Sulfate and chloride concentrations in Texas aquifers

Hudak, Paul F.

doi:10.1016/s0160-4120(00)00078-7

Cited by 31 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Furthermore, in this group 2 area (Fig. 5), groundwater is characterized by a foul smell probably caused by sulfate reducing bacteria, which convert sulfate to H 2 S (Hudak, 2000). These differences probably are associated with the length of the groundwater flow paths, characterized by various dykes and fractured zone (Figs.…”

Section: Codementioning

confidence: 91%

Groundwater chemical characterization of a Rio de Janeiro coastal aquifer, SE – Brazil

Silva-Filho

Barcellos

Emblanch

et al. 2009

Journal of South American Earth Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Codementioning

confidence: 91%

Groundwater chemical characterization of a Rio de Janeiro coastal aquifer, SE – Brazil

Silva-Filho

Barcellos

Emblanch

et al. 2009

Journal of South American Earth Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Geochemical processes, regional geology and land use pattern are major factors for controlling groundwater chemistry (Matthess, 1982;Kumar, et al 2006;Liu, et al 2008;Zhu and Schwartz, 2011;Rajesh, et al 2012). The evaporation and irrigation return flow also influence major ion chemistry of groundwater (Stigtera, et al 1998;Hudak, 2000;Guo and Wang, 2004;Rajmohan and Elango, 2006).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of groundwater quality in the Chotanagpur plateau region of the Subarnarekha river basin, Jharkhand State, India

Gautam

Maharana

Sharma

et al. 2015

Sustainability of Water Quality and Ecology

143

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Sulfate concentrations above 500 mg L -1 (165 mg SO 4 -S L -1 ) can have laxative effects on humans (Hudak 2000). Surface and groundwater in semiarid regions tend to be high in dissolved solids, including SO 4 -S, because the soils are not fully leached, and surplus solutes accumulate (Hem 1985).…”

Section: Sulfur (S) Is An Essential Plant Nutrient For Crop Productiomentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Well water SO 4 -S in the second and third statistical groups ranged from 60 mg L -1 for Hockley County, to 93 mg L -1 in Lynn County, 9 mg L -1 in Hale County, and 37 mg L -1 in Lamb County. Hudak (2000) reported a median SO 4 -S concentration ranging from 34 mg L -1 to 666 mg L -1 for the SHP Ogallala Aquifer and attributes the higher SO 4 concentration to brine contamination from oil/ gas exploration activities. Well depth county means ranged from 32 m (107 ft) in Lynn County to 93 m (310 ft) in Hale County (table 3).…”

Section: Soilmentioning

confidence: 99%

Soil profile sulfate in irrigated southern high plains cotton fields and Ogallala groundwater

Malapati¹,

Bronson²,

Booker³

et al. 2011

Journal of Soil and Water Conservation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Sulfate (SO 4 ) is one of the most important anions in soils and groundwater in semiarid regions, including west Texas. Crops' sulfur (S) requirement is about 10% to 20% of the nitrogen requirements. However, there is far less information on soil test SO 4 -S (S in the SO 4 form [sulfate-S]) for the western United States, compared to the humid eastern United States. The deposition of S from the atmosphere has declined nationwide, as coal-fired power plants have been scrubbing their emissions of S. This, combined with greater cotton yields and the lack of S fertilization on the Texas Southern High Plains (SHP) point to the need for a soil profile SO 4 -S assessment. The first objective of this study was to assess residual soil profile SO 4 -S content in irrigated cotton (Gossypium hirsutum) fields across a range of soil types and counties of the Texas SHP. The second objective was to compile regional SO 4 -S concentration data from the Texas Water Development Board irrigation well water quality database and analyze Ogallala groundwater SO 4 -S levels by county, soil map unit, and well depth. Soil profile (0 to 0.9 m [0 to 36 in]) SO 4 -S content ranged from 120 to 475 kg ha -1 (107 to 424 lb ac -1 ) among seven center-pivot fields sampled. About half of this S was in the 0.6 to 0.9 m (24 to 36 in) soil layer, which typically was sandy clay loam or clay loam in texture. Well water SO 4 -S concentration ranged from 9 to 220 mg L -1 (ppm) in clayey soils with deep groundwater to sandy soils with shallow groundwater, respectively. Groundwater SO 4 -S concentration was greater than the USEPA drinking water standard of 83 mg L -1 in 32% of the wells, especially in the southeastern corner of the study area. There was no consistent relationship between soil map unit and SO 4 -S content in the soil profile (0 to 0.9 m). A significant negative relationship between well depth and well water SO 4 -S concentration was observed in all the eleven-county study area of the SHP of West Texas. In conclusion, soil profile SO 4 content to 0.9 m is high in SHP irrigated cotton fields and in most cases should be adequate for crop S nutritional requirements.

show abstract

Sulfate and chloride concentrations in Texas aquifers

Cited by 31 publications

References 4 publications

Groundwater chemical characterization of a Rio de Janeiro coastal aquifer, SE – Brazil

Groundwater chemical characterization of a Rio de Janeiro coastal aquifer, SE – Brazil

Evaluation of groundwater quality in the Chotanagpur plateau region of the Subarnarekha river basin, Jharkhand State, India

Soil profile sulfate in irrigated southern high plains cotton fields and Ogallala groundwater

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About