions of South Australia and the cotton
growing regions of the Namoi and Condamine Valleys and the sugarcane region of
Bundaberg (Rengasamy and Olsson, 1993). Studies in Queensland have shown that long-
term irrigation with saline groundwater can cause sodicity and salinity problems (Talbot
and Bruce, L974).
Sodicity Rating
The level of sodicity in inigation water must be considered, particularly for soils with
clayey horizons because irrigation water may result in high exchangeable sodium (ESP).
This may be measured by the sodium adsorption ratio (SAR) of the irrigation water
@quation 1-1):
+a1-1 SAR =
f co'* +Mo'* 1
lzl
Where ionic concentrations are in mmole"/L. Although SAR provides an indication of
potential threat to the soil, it should not be considered exact as the equation does not
consider the following factors (Bresler et al., 1982): (i) ion activity, ion pairs and
complexes, which can vary with ionic strength, particularly for calcium at high salt
concentrations and; (ii) increased affinity for calcium over magnesium in ion exchange,
18
although these are considered identical in the equation. However, it has been widely found
that SAR is successful for predicting ion-exchange in the soil and ESP of the soil (Bresler
et al.,1982). The SAR equation was developed from the Gapon equation @quation 1-2),
which uses concentrations instead of activities:
1-2
The Gapon equation indicates that the ratio of sodium to calcium on the clay complex
varies with soil solution concentration. Therefore, the composition of the soil solution
influences the abundance of sodium ions on the clay surface and thereby affects the ESP of
the soil. This indicates the ESP of the soil will vary with soil solution composition,
particularly for a soil receiving saline (irrigation) and non-saline (rainfall) water. When a
soil receives rainfall the concentration of salts in the soil solution decreases, the exchange
of calcium is favoured and the Na/Ca clay complex ratio is reduced. Therefore increased
salt concentration of water favours the adsorption of sodium ions on the clay surface.
The clay mineralogy, salt content and SAR must all be considered in the final assessment
of a water source; however guidelines developed by the National Water Quality
Management Strategy (1999) recommended a maximum SAR of 20 for the A horizon of
RBE and 5 for the B horizon, but note that values are given for a high rainfall region
(>2000 mm/year). If this irrigation water was applied to areas of low rainfall and high
evapotranspiration, such as the Barossa Valley, the Gapon equation shows concentration of
soil solution salts would increase to a greater magnitude than solution SAR.
I9
Bicarbonate and Carbonate Concentratíon
Bicarbonate (HCO:-) is a major source of alkalinity in inigation waters and soils of the arid
and semi-arid regions of Australia (National Water Quality Management Strategy,1999).
Carbonate ions are formed from the reaction of COz with components in the soils or water
(e.g. CaCO¡). High levels of HCO¡- can increase calcium and magnesium precipitation as
insoluble carbonates, thereby increasing soil SAR and may adversely affect soil structure.
Soil pH may also increase if irrigation water with a high HCO3- content is applied to soil
(National'Water Quality Management Strategy, 1999).
Other Toxic Elements
Some trace elements, such as boron, lithium and selenium can be present at high
concentrations in groundwater. However, boron is the only trace element of concern in
groundwater used to irrigate vines in Australia (e.g. National Water Quality Management
Strategy, 1999). Grapevines are sensitive to boron with symptoms including cupping of
leaves, reduced set, seedless berries, yellowing of veins and death of the shoot tip (CRCV,
2001).
1.3.3. lnfluence of lrrigation Method on Soil
The movement of water, and distribution of salts in soil varies with irrigation method and
soil type. Soil water movement generally displays a large lateral component under drip
irrigation and a larger vertical one under furrow irrigation (Mantell et al., 1985). Soils
with less permeable subsoil layers such as clay or continuous carbonate horizons cause
water to move laterally during irrigation. The three dimensional pattern of water flow and
distribution will influence the extent (depth and lateral distribution) of soil salinisation and
20
sodification, that will impact on plant response, root growth and water uptake (Mantell e/
al., L985).
Drip irrigation leaches the soil of salts directly under the dripper, and thus soil salinity in
this zone increases with depth (Hanson and Bendixen, 1995; Mantell et aI., 1985).
Conversely, surface salt accumulation occurs at the periphery of the wetting ring, a
position that often corresponds with the vine midrow (Mantell et a1.,1985). 'When these
salts remain in the zone of accumulation no harmful effects develop in plants, but when
leached into the rootzone by rainfall, damage occurs to the plant root system (Bernstein
and Francois, 1973). Because grapevines are perennials with extensive root systems,
additional water may be required to maintain the desired salt balance in the root zone by
leaching of salts into the subsoil (Ayars et aL, 1999).
Drip irrigation encourages regions of high root density to develop near the soil surface,
especially under the dripper. Furrow irrigation increases the depth and lateral distance of
roots from the plant so that they are more evenly distributed throughout the soil volume
(Araujo et al., 1995b; Goldberg et al., l97L; Safran et aI., 1975). Plants with aconfined
root system, such as under drip irrigation, may deplete water and mineral nutrients in the
immediate root zone, and may therefore be more dependent on irrigation and fertilisation
(Araujo et al., 1995a).
A study by McCarthy (1976) found flood irrigation reduced the salt loading in the soil,
with uniform salt levels through the profile, whereas drip inigation was found to
accumulate salts at distances 50cm from the dripper. However, the flood-irrigated vines
may have received a higher quantity of water, which leached the profile. Myburgh (2003)
2l
has discussed various modifications to traditional flood irrigation that reduce water
application and thereby salt loading to the soil.
1.3.4. Summary
Although the quality of irrigation water in Australia is variable, that from groundwater in
the Barossa Valley is high in NaCl, and is almost certainly leading to the development of
sodic or saline conditions in the soil profile (discussed further in Section 1.4). The method
of water application influences the distribution of these elements, drip irrigation reduces
water application and improves water use efficiency (WUE). However, research is
required to investigate the efficiency of drip irrigation with respect to salinity and sodicity
accumulation zones in the soil profile, particularly if the reduced water application
prevents leaching of salts.
1.4. lmpact of Saline lrrigation Water on Soil
Irrigation of RBE is expected to cause alterations in soil properties, because increased
application of water should modify the wetting and drying pattern of the profile, which in
turn could increase clay illuviation and modify soil physical properties. Irrigation with
saline groundwater may have an even greater impact on soil physio-chemical properties
because of the large input of salts, which may also result in the formation of layers or areas
that are either sodic or saline. Because RBE are being irrigated with saline groundwater
the major degradation processes in the Barossa Valley are the formation of saline and sodic
soils. The rate and extent of these processes and management strategies need careful study
and articulation.
22
1.4.1. Soil salinity
Soil salinity is a major factor affecting agriculture (Ali et aL.,2000), with estimates of over
0.4 million square kilometres, or 57o of Australian land classified as saline (e.9.
Rengasamy and Olsson, l99I). The type of salt and concentration varies with location.
Although saline soils in Australia are dominated by sodium chloride (Rengasamy and
Olsson, L993) they may also contain potassium (K*), calcium (Ca+) and magnesium (Mg*),
sulfate (SO¿2-), carbonate (CO¡'-) and bicarbonate (HCO3-) (Cass et al.,1996). Saline soils
are classified as soils containing more than 0.17o NaCl if loams (or coarser) or 0.27o if clay
loams and clays (Northcote and Skene, 1972). Salinities below this classification level
may still adversely influence plants, particularly sensitive varieties and species. The soil
solution composition will change with evapotranspiration; the concentration of soluble
salts will increase and those with low solubility will precipitate (e.g. Shaw et al., 1987).
This rise in concentration decreases the osmotic potential and water extraction by plants is
thereby made more difficult.
The application of saline water through drip irrigation has been shown by many
researchers (e.g. Meiri et aI., 1982; Yaron et al., L973) to result in a leached zone beneath
the dripper, wheras a region of salt accumulation occurs at the edge of the wetting front.
Water content is high beneath the dripper and decreases with distance away, with roots
normally accumulating in the high matric potential region beneath the dripper (Shalhevet e/
aL, L983). One example of salt accumulation in South Australian RBE drip irrigated with
saline water was given by McCarthy (1976) who showed that five years of drip irrigation
with approximately L9 Nn thalyr of water (2.34 dSlm) caused an increase in soil salinity.
This depended on distance from the clripper ancl although salinity varied on a weekly basis,
the salinity at 50cm from the dripper was consistently higher than that at 150cm (Figure
23
I-2). This clearly shows salt from the zone wetted by the irrigation dripper is not being
leached into the mid-row (McCarthy, 1976). The build-up of salts from drip irrigation was
considered high at the bottom of the rootzone (EC,. >5 dS/m) and possibly high enough to
decrease yield. However, salinþ directly beneath the dripper v/as not measured by
McCarthy (1976).
2oth February 1974
II1 ds/m2 ds/m
I3ds/m4 ds/m
I s¿slm
80 '100 '120 '140
Distance from dripper (cm)
Figure 1-2 Satt accumuløtíon in a Northern Adelaide Plaíns vineyard soíl aftertiveyeørs drip inígation (modìliedfrom McCørthy, 1976)
There are relatively few problems with the physical properties of saline soils irrigated with
saline water. However, when saline soils are leached by rainfall (1.e. low EC), this may
result in the development of a sodic soil layer. Because EC often increases with depth in a
sodic soil, sodicity and salinþ may occur in a single profile, i.e. sodicþ at the surface and
salinity at depth (e.g. Northcote and Skene, 1972; Peverill et al., 1999). Physical
deterioration of sodic soils often occurs because of increased swelling and dispersion of
clay particles (Quirk and Schofield, 1955; Keren et al., 1933); this is discussed further in
10
20
30
î40{¿Êô-
Eso
ô0
70
80
60
24
section I.4.2. However, management of a salt-affected soil strongly affects its 'physical
fertility' (Sumner et al., 1998). For example, soil structure tends to decline and organic
matter is reduced under intensive cultivation. The soil strength also increases, whereas
aeration decreases due to increased frequency of waterlogging (Cass et al., 1996).
Strongly saline soils are less susceptible to damage by intense cultivation, but salt stress
and toxicity on the plant is, of course, gteater.
The composition of soil water that may be available for grapevine uptake is not always the
same as that of the applied irrigation water, because of evaporation and water uptake by
roots (Shainberg and Oster, 1978). These processes cause: (i) precipitation of carbonates
and sulfates; (ii) dissolution of soil minerals; (iii) cation exchange reactions; (iv) decline in
soil physical chemistry; and (v) poor plant growth (Rengasamy, 1990).
1.4.2. Soil sodicity
In Australia a sodic soil is defined as one having an exchangeable sodium percentage
(ESP) greater than 6 within the fine earth soil material (Northcote and Skene, 1972; Isbell,
1996). Sodium chloride dominates the salts in the Australian environment. When this salt
is leached by rain or irrigation the soil becomes sodic, unless sources of calcium or
magnesium are naturally present in the profile (Rengasamy and Olsson, 1993). Soil
sodification results in a poorly structured soil with surface crusting, hardsetting, low
hydraulic conductivity and a tendency to become waterlogged (Northcote and Skene,
r972).
In general, winter rainfall (low EC) following application of saline irrigation water will
cause a reduction in the surface salt concentration @owley, 1995). However, soil ESP
25
will not be reduced by the same degree (Oster, 1994). This results in dispersion, followed
by clay migration, blockage of water-conducting pores and structural problems (Curtin er
a1.,1994). The amount of clay found in percolate is strongly correlated with the hydraulic
conductivity, with decreases in hydraulic conductivity attributed to dispersion and
blockage of pores (McNeal et al., 1968). Mace and Amrhein (2001) found that both
internal swelling of clay aggregates and clay dispersion occur simultaneously in the soil
and proposed that internal swelling decreases large pore sizes and is most responsible for
quickly reducing the saturated hydraulic conductivity of a soil. A soil with a calcium-
saturated clay soil behaves very differently from a sodium-clay soil because of electrostatic
forces @engasamy and Olsen, 1991). If calcium is attached to the clay particles, the
double layer is compressed to a position close to the clay surface (Shainberg and Oster,
1978). Sodium clay platelets have increased hydration when in equilibrium with a dilute
salt solution and this causes spontaneous swelling and dispersion (Norrish,1972).
Clay dispersion is a result of the interplay of attractive and repulsive forces in the electrical
double layer on the surface of charged colloids (van Olphen, 1977). An electrical double
diffuse layer forms on each platelet. When two clay platelets are in parallel alignment with
solution ions distributed between them, the diffuse layers from each clay platelet overlap to
cause the ion concentration midway between the platelets to be greater than the
surrounding bulk solution; thus water is drawn between the platelets (osmotic pressure)
forcing them apart (Rengasamy et al., 1934). The thickness of the double layer, or
separation of the clay platelets depends on the concentration of ions in the bulk solution
and valency of the ion (van Olphen, 1977; Rengasamy et a\.,1934). A number of external
factors also influence dispersion and swelling, and thus structural degradation. These
include: texture, mineralogy, the presence of cementing agents, soil pH, aggregate
26
structure (Curtin et aI., 1994), calcium carbonate (Nadler et aI., 1996), gypsum (Bridge,
1968), iron and aluminium oxides, exchangeable aluminium, calcium:magnesium ratio
@merson, 1983), strength of edge to face attractions (Greene et aI., 1978), degree of
drying (Collis-George and Smiles, 1963) and both organic (Nelson, L997) and inorganic
constituents (McNeal et al., 1968). Swelling is a process that can be reversed by
application of divalent ions or increasing electrolyte concentration. Dispersion of clay,
however, is irreversible and can result in the formation of a hard, less permeable clay pan
caused by the migration of colloids (Shainberg and Oster, 1978; Minhas and Sharma,
1e86).
Soil permeability may be maintained in sodic soils if the electrolyte concentration of the
soil solution remains above a critical value (threshold electrolyte concentration: TEC)
(Quirk and Schofield, 1955). A threshold concentration exists because the diffuse double
layer has a higher concentration of sodium ions on the layer silicate surfaces than in the
soil solution. The threshold concentration varies witn cfay type, clay content and soil
cements (e.9. organic matter) (Rengasamy et aI., 1984). The laboratory threshold
concentration for RBE in south-eastern Australia may be used as an indication of the effect
of saline water and mechanical disturbance on the soil structure (Rengasamy et a1.,1984).
The threshold concentration, Er = 0.056S4R + 0.06
This equation may be applied to irrigation water or a saturated extract of the soil solution.
At about one quarter of the threshold concentration, clay particles start to move from the
soil (Quirk, 1998).
27
Specific salts in the soil solution affect the hydraulic conductivity of unstable soils and
reduce movement of soil solutions (Jayawardane, 1990). Divalent ions, such as
magnesium and calcium confer positive physical properties whereas sodium may result in
dispersion and swelling (Shainberg and Oster, 1978). As permeability of a soil decreases
by the square of the pore radius, adsorbed sodium that causes only a small reduction in the
size of larger pores, may have a significant effect on the permeability (Shainberg and
Oster, 1978). This may result in decreased aeration and gas exchange, but this is
dependent on clay type, because highly swelling clays (e.g. smectites) will have a greater
decrease in permeability than non-swelling clays (e.9. kaolinite) (Shainberg and Oster,
re78).
Soil pH has been found to affect dispersion in pure clay systems (Schofield and Samson,
1954). Soil pH affects dispersion by changing the net negative charge on layer silicate
particles thus affecting dispersion and, therefore, hydraulic conductivity (Chorom and
Rengasamy, 1995). Sodium and potassium ions tend to concentrate and thereby increase
the residual alkalinity and pH of the soil solution (Gupta and Abrol, 1990). However, a
rise in pH is moderated by the precipitation of bicarbonate ions with calcium and
magnesium (Chorom and Rengasamy, 1995). A low soil pH causes adsorbed sodium to be
replaced by hydrogen on the layer silicate complex. As a result sodium concentration in
the soil solution, and hydrogen concentration on the complex increase (Chorom and
Rengasamy, 1995). This may cause layer silicates to break down if the protons penetrate
the layer silicate structure.
Although sodic soils have both chemical and physical problems; soil physical issues
dominate and affect the chemical nature of the soil. When a sodic soil dries, dispersed
28
layer silicates from soil aggregates block pores and seal pathways for air and water
movement thus causing a dense, slowly permeable clod to form (Rengasamy and Olsson,
1991). A waterlogged soil becomes rapidly depleted in oxygen because of consumption by
root and micro-organisms, although the rate is dependent on temperature and organic
substrates. V/ith the removal of oxygen as a terminal acceptor for electrons, the soil
environment becomes increasingly reducing in nature, with some compounds being
phytotoxic (such as NOz-, Fe2*, Mn2* and HzS). Waterlogging also reduces the diffusion of
ethylene and CO2, both of which adversely affect nitrogen fixation (West, 1990) and
results in nutrients becoming unavailable to plants (Naidu and Rengasamy, 1993). pH and
redox potential, both of which are affected by waterlogging, control concentrations of
boron, copper, manganese, iron, molybdenum and zinc in solution (Lindsay, 1979). Thus
the fertility of a sodic soil relies on the presence of water, oxygen and nutrients being
delivered to the roots in a form that the plant can take up (Ponnamperuma, 1984).
1.4.3. lmpact of lrrigation on Red Brown Earths
RBE are the most important irrigated soils in Australia (Cockroft and Martin, 1981).
However, these soils are fragile and often poorly drained. In some regions long-term
irrigation has caused groundwater and perched watertables to rise, a process that is closely
related to the rise in salt content of the soil (Cockroft and Martin, 1981).
Drip irrigation under certain conditions has been found to degrade soil properties, but it is
not known how drip irrigation will affect RBE when utilising saline water. Consequently,
much more work is required to quantify the physio-chemical impacts on RBE when
irrigated.
29
1.5. Vitis vinifera as an irrigated crop
Traditionally the effects of soil properties on Vitis viniþra (grapevines) have been
considered a secondary influence on vine yield and wine quality, with climate and canopy
management considered more influential, for example Charters (2000) states wine flavour
is only slightly influenced by soil. Recent research by Rawson (2002) concluded that soil
variation has a very dominant influence on grape composition, which is supported by
Seguin (1986) who accredited the production of premium wine in Bordeaux and Médoc
regions of France directly to soil factors. It has been considered that regions producing
high quality grapes and wines are those with well structured, permeable, well aerated soils
(Lanyon et aI., 2004). The effect of soil properties on grape production (White, 2003;
Lanyon et al., 2004), root growth (Cass, 2002; Dowley, 2004) and wine quality (Rawson,
2002) have been researched and reviewed in detail; the influence of irrigation, sodicity and
salinity on grapevines will be discussed further.
1.5.1. Effects of lrrigation on yif,s vinifera
The distribution of the roots in the soil profile is relatively varied depending on soil
environment, whereas root density is a function of the rootstock (Southey and Archer,
1988). Nagarajah (1987) also found rootstock affects the density of root systems in
regions of the soil profile, but Daulta and Chauhan (1980) reported that the size of the area
containing the majority of roots is affected by the cultivar.
Grapevine root distribution and density appear to be a function of the soil environment and
the grapevine cultivar. Richards (1983) suggested that, regardless of soil type, origin or
nature, grapevine roots often concentrate in the upper metre of soil. However, dcnsc finc
grapevine roots have been found at a depth of two metres (Wakabayashi et al., 1974).
30
Archer and Strauss (1985) concluded that increasing planting density in a vineyard results
in smaller, denser root systems as a result of inter-vine competition. However, grapevine
root distribution is significantly affected by soil water regimes, with roots concentrating at
high densities in regions beneath irrigation drippers and within the wetted zone, and at
lower densities beneath sprinkler systems (YanZyl,1984; Safran et a1.,1915; Stevens and
Douglas, 1994). In finer textured soils root distribution directly beneath the dripper is less
than at the edges of the wetted zone because of saturation and anoxia directly beneath the
dripper (YanZyl,1988). Root growth in regions that receive minimal water (e.9. mid-row)
occurs once the soil has been sufficiently wetted. This is normally by spring and autumn
rains and leads Van Zyl (1988) to suggest that irrigation systems are more influential in
determining root distribution patterns in areas of low rainfall.
1.5.2. Effects of Salinity on Vitis vinifera
Soil salinity is defined as the presence of salts in the soil to a degree that may adversely
affect plant growth. Such salts occurs either naturally or is introduced through irrigation
with saline water or from the rising water tables associated with irrigation salinity and
dryland salinity. Many Australian soils are saline via one of these mechanisms (¿.9.
Northcote and Skene, 1972). The effect of salinity on Vitis vinifera (grapevines) has been
reviewed by Walker (1994) who concluded that increasing soil salinity is detrimental to
vine performance. Grapevines are non-halophytes and moderately sensitive to salt (Mass
and Hoffman, 1977), although growth may be affected at low salinities prior to visible
symptoms of stress @ownton, 1977, Walker et aL.,1981). The response of grapevines to
salinity is wide-ranging and dependent on other factors such as: (i) irrigation management;
(ii) environmental factors (e.g. temperature, humidity, evaporation); (iii) stage of plant
development; (iv) cultivar; (v) rootstock; (vi) soil fertility; (vii) soil water ('West, 1990);
3I
(viii) sodicity and waterlogging (Cass et al., L996). Generally, salinity influences berry
composition and concentration via the uptake of cations and anions through the root
system. Various rootstocks vary in their ability to absorb and transport these cations and
anions, thereby also influencing berry composition (Bernstein et al., 1969). Because
salinity in Australian soils is dominated by NaCl, berries and wines grown on saline soils
often have increased concentrations of sodium and chloride (Downton, t977). Salinity can
also reduce photosynthesis, stomatal conductance (Prior et aI., I992b) and induce
potassium deficiency, all of which delay the maturation of grapevine berries (Nagarajah,
2000); decrease berry and bunch numbers (Prior et al. 1992 a,b); and reduce vine growth
rate and size (Mass and Hoffman, 1977). Berry acid concentration increases with salinity
but sugar content is unaffected (Prior et al., 1992 a,b).
Many crops respond to a saline rootzone via the total osmotic potential of the soil water
rather than via the concentration of individual ionic species (West, 1990). Grapevines are
more sensitive to chloride than sulphate or carbonate whereas sodium and potassium
carbonates cause larger growth reductions in the vines than calcium and magnesium
carbonates (Kishore et al., 1975). Because water is removed from the rootzone, salt
concentration in the soil solution rises. Thus the osmotic potential of the soil water falls,
the concentration of toxic ions increases and water uptake and transpiration decline
(Shainberg and Oster, 1978).
1.5.3. Effects of Sodicity on yif,s vinifera
Sodic soils commonly affect plants indirectly through poor soil physio-chemical properties
that develop from soil compaction, waterlogging, aggregate slaking, clispersion and
hardsetting. These properties create an unfavourable environment for root extension, water
32
uptake and respiration, thus causing poor root vine growth, reduced yields Qitzpatnck et
aL, 1992), lower quality grapes (Cass et al., 1996), lower biomass and low carbon
additions to these soil layers (Naidu and Rengasamy, 1993).
Non-saline sodic soils may result in a vine becoming deficient in calcium and magnesium
because of the lower concentrations of these on the exchange complex and in soil solution
(Shainberg and Oster, 1978). This was confirmed by Lynch and Lauchli (1985) who found
that in waterlogged saline sodic soils, calcium uptake and translocation in plants was
limited. In both saline and non-saline sodic soils, accumulation of chloride or sodium in
the leaves causes changes of the membrane permeability and stability (Levitt, 1980) and
stomatal closure resulting in excessive water loss and leaf injury (Shainberg and Oster,
1978). Sodic soil conditions influence translocation of specific elements in roots, shoots
and leaves differentially. As the ESP of a soil increases, potassium, calcium and
magnesium contents in vines decrease, whereas phosphorus, zinc and copper increase
(Samra, 1985).
Sodic soils often have deficiencies in phosphorus and nitrogen (e.g. Naidu and Rengasamy,
1993) and may have deficiencies in other nutrients, such as sulfur, molybdenum, copper,
zinc and manganese (e.9. Churchman et al., 1993). Cartwright et al., (1986) found that
many South Australian sodic soils contained toxic levels of boron. Seelinger (1968)
concluded that in South Australian soils with a sodicity problem, nutrient constraints on
plant growth vary with soil type.
33
1.6. Methods to prevent or remediate soil degradation
caused by saline drip irrigation
Application of saline irrigation water requires soil amelioration and other management
treatments to reduce long-term soil sodicity and salinity of RBE (Rengasamy and Olsson,
1993). This may include the use of calcium amendments, such as gypsum (Grierson,
1978), organic matter, increased leaching, modification of cropping regime and deep
ripping. The prime objectives are to stabilise soil aggregates, improve infiltration and
reduce the effects of high sodium. These management options will be discussed in further
detail below.
1.6.1. Leaching
Some sodium may leach and drain from soil profiles (Rengasamy and Olsson, 1993),
particularly if the profile is free-draining and receives high rainfall. Many soils in
Australia, especially RBE, have a low leaching fraction, particularly in the B horizon
(Prendergast, 1993). Therefore, increased leaching of the soil layers is important to
prevent increased salinisation (Rengasamy and Olsson, 1993). Any increase in leaching
fraction will result in increased salt loading to groundwater and nearby watercourses and
may also encourage a rise in the local watertable. Suggestions have been made to reuse
drainage water, although Rengasamy and Olsson (1993) point out that increased NaCl in
irrigation water may cause the increasing solubility of toxic elements.
1.6.2. Gypsum Application
Gypsum has commonly been applied as a soil amendment to saline-sodic soils to improve
the structure of surface soils and reduce adverse affects from saline irrigation water
(Loveday and Bridge, 1983). Gypsum (CaSO¿ ' 2H2O) promotes flocculation of clay
34
particles through increased electrolyte concentration and exchange of sodium for calcium
on the clay particle exchange sites (e.g. Gnerson, 1978; Shaw et al., 1987; Levy and
Sumner, 1998; Oster and Jayawardane, 1998) thereby improving soil tilth, reduced crust
strength, reduced runoff, increased water infiltration and storage, and increased drainage
and leaching (Loveday and Bridge, 1983). Gypsum may be applied to the soil surtace
directly or via the irrigation \¡/ater (Shainberg and Oster, 1978). The reaction on the clay
exchange site with CaSOa is:
2Na-Clay + CaSO¿ <+ Ca-Clay + Na2SO4
The exchange of sodium for calcium improves soil aggregation and hence reduces
waterlogging and surface crusting. However, the sodium exchanged from the clay must be
leached from the soil profile for long-term benefits (Shaw et al., 1987).
Dissolution of gypsum (C** and SO¿2-) and therefore its effectiveness, is related to particle
sizeviz. as particle size is reduced, specific surface area increases and therefore dissolution
increases (Keren and Shainberg, 1981). The rate of dissolution also increases with the
purity of the gypsum (Naidu et aI., 1993). The flow rate of the percolating solution
determines the efficiency of reclamation when low solubility soil amendments are utilised
(Nadler et al., 1996). As flow rate increases, the water film around gypsum particles
decreases and contact time between gypsum particles and a volume of water also decreases
(Kemper et aL,1975; Keren and O'Connor, 1982).
The amount of gypsum required to reduce ESP to a desirable level is often very high, for
example Loveday and Bridge (1983) calculated 12.5 tlha was required in the Riverina to
35
reduce the ESP in the surface 20 cm of a typical irrigated clay assuming a 507o
replacement efficiency, and from field data it was found 25 tlha was needed to reduce the
ESP from 11 to 5 (Loveday, 1976). However, the electrolyte effect also improves
permeability particularly in the initial periods after application (Loveday,1976). Gypsum
is commonly applied at rates of 1-5 t/ha on South Australian soils with dispersive and
surface crusting properties (Russell and Brooker, 1963; Rengasamy and Olsson, 1993;
Cass and Fitzpatrick, 1999). These application rates may be lower than soil requirements,
because L6 üha of gypsum is necessary to replace lmeq/100g of exchangeable sodium in
the soil to a depth of one metre, assuming 75Vo efficiency (Shainberg and Oster, 1978).
Application of gypsum normally occurs prior to winter, so dissolution by winter rains
maintains the soil solution at an appreciable salt concentration and prevents a reduction in
hydraulic conductivity during winter (Mantell et a1.,1985). If gypsum application occurs
during irrigation, salts are only moved from one location to another; for example from
beneath the dripper to the midrow and not through the soil profile (Mantell et a1.,1985).
1.6.3. Modified cropping
Plants are able to take up sodium, for example pasture and cereal crops, which are able to
be used as cover crops in vineyards, can remove 100-500 kg of sodium per hectare per
annum from moderately saline soils. Rengasamy and Olsson (1993) calculated that a RBE
soil with a ECl,s of 1 dS/m contains I,725 tonnes of sodium per hectare in the top metre
and concluded the removal of sodium by crops is negligible.
The selection of salt tolerant grapevine cultivars (Groot-Obbink and Alexander, 1973) and
rootstocks @ownton, 1985) may not improve soil conditions, but allow the continued
production from saline or sodic land. The use of cover crops in vineyards may improve
36
soil properties, particularly if the selection of cover crop includes both plants with fibrous
roots and others with a deep penetrating taproot. This increased root biomass will improve
soil structure, infiltration and therefore movement of gypsum in to the soil. Although this
improved infiltration may result in water moving through mainly macro pores and the
leaching of the clay matrix may not be as effective.
1.6.4. lncreased organ¡c matter
Organic matter is important in stabilising soil structure and also influences the overall
selectivity of calcium over sodium in soils. The nature of the exchange complex (organic
matter or minerals) affects the ion-exchange equilibria (Wiklander, 1964) with different
materials having different selectivity of cations; for example organic material adsorbs more
calcium than clay minerals (Schachtschbel, 1940) and this increases with pH caused by
increasing CEC (Pratt et a1.,1962; Gupta et a1.,1984). The stability of the bond formed
increases with increasing ionisation potential of the cation, with calcium forming more
stable complexes than sodium (Chaberek and Martell, 1959). The selectivity of calcium
over sodium in a soil is related to the organic matter content (Poonia and Talibudeen, L977;
Poonia et a1.,1984). Soils with high organic matter have a higher selectivity for calcium if
the soil has a high ESP (< 50). At lower ESP selectivity is reduced (Poonia et a1.,1984).
Organic sites hold more calcium than sodium compared to inorganic exchange sites,
particularly with increasing CEC of the organic matter, increased soil solution pH or
decreased calcium activity because of decreased ionic strength. Therefore soils with
higher organic matter are less susceptible to becoming sodic than soils with low levels of
organic matter. This has been shown to be true in the field (Rengasamy and Olsson, 1993),
pot experiments (Lax et aI., 1994) and with various qualities of irrigation water (Chander
et aI., 1994). However, Baldock et al. (1994) applied wheat straw, gypsum and lime to
37
ameliorate the unstable structure of a degraded RBE and found the incorporation of wheat
straw into the surface 10 cm resulted in dispersion of the upper 20 cm of the profile. This
was attributed to the mobilisation of surface clay particles and their movement downwards,
thereby blocking pores and lowering hydraulic conductivity in the region below this
ameliorated area. This suggests application should be restricted to the soil surface, because
mechanical disturbance involved with incorporation of material, particularly into a sodic
soil, can result in dispersion and clay illuviation.
1.7. Conclusions
The use of poor quality groundwater for irrigation is causing an increase in soil salinisation
and sodification in Australia. Soil salinity from irrigation results from a build up of salts in
the soil profile. The change in soil chemical properties may affect the grapevine; for
example, the concentration of sodium and chloride in the root zone significantly affects the
concentration of these elements in the berry juice, and thus also in the wine. Australian
wines contain a higher concentration of sodium and chloride than many other countries
because of irrigation, own-rooted vines and overhead irrigation on salt-affected soils.
However, if concentration of these elements continues to increase in Australian wines, they
may be prevented from sale on the domestic market and in the European lJnion, an
outcome that will seriously affect the wine industry.
Sodic soils commonly affect plants indirectly through poor soil physical properties, that
develop from soil compaction, waterlogging, aggregate slaking, dispersion and hardsetting.
These properties create an unfavourable environment for root extension, water uptake and
respiration, thus causing poor root vine growth, reduced yields, lower quality grapes, lower
38
biomass and low carbon additions to these soil layers. The long-term effect on grapevines
is unknown but does not appear to be favourable.
In the Barossa Valley, a leading grape growing district of Australia, water resources are
limited and have resulted in saline groundwater being utilised for irrigation. lltris water is
of variable quality but may have an EC up to 3.5 dS/m which is considered marginal for
long-term use with Vitis vinifera. It is thus crucial to the sustainability of grape growing in
the Barossa Valley to understand and respond to soil property changes resulting from
usage of water of marginal quality. This review has identified a number of aspects, which
require further study:
1. The effect of long-term irrigation with water of marginal quality on soil chemical,
physical and mineralogical properties in vineyards.
2. The effect on soil properties of changing to a less saline water source after long-term
saline irrigation water has been applied.
3. To determine if the application of gypsum avoids or prevents problems associated with
application of saline water or the switching from a saline source to a less saline water
source.
These three aspects will be addressed in this study to determine the effect of irrigation
water of marginal quality on soil properties under vineyards.
39
Chapter 2. Site Description, Properties and Soil
Classification
2.1. Site Description
2.1.1. lntroduction
This study was conducted in two of Australia's premium grape growing districts. The
majority of the work was conducted at a focus site in the Barossa Valley and a secondary
minor site in Mclaren Vale was selected to support research findings from the Barossa
Valley. Both regions historically have had limited availability to high quality irrigation
water and have relied on saline groundwater for irrigation of vines. The two sites are very
similar, insofar as both have texture contrast soils (RBE; Stace et al., 1968), with a similar
climatic regime and management, and similar mineralogy and particle size distribution.
Gypsum had not been applied to soils at the Barossa Site, whereas, at the Mclaren Vale
site, gypsum had been applied every second year since commencement of irrigation.
2.1.2. Location and general description
Barossa Valley
The Barossa Valley Region, South Australia, is located 60 km northeast of Adelaide
@gure 2-I) at an elevation of 180-290 m above sea level. The area is a relatively flat
plain, bounded on the east by the Angaston Hills and Barossa Ranges, and to the west by
the Greenock Hills (Cobb, 1986; Northcote et aI., 1954). The grape industry is of major
importance in the region with 8469 hectares of grapevines planted. In 2002 the Barossa
Valley crushed 57,63I tonnes of grapes, valued at over $81 million to producers
40
(Phylloxera and Grape Industry Board of South Australia, 2002) and $360 million after
wine production (Barossa Light Development Inc, 2001).
I
Bth8
B*ar0ssa
Figure 2-1 Locatíon of Børossa and McLaren Vale Regions in Austrølia
Irrigation in the Barossa Valley commenced in the 1970s to improve water supply for vines
and increase grape production (Hallows and Thompson, 1995) with estimations of up to
70%o of grapevines being inigated with groundwater (Cobb, 1986). In1995,8750MLlyear
were used for irrigating vines (Table 2-1), with the majority of this sourced from
groundwatcr supplics. Thc incrcase in water demands in the 1990's caused growers to
ADELAIDE
Hehndol
Bl¡dwúod e
Ed€ñ Vsilåy
PlÊår:!nt
t'
lcynetoil
'fâilsil BÉ¡dSrrâlhàlbyn
Bridge
Haño
Lzke .ÀteÆnõilnè
Wakolìold
Nalional Roule Number
¡,bin Roâd
.\*
Clarê
The Barossa Region
The McLaren Vale Region
Elizabeth
lt@l
lrcÐ PeÍltv¡a Poi Pine EPol Auguõ¡ß
Al¡æ Spc¡ngsvla Porl Áugtsl3
41
investigate alternative water sources. This has led to two new irrigation water schemes in
the Barossa Valley:
1. From 1998 spare off-peak capacity in SA Water's Swan Reach-to-Stockwell
pipeline was used to transport water from the River Murray to the Barossa region in
the off-peak months between April and November. The water is either used
immediately or stored for use in summer (Ruralfunds, 2003).
2. SA Water and Barossa Infrastructure Ltd (Btr-) have established a scheme to
transport water from the River Murray to the Barossa area to supplement existing
groundwater supplies. The construction of the South Para Reservoir at the
Southern edge of the Barossa Valley allowed the 'Warren Reservoir to become part
of the water transport and storage of the BIL scheme (Ruralfunds, 2003). The BIL
scheme extracts water from the Murray-Darling river system during winter months
and transports it, via the Mannum-Adelaide pipeline to the Warren reservoir where
it is stored until summer when it is transported to the Barossa for irrigation. The
scheme is expected to provide the Barossa with an extra 5000 to 7000 Ml/year and
coÍrmenced water supply late in the 200L-2002 growing season (Ruralfunds, 2003).
These irrigation schemes for the Barossa Valley will allow the expansion of viticulture in
the Barossa (Table 2-1). However, many existing vineyards which have historically been
irrigated with saline bore water, will switch to the less saline water with the introduction of
these new water sources.
42
$47.6mGrape Value ($850/t) 5242.2m$8o.tm
11 0005 800Land (ha) n 2001
15 0008 750Water (MUyr) 45 000
56 000Grapes (t) 285 00095 000
t995 204520t0Tøble 2-I Predicted vitículture in the Børossa
tNote: Water use efficiency remains constant with time (156-158 KL water/t grape). Howeveryield increases (from 9.7 tlha in 1995 to 16.6 t/ha in 2045). Indicating land area has been
underestimated for 2045.
Barossa Valley Vinevard
Soil, site and groundwater data were collected from a vineyard at the Nuriootpa Research
Station, in the Barossa Valley (Latitude: -34.48; Longitude: 139.00), this vineyard was the
major research site in the study. The vineyard had received above-ground drip irrigation
with groundwater (bore water) since its establishment in 1989, between 2000n and200213
an average of 1.54 Ml/ha/yr (154 mm/year) was applied. However, due to the failure of a
bore, the water source was switched in 1993 with the drilling of a new bore, which was
slightly less saline (Table 2-2 and Appendix G). The vineyard is own-rooted Viris
Viniþra cv Chardonnay with row and vine spacings of 3.0 m and 2.25 mrespectively in an
east-west orientation, as each vine has a single dripper this equates to an average of
1039litres of irrigation water applied to each vine. Vines were pruned to 40 buds (2 bud
spurs) on a bilateral cordon with a single foliage catch wire approximately 30 cm above the
cordon. The cover crop consisting of swan oats and faba beans (4:1 mix) was planted in
early May each year then slashed and sprayed in September (bud burst).
A non-irrigated paired site, 10 metres from the 1l-year irrigated vineyard, was selected for
comparison. This site was trellised but was not planted with vines, although had identical
cover crop management to that of the vineyard.
43
Half of vineyard2000-present
Mains (towndrinking water)
8.3 in200U2
0.3 - 0.5 in200ll2 2.7 in200U2
Bore (2) 1993 - present 8.2 in200U2
8.0 in200U2
2.2 in 1993
2.2 - 3.2 in200ll2
1989 - 1993Bore (1) Notavailable
2.5 Notavailable
Rainfall 0.08All 0.86.5
Water EC (dS/m)Years used SARpHTable 2-2 - Ch data water soarces the Barossa reseørch
Vineyard (inigated) <-10 metres apart--, Non-Inigated
i.;..-f'-'
Figure 2-2 Non-irrigøted and Inigated sites in the Bsrossø Valley
McLaren Vale Region
Mclaren Vale is located in the V/illunga Basin, South Australia on the southern fringe of
Adelaide. The region extends from Reynella in the North to V/illunga in the South,
encompassing an area of 155 km2 (Figure 2-1). Much of the natural vegetation in the
region has been removed for housing, grazing, horticulture and viticulture.
The majority of vineyards are located on flat to slightly undulating land within 12
kilometres of the sea. Main varieties are Cabemet Sauvignon, Shiraz, Grenache, Pinot
44
Noir, Chardonnay, Riesling and Sauvignon Blanc, with vine vigour and yields often being
low to moderate. In 2002, 49,128 tonnes of grapes in the Mclaren Vale region were
crushed, providing growers with over $80 million (Phylloxera and Grape Industry Board of
South Australia, 2002). However there is limited scope for further expansion because of
urban development and limited good quality water for irrigation.
Due to dry summers, groundwater is used extensively for irrigation @ME, 1991).
Approximately 3000 hectares were irrigated with groundwater in 1994, which equates to
products worth $20 million annually (Southern Vales Water Resources Committee,1992).
Approximately SOVo of irrigated land is under drip irrigation. The quality of groundwater
is variable. For example, salinities range from 500 mgllnear Mclaren Vale to 1500 mglL
near Willunga, and generally increases with increased extraction @ME, 1991).
Mclaren Vale Vinevard
Soil and site data were collected from a vineyard (Whits end) owned and managed by Jock
and John Harvey (Latitude: -35.27; Longitude: 138.55) near Willunga. This vineyard was
selected to complement the Barossa Valley site, insofar as it had a similar climate and soils
type. However, unlike the Barossa site, gypsum had been applied to the soil every second
year since irrigation coÍrmenced, thereby allowing a comparison with the major research
site in the Barossa. Only limited research (Chapter 8) was conducted at the Mclaren Vale
site, while in-depth research was conducted at the Barossa site (Chapters 4,5,6,7,9,I0
and 11).
The Mclaren Vale site was planted with Shiraz vines (own rootstocks) in 1987. Prior to
this, the area was used to dry grow a variety of crops, including canola. The vineyard has
45
received on average I lvuha/yr from above-ground drip irrigation for fourteen years (EC
of 1.17 dS/m), sourced from underground aquifers. Gypsum had been broad acre applied
every second year at a rate of 2.6 tonneslhectare. This rate is thought to prevent sodicity in
the root zone (particularly in the upper B horizon), given the salinity of the irrigation
water.
A non-irrigated paired site, 10 metres from the irrigated vineyard, was selected because of
the identical soil type present in the vineyard. The vegetation of the control site was
pasture with a few large Eucalyptus species present.
2.1.3. Geology and geomorphology
Barossa Valley
Geoloqv and Geomorphologv
The Barossa Valley is a shallow asymmetrical syncline with a Tertiary fault along the
south-eastern side. The relief of the Barossa ranges is attributed to differential erosion and
general uplift of the ranges @algarno, 196l). The current landform was initiated during
the formation of the Adelaide geosyncline when Precambrian siltstones and shales (750 to
1000 million years old), were originally deposited. These were followed by Cambrian
marbles, shales and dolomitic siltstones, which together with the Precambrian rocks,
currently form the basement of the Barossa Valley (Cobb, 1986; Drexel et a1.,1993).
After deposition the Precambrian and Cambrian rocks were elevated to a mountain range
and, during Permian times, eroded (Cobb, 1986; Price and Cosgrove, 1990). At the end of
the Tertiary period, wet warm conditions prevailed, resulting in the formation of a flat land
surface being intensely leached, thereby forming areas of deeply weathered profiles
46
composed of leached sands, ironstone, hard siliceous quartzitelike material, and kaolinitic
clays (Northcote et a1.,1954).
Tectonic activity during the Tertiary period caused the formation of the Stockwell Fault
and this was accompanied by basement block subsidence along this and other faults
(Taylor et al., 1974) and uplift of the Mountain Lofty Ranges (Cobb, 1986). During this
time the valley was also tilted downwards from west to east to form an asymmetric acute
trough the deepest part of which is along the western boundary (Cobb, 1986). Erosion of
soil from the surrounding hills into the valley produced sedimentary deposits 130 m thick
in areas, thereby reducing the sloping valley floor (Northcote et a1.,1954). Initial material
eroded from the hills was leached Pliocene material. The exposed Pre-Cambrian rocks
were weathered and eroded to bury the Pliocene material on the valley floor. Therefore,
soil material on the valley floor was deposited as alluvium or colluvium, the nature of the
material depending on the rocks weathered. Fine-grained micaceous sandstone was a
major rock type weathered (Northcote et aI., L954; Olliver, 1962).
Tertiary sediments were overlain by a thin Quaternary layer of dark red-brown clay and
outwash material of silt size (Northcote et al., L954; Cobb, 1986). Recently, the North Para
River has flowed through the landscape, bringing new parent materials and eroding those
already present. These processes have resulted in the following three broad groups of soils
being formed in the Barossa Valley: (i) remnants of leached material from the peneplain;
(ii) older alluvium and colluvium; (iii) recent alluvium of the North Para River (Northcote
et a1.,1954).
47
Hydrology and Groundwater
The depositional system of the Barossa Valley has led to the formation of a complex
aquifer system, in which groundwater is stored in, and moves through, a range of
unconsolidated sediments. The system of aquifers includes the following components
(Cobb, 1986):
(i) Hard Rock Aquifer. Water is stored in the Precambrian and Cambrian rocks
underlying the Barossa Valley. This water moves through openings in rocks
and has wide ranging salinities because of varied rock types and tectonic
stresses. This water source has only recently been used for irrigation (1.e. since
1eeo).
(ii) Lower Aquifer. Occupies the eastern part of the Valley but is not used for
irrigation
(iii) Middle Aquifer. Is used for irrigation for the north and northeast of the basin.
Salinity ranges from 800 to 1500 mgll- (1.25 to 2.34 dSlm).
(iv) Upper Aquifer. This is the main source for irrigation in the southern regions of
the basin with salinity levels ranging from 1600 to 2700 mglL (2.50 to
4.22 dSlm).
McLaren Vale
Geology and Geomorpholooy
There have been three main periods of landscape development in the Willunga Basin,
peneplanation followed by diastrophism, and eustatic movements (e.9. 'Ward, 1966). The
current day escarpments and basins were formed by tectonic activity during the late
Miocene or early Pliocene. The geology of WilJunga Basin is dominated by a fault line,
which forms the Willunga escarpment (e.g. Southern Vales Water Resources Committee,
48
1995). Uplift along the fault created a large wedge shaped depression (Southem Vales
Water Resources Committee, 1995), which has filled with sand, silt, clay and limestone up
to 350 m thick. These sediments were deposited as a series of layers from various
environments, including marine, coastal and river plains (DME, 1991). During the
Quaternary period, alluvial plains were formed in the coastal sector of the Mt Lofty Ranges
and basin region. Originally a peneplain, formed from subaerial erosion during. the
Mesozoic period, existed throughout the Willunga region. Deep weathering of the
peneplain formed lateritic soils, which now cover much of the land surface in the Willunga
region (Ward, 1966).
Hvdrologv and G roundwater
There are many aquifers throughout the layers in the Willunga Basin, however, only two
are used for irrigation @ME, I99l). The upper of these two, the Port Willunga aquifer, is
the main source for irrigation in the southern part of the basin and consists of limestone
and sand. Salinities of the water range from 350 to 2000 mglL (0.55 to 3.13 dS/m),
whereas in the northern area of the basin, the lower Maslin Sands aquifer is predominately
for irrigation. This aquifer consists of sand and silt with salinities ranging from 500 to
50000 mglL (0.78 to 78 dS/m) @ME, 1991).
2.1.4. Climate
Climatic data for both the Barossa Valley and Mclaren Vale are similar (Table 2-3). Data
presented were sourced from the Commonwealth Bureau of Meteorology (2003) and
collected from long-term records for Nurioopta, Adelaide (Kent Town), Willunga and
Kuitpo Forest weather stations. Mean annual dataare presented in Table 2-3 andlong term
detailed monthly data arc provided in Appendix B. The Nurioopta weather station is
49
located 100 m from the vineyard and provides accurate micro-climate data. The V/illunga
station is located two kilometres from the research vineyard in a similar landform.
However, as some data was unavailable for this station, Kuitpo Forest climate data is also
included in Appendix B.
Table 2-3 - Average annual climatic data for weather statíons adjacent to field sítes
weølth Bureau 2003
The climate of the Barossa Valley and Mclaren Vale is characterised as Mediterranean
with hot dry summers and cool wet winters and has a xeric moisture regime (Soil Survey
Staff, 1999) (Table 2-4). Iæss than 30Vo of the rainfall occurs during the growing season
(October-March) and the low spring-summer rainfall is generally supplemented by drip
irrigation.
Soil Temperature Regime
Soil temperature is estimated by adding 10C to air temperature (Soil Survey Staff, 1999).
Because mean annual daily temperatures were 14.6 n.L0C the estimated soil
temperatures were 15.6 - 18.10C and the mean range of summer and winter soil
temperatures of the three sites were 19.6 -23.4oC (summer) and 10.0 - l2.g0c (winter).
Because the difference between soil temperature between summer and winter is > 50C at a
depth 50 cm from the soil surface and the mean annual soil temperature is higher than 150C
20.6nla 4.211.0651Willunga
12.T22.rI2T557Adelaide(Kent Town)
4.0
8.820.9118502Nurioopta 4.7
Mean AnnualDaily
Evaporation(mm)
Mean DailyMinimumemperature
(0c)T
Mean DailyMaximum
MeanAnnualRainDays
(number)
MeanAnnualRainfall
(mm)
Station
50
but lower than220C, the temperature regime is classified as 'thermic' (Soil Survey Staff,
teee).
SoilWater Regime
The soil water regime is determined by comparing rainfall with potential evaporation. The
evaporation is estimated from open pan evaporation measurements (class A pan
evaporation) by applying a coefficient of 0.7 (Yaalon, 1983). In Australia the coefficient
has been shown to vary from 0.6 to 0.8 in winter and summer @illey and Sheperd,1972
cited by Monarto Development Commission, 1976). Therefore, in winter and summer pan
coefficients of 0.6 and 0.8 were applied, and in spring and autumn a coefficient of 0.7 was
applied in order to estimate potential evapotranspiration from class A pan evaporation.
Potential evapotranspiration is annually 1.5 -2.4 times higher than annual rainfall, and it is
higher for all seasons except winter. Therefore, the soil water regime is dry for more than
45 consecutive days during sunìmer and moist for more than 45 consecutive days during
winter. Because the annual soil temperature is also lower than 22oC and the difference
between winter and summer soil temperature greater than 50C, the water regime is
classified as 'Xeric' (Soil Survey Staff, 1999).
Table 2-4 - e nv ir o nm e ntal charøct e ris tíc s the two sifes
Well structuredillitic sandy
loam
Native - Scrubcovered plainPresent day -Vitis vinifera
ThermicXericPlain(<2Vo slope)
QuaternaryAlluvium
McLarenVale
Illitic sandy clayloam with
gravel lenses
Native - Scrubcovered plainPresent day -Vitis vinifera
ThermicXericPlain(<27o slope)
QuaternaryAlluvium
BarossaValley
Parent materialVegetationTemperaturerogimea
'Water
regimenLandformGeologySite
u (Soil Survey Staff, 1999)
51
2.2. Soils
2.2.1. Barossa
The Barossa Valley has a wide range of soils, an inevitable consequence of the broad range
of physiography, lithology and climatic conditions in the Valley. Soils include ones with
texture contrast (e.9. RBE), no marked contrast (e.9. Black Earths); soil complexes (e.9.
soils along drainage lines); and alluvial soils (Northcote et aL, 1954). Although most
viticultural soils are slow draining, both non-sodic and sodic texture contrast profiles occur
@tzpatrick et aI., 1992). A small patch of soils west of Nurioopta are subject to seasonal
waterlogging and have sodic subsoils with alkaline pHs (Fitzpatrick et al., L992). The
dominant Great Soil Group is the Red Brown Earth (Northcote et al., 1954; Stace et aI.,
1968). The soil at the field site is a RBE typical of the region and has an ábrupt texture
contrast between the A and B horizons at a depth of 35 cm (Figure 2-3). A full soil profile
description is provided in Appendix B and chemical and physical properties are discussed
in Chapter 5. However, selected morphological (Table 2-5) and chemical (Table 2-6)
features of the non-irrigated site are presented to clearly show the important characteristics.
The irrigated and non-irrigated Barossa Valley soils have been classified according to a the
Australian, V/orld and USA systems that are included in Figure 2-3. This is to demonstrate
that, although the soils are similar morphologically, their differing chemistry (discussed in
Chapter 5) has lead to variation in classification.
52
Ap
A2
Bt1
Bt2
Btk3
Calcic Palexeralf(Soil Survey Staff, 1999)
Haptic Mesotrophic Red Chromosol (Isbell,re96)
Chromi-Calcic Lixisol(FAO, 1998)
7.2 Non-restrictive duplex soil with wellstructured top soil
Maschmedt e/ 2002Fìgure 2-3 Soìt proJïle of Barossa Vølley non-inigated (0-90 cm) site and soilclassíftcation
The soil is a textrue contrast profile, with the A horizon consisting of fine sandy loam
material overlying a clayey Btl horizon (Table 2-5). Some calcareous nodules are present
at depth, however the Btl is free of carbonate. The red colouring of the soil indicates the
53
soil has been historically well-drained with few extended periods of waterlogging or
subjected to a perched water table.
Table 2-5 Selected morphologícal features of the non-irrigøted Barossa Valley RedBrown Earth
Few mediumto course
Weaksubangular blocky
Clay loam(eravel)
7.5YR4t41.6+Btkg3
Few mediumto course
'Weak
subangular blockyLight clay5YR4t4t.2 - r.6Btk2
Few mediumto course
Weaksubangular blocky
Mediumclay2.5YR4/6t.0 - r.2Btkl
Few mediumto course
Strongsubangular blocky
Mediumclay10R3/40.5 - 1.0Bt2
AbsentModeratesubangular blocky
Light clay10R3/30.4 - 0.5Br1
AbsentModerate subangularblocky to granular
Fine sandyloam
7.5YR4t3o.2-0.4El (42)
AbsentModerate subangularblocky to granular
Fine sandyloam
7.5YP.3120 -0.2Ap
CarbonateNodules2
StructureTexture ClassMoistColour
Depth(m)
Horizont
Horizonation nomenclature according to Soil Survey Staff (1999)2Carbonate nodule classification according to McDonald el at. (1998): medium 2-6mm;coarse=6-20mm
The summary of chemical properties in Table 2-6 for the non-irrigated soil profile shows
that the profile has a low salt content @C,. = 0.I2 - 0.90 dS/m), particularly in the A and
Btl horizons. The ESP is also low (1.35 - 4.62), although some minor exchangeable
sodium accumulation has occurred at the soil surface (ESP = 4.62) and corresponds to salt
accumulation through evaporation. The pH (6.10 - 6.77) is favourable for plant root
growth throughout the profile. Organic carbon content (0.15 - O.77Vo) is very low in the A
and Bt1 horizons. This may be due to the non-irrigated site remaining bare during suÍìmer
months and only under a cover crop in winter months.
54
Table 2-6 Summary of soil chemical propefües of the non-irrìgated Barossa Valley RedBrown Earth
6.772.760.901.6+Btkg3
6.s62.620.68t.2 - r.6Brk2
6.472.830.62r.o - r.2Brkl
6.20 - 6.281.35 - r.420.35 - 0.480.5 - 1.0Btz
0.36.332.730.280.4 - 0.5Bt1
o.r5 - 0.276.27 - 6.582.46 -3.r80.250.2 -0.4El (42)
0.29 - 0.116.10 - 6.17r.9r - 4.620.t2 -0.400 -0.2Ap
OrganicCarbon
(vo)
pHESPEC,.
(dS/m)
Depth (m)Horizon
2.2.2. McLaren Vale
The range and distribution of Soil Groups in the V/illunga basin have been determined by
lithology and duration of exposure of parent material to weathering. It appears that climate
is not a unique factor in soil differentiation. According to Ward (1966) past weathering
has had little affect in differentiation between soils at a different stage of a single
weathering process, which are modified by parent material. Soils on the "'Willunga Plain",
formed on Pliocene and post-Pliocene sediments derived from alluvium, are RBE with
surface features of sandy loams and loams overlying Bt horizons with soil textures ranging
from medium to heavy clays. In general, soils are often deep (>2m) and friable and have
properties that allow good intemal drainage (Hill Environmental Consultants,1992).
2.3. Pedogenic processes
2.3.1. lntroduction
The rate, direction and extent of soil development is controlled by the following factors: (i)
parent material, (ii) topography, (iii) climate, (iv) time and (v) biotic activity (e.9. Jenny,
55
1941; Hausenbuiller, 1985). These soil forming factors can work both separately and
together (Hausenbuiller, 1985)
2.3.2. Parent Material
Typically, RBE in South Australia have developed on an alluvial-colluvial apron derived
from Pre-Cambrian slates, shales and quartzites (Aitchison ¿f a1.,1954). Clay minerals in
these soils usually comprise illite and kaolinite and some randomly interstratified minerals
(Chittleborough and Oades, 1980a,b). However, the dominant mineral depends on the
source of parent material. Illite predominates in alluvial and loess deposits. However,
when soils are derived from granite, granodiorite, basalt or basaltic alluvium, the dominant
mineral is often kaolin (Radoslovich, 1958).
2.3.3. Climate
Generally, RBE have formed in a humid, continental environment @ust, 1983). The
development of RBE requires wetting and drying cycles to allow formation of an argillic
Bt horizon with medium to heavy clay texture (Chittleborough, 1981).
2.3.4. Time
RBE have profiles dominated by the mineral fraction and strong texture contrast between
the A and B horizons (Chittleborough, 1981). Several theories have been proposed to
explain the development of RBE. In-situ, as opposed to ex-situ (sedimentary), processes
are the most favoured.
Most likely RBE were formed through clay illuviation, which involves the dispersion,
translocation and accumulation of clay size particles (< 2pm through the soil profile
56
(Chittleborough, 1992). Dispersion of the clay occurs when flocculating agents, such as
high salt content and carbonate are not present. The clay may then be transported
downwards in suspension (translocation) and deposited on peds, grains or channel surfaces
when water is taken up by the dry matrix. Dispersion and translocation are aided by
wetting and drying (i.e. xenc conditions) and if the parent material is of loamy texture
(Chittleborough, 1992). This theory is supported by the presence of clay skins and the
sequence of different stages of the process in time. With time, the A horizon contains less
clay material, and has a sandier more quartz-rich material (e.g. Ward, 1966).
A case study by Fitzpatrick and Chittleborough (2002) clearly summarised the
development of the A and B horizons in a Red Brown Earth (Alfisol) using the residual
titanium and zirconium minerals as pedogenic indicators. Fitzpatrick and Chittleborough
(2002) applied criteria developed by Brewer (1916) and Chittleborough and Oades
(1980a,b) based on zircon and rutile to determine if profile distinction occurred due to: (i)
distinct geological layers, (ii) different intensities and extents of chemical and physical
weathering, or (iii) translocation of minerals. It was concluded that horizon development
was a result of gradual redistribution of clay minerals through the profile rather than by the
in-situ weathering and formation of clay. These results were consistent with properties
such as void argillans in the B horizon. Further calculations allowed Fitzpatrick and
Chittleborough (2002) to suggest that the soil had developed over a period of 30k - 100k
years and during this time the Bt horizon gained 80g material per 1009 of parent material.
2.3.5. CarbonateFormation
Layers of carbonates in the Barossa Valley soil may have formed from a number of
different processes, for example, the periodic rise of groundwater containing high levels of
57
CaCO3, resulting in deposition. Alternatively, this layer may have formed from the
movement of CaCO¡ through the profile, or finally it may have originally been deposited
throughout the profile, but was then leached to a concentrated layer at depth.
Carbonate formation at depth in the Barossa profile is probably caused by a combination of
several soil formation processes. Soils were formed in alluvial and colluvial material
deposited during a time when sea levels were low and the carbonate-rich marine material
was exposed and deposited. However, because this material was only available for
deposition during specific eras, the carbonate was deposited intermittently. Other material
making up the profile was derived from both alluvial and colluvial processes. These
processes continued, even when the carbonate material was not being deposited.
The three sources of material were very rich in nutrients, which supported a high biological
activity that resulted in the mixing of these three parent materials into a homogeneous
substrate.
58
Chapter 3. General Methods
3.1. lntroduction
All sites studied had received long-term (>10 years) drip irrigation with saline bore water,
however little published data was available for the morphology, chemical or physical
properties of the soil, and what was available was not detailed enough for this study (see
Chapter 2 for site details). Thus, as it was imperative to understand the extent to which
soil properties had been influenced by saline water, a detailed study of soil propefties was
conducted on adjacent paired non-irrigated and irrigated sites (Chapter 3). The general
methods described in this Chapter and the following Chapters are discussed in detail
below. However, some specific methods are outlined in more detail in the following
chapters which deal with: suction cups (Chapter 9); mineralogy (Chapter 4); and redox
potential (Chapter 10).
3.2. Soil sampling and gypsum applicat¡on
3.2.1. Paired Sites (Chapter 5)
To permit detailed soil description and sampling, three soil pits were excavated (1 non-
irrigated, 2 irngated) using a backhoe to a depth of 180 cm in August 2000. At the
irrigated sites, soil was sampled in vertical and horizontal directions from the dripper as
follows: (i) to a depth of 180 cm at a distance of 35 cm from the dripper and; (ii) to a depth
of 60 cm depth for the remaining distances from the dripper (5, 15 and 105 cm). While the
non-irrigated site was sampled only vertically to a depth of 180 cm. Depth intervals
collected were: 0-5 cm, 5-10cm, 10-20 cm, 30-40 cm, 40-50 cm, 50-80 cm (non-irrigated),
50-70 cm (irrigated), 70-100 cm (irrigated), 80-100 cm (non-irrigated), 100-120 cm,
I2O-I40 cm (non-irrigated), 120-150 cm (irrigated), 140-160 cm (non-irrigated), 150-
59
180 cm (inigated), 160-180 cm. All soil samples were taken directly under the vine row to
minimise the effects of compaction in the irrigated and non-irrigated samples (Figure 3-l).
Figure 3-l Soil pit demonstratìng soil samplíng øt varioas positions beneath the vine rowìn the Barossa vineyard (O indicating positìon of drippers)
Morphological descriptions were made according to McDonald et al. (1998), and full
descriptions are provided in Appendix B. The soils were classif,red according to Soil
Survey Staff (1999), FAO (1998), Isbell (1996) and Maschmedt et al. (2002). For each
profile, representative soil samples were collected (approximately 5kg) and initially stored
in plastic bags. V/ithin 24 hours soil samples were air dried (Figure 3-2). Samples were
gently ground, then hand sieved (2 mm).
The <2mm fraction was analysed using the following methods, which are detailed in
Section 3.3; partícle size distribution, air:water permeability, saturation extract (EC'.,
pHr., and Na, K, Ca, Mg and B via ICP), organic carbon content, cation exchange capacity
(CEC), exchangeable cations.
60
>2mm fraction(Stored)
<2mmfraction(analysed)
Ground and Sieved
Sub-sample ofAir Dried Soil
(Stored)500 grams
Air Dried
Sub-sample ofField Soil (moist)
(Stored)
500 grams
Field Soil (moist)
Fígure 3-2 Preparatíon of soíl semples from the Barossa Valley
Soil cores were collected from the non-irrigated and irrigated sites with a drilling rig in
August 2000, while the soil \ryas moist. Cores were collected to a depth of 110 cm from
both sites and at 25, 40,70 and 100 cm from the dripper in the irrigated site. Cores were
air-dried and undisturbed aggregates were collected and analysed for clod bulk density
(detailed in section 3.3.1). The A2 and Btl horizons were also sampled from the cores and
used for preparing thin sections for micromorphological analyses (detailed in section
3.3.1).
3.2.2. Seasonal Changes in Soil Properties (Chapters 6, 7 and 8)
Application of gypsum at the Barossa Valley Site
A number of gypsum sources are available within South Australia, each varying in
chemical composition (Keeling and Pain, 2001). Gypsum used in this study was mined by
Processed Gypsum Products Australia (previously known as Linke Contracting) and
marketed as Blanchetown Hi-Ag, which was selected as it is thc purest commercial
6t
gypsum available (90yo), the remaining 10 o/o consisted of insoluble residue (9%), sodium
chloride salt (<1%) and calcium carbonate (<l%) (Keeling and Pain,2001).
Gypsum application occurred in May 2001 and 2002 prior to winter rainfall. Because
other research programs were in progress in the vineyard, gypsum was applied to a one-
metre strip directly beneath the drip line to prevent adjacent vines being affected (Figure
3-3). Application rates on this strip were zero, four and eight tonnes/hectare, which
equates to the equivalent of 0, 1 .26 and 252 towrcs/hectare, respectively, if evenly spread
over the entire soil surface in the vineyard. Gypsum was hand spread to ensure an even
and accurate application (Figure 3-3). To prevent contamination of adjacent vines by wind
movement of gypsum, the treatments were either covered with coarse shade cloth (in 2001)
or sprayed with a fine film of water (in2002).
Figure 3-3 Gypsum øpplicøtion ut equivølent rates of (a) four and (b) eighttonnes/hectare
Application of gypsum at the McLaren Vale Site
Gypsum was applied over the entire Mclaren Vale vineyard every second year since
establishment by the owners. The gypsum was applie d at a rate of 2.6 tonnes/hectare by an
automatic spreader.
62
Gypsum at the Non-lrrigafed SÍes
As detailed in Chapter 2, adjacent to each of the Mclaren Vale and Barossa Valley
vineyards was a non-irrigated paired site for comparison which had never received
gypsum.
Sample collection
Soil was sampled from the Mclaren Vale and Barossa Valley sites on seven occasions
between November 2001 and April 2003 to determine seasonal changes in soil chemical
properties. These sampling events coincided with important soil water quality periods
(Table 3-1).
Table 3-1 times ønd
For each treatment, soil was collected at 10, 50 and 100 cm distances from the dripper to a
depth of 65 cm (Figure 3-4). Because saturated paste extracts require a large amount of
soil (150 to 500 grams), two soil auger holes (7 cm diameter) were excavated to acquire
sufficient soil for determination. The auger holes were at an identical position (and angle)
63
Four months135.1
Minimalr25.2
Maximum salt accumulationprior to leaching
16 April2003
Minimal25.2
Two weeks28.4
Initial accumulation of salt18 December2002
Winter rains101.0
0Maximum leaching of saltswith winter rains prior toirrigation cofitmencement -
20 November2002
5.9Mid WinterRains 174.8
Mid Winter31 July2002
Minimal57.9
Four months183.3
Maximum salt accumulationprior to leaching
17 April2002
Two weeks18.6
Minimal26.4
Initial accumulation of salt20 December2001
0 (since 1/08/01)Winter rains244.5 (since
1/08/01)
Maximum leaching of saltswith winter rains prior toirri gation commencement
22 November200r
Irrigationduration since
previoussampling (mm)
Rainfall sinceprevious
sampling (mm)
ImportanceDate
in relation to the dripper, but adjacent to each other (Figure 3-4). Because six auger holes
per treatment were required at each sampling site, adjacent vines were used for each
sampling date. Holes were filled with bentonite to prevent preferential flow and reduce
disturbance to the vineyard site. Soil collected was separated during sampling to depth
intervals of 0-10 cm, 10-20 cm, 20-30 cm, 30-40 cm, 40-50 cm, 50-60 cm and 60-70 cm
for November 2001. From December 2001 sampling intervals were changed to 0-10 cm,
IO-25 cm,25-35 cm,35-45 cm,45-55 cm and 55-65 cm.
MidRow
(I))
Vine
I Dripper
- þ¡ip ll¡s
@ Auger Hole
lm-strip gypsur
(())
Figure 3-4 Dìngrammatíc representation of posítioníng of øuger holes for soil sampling
Analysis of samples
Soil was dried at 400C in an oven for two weeks, then gently mechanically crushed, hand
sieved and the <2mm fraction collected. This is.consistent with sample preparation for all
paired site samples (section 3.2.I). The <2mm fraction was analysed for pH, EC, soluble
cations and chloride by creating a saturated paste as detailed in section 3.3.2.
Statistical treatment
Because a large amount of soil (>150 grams) is required for saturation extracts, replicate
observations could not be conducted. However, in November 2002 a treatment was
64
sampled in triplicate to allow for determination of sample variability. All replicates were
found to be consistent, which confirmed that the relatively large amount of soil used in
these determinations effectively dealt with variability and the requirement for replication.
3.3. Laboratory Ana¡yses
3.3.1. Physical Analyses
Water Content
Air-dry water content was calculated (Rayment and Higginson, 1992) to allow for results
to be recalculated on an oven dry basis.
Particle Size Analysis
40 grams of air-dry soil (<2 mm) was added to 50 mL of 107o sodium metaphosphate,
5 mL of 0.6M sodium hydroxide and 500 mL of water, then mechanically shaken end-
over-end for 24 hours (Gee and Bauder, 1986). The solution was transferred to a
measuring cylinder and made up to 1000 mL with water, allowed to stand for 30 minutes
to thermally equilibrate, then mixed thoroughly with a plunger inserted into the cylinder.
A hydrometer was floated on the suspension and a reading taken after 5 minutes (silt plus
clay). A second reading was taken at 5 hours (clay). Solutions were re-mixed and
measurements repeated twice. Hydrometer and temperature measurements were also taken
at corresponding time intervals on a sample not containing soil (blank).
Bulk Density
A modification of Blake and Hartge's (1986) method was used to determine soil bulk
dcnsity. Representative clods (10 - 20 mm diameter) were selectcd from each sub-sample
of air-dry soil to allow determination of soil bulk density. A fine nylon thread was
65
attached to each clod to allow it to be freely suspended. The bulk density was then
determined by weighing the clod in air, coating the clod with paraffin wax by emersion,
reweighing it, then measuring its volume. The volume was determined by submerging the
clod in a beaker of water and noting the apparent weight gain of the beaker of water.
Equation 3-1 shows calculations for bulk density from the clod wax method.
PwXffiro¡t3-1 Pa=
Where, P¡ = bulk density, p* = density water (assumed 1 d"ttr'), In5s¡ = oven dry mass of
soil, Am = apparent increase in mass of water when clod + wax submerged, m** = mass of
paraffin coating, Pwax = density of paraffin (0.84 g/cm3).
Ai r:W ate r P e rmeability
Approximately 80 cm3 air-dry sub sample of soil (<2 mm) was placed in a container
(modification of Reeve, 1965) with an internal diameter of 44 mm, and a hole in the base
which was covered with gauze mesh and a 2mm layer of sand. The soil was packed by
placing a metal weight on the soil surface then lifting the container to a height of 2 cm off
a wooden bench and allowing it to drop 50 times. At completion the metal weight was
removed and replaced with a disc of filter paper, to reduce surface disturbance during the
next step. The container was then connected to a compressed air source as described by
Reeve (1965) to allow the calculation of air permeability from Equation 3-2. The same
soil container was then connected to a constant head water supply to determine time
required for a given volume of water to pass through the soil as described by Reeve (1965),
to allow the calculation of water permeability from Equation 3-3.
66
3-2
'Where , k'u = permeability with air, L = length of soil column, V = volume of soil
container, Tl = viscosity of air, A = cross-Sectional area of sample, Pa = atmospheric
pressure, S = slope of log y versus time curve; where y = displacement of the water.
3-3 = LxV xr1* p.xgxAx Lhx\t
'Where, k'* = permeability with water, I = viscosity of water, V = volume of percolate,
L = length of soil column, pw = density of water, g = acceleration due to gravity, A = cross-
sectional area of sample, Ah = hydraulic head, At = time for V to move through soil.
Micromorphology
Cores were taken from both sites with a drill rig and the A and Bt1 horizons sampled for
micromorphological descriptions (Brewer, 1916). Samples were slowly impregnated with
resin at the CSIRO Land and Water laboratories in Canberra. Thin sections of soils were
prepared and mounted on slides by Pontifex & Associates Pty Ltd (Adelaide). These slides
were examined and photographed under an axiophot microscope.
3.3.2. ChemicalAnalyses
Organíc Carbon
5 Grams of air-dry soil (<2 mm) was placed in a 500 mL conical flask and 10 mL of lN
potassium dichromate and 20 mL of concentrated sulphuric acid added (modified method
of Walkley and Black described by Nelson and Sommers, 1982). The flask was gently
shaken for one minute, allowed to digest completely for 30 minutes, then 200 mL of water
k'
67
and 10 mL of orthophosphoric acid was added. After 60 minutes, 0.5 mL of
o-phenanthroline indicator was added and the solution titrated against ferrous sulphate to
determine organic carbon content. A blank was also titrated to allow for correction of the
unstable ferrous sulphate. Organic carbon was calculated on the assumption that 1 mL of
potassium dichromate used equals 3 mg of carbon @quation 3-4).
