Nutrient behavior in saline‐sodic/sodic soils during reclamation by different crop and chemical amendments requires detailed evaluation because of changes in soil salinity/sodicity and the loss of some nutrients via the leaching of soluble salts and exchangeable Na+. A saline‐sodic field [electrical conductivity (ECe) = 7.4–9.0 dS m‐1, sodium adsorption ratio (SAR) = 55.6–73.0, pHs = 8.2–8.6, cation exchange capacity (CEC) = 10.8–11.2 emole kg‐1, CaCO3 content 9.1–9.7%, sandy clay loam texture for the upper 30 cm of soil depth] was reclaimed by chemical and biological methods. Five treatments were used, employing three cropped treatments, i.e., sesbania (Sesbania aculeata Pers.), sordan [Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench × Sorghum Sudanese (Piper) Stapf], and hallar grass [Leptochloa fusca (L.) Kunth], and two non‐cropped treatments (control and gypsum at 100% gypsum requirement of the 15 cm soil layer). After two seasons of cropping, the treatment effectiveness for soil reclamation was found in the order gypsum ≈ sesbania > kallar grass ≈ sordan > control. Regarding nutrient availability during reclamation, Kjeldahl N, Na HCO3 extractable P, NH4OAc extractable K, and DTPA extractable micronutrients (Fe, Mn, Cu, and Zn) were determined from the treatments after each season's harvest. Cropping improved the availability of P, Fe, Mn, Cu, and Zn, but gypsum application decreased their availability. An increase in N content was only determined for the sesbania treatment. No effect of the treatments was observed on K status of the soil. Among the plant species, sesbania was found to be a better choice because of its higher fodder yield, vigorous and deeper root system, and ability to fix N for subsequent crops.