CLASSES AND AVAILABILITY OF SOIL WATER
For many years soil water has been classified as hygroscopic, capil-
lary, and gravitational. Hygroscopic water is on the surface of the
soil grains and is not capable of movement by the action of gravity or
capillary forces. Capillary water is that part in excess of the hygro-
scopic water which exists in the pore space of the soil and is retained
against the force of gravity in a soil that permits unobstructed drain-
age. Gravitational water is that part in excess of hygroscopic and
capillary water which will move out of the soil if favorable drainage
is provided. There is no precise boundary or line of demarcation
between these three classes of soil water. The proportion of each
class depends on soil texture, structure, organic matter content,
temperature, and depth of soil column considered.
Water may also be classified as unavailable, available, and gravita-
tional or superfluous. Such a grouping refers to the availability of soil
water to plants. Gravitational water drains quickly from the root
zone under normal drainage conditions. Unavailable water is held too
tightly by capillary forces and is generally not accessible to plant
roots. Available water is the difference between gravitational and un-
available water.
Water drains from the soil under the constant pull of gravity.
Sandy soils drain readily, while clay soils drain very slowly. Hence,
one day after irrigating a sandy soil most of the gravitational water
has drained out of the soil, whereas clay may require 4 or more days
for gravitational water to drain. The rate of drainage is most rapid
immediately after irrigating and decreases constantly, nevertheless it
continues to drain at a relatively slow rate, even after gravitational
water has been removed. On the average, 2 days are required before
the rate of drainage decreases rather sharply and gravitational water
has been removed from the root zone. This implies, of course, that no
restricting layers are in the root zone to impede the downward flow
of water.
Relationships between the various terms used in identifying classes
and availability of soil water are shown
Field Capacify
When gravitational water has been removed, the moisture content
of soil is called field capacity. Field capacity cannot be determined
Saturation
Gravitational water
Rapid drainage
Field capacity
Available Capillary water
moisture Slow drainage
Permanent wilting A
Unavailable Hygroscopic wafer
moisture Essentially no drainage
Classes of soil-water availability to plants and drainage characteristics.
accurately because there is no discontinuity in the curve of moisture
content versus time. Nevertheless, the concept of field capacity is
extremely useful in arriving at the amount of water available in the
soil for plant use. Most of the gravitational water drains through the
soil before it can be used consumptively by plants.
In practice, field capacity is usually determined 2 days after an irri-
gation. Therefore, field capacity defines a specific point on the
moisture-content time curve. Specifying the time also makes it
possible to calculate the water used consumptively by plants while
gravitational water is draining from the soil. A soil will come to field
capacity more quickly when an active crop is growing than when there
are no roots removing water from the soil. Special precaution should
be taken not to overlook the amount of water consumptively used by
the crop between the time of irrigation and the time at which field
capacity is determined. The amount of water thus used when light
irrigations are given is very important, and the principle should never
be overlooked in irrigation practice.
Field capacity can be measured by determining moisture content
of soil after an irrigation which is sufficiently heavy to insure thorough
wetting of the soil to be tested. Observing the decrease in moisture
by making moisture determinations at different times after irrigation
is valuable in understanding and properly interpreting the field capac-
ity characteristics of soil. However, soils must be well drained before
reliable field determinations can be made in this manner. Restricting
layers of silt and clay as well as a high water table will impede drain-
age and give erroneous indications of field capacity.
Since field capacity by definition is a direct function of time, the
importance of time in the determination and use of this concept cannot
be overemphasized. For example, field capacity measured 2 days after
an irrigation cannot be used without modification to estimate the water
remaining in the soil in the spring following fall irrigation. Further-
more, the value of field capacity determined when a crop is growing
on the land will be somewhat different from the value when the land
is bare. The effect of excessive surface evaporation versus little or no
surface evaporation will also have its influence. Despite these limita-
tions the concept of field capacity is extremely useful for estimating
the volume of water retained in the soil. Precise determinations of
field capacity are generally not necessary for field applications.
Soil moisture tension is normally between % o and 1/3 atmospheres 3
when the soil is at field capacity. The correct value depends upon the
drainage characteristics of the soil and the time after irrigation at
which the soil is assumed to reach field capacity. Sandy soils tend to
be near % o atm at field capacity, while clays tend toward 1/3 atm.
Some soils have gone as high as 0.6 atm. For most agricultural soils,
a tension of 34 0 corresponds more closely than does 1/3 atm to the
generally accepted values of field capacity determined by moisture
content. The large difference in moisture content and volume of water
in the soil between % o and 1/3 atm makes it important to define the
tension correctly at which field capacity occurs. Considering field
capacity to occur at 1/3 atm tension when it is % 0 of an atm leads to
gross errors in estimating the volume of water available to plants
following irrigation.
Permanent Wilting Point
The soil-moisture content when plants permanently wilt is called the
permanent wilting point or the wilting coefficient. The permanent
wilting point is at the lower end of the available moisture range. A
plant will wilt when it is no longer able to extract sufficient moisture
from the soil to meet its water needs. Temporary wilting will occur in
many crops on a hot windy day, but the plants recover in the cooler
portion of the day. Permanent wilting, as well as temporary wilting,
depends upon the rate of water used by the plant, the depth of the
root zone, and the water holding capacity of the soil. Permanent wilt-
ing will occur at a higher moisture content in a hot climate than in a
cool climate. A plant is considered to be permanently wilted when it
will not recover after being placed in a saturated atmosphere where
little or no consumptive water use occurs.
3 One atmosphere equals 14.7 pounds per square inch.
Field estimates of wilting point can often be made by determining
the moisture content of soils in which plants have permanently wilted.
This method is subject to more error and requires more judgment
than field determinations of field capacity. Allowance must be made
for depth and nature of rooting. Furthermore, it is often difficult
to find plants in the condition of permanent wilt. For a plant
to reach permanent wilting following an irrigation, provided that
the plant is using considerable water, will require 1 week in sands
to perhaps 4 weeks in clays, and even longer if the plant is deeply
rooted.
The tension at which permanent wilting occurs can vary from 7
to as high as 40 atm, depending upon rate of consumptive use, crop,
salt content of soil, and soil texture. As the temperature and rates of
consumptive use increase, permanent wilting will occur at significantly
lower tensions and higher moisture contents. The tension in the soil
moisture when the soil is at permanent wilting is generally considered
to be 15 atm. Whether in reality it is 10 or 20 atm makes very little
difference, since the change of moisture is slight with rather large
changes of moisture tension.
As an approximation, the permanent wilting percentage can be
estimated by dividing the field capacity by a factor varying from 2.0
to 2.4, depending upon the amount of silt in the soil. For soils of high
silt content 2.4 should be used.
Available Moisture
The difference in moisture content of the soil between field capacity
and permanent wilting is termed the available moisture. This repre-
sents the moisture which can be stored in the soil for subsequent use
by plants. Available moisture can be expressed as percentage mois-
ture P,„, as percentage volume P,,, or as depth d, whichever is most
convenient.
Often it becomes desirable to refer to the amount of available mois-
ture remaining in or extracted from the soil. This can also be ex-
pressed by P„„ P,,, or d, when it is desired to know the quantity of
water in the soil. However, when correlating the moisture condition of
the soil to crop response, the amount of moisture remaining, or ex-
tracted, can be represented as a percentage of the available moisture
to obtain a more significant expression of moisture condition in the
soil.
Readily Available Moisture
Soil moisture content near the wilting point is not readily available
to the plant. Hence, the term readily available moisture has been
used to refer to that portion of the available moisture that is most
easily extracted by plants, approximately 75 percent of the available
moisture.
 INTERCEPTION OF RAIN WATER BY PLANTS

RAIN CLOUDS

mish...
44111■0411,0- 4.4, izoON
CLOUD FORMATION

PRECIPITATION
t
EVAPORATION
•

6
4'1'
N.
eb
P o
RFAcp 0
Vn UOFc .. 9

INFILTRATION
1t
t t t
t t
ti •
ttt 4
• 4 0
SOIL 4 4
+
PERCOLATION 4 14 f
ROCK 4
,„
—GROUND WATER- OCEAN
DEEP PERCOLATION

Diagram of the hydrologic cycle showing the interrelationships among

soil, plants, and the atmosphere. Only water is lost from soils in evaporation and
transpiration from plant surfaces. Solid particles are often included in surface runoff
water. and nutrients in percolation water.

SOIL-WATER-PLANT CONTINUUM

".....-% WATER IS RETURNED TO

THE ATMOSPHERE BY
EVAPO-TRANSPIRATION
1117.01e1
WATER IS 1011 AV211,11
TRANSPORTED islin bh ?MOO.
UPWARD
IN PLANT
WATER IS ADDED TO
SOIL THROUGH
LOSS THROUGH PRECIPITATION AND
STOMATA IN LEAF IRRIGATION
// / //
//
/ /
/ //
WATER IS / /0
LOST BY /
EVAPORATION ABSORPTION BY f/ / /
/
ROOT HAIRS // IP/ /

Soil-plant-atmosphere continuum. In recent years scientists have come

to realize that a common set of basic principles governs relationships among water,
soil, plants, and the atmosphere. This continuum is best illustrated by following water
as it is added to soils through precipitation or irrigation, as it behaves in soils, is lost
directly to the atmosphere from soils, or is absorbed by plants, transported upward, and
subsequently evaporated into the atmosphere. Water behavior in all cases is subject to
the same basic physical and chemical laws.
Available Moisture in Soils

Soil Texture Range Average

mm/m in/ft mm/m in/ft

Coarse sand — gravel 33-66 0.4-0.8 42 0.5

Coarse sand — loamy sand 62-83 0.7-1.0 67 0.8
Sandy loam — fine loamy sand 83-125 1.0-1.5 104 1.2
Loams — and sandy clay loans 125-192 1.5-2.3 158 1.9
Fine clay barns — silty clay
loans 146-208 1.7-2.5 175 2.1
Silty clay — clay 133-208 1.6-2.5 167 2.0

WATER USE
Irrigation intervals and system capacity requirements are usually
based on the maximum transpiration expected during peak periods
of water use. Transpiration peaks range from as low as 3 mm (0.12
in) per day for vineyard up to 8 mm (.32 in) per day for vegetables
and truck crops ,

1' CITRUS --I TRUCK GARDENS -A

.1-- VINEYARDS ORCHARDS

MIL.LIMETERS PER DAY

1.0 20 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 70 8.0

lierSO4.14 ■1■WINIf- nor adowiWnoto...

0.05 0.10 0.15 0 20 0.25 030

INCHES PER DAY
Transpiration peaks for varied types of plantings, with con-
version scale.

The plant canopies of young and wide-spaced crops inters el'!

only a pOrtion of the incoming radiation. Where the unshaded sur-
faces are wetted by irrigation, part of the applied water is lost to
non-beneficial consumptive use through evaporation from wetteb
surfaces or transpiration from undesirable vegetation.
Under trickle irrigation these losses are reduced to a minimum
and transpiration by plants accounts for practically all of the con-
sumptive use.

114
 SANDY LOAM CLAY LOAM

0 LATERAL SPACING
;-......
. ( -0.._ :1.5.7;r:',..'.2- ,..1....;;;; ,-,; , ....- •'..;
0 15 Min. I - .....1"-...61-S;:',r. .. :. .'
or •,./.,.. tyglt :"; ,...; trours ' ,...e....': ✓ • EMITTER DRY SURFACE
...,,,, , o' •• ..' ,....."
;,,,%,
12 -
r.: .;x .0 '''''" .4•";—;:":;,"
40 Min. ;...;..:;,
.„.....0:-',. . . ..,..
.,,..,,,,..0
O '',"'"
';... ,:r? ,1.; ; . Ems ..,,." SALT ACCUMULATION /
-=-'-;-V ' ,..X.'"ei'e' ,-- 4'1.= 1,''-'" _
24 ..-
0 74Y.112al
''
''
0
7 =,. FLOW LINE
• :.■ e ...S.
36
1 Hour
/ ); -v-s---:...
'..i.---;--r '
0 Z..:.;;"
oc ft
tIl#
48 Hours i`v
48 MOISTURE
CONTOUR
24 Hours
1 60
X
DEEP PERCOLATION
72
18 12 6 0 6 12 18 30 24 18 12 6 0 6 12 18 24 30 WETTED WIDTH —4
DISTANCE—I NCHE S FROM CENTER

A light irrigation simply wets o shallower depth to its field capacity than heavy irrigation does. Typical soil moisture pattern under trickle irrigation.
Soils cannot be partially wetted. They must be completely wetted or not of all.

GROUND SURFACE
••, • VIal

.■
IF ., N\ mg. 1r■ \
i
N\ .

WENI
T AREA Irk WET1AREA .li■
•fil II
111 2
28.6 %

lic .„ DEC1/416 l
21.5 %

1111Zp■ Irk 1. 1:11

3

16.7 %

IL 1. Nil III 1. All w

w
4

12.8 %

III
Li.
5
DRY AREA DRY AREA
■I/ 104%
Water does not move rapidly either upward, sideways, or downward by capillarity, and 6
it will stay until removed by plants. This graph is taken from actual measurements in an irrigation
furrow. The soil is loam. After the water disappeared from the irrigation furrow, a trench was cut 1 0.0 %

moist
across It and the line of demarcation between dry soil
and was noted. The trench was then
tin covered. Fifty-six days later, it was opened, a new face was cut, and the line of demarcation was
again determined, but the moisture movement was too slight to measure.
Pattern of moisture use
 WATER RETENTION AND MOVEMENT
HOW DO SOILS HOLD WATER?

In well drained soils water is held largely as films The retention of water by a soil can be called SOIL
around individual soil particles. The thinner the SUCTION because a suction force must be exerted to pull
films, the more tightly the water is held. water from soil. Does this seem strange?

Fig. 1 Consider a sponge sucks up water.' To release the water

you have to exert a squeezing PRESSURE to overcome the
sponge's SUCTION for water.

A tensiometer measures the suction required to remove

water from soils.

HOW DOES WATER MOVE IN SOILS?

When the soil is wetted by an irrigation, the films

become thick. Under these conditions, if it were
possible to insert an ultra small hypodermic needle
into the film, we could draw water away from the soil
particle with a SUCTION of about 1.5 pounds per square
inch.
Fig. 2
Gravity is only one of several forces which causes water
to move in soils. Water also moves by capillarity.
Imagine two soil particles...One is surrounded by a thick
film of water; the other by a thin film. The thin film
is held by high suction, the thick film by low suction.
Fig. 4

As the soil dries, the films become thinner and the

remaining water is held more tightly. For example, if
we cut the thickness of the film in half, we would have
to exert a SUCTION of perhaps 210 pounds per square inch.

Fig. 3

THIN THICK
4 Water Film Water Film
Thin Waicr
1146 Fi 111,'“
If the two particles are brought together until the The attraction of water to soil particles may be much
films of water touch - - - greater than the pull of gravity.

Gravity
PULL
Downwards

1 less
than
1
Soil
results
in
Water
MOVEMENT
Upwards

SUCTION
Upwards
Just Before Immediately Water flow
Contact After equalizes
Contact Film Thickness Soil SUCTION greater than gravity PULL allows water to
move in any direction. Thus water may move upwards to
a nearby root---or downwards when you irrigate. In
The water will flow to the drier particle. The flow either case water moves toward the drier soil area---
continues until the film thicknesses are equal. In even against gravity.
other words, water continues to flow until there are
no DIFFERE..CES due to tension between the films.
HOW DOES WATER GET TO THE VINE?
Through this means water moves from a wet area to a dry
area in the soil. Water moves by "SLITHERING" AROUND
THE SOIL PARTICLES FROM ONE FILM TO ANOTHER. With soil SUCTION for water often greater than gravity
PULL and with both soil suction and gravity pulling
Fig. 6 together against the vine---how does the vine suck up
water?

dir Vine
Pull
Upward.

VERSUS

and
Movement •
(THICK Films) (THIN Films) 11'
Soil Gravity
Suction Pull
Downwards Downwards
 If after equilibrium was reached, we added still more
sugar to the container on the right, more water would
flow to the right.
What would happen----
WHAT HAPPENS TO WATER IN PLANT LEAVES?
Water is lost by the leaves by evaporation. The process
is called TRANSPIRATION and accounts for another PULL
for water by the vine.

If instead of an open container on the right, we Leaves contain tiny little valves which regulate:
confined the volume of water after adding the sugar....
1. the intake or loss of carbon dioxide and
Fig. 13 oxygen, and...
Tendency to flow 2. the loss of water.
until:
When the valves in the leaves are open to accommodate
Pressure Osmotic intake of carbon dioxide for sugar manufacture, water
PUSH " SUCTION loss is inevitable. This makes it necessary for the
downward upward vine to continuously use water. Conversely, severe
le water shortage may greatly hinder sugar manufacture.

Weak COMBINED FORCES IN THE VINE AND SOIL WHICH HOVE WATER
Sugar
lution Now that we have forces of PULL, PUSH and SUCTION
running around in all directions, let's see if we can
tie these forces together to get water to move up
into a real live vine!

The tendency of water to MOW toward the highest
concentration would build up pressure. This tendency
would continue until the PUSH of pressure was equal
to the PULL of osmotic suction.
Plant cell walls confine the volume of dissolved
sugars and salts within the cells. Plant cells
build up pressure. Wilting results when plants
lose PRESSURE due to a greater rate of loss than
...— intake of water. This can occur when the soil is
too dry.
4141411
4::poo The pressure in a plant is called TURGOR PRESSURE.
Forces in the vine include:
a. OSMOTIC SUCTION & TRANSPIRATIONAL FULL---because
*Plant cell walls act as membranes.
*Plant cells contain large amounts of dissolved
sugars, some salts and gelatin-like material.
*Water evaporates from leaf surfaces.
b. TURGOR PRESSURE---because
*Plant cells build up pressure. This causes
tissues to become rigid and enables the plant .
to remain upright.
 How does a vine PULL for water co overcome the combined We mentioned OSMOSIS. For osmosis to occur there must
PULL of gravity and soil suction? be (1) unequal concentration of sugars and/or salts
as well as (2) separation of the solutions by the right
WATER PULLED BY OSMOTIC SUCTION BY THE VINE kind of membrane.

Osmosis occurs in situations where a membrane separates
two solutions of unequal concentration.
Suppose we poured PURE water into two containers
separated only by a membrane such as those found in
living plants. . .
Suppose we added a little sugar to the container on the
left,and lots of sugar to the one on the right to cause
UNEQUAL CONCENTRATIONS.
Fig. 11

Pig. 9 Difference in
POTENTIAL ENERGY

Difference in
L Elevation causes
difference in
POTENTIAL ENERGY

Water would flow in the direction of highest concentration.

Water will flow if there are differences in elevation.
It will flow in the direction of least elevation.
Differences in elevation result in differences in
POTENTIAL ENERGY---because of the pull of gravity.
Water will stop flowing when there are no differences
in potential energy.
Fig. 10
This is because dissolved sugars and/or salts reduce the
POTENTIAL ENERGY of the water. The solution on the right
with more sugar would have the lowest potential energy.
Water always flows "DOWN HILL" in terms of POTENTIAL
ENERGY but may flow UP HILL in terms of elevation if the
potential is lower on top of the hill than at the bottom.
(A pump pushes water up hill---!)
For our example in Figure 12, water would continue to
flow, and the water level in the container on the right
would continue to rise---until GRAVITY PULL downwards
finally equaled OSMOTIC SUCTION upwards.

Fig. 12
No flow when:

■
No flow when:
No difference in
POTENTIAL ENERGY gravity
pu ll
][1 OsmotiS
Suction
 Forces the vine must overcome include: WATER MOVES INTO THE VINE

1. - Downward PULL due to gravity. Water will move upward in the vine when:

2. SOIL SUCTION due to attraction of soil a) OSMOTIC SUCTION and I. 1)SOIL SUCTION and
particles for water. TRANSPIRATIONAL PULL 2)GRAVITY PULL
minus exceeds plus
Before we go farther, have we missed any important b) TURGOR PRESSURE 3)0SMOTIC SUCTION
PULLS, PUSHES or SUCTIONS...? [ — — MM. •IIMM. ■■•• ...M.. ..... .]

In the vine OW
[In the soil
What would happen if you allowed too much salt to
accumulate in your vineyard soils....
— — — — —
Fig. 15
A .MMP ...■ M■P M.M.• PIM

Oh,- - - - SUCTION!!?

We almost overlooked a very important force which

OSMOTICSUCTI ON an d
the vine must overcome. The amount of OSMOTIC SUCTION
depends on the DIFFERENCE in dissolved sugars and salts. z
See figure 10, page 3.

Increased salts in the soil decreases the osmotic suction

advantage of a plant. That is, if we added enough salt 0
to the soil, we could cause water to be sucked out of
the plant.

Fig. 14
Plant sucks water from
the soil
P
-4 •■■• ■••••• ■■•■•■ AINE•11■

Add too much (a) (b) VS (1) (2) (3)

SALT Greater suction for water by the vine allows water in the
to the soil soil to move up into the vine provided the soil is not
too dry. Dry soil greatly slows the RATE of water
Soil sucks movement and greatly increase the amount of PULL the
water from vine must exert.
the plant:
Figure 15 shows relatively high soil suction. If the
Add osmotic suction, due to dissolved salts in the soil, soil dried more, soil suction would increase and thus
as another SUCTION the vine must overcome in order to diminish the rate of water flow. Eventually the rate
suck up water- would not satisfy the vine's needs...An irrigation to
OMNI ► reduce the soil suction and increase the rate of water
3. OSMOTIC SUCTION due to dissolved salts in the movement to the vine would be in order.
soil.
 VINE RESPONSES SOIL SUCTION
HOW DO ROOTS OBTAIN WATER?
Roots must pull water from the films of water surrounding
the soil particles. In doing so, the films of water
become increasingly thinner and the air spaces
correspondingly greater.
Fig. 15
Very Wet Moist Dry
Both water and air compete for the same space between
soil particles. A saturated soil is one where loosely
held water films are so thick that air space is
non-existent. This condition may occur shortly
after an irrigation but should not persist unless
drainage is impaired.
When excessive water has been applied and drainage
is impaired, saturated soil conditions may exist for
long periods.
CAN SOILS-BE TOO WET?
Limited air space in saturated or near saturated
soils limits oxygen. Roots require an oxygen supply
to survive. Insufficient oxygen can be critical
especially during the growing season. Root growth
may stop, and even death of existing roots may occur--
if saturated soil conditions prevail for more than
several days.
Fig. 16
INSUFFICIENT
OXYGEN
KILLS
ROOTS
Oxygen requirements are much less during the dormant
period. Consequently, this would be the best period
to apply heavy leaching irrigations to reduce harmful
salt accumulations in the root zone.
WHAT CAUSES SOIL SUCTION?
Soil particles strongly attract water. The attraction
is called ADHESION. Thinner films of water adjacent to
the soil particle are held very tightly by adhesion.
Thicker films are held much more loosely and are
more readily available for plant uptake.
Fig. 17
Loosely held thick water film
Very tightly held thin water fil
As the soil dries, the water films around the soil Fig. 18
particle become increasingly thinner and the remaining
water is held at increasingly higher suctions.

WHEN IS A SOIL TOO DRY?

When the vine cannot suck hard enough to get water

fast enough to supply its needs, the soil definitely
Thick Water
has become too dry and the vine is in trouble. Leaf Thin Water
drop may result. (Fewer leaves may help to reduce the Films
water needs of the plant.) Films

Low soil suction is necessary for vigorous shoot growth.

As soil suctions become increasingly higher, shoot
growth slows and eventually stops.
THIN water films slow the rate
Water movement is slowed when water films become thin. of flow much like a reduced pipe
Films of water closest to vine roots are the first to size.
give up water.

Thin water films in the immediate vicinity of roots

may slow water movement and limit uptake by the vine.
Limited water uptake may reduce vine growth. This may
occur even though there are thicker films of water at
lower suctions at a distance from the roots.
Water moves slowly in soils that are dry. This is
because the water films through which water slithers
are so thin that passage is difficult.
Thus thin water films in the vicinity of the roots may limit
the rate of water flow and slow vine growth. Early stoppage
of vine growth may allow the non-irrigated vine to better
withstand the upcoming hot summer than a vigorously
growing vine with a correspondingly greater evaporation
surface.
Needless to say, vell-timed irrigations can keep the vine
growing longer, if more growth is needed to maximize
production and quality.
The amount of water to apply remains a best guess for many people. Even post
harvest irrigations are thought of by some to be a given and others to be
a disaster. Vineyard location, soil type and depth, vine vigor and other
factors all affect soil moisture content and vine water use. Soil water poten-
tial and soil water content can be readily measured by several methods. How-
ever, relating soil water conditions to specific changes in canopy behavior,
fruit composition and subsequent wine quality can be more difficult. Controlled
water deficits have been shown to affect wine quality.

Irrigation management is but one of the problems facing the grower today.
It is assumed by many to be another tool that will allow them to "fine tune"
their grape quality. Exactly how to do that is not known, and only recently
have investigations focused on the impacts of water availability on the ulti-
mate product--wine quality.

This newsletter attempts to review the roles water plays in the vine and the
factors that regulate its availability. The following article is written
by Terry Prichard, Cooperative Extension Soil and Water Specialist in San
Joaquin County. He is the principal investigator of a research project that
was recommended for funding by the 1986/1987 Research and Development Committee
of the Winegrowers of California. That project, "Response of Winegrapes to
Water-Induced Stress" will attempt to better define the relationship of con-
sumptive water use by vines to yield and wine quality. The research is being
conducted in the San Joaquin Valley. It will attempt to develop an irrigation
strategy that will be applicable in a wide variety of climatic and soil condi-
tions. The cooperating investigators are Craig Rouse of Robert Mondavi Winery
and Jim Wolpert, Cooperative Extension Viticulture Specialist, U.C. Davis.

WATER RELATIONS OF WINE GRAPES

T.L. Prichard
Extension Soil & Water Specialist

Grapevines, like other summer crops, use large amounts of water. The peak
consumptive water use by a full coverage vineyard can exceed 0.34 inches or
9,000 gallons per day. To attain these consumptive use rates soil moisture
must not be limiting. Most of the water, 99 percent plus, passes through
the vine and is lost to the atmosphere. Less than one percent of the water
taken up by the vine is retained in plant tissue. The importance of this
relatively small one percent cannot be overstated. Small changes in this
fraction can make the difference between no growth and vigorus growth, weak
vines and strong vines, a disease and insect affected harvest, and one of
a good yield of high quality grapes.

The water retained by the vine tissues, or the plant water status, is affected
by evaporative demand as well as the availability of the water to the vine.

If evaporative demand exceeds the supply of water to the vine; a water deficit
can occur. Experimental studies on water relations of wine grapes are not
abundant, although management techniques that induce vine water deficits have
been used for years as a method of regulating vine vigor, yield, and wine
qualities.

2 I Bd
Much of the current water management the6ry as to the effect of water stress
on grape yields and wine qualities have been a result of site specific per-
sonal experience, personal preference and folklore.

Water Functions

Water serves many functions in plants; as a constituent, a solvent, a reactant,

and it also serves to maintain cell turgidity.

As a constituent, water represents 80-90 percent of the fresh weight of leaves

and 50 percent of woody parts of the vine.

As a solvent, water dissolves mineral nutrients in the soil and provides for
their transport toward the roots. Once in the vine, water facilitates the
movement of minerals and other solutes from cell to cell and organ to organ.
Since cell walls and most membranes are relatively permeable to water, trans-
location of solutes of all kinds occur.

As a reactant, water functions as an intermediate in basic reactions such

as photosynthesis and respiration.

Water is necessary for the maintenance of turgidity or the pressure that de-
velops when the cell membrane is pressed against the cell wall. The main-
tenance of turgidity is essential for cell growth and enlargement and is
important in control of vapor exit and gas entry to the leaf.

Water Balance

The loss of water from the vine in the form of vapor is known as transpiration.
It is an evaporative process dependent on environmental factors such as the
supply of energy and the vapor pressure gradient between the evaporation sur-
face (usually leaves) and ambient air. Evaporation is a simple process while
transpiration is much more complex in that it is additionally controlled by
plant factors. Evaporation from the leaf surface maintains leaf temperature
in a range to favor photosynthesis and other biochemical reactions.

To keep up with this loss of water by transpiration, the vine extracts water
from the soil by a passive process through an extensive system of roots.

The water balance is the relative condition of a plant when contrasting tran-
spiration loss to water uptake. So it follows that the water balance of a
vine growing in moist soil would be most affected by atmospheric factors that
control the rate of transpiration while vines in dry soil would be most affected
by the availability of soil water. Both conditions can cause plant water
deficits.

The absorption of water is a passive process. Water moves from where its
energy status is high to where energy status is low. Water moves downhill
on an energy gradient. The lowest energy being at the leaves or evaporative
surface.

The energy status of water is expressed as water potential in units of negative

pressure called bars or atmospheres. As water is transpired from leaves,
their water content as well as water potential is reduced. This phenomenon
causes water to be drawn from areas of high water potential, namely trunk,
roots and soil (Figure 1).
3
gl
 Water Potential (bars)

-31 -15 -0.3 0

Soil non-available available gravitational

Surface water water water

hygroscopic
T
lower limit field saturation
water • of water capacity
(less than extraction
-31 bars)

Figure 1. Soil water potential---A measure of the energy status of water

in the soil. Indicates the direction of water movement. Water flows from
high water potential to low water potential. Largest water potential is "0".
Therefore, most water potentials are negative numbers in units of bars or atmo-
spheres. [From Steve Grattan, Plant Water Specialist, UCDJ
-

Water uptake and transpiration rates usually are not equal in a vine (Figure
2). • Since transpiration is set in motion by solar radiation, the increase
in sunlight and air temperature in the morning signals water uptake to take
place. Since this water status "signal" is transferred to the roots to affect
water uptake, a lag between transpiration and water uptake occurs causing
water deficits to occur.

4 180
 O
W
transpiration
<<
CL
LL Z
0
LLJ }-
uptake

6:00 12:00 18:00 24:00

TIME

Figure 2. Generalized trends in plant transpiration, water uptake and leaf-:

water potential.

As evening approaches, transpirational demand is reduced, uptake exceeds losses

and the plant water status recovers. A vine usually has a deficit water status
at midday even if the soil is well irrigated.

Water Deficit Regulation

Vines regulate transpirational water loss and thus water balance through the
operation of structures called stomata. They act as valves to regulate the
exit of water vapor from the leaves.

During the day if there is no severe water deficiency, stomata are open and
transpiration proceeds based on environmental conditions.

While the stomata are open, carbon dioxide can enter the leaf for use in photo-
synthesis. When water deficit in the leaves goes beyond a threshold level,
stomata close to slow the loss of water vapor and, therefore, limit the influx
of carbon dioxide.

This control mechanism operates to minimize severe water deficiency in the

plant. However, the reduction of photosynthesis or the rate of dry matter
production is also slowed.

5
Effects of Water Deficits

It would be helpful for vineyardists to know the amount of water deficit which
would affect yield and quality of wine grapes. However, there is no simple
answer to this question.

Short term water deficits occurring at midday as we have disclosed are normal.
Although as transpiration is increased or soil water diminishes, water deficit
can last longer each day affecting important physiological processes. The
detrimental effects of water deficits tend to be cumulative both with respect
to the degree of deficit and duration.

One of the vine's processes most sensitive to growth is cell enlargement or

expansive growth. Vines normally attempt to keep the ratio of top growth
to root growth constant, which balances the loss structures to uptake struc-
tures. When water deficit conditions exist, expansive top growth is slowed
to maintain the balance.
1
Kasmatis and Vaadia (1961) and others have found vegetative growth to be
quite sensitive to water deficits. Measurements of pruning weights in other
experimental trials also indicate reductions in vegetative growth as a function
of consumptive water use.

If the leaf canopy is extensive and effectively captures most of the sunlight,
photosynthesis would be limited by available light, not leaf surface. In this
instance, additional foliage growth may not benefit the crop. The reduction
in expansive growth by mild water stress could be tolerated and may very well
be beneficial. The effect of heavy vegetation can cause reduction in fruit
pigment in varieties such as Zinfandel or Cabernet Sauvignon. Large amounts
of vegetative growth can also increase the chance of Botrytis rot occurrence
and cause poor wood maturity.

The effect of water deficit on bud fruitfulness is less well known. Although
as water deficit is properly timed to coincide with the period of fruit bud
initiation, it could enhance bud fertility by diverting assimilates from shoot
growth to the developing buds. A caution is that if water deficit is severe,
stomates will close reducing photosynthesis and carbohydrate production and
accumulation will be reduced.

The effect upon crop yield due to water stress through reduced water supplies
is currently being evaluated. Reductions in relative yield of Chenin blanc
as a function of seasonal water supply has been shown.

Wine quality in respect to water stress is much more difficult to quantify.

Each wine maker may have preferences of color, pH, etc. A comparison of the
quantitative effects of water stress on juice and wine qualities is most appro-
priate to view the effects of water deficits.

Management of Water Deficits

Mild water deficiency affecting expansive growth will not directly affect
stomata) opening and, therefore, photosynthesis. Severe deficiency will cause
reductions in photosynthesis and, therefore, carbohydrate assimilation.

LAO
6
From the management perspective, water deficits can be utilized to maintain
good yields of high quality grapes. Mild water stress can be utilized as
a tool to minimize crop expansive growth at key growth states to accomplish
goals such as enhancing bud fruitfulness or reduction of canopy size.

Inducing water stress as a management tool can be hazardous. Regulating the

available supply of water to the vine is the most common method of controlling
water status. Surface applied irrigation systems are more difficult to manage
than localized irrigation such as drip irrigation. Sprinklers are an advantage
only before veraison.

If not closely monitored, , severe water stress can occur. After severe water
stress, nearly a week can elapse before stomata! function and photosynthesis
are fully restored.
 Salinity Appraisal of
Soil and Water

Production of Grapes
Division of Agricultural Sciences
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA

Water-Quality Appraisal

Quality of the water supply can also affect the suitability of a

site for production of quality grapes. A grower is interested
in the effect of the irrigation water on the crop—how salts in
the water can directly or indirectly influence yield and
quality of grapes.

Types and importance of salts in water

All irrigation waters contain varying amounts of soluble salts, The villain—too much total salt or too
such as the bicarbonate, chloride and sulfate salts of calcium, much of a certain kind of salt.

10

1 R1
magnesium, and sodium. Water may also contain small amounts of nitrogen, boron, and other
elements. Some water contains iron, bicarbonate, silt, organic matter, algae, or bacteria, any of
which could cause plugging of the emitters and tubing used in drip irrigation.

Although irrigation water quality is one of the more important factors involved in grape
production, its importance in general has been over-emphasized nearly as often as it has been
neglected. Vines do not grow in the applied water—they grow in moist soil, and for the most part
they take up irrigation or rain water after it has had time to come to equilibrium not only with
the soil but also with water remaining from previous irrigations or rains. Actually, successful
long-term use of irrigation water depends on a number of things other than its quality. These
include on-farm water management, climate, soil, drainage characteristics, and salt tolerance of
the vines. Of these, water management to apply adequate water for crop use and leaching may be
the more important.

Relatively poor irrigation waters have been used successfully by good managers—and relatively
good water has been misused by poor managers, with subsequent severe salinity problems. Such
problems occur most often where a perched water table complicates water management.

Good-quality water has the potential for producing maximum crop yields. Poor-quality water can
cause reduced yields unless special management practices are adopted.

Four types of grape-production problems related to water quality are recognized:

Salinity problems. Water brings in salts which may accumulate in the soil and reduce yield.
Soil permeability problems. Low-salt water or relatively high-sodium water may reduce soil
permeability.
Toxicity problems. Chlorides or boron in irrigation water may accumulate in grape leaves.
Sodium may also accumulate by way of foliar intake if vines are sprinkler irrigated.
Miscellaneous problems. Nutrients such as nitrogen may cause excessive vigor and lowered
yields, or bicarbonate in sprinkler-applied water may result in an objectionable white
deposit of lime on leaves or fruit.

Table 2 gives water-quality guidelines for each of the above types of problem. Even though these
problems often occur in combination, they are more easily understood and evaluated on a
one-problem-at-a-time basis.

Water salinity less than ECw = 1 mmhos/cm is considered excellent for grapes under average
vineyard management. Water salinity in excess of ECw = 1 mmho/cm may still be satisfactory if
special management practices are adopted.

Soil permeability problems caused by water

The first effects of water quality upon water penetration into soil should be apparent after
several irrigations. The final effects, however, may not be known for several years for they will
also depend upon irrigation management, cultural practices, soil, climate, and rainfall. High-salt
content of irrigation water improves the rate of infiltration; low-salt content reduces it. Ex-
tremely low-salt water often results in poor water penetration. Relatively high sodium slows

11
 Table 2. Guidelines for Interpreting Laboratory Data on Water
Suitability for Grapes

Problem and related Increasing

a/
constituents No problem problem Severe problem-

Salinity12/—affects water
availability to crop

ECw (in millimhos/cm) < 1** 1.0 to 2.7 > 2.7

Permeability—affects rate of
water movement into and
through soil

ECw (in millimhos/cm) > 0.5 0.5 to 0.2 < 0.2

adj.SARS/—(an estimation of <6 6 to 9 >9

the permeability hazard)

Toxicity—of specific ions which

affect growth of crop
Sodium (meq/1)* <20 -- --

Chloride (meq/1)* <4 4 to 15 > 15

Boron (ppm) <1 1 to 3 >3

Miscellaneous

Bicarbonate) < 1.5 1.5 to 7.5 > 7.5

Nitrate-nitrogen (ppm) < 5 to 30 >30

The acceptable range for pH is between 6.5 and 8 4.

' * With overhead sprinkler irrigation, sodium or chloride in excess of 3 meq/1 under extreme
drying conditions may result in excessive leaf absorption, leaf burn and crop damage. If
overhead sprinklers are used for cooling by frequent on-off cycling, damage may occur even
at lower concentrations.

** <means "less than"; > means "more than".

21 Special management practices and favorable soil conditions required for successful
production.

121 Assumes that rainfall and extra water applied due to inefficiencies of normal irrigation will
supply crop needs plus about 15% extra for salinity control.

-C./ Adjusted Sodium Adsorption Ratio. Permeability problems are more likely to occur with
low-salt water than with high.

LI/ Bicarbonate (HCO3) in water applied by overhead sprinklers may cause white deposits on
fruit and leaves (not toxic but reduces market acceptability).

Note: Guidelines are flexible and should be modified when warranted by local practices, ex-
perience, special conditions, or method of irrigation.

14`4
12
water infiltration; relatively high calcium improves it. Permeability problems due to water quality
are particularly troublesome on sandy loam soils. Clay soils are affected to a lesser degree.

In predicting a potential permeability problem from a water-analysis, two determinations are

helpful: water salinity (ECw) and the adjusted sodium adsorption ratio (adj.SAR).
• Extremely low-salinity water (ECw less than 0.2 mmho/cm) will usually cause some degree
of reduced permeability.
• A high adjusted Sodium Adsorption Ratio (adj.SAR greater than 9) can be expected to
cause a severe permeability problem and will be most severe on shrinking-swelling type soils.

These two problems rarely occur together.

Toxicity problems

Chloride or boron from applied water gradually accumulate in leaves as water taken up by the
vines is transpired through them. If chloride, or boron accumulate in excess of the plant's
tolerance, leaf burn occurs and crop yield may be reduced. Grapes are reported to be relatively
insensitive to sodium in soil, but are sensitive to sodium in sprinkler applied water.
-

Toxicity from overhead sprinkling. If overhead sprinkling is done with waters containing
chloride, sodium, or boron, salt concentration increases on the leaves as water evaporates.
Absorption through leaves may then cause toxicity. Such toxicity from sprinkling occurs
primarily during periods of low humidity, high temperatures, or drying winds, all of which cause
rapid evaporation of water and greater concentration of salts on the leaves between wettings.
Sequencing of sprinklers for heat suppression (i.e., 3 minutes on, 15 minutes off) is another
special case where dry-down between wettings can greatly increase salt concentration and
toxicity effects. A typical toxicity symptom is burning or necrosis of leaf tissue at the tip and
outer edge of the grape leaf.

Sprinkler-applied water containing as little as 3 meq/1 (100 ppm) chloride, 3 meq/1 (70 ppm)
sodium or 1 ppm boron may cause injury, although the same levels would not be expected to
cause significant leaf burn if applied by furrow, flood, basin, or drip irrigation. Damage from leaf
absorption is believed to be much less probable if relative humidity remains above 30 to
40 percent.

Miscellaneous problems

Excessive nitrogen in irrigation water causes excessive vine growth and delayed fruit maturity.
This is difficult to correct, but blending or changing to lower nitrate water sources should help.
Reducing the amount of applied water and allowing soils to become somewhat drier between
irrigations has also helped to slow excessive vegetative growth.

White deposits on berries resulting from overhead sprinkling with high bicarbonate water can
greatly detract from the appearance of the grape cluster and will reduce fresh-market accept-
ability. Night irrigations can substantially reduce the amount of deposit. A procedure to reduce
bicarbonate in sprinkler-applied water which has not been thoroughly evaluated (and thus needs
more research) is the addition of sulfuric acid or sulfur dioxide to water at a controlled rate to
reduce water pH to 6.5.
13
t‘S
Problems associated with a water pH above 8.4 or below 6.5 are usually related to toxicity,
nutritional imbalances, or soil permeability problems. Corrective procedures for abnormal pH are
often possible, but vineyard management then may become much more complicated. Soil
applications of lime for acidity control or gypsum for sodicity control are usual corrective
actions.

Management

Good management often can restore salt-damaged soil to acceptable productivity. The usual
solutions to the soil and water problems are as follows.

Irrigation

Certain irrigation practices can decrease the severity of problems related to soil or water, or delay
their onset and in some cases may even prevent them. These practices include: changing
scheduling and duration of irrigations; moving the water furrow closer to or under the vine row;
winter leaching; getting rid of some or all of the weeds which compete for water; and
land-grading for better distribution of water. Tensiometers, which measure the degree of soil
wetness, are recommended as a guide to water needs and irrigation schedules; they are
particularly well adapted to sandy and loamy soils. Tensiometers may be used somewhat as a
thermostat is used to regulate temperature: if readings in the upper one-third of the root zone
show that soil is too dry (60 to 80 centibars) for the "comfort" of vines, irrigate. If readings are
in the comfort zone (10 to 30 centibars), don't irrigate. Tensiometer readings of 0 to less than
10 centibars at or near the bottom of the root zone indicate an excessively wet soil; if this
persists for more than a day or two after an irrigation, a change in irrigation practices or
improved drainage (tile under drains or deep ripping) is needed.

Vineyards with salinity problems should be irrigated at 20 to 40 centibars of suction during the
early and main growth period instead of at the 30 to 50 centibars often recommended for
non-saline soils (80 centibars of suction is approximately the maximum reading of the
tensiometer, but such a reading does not mean all available moisture is gone). As harvest time
approaches, the vineyard is usually allowed to become much drier in order to slow shoot growth
and mature the crop.

Enough water should be applied to meet the vines needs for good production and quality and to
help control salts through leaching below the root zone. Depending on climate, a water supply of
4 to 5 gallons per minute per acre usually is considered the minimum required in sprinkler
irrigation. Under some soil conditions and methods of application, such as a sandy soil with
furrow irrigation in a hot climate, 10 gallons per minute per acre would be desirable.

For best production and quality, irrigations should begin early enough in the growing season and
should be frequent enough to produce an adequate vine leaf canopy. Once this is accomplished,
irrigation should be reduced to discourage further tip growth, but be sure there is enough soil
moisture to maintain a healthy canopy through harvest. After harvest, irrigate after tip growth
has stopped but before vines become excessively dry and defoliated; otherwise, unwanted
continued tip growth or regrowth is likely. Conversely, early and nearly-complete defoliation
before harvest will likely result in regrowth whether or not you irrigate.

14
The preferred time for leaching is during winter dormancy. A post-harvest irrigation can replenish
soil water and facilitate winter rainfall leaching. In dry years, winter irrigations in late December
through early February may be necessary for replenishing deep soil moisture and for adequate
leaching.

Fertilize for production and quality. Remember: grapes are not heavy users of nitrogen. Avoid
excesses and luxury levels of fertilizers; these can cause overly vigorous vine growth, poor quality
and reduced yields, and can also result in salinity and pollution problems. Any nitrogen in the
water supply should be taken into account when fertilizing grapes.

Solutions to specific problems

Salinity is the water-quality-related problem most often affecting vineyards in California. In a

vineyard, almost all of the salts in applied water remain in the soil, with only a little going into
the crop. However, each irrigation adds more salt. These added salts will accumulate and increase
in concentrations, eventually causing a salinity problem unless they are removed by leaching.

Leaching. The amount of leaching water required to control salts is known as the leaching
requirement. Leaching is the only practical way of removing soluble salts from the soil; there is
no magic chemical that can neutralize or remove them. Soil or water amendments may increase
the rate at which water enters or moves some ions through soil, but it is the water that does the
job.

Enough leaching should be done to reduce the average salinity in the main portion of the root
zone to at least an ECe of 1.5 to 2.5 mmho/cm at the beginning of the growing season. This
should allow 90 percent maximum potential yield for grapes. After leaching, follow good
water-management practices to meet growth requirement of the vines. If drainage is poor leaching
may not be possible without artificial drainage, or if possible the effects may be only temporary.
Artificial drains (tile, or underdrains) have been used in many areas, but they require a
complementary off-farm collection, transport, and disposal system.

A leaching requirement can be calculated and is specific for the quality of water being used and
the salinity tolerance of the crop being grown (see Appendix). Timing of leaching is usually not
critical but leaching in winter is generally recommended. Leaching, however, can be done at each
irrigation, after several irrigations, in the winter dormant period, or after several growing seasons
as long as (a) salts do not approach damaging concentrations between leachings, and (b) the
deeper part of the root zone does not become waterlogged.

Perched water tables at any time during the growing season

may result in low oxygen supplies for roots, root rot, and
shallower rooting depth. Because the shallower rooting depth
means lesser amounts of water can be stored in the reduced
rooting depth, good water management becomes more
critical to prevent a shortage of water to the vines between
irrigations.

RFAIMM
, WifrigaMistalAling
MINMENIMay
A shallow, perched water table for
more than a few days is a serious

ItA
problem.
15
The amount of water needed to restore productivity of a too-salty soil depends primarily on the
degree of soil salinity and the depth of soil to be leached. Roughly, 1 acre-foot of good-quality
water passing through and below a 1-foot-depth of soil will remove about 80 percent of the salts
in the top 1-foot of soil. But the 1 acre-foot of water leaches only about 50 percent of the salts
from the 2nd-foot-depth of soil. It takes considerable water to reclaim soils!

The quality of water used for leaching will also influence final soil salinity—salinity of the soil
surface after leaching will be about the same as the salinity of the water applied. The salinity of
the deeper soil will be higher. The vines respond to average salinity of the root zone, so a
systematic sampling of vineyards can serve to monitor the salinity status and need for, or
effectiveness of, leaching.

Preventionof salinity problems through good water management, proper timing of irrigations,
and monitoring for adequacy of control is not only easier but is generally less costly in the long
run than are reduced yields or leaching to restore production. In short, good management pays
even if soil, water, and climate are ideal.

Permeability. If soil-permeability problems are great enough to affect water supply to the vines, it
may be necessary to increase the time water is on the land or to increase the rate of water entry
into the soil.

Increasing the time water is on the land can be accomplished by lengthening the duration of each
irrigation, or by irrigating more frequently. With sprinklers, however, extending the duration of
an irrigation without having excessive surface runoff may require changing to smaller orifices in
the sprinklers.

Increasing the rate of water entry into the soil can often be accomplished by cultivation, by cover
crops, by soil-profile modification techniques, or by use of soil or water amendments such as
gypsum, sulfuric acid, or sulfur dioxide.

Low-salinity waters. Low-salinity water has often been associated with surface-soil permeability
problems. Friant-Kern canal water is an example of a low-salinity problem water. The reasons are
not clearly understood, but such a low-salt water (ECw less than 0.2 mmho/cm) causes surface
soil to seal and absorb less water, resulting in more surface runoff. Amendments such as gypsum
applied directly to the soil, or in continuous applications in water, have long been used to correct
the problem (gypsum at 100 to 500 pounds per acre-foot of water has been used). Where
amendments are effective, infiltration rates have increased by as much as 50 to 300 percent.
Return-flow systems for furrow-applied water can capture and utilize runoff water and greatly
increase irrigation efficiency.

Toxicity. Leach and manage as for control of salinity (boron leaches about three times less
readily than does chloride). If the problem is too severe, look for another water supply. Blending
with a better supply is an acceptable alternative.

To minimize leaf burn and deposits from overhead sprinkler irrigation:

• Sprinkle only at night when humidity is higher and rate of drying is reduced.
• Use sprinkler heads that rotate at least once per minute.

16
 • Avoid or minimize irrigating during periods of low humidity or drying winds. Start the hot,
dry season with good soil moisture.

• If better water is available use it exclusively, or blend it with your poorer-quality water.

Wind-blow sprays or mists of high-salt water from sprinklers are particularly hazardous because
salts are concentrated (through evaporation) in the spray as it drifts down-wind from the
sprinklers. Such spray-drift falling on leaves of nearby vines can result in severe leaf burn. Thus
sprinkler sets should be made downwind, rather than upwind, to wash off deposits.

Id d o

Artificial
/ underdrain

Good soil + good water ... or fair soil or water + excellent management = happy vines, good
yields, good profits, happy grower.

References

University of California Cooperative Extension Leaflet 2946

(1977) "How to Appraise Soil Physical Factors for Irrigated
Vineyards," by R. A. Neja, W. E. Wildman, and L. P. Christensen
(20 pages).

Monterey County and San Joaquin County leaflet (July 1975)

"How to Appraise and Correct Vineyard Biological Problems That
Cause Decline," by J. J. Kissler and R. A. Neja (16 pages).

University of California Cooperative Extension Leaflet 2791

(1975) "Managing and Modifying Problem Soils," by W. E.
Wildman, Jewell L. Meyer, and R. A. Neja (temporarily out-of-
stock).

11
 RECOMMENDED MAXIMUM CONCENTRATIONS OF TRACE ELEMENTS IN IRRIGATION WATER
Recommended Maximum
Element Concentration , (mg/L) Remarks

Al (aluminwni 5.0 Can cause non-productivity in acid soils (pH < 5.5), but
more alkaline soils at pH > 7.0 will precipitate the ion
and eliminate any toxicity.

As (arsenic) 0.10 Toxicity to plants varies widely, ranging from 12 mg/L

. for Sudan grass to less than 0.05 mg/L for rice.

Be (beryllium) 0.10 Toxicity to plants varies widely, ranging from 5 mg/L for
kale to 0.5 mg/L for bush beans.

Cd (cadmium) 0.01 Toxic to beans, beets, and turnips at concentrations as

low as 0.1 mg/L in nutrient solutions. Conservative limits
recommended due to its potential for accumulation in plants
and soils to concentrations that may be harmful to humans.

Co (cobalt) 0.05 Toxic to tomato plants at 0.1 mg/L in nutrient solution.

Tends to be inactivated by neutral and alkaline soils.

Cr (chromium) 0.10 Not generally recognized as an essential growth element.

Conservative limits recomended due to lack of knowledge
on its toxicity to plants.

Cu (copper) 0.20 Toxic to a number of plants at 0.1 to 1.0 mg/L in nutrient

solutions.

F (fluoride) 1.0 Inactivated by neutral and alkaline soils.

Fe (iron) 5.0 Not toxic to plants in aerated soils, but can contribute to
soil acidification and loss of availability of essential
phosphorus and molybdenum. Overhead sprinkling may result
in unsightly deposits on plants, equipment and buildings.

L1 (lithium) 2.5 Tolerated by most crops up to 5 mg/L; mobile in soil. Toxic

to citrus at low concentrations ( < 0.075 mg/L). Acts similar
to boron.

Mn (manganese) 0.20 Toxic to a number of crops at a few-tenths to a few mg/L,

but usually only in acid soils.

No (molybdenum) 0.01 Not toxic to plants at normal concentrations in soil and

•water. Can be toxic to livestock if foraae is grown in
soils with high concentrations of available molybdenum.

Ni (nickel) 0.20 Toxic to a number of plants at 0.5 mg/L to 1.0 mg/L; reduced
toxicity at neutral or alkaline pH.

Pb (lead) 5.0 Can inhibit plant cell growth at very high concentrations.

Se (selenium) 0.02 Toxic to plants at concentrations as low as 0.025 mg/L and

toxic to livestock if forage is grown in soils with rela-
tively high levels of added selenium. An essential element
to animals but in very low concentrations.

Sn tin)
T1 titanium) Effectively excluded by plants; specific tolerance unknown.
W tungsten)

V (vanadium) 0.10 Toxic to many plants at relatively low concentrations.

Zn (zinc) 2.0 Toxic to many plants at widely varying concentrations;

reduced toxicity at pH > 6.0 and in fine textured or
organic soils.

2 00
 DELLAVA LIE
Laboratory, Inc.
Chemists anii Consultants WATER ANALYSIS INTERPRETATION
—8 M. We ► •loy. NON 111 • Fresno. CA 93720 • mos► 233-0129
ISIS E. Toler• Ave. • 7.1•••. CA 93274 • MO* 088-0000

5fc ELECTRICAL CONDUCTIVITY - An estimate of the concentration of soluble salts, ex-

pressed as millimhos per centimeter.
Below 0.5 Depending on soil texture, permeability prolems may occur due to
low salt content
Below 0.75 Low salinity hazard - can be used for irrigation of most crops
0.75 - 1.5 Medium salinity hazard - can be used for irrigation of moderately
salt tolerant crops
1.5 - 3.0 High salinity hazard - can be used for irrigation of highly salt
tolerant crops
Above 3.0 Very high salinity hazard - generally not suitable for continual use
for irrigation except under most favorable conditions of soil,
climate, salt tolerance of crop and necessary leaching.
Note: This interpretation of EC assumes that 10-20% of the total water applied
passes through and below the root zone. In most cases deep percolation losses, due
to inefficiency of normal irrigation practices, will satisfy this leaching require-
ment for the usual crops of an area.

BORON - Concentrations of boron expressed as ppm.

ireToT; 0.5 Satisfactory for all crops.
0.5 - 1.0 Satisfactory for most crops. Sensitive crops may show injury,
however, yields may not be affected.
1.0 - 2.0 Satisfactory for semi-tolerant crops. Sensitive crops are usually
reduced in yield and vigor.
2.0 - 4.0 Only tolerant crops produce satisfactory yields.
Above 4.0 Generally unsatisfactory for continued use.

Ca+Mg; Na CALCIUM PLUS MAGNESIUM; SODIUM - Expressed as milliequivalents per liter. Used in
calculating SARand adjusted SAR.

SAR SODIUM ADSORPTION RATIO - A calculated value used to estimate the exchangeable sodi-
um percentage, ESP ofsoil after long-term use of water.

5AR a dj SODIUM ADSORPTION RATIO - adjusted - This ratio takes into consideration carbon-
aates bicarbonin regard and their calcium precipitation. The relationship
between the SAR a dj of the irrigation water and probable ESP of the soil, are as
follows:

Exchangeable
Sodium
SAR a dj Percentage Interpretation

Below 6 Below 10
No soil permeability problem expected due to sodium
7 - 9 10 - 15
Possible permeability problems with fine textured
soils. (Saturation percentage above 50)
Above 9 Above 15 Permeability problems likely on all mineral soils,
with possible exceptions of very coarse textured
soils. (Saturation percentage below 20)
Note: Permeability problems are more probable at a given SAR a dj with waters of
low salinity than at high salinity.

0I
Cl CHLORIDE - Expressed as milliequivalents per liter. Fruit crops in general and many
woody ornamentals are chloride sensitive.
Below 2 Satisfactory for all crops •
2 - 10 Range associated with leaf burn on chloride sensitive crops
Above 10 Generally unsatisfactory for chloride sensitive crops

CO3+ CARBONATE PLUS BICARBONATE - Expressed as milliequivalents per liter. Waters

HCO3 relatively —FT6h in sodium carbonate or bicarbonate may present special problems.

NO3-N NITRATE NITROGEN - in the water - expressed as parts per million of nitrogen.
NO3-N X 2.72 g N in lbs/ac. ft. of water
NO3-N X 4.4 = NO3 in ppm

pH DEGREE OF ACIDITY or ALKALINITY - Normal range for western irrigation waters is from
pH 6.5 to u747---

The following table summarizes the above information:

PROBLEM DEGREE OF PROBLEM

Salinity None Increasing Severe

EC(mmhos/cm) 0.75 0.75 - 3.0 3.0

Permeability
Caused by Tow salt:
EC(mmhos/cm) "0.5 *0.50
Caused by sodium:
SARadj 6 6 - 9 9
Toxicity
From root absorption:
Sodium(SARadj) 3 3 - 9 9
Chloride(meq/1) 4 4 - 10 10
Boron(ppm) 0.5 0.5 - 2 2
oxicity •
rom leaf absorption(sprinklers)
Sodium(meq/1) 3
Chloride(meq/1) 3
Miscellaneous
Excess nutrient:
Nitrate nitrogen(ppm)
- 5 5-30 30
"Whitewashing"
Calcium & bicarbonate(meq/1) ea. *1.5 **1.5

*less than
**greater than

2 02
 'GUIDE FOR ESTIMATING AVAILABLE SOIL MOISTURE BY THE "FEEL" METHOD
:Available Feel or appearance of soil
soil
(moisture Coarse Moderately Medium Fine and Very
r.maining Texture Coarse Texture Texture Fine Texture

:0 to 25 Dry, loose, Dry, loose, Powdery dry, some- Hard, baked,

'.percent single grained, flows through times slightly cracked, some-
flows through fingers. crusted but easily times has
fingers. broken down into loose crumbs
powdery condition. on surface.

25 to 50 Appears to be Appears to be Somewhat crumbly Somewhat

percent dry, will not dry, will not but holds pliable, will
form a ball form a ball. together from ball under
with pressure. 1/ pressure. pressure.
iJ i/

50 to 75 Appears to be Tends to ball Forms a ball Forms a ball,

percent dry, will not under pressure somewhat plastic, ribbons out
form a ball but seldom will sometimes between thumb
with pressure. holds slick slightly and fore-
together. with pressure. finger.

75 percent Tends to stick Forms weak Forms a ball, is Easily ribbons

to field together slight- ball, breaks very pliable, out between the
capacity ly, sometimes easily, will slicks readily fingers, has
(100%) forms a very " not slick. if relatively slick feeling.
weak ball under high in clay.
pressure.

At field Upon squeezing, Upon squeezing Upon squeezing, Upon squeezing,

capacity no free water no free water no free water no free water
(100%) appears on . appears on appears on soil appears on
soil but wet soil but wet but wet outline soil but wet
outline of ball outline of ' of ball is left outline of ball
is left on hand. ball is left on hand. is left on hand.
on hand.