3-4
Exchangeable Cations and Cation Exchange Capacity (CEC)
A 2.5 g air-dry subsample of soil (<2 mm) was mixed with 5 g of acid washed sand, then
placed in a leaching tube containing pyrex wool and 1 g of acid washed sand as a plug
(Figure 3-5). This was covered with a further 2 g of acid washed sand (modified from
Rayment and Higginson (1992)). The method of Rayment and Higginson (1992) was then
followed. Exchangeable cations were analysed using an atomic absorption
spectrophotometer (AAS) and a flame photometer. Cation exchange capacity (CEC) was
measured by an auto analyser. These results were also used to calculate exchangeable
sodium percentage (ESP).
Sand
Soil and sand mixSand
Pyrex wool
Figure 3-5 Leaching tube for exchangeable catíon determínation
7o o r g anic c arb on - (me qK
"c r'o' -me qp e s o )(0'o03ìfr00)
grams soil
68
Saturation Ertract (EC"", pH"", Chloride and Cations)
150 - 250 Grams of soil (< 2 mm) were placed in a container with a spatula and weighed.
Water was added to the soil until saturation was reached (Rhoades, 1982). The container
was covered for 16 - 20 hours, and then saturation confirmed. The container was
reweighed (with spatula), then pH measured. The paste was then transferred to a filter
funnel, containing Whatman 42 filter paper, and soil solution was removed over three
hours using a mechanical vacuum extractor (Centurion International). The EC of the soil
solution (filtrate) was measured and 1 drop of lM HNO¡ was added per 25 mL of extract
prior to storage at 4oC. Extracts were diluted accordingly and analysed for cations with
ICPAES. These results were used to determine sodium adsorption ratio (SAR). Cl- was
determined with an auto analyser.
69
Chapter 4. Regolith Processes
4.1. lntroduction
The formation of the South Australian RBE involved clay movement and redistribution to
create the present-day duplex soil profile (Chittleborough, 1992). This soil profile formed
under conditions imposed by the climate, parent material, relief and biotic factors.
However, with the establishment of a vineyard and application of irrigation water, a new
set of soil forming factors, including modified parent material (in part due to electrolyte in
irrigation water), biota and climatic conditions (increased precipitation) have been imposed
on the soil. There may also have been deep soil preparation effects, such as deep ripping.
It is critical to establish whether the irrigated and non-irrigated soils were originally
derived from the same material and were therefore geochemically similar in order to
enable further research on irrigation impacts to be undertaken.
Assuming soil formation has occurred over 30 to 100K years (Fitzpatrick and
Chittleborough, 2002), the historical rate of change of elements and clay from the
inception of soil formation can be predicted. Equations used to measure these losses and
gains have been developed by many researchers (e.g. Haseman and Marshall 1945;
Brewer, 1976). The equations rely on the assumption that particular components (e.g.
zircon), or chemical indices of these component , f".r.ZrOz),have remained immobile and
unweathered during soil formation. These equations investigate the change in weatherable
compounds (ø.g. MgO) in the soil profile compared to the changes in resistant compounds
(e.g. ZrO).
70
The aims in this chapter were to:
(1) Quantify the geochemistry of the soil profile.
(2) Calculate the gains and losses of components as a result of soil development.
(3) Determine variations in geochemistry between the irrigated and non-irrigated sites
4.1.1. Formulae for loss and ga¡ns of constituents during pedogenesis
To accurately compare the parent material of a profile and the altered soil, a stable
constituent is required. This constituent must be relatively immobile, both chemically and
physically and thereby be relatively unaffected by soil formation processes such as
illuviation and chemical dissolution. There are a number of soil constituents which may be
used for pedogenic studies, such as zircon, xenotime and rutile.
The true parent material must also be established for soil calculations to be accurate.
Given that the material that gave rise to the soil horizons has been transformed, the
material that most closely represents the original material must be selected. In addition, it
must be determined if the parent material of the profile was homogenous throughout.
Some horizons may for example have been formed from geochemically and
mineralogically different materials, a condition not uncommon in sedimentary
environments.
4.1.2. Soil Format¡on Calculations
Equations used to estimate soil gains and losses, based on stable constituents, were initially
proposed by Menill (I92I) to allow the estimation of material lost during weathering.
Many researchers have since developed these further; however equations used in this
7I
research were foflnulated by Brewer (1976) and modified by others (e.g. Fitzpatnck and
Chittleborough, 2002).
4,2. Methods
4.2.1. SamplePreparation
Unfractionated samples of soil and soil carbonates was collected from seven depths of the
Barossa Valley non-irrigated and irrigated (35 cm from dripper) sites. Soil carbonates
were separated from surounding media through visual identification, manual selection, air
drying then removal of excess soil attached to the exterior of the carbonates. Each sample
was ground in a ball and hammer mill to a fine powder and analysed by X-ray diffraction
spectrometry (XRD), X-ray fluorescence spectrometry (XRF) and inductively coupled
plasma atomic emission spectrophotometry (ICPAES). Also, the 20-53 ¡rm and 53-125
¡,lm fractions were separated from the <2mm samples of soil and elemental concentrations
measured by XRF. Fractionation was performed by disaggregating 20 grams of soil in a
600 mL beaker with 50 nl- IÙVo calgon, 5mL 0.6 M NaOH and 200 mL reverse osmosis
(RO) water. The suspension was sonified for 1 minute, poured into a 1L measuring
cylinder, made-up to 1 L with RO water and stirred vigorously for 1 minute. After 10
minutes the top 22 cm of supernatant was extracted with a suction hose. The cylinder was
again made-up to 1 L with RO water and the processes of sedimentation and supernatant
removal repeated four times. At this stage the cylinder only contained material >20 p"m.
This was washed through a 53 pm sieve to collect 20 -53 ¡rm. The 53-125 pm and >I25
¡rm fractions were obtained by passing through a I25 p,m sieve.
72
4.2.2. Elemental Chemistry
Unfractionated ground soil and fractions of soil (20-53 ¡rm and 53-125 ¡rm) were analysed
by XRF. Between 0.900 and 1.100 grams of sample were accurately weighed, and
combined with between 3.900 and 4.100 grams of dry 12-22lithium borate flux. Samples
were placed in a platinum crucible, gently mixed then heated in a 10500C furnace for 12
minutes during which time the crucible contents were mixed three times. The crucible was
then moved to a gas ring and checked for dissolution before 2 crystals of NII¿I were added.
The sampled was poured into a preheated mould and cooled over an air jet for 3 minutes to
form a glass disc. Samples were analysed using a Philips PW 140 X-ray fluorescence
spectrometer with a Sc/IvIo X-ray source (Norrish and Hutton, 1969).
4.2.3. lnductively Coupled Plasma (lCP)
Unfractionated ground soil and fractions of soil (20-53 ¡rm and 53-125 pm) were analysed
by inductively coupled plasma optical emission spectrometry (ICP-OES) and inductively
coupled plasma mass spectrometry (ICP-MS) by AMDEL in Adelaide. The digestions,
methods and elements were:
(i) ICP-OES suite (Al, Ba, Ca, Cr, Cu, Fe, K, Mg, Mn, Na, Nb, Ni, P, Pb,
S, Ti, Y, Zn); sample digestion with hydrochloric acid, nitric and
hydrofluoric acids, with a final dissolution in hydrochloric acid (mixed
acid digest).
(ii) ICP-MS suite (Ag, As, Bi, Cd, Co, Cs, Ga, In, Mo, Rb, Sb, Se, Sn, Sr,
Te, Th, Tl, U, W, Y, Pt, Tm, Ce, Dy, Er, Eu, Gd, Ho, La, Lu, Nd, Pr,
Sm, Tb, Yb); mixed acid digest.
73
4.2.4. Material Analysed
Selection of stable constituent
Two methods are available to analyse and select the stable constituents of the soil profile.
The first involves individual grain counting of resistant materials, using either a
microprobe or manually counting grains in thin sections (Chittleborough, 1989). The
second method involves measuring the quantity of elements in the fraction by methods
such as XRF or ICPAES. Both methods have advantages and disadvantages e.g. grain
counting is labour intensive and, if the resistant mineral is in low concentration large
amounts of time are required to get a statistically sound result. Chemical indices depend
on the element being only present in the resistant mineral. Scanning electron microscopy
was undertaken prior to XRF analysis, to confirm that Zr and Ti were present in the
resistant minerals, zircon and rutile, respectively, then XRF was used to determine the
quantity of Ti andZr.
Bulk density measu rement
Bulk density measurements described in Section 3.3.1 were used for gain and loss
calculations.
4.2.5. Mass balance formulae
A number of formulae are available to interpret data obtained for assessing the quantity of
elements lost or gained during weathering; however this study utilised equations developed
by Brewer (1916). The equations assume parent material as the basis for calculations,
which may either be rock or soil material located at the base of the soil profile. Soil
horizon refers to present-day soil horizons, which are compared to the parent material.
74
The following symbols are used in equations 4-1 to 4-10:
Dp
D5
PP
P5
Rp
R5
Tp
Ts
AT
^T'VP
V5
AV
^v'Wp
W5
^w^w'Xp
X5
X6
Xcp
Bulk density of parent material (g/"-')
Bulk density of soil horizon (g/cm3)
Percentage by mass of constituent in parent material
Percentage by mass ofconstituent in soil horizon
Immobile constituents in parent material (mass 7o)
Immobile constituent in soil horizon (mass 7o)
Thickness of parent material from which soil horizon formed (cm)
Thickness of soil horizon (cm)
Change in soil horizon thickness with soil formation (cm)
Change in soil horizon thickness with soil formation (7o)
Volume of parent material from which soil horizon formed (cm3)
Volume of soil horizon (cm3)
Change in soil horizon volume with soil formation (cm3)
Change in soil horizon volume with soil formation (7o)
Mass of parent material from which soil horizon formed (g)
Mass of soil horizon (g)
Change in soil horizon mass (g)
Change in soil horizon mass (7o)
Mass of constituent in parent material from which soil horizon formed (g)
Mass of constituent in soil horizon (g)
Mass of constituent lost or gained in soil horizon due to soil development (g)
Percentage ofconstituent lost or gained in soil horizon due to soil (7o)
Volume of parent material that formed the present-day soil horizons (Vn) is given by
Equation 4-1:
Vp4-1
4-2
Change in volume from soil formation (AV) is given by Equation 4-2:
LV =Vs -Vp
Percentage change in volume (AV') due to soil formation is given by Equation 4-3
75
4-3 ÂV'= t#) x100
Thickness of parent material that has weathered to form the soil horizon (Tp) is given by
Equation 4-4:
TpZs.Ds.Rs
Dp.Rp
Change in thickness from soil formation (AT) is given by Equation 4-5:
LT =Ts -Tp
Percentage change in soil thickness (AT') is given by Equation 4-6:
4-4
4-5
4-6 LT'=Ts -Tp
Tpx100
Mass of parent material which formed the present-day soil horizons is given by Equation
4-7:
4-7
Change in mass from soil formation is given by Equation 4-8:
4-8 LW =Ws -Wp
Percentage change in soil mass is given by Equation 4-9:
wp =vs.D, +vn.on(t - #)
LW'=lt'-tolrroo[vYp)
4-9
Mass of constituent in present day soil is given by Equation 4-10:
76
4-10 XsVs.Ds.Ps
100
Mass of constituent in parent material is given by Equation 4-11:
4-1r
Percentage loss or gain of constituent in the soil horizon compared to the parent material is
given by Equation4-I2
Vs.Ds.Rs Po1¡1 --X '' Rp 100
xsp=["#)"'*4-12
4.3. Results and Discussion
4.3.1. Concentration of major elements in soil
The bulk densities of soil samples and concentrations of SiOz, AlzO¡, MgO, FezO¡, CaO,
NazO, KzO, TiOz, Zñ2 constituents measured in the bulk soil are presented in Table 4-1.
Throughout the profile SiO2, AlzO: and FezO¡ comprise approximately 807o of the soil
mass. The SiOz:Al2O3 is higher in the A horizon than the B horizon, which is caused by
the accumulation of quartz and weathering of feldspars and mica in the A horizon. In the
B horizon, the SiO2:Al2O3 ratio is reduced, most probably because of increased layer
silicates of clay size (<2 pm) by accumulation of clay illuviation and less intense
weathering of the Bt horizons compared to the N A2 horizons.
77
SiO2 Al2Os MgO FezOg CaO NazO KzO TiO2 ZrOz
3
15
25
39
65
110
170
Ap
Ap
MBt1
Bt2Btkl
1.53
1.53
1.70
1.47
1.52
1.49
1.48
o//o
1.53
87.98
80.38
63.93
55.07
78.18
62.11
o//o
81.41
7.24
7.19
10.37
16.15
10.44
14.11
o/fo
6.73
0.44
0.46
0.9
1.54
1.09
1.86
o//o
0.46
1.96
1.94
4.01
7.5
5.04
6.11
o.72
0.75
0.56
1.03
1.04
1.65
o//o
1.83
1.33
1.28
1.03
0.73
1.02
1.14
o//o
0.67
1.55
1.57
1.9
2.2
1.7
2.44
o//o
1.25
0.61
0.65
0.66
0.74
0.81
0.77
ppm
1.47
478496
476
365
288
438
o//o
D.
Depth(cm) Horizon (g/cms)
Table 4-1 Bulk densíty and major element concentrøtìons in the non-írrigøted soilthe Børossa
All oxides are strongly correlated. Most of the variation appears to be related to increases
in clay content in Bt horizons and decreasing amounts of quartz present in the lower part of
the soil profile.
4.3.2. Selection of parent material
Bedrock was not encountered in the soil profiles of this study. However,
micromorphological and physiochemical analyses indicated that material at 160-180 cm
could be considered the parent material. In particular, the ratios of ZrOz:TiO2 show small
variations below a depth of 50 cm indicating that the parent material is relatively uniform
throughout. Small variations in ZIO2:T1O2 are found in the 53-125 pm and 2O-53 ¡tm
fractions due to low concentrations of heavy mineral constituents in these fractions.
78
oô
E
E
ó
o
20
4
æ
80
1m
'120
140
160
180
0
0
60
80
1æ
1m
1ß
1æ
læo5oo o1 o2 03 o4
01 02 0s 04
zo, (2G53sm):Tio2 (20-53m)
Fígure 4-1 RaÍio of ZrO2 to TíOz ín the 20-53pmfractions
zro, (53-1 25Fm):Tio, (53-1 25l¡m)
Figure 4-2 Ratio of ZrOz to TiOz ín the 53-
125 pmfractíons
05oo
4.3.3. Loss and ga¡n calculations
Changes in volume and mass with soilformation
Changes in soil horizon thickness, volume and mass, which have occurred during soil
formation are present in Table 4-2. ^ll
calculations were performed on bulk samples from
soil horizons; each horizon varies in thickness.
Material has been lost from NA2 horizons, which can be seen by the decrease in volume,
thickness and mass. While the Btl and Bt2 horizons have increased in mass, volume and
thickness. This is consistent with the weathering and illuviation of clay from the surface to
depth.
79
Total(0-170) 180.0 176.0 4.0 -13.5 180.0 176.0 4.0 -13.5 273.7 260.5 13.2 6.9
Ds
Depth(cm) Horizon (g/cm3)
3 Ap 1.53
15 Ap 1.53
25 A2 1.70
39 Bt1 1.47
65 Bt2 1.52
110 Btkl 1.49
170 Btkg3 1.48
v. ve Av ^v'
T" Te ^T ^T' ws we ^w ^w'
cmt5.0
15.0
15.0
5.0
60.0
60.0
20.o
cmt6.0
18.6
19.9
4.4
43.0
64.1
20.0
cmt-1.0
-3.6
-4.9
0.6
17.O
-4.1
0.0
o//o
-16.5
-19.4
-24.5
13.8
39.5-6.5
0.0
cm
5.0
15.0
15.0
5.0
60.0
60.0
20.o
cm
6.0
18.6
19.9
4.4
43.0
64.1
20.o
cm-1.0
-3.6
-4.9
0.6
17.0-4.1
0.0
o//o
-16.5
-19.4
-24.5
13.8
39.5-6.5
0.0
g
7.7
23.O
25.5
7.4
91.2
89.4
29.6
g
8.9
27.5
29.4
6.5
63.7
94.9
29.6
g
-1.2
-4.6
-3.9
0.8
27.5-5.5
0.0
/o
-13.6
-16.7
-13.2
13.0
43.3-5.8
0.0
Table 4-2 Physìcal changes in soíl properties in the non-irrigøted soil profile from theBarossa
Table 4-2 shows the total losses and gains of volume, thickness and mass for the soil
profile as a result of the formation of the N A2 and Bt horizons. Overall there was a 6.97o
increase in mass during soil formation throughout the profile. Given the quite Iarge 7o
mass changes in the A (losses) and B (gains) horizons, the overall mass change is relatively
small and indicates the profile was formed by internal redistribution of constituents,
although there may have been some addition from aeolian sources.
Changes ín chemical composition of the profile
Variations of soil constituents for each layer have been calculated for both mass (Table
4-3) and percentage (Table 4-4). The percentage loss and gain of elements throughout the
profile have also been plotted in Figure 4-3 to Figure 4-9.
80
Total(0-170) 28.32 -3.75 -1.60 -1.38 -1.49 -0.25 -1.10
Depth Horizon SiO2 Al2Os MgO
(cm) ggg
3
15
25
39
65
110
170
Ap
Ap
A2
Bt1
Bt2BtklBtkg3
o.73
3.08
2.24
0.66
10.69
10.93
0.00
-0.73
-2.23
-2.31
-0.16
5.75-4.06
0.00
-0.13
-0.41
-0.43
-0.05
o.22-0.79
0.00
-0.40
-1.23
-1.30
-0.10
2.95-1.30
0.00
-0.09
-o.29
-0.29
-0.07
-0.11
-0.64
0.00
-0.01
-0.01
-0.01
0.00-0.06
-o.17
0.00
-0.10
-0.32
-0.32
-0.02
0.45-0.80
0.00
g g
CaO KzOFezOg
g
Na2O
g
Table 4-3 Losses and gøíns of elements (Ð ín the non-irrigated soil prffie from theBarossa
Tøble 4-4 l-osses and gøíns of elements (mass 7o) ín the non-írrígated soíl proft.le fromthe Barossø
120
1û
160
180
o s ao"ll, n",n J,ta,o.
20 2s 30 '80 -60
Loss or gain of Alzos
Fìgure 4-3 Percentage change in mass of Figure 4-4 Percentage change in mass ofSiO2 Alzos
E
ooo
0
m
40
60
80
1m
120
140
160
180
0
20
&
60
b8o;ãt*ô
ïotal (0-170) 19.75 -1 1 .50 -37.17 -9.80 -39.16 -9.56 -19.52
3
15
25
39
65
110
170
Ap
Ap
A2
Bt1
Bt2BtklBtks3
13.21
18.01
12.27
16.30
27.03
18.53
0.00
-58.80
-57.25
-55.79
-16.96
63.99-30.33
0.00
-78.64
-80.29
-78.55
-45.33
18.62
-44.82
0.00
-74.13
-73.28
-72.46
-25.85
75.87-22.32
0.00
-64.93
-63.65
-60.57
-61.65
-10.56
-40.65
0.00
-5.29
-2.8'l-2.59
2.09-8.25
-15.75
0.00
-47.96
-47.08
-44.18
-12.02
29.18-34.39
0.00
KrOo//o/oo//oo//o
Al2o3 CaO NazOFe2Ogo//o
Mgoo//o
Horizon SiO2o//o
Depth
(cm)
81
E
toô
æ
40
60
bso;S rooo
1N
20
&
60
80
tm
120
t4
160
180
140
180
Í80100 -80 €0 -& -m 0 20 40
Loss or gain of MgO
Fígure 4-5 Percentage change ín mass ofMso
-1oo -æ -60 -& -20 0 æ 40 60 80 100
LGs or galn of Fe2O3
Fígure 4-6 Percentage change ín mass ofFezOs
0
20
40
60
b80;-& r*o
120
t0
1æ
180
o
20
,t0
60
bm;3rmo
120
1{O
160
't 80-7O { -50 -40 -S -2O -lO O i8 16 '14 -12 -f0 € 6 '4 -2 O
Loss or galn of CaO Loss or galn of Na2O
Figure 4-7 Percentage change in mass of Fígure 4-8 Percentage changeCaO NazO
mass of
0
û&
60
Èõ80ãÊimô
1m
't0
lm
180
Figure 4-s Prr;;;äå'"ro"rre in møss ofKzO
As expected, except for the Bt1 horizon, all elements, apart from SiOz, were lost
throughout the profile, as a result of soil development. The gain in CaO in the Bt2 horizon
is caused by the increased accumulation of carbonate content in this horizon. The overall
form of depth functions for all major elements is similar, with the A horizon containing
82
lower amounts of elements than the remainder of the profile, indicating this region has
been intensely weathered.
Total losses and gains in elements in the soil profile are shown in Table 4-3 andTable 4-4.
The data indicated that CaO, MgO, KzO and FezO¡ have been lost at similar rates; however
twice as much AlzO¡ has been lost. The overall profile has gained SiO2 perhaps in part
from aeolian sources, which is supported by Butler and Churchward (1983) who suggest
the Barossa Valley has been covered by an aeolian dust mantle.
4.3.4. Geochemistry of Non-lrrigated and lrrigated Sites
Major element composition
Variations in soil geochemistry of the non-irrigated and irrigated sites are plotted in Figure
4-10. Many of the differences between the sites appear to be correlated with variations in
the major components quartz, clay, Fe oxide and carbonate contents, with little geological
variation between the samples sites.
83
(A) (B)Me(%)
0.ó02
(c)Fe(%)
123456
(D)Ti (ppn)
0 4000
(E)Zr (ppm)
0 200 40050 70 90
(%)sio,
0
160
0 0 0
r20
0
4040404040
8080808080
u
o o
t201ZO 120 t20
160
200
160160ló0
200200200200
(F) (G)At(o/")
(H)Ct (o/o)
(r)Pb (ppm)
10 20 30
(ÐS (ppm)TilZr
0 10203040 3579 04 0.8 12 0
0 0 0 00
40404040
80
120
80
120
80
120
80
t20
80
120
160r60 160
200200 200 200200
Figure 4-10 Geochemical vafiations of selected elements in irrigated and non-brígaled soil profrles;(A) Siticon Oxide; (B) Magnesium; (C) Iron; (D) TiÍanium; (E) Zirconium; (F)
Titanium/Zirconium; (G) Aluminium; (H) Calcíum; (I) Leød; (J) Sufiur; (K) Manganese; (L)
Cobalt; (M) Potassiam; (N) Sodium; (O) Chloride; (P) Phosphorus; (Q) Copper; (R) Zinc; (S)
Nìckel, (T) Arsenic. Red: non-in¡gated; Black = inigated (35 cmfrom dripper). Note lhe varyingunils and scales on x-üxes. (continued)
160160
84
Mn (ppm)0 200 400
(r)Co (ppm)
0 102030
(a)Cu (ppm)
(M)K(%)
23
(R)
(N)Na (%)
0.4 0.8 1.2
(s)Ni (ppm)
040
(o)Cl (ppn)
100 300
(K)
0 0
4040404040
8080808080
t20120120
1601ó0160160
200200200200
4040404040
8080808080
120120t20120t20
00 0
E
o
120 t20
160
200
0
(P)P (ppn)
200 0 1020304050zr (ppm)
040
(r)As (ppm)
40 I0 0 0 0 0
E
ooo
160 1ó0 160
200 200 200 200 200
Figure 4-10 (Continued) Geochemical variøtions of selected elements in irrigated and non'irrigøted soíl proJiles; (A) Silicon Oxide; (B) Møgnesium; (C) Iron; (D) Titønium; (E)
Zirconium; (F) Tíranium/Zirconium; (G) Aluminium; (H) Calcium; (I) Lead; (,1) Sufiur; (K)
Manganese; (L) Cobalt; (M) Potassium; (N) Sodium; (o) chloride; (P) Phosphorus; (ØCopper; (R) Zinc; (S) Nickel, (T) Arsenic. Red : non-¡rrigated; Black = irrìgated (35 cm fromdripper). Note the vatying unils and scales on x-oxes.
160160
85
Correlation of Ca with Sr and Mg suggested that these elements have been incorporated
into the calcite structure. There is also a difference between the A and B horizons of the
irrigated and non-irrigated profiles. In the A horizon of the irrigated site compared with
the lower part of the profile, the soil has more Cd, Pb and S, and less Al, Co, Cs, Fe, Ga,
In, Mg, Ni, Rb, Sn, Tl. Most of these differences are due to increased clay content of the B
horizon, and less qtartz. There may also be leaching effects due to irrigation and mobility
of the more mobile/soluble elements.
A comparison between the A and B horizons was also conducted for the non-irrigated site,
the A horizon was found to contain, more Cd, Na, P and Pb, and less Al, Co, Cs, Cu, Fe,
Ga, In, Mg, Mo, Ni, Rb, Sn, and REE (rare earth elements). These arc agun, due to the
increased clay content of the B horizon and corresponding decrease in quartz.
The main differences between the irrigated and non-irrigated profile appear to be in the
behaviour of Cu, As, Cl, REE and S. A similar trend is evident for Cu, As and S with
accumulations in the Btl and Bt2 horizons of the irrigated site. This accumulation may be
caused by the application of chemical sprays, such as copper sulphate, to the irrigated
vineyard. The spray may either directly land on the soil surface or indirectly be washed off
vine foliage on to the soil. Subsequent rain events may then leach these chemicals through
the sandy loam A horizon to the B horizon where they accumulate through association with
the clay matrix (Figure 4-10J, Q and T). Chloride concentrations are also elevated in the
irrigated soil, however these peak in the Btkl horizon (110 cm) indicating Cl is more
mobile than As, Cu and S.
86
4.3.5. Carbonate-rich samples
Powder X-ray diffraction of the carbonate nodules established that they are calcite. There
does not appear to be any clear difference in geochemical behaviour between irrigated and
non-irrigated samples. Most elements are negatively correlated with Ca, except Mg and Sr
(present in the calcite structure), S (some gypsum present) and REE. This indicates
irrigation effects are not reaching to the depth of carbonate nodules (85 cm).
4.4. Conclusions
As a result of soil formation, material has been lost from the A horizon, which can be seen
by the decrease in volume, thickness and mass, whereas the upper B horizon has increased
in mass, volume and thickness. This is consistent with the weathering and illuviation of
clay from the surface to deeper into the soil profile.
Chemically and mineralogically the irrigated and non-irrigated profiles are not
significantly different, except for Cu, As, S and Cl. The profiles can be considered
geolo$ically identical. Consequently, if there are differences in salinity or sodicity
between the irrigated and non-irrigated profiles this may be directly attributed to the
impact of irrigation, which is investigated in Chapter 5.
87
Chapter 5. lmpact of Long-term lrrigation on Soil
Properties
5.1. lntroduction
To improve water supply and stabilise grape production, irrigation was introduced in the
1970's in winter rainfall/summer drought regions. In the Barossa Valley, for example, this
has resulted in7O7o of the vineyards using underground water for irrigation (Cobb, 1986).
However, many regions in Southern Australia, including the Barossa Valley, do not have
access to high quality groundwater for irrigation and the salinity of water sources
commonly approaches the upper threshold above which yield loss may occur (Cobb,
1e86).
Imigation water of inferior quality combined with unsuitable management practices
(particularly excess water application) has increased salinity and sodicity of many soils,
including vineyard soils in South Australia (Cass et a\.,1996; Dowley, 1995, Lanyon et al.,
2004; Rengasamy and Olsson, 1993). At the same time soil biological properties are
deteriorating (Shainberg and Oster, 1978) and deleterious off-site impacts may increase
(Sadeh and Ravina, 2000). In the longer term the sustainability of vineyards is questionable
and wine quality may be threatened.
As discussed in Chapter 1, the movement of water, and distribution of salts varies with
irrigation method (e.9. flood, over-head sprinklers or drip) and soil type. Soil water
movement generally displays a large lateral component under drip inigation and a larger
vertical one under furrow irrigation (Mantell et al., 1985). Soils with less permeable
subsoil layers cause water to move laterally during irrigation. The three dimensional
88
pattern of water flow and distribution will influence the extent (depth and lateral
distribution) of soil salinisation and sodification, which will impact on plant response, root
growth and water uptake (Mantell et a1.,1985).
Sustainability of vineyards under irrigation with water of marginal quality (EC > 2.5 dS/m)
is of major concern to the viticulture industry, particularly as water quality is unlikely to
improve. Consequently, the objectives of this study were to determine:
1. Morphological, chemical and physical changes that have occurred to soil as a
result of drip irrigation in a vineyard with moderately saline groundwater (EC 2.5 -
3.5 dS/m) for 11 years
5.2. Materials and Methods
The Barossa Valley vineyard described in Chapter 2 was used for this study. A non-
irrigated unplanted paired site, 10 metres from the long-term (11 years) irrigated vineyard,
was also sampled for comparison; this is described in detail in Chapter 2. Briefly, both
sites are RBE (Figure 5-1) with similar morphology and surface management and both
sites were trellised.
As detailed in Chapter 2, soil pits were excavated in the irrigated and non-irrigated sites in
August 2001 for soil description and sampling. EC,", pHr", OC, SAR'., CEC, ESP, bulk
density, particle size distribution, air:water permeability ratio and XRD measurements
were conducted on all samples, as detailed in Chapter 3. A1l measurements, except
saturation extracts, were conducted in duplicate.
89
ba.* €10m)
Ap
A2
Bt1
B,t2
Btk3
Fìgure 5-1 Proftles (0-90 cm) of adiøcent (a) Non-irrìgated ønd (b) Irrìgated soìls. Note:
A/B boundary øt the same depthfor each profile
5.3. Results and Discuss¡on
5.3.1. Classification
The non-irrigated and irrigated profiles were classified according to a number of systems
(Table 5-1). Eleven years of inigation with bore water have changed in the morphological,
chemical and physical properties of the soil and this is reflected in a dramatic change in
classiflrcation compared to the non-irrigated site due mainly to variations in soil chemical
properties and the presence of a perched watertable in the irrigated soil during winter.
90
Table 5-7 Classifrcatíon o.f Non-Irrìgated and. Inísated soíl pro.fíles
Classification Svstem Non-irrigated IrrigatedSoil Survey Staff,
1999
Isbell, 1996
FAO, 1998
Maschmedt et aI.,2002
Calcic Palexeralf
Haplic Mesotrophic RedChromosol
Chromi-Calcic Lixisol
7.2 Non-restrictive duplex soilwith well structured top soil
Aquic Natrixeralf
Calcic Subnatric RedSodosol
Chromi-Gleyic Solonetz(Calcic)
6.2 Restrictive duplex soilwith well structured top soil
5.3.2. Morphological Properties
The non-irrigated and irrigated profiles (35 cm from dripper) were described according to
McDonald et al. (1998). A full description is provided in Appendix B, however a
summ¿ìry of key features is detailed (Table 5-2). The profiles are morphologically similar,
particularly the texture, horizon delineation and carbonate content throughout the profile.
The irrigated profile has however, a slightly redder hue in the Btl andBt2 horizons due to
the formation of fenihydrite, as discussed in the micromorphology section. Therefore,
profiles may be considered to have originally been the same soil.
91
Table 5-2 Morphological characterìstics of the non-írrígated and irrigated RBE soíls ínthe Barossa
Horizon Depth(m)
MoistColour
TextureClass2
CarbonateNodulesa
Non-Irrisated
ApA2Bt1Bt2BrklBtk2Btkg3
0-0.20.2-0.40.4 - 0.50.5 - 1.0r.0 - r.21.2 - r.6
1.6+
0 -0.20.2-0.40.4 - 0.50.5 - 1.0t.0 - r.2r.2- r.6
1.6+
7.5YR3/27.5YR4/32.5YR3/22.5YR4t32.5YR4t65YR4i4
7.5vR4t4
7.5YR3t27.5YR4/3
10R3/310R3/4
2.5YR4t65YR4/4
7.5YR4t4
2-2SB&1GR2-2I4SB&.IGF.
2-3t4SB3-4AB1-5SB14SB1-4SB
2-2SB&1GR2-2l4SB&lGR
24/5SB3-5AB1-5SB
1-4l5SB1-4l5SB
FSLFSLLCMCMCLCCL
absentabsentabsentabsent
L-2r-2t-2
absentabsentabsentabsent
1-2r-2t-2
(gravel)Irrisated
ApA2Br1Bt2BtklBtk2Btkg3
FSLFSLLCMCMCLCCL
(gravel)
classification according to McDonald et al. (1998): p = disturbance by tillage or traffic; t
= accumulation of silicate clay; k = accumulation of carbonates; g = gleyinglexture classification according to McDonald et al. (1998): FSL = fine sandy loam; CL = clayloam; LC = light clay; MC = medium clay.3Structure classification according to McDonald et al. (1998): Structure grade: 1 = weak, 2 =moderate,3=strong. Pedsize: I=<2mm,2=2-5mm,3 = 5-10mm,4 = 10-20mrn,5 =20-50 mm, 6 = 50-100 mm. Type of pedality: AB = angular blocþ, Çft = granular, SB = subangularblocky.aCarbonate nodule classification according to McDonald et aI. (1998): Size of segfegations: 2 =2-6mmmedium, 3 = 6-20 Íìm coarse.
5.3.3. Physical Properties
Particle Size Distribution
The trend in clay content with depth is similar between the irrigated and non-irrigated sites
(Figure 5-2 andFigure 5-3). However, the A horizon (sandy loam) of the non-irrigated site
has a slightly lower clay content, possibly because the irrigated site was ripped (and
mixed) to a depth of 0.5 m during establishment. Both the non-irrigated and irrigated
profile contain l6-I7Vo clay in the A horizon and 557o in the Btl horizon giving a ratio of
92
about 1:3, which defines the soil as texture contrast. The clay content decreases with depth
in the B horizon due to clay illuviation accumulating more fine particles in the upper part
of this horizon.
Particle Size Distribution (o/o)
o 20 40 60 80 100
20
I Clayt----- sittI Sand
Figure 5-2 Pørticle Síze Dístríbutìon of Non-Inígated Soil at nine depths sampled 35 cm
from the dripper
20
Particle Size Distribution (o/o)
40 60 80 100
0
ã40ÈoEô_c,ô60
80
100
ã40Èo
CLc)o60
80
100
0
20
I Clayr---r sittI Sand
Figure 5-3 Partìcle Size Distríbution of lruigated Soíl ø1níne depths sampled 35 cmfromthe drþper
93
Bulk Density
The bulk density of the inigated site was up to 30 % greater than the non-irrigated soil.
Bulk density increased with distance from the irrigation dripper (Figure 5-4). A compacted
layer is evident in both the irrigated and non-irrigated soils at 20 cm depth, even though
samples were collected from beneath the vine row. The bulk density values may be
elevated compared to other studies as the wax method measures clod or aggtegate bulk
density rather than entire soil bulk density, therefore it could negate root channels and
voids around aggregates, which would reduce soil bulk density. However, the inigated site
has a consistently higher clod bulk density than the non-irrigated site, which is consistent
with other measurements taken at the inigated site (higher ESP and SAR, lower porosity).
Bulk Density (g/cm3)
'1.3 14 1.5 '1.6 1.7 18 1.9 2.0
0
20
40
Esoo;o.o80(l
100
120
140
- Non-irrigated
- lrrigated -25cm fÍomdripperlrrigated - 40cm from driPPer
+ lrr¡gated - 70cm from drippeÍ
- lrrigated - l00cm from dr¡Pper
Fìgure 5-4 Butk density (wax method) of the Barossa Vøltey non-inigated and imígaled
soil profiles
Micromorphology
In order to quantify the effect of inigation on soil structure (e.g. porosity), thin sections of
the upper B horizon were examined (Figure 5-5). The micrograph of the irrigated site
revealed few channels, voids or clay coatings and had a deep red colour. In contrast, the
94
micrograph of the non-irrigated site showed numerous channels, voids and thick clay
coatings surrounding the voids and had a yellowish red colour. The lack of voids is
consistent with the higher bulk density of the inigated site (Figure 5-4). The deeper red
colouring of the inigated site can be attributed to the formation of ferrihydrite (poorly
crystalline iron oxide). Periodic reducing conditions will selectively dissolve goethite and
hematite contained in the original soil and re-precipitate the iron as fenihydrite often as a
coating on clay particles (Bingham et a1.,2001). The non-irrigated site displayed cutans,
which have developed from the dispersion and migration of clay particles through the
profile. The lack of clay coatings at the inigated site may be a result of the increased
amplitude and frequency of wetting and drying cycles in this horizon due to inigation.
Resulting forces of shrinkage and swelling can destroy cutans or prevent them from
forming. Channels and vughs in this horizon may have been filled by dispersed clay. In
contrast, the lower part of the A horizon did not appear to exhibit any differences between
irrigated and non-irrigated sites, due to the low clay content and low shrink-swell capacity
of this horizon.
b.
I-!99-¡
a.
l-!9cp-J
Figure 5-5 Mícromorphologt of the upper B horizon ín the non-irrígated (a) andìrrigated (b) soits. The arrow indícates clay coatíngs (cutans) sunoundìng voíds
in the non-itigated soil
95
Ai r:Water Perme abi I ity
There was little difference in air:water permeability ratio of the A horizon of any samples
(all values 6 - 50), although the A horizon in the non-irrigated site was consistently low,
indicating the soil has good structural stabilþ (Figure 5-6). The non-inigated B horizon
had some structural instability, particularly in the B horizon and has a similar trend in
structural stability through the profile as the inigated site - 35 cm from dripper profile.
However, the air: water permeability ratio of the B horizon of the inigated soil increased
with distance from the dripper. This structural stability decline was due to the soil
dispersing as it has a higher ESP and distilled water was used for measurements (e.g. Btl
105 cm from dripper (Figure 5-l 1).
Air: Water Permeability Ratio
10 100 1000 I 00000
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
Eo!
o-oô
+ Non-lrr¡gated+ lrrigated - 5 cm from dripper+ lrrigated - 35 cm from dripper
- lrrigated - 105 cm from dripper
Figure 5-6 Air: Water Permeabílíly Ratìo of the Børossu Valley non-ìrrigated andirrigated soìls
96
5.3.4. Chemical Properties
Organic Carbon (OC)
Organic carbon content was low for both the irrigated and non-irrigated sites, and declined
with depth at both sites (Figure 5-7). The concentration of vine roots beneath the dripper
may account for the slight increase in organic matter in this zone, although this was not
significant.
0.0 0.2 0.4
Organic Carbon (%)
0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.40
10
ì20o
!
o-oo30
40
50
Nonlnigatedlnigated - scm from dripperlnigated - 15cm from dripperlnigated - 35cm from dripperlnigated - l05cm from dripper
Fígure 5-7 Organic Carbon of the Barossø Valley non-itigøted and itígated soìls
Electrical Conductivity (EC"")
Samples were collected in August prior to which rains had leached salts from the sandy
loam A horizon into the B horizon. The electrical conductivity of the saturation extract
(EC*) of the non-irrigated site was low throughout the A, A2 and Btl horizons (EC'. <
0.5dS/m) and then gradually increased with depth in the B horizon to 0.7dS/m at 1'70 cm
due to salts contained in rainfall steadily leaching through the profile. The surface was
97
also slightly higher (ECr": 0.4 dS/m) than the A2 horizon (ECr. :0.25 dS/m) as a result of
evaporation and concentration of salts.
The salinity in the A and A2 horizons of the irrigated site were moderately elevated
compared to the non-irrigated site (ECr.:0.5-1.0dS/m). The inigated B horizon,
particularly away from the dripper, had higher ECr. peaking at 3.4 dS/m at a distance of
105 cm from the dripper. The profile at 35 cm from the dripper was sampled to a greater
depth, and showed a salt "bulge" at 140 cm, suggesting other inigated samples (e.g. 15 cm
from drþer) may also have this if sampling had occurred to a greater depth. This is a
result of rainfall and inigation leaching salt to depth.
Ec." (ds/m)
2
0
20
40
60
trõ80
Ê 1ooo
120
140
160
180
Fígure 5-8 Electrical Conductivity (søturation extract) of the Barossa Valley non-írrigøled and irrigated soils
PHt"
The pH of all samples from the non-irrigated site was in the range 6.1 - 6.8 and increased
slightly with depth (Figure 5-9). Inigation increased soil pH, although the rise, especially
near the soil surface, was larger near the dripper (5, 15 and 35 cm - pH 7.6 to 8.3) than at a
430
+ Non-lrrigated+ lrrigated - Scm from dripper
lrr¡gated - 1Scm from dripper+ lnigated - 35cm from dripper
- lnigated - 105cmfrom dripper
98
distance (105 cm - pH 7.2 to 7.45). The increase was relatively uniform down the profile
for each distance from the dripper, indicating the soil had approximately equilibrated with
the inigation water (pH 7.91) received at each point. The rise was due to carbonate present
in inigation water, however it was unlikely to have influenced vine root growth or function
as a soil pHcucp of between 5.5 and 8 is generally accepted as ideal for vine growth
(Lanyon et aL.,2004).
ÞH."
5.5 60 65 7.O 7.5 80 8.5
0
20
40
60
Fõ80E$ rooo
120
140
160
180
Fígure 5-9 pH (saturølìon extract) of the Barossø Vølley non-irrigated and irrigatedsoils
Cation Exchange Capacity (CEC)
The CEC was very similar for all profiles (Figure 5-10), with the A horizon having a lower
CEC (7 - 11 cmol,lkg) than the B horizon (19 - 24 cmolJkg). The inigated soil had a
slightly higher CEC in the Btl horizon. Slight variations in organic carbon content of the
soil (Figure 5-7) did not affect CEC, as the profile with the highest organic carbon (5 cm
from dripper) had the second lowest CEC in the A horizon. This was due to low and
fluctuating organic carbon values in the A horizon for each profile.
+ Non-lrrigated
- lrrigated - scm from dr¡pperlrrigated - lScm from driPPer
+ lrrigated - 35cm from dr¡pper
- lrrigated - 105cm from dripper
99
CEC (cmol"/ke)
10 15 25 JU
è)
.4o.o
t-.t
+ Non-lrrigated+ IrrigatÊd - 5cm from dripper
Irrigated - I 5cm from dripper
-+ Irrigated - 35cm from dripper
- Inigated - 105cmfrom dripper
Fígure 5-10 Cation Exchønge Capøcíty (CEC) of the Barossa Valley non-¡migated andirrigøted soíls
Exchangeable Sodium Percent (ESP)
The ESP of the non-irrigated site was slightly higher at the surface (4.5) but was
consistently low throughout the remainder of the profile (1.S - 3, Figure 5-11). The slight
rise at the surface is probably from salt accumulation (Figure 5-8) from capillary rise and
evaporation of soil water and consequent sodification. Some wind-blown salt from St
Vincent's gutf (40 km west) may be deposited on the vineyard.
The ESP of the irrigated site generally increased with distance from the dripper,
particularlyintheBtl (5 cm:6.1, 15 cm:9.0,35 cm:13.2 and 105 cm:16.0). These
values result in the soil being classified as sodic, non-saline in regions of the profile (USSL
Staff, 1954) according to the US system, while all soils with ESP>6 are considered sodic
under the Australian soil classification system (Isbell, 1996).
50 20
0
20
40
60
80
100
t20
140
160
180
100
ESP in the B horizon of the inigated site declined with depth. The highest value (ESP :
18.1) recorded was 35 cm from the dripper at a depth of 60 cm, which is eight times higher
than the corresponding depth in the non-irrigated soil. The ESP below 60 cm depth was
less, as sodium concentration is correlated with ESP, this suggests the highest sodium
accumulation in the profile is in a region at a 60 cm depth and about 35 cm laterally from
the drþer when irrigation water is applied from an above-ground point water source
(Figure 5-12).
Exchaneable Sodium Percentage
0246 81012141618200
20
40
ó0
É980iD TUUH
120
140
160
180
+ Non-Irigated+ Irrigated - 5cm from dripper
Inigated - 15cm from dripper
- Inigated - 35cm from dripper
+ Inigated - 105cm from dripper
Figure 5-11 Exchangeable Sodìum Percentøge (ESP) of the Barossø Valley non-írrigated and ínigated soíß
20
Distanæ Fom Dripper (cm)
40m 80 100
E{)€A
t0
20
q
50
IIIIIIl¡ÆII
5
67II10
11
12
'13
14
60
t0l
Sodium Adsorption Ratio (SAR)
The sodium adsorption ratio (SAR) of saturated extracts from soil sampled in the inigated
site (Figure 5-13) was up to 16 times higher than samples from the non-irrigated site. As
expected, SAR exhibited a similar trend to ESP (Figure 5-11) and increased with distance
from the dripper. There was a sharp increase in the SAR at the top of the B horizon
(40 cm), whereas the non-irrigated site showed no such increase in SAR with clay content
but did increase slightly at a depth of 1l0cm. This correlation between ESP and SAR
measurements means the SAR data presented in Chapters 6, 7 and 8 may be considered a
measure of the soil ESP or sodicity.
SAR
4 Þ 8 10 12 14 16 18
Figure 5-13 Sodium Adsorption Røtio (SAR) of the Barossa Vølley non-inìgated andírrigated soíls
200
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
Eo-co.oo
- Non-inigated
- lrrigated - Scm from dripperlrrigated - 15cm from driPPer
.+ l¡¡ig¿ts! - 35cm from dripper+ lrr¡gated - 105cm from dripper
102
5.4. Conclusions
Alternating applications of saline and non-saline water, from irrigation and rainfall
respectively, on a RBE enhanced clay dispersion and migration. Dispersion and migration
were promoted by an increase in the ESP/SAR. During winter rainfall events salts were
flushed through the profile, thus enhancing dispersion in the upper B horizon, resulting in
the formation of a less permeable layer. This in turn caused a saturated anaerobic zone to
-develop during winter months. Evidence of clay dispersion (breakdown of micro
aggregate structure) was observed in the form of reduced numbers of pores and voids;
alterations in colour (an indication that iron has changed form) and increased bulk density
(up to 3OVo).
This alteration in soil properties manifested in the change in soil classification (Figure 5-1)
vø. Chromosol to Sodosol (Isbell, 1996), Palexeralf to Natrixeralf (Soil Survey Staff,
1999) and Lixisol to Solonetz (FAO, 1998). In addition there was evidence of wetness
(aquic and gleyed conditions) in the irrigated soil. This has been summarised in a
preliminary mechanistic model (Figure 5-14) to explain soil chemical and physical
processes during the summer irrigation season and winter rainfall events, which result in a
degradation of the soil structure. Both the irrigated and non-irrigated sites are shown, to
demonstrate the different pro..rrls occurring in each profile.
The model demonstrates that summer irrigation results in an accumulation of salts in the A
and upper B horizons. Salts are at a higher concentration between the drippers than
directly beneath them, where more leaching occurs. The high EC of the soil retards
103
dispersion. The non-irrigated site is well aerated and receives minimal water input during
the summer months.
During the winter months salts are leached through the profile. This creates an
environment with high sodium concentrations on the cation exchange complex and low EC
of the soil solution, resulting in dispersion and collapse of the voids and channels in the B
horizon.
104
Note: EC units dS/mLeaching of chloride through the profile may occur during winter
(B) Winter Non-Inigated - Rainfall Irrigated Vines - Rainfall:' ¡' ,,' ,.t ,; ,,/ ,r./ ./'/: .i ,/' ,/- ./' /,'l, t' ;. t -,, /',/ ./ t ./,/,/ ./ /,
'./' ;/ ' ,,/ ,,/ i
35
100
Calcic Palexeralf(Soil Survey Staff, 1999)
Haplic Mesotrophic Red Chromosol(Isbell, 1996)
Chromi-Calcic Lixisol(FAO, 1998)
7.2 Non-restrictive duplex soil with wellstructured top soil
(Maschmedt et al., 2002')
Aquic Natrixeralf(Soil Survey Stafl 1999)
Calcic Subnatric Red Sodosol(Isbell, 1996)
Chromi-Gleyic Solonetz (Calcic)(FAO, 1998)
6.2 Restrictive duplex soil with well structuredtop soil
(Maschmedt et al., 2OO2)
pH 7.8sn
SAR=1soEC=0.5sn
pH 7.358SAR=4s¿EC=0.5se
II¡¡aaI¡
pII 6.5snSAR=1ssEC=0,5ss
(Al Summer Non-Irrigated - Low RainfalE Vines - Saline W
o0 0
35
60
pH 7.85¡SAR=1seEC=5sr
pH 7.3seSAR=4sEEC=8se
pH 6.55¡SÄR=1s¡EC=0.5se
Figure 5-14 Mechanístic model of soil processes occurr¡ng during summer (A) anilwínter (B) in the irrigated. and non-írriga.ted soils
105
Chapter 6. lrrigation with Bore Water in the Barossa
Valley: Effects of Gypsum Application
6.1. Introduction
The Barossa Valley site has been irrigated for 11 years with saline ground water. Previous
work in this study (Chapter 5) has shown that 11 years of alternating saline irrigation and
non-saline water (rainfall) formed a seasonally waterlogged saline-sodic soil due to clay
dispersion and formation of a less permeable clay layer in the Btl horizon. Many studies
(e.g. Gnerson, 1978; I-evy and Sumner 1998) have shown that gypsum (CaSO¿.2HzO)
application can prevent the development of sodic soils and improve the properties of sodic
soils, by improving infiltration, reducing hard-setting and surface crusting and by reducing
soil strength for root growth. Briefly, gypsum acts by two mechanisms to prevent clay
dispersion. It increases the electrolyte concentration of soil solution and thereby retards
spontaneous and mechanical dispersion. Secondly, calcium exchanges with sodium on the
clay exchange complex and so minimises the tendency of the soil to disperse. However,
little is known about the impact of gypsum application on soil chemical properties,
particularly when applied to texture contrast soils that have received drip irrigated for long
periods of time.
This work investigated the application of gypsum on the Barossa Valley field site to
determine:
1. Seasonal two-dimensional changes in chemical properties of a drip-inigated and
non-irrigated Red Brown Earth
2. Seasonal movement and accumulation of gypsum in the soil profile
106
6.2. Methods
Application of gypsum (15 May 2001 and 14 May 2002), sample collection and analysis
and statistical treatment of results for application of gypsum in the Barossa Valley site are
detailed in Chapter 3.
6.3. Results
The following time series of colour contour graphs @gure 6-1 to Figure 6-4) were plotted
with identical axes and configurations for easy comparison. Depth (Y axis) and distance
from dripper (X axis) is plotted on each graph.
Each treatment (i.e. bore water without gypsum, bore water with gypsum at 4 t/ha, bore
water with gypsum at 8 t/ha and non-irrigated) is plotted on separate pages. Moving from
left to right (A to G) across each page of graphs is the time series, summarised in Table
6-r.
Table 6-I times and
Four months135.1
Minimal125.2
Maximum salt accumulationprior to leaching
G16 April2003
Two weeks28.4
Minimal25.2
Initial accumulation of saltF18 December2002
0Winter rains101.0
Maximum leaching of saltswith winter rains prior toirrigation commencement
E20 November2002
5.9Mid WinterRains I74.8
Mid WinterD31 July2002
Maximum salt accumulationprior to leaching
Four months183.3
Minimal57.9
C17 April2002
Two weeks18.6
Minimal26.4
Initial accumulation of saltB20 December2001
0 (since1/08/01)
Vy'inter rains244.5 (since
1/08/01)
Maximum leaching of saltswith winter rains prior toirrigation commencement
A22 November200r
Irrigationsince previoussampling (mm)
Rainfallsince previoussamplins (mm)
ImportanceKey toFigures
Date
107
Specific chemical properties considered important were plotted down the page for each
figure. The properties selected are Electrical Conductivity (labelled as 'a'), Sodium
Adsorption Ratio (labelled as 'b'), Sodium (labelled as 'c') and Calcium (labelled as 'd').
Therefore, reference to Figure 6-14c, designates the first set of graphs in Chapter 6 (Non-
Irrigated Barossa site) for sodium (c) in November 2001 (A).
6.3.1. Non-lrrigated Site
During the experiment a calcium and sodium source, possibly a fungicide spray or
fertiliser, was applied to regions of the non-irrigated site probably in March 20O2 and2003
@gure 6-1Cd, Dd and Appendix C). This was unfortunately not revealed until soil
analysis had been conducted. However, after July 2OO2 a second non-irrigated paired site
@gure 6-18, F and G) was also sampled to ensure calcium present in the first paired site
was from suspected contamination and not a natural soil process. This secondary site was
relatively free of calcium, confirming that regions of the initial control site had been
contaminated. Only results from November 2001 (Figure 6-14), December 2001 (Figure
6-18) and April 2002 (Figure 6-1C) from the initial control site and results from control
site 2 (Figure 6-1E, F and G) will be discussed further, however other results from the
initial site (July 2002, November 2002, December 2002 and April 2003) are presented in
Appendix H.
Electrical Conductivity
Throughout the year the EC in all layers of the profile is generally low (<2 dS/m).
However, the slight increase in EC (up to 3 dS/m) at the soil surface in April each year is
evidence that some salts accumulate due to the evaporation of soil water and concentration
108
of salts at the soil surface (Figure 6-1Ca and Ga). This indicates the natural soil has a low
salt level (mostly from the atmosphere and rain), which has largely been leached over time.
Sodium Adsorption Ratio (SAR)
The SAR of the non-irrigated soil profile is low (<1.5) throughout the year (Figure 6-1b)
with little seasonal or spatial variation.
Sodium
Sodium is low (<5 mmol/L) at all times (Figure 6-1c), including the Btl horizon, which
has the capacity to adsorb any sodium entering the soil profile indicating the soil naturally
has a low sodium content and any increase found in the irrigated treatments is caused by
the application of bore water as other management practices are consistent.
Calcium
As stated previously, the initial control site (e.g. Figure 6-1Dd) was found to contain small
levels of Ca. Consequently, a nearby replacement control site was chosen 15m adjacent to
the irrigated site. Ignoring the contaminated Ca readings at the surface, the calcium levels
are constantly low (<2.5 mmol/L) indicating the soil contains little calcium to buffer
against increases in sodium concentration.
General
Although problems were encountered with the non-irrigated site, the data show that the site
is suitable to demonstrate that the undisturbed soil has low EC and SAR values. Similarly,
calcium levels are low, indicating that the application of sodium in irrigation water will
increase SAR and promote clay dispersion unless calcium or EC levels are also increased.
109
6.3.2. Bore Water without Gypsum
El ectrical Co nductivity
The soil is leached of most salt @C < 2 dS/m) in winter months, particularly in 2001
(Figure 6-2Aa), salts then accumulate with irrigation (Figure 6-2Ca), around a wetting
"onion" shape (upto 5 dS/m). This wetting "onion" is the spherical region of soil beneath
the dripper which is continually being wetted by irrigation, therefore moving the salts to
the edge of this wetting "onion" shape (1.e. low salts levels within the sphere and high
levels at the edge). In winter 2002 @gure 6-2Da and Ea), a zone leached of salt
developed beneath the dripper (EC 0.5 to 4 dS/m), however in areas at a distance from the
dripper the EC remained relatively high (EC 4 to 6 dS/m). krigation in 200213 (Figure
6-2Ga) again increased the EC of the soil @C >4 dS/m) with only a limited area beneath
the dripper leached of salts (EC <1 dS/m).
Rainfall in 2001 was 130mm greater during the non-irrigation period, May to November
than during this same period in 2002 (Table 6-2). Consequently, in 2001 more salts were
leached from the profile, particularly beneath the dripper than in 2002. However, in winter
2002 salts remained at the edge of the wetting "onion" around the dripper particularly in
the B horizon; this may impact on vine performance.
Table 6-2 at the Barossa síte months
Sodium Adsorption Ratio (SAR)
Throughout the A horizon the SAR is low at the end of winter 2001(SAR - 5). However,
the B horizon maintains a moderate SAR (SAR - 10) (Figure 6-2Ab). Irrigation in
II0
419 mm 289 mm
1" May - 30to November2002
1" May - 30to November2001
200112, increases SAR to 12 in both the A and B horizons at the edge of the wetting onion,
however, the SAR in the A horizon beneath the dripper and in the B horizon at 100 cm
from the dripper remains low (SAR < 9) @gure 6-2Cb). The low winter rains in 2002
caused the SAR to remain high (SAR > 10) throughout the profile except in the A horizon
beneath the dripper (SAR <9) @gure 6-2Db and Eb). Following irrigation in 200213 the
majority of the profile became sodic (SAR - 15), except for the A horizon beneath the
dripper, whose SAR continued to remain low (SAR < 9) (Figure 6-2Gb).
The NA2 horizons are predominantly leached, especially with high winter rainfall events.
However, at the end of winter 2001 the Btl horizon maintains an SAR of 10, while EC has
declined to <1 dS/m.
The build-up of sodium, and hence the increase in SAR, is caused by sodium being applied
through the inigation water, which occurs by drip irrigation causing a similar wetting
pattern to be evident in both 2001-02 and2002-O3. This indicates a similar region of soil
is constantly accumulating sodium, which may also correspond with high vine root
densities, as the distribution of water in a soil profile has a strong influence on root
distribution (Lanyon et aI., 2004), roots have been found to concentrate in the wetted
region beneath drippers (van Zyl, 1984).
Sodium
Sodium is low (< 5 mmol/L) throughout the profile after winter 200I (Figure 6-2Ãc),
although some sodium is present at a distance from the dripper in the B horizon (Na = 15
mmol/L). However, after 2 weeks irrigation (Figure 6-2Bc) sodium has increased (10 to
15 mmol/L) and at the completion of irrigation @igure 6-2Cc) the majority of the profile
T]I
contains high levels of sodium (> 20 mmol/L). These levels remain high throughout
winter 2002 (Figure 6-2Dc and Ec) and irrigati on 200213 @gure 6-2Fc and Gc).
Calcium
At all sampling events, calcium levels are low (< 4 mmolll-) in the soil profile, although
some accumulation (4.5 - 6 mmol/L) does occur in the B horizon at the end of irrigation
(Figure 6-2Cd and Gd).
The calcium accumulation in the soil profile is due to calcium addition from irrigation
water (Ca - 100 mg/L in bore water), which has been applied for over ten years. This is
confirmed by calcium concentration following a similar spatial trend to EC in the A and
Btl, however higher concentrations occur in2002 due to the drier winter.
General
Application of bore water to a Barossa Valley RBE has increased the ECse and SAR in
surface and subsurface layers during the irrigation season. Soil physiochemical properties
have been found to be strongly dependent on rainfall, because in the winter of 2001 the
high rainfall caused greater leaching of salts. In contrast, in 2002, with reduced rainfall,
limited leaching of the profile has occurred, causing the soil to contain high levels at the
conclusion of irrigation in 2003. Calcium levels in the soil are low, although some
accumulation occurs with irrigation. This suggests that application of calcium may reduce
SAR, particularly at the edge of the wetting onion.
112
6.3.3. Bore Water - Gypsum 4 tonnes/hectare
Electrical Conductivity
Salts are generally low (EC < 2 dS/m) in the soil profile after winter rains in 2001 (Figure
6-3Aa) and at the commencement of irrigation 2001 (Figure 6-3Ba). At the completion of
irrigation 200112 (Figure 6-3Ca) salts had accumulated (EC 4-5 dS/m) around the wetting
onion in the A and B horizons, with a leached region in the A horizon beneath the dripper
(EC < 2 dS/m). Winter rains in 2002 @gure 6-3Da and Ea) reduced salt levels (EC <
2 dS/m), in the soil beneath the dripper and at 100 cm from the dripper however at 50 cm
from the dripper the EC remained constant (EC = 4-5 dS/m). Irigation in 2O0213 caused
salts to accumulate (EC = 4-5 dS/m) in the B horizon and at 50 cm from the dripper in the
A horizon @gure 6-3Ga).
The application of gypsum at 4 tonnes/hectare has resulted in a small increase in EC during
winter months compared to bore water application without gypsum, although vines should
not be affected by this small rise in salt content.
Sodium Adsorption Ratio (SAR)
The SAR of the soil is low (< 5) in the A horizon and moderate (5 - 10) in the B horizon
six months after gypsum application @igure 6-3Ab). The SAR increases (to 14) in the B
horizon with the conìmencement of irrigation (Figure 6-3Bb). In contrast, the SAR in the
A horizon remains low (< 5). However, at the end of irrigation the SAR is 10-12 in the A
and B horizons up to 50 cm from the dripper (Figure 6-3Cb). In winter 2002 the B horizon
beneath the dripper has a SAR of 10-15, while in the A horizon the SAR has been reduced
to < 5 except in the zone 50 cm from the dripper (SAR = l0-I2) (Figure 6-3Db and Eb).
Imigation in 200213 increases the SAR to 10 - 14 in the B horizon at 50 cm from the
113
dripper whereas in the A horizon the SAR remains relatively low (SAR <5 to 10) (Figure
6-3Fb and Gb).
SAR has declined with gypsum application, particularly in the NA2 horizons, however the
Btl horizon has maintained a high SAR after the drier winter, which requires further
application of gypsum. This indicates effective gypsum application requires a moderate
winter rainfall, which acts to leach calcium to the required depth (35cm, Bt1 horizon) so
that it exchanges with sodium, which is then leached to depth.
Sodium
Sodium levels and accumulation zones were similar with or without gypsum application (at
4tlha). Sodium is low (< 5 mmoUl,) up to 50 cm from the dripper after winter 200I
(Figure 6-3Ac), but high at 100 cm from the dripper (Na = 15 to 20 mmol/L). With only 2
weeks of irrigation with bore water, sodium increased (10 to 15 mmol/L) throughout the B
horizon (Figure 6-3Bc) and by Apnl 2002, the completion of irrigation, the profile
contained high levels of sodium (> 20 mmol/L) @gure 6-3Cc). These levels remained
constant during winter 2002 @gure 6-3Dc and Ec) and increased with irrigation in200213
@gure 6-3Fc and Gc) except in a limited region of the A horizon (Na <10 mmol/L).
Calcium
Calcium is generally low (> 3 mmol/L) in the B horizon at the end of winter 2001 (Figure
6-3Ad) six months after gypsum application, although some accumulation is present at a
distance from the dripper (5-6 mmol/L). However, the A horizon has up to 7 mmolll at
the surface (Figure 6-3Ad). At the completion of irrigation (Figure 6-3Cd) calcium has
accumulated throughout the profile (4-8 mmol/L), except beneath the dripper and along the
114
A/B interface (< 3 mmoUl-). During winter 2002 (Figure 6-3Dd and Ed) calcium levels
continue to be high in the B horizon at a distance from the dripper (4-8 mmolll), however
directly beneath the dripper the level is low (< 3mmoUl). The A horizon has high
amounts, particularly in the top 15 cm (> 6 mmoVl-). Irrigation in 2O0213 (Figure 6-3Fd
and Gd) again caused regions beneath the dripper and along the A/B interface to resume
low concentrations of calcium (< 3 mmol./L), while the remainder of the B horizon
remained high (a-6 mmol/L).
The second application of 4 tonnes/hectare of gypsum (May 2002) saturated the A horizon
with calcium. However, the movement of irrigation water across the A/B interface leached
calcium from both this zone and also beneath the dripper. An accumulation zone on the
soil surface and in the Bt1 horizon at a distance from the dripper developed.
General
The application of 4 tonnes/trectare of gypsum has reduced SAR, although regions of
decline are closely linked to the movement and accumulation of calcium in the profile.
Calcium is readily leached beneath the dripper, however due to the history of long-term
saline irrigation, SAR is at moderately high levels in the Btl horizon of this region and
requires a further calcium input. Gypsum application has not increased EC, therefore the
dominant process preventing soil degradation with gypsum application is the reduction in
SAR rather than increased soil solution EC.
lts
6.3.4. Bore Water - Gypsum I tonnes/hectare
Electrical Cond uctivity
At the end of winter 2001 @gurc 6-4Aa) and2002 (Figure 6-4Ea) salts are low (<3 dS/m)
throughout the profile except for some accumulation in the B horizon (EC = 4 dS/m),
particularly at a distance from the dripper in 2002. krigation in both 200112 @gure
6-4Ca) and200213 (Figure 6-4Ga) resulted in salt accumulation at 50 cm from the dripper
(EC > 4 dS/m), although this occurred in 200112 in the A and Btl horizons, while in
200313 it occurred in the A and Bt2 horizons. In mid-winter 2002 (Figure 6-4Da) the
entire profile was moderately saline (EC = 3-5 dS/m).
Salts in the profile increased with the application of gypsum at 8 tonnes/hectare. High
levels occurred in mid-winter 2002 prior to leaching of salts by rainfall, as salts sourced
from both summer irrigation and high gypsum were concentrated in the profile, resulting in
a high salt load.
Again, at the end of the 2002-03 inigation season the profile contained high levels of salts,
if a high rate of gypsum was applied after this inigation season, followed by a second dry
winter, the profile would be loaded with salts and the vines possibly under stress.
High application rates of gypsum should be monitored, especially in low rainfall winters
when salt leaching does not occur.
Sodium Adsorption Ratio (SAR)
SAR is low (< 9) throughout the profile in November 2OOt (Figure 6-4Ab). Irrigation in
200112 has caused the SAR to increase (up to 13, Figure 6-4Bb and Cb) particularly in the
116
B horizon and beneath the dripper. 'Winter 2002 reduced the SAR to 10-11 in the B
horizon and to <9 throughout the A horizon (Figure 6-4Db and Eb). Irrigation in 200213
again increased SAR in the B horizon (up to 13).
SAR has decreased with increased gypsum application, however the reduction is not a
proportional response. Regions in the soil, such as the Bt1 beneath the dripper require
further applications of gypsum to reduce the SAR.
Sodium
Sodium is low (< 5 mmoUl) throughout the A horizon and the B horizon directly beneath
in dripper after winter 2001(Figure 6-4Ac), the remainder of the profile has high sodium
(Na - 15 to 20 mmol/L). However, after 2 weeks irrigation (Figure 6-4Bc) sodium has
increased (10 - 20 mmolll.) throughout the profile. At the completion of irrigation (Figure
6-4Cc) the entire profile contains high levels of sodium (> 20 mmolll-). These high levels
generally persist throughout winter 2002 (Figure 6-4Dc and Ec) and irrigation 200213
(Figure 6-4Fc and Gc) except in the A horizon in November 20O2 (Figure 6-4Ec) when
regions of the A horizon have been leached (Na = I0 - 20 mmollI-).
Calcium
The A horizon remains high in calcium (> 8 mmol/) for all samplings except beneath the
dripper during irrigation (e.g. Figure 6-4Cd,Fd and Gd). The B horizon is low in calcium
beneath the dripper (Ca < 4 mmol/L), but calcium accumulation occurs at 50 - 100 cm
from the dripper (Ca >4 mmol/L), particularly with irrigation in 2002 (Figure 6-4Gd).
117
The higher rate of calcium application has caused a similar pattern of accumulation as the
lower rate. However, as the A horizon contains higher levels, Ca is available to move into
the soil throughout the irrigation period and the A horizon remains high in calcium
throughout the 2002-03 inigation season.
General
Application of gypsum at a higher rate (8 tonnes/hectare) to a RBE undergoing long-term
irrigation with groundwater has reduced SAR in regions of the profile. However, as found
with lower gypsum application rates, the Btl horizon beneath the dripper maintains at a
moderate SAR and requires additional calcium input. Some increase in salt loading of the
profile occurs with high gypsum application, particularly in low rainfall years when
irrigation salts are not leached from the profile.
6.4. Conclusions
RBE in the Barossa Valley have naturally low SAR and EC throughout the year, with only
a slight salt accumulation at the soil surface. Application of saline irrigation water in
summer months has caused the accumulation of sodium and salts particularly at 50-100 cm
from the dripper. During winter rainfall the soil is leached of salts, particularly beneath the
dripper and in the A2 horizon. Some sodium remains in the profile, even during years of
high rainfall which contributes to the high SAR maintained in the B horizon.
These changes in soil chemical properties were remediated with gypsum application. This
reduced the SAR, although calcium was leached beneath the dripper with inigation
application. The Btl beneath the dripper with gypsum application is leached of gypsum
with drip irrigation and SAR remains high, even with 8 tonnesÆtectare of gypsum. The
Ir8
soil requires additional applications of gypsum, particularly with continued application of
saline water, however, gypsum application should not increase beyond 8 tonnes/hectare as
the EC would further rise, especially with a dry winter whon the lack of rainfall prevents
leaching of salts. These results have been combined with soil solution composition data
and summarised in a mechanistic model shown in chapter 9.
