Hostname: page-component-7dd5485656-pnlb5 Total loading time: 0.001 Render date: 2025-10-30T12:59:04.822Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

ASSESSING AVAILABLE SOIL SULPHUR FROM PHOSPHOGYPSUM APPLICATIONS IN A NO-TILL CROPPING SYSTEM

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 February 2014

SUSANA CHURKA BLUM ,
FERNANDO JOSÉ GARBUIO ,
HÉLIO ANTÔNIO WOOD JORIS  and
EDUARDO FÁVERO CAIRES
SUSANA CHURKA BLUM*
Affiliation:
Department of Soil Science and Agricultural Engineering, Universidade Estadual de Ponta Grossa, Avenida General Carlos Cavalvanti 4748, Ponta Grossa, Paraná 84030-900, Brazil
FERNANDO JOSÉ GARBUIO
Affiliation:
Department of Soil Science and Agricultural Engineering, Universidade Estadual de Ponta Grossa, Avenida General Carlos Cavalvanti 4748, Ponta Grossa, Paraná 84030-900, Brazil
HÉLIO ANTÔNIO WOOD JORIS
Affiliation:
Department of Soil Science and Agricultural Engineering, Universidade Estadual de Ponta Grossa, Avenida General Carlos Cavalvanti 4748, Ponta Grossa, Paraná 84030-900, Brazil
EDUARDO FÁVERO CAIRES
Affiliation:
Department of Soil Science and Agricultural Engineering, Universidade Estadual de Ponta Grossa, Avenida General Carlos Cavalvanti 4748, Ponta Grossa, Paraná 84030-900, Brazil
*
†Corresponding author. Email: sschurka@yahoo.com.br; Current address: Institute of Rural Development, Universidade da Integração Internacional da Lusofonia Afro-Brasileira, Campus da Liberdade, Redenção, Ceará 62790-000, Brazil.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

The complex dynamics of the sulphur (S) cycle has prompted several questions concerning its bioavailability and evaluation by different extraction methods, and few studies under field conditions have been performed to elucidate available S on Brazilian soils under no-till (NT) cropping systems. A field experiment examined the effects of phosphogypsum (PG) applications on nutrient uptake and availability of S to maize and wheat crops under an NT system aiming to establish critic levels of S on an Oxisol (clay, kaolinitic, Rhodic Hapludox) in Parana state, Brazil. PG at the rates of 0, 3, 6 and 9 t ha−1 was applied on the surface of the plots in 1998 upon conversion from pasture to an NT cropping system, and in 2004 subplots received either 0 or 6 t ha−1 of PG on the surface. Effects of PG applications on nutrient uptake and available soil SO4-S to the maize and wheat crops were evaluated in 2004–2005. Increasing the surface-applied PG rate in 1998 increased Mg uptake by maize, and N, K, Ca and Mg uptake by wheat plants. Reapplication of PG in 2004 increased the uptake of N and P by maize, and the uptake of N, K, Ca and Mg by wheat plants. The PG rates surface-applied in 1998 have resulted in a long-term residual effect on soil by increasing SO4-S in surface and subsoil layers 6.5 and 7.5 years after application, affecting aboveground biomass, S uptake and S content in the leaves of the wheat crop. The reapplication of PG in 2004 increased maize S uptake, S content in leaves and grains and S exported by maize harvest, and increased wheat aboveground biomass, S uptake and S content in leaves. These effects were due to increasing available soil SO4-S from different depths extracted by 0.5 M ammonium acetate (NH4OAc) along with 0.25 M acetic acid (HOAc) and 0.01 M calcium phosphate (Ca(H2PO4)2). Both extractants were very similar in their ability to assess available soil S in these crops, and the 0–0.20-m layer is shown to be adequate for evaluating the concentration of available SO4-S in maize and wheat cultivated under NT.

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Experimental Agriculture , Volume 50 , Issue 4 , October 2014 , pp. 516 - 532
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2014 

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

Alves, M. E. and Lavorentti, A. (2004). Sulfate adsorption and its relationships with properties of representative soils of the São Paulo State, Brazil. Geoderma 118:89–99.Google Scholar
Anderson, G., Lefroy, R. N., Chinoin, N. and Blair, G. (1992). Soil sulfur testing. Sulphur in Agriculture 16:6–14.Google Scholar
Bardsley, C. E. and Lancaster, J. D. (1965). Sulphur. In Methods of Soil Analysis: Chemical and Microbiological Properties, 1103–1116. (Ed. Black, C. A.). Madison, WI: ASA.Google Scholar
Blair, G. J., Chinoin, N., Lefroy, R. D. B., Anderson, G. C. and Crocker, G. J. (1991). A soil sulfur test for pastures and crops. Australian Journal of Soil Research 29:619–626.Google Scholar
Bullock, D. G. and Goodroad, L. L. (1989). Effect of sulphur rate, application method, and source on yield and mineral content of corn. Communications in Soil Science and Plant Analysis 20:1209–1217.Google Scholar
Caires, E. F., Alleoni, L. R. F., Cambri, M. A. and Barth, G. (2005). Surface application of lime for crop grain production under a no-till system. Agronomy Journal 97:791–798.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Caires, E. F., Barth, G., Garbuio, F. J. and Kusman, M. T. (2002a). Influence of surface lime application in a no-tillage system on soil acidity, corn root growth and nutrition. Revista Brasileira de Ciência do Solo 26:1011–1022. (In Portuguese with abstract in English)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Caires, E. F., Blum, J., Barth, G., Garbuio, F. J. and Kusman, M. T. (2003). Changes in chemical soil characteristics and soybean response to lime and gypsum applications in a no-tillage system. Revista Brasileira de Ciência do Solo 27:275–286. (In Portuguese with abstract in English)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Caires, E. F., Churka, S., Garbuio, F. J., Ferrari, R. A. and Morgano, M. A. (2006). Soybean yield and quality as a function of lime and gypsum applications. Scientia Agricola 63:370–379.Google Scholar
Caires, E. F., Feldhaus, I. C., Barth, G. and Garbuio, F. J. (2002b). Lime and gypsum application on the wheat crop. Sci entia Agric ola 59:357–364.Google Scholar
Caires, E. F., Garbuio, F. J., Churka, S., Barth, G. and Corrêa, J. C. L. (2008). Effects of soil acidity amelioration by surface liming on no-till corn, soybean, and wheat root growth and yield. European Journal of Agronomy 28:57–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Caires, E. F., Garbuio, F. J., Churka, S. and Joris, H. A. W. (2011a). Use of gypsum for crop grain production under a subtropical no-till cropping system. Agronomy Journal 103:1804–1814.Google Scholar
Caires, E. F., Kusman, M. T., Barth, G., Garbuio, F. J. and Padilha, J. M. (2004). Changes in soil chemical properties and corn response to lime and gypsum applications. Revista Brasileira de Ciência do Solo 28:125–136. (In Portuguese with abstract in English)Google Scholar
Caires, E. F., Maschietto, E. H. G., Garbuio, F. J., Churka, S. and Joris, H. A. W. (2011b). Surface application of gypsum in low acidic oxisol under no-till cropping system. Scientia Agricola 68:209–216.Google Scholar
Chao, T. T., Harward, M. E. and Fang, S. C. (1964). Iron or aluminum coatings in relation to sulfate adsorption characteristics of soil. Soil Science Society of America Proceedings 28:623–625.Google Scholar
Chen, L., Kost, D. and Dick, W. A. (2008). Flue gas desulfurization products as sulfur sources for corn. Soil Science Society of America Journal 72:1464–1470.Google Scholar
Couto, W., Lathell, D. J. and Bouldin, J. R. (1979). Sulfate adsorption by two oxisols and alfisols of the tropics. Soil Science 127:108–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cui, X. Y., Wang, S. P., Wang, Y. F., Xing, X. R., Chen, Z. Z., Haneklaus, S., Fleckenstein, J. and Schnug, E. (2006). Suitability of extractants for predicting available sulfur in natural grassland in the Inner Mongolia Steppe of China. Communications in Soil Science and Plant Analysis 37:721–732.Google Scholar
De Bona, F. D. and Monteiro, F. A. (2010). Nitrogen and sulfur fertilization and dynamics in a Brazilian Entisol under pasture. Soil Science Society of America Journal 74:1248–1258.Google Scholar
Derpsch, R. and Friedrich, T. (2009). Global overview of conservation agriculture adoption. In Proceedings of the 4th World Congress on Conservation Agriculture, 429–438 (Ed. Joshi, P. K.). New Delhi, India: Lead Papers.Google Scholar
Dick, W. A., Kost, D. and Chen, L. (2008). Availability of sulfur to crops from soil and other sources. In Sulfur: A Missing Link Between Soils, Crops and Nutrition, 59–82 (Ed. Jez, J.). Madison, WI: ASA.Google Scholar
Epstein, E. and Bloom, A. J. (2005). Mineral Nutrition of Plants: Principles and Perspectives, 2nd edn. Sunderland, UK: Sinauer.Google Scholar
Farina, M. P. W., Channon, P. and Thibaud, G. R. (2000). A comparison of strategies for amelioration subsoil acidity: II long-term soil effects. Soil Science Society of America Journal 64:652–658.Google Scholar
Ferreira, A. C. B., Araújo, G. A., Pereira, P. R. G. and Cardoso, A. A. (2001). Corn crop characteristics under nitrogen, molybdenum and zinc fertilization. Scientia Agricola 58:131–138. (In Portuguese with abstract in English)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fox, R. L., Olson, R. A. and Rhoades, H. F. (1964). Evaluating the sulfur status of soil by plant and soil test. Soil Science Society of America Proceedings 28:243–246.Google Scholar
Goh, K. M. and Pamidi, J. (2003). Plant uptake of sulphur as related to changes in the HI-reducible and total sulphur fractions in soil. Plant & Soil 250:1–13.Google Scholar
IBGE (2012). Levantamento Sistemático da Produção Agrícola. Rio de Janeiro, Brazil: Fundação Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatística. Available at: http://www.ibge.gov.br/home/estatistica/indicadores/agropecuaria/lspa/ (accessed 20 July 2012).Google Scholar
Kang, B. and Osiname, O. (1976). Sulphur response of maize in Western Nigeria. Agronomy Journal 68:333–336.Google Scholar
Kertesz, M. A. and Mirleau, P. (2004). The role of soil microbes in plant sulphur nutrition. Journal of Experimental Botany 55:1939–1945.Google Scholar
Kost, D. A., Chen, L. and Dick, W. A. (2008). Predicting plant sulfur deficiency in soils: results from Ohio. Biology and Fertility of Soils 44:1091–1098.Google Scholar
Lal, R. (2006). Enhancing crop yields in the developing countries through restoration of the soil organic carbon pool in agricultural lands. Land Degradation and Development 17:197–209.Google Scholar
Lehmann, J., Solomon, D., Zhao, F. J. and McGrath, S. P. (2008). Atmosferic SO2 emissions since the late 1800s change organic sulfur forms in humic substance extracts of soils. Environmental Science and Technology 42:3550–3555.Google Scholar
Neptune, A. M. L., Tabatabai, M. A. and Hanway, J. J. (1975). Sulfur fractions and carbon-nitrogen-phosphorus relationships in some Brazilian and Iowa soils. Soil Science Society of America Proceedings 39:51–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oliveira, E. L. (2003). Suggestion of Fertilization and Liming for Crops of Interest Economic at the Parana State, IAPAR Circ. 128. Londrina, Brazil: Instituto Agronômico do Paraná (IAPAR), 30 pp. (In Portuguese)Google Scholar
Oliveira, E. L. and Pavan, M. A. (1996). Control of soil acidity in no-tillage system for soybean production. Soil & Tillage Research 38:47–57.Google Scholar
Prochnow, L. I. and Boaretto, A. E. (1995). Soil sampling depth for available sulphur evaluation in sicilian lemon (Citrus limon Burm. orchard.) Scientia Agricola 52:101–106. (In Portuguese with abstract in English)Google Scholar
Prochnow, L. I., Boaretto, A. E. and Vitti, G. C. (1997). Ion-exchange resin to evaluate sulphur availability in soils. Revista Brasileira de Ciência do Solo 21:335–339. (In Portuguese with abstract in English)Google Scholar
Ribeiro, A. C., Accioly, L. J. O., Alvarez-Venegas, V. H., Braga, J. M. and Alves, V. M. C. (1991). Evaluation of soil available sulfur by the ion-exchange resin method. Revista Brasileira de Ciência do Solo 15:321–327. (In Portuguese with abstract in English)Google Scholar
Ribeiro, E. S., Dias, L. E., Alvarez-Venegas, V. H., Mello, J. W. V. and Daniels, W. L. (2001). Dynamics of sulfur fractions in Brazilian soils submitted to consecutive harvests of sorghum. Soil Science Society of America Journal 65:787–794.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Salvagiotti, F., Castellarín, J. M., Miralles, D. J. and Pedrol, H. (2009). Sulfur fertilization improves nitrogen use efficiency in wheat by increasing nitrogen uptake. Field Crops Research 113:170–177.Google Scholar
Scherer, H. W. (2009). Sulfur in soils. Journal of Plant Nutrition and Soil Science 172:326–335.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schmidt, F., De Bona, F. D., Silveira, C. P. and Monteiro, F. A. (2012). Soil sulfur fractions dynamics and distribution in a tropical grass pasture amended with nitrogen and sulfur fertilizers. Journal of Plant Nutrition and Soil Science 175:60–67.Google Scholar
Silva, D. J., Alvarez Venegas, V. H., Ruiz, H. A. and Sant'Anna, R. (2003). Translocation and redistribution of sulphur in corn and soybean plants. Pesquisa Agropecuária Brasileira 38:715–721. (In Portuguese with abstract in English)Google Scholar
Solomon, D., Lehmann, J., Zarruk, K. K., Dathe, J., Kinyangy, J., Liang, B. and Machado, S. (2011). Speciation and long - and short-term molecular-level dynamics of soil organic sulfur studied by x-ray absorption near-edge structure spectroscopy. Journal of Environmental Quality 40:704–718.Google Scholar
Sumner, M. E., Shahandeh, H., Bouton, J. and Hammel, J. (1986). Amelioration of an acid soil profile trough deep liming and surface application of gypsum. Soil Science Society of America Journal 50:1254–1258.Google Scholar
Tabatabai, M. A. (1987). Physicochemical fate of sulfate in soils. Journal of Journal of the Air Pollution Control Association (Journal of the Air & Waste Management Association) 37:34–38.Google Scholar
Tabatabai, M. A. (2005) Chemistry of sulfur in soils. In Chemical Processes in Soils, 193–226 (Eds. Tabatabai, M. A. and Sparks, D. L.). Madison, WI: SSSA.Google Scholar
Toma, M., Sumner, M. E., Weeks, G. and Saigusa, M. (1999). Long-term effects of gypsum on crop yield and subsoil chemical properties. Soil Science Society of America Journal 39:891–895.Google Scholar
Vitti, G. C. (1989). Sulfur in soil. In Interpretation of Chemical Analysis of Soil and Plant for Fertilization, 129–173 (Eds. Büll, L. T. and Rosolem, C. A.). Botucatu, Brazil: Studies and Research Foundation for Agriculture and Forestry. (In Portuguese)Google Scholar
Wallington, T. J., Anderson, J. E., Mueller, S. A., Kolinski Morris, E. and Ginder, J. M. (2012). Corn ethanol production, food exports and indirect land use. Environmental Science and Technology 46:6379–6384.Google Scholar
Zhang, G. Y. and Yu, T. R. (1997). Coordination adsorption of anions. In Chemistry of Variable Charge Soils, 175–218 (Ed. Yu, T. R.). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar