Pots treated with biogypsum and bioassimilable sulfur improved chickpea growth, suggesting effective salinity mitigation.
Water scarcity is becoming an issue of concern which necessitates the use of underground brackish water for crop production. Poor quality underground water is harmful owing to its adverse effect on soil properties and crop growth. The effectiveness of biogypsum and bioassimilable sulfur prepared by inoculating sulphur and gypsum with bacteria was evaluated in a pot study to ameliorate the negative impact of brackish water on chickpea. The soil was mixed with biogypsum and bioassimilable sulphur alone and in combination. After filling the pots with treated and untreated soil, recommended dose of NPK was applied and five seeds of chickpea were sown in each pot. Two sets of pots with three replications were arranged according to completely randomized design. The pots were irrigated with brackish water and in case of control canal water was applied. To maintain uniform population, two plants per pot were maintained after germination. Nodulation data was collected from one set at flowering stage and data regarding growth and yield parameters was collected at maturity from second set. Results revealed that biogypsum and bioassimilable sulfur positively reduced the negative impacts of brackish water on chickpea growth and yield. Although both biogypsum and bioassimilable sulfur improved chickpea growth in the presence of brackish water whether applied alone or in combination however, significant increase in nodulation and yield was observed when both were applied in combination. The application of biogypsum and bioassimilable sulfur also improved the physicochemical properties (pH, ECe and bulk density) of soil. From present work it can be concluded that application of biogypsum and bioassimilable sulfur, could be an effective approach to mitigate the negative effect of brackish water.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Nadeem et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: