Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-r6qrq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-30T04:40:03.110Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effects of Gypsum and Zinc on Rice Nutrition on Sodic Soil

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 October 2008

P. N. Takkar  and
V. K. Nayyar
P. N. Takkar
Affiliation:
Department of Soils, Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana, India
V. K. Nayyar
Affiliation:
Department of Soils, Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana, India
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

A field experiment was conducted on a Zn-deficient highly-deteriorated sodic soil of the Ghabdan series to determine the effect of three rates of gypsum (G0, G25, G50% of the gypsum requirement of soil) and three rates of Zn (Zn0, Zn11, Zn22 kg Zn/ha) on rice variety PR 106. Gypsum application significantly increased yield and Zn uptake in rice because of a significant decrease in soil pH and increase in Ca and Zn supply. Zinc application alone significantly increased soil and plant Zn but yields were poorer than with gypsum application alone because of Ca deficiency/Na toxicity. The same rates of Zn applied together with gypsum markedly increased yield and Zn uptake, revealing a deficiency of both Ca and Zn. The best grain yield was recorded either at G50Zn11 or G25Zn22, indicating an economy in gypsum at higher rates of Zn or of Zn at higher rates of gypsum application.

Type
Research Article
Information
Experimental Agriculture , Volume 17 , Issue 1 , January 1981 , pp. 49 - 55
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1981

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

Abrol, I. P. (1968). Trans. 9th Int. Congr. Soil Sci., Adelaide, Australia, II, 585–596.Google Scholar
Bhumbla, D. R. & Abrol, I. P. (1971). Indian Farming 21:11–13.Google Scholar
Black, C. A. (1965). Agron. Publ. 9, Am. Soc. Agron. Inc., Madison, Wis. USA.Google Scholar
Brar, M. S. & Sekhon, G. S. (1976a). Plant and Soil 45:137–143.Google Scholar
Brar, M. S. & Sekhon, G. S. (1976b). Plant and Soil 45:145–150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Forno, D. A., Yoshida, S. & Asher, J. (1975). Plant and Soil 42:537–550.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lindsay, W. L. (1972). Micronutrients in Agriculture. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. Inc., Madison, Wis. 41–58.Google Scholar
Lindsay, W. L. & Norvell, W. A. (1978). Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 42:421–428.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Poonia, S. R. & Bhumbla, D. R. (1972). Plant and Soil 36:671–679.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Takkar, P. N. & Mann, M. S. (1975). Agrochimica 19:420–429.Google Scholar
Takkar, P. N., Mann, M. S. & Randhawa, N. S. (1973). Indian Farming 23:5–8.Google Scholar
Takkar, P. N. & Sidhu, B. S. (1979). J. Agri. Sci., Camb. 93:441–447.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Takkar, P. N. & Singh, T. (1978). Agron. J. 70:441–447.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Us Salinity Lab. (1954). Diagnosis and Improvement of Saline and Alkali Soils. Agric. Handbook 60, USDA, US Gov. Print. Off., Washington DC.Google Scholar
Yoshida, S. (1968). Int. Rice Comm. 11th Sess. Working Party on Rice Soils Water and Fert. Practice, Kandy, Ceylon, 2–5.Google Scholar