Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2plfb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-29T13:08:52.888Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Potassium in soils under different cropping systems:1. Behaviour of K remaining in soils from classical and rotation experiments at Rothamsted and Woburn and evaluation of methods of measuring soil potassium

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

A. E. Johnston  and
T. M. Addiscott
A. E. Johnston
Affiliation:
Rothamsted Experimental Station, Harpenden, Herts
T. M. Addiscott
Affiliation:
Rothamsted Experimental Station, Harpenden, Herts
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Measurements made on soils from the Ley–Arable rotation experiments and some of the Classical experiments at Rothamsted and Woburn are described. Values of exchangeable K, equilibrium activity ratio, equilibrium K potential, and buffer capacity are given for each plot. Potassium quantity/intensity relationships measured for each plot showed that no differences in K exchange behaviour have arisen as a result of manuring or of ley or arable treatments. The only fundamental variation was in the quantity of K in the soils. Continuous ley plots, whether given N fertilizer or containing clover, contained much more K than plots carrying crop rotations. In the Classical experiment soils, quantity of K depended largely on manuring.

Potassium uptakes by ryegrass grown on the soils from the various plots are discussed. Potassium uptake was well-related to quantity of K, better so than to the other K parameters. The release of non-exchangeable K to the crop was non-linearly related to the fall in exchangeable K in the soils from the Rothamsted Ley-Arable experiments.

Drying and re-wetting the cropped soils released K in amounts inversely proportional to the amount of K in the moist cropped soil. This release of K was unrelated to the original exchangeable K contents of the soils.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 76 , Issue 3 , June 1971 , pp. 539 - 552
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1971

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

Addiscott, T. M. (1970a). Rep. Rothamsted exp. Stn for 1969, p. 63.Google Scholar
Addiscott, T. M. (1970b). Use of the quantity/potential relationship to provide a scale of the ability of extractants to remove soil potassium. J. agric. Sci., Camb. 74, 119–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Addiscott, T. M. (1970C). The uptake of initially available soil potassium by ryegrass. J. agric. Sci., Camb. 74, 123–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Addiscott, T. M. (1970d). The potassium Q/I relationships of soils given different K manuring. J. agric. Sci., Camb. 74, 131–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Addiscott, T. M. (1970e). Potassium:calcium exchange in soils of the Broadbalk experiment at Rothamsted. J. agric. Sci., Camb. 75, 451–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Addiscott, T. M. & Talibudeen, O. (1969). The buffering capacity of potassium reserves in soils. Potash Rev. Subject 4, 45th suite, pp. 1–24.Google Scholar
Arnold, P. W. (1962a). Soil potassium and its availability to plants. Outl. Agric. 3, 263–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arnold, P. W. (1962b). The potassium status of some English soils considered as a problem of energy relationships. Proc. Fertil. Soc. 72, 25–43.Google Scholar
Arnold, P. W. (1970). The behaviour of potassium in soils. Proc. Fertil. Soc. 115, 3–15.Google Scholar
Arnold, P. W. & Close, B. M. (1961). Potassium releasing power of soils from the Agdell rotation experiments assessed by glasshouse cropping. J. agric. Sci., Camb. 57, 381–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Babbow, N. J.Ozanne, P. G. & Shaw, T. C. (1965). Nutrient potential and capacity. I. The concepts of nutrient potential and capacity and their application to soil potassium and phosphorus. Aust. J. agric. Res. 16, 61–76.Google Scholar
Beckett, P. H. T. (1964). Studies on soil potassium. II. The immediate Q/l relations of labile potassium in the soil. J. Soil Sci. 15 (1), 9–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beckett, P. H. T. (1965). Activity coefficients for studies on soil potassium. Agrochimica 9 (2), 150–2.Google Scholar
Beckett, P. H. T., Craig, J. B., Nafady, M. H. M. & Watson, J. P. (1966). Studies on soil potassium. V. The stability of Q/l relations. Pl. Soil 25 (3), 435–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beckett, P. H. T. & Nafady, M. H. M. (1967). Studies on soil potassium. VI. The effect of K fixation and release on the form of the K: Ca + Mg exchange isotherm. J. Soil Sci. 18 (2), 244–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De Turk, E. E., Wood, L. K. & Bray, R. H. (1943). Potash fixation in corn-belt soils. Soil Sci. 55, 1–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haylock, O. F. (1956). A method for estimating the availability of non-exchangeable potassium. Proc. 6th Int. Gongr. Soil Sci. B, 403–8.Google Scholar
I.S.S.S. (1934). Trans 1st Oomm. Int. Soc. Soil Sci. pp. 303–5.Google Scholar
Johnston, A. E. (1971). Potassium residues in soils from experiments at Rothamsted and Woburn. In Residual values of applied nutrients. Tech. Bull. Minist. Agric. Fish Fd no. 20,Google Scholar
Johnston, A. E. & Garner, H. V. (1969). The Broadbalk wheat experiment: historical introduction. Rep. Rothamsted exp. Stn for 1968, pt 2, pp. 12–25.Google Scholar
Johnston, A. E., Warren, R. G. & Penny, A. (1970). The value of residues from long period manuring at Rothamsted and Woburn. V. The value to arable crops of residues accumulated from potassium fertilisers. Rep. Rothamsted exp. Stn for 1969, pt 2, pp. 69–90.Google Scholar
Karim, A. Q. M. B. & Malek, M. A. (1957). Potassium fixation in East Pakistan soils under different conditions. Soil Sci. 83, 229–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maclean, A. J. (1961). Potassium supplying power of some Canadian soils. Can. J. Soil Sci. 41, 196–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Matthews, B. C. & Beckett, P. H. T. (1962). A new procedure for studying the release and fixation of potassium ions in soil. J. agric. Sd., Camb. 58, 59–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Matthews, B. C. & Shebbell, C. G. (1960). Effect of drying on exchangeable potassium of Ontario soils and the relation of exchangeable potassium to crop yield. Can. J. Soil. Sci. 40, 35–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reitmeier, R. F. (1951). Soil potassium. Adv. Agron. 3, 113–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rothamsted Experimental Station (1970). Details of the Classical and Long-term Experiments up to 1967. 128 pp. Harpenden.Google Scholar
Schofield, R. K. (1947). A ratio law governing the equilibrium of cations in the soil solution. Proc. Wth Int. Cong, pure appl. Chem., London 3, 257–61.Google Scholar
Talibudeen, O. & Dey, S. K. (1968). Potassium reserves in British soils. I. The Rothamsted classical experiments. J. agric. Sci., Camb. 71, 95–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Warren, R. G. & Johnston, A. E. (1962a). Barnfield. Rep. Rothamsted exp. Stn for 1961, pp. 227–47.Google Scholar
Warren, R. G. & Johnston, A. E. (1962b). The accumulation and loss of soil potassium in long term experiments at Rothamsted and Woburn. Proc. Fertil. Soc. 72, 1–24.Google Scholar
Warren, R. G. & Johnston, A. E. (1967). Hoosfield Continuous Barley. Rep. Rothamsted exp. Stn for 1966, pp. 320–38.Google Scholar
Woodruff, C. M. (1955). The energies of replacement of calcium by potassium in soils. Proc. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. 19, 167–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
York, E. J., Bradfield, R. & Peech, M. (1953). Calcium-potassium interactions in soils and plants. I. Lime-induced potassium fixation in Mardin silt loam. Soil Sci. 76, 379–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar