Research Journal of Agriculture and Biological Sciences, 4(5): 485-499, 2008

© 2008, INSInet Publication

Land Suitability for Agricultural of Certain Crops in Al-bostan Area, Egypt

M.Z. Salem, G.W. Ageeb and I.S. Rahim

Soils and Water Use Dept., National Research Center, Cairo, Egypt.

Abstract: Eighteen soil profiles have been chosen to represent production and research station of National
Research Centre, which including El-Emam Malek and El-Esraa and El Mearage farms. The main
morphological properties of the studied soil profiles were described. The studied soil profiles are classified
to subgroup level according to Key of Soil Taxonomy as Typic Torripsamments. The obtained results
indicate that the soil texture is sandy, and gravels are found in some soil profiles. Organic matter content
is low and ranged between 0.08-0.92 %. Soil salinity is low and ranges between 0.15-1.64 dS/m. Cation
exchange capacity is low and ranges between 4.2-13.9 meq/100g soil. Calcium carbonate content ranges
between 1.17-13.34%. Land capability classification of area under investigation is belonging to Class 4,
the limiting factors for agricultural production are gravel percent (G%), available moisture percent(AM%),
exchangeable sodium percent (ESP) and cation exchange capacity(CEC). The studied soils are evaluated
to determine its suitability for growing 12 crops. Data reveal that soil profiles from El Emam Malek and
El-Esraa farms are placed at high suitable (S2) and moderate suitable (S3) for growing crops, while soils
represented by profiles 5 and 6 are placed at non-suitable (S5) for growing crops, the limiting factors for
agricultural production are soil texture and exchangeable sodium percent (ESP) in the most of soil profiles.

Key words: Land suitability, Land capability, Remote sensing, Geographic Information System, Al-
Bostan area.

INTRODUCTION The main resource of irrigation water at Al-Bostan

Production and research station of National
Research Centre, which including El-Emam Malek farm
(145 feddans) and El-Esraa and El-Mearage farm (160
feddans). The study area lies to the North West of the
Nile Delta of Egypt between 30° 29 N and 30° 19 E
(El-Emam Malek farm) and 30° 30 N to 30° 21 E
(El-Esraa and El-Mearage farm) Map (1). The aim of
the present study is to evaluate land capability and
suitability for growing different crops.
Such work will be useful for agricultural
development policy of the region under consideration.
The climate of the studied area is situated in the desert
zone of Egypt which characterized by hot dry summer
and warm winter. The maximum air temperature is
31.6C° in August, while the minimum air temperature
is 7.4C° in January. The maximum rainfall is 10.30
mm in December, while the minimum rainfall is 0.00
in June, July and August. The relative air humidity
shows the highest value is 69.7 % in January, while
the lowest value is 53% in July. The highest wind
speed is 21.1km/hr in April[1]. Parent material of the
studied soils is sand deposits. The digital elevation
model (DEM) is illustrated in Maps 2 and 3, shows
that elevation ranges from 23-48 m A.S.L. at El-Emam
Malek farm and 13-42m A.S.L. at El-Esraa and El-
Mearage farm.
area is El-Nubariya canal through Al-Bostan canal
except for some areas that irrigated by artesian wells
water[2].
The identified soils of West Nubariya, Egypt
according to analyzed data from both landsat MSS and
SPOT high resolution visible, belong to Entisols and
Aridisols[3] . Soils of some newly areas in Nubariya
could be classified as: Typic Torripsamments, Typic
Calciorthids and Typic P aleorthids[4] . While soils of
West Nubariya classified to, Typic Calciorthids, Calcic
Gypsiorthids, Cambic Gypsiorthids, Typic Torriorthents,
and Lithic Torriorthents[5]. The area extends to cover
seven villages at West Nubariya which represent the
first stage of reclamation soils classified to
Haploclaci-gypsids, Haplocalcids, Petrocalcids and
Petrogypsids[6] . Many areas which locate in Nubariya
for sustainable agricultural development through out the
integration of GIS/RS techniques, with link cluster
analysis, classified as, Typic Haplosalids, Typic
To r r ip s a m m e n t s, Ty p ic H a p lo gy p sid s, Ty p ic
Calcigypsids and Typic Haplocalcids[6].
Designed a computer program [7] (SSCC) based on [8 ]
have been used to determine quantitatively soil
suitability for certain crops and named this method.
The concept of SSCC program is to match soil
characteristics with crops requirements (includes
climatic requirement) the possibility for including more

Corresponding Author: M.Z. Salem, Soils and Water Use Dept., National Research Center, Cairo, Egypt.

485
 Res. J. Agric. & Biol. Sci., 4(5): 485-499, 2008

Map 1: Location map of the production and research station of National Research Centre, Landsat (ETM 2001)

Map 2: Digital elevation model of El-Emam Malek farm

486
 Res. J. Agric. & Biol. Sci., 4(5): 485-499, 2008
Map 3: Digital elevation model of El Esraa and El- Merage farm
crops. The limitations are gravel %, salinity, ESP,
depth and slope. The formula is as follows IS =
A.B.C.D.E.F.G.H. The suggested quantitative systems[9]
were more suitable under the Egyptian conditions,
where the results were compatible and added that[10,11]
it could be considered prevailing in the soils of Egypt.
On the other hand [12] reported that the quantitative land
capability classification also worked out following the
modified system[11] . The main objectives of land
evaluation are to assess the suitability of different tracts
of land for specific alternative forms of rural land
use [13] . 5.46 % of total area of newly reclaimed areas
in Nubariya area high suitable only for olives and
moderately suitable for potato, pepper, onion, garlic,
watermelon, apples, almond, date palms, citrus, grape
and pea [4]. Land capability classification indicated that
soils of W est Nubariya belong to class 1(9.34%), class
II (20.74%) and class III (70.10%). Land suitability
classification was carried out for wheat, alfalfa, maize
and watermelon [14] . While land capability classification
of the soils of branch 20 areas of West Nubariya
belong to class I, II, III and IV [6] . Land suitability
evaluation for wheat, maize, citrus and banana
respectively, have been done in the same study.
The changes in soil characteristics and soil quality
under different land use periods and management
practices (cropping patterns, irrigation systems, water
recourses and quality were compare and analyze
487
also the study dealt with land capability and land
suitability[1 5] in sandy soils at El Bostan region,
and found that the capability classes of the
investigated area are classes (C3) moderate, (C4)
marginal, while most of the studied soils are
moderately (class 3) to low (class 4) suitable for tested
crops. The main limiting factors in all the studied soils
are soil texture, sodium saturation, salinity, useful depth
and carbonate content.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Eighteen soil profiles were chosen to represent
the studied area which covering about 305
feddans. Ten soil profiles from El-Emam Malek farm
and eight profiles from El-Esraa and El-Mearage
farm. The profiles were morphologically described[16] .
Fifty five soil samples were collected for the following
analyses; particle size distribution using standard
sieving technique [ 1 7] , soil moisture constants [ 1 8 ] ,
hydraulic conductivity in disturbed soil samples [ 19], soil
reaction (pH) of soil water suspension (1:2.5), EC
(dS/m) of soil extract (1:1), soluble cations and anions,
Cation exchange capacity (CEC), calcium carbonate
content (CaCO 3 %) and gypsum content[20] .
Soil classification was carried out [21] . Land
capability classification was performed on the
study area [22] , while land suitability classification was
 Res. J. Agric. & Biol. Sci., 4(5): 485-499, 2008

performed using MicroLIES Almagra evaluation RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

model[23] . The main soil characteristics considered in
this system as follow: useful depth, texture, drainage,
calcium carbonate content, salinity, sodium saturation
and degree of development of the profile.
GIS Database: GIS database of production and
research station soils was established in Arc GIS 9.0
software. The database was started by create a base
maps of the farms, which includes a number of 120
observation points. These points were observed to get
the spot height and geographic position by GPS of the
surface features of the farms. The database include a
set of thematic maps such as location of the farm,
contour lines, surface layout of the farms, location of
the soil profiles, gravel distribution, alkalinity, salinity,
cation exchange capacity, calcium carbonate distribution
and soil depth. These maps were produced depend
upon the attribute data of the observation points and
soil profile analyses. The GIS database includes
detailed description and laboratory analyses of 18 soil
profiles and land suitability for growing 12 crops.
Physical properties: Data in Table (1) show that the
particle size distribution of the studied soil profiles, the
soil texture was sandy, where the sand fraction more
than 94%, with very low percent of clay and silt
fractions. The gravels percent ranged between 10 –
90% in El-Emam Malek (profiles 3, 4, 5 and 6), while
it is ranging from 2-24% at El-Esraa and El-Mearage
farms (profiles 12, 13, 14, 15 and 18).
The soil moisture constants presented in Table (2),
the available water (AW%) was low and ranged
between 5.4-9.9%, of El-Emam Malek farm and 6.7-
10.7 of El-Esraa and El-Mearage farm. This is expected
due to the relatively low clay content and consequently
low water holding capacity. Soil hydraulic conductivity
(HC) was high values in the study area and ranged
between 14.3-25.1 cm/hr, these high values may be
attributed to be sandy texture of the soils.
Chemical Properties: The data presented in Table (3)
show that the soil salinity (EC/dS/m) in most profiles

Table 1: Particle size distribution of the studied soil profiles

Profile No. Depth (cm) Gravel % VCS% CS % MS % FS % VFS % Silt+clay % Texture
El-Emam Malek farm
1 0-20 - 2.44 11.12 32.34 34.85 15.73 3.25 Sandy
20-60 - 1.55 10.45 33.32 32.45 18.76 3.47 Sandy
60-150 - 2.21 20.23 40.35 28.35 6.55 2.31 Sandy
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2 0-40 - 14.14 11.27 34.25 32.22 4.89 3.23 Coarse nd
40-150 - 15.22 13.23 28.53 33.45 5.36 4.21 Coarse sand
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3 0-150 10 22.32 19.45 33.45 10.21 7.57 2.32 Coarse sand
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
4 0-30 13 12.34 20.22 30.41 30.22 4.49 2.32 Coarse sand
30-50 18 10.11 8.23 20.31 52.13 5.91 3.31 Fine sand
50-70 95 7.25 10.25 30.22 30.44 18.39 3.45 Sandy
70-150 79 6.35 7.32 28.22 34.2 19.66 4.25 Sandy
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
5 0-50 38 3.45 7.75 30.23 37.22 19.03 2.32 Sandy
50-70 59 1.54 2.75 23.12 54.47 14.37 3.75 Sandy
70-150 - 2.54 8.73 33.24 36.35 14.89 4.25 Sandy
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
6 0-60 40 10.11 13.45 37.21 30.25 5.75 3.23 Sandy
60-150 10 8.72 7.15 21.21 51.24 7.44 4.24 Sandy
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
7 0-70 - 12.57 18.23 32.03 31.23 3.22 2.72 Fine sand
70-150 - 7.53 10.23 30.23 41.02 6.68 4.31 Coarse sand
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
8 0-60 - 10.32 11.24 30.23 38.39 7.47 2.35 Sandy
60-150 - 9.24 10.25 34.23 40.21 2.74 3.33 Sandy
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
9 0-50 - 17.22 6.22 34.32 29.51 10.28 2.45 Sandy
50-93 - 9.25 10.25 37.22 30.21 9.35 3.72 Sandy
93-125 - 6.32 3.25 27.21 50.21 9.19 3.84 Sandy
125-150 - 9.28 11.23 32.11 34.22 8.61 4.55 Fine sand
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
10 0-20 - 16.11 7.35 28.32 32.12 12.89 3.21 Sandy
20-50 - 10.15 11.23 29.22 34.55 11.31 3.45 Sandy
50-120 - 11.55 12.34 30.22 36.12 5.56 4.21 Sandy
120-150 - 10.13 8.21 33.34 37.22 7.32 3.78 Sandy
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

488
 Res. J. Agric. & Biol. Sci., 4(5): 485-499, 2008

Table 1: Continued
El-Esraa and El-Mearage farm
11 0-30 - 11.13 17.25 30.25 34.21 4.84 2.32 andy
30-60 - 12.13 10.4 37.25 32.31 4.8 3.11 Sandy
60-90 - 5.32 4.91 28.23 52.33 5.68 3.53 Fine sand
90-150 - 7.83 10.11 35.33 33.24 9.28 4.12 Sandy
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
12 0-35 6 11.35 20.22 26.45 33.2 5.55 3.23 Coarse sand
35-65 8 8.75 10.22 30.23 40.11 6.88 3.81 Sandy
65-90 14 3.52 7.23 28.22 50.42 6.4 4.21 [Fine sand
90-140 - 9.27 10.11 33.21 30.22 13.34 3.85 Sandy
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
13 0-40 9 10.23 11.33 37.22 30.33 8.66 2.23 Sandy
40-80 15 9.23 10.45 38.33 31.23 7.64 3.12 Sandy
80-150 10 8.75 11.33 40.11 28.32 7.38 4.11 Sandy
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
14 0-40 5 12.14 18.45 32.23 30.31 4.7 5.17 Sandy
40-65 3 10.32 11.21 35.23 28.31 11.8 3.13 Sandy
65-150 3 9.24 10.34 36.24 33.21 6.81 4.15 Sandy
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
15 0-30 7 10.13 13.11 34.22 31.31 8 3.23 Sandy
30-50 2 9.58 10.21 37.22 34.23 4.64 4.12 Sandy
50-70 2 5.35 6.21 26.23 53.2 5.46 3.55 Fine sand
70-150 24 7.52 5.62 40.24 30.21 12.18 4.23 Sandy
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
16 0-30 - 9.53 10.11 34.33 37.22 6.46 2.35 Sandy
30-50 2 5.63 9.52 26.23 50.21 4.56 3.85 [Fine sand
50-110 - 9.53 12.11 34.55 30.22 10.19 3.4 Sandy
110-150 - 8.25 9.32 35.32 33.14 9.55 4.42 Sandy
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
17 0-30 - 13.22 14.23 34.32 32.33 3.58 2.32 Sandy
30-70 - 9.32 10.34 35.22 37.33 4.34 3.45 Coarse sand
70-110 - 4.56 9.23 24.11 54.32 3.98 3.8 Fine sand
110-150 - 5.72 10.22 33.22 34.54 12.07 4.23 Sandy
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
18 0-25 10 10.22 9.32 34.35 30.21 12.55 3.35 Sandy
25-60 15 9.72 10.55 36.23 31.23 8.47 3.8 Sandy
Where: V=very; C= coarse; F= fine; M= medium; S=sand

Table 2: Soil moisture constants of the studied soil profiles

Profile No. Depth (m) SP% Texture FC% WP % AW% HC cm/hr
El-Emam Malek farm
1 0-20 20 Sandy 14.2 6.2 8.0 18.2
20-60 19 Sandy 14.5 5.4 9.1 17.1
60-150 20 Sandy 13.1 4.6 8.5 19.5
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2 0-40 19 Coarse nd 12.8 4.2 8.6 20.5
40-150 20 Coarse sand 13.4 4.5 8.9 20.1
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3 0-150 21 Coarse sand 14.3 4.4 9.9 18.4
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
4 0-30 28 Coarse sand 14.3 4.4 9.9* 18.4
30-50 25 Fine sand 12.5 4.1 8.4 21.3
50-70 26 Sandy 12.1 4.3 7.8 20.7
70-150 28 Sandy 13.2 5.1 8.1 19.3
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
5 0-50 21 Sandy 15.4 7.2 8.2 17.1
50-70 23 Sandy 14.8 5.6 9.1 18.6
70-150 20 Sandy 15.2 6.7 8.5 16.7
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
6 0-60 16 Sandy 12.6 5.1 7.5 22.4
60-150 21 Sandy 9.5 3.4 6.1 24.7
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
7 0-70 19 Fine sand 11.2 4.3 6.9 22.3
70-150 20 Coarse sand 10.2 4.1 6.1 23.4
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
8 0-60 17 Sandy 9.8 3.7 6.1 25.1
60-150 18 Sandy 13.2 5.2 8.0 21.6
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
9 0-50 21 Sandy 10.1 4.7 5.4 22.5
50-93 19 Sandy 13.5 5.6 7.9 19
93-125 22 Sandy 12.5 4.6 7.9 21.5
125-150 24 Fine sand 12.2 4.4 7.8 22.3
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

489
 Res. J. Agric. & Biol. Sci., 4(5): 485-499, 2008

Table 2: Continued
10 0-20 24 Sandy 10.6 3.8 6.8 24.1
20-50 22 Sandy 14.3 4.6 9.7 19.5
50-120 22 Sandy 15.2 5.8 9.4 17.4
120-150 22 Sandy 13.7 4.3 9.4 19.3
El-Esraa and El-Mearage farm
11 0-30 15 sandy 4.2 4.2 10 18
30-60 17 Sandy 3.9 3.9 9.3 20.1
60-90 16 Fine sand 3.5 3.5 9.3 21.5
90-150 25 Sandy 3.3 3.3 9.3 20.7
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
12 0-35 19 Coarse sand 5.7 5.7 9.5 15.2
35-65 20 Sandy 5.6 5.6 10 14.3
65-90 22 [Fine sand 4.2 4.2 8.1 22.4
90-140 25 Sandy 4.1 4.1 8.6 23.1
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
13 0-40 22 Sandy 3.5 3.5 9.1 22.8
40-80 20 Sandy 3.8 3.8 9.6 20.4
80-150 25 Sandy 5.2 5.2 10 14.9
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
14 0-40 20 Sandy 4.2 4.2 8.3 21.5
40-65 22 Sandy 4.4 4.4 8.4 20.8
65-150 25 Sandy 5.8 5.8 10.3 18.4
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
15 0-30 21 Sandy 4.7 4.7 9.80 16.7
30-50 25 Sandy 5.3 5.3 10 15.2
50-70 23 Fine sand 5.7 5.7 9.9 14.7
70-150 28 Sandy 4.8 4.8 10.4 15.5
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
16 0-30 16 Sandy 4.2 4.2 7.7 19.6
30-50 18 [Fine sand 4.6 4.6 7.9 21.4
50-110 18 Sandy 4.5 4.5 7.9 22.1
110-150 22 Sandy 4.8 4.8 8.4 20.8
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
17 0-30 20 Sandy 5.6 5.6 9.6 15.2
30-70 15 Coarse sand 4.2 4.2 9.0 18.9
70-110 20 Fine sand 4.1 4.1 9.3 19.1
110-150 23 Sandy 3.7 3.7 9.1 21.5
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
18 0-25 22 Sandy 3.5 3.5 6.7 22.4
25-60 16 Sandy 4.2 4.2 8.4 20.4
Where: SP= saturation percent, FC= field capacity, WP= wilting point, AW= available water, HC= hydraulic conductivity.

Map 4: Soil salinity distribution of El-Emam Malek farm

490
 Res. J. Agric. & Biol. Sci., 4(5): 485-499, 2008

Map 5: Soil salinity distribution of El Esraa and El- Merage farm

Table 3: Some chemical properties of the studied soil profiles

Profile Depth O.M. pH EC Ca Gypsum Exch. Cations meq/100g) CEC (meq/ SAR ESP
No. (cm) % 1:2.5 (dS/m) CO 3 % K+ Na+ Mg++ Ca+ 100g soil)
El-Emam Malek farm
1 0-20 0.61 8.55 0.19 4.68 - 0.5 1.5 2.5 3.5 8.0 1.6 16.25
20-60 0.44 8.36 0.19 5.85 - 0.6 1.3 2.2 3.1 7.2 1.7 15.41
60-150 - 8.6 0.28 4.69 0.12 0.5 1.7 2.6 3.9 8.7 1.7 16.32
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2 0-40 0.53 8.7 0.82 5.85 0.62 0.3 2.5 3.3 4.4 10.5 6.5 23.81
40-150 0.32 8.62 0.26 3.51 0.12 0.5 1.6 2.5 4 8.6 1.3 16.05
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3 0-150 0.14 8.42 0.25 4.68 0.08 0.6 1.7 2.7 3.6 8.6 1.6 11.18
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
4 0-30 0.92 8.43 0.22 5.85 - 0.6 1.5 2 3 7.1 1.5 17.18
30-50 0.46 8.44 0.35 1.17 0.07 0.4 2 2.8 4.2 9.4 1.7 17.02
50-70 0.11 8.62 0.34 2.34 0.09 0.5 2.1 2.6 4 9.2 1.8 18.26
70-150 0.1 8.68 0.25 4.68 0.03 0.3 1.5 2 3.5 7.3 1.6 15.89
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
5 0-50 0.83 8.75 0.27 10.53 0.07 0.4 1.5 2.1 3.8 7.8 1.4 16.03
50-70 0.22 8.75 0.42 4.68 0.09 0.7 2.2 2.9 4.3 10.1 1.9 17.43
70-150 - 8.75 0.21 10.53 0.05 0.5 1.5 1.8 2.9 6.7 1.8 18.81
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
6 0-60 0.3 8.53 0.17 12.87 - 0.4 1 1.1 2 4.5 1.5 19.02
60-150 0.1 9.3 0.38 13.34 0.12 0.6 1.9 3 4 8.5 1.6 18.35
7 0-70 0.62 8.48 0.2 12.87 - 0.4 1.2 1.6 3 5.2 1.5 19.42
70-150 - 8.62 0.15 10.53 - 0.3 1 1.1 2 4.4 1.4 19.1
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
8 0-60 0.77 8.58 0.26 9.36 0.03 0.4 1.5 1.9 3 6.8 1.3 19.26
60-150 0.25 8.41 0.24 4.68 0.02 0.4 1.2 1.3 2.5 5.4 1.4 18.52
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
9 0-50 0.65 8.7 0.2 7.02 - 0.3 1.1 1 1.8 4.2 1.5 21.19
50-93 0.25 9.77 0.28 2.34 0.06 0.5 1.4 2 3.2 6.1 1.4 19.18
93-125 0.1 9.32 0.44 4.68 0.1 0.8 2.6 3.1 4.4 10.9 2.2 19.45
125-150 - 9.11 0.37 3.51 0.08 0.5 1.7 2.2 3.9 8.3 1.5 16.14
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

491
 Res. J. Agric. & Biol. Sci., 4(5): 485-499, 2008

Table 3: Continued
10 0-20 0.87 8.5 0.43 4.68 0.08 0.7 2.2 2.5 4 9.4 2.0 18.3
20-50 0.27 8.65 0.28 3.51 0.02 0.6 1.4 2.1 3 7.1 1.4 16.06
50-110 0.09 8.62 0.16 4.68 - 0.5 0.9 0.9 1.9 4.2 1.3 17.14
110-135 - 8.79 0.16 3.51 - 0.6 0.8 0.9 2 4.3 1.1 15.12
El-Esraa and El-Mearage farm
11 0-30 0.67 8.28 0.28 3.51 0.03 3.8 2.2 1.4 0.6 8 1.4 15.25
30-60 0.3 8.35 0.25 53.04 0.01 3.2 2 1.5 0.5 7.2 1.6 18.06
60-90 0.2 8.48 0.36 5.85 0.03 4.3 2.9 1.5 0.8 9.5 1.0 13.89
90-150 0.1 8.42 0.42 7.02 0.05 5 3.1 1.6 0.9 10.6 1.0 12.26
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
12 0-35 0.3 8.22 0.5 5.85 0.1 5.1 3.3 1.8 1 11.2 1.2 23.81
35-65 0.2 7.92 1.57 10.53 0.19 5 3.2 2.8 1.5 12.5 3.9 10.72
65-90 0.1 8.48 0.35 7.02 0.06 4 2.7 1.5 0.8 9 1.0 14
90-140 - 8.98 0.49 6.08 0.07 4.3 3.1 2.5 1 10.9 1.8 18.34
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
13 0-40 0.4 8.2 1.05 7.02 0.09 5.3 4 3.5 1.1 13.9 2.5 18.53
40-80 0.2 8.11 1.29 5.85 0.3 5.5 3.3 2.7 1 12.5 2.9 13.28
80-150 - 8.6 0.24 4.68 - 3 2.1 1.5 0.7 7.3 1.5 16.71
14 0-40 0.67 8.59 0.22 4.21 - 2.8 1.9 1.4 0.6 6.7 1.6 17.61
15.52
40-65 0.4 8.57 0.24 9.36 0.01 2.9 2 1.3 0.5 6.7 1.6 16.15
65-150 0.1 8.3 0.22 7.02 - 2.7 1.9 1.3 0.6 6.5 1.5 15.0
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
15 0-30 0.43 8.45 0.25 5.85 0.02 3.0 2.0 1.5 0.7 7.2 1.6 17.36
20-50 0.2 8.4 0.21 9.36 0.6 2.9 1.9 1.4 0.5 5.7 1.6 19.65
50-70 0.11 8.45 0.24 9.83 0.7 3.3 2.5 1.5 0.7 8 1.2 15.88
70-150 - 8.38 0.47 8.19 0.04 4.9 3.3 2.8 0.9 11.5 2.3 17.74
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
16 0-30 0.32 8.36 0.22 5.85 - 2.8 1.7 1.3 0.7 6.5 1.5 17.23
30-50 0.22 8.44 0.18 7.02 - 2.3 1.5 1.2 0.5 5.5 1.7 18.55
50-110 0.12 8.49 0.2 4.68 - 2.5 1.6 1.3 0.6 6 1.5 18.67
110-150 - 8.39 0.27 8.19 0.02 3.1 2.3 1.5 0.7 7.6 1.1 16.84
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
17 0-30 0.43 8.35 0.18 5.85 - 2 1.3 1.2 0.5 5 1.7 20.0
30-70 0.11 8.41 0.2 4.68 - 2.2 1.4 1.2 0.3 5.1 1.7 20.0
70-110 0.09 8.42 0.2 4.21 - 2.2 1.4 1.3 0.4 5.3 1.5 20.2
110-150 0.05 8.12 1.64 12.87 0.08 5.1 3.4 2.7 1.2 12.4 4.0 20.75
25-60 0.08 8.46 0.2 6.32 0.01 2.4 1.7 1.2 0.5 5.8 1.3 7.50
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
18 0-25 0.21 8.27 0.29 5.85 0.03 0.9 1.5 2.8 3.5 8.7 1.3 14.25
25-60 0.08 8.46 0.2 6.23 0.01 0.5 1.2 1.7 2.4 5.8 1.3 18.28

is non-saline and EC values ranged between 0.15
– 1.64 dS/m in the studied soil profiles, Maps (4
and 5). pH value is slightly alkaline to alkaline
and ranged between 7.92 to 9.32 and there is no
specific trend with depth in the studied soil profiles.
Organic matter content (OM %) was very low as
that soil is newly cultivated and organic matter
ranged from 0.08 to 0.92%. The Calcium carbonate
content have wide variation and ranged between1.17
to 13.34 and 3.04 to 12.87 % at El-Emam Malek and
El-Esraa and El-Mearage farms, respectively, Maps
(6, 7). Gypsum content is very low in most studied
profiles and ranged between 0.1-0.7%. Cation exchange
capacity (CEC) is low and ranged between 4.2-10.9
meq/100g soil and 5.0-13.9 meq/100g soil at El-
Emam Malek and El-Esraa and El-Mearage farms,
respectively, Maps (8 and 9), this is due to the
coarse texture and low content of clay and organic
matter. Exchangeable sodium percentage (ESP) value
ranged between 7.5- 23.81, in most soil profiles, Maps
(10 and 11).
Soil Classification: The climatic conditions prevailing
in the studied area, the morphological characteristics of
the studied soil profiles, the physical and chemical
properties of the soils, therefore the studied soil
profiles were classified to Entisols as Typic
Torripsamments[22] .
Land Capability Evaluation: Land capability
evaluation of the studied area was performed[23] .
The outputs from the land evaluation software linked

492
 Res. J. Agric. & Biol. Sci., 4(5): 485-499, 2008

Map 6: Calcium carbonate distribution of El-Emam Malek farm

Map 7: Calcium carbonate distribution of El Esraa and El- Merage farm

493
 Res. J. Agric. & Biol. Sci., 4(5): 485-499, 2008

Map 8: Cation exchange capacity distribution of El-Emam Malek farm

Map 9: Cation exchange capacity distribution of El Esraa and El- Merage farm

494
 Res. J. Agric. & Biol. Sci., 4(5): 485-499, 2008

Map 10: Exchangeable sodium percent distribution of El-Emam Malek farm

Map 11: Exchangeable sodium percent distribution of El Esraa farm

495
 Res. J. Agric. & Biol. Sci., 4(5): 485-499, 2008

The main limiting factors for capability classes
of El-Emam Malek and El-Esraa are gravel percentage
(G %), available moisture percent (AM%)exchangeable
sodium percent (ESP) and cation exchange capacity
(CEC), Map (12), while the limiting factors for
capability classes of El Esraa farm are available
moisture percent (AM%) exchangeable sodium percent
(ESP) and cation exchange capacity (CEC), Map (13)
but these soils may need different management to
recover the productive capability.

Map 12: Limiting factors for land capability class of El-Emam Malek farm

Map 13: Limiting factors for land capability class of El Esraa and El- Merage farm

496
 Res. J. Agric. & Biol. Sci., 4(5): 485-499, 2008

to the GIS software (Arc Map 9.0) across a database classes of soil for most studied profiles belonging to
file and different queries were carried out to get the class (C4) Table (4).
final outputted maps. Data reveal that the capability

Table 4: Capability class of the studied soil profiles

Soil factors
Profile no. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Capability class Limiting factors
A B C D E F G H
El Emam Malek Farm
1 2 4 1 1 1 1 1 3 C4 B, H
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2 3 4 1 1 1 1 1 3 C 4 A, B, H
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3 3 4 1 1 2 1 1 3 C 4 A, B, H
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
4 3 4 1 1 4 1 1 3 C 4 A, B, E, H
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
5 3 4 1 1 3 1 1 3 C 4 A, B, E, H
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
6 3 4 1 1 3 1 1 3 C4 A, B, E, H
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
7 2 4 1 1 1 1 1 3 C4 B,H
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
8 2 4 1 1 1 1 1 3 C4 B,H
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
9 2 4 1 1 1 1 1 3 C4 B,H
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
10 3 4 1 1 1 1 1 3 C4 A, B, H
El-Esraa and El-Mearage farm
11 2 4 1 1 1 1 1 3 C4 B,H
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
12 3 4 1 1 2 1 1 3 C4 A, B, H
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
13 2 3 1 1 2 1 1 3 C3 B,H
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
14 2 4 1 1 2 1 1 3 C4 B,H
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
15 2 4 1 1 2 1 1 3 C4 B,H
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
16 2 4 1 1 1 1 1 3 C4 B,H
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
17 2 4 1 1 1 1 1 3 C4 B,H
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
18 4 4 2 3 2 1 1 3 C4 A, B, H
Where: A= Available moisture content (%), B= Cation exchange capacity (meq/100g soil, C= Drainage condition (class), D= Soil depth (cm),
E= Gravel %, F= Slope, G= Salinity (EC in dS/m) and H= Exchangeable so d ium p ercent (ESP).Capability class: C1= Excellent for cultivation,
C2= Moderate, C3 = Good, C4 = Poor for cultivation.

Land Suitability Evaluation: Different land suitability
classes and indices 12 crops were predicted based on
the matching between land qualities and characteristics
and crop standard requirements using Almagra program
through MicroLIES evaluation software [23] . Evaluated
crops are wheat, corn, watermelon, potato, soybean,
cotton, sunflower, sugar beet, alfalfa, peach, citrus and
olive. Data shown in Table (5), indicated that the
studied soil profiles of El-Emam Malek farm are
moderately suitable (S3) for growing crops, while the
soils represented by profiles 5 and 6 are placed at non-
suitable (S5) for growing crops. Soils of El-Esraa and
El-Mearage farm are placed at high suitable (S2) and
moderate suitable (S3) for growing all crops.
The main limiting factors for agricultural
production are soil texture and exchangeable sodium
percentage (ESP) in the most profiles, except soils
represented by profile 18; the limiting factors are
exchangeable sodium percentage (ESP) and soil
depth. The obtained results help the decision makers
in defining the optimum agricultural land use in the
area.

Table 5: Land suitability of the studied soil profiles in NRC Farm

crops
Profile no. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Limiting factors
Wheat Corn Water Potato Soya Cotton Sun Sugar Alfalfa Peach Citrus Olive
melon bean flower beet
El Emam Malek farm
1 3 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 a, t
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

497
 Res. J. Agric. & Biol. Sci., 4(5): 485-499, 2008

Table 5: Continued
2 3 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 a, t
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3 3 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 a, t, d
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
4 3 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 a, t, d
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 4 t, d, a
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
6 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 4 t, a
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
7 3 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 a
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
8 3 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 a
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
9 3 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 a
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
10 3 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 a
El-Esraa farm
11 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 2 2 t, a
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
12 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 2 2 t, a
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
13 2 3 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 a
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
14 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 2 2 t, a
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
15 3 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 a, t
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
16 3 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 a, t
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
17 3 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 a, t
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
18 2 3 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 ds, a
Where: suitability class: S1 = optimum suitability, S2= High suitable, S3= Moderate suitable, S 4 = Marginal suitability, S5 = no suitability.

REFERENCES 7. Abdel-Rahman, S.I. F.B. Labib and M.A. Abdel-

Rahman, 1989. Land suitability for certain crops in
1. Abdel Azez, A., 1989. Climatology condition in the western desert of Egypt. Egypt J. Soil Sci.,
Western Desert. Encyclopedia of Western Desert Special Issue 1-12.
Research Institute, Cairo, Egypt. 8. Sys, C., 1985. Land Evaluation. Administration
2. Osama, R.M., 2004. Integrating GIS, remote general de La cooperation and development.
sensing and Modeling for Agricultural land Bruxelles, Belgique.
suitability evaluation at East Wadi El-Natrun, 9. Moussa, M.A., 1991. Land suitability evaluation of
Egypt.MSc Thesis, Fac.,of Agri. Alex. Univ. El Saff area Eastern Desert Egypt for agriculture
3. Hamdi, H., F.M. Hawela and H.M. El-Khattib, utilization. Ph.D. Thesis, Fac. Agric., Zagazig
1991. Detection of surface soil variations using Univ., Egypt.
different resolution satellite data. Egypt J. Soil 10. Storie, R.E., 1964. Handbook of Soil Evaluation.
Sci., 31(4): 483-488 Associated students Bookstorie, University of
4. Mohamed, M.S., 1995. Land suitability studies for California, Berkeley, California.
proper land use in some newly reclaimed areas 11. Sys and S.W. Verheye, 1978. An attempt to the
using remote sensing techniques, Egypt. M.Sc. evaluation of physical land characteristics for
Thesis, Fac. of Agric., Cairo Univ., Cairo, Egypt. irrigation according to the FAO framework for
5. Abdel Mottaleb, M.A., F.M Hawela, I.F. land evaluation. Int.1.Train Cent. Post. Grad. Soil
Rashed and M.E. El-Hemely, 1997. Studies on soil SCi., Ghent. Belgium.
and water resources of El-Nobaria area. I- . Soil 12. El-Hemely, M.E., 1992. A study of the soil and
Survey and Classification. Egypt J. Soil Sci., water resources of El Nobaria Area. Ph.D. Thesis,
37(3): 311-323. Fac. Agric., El-Azhar Univ., Egypt.
6. Morsy, I.M. and H.M. Ramadan, 2002. Integration 13. Huizing, H., A. Faarsh and K. Debies, 1995. Land
GIS/RS techinques with link clustring analysis for evaluation (land system evaluation), Lecture
land evaluation of branch 20 area, west nubaria, notes for LELU model ITC, Enschede, the
Egypt. Minufiya J. Agric. Res., 27(4): 1041-1065 Netherlands.

498
 Res. J. Agric. & Biol. Sci., 4(5): 485-499, 2008

14. Ramadan, H.M. and I.M. Morsy, 2001. Application 20. Black, C.A., D.D. Evans, J.I. Nhite, L.E.
of GIS technology in soil survey and land use Ensminger and F.E. Clark, 1982. ”Methods of Soil
system analysis, West Nubaria, Egypt. Minufiya, J. Analysis”. Amr. Soc. Angron. Inc. Madison.
Agric. Res., 26(50): 1279-1302. 21. Key to Soil Taxonomy, 2003. Soil Survey Staff,
15. Ragab, I.M., 2003. Impact of land management E igh t E d ition, USDA, Natura l R e so u r c e s
practices on soil quality in sandy soils, El Bostan Conservation Service, Washington, D,C.
region, Egypt. Ph.D. Thesis, Fac.,of Agric. Alex., 22. Siderius, W., 1989. Selective readings in Land
Univ. Evaluation. Lecture Note, ITC, En. Schede. The
16. F.A.O., 1990. Guideline for soil profile description. Netherlands.
3 rd Edition, F.A.O., Rome. 23. De la Rosa, D., 2000. MicroLIES: Conceptual
17. Folk, R.L., 1974. Petrology of Sedimentary rocks, Framework Agroecological Land Evaluation. Istituo
Hemphill publishing Company. Austin, Taxes, de Recursos Naturales Agrobiologia, CSIC, avda.
pp: 94. Reina Mercedes 10. 41010 Selvilla, Spain.
18. Klute, A., 1986. Water Retention: Laboratory
methods. Methods of Soil Analysis, A. Klute
(ed), Part 12 nd edition, Agron. Monogr. pp: 635-
662, ASA.
19. Klute, A. and Dirksen, C.(1986). Hydraulic
conductivity and diffusivity: Laboratory methods.
In Methods of Soil Analysis. Part 1 Agronomy 2nd
edition. ASA and SSSA, Madison, W1. A. Klute
(ed), p: 687-734.

499