Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-j824f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-03T05:28:32.905Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The reclamation of land covered with pulverized fuel ash. The influence of soil depth on crop performance

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

D. R. Hodgson ,
R. Holliday  and
F. Cope
D. R. Hodgson
Affiliation:
Department of Agriculture, University of Leeds
R. Holliday
Affiliation:
Department of Agriculture, University of Leeds
F. Cope
Affiliation:
Department of Agriculture, University of Leeds
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

1. A review of land restoration problems in relation to the soil depth required for successful crops showed that factual information on this orthodox method of restoration was inadequate.

2. A field trial sited on pulverized fuel ash is described in which the relationship between crop yield and soil depth at a range of fertilizer levels was determined; kale, oats, rape, barley and potatoes were the test crops.

3. The crops were divided into two groups, sensitive (kale and barley) and tolerant (oats, rape, potatoes) to ash toxicity, on the basis of their response to soil depth at the high fertilizer level. Quadratic expressions relating yield to soil depth, over the range 3–36 in. at each fertilizer level were fitted to the data for each crop group.

4. Yield isoquants, derived from the fertilizer response curves at each soil depth, enabled soil depth-fertilizer level combinations to be ascertained for producing a given level of crop yield. Fertilizer could be substituted for soil more effectively for tolerant than sensitive crops.

5. A 12 in. cover of soil together with 1½ times the normal farm fertilizer dressing for the crop was the minimum for acceptable yields. Fertilizer use may have to be increased to twice normal dressings to maintain yields if soil depths are reduced to below 12 in.

6. Crop yields were not increased by a soil covering greater than 24 in. deep.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 61 , Issue 3 , November 1963 , pp. 299 - 308
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1963

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

Batjer, L. P. & Oskamp, J. (1935). Bull. N.Y. Agric. Exp. Sta., p. 626.Google Scholar
Boulding, K. E. (1948). Economic Analysis. New York: Harper and Bros.Google Scholar
Clarke, G. R. (1951). J. Soil Sci. 2, 50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coates, U. A. (1956). Lanes. C.C. Planning Dept., Press Statement, 13 07.Google Scholar
Collier, D. & Gachon, L. (1955). Fld Crop Abstr. 8, 246.Google Scholar
Collier, D. et al. (1958). Fid Crop Abstr. 12, 277.Google Scholar
Cope, F. (1961). Ph.D. Thesis, Leeds Univ.Google Scholar
Deakins, R. M. (1952). Proc. 6th Int. Grassl. Congr. 2, 968.Google Scholar
Engledow, F. L. & Ramiah, K. (1930). J. Agric. Sci. 20, 337.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Farmer and Stockbreeder (1948). 25th 05, p. 1189.Google Scholar
Heady, E. O., Pesek, J. T. & Brown, W. G. (1955). Bull. Iowa Agric. Exp. Sta. Res., p. 424.Google Scholar
Hodgson, D. R. (1961). Ph.D. Thesis, Leeds Univ.Google Scholar
Holliday, R., Hodgson, D. R., Townsend, W. N. & Wood, J. W. (1958). Nature, Lond., 181, 1079.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huang, H. S. (1945). Soil Sci. 62, 227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hunt, I. V. & Farrant, D. P. (1955). J. Brit. Grassl. Soc. 10, 127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MacFarlane, W. K. (1951). Scot. J. Agric. 30, 125.Google Scholar
Morley Davies, W. (1954). Agric. Progr. 29, 88.Google Scholar
Rees, W. J. & Skelding, A. D. (1953). Agric., Lond., 59, 586.Google Scholar
Sand and Gravel Comm. Rep. (1953). Ministry of Housing and Local Govt, part 18. London: H.M.S.O.Google Scholar
Spillman, W. J. & Lang, E. (1924). The Law of Diminishing Returns. New York: World Book Co.Google Scholar
Stapledon, R. G. (1912). J. Agric. Sci. 5, 129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar