Skip to main navigation menu Skip to main content Skip to site footer
Plant Science Today (PST)

Research Articles

Vol. 13 No. sp5 (2026): Recent Advances in Agriculture

Delineation of potential zones for makhana (Euryale ferox L.) cultivation through the integrating of multi-criteria evaluation and GIS in Northern Bihar

DOI
https://doi.org/10.14719/pst.13978
Submitted
4 February 2026
Published
24-07-2026

Abstract

Cultivation suitability of makhana (Euryale ferox L.) in Northern Bihar was evaluated using a multi-criteria evaluation (MCE) framework integrating the analytical hierarchy process (AHP) and geographic information systems (GIS). Critical factors such as soil texture, slope, land use, soil drainage and water quality were considered, with their relative importance quantified using AHP. Soil and water analyses revealed soils ranging from sandy loam to sandy clay loam, pH values varying from slightly acidic to alkaline, organic carbon (OC) contents between 0.29 % and 0.87 % and electrical conductivity (EC) values ranging from 0.07 to 0.38 dS m-1. Water quality is crucial for safe drinking water and agricultural use; however, contamination of iron poses significant health and environmental risks. This study assessed water quality by analysing the sodium adsorption ratios and iron concentrations. While sodium adsorption ratios remained within acceptable limits, the iron concentrations in groundwater exceeded the permissible thresholds, indicating potential risks that require urgent attention. Overlaying all nine parameters identified 1826 ha (7.24 %) as suitable makhana growing areas, primarily in Purnia East District. The AHP results classified 480.23 ha (26.30 %) as highly suitable (S1), 846.53 ha (46.36 %) as moderately suitable (S2) and 422.90 ha (23.16 %) as marginally suitable (S3), while 73.77 ha (4.04 %) and 2.556 ha (0.14 %) were classified as currently unsuitable (N1) and permanently unsuitable (N2) respectively. These findings demonstrate the effectiveness of AHP-based MCE combined with GIS as a robust tool for identifying potential cultivation zones, facilitating targeted agricultural planning and sustainable resource management in the region, while highlighting the need to address groundwater iron contamination to ensure safe and sustainable makhana cultivation.

References

  1. 1. Das S, Maulik N, Der P, Das DK, Raychaudhuri U. Effect of Euryale ferox (makhana), a herb of aquatic origin, on myocardial ischemic reperfusion injury. Mol Cell Biochem. 2006;289(1–2):55–63. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11010-006-9147-1
  2. 2. Devi M, Patel S, Vishwakarma R, Arora S, Sharma K, Jha S, et al. Effects of popping on physicochemical, technological, antioxidant, and microstructural properties of makhana seeds. J Food Process Preserv. 2020;44(10):e14787. https://doi.org/10.1111/jfpp.14787
  3. 3. Song CW, Cheng YX, Li N, Wang SM, Zhou LL, Han QB, et al. Isolation and identification of compounds responsible for antioxidant capacity of Euryale ferox seeds. J Agric Food Chem. 2011;59(4):1199–204. https://doi.org/10.1021/jf1041933
  4. 4. Sinha R, Friend PF. River systems and their sediment flux, Indo-Gangetic plains, northern Bihar, India. Sedimentology. 1994;41(4):825–45. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-3091.1994.tb01426.x
  5. 5. Tripathi G, Pandey AC, Parida BR. Spatiotemporal rainfall variability and flood prognosis analysis using satellite data over north Bihar during the August 2017 flood event. Hydrology. 2019;6(2):38. https://doi.org/10.3390/hydrology6020038
  6. 6. Bhagat RM, Shrestha B, Singh S, Pradhan S, Immerzeel W, Rana RS, et al. Land suitability analysis for cereal production in Himachal Pradesh (India) using a geographical information system. J Indian Soc Remote Sens. 2009;37(2):233–40. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12524-009-0018-6
  7. 7. Halder JC. Land suitability assessment for crop cultivation using remote sensing and GIS. J Geogr Geol. 2013;5(3):65–74. https://doi.org/10.5539/jgg.v5n3p65
  8. 8. Vavatsikos AP, Demesouka OE, Anagnostopoulos KP. GIS-based suitability analysis using fuzzy PROMETHEE. J Environ Plan Manag. 2019;63(4):604–28. https://doi.org/10.1080/09640568.2019.1599830
  9. 9. Montgomery B, Dragićević S. Comparison of GIS-based logic scoring of preference and multicriteria evaluation methods for urban land-use suitability. Geogr Anal. 2016;48(4):427–47. https://doi.org/10.1111/gean.12103
  10. 10. Abebe MT, Megento TL. Urban green space development using GIS-based multi-criteria analysis in the Addis Ababa metropolis. Appl Geomat. 2017;9(4):247–61. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12518-017-0198-7
  11. 11. Arabsheibani R, Abedini A, Kanani Sadat Y. Land suitability assessment for locating industrial parks: a hybrid multi-criteria decision-making approach using GIS. Geogr Res. 2016;54(4):446–60. https://doi.org/10.1111/1745-5871.12176
  12. 12. Alossta A, Elmansouri O, Badi I. Resolving the location selection problem using an integrated AHP-RAFSI approach. Rep Mech Eng. 2021;2(1):135–42. https://doi.org/10.31181/rme200102135a
  13. 13. Alogayell HM, Kamal A, Ramadan MS, Alkadi II, Zeidan AM, Ramadan RH. Spatial modeling of land resources and constraints to guide urban development in Saudi Arabia’s NEOM region using geomatic techniques. Front Sustain Cities. 2024;6:1370881. https://doi.org/10.3389/frsc.2024.1370881
  14. 14. Zandi I, Lotfata A, Alesheikh AA, Garau C, Bigdeli B, Pahlavani P. GIS-enabled multi-criteria assessment of hospital site suitability: a case study of Tehran. Sustainability. 2024;16(5):2079. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16052079
  15. 15. Rahman RM, Saha SK. Remote sensing, spatial multi-criteria evaluation and analytic hierarchy process in optimal cropping pattern planning for flood-prone areas. J Spat Sci. 2008;53(2):161–77. https://doi.org/10.1080/14498596.2008.9635156
  16. 16. Zabihi H, Langat PK, Nor Said M, Lee S, Shahabi H, Alizadeh M, et al. GIS multi-criteria analysis by ordered weighted averaging toward an integrated citrus management strategy. Sustainability. 2019;11(4):1009. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11041009
  17. 17. Fenta AA, Kifle A, Hailu G, Gebreyohannes T. Spatial analysis of groundwater potential using remote sensing and GIS-based multi-criteria evaluation in the Raya Valley, northern Ethiopia. Hydrogeol J. 2015;23(1):195–206. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10040-014-1198-x
  18. 18. Guo Z, Xu M, Xu Y, Shao X, Shi X, Shibasaki R, et al. Super-resolution integrated building semantic segmentation for multi-source remote sensing imagery. IEEE Access. 2019;7:99381–97. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2019.2928646
  19. 19. Goepel KD. Implementation of an online software tool for the analytic hierarchy process (AHP-OS). Int J Anal Hierarchy Process. 2018;10(3). https://doi.org/10.13033/ijahp.v10i3.590
  20. 20. Chen CY, Huang JJ. Integrating dynamic Bayesian networks and analytic hierarchy process for time-dependent multi-criteria decision-making. Mathematics. 2023;11(10):2362. https://doi.org/10.3390/math11102362
  21. 21. Takahashi T, Nakano K, Nira R, Kumagai E, Nishida M, Namikawa M. Conversion of soil particle size distribution and texture classification from the ISSS system to the FAO/USDA system in Japanese paddy soils. Soil Sci Plant Nutr. 2020;66(3):407–14. https://doi.org/10.1080/00380768.2020.1763143
  22. 22. Shukla MK, Ebinger M, Lal R, Underwood J. Physical and hydrological characteristics of reclaimed minesoils in southeastern Ohio. Soil Sci Soc Am J. 2004;68(4):1352–9. https://doi.org/10.2136/sssaj2004.1352
  23. 23. Bahadori M, Tofighi H. Modified Walkley-Black method based on spectrophotometric procedure. Commun Soil Sci Plant Anal. 2015;47(2):213–20. https://doi.org/10.1080/00103624.2015.1118118
  24. 24. Singh KK, Tewari G, Kumar S. Evaluation of groundwater quality for suitability of irrigation purposes: a case study in Udham Singh Nagar, Uttarakhand. J Chem. 2020;2020:1–15. https://doi.org/10.1155/2020/6924026
  25. 25. Wang Z, Feng Z, Wang M, Yang L. Effective removal of calcium and magnesium ions from water by a novel alginate-citrate composite aerogel. Gels. 2021;7(3):125. https://doi.org/10.3390/gels7030125
  26. 26. Kopáček J, Borovec J, Hejzlar J, Porcal P. Spectrophotometric determination of iron, aluminum and phosphorus in soil and sediment extracts after nitric and perchloric acid digestion. Commun Soil Sci Plant Anal. 2001;32(9–10):1431–43. https://doi.org/10.1081/CSS-100104203
  27. 27. Saaty T. A scaling method for priorities in hierarchical structures. J Math Psychol. 1977;15:234–81. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-2496(77)90033-5
  28. 28. Villaseñor Alva JA, Estrada EG. A generalization of Shapiro-Wilk’s test for multivariate normality. Commun Stat Theory Methods. 2009;38(11):1870–83. https://doi.org/10.1080/03610920802474465
  29. 29. Liu H, Ren J, Tian Y, Wang H, Yin Y. Climatic and anthropogenic controls of topsoil features in the semiarid East Asian steppe. Geophys Res Lett. 2008;35(4):L04401. https://doi.org/10.1029/2007GL032980
  30. 30. Liu Y, Cao Y, He H, Levi E, Jeppesen E, Li W, et al. Responses of submerged macrophytes and periphyton to warming under two nitrogen scenarios: a microcosm study. Hydrobiologia. 2021;848(6):1333–46. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10750-021-04530-z
  31. 31. Liu F, Zhang GL, Song X, Li D, Zhao Y, Yang J, et al. High-resolution and three-dimensional mapping of soil texture in China. Geoderma. 2019;361:114061. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoderma.2019.114061
  32. 32. Zhang S, Ding D, Tan S, Liu L, Li J, Sun Y. Geological hazard susceptibility evaluation of slope rock and soil mass movement using information quantity, deterministic coefficient and logistic regression models. Sustainability. 2023;15(13):10466. https://doi.org/10.3390/su151310466
  33. 33. Jarecke KM, Wondzell SM, Bladon KD. Influence of local and nonlocal factors on soil water content in a steep forested catchment. Water Resour Res. 2021;57(5):e2020WR028343. https://doi.org/10.1029/2020WR028343
  34. 34. Deng Y, Li M, Pan H, Lan L, He X, Ma Y, et al. Relationship between lightning activity and terrain in high-altitude mountainous areas. IEEE Trans Power Deliv. 2023;38(5):3561–70. https://doi.org/10.1109/TPWRD.2023.3283606
  35. 35. Adhikari K, Greve MH, Malone BP, McBratney AB, Minasny B, Kheir RB, et al. High-resolution 3-D mapping of soil texture in Denmark. Soil Sci Soc Am J. 2013;77(3):860–76. https://doi.org/10.2136/sssaj2012.0275
  36. 36. Wu S, Gao G, Du Y, Mo X, Tan Q, Sun X, et al. Low soil pH enhances fruit acidity by inhibiting citric acid degradation in lemon (Citrus limon L.). Hortic Adv. 2024;2(1):e00044. https://doi.org/10.1007/s44281-024-00044-5
  37. 37. Sulaiman S, Hernandez-Ramirez G, Sulaiman Z, Navaranjan N. Plant residues ameliorate pH of agricultural acidic soil in a laboratory incubation: a meta-analysis. J Plant Nutr Soil Sci. 2023;186(3):330–8. https://doi.org/10.1002/jpln.202200332
  38. 38. Rukshana F, Butterly CR, Baldock JA, Xu JM, Tang C. Model organic compounds differ in priming effects on alkalinity release in soils through carbon and nitrogen mineralization. Soil Biol Biochem. 2012;51:35–43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soilbio.2012.03.022
  39. 39. Solangi KA, Siyal AA, Wu Y, Zhou G, Solangi F, Lakhiar IA, et al. Assessment of spatial and temporal distribution of soil salinity using field and satellite data. Agronomy. 2019;9(12):869. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy9120869
  40. 40. Ghazaryan K, Chen Y. Hydrochemical assessment of surface water for irrigation purposes and its influence on soil salinity in the Tikanlik oasis, China. Environ Earth Sci. 2016;75(5):5287. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12665-016-5287-0
  41. 41. Arslan H, Çolak MG. Assessment of groundwater quality through water quality and nitrate pollution indices in northern Türkiye. Environ Monit Assess. 2023;195(10):11854. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-023-11854-x
  42. 42. Norton JB, Mukhwana EJ, Norton U. Loss and recovery of soil organic carbon and nitrogen in a semiarid agroecosystem. Soil Sci Soc Am J. 2012;76(2):505–14. https://doi.org/10.2136/sssaj2011.0284
  43. 43. Sandeep S, Pal S, Manjaiah KM, Singh AK. Soil carbon fractions under maize-wheat system: effect of tillage and nutrient management. Environ Monit Assess. 2015;188(1):4995. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-015-4995-3
  44. 44. Li Z, Hao X, Zhang J, Zhao B. Effects of residue incorporation and plant growth on soil labile organic carbon and microbial properties under two soil moisture levels. Environ Sci Pollut Res. 2017;24(23):18849–59. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-017-9529-9
  45. 45. Benslama A, Boubehziz S, Khanchoul K, Chikhi F, Navarro-Pedreño J, Benbrahim F. Monitoring variations in soil salinity in a palm grove in southern Algeria. Sustainability. 2020;12(15):6117. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12156117
  46. 46. Islam MT, Jahan N, Das N, Siddik MS, Adham AKM, Mahmud K. Utilizing geographic information system and indexing to evaluate irrigation suitability of groundwater in Bangladesh. Arch Agric Environ Sci. 2023;8(3):385–96. https://doi.org/10.26832/24566632.2023.0803017
  47. 47. Wu Y, Ren Z, Min R, Zhang J, Xia Y, Sun M, et al. Differential effects of paclobutrazol on bulblet growth of oriental lily cultured in vitro. J Plant Growth Regul. 2019;38(2):359–72. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00344-018-9844-5
  48. 48. Oinam JD, Ramanathan A, Linda A, Singh G. Arsenic, iron and dissolved ion variations in groundwater of Bishnupur District, Manipur, India. Environ Earth Sci. 2011;62(6):1183–95. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12665-010-0607-2
  49. 49. Kupa E, Adanma U, Ogunbiyi E, Solomon N. Groundwater quality and agricultural contamination: a multidisciplinary assessment of risk and mitigation strategies. World J Adv Res Rev. 2024;22(2):1772–84. https://doi.org/10.30574/wjarr.2024.22.2.1607
  50. 50. Li X, Li Z, Fu W, Li F. Influence of shallow groundwater on physicochemical properties of field soil, crop yield and groundwater. Agriculture. 2024;14(3):341. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture14030341
  51. 51. Pei H, Scanlon BR, Shen Y, Reedy RC, Long D, Liu C. Impacts of agricultural intensification on crop yield and groundwater resources: comparison of North China Plain and US High Plains. Environ Res Lett. 2015;10(4):044013. https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/10/4/044013
  52. 52. Kara C, Doratli N. Application of GIS/AHP in siting sanitary landfill: a case study in Northern Cyprus. Waste Manag Res. 2012;30(9):966–80. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734242X12453975
  53. 53. Zhang X, Fang C, Wang Z, Ma H. Urban construction land suitability evaluation based on improved GIS multi-criteria evaluation: a case of Hefei City, China. Chin Geogr Sci. 2013;23(6):740–53. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11769-013-0609-6
  54. 54. Ghasemkhani N, Vayghan S, Abdollahi A, Pradhan B, Alamri A. Urban development modeling using integrated fuzzy systems, ordered weighted averaging and geospatial techniques. Sustainability. 2020;12(3):809. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12030809
  55. 55. Özcan Z, Caglayan İ, Kabak Ö, Kılıç Gül F. Integrated risk mapping for forest fire management using analytic hierarchy process and ordered weighted average. Nat Hazards. 2024;121(1):959–1001. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-024-06810-y
  56. 56. Zabihi H, Alizadeh M, Langat PK, Karami M, Shahabi H, Ahmad A, et al. GIS multi-criteria analysis by ordered weighted averaging toward an integrated citrus management strategy. Sustainability. 2019;11(4):1009. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11041009

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.