Hubbry Logo
Soil salinity controlSoil salinity controlMain
Open search
Soil salinity control
Community hub
Soil salinity control
logo
8 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Soil salinity control
Soil salinity control
Soil salinity control
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia
Yield of mustard (colza) and soil salinity

Soil salinity control refers to controlling the process and progress of soil salinity to prevent soil degradation by salination and reclamation of already salty (saline) soils. Soil reclamation is also known as soil improvement, rehabilitation, remediation, recuperation, or amelioration.

The primary man-made cause of salinization is irrigation. River water or groundwater used in irrigation contains salts, which remain in the soil after the water has evaporated.

The primary method of controlling soil salinity is to permit 10–20% of the irrigation water to leach the soil, so that it will be drained and discharged through an appropriate drainage system. The salt concentration of the drainage water is normally 5 to 10 times higher than that of the irrigation water which meant that salt export will more closely match salt import and it will not accumulate.

Problems with soil salinity

[edit]

Salty (saline) soils have high salt content. The predominant salt is normally sodium chloride (NaCl, "table salt"). Saline soils are therefore also sodic soils but there may be sodic soils that are not saline, but alkaline.

World Soil Salt Degradation

This damage is an average of 2,000 hectares of irrigated land in arid and semi-arid areas daily for more than 20 years across 75 countries (each week the world loses an area larger than Manhattan)...To feed the world's anticipated nine billion people by 2050, and with little new productive land available, it's a case of all lands needed on deck.—principal author Manzoor Qadir, Assistant Director, Water and Human Development, at UN University's Canadian-based Institute for Water, Environment and Health[1]

According to a study by UN University, about 62 million hectares (240 thousand square miles; 150 million acres), representing 20% of the world's irrigated lands are affected, up from 45 million ha (170 thousand sq mi; 110 million acres) in the early 1990s.[1] In the Indo-Gangetic Plain, home to over 10% of the world's population, crop yield losses for wheat, rice, sugarcane and cotton grown on salt-affected lands could be 40%, 45%, 48%, and 63%, respectively.[1]

Salty soils are a common feature and an environmental problem in irrigated lands in arid and semi-arid regions, resulting in poor or little crop production.[2] The causes of salty soils are often associated with high water tables, which are caused by a lack of natural subsurface drainage to the underground. Poor subsurface drainage may be caused by insufficient transport capacity of the aquifer or because water cannot exit the aquifer, for instance, if the aquifer is situated in a topographical depression.

Worldwide, the major factor in the development of saline soils is a lack of precipitation. Most naturally saline soils are found in (semi) arid regions and climates of the earth.

Primary cause

[edit]
Irrigated saline land with poor crop stand

Man-made salinization is primarily caused by salt found in irrigation water. All irrigation water derived from rivers or groundwater, regardless of water purity, contains salts that remain behind in the soil after the water has evaporated.

For example, assuming irrigation water with a low salt concentration of 0.3 g/L (equal to 0.3 kg/m3 corresponding to an electric conductivity of about 0.5 FdS/m) and a modest annual supply of irrigation water of 10,000 m3/ha (almost 3 mm/day) brings 3,000 kg salt/ha each year. With the absence of sufficient natural drainage (as in waterlogged soils), and proper leaching and drainage program to remove salts, this would lead to high soil salinity and reduced crop yields in the long run.

Much of the water used in irrigation has a higher salt content than 0.3 g/L, compounded by irrigation projects using a far greater annual supply of water. Sugar cane, for example, needs about 20,000 m3/ha of water per year. As a result, irrigated areas often receive more than 3,000 kg/ha of salt per year, with some receiving as much as 10,000 kg/ha/year.

Secondary cause

[edit]

The secondary cause of salinization is waterlogging in irrigated land. Irrigation causes changes to the natural water balance of irrigated lands. Large quantities of water in irrigation projects are not consumed by plants and must go somewhere. In irrigation projects, it is impossible to achieve 100% irrigation efficiency where all the irrigation water is consumed by the plants. The maximum attainable irrigation efficiency is about 70%, but usually, it is less than 60%. This means that minimum 30%, but usually more than 40% of the irrigation water is not evaporated and it must go somewhere.

Most of the water lost this way is stored underground which can change the original hydrology of local aquifers considerably. Many aquifers cannot absorb and transport these quantities of water, and so the water table rises leading to waterlogging.

Waterlogging causes three problems:

  • The shallow water table and lack of oxygenation of the root zone reduces the yield of most crops.
  • It leads to an accumulation of salts brought in with the irrigation water as their removal through the aquifer is blocked.
  • With the upward seepage of groundwater, more salts are brought into the soil and the salination is aggravated.

Aquifer conditions in irrigated land and the groundwater flow have an important role in soil salinization,[3] as illustrated here:

  • Illustration of the influence of aquifer conditions on soil salinization in irrigated land
  • Soil salinization in the lower parts of undulating land with a good aquifer
    Soil salinization in the lower parts of undulating land with a good aquifer
  • Soil salinization in the unirrigated parts of flat land with a good aquifer
    Soil salinization in the unirrigated parts of flat land with a good aquifer
  • Soil salinization in irrigated flat land without an aquifer
    Soil salinization in irrigated flat land without an aquifer
  • Soil salinization in a coastal delta from irrigation higher up
    Soil salinization in a coastal delta from irrigation higher up

Salt affected area

[edit]

Normally, the salinization of agricultural land affects a considerable area of 20% to 30% in irrigation projects. When the agriculture in such a fraction of the land is abandoned, a new salt and water balance is attained, a new equilibrium is reached and the situation becomes stable.

In India alone, thousands of square kilometers have been severely salinized. China and Pakistan do not lag far behind (perhaps China has even more salt affected land than India). A regional distribution of the 3,230,000 km2 of saline land worldwide is shown in the following table derived from the FAO/UNESCO Soil Map of the World.[4]

Region Area (106ha)
Australia 84.7
Africa 69.5
Latin America 59.4
Near and Middle East 53.1
Europe 20.7
Asia and Far East 19.5
Northern America 16.0
Spatial variation of soil salinity

Spatial variation

[edit]

Although the principles of the processes of salinization are fairly easy to understand, it is more difficult to explain why certain parts of the land suffer from the problems and other parts do not, or to predict accurately which part of the land will fall victim. The main reason for this is the variation of natural conditions in time and space, the usually uneven distribution of the irrigation water, and the seasonal or yearly changes of agricultural practices. Only in lands with undulating topography is the prediction simple: the depressional areas will degrade the most.

The preparation of salt and water balances[3] for distinguishable sub-areas in the irrigation project, or the use of agro-hydro-salinity models,[5] can be helpful in explaining or predicting the extent and severity of the problems.

Diagnosis

[edit]
The maize crop (corn) in Egypt has a salt tolerance of ECe=5.5 dS/m beyond which the yield declines.[6]
The rice crop in Egypt has a similar salt tolerance as maize.[7]

Measurement

[edit]

Soil salinity is measured as the salt concentration of the soil solution in tems of g/L or electric conductivity (EC) in dS/m. The relation between these two units is about 5/3: y g/L => 5y/3 dS/m. Seawater may have a salt concentration of 30 g/L (3%) and an EC of 50 dS/m.

The standard for the determination of soil salinity is from an extract of a saturated paste of the soil, and the EC is then written as ECe. The extract is obtained by centrifugation. The salinity can more easily be measured, without centrifugation, in a 2:1 or 5:1 water:soil mixture (in terms of g water per g dry soil) than from a saturated paste. The relation between ECe and EC2:1 is about 4, hence: ECe = 4EC1:2.[8]

Classification

[edit]

Soils are considered saline when the ECe > 4.[9] When 4 < ECe < 8, the soil is called slightly saline, when 8 < ECe < 16 it is called (moderately) saline, and when ECe > 16 severely saline.

Crop tolerance

[edit]

Sensitive crops lose their vigor already in slightly saline soils; most crops are negatively affected by (moderately) saline soils, and only salinity resistant crops thrive in severely saline soils. The University of Wyoming[10] and the Government of Alberta[11] report data on the salt tolerance of plants.

Principles of salinity control

[edit]

Drainage is the primary method of controlling soil salinity. The system should permit a small fraction of the irrigation water (about 10 to 20 percent, the drainage or leaching fraction) to be drained and discharged out of the irrigation project.[12]

In irrigated areas where salinity is stable, the salt concentration of the drainage water is normally 5 to 10 times higher than that of the irrigation water. Salt export matches salt import and salt will not accumulate.

When reclaiming already salinized soils, the salt concentration of the drainage water will initially be much higher than that of the irrigation water (for example 50 times higher). Salt export will greatly exceed salt import, so that with the same drainage fraction a rapid desalinization occurs. After one or two years, the soil salinity is decreased so much, that the salinity of the drainage water has come down to a normal value and a new, favorable, equilibrium is reached.

In regions with pronounced dry and wet seasons, the drainage system may be operated in the wet season only, and closed during the dry season. This practice of checked or controlled drainage saves irrigation water.

The discharge of salty drainage water may pose environmental problems to downstream areas. The environmental hazards must be considered very carefully and, if necessary mitigating measures must be taken. If possible, the drainage must be limited to wet seasons only, when the salty effluent inflicts the least harm.

Drainage systems

[edit]
Parameters of a horizontal drainage system
Parameters of a vertical drainage system

Land drainage for soil salinity control is usually by horizontal drainage system (figure left), but vertical systems (figure right) are also employed.

The drainage system designed to evacuate salty water also lowers the water table. To reduce the cost of the system, the lowering must be reduced to a minimum. The highest permissible level of the water table (or the shallowest permissible depth) depends on the irrigation and agricultural practices and kind of crops.

In many cases a seasonal average water table depth of 0.6 to 0.8 m is deep enough. This means that the water table may occasionally be less than 0.6 m (say 0.2 m just after an irrigation or a rain storm). This automatically implies that, in other occasions, the water table will be deeper than 0.8 m (say 1.2 m). The fluctuation of the water table helps in the breathing function of the soil while the expulsion of carbon dioxide (CO2) produced by the plant roots and the inhalation of fresh oxygen (O2) is promoted.

The establishing of a not-too-deep water table offers the additional advantage that excessive field irrigation is discouraged, as the crop yield would be negatively affected by the resulting elevated water table, and irrigation water may be saved.

The statements made above on the optimum depth of the water table are very general, because in some instances the required water table may be still shallower than indicated (for example in rice paddies), while in other instances it must be considerably deeper (for example in some orchards). The establishment of the optimum depth of the water table is in the realm of agricultural drainage criteria.[13]

Soil leaching

[edit]
Water balance factors in the soil

The vadose zone of the soil below the soil surface and the water table is subject to four main hydrological inflow and outflow factors:[3]

  • Infiltration of rain and irrigation water (Irr) into the soil through the soil surface (Inf) :
  • Inf = Rain + Irr
  • Evaporation of soil water through plants and directly into the air through the soil surface (Evap)
  • Percolation of water from the unsaturated zone soil into the groundwater through the watertable (Perc)
  • Capillary rise of groundwater moving by capillary suction forces into the unsaturated zone (Cap)

In steady state (i.e. the amount of water stored in the unsaturated zone does not change in the long run) the water balance of the unsaturated zone reads: Inflow = Outflow, thus:

  • Inf + Cap = Evap + Perc or:
  • Irr + Rain + Cap = Evap + Perc

and the salt balance is

  • Irr.Ci + Cap.Cc = Evap.Fc.Ce + Perc.Cp + Ss

where Ci is the salt concentration of the irrigation water, Cc is the salt concentration of the capillary rise, equal to the salt concentration of the upper part of the groundwater body, Fc is the fraction of the total evaporation transpired by plants, Ce is the salt concentration of the water taken up by the plant roots, Cp is the salt concentration of the percolation water, and Ss is the increase of salt storage in the unsaturated soil. This assumes that the rainfall contains no salts. Only along the coast this may not be true. Further it is assumed that no runoff or surface drainage occurs. The amount of removed by plants (Evap.Fc.Ce) is usually negligibly small: Evap.Fc.Ce = 0

Leaching curves, calibrating leaching efficiency

The salt concentration Cp can be taken as a part of the salt concentration of the soil in the unsaturated zone (Cu) giving: Cp = Le.Cu, where Le is the leaching efficiency. The leaching efficiency is often in the order of 0.7 to 0.8,[14] but in poorly structured, heavy clay soils it may be less. In the Leziria Grande polder in the delta of the Tagus river in Portugal it was found that the leaching efficiency was only 0.15.[15]
Assuming that one wishes to avoid the soil salinity to increase and maintain the soil salinity Cu at a desired level Cd we have:
Ss = 0, Cu = Cd and Cp = Le.Cd. Hence the salt balance can be simplified to:

  • Perc.Le.Cd = Irr.Ci + Cap.Cc

Setting the amount percolation water required to fulfill this salt balance equal to Lr (the leaching requirement) it is found that:

  • Lr = (Irr.Ci + Cap.Cc) / Le.Cd .

Substituting herein Irr = Evap + Perc − Rain − Cap and re-arranging gives :

  • Lr = [ (Evap−Rain).Ci + Cap(Cc−Ci) ] / (Le.Cd − Ci)[12]

With this the irrigation and drainage requirements for salinity control can be computed too.
In irrigation projects in (semi)arid zones and climates it is important to check the leaching requirement, whereby the field irrigation efficiency (indicating the fraction of irrigation water percolating to the underground) is to be taken into account.
The desired soil salinity level Cd depends on the crop tolerance to salt. The University of Wyoming,[10] US, and the Government of Alberta,[11] Canada, report crop tolerance data.

Strip cropping: an alternative

[edit]
Hydrological principles of strip cropping to control the depth of the water table and the soil salinity

In irrigated lands with scarce water resources suffering from drainage (high water table) and soil salinity problems, strip cropping is sometimes practiced with strips of land where every other strip is irrigated while the strips in between are left permanently fallow.[16]

Owing to the water application in the irrigated strips they have a higher water table which induces flow of groundwater to the unirrigated strips. This flow functions as subsurface drainage for the irrigated strips, whereby the water table is maintained at a not-too-shallow depth, leaching of the soil is possible, and the soil salinity can be controlled at an acceptably low level.

In the unirrigated (sacrificial) strips the soil is dry and the groundwater comes up by capillary rise and evaporates leaving the salts behind, so that here the soil salinizes. Nevertheless, they can have some use for livestock, sowing salinity resistant grasses or weeds. Moreover, useful salt resistant trees can be planted like Casuarina, Eucalyptus, or Atriplex, keeping in mind that the trees have deep rooting systems and the salinity of the wet subsoil is less than of the topsoil. In these ways wind erosion can be controlled. The unirrigated strips can also be used for salt harvesting.[citation needed]

Soil salinity models

[edit]
SaltMod components

The majority of the computer models available for water and solute transport in the soil (e.g. SWAP,[17] DrainMod-S,[18] UnSatChem,[19] and Hydrus[20]) are based on Richard's differential equation for the movement of water in unsaturated soil in combination with Fick's differential convection–diffusion equation for advection and dispersion of salts.

The models require the input of soil characteristics like the relations between variable unsaturated soil moisture content, water tension, water retention curve, unsaturated hydraulic conductivity, dispersity, and diffusivity. These relations vary greatly from place to place and time to time and are not easy to measure. Further, the models are complicated to calibrate under farmer's field conditions because the soil salinity here is spatially very variable. The models use short time steps and need at least a daily, if not hourly, database of hydrological phenomena. Altogether, this makes model application to a fairly large project the job of a team of specialists with ample facilities.

Simpler models, like SaltMod,[5] based on monthly or seasonal water and soil balances and an empirical capillary rise function, are also available. They are useful for long-term salinity predictions in relation to irrigation and drainage practices.

LeachMod,[21][22] Using the SaltMod principles helps in analyzing leaching experiments in which the soil salinity was monitored in various root zone layers while the model will optimize the value of the leaching efficiency of each layer so that a fit is obtained of observed with simulated soil salinity values.

Spatial variations owing to variations in topography can be simulated and predicted using salinity cum groundwater models, like SahysMod.

See also

[edit]

References

[edit]
[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

Soil salinity control

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia
Soil salinity control encompasses the strategies and practices employed to manage the accumulation of soluble salts in soil, preventing salinization that impairs and . High salt concentrations, typically measured by electrical conductivity exceeding 4 dS m⁻¹, restrict plant water uptake through osmotic stress, cause , and disrupt , affecting 33% of global irrigated agricultural lands and 20% of cultivated areas (as of 2015 estimates). However, a 2024 FAO assessment updates this to nearly 1.4 billion hectares globally (10.7% of land area), impacting about 10% of irrigated and rainfed croplands. This issue arises from natural factors like low , high , and rock , as well as human activities such as with and poor drainage, leading to projected salinization of over 50% of by 2050 if unchecked. Key effects include reduced crop yields—often by 20–50%— imbalances, and due to diminished aggregation and infiltration. Saline soils feature high levels of neutral salts like , while sodic soils are dominated by sodium, exacerbating dispersion and poor aeration; saline-sodic soils combine both challenges. These impacts, with hotspots in arid regions and irrigated systems, underscore salinization's role as a major environmental threat to . Effective control relies on integrated approaches, including leaching excess salts from the root zone with low- water to maintain electrical conductivity below tolerance thresholds—such as the leaching fraction calculated as LR=ECiw5ECe−ECiwLR = \frac{EC_{iw}}{5 EC_{e} - EC_{iw}}, where ECiwEC_{iw} is water and ECeEC_{e} is the 's threshold . For sodic , amendments like replace sodium with calcium, followed by leaching to restore . Additional methods involve precision techniques (e.g., drip systems), selecting salt-tolerant like or halophytes, and improving drainage to lower water tables, all aimed at sustainable in salt-prone environments.

Understanding Soil Salinity

Definition and Primary Causes

Soil salinity refers to the accumulation of soluble salts, such as (NaCl) and (CaSO4), in the soil profile, which adversely affects growth by creating osmotic stress and toxicity. This condition is typically quantified through the electrical conductivity of the saturation extract (ECe), with saline soils defined as those exhibiting ECe values greater than or equal to 4 dS/m at 25°C. These salts dissolve in water, increasing its and reducing the availability of water to despite adequate moisture levels. Primary natural causes of soil salinity include the of salt-rich parent materials, where minerals in rocks break down over time, releasing soluble salts into the soil. In coastal areas, sea spray deposits sodium and ions directly onto soils, contributing to salt buildup, particularly in regions with frequent marine influence. Additionally, rise from underlying saline transports salts upward to the root zone, especially in areas with shallow water tables and high rates. These processes are exacerbated in arid regions where annual rainfall is less than 250 mm, insufficient to naturally leach salts below the root zone and leading to progressive accumulation. Irrigation-induced salinity arises from the repeated application of water containing dissolved salts, which accumulates in the soil as water is taken up by plants or evaporates, leaving salts behind. Poor-quality irrigation sources, such as brackish groundwater or river water with elevated salt content, intensify this buildup over time, particularly in intensive farming systems without adequate drainage. Historically, this issue was recognized as early as circa 2000 BCE in ancient Mesopotamia, where over-irrigation led to salinization that reduced crop yields by up to 50%, contributing to the decline of early agricultural civilizations.

Secondary Causes and Global Extent

Secondary causes of soil salinity primarily stem from human activities that exacerbate salt accumulation in agricultural landscapes. Over-irrigation without adequate drainage is a key driver, as it raises water tables and concentrates salts through evapotranspiration in arid and semi-arid regions, leading to secondary salinization. The use of brackish irrigation water, typically with electrical conductivity (EC) exceeding 3 dS/m, introduces soluble salts directly into the soil profile, particularly when leaching is insufficient to flush them below the root zone. Deforestation further amplifies this by removing vegetative cover, which increases surface evaporation rates and promotes capillary rise of saline groundwater to the soil surface. Additionally, overuse of fertilizers, especially nitrogen-based ones, contributes to salt inputs through excess application that exceeds plant uptake, resulting in residual ions that elevate soil EC over time. Globally, salt-affected soils encompass approximately 1.381 billion hectares, representing about 10.7% of the world's land area (as of ), with approximately 10% of irrigated cropland—totaling around 35 million hectares—impacted by . These affected areas are disproportionately concentrated in arid and semi-arid zones, with notable hotspots in (357 million hectares total salt-affected, including approximately 2 million hectares of irrigated and dryland saline soils), (6.7 million hectares of saline soils), and the (over 50 million hectares across the region). Projections from earlier studies indicate that more than 50% of could be salinized by 2050 if current trends continue, driven by factors such as rising temperatures that enhance and sea-level rise that intrudes saline water into coastal aquifers. Spatial variations in soil salinity reflect both climatic patterns and management practices, with zonal distributions prevalent in arid and semi-arid climates where low rainfall limits natural leaching. Localized hotspots often arise from poor land management, such as intensive irrigation in valleys or floodplains without drainage infrastructure. Soil texture plays a critical role in these patterns; fine-textured soils, rich in clay, retain salts more effectively due to their higher water-holding capacity and lower permeability, which hinders leaching compared to coarser sands. This retention exacerbates salinity in poorly drained fine soils, contrasting with more uniform dispersal in permeable textures.

Environmental and Agricultural Impacts

Soil salinity imposes significant constraints on primarily through osmotic stress and ion toxicity. Osmotic stress arises when high salt concentrations in the solution lower the , making it harder for to absorb despite adequate , leading to physiological water deficit and reduced growth. Ion toxicity occurs as excessive sodium (Na⁺) and chloride (Cl⁻) ions accumulate in plant tissues, particularly harming root functions and disrupting nutrient balance by competing with essential ions like . For , a moderately salt-tolerant , yields remain unaffected up to a soil electrical conductivity (ECe) of 6 dS/m, but beyond this threshold, losses average 7.1% per additional dS/m, resulting in 10-25% reductions at moderate levels around 7-9 dS/m. Globally, these impacts contribute to an estimated annual economic loss of $27.3 billion (as estimated in 2013) from reduced production on salt-affected irrigated lands, which cover about 10% of the world's approximately 350 million hectares of irrigated area (as of 2021). Environmentally, soil salinity drives biodiversity loss, particularly in wetlands where elevated salt levels alter habitat suitability and reduce species richness in aquatic and terrestrial communities. It degrades soil structure by promoting dispersion of clay particles, which diminishes aggregate stability and increases susceptibility to water and wind erosion, exacerbating land degradation. Salinity also contaminates through upward capillary rise of saline water tables or leaching of salts from surface soils, rendering aquifers unsuitable for or drinking and perpetuating cycles of salinization. In regions like the basin, intensified salinity has accelerated , transforming fertile deltas into barren salt flats and amplifying dust storms that further degrade surrounding ecosystems. Over the long term, soil salinity creates feedback loops that worsen , especially in climate-vulnerable arid and semi-arid areas where reduced plant lowers local and rainfall efficiency, compounding effects. As intensifies and irregular , these loops accelerate salinization, further limiting freshwater availability and promoting irreversible land abandonment in affected regions.

Diagnosis and Classification

Field and Laboratory Measurement

Field measurements of soil salinity provide essential data for on-site assessment, enabling rapid mapping and monitoring without extensive soil disturbance. These methods primarily measure electrical conductivity (EC), which correlates with salt concentration, as higher salinity increases soil's ability to conduct . Common field techniques include non-invasive and in-situ approaches that target apparent electrical conductivity (ECa) to delineate saline areas efficiently. Electromagnetic induction (EMI) sensors, such as the EM38 device, offer a non-invasive method for mapping soil salinity across large fields by generating an electromagnetic field that induces currents in conductive soil layers. In vertical dipole mode, EMI typically assesses salinity to a depth of approximately 1.5 to 2 meters, with prediction accuracies often achieving coefficients of determination (R²) between 0.7 and 0.9 when calibrated against laboratory data, though errors can reach ±10% due to soil heterogeneity and texture influences. Four-electrode probes enable direct in-situ EC measurements by inserting two current-injecting and two potential-measuring electrodes into the soil, providing bulk ECa values at specific depths with high precision for small volumes, typically within 5-10 cm of the probe tip, and are particularly useful for verifying EMI results in targeted locations. Gypsum blocks, embedded in the soil, primarily monitor soil moisture through electrical resistance changes, with the gypsum material buffering against salinity effects to maintain measurement accuracy for water content, though high salinity can influence readings and requires calibration to account for such interferences. Laboratory methods complement field data by providing standardized, precise quantification of from collected samples. The saturated paste extract technique, the established standard for ECe (electrical conductivity of the saturation extract), involves mixing with water to form a paste, allowing salts to dissolve, then extracting and measuring the EC of the phase, which directly reflects the available to plant roots. For quicker assessments, samples are oven-dried at 105°C to constant weight before preparing a 1:5 -to-water suspension, whose EC (EC1:5) serves as a proxy for , often convertible to ECe via empirical factors like multiplication by 5-7 depending on . Complementary metrics include , measured in the same extracts to assess impacts on salt solubility, and the (SAR), calculated as SAR = [Na⁺] / √([Ca²⁺ + Mg²⁺]/2) from cation concentrations in the extract, which indicates sodicity risk by evaluating sodium's dominance relative to divalent cations. Best practices for accurate salinity assessment emphasize strategic sampling to capture vertical and temporal variability. Samples should be collected at multiple depths, such as 0-30 cm for surface-root zone effects and 30-60 cm for subsurface accumulation, using a auger to minimize , with at least 10-15 subsamples composited per depth interval across uniform field zones. Measurements are ideally conducted during dry periods, like late summer, when salts concentrate due to , enhancing detection sensitivity. For , site-specific calibration against lab ECe is crucial to account for clay content and moisture, ensuring reliable mapping that informs subsequent classification systems.

Soil Salinity Classification Systems

Soil salinity classification systems provide standardized frameworks for identifying and categorizing salt-affected soils based on measurable chemical properties, enabling consistent assessment across regions and supporting targeted management strategies. These systems primarily distinguish between saline, sodic, and saline-sodic soils using thresholds for electrical conductivity of the saturation extract (ECe) and exchangeable sodium percentage (ESP). The (USDA) system, established in the seminal 1954 handbook Diagnosis and Improvement of Saline and Alkali Soils, defines saline soils as those with ECe greater than 4 dS/m and ESP less than 15%, indicating high soluble salt content without significant sodium dominance. Sodic soils are characterized by ESP exceeding 15% and ECe less than 4 dS/m, often accompanied by a above 8.5 due to sodium's dispersive effects on . Saline-sodic soils meet both criteria (ECe > 4 dS/m and ESP > 15%), combining high salinity with sodium hazards. This framework relies on laboratory-derived ECe from saturated paste extracts and ESP calculated as the proportion of sodium on the soil's (CEC). Soil texture indirectly influences classification by affecting CEC and water retention, with finer-textured soils (e.g., clays) exhibiting higher CEC and thus potentially lower ESP for equivalent sodium levels compared to sandy soils. The (FAO) adopts a similar diagnostic approach but emphasizes degree classes for broader global application, as outlined in its guidelines on salt-affected soils. Saline soils under FAO criteria mirror USDA definitions (ECe > 4 dS/m, ESP < 15%, < 8.5), while sodic soils require ESP > 15%, > 8.5, and ECe < 4 dS/m; saline-sodic soils exceed both ECe and ESP thresholds. FAO further stratifies intensity into classes: non-saline (ECe < 4 dS/m), slightly saline (4–8 dS/m), moderately saline (8–15 dS/m), and strongly saline (>15 dS/m), facilitating mapping and monitoring in diverse agroecological zones. Like the USDA system, FAO indicators incorporate for sodicity confirmation and note texture's role in modulating salt distribution and hydraulic properties, though thresholds remain texture-independent.
Classification TypeECe (dS/m)ESP (%)pHKey Features
USDA/FAO: Saline>4<15<8.5High soluble salts; minimal sodium dispersion.
USDA/FAO: Sodic<4>15>8.5High exchangeable sodium; poor and infiltration.
USDA/FAO: Saline-Sodic>4>15Variable (often <8.5 initially)Combined salinity and sodicity hazards.
These systems originated from the USDA's 1954 efforts to address post-World War II irrigation challenges in arid regions, evolving through integrations with soil taxonomy (e.g., Salic and Natric horizons in the 12th edition of Keys to Soil Taxonomy, 2014) and recent 2020s adaptations by the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) that incorporate climate resilience factors like sea-level rise and drought-induced salinization in assessment protocols. Despite refinements in remote sensing and modeling, the core ECe and ESP thresholds persist as foundational for global soil surveys.

Crop and Ecosystem Tolerance Thresholds

Crop salinity tolerance is typically quantified using the electrical conductivity of the saturation extract (ECe) from the root zone, with most crops exhibiting no yield reduction up to a species-specific threshold beyond which relative yield declines linearly with increasing salinity. This relationship is modeled by the piecewise linear response function proposed by Maas and Hoffman, where yield Y is expressed as Y = 100 - slope × (ECe - threshold) for ECe above the threshold, with the slope representing the percentage yield loss per unit increase in ECe. Sensitive crops, such as beans, have a low threshold ECe of approximately 1.0 dS/m, beyond which yields decrease sharply, with yields reaching 50% of potential at approximately 3.6 dS/m (calculated from the model's slope of 19% per dS/m), due to osmotic stress and ion toxicity affecting germination and early growth. In contrast, tolerant crops like barley withstand higher salinity, with a threshold ECe of 8.0 dS/m and a gentler slope of about 5% yield loss per dS/m, allowing sustained productivity in moderately saline conditions. Ecosystems exhibit varying salinity thresholds that influence community structure and function. Halophytes in salt marshes, such as , tolerate ECe levels exceeding 20 dS/m through specialized mechanisms like salt exclusion and compartmentalization, maintaining dominance in hypersaline environments. Freshwater wetlands, however, experience biodiversity decline above an ECe of approximately 5 dS/m, as elevated salinity disrupts microbial processes, reduces habitat suitability for sensitive flora and fauna, and shifts community composition toward more tolerant species. Several factors modulate these tolerance thresholds. Genotypic variations, including differences in ion transporters and osmolyte accumulation, enable some varieties to outperform others under saline stress, as highlighted in genetic studies of ion homeostasis. Sensitivity is often highest during reproductive stages like flowering, when salt-induced osmotic imbalances impair pollination and seed set more severely than during vegetative growth. Breeding advances since the 2010s, particularly the incorporation of the Saltol QTL for seedling-stage tolerance, have produced commercial rice varieties like BRRI dhan67 that maintain yields under ECe up to 12 dS/m, expanding cultivation on saline-prone lands.

Principles of Salinity Management

Leaching and Salt Removal Fundamentals

Leaching is a fundamental process in soil salinity control that involves the vertical movement of soluble salts from the root zone to deeper soil layers or below the root zone, achieved through the application of irrigation water or natural rainfall in excess of crop evapotranspiration needs. This excess water, known as the leaching fraction, percolates through the soil profile, carrying dissolved salts downward and preventing their accumulation in the upper root zone where they could impair plant growth. The effectiveness of leaching relies on maintaining a steady-state balance where the salt input from irrigation water is counteracted by salt export via drainage, ensuring soil salinity remains below crop tolerance thresholds. According to the U.S. Salinity Laboratory, this process is essential for sustaining agricultural productivity in irrigated arid and semi-arid regions where evaporation concentrates salts. The leaching requirement (LR) quantifies the minimum fraction of applied water that must percolate below the root zone to maintain the electrical conductivity of the soil saturation extract (ECe) below a crop-specific threshold, thereby avoiding yield reductions due to salinity stress. LR is typically calculated using the steady-state formula: LR = EC_w / (5 EC_t - EC_w), where EC_w is the electrical conductivity of the irrigation water (dS/m) and EC_t is the threshold ECe for the crop (dS/m); the factor of 5 approximates the salt concentration increase due to evapotranspiration. For instance, for a crop tolerant to EC_t = 5 dS/m irrigated with water of EC_w = 1 dS/m, the LR is approximately 0.04, or 4%, meaning approximately 4% of the applied water must leach through to control salinity. Transient models, such as those simulating dynamic soil processes, can indicate lower LR values compared to steady-state estimates due to factors like salt precipitation. Salt removal efficiency during leaching varies based on soil physical properties, including porosity, which determines water-holding capacity and drainage pathways; infiltration rate, which governs how uniformly water moves through the profile; and irrigation water quality, as higher salinity in the source water increases the LR needed. In coarse-textured s like sandy types with high porosity and infiltration rates (often >50 mm/h), salts are more readily mobilized and removed, enhancing efficiency; for example, applying a 10-20% LR in sandy soils can reduce ECe by up to 50% in the root zone after targeted applications. In contrast, finer soils with lower permeability require higher LR to achieve similar reductions due to slower drainage and greater salt retention. Proper management ensures salts are flushed without excessive water use, as over-application can lead to waterlogging by raising the and reducing . The underlying fundamentals of flow in leaching are described by , which governs the advective transport of and dissolved salts through the matrix. states that the volumetric flux (q) of is proportional to the : q=−Kdhdlq = -K \frac{dh}{dl} where qq is the Darcy flux (m/s), KK is the saturated (m/s), hh is the (m), and dldl is the distance along the flow path (m). This equation highlights how higher KK in permeable soils like sands facilitates greater salt leaching rates under a given , while low KK in clays necessitates more careful application to avoid perched tables. Integrating [Darcy's law](/page/Darcy's law) with salt transport models helps predict leaching outcomes, emphasizing the need to balance salt removal with risks like nutrient leaching or structural degradation.

Drainage System Design Basics

Drainage systems for soil salinity control are engineered to remove excess and salts from the zone, maintaining optimal while preventing waterlogging and salt accumulation. Key design principles focus on drain spacing, depth, and , tailored to permeability and hydrological conditions. Drain spacing typically ranges from 30 to 50 meters for tile systems, adjusted based on permeability to ensure efficient removal without excessive deep losses. Depths are generally set at 1.8 to 3 meters (6-10 feet) to target the zone effectively in saline environments, allowing for adequate leaching while minimizing energy costs for flow. of 0.2 to 0.5 percent are recommended to promote gravity-driven drainage, balancing flow velocity to avoid or buildup in pipes. These parameters work in synergy with leaching practices to reduce by facilitating the downward movement and extraction of salt-laden . Two primary types of drainage systems are employed: open ditches and subsurface pipes. Open ditches collect surface and subsurface runoff, suitable for areas with low permeability where visible maintenance is feasible, though they can increase evaporation and weed growth in saline settings. Subsurface pipes, installed belowground, provide more precise control by intercepting directly, ideal for irrigated saline lands to prevent salt buildup without disrupting surface operations. Material selection emphasizes corrosion resistance due to high salinity; (PVC) pipes are preferred for their durability and compliance with standards like ASTM F758, outperforming traditional clay or in longevity and installation ease. Economic viability hinges on balancing upfront installation costs against long-term agricultural benefits. Initial costs for drainage systems range from $4,500 to $9,000 per (as of 2024), varying with , system complexity, and site preparation needs. These investments often yield 20 to 50 percent increases in crop productivity post-installation, as reduced enhances root health and water uptake, particularly in salt-sensitive crops like or . Proper design thus ensures cost recovery through sustained yields, making drainage a cornerstone of salinity management in arid and semi-arid regions.

Water and Salt Balance Equations

The water balance equation quantifies the dynamics of water movement in the soil profile, essential for managing by ensuring sufficient drainage to prevent salt buildup. It is expressed as the change in soil water storage (ΔS) resulting from inputs and outputs: ΔS=P+I−ET−R−D\Delta S = P + I - ET - R - D where P represents , I is water applied, ET denotes , R is , and D is deep or drainage outflow. This equation assumes a such as the root zone and accounts for storage changes over time, typically on a daily or seasonal basis. In saline environments, maintaining a positive drainage term (D) is critical to flush excess salts, as inadequate outflow can lead to rise and secondary salinization. The salt balance equation tracks solute transport alongside flow, focusing on salt mass conservation to predict accumulation or depletion in the . It states that salt input equals salt output plus accumulation: Salt input = Salt output + Accumulation. Under steady-state conditions, where accumulation approaches zero over long periods, the equation simplifies to: Ci⋅(I+P)=Cd⋅DC_i \cdot (I + P) = C_d \cdot D here, CiC_i is the salt concentration in the input (from and ), and CdC_d is the concentration in the drainage . This formulation highlights the need for dilution through excess application, as salts are conservative and primarily exit via drainage. Deviations from occur during transient phases, such as initial reclamation, where accumulation must be explicitly modeled. These equations underpin practical applications in salinity control, particularly for determining the minimum drainage rate required to maintain acceptable root zone salinity. The drainage rate must exceed the input water volume adjusted for the ratio of input to target concentrations: D>(I+P)⋅(Ci/Ct)D > (I + P) \cdot (C_i / C_t), where CtC_t is the maximum allowable salt concentration in the root zone for crop tolerance. This derives from steady-state salt balance principles and informs leaching requirements, ensuring salts are removed without excessive water use. For instance, in arid irrigated regions, simulations using these equations guide the design of drainage systems to achieve CtC_t below crop-specific thresholds, such as 4 dS/m for sensitive crops like beans. Software tools like SaltMod apply these balances in numerical simulations to predict long-term salinity trends, incorporating factors like , scheduling, and contributions for scenario testing in reclamation projects.

Conventional Control Methods

Subsurface and Surface Drainage Techniques

Subsurface drainage techniques involve installing underground systems to remove excess water and dissolved salts from the root zone, thereby preventing waterlogging and salinity buildup in agricultural soils. Tile drainage, one of the most widely adopted methods, utilizes perforated pipes typically made of clay, concrete, or plastic, buried at depths of 0.6 to 1.2 meters in parallel lines spaced 15 to 30 meters apart, depending on soil permeability and field slope. These pipes are often wrapped in geotextile fabric to filter out soil particles and reduce sediment entry, facilitating the interception and conveyance of saline groundwater to outlets such as ditches or sumps. In heavy clay soils with low permeability, mole drainage serves as an alternative or complementary approach, where a cylindrical plow (mole) is pulled through the subsoil at depths of 0.5 to 0.8 meters to create unlined channels that promote lateral water movement toward collector drains; this method relies on the soil's natural cohesion and is suitable for cohesive clays but requires periodic renewal every 20 to 30 years due to channel collapse. Maintenance of subsurface systems is essential to prevent clogging from salt precipitates or soil ingress, involving regular inspections, flushing with clean water, and sediment removal from outlets to sustain hydraulic efficiency. Surface drainage techniques focus on shaping the land surface to accelerate runoff of tailwater and rainfall, minimizing and salt accumulation on the surface. Furrow grading involves plowing or shaping fields into graded furrows—narrow channels aligned with the rows—to direct excess downslope at a uniform gradient of 0.1 to 0.5 percent, ensuring rapid removal without . Bed-and-furrow systems elevate beds 15 to 30 centimeters above adjacent furrows, allowing salts to concentrate in the furrows for easier flushing while protecting root zones; this configuration is particularly effective in moderately sloped fields under furrow . To achieve precise slopes and uniform distribution, laser leveling uses GPS-guided or laser-equipped machinery to smooth fields within 2 to 5 centimeters accuracy, reducing uneven infiltration that exacerbates patches. These methods draw from basic drainage design principles, such as ensuring adequate outlet capacity to handle peak flows. In California's , extensive implementation of combined subsurface and surface furrow systems since the mid-20th century has successfully mitigated , with drainage infrastructure reducing shallow groundwater levels and associated salt accumulation, enabling sustained crop production on over 200,000 hectares of arid land irrigated by water. For instance, vertical drainage pilots in the region have demonstrated up to 50 percent greater effectiveness in lowering water tables compared to traditional horizontal tiles, contributing to overall declines through enhanced leaching pathways. However, in clay-dominated soils, challenges persist due to slow permeability, often necessitating sump pumps to lift drainage water from low-lying areas and prevent , as natural slopes are insufficient for gravity outflow.

Soil Leaching Practices

Soil leaching practices involve applying excess water to displace soluble salts from the root zone, thereby reducing to levels suitable for growth. These operations are typically conducted at the field level to maintain electrical conductivity of the saturation extract (ECe) below crop-specific thresholds, preventing osmotic stress and in . Effective leaching requires careful timing, such as pre-planting or post-harvest periods, to minimize interference with crop cycles while maximizing salt removal efficiency. Pre-planting leaching is a common practice to initially reduce salinity in affected fields, often applying 10-20 cm of depth to flush salts downward beyond the root zone. This method is particularly useful in arid regions where winter rainfall is insufficient, allowing salts to be displaced before salt-sensitive crops like or grains. For instance, in almond orchards, pre-planting applications of this volume can lower root-zone ECe by 20-50%, depending on initial and , provided adequate drainage facilitates salt export. Cyclic leaching, involving alternating wet-dry periods, enhances efficiency in perennial orchards by promoting rise of salts during dry phases for subsequent removal, reducing total use by up to 30% compared to continuous flooding. Irrigation methods significantly influence leaching outcomes, with choices tailored to crop type and conditions. provides controlled, localized application that concentrates water near , achieving higher salt removal per unit volume than methods in uneven terrains, though it may require higher fractions (15-25%) to ensure deep . In contrast, irrigation allows broader coverage and deeper penetration, ideal for initial heavy leaching but risking uneven distribution in coarse soils. For paddies, ponded leaching maintains standing water depths of 5-10 cm, effectively controlling ECe below 3 dS/m—the threshold for optimal yields—by continuous that mimics natural conditions. Optimization of leaching practices emphasizes using low-salinity irrigation water (ECw < 0.75 dS/m) to avoid reintroducing salts, combined with post-leach monitoring of soil ECe via saturation paste extracts or electromagnetic sensors to verify reductions and adjust future volumes. This approach prevents over-leaching, which can lead to nutrient losses such as nitrogen and potassium through deep drainage, potentially requiring supplemental fertilization. In practice, targeting a leaching fraction of 10-20% based on real-time ECe data ensures sustainable salinity control while conserving water resources.

Reclamation Strategies for Saline Lands

Reclamation of highly saline or sodic lands typically involves integrated approaches that address both chemical and physical soil constraints to restore productivity. For sodic soils, where high sodium levels cause dispersion and poor structure, gypsum application is a primary strategy, providing calcium ions (Ca²⁺) to displace sodium ions (Na⁺) from the soil exchange complex, thereby improving permeability and allowing subsequent leaching. Application rates commonly range from 2 to 5 tons per hectare, depending on soil exchangeable sodium percentage (ESP) and texture, with reductions in ESP of 20-40% observed within 3-6 months post-application. This amendment facilitates salt removal by enhancing soil hydraulic conductivity, often combined with irrigation to leach displaced salts below the root zone. Phased reclamation programs for saline-sodic lands integrate drainage installation, leaching, and crop planting over 2-5 years to progressively reduce salinity while building soil health. Initial phases focus on subsurface or surface drainage systems to lower water tables and prevent re-accumulation of salts, followed by controlled leaching using low-salinity water to flush soluble salts from the profile. Subsequent planting of salt-tolerant crops or grasses stabilizes the soil and supports ongoing desalinization, with full productivity often achieved after 3-4 years in responsive soils treated with amendments like gypsum. These strategies draw on leaching fundamentals, where excess irrigation maintains a leaching fraction to export salts beyond the root zone. A multi-step process is essential for effective restoration, beginning with mechanical scraping of accumulated surface salts to immediately lower topsoil salinity and prepare the site for amendment incorporation. This is followed by application of organic amendments, such as manure at rates of 10-20 tons per hectare, which enhance soil structure by increasing organic matter, promoting aggregation, and improving water infiltration and nutrient retention. In integrated projects, these steps—scraping, amending, leaching, and planting—yield measurable improvements, as demonstrated in Pakistan's Indus Basin, where salinity control efforts recovered up to 40% of crop yields on previously unproductive lands through combined drainage and amendment practices. Despite these advances, reclamation faces significant challenges, including high implementation costs in remote or arid regions, where transportation of materials like gypsum and construction of drainage infrastructure can exceed $1,000 per hectare. Long-term sustainability is further threatened by climate change, which may intensify salinization through altered precipitation patterns, rising temperatures, and increased evapotranspiration, potentially undermining restored lands without adaptive management.

Alternative and Emerging Approaches

Vegetative and Strip Cropping Methods

Vegetative and strip cropping methods represent non-structural approaches to soil salinity control, leveraging plant arrangements to manage salt movement, reduce erosion, and promote soil stability without relying on engineered drainage systems. Contour strip cropping involves alternating strips of salt-tolerant crops, such as (Medicago sativa), with more salt-sensitive crops along the natural contours of sloping fields. This configuration slows surface runoff, allowing salts carried in water to infiltrate and be intercepted by the tolerant vegetation, which can uptake and store salts in biomass. By maintaining vegetative cover across the landscape, strip cropping minimizes salt accumulation in productive areas and facilitates natural leaching during rainfall events. In practice, strips are typically 10-30 meters wide, with salt-tolerant species like occupying the lower or more saline-prone positions to act as barriers. Alfalfa, with its deep root system and moderate salt tolerance (threshold ECe of 2.0-2.3 dS/m), helps lower shallow water tables that contribute to salinization by increasing evapotranspiration rates. This method has been applied in irrigated regions with high water tables, where alternating irrigated and fallow strips induces lateral groundwater flow toward fallow areas, concentrating salts there for easier management. Studies in semi-arid environments demonstrate that such systems can maintain suitable water table depths (1-2 meters) in cropped strips, enabling effective salt leaching while reducing overall salinity buildup. A key benefit of contour strip cropping is its efficacy in erosion control, which indirectly mitigates salinity by preventing salt-laden topsoil from being transported downslope. Erosion losses can be reduced by 50-75% compared to conventional row cropping on slopes, depending on strip width and slope steepness, as the close-growing tolerant crops trap sediment and slow water velocity. This practice also supports integrated crop rotations, enhancing soil organic matter and nutrient cycling without the need for chemical inputs. Vegetative barriers complement strip cropping by establishing linear hedges of deep-rooted, salt-accumulating shrubs perpendicular to water flow. Species like old man saltbush (Atriplex nummularia) or river saltbush (Atriplex amnicola) are planted in dense rows (1-2 meters spacing) to form living fences that intercept saline runoff, uptake excess salts through transpiration, and stabilize soil structure. These halophytic shrubs thrive in moderately to highly saline conditions (ECe 8-16 dS/m), using deep soil moisture to lower groundwater levels and disrupt capillary rise of salts to the surface. In Australian wheatlands, such barriers have been employed since the 1940s to rehabilitate salt-affected pastures, with early trials demonstrating improved forage production on marginal lands. The implementation of vegetative barriers involves direct seeding or nursery transplants in alley or block configurations, often combined with understory grasses for year-round cover. Over 10-20 years, these systems can reduce surface salinity by 20-50% in adjacent areas by enhancing deep drainage and salt exclusion, while providing supplementary livestock forage during dry periods. Historical applications in Western Australia's grainbelt, starting in the mid-20th century, highlight their role in preventing further salinization from land clearing. Both methods offer economic advantages as low-cost alternatives to subsurface drainage, with establishment costs for strip cropping or vegetative barriers ranging from $200-900 AUD/ha (approximately $130-600 USD/ha), compared to $1,000-3,000 USD/ha for drainage installations depending on soil texture and spacing. This affordability stems from using existing farm machinery and native-adapted plants, avoiding high capital for infrastructure. Additionally, these approaches enhance biodiversity by creating heterogeneous habitats that support pollinators, soil microbes, and diverse understory species, fostering resilient agroecosystems.

Bioengineering and Phytoremediation

Bioengineering and phytoremediation leverage biological systems, including genetically modified plants and microbial communities, to mitigate soil salinity by enhancing salt uptake, exclusion, or transformation processes. Phytoremediation, in particular, employs salt-tolerant plants known as halophytes to extract salts from soil through their root systems and accumulate them in aboveground biomass, which can then be harvested to reduce soil salt content. Halophyte crops such as Salicornia species are effective for this purpose, as they can accumulate salts comprising up to 40-50% of their dry weight in biomass, facilitating salt removal without requiring extensive infrastructure. This approach is particularly suited to saline environments, where traditional crops fail, and integrates with sustainable agriculture by producing edible or fodder biomass from species like Salicornia brachiata. Microbial enhancements further amplify phytoremediation efficacy through salt-tolerant rhizobacteria, which colonize plant roots and promote growth under saline stress while aiding salt exclusion or solubilization. These plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria (PGPR), such as halotolerant strains of Bacillus and Pseudomonas, produce osmolytes and enzymes that mitigate ionic toxicity, enabling host plants to uptake more water and nutrients in saline conditions. Inoculation with such microbes has been shown to increase plant biomass by 20-50% in salt-affected soils, indirectly boosting salt extraction rates. This symbiotic interaction not only accelerates remediation but also improves soil microbial diversity, contributing to long-term fertility restoration. Bioengineering advances include genetic modifications to confer salt-excluding traits, such as overexpression of the SOS1 gene, which encodes a plasma membrane Na+/H+ antiporter that extrudes sodium ions from root cells. In tobacco, transgenic lines overexpressing the Arabidopsis SOS1 gene exhibited greater survival and growth under 200 mM NaCl stress compared to wild-type plants, demonstrating enhanced salt exclusion without yield penalties in moderate salinity. Similarly, constructed wetlands engineered with salt-tolerant reeds like provide passive treatment by facilitating salt filtration and evapotranspiration in saline leachates from soils. These systems, often vegetated with halophytes, can reduce salinity in influent water by 30-50% through plant uptake and microbial degradation, offering a low-maintenance option for integrating with soil reclamation efforts. Recent field trials in the 2020s have validated these techniques, with halophyte plantings in arid saline sites achieving 20-40% reductions in soil electrical conductivity (ECe) over 2-3 years, as seen in studies using Salicornia and Atriplex species in regions like Iran's Urmia Lake basin. For instance, Salicornia europaea has shown notable reductions in ECe after one growing season, with cumulative effects amplifying over multiple cycles through repeated biomass harvest. However, scalability in large arid zones remains challenged by high water demands for establishment, slow remediation timelines (often 3-5 years for significant impact), and the need for site-specific halophyte selection to match local climates and soil types. Despite these hurdles, ongoing research emphasizes integrating bioengineered halophytes with microbial inoculants to enhance efficiency in expansive, water-limited areas.

Precision Agriculture and Soil Amendments

Precision agriculture employs advanced technologies to manage soil salinity at a site-specific level, optimizing resource use and minimizing salt accumulation. Variable-rate irrigation systems, integrated with soil sensors and artificial intelligence (AI), enable precise water application tailored to spatial variability in soil moisture and salinity levels, thereby preventing excessive salt buildup in the root zone. These systems use real-time data from embedded sensors that monitor parameters such as electrical conductivity (EC), pH, and moisture content to adjust irrigation rates dynamically, reducing over-irrigation that exacerbates salinity while conserving water. For instance, AI algorithms analyze sensor inputs to predict salinity hotspots and automate drip or sprinkler adjustments, promoting sustainable water management in arid and semi-arid regions prone to salinization. Drone-based electrical conductivity (EC) mapping further enhances site-specific salinity management by providing high-resolution aerial data for identifying and delineating saline patches within fields. Unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) equipped with hyperspectral or multispectral imagers capture EC variations across large areas, allowing farmers to generate detailed salinity maps that inform targeted interventions like localized leaching or amendment applications. This approach is particularly effective for field-scale monitoring, as it integrates electromagnetic induction data to estimate soil salt content non-destructively, enabling proactive adjustments in crop zoning and irrigation scheduling to mitigate yield losses from uneven salinization. Studies have demonstrated that UAV-derived EC maps improve the accuracy of salinity assessment under crop cover, supporting precision decisions that enhance overall farm productivity. Soil amendments play a crucial role in countering salinity effects through chemical and physical modifications that improve soil structure and reduce salt impacts. In sodic soils, where high sodium levels degrade soil permeability, acidifying amendments such as elemental sulfur or sulfuric acid are applied to lower pH and displace sodium ions, facilitating better water infiltration and salt leaching. These amendments react with soil carbonates to release calcium, which replaces sodium on exchange sites, thereby reclaiming sodic conditions more rapidly than traditional gypsum in calcareous environments. Organic mulches, including crop residues or compost, are used to suppress soil evaporation, minimizing upward salt movement and maintaining lower surface salinity levels, especially in drip-irrigated systems with moderately saline water. By covering the soil surface, these mulches enhance water retention and reduce salt evapo-concentration, contributing to sustained soil health and crop performance. Nano-fertilizers represent an innovative amendment for salt mitigation, delivering micronutrients like zinc and silicon in nanoscale forms to bolster plant tolerance to salinity stress without exacerbating soil salt loads. Foliar or soil-applied nano-zinc enhances antioxidant activity and ion homeostasis in crops, alleviating osmotic and ionic stresses from high salinity, while nano-silicon strengthens cell walls and improves water uptake efficiency. These targeted fertilizers improve nutrient use efficiency under saline conditions, reducing the need for bulk applications that could contribute to further salinization. Research shows that nano-fertilizers can mitigate salinity-induced yield reductions in crops like wheat and cotton by up to 20-30% compared to conventional fertilizers. As of 2025, nano-silicon fertilizers have been shown to increase cotton yields by up to 31% under saline conditions at reduced fertilizer rates. Emerging trends in precision agriculture for salinity control include blockchain integration for tracking sustainable practices, ensuring verifiable records of irrigation and amendment applications to support compliance with environmental regulations and incentivize adoption. This technology enables transparent supply chain documentation, linking farm-level salinity management data to broader sustainability goals, such as reduced water use and carbon sequestration. Cost-benefit analyses indicate that investments in these precision tools, typically around $1,000 per hectare for sensor and drone systems, can yield 15-20% improvements in crop yields on saline lands by optimizing inputs and minimizing salt-related losses. Such returns underscore the economic viability of these approaches, particularly when combined with long-term monitoring for adaptive adjustments.

Modeling and Monitoring Tools

Empirical and Process-Based Salinity Models

Empirical models in soil salinity control use statistical correlations from experimental data to estimate crop responses to salinity, aiding in threshold identification and management planning. The Maas-Hoffman model exemplifies this approach by relating relative crop yield to soil electrical conductivity (EC_e), assuming no yield loss up to a salinity threshold, followed by a linear decline thereafter. The model is formulated as Y=100−b(ECe−t)Y = 100 - b(EC_e - t) where YY is the relative yield in percent, bb is the yield reduction slope in percent per dS/m, ECeEC_e is the electrical conductivity of the saturation extract in dS/m, and tt is the salinity threshold in dS/m. Crop-specific parameters, such as t=6.0t = 6.0 dS/m and b=7.1%b = 7.1\% per dS/m for wheat, were derived from controlled experiments across multiple species, enabling rapid assessment of salinity impacts without detailed process simulation. Process-based models simulate salinity dynamics by solving governing equations for water flow, solute transport, and plant interactions, offering predictive capabilities for complex scenarios like variable irrigation. HYDRUS-1D employs the Richards equation for one-dimensional variably saturated flow and the convection-dispersion equation for solute movement, incorporating modules like UNSATCHEM for ion exchange and precipitation relevant to salinity buildup. This model has been validated in field studies for predicting salt leaching efficiency, with applications in arid regions showing accurate reproduction of EC_e profiles under drip irrigation. The SWAP (Soil-Water-Atmosphere-Plant) model extends process-based simulation by coupling Richards equation-based hydrology with crop growth submodels, such as WOFOST, to capture interactions among water uptake, salt accumulation, and yield reduction. It simulates vertical transport of salts in the root zone while accounting for evapotranspiration and root distribution, proving effective for evaluating salinity-tolerant cropping systems in saline groundwater areas. Validation of both empirical and process-based models involves calibrating against field-measured data, such as soil moisture and EC_e profiles from lysimeters or monitoring wells. While empirical models like Maas-Hoffman align well with steady-state greenhouse data (R² > 0.9 for many crops), process-based models like HYDRUS-1D and SWAP demonstrate good accuracy in homogeneous profiles. However, in heterogeneous soils with macropores or layered textures, these models exhibit limitations, including overestimation of solute dispersion due to unmodeled preferential flow and parameter variability.

Remote Sensing and GIS for Salinity Mapping

Remote sensing technologies, particularly multispectral from platforms like Landsat and , enable large-scale detection of by analyzing spectral signatures associated with salt accumulation. These systems utilize vegetation indices such as the (NDVI), calculated as (NIR - Red)/(NIR + Red), to indirectly assess through its impact on plant health, as stressed vegetation exhibits reduced NDVI values. Additionally, direct detection leverages shortwave infrared (SWIR) bands in the 1.6-2.2 μm range (e.g., 's B11 at 1610 nm and B12 at 2190 nm), where salts like chlorides and sulfates absorb radiation, allowing indices like the Normalized Difference Salinity Index (NDSI = (SWIR1 - NIR)/(SWIR1 + NIR)) and ASTER Salinity Index to map saline areas effectively. Hyperspectral sensors enhance precision by capturing narrow spectral bands across the 350-2500 nm range, enabling the identification of specific ions such as Na⁺, Cl⁻, and SO₄²⁻ through characteristic absorption features. For instance, satellite-based hyperspectral imagers like Gaofen-5's Advanced Hyperspectral Imager (AHSI) correlate soil spectra with ion contents using multiple linear regression models, achieving R² values up to 0.79 for total soil salt content and 0.58 for Na⁺. These sensors outperform multispectral data in distinguishing salt components, particularly in arid environments where surface salts are prominent. Geographic Information Systems (GIS) integrate data with ground measurements for and mapping. Ordinary of electrical conductivity of the saturation extract (ECe) data produces continuous surfaces, modeling spatial with semivariograms to predict values at unsampled locations; in arid districts like , , this reveals strong spatial dependence (nugget-to-sill ratio <25%) for surface ECe around 3.9 dS/m. Overlay analyses combine layers with topographic data, such as digital models, to delineate risk zones by weighting factors like and landforms, as demonstrated in Egypt's where linear regression between predicted and measured EC yielded R² = 0.72. In arid and semi-arid regions, these GIS approaches achieve mapping accuracies of 80-90%, facilitating targeted reclamation efforts. Recent advances in the 2020s incorporate algorithms with for improved prediction and near-real-time monitoring. Models like artificial neural networks (ANN) and (RF), applied to Landsat and Sentinel data with indices, attain accuracies up to 92% (AUC 0.921) by handling spectral variability and vegetation interference, enabling dynamic alerts for hotspots amid climate fluctuations. In China's Delta, for example, RF models integrated with imagery and mapped multi-depth (0-60 cm) with R² up to 0.85, revealing higher surface levels (mean 7.1 dS/m) in salterns and bare lands compared to deeper profiles in farmlands, supporting eco-restoration zoning.

Long-Term Monitoring and Adaptive Management

Long-term monitoring of is essential to detect gradual changes and ensure the effectiveness of control measures over time. Standard protocols typically involve annual soil sampling using systematic grid systems, such as centric 12x12 grids covering fields of approximately 64 hectares, with samples collected at multiple depths (e.g., 0-30 cm, 30-60 cm, and 60-90 cm) to capture profiles. These grids enhance spatial accuracy by associating attributes with geographic coordinates via GPS, allowing for post-irrigation when soils are at to reflect root-zone conditions. level tracking complements this by monitoring depth and using sensors, as perched can influence surface soil salt accumulation. Crop yield monitoring integrates with these protocols to assess salinity impacts on productivity, often through field-scale observations correlated with electrical conductivity (EC) measurements. Bulk EC is evaluated using electromagnetic induction tools like the EM-38 for non-invasive mapping, calibrated against saturated paste extracts (ECe) to quantify salt levels. For continuous data collection, (IoT) sensors deployed in observation wells measure via conductivity probes and groundwater depth with ultrasonic transducers, transmitting readings every 15 minutes to platforms for real-time analysis and early warnings. This combination of periodic sampling and automated sensing supports scalable surveillance, with tools like ESAP software optimizing sample sites (e.g., 20 per hour) for efficient long-term tracking. Adaptive management in soil salinity control involves iteratively adjusting practices based on monitoring data and external factors like climate variability to maintain . Strategies include increasing leaching frequency during periods forecasted by climate models, which helps prevent salt buildup exacerbated by reduced rainfall, while conserving water through targeted . Policy frameworks, such as the European Union's (CAP), provide incentives through programs like IPARD III (2021-2027), funding measures for , , and cover cropping to enhance resilience against salinization. These adaptations reduce uncertainty by testing interventions—such as prioritizing low-salinity zones for sensitive crops—and refining them via and field experiments. Looking ahead, integrating soil salinity control with carbon farming offers dual benefits by boosting soil organic carbon (SOC) sequestration while reclaiming salt-affected lands. Management practices like organic amendments in saline soils can preserve SOC levels, potentially averting a projected global loss of 6.8 petagrams by 2100, and simultaneously improve fertility for higher yields. A notable example is Israel's Negev Desert, where adaptive technologies including precision irrigation and wastewater reuse have sustained agricultural productivity since the 1950s, achieving yields like 300 tonnes of tomatoes per hectare—far exceeding global averages—despite arid, saline conditions. Such approaches, briefly informed by GIS mapping for spatial planning, underscore the potential for technology-driven resilience in saline environments.

References

  1. https://www.fao.org/4/r4082e/r4082e08.htm
  2. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4336437/
  3. https://www.fao.org/newsroom/detail/fao-launches-first-major-global-assessment-of-salt-affected-soils-in-50-years/en
  4. https://soilhealth.ucdavis.edu/soil-challenges/salinity
  5. https://www.ars.usda.gov/arsuserfiles/20360500/pdf_pubs/P2143.pdf
  6. https://www.shsu.edu/academics/agricultural-sciences-and-engineering-technology/documents/ManagingSoilSalinity.pdf
  7. https://www.nrcs.usda.gov/sites/default/files/2022-10/Soil%2520Electrical%2520Conductivity.pdf
  8. https://www.fao.org/4/x5871e/x5871e04.htm
  9. https://www.ctahr.hawaii.edu/oc/freepubs/pdf/pnm17.pdf
  10. https://extension.okstate.edu/fact-sheets/salinity-management-in-home-lawns.html
  11. https://secure.caes.uga.edu/extension/publications/files/pdf/C%25201019_4.PDF
  12. https://www.ctahr.hawaii.edu/huen/tpss435/salt_affected.pdf
  13. https://openknowledge.fao.org/server/api/core/bitstreams/3ec22e45-bfd6-4020-8fb9-a01aaf87ad97/content/y1899e09.htm
  14. https://extension.sdstate.edu/soil-salinity-sodicity-and-alkalinity-south-dakota-soils
  15. https://www.soils4teachers.org/files/s4t/know-soil-challenge-of-salinization.pdf
  16. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2589004224000518
  17. https://www.ars.usda.gov/pacific-west-area/riverside-ca/agricultural-water-efficiency-and-salinity-research-unit/docs/about/frequently-asked-questions-about-salinity/
  18. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/329812536_Effect_of_Brackish_Water_Irrigation_on_soil_Water-salt_Distribution
  19. https://pollution.sustainability-directory.com/question/what-are-the-causes-of-salinization/
  20. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25226832/
  21. https://ipm.ucanr.edu/PMG/GARDEN/ENVIRON/salttoxicity.html
  22. https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/0-306-48155-3_1
  23. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/sustainable-food-systems/articles/10.3389/fsufs.2020.533781/full
  24. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0301479720313086
  25. https://www.ars.usda.gov/arsuserfiles/20361500/pdf_pubs/P2682.pdf
  26. https://content.ces.ncsu.edu/effects-of-sodium-salts-on-soils-in-coastal-agricultural-fields
  27. https://acsess.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.2136/vzj2017.01.0019
  28. https://extension.sdstate.edu/sites/default/files/2020-03/S-0005-19-Wheat.pdf
  29. https://www.iwmi.org/news/the-scourge-of-salt/
  30. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-018-24137-0
  31. https://www.fao.org/global-soil-partnership/areas-of-work/soil-salinity/en/
  32. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/environmental-science/articles/10.3389/fenvs.2021.712831/full
  33. https://bulletinofcas.researchcommons.org/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?filename=0&article=2275&context=journal&type=additional
  34. https://www.nature.com/articles/s44264-025-00098-6
  35. https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.adn3747
  36. https://www.ars.usda.gov/arsuserfiles/20361500/pdf_pubs/P2558.pdf
  37. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0022169411003696
  38. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5712893/
  39. https://www.ars.usda.gov/arsuserfiles/20361500/pdf_pubs/P1085.pdf
  40. https://asr.urmia.ac.ir/article_121631_en.html?lang=fa
  41. https://www.lawr.ucdavis.edu/field-use-soil-moisture-blocks
  42. https://www.ars.usda.gov/arsuserfiles/20360500/pdf_pubs/P2291.pdf
  43. https://www.ndsu.edu/agriculture/extension/publications/soil-testing-unproductive-areas
  44. https://www.ars.usda.gov/arsuserfiles/20361500/pdf_pubs/P1747.pdf
  45. https://www.ars.usda.gov/ARSUserFiles/20360500/hb60_pdf/hb60complete.pdf
  46. https://www.fao.org/4/x5871e/x5871e00.htm
  47. https://nrcs.usda.gov/plantmaterials/mtpmctn7579.pdf
  48. https://www.fao.org/4/x5871e/x5871e05.htm#4.2%20Measuring%20sodicity/alkali%20status%20of%20soils
  49. https://www.nrcs.usda.gov/sites/default/files/2022-09/Saline_Sodic_Soil_Management_610_CPS_10_2020.pdf
  50. https://www.biosaline.org/sites/default/files/publicationsfile/developments_in_soil_salinity_assessment.pdf
  51. https://www.ars.usda.gov/arsuserfiles/20360500/pdf_pubs/P572.pdf
  52. https://www.fao.org/4/y4263e/y4263e0e.htm
  53. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10325650/
  54. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10584-025-03948-x
  55. https://nph.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1469-8137.2005.01487.x
  56. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/plant-science/articles/10.3389/fpls.2023.1241736/full
  57. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7664944/
  58. https://www.fao.org/4/t0234e/t0234e03.htm
  59. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0378377407000509
  60. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0378377423001154
  61. https://www.scirp.org/journal/paperinformation?paperid=120773
  62. https://fyi.extension.wisc.edu/drainage/files/2011/07/USDA-Drainage-Handbook.pdf
  63. https://irrigationtoolbox.com/NEH/Part624_Drainage/NEH%2016%20Chapter%204.pdf
  64. https://investigatemidwest.org/2024/06/19/we-should-have-a-sense-of-urgency-as-farm-drainage-tile-drives-nutrient-pollution/
  65. https://www.ars.usda.gov/arsuserfiles/20361500/pdf_pubs/P2253.pdf
  66. https://www.waterlog.info/saltmod.htm
  67. https://www.ndsu.edu/agriculture/extension/publications/frequently-asked-questions-about-subsurface-tile-drainage
  68. https://www.canr.msu.edu/field_crops/uploads/files/E3452_MoleDrains_Rev3.pdf
  69. https://extension.umn.edu/agricultural-drainage/subsurface-drainage-red-river-valley
  70. https://directives.nrcs.usda.gov/sites/default/files2/1712930918/31801.pdf
  71. https://extension.okstate.edu/fact-sheets/surface-irrigation-systems.html
  72. https://nrm.dfg.ca.gov/FileHandler.ashx?DocumentID=7232
  73. https://nrm.dfg.ca.gov/FileHandler.ashx?DocumentID=8651
  74. https://my.ucanr.edu/repository/fileAccessPublic.cfm?fn=ca4902p12-169889.pdf
  75. https://www.ars.usda.gov/arsuserfiles/20360500/pdf_pubs/P574.pdf
  76. https://www.ars.usda.gov/arsuserfiles/20360500/pdf_pubs/P2261.pdf
  77. https://anrcatalog.ucanr.edu/pdf/8550.pdf
  78. https://extension.usu.edu/irrigation/research/managing-saline-and-sodic-soils
  79. https://www.thealmonddoctor.com/blog/post-harvest-leaching-fractions-to-manage-salinity
  80. https://anrcatalog.ucanr.edu/pdf/8447.pdf
  81. https://www.fao.org/4/y4263e/y4263e0d.htm
  82. https://www.ars.usda.gov/ARSUserFiles/20360500/saline_seep_management.pdf
  83. https://www.fao.org/3/y5082e/y5082e06.htm
  84. https://extensionpublications.ku.edu/salineandsodicsoilmanagementinkansas.pdf
  85. https://www.iwm-pakistan.org/sites/default/files/2020-09/Impact%20of%20Salinity%20Management%20on%20Farm%20Productivity%20in%20Indus%20Basin.pdf
  86. https://www.worldbank.org/en/news/feature/2019/03/14/pakistans-salty-wounds
  87. https://www.fao.org/3/ca8638en/ca8638en.pdf
  88. https://thewaterchannel.tv/articles/soil-salinity-control-in-irrigated-land/
  89. https://www.ndsu.edu/agriculture/extension/publications/managing-saline-soils-north-dakota
  90. https://objects.lib.uidaho.edu/uiext/uiext29494.pdf
  91. https://agriculture.vic.gov.au/farm-management/water/saltbush-for-saline-land
  92. https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/265537110/29722313
  93. https://library.dpird.wa.gov.au/nrm_factsheets/5/
  94. https://uknowledge.uky.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=4240&context=igc
  95. https://eyresgreensaltbush.com.au/media/113_SaltbushonEyrePeninsula.pdf
  96. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/330159296_Cost_Estimation_of_Sub-Surface_Drainage_Systems_for_Reclamation_of_Waterlogged_Saline_Lands
  97. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9655280/
  98. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4109415/
  99. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/387659059_Phytoremediation_Efficiency_of_Salicornia_brachiata_Roxb_-_A_Salt_Marsh_Halophyte_on_Restoration_of_Shrimp_Farm_Contaminated_Soil
  100. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/microbiology/articles/10.3389/fmicb.2019.02791/full
  101. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0176161711004494
  102. https://www.v3.pjsir.org/index.php/physical-sciences/article/download/562/376
  103. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0048969717301018
  104. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9293993/
  105. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/environmental-science/articles/10.3389/fenvs.2023.1198540/full
  106. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666765722000394
  107. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/263285734_Phytoremediation_-_A_sustainable_approach_for_contaminant_remediation_in_arid_and_semi_arid_regions_-_a_review
  108. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atech.2025.100982
  109. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/plant-science/articles/10.3389/fpls.2025.1587869/full
  110. https://portal.nifa.usda.gov/web/crisprojectpages/1023249-artificial-intelligence-for-sustainable-water-nutrient-salinity-and-pest-management-in-the-western-us.html
  111. https://www.mdpi.com/2072-4292/11/7/736
  112. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1569843225002316
  113. https://extension.oregonstate.edu/catalog/pnw-601-managing-salt-affected-soils-crop-production
  114. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s44447-025-00051-6
  115. https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fsufs.2025.1695604/full
  116. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11085825/
  117. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/plant-science/articles/10.3389/fpls.2025.1592866/full
  118. https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/2515-7620/ad16f0
  119. https://www.leher.ag/blog/precision-agriculture-benefits-techniques
  120. https://www.pc-progress.com/en/Default.aspx?hydrus-1d
  121. https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1029/2023WR034750
  122. http://www.swap.wur.nl/summary.htm
  123. https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0472/12/9/1490
  124. https://scholarcommons.sc.edu/etd/4870/
  125. https://www.mdpi.com/2073-4441/13/4/559
  126. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/22797254.2020.1854622
  127. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-025-10969-0
  128. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30411166/
  129. https://www.intechopen.com/chapters/72231
  130. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-023-44132-4
  131. https://www.mdpi.com/2072-4292/15/24/5640
  132. https://www.fao.org/4/x2002e/x2002e.pdf
  133. https://www.ars.usda.gov/arsuserfiles/20361500/pdf_pubs/P819.pdf
  134. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1944398625004199
  135. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/304357249_Adaptive_management_for_soil_ecosystem_services
  136. https://eu4green.eu/wp-content/uploads/2025/02/Study-on-Climate-Change-Adaptation_Volume-II.pdf
  137. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/00103624.2025.2522915
  138. https://www.preventionweb.net/news/israels-pioneering-desert-farms-climate-adaptation-example
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.