Fourth Lab Report: JAGUNG PANDAN

Title: Soil Sieve and Nutrient Analysis
Date of Submission: 28th April 2018
Lecturer: DR. DIANA DEMIYAH MOHD HAMDAN

NAME	MATRIC NUMBER
PAVITRA A/P MURUGAYAH	BS17160700
NURUL NATASYAH BINTI KANAPIA@HANAFIAH	BS17110546
KONG WAN LING	BS17110429
NURFATIN SOFEA BINTI MOHD HELMI	BS17110574
SOW XIAO HUI	BS17110464
AARON CHIN VUI CHANG	BS17160670

Soil Sieve Analysis

1.0      Introduction

Sieve analysis is an analytical technique used to determine the particle size distribution of the coarse and fine aggregates. The technique involves the layering of sieves with different grades of sieve opening sizes. The size distribution is critical crucial to the way the material performs in use and sieve analysis can be performed on any type of non-organic or organic granular materials including sands, crushed rock, clays, granite, feldspars, coal, soil, a wide range pf manufactured powders, grain and seeds then down minimum size depending on exact method. The amount is determined by largest size of aggregate is placed upon the top of a sieves and shaken by mechanical means for a period of the time. The top sieve has the largest screen openings and the screen opening sizes decreases with each sieve down to the bottom sieve which has smallest opening size screen for the type of material specified. Sieve analysis is important for analyzing materials because particle size distribution can affect a wide range of properties such as the strength of concrete, the solubility of a mixture, surface area properties and even their taste.

2.0      Objectives

To determines the relative proportions of different grain sizes as they are distributed among certain size ranges.

3.0      APPARATUS AND MATERIALS

Air-dried soils

Stack of sieves including pan and cover

Weighing balance

Mechanical sieve shaker

Brush

Pestle and mortar

Tray

4.0      PROCEDURE

1. Tree roots, pieces of bark and rocks were removed from the soil samples.
2. Clumps of air-dried soils was break by hand or pestle and mortar were used before air-dried soils sample were sieve.
3. The total weight of the soils sample were measured before sieve.
4. Five size of mesh sieve (one of the sieve=63µm mesh size) were selected.
5. The sieves were ensure be cleaned.The brush was use to poke the soil particles that stuck in the openings without injuring the mesh.
6. A stack of sieves were prepared on the mechanical sieve shaker.The order on the larger opening size until smaller opening size of sieves were ensure in the correct position.The pan were set first in the stack and the top of the biggest mesh size sieve was covered by cover.
7. The soil sample was pour and the cover was place on it.
8. The clamps were fixed.
9. A tray was placed below the opening of the pan to collect the finest particle.
10. The time was adjusted to 15 minutes and the shaker was get going on 40-50.
11. After the shaker had stopped,the mass of each sieve and retained soil were mass.
12. The brush was used to poke out the particles that stuck on the mesh (if any) and it was collected.
13. The soil collected were labelled and weight on their mass.
14. The results were recorded and calculated.

5.0      Result and Discussion

Mangrove Soil
Total Mass= 100g

Table 5.1: Sieve Analysis Result of Mangrove Soil

No. Sieve	Sieve Opening Mesh Size (mm)	Mass of soil retained on each sieve (g)	Percentage of mass retained on each sieve, Rn (%)	Cumulative percent retained (% Cumulative Passing= 100% - % Cumulative Retained) (%)	Percentage of Finer (100 - ∑Rn) (%)
10	2.000	3.806	3.806	3.806	96.194
18	1.000	1.851	1.851	5.657	94.343
20	0.600	3.724	3.724	9.381	90.619
35	0.500	1.891	1.891	11.2712	88.728
230	0.063	69.024	69.024	80.295	19.705
Pan	-	19.705	19.705	100.000	0.000

Figure 5.1: Graph of Passing Percentage against Sieve Size for Mangrove Soil

Lake of Residential College E Soil
Total Mass= 100g

Table 5.2: Sieve Analysis Result of Lake of Residential College E Soil

No. Sieve	Sieve Opening Mesh Size (mm)	Mass of soil retained on each sieve (g)	Percentage of mass retained on each sieve, Rn (%)	Cumulative percent retained (% Cumulative Passing= 100% - % Cumulative Retained) (%)	Percentage of Finer (100 - ∑Rn) (%)
10	2.000	3.200	3.200	3.200	96.801
18	1.000	2.600	2.600	5.800	94.201
20	0.600	2.440	2.440	8.240	91.761
35	0.500	1.657	1.657	9.896	90.104
230	0.063	66.625	66.625	76.522	23.479
Pan	-	23.479	23.479	100.000	0.000

Figure 5.2: Graph of Passing Percentage against Sieve Size for Lake of Residential College E Soil

FSSA Soil
Total Mass= 100g

Table 5.3: Sieve Analysis Result of FSSA Soil

No. Sieve	Sieve Opening Mesh Size (mm)	Mass of soil retained on each sieve (g)	Percentage of mass retained on each sieve, Rn (%)	Cumulative percent retained (% Cumulative Passing= 100% - % Cumulative Retained) (%)	Percentage of Finer (100 - ∑Rn) (%)
10	2.000	19.006	19.006	19.006	80.994
18	1.000	17.118	17.118	36.124	63.876
20	0.600	10.799	10.799	46.923	53.077
35	0.500	3.953	3.953	50.876	49.124
230	0.063	34.937	34.9371	85.813	14.187
Pan	-	14.187	14.187	100.000	0.000

Figure 5.3: Graph of Passing Percentage against Sieve Size for FSSA Soil

Mountain Soil
Total Mass= 100g

Table 5.4: Sieve Analysis Result of Mountain Soil

No. Sieve	Sieve Opening Mesh Size (mm)	Mass of soil retained on each sieve (g)	Percentage of mass retained on each sieve, Rn (%)	Cumulative percent retained (% Cumulative Passing= 100% - % Cumulative Retained) (%)	Percentage of Finer (100 - ∑Rn) (%)
10	2.000	17.276	17.276	17.276	82.724
18	1.000	13.728	13.728	31.004	68.996
20	0.600	8.308	8.308	39.312	60.688
35	0.500	3.680	3.680	42.992	57.008
230	0.063	40.756	40.756	83.748	16.252
Pan	-	16.252	16.252	100.000	0.000

Figure 5.4: Graph of Passing Percentage against Sieve Size for Mountain Soil

Sandy Soil
Total Mass= 100g

Table 5.5: Sieve Analysis Result of Sandy Soil

No. Sieve	Sieve Opening Mesh Size (mm)	Mass of soil retained on each sieve (g)	Percentage of mass retained on each sieve, Rn (%)	Cumulative percent retained (% Cumulative Passing= 100% - % Cumulative Retained) (%)	Percentage of Finer (100 - ∑Rn) (%)
10	2.000	1.001	1.001	1.001	98.999
18	1.000	1.140	1.140	2.140	97.860
20	0.600	1.336	1.336	3.477	96.524
35	0.500	1.278	1.278	4.755	95.246
230	0.063	2.989	2.989	7.743	92.257
Pan	-	92.257	92.257	100.000	0.000

Figure 5.5: Graph of Passing Percentage against Sieve Size for Sandy Soil

6.0      Discussion

Sieve analysis test helps to determine the particle size distribution of the coarse and fine aggregates. The calculated by the combination of several separate elements of the rocks is known as aggregates. Meanwhile, a sieve analysis can be performed on any either non-organic or organic granular materials including sands, crushed rock, clays, granite, feldspars, coal, soil, a wide range of manufactured powders, grain and seeds, down to a minimum size depending on the exact method. In this experiment, there are five types of dry soils that will be used for the sieve analysis which are Mangrove soil, FSSA soil, Lake of Residental College E, Sandy soil and Mountain soil. According to British Soil Classification System, the soils are classified according to different sizes which are further divided into course, medium and fine sub-groups.

From the graph above, it shows that Lake of Residental College E have almost same pattern as Mangrove soil while FSSA soil have almost same pattern as Mountain soil. Each of the soils have different type of percent passing through 0.063 mm. It is clearly that the finest soil of percentage is sandy soil with percentage of 92.257. Only a small percentage with 14.187 % of FSSA soil that can pass through the finest mesh sieve.

From the previous results, FSSA soil contains 0.20 cm of sand (3.08%) and 6.30 cm of silt (96.9%) and 0% of clay from the soil jar test. According to the soil texture triangle, it can be said that the FSSA soil is a silt soil. According to the theory, silt particles measure between 0.05 and 0.002 mm, suppose be the finest one. However, the type of FSSA soil that was determined through sieve analysis cannot be supported by the results of soil texture analysis and jar test analysis where both test have shown that the FSSA soil is a silt soil whereas the sieve analysis show it was the least soil in the percentage of finer.

This is because it can be shown that the soil with the highest percentage finer would be soil samples from silty clay loam. However, through the sieve analysis test sandy soil recorded the finest soil in the finest sieve opening mesh size as the percentage of finer soils that passed through the 63 microns sieve mesh was the highest (92.257%), followed by Lake of Residental College E soil (23.479%), mangrove soil (19.705%) and mountain soil (16.252%). This can be said that, as the sizes of the mesh sieves decreases, only finer particles such as clay and silt which the size ranges are smaller than sand would be able to pass through the sieves. So, it can be said that our sandy soil may the finest seamless sand which is the finest among the all types of soil (Haseeb Jamal, 2005).

Thus, method of using sieve analysis to calculate the mass and percentage of retained soil sometimes may not really accurate because there will be some particles that stuck in the opening of sieves and hardly to be removed as well as some of the soil particles may finer that the sieve opening mesh size. Furthermore, the results can also be affected by spilling of some particles contents during the separating of tightly fit the sieves from the nest after shaking. Therefore, to prevent and ensure the minimal loss of soil during the experiment, the difference between combined mass of all retained soil and pre-sieve soil can be compared. The larger the differences, the more soil is loss during the experiment which indicates inaccuracy in the result.

7.0      Conclusion

In conclusion, sandy soil recorded as the highest passing percentage (92.257%) which means the most the finest size particles pass through the sieve analysis. Then followed by lake of Residential College E soil (23.479%), mangrove soil (19.705%) and mountain soil (16.252%). For FSSA soil, recorded as the lowest passing percentage among these five soils which is 14.187%.

8.0      Reference

A. Blaud, M. Menon et al. (2016). Effects of Dry and Wet Sieving of Soil on Identification and Interpretation of Microbial Community Composition. Retrived on 29 April 2018 from https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0065211316301122#.

Antonio Girona-García, Oriol Ortiz-Perpiñá etal. (2017). Effects of prescribed burning on soil organic C, aggregate stability and water repellency in a subalpine shrubland: Variations among sieve fractions and depths. Retrieved on 28.04.2018 from https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0341816218301000. 

Haseeb Jamal. Sieve Analysis & Particle Size Analysis. Retrieved on 28.04.2018 from https://www.aboutcivil.org/Sieve-analysis-and-soil-classification.html.

Leslie Davidson, Sarah Springman. (2000). Soil Description and Classification. Retrieved on 29.04.2018 from http://environment.uwe.ac.uk/geocal/SoilMech/classification/default.htm.

Soil Nutrient Analysis

1.0      Introduction

Plant growth and development largely depend on the combination and concentration of mineral nutrients available in soil. Plants often face significant challenges in obtaining an adequate supply of these nutrients to meet the demands of basic cellular processes due to their relatively immobility. A deficiency of any one of them may result in decreased plant productivity and fertility. Symptoms of nutrients deficiency may include stunted growth, death of plants tissue or yellowing of the leaves caused by reduced by a reduced production of chlorophyll, a pigment needed for photosynthesis.

Nutrient deficiency can have a significant impact on agriculture, resulting in reduced crop yield or reduced plant quality. Nutrients deficiency can also lead to reduced overall biodiversity since plants serve as the producers that support most food webs.

Changes in the climate and atmosphere can have serious effects on plants, including changes in the availability of certain nutrients. In a world of continual global climate change, it is very important to understand the strategies that plants have evolved to allow them to cope with some of these obstacles.

Two classes of nutrients are considered essential for plant which are macronutrients and micronutrients. Macronutrients are building blocks of crucial cellular components like proteins and nucleic. They required in large quantities. Nitrogen, phosphorus, magnesium and potassium are some of the most important macronutrients.

Micronutrients including iron, zinc, manganese and copper are required in very small amount. Micronutrients also often required as cofactor for enzymes. Mineral nutrients are usually obtained from the soil through plants roots, but many factors can affect the efficiency of nutrient acquisition. The chemistry and composition of certain soils can make it harder for the plants to absorb nutrients. The nutrients may not be available in certain soils, or may be present in forms that the plants cannot use. Soil properties like water content, pH and compaction may exacerbate these problems.

Plants are known to show different responses to different specific nutrients deficiencies and the responses can vary between species.

2.0      Objective

1)    To identify the macronutrients in plants such nitrogen (N), phosphorus (P) and sulphate (S).

3.0      Apparatus and Materials

1. 20 gram dried soil samples
2. Distilled water
3. 200 ml glass beaker
4. 0.45µm membrane filter paper
5. Vacuum pump
6. Magnetic field
7. Stirrer plate
8. Spatula
9. High density polyethylene (HDPE) bottle
10. Machine HACH
11. Powder pillow for Code (680 Sulphate). (490 P React. PV- Phosphorus) and (355N, Nitrate HR PP)

4.0      Procedures

1. Avoid handling the soil with your bare hands and the gloves is wear while handling.
2. The soil that has been air-dried outside of the lab is weighed. The soil is touched to ensure complete dried out of moisture.
3. 20g of dried soil samples is taken and put in beaker separately for each type of soil.
4. 50ml of distilled water is added together with the soil samples.
5. The magnetic stirrer is using to mix the sample solution well for 20 minutes.
6. The mixture is allowed to stand undisturbed for at least 10 minutes to allow the fine particles in the soil to settle out. The clarity of the solution will vary, the clear the better,
7. Then, the solution is filtered using the 0.45µm membrane filter paper vacuum. Filter solution which is clear liquid first compare to murky ones. The HDPE bottles is stored for macronutrient analysis using the HACH kit.
8. Next, three nutrient are analysed using the HACH kit.
9. Wearing the gloves all the time when conducting experiment by using HACH kit.
10.     The nutrient is analysed with code (680 Sulphate), (490 P React. PV-Phosphorus) and (355N, Nitrate HR PP).
11. The readings for each nutrients is taken and averaged.
12. After solution had been analysed, the solution is not discard in the sink. Collect in a beaker first before discard into a proper waste storage.

4.1      Procedure for nutrient analysis code (680 Sulphate)

1. The stored programs is pressed.
2. Code (680 Sulphate) is selected for the test.
3. A square sample cell is filled with 10ml of sample.
4. To prepare the samples, the contents of one SulfaVer 4 Reagent Powder Pillow is added to the sample cell. Then, swirled vigorously to dissolve powder and white turbidity will form if sulphate is present.
5. The timer is press and a five minute reaction period will begin. Do not disturb the cell during this time.
6. A second square sample cell is filled with 10ml of sample.
7. When the timer expires, the blank is inserted into the cell holder with the line facing right. Next, press Zero and the display will showed.
8. Within five minutes after the timer expires, the prepared sample is inserted into the cell holder with the filled liner facing right. Press read and the results is recorded. Next, the sample cells is cleaned with a soap and brush.

4.2      Procedure for nutrient analysis code (490 P React. PV-Phosphorus)

1. The stored programs is pressed.
2. Code (490 P React. PV-Phosphorus) is selected for the test.
3. A square sample cell is filled with 10ml of sample.
4. To prepared the samples, the contents of one PhosVer 3 phosphate Powder Pillow is added to the cell. Immediately stopper and shake vigorously for 30 minutes.
5. The timer is press and a two minutes reaction period will begin. If the samples was digested using the Acid Persulphate digestion, a ten minute reaction period is required.
6. A second square sample cell is filled with 10ml of sample.
7. When the timer expires, the blank is wiped and inserted it into the cell holder with the filled line facing right, press Zero and the display will showed.
8. The prepared sample is wiped and inserted it into the cell holder with the filled line facing right. Press read and the results is recorded.

4.3      Procedure for nutrient analysis code (355N, Nitrate HR PP)

1. The stored programs is pressed.
2. Code (355N, Nitrate HR PP) is selected for the test.
3. A square sample cell is filled with 10ml of sample.
4. To prepare samples, the contents of one NitraVer 5-Nitrate Reagent Powder Pillow is added.
5. The timer is press and a one minute reaction period will begin.
6. The cell is shook vigorously until the timer expires.
7. When the timer expires, press timer again and a five minute reaction will begin. An amber colour will develop if nitrate is present.
8. Next, when the timer expires, a second square samples cell is filled with 10ml of samples.
9. The blank is wiped and inserted it into the cell holder with the fill line facing right.
10. Then, press Zero and the display will showed,
11. Within one minute after the timer expires, the prepared samples is wiped and inserted it into the cell holder with the filled line facing right. Press read and results is recorded.

5.0      Result

Table 5.1: Result of Nutrient Analysis for Each Soil Sample

TYPE OF SOIL		FIRST READING	SECOND READING	THIRD READING	AVERAGE
Mangrove	680 Sulphate	>3.50!	>3.50!	>3.50!	>3.50!
	355N, Nitrate HR PP	3.60	3.60	3.60	3.60
	490 P React. PV- Phosphorus	0.38	0.38	0.38	0.38
Mountain	680 Sulphate	1.00	1.00	1.00	1.00
	355N, Nitrate HR PP	2.80	2.80	2.80	2.80
	490 P React. PV- Phosphorus	0.19	0.19	0.19	0.19
Lake of Residential College E	680 Sulphate	33.00	33.00	33.00	33.00
	355N, Nitrate HR PP	Over detection limit	Over detection limit	Over detection limit	Over detection limit
	490 P React. PV- Phosphorus	0.51	0.51	0.51	0.51
FSSA	680 Sulphate	18.00	18.00	18.00	18.00
	355N, Nitrate HR PP	3.90	3.90	4.00	3.93
	490 P React. PV- Phosphorus	0.88	0.91	0.92	0.90
Sandy	680 Sulphate	11.00	11.00	11.00	11.00
	355N, Nitrate HR PP	4.10	4.10	4.10	4.10
	490 P React. PV- Phosphorus	0.28	0.30	0.32	0.30

6.0      Discussion

Soil is a major source of nutrients needed by plants for growth. Plants need at least 17 nutrients. These include the macronutrients nitrogen (N), phosphorus (P), potassium (K), calcium (Ca), magnesium (Mg) and sulphur (S) and the micronutrients chlorine (Cl), boron (B), iron (Fe), manganese (Mn), copper (Cu), zinc (Zn), nickel (Ni) and molybdenum (Mo). These are generally obtained from the soil. Crop production is often limited by low phytoavailability of essential mineral elements or the presence of excessive concentrations of potentially toxic mineral elements. The macronutrient are needed in large amount whereas the micronutrient are needed in small amount.

Nitrogen is a key element in plant growth. It is found in all plant cells, in plant proteins and hormones, and in chlorophyll. Atmospheric nitrogen is a source of soil nitrogen. Some plants such as legumes fix atmospheric nitrogen in their roots; otherwise fertiliser factories use nitrogen from the air to make ammonium sulphate, ammonium nitrate and urea. When applied to soil, nitrogen is converted to mineral form, nitrate, so that plants can take it up. Soils high in organic matter such as chocolate soils are generally higher in nitrogen than podzolic soils. Nitrate is easily leached out of soil by heavy rain, resulting in soil acidification.

Phosphorus (P) is important in cell division, root development, flowering and fruiting. Potassium (K) increases vigour and disease resistance of plants, helps form and move starches, sugars and oils in plants, and can improve fruit quality. On the other hand, sulphur is a structural component of some amino acids (including cysteine and methionine) and vitamins, and is essential for chloroplast growth and function; it is found in the iron-sulphur complexes of the electron transport chains in photosynthesis. It is needed for N2 fixation by legumes, and the conversion of nitrate into amino acids and then into protein. It is also responsible for many flavours and odours compounds in plants such as the aroma of onions and cabbage.

To determine the nutrient content, 680 Sulphate reagent was used to determine the amount of sulphate (sulphur) content in the soil , 490 P React PV-phosphorus was used to determine the amount of phosphorus content and 355 N, Nitrate HRPP was used to determine the nitrate (nitrogen) content. Firstly, the mangrove soil sulphate content is >3.5!, the nitrate content is 3.6 and the phosphorus content is 0.38 whereas for the mountain soil, the sulphate content is 1, the nitrate content is 2.8 and the phosphorus content is 0.19. For the soil from the lake of Residential College E , it has the highest amount of sulphate content compared to the rest which is 33, the nitrate content is over the detection limit which is also known as over the detection range and the phosphorus content is 0.51. Next, FSSA soil has got the most phosphorus content in its soil which is 0.90, the sulphate content is 18 and the nitrate content is 3.93. Lastly, the sandy soil has the highest content of nitrate which is 4.1, the sulphate content is 11 and the phosphorus content is 0.3.

Nitrogen deficiency most often results in stunted growth, slow growth, and chlorosis. Nitrogen deficient plants will also exhibit a purple appearance on the stems, petioles and underside of leaves from an accumulation of anthocyanin pigments. Besides that, phosphorus deficiency in plants is characterized by an intense green coloration or reddening in leaves due to lack of chlorophyll. If the plant is experiencing high phosphorus deficiencies the leaves may become denatured and show signs of death. Occasionally the leaves may appear purple from an accumulation of anthocyanin because phosphorus is a mobile nutrient, older leaves will show the first signs of deficiency. In plants, sulphur cannot be mobilized from older leaves for new growth, so deficiency symptoms are seen in the youngest tissues first. Symptoms of deficiency include yellowing of leaves and stunted growth. The lowest content for nitrate, sulphate and phosphorus is the soil from mountain. This explains no growth in the soil.

7.0        Conclusion

In conclusion, identification of macronutrient was conclude in Table 5.1. From that table, soil sample of lake of Residential College E recorded the highest macronutrient than other soil sample. So this is suitable for jagung pandan growth. Nutrient is very important for jagung pandan growth. Based on our observation, the leaf of jagung pandan is yellowish and purplish in colour. This indicates our jagung pandan is lack of phosphorus. But we cannot add on any fertilisers because we want to measure the origin nutrient inside each of our sample soil.

8.0      References

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plant_nutrition

https://www.dpi.nsw.gov.au/agriculture/soils/improvement/plant-nutrients

https://keys.lucidcentral.org/keys/sweetpotato/key/Sweetpotato%20Diagnotes/Media/Html/TheProblems/MineralDeficiencies/NitrogenDeficiency/N%20deficiency.htm