Does Turbulent-Flow Conditioning of Irrigation Water Influence Soil Chemical Processes: I. Laboratory Results

ABSTRACT

Researchers commonly assume that the intrinsic behavior of molecular water is invariable, yet accumulating evidence suggests that water behavior can be modified via non-chemical means, e.g. by magnetic field effects. This laboratory study examined the effect of turbulent-flow conditioning (CTap) of a mineralized irrigation water source (Tap water) on water chemistry and the behavior and character of soil–water interactions. Turbulent conditioning did not alter the chemistry of water itself; dissolved organic and inorganic carbon, nitrate, ammonium, chloride, dissolved oxygen, and nutrient element concentrations were the same both before and after treatment. However, turbulent conditioning slightly reduced the surface tension of CTap water relative to Tap. Results indicate that CTap irrigation water changed the chemical composition in one pore volume of water leached through the soil column; consistently increasing mean potassium, ammonium, magnesium, and calcium concentrations by 1.2- to 1.4-fold compared to untreated Tap water. Results for the micro-nutrients were inconclusive because their concentrations in the waters were below the analytical detection limit. Conditioning may have changed physical properties of the CTap water, which altered the nature of its physical and/or chemical interactions with the soil. A consistent effect develops after incubated soil is irrigated for >4-weeks, suggesting that the treatment impacts on soil properties may accumulate over time, potentially influencing soil productivity and management. This phenomenon deserves to be further investigated; if the capacity of this simple device to increase soil cation leaching can be confirmed, it could potentially provide an economical means of managing salt-affected soils.

KEYWORDS:

• Calcareous soils
• cations
• anions
• geochemistry
• leaching
• leachate
• nutrients
• salts

Acknowledgments

I thank Dr. Kurt Spokas and several anonymous reviewers for their insightful comments on initial drafts of the manuscript; Larry Freeborn, Katie Shewmaker, Jim Foerster, and Susan Glaze for their technical support; and Kandis Bordi Diaz, Quinn Inwards, and Kevin Robison for their able assistance in the laboratory.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Supplementary material

Supplemental data for this article can be accessed on the publisher’s website.

Additional information

Funding

This work was supported by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service.