3

Soil Acidity and Alkalinity

Throughout the world, soil acidity and alkalinity problems increasingly
influence plant health and yield. Therefore, it is essential to understand
the chemistry of these processes to effect proper management for opti-
mum plant productivity. Acid topsoils occur on approximately 30% of
the ice-free land area in the world, whereas 75% of these acid soils also
overlay acid subsoils (Table 3-1). The majority of the world’s acid soils
occur in Asia, Africa, and the Americas (Fig. 3-1). As we discuss the pri-
mary sources of soil acidity in the next sections, you will recognize that
as soil nutrient removal increases by higher crop yields and increased use
of fertilizers, soil acidity–related production problems will also increase.

ACIDITY IN WATER
Pure water undergoes slight dissociation:
H2O N H+ + OH-
The H+ actually attaches to another H2O molecule to give:
H2O + H+ N H3O+
Since both H+ and OH- are produced, H2O is a weak acid and weak
base. The H+ (or H3O+ ) and OH- concentrations in pure H2O, not in
equilibrium with atmospheric CO2, are 10-7 M (M = molarity, moles/
liter or m/L). The product of H+ and OH- concentra-
tion, shown in the following equation, is the dissociation
constant for water, or K w.
3H+ 4 * 3OH- 4 = 310-7 M4 * 310-7 M4
= 10-14 = K w
In equilibrium with atmospheric CO2, the pH of H2O is
5.5–5.7 because of the following reaction:
H2O + CO2 N H+ + HCO3-
Therefore, rainfall is a natural source of soil acidity and
important in chemical weathering of parent materials.
Adding an acid to H2O will increase 3H+ 4, but 3OH- 4
would decrease because K w is a constant 10-14. For
example, in a 0.1 M HCl solution, the 3H+ 4 is 10-1 M;
thus, the 3OH- 4 = 10-13 M by:
K w = 3H+ 4 * 3OH- 4 = 10-14
310-1 M4 * 3OH- 4 = 10-14
3OH- 4 = 10-13
52 chapter three soil acidity and alkalinity

TABLE 3-1
G LOBAL D ISTRIBUTION OF A CID S OILS

Land Area
Region Total1 Cultivated Acidic2
———————— million ha ———————— %
World 13,100 1,500 3,950 30
America
North 1,867 216 662 35
Central 245 31 36 15
South 1,760 113 916 52
Asia 3,094 505 1,038 34
Europe 2,207 277 391 18
Africa 2,964 219 659 22
Oceania 849 46 245 29
1Ice-freeland area.
2Percentage of acid topsoils of the total land area.
Source: Adapted from Sumner and Noble. 2003. Soil Acidification: The World Story. In Rengel (ed.),
Handbook of Soil Acidity. New York: Marcel Dekker.

The H+ concentration in solution can be conveniently expressed using pH and is

defined as follows:
1
pH = log = -log1H+ 2
1H+ 2
Thus, a solution with H+ = 10-5 M has a pH of 5.0.
10-5 M S -log310-54 = -3 -54 = 5
Each unit increase in pH represents a 10-fold decrease in H+ or increase in OH-
(Table 3-2). Solutions with pH 6 7 are acidic, those with pH 7 7 are basic, and
those with pH = 7 are neutral. The pH represents the H+ concentration in solution
and does not measure the undissociated or potential acidity. Soil solution pH is clas-
sified according to:
64.5 extremely acidic 6.6–7.3 neutral
4.5–5.0 very strongly acidic 7.4–7.8 mildly alkaline
5.1–5.5 strongly acidic 7.9–8.4 moderately alkaline
5.6–6.0 medium acidic 8.5–9.0 strongly alkaline
6.1–6.5 slightly acidic

SOURCES OF SOIL ACIDITY

Precipitation
As discussed earlier, H2O in equilibrium with atmospheric CO2 has a pH of about
5.6, resulting from:
H2O + CO2 N H2CO3 N H+ + HCO3-
Rainfall containing no acid-forming contaminants will continually add acid to soil,
contributing to weathering of soil minerals and soil acidity. The quantity of acid
added is small, and with near neutral or greater soil pH, most of this acid will be
 Topsoil pH
,4.5
4.5–5.5
5.5–7.2
7.2–8.5
.8.5
soil acidity and alkalinity

Figure 3-1
Major acid soil regions in the world. (SAGE, 2002, http://www.sage.wisc.edu/atlas/maps.php.) (No data for Greenland.)
chapter three
53
54 chapter three soil acidity and alkalinity

TABLE 3-2
R ELATIONSHIP B ETWEEN P H, P OH, AND H+ AND
OH − C ONCENTRATION (M)

pH H+ OH − pOH
————— m/L ————-
0 100 10-14 14
-1
1 10 10-13 13
-2
2 10 10-12 12
-3
3 10 10-11 11
4 10-4 10-10 10
-5
5 10 10-9 9
-6
6 10 10-8 8
-7
7 10 10-7 7
8 10-8 10-6 6
-9
9 10 10-5 5
-10
10 10 10-4 4
-11
11 10 10-3 3
12 10-12 10-2 2
-13
13 10 10-1 1
-14
14 10 100 0

Note: The shaded area represents the commonly observed range in soil pH.

neutralized. However, as the quantity of precipitation increases, more acid is added.

Acid soils in the United States (Fig. 3-2) generally occur in regions where annual pre-
cipitation exceeds 25–30 in. (Fig. 3-3).
Precipitation pH varies with region, with lower pH in eastern U.S. regions as a
result of greater pollutant loading into the atmosphere (Fig. 3-4). Primary pollutants
are SO2, NH3, and various NOx gases that include nitric oxide (NO), nitrogen dioxide
1NO22, and nitrous oxide 1N2O2. The global sources of NOx gases include fossil
fuel combustion (40%), biomass combustion (22%), lightning (15%), soil microbial
activity (15%), and chemical oxidation of NH3 (8%). About 50% of the global SO2
emission is anthropogenic, primarily related to burning coal to produce electricity
and other industrial emissions (steel manufacturing, etc.). The remaining 50% of
SO2 emission is due to natural processes including ocean biogenic production (20%),
volcanoes (10%), soil, plant, animal emissions (10%), wind-raised dust (6%), coastal
zone and wetland biogenic sources (2%), and biomass burning (2%). The emission
of NH3 varies depending on region. In North America and Europe, 65–75% is due
to livestock production systems (including manure application to soils), 10–15%
from fertilizer application, and the remainder from industrial sources.
Ultimately, the oxidation and hydrolysis reactions of these gases in the atmo-
sphere (reactions with O2 and H2O) produce NH4+ and H+ . The emission of NH3 is
not acid forming since it combines with H2O by:
NH3 + H2O N NH4+ + OH-
The base 1OH- 2 produced neutralizes some of the acids produced from NOx and
SO2 emission. However, once in the soil, microorganisms convert NH4+ to NO3-
producing H+ by:
NH4+ + 2O2 N NO3- + H2O + 2H+
When SO2 enters the atmosphere, the acid producing reaction is:
SO2 + 1>2O2 + H2O N SO4-2 + 2H+
 Topsoil pH
,4.5
4.5–5.5
5.5–7.2
soil acidity and alkalinity

7.2–8.5
.8.5

Figure 3-2
Predominate acid soil regions in the United States. (SAGE, 2002, http://www.sage.wisc.edu/atlas/maps.php.)
chapter three
55
56 chapter three soil acidity and alkalinity

Figure 3-3
Average annual
precipitation in the
United States.

AVERAGE
460° 200°
64° ANNUAL
32°16° PRECIPITATION
300°
16° IN INCHES
16° 300°
128
16° 96
0 200 ml
80
N 64 0 400 mL
0 200 km 40
32 0 400 km
24
16
0 600 mL 8
0
0 600 km

5.2
5.2 5.3 5.2
5.5
5.4 5.8 52 4.8
5.6
5.5 6.0 5.1 5.1 4.8
5.3 51 50 4.7
5.3 5.3 5.8 5.2 4.7 4.8 4.7 4.8
5.3 5.4 53 49
5.1 4.7
5.2 4.6 4.7
5.3 5.2 4.8 4.6
5.7 46 45
5.3 5.2 5.1 5.0 4.9 4.5 4.6
5.9 4.5
5.5 5.3
5.4 5.7 5.3 5.7 4.8 4.6
5.7 5.6 4.7 46 4.5 4.5 4 6
5.2 5.0 4.8
5.3 4.4
5.3 4.7 4.5 4.6
5.4 5.5 5.1 4.4
6.4 5.6 4.4
4.5
6.1 5.8 5.4 4.9 4.6 4.4 4.4 4.6 4.4
6.1 6.0 5.4 4.5
4.3 4.4
5.4 5.8 4.7 4.7 4.6 46 4.5
5.4 5.3 4.7
5.7 5.1 4.5
5.3 4.6 4.5 4.4 4.6
5.6 4.8 4.5
5.6 5.3 4.9 6.1 4.6 4.6 4.6
5.2 6.0 4.5
5.4 5.4 4.6
5.0 5.1 5.4 4.7 4.6
5.2 4.7 4.7 4.5
4.8 4.7 4.6 5.0
4.7 4.7
5.1 5.4 4.5 4.8 4.9
5.4 4.8 Lab pH
6.3 5.4 4.8 4.6 4.6
5.3 5.1 4.9 5.1
5.6
4.6 4.8 $5.3
4.9 4.9
5.2 5.1 4.9
4.8 4.7 4.7 4.7
5.2–5.3
5.4 5.4 5.6 5.1–5.2
5.3 4.7
5.3 4.8 5.0–5.1
4.9 4.9
4.8 4.9 4.9–5.0
Figure 3-4 5.3 4.8
4.7 4.9
4.8 4.8–4.9
Distribution of precipitation 5.2
4.8 4.8 4.8 4.7–4.8
5.4 5.0 4.8
pH in the United States. 4.8 4.6–4.7
5.2 4.5–4.6
(National Atmospheric Deposition 4.7
Program, 2009, NADP Program 4.4–4.5
Office, Illinois State Water Survey, 5.0 4.3–4.4
Champaign, Ill.) ,4.3

Leaching
One of the largest effects on acid formation in soils is the transport of water below
the root zone, carrying dissolved or soluble ions. The most soluble anions are NO3-,
Cl- , and HCO3-, while the most soluble cations are Na+ , Ca+2, Mg +2, and K + . Elec-
trical neutrality of the soil solution must be maintained; thus, as anions leach, basic
cations also leach reducing base saturation (BS) and pH. The environment exhibit-
ing greater leaching potential will be more acidifying (Fig. 3-5). Leaching potential
increases with increasing rainfall (Fig. 3-6). As NO3- is produced from nitrification
of NH4+ from plant residues, manures, soil OM, or N fertilizers, no net H+ would be
produced if all the NO3- were absorbed by plants (Table 3-3). Unfortunately, crop
 soil acidity and alkalinity chapter three 57

Figure 3-5
Potential water percolation
below the root zone
in the United States.
Potential established from
USDA-NRCS percolation
factor that includes
precipitation adjusted
for crop water use and
hydrologic soil group,
which vary with surface and
subsurface water transport
properties.
(Adapted from Kellogg, 2000;
USDA-NRCS.)

Percolation Potential
Very high
High
Medium
Low
Very low
None

70 Figure 3-6
Sand Influence of rainfall and soil
60 Loam texture on NO3- leaching
NO3– LEACHED (kgyha)

Clay in wheat.
50
(Adapted from Anderson et al., 1998,
Aust. J. Agric. Res., 49:345–361.)
40

30

20

10

0
250–325 325–450 450–750 >750
RAINFALL ZONE (mm)

recovery of NO3- is not complete and some NO3- leaching occurs in nearly every
cropping situation, if sufficient water is present for transport below the root zone.
Net soil profile acidification occurs only when leaching water containing NO3- (and
an equivalent quantity of bases) is transported below the root zone. Movement of
NO3- within the root zone results in no net acidification as roots exude organic an-
ions when NO3- uptake occurs lower in the root zone. Although wide variations exist
between cropping systems, non-legume systems where fertilizer or waste N is used
exhibit greater NO3- leaching than legume-based rotations. Also, NO3- leaching and
soil acidity can be greater in unfertilized legume pastures compared to unfertilized
grass pastures. Similar differences in soil acidity have been observed between decidu-
ous and leguminous forest systems.

Crop Nutrient Uptake and Other Transformations

Nutrient requirements of crops vary greatly (Chapter 9). Crop removal of basic cat-
ions will reduce base saturation and increase soil acidity. Plants alter the soil pH
through imbalances in cation/anion uptake. As cations are absorbed by plant roots,
electrical neutrality is maintained through uptake of an anion or extrusion of H+
and/or organic acids. When anions are absorbed, uptake of cations or extrusion of
58 chapter three soil acidity and alkalinity

TABLE 3-3
N UTRIENT U PTAKE AND S ELECTED N UTRIENT T RANSFORMATIONS IN
S OILS T HAT I NFLUENCE S OIL P H
Process Reaction pH Effect1
mole H + >mole N or S
Nitrogen
NO3- uptake NO3- + 8H+ + 8e- N NH2 + 2H2O + OH- -1
Mineralization R@NH2 + H+ + H2O N R@OH + NH4+ -1
Denitrification 2NO3- + 2H+ N N 2 + 21>2O2 + H2O -1
Urea hydrolysis 1NH222CO + 3H2O N 2NH4+ + 2OH- + CO2 -1
NH4+ uptake NH4+ + R@OH N R@NH2 + H+ + H2O +1
Immobilization NH4+ + R@OH N R@NH2 + H+ + H2O +1
Volatilization NH4+ + OH- N NH3 + H2O +1
Nitrification NH4+ + 2O2 N NO3- + H2O + 2H+ +2
Sulfur
SO4-2 uptake SO4-2 + 8H+ + 8e- N SH2 + 2H2O + 2OH- -2
Mineralization R@S + 11>2O2 + H2O N SO4-2 + 2H+ +2
1Negative number represents increase in pH; positive number represents decrease in pH.

OH- or HCO3- occurs to maintain electrical neutrality. When cation exceeds anion
uptake, excess H+ is released into the rhizosphere, while OH- >HCO3- is released
when anion exceeds cation uptake. Generally, most plants take up more cations than
anions, resulting in soil acidification (Table 3-4). For example in legumes, cation
uptake is greater than anion uptake because legumes provide a majority of N through
N2 fixation. Alternatively, rhizosphere pH will increase slightly with plants relying
entirely on NO3-, which does not commonly occur (Fig. 3-7). The net effect of crop
growth on soil acidity depends on plant species, the proportion of NH4+ and NO3-
uptake, total biomass production (or yield), quantity of plant material harvested, and
quantity of NO3- leached. Higher legume or non-legume (fertilized with NH4+ ) bio-
mass production results in greater soil acidity. Soil acidity would be lower with grain
harvest compared to grain plus residues. Increasing the quantity of biomass left in the
field increases acidity produced through microbial degradation.
Transformations of nutrients in soil can be both acid-producing and acid-
consuming (Table 3-3). Inspection of N and S transformations shows little net effect
on soil pH, except as NO3- and SO4-2 leach, along with an equivalent quantity of
cations, decreasing soil pH.

Soil OM
As microorganisms decompose soil OM, they release CO2 that quickly reacts with
H2O to produce H+ and HCO3-. Decomposition of organic residues and root respi-
ration increases CO2 in soil air to about ten times the atmospheric CO2; thus, acidity
produced from CO2 in soil air is greater than that produced in the atmosphere. In
addition, microorganisms produce organic acids by:
Organic C S R@COOH S R@COO- + H+
The type of residue added influences the quantity of acid produced. For example,
residue in a coniferous forest produces more acid than in soils under deciduous forest
or grasslands. Also, soil OM contains reactive carboxylic and phenolic groups that
behave as weak acids releasing H+ (Fig. 2-10). Soil OM content varies with the envi-
ronment, vegetation, and soil; thus, its contribution to soil acidity varies accordingly.
 soil acidity and alkalinity chapter three 59

TABLE 3-4
V ARIATION IN E XCESS C ATION U PTAKE IN L EGUME AND
N ON -L EGUME C ROPS
Species H + Production Excess Cations
cmol/kg shoot1 cmol/kg plant
Grain Legumes
Chickpea 58–220 108–177
Soybean 72–117 85–142
Narrow-leafed lupin 55–178 93–142
Grasspea 144 122
Yellow lupin 31–145 82–119
Field pea 78–132 110–116
Faba bean 32–68 60–122
Common vetch 149 126
Forage Legumes
Sweet clover 96–184 118–173
Lucerne 120–187 101–173
Red clover 128–180 129–180
White clover 120–190 165–185
Subterranean clover 28–100 88–175
Cereal Grains
Oats — 48–76
Barley — 26–49
Sorghum — 29–44
Wheat — 25–73
Corn — 38–75
1cmol/kg shoot = meq/100g shoot
Source: Tang and Rengel. 2003. In Rengel (ed.), Handbook of Soil Acidity (pp. 57–81). New York:
Marcel Decker.

7.5 Figure 3-7

Relative influence of anion
Anion uptake
and cation uptake on
rhizosphere pH.
SOLUTION pH

6.5

Cation uptake
5.5

4.5
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4
DISTANCE FROM ROOT SURFACE (cm)

In peat and muck soils and in mineral soils containing large amounts of OM, organic
acids contribute significantly to soil acidity.

Soil Mineral Exchange and Hydrolysis Reactions

The dissociation of H+ from edges of clay minerals, Al and Fe oxides, and soil OM
surfaces contributes to soil acidity and pH buffering. The edges of clay minerals
such as kaolinite (1:1) and montmorillonite (2:1) can buffer soil pH (Fig. 2-9).
60 chapter three soil acidity and alkalinity

The pH buffering capacity associated with Al and Fe oxides behaves similarly, as

follows:

As pH decreases, adsorbed H+ increases, which increases the surface 1+2 charge or

AEC. Soils with high clay, Al/Fe oxide, and/or soil OM contents exhibit greater pH
buffer capacity than sandy and/or low OM soils.
In acid soils containing Al(OH)3, changes in soil pH affect Al+3 concentration
in soil solution according to:
Al1OH23 + 3H+ N Al+3 + 3H2O
The equilibrium reaction shows that as pH decreases (increasing H+ ), the equilib-
rium shifts to the right where Al1OH23 dissolves to produce Al+3, which can then be
adsorbed to the CEC. Depending on pH, Al+3 will hydrolyze according to:
Al+3 + H2O N Al1OH2+2 + H+
Al1OH2 +2 + H2O N Al1OH22+ + H+
Al1OH22+ + H2O N Al1OH230 + H+
Al1OH230 + H2O N Al1OH24- + H+
Each successive step occurs at a higher pH (Fig. 3-8). At low pH, more of the Al
hydrolysis species are 1+2 charged 1Al+3, Al(OH22+), which enables greater Al
adsorption to CEC. Hydrolysis of Al+3 generates H+ and lowers pH, unless there is a
source of OH- to neutralize H+ .
If a base is added (i.e., CaCO3), H+ will be neutralized first. With continued
addition of base, Al+3 hydrolyzes, with the production of H+ . In this way, Al+3 hy-
drolysis buffers the increase in solution pH. Soil pH will not increase until sufficient
base is added to decrease soluble Al+3. It should be noted that Al1OH23 will precipi-
tate at pH 6.5, decreasing Al+3 in solution and increasing pH.

Figure 3-8 100 +3

Relationship between pH Al(OH)2+
and the distribution and 80 Al(OH)30 +2
AVERAGE CHARGE

average charge of soluble

Al species. As pH decreases Al+3
TOTAL Al (%)

Al(OH)4– +1
below 5, Al +3 concentration 60
in solution greatly increases.
Average
40 charge 0

20 21
AlOH+2
0 22
3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
pH
 soil acidity and alkalinity chapter three 61

Hydrolysis of Fe+3 is similar to Al+3. Although Fe is more acidic than Al, the
acidity is buffered by Al hydrolysis reactions. Thus, Fe hydrolysis has little effect on
soil pH until most of the soil Al has reacted. Al and Fe hydroxides occur as amor-
phous or crystalline colloids, coating clay and other mineral surfaces. They are also
held between the lattices of expanding clay minerals, preventing collapse of these
lattices as water is removed during drying.

Soluble Salts
Acidic, neutral, or basic salts in the soil solution originate from mineral weathering,
OM decomposition, or addition of fertilizers and manures. The cations of these salts
will displace adsorbed Al+3 in acidic soils and thus decrease soil solution pH as the
Al+3 hydrolyzes. Divalent cations have a greater effect on lowering soil pH than mon-
ovalent metal cations (see the lyotropic series in Chapter 2).
Band-applied fertilizer will result in a high soluble-salt concentration in the
affected soil zone, which will decrease pH through Al+3 hydrolysis. With high rates
of band-applied fertilizer in soils with pH 5.0–5.5, the increased soluble Al+3 can be
detrimental to plant growth.

Fertilizers
Fertilizer materials vary in their soil reaction pH. Nitrate sources carrying a
basic cation are less acid-forming than NH4+ sources. Compared with P fertilizers,
NH4+ containing or forming sources exhibit greater effect on soil pH (Table 3-5).
The acidity produced is greater when S and P sources are combined with NH4+
than with N-only sources. Phosphoric acid released from dissolving P fertilizers
can temporarily acidify small, localized zones at the site of application. With triple
superphosphate, reaction zone pH is 1.5, and with monoammonium phosphate re-
action zone pH is 3.5; however, the quantity of H+ produced is very small and has
little long-term effect on bulk soil pH. Diammonium phosphate will initially raise
soil pH to about 8, unless the initial soil pH is greater than the pH of the fertilizer
(see Table 5-10). Acidity produced by the nitrification of the NH4+ will offset this
initial pH increase.
Table 3-5 shows the theoretical quantity of CaCO3 needed to neutral-
ize the acidity produced per unit of N or S fertilizer applied. For example, with

TABLE 3-5
S OIL A CIDITY P RODUCED BY N AND S F ERTILIZERS

mole H + , mole CaCO3

Fertilizer Source Soil Reaction N or S Equiv.1
Anhydrous ammonia NH3 + 2O2 S H+ + NO3- + H2O 1 3.6
Urea 1NH222CO + 4O2 S 2NO3- + 2H+ + CO2 + H2O 1 3.6
Ammonium nitrate NH4NO3 + 2O2 S 2NO3- + 2H+ + H2O 1 3.6
Ammonium sulfate 1NH422SO4 + 4O2 S 2NO3- + 4H+ + SO4-2 + H2O 2 7.2
Monoammonium phosphate NH4H2PO4 + O2 S 2NO3- + 2H+ + H2PO4- + H2O 2 7.2
Diammonium phosphate 1NH422HPO4 + O2 S 2NO3- + 3H+ + H2PO4- + H2O 1.5 5.4
Elemental S S + 112 O2 + H2O S SO4-2 + 2H+ 2 7.2
Ammonium thiosulfate 1NH422S2O3 + 6O2 S 2SO4-2 + 2NO3- + 6H+ + H2O 1.5 5.4
1The CaCO3 equivalent represents the lb CaCO3 >lb N or S applied to neutralize acidity in the fertilizer.
Source: Adams, 1984, Soil Acidity and Liming, No. 12, p. 234, ASA.
62 chapter three soil acidity and alkalinity

1NH422SO4, 7.2 lb CaCO3 are needed to neutralize the H+ produced per lb of N

applied. The method used to determine CaCO3 equivalent for 1NH422SO4 is:
4 moles of H+ produced/2 moles N applied
or,
4 equivalent weights of H+ produced/2 equivalent weights of N applied
thus,
4 equivalent weights of CaCO3 S neutralize 4 equivalent weights
of H+ produced/2 equivalent weights of N applied
4 * 50 g CaCO3 >eq 7.2 g CaCO3 7.2 lb CaCO3
= =
2 * 14 g N>eq gN lb N
The theoretical CaCO3 equivalents are usually an overestimate of the CaCO3 re-
quired to neutralize the acidity produced from application of fertilizers. As previously
discussed, root absorption of fertilizer anions 1NO3-, SO4-2, or H2PO4-2 would
neutralize some of the acidity produced from nitrification of NH4+ or oxidation of
S (Table 3-3). When anion uptake effects are considered, the CaCO3 equivalent is
often reduced by ∼ 50%, which may be too extreme considering the acidity produced
with NH4+ uptake.
The extent and rate of soil pH decline with fertilization varies among soils
and management. Plant growth problems due to high soil acidity might develop
in 5 years on a sandy soil or 10 years on a silt loam, but might take 15 years
or more on a clay loam. For example, after 20 years of 200 lb N/a as NH4NO3
applied annually to bromegrass, surface soil pH decreased 1 pH unit (6.5–5.5
pH) (Fig. 3-9). After 40 years, surface soil pH decreased more than 2 pH units
(6.5–4.1 pH).

Estimating the effect of N fertilizer use on soil pH Using Table 3-5 and Figure
2-11, we can predict the decrease in soil pH caused by applying N fertilizers. This
valuable tool can be used to estimate future lime requirements to maintain optimum
soil pH (see Table 3-8, pg. 70).
For example, assume you are managing a field of tall fescue (optimum pH 5.5–6.5).
Your soil test report shows:
soil pH 6.5
CEC 10 meq>100g
OM 3%
BS 75%
You make four applications of 40 lb N/a as 1NH422SO4 each year. Estimate the
decrease in soil pH after 5 years of N management on this turf (see NOTE, pg. 62).
1. Determine total N application.
40 lb N>a * 4 applications>yr = 160 lb N>a>yr * 5 yr = 800 lb N>a
2. Estimate quantity of lime needed to neutralize acidity produced with this N source.
In Table 3-5, use 7.2 lb CaCO3 >lb N as 1NH422SO4.
800 lb N>a * 7.2 lb CaCO3 >lb N = 5,760 lb CaCO3 >a
 soil acidity and alkalinity chapter three 63

0 Figure 3-9
A Soil pH decreases
dramatically with increasing
–10 N rate and years of
application. Soil fertilized
annually since 1946 (A) and
DEPTH (cm) –20 fertilized annually from 1946
to 1965 (no N applied since
1965). Soils were sampled
N rate (kgyha)
–30 224 in 1985.
157 (Schwab et al., 1990, SSSAJ,
112 53:1412–1417.)
67
–40 22
0
4 5 6 7

0
B

–10
DEPTH (cm)

–20

N rate (kgyha)
–30 224
157
112
67
–40 22
0
4 5 6 7
pH

3. Determine quantity of acid 1meq>100 g2 added (assume 6″ soil depth or afs; see
Chapter 2).
5,760 lb CaCO3 5,760 lb CaCO3
=
afs 2 * 106 lb soil
5,760 lb CaCO3 0.5 * 10 - 4 0.288 lb CaCO3
* -4
=
2 * 10 lb soil
6
0.5 * 10 100 lb soil
0.288 g CaCO3 103 mg
= *
100 g soil g
288 mg CaCO3
=
100 g soil
288 mg CaCO3 1 meq 5.76 meq CaCO3
* =
100 g soil 50 mg CaCO3 100 g soil
5.76 meq CaCO3 5.76 meq acid added
=
100 g soil 100 g soil
5.76 meq acid added 5.76 meq bases removed from CEC
=
100 g soil 100 g soil
64 chapter three soil acidity and alkalinity

4. Convert meq acid/100 g soil added to decrease in BS 1initial BS = 75%2.

10 meq CEC 7.5 meq bases
75% BS * = 3initial bases on CEC4
100 g soil 100 g soil
7.5 meq base 5.76 meq bases removed from CEC 1.74 meq base
- = 3bases left on CEC4
100 g soil 100 g soil 100 g soil
1.74 meq base 10 meq CEC
, * 100 = 17.4% BS 3new BS after 5 yr N addition4
100 g soil 100 g soil
5. Estimate new soil pH (Fig. 2-11).
17.4 %BS is ∼ 4.5 pH 3from Fig. 2-114
Therefore, applying 800 lb N/a over 5 years would decrease soil pH by 2 units
16.5 S 4.5 pH2. The reason soil pH would likely decrease this amount is because
the coarse-textured soil (10 meq CEC/100 g soil) has little buffer capacity for the
added acid. If this soil had a CEC = 20 meq/100 g soil, the change in %BS would
have been (assuming initial 75% BS):
15 meq>100 g soil - 5.76 meq acid>100 g soil = 9.24 meq base left>100 g soil
9.24 meq>100 g soil , 20 meq CEC>100 g soil * 100 = 46.2% BS
Therefore, with this clay or clay loam soil, BS decreases from 75 to 46.2%. Using
Figure 2-11, pH would decrease from 6.5 to 5.3.

SOIL pH BUFFERING
Soil behaves like a weak acid that will buffer pH. In acid soils, adsorbed Al+3 will
be in equilibrium with Al+3 in soil solution, which hydrolyzes to produce H+ , de-
pending on solution pH. If H+ is neutralized by a base (i.e., CaCO3), solution Al+3
precipitates as Al1OH23, causing exchangeable Al+3 to desorb to resupply solution
Al+3. Thus, soil pH remains the same or is buffered. As more base is added, the
reaction continues, with more adsorbed Al+3 neutralized and replaced on the CEC
with the cation of the added base. As a result, soil pH gradually increases (Fig. 3-10).
Thus, soil is a pH buffer, where the buffer capacity (BC) increases with increasing
clay and OM content and decreasing pH or quantity of exchangeable acid. The
H-saturated clay (Fig. 3-10) was prepared in a laboratory to demonstrate how
increasing the amount and form of the exchangeable acid can increase the pH buff-
ering properties. In this case, significantly more base is needed to change pH in the
H-saturated clay than in the Al-saturated clay.

NOTE:
Application of nutrients and other inputs in the turf While the CaCO3 rate was determined on the afs basis
industry is commonly based on 1,000 ft2 instead of an acre (1 acre and 6″ deep), products are applied on an area basis,
143,560 ft22. The conversion is simple: allowing lb/afs/43.56 conversion to lb/1,000 ft2.

1,000 ft2 = 1>43.56 acre

Using the previous example

160 lb N>a , 43.56 = 3.67 lb N>1,000 ft2

5,760 lb CaCO3 >a , 43.56 = 132 lb CaCO3 >1,000 ft2
 soil acidity and alkalinity chapter three 65

Figure 3-10
Titration of Al-saturated and
7
H-saturated montmorillonite
clays. The buffer behavior
6 of the Al-saturated clay is
typical of many acid soils.
SOIL pH Al-saturated Clay The H-saturated clay was
5
prepared in a laboratory as
they rarely occur naturally.
4 (Adapted from Chesworth, 2008,
Encyclopedia of Soil Science,
Springer, N.Y.)
3 H-saturated Clay

2
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
NEUTRALIZATION (%)

Figure 3-11
Approximate limestone (t/a)
required to raise surface
soil pH (7-in. depth) of four
textural classes with typical
LIMESTONE (tya)

CEC (meq/100 g soil).

The reverse reaction also occurs. As acid is continually added, OH- in the soil
solution is neutralized. Gradually, the Al1OH23 dissolves, to resupply OH- , which
increases Al+3 in solution and subsequently on the CEC. As the reaction continues,
soil pH continuously but slowly decreases as the Al+3 replaces adsorbed basic cations.
The quantity of clay minerals and OM in a soil determines the extent of buffer-
ing in soils (see Buffering Capacity, pg. 35). Soils containing large amounts of clay
and OM are highly buffered and require larger amounts of lime to increase pH than
soils with a lower BC. Sandy soils with small amounts of clay and OM are poorly
buffered and require only small amounts of lime to effect a given change in pH. Soils
containing mostly 1:1 clay minerals (ultisols and oxisols) are generally less buffered
than soils with principally 2:1 clay minerals (alfisols and mollisols). For example, the
lime requirement increases with increasing clay content and CEC (Fig. 3-11).

DETERMINATION OF ACTIVE AND POTENTIAL

ACIDITY IN SOILS
Active Acidity
Active acidity represents the H+ and Al+3 concentrations in the soil solution. The
most accurate and widely used method involves measuring pH in a saturated paste
or a more diluted soil-water mixture with a pH meter and a glass electrode. On a
66 chapter three soil acidity and alkalinity

soil test report, soil pH represents the acidity in a soil solution. However, soil pH is
a useful indicator of the presence of exchangeable Al+3 and H+ . Exchangeable H+ is
present at pH 6 4, while exchangeable Al+3 occurs predominantly at pH 6 5.5.
Increasing the dilution of the soil from saturation to 1:1 to 1:10 soil : water ratio
increases the measured pH compared with the pH of a saturated paste. To minimize
differences in solution ion concentration between soils, some laboratories dilute the
soil with 0.01 M CaCl2 instead of water. Adding Ca+2 decreases the pH compared
with soil diluted with water. Changes in measured pH with dilution and added salt
are generally small, ranging between 0.1 and 0.5 pH unit.

Potential Acidity
Soil pH measurements are excellent indicators of soil acidity, but do not measure
potential acidity. Potential acidity represents the H+ and Al+3 on the CEC (Fig. 3-12).
Quantifying potential soil acidity requires titrating the soil with a base, which can be
used to determine the lime requirement or quantity of CaCO3 needed to increase pH
to a desired level. Thus, the lime requirement of a soil is related not only to soil pH,
but also to its BC or CEC (Fig. 3-11). High clay and/or high OM soils have higher
BCs and lime requirements, whereas coarse-textured soils low in clay and OM have
lower BCs and lime requirements.
To demonstrate how BC influences the quantity of base needed to neutralize
potential acidity (exchangeable Al+3), we use two soils with CEC = 20 meq/100 g
and 10 meq/100 g. Both have 50% exchangeable Al+3, or 50% acid saturation (AS),
or alternatively 50% BS.
Soil 1 S 50% AS * 20 meq CEC>100 g soil = 10 meq acids>100 g soil
Soil 2 S 50% AS * 10 meq CEC>100 g soil = 5 meq acids>100 g soil
If we wanted to neutralize all of the exchangeable acid 1Al+32, then we would need to
add an equivalent quantity of base 1CaCO32:
Soil 1 S 10 meq acids>100 g soil = 10 meq CaCO3 >100 g soil
Soil 2 S 5 meq acids>100 g soil = 5 meq CaCO3 >100 g soil

Figure 3-12 0.7

As soil pH increases, Al +3
saturation decreases. In
most soils, little or no effect 0.6
of Al +3 toxicity on plant
growth is observed above
pH 5.0–5.5. 0.5
(Adapted from Thomas and
Hargrove, 1984, in Adams (ed.), Soil
Acidity and Liming, ASA, CSSA,
AI+3yCEC

SSSA, Madison, Wis.) 0.4

0.3

0.2

0.1

0
4 5 6 7
SOIL pH
 soil acidity and alkalinity chapter three 67

Now convert the charge units (meq CaCO3 >100 g soil) to mass units 1lb CaCO3 >afs2.
For Soil 1:
10 meq CaCO3 50 mg CaCO3 500 mg CaCO3
* =
100 g soil meq 100 g soil
0.5 g CaCO3
=
100 g soil
0.5 lb CaCO3
=
100 lb soil
0.5 lb CaCO3 2 * 10 lb soil
6 10,000 lb CaCO3
* =
100 lb soil afs afs
For Soil 2, the quantity of base needed would only be 5,000 lb CaCO3 >afs. On a
practical basis, both rates are higher than needed because all the exchangeable acids
do not need to be neutralized to increase pH. Figure 3-12 shows that decreasing Al+3
saturation to 5% would increase pH to about 5.5.

PLANT GROWTH PROBLEMS IN ACID SOILS

High soil acid content can severely restrict plant growth, an increasing problem
throughout the world. The primary effects of soil acids on plant health are related
to acid toxicity effects on root growth and reduced nutrient availability (Table 3-6).
Recognizing acid soil problems is essential to effective management of horticultural
and agricultural plants.

TABLE 3-6
P OTENTIAL P LANT N UTRIENT P ROBLEMS R ELATED TO
E XCESSIVE S OIL A CIDITY

Nutrient Problem Soil pH and Other Conditions Effect of Liming

Al and Mn toxicity Usually pH 6 5.095.5, Exchangeable Al, solution
depends on crop and variety Al/Mn decrease with
increasing pH
H+ toxicity pH 6 4.0, Al/Mn toxicity Decrease solution and
commonly occurs first; adsorbed H+
observed mostly in solution
culture
Ca deficiency Low CEC, pH 6 4.594.8, tropical, Increase exchangeable Ca
highly weathered soils
Mg deficiency pH 6 5.5, low CEC or BS Increase Mg saturation
Mo deficiency pH 6 5.5 Liming to increase solution Mo
N deficiency pH 6 5.095.5, decreased Increase microbial activity; add
nitrification and residues as OM decomposi-
mineralization; low OM tion increases pH
P deficiency pH 6 5.0; highly weathered soils Decrease exchangeable Al and
dominant in Al/Fe oxides AEC; increase BS and CEC;
increase solubility of Fe/Al-P
minerals
K deficiency pH 6 5.0, low CEC, low BS, Decrease exchangeable Al,
highly leached soils, high increase BS
exchangeable Al
68 chapter three soil acidity and alkalinity

Figure 3-13 Effect of H+ toxicity (solution PH) on soy beanroot growth

Effect of H + toxicity (solution
pH) on soybean root growth. 50
(Adapted from Sanzonowicz et al.,
1998. J. Plant Nutr., 21:387–403.) 40

30

20

10

0
3 3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5 6

Al+3, Mn2, and H+ Toxicity

In soil, increased Al+3 and Mn+2 solubility at low pH confounds the direct assessment
of H+ toxicity in plants. Although exchangeable H+ increases relative to exchangeable
Al+3 at soil pH 6 4, it is difficult to separate the toxicity effects of these elements.
Using hydroponic growth techniques, where Al+3 and Mn+2 concentrations can be
eliminated or controlled, true H+ toxicity can be observed. With low solution pH,
visual H+ toxicity symptoms include stunted top growth, reduced lateral root growth,
and brownish discoloration of roots (very similar to Al+3 toxicity). Excess H+ deterio-
rates root membrane structure and function, increasing root permeability and loss of
organic substrates, and reducing nutrient uptake. Root growth decreases substantially
below pH 5 (Fig. 3-13).
Al+3 toxicity limits plant growth, depending on solution and exchangeable Al+3
concentration, the crop, and in many cases the cultivar or variety. The toxic effects of
Al+3 in plants are due to increased soluble Al+3, which substantially increases below
pH 5 (Fig. 3-8), or exchangeable Al3+ increases above about 10–30% of the CEC
(Fig. 3-12). Increasing exchangeable Al+3 increases Al+3 in solution (Fig. 3-14).
The initial symptom of Al3+ toxicity is a rapid inhibition of root growth that
occurs before any visual effects are observed on the above-ground plant tissues (Fig.
3-15). Despite increasing soil pH, maintaining high solution Al+3 concentration
severely restricts root growth. These data suggest that normal root growth occurs
when solution Al+3 is very low, which requires low exchangeable Al+3.
The site of Al toxicity is localized in the root apex. Initially, roots appear discol-
ored, which indicates a deterioration of cells in the root cap, root apex, and vascular

Figure 3-14 0.20

Influence of exchangeable Haplustox
SOIL SOLUTION Al (mmolc L–1)

Al +3 on Al +3 concentration Umbraquult
in solution in oxisols and 0.15 Paleudult
ultisols.
(Gonzalez et al., 1979, SSSAJ,
43:1155–1158; Jallah and Smyth, 0.10
1998, Comm. Soil Sci. Plant Anal.,
29:37–50.)

0.05

0.00
0 20 40 60 80
Al SATURATION (%)
 soil acidity and alkalinity chapter three 69

80 Figure 3-15
pH4.0 - tap root pH4.0 - lateral Influence of soil solution
70 pH4.6 - tap root pH4.6 - lateral pH and Al +3 on soybean
pH5.2 - tap root pH5.2 - lateral root growth.

ROOT LENGTH (cm)

60
(Sanzonowicz et al., 1998, Agron. J.,
50 21:387–403.)

40

30

20

10

0
0 7.5 15 22.5 30
SOLUTION Al+3 (uM)

elements (Fig. 3-16). Root cell division is inhibited or ceases, resulting in a reduction
and/or cessation in tap and lateral root growth, with subsequent failure of the whole
root system to elongate. Ultimately, the deterioration of root cells decreases the root
membrane permeability to water and nutrients, which reduces both root and top
growth.
Crops differ widely in their susceptibility to Al+3 toxicity; thus, Al+3 tolerance
is genetically controlled (Table 3-7). Different crop varieties also vary widely in their
tolerance to Al+3, where some grasses are quite Al+3 tolerant.
Manganese is an essential plant nutrient, but at high concentrations can be toxic
to plants. The dominant Mn specie in solution is Mn+2 in equilibrium with MnO2:
MnO2 + 4H+ + 2e- N Mn+2 + 2H2O

Figure 3-16
Differential effects of Al +3
on root growth of Perry (top)
and Chief (bottom) soybean
varieties grown in solution
containing 2 ppm Ca. Left
to right: 0, 8, 12 ppm Al +3
added. Inset photo shows
an example of root tip
damage by Al +3.
(Foy et al.,1969, Agron. J., 61:505.,
with permission, copyright American
Society of Agronomy.)
Al tolerant variety

Al+3(ppm) 0 8 12
Al sensitive variety
70 chapter three soil acidity and alkalinity

TABLE 3-7
A LUMINUM T OLERANCE OF S ELECTED C ROPS
Highly Sensitive Sensitive Tolerant Highly Tolerant
Alfalfa Canola Ryegrass Orchard grass1
Annual medics Barley1 Tall fescue Rhodes grass
Red clover Wheat1 White clover Lovegrass
Buffel grass Orchard grass1 Paspalum
Lesedeza Wheat1 Oats
Cotton Subterranean clover Triticale
Soybean Lupins Yellow serradella
Sorghum Dallsigrass Cereal rye
Peanuts Corn Bermuda grass
Rice1 Rice1 Bahia grass
Barley1
1Some crops are listed twice because Al tolerance depends on variety.

As soil pH decreases, Mn+2 in solution increases at soil pH 6 5 (Fig. 3-17). Since

solution Al+3 also increases greatly below pH 5, Mn and Al toxicity can occur to-
gether. Since Mn+2 is readily absorbed and translocated from roots to shoots, the
initial toxicity symptoms appear in the shoots. In many grain crops, yellow-brown
spots appear between leaf veins, often appearing like interveinal chlorosis similar to
Fe deficiency (see color plates). In legume and broadleaf crops, necrosis of leaf edges
occurs and leaves appear crinkled.
Iron toxicity can also occur; however, Al toxicity dominates in most strongly
acid soils. When tidal marshlands in coastal areas are drained, the underlying FeS2
oxidizes generating substantial acidity and soluble Fe+2 >Fe+3 (Chapter 7). Once oxi-
dized, soil pH drops from near neutral to 64 pH. These soils are difficult to manage
for plant growth and require large rates of lime to raise soil pH.

Ca+2, Mg+2, and P Deficiency

Soils with high levels of soluble or exchangeable Al+3, especially low CEC soils, gen-
erally contain low exchangeable Ca+2 and Mg +2, resulting in potential Ca and Mg
deficiency (Fig. 3-18). As soluble and exchangeable Al+3 increases, nutrient uptake
and transport to shoots decrease (Fig. 3-19). In acid soils, the detrimental effects
of Al toxicity can be reduced or prevented by increasing solution Ca+2. Magnesium
deficiencies caused by inhibition of Mg +2 uptake by Al+3 and H+ commonly occur

Figure 3-17 12.0

Relationship between soil
pH and solution Mn in 10.0
(in saturated soil paste)
SOLUBLE Mn (mgyL)

oxisols.
(Hue et al., 2001, SSSAJ, 65:153–160.) 8.0

6.0

4.0

2.0

0.0
4.5 5.0 5.5 6.0 6.5
SOIL pH (1:1 in water)
 soil acidity and alkalinity chapter three 71

Figure 3-18
Influence of added Ca on
remediating Al toxicity.
(Dr. Eugene J. Kamprath)

10 70 Figure 3-19
Effect of increasing
60 soluble Al +3 on nutrient
Ca, Mg, P CONC. (mgyg shoot)

8 accumulation in corn.
(Adapted from Pintro et al., 1996,

K CONC. (mgyg shoot)

50
J. Plant Nutr., 19:729–741.)

6
Ca Mg 40
P K
30
4

20
2
10

0 0
0 5 10 15 30
SOLUTION Al+3 (uM)

on acid 1pH 6 52, sandy soils. As with Ca2+, Mg2+ availability is more a function
of the level of Mg saturation than the quantity of exchangeable Mg +2. Generally,
optimum plant growth occurs at 5–10% Mg saturation. Liming soils to greatly
reduce Al saturation will generally increase Mg availability. In soils with low Mg satu-
ration, application of dolomitic lime is required.
Phosphorus deficiency is common in highly weathered acid soils (e.g., oxisols
and ultisols). In these soils, low P solubility exists due to P reactions with Fe and Al
oxides. Phosphorus availability decreases as pH decreases below 6.5 due to P precipi-
tation as Al/FePO4 # 2H2O and adsorption on Al and Fe oxide surfaces (Chapter 5).
Therefore, increasing soil pH by liming can increase P solubility and availability to
crops. Elevated Al+3 levels at the root surface also enhance formation of insoluble
AlPO4 # 2H2O that limits H2PO4- uptake. In addition, as root growth is reduced by
Al toxicity, P uptake is reduced because the soil volume explored by roots is reduced.
Correction of P deficiency in these acid soils can require substantial P application
rates; however, the Al toxicity still must be remediated for optimum production.
In weathered-, acid-, course-textured soils, K + deficiencies also are common.
Reducing exchangeable Al+3 by liming will generally increase CEC; however, since
these soils are also low in K-bearing minerals, K fertilization is required for optimum
plant growth (Chapter 6).
72 chapter three soil acidity and alkalinity

Molybdenum availability in soils decreases with decreasing soil pH; thus, in acid
soils crop response to applied Mo or liming can be observed. In acid soils, MoO4-2
is adsorbed by Al and Fe oxides, which is exchanged with OH- as pH is increased
by liming. This is particularly important with legume crops, since Mo is essential to
rhyzobia in their function in converting N2 to NH4+ . Many legumes often respond
to liming acid soils above pH 6. Increasing pH to 6.0–6.2 increases Mo availability
to bacteria involved in N2 fixation. Therefore, higher pH levels for optimum legume
productivity are related to increased solubility of soil Mo and subsequent enhance-
ment of N2 fixation by bacteria.

REDUCING SOIL ACIDITY EFFECTS ON PLANTS

Plant Tolerance to Al
Crop species and genotypes within a specie can vary greatly in their ability to tolerate
toxic levels of Al+3. Therefore, careful selection of crops and cultivars can help reduce
Al toxicity effects and enhance productivity (Table 3-8).

TABLE 3-8
S OIL P H R ANGE FOR O PTIMUM G ROWTH OF S ELECTED C ROPS

Plant Soil pH Range

4 4.5 5 5.5 6 6.5 7 7.5 8
Abutilon
African Violet
Ageratum
Alsike Clover
Alamanda
Alfalfa
Almond, flowering
Alyssum
Amaranthus
Amaryllis
Apples
Apricot
Arbor Vitae
Ashe, White
Asparagus
Aspen
Aster
Avacado
Azalea
Baby’s Breath
Balsam (Touch-Me-Not)
Banana
Barberry
Barley
Beans, Broad
Beans, Field
Beans; Lima, Snap
Beans, Velvet
Beets, Sugar
Beets, Table
Begonia
Bell Pepper
Bermuda grass
Birch, white
Bitter Melons
Blueberries
Bluegrass, Kentucky
Bougainvillae
Boxwood
Breadfruit
Broccoli
 soil acidity and alkalinity chapter three 73

Plant Soil pH Range

4 4.5 5 5.5 6 6.5 7 7.5 8
Broom
Buckwheat
Butterfly Bush
Burning bush
Cabbage
Caladium
Camellia
Candytuft
Carnation
Carrots
Cauliflower
Cedar, White
Celery
Centipede grass
Cherry
Chrysanthemum
Clematis
Clover, Kaimi
Clover, Red
Clover, Sweet
Clover, White
Club moss
Cockscomb (Celosia)
Coconut
Coffee
Coleus
Corn, Field
Corn, Sweet
Cornflower
Cotton
Cowpeas
Crab apple
Cranberries
Crapemyrtle
Crimson Clover
Croton
Cucumber
Dahlia
Date
Daylilly
Dianthus
Dichondra
Dogwood
Duranta
Eggplant
Elm
Erica
Eucalyptus
Euonymus
Fescue, Tall
Ficus
Fig
Fir, balsam
Fir, Douglas
Flax
Forsythia
Four-O-Clock
Foxglove
Gardenia
Garlic
Geranium
Geranium, Ivy
Gerbera
Ginger
Gladiolus
Gloxinia
Gobo
Gourde
Grapefruit
Grapes
Grass; Flame, Kikuyu, Pangola
Guava
Hazelnut
Heather
Hemlock
74 chapter three soil acidity and alkalinity

Plant Soil pH Range

4 4.5 5 5.5 6 6.5 7 7.5 8
Hibiscus
Holly, American
Hollyhock
Honeysuckle
Huckleberry
Hydrangea, Blue
Hydrangea, Pink
Impatiens
Iris
Ironwood
Ivy, Boston
Jade Vine
Juniper, Irish
Kale
Kumera
Kumquat
Lantana
Larch, European
Larkspur
Leeks
Lemon
Lettuce
Lilac
Lily, Easter
Lime
Lupin
Lupine
Lychee
Macadamia
Magnolia
Mango
Maple
Maple, Sugar
Marigold
Marrow
Melons
Mint
Moss, sphagnum
Mock Orange
Mondo Grass
Moss Rose
Muskmelons
Mustard
Narcissus
Nasturtium
Oak, Black
Oak; Pin, White
Oak, Red
Oak, Scarlet
Oats
Okra
Oleander
Onions
Orange
Orchid
Palms
Pansy
Papaya
Parsley
Parsnips
Passion Fruit
Peach
Peanut
Pear
Peas; Field, Garden
Peppers; garden, ornamental
Perriwinkle
Petunia
Philadelphus (English Dogwood)
Phlox
Pine
Pine; Jack, Longleaf
Pine. Loblolly, Red, Yellow
 soil acidity and alkalinity chapter three 75

Plant Soil pH Range

4 4.5 5 5.5 6 6.5 7 7.5 8
Pine, White
Pineapple
Poinsettia
Pomegranate
Poppy
Potatoes
Potatoes, Sweet
Potatoes, White
Primula
Pummelo
Pumpkin
Radishes
Raspberries
Raspberry, Red
Red Clover
Redbud
Rhododendron
Rhubarb
Rice
Roses
Rye
Ryegrass
Salvia
Shasta Daisy
Snapdragon
Snowball
Sorghum
Soybeans
Spinach
Spiraea.
Spruce, Black
Spruce, Colorado
Spruce, White
Squash
St. Augustine
Strawberreis
Sudangrass
Sugarcane
Sunflower
Sweet William
Sweetpea
Sycamore
Tamarack
Tangerine
Taro
Timothy
Tobacco
Tomatoes
Trefoil, Birdsfoot
Turnips
Tulips
Verbena
Vetch
Viburnum
Vinca
Viola
Vitex
Walnut, Black
Watercress
Weeping Willow
Wheat
Whiteclover
Yew, Japanese
Zinnia
Zoysia
76 chapter three soil acidity and alkalinity

Figure 3-20 Al tolerant Al sensitive

Mechanism of Al tolerance
in selected species and
varieties within species.
(Adapted from Delhaize et al.,
2004. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci.,
101:15249–15254.)

Elevated Depressed
organic acid organic acid
excretion excretion

Al+3 Al+3 Al+3

Al+3
Al+3
Al+3 Al+3
Al+3 Al+3 Al+3
Al+3 Al+3 Al+3 Al+3
Al+3 Al+3
Al+3 Al+3 Al-organic
acid complex
Al+3 Al+3

The mechanisms of Al tolerance include both internal and external processes.

The internal mechanism is based on observations that some plants tolerate high Al
levels through accumulation of Al in the shoot where internal Al detoxification can
occur. For example, Hydrangea (an ornamental plant) flowers turn from red to blue
when transplanted to an acid soil, which is due to Al accumulation in the sepals.
Hydrangea can accumulate about 3,000 ppm Al, while buckwheat accumulates as
high as 15,000 ppm Al in leaves when grown on acid soils. These plants complex
Al+3 with oxalate and citrate in the roots and leaves.
The external mechanism is based on a correlation between Al tolerance and Al-
activated organic acid release (Fig. 3-20). Certain plant genotypes tolerate Al+3 be-
cause they exude organic acids (malate, citrate, or oxalate) from the root tips. These
organic acids chelate or complex soluble Al+3 at the root surface and effectively limit
Al+3 uptake. Genotypes within several species (Table 3-9) release more organic acid
than Al-sensitive genotypes.
Recent research has identified the specific gene in Al tolerant wheat that con-
trols organic acid exudation and Al tolerance. Wheat breeding programs are currently
developing varieties with enhanced Al tolerance. The Al tolerance gene has also been

TABLE 3-9
P LANT S PECIES WHERE S PECIFIC O RGANIC A CID
E XUDATION BY R OOTS IS C ORRELATED WITH
Al T OLERANCE

Barley Rapeseed Sunflower

Buckwheat Rye Taro
Corn Snapbeans Tobacco
Oat Sorghum Triticale
Radish Soybean Wheat
 soil acidity and alkalinity chapter three 77

Figure 3-21
Genetically modified
barley with the wheat Al
tolerance gene (left) and
the unmodified barley plant
(right) grown on acid soil.
(Photo by Carl Davies; permission
provided Manny Delhaize and Peter
Ryan, CSIRO Plant Industry, PO Box
1600, Canberra, ACT 2601, Australia.)

successfully inserted into barley (Fig. 3-21). Improving Al tolerance through genetic
modification of many important food crops will be invaluable to optimizing plant
growth in acid soils.
One short-term management strategy for reducing Al+3 toxicity in seedlings is
band application of fertilizer P (Table 3-10). These data show that band-applied P
at planting reduces Al+3 toxicity and increased wheat and sorghum yield on low pH,
high P soils.

TABLE 3-10
L IME AND P E FFECTS ON W HEAT AND S ORGHUM G ROWN ON L OW P H S OILS

Lime Rate P Rate & Application Method

Broadcast Band1
Crop 1lb P2O5 , a2 lb ECCE/a 0 40 40/35
——————— bu/a ———————
0 38 42 54
Wheat (40) 3,750 51 51 57
7,500 49 49 55
0 55 — 76
Sorghum (35) 5,000 63 — 83
10,000 73 — 83
1Initial
soil pH 4.5; high soil test P.
Source: Adapted from Lamond et al., 1997, Better Crops, 81:10–11.
78 chapter three soil acidity and alkalinity

Neutralizing Soil Acidity with Lime

Liming reactions in soil Liming reactions begin with the neutralization of H+ in
the soil solution by adding a base 1usually OH- or CO3-22 originating from the lime
material. For example, CaCO3 behaves as:
CaCO3 + 2H+ N Ca+2 + CO2 + H2O
The fast reaction of 2H+ + CO3-2 S CO2 + H2O neutralizes H+ in soil so-
lution. Exchangeable Al+3 desorbs from the CEC as solution Ca+2 increases
from the dissolving CaCO3. Two Al+3 on the CEC are replaced by three
Ca+2 361 +2 charges of Al replaced by 61 +2 charges of Ca4. Once in solution the
Al+3 hydrolyzes to produce more H+ , which is neutralized by CO3-2. In this way,
both soil pH and BS increase (Fig. 2-11). Since the majority of exchangeable acidity
occurs as exchangeable Al+3, the neutralization reaction can be represented by:
Step 1: Exchange 2Al+3 on the CEC with 3Ca+2 from the CaCO3.

Ca+2
Soil Exchange or CEC

Ca+2
Ca+2
AI+3
K+
K+ + 3Ca+2 + 2AI+3
Mg+2
Mg+2
Ca+2
AI+3
Ca+2

Step 2: Al+3 in solution hydrolyzes (reacts with water) to produce 6H+ ; the Al1OH23
precipitates out of solution.
2Al+3 + 6H2O N 2Al1OH23 + 6H+

Step 3: CO3-2 1from CaCO32 neutralizes the H+ produced from Step 2.

3CO3-2 + 6H+ N 3CO2 + 3H2O
Overall Reaction

Ca+2
Soil Exchange or CEC

Ca+2
Ca+2
AI+3
K+
K+ + 3CaCO3 + 6H2O + 2AI(OH)3 + 3CO2 + 3H2O
Mg+2
Mg+2
Ca+2
AI+3
Ca+2

The rate of the reaction is directly related to the rate at which the H+ ions are neu-
tralized in solution. As long as sufficient CaCO3 is available, H+ will be converted to
H2O. The continued removal of H+ from the soil solution will ultimately result in
the precipitation of Al+3 as Al1OH23 and replacement on the CEC with Ca+2. Thus,
as soil pH increases, BS also increases (Fig. 2-11).
 soil acidity and alkalinity chapter three 79

7 Figure 3-22
Example titration to deter-
mine lime requirement of an
acid sandy loam soil. Initial
6 soil pH is 4.5. Increasing
addition of base (meq/100 g

SOIL pH
soil) increases soil pH.

4
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Meq BASEy100 g SOIL

Determining lime requirement The lime requirement of a soil can be determined

by several different methods. Titrating a soil with a base [i.e., Ca1OH22] will increase
soil pH (Fig. 3-22). After equilibration, pH is determined and the pH values are
plotted against the quantity (meq) of base added. From these data it is simple to de-
termine the amount of lime to be added. For example, increasing pH from 4.5 to 6.5
requires adding 6.0 meq base/100 g soil (Fig. 3-22). Thus, the quantity of CaCO3
needed to increase pH to 6.5 would be:
6 meq base 6 meq CaCO3
=
100 g soil 100 g soil
6 meq CaCO3 50 mg CaCO3 300 mg CaCO3
* =
100 g soil meq 100 g soil
0.3 g CaCO3
=
100 g soil
0.3 lb CaCO3
=
100 lb soil
0.3 lb CaCO3 2 * 10 lb soil
6 6,000 lb CaCO3
* =
100 lb soil afs afs
Soil titration with a base is not generally used in routine soil testing for lime re-
quirements because titrations are usually time consuming. However, reliable titration
methods have been recently developed that can be practically used in determining
lime requirements (Fig. 3-23).
7.5 Figure 3-23
y 2 = 20.24 + 10.44x 2 Titration curve for a loam
7.0 r 2 = 0.9997 soil using a 30-minute time
interval between additions
6.5 of Ca1OH22. Volume of
base added is converted to
6.0 equivalent CaCO3 (Mg/ha).
pH

(Liu et al., 2004, SSSAJ,

5.5
68:1228–1233.)

5.0

4.5

4.0
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0
CaCO3 (Mg ha–1)
80 chapter three soil acidity and alkalinity

TABLE 3-11
C OMMON B UFFER M ETHODS U SED TO D ETERMINE L IME R EQUIREMENT
Buffer Target CaCO3 Required/0.1
Buffer Method pH pH Intended Use Decrease in Buffer pH
t/a
6.8 0.27
SMP 6.8 6.4 Exchangeable Al-alfisols 0.22
6.0 0.18
Woodruff 7.0 6.5–7.0 Mollisols 0.22
Adams-Evans 8.0 6.5 Low CEC-ultisols 0.04
Mehlich 6.6 6.0 Exchangeable Al-ultisols 0.07
Source: van Lierop. 1990. Soil pH and Lime Requirement Determinations. In R. L.Westerman (ed.), Soil
Testing and Plant Analysis (3rd ed., pp. 73–126). Soil Sci. Soc. Am., Madison, Wis.

The most common method used to estimate lime requirement is based on the
change in pH of a buffered solution (the base) added to a soil (the acid). When a buf-
fer solution of known base concentration is added to an acid soil, the buffer pH is
depressed in proportion to the original soil pH and its BC. A large drop in buffer pH
would indicate a low pH soil with a large reserve or potential acidity, and a high lime
requirement. A specific volume of the buffer solution is added to a given weight or
volume of soil, and the decrease in pH of the buffer solution is related to the amount
of soil acidity and ultimately the lime requirement.
Four buffer methods are commonly used to determine the lime requirement
(Table 3-11). The Shoemaker, McLean, and Pratt (SMP) buffer is used with soils
containing 2:1 and 2:1:1clays, especially high OM alfisols. The SMP and Woodruff
buffers are commonly used in regions dominated with mollisols. The Adams-Evans
buffer was developed for low CEC and kaolinitic soils. The Mehlich buffer was ini-
tially developed for use on moderate to highly weathered ultisols, although it is in-
creasingly used in other regions. Recently, Mehlich and SMP buffer methods were
compared on nearly 100 mollisol and alfisol soils, and both methods accurately esti-
mated lime requirements (Fig. 3-24).
Liming materials The most common lime sources are calcitic and dolomitic lime-
stone (Table 3-12). The accompanying anion must neutralize H+ in solution and
hence Al+3 on the CEC. Common anions associated with liming materials are
CO3-2, OH- , and O-2. Gypsum 1CaSO4 # 2H2O2 and other neutral salts cannot
neutralize H+ , as shown by:
CaSO4 # 2H2O + 2H+ N Ca+2 + 2H+ + SO4-2 + 2H2O
In fact, neutral salts lower soil pH. In the previous example, Ca+2 replaces adsorbed
Al+3 that increases solution Al+3, which hydrolyzes to generate H+ and decreases pH.
This is especially true with band-applied salts where the fertilized zone pH is de-
pressed. Although gypsum will not neutralize soil pH, increasing Ca+2 in solution
may enhance growth if Ca+2 is marginally deficient. Also, formation of AlSO40 re-
duces Al+3 in solution and subsequent potential Al toxicity. Other neutral salts that
are not liming materials include MgSO4 # 7H2O, KCl, CaCl2, and MgCl2. NaOH
could be considered a liming material but addition of Na on the CEC is not recom-
mended (see Saline, Sodic, and Saline-Sodic Soils).
 soil acidity and alkalinity chapter three 81

6 Figure 3-24
Comparison of SMP and
Mehlich SMP
Mehlich buffer methods for

LIME REQUIREMENT (tya)

5
estimated lime requirement.
y = 1.13x 2 – 18.9x + 78 For a lime requirement of
4
r 2 = 0.71
2 t/a, the Mehlich and SMP
3 buffer pH would be about
6 and 6.6, respectively.
2 (Godsey et al., 2007, SSSAJ,
71:843–850.)

1 y = 4.42x 2 – 58.6x + 195

r 2 = 0.84
0
5.4 5.6 5.8 6 6.2 6.4 6.6 6.8 7 7.2 7.4
SMP OR MEHLICH BUFFER (pH)

Calcium Carbonate Equivalent

The value of a liming material depends on the quantity of acid that a unit weight
of lime will neutralize, which is related to its composition and purity. Pure CaCO3
is the standard against which other liming materials are measured, and its neutral-
izing value is 100%. The calcium carbonate equivalent (CCE) is defined as the acid-
neutralizing capacity of a liming material expressed as a weight percentage of CaCO3.
Consider the following reactions:
CaCO3 + 2H+ N Ca+2 + CO2 + H2O
Ca1OH22 + 2H+ N Ca+2 + H2O
In each reaction, 1 mole of either material will neutralize 2 moles of H+ . The molecular
weight of CaCO3 is 100 g/mole, whereas that of Ca1OH22 is only 74 g/mole; thus, 74 g
of Ca1OH22 will neutralize the same amount of acid as 100 g of CaCO3. Therefore, the
neutralizing value, or CCE, of equal weights of the two materials is calculated by:
100g CaCO3 >mole
* 100 = 135% CCE
74g Ca1OH22 >mole
Therefore, Ca1OH22 will neutralize 1.35 times as much acid as the same weight of
CaCO3 1CCE = 135%2.
The same procedure is used to calculate the neutralizing value of other lim-
ing materials (Table 3-12). Dolomite is unique in that there are 2CO3-2 in each
CaMg1CO322, so half the molecular weight is used to determined CCE.
CaMg1CO322 + 4H+ N Ca2+ + Mg +2 + 2CO2 + 2H2O
100 g CaCO3 >mole
* 100 = 109% CCE
0.5 * 184 g CaMg1CO322 >mole
Lime material composition can also be expressed by its Ca and/or Mg content. For
example, pure CaCO3 contains 40% Ca calculated by the ratio of molecular weights:
40 g Ca>mole
* 100 = 40% Ca
100 g CaCO3 >mole

Calcium and Calcium-Magnesium Carbonates. Calcium carbonate 1CaCO32, or

calcite, and calcium-magnesium carbonate 3CaMg1CO3224, or dolomite, are the
most common liming materials and generally referred to as Ag-lime. The CCE of
pure CaCO3 is 100%, while the CCE of pure dolomite is 109%; however, these
82 chapter three soil acidity and alkalinity

TABLE 3-12
C OMMON L IME M ATERIALS
Chemical
Lime Material Composition Properties CCE (%)1
Calcium carbonate CaCO3 (pure) Reference material 100
Calcitic limestone (Ag-lime) CaCO3 Variable fineness 80–100
Suspension or fluid lime CaCO3 Very fine particles 95–100
Dolomitic limestone CaMg1CO322 650% Mg 95–100
Dolomite CaMg1CO322 750% Mg 100–120
Marl CaCO3 Clay contamination 70–90
Burned lime CaO Hard to handle 150–175
Hydrated or slaked lime Ca1OH22 Fast acting 120–135
Slag CaSiO3 Variable composition 60–90
Wood ash Ca, Mg, K oxides Depends on type of burn 30–70
Power plant ash Ca, Mg, K oxides Highly variable 25–50
Ground oyster shells CaCO3 Localized use Up to 95
Cement kiln dusts Ca oxides Localized use 40–100
Biosolids and by-products CaO, Ca1OH22, Variable composition Variable
1CCE S calcium carbonate equivalent represents the neutralizing value of the material compared to pure CaCO .
3
For example, pure Ca1OH22 neutralizes 35% more acid than the same weight of pure CaCO3.

open-pit–mined materials contain impurities. Calcitic limestone contains Ú85% CaCO3

and small amounts of MgCO3 and other minerals, where the CCE 6 100% (Table 3-12).
Dolomite contains both MgCO3 and CaCO3 with at least 15% MgCO3. Consequently,
the CCE of dolomite is higher than calcitic lime as calculated earlier. Although dolomite
has a slightly higher CCE than calcite, dolomite has a lower solubility and thus will dis-
solve more slowly; however, the difference is generally too small to observe in field crop
response. The primary factors in determining which carbonate source to apply are if soil
Mg supply is low and the difference in material cost. Dolomite should be used on acid
soils testing low or very low in Mg. If Mg is not needed, then either source can be used,
depending on cost.
Pelletized lime is made from finely ground (100–200 mesh) dolomitic or calcitic
lime. The fine particles are formed into round pellets 1∼ 0.190.2@in. diameter2 using a
lignosulfonate or other water-soluble binding agent. The primary advantage is easier han-
dling, more uniform application, and reduced dust compared to Ag-lime. Pelletized lime
products are commonly used in the turf and landscape industry, although its use in agri-
culture is increasing.
Fluid or suspension lime is commonly a 50>50 mixture of very finely ground
1∼ 200 mesh2 Ag-lime and water. Suspending agents (0.5% clay, tetrasodium pyrophos-
phate) are added to maintain dispersion. Liquid urea-ammonium nitrate may be used as
the suspending agent adding a small amount of N to the suspension. Fluid lime products
can also come from lime materials used in municipal water treatment plants. Fluid lime
can be applied uniformly with standard fluid application equipment; however, single pass
application rates are …500 lb/a.
Pelletized and fluid limes are excellent materials that generally react faster in soil
than Ag-lime; however, the finer particle size of these materials does not increase their
neutralizing value. Increasing soil pH to a target level will require an equivalent (neu-
tralizing value) quantity of lime, regardless of the source. Recall that neutralizing 2 meq
acid/100 g soil requires application of 2 meq base/100 g soil (see pg. 29). In addition, the
cost of pelletized lime is considerably higher than Ag-lime.
 soil acidity and alkalinity chapter three 83

Calcium Oxide and Hyroxide. Calcium oxide (CaO) is the only material to which
the term lime may be correctly applied. Also known as unslaked lime, burnt lime, or
quicklime, CaO is a white powder, shipped in paper bags because of its caustic prop-
erties. It is manufactured by heating CaCO3 in a furnace, driving off CO2. CaO is
the most effective of all liming materials (Table 3-12). When unusually rapid results
are required, either CaO or Ca1OH22 should be used. Because of its high reactivity
with water, avoid contact with skin, eyes, and lungs.
Calcium hydroxide 3Ca1OH224, or slaked lime, hydrated lime, or builders’
lime, is a white powder and difficult to handle. Neutralization of acid occurs rapidly.
Slaked lime is prepared by hydrating CaO and has a high CCE (Table 3-12).
Marl. Marls are soft, unconsolidated deposits of CaCO3 frequently mixed with
earthen impurities and usually quite moist. Marl deposits are generally thin, recovered
by dragline or power shovel after the overburden has been removed. The fresh material
is stockpiled and allowed to dry before being applied to the land. Marl is almost always
low in Mg, and its CCE ranges from 70 to 90%, depending on clay content.
Calcium Silicates. Calcium silicate is surface mined from natural deposits frequently
near coastal regions and has a CCE of 60–90%. A more common source of CaSiO3
is slag by-products of iron manufacturing. In the blast-furnace reduction of Fe ore,
CaCO3 loses CO2 and forms CaO, which combines with molten Si to produce a slag
that is either air or water cooled. Slags usually contain appreciable amounts of Ca, Mg
and P, depending on the source of Fe ore and manufacturing process (Table 3-13).
Availability of these materials is often limited to Fe manufacturing regions.
Wood and Other Ash Products. Burning plant and waste residues (wood, crop resi-
due, animal waste) produces ash-containing Ca, Mg, K, Na, and other metal oxides
and hydroxides. While these ash by-products neutralize acidity, their CCE is highly
variable and must be determined before correct application rates can be established.
Coal or fly ash from coal-burning power plants also has a variable CCE; however,
these materials should also be analyzed for heavy metal content before use.
Biosolids, By-Products, and Other Materials. Other materials used as liming agents
in areas close to their source are biosolids from waste treatment plants, lime or flue
dust from cement manufacturing, pulp mill lime, carbide lime, acetylene lime, pack-
ing house lime, and so on. These by-products contain variable CCE that should be
determined to ensure effective application and soil pH management.

TABLE 3-13
C HEMICAL AND L IME C HARACTERISTICS OF S LAG M ATERIALS
C OMPARED TO A G - LIME
Property Slag Source Agricultural Lime
Steel Furnace Blast Furnace
pH 12.5 10.3 8.2
CCE 79.8 81.1 97
ECCE 22 27 77
Ca, % 22.2 25.2 21.1
Mg, % 5.5 5.1 12.6
Fe, % 15.9 0.9 0.2
Al, % 1.6 3.8 0
P, ppm 23 59 34
Source: Adapted from D. Munn, 2003, Turfgrass Trends.
84 chapter three soil acidity and alkalinity

Fineness Factor of Limestone or Particle Size Distribution

The effectiveness of liming materials also depends on their particle size distribution
or fineness, because the reaction rate depends on the surface area in contact with
the soil. CaO and Ca1OH22 are powders with the smallest particle size, but lime-
stone needs to be crushed to reduce particle size. Sieve size or mesh is the number
of openings per inch (Fig. 3-25). A 60-mesh sieve has 60 openings per inch.
A particle passing 60-mesh sieve would have a diameter 60.0098 in. 160.25 mm2
(Fig. 3-26).
When crushed limestone is thoroughly incorporated into the soil, the reaction rate
will increase with deceasing particle size (increasing fineness) (Fig. 3-27). Decreasing
the particle size fraction of a liming material decreases the lime rate required to raise soil

Figure 3-25 8 mesh 20 mesh

Sieve size or mesh
represents the number of
openings per inch of screen.
1 inch

Figure 3-26 0.1 2.5

Relationship between sieve 0.09 2.25
mesh size (# opening/inch)
0.08 2
and individual opening

OPENING SIZE (mm)

OPENING SIZE (in.)

distance in in. and mm. 0.07 1.75

0.06 1.5
0.05 1.25
0.04 1
0.03 0.75
0.02 0.5
0.01 0.25
0 0
8 10 12 14 16 18 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 60 70 80 100
SIEVE SIZE (mesh)

Figure 3-27 7.0

100 mesh
Typical effect of lime particle
size on soil pH over 3 years.
(Meyer and Volk, 1952, Soil Sci.,
6.5
60–80 mesh
73:37–52.)
40–50 mesh
SOIL pH

6.0

20–30 mesh
5.5

8–20 mesh
5.0 none

12 24 36
REACTION TIME (months)
 soil acidity and alkalinity chapter three 85

100 12 Figure 3-28

Relative lime efficiency of
Lime efficiency 10 different size fractions of
80

LIME EFFICIENCY (%)

Lime rate limestone in raising soil pH

LIME RATE (tya)

8 to 7.0. Greater lime rates
60 are needed for coarser lime
6 material (low mesh) to raise
soil pH to the same level as
40
4 a finer material (high mesh).

20 2

0 0
10 20 40 60 80 100
PARTICLE SIZE (mesh)

120 Figure 3-29

Effect of increasing propor-
100 tion of finer particles on
RELATIVE YIELD (%)

relative crop yield. Data are

80
averages of lime responses
on six different crops over
60
6–8 years.
40 (Adapted from Barber, 1984, Soil
Acidity and Liming, Agron No. 12,
ASA, Madison, Wis.)
20

0
< 20 20–30 30–40 40–50 50–60 60–80 > 80
% LIME PASSING 60-MESH SIEVE (< 0 .25 mm)

pH, or increases the effectiveness of a given lime material (Fig. 3-28). In this example, a
100-mesh lime material (100% efficient) requires only 1 t/a to increase soil pH to 7.0,
whereas a 50-mesh lime material (40% efficient) requires 2 t/a. When applied at the
same lime rate, increasing the proportion of finer particles improves crop productivity
because of increased neutralization of soil acids (Fig. 3-29), but also increases the cost of
the material. Because limestone cost increases with fineness, materials that require mini-
mum grinding, yet contain enough fine material to change pH rapidly and maintain
desired pH for 4–5 years, are preferred.
Agricultural limestones contain both coarse and fine materials. Fineness is
quantified by measuring the distribution of particle sizes in a given limestone sample.
Particle size distribution or fineness represents the particles passing through or re-
tained on a specific sieve size. Most agricultural lime contains a range of particle sizes
from very fine, dust-size particles to coarse, sand-size particles. The standards for par-
ticle size distribution vary between regions (Table 3-14). The fineness factor is the
sum of the percentages of each size fraction multiplied by the appropriate efficiency
factor (Table 3-15).
Overall Lime Quality
The effective calcium carbonate equivalent (ECCE) rating of a limestone is the
product of the CCE and fineness factor (Table 3-15). Manufacturers guarantee the
CCE and fineness of any lime product sold. Thus, if 4,000 lb CaCO3 >a were rec-
ommended, it would take 4,000 lb>a , 0.68 = 5,882 lb>a of material “A” and
4,000 lb>a , 0.81 = 4,938 lb>a of material “B” to increase soil pH to the same
86 chapter three soil acidity and alkalinity

TABLE 3-14
F INENESS F ACTORS FOR A GRICULTURAL L IMESTONE IN THE
U NITED S TATES AND C ANADA

Region Particle Size (mesh) Fineness Factor

78 0
Indiana, Kansas, Michigan,
8–60 0.5 (0.4)
(Nebraska), North Carolina
660 1.0
710 0
Alabama, Idaho, (Kentucky),
10–60 (50) 0.5 [0.4]
Mississippi, [Ontario]
660 (50) 1.0
74 0.1
Iowa 4–8 0.3
660 0.6
78 0
Minnesota, Ohio, Texas, 8–20 0.2
Wisconsin 20–60 0.6
660 1.0
78 0
8–40 (30) 0.25
Missouri (Illinois)
40–60 (30) 0.6
660 1.0
720 0
20–60 0.4
Virginia
60–100 0.8
6100 1.0
710 0
10–20 0.3
Oregon
20–40 0.6
640 1.0
710 0.05
10–30 0.2
Alberta 30–60 0.5
660 1.0

TABLE 3-15
F INENESS E FFECTS ON E FFECTIVE C ALCIUM C ARBONATE E QUIVALENT
OF T WO L IME S OURCES

Lime Lime
Material Material
“A” “B”
Calcium Carbonate Equivalent (CCE) 80 90
Fineness (% passing through sieve)
78 mesh 3 2
8–60 mesh 24 36
660 mesh 73 62
Fineness Factor Calculation (Table 3-14; Indiana)
78 mesh * 0 3 * 0 = 0 2 * 0 = 0
8–60 mesh * 0.5 24 * 0.5 = 12 36 * 0.5 = 18
660 mesh * 1.0 73 * 1.0 = 73 62 * 1.0 = 62
Fineness Factor (FF) 73 + 12 = 85 62 + 18 = 90
FF = sum of 3 individual factors
Effective Calcium Carbonate Equivalent (ECCE) 0.80 * 85 = 68 0.90 * 90 = 81
ECCE = CCE * FF
 soil acidity and alkalinity chapter three 87

level. For the same degree of fineness, the material that costs the least per unit of
CCE should be used.
5,882 lb lime A 1t $25 $73.53
Lime “A” S $25>t * * =
a 2,000 lb t a
4,938 lb lime B 1t $34 $83.95
Lime “B” S $34>t * * =
a 2,000 lb t a
The ECCE of lime “B” is greater than “A”; however, the cost per acre of lime “A”
is lower and should be selected. This also assumes that the moisture content in both
materials is the same.
Lime “A” S 5% moisture
5,882 lb lime A 5,882 lb lime A 5,588 lb lime A 1dry2
- 10.052 =
a a a
Lime “B” S 15% moisture
4,938 lb lime B 4,938 lb lime B 4,197 lb lime B 1dry2
- 10.152 =
a a a
Now recalculate the lime cost ($/a) based on equal moisture contents.
5,588 lb lime A 1t $25 $69.85
Lime “A” S * * =
a 2,000 lb t a
4,197 lb lime B 1t $34 $71.35
Lime “B” S * * =
a 2,000 lb t a
Adjusting for moisture content shows the two lime sources are similarly priced.
Application of liming materials

Tillage Systems
For high lime rates, broadcasting one-half the lime, followed by disking and/or plow-
ing, and then broadcasting the other half and disking, is effective in mixing lime
throughout the 0–6-in. depth. Lime recommendations are generally made on the
basis of a 6–8-in. soil depth. With deeper tillage, lime recommendations should be
increased (Table 3-16).
Neutralization of subsoil acidity through deep incorporation of surface-
applied lime is possible with large tillage equipment. The effect of incorporation
depth on cotton growth showed that the amount and depth of cotton rooting were

TABLE 3-16
A DJUSTMENT F ACTORS FOR D EPTH
OF L IME I NCORPORATION

Adjustment Factor
Incorporation
Depth (in.) Ohio Kansas
3 0.38 0.43
5 0.62 0.71
7 0.88 1.00
9 1.13 1.29
11 1.38 1.57
Sources: Adapted from Mullen et al., 2005, Ohio State Univ. 14th ed., Bull.
472-05; adapted from Witney and Lamond, 1993, Kansas State Univ. MF-1065.
88 chapter three soil acidity and alkalinity

Figure 3-30
Amount and depth of cot-
ton rooting as affected by
depth of lime incorporation.
From left to right: unlimed;
limed 0–6 in.; limed 0–18 in.
(Doss et al., 1979, Agron. J., 71:541,
with permission, copyright American
Society of Agronomy).

Figure 3-31 100

Effect of depth of lime
incorporation on relative
80
RELATIVE YIELD (%)

crop yield.
(Adapted from Bouldin, 1979, Cornell
Int. Agr. Bull. 74, Cornell Univ.; and 60
Pinkerton and Simpson,1986, Aust. J. Canarygrass
Exper. Agric., 26:107–113.)
Rapeseed
40
Wheat

20 Corn
Alfalfa
0
0 4 8 12 16 20 24 28 32
DEPTH OF INCORPORATION (in.)

increased by mixing lime to a depth of 18 in. (Fig. 3-30). Depth of lime incor-
poration will increase with increasing rooting depth characteristics of different
crops (Fig. 3-31). Surface lime applications without some mixing in the soil are not
immediately effective in increasing soil pH below the surface 0–2-in. depth. In sev-
eral studies it was observed that 10 or more years were required for surface-applied
lime without incorporation to raise soil pH at a depth of 6 in. Keeping surface soils
at a higher pH over time is one option to increase subsoil pH (Table 3-17).
No-Tillage Systems
With no-till cropping systems, surface soil pH can decrease substantially in a few
years because of the acidity produced by surface-applied N fertilizers and decompo-
sition of crop residues (Table 3-18). If the increased acidity is concentrated in the
soil surface, surface liming applications are effective. With low pH subsoil, limestone

TABLE 3-17
E FFECT OF S URFACE S OIL P H L EVELS ON S UBSOIL P H

Soil Depth (in.) pH at Various Depths with Increasing Surface Soil pH

0–7 4.9 5.5 6.0 6.5
7–14 4.9 5.2 5.9 6.7
14–21 4.7 4.8 5.2 5.4
Source: Ohio Agronomy Guide, 1985, Cooperative Extension Service, Ohio State Univ.
 soil acidity and alkalinity chapter three 89

TABLE 3-18
S OIL P H A FTER 7 Y EARS OF C ONTINUOUS C ORN U NDER
C ONVENTIONAL AND N O -T ILLAGE S YSTEM
N Rate Soil Depth Conventional Tillage No Tillage
lbs/a in. Limed Unlimed Limed Unlimed
0–2 5.9 5.2 5.9 4.8
150 2–6 6.3 5.6 5.9 5.5
6–12 6.2 5.7 6.0 5.9
0–2 5.3 4.9 5.5 4.3
300 2–6 5.9 5.1 5.3 4.8
6–12 6.0 5.5 5.8 5.5
Source: Blevins et al., 1978, Agron. J., 70:322.

should be incorporated to the desired depth before initiating a no-tillage system. If

subsoil pH is adequate, maintenance of both surface and subsoil pH can be accom-
plished with surface lime applications. In no-tillage systems, surface-applied lime
every 3 years can be as effective in maintaining surface and subsoil pH as annual
lime applications; however, higher lime rates may be needed to effect vertical lime
movement. Where incorporation is not possible, surface application of limestone
to acid soils is effective even though the immediate effect occurs only near the soil
surface. Compared to conventional tillage systems where lime incorporation is fea-
sible, more frequent applications are necessary in no-till systems to maintain soil
pH with depth. If subsoil pH is low, surface unincorporated lime applications may
have little effect on subsoil pH (Fig. 3-32).
Time and Frequency of Liming Applications
For rotations with legumes and other crops with higher optimum pH ranges
(Table 3-8), lime should be applied 3–6 months before seeding. Sufficient time
for acid neutralization is particularly important on low pH soils. Applied too close
to planting, lime may not have adequate time to react, unless finer particle size
lime products are used (pelletized or fluid lime). In cereal-legume rotations, lime
is best applied prior to cereal planting to allow more time for the lime to react and
increase soil pH. However, lime applications before wheat planting should also
accompany control of take-all disease. Caustic forms of lime 3CaO and Ca1OH224
should be spread well before planting to prevent injury to germinating seeds.

SOIL pH Figure 3-32

4 5 6 7 8 Comparison of Ag-lime
0
incorporation on surface
soil pH in no-till crop pro-
2
duction. Lime applied in
SOIL DEPTH (in.)

4 1985, soil sampled in 1992.

(Sawyer and Peck, 1991, Ill. Fert.
Conf. Proc., pp. 95–100.)
6

8 No lime
6.5 tya - incorporated
10 6.5 tya - not incorporated
9.5 tya - incorporated
12
90 chapter three soil acidity and alkalinity

7.5
Lime Rate (tya)

7 12

6.5

SOIL pH
6
6
4
5.5
2
5
0
4.5
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
YEARS AFTER APPLICATION
Figure 3-33
Influence of lime rate and time after application on soil pH. Target pH was
6.2, where re-application of 4 t/a every 4–5 years is recommended.
(Patrick et al., 1995, SSSAJ, 95:248–254.)

Lime application frequency generally depends on soil texture, tillage system,

N source and rate, crop removal, precipitation patterns, and lime rate. On sandy
soils, more frequent applications are preferable, whereas on fine-textured soils,
larger amounts may be applied less often. Finely divided lime (high ECCE) reacts
more quickly, but its effect is maintained over a shorter period than coarse mate-
rials. The only reliable method to determine re-liming needs is through soil test-
ing (Chapter 9). Samples should be taken at least every 3 years, unless production
problems potentially related to soil acidity persist (Fig. 3-33). These data show
that liming is required about every 4–5 years to maintain optimum soil pH at 6.2.
Regular soil testing is the best way to identify frequency and rate of lime to main-
tain optimum soil pH.
Equipment
Dry lime applied by the supplier or the producer is the most common method.
The spinner truck spreader that distributes lime in a semicircle from the rear of the
truck is common in agricultural and turf crops (Fig. 3-34). Smaller equipment in
turf, landscape, and other horticultural systems is commonly used. Regardless of
the method employed, care should be taken to ensure uniform application. When
high lime rates are needed, applying no more than 2 t/a per application will help
ensure uniform distribution of lime material. Non-uniform distribution can result
in excesses and deficiencies in different parts of the same field and corresponding
non-uniform crop growth.
Plant and soil response to liming Adding lime to neutralize exchangeable acids will
change pertinent soil test properties (Table 3-19). Maintaining a regular soil testing
program where soils are sampled and analyzed every 2–3 years is essential to remov-
ing soil acidity as a limiting factor to optimum plant growth. In most mineral soils,
liming to pH 5.5–6.5, depending on the plant (Table 3-8), substantially reduces ex-
changeable Al+3 (Fig. 3-12). When lime is added to acid soils, exchangeable and so-
lution Al+3 is reduced by precipitation as Al1OH23, which increases yield potential
(Table 3-20). As a result of reduced adsorbed and solution Al+3, Al toxicity potential
is greatly reduced. Many studies have demonstrated an increase in crop productivity
with an increase in soil pH (Table 3-21, Fig. 3-35).
soil acidity and alkalinity chapter three 91

Figure 3-34
Common field scale lime
application equipment.
Top photo shows a spinner
spreader, whereas the photo
below it is a close-up of the
spinner device. The third
photo shows a forced-air
applicator, and the bottom
photo shows a liquid appli-
cator for fluid lime.
(First Photo: Stahly. Second Photo:
Adams Fertilizer Equipment
Manufacture.)
92 chapter three soil acidity and alkalinity

TABLE 3-19
E FFECT OF I NCREASING L IME R ATE ON S OIL T EST P ROPERTIES

Lime Soil
Rate1 pH P K Ca Mg K Na H CEC
t/a —— ppm ——— —————————– meq/100 g Soil —————————–
0 5.25 19.1 112 7.6 1.6 0.2 0.8 5.4 15.5
0.5 5.38 18.1 126 8.1 1.7 0.2 0.8 5.4 16.2
1 5.48 15.7 119 8.5 1.8 0.2 0.8 3.3 14.6
2 5.71 21.7 145 9.7 2.2 0.2 0.9 2.1 15.2
3 6.28 16.2 114 10.3 2.4 0.2 0.9 0 13.8
4 6.49 22.2 121 10.9 2.6 0.2 0.7 0 14.4
6 6.84 29.2 126 11.5 2.8 0.2 0.8 0 15.3
8 7.18 31.5 123 12.3 3.0 0.2 0.8 0 16.2
1ECCE; broadcast incorporated May 1999; soil samples collected Oct 2003 (0–6-in. depth).
Note: Shaded columns represent significant responses to lime rate.
Source: S. Henning, 2004, Iowa State Univ., ISRF04-13.

TABLE 3-20
L IME E FFECTS ON W HEAT Y IELDS , S OIL P H,
AND E XTRACTABLE Al +3

Lime Rate Wheat Yield Soil pH Al+3

lb ECC/a bu/a ppm
0 14 4.6 102
3,000 37 5.1 26
6,000 38 5.9 0
12,000 37 6.4 0
Note: 1986–89 average yield data; soil pH and KCl extractable Al+3 measured in 1989.
Source: Whitney and Lamond, 1993, Liming Acid Soils, Kansas State Univ. Coop. Ext. MF-1065.

TABLE 3-21
A VERAGE C ROP R ESPONSES TO L IME FROM 1992 TO 2003
Crop Unlimed Limed Lime Response
———————– t/ha ———————– %
Wheat 1.45 3.10 1.64 113
Oat 1.96 2.48 0.52 26
Triticale 1.88 2.77 0.89 47
Canola 0.83 1.66 0.85 101
Pea 0.36 1.21 0.85 241
Lupin 1.39 1.41 0.02 1
Note: Crops grown in rotation.
Source: Adapted from Li and Conyers, 2006, Crop Responses to Lime, NSW Dept Primary Ind.,
Prinefact 33.
 soil acidity and alkalinity chapter three 93

100 Figure 3-35

Effect of increasing soil pH
on relative wheat yield.
90
(Mahler and McDole, 1987.)

MAXIMUM YIELD (%) 80

70

60

50

40

30
4.8 4.9 5.0 5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4 5.5 5.6 5.7 5.8 5.9 6.0 6.1 6.2
SOIL pH

On alfisols and mollisols, liming to pH 6.4–6.6 is optimum for most crops except
forage legumes (alfalfa, sweet clover), whereas liming to pH 6.7–6.9 is recommended.
Liming ultisols and oxisols to pH 5.5–6.0 is suitable for most plants; overliming these
soils can reduce micronutrient availability. Liming highly weathered soils is essential for
production of most legume crops (Table 3-22). Symbiotic N2 fixation is favored by ad-
equate liming (Chapter 4). Activity of rhizobium is restricted by soil pH 6 6.0; thus,
liming will increase legume growth because of increased N2 fixation. Adequate liming is
also essential for plants to utilize residual or applied N (Fig. 3-36).
In soils with high OM content, exchangeable Al+3 is strongly adsorbed to R@COO-
sites (Fig. 2-10) reducing soluble Al+3, and potential Al toxicity, compared to mineral
soils. As a result, the critical pH below which plant yield is reduced 1pH ∼ 52 is lower
than that for mineral soils. Thus, liming high OM soils to pH 5 provides adequate Ca to
reduce Al+3 >H+ toxicity effects on plant growth (Table 3-22).
In low pH, high Al and Fe oxide soils, P precipitates as insoluble Fe/Al-P com-
pounds (Chapter 5). Liming these acidic soils will precipitate Al+3 as Al1OH23, thus

TABLE 3-22
E FFECT OF L IMING ON S OIL P H AND N ODULATION IN S OYBEAN

Soil pH Shoot Dry Weight Nodules

g/pot number/pot
Ultisol 4.6 2.4 21
5.2 3.2 64
5.9 3.6 77

Histosol 4.3 1.4 0

4.5 2.3 64
4.7 3.5 165
5.1 2.9 113
5.3 2.7 91
Source: Sartain and Kamprath, 1975, Agron. J., 67:507–510; Mengel and Kamprath, 1978,
Agron. J., 70:959–963.
94 chapter three soil acidity and alkalinity

Figure 3-36 6.0

Liming effect on wheat Limed
Unlimed
response to plant available 5.0
N in the soil.

GRAIN YIELD (tyha)

(Li and Conyers, 2006, Crop
4.0
responses to lime, NSW Dept
Primary Ind., Prinefact 33.)
3.0

2.0

1.0

0.0
0 50 100 150 200
SOIL AVAILABLE N (kgyha) AT SOWING (0–60 cm)

increasing plant available P. Alternatively, liming soils to 7pH 6.8–7.0 can reduce P
availability because of the precipitation of Ca or Mg phosphates. A liming program
should be planned so that the pH can be kept between 5.5 and 6.8, depending on
crop, if maximum benefit is to be derived from applied P. With the exception of Mo,
micronutrient availability decreases with increasing pH (Chapter 8). Lime addition
reduces solution concentration of many micronutrients, although soil pH values of
5.5–6.0 are usually sufficient to maintain adequate micronutrient availability. Over-
liming will reduce micronutrient availability below needed levels. A regular soil test-
ing program will help identify potential nutrient problems.
Liming has a significant role in the control of certain plant pathogens. Clubroot is
a disease of cole crops that reduces yields and causes infected roots to enlarge and become
distorted. Lime does not directly affect the clubroot organism, but at soil pH 7 7 germi-
nation of clubroot spores is inhibited (Table 3-23). Alternatively, liming increases the in-
cidence of diseases such as scab in root crops. Severity of take-all infection in wheat, with
resultant yield reductions, is increased by liming soils to near neutral pH. Lime applica-
tions before wheat planting are not advised unless take-all disease has been controlled.
Structure of fine-textured soils may be improved by liming, as a result of
enhanced flocculation of Ca-saturated clays. Favorable effects of lime on soil struc-
ture include reduced soil crusting, better emergence of small-seeded crops, and lower
power requirements for tillage operations. However, the overliming of oxisols and
ultisols can result in the deterioration of soil structure, with a decrease in water
percolation.

TABLE 3-23
E FFECT OF L IMING ON C LUBROOT D ISEASE IN C AULIFLOWER

Lime Rate Marketable Yield Clubroot Rating1 Soil pH at Harvest

t/a %
0 38 3.5 5.6
2.5 56 2.7 6.5
5.0 77 2.2 6.8
10.0 80 1.5 7.2
1Clubroot rating = Σ [# roots at a rating * rating]/total # roots.

Rating: 0, no visible clubroot; 1, fewer than 10 galls on the lateral roots; 2, more than 10 galls on the
lateral roots, taproot free of clubroot; 3, galls on taproot; 4, severe clubbing on all roots.
Source: Waring, 1980, Proc. 22nd Lower Mainland Hort. Assoc. Short Course, pp. 95–96.
 soil acidity and alkalinity chapter three 95

0 21 Figure 3-37
Potential mechanism for
OH
increasing subsoil pH
Fe Fe
O O
through SO4-2 adsorption
OH2
following application of
1 OH2 1 H2O
CaSO4 # 2H2O (gypsum).
OH 1 SO422 OH S
OH O O
Fe Fe
OH2 OH2

Even at high application rates, lime may have only minimal effects on acidity
below the depth of incorporation. Gypsum can improve the rooting environment to
about 0.75-m depth depending on the soil. As discussed earlier, gypsum is not a liming
material; however, application of gypsum has been shown to ameliorate subsoil acidity
in highly weathered soils. The increase in pH may be related to adsorption of SO4-2 on
Al/Fe oxides with subsequent release of OH- and the precipitation or polymerization
of Al due to the reaction with OH- (Fig. 3-37). The negative charge developed by this
reaction results in Ca+2 being held on the exchange site. In general, acid subsoil amelio-
ration in soils with Al-hydroxy interlayer minerals requires greater quantities of gypsum
than soils that are dominantly kaolinitic. To determine which soils are responsive to
gypsum applications, pH measurements are made of acid subsoils with solutions of KCl
and K 2SO4. Responsive soils will have a higher pH in K 2SO4 than in KCl due to the
replacement of OH- from the hydrated oxides of Al and Fe by SO4-2. Unless acid sub-
soils contain appreciable amounts of hydrated Al and Fe oxides, application of gypsum
will not be effective in alleviating subsoil acidity.

CALCAREOUS SOILS
General Description
Calcareous soils contain measurable quantities of native CaCO3 mineral. These
soils commonly occur in semiarid and arid regions where annual precipitation is
620 in. and will have soil pH values 7 7.2 (Figs 3-1 and 3-2). Globally, about
6% of total ice-free land area soils are classified as calcareous (Table 3-24). As pre-
cipitation increases from semiarid to humid regions, depth to CaCO3 increases

TABLE 3-24
G LOBAL D ISTRIBUTION OF C ALCAREOUS , S ALINE , AND S ODIC S OILS

Land Area
Region Total1 Cultivated Calcareous2 Saline2 Sodic2
—————– ha * 106 —————– % ha * 106 % ha * 106 %

World 13,100 1,500 796.2 6.1 187.3 1.4 135.3 1.0

America
North 1,867 216 114.7 6.1 0.1 0.0 10.7 0.6
South/Central 2,005 144 24.3 1.2 24.3 1.2 34.7 1.7
Asia 3,094 505 315.4 10.2 95.4 3.1 30 1.0
Europe 2,207 277 56.7 2.6 2.3 0.1 7.9 0.4
Africa 2,964 219 171.2 5.8 48.6 1.6 13.8 0.5
Oceania 849 46 113.9 13.4 16.6 2.0 38.1 4.5
1Ice-free land area.
2Percenatge of acid topsoils of the total land area.
96 chapter three soil acidity and alkalinity

Figure 3-38 RAINFALL

As rainfall increases from 25 50 75 100 (cm)
one region to another, the
10 20 30 40
depth to measurable CaCO3 (in.)
content increases. Thus, in 10 25
arid and semiarid regions, 50
20
CaCO3 is present in the
surface soil. 30 75

40 100

50 125

DEPTH (cm)
DEPTH (in.)
60 150

70 175

80 200

90 225

100 250

110 275

120 300

(Fig. 3-38). Generally, when annual precipitation exceeds 30–40 in., no free lime
is present in the rooting zone. The pH of a soil containing CaCO3 in equilibrium
with atmospheric CO2 is 8.5; however, the 10-fold higher CO2 content in soil air
decreases pH to 7.2–7.5. Calcareous soils with pH 7 7.6 are influenced by high
salt and/or Na.
The presence of CaCO3 will generally not reduce plant productivity; however,
common production problems observed in calcareous soils include low P (Chapter 5)
and micronutrient availability (Chapter 8), especially with plants less tolerant of low
levels of these nutrients.

Acidifying Calcareous Soil

Calcareous soils can be very productive, although water is frequently the most limit-
ing plant growth factor. Plants favoring acid soils will not be productive on calcare-
ous soils; this is especially true for plants with low optimum soil pH (Table 3-8). For
example, blueberry and azalea production is not possible in calcareous soils. Micro-
nutrient deficiencies commonly affect many turfgrass species grown on calcareous
surface soils (Chapter 8).
In regions where the surface soil is slightly acidic, land leveling to facilitate sur-
face irrigation can expose calcareous subsoils that are less favorable for plant growth.
Problems of high soil pH are not confined to arid and semiarid areas. Acidifying
paddy soil has increased rice yields, which is often related to increased availability of
micronutrients. In humid regions, overliming or dust from limestone-graveled roads
may blow onto field borders, increasing soil pH. In other areas, moderately acidic
soils may need further acidification for optimum production of blueberries, cranber-
ries, azaleas, rhododendrons, camellias, potatoes, and conifer seedlings.
Acidifying calcareous soils can be difficult and expensive. To decrease soil pH,
CaCO3 in the soil must be dissolved or neutralized by adding acid or acid-forming
materials. In most field crop situations, reducing soil pH by neutralizing CaCO3 is
not practical. For example, the quantity of elemental S° needed to neutralize a soil
with only 2% CaCO3 (0–6-in. depth) is estimated by:
 soil acidity and alkalinity chapter three 97

2% CaCO3 content in 6@in. surface soil depth 1∼2 * 106 lb soil>afs2

2 g CaCO3 2,000 mg CaCO3
2% CaCO3 = =
100 g soil 100 g soil
2,000 mg CaCO3 50 mg CaCO3 40 meq CaCO3
, =
100 g soil meq 100 g soil
Thus, if there are 40 meq CaCO3, then 40 meq of acid is required to neutralize the
CaCO3 1remember meq A = meq B2, thus:
40 meq CaCO3 40 meq S°
=
100 g soil 100 g soil
40 meq S° 16 mg S° 640 mg S°
* =
100 g soil meq 100 g soil
0.64 g S°
=
100 g soil
0.64 lb S°
=
100 lb soil
0.64 lb S° 2 * 104 12,800 lb S° 1t 6.4 t S°
* = * =
100 lb soil 2 * 104
2 * 10 lb soil
6 2,000 lb afs
Once neutralized, soil pH would likely be about the same as before neutralization
because the CEC would still be nearly 100% saturated with basic cations (100% BS).
To ultimately lower soil pH below 7, additional S° would be needed to produce H+ and
Al+3, which would in turn reduce the BS necessary to lower soil pH. The additional
quantity of S° can be estimated similarly to the pH-BS calculations shown earlier. More
importantly, 6.4 t S/a would be very expensive and thus impractical. On calcareous
soils, it is more logical to plant crops tolerant of higher soil pH (Table 3-8). However, it
is practical to lower calcareous soil pH if a small volume (or mass) of soil is used, typical
of horticultural landscape or potted plants.
If the soil is not calcareous and needs to be acidified, then the chemistry of soil
acidification is the reverse of liming acid soils. For example, assume a soil at pH 6.5 is
acidified to pH 5.5 1CEC = 20 meq>100 g soil2. Using Figure 2-11, the estimated
quantity of S° needed is:
at soil pH 6.5 S ∼ 75% BS
at soil pH 5.5 S ∼ 50% BS
∼25% decrease in %BS
20 meq CEC 5 meq base reduction
0.25 * =
100 g soil 100 g soil
5 meq acid needed
=
100 g soil
5 meq S° 16 mg S° 80 mg S°
* =
100 g soil meq 100 g soil
0.08 g S°
=
100 g soil
0.08 lb S°
=
100 lb soil
0.08 lb S° 2 * 10 4
1,600 lb S° 1,600 lb S°
* = =
100 lb soil 2 * 10 4
2 * 10 lb soil
6 afs
98 chapter three soil acidity and alkalinity

TABLE 3-25
Q UANTITY OF E LEMENTAL S° R EQUIRED TO R EDUCE S OIL P H (7- IN . DEPTH )

Desired pH Loamy Sandy Clay

Change Sands Sands Loams Loams Loams Organic
lb S/a
7.0–6.0 300 400 500 700 1,100 1,750
6.0–5.0 800 1,000 1,200 1,400 1,400 2,750
5.0–4.0 800 1,000 1,200 1,400 1,400 4,500
lb S>1,000 ft2
7.0–6.0 7 10 12 16 25 39
6.0–5.0 18 23 28 32 32 63
5.0–4.0 18 23 28 32 41 103
Note: The conversion from lb/a to lb>1,000 ft2 is lb>43,560 ft2 1or 1 acre2 , 43.56 = lb>1,000 ft2.
Source: USDA Handbook #60, Diagnosis and improvement of saline and alkaline soils.

This S° application rate is similar to that needed to acidify the loam/clay loam
soil from pH 6 to pH 5 (Table 3-25). Any differences would be related to differences
in the CEC used in the above calculation and that assumed for the textural classes in
Table 3-25. In addition, the pH-BS relationship in Figure 2-11 is a general represen-
tation, which would vary between soil types.
These calculations are illustrated for elemental S°; however, several acidic or
acid-forming materials can be used. The calculations are conducted in the same man-
ner with the other materials, although the equivalent weight of each compound is
different (see pg. 30).
Sources of Acids

Elemental S°
Elemental S° is an effective soil acidulent. When S° is applied, the soil reaction is:
S + 1.5O2 + H2O N SO4-2 + 2H+
For every mole of S° applied and oxidized, 2 moles of H+ are produced, which
decreases soil pH. S° oxidation is a microbial mediated process that may be slow,
particularly in cold and dry alkaline soils with no history of S° application. Finely
ground S° should be broadcast and incorporated several weeks or months before
planting to assure complete reaction.
Under some conditions, it may be advisable to acidulate a zone near
plant roots to increase micronutrient and/or P availability. Both of these con-
ditions frequently need to be corrected on saline-alkaline soils. Elemental S°
can be applied in bands as either granular S° or S° suspensions. When S° is band
applied, lower rates are required than broadcast S° (Chapter 7).
Sulfuric Acid
Sulfuric acid 1H2SO42 has been used for reclaiming Na- or B-affected soils, increas-
ing availability of P and micronutrients, reducing NH3 volatilization potential,
increasing water penetration, controlling certain weeds and soilborne pathogens, and
enhancing the establishment of range grasses. The favorable influence of H2SO4 and
other acidifying treatments on sorghum (Fig. 3-39) and rice yield (Table 3-26) is par-
tially related to increased nutrient availability.
 soil acidity and alkalinity chapter three 99

50 Figure 3-39
No FeSO4 100 lb/a FeSO4 500 lb/a FeSO4 Effects of H2SO4 and FeSO4
on grain sorghum yields on

SORGHUM YIELD (buya)

40
a calcareous soil. Reducing
soil pH with H2SO4 increases
30 Fe availability to similar lev-
els as adding FeSO4.
(Mather, 1985, Fertilizer Technology
20 and Use, Soil Sci. Soc. Am.)

10

0
0 100 500 5,000
H2SO4 RATE (lbya)

TABLE 3-26
E FFECT OF S OIL A CIDIFIERS ON THE Y IELD OF T WO V ARIETIES OF R ICE

Soil Amendment Bluebonnet 50 IR661

——————– bu/a ——————–
Control 40 87
Gypsum 43 96
S 48 100
H2SO4 55 104
Source: Chapman, 1980, Aust. J. Exp. Agric. Animal Husb., 20:725–730.

H2SO4 can be added directly to the soil, but it requires the use of special acid-
resistant equipment and clothing. It can be dribbled on the surface or applied with a
knife applicator (Chapter 10). It can also be applied in high pH or HCO3- containing
irrigation water. H2SO4 has the advantage of reacting instantaneously with the soil.
Aluminum Sulfate
Aluminum sulfate 3Al21SO4234 is used by floriculturists for acidulating soil for pro-
duction of azaleas, camellias, and similar acid-tolerant ornamentals, although it is not
commonly used in agriculture. When Al21SO423 is added to water, it hydrolyzes to
produce an acid solution:
Al21SO423 + 6H2O N 2Al1OH23 + 6H+ + 3SO4-2
Iron sulfate 1FeSO42 is applied to soils for acidification and as an Fe source will
behave similarly to Al21SO423. Use this product with caution as increasing Al+3 in
solution may promote Al toxicity problems.
Ammonium Polysulfide
Liquid ammonium polysulfide 1NH4Sx2 is used to lower soil pH and to increase
water penetration in irrigated saline-alkaline soils. It can be applied in a band 3–4 in.
to the side of the seed or metered into furrow irrigation systems. Band application is
more effective in correcting micronutrient deficiencies than application through irriga-
tion water. The polysulfide decomposes into ammonium sulfide and colloidal S° when
applied. The S° and S-2 are oxidized to H2SO4. Potassium polysulfide can also be used.
100 chapter three soil acidity and alkalinity

Organic Sources
Any organic material incorporated into the surface soil will ultimately reduce soil pH,
except in calcareous soils. Examples of such materials are yard waste, pine straw, sawdust,
and peat. Generally, the higher the N content (lower C:N ratio) of the residue, the more
acid will be generated through mineralization of organic N to NH4+ and its subsequent
nitrification to NO3- (Table 3-3; Chapter 4). Use of high C:N ratio materials (sawdust,
pine straw, etc.) will produce acids, but also will immobilize plant available N, thus ad-
ditional N may be needed to meet plant N requirement (Chapter 4). For maximum
benefit, organic materials should be incorporated into the surface 3–4 in. of soil. The
decrease in soil pH will depend on the material source and quantity incorporated. Heavy
application rates are generally needed.
Acidification in Fertilizer Bands
Because of the high BC for pH in calcareous soils, it is usually too expensive to use
enough acidifying material for complete neutralization of CaCO3. It is unnecessary
to neutralize the entire soil mass because soil zones more favorable for root growth
and nutrient uptake can be created by confining the acid-forming materials to bands
and other localized placement. Band-applied ammonium thiosulfate and ammonium
polyphosphate fertilizers can acidify soil in and near the band, which can increase
micronutrient availability.

SALINE, SODIC, AND SALINE-SODIC SOILS

Soluble salts occur in all natural waters. Sea water contains 2.2 lb salt>ft3, while fresh
water contains 0.01 lb salt>ft3. Thus, sea water is 220 times saltier than fresh water.
Soil water also contains soluble salts, where the quantity of salt in the root zone can vary
widely. When the salt concentration increases, soils can become salt-affected, restricting
plant growth depending on the salt concentration and the salt tolerance of the plant.
Soil salinity can increase to excessive levels either naturally or by poor irrigation water
management. Salt-affected soils commonly occur in arid regions and semiarid regions,
where generally soil pH 7 7.2 (Figs 3-1 and 3-2). Only 2.5% of the world’s land area
is saline or sodic (Table 3-24). However, current estimates suggest that 6–8% of crop-
land is salt affected. Development of salt-affected irrigated soils is the most common
form of chemical degradation of soil and increasingly affects crop productivity. The
primary processes involved in salt accumulation in soils are:
• weathering of rocks and parent materials
• high water table with high evaporative demand
• exposure to salt water spray or flooding near the ocean; sea water intrusion into
groundwater
• poor quality (high salt) irrigation water; irrigation mismanagement, with poor
internal soil drainage
• excessive application of salts in fertilizer, animal manure, or compost
Rapid extension of irrigated lands over the last four decades has increased salinity
of cultivated soils. Large areas of the Indian subcontinent have been rendered unpro-
ductive by salt accumulation. Salinity is a major problem in paddy rice production.
Under low rainfall, high evaporative conditions in arid regions, H2O moves up-
ward from shallow water tables and evaporates, leaving salts at the soil surface to form
saline, sodic, or saline-sodic soils (Fig. 3-40). Runoff water containing additional salts
is collected in landscape depressions, increasing salt accumulation. These soils are
widespread in semiarid and arid regions, where rainfall is not sufficient for adequate
leaching, usually 6 20 in./yr (Figs 3-3 and 3-41).
 soil acidity and alkalinity chapter three 101

Figure 3-40
Salt-Affected Soil Processes involved in
Normal Soil (salts andyor Na) development of saline,
pH , 8.5 pH . 8.5 sodic, or saline-sodic soils.
ECse , 4 mmho/cm ECse . 4 mmho/cm
SAR , 13 SAR . 13
ESP , 15 ESP . 15

Soil Surface Salt addition

Runoff water Evaporation
Fertilizer
Na1
Ca12 1
SO422 Cl2 Na
Cl2 Ca12
Mg12 Mg12
2
Cl Ca 12
12
Ca12
Mg HCO32 Na1 Na1
SO422
1
K Ca12 Cl2
SO4 22
Ca 12

Ca12 Na1
CO322 1 12
Na1 Na1 Cl2 Cl2 Na Ca 1 CLAY
12
Ca 12 Na
CLAY Cl2 CO3 22 Mg Ca12
22 Na1
Salt addition Cl2 SO4
Exch. 1 Sol’n Ions Water table Sol’n 1 Exch. Ions

Figure 3-41
Areas in the United States
where soil salinity limits
yield potential.
(USDA-NRCS, 1992.)

Accumulated salts contain the cations Na+ , K + , Ca+2, and Mg +2, and the an-
ions Cl- , SO4-2, HCO3-, and CO3-2. They can be weathered from minerals and
accumulate in areas where the precipitation is too low to provide leaching. Na is
particularly detrimental, because of its both toxic effect on plants and effect on soil
structure. When a high percentage of the CEC is occupied by Na+ , soil aggregates
disperse, reducing natural aggregation and soil structure. These soils become imper-
meable to water, develop hard surface crusts, and may keep a water layer, or “slick
spot,” on the surface longer than low Na+ soils. As exchangeable Na+ increases, the
percentage of dispersed clay increases (Fig. 3-42), resulting in substantial decreases in
hydraulic conductivity (or less permeability to water).
Dispersion problems occur at different exchangeable Na+ contents. Fine-
textured soils with montmorillonitic clays disperse when approximately 15%
102 chapter three soil acidity and alkalinity

Figure 3-42 16 100

Increasing exchangeable

RELATIVE HYDRAULIC
14

DISPERSED CLAY (%)

CONDUCTIVITY (%)
Na content increases the 80
12
amount of clay dispersed (a)
10 60
and decreases the hydraulic
conductivity (b). 8
6 40
4
20
2
0 0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
EXCHANGEABLE Na (% of CEC) DISPERSED CLAY (%)
(a) (b)

of the CEC is Na+ saturated. On tropical soils high in Fe and Al oxides and on
some kaolinitic soils, 40% Na+ saturation is required before dispersion is serious.
Soils with low clay content are also less prone to problems because they are more
permeable.

Definitions
Saline soils Saline soils have an electrical conductivity of the saturated extract
1ECse2 7 4 mmho>cm, pH 6 8.5, a n d e x c h a n g e a b l e s o d i u m p e r c e n t a g e
1ESP2 6 15% (Table 3-27; Fig. 3-43). Saline soils were formerly called white alkali
because of the deposits of salts on the surface following evaporation. The excess salts
can be leached out, with no appreciable rise in pH. The concentration of soluble salts
is sufficient to interfere with plant growth, although salt tolerance varies with plant
species.
Sodic soils Sodic soils occur when ESP 7 15%, ECse 6 4 mmho/cm, and
pH 7 8.5 (Table 3-27). They were formerly called black alkali because of the dis-
solved OM deposited on the surface along with the salts. In sodic soils, excess Na+
disperses soil colloids and creates nutritional disorders in most plants.
Saline-sodic soils Saline-sodic soils have both ECse 7 4 mmho/cm to qualify
as saline and high exchangeable Na+ 1 715% ESP2 to qualify as sodic; however,
soil pH is usually 68.5. In contrast to saline soils, when the salts are leached

TABLE 3-27
C LASSIFICATION AND P ROPERTIES OF S ALT -A FFECTED S OILS

Classification ECse (mmho/cm)1 Soil pH ESP % Physical Condition

Saline 74 68.5 615 Normal
Sodic 64 78.5 715 Poor
Saline-sodic 74 68.5 715 Normal
1ECse represents the electrical conductivity of the saturated extract. Distilled H O is added to a soil sample
2
to exactly fill the pore space. After equilibration, the soil water is removed through vacuum filtration. An
electrode is inserted into the saturated soil extract and the electrical conductivity is measured. A high ECse
means a high salt concentration (more ions in solution conduct more current). Low salt concentration would
result in a low ECse reading. The unit mmho/cm comes from the unit of electrical resistance (ohm), such that
conductivity, or the opposite of resistance, is given the unit “mho.” An “mmho” is 0.001 * mho. The “cm”
unit in mmho/cm comes from the separation distance between the 1 -2 and 1 +2 charged surfaces of the
electrode that senses ECse.
Also, mmho>cm = ds>m in SI units; where ds = decisiemen.
 soil acidity and alkalinity chapter three 103

EC (millimhos per cm) Figure 3-43

0 4 8 12 16 Classification system
0 or saline, sodic, and
SALINE saline-sodic soils.
(White alkali) (U.S. Salinity Lab, Handbook 60,
NORMAL 1954.)

Increasing salt hazard

EXCHANGEABLE Na (%)

15
Some plants grow

SODIC
(Black alkali)
SALINE–SODIC
(Both white alkali
30 FE
W and black alkali)

OW
GR
PLANTS

45

out, the exchangeable Na+ hydrolyzes and the pH increases, which results in a
sodic soil (Table 3-27).

Relationships
Several interrelated parameters are commonly used to quantify salt- and Na+ -affected
soils. By measuring ECse of a soil, the total quantity of salts in the soil solution can
be estimated by:
ECse * 10 = total soluble cations 1meq>L2
Also,
Total dissolved salts 1ppm or mg>L2 = 640 * ECse 1mmho>cm2
If the soluble cations are measured in the saturated extract, the sodium adsorp-
tion ratio (SAR) can be calculated by:
Na+
SAR = 3all units in meq>L soil water4
1Ca+2 + Mg +22
B 2
Although SAR represents the ratio of cations in solution, values Ú13 usually indicate
high exchangeable Na+ . Because of the equilibrium relationships between solution
and exchangeable cations in soils, the SAR should be related to the quantity of Na+
on the CEC, which is expressed as the exchangeable sodium ratio (ESR). The ESR is
defined by:
Exchangeable Na+
ESR = 3all units in meq>100 g soil4
Exchangeable 1Ca+2 + Mg +22
The relationship between solution and exchangeable cations in salt-affected soils can
be used to estimate the ESR from the SAR if the quantity of exchangeable cations
has not been measured (Fig. 3-44). The following equation represents the linear
relationship:
ESR = 0.015 1SAR2
104 chapter three soil acidity and alkalinity

Figure 3-44
Relationship between ESR
and SAR in salt-affected
soils.

Again, ESR (cations on CEC) is being estimated from the concentration of Ca+2,
Mg +2, and Na+ in soil solution. Subsequently, ESR is related to ESP previously used
to classify Na+ -affected soils (Table 3-27) and is given by:
Exchangeable Na+
ESP = * 100 3all units in meq>100 g soil4
CEC
Thus, if a laboratory provides the concentration of exchangeable cations (meq/100 g
soil), the ESP can be directly calculated. If the laboratory only measured cation con-
centration in the soil solution, then the ESP can be estimated from the SAR. First,
estimate the ESR from the SAR (see above), then estimate the ESP from the ESR by:
100 ESR
ESP =
1 + ESR
These parameters and interrelationships are valuable in characterizing the solution
and exchange chemistry of salt- and Na+ -affected soils. The following example illus-
trates how these relationships can be used. Additional examples are provided in the
Instructors Manual.
A soil analysis revealed that the saturated extract contained:
20 meq Ca+2 >L
10 meq Mg +2 >L
100 meq Na+ >L
The ECse = 2.2 mmho>cm, soil pH = 8.6, and CEC = 25 meq>100 g soil. Eval-
uate this soil for potential salinity or sodicity problems. Since the laboratory only
provided cation concentrations in the soil solution, first calculate the SAR:
100
SAR = = 25.8 3all units in meq>L soil water4
120 + 102
B 2
then estimate the ESR:
ESR = 0.015 125.82 = 0.39
then estimate the ESP:
100 10.392
ESP = = 28%
1 + 10.392
 soil acidity and alkalinity chapter three 105

Since the ECse 6 4 mmho>cm and the ESP 7 15%, this soil would be classified
as sodic. Gypsum application would likely be recommended to reduce the ESP (see
pg. 111 for example calculation).

Effects on Plant Growth

Soil salinity limits plant growth by (1) a water imbalance in the plant (physiological
drought), (2) ion imbalances that result in increased energy consumption (carbohy-
drate respiration) to maintain metabolic processes, and (3) toxicity from Na+ and Cl- .
Decreasing the osmotic potential of soil water due to elevated salt concentration re-
duces water movement into plant root cells, causing the cell to collapse (plasmolysis).
The plant may show signs of drought stress. Early signs of salt stress are chlorosis (leaf
yellowing) or darker bluish-green leaf color depending on the plant species. In each
case plants are stunted with shortened internodes. Symptoms show up first in older
needles and leaves, where salts accumulate. In conifers, needles are yellow and turn
brown from the tips downward. Broadleaf plants and woody species show the greatest
symptoms at leaf tips and margins, which eventually turn necrotic. Saline irrigation
water can also result in leaf burn, depending on the crop (Table 3-28). As soil salinity
increases above threshold levels (Table 3-29), plant growth rate decreases. Top growth
is usually affected more than root growth.
High Na+ is toxic to plants roots, especially during drought conditions when
+
Na concentration in the soil solution increases and enhances dehydration of root
tissue. Under sodic conditions, Na+ can replace Ca+2 in cell membranes, increasing
membrane permeability and transport of ions. Many plants, especially grasses, accu-
mulate Na+ in leaves, resulting in necrosis of leaf tips and edges.
Although Cl- is an essential micronutrient, excess Cl- in soil solution or in
irrigation water can reduce productivity in sensitive crops. Woody plants are more
sensitive to Cl- than non-woody species. For most crops, the salinity tolerance pro-
vides an approximate guideline for Na+ and Cl- toxicity (Table 3-29).
Toxicity to excessive B occurs in some arid region soils. B accumulates in leaf
tissues causing necrosis. Removing grass clippings can help remove some B from the
system. Most turf grasses are B tolerant, whereas many fruit and vegetable crops are
sensitive (Chapter 8).
Although in most situations yield decrease is related to total salt concentration
in the soil solution, excess soil salinity may induce nutrient imbalances (deficiencies
or toxicities). For example, excessive SO4-2 and low Ca+2 and/or Mg +2 can occur in
saline soils, causing internal browning in lettuce, blossom-end rot in tomato and pep-
per, and blackheart in celery.
Plants differ greatly in their tolerance to soil salinity (Table 3-29). For example,
old alfalfa is more tolerant than young alfalfa. Barley and cotton have considerable

TABLE 3-28
S ENSITIVITY OF S EVERAL C ROPS TO L EAF B URN C AUSED
−
BY Cl IN S PRINKLER I RRIGATION W ATER

Tolerant Semi-Tolerant Sensitive Very Sensitive

Cotton Barley Alfalfa Potato
Sugar beet Corn Sesame Tomato
Sunflower Safflower Soybeans Fruit crops
Sorghum Citrus fruits
106 chapter three soil acidity and alkalinity

TABLE 3-29
S ALT T OLERANCE OF S ELECTED C ROPS
Threshold ECse % Yield Decrease/ ECse @ 50% Salt Tolerance
Crop (mmho/cm) Unit ECse Increase Yield Loss Rating1
Alfalfa 2.0 7.3 8.8 MS
Almond 1.5 19 4.3 S
Apple 1.0 15 4.3 S
Apricot 1.6 24 3.8 S
Avocado 1.0 24 3.1 S
Barley (forage) 6.0 7.1 13.1 MT
Barley (grain) 8.0 5.0 18.0 T
Bean 1.0 19 3.6 S
Beet (garden) 4.0 9.0 9.6 MT
Bentgrass 2.5 7.0 8.3 MS
Bermudagrass 6.9 6.4 14.7 T
Blackberry 1.5 22 3.8 S
Boysenberry 1.5 22 3.8 S
Broad bean 1.6 9.6 6.8 MS
Broccoli 2.8 9.2 8.3 MT
Bromegrass 2.5 7.2 8.7 MT
Cabbage 1.8 9.7 7.0 MS
Canarygrass (reed) 2.0 6.4 7.0 MS
Carrot 1.0 14 4.6 S
Clover (berseem) 1.5 5.8 10.1 MT
Clover (red, ladino, alsike) 1.5 12 5.7 MS
Corn (forage) 1.8 7.4 8.6 MS
Corn (grain, sweet) 1.7 12 5.9 MS
Cotton 7.7 5.2 17.3 T
Cowpea 1.3 14 4.9 MS
Cucumber 2.5 13 6.3 MS
Date 4.0 3.6 17.9 T
Fescue (tall) 3.9 5.3 13.3 MT
Flax 1.7 12 5.9 MS
Grape 1.5 9.5 6.8 MS
Grapefruit 1.8 16 4.9 S
Hardinggrass 4.6 7.6 11.2 MT
Lemon 1.0 14 6.8 S
Lettuce 1.3 13 5.1 MS
Lovegrass 2.0 8.5 7.9 MS
Meadow foxtail 1.5 9.7 6.7 MS
Onion 1.2 16 4.3 S
Orange 1.7 16 4.8 S
Orchardgrass 1.5 6.2 9.6 MT
Peach 3.2 19 5.8 S
Peanut 3.2 29 4.9 MS
Pepper 1.5 14 5.1 MS
Plum 1.5 18 4.3 S
Potato (sweet) 1.5 11 6.0 MS
Potato (white) 1.7 12 5.9 MS
Radish 1.2 13 5.0 MS
Rice (paddy) 3.0 12 7.2 MS
Ryegrass (perennial) 5.6 7.6 12.2 MT
Sorghum 4.8 8.0 11.1 MT
Soybean 5.0 20 7.5 MT
Spinach 2.0 7.6 8.6 MS
Strawberry 1.0 33 2.5 S
Sudangrass 2.8 4.3 14.4 MT
Sugar Beet 7.0 5.9 15.5 T
 soil acidity and alkalinity chapter three 107

Threshold ECse % Yield Decrease/ ECse @ 50% Salt Tolerance

Crop (mmho/cm) Unit ECse Increase Yield Loss Rating1
Sugarcane 1.7 5.9 10.2 MS
Tomato 2.5 9.9 7.6 MS
Trefoil (big) 2.3 19 4.9 MS
Trefoil (birdsfoot) 5.0 10 10.0 MT
Vetch (common) 3.0 11 7.5 MS
Wheat 6.0 7.1 13.0 MT
Wheatgrass (crested) 3.5 4.0 16.0 MT
Wheatgrass (fairway) 7.5 6.9 14.7 T
Wheatgrass (tall) 7.5 4.2 19.4 T
Wild rye (beardless) 2.7 6.0 11.0 MT
1S, sensitive; MS, moderately sensitive; MT, moderately tolerant; T, tolerant.

salt tolerance, but high salt will affect vegetative more than reproductive growth.
Cultivar or variety differences also exist. For example, soybean varieties differ in Cl-
exclusion (Table 3-30). Effective excluders of Na+ and Cl- may still exhibit low yield
because of salt-related water stress. Tolerant crops that do not exclude Na+ have a
capacity to maintain a high K + >Na+ ratio in the growing tissue. Conventional breed-
ing and genetic engineering methods are being used to improve adaptation and toler-
ance to saline and sodic soil environments.
Quantifying salt tolerance Plant tolerance to soil salinity is expressed as the yield
decrease with a given amount of soluble salts compared with yield under non-saline
conditions. Threshold salinity levels have been established for most crops and rep-
resent the minimum salinity level (ECse) above which salinity limits plant growth
(Table 3-29). These values represent general guidelines, since many interactions
among plant, soil, water, and environmental factors influence salt tolerance. Above
the threshold ECse level, plant growth generally decreases linearly with increasing
salinity (Fig. 3-45).
Relative yield loss (Y) at any given ECse level can be calculated for any crop
from the values in Table 3-29 for threshold levels (A) and the % yield decrease per
unit increase in ECse (b) above the threshold by the following:
Y = 100 - b 1ECse - A2

TABLE 3-30
L EAF -S CORCH R ATINGS , Y IELD , AND Cl − C ONCENTRATION IN L EAVES AND
S EEDS OF F IVE S USCEPTIBLE AND T EN T OLERANT S OYBEAN C ULTURES

Cl− concentration
Soybean Type Leaf Scorch Rating1 Yield Leaves Seed
bu/a % ppm
Cl susceptible 3.4 15 1.67 682
Cl tolerant 1.0 24 0.09 111
11 = none, 5 = severe.

Source: Parker et al., 1986.

108 chapter three soil acidity and alkalinity

Figure 3-45 100 Threshold ECse (A)

Graphical representation of
salt tolerance threshold (A)

RELATIVE YIELD (%)

and yield loss associated 75
% Yield
with increasing ECse. The b=
slope “b” represents the % ECse
yield loss per unit increase 50
in ECse.
ECse @ 50% Yield loss
25

0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
ECse (mmhoycm)

For example, alfalfa yield decreases about 7.3% per unit increase in ECse above
the 2.0 mmho/cm ECse threshold (Table 3-29). Thus, if a soil analysis showed
4.0 mmho/cm ECse, then the estimated relative alfalfa yield would be:
Y = 100 - 7.3 14.0 - 2.02 = 85.4%
Using these linear relationships, plants can be categorized into groups based on sen-
sitivity or tolerance to soil salinity (Fig. 3-46). These ratings are only relative but
can be used to estimate yield depression at specific soil salinity levels for many crops
(Fig. 3-47). Salt tolerance ratings for other crops are provided in the Instructors
Manual.
Factors affecting salt tolerance

Plant Factors
For some plants soil salinity influences growth at all growth stages, but for many
crops sensitivity varies with the growth stage. For example, several grain crops (e.g.,
rice, wheat, corn, and barley) are relatively salt tolerant at germination and matu-
rity but are very sensitive during early seedling and, in some cases, vegetative growth
stages. In contrast, sugarbeet, safflower, soybean, and many bean crops (including
soybean) are sensitive during germination. The growth reduction often depends on

Figure 3-46 100

Divisions for classifying crop
tolerance to salinity.
80
RELATIVE CROP YIELD (%)

60

40
Unsuitable
for crops

20
Sensitive Moderately Moderately Tolerant
sensitive tolerant

0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
ECse (mmhoycm)
 soil acidity and alkalinity chapter three 109

100 100
ROOT CROPS FRUIT & NUT CROPS
RELATIVE CROP YIELD (%)

RELATIVE CROP YIELD (%)

80 80

A pr
date

ico
t, b
60 60

l
ack

Gr
St ra

ap A oyse
ber

G
ra
efr lmo

pe
40 40

wbe

ry,

uit nd peberry
G
ar

&b

& o & pach

de

rry
n

Sw ota ish

ran lum
be

P d
ee to
20 ef 20

ge
On

Ra rrot
Ca on

tP

n
i

ot
at
o
0 0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
100 100
GRAIN CROPS VEGETABLE CROPS
RELATIVE CROP YIELD (%)

RELATIVE CROP YIELD (%)

80 80

60 60

S
40 40 C To Br pin

Be
ab m oc ac

Cu
ba at co h

an

cu
Pe
ge o li
Ba

mb ettuc
Wh

pp
Corn
Rice

rle

20 20

er

er
ea

L
y
t

e
0 0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
ECse (mmhoycm) ECse (mmhoycm)

Figure 3-47
Relationship between salinity level (ECse) and relative crop yield (%) for selected crops. The light and dark shaded zones
correspond to salt tolerance classified as moderately tolerant and tolerant, respectively (Fig. 3-46). The ECse scales are not
the same. For example, barley is much more salt tolerant than corn, whereas corn is much more tolerant than strawberry.
(El-Swaify, 2000, in Silva and Uchida (eds.), Plant Nutrient Mgmt. Hawaii’s Soils, pp. 151–158, Univ. of Hawaii-Manoa.)

the variety, particularly with many grasses and some legume crops. Differences in salt
tolerance have also been observed between different vine and fruit tree rootstocks.
Fruit tree and some vine crops are particularly sensitive to Cl- toxicity; however, salt-
tolerant varieties exhibit reduced Cl- accumulation in the roots and/or Cl transloca-
tion from roots to above-ground tissues. Most grasses used in the turf industry are
relatively salt tolerant.
Soil Factors
In general, crops grown on nutrient-deficient soils are more salt tolerant than the same
crops grown in soils with sufficient nutrients. Lower growth rates and lower water de-
mand are likely causes for the increased tolerance to soil salinity. In these cases, nutrient
deficiency is the most limiting factor to maximum yield potential; thus, nutrient addi-
tions would increase plant growth and subsequently decrease salt tolerance.
Because saline and sodic soils have pH 7 7.0, micronutrient deficiencies can
be more common (Chapter 8). Overfertilization with N can decrease salt tolerance in
some crops because of increased vegetative growth and water demand. At recommended
rates, little or no effect on soil salinity or salt tolerance is observed with either inorganic
or organic nutrient addition. Continued overapplication of manure, as well as N and K
fertilizers, can increase soil salinity, especially in poorly drained, irrigated soils. Over-
application with band-applied fertilizers containing relatively high concentrations of
N and K can cause salt damage to germinating seeds and seedlings (Chapter 10).
110 chapter three soil acidity and alkalinity

Figure 3-48 Seed

In furrow-irrigated cropping placement
systems, salts accumulate
near the center of the bed.
Seeds should be planted
on the side of the beds to
avoid salinity problems.
Water Water
(Ludwick et al., 1978, Colorado State
Univ. Coop. Ext. No. 504.)

Zone of maximum
salt accumulation

Proper irrigation management is essential to reducing soil salinity effects on plant

growth and yield. Total salt concentration in the soil solution is the highest when the
water content has been reduced by evapotranspiration. With irrigation, soil solution
salts are diluted and ECse decreases. If soil salinity increases above threshold levels
(Fig. 3-47) during dry periods, more frequent irrigation will be required to prevent
water and salinity stress and, thus, negative effects on plant growth and yield. Also, the
percentage of plant available water decreases with increasing salinity (higher osmotic
potential), requiring more frequent irrigation. Excessive irrigation reduces aeration,
especially in poorly drained soils, and can reduce salt tolerance in some plants. Under
furrow irrigation conditions, excess water leaches into the furrow area; however, soil
water movement from the bottom of the furrow to the midrow area deposits salts as
water evaporates from the soil surface. Salt-sensitive crops must be planted to the side
of the midrow to minimize salt injury to germinating seeds and seedlings (Fig. 3-48).
Much lower water rates are used in trickle irrigation compared with furrow irrigation,
resulting in greater salt accumulation and potential for yield losses.
Environmental Factors
Under hot, dry conditions, most crops are less salt tolerant than under cool, humid
conditions because of greatly increased evapotranspiration demand. These climatic
effects of temperature and humidity on salt tolerance are particularly important with
the most salt-sensitive crops.

Reducing Salts and/or Na in Soils

Critical soil test information is required before a management strategy is imple-
mented to remediate salt- and/or Na+ -affected soils. These include:
• soil pH
• ECse
• solution and exchangeable cations and anions 1Ca+2, Mg +2, Na+ , Cl- , SO4-2,
CO3-2, HCO3-2
• CEC, soil texture
• CaCO3 content, or qualitative determination of its presence
• analysis of available irrigation water quality (pH, EC, Na+ content)
From these soil test data, the following parameters are calculated or estimated:
• total dissolved solids
• SAR
• ESP
• gypsum 1CaSO4 # 2H2O2 requirement (if a sodic or saline-sodic soil)
From these results, the soil is classified as saline, sodic, or saline-sodic. The fol-
lowing general management should be considered.
 soil acidity and alkalinity chapter three 111

Figure 3-49
Normal Soil Salt-Affected Soil Reclaiming a saline soil by
adding low salt and/or Na
pH , 8.5 pH , 8.5 irrigation water and leach-
ECse , 4 mmho/cm ECse . 4 mmho/cm
ing soluble salts in the soil
SAR , 13 SAR , 13
ESP , 15 ESP , 15 solution below the root
zone.
Irrigation
Soil Surface Low EC water

Na1
Ca12 22 2
1
SO4 Cl Na
Cl2 Ca12
Mg12 Mg12
2
Cl Ca12
Mg12 HCO32 Na1
Ca12 SO422 Na1
K1 Ca12 Cl 2
SO4 22
Ca 12

Ca12 Na1
CO322 1 12
Na1 Na 1 Cl2 Cl2 Na Ca 1 CLAY
Ca12 Salt leaching 12 Na
CLAY Cl2 CO322 Mg Ca12
2 SO 22 Na1
Cl 4

Exch. 1 Sol’n Ions Sol’n 1 Exch. Ions

Saline soils Saline soils are relatively easy to reclaim if adequate amounts of low-
salt irrigation waters are available and internal and surface drainage are feasible. Salts
must be leached below the root zone and out of contact with subsequent irrigation
water (Fig. 3-49).
The quantity of irrigation water needed to leach the salts out of the root zone,
or the leaching requirement (LR), can be estimated by the following relationship:
ECiw
LR =
51ECse2 - ECiw
where LR = leaching requirement
ECse = threshold ECse for a given crop
ECiw = EC of irrigation water
For example, Kentucky bluegrass’s threshold ECse = 3.0. If the ECiw = 1.5, then
the LR is:
1.5
LR = = 0.111
5132 - 1.5
LR represents the additional water 1LR = 11.1%2 needed to leach out salts over
that needed to saturate the profile. Although this relationship provides an estimate
of the water volume needed to reduce salts in the soil, more sophisticated calcula-
tions are generally used to precisely estimate the amount of leaching water needed.
The amount of leaching water required depends on (1) the desired ECse, which de-
pends on the salt tolerance of the intended crop; (2) irrigation water quality (ECiw);
(3) rooting or leaching depth; and (4) soil water-holding capacity.
As seen in the LR calculation, the quality of irrigation water used to leach salts be-
low the root zone is an important factor in managing soil salinity. The EC and SAR of
the available water must be determined before application. Based on these values, water
quality can be evaluated (Fig. 3-50). As the EC and SAR of the irrigation water increase,
greater precautions should be taken in using it to leach salts below the root zone.
In soils with a high water table, drain installation may be required before leaching.
If there is a dense calcareous or gypsiferous layer or the soil is impervious, deep chiseling
112 chapter three soil acidity and alkalinity

100 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 1000 2 3 4 5000

VERY HIGH
4
30

28
C1-S4

26 C2-S4

HIGH
2
24 C3-S4

SODIUM (ALKALI) HAZARD

22 C4-S4

SODIUM - ADSORPTION-RATIO (SAR)

C1-S3
20

18
C2-S3

MEDIUM
16

2
14
C1-S2 C3-S3
12

10
C2-S2 C4-S3

8 C3-S2
LOW

6
1

C4-S2
C1-S1
4
C2-S1
2
C3-S1
C4-S1
0
100 250 750 2250
CL

CONDUCTIVITY – MICROMHOS/CM (EC×106) AT 258C

AS
S

1 2 3 4
LOW MEDIUM HIGH VERY HIGH

SALINITY HAZARD

1. Salinity classification 2. Sodium classification

C1 - Low-salinity water can be used for irrigation S1 - Low-sodium water can be used for irrigation on
with most crops on most soils, with little almost all soils with little danger of the
likelihood that a salinity problem will develop. development of a sodium problem. However,
Some leaching is required, but this occurs under sodium-sensitive crops, such as stone-fruit
normal irrigation practices except in soils of trees and avocados, may accumulate injurious
extremely low permeability. amounts of sodium in the leaves.

C2 - Medium-salinity water can be used if a S2 - Medium-sodium water may present a moderate

moderate amount of leaching occurs. Plants sodium problem in fine-textured (clay) soils
with moderate salt tolerance can be grown in unless there is gypsum in the soil. This water
most instances without special practices for can be used on coarse-textured (sandy) or
salinity control. organic soils that take water well.

C3 - High-salinity water cannot be used on soil with S3 - High-sodium water may produce troublesome
restricted drainage. Even with adequate sodium problems in most soils and will require
drainage, special management for salinity special management, good drainage, high
control may be required, and plants with good leaching, and additions of organic matter. If
salt tolerance should be selected. there is plenty of gypsum in the soil, a serious
problem may not develop for some time. If
gypsum is not present, it or some similar
material may have to be added.

C4 - Very-high-salinity water is not suitable for S4 - Very-high-sodium water is generally unsatis-

irrigation under ordinary conditions but may be factory for irrigation except at low- or medium-
used occasionally under very special salinity levels, where the use of gypsum or
circumstances. The soil must be permeable, some other amendment makes it possible to
drainage must be adequate, irrigation water use such water.
must be applied in excess to provide
considerable leaching, and very-salt-tolerant
crops should be selected.

Figure 3-50
Classification of irrigation waters. (U.S. Salinity Laboratory, Handbook 60, 1954.)
 soil acidity and alkalinity chapter three 113

or plowing may be needed to improve infiltration. When only rainfall or limited irriga-
tion is available, surface organic mulches will reduce evaporation and increase drainage.
Managing the soil to minimize salt accumulation is essential, especially in semi-
arid and arid regions. Maintaining the soil near field capacity with frequent watering
dilutes salts. Light leaching before planting or light irrigation after planting moves
salts below the planting and early rooting zone. If water is available, periodic leaching
when crops are not growing will move salts out of the root zone. Much of the salt
may precipitate as CaSO4 # 2H2O and CaCO3 or MgCO3 during dry periods and
will not react as soluble salt, although precipitation of Ca and Mg will increase the
proportion of Na+ present in solution (see SAR definition).
Managing soils for improved drainage is essential for controlling soil salinity. When
ridge-tillage systems are used, the salt moves upward with capillary H2O and is deposited
on the center of the ridges where the water evaporates. Planting on the shoulders or edge
of the ridges helps to avoid problems associated with excess salts (Fig. 3-48).
Sodic or saline-sodic soils (no CaCO3 present) In sodic and saline-sodic soils, ex-
changeable Na+ and/or ECse must be reduced, which can be difficult because the
soil clay may be dispersed, preventing infiltration. Reducing exchangeable Na+
is accomplished by replacement with Ca+2 by adding appropriate rate of gypsum
(CaSO4 # 2H2O). The reaction is:

Clay-2Na + Ca+2 Clay-Ca + 2Na+

CaSO4 Amendment
+
Irrigation
Ca+2
– +
Ca+2 HCO3 CI– Na
SO4–2 + Ca +2
Mg+2 Mg+2 Na+
HCO3– Na Na+
Ca+2 +2 CI–
Ca –2 +2
K+ SO4 Ca Ca+2
Ca+2 Ca+2 Na+
–2 CO3–2 SO4–2 Ca+2
Na +
Mg+2 CO3 – +
Ca +2
Ca +2 CI– CI Mg+2 Na+2 CLAY
Na+ Ca
+2
CLAY Ca SO4–2 Na+
Na+ Na+ Leaching
Na+

Estimating the quantity of CaSO4 # 2H2O required is similar to the calcula-

tion for estimating the CaCO3 required to increase pH. For example, a soil with
CEC = 24 meq>100 g soil contains 15% ESP, and we need to reduce the ESP to
5%; thus, 15% - 5% = 10% reduction in ESP.
Reduce ESP from 15 to 5% of the CEC, or 10% of CEC occupied by Na+
must be removed and is calculated by:
24 meq CEC 2.4 meq Na+
0.10 * = 3Na+ removal4
100 g soil 100 g soil
Thus,
2.4 meq Na+ removed 2.4 meq Ca+2 added
=
100 g soil 100 g soil
2.4 meq CaSO4 # 2H2O added
=
100 g soil
114 chapter three soil acidity and alkalinity

NOTE:
The equivalent weight of CaSO4 # 2H2O is determined Now, remember 1 mole Ca+2 = 2 moles 1 +2 or
exactly as we did for CaCO3 on page 30: 2 equivalents; thus:
CaSO4 # 2H2O N Ca+2 + SO4-2 + 2H2O 172 g CaSO4 # 2H2O 86 g CaSO4 # 2H2O
=
Clay@2Na+ + Ca+2 N Clay@Ca+2 + 2Na+ 2 moles Na+ 1 mole Na+
86 g CaSO4 # 2H2O 86 mg CaSO4 # 2H2O
Thus, 1 mole or molecular weight of CaSO4 # 2H2O (172 = =
g/m) exchanges or reacts with 2 moles Na+ . eq meq

Now convert the charge units (meq/100 g soil) to mass units (lb/afs):
2.4 meq CaSO4 # 2H2O added 86 mg CaSO4 # 2H2O 206 mg CaSO4 # 2H2O
* =
100 g soil meq 100 g soil
0.206 g CaSO4 # 2H2O
=
100 g soil
0.206 lb CaSO4 # 2H2O
=
100 lb soil
#
0.206 lb CaSO4 2H2O 2 * 10 4
4,120 lb CaSO4 # 2H2O
* =
100 lb soil 2 * 104 afs
If it were desired to reduce exchangeable Na+ in 0–12-in. depth instead of 0–6-in.
depth (afs), then the CaSO4 # 2H2O rate would be doubled (8,240 lb/a-ft). The rec-
ommended gypsum would be broadcast applied followed by slow irrigation to dis-
solve the CaSO4 # 2H2O and move the Ca+2 into the target soil depth. The Na-Ca
exchange and leaching process can take several months.
Sodic or saline-sodic soils (CaCO3 present) In calcareous soils, the soil already has
an available Ca+2 source in CaCO3. Thus, the amendment could be an acid or acid-
forming material to dissolve the CaCO3 to produce Ca+2 that would then replace
exchangeable Na+ according to:

S + H2O + 3/2 O2 2H+ + SO4–2

2H+ + CaCO3 Ca+2 + H2O + CO2

S Amendment
+
Irrigation
Ca+2
Na+
– CI–
Ca+2 HCO3 CI– Ca+2
Mg+2 Mg+2 Na+
Ca+2 +2 CI– HCO3 –Na+
K+ Ca Ca +2 K+
CO3–2 Ca+2 Na+
Ca+2 Ca+2 SO4 –2
Na +
Mg+2 Na+ Ca+2
SO4–2 CI– Na+
Ca+2 Ca+2 Mg+2 Ca+2 CLAY
Na+
CLAY Ca+2 SO4–2 CO3–2 Na+
Na+ Na+ Leaching
SO4–2 Na+
 soil acidity and alkalinity chapter three 115

NOTE:
The equivalent weight of S is determined by: Thus, 1 mole S resulted in the exchange of 2 moles Na+ , so
the equivalent weight of S is:
S + 1.5O2 + H2O N SO4-2 + 2H+
32 g S 16 g S 16 g S 16 mg S
Thus, 1 mole or molecular weight of S (32 g/m) oxidizes to = = =
+ + eq meq
form 2 moles H+ . 2 moles Na 1 mole Na

CaCO3 + 2H+ N Ca+2 + CO2 + H2O

2 moles H+ dissolves 1 mole CaCO3 to produced 1 mole Ca+2.

Clay@2Na+ + Ca+2 N Clay@Ca+2 + 2Na+

In the previous example, assume the soil also contained 2% CaCO3. Thus, a reduc-
tion of 2.4 meq exchangeable Na+ >100 g soil is still required; however, elemental
S is added that will oxidize to produce 2H+ , which will dissolve exactly 2.4 meq
CaCO3 >100 g soil to produce 2.4 meq Ca+2 >100 g soil:
2.4 meq Na+ removed 2.4 meq Ca+2 added
=
100 g soil 100 g soil
2.4 meq CaCO3 in soil
=
100 g soil
2.4 meq S added
= 3to dissolve CaCO34
100 g soil
The calculation for S rate is:
2 .4 meq S added 16 mg S 38 mg S
* =
100 g soil meq 100 g soil
0.038 g S
=
100 g soil
0.038 lb S
=
100 lb soil
0.038 lb S 2 * 104 760 lb S
* =
100 lb soil 2 * 104 afs
Since the oxidation of S is a microbially mediated reaction, additional time is re-
quired for the amendment process to be completed. In some situations, the remedia-
tion of sodic soils can take several months, often taking the field out of production
until the remediation process is completed.
To use S as an amendment to reduce exchangeable Na+ (ESP), the soil must
be calcareous or contain sufficient CaCO3. In the previous example, the minimum
%CaCO3 content is estimated by:
2 .4 meq Na+ removed 2.4 meq Ca+2 added
=
100 g soil 100 g soil
2.4 meq CaCO3 in soil
=
100 g soil
116 chapter three soil acidity and alkalinity

2.4 meq CaCO3 added 50 mg CaCO3 120 mg CaCO3

* =
100 g soil meq 100 g soil
0.120 g CaCO3
=
100 g soil
= 0.12 % CaCO3
Estimating amendment rates for sodic or saline-sodic soils is relatively easy once the
reduction in exchangeable Na+ is determined:
X meq Na+ removed
100 g soil
X meq Ca+2 needed
=
100 g soil
X meq CaSO4 # 2H2O added
=
100 g soil
X meq S added
= 3if CaCO3 present in soil4
100 g soil
X meq CaCO3 in soil
= 3minimum CaCO3 needed in soil4
100 g soil
Gypsum (or S) should be broadcast and thoroughly incorporated into the surface 3–4
in. of soil. Once uniform application is accomplished, high quality irrigation water
is applied at rates to ensure water is transported below the root zone or to depths
1 72 - 3 ft2 where exchangeable Na+ will have minimal impact on plant growth.
Fields with little or no slope can be flooded to ensure adequate percolation of water
and salts. In some cases, high ESP will initially limit infiltration; however, eventually
sufficient Ca will improve aggregation and water transport. Following reclamation,
ESP will again increase as evaporative waters transport salts to the surface soil. Regu-
lar soil testing will identify when subsequent amendment is needed.

STUDY QUESTIONS
1. A solution has 10-5.2 M H+ concentration. What 9. Write the chemical reactions that occur when lime
is the solution pH? is added to an acid soil.
2. Identify the principal sources of soil acidity? 10. Can CaSO4 # 2H2O be used as a liming agent?
3. Distinguish between active and potential acidity. Write the neutralization reaction.
Which of these two forms is measured when soil 11. Define neutralizing value or calcium carbonate
pH is determined? equivalent (CCE). What is the CCE of Na2CO3?
4. Solution A has a pH of 3.0. Solution B has a pH of 12. You analyze limestone and find that it has a neu-
6.0. The active acidity of solution A is how many tralizing value of 85%. How many tons of this
times greater than that of solution B? limestone would be equivalent to 3 t of pure
5. How is soil pH affected by fertilizer applications? CaCO3?
Provide several example reactions. 13. In addition to purity and neutralizing value, what
6. Define lime requirement. The term Ag-lime usu- other property of limestone is important as a lim-
ally refers to what materials? ing material?
7. How does soil BC influence the lime requirement? 14. Using the following reactions, indicate if the mate-
8. How is the lime requirement of a soil determined? rial can be used as a suitable liming material.
 soil acidity and alkalinity chapter three 117

a. clay@2H+ + CaSO4 # 2H2O N clay@Ca+2 recommendation? If not, what would you recom-
+ 2H+ + SO4-2 + 2H2O mend? Show all calculations.
b. clay@2H + 2KOH N clay@2K + + 2H2O
+ 22. A grower received a lime recommendation of 4 t/afs
c. clay@2H+ + Mg1HCO322 N clay@Mg +2 of CaCO3. The only material available is dolomite
+ 2CO2 + 2H2O or CaMg1CO322. The dolomite has a CCE of 90%
d. clay@2H+ + 2KCl N clay@2K + + 2H+ + Cl- and 54% passes a 60-mesh screen, 25% passes an
e. clay@2H+ + Na2CO3 N clay@2Na+ 8-mesh screen, while the remainder will not pass the
+ CO2 + H2O 8-mesh screen (use Indiana in Table 3-14).
15. Adding lime will increase BS of an acid soil. a. Calculate the ECC of this dolomite.
A grower indicates that adding gypsum will do b. How many lb dolomite/afs does he need to
the same thing at half the cost. What would you apply?
advise this grower? 23. Titration of a 50 g soil sample with 10 mL of 0.25 N
16. A soil sample has a pH of 6.0 and CEC of NaOH raises soil pH from 5.3 to 6.5. How many
25 meq/100g. 50 g of soil was titrated with 50 ml lb/afs of the following materials would be required?
of 0.1 N kOH to pH 7.0. Calculate the lime a. Pure CaCO3
recommendation in lb/afs. b. Pure CaMg1CO322
17. Calculate the lb/afs of CaCO3 (using Figure 2-11), c. Lime material with CCE of 85% and the following
to raise the soil pH from 5.0 to 6.5. The CEC is screen analysis (use Indiana in Table 3-14).
30 meq/100 g. Mesh Size % of Material
18. A grower received a lime recommendation of 8 t/afs
660 50
of 80% ECC lime material. His soil test results
showed pH = 5.5 and CEC = 26 meq>100 g. 8–60 25
The grower thought that this recommendation 78 25
was too high. How much would the soil pH in- 24. Are benefits derived from deep mixing of lime in
crease if the grower only applied 4 t/afs of the lime soil? Can long-term liming of surface soil influ-
material? (Use Fig. 2-11 and assume all the lime ence subsoil acidity?
reacted.) 25. You have lost the liming recommendations sent
19. A golf course superintendent wants to plant fescue to you by the soil laboratory, but you do recall
in two fairways that have drastically different soil that 3 t/a were recommended for field B. Because
properties. the pH is the same in both fields, you apply 3 t
Fairway 1—silt loam texture; soil to field A as well. Have you acted wisely? Why or
pH = 5.7; BS = 58%; CEC = 15 meq>100 g why not?
26. 30 ml of 1 N H 2SO 4 was added to completely
Fairway 2—clay loam texture; soil
neutralize the line content of 10 g of calcareous
pH = 6.0; BS = 60%; CEC = 40 meq>100 g
soil. Excess acid was titrated with 10 ml 0.5 N
a. Calculate the CaCO3 (lb/afs) required to NaOH. What is the percentage of lime content?
neutralize soil acidity in Fairway 1 to pH 6.8 27. Answer the following questions for the soil data
and BS of 90%. listed below.
b. Calculate the CaCO3 (lb/afs) required to
Exchangeable Cations in
neutralize soil acidity in Fairway 2 to pH 6.8
Cations Saturated Extract
and BS of 90%.
(ppm Soil) (ppm Solution)
20. A soil had an initial pH of 5.5 and a CEC =
25 meq>100 g. After the producer applied the Ca 1,600 180
lime, the pH increased to 6.5. How much lime did Mg 600 20
she apply? (Use Fig. 2-11 and assume all the lime Na 1,000 900
reacted.)
K 600 5
21. A soil has the following properties: clay content =
50%; CEC = 40 meq>100 g; pH = 5.2; CEC 1meq>100 g2 = 17 pH 1sat’d paste2
%Ca saturation = 40; %Mg saturation = 6; = 8.6
%K saturation = 8; %Na saturation = 0. T h e CaCO3 1%2 = 2 ECse 1mmho>cm2
lab recommended 3 t/afs of CaCO3. Is this a good = 4.5
118 chapter three soil acidity and alkalinity

a. Calculate CEC and compare with measured 34. A golf course manager complained that when he
CEC. Suggest a reason why the two values irrigated the fairways the water would not infil-
may be different. trate very readily. Soil samples were collected and
b. Calculate SAR and estimate SAR from the the soil solution (saturated extract) contained:
exchangeable cation data.
1,600 ppm Ca+2
c. Calculate and estimate ESR and ESP.
28. Explain how S acidulates a soil. 960 ppm Mg +2
29. What are the main cations in saline, sodic, and 2,760 ppm Na+
saline-sodic soils? Explain how sodic soils become
impermeable. The CEC was 35 meq/100 g soil and the lab
30. Write the chemical reactions when S is added as an recommended lowering the ESP to 5% to improve
amendment to reduce exchangeable Na. infiltration.
31. Explain why CaSO4 is effective in reclaiming a. Calculate the gypsum required to lower ESP
saline soils. to 5% (lb/a-ft).
32. A soil has the following properties: pH = 8.6; b. How much S (lb/a-ft) would be required
ESP = 18%; CEC = 25 me>100 g; to lower the ESP to 5%?
CaCO3 = 2%. c. The soil contained 0.2% lime. Was there
a. Calculate the SAR. enough lime present to supply enough Ca+2
b. A lab recommended adding 4,300 lb gypsum/ to lower ESP to 5%?
afs. Calculate the final ESP if the grower 35. Using Figure 3.1, identify the major acid soil
followed the recommendation. regions in the world.
c. If the grower added S instead of gypsum, 36. Mention the sources of soil acidity.
calculate the final CaCO3 content. 37. How do you classify irrigation waters based on
33. A laboratory analysis showed the following results: a. Salinity
b. Sodium content.
CEC = 28 meq>100 g
38. On the basis of soil test data, how do you classify
solution Ca = 6 meq>L
soil?
solution Mg = 2 meq>L
39. Proper irrigation management is essential to
solution Na = 36 meq>L
reduce soil salinity effects on plant growth and
EC = 5.2 mmhos>cm
development. Justify.
CaCO3 = 0.2%
40. Define
soil pH = 8.6
a. Saline soil,
a. Calculate SAR, ESR, and ESP.
b. Sodic soil and
b. Calculate the S (lb/afs) required to neutralize
c. Saline-sodic soil.
all the lime.
41. Describe the processes involved in the salt accu-
c. Calculate the gypsum (lb/afs) required to
mulation of soil in detail.
reduce ESP to 5%.

SELECTED REFERENCES
Adams, F. (Ed.). 1984. Soil acidity and liming. Madi- Follett, R. H., L. S. Murphy, and R. L. Donahue. 1981.
son, Wis.: Soil Science Society of America. Fertilizers and soil amendments. Englewood Cliffs,
Alley, M. M., and L. W. Zelazny. 1987. Soil acidity: N.J.: Prentice Hall.
Soil pH and lime needs. In J. R. Brown (Ed.), Kamprath, E. J., and C. D. Foy. 1985. Lime-fertilizer-
Soil testing: Sampling, correlation, calibration, and plant interactions in acid soils. In O. P. Engles-
interpretation. Madison, Wis. Special Publication tad (Ed.), Fertilizer technology and use. Madison,
No. 21. Soil Science Society of America. Wis.: Soil Science Society of America.
Bresler, E., B. L. McNeal, and D. L. Carter. 1982.
Saline and sodic soils. New York: Springer-Verlag.
 soil acidity and alkalinity chapter three 119

McLean, E. O. 1973. Testing soils for pH and lime Thomas, G. W., and W. L. Hargrove. 1984. The chem-
requirement. In L. M. Walsh and J. D. Beaton istry of soil acidity. In Adams, F. (Ed.), Soil acidity
(Eds.), Soil testing and plant analysis. Madison, and liming (2nd ed., pp. 3–56). Madison, Wis.:
Wis.: Soil Science Society of America. American Society of Agronomy.
Rengel, Z (Ed.). 2003. Handbook of soil acidity. New
York: Marcel Dekker.
Thomas, G. W. 1988. Beyond exchangeable alumi-
num: Another ride on the merry-go-round. Com-
munications in Soil Science and Plant Analysis
19(7/12): 833–856.