Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
The suitability of domestic roof harvested rainwater as source of irrigation water for homestead gardening Akintola, O.A. and Sangodoyin, A.Y, senior research officer and Acting Head of Programme, Farming Systems
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×

Introducing the official SlideShare app

Stunning, full-screen experience for iPhone and Android

Text the download link to your phone

Standard text messaging rates apply

The suitability of domestic roof harvested rainwater as source of irrigation water for homestead gardening Akintola, O.A. and Sangodoyin, A.Y, senior research officer and Acting Head of Programme, Farming Systems

482
views

Published on

Working Group 2

Working Group 2

Published in: Technology, Business

0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
482
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
10
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. The suitability of domestic roof harvested rainwater as source of irrigation water for homestead gardening . Akintola, O.A * . and Sangodoyin, A.Y** . *National Horticultural Research Institute of Nigeria, Idi-Ishin, Ibadan. Nigeria. E-mail: [email_address] ** Department of Agricultural and Environmental Engineering, Faculty of Technology, University of Ibadan, Ibadan. Nigeria. By
  • 2. OUTLINE OF PRESENTATION
    • Introduction
    • Methodology
    • Results and Discussions
    • Conclusions
  • 3. INTRODUCTION
    • Good quality food is essential in the right quantity and quality to enhance quality of life.
    • Due to some problems associated with horticultural crop handling in developing countries such as indiscriminate application of chemicals and other dangerous farming practices, homestead gardening seem to be a way of ensuring that each householder has access to good quality food.
    • To achieve this, a source of irrigation is imperative.
    • Contamination of surface and shallow wells due to improper handling of industrial and domestic wastes is the main reason why the use of domestic roof harvested rainwater (DRHRW) is generally being recommended.
  • 4. INTRODUCTION (CONTD.)
    • Rainwater is expected to be clean since it has been purified in the hydrological cycle.
    • Previous work had focused on quantity rather than the quality of harvested rainwater.
    • Hence this study investigated the quality of DRHRW harvested under varying environmental conditions in relation to its use for irrigation of homestead garden.
  • 5. METHODOLOGY
    • The areas used for this study were Ibadan (7 o 23 1 47 11 N, 3 o 55 1 0 11 E), Lagos (6 o 27 1 11 1 N, 3 o 23 1 45 11 E) and Port-Harcourt (4 o 45 1 0 11 N, 7 o 0 1 0 11 E) in Nigeria (Fig. 1 )
    • The samples were collected at twelve locations per city in three replicates.
    • Four different roof materials, namely corrugated iron sheet, long span aluminium, asbestos and step-tiles in service condition in some pre-selected locations in Ibadan (residential), Lagos (industrial) and Port-Harcourt (gas flaring) regions were investigated (Fig. 2)
    • The rainwater samples were collected from roofs with varying length of service viz : < 5years; 5 to 10years and >10years of service.
    • Water samples were harvested using clean and sterile polyethylene bowls and transferred into clean polyethylene containers at about 1.5m above the ground surface.
    • The procedure eliminated possible contamination through splashes from the ground surface or the introduction of other sources of contamination outside the scope of this study .
  • 6. METHODOLOGY (CONTD.)
    • Microbiological Analysis
    • Samples were collected into McCartney bottles using sterile plastic buckets and bowl.
    • All the samples were analyzed within 24 hrs.
    • The procedure employed include: determination of the total viable count by pour plate method; presumptive coliform test for the detection of coliform as well as detection of pathogens using differential media.
    • The chemicals used in the study were of analytical grade. All the microbiological media used were produced by Difco and the preparation was done according to test guidelines (APHA, 1995; Coker and Ehimika, 2005).
    •  
  • 7. METHODOLOGY (CONTD.)
    • Chemical Analysis
    • Samples were collected using clean buckets and bowls into clean and pre-treated polyethylene container.
    • Metals in the samples were preserved in 5mls conc. HNO 3 in 1L of water (John-De-Zuane, 1990).
    • Sample preparations and handling were done according to standard procedures viz John-De-Zuane (1990), APHA (1995) and WHO (2004).
  • 8. RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
    • Microbiological Quality
    • The samples showed evidence of contamination which is likely to be either from dust or bird droppings ( Table 1) .
    • Escherichia coli (E. coli) was isolated from almost all the samples considered. The value was observed to be below the infection dose of 10 6 cfuml -1 (Hazen and Toranazos, 1990).
    • It will only be of major concern if the water is used to irrigate fruit crops and the fruits are eaten without washing.
    • Pseudomonas fluorescens , on the other hand was detected in about 25, 50 and 70% in the samples from residential, industrial and gas flaring regions respectively.
  • 9. RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS (CONTD.)
    • P. fluorescens strains (CHAO or Pf-5) present bio-control properties, protecting the roots of some plant species against parasitic fungi such as Fusarium and Pythium , as well as phytophagous nematodes (Anon.,2007).
    • DRHRW that is “contaminated” with P. fluorescens can be a good source of irrigation water and may assist the farmer in curtailing the problem of nematode invasion thereby increasing crop yield.
    • Age of roof and roof type does not have major impact on the distribution of E.coli and P.fluorescens (Table 1) .
  • 10. RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS (CONTD.)
    • Chemical Quality
    • Lead was detected in about 62% of samples from Ibadan (residential) and all the samples from Lagos (industrial) and Port-Harcourt (gas flaring) areas.
    • Cadmium was detected in all the samples from Industrial area as well as in about 69 and 84% of samples from residential and gas flaring areas.
    • Lead and Cadmium were detected from DRHRW in all the three locations in the range 0.01 – 0.13mg/L and 0.01 – 0.15mg/L respectively ( Figs. 3 - 5 ). These were traced to anthropogenic factors.
    • Mean Cd value of 0.02, 0.06 and 0.05 ( Fig. 6 ) for Ibadan, Lagos and Port-Harcourt respectively indicate almost 3 times Cd levels between residential and industrial or gas flaring in rainwater samples
  • 11. RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS (CONTD.)
    • Rainwater harvested in industrial and gas flaring regions must not be considered for irrigation purpose so as to avoid situations in which cultivated crops will accumulate heavy metals and pass it to man via food chain.
    • Iron and nitrate were detected in almost all the samples investigated in the range of 0.21 – 1.13mg/L and 51.05 – 305.93mg/L respectively ( Table 2 ).
    • Nitrate content in DRHRW samples collected were higher than the WHO recommended standard of 45mgl -1 for all locations.
    • This however does not pose any risk to its being use to irrigate homestead gardening. On the other hand, it is an indication of its suitability for irrigation purposes.
    • The concentrations of iron detected is also within the safe limit recommended for use by health authorities even for potable uses (WHO, 2004: USEPA, 1994).
  • 12. CONCLUSSIONS
    • Findings from this research work indicated that the quality of DRHRW in industrial and gas flaring environments are not suitable for irrigation of homested gardening because of its chemical constituents.
    • It is contaminated with lead and cadmium which are suspected to be from anthropogenic source.
    • Those harvested from residential environment however proved to be suitable for irrigation purposes.
