Water Air Soil Pollut (2016) 227: 135
DOI 10.1007/s11270-016-2837-8
Treated Olive Mill Wastewater Effects on Soil Properties
and Plant Growth
Munir J. M. Rusan · Ammar A. Albalasmeh ·
Hanan I. Malkawi
Received: 24 January 2016 / Accepted: 28 March 2016 / Published online: 6 April 2016
© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016
Abstract Olive-oil production has a vital impact on
the socioeconomic development in most Mediter-
ranean countries, where 97.5 % of the world oil is
produced. However, the olive-oil extraction process
generates considerable quantities of an agro-industrial
effluent, olive mill wastewater (OMW), which has
negative impact on the environment and biological
life. The objective of this study was to evaluate the
potential use of OMW treated by different technolo-
gies in irrigation and determine its effect on the plant
growth and soil quality parameters. Different tech-
nologies were used to treat the OMW, the resultant
treated OMW was used to irrigate the maize planted in
the pot experiment. The results indicated that UOMW
increased soil salinity and reduced plant growth, while
the treated OMW by different technologies improved
plant growth and resulted in lower soil pH. The impact
on other soil properties varied depending on the tech-
niques used for treatments. Although treated OMW
enhanced plant growth compared with the untreated,
the plant growth remained lower than that obtained
M. J. M. Rusan () · A. A. Albalasmeh
Department of Natural Resources and The Environment,
Faculty of Agriculture, Jordan University of Science and
Technology, Irbid, Jordan
e-mail: mrusan@just.edu.jo
H. I. Malkawi
Hamdan Bin Mohammed Smart University, Dubai,
United Arab Emirates
using the potable water with fertilizers, indicating lack
of some essential plant nutrients.
Keywords Olive mill wastewater · Plant growth ·
Reverse osmosis
1 Introduction
Olive-oil production has a vital impact on the socio-
economic development in most countries of the
Mediterranean basin, where 97.5 % (more than 30
million cubic meters) of the world oil is produced
with annual growth of 6 % between 2007 and 2012
(Marinelli and Oreggia 2013; Mekki et al. 2006). The
olive-oil extraction process generates a considerable
quantities of agro-industrial effluent known as olive
mill wastewater (OMW). Olive extraction process nor-
mally generates olive-oil (20–32 %), aqueous phase
(40–50 %), and solid byproduct (30 %) (Borja et al.
1992).
OMW contains a large supply of organic matter and
toxic phenolic compounds. Because of the high lev-
els of polyphenols concentrations (0.5 to 25 g l−1 ) and
other toxic organic load, OMW is considered a toxic
such that the improper disposal of OMW imposes seri-
ous problems to the environment and public health
(Azam et al. 2002). Polyphenols in OMW are phy-
totoxic and known to have a plant growth inhibition
properties and antibacterial effect thus prohibiting its
135 Page 2 of 10
disposal neither to the environment nor to the sewage
systems (Rusan et al. 2015). Therefore, environmen-
tal regulation in most countries of the Mediterranean
basin forbids the direct disposal of OMW into the
environment or into domestic wastewater treatment
plants. Consequently, OMW must be treated before
reuse or before disposal to the environment. Several
methods for OMW treatment have been employed in
recent years such as evaporation, electrocoagulation,
oxidation by ozone and using fenton reagent, aerobic
and anaerobic biological treatments as well as reuse by
spreading onto agricultural soil as an organic fertilizer
(Eusébio et al. 2007; Mekki et al. 2013).
On the other hand, OMW contains high amount
(80–150 kg m−3 ) of beneficial organic compounds
and plant mineral nutrients for the soil–plant system
that can sustain fertility and productivity of the soils
(Bene et al. 2013; Weber et al. 1996). Soils of the
Mediterranean region are characterized by lack in soil
organic matter with low level of fertility and produc-
tivity (Brunetti et al. 2007). To compensate for the
negative balance with respect to soil carbon, exter-
nal sources of organic matter should be periodically
added to the soil. Currently, organic wastes of vari-
ous origins and nature are widely used as amendments
to increase soil organic matter and crop productiv-
ity. OMW which is rich in organic compounds can
be used to restore the deficit in soil carbon, com-
bat soil degradation, and improve soil fertility which
consequently enhancing sustainability of the Mediter-
ranean agroecosystems (Mohammad and Mazahreh
2003; Mohawesh et al. 2014).
In addition, several researchers suggested that the
OMW can be used as a source of irrigation water
as well. Water is a vital resource but a severely lim-
ited one in most arid and semi-arid countries of the
Mediterranean basin (Fatta et al. 2005). Therefore,
OMW could be a valuable and affordable source
for irrigation water in such countries in particular.
However, this wastewater can impose a threat to the
environment and public health if used directly and
improperly (Al-Rashidi et al. 2013; Rusan et al. 2007),
therefore, OMW should be used adequately to mini-
mize the pollution of the ecosystem and maximizing
the use of the water, nutrients and organic matter of
the OMW (Mekki et al. 2013).
Water Air Soil Pollut (2016) 227: 135
The objectives of this study were to evaluate the
potential use of OMW treated by different technolo-
gies in irrigation and to determine its effect on the
plant growth and soil quality parameters.
2 Materials and Methods
2.1 Soil Collection and Characterization
A calcareous soil with a low organic matter con-
tent classified as fine-loamy, mixed, thermic, and
Calcic Paleargid (Khresat et al. 1998) was collected
from the surface (0–20 cm) of the Research station
at Jordan University of Science and Technology and
used in this study. The soil was air-dried and sieved
through a 2-mm sieve. The soil was analyzed for major
physicochemical characteristics; particle size distri-
bution was determined by hydrometer method (Gee
and Bauder 1986); bulk density was determined by
the core method (Blake and Hartge 1986), soil pH
was measured on 1:1 soil:water suspension (Mclean
1982); soil electrical conductivity (EC) was measured
on 1:1 soil:water extracts (Rhoades 1982b); soil car-
bonates (CaCO3 ) by titration method (Richards 1954);
cation exchange capacity (CEC) was measured fol-
lowing (Rhoades 1982a). Organic matter content was
determined as described in Walkley-Black method
(Nelson and Sommers 1982); potassium was mea-
sured using flame photometer following the meth-
ods described by (Richards 1954); total nitrogen
using a modified micro-Kjeldahl digestion procedure
(Bremner and Mulvaney 1982); available phospho-
rus by extraction with sodium bicarbonate (Olsen
et al. 1954); and heavy metals (Cu, Cd, Fe, Zn, Pb,
Mn) by DTPA-extractable microelements (Lindsay
and Norvell 1978). The major physicochemical char-
acteristics of the soil used in this study are summarized
in Table 3. Note that this soil has never received OMW.
2.2 Olive Mill Wastewater
OMW used in this experiment was collected in
2012/2013 season from different Mediterranean
olive oil producing countries, participating in the
MEDOLICO project, treated by different technol-
Water Air Soil Pollut (2016) 227: 135
ogy. Untreated and treated OMW was applied to the
soil as a source of irrigation water, various treat-
ments were investigated in a randomized complete
block design with four replications in a greenhouse
pot experiment. The treatments were (1) control
using only potable water (W); (2) potable water
with the addition of fertilizer to the soil at the rec-
ommended rate of 80 kg ha−1 DAP (diammonium
phosphate) (W+F); (3) untreated OMW (UOMW);
(4) OMW treated by aerobic biological technology
in a JACTO Bioreactor (JR); (5) OMW treated by
solar fenton oxidation after coagulation-flocculation
(SFO); (6) OMW treated by an integrated microfil-
tration/reverse osmosis (MF+RO) process; (7) OMW
treated by microfiltration followed by nanofiltration
(MF+NF).
In JR treatment, A 100L-JACTO reactor coupled
with a cross-flow ultrafiltration membrane system was
used for aerobic biological treatment of OMW, under
good conditions of aeration rate of 0.2 vvm and turbu-
lent mixing (Eusébio et al. 2007). In SFO treatment,
OMW was coagulated with Iron(II) Sulfate Heptahy-
drate, followed by flocculation using the anionic poly-
electrolyte FLOCAN. Then, the photocatalytic exper-
iments were carried out in a solar compound parabolic
collector (CPC) pilot plant (Michael et al. 2014). In the
MF+NF treatment, the OMW was acidified to pH = 2
using sulfuric acid. The acidified OMW was placed in
feed container with submerged MF. Using a modified
batch mode, the acidified OMW was drawn through
the MF to give a volume concentration factor of 3–6.
The MF permeate was then treated by nanofiltration
to remove the bulk of the polyphenols while operat-
ing the NF unit at 20 bar (Wiesman et al. 2013). In
MF+RO treatment, the MF process is the 1st step of
OMW treatment where OMW is separated into two
streams. The main stream is the MF permeate, which
is a partially depurated water used to feed the 2nd step
of OMW treatment the RO process. The RO process
allows obtaining colorless water for irrigation/reuse
(the RO permeate), characterized by a very low salin-
ity and COD, and a minor volume by-product rich in
polyphenols (Bottino et al. 2015).
Treated and untreated OMW samples were ana-
lyzed in four replicates for various physicochemical
characteristics (pH, electrical conductivity (EC), total
Page 3 of 10 135
suspended solids (TSS), total polyphenols (TP), chem-
ical oxygen demand (COD), nitrogen (N), phospho-
rous (P), and potassium (K)) following the standard
methods described by the American Public Health
Association (APHA) (APHA 1992).
2.3 Pot Experiment
Pot experiment was carried out in March 2013 in the
greenhouse at Jordan University of Science and Tech-
nology. Each pot was filled with 5 kg air-dry soil.
Three seeds of hybrid maize (Zea mays, Merkur vari-
ety from Seminis Company, Hungary) were seeded
per pot and irrigated using tap water until the emer-
gence stage, which took 6 days then we used the
treated OMW by different technologies to the end
of the experiment. The pots were watered periodi-
cally (2–3 times a week) to maintain water content
at approximate field capacity (on gravemetric basis).
After germination, seedlings were thinned to keep one
plants per pot. After 8 weeks at the flowering stage,
the above-ground biomass (shoot) was harvested from
each pot and the shoot fresh weight and height were
recorded. Then the plants were oven-dried at 70 °C
for 48 h, and the over-dry weights were recorded.
Plant samples were ground to a fine powder using
laboratory mill with 0.5-mm sieve. The milled plant
samples were analyzed for the total nitrogen using a
modified micro-Kjeldahl digestion procedure (Brem-
ner and Mulvaney 1982). Total P, K, Zn, Cu, Pb, Cd,
Fe, and Mn were determined in the dry ash digestion.
Total P was determined using vanadate/molybdate
method (yellow method), K by flame photometry, and
Zn, Cu, Pb, Cd, Fe, and Mn by atomic absorption
spectroscopy (Chapman and Pratt 1961). At the end
of the experiment, the soil was analyzed for the same
parameters mentioned above.
2.4 Statistical Analysis
Analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to determine
the effect of each treatment. When the F ratio was sig-
nificant, a multiple mean comparison was performed
using Fisher’s Least Significance Test (0.05 proba-
bility level). Statistical analyses were performed with
SYSTAT Statistical Program (Wilkinson 1990).
135 Page 4 of 10 Water Air Soil Pollut (2016) 227: 135

