Rit Landbúnaðardeildar : B-flokkur - 01.12.1961, Blaðsíða 35

Rit Landbúnaðardeildar : B-flokkur - 01.12.1961, Blaðsíða 35
33 of nitrogen and potash remain unchanged for all plots. Graph 2 shows that the rate of in- crease of phosphorus uptake is similar for all experimental sites, whereas the total uptake at any particular level of phosphorus application varied markedly. At the Sámsstadir experiment station, for instance, grass on peat soil (Sámsst. (70 N)) took up far greater phosphorus than on silt loam soil (Sámsst. (120 N)), in spite of the fact that the latter plots received about 70 per cent more nitrogen. The peat soil gave larger yields and also grass with somewhat higher phosphorus content (see Tables 11 and 12). Tables 5, 6 and 7 and graph 3 show that the „apparent phosphorus balance" of the soil dropped rapidly with increased phosphorus fertilization, in particular for low rates of appli- cation. This means that in relation to the amount applied, the quantity taken up by the grass was by far greatest when the phosphorus applications were low. Thus in three of the present trials, at the annual application of 13,1 kg P per hectare, the total quantity taken up by the grass was 15 to 45 per cent greater than that applied to the soil (the „apparent phosphorus balance“ is 115 to 145 per cent). When the phosphorus application was doubled, to 26,2 kg P/ha, the „apparent phosphorus balance" dropped to about 70 to 80 per cent. This efficient utilization of low rates of phosphorus applications was somewhat unexpected, yet a pleasant surprise. The relatively low requirements and efficient utilization of phosphorus was unex- pected for soils which when plowed and harrowed in a virgin condition are usually so totally deficient in phosphorus that no plant will thrive without a phosphorus application. Two questions relative to phosphorus are of primary interest to the farmer: (1) What is the minimal quantity of phosphorus required to avoid yield reduction due to phosphorus defi- ciency? (2) Is the supply of available phosphorus in the soil enough to ensure grass or fodder with sufficient phosphorus content from a nutritional standpoint? These questions are treated in another paper (Jóhannesson, 1959), and graph 4 is from that paper. This graph indicates that a small annual applicatiion, or about 30 kg P2O5 per hectare, was sufficient for the re- spective fields, and other evidence presented in the mentioned paper indicated that approxi- mately 40 to 45 kg P2O5 sufficed along with 120 kg N or less pr. hectare. Analytical data listed in the paper also indicated that grass from plots which receive annually 13,1 kg P (30 kg P2O5) pr. hectare is sufficiently rich in phosphorus from a nutritional point of view. It is obvious that more soil phosphorus accumulates as the annual applications increase. Table 13 lists some analytical data on the amount of extracted soil phosphorus, and shows an in- creased quantity of „available“ phosphorus with increased rates of phosphorus fertilization. These data, however, are not absolute measures of the quantity of soil phosphorus that may become available to the grass, and therefore they cannot be used as a basis for any quantative calculations. Experimental results of the agronomic experiment stations (Arni Jónsson, 1947— 1958) and some scattered fertilizer trials (Jóhannesson, 1956), however, have shown that very appreciable residual effects from phosphorus fertilizer (triple superphosphate) are observed in permanent grass fields. Yet, available evidence strongly indicates that for permanent grass fields it is more profitable to top-dress with relatively small quantities of phosphorus fertiliizer annually than with larger quantities at greater intervals. Comments relating to Tables 8 and 9. These Tables are included because they throw some further light on the orders of magni- tude of phosphorus content in grass and of the „apparent phosphorus balance“ of the soil or phosphorus utilization. Table 13 lists some characteristics of the respective soils. It is difficult to make comparisons between the four experiment stations as regards yields and chemical composition, since climatic or growing conditions usually are significantly different in any one as well as in different seasons. The present information is insufficient to state in quantitave terms the climatic influence or to eliminate its varying effects. Thus climatic
Blaðsíða 1
Blaðsíða 2
Blaðsíða 3
Blaðsíða 4
Blaðsíða 5
Blaðsíða 6
Blaðsíða 7
Blaðsíða 8
Blaðsíða 9
Blaðsíða 10
Blaðsíða 11
Blaðsíða 12
Blaðsíða 13
Blaðsíða 14
Blaðsíða 15
Blaðsíða 16
Blaðsíða 17
Blaðsíða 18
Blaðsíða 19
Blaðsíða 20
Blaðsíða 21
Blaðsíða 22
Blaðsíða 23
Blaðsíða 24
Blaðsíða 25
Blaðsíða 26
Blaðsíða 27
Blaðsíða 28
Blaðsíða 29
Blaðsíða 30
Blaðsíða 31
Blaðsíða 32
Blaðsíða 33
Blaðsíða 34
Blaðsíða 35
Blaðsíða 36
Blaðsíða 37
Blaðsíða 38
Blaðsíða 39
Blaðsíða 40
Blaðsíða 41
Blaðsíða 42
Blaðsíða 43
Blaðsíða 44
Blaðsíða 45
Blaðsíða 46
Blaðsíða 47
Blaðsíða 48
Blaðsíða 49
Blaðsíða 50
Blaðsíða 51
Blaðsíða 52
Blaðsíða 53
Blaðsíða 54
Blaðsíða 55
Blaðsíða 56

x

Rit Landbúnaðardeildar : B-flokkur

Beinir tenglar

Ef þú vilt tengja á þennan titil, vinsamlegast notaðu þessa tengla:

Tengja á þennan titil: Rit Landbúnaðardeildar : B-flokkur
https://timarit.is/publication/1605

Tengja á þetta tölublað:

Tengja á þessa síðu:

Tengja á þessa grein:

Vinsamlegast ekki tengja beint á myndir eða PDF skjöl á Tímarit.is þar sem slíkar slóðir geta breyst án fyrirvara. Notið slóðirnar hér fyrir ofan til að tengja á vefinn.