International Journal of Agricultural

Science and Research (IJASR)

ISSN(P): 2250-0057; ISSN(E): 2321-0087
Vol. 6, Issue 3, Jun 2016, 25-30
TJPRC Pvt. Ltd.

CHEMICAL CHARACTERISATION AND NUTRIENT RATING OF SOILS OF

ARECANUT (ARECA CATECHU L.) GARDENS OF HILLY ZONE OF KARNATAKA
NIRANJANA, K. S.1, YOGENDRA, K.2 & MAHADEVAN, K. M3
1

Research Scholar, Department of P. G. Studies & Research in Environmental Science, Kuvempu University,
Jnana Sahyadri, Shankaraghatta, Shivamogga, Karnataka, India

Assistant Professor, Department of P.G. Studies & Research in Environmental Science, Kuvempu University, Jnana Sahyadri,
Shankaraghatta, Shivamogga, Karnataka, India
3

Professor, Department of Studies & Research in Chemistry, Kuvempu University P.G Centre, Kadur,
Chikmagaluru, Karnataka, India

ABSTRACT
Chemical characterisation and nutrient rating of surface soils (0-30 cm) was studied in 225 representative
samples of different hoblis from Arecanut growing taluks of Shivamoga and Chikmagaluru districts of Karnataka. The
study revealed that the majority of the soils were medium to highly acidic with non-saline nature and high in organic
carbon content. The available nitrogen and potassium status were medium and available phosphorus status was low.
The exchangeable calcium and magnesium contents varied from 1.30 to 5.30 cmol (p+) kg-1 and 0.30 to 3.30 cmol (p+)
respectively. The available sulphur ranged from 4.60 to 24.50 ppm. The soils were high in micronutrients,

viz.,iron, manganese and copper. Zinc content was in the range of 0.14 to 3.72 ppm.
KEYWORDS: Arecanut, Chemical Characterisation, Nutrient Index, Fertility Rating, Hilly Zone

Received: Mar 18, 2016; Accepted: Apr 07, 2016; Published: Apr 12, 2016; Paper Id.: IJASRJUN20164

Original Article

kg-1

INTRODUCTION
Arecanut (Areca catechu L.) is one of the most profitable commercial plantation crop grown in Karnataka
state and is grown in about 2.18 lakh ha. with an annual production of 4.58 lakh tonnes. The state has three distinct
tracts viz., the Malnad, the Coastal and the Plains. The Malnad tract mainly comprises of Thirthahalli, Hosanagara
and Sagara talukas of Shivamogga district and Sringeri, Koppa, Mudigere & N.R.Pura talukas of Chickmagalore
district that comes under hilly zone (zone 9) of agro-climatic zone of Karnataka.. These two districts contribute
38.53 percent of total area and 34.19 percent of total production of the state (Anonymous, 2008). The above
talukas are characterized by varying parent materials, heavy rainfall, variation in altitude, temperature fluctuations
etc. These factors may play dominant role in determining the soil fertility. As such, Arecanut crop is perennial in
nature and its productivity tend to affected by many factors, out of which soil nutrient status such as organic
carbon, available nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium as well as secondary and micronutrients are the important
factors. Hence, in the present study, an effort was made to determine the soil chemical properties and nutrient status
in arecanut gardens of the some representative hoblis of different taluks of hilly zone of Karnataka. The findings of
the study are useful in adopting crop production technologies and nutritional management practices to keep the
gardens healthy and productive (Bhat, 1978).

www.tjprc.org

editor@tjprc.org

26

Niranjana, K. S., Yogendra, K. & Mahadevan, K. M

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Fifty surface samples (0-30 cm) were collected from Thirthahalli, forty five from Sagara and thirty from
Hosanagara of Shivamogga district. Similarly, thirty samples each from Koppa and Sringeri, twenty samples each from
N.R.Pura, and Mudigere Taluks of Chikamagaluru district was collected. The samples collected represented different
hoblis of the respective talukas. Major land use pattern of these areas consists of mixed cropping of arecanut with black
pepper, coffee and cocoa. The soil samples collected were dried under shade and analyzed for different parameters by
following standard procedures. Percent of organic carbon was estimated by following Walkley and Black wet oxidation
method. The mineralizable nitrogen content by Kjeldhals distillation method, the Brays available P2O5 by
spectrophotometric method, the available K2O by flame photometry, exchangeable Ca and Mg by versenate titration
method and available sulphur by turbidometric method (Jackson, 1973). The DTPA extractable Fe, Mn, Cu and Zn were
estimated using atomic absorption spectrophotometer (Lindsay and Norwell, 1978). The data on different nutrients were
presented as a mean of locations in each taluk. Nutrient indices were computed by adopting soil fertility ratings as
described by Ramamoothy and Bajaj (1969) as follows. Nutrient Index (NI) value =(% low x 1)+ % medium x 2)+(% high
x 3) / 100 with NI values less than 1.67 being low fertile, 1.67 to 2.33 being medium and more than 2.33 being high.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

Chemical Properties and the Status of Major Nutrients
The range of soil chemical properties and major available nutrients status are presented in Table 1. Majority of the
soils were moderately acidic in nature in all the taluks but in Sringeri, Koppa and Mudigere equal number of samples
showed high acidity. All the samples were low in electrical conductivity. As these soils are derivatives of granite and
granite gneiss, which lacks basic, properties and evenly distributed very high rainfall tend to influence acidic pH and low
EC (Anthanarayana and Perur, 1973, Rao, 1992). Though organic carbon content ranged from 0.45 to 2.35 percent, most of
the samples showed high status. Among the seven taluks, the most variations were found in Sringeri taluk with a mean
value of 1.44 percent and highest mean value (1. 56%) was observed in Mudigere taluk. These variations are due to regular
management practices such as organic matter recycling in arecanut garden inter croped with coffee. Mohapatra and Bhat
(1982) observed similar findings.
The available nitrogen content varied from 146.37 to 663.28 kg ha-1. Shukla et. al., (1965) also found wide
variation in N content in their studies. However, majority of the soils showed medium to high status. Most of the soil
samples were low with respect to available P2O5 content and a very few samples fell under high status category. This may
be attributed to the high fixation of phosphorus as iron and aluminum phosphates under highly acidic conditions.
(Niranjana, K.S., 1997). The available potassium content of the samples ranged from 95.60 to 458.56 kg ha-1. The mean
values of the all the samples were medium in available K2O content (Vishwanath Shetty et. al., 2008).
Secondary and Micronutrients
The data on secondary and micro nutrient status of all the taluks are presented in Table 2. The exchangeable
calcium and magnesium contents of soil were found to be marginal to adequate and the calcium content of the soil ranged
from 1.60 to 5.30 c mol(p+ ) kg-1 . The mean value of exchangeable magnesium content ranged from 0.30 to 3.30 c mol(p+
) kg-1 in all the taluks. The similar findings were observed by Dhananjaya et. al.,(2009). The available sulphur content
ranged from 4.60 to 22.60 ppm with samples from Hosanagar and Thirthahalli showing wide variations (Ananthanarayana

Impact Factor (JCC): 4.7987

NAAS Rating: 3.53

Chemical Characterisation and Nutrient Rating of Soils of Arecanut

(Areca Catechu L.) Gardens of Hilly Zone of Karnataka

27

et. al., 1986).

The DTPA extractable iron, manganese, zinc and copper content of soils of arecanut gardens of all the taluks were
sufficient to high. The exchangeable iron, manganese, copper and zinc ranged from 10.57 to 68.96 ppm, 3.40 to 33.65
ppm, 2.73 to 34.51 ppm and 0.14 to 3.72 ppm, respectively (Takkar, 1996). The higher levels of iron and manganese can
be related to the highly acidic nature of the soil as reported by Vajranabiah et.al. (1982). The high zinc content in these
soils is mainly attributed to the high organic carbon status, which is in consonance with findings of Kannan and Mathan
(1994). The high content of copper may be attributed to the repeated sprays of bordeaux mixture to combat Mahali or
koleroga caused by Phytophthora (Shilpashree et.al., 2011).
Soil Fertility Rating and Nutrient Indices
The data on the fertility evaluation for pH, organic carbon, available N, P2O5 and K2O and the percentage of
samples falling under each category are presented in Table 3. The fertility rating and Nutrient Index (NI) value of organic
carbon, available N, P2O5 and K2O are presented in Table 4. More than 50 percent of the samples of gardens fall under
moderately acidic categories. The percent highly acidic soils were high in Sringeri followed by Koppa, Mudigereand
Hosanagara and neutral soil reactions were slightly observed in Thirthahally, Sagara and N R pura Taluk. Over all, more
than 72 percent of the samples were high in organic carbon content and consequently have high fertility rating with NI
values more than 2.40. More than 52 percent of the samples were medium in available N status and the samples of
Hosanagar taluk showed high fertility rating, whereas the rest of the taluks showed medium fertility rating. More than 74
percent of the samples were low with respect to available P2O5 content, and the fertility ratings of all these taluks were
low with NI values less than 1.23. Majority of the samples were medium in available K2O status and hence all the taluks
fall under medium fertility rating category with NI value 1.90 to 2.25. Vishwanth Shetty (2008) and Jyothi et. al., (2009)
noticed similar observations during fertility studies in arecanut.

CONCLUSIONS
It can be concluded that, in arecanut growing belts of hilly zone of Karnataka, viz., Thirthahalli, Hosanagara,
sagara. Koppa, Sringeri, N R Pura and Mudigere, the majority of the soils were moderately acidic with non-saline nature
and were high in organic carbon content. The available N and K were medium in fertility rating and that of P was low.
Majority of the soils of the garden were sufficient to exchangeable calcium and magnesium. The micro nutrient viz., Fe,
Mn, Zn and Cu showed wide variation in all the samples of different taluks. Hence the findings of the study are useful in
adopting crop production technologies and nutritional management practices to keep the gardens healthy and productive
(Bhat, 1978).
REFERENCES

1.

Anantahnarayana,R. and Perur, N.G. (1973). Characterization of some acid soil of Mysore,State. Mysore J.
Agric. Sci., 7, 349-353.

2.

Ananthanarayana, R. Reddy, M.N., Mithyantha, M.S. and Perur, N.G. (1986). Status of

available

secondary

nutrients in acid soils of Karnataka. J. Indian Soc. Soil Sci., 34,614-616.

3.

Anonymous. (2008). Horticultural crop statistics of Karnataka state at a glance Horticulture Department, Govt.
of Karnataka, pp. 58.

www.tjprc.org

editor@tjprc.org

28

Niranjana, K. S., Yogendra, K. & Mahadevan, K. M

4.

Bhat, K.S. (1978). Agronomic research in arecanut a review. J. Plantn. Crops, 6,67-80.

5.

Dhananjaya, B.N., Sreenivasamurthy, C.A., Preethu, D.C., Dhananjaya, B.C. and Chandrashekar, S.C. (2009).
Environment and Ecology, 27(1A), 407-412.

6.

Jackson, M.L. (1973). Soil Chemical Analysis. Prentice Hall of India (Pvt.) Ltd., New Delhi.

7.

Jyothi, T.V., Vishwanatha Shetty, Y. and Dinesh Kumar, M. (2009). Characterization and DTPA- Zn status in
traditional arecanut garden soils of south Karnataka. Karnataka J. Agric. Sci., 22(5), 1013-1015.

8.

Kannan, N. and Mathan, K.K. (1994). Iron, manganese, zinc and copper contents of some selected watersheds in
hilly regions of Tamil Nadu. Madras Agric. J., 81, 512-514.

9.

Lindsy, W.L. and Norwell, W.A. (1978). Development of DTPA soil test for zinc, iron,

manganese and copper.

Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J., 42, 421-428.

10. Mohapatra, A.R. and Bhat, N.T. (1982). The Arecanut Palm, Crop management, A. Soils and

Manures.

(Ed.)

Bavappa, K.V.A., Nair, M.K. and Prem Kumar, T., CPCRI,Kasargod. (pp. 97-104).
11. Niranjana, K.S. (1997). Distribution and fractionation of phosphorus in soils of different agro-climatic zones of
Karnataka. M.Sc. Thesis, Univ. Agric. Sci., Bangalore (India).
12. Ramamoorthy, B. and Bajaj, J.C. (1969). Available Nitrogen, Phosphorus and Potassium

status of Indian

soils. Fert. News, 14, 25-36.

13. Rao, K.V. (1992). Dynamics of aluminium in base unsaturated soils of Karnataka. Ph. D. Thesis, Univ. Agric.
Sci., Bangalore (India).
14. Shilpashree, Y. P., Narayana, J., Anilkumar, Talageri, D. Vishwanath Shetty, Y. and Satish, C. (2011). Nutrient
status in arecanut garden soils of Shimoga and Bhadravathi taluk. Plant Archives, 11(1), 429-430.
15. Shukla, S.S., Roy Choudhary, S.P. and Anjaneyalu, B.S.R. (1965). Studies on some foot

hill soils of Himalaya. J.

Indian Soc. Soil Sci., 13, 115-122.

16. Takkar, P.N. (1996). Micronutrient research in sustainable productivity in India. J. Indian Soc. Soil Sci., 44, 562565.
17. Vajranabiah, S.N., Sheshagiri, M., Udayakumar, Krishnamurthy, K., Badiger, M.K. and Reddy, H.R. (1982).
Nutritional disorders in areca plants of Koppa and Sringeri affected by yellow syndrome. Proc. National seminar
on Micronutrients in cro production, Bangalore (India). (pp.183-190).
18. Vishwanath Shetty, Y, Nagamma, M.S., Dinesh Kumar, M. and Jayaprakash, S.M. (2008). Fertility status in
Arecanut garden soils of Karnataka. Karnataka J. Agric Sci., 21(4), 503-506.

Impact Factor (JCC): 4.7987

NAAS Rating: 3.53

Chemical Characterisation and Nutrient Rating of Soils of Arecanut

(Areca Catechu L.) Gardens of Hilly Zone of Karnataka

29

APPENDICES
Table 1: The Range of Chemical Properties and the available Major
Nutrients of Arecanut Garden Soils of different Taluks
Sl.
N
o.

Taluks &
No. of
samples

pH
(1:2.5)

E.C.
(dS/m)

O.C.
(%)

Avl. N
(kg/ha)

0.050.48-2.24
183.25-584.50
0.13
(1.50)
(383.75)
(0.08)
0.06Hosanagara
5.35-6.69
0.51-1.91
196.75-577.75
2
0.18
(30)
(5.62)
(1.38)
(345.50)
(0.13)
0.03Sagara
5.62-6.94
0.35-1.87
152.93-577.64
3
0.24
(45)
(5.89)
(1.45)
(358.03)
(0.09)
0.06Koppa
5.40-6.40
0.47-1.72
217.04-641.07
4
0.14
(30)
(5.56)
(1.32)
(337.20)
(0.08)
0.03Sringeri
5.21-5.96
0.49-2.35
207.50-663.28
5
0.10
(30)
(5.38)
(1.44)
(362.75)
(0.05)
0.04N.R. Pura
5.50-7.05
0.45-2.04
146.37-539.84
6
0.20
(20)
(6.25)
(1.26)
(325.75)
(0.11)
0.03Mudigere
5.28-6.34
0.51-1.94
164.75-553.05
7
0.18)
(20)
(5.87)
(1.56)
(327.96)
(0.06)
(Figures in paranthesis indicate the mean value of different samples)
Thirthahally
(50)

5.43-6.76
(5.87)

Avl.P2O5
(kg/ha)

Avl. K2O
(kg/ha)

7.2622.91
(14.22)
7.1323.86
(13.45)
8.4832.74
(18.29)
7.3825.66
(13.97)
5.1321.27
(13.55)
5.1325.87
(14.22)
6.4927.58
(14.31)

133.76430.08
(164.33)
120.80458.56
(208.32)
80.92413.04
(188.38)
111.44450.56
(147.67)
95.60416.64
(172.7)
128.44430.08
(254.48)
118.37457.93
(184.88)

Table 2: The Range of Secondary and Micronutrients in the Samples

Taluks & No.
of samples

Exch. Ca
(c mol
(p+) kg-1)

Exch. Mg
(c mol
(p+) kg-1)

Thirthahally
(50)

2.10-4.20
(3.30)

0.60-2.30
(1.40)

Hosanagara
(30)

1.70-5.30
(3.70)

0.50-3.30
(1.80)

Sagara
(45)

1.80-4.40
(3.90)

0.60-2.70
(1.90)

Koppa
(30)

2.10-4.40
(3.10)

0.50-2.80
(1.70)

Sringeri
(30)

1.60-3.30
(2.60)

0.30-2.30
(1.30)

N.R. Pura
(20)

2.30-5.30
(4.10)

0.60-2.80
(1.80)

Mudigere
(20)

1.30-3.60
(2.90)

0.40-2.40
(1.50)

Sl.
No.

Avl. S
(ppm)
5.5015.60
(8.50)
6.6022.50
(8.10)
8.3524.50
(13.50)
4.6015.50
(6.50)
5.8015.80
(7.50)
5.1017.50
(6.70)
6.2522.60
(15.60)

Exch. Fe
(ppm)

10.57-58.27
(29.92)
15.09-59.04
(36.40)
12.57-54.49
(38.47)
20.23-58.88
(42.50)
23.95-68.96
(30.06)
20.06-52.60
(38.55)
18.75-53.89
(38.57)

Exch.
Mn
(ppm)
6.0421.88
(14.73)
3.4023.07
(18.20)
4.1233.65
(24.64)
12.6024.63
(16.63)
9.8216.70
(13.82)
10.4433.07
(20.56)
7.6421.07
(18.05)

Exch. Cu
(ppm)

4.57-34.51
(18.13)
4.23-21.68
(11.68)
3.63-25.86
(14.51)
2.73-18.36
(10.68)
3.35-29.29
(20.62)
2.75-22.57
(12.69)
4.11-26.53
(15.63)

Exch.
Zn
(ppm)
0.171.89
(0.34)
0.162.98
(1.09)
0.142.98
(0.83)
0.231.44
(0.79)
0.181.74
(0.98)
0.213.72
(1.89)
0.162.84
(0.64)

(Figures in parenthesis indicate the mean value of different samples)

www.tjprc.org

editor@tjprc.org

30

Niranjana, K. S., Yogendra, K. & Mahadevan, K. M

Table 3: Soil Fertility Evaluation for Ph, Organic Carbon and Available N, P2O5, K2O

S
l
.
N
o

Talu
ks
&
No.
of
sam
ples

Ph (1:2.5)

Lo
w
(<0.
50)

Me
diu
m
(0.5
00.7
5)

High
(>0.7
5)

4
(8.0
0)

3
(6.0
0)

8
(16.
00)

19
(63.33)

2
(6.6
7)

6
(20.
00)

8
(17.
78)

33
(73.33)

4
(8.8
9)

2
(4.4
4)

Kop
pa
(30)

11
(36.
67)

19
(63.33)

Srin
geri
(30)

15
(50.
00)

15
(50.00)

N.R.
Pura
(20)

4
(20.
00)

Mud
igere
(20)

7
(35.
00)

Hig
hly
acid
ic
(<5.
5)

Moder
ately
acidic
(5.56.5)

Neu
tral
(6.57.5)

13
(26.
00)

33
(66.00)

9
(30.
00)

Saga
ra
(45)

Thirt
haha
ly
(50)
Hos
anag
ara
(30)

Available N
(kg/ha)

O.C. (%)

12
(26.
67)

Low
(<280)

Mediu
m
(280560)

High
(>560)

39
(78.0
0)

6
(12.00)

26
(52.00)

18
(36.00)

24
(80.0
0)

3
(10.00)

11
(36.67)

16
(53.33)

31
(68.8
9)

5
(11.11)

23
(51.11)

17
(37.78)

2
(6.6
7)

9
(30.
00)

19
(63.3
3)

5
(16.67)

17
(56.67)

8
(26.67)

2
(6.6
7)

11
(36.
67)

17
(56.6
7)

6
(20.00)

15
(50.00)

9
(30.00)

12
(60.00)

4
(20.
00)

2
(10.
00)

7
(35.
00)

11
(55.0
0)

7
(35.00)

10
(50.00)

3
(15.00)

13
(65.00)

8
(40.
00

12
(60.0
0)

4
(20.00)

12
(60.00)

4
(20.00)

Available
K2O
(Kg/ha)

Available P2O5
(kg/ha)

Lo
w
(<2
2.9
)
38
(76
.67
)
21
(70
.00
)
28
(62
.23
)
22
(73
.33
)
28
(93
.33
)
11
(55
.00
)
10
(50
.00
)

Med
ium
(22.
9056.3
3)

High
(>56.
33)

Low
(<141)

Med
ium
(141
336)

Hig
h
(>33
6)

10
(20.
00)

2
(3.33)

3
(6.00)

38
(76.
00)

9
(18.
00)

8
(26.
67)

1
(3.33)

2
(6.67)

22
(73.
33)

6
(20.
00)

15
(33.
33)

2
(4.44)

3
(6.67)

31
(68.
89)

10
(22.
22)

8
(26.
67)

6
(20.00)

19
(63.
33)

5
(16.
67)

2
(6.6
7)

7
(23.33)

16
(53.
33)

7
(23.
33)

5
(25.
00)

4
(20.00
)

2
(10.00)

11
(55.
00)

7
(35.
00)

9
(45.
00)

1
(5.00)

4
(20.00)

14
(70.
00)

2
(10.
00)

(Figures in parenthesis indicate the percent of the total no. of samples)

Table 4: Nutrient Indices and Fertility Ratings for Organic Carbon and Major Nutrients
Sl.
No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7

Taluks &
No. of
Samples

O.C. (%)
Nutrient
Index

Thirthahally
(50)
Hosanagara
(30)
Sagara
(45)
Koppa
(30)
Sringeri
(30)
N.R. Pura
(20)
Mudigere
(20)

Impact Factor (JCC): 4.7987

Fertility
Rating

Available N
(kg/ha)
Nutrient Fertility
Index
Rating

Available P2O5
(kg/ha)
Nutrient Fertility
Index
rating

Available K2O
(Kg/ha)
Nutrient Fertility
Index
Rating

2.72

High

1.70

Medium

1.27

Low

2.12

Medium

2.80

High

2.43

High

1.33

Low

2.13

Medium

2.64

High

2.27

Medium

1.42

Low

2.11

Medium

2.57

High

2.10

Medium

1.27

Low

1.97

Medium

2.50

High

2.10

Medium

1.07

Low

2.00

Medium

2.45

High

1.80

Medium

1.45

Low

2.25

Medium

2.40

High

2.00

Medium

1.55

Low

1.90

Medium

NAAS Rating: 3.53