Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-m9kch Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-01T06:54:26.188Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Cation-anion relationships in crop nutrition: II. Factors affecting the ratios of sum of the cations: sum of the anions in Italian rye-grass

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

R. K. Cunningham
R. K. Cunningham
Affiliation:
Rothamsted Experimental Station, Harpenden, Herts.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The ratios of S cations (Na + K + Ca + Mg in m-equiv./100g.):2 anions (N + P + Cl + S in mequiv./ lOO g.), R values, in over 100 samples of Italian rye-grass grown in the field ranged from 0-33 to 0-92. Italian rye-grass, grown in the greenhouse at 11 levels of a nutrient mixture, had R values ranging from 0-58 to 1-36.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 63 , Issue 1 , August 1964 , pp. 103 - 108
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1964

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

Bear, P. E. (1950). Agron. J. 42, 176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cunningham, R. K. (1962). J. Agric. Sci. 59, 257.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cunningham, R. K. (1963 a). Ph.D. Thesis, London University.Google Scholar
Cunningham, R. K. (1963 b). Rep. Rothamst. Exp. Sta. 1962, p. 65.Google Scholar
Cunningham, R. K. (1964). J. Agric. Sci. 63, 97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dijkshoorn, W. (1957 a). Neth. J. Agric. Sci. 5, 81.Google Scholar
Dijkshoorn, W. (1957 b). Neth. J. Agric. Sci. 5, 233.Google Scholar
Dijkshoorn, W. (1957 c). Jaarb. Biol. Onderz. Landbouwk. 1957, Wageningen, p. 141.Google Scholar
Dijkshoorn, W. (1958 a). Neth. J. Agric. Sci. 6, 131.Google Scholar
Dijkshoorn, W. (1958 b). Neth. J. Agric. Sci. 6, 211.Google Scholar
Dijkshoorn, W. (1959). Neth. J. Agric. Sci. 7, 194.Google Scholar
Dijkshoorn, W. & t'Hart, M. L. (1957). Neth. J. Agric. Sci. 5, 18.Google Scholar
Epstein, E. & Hagen, C. E. (1952). Plant Physiol. 27, 457.Google Scholar
Gasser, J. K. R. (1961). J. Sci. Fd Agric. 11, 778.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McCalla, A. G. & Woodford, E. K. (1938). Plant Physiol. 13, 695.Google Scholar
Osterhout, W. J. V. (1936). Bot. Rev. 2, 283.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Said, I. M. (1959). Versl. Landbouwk. Onderz. Wageningen, 65, 16.Google Scholar
Scharrer, K. & Jung, J. (1955 a0). Z. PflErnähr. Düng. 71, 76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scharrer, K. & Jung, J. (1955 b). Z. PflErnähr. Düng. 71, 97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Steward, F. C. & Millar, F. K. (1954). Symp. Soc. Exp. Biol. 8, 367.Google Scholar
Sutcliffe, J. F. (1960). Nature, Lond., 188, 294.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tejwani, K. G. & Venkataraman, K. V. (1958). Soil Sci. 86, 310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walker, T. W. (1960). Soil Sci. 89, 328.CrossRefGoogle Scholar