Effect of Magnetic Treated Irrigation Water on Salt Removal from a Sandy Soil

and on the Availability of certain Nutrients

Hilal** M. H.; El-Fakhrani*, Y. M.; Mabrouk*, S.S.; Mohamed, A.I*.; Ebead *, B.M.
*Soil & Water Dept., Faculty of Agric, Suez Canal Univ.
**Soils and Water Use Dept., National Research Centre, Cairo.
ABSTRACT
Ferro magnetism is a property of certain metals and alloys, while Para
magnetism is a property of all materials and water is not an exception. When passing
a magnetic field, irrigation water gain a magnetic moment and retain it for 24 to 48
hrs. Magnetic treatment of irrigation water depends on magnetic field intensity,
composition of dissolved salts and velocity of crossing a magnetron of 0.5 inch
diameter. In this work magnetic activation of 3 different sources of irrigation water,
namely: Ismailia canal; El-Salam canal; Abou-Sewer well, caused a little effect on
water analyses. However magnetic treated water undergoes several changes in its
physical properties. It also exerts several effects on the soil waterplant system. A
column experiment was carried out to evaluate the effect of magnetic treated
irrigation water on the movement and availability of certain nutrients and on the
leaching of ions and salts from a sandy soil (Suez Canal Uni. Farm). Total salt
removal from the soil after six displacements was significantly increased with
magnetized water as compared with the normal water. Total salt removal from the soil
after the course of leaching of soil irrigated with magnetized Ismailia Canal, El-Salam
Canal or Abou-Sewer well water were about 39, 32 and 25%, respectively over the
non magnetized water. The rate of both of salt removal and magnetization effect keep
dropping by successive leaching. Assessment of Soil salinity after leaching indicated
that Abou-Sewer well water increased soil salinity by 10 folds over that of Ismailia
canal water. However, magnetic treatment and phosphate application caused little
effects, at all soil depths. The highest Extractable soil K After leaching, with normal
and magnetized water, was detected at soil depth of 15-30 cm while the lowest K
value was present at soil surface of (0-5 cm). That indicated that K moved down ward
to the third depth (15-30 cm). K concentration in soil water extract increased
significantly after leaching with magnetized water compared with normal water at all
soil depths. Percentages of phosphate in the first displacement, with magnetized
water, were about 39, 45 and 46%, over the non magnetized irrigation water, of
Ismailia Canal, El-Salam Canal and Abou-Sewer well water, respectively. Leaching
the soil with magnetized water significantly increased available soil P content
compared with the leaching with normal water at all soil depths. Behavior of nutrients
in a magnetic field is a function their magnetic susceptibility.
Keywords: Magnetron unit– Magnetic susceptibility- Irrigation water quality –Tri
Calcium Phosphate - Soil columns- Displacement of soil solution.

1. Introduction
In arid and semi- arid region sustainable agricultural development is
influenced to a great extent by water quality that might be used economically and
effectively in developing agriculture programs. Soil desalination at such conditions is
also a crucial problem facing agriculture. Agriculture suffered from both salt-affected
soils beside saline underground brackish water contains varying amounts of dissolved
salts used for irrigation. Tackashinko (1997) stated that the possibility of using
magnetized water to desalinate the soil is accounted for the enhanced dissolving
capacity of the magnetized water, which has been registered repeatedly. Zhu et al.,
(1986) has also reported that laboratory tests have showed that desalination of a saline

1
soil was 29 % greater in the first leaching and 33 % greater in the second leaching
with magnetized water compared to untreated water.
Magnetized water was shown to have 3 main effects: 1) increasing the
leaching of excess soluble salts, 2) lowering soil alkalinity and 3) dissolving slightly
soluble salts such carbonates, phosphates and sulfates. However, the degree of
effectiveness of magnetized water on soil salinity and ionic balance in soil solution
depended greatly on the traveling distance of magnetized water along the drip
irrigation lines (Hilal and Hilal, 2000a and b). Tai et al. (2008) observed that on
subjecting water to magnetic field, it leads to modification of its properties, as it
becomes more energetic and more able to flow which can be considered as a birth of
new science called Magneto biology. They also pointed out that, magnetized water
prevents harmful metals such as, lead and nickel, from uptake by roots and reaching
fruits and roots. However, it increases the percentage of nutrient elements like
phosphorus, potassium and zinc.
Some researchers reported that magnetic treatment affects water properties,
such as light absorbance, pH, zeta potential and surface tension (Holysz et al., 2002;
Chibowski et al., 2003; Cho and Lee, 2005). However, these effects have not always
been confirmed (Limpert and Raber, 1985; Baker et al., 1997). Chibowski et al.
(2003) reviewed the literatures on magnetic field treatment and carried out tests on
magnetic field effects on precipitated calcium carbonate in well-defined and
controlled systems and conditions. Amiri and Dadkhah (2006) found that changes in
surface tension due to magnetic treatment can be a key point in tracing impurities in
water. Meaningful changes in surface tension of a liquid sample after a day can be a
good indicator for the presence of physical and chemical changes in the sample.
The objective of the current study is to evaluate the effect of magnetized
irrigation water quality (i.e. Ismailia canal, El-Salam canal and Abou-Sewer well
water) and the individual and the combined application of sewage sludge compost
(SSC) and tricalcium phosphate (TCP) on the availability of certain nutritional
elements and the movement and leachability of salinity from a sandy soil.

2. Materials and methods

Column experiment was carried out to investigate the role of magnetized
irrigation water on the availability of certain nutritional elements, the efficiency of
salt removal and leachability from a sandy soil (Table 1). The PVC columns with 35
cm in length and 8.6 cm in diameter were used. The PVC columns were covered at
the bottom with plastic screen, with 2.0 mm hole at the center. The bottom of PVC
column was covered with filter paper. The Sandy soil sample which was collected
from the experimental farm of the Faculty of Agriculture, Suez Canal University, was
air dried, sieved by 2.0 mm sieve and thoroughly mixed. The PVC column was
thoroughly packed with soil at rate of 3.0 kg with 32 cm height.
The experimental design was divided into two main plots, i.e. normal and
magnetized irrigation water. The subplots were divided into three sets, i.e. Ismailia
canal, El-Salam canal and Abou-Sewer well waters. The sub-subplots were divided
into two sets, i.e. sewage sludge compost and tricalcium phosphate. Thereafter, each
experimental treatment was replicated 3 times and the experimental design was as
follows:
1. Soil (Control)
2. Soil + 720 kg tricalcium phosphate (Ca3(PO4)2) ha-1 (TCP)

2
 Irrigation water sources were magnetized by passing a magnetic field and will
acquire a magnetic moment for 48-72 hours after crossing the magnetic field.
However, such time is good enough for magnetized irrigation water to impose
magnetic effect on the soil plant– water system. The water passed throws 1000 gauss
magnetron unit of 0.5 inch diameter which produced by magnetic technologies
(Takatchenko, 1997).
Tricalcium phosphate, 46% P2O5, were added at rates of 13.5 g and 0.5
g/column, and mixed with the surface 10 cm of the soil column. Each column was
saturated by capillary rise from bottom to top the soil by the different normal and
magnetized water sources.
Saturated soil columns were kept 4 days periods from the first leaching;
followed by 6 leachates at 15-day intervals. Water of different treatments was added
at 1.5 times of the water holding capacity. Water leachates of the different treatments
were collected and prepared for analyses electrical conductivity (EC, dSm-1), soluble
K and P. The pH of the soil samples is determined by bench type Beckman glass
electrode pH meter in 1: 2.5 soil water suspensions according to Page et al, (1982).
Also, total salt removal (mg/column) from each soil was calculated. Split-split plot
design with three replicates was used and Plabstat version 2D computer program was
used for statistical analysis.
Soil water holding capacity and mechanical analysis were determined
according to Richards, (1954). Electrical conductivity was measured in the saturated
soil and 1:5 soil: distilled water extracts and expressed as (dSm-1) using conductivity
meter model 710 according to Richards (1954). Soil extracts were used for the
determinations of soluble K and P according to Richards (1954).

Table (1). Some chemical and physical characteristics of used soil.

pH 7.60
ECe, dSm-1 2.10
Ca2+, meql-1 5.70
Mg 2+, meql-1 5.30
Na+, meql-1 8.10
K+ , meql-1 1.20
HCO3-, meql-1 4.80
Cl-, meql-1 7.50
SO4-2, meql-1 8.30
Available N, (ppm) 8.00
Available P, (ppm) 5.00
Available K, (ppm) 10.5
CaCO3, % 0.69
Organic matter, % 0.43
Water holding capacity, % 16.0
Mechanical analysis: Sand, % 88.20
Silt, % 9.40
Clay, % 2.40
Texture class: Sandy

3
Table (2). Some chemical properties of the used water sources before and after
magnetizing.

Non-magnetized water Magnetized water

Parameters Ismailia El-Salam Abou Swear Ismailia El-Salam Abou Swear
Canal Canal Well Canal Canal Well
pH 7. 30 7.66 8.20 7.20 7.49 8.10
EC, dSm-1 0.32 1.36 3.70 0.33 1.37 3.81
Ca2+, meql-1 0.84 3.00 13.00 0,99 3,05 14.1
Mg 2+, meql-1 0.73 1.00 4.40 0,79 1,02 4.47
Na+, meql-1 1.02 9.29 18.65 0,92 9.29 18.6
K+ , meql-1 0.61 0.40 0.95 0,63 0.40 0.96
HCO3-, meql-1 1.30 3.70 5.40 1,28 3.70 5.30
Cl-, meql-1 1.21 7.50 25.2 1,20 7.50 25.2
SO4-2, meql-1 0.83 2.50 6.30 0,82 2.56 7.67
Soluble P, ppm 3.21 3.86 4.12 3.39 3.98 4.23

Available K in soil was determined in ammonium acetate extract by using

flame photometer and Available phosphorus was determined calorimetrically in 0.5 M
NaHCO3 extract according to Jackson (1958). Electrical conductivity and soluble –
K+, -Ca+2, -Mg+2, Na+ and Cl- in sewage sludge compost extract (1:1) and pH in
sewage sludge compost suspension (1:2.5) were determined as described by APHA,
(1985). Sewage sludge compost sample was digested for the determinations of total-
N, and P according the method described in APHA (1985).
Electrical conductivity and pH in both irrigation water sources and leachates
were measured using conductivity meter model 710 and pH meter, respectively,
according to APHA, (1985). Anions of CO3-2, HCO3-, Cl-, and SO4-2, cations of Ca2+,
Mg2+, Na+ and K+ and P were determined according to APHA, (1985).

3. Results and Discussion

A column experiment was carried out to evaluate the effect of different
magnetized irrigation water and the application of tricalcium phosphate (TCP) on the
availability of certain nutritional elements and their movement and distribution in
sandy soil. Salt removal from the soil columns was also evaluated.

3.1 Electrical conductivity in water leachates

Table (3) showed that electrical conductivity values (EC, dSm-1) in water
leachates of columns magnetized water were higher compared with non-magnetized
water. It seems that magnetizing the irrigation water plays an important role in
removing the soluble salts from the soil. Total soluble salts concentration in the first
leachate of all columns was higher compared with subsequent leachates while it was
lower in the last leachate. The efficiency of magnetizing water on removing soluble
salts from the soil which received high saline irrigation water was more less than
those received low saline irrigation water. TCP treatment increased the concentration
of total soluble salts was much higher in water leachates.

4
 Table (3). Total soluble salts (EC, dSm-1) changes in water leachates as affected by
using of normal and magnetized irrigation water.

Normal Water Magnetic Water

Treatment
Ismailia El-Salam Abou Swear Ismailia El-Salam Abou Swear
s
Canal Water Canal Water Well Water Canal Water Canal Water Well Water
Leachate 1
Control 1.07 1.90 2.86 1.26 2.17 3.14
TCP 1.25 1.94 2.93 1.28 2.21 3.22
Leachate 2
Control 0.72 1.26 1.89 0.88 1.37 2.02
TCP 0.86 1.28 1.93 0.96 1.43 2.03
Leachate 3
Control 0.68 1.20 1.84 0.86 1.35 1.98
TCP 0.79 1.23 1.85 0.93 1.42 2.00
Leachate 4
Control 0.66 1.15 1.70 0.85 1.34 1.84
TCP 0.75 1.16 1.74 0.93 1.36 1.89
Leachate 5
Control 0.53 1.01 1.52 0.63 1.12 1.62
TCP 0.64 1.02 1.58 0.73 1.13 1.65
Leachate 6
Control 0.43 0.72 1.11 0.48 0.76 1.18
TCP 0.54 0.83 1.20 0.61 0.90 1.28
TCP = tricalcium phosphate
Factors LSD0.05
Leachate 1 Leachate 2 Leachate 3 Leachate 4 Leachate 5 Leachate
6
Magnetism (M) 0.05 0.03 0.02 0.03 0.01 0.02
Water Type (W) 0.05 0.06 0.05 0.04 0.01 0.02
Treatments (T) 0.04** 0.04** 0.04** 0.02** 0.02** 0.02**
MxW 0.04 0.02 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.02
MxT n.s ns Ns ns N.S n.s
WxT 0.06** 0.04** 0.08** 0.08** 0.05** 0.03**
MxWxT 0.06** N.S Ns ns N.S n.s

3.2 Salt removal from soil

Salt removal from the soil was significantly in soil columns treated by TCP
under the conditions of using normal or magnetized irrigation water. The Same trend
was found with both non- and magnetized irrigation water. Using magnetized
irrigation water resulted in much salt removal from the soil compared with the normal
irrigation water after each leaching process. It was found that salt removal decreased
with subsequent leaching frequency (Table 4). Magnetic treatment of water has been
reported to change some of the physical and chemical properties of water, mainly
hydrogen bonding, polarity, surface tension, conductivity, pH and solubility of salts
(Smikhina, 1981; Amiri and Dadkhah, 2006; Chang and Weng, 2008).

Total salt removal from the soil after the six leachates was ranged between 22-
26% in soil irrigated with magnetized water for the applying TCP compared with
irrigated with the normal water. Total salt removal from the soil after the six leachates
was greater in soil irrigated with magnetized water compared with the normal water.
Since, total salt removal percentages for soil irrigated with magnetized Ismailia Canal,
El-Salam Canal and Abou-Sewer well water were about 39, 24 and 25%, respectively,
over the non magnetized water .

5
 Table (4). Salt removal (mg/column) from soil columns after each leachate affected
by using of normal and magnetized water and different soil treatments.
Normal Water Magnetic Water
Treatments Ismailia Canal El-Salam Abou Swear Ismailia Canal El-Salam Abou Swear
Water Canal Water Well Water Water Canal Water Well Water
Leachate 1
Control 115 209 315 164 268 431
TCP 133 219 322 166 298 447
Leachate 2
Control 47.8 81.6 117 67.1 95.3 138
TCP 54.3 85.3 126 64.3 99.0 146
Leachate 3
Control 41.0 77.8 115 56.0 93.0 135
TCP 53.3 84.1 123 68.2 98.0 143
Leachate 4
Control 35.5 73.8 115 50.5 92.1 134
TCP 46.8 86.4 119 64.9 95.7 142
Leachate 5
Control 27.8 56.6 96.3 37.1 70.3 114
TCP 36.6 65.1 110 46.2 75.0 125
Leachate 6
Control 22.1 39.9 69.7 26.8 46.9 84.1
TCP 32.0 54.4 83.2 37.8 63.4 95.0
**
TCP = tricalcium phosphate
Factors LSD0.05
Leachate 1 Leachate 2 Leachate 3 Leachate 4 Leachate 5 Leachate 6
Magnetism (M) 33.86 4.61 2.32 2.22 1.81 2.99
Water Type (W) 21.88 6.36 4.55 4.68 1.63 2.79
Treatments (T) 24.71** 9.80** 10.00** 3.94** 2.02** 2.88**
MxW 36.01 7.92 4.71 3.17 1.31 1.45
MxT 29.17* 7.06 4.42* 2.87** 2.68* 4.15*
WxT 28.54** 8.41* Ns 6.43** 2.36** 2.62**
MxWxT Ns ns Ns 5.54* Ns N.S

Tackashinko (1997) stated that the possibility of using magnetized water to

desalinate the soil is accounted for the enhanced dissolving capacity of the
magnetized water, which has been registered repeatedly. Zhu et al, (1982) has also
reported that laboratory tests have showed that desalination of a saline soil was 29%
greater in the first leaching and 33% greater in the second leaching with magnetized
water compared to untreated water.

Hilal et al, (2002) reported that magnetized water was shown to have 3 main
effects: 1) increasing the leaching of excess soluble salts, 2) lowering soil alkalinity
and 3) dissolving slightly soluble salts such carbonates, phosphates and sulfates.
However, the degree of effectiveness of magnetized water on soil salinity and ionic
balance in soil solution depended greatly on the traveling distance of magnetized
water along the drip irrigation lines.

3.3 Soluble K in water leachates

Data obtained on soluble K concentration in soil water leachates as affected by using
of normal and magnetized irrigation water qualities and soil treatments are presented
in Table (5). These results indicated that using of magnetized irrigation water resulted
in significant increase in soluble K concentration as compared with normal water.
Applying of TCP to the soil resulted in significant increase in soluble K concentration
in water leachates as compared with untreated soil under the conditions of magnetized
and non-magnetized irrigation water. Concentration of soluble K in water leachates

6
 gradually decreased with leaching process frequency and the lowest soluble K
concentration was found after the last leaching process.

Table (5). Soluble potassium (me l-1) in leachates after each leachate affected by using
of normal and magnetized water of different soil treatments.
Normal Water Magnetic Water
Treatments Ismailia El-Salam Abou Swear Ismailia El-Salam Abou Swear
Canal Water Canal Water Well Water Canal Water Canal Water Well Water
Leachate 1
Control 0.80 0.77 0.94 0.93 0.90 1.12
TCP 0.93 0.92 0.95 0.96 0.94 1.20
Leachate 2
Control 0.53 0.47 0.65 0.87 0.78 0.97
TCP 0.65 0.58 0.68 0.98 0.91 0.99
Leachate 3
Control 0.48 0.40 0.59 0.80 0.71 0.90
TCP 0.56 0.50 0.61 0.92 0.86 0.92
Leachate 4
Control 0.45 0.32 0.50 0.78 0.67 0.87
TCP 0.49 0.42 0.51 0.83 0.77 0.88
Leachate 5
Control 0.30 0.25 0.42 0.38 0.33 0.47
TCP 0.36 0.31 0.46 0.40 0.38 0.70
Leachate 6
Control 0.18 0.19 0.35 0.28 0.26 0.44
TCP 0.31 0.22 0.38 0.39 0.32 0.48
*
SSC = sewage sludge compost **TCP = tricalcium phosphate
Factors LSD0.05
Leachate 1 Leachate 2 Leachate 3 Leachate 4 Leachate 5 Leachate 6
Magnetism (M) .05 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.09 0.03
Water Type (W) .02 0.04 0.04 0.02 0.12 0.02
Treatments (T) .04** 0.06** 0.05** 0.05** 0.14** 0.02**
MxW .07 0.08 0.02 0.02 0.16 0.02
MxT .08* ns 0.02** 0.02** ns n.s
WxT .08** 0.08* 0.08* 0.07* 0.14** 0.03**
MxWxT 0.12* ns ns n.s N.S ns

3.4 Soluble phosphates in water leachates

Data obtained on soluble phosphate concentration in water leachates
influenced by magnetized irrigation water and soil treatments are presented (Table 6).
These results indicated that the concentration of soluble phosphates in water leachates
was increased by using magnetized irrigation water compared with non-magnetized
water. This clearly shows that magnetized irrigation water helps in increasing the
solubility of phosphate salts in soil. Applying of TCP to the soil significantly
increased soluble phosphates concentration in water leachates. It may be due to the
more P release from the applied TCP to the soil. Concentrations of soluble phosphates
in water leachates gradually decreased with leaching frequency and the lowest soluble
phosphate concentrations was found after the sixth leaching process. It can be
concluded that irrigation with magnetized water helps an important role in increasing
P solubility and availability, in particular TCP.

Percentages of soluble phosphate in water leachate after the first leaching

process were about 39, 45 and 46%, over the non-magnetized irrigation water, for
magnetized Ismailia Canal, El-Salam Canal and Abou-Sewer well water, respectively.

7
 Table (6). Soluble phosphates (me l-1) changes in leachates after each leachate
affected by using of normal and magnetized water qualities and different soil
treatments.
Normal Water Magnetic Water
Ismailia Canal El-Salam Abou Swear Ismailia Canal El-Salam Abou
Treatments
Water Canal Water Well Water Water Canal Water Swear Well
Water
Leachate 1
Control 3.71 4.38 5.70 5.16 6.35 8.34
TCP 4.03 6.16 6.75 6.38 8.89 9.37
Leachate 2
Control 3.10 3.67 4.33 4.65 5.26 5.68
TCP 4.00 4.49 4.90 5.82 7.16 6.92
Leachate 3
Control 2.68 3.35 3.74 4.29 4.60 5.61
TCP 3.52 3.92 4.30 5.57 5.94 6.72
Leachate 4
Control 2.31 3.20 3.60 3.83 4.35 5.13
TCP 3.41 3.34 4.25 5.48 5.25 6.36
Leachate 5
Control 1.49 1.89 2.76 2.23 2.39 4.17
TCP 2.35 2.50 3.52 3.39 4.14 5.19
Leachate 6
Control 0.95 0.99 1.43 1.42 1.26 2.79
TCP 1.56 2.06 2.90 1.99 3.44 3.85
**
TCP = tricalcium phosphate
Factors LSD0.05
Leachate 1 Leachate 2 Leachate 3 Leachate 4 Leachate 5 Leachate 6
Magnetism (M) 0.22 1.13 0.30 0.25 0.42 0.45
Water Type (W) 0.50 0.95 0.66 0.54 0.25 0.46
Treatments (T) 0.64** 0.66** 0.34** 0.55** 0.36** 0.45**
MxW 0.85 1.09 1.06 1.29 0.32 0.64
MxT 0.75* 0.68** 0.96* 1.31* ns 0.56
WxT N.S N.S n.s ns 0.61** 0.79**
MxWxT N.S N.S n.s ns 0.52* ns

Percentages of soluble phosphates in water leachates after the first leaching process
for soil treated with TCP were about 58, 44 and 39% for magnetized Ismailia Canal,
El-Salam Canal and Abou-Sewer well irrigation water, respectively.

3.5 Soil salinity after leaching

Data show that soil salinity (EC, dSm-1) in soil water extract 1:5 was
significantly increased with soil depth after leaching process (Table 7). It was noticed
that the highest soil salinity was obtained at 15-30 cm soil depth while the lowest soil
salinity was obtained at 0-5 cm soil depth. This clearly indicated that the soluble soil
salts moved and concentrated at the 15-30 cm. Soil salinity was significantly
decreased after the leaching with different magnetized irrigation water compared with
the different normal water at all soil depths. This may be due to the increase of
removed of soluble salts by leaching with the magnetized water compared with the
normal water. Application of the TCP significantly increased soil salinity at the three
soil depths after leaching with the normal and magnetized water. The removal of
soluble soil salts by leaching with magnetized water play an important role in projects
of improvement and reclamation of salt-affected soils.
The use of magnetically treated irrigation water reduced soil pH but increased soil EC
and available P in celery and snow pea. Overall, the results indicate some beneficial
effect of magnetically treated irrigation water, particularly for saline water and

8
 recycled water, on the yield and water productivity of celery and snow pea plants
under controlled environmental conditions (Maheshwari and Grewal, 2009).

Table (7).Influence of leaching with different normal and magnetized irrigation

water and soil treatments application on soil salinity* (EC*, dSm-1).
Normal Water Magnetic Water
Treatments Ismailia El-Salam Abou Swear Ismailia El-Salam Abou Swear
Canal Water Canal Water Well Water Canal Water Canal Water Well Water
0 – 5 cm
Control 0.55 2.14 5.48 0.51 2.00 5.23
TCP 0.60 2.32 5.66 0.54 2.15 5.54
5 – 15 cm
Control 0.62 2.31 5.60 0.56 2.12 5.48
TCP 0.65 2.50 5.70 0.58 2.29 5.62
15 – 30 cm
Control 0.68 2.36 5.70 0.60 2.26 5.59
TCP 0.72 2.59 5.80 0.64 2.38 5.73
**
TCP = tricalcium phosphate *EC in soil was measured in soil water extract 1:5
Factors LSD0.05
0 – 5 cm 5 – 15 cm 15 – 30 cm
Magnetism (M) 0.08 0.03 0.04
Water Type (W) 0.06 0.06 0.02
Treatments (T) 0.03** 0.04** 0.03**
MxW 0.09 0.05 0.18
MxT n.s N.s 0.03*
WxT 0.07** 0.04** 0.05**
MxWxT n.s n.s n.s

Soil desalination at such conditions is a crucial problem facing agriculture.

Agriculture suffered from both salt-affected soil beside saline underground brackish
water contains varying amounts of dissolved salts used for irrigation. Tackashinko
(1997) stated that the possibility of using magnetized water to desalinate the soil is
accounted for the enhanced dissolving capacity of the magnetized water, which has
been registered repeatedly. He added that magnetized water removed 50 % to 80 % of
soil Cl- compared to a removal of 30 % by normal irrigation water. Zhu et al., (1986)
has also reported that laboratory tests have showed that desalination of a saline soil
was 29 % greater in the first leaching and 33 % greater in the second leaching with
magnetized water compared to untreated water.

3.6 Soluble soil K after leaching

Data concerning the effect of leaching with the different normal and
magnetized water and application of TCP to the soil on the soluble soil K
concentration in soil water extract (1:5) is presented in (Table 8). The concentration of
K in soil water extract was significantly increased with soil depth under the leaching
process conditions of different normal and magnetized water. The highest K
concentration was found at soil depth 15-30 cm while the lowest K concentration was
found at soil surface (0-5 cm). It was indicated that K was moved downward and
concentrated at the third depth (15-30 cm).The K concentration in soil water extract
was significantly increased after leaching with different magnetized water compared
with different normal water at all soil depths.

9
 Table (8).Influence of leaching with different normal and magnetized irrigation water
and soil *treatments application on the concentration of soil soluble
potassium (me l-1).
Normal Water Magnetic Water
Treatments Ismailia Canal El-Salam Abou Swear Ismailia Canal El-Salam Abou Swear
Water Canal Water Well Water Water Canal Water Well Water
0 – 5 cm
Control 0.54 0.54 1.48 0.61 0.63 1.56
TCP 0.64 0.66 1.84 0.71 0.77 1.98
5 – 15 cm
Control 0.70 0.59 1.82 0.75 0.70 2.01
TCP 0.76 0.69 1.95 0.80 0.81 2.08
15 – 30 cm
Control 0.80 0.67 1.88 0.84 0.74 2.09
TCP 0.86 0.72 2.06 0.94 0.87 2.16
**
TCP = tricalcium phosphate - *Soluble potassium in soil was measured in soil water extract 1:5
Factors LSD0.05
0 – 5 cm 5 – 15 cm 15 – 30 cm
Magnetism (M) 0.24 0.08 0.15
Water Type (W) 0.09 0.14 0.08
Treatments (T) 0.10** 0.08** 0.06**
MxW 0.11 0.14 0.33
MxT n.s n.s N.S
WxT 0.17** 0.15** 0.11**
MxWxT n.s n.s N.S

The application TCP to the soil resulted in increasing the concentration of K in

soil after leaching process. It was found that K concentration in soil was increased by
increasing irrigation water salinity.

3.7 Available soil P after leaching

Data obtained on the effect of leaching with different normal and magnetized
water; and TCP application on the available soil P content are shown in Table 10.
These data indicated that, the application of TCP to the soil was increasing available
soil P with the different normal and magnetized water at all the soil depths. This may
duo to the SSC is rich in P content and supplies more P release in the soil which
should be reflected to plant growth.

Since, the P form in TCP is more very slightly soluble and unavailable to
plant. Leaching the soil with magnetized water significantly increased available soil P
content compared with the leaching with normal water at all soil depths. This
indicated that magnetized water plays an important role in increasing the availability
of soil P. It was found that available soil P was decreased with soil depth, and it
reached highest values in the surface soil layer (0-5 cm) compared with the second (5-
15 cm) and the third (15-30 cm) soil depths under the conditions of leaching with both
the normal and magnetized irrigation water. This result indicated that the P element
un-moved through the soil. The use of magnetically treated irrigation water increased
available soil P in celery and snow pea. (Maheshwari and Grewal, 2009). The wash-
out produce by magnetized water the soil was obsereved to have an increase in
phosphate mobile forms (Tackashinko, 1997).