3 Results and Discussions

3.1 Physicochemical Characterization of Olive Mill

Wastewater

The major physicochemical properties of the treated

and untreated olive mill wastewater are summarized
in Table 1. Generally, OMW has similar properties in
term of being acidic, saline, and heavily loaded by
organic material, which are the distinguished charac-
teristics of raw OMW (Rusan et al. 2015). Both treated
and untreated OMW used in the experiment were
acidic, which ranges from strong to slightly acidic
condition. The lowest pH values (around 2) were for
the SFO and MF+NF treatments, for this reason, the
pH has been adjusted to be 6.00.
The EC was the highest for MF+NF (11.4 dS
−1
m ) followed by the untreated OMW and JR treat-
ments (7.6 and 5.3 dS m−1 , respectively). The highest
value for the TSS was observed for the untreated
OMW (1236 mg L−1 ), while the lowest TSS was
observed for the MF+RO (12 mg L−1 ) and for the
water (10 mg L−1 ). The COD values were remarkably
the highest for the untreated OMW and JR treatment
(118.8 and 12.1 g L−1 , respectively), while the lowest
value was observed by the MF+RO (0.5 g L−1 ). The
total polyphenols were remarkably the highest for the
untreated OMW and JR treatment (1666.7 and 573.5
mg L−1 , respectively), while the lowest value was
observed for the MF+RO (0.98 mg L−1 ). Nitrogen,
phosphorus, and potassium concentrations were the
highest for the untreated OMW (96.8, 369, and 2441.8
mg L−1 , respectively). Contrary, the lowest concen-
trations for these elements were for the MF+RO (4.4,
31.0 and 7.6 mg L−1 , respectively.
3.2 Plant Growth
Plant dry weight and height are depicted in Fig. 1 on
primary and secondary y-axis, respectively. The plant
dry weight was the highest in the potable water plus
the recommended rate of fertilizer treatment (W+F),
followed by the control treatment (W) where potable
water alone was used. The lowest dry weight obtained
with application of UOMW. Treating the OMW by
different technologies resulted in varied effects on
plant dry weight. Both SFO and MF+RO treatments
resulted in a higher plant dry weight in compared to
JR and MF+NF treatments. These results show that
Fig. 1 Effects of untreated and treated OMW by different tech-
niques on plant dry weight and hight. Note that different letters
mean significant difference recorded at P < 0.05 within differ-
ent treatments. Upper and lower case letters are for plant dry
weight and hight measurements, respectively
untreated OMW was phytotoxic to maize plants as
indicated by the lower plant weights with UOMW
application. However, phytotoxicity decreased signif-
icantly following treatments of OMW with all tech-
nologies investigated as results of removing the phe-
nols and other phytotoxic compounds from the raw
OMW, such a result is in agreement with the results
obtained by several authors (Mekki et al. 2006; Rusan
et al. 2015). Similar results for the plant height were
obtained, where W+F showed the highest plant height
followed by the control (W) treatment. A decrease
in plant height was exhibited under OMW treated
by different technologies treatments. However, it was
higher compared to the UOMW treatment except for
MF+NF treatment, which showed the lowest height.
This may be attributed to the high salinity of MF+NF
treatment (Table 1). Similar conclusion was drawn by
Mekki et al. (2006) after a significant reduction of
the plant height of the untreated olive mill wastew-
ater treatment comparatively with the treated OMW
and control treatments. Also, Moreno et al. (1987)
reported that application of untreated OMW causes
impose phytotoxic effects.
Water Air Soil Pollut (2016) 227: 135 Page 5 of 10 135

Table 1 Physicochemical characterization of treated and untreated olive mill wastewater (OMW)