119
November 2001
(maximum leaching)December 2001
(after 2 weeks irrigation)April2002
(maximum salt)
Date of SamplingJu'ly 2002
(mid winter)November 2002
(maximum leaching)December 2002 April 2003
(after2 weeks irrigation) (maximum salt)
0 ds/mI ds/m2 ds/m3 dS/ñ4 d/Sm
Electrical Conductivity (EC) ds/m - (a)
10
20
30
40
50
ôo
l0
20
ç
€340
50
60
02468101214
Sodium Adsorption Ratio (SAR) - (b)
Sodium (mmoVl) - (c)
't0
20
30
40
50
ô0
l0
20
9¡oã.Ä¿o
50
60
l0
20
â3io
Ê4050
60
t0
20-E{, ioE,3 ¿o
50
60
IO
20
530'--g ¿oA
50
ó0
l0
20
b10
840
50
60
- 0 mmol/L
- 5 mmol/L
- l0mmdtr15 mmdtr
- 20 mmol/L
0 mhoul
2 mmol/L3 mmol/L4 mmol/L5 mmoul6 mmol/L
- I mmol/L
Figure 6-l: Showing Non-Irrigated Barossa; with the white line indicating the A/B interface t20
November 2001
(maximum leaching)December 2001
(after 2 weeks inigati on)
April2002(maximum salt)
Date of SamplingIuly 2002
(mid winter)November 2002
(maximum leaching)December 2002 April 2003
(after2 weeks inigation) (maximum salt)
Electrical Conductivþ (EC) dS/m - (a)Distdæ from Dripper (cm)
2s 50 75 100
Disteæ From Dripper (cm)
25 50 75 100
Distânce From Dripper (cm) Distmce From Drippe¡ (cm)
2s 50 75 100
Distmæ From Dripper (cm) Distanæ Fþm Dripper (cm) Dishæ FromD¡ipper (cm)
25 50 75 100 25 50 75 r00 2s 50 75 100 2s 50 75 t00
l0
20
30
40
s0
ó0
'10
20
40
50
60
10
20--9 go
äÄ40
50
60
- ods/m
- 1 ds/m
- 2ds/m
- 3ds/m
- 4ds/m5 ds/m
- Tdsrm
r 0 mmoulr 5 mmô|tr
- 10 mmol/L15 mmol/L
- 20 mmol/L
r 0 hmol/L
- 'l mmoul
- 2 hmoul
r 3 mmol/Lr 4mmdÂ
6 hmol/L
- 7 mmouL
- I mmoul
Sodium Adsorption Ratio (SAR) - (b)
l0
20
ã30
R40â50
60
Sodium (mmoVl) - (c)
l0
20
530-g
¿o
50
ó0
l0
20
€Ä¿o
50
60
t0
20
5ro
ß40
50
Calcium (mmol/L) - (d)
t0
20
?930èÄ¿o
50
6060
I
67II1011't2
1311l5
Figure 6-2: Showing the Barossa Valley vineyard site inigated with bore water (without gypsum application) ; with the white line indicating the A/B interface t2l
November 2(Dl(ma,ximum leaching)
(A)
December 2001
(after 2 weeks inigation)(B)
Apr|t2002(maximum salt)
(c)
Distânæ Frcm Dripp€r (cm)
Date of SamplingIuly 2002
(mid winter)(D)
November 2002
(maximum leaching)(E)
December 2002 April 2003
(after 2 weeks irrigation) (maximum salt)(F) (G)
Electrical Conductivity (EC) ds/m - (a)Distdce From D¡ipper (cm) Distmce Frem dripper (cm)
25 s0 15 100 25 50 75 100 25 50 75 100
Distace Frcm Dripper (cm)
2s 50 75 r00
Disteæ Frm Dripp€r (cm)
25 s0 75 100 25 50 75 100 25 50 75 100
Distaæ FrcmDripper (cm) Distanæ Frcm Dripp€r (cm)
.{F_
l0
20
530Io
50
60
l0
20
ãro
50
60
-5-6-7-8-9-10
12
-'15
10
20ãcao5Ä40
50
60
10
20ã930
Ä40
50
l0
20
-JU
Ä¿o
50
60
t0
20
9io
Ä¿o
50
ó0
0 dsi/m1 dgm2 ds/m3 dgm4 dsr/m5 dgm
- 7ds/m
Sodium Adsorption Ratio (SAR)- (b)
Sodium (mmoVl) - (c)
l0
20
E¡o
R40
50
60
l0
20
ã¡o
ß40
50
60
Calcium (mmoVl.) - (d)
- 0 mmoul
- 5 mmol/L
r 10 nmoul15 mmol/L
- 20 mmdtr
r 0 mmol/Lr'l mmol/Lr 2 mmol/L
- 3 mmouL
6 mmoUL
r I mmol/L
interface
November 2001(maximum leaching)
December 2001(after 2 weeks inigation)
April2002(maximum salt)
Date of SamplingIu,ly 200.2
(mid winter)November 2002
(maximum leaching)December 2002
(after 2 weeks irrigation)April2003
(maximum salt)
Electrical Conductivity (EC) dS/m - (a)DistÐce frcm Dripper (cm) Distace From Dripper (cm) Disæ@ Frcn Dripper (cm)
25 50 75 100 25 50 75 r00 25 s0 75 100
DistÆce Frcm Dripper (cm)
25 50 7s 100
D¡stoce Frcm Dripper (cm)
25 50 75 100
Distace From Dripper (cm)
25 50 75 100
Dishæ F@m Drippcr (m)25 50 75 t00
l0
20
õ30E.9o
4o
50
60
l0
20
Eio-*
¿o
50
60
'10
20-ts9305Ä40
50
60
r odgmr 1 ds/m
- 2dgm
- 3dsi/m
- 4dsi/m5 dsr/m
- 6ds/m
r 7 dsi/m
-5-6-7-8rg
-1012
-14-15
Sodium Adsorption Ratio (SAR) - (b)
Sodium (mmoVl) - (c)
10
20?e.æ
Ä40
50
w
t0
20I9¡o'É
Ä¿o
50
60
I0
20
?l, 30
Ä+o
50
60
l0
20â5lo
840o50
60
- 0 mmol/L
- 5 mmol/L
r l0 mmol/L'15 m moUL
- 20 mmol/L
- 0 mmol/L
r I hmouL
- 2mmol/L
- 3 mmol/L
- 4 mmol/L
6 mmol/L
- 8 mmoul
Calcium (mmol/L) - (d)
l0
20
530
840o50
60 nFigure 6-4: Showing the Barossa Valley vineyard site inigated with bore water and applied with 8 tonnes/ha of gypsum in May 2Ol and 2002 ; with the white line indicating the A./B
interfacet23
Ghapter 7. lrrigation with Mains Water in the Barossa
Valley: Effects of Gypsum Application
7.1. lntroduction
Established vineyards have traditionally been irrigated with bore water of varying salinity
(up to 3.5 dS/m) but recently, as discussed in Chapter 2, the availability of less-saline water
(BIL scheme) in the Barossa has allowed the changing of water sources for established
vineyards and expansion of new vineyards.
To predict the implications of this switch in water quality on sodic RBE, the trial vineyard
sampled in Chapter 5 (paired site) had 50Vo of vines continually irrigated with bore water
(Chapter 6), while remaining vines were switched in 2000 to a less saline water source
(0.5 dS/m). This trial commenced prior to BIL water becoming available, to allow the
production of results and recommendations prior to less-saline water being applied to
existing commercial vineyards. Town drinking water, known as mains water in this report,
which is a similar composition to the BIL water, was used for irrigation.
This work investigated the broad acre application of gypsum at three rates on the Barossa
Valley field site, which was switched from saline to less saline irrigation water to
determine:
1. If the combination of less saline water and calcium amendment would reduce
potential soil structural problems
2. If regions susceptible to clay dispersion were reduced by these practices
3. A suitable gypsum application rate when less saline water is applied.
t24
7.2. Methods
The application of gypsum, collection of samples, analysis of samples and statistical
treatment of results for broad acre application of gypsum in the Barossa Valley site are
described in Chapter 3. Composition of mains irrigation water is summarised in Chapter 2,
with full analysis detailed in Appendix G.
7.3. Results
7.3.1. Mains Water without Gypsum
Electrical Conductivity
The EC of the soil profile remains low throughout the year (< 3 dS/m), except for some
slight salt accumulation in the B horizon (EC = 4 dS/m) from July 2002 @gure 7-1Da).
Mains water provides less stress on vines in terms of salinity and they should be able to
take up water easier, a lower osmotic gradient exists.
Sodium Adsorption Ratio (SAR)
The SAR of the B horizon is raised (SAR = 10 - 15) at the end of winter rains in 2001
(Figure 7-1Ab). However, irrigation in 200112 and subsequent rain events resulted in a
reduced SAR (5 - 11) throughout the soil for all other sampling dates. The A horizon had
a low SAR (<9) for all sampling periods except at 100 cm from the dripper after
commencement of irrigation in 2001 @gure 7-1Bb) when the SAR reached 10-11.
SAR builds up during the irrigation season, particularly in the Btl horizon. Reduced
leaching has occurred beneath the dripper, which may be due to increased water uptake
from vines due to the increased salt-osmotic potential.
125
With winter rains, SAR is reduced, although regions of the B horizon maintain a moderate
SAR. These coincide with low EC, especially at the end of irrigation prior to leaching with
winter rains.
Sodium
Beneath the dripper remains low (<5 mmol/L) in sodium throughout the sampling period.
The A horizon is also low in sodium (<5 mmol,/L) except at selected times (e.9. end of
irrigation 200213, Figure 7-1Gc), when sodium reached up to 10 mmol/L. The B horizon
at a distance from the dripper remains high in sodium (15 - 20 mmol/L) particularly after
Ju,ly 2002 (Figure 7-1Dc).
Calcium
Calcium is low (< 3 mmol/L) throughout the soil profile, except for some slight
accumulation at 50 - 100 cm from the dripper at 50 - 60 cm depth (Figure 7-IDd, Ed and
Fd). Calcium levels in the bore water are five times those found in mains water (100 mg/L
versus 2O mgll-), which explains the accumulation of calcium with bore water irrigation,
but very little with mains irrigation.
Chemícal effects on Clay Dlspersíon
The first few years are critical when switching to a less saline water source, as EC declines
rapidly, but SAR requires a number of years, depending on conditions, to decline, resulting
in a situation where the Btl horizon may become dispersed. This period of time may allow
a large amount of soil structural damage to occur, particularly in the Btl horizon.
126
7.3.2. Mains Water - Gypsum 4 tonnes/hectare
E lectrical Con d u ctivity
The EC of the soil profile remains low throughout the year (< 3 dS/m), except for some
slight salt accumulation in the B horizon (EC = 4 dS/m) at a distance from the dripper from
November 2002 (Figure 7 -ZF,a).
The EC of the profile is similar to that with no added gypsum, which is consistent with
findings on the site using Bore water where 4 tonneslhectare of gypsum did not
substantially increase EC. This confirms the application of 4 tonneslhectare of gypsum, in
the short term, will not increase soil EC to a level which will affect vine root function.
However, as soil solution EC is not increased, the soil may disperse in regions of low
calcium.
Sodium Adsorption Hatio (SAR)
SAR of the profile is raised (SAR = 12 - 13) in the B horizon at the end of winter rains in
2001 (Figure 7-lAb). However, inigation in200ll2 and subsequent rain events resulted in
a reduced SAR (< 11) throughout the soil for all other sampling dates. The A horizon had
a low SAR (<9) for all sampling periods.
SAR has declined both with mains water and gypsum application. SAR is lower with
gypsum application in the Btl horizon and remains low throughout the winter period,
however the 2002-03 irrigation season causes the SAR to increase slightly.
127
Sodium
Beneath the dripper remains low (<5 mmol/L) in sodium throughout the sampling period.
The A horizon is also low in sodium (<5 mmolll) except at selected times (e.9. end of
irrigation 200213, Figure 7-1Gc), when sodium reached up to 10 mmolll. The B horizon
at a distance from the dripper remains high in sodium (15 - 20 mmol/L) particularly after
JuIy 2002 (Figure 7-1Dc).
Calcium
Calcium is low (Ca > 3 mmol/L) in the B horizon at the end of winter 2001 (Figure 7-2Ad)
six months after gypsum application, although the A horizon has up to 8 mmol/L at the
surface. At the completion of irrigation ln 200112 @gure 7-2Cd) calcium has been
leached from beneath the dripper (Ca < 3 mmol/L) and accumulations have only occurred
in the A horizon (4-7 mmolll) and in the B horizon at a distance from the dripper (4
mmol/L). In July 2002, mid winter (Figure 7-2Dd) the A horizon contains 4-8 mmol/L of
calcium, while the B horizon has been completely leached (Ca < 3 mmol/L). The
remaining sampling periods show some accumulation in the A horizon, with a leached
region beneath the dripper and accumulation at a distance from the dripper in the B
horizon.
Although the SAR has declined, calcium levels have only increased in the A horizon and at
a distance from the dripper in the Btl horizon. Initially large amounts of calcium are
present on the soil surface; however, after only 2 weeks of irrigation, the region beneath
the dripper is entirely leached.
128
Suction cup results (Chapter 9) found calcium levels were elevated throughout the soil
profile, particularly in the A horizon 12 to 16 weeks after application, however, they
rapidly declined after this, to a level slightly higher, than that without gypsum. Therefore,
if the maximum concentration was found 16 weeks after application the peak may have
been missed with the saturation extract samples, as in year 1 initial samples were collected
6 months after the first gypsum application, while in the second year, samples were taken 9
weeks and 6 months after application.
As found in the suction cup work, calcium increased by a greater magnitude under bore
water irrigation compared to that of mains water at 4 tonnes lhectare. This is a result of less
calcium entering the soil in mains irrigation water (25 EIL) than in the bore irrigation water
(100 g/L). The lower salt content of the mains soil profile may also reduce the solubility of
gypsum and less calcium will enter the profile than will bore irrigation water.
Chemical effects on Clay Dispersion
Gypsum has not increased the EC, but has increased calcium. Regions of the soil, such as
the Bt1, are still susceptible to dispersion.
7.3.3. Mains Water - Gypsum I tonnes/hectare
Elect rical Co nductivity
Electrical conductivity is low throughout the profile (<3 dS/m) except at the completion of
irrigation in2O0Il2 (Figure 7-3Ca) and2002l3 (Figure 7-3Ga) when salts accumulate at 50
to 100 cm from the dripper (up to 5 dS/m).
129
Salt increased after the second application of gypsum at 8 tonnes/hectare (Appendix C).
However, these values are still significantly lower than EC of soil irrigated with bore water
(Chapter 6). The salt input from gypsum application will not reduce vine root growth as
the system is receiving less salt input overall from irrigation water. However, if multiple
dry years or more saline water is applied with 8 tonnes/hectare of gypsum, soil EC must be
monitored.
Sodíum Adsorption Ratio (SAR)
SAR is low (< 9) in the A horizon throughout the sampling period. However, the B
horizon in November 200I (Figure 7-3Ab) has an SAR up to 13, which declines to 11 with
the commencement of irrigation @igure 7-3Bb). The SAR in the B horizon remains
moderate (10-11 mmol/L) for the remainder of the study. SAR has decreased with
increased gypsum application, however regions in the soil, such as the Btl beneath the
dripper require further applications of gypsum to reduce the SAR.
Sodium
Sodium accumulation zones with 8 tonnes/hectare gypsum (Figure 7-3c) arc similar to
those at 4 tonnes/trectare @gure 7-2c). The region beneath the dripper remains low
(<5 mmoUl) in sodium throughout the sampling period. The A horizon is low in sodium
(<5 mmoUl) during winter (Figure 7-38c, Dc and Ec) but during summer irrigation
accumulates sodium (10 to >20 mmol/L). The B horizon remains high in sodium (15 -
20 mmol/L) particularly after July 2002 (Figure 7-3Dc).
130
Calcium
Calcium is high in the A horizon (5 - 8 mmoVl) at all times, except beneath the dripper
during irrigation (Figure 7-3Cd, Fd and Gd). The B horizon is low (<3 mmoUl) in
calcium until winter 2002 (Figure 7-3Dd) when calcium has accumulated in the B horizon
beneath the dripper (up to 8 mmol/L). hrigation has leached this zone of calcium (Figure
7-3Fd and Gd) and caused the B horizon at 100 cm from the dripper to increase in calcium
content (4-6 mmol/L).
The higher rate of calcium application has caused a similar pattern of accumulation as the
lower rate, however the A horizon contains higher levels throughout the 2OO2-03 irrigation
season and gypsum is still available to move into the B horizon.
Chemical effects on Clay Dispersion
The combination of low-saline irrigation water and high gypsum application has reduced
SAR and increased salts in the profile to prevent further soil structural damage.
7.4. Conclusions
The switching from 11 years irrigation with saline water to a less saline water source
caused a Barossa Valley RBE to decrease in salt content. However, the SAR particularly
in the B horizon at 100 cm from the dripper was maintained at similar levels to the soil
irrigated with saline water. As salts are no longer applied with irrigation, the soil
maintains a low EC throughout the year. By contrast soils irrigated with bore water have
periods of salt flushing in winter and possible dispersion in winter, while in summer the
profile is high in salts and less likely to disperse. The soil irrigated with bore water, then
131
switched to mains water is a constant environment of low EC and moderate SAR and
therefore soil degradation may continue.
Application of gypsum has only slightly increased salt levels but has reduced the SAR.
Although, calcium was maintained at higher concentrations in the A horizon. As the mains
water contains sodium, although at a lower level than bore water, so that continued
application of calcium at a reduced rate may be required.
132
November 2001(maximum leaching)
(A)
December 2001(after 2 weeks inigation)
(B)
Apnl2002(maximum salt)
(c)
Date of SamplingIuly 2002
(mid winter)(D)
November 2002 December 2002 April 2003
(maximum leaching) (after 2 weeks irrigation) (maximum salt)(E) (F) (G)
Electrical Conductivþ (EC) dS/m - (a)Distanæ From Dripper (cm) Distance F¡om Dripper (cm) Distace From Dripper (cm) Distance From Dripper (cm)
25 50 75 100 25 50 75 r00 25 50 7s 100 25 50 75 100
Sodium Adsorption Ratio (SAR) - (b)
Distæce Frcm Dripper (cm)
25 50 7s 100
Distace From Dripper (cm)
25 50 7s 100
Dife@ Frcm D¡ippor(cm)
25 50 75 t00
l0
20
5lo-A ¿o
50
60
10
20aJ¿ 3o5Ä40
50
ÞU
- odgm
- 1 ds/m
- 2ds/m
- 3ds/m
- 4ds/m5 ds/m
- 7 ds/m
- 0 mmol/L
- 5 mmol/L
- 10 mmol/L15 mmoul
- 20 mmol/L
- 0 mmol/L
-'l mmol/L
r 2 mmol/Lr 3 mmol/L
6 mmol/L
t0
20
ß40
50
60
'10
20-tsi¿ 30*o
Ä40
50
60
l0
20
9¡o€Ä¿o
50
60
ì0
20
?9¡o5o
Ä¿o
50
60
Sodium (mmol/L) - (c)
l0
20
R40
50
60
Calcium (mmol/L
l0
20
30
40
50
60
133
-5-6-7
-9-io
121311't5
Figure 7-l: Showing the Barossa Valley vineyard site inigated with mains water (without gypsum application) ; with the white line indicating the AÆinterface
November 2001(maximum leaching)
December 2001(after 2 weeks irrigation)
April2002(maximum salt)
Date of SamplingIuly 20f2
(mid winter)November 2002
(maximum leaching)December 2002
(after 2 weeks irrigation)April2003
(maximum salt)
Electrical Conductivity (EC) dS/m - (a)Distmæ From Dripper (cni) DistaceFrom Dripper (cm) Dishæ FYöfñDlÞper (cm)
25 50 75 100 25 50 75 100 25 50 75 100
Dishæe Frcm Dripper (m)25 50 75 t00
Distaæ From Dripper (cm) Dimce Frm Dripper (cm)
25 50 75 100
Dishæ Frcm Dripper (m)25 50 75 10025 s0 75 100
'10
20â930
Ä40
50
AN
l0
20
i'¿oâ
50
60
0 ds/m'I ds/m2 ds/m3 ds/m4 ds/m5 ds/m6 ds/m7 ds/m
Sodium Adsorption Ratio (SAR)- (b)
t0
20
E30
Ê40
50
60
10
20
l, 30
Ä40
50
60
t0
20
e.30
å¿o
50
60
À
€
l0
20
?9lo€Ä¿o
50
60
l0
20
30
40
50
60
Sodium - (c)
- (d)Calcium
10
20
5¡oß40
50
60
- 0 mmol/L
- I mmol/L
r 2 mmol/L
- 3 mmol/L
6 mmol/L
- 8 mmouL
interface
r5
-6-7ro
rl0
12
0 mmol/L5 mmol/L't0
1520
November 2001(maximum leaching)
December 2001(after 2 weeks irrigation)
April2002(maximum salt)
Date of SamplingJu,ly 2002
(mid winter)November 2002
(maximum leaching)December 2002
(after 2 weeks irrigation)April2003
(maximum salt)
Electrical Conductivity (EC) dS/m - (a)Distace From Dripper (cm) D¡stace Frcm Dnpper (cm)
25 50 75 100
Dista¡æ From Dripper (cm)
25 50 75 t00
Dishce From Dripper (cm)
25 50 75 100
Dituæ Fom Dripper (cm)
25 50 75 ì00
Distæce From Dripper (cm) Distance From Dripper (cm)
25 50 75 100 2s 50 75 r00 25 50 75 100
10
20?áå40
50
60
20
Êbr0
á¿o
50
60
10
20
930äÄ40
50
60
Sodium Adsorption Ratio (SAR) - (b)
t0
Sodium (mmol/L) - (c)
- ods/m
- 'l ds/m
- 2 ds/m
- 3ds/m
- 4ds/m5 ds/m
- 6 ds/m
- 7ds/m
r5
-6-8
12
ì0
20
530
840
50
60
t0
20
ð30
-ß ¿o
50
60
l0
20
R40
50
60
IO
20
30
40
50
60
â
a
- 0 mmol/L
- 5 mmoul
r '10 mmoul1 5 mmoul
- 20 mmol/L
- 0 mmol/L
- l mmUL
- 2 mmouL
- 3 mmoul
ú 5 mmouL6 mmol/L
- I mmol/L
Calcium (mmol/L) - (d)
l0
20
30
40
50
60
Ghapter L lrrigation with Bore Water in Mclaren Vale
8.1. lntroduction
An additional vineyard in Mclaren Vale was selected as it was situated on a RBE which
also had been drip irrigated over a long period with bore water. However, gypsum has
been applied biennially since vineyard establishment. Further details on the region and site
are provided in Chapter 2. Briefly, this vineyard provided a more 'ideal' management
system, with water of lower salinity than the bore water used in the Barossa Valley and
application of gypsum since establishment. This enabled research to determine if a more
ideal management system could reduce the potential for soil structural damage occurring.
If this is not true then perhaps saline irrigated vineyards on RBE soil types might be
considered unsustainable.
This worked investigated the biannual broad acre application of gypsum on the Mclaren
Vale field site since establishment to determine
1. The two-dimensional variation in chemical properties under a drip irrigated
vineyard, which has received long-term gypsum application
2. The seasonal movement and accumulation of gypsum in the soil profile when
applied since vineyard establishment.
8.2. Methods
Gypsum was mechanically applied by the vineyard o\ryners at 2.6 tonnes/hectare over the
entire vineyard every second year, and this process was continued during the research. The
collection of samples, analysis of samples and statistical treatment of results was identical
to the Barossa samples discussed in Chapters 6 and 7 and is fully detailed in Chapter 3.
r36
8.3. Results
Soil was sampled at times and for the reasons summarised in Table 8-1. The chemical
properties of these samples are shown as a time series in Figure 8-1 and Figure 8-2.
Tøble 8-I tímes and
Specific chemical properties considered important were plotted down the page for each
treatment. The properties selected were Electrical Conductivity (labelled as 'a'), Sodium
Adsorption Ratio (labelled as 'b'), Sodium (labelled as 'c') and Calcium (labelled as 'd').
Therefore, the reference to Figure 6-1Ac indicates the graph is the first in Chapter 6 (Non-
Irigated site at Barossa site) and a plot of sodium (c) in November 2001 (A).
Four months135.1
Minimalt25.2
Maximum salt accumulationprior to leaching
G16 April2003
Two weeks28.4
Minimal25.2
Initial accumulation of saltF18 December2002
0Winter rains101.0
Maximum leaching of saltswith winter rains prior toirri gation c ommencement
E20 November2002
Mid WinterRains I74.8
Mid Winter 5.9D31 July2002
Four months183.3
Minimal57.9
Maximum salt accumulationprior to leaching
C17 April2002
Two weeks18.6
Minimal26.4
Initial accumulation of saltB20 December2001
0 (since
1/08i01)Winter rains244.5 (since
1/08/01)
Maximum leaching of saltswith winter rains prior toirrigation commencement
A22 November2001
Irrigationsince previoussampline (mm)
Rainfallsince previoussamplins (mm)
ImportanceKey toFigures
Date
137
8.3.1. Non-lrrigated
Electrical Conductivity
The EC of the non-irrigated site is low throughout the year (< 2 dS/m), although some
surface salt accumulation (2-3 dS/m) occurs during summer months @gure 8-1Fa and Ga
and Appendix C) due to evaporation and concentration of salts in the soil.
Sodium Adsorption Ratio (SAR)
The SAR is also low (<2) to a depth of 65 cm during the entire year, except at the soil
surface in December 2O02 when it rises slightly (SAR = 4). This increase is caused by the
accumulation of salts at the surface.
Sodium
Sodium also follows a similar trend to EC, low throughout the profile, with a slight
increase in summer months.
Calcium
Calcium is low throughout the profile (<3 mmol/L). However, vineyard management in
the adjacent vineyard, particularly in 2002 (Figure 8-1Gd), caused some calcium
accumulation in the A horizon (up to 8 mmol/L). This is not accompanied by a large
increase EC, however most elements including B, K, Mg, Mn, Na, S andZn increased in
the A horizon, although they were still well below the irrigated soil levels. The increase in
these cations in the NA2 horizons is interpreted to be caused by: (i) spray drift from
surrounding vineyards, (ii) gypsum application accidentally being applied to both the
inigated and non-irrigated sites, (iii) possible flooding of the non-irrigated site with bore
water.
r38
General
SAR is low throughout the year, however at the commencement of winter rains, which can
cause dispersion, salt accumulation had occurred and reduced any potential for the soil to
disperse. The soil structure in the non-irrigated site would not be damaged as: (i) there is
no mechanical disturbance, (ii) little compaction occurs, (iii) only sodium from rainfall
enters the soil (low SAR), (iv) there is cover crop present to stabilise the soil and (v) salts
present at the commencement of winter rains to prevent dispersion.
8.3.2. Bore water with long-term gypsum application
E I ect rical Cond uctivity
The A horizon accumulates salts during summer irrigation (up to 4.5 dS/m), but is leached
with winter rains (<2 dS/m), particularly beneath the dripper. The B horizon remains
relatively free of salts (<3.5 dS/m), except at the end of irrigation in 2003 (Figure 8-2Ga)
when the EC of the entire profile is elevated (2-6 ds/m).
These lower levels of salts than found in the Barossa Valley are due to: (i) the lower EC of
the irrigation water, (ii) reduced dispersion in the B horizon resulting from gypsum
application, so that salts are readily leached in winter and (iii) although gypsum is a salt
source, not enough is applied to cause EC to rise dramatically.
Sodium Adsorption Ratio (SAR)
SAR remained low (<8) at all times throughout the soil profile including the B horizon
during irrigation. A slight increase in SAR (8.5) occurred beneath the dripper with
139
irrigation (Figure 8-2Gb) as calcium is leached from this zone. This indicates gypsum
application maintained a low SAR.
Sodium
Sodium is low throughout the profile during the 2O0Il2 irrigation season (Figure 8-24c, Bc
and Cc). However, sodium then accumulates around the wetting onion, peaking in April
2003 @gure 8-2Gc) at >20 mmolll- 50 cm from the dripper. Regions 100 cm from the
dripper remain low in sodium (< Smmol/L).
Calcium
Biennial applications of gypsum has allowed calcium to accumulate throughout the soil
profile (>5 mmol/L). Although, leaching occurs beneath the dripper with irrigation in both
the A and B horizons (< 4 mmol/L).
Some depletion also occurs in November 2001 (Figure 8-2Ad), 18 months after gypsum
application, indicating biennial application is required otherwise the soil will be leached of
calcium and SAR will rise. Calcium increased in December 200I, due to calcium entering
through the irrigation system.
General
Gypsum application to RBE acts by primarily increasing the calcium, and thereby reducing
SAR (ESP) rather than by increasing EC. Adequate gypsum has been applied, as SAR is
maintained at a low value but EC is not increased to a level which would cause problems
for vine water uptake.
140
8.4. Conclusions
The regular application of gypsum from initial vineyard establishment together with the
application of bore water of lower salinity have prevented the SAR rising throughout the
profile. Large regions of the soil profile have high levels of calcium, although some
leaching occurs beneath the dripper with irrigation and following winter rains. This may
be a region susceptible to clay dispersion, as although the SAR was low, some sodium was
present. Continued application of gypsum to this site is reconìmended, although the rate or
frequency may be reduced as the soil contains high levels of calcium.
141
November 2001(maximum leaching)
December 2001(after 2 weeks irrigation)
April2002(maximum salt)
Date of Samplinghtly 2002
(mid winter)November 2002 December 2002 April 2003
(maximum leaching) (after 2 weeks irrigation) (maximum salt)
.q
3'
eã
Electrical Conductivity (EC) dS/m - (a)
Sodium Adsorption Ratio (SAR) - (b)
Sodium
a
E
F
6
E
Calcium - (d)
- odgm
- 1 ds/m
- 2 ds/m
r 3 ds/m
- 4ds/m5 ds/m
- 0 mmol/L
- 5 mmoul
- 10 mmol/L15 mmol/L
- 20 mmol/L
- 0 mmol/L
- 2 mmol/L
- 3 mmol/L
6 mmol/L
0216I101211
Figure 8-1: Showing Non-Inigated Mclaren Site; with the white line indicating the A/B interface 142
November 2001
(maximum leaching)December 2001
(after 2 weeks irrigation)Apr1l2002
(maximum salt)
Date of SamplingIuly 2002
(mid winter)November 2002 December 2002 April 2003
(maximum leaching) (aftør2 weeks irrigatiør) (maximum salt)
Electrical Conductivþ (EC) dS/m - (a)
g
É
E
É
- ods/m
r ldvm
- 2ds/m
r 3 ds/m
- 4ds/m5 dsi/m
- 6ds/m
r 7ds/m
&
Sodium Adsorption Ratio (SAR) - (b)
Sodium (mmoVl) - (c)
Calcium (mmol/L) - (d)
Ã
r 0 mmol/Lr 5 mmol/L
- l0 mmol/L15 mmdtr
r 20 mmol/L
rOllmULr lfmUL
- 2mUL
- 3moUL
- 4mUL
- SmmULô mmoul
r TllmUL
-8ml/L
Figr.ue 8-2: Showing Mclaren lrrigated vineyard site; withthe white line indicating the A/B interface r43
Chapter 9. Changes in Soil Solution Ghemistry
9.1. Introduction
Determination of the vadose zone soil solution chemistry is of great importance to soil and
other earth scientists as it provides an indication of the: (i) salinity and sodicity status of
soils; (ii) potential pollution of groundwater (Dorrance et a\.,1991); (iii) the quality of soil
in relation to plant water uptake and growth (e.g.Briggs and McCall, 1904); and (iv)
pedogenic processes (e.9. Goyne et a1.,2000).
Soils often exhibit macro- and micro-pore flow and under saturated conditions, solutions
will move faster through macro-pores, thereby bypassing finer pores. This results in the
pore-liquid of macro-pores possibly being very different in composition to that in the
micro-pores (Thomas and Phillips, 1979). Samples collected in short time intervals
represent solutions which are moving rapidly through the soil and are held at low tensions.
However this is also considered to represent the leachate of a soil system more closely than
samples collected at high tensions (Severson and Grigal, I916) and represents soil solution
which is readily available for plant uptake.
Vadose zone soil solutions are often difficult to sample without altering the solution
composition and may not represent true temporal or spatial variations. Solutions may be
sampled from cores or in situ pore solution samplers. Soil cores may be used to determine
the spatial distribution of solutes within a profile, although the methodology is very labour
intensive, destructive and difficult for continuous monitoring (Rhoades, 1982). The use of
in situ samplers allows continuous monitoring of solute concentrations at specific depths
144
within soil profiles. However, care needs to be taken in sampling because the sample
solute composition and concentration may be influenced by intake rate, vacuum pressure,
blocking of ceramic cups, ion diffusion, adsorption and leaching (Hansen and Harris, 1975;
Morrison and Lowery, 1990). Chemical interactions between porous ceramic tips and soil
solution may affect the chemistry of the solution collected, often because of physical
disturbance during installation (Spangerberg et aI., 1997). Soil solution samplers are
limited in their application because spatial variability in soil solution composition means
that a single suction cup may not necessarily represent the true soil solution chemistry of a
particular soil horizon or profile @ebyle et a1.,1988).
In order to follow variations in the pore water chemistry due to seasonal changes in rainfall
and irrigatioî, in sllz samplers \ryere installed. Porous ceramic suction cups were selected
to continually monitor soil solution because: (i) the volume sampled is relatively small
compared to other sampling devices, (ii) the suction cups consist of material which
minimises alterations in soil solution composition, (iii) the suction cups are able to be
permanently installed and sampled numerous times, with minimal soil disturbance and (iv)
sampling may occur when the soil is unsaturated, unlike other in situ devices (e.g. zerc-
tension samplers) (Goyne et a1.,2000).
As shown in Chapters 5 and 7, regions of the soil became sodic with long-term irrigation
with bore water followed by irrigation with mains water. Consequently, calcium
amelioration was applied to investigate the seasonal effect of bore water drip irrigation on
a RBE with and without gypsum application.
145
The aims of the observations described in this chapter were to:
1. Quantify the pore water chemistry of a Red Brown Earth which had been
drip-irrigated for 11 years with bore water.
2. Determine if changing to less saline irrigation water modifies pore solution
chemistry.
3. Determine if application of gypsum modifies pore solution chemistry.
4. Compare soil solution composition to saturation extraction composition.
9.2. Methods
9.2.1. Suction cup design, installation and testing
Suction cup des¡gn
Porous ceramic suction cup design was modified from Hicks et al. (1999). To strengthen
fabrication, the clear transmission tubing and glass weight attached to the bottom of the
tubing was replaced with stainless steel tubing. The design of the modified suction cup is
shown in Figure 9-1.
As mentioned above, the porous ceramic tip of a suction cup may contaminate samples
(Wolff, 1967:. Debyle et al., 1988). However, contamination may be reduced by pre-
washing with dilute HCl. The ceramic tensiometer tips (Cooinda Ceramics, size 4,40 mm
x 60 mm, 3.5 mm wall thickness) used in this study were acid washed by placing them
upright in a container of l7o Hydrochloric acid, ensuring no acid was initially inside the
ceramic tips. The ceramic tips were then left for 24 hours to allow acid to move slowly
through the porous ceramic cups, thereby displacing air with acid and resulting in the
porous fabric becoming saturated with acid. This procedure was repeated four times then
146
flushed with deionised water to remove any excess acid. The ceramic tips were allowed to
dry under atmospheric conditions.
50 mm end cap
3 way tap
50 mmplasticconduit
rubber bung
50 mm end cap
2 mm stainlesssteel tubing
Magnification of suction cupwall, to show joint betweenceramic cup and plastic conduit
40 mm plasticconduit
2 mm stainlesssteel tubing
PorousceraÍuc cup
Fígure 9-1 Desígn of Porous Ceramíc Suction Cup (modiftedfrom Hícks et al., 1999)
The initial process of construction involved attaching the acid-washed ceramic tip to a
length of 40 mm conduit. To ensure a tight fit, the outside surface of the ceramic tip at the
joining area was smoothed using fine emery paper and the inside of each conduit
individually trimmed \ryith a lathe. The join was further secured with fast setting
isocyanurate (Araldite). The length of the conduit ìwas selected to allow a protrusion of
approximately 15 cm above the soil surface when installed at the required depth.
147
A 40 mm diameter hole was drilled through the centre of an end cap, which was then
secured to the top of the conduit bearing the ceramic cup. Two holes were drilled through
a rubber bung to enable two pieces of stainless steel tubing to be inserted through the
rubber bung as shown in Figure 9-1. Stainless steel tubing was used to extract the solution
from the cup. A three-way plastic medical tap was attached to the top of each stainless
steel tube with fast setting isocyanurate to enable suction to be maintained. A short piece
of 50 mm conduit and an end cap were joined to act as a cover, thereby preventing the
rubber bung or 3 way taps being exposed to climatic conditions.
Suction cup installation
Suction cups were permanently installed in the vineyard at various depths and distances
from drippers (Figure 9-2). These depths corresponded to the A (10 cm), A2 (25 cm), Btl
(40 cm) and Btkl (100 cm) horizons. The three shallowest suction cups were installed at
10, 50 and 100 cm from the dripper, while the suction cup at 100 cm depth was installed at
a distance of 10 cm from the dripper. A total of ten suction cups were required per
treatment and these were not placed under a single vineidripper, because they may have
interfered with each other. Consequently, three adjacent vines were used for each
treatment (Figure 9-2). This configuration of suction cup installation was repeated in both
bore and mains irrigation quality water treatments at the Barossa Valley field site (for
details on these water sources and the field site see Chapter 2). The experiment was
duplicated for gypsum treatment, applied at a. rate of 4 tonneslha for both of the water
treatments (for details on gypsum application see Chapter 3). This resulted in a total of 40
suction cups installed.
148
5{lo 10cm 10cm
Distane fmm dripper
50m 100cm
VINE2
50q 10m 10q
Distanæ frem dripper
50q lülq
VINE 1
Soil Surface
10 cm
25 cm
.4./B Intcrface
4ll cE
Soil Surf¡ce
l0 cm
25uA.lT Interface
4{l cm
lü) cm 100 m
1ü) cm 100 u
VINE 3
SoiI Surf&e
10 cm
25q.À,/B Interface
40 cm
1ü)q
100 m l)q l0@ 10u
Disastrce lmn d¡¡pper
50r l0O@
Figure 9-2 Positíonìng of suction cups for each treatment
Suction cups were installed by hand augering a hole slightly wider than the diameter of the
suction cups to the specified depth. Soil removed was collected and kept in the order it
was extracted. A soil slurry was then made from the final portion of soil removed from the
auger hole with deionised water. Approximately 5009 of the slurry was poured down the
hole, and then the suction cup was placed into it. This allowed the suction cup to have
close contact with the surrounding soil of similar composition (e.g.Grossman and Udluft,
1991). Other experiments have employed qùartz silt for this purpose (¿.9. Smith and
Carsel, 1986), however it was thought that during times of drying, the hydraulic
conductivity of the sand may prevent adequate sampling of the suffounding soil solution.
149
The slurry was then tamped down to ensure minimal air was present. The next 5 cm of the
hole was filled with granulated bentonite clay to prevent preferential flow into the soil
slurry. The remaining soil was then replaced as a slurry, ensuring the slurry consisted of
soil sampled from the appropriate depth.
Suction cup testing
To verify the solution collected \ryas uncontaminated by the suction cups, a suction cup was
installed in a container of acid washed sand. Distilled water was then added to the sand
and solution extracted through the suction cup. The EC, pH and cations (via ICP) of the
extract and distilled water were compared. Both solutions were found to be of the same
composition, which confirmed that the suction cups were not contaminating the soil
solution extracted.
9.2.2. Sample collection from suction cups and laboratory analysis
Sample collect¡on
Each suction cup was connected to a vacuum pump via a water trap and receiving flask
with transmission tubing (Figure 9-3). A continuous vacuum in the suction cups was not
maintained, as applying suction to such a large surface may alter the transport process and
the sample will not be representative of the soil solution (van der Ploeg and Beese, l97l).
Instead a suction of 60 kPa was applied to each suction cup for 3 minutes by the vacuum
pump, then the system sealed for 90 minutes before sampling. The sampling time and
suction applied was kept constant for each sampling event, to ensure that the sample was
consistently extracted from a similar pore group each time.
r50
Vacuumflask
Ballvalve
Gauge
Watertrap
Receivingflask
Suctioncup
Figure 9-3 Sampling of Suctíon Cup (modífiedfrom Hìcks et al., 1999)
The suction cups were allowed a three month period to equilibrate during which the soil
solution was sampled fortnightly but discarded. Suction cups initially may underestimate
solution concentration because of solute adsorption within the cup (Grossman and Udluft,
1991). However, preferential adsorption declines rapidly as the exchange sites of the
ceramic cup equilibrate with the soil solution @ebyle et aI., 1988), however solution
concentrations > 0.1 mmol"dl-l are not affected(e.5. Wood, Ig74). Since this research
was conducted Grobler et aI. (2003) has shown that the first 0.19 mL of solution collected
will equilibrate with the suction cup and remaining solution is of true composition.
Although the exact amount of solution will depend on the size and nature of the suction
cup, only low amounts of solution are required to equilibrate the suction cup. After the
initial three month period when the full sampling program began, samples of less than 2O
mL were discarded.
151
Laboratory Analysis
All solutions were taken immediately to the laboratory for pH and EC determinations. One
drop of HNO: per 25 mL of solution was added prior to storage at 40C. Extracts were
diluted appropriately and analysed for cations via ICPAES (inductively coupled plasma
atomic emission spectrophotometry); Cl- was determined with an auto-analyser. The
concentration of major cations measured in soil solution as well as pH, EC and Cl- results
are fully tabulated in Appendix D.
9.3. Results and Discuss¡on
The following series of colour graphs were plotted with identical axes and configuration, to
allow for easy comparison (Figure 9-11 to Figure 9-1S). For each figure, depth of suction
cup installation is plotted down the page and distance from the inigation dripper across the
page, as shown in Figure 9-4. While on each respective paired graphs calcium and sodium
(both in mg/L) or SAR and EC is plotted on the Y axis.
Soil Surface
A/B Interface
100 E Displayed infrgures
t0 50 100
Distance from Dripper (cm)
Fígure 9-4 Arrangement of graphs for Jìgures 9-11 to 9-18, to show samplíng position ín
relation to the ìnigatíon dripper, A/B intedace and vine.
t0
25
40
I
o IÞ.
J
h.
k:Rainfall !
c.b
f.
a.
e.d.
152
Soil solution composition was compared to saturation extract composition presented in
Chapters 6 and 7 (Section 9.3.3). To allow for accurate comparisons, average soil solution
composition was calculated for the following periods: (i) prior to irrigation coÍrmencement
2001 (September to November); (ii) end of irrigation 2002 (February to April) and; (iii)
prior to irrigation commencement 2002 (September to November). As some suction cups
were unable to extract solution during dry periods, these data could not be compared.
Results are tabulated for each treatment (Appendix E) and are compared to similar
sampling times for saturation extracts (Table 9-1).
Table 9-I Collectíon data of sømples for comparison of soíl solutíon and saturatìonextraction c omp o sífía n
November 2002September to November2002
Apnl2002February to April2002
November 2001September to November200r
Saturation ExtractCollection
Soil Solution CollectionPeriod
9.3.1. Pore Water Chemistry with Bore Water lrrigation
Bore water without appl¡cation of gypsum
Sodium
On average, approximately 707o (by concentration) of ions measured in the soil solution
for all depths and distances from the dripper were sodium (Figure 9-114 to J). After the
completion of irrigation with bore water sodium levels vary with distance from the dripper,
for example in April 2002, sodium concentrations directly under the dripper were
approximately 700 and 1100 mgtLin the A horizon (10 cm depth) (Figure 9-11A), and Bt1
horizon (40cm depth) (Figure 9-11G), respectively (c.f. bore water contains an average of
445 mgll-, Appendix G). At 50 cm from the dripper the sodium concentrations were
2000 and 3700 mgtL in the A (10 cm) and Btl (40 cm) horizons, respectively. However,
at the end of winter (September 2002) the level of sodium decreased in specific zones. For
Is3
example, the sodium concentration directly under the dripper was approximately 200 and
1100 mg/L in the A horizon @gure 9-114) and Btl horizons (Figure 9-11G), respectively.
In contrast, at 50 cm from the dripper the sodium concentrations remained at levels >2500
mglL in the A and Btl horizons (Figure 9-118 and H). At 100 cm from the dripper the
sodium concentrations decreased to levels of 400 and 350 mglL for the A2 @igure 9-1lF)
and Btl horizons (Figure 9-11I), respectively with winter rains.
Sodium levels are more constant in the Btl horizon, compared to the A horizon because of
the restricting clayey B horizon. Maximum accumulation of sodium occurs at a distance
of 50 cm from the dripper, with concentrations at 100 cm from the dripper declining,
particularly in the Bt1 horizon.
At a depth of 100 cm, directly under the dripper, sodium levels varied seasonally, but
clearly increased at the end of winter 2001. This is caused by sodium ions being flushed or
leached through the soil by rainfall.
Calcium
Calcium levels throughout the soil profile are low (Figure 9-114 to J). The low
concentrations of calcium (<1000 mg/L) is due to the low concentration of calcium in
irrigation water (average I03 mgtL, Appendix G), which has been applied for over ten
years. Calcium concentrations are also elevated at a depth of 100 cm, due to the presence
of calcium carbonate (Figure 9-1 1J).
154
SAR
High SAR values (SAR > 13) \ryere measured for the majority of the year throughout the
soil, except in the A horizon beneath the dripper (SAR <10), indicating continuous high
levels of sodicity (Figure 9-I2). However, SAR values fluctuated seasonally with very
high levels (>20) occurring at the completion of inigation (e.g.Figure 9-l2B). Seasonal
trends in SAR in the profile are more dependent on the sodium concentrations rather than
calcium or magnesium, as these temain relatively constant throughout the year, while
sodium fluctuates.
Electrical Conductivitv (EC)
The EC is highly variable in parts of the profile (e.g. the A horizon at 50cm from the
dripper, Figure 9-I2B). Salts are leached during winter (April to November) followed by
concentration over the following summer @ecember to April); this is evident throughout
the profile (e.9. Figure 9-128, D, F and H). Salt build-up under the dripper is very low
compared to regions at a distance from the dripper because the A horizon under the dripper
receives a large amount of leaching during irrigation @gure 9-I2A). However it can still
be observed that some salt accumulation has occurred with gradual .flushing occurring
during winter.
The highest EC values \ryere obtained in the A horizon (10 cm depth) at a distance of 50 cm
(Figure 9-I2B). This is caused by high evaporation of water at the soil surface, resulting in
the concentration of salts, together with the accumulation of salt at 50cm from the dripper
(at the fringe of the wetting onion). However, because this salt accumulation occurs in a
sandy loam soil, the winter rainfall quickly leaches it.
155
The EC of soil at a distance of 100 cm from the dripper (e.9. Figure 9-I2I) undergoes less
dramatic change during winter months, indicating that minimal salt from irrigation reaches
this region and is not undergoing seasonal fluctuations.
General effects of bore water irrioation without ovosum aoplication
There are regions in the soil and times in which conditions promoting dispersion of clay
particles may prevail. This was particularly evident in the Btl horizon, where the SAR of
the soil declined at a lower rate in winter than EC. Salt accumulation and leaching appears
to be relative to the distance from the dripper and may also be caused by old root channels,
which contribute to preferential water flow.
Conditions in the A horizon do not appear to be as conducive to clay dispersion. During
periods of low EC the SAR also declines, which may be due to the low CEC (low clay and
organic matter content) of this horizon.
Bore water with application of gypsum 4 tonnes/hectare
Sodium
Concentrations and trends of sodium throughout the profile are very similar with and
without gypsum application (Figure 9-11 and Figure 9-13). However, on average,
approximately 50Vo (by concentration) of ions measured in the soil solution for all depths
and distances from the dripper were sodium even when gypsum was applied (Appendix D),
compared to 707o without gypsum application. The amount of sodium is similar for bore
water application, with or without gypsum application, however the sodium is less
dominant over calcium in the solution.
156
After the completion of irrigation with bore water in April 2002, sodium concentrations
directly under the dripper were approximately 600 mg/L in the A horizon @gure 9-134).
While at 50 cm from the dripper the sodium concentrations were 2300 mgll' in the A
horizon (Figure 9-138). Sodium levels declined with winter rainfall in the A and A2
horizons.
Calcium
Calcium applied over the entire soil surface in May 2001 has moved into the soil @gure
9-138) and slightly increased calcium throughout the profile. A rise in calcium
concentration occurred 10 weeks after application in the A and A2 horizons @gure 9-134,
B, C, D, E) because a number of major rain events (total of 154 mm) happened in this
period (Figure 9-13K). This rain quickly dissolved fine gypsum, leaving co¿ìrser material
to be slowly dissolved by subsequent rainfall. The readily dissolved gypsum was mobile,
leaching through the sandy loam A horizon. This leaching depleted the A horizon of
calcium by the end of winter (Figure 9-134, B, C). Therefore, with continued bore water
use additional applications of gypsum are required, particularly in soils with slightly
coarser-textured A horizons.
Calcium accumulation occurred in the Btl horizon, particularly at a distance of 100 cm
from the dripper (Figure 9-13I). At this position in the soil, calcium levels were also found
to be slightly elevated without gypsum application (Figure 9-13I). Therefore, the calcium
accumulation in this zone may be not only be from gypsum but also from irrigation water.
157
SAR
As calcium levels throughout the soil increased with gypsum application, while sodium
remained similar, the SAR has decreased particularly in late winter (Figure 9-I4).
However, the SAR was still relatively high (>10) in some of the A2hoizon throughout the
year (Figure 9-l4E). The SAR of the Btl horizon beneath the dripper was high (>25) at
the end of the irrigation period, however sharply declined to 10 - 15 with winter rains.
These results suggest the rate of gypsum application in the first year should be increased or
repeated again later in winter to reduce SAR.
Electrical Conductivity
Gypsum application slightly increased EC of the soil solution, particularly in the A horizon
during winter when salts from irrigation were leached (Figure 9-114, B and Figure 9-141^,
B). However, during summer months this increase is not evident, as the salt input from
bore irrigation water is significantly higher.
General effects of bore water irriqation with gypsum application
Gypsum application has reduced regions and times in the soil that have both high SAR and
low EC particularly directly beneath the dripper. However, zones of the soil e.g. the Bt1
horizon (Figure 9-13G) and parts of the A horizon @gure 9-13E) require further calcium
inputs if continued irrigation with bore water occurs.
158
9.3.2. Pore Water Chemistry with Mains Water lrrigation
Mains water without application of gypsum
Sodium
The reduced salt input through improved water quality reduced sodium levels within the
wetting onion (Figure 9-154, B, D and E). However, outside the wetting onion sodium
levels remained constant (Figure 9-15J) or increased (Figure 9-15I), due to the slow
leaching of residual sodium through the soil which accumulated at a greater depth.
Calcium
Calcium levels are relatively stable throughout the soil profile (Figure 9-154, C, D, H),
except in the Btl horizon at 100 cm from the dripper (250 - 360 mg/l) (Figure 9-150.
Some calcium enters the soil through irrigation with mains water, as it contains 25 mg/L of
calcium. However, this calciuin concentration is not high enough to significantly reduce
SAR.
SAR
SAR of the soil solution is again dependent on sodium concentration, with other major
cations remaining relatively constant seasonally throughout the soil profile. The SAR is
reduced with the application of a less saline water source, holvever, some sodium remains
in the soil while EC declines (Figure 9-16H and J).
Electrical Conductivity
The soil solution decreased in salinity with mains water irrigation, particularly in the
wetting onion, where sodium also declined @gure 9-164, B, D). However, in the Btl
horizon (e.g. Figure 9-16H) EC declined more than SAR. So whilst sodium and EC levels
159
are both reduced with mains water irrigation, the soil has a greater capacity to disperse
during the initial switch from saline to non-saline irrigation water.
The application of mains water has caused the pore water chemistry to change and reflect
the less saline irrigation water. However, the high SAR of the soil prior to this switch is
maintained in the B horizon (SAR = 14 - 18), perhaps due to the slow equilibration of soil
solution with the clay matrix. This indicates that switching to a less saline irrigation source
may require either more gradual introduction (e.g. similar to the high salt water dilution
method (Fitzpatrick et al., I97I) or the application of a calcium source during the initial
period.
Mains water with application of gypsum 4 tonnes/hectare
Sodium
Sodium levels have been maintained with the application of gypsum (Figure 9-15C, H and
Figure 9-I7C, H). This is again due to the large amount of sodium applied historically.
Calcium
Calcium levels are slightly elevated in the A horizon 12 to 16 weeks after application
(Figure 9-178, C). As discussed above, during this time the sites received a number of
major rain events (Figure 9-L7K), which may have dissolved the fine gypsum, which
readily moved into the profile. Calcium in the A horizon appears to be stabilised at a
slightly higher level than the zeÍo gypsum treatment, and has reduced the SAR
significantly.
160
Elevated levels of calcium were not as evident in the Bt1 horizon of this treatment,
compared to the bore water treatments, due to less calcium being applied in the irrigation
water and also less salt in the system, which reduces the solubility of gypsum.
SAR
The SAR of the soil is dominated by sodium applied through irrigation water and calcium
from gypsum. The calcium has reduced SAR, particularly at the end of the first winter
(from 6.6 to 2.4) (e.5. Figure 9-L6E and Figure 9-18E) and the subsequent winter (from 6.9
to 3.8) (e.g. Figure 9-16E and Figure 9-18E), however the B horizon @gure 9-18G) still
had a high SAR and low EC indicating continued small applications of gypsum should be
applied, even when water of low salinity is used for irrigation.
Electrical Cond uctivity
The EC is similar to mains without gypsum (< 5 dS/m), except in the A2honzon at 50 cm
from the dripper, where the EC has risen from 2.2 to 4.3 dS/m at the end of summer
(Figure 9-18E). This is not considered a problem as vine roots in this zone have been
subjected to 12 dS/m soil solution when irrigated with bore water. However, continued
application of gypsum, especially if the rate, timing or application method is modified,
should be accompanied by continued monitoring of salt levels in the soil profile,
specifically within the wetting onion.
General effects of mains water irriqation with qvpsum applicat¡on
The application of irrigation water of low salinity together with gypsum reduces the
potential for structural'damage. When switching from a saline source to a low saline
source, the application of gypsum for a minimum of 12 months to reduce the SAR to create
161
an environment where the EC of the irrigation water combined with salts and calcium from
gypsum will prevent clay dispersion.
9.3.3. Comparison of Soil Solution to Saturation Extract Composition
A comparison of saturated extract and soil solution data is detailed in Appendix E. As
previously discussed, for this comparison soil solution data was averaged over a three
month period (September - November or February - April), while saturation extract data
was collected at a single time point (November or April).
These data were expected to be different, as suction cup data represents solution rapidly
moving through the soil and held at low tension (macro-pores) and is affected by water
content. Saturation extract data on the other hand was obtained from ground and sieved
material, therefore providing information on the composition of the entire soil, including
macro-pores and micro-pores. In short, the difference depends on texture and structure
(i.e. macropore:micropore distribution). However, as gaps are present in the suction cup
data and what has been obtained is averaged over a three month period, experimental
erïors maybe present. Comparisons and conclusions have been carefully considered but
further work is required.
This view is supported by Curtin and Naidu (1998) who discuss how ion concentrations
may vary with collection method, for example solution culture, displaced soil solution or
aqueous extracts (refers to Carter et al., 1979; Carter and Webster, 1990; Grattan and
Grieve, Ig92). The variation in these values is also due to physical, chemical and
biological processes that may affect solute transport in the vadose zone (Grossman and
Udluft, 1991). However, Patterson et al. (2000) concluded that specific compounds
162
require different methods of sampling for example, highly sorptive organic compounds
versus mobile non-volatile compounds
In this study the major differences found in EC, SAR, Ca and Na between the two
sampling methods were:
1. After winter rains sodium concentration peaks at 50 cm from the dripper in the soil
solution, but at 100 cm for saturation extracts. This was considered to arise from
higher vine root density at 50 cm from the dripper; these vine roots take up soil
water and concentrate salts in the soil solution. This concentration affects only soil
solution concentration as salts present in the micro-pores buffer the salt
concentration for saturation extract composition.
2. During application of bore water the sodium loading both in the soil solution and
saturation extracts increase during suÍrmer, although beneath the dripper sodium
increases by about 7-13 fold in the saturation extracts but only by about 2-5 fold in
the soil solution. This shows that saturation extraction composition is seasonally
more variable beneath the dripper than soil solution composition as salts measured
during summer in the soil solution are diluted, particularly, beneath the dripper due
to the practice of sampling of suction cups 16 hours after irrigation. During winter
the soil beneath the dripper is frequently drier during sampling and sodium is more
concentrated in soil solution, therefore it appears relatively lower than saturation
extract results when compared to the summer situation.
3. At the soil surface some evaporation and concentration of the soil solution is
observed, particularly beneath the dripper, where water content is very high. This
can be seen by a relatively higher increase in this zone compared to that indicated
by saturation extracts and A2 horizon soil solution results (Appendix E).
163
4. The application of gypsum has caused the EC to increase in the majority of the
profile during winter. However, with the application of saline water, differences in
EC are not detected during summer months. Therefore, application of gypsum
buffers against seasonal changes in soil EC, particularly in the A horizon.
The variations between saturation extract and soil solution data allowed the development
of a mechanistic model. This model @gure 9-6 to Figure 9-9) details seasonal changes in
water and solute movement and concentration in both the macro- and micro-pores with
bore water application. A second model has also been developed to show the movement of
the first application of gypsum to a drip-irrigated soil (Figure 9-10). The key for both
models is detailed in Figure 9-5.
164
Calcium Concentration(Figure 9-10)
Macro-pores
Low
Moderate
I High
Micro-pores
I High
Soil Salinity Rating(Shaw, 1988)
(macro or micro-pores)
Very Low (EC,":0- 0.95)
Low (EC,":0.95 - 1.9)
Moderate (EC,":1.9 - 4.5)
High (EC,.>4.5 )
Water ContentMacro-pores
Low
Moderate
High
Micro-pores
High
\ vine root
Aggregates (granular) in the A horizon (macro-pore flowoutside, micro-pore flow within)
(sub angular blocky) in the B horizon (macropore flow outside, micro-pore flow within)
Key to Fiqures
Fígure 9-5 Key to Figures 9-6 to 9-10
Fígure 9-6 Vl/ster ønd sølt sccumulatíon in soil macro and micro pores duringSeptember (vìne dormancy, prior to bud burst) when irrìgated wìth saline bore water
September - Vine dormancy (prior to bud burst)Water Accumulation
Depth (cm)
0
A Horizon
35
Distance from Dripper (cm)50
B Horizon
1. Macro and micro pores saturated
2. Root distribution mainly in macropores
l0
Salt AccumulationDistance from DriPPer (cm)
50 100
1. Leaching of salts has occurred duringwinter via macro pores
2. Salts accumulate at edge of wettingfront at moderate levels
3. Salt accumulation also occurs at
100
X
165
November - Vine bud burst but irrigation yet to commence\ilater Accumulation Salt Accumulation
Distance from Dripper (cm)50 10
Distance from Dripper (cm)50 100Depth (cm)
0
A Horizon
35
B Horimn
(
(
t
1
2J
80
Water uptake via vine roots from macro-pores 1.
Water evaporation at soil surfaceSoil aggregates (and micro-pores) continue to 2.
contain water in the A and B horizons
Salts remain at edge of wetting frontat moderate levelsSalt concentration at soil surfacefrom evaporationSalts become concentrated in the soilsolution in macro pores as vines
water
Fìgure 9-7 lluter and sølt uccumulation in soíl m&cro ønd mìcro pores durìngNovember (vìne bud burst, príor to inigøtíon commencement) when ìnigated with saline
bore water
(commencement of inigation) when íwigated with saline bore wster
December - Commencement of irrigationWater Accumulation
Depth (cm)
0
A Horizon
35
10Distance from Dripper (cm)
f) 100
B Horimn
80
1. Some micro-aggregates and blocky peds have 1.
water extracted by roots, although most containwater (i.e. unavailable to plants)
2. Soil beneath dripper is saturated after inigation 2.
3. Macro-pores in A horizon are saturated withirrigation water, but water may not move into
Salt AccumulationDistance from Dripper (cm)
t0 50
Salts remain at edge of wetting onionwith the soil solution in this regionincreasing in ECConcentration of salts at soil surfacefrom evaporation
((
(
166
during December
April - End of irrigationWater Accumulation
Distance from Dripper (cm)f)
Salt AccumulationDistance from Dripper (cm)
50
Macro and micro-pores have high saltconcentration at edge of wetting onionContinued concentration of salts at thesoil surface from evaporationSoil solution in macro pores has
moderate level of salt
Depth (cm)
0
A Horizon
35
B Horizon
10010
((
(
80
1
2.
Soil saturated beneath dripper during water 1.
applicationA1l macro pores and most peds in the B horizon 2.
dry with some water remaining in micro pores .J.
Figure 9-9 úl/ater and sølt accumuløt¡on ìn soil macro and micro pores during Aprìl(end of irrigation) when iruigated with søline bore water
167
AprilEnd of irrigation
Depah (cm)
0
A Horizon
35
Distsnce from Dripper (cm)50
B Horizon
80
1. Continued flushing of calcium causes theregion beneath the dripper to have very lowconcentrations2.Caliummoves to 50-100 cm from thedrþer3. Calcium starts to move into the B horizonmlcro pores at a distance from the dripper
DecemberCommencement of irrigation
Depth (cm)
0
A Horizon
35
10Distance f¡om Dripper (cm)
50 100
B Horizon
80
l. Flushing of calcium from beneath thedripper with inigation
I,/I+
NovemberVine bud burst
10
Distance f¡om Dripper (cm)50 100Deprh (cm)
0
A Horizon
35
B Ho¡izon
80
I
1. Calcium remains in the A horizon2. Slight increase in calcium soil solutionconcentration as water is uptaken by vines.
SeptemberVine dormancy (prior to bud burst)
Depth (cm)
0
A Horizon
35
10Distance f¡om Dripper (cm)
50 100
B Horizon
80
1. Winter rains moves Calcium in the Ahorizon, it reaches slightly greater depths
beneath the dripper than at a distance.
Calcium is higher in the soil solution than themicro pores.2.The B horizon remains low in calciumsourced from gypsum
Figure 9-10 Seasonal cølcíum uccumulatíon in soìl møcro and mìcro pores followíngínítìal gtpsumin Møy
168
Vine roots and the soil are subjected to seasonal changes in soil chemistry, as measured by
the suction cups and saturation extracts. The trends in both sets of data were consistent,
however the magnitude of variations differed. This poses the idea that saturation extract
data provides a base line for comparisons of seasonal variations in chemical properties.
However, the vine roots may be subjected to soil varying in a different manner than found
from saturation extract results, due to variations in water content around the root. From
this research, it is suggested that the application of data for future recommendations will
determine the method of sampling. For example, if data is required on the soil structural
stability regarding SARÆC interaction then saturation extracts should be favoured as the
entire soil matrix is analysed. However, if the interaction between soil composition and
berry composition is analysed then suction cup data is more appropriate, as this is the
solution in macro-pores, which is readily available for plant uptake. This method is also
most appropriate to investigate solute transport of sodium, calcium and chloride through
the profile to groundwater.
9.4. Conclusions
The soil solution of a RBE under long-term irrigation was found to vary in the A and B
horizons. Seasonally, the B horizon has relatively stable SAR being buffered by the
relatively high clay content (and CEC), while EC declines in winter. In contrast, the SAR
and EC of the A horizon fluctuate together due to the low CEC of the sandy loam horizon.
As observed with saturation extract composition, gypsum application has reduced regions
which have high SAR and low EC, although regions of the A and B horizons were found to
require further calcium inputs.
169
The application of less saline water caused a larger change in pore water chemistry than
observed for saturation extracts. This may be due to the equilibration of soil solution with
the clay matrix. Cation and salt concentrations are reduced in the soil, although SAR is
maintained with the switch to a less saline water source, particularly in the B horizon.
170
l0Distance from irrigation dripper (cm)
50
Ol-May ol-Aug Ol-Nov ol-Feb ol-May ol-Aug ol-Nov 40
----.- Calcium+ Sodium
100Depth (cm)
4ooo
10
î ¡ooo'ù
2 zooo
ãI looo
4000
3000
2000
1000
E¡o
oË20òots
.6 lo
(ü
Jà6z.úd
()
04000
I'ù
z!ÉdO
25
I'ù
z-odO
40
3000
2000
1000
04000
3000
2000
1000
0
100
00 ol-May 0l-Aug ol-Nov ol-Feb ol-May ot-Aug ol-Nov
Ol-May ol-Aug ol-Nov 0l-Feb ol-May ot-Aug ol-Nov
VV
v
¡eO¡
a
t
t
v v
B
va
a aa
Suction Cup Failue c
a"o "v
v
a
v VV
D
VYv.tt a
Y
V
E
t tçt
vt vv
F
Vv
aa
Y VV v
v
a
G
o oto v vv
VyY
Y
v vv
H
a aa a a aa a aa
vv
5 ¡ a5 ¡¡ ¡¡ I
-aa a aaa
v
vv
ItutralI lrigdion
K
Figure 9-11: Showing seasonal variation (May 2001 - November 2(X)2) in Calcium andSodium of the soil solution, collected via
,u":tìon .upr, when inigated with Bore witer *d Gyp.ut is applied at 0 t/ha.- Figures A-J show data from specific points in the
soil profilé (see green téxt on left and top), while Figure K deta-ils inigation and rainfall during the time period.
t7t
oooo
oI
9O
A
ooooool
oo o¡
!
oo
Ia
oo
o ¡
o
o
B
o oo.o
D
Tlisfonne frnm irrioafinn ¡lrinnpr lcmìflisfqnea from irrio¡linn ¡lrinner lcmì
Distance from irrigation dripper (cm)50D r0 100
Depth (cm)
25
40
100
30
É.
U)
20P_(ú
e109
C)ul
0
30É.
U)
zoE(ú
EU)l0gOuJ
l0
0
30É.
U)
zoE(ú
E(t)
IOEoUJ
0
40
E30
Ë20il)E
Fro(dú
30É.
U)
20P-(ú
Ê10È
oLU
ol-May 0l-Aug Ol-Nov ol-Feb ol-Àdây ol-Aug 0l-Nov Ol-May 0l-Aug 0l-Nov Ol-Feb Ol-May Ol-Aug 0l-Nov
+EC---o-- SAR
0 0
Ol-May ol-Aug ol-Nov ol-Feb Ol-May ol-Aug ol-Nov ol-May ol-Aug 0l-Nov 0l-Feå ol-May ol-Aug ol-Nov
Figure 9-12: S 0l - November 2002) in EC and SAR of the soil solution, collected via suction cups,
wlîen inigated plied at 0 t/ha. Figures A-J show data from specific points in the soil profile (see
green teit on I irrigation and rainfall duringthe time period.
Suction Cup Failue c
ooorl
O OO r¡I ¡ lt ¡ ¡ ¡
ooo
ooo
oa
¡
D
oooot
oo
I
"€'
1t
o
E
ô ô -̂ ooôo
o
F
¡ ¡lI
¡ooo ooooo o oo
I ¡¡ t
o
G
¡
I
ooH
o ooo o
a tt t !
ooo
ooat Iotrg:i
I
aP
ì¡
oooo o o
I kinfalI lrigâtion
K
t72
4
a a 3 aa <a a a a
{
a<a
{ {
F
a{a oaa{ <a a<
U o5
Ca
and
Na
(mgl
l.)
a83
ì.) UI
3
(mdl
-) E
Ca
and
Na
88
Ca
and
Na
(mgl
l)
EË
Ë
Rai
nfal
l/lni
gat
ion
(mm
)o
ooo
Ca
and
Na
(mg/
L)
Êeg
o
? q m 2 o 't d i q o
^N/
à
o.Ê
Pà¡
É
J-Ë
.^b¡
-
- 9J
b
ÐØ
.¿ ^'
âr.
- v
A'IJ
N
S¿
.8'O
É?
Q9ô
v
E >
-^iJ
,-r
()m
Ø=
(Þt=
oi$È
'cJ
+(,
o =
'ÒF
Ø
5¡E
p ô¡.
ô5 o?ú
r9Ø
=oo
{ë
à9
i=
'e Æ
oÞ
!Ø
" I
9.C
:x8
r38
- 1
(D¿
;
^i.
tE
ID.È
o9 ocã
Iô=
'>xË
@
êô oÈ
|È
1 !
v
It a Þ o + o
uf'
qgo È ! o ê
z i 2
1t Øo
oo =o
c='
3=
t I z 2
o
\ì (.r)
4
4a a
É ô I ô É r
{a
a a
<aa
a
{
a
a
tú
a a
aa
{
a aú
a a a a
a { a a a
o Þ o :t g. d
aa -
aa ¡a<
ô
I - a a a o
IJ<
a
a{ a {o
-t - <a
^
r00
ot-May ol-Aug ol-Nov 0l-Feb ol-May ol-Aug 0l-Nov ol-May ol-Aug ol-Nov ol-Feb ol-May oì-Aug ol-Nov
+EC--.-- sAR
0l-May Ol-Aug Ol-Nov Ol-Feb 0l-May 0l-Aug Ol-Nov
Distance from irrjytion dripper (cm)
Depth (cm)
25
40
100
30
ÉU)E'mc(ú
trc)
roE
oul
ÉC)
-Þ̂c(ú
E(t)
reo
Oul
t0
l0
Ol-May ol-Aug Ol-Nov ol-Feb ol-May ol-Aug ol-Nov
É.
U)Þ(ú
EU)Þoul
40
E¡o
oË20o0
Ero&
É.
ØEc(g
EU)Þ(Jul
0
¡^oxE
o
o ¡
o
B
oo
I
o
ôôo
lr
o oooo
lçôoç t tttt
û tla
A
o¡ oo oo
al
ooo
C
IO O. ¡
o o
o
o¡
D
o
aroooo
o o
or¡ o
oo
¡
o
E
oo
.ooo¡to o
F
r!ô9
ooo...i o
ooo
oo
G
t t aa a
Suction Cup FailueH
o5o
Suction Cup Failwe
K
Figure 9-14: Showing seasonal variation (May 2001 - November 2002) in EC and SAR of the soil solution, collected via suction cups,
wñen inigated with Bire water and Gypsum is applied at 4 tth^. Figures A¡J show data from specific points in the soil profile (see
green te;on left and top), while Figure K details irrigation (red) and rainfall (blue) during the time period'
174
Depth (cm)
l0
D
l¡.----¡ Ç 55: ¡¡
A
a a tt r
Distance from irrigation dripper (cm)50
E
!r l çç çr Xt
B
v vvaa
Ol-May ol-Aug Ol-Nov 01-Feb ol-May ol-Aug ol-Nov
+ Calcium+ Sodium
100
F
V y VV V vaa
C
V
vt
May/01 Âug/oì Nov/01 Feb/02 May/02 Au!02 Nov/02
IÞn,
dz!mF
OI0m
10
2,*€
(J rmo
t<
Òo
J'ù
zËã(J
40
40
E¡o
ôË20mF
Frocdú
2,*Éd(J rm
100
1mË
0
Suction Cup FailueG
vç 9 vv vy
H
aa
VV
aa aa
v vv v
K
0l-May Ol-Aug 0l-Nov 0l-Feb Oì-May Ol-Aug Ol-Nov
Figure 9-15: Showing se¿$onal variation (May 2001 -November 2002)inCalcium and Sodium of the soil solution, collected via suction cups'
wñen inigated with ùain water and Gypsum-is applied at 0 tons/ha. Figures A-J show data from specific points in the soil profile (see green
text on le}t and top), while Figure K details inigation (red) and rainfall (blue) during the time period.
175
o I
A
I
o
Ill
oooo
Depth (cm)
25
40
100
30
É.
U)--Euc
(ú
EU)loE
olrJ
30
tU)o8C(ú
EU)
roÞ
ouJ
l0
10
ol-M¿y Ol-Aug ol-Nov ol-Feb ol-May ol-Aug ol-Nov
Distance from irrigation dripper (cm)50
E
o Oô'ot! ,
oooo oo O9
0l-May Ol-Aug Ol-Nov 0l-Feb Ol-May 0ì-Aug 0l-Nov 40
+EC---.- sAR
r00
c
o
o
oo çOo
r rl t¡
Ol-May ol-Aug ot-Nov ol-Feb 0t-May ol-Aug ol-Nov
t0
É.
ct)T'c(ú
EU)Þoul
E¡o
Ë20d)
=Frodú
ÉU)Ec(õ
È(/)E
oul
0
Figure 9-16: Showing seasonal va¡iation (May 2001 - November 2002) in EC and SAR of the soil solution, collected via suction cups,
wñen inigated with lliain water and Gypsum is applied at 0 tons/ha. Figures A-J show data from specific points in the soil profile (see
green text on left and top), while Figure K details inigation (red) and rainfall (blue) during the time period.
B
tloo
o
I
ôoooo
l¡r
o o ooo
D
ooorl I I ¡ ¡¡
oôo oc
F
o
¡
oo
ll
Suction Cup Failue G
oooo ooo
H
tl I rt
oooo oo
r¡ tl
t ta
o
t
ooo
K
t76
l0
ol-May ol-Aug ol-Nov ol-Feb 0l-May ol-Aug ol-Nov
Distance from dripper (cm)
Ol-May Ol-Aug 0l-Nov Ol-Feb 0l-May Ol-Aug 0l-Nov
+ Calcium_fi Sod¡um
t00
Depth (cm)
l0
25
I-ù
dz
dO
04000
1¡ooo'ù
f;zæo
$ rooo
0
4000
I,ù¡ooo
Edz.d 2000
dQ
1000
40
40
E¡o5oË20d)
Eroú
J-ù
63z6
O100
4000
3000
2000
1000
4000
3000
2000
1000
0
00
Ol-May Ol-Aug Ol-Nov Ol-Feb Ol-May Ol-Aug Ol-Nov
!¡a
a
v
c
(t
F
o ¡a
v
G
vv vv v v
H
v v vv v V
Suction Cup Failue
Suction Cup FailueK
Figure 9-17: Showing seasonal va¡iation (May 2001 - November 2002) in Calcium and Sodium of the soil solution, collected via suction cups,
wñen inigated with ùains water and Gypìum is applied at 4 tons/ha. Figures A-J show data from specific points in the soil profile (see green
text on lelft and top), while Figure K details irrigation (red) and rainfall (blue) during the time period.
t77
ôçoootl r
ôo!t
B
o
I
Depth (cm)
25
40
100
30É.
U)
2oE(ú
eU)
109()trj
10
3otU)E'
20ãcò
109Or.rl
30ÉU)
20:coE
1èoIJJ
0
l0A
oI
ooooo
Distance from dripper (cm)
0l-May ol-Aug ol-Nov ol-Feb ol-May Ol-Aug ol-Nov
+EC-o- SAR
r00
0l-Nov ol-Feb
0
0
ÉCJ)
30
20:--(ú
Eal)log
{
æò0
E
-d
6úoul
0
Ol-lvfay ol-Aug ol-Nov ol-Feb ol-May ol-Aug ol-Nov ol-May ol-Aug Ol-Nov ol-Feb ol-May ol-Aug ol-Nov
Figure 9-18: Showing seasonal va¡iation (May 2001 - November 2002) in EC ærd SAR of the soil solution, collected via suction cups,
wh-en inigated with Niains water and Gypsum is applied at 4 tons/ha. Figures A-J show data from specific points in the soil profile (see
green texaon left and top), while Figure K details inigation (red) and rainfall @lue) during the time period.
oo
o
o o
c
oo
ll
o¡
D
oo oo.tt. I
oo
Ê9
E
oI
oooo¡
o
¡oa
oo
la o I
F
O¿ 9
oo
O9
ll lt ¡ I
o
o
G
O9
aa
ooo
oo
ô
H
¡ r t¡ r t
Suction Cup Failue
Suction Cup Failue
178
Ghapter 10. Changes in Redox Potential
10.1 . lntroduction
Soil redox potential (Eh) is a measure of a soil's tendency to reduce or oxidize
susceptible substances (Ponnamperuma, 1972) and is a function of a number of complex
redox reactions, reflecting the physiochemical status of the soil (Patrick et al., 1996)' A
soil profile contains a number of components, or redox couples, which actively influence
and contribute to the redox potential of a soil horizon. Therefore, soil redox potential
may be referred to as a 'mixed potential' (Bohn, 1968), with the final value being a
weighted average of all potentials of the redox components present (Bohn, 197t)' The
oxidised and reduced states of a substance result in an electrochemical potential
developing from electron ffansfer reactions as expressed in the Nernst equation (10-1):
to-r Eh= Eo -nr ,n@4x(*4.\nF "' (nea)
'Where,
Eh = electrode potential; .d = standard half cell potential; F - Faraday constant;
n = number of electrons exchanged in the reaction; ft = gas constant; T = the absolute
temperature; m is a coefficient (Rowell, 1981); H* is the activity of protons; and (Ox) and
(Red) arc the activities of the oxidized and reduced forms of the complex.
This shows Eh increases with increasing activity of the oxidized component (Ox),
decreases with increasing activity of the reduced component (Red) and increases with
increasing activity of H* (Patrick et al., !996). Monitoring Eh changes in soils whose pH
179
is strongly buffered, such as RBE, effectively removes the pH component. Redox
potential can be measured using an inert electrode, which readily transfers electrons to or
from the soil system, but does not react with the soil. When the inert electrode is coupled
with a half cell of known potential, reducing systems transfer electrons to the electrode,
while oxidising systems take electrons from the electrode (Patrick et aI., 1996). The
electrode acquires a potential equivalent to the system it is subjected to (Bohn, 1968).
The most dominant components in soils, which control the final redox potential are
unimolecular and ionic species of oxygen, hydrogen, nitrogen, ilon, manganese, carbon
and sulfur (e.g. Ponnamperuma et al., !967; Bohn, I97t). The most commonly occurring
easily reduced component of soil systems is Oz, which is an electron acceptor in soil
redox processes such as, for example, microbial oxidation of organic matter (Bohn,
1968). Thus, in aerated soils (Eh values ranging from +400 to +700 mV) the Oz-HzO
redox goup is the most important contributor (Meek and Grass, 1915). Consequently,
when oxygen is present in the soil, other components are less active; however, once soils
become waterlogged, the rate of Oz diffusion decreases and, if this diffusion rate is less
than microbial demand, Eh declines accordingly. Once 02 concentration is too low to
support redox processes, a less easily reduced component becomes the electron acceptor,
thereby allowing the soil to be reduced further and acquire lower Eh values (Rowell,
1981). Change in Eh is dependent on water content, temperature, organic matter (amount
and nature), microbial biomass (type and size) and redox components present in the soil
(Ponnamperuma, 1972).
180
Redox potential is a surrogate means of monitoring soil biogeochemical processes to help
understand changes in soil morphology (e.S.soil colour), plant nutrient status, mobility of
chemical species and oxygen status of soils (e.g. Patrick et aI., 1996). Continuous
monitoring often occurs by permanently installing redox electrodes in soil. However,
problems may occur when these are permanently installed in soil, such as: (i) if Pt
electrodes are exposed to wet or waterlogged conditions for extended periods, current
leakage from the soil solution to the region between the Pt wire (inert material) and Cu
wire may occur, causing oxidation of the Cu wire and changes in the electromotive force
(EMF) (Mann and Stolzy,lg72), (ii) electrode poisoning (V/hitfield, t974), (iii) salt
bridge damage and, (iv) availability and development of data loggers able to continually
measure and store Eh. In-depth research was conducted by Dowley et al. (1998,2004)
and van Bochove et al. (2OOZ) to eliminate these problems and to collect accurate
continuous field data. Methods and equipment developed by Dowley et aI. (1998' 2004)
have been used at the Barossa Valley field site.
The aims of the research described in this chapter were to:
1. Measure redox potential (Eh) of a Red Brown Earth that was drip irrigated for 11
years with bore water.
2. Determine if changing to less saline irrigation water modifies redox potential (Eh)
of a vineyard soil.
3. Determine if application of gypsum modifies redox potential (Eh) of a vineyard
soil.
181
10.2. Methods
Platinum electrodes were installed in the Barossa Valley field site under the same
treatments monitored with suction cups i.e. (t) bore water, without gypsum, (ii) bore
water and gypsum 4 tonnes/hectare, (iii) mains water, without gypsum, (iv) mains water
and gypsum 4 tonneslhectare. All ffeatments had three electrodes at depths of 5, 30 and
65 cm installed at a distance of ten centimetres from the dripper (Figure 10-1b).
a.
Sola¡Panel
DATAI¡GGER
l2-VoltDnttcry
Redox Salt Temperature
Electrodes Bridge Probes
Soil Suffâc€
5cm
30 cm
A/B Interface
65 crn
Ñ neaoxetætroae
! rrieationorinær
cm
l0 cm
b.
Figure 10-1 l-ayout of redox electrodes and. system design in the vineyørd': (ø) in cross
section and (b) plan vievt
Platinum electrodes, salt bridge (with Ag/AgCl reference electrode) and data logger
(Figure 10-1a) were constructed and pennanently installed as described by Dowl ey et al.
(1998). Electrodes were calibrated prior to field installation with Zobell's solution
(Nordstrom, 1977). Electrodes were installed by augering a naffow hole to a depth just
short of the required installation depth. The electrode was then pushed into undisturbed
soil at the base of the hole. The hole was backfilled with bentonite to prevent any
182
preferential water flow. Electrode potentials were measured every four hours via a data
logger (Microscan Electronics) and downloaded periodically.
10.3. Results and Discussion
Redox potentials were found to fluctuate through the day, especially at 5 cm depth, as
might be expected. This resulted in some difficuþ in being able to interpret the data
clearly (Appendix F). Due to the large amount of Eh data produced, it was decided that
averaging of data over a four day period (Figure 10-2) would dampen these short term
fluctuations to provide a more consistent representation of the soil environment (this data
is shown in Figure 10-3 to Figure 10-6). These fluctuations are hypothesised to be due to
a combination of: (i) rainfall; (ii) frequent inigation with relatively low amounts of water
and; and (iii) diurnal variations as noted by Neue (1997) for a rice field in Malaysia;
although conditions here are very different, a similar phenomenon may occur. This
research was focused on the longer-term seasonal changes in redox potential and
therefore short-term fluctuations will not be discussed further.
(a) (b)
9 600
E
U6EæoõÀo3É. 200
t 600
Ect¡lõË ¿ooooÀ
EoÉ. 200
800
I February 13 February
800
I February 13 Februâry l7 February
2002
2l Februaryl7 Februâry
2002
2l Fêbru¿ry
Fígure 10-2 Redox potential (Eh) of soíl irrígated wíth bore water (wíthout g¡tpsum)
orn o short períod of datø collection showing (a) fluctua.tions usìng raw data, (b) dara
averaged over successive four-day perìods
- scm
- 30cm
- 65cm
183
600
tEX 4ooE!,(!
E 200IoÈäoÞoÉ.
-200
800
-400
-400
20
EE
(5
.goÉ.
't0
0
- scm
- 30cm
-ô5cmI Ra¡nfall
-sqT-
30on
-650îI Rainfal
"ø$.rrs "q*" t"'-"
2001-2002
Figure 10-3 Redox polential of soil ìrrígated wilh bore wuter (withoul g¡tpsum)
25600
tE:4ooIJJ_
(ú
E2o0IoÈðo!o)É.
30800
20
5
EE
(5
c(úÉ.
10
5-200
0
+9+S ,".ô
2001-2002
Fìgure t0-4 Redox potentiøl of soil iruìgated with bore water and 4 tonnes/hectare ofgJìpsum applìed, wìth gltpsum applicatíon occutring in Møy 2001
30
184
800
600
EX 4oo-cTU
õË 200d)ofLX^ovroc)É.
-200
-400
20
EE
._coÉ.
l0
600
tEX ¿oo
!tJJ
(U
E 200IoÀðo!toÉ.
-200
25
20
EE
.=oÉ.
10
5
-scm-
30cm
- 65cm
I Rainfall
-5cm-
30cm
-ôscmI Rainf¿ll
{g{ ."a''tg' .f'
""'"ô
2001-2002
Fìgure 10-5 Redox potentíøl of soíl irrìgated with møìns water (wífhout gltpsum)
30
25
800
-400 0
.r$ryS "q*t".'"ô
2001-2002
Fìgure 10-6 Redox potenlial of soil irrìgøted wílh møins wøler and 4 lonnes/hectøre ofgypsum applíed, wíth gltpsum applicatìon occuning ín Møy 2001
185
10.3.1. Bore water without gypsum application
The A and A2 horizons (5 and 30 cm) generally maintain high Eh values (+150 to
+600 mV) throughout the year, including winter months (Figure 10-3). Eh remains
relatively high (+450 to +700 mV) and begins to fluctuate when irrigation commences in
November then drops to +200 mV because of February rain.
Eh values fluctuate in the A horizon with irrigation due to: (i) large irrigation events
every four days; (ii) both irrigation and rainfall coinciding and; (iii) multþle irrigation
events within a short period. The A2 horizon (30 cm depth) generally has a lower Eh
during winter (May to September) and during certain periods of irrigation because of the
development of a perched watertable on the B horizon. Large rainfalls events in
February, combined with continued irrigation, resulted in a large reduction in Eh in the
NA2 horizons
The Eh of the B horizon (65 cm) ranges between 0 and -200 mV in winter (May to
September). The Eh then rises steadity to +400 mV and remains constant throughout
irrigation in summer (November to April) (Figure 10-3). The steady increase in Eh
during Spring (September/October) is caused by the B horizon drying out as vines break
dormancy (bud burst), coÍtmence taking up water and the roots begin respiring. The
completion of drying in the B horizon (Eh ceases to rise) coincides with the
commencement of irrigation (November). From this point the water content of the soil is
maintained by irrigation.
186
10.3.2. Bore water with application of gypsum 4 tonnes/hectare
Eh in the A horizon (5 cm) fluctuates in winter (May to October) with values ranging
from +550 to -200 mV; during irrigation Eh remains constant at +600 to +650 mV. Eh
in the A2 horizon (30 cm) remains fairly constant (0 to +50 mV) in winter (June to
September); however during irrigation in November the Eh rises to 300 mV and
fluctuates (+200 to +400 mV) until April when it declines slowly to +150 mV because of
large rainfall events (Figure 10-4). Eh in the B horizon follows a trend similar to the A2
horizon.
The development of more reducing conditions (lower Eh) in the A and A2 horizons in
winter following application of gypsum is interpreted to be caused by:
(1) Reduced surface crusting and improved water infiltration in the A horizon
and increased hydraulic conductivity in the A2 horizon but little change in
the Btl horizon. This may lead to more water entering the soil, but the
reduced permeability of the B horizon causes the rapid development of
ponding on the B horizon in winter.
(2) An additional source of energy ('food') for strict anaerobic bacteria
(Desulþvibrio and Desulþtomaculurn species) (Freney and Williams,
1983) may be derived from the reduction of sulfate to sulfide from
gypsum application. These anaerobic bacteria are only active at a low Eh,
however once suitable Eh conditions prevail, the bacteria further reduce
the Eh and maintain the soil in anaerobic conditions for an extended
period. Although the recorded Eh data in the bulk soil did not fall below
187
50 mV, it is possible that micro-zones of the soil contain high levels of
organic matter (e.g. root channel) and low Eh values.
The application of gypsum may also alter Eh through changes in: (i) the soil pH, however
this was checked from saturation extract results and found to be minimal (0.5 unit), (ii)
displacement of cations and anions, which would have occurred in the A and A2 horizons
during winter, (iii) impurities contained in the gypsum, which were minimal as described
in Chapter 3.
The Eh of the B horizon slowly rises from September until irrigation commencement
(late November), as observed without gypsum application. This is caused by vines
breaking dormancy and taking up water while roots begin respiring. However, once
irrigation coÍìmences Eh steadies, indicating the majority of vine root activity (water
uptake) may now be occurring in the wetting sphere of the A and A2 horizons.
The Eh of the A2 horizon declined minimally with February rains compared to the rapid
decline observed without gypsum application. This may be due to irrigation leaching
calcium into the B horizon and improving the hydraulic conductivity of this horizon, as
occurred in the A and A2 horizons during the previous winter. Therefore water moves
readily through the horizon, particularly by old root channels, without waterlogging.
10.3.3. Mains water without gypsum application
Unlike the bore water treatment, the Eh of the A horizon for the mains treatment remains
constant (+550 to +750 mV) throughout the entire year. However, the redox electrode at
.t88
30 cm (42 horizon) was damaged. Eh in the B horizon rose from +200 mV to +550 mV
in July and remained relatively constant until January when it began to decline to around
+250 mV (Figure 10-5).
The variations in soil Eh with the application of less saline irrigation water is interpreted
to be a result of mains water causing dispersion of clay in the Btl horizon and reduced
permeability. The soil has a high ESP in the Bt1 from long-term saline irrigation; when
switching to a less saline water source some salt leaching occurs in winter' However,
little replacement of exchangeable salts occurred during the following irrigation so that
the combination of high ESP and relatively low EC caused clay dispersion in the Bt1
horizon. A perched water table formed on the Btl horizon, causing the B horizon to
become more aerobic during winter months, as water is unable to reach this depth
The A horizon has a similar Eh to the bore water treatment until February. However
rains at the end of summer have not affected Eh as much, possibly because of high
hydraulic conductivity of the A horizon and ponding above the B horizon and/or
increased root activity in the A horizon when less saline (mains) water is applied, thereby
increasing water uptake and maintaining the soil at a higher Eh.
10.3.4. Mains water with application of gypsum 4 tonnes/hectare
Eh in the A horizon (5 cm) steadily declines from June to January (+450 to +200 mV). A
rise occurs during January (to +400 mV) before remaining relatively steady at about +300
mV for the remainder of the irrigation period (Figure 10-6). For the A2 hotizon (30 cm)
189
Eh is relatively constant from June to February (+550 mV) at which time it slowly
decreases to +250 mV. The B horizon (65 cm) slowly increases in Eh (+350 to
+550 mV) throughout winter until inigation coûìmences (November), then remains
generally constant (+550 mV), except for three small 'spikes' of about +150 mV.
The A horizon is again more anaerobic with the application of gypsum, possibly caused
by sulphur bacteria activity (Figure 10-5 and Figure 10-6). The redox potential does not
increase at the soil surface in October as observed in the bore/gypsum treatment, because
gypsum is not leached from the soil and bacteria are active longer.
10.4. Gonclusions
The long-term application of saline irrigation water causes the B horizon to be
waterlogged during winter months. This waterlogging is a result of reduced porosity,
channels and voids as discussed in Chapter 5.
The switching from a saline long-term saline irrigation water to a less saline source
resulted in a perched watertable forming above the B horizon due to the high SAR and
low EC environment.
The application of gypsum may increase the activity of certain bacteria and fungi. These
micro-organisms may reduce sulfate sourced from gypsum to sulfide, causing further and
longer reductions in soil Eh.
190
This research shows soil redox potential can be used as a continuous field measurement
and offers a monitoring method to differentiate between management systems. However,
further work is required to investigate redox variability within vineyards and the
relationship between Eh and vine root growth and function. This work also highlights the
need for Eh probes to be either heavily replicated at each site or be accompanied by
simultaneous soil water content monitoring.
191
Chapter l1 . Forecasting soil properties using a 2D
computer model
11.1. lntroduction
The accumulation of salt in general and of sodium in particular throughout the soil profile
is an important process in the degradation of the RBE studied in the Barossa Valley'
Previous work (Chapters 6, 7 and 8) has shown that the application of gypsum to the
surface of the soil can act to reduce the potential for soil sffuctural decline by amongst
other things, reducing SAR. However, zones of lower calcium concentrations were
found, particularly beneath the dripper (Chapter 6 and 7). It is proposed that
concentrating the application of gypsum within an area beneath the dripper may result in
the accumulation of calcium in zones of high ESP. Understanding the patterns of
gypsum accumulation under various modes of application is essential for long-term
sustainability of irrigation using saline water.
Patterns of gypsum accumulation were investigated through field studies (Chapters 6, 7
and 8), although this was only over a relatively short period (16 months). In order to
extrapolate field data to several decades an existing predictive mathematical model was
used. This allowed the simulation of many years of irrigation and gypsum application
and the investigation of multiple management scenarios. The aim of this research was not
to match measured data exactly but to study several management scenarios in order to
predict future trends in soil properties.
192
A number of models are available for modelling the vadose zone of the soil profile, for
example, SWAGMAN (Meyer et al., 1992), RZWQM (Ma et al.,20OL), UNSATCHEM
(Simunek et al., 1996), SWIM (Krysanova et al., 1996), APSIM (McCowen et a1.,1996)
and LEACHM (Hutson, 2003). LEACHM (Leaching Estimation And CHemistry Model)
was selected for this reseatch, the objectives of which were to predict:
1. Whether salt accumulation zones vary with the salinity of irrigation water over a
long period (67 year).
2. Monthly accumulation patterns of gypsum when applied over the entire soil
surface or immediately beneath the irrigation dripper.
11.2. Theory and lnput Data
The information used in these simulations is based on soil and crop data from the SARDI
Barossa Research Station (Chapters 5, 6, 7,9 and 10). LEACHM allows the input of
many factors, thereby also allowing a number of combinations of soils, crops and
irrigation schedules to be simulated. However, for this research the soil, crop, weather
and irrigation data remained constant for each scenario, while irrigation quality and
chemical application were manipulated.
11.2.1. The TRANSMIT Model
LEACHM (Hutson 2003) is a process-based mathematical model that simulates the
addition, movement and accumulation of water and chemicals in the soil profile,
including their interactions, transformations and uptake by plants. TRANSMIT (Hutson
and'Wagenet, 1995), the two dimensional version of LEACHM was chosen for this study
193
as it allowed the simulation of drip irrigation, which is common practice in the Barossa
Valley, rather than a one dimensional model, which only allows modelling of rainfall and
flood irrigation. TRANSMIT simulates a single chemical, accounting for solubility,
sorption and degradation. Gypsum was assumed to be a sparingly soluble, non-adsorbed
and non-degradable chemical. This model does not incorporate inorganic soil chemistry,
due to increased execution time and parameter estimation.
The soil profile is divided into horizontal ('rows') and vertical ('columns') sections, to
give'cells', then the total time period is divided into time steps. Changes in water and
solute concentration are calculated at each time step for every cell. The time step was set
at a maximum of 0.1 day (i.e. every 144 minutes) for all simulations. During periods of
high water flow, TRANSMIT reduces the time intervals. Additional simulations were
performed at 0.02 day (i.e. every 29 minutes) to verify that salt movement was not
significantly different with increased time resolution.
11.2.2. Soil Profile
The soil profile data used in TRANSMIT was obtained from other work conducted for
this research (Chapter 5). The non-irrigated profile data was used to define the initial soil
properties to represent soil unaffected by saline irrigation; these data were identical for all
simulations.
Input data included horizon delineation, texture class (7o sand, silt and clay), organic
carbon and bulk density. Some data that was unavailable from previous work was
194
estimated, such as hydraulic conductivity, which was found from a pedoffansfer function'
For example, to estimate hydraulic conductivity a two-part water retention function,
based on the Campbell equation (Hutson and Cass, 1987) was used to describe water
retention. The parameters in this function were defined to reflect the known or estimated
water retention properties of the simulated profiles. The Campbell hydraulic conductivity
function was used to describe hydraulic conductivity, using an estimated matching factor.
The profile modelled had a depth of 1.5m and a width of 1.5m at right angles to the drip
line. For all simulations, the surface \ryas unponded under infiltration, while the lower
boundary had unit gradient drainage, i.e. the flux density across the lower boundary is
numerically equal to the current lower boundary hydraulic conductivity value, and is
sensitive to the nature of the soil at that depth. These conditions mean any salt
accumulation in the profile is due to salt input from irrigation or gypsum applications
rather than from a shallow saline water table, which may occur in some situations.
11.2.3. Soil Physical Data
All simulations used the Richards equation (11-1) for water flow, content, fluxes and
potentials and the convection-dispersion equation for solute and water transport in
TRANSMIT
(r1-r) *rt'l=*["trl#] uQ,t)
Where, 0 = volumetric water content (-'l-t); H = hydraulic potential (matric and
gravitational potentials) (mm); K = hydraulic conductivity (mm/d); t = time (d); z= depth
195
(mm); U = sink term which indicates water lost per unit time by transpiration (mm/d);
and the differential water capacity c(e) = ae/ah @ is soil water pressure head)' For
horizontal flow, the gravitational potential is zero.
Water retention may be described by a number of different equations, however in
TRANSMIT the Campbell (1974) function (11-2) is used:
(11-2) ,= "(+\'[4]'Where,
0s = volumetric water content at saturation; a and b are constants. To remove the
sharp discontinuity at h = a and 0/0, = 1 the power function is replaced by a parabolic
function at potentials near saturation Qlutson and Cass, 1987).
The hydraulic conductivity of the soil is described by Campbells (1974) conductivity
function
/ \2b+2+P
(1r-3) K(e) =r,[+ ì"[4 J
Where, K(0) = hydraulic conductivity (mm/d) at the water content 0; K, - hydraulic
conductivity at soil saturation 0rl P= pore interaction parameter.
For each cell in the soil, the soil texture was used to estimate the particle size distribution,
then a pedotransfer function was used to estimate the water content at a number of matric
potential values, then (11-2) was fitted to the retention data. This is presented in Figure
11-1.
196
500kPa
10kPa Saturation
200
400
Ê 600E.EË- Boooo
1000
1200
I Plant available water
1400
o.o 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4
Water Content (0,)
Figure I1-I Water content lor the Barossa Valley Red. Brown Earth at soilsaturøtion, -10 kPa und -1500 kPa; the shadeil area shows plønt øvail'øble water
11.2.4. Salt Transport and Accumulation
TRANSMIT, a two-dimensional model, does not incorporate inorganic soil chemistry,
however LEACHC, a one-dimensional model, is available for more detailed solute
movement, cation exchange and inorganic soil chemistry, if required. TRANSMIT
incorporates sorption of ions and precipitation as well as dissolved and sparingly soluble
salts. In these simulations gypsum solubility was assumed to be 2gll', while salts
contained in irrigation water had no solubility limit. Therefore, for all gypsum scenatios,
water (irrigation or rainfall) entering the soil had a maximum gypsum content of 2gtL.
Dilution occurs when the supply of gypsum at the point of water infiltration is exhausted.
As soil water was removed by evaporation or plant root uptake, gypsum became
concentrated to 2gtL and precipitated, which led to regions of gypsum accumulation.
'However, after depletion of gypsum at the soil surface, water entering the soil contained
<zgn- of gypsum, so that as it passed through regions of gypsum accumulation, the
197
gypsum was dissolved and moved through the profile with the water until it re-
precipitated or passed below the modeled depth (1500 mm). Near the base of the profile
(1200 - 1500 mm) little gypsum accumulation occurred, as roots were absent from this
depth, therefore water was not removed by evaporation or root uptake which would cause
the concentration and precipitation of gypsum to occur'
Movement and distribution of soluble salts in the soil are modeled using the convection-
dispersion equation (11-4) during each time step.
a(11-4) òt òz
Where, cl = solution concentration; O = source andlor sink term; D = effective dispersion
coefficient; e = water flux density; z = distancel t = time; with appropriate values used for
horizontal or vertical flow.
11.2.5. Weather and CroP
Climate data for the Nuriootpa weather station, situated adjacent to the field study site
was obtained from the SILO Patched Point Dataset (Bureau of Meteorology, 2001;
Jeffery et a1.,2001) this provided data from 1889 to the present day' However, for all
simulations the weather data was modified such that it consisted of two parts; the first
was weather from 1985 to 2001 (17 years); while the second part, which was patched on
to the end of the first part, was from 1952 to 2001 (50 years). These two pafts gave a
combined total of 67 years for the simulations. In all simulations the years are labeled
1985 throughto2O52.
òc,0
l.tu,¿*-n,")**
198
Daily rainfall was included in this model to simulate salt movement not only through drip
irrigation, but also with rainfall. In the simulations rainfall was defined as salt-free' as
the concentrations of salts in irrigation water and those associated accumulation of
gypsum application are of much greater importance.
Weekly potential evapotranspiration (mm) data is supplied to TRANSMIT and used to
calculate daily potential evapotranspiration ( 1 1 -5 ).
(11-s) ET¿oy =lf ̂ r*xET**o)
7
wherefra¡rr¡ is an ETP scaling factor (based on Childs and Hanks, 1975)
However, these data are for a reference crop defined by Allen et al. (1998) as a reference
surface "not short of water". As grapevines transpire at a daily rate different to this
reference value, a sub-routine relating crop growth phase to daily potential transpiration
was added to the TRANSMIT model. This allowed the reference crop ET to be adjusted
using a factor that varied through the growing season, this factor was based on for
example, information from vineyard irigation guides. The factor ranged from zero at the
start of the growing season, increasing linearly to 0.3 when 4o%ô of the growing season
had elapsed, remained at 0.3 until a further 307o of the season had elapsed, and then
decreased linearly to zero by leaf fall. This factor was used to splìt reference ET into a
potential transpiration, therefore potential transpiration was always <0.3 of the reference
ET. Actual transpiration was less than potential if soil water was limiting (potential and
conductivity-based), and actual evaporation from the soil decreases as the soil surface
dries
199
For all simulations grapevines (perennial crop) were "gfown". During June to August
(inclusive) grapevines are dormant, so therefore the soil was assumed to be fallow with
no transpiration or root growth occurring. Crop growth patterns were identical for all
simulations, and consistent with the Barossa Valley vineyard'
11 .2.6.lrrigation
Inigation was automated in the model by allowing the soil to dry to a defined threshold
before the application of irrigation water. The sensed depth and activation point were set
so that irrigation in the model closely match those which have occurred at the Barossa
Valley field site in terms of amount, duration and frequency. Irrigation was allowed
between November 30ù each year and April 30ft the following year, to coincide with
grapevine activity.
The EC of water applied was set at 2.5 (bore simulations), 0.5 (mains simulations) and 0
(gypsum simulations) dS/m. The inigation water applied for gypsum simulations was
assumed salt-free to emphasis the accumulation and movement of salt sourced from
gypsum.
11.3. Simulations and Data Obtained
Six two-dimensional (TRANSMIT) simulations were run under conditions described in
Table 11-1, and all simulations were conducted over a 67 yeu period. Gypsum was
applied every second year at the completion of irrigation.
200
4Beneath dripper0Figure 11-7 andFigure 11-13
6
8Beneath dripper0Figure 11-6 andFigure 11-12
5
4Entire soil surface0Figure 11-5 andFigure 11-11
4
8Entire soil surface0Figure 114 andFigure 11-10
J
nlanJa0.5Figure 11-3 andFigure 11-9
2
nlanla2.5Figure II-2 andFigure 11-8
1
GypsumApplication Rate(equivalent t/ha)
GypsumApplication Method
Salinity (EC) ofInigation Water
(dS/m)
Outputsummarised in:
Simulation
Table 11-1 Simulations conducted in TRANSMIT
TRANSMIT produces a fange of data on a daily, monthly and yearly basis. All graphs
presented are a plot of monthly values of total salt or gypsum in each 'cell'. Figure 11-2
to Figure 11-7 show a'snap-shot' of the entire profile at a specific point in time, while
Figure 11-8 to Figure 11-13 show monthly data from a column of cells which is patched
together to show a vertical time series over the entire simulation period (67 years).
11.4. Results and Discuss¡on
The mean annual water balance components are shown in Table 11-2, these were
identical for each simulation. However, in field studies soil properties and plant function
may vary with treatment, for example the development of saline or sodic conditions may
alter drainage, plant transpiration or water movement. krigation water applied in these
201
simulations averaged 1.83 Ml-/halyr. This was slightly higher than the average volume
applied to field vines during the three years of this study (1.54 Ml/ha/yr). However, the
field applications varied, and in 20OIl02 the field vines received 1.81 ML-/ha.
Table 1I-2 Meøn annuøl water mass balønce comÛonentsMean Annual
(mm)
Inputs
Outputs
RainIrrigationDrainageTranspirationEvaporation
49918389220378
11.4.1. Distribution of salts through the soil profile
The vertical and horizontal distribution of salts at two time points were plotted to
compare the accumulation zones of salts sourced from irrigation water to those from
gypsum. Values (g/kg soil) include the dissolved and precipitated salts at each point.
"snapshots" following periods of high salt accumulation (year 2033) and leaching (year
2036) were plotted.
Application of Saline lrrigation Water
The application of bore water through drip irrigation without gypsum has resulted in a
salt plume developing in the soil (Figure lt-Za). During low rainfall periods salt
accumulation in the Bt1 horizon is high up to 60 cm from the dripper, while in the A
horizon salinity increases with depth beneath the dripper (10 g/kg at surface, 4O glkg at
25 cm depth) (Figure lI-Za). At >80 cm from the dripper the salt content remains low
(<30 g/kg). With increased rainfall and leaching the upper part of the profile (0 - 45 cm)
is low in salts (<25 glkg) (Figure II-zb). However the B horizon up to 100 cm from the
202
dripper remains high (> 50 dkg). Simulations indicated that the A horizon is often
leached of salts due to its coarser texture, although during years of accumulation, salts
occur in regions of the A horizon directly beneath the dripper, this coincides with high
root density and may result in high uptake of salt by vines. The A and upper B horizons
are leached of salts during wet periods (Figure ll-zb), however salts remain at high
concentration at depth, up to 80 cm from the dripper. The deep salt accumulation should
be monitored as the rising of the curent watertable or formation of a perched watertable
could result in anaerobic, saline conditions unsuitable for root growth or function'
The regions susceptible to soil structural decline are those with high clay content, high
ESP and fluctuating levels of salinity. During periods of irrigation (summer) when salt is
added to the system, sodium is adsorbed to the clay complex (increasing ESP). However,
when EC declines (with leaching by winter rains), ESP remains constant initially thereby
allowing clay dispersion to occur. The region most susceptible under these conditions is
the upper 40 cm of the B horizon from beneath the dripper to a distance of 60 cm from
the dripper (Figure LL-Za,b).
203
I oqlrsI tosll1gI zo glkgI 30 g/kg
I40s/lç50 g/lç
I 60 s/kgI 70 g/kg
(a) (b)
-mo
4
ff
s0
i@o
læo
Ë.o
E
Éô
-2@
<m
ff
ff
-10æ
-12@
-14æ
I ogltoI 109/ksI 20s/ksI oo slrsI 40 q/ks
50 g/kgI 60 s/kgI 70 s/kg
140
4oæ0m1mD¡st€næ from Drjpper (mm)
Ðo Ææ0m10æD¡stan@ frcm DriPPor (mm)
12æ tm 12@ 14@2m
Fígure 1I-2 Satt distribution when the soil ìs drtp ínìgated with bore wøler øfter (a) a
plriod of salt accumulation ín 2033 ønd (b) ø per¡od oÍ salt leaching in 2036
Application of Low Salinity lrrigation Water
As expected, the application of less saline mains water has reduced the amount of salt
accumulation in the profile (Figure 11-3). During a low rainfall period, the highest
concentration of salts was 30 glkg at 40 - 50 cm depth beneath the dripper and also at the
base of the profile beneath the dripper (Figure 11-3a). In a period of high rainfall the
profile is leached throughout (<30 glkg) (Figure 11-3b). The region of accumulation is
similar to that under bore water application due to identical water application strategies.
Salt has againbeen leached through the profile with years of high rainfall, however some
salt is evident at depth (Figure 11-2b). Using mains water, there are fewer regions
susceptible to dispersion, although the upper B horizon beneath the dripper may still
become sodic, but over a longer period of time than with bore water. In some Barossa
vineyards, mains water is used on soils previously inigated with bore water, as
investigated in Chapter 7. This management practice was not a scenario conducted in
TRANSMIT.
204
(a)
-m
4
&
&
lm
lm
lÆ
ÊË-I
5ô
(b)
.M
-@
s
-m
¡m
lru
lÆ
m dm@1@
Oistan€ from Drippêr (mm)
1Ð t0&@mtmDistanæ fmm Dripper (m)
1m 1@
Fígure 11-3 Salt distríbulíon when the soil is drþ írrigated wíth mains waler after (ø) a
períod of salt accumulatìon in 2033 and (b) ø period of salt leaching in 2036
Gypsum Application over the Entire Soil Surtace at I t/ha
The application of gypsum (8 t/ha) over the entire soil surface has caused a plume of
gypsum salt 40 to 90 cm from the dripper (Figure 11-4). A region extending from 45 cm
(in dry periods) to 90 cm (in wet periods) depth beneath the dripper is leached of gypsum
salt (<20 g/kg). The soil surface at distances >25 cm from the dripper remains high
(>100 g/kg) in gypsum. The leached zone extends up to 60 cm from the dripper in the A
horizon. The accumulation pattern is similar during periods of high (Figure 11-4a) or
low (Figure 11-4b) rainfall, although as noted above leached patterns beneath the dripper
vafy.
As discussed previously the B horizon beneath the dripper is a critical region for soil
structural decline, therefore the movement of gypsum salts to this region is important.
The simulated application of gypsum over the entire soil surface resulted in a leached
areainthis critical region (Figure l1-4) due to the drip irrigation leaching gypsum salt to
other soil regions. The gypsum salt accumulation at 60 cm from the dripper will reduce
IIIIIII70
o dks10 O/l(o20 slkg
4050
s/lqs/l€s/l€g/l€s/l€
IIIIII
1020
4050EO
70
s/lçs/lçs/kss/Kss/kss/kos/lç
205
the ESP, however as root density is greater beneath the dripper, improved soil conditions
directly beneath the dripper may be more desirable.
(a) (b)
ÊE
ô
ÊE
E
o
-æ0
40
s
&
tm0
-1N
-140
-æ0
4
40
@
tæ0
im
140
m @ @ 1m 1æ0 1m @ 6@ &0 1@0
D¡Gbnce fom Dripper (mm)
æ0 I 200 1@
o¡stan@ fom Dripper (mm)
Figure 11-4 Gypsum dístribulion when applíed over lhe entire soil surface at I l/ha andthe víneyard is drþ irrigated øfter (a) a períod of gltpsum (salt) accumulatìon ìn 2033
and (b) a periodof gìpsum salt leachìng in 2036
Gypsum Application over the Entire So/ Surface at 4 t/ha
The application of four tonnes/hectare of gypsum over the entire soil surface (Figure
1 1-5) resulted in a similar pattern of salt accumulation as observed with the application of
eight tonnes/hectare. Gypsum salt has again accumulated at 40 to 90 cm from the
dripper, although concentrations are lower (30 to 100 g/kg). Gypsum salt accumulated at
1400 cm from the dripper have declined with reduced application rate (from 60 to 15
g/kg). Rainfall has leached the profile of gypsum salt (from >100 to <10 g/kg) except at
60 to 120 cm depth where gypsum salt remains at 30 to 100 cm from the dripper (100
g/kg) (Figure 11-5b). These levels would be sufficient to maintain a low ESP but with
the Btl horizon beneath the dripper susceptible to structural decline.
IIIII
020406080 gr'kg
I 00 gr'ks
dkss/ksdkss/ks
IIII&I 100Cks
o dks20 s/kS40 s/ks60 S/kS80 S/kS
206
(a)
-m
Æ
æ
s
lm
-1m
t&
ËE
E
Ë-ô
IIIo øks
I20 S/kS40 S/kS00 S/kS
tìNù 80 g/kg
I looq/kg
(b)
-m
-o
-m
-m
t0æ
l2æ
tm@ffim1m
D¡stanæ from Dripp€r (mm)
1m 1m mm1m0D¡stânce from Ddpper (mm)
1Ð t{0N dru
Figare 11-5 Gypsumdìstríbution when applìed over the entíre soil surface ú 4 r/ha and
the vineyard ß dríp ìnigøted, after (a) a period of gtpsum (søþ øccumulalìon in 2033
and (b) a periodof gìpsum sølt leøching in 2036
Gypsum Apptication Beneath the Dripper to the equivalent of I Uha
The application of 8 tonneslhectare ofgypsum to a restricted zone to directly beneath the
dripper causes high concentrations (>100 g/kg) of gypsum salt in a naffow band (0 to 40
cm distance from the dripper) to a depth of 120 cm. Gypsum salt levels outside this band
are low (<100 glkg), particularly >60 cm from the dripper. Gypsum concentration does
not vary throughout the profile with increased rainfall (Figure 11-6b) due to the low
solubility of gypsum and constant availability on the soil surface.
IIII'*sÈI
o dks20 slkg40 glkg60 g/kg
80 g/ks1 00 sr'kg
207
(a) (b)
-200
-400
600
-800
1000
-1200
-1400
-200
-{0
,æ0
-æ0
¡m0
-1æO
1&0
EE
ô
IIIIt: .'ìI
I 0 g/ks
I20 g/lçf 40 s/þI60 s/l(g
E
qo
0 g/kg
20 g/lrg
40 g/kg
60 g/kg
80 g/kg'100 s/K
i. ':i 80 g/kg
I I00 g/k(
1m 600 æ0 i000 1ä0
Didance from Dripper (mh)
1{0200 4m 600 s0 1m0
Distance from Dripper (mm)
1200 1€0
Figure 1I-6 Gypsum dístrìbution when applied dírectly beneath the dípper øt e¡ghttonnes/hectare and the víneyañ ís drìp ìruigated after (a) u per¡od of gypsum saltaccumulation in 2033 and (b) a períod of gypsum salt leaching ín 2036
Gypsum Application Beneath the Dripper to the equivalent of 4 t/ha
The restricted application of gypsum to a zone beneath the dripper at four tonnes per
hectare causes gypsum salt accumulation in a narrow band beneath the dripper (Figure
II-7). The accumulation zone is similar to that observed with the application of eight
tonnes/hectare. Concentrations are identical in the B horizon (>40 cm depth), however in
the A horizon it is lower (10 to 100 g/kg), indicating the gypsurn salt is leached from the
A horizon, particularly during periods of high rainfall (Figure ll-7b). However, the
remainder of the profîle does not exhibit any differences in gypsum accumulation
between 4 or 8 tonne applications. Therefore the increased application may cause
increased leaching of gypsum salt through the profile and contamination of groundwater.
208
(a)
-m
-0
tr
s
iW
iÐ
l@
EE
€o
ÊE
5ô
IIIw
o dks20 SlkS40 dks60 dks80 dks
I loo s/ks
(b)
-2N
4
@
{m
i0m
l2æ
im@mmlru
D¡ôtânæ from DriPP6r (mm)
1N 1& 40 6m 8m 1m
D¡ôtanoð from Dripper (mm)
140M
Figure 11-7 Gypsum distributìon when applìed dírectty beneath the dipper at 4 t/ha and
thá vineyard ii drip ìrrtgated after (a) a perìod of gtpsum salt uccumulation in 2033
and (b )ø period of gJìpsum sall leaching ìn 2036
11.4.2. Seasonal Variations in Salt Content
The seasonal variations of salts directly beneath the dripper and 80 cm from the dripper
were plotted on a time scale to show the extent of seasonal accumulation and leaching.
Application of Saline lrrigation Water
The accumulation and leaching of salt with bore water application is presented in Figure
11-8. Directly beneath the dripper, salt accumulation remains high for the majority of the
67 years of the simulation. Thorough leaching only occurs during particularly wet
periods; on average this is once every 12 years. At a distance from the dripper (Figure
11-8b), less salt accumulation occurs, therefore more regular leaching of the entire profile
occurs. The A horizon beneath the dripper accumulates and is leached of salts
seasonally, but at 80 cm from the dripper, accumulation only occurs in dry periods.
IIIITI 1oo o/ks
0 g/kg20 øks40 g/kg
60 S/ks80 g/kg
209
,i" \'' ,'ii;,\ rl\ l"ì\Iitr'ì,ì
lt\ì
;
\
ì:
T
t.
t
\
Irtl
(a)
200
400
600
800
1 000
1200
't400
EE
.E,
o-c)o
10 20 30 40
Time (years)
30 40
Time (years)
50 60
EE
o-oô
(b)
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
10 20 50 60
Fìgare 1t-8 Sa/r dístrtbufion when lhe soil is drip ìrrigaled with bore wøter showíng (ø)
dìrectly beneøth drípper and (b) 80 cmfrom drìpper
Application of Low Salinity lrrigation Water
The salt distribution with less saline mains water is similar to that with bore water, but at
much lower concentrations @igure l1-9). Although the salinity of the B horizon is raised
with the application of mains water, these salts are regularly leached, particularly beneath
the dripper @igure 11-9a). The A horizon remains consistently low throughout the
simulation period, indicating the combination of the sandy loam texture and low salinity
water will prevent salinity problems in this horizon. As the majority of active vine roots
will be located in the A horizon and beneath the dripper, uptake of salts by vines inigated
with mains water will be lower than vines irrigated with bore water.
IIIIIII
g/kg
l020
30405060
70
0
g/kg
g/kgg/kg
g/kgg/kg
g/kg
g/kg
!
\lú
il
i
\rt
ivr!t I
rVv
llill¡i !
ì
0 g/kg
10 g/kg
20 g/kg
30 g/kg
40 g/kg
50 g/kg
60 g/kg
70 g/kg
IIIIIII
210
EE
o-o)ô
(a)
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
(b)
200
400
600
800
1 000
1200
1400
10 20 30 40
Time (years)
50 60
EE
o0)ô
10 20 30 40
Time (years)
50 60
Fígure 11-9 Søtt dístributíon when the soil ìs drip inigated with møins water showing(ø) directþ beneath drþper and (b) 80 cmfromdripper
Gypsum Application over the Entire Soíl Surtace at I Uha
Gypsum applied at 8 t/ha over the entire surface is regularly leached from beneath the
dripper (Figure 1 1 - 1 0a), although some accumulation occurs in the A horizon for short
periods coinciding with application. The accumulation at depth beneath the dripper
occurs at maximum root depth, the model has been set such that no root growth occurs
past 120 cm, therefore water is not taken up. Therefore, gypsum salt is unable to
concentrate and precipitate, and moves freely through the remainder of the profile with
water at a concentration of 2 glL or less. Beneath the dripper, the soil profile is entirely
leached of gypsum salt in year 31, due to high rainfall and the absence of gypsum
application (Figure 1 1-1 0a).
r 0g/k9r10
203040506070
g/kgg/kg
s/ksg/ksg/kgg/ks
s/ks
0 g/kg1 0 g/kg20 g/kg30 g/kg40 g/kg50 g/kg60 g/kg70 g/kg
IIIII
II
211
EE
o-(¡,o
At an 80 cm distance from the dripper the soil requires six years of gypsum applications
for the profile to reach high (> 100 glkg) of gypsum. This is then maintain th'roughout
the simulation with periods of high leaching having little effect of gypsum accumulation.
(a)
200
400
600
800
1 000
1200
1400
10 20 30 40
Time (years)
50 60
200
400
600
800
1000
1 200
1400
10 20 30 40
Time (years)
50 60
Figure 11-10 Gypsum dístríbution when apptíed over the enlìre soìl sutface at I l/høønd the vineyard ìs drip irrìgaled showing (a) direcrly benealh dripper and (b) 80 cm
from drípper
Gypsum Application over the Entire Soil Surtace at 4 Uha
The application of four tonnes of gypsum over the entire soil surface (Figure 11-11)
results in a very similar accumulation pattem in the A horizon compared to eight tonnes
@igure 11-10). However, the concentrations throughout the soil profile are low,
resulting in the profile being more readily leached. This is evident both beneath the
IIIIryËI
0 g/kg20 g/kg40 g/kg60 g/kg
80 g/kgI 00 g/kg
EEECLo)ô
IIIIüËffiI
0 g/kg20 g/kg40 g/kg
60 g/kg80 g/kgI 00 g/kg
212
dripper (Figure 11-11a) and at 80 cm from the dripper (Figure 11-11b). Beneath the
dripper the maximum gypsum salt concentration is 80 g/kg, although the majority of the
soil remains below 40 glkgthroughout the simulation. At 80 cm from the dripper the soil
requires 14 years to reach high levels, which is 8 years longer than required for the I t/ha
application rate. The Btl is regularly leached of gypsum salt (<60 glkg), indicating this
may not be an adequaterate of application.
IIIIæJå.
I
0 g/kg2Q glkg40 g/kg60 g/kg80 g/kg1 00 g/kg
l0 20 30 40
Time (years)
50 60
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
200
400
600
800
1 000
1 200
1400
EE
o.oo
EE-co-c)ô
IIII
I
0 g/kg20 glkg40 g/kg
60 g/kg80 g/kg1 00 g/kg
30 40 50 60
Time (years)
Fígure 11-11 Gypsum distribulíon when øpplied over the entire soil surface at 4 l/haand the vineyard is drìp ìnigated showíng (a) dìrecrly beneøth dripper and (b) 80 cm
from drìpper
Gypsum Application Beneath Dripper
The application of gypsum directly beneath the dripper provides gypsum to a zone
immediately beneath this application zone. This is evident in Figure II-12 and Figure
11-13 where high amounts of gypsum salt occur throughout the profile to a depth of I20
2010
213
cm beneath the dripper, but at 80 cm from the dripper only slight traces of gypsum salt
are observed, corresponding to dry years when larger amounts of irrigation were applied.
The increased application level has little effect on accumulation pattems or time required
for gypsum salt concentration to build up, although, with the lower application rate, the A
horizon regularly becomes leached of gypsum. As the A horizon has a low ESP and clay
content, the leaching of gypsum salt is not a concern. Therefore the application of
gypsum at 4 tlltain a concentrated region beneath the dripper is more suitable than 8 lha
by the same application method.
0 g/kgI 20 g/kgr 40 g/kgr 60 g/kgctr 80 g/kgI1009/kg
10 30 40 60
Time (years)
r og/kgI20g/kgr 40 g/kgr 60 g/kgrBffi 809/kgr 1009/kg
10 20 30 40
Time (years)
50 60
Figure 11-12 Gypsum dìstributíon when øpplíed under dripper al eight lonnes/hectare
and the vìneyard ìs drþ ìnigated showìng (a) dírecrly benealh drìpper and (b) 80 cm
from dripper
200
400
600
800
1 000
1200
1400
EE
ooo
200
400
600
800
1 000
1200
1400
EE
-co(l)ô
5020
214
EE
o-o)o
IIII*ËçEË
I
0 g/kg20 g/kg40 g/kg60 g/kg80 g/kg1 00 g/kg
10 20 30 40
Time (years)
50 60
r og/kgr 209/kgI 40 g/kgr 609/kgrffi 80 g/kgI 1009/kg
10 20 30 40
Time (years)
50 60
Figure 11-13 Gypsum dislríbulion when applìed under dripper at Íour tonnes/heclare
ønd the víneyard is dríp irrigated showíng (a) dírecrly beneath dripper ünd (b) 80 cm
from drtpper
11.5. Conclusions
TRANSMIT is a complex model with many variables. Only those variables related
directly to gypsum application and salt transport were varied between simulations. Other
variables, for example, those describing plants, soil and evapotranspiration, were chosen
to represent the experimental plots, but were held constant between simulations. This
allowed simulation of the key experimental variables, namely, gypsum application and
quality of irrigation water. Since the model is a simplified representation of natural
conditions, simulated data may not exactly match field results; however, qualitative
differences between scenarios are the focus of this research. In this work, for example,
root growth and distribution were common in all scenarios, although increased salinity
will affect roots and thereby change water uptake (transpiration) and distribution in the
EE
o-I
215
profile. Furthermore, based on field observations, roots did not extend to depths greater
than 1400 mm. Root distribution significantly influences gypsum accumulation patterns,
and if vine roots were prolific and active at depth, increased gypsum accumulation may
occur
Macropore flow was not included in the model. 'Water movement in the sandy loam A
horizon would be relatively unaffected by modifications in soil structure. However,
water movement in the B horizon could be different if preferential flow paths developed.
Based on observed irrigated soil morphology, the Btl horizon in the modelled scenarios
assumed no macropore flow. However, if gypsum were applied from the commencement
of irrigation, this might preserve macro-porosity, promoting continued water movement
through these pathways.
Modelling with TRANSMIT highlighted the seasonal and long-term variations in the
movement of salt derived from irrigation water and gypsum. High rainfall periods were
shown to leach the profile of salt. Salts from irrigation water moved laterally more than
1400 cm from the dripper, indicating that some overlap of salt accumulation is likely
between adjacent drippers.
This research highlighted the critical differences between movement and distribution of a
sparingly soluble salt compared to one with no limitations on solubility. These
differences cause variations in accumulation patterns between salts from irrigation water
and those sourced from gypsum. Further work should investigate the application of
216
more soluble calcium salts, such as CaClz and Ca(NO)2 to irngation water, however
these sources of calcium may not be appropriate for the grape growing industry
considering possible plant side effects (nutrition, N); plant toxicity, Cl) and economics.
Since TRANSMIT does not simulate cation exchange, it is difFlcult to infer the actual
ESP of the soil, or the extent to which added calcium will displace exchangeable sodium.
Changes in soil solution composition following cation exchange could lead to more
gypsum dissolution than simulated.
The application of gypsum may be most efficient by combining a low concentration over
the entire soil surface with a more concentrated rate beneath the dripper. These
application scenarios could be assessed initially by modelling and then confirmed by field
studies. Gypsum may also be dissolved in irrigation water, however, due to the low
solubility of gypsum (2 gL) and the relatively low amounts of water (1.8MUyr) applied
to the vineyards studied here, only limited amounts of calcium would enter the soil to
reduce ESP. However, this application method will reduce irrigation water SAR (for the
bore water studied in this work to about 5 if 1 g/L were added) and may be useful as an
ongoing strategy to prevent newly established irrigated soils becoming sodic'
Developing optimum amelioration strategies by varying gypsum application rates,
frequencies and surface placement is considered an important research priority.
217
Chapter 12. General Discussion and Recommendations
12,1. General Discussion
The literature review (Chapter 1) included discussions about the genesis of RBE, the
effect of water quality on the properties of RBE and the amelioration of these soils with
gypsum. It is well established that the application of saline irrigation water to vineyards
has a negative impact on soil and gtapevine productivity, because of increased soil
salinity and sodicity. However, in this study the seasonal and long-term morphological
and physiochemical changes that occur in RBE when irrigated with saline groundwater
were quantified. Particular emphasis was placed on describing and quantifying two-
dimensional variations resulting from water and solute movement beneath drippers. As
well, this work focused on quantifying the efficiency of gypsum application to ameliorate
salt-affected soils.
A comparison of paired sites in a vineyard irrigated for eleven years with saline water
and an adjacent non-irrigated site (10 m apart) was made (Chapter 5). Interpretation of
morphological, chemical and physical properties showed that alternating application of
saline (bore, EC up to 3.5 dS/m) and non-saline (rain) water caused increases in soil
electrical conductivity (EC."), sodium adsorption ratio (SAR), bulk density (p5) and pH.
These properties were affected to a greater degree with increasing distance from the
dripper, a behavioural feature, which resulted from the presence of an argillic B horizon
which influenced soil properties.
218
The micromorphology of the A and B horizons of the irrigated and non-irrigated sites
were vastly different, with the irrigated site having reduced voids and channels,
consistent with high pb measurements. Changes in soil morphological, chemical and
physical properties were interpreted to have resulted from the dispersion and migration of
clays, and from the development of weakly redoximorphic conditions. Eleven years of
irigation substantially changed the soil from a Calcic Palexeralf (non-irrigated site) to an
Aquic Natrixeralf (irrigated site) (Soil Survey Staff, 1999).
Soil data (ECr", SAR'", Nar" and Car") collected over space and time from sites in the
Barossa Valley and Mclaren Vale regions were used to quantify the impact of gypsum
and irrigation water quality on RBE. Data from confrol sites indicated that non-irrigated
soils naturally have a low EC.", SAR,., Nau" and Car". The Barossa vineyard had been
drip irrigated for eleven years with saline water (2.5 dS/m), then gypsum was applied at a
rate of 0, 4 or 8 tonneslhectare in 2001 and 2002. Application of gypsum caused
increased salinity, with high levels occurring in mid-winter 2OO2 prior to leaching of salts
by rainfall. However, SAR declined with increased rates of gypsum application,
particularly in the A horizon and in the Btl horizon 100 cm from the dripper. This
indicates that the application of gypsum to RBE will ameliorate A and B horizons
through reflocculation of clay particles thereby preventing further decline in soil physical
properties.
When a RBE has been irrigated for 9 years with saline water (2.5 dS/m) prior to
switching to a less saline water source (0.5 dS/m), the first two years are critical because
219
EC declines rapidly. In contrast, SAR requires more than 2 years, depending on
conditions, to decline substantially, resulting in a period during which the Btl horizon
may become dispersive. However, when gypsum is applied, SAR is reduced while EC'"
is increased.
Application of gypsum every second year from the establishment of vineyards will
prevent soil SAR increasing because a large volume of the soil profile maintains high
calcium levels throughout the year. Irigation leached calcium to a depth of 20 cm
beneath the dripper.
Platinum electrodes were used to automatically measure seasonal redox potential (Eh)
changes in the A, AZ and Bt1 horizons in RBE. Eh varied in accordance with the quality
of irrigation water and gypsum application. Inrigation with saline water caused the Bt1
horizon to become strongly reducing during winter months (Eh -200 to 0 mV). Irrigation
with less saline water caused less reducing conditions (Eh +200 to +400 mV). Strongly
reducing conditions are caused by the formation of a less permeable layer in the Btl
horizon due to dispersion and migration of clay. Application of gypsum increased soil
Eh, particularly in the A2 horizon (+500 to +50 mV) during winter. Consequently, redox
potential is considered to be a tool capable of continuously monitoring soil changes
following irigation with various levels of salinity and after amelioration with gypsum.
Interpretation of chemical composition data from soil saturation extracts and from soil
solution (in situ suction cups) permitted development of conceptual mechanistic models
220
to show spatial and seasonal changes in macro- and micro-pore chemistry and the sources
and supply of solutes. These mechanistic models highlight the complex soil processes
beneath drippers indicating how salts are leached with corresponding variations in macro-
and micro-pore water content.
A predictive mathematical model, TRANSMIT was developed to predict zones of
gypsum and salt accumulation during long-term irrigation (67 years). 'When gypsum was
applied over the entire soil surface, it accumulated at 60 to 90 cm from the dripper in the
B horizon. Higher application rates caused higher concentrations of gypsum salts to
accumulate. When gypsum was applied immediately beneath the dripper, salts
accumulated in a 'column' under the dripper (at 0 to 35 cm from the dripper), but with
very little movement away from the dripper. TRANSMIT permitted the following
processes to be predicted:
1. The zones of accumulation of salts when irrigated with water of high and low
salinity are similar; although concentrations were significantly lower with
less saline water.
2. In low rainfall years salts accumulated throughout the B horizon (depth of
35 - 150 cm); while in periods of high rainfall (and leaching) the A', A2 and
Btl horizons (depth of 0 - 60 cm) were leached, although at gteater depths
(80 - 150 cm) salt concentrations remained high.
221
12.1 .1. lmplications and Recommendations
This research has provided data for improving management of soils in vineyards with
regard to irrigation practices. Moreover, these results also provide the basis for future
studies of vineyard soils. The soil morphological, chemical and physical data will be
used as input data for vine growth modelling programs, such as Vinelogic (Godwin et al.,
2002). The long-term application of saline water by drip irigation on texture contrast
soils has been shown by this research to have caused spatial variations in soil properties,
with regions developing: (i) increased soil sodicity; (ii) a less permeable Btl horizon; (iii)
increased bulk density; and (iv) increased soil salinity. Consequently it is important to
understand these processes before management practices can be modified. This research
investigated the effect of changed water quality and the application of calcium (gypsum)
in arresting this decline, however, other methods are available. Specific areas for
implications of results will be discussed further.
Future lrrigation Water Sources
Drip irrigation of vineyards is expected to expand to improve water use efficiency of
vineyards (compared to other irrigation methods), while reducing the reliance on rainfall
for grape production, although management of this water is critical. This research has
shown that long-tern use of saline water has caused RBE to become sodic, with the Bt1
horizon increasing in bulk density. Increased sodicity in RBE can be combated by
gypsum application. Recommendations from this study for use of gypsum on RBE are
summarised in Table 12-1. However, the application of this research to specific sites will
require additional soil and irrigation water analyses to ensure that other problems (e.9.
222
high boron) are not an issue. Gypsum application should be combined with continued
monitoring to ensure that the soil does not have high salt loading, causing vine stress.
The recommendations listed below are for the application of gypsum over the entire soil
surface, however, as discussed in Chapter 11, the combination of a higher application
beneath the dripper and lower level over the remainder of the soil surface may result in a
more beneficial accumulation pattern in the soil.
Table I2-I Recommendations for Gypsunt Application Rates for Barossa Valley RedBrown Earths
Note: Rates will vary depending on site conditions, however for the Barossa Valleyresearch site the following rates are recommended: low = 0.5 - 3 Üha; moderate = 2 - 4t/ha;high=4-8t/ha.
These recommendations highlight the need for comprehensive soil and water analyses
and to manage the soil according to water quality and site history. It is critical to
determine soil type, slope, water table depth and inigation management (frequency and
rate). As shown in Table 12-1 switching to a 'better', less saline water source will not
automatically improve the soil properties, particularly if the previous water source was
significantly higher in sodium.
High rate every year for three years,
then moderate nàte every year for threeyears, then low rate tJha every l-2 yearc
Long-term drip inigated with poor qualitywater (e.g. 3.5 dS/m groundwater), thenswitched to good quality water (e.R.0.5 dS/m)
High rate every year for three years,
then moderaterate every l-2yearsLong-term drip irrigated with poor qualitywater (e.s. 3.5 dS/m sroundwater)
Moderate rate every year for two years,
then low rate every 1-2 yearsLong-term drip irrigated with good qualitywater (e.g. 0.5 dS/m)
Low rate every l-2 yensNewly established site, previously non-irrigated. Irigation water poor quality (e.g. 3.5dS/m groundwater)
Low rate every 2-3 yearsNewly established site, previously non-irrigated. Irrigation water good quality (e.g.
0.5 dS/m)
Gyp sum RecommendationstOualitv of Irrieation Water and Site History
223
Selection of land for the establishment of new vineyards must not only consider water
availability but also other factors listed above (e.g. soil type and slope). Particular
consideration must be given to current and future quality of irrigation water and the
impact of this on the soil type. Management options may then be considered to minimise
problems, which may be encountered either immediately or in the future.
Sampling of Vineyards
This research highlighted large variations in soil properties at various distances from the
dripper. Therefore, any sampling of drip irrigated vineyards must consider sampling
position (distance from dripper) and depth of sampling. It may also be useful prior to
sampling to investigate the distribution and quantity of vine roots, which will enable
some corelation between soil and grapevine properties.
If multiple vineyards are sampled and salt distribution compared, then each vineyard
requires sampling at multiple depths and distances from the dripper. This is because the
salt distribution pattern for each vineyárd will vary with irrigation management (duration,
frequency or rate). Thus, the development of a two-dimensional distribution pattern for
each vineyard will allow more accurate comparisons.
Sampling at a single distance from the dripper can be used if a single vineyard is to be
sampled multþle times to compare variations: (i) throughout the vineyard; (ii) during
season or; (iii) over a number of years. For these, it is recommended that the sampling
224
distance from the dripper (SD) occur at a distance one quarter of the distance to the next
dripper. For the Barossa Valley vineyard, this would result in the sampling point being
55 cm from the dripper, a.zone with high salt content.
12.2. Recommendations for Future Research
Due to the enormity, in terms of both number of variables and number of samples, of the
current field of study, there are many areas highlighted requiring additional work. These
will be discussed further.
As discussed in Chapter 1 other methods for amelioration of sodic soils are available,
such as increasing organic matter content and modifying cropping practices (e.g' deep
ripping). Further work should combine gypsum application with other methods, such as
variations in cover crop, rootstocks or deep ripping to improve and maintain soil physical
properties.
Geochemical gain and loss calculations were discussed in Chapter 3 to determine
differences between irrigated and non-irrigated sites. This work should be developed and
refined further with emphasis on quantifying the impact of water quality on the formation
or dissolution of carbonate nodules occurring in these soils.
Redox probes and soil solution samplers (suction cups) currently remain permanently
installed in the Barossa vineyard site. Continued monitoring of the soil redox potential
and soil solution composition will further complement data obtained in this study and
225
allow further assessment of the long-term (".g. >5 years) movement and accumulation of
gypsum in the soil profile. Soil redox potential should be further investigated,
particularly variations in redox potential of vineyards with regard to distance from
dripper, chemical applications, water quality and soil type.
The later part of this research project focused mainly on seasonal changes in soil
chemical properties. Further, more detailed work should be conducted on changes in
physical properties (e.g. hydraulic conductivity) because of the lack of seasonal variation
in physical measurements, focus should be on the rate of change over the long-term (>5
years).
Further work should be conducted to test theories developed from the modelling work
and further investigate the method of application in the field to confirm accumulation
zones of gypsum when applied in a concentrated area beneath drippers. There is also
scope to further the modelling work through investigation of other strategies such as, the
simultaneous gypsum application at a high rate beneath the dripper and a lower rate over
the entire soil surface. Data obtained may also be incorporated into LEACHC, a soil
chemistry model combining cation exchange with solute movement, to investigate
variations in the exchange of calcium and sodium on the clay matrix, and the leaching of
these cations. Further work into the effect of macropore flow compared to micropore
flow on soil properties may also be investigated through LEACHM.
226
All studies were confined to a single soil group (although the most contmon soil group in
SE Australia) from two wine regions. Future work to be conducted should be repeated on
other major viticultural soil types occurring in other viticulture regions (e.9. Coonawarra,
Riverland, Great Western). This should also be combined with continued research to
investigate whether the application of gypsum affects vine canopy or berry quality and
yield. As a lag phase often occurs between application and measurement in berries, a
long-term trial or continuation of the existing vineyard will be required. Further studies
should also be conducted to determine if the application of additional water and salts to a
region impacts on the extended environment, such as regional groundwater or rivers.
227
ReferencesAitchison, G.D., R.C. Sprigg, and G.\M. Cochrane. 1954. The soils and geology of
Adelaide and suburbs. Geol. Surv. S. Aust. Bull 32.
Ali, R., R.L. Elliott, J.E. Ayars, and E.W. Stevens. 2000. Soil salinity modeling over
shallow water tables. I: Validation of LEACHC. Journal of Irrigation & Drainage
Engineering ASCE 126:223-233.
Allen, R.G., L.S. Pereira, D. Raes, and M. Smith. 1998. Crop evapotranspiration.Guidelines for computing crop water requirements. FAO Irrigation and Drainage
Paper No. 56, FAO Rome, Italy, 300pp.
Allison, F.8.1973. Soil Organic Matter and its Role in Crop Production. Elsevier
Scientifîc Pub, Amsterdam.
Alperovitch, N., I. Shainberg, R. Keren, and M.J. Singer. 1985. Effect of clay mineralogyand aluminum and iron oxides on the hydraulic conductivity of clay-sandmixtures. Clay Miner alogy 33:443 -450.
Araujo, F., L.E. 'Williams, and M.A. Matthews. 1995a. A comparative study of young
thompson seedless grapevines (Vitis Vinifera L) under drip and furrow irrigation2. Growth, water Use efficiency and nitrogen partitioning. Scientia Horticulturae60:251-265.
Araujo, F., L.E. Williams, D.W. Grimes, and M.A. Matthews. 1995b. A comparative
study of young thompson seedless gtapevines under drip and furrow irrigation 1.
Root and soil water distributions. Scientia Horticulturae 60:235-249.
Archer, E., and H.C. Strauss. 1985. Effect of plant density on root distribution of three
year old grafter 99 Richter grapevines. South African Journal of Enology and
Viticulture 6:25-30.
Ayars, J.E., C.J. Phene, R.B. Hutmacher, K.R. Davis, R.A. Schoneman, S.S. Vail, and
R.M. Mead . 1999. Subsurface drip irrigation of row crops: a review of 15 years ofresearch at the Water Management Research Laboratory. Agricultural WaterManagement.42:l-27.
228
Baldock, J.4., M. Aoyama, J.M. Oades, and C.D. Grant. 1994. Structural amelioration ofa South Australian Red-Brown Earth using calcium and organic amendments.
Australian Journal of Soil Research 32:57t-594.
Barossa Light Development Inc. 2001. Profile of the Barossa/Light Region, Tanunda,
South Australia.
Barrow, N.J. 1969. The accumulation of soil organic matter under pasture and its effect
on soil properties. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture and Animal
Husbundary 9:437-44.
Bechwith, R.S. 1963. Chemical extraction of nutrients in soils and uptake by plants.
Agrochimic a I :296 -3 13.
Bernstein, L., and L.E. Francois. 1973. Comparisons of drip, furrow and sprinkler
irrigation. Soil Science 1 15:73-86.
Bernstein, L., C.F. Ehlig, and R.A. Clark. 1969. Effect of grape rootstock on chloride
accumulation in leaves. Journal of American Society of Horticultural Sciences
94:584-590.
Bigham, J.M., R.'W. Fitzpatrick, and D.G. Schulze. 2001. kon oxides,p.323-366,únJ.B. Dixon and D. G. Schulze, eds. Soil Mineralogy with EnvironmentalApplications. Soil Science Society America Book Series No 7, SSSA, Madison,
Wisconsin.
Blackburn, G., and R.M. Baker . t953. The soils of part of the southern Flinders Ranges,
South Australia. CSIRO Soil Publ. 3.
Blake, G.R., and K.H. Hartge. 1986. Bulk Density, p.363-375, In A. Klute, ed. Methods
of Soil Analysis, Part 1. Physical and Mineralogical Methods, 2nd Edition ed.
American Society of Agtonomy - Soil Science Society of America, Madison,'Wisconsin, USA.
Bohn, H.L. 1968. Electromotive force of inert elecffodes in soil suspensions. Soil Science
Society of America Proc. 32:2Il-215 .
Bohn, H.L.1971. Redox Potentials. Soil Science ll2:39-45.
229
Bresler, E., B.L. McNeal, and D.L. Carter. 1982. Saline and Sodic Soils: Principles-
Dynamics-Modeling (Advanced series in agricultural sciences: I 0) Springer-
Verlag, Berlin.
Brewer, R. 1968. Clay illuviation as a factor in the particle size-differentiation in soilprofile. Trans. 9th Congr. Soil Sc. 4:489-498.
Brewer, R. 1976. Fabric and mineral analysis of soils Robert E. Krieger Publishing
Company, New York.
Bridge, B.J. 1968. Soil physical properties as influenced by gypsum. M.Sc., University ofSydney, Sydney, Australia.
Briggs, L.J., and A.G. McCall. 1904. An artificial root for inducing capillary movement
of soil moisture. Science 20:566-569.
Bui, E.N., L. Krogh, R.S. Lavado, F.O. Nachtergaele, T. Toth, and R'W. Fitzpatrick.1998. Distribution of Sodic Soils: The World Scene, p. t9-34,1nM. E. Sumner
and R. Naidu, eds. Sodic Soils: Distribution, Properties, Management and
Environmental Consequences. Oxford University Press, New York.
Bureau of Meteorology. 2001. Patched Point data for station: 23373 NURIOOTPAVITICULTURAL lonline]. Available by Bureau of Meteorology and QueenslandGovt http://www.nrm.qld. gov.au/silo.
Butler, 8.E., and H.M. Churchward. 1983. Aeolian processes,In Division of Soils
CSIRO, ed. Soils: An Australian viewpoint. CSIRO, Melbourne'
Buurman, P., A.G. Jongmans, and M.D. PiPujol. 1998. Clay illuviation and mechanical
clay infiltration - is there a difference? Quaternary International5I-52:66-69.
Campbell, G.S. 1974. A simple method for determining unsaturated conductivity frommoisture retention data. Soil Science 771:3LL-314.
Carter, M.R., and G.R. Webster. 1990. Use of calcium-to-total cation ratio in soilsaturation extracts as an index of plant-available calcium. Soil Science 149:'212-
2t7.
230
Carter, M.R., G.R. Webster, and R.R. Cairns.1979. Effect of moisture change and
salinity on the Mg/Ca ratio and ratio of Cattotalcations in soil solution' Canadian
Journal of Soil Science 59:439-443.
Cartwright, 8., B.A. Zarcinas, and L.R. Spouncer. 1986. Boron toxicity in South
Australian barley crops. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research3T:351-9
Cass, A. 1998a. Assessment of vineyard soils, p.78-82,1n R. J. Blair, et al., eds. Proc'
Tenth Australian Wine Indushy Technical Conference. Winetitles, Adelaide.
Cass, A. 1998b. Vineyard soils - measuring and managing chemical impediments to
growth. The Australian Grapegrower and Winemaker 415:13-16'
Cass, A. 2002. Sustainable viticultural production: Optimising soil resources. GWRDC
Final Reporc CRS 95/1.
Cass, 4., and D. Maschmedt. 1998a. Understanding soils - for optimum yield. The
Australian Grapegrower and rüinemaker 4L | :13 -16.
Cass, 4., and D. Maschmedt. 1998b. Vineyard soils - recognising structural problems
The Australian Grapegrower and Winemaker 412:23-26.
Cass, 4., and R.'W. Fitzpatrick.lggg. Soil assessment for almond production on the
Weman Development. Confidential Report to Kyndalyn Park Almonds Pty Ltd.
CSIRO Land and'Water Consultancy Report 99140.
Cass, 4., R.R. \ù/alker, and R.W. Fitzpatrick. t996. Vineyard soil degradation by salt
accumulation and the effect on the performance of the vine, p. 153-160' In C. S.
Stockley, Sas, 4.N., Johnstone, R.S. and I-ee, T.H., ed. Ninth Australian wine
industry technic al conference.'Winetitles, Adel aide.
Cass, 4., D. Maschmedt, and J. Chapman. 1998. Vineyard soils - Managing physical
impediments to root growth. The Australian Grapegrower and Winemaker
414:13-17.
Chaberek, S., and E. Martell. 1959. Organic sequestering agents: a discussion of the
chemical behaviour and applications of metal chelate compounds in aqueous
systems Wiley, New York, USA.
231
Chander, K., S. Goyal, and K.K. Kapoor. I994.Effect of sodic water irrigation and
farmyard manure application on soil microbial biomass and microbial activity.Applied Soil Ecology I:I39-t44.
Charters, S. 2000. The world of wine, p. l4-61The encyclopaedia of wine. Harper
Collins Publishers, Australia.
Childs, S.W., and R.J. Hanks . L975. Model of effects of soil salinity on crop growth. Soil
Science Society of America Proc. 39:617 -622.
Chittleborough, D.J. 1981. Genesis, p. 29-46,lnJ,M. Oades, et a1., eds. Red-BrownEarths of Australia. Waite Agricultural Research Institute, University of Adelaide
and the CSIRO Division of Soils, Adelaide.
Chittleborough, D.J. 1989. Genesis of a Xeralf on feldspathic sandstone, South Australia.
Soil Scienc e 4O:235 -250.
Chittleborough, D.J. 1992. Formation and pedology of duplex soils. Australian Journal ofExperimental Agriculture 32:815 -25.
Chittleborough, D.J., and J.M. Oades. 1979. The development of a red-brown earth. I. Areinterpretation of published data. Australian Journal of Soil Research 17:37l'381.
Chittleborough, D.J., and J.M. Oades. 1980a. The development of a red-brown earth. II.Uniformity of the parent material. Australian Journal of Soil Resea¡ch 18:375-
382.
Chittleborough, D.J., and J.M. Oades. 1980b. The development of a red-brown earth. III.The degree of weathering and translocation of clay. Australian Journal of Soil
Research 18:383-393.
Chorom, M., and P. Rengasamy. 1995. Dispersion and zeta potential of pure clays as
related to net particle charge under varying ph, electrolyte concentration and
cation type. European Journal of Soil Science 46:651-665.
Churchman, G.J., J.O. Skjemstad, and J.M. Oades . lgg3.Influence of clay minerals and
organic matter on effects of sodicity on soils. Australian Journal of Soil Research
31:779-800.
232
Cobb, M.A. 1986. Groundwater resoufces of the Barossa Valley D.J. Woolman,
Adelaide.
Cockroft, 8., and F.M. Martin. 1981. Irrigation, p. 133-148, In J.M. Oades, et a1., eds.
Red-Brown Earths of Australia. Waite Agricultural Research Institute, University
of Adelaide and the CSIRO Division of Soils, Adelaide'
Collis-Georgo, N., and D.E. Smiles. 1963. An examination of cation balance and
moisture characteristic methods of determining the stability of soil aggregates'
Journal of Soil Science 14:27-32.
Commonwealth Bureau of Meteorology. 2003. Climate averages [Online](verified
z0trU03).
Conradie, 'W.J., and D. Saayman. 1989. Effects of long-term nitrogen, phosphorous and
potassium fcrtilisation on Chenin blanc vines. IL Leaf analyses and gtape
composition. American Journal of Enology and viticulture 40:91-98.
CRCV 2O0L Viticultural to Practice 2003, Water Management for Grapevine
Production. CRCV, Adelaide.
Curtin, D., and R. Naidu. 1998. Fertility constraints to plant production, p.IO7-123, InM. E. Sumner and R. Naidu, eds. Sodic soils, distribution, properties,
management, and environmental consequences. Oxford University Press, New
York.
Curtin, D., H. Steppuhn, and F. Selles. L994. Clay dispersion in relation to sodicity,
electrolyte concentration, and mechanical effects. Soil Science Society ofAmerica Journal 58:955 -962.
Dalgarno, C.R. 1961. Geology of the Barossa Valley. M.Sc Thesis, University ofAdelaide, Adelaide.
Daulta, 8.S., and K.S. Chauhan. 1980. Varietal variation in root growth of some
grapevine cultivars. Proq. Hort. 12:37-39.
Debyle, N.V., R.'W. Hennes, and G.E. Hart. 1998. Evaluation of ceramic cups fordetermining soil solution chemistry. Soil Science 146:30-36.
233
Dixit, S.P. 1975. The electrophoretic mobility of natural clays and their potential mobilitywithin the pedon. Geoderma L3:325-30.
DME. 1992. Groundwater in the Willunga Basin, Information Sheet 17. South Australian
Department of Mines and Energy, Adelaide.
Dorrance, D.W., L.G. Wilson, L.G. Everett, and C. S.J. 1991. Compendium of In Situ
Pore-Liquid Samplers for Vadose Zone,p. 300-31,In R. G. Nash and A. R.
Leslie, eds. Groundwater residue sampling design. American Chemical Society,
Boston.
Dowley, 4., R.V/. Fitzpatrick, and A. Cass. 2004. Review of redox potential
measurements in soils. In Preparation for Australian Journal of Soil Research.
Dowley, 4., R.Fitzpatrick, A. Cass, and W. Besz. 1998. Measurement of redox potential
(Eh) in periodically waterlogged viticultural soils World Congress of SoilScience, Monþellier, France.
Dowley, A.C. 1995. The effects of irrigation with poor quality gtoundwater on soil
salinity, sodicity and the quality of vineyard production. Honours Thesis,
University of Adelaide.
Downton, W.J.S. 1977. Salinity effects on the ion composition of fruiting cabernet
sauvignon vines. American Journal of Enology and Viticulture 28:2lO-2I4.
Downton, W.J.S. 1985. Growth and mineral composition of the sultana grapevine as
influenced by salinity and rootstock. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research
36:425-34.
Drexel, J.F., W.V. Preiss, and A.J. Parker. 1993. The Geology of South Australia Mines
and Energy, South Australia, Geological Survey of South Australia.
Emerson, W.W. 1983. Inter-particle bonding, p.477-98,1n Division of Soils CSIRO, ed.
Soils: an Australian Viewpoint. CSIRO, Melbourne.
Emerson, W.W., and C.L. Chi. t977. Exchangeable calcium, magnesium and sodium and
the dispersion of illites in water. II. Dispersion of illites in water. AusffalianJournal of Soil Research 15:255-62.
234
Everett, L.G., and L.G. McMillion. 1985. Ground Water Monitoring Review 5:51-60.
Failla, O., G. Stringari, D. Porro, and A. Scienza. 1993. Stato nutrizionale di alcune zone
viticole dell'Itali a centro- settentrionale. Vi gnevini 20 :7 7 -82.
FAO. 1988. World Reference Base for Soil Resources (WRB) World Soil Resources 84.
Food and Agriculture Organisation for the United Nations (FAO), Rome.
Firman, J.B. 1969. Stratigraphy and landscape relations of soil materials near Adelaide,South Australia. Transactions of the Royal Society of South Australia 93:39-54.
Fitzpatrick, R.W., and D.J. Chittleborough. 2002. Titanium andZrconium minerals, p667-690,InJ.B. Dixon and D. G. Schulze, eds. Soil Mineralogy withEnvironmental Applications. Soil Science Society America Book Series No 7,
SSSA, Madison,'Wisconsin.
Fitzpatrick, R.W., D.P. Turner, A. Cass, and M.E. Sumner. 1971. Reclamation.of some
sodic soils by the high salt water dilution method. Proceedings of the SouthAfrican Sugar Technologists' Association: 1 - 1 0.
Fitzpatrick, R.W., Wright, M.J. and Stevens, R.M. 1992. Drainage, sodicity and relatedproblems of vineyards, p. 38-44, In C. S. Stockley, Johnstone, R.S., Leske, P.A.and Lee, T.H., ed. Proceedings of the Eighth Australian 'Wine Industry TechnicalConference. Winetitles, Melbourne.
French, R.J., 'W.8. Matheson, and A.L. Clarke. 1968. Soils and agriculture of theNorthern and Yorke Peninsula regions in South Australia. Department ofAgriculture S. Aust Spec. Bull. t/68:72.
Freney, J.R., and C.H. Williams. 1983. The sulphur cycle in soil, p. 729-207,InM.YIvanov and J. R. Freney, eds. The global biogeochemical sulphur cycle. JohnWiley and Sons, New York.
Gee, G.W., and J.W. Bauder. 1986. Particle-size Analysis, p.383-4IL,In A. Klute, ed.
Methods of Soil Analysis, Part 1. Physical and Mineralogical Methods, 2ndEdition ed. American Society of Agronomy - Soil Science Society of America,Madison, Wisconsin, USA.
Gladstone, L 1992. Viticulture and Environment Winetitles, Australia.
235
Godwin, D.C., R.J.G. White, K.J. Sommer, R.R. Walker, I. Goodwin, and P.R.C.Clingeleffer.2002. VineLOGIC-a model of grapevine growth, development and
water use, .In C. Dundon, et al., eds. Managing Water. Proceedings of AustralianSociety of Viticulture and Oenology Seminar, Mildura, Victoria.
Goldberg, S.D., M. Rinot, and N. Karu. l9TL.F;ffect of trickle irrigation intervals ondistribution and utilization of soil moisture in a vineyard. Soil Science Society ofAmerica Proc. 35 :127 -130.
Goyne, K.W., R.L. Day, and J. Chorover. 2000. Artefacts caused by collection of soilsolution with passive capillary samplers. Soil Science Society of America Journal64:1.330-t336.
Grattan, S.R., and C.M. Grieve.1992. Mineral element acquisition and growth responseof plants in saline environments. Agric. Ecosys. Environ. 38:275-300.
Greacen, E.L. 1981. Physical properties and water relations, In K. Norrish, ed. Red-Brown Earths of Australia. 'Waite Agricultural Research Institute, University ofAdelaide and the CSIRO Division of Soils, Adelaide.
Green, P.7966. Mineralogical and weathering study of a Red-Brown Earth formed ongranodiorite. Australian Journal of Soil Research 4:I8I-197.
Greene, R.S.B., A.M. Posner, and J.P. Quirk. 1978. A study of the coagulation ofmontmorillonite and illite suspensions by CaCl, using the electron microscope, p.35-40, InW. 'W. Emerson, et al., eds. Modification of soil structure. John Wileyand Sons, New York.
Greenland, D.J., G.R. Lindstrom, and J.P. Quirk. 1962. Organic materials which stabilizenatural soil aggregates. Proc. Soil. Sci. Soc. Am 26:366-7I.
Grierson,I.T. l9TS.GypsumandRed-BrownEarths,p.315-324,InW.W.Emerson,etal., eds. Modification of Soil Structure. John \ü/iley and Sons, New York.
Grobler, L., A.S. Claassens, and Annandale. 2003. Ceramic suction samplers: A reliablemethod for extracting soil solutions for analysis. South African Journal of Plantand Soil20:16l-164.
236
Groot-Obbink, J., and D.M. Alexander. 1973. Response of six grapevine cultivars to arange of chloride concentrations. American Journal of Enology and Viticulture24:65-68.
Grossman, J., and P. Udluft. 1991. The extraction of soil water by suction-cup method: a
review. Journal of Soil Science 42:83-93.
Gupta, R.K., and I.P. Abrol. 1990. Salt-affected soils: Their reclamation and management
for crop production. Advances in Soil Science ll:223-288.
Gupta, R.K., D.K. Bhumbla, and I.P. Abrol. 1984. Effect of sodicitY, PH, organic matter,
and calcium carbonate on the dispersion behaviour of soils. Soil Science 137:245-251.
Hallows, P.J., and D.G. Thompson. 1995. The history of irrigation in Australia FirstMildura Inigation Trust, Mildura, Victoria.
Hansen, E.4., and A.R. Harris.I975. Validity of soil water samples collected withporous ceramic cups. Soil Science Society of America Proc.39:528-536.
Hanson, 8.R., and V/.E. Bendixen. 1995. Drip irrigation conüols soil salinity under rowcrops. Cal. Agric. 49:19-23.
Hardie, W.J., and J.A. Considine. t976. Response of grapes to water-deficit shess inparticular stages of development. American Journal of Enology and Viticulture27:55-61.
Haseman, J.F., and C.E. M shall. 1945. The use of heavy minerals in studies of the
origin and development of soils. Monograph of the Agricultural ExperimentalStation of Research Bulletin 381 75.
Hausenbuiller, R.L. 1985. Soil Science: Principle and practice. 3rd ed. Brown, Dubuque,Iowa.
Hicks,'W.S., G.M. Bowman, and R.V/. Fitzpatrick. 1999. East Trinity acid sulfate soils,part 1: environmental hazards Technical Report L4199. CSIRO Land and Water.
zJ/
Hill Environmental Consultants.1992. Draft report on strategies for future operation ofthe Christies Beach wastewater plant and wastewater treatment and disposal forthe Willunga basin, Melbourne.
Hubble, G.D., R.F. Isbell, and K.H. Northcote. 1983. Features of Australian Soils, p.17-48, In Division of Soils CSIRO, ed. Soils: an Australian viewpoint. CSIRO,Melbourne.
Hunsaker, V.E., and P.F. Pratt. 1971. Calcium-magnesium exchange equilibria in soils.Soil Science Society of America Proc. 35:15I-152.
Hutson, J.L.2003. LEACHM (Leaching Estimation and Chemistry Model) A process-based model of water and solute movement, transformations, plant uptake andchemical reactions in the unsaturated zone. Version 4 ed. Research Series No.R03-1, Department of Crop and Soil Sciences, Cornell University, Ithaca, NewYork.
Hutson, J.L., and A. Cass. 1987. A retentivity function for use in soil-water simulationmodels. Soil Science 38:105-113.
Hutson, J.L., and R.J. Wagenet. 1995. A multi-region model describing water flow andsolute transport in heterogeneous soils. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 59:743-157.
Isbell, R.F. 1996. The Aus alian soil classification system CSIRO, Publishing,Melbourne, Australia.
Jayawardane, N.S. 1990. Predicating the upward flow from saline watertables using theequivalent salt solution concept, p. 145-155, In E. Humphreys, et a1., eds.Management of soil salinity in South East Australia, New South Wales.
Jeffery, S.J., J.O. Carter, K.M. Moodie, and A.R. Beswick. 2001. Using spatialinterpolation to construct a comprehensive archive of Australian climate data.Environmental Modelling and S oftw are 1 6 : 309-3 3 0.
Jenny, H. 1941. Factors of Soil Formation McGraw-Hill, New York.
Keeling, J.L., and M.A. Pain. 2001. Gypsum in Agriculture - quality standards in place as
demand grows. MESA Journal 2O:I7-21.
238
Kemper, W.D., J. Olssen, and C.J. DeMooy. 1975. Dissolution rate of gypsum in flowingwater. Soil Science Society of America Journal 53:1624-1628.
Keren, R., and L Shainberg. 1981. Effect of dissolution rate on the efficiency of industrialand mined gypsum in improving infiltration of a sodic soil. Soil Science Societyof America Journal 45:103-7 .
Keren, R., and G.A. O'Connor. 1982. Gypsum dissolution and sodic soil reclamation as
affected by flow velocity. Soil Science Society of America Journal 46:126-32.
Keren, R., I. Shainberg, H. Frenkel, and Y. Yalo. 1983. The effect of exchangeablesodium and gypsum on surface runoff from loess soil. Soil Science Society ofAmerica Journal 47 :1007-1004.
Kienzler, K. 2001. Impact of Long-term Vineyard krigation with Saline Water on SoilProperties. Research Report, University of Adelaide, Adelaide.
Kishore, D.K., R.M. Pandey, and W.J.S. Downton. l975.Effect of salt stress on growthcharacteristics of Perlette grapevines. Prog. Hort. I7:289-97 .
Kriedemann, P.E., and I. Goodwin. 2003. Regulated Deficit krigation and PartialRootzone Drying, Inigation Insights No. 3 Land and Water Australia, Canberra.
Krysanova, V., D.I. Müller-Wohlfeil, and A. Becker. 1996. Integrated Modelling ofHydrology and Water Quality in mesoscale watersheds. PIK Report No. 18, July1996, PIK, Potsdam.
Ladd, J.N., and J.H.A. Butler. 1970. The effect of inorganic cations on the inhibition and
stimulation of protease activity by soil humic acids. Soil. Biol. Biochem. 2:33-40.
Lanyon, D.M., A. Cass, and D. Hansen. 2004. The effect of soil properties andmanagement on wine grape production. Australian Journal of Grape and WineResearch (Submitted).
Lax, 4., E.Diaz, V. Castillo, and J. Albalajo. 1994. Reclamation of physical andchemical properties of a salinised soil by organic amendment. Arid Soil Research
and Rehabilitation 8:9-17.
239
Levitt, J. 1980. Responses of plants to environmental stress. Vol II Academic Press, NewYork.
Levy, G.L., and M.E. Sumner. 1998. Mined and by-product gypsum as soil amendmentsand conditioners, p.I87-2t5,1n A. Wallace and R. E. Terry, eds. Handbook ofsoil conditioners. Marcel Dekker, USA.
Lindsay, W.L. 1979. Chemical equilibria in soils John Wiley, New York.
Loughran, R.J., B.L. Campbell, and G.L. Elliot. 1986. Sediment dynamics in a partiallycultivated catchment in New South Wales, Australia. Journal of Hydrology83:285-297.
Loughran, R.J., B.L. Campbell, D.J. Shelley, and G.L. Elliot. 1992.Developing a
sediment budget for a small drainage basin in Australia. Hydrological Processes
6:145-158.
LÆuw, P.E., and A.T.P. Bennie. l99L.Water runoff and soil erosion in vineyard soils.The Australian Grapegrower and Winemaker - Annual Technical Issue 340:110-1 13.
Loveday, J. 1988. Australian soils - the last two hundred years, p.l-22,InL.Loveday,ed. National Soils Conference - Review Papers. Australian Society of SoilScience, Canberra.
Loveday, J., and B.J. Bridge. 1983. Management of salt affected soils, In CSIRO, ed.
National Soils Conference, Review Papers. CSIRO, Melbourne.
Loveday, L. 1976. Relative significance of electrolyte and cation exchange effects whengypsum is applied to a sodic clay soil. Australian Journal of Soil Research14:361-37I.
Lynch, J., and A. Lauchli. 1985. Salt stress disturbs the calcium nutrition of barley. NewPhytol. 99:345-54.
Ma, L., L.R. Ahuja, J.C. Ascough, M.J. Shaffer, K.W. Rojas, R.W.Malone, and M.R.Cameira. 20OI.Integrating system modeling with field research in agriculture:Applications of the root zone water quality model (RZWQM). Advances inAgronomy 71.
240
Mace, J.E., and C. Amrhein. 2001. Leaching and reclamation of a soil irrigated withmoderate SAR waters. Soil Science Society of America Journal 65:199-204.
Mann, L.D., and L.H. Stolzy.1912. Am improved construction method for platinumelectrodes. Soil Science Society of America Journal 36:853-854.
Mantell, 4., H. Frenkel, and A. Meiri. 1985. Drip irrigation of cotton with saline-sodicwater. Irrigation Science 6:95-106.
Maschmedt, D., R.W. Fitzpatrick, and A. Cass. 2002. Key for identifying categories ofvineyard soils in Australia. CSIRO Land and Water, Technical Report 30102,Adelaide.
Mass, E.V., and G.J. Hoffman.1977. Crop salt tolerance - Current Assessment. Journalof Lrigation and Drainage, Proc. Am. Soc. Civil Eng. 103:115-134.
McCarthy, M.1997a. Regulated deficit irrigation and partial root zone dlying forvineyards. Australian Viticulture October/1.{ov ember:20-21.
McCarthy, M.G. 1976. Angle Vale Effluent krigation Trial tlT6.Department ofAgriculture, South Australia.
McCarthy, M.G. 1997b. Effect of timing of water deficit on fruit development andcomposition of Vitis vinifera cv. Shiraz. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Adelaide,Adelaide.
McCown, R.L., G.L. Hammer, J.N.G. Hargreaves, D.P.Holzworth, and D.M. Freebairn.1996. APSIM: a novel software system for model development, model testing andsimulation in agricultural systems research. Agricultural Systems 50:255-71.
McDonald, R.C., R.F. Isbell, J.G. Speight, J. Walker, and M.S. Hopkins. 1998. Australiansoil and land survey handbook. 2nd. reprinted ed. Australian Collaborative LandEvaluation Program, Melbourne.
McNab, S., and R. Dick. 1995. Soil temperature and moisture levels can affect fertiliserbreakdown in vineyards. The Australian Grapegrower and Winemaker 378:747-142.
241
McNeal, 8.L., D.A. Layfield, V/.4. Norvell, and J.D. Rhoades. 1968. Factors influencinghydraulic conductivity of soils in the presence of mixed-salt solutions. SoilScience Society of America Journal 32:L87-90.
Meek, 8.D., and L.B. Grass. 1975. Redox potential in irrigated desert soils as an indicatorof aeration status. Soil Science Society of America Proc. 39:870-875.
Meiri, 4., J. Shalhevet, D. Shimshi, and M. Tibor. 1982.kngation of spring potatoeswutg saline water. Agtc. Res. Org, Volcani Center, Institute of Soil and Water,Annual Report.
Merrill, G.P.192t. Rocks, rock weathering, and soils Macmillan Book co, New York.
Meyer, W.S., C. Robbins, S.A.Prathapar, and R.J.G. White. 1992. SWAGMAN Whatif.January 1992V 1.0 ed. CSIRO.
Minhas, P.S., and D.R. Sharma. 1986. Hydraulic conductivity and clay dispersion as
affected by application sequence of saline and simulated rain water. krigationScience 7:159-67.
Monarto Development Commission. 1976. Monarto environmental impact statementphase 1. Environmental Planning Division, Adelaide, South Australia.
Morrison, R.D., and B. Lowery. 1990. Effect of cup properties, sampler geometry, andvacuum on the sampling rate of porous cup samplers. Soil Science 149:308-316
Myburgh, P., A. Cass, and P. Clingeleffer. t996. Root systems and soils in Ausffalianvineyards and orchards - an assessment. Barossa Valley Rotary FoundationFellowship Report.
Myburgh, P.A. 2003. Possible flood irrigation technologies to reduce water use ofSultanina grapevines in a hot, arid climate. South African Tydskr. Plant Grond20:180-187.
Myburgh, P.4., and J.H. Moolman.1993. Effect of ridging on the temperature regime ofa waterlogged vineyard soil. South African Journal of Plant and Soil lO:17-21.
242
Nadler, 4., G.J. Iævy, R. Keren, and H. Eisenberg. 1996. Sodic calcareous soilreclamation as affected by water chemical composition and flow rate. SoilScience Society of America Journal 6O:252-257 .
Nagarajah, S. 1987. Effects of soil texture on the rooting patterns of Thompson seedless
vines on own roots and on Ramsey rootstocks in irrigated vineyards. AmericanJournal of Enology and Viticulture 38:54-59.
Nagarajah, S. 2000. Improving grapevine nutrition by taking out the guesswork.Australian Viticulture May/June.
Naidu, R., and P. Rengasamy.1993.Ion interactions and constraints to plant nutrition inAustralian sodic soils. Australian Journal of Soil Research 31:801-819.
Naidu, R., R.H. Merry, G.J. Churchman, M.J. Wright, R.S. Murray, R.W.Fitzpaffick, andB.A.Zarcinas. 1993. Sodicity in South Australia - a Review. Australian Journal ofSoil Research 3 1 :91 l-929.
National Water Quality Management Strategy. 1999. Australian and New Ze,alandGuidelines for Fresh and Marine Quality Vol4. Australia and New ZealandEnvironment and Conservation Council, Agriculture and Resource ManagementCouncil of Australia and New 7,ealand.
Nelson, D.W., and L.E. Sommers. l9\2.TotaI Carbon, Organic Carbon, and OrganicMatter, p.539-579,ln A.. L. Page, et al., eds. Methods of Soil Analysis, Part2.Chemical and Microbiological Properties, 2nd Edition ed. American Society ofAgronomy - Soil Science Society of America, Madison, Wisconsin, USA.
Nelson, P.N. 1997. Organic Matter in Sodic Soils - Its nature, decomposition andinfluence on clay dispersion. Ph.D, University of Adelaide, Adelaide.
Neue, H.U. 1997. Fluxes of methane from rice fields and potential for mitigation. Soiluse and land management 13:258-267.
Noack, 4.G., C.D. Grant, and D.J. Chittleborough. 2000. Colloid movement throughstable soils of low cation-exchange capacity. Environmental Science andTechnology 3 4:2490 -2497 .
243
Nordstrom, D.K.1977. Thermochemical redox equilibria of Zobell's solution.Geochimica et Cosmochimica 41 : 1835-1841
Norrish, K.1972. Forces between clay particles. Proc. Int. Clay Conf. Madrid:375-83.
Norrish, K., and J.T. Hutton. L969. An accurate X-ray spectroscopic method for theanalysis of a wide range of geological samples. Geochimica et CosmochimicaActa 47:1855-1863.
Norrish, K., and J.G. Pickering. 1983. Clay Minerals, p. 281-308,1n Division of SoilsCSIRO, ed. Soils: an Australian viewpoint. CSIRO, Melbourne.
Northcote, K.H. 1981. Morphology, distribution and classification,InK. Norrish, ed.
Red-Brown Earths of Australia. Waite Agricultural Research Institute, Universityof Adelaide and the CSIRO Division of Soils, Adelaide.
Northcote, K.H. 1983. Central Southern Region, p.217-218, In Division of Soils CSIRO,ed. Soils: an Australian viewpoint. CSIRO, Melbourne.
Northcote, K.H. 1998. Soil and Australian Viticulture, p. 61-90, /r¿ B. Coombe and P. R.Dry, eds. Viticulture. I. Resources. Winetitles, Adelaide.
Northcote, K.H., and J.K.M. Skene. 1972. Australian soils with saline and sodicproperties. Soil publication No. 27 CSIRO, Australia.
Northcote, K.H., Russell, J.S. and Wells, C.B. 1954. Soils and land uses in the BarossaDistrict, South Australia Series No. 13. Division of Soils, CSIRO, Melbourne.
Oades, J.M. 1981. Organic Matter in the Urrbrae soil, p. 63-82,ún1.M. Oades, et al., eds.
Red-Brown Earths of Australia. Waite Agricultural Research Institute, Universityof Adelaide and the CSIRO Division of Soils, Adelaide.
Oades, J.M., D.G. Lewis, and K. Norrish. 1981. Red-Brown Earths of Australia WaiteAgricultural Research Institute, University of Adelaide and the CSIRO Divisionof Soils, Adelaide.
Oertel, A.C. 1961. Pedogenesis of some Red-Brown Earths based on trace elementprofiles. J. Soil Science 12:242-58.
244
Oertel, A.C. L974. The development of a typical Red-Brown Earth. Australian Journal ofSoil Research 12:97 -105.
Oertel, 4.C., and J.B. Giles. 1966. Quantitative study of a layered soil. Australian Journalof Soil Research 4:L9-28.
Oertel, A.C., and J.B. Giles. 196T.Development of a Red-Brown Earth profile.Australian Journal of Soil Research 5:t33-47.
Olliver, J.G.1962. Test boring - Rowland Flat sand deposit. Mining Review, AdelaideI2L:IM-I5O.
Olsson, K.4., A.J. Taylor, and P. V/illoughby. 1980. Development of yield potential inirrigated agriculture by soil modification. Aust Soil Sc Soc Inc Nat Conf, Sydney
Oster, J.D. 1982. Gypsum use in irrigated Agriculture: A review. Fertiliser Research3:73-89.
Oster, J.D. 1994. [rigation With Poor Quality'Water. Agricultural Water Management25:271-297.
Oster, J.D., and N.S. Jayawardane. 1998. Agricultural Management of Sodic Soils, p.
125-148,Inl|l4.. E. Sumner and R. Naidu, eds. Sodic Soils: Distribution,Properties, Management, and Environmental Consequences. Oxford UniversityPress, New York.
Patrick, W.H., R.P. Gambrell, and S.P. Faulkner.1996. Redox measurement in soils, p1255-1273,InD.L. Sparks, et al., eds. Methods of Soil Analysis Part 3. SoilScience Society of America, Madison, Wisconsin.
Patterson,8.M., P.D. Franzmann, J.L. Rayner, and G.B. Davis. 2000. Combining coringand suction cup data to improve the monitoring of pesticides in sandy vadosezones: a field-release experiment. Journal of Contaminant Hydrology 46:t87-2O4.
Peverill, K.I., L.A. Sparrow, and D.J. Reuter, (eds.) 1999. Soil Analysis an interpretationmanual. CSIRO, Melbourne.
245
Phylloxera and Grape Industry Board of South Australia. 2002. South AustralianWinegrapes - Utilisation and pricing survey.
Piper, C.S. 1938. The Red-Brown Earth of South Australia. Trans. Royal Soc. S.A.62:53-L00.
Ponnamperurnma, F. t972. Chemistry of submerged soils. Advances in Agronomy 24:29-96.
PonnamperuÍuna, F. 1984. Effects of flooding on soils, p.9-46,únT.T. Kozlowski, edFlooding and plant growth. Academic Press.
Ponnamperunìma, F., E.M. Tianco, and T. Loy.1967. Redox equilibria in flooded soils1. The iron hydroxide system. Soil Science LO3:374-382.
Poonia, S.R., and O. Talibudeen. 1977. Sodium-calcium exchange equilibria in salt-affected and normal soils. Joumal of Soil Science 28:276-288.
Poonia, S.R., S.C. Mehta, and P. Raj. 1984. Sodification of soil in relation to orgamcmatter, total electrolyte concentration and nature of cations and anions. Journal ofIndian Society of Soil Science 32:663-668.
Pratt, P.F., L.D. \ryhitting, and B.L. Grover. 1962. Effect of pH on sodium-calciumexchange equilibria in soils. Soil Science Society of America Proc.26:227-230
Prendergast, J.B. 1993. Soil water bypass and solute transport under irrigated pasture.Soil Science Society of America 59:1531-1539.
Price, N.J., and J.W. Cosgrove. 1990. Analysis of geological structures CambridgeUniversity Press, Cambridge.
Prior, L.D., A.M. Grieve, and B.R. Cullis. 1992a. Sodium chloride and soil textureinteractions in irrigated field grown sultana grapevines. I. Yield and fruit quality.Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 43:1051-66.
Prior, L.D., A.M. Grieve, and B.R. Cullis. 1992b. Sodium chloride and soil textureinteractions in irrigated field grown sultana grapevines. III. Soil and root systemeffects. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 43:1085-1100.
246
Qadir, M., S. Schubert, A. Ghafoor, and G. Murtaza. 2001. Amelioration strategies forsodic soils: A review. Land Degradation and Development 12:357-386.
Quirk, J.P. 1955. Significance of surface areas calculated from water vapor sorptionisotherms by use of the B.E.T. equation. Soil Science 80:423-30.
Quirk, J.P. 1998. Sodic Soils [Online]. Available by Australian Academy of Sciencehttp://www.science.org.au/nova/035/quirk (verified 29 I ll0t).
Quirk, J.P., and R.K. Schofield. 1955. The effect of electrolyte concentration on soilpermeability. Journal of Soil Science 6:163-78.
Radoslovich, E.'W. 1958. Clay mineralogy of some Australian Red-brown Earths. Journalof Soil Science 9:242-25t.
Rawson, G.^.2002. The influence of geology and soil characteristics on the fruitcornposition of winegrapes (Viris vinifura cv: Shiraz), Hunter Valley, New SouthWales - Implications for regionality in the Australian Wine Industry. Ph.D. thesis,University of Newcastle.
Rayment, G.E., and F.R. Higginson. 1992. Australian Laboratory Handbook of Soil andWater Chemical Methods Inkata Press, Melbourne.
Reeve, R.C. 1965. Air-to-Water Permeability Ratio, p. 520-53L, In C. A. Black, ed.
Methods of Soil Analysis, Part 1. Physical and Mineralogical Properties, 1stEdition ed. American Society of Agronomy, Madison, Wisconsin, USA.
Rengasamy, P. 1990. Water quality for soil structure, p.Il5-L27,InE. Humphreys, et a1.,
eds. Management of soil salinity in South East Australia, New South Wales.
Rengasamy, P., and K.A. Olsson. 1991. Sodicity and soil structure. Australian Journal ofSoil Resear ch 29 :935 -9 52.
Rengasamy, P., and K.A. Olsson. 1993. trigation and sodicity. Australian Journal of SoilResearch 3l:82I-837.
247
Rengasamy, P., R.S.B. Greene, G.'W. Ford, and A.H. Mehanni. 1984. Identification ofdispersive behaviour and the management of red-brown earths. Australian Journalof Soil Research 22:4L3-43I.
Rhoades, J.D. 1982. Soluble salts, p. 985-1004,1n A. Klute, ed. Methods of SoilAnalysis, Part2; Chemical and Microbiological Properties, 2nd Edition ed.American Society of Agronomy - Soil Science Society of America, Madison,Wisconsin.
Richards, D. 1983. The grape root system. Horticulture reviews 5:127-168
Robinson, J.8.1992. Grapevine Nutrition, p.178-208,1n8. G. Coombe and P. R. Dry,eds. Viticulture. II. Practices. Winetitles, Adelaide.
Ross, S. 1989. Soil processes: A systematic approach Routledge, London.
Rowell,D.L. l9Sl.Oxidationandreduction,p.40l-6L,InD.J. GreenlandandM.H.B.Hayes, eds. The chemistry of soil processes. Wiley Interscience, Chichester.
Ruralfunds .2003. An overview of the operations of Barossa Infrasffucture Limited (BIL)[Online] http ://www.ruralfunds.com.aulPDF/Bll%20scheme.pdf.
Russell, R.S., and M.I.H. Brooker. 1963. Preliminary experiments on the reclamation of asaline sodic soil in the Jervois area. Expt. Rec. Dept. Agric. South Australia 1:5-20.
Rust PPK. 1996. A strategy for sustainable and economic management of water resourcesin the Barossa region - Final report, for Barossa Regional Economic DevelopmentAuthority, North Para Water Resources Committee, Department of Environmentand Natural Resources, Economic Development Authority and BRM RegionalAssociation INC. Rust PPK Pty Ltd, Adelaide.
Saayman, D. 1977 . The effect of soil and climate on wine quality InternationalSymposium on the Quality of the Vintage, Cape Town.
Sadeh, 4., and I. Ravina. 2000. Relationships between yield and irrigation with low-quality water - a system approach. Agricultural Systems 64:99-113.
248
Safran, 8., B. Bravdo, andZ. Bernsteiin. t975.L'irrrgation do le vigne par goutte a
goutte. Bull. OIV 531:405-429.
Samra, J.S. 1985. Sodicity tolerance of grapes with reference to the uptake of nutrients.Indian Journal of Horticulture 42:12-17 .
Sas, 4.N., and R.M. Stevens. 1998. Meeting a salt specification. Proceedings 10thAustralian Wine Indu stry Technical Conference : I I 6 - l2O.'
Schachtschabel, P. 1940. Untersuchungen uber die sorption der tonmineralien undorganischen boden-kolloide, und die bestimmung des anteils dieser kolloide ander sorption im boden. Kolloid-Beihefte 5l:199-276.
Schofield, R.K., and H.R. Samson. 1954. Flocculation of kaolinite due to attraction ofoppositely charged crystal faces. Discussions of Faraday Society 18:135-45.
Seelinger, M.T. 1968. FerLilizer for cereal areas. J. Dept. Agriculture of South Australia72:90-3.
Seguin, G. 1986. Effect of soil sodicity on the growth of four cultivars of grape. IndianJournal of Horticulture 43:60-65.
Sehgal, J.L., P. Gombeer, and J. D'Hoore. 1976. Clay migration in the formation ofargillic horizons in soils developed under varying moisture regimes. J Indian SocSoil Science24:2O-28.
Severson, R.C., and D.F. Grigal . 1976. Soil solution concentrations: Effect of extractiontime using porous ceramic cups under constant tension. Water Resources Bulletin12:116I-117O.
Shainberg, I., and J.D. Oster. 1978. Quality of irrigation water International ImigationInformation Centre, Israel.
Shalhevet, J., G.J. Hoffman, A. Meiri, B. Heuer, and L.E. Francois. 1983. Salinitytolerance of crops in irrigated agriculture under dynamic conditions. Final ReportBARD.
249
Shaw, R., K.K. Hughes, P.J. Thorburn, and A.J. Dowling. 1987. Landscape, soil and
water salinity Procc. Brisbane Regional Salinity Workshop, Conference and
workshop series QCC87003.
Shaw, R.L. 1988. Soil salinity and sodicity, p. 109-134,InLF. Fergus, ed.
Understanding Soils and Soil Data. Queensland Branch, Australian Society ofSoil Science, Brisbane, Australia.
Simonson, R.W. 1949. Genesis and classification of red-yellow podzolic soils. Proc. Soil.Sci. Soc. Am 14:316-319.
Simunek, J., D. Suarez, andM. Sejna. 1996. The UNSATCHEM software package forsimulating one-dimensional variably saturated water flow, heat, transport, carbondioxide production and transport, and multicomponent solute transport with majorion equilibrium and kinetic chemistry, Version 2 Research Report No. 141. U. S.
Salinity Laboratory, Agricultural Research Service, U. S. Department ofAgriculture, Riverside, California.
Sleeman, J.R. 1964. Structure variation within two Red-Brown Earth profiles. AustralianJournal of Soil Research 2:L46-61.
Smith, C.N., and R.F. Carsel. 1986. A stainless-steel soil solution sampler for monitoringpesticides in the vadose zone. Soil Science Society of America Journal 50:263-265.
Soil Survey Staff. 1999. Soil Taxonomy - a basic system of soil classification for makingand interpreting soil surveys, Second Edition. 2nd ed. United States Departmentof Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service.
Southern Vales Resource Committee. L992. Willunga Basin: Water resourcesmanagement plan. Southern Vales Resource Committee, Adelaide, SouthAustralia.
Southey, J.M., and E. Archer. 1988. The effect of rootstock cultivar on grapevine rootdishibution and density,p.57-73,InJ.L.vanZyl, ed. The grapevine root and itsenvironment. Technical communication 21 5, Dep artment of Agriculture andWater Supply, Pretoria.
250
Spangenberg, 4., Cecchini, G. and Lamersdorf, N. 1997. Analysing the performance of amicro soil solution sampling device in a laboratory examination and a fieldexperiment. Plant and Soil 196:59-70.
Stace, H.C.T., G.D. Hubble, R. Brewer, K.H. Northcote, J.R. Sleeman, M.J. Mulcahy,and E.G. Hallsworth. 1968. A handbook of Ausftalian soils Rellim, Adelaide.
Stephens, C.G., R.I. Herriot, R.G. Downes, T. Langford-Smith, and A.M. Acock. 1945. Asoil, land-use and erosion survey of part of County Victoria, South Australia.CSIRO Aust. Bull. 188.
Stevens, R.M., and G.C. Harvey. 1990. Grapevine responses to transient soil salinization,p.2ll-2t9,1n E. Humphreys, et al., eds. Management of soil salinity in SouthEast Australia, New South Wales.
Stevens, R.M., and T. Douglas. 1994. Distribution of grapevine roots and salt under dripand full-ground cover microjet irrigation systems. Úrigation Science 15:147-t52.
Stevens, R.M., G. Harvey, D.L. Partington, and B.G. Coombe.1999.Irrigation ofgrapevines with saline water at different growth stages - 1. Effects on soil,vegetative growth, and yield. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 5O:343-355.
Sumner, M.E., P. Rengasamy, and R. Naidu. 1998. Sodic soils: A reappraisal, InM.E.Sumner and R. Naidu, eds. Sodic soils, distribution, properties, management, and
environmental consequences. Oxford University Press, New York.
Talbot, R.J., and I.J. Bruce. I974.Effects of leaching on salinity levels and other soilproperties of a clay soil in the Lockyer Valley, QLD. Queensland Journal ofAgriculture and Animal Science 3I:174-83.
Taylor, J.K. 1983. The Australian environment, p. 1-2, In Division of Soils CSIRO, ed.
Soils: an Australian viewpoint. CSIRO, Melbourne.
Taylor, J.K., B.P. Thomson, and R.G. Shepherd. l974.The soils and geology of theAdelaide area. Bull. geol. Surv. S. Aust.46.
Thomas, G.'W., and R.E. Phillips. 1979. Journal of Environmental Quality 8:149-152.
251
Tisdall, J.M. 1978. Ecology of Earthworms in i:rigated orchards, p.297-303,1n W. W.Emerson, et al., eds. Modification of Soil Structure. John Wiley and Sons, NewYork.
Torrent, J. 1995. Genesis and properties of the soils of Mediterranean regions. AnnoNapoli.
Turchenek, L.W., and J.M. Oades. L9T9.Fructionation of organo-mineral complexes bysedimentation and density techniques. Geoderma 27 :3 t I - 43 .
USSL Staff. 1954. Diagnosis and improvement of saline and sodic soils. Handbook 60U.S. Government Printing Office,'Washington D. C.
van Bochove, E., S. Beauchemin, and G. Theriault.2002. Continuous multiplemeasurement of soil redox potential using platinum microelecffodes. Soil ScienceSociety of America Journal 66:1813-1820.
van der Ploeg, R.R., and F. Beese. L977.Model calculations for the extraction of soilwater by ceramic cups and plates. Soil Science Society of America Journal4l:466-470.
Van Huyssteen, L. 1983. Interpretation and use of penetrometer data to describe soilcompaction in vineyards. South African Journal of Enology and Viticulture 4:59-65.
Van Huyssteen, L., and H.W. Weber. 1980. The effect of selected minimum andconventional tillage practices in vineyard cultivation on vine performance. SouthAfrican Journal of Enology and Viticulture 1:77-83.
van Olphen,H. 1977 . An introduction to clay colloid chemistry. 2nd ed. John Wiley,New York.
vanZyl, J.L. 1984. Response of Colombar grapevines to irrigation as regards qualityaspect and growth. South African Journal of Enology and Viticulttre 5:19-28
vanZyl, J.L. 1988. Response of grapevine root growth and the role of roots as a source ofnutrientreserves, p. 1-15, InJ.L.YanZyl, ed. The grapevine root and itsenvironment. Technical communication 215, Department of Agriculture and'Water Supply, Pretoria.
252
'Wakabayashi, S., Y. Ando, and Y. Kimura. 1974. Studies on the root systems of fruit
trees growing on the volcanic ash in Northern Kanto district. II The vertical rootdistribution of grapevines planted in a particularly deep volcanic ash soil andsome physical properties of the soil. Bull. Coll. Agricult. Utsunomiya University9:15-20.
Walker, P.H. 1962. Soil layers on hillslopes: A study of Nowra, N.S.W. J. Soil Science13:167-I77.
Walker, R.R. 1994. Grapevine responses to salinity. Bulletin De L'O.I.V .76t-762:635-66r.
'Walker, R.R., E. Torokfalvy, N.S. Scott, and P.E. Kriedemann. 1981. An analysis ofphotosynthetic response to salt treatment inVitis vinifura. Australian Journal ofPlant Physiology 8:359-7 4.
'Ward, W.T. 1966. Geology, geomorphology, and soils of the south-western part ofCounty Adelaide, South Australia. CSIRO Aust. Series: Soil publication: 23.
West, D.W. 1990. Plant responses to waterlogging and salinity, p. 157-169, InE.Humphreys, et al., eds. Management of soil salinity in South East Australia, NewSouthWales.
'Wheaton, 4.D., B.M. McKenzie, and J.M. Tisdall. 2002. Management of a sodic soil forwine production. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture 42:333-339.
White, R.E. 2003. Soils for Fine Wines Oxford University Press, New York.
Whitfield, M.1974. Thermodynamic limitations on the use of the platinum electrode inEh measurements. Limnology and Oceanography 19:857-865.
rüiklander, L. 1964. Cation and anion exchange phenomena,p. 763-205, InF. E. Bear,ed. Chemistry of the soil. Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York, USA.
Williams, C.H. 1981. Chemical Properties, p.47-62,ln1.M. Oades, et a1., eds. Red-Brown Earths of Australia. Waite Agricultural Research Institute, University ofAdelaide and the CSIRO Division of Soils, Adelaide.
253
Williams, C.H., and J. Lipsett. 1961. Fertility changes in soils cultivated to wheat insouthern New South Wales. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 12:612-629.
Wolff, R.G. 1967. Weathering of Woodstock granite near Baltimore, Maryland.American Journal of Science 265:106-t17.
Wood, W.W. 1974. Reply to C.B. England's comment. Water Resources Research10:1049.
Yaalon, D.H. 1983. Climate, time and soil development, p.233-25t,InL.P. Wilding, etal., eds. Pedogenesis and soil taxonomy. I. Concepts and interactions, Amsterdam,Netherlands.
Yaron, 8., J. Shalhevet, and D. Shimshi. 1973. Pattern of salt distribution under trickleirrigation. Ecological Studies, vol fV Springer, Nerline.
2s4
A A: Climatic data for field sites
Calculated from mean daily minimum and maximum
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Rainfall(mm)
Mean monthly
Median monthly
Mean no. ofraindays
18.5 22.2 38.2 55 56.3
10.2 14.8 30.7 40.6 52.1
18.8
15.1
66.2 63.6 60 49.4 29,3 24.3
66.2 64.2 58 42 28.7 20.6
4.6 3.6 5.2 8.4 12.2 13.2 16.3 16.3 13.2 10.9 7.5 6.2
Temperature (degrees C)
Mean daily max. 28'8 28'6
Mean daily min. 13'6 13'9
Highest daily Max 43'7 42'1
Lowest daily Min 2'2 3'7
Mean dailyl 21.2 21.9
25.7
11.8
41.3
0.8
18.8
21.4
I36.4
0.2
15.2
17
6.7
29
-3
11.9
14.2
5.1
25.3
-5.4
9.7
13.2
4.4
25.5
-4.7
8.8
14.3
4.8
28
-2.8
9.6
16.8
5.8
31.9
-2.1
11.3
20.2
I36.3
-0.6
14.1
23.8 26.3
9.9 11.8
41 41.3
-1 2.6
16.9 19.1
Relative Humidity (%)
Mean 9am 52 54
Mean 3pm 33 34
78 84 84 80 72 63 56 53
60 66 67 63 56 47 39 36
13.9
5.3
9.6
8.2
183
58
39
12.6
7.3
8.4
6.1
132
66
47
8.8
10.5
6.7
3.6
75
6
14.2
5.1
2.1
45
5
14.1
4.5
1.4
25
tr
15.5
4.6
1.5
27
7.9
11.6
7.7
4.7
102
7.9
10
B.B
6.6
138
'10.4
I
9.3
7.9
195
Mean no. of cleardays 14.1
Mean no. of cloudydays 6.3
Mean daily hours ofsunshine 10
Mean dailyevaporation (mm) 8.6
Mean monthlyevapotranspiration' 213
5.5 6.6
13.9 12.4
5.7 6.3
2.1 3.1
39 65
Annual
502
493.7
'117.7
20.9
8.8
43.7
-5.4
14.9
103.6
129.9
1244
4.7
7.2
67
49
Latitude (deg S): -34.4767
Longitude (deg E): 139.0047 Elevation: 274m
Station: NURIOOTPA Commenced: 1952
Last record: 1999
2Calculated from class 'A' pan evaporation
255
Annual
854
841.8
147.2
20.6
8.7
42.6
-4.2
14.65
74
47
60.9
81.6
7.2
4.7
1 250
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Rainfall(mm)
Mean monthly
Median monthly
Mean no. ofraindays
25.7 2't.6 39.7 66.6 88.5 112.1 130,2119.690.6 76.3 43.6 39.4
24 14.9 35.4 59.5 80.8 106 121.6121.7 87.5 67.9 37.8 26.8
6.8 5.2 8.5 11.8 14.5 16.9 18.1 18.3 15.8 13.4 9.8 8.1
Temperature (degrees C)
Mean daily max. 25'8 26'4 24 2O'5
Mean daily min. 12 12'1 10'8 8'3
Highest daily Max 41'8 42'6 4O'2 35'2
Lowest daily Min 2 4'2 2 O
Mean dailyl 18'9 19'2 17.4 14'4
Relative Humidity (%)
Mean 9am 63 67
Mean 3pm 41 40
13.4 16.3 18.9 22.1
4.8 5.8 7.4 8.9
24.1 30.4 35.4 39.4
-2.6 -1.5 0.5 0.6
9.1 1 1.0 13,15 15.5
16.1
6.7
26
-2
11.4
13.4
5.5
21.3
-4.2
9,4
12.7
4.5
19.6
-3.9
8.6
24.6
10.9
40.3
2.3
17.7
66
47
72 84 89 88
53 73 76 73
82
61 66 54 48 43
10.1 10.6 8.4 4.2 1.1 1,5 5.8 2.6 2 3.2 3.8 7.7
7.5 6.6 8,9 7.2 5.8 7.3 8.5 5.7 5.2 5.2 5.4 8.5
10 9.6 8.4 6.7 5.1 4.5 4.6 5.7 6.3 7.7 8.8 9,3
63696975
Mean no. of cleardays
Mean no. of cloudydays
Mean daily hours ofsunshine
Mean dailyevaporation (mm)
Mean monthlyevapotranspiration'
2.1
46
1.4
25
1.5
28
2.1
39
3,1
67
8.6 8.2
213 184
6.1
132
3.6
76
4.7
101
6.6
143
7.9
'f 96
Station: KUITPO FOREST
Latitude (deg S): -35.2158 S
Longitude: 138.7014 E
Commenced: 1971
Last record: 2001
Elevation: 300m
Calculated froù mean daily minimum and maximum2Calculated from class 'A' pan evaporation
256
Annual
556.6
546
120.6
12.2
22.1
44.2
-0.4
't7.1
63
48
85.6
146.8
7.6
4
1 070
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
nfall(mm)
monthly 19,4 12.7 27.4 41.1 61.2 79.7 79.9 68 62.2 47.5 29.7 27.8
20.3 10.4 22.4 33.6 54.6 81.5 71.4 68.9 64.7 43 30.3 23.8monthly
no, of4 3.6 6 8,1 12.5 15.2 16.5 16.5 13.1 10.3 7.9 6.9
(degrees C)
Mean daily max. 16.9 17.2
Mean daily min. 28.9 29.4
Highest daily Max 44.2 43.4
15.2
26.1
41.9
7.2
20.6
12.1
22.2
36.7
4.3
17.1
'10.2
18.8
28.7
1.5
14.5
8.1
16
25.4
-0.4
12.0
7.4
15.2
22.6
0.4
11.3
8.2
16.5
27.8
1.6
12.3
9.6
18.7
34.3
2.6
14.1
11.5
21.7
39
4.9
16.6
13.8
24.7
42
5.7
19.2
15.5
26.8
42
I21.1
daily Min 9.2 9.5
dailyl 22.9 23.3
Humidity (%)
9am
3pm
54 54 59 63 72 80
38 37 43 48 56 62
78
61
71 64 57 55 54
56 52 46 4',1 41
no. of clear11.7 12.6 10.5 7.9 4.5 3.4 3.8 5.1 5 6.4 6.7 8.1
Mean no. of cloudy7.6 6.6 9.6 11.8 16 16 16 14.3 13.7 12.9 10.9 11.3
Mean daily hours ofrne
daily
10.5 10.2 8.5 7.2 5.3 4.5 4.8 6 6.6 8.3 I 9.5
on (mm) 7.2 6.7 4.9 3 1,9 1.4 1.5 2.1 3 4.4 5.7 6.5
m178 150 106 63 41 25 27 39 63 95 119 161
ion: ADELAIDE (KENT TOWN) Commenced: 1977
Last record: 2001
(deg S): -34.9231
(deg E): 138.6206 Elevation: 4Bm
Calculated from mean daily minimum and maximum2Calculated from class 'A' pan evaporation
257
Annual
635.05
646.1
15.7
1
1.0
.3
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
nfall(mm)
monthly 13.85 14.1 17.7 42.3 79.4587.7592.15 79.2 66.9 47.4 26.4 19.9
20.2 23.2 27.4 48.7 79.9 90.4 93.8 78.9 70.2 53 34j 26.3monthly
Mean no. ofraindays Not available
(degrees C)
daily max. 26.3 26.3 24.0 21.1 17.7
daily min. 15.0 15.2 13.8 11.6 9.7
15.2 14.3 15.2
7.9 7.1 7.5
17.219.8 22.5 24.3
8.5 10.1 11.9 13.6
daily Max
daily Min
Not available
Not available
20.6 20.8 18.9 16.3 ',t3.7 11.6 10.7 11.3 12.915.0 17.2 18.9daily
Relative Humidity (%)
Mean 9am Not available
3pm Not available
no. of clearNot available
no. of cloudyNot available
Mean daily hours of
daily
Not available
Not available
1 125 114 110
(mm)
monthly 90 74 59 57 61 70 87 98 11
Elevation:
WILLUNGA
(deg S): -35.27
(deg E): 138.55
Commenced: 1957
Last record: 2003
from Linacre equation
258
Appendix B: Morphological description of non-irrigated and
irrigated soil profile in the Barossa Valley.
