Hostname: page-component-669899f699-cf6xr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-04-26T00:26:59.763Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Responses of Rhodes Grass and Overseeded Legumes to Nitrogen and Potash Fertilizers and to the Availability of Soil Potassium in Israel

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 October 2008

A. Dovrat
A. Dovrat
Affiliation:
Hebrew University, Faculty of Agriculture, Department of Field and Vegetable Crops, Rehovot, Israel*
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Results are reported from experiments with nitrogen and potash fertilizers in irrigated Rhodes grass (Chloris gayana), into which annual winter legumes, e.g. berseem (Trifolium alexandrinum) and vetch (Vicia sativa) were overseeded. The experiments were carried out over a three year period on a sandy loam soil at Bet Dagan Experimental Farm, Israel. Ammonium sulphate, applied in equal split rates of up to 384 lb N per acre, linearly increased dry matter yields of Rhodes grass, and the increase of yield proportionally increased the uptake of K by harvest. The K content of the dry matter decreased with increasing nitrogen fertilization to 0·47 per cent which, however, was still found sufficient for maintaining maximum production of Rhodes grass. The yield of annual winter legumes decreased proportionally to the amount of nitrogen fertilizer applied during the summer. Acute potassium starvation was observed. An autumn application of potassium chloride restored dry matter production to normal levels. Availability of soil K, expressed in terms of energies of replacement [ΔF(− 1)], decreased proportionally to the amount of nitrogen fertilizer applied. When ΔF reached approximately 4,250 cal/mol, overseeded legumes were K-deficient, whereas Rhodes grass at that value was still able to extinct sufficient K from the soil for normal growth.

Type
Research Article
Information
Experimental Agriculture , Volume 2 , Issue 4 , October 1966 , pp. 255 - 263
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1966

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

REFERENCES

Brockington, N. R. (1964). Emp. J exp. Agric. 32, 76.Google Scholar
Burton, G. W. & Jackson, J. E. (1962). Agnon. J. 54, 40.Google Scholar
Dovrat, A. (1962). Potass. Symp. 7, 375.Google Scholar
Dovrat, A. (1966). Israel J. agr. Res. 16, 92.Google Scholar
Dovrat, A., Leshem, J. & Jacobson, O. B. (1961). Spec. Bull. Nat. Univ. Inst. Agric., Rehovot, Israel. No. 40.Google Scholar
Fischer, F. L. & Caldwell, A. G. (1959). Agron. J. 51, 99.Google Scholar
Hagin, J. & Bazelet, M. (1964). Potash Review, Subject 16, 31st suite.Google Scholar
Hagin, J. & Dovrat, A. (1963). Emp. J. exp. Agric. 31, 186.Google Scholar
Henzell, E. F. (1963). Aust. J. exp. Agric. & Animal Husb. 3, 290.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jackson, J. E., Walker, M. E. & Carter, R. L. (1959). Agron. J. 51, 129.Google Scholar
Vincente-Chandler, J., Pearson, R. W., Abruna, F. & Silva, S. (1962). Agnon. J. 54, 450.Google Scholar
Vincente-Chandler, J., Silva, S. & Figarella, J. (1959). Agnon. J. 51, 202.Google Scholar
Ward, G. M. & Johnson, B. (1960). Can. Dep. Agr. Res. Branch Publ. No. 1064.Google Scholar
Woodruff, C. M. (1955). Proc. Soil Sci. Soc. Amer. 19, 167.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Woodruff, C. M. & McIntosh, J. L. (1960). Trans. 7th Int. Cong. Soil Sci. III, 80.Google Scholar