10
 Table (9).Influence of leaching with different normal and magnetized irrigation water*
and soil treatments application on the content of available soil phosphorus
(ppm).
Normal Water Magnetic Water
Treatments Ismailia Canal El-Salam Abou Swear Ismailia Canal El-Salam Abou Swear
Water Canal Water Well Water Water Canal Water Well Water
0 – 5 cm
Control 0.50 0.94 1.34 0.78 1.41 1.93
TCP 4.97 7.60 9.69 7.84 9.22 10.2
5 – 15 cm
Control 0.41 0.71 1.05 0.65 1.14 1.40
TCP 4.04 6.72 8.94 6.07 8.88 10.1
15 – 30 cm
Control 0.19 0.21 0.38 0.27 0.35 0.57
TCP 1.30 1.13 3.02 2.94 3.68 5.08
**
TCP = tricalcium phosphate - * Available soil phosphorus was measured in sodium bicarbonate (0.5
M) extract 1:20
Factors LSD0.05
0 – 5 cm 5 – 15 cm 15 – 30 cm
Magnetism (M) 0.98 0.23 0.42
Water Type (W) 0.22 0.15 0.15
Treatments (T) 1.17** 0.69** 0.32**
MxW 0.90 0.69 0.76
MxT 0.98** 0.19** 0.62**
WxT 0.77** 0.43** 0.45**
MxWxT 1.09** n.s 1.05**

References
American Public Health Association (APHA). (1985). Standard Methods for the
Examination of Water and Wastewater, 15th. Ed. Washington, D. C.
Amiri, M.C. and Dadkhah, A.A. (2006). On reduction in the surface tension of water
due to magnetic treatment. Colloids Surf A: Physicochem Eng Aspects, 278:
252-255.
Baker, J.S.; Judd, S.J. and Parsons, S.A. (1997). Antiscale magnetic pretreatment of
RO feed water. Desalination, 10: 151-166.
Chang ,K.T. and Weng, C.I. (2008). An investigation into structure of aqueous NaCl
electrolyte solutions under magnetic fields. Comput Mater Sci 43: 1048–1055.
Chibowski, E.; Holysz, L.; Szczes, A. and Chibowski, M. (2003). Precipitation of
calcium carbonate from magnetically treated sodium carbonate solution.
Colloids Surf. A, 225: 63-73.
Cho, Y.I. and Lee, S.H. (2005). Reduction in the surface tension of water due to
physical water treatment for fouling control in heat exchangers, Int. Commun.
Heat Mass Transfers, 1: 1-9.
Hilal, M. H. and Hillal, M. M. (2000b): Application of magnetic technologies in
desert agriculture . II-Effect of magnetic treatments of irrigation water on water
on salt distribution in olive and citrus field and induced changes of ionic balance
in soil and plant. Egypt. J. Soil Sci. 40:(3),423-435.
Hilal, M.H. and Hillal, M.M (2000a): Application of magnetic technologies in desert
agriculture .1-Seed germination and seedling emergence of some crop in a saline
calcareous soil. Egypt J. Soil Sci. 40:(3), 413-421.
Hilal, M.H.; S.M. Shata, A.A.; Abdel-Dayem, and Hillal, M.M. (2002): Application
of magnetic technologies in desert agriculture. III- Effect of Magnetized Water

11
 on yield and uptake of certain elements by citrus in relation to nutrients
mobilization in soil. Egypt J. Soil Sci. 42(1), 43-55.
Holysz,L,; Chibowski, M. and Chibowski, E. (2002). Time dependent changes of zeta
potential and other parameters of in situ calcium carbonate due to magnetic
field treatment. Colloids Surf. A, 208: 231-240.
Jackson, M. L. (1958). Soil Chemical Analysis. Constable and Co. London.
Limpert, G.J.C. and Raber, J.L. (1985). Tests of non-chemical scale control devices in
a once-through system. Mater. Performance, 24: 40-45.
Maheshwari, B.L, and Grewal, H.S. (2009). Magnetic treatment of irrigation water:
Its effects on vegetable crop yield and water productivity. Agric Water Manage
96: 1229–1236.
Page, A.L.; R.H. Miller, and D.R. Keeney. (1982). “Methods of Soil
Analysis”. Part 2: Chemical and Microbiological Analysis. Am. Soc.,
Madison, Wisconsin, USA.
Richards, L.A. (1954). Diagnosis and Improvement of saline and Alkaline soils.
US.D.A Handbook No.60.
Smikhina, L.P. (1981). Changes in refractive index of water on magnetic treatment.
Colloid J 2: 401–404.
Tai, C.Y., Wu, C.K. and Chang, M.C. (2008). Effects of magnetic field on the
crystallization of CaCO3 using permanent magnets. Chem. Engin. Sci., 63:
5606-5612.
Takatshinko, Y. (1997). Hydromagnetic systems and their role in creating micro
climate. International Symposium on Sustainable Management of Salt Affected
Soils, Cairo, Egypt, 22-28 Sept.
Zhu, T.Y.; Sheng, D.G. and Liu, H.W. (1982). Studies on the effectiveness of
magnetized water in improving saline soils. Irrigation Drainage Abstracts, 012-
01629.
‫الملخص العربى‬
‫ هو‬Para magnetism ‫ في حين أن‬،‫ هي خاصية تمتاز بها بعض المعادن والسبائك‬Ferro magnetism
‫ عند تمرير مياه الرى فى المجال المغناطيسي فإن مياه الرى‬.‫خاصية متاحة لجميع المواد والمياه بال استثناء‬
‫ المعاملة المغناطيسية لمياه الرى تعتمد على‬.‫ ساعة‬48 ‫ إلى‬24 ‫تكتسب المغناطيسية لحظياً تحتفظ بها لمدة من‬
‫مكونات االمالح الذائبة فى المياه و سرعة عبور المياه المراد معاملتها مغناطيسيا و على كثافة المجال‬
‫ فى هذه الدراسة اجريت تجربة أعمدة لدراسة تقييم تأثير مياه الرى‬. ‫ بوصة‬0.5 ‫المغناطيسي للممغنط قطره‬
‫الممغنطة على غسيل األمالح وازالته من التربة مع استخدام مصادر مختلفة من المياه منخفضة الجودة بالمقارنة‬
‫ تمت تعبأة‬.‫ سم‬8.6 ‫ سم وقطره‬35 ‫ طول العمود‬PVC G‫ و تم استخدام اعمدة بالستيكية‬، )‫بمياة النيل (كونترول‬
‫ تم تشبيع‬.‫ سم‬32 ‫ كيلو جرام من التربة المنخولة جيدا حيث كان طول عمود التربة بالعمود‬3 ‫العمود بمعدل‬
‫ يوم تم اضافة معامالت المياه المختلفة الممغنطة وغير الممغنطة بمعدل‬15 ‫ ايام وبعد‬4 ‫اعمدة التربة وتركت‬
( ‫ مرة من السعة الحقلية بثالث انواع من مياه الرى مختلفة الجودة و هى مياه ترعة االسماعيلية‬1.5 ‫حوالى‬
‫ تم تجميع الراشح وقياس‬.) dSm-1 3.7( ‫) و مياه آبار‬dSm-11.36 ( ‫) و مياه ترعة السالم‬dSm-1 0.32
‫ التوصيل الكهربى لمياه الراشح بعد الغسيل بالمياه الممغنطة كان اعلى‬: ‫ أظهرت النتائج ما يللى‬.‫حجمه وتحليله‬
‫ وكانت كمية‬.‫ وهذا يعنى ان مغنطة مياه الرى تلعب دورا مهما فى إزالة االمالح من التربة‬.‫من المياه العادية‬
‫ حيث كانت مياه الغسلة السادسة‬، ‫األمالح الكلية الذائبة فى مياه راشح الغسلة االولى أعلى مقارنة بباقى الغسالت‬
‫ وكانت كفاءة المياه الممغنطة مرتفعة الملوحة فى ازالة‬G.‫واالخيرة أقل الغسالت احتواء" لألمالح الكلية الذائبة‬

12
 ‫االمالح الذائبة من التربة اقل من المياه الممغنطة منخفضة الملوحة‪ .‬كمية االمالح المزالة من التربة بعد‬
‫الغسالت الست كانت اعلى فى حالة الغسيل بالمياه الممغنطة بحوالى ‪ %26 -22‬من التربة المعاملة بالمياه‬
‫العادية‪ .‬بينما كانت كمية األمالح المزالة من التربة فى حالة استخدام مياه الرى الممغنطة لترعة االسماعيلية‬
‫وترعة السالم ومياه بئرأبوصوير أعلى بحوالى ‪ 39‬و‪ 24‬و‪ % 25‬على التوالى من المياه غيرالممغنطة لكل‬
‫منها ‪ ،‬بما يعنى ان استخدام مياه الرى الممغنطة كان مفيدا فى إزالة االمالح من التربة ‪ .‬وقد وجد ان إزالة‬
‫االمالح من التربة قد انخفض بتوالى عمليات الغسيل وكانت اقل كمية امالح مزالة فى الغسلة السادسة‪ .‬وجد ان‬
‫تركيز البوتاسيوم و الفوسفور فى مستخلص التربة يزداد مع العمق فى التربة بعد عمليات الغسيل المختلفة سواء‬
‫مع الماء الممغنط او غير الممغنط وكان اعلى تركيز فى العمق الثالث واقل تركيز فى العمق االول ‪ .‬وقد وجد‬
‫ان تركيز ‪ K‬قد ارتفع باستعمال المياه الممغنطة فى الغسيل‪ .‬كانت هناك فروق معنوية كبيرة فى ملوحة التربة‬
‫نتيجة معامالت التربة المختلفة‪ .‬و قد لوحظ من النتائج أن زيادة ملوحة ماء الرى أدت اإلى زيادة ملوحة التربة ‪،‬‬
‫حيث سجلت النتائج أقل ملوحة للتربة عند الرى بمياه ترعة االسماعيلية تليها مياه ترعة السالم ثم مياه بئر أبو‬
‫صوير ‪ .‬كما أدى الرى بالمياه الممغنطة إلى خفض ملوحة التربة بالمقارنة بالرى بالمياه غير الممغنطة‪ .‬كانت‬
‫هناك فروق معنوية كبيرة فى تركيز عناصر الفوسفور والبوتاسيوم الميسرة فى التربة نتيجة معامالت التربة‬
‫المختلفة‪ .‬وقد وجد أن الرى بالمياه الممغنطة أدى إلى زيادة معنوية فى تركيز عناصر الفوسفور والبوتاسيوم‬
‫الميسرة فى التربة بالمقارنة بالرى بالمياه غير الممغنطة‪.‬‬

‫‪13‬‬