SOIL CA, AL, ACIDITY AND PENETRATION RESISTANCE WITH SUBSOILING, LIME AND GYPSUM TREATMENTS

被引:11
作者
MCCRAY, JM
SUMNER, ME
RADCLIFFE, DE
CLARK, RL
机构
[1] Department of Agronomy, University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia
[2] Department of Agricultural Engineering, University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia
关键词
D O I
10.1111/j.1475-2743.1991.tb00874.x
中图分类号
S15 [土壤学];
学科分类号
0903 ; 090301 ;
摘要
Crop growth on strongly weathered soils is often limited by soil compaction in addition to aluminium toxicity and/or calcium deficiency. This study examines the effects of subsoiling, lime and gypsum on penetrometer resistance, acidity, aluminium and calcium levels and cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.) root growth on soils transitional between Cecil and Appling series (clayey, kaolinitic, thermic Typic Hapludults) in the Piedmont region of Georgia, USA. The main plots were subsoiled to depths of 0.35 or 0.80 m or untreated. Dolomitic limestone (0 or 4.03 t per hectare on subplots) and phosphogypsum (0 or 10 t per hectare on sub-subplots) were incorporated into the surface soil (0.15 m). Deep subsoiling (0.80 m depth) decreased penetrometer resistance at 0.3-0.5 m depth and increased yield in two of three years, but there was no response to shallow subsoiling (0.35 m depth). Lime increased yield when surface soil water pH prior to amendment was less than a Cate-Nelson critical value of 4.6. Gypsum moved downward much more rapidly than lime, increasing soil solution calcium ion activity to a depth of 0.8 m within 5 months of application. There were differences in clay content between replicate plots and calcium movement was faster where the clay content was less. Yield responses to gypsum in 1986 were attributed to increased root growth below 0.2 m resulting from the increased calcium ion activity. Yield response to gypsum in limed sub-subplots was significant only in 1986.
引用
收藏
页码:193 / 199
页数:7
相关论文
共 30 条
[1]  
Adams F., Lund Z.F., Effect of chemical activity of soil solution aluminium on cotton root penetration of acid subsoils, Soil Science, 101, pp. 193-198, (1966)
[2]  
Adams F., Moore B.L., Chemical factors affecting root growth in subsoil horizons of Coastal Plains soils, Soil Science Society of America Journal, 47, pp. 99-102, (1983)
[3]  
Soil cone penetrometer, 1985, (1985)
[4]  
Brenes E., Pearson R.W., Root responses of three Gramineae species to soil acidity in an Oxisol and an Ultisol, Soil Science, 116, pp. 295-302, (1973)
[5]  
Brennan W.C., Axley J.H., Influence of subsoil amelioration with lime, phosphorus and potassium on the yield of soybeans and barley, Communications in Soil Science and Plant Analysis, 14, pp. 1119-1132, (1983)
[6]  
Carter L.M., Tavernetti J.R., Influence of precision tillage and soil compaction on cotton yields, Transactions of the American Society of Agricultural Engineers, 11, pp. 65-67, (1968)
[7]  
Cate R.B., Nelson L.A., A rapid method for correlation of soil test analyses with plant response data. North Carolina Agricultural Experiment Station, International Soil Testing Series Technical Bulletin, 1, (1965)
[8]  
Clark R.L., Reid J.R., Topographic mapping of soil properties, (1984)
[9]  
Evans C.E., Kamprath E.J., Lime response as related to percent Al saturation, solution Al, and organic matter content, Soil Science Society of America Journal, 34, pp. 893-896, (1970)
[10]  
Farina M.P., Channon W.P., Acid‐subsoil amelioration. I. A comparison of several mechanical procedures, Soil Science Society of America Journal, 52, pp. 169-175, (1988)