Parameter Unit W W + Fa JR SFO MF+NF MF+RO UOMW

pH initial – 7.80 7.80 6.19 2.02 1.80 4.50 4.70

pH adjusted – 7.80 7.80 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00
EC dS m−1 0.56 0.56 5.30 1.50 11.40 0.12 7.60
TSS mg L−1 10.00 10.00 362 310 378 12 1236
TP mg L−1 0.98 0.98 573.50 6.20 343.10 0.98 1666.7
COD g L−1 – – 12.1 0.83 10.87 0.50 118.8
N mg L−1 11.70 11.70 68.60 10 33.60 4.4 96.8
P 2 O5 mg L−1 34.3 34.3 301 31 152 31 369
K2 O mg L−1 10.90 10.90 343.30 45.40 175.20 7.60 2441.8

a The fertilizers were added to the soil not to the water

3.3 Plant Nutrient Content
The percentage of N, P, and K in the plant were
higher in the W+F and UOMW compared with other
treatments (Table 2). This could be attributed to the
addition of fertilizers in the W+F treatments and to
the high initial concentrations of these nutrients in the
UOMW (Table 1). However, the plant uptake of these
nutrients was higher only with the W+F but not with
the UOMW which increased their percentage concen-
trations in the plant (Table 2). Such difference was
caused obviously by the relatively lower plant dry
weight obtained with the UOMW (Fig. 1). The uptake
of N, P, and K was lower in the control compared with
the W+F treatment suggesting the soil is deficient in
these nutrients. The uptake of N, P, and K with the
application of OMW treated by the different technolo-
gies was not significantly different but P and K was
significantly higher than UOMW (Table 2).
The uptake of micronutrients (Fe, Mn, Zn, and
Cu) and heavy metals (Cd and Pb) was generally not
affected significantly by all the treatments investigated
including the control (Table 2). However, the posi-
tive effect obtained with the addition of recommended
fertilization compared with the control treatment indi-
cates the soil is deficient in N, P, and K and the
crop responded positively to these nutrients added
in the W+F. Therefore, these nutrients contained in
the untreated and treated OMW could be an addi-
tional source of these nutrients for the soil. These
results are in agreement with the conclusion drawn
by Brunetti et al. (2007) and Piotrowska et al. (2006)
where OMW application on soil enrich it with plant
nutrients notably, N, P, K, Mg, and Fe.
3.4 Soil Physicochemical Properties
The analysis of the soil used in this study showed that
the soil is basic and alkaline, poor in organic matter,
N, P, and basic micronutrients. Available K is con-
sidered to be adequate for normal plant growth. The
soil is fine-textured classified as silty clay loam with
relatively high CEC (Table 3).
Soil pH at the end of the growing period was sig-
nificantly lower in the soil irrigated by untreated and
treated OMW by different technologies compared to
the control (Table 4). Such decrease is attributed to
their initial lower pH (6.0) (Table 1). Although this
decrease in the soil pH is not expected to persist longer
due to the higher buffering capacity of such highly cal-
careous alkaline soil and the soil pH is expected to rise
again (Weber et al. 1996), the crops would probably
benefit from this temporal decrease in soil pH during
the growing season. This decrease in the soil pH would
enhance the solubility and availability of certain nutri-
ents in calcareous soils such as P, Fe, Mn, Zn, B, and
Cu (Mohammad and Mazahreh 2003).
Electrical conductivity (EC) increased significantly
by the application of treated and untreated OMW
except the MF+RO treatment (Table 4). JR, UOMW,
and MF+NF resulted in the highest EC (6.20, 5.88,
and 5.73 dS m−1 , respectively). However, OMW
135 Page 6 of 10 Water Air Soil Pollut (2016) 227: 135

treated by solar fenton oxidation (SFO) resulted in

mg plant −1
a lower soil EC (2.51 dS m−1 ) compared to the

0.18a
0.15a
0.08a
0.08a
0.12a
0.09a
0.17a
previous treatments but it was higher than the EC
Pb
obtained in the control (W) and (W+F) treatments.
MF+RO treatment resulted in the lowest soil EC
mg plant −1

among the treated OMW treatments as the reverse

osmosis would remove most of the salt presented in
0.06a
0.03a
0.03a
0.04a
0.03a
0.03a
0.03a
Cd

the UOMW. These results can be expected because

of the EC values of the treated and untreated OMW
mg plant −1

(Table 1). Pierantozzi et al. (2013) noted similar

results where application of OMW tend to increase
0.02a
0.02a
0.03a
0.03a
0.03a
0.02a
0.02a soil salinity.
Cu

Rinaldi et al. (2003) reported that soil application of

Table 2 Effects of untreated and treated OMW by different techniques on plant contents of N, P, K, micronutrients and heavy metals

OMW can increase soil electrical conductivity. There-

mg plant −1

fore, periodically monitoring of soil salinity (EC) and

developing a proper irrigation management strategies
0.39a
0.74a
0.27a
0.36a
0.21a
0.44a
0.25a
Zn

are required to minimizes the adverse effects of salt

accumulation on soil quality and plant growth (Azam
mg plant −1

et al. 2002).
Total polyphenols (TP) was the highest in the
1.86a
1.96a
1.44a
1.81a
1.62a
1.91a
1.83a
Mn

UOMW treatment (16.55 %) followed by the JR treat-

ment (12.07 %) compared to the other treatments
Numbers with a different letter in the same column mean significant difference recorded at P < 0.05

where no significant difference detected (Table 4).

mg plant −1

Mekki et al. (2006) found similar results of high

3.68a
4.12a
1.74b
1.58b
1.44b
1.92b
1.09b

toxic phenolic content in the UOMW treatment.

Fe

Polyphenols are difficult to decompose (Davies et al.

2004; Obied et al. 2005) and present phytotoxicity
g plant −1

(Aggelis et al. 2003) or suppression of soil microor-

1.38b
2.28a

0.60d
0.65d
0.32e
1.00c

1.03c

ganisms (Kotsou et al. 2004). Moreover, the high level

K

of polyphenols in OMW can also pollute surface and

groundwater resources (Aggelis et al. 2003).
g plant −1

Soil OM was the highest in the UOMW treat-

0.09b
0.20a
0.03d
0.07b
0.04c
0.06c
0.04c

ment (2.10 %) followed by the JR treatment (1.26 %)

P

compared to the other treatments where no signifi-

cant difference detected (Table 4). Soil irrigated with
g plant −1

OMW had significantly higher organic matter con-

0.76bc
0.39bc
0.49bc
0.72bc
1.63 a
0.99b

0.24c

tent and lower bulk density and than that of control

N

sites (Mahmoud et al. 2010; Mohawesh et al. 2014).

This decrease in the bulk density (Table 4) is expected
2.04b
2.53a
2.36a
2.05b
2.09b
2.08b
2.07b
%

under increase in soil organic matter (Sakin 2012).

K

0.15bc
0.17bc
0.18bc
0.22a
0.21a

0.09d
0.14c

3.5 Soil Nutrients

%
P

The results of N, P, and K analyses in soil

1.69ab
1.55bc

1.57bc
1.81a
1.46c

1.36c

1.44c

after the end of the experiments are tabulated in

%
N

Table 5. There was no significant difference in N %

between all treatments used. However, soil P and K
Treatment

MF+RO
MF+NF
UOMW

drastically increased with all treatments (except SFO

W+F

SFO

and MF+RO) compared with the control, where the

JR
W
Water Air Soil Pollut (2016) 227: 135 Page 7 of 10 135

Table 3 Physicochemical properties of the soil used in the OMW contains nutrients and other compounds that
experiment might be beneficial to the soil fertility and productiv-
Parameter Unit Value ity (Belaqziz et al. 2008; López-Piñeiro et al. 2011).
This is particularly important for the soil of the arid
pH – 8.18 and semi-arid regions where the soil is characterized
EC a dS m−1 0.61 by low fertility, low nutrient availability, and produc-
CEC b cmol kg−1 34.32 tivity as well as low microbial activity and microbial
CaCO3 % 13.38 biomass levels. This is due to low content of organic
OM c % 0.72 matter and low level of essential nutrients for the plant
N % 0.01 growth. Furthermore, soils of the semi-arid region are
P mg kg−1 7.10 vulnerable to erosion and degradation due to poor soil
K mg kg−1 452 structure as a result of lower organic matter content
Fe mg kg−1 3.56 (Zhang et al. 2014).
Mn mg kg−1 3.58 Soil contents of micronutrients and heavy metals
Zn mg kg−1 1.88 are tabulated in Table 5. The concentrations of the
Cu mg kg−1 1.22 DTPA extractable heavy metals (Zn, Cu, Cd, and Pb)
Pb mg kg−1 0.68 in the soil after harvesting the crop were not affected
Cd mg kg−1 0.06 significantly by the irrigation water source (Table 5).
Bulk density g cm3 1.38 This could be attributed to their very low concen-
Texture Class – Silty clay loam trations in the untreated and treated OMW (data not
shown). In addition, the soil used in this experiment
a Electrical
conductivity has a fine texture soil and high CEC, therefore, has
b Cationexchange capacity the capacity to treat OMW and retain considerable
c Organic matter amount of heavy metals rendering them not bioavail-
able that commonly measured by DTPA extraction
(Mohammad and Mazahreh 2003).
highest value for soil P and soil K was 82.50 and 2926 Although OMW contained very small amount of
mg kg−1 for the UOMW, respectively. The increase micronutrients, the DTPA extractable Fe and Mn sig-
in soil P and K contents with OMW application can nificantly increased in the soil (Table 5). This could be
be attributed to their high content in the OMW used attributed to the chelation reactions of Fe and Mn with
in the irrigation (Table 1). Chartzoulakis et al. (2010) the organic compounds provided by OMW applica-
has shown that soil application of OMW increased tion, which is considered one of the main mechanisms
available soil P and K. for enhancing solubility and availability of Fe and

Table 4 Effects of untreated and treated OMW by different techniques on soil properties

pH EC TP OM Bulk density
Treatment
dS m−1 % % g cm−3

W 7.86a 0.98c 0.12c 0.71c 1.27a

W+F 7.85ab 0.87c 0.14c 0.65c 1.23a
UOMW 7.70c 5.88a 16.55a 2.10a 1.07c
SFO 7.73bc 2.51b 0.07c 0.79c 1.27a
JR 7.72c 6.20a 12.07b 1.26b 1.10bc
MF+NF 7.73bc 5.73a 1.41c 0.62c 1.21ab
MF+RO 7.72c 0.45c 0.10c 0.67c 1.25a

