Call For Paper - Upcoming Conferences
Research Article | Open Access | Download PDF
Volume 13 | Issue 5 | Year 2026 | Article Id. IJCE-V13I5P115 | DOI : https://doi.org/10.14445/23488352/IJCE-V13I5P115

Use of Nopal Mucilage, Chia, and Tara Gum for Stabilizing Liquid Soils

Viviana Quispe Ponce, Shaury Santy Barzola Bravo, Tito Aldair Velarde Ascarza, Marko Antonio Lengua Fernandez

Received Revised Accepted Published
20 Feb 2026 06 Apr 2026 22 Apr 2026 29 May 2026

Citation :

Viviana Quispe Ponce, Shaury Santy Barzola Bravo, Tito Aldair Velarde Ascarza, Marko Antonio Lengua Fernandez, "Use of Nopal Mucilage, Chia, and Tara Gum for Stabilizing Liquid Soils," International Journal of Civil Engineering, vol. 13, no. 5, pp. 222-249, 2026. Crossref, https://doi.org/10.14445/23488352/IJCE-V13I5P115

Abstract

Soil liquefaction is one of the most critical phenomena associated with moderate and severe earthquakes, due to the abrupt loss of strength and stiffness in saturated sands, causing settlement, lateral displacement, and structural failure. Given that conventional stabilizers have environmental limitations, this research evaluated sustainable alternatives based on Nopal Mucilage, Chia Mucilage, and Tara Gum applied to poorly graded Sandy Soil (SP) in the Pilcomayo sector, characterized by a shallow water table and high vulnerability to liquefaction. The soil was classified as poorly graded sand with gravel (SP) after granulometric, limit, and compaction tests. Specimens were prepared with this material and treated with biopolymers in different dosages: Nopal Mucilage at 4%, 6%, 8%, 10%, and 12%; Chia Mucilage at 1%, 1.5%, 2%, 2.5%, and 3%; and Tara Gum at 0.2%, 0.3%, 0.4%, 0.5% and 0.6%. After 28 days of curing, static and cyclic triaxial CU tests were performed to evaluate resistance and susceptibility to liquefaction. The results showed that tara gum achieved its best performance at 0.4%, achieving balanced increases in cohesion, friction angle, allowable capacity, and number of cycles to liquefaction, as well as lower pore pressures. Nopal mucilage, particularly at 10%, showed the greatest improvements in static strength, increasing cohesion, and allowable capacity. Chia mucilage, with the best response at 2%, effectively reduced the development of pore pressure under cyclic loads. Overall, the three biopolymers proved to be viable, economical, and eco-efficient natural additives capable of improving the dynamic behavior of sands and reducing their susceptibility to liquefaction.

Keywords

Natural Biopolymers, Soil Liquefaction, Mucilage, Tara Gum, Triaxial Test.

References

  1. Radu Popescu, and Pradipta Chakrabortty, “Mechanism of Seismic Liquefaction for Heterogeneous Soil,” Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, vol. 176, pp. 1-13, 2024.
    [    CrossRef] [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
  2. Behnam Ramezani et al., “Seismic Resilience with Deep Soil Mixing: Numerical and Experimental Insights into Liquefaction Mitigation,” Geotechnical and Geological Engineering, vol. 43, pp. 1-19, 2025.
    [    CrossRef] [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
  3. Ali Asgari, Faramarz Ranjbar, and Mohsen Bagheri, “Seismic Resilience of Pile Groups to Lateral Spreading in Liquefiable Soils: 3D Parallel Finite Element Modeling,” Structures, vol. 74, 2025.
    [    CrossRef] [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
  4. Yan-Guo Zhou et al., “Post-Liquefaction Deformation Mechanisms of Stone Column-Improved Liquefiable Sloping Ground Under Cyclic Loadings,” Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, vol. 177, 2024.
    [    CrossRef] [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
  5. R. A. Green et al., “Geotechnical Aspects of the Mw 6.2 2011 Christchurch, New Zealand, Earthquake,” GeoCongress 2012: State of the Art and Practice in Geotechnical Engineering, pp. 1700-1709, 2012.
    [    CrossRef] [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
  6. I. Ishii et al., “Liquefaction-Induced Damage to Houses and site Characterization in Urayasu City during the 2011 Tohoku Earthquake, Japan,” Japanese Geotechnical Journal, vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 91-107, 2017.
    [    Google Scholar]
  7. Adel Asadi et al., “Geospatial Liquefaction Modeling of the 2023 Türkiye Earthquake Sequence by an Ensemble of Global, Continental, Regional, and Event‐Specific Models,” Seismological Research Letters, vol. 95, no. 2A, pp. 697-719, 2024.
    [    CrossRef] [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
  8. Franck A. Audemard M et al., “Soil Liquefaction during the Arequipa Mw 8.4, June 23, 2001 Earthquake, Southern Coastal Peru,” Engineering Geology, vol. 78, no. 3-4, pp. 237-255, 2005.
    [    CrossRef] [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
  9. J. W. Dewey, The Earthquake and After-Shock Activity, 2001. [Online]. Available: https://www.eeri.org/lfe/pdf/peru_arequipa_eeri_preliminary_report.pdf
  10. Hernando Tavera, and Isabel Bernal, “The Pisco (Peru) Earthquake of 15 August 2007,” Seismological Research Letters, vol. 79, no. 4, pp. 510-515, 2008.
    [    CrossRef] [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
  11. Riwaj Dhakal, and Misko Cubrinovski, “Liquefaction Response of Reclaimed Soils from Effective Stress Analysis,” Soils and Foundations, vol. 65, no. 5, pp. 1-25, 2025.
    [    CrossRef] [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
  12. Pınar Sarı Çavdar, “Investigation of Flood and Soil Liquefaction Risks for Disaster Risk Reduction in the Construction of Water Reservoirs,” Ain Shams Engineering Journal, vol. 16, no. 10, pp. 1-24, 2025.
    [    CrossRef] [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
  13. Isaac I. Akinwumi, and Ikenna Ukegbu, “Soil Modification by Addition of Cactus Mucilage,” Geomechanics and Engineering, vol. 8, no. 5, pp. 649-661, 2015.
    [    Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
  14. Antonio Di Marsico et al., “Mucilage from Fruits/Seeds of Chia (Salvia Hispanica L.) Improves Soil Aggregate Stability,” Plant and Soil, vol. 425, pp. 57-69, 2018.
    [    CrossRef] [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
  15. Fenghong Yang et al., “Preparation and Water Erosion Resistance Properties of Tara Gum-G-Poly (Acrylic Acid-Co-Methyl Methacrylate) Emulsion,” International Journal of Biological Macromolecules, vol. 242, no. 1, 2023.
    [    CrossRef] [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
  16. Parviz Maleki et al., “Static and Dynamic Behavior of Loose Sand and Silty Sand Treated with Guar and Agar Gums (Micro and Macro Study),” Carbohydrate Polymer Technologies and Applications, vol. 11, pp. 1-11, 2025.
    [    CrossRef] [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
  17. Nesil Özbakan, and Burak Evirgen, “The Effect of Sodium Polyacrylate Gel on the Properties of Liquefiable Sandy Soil under Seismic Condition,” Journal of Engineering Research, vol. 11, no. 1, 2023.
    [    CrossRef] [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
  18. Krzysztof Lejcuś, Michał Śpitalniak, and Jolanta Dąbrowska, “Swelling Behaviour of Superabsorbent Polymers for Soil Amendment under Different Loads,” Polymers, vol. 10, no. 3, pp. 1-13, 2018.
    [    CrossRef] [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
  19. Jinghua Zhang et al., “Soil Improvement with Laponite: Effects on Soil-Structure Interaction in Liquefiable Sands,” Computers and Geotechnics, vol. 185, pp. 1-18, 2025.
    [    CrossRef] [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
  20. Lucia Mele et al., “Experimental Study of the Injectability and Effectiveness of Laponite Mixtures as Liquefaction Mitigation Technique,” Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering and Soil Dynamics V, pp. 267-275, 2018.
    [    CrossRef] [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
  21. Daniel Mendoza-Goden et al., “Evaluation of Expanded Clay and Tuff as Lightweight Agents in Concrete Stabilized with Nopal Mucilage and Aloe Vera,” Eng, vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 1-14, 2025.
    [CrossRef] [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
  22. J. C. Rodríguez-Uribe, J. Serrano-Arellano, and Z. B. Trejo-Torres, Chapter 7 Waterproofing System based on Mortar and Cactus Mucilage (Opuntia Ficus-Indica), Architecture and Sustainability Handbook T-I, pp. 69-82, 2021.
    [    Publisher Link]
  23. Zied Kammoun, and Abderraouf Trabelsi, “Development of Lightweight Concrete using Prickly Pear Fibres,” Construction and Building Materials, vol. 210, pp. 269-277, 2019.
    [    CrossRef] [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
  24. F.M. León-Martínez, and P.F. de J. Cano-Barrita, “Cactus Mucilage: A Review of its Rheological and Physicochemical Properties and Use as Bio-Admixture in Building Materials,” International Journal of Biological Macromolecules, vol. 279, 2024.
    [    CrossRef] [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
  25. A. Di Marsico et al., “Mucilage from Seeds of Chia (Salvia Hispanica L.) Used as Soil Conditioner; Effects on the Sorption-Desorption of Four Herbicides in Three Different Soils,” Science of The Total Environment, vol. 625, pp. 531-538, 2018.
    [    CrossRef] [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
  26. Cesar Luque Apaza, “Addition of Chia Mucilage and its Influence on the Physical-Mechanical Properties of Concrete F'c = 210 kg/cm 2, Lima, 2022,” M.S. Thesis, Continental University, 2024.
    [    Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
  27. Zevallos Reyes, and Carmen, “Evaluation of the Mechanical and Impermeability Properties of Adobe with Added Tara Gum in the City of Huánuco – 2024,” U.G. Thesis, University of Huánuco, pp. 1-120, 2025.
    [    Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
  28. Guillermo Borja et al., “Sustainable Urban Management and Informal Constructions in the Marginal Strip of the Cunas River in the District of Pilcomayo-Huancayo, 2024,” M.S. Thesis, Peruvian University of the Andes, 2024.
    [    Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
  29. Luis Alberto Condezo Ordoñez, Lizbeth Meza Condezo, and Mely Milda Vivas Malpartida, “Tax Culture and Property Tax Collection in the District of Pilcomayo, Province of Huancayo, Junín Region, Period 2020-2021,” M.S. Thesis, Universidad Continental, pp. 1-145, 2024.
    [    Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
  30. Betty María Condori Quispe, and Dayana Montalvan Salcedo, “Study Of the Shear Strength of Soils in El Tambo,” University Outlook in Engineering and Technology, vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 150-152, 2022. [CrossRef]
    [    Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
  31. Hazard Map, Land Use Plan in the Face of Disasters and Mitigation Measures for the City of Huancayo, National Institute of Civil Defense, 2011. [Online]. Available: https://sigrid.cenepred.gob.pe/sigridv3/documento/4406
  32. Tadao Enomoto, “Effects of Non-Plastic Silt and Soil Aging on Re-Liquefaction Resistance of Sandy Soils,” Journal of Rock Mechanics and Geotechnical Engineering, vol. 18, no. 2, pp. 1601-1620, 2026.
    [    CrossRef] [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
  33. Jeong Youn Lee et al., “Improvement of Underwater Durability and Liquefaction Evaluation of Biopolymer-Treated Soil using Tannic Acid,” Journal of Rock Mechanics and Geotechnical Engineering, vol. 18, no. 3, pp. 2395-2407, 2026.
    [    CrossRef] [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
  34. Luísa Mendes de Carvalho Coelho et al., “Innovations and Challenges in the use of Cactus Mucilage: A Technological Analysis,” International Journal of Biological Macromolecules, vol. 316, no. 1, 2025.
    [    CrossRef] [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
  35. Alebel Abebaw Teshager, Minaleshewa Atlabachew, and Adugna Nigatu Alene, “Development of Biodegradable Film from Cactus (Opuntia Ficus Indica) Mucilage Loaded with Acid-Leached Kaolin as Filler,” Heliyon, vol. 10, no. 11, 2024.
    [    CrossRef] [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
  36. Nuria Calero et al., “Synergistic Rheology of Chia and Aloe Vera Mucilage with Spirulina Residue: Enhancing Emulsion Stability for Sustainable Food Applications,” Journal of Molecular Liquids, vol. 437, 2025.
    [    CrossRef] [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
  37. María Vela-Albarrán et al., “Investigating Surface Properties of a Blend of Phycocyanin and Chia Mucilage for its Possible Applications in Dispersed Systems,” Journal of Agriculture and Food Research, vol. 23, pp. 1-10, 2025.
    [    CrossRef] [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
  38. ECOANDINO Black Chia Organic Seeds Doypack 200g, 2025. [Online]. Available: https://www.plazavea.com.pe/chia-negra-ecoandino-granos-organicos-doypack-200g/p.
  39. Pallabita Rakshit et al., “Hydrophilic coatings over Fe3+- Carboxymethyl Tara Gum Hydrogel Microparticles for Sustained Dissolution of a Water Soluble Drug in Gastrointestinal Milieu,” Next Materials, vol. 9, pp. 1-17, 2025.
    [    CrossRef] [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
  40. Valentina Vulpitta et al., “Integrated Physicochemical and Chemometric Analysis for the Detection of Tara Gum Adulteration,” LWT, vol. 228, pp. 1-12, 2025.
    [    CrossRef] [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
  41. Goma De Tara, MamaTara,  2025. [Online]. Available: https://mamataraperu.com/gomas/.
  42. ASTM D1586/D1586M-18e1, Standard Test Method for Standard Penetration Test (SPT) and Split-Barrel Sampling of Soils, ASTM International, 2018.
    [    CrossRef] [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
  43. Jilei Hu, Lianming Huang, and Qi Shao, “Combination Models of Random Forest for Predicting Seismic Liquefaction based on SPT, CPT, Vs Databases Considering Sampling Strategies,” Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, vol. 198, 2025.
    [    CrossRef] [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
  44. Yonggang Zhang et al., “The Adoption of Deep Neural Network (DNN) to the Prediction of Soil Liquefaction Based on Shear Wave Velocity,” Bulletin of Engineering Geology and the Environment, vol. 80, pp. 5053-5060, 2021.
    [    CrossRef] [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
  45. Divesh Ranjan Kumar et al., “Liquefaction Susceptibility using Machine Learning based on SPT Data,” Intelligent Systems with Applications, vol. 20, pp. 1-13, 2023.
    [    CrossRef] [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
  46. ASTM D2216-19, Standard Test Methods for Laboratory Determination of Water (Moisture) Content of Soil and Rock by Mass, ASTM International, 2019.
    [    CrossRef] [Publisher Link]
  47. ASTM D422-63(2007), Standard Test Method for Particle-Size Analysis of Soils, ASTM International, 2007.
    [    CrossRef] [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
  48. ASTM D4318-17e1, Standard Test Methods for Liquid Limit, Plastic Limit, and Plasticity Index of Soils, 2017.
    [    CrossRef] [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
  49. Ahmet Demir et al., “Investigation of the Influence Zone of Stone Columns with and without Geogrid Encasement by Experimental and Numerical Studies,” Alexandria Engineering Journal, vol. 123, pp. 124-137, 2025.
    [    CrossRef] [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
  50. Jabulani Matsimbe et al., “Characterization and Valorization of Fly Ash and Phosphogypsum into a Binary Composite for Construction,” Cleaner Waste Systems, vol. 12, pp. 1-13, 2025.
    [    CrossRef] [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
  51. ASTM D854-23, Standard Test Methods for Specific Gravity of Soil Solids by the Water Displacement Method, ASTM International, 2023.
    [    CrossRef] [Publisher Link]
  52. Shaivan Hirebelaguly Shivaprakash, and Asuri Sridharan, “Correlation of Compaction Characteristics of Standard and Reduced Proctor Tests,” Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers - Geotechnical Engineering, vol. 174, no. 2, pp. 170-180, 2020.
    [    CrossRef] [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
  53. Magdalena Kowalska, “Compactness of Scrap Tyre Rubber Aggregates in Standard Proctor Test,” Procedia Engineering, vol. 161, pp. 975-979, 2016.
    [    CrossRef] [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
  54. ASTM D698-12(2021), Standard Test Methods for Laboratory Compaction Characteristics of Soil Using Standard Effort (12,400 ft-lbf/ft3 (600 kN-m/m3)), ASTM International, 2021.
    [    CrossRef] [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
  55. Xin Liu et al., “Experimental Study on the Monotonic and Cyclic Behavior of Carbonate Sand in the South China Sea,” KSCE Journal of Civil Engineering, vol. 25, no. 9, pp. 3254-3263, 2021.
    [    CrossRef] [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
  56. Tae Hyun Hwang, Kang Hyun Kim, and Jong Ho Shin, “Experimental and Numerical Study on Lateral Resistance of Micropile in Sand,” KSCE Journal of Civil Engineering, vol. 27, no. 9, pp. 3740-3752, 2023.
    [    CrossRef] [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
  57. ASTM D4253-16, Standard Test Methods for Maximum Index Density and Unit Weight of Soils Using a Vibratory Table, ASTM International, 2016.
    [    CrossRef] [Publisher Link]
  58. ASTM D4254-16, Standard Test Methods for Minimum Index Density and Unit Weight of Soils and Calculation of Relative Density (Withdrawn 2025), ASTM International, 2025.
    [    Publisher Link]
  59. Jongchan Kim et al., “Evaluation of Thawing and Stress Restoration Method for Artificial Frozen Sandy Soils Using Sensors,” Sensors, vol. 21, no. 5, pp. 1-17, 2021.
    [    CrossRef] [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
  60. Ting Yao, and Wei Li, “Effect of Initial Fabric from Sample Preparation on the Mechanical Behaviour of a Carbonate Sand from the South China Sea,” Engineering Geology, vol. 326, 2023.
    [    CrossRef] [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
  61. Jinquan Shi, Wim Haegeman, and Joren Andries, “Investigation on the Mechanical Properties of a Calcareous Sand: The Role of the Initial Fabric,” Marine Georesources and Geotechnology, vol. 39, no. 7, pp. 859-875, 2021.
    [    CrossRef] [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
  62. M.M. Shahien, “Fines Content Correction Factors for SPT N Values - Liquefaction Resistance Correlation,” Geotechnical and Geophysical Site Characterisation, pp. 1-7, 2016.
    [    Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
  63. Zhehao Zhu et al., “Assessment of Tamping-Based Specimen Preparation Methods on Static Liquefaction of Loose Silty Sand,” Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, vol. 143, 2021.
    [    CrossRef] [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
  64. ASTM D4767-11, Standard Test Method for Undrained Consolidated Triaxial Compression Testing Of Cohesive Soils, ASTM International, 2020.
    [    CrossRef] [Publisher Link]
  65. Haotian Guo et al., “Experimental Study and Correction of Dynamic Characteristic Parameters of Silty Clay under Negative Temperature Conditions,” Soils and Foundations, vol. 64, no. 6, pp. 1-11, 2024.
    [    CrossRef] [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
  66. Bereket Yohannes et al., “Particle Size Induced Heterogeneity in Compacted Powders: Effect of Large Particles,” Advanced Powder Technology, vol. 29, no. 12, pp. 2978-2986, 2018.
    [    CrossRef] [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
  67. ASTM D5311-11, Standard Test Method for Load Controlled Cyclic Triaxial Strength of Soil, ASTM International, pp. 1-11, 2012.
    [    CrossRef] [Publisher Link]
  68. Yi Fang et al., “Energy-based ue - εvp Coupled Incremental Model of Saturated Marine Coral Sand Subjected to Cyclic Loading,” Applied Ocean Research, vol. 160, 2025.
    [    CrossRef] [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
  69. Shiv Shankar Kumar, Arindam Dey, and A. Murali Krishna, “Liquefaction Potential Assessment of Brahmaputra Sand Based on Regular and Irregular Excitations Using Stress-Controlled Cyclic Triaxial Test,” KSCE Journal of Civil Engineering, vol. 24, no. 4, pp. 1070-1082, 2020.
    [    CrossRef] [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
  70. Valentina Lentini, and Francesco Castelli, “Liquefaction Resistance of Sandy Soils from Undrained Cyclic Triaxial Tests,” Geotechnical and Geological Engineering, vol. 37, pp. 201-216, 2019.
    [    CrossRef] [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]