    • The presence of Pseudomonas flourescens in all location indicated that DRHRW may also serve as a nemanticide to some extent, if used to irrigate homestead garden
  • 13. Thanks for your patience
  • 14. Fig.1. Site maps indicating sampling sites
  • 15. Fig 2. The four roof materials investigated Corrugated iron sheet in service condition. Long span aluminium in service condition Asbestos roof in service condition . Step tiles in service condition.
  • 16.
      • Table 1. Microbiological qualities of domestic roof harvested rainwater under investigation.
    All parameters in cfu/ml (x 10 5 Cfu/ml). Rtp- Roof type. Rtp 1 to 4 represent corrugated iron sheet, long span aluminium, asbestos and step-tiles Ages 1 to 3 represent 5, 5 – 10 and ˃ 10 years in service conditions Contr - Control i.e rainwater samples collected without input from roof materials. Ibadan Lagos Port-Harcourt Rtp Age E.coli Pse fl. E.coli Pse fl. E.coli Pse fl. 1 1 1.33 ± 0.01 0.83 ± 0.01 2.00 ± 0.01 1.67 ± 0.01 1.75 ± 0.01 3.01 ± 0.01 1 2 1.27 ± 0.21 nd 6.00 ± 0.01 0.50 ± 0.00 1.27 ± 0.02 nd 1 3 nd nd 3.67 ± 0.01 1.17 ± 0.01 1.04 ± 0.01 0.83 ± 0.01 2 1 2.50± 0.00 nd 3.17 ± 0.01 nd 1.07 ± 0.01 0.50 ± 0.00 2 2 1.17 ± 0.01 nd 2.00 ± 0.01 0.33 ± 0.00 1.24 ± 0.01 0.84 ± 0.01 2 3 1.83 ± 0.01 nd 1.78 ± 0.01 nd 1.24 ± 0.00 0.83 ± 0.01 3 1 1.60 ± 0.01 nd 3.83 ± 0.01 0.83 ± 0.01 1.57 ± 0.01 nd 3 2 2.50± 0.00 1.00 ± 0.00 5.16 ± 0.02 0.50 ± 0.00 3.11 ± 0.01 1.17 ± 0.01 3 3 2.17 ± 0.02 nd nd nd 0.49 ± 0.01 0.83 ± 0.01 4 1 1.27± 0.21 nd 2.93 ± 0.01 nd 1.24 ± 0.00 0.50 ± 0.00 4 2 2.00 ± 0.01 1.06 ± 0.01 0.98 ± 0.01 nd 1.25 ± 0.01 nd 4 3 1.00 ± 0.00 nd 1.62 ± 0.01 nd 1.24 ± 0.01 1.16 ± 0.01 Contr 1.62 ± 0.04 nd 6.00 ± 0.01 1.83 ± 0.01 2.11 ± 0.01 nd
  • 17. Fig. 3. Box and Whisker presentation of concentrations of Cd and Pb (Mg/l) for Ibadan, Lagos and Port-Harcourt, Nigeria referred to as locations 1, 2 and 3 repectively. Thus Pb1 refer to concentration of Pb in samples from Ibadan area
  • 18. Fig. 4. Box and Whisker presentation of concentrations of Cd and Pb for age of roof: ˂5, 5 – 10 and ˃ 10 years in service condition denoted by 1, 2 and 3 repectively. Thus Cd1 refer to concentration of Cd for from roof that is ˂ 5years in service condition
  • 19. Fig. 5. Box and Whisker presentation of concentrations of Cd and Pb for corrugated iron sheet, long-span aluminium, asbestos and step tiles denoted by 1, 2 and 3 respectively. Thus Cd 4 refer to concentration of Pb in samples from step tiles’ roof
  • 20.
      • Fig. 6 Mean Cadmium concentrations (Mg/L) for the three locations under consideration .
      • Fig. 5. Mean Cadmium concentrations (Mg/L) for the three locations under consideration .
  • 21. Rtp- Roof type. Rtp 1 to 4 represent corrugated iron sheet, long span aluminium, asbestos and step-tiles Ages 1 to 3 represent 5, 5 – 10 and ˃ 10 years in service conditions Contr - Control i.e rainwater samples collected without input from roof materials
      • Table 2. Concentrations of Fe and NO 3 in domestic roof harvested rainwater under investigation
    Ibadan Lagos Port-Harcourt Rtp Age Fe NO 3 Fe NO 3 Fe NO 3 1 1 0.47 ± 0.02 152.79 ± 0.61 0.69 ± 0.01 204.14 ± 0.08 0.66 ± 0.02 153.49 ± 0.61 1 2 0.39 ± 0.01 255.93 ± 1.21 0.57 ± 0.01 102.44 ± 1.60 0.73 0.02 203.84 ± 0.61 1 3 0.45 ± 0.02 255.23 ± 1.05 0.60 ± 0.02 51.05 ± 1.05 0.50 ± 0.02 153.49 ± 0.61 2 1 0.65 ± 0.01 203.49 ± 1.21 0.58 ± 0.02 51.40 ± 1.60 0.21 ± 0.01 204.54 0.60 2 2 0.71 ± 0.01 203.52 ± 1.15 0.59 ± 0.02 103.14 ± 1.05 1.13 ± 0.03 101.74 ± 0.60 2 3 0.77 ± 0.02 153.14 ± 1.05 0.56 ± 0.01 153.49 ± 0.61 0.46 ± 0.03 102.44 ± 0.61 3 1 0.73 ± 0.01 255.23 ± 0.00 0.67 ± 0.02 51.40 ± 0.60 0.39 ± 0.01 102.48 ± 0.57 3 2 1.13 ± 0.01 152.78 ± 0.63 0.65 ± 0.02 102.44 ± 0.61 0.35 ± 0.01 102.44 ± 1.60 3 3 0.55 ± 0.01 305.93 ± 0.61 0.59 ± 0.02 255.53 ± 0.65 0.73 ± 0.01 204.14 ± 0.08 4 1 0.57 ± 0.01 255.23 ± 1.05 0.58 ± 0.01 203.84 ± 1.60 0.95 ± 0.04 102.09 ± 0.00 4 2 0.75 ± 0.01 152.79 ± 0.61 0.60 ± 0.02 101.74 ± 0.60 1.05 ± 0.02 nd 4 3 0.57 ± 0.03 255.23± 1.05 0.56 ± 0.02 102.14 ± 0.08 0.37 ± 0.02 152.09 ± 1.05 Contr 0.63 ± 0.01 204.19 ± 1.05 0.52 ± 0.02 152.09 ± 1.05 0.56 ± 0.02 152.79 ± 1.60