Numbers with a different letter in the same column mean significant difference recorded at P < 0.05
135 Page 8 of 10 Water Air Soil Pollut (2016) 227: 135

DTPA-Pb
Mn in alkaline and highly calcareous soils (Moham-

mg kg−1
mad and Mazahreh 2003; Ylivainio 2010). In addition,

0.40a
0.51a
0.31a
0.39a
0.38a
0.29a
0.30a
both Fe and Mn are transitional metals that can easily
change their oxidation states. The possible reduc-
ing conditions created during irrigation periods with
OMW can facilitate reduction of both Fe and Mn
DTPA-Cd
mg kg−1

into the more soluble and available reduced forms

0.11a
0.08a
0.10a
0.09a
0.12a
0.11a
0.09a
(Lambers et al. 2008; Mohammad and Mazahreh
2003).
DTPA-Mn
mg kg −1

4 Conclusion
2.13b
2.73b
2.57b
2.21b
1.10c
1.30c
3.40a
Table 5 Effects of untreated and treated OMW by different techniques on soil contents of N,P, K and micronutrients and heavy metals

The results obtained from this study indicated that

the application of OMW treated by different tech-
nologies to soil as amendment as well as source of
irrigation has significant impact on several physic-
DTPA-Fe
mg kg −1

ochemical properties and fertility parameters of the

2.07b
1.50c
1.56c
3.12a
1.20c
2.94a

1.28c

soil and plant. Therefore, characteristics of OMW and

soil should be considered in management of OMW
land application.
Generally, treated OMW by different technologies
DTPA-Cu

Numbers with a different letter in the same column mean significant difference recorded at P < 0.05
mg kg −1

enhanced plant growth compared to the untreated

1.49a
1.32a
1.30a
1.64a
1.47a
1.44a
1.52a

OMW. However, plant growth remained lower than

that obtained using the potable water with fertiliz-
ers indicating lack of some essential plant nutrients.
Among the technologies used in this study, MF+RO
DTPA-Zn
mg kg −1

ad SFO treatments increased plant growth and plant

1.88a
1.84a
1.45a
1.82a
1.43a
1.66a
1.77a

nutrients of P and K elements followed by MF+NF

and JR treatments. The lowest soil EC was obtained in
the MF+RO treatment followed by SFO then MF+NF
and JR treatments. For the TP, MF+RO, SFO, and
mg kg −1

MF+NF treatments have the lowest percentage fol-

Exch-K

2613b
2926a

1548c

lowed by JR technology.
631d
624d

582d

588d

Finally, proper management of wastewater irriga-

tion and periodic monitoring of soil fertility and crop
quality parameters are required to ensure successful,
safe, and long-term reuse of wastewater for irrigation.
mg kg −1
Olsen-P

18.80de
44.27bc
29.60d
34.63c
82.50a

12.83e
8.83e

Acknowledgments This work was prepared in the framework

of the project ”Mediterranean Cooperation in the Treatment and
Valorisation of Olive Mill Wastewater (MEDOLICO)” which
0.09a
0.09a
0.12a
0.10a
0.13a
0.13a
0.11a

is funded by the European Union under the ENPI Cross-

%
N

Border Cooperation Mediterranean Sea Basin Programme.

MEDOLICO total budget is 1.9 million Euro and it is co-
financed through the European Neighbourhood and Partnership
Instrument (90 %) and national funds of the countries partici-
Treatment

pating in the project (10 %). The authors acknowledge also all
MF+RO
MF+NF
UOMW

the partners participating in MEDOLICO project for providing

W+F

SFO

us with the treated OMW using different technologies.