Profile Name:
Landform Element:Isbell (1996):FAO (1ee8):
Soil Survey Staff (1996):
Maschmedt et aL (2002)
Non-irrigatedFlat (I-3Vo slope to the V/SW)Haplic Mesotrophic Red ChromosolChromi-Calcic Lixisol
Calcic Palexeralf
7.2 Non-restrictive duplex soil withwell structured top soil
DescriptionDark brown (7.5YR3/2); fine sandy loam; moderate2-5mm subangular blocky to <2mm granular; veryfriable; few 1-2mm roots; clear wavy change to-
Horizon DepthAp 0 to 0.20m
Bt1
Bt2
Btkl
Btk2
A2 0.20 to 0.40m Brown (7.5YR4/3); fine sandy loam; moderate 2-5
and 10-20mm subangular blocky to <2mm granular;
very friable; common t-2mmroots; sharp to-
0.40 to 0.50m Dark reddish brown (2.5YR312); 2-to7o 5-15mmfaint reddish brown (2.5YR414) mottles; light clay;moderate 5-20mm subangular blocky; friable; few<lmm roots; clear wavy change to-
0.50to 1.00m Reddish brown (2.5YR4/3); medium clay; strongl0-20mm angular block; very firm; few <lmmroots; few medium to course calcareous
fragments/nodules; clear wavy change to-
1.00 to 1.20m Red (2.5YF.416); medium clay; weak 20-50mmsubangular blocky; few medium to course calcareousfragments/nodules; gradual smooth change to-
1.20 to 1.60m Reddish brown (5YR4/4); light clay; weak 10-20mmsubangular blocky; few medium to course calcareousfragments/nodules; gradual smooth change to-
259
Btkg >1.60m Strong brown (7.5YR414); L0-207o 5-15mm darkgreenish gray (58G4/1) mottles; clay loam (gravel);weak 10-20mm subangular blocky; few medium tocourse calcareous fragments/nodules; firm to veryfirm
L.70m Bottom of inspection trench
260
Profile Name:
Landform Element:Isbell (1996):FAO (1e98):
Soil Survey Sraff (1996):
Maschmedt et al. (2002)
IrrigatedFlat (l-37o slope to the WSW)Calcic Subnatric Red SodosolChromi-Gleyic Solonetz
Aquic Natrixeralf
6.2 Restrictive duplex soil withwell structured top soil
DescriptionDark brown (7.5YR3l2); fine sandy loam; moderate2-5mm subangular blocky to <2mm granular; veryfriable; few 1-2mm roots; clear wavy change to-
Horizon DepthAp 0 to 0.20m
A2
Br1
0.20 to 0.40m Brown (7.5YR4/3); fine sandy loam; moderute 2-5and 10-20mm subangular blocky to <2mm granular;very friable; common l-2mm and few 2-5mm roots;clear wavy change to-
0.40 to 0.50m Dusky red (10R3/3); 2-IO7o 5-15mm faint retldishbrown (2.5YR4/3) mottles; light clay; moderate 10-
50mm subangular blocky; firm; common 2-5mmroots; clear wavy change to-
Btz 0.50 to 1.00m Dark red (10K/a); medium clay; strong 20-50mmangular block; very firm; few 1-2mm and 2-5mmroots; few medium to course calcareousfragments/nodules ; clear irregular change to-
Brkl 1.00 to I.20m Red (2.5YR4/6); medium clay; weak 20-50mmsubangular blocky; few medium to course calcareousfragments/nodules; few 1-2mm roots; gradual wavychange to-
Btk2 L.20 to 1.60m Reddish brown (5YR4/a); tght clay; weak 10-50mmsubangular blocky; few medium to course calcareousfragments/nodules; gradual wavy change to-
Btkg >1.60 Strong brown (7.5YR4/4); L0-207o 15-30mmgreenish gray (108G5/1) mottles; clay loam(gravel);weak 10-50mm subangular blocky; few medium tocourse calcareous fragments/nodules; firm to veryfirm
1.80m Bottom of inspection trench
26t
BârossaBarossaBarossaBarossa
BarossaBarossaBarossa
BarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBerossaBarossaBarossa
BarossaBarossaBerossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaFigure 6-1
C - Saturation Extract Com ion from C TandB
Gypsum fromSampling Application Dripper Depth EC AJ B Ca Cu Fe Mg
Date Water K
15t4t20031911212002191121200219t12200219112120021911212002
19t12200220/1',U200220111120022011112002
20t11t20022011112002
201111200231n200231n/200231n/200231n200231nDOO231n200217t4/200217t4t200217/41200217t41200217t4t2002171412002
20/121200120112J2001
20/1212001201121200120t12200120t12/200122J111200122J't1120012211112001
2211112001221111200122111120012211112001
Non-lrrioated 11l
Non-lniqated (1)
Non-lrriqated (1)
Non-lniqated (1)
Non-lnioated (1)Non-lniqated (1)
Non-lniqated (1 )
Non-lrrioated l1 )
lon-lrrioated l1 I
Non-lrriqated (1){on-lrriqated (1 )
Non-lniqated (1)
Non-lniqated (1),lon-lnioated (1)
Non-lrriqated (1)ated ('1)
Non-lniqated ( l )
560504030
17.55
60504030
17.55
60504030
17.55
60504030
17.55
60504030
17.55
655545352515
5
5.450.490.560.330.51o.441.12o.410.410.350.250.31
0.910.590.560.601.062.O1
2.500.530.640.660.490.712.71
o.400.35o.47o.320.491 .130.48o.440.410.290.360.451.22
0.600.050.050.03o.201 .100.270.11
0.040.05o.250.51
0.320.000.23-0.03o.170.400.060.060.030.100.091.12o.250.010.060.020.59
't.25o.570.000.000.020.351.4414.430.01
0.390.130.1 1
0.100.090.110.18o.'t40.130.130.12o.120.200.15o.12o.140.130. 16
0.31o.170.150.16o.120.140.290.150.160.130.130.15o.210.140.140.19o.12o.20o.210.28
698.2338.1648.7547.4233.5844-3590.0834.5s37.3936.5425.4531.91
79.7558.3255.8366.84
'140.68264.12318.8343.6754.7362.1145.8576.7'l236.2731.0643.1245.9929.71
41.56/ t-Jo37.4336.71
48.1229.7039.4343.36127.9s
0.090.010.010.o20.o20.o70.100.030.070.080. 13
o.20o.290.010.060.030.040.070.13-0.010.000.010.030.030.16-0.010.00-0.01o.o2o.12o.14-o.o2-0.010.000.010.15o.14o.12
0.16-0.010.000.000.140.52o.120.010.010.01
0.0ô0.350.16-0.050.10-0.05-0.04-0.06-0.08-0.10-0.10-0.08-0.070.14-0. 15
-0.11-o.22-0.100.671.51
o.52-o.12-o.12-o.23o.22
'L0910.86-0.19
373.2923.0926.2326.4120.8043.95128.8216.1718.30
'19.7819.6631.54126.2724.8526.0029.6145.22
105.4s223.1919.9623.6328.4128.0359.29
354.4917.6724.6929.5027.5377.95236.0626.0029.1036.3123.O750.2474.22163.87
10.4011.939.935.295.169.7510.78
't0.077.974.214.329.5217.4614.6715.0524.1434.2744.5713.1014.1814.408.438.75
25.6310.6613.1911.436.335.839.939.088.269.854.274.745.8913.52
4.73-0.01-0.01-0.01-o.o2o.220.820.01
0.010.040.110.21
o.52
-0.010.050.160.81
1.13-o.o7-0.06-0.060.06-0.060.360.58-0.08-0.14-0.05-0.09-0.09-0.09-0.10-0.09-0. 16
-0.11-0.15-0.04-o.21
Mnmo/L
237.9627.2127.592't.59
'12.0313.9643.0226.3123.5018.6412.0012.5342.O530.6026.1624.2733.9356.3688.4832.9333.2031.2423.7621.7088.1930.0734.3026.3s17.6025.1757.6731.5829.1826.3411.00
'I'1.3111.2133.51
Namo/L
4.41o.27o.120.111.3s2.924.251.590.900.660.292.333.61
0.090.060.040,190.922.920.080.01
0.010.583.205.22o.o2-0.010.030.063.845.92-0.03-o.020.04o.173.856.425.79
P
mo/L
168.7626.2120.3815.685.706.8823.8223.5321.1817.299.328.54
27.71
44.3744.0544.65s1.9644.32
107.9326.2629.9834.3620.6315.9773.7122.8023.3519.3811.01
14.U34.0624.8426.6231.387.807.469.40
31.32
Smq/L
0.17o.o2o.o2o.o2o.o20.040.060.040.060.060.07o.o7o.o70.060.050.080.090. 16
0.130.020.000.030.o20.010.160.030.14o.o2-0.010.030.050.01
0.010.20-0.010.11o.o20.06
Znmc/L
17.420.951.22
't.18o.841.11
2.250.860.930.91
0.630.801.991.461.391.673.51
6.597.951.091.371.551.141.91
5.89o.771.081.15o.741.O4
1.790.930.921.20o.740.981.083.19
lcallmmoliL)
3-590.430.49o.41
o.22o.210.40o.440.410.330.170.180.39o.720.60o.620.991.41
1.830.540.580.590.350.361.05o.440.s4o.470.26o.24o.41
o.370.34o.41
0.18o.20o.240.56
lMsl{mmol/L)
10.351 .181.200.940.520.611.871.141.O2
0.810.520.54
'1.831.331.141.061.482.453.851.431.44
'1.36
0.943.84
'1.311.491 .150.771.092.s1
1.371.27
'1.150.480.490.491.46
lNal(mmol/L)
9.550.590.670.680.531.123.290.410.470.51
0.500.813.230.640.66o.761 .162.705.710.510.60o.74o.721.52s.070.450.63o.750.701.996.040.66o.740.930.591.291.904.19
tKtlmmol/L)
2.26
'I .0.1
o.92o.740.510.531.151.000.880.730.580.551.190.900.81o.700.70o.87
1.121.030.930.850.63
'1.461 .191.170.900.760.971.691.201 .130.900.500.4s0.42o.75
SAR
Page262
BarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossa
BarossaBerossaBarossaBarossa
BarossaBarossaBarossa
BarossaBarossa
Figure 6-2
BarossaBarossa
BarossaBarossa
Barossa
BarossaBarossa
BarossaBarossa
BarossaBarossaBarossa
BarossaBarossa
BarossaBarossaReoion
22J1112001
22J1112001
2211
22J'l
2,,11120012?]1112001
1
1
221111200122J1112001
22111120012a111200124fi/20012211112001
151412003
1st4t20031
15141200315t4t20031
1911212002911
1
1
19112J20022011112002
20111
2011
151412003151412003151412003
1
SamplingDate
BoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBore
Non-lniqated (2),lon-lniqated (2)
Non-lrriqated (2)
Non-lrriqated (2)
Non-lNon-lrriqated (1)Non-l
lrr¡gationWater
00000000000000000
GypsumApplicat¡on
(t/ha)
100100
'10050505050505050
't01010101010
10
Distancefrom
Dripper(cm)
25155
6555453525155
655545352515
5
60504030
17.55
60504030
17.55
60504030
17.55
504030
17.5
Depth(cm)
1.241.341.280.430.330.350.450.490.430.600.630.590.400.400.320.250.31
0.33o.44o.720.550.410.780.330.36o.290.30o.440.63o.370.370.450.350.38o.74
0.820.61o.710.94
EC(d9m)
0.07a.a21.810.030.400.010.o20.590.060.130.110.08o.290.104.666.64o.o7
0.390.110.151.524.5219.720.060.043.17
22.814.690.902.482.92o.413.7116.97
10
0.08
0.110.11
0.350.63
AImc/L
0.26o.26o.250.100. 13
o.320.29o.22o.210.310.090.090.18o.280.130.110. 13
0.160.13o.'t20.150.10o.2'l0.24o.2'l0.150.100.14o.220.31o.24o.17o.120.10o.17
0.150.160.130.15mo/L
26.12
'18.4520.413.713.348.3713.6532.9422.3540.867.206.596.9411.9710.4412.9417.45
20.2829.7962.5994.5442.2780.2413.1913.9912.7224-5347.9870.1310.4112.2621.9336.8554.10
52.9988.40
a2.7855.2165.4993.79
Camq/L
0.03o.200.09o.o2o.o20.070.040.070.100.260.010.010.070.060.o20.030-04
0.o20.01o.o20. 13
o.20o.210.010.01o.o2o.120.120.110.02o.o20.050.150.160.09
0.01
0.100.050.11
Cumo/L
-o.o75.131.13-o.230.08-o.23-0.01o.23-0.03-0.08-0.20-o.23-0.39-0.042.804.13
-0.05
0.24o.o20.040.392.5415.940.000.002.36
27.753.171.071.892.210.2912.0010.850.16
o.o2o.o20.060.14
Femo/L
14.9345.5024.162.592.773.56s.107.269.66
19.315.245.175.778.O212.8312.5914.16
13.7017.4129.2769.0565.99172.O38.384.82a-7217.6448.1883.806.056.477.791s.9645.2676.13
22.O825.9032.7163.17
K mo/L
'15.5912.5613.751.241.053.798.0215.4712.4419.072.552.472.935.647.428.749.71
5.267.39
'12.9515.575.5511.465.655.844.737.778.2811.095.475.677.538.979.09
15.4313.72
21.O412.9810.9812.OO
Mgmq/L
-0.11-0.08-0.10-0.19-0.19-0.19-0.10-0.16-0.10-0.18-0.19-0.19-o.47-0.19-0.08-0.06-0.06
0.000.000.010.19o.740.93-o.o2o.oo-0.01o.06o.32-0.01-0.010.00o.ù20.150.59-0.01
0.080.110.550.68
Mnmq/L
212.57242.O2
228.9697.7476.9080.0379.1067.3357.7583.34146.21123.16103.5078.3038.2923.O7
21.74
31.6636.5947.3551.3826.1320.5544.7445.4836.0931.9522.5929.1655.6854.1456.2248.2921.2324.42
43.2432.6734.6451 .16
Namo/L
o.756.736.79o.o0-0.05-0.020.040.190.462.O0
-0.06-0.06-0.120.070.861.451.24
0.080.060.06o.241.54
't0.580.650.460.15o.271.064.061.12o.75o.250.372.282.O4
0.10o.o7o.722.70
P
mo/L
36.4839.3740.2319.969.6f11.51
14.5216.0612.3015.2258.0745.9829.t915.3710.227.516.46
9.977.599.3116.877.9312.35
'12.4113.1 1
6.863.863.067.7019.0717.2316.359.904.15
32.136.20
46.4919.9824.5529.77
smq/L
-0.010.00-0.010.050.04o.o7-0.020.04-o.o20.030.120.06o.240.03-0.01
-0.01-0.01
0.01o.o20.030.030.080.010.010.040.030.030.020.030.010.03o.o20.06o.02
0.040.060.090.11
Znmq/L
0.650.460.510.090.08o.21o.34o.a20.561.020.180.16o.170.300.26o.32o.44
0.51o.741.562.36
'1.052.O00.330.350.320.611.201.75o.260.31
0.550.92
'1.35
1
2.21
2.O7
1.381.532.34
lcallmmol/L)
0.64o.520.570.050.040. 16
0.330.640.51o.780.100.10o.12o.230.31
0.40
o.220.300.53o.64o.23o.470.23o.240.19o.320.340.46o.220.230.31o.370.370.56
0.870.530.450.49
IMs](mmol/L)
9.2510.539.964.253.353.483.442.932.513.62D.JO
5.364.503.41
1.671.000.95
1.381.s92.062.231.140.891.951.981.571
0.981.272.422.352.452.10o.92
1.551.06
1.881.42
'1.512.23
lNal(mmol/L)
0.381 .160.62o.o70.070.090.130.19o.250.490.130.130.150.21
0.330.320.36
0.350.45o.75
't.694.400.21o.23o.220.451.232.140.15o.170.20o.41
'1.16
0.461.95
0.560.660.841.62
tKllmmol/L)
8.1310.659.61
11.159.405.764.202.432.432.7011.9210.388.314.672.21
1.21
1.04
1.621.561.421.291.000.572.602.582.191-440.790.853.483.21
2.641.850.700.64
1.101.11
1.031.O4
1.32SAR
Page 263
BarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossa
BarossaBarossaBarossaBerossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBârossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBerossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBerossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossa
Barossa
31nno0231nPOOZ17141200217141200217/4t200217t4t20021714/2002171412002171412002
17/4t20021714120021714/200217t4t200217141200217t4t20021
17t412002171412002
't71412002171412002
20112120012011212001
201't21200120112/2001
20ñ212001201121200120t12t2@1
20112120012011212001201121200120t12/2001201't212001201't22001
20112J2001201121200122111120012211112001
22/11120012?J1112001
SamplingDate
BôreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBore
BoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBore
lrrigationWater
00000000000o000000000000000000000000000000
GypsumApplication
',l010100100100100100100505050505050101010
'1010
101001001001001001005050505050501010
'1010
1010
100100100100
D¡stancefrom
Dripperlcm)
17.55
60504030
17.5560504030
17.55
60504030
17.55
60504030
17.55
60504030
17.5560504030
17.55
65554535
Depthlcm)
0.660.593. 15
2.952.552.452.517.802.æ3.966.416.223.322.614.755.31
4.242.982.351.41
2.142.051.481.151.O2
1.95
't.851.s91.441.191.50
'1.550.952.051.341.981.581.451.651.951.601.62
ECldS/m)
3.280.350.090.300.130.130.180.190.11
o.120.200.190.10o.12o.17o.210.140.190.080.050.000.000.01
0.030.010.010.000.060.080.000.000.00o.410.730.010.010.030.000.010.010.040.04
AImo/L
0.28o.120.110.100.11
o.2a0.s30.11
0.09o.'t20.16o.27o.3l0.080.16o.250.320.30o.28o.o90.09o.070.090.13o.21o.o70.060.070. 15
o.24o.260.100.240.310.340.23o.220.050.040.09o.'18
Bmo/L
25.1',l39.21
't 34.68130.3293.8085.0473.03289.3568.35
'125.06254.15255.2371.5568.06132.69190.28130.3271.2270.3941.6689.9383.6350.1533.8629.3371.2646.4539.1324.6323.8549.6739.696.39
'15.5642.62
120.-4770.5460.8333.2645.8545.8032.98
Camq/L
o.240.36-0.010.000.000.01
0.0s0.110.00-0.010.00o.o20.06o.l40.000.01
0.01
0.040.140.10-0.01-o.o2-0.010.030.100.09-0.01-0.01
-0.010.040.050.090.00o.o1o.o70.100.03o.o7-0.01
-0.010.010.01
Cumo/L
6.87o.17-0.09-o.o7-0.08-0.07-0.06-o.22-0.07-o.o7-0.21-o.21
-o.o7-0.01-o.o2-o.23-0.07-0.03-0.08-0.03-0.12-o.12-o.12-0.09-0.11-0.11-0.13-0.07-0.19-0.13-0.12-o.12-0.03-0.13-o.12-0.11-0.08-o.12-o.12-o.12-o.20-o.07
Femc/L
5.6113.3818.4519.9922.5432.4764.92149.721 1.5415.0823.5530.4724.1218.31
11.9312.6211.009.3613.4011.7514.9915.5014.0314.8324.5292.858.497.496.388.9520.7620.942.273.226. 14
16.71
15.7616.329.4111.2313.6512.25
K mo/L
14.3723.1356.8350.9433.4728.8229.69128.0828.4650.62104.30112.'t04'1.2344.33s8.369t.9666.5239.4043.O724.9134.3629.O7
16.1 I10.2510.8839.11
19.15
'16.3110.4610.8029.O221.702.727.60
22.6'l70.7938.0833.41
'10.9316.61
18.4615.51
Mgmo/L
0.060.060.0Ít0.06-0.02-0.040.01
-0.29-0.05-0.o2-0.15-o.2s-0.08-0.07-0.05-o.27-0.08-0.070.00-0.05-0.08-0.04-0.09-o.07-0.10-0.10-0.10-0.11-o.21-0.11-0.11-0.10-o.2'l-0.52-0.10-0.09-0.07-0.11-0.09-0.09-0.15-0.05
Mnmo/L
137.9771.66438.56412.61
388.34371.90378.321227.33445.57650.56982.O2935.02580.61441.63778.98834.79690.96497.62397.01
221.33383.63385.44295.27241.69
'| 98.48300.05392.86351.81274.85274.65302.2833ô.38't72.94236.1 6259-43252.88272.25273.30328.54374.43380.43301.52
Namq/L
o.770.390.150.34o.17o.120.372.060.480.67o.420.180.451.450.340.16o.170.140.150.140.040.04o.121.70
't2.902.100.03o.050.082.O1
3.98
't.010.06-0.090.080.19o.22o.52-o.o20.01
-0.04o.o2
P
mq/L
20.3218.9391.7881.0079.O454.4255.36168.76133.54105.851 13.55130.9480.5361.3658.91
83.52101.9771.3156.1325.38124.44143.45119.5268.5031.4453.88
't30.69'133.9593.3643.5744.O346.6731.0524.O426.3840.8337.8740.8590.8584.4876.0551.80
Smo/L
0.040.060.050.050.040.020.020.08o.o20.030.080.100.02o.020.040.060.030.010.030.01
0.000.000.000.000.00-o.020.000.000.08-0.01-0.01-0.010.030.200.00-0.01-0.01-0.o2-0.010.00o.o7-0.01
Znmo/L
0.630.983.363.252.342.121.827.221.71
3.126.346.371.791.703.314.753.251.781.761.042.242.091.250.84o.731.781.160.980.610.591.240.990.160.391.063.01
't.761.520.831.',t4
1.14o.82
Ica]lmmol/L)
0.590.952.342.10
't.38't.191.225.271.172.O8
4.294.611.701.422.403.782.741.621.77
't.o21.41
1.200.67o.420.451.61
0.790.670.43o.M1 .190.890.11
0.310.932.911.57
't.370.450.680.760.64
tMsl(mmol/L)
6.003.1219.0817.9516.89
'16.1816.4653.3919.3828.3042.7240.6725.2519.2133.8836.31
30.0521.6517.279.6316.6916.7712.8410.51
8.6313.0s17.0915.3011.9611.9513.1514.637.5210.2711.2811.0011.8411.8914.2916.2916.5513.12
INa](mmol/L)
o.140.34o.470.510.580.831.664.850.300.390.60o.7ao.62o.470.31o.32o.280.240.340.30
0.400.360.380.732.37o.220.190.160.230.s30.540.060.080.160.430.400.42o.240.290.350.31
tKj(mmol/L)
5442.247.997.768.768.899.43
1s.1 1
11.4312.4113.1012.2713.5410.2414.1812.43
11.749.196.708.739.259.289.347.957.0912.2511.9211.7011.728.4310.6614.44
'12.277.994.526.496.9912.6312.0512.0010.85SAR
Page 264
BarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBârossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBerossaBarossaBarossaBarossa
BarossaBarossa
BarossaBarossa
BarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossa
BarossaBarossa
BarossaBerossa
201111200220t11t2002201111200220111/200220t11t200220t1112002201111200220t1'U20022011',v20022011'U2002201111200220t11t200220/111200220t11/20022011112002
20t1'U2002201't'1120022011112002
2011
20111120022011112002201111200220111120022011112002201111200231n1200231n/200231n200231
31t212002s1u/200231n200231
31n/200231nPO0231nÞOO231nDOO231n1200231n/200231n2002
SamplingDate
BoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBore
BoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBore
lrrigationWater
00000000000000000000000000000o000000000000
GypsumApplicat¡on
(Uhal
100100
50 rep350 reo350 rep350 rep350 reo350 rep350 rcp250 rep250rcoz50 reD250 rcpz50 rep250 reol50 reol50 repl50 reDl5050
1010101010
't010010010010010010050505050505010101010
D¡stancefrom
Dripper(cm)
17.55
60504030
17.55
60504030
17.5560504030
17.55
60504030
17.5560504030
17.5560504030
17.55
60504030
Depthlcm)
3.709.804.554.'lo3.923.402.553.306.054.513.902.972.253.054.784.654.203.352.703.202.902.221.381.150.84o.923.554.244.703.953.962.113.683.954.353.553.152.492.891.981.661.01
ECldS/m)
0.54o.520.16o.17o.21
o.200.750.060.160.160.400.93o.23o.440.160.15o.170.19o.17o.41
o.17o.170.28o.120.1 1
o.t9o.230.19o.'12o.'t70.100.390.140.120.150.150.26o.76o.140.11o.1913.31
AImq/L
0.15o.260.080.090.14o.2'l0.300.360.070.050.040.08o.25o.320.110.09o.o70.11o.270.300.08o.140.26o.280.26o.25o.14o.120.110.15o.230.41o.120.110.08o.12o.21o.250.1 1
0.13o.290.34mo/L
114.75
't 86.03150.25
't42.64't32.5458.1966.69171.45
't78.92172.O7
139.3084.7348.81186.89180.77165.90148.8995.6754.34186.4372.1347.9022.8429.8741.6374.56170.O221'1.58244.21183.36176.6378.39133.42145.68168.71
't33.9786.1843.5574.6532.6315.1615.65
Camo/L
0.040.06-0.01-o.o2o.020.11
0.160.19
-0.03-0.0,|
-0.010.010.090.130.00-0.010.000.050.11o.24-0.010.000.070.11
0.140.260.000.00o.oo0.040.07o.21
0.010.01
o.o20.060.10o.370.o70.030.390.38
Cumo/L
0.16o.200.060.060.050.060.150.160.050,060.11
0.280.330.19o.o70.050.06o.o7o.o70.170.050.050.090.14o.o70.09o.o20.010.000.o2o.oo0.18o.o20.000.010.310.04'1.720.000.01
0.1015.99
Femo/L
62.O3242.O413.55
't3.3712.84'12.2813.4945.3717.7116.5213.9711.0414.3351.0718.3317.1316.3013.3819.7660.359.967.51
4.975.519.0421.2719.3922.9428.9137.2061.9674.A1
't 5.1015.8716.4515.4717.8234.3s8.755.063.064.61
K mo/L
171.4149.3452.5345.6524.8218.18
't20.2671.7268.8356.8324.6921.61103.5082.0673.3465.1444.5730.29130.1034.2223.27
'10.7814.8022.3439.4974.O1
89.0995.8374.1081.4632.5056.7860.9371.3056.81
43.6423.1333.9815.957.OA
7.90
Mgmo/L
0.311.24o.o2o.o20.00-0.010.04-0.010.090.060.01o.o20.090.06o.12o.'t40.040.000.010.09-0.01-0.010.000.oo0.040.100.090.160.18o.17o.20o.220.130.140.060.010.040.050.000.000.000.03
Mnmq/L
588.481587.50s91.77577.61665.1 1
521.44457.061053.70749.86759.38730.35570.73526.301192.26774.61766.33753.68621.80505.50
1 298.99568.74446.72288.23250.53146.O487.48
582.61658.16705.50639.60622.65383.02681.16704.32783.98662.55606.95545.24580.00368.28230.49174.57
Namo/L
0.582.25o.790.650.48o.a71.191.091.1Io.520.420.280.61
1.541.49o.780.430.30o.741.31
0.58o.440.430.590.600.580.38o.28o.22o.17o.251.80o.250.25o.280.27o.373.99o.20o.20o.440.64
P
mo/L
71.34174.43126.881 13.58
'I 18.1166.9s28.3461.53142.OO
135.74140.3981 .1050.8295.94153.92127.60130.3391.M53.3086.1 1
99.4288.1735.4221.3716.9527.O1
107.8292.3588.4288.61
73.0048.48
148.72
't42.26136.1 1
105.3675.6959.31
't 03.6499.9741.3921.14
Smo/L
0.04o.o7o.o70.050.040.030.010.01
0.04o.070.030.000.000.040.070. 10
0.060.05o.o20.060.010.00o.020.000.010.030.100.130.14o.120.110.090.'10
0.090.130.090.070.070.100.050.060.04
Znmo/L
2.864.643.753.563.311.451.664.284.464.293.482.111.224.664.514.143.712.391.364.651.801.20o.57o.751.04
't.864.245.286.094.574.41
't.963.333.634.2'l3.342.15
't.860.810.380.39
Ica]lmmol/L)
2.467.O52.O32.161.881.O2
0.754.952.952.832.34
0.894.263.383.O22.681.831.255.351.41
0.96o.440.61o.921.623.043.663.943.053.351.342.342.512.932.341.800.951.400.66o.29o.32
tMsllmmol/Lì
69.0525.7425.1228.9322.6819.8845.8332.6233.0331.7724.8322.49s1.8633.6933.33
27.O521.9956.5024.7419.4312.5410.906.3s3.81
2s.3428.6330.6927.4227.O416.6629.6330.6434.1028.4226.4023.7225.2316.0210.037.59
lNal(mmol/L)
''l.596.190.350.340.330.31o.341 .160.45o.420.36o.28o.371.31o.47o.44o.420.340.511.54o.250.190.13o.14o.230.540.500.59o.740.951.581.910.390.41
o.420.400.460.880.220.130.08o.12
tKj(mmol/L)
11.0920.1910.7110.5112.7114.4212.8015.091 t.9812.3813.1814.03'15.7717.3612.0012.4612.9613.1713.6317.8613.8113.2412.469.364.542.049.399.579.6910.089.729.1812.45
12.36
't2.7612.0913.29
'13.9713.2112.258.98SAR
Page 265
BarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossa
BarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossa
BarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossa
BarossaBarossaBarossaBerossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBârossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaReoion
15t4t200315t4t20031514120031s1412003
't5t4/20031st4t20031s|41200315t4t20031514/200315t4t2003
't5t4t2003
15t4t200315t4/200315141200315/412003151412003151412003
1911212002
19/1212002191121200219112J2002
19t12t2@219t121200219/12J200219t1?/200219112J2æ219t'12t2û219112J2ú219t12t2002191121200219112J200219t',t2,2002191'1212002
't911212002'19112J2002201111200220111/200220t111200220t1112002
SamplingDate
BoreEoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBore
BoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBore
lrrigationWater
o00000000000000000000000000o00000000o0o0
GypsumApplication
Itlha)
10010010010010010050505050505010
'10
't01010
't0100100100
'| 001001005050505050501010
10101010
100100100100
Distancefrom
Dripperlcm)
60504030
17.55
60504030
17.55
60504030
17.55
60504030
17.55
60504030
17.55
60504030
17.5560504030
Depth(cm)
4.624.754.483.623.355.455.806.106.404.535.025.60s.604.653.453.042.151.683.703.883.682.702.503.503.924.003.322.713.433.602.743.002.652.442.052.404.473.404.053.60
EC(dS/m)
0.19o.20o.210.19o.270.680.540.460.460.190.600.190.49o.200.20o.24o.240.150.20o.'t20.150.861.160.45o.170.180.33o.240.19o.32o.28o.'t40.t3o.210.19o.'t40.15o.170.14o.20
AImo/L
o.120.130.13o.170.230.51
o.240.190.180.140.35o.14o.200.t80.290.310.31
0.260.100.090.080.090.13o.260.050.050.t3o.250.340.390.10o.230.370.370.30o.25o.120.100.100.11
B
mc/L
234.72235.91
205.40I 14.6580.21
162.12244.65269.45248.28131.74125.69131.7417t.68120.O780.6689.8865.4262.93149.41155.86137.9980.9054.17
236.47
'106.49109.1375.5351.1582.63130.4158.1759.8474.576s.847't.70108.04207.49134.27160.54128.46
Camo/L
0.000.020.000.070.1 1
0.19o.o2-0.01-0.010.060.110.060.040.000.'t40.06o.260.180.000.000.000.030.110.160.01
o.oo0.01
o.03o.o70.090.01
0.010.05o.o70.100.17-o.o2-o.o2-0.02o.o1
Cumq/L
0.050.070.050.050.o70.32o.22o.12o.120.04o.170.040. t30.060.070.090.08o.o70.000.000.01
o.120.390.050.01
o.o1o.12o.o10.o20.100.020.00-0.010.02o.o2o.o20.050.060.05o.o7
Femo/L
22.3025.4032.3838.5758.41
128.3220.2220.4421.2019.31
29.O219.31
14.6010.994.7'l8.6210.4414.1218.3021.4726.8836.7058.69218.6412.5011.619.00
10.1 1
11.9622.728.238.1610.067.739.1719.3720.9818.2124.8232.81
K mq/L
90.3884.7666.6938.9933.0172.2899.05108.76
'103.0161.7065.5361.7084.4365.4945.9056.9439.9437.3665.9467.2754.7032.7225.72129.1447.9952.1538.7826.4551.9485.8228.9631.7940.5339.7841.9761.9890.0453.4564.9660.02
Mgmo/L
o.170.28o.250.160.190.s0o.17o.240.13o.o2o.o20.o20.000.02o.o20.030.050.100.05o.140.180. 14
0.150.09-0.04-0.03-0.03-0.04-o.o20.00-0.04-0.04-0.03-0.03-0.03-o.o2o.210.150.35o.23
Mnmc/L
653.45694.94704.86651.56623.53922.O09s1.16997.33102f4.03840.05883.28840.051014.O7887.10629.86509.67362.19273.22592.72621.45620.O4s09.23471.O9
1442.79704.36734.52610.17525.1 3590.82526.62s42.OO582.51512.32448.66364.62349.17663.83540.50662.93595.25
Namo/L
0.19o.17o.2'lo.240.972.O3
0.330.36o.24o.731.28o.73o.27o.170.24o.240.26o.270.400.20o.230.220.932.320.530.340.38o.731.360.480.31
o.270.46o.740.550.s61.540.940.450.33
P
mq/L
105.33108.80120.88106.3467.2699.001s4.08175.1 1
170.80113.S087.99
1 13.90129.78121.1875.2970.0649.O7
36.7699.4588.4596.4073.0754.21
158.21
101.681 06.1 786.9354.5750.6051.6691.3370.5566.9960.5450.2853.61
1 19.0597.18
't11.2284.63
smq/L
0.100.150.08o.o70.030.070.050.070.04o.o20.04o.o20.050.030.060.030.060.040.060.050.050.03o.o20.09o.o20.030.030.01o.o20.030.00o.o20.030.030.020.040.070.040.060.05
Znmo/L
5.86s.895.122,862.004.O46.206.726.193.293.143.294.283.002.O'l2.241.631.573.733.893.442.O2
1.355.902.662.721.881.282.063.251.451.491.861.641.792.705.183.354.O1
3.21
lcalfmmol/Ll
3.723.492.741.601.362.974.O74.474.242.542.702.543.472.691.892.341.641.542.7'l2.772.251.351.065.311.972.151.60
't.092.143.531 .191.31
1.671.641.732.553.702.202.672.47
tMsl(mmol/L)
2A.4230.2330.6628.3427.1240.1 041.3743.3845-4136.5438.4236.5444.1138.5927.4022.1715.7511.8825.7827.O326.9722.'t520.4962.7630.6431.9526.5422.4425.7022.9123.5825.3422.2819.521s.8615.1 I28.4723.s1
28.4425.89
lNal(mmol/L)
0.570.650.830.991.493.24o.520.s2o.540.49o.740.49o.370.28o.22o.22o.270.360.470.550.690.941.505.59o.320.30o.23o.260.310.580.21o.210.260.200.230.500.s4o.470.630.84
tK1(mmol/L)
9.199.8710.93
't 3.4114.8015.1412.90
'12.9614.061s.1415.91
15.1415.8416.1813.8710.358.706.7410.1610.481 1.3012.0813.2018.7414.2414.4414.23
'14.8612.548.7914.5015.141 1.86
10.748.466.639.699.9811.1610.47SAR
Page 266
BarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossa
BarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossa
BarossaBarossaBerossaBarossaBarossa
BarossaBarossa
BarossaBarossaFisure 6-3Reoion
17t4/2t171412002
20112J200120t12t2001
212001201121200120t12J2001
20112,20012011?/200120112J200120t12/200120112J200120/12J200120t121200120t12J200120112J200120/121200120/12J200120112200120/1212001221111200'l22J111200122J1112001
22t11/20011/2001
22111
2211112001
221111200122J11120012211112001
22J11t20012211112001221111200122111/200122J111200122J11t2001
1/2001221111200122111/20012211
221112001
SamplingDete
BoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBore
BoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBore
lrrigationWater
44444444444444444444444444444444444444444
GypsumApplication
1010
't00100100100100100505050505050101010101010
10010010010010010010050505050505050
'10101010101010
Distancefrom
Dr¡pper(cm)
17.55
60504030
17.5560504030
't7.55
60504030
17.55
6555453525155
6555453525155
6555453525155
Depthlcm)
2.241.811.951.59
't.520.981.O4
2.141.49
't.441.531.081.261.49
't.3s1.461.741.41
1.522.544.524.453.953.522.351.952.500.840.88o.770.860.840.681.460.68o.780.860.790.880.91
1.52
ECldS/m)
0.050.010.000.000.000.000.050.070.07o.020.000.01
0.030.100.0,|
0.000.000.000.03o.120.010.01
-0.010.060.06o.120.130.050.200.090.000.000.000.010.000.000.000.040.01
0.00
AImo/L
o.320.310.080.060.o7o.220.27o.22o.o70.080.200.240.270.300.100.180.30o.27o.21
o.240.150.110.090.1 1
o.24o.24o.410.1 1
0.080.10o.260.320.29o.240.12o.240.32o.21
0.140.110.13
Bmq/L
6S.03s6.9968.0649.7150.2654.62
147.63567.1024.8328.6066.7558.9069.21
'114.1822.8028.0379.2275-4792.49
256.26306.71262.56217.80164.1280.6255.051s9.6419.3318.3824.4532.8859.1 I55.59241.5613.3028.0654.628't.2498.32107.59291.40
Camc/L
o.o70.o7-0.01-0.01-0.010.080.030.020.000.010.030.050.060.13o.o20.030.03o.o2o.o20.030.01-o.o2-o.o20.000.050.100.180.030.040.030.110.040.040.040.000.010.030.030.'19o.o20.05
Cumo/L
-0.08-0.03-o.12-0.13-0.13-0.12-0.'12-0.23-o.o7-o.o7-0.11-0.11
-0.1 1
-o.o7-0.04-0.13-o.13-o.12-0.13-o.24-o.23-0.23-0.23-o.24-o.21-o.21
-0.15-0.10-o.20-0.09-0.23-o.12-o.12-o.12-o.12-o.12-o.12-o.12-0.08-0.11-0.11
Femo/L
12.O413.4214.6414.33
'16.5023.9253.9267.656.727.3613.4724.4627.5441.055.265.087-318.7712.4019.6325.5232.4242.2249.6784.3054.02167.446.717.O9
'1o.20
'18.2820.8926.9847.224.686.899.00
't5.8122.OO
21.7937.32
K mo/L
41.9833.8827.6020.5219.4917.5329.1264.3110.'t21'1.7427.8421.7225.1433.2110.01
't4.4041.7642.5939.5683.8868.0357.6748.8340.8827.2016.3147.O45.425.739.2113.2430.9328.8059.004.7612.5927.3744.7655.4255.2763.93
Mgmq/L
-0.1-0.05-0.07-0.09-0.11-0.11-0.11-0.21
-0.10-0.11-0.10-0.10-0.09-o.o7-0.07-0.11-0.10-0.11-0.11-o.21-0.030.01
-0.010.00-0.14-0.18-0.11-0.13-0.18-0.20-o.21
-0.11
-0.11-0.09-0.11-0.1 1
-0.11
-0.08o.05-0.080.02
Mnmo/L
291.22377.47326.1 I275.2918 t .3663.9430.85349.42331.93302.08184.5921 1.90237.66335.54331.63327.4321 6.1 3246.10334.14605.06605.37614.50573.O7379.1 1
348.85333.80219.06206.24216.75190.8897.5255.9634.67
't47.09151.59111.8765.3628.8017.9420.79
Namo/L
o.41
-0.03-0.04-o.o20.040.450.92-0.03-o.o20.03o.140.371.300.01
o.o20.05o.030.07-o.o70.06-0.06-0.08-0.050.88o.523.83-0.03-0.05-0.03-o.o2o.21
1 .131.330.060.s01.540.08o.120.060.05
Pmo/L
60.8247.40146.32134.00147.7295.77155.74530.851 15.38114.45109.3469.3564.16149.65111.46117.181 14.6156.1375.08329.93145.76144.11134.631 19.661 12.661 19.95280.2392.5194.90138.76135.73119.5591.59
266.3982.25112.07130.76129.53126.61130.37293.62
Smo/L
0.01o.020.000.03-0.01-0.01-0.010.050.000.00-0.01
-0.01
-0.01
-0.010.000.010.10-0.01-0.o20.03o.120.010.000.030.030.080.03o.o20.04o.020.060.02-0.010.03-0.010.000.00o.o7o.o20.000.04
Znmq/L
1.721.421.701.241.251.363.6814.150.620.71
1.671.471.732.85o.570.701.981.882.316.397.656.555.434.092.O1
1.373.980.480.460.620.821.481.396.030.330.701.362.O3
2.452.687.27
Ica](mmol/L)
1.731.391.140.840.800.721.202.650.42o.481 .150.891.031.370.410.591.721.75
'1.633.452.802.372.O1
'1.681.12o.671.94o.22o.240.380.541.271 .182.43o.20o.521 .131.842.242.272.63
tMsllmmol/L)
16.7912.6716.4214.1911.977.892
't.34'15.2014.4413.148.039.2210.3414.6014.4214.249.4010.7014.5326.3226.3326.7324.9316.4915.1714.529.538.979.438.304.242.431.516.406.594.472.841.25o.7a0.90
lNallmmol/L)
0.31o.340.370.37o.420.611.381.73o.170.190.340.630.701.050.130.130.19o.220.320.500.650.831.08
't.272.161.384.24o.170.18o.26o.470.530.691.21o.120.18o.230.400.560.560.95
tKl(mmol/L)
7.559.759.838.355.461.260.3314.9313.207.845.225.555.0414.74
12.697.414.935.404.638.148.829.8010.379.3210.615.9711.3510.779.437.112.561.s20.528.815.983.081.450.580.35o.29
SAR
Page267
BarossaBarossa
BarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossa
BarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossa
BarossaBarossa
Barossa
Barossa
Barossa
BarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossa
Barossa
20t11t200220111
2011112002201111200220/11120022011
20t112011112æ23
31nÞOO231n/2002vn/200231
31n20023l331
31n/200231
31n1200231n/2002s1nt200231n1200231n/200217t4t20021
17t4t200217141200217t4/200217t4t20021
171412002
1714120021
17t4/20021
,1
1714/2002171412002171412002
SamplingDate
BoreBore
BoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBore
BoreBore
lrrigat¡onWater
444444444444
44444444444444444444444444444
GypsumApplication
5050101010101010
't00100
'10010010010050505050505010
'1010
'1010l0
100100100100100100505050505050101010
'10
Distancefrom
Dripper
't7.55
60504030
17.55
60504030
17.55
60504030
17.55
60504030
17.55
60504030
17.55
60504030
17.55
60504030
Depth(cm)
4.055.954.503.652.OO
1.41
't.262.212.682.352.472.152.302.O54.013.953.854.454.495.522.51
't.721.581.71
't.252.103.923.302.442.982.683.62s.095.194.033.694.133.684.153.262.852.93
ECld9m)
0.190.410.15o.170.190.070.07o.l50. t30.080.130.120.120.130.130.330.31o.21
0.13o.120.140.080.160.050.04o.12o.100.08o.o9o.250.39o.170.08o.12o.140.09o.'t20.100.080.090.31o.26
AI
mo/L
o340.36o.05o.170.360.030.31
o.250.110.100.160.19o.23o.240.090.100.160.260.330.360.160.22o.270.310.300.360.100.080.11o.2ao.230.260.14o.250.180.080.090.1 1
0.100.21
0.31
0.36
Bmq/L
162.43448.00153.8892.2544.O8o.o744.31
336.23152.22
't52.763't8.242ß.49454.38466.68174.31
167.00151.39169.64162.4943Ít.4650.5948.5548.7844.2983.08306.42223.41182.64144.70199.44363.71
653-42415.79180.72134.81135.60155.24
't41.51129.23
't07.7983.1 482.30
Camq/L
o.l0o.120.01o.o20.09-o.o20.08o.140.000.00o.o20.030.050.080.000.01
0.060.100.090.140.050.04o.o70.100.080.1 |
-0.010.000.01
0.060.05o.o70.030.080.040.000.000.000.000.000.030.04
Cums/L
0.040.060.010.020.06o.o20.04o.o7-0.05-0.08-0.040.000.010.010.00o.120.11
o.o20.010.010.000.010.060.140.01o.o2-0.08-0.09-0.08-0.040.05-0.07-0.06-0.07-0.07-o-08-0.07-0.o7-0.09-0.09-0.09-o.o7
Femo/L
40.31
93.5914.0811.038.0so.228.23
27.O517.5820.6633.1835.7573.7671.82't4.7514.2516.3921.7641.92
100.496.986.847.1611.5812.8929.1916.8118.2023.2639.0178.8584.6092.8769.7438.3518.1717.85
'15.89'10.969.729.4610.90
K mo/L
74.901U.2966.3745.6621.160.0820.92126.8456.7053.979f.4957.6064.5644.3842.5764.0161.51
78.1074.51
127.5222.3522.2523.2445.8248.06123.1973.6557.9141.8056.51s3.2890.73
1 12.3565.8954.6249.5858.7653.6657.4952.1 042.9344.24
Mgmq/L
0.000.23-0.01-0.010.01-0.01
-0.010.34-0.o2-0.030.010.030.05o.140.04o.o20.010.010.010.05-o.ol0.010.01
0.070.060.16o.05-0.03-0.09-0.03o.o7o.270.13-0.10-0.1 1
-0.08-0.06-0.04-0.10-0.1 1
-o.12-0.11
Mnmo/L
675.46711.64922.17695.96421.OA
1.44244.15122.93413.08338.90313.26185.6674.4340.92
734.31
732.60718.66831.06819.87842.40415.99360.60324.9431 1.96176.03129.19s't2.20452.17330.46374.14162.8s126.36933.12854.31
658.97610.32687.38603.'19
713.29558.60507.45531.81
Namo/L
1.261.730.960.642.81
0.011.20o.780.080.06o.o70.090.220.91o.23o.14o.24o.170.441.25o.20o.320.33o.420.23o.170.360.11o.070.130.491.160.560.69o.22o.120.14o.250.25o.21
0.110.10
Pmo/L
't45.46281.46185.37139.3583.330.38
124.53438.37120.45134.18351.29203.83420.39437.62194.26208.61176.34182.67225.42480.12144.13
'ts8.55161.13195.79161.15431.69133.21
141.O4132.561s0.06280.79464.09218.O7
't41.20106.70158.55194.64181 .60125.64113.05115.2786.09
smoiL
0.050.100.050.010.01
-0.010.030.100.070.080.130.13o.170.180.090.110.100.100.09o.170.100.040.03o.o70.050.180.060.050.040.050.090.130.100.050.030.040.040.050.030.o2o.o2o.o2
ZnmoiL
4.0511.183.842.301.100.001.118.393.803.81
7.946.15
't1.3411.644.354.173.784.234.0510.81
1.261.21
1.222.102.O77.655.574.563.714.989.0716.3010.374.513.363.383.873.533.222.692.O72.O5
lcallmmol/Lì
3.086.352.731.880.870.000.865.222.332.223.762.372.66
'1.832.572.632.533.213.065.250.920.920.96
't.881.985.O7
3.032.381.722.322.193.734.62
2.252.O42.422.21
2.372.141.771.42
tMsllmmol/L)
29.3830.9540.1130.2718.320.0610.625.3517.9714.7413.638.083.241.78
31.9431.8731.2636.1535.6636.641
15.6914.3113.577.665.62
22.2819.6714.3716.277.O85.5040.5937.1628.6626.5529.9026.2431.0324.3022.O7
23.13
lNallmmol/L)
1.032.390.360.28o.210.01o.2'l0.690.450.530.850.91
1.891.840.380.360.420.561.O7
2.570,18o.170.180.300.33o.750.43o.470.59
2.O22.162341.780.980.460.460.410.240.25o.240.28
tKl(mmol/L)
11.007.3915.6514.81
't 3.050.927.571.457.266.003.982.770.870.4912.1412.22
't2.45't3.2513.379. 14
12.25
'10.769.716.79
1.587.607.476.176.O22.11
1.2310.4813.8312.1011.40
't1.9210.9513.1211.0511.2611.75SAB
Page 268
BarossaBârosse
Barossa
BarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBerossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossa
BarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossa
Barossa
BarossaBarossa
Barossa
BarossaBarossaReoion
15141200315141200s
15141200315t4/20031514t200315t4t2W31
'|
151412003
15141200315141200315t4/200315141200315t4t2003
1 9/l1
19t12J20021
1911
19t12t200219t12t20021911
19/12/20021911212002
1 9/1
1
1 9/l19112J2002
19t12/20021911
19t12J200219112120022011112002201'11/2002201111200220t11t200220111120022011112002
2011112002
1
'|
I
SamplingDate
BoreBore
BoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBore
lrr¡gat¡onWater
44
444444444444444444444444444444444444444
Gypsum
þplication
100
5050505050501010
1010
'1010100100
't00100100
't005050505050501010101010
1010010010010010010050505050
D¡stancefrom
Dripper
17.5
60504030
17.5560504030
17.55
60504030
17.5560504030
17.55
60504030
17.55
60504030
17.55
60504030
Depthlcml
2.343.40
5.955.354.853.954.613.454.523.41
2.522.631.981.744.204.OO
3.102.652.ñ2.396.006.00s.103.522.502.905.454.O72.302.602.OO
2.453.5s3.322.702.OO
't.923.155.075.404.623.70
EC(dS/m)
o.20o.19
0.490.55o.250.43o.22o.27o.21
o.24o.32o.200.96o.21o.20o.12o.140.160.300.110.330.37o.350.240.160.130.360.18o.200.31
o.a7o.230.160.160.19o.23o.o40.130.400.430.18o.21
AImq/L
o.20
o.o20.030.130.260.290.32o.120.290.31
o.32o.290.230.08o.o70.060. t3o.270.320.05o.o20.øo.230.350.380.030.130.280.31
o.2a0.300.1 1
0.100.09o.22o.230.300.03o.o20.10o.23
Bmq/L
.71
226.89189.85174.60115.80190.48126.47132.5098.6777.6897.7767.3275.09208.O4201.12169.93136.83142.36383.72248.76227.69175.65100.4679.24180.00177.79
'| 1s.2865.9769.8879.1 0
't24.6'l209.09147.74167.71165.71192.13512.62264.622U.73169.36114.76
Cams/L
0.150.13
o.o2-0.010.010.05o.120.190.010.020.050.100.16o.240.000.000.00o.o20.050.11
-0.01-0.01-0.010.040.09o.210.01o.o20.040.080.11
0.190.010.01o.o20.040.070.140.000.000.030.10
Cumo/L
o.05
o.'t70.18o.o70.100.070. t00.070.080.080.10o.210.080.01
0.00-0.010.010.060.o2-o.o2-o.o2-o.o20.030.030.05-0.010.000.01
o.060.450.06o.o20.01
0.030.050.01
o.040.030.03o.o2o.o2
Femo/L
'|
85.00
14.0512.5716.0816.9422.9726.299.429.6011.0917.6811.5816.2523.4324.8223.1623.3436.1552.4518.11
15.9413.749.989.2023.8211.8510.018.407.489.56
22.O4
19.87?2.9724.5538.41105.38171.1720.4922.1321.7519.28
K mc/L
71.52
82.4077.5579.4055.4797.7060.1662.2851.1242.9658.1040.2842.O5
67.6363.3257-O244.8539.6666.1991.2285.6666.2943.4738.2884.9867.3752.6631.8134.1 538.0258.9669.7462.0652.784A.a740.4272.71
97.9989.5168.85s1 .14
Mg
mo/L
0.110.10
0.01-0.010.01
0.050.060.090.020.040.050.050.25o.120.130.11
o.24o.12-0.04-0.11-0.04-0.010.03-0.t1-0.04-0.010.000.510.010.350.250.060.06-0.010.400.18o.o2-0.01-0.01
Mnmo/L
324.O7
990.20887.03885.01
594.03768.61
456.98810.60616.52447.35440.30351.60285.64644.99624.5558t.03391.62232.441 13.96985.67971.37870.12623.94421.94382.22924.42712.664A0.92393.24327.47343.41590.83566.94440.30264.37185.61235.36972.40956.86860.83681.70
Namo/L
0.34o.2a0.16o.17o.210.76o.170.260.20o.23o.25o.241.561.45o.a20.461 .101.91
1.74't.67o.720.390.961.811.90o.871.330.640.671.051.591.68o.710.461.562.320.980.70o.470.40
Pmq/L
209.71254.47
189.28142.23181.12130.47192.17108.43130.7097.0661.6063.5546.1743.57
209.35236.77230.38
't70.74148.62352.10236.0923Í¡.98188.19
'I18.1 |63.76163.22147.54124.5883.0472.6446.1957.78174.54199.67210.13189.96
490.O7237.U236.60
't 95.88127.31
Smo/L
0.050.05
0.040.030.01o.020.020.040.030.000.01o.o2o.o20.030.060.060.050.040.050.09o.o70.080.050.030.01
0.080.040.030.020.01o.o20.0s0.070.060.06o.o70.03o.120.070.050.060.04
Znmo/L
8.70
5.664.744.362.894.753.163.31
2.46
't.942.441.681.A75.195.024.243.423.559.576.215.684.382.511.984.494.442.881.651.741.973.115.224.684.184.134.79'12.796.605.864.232.86
lcallmmol/L)
'1.35
2.94
3.393.193.272.284.O2
2.472.562.101.772.391.661.732.782.602.351.841.632.723.753.52
1.791.573.502.772.171.31
1.40
't.562.432.872.552.172.O1
1.662.994.033.682.432.10
tMsl(mmol/L)
14.27
43.O738.5838.5025.A433.4319.8835.2626.8219.4619.1515.2912.4228.0627.1725.2717.03
'10.114.9642.8742.2537.8527.1418.3516.6340.2131.0020.9217.1014.24't4.9425.7024.661 9.15
't1.508.O7
10.2442.3041.6237.4429.65
lNal(mmol/L)
2.762.17
0.36o.320.410.430.590.67o.240.250.280.450.30o.420.600.630.590.600.921.340.46o.410.350.26o.240.610.300.260.21
0.19o.240.560.510.590.630.982.704.38o.52o.570.560.49
tKllmmol/L)
3.274. 18
14.3213.7013.9411.3611.298.3814.5612.5510.118.728.376.559.949.849.8s7.434.441.41
13.5913.9314.1 I13.109.745.8814.9813.8012.179.647.57o.s9.049.177.604.643. 18
2.5812.97
13.4814.0913.30SAR
Page 269
BârossaBarossaBerossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossa
BarossaBarossaBarossaBarossa
BarossaBarossaBarossa
Barossa
BarossaBerossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossa
BarossaFisure 6-4
BarossaBarossa
Reqion
20t12J2001201121200'l20t12/200120112J200120/1212001
20t12t20012011
20/121200120t12t200120112J200120/12120012011212001
20t1ù200122J1112001
22J1't12001
22111120012211'U200122t1'U200122J111200122J111200122J111200122J't11200122t11t200122111/20012211112001
22/11t20012211112001221111200122111/2001
22111120012211112001
22t11120012211112001
22t11t2001
15141200315t4/200î1514/2003151412003
SamplingDate
BoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBore
BoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBore
BoreBoreBore
lrrigationWater
88I888IIII888III88IIIIIII8
II8II8IIII
4444
GypsumApplication
1001001005050505050501010101010
10
't 00100100100100100100505050505050501010101010
1010
100100100100
Distancefrom
Dripperlcml
3017.5
560504030
'17.55
60504030
17.55
65554535251556555453525155
655545352515
5
60504030
Depthlcm)
2.652.313.052.O51.901.862.222.503.451.852.092.362.242.'132.984.494.805-153.312.OO
2.292.992.24
't.781.26
'1.751.291.902.321.101.31
1.382.432.482.252.31
3.A23.613.253.04
EC(d9m)
0.010.010.010.050.10o.o10.080.000.01o.230.01
o.o20.03o.o20.050.000.00o.o20.000.000.030.000.06o.o20.01
0.010.000.01
0.000.040.00o.o0o.o20.00-0.01-0.01
o.21o.22o.22o.20
AImq/L
0.280.16o.320.09o.21
0.360.390.370.33o.120.31
0.600.360.31
o.280.140.100.11
0. 13
o.20o.23o.320.08o.o70.180.36o.420.380.330. 14
0.19o.220.130.1 '|
0.t1o.12
0.080.080.09o.12
Bmq/L
371.36183.71615.3859.8744.744s.37
148.58310.65609.6926.2335.1470.35125.3410a.22233.94241.45257.97366.37152.1374.44170.16521.091 16.6363.8334.4895.49109.50255.94455.4931.2689.35153.54353.73441.22477.47589.99
194.68195.28142.7225.25
Camo/L
0.13o.'t40.310.130.19o.140. 16
0.21
o.24o.020.01
0.000.000.04o.o2-0.01o.020.010.01
0.080.090.060.010.00o.o20.04o.060.060.060.010.00-0.010.030.060.010.05
-0.010.01
0.010.03
Cumo/L
-0.24-o.21-o.22-0.13-0.10-o.24-o.24-o.23-0.07-o.24-0.23-0.24-o.23-0.21
-0.24-o.24-0.20-0.23-0.24-0.1 1
-o.24-o.14-0.11-o.12-o.12-o.12-o.12-0.23-0.08-o.12-o.12-o.24-0.24-o.24-0.24
0.050.06o.080.0s
Fe
mc/L
94.2145.25
129.099.047.828.9811-2326.1145.246.658.319.5811.2015.2220.5928.4331.2538.6135.8349.85121.73't74.O814.0510.437.6811.3014.5343.3873.587.8910.7912.O517.6650.6258.5542.20
13.5014.6018.2937.71
K moiL
90-1 763.96
101 .5525.5824.7728.0878.36134.20140.3712.2720.9948.4274.7646.9166.4568.9772.7690.9143.9423.5640.9379.7235.3822.9614.7849.4758.2198.0498.6712.6239.6771.36
1 16.92132.9470.71
56.49
61.185A.7254.1258.64
Mgmo/L
-o.21-o.21-o.20-o.17-0.14-0.11-o.21-o.20-o.21-o.21
-o.21-o.21
-o.21-o.20-0.19-0.'t2-0.t1-0.04-0.15-o.22-0.08-0.18-0.14-0.09-0. 10
-0.11-0.11-0.11-o.21-0.06-0.11-o. t1
-o.170.22-0.21
-0.20
0.080.130.090.08
MnmqiL
281 .58373.31
243.81447.19440.61450.99438.16267.34336.39326.75362.07390.90264.39275.6'l345.93677.74710.93762.00549.85339.22281.53143.914'18.27338.44271.92262.59126.24101 .4547.42188.53168.4792.8935.1630.8115.8118.07
593.73ss8.55496.17379.04
Namq/L
1 .180.002.12-0.030.030.04-0.030.110.37-0.05-0.01-0.04-0.060.38o.240.00-0.050.t80.050.070.78
'1.55-0.020.000.030.040.050.461.690.00-o.o2-o.o2-0.05-0.o2o.o2-0.03
o.32o.370.190.16
P
mo/L
442.66243.62626. t 3225.24170.92166.85363.04433.1 9677.34146.02147.56185.82
't69.7487.1 0248.72136.73202.93447.96251.',18218.18361.40826.97368.98271-53182.71275.60210.16373.38s19.38
't48.93229.53270.1s450.81
557.13475.33536.32
148.19168.621 63.8Ít169.91
Smc/L
0.040.050.'120.100.080.ol0.05o.o70.1 t
0.030.03o.o2o.o20.030.030.000.050.040.o20.060.150.040.030.01o.02o.o20.010.030.0so.o70.030.030.040.050.010.05
o.o'1
0.030.050.05
Znmo/L
9.274.5815.351.491.121.133.71
7.751s.210.650.881.763.232.705.846.026.449.143.801.864.2513.002.911.590.862.382.736.3911.36o.782.233.838.83
'12.0111.91
14.72
4.864.A74.565.62
lcallmmol/L)
3.712.634.181.051.O2
1.153.225.525.770.500.861.993.081.93
2.842.993.741.81
0.971.683.281.460.940.612.042.394.034.06o.52
'1.632.944.815.472.91
2.32
2.522.422.232.41
tMsl(mmol/L)
't2.25't6.24'10.602't.1919.1719.6219.0611.6314.6314.21
15.7517.0011.50
'11.9915.0529.4830.9233.1 423.9214.7612.256.2618.1914.7211.8311.425.494.412.068.207.334.O41.531.340.690.79
25.8324.3021.5816.49
INa]lmmol/L)
2.4'l1.'16
3.30o.230.20o.23o.290.671 .160.17o.21
o.24o.290.390.53o.730.800.990.921.273.114.450.36o.270.20o.29o.371.11
1.88o.20o.280.3'|0.451.291.501.08
0.35o.37o.470.96
tlqlmmol/L)
3.406.052.4013.2813.1212.977.243.193.1913.2011.948.784.585.575.149.9010.o79.2410.108.785.031.558.719.249.765.432.431.370.537.203.731.550.41
0.320.180.19
9.519.008.245.82SAR
Page 27O
BarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarosseBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBerossaBarossaBarossaBarossa
BarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBârosseBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossa
BarossaReoion
201111200220/111200220111/200231m200231n1200231n1200231t7t200231t71200231n/200231n200231n/200231m200231n1200231n1200231n1200231n200231n200231n120023'1ni200231t7t200231n12002171412002
'17t4t2002't7t4t200217t4t200217t4120021714120021
17t4/200217141200217t4t200217141200217141200217t4t200217141200217t4t200217t4t2002171412002
201121200120112J200'l
2011212001
SamplingDate
BoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBore
BoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBore
lrr¡gationWater
88II8III8III8II888
I8I8I88III88I8II888II8I8
GypsumApplication
(Uha)
't010
'1010010010010010010050505050505010101010
1010
100100100
't 00100
'100505050505050101010101010100
'100100
D¡stancefrom
Dripper(cm)
3017.5
560504030
17.5560504030
17.5560504030
17.5560504030
17.55
60504030
17.5560504030
17.55
605040
Depth(cm)
1.471.602.71
3.653.354.406.503.583.454.283.804.424.894.094.053.553.052.392.852.453.452.71
2.733.444.233.594.112.423.684.725.454.889.052.553.654.O1
3.893.721.982.452.612.11
ECld9m)
0.060.050.160.100.070.11o.250.090.060.130.140.180.1 1
o.140.060.140.092.O80.060.0s0.130.110.110.090.11
0.130.08o.120.090. t0o_360.09o.250.090.10o.'t7o.220.100.050.010.010.01
AI
mo/L
o.2a0.290.350.100.09o.12o.270.150.21
0.10o.220.300.360.330.280.12o.230.31o.320.310.30o.170.160.140.180.19o.240.100.180.160.360.40o.370.10o.230.360.44o.370.30o.120.090.09
B
moiL
55.61124.16417.79282.'18180.12283.38588.62324.A8572.51202.412s3.88196.62198.79191.57537.43163.95140.3966.7286.52163.02517.55107.O7
104.74178.28382.49368.87590.2281.50149.45245.42212-A3138.27522.6060.53120.35127.27100.05125.9570.61
120.141 16.811 10.26
Camo/L
0.110.080.140.010.o2o.o20.030.060.060.050.04o.o20.06o.120.080.030.060.030.080.100.080.000.01o.o20.030.100.080.010.060.030.030.090.07o.o2o.020.030.090.110.080.06o.o2o.23
Cuma/L
o.o20.01
0.04-0.08-0.09-o.o7-o.22-0.08-0.08-0.06-0.05-0.04-0.03-0.06-0.08-0.06-0.090.96-0.08-0.08-0.07-0.09-0.o7-0.08-o.o7-0.06-0.07-0.07-0.08-o.o7-0.08-0.07-o.21
-0.08-0.08-o.o20.02-0.06-0.03-o.24-o.24-o.24
Femq/L
8.5614.9134.7513.97
't4.3122.2259.7482.67120.8711.2013.7612.2718.3220.6440.879.1510.006.539.04
'19.6533.7010.9813.6825.6353.4092.6581.267.3912.7722.7428.6028.0647.276.129.6613.8920.6329.76
't6.5714.8919.61
23.56K mq/L
26.3760.00
'165.8871.O456.19102.48182.9974.9686.7087.83123.72105.0487.9764.92116.7266.9370.5237.9548.2787.05195.9030.3733.9566.49122.0386.7496.6030.6761.72
101 .5491.7061.30214.3425.6961.8377.7264.51
82.5042.5735.2636.0434.91
Mg
mo/L
-0.010.030.310.01
-0.04-0.05-o.07o.'t20.03-0.06-o.o7-0.06-0.01-o.o2-0.01
-0.06-o.o7-0.05-0.04-0.020.04-0.05-0.06-0.04-0.03o.28-0.11-0.1 1
-0.10-0.09-0.16-0.08-o.22-0.11
-0.11-0.09o.170.35-0.04-0.15-0.19-0.19
Mn
mo/L
263.15204.82199.90609.24585.49669.74865.28480.9'|282.37804.81768.34763.80962.59835.10s35.61681.426s7.00478.21538.21
413.56296. 1 8461.63454.26505.62449.56356.44346.86522-45631.83661.16897.54880.121416-27485.01605.80638.9061 1.87586.51
294.52509.43537.26426.76
Namo/L
0.400.s41.120.090.010.03o.05o.171.010.06o.o70.050.23o.270.460.09o.12o.o7o.2'l0.230.11
0.080.04o.020.05o.421.440.100.110.030.050.190.810.130.060.08o.21o.22o.12-0.05-0.08-0.03
P
mq/L
123.98218.65583.90470.O5234.23260.23549.63355.33631.11
369.49288.74219.73332.44442.41801.'l 1
283.78204.OO
126-97200.48387.71809.35196.671ô8.28235.93407.144'19.62629.38175.56188.81220.96237.57155.t6524.A5101 .65103.9797.7474.9783.21
46.62179.1 1
170.74173.78
Smc/L
o.020.040.10o.120.10o.120.260.130.160.11o.140.11
0.090.080.16o.o7o.o70.04o.o70.090.180.04o.040.05o.o70.090.100.010.04o.07o.o70.o4o.170.040.040.040.06o.040.030.150.050.11
Znmq/L
'I .393.1010.427.O44.497.O7
'14.698.1114.285.056.334.914.964.7813.41
4.093.s0
'I .662.164.O712.912.672.614.459.549.2014.732.033.736.135.313.4513.04
'1.513.003.182.503.'t4'1.763.002.912.75
[ca](mmol/L)
1.O8
2.476.822.922.31
4.227.533.083.573.615.094.323.622.674.802.752.901.561.993.588.061.251.402.745.O23.573.971.262.544.183.772.528.821.062.543.202.653.391.751.451.481.44
tMslfmmoliL)
11.458.918.7026.5025.4729.1337.6420.9212.2835.01
33.4233.2241.8736.3223.3029.6428.5820.8023.41
17.9912.8820.0819.7621.9919.5515.501s.0922.7327.4828.7639.0438.2861.6021.1026.3527.7926.6125.5112.81
22.1623.3718.56
INa]lmmol/L)
o.220.380.890.360.37o.571.532.113.09
0.350.310.470.531.05o.23o.26o.17o.230.500.860.280.350.661.372.372.080.190.330.580.730.721.21
0.160.250.360.530.76o.42
0.500.60
tKl(mmol/L)
7.283.782.098.409.768.677.996.252.9111.899.8910.9414.30
'13.315.4611.3311.2911.581 1.506.502.8110.149.878.21
s.124.343.4912.5210.988.9612.9515.6713.1813.1711.1911.01
11.739.986.8410.511 1.149.07SAR
Page 271
BarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBârossaBarossaBarossaBarossa
BarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossa
BarossaBarossaBarossaBarossa
BarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossa
Reqion
1514/200315/4t200315t4t200315141200315t4t200315t4t20031514120031514/200315/4/2003
19t12/200219112200219112/200219t121200219t12J200219112J2002191121200219112J2002191121200219t12t200219112J2002191121200219t12t2002191121200219112/200219t1?/200219t12t2002
't9/1212002201111200220t11t200220t11t20022011112002201111200220t11t200220/1112002201111200220111/200220t11t200220t111200220t11t200220111/2002201111200220t11t2002
SamplingDate
BoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBore
BoreBoreBore
lrrigationWater
IIII888I8IIII8IIIII8III8I8I88888IIIIIII8
II
GypsumApplication
5050501010
'10
't01010
't00100100100100100505050505050101010
'101010
100100100
'10010010050505050505010
1010
Distancefrom
Dripperlcml
't7.55
60504030
17.5560504030
17.55
60504030
17.55
60504030
'17.55
60504030
17.55
60504030
17.55
605040
Depthlcm)
4.246.475.404.654.103.222.821.722.302.302.31
2.722.602.554.654.755.405.303.803.402.752.401.75
'1.951.801.903.103.15s.o72.AO
2.683.903.593.813.001.781.403.802.652.902.09
ECld9m)
o.360.37o.54o.47o.20o.220.33o.210.16o.240.160.140.180.180.140.150.130.360.380.1 1
0.13o.210.140.18o.o70.050.160.150.140.17o.370.150.150. 18
0.160.t9o.7'lo.700.¿fÍ¡
o.28o.'17o.21
AImc/L
0.330.34o.44o.20o.24o.420.370.320.260.100.100.100.19o.220.180.09o.120.10o.24o.28o.210.100.190.33o.32o.240.220.13o.120.100.16o.20o.270.09o.o80.15o.25o.28o.410.130.160.29
Bmo/L
101 .90
't70.69696.00183.43129.3993.9388.26125.6977.08
't47.38167.1 1
206.67472.67557.33633.74222.56194.19263.34278.91293.66574.7476.1660.79s0.5586.8391.5894.27
206.94228.35218.86285.42376.14649.73161 .85167.32104.1850.1540.1 0
349.6481.07105.9261.68
Camo/L
0.060. 10
0.26-0.0t0.010.050.13o.21o.240.010.030.050.040.050.090.030.040.04o.o70.04o.o7o.o2o.o20.040.050.080.120.03o.030.040.060.090.15o.o20.040.050.060.15o.200.030.040.09
CumoiL
0.110.08o.22o.'120.040.060.12o.080.05o.o20.01
0.000.03o.020.030.000.000.01
o.o20.000.030.010.000.10o.o20.010.05o.o2o.o20.o70.080.030.060.02o.o20.030.341.1 I0.040.01o.o2o.o2
Femq/L
