COLLEGE OF AGRICULTURE , OUAT,

BHUBANESWAR

EXPERIENTIAL LEARNING PROGRAMME 2022-23

SOIL TESTING AND PREPARATION OF SOIL HEALTH
CARD

SUBMITTED BY: SUBMITTED TO:

PREETI BARSHA PANDA ASST. PROF. DR. SUBHASHIS SAREN
ADM. NO.: 191210108 ASST. PROF. DR. BANDITA JENA
SECTION: B DEPARTMENT OF SOIL SCIENCE
AND AGRICULTURAL CHEMISTRY
4th YEAR, B.Sc.Ag

1
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

It is with a sense of great pleasure; that I PREETI BARSHA PANDA present

this report on “EXPERIENTIAL LEARNING PROGRAMME” (ELP) on the
module “SOIL TESTING AND PREPARATION OF SOIL HEALTH CARDS”.

I am extremely thankful to Prof. H. K. Patro, Dean, College of

Agriculture & CEO of ELP for his cooperation & encouragement.

Expressing my deep gratitude to ELP evaluation committee members,

Dr. B.S. Rath (Professor & HOD Ag. Meteorology, Chief Co-coordinator,
Student READY), Dr. B.P. Mohapatra (Professor & HOD, Extension
Education, Co-coordinator, ELP).

I am extremely thankful to Dr. Subhashis Saren (Asst. Professor, Dept.

of Soil Science and Agricultural Chemistry, Manager of our ELP Module)
for his utter cooperation and timely guidance while doing our
objectives. I feel honored to offer my sincere gratitude to all those
people who helped me in completing my ELP program. Last but not the
least, we have all worked together for the accomplishment of the
program and we kept up the enthusiasm throughout the task.

2
 Contents

SL. No. PARTICULARS PAGE NO.

1 Importance of module 4
2 Skill developed from module 5
3 Soil health card 6
4 Information on farmers 8
5 Information on soil colour 9
6 Information on soil texture 10
7 Information on soil Ph and EC 11
8 Information on organic carbon content 13
9 Information on available macro 14
nutrients in soil samples (N, P and K)
10 Information on available micro 18
nutrients in soil samples (Fe, Zn, Cu and
Mn)
11 Information on available sulfur in soil 20
samples
12 Recommendations 21
13 Feedback from the ELP module 22
14 Action photographs 23

3
IMPORTANCE OF MODULE:
Some of the importance of the ELP module are –

➢ Experiential learning programme is a philosophy and methodology to

engage students in direct experience in order to increase knowledge,
develop skills, entrepreneurship, and in calculate values.
➢ It is helpful in building skills in project development and execution,
decision-making, individual and team coordination, approach to problem
solving, resolving conflicts etc.
➢ Along with this it also provides confidence to design and execute project
work.

OBJECTIVE OF THE MODULE:

The objectives of the programme are:

➢ Collection of GPS based soil samples.
➢ Determination of soil colour.
➢ Determination of soil textural classes of soil samples.
➢ Determination of pH of soil samples..
➢ Determination of organic carbon content in soil samples.
➢ Determination of available potassium in soil samples.
➢ Determination of available nitrogen in soil samples.
➢ Determination of available phosphorus in soil samples.
➢ Determination of available micro-nutrients (Zn, Fe, Cu and Mn) in soil
samples.
➢ Determination of available sulfur in soil samples.

FINAL OUTPUT OF THE MODULE:

Final output means what output we had got in the whole module. Some of them
are,
➢ How soil test based recommendation is given as per the presence of
different parameters in soil.
➢ How one can establish a soil testing laboratory with required precautions.
➢ How to maintain a discipline in work.
4
 ➢ What equipments should be purchased and how to use them.
➢ What to be done or what not to be in the soil testing laboratory.

ORIENTATION PROGRAMME:

The orientation programme for the ELP Module Soil testing and preparation of
Soil Health Cards was conducted by Prof. Subashis Saren , Dept. of Soil science
and agricultural chemistry on 21st January, 2023 in the STCR laboratory. The
motto of this orientation programme was to aware the students about the works
which should be done during the whole semester.
During the programme, the students were briefed about the various
requirements and importance of the ELP module and how we can complete the
module successfully.

SKILL DEVELOPED DURING THE MODULE:

➢ First of all this ELP programme is mainly designed to provide experience in

different works and also to improve the interpersonal and analytical skills.
➢ During the course of whole ELP programme we came across various
instruments and revived our practical knowledge that we had learnt during
our entire period of study.
➢ Through this ELP programme we were directly involved in the estimation of
different parameters of soil by doing different testing methods ourselves
under the guidance of our ELP manager.
➢ As we were directly involved in the estimation of various parameters of
different samples, we got a basic knowledge about the status of those
parameters basing on which we can also recommend a farmer about those
parameters.

TECHNICAL KNOWLEDGE DEVELOPED DURING THE

MODULE:

5
 ➢ This ELP programme not only provided us professional knowledge but also
strengthened our technical knowledge.
➢ As a result of which we gained a basic knowledge about the working
principle, procedures as well as the required precautions to be taken while
handling various equipments that are used for estimation of various
parameters of different elements used in the laboratory.
➢ Besides these things we can also recommend a farmer about the easy and
the best approach to get the status of various parameters in his farm field.

MISCELLANEOUS SKILL DEVELOPED:

➢ During this whole programme we learnt so many skills like problem solving,
flexibility, adaptability, taking the initiative, self-awareness which will help
us in future if we want to establish a soil testing laboratory.
➢ Apart from that we learnt how to work in a team in coordination with team
members to complete a task.
➢ Besides all these we also developed several skills like curiosity, time
management, strategic thinking etc.

SOIL HEALTH CARD:

Soil Health Card Scheme is a scheme launched by the Government of India on 19

February 2015. Under the scheme, the government plans to issue soil cards to
farmers which will carry crop-wise recommendations of nutrients and fertilisers
required for the individual farms to help farmers to improve productivity through
judicious use of inputs.

WHAT IS SOIL HEALTH CARD?

Soil Health Card(SHC) is a printed report that a farmer will be handed over for
each of his holdings. It will contain the status of his soil with respect to 12
parameters, namely N,P,K (Macro-nutrients) ; S (Secondary- nutrient) ; Zn, Fe, Cu,
Mn, Bo (Micro - nutrients) ; and pH, EC, OC (Physical parameters). Based on this,
6
the SHC will also indicate fertilizer recommendations and soil amendment
required for the farm. The card will contain an advisory based on the soil nutrient
status of a farmer’s holding. It will show recommendations on dosage of different
nutrients needed. Further, it will advise the farmer on the fertilizers and their
quantities he should apply, and also the soil amendments that he should
undertake, so as to realize optimal yields.
It is promoted by the Department of Agriculture & Co-operation under the
Ministry of Agriculture and Farmer’s Welfare. It is being implemented through
Department of Agriculture of all State and Union Governments.

BENEFITS OF SOIL HEALTH CARD:

➢ The farmers will be notified about the soil type and they can plant crops
accordingly.
➢ The authorities provide a report to the farmers once in 3 years after
observing the soil regularly. This makes the farmers not to be concerned
about the cultivation even if the soil changes due to natural factors.
➢ The farmers are also given advice by the experts to improve the
productivity of the crops and the necessary methods that have to be
practised in order to implement the changes.
➢ The Government sees that the same person is carrying out all the soil
analysis so that there can be further changes that can be made if required.
➢ The farmers will be informed about the needed nutrients in the soil.
➢ With the help of the Soil Health Card Scheme, the farmers can plan the
future of their crops as well as land.

7
 INFORMATION SHEET ON FARMERS NAME, VILLAGE,
LAND TYPE, LATITUDE AND LONGITUDE:
(STATE: ODISHA )

SL. NAME OF FARMER DISTRICT BLOCK VILLAGE GP LAND LATITUDE LONGITUDE

NO. TYPE (‘N) (‘E)

1. Pradosh ku. Panda Cuttack Baramba K.c.pur K.c.pur Upland 20.41996 85.34010

2. Bapi Panda Cuttack Baramba K.c.pur K.c.pur Upland 20.41697 85.34156

3. Gopinath Sahoo Cuttack Baramba K.c.pur K.c.pur Upland 20.41997 85.34179

4. Sujata Panigrahi Cuttack Baramba K.c.pur K.c.pur Mid-land 20.41667 85.34076

5. Pintu Sahoo Cuttack Baramba K.c.pur K.c.pur Mid-land 20.41585 85.34095

6. Prabhudatta Panda Cuttack Baramba K.c.pur K.c.pur Mid-land 20.41686 85.34069

7. Gopal Ku. Das Cuttack Baramba K.c.pur K.c.pur Mid-land 20.41787 85.34171

8. Sasmita Samal Cuttack Baramba K.c.pur K.c.pur Mid-land 20.41437 85.34191

9. Sudarsana Panda Cuttack Baramba K.c.pur K.c.pur Mid-land 20.41576 85.34136

10. Niranjan Samal Dhenkanal Sadar Sadar Sadar Mid-land 20.41326 85.34129

11. Binod Ku. Mallik Dhenkanal Sadar Sadar Sadar Mid-land 20.41243 85.34116

12. Rabi Panda Cuttack Baramba K.c.pur K.c.pur Upland 20.41423 85.34018

13. Sulochana Pani Cuttack Baramba K.c.pur K.c.pur Upland 20.41518 85.34034

14. Kabita Sahoo Cuttack Baramba K.c.pur K.c.pur Upland 20.41562 85.34085

15. Babool Panda Cuttack Baramba K.c.pur K.c.pur Mid-land 20.41852 85.34176

16. Pabana Ku. Dash Cuttack Baramba K.c.pur K.c.pur Upland 20.41143 85.34156

17. Gobinda Panda Cuttack Baramba K.c.pur K.c.pur Mid-land 20.41679 85.34143

18. Susmita Panda Cuttack Baramba K.c.pur K.c.pur Mid-land 20.41596 85.34121

19. Budhia Samal Cuttack Baramba K.c.pur K.c.pur Upland 20.41456 85.34137

20. Susama Patra Cuttack Baramba K.c.pur K.c.pur Upland 20.41669 85.34191

8
INFORMATION ON SOIL COLOUR:
SAMPLE NO. NOTATION COLOUR
1. 2.5Y 6/4 Light Yellowish Brown

2. 2.5Y 4/4 Olive Brown

3. 2.5Y 6/3 Light Yellowish Brown

4. 2.5Y 5/4 Light Olive Brown

5. 10YR 5/4 Yellowish Brown

6. 5Y 4/4 Olive

7. 2.5Y 5/4 Light Olive Brown

8. 2.5Y 6/4 Light Yellowish Brown

9. 2.5Y 7/4 Pale Yellow

10. 10YR 5/6 Yellowish Brown

11. 2.5Y 7/6 Yellow

12. 2.5Y 4/3 Olive Brown

13. 2.5Y 5/4 Light Olive Brown

14. 2.5Y 6/4 Light Yellowish Brown

15. 2.5Y 6/4 Light Yellowish Brown

16. 2.5Y 5/4 Light Olive Brown

17. 2.5Y 4/4 Olive Brown

18. 10YR 4/4 Dark Yellowish Brown

19. 2.5Y 5/4 Light Olive Brown

20. 2.5Y 5/4 Light Olive Brown

❖ In the notation 10YR 7/4

HUE (Dominant Spectral Colour): 10YR

VALUE (Lightness or Darkness):7
CHROMA (Purity): 4

9
INFORMATION ON SOIL TEXTURE OF SOIL SAMPLES
BY BUOYCOUS HYDROMETER METHOD:
SAMPLE NO. %SAND %SILT %CLAY TEXTURAL CLASS

1. 67.80 6.45 25.75 Sandy clay loam

2. 39.75 3.0 57.25 Clay

3. 67.25 1.05 31.70 Sandy clay

4. 57.25 4.10 38.65 Sandy loam

5. 47.25 2.65 50.10 Clay

6. 33.00 1.25 65.75 Clay

7. 28.00 0.85 71.15 Clay

8. 65.50 1.0 33.50 Sandy clay

9. 73.00 1.5 25.50 Sandy clay loam

10. 78.00 1.0 21.00 Sandy clay loam

11. 80.50 2.2 17.30 Sandy loam

12. 58.00 1.2 40.80 Sandy clay

13. 60.50 1.5 38.00 Sandy clay loam

14. 53.00 1.3 45.70 Sandy clay

15. 43.00 0.9 56.10 Clay

16. 31.50 1.4 67.10 Clay

17. 16.50 4.8 78.70 Clay

18. 21.50 6.9 71.60 Clay

19. 36.50 2.7 60.80 Clay

20. 69.00 3.7 27.30 Sandy clay

CONCLUSION:

Textural class No. of Samples

Sandy Clay Loam 4

Clay 9

10
 Sandy loam 2

Sandy clay 5

clay sandy clay sandy clay loam sandy loam

INFORMATION ON pH AND EC OF SOIL SAMPLES:

SAMPLE NO. EC (dS/m) pH (1:2) INTERPRETATION

1. 0.234 6.60 Neutral

2. 0.236 6.50 Slightly acidic

3. 0.056 6.40 Slightly acidic

4. 0.213 6.14 Slightly acidic

5. 0.213 6.08 Slightly acidic

6. 0.153 6.30 Slightly acidic

7. 0.116 6.00 Slightly acidic

8. 0.132 4.90 Strongly acidic

9. 0.185 5.60 Moderately acidic

10. 0.241 6.30 Slightly acidic

11. 0.268 5.60 Moderately acidic

11
 12. 0.152 5.40 Acidic

13. 0.151 5.80 Moderately acidic

14. 0.118 5.30 Acidic

15. 0.123 5.00 Acidic

16. 0.091 5.90 Moderately acidic

17. 0.157 6.20 Slightly acidic

18. 0.102 5.60 Moderately acidic

19. 0.147 5.50 Moderately acidic

20. 0.130 6.10 Slightly acidic

RATING:
4-5: Strongly acidic
5-5.5: Acidic
5.5-6: Moderately acidic
6-6.5: Slightly acidic
6.5-7.5: Neutral

CONCLUSION:
Strongly acidic soil needs liming @5q/ha per year. EC for all soil samples is less
than 1, so soils are safe for all crops.

neutral
slightly acidic
acidic
moderately acidic

12
INFORMATION ON ORGANIC CARBON CONTENT OF
SOIL SAMPLES:
SAMPLE NO. ORGANIC CARBON (%) RATING
1. 0.19 Low

2. 0.24 Low

3. 0.50 Medium

4. 0.74 Medium

5. 0.70 Medium

6. 0.91 High

7. 0.25 Low

8. 0.80 High

9. 0.83 High

10. 0.59 Medium

11. 0.86 High

12. 0.62 Medium

13. 0.45 Low

14. 0.76 High

15. 0.68 Medium

16. 0.68 Medium

17. 0.54 Medium

18. 0.56 Medium

19. 0.62 Medium

20. 0.47 Low

13
CONCLUSION:
STATUS NO. OF SAMPLES

Low (O.C. < 0.5%) 5

Medium ( O.C. is 0.5% - 0.75%) 10

High (O.C. > 0.75%) 5

Low medium High

25% 25%

50%

INFORMATION ON AVAILABLE MACCRO-NUTRIENTS

(N, P AND K) IN SOIL SAMPLE:
AVAILABLE NITROGEN :
SAMPLE NO. N (kg/Ha) RATING

1. 175 LOW

2. 187.5 LOW

3. 162.5 LOW

4. 150 LOW

5. 162.5 LOW

6. 187.5 LOW

7. 150 LOW

14
 8. 175 LOW

9. 150 LOW

10. 137.5 LOW

11. 150 LOW

12. 162.5 LOW

13. 175 LOW

14. 175 LOW

15. 200 LOW

16. 187.5 LOW

17. 212.5 LOW

18. 150 LOW

19. 200 LOW

20. 125 LOW

CONCLUSION:

Status No. of samples

Low (<250 kg N/ha) 20
Medium (250-500 kg N/ha) 0
High (>500 kg N/ha) 0

AVAILABLE PHOSPHORUS IN SOIL SAMPLE BY BRAY’S METHOD:

SAMPLE NO. P (kg/Ha) P2O5 (kg/Ha) RATING

1. 1.925 4.4083 LOW

2. 3.08 7.0532 LOW

3. 0.539 1.2343 LOW

4. 3.003 6.8768 LOW

5. 2.233 5.1135 LOW

6. 3.465 7.9348 LOW

15
 7. 4.389 10.0508 LOW

8. 4.697 10.7561 LOW

9. 5.740 13.1446 LOW

10. 3.157 7.2295 LOW

11. 3.080 7.0532 LOW

12. 7.007 16.0460 MEDIUM

13. 6.699 15.3407 MEDIUM

14. 2.079 4.7609 LOW

15. 2.541 5.8188 LOW

16. 3.542 8.1111 LOW

17. 5.159 11.8141 LOW

18. 6.083 13.9301 LOW

19. 6.545 14.9880 MEDIUM

20. 1.540 3.5266 LOW

CONCLUSION:

Status No. of samples

Low (<14 kg P/Ha) 17
Medium (14-40 kg P/Ha) 3
High (>40 kg P/Ha) 0

low
medium
high

16
AVAILABLE SOIL POTASSIUM IN SOIL SAMPLES BY AMMONIUM ACETATE
METHOD USING FLAME PHOTOMETER:
SAMPLE NO. K (kg/Ha) K2O (kg/Ha) RATING

1. 818.16 981.79 HIGH

2. 285.26 342.31 HIGH

3. 135.86 163.03 MEDIUM

4. 91.05 109.26 LOW

5. 148.96 178.75 MEDIUM

6. 176.40 211.68 MEDIUM

7. 131.71 158.052 MEDIUM

8. 1024.00 1228.80 HIGH

9. 856.80 1028.16 HIGH

10. 1259.44 1511.33 HIGH

11. 484.069 580.88 HIGH

12. 174.04 208.85 MEDIUM

13. 116.14 139.37 MEDIUM

14. 186.48 223.77 MEDIUM

15. 185.92 223.10 MEDIUM

16. 1036.00 1243.20 HIGH

17. 187.04 224.45 MEDIUM

18. 222.88 267.46 MEDIUM

19. 433.44 520.13 HIGH

20. 527.52 633.02 HIGH

CONCLUSION:

Status No. of samples

Low (<118 kg K/Ha) 1
Medium (118 – 280 kg K/Ha) 10

17
 High (>280 kg K/Ha) 9

low
medium
high

INFORMATION ON AVAILABLE MICRO-NUTRIENTS

(Zn, Fe, Cu and Mn) IN SOIL SAMPLES:

AVAILABLE ZINC:
Wavelength used: 213.8 nm Critical limit: 0.6 ppm

SAMPLE NO. Zn (mg/Kg) REMARKS

1. 1.216 Sufficient

2. 1.33 Sufficient

3. 1.156 Sufficient

4. 0.574 Deficient

5. 0.66 Sufficient

18
CONCLUSION:
Conc. <0.6 ppm : Deficient in Zn (1
sample)
sufficient
Conc. > 0.6 ppm : sufficient in Zn (4 deficient
samples)
Range of samples: 0.57- 1.33 mg/Kg

AVAILABLE IRON:
Wavelength used: 248 nm Critical limit: 6 ppm

SAMPLE NO. Fe (mg/Kg) REMARKS

1. 55.48 Sufficient

2. 126.76 Sufficient

3. 57.76 Sufficient

4. 50.32 Sufficient

5. 68.28 Sufficient

CONCLUSION:
Conc. <6 ppm : Deficient in Fe (0 sample)
Conc. > 6 ppm : sufficient in Fe (5 samples)
Range of samples: 50.32- 126.76 mg/Kg

AVAILABLE COPPER:
Wavelength used: 324 nm Critical limit: 0.4 ppm

SAMPLE NO. Cu (mg/Kg) REMARKS

1. 3.306 Sufficient

2. 5.032 Sufficient

3. 2.878 Sufficient

19
 4. 2.606 Sufficient

5. 3.424 Sufficient

CONCLUSION:
Conc. <0.4 ppm : Deficient in Cu (0 sample)
Conc. >0.4 ppm : sufficient in Cu (5 samples)
Range of samples: 2.8- 5.0 mg/Kg

