Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-nr4z6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-05T00:00:11.555Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

The relative uptake of phosphorus by crops and natural fallow from different parts of their root zone

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

P. H. Nye
Affiliation:
University College of Ghana
W. N. M. Foster
Affiliation:
University College of Ghana

Extract

A tracer method has been used to determine the relative amounts of phosphorus that a range of short-term crops and fallows derive from different parts of their root zone when growing on a phosphorus deficient latosol. The short-term crops made little use of sub-soil phosphorus: millet derived 16% from below 12 in. after 95 days growth; and maize derived 7% and pigeon pea 11% from below 10 in. after 80 days. Pigeon pea feeds much closer to its base than the cereals until the 50th day. Since millet absorbed little phosphorus from subsoil placed in a layer only 5–10 in. deep, it is concluded that the poor uptake of subsoil phosphorus is due to low availability, rather than a natural surface feeding habit.

Pigeon pea in its second year extracted little more phosphorus from the subsoil than it did in the first. On the other hand, in a natural savanna both the perennial grasses and the associated dicots derived over 30% of their phosphorus from below the 10 in. layer. The amount corresponded with the proportion of dicotyledonous roots in the subsoil, but exceeded the corresponding proportion of grass roots. The greater proportion of subsoil phosphorus in the savanna may be due to lower availability of phosphorus in the topsoil, which in contrast to the other plots did not receive fertilizer.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1961

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

Hall, N. S., Chandler, W. F., van Bavel, C. H. M., Reid, P. H. & Anderson, J. H. (1953). Tech. Bull. N.C. agric. Exp. Sta. no. 101.Google Scholar
Lipps, R. C., Fox, R. L. & Koehler, F. E. (1957). Soil Sci. 84, 195.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Murdock, J. T. & Engelbert, L. E. (1958). Proc. Soil Sci. Soc. Amer. 22, 53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nye, P. H. (1958). J. W. Afr. Sci. Ass. 4, 31.Google Scholar
Nye, P. H. & Foster, W. N. M. (1958). Plant & Soil, 9, 338.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nye, P. H. & Foster, W. N. M. (1960). 7th International Congr. Soil Sci. (Madison) (In the Press.)Google Scholar