AN ABSTRACT OF THE THESIS OF
in
Donald A. Horneck
for the degree of
Soil Science
presented on
Doctor of Philosophy
April 25, 1994
Title: NUTRIENT MANAGEMENT AND CYCLING IN GRASS
SEED CROPS
Redacted for Privacy
Abstract approved:
John Hart
Grass seed production in Oregon's Willamette Valley traditionally relied on
open field burning for straw residue disposal and nutrient recycling. Changes in
residue management from open field burning to methods that remove straw coincided
with rapidly declining K soil test values. A survey of grass seed fields showed that
many fields had low soil pH. In contrast, P and K fertilization continued in spite of
soil test values 3 times critical levels. These findings raised questions about
fertilization and nutrition of grass grown for seed. In an effort to answer questions
about plant nutrient demand, soil nutrient supply and liming for grass seed
production, three field studies were implemented.
The first study measured nutrient and dry matter accumulation by 5 grass
species. Nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium were taken up in advance of dry matter
production in perennial ryegrasses and orchard grass. In contrast nutrient
accumulation by Kentucky bluegrass, tall and fine fescues coincided with dry matter
production.
The second study examined K nutrition of grass grown for seed. Fertilizer K
or K soil test level did not influence seed yield. High K soil test levels produced high
straw K concentration. Tall fescue accumulated a maximum of 300 kg K
ha1
where
as perennial ryegrass accumulated only 125 kg K ha'. The difference in K uptake of
these grasses was a function of both dry matter and K concentration.
The third study investigated P and lime applications to grass grown for seed.
P applications had no effect on seed yield or tissue P, hut increased inorganic P in
soil solution and conventional soil tests. Cool season grasses took up between 17 and
34 kg P ha. Lime increased soil pH but did not increase seed yield. Lime increased
soil solution pH and bases while decreasing metallic cation concentration. This study
did not provide a justification for P fertilization when soil test P is above 25 mg kg
P. Lime had little effect on Pi and conventional soil tests.
NUTRIENT MANAGEMENT AND CYCLING
IN GRASS SEED CROPS
Donald A. Horneck
A THESIS
submitted to
Oregon State University
in partial fulfillment of
the requirements for the
degree of
Doctor of Philosophy
Completed April 25, 1994
Commencement June 1995
APPROVED:
Redacted for Privacy
fessor of Crop and Soil Science in charge of major
Redacted for Privacy
Chairman of department of Crop and Soil Science
Redacted for Privacy
I )ean of Graduate S
Date thesis presented:
Typed by:
April 25. 1994
Donald A. Horneck
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I would like to thank first of all John Hart my advisor, friend, supervisor... He has
withstood my continued harassment and given me needed guidance. The few non gray hairs
his kids left I was more than willing to convert. Not only did we finish my degree, but the
soil testing laboratory moved, merged and survived. We conquered a quadrathon, ate lots of
Joan's goodies after races, survived videos and an insurmountable quantity of noon hour
bulishit. We had lots of fun, which is what life is about.
I would also like to thank my committee members. Neil Christensen for his
availability and willingness to act as a sounding board for some of my crazier ideas. Bill
Young for his cooperation on several articles that make up this thesis. His interest and help
greatly assisted my work. Mike Schulyer and Pete Nelson for the quality of their classes and
willingness to assist graduate students outside their department.
The Soil testing crew, currently Barb, Robert and Glenda, have been good friends and
a pleasure to work with. Their dedication and standards of quality have made my tenure at
OSU rew arding. Their work in the laboratory was the basis from which my reputation in the
fertilizer industry was built, thanks. The Soils department, secretaries, faculty and fellow
graduate students have been helpful and a joy to work with.
Most importantly, I would like to thank my wife Vicki. She has patently endured
moves, family stress and long hours so that I could fulfill a dream and finish my degree.
