Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-4rdpn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-03T05:30:00.644Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The effects of magnesium fertilizers on yield and chemical composition of sugar beet

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

A. P. Draycott  and
M. J. Durrant
A. P. Draycott
Affiliation:
Broom's Barn Experimental Station, Higham, Bury St. Edmunds, Suffolk
M. J. Durrant
Affiliation:
Broom's Barn Experimental Station, Higham, Bury St. Edmunds, Suffolk
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Nineteen experiments were made between 1964 and 1967 on fields where previous sugar beet crops showed symptoms of magnesium deficiency. None, 2·5 or 5 cwt/acre kieserite or 20 cwt/acre dolomitic limestone were tested in a factorial design with none or 3 cwt/acre agricultural salt (crude sodium chloride), and 0.8 or 1.2 cwt/acre nitrogen as ‘Nitro-Chalk’. Additional plots tested kainit (7 cwt/acre) and a large dressing of potash (2 cwt/acre) as muriate of potash.

Kieserite and dolomitic limestone increased sugar yield and the most effective dressing was 5 cwt/acre kieserite, which gave 3·1 cwt/acre more sugar than the crop without magnesium fertilizer. Agricultural salt and the larger dressing of nitrogen were profitable, and neither interacted with magnesium on average; the large dressing of potash also increased yield. The magnesium in the kainit increased yield slightly, but the dressing tested supplied too little to satisfy the crop's requirement of magnesium.

Each year in late summer the percentage of plants showing magnesium-deficiency symptoms was recorded, and a sample of twenty-four plants harvested from each of the magnesium treatments and analysed. All the magnesium fertilizers increased the concentration of magnesium in leaves, petioles and roots, and also decreased the number of plants showing deficiency symptoms.

The magnesium concentrations in plants grown without magnesium differed widely and were related both to the yield response to magnesium fertilizer and to the percentage of plants with deficiency symptoms. Both relationships showed a similar ‘transition zone’ from deficiency to adequate supply, for leaves this was 0·2–0·4% Mg, for petioles 0·1–0·2 Mg and for roots 0·075–0·125 % Mg in the dry matter.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 72 , Issue 2 , April 1969 , pp. 319 - 324
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1969

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

Adams, S. N. (1961). The effect of time of application of phosphate and potash on sugar beet. J. agric. Sci., Camb. 56, 127–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Draycott, A. P. & Dukrant, M. J. (1968). Uptake of magnesium by sugar beet. Rep. Rothamsted exp. Stn. 1967, p. 286.Google Scholar
Hale, J. B., Watson, M. A. & Hull, R. (1946). Some causes of chlorosis and necrosis of sugar beet foliage. Ann. appl. Biol. 33, 13–28.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Harrod, M. F. & Caldwell, T. H. (1967). The magnesium manuring of sugar beet on light sandy soils of East Anglia. Tech. Bull. Min. Agric. Fish. Fd. no. 14, 127–42.Google Scholar
Jacob, A. (1958). Magnesium, the Fifth Major Plant Nutrient. London: Staples Press.Google Scholar
Tinker, P. B. H. (1965). The effects of nitrogen, potassium and sodium fertilizers on sugar beet. J. agric. Sci., Camb. 65, 207–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tinker, P. B. H. (1967). The effects of magnesium sulphate on sugar-beet yield and its interactions with other fertilizers. J. Agric. Sci., Oamb. 68, 205–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ulrich, A. (1961). Plant analysis in sugar-beet nutrition. In Plant Analysis and Fertilizer Problems, pp. 190–211. Washington: Am. Inst. Biol. Sci.Google Scholar