Effect of Polyacrylamide Polymer on Wind Erosion Control of Sandy Soil in Azadegan Plain

آب و خاک

Article 7, Volume 31, Issue 4 - Serial Number 54, September 2018, Pages 1070-1082   

Document Type: Research Article

DOI: 10.22067/jsw.v31i4.32428

Authors

F. Arzaghi¹; A. Farrokhian Firouzi^{* 1}; N. Enayatizamir; B. Khalilimoghaddam²

¹Faculty of Agriculture, Shahid Chamran University of Ahvaz

²Ramin Agriculture and Natural Resources University of Khuzestan

Abstract

Introduction: Wind erosion is the most important agent of environmental degradation, poverty of soil, air pollution and the dust spread. Wind erosion is causing a lot of damage to crops, buildings, facilities and vehicles. The first step of the wind erosion control is the stabilization of soil particles. Soil stabilizing methods to control wind erosion can be classified into mechanical, biological and chemical stabilization. Mechanical soil stabilization type is relatively time-consuming and costly. Biological stabilization is a traditional way that exhibits a long-term validity but sandy soil cannot provide essential water and nutrition elements needed by plant. Recently, chemical stabilization such as high-molecular-weight anionic polyacrylamide (PAM) has attracted the attention of researchers because of its advantages in easy and quick construction, and the improvement of the growing conditions for plant. However PAM has been mainly used to control water erosion and there is still little available information regarding the effectiveness of PAM on preventing soil loss by wind erosion. The main objective of this study was to investigate the feasibility of using PAM in wind erosion controlling. Also, effects of PAM on some soil physical and chemical properties and their temporal variability were evaluated.
Materials and Methods: In this study polyacrylamide polymer was used as a restoration of soil and soil structure stabilizer on sandy soil of Azadegan Plain (Khuzestan province, Iran). Consequently, an experiment was conducted as factorial based on completely randomized design with three replicates. The experimental treatments were consist polyacrylamide polymer (PAM) at three levels (0, 0.5, and 1 %), soil moisture at two levels (80% FC and dry) and time duration at three levels (15, 30 and 45 days). The emulsion of PAM was sprayed homogeneously on the soil surface. After passing each time treatment, penetration resistance and some physical and chemical properties of soil was measured. Finally after doing all measurements, the treatment with maximum penetration resistance were selected and the sample was prepared for wind tunnel testing. The wind erosion experiments were conducted in a wind tunnel. Soil samples were located in removable trays. The width and length of the trays was 30 and 100 cm, respectively. The wind erosion experiments were performed under wind velocity of 12 m s−1 according to the actual situation of study area.
Results and Discussion: The results indicated that in comparison to control, soil acidity decreased at both levels of the polymer with increasing time. The decreasing of soil acidity in wet treatments was more than dry treatment. The lowest amount of pH was obtained in the 30-day wet treatment at 1% polymer level. The results show from the 30th day onwards, soil pH increased, which is probably due to the polymer degradation. With passing time, soil electrical conductivity (EC) at both levels of the polymer (0.5 and 1%) increased and decreased respectively after 30 days. These observations are probably because after 30 days the properties of polymer-hydrophilic units gradually decrease and water adsorption was reduced or that soil soluble salts were adsorbed by polymer particles. The results also showed with passing time, Mean Weight-Diameter of Soil Aggregates (MWD) increased and then after 30 days declined. The largest MWD was observed in 30 days treatment at 1% polymer level. After thirty days, its effect has probably diminished due to polymer degradation. Furthermore, the results showed no significant difference of bulk density among treated soil with different level of polymer, but application of polymer caused to decrease bulk density comparison to control. Polymer application increased soil penetration resistance significantly. Using 1% of polymer increased it to 6 kg/m2. The results also indicated that the soil resistance at first increased with time and then decreased significantly. The amount of soil penetration resistance at 45-day was less than 15-day. The results of wind tunnel with a maximum 12 m/s wind velocity showed that application of the polymer reduced the erosion of sands samples to zero.
Conclusion: The research results indicated that PAM application increased soil penetration resistance and MWD. The polymer could improve the structure of soil aggregates and increase the amount of dry-stable aggregates and therefore decrease soil bulk density. Spraying PAM solution on the surface of soil significantly decreased the wind erosion amounts. Therefore, this inexpensive and easily usable polymer can be considered as a soil stabilizer to control wind erosion in arid and semiarid areas.

Keywords

Penetration resistance; Soil Moisture; Time; wind tunnel

References

1. Ahmadi H., Ekhtessasi M.R., Feiznia S., and Ghanei Bafghi M.J. 2002. Control Methods of Wind Erosion for Railroads Protection (Case study: Bafgh Region). Iranian Journal of Natural Resources, 3: 327-338. (in Persian with English abstract)

2. Al-Harbi A.R., Al-Omran A.M., Shalalay A.A., and Choudhary, M.L. 1999.Efficacy of a hydrophilic polymer declines with time in greenhouse experiments.HortScience, 34(2): 223-224.

3. Azzam R.A. 1980. Tailoring polymeric gels for soil reclamation and hydroponics. Communications. Soil Science and Plant Analysis, 16(10): 1123-1138.

4. Chen Q.C., Jiang P.F., Lei T.W., Li R.P., and Tang Z. J. 2006. Wind tunnel experiment on the impacts of polyacrylamide on wind erosion of loosens soil materials. Transactions of the CSA, 22: 7–11 (in Chinese with English Abstract)

5. Chepil W.S. 1945. Dynamics of wind erosion: I. Nature of movement of soil by wind. Soil Science, 60: 305–320.

6. Esmaili Dastjerdipor A., Farpor H.M., and Sarcheshmeh pour M. 2011. Comparison of crust strength derived from cyanobacteria inoculation and polymers in a sandy soil. The 5th National Conference and Exhibition of Environmental Engineering, 21-22 Nov. 2011. Tehran University, Iran.

7. He J.J., Cai G.Q., and Tang Z.J. 2007. Wind tunnel experimentalstudy on the effect of PAM on soil wind erosioncontrol. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 145:185–193.

8. Kazemi A. Darbandi S.,and Ahmadi A. 2011. Investigation of the effect of a new polymer on soil infiltration and soil aggregate stability against erosion. 1th National Congress on New Science and Technology, 10-12 Sept. 2011. Zanjan, Iran (in Persian).

9. Kouchakzadeh M.,Sabagh Foroush E.I., and Ganji Khoramdel N. 2000.The effect of water superabsorbent polymer on some physical properties of soil. Journal of Soil and Water Sciences, 14(2): 176-186 (in Persian with English abstract).

10. Lal, R. 2003. Soil erosion and global carbon budget, International Environment, 29: 437-450.

11. Lian-You L., Shang-Yu G., Pei-Jun S., Xiao-Yan L., and Zhi-Bao D. 2003. Wind tunnel measurements of adobe abrasion by blown sand: profile characteristics in relation to wind velocity and sand flux. Journal of Arid Environments, 53(3): 351-363.

12. Mahdian, M. 2005. Investigating the status of land degradation in Iran. 3th National Conference on Erosion and Sediment, 18-31 Aug. 2005. Soil Conservation and Watershed Management Research Institute, Tehran, Iran (in Persian).

13. Modaresnia A.R., Sadeghi M.M., Abtahi S.M., and Emtiazi, G. 2011. Performance Evaluation of the Microbiology Stabilization of sand dunes using wind tunnel (case study: Segzi, Isfahan). 2th International conference on sustainable development and urban construction, 1-2 Dec. 2011, Isfahan, Iran (in Persian).

14. Nordstrom K.F., and Hotta S. 2004. Wind erosion from cropland in the USA: a review of problems, solutions and prospects. Geoderma, 121: 157–167.

15. Oumarou Malam Issa O., De´farge C., Bissonnais Y L., Marin Be., Duval O., Bruand A., D’Acqui., Nordenberg S., and Annerman M. 2007. Effects of the inoculation of cyanobacteria on the microstructure and the structural stability of a tropical soil. Plant Soil, 290: 209–219.

16. Samaei H.R., Golchin A., Mosadeghi M.R., and Ahmadi, Sh. 2012.The Effects of Water Soluble Polymers on Physical Properties of the Soils with Different Texture in Hamedan. Journal of Water and Soil, 26 (4): 809-817.

17. Sekhavatian A., and Eslami A. 2010. Comparisons of in situ and laboratory tests for evaluation of non-drainage shear strength of Rasht claysoil. 4th International Conference on Geotechnical Engineering and Soil Mechanics, 2-3 NOV. 2010. Tehran, Iran.

18. Shorafa M. 1987. The effect of perlite and hydroplas on porosity, water retention and soil hydraulic conductivity. M.Sc. thesis, College of Agriculture and Natural Resources, University of Tehran. Iran (in Persian with English abstract).

19. Skidmore E. L. 1986.Wind erosion control. Climatic Change. 9: 209–218.

20. Sojka R.E., and Lentz R.D. 1997. Reducing furrow irrigation erosion with polyacrylamide (PAM). Journal of Production Agriculture, 10: 47–52

21. Sojka R.E., Bjorneberg D.L., Entry J.A., Lentz R.D., and Orts W.J. 2007. Polyacrylamide in agriculture and environmental land management. Advances in Agronomy, 92: 75–162.

22. Steven Green V., and Stott D.E. 2001. Polyacrylamid: A review of the use, effectiveness, and cost of a soil erosion control amendment. Hort Science, 36: 384-389.

23. Subramaniam N. and Chinappa G.P. 2002. Remote sensing and GIS techniques for land degradation assessment due to water erosion, in: 17th WCSS (Thailand): 815-819.

24. Telysheva G. and Shulga G. 1995. Silicon-containing polycomplexes for protection against wind erosion of sandysoil. Journal of agricultural engineering research, 62(4):221-227.

25. Tisdall J.,NelsonS., Wilkinson K., Smith S., and Mckenzie B. 2012. Stabilization of soil against erosion by six saprotrophic fungi. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 50: 134-141.

26. Wang Y., and Boogher C.A. 1987. Effect of medium-incorporated hydrogel on plantgrowth and water use of two foliage species. Journal of Environmental Horticulture, 5:125-127.

27. Zabihi F., Neyshabouri M.R., and Dalalian M.R. 2013. Effects of Polyacrylamide, Pumice and Municipal Compost on Some Physical and Chemical Characteristics of a Saline-Sodic Clay Soil. Water and Soil Science, 23(3): 79-92. (in Persian with English abstract)

28. Zangooi Nasab Sh., Emami H., Astaraei A., and Yari A. 2012. The Effect of different levels of superabsorbent and irrigation duration on some soil physical properties and growth indices of Atriplex plant. Journal of Water Research in Agriculture, 26 (2): 211-223. (in Persian with English abstract)

29. Zhao H.L., Yi X.Y., Zhou R.L., Zhao X.Y., Zhang T.H., and Drake S. 2006.Wind erosion and sand accumulation effects on soil properties in Horqin Sandy Farmland, Inner Mongolia, Catena, 65: 71-76