Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-zzh7m Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-27T18:54:42.760Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Responses of sugar beet to sulphur fertilizer in England

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 November 2010

K. W. JAGGARD*
Affiliation:
Broom's Barn Research Centre, Higham, Bury St. Edmunds, Suffolk IP28 6NP, UK
F.-J. ZHAO
Affiliation:
Rothamsted Research, Harpenden, Hertfordshire AL5 2JQ, UK
*
*To whom all correspondence should be addressed. Email: keith.jaggard@bbsrc.ac.uk

Summary

Six field experiments were carried out in eastern England between 2003 and 2005 to test the effect of sulphur (S) fertilizer on the yield of sugar beet (Beta vulgaris L.). The experiments were undertaken at sites where there had previously been a positive response to S in other crops or where no S-containing materials had been applied for more than 20 years. No individual experiment produced a significant positive response to S application, but the treatments that received no S fertilizer produced the smallest yield in five of the six experiments. Analysis across years using restricted maximum likelihood (REML) procedures showed that there was a positive and significant sugar yield response in beet of 0·56 t/ha where positive responses had previously been recorded in other crops grown on these loamy sand soils. Beet crops grown in soils of this type should receive S fertilizer that can be applied conveniently as sufficient ammonium sulphate to supply the first dressing of N.

Type
Crops and Soils
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2010

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

Anon. (2005). International Commission for Uniform Methods of Sugar Analysis: Methods Book (2005). Berlin: Bartens.Google Scholar
Armstrong, M. J. (1985). Sulphur nutrition. In Rothamsted Experimental Station Report for 1984, p. 47. Harpenden, Herts, UK: Rothamsted Experimental Station.Google Scholar
Blake-Kalff, M. M. A., Hawkesford, M. J., Zhao, F. J. & McGrath, S. P. (2000). Diagnosing sulphur deficiency in field-grown oilseed rape (Brassica napus L.) and wheat (Triticum aestivum L.). Plant and Soil 225, 95107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bravo, S., Lee, G. S. & Schmehl, W. R. (1989). The effect of planting date, nitrogen fertilizer rate and harvest date on seasonal concentration and total content of six macronutrients in sugarbeet. Journal of Sugar Beet Research 26, 3449.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
DEFRA. (2000). Fertiliser Recommendations for Agricultural and Horticultural Crops RB209. London: The Stationary Office.Google Scholar
Draycott, A. P. & Christenson, D. R. (2003). Nutrients for Sugar Beet Production: Soil Plant Relationships. Wallingford: CABI Publishing.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fowler, D., Cape, N., Smith, R., Nemitz, E., Sutton, M., Dore, T., Coyle, M., Crossley, A., Storeton-West, R., Muller, J., Phillips, G., Thomas, R., Vieno, M., Yang, S., Famulari, D., Twigg, M., Bealey, B., Benham, D., Hayman, G., Lawrence, H., Vincent, K., Fagerli, H. & Simpson, D. (2009). Acid Deposition processes RMP2258 Final Report (SID5 Section 8): Extension. Project Report to DEFRA. Penicuik, UK & London: Centre for Ecology and Hydrology and DEFRA. Available online at: http://www.uk-pollutantdeposition.ceh.ac.uk/reports (verified 5 October 2010).Google Scholar
Hodge, C. A. H. (1991). Soils in Suffolk 1. Soil Survey Record No. 107. Silsoe, UK: Cranfield University, Soil Survey and Land Research Centre.Google Scholar
Hoffmann, C., Stockfisch, N. & Koch, H.-J. (2004). Influence of sulphur supply on yield and quality of sugar beet (Beta vulgaris L.) – determination of a threshold value. European Journal of Agronomy 21, 6980.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jourdan, O., Bourrié, B. & Etourneaud, F. (1992). Elaboration of curves of absorption of mineral elements. In La Betterave, pp. 18. Aspach-le-Bas, France: Ministere de l'Agriculture et de la Pêche.Google Scholar
Lane, P. W. & Payne, R. W. (1996). Genstat for Windows: an Introductory Course, 3rd edn. Harpenden, Herts, UK: Lawes Agricultural Trust.Google Scholar
Lang, B. (2009). Farm Business Survey Report 2007/2008: Crop Production in England. Cambridge, UK: Rural Business Research, University of Cambridge.Google Scholar
Last, P. J., Webb, D. J., Bugg, R. B., Bean, K. M. R., Durrant, M. J. & Jaggard, K. W. (1984). Long-term effects of fertilizers at Broom's Barn, 1965–82. In Rothamsted Experimental Station Report for 1984 Part 2, pp. 231249. Harpenden, Herts, UK: Rothamsted Experimental Station.Google Scholar
McGrath, S. P. & Zhao, F. J. (1995). A risk assessment of sulphur deficiency in cereals using soil and atmospheric deposition data. Soil Use and Management 11, 110114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McGrath, S. P. & Zhao, F. J. (1996). Sulphur uptake, yield responses and the interactions between nitrogen and sulphur in winter oilseed rape (Brassica napus). Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 126, 5362.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McGrath, S. P., Zhao, F. J. & Blake-Kalff, M. M. A. (2002). History and outlook for sulphur fertilisers in Europe. In Fertiliser Society Proceedings No. 497. York, UK: International Fertiliser Society.Google Scholar
Sexton, J. (1996). Sulphur survey of the sugar beet crop in England: 1995. British Sugar Beet Review 64, 5053.Google Scholar
Syers, J. K., Skinner, R. J. & Curtin, D. (1987). Soil and fertilizer sulphur in UK agriculture. In Fertiliser Society Proceedings No. 264. York, UK: International Fertiliser Society.Google Scholar
Thomas, S. G., Hocking, T. J. & Bilsborrow, P. E. (2003). Effect of sulphur fertilization on the growth and metabolism of sugar beet grown on soils of differing sulphur status. Field Crops Research 83, 223235.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhao, F. J., McGrath, S. P., Blake-Kalff, M. M. A., Link, A. & Tucker, M. (2002). Crop responses to sulphur fertilisation in Europe. In Fertiliser Society Proceedings No. 504. York, UK: International Fertiliser Society.Google Scholar