Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-tf8b9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-27T20:53:28.670Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Availability of Phosphorus to Sugar Cane in Hawaii as Influenced by Various Phosphorus Fertilizers and Methods of Application*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 October 2008

S. K. de Datta  and
J. C. Moomaw
S. K. de Datta
Affiliation:
Department of Agronomy and Soil Science, University of Hawaii, Honolulu, Hawaii
J. C. Moomaw
Affiliation:
Department of Agronomy and Soil Science, University of Hawaii, Honolulu, Hawaii
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

An experiment was carried out in the glasshouse to determine the availability of P, and utilization of added phosphate fertilizers from three fertilizer materials, applied by two different methods to sugar cane grown in four diverse soil systems. Phosphorus was applied at the equivalent rate of 175 pounds P (400 pounds P2O5) per acre. A larger response from added P in terms of plant yields was obtained from an aluminous ferruginous latosol and least from dark magnesium clay. Differences in yields of sugar cane were evidently associated with differences in P content in the cane plants and, in certain cases, with a reduction in Al content in plant tops, and the less soluble superphosphate increased yields more than the highly soluble NH4H2PO4. Phosphate fertilizers applied as foliar spray greatly increased the P content in the plants, and plants contained twenty times more P when sprayed with NH4H2PO4 than when the same fertilizer was applied to the soil. However, increased P content in the plants did not necessarily indicate that the P was translocated within the plants or that the added P participated in metabolic processes. The evidence indicated that in soils where the ‘A’ value was high the P status of the sugar cane tops was not correspondingly high.

Type
Research Article
Information
Experimental Agriculture , Volume 1 , Issue 4 , October 1965 , pp. 261 - 270
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1965

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.)

References

REFERENCES

Boynton, D. (1954). Ann. Rev. Plant Physiol. 5, 31.Google Scholar
Burr, G. O., Tanimoto, T., Hartt, C. E., Forbes, A., Sadsoka, G., Ashton, F. M., Payne, J. H., Silva, J. A. & Sloane, G. E. (1956). Proc. Peaceful Uses of Atomic Energy 12, 177.Google Scholar
De Datta, S. K., Fox, R. L. & Sherman, G. D. (1963). Agron. J. 55, 311.Google Scholar
Fox, R. L., De Datta, S. K. & Sherman, G. D. (1962). Trans. Int. Soil Conf.,New Zealand,574.Google Scholar
Fox, R. L., De Datta, S. K. & Wang, J. M. (1964). 8th Int. Soil Sci. Congress, Bucharest.Google Scholar
Fried, M. & Dean, L. A. (1952). Soil Sci. 73, 263.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Suehisa, R. H. (1961). M.S. thesis. Univ. of Hawaii.Google Scholar
Tukey, H. B., Wittwer, S. H., Teubner, F. G. & Long, W. G. (1956). Proc. Int. Conf., Peaceful Use of Atomic Energy, 1955, (Biol. Agric. 12, 138).Google Scholar
Wittwer, S. H. & Lundahl, W. S. (1951). Plant Physiol. 26, 792.Google Scholar
Wittwar, S. H. (1957). Atomic Energy and Agriculture. Amer. Assoc. Adv. Sci.Google Scholar
Wittwer, S. H. & Teubner, F. C. (1959). Ann. Rev. Plant Physiol. 10, 13.Google Scholar
Wittwer, S. H., Bukovac, M. J. & Tukey, H. B. (1963). Fertilizer Technology and Uses. (Ed. McVikar, M. H., Bridger, G. L. & Nelson, L. B.) Madison, Wisc., Soil Sci. Soc. Amer.Google Scholar