Assessment of Groundwater Resources for Irrigation Purposes in Assiut Governorate, Upper Egypt

[Morsi et. al., Vol.6 (Iss.4): April 2018] ISSN- 2350-0530(O), ISSN- 2394-3629(P) (Received: Mar 03, 2018 - Accepted: Apr 29, 2018) DOI: 10.29121/granthaalayah.v6.i4.2018.1649

Science ASSESSMENT OF GROUNDWATER RESOURCES FOR IRRIGATION PURPOSES IN ASSIUT GOVERNORATE, UPPER EGYPT

Mamdouh, S. Morsi *1, Abdelhai A. Farrag 2, Esam E. A. El Sayed 3 *1 Department of Mines and quarry Minia Governorate, Egypt 2 Geology Department, Faculty of Science, Assiut University, Egypt 3 Geology Department, Faculty of Science, Minia University61519, Egypt

Abstract A general increase of water demand in Egypt is prominently denoted. This situation is more noticeable in the Middle and Upper Egypt of arid Zone and limited water resources in which Assiut is one of the governorates of this Zone. The main objectives of this study are to assess the groundwater quality for irrigation, and to present solutions for managing and protecting these resources in Assiut area. To achieve that, one hundred and nine groundwater samples were collected from Quaternary aquifer during autumn of the year 2013. Chemical analysis was carried out and analyzed for major and trace elements according to the irrigation water guidelines of (FAO, 1985), and Rowe, et al. 1995, taking into account the spatial variations and the representation of the hydrochemical data. The results show that 47% none degree of restriction on use and 52% Slightly to moderate degree of restriction on use, According TDS hazarded. 55 % belongs to (C2- S1) good water for irrigation all crops in all soils and45 % belongs to (C3 -S1) good water for irrigation all crops in all soils under ordinary and specific condition like adequate drainage and leaching, According U.S. salinity laboratory staff classification depend on (EC,TDS and SAR) hazarded. while according to RSC (residual sodium carbonate100% Low RSC hazard (safe water for irrigation. 89% Excellent water for irrigation sensitive all crops and low likelihood of soil problems and11% good to permissible for irrigation semi - tolerant and tolerant crops and slightly to moderate likelihood of soil problems according Boron content, in compared to recommended limits in (FAO, 1995, 2010) guideline for irrigation water. Consequently, it is recommended to prevent the sewage and domestic waste water, and the industrial waste water from direct disposal without treatment to the ground wells, irrigation canals and River Nile; avoiding the construction of open septic tanks, especially near the pumping wells; controlling the use of fertilizers and pesticides in the agriculture purposes; selected the suitable crops for every sector (area) according to the chemical character's of the available irrigation water and soil properties.

Keywords: Quaternary; Groundwater; Irrigation; Assiut area; River Nile; Egypt.

Cite This Article: Mamdouh, S. Morsi, Abdelhai A. Farrag, and Esam E. A. El Sayed. (2018). “ASSESSMENT OF GROUNDWATER RESOURCES FOR IRRIGATION PURPOSES IN ASSIUT GOVERNORATE, UPPER EGYPT.” International Journal of Research - Granthaalayah, 6(4), 248-273. https://doi.org/10.29121/granthaalayah.v6.i4.2018.1649.

Http://www.granthaalayah.com ©International Journal of Research - GRANTHAALAYAH [248] [Morsi et. al., Vol.6 (Iss.4): April 2018] ISSN- 2350-0530(O), ISSN- 2394-3629(P) (Received: Mar 03, 2018 - Accepted: Apr 29, 2018) DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.1248172 1. Introduction

As a result of increasing population and human activities, pollution became a serious problem affecting the surface and groundwater resources in Assiut Governorate. This study is an expansion of previous studies carried out on the surface and ground water resources of the western bank of the River Nile between EL-Edwa and Der Mawas cities of Minia Governorate in Upper Egypt (e.g. El Kashouty et al., 2012; Elewa et al., 2013 and Morsi M. S 2012). The main sources of surface and groundwater pollution in this area are the industrial and domestic sewage, and the waste water.

Surface water and groundwater are mainly exposed to contamination with hazardous industrial waste, fertilizes, and pesticides from agricultural activities, as well as oil pollution brought from ships and oil terminals (EEAA-EIMP, 1999 and UN, 2002). Another source of contamination in the study area is the domestic sewage from villages and cities, and human activities. Because the need of water increases due to population growth, industrial development and cultivation of desert land, the availability of water of acceptable quality in Egypt is limited and getting even more restricted. The main purpose of the present study is to assess and to evaluate the quality of groundwater for the irrigation purposes. All irrigation water contains some dissolved salts. These dissolved salts are present because some chemical elements have a strong attraction for water and a relatively weak attraction for other elements. Sodium and chloride are two such chemical elements; the amounts of these elements contained in water must be very high before sodium will combine with chloride to form the solid material sodium chloride, common table salt. The total amount and kinds of salts determine the suitability of the water for irrigation use. Water from some sources may contain so much salt that it is unsuitable for irrigation because of potential danger to the soil or crops. Irrigation water quality can best be determined by chemical laboratory analysis.

Study Area

The study area is located on the eastern and western banks of the River Nile between the cities of Dirout at north and EL-Badary of Sedfa at south within Assiut Governorate. The area is bordered from the east and the west by cultivated areas and limestone plateau, approximately between latitudes 26o 15ˉ and 27o 10ˉ N and longitudes 30o 40ˉ and 31o 30ˉ E (Fig. 1). Assiut Governorate includes 11 cities, 56 main villages, and 235 subordinate villages, and the number of its population is about 4 million people, form which 73 % are living in the rural area and 27% are living in the urban area.

Figure 1: Location map of study area in Assiut Governorate

Http://www.granthaalayah.com ©International Journal of Research - GRANTHAALAYAH [249]

[Morsi et. al., Vol.6 (Iss.4): April 2018] ISSN- 2350-0530(O), ISSN- 2394-3629(P) (Received: Mar 03, 2018 - Accepted: Apr 29, 2018) DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.1248172

Figure 2: Location map of the collected groundwater Samples from the study area

Climate

The study area is characterized by arid to semiarid, hot climate. The annual average of temperature is about 22.7o (the minimum temperature is 15.3o, and the maximum temperature is about 30.3o). The average rainfall value is about 0.7 mm/month. The average value of relative humidity is 38%. The average value of evaporation is about 14.2 mm/year. The winds reach the average of 7.5 Knot/hour (Egyptian metrological Authority, 1981-2001) and (EEAA, 2005)

Geological Setting

The study area in recognized as a part of Nile Basin. Geomorphologically

the study area is dominated by four main geomorphic units which are; (Fig 3) 1) The young alluvial plains of the Nile which underlain by silty clay layer of Holocene that caps the graded sand and gravel units of Pleistocene Time. 2) Old alluvial plains which comprise the early Pleistocene terraces which are composed of travertine, conglomerates interbeded with clays, sands, and gravels, and late Pleistocene terraces made up debris, loose deposits, limestone cobbles and flint boulders. Its extends from the foot slope of the Eocene scarps to the boundary of the young alluvial plains of the Nile. 3) Limestone plateaux: composed of hard limestone of Eocene Time. 4) The desert-Hydrographic patterns which dissect the limestone plateaux surface and are directed into the Nile Valley.

Http://www.granthaalayah.com ©International Journal of Research - GRANTHAALAYAH [250]

[Morsi et. al., Vol.6 (Iss.4): April 2018] ISSN- 2350-0530(O), ISSN- 2394-3629(P) (Received: Mar 03, 2018 - Accepted: Apr 29, 2018) DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.1248172

30 45E 31 00E 31 15E

27 30N

27 15 N

27 00 N

26 45 N 0 3 6 9

Old alluvial Plin ( Wadi deposits) Calcareous Structural plateau . Young alluvial Plain (Flood plain) River Nile Figure 3: Geomorphologic map of Assiut governorate 1992, survey Egypt, 1957, and Said, 1962, 1981)

Figure 4: Geological map of the study area (modified after EGPS (after Wali, and Conoco, (1987) Stratigraphical Background

The study area is composed essentially of alluvial deposits, which are characterized by irregularities in their distribution. They are built of lenticular bodies of sands and gravels intercalated with clay and silt interbeded. At the upper and near the surface, parts of these sediments are generally unconsolidated and usually completely loose, overlying in most cases inhomogeneous sequences of sands and clays. the thickness of these sediments increasing generally towards the River Nile and may reach more than 300 m above the bed rock of the limestone succession .these sediments are relate to the Pleistocene age and were classified from the oldest to the youngest by (said 1983) into Protonile, Prenile and NeoNile sediments (Fig. 4).

Http://www.granthaalayah.com ©International Journal of Research - GRANTHAALAYAH [251]

[Morsi et. al., Vol.6 (Iss.4): April 2018] ISSN- 2350-0530(O), ISSN- 2394-3629(P) (Received: Mar 03, 2018 - Accepted: Apr 29, 2018) DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.1248172 The carbonate rocks are representing by the plateau bordering the Nile Valley. In the subsurface the lower Eocone rocks form the bottom of the Nile Valley. The Nile Gorge is filled with the Pliocene and Quaternary deposited. The Pliocene deposited consist of clay interbeded with sand are unconformably resting on the Eocene carbonate rocks. (Said 1981).

Ageneralized stratigraphic section (Said, 1983 &1990) shows that the carbonate section of the Eocene is formed at the base from shale chalk, sandstone and on conglomerates while at the top: the clays marls and shales are dominating. Table (1)

Geological Structures

The structural setting of Assuit area was studied by different authors as a part of the Nile Valley (Said 1961 &1962, Omara 1972, Omara el al., 1970&1974, Osman 1980, Bakhiet 1989, Mansour 2010 and shama,1972 and others) they mentioned that folds in the area northwest of Assuit have a general NW-SE direction. These folds are mainly related to faults formed as a result of tension rather than compressional forces. Also they showed that faulting is the major deformation feature affecting the area around Assuit which resulted from tensional force also they pointed out that the Eocone Limestone plateau at the area north west of Assuit was influenced by faults and folds .the fault trends were arranged according to their decreasing order as NW-NS, N-S, NE and E-W trends .The minor folds especially in south part the study area gave an apparently axial trend directed NNW-SSE and ENE-WSW (Fig. 4).

Table 1: Main Stratigraphic units of Eocene deposits in the study area (after Said, 1990) and (El Miligy, 2003) Age Group Formation deposit Late Eocene Maadi Maadi 110m Beni Suef 86m

El-Fashn

Qarara 170m Maghagha 60m

Samalut 160

Middle Eocene Mokatam Early Eocene Minia Formation Thebes Durnka Esna Shale

Hydrogeological Conditions

The Egyptian territory lies in general within to arid zone of North Africa. These are little rainfall throughout the year in addition to some irregular storms and sometimes torrents that take place during winter seasons. The main sources of groundwater recharging are the subsurface seepage from irrigation and drainage canals and direct infiltration of return flow irrigation. The River Nile acts as effluent stream especially after the construction of the High Aswan Dam in 1966. The groundwater depth varies from one locality to another. It ranges between 2-6 m in the young alluvial plain to more than 20 m the old alluvial plains. The general groundwater flows direction is to the north word.

Http://www.granthaalayah.com ©International Journal of Research - GRANTHAALAYAH [252]

[Morsi et. al., Vol.6 (Iss.4): April 2018] ISSN- 2350-0530(O), ISSN- 2394-3629(P) (Received: Mar 03, 2018 - Accepted: Apr 29, 2018) DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.1248172 The Quaternary and Pliocene water bearing sediments are of particular importance in the area of the study (Fig. 4). The quaternary aquifer has A wide geographically distribution in the Nile valley and in the adjacent desert fringes. It is composed of graded sand and gravel with occasional clay intercalations. The aquifer in considered as unconfined to semi-confined one. The aquifer is partially overlain by semi-permeable silty clay layers .and by the middle portion of the Nile Valley, where it is considered semi-confined (Fig. 5-a, b).

From the hydrogeological investigation the Quaternary aquifer thickness varies from more than 300 m at Dirout District to 200 m at Abu Tij District.

l i

o Wadi El Assiuty N

Desart Fringe

e r

Desart Fringe v o Water table

60 i

B R

0 20

-40

-60

-80

-100

-120

-140

-160

-180

Fault legend

Holocene depsits(silt, clay) Eocene Limestone 0 12.5 25 km Quaternary Sand and gravel Paeleocene Shale Plio-Pleistocenw deposits Pliocene deposits (Clay) Figure 5-a: Hydro geological cross sections After (Dawoud et al., 2009)

W E

Depth in m

100 r

i R

-100

-200

Fault Fault Legend Holocene - Silty Clay Pliocene Clay 0 1 2 3 km H. Scale Pleistocene - Sand and gravel Eocene Limestone Figure 5-b: Hydrogeological cross-section South Assiut city (modified after (Mousa et al., 1994)

2. Materials and Methods

This research depend on the representation the published results of chemical analysis of 109 groundwater samples were collected from 109 pumping well all over the study area during autumn season 2013 from quaternary aquifer by (Morsi M. S., 2015) Figure (2). (Details materials and methods in Morsi 2015)

Http://www.granthaalayah.com ©International Journal of Research - GRANTHAALAYAH [253]

[Morsi et. al., Vol.6 (Iss.4): April 2018] ISSN- 2350-0530(O), ISSN- 2394-3629(P) (Received: Mar 03, 2018 - Accepted: Apr 29, 2018) DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.1248172 3. Results and Discussion

Soil scientists use common categories to describe the irrigation water effect on crop production and soil quality (e.g. salinity hazard, sodium hazard, chloride, boron, nitrate, PH and total alkalinity). The other potential irrigation water contaminants that might affect the suitability of agricultural use are heavy metals and microbial contaminants. Quality standards for irrigation water are based on important factors that affect the productivity of the crops. Several authors have proposed many different classifications for irrigation water. Considering the quality of water and their suitability for irrigation purposes, a number of concepts must be taken into consideration; these are: 1) The total concentration of soluble salt (TDS). 2) The relative proportion of sodium to other cataions (SAR). 3) The residual sodium carbonate (RSC). 4) The concentration of certain minor constituents, especially Boron.

It is notable that the quality requirements of irrigation water vary between crops types and drain ability of soils and climate.

The recommended water quality criteria for irrigation (according to FAO, 1985, 2010) and the guidelines for interpretation of water quality for irrigation (according to Ayers, 1977; Ayers and Wesrcot, 1985, Eaton, 1950, leeden et al. 1990,) are presented in Tables 1,2,3,4,5,6,7 and 8.

The application of these standards to the chemical data in the studied area (details chemical data in Morsi M. S. 2015) revealed the following results:

Table 1: Guidelines are based on (FAO) handbook 29 and PACE turf observations (2010) Likelihood of soil problems Quality parameter low Medium High ECw(ds/m,mmhos/cm) <0.7 0.7 -3.0 > TDS(mg/l,ppm) <450 450 – 2000 > SAR 0- 3 ECW>0.7 ECW 0.7-0.2 ECW <0.2 SAR 3 – 6 ECW>1.2 ECW 1.2- 0.3 ECW <0.3 SAR 6 – 12 ECW>1.9 ECW 1.9- 0.5 ECW <0.5 SAR 12 – 20 ECW>2.9 ECW 2.9- 1.3 ECW <2.9 Sodium Na (me/l) <3 3 -9 >9 Sodium Na (mg/l, ppm) <70 70 -200 >200 RSC (me/l) <1.25 >1.25 Nitrate NO3 –N (mg/l,ppm) <5 5 -20 >30 Ammonium NH4-N(mg/l,ppm) <5 5 – 20 >20 Boron B(mg/l,ppm) <0.5 0.5 – 3.0 >3.0 Bicarbonate HCO3(me/l) <1.5 1.5 – 8.5 >8.5 Bicarbonate HCo3 (mg/l,ppm) 92 92- 520 > 520 Chloride CL(me/l) <3 >3 Chloride CL(mg/l,ppm) <105 >105

Http://www.granthaalayah.com ©International Journal of Research - GRANTHAALAYAH [254]

[Morsi et. al., Vol.6 (Iss.4): April 2018] ISSN- 2350-0530(O), ISSN- 2394-3629(P) (Received: Mar 03, 2018 - Accepted: Apr 29, 2018) DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.1248172 Table 2: guideline for interpretation of water quality for irrigation (FAO, 1985) Potential irrigation water Parameter Degree of restriction on use quality problem None Slight to Severe moderate Salinity(affects crop water ECiw (mmho/cm) < 0.7 0.7 – 3.0 > 3.0 availability) Or TDS (mg/l) < 450 450 – 2,000 > 2,000 Infiltration SAR ECiw (mmho/cm) (affects water infiltration rate, 0 - 3 > 0.7 0.7 – 0.2 < 0.2 evaluated by using ECiw and 3 - 6 > 1.2 1.2 – 0.3 < 0.3 SAR together) 6 - 12 > 1.9 1.9 – 0.5 < 0.5 12 - 20 > 2.9 2.9 – 1.3 < 1.3 20 - 40 > 5.0 5.0 – 2.9 < 2.9 Specific ion toxicity SARadj < 3 3 – 9 > 9 (affects sensitive crops) (Na+) surface irrigation meq/l < 3 > 3 sprinkler irrigation (Cl-) surface irrigation meq/l < 4 4 – 10 > 10 sprinkler irrigation meq/l < 3 > 3 Boron (B+++) Ppm/l < 0.7 0.7 – 3.0 > 3.0 - (HCO3 ) Bicarbonate meq/l < 1.5 1.5 – 8.5 > 8.5 (overhead sprinkler only)

Plugging potential from irrigation water used in micro irrigation system Problem Low Medium Severe Physical Suspended Solids (ppm) < 50 50 – 100 > 100 Chemical pH < 7.0 7.0 – 8.0 > 8.0 TDS (ppm) < 500 500 – 2000 > 2000 Manganese (ppm) < 0.1 0.1 – 1.5 > 1.5 Iron (ppm) < 0.1 0.1 – 1.5 > 1.5 Hydrogen sulfide (ppm) < 0.5 0.5 – 2.0 > 2.0 Biological Bacteria pop. (no./ml) < 10,000 10,000 – 50,000 > 50,000

1 Adapted from Western Fertilizer Handbook, 2002, Ninth edition, California Plant Health Association, Interstate Publications, Inc., Danville, Illinois.

Table 3: recommended water quality criteria for irrigation (Ayers 1977) Constituents Unit Suitability for irrigation Specific crops affected Suitable Marginal Unsuitable EC µmmhos/cm <750 750-3000 >3000 TDS mg/l <250 500-2000 >2000

Http://www.granthaalayah.com ©International Journal of Research - GRANTHAALAYAH [255]

[Morsi et. al., Vol.6 (Iss.4): April 2018] ISSN- 2350-0530(O), ISSN- 2394-3629(P) (Received: Mar 03, 2018 - Accepted: Apr 29, 2018) DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.1248172 B++ mg/l <0.5 0.5-2 >2 Fruit and citrius trees 5-1 mg/l& field crops 1-2 mg/l & crasses mg/ CL- mg/l <142 142-355 >355 Tree crops and ornamentals – root adsorption Field and vegetable crops- foliar damage at >106 mg/l SAR <3 3 – 9 >9 Tree crops- root adsorption - SO4 mg/l <350 350 - 600 >600

Table 4: Guidelines for interpretations of water quality for irrigation (Ayers and wesrcot 1985) Potential irrigation Degree of restriction on use Properties Units None Sligh to moderate Severe Crop Effects Salinity ECw(ds/m) <0.7 0.7-3.0 >3.0 Soil Effects SAR=0-3 >0.7 0.7-0.2 <0.2 3-6 And >1.2 1.2-0.3 <0.3 Infiltration 6-12 ECw >1.9 1.9-0.5 <0.5 12-20 >2.9 2.9-1.3 <1.3 20-40 >5.0 5.0-2.9 <2.9 Crop Effects Specific ion toxicity Sodium SAR <3.0 3.0-9.0 >9.0 Chloride(meq/l) <4.0 4.0-10.0 >10.0 Boron(mg/l) <0.7 0.7-3.0 >3.0 Miscellaneous Nitrogen(mg/l) <5 5.0-30 >30 Bicarbonate(meq/l) <1.5 1.5-8.5 >8.5 PH Normal range 6.5-8.4

Table 5: Eaton classification (1950) based 0n (RSC) Suitability of water samples for irrigation Values of RSC in epm Safe < 1.25 Marginal 1.25 - 2.5 Unsuitable > 2.5

Table 6: shown limits of boron in irrigation water (leeden et. Al. 1990) permissible limits boron (in parts par million) Crop group Class of water Sensitive Semi- tolerant Tolerant Excellent < o.33 < 0.67 < 1.00 Good 0.33 to 0.67 0.67 to 1.33 1.00 to 2.00 Permissible 0.67 to 1.0 1.33 to 2.00 2.00 to 3.00 Doubtful 1.o to 1.25 2.00 to 2.5 3.00 to 3.75 Unsuitable > 1.25 > 2.5 >3.75

Http://www.granthaalayah.com ©International Journal of Research - GRANTHAALAYAH [256]

[Morsi et. al., Vol.6 (Iss.4): April 2018] ISSN- 2350-0530(O), ISSN- 2394-3629(P) (Received: Mar 03, 2018 - Accepted: Apr 29, 2018) DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.1248172 Table 7: shown crop groups of boron tolerance (Leeden et.at.1990) Sensitive Semi tolerant Tolerant Pecan Sunflower (native) Athel ( tamarix aphylly) walnut(black, Persian or Potato Asparagus English), Cotton ( Acala and pima) Palm( phoenix canariensis) Jerusalem – artichoke Tomato Date palm (p.dactylifera) Navy bean Sweet pea Sugar beet Plum Radish Mangel Pear Field pea Garden beet Apple Ragged robin rose Alfalfa Grape (sultania and Malaga) Olive Gladiolus Kadota fig Barley Broad bean Persimmon Wheat Onion Cherry Corn Turnip Peach Milo Cabbage Apricot Oat Lettuce Thom less blackberry Zinnia Carrot Orange Pumpkin Avocado Bell pepper Grapefruit Sweet potato Lemon Lima bean

Table 8: U.S. salinity staff classification (Richards 1954) which based on the sodium adsorption ratio (SAR) and the specific conductance (in micro mhos) the water divided into four classes Conductivity Quality Range Usage C1 Low salinity 100 - 250 Can be used for irrigation of most crops in water most soils with little likelihood that soil salinity develop C2 Medium 250 - 750 Can be used if a moderate amount of leaching salinity water occurs C3 High salinity 750 – 2250 Canot be used on soil with restricted Drainage water even with adequate Drainage special management for salinity control may be required and plants with good salt tolerant should be selected. C4 Very high > 2250 Is not suitable for irrigation under ordinary salinity water conditions but may be used occasionally under special conditions as the soils must be permeable, and Drainge must be adequate, irrigation water must be applied in excess to provide considerable leaching. SAR quality Range Usage S1 Low sodium 0 – 10 Can be used for irrigation of almost all soils water with little changes of the development of harmful levels of exchangeable sodium.

Http://www.granthaalayah.com ©International Journal of Research - GRANTHAALAYAH [257]

[Morsi et. al., Vol.6 (Iss.4): April 2018] ISSN- 2350-0530(O), ISSN- 2394-3629(P) (Received: Mar 03, 2018 - Accepted: Apr 29, 2018) DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.1248172 Conductivity Quality Range Usage S2 Medium 10 -18 Will represents an appreciable sodium hazard sodium water in fine-textured soils having high cation exchange capacity, especially under low leaching conditions, unless gypsum is present in the soil. S3 High sodium 18 – 26 May produce harmful levels of exchangeable water sodium in most soils and will require special soil management, good Drainage, high leaching and organic matter condition. S4 Very high 26 – 100 Is generally unsatisfactory for irrigation ٍ sodium water purposes except at low and perhaps land perhaps medium salinities.

Salinity and Total Dissolved Solids

Electrical conductivity (EC) and salinity usually contribute to the total dissolved solids (TDS). The problem occurs when the salts accumulate in the root level in an extent preventing the crop to be able to extract sufficient water from the salty soil solution, causing a water stress for a significant period. If water uptake is appreciably reduced, the plant slows its rate of growth. The most influential water quality guideline on crop productivity is the water salinity hazard that is measured by electrical conductivity (ECw). The primary effect of the high ECw on crop productivity is the inability of the plant to compete with ions in the soil solution for water. The higher the ECw, the lower the level of water content available to plants; even though the soil may appear wet (Yousry et al., 2009). the TDS values range from 210 to 1355 mg/l 53% of samples within the range of Low Likelihood of soil problems, and 47% of samples is considered as medium likelihood of soil proplems (marginal) relatively to the TDS concentration, but the other parameters can be controlled in its use (Fig. 6-a,b).

30 30 E 31 00 E 31 30 E

3 1 5

2 4 l

8 e

6 1250v

e l

10 Dayrout

9 7 s m

27 e 14 l b 27

12 11 o 13 1100r

30 N p

l 15 17 i

16 o 30 N

20 f o

21 19 d Al-Qusiya

22 950o

h i

23 25 26 l e

30 k 27 i 29 L 31 35

28 m

36 800

u i

33 Manfalout d 53 e 37 54 32 40 55 M 38 56 34 41 39 Abnoub 57 500l 58 e

42 v 52 63

45 51 e l 59 43 s 50

62 m

44 46 61 64 e

60 l 49 67 Alfath65 47 450b 48 o 65 r 70 Assiut p

68 l

66 i

71 88 o

73 o 72 350

77 d o

74 76 80 o h

75 i

79 82 l e

78 k 81 i

83 L 85 Sahel84 silim 200 Ab-Tig92 w

93 86 o L 87 88 27 94 89 97 90 27 00 N 96 Al-Badari 98 100 102 00 N 99 Sidfa107 91 50 105 106 Well No 103 104 Well Site 108 Al-Ghanayim Markaz 109 River Nile Caltevatit Boundere

0 5000 10000 31 00 E 31 30 E Figure 6-a: contour map distribution groundwater samples according TDS hazard (FAO, 1985, 2010)

Http://www.granthaalayah.com ©International Journal of Research - GRANTHAALAYAH [258]

[Morsi et. al., Vol.6 (Iss.4): April 2018] ISSN- 2350-0530(O), ISSN- 2394-3629(P) (Received: Mar 03, 2018 - Accepted: Apr 29, 2018) DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.1248172

TDS FAO1 FAO2 2500 HighLikelihood of soil problems level 2000

1500 Medium Likelihood of soil problems level mg/l 1000

500 Low Likelihood of soil problems level 0 1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 37 39 41 43 45 47 49 51 53 55 57 59 61 63 65 67 69 71 73 75 77 79 81 83 85 87 89 91 93 95 97 99 101 103 105 107 109 Site No Figure 6-b: histogram show classification of groundwater samples according TDS hazard (FAO, 19985 , 2010)

Sodium hazard

Sodium ions Sodium toxicity is often reduced if sufficient calcium is available in the soil. Excessive sodium causes mineral particles of soil to disperse and water penetration to decrease. High sodium concentration accompanied by decrease in the infiltration rate causes problem as the crop could not be adequately supplied with water especially when the hydraulic conductivity of the soil profile is too low to provide adequate drainage. If calcium and magnesium are the predominant adsorbed cations on the soil exchange complex, the soil tends to be easily tilled and have a readily permeable granular structure (Yousry, et al., 2009).

For groundwater samples (Fig.7-a,b), the sodium concentration ranges between 17 mg/l (0.77 meq/l) to195 mg/l (8.85 meq/l), and about 21.1% of samples is considered to have medium likelihood of soil problems (marginal) relatively to the sodium ions concentration, but the remaining samples indicate that there is no restriction of using sensitive crops, and lies within the low likelihood of soil prop problem. It is notable that sodium is toxic to certain plants and causes an adverse effect on the soil structure, infiltration, and permeability characteristics (El-Sherbini et al., 1997). Investigations exhibit that the excessive sodium exceeds three times as much as calcium. This high sodium content (>3:1) often results in severe water infiltration problem due to soil dispersion and plugging of the surface pores; this effect is similar to that of water with low salinity.

30 30 E 31 00 E 31 30 E

3 1 5 2 4

8 6 10 Dayrout 7 27 9 Na 14 12 11 27 30 N 13 15 17 190 16 30 N

20 s

18 m

21 19 e

Al-Qusiya l b

22 o

25 26 l

23 i o

30 s

27 f 29 o 31 35 28 d

36 o

h i 33 130l Manfalout e

53 k

37 i 54 l 32 40 55

34 38 39 56 m u

41 i

Abnoub 57 d e

58 M 42 63 45 51 52 59 43 50 62 44 46 61 64 60 Alfath 47 49 67 65 48 70 70 65 s Assiut68

66 m e 71 l

88 b

r p

72 l i

77 o

74 76 f 80 o 75 79 d

82 o

78 o h

81 i 83 l 85 e

84 k

Sahel silim i l Ab-Tig92 10

93 86 w o

87 88 L 27 94 89 97 90 27 00 N 96 Al-Badari 98 100 102 00 N 99 Sidfa107 91 50 105 106 Well No 103 104 Well Site 108 Al-Ghanayim Markaz 109 River Nile Caltevatit Boundere

0 5000 10000 31 00 E 31 30 E Figure 7-a: contour map distribution groundwater samples according Na+ ions hazard (FAO, 1985, 2010)

Http://www.granthaalayah.com ©International Journal of Research - GRANTHAALAYAH [259]

[Morsi et. al., Vol.6 (Iss.4): April 2018] ISSN- 2350-0530(O), ISSN- 2394-3629(P) (Received: Mar 03, 2018 - Accepted: Apr 29, 2018) DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.1248172

Na FAO1 FAO2 250 HighLikelihood of soil problems level 200

150

Medium Likelihood of soil problems level mg/l 100

50 Low Likelihood of soil problems level 0 1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 37 39 41 43 45 47 49 51 53 55 57 59 61 63 65 67 69 71 73 75 77 79 81 83 85 87 89 91 93 95 97 99 101 103 105 107 109 Site No Figure 7-b: Histogram show classification of groundwater samples according Na+ hazard (FAO, 19985, 2010)

Infiltration Concerns Calcium, magnesium, and sodium are used to calculate the sodium adsorption ratio (SAR) of the irrigation water. The adjusted SAR is calculated using information from (Suarez 1981), which includes the bicarbonate content of the irrigation water. The permeability hazard of an irrigation water sample is related to both the SAR and EC of the irrigation water (Flynnl, 2009).

An infiltration problem occurs if the irrigation water does not enter the soil rapid enough during a normal irrigation cycle to replenish the soil with water needed by the crop before the next irrigation. Low salinity water (less than 0.5 ds/m and especially below 0.2 ds/m) is corrosive and tends to leach surface soils free of soluble minerals and salts, especially calcium, reducing their strong stabilizing influence on soil aggregates and soil structure without salts and without calcium. The soil disperses and the dispersed finer soil particles fill many of the smaller pore spaces, sealing the surface and greatly reducing the rate at which water infiltrates the soil surface. We herein used the method of (Richards 1954) to evaluate the infiltration potential (e.g. the sodium adsorption ratio; SAR).

Sodium Adsorption Ratio (SAR) The sodium adsorption ratio (SAR) is used to estimate the sodality hazard of the Water.

SAR is a measure of the tendency of the irrigation water to the soil clay minerals with sodium ions, sodium clays have poor structure and develop permeability problems (George, 1983).

SAR is defined as in equation

Where Na+, Ca2+ and Mg2+ represent meq 1-1 of sodium, calcium and magnesium ions, respectively. SAR values were evaluated according to FAO guidelines.

According to the U.S. salinity staff classification (Richards 1954) which based on the sodium adsorption ratio (SAR) and the specific conductance (in micro mhos) the water divided into four classes (table, 9).

For groundwater samples (Fig.8-a,b), the SAR values range from 0.29 to 3.53. 55% are good (suitable) for irrigation in all soils as they are located in class [C2-S1] and 45% located in class [C3-S1], (Ayers and westcot, 1985). [C denotes conductance and S denote SAR].

Http://www.granthaalayah.com ©International Journal of Research - GRANTHAALAYAH [260]

[Morsi et. al., Vol.6 (Iss.4): April 2018] ISSN- 2350-0530(O), ISSN- 2394-3629(P) (Received: Mar 03, 2018 - Accepted: Apr 29, 2018) DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.1248172

Figure 8-a: Classification of groundwater samples according to U.S. salinity staff classification (Richards 1954)

30 30 E 31 00 E 31 30 E

3 1 5 2 4

8 6 10 Dayrout 7 27 9 14 12 11 27 30 N 13 15 17 1 16 30 N 20

18 1.85S 21 19

Al-Qusiya

22 - 23 25 26 30 27 29

31 35 3 28 36 33 Manfalout 53 C 37 54 32 40 55 38 56 34 41 39 Abnoub 57 58 42 63 45 51 52 1.4 59 43 50 62 44 46 61 64 60 Alfath 47 49 67 65 48 70 65 1 Assiut68

66 S

71 88 - 73

72 2 77

74 76 80 C 75 79 82 78 81 85 83 0 Sahel84 silim Ab-Tig92 93 86 87 88 27 94 89 97 90 27 00 N 96 Al-Badari 98 100 102 00 N 99 Sidfa107 91 50 105 106 Well No 103 104 Well Site 108 Al-Ghanayim Markaz 109 River Nile Caltevatit Boundere

0 5000 10000 31 00 E 31 30 E Figure 8-b: iso- contour map distribution of classes in groundwater samples according to U.S. salinity staff classification (Richards 1954)

Residual Sodium Carbonates (Eaton's Classification, 1950) When the sum of carbonate and bicarbonate is in excess of calcium and magnesium, there is an almost complete precipitation of the latter (Eaton's 1950). This can cause an increase in the proportionate amount of sodium, and so the effect on the soil is the high sodium content. The term residual sodium carbonates (RSC) is defined as follows: 2+ - 2+ 2+ RSC = (CO 3 + HCO 3) – (Ca +Mg ) all in mep/L

The RSC is used to distinguish between the different water classes for irrigation purposes, because the high concentration of bicarbonate leads to an increase in the PH value, which causes the dissolution of the organic matter. Moreover, the high concentration of the bicarbonate ions in the

Http://www.granthaalayah.com ©International Journal of Research - GRANTHAALAYAH [261]

[Morsi et. al., Vol.6 (Iss.4): April 2018] ISSN- 2350-0530(O), ISSN- 2394-3629(P) (Received: Mar 03, 2018 - Accepted: Apr 29, 2018) DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.1248172 irrigation water leads to its toxicity and affects the mineral nutrition of plants (see Eaton’s classification, 1950).

The groundwater samples (Fig.9-a,b) have RSC values ranging from -26.15 to 2; about 95% can be positioned within the level of none restriction on use; they belong to the possibly safe water for irrigation; as they are free from residual sodium carbonate (RSC) hazard. Whereas, the remaining 5% is considered as belonging to the slight to moderate restriction on use (marginal) relatively to the RSC values.

30 30 E 31 00 E 31 30 E

3 1 5 2 4

8 6 10 Dayrout 7 Marginal 27 9 14 12 11 27 30 N 13 15 17 16 30 N 20 18 21 19 Al-Qusiya 22

23 25 26 30 -10 27 29 31 35 28 36 33 Manfalout 53 37 54 32 40 55 38 56 34 41 39 Abnoub 57 58 42 63 45 51 52 Safe 59 43 50 62 44 46 61 64 60 Alfath 47 49 67 65 48 70 65 Assiut68 66 71 88 -26 72 73 77 74 76 80 75 79 82 78 81 85 83 Sahel84 silim Ab-Tig92 93 86 87 88 27 94 89 97 90 27 00 N 96 Al-Badari 98 100 102 00 N 99 Sidfa107 91 50 105 106 Well No 103 104 Well Site 108 Al-Ghanayim Markaz 109 River Nile Caltevatit Boundere

0 5000 10000 31 00 E 31 30 E Figure 9-a: iso- contour map distribution of RSC values hazard in groundwater samples according to (Eaton 1950)

RAC safe level Marginal level

-1 1 4 7 10 13 16 19 22 25 28 31 34 37 40 43 46 49 52 55 58 61 64 67 70 73 76 79 82 85 88 91 94 97 100 103 106 109

-6

-11 RSC value RSC -16

-21

-26

Figure 9-b: Histogram show classification of groundwater samples according RSC values hazard (Eaton 1950)

Specific Ion Toxicity The specific ion toxicity (like chloride and boron) occurs when the decline of crop growth is due to the excessive concentrations of that specific ion rather than to the osmotic effect alone (Yousry, et al., 2009).

Http://www.granthaalayah.com ©International Journal of Research - GRANTHAALAYAH [262]

[Morsi et. al., Vol.6 (Iss.4): April 2018] ISSN- 2350-0530(O), ISSN- 2394-3629(P) (Received: Mar 03, 2018 - Accepted: Apr 29, 2018) DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.1248172 Chloride Chloride ions concentration (Fig.10-a, b), ranges between 15 mg/l (0.42 meq/l) and 477 mg/l (13.44 meq/l); Table 3. Comparing the data of chloride with FAO guidelines, it was found that about 83.5% of the values are lesser than 4 meq/l; meaning that there is no restriction on using it for some susceptible crops. On the other hand, about 15.5% of samples at sites no. 17, 19, 25, 34, 36, 37, 63, 64, 66, 80, 82, 84, 86, 89 and 92 are belonging to the slight to moderate restriction on use (marginal) relatively to the chloride ions values. While, 0.91% of samples at site no. 3 belongs to the severe restriction on use.

30 30 E 31 00 E 31 30 E

3 1 5 2 4 Severe restriction one use for crops 477 8 6 400 10 Dayrout and Low likelihood of soil proplems 9 7 27 Cl 350 14 12 11 27 30 N 13 Slight to moderate restriction one use for crops 300 15 17 30 N 16 and medium likelihood of soil proplems 250 20 18 21 19 200 Al-Qusiya 22

23 25 26 140 30 none restriction one use for crops 27 29 100 31 35 28 36 and Low likelihood of soil proplems 50 33 Manfalout 53 37 54 32 40 55 0 38 56 34 41 39 Abnoub 57 58 42 63 45 51 52 59 43 50 62 44 46 61 64 60 Alfath 47 49 67 65 48 70 65 Assiut68 66 71 88

72 73 77 74 76 80 75 79 82 78 81 85 83 Sahel84 silim Ab-Tig92 93 86 87 88 27 94 89 97 90 27 00 N 96 Al-Badari 98 100 102 00 N 99 Sidfa107 91 50 105 106 Well No 103 104 Well Site 108 Al-Ghanayim Markaz 109 River Nile Caltevatit Boundere

0 5000 10000 31 00 E 31 30 E Figure 10-a: iso- contour map distribution of Cl- values hazard in groundwater samples according to (FAO, 1985, 2010)

CL FAO1 FAO2 16

14 Severe restriction one use for crops and Low likelihood of soil proplems 12

8 Slight to moderate restriction one use for crops and medium likelihood of soil proplems 6

value in meq/lL value 4

2 none restriction one use for crops and Low likelihood of soil proplems 0 1 4 7 10 13 16 19 22 25 28 31 34 37 40 43 46 49 52 55 58 61 64 67 70 73 76 79 82 85 88 91 94 97 100 103 106 109 site no.

Figure 10-b: Histogram show classification of groundwater samples according Cl- values hazard (FAO, 1985, 2010

Boron The boron is another element that is essential in low amount for plant growth, but it is toxic at higher concentrations. In fact, toxicity can occur on sensitive crops at concentrations lesser than 1 mg/l. surface water rarely contain enough boron to be toxic but groundwater occasionally contain toxic amounts. Boron toxicity symptoms normally sow first an older leaves as a yellowing, spotting, or drying of leaf tissue at the tips and edges (Yousry, et al., 2009).

Http://www.granthaalayah.com ©International Journal of Research - GRANTHAALAYAH [263]

[Morsi et. al., Vol.6 (Iss.4): April 2018] ISSN- 2350-0530(O), ISSN- 2394-3629(P) (Received: Mar 03, 2018 - Accepted: Apr 29, 2018) DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.1248172 According to (Leeden et al. 1990), the surface and groundwater in the study area can be classified depending on the boron content and the crops tolerant to it in the following manner:

For groundwater samples, about (78.9%) (range between 0.008 and 0.31 mg/) have B2+ values less than 0.33 mg/l are suitable for irrigation of all crops (excellent), while about (8.26%) of groundwater samples have B2+values between 0.35 mg/l and 0.63 mg/l are good for irrigation of Sensitive Crop group and excellent for irrigation of semi- tolerant and tolerant crops. about (11%) of groundwater samples have B2+values between 0.67 mg/l and 0.95 mg/l are permissible for irrigation of Sensitive Crop group, good for irrigation of semi- tolerant while excellent for irrigation of Tolerant Crop group , and about (1.84%) of groundwater samples have B2+values between 1.1 mg/l and 1.2 mg/l are doubtful for irrigation Sensitive Crop group , while permissible for irrigation of semi- tolerant Crop group and good for irrigation of tolerant Crop group (Fig. 11- a,b).

30 30 E 31 00 E 31 30 E

3 1 5

2 4 l u

8 f 3050000 6 t

10 Dayrout b 7 9 B u 27 o 14

12 11 D 27 30 N 13 0.908 15 e

17 l 16 30 N

3040000 b

20 i 18 21 19 s

Al-Qusiya s

22 i 25 26

23 m

30 r 27 29 e 31 35 0.608 3030000 28 p 36

33 Manfalout d 37 53

54 o 32 40 55 38 56 o 34 41 39

Abnoub 57 G 58 42 63 3020000 45 51 52 59 43 0.308 50 62 t 44 46 61 64 60 n 49 67 Alfath65

47 e

48 l 70 Assiut 65 l

68 e 66 71 88 c 3010000 x 73

72 E 77 0.008 74 76 80 75 79 82 78 81 85 83 Sahel84 silim Ab-Tig92 3000000 93 86 87 88 27 94 89 97 90 27 00 N 96 Al-Badari 98 100 102 00 N 99 2990000 Sidfa107 91 50 105 106 Well No 103 104 Well Site 108 Al-Ghanayim Markaz 109 River Nile 2980000Caltevatit Boundere

0 5000 10000 31 00 E 31 30 E Figure 11-a: Distribution of B2+concentration contour map of groundwater samples in study area on basis of Crop groups of boron tolerance (Leaden, et al., 1990)

B Excellent Good permissible Doubtful 1.4 Unsuitable 1.2 Doubtful 1

0.8 Permissible

0.6 Good value in mg/l value 0.4 0.2 Excellent

0 1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 37 39 41 43 45 47 49 51 53 55 57 59 61 63 65 67 69 71 73 75 77 79 81 83 85 87 89 91 93 95 97 99 101 103 105 107 109 site no.

Figure 11-b: Histogram show classification of groundwater samples according B2+concentration on basis of Crop groups of boron tolerance (Leaden, et al., 1990)

While According to (FAO, 1985 & 2010) guidelines for irrigation water, depended on boron content and likelihood of soil problems can be classified surface and groundwater in study area as the following manner:

Http://www.granthaalayah.com ©International Journal of Research - GRANTHAALAYAH [264]

[Morsi et. al., Vol.6 (Iss.4): April 2018] ISSN- 2350-0530(O), ISSN- 2394-3629(P) (Received: Mar 03, 2018 - Accepted: Apr 29, 2018) DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.1248172 For groundwater, 89% fo samples have B2+ values less than 0.7 mg/l.(ranged from 0.008 to 0.68 mg/l) They belong to low likelihood of soil problems (none degree of restriction on use) for irrigation (the possibly safe water). While the rest samples (11%) have B2+ values ranged from 0.7 to 1.2 mg/l, They belong to likelihood of soil problems (Slight to moderate degree of restriction on use) for irrigation (Fig. 12-a,b).

30 30 E 31 00 E 31 30 E degree of restriction on use 3 1 5 2 4

8 6 d 3050000 10 Dayrout e

9 7 t a 27 1.008r 14 e 27

12 11 d 13 30 N o 15 17 16 m 30 N 3040000

20 o

18 t 21 19 Al-Qusiya 0.808t

22 h

26 g 23 25 i 30 l 27 29 S 31 35 3030000 28 36 0.608 33 Manfalout 53 37 54 32 40 55 38 56 34 41 39 Abnoub 57 58 42 63 3020000 45 51 52 0.408 59

43 e 50 62 44 46 61 64 60 49 67 Alfath 47 65 n 48 70 65 Assiut68 66 o 71 0.208 3010000 88 72 73 N 77 74 76 80 75 79 82 78 81 0.008 85 83 Sahel84 silim Ab-Tig92 3000000 93 86 87 88 27 94 89 97 90 27 00 N 96 Al-Badari 98 100 102 00 N 99 2990000 Sidfa107 91 50 105 106 Well No 103 104 Well Site 108 Al-Ghanayim Markaz 109 River Nile 2980000Caltevatit Boundere

0 5000 10000 31 00 E 31 30 E Figure 12-a: Distribution of B2+concentration contour map of groundwater samples in study area on basis of likelihood of soil problems (FAO, 1985 & 2010)

10 B FAO1 FAO2 High likelihood of soil problems ‎ Medium likelihood of soil problems ‎ 1 1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 37 39 41 43 45 47 49 51 53 55 57 59 61 63 65 67 69 71 73 75 77 79 81 83 85 87 89 91 93 95 97 99 101 103 105 107 109 Low likelihood of soil problems ‎

0.1 value in mg/l in value

0.01

0.001 Site No Figure 12-b; Histogram show classification of surface water samples according B2+ concentration on basis of likelihood of soil problems (FAO, 1985 & 2010)

Bicarbonates The presence of bicarbonate leads to the precipitation of calcium carbonate (scale) at water pH greater than 7.5. Acidification of the water is the best way to manage bicarbonate, where water levels lesser than 1.5 mg/l will not cause problems. Severe problems can be noticed at levels above 2.5 mg/l.

For groundwater samples (Fig.13-a,b), the bicarbonate ions concentration ranges from 90 mg/l to 730 mg/l (1.5 to 11.94 meq/l) all the groundwater samples are belonging to the level of slightly to moderate restriction on use (medium likelihood of soil problem), except at sites no. 17, 38, 64, 84, and 89, which show bigger problem.

Http://www.granthaalayah.com ©International Journal of Research - GRANTHAALAYAH [265]

[Morsi et. al., Vol.6 (Iss.4): April 2018] ISSN- 2350-0530(O), ISSN- 2394-3629(P) (Received: Mar 03, 2018 - Accepted: Apr 29, 2018) DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.1248172 Heavy Metals Not all trace elements are toxic and many of them are essential for plant growth, but in small quantities (e.g. Fe, Mn, Zn). However, excessive quantities will cause undesirable accumulations in the plant tissues and reduces the growth rate.

By comparing the result with the recommended maximum concentrations of some trace elements in irrigation water (FAO, 1985) and (Rowe et al., 1995) were 5, 5, 2, 0.2, 0.2, 0.2, 0.1, 0.1, 0.05 and 0.01 the maximum limit )for lead, iron, zinc, copper, nickel, manganese, arsenic, chromium, cobalt and cadmium, respectively can be obtained the following:

For groundwater samples, comparing the above recommended values with the data obtained from the analysis of heavy metals revealed that lead, iron, zinc, copper, arsenic, and chromium values are within the limits recommended by FAO (1985), and Rowe et al. (1995), indicating none restriction on use. Manganese concentration is high at all sites except sites no. 29, 80, 83 and 84, and lies within the level of none restriction on use. The cadmium concentration is higher at 52% of the sites. The copper concentration is higher at 12% of the sites, and the iron concentration is higher at all sites, except sites no. 63, 80, 83, 84 and 92, and lies within the slightly – medium to severe restriction on use (fig.14).

30 30 E 31 00 E 31 30 E

3 1 5 2 4

8 6 720

10 Dayrout High likelihood of soil problems 640 9 7 27 520 14 27 12 11 480 30 N 13 15 17 400 16 30 N

20 Medium Likelihood of soil problems320 18 21 19 Al-Qusiya 240 22

23 25 26 92 30 27 29 80 31 35 28 36 33 Manfalout 53 37 54 32 40 55 38 56 34 41 39 Abnoub 57 58 42 63 45 51 52 59 43 50 62 44 46 61 64 60 Alfath 47 49 67 65 48 70 65 Assiut68 66 71 88

0 5000 10000 31 00 E 31 30 E Figure 13-a: Distribution of HCO3 concentration contour map of groundwater samples in study area on basis of likelihood of soil problems (FAO, 1985 & 2010)

HCO3 FAO1 FAO2 800

700 High likelihood of soil problems 600

500

400

value in mg/l value in 300 200 Medium likelihood of soil problems

100 Low likelihood of soil problems 0 1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 37 39 41 43 45 47 49 51 53 55 57 59 61 63 65 67 69 71 73 75 77 79 81 83 85 87 89 91 93 95 97 99 101 103 105 107 109 Site No Figure 13-b: Histogram show classification of surface water samples according HCO3 concentration on basis of likelihood of soil problems (FAO, 1985 & 2010)

[Morsi et. al., Vol.6 (Iss.4): April 2018] ISSN- 2350-0530(O), ISSN- 2394-3629(P) (Received: Mar 03, 2018 - Accepted: Apr 29, 2018) DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.1248172

Fe FAO1 FAO2 long Term Short T 100

mg/l 1 4 7 10 13 16 19 22 25 28 31 34 37 40 43 46 49 52 55 58 61 64 67 70 73 76 79 82 85 88 91 94 97 100 103 106 109

0.1

0.01 Site No

Mn FAO1 FAO2 long Term Short T 10

1 4 7 10 13 16 19 22 25 28 31 34 37 40 43 46 49 52 55 58 61 64 67 70 73 76 79 82 85 88 91 94 97 100 103 106 109 mg/l

0.1

0.01 Site No Cu long Term Short T 10

1 1 4 7 10 13 16 19 22 25 28 31 34 37 40 43 46 49 52 55 58 61 64 67 70 73 76 79 82 85 88 91 94 97 100 103 106 109

0.1 mg/l 0.01

0.001

0.0001 Site No Cd long Term Short T 1 1 4 7 10 13 16 19 22 25 28 31 34 37 40 43 46 49 52 55 58 61 64 67 70 73 76 79 82 85 88 91 94 97 100 103 106 109

0.1

0.01 mg/l 0.001

0.0001

0.00001 Site No

Cr long Term Short T

1 1 4 7 10 13 16 19 22 25 28 31 34 37 40 43 46 49 52 55 58 61 64 67 70 73 76 79 82 85 88 91 94 97 100 103 106 109

0.1

0.01 mg/l

0.001

0.0001 Site No Pb long Term Short T

1 1 4 7 10 13 16 19 22 25 28 31 34 37 40 43 46 49 52 55 58 61 64 67 70 73 76 79 82 85 88 91 94 97 100 103 106 109

0.1 mg/l 0.01

0.001

0.0001 Site No Ni long Term Short T 10

1 1 4 7 10 13 16 19 22 25 28 31 34 37 40 43 46 49 52 55 58 61 64 67 70 73 76 79 82 85 88 91 94 97 100 103 106 109

0.1

Figuremg/l 14: Variation in trace and heavy metals concentration of groundwater samples according 0.01

to0.001 recommended limits of (FAO, 1985) guideline for irrigation water and ( Rowe,. el at 1995)

[Morsi et. al., Vol.6 (Iss.4): April 2018] ISSN- 2350-0530(O), ISSN- 2394-3629(P) (Received: Mar 03, 2018 - Accepted: Apr 29, 2018) DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.1248172 Miscellaneous Elements The miscellaneous elements include the pH values, the total alkalinity, and the nutrients (ammonia and nitrates)

PH values For surface water samples, the pH values range between 6.6 and 8.9

The increase of pH values at sites no. 6, 7, 9, 11, 12, 13 and 16 could be related to photosynthesis and growth of aquatic plants (Allem, et al., 1969; El-Wakeel et Al., 1970). Photosynthesis consumes carbon dioxide leading to the rise of pH value.

However, chemical reactions in water that are controlled by the pH values and the biological activity is usually restricted to a fairly pH range of 5 to 8 (Tebbutt, 1998).

The greatest direct hazard of an abnormal pH value is its impact on the irrigation equipments.

For groundwater samples, the pH values range from 7.4 to 9.7, and lies within the slight to moderate restriction on use level. At sites no. 16, 18, 34, 51, 72 and 83; the values lie within the severe restriction on use level; indicating high pollution around these sites (fig.15).

Total Alkalinity Alkalinity serves as a pH reservoir for inorganic carbon. It is usually taken as an index of productive potential of water (Ravindra et al., 2003).

For groundwater samples, the total alkalinity ranges between 102 to 695 mg/l (about 1.7 to 11.37 meq/l), The bicarbonate concentrations of groundwater ranges between 1.5 and 11.49 meq/l indicating that there is a slight to moderate restriction of use; while sites no. 17, 38, 64, 84 and 89 are considered as belonging to the level of high severe restriction on use (fig.13-a, b).

30 30 E 31 00 E 31 30 E

3 1 5

2 4

8 6 e s

10 9.5u

Dayrout 7

9 n o

27 14 n 27

12 11 o i 30 N 13 t 9.2c 15 i 17 r 16 t 30 N

20 s

e r

18 21 19 Al-Qusiya e 22 r

8.9e 23 25 26 v

30 e S 27 29 31 35 28 36 8.5 33 e Manfalout s 53 37 54 u 32 40 55 38 56 n

34 41 39 o

Abnoub 57 58 8.3n 42 o 52 63 i 45 51 t

59 c i

43 r

50 62 t 44 46 61 64 60 Alfath s

47 49 67 65 e r 48 8 65 e

70 t Assiut68

66 a 71 r

88 d o

72 73 m

77 7.7 o

76 t 74 80 75 t

79 82 h g

78 i

81 l 83

85 S Sahel84 silim 7.4 Ab-Tig92 93 86 87 88 27 94 89 97 90 27 00 N 96 Al-Badari 98 100 102 00 N 99 Sidfa107 91 50 105 106 Well No 103 104 Well Site 108 Al-Ghanayim Markaz 109 River Nile Caltevatit Boundere

0 5000 10000 31 00 E 31 30 E Figure 15: Distribution of PH values contour map of groundwater samples according to recommended limits of (FAO, 1985) guideline for irrigation water

[Morsi et. al., Vol.6 (Iss.4): April 2018] ISSN- 2350-0530(O), ISSN- 2394-3629(P) (Received: Mar 03, 2018 - Accepted: Apr 29, 2018) DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.1248172 Nutrients (Ammonia and Nitrates) For groundwater samples, the concentration of ammonia ranges from zero to 1.8 mg/l (Fig.16) within the permissible low level of likelihood of soil problems (none restriction of use at all sites for all crops).

The nitrate concentration along groundwater samples ranges from zero to 28 mg/l. About 54% of these samples (Fig.17) lies within the permissible low level of likelihood of soil problems (none restriction of use at all sites for all crops), and about 43% of samples is belonging to the level of the slight to moderate restriction on use.

The high concentration of ammonia in wastewater discharging from drain or sewage waste led to the high contamination of the water by ammonia. The ammonia concentration in unpolluted water is lesser than 0.2 mg/l as nitrogen (chapman, 1992).

By comparing the ammonia and nitrate values with the FAO guidelines (5 mg/l N) it is found that there is no restriction on using the studied water samples for sensitive crops except above mentioned sites.

30 30 E 31 00 E 31 30 E

3 1 5 2 4 1.8 8 6 10 Dayrout 7 27 9 1.6 14 12 11 27 30 N 13 15 17 1.4 16 30 N 20 18 21 19 Al-Qusiya 1.2 22

23 25 26 30 1 27 29 31 35 28 36 33 Manfalout 53 0.8 37 54 32 40 55 38 56 34 41 39 Abnoub 57 58 0.6 42 63 45 51 52 59 43 50 62 44 46 61 64 0.4 60 Alfath 47 49 67 65 48 70 65 Assiut68 66 0.2 71 88

72 73 77 0 74 76 80 75 79 82 78 81 85 83 Sahel84 silim Ab-Tig92 93 86 87 88 27 94 89 97 90 27 00 N 96 Al-Badari 98 100 102 00 N 99 Sidfa107 91 50 105 106 Well No 103 104 Well Site 108 Al-Ghanayim Markaz 109 River Nile Caltevatit Boundere

0 5000 10000 31 00 E 31 30 E Figure 16: Distribution of NH4 concentration contour map of groundwater samples according to recommended limits of (FAO, 1985) guideline for irrigation water

30 30 E 31 00 E 31 30 E

3 1 5 2 4 26

8 6 h g

10 Dayrout i 9 7 23

27 H 14 12 11 27 30 N 13 20 15 17 16 30 N 20 17 18 21 19 Al-Qusiya

22 m 25 26 14 23 u 30 i

27 29 d 31 35

28 e 36 11

33 Manfalout M 53 37 54 32 40 55 8 38 56 34 41 39 Abnoub 57 58 42 63 45 51 52 5 59 43 50 62 44 46 61 64 60 Alfath w 47 49 67 65 2 48 o

70 65 L Assiut68 66 -1 71 88

0 5000 10000 31 00 E 31 30 E Figure17: Distribution of NO3 concentration contour map of groundwater samples according to recommended limits of (FAO, 1985) guideline for irrigation water

[Morsi et. al., Vol.6 (Iss.4): April 2018] ISSN- 2350-0530(O), ISSN- 2394-3629(P) (Received: Mar 03, 2018 - Accepted: Apr 29, 2018) DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.1248172 4. Conclusions and Recommendations

Our analyses detected the variation in the properties of the groundwaters. All the PH values of groundwater samples are within the recommended limits of FAO (1985), except at sites no. 16, 18, 34, 51, 72 and 84 of groundwater samples, which exhibit more than the recommended limits. All the TDS concentrations in groundwater samples are within the recommended limits of FAO (1985) indicating none restoration on use, except 47%of groundwater samples; these are considered as belonging to the slight to moderate restoration on use. All the Na concentrations at groundwater samples are within the recommended limits of FAO (1985) (e.g. none restoration on use), except 21.1 % of groundwater samples which are belonging to the slight to moderate restoration on use. All the Boron concentrations at groundwater samples belong to the safe limits of irrigation water for the sensitive crops (excellent), except 14.6 % of groundwater samples which are good for irrigation of Sensitive crop group and excellent for irrigation of semi- tolerant and tolerant crops. There are about 1.8% of groundwater samples have B2+values more than 1 ppm (excellent to good for irrigation of tolerant crop group), and good for irrigation of semi-tolerant crop group, while permissible for irrigation of sensitive crop group. Chloride concentrations at surface and groundwater samples (within the recommended limits), except 15.5 % of groundwater samples which are considered as belonging to the slight to moderate restoration on use, and 0.91% at site no. 3 (severe restriction on use).

The bicarbonate concentrations in groundwater samples are within the moderate –medium level of likelihood of soil problem, except at site no. (7, 38, 64, 84 and 89 of groundwater samples, which fit in the higher severe restriction on use. The NH3 concentrations in all groundwater samples are within the recommended limits (none restoration on use) for all sensitive crops, while the NO3 concentrations in all groundwater samples are within the recommended limits (none restoration on use) for all sensitive crops, except 43% of groundwater samples, which are within the moderate – medium level of likelihood of soil problem, and about 3% of groundwater samples, which are considered as belonging to the high Severe restriction on use (high soil problem).

Consequently, we recommend a strong control is needed concerning the use of fertilizers and pesticides in the agriculture purposes, as well as selecting the suitable kind of crops for each area as in (fig. 18) and (fig.8) which show classified the groundwater in study area based on the hazard of TDS, Na, EC and SAR values and their effected on planet growth and its products in related to soil problems, also as show in details in (fig. 19) and (fig. 11,12) and (table 9) which obtained more details based on Boron hazard in related to the sensitivity and tolerant of deferent crops to it. preventing the direct disposal of sewage, domestic waste water, and industrial waste water before treatment to the darning ground well, irrigation canals and the River Nile. We also stress on preventing the construction of open septic tanks, especially near the pumping well.

[Morsi et. al., Vol.6 (Iss.4): April 2018] ISSN- 2350-0530(O), ISSN- 2394-3629(P) (Received: Mar 03, 2018 - Accepted: Apr 29, 2018) DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.1248172

30 30 E 31 00 E 31 30 E

3 1 5 2 4

8 6 10 Dayrout 7 27 9 14 12 11 27 30 N 13 15 17 16 30 N 20 18 21 19 Al-Qusiya 22

23 25 26 30 27 29 31 35 28 36 33 Manfalout 53 37 54 32 40 55 38 56 34 41 39 Abnoub 57 58 42 63 45 51 52 59 43 50 62 44 46 61 64 60 Alfath 47 49 67 65 48 70 65 Assiut68 66 Legend 71 88 72 73 50 Well No 77 Well Site 74 76 80 75 Markaz 79 82 78 81 River Nile 85 83 Sahel84 silim Ab-Tig92 Caltevatit Boundere 93 86 87 88 27 94 89 97 90 27 00 N Good groundwater for irrigation in all soils 96 Al-Badari 98 100 102 00 N 99 Suitable under ordinary condation, Sidfa107 91 105 106 103 104 it can be used under specific condition 108 Al-Ghanayim 109 like adequate drainage and leaching

0 5000 10000 31 00 E 31 30 E Figure 18: contour map showing Distribution of suitability of groundwater for irrigation purpose in related to likelihood soil problems according to recommended limits of (FAO, 1985, 2010) guideline for irrigation water

30 30 E 31 00 E 31 30 E

3 1 5 2 4 3050000 8 6 10 Dayrout 7 27 9 B 14 27 12 11 30 N 13 15 17 30 N 3040000 16 20 18 21 19 Al-Qusiya 22

23 25 26 30 27 29 31 35 3030000 28 36 33 Manfalout 53 37 54 32 40 55 38 56 34 41 39 Abnoub 57 58 42 63 Legend3020000 45 51 52 59 43 50 62 44 46 61 64 50 Well No 60 Alfath 47 49 67 65 Well Site 48 70 65 Markaz Assiut68 66 71 3010000River Nile 88 Caltevatit Boundere 72 73 77 74 76 80 75 Excellent (belong to the safe 79 82 78 limits of irrigation water for all crops) 81 85 83 Sahel84 silim Ab-Tig92 3000000 93 86 Good for sensitive crops and excellent for 87 88 27 94 89 semi-tolerant and tolerant crops 97 90 27 00 N 96 Al-Badari 98 100 102 00 N Permissible for irrigation of sensitive crops and excellent to good 99 2990000 Sidfa107 91 for semi-tolerant and tolernt crops 105 106 103 104 108 Al-Ghanayim Doubtful for irrigation of sensitive crops and permissible to good 109 for semi-tolernt and tolerant crops 2980000

0 5000 10000 31 00 E 31 30 E Figure 19: contour map showing Distribution of suitability of groundwater for irrigation purpose in related to Boron hazard and crop groups’ tolerance according to recommended limits of (FAO, 1985, 2010) and (Leeden et. Al., 1990) guideline for irrigation water

References

[1] Allem, A.A. and samman, A.A. (1969). “PRODUCTIVITY OF LAKE MARIUT, EGYPT PART I, PHYSICAL AND CHEMICAL ASPECTS”. Intern. Revue Ges. Hydrobiol., 54, 313 – 355. [2] Ayers, R. S. and westcot (1985). “WATER QUALITY FOR AGRICULTURE” Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations (FAO) irrigation and Drainage Paper 29 Rev. 1, Rome, Italy. [3] Ayers, R. S., (1977). “QUALITY OF WATER FOR IRRIGATION" Jour. Of the irrigation and drainage division ASCE, vol. 103. No. IR2. [4] Bakhiet, A.A (1989). “GEOLOGICAL AND GEOPHYSICAL STUDIES ON THE AREAS AROUND WADI EL ASSIUTI” Ph.D. thesis, Fac.,Sci.,Assiuy,Univ.

[Morsi et. al., Vol.6 (Iss.4): April 2018] ISSN- 2350-0530(O), ISSN- 2394-3629(P) (Received: Mar 03, 2018 - Accepted: Apr 29, 2018) DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.1248172 [5] Chapman, D. (1992). “WATER QUALITY ASSESSMENT, A GUIDE TO THE USE OF BIOTA, SEDIMENTS AND WATER IN ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING” Chapman & Hall, London, (on behalf of UNESCO/WHO/UNEP). Pp., 585. [6] Dawoud, M. A., Ewea, H. A., (2009). “SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT VIA PTIMAL INTEGRATION OF SURFACE AND GROUNDWATER IN ARID ENVIRONMENT NILE RIVER QUATERNARY AQUIFER CASE STUDY” International conference water conservation in arid rigions 12-14 October 2009. [7] Eaton, F.M. (1950). “SIGNIFICANCE OF CARBONATES IN IRRIGATION WATER” Soil science 39:123-133. [8] EEAA (2005). “ENVIRONMENTAL PROFILE OF ASSIUT GOVERNORATE 2005” Egyptian Environmental Affair Agency. [9] EEAA-EIMP (1999). “ANNUAL REPORT FOR MONITORING OF MEDITERRANEAN COASTL WATER FOR YEAR 1998” Egyptian Environmental Affair Agency. [10] Egyptian meteorological Authority Egyptian meteorological authority (1981-2001). “ANNUAL METEOROLOGICAL REPORTS” Cairo. [11] El Kashoute M., A.,El-Sayed,E.E., Elewa A. M.t., Morsi M. S., (2011). “ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT OF ANTHROPOGENIC ACTIVITIES ON SURFACE AND GROUNWATER SYSTEMS IN THE WESTERN PART OF THE RIVER NILE, IN MINIA GOVERNORATE” journal of Amirican science , 2012; 8(5) 150 – 161 pp. [12] Elewa A. M. T., El Kashoute M., A., El-Sayed,E.E., Morsi M. S., (2013). “QUANTITATIVE STUDY OF SURFACE AND GROUNDWATER SYSTEMS IN THE WESTERN PART OF THE RIVER NILE, IN MINIA GOVERNORATE UPPER EGYPT: WATER QUALITY IN RELATION TO ANTHROPOGENIC ACTIVITIES” Greener journal of physical sciences ISSN: 2276-7851. [13] El-Miligy E., M., M., (2003). “GROUNDWATER RESOURCES EVALUATION OF ASSIUT GOVERNORATE” A thesis submitted for the Dr. ph. D Science in geology (hydrology) Geo. Dept. facl. Of science Assiut Univ. Egypt. [14] El-Sherbini, A., El Fiky, A., El Moattassem, M., Abdel Gawad, s. and Nour El Din, M. (1997). “DESIGH OF MONITORING NETWORK FOR WATER MANAGEMENT IN THE RIVER NILE” Nile 2002, Feb. 1997 , addis ABABA, Ethiopia. [15] El-Sherbini, A.M., Bary, M.A.A., Heikal, M.T. and Hamdy, A. (1997). “ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS OF POLLUTION SOURCES ON ROSETTA BRANCH WATER QUALITY” Volume II. Water quality and pollution control. Water management, salinity and pollution control towards sustainable irrigation in the Mediterranean region. CIHEAM international conference, valenzano, Bari, Italy, 22-26 September, 65-85. [16] El-Wakeel, S. K. and wahby, S. D. (1970). “HYDROGRAPHY AND CHEMISTRY OF LAKE MANSALH, EGYPT” Arch. Hydrobiol., 67, 173 – 200. [17] FAO (1985). “FOOD AND AGRICULTURE ORGANIZATION OF THE UNITED NATIONS (FAO) (1985)” Irrigation and Drainage. Bull. NO 29 Rev. I. [18] Fishman, M. G. and Friedman, L. C. (1985). “METHODS FOR DETERMINATION OF INORGANIC SUBSTANCES IN WATER AND FLUVIAL SEDIMENTS” U. S. Geol. Surv., Book 5, Chapter. A1. Open File Report, pp. 85– 495, Denver, Colorado, U. S. A. [19] Flynnl R.(2009). “IRRIGATION WATER ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION, 1 EXTENSION AGRONOMIST, AGRICAUTURAL SCIENCE CENTER AT ARTESIA” New Mexico State University Guide W-102.Sc Cooperative Extension Service • College of Agricultural, Consumer and Environmental Sciencesiences This publication is scheduled to be updated and reissued 12/14. [20] Leeden, V. F., Troise, F. L. and Todd,D. K.( 1990). “THE WATER ENCYCLOPEDIA” Lewis publishers, 808p. [21] Mansouir M. R., (2010). “EVALUATION OF WATER RESOURCES OF THE NORTHERN COAST OF SINAI – EGYPT” M Sc. 2010 fucl. Sci. geol. Dep. Cairo University.

[Morsi et. al., Vol.6 (Iss.4): April 2018] ISSN- 2350-0530(O), ISSN- 2394-3629(P) (Received: Mar 03, 2018 - Accepted: Apr 29, 2018) DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.1248172 [22] Morsi M. S., (2012). “ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT OF ANTHROPOGENIC ACTIVITIES ON THE SURFACE AND GROUNDWATER SYSTEMS IN THE WESTERN PART OF THE RIVER NILE, IN MINIA GOVERNORATE” M Sc. Thesis 2012 fucl. Sci. geol. Dep. Minia University. [23] Morsi M. S., (2015). “ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT OF ANTHROPOGENIC ACTIVITIES ON THE SURFACE AND GROUNDWATER AROUND THE RIVER NILE, BETWEEN DIROUT AND EL-BADARI – ASSIUT GOVERNORAT” Ph.D. Thesis 2015 fucl. Sci. geol. Dep. Minia University. [24] Mousa, S.E., Attia, F.A., Abu El Fotouh, A.M. (1994). “ GEOLOGICAL AND HYDROLOGICL STUDY ON THE QUATERNARY AQUIFER IN THE NILE VALLEY BETWEEN ASSIUT AND SOHAG GOVERNORAT, EGYPT” Geological Journal of Egypt, 38: 1-20. [25] Omara, S. (1972). “LIMESTONE DYKES IN THE NILE VALLY AROUND ASSIUT, UPPER EGYPT” N.Jb. Geol. Paleont. Mn., Stuttgart, pp. 475-483. [26] Omara, S.El Tahlawi, M.R.and Hafe,H. (1970). “THE GEOLOGY OF THE ENVIONS OF ASSIUT” Bull. Sci., Geograph. Egypt, 43, Cairo. [27] Omara, S.El Tahlawi, M.R.and Shama, K. (1974). “DETAILED GEOLOGICAL MAPPING OF THE DESERT AREA BETWEEN MANFALUT AND SIROUT” Detailed geological mapping of the desert area between Manfalut and Sirout, Bull. Sci., Geogr. No.47, Cairo. [28] Osman, H.Z., (1980). “GEOLOGICAL STUDIES ON THE AREA TO THE NORTHWEST OF ASSIUT” M.Sc., thesis, AssiutUniv. 276p. [29] Rainwater, F. H. and Thatcher, L. L. (1960). “METHODS FOR COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS OF WATER SAMPLES” U. S. Geol. Surv. Water Supply, paper No. 1454, U. S. A., 301p. [30] Ravindra, K.; Meenakshi, A.; Rani, M. and kaushik, A. (2003). “SEASONAL VARIATIONS IN PHYSICOCHEMICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF RIVER YAMUNA IN HARYANA AND ITS ECOLOGICAL BEST DESIGNATED USE” Environ. Monit., 5: 419-426. [31] Richards, L.A. (1954). “IN USDA AGRICULTURAL HANDBOOK” US Department of agriculture, Washington DC, pp., 160. [32] Rowe,D.R. el at 1995 Rowe, D. R. and Abdel Magid, I. M. (1995). “HANDBOOK OF WAST WATER RECLAMATION AND REUSE” CRC press. Inc. 550p. [33] Said R. (1981). “GEOLOGICAL EVALUATION OF THE RIVER NILE” Springer-Verlag, NY, Heidelberg, Berlin, 151pp. [34] Said, R (1983). “PROPOSED CLASSIFICATION OF THE QUATERNARY OF EGYPT” J. Afr. Earth Sci., Vol. 1, pp. 41-45. [35] Said, R (1990). “THE GEOLOGY OF EGYPT” balkema, Rotterdam, Broodfield. [36] Said, R. (1961). “TECTONIC FRAMEWORK OF EGYPT AND ITS INFLUENCE AND DISTRIBUTION OF FORAMINIFERA” A. Ass. Petrol. Geologists Bll. Vol. 45. [37] Said, R. (1962). “THE GEOLOGY OF EGYPT” Elsevier Pub1. Co., Amsterdam, New York. [38] Shama, K.M. (1972). “GEOLOGY OF THE AREA BETWEEN MANFALUT AND DAIRUT” M.sc., thesis, Fac. Sci., Assiut Univ. [39] Suarez, D.L. (1981). “RELATION BETWEEN PH AND SODIUM ADSORPTION RATIO (SAR) AND AN ALTERNATIVE METHOD OF ESTIMATING SAR OF SOIL OR DRAINAGE WATERS “Soil Science Society of America Journal, 45, 469–475. [40] UN (2002). “JOHANNSBURG SUMMIT 2002, COUNTRY PROFILE, EGYPT” http: ∕∕www.un.org /esa/agenda21/natlinfo/ wssd/Egypt.pdf. [41] Yousry, M., El-Sherbini,A., Heikal, M.,T., Salem,T.,A.(2009). “SUITABILITY OF WATER QUALITY ATATUS OF ROSETTA BRANCH FOR WEST DELTA WATER CONSERVATION AND IRRIGATION REHABITATION PROJECT” Water science. Scientific Journal of the National water Research center. Issue, 46.October 2009. *Corresponding author. E-mail address: Geo_mamdoh@ yahoo.com