Iron oxide-impregnated paper vs. Bray-1 soil-test methods predicting crop response from phosphate-rock sources

Ephraim Muchada Govere, S. H. Chien, R. H. Fox

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

1 Citation (Scopus)

Abstract

The effectiveness of a Pi (iron oxide-impregnated paper) method was compared with that of Bray-1 method in extracting phosphorus (P) from an acid Hartsells silt loam (Typic Hapludult, pH 4.8) treated with low-release P fertilizers derived from Dorowa (Zimbabwe) phosphate rock (DPR) with maize (Zea mays L) as indicator crop in a randomized block design greenhouse experiment with three replicates. The fertilizers used were finely ground DPR, partially acidulated DPR (PADPR), a compacted mixture of DPR + triple superphosphate (TSP) + urea + potassium chloride (DTUK) with half of P from DPR and half from TSP, and a commercial grade single superphosphate (SSP) as a standard. The results indicated that the correlation between Bray-1 and Pi-extractable P was high (r=97***). The regression coefficients for dry matter yield (DMY) and P uptake (PUPT) as a function of Bray-1 P level of SSP (DMY = 1.16 + 0.24Bray-1 P; PUPT = 0.93 + 0.45Bray-1 P) were significantly lower (p < 0.001) than those for DTUK (DMY = 1.16 + 0.43Bray-1 P; PUPT = 0.93 + 0.74Bray-1 P) and PADPR (DMY = 1.16 + 0.47Bray-1 P; PUPT = 0.93 + 0.82Bray-1 P). That is, a given soil-extractable P level with SSP resulted in a lower dry matter yield or P uptake than that from DTUK and PADPR. Thus, Bray-1 underestimated the agronomic effectiveness of DTUK and PADPR with respect to SSP. Based on this green-house research, soil testing for fertilizer recommendations using the Bray-1 test may result in two different response functions, one for water-soluble P sources and another for water-insoluble P sources.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1981-1993
Number of pages13
JournalCommunications in Soil Science and Plant Analysis
Volume35
Issue number13-14
DOIs
StatePublished - Oct 11 2004

Fingerprint

superphosphate
phosphate rock
rock phosphate
iron oxides
soil test
iron oxide
dry matter
crop
crops
triple superphosphate
fertilizers
soil
phosphorus
testing
fertilizer
methodology
potassium chloride
Zimbabwe
soil analysis
greenhouse experimentation

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Agronomy and Crop Science
  • Soil Science

Cite this

@article{29fc7166a9404fc8a3ee584a57c08321,
title = "Iron oxide-impregnated paper vs. Bray-1 soil-test methods predicting crop response from phosphate-rock sources",
abstract = "The effectiveness of a Pi (iron oxide-impregnated paper) method was compared with that of Bray-1 method in extracting phosphorus (P) from an acid Hartsells silt loam (Typic Hapludult, pH 4.8) treated with low-release P fertilizers derived from Dorowa (Zimbabwe) phosphate rock (DPR) with maize (Zea mays L) as indicator crop in a randomized block design greenhouse experiment with three replicates. The fertilizers used were finely ground DPR, partially acidulated DPR (PADPR), a compacted mixture of DPR + triple superphosphate (TSP) + urea + potassium chloride (DTUK) with half of P from DPR and half from TSP, and a commercial grade single superphosphate (SSP) as a standard. The results indicated that the correlation between Bray-1 and Pi-extractable P was high (r=97***). The regression coefficients for dry matter yield (DMY) and P uptake (PUPT) as a function of Bray-1 P level of SSP (DMY = 1.16 + 0.24Bray-1 P; PUPT = 0.93 + 0.45Bray-1 P) were significantly lower (p < 0.001) than those for DTUK (DMY = 1.16 + 0.43Bray-1 P; PUPT = 0.93 + 0.74Bray-1 P) and PADPR (DMY = 1.16 + 0.47Bray-1 P; PUPT = 0.93 + 0.82Bray-1 P). That is, a given soil-extractable P level with SSP resulted in a lower dry matter yield or P uptake than that from DTUK and PADPR. Thus, Bray-1 underestimated the agronomic effectiveness of DTUK and PADPR with respect to SSP. Based on this green-house research, soil testing for fertilizer recommendations using the Bray-1 test may result in two different response functions, one for water-soluble P sources and another for water-insoluble P sources.",
author = "Govere, {Ephraim Muchada} and Chien, {S. H.} and Fox, {R. H.}",
year = "2004",
month = "10",
day = "11",
doi = "10.1081/LCSS-200026826",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "35",
pages = "1981--1993",
journal = "Communications in Soil Science and Plant Analysis",
issn = "0010-3624",
publisher = "Taylor and Francis Ltd.",
number = "13-14",

}

Iron oxide-impregnated paper vs. Bray-1 soil-test methods predicting crop response from phosphate-rock sources. / Govere, Ephraim Muchada; Chien, S. H.; Fox, R. H.

In: Communications in Soil Science and Plant Analysis, Vol. 35, No. 13-14, 11.10.2004, p. 1981-1993.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Iron oxide-impregnated paper vs. Bray-1 soil-test methods predicting crop response from phosphate-rock sources

AU - Govere, Ephraim Muchada

AU - Chien, S. H.

AU - Fox, R. H.

PY - 2004/10/11

Y1 - 2004/10/11

N2 - The effectiveness of a Pi (iron oxide-impregnated paper) method was compared with that of Bray-1 method in extracting phosphorus (P) from an acid Hartsells silt loam (Typic Hapludult, pH 4.8) treated with low-release P fertilizers derived from Dorowa (Zimbabwe) phosphate rock (DPR) with maize (Zea mays L) as indicator crop in a randomized block design greenhouse experiment with three replicates. The fertilizers used were finely ground DPR, partially acidulated DPR (PADPR), a compacted mixture of DPR + triple superphosphate (TSP) + urea + potassium chloride (DTUK) with half of P from DPR and half from TSP, and a commercial grade single superphosphate (SSP) as a standard. The results indicated that the correlation between Bray-1 and Pi-extractable P was high (r=97***). The regression coefficients for dry matter yield (DMY) and P uptake (PUPT) as a function of Bray-1 P level of SSP (DMY = 1.16 + 0.24Bray-1 P; PUPT = 0.93 + 0.45Bray-1 P) were significantly lower (p < 0.001) than those for DTUK (DMY = 1.16 + 0.43Bray-1 P; PUPT = 0.93 + 0.74Bray-1 P) and PADPR (DMY = 1.16 + 0.47Bray-1 P; PUPT = 0.93 + 0.82Bray-1 P). That is, a given soil-extractable P level with SSP resulted in a lower dry matter yield or P uptake than that from DTUK and PADPR. Thus, Bray-1 underestimated the agronomic effectiveness of DTUK and PADPR with respect to SSP. Based on this green-house research, soil testing for fertilizer recommendations using the Bray-1 test may result in two different response functions, one for water-soluble P sources and another for water-insoluble P sources.

AB - The effectiveness of a Pi (iron oxide-impregnated paper) method was compared with that of Bray-1 method in extracting phosphorus (P) from an acid Hartsells silt loam (Typic Hapludult, pH 4.8) treated with low-release P fertilizers derived from Dorowa (Zimbabwe) phosphate rock (DPR) with maize (Zea mays L) as indicator crop in a randomized block design greenhouse experiment with three replicates. The fertilizers used were finely ground DPR, partially acidulated DPR (PADPR), a compacted mixture of DPR + triple superphosphate (TSP) + urea + potassium chloride (DTUK) with half of P from DPR and half from TSP, and a commercial grade single superphosphate (SSP) as a standard. The results indicated that the correlation between Bray-1 and Pi-extractable P was high (r=97***). The regression coefficients for dry matter yield (DMY) and P uptake (PUPT) as a function of Bray-1 P level of SSP (DMY = 1.16 + 0.24Bray-1 P; PUPT = 0.93 + 0.45Bray-1 P) were significantly lower (p < 0.001) than those for DTUK (DMY = 1.16 + 0.43Bray-1 P; PUPT = 0.93 + 0.74Bray-1 P) and PADPR (DMY = 1.16 + 0.47Bray-1 P; PUPT = 0.93 + 0.82Bray-1 P). That is, a given soil-extractable P level with SSP resulted in a lower dry matter yield or P uptake than that from DTUK and PADPR. Thus, Bray-1 underestimated the agronomic effectiveness of DTUK and PADPR with respect to SSP. Based on this green-house research, soil testing for fertilizer recommendations using the Bray-1 test may result in two different response functions, one for water-soluble P sources and another for water-insoluble P sources.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=4644281645&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=4644281645&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1081/LCSS-200026826

DO - 10.1081/LCSS-200026826

M3 - Article

VL - 35

SP - 1981

EP - 1993

JO - Communications in Soil Science and Plant Analysis

JF - Communications in Soil Science and Plant Analysis

SN - 0010-3624

IS - 13-14

ER -