13.9852.09138.15
't2.7411.1310.0018.1034.2220.,l511.3614.9329.9077.O596.6277.1214.7116.0327.5544.2470.63
't04.039.719.538.9314.951A.O7
18.ô415.2618.3025.3252.2992.10158.1414.4115.71
't 4.8511.1913.5141.419.3310.909.27
K mo/L
50.4463.2316s.8079.1 366.6256.7660.3575.4541.7825.8229.3436.0072.3067.6044.4971.6071.7488.10
1 14.0986.6691.2432.2528.1926.0141.5929.744dt.1 640.8144.2747.06ô8.9172.9480.3147.1354.7541.5821.7416.50132.2932.81
45.3927.02
Mgmq/L
0.040.090.16-o.o20.000.010.110.4ôo.12-0.01-0.04-0.030.14o.270.19-0.o2-0.04-0. t0-0.04-0.04o.'t4-0.04-0.05-0.020.000.000.04o.070.00-0.010-16o.240.360.00-0.01-o.02o.030.01
o.o1-0.02-0.030.00
Mnm0/L
621.31696. 1 9787.42680.09596.85585.49595.26394.35264.82394.42376.37317.47168.6568.0445.52
836.16900.10952.359'12.645s1.67244.88532.32479.35322.21313.48276.17297.95480.7'l511.20486.72292.51182.50252.37666.32698.82557.5934A.7'l272.43553.05507.23542.67M7.99
Namo/L
0.99
't.960.150.10o.'12o.220.280.261 .131.140.900.790.981.77
'1.110.68o.700.850.801.721.350.39o.52o.520.46o.71
'1.67o.720.44o.441.182.93o.570.40o.290.26o.921.530.510.550.47
P
mq/L
124.69
'181 .81
750.62
'191 .64185.63
'fi6.7592.5778.5147.12220.44229.41234.55467.29480.145 t 0.62285.42259.97349.55435.83393.37s78.40127.O4120.4166.8057.1448.2748.77
236.66257.22240.35292.97358.91494.26220.54200.60144.0686.8889.27
s24.38
't47.73237.70150.69
S
mo/L
o.oo0.01
0.100.010.010.000.000.010.020.040.05o.o70.100.090.100.080.060.080.080.050.10o.o20.010.o20.03o.o20.040.090.070.080.090.110.130.060.060.03o.o2o.o20.100.030.050.03
Znmq/L
2.544.2617.374.583.232.U2.203.141.923.684.175.1611.7913.9115.8 t5.554.446.576.967.3314.341.901.521.262.172.282.355.165.705.467.',129.3816.214.044.172.60't.251.008.722.O2
2.641.54
lcal(mmol/L)
2.O72.606.823.252.742.332.483. 10
1.72
't.061.211.482.972.781.832.952.953.624.693.563.751.331.t61.O7
1.71
1.221.781.681.82
't.942.833.003.301.942.251.71
0.890.685.441.3s1.871.11
tMsl(mmol/L)
27.O3
30.2834.2529.5825.9625.4725.8917.1511.5217.1716.3713.81
7.342.961.98
36.3739.1541.4239.7024.OO
10.6523.1520.8514.O213.6412.O1
12.9620.9122.2421.1712.727.9410.9828.9830.40
15.1711.4724.0622.0623.6019.49
lNallmmol/L)
0.361.333.530.33o.28o.260.460.980.520.290.380.761.972.471.970.380.41
0.701 .131.8'|
2.66o.25o.24o.230.380.460.480.39o.470.651.342.364.040.370.400.380.290.351.06o.240.280.24
tKllmmol/L)
12.5811.566.9610.5710.6311.77
11.966.876.047.897.065.361.91
o.720.4712.4814.O2
12.97
'I 1.637.272.5012.8912.749.186.926.416.387.998.11
7.784.032.262.48
1 1.8611.991 1.68
9.166.3912.O1
11.1211.97SAR
Page272
BarossaBarossaBârossaBarossaBerossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossa
BarossaBarossaBarossaBerossaBarossaBarossaBarossa
BarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaFigure 7-1
BarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaReqion
20/12/200120112J200120/12/200120112J200120t12J2001201121200120112/2001201'1212001
20112J200120t12J200122J11120012211112001
221111200122t11t200122J1112001
22J111200122J1',!12001
2i,111200122J11t200122J111200122t111200122111/2001
22/1112001221111200122t11/2001221't11200122J11120012211/200122J1112001221111200122t11t2001
15141200315t4t2003151412003
't5141200315t4t2@3't5l4l2æ3151412003151412003151412003
SamplingDate
MainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMa¡nsMainsMa¡nsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMa¡ns
BoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBore
lrrigationWater
o0000000000000000000000000o0000
IIII8I8I8
GypsumAppl¡cation
(Uhâ)
505050501010
10101010100100100100100100
't00505050505050501010101010
't010
100
'100100100100100505050
D¡stancefrom
Dripper(cm)
4030
't7.5560504030
17.55
6555453525155
6555453525155
6555453525
't55
60504030
'17.55
605040
Depthlcm)
1 .160.950.940.560.91o.440.560.880.68o-522.601.891.50
't.4'l1.080.840.972.822.251.351.241.12o.a20.80
't.401.25o.770.510.580.560.48
3.524.154.452.983.656.205.456.455.70
ECld9m)
0.000.010.342.980.03o.o20.040.030.01
o.400.00o.o20.050.050.030.777.O70.010.000.011.190.092.O210.69o.370.040.09o.040.010.03o.o2
0.18o.240.230.30o.240.480.480.480.50
AI
mc/L
0.20o.250.360.390.100.190.180.15o.120.110.110.14o.14o.o7o.120.240.350.090.060.040.180.400.400.350.06o.06o.200.38o.29o.24o.23
o.120.090.10o.17o.24o.370.18o.170.24
B
mo/L
40.51
30.5332.6331 .186.95
'13.3525.4755.7037.0623.9282.1160.2030.01
23.2029.4713.7020.7975.3750.8616.8213.9821.2222.1915.746.626.643.5411.4823.1841.3744.'19
260.06341.85357.35211.72369.92873.66249.95323.1 8240.62
Camc/L
o.o20.11
o.23o.37o.170.150.100.100.150.11
-0.01-0.03-0.01
-0.010.060.13o.28-0.01
-0.010.01
0.19o.140.180.32-0.010.010.040.05o.o70.090.14
0.000.000.020.030.060.110.00o.o2o.o1
Cumo/L
-o.12-0.1 1
o.222.22-0.22-o.23-0.08-0.09-0.23-0.o2-o.23-0.57-0.51-o.21-0.080.675.43-o.24-o.24-0.11o.7a0.001.469.050.04-o.21
-0.53-0.16-0.08-0.08-0.23
0.040.050.06o.o70.070. 15
0.13o.140.16
Femq/L
16.3816.3028.9941.976.038.6914.5222.O417.5812.1812.299.708.169.0913.2521.0036.95
't2.138.995.285.006.989.9516.303.353.261.633.497.4311.87
'12.30
18.7131.4252.6083.56127.42166.9215.7520.4119.65
K mq/L
18.061s.6016.2313.813.426.8314.9931.O720.1512.91
34.3424.8411.597349. t87.O9
't1.4232.032't.327.094.6510.4113.329.382.34
'1.591.825.3314.2224.O922.78
51.4860.6366.4641.74s9.5941.8275.77104.0387.05
Mgmo/L
-0.09-0.11-o.fo0.03-o.21-o.20-0.080.æ-o.21-0.18-o.19-0.49-0.46-o.20-0.07-0.11-0.09-0.15-o.17-0.11-o.21-o.22-0.16-0.08-o.22-o.21-0.54-o.21-0.10-0.07-o.22
0.100.020.03o.070.19o.320.010.010.04
Mnmc/L
238.86
'198.54194.401 18.39117.O4
94.7067.7276.26ao.2a71.16441.12396.1 6289.45229.24199.47152.95176.63512.54443.00292.49228.80225.29153.74162.47213.66
'174.50142.17
't 3l .5267.4642.9538.09
491.915s4.69665.77406.524t 1.10387.88871.461021.09976.90
Namo/L
0.010.101.084.970.000.030.050.160.290.56-0.05-0. 14
-0.06-0.031.868.924.73-o.o2-0.010.030.184.31s.703.77-0.040.15-0.100.040.14o.410.59
o.200.11o.'120.17o.a21.420.30o.24o.17
Pmo/L
84.9837.5531.8418.9222.9712.7715.4413.71
't6.1212.99143.56
'155.47127.2797.6958.1 019.0123.05154.27156.5086.8833.9526.0516.3614.2371-5363.6927.O1
13.9411.6613.5014.34
147.75207.90274.',ts207.29339.18486.s1232.53350.97292.68
Smo/L
0.00-0.01-0.01o.14o.070.06-0.01o.o20.040.040.110.31
o.280.050.00-0.010.000.060.060.000.060.05o.o70.010.060.06o.260.05-0.01-0.010.05
0.080.01
0.030.04o.o20.10-0.01o.020.01
Znmq/L
1.01
0.760.81
o.7ao.170.330.641.39o.920.602.O51.500.750.58o.740.340.521.881.27o.420.350.530.550.39o.17o.170.090.290.58
't.031.10
6.498.538.925.289.2321.806.248.066.00
lcal(mmol/L)
o.740.640.67o.570.t4o.2a0.621.280.830.531.4'l1.020.480.300.38o.29o.471.320.88o.290.19o.430.550.390. 10
o.o70.07o.220.580.990.94
2.122.492.731.722.453.373.124.283.58
tMsl(mmol/L)
10.398.648.465.155.094.122.953.323.493.1019.1917.2312.599.978.686.657.6822.2919.2712.729.959.806.697.O79.297.596.185.722.931.471.66
21.4024.1328.9617.6817.4416.8737.9144.4',1
42.49
lNallmmol/Ll
o.42o.42o.741.O7
0.1so.22o.370.560.450.31
0.3'l0.250.210.23o.340.540.950.31
o.230.13o. l30.180.25o.420.090.080.040.090.190.300.31
0.480.801.352.143.264.270.40o.520.50
tKllmmol/L)
7.857.296.954.449.085.262.632.O3
2.642.91
10.3110.8511.3710.624.228.367.7312.4713.1515.0913.5510.016.378.0118.1815.7815.318.052.721.31
1 .16
7.297.278.486.685.233.3612.3912.6413.73SAH
Page 273
BarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossa
BarossaBarossa
BarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossa
BarossaBarossa
BarossaBarossaBarossaReoion
31n120023ln200231n/200231n200231n1200231n/200231n1200231n/200231n/200231il200231nt2W231m200231n/200231m200231n200231nPOOZ17t4t2002
't7t4t200217t4t20021714/20021714/200217t4/20021714t200217141200217t4t200217t4t20021714120021714/200217t4t200217141200217t4t20021714/200217t4t200217t4/2002
20112-120012011212001
201121200120112200120/12t2001201121200120112J20012011212001
SamplingDate
MâinsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMains
MainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMa¡nsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMa¡nsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMa¡ns
MainsMains
lrrigationWater
0000000000000o000o00000000000000000o000000
GypsumApplication
(Vha)
100
't0010010050505050505010
't0101010
10100100100100
'f 001005050505050501010
'10101010
1001001001001001005050
D¡stancefrom
Dripper(cm)
4030
17.5560504030
17.5560504030
17.55
60504030
17.55
60504030
17.55
60504030
17.5560504030
17.556050
Depth(cm)
1.840.990.63o.523.523.412.812.751.691.251.88
't.271.250.66o.650.581.521.21
0.930.66o.721.752.O2
2.141.95'1.250.960.931.461.140.990.920.940.361.42
't.611.721.410.840.931.721.75
ECld9m)
o.041.634.08
't2.900.050.0s0.060.135.290.000.110.03o.o13.141.580.310.090.081.40
21.051.042.O20.08o.o70.060.1822.943.42o.o20.070.18o.14o.147.840.11o.o2o.o70.t9
15. 13
6.540.000.00
AI
mo/L
o.120.250.310.300.130.1 '|
0.110.18o.21
0.350.130.14o.120.090.090.100.100.13o.21o.250.330.360.090. 13
0.150.28o.270.460.150.150.130.100.110.100.06o.12o.240.260.360.40o.120.16
Bmo/L
56.5327.732'1.7023.94
226.86186.95
't22.8882.6131.6426.8042.O833.6938.6920.0828.5733.11
1A.71
16.6614.52
'12.6232.3626.5555.5967.9656.4632.4423.5819.6137.9026.31
23.7433.654A.4318.6022.392A.4840.9231.02
'11.26
'| 6.9272.O8
73.69
Camc/L
o.o10.040.09o.290.000.01
0.00o.o2o.210.61
o.o20.o70.050.050.10o.140.18o.200.400.090.11
o.220.00o.o20.030.15o.170.460.030.01
o.o2o.o7o.o70.060.010.040.090.09o.27o.570.01
-0.01
Cumo/L
-0.041.132.209.18-0.10-0.09-0.09-0.062.6717.53-0.06-0.04-0.042.140.820.06-0.54-0.181.3614.s4o.521.41
-0.1 1
-0.19-0.09o.o214.972.84-0.1 1
-0.08o.o2-0.01-o.o74.79-0.16-0.23-o.17-0.099.692.74-0.25-o.12
Femq/L
37.0340.9846.6263.3336.1948.0160.1084.8870.1 597.2713.O215.3523.0611.6014.5722.897.O47.9511.3817.3228.7346.08
'13.8419.5920.10173429.7748.1413.9114.812't.5420.8021.2612.149.5613.0319.4923.3026.4666.4219.3125.57
K mo/L
16.979.966.836.1 1
54.8043.4628.8920.808.796.8717.3515.2418.2911.2216.2817.557.536.777.157.41
16.1 1
9.6921.9825.2524.4616.751 1.656.1417.1912.5912.7420.5227.95
't0.609.7613.4220.71
't5.136.477.',t1
2s.0025.86
Mgmc/L
-0.010.000.190.490.03o.120. 10
-o.æo.240.83-0.07-0.0f0.030.05o.26o.11
-0.49-0.19-0.090.050.26-0.10-0.09-0.16-0.05-o.o7-0.040.11
-0.07-0.07-o.070.080.250.60-o.20-0.19-0.15-o.21
-0.0s0.04-0.19-0.07
Mnmo/L
304.92159.6390.2563.8í]523.71517.49473.69516.36363.3525',t.43302.46239.63213.871 19.3088.3865.91275.89244.86193.85129.3385.4957.53353.39355.99333.92223.55177.18170.55247.O3
'| 99.37171.01144.88
'107.5952.23
289.20318.49368.47308.59190.33188.69350.94358.41
Namq/L
0.08o.243.377.24o.o20.040.04o.122.458.170.100.540.59o.23o.410.36-o.o70.120.19o.281.034.640.01
-o.o40.04o.222.067.660.020.030.040.08o.220.98-o.o7-0.050.04o.207.3413.37-0.09-0.03
P
mq/L
65.4526.2816.269.01
137.93
'163.73140.77122.O460.2644.9675.0346.2240.4621.8220.0516.3661.7843.9332.9621.27
't 8.3516.71
103.29123.8586.3335.2419.1518.7554.7429.7324.6023.7722.2'l6.3049.2653.6679.9267.5324.1826.10107.73124.25
smo/L
0.050.o2o.o10.050.100.090.060.0s0.030.080.030.030.030.030.040.04
-0.010.00o.o20.000.020.o00.020.000.010.010.010.030.000.000.00o.o20.010.030.040.050.050.080.01
0.090.060.00
Znmo/L
1.41
0.69o.540.605.664.663.O72.06o.790.671.050.840.970.50o.7'l0.83o.47o.420.360.310.81
0.661.391.701.41
0.810.590.490.950.660.590.841.210.460.56o.71
1.O2
o.T7o.28o.42
't.801.84
lcallmmol/Ll
o.70o.41
o.280.252.251.791.1I0.860.360.28o.710.630.750.46o.670.720.31
0.28o.290.320.660.400.901.O4
1.01
0.69o.4ao.25o.7'lo.52o.520.84
'I. t50.440.400.550.850.62o.27o.291.031.06
tMsllmmol/L)
13.266.943.932.7422.7822.5120.6022.46
'1s.8010.9413.1610.429.305. 1I3.842.8712.0010.658.43s.633.72
15.3715.4814.529.727.7'l7.4210.748.677.M6.304.682.2712.5813.8516.0313.424.288.2115.2715.59
lNal(mmol/L)
0.951.051 .191.620.931.231.542.171.792.490.330.390.590.30o.370.590.18o.20o.29o.44o.731.180.350.500.51o.44o.761.230.360.380.550.530.540.31o.240-330.500.600.681.700.490.65
tt4(mmol/L)
9.136.624.333.01
8.108.869.9913.1514.7311.219.918.607.105.293.272.3013.6212.78
'10.417.053.072.Áß10.169.369.357.947.468.618.368.007.O44.863.052.3912.8412.3311.711 1.36
9.7',\
9.089.15SAR
Page 274
BarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBerosseBarossaBarossa
BarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossa
BarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBerossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBârossaReoion
15t4t200315141200315t4t2003151412003
19t12J2002
't9t't220021911
191121200219/12J200219112/200219112J200219t12/2002191't2J200219112120021911212002
19112J2002
191't2J2002
't9/12t200219/'t2J200219112J200219t12J2002
't9112J200220/11120022011112002201111200220/111200220t11t20022011'U200220t11t200220/1112002201111200220t11t20022011112002201111200220t11t200220/11120022011112002
2011
2011'U200231n200231n12002
SamplingDate
MainsMainsMainsMa¡nsMainsMalnsMainsMainsMainsMa¡nsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMa¡nsMainsMa¡nsMainsMainsMa¡nsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMa¡ns
MainsMainsMainsMainsMa¡nsMains
lrrigationWater
o0o0000000000000
00000000000000000000000000
GypsumApplicalion
(Uha)
1010
1010
10010010010010010050505050505010
101010
't010100100100
'1001001005050505050501010101010
'10100100
Distancefrom
Dripper(cm)
4030
17.5560504030
17.55
60504030
17.5560504030
17.55
60504030
17.5560504030
17.5560504030
17.55
6050
Depth(cml
0.68o.42o.700.724.403.802.91
1.801.430.763.353.052.501.80
't.581.650.870.880.600.55o.720.684.174.203.331.52o.740.99
't.921.451.310.900.760.640.80o.750.6'l0.550.680.952.412.44
ECldS/m)
0.595.780.33o.280.130.160.251.81
0.8014.54o.120.130. 15
0.580.48o.221.84o.3710.244.00o.7'lo.22o.150.150.1915.2822.220.790.1 1
0.080.130.580.351.870.11o.211.050.130.290.450.08o.o7
AImo/L
o.230.090.o70.060.060.05o.'14o.24o.25o.210.080.060.100.290.260.21
0.080.15o.220.100.100.08o.120.130.110.100.19o.240.070.080.16o.27o.290.190.120.30o.27o.120. 10
0.1 1
0.120.10mo/L
33.54 | 0.1121.7142.9341.60
't 91 .67149.9493.61
41.2636.5328.59124.7398.0867.4548.6545.7759.51
15.5421.9126.7627.1236.8737.21172.21171.491 18.5539.2117.2737.6841.6830.0424.9525.1938.3934.0312.3'l18.6123.5233.8849.5670.14133.86101.09
Camq/L
o.o7o.120.180.000.01
0.030.040.100.340.010.010.08o.o70.130.160.030.05o.o70.060.090.08o.o20.01
0.04o.'t20.18o.210.050.06o.120.070.16o.260.050.09o.12o.200.13o.210.000.00
Cumq/L
0.894.330.150.130.000.00o.o70.54o.7111.620.000.000.01
0. t60.180.101.26o.207.232.31o.250.04o.o20.03o.o49.9015.47o.44o.o20.01
o.040.930.151.65o.o20.080.860.080.14o.24-0.08-0.10
Femc¡/L
8.959.4713.2913.7717.7617.O517.8312.5525.4736.0614.9714.8014.4416.1325.8567.674.034.436.476.0912.9513.2426.9528.2231.1734.0943.38103.667.776.11
s.7'l4.6911.41
36.133.453.984.346.6727.3646.4528.8832.74
K mo/L
14.88
'10.1424.1226.3669.8956.9635.01
't 8.9316.7210.4942.2435.4625.O1
24.2827.4025.566.51
10.1212.3413.73
'19.6220.9669.6770.6943.9614.496. 10
9.4618.4613.6311.4810.9218.6614.O4s.468.7710.4913.7927.3938.3237.1028.31
Mgmq/L
0.04o.240.510.36-0.01-0.04-0.040.070.060.31
-0.01-o.o2-0.030.050.140.13-0.02-0.020.090.23o.120.060.060.050.000.080.41o.22-0.01-0.01-0.010.010.070.13-0.01-0.0'l0.000.04o.320.500.04-0.04
Mnmo/L
122.5269.5593.1689.93667.66625.05492.06315.56220.241 t 8.03550.00519.50447.88316.07243.26180.83164.01
156.57106.0482.47aa.4770.62657.22655.50557.36284.67128.5695.6635t.87278.43232.68178.51124.1974.98
't63.58149.76119.2780.7753.7756.81454.40401.95
Namc/L
1.97o.27o.25o.220.660.340.310.300.913.380.610.43o.370.551.O2
1.71
0.26o.261.29o.670.48o.440.400.40o.24o.272.891.770.38o.17o.170.240.38o.870.190.530.35o.22o.28o.260.100.0s
P
mq/L
20.'1110.9419.2119.39121.27124.4386.7047.4725.5914.a7
138.07135.7486.6936.573s.9728.5325.6922.4214.3812.8620.3813.46
1 15.55
'I 13.391 1 1.6632.3710.7013.0171.9154.3641.8921.5420.4012.7927.6320.9914.2412.5921.3029.06103.31108.40
Smo/L
0.010.01
0.03o.o20.060.040.o2o.o2o.o20.040.040.030.030.010.040.030.00o.o20.03o.o20.05o.o20.10o.o70.040.040.030.050.030.04o.o20.030.050.050.04o.o20.01
o. t30.060.0s0.090.06
Znmcy'L
o.a40.541.O7
1.044.783.742.341.030.91o.713.112.451.681.21
1.141.480.390.550.670.680.920.934.304.282.960.980.430.s4
't.040.75o.620.630.960.850.310.460.590.851.241.753.342.52
lcallmmol/L)
0.61o.420.991.082.882.341.440.780.690.431.741.461.03
'1.001.131.050.27o.420.51
0.560.810.862.a72.911.810.60o.250.390.760.56o.470.45o.770.580.220.360.430.571.131.581.531 .16
tMsllmmol/L)
5.333.034.053.9129.M27.1921.4013.739.585.1323.9222.60
't 9.4813.75
'10.587.877.136.814.613.593.853.07
28.5928.5124.2412.385.594.1615.3112.1110.127.765.403.267.126.s15.193.s1
2.342.4719.7717.48
lNallmmol/L)
o.23o.240.340.35o.45o.440.460.320.650.920.380.380.370.41
0.661.730.100.11o.170.160.330.340.69o.720.80o.a7
't .1 'l2.65o.200.160.15o.12o.29o.920.090.100.11o.17o.701.19o.740.84
tKl(mmol/L)
4.433.092.822.6910.4911.O2
11.0210.21
7.584.8010.86
't 1.43
't 1.839.247.024.948.81
6.944.253.222.932.30
'10.6810.641 1.109.876.773.61
1 1.41
10.589.677.484.112.739.767.175.142.961.521.35
9.t 1
SAR
Page 275
BarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBerossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossa
BarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBerossaBarossaFigureT-2
BarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossa
BarossaBarossaReqion
20112120012011212001
20t12t200120112J200120/1212001221'1112001
2211112001221111200122t1't/200122J1
22J1112001221'1112001
22t111200122111t20012211112001221111200122J1112001
22J't1120012211't12001221111200122J1112001
22t11t20012211112001
221111200122t11120012211112001
15t4t20031514/200315t4t20031st4t200315/41200315/4t20031514/20031514120031
1
151412003
15t4t200315t4t2003151412003
SamplingDate
Mâ¡nsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMe¡nsMainsMa¡nsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMains
MainsMains
Mains
MainsMainsMâinsMainsMainsMainsMains
MainsMainsMainsMains
lrrigationWater
44444444444444444444444444
00o0o000000o00
GypsumApplication
fVha)
1010
1010
10100100100100
'10010010050505050505050l010
1010
1010
10
100100
't 001001001005050505050501010
D¡stancefrom
Dr¡pperlcm)
504030
't7.55
655545352515
56555453525155
6555453525155
60504030
17.55
60504030
17.556050
Depth(cm)
1.010.931.060.89o.752.243.201.653.10
't.241.722.27
't.65't.411 .191.090.931 .181.722.251.81
1.091.441.261.852.22
4.492.752.351.440.790.531.69
'1.681.791.461.21o.740.970.83
EC(dS/m)
0.110.000.000.010.05-0.0'l-0.010.03-0.010.000.000.060.080.01
0.030.000.000.020.01
0.040.040.010.000.000.030.03
0.190.19o.200.733.723.840.11
0.100.130.290.411.O7
o.120.16
AImo/L
o.290.160.110.1 1
0.06o.14o.o90.09o.270.310.33o.250.100.09o.'140.'17
0.310.350.360.160.'17
o.370.31
0.26o.21o.22
o.120.090.090.18o.24o.200.08o.'t40.24o.420.40o.260.34o.29
Bmc/L
s5.7678.4265.4960.582s.6950.1538.1033.9052.31
75.88201.09476.4330.8023.55
't 9.1033.5354.98
14 t.58242.9019.00
'15.7635.59
1 10.9299.51
300.33478.23
200.7095.0061.0840.7821.6726.7539.0340.7853.9664.U44.2349.6030.8037.40
Camo/L
o.o20.000.000.01o.o20.o00.000.01o.140.06o.060.050.000.010.01
0.090.100.100.100.01
0.050.040.030.050.040.06
-o.o20.000.010.030.18o.320.010.030.040.11o.170.29o.o70.09
Cumc/L
-0.14-o.12-o.12-o.12-0.12-o.24-o.24-0.11-0.59-o.'t2-o.'t2-o.14-0.05-o.12-0.10-0.10-0.11-0.t1-0.11,0.21-o.23-0.12-0.12-0.12-0.08-0.19
0.050.040.050.181.81
1.570.04o.o20.030.11o.220.500.030.06
Femc/L
5.5711.9717.4717.576.2512.2210.71
10.0716.5121.2831.2332.519.259.069.5619.2229.7947.O963.465.784.847.4516.4013.0519.8120.37
16.5714.4010.6514.1026.6139.756.717.569.1612.4127.6944.426.007.40
K mq/L
29.3941.4634.9528.537.6523.7718.3215.7123.9731.3063.8075.96
'13.1910.259.0913.4923.3045.7466-088.318.5819.87s8.0149.2288.0388.31
65.8533.8021.OO
15.238.457.4315.3016.8324.2528.2638.4720.3815.4418.13
Mgmq/L
-o.12-0.10-o.ú2-0.09-0.10-o.21-o.21
-0.11-0.s5-0.1 1
-0.10-o.14-0.09-0.10-0.11
-0.11-0.11-0.10-0.08-0.20-o.21
-0.11-0.1 1
-0.11-0.06-0.16
0.09o.oo0.00o.o2o.281.030.010.000.000.040.260.360.000.03
Mnmc/L
108.1363.71
69.2891.2841.46449.42402.70347.10269.78
'187.83't64.7089.1 6343.47289.71255.62213.09120.8268.4758.06
255.O7228.39204.84170.O7
1 51 .6482.2342.37
727.62s02.01442.87272.731s6.5883.08
333.92317.36325.55310.24237.46126.93175.78149.09
Namq/L
o.2a0.800.30o.'t20.04-0.06-0.090.01
-0.16o.280.630.67-o.o2-0.02-0.01o.o70.501 .151.28-0.06-o.o70.140.190.28o.'t2o.19
o.22o.17o.140.753.744.500. 15
0.12o.14o.21o.281.050.311.10
P
mo/L
a7 6735.6712.O816.5610.51
150.68154.12
'155.73160.57155.82316.58506.90132.591 18.07105.1684.0378.96179.95305.80
't41.O21 16.52
't24.20196.751s2.73350.10477.51
124.47114.6675.7528.6316.139.28
74.4654.1349.2140.5937.0920.1023.922s.43
smo/L
o.12-0.010.04o.o20.06-0.01o.o70.ol0.030.01
o.o40.030.010.000.000.000.00o.o20.040.000.01
o.o2-0.01-0.01o.o2o.o2
0.030.020.000.000.010.090.00o.o20.01
0.030.030.070.01
o.o2
Znmq/L
1.391.961.63
't.510.641.250.950.851.31
1.895.O211.89o.770.s90.480.841.373.537.060.470.390.892.772.487.4911.93
5.012.371.521.020.540.670.971.O21.35
't.612.10
't.24
0.93
lcal(mmol/L)
1.21
1.71
1.441.170.310.980.750.650.991.292.623.120.54o.420.370.550.961.882.720.340.35o.822.392.O23.623.63
2.711.390.860.630.350.310.630.69
'1.00
'1.161.580.840.63o.75
tMslfmmol/L)
4.702.773.013.971.80
'19.5517.5215.101't.738.177.163.8814.9412.6011.129.275.262.982.5311.099.938.91
7.406.603.581.84
31.6521.8419.2611.866.813.61
14.52
'13.80'14.1613.4910.335.527.656.49
lNal(mmolil)
o.140.310.450.450. 16
0.310.27o.26o.420.540.800.83o.240.23o.240.490.761.201.620.15o.'120.19o.420.330.5.|o.52
o.42o.37o.270.360.681.O2
o.170.'.l90.230.33o.711.140.15o. t9
tKl(mmoliL)
2.921.451.722.42
'1.8413.0913.4212.367.754.s82.591.0013.0512.5412.067.863.441.280.8112.28
'I 1.506.823.263.11
1.O7
o.47
11.3911.2612.479.257.233.6611.4710.569.258.11
5.383.836.4s5.01
SAR
Page 276
BârosseBarossaBerosseBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBerossaBarossaBarossaBarossa
BarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBerossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBerossaBarossaBarossaBarossa
BarossaBarossa
BarossaBarossaBarossaBarossa
BarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaReoion
31n1200231n1200231nPOOZ31t71200231n1200231n/200231n200231n/200231m200231n200231m2002't7141200217t4t20021
1
'l7t4t2w217t4t200217141200217t4t200217/4/200217141200217141200217t4t200217t41200217/412002
'17t4t2002171412002
171412002171412002
20t12t2001201121200120112J200120t12t2û120112J20012011212001201121200120112200120t12t2001201121200'l20t12/2001201121200120t12y200'
SamplingDate
MainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMeinsMainsMainsMainsMainsMains
lrrigationWater
444444444444444444444444444444444444444444
GypsumApplication
(t/ha)
5050505050101010
't01010100100100100100100505050505050
't0101010101010010010010010010050505050505010
D¡stancefrom
Dripperlcm)
504030
17.5560504030
't7.55
60504030
17.5560504030
17.55
60504030
17.55
60504030
17.55
60504030
17.55
60
Depthlcm)
1.611.441.421.221.831.481.031.251.421.A22.593.283.172.211.341.572.181.441.482.111. ts1.262.49
't.06't.37o.78o.700.51o.443.322.382.981.951.752.391.461.701.751.791.982.541.09
ECfdS/m)
0.100.110.180.100.000.130.030.03o.o20.030.08o.o7o.o70.061.79o.240.16o.230.090.081.941.080.15o.230.250.060.2511.560.08o.17o.120. t30.050.t90.100.010.00o.24o.ooo.140.06o.o2
AImo/L
0.110.110.130.18o.200.1 1
0.160.100.080.090.130.100.090.11
0.18o.25o.420.060.070.160.300.330.330.t10.190.08o.200.080.090.100.10o.14o.200.25o.350.10o.140.180.090.13o.22o.17
Bmq/L
56.9697.5462.3379.20367.8067.3645.4094.38195.94249.72521.46174.30158.3283.2241.5974.25177.9324.1935.7981.6133.4236.56173.3740.3954.1 1
19.7126.6122.6922.73213.39121.79
'161 .08127.781 15.66297.9656.2171.60103.5590.44
169.44300.4531.92
Camq/L
0.030.050.05o.o7o.07o.o20.030.040.030.080.09-o.02-0.010.010.030.0s0.160.000.04o.o20.01
0.050.090.010.01
o.050.030.030.06-o.o2-0.010.010.040.060.070.00-0.010.000.000.050.040.00
Cumo./L
-o.o70.000.05-0.03-0.040.01
-0.05-0.05-0.05-0.04-o.o7-0.20-o.l 9-0.090.900.00-o.o2o.o7-0.03-0.030.570.63-o.o20.05-o.o2-o.o20.1 1
7.950.00-0.22-o.20-0.t3-o.23-o.23-o.22-o.12-o.12-0.23-o.12-o.22-o.22-0.11
Fe
mo/L
10.9616.3018.9439.1668.057.885.51
6.198.99
29.9859.1323.3027.9531.4839.1276.23132.136.207.3913.297.9612.3251-477.666.873.973.539.36
10.8123.3825.0943.7686.13
1 17.99163.029.5911.12
't7.o324.9244.92103.825.56
K mq/L
20.4337.6425.7029.O737.7427.9922.7040.3862.00107.27133.6747.544't.8223.1313.7622.5539.288.7813.8637.2620.4420.6353.3917.9427.588.51
13.6210.0212.2248.6132.2039.9431.2832.1744.O71A.2724.9936.4531.6063.1355.8914.57
Mgmo/L
-0.G}-0.æ0.01
0.15-0.03-0.0Í¡0.o20.o70.450.21
-0.09-0.13-0.06-0.02-0.030.19-0.05-0.05-0.050.060.180.06-o.o2-0.05-0.06-0.06-o.02-o.02-0.08-o.'17-0.11
-0.19-0.19-0.18-0.10-0.10-0.19-0.10-0.16-0.18-0.08
Mnmo/L
294.73299.82235.76164.8354j4
264.60172.31171.O495.8559.1950.55
480.09468.59374.92228.45217.87250.01280.01314.36347.89201.65226j4304.73
't64.60204.259t.49109.9478.0956.65
455.60399.05433.16324.68229.28229.11290.23265.A2241.70213.32't71.84243.41185.68
Namq/L
o_ 180.370. 14
1.221.140.18o.21o.420.160.190.11
0.15o.140.080.402.345.05o.140.100.o70.100.811.080.130.180.151.640.160.06o.250.1 1
0.530.05o.732.350.080.56o.780.080.161.390.08
Pmq/L
151 .53203.93138.38178.06368.25219.63142.10194.60244.54319.05617.19125.90166.98134.14123.17201.45350.75127.46155.66174.5443.5956.66196.4359.5865.8112.8024.2810.9211.58
207.79
't49.30215.96218.38188.59380.52126.58149.45158.851 13.31
186.67293.45130.71
Smo/L
0.030.050.040.040.090.03o.o20.040.080.100.180.040.05-0.01-0.01
-0.010.o20.030.ol0.020.01
0.000.100.01
o.o20.000.000.000.010.050.060.060.180.060.180.01o.o20.060.020.280.060.04
Znmq/L
'1.422.431.561.989.181.681 .132.354.896.23
't3.014.353.952.O81.O4
'1.854.440.600.892.O40.830.914.331.01
1.350.490.660.57o.575.323.044.023.192.897.431.401.792.542.264.237.500.80
Ica]lmmol/L)
o.a41.551.061-201.551.150.931.662.554.415.501.961.720.950.570.931.620.36o.571.530.840.852.200.741.130.350.56o.410.502.001.321.641.29
't.32
0.75
'I .031.501.302.602.300.60
tMsl(mmol/L)
12.8213.0410.257.172.3511.517.497.444.172.572.20
20.8820.3816.319.949.4810.8712.1813.67
't5.134.779.8413.267.168.883.984.783.402.4619.8217.3618.8414.129.979.9712.6211.5610.519.287.4710.598.08
lNal(mmol/L)
0.28o.420.4{t1.001.740.200.140.160.23o.771.51
0.60o.710.81
1.001.953.380.160.190.34o.20o.321.320.200.180.100.090.240.280.600.641.122.203.O2
4.17o.25o.28o.440.641 .152.660.14
tKllmmol/L)
8.526.546.344.03o.726.845.213.71
1.530.790.5,|
8.328.569.377.85s.684.42
't2.4011.308.01
6.787.415.195.425.644.344.323.432.387.328.317.926.684.863.258.606.894.204.922.863.386.84SAR
Page277
BârossâBarossaBerosseBarossa
BarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBerossaBarossaBarossa
BarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBerôssaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaReq¡on
2011112002
1911212002
2011112002
1911?J200219112120021911212002
19t12t200219112J200219t12t2002191122002191121200219/12t200219t12t2002191122002191't21200219t12t200219t't2J20021911212002
191121200220t111200220t11t200220/111200220111/200220t11t2002
20t11t200220t1112002201111200220t11/2002201111200220t11t20022011112002201111200220ñ11200220111120022011
31n/200231
31t7t2002
31m2002Date
Sampl¡ng
MainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMa¡nsMa¡ns
MeinsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMains
MainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMa¡ns
MainsMa¡nsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMains
lrrigationWater
444444444444444444444444444444444444444444
GypsumAppl¡cation
(Vha)
10010010010010050505050505010
10101010
'10100100100100100100505050505050101010
10
't010
'10010010010010010050
Distancefrom
Dr¡pper(cm¡
504030
17.55
60504030
17.5560504030
17.5560504030
17.55
60504030
17.5560504030
17.5560504030
17.55
60lcm)
Depth
3.202.821.232.851.82
'1.571.4s1.902.283.111.151.200.93o.420.581.003.913.903.602.501.71
2.502.252.192.OO
1.601.302.502.681 .191.35
't.151.431.502.022.O1
1.891.551.482.O51.68
ECfdS/m)
o.240.301.24o.27o.44o.230.190.130.11
0.16o.240.500.16o.233-O2
0.950.1 I
0.11
0.11
0.130.18
o.210.03
0.160.'150.160.060.040.160.180.080.13o.o70.130.090.050.100.050.050.030.040.06
AmdL
o.o90.09o-12o.200.300.050.040. 10
0.16o.170.230.060.13o.170.080.070.060.100.090.08o.t10.160.330.040.050.11o.140.160.280.09o.200.130.090.080.09o.070.060.080.16o.26o.27o.o7
Bmo/L
175.31156.4254.74
108.41285.8342.3540.4241.9177.50252.21
328.5121.6846.8049.5623.8939.6084.O7
286.59268.88213.93180.8579.34204.4875.6988.9278.6166.7265.37
242.3135.2953.7165.5088.66
205.6499.23
'I t s.3170.5788.66
1s1.28
1 10.38451.8452.66
Camc/L
0.00o.oo
o.o20.100.t lo.o2o.o2o.o20.o20.050.090.040.040.o70.040.060.100.030.010.040.050. 13
o.20o.040.110.070.11o.22o.280.1s0.19o.170.110.180.160.000.010.060.04o.140.o7o.o2
Cumq/L
0.080.16o.420.080.15o.o70.08o.o2o.o2o.o2o.120.340.000.012.830.340.03-0.01
-0.01-0.010.010.010.060.020.010.01
o.0lo.o20.05o.030.01
0.040.020.050.03-0.040.01
-0.04-0.04-0.03-0.01-0.04
Femq/L
31.3937.7034.2580.80171 .05
8.938.578.879.533't.4466.595.1 1
5.865.O2
3.448.4712.4335.7541.0342.8644.4156.38
't28.9413.87
'15.8617.2220.1129.U91.246.637.107.449.5918.1535.51
15.8318.6323.'1643.92
124.121 19.3510.18
K mc/L
46.8839.6417.7438.1150.821s.1 1
15.3516.9439.52118.61
71.318.17
21.O922.398.6510.3720.o278.2970.7154.8451.0029.2551.5824.5629.6329.6927.4728.5166.5713.3625.4129.4235.2647.7567.5025.9230.5019.9723.2834.0837.1717.26
Mgmo/L
o.o70.050.14o.251.30-o.o2-0.02-o.o2-0.01-0.010.10-0.02-o.o2-0.010.050.190.120.11
o.o70.040.11
-0.011.21
-0.01-0.010.00-0.01-0.010.61
-0.010.000.050.130.540.340.01
-0.01-o.o2-0.010.180.92-o.o2
Mnmo/L
446.65388.02177.24179.20256.66307.75267.94240.O4243.22s58.15308.49211.8618s.261 14.3155.53
93.97514.28537.62478.86390.37
286.67
67.33
246.36
392.54391.85348.99268.09198.41287.62247-15195.35156.s7131.6180.7154.65
335.8s340.82268.32238.28128.1930.61318.74
Namc/L
0.650.31o.23
't.063.370.650.380.270.360.981.830.660.81
0.690.360.300.361.931.370.91
0.601.994.520.831.13o.470.401.3:t1.990.935.616.330.520.460.48o.280.19o.240.302.'t51.540. 18
P
mc¡/L
127.41
196.1296.21
191 .14392.76119.47
'108.5194.72
1 18.87301.31379.9487.06
1 12.8973.589.68
'17.4341.10108.23136.01
190.08269.17169.70314.78150.45186.86
''t61 .89127.05122.20332.7299.78121.67127.74133.49156.14228.33182.75235.03161.27
'196.64218.93452.58160.33
smq/L
o.o70.060.020.050.090.030.030.020.040.080.090.010.o20.04o.o20.030.040.080.o7o.o70.0s0.040.130.05o.o70.04
0.060.050.04o.o4o.o7o.120.05
Znmo/L
o.o40.04o.120.05o.o7o.o70.10o.o70.07
4.373.90
'1.372.707.131.061.01
1.051.936.298.200.541.171.240.600.992.'to7.156.715.344.511.985. 10
1.892.221.961.661.636.050.88
't.341.632.213.775.132.482.881.762.21
2.7511.271.31
lcal(mmoul)
1_931.63o.731.572.090.620.630.701.634.882.930.340.87o.920.360.43o.823.222.912.262.101.202.121.011.221.221.151.172.74
1.451.962.781.071.25o.820.96
't.401.53o.71
IMs]lmmol/L)
0.551.051.21
19.4316.88
1 1.16
7.717.79
13.3911.6510.4412.3215.5813.429.228.064.972.422.934.0922.3723.3920.8316.9810.7212.4717.O717.O4
't 5.1811.ô68.6312.5110.758.506.81
5.723.5'l2.3814.61
14.8211.6710.365.581.33
13.86
INa]lmmo /L)
o.800.960.882.O74.370.23o.22o.230.240.801.700.130.150.130.09o.22o.320.911.051.101.141.443.300.35
0.400.480.591.123.173.050.26
IKlfmmol/L)
0.410.440.510.752.33o.170.18o.200.250.460.91
7.747.185.333.773.6810.339.107.91
Õ-5J
4.664.O29.845.653.382.482.462.396.957.547.566.606.014.6410.039.198.51
6.965.154.228.995.504.O42.991.470.857.767.297.265.A22.740.379.75SAR
Page 278
BerosseBarossaBarossaBârossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBerossaBarossaBarossâBarossaBarossaBarossaBerossâBarossa
BarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaFisure 7-3
BarossaBarossaBârossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossa
BarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBerossaBarossaBarossa
BarossaReoion
22t11t200122,111200122J111200122J1112001
22111/200122t111200122J111200122t11t20012211'U2001221't11200122t11t200122111/200122t't11200'l22J1'U2001221't1/20012211't/2001221't1t20012211'U200122J't112001
22111/2001
22J11/2001
15141200315141200s15t4t200315/4t20031514t200315t4t200315t412003
1514/2003't51412003
15/4t20031514120031514/20031
1
1s|412003
'1514/2003151412003
'15141200319112J2002
SamplingDate
MainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMains
Mains
MainsMa¡ns
MainsMainsMainsMains
MainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMains
Mains
lrrigationWater
88
888II8II8IIIIII888I
4444444
44
4444444444
GypsumApplication
(Vha)
100100
't 00100100100100505050505050501010101010
1010
10010010010010010050
5050
505050101010101010100
Distancefrom
Dripper(cm)
65554535251556555453525155
6555453525155
60504030
17.55
6050
3017.5
560504030
17.55
60
Depthlcml
2.O82.111.381.142-O81.702.65
't.28't.441.362.151.541.782.651.571.683.101.501.582.823.00
3.363.242.821.752.232.O52.222.45
1.542.182.55
'1.651.2A0.790.73o.771.003.65
ECld9m)
-0.01-0.010.040.090.010.000.010.000.00o.o20.00o.o00.000.000.000.010.01
o.o70.02o.o20.01
o.21o.20o.22o.17o.24o.27o.200.19
0.18o.260.300.13o.'t20.160.350.13o.240.16
AImq/L
0.08o.080.070.100.130.220.27o.140.090.190.30o.320.300.290.050.07o.120.350.300.3Í¡0.29
0.110.110.150.180.260.410.08
o.120.08
o.20o.270.40o.o70.14o.t l0.060.050.060.11
B
mo/L
60.7694.8934.t062.01
297.OO
224.71575.7934.6971.7939.03111.771 10.96252.97539.4429.8630.3232.9953.62145.'17456.01606.47
206. I 6
't85.84'176.66114.42207.19242.4964.7473.48
56.76120.81226.0642.1843.0938.9650.s556.6343.12
221.26
Camo/L
o.o20.160.030.050.050. t3o.o70.050.150.090.120.110.150.010.04o.120.140.050.100.09
0.000.000.000.030.050.110.000.00
o.o2o.o70.1 1
0.050.01
0.060.110. 18
0.14-0.01
Cumo/L
-o.24-o.25-o.o7-0.01-0.10-0.12-o.20-o.12-0.24-0.11-o.23-o.12-o.'12-0.23-o.12-o.12-o.24-0.14-0.10-o.20-o.22
0.050.060.080.030.060.110.04o.04
0.030.050. 10
0.040.040.060.130.05o.140.06
Femo/L
4.329.977.90
22.',t960.6475.0393.854.917.685.438.3318.8233.2362.O46.169.286.3411.6524.2838.6869.88
26.0334.1843.4266.45
1 18.35120.638.36
1
9.50
9.9328.3969.206.505.093.807.989.159.0126.82
K mo/L
18.3027.31
10.1618.9065.1756.25
'100.3115.2327.1617.5449.6357.1994.54
'| 19.s71 1.3811.5513.0525.7670.46163.86149.01
56.7649.1744.1932.0560.3633.1 521.8326.1 5
30.5067.6077.8917.8820.6316.3421.5824.3022.6861.05
Mgmo/L
-0.1s-0.21
-0.m-0.09-0.10-0.11
-0.19-0.11
-0.19-0.10-o.2-0.11-0.1 1
-0.2-0.10-0.10-o.22-0.13-0.09-0.20-o.21
0.080.06o.'170.31o.721.080.000.03
0.010.040.100.01
o.o2o.12o.620.70o.440.1
,|
Mnmc/L
385.58400.90274.13193.29146.0871.1040.32
272.45437.95286.43390.11184.2399.8662.34
354.28357.76339.10276.94129.2'l83.3053.57
475.'t347't.O4426.48242.78224.45132.56439.23428.16
273.98315.02281.72325.95222.79136.92104.3699.3878.17
481.16
Namq/L
-0.05-0.060.070.030.010.41o.a20.290.03o.o2-0.o10.080.050.54o.o20.02-o.o20.010.110.130.19
0.180.090.140.391.392.90o.23o.12
0.11o.471.630.200.11
o.170.160.180.191.25
P
mq/L
174.44283.83138.14166.88409.12289.95579.76201 .90255.43176.883s2.80231.40348.04597.92179.43197.36202.O4
203.49232.88565.24661.81
98.88115.94222.79
'191 .s2329.23299.67142.2s143.99
92.74186.38279.17108.4684.0320.14
'16.5719.s714.15
't22.64
Smq/L
0.03o.290.070.060. 13
0.06o.12o.o70.130.07o.o20.060.020.060.010.12o.020.o20.030.030.06
0.030.050.050.030.050.100.01o.o2
0.000.o20.030.010.000.000.01o.o20.02o.o7
Znmo/L
1.522.370.851.557.415.61
14.37o.871.790.972.792.776.31
'13.46o.750.760.821.343.6211.3815.13
5.144.644.412.8s5.',17
7.051.621.83
1.423.01
5.641.051.08o.971.261.41
1.085.52
lcalfmmol/L)
0.751.120.420.782.642.3'l4.'t30.631.12o.722.O4
2.353.894.92o.470.480.541.062.906.746.13
2.332.O21.821.322.441.360.901.08
1-252.783.20o.740.850.670.89
'1.000.932.51
tMsìlmmol/L)
16.7717.4411.928.416.353.091.75
't't.8719.0512.4616.978.0't4.342.7115.41
''15.5614.7512.O55.623.622.33
20.6720.4918.5510.569.765.77
19.1 1
18.62
11.9213.7012.25
'14.189.695.964.544.323.4020.93
lNallmmol/L)
o.21o.26o.200.571.551.922.400.130.20o.14o.210.480.851.590.16o.240.160.300.620.991.79
0.670.871.11
1.703.033.09o.21
0.31024
0.250.731.77o.170.t30.10o.20o.23o.230.69
tKt(mmol/L)
9.3310.595.51
2.001 .10
o.419.7211.179.577.723.541.360.6313.9914.O2
12.657.782.200.850.51
7.567.947.445.'173.531.99
12.O5
10.92
7.29s.694.1210.606.994.653.102.782.407.38SAR
Page 279
BârôssâBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBerossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBerossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBerossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBerossaBarossaBarossaBarossaReoion
31n1200231n200231n200231u/20023ln200231n/2002171412002
1
1
171412002171412002
17t4t200217t4t20021
'I
171412002171412æ2171412002171412ñ21714120021714/2002171412002171412002
17141200220t't2t2001201't21200120112J2001
20/12J200120t1z20o120112J2001201121200120t12J20012011212001201121200120t12/200120112120012011212001
201121200120t12J2001201121200120t1?,20012011212001
SamplingDate
MainsMainsMainsMainsMa¡ns
MainsMainsMaÍnsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMa¡nsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMa¡nsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMa¡ns
MainsMainsMainsMains
úlainsMains
lrr¡gat¡onWater
8III8I8I8I8IIIII88III8III8IIII88II8IIIIIII
GypsumApplication
lVha)
10l010
101010100
'r00100100100100505050505050
'1010
10101010
1001001001001001005050505050501010
'lo101010
Distancefrom
Dr¡pper(cm)
60504030
17.5560504030
17.55
60504030
17.5560504030
17.55
60504030
17.s560504030
17.55
60504030
17.55
Depth(cm)
1.991.752.722.711.252.453.412.O31.492.21
1.652.542.282.482.654.374.986.051.151.270.900.812.010.491.150.960.841.393.202.141 .191.16
'1.281.091.742.383.552.472.091.602.122.15
EC(dS/m)
o.050.090.05o.o20.07o.28o.291.21
0.140.190.11
0.t10.100.09o.17o.14o.270.100.180.gt0.10o.120.180.01
0.010.01o.o2o.o2o.o20.06o.05o.o50.060.030.000.020.oo0.0,|
0.000.000.00
AImc/L
o.20o.170.13o.o90.150.12o.090.160.220.26o.320.16o.12o.17o.320.481.61
o.23o.230.100.090.240.100.100.080.110.150.2'lo.240.090.03o.170.340.360.630.10o.t60.180.100.100.12
B
mo/L
145.60429.91531.60372.40583.88163.84109.0278.01179.29195.64524.2486.76107.'11
't18.20325.34361.55702.2057.8'l52.3652.6745.7780.6939.96
263.31
165.2698.5272.72294.24M2.5528.2425.2260.8931.46147.35912.7950.7861.8887.47103.12212.97588.47
Camc/L
o.o20.040.060.030.060.o70.00-0.01o.o10.070.03o.070.040.090.180.11o.o7o.o9o.o70.010.180.040.060.11
-0.01-0.01-0.010.030.09o.o20.010.010.010.010.070.110.020.020.03o.o2o.120.04
Cumo/L
o.o7-0.04-0.06-0.09-0.04-0.10-0.040.000.76-0.03-0.01-0.o7-0.08-0.09-0.08-0.04-0.06-0.160.00o.040.180.00-0.o2o.ol-o.12-o.12-o.12-0.1 1
-o.23-0.24-0.59-0.09-0.58-0.06-0.09-0.24-0.24-0.24-o.23-o.12-0.24-0.23
Femc/L
11.619.31
f 1.11
12.3125.O448.9327.8034.2244.6576.27105.93154.6912.50
't4.'t119.5441.6295.05161.441 1.156.97
1 1.618.6215.6515.7532.903Í|.3338.6651.86151.47166.687.517.4011.829.1141.70
226.81
8.934.5210.6816.4420.o719.87
K mo/L
44.5259.90126.331 18.94
't21.6975.2149.4430.1020.3840.4240.0150.2234.71
41.9148.52
141.13155.85229.4628.9124.6522.7220.'1442.6120.9867.8146.4826.6020.5260.6862.21
10.5110.1925.4218.8671.09
256.8820.3829.5142.9761.9835.4056.24
Mgmq/L
-0.03-o.o20.16o.670.870.68-0.02-0.010.01
o.26o.722.06
-0.10-0.10-o.o70.010.010.62-0.02-0.010.450.050.160.18o.17
-0.01-0.04-0.09-0.16-0.19-0.49-0.10-0.49-0.09-0.07-0.13-o.20-0.20-0.160.48-o.12-0.18
Mnmo/L
319.22226.14226.86126.9082.7932.05517.76273.57208.26281.8295.3839.79397.06406.82450.43567.47604.44503.80146,67186.711 t 9.7811't.24302.3781.556't2.2154A.54
406.12300.01210.59105.59308.54246.77359.29243.'t2274.77203.52214.56154.3269.9695.67
'104.9389.33
Namo/L
0.050.060.11o.070.t10. t0o.210.020.060.090.831.750.140.110.140.050.311.430.110.070.180.080.130.160.01
-0.010.000.060.610.90
-0.180.01
-0.13o.o7o.724.42-0.05-o.06-o.o2o.020.010.07
P
mo/L
313.60319.98643.79631.720.00
574.84160.05107.06158.04334.88294.98560.30217.86241.O9230.'12500.82522.53697.6756.1063.8521.2436.2548.5120.07
't25.461 13.83108.86144.23452.O2507.51127.91122.4024A-87152.87347.O4
o.oo189.1 1
157.12
'| 16.58237.2821s.81553.52
smc/L
0.060.08o.14o.170.1 1
0.180.080.03o.o20.050.05o.22o.o70.070.090.13o.140.40o.o20.01
0.010.010.030.010.0so.o20.01
0.010.080.08o.270.05o.22-0.010.000.080.05o.o70.050.030.110.09
Znmo/L
3.013.6310.7313.269.29
'14.574.092.721.954.474.8813.082.162.672.958.129.O217.521.441.31
1.31
1.142.011.006.574.'t22.461.817.U11.04o.700.631.520.783.68
22.771.271.542.142.57s.31
14.68
fcal(mmol/L)
2.OO
2.465.204.895.013.092.031.240.84
',l.681.652.O7
1.431.722.005.816.41
9.441.191.01
0.930.831.750.862.791.91
1.090.842.502.560.43o.421.060.782.9210.57o.a41.21
1.772.551.462.31
tMsl(mmol/L)
13.899.849.875.523.601.39
22.5211.909.0612.264.151.73
17.27
't7.7019.5924.6826.2921.916.384.125.214.84
'13.153.5526.6323.86
't7.6713.059.164.5913.4212.4715.6310.58
't2.138.859.336.743.044.164.56
lNallmmol/L)
o_30o.24o.280.310.641.250.71
0.88't.14
'1.952.713.960.320.360.s01.062.434.13o.290.180.30o.220.40o.400.840.850.991.333.874.260.'190.190.30o.231.O7
s.80o.23o.22
0.420.510.51
tRlmmol/Ll
3.982.471.300.950.339.105.985.434.941.62o.449.118.448.81
6.626.694.223.935.333.473.456.782.608.709.719.378.002.921.25
12.5912.189.738.464.721.536.434.061.531.841.750.94SAR
Page 280
BarossaBarossaBarossa
Barossa
BarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBârossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBerossaBarossaBarossa
BarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossa
Barossa
BarossaBarossa
BarossaReqion
191121200219t12/2002191121200219t12/2002191121200219t12t2002191121200219t1212002
't9t12/200219t1ù200219n?,200219t12/2002
201'l
201't11200220/1112002201't'U2002201't'U20022011'11200220111120022011'U200220t11t20022011'U20022011'112002
20t11t200220/11120022011112002
201111200220t11120022011112002
31t712002xnt2002s1n1200231n1200231n200231n1200231m200231
31m200231n200231n/2002
SamplingDate
MeinsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMa¡nsMainsMa¡ns
MainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMains
lrrigationWater
8IIII88I8I8I8III8II88
8II88I8II88IIII8
I8III
GypsumApplication
Itlha)
5050505050501010
10
't010
10100100100
't 00100100505050505050
'lo1010101010
100
't 00100100100100505050505050
D¡stancef rom
Dripper(cm)
60504030
17.5560504030
17.5560504030
17.55
60504030
17.5560504030
17.5560504030
17.55
60504030
17.55
Depth(cm)
2.551.972.773.353.O74.081.351.200.55o.76o.77o.782.B',l,
2342.101.36
't.402.921.601.601.351.582.903.051.171.75
't.58't.722.502.703.082.521.992.O21.582.592.192.322.48
'1.942.O42.54
ECfdS/m)
0.190.51
o.21o.42o.32o.170.290.15o.a70.680.50o.24o.120.130.180.690.730.14o.780.100.330.150.160.11o.14o.l10.060.180.13o.17o.120.11
0.050.08o.o20.08o.'t40.14o.120.04-0.010.04
AI
mo/L
0.060.11o.230.37o.290.390.13o.170.1 |
0. 10
o.080.080.15o.120. t6o.25o.2a0.340.080.100.19o.320.400.460.150.18o.120.10o.140.16o.140. 10
0.09o.220.290.330.080.13o.240.29o.270.35mq/L
94.2453.93108.33218.19286.97s86.4361.3588.4336.3259.7775.50132.72114.7297.9779.41
57.44163.92524.8035.3342.A647.17
1 21 .66503.70508.8649.92
155.91
172-75326.21s07.30575.09174.81137.73123.16218.1 9
194-22557.2169.2586.71
't 08.041 16.65201.624AO.79
Camq/L
-0.01o.o20.03o.o30.05o.090.010.04o.o20.040.03o-o70.00o.020.040.030.060.090.030.030.04o.o20.050. t30.010.040.290.030.080.'150.00o.oo0.010.01
0.060.080.02o.020.030.030.060.08
Cumq/L
0.06o.290.060.130.120.100.150.050.33o.200.080.10-o.o2-0.010.000.10o.230.030.510.010.140.150.030.01
o.o30.000.010.020.00o.o2-0.06-0.08-0.04-0.02-0.04-0.o7-0.06-0.08-0.08-0.04-0.05-0.09
Femo/L
19.1417.4326.6334.2765.98172.O79.988.934.4414.8422.3018.9225.8022.8424.1027.5279.66157.7011.8211.439.0910.7744.34
139.5910.2713.5513.5310.2539.0055.9627.2228.4633.7869.56132.81
144.2911.08
't2.0612.2711.2240.8190.99
K moiL
35.9020.9142.AO89.02101.84
'126.5629.6937.11
't 3.3615.697.6928.O7
47.9138.4028.9023.4655.8082.6716.3919.9222.8853.84137.41114.7523.6164.8255.4741.27153.731 34.1 656.9642.5735.7858.0643.O258.0827.9437.4453.2558.5771.6780.40
Mgmo/L
0.000.000.000.03o.o70.390.00o.020.08o.23o.700.19-0.020.00-0.040.040.231.76-0.02-0.02-o.o20.o20.051 .15-0.010.03o.23o.521.391.74o.o2-0.010.000.030.081.29-o.o7-o.o7-0.06-o.02-o.o2o.26
Mnmq/L
461.69363.02494.88489.57334.15263.71197.481M.5163.8285.6874.1091.28501.27454.1 3
398.292't3.94178.72147.44324.34316.64262.17217.25193.24181.24206.53217.23159.1761 .9956.0659.04
422.65370.70306.21
'186.9565.8749.62
417.19421.49424.26281.23205.65114.44
Namq/L
0.31o.220.673.090.902.O40.16o.170.1 1
0.150.310.300.820.481.330.601.332.370.35o.340.36o.441.12
't.96o.410.54o.52o.571.Ol1.01o.180.110.080.101.381.890.070.060.t10.110.401.32
P
mq/L
245.08150.74258.39433.14449.73727.44165.57157.4139.0727.2735.7058.24157.14205.39201.12147.55283.89571.43125.73151 .83150.78236.49631.9s6't7.37157.80317.O4252.18379.68581.11591.82134.38141.66243.22362.02280.O7583.48206.57231.86269.74266.56336.80539.59
Smo/L
0.030.o20.040.050.08o.120.o20.040.010.06o.o2o.050.040.06o.o20.030.050.130.020.01
o.o20.050.100.09o.o20.040.050.050.100.150.09o.o70.070.090.08o.230.040.040.060.05o.o70.16
Znmo/L
2.351.352.70s.447.1614.631.532.21
0.911.491.883.312.862.44
't.981.434.0913.090.881.O7
1.183.04
'12.57't2.701.253.894.318.1412.6614.354.363.443.O75.444.85
'13.901.732.162.702.915.0312.OO
Icallmmol/L)
1.480.861.763.664.195.211.221.530.550.65o.321 .151.971.58
'1.190.972.303.400.670.820.942.2'l5.654.720.972.672.283.346.325.522.341.751.472.391.772.391 .151.542.192.41
2.953.31
tMsl(mmol/L)
20.0815.7921.5321.2914.5311.478.596.292.783.733.223.9721.8019.7517.329.317.776.4114.11
13.7711.409.458.417.A88.989.45
2.702.442.5718.3816.1213.328. 13
2.872.1618.1518.3318.4512.238.955. ls
lNal(mmol/L)
0.490.460.680.881.694.400.26o.230.110.38o.570.480.660.580.620.702.O44.030.300.29o.23o.28
'I .'t 33.57o.260.350.350.261.001.43o.70o.730.861.783.403.690.280.310.31
0.291.042.33
tKlfmmol/L)
10.2610.6310.197.064.312.58s. t83.252.302.552.171.889.929.859.736.013.081.58
11.3110.o27.444.121.97
'1.896.033.692.700.800.560.587.'to7.086.252.911.11
0.5310.709.53I5.303.171.32SAR
Page 281
lcLaren ValeMcLaren ValeMcLaren
Mclaren ValeMclaren ValeMcLaren ValeMclaren ValeMclaren ValeMclaren Vale
ValeMclaren ValeMclaren ValeMclaren ValeMcLaren ValeMclaren ValeFigure 8-1
Barossa
BarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossa
BarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBerossaBarossaBarossaBarossaBarossaReoion
8t5t200281512002
asl20029t'U2002911120029t1t20029t1t200291112002
911
7111120017t11t20017t11120017111120017111120017111 1
7t1'U2001
1514120031514/2003
'|
'|
'|15141200315t4t200315t4t200315141200315/412003
't5/4/200315/41200315/4t2003151412003
't1
15/41200315t4t2003
19t1212002191121200219t12t200219112J2@219112120021911212002
SamplingDate
rtedNon-lrrioatedNon-lrrioated
rtedNon-lrr¡qatedNon-lrrioated
Non-lniqated
atedNon-lrriqated
ated
Non-lrr¡oated
MainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMa¡nsMa¡nsMa¡ns
Me¡nsMains
MainsMainsMainsMeinsMa¡ns
lrrigationWater
I88III8IIIIIIII8III8III
GypsumAppl¡cation
100100100100100100505050505050
't01010101010
100100100100100100
fromDripper
3017.5
560504030
17.556555453525155
60504030
17.55
60504030
17.55
60504030
17.55
60504030
't7.55
Depthlcm)
o.260.541.930.390.350.310.290.30o.570.380.350.350.29o.740.450.68
4.11
3.713.722.853.753.222.853.013.292.443.952-781.690.940.680.981.21
0.943.203. 13
2.501.752.403.90
ECld9m)
0.330.t00.29o.020.010.080.030.16o.250.030.010.000.040.000.03o.20
0.18o.27o.210.400.18o.230.'17
o.17o.220.43o.20o.220.150.t11.24o.22o.2ao.24o.270.150.19o.78o.260.14
AImo/L
o.o70.040.26o.120.11
o.120.07o.140.19o.12o.140.17o.17o.240.21
0.36
0.16o.120.18o.270.360.360.090.090.290.470.45o.42o.080.16o.120.070.060.050.080.o70.140.23o.2ao.32
Bmq/L
8.3928.35
2A7.O1
22.0619.5717.679.1317.6139.2924.3424.5521.7817.1256.1025.3239.13
2 t 6.18
't76.91233.66147.96s09.10591.3792.09105.19207.89174.99393.30449.9351.42u.4833.4079.85100.7666.30
1 39.1 6143.01
140.2792.88
287.16524.28
Camq/L
o-o1
-0.120.03-0.01-0.01-0.010.000.000.01
-0.01o.o10.010.08o.120.17o.o7
-0.0'|0.000.03o.o20.080.100.00o.o20.030.100.18o.140.030.010.04o.o90.14o.170.010.010.01
0.050.040.08
Cumo/L
0.10-0.090.01
-o.24-0.12-o.07-0.10o.220.39-0.10-0.11-o.12-0.18-0.08-o.170.15
0.010.040.030.060.060.10o.o2o.o20.040.10o.o70.080.06o.o20.85o.120.160.08o.120.060.060.160.090.07
Fe
mo/L
4.2415.52
130.547.158.047.67s.1015.9240.387.O27.156.976.544.4A9.81
69.98
30.4031.3943.8965.01
169.1 I139.4817.7014.4720.2918.1668.0212A-749.497.O45.99
't 9.8227.9819.9124.7523.6724.7422.7067.5713t.99K mc/L
2.826.1956.739.467.676.872.834.758.519.679.538.495.63
25.957.2010.44
83.8466.9077.8735.4094.9946.6937.6241.5886.2199.64152.76100.9324.9617.0614.0926.9543.4541.3454.3255.1051.2035.6767.8384.00
Mgmo/L
-0.020.305.20-0.17-0.08-0.o7-0.10-0.09-o.07-0.10-0.06-o.o7-o.21-0.09-0.120.00
0.100.040.1 1
o.141.472.73-o.02-0.030.040.390.941.210.010.00o.lo1.O72.28
't.060.050.01
0.030.09o.120.00
Mnmq/L
12.6226.29
123.9829.5827.7726.3412.6628.O4
42.7531.3631.2730.9326.2966.9737.75s3.06
593.1 4565.61
568.50292.78339.0640.85539.69563.89529.77393.76447.26143.19266-64156.98102.201 14.18121.3590.96
516.21528.47409.55269.40246.62399.42
Namo/L
o.02
-0.050.520.080.07o-120.030.100.1Io.230.360.330.080.48-0.040.31
o.200.t1o.170.400.792.330.'t20.110.18o.370.612.130.090.10o.120.190.24o.17o.23o.41o.M0.461.042.68
P
mo/L
9.4638.51
275.O539.7335.8332.',t712.O79.9817.7327.2426.1223.2317.6130.5810.3325.98
157.34171.7',|,
365.67284.23697.51572.88
'168.69199.62377.95273.85499.64518.20109.6463.3828.8037.7047.4537.9314232256.31280.1 I206.43442.25703.71
smo/L
o_04
-0.03o.10o.o70.000.00o.02
-0.01-0.010.01
o.o70.030.19o.o2o.20-0.01
0.01o.o20.010.01
0.070.160.01
0.00o.o20.030.030.060.050.000.010.030.030.040.060.050.060.030.060.08
Znmo/L
o.210.71
7.160.550.49o.440.23o.440.980.61
0-61
0.540.431.400.630.98
5.394.4'l5.833.6912.7014.752.302.625.194.379.8111.231.280.860.831.992.511.653.473.s73.502.327.1613.08
lcal(mmol/L)
o.120.252.330.390.32o.2a0.120.200.350.400.390.35o.231.O7
0.300.43
3.452.753.201.463.911.921.55
s.554.106.284.'151.03o.700.581.111.79
't.702.232.272.11
1.472.793.46
tMsllmmol/L)
0.551.145.391.291.2'l
'1.150.551.221.861.361.361.351.142.911.642.3',1
25.8024.6024.7312.7414.751.78
23.4724.5323.O417.1319.456.2311.606.834.454.975.283.96
22.4522.9917.8111.7210.7317.37
lNallmmol/L)
0.110.403.340. 18
o.21o.200.13o.41
1.030.180.180.18o.170.11
0.251.79
0.780.801.121.664.333.570.45o.47o.520.461.743.29o.240.180.150.510.720.510.630-61
0.630.581.733.38
tKt(mmoUL)
0.96
1.751.331.351.350.941.531.61
1.361.361.421.41
1.851.70
'1.95
8.689. 19
8.235.6'l3.62o.44
1 1.9711.747.805.894.851.597.63s.463.742.822.552.'t69.409.527.526.O23.404.27SAR
Page 282
Mclaren ValeMcLaren ValeMclaren ValeMcLaren ValeMclaren ValeMcLaren ValeMcL"aren ValeMcLaren ValeMclaren ValeMcLaren ValeMclaren Vale
ValeMcLaren ValeFigure 8-2
Mclaren ValeMcLaren
McLaren ValeMcLaren
Mcl-aren ValeMclaren ValeMclaren ValeMclaren Vale
ValeMcLarenMclaren ValeMclaren ValeMclaren ValeMclaren Vale
McLaren Vale
McLaren ValeMcLaren ValeMclaren Vale
McLarenVale
McLaren ValeReqion
7111/20017111120017t11t2001711',U2001
7111120017t't1t20017t11120017111120017t11t20017111120017t11t20017t't1t20017111/2001
211412003
2114/200321t4t2003211412003
21141200321t4t2003141'U200314/v2003't4111200314111200314t1t200314t1t2003
20t1't1200220t11t200220t11t2002201't11200220t11t2@220t't1t200231n2002
31n/2002s1nÞoo231ni200231n12002
81512002e/5120028t512002
SamplingDate
lrrioatedlrrioatedlrriqatedlrrioatedlrrioaledlnioatedlrrioatedlniqatedfrrioatedlrríoated
riqatedlrrioated
atedNon-lrriqated
Non-lrrioatedated
Non-lrriqated
atedNon-lrriqatedNon-lrrioated
atedNon-lrriqated
atedNon-lrriqatedlon-lrrioated
lon-lrriqated
Non-lrrioated
Non-lrriqatedNon-lrrioated
lnigationWater
GypsumApplication
(t/ha)
505050505050
'1010
101010
1010
D¡stancefrom
Dr¡pperlcm)
55453525155655545352515
5
60504030
17.5560504030
17.5560504030
17.55
4050
3017.5
560605040
Depth(cm)
2.O1
2.O92.451.330.850.742.O',!
1.851.521.081.110.650.67
1.440.550.64't.o72.OA
2.171.101.100.480.88
'L492.050.500.550.600.810.90
't.25o.42
0.69o.82o.930.32o.410.350.34
EC(dS/m)
o.o70.030.030.110.130.190.090.090.100.o20.160.09
0.16o.120.130.120.66o.320.140.110.110.08o.17o.23o.o70.080.060.06o.08o.320.11
0.030.15o.120.07o.o70.090. t1
AI
mq/L
o.130.17o.17o.24o.220.21
o.140.100.08o.120.32o.200.20
0.090.10o.120.130.16o.270.11
o.'t2o.140.150.180.270.100.100.11
0.130-t30.160.10
0.130.16o.270.090.100.11o.12
Bmo/L
264.60302.89492.94569.09122.6579.73't25.5496.6978.2941.9462.1533.0571.13
32.O4
38.4647.59108.58259.1 I354.8321.7252.5834.3177.O1
't 82.582A3.7928.9833.5035.9867.2477.68104.81
50.4831.96
73.29
't12.13
't30.8224.1427.3'l22.4623.16
Camo/L
o.0f0.03o-05o.280.090.160.050.040.09o.17o.320.040.13
0.000.010.010.o2o.o2o.o20.000.01
o.0l0.010.01
0.02o.o2o.o20.04o.o20.030.060.01
0.01
o.030.060.000.010.010.01
Cumo/L
-o.24-o.14-o.20-o.22o.0l0.04o.o20.000.010.01
-o.21
-0.010.03
0.01
o.010.01
0.010.060.10o.o20.02o.o20.040.05o.160.000.01
0.00o.ol0.050.45
-o.o2o.o0
-0.02o.o20.04-o.o2-0.03-0.01-o.o2
Femo/L
17.2921.4830.1 759.5651.1 1
51.5814.131t.699.705.493.9525.1312.35
7.088.1810.4519.8045.9668.61
6.759.8510.94
't6.7042.4075.41
7.388.369.181s.0026.5949.87
9.967.52
13.7835.3667.136.307.356.947.48
K mq/L
76.9964.8565.0545.5610.'126.0937.8022.2517.6914.4628.1 67.4727.98
'12.6314.6716.7932.7758.2647.148.8018.6012.11
22.O434.9440.501't.7013.1 I
13.0421.6320.1619.4912.30
22.O524.81
20-a49.7511.41
a.a28.41
Mgmo/L
-o.21-0.13-0.192.210.030.030.160.000.010.01
-0.18-0.060.00
0.050.09o.120.¿lÍl6.567.360.030.080.08o.202.438.380.040.11o.140.291.393.060.04
o.121 .192.O40.01
-0.04-0.03-0.04
Mnmo/L
130.041 17.99107.2483.6240.7841.78
293.09283.1 I259.30211.16
'.l73.9148.9343.62
37.2241.1245-4270.87
't08.73109.9186.18133.6636.0970.2292.98108.2862.7174.9877.5990.80
101 .31
I 4it.9535.57
48.2757.8934.6331.393í¡.5229.8029.80
Namo/L
0.654.690.291.8s4.32o.220.060.05o.2'l0.000.080.86
0.270.330.330.31o.28o.570.530.670.600.480.290.611.211.511.72
'L550.661.O2
0.600.49
0.33o.371.010.340.030.05o.05
Pmo/L
ssa.T7519.44s65.291 26.1 I56.32
202.41
't 94.43181.11107.4996.0916.3431.77
45.8349.0456.93122.82268.423s0.6156.27I ts.s246.62
103.16227.44261.8943.2646.1950.4587.05121.26133.3239.76
83.72135.48130.6234.2738.8333.4Ít29. ',l'
smo/L
o.050.050.05o.42-0.03-0.01-0.050.03o.o20.04o.070.04
-0.06
0.000.000.01
0.040.100.110.000.03o-o20.060.070.100.030.030.030.050.050.12
0.03o.o2
0.050.050.080.01
o.o2o.o20.01
Znmq/L
6.607.5612.3014.203.06
't.993.132.411.951.051.55o.a21.77
0.800.961.192.716.478.850.541.31
0.861.924.567.08o.720.840.901.681.942.62
1
0.80
1.832.803.260.600.680.560.58
[ca]lmmol/L)
3.172.672.681.87o.42o.251.550.920.730.591 .160.31
1 .15
o.520.600.691.352.401.940.360.770.500.911.441.670.480.90.540.890.830.800.51
0.911.O2
0.860.40o.470.360.35
IMs]lmmol/Ll
5.665.134.673.641.771.A212.7512.3211.289.197.562.131.90
1.621.791.983.084.734.743.755.811.573.0s4.O44.712.733.263.383.954.416.26
1.831.55
2.102.52
't.s11.37
'1.461.301.30
lNallmmol/L)
o.440.55o.771.521.31
1.320.360.300.25o.'140.100.640.32
0.180.21
o.270.511.181.750.170.250.280.431.081.930.19o.21o.230.380.681.280.19
0.350.901.720.160. 1I0.180.19
tKt(mmol/L)
1.81
1.61
0.910.951.21
5.896.756.897.174.602.001.11
1.41
1.431.441.531.591.463.944.031.3s1.821.651.592.492.782.422.462.653.39
1.301.36
1.271.29o.741.36
't.361.351.35SAR
Page 283
McLaren ValeMclaren Vale
McLaren ValeMcLaren Vale
ValeMcLaren ValeMclaren ValeMclaren ValeMclaren Vale
ValeMcLaren ValeMclaren ValeMclaren ValeMcLarenMclaren ValeMclaren Vale
Mcl"aren ValeMcLaren ValeMcLaren
Vale
McLaren ValeMclaren Vale
Mclaren ValeMclaren ValeMclaren ValeMclaren ValeMclaren ValeMclaren ValeMclaren ValeMclaren ValeMcLaren ValeMcLaren
McLaren Vale
McLaren ValeMclaren Vale
Reoion
8t5t2002815120028/5t20028t5t200281512002a5/2002ast2002815120028/51200281512002a5/20028t5t200281512002
8t5t20028t5t2002ust2002
9t1120029t1t20029t1t2002911
91112002
9t1t20029111200291112002
91112002st1t2002911
9t1t2002911120029t1t2002911120029t1120029t1t2002
7t11t20017111/20017t11t20017111120017111120017l'l
711112001
SamplingDate
lrr¡oatedlrríoated
lrrioatedlrrioate<
lrr¡oatedlrrioatedlrrioatedlrrioated
lrrioatedlrrioatetlniqatedlrrioatedlrrioatedlrrioateclnioated
lrrioatedlrrioateclrrioatedlrrioatedlrrioaledlrrioaterlrriqatedlrrioatedlrrioatedlrrioatedlrrioater
lrrìoatedlrrioatedlrrioatedlrrioatedlrrioatedlrriqated
lrr¡oated
lrrigationWater
GypsumAppl¡cat¡on
10010010010050505050505010101010
't010
100100100
't 00100
'1005050505050501010101010101001001001001@10010050
Distancefrom
Dripperlcm)
4030
17.5560504030
17.5560504030
17.55
60504030
17.55
60504030
17.55
60504030
17.55
655545352515
565
Depth(cm)
2.4A2.412.253.691.951.812.242.843.624.702.O51.621.58
't.341.902.361.401.793.153.152.722.991.792.'t51.922.892.713.621.812.O23.652.321.060.921.511.74'1.755.452.0s0.980.972.O5
EC(dS/m)
0.14o.210.30o.120.180.06o.140.130.100.080.050.070.13o.120.10o.200.030.01
0.050.060.31
0.190.01o.o20.020.10o.230.10o.o20.050.040.030.010.020.000.000.000.500.08o.120.10-0.01
AImg/L
0.150. 15
0.'170.220.110.110.16o.17o.21o.20o.o90.08o.o70.130.220.160.110.150.190.160.18o.200.100.120.110.1so.200.31
o.080.090.11o.270.23o.170.11o.120.t40.250.180.16o.200.'13
mo/L
529.73547.O1
748.682ß.51236.80384.17592.294æ.42794.88113.7572.6465.986f.84156.063Í¡8.05195.29294.94684.62763.81607.80568.25218.61266.66255.67526.2660t.17643.3097.36
1 14.98162.66420.6145.2947.73202.49231.03264i4350.71449.E9155.22124.32252.76
Camo/L
o_030.050.070.060.010.000.030.10o.030.040.000.000.050.030.030.03-0.01
-0.010.000.01
0.060.06-0.010.000.04o.o2-0.010.030.o00.000.00o.o20.060.10-0.010.030.030.110.08o.120.10-0.01
Cumq/L
-o.o7-0.o7-0.06-0.06-0.03-0.03-0.o2-o.o7-0.07-0.08-o.o4-0.040.01
-0.o2-0.02-o.o7-0.09-o.12-0.23-o.22-o.21
-o.20-o.12-0.23-o.12-o.22-o.21
-o.21
-0.1 1
-0.09-o.23-0.23-0.09-0.01-o.12-o.12-o.120.04-o.210.010.01
-o.24
Femo/L
24.4A45.1265.49150.5517.2518.3428.3049.6723.95
'138.5513.5311.0610.245.364.8352.O7
14.2720.2730.3539.6054.42
131 .41
15.5518.31
23.2848.0086.53
't44.991 1.55
'10.108.279.432.367.6115.5517.8822.1225.2249.7946.3863.8817.66
K mo/L
92.1 654.0827.4540.9178.0361.8663.2366.16202.4269.6433.9018.2420.71
2A3477.1329.6959.7270.49114.1282.9049.6557.4668.6574.O453.0768.5241.3151.5627.6422.5533.94't20.o723.8223.0573.0072.2462.8357.7940.8514.0610.7385.60
Mgmc/L
0.510.963.11
4.15o.060.100.38o.72-0.04-0.100.00-0.03-0.02-0.03-0.022.35o.'12-0.040.341.184.576.69o.'12-0.010.30't.206.09s.77-0.01-0.03-o.20-0.14-0.10-0.1 0o-o7o.02o.06o.260.870.41
0.01
-o.21
Mnmc/L
83.6454.6333.89115.27121.781 13.29105.59114.92264.22243.O9303.64263.94275.13231.75213.4079.2341.2142.6257.5568.3744.2185.52120.21
't48.141 18.68148.3673.69146.41256.94300.59324.25374.27
'156.85122.6764.2564.7758.3571.9841.2230.8539.31
126.88
Namqil
0.49o.2a0.532.28o.o40.040.060.060.612.200.040.020.10o.12o.320.59o.420.343.39
39.330.662.O20.33o.420.193.80o.372.47o.240.371.100.86o.271 .160.11
o.14o.32o.70o.080.534.560.09
P
mq/L
542.20s31.73504.80540.90339.1 1
293.73418.25s97.03643.24550.1 I198.33144.A7141.75143.96237.34324.05245.94342.70724.54723.44590.17524.27307.00362.33326.80593.1 4599.01576.21200.29221.82271.84636. t 1
46.3025.26
269.37286.O7300.31
371.52432.60143.3096.61
356.66
Smo/L
o.170.18o.220.24o.o70.060.190.190.180.160.05o.o2o.020.o20.080.190.o20.020.1 1
0.10o.17o.29o.020.060.060. 13
0.15o.21o.o20.010.040.o7-0.010.000.,l00.060.09-o.220.200.23-0.030.04
Znmo/L
12.0613.2213.6518.686.205.919.5914.741 1.6419.832.84
't.811.651.543.898.434.877.36
'17.o819.0615.1614.185.45.6.656.3813.1315.0016.052.432.874.0610.49
't.131 .195.065.766.598.7511.223.873.106.31
lcallmmol/L)
3.792.221 .13
't.683.212.542.602.728.332.861.39o.750.851.173.171.222.462.904.693. ',l,
2.O42.362.423.052.142.421.702.121.'t40.931.404.940.980.953.002.972.582.381.680.58o.443.52
tMsl(mmol/L)
3.642.38
't.475.01
5.304.934.595.OO
'I t.4910.5713.21
'| t.4811.9710.089.283.451.791.852.502.971.923.725.236.445.166.453.216.3711.1813.O714.2816.286.825.342.792.992.543.131.791.341.71
5.52
lNallmmoUL)
0.63
'1.151.683.85o.44o.47o.721.270.613.540.35o.280.260. 14
o.121.330.36o.520.781.01
1.393.360.40o.470.601.232.213.710.30o.26o.21o.240.060.190.400.46o.570.641.27
'1.191.630.4s
tKlmmol/L)
0.91
0.600.381.11
1.731.691.32
'f.192.572.226.427.177.576.123.49
'L110.660.580.540.630.460.911.822.O7
1.761.620.781.495.926.716.11
4.144.703.650.981.01
0.840.940.500.640.91
1-76SAR
Page284
Mclaren ValeMclaren ValeMcLaren ValeMcLaren ValeMclaren ValeMclaren ValeMclaren ValeMclaren ValeMcLaren ValeMclaren Vale
McLaren ValeMclaren ValeMclaren ValeMclaren ValeMcLâren ValeMclaren ValeMclaren ValeMcLaren ValeMcl-aren ValeMcLaren ValeMclaren ValeMcLaren ValeMclaren ValeMcLaren ValeMcLaren ValeMclaren ValeMcLaren ValeMcLaren ValeMcLaren ValeMclaren ValeMcLaren ValeMct-aren Vale
ValeMcLaren ValeMclaren ValeMcLaren ValeMclaren ValeMclaren ValeMcLaren
ValeMcLaren ValeReoion
14t1t200314111200314111200314t1t2003
20111/200220t11t200220/11120ß.2
20t11120Æ.2
20/11/200220t11t200220t11t20022011
201'l
20t11t2002
2011
20t11t200220t11t2002201111200220/111200220t11t20022011112002
gnDoo231/7/200231n1200231n20023'v.7t200231nt200231n200231n200231ui2002s1nÞoo231n/200231n200231il200231u/2002s1n/200231ni200231n200231n/2002aü2@281512002
Sampl¡ngDate
lrriqatedlrrioateclrriqatedlnioatedlrrioatedlrrioatedlrriaate(lrrioated
lrriqatedlrriqatedlrriqatedlrrioâtedlrriqatedlrr¡oatedlrrioaletlrr¡qatedlrrioatedlrrioate<
lnioatedlrr¡oatedlrrioated
lrr¡oatedlrrioated
lrrioatedlrrioatedlniqatedlrrioatedlrrioate(lrrioatedlrríoatedlrrioateclrriqatedlrrioate(lrriqatedlrrioatedlrr¡oatedlrrioatedlrrioated
lrrigationWater
GypsumApplication
lVhal
101010
'101001001001001001005050505050501010
't010
'1010
10010010010010010050505050505010101010
'1010
100100
D¡stancef rom
Dripper(cm)
4030
17.55
60504030
17.5560504030
17.5560504030
17.5560504030
17.5560504030
17.5560504030
17.556050
Depth(cm)
1.452.301.460.880.s00.550.600.81
0.901.252.901.621.551.60
't.602.882.582.282.122.122.505.001.691.751.642.352.712.552.422.321.893.314.104.31
2.552.O91.953.143.602.572.222.34
EC(dS/m)
0.431.230.802.58o.120.08o.o20.09o.200.080.140.08o.'t20.060.08o.12o.120.140.160.190.,l80.350.370.080.120.11o.120.10o.120.080.030.090.390.11
0.100.110.090.130.090.030.300.14
AImo/L
0.t1o.22o.21o.170.1 I0.110.130.120.130.170.080.080.090.090.130.160.080.040.040.13o.200.170.100. t10.130.180.180.18o.'t2o.120.100. t6o.'170.19o.210.110.090.150.16o.200.160.16
B
mo/L
ü.74146.0063.6649.O2
223.21373.40237.51
174.53273.58602.90276.55209.87177.62't82.48266.31550.1990.7066.6272.67106.44149.10385.52253.34290.73290.955 t 5.21
644.35518.89312.29313.27273.24559.83701 .1S
521.33339.58184.53159.10431.84551.45486.01
327.82389.86
Camo/L
0.000.030.050.01
o.o20.01
0.040.050.080.01o.o2o.o20.020.050.05o.o2o.o2o.o40.07o.05o.o70.01
o.o20.01o.o20.040.050.000.010.000.010.050.050.03o.o20.000.020.050.030.03o.o2
Gumc/L
o.140.590.311.570.00o.oo0.000.01
0.010.010.01
0.000.010.000.010.01
0.00-0.010.000.08o.o20.04o.12-0.030.00
-0.08-o.o7-0.06-0.08-0.09-0.04-0.07-o.o2-0.05-0.06-0.08-0.04-0.08-0.08-0.08-0.08-o.o7
Femq/L
6.634.642.657.90't4.5219.6018.t317.9941.22103,1215.5214.39't3.47't3.1419.0378.189.977-526.536.284.6219.1214.9516.8820.5640.9771.68124.1016.9216.81
17.6240.0184.19210.26
9.3912.161 1.5814.1310.6557.4619.2019.53
K mq/L
25.3365.5532.1125.4778.',t498.3255.0827.8622.9636.82104.81
70.9052.3949.6178.80
'188.1233.0421.3625.1746.5769.72164.6784.0178.3659.2960.9846.3644.35
101 .8384.9459.9388.1 I91.7895.37
't31 .91
43.4032-2380.32138.94127.O5106.24107.06
Mgmo/L
0.030.100.03o.070.250.31
-o.o21.123.764.92022o.120.060.080.511.060.040.00-0.03-0.030.01
0.07o.17o.17o.251.865.063.040.200.100.151.725.852.900.030.030.060.31o.170.09o.471.18
Mnmo/L
210.94305.83235.86122.8074.1179.3671.4856.1248.3760.72
27s.O3281.87298.57305.89305.576 t 9.98321.47300.94304.77274.45182.27171.4380.4173.3758.5756.9572.10100.73192.23199.78141 .56260.06313.45422.37234.61283.4s303.37395.01380.78122.12102.0093.38
Namo/L
o.230.440.561.1 I2.201.961.170.51
0.882.382.201.961.821.360.91
1.571.691.562.231.540.83't.280.390.500.'17
0.23
'L513.01
0.680.510.11o.170.612.940.320.510.450.83o.170.930.060.08
P
mc/L
a2.4196.7945.5625.O2
277.76434.73259.55176.79255.46492.65369.77299.14261.74260.53363.75638.41182.1117s.31
'186.89222.46220.15466.42323.96337.77284.O8
423.73519.89489.74417.98406.87319.95547.52581.67563.59s07.18290.'14297.44620.70763.44578.15421.87489.42
Smq/L
0.030.040.040.050.06o.o70.050.05o.120.120.090.06o.060.050.08o.14o.040.o20.050.060.o70.1ô0. 10
0.110.090.17o.24o.23o.120.130.080.18o.27o.250.130.080.050.150.190.160.150.18
Znmq/L
2.O4
3.641.591.225.579.325.934.356.8315.046.905.244.434.556.6413.732.26
't.661.812.663.729.626.327.257.2612.8516.0812.957.797.826.8213.9717.4913.018.474.603.9710.7713.7612.138.189.73
lcal(mmol/L)
1.021
2.701.321.053.214.O42.271.150.941.51
4.31
2.922.162.O43.247.741.360.881.041.922.476.773.463-222.442.511.911.824.193.492.473.633.743.925.431.791.333.305.725.234.374.40
tMsllmmol/L)
9.1813.3010.265.343.223.453.11
2.442.102.6411.9612.2612.9913.3113.2926.9713.9813.0913.2611.947.937-463.503.192.552.483.'t44.388.368.696.1611.31
13.6318.3710.2012.3313.20
't7.'1816.565.31
4-444.06
lNallmmol/L)
o.17o.12o.07o.20o.370.500.460.461.052.640.40o.370.340.340.492.000.260.19o.170.16o.120.490.380.430.53
'1.0s1.833.170.430.430.451.O2
2.'t55.38o.240.31
0.360.271.470.490.50
tKlmmol/L)
5.235.286.013.54
't.090.94
'1.091.040.750.653.574.295.065.184.235.A27.358.21
7.455.583.091.441.120.99o.820.63o.741.142.422.582.O22.702.964.472.744.885.734.583.751.281.251.08SAR
Page 285
Mclaren ValeMcLaren ValeMcLaren ValeMclaren ValeMclaren ValeMcLaren ValeMclaren ValeMcLaren ValeMclaren Vale
ValeMclaren ValeMcLaren ValeMclaren ValeMcLarenMcLaren ValeMclaren ValeMclaren ValeMclaren ValeMclaren ValeMclaren ValeMcLaren ValeMclâren ValeMclaren ValeMcLaren ValeMcLaren ValeMclaren ValeMclaren Vale
ValeMclaren ValeMclaren Vale
Mclaren ValeReqion
21141200321t4t200321t41200321t4t200321t4t200321t4t2003211412003211412003211412003
21t4t200321t4t200321141200321141200321t4t20032'U412æ321t4t20032114/20032'U4t2003141112003141112003
't4t1t2003141112003
14t1t200314t1t2003
'14/'U2003
,,|
14111200314t1t2003
't4111200314t1t200314/112003141112003
SamplingDate
lrrioatedrrioated
lrrioate<
lnioatedrr¡oatedlrrioatedlrrioate(lrrioated
lrriqatedlrrioatedlrrioatedlrrioatedlrrioatedlrriqatedlrrioatedrrioated
lrrioatedlrrioatedlrrioatedlrrioatetlrriqatedlrrioatedlrrioatedlrrioated
lrrioatedlrrioatedlrr¡qatedlrrioatedlrrioated
lrrigat¡onWater
GypsumApplication
100100100100100100505050505050101010101010
100100100100100100505050505050
'1010
D¡stancefrom
Dripperlcmì
60504030
17.55
60504030
17.5560504030
17.55
60504030
17.55
60504030
17.55
6050
Depthlcm)
2.242.353.053.093.424.O2
3.683.984.31
4.264.955.992.153.745.525.041.621.261.501.441.41
1.321.362.451.581.421.652.501.903.480.851.30
ECld9m)
0.180.22o.21o.260.350.310.20o.270.28o.320.45o.520.16o.200.43o.44o.29o.'120.090.090.16o.'t70.310.360.080.110.110.18o.20o.290.11
o-14
AImo/L
o-130.150.160.190.18o.200.160.180.190.19o.22o.32o-120.180.380.29o.24o.200.10o.o90.11
0.13o.'140.160.100.11o.140.20o.22o.210.09o.o7
Bmq/L
318-O8355.20566.63648.0561 5.1 2657.50483.49633.50685.94716.59773.96665.08229.24485.00701.18s65.6761 .4976.24211.49
'19s.14229.52221.99232.17469.36179.93174.'t2251.95543.93391.20661.5038.4762.72
Camq/L
o.oo0.000.03o.o20.050.030.030.050.11
0.050.110.1 1
0.06o.'120.05o.040.130.100.000.000.000.02o.o20.030.00o.o20.00o.o20.020.040.000.01
Cumo/L
o.o20.030.040.040.070.09o.020.050.040.030.090.080.010.040.080.09o.140.060.030.030.060.05o.o70.130.040.050.040.080.090.140.040.05
Femo/L
15.5817.0020.9630.0360.23177.5622.7324.3829.1938.5265.97125.917.636.855.445.152.147.3712.2'l11.6016.3622.5637.22103.68
't4.2014.3421.4942.5144.60
137.317.628.3s
K mc/L
'I 16.4s1 12.05127.3993.2976.11102.29145.96143.37126.3298.09100.0410s.3931.2071.42
142.OO
200.5629.5241.8960.0064.8543.5924.8613.4325.6054.1644.O747.5357.4224.5746.4511.1112.89
Mgmo/L
0.41
o.440.82
'1.947.138.05o.72o.822.O83.629.987.230.070.060.030.040.040.050.080.120.100.334.298.730.090.07o.201.604.328.160.03o.03
Mnmq/L
112.21
1 13.93124.96114.32143.57229.12290.71
303.95363.86357.52414.33570.03232.86339.70497.62586.31314.18173.3950.3159.3541.41
37.5538.1 1
68.1 I125.73105.2090.3084.0063.18164.92137.1 1
230.09
Namq/L
0.51
0.660.860.560.402.O1
0.953.243.602.520.492.O4
o.a22.563.79o.470.45o.470.610.610.48o.240.331.930.65o.620.440.500.502.220.480.49
P
mo/L
408.1 6433.01
607.70596.38440.45637.39581.25702.98704.51682.12607.27702.72215.72318.93518.40735.O246.9532.32
260.58261.31237.41210.93210.29395.76251.95225.91
287.54534.72337.77s24.69100.98159.22
Smo/L
o_o40.000.050.08o.140.250.010.070.1'l0.11o.2'lo.20o.o20.030.08o.o20.030.030.060.060.06o.o70.10o.220.060.060.06o.120.110.28o.o20.03
Znmo/L
7.948.8614.1416.'1715.3516.4012.0615.8'l17.11
17.8819.3116.595.7212.1017.49
't 4.111.531.905.284.475.735.545.7911.71
4.494.346.2913.579.7616.500.961.56
tcallmmol/L)
4.794.615.243.843.134.216.005.905.204.034.124.341.282.945.848.251.21
1.722.472.671.791.020.551.052.231.81
1.9s2.361.011.910.460.53
IMs](mmol/L)
4.884.965.444.976.249.9712.6513.2215.8315.5518.O224.7910.1314.7421.6425.5013.677.542.192.581.801.631.662.975.474.583.933.652.757.175.9610.01
INa](mmol/L)
0.400.430.540.771.544.540.58o.62o.750.991.693.220.200.18o.140.13o.060. 1I0.31
0.30o.420.580.952.650.36o.370.551.091.143.51
0.19
tKllmmol/L)
1.371.351.231.11
1.452.202.972.443.353.323.725.423.833.814.485.39a.243.960.790.940.660.640.660.832.11
1.841.370.920.841.675.016.91SAR
Page 286
411012001
11912001
91812001
f n200114/61200124/512001181s12001
101512001
101912002
2916120021014/20022513/2002181312æ27131200241212002
10t11200227/101200111912001
9/812001
11'n/200114t612001
18ts1200141512001
9110120029t112001819/2001711112001
6129120025110120024t10120023121/20022J22J2002121312001
11n200110/4120011011120021t1012002
ureDate
Appendix D - Soil Solutio n Gomposition from Ghapter 9
BoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBore
lrrigationWater
00000000000000000
000000
00000000000000
Application
10
10101010
1010105050505050505050505050505050501010101010101010
101010
'101010
fromDri
252525252525252510101010101010
101010
101010
1010
10101010101010
1010101010
't010
Depth(cm)
1.261.742.582.202.556.056.706.2016.501s.0116.2018.3314.1510.2611.339.602.503.125.227.204.2311.7s9.65o.760.51o.67o.771.842.973.844.815.34o.570.480.41o.444.12
EC(dS/m)
8.718.518.748.748.728.458.338.197.918.128.248.058.178.738.238.708.899.028.788.268.268.328.028.568.498.488.338.418.508.558.348.598.648.648.648.478.64
pH
33.9332,5822.9918.9918.3774.15136.52108.08436.23409.09467.76492.48302.45349.80657.82523.0967.9590.38183.04251.31126.98705.96397.1329.8628.1931.6832.2336.2355.4188.s478.3382.0'l22.5118.4119.0222.4765.62
Camg/L
11.099.2213.1318.4615.4325.9621.9122.59103.00131.93149.53196.55124.9s103.93109.29111.9735.2'l41.6956.4978.9556.48151.83110.2716.7411.6514.2515.4618.5320.5424.9624.51
26.4110.059.989.4111.0314.52
K mq/L
35.4841.4567.U69.2159.17169.92145.36168.15388.70262.63278.O3285.38279.15174.35550.16335.7434.4049.31
100.73130.5259.00
424.15189.6067.3849.8'1
64.5854.18104.21106.38122.35120.3189.5543.2248.6345.8852.8456.32
Mgmo/L
231.40329.18507.54621.64595.11
1203.661038.861204.173046.531855.482087.852578.75236'1.90
'1839.083166.661834.71450.62666.971157.751332.631194.483237.782039.98191.18182.39175.29195.23212.54574.17586.33622.87599.63184,58146.26
'181.43184.27285.65
Namq/L
0.150.090.050.190.12-0.040.02
-0.010.851.152.282.952.602.430.952.325.473.682.864.0210.562.952.21
0.840.460.460.950.250.190.08o.o70.080.320.510.630.720.08
P
ms/L
8.449.90
29.3027.0334.45128.98117.46141.72341.30352.55420.23335.95237.95213.83479.49270.7724.6732.05135.02183.37109.23470.68280.5935.8142.5978.589.5837.8447.9884.5893.6798.757.5211.2625.6231.09119.65
S
mo/L
0.850.810.570.470.461.853.41
2.7010.8810.2111.6712.297.558.7316.4113.051.702.264.576.273.1717.619.91
o.750.700.790.800.901.382.21
1.952.O50.560.46o.470.561.64
lcal(mmol/L)
1.461.71
2.792.852.436.995.986.9215.9910.8011.4411.7411.487.17
22.6313.811.422.034.145.372.4317.457.802.772.052.662.234.294.385.034.953.681.782.001.892.172.32
lMsl(mmol/L)
10.0714.3222.O827.O425.8952.3645.1 I52.38132.5280.7190.82112.17102.7479.99137.7479.8019.6029.0150.3657.9751.96140.8388.738.327.937.628.499.24
24.9725.5027.0926.088.036.367.898.0212.42
[Na](mmol/L)
0.280.240.340.470.390.660.560.582.633.373.82s.033.202.662.802.860.901.071.442.021.443.882.820.430.300.360.40o.470.530.640.630.680.260.260.240.280.37
tKl(mmol/L)
6.639.O2
12.0414.8415.22
17.6114.75
16.8925.5617.61
'18.8922.8823.5520.0622.0415.4011.11
'14.0217.0616.9921.9623.7821.094.434.784.114.884.0610.419.4810.31
10.905.2s4.06s.l44.856.25
SAR
Page 287
21/31200224212002412120021011/20024t101200111912001
9/812001
i1n200114t6/20011110120021019120022711112001
27t10/20014/1012001119/200191812001
11nÞOO11014120022s/31200218131200215131200271312002
28t2120023t212002fn1200114/6120011015/20014/512001111012002101912002291612002
10/5120021014120021813120027131200228/z200231212002101112002311212001711112001Date
BoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBore
lrrigationWater
0000000000000000000000o00000000000o00000
GypsumApplication
(Uha)
10101010101010
1010
1001001001001001001001005050505050505050505050101010
101010101010101010
Drstancefrom
Dripper
40404040404040404025252525252525252525252525252525252525252525252525252525252525
Depth(cm)
6.506.408.605.803.354.124.084.215.023.11
3.763.401.652.153.873.494.058.1011.368.0410.6011.3312.4014.003.827.OO
4.955.743.51
4.O83.585.896.499.128.068.386.606.501.21
1.22
EC(dS/m)
8.357.888.518.408.628.878.458.248.598.498.378.738.598.318.478.61
8.398.81
7.888.268.078.358.21
8.108.518.458.338.468.648.548.778.498.467.818.408.037.398.668.568.67PH
180.9482.79
300.2237.2113.9222.9626.7428.0978.1352.1876.1850.6340.9947.6395.80136.10147.O844.81
176.53155.70164.01223.01
254.06428.1571.75194.19153.43258.9154.8567.9735.15191.54125.1s234.79259.89318.95292.54
'145.5024.6331.62
Camo/L
16.7115.5320.3815.'1610.0211.0810.8410.7322.6144.3849.6741.01
39.1542.5554.5060.11
67.2625.1221.3018.1322.O332.6029.8559.2516.3817.6415.5817.3911.4913.8610.9522.7620.3721.4323.9528.5540.3316.8210.099.55
K ms/L
161.43167.01273.871s9.4179.37109.08100.45101.14162.1716.8921.æ14.9910.8312.9026.8937.U40.49
183.58279.83190.73280.14306.90310.33359.7349.55146.1510s.86183.13107.36122.14101.36201.64171.77240.09201.59201.23154.06309,4632.81
32.54
Mgmc/L
1154.381077.061565.04951 .18677.66839.1083s.40848.551300.14446.37596.37411.48372.22405.54624.40800.82826.981553.411941.701440.78177A.251871.902048.831909.15604.361233.451093.231491.96679.38718.08684.831575.091458.731577.301402.201390.03928.201460.44189.73211.26
Namc/L
0.14-0.030.01
-0.050.000.010.000.00-0.022.392.503.033.M2.762.571.051.710.030.951.53
'1.351.631.882.251.130.570.870.91
0.070.11o.o20,01
-0.010.080.150.20o.230.060.090.09
Pmo/L
114.88117.66183.0892.71
45.2471.11
77.3583.58141.6629.7551.3930.7822.9527.4654.5681.2888.10167.62211.35148.15208.70227.65270.70316.8045.34
148.79111,79187.1567.6166.7479,89149.65156.72178.30161.48169.28115.03208.307.547.65
Smo/L
4.512.O77.490.930.350.570.670.701.951.301.901.261.021.192.393,403.671.124.403.884.095.566.3410.681.794.853.836.461.371.700,884.783.125.866.487.967.303.630.61
o.79
lcal(mmol/L)
6.646.8711.276.563.264.494.134.166.670.690.900.620.450.531.111.541.677.5511.517.8511.5212.6212.7714.802.O46.014.357.534.425.024.178.297.079.888.298.286.3412.731.351.34
tMsl(mmol/L)
50.2146.8568.0741.3729.4836.5036.3436.9156.5519.4225.9417.9016.1917.6427.1634.8335.9767.5784.4662.6777.3581.4289.1283.0426.2953.6547.5564.9029.5531.2329.7968.5163.4568.6160.9960.4640.3763.528.259.19
lNal(mmol/L)
0.430.400.520.390.260.280.280.270.581.141.271.051.001.091.391.s41.720.640.540.460.560.830.761.520.420.450.400.440.290.350.280.580.520.550.61o.731.030.430.26o.24
tKl(mmol/L)
15.0315.6715.7215.1215.5116.2316.5916.7419.2613.7415.5013.0513.3613.4514.5215.6715.5722.9521.1718.3019.5719.0920.3916.4513.4416.2816.6217.3512.2912.0513.2618.9519.8817.3015.871s.0110.9315.71
s.896.30SAR
Page 288
29161200210/51200210141200221/312002221212002
10/1/20023/12120017/11120014/10/200111912001
91812001
fn12001F¡gure 9-12
27111120014t1012001
141912001
11912001
91812001
11n/200110/912002u/1?/200127/111200127110120014/101200111912001
91812001
f n20011416/20012916/2002101412002211312002101112002411012001
3118/2001
9t8/200114t6/2001
'to/91200229t612002101412002Date
BoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBore
BoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBore
lrrigationWater
444444444444
000
0000000o000000000000000
Application
10
1010101010101010
101010
1010
1010
10
101001001001001001001001001005050505050505050101010
Distancefrom
Dripper
1010101010
'101010101010
10
1001001001001001004040404040404040404040404040404040404040
Depthlcm)
2.453.523.674.655.423.122.382.452.602.21
2.35o.77
8.107.9010.9011.309.259.303.093.763.043.253.224.284.724.552.2511.9312.8712.æ1'1.28
9.5113.2514.8815.457.105.486.05
EC(dS/m)
8.418.508.558.348.598.648.648.648.648.498.488.33
8.167.487.927.798.158.087.898.258.138.198.028.248.007.998.078.378.378.41
8.228.097.898.198.058.498.088.48
pH
231.49173.551s8.14120.92133.1181.27
138.48143.42163.83286.44200.6042.23
461.69417.82611.46631.14458.11475.28307.53255.70258.81252.18252.56372.66397.96415.24468.28603.81646.18632.98615.47548.16621.27641.29649.3750.76101.9097.75
Camq/L
13.4521.2019.6518.6421.6510.7314.3514.551s.9121.9022.4714.19
32.9429.8360.7063.4043.6040.6966.1853.9343.6347.6847.4362.1360.4862.'t570.1557.2861.2859.4858.3742.5642.1548.3862.1516.1313.0114.88
K mq/L
146.36105.35106.40126.82129.8853.73152.49152.33138.17122.6880.9522.11
131.46136.81372.88368.88261.82249.41107.5771.æ71.6569.4Íì70.08100.36107.O7112.52
'126.55223.54264.',t5268.19224.74196.47208.33224.68249.28197.56197.67148.91
Mgmo/L
273.46567.16596.00646.45624.74320.04154.55190.86210.01
151.33210.77159.72
1898.521878.01
3116.833064.132229.872120.45345.97387.81401.64359.70364.58483.29488.95512.28569,813429.653784.283685.493317.622947.283205.453247.283458.641370.221077.881117.76
Namc/L
0.040.100.060.070.25o.o2o.o7o.o20.01
0.180.361.02
-0.020.05-0.30-0.330.04-0.010.18o.14o.120.'t30.040.010.070.070.090.02o.o20.050.050.04o.020.05o.o20.230.02-0.04
Pmo/L
408.4271.0670.9781.2783.2737.80
302.33345.24377.64416.93286.01
5.19
210.83200.30384,33373.10254.01242.1771.4167.9868.8067.4569.0'l83.4889.2895.28
139.41
168.4Í]191.58187.46184.37132.74164.33190.68195.68128.53127.27103.29
Smq/L
5.784.333.953.023.322.O33.463.584.097.155.001.05
11.5210.4215.2615.7511.4311.867.676.386.466.296.309.309.9310.3611.6815.0716.1215.7915.3613.6815.50
'16.0016.20
'1.272.542.44
lcal(mmol/l-)
6.O24.334.385.225.342.21
6.276.275.685.053.330.91
5.415.6315.3415.1710.7710.264.422.932.952.862.884.134.404.635.219.2010.8711.039.248.088.579.2410.258.138.136.13
lMsI(mmol/L)
11.8924.6725.9228.1227.'17
'13.926.728.309.136.589.176.95
82.5881.69135.57133.2896.9992.2315.0516.8717.471s.6515.8621 .O2
21.2722.2824.79149.18
'164.61160.31144.31
128.20139.43141.25150.4459.6046.8848.62
lNal(mmol/L)
0.340.s40.500.480.550.270.370.370.410.560.570.36
0.840.761.551.621.'t21.041.691.381.121.221.21
1.59
't.551.591.791.461.571.521.491.091.081.241.590.4'1
0.330.38
tKl(mmol/L)
3.468.388.999.809.237.202.162.652.921.893.184.96
20.0720.3924.5123.9720.5919.614.335.535.705.175.235.745.625.766.03
30.2931.6930.9529.0927.4828.4228.1129.2519.4514.3516.61SAR
Page 289
4110/200131/812001
9/8/2001141612001
2916/2002101512002
10/4/200221/31200210/1120024110/2001311812001
91812001
11nnoo114/61200118/512001101512001
111012002
10/912002291612002101412002
18/3/20024t212002101112002
27110120011/9/20019/8/200111.n200118/51200111101200210/9120022916/20021014/200218131200241212002
101112002271101200111912001
91812001
11n/200118/5/2001Date
BoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBore
lrrigationWater
4444444444444444444444444444444444444444
GypsumApplication
(Vha)
5050505010
1010101010
10101010
't010
100
'100100100100100100100100100100100505050505050505050505050
Distancefrom
Dr¡pper
2525252525252525252525252525252510
1010
't01010
10101010101010101010101010
1010101010
Depth(cm¡
3.856.6011.609.852.686.809.459.654.852,402.351.541.192.655.253.1s9.2510.5416.5213.2112.1511.3610.128.048.098.2510.3212.518.8510.7516.5213.2114.1s11.3610.128.048.098.2510.3212.51
EC(dS/m)
8.828.768.788.608.358.418.368.518.258.608.568.628.638.528.538.408.248.138.328.218.238.71
8.728.888.488.748.258.418.268.21
8.328.218.238.718.728.888.488.748,258.41
pH
181.36251.40685.43280.97148.28224.26408.90264.58110.48309.63162.6860.2050.13128.19239.4470.62
523.58768.951207.91478.25387.68404.87301.45478.39486.28775.961375.28503.65929.75
1113.51
1909.09251.31183.0467.9590.38602.45623.09775.961567.76957.82
Camc¡/L
28.2430.6'1
74.4563.279.5715.1219.4327.0612.7154.U',l5.5311.O2
10,6119.6530.9630.84101.95112.62124.8359.7564.9861.5754.2187.3694.62107.48112.8492.85
221.94254,39284.37189.27139.31104.67112.45145.21189.602'12.54
241.67154.12K mc/L
116.98199.45636.23245.48113.46230.36320.77266.28136.74124.90112.O739.8233.9280.55153.57102.55171.59174.92264.57200.17192.74184.74176.38158.54176.38178.34187.09
'148.21506.37586.46682.05378.30202.64164.37152.94132.67154.26256.63289.41256.84
Mgmo/L
795.691126.633183.252089.98432.70
1127.O0
1575.551702.25794.77171.95294.06272.88248.90453.27778.21580.15686.37867.92
1 108.391589.321401.241374.851267.94408.37573.28918.371284.631487.29768.U11 18.191855.482287.851961.901866.661834.71450.62666.971057.751332.633237.78
Namc/L
2.621.42o.781.420,03-0.020.1'1
0,080.011.32o.520.610.941.050.410.050.990.161.121.47
't.581.17o.970.250.240.120.380.544.165.677.652.892.402.204.166.246.81
7.628.641.85
Pmo/L
331.60223.89488.25252.30268.65153.15223.76222.45105.95466.29320.8516.979.23
60.0385.7063.53524.39607.91
682.17238.91
234.81246.68309.47381.69487.32514.84486.74118.30821.621064.721152.45560.74264.21279.84170.45501.29523.68740.15890.89470.12
smc/L
4.526.2717.107.O1
3.705.6010.206.602.767.734.061.501.253.205.971.7613.0619.1930.1411.939.6710.107.5211.9412.1319,3634.31
12.5723.2027.7847.636.274.571.702.2615.0315.5519.3639.1223.90
lcal(mmolÀ)
4.818.2026.1710.104.679.4813.1910.955.625.144.611.641.403.31
6.324.227.067.2010.888.237.937.607.266.527.267.347.706.10
20.8324.1228.0615.568.346.766.295.466.3510.5611.9010.57
lMsl(mmol/L)
34.6149.01
'138.4690.9118.8249.0268.5374.0434.577.4812.7911.8710.8319.7233.8525.2329.8637.7548.2169.1360.9559.8055.1517.7624.9439.9555.8864.6933.4248.6480.7199.5285.3481.1979.8019.6029.01
46.0157.97
140.83
[Na](mmol/L)
0.720.781.901.620.240.390.500.690.331.400.40o.280.270.50o.790.792.6',1
2.883.191.531.661.571.392.232.422.752.892.375.686.517.274.843.s62.682.883.714.855.446.183.94
tK(mmol/L)
11.3312.8821.0521.986.51
12.6314.1717.6711.942.094.246.706.667.739.6610.326.667.357.53
't5.3914.5314.2114.354.135.667.738.6214.985.046.759.28
21.3021.3016.4619.91
4.836.929.498.69
21.90SAR
Page 290
11t7/2001141612001
10/91200229/6120021015/200210141200221131200222t2J200210111200227110/200111912001
91812001
11n2001141612001
4/s|2001re
271101200111912001
sl812001f n200141512001
4t101200111912001
91812001
f n20011416/200110/91200229/612002411012001
1t9/200191812001
f n/2001141612001
1110120021019120022916/200221131200224212002101112002
Date
MainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMains
BoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBore
lrrigationWater
000000000000000
44444444444444444444444
umApplication
5050101010101010101010
'101010
10
1001001001001001010101010
100100100100100100100505050505050
from
101010101010101010
101010
1010
10
4040404040404040404025252525252525252525252525
Depth(cm)
1.541.890.890.631.011.070.861.752.45o.710.500.460.390.680.74
s.115.275.836.216.485.845.225.916.147.144.113.954.524.134.924.865.454.106.2013.0014.0114.208.05
EC(dS/m)
8.3s8.538.368.648.268.608.578.658.508.348.308.248.088.308.19
8.278.318.478.358.248.228.268.308.458.318.21
7.958.308.618.228.408.088.748.698.358.568.438.56
pH
s2.464A.O2
57.4238.7445.6954.3545.09122.48107.6267.6142.584.2832.3835.3734.27
643.8172s.14648.61511.68457.16204.26158.4776.8782.4996.89378.46511.64186.41115.3739.8436.7029.18
213.8428'1.90510.76649.79742.61227.80
Cams/L
10.4622.059.087.6112.1310.597.73
31.5613.8510.667.11
7.316.11
7.91
10.17
42.7148.6247.2844.8538.6430.5226.2718.0419.4925.51124.39
'158.1596.8484.7360.3863.0245.3031.8436.9552.4568.79103.3030.75
K mc/L
28.4524.8833.9523.5926.0629.7824.4854.0459.8532.1421.9821.4415.5817.8016.49
127.641 38.1 9124.741 19.3297.28174.æ13s.91126.94113.461 1 1.1328.39158.2017.6214.1311.5710.999.63
135.68221.67703.95433.70664.30279.57
Mgmq/L
235.74319.3375.8768,58124.93144.90124.03375.87375.6757.0830.11
36.0036.3562.24
100.92
536.81557,16551.06586.31607.49783.38946.281467,691596.381624.19208.69250.65253.49268.42265.20284.77230.851064.351386.343107.133865.694461.801238.75
Nams/L
0.081.690.040.010.060.050.06o.340.040.010.01
0.030.020.080.43
0.070.090.08o.o70.090.100.100.030.060.094.971.856.845.466.608.467.191.241.531.232.401.100.83
Pmc/L
12.49
'14.3210.004.9214.3917.0413.8355.0758.61
5.212.061.950.8'l1.19
18.89
204.84210.57196.75128.57134.28206.38201.55182.79164.38155.44214.72612.06229.64167.8322.8615.7418.29
297.34306.31857.65426.82s48.13216.52
SmdL
't.311.201.430.971.141.361.123.062.691.691.061.100.810.880.85
16.0618.0916.1812.7711.415.103.951.922.062.429.4412.774.652.880.990.920.73s.347.0312.7416.21
'18.535.68
lcallmmol/L)
1.171.O2
1.400.971.071.231.01
2.222.461.320.900.880.640.730.68
5.255.685.134.914.007.175.595.224.674.571.176.510.720.580.480.450.405.589.12
28.9617.8427.3311.50
[Ms](mmol/L)
10.2513.893.302.985.436.305.3916.3516.342.481.31
1.571.582.71
4.39
23.3s24.2323.9725.5026.4234.0741.1663.8469.4470.659.0810.9011.0311.6811.5412.3910.0446.3060.30135.15168.15194.0853.88
INa](mmol/L)
0.270.560.230.'190.310.27o.200.810.350.270.180.190.160.200.26
1.091.241.21
1.150.990.780.670.460.500.653.184.O42.482.171.541.6'1
1.160.810.951.341.762.640.79
tKI(mmol/L)
6.519.321.962.143.653.923.697.127.201.430.931.11
1.31
2.133.55
5.064.975.196.076.739.7313.3223.8926.7826.722.792.484.766.289.5210.599.47
14.01
15.0020.9328.8128.6613.00SAR
Page291
141612001
111012002
1019/200229161200210t51200210/4/200227110/20014t101200111912001
91812001
fin/2001141612001
241512001
1t1012002101912002
101512002101412002
21131200210t11200227110120014110/200111912001
91812001
11n20011416/2001181512001
4/512001
'v101200210/9120022711012001
4t10120011t91200191812001
f n/2001111012002
10/91200229/61200227t10120014110/200191812001
Date
MainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMains
lrrigationWater
0000000000000000000000000000000o00000000
Application
1005050505050505050505050501010
10101010
1010101010101010
100100100100100
'100100505050505050
from
25252525252525252525252525252525252525252525252525252510101010101010101010
101010
Depth(cm)
2.412.202.282.352.462.511.600.980.920.330,460.641.520.980.981.852.11
2.361.42o.670.69o.770.820.68o.761.422.OO
1.491.s21.361.622.252.612.593.153.141.791.161.021.39
EC(dS/m)
8.378.298.248.438.228,507.608.508.418.128.058.228.348.698.678.298.608.468.388.478.648.428.688.338.408.398.278.248.198.098.218.878.478.61
8.478.478.838.738,378.29
pH
63.4611.5415.2917.7531.3232.5714.2512.4810.3011.2513.2815.4914.2551.2855.81
76.35133.06154.49154.2681.4449.4824.1532.1451.2554.3679.33107.3523.51
26.5819.1938.3039.9427.2568.9197.5487.5972.2450.2532.9947.34
Camq/L
76.8714.951s.8717.4618.7523.5821.5722.5018.5014.2616.5818.6722.474.574.858.539.4811.649.657.615.063.873.674.215.228.9712.3246.8749.7144.1759.0653.0852.7984.Æt17.8317.24
't3.1014.74
't1.9713.96
K mc/L
26.368.0910.8417.4721.6822.075.645.985.624.874.305.856.33
24.3224.8838.5145.4653.0667.0038.2232.1632.4330.1329.2528.5839.5861.9311.8715.267.1117.O4
14.5310.6423.9977.3976.8144.7930.8620.6131.62
Mgmq/L
514.68125.37157.O4224.25242.57256.32110.33114.60109.78112.57119.88
'108.48181.46149.74
't54.35273.66311.41341.46117.71108.5271.2370.7478.5980.74101.74181.95236.18284.32297.68248.72302.69361,48446.45940.23523.51519.39u4.17259.76179.58226.57
Namq/L
8.200.690.510.51o.410.650.541.040.690.780.840.560.130.050.06o.o20.000.01o.o20.060.120,01
0.030.04o.o2o.o2o.o79.9810.049.8410.885.3314.574.370.140.130.110.19o.12o.o4
Pms/L
45.756.488.8012.0514.2516.346.866.575.166.936.586.959.357.568.10
32.8743.8654.4131.8411.843.251.952.162.046.0433.2754.0612.8613.7512.51
15.7513.7518.3444.8684.8782.9532.1613.909.8814.85
Smc/L
1.580.290.38o.44o.780.81
0.360.310.26o.280,330.390.361.281.391.903.323.853.852.O31.230.600.801.281.361.982.680.590.660.480.961.000.681.722.432.191.801.250.821.18
lcal(mmol/L)
1.080.330.45o.720.890.91
0.23o.25o.23o.200.18o.240.26
'1.001.021.581.872.182.761.571.321.331.241.201.181.632.550.490.630.290.700.60o.440.993.183.161.841.270.851.30
lMsl(mmol/L)
22.395.456.839.7510.5511.154.804.984.784.905.21
4.727.896.516.7111.9013.5514.855.124.723.103.083.423.514.437.9110.2712.3712.9510.8213.1715.7219.4240.9022.7722.5914.9711.307.819.86
lNal(mmolÀ)
1.970.380.410.4s0.480.600.550.580.470.360.420.480.570.120.12o.220.240.300.250.190.130.100.090.110.130.230.321.201.271.131.51
1.361.352.160.46o.440.330.380.3'l0.36
tKl(mmol/L)
13.71
6.927.517.038.168.506.266,686.838.317.327.21
10.064.31
4.326.375.9s6.041.992.491.942.212.392.232.784.174.4911.9311.4012.3210.2312,4518.3724.869.61
9.777.847.116.046.26SAB
Page292
1t101200210/9/20022916/200210151200210t41200221/3/20022212J2002
10/11200227t101200111912001
918/2001
fin/2001141612001
4t512001
1019120022711012001
4110/200111912001
1110/2002101912002
27110120014110/200131t81200191812001
2711012001
4t101200111912001
91812001
11n200114t6/2001241512001
11101200210t9120022916/20024t10/2001311812001
918/200111n2001Date
MainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMains
MainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMains
lrrigationWater
44444444444444
0000o0000000000000000000
Application
10101010101010
'1010
1010
101010
10101010
10010010010010010050505050505050100100100100100100100
fromD
1010101010
10101010
101010
1010
1001001001004040404040404040404040404025252525252525
Depth(cm)
0.610.630.921.051.420.982.322.610.540.s80.981,051.120.89
3.863.093.804.057.407.756.757.407.758.202.152.302.952.682.653.153.883.613.561.890.842.452.OO
2.40
EC(dS/m)
8.248.328.368.488.s18.528.498.478.348.278.328.198.248.'15
8.348.648.098.237.727.988.237.727.988.209.O28.318.188.558.738.208.538.628.6s8.528.348.388.597.92
pH
51.2849.5768.6455.4362.5665.46119.55115.6947.5245.2364.3367.8572.4534.27
1 1.959.3816.729.96
311.59325.91255.04297.66342.44356.3610.0421.9142.6816.5719.6743.3121.74
120.351 19.5878.1246.947't.1562.0369.61
Camo/L
10.308.656.9812.O2
11.608.55
24.3413.0411.297.567.855.158.0511.25
18.0517.1416.9418.7740.2841.9536.7241.1742.0242.6210.919.6215.388.0820.2910.9413.5792.0590.6464.9665.9970.9770.0474.24
K mc/L
29.3724.7920.2927.5827.9229.6261.8360.5332.2922.6624.5221.5929.8515.29
54.7254.005s.4958.01134.8s146.3'l115.51133.38152.68154.3246.3256.7276.9557.3460.3861.6668.1053.4553.7035.3620.8931.3928.3329.39
Mgmcy'L
58.3638.6475.98132.64165.76201.47318.94305.6861.6032.8238.9541.5265.8588.57
786.94754.44740.64813.791241.271296.381110.921212.421325.571343.73527.88617.05762.20635.35655.07668.22783.12s66.41568.45375.57345.63M0.95452.46467.49
Nams/L
o.o20.070.050.060.080.090.060.030.010.02o.o20.060.080.09
0.060.03o.o70.060.040.040.030.540.01
-0.04o.o20.030.080.050.130.000.083.503.306.3110.488.347.608.91
Pmo/L
72.3684.6512.4942.1346.5344.4547.8555.6270.5990.45125.69140.59186.5521.06
103.8792.3792.7598.67249.38251.63253.46256.40266.62268.9068.9597.34
119.1081.79103.69121.20137.31
59.0863.2747.8318.5033.3436.1040.08
smq/L
1.281.241.71
1.381.561.632.982.891.191.131.601.691.810.85
0.300.230.420.257.778.136.367.438.548.890.250.551.06o.410.491.080.543.002.981.951.171.781.551.74
lcal(mmol/L)
1.21
1.020,831.131.151.222.542.491.330.931.0'1
0.891.230.63
2.252.222.282.395.556.024.755.496.286.35
't.912.333.172.362.482.542.802.202.211.450.861.291.171.21
tMsI(mmol/L)
2.541.683.315.777.2'l8.7613.8713.302.681.431.691.81
2.863.85
34.2332.8232.2235.40s3.9956.3948.3252.7457,6658.4522.9626.8433.1527.6428.4929.0734.0624.6424.7316.3415.0319.18
'19.6820.33
lNal(mmol/L)
0.260.220.180.31
0.300.220.620.330.290.190.200.130.21o.29
0.46o.440.430.481.031.070.941.051.071.090.280.250.39o.21o.520.280.352.352.32t -btl1.691.821,791.90
tKI(mmol/L)
1.61
1.122.073.644.385.195.905.731.690.991.051.121.643.16
21.4420.9419.6121.81
14.7914.9914.4914.6814.9814.9715.6415.8216.1216.6016.5215.2818.6310.8010.858.8s10.5510.9511.9511.85SAR
Page 293
311812001
91812001
11m200111101200210191200229161200210/s12002101412002
1011120022711012001411012001
11912001
918/200111m200114t6/2001241512001
101912002291612002101512002101412002211312002
22121200210111200227110/2001
411012001
1t91200191812001
11n20014/101200111912001
91812001
11n/20011l't01200210t9/20022916120024t1012001
't/912001918/200111n2001141612001
Date
MainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMains
lrrigationWater
4444444444444444444444444444444444444444
Application
10010010050505050505050505050505050101010101010101010101010
1001001001005050505050505050
Distancefrom
Dripper
2525252525252525252525252525252525252525252525252525252510
101010101010101010
'1010
Depth(cm)
0.890.370.482.352.352.354.O1
4.31
1.941.601.470.920.330.460.640.891.821.901.942.412.811.401.391.41
1.551.720.900.461.622.252.612.591.751.892.451.131.721.521.001.79
EC(dS/m)
7.988.057.638.338.498.438.228.508.4'l7.608.508.418.128.058.228.348.318.548.608.348.378.488.458.'178.448.398.348.318.218.878.478.61
8.318.497.828.128.248.328.177.98pH
52.5918.7830.74169.58158.3696.2172.66106.0698.14144.15143.4336.9010.5513.91
12.5189.75191.3789.3777.71109.51131.67128.80110.75206.27147.90162.2532.0233.s684.51168.42114.3569.14178.51221.58231.8359.84152.54124.5959.7355.93
Camo/L
34.7520.5633.2388.5961.5827.7235.1746.3059.35181.9467.61
27.7315.2417.6220.1043.3525.137.7611.8715.8924,17150.7524.8842.0721.4622.8513.1014.s970.'1486.7467.4142.1749.5452.6845.6333.0697.1974.2662.1266.05
K mo/L
18.375.9¿8.87
49.5851.8738.8745.3961.4944.9756.4Íì49.1814.065.99s.344.91
51.6582.1542.O836.7249.6566.2445.1648.159s.7169.8074.7015.0615.3726.3235.2628.6418.5449.81
54.6663.8630.9638.7634.5815.4616.19
Mgmo/L
86.7563.31115.89221.25308.57327.77436.93556.63237.64166.54129.06148.50109.29114.37153.00509.2168.24
142.31228.81319.6s483.77317.97210.2563.1649.8466.0153.4558.09
294.11384.13482.15806.24201.79221.54566.26172.46194.95174.58217.84231.67
Namc/L
2.653.770.560.770.580.400.65o.760.551.471.172.204.014.473.880.100.080.03-0.02o.o2o.o7o.790.120.590.030.06o.440.4610.129.4610.264.132.292.31o.44s.482.871.263.101.89
Pmo/L
82.606.9811.80
245.O7268.88211.4773.M105.2060.64
291.19265.5998.997.056.8212.O0
73.56286.46140.8534.15s3.8978.2251.6953.54275.27184.43214.804.161.11
124.15185.21
106.5158.12287.36309.67439.9226.66
268.21205.1773.4441.48
Smq/L
1.310.47o.774.233.952.401.81
2.652.453.603.580.920.260.350.31
2.244.772.231.942.733.293.212.765.153.694.050.800.842.114.202.851.734.455.535.781.493.81
3.11
1.491.40
lcal(mmol/L)
0.760.240.362.O42.131.601.872.531.852.322.020.580.250.220.202.123.381.731.512.042.721.861.983.942.873.070.620.631.081.451.18o.762.O52.252.631.271.591.420.640.67
IMs](mmol/L)
3.772.755.049.6213.4214.2619.0124.2110.347.245.61
6.464.754.976.65
22.152.976.199.9513.9021.O413.839.1s2.752.172.872.322.5312.7916.71
20.9735.078.789.6424.637.508.487.599.4810.08
lNaI(mmol/L)
0.890.530.852.271.57o.710.901.181.524.651.730.710.390.450.51
1.11
0.64o.200.30o.41o.623.860.641.080.550.580.330.371.792.221.721.081.271.351.170.852.491.901.591.69
tKI(mmol/L)
2.623.264.743.845.447.139.91
10.644.992.982.375.286.666.61
9.2810.601.043.115.36o.óo8.586.144.200.91
0.851.081.952.087.167.O310.4522.233.443.468.494.513.653.576.507.02SAR
Page 294
4/121200127110/20011/9/20019/812001fn/20012415/20011110/200210t9120022916120024t12120014t10120011/9/200191812001
14t612001
24ts1200111101200210/9120022916/2002411012001
Date
MainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMains
lrrigationWater
4444444444444444444
Application
5050505050501010101010
10101010
100100100100
from
40404040404040404040404040404025252525
Depth
2.982.082.612.782.713.241.741.852.441.751.461.422.01
2.202.412.352.353.391.69
EC
8.328.468.098.258.648.328.478.428.s38.348.498.478.318.658.458.338.497.778.07OH
122.4548.4534.6222.5025.3525.7671.0866.2564.7894.78
1 10.1489.4551.2442.51
32.54388.39402.85486.76167.06
Camc/L
13.5811.549.4913.0512.7511.s210.2011.1410.0611.8511.5210.549.939.5810.5262.s866.4871.2160.15
K ms/L
68.4255.4947.2649.3242.1542.5870.2665.8462.8164.7369.0567.1166.0258.51
36.71188.39202.34221.6463.24
Mgmo/L
630.55518.67622.64624.87614.13708.42499.51511.51641.28526.31485.21
486.32511.24604.13642.51
10'1.2588,54131.30148.21
Namq/L
0.090.050.08o.o70.090.050,090.030.060.080.08o.o70.080.070.051.351.120.501.63
P
mg/L
184.27154.25106.40104.59106.37126.34204.68175.28138.64175.23281.26184.52164.24134.10128.45614.27678.59725.64290.16
Smo/L
3.061.210.860.560.630.641.771.651.622.362.752.231.281.060.819.6910.0512.144.17
lcal(mmol/L)
2.812.281.942.031.731.752.892.712.582.662.842.762.722.411.51
7.758.329.122.60
tMsl(mmol/L)
27.4322.5627.O827.1826.7130.8121.7322.2527.8922.8921.1121.1522.2426.2827.954.403.855.716.45
lNaIlmmol/L)
0.350.300.240.330.330.290.260.28o.260.300.29o.270.250.25o.271.601.701.821.54
tKl(mmol/L)
11.3212.0716.1616.8917.3619.9110.0610.6514.11
10.21
8.939.47
1 1.1314.11
18.341.050.901.242.48SAR
Page 295
100
,t0
'.t5l0
Depth(cm)
9.553.73t.4l0.47
ECdS/m
SS SE
10 cm From Dripper
0.400.32
0.31
.- ta':
'' 1'l
':Ì
,lrj.l
IltII
-:: t,l
53018
1t))
CamC/L
SSISE
7
l0t7
9.s
3.12
ECdS/m
SS SE
50 cm From Dripper
0.3s0.490.60
l'. 'ì.:.
.
I
II
i;ì ì:
s48
76
CamglL
SSISE
8
33
4l
3.42.8
ECdS/m
SSISEI
100 cm From Dripper
1.6
1.241.28
. t;
't :l
I
i\' ì.
,t
'i..,
28459
CamglL
SS ISE
462620
Appendix E - Saturation Extract versus Soil Solution Datafrilte A-l Average soil solution composition (SS) and saturation extract (SE) results from bore wuter without gypsum application from
to November 2001
Tabte A-2 Average soil solution composition (SS) ünd ssturation extract (SE) results from bore wuter without glpsum application fromF,ebr to 2002
Tøble A-3 Average soil solution composition (SS) and suturütíon extruct (SE) results from bore water without gypsum application fromto November 2002
Depth(cm)
rt00
402510
7.734.7
SS
6.28 4.242.99t.4t
SE
ECdS/m
.-: ,l
.l'. -.:
,' . ,r.
:., a:"
139
24683
SS
l0 cm From
r307t42
SE
Camg.lL
10.814.7
SS
12.8 6.416.22
2.61
SE
ECdS/m
:, t-i",i 640
207403
SS
50 cm From Dripper
25425568
SE
Came/L
SS
7.80
SE
ECdS/m
2.552.45
:.ì"1
':),"i
SS
289
SE
Camg./L
100 cm From Dripper
9485
100
40
t(10
Depth(cm)
8.977.1
3.800.6
SS
ECdS/m
10 cm From Dripper
r.38l.l50.92
SE
- i";:, .';
t :'-.
470506l26
SS
Cams.lL
233075
SE
t 1.3
12.5
SS
ECdS/m
50 cm From Dripper
4.203.353.20
SE I i:;
:i:,,
l .i ...
l:1 "
. ,,i., ::
r,t ì
603
402
SS
Camg/L
14996
186
SE
3.1
3.4
SS
ECdS/m
100 cm From Dripper
4.0s3.609.80
SE
;: ,. li
ì1.ì:
:l'.:,.
;t::t...-
"'r..:..'
:'i!:.:,
:ìrl,:l
30764
SS
CamplL
161
129186
SE
296
100402510
Depth(cm)
5-5J2.4
2.42
0.860.881.52
SS SE
ECdS/m
Li-]" l
i)"3
((5; l.-
5.\ 14
E65
f7llFi4
ttl
"' ll2i
5ti
Ir¿lns,,'l -
181
310198
5598
291
CamqlL
SSISE
10 cm From Dripper
5.238.07
0.840.841.46
SS SE
ECdS/m
i 2.1
:.:r'
','' -¡
l.{¡iÌ_5
55
$ '9n iù
rir
só1s5q
N¡ro'/'l
sËL!n
5S
?IT
r.)g
35216613
mqlLSSISE
Ca50 cm From Dripper
2559
242
5.194.338.07
3.952.352.s0 n" )
{}.s
útir, í!
s,e";l
$ j:lsri
f+;ct49 1
--r7E
-l3J
\ianrgi t-
I sr''s$
6l -t 684151
482
21881
160
CamglL
SSISE
100 cm From Dripper
Table A-4 Average soil solution composition (SS) ünd saturation extract (SE) results Írom September to November 2001 from bore water
with 4 tonnes/hectare
Table A-5 Average soil solution composition (SS) and saturatìon extruct (SE) results from bore water with 4 tonnes/hectare gtpsum
to 2002
Table A-6 Average soil solution composit¡on (SS) ond saturstíon extract (SE) results from bore water with 4 tonnes/hectare gypsam
s to November 2002
100
402510
Depth(cm)
9.554.58
2.932.28l.8l
SS SE
ECdS/m
i 5"{)
"). "_1
I 1"3
1 i.-¡¿
i"í,
$it
l6Jlç
{r2l
5ûE
:-J I
s5,
\¿l
g/
I
5Eù_
337137
8382
s7
SS
mCa
clL
lrt
10 cm From Dripper
13.68
4.033.693.68
SS SE
ECdS/m
:$.í{? i.-ì
IL-¡iT iì
.qS $n
5:!r ii,
"38úô
:t25
i;59ót{}ir I 9;r
&ia
I
:t Itss
649217
50 cm From Dripper
135
136
142
CamglL
SSISE
12.68
4.01
3.89r.98
SS SE
ECdS/m
r5"{i
I i.il'!",
Áç
9.x.;t,
gti3l
I.{95
JJ¡J,-À
11{-
5.¿
r-r I-
5S stj
432
149
1996s3
SS
mCa
clL
lt"
100 cm From Dripper
r00402510
Depth(cm)
2.92.23
ECdS/m
SS SE
10 cm From
2.00t.4l2.21
rJ
,j,*1
3i.3" í(
$s ¡{,
i3"ilt).e
1.+
i8b2.3¡i
\xntgi i-
ss I 5i¡.
i2.3
154186
CamL
SS SE
44
3365.t59.8
ECdS/m
SS SE
50 cm From Dripper
4.623.705.95 3.:j
5.1,,(
35 sfi
!i" I
: :l--1 1225
q-[3
\'*srgi i-
ss lsrjI
tJ.a1l\ L
óE?
-r1
2481022
Camg/L
SSISNI
169ll5448
4.tl9.90
ECdS/m
SS SE
100 cm From Dripper
2.702.003.15
:"8
- .,1
s.x,r{
$5 $ll
?.fi-1.{ì
1 t:. 7: ,1
l\:¡
sqlI
L,
sfi
-{4\Ì
)ú-T
z-15
378686
Camg/L
SSISE
168
166513
297
100
402510
Depth(cm)
3.6s
0.71
0.6r
ECdS/m
SS SE
10 cm From
0.770.s80.48
:, .",:1 .
:,: jjI'lI
i.:l-t i;
t2
5255
Camg/L
SSISE
4
2344
2.47t-111.09
ECdS/m
SSISNI
50 cm From Dripper
1.3st.l20.80
.1.: 'lr
.i.,i,;..:
I l-' -l.tI
-t.
:1,".) ,:
ir;l
25t242
Camg/L
SSISE
t72tt6
7-31.6s1.74
ECdS/m
SS SE
100 cm From Dripper
1.501.080.97
J,í,.:,
;r..i-
it.Ì ij
,.III
3i
'l f.iì.:i;:,'.i
2985932
CamL
SS SE
30
302t
Tuble A-7 Averøge soil solution composition (SS) und saturetion extract (SE) results from mains water without gypsum øpplication fromto November 2001
Tabte A-B Average soil solution composition (SS) and saturstion extrøct (SE) results from mains water without gypsum applicütion fromto 2002
T,uble A-9 Average soil solution composítion (SS) ünd saturation extract (SE) results from møins wøter without gypsum øpplication fromto November 2002
10040
25l0
Depth(cm)
2.241.23 0.36
SS
ECdS/m
SE
0.990.92
IIt"I
14474 r9
mglLSSISE
Cal0 cm From Dripper
2434 2.51
0.93
SS SE
ECdS/m
1.951.25 ;.: ^.
i'. .::
.tI
I
:!"ri .
335/33
20
mg/LSSISE
Ca50 cm From Dripper
0.930.66
1.75
SS SE
ECdS/m
"t :r
. lì:.r:
l.ì t,
il
i27
LSESS
Ca100 cm From
l5t3
It00402510
Drepth(,cm)
3.86
0.980.89
ECdS/m
SS SE
10 cm From Dripper
0.61
0.550.95
" :,) .l
..',
l^:1.I
I
r.
l2
5457
CamglL
SSISE
243470
2.243.15
ECdS/m
SS SE
50 cm From Dripper
l.3l0.900.64
l': jI.tI
l393
CamglL
SSISEI
t<2534
7.583.591.50
ECdS/m
SS SE
100 cm From Dripper
3.331.52
0.99
::r ):
li; r'"'
,1":r
,".;L
:r Íir..",l:',I
-i. i:, 11
319120
25
Camg/L
SSISE
119
39
38
298
l0
Depth(cm)
1004025
1.44
1.560.56
ECdS/m
SSISEI
1.09r.26
)))ì:. .
. ¡:' 'l
.1,.¡
;,-r:ì
ì'f ^'t'
,ti l:
i':.'.'l
100
172
46100
478
CamglL
SSISE
l0 cm From Dripper
36 2_35
1.331.43
1.190.931.72
SS SE
ECdS/m
:r . ,1.
,. ii
:i.,
,'r !l
51,'
i. "",
l.
";;ii j.
ji"'j
42
r08106
mglLSSISE
Ca50 cm From D
l955283
1.291.94 2.27
1.651.24 ,.'::
J."1 )
lrt
1: L.
I.;tI
126il0
3476476
Camg/L
SSISE
100 cm From Dripper
Tsbte A-10 Average soil solution composition (SS) and saturation extract (SE) results from mains water with 4 tonnes/hectøre gtpsum
s to November 2001
Tahle A-Il Averüge soil solution composition (SS) ünd saturution extruct (SE) results from møins water with 4 tonnes/hectare gypsum
to 2002
T'able A-12 Average soil solution composition (SS) and ssturation extrøct (SE) results from mü¡ns ht&ter with 4 tonnes/hectare gypsum
to November 2002
10
Depth(,cm)
1004025 2.21
1.57 0.44
SS SE
ECdS/m
0.78
0.70.rl -.:, l,
.,: .:
t,, :r
!1,'l;':..lr. l
12383
10 cm From
202723
SS
mCa
clL
lr"4.31 l.l5
2.49
ECdS/m
SS I SN,I
2.lt
:..' :.: 5:li :" :-
t. :-'.
ll': :i
., l.t
,".tl
106
82
33173
mglLSSISE
Ca50 cm From Dripper
SS SE
ECdS/m
2.21r.342.18
.l', :
.i:- ::
":. i: ..
i,r i:
:r ,"r. ',..,I.tI
83
42178
mg/LSSISE
Ca100 cm From Dripper
100
402510
Depth(cm)
l-801.820.62
1.35
l.l51.50
SS
ECdS/m
SE
:r, ì1
, t'l t,:
.^:;_._,II
II
69191
50
66
89206
mglLSSISE
Ca10 cm From Dripper
2.351.82
2.01.62.5
:i.
'1 1
-,.; i';
\:::
lr;:"ì
Ír:.
I
l:r
t64200
50 cm From Dripper
79
67242
mg/LSSISE
Ca
2.352.43
3.602.502.50
SS
ECdS/m
SE
i:
.l o.,, '
-! ...i "l
ii!;,
ir::
.... :i
iì,
I
396200
214r8l205
mglLSSISE
Ca100 cm From Dripper
299
Appendix F: Soil Redox Potential (Eh) Prior to Averaging
1200
I 000
t 8oogE 600
õË 400
IofL 2ooxo!t&o-200
-400
1200
'1000
9 aoogÊ ooo
.U
= 400
q)
oÀ 2ooxo!&o
-200
-400
25
EE
(Ú
c'õÉ.
I Rã¡nfall0
+$*t' o*ì*o"t'ô
2001-2002
Fígure F-I Redox potential of soít itrígated with bore watØ (wíthout gltpsam)
30
20
EE
(úc'õÉ.
10
rScm
I Ra¡nfall0
úr*o**.."o ooì*'""'"ô
2001-2002
Figure F-2 Redox potentíal of soil irrigøted with bore water and 4 l/ha of g¡tpsum
øpplied
300
¡l¡ l-¡l
t 8ooE
î 600
tË 4oo.9oo- 2ooxo!t&o
-200
-400
600
tEX ¿ooEg,rE 2ooq)
oÀ!o!o)É.
-200
1200
1 000
-400
EE
(ú
.g(5É.
15
25
30
20
10
l0
5
0
I Ra¡nfãll
+$nn$ orì00""$
2001-2002
Figure F-3 Redox potential of soit ìnígaled wilh maíns wøter (wìthout g¡tpsum)
30800
EE
(ú
.EoÉ.
I Rainfall
"r$*"S ""å*"^\
"t'""
2001-2002
Fìgure F-4 Redox potentiøl of soíl inigøted wílh maíns wøter ønd 4 l/ha of g¡tpsum
øpplíed
301
Appendix G - Barossa Valley lrrigation Water Composition
AIEC Ca Cu Fe K Mn Mg Na P S Zn [Ca] tMSl [Na] tKllrrigationWater
BoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBore
SamplingDate dS/m pH mg/L (mmol/L) (mmoUl) SAR
2711212000271121200027/1212000
41112001411/200141112001
18/11200118/11200118/1/20012511/200125/1/2001251112001
11?/20011/212001112/20018/21200181212001
812J20011512J2001
15/212001151212001
22/2120012212/2001221212001
61312001
6/3120016/31200115/312001151312001
1513/20012213/2001221312001
22/3/20015112/20015/12/2001
2.102.102.202.152.052.O52.202.252.253.112.952.963.063.043.003.123.'123.153.133.143.113.063.083.083.133.133.153.183.173.163.053.063.061.822.29
8.597.877.987.677.998.397.588.327.658.168.088.277.917.958.208.067.948.167.248.148.497.517.567.427.738.208.088.387.327.267.367.877.327.777.67
-o.21-0.20-o.21-0.10-o.21-0.20-o.14-0.20-o.21-o.23-o.22-o.22-o.20-0.17-o.21-o.17-o.22-o.22-o.21-o.22-o.22-o.20-o.22-o.20-o.27-0.33-0.30-0.31-0.10-0.33-0.34-0.34-o.34o.o70.08
0.300.30o.32o.320.30o.270.350.300.310.330.310.330.330.39o.340.330.330.300.340.330.340.330.330.300.340.3s0.380.340.34o.370.330.310.35o.250.30
73.2381.40103.3388.7067.4954.O4
109.8961.53106.47123.6975.0975.U93.03107.0577.08
1 16.99117.76114.96123.26116.01131.40129.27123.6712'1.58127.82107.08't26.92
118.94125.60128.49122.54124.60125.2359.5498.57
0.100.100.130.160.090.090.100.100.100.140.100.100.110.100.080.100.120,100.100.100.110.100.090.100.090,080.080.070.080.080.090.08o.o70.000.00
-o.27-0.27-0.25-0.14-o.25-0.26-0.26-o.26-o.26-o.27-0.27-0.27-o.26-0.20-o.26-0.26-o.25-o.27-o.26-0.26-0.27-0.26-o.25-0.26-0.30-0.37-0.38-0.38-0.38-0.39-0.38-0.38-0.39-0.09-0.09
11.4211.71
11.2311.4211.1210.9911.4711.3310.9911.4011.4911.6611.5113.7311.3710.9511.2410.9410.8611.1711.8511.6410.6910.8313.8114.4914.2814.3813.8414.2213.7013.6413.8510.9513.51
-o.o7-0.07-0.070.04-0.06-0.06-0.07-0.07-0.07-o.o7-0.07-0.07-0.07-0.01-0.06-o.o7-0,06-0.07-0.07-0.07-0.07-o.o7-o.o7-0.07-0.10-0.16-o.17-o.17-0.17-o.17-0.17-0.17-o.17-o.12-o.12
73.7773.8171.7574.9173.3771.9275.1972.9273.4274.5176.2675.3874.2190.2876.1374.9071.4973.7874.3074.8379.4077.7674.5673.3179.3478.7480.0580.4577.9179.7275.2076.9677.6561.7975.78
449.47450.16432.95457.51451.88445.32461.77453.22452.44458.17460.29455.65444.91543.86459.78447.44425.24442.34444.48447.65474.46460.09441.O4433.72465.78463.41470.64475.60459.41470.42428.07439.60445.44338.53417.67
0.110.050.05o.120.040.040.040.040.050.070.030.050.080.080.030.070.070.060.060.03o.o70.040.040.050.040.000.000.010.00-0.01
0.02-0.020.01-0.01
0.01
51.0150.7749.5951.5650.2048.7051.5750.0950.375',1.27
52.3651.5250.2462.3051.9051.0848.7250.3850.8551.1854.4954.0051.7550.8551.5750.7451.8552.O7
50.4451.5149.6450.6151.0039.7549.43
0.070.080.080.130.060.08o.o7o.o70.090.160.070.050.060.070.150.080.08o.070.180.070.56o.20o.22o.250.080.050.060.050.18o.200.420.290.19o.o2o.o4
1.832.032.582.211.681.352.741.542.663.091.871.882.322.671.922.922.942.873.082.893.283.233.093.033.192.673.172.973.133.213.063.113.121.492.46
3.033.042.953.083.O22.963.093.003.O2
3.063.143.103.053.713.133.082.943.033.063.083.273.203.O73.O2
3.263.243.293.313.203.283.093.173.192.543.12
19.5519.5818.8319.9019.6619.3720.0919.7119.6819.9320.0219.8219.3523.6620.0019.4618.5019.2419.3319.4720.6420.0119.1818.8720.2620.1620.4720.6919.9820.4618.6219.1219.3814.7318.17
o.290.300.290.29o.280.280.29o.290.280.290.290.300.290.350.290.280.290.28o.28o.290.300.30o.27o.280.350.370.370.370.350.360.350.350.350.280.35
8.878.708.01
8.659.069.338.329.268.268.048.948.888.359.368.907.957.637.927.817.978.077.907.737.677.988.298.058.267.948.047.517.637.717.347.69
Page 302
A ca cu Fe K Mn Mg Na P S Zn [ca] [MS] [Na] tKJlrrigationWater
BoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBoreBore
MainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMains
SamplingDate
ECdS/m
2.282.292.322.232.322.252.322.302.U2.322.292.252.272.21
0.310.300.300.380.380.380.450.46o.470.600.600.590.590.580.58o.520.530.530.500.490.500.49
7.897.957.957.917.938.017.997.937.927.988.098.238.177.67
8.258.228.218.288.328.448.248.268.238.068.218.358.368.558.548.318.548.047.948.358.O78.34
117.20115.281 18.2895.38
1 13.1578.54115.02113.34120.14117.0862.3054.4060.1 7120.26
24.9624.3624.5322.9823.0122.9023.4123.6023.2323.2522.9723.O4
19.1319.6519.5321.4021.6921.3921.7021.4121.5323.27
0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.010.000.010.000.000.03
0.050.050.060.060.050.050.050.060.060.070.080.070.080.060.060.08o.120.061.65o.570.190.10
-0.09-0.07-0.08-0.09-0.09-0.09-0.09-0.08-0.08-0.08-0.09-0.09-0.09-0.09
-0.20-0.19-0.13-0.18-o.20-o.20-0.20-0.20-o.20-0.20-0.20-o.20-0.15-0.19-0.19-o.20-0.20-o.20-0.13-0.16-0.19-0.19
13.4913.3213.5013.4713.4713.3213.5413.6213.5313.5413.8814.O4
14.1315.26
5.075.06s.365.755.495.605.805.675.845.755.555.646.095.885.776.006.036.256.296.266.467.29
75.9774.9975.6875.3975.2474.3675.5275.1775.6375.4076.9978.1178.6375.05
9.088.898.9311.2911.2811.3813.5913.7213.5112.7812.4912.5412.3312.5712.5410.7511.0210.7610.8210.7310.7510.80
418.45422.63426.46424.64429.O4424.95430.27430.19433.05431.21444.83453.75455.76424.79
51.0850.2250.0176.5676.7776.8890.1391.2289.5583.0481.2581.6081.6084.3583.9475.5676.æ76.9671.4471.'t271.5669.00
0.010.01o.o20.01o.020.000.020.01o.02o.o20.000.010.010.05
-0.03-0.040.01-0.03-0.03-o.o2-0.04-0.02-0.02-0.02-0.02-o.o20.01-0.02-0.04-o.o2-0.03-0.02-0.01-0.01-o.o20.00
49.5549.0949.6549.3349.3648.8449.3949.O4
49.4549.2249.7050.5850.9849.06
17.1016.8816.9119.2519.2919.2318.3718.41
18.2217.3717.2217.2616.5016.8616.7617.8317.9217.7216.8816.7316.8615.05
0.040.040.030.030.030.030.030.030.040.04o.o20.030.030.08
o.120.080.050.03o.o2o.o20.020.030.030.030.030.030.030.030.020.040.050.030.430.180.090.04
2.922.882.952.382.821.962.872.833.002.921.551.361.503.00
0.620.610.61o.57o.570.570.580.590.580.58o.570.57o.480.490.490.530.540.530.540.530.540.58
3.133.083.113.103.093.063.113.093.113.103.173.213.233.09
o.370.370.370.460.460.470.560.560.560.530.51o.520.510.520.52o.440.45o.440.44o.44o.44o.44
18.2018.3818.5518.4718.6618.4818.7218.71
18.8418.7619.3519.7419.8218.48
2.222.182.183.333.343.343.923.973.903.613.533.553.553.673.653.293.333.353.113.093.113.00
0.350.340.350.340.340.340.350.350.350.350.360.360.360.39
SAR
2.232.212.203.273.283.283.673.70ó.oo3.433.393.403.583.663.653.333.343.393.133.133.152.97
B
5112/200131112002311120023/1120021/2/200211?/200211212002
25/21200225/2J2002251212002
'/4120022/4120022/41200291412002
271121200027/121200027t1212000
41112001411/20014/112001181112001
1811/200118/112001251112001
25/112001251112001
1/2J20011/21200111212001812/20018/2/200181212001
15/?,200115/21200115/2J20012212,2001
0.070.080.100.110.080.080.080.080.080.080.070.070.080.08
0.300.310.31o.32o.32o.32o.32o.320.33o.320.330.340.34o.32
-o.12-0.10-0.11-0.11-o.12-o.12-o.12-0.11-0.11-0.11-o.12-o.12-o.12-0.11
7.407.537.537.897.678.257.667.697.627.648.909.239.117.49
-0.10-0.09-0.04-0.11-0.15-0.16-0.080.08-0.08-0.07-0.07-0.07-0.08-0.11-o.12-o.12-o.120.18-0.01-o.14-0.15-0.13
0.030.030.030.050.040.06o.o70.070.080.090.060.060.090.060.06o.o70.080.080.050.060.060.05
-0.08-0.08-0.03-0.08-0.08-0.08-0.08-0.08-0.08-0.08-0.08-0.08-0.05-0.08-0.08-0.08-0.08-0.08-0.08-0.08-0.08-0.09
0.130.130.140.15o.14o.140.150.150.150.150.14o.140.160.150.150.r50.150.160.160.16o.170.19
Page 303
lrrigationWater
SamplingDate
EC AIdS/m pH mg/L B mg/L
Ca Cu Fe K Mn Mg Na P S Zn [Ca] [MS] [Na] tKmg/L mg/L mg/L mglL mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L m
MainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMainsMains
0.490.500.480.500.500.490.480.490.500.510.510.31o.42o.410.46o.470.46o.48o.47o.470.460.460.47o.320.34o.320.51
8.488.868.168.558.477.777.818.058.038.128.208.607.458.057.847.917.827.847.827.867.847.827.837.697.787.727.70
-o.12-0.07-0.11-0.08-0.11-0.10-0.11-0.11-0.11-o.12-0.11
0.050.060.100.090.100.090.11o.140.110.050.050.050.080.070.07o.o4
0.06o.o70.060.070.060.070.07o.o70.060.050.060.010.060.060.07o.o70.070.080.080.070.080.080.080.060.050.050.08
22.9923.4526.O226.2126.1325.4725.0025.6025.O225.6725.679.1116.7719.8319.7920.4022.7222.1321.9120.4722.5022.8725.9718.8418.9620.o121.34
o.070.070.060.060.060.090.080.10o.o70.071.950.000.010.010.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.010.010.000.01
-0.19-0.13-0.19-0.19-o.20-0.20-0.20-0.20-0.19-0.19-0.19-0.04-0.04-0.01-0.05-0.05-0.05-0.05-0.02-0.04-0.05-0.05-0.05-o.o2-0.04-0.04-0.04
7.337.228.958.848.838.718.488.526.997.O87.091.375.986.056.806.737.O4
7.677.377.578.198.198.436.977.018.O7
9.07
-0.08-0.02-0.08-0.08-0.08-0.08-0.09-0.09-0.09-0.09-0.09-0.06-0.06-o.o2-0.06-0.06-0.06-0.06-0.03-0.05-0.06-0.06-0.06-0.03-0.05-0.05-0.06
10.5610.8112.O3
12.1412.0912.O7
1'1.76
12.0611.4711.7911.773.2012.3613.4714.1014.0115.3114.8814.2414.1714.9614.9116.0610.2410.3510.8414.20
67.8569.6366.6167.5067.3867.8766.0767.2466.2867.6867.4217.5677.5077.1086.4084.6985.7586.2483.1384.1682.O280.8281.3752.4553.2753.9083.35
-0.01
0.01-o.02-0.01-0.01-0.02-0.02-0.01-0.01-0.01-0.01
0.000.010.030.030.030.040.040.060.040.150.150.160.010.000.000.11
14.9415.3113.0013.0012.9912.3812.1612.41
12.3912.5812.522.3611.361 1.1911.9812.OO
1 1.5911.6411.7311.588.718.628.4112.8512.9812.659.24
0.030.03o.o20.020.030.040.040.050.030.030.040.000.01o.o20.000.000.000.000.010.000.010.000.000.010.010.00o.02
0.570.590.650.650.650.640.620,640.620.640.64o.23o.420.490.490.510.570.550.550.510.560.570.65o.470.470.500.53
0.43o.44.0.490.500.500.500.480.50o.470.480.480.130.510.550.580.580.630.610.590.58o.620.610.66o.420.430.450.58
2.953.032.902.942.932.952.872.922.882.942.930.763.373.353.763.683.733.753.623.663.573.523.542.282.322.343.63
0.190.18o.230.23o.23o.220.220.220.180.180.180.040.150.150.17o.170.180.200.190.19o.21o.210.220.180.18o.21o.23
2.942.982.712.732.732.772.732.752.752.772.771.283.503.273.633.543.41
3.483.403.503.293.233.092.422.442.413.43
22J?/2001221212001
6/31200161312001
6/3/200115/312001151312001
151312001
22J31200122J312001
22J312001511212001
5112J20015112J200131112002311/2002311120021/21200211212002
112J200225/2/200225/2J20022512/2002z412002214120022/4120029/412002
Page 304
November 2001
(maximum leaching)December 2001
(after 2 weeks inigation)Apnl2002
(maximum salt)
Date of SamplingJu,ly 2002
(mid winter)November 2002
(maximum leaching)December 2002 April 2003
(after 2 weeks irrigation) (ma,rimum salt)
10
20?-&5Ä¿o
50
60
l0
20
Êõ30
840
50
60
10
20?930
Ä40
50
60
l0
Êõ30
F¿o
50
60
l0
20ãi, 30
Ä¿o
50
60
l0
20
ìi lo
840
50
60
l0
20
äÄ¿o
50
60
l0
20
5ÌoE840
50
60
Electrical Conductivþ (EC) dS/m - (a)
Sodium Adsorption Ratio (SAR) - (b)
Sodium
- ods/m
r I ds/m
- 2ds/m
- 3ds/m
- 4ds/m5 ds/n
- 7ds/m
r 0 mmol/Lr 5 mmol/L
- l0 mmol/L15 mmol/L
r 20 mmol/L
- 0 mmol/L
- I mmol/L
- 2 mmol/L
- 3 mmol/L
- 4 mmol/L
6 mmoul
- 8 mmol/L
Calcium
02468101211
Appendix H: Showing Non-Inigated Ba¡ossa- Initial site with contamination; with the white line indicating the A./B interface 305
Appendix I: Oral Presentations
Date Title Organisation
25 September2000
November2000
10 March200r
19 Jtne2002
17 August2002
10 October2002
2 December2002
31 January2003
12Jtne2OO3
4 April2001
6May 2002 krigation Induced Salinity
Management of Saline Irrigation Waterin Barossa Valley Vineyards
Soil and water toxics
Presentation ofresearch at Barossa fieldsite
Sustainability of Long-Term VineyardIrrigation with Water of Marginal
Quality (Introductory PhD Seminar)
Vineyard Soil Degradation followingIrrigation with Saline Groundwater
Poster Presentation: Vineyard SoilDegradation following Irrigation with
Saline Groundwater for 20 years
Vineyard Soil Degradation followingInigation with Saline Groundwater
Seasonal Changes inSoil Chemical Properties in an
Inigated Barossa Valley Vineyard(awarded "best under 35 oral
presentation" for the conference)
Vineyard Soil Degradation followingInigation with Saline Groundwater
Properties and Ameliorationof Red Brown Earths
in Vineyards Drip Irrigated with SalineWater
CRCV Program 2Meeting,Waite Institute, SA
Research into PracticeWorkshop, Mclaren Vale
CRCV
Dept Soil and Water,Adelaide University
B arossa Valley AgriculturalBureau Conference
CRCV Program 2 ReviewMeeting, CSIRO Merbein,
Vic
17ü World Congress of SoilScience, Bangkok Thailand
SA Dryland SalinityTechnical Advisory Group,
Adelaide
ASS SI Conference, Perth
Barossa Valley ViticultureTechnical Group, Barossa
Valley Field Site
Tatura Research Station
306
22 Algust2003
4 September2003
October 2003
23March2004
July 2004
July 2004
July 2004
Modelling Impacts of Saline hrigationand Gypsum Application on Barossa
Soils
Management of Saline Irrigation'Waterin Barossa Valley Vineyards
Modelling Impacts of Saline Irrigationand Gypsum Application on Barossa
Soils. Note: Invited speaker, butpresented by M. McCarthy
Impact of Drip krigation on theProperties of Red Brown Earths
following Changing ManagementPractices in Vineyards
P o st er P res entation: Vineyard SoilD e g radation follow ing I r ri g ation w ith
Saline Groundwater for 20 years
P o st er P re s entation : Gyp sum
Amelioration of lrrigated BarossaValley Vineyards
Worksop P re s entation: H olistic soilmanagement
Barossa Valley ViticultureTechnical Group, St Hallet
Winery
CRCV Program 2 ReviewMeeting, Adelaide
Fable Wine Consulting
Discipline of Soil and LandSystems, University of
Adelaide
l2'h AWITC, Melbourne
l2'h AWITC, Melbourne
l2th AWITC, Melbourne
307
Clark, L., Fitzpatrick, R., McCarthy, M., Murray, R. and Chittleborough, D. 2002: Vineyard soil degradation following irrigation with saline groundwater for twenty years. Proceedings of the International Union of Soil Science, 17th World Congress of Soil Science, 14-21 August 2002, Thailand. Symposium no. 33, Vol 3 pp 1115 CD-ROM
NOTE: This publication is included in the print copy of the thesis held in the University of Adelaide Library.
Clark , L., Fitzpatrick, R., McCarthy, M., Chittleborough, D., Murray, R., and Hutson, J., 2002 Seasonal changes in soil chemical properties in an irrigated Barossa Valley vineyard in FutureSoils: Managing soil resources to ensure access to markets for future generations, Australian Society of Soil Science, National Conference, December 2002, Perth. Pp 44-45
NOTE: This publication is included in the print copy of the thesis held in the University of Adelaide Library.