AVAILABLE MANGANESE:
Wavelength used: 250 nm Critical limit: 3.5 ppm

SAMPLE NO. Mn (mg/Kg) REMARKS

1. 22.08 Sufficient

2. 161.12 Sufficient

3. 85.88 Sufficient

4. 88.24 Sufficient

5. 69.4 Sufficient

CONCLUSION:

Conc. <3.5 ppm : Deficient in Mn (0 sample)

Conc. >3.5 ppm : sufficient in Mn (5 samples)
Range of samples: 22.08 – 161.12 mg/Kg

INFORMATION ON AVAILABLE SULFUR IN SOIL

SAMPLES BY TURBIDIMETRIC METHOD:
SAMPLE NO. AVAILABLE S (kg/Ha) RATING

1. 20.16 MEDIUM

2. 13.44 LOW

20
 3. 8.40 LOW

4. 8.68 LOW

5. 6.72 LOW

CONCLUSION:
STATUS NO. OF SAMPLES

Low (<20 kg/Ha) 4

Medium (20 – 40 kg/Ha) 1

High (>40 kg/Ha) 0

low
medium
high

RECOMMENDATION:
Soil analysis of individual field is done for fertilizer recommendation on the basis
of soil test result. For every crop on the basis of agronomic trait recommended
doses have been established which is uniform throughout the states. As fertilizer
application and rate of recommended dose don’t take soil fertility into account
there maybe either overdose of fertilizer or also the growth & yield. Basing on soil
fertility status the recommended dose need to be adjusted. Usually the medium
status of soil result is equated with recommended doses. If the fertility status of
soil is more the recommended dose is reduced & the extent of reduction varies
from laboratory to laboratory and state to state. Generally in Odisha 25% is
reduced over the recommended dose if the fertility is high, 25% increased if
fertility is low.
21
 ➢ The pH content of most of the soil samples are strongly acidic so liming
must be done @5quintal/ha/year.
➢ Since the organic carbon content is low in most of the soil samples so
recommended FYM dose must be applied that is 5 tons/ha.
➢ The Available Nitrogen content is low in most of the soil samples so 25%
more than recommended N-fertilizer must be applied.
➢ The Available Phosphorous content is medium in most of the soil samples
so recommended potash fertilizer must be applied.
➢ The Available Potassium content is medium in most of the soil samples so
recommended potash fertilizer must be applied.
➢ The Available Zinc content of some samples are deficient while others are
moderately sufficient, so Zn must be applied to field for better yield in case
of cereals.
➢ The Available Copper, Iron and Manganese content are found to be
sufficient in all samples but more should be applied by foliar spray in case
of plantation crops and fruits for better quality produce.
➢ The Available Sulfur content was found to be low in samples so sufficient
organic matter and sulfur containing fertilizers are required to be added in
case of oilseed crops for sustainable production.

FEEDBACK FROM THE ELP MODULE:

➢ We have got really a spectacular practical experience indeed.

➢ A part from it, it would be much better if much space will be provided for
the betterment of the infrastructure of the soil testing laboratory. As a
result of less infrastructure of the laboratory on an average not more than
5-6 students were able to perform their experiment at a time in a whole
day which is a major drawback. If this would have been resumed then more
number of students would have performed their experiment and more
number of samples would have been covered in a single day.
➢ The knowledge and experience that we have gained during this short
period of ELP programme will help us a lot in the future.

22
ACTION PHOTOGRAPHS:

COMPOSITE SOIL
COLLECTION AND
PROCESSING

23
SHADE DRYING DETERMINATION OF SOIL COLOUR

DETERMINATION OF SOIL pH AND EC

24
 DETERMINATION OF ORGANIC CARBON CONTENT

DETERMINATION OF SOIL TEXTURE

DETERMINATION OF AVAILABLE PHOSPHORUS IN SOIL

25
DETERMINATION OF DETERMINATION OF SULFUR
MICRO-NUTRIENTS

Preeti Barsha Panda

191210108

26