JR
W
Water Air Soil Pollut (2016) 227: 135
References
Aggelis, G., Iconomou, D., Christou, M., Bokas, D., Kotzail-
ias, S., Christou, G., Tsagou, V., & Papanikolaou, S. (2003).
Phenolic removal in a model olive oil mill wastewater
using pleurotus ostreatus in bioreactor cultures and bio-
logical evaluation of the process. Water Research, 37(16),
3897–3904.
Al-Rashidi, R., Rusan, M., & Obaid, K. (2013). Changes in
plant nutrients, and microbial biomass in different soil
depths after long-term surface application of secondary
treated wastewater. Environmental and Climate Technolo-
gies, 11, 1–8.
APHA. (1992). Standard mehods for the exmnination of water
and wastewater, 18th Edition. Washington, DC: American
Public Health Association.
Azam, F., Müller, C., Weiske, A., Benckiser, G., & Ottow,
J. (2002). Nitrification and denitrification as sources of
atmospheric nitrous oxide – role of oxidizable carbon and
applied nitrogen. Biology and Fertility of Soils, 35(1), 54–
61.
Belaqziz, M., Lakhal, E.K., Mbouobda, H., & El-Hadrami, I.
(2008). Land spreading of olive mill wastewater: effect on
maize (zea maize). Journal of Agronomy and Crop Science,
7, 297–305.
Bene, C.D., Pellegrino, E., Debolini, M., Silvestri, N., &
Bonari, E. (2013). Short- and long-term effects of olive mill
wastewater land spreading on soil chemical and biological
properties. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 56(0), 21–30.
Blake, G.R., & Hartge, K.H. (1986). Bulk density. In Klute, A,
(Ed.), methods of soil analysis: part 1—physical and miner-
alogical methods Soil Science Society of America American
Society of Agronomy (pp. 363-375).
Borja, R., Martı́n, A., & Alonso, V. (1992). Influence of the
microorganism support on the kinetics of anaerobic fermen-
tation of condensation water from thermally concentrated
olive mill wastewater. Biodegradation, 3(1), 93–103.
Bottino, A., Capannelli, G., Comite, A., Ferrari, F., Jezowska,
A., & Firpo, R. (2015). Treatment of olive mill wastewater
through integrated pressure driven membrane processes.
Bremner, J.M., & Mulvaney, C.S. (1982). Nitrogen—total.
In Page, A.L. (Ed.), Methods of Soil Analysis. Part
2 Chemical and Microbiological Properties American
Society of Agronomy Soil Science Society of America
(pp. 595–624).
Brunetti, G., Senesi, N., & Plaza, C. (2007). Effects of amend-
ment with treated and untreated olive oil mill wastewaters
on soil properties, soil humic substances and wheat yield.
Geoderma, 138(1–2), 144–152.
Chapman, H.D., & Pratt, P.F. (1961). Methods of analysis for
soils, plants and waters. USA: Univ. California berkeley
CA.
Chartzoulakis, K., Psarras, G., Moutsopoulou, M., & Ste-
fanoudaki, E. (2010). Application of olive mill wastewater
to a cretan olive orchard: effects on soil properties, plant
performance and the environment. Agriculture, Ecosystems
& Environment, 138(3–4), 293–298.
Davies, L., Vilhena, A., Novais, J.M., & Martins-Dias, S.
(2004). Olive mill wastewater characteristics: modeling and
statistical analysis. Grasas y Aceites, 55(3), 233–241.
Page 9 of 10 135
Eusébio, A., Mateus, M., Baeta-Hall, L., Sàágua, M., Tenreiro,
R., Almeida-Vara, E., & Duarte, J. (2007). Characterization
of the microbial communities in jet-loop (jacto) reactors
during aerobic olive oil wastewater treatment. International
Biodeterioration & Biodegradation, 59(3), 226–233.
Fatta, D., Arslan Alaton, I., Gokcay, L., Rusan, M., Assobhei,
O., Mountadar, M., & Papadopoulos, A. (2005). Wastewater
reuse: problems and challenges in Cyprus, Turkey, Jordan
and Morocco. European Water, 11/12, 63–69.
Gee, G.W., & Bauder, J.W. (1986). Particle-size analysis. In
Klute, A. (Ed.), methods of soil analysis: part 1—physical
and mineralogical methods Soil Science Society of America
American Society of Agronomy (pp. 383-411).
Khresat, S., Rawajfih, Z., & Mohammad, M. (1998). Morpho-
logical, physical and chemical properties of selected soils
in the arid and semi-arid region in north-western Jordan.
Journal of Arid Environments, 40(1), 15–25.
Kotsou, M., Mari, I., Lasaridi, K., Chatzipavlidis, I., Balis, C., &
Kyriacou, A. (2004). The effect of olive oil mill wastewater
(omw) on soil microbial communities and suppressiveness
against rhizoctonia solani. Applied Soil Ecology, 26(2),
113–121.
Lambers, H., Chapin, F.S., & Pons, T.L. (2008). Plant physio-
logical ecology, 2nd Edition. New York: Springer.
Lindsay, W.L., & Norvell, W.A. (1978). Development of a
dtpa soil test for zinc, iron, manganese, and copper1. Soil
Science Society of America Journal, 42(3), 421–428.
López-Piñeiro, A., Albarrán, A., Nunes, J.M.R., Peña, D., &
Cabrera, D. (2011). Cumulative and residual effects of two-
phase olive mill waste on olive grove production and soil
properties. Soil Science Society of America Journal, 75(3),
1061–1069.
Mahmoud, M., Janssen, M., Haboub, N., Nassour, A., &
Lennartz, B. (2010). The impact of olive mill wastewater
application on flow and transport properties in soils. Soil
and Tillage Research, 107(1), 36–41.
Marinelli, L., & Oreggia, M. (2013). A guide to the world of
extra virgin olive oil, (p. 831). Italy: Marco Oreggia.
Mclean, E. (1982). Soil ph and lime requirement. In Page, A.
(Ed.), Methods of Soil Analysis. Part 2 Chemical and Micro-
biological Properties American Society of Agronomy Soil
Science Society of America (pp. 199-224).
Mekki, A., Dhouib, A., & Sayadi, S. (2006). Olive wastew-
ater as an ecological fertiliser. Agronomy for Sustainable
Development, 26, 61–67.
Mekki, A., Dhouib, A., & Sayadi, S. (2013). Effects of olive
mill wastewater application on soil properties and plants
growth. International Journal of Recycling of Organic
Waste in Agriculture, 2(1), 1–7.
Michael, I., Panagi, A., Ioannou, L.A., Frontistis, Z., &
Fatta-Kassinos, D. (2014). Utilizing solar energy for the
purification of olive mill wastewater using a pilot-scale
photocatalytic reactor after coagulation-flocculation. Water
Research, 60, 28–40.
Mohammad, M.J., & Mazahreh, N. (2003). Changes in soil fer-
tility parameters in response to irrigation of forage crops
with secondary treated wastewater. Communications in Soil
Science and Plant Analysis, 34(9-10), 1281–1294.
Mohawesh, O., Mahmoud, M., Janssen, M., & Lennartz, B.
(2014). Effect of irrigation with olive mill wastewater on
135 Page 10 of 10
soil hydraulic and solute transport properties. International
Journal of Environmental Science and Technology, 11(4),
927–934.
Moreno, E., Perez, J., Ramos-Cormenzana, A., & Martinez,
J. (1987). Antimicrobial effect of waste water from olive
oil extraction plants selecting soil bacteria after incubation
with diluted waste. Microbios, 51, 169–174.
Nelson, D.W., & Sommers, L. E. (1982). Total carbon, organic
carbon, and organic matter1.
Obied, H.K., Allen, M.S., Bedgood, D.R., Prenzler, P.D.,
Robards, K., & Stockmann, R. (2005). Bioactivity and
analysis of biophenols recovered from olive mill waste.
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry, 53(4), 823–
837.
Olsen, C., Cole, C., Watanabe, F., & Dean, L. (1954). Esti-
mation of available phosphorus in soils by extraction with
sodium bicarbonate. United States Department of Agricul-
ture circular, 939.
Pierantozzi, P., Torres, M., Verdenelli, R., Basanta, M., Maestri,
D.M., & Meriles, J.M. (2013). Short-term impact of olive
mill wastewater (omww) applications on the physico-
chemical and microbiological soil properties of an olive
grove in argentina. Journal of Environmental Science and
Health, Part B, 48(5), 393–401.
Piotrowska, A., Iamarino, G., Rao, M.A., & Gianfreda, L.
(2006). Short-term effects of olive mill waste water (omw)
on chemical and biochemical properties of a semiarid
mediterranean soil. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 38(3),
600–610.
Rhoades, J.D. (1982a). Cation exchange capacity. In Page, a. l.
(ed.), methods of soil analysis. Part 2. Chemical and micro-
biological properties American Society of Agronomy Soil
Science Society of America (pp. 149-157).
Rhoades, J.D. (1982b). Soluble salts. In Page, a. l. (ed.), meth-
ods of soil analysis. Part 2. Chemical and microbiological
properties American Society of Agronomy Soil Science
Society of America (pp. 167-179).
Water Air Soil Pollut (2016) 227: 135
Richards, L. (1954). Diagnosis and improvement of saline and
alkali soils. U.S. Department of Agriculture: Washington
D.C.
Rinaldi, M., Rana, G., & Introna, M. (2003). Olive-mill wastew-
ater spreading in southern Italy: effects on a durum wheat
crop. Field Crops Research, 84(3), 319–326.
Rusan, M.J., Albalasmeh, A., Zuraiqi, S., & Bashabsheh,
M. (2015). Evaluation of phytotoxicity effect of olive
mill wastewater treated by different technologies on
seed germination of barley (hordeum vulgare l.) Envi-
ronmental Science and Pollution Research, 22(12), 9127
–9135.
Rusan, M.J.M., Hinnawi, S., & Rousan, L. (2007). Long
term effect of wastewater irrigation of forage crops on
soil and plant quality parameters. Desalination, 215(1–3),
143–152.
Sakin, E. (2012). Organic carbon organic matter and bulk
density relationships in arid-semi arid soils in southeast
anatolia region. African Journal of Biotechnology, 11(6),
1373–1377.
Weber, B., Avnimelech, Y., & Juanico, M. (1996). Salt enrich-
ment of municipal sewage: New prevention approaches
in israel. Environmental Management, 20(4), 487
–495.
Wiesman, Z., Linder, C., Niemark, G., Abramovitz, J., Wais-
man, M., & Gilron, J. (2013). Treating olive mill wastewater
for recovery of valuable byproducts Tech. rep. Medolico-
ENPI.
Wilkinson, L. (1990). SYSTAT The system for statistics: SYS-
TAT inc Evanston IL.
Ylivainio, K. (2010). Effects of iron(iii)chelates on the solu-
bility of heavy metals in calcareous soils. Environmental
Pollution, 158(10), 3194–3200.
Zhang, P., Wei, T., Jia, Z., Han, Q., Ren, X., & Li, Y. (2014).
Effects of straw incorporation on soil organic matter and
soil water-stable aggregates content in semiarid regions of
northwest china. PLoS ONE, 9(3), e92839.