Between getting my M.S. at Illinois and a Phd at OSU, I'm sure she felt my attendance at
school would never end. Her love, dedication and understanding has made my stay at OSU
possible. During the process three children, Amethyst. Abigail and Brian. were born and
accumulated 10 years. Their demands have been enjoyable and a constant challenge.
Through it all, I am yet reminded of a quote by Mark Twain, "I have never let
schooling interfere with my education", to which I still subscribe.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION
References
CHAPTER 2. THE INFLUENCE OF SAMPLING INTENSITY,
LIM[NG, P-RATE AND METHOD OF P APPLICATION
ON P SOIL TEST VALUES
Introduction
Materials and Methods
Results and Discussion
Summary and Conclusions
References
CHAPTER 3. UPTAKE OF N, P, K, 5, Ca, Mg, Zn, Mn, Cu,
AND B BY Cool-season GRASSES
Introduction
Materials and Methods
Results
Discussion
Summary and Conclusions
References
1
8
11
11
13
14
16
26
27
27
30
32
39
42
56
(HAPTER 4. EFFECT OF SOIL K ON TISSUE K IN PERENNIAL
RYFGRASS AND TALL FESCUE
Introduction
Materials and Methods
Results and Discussion
Summary and Conclusions
References
58
(I'HAPTER 5. SOLUTION P IN TWO SOILS AMENDED
WITH LIME AND P
Introduction
Materials and Methods
Results and Discussion
Summary and Conclusions
References
77
CHAPTER 6. FURTHER ACTION
94
BIBLIOGRAPHY
95
58
60
62
68
75
77
79
81
85
92
Page
APPENDICES
Appendix 1. Data from chapter 2
Appendix 2. Data from chapter 3
Appendix 3. Data from chapter 4
Appendix 4. Data from chapter 5
100
101
108
121
140
LIST OF FIGURES
FIGURE
Page
2.1. Method of random sampling.
16
2.2. Relationship between Bray-Kurtz and sampling error
17
with sampling intensity for the unlimed plots.
2.3. Effect of soil pH and sampling error by sampling intensity
18
for unlimed plots.
2.4. Relationship of Bray-Kurtz and Olsen-P with random and
19
systematic sampling for banded plots.
2.5. Relation of Bray-Kurtz and Olsen P with P application method.
20
2.6. Relationship of Bray-Kurtz and Olsen P with P rate.
21
2.7. Relationship between Bray-Kurtz and sampling error with
22
sampling intensity for limed plots.
2 8. Effect of liming on Olsen and Bray-Kurtz levels.
23
2 9. Correlation of Olsen with Bray-Kurtz.
24
3.1. Dry matter accumulation for five grass species by heat unit.
43
3.2. Normalized uptake of N, P, K and S for Fawn, tall fescue by heat unit.
44
3.3. Normalized uptake of N, P, K and S for Rebel, tall fescue by heat unit.
45
3.4. Normalized uptake of N, P, K and S for Newport, Kentucky bluegrass
by heat unit.
46
3.5. Normalized uptake of N, P, K and S for Penniawn. fine fescue
by heat unit.
47
3.6. Normalized uptake of N, P, K and S for Linn, perennial ryegrass
by heat unit.
48
3.7. Normalized uptake of N, P, K and S for Pennfine, perennial ryegrass by
49
heat unit.
pg
3.8. Normalized uptake of N, P, K and S for Potomac, orchardgrass
by heat unit.
50
4.1. Effect of soil K on straw and seed K for tall fescue and perennial ryegrass.
69
4.2. Predicted straw K for tall fescue and perennial ryegrass from soil K.
70
4.3. Rate of change for straw K for tall fescue and perennial ryegrass
71
due to soil K.
4.4. Effect of soil K on straw K uptake for perennial ryegrass and tall fescue.
72
5.1. Effect of soil pH on Zn, Mn, Cu, Fe, and Al concentrations in
86
soil solution at Hyslop.
5.2. Effect of lime application on Soil test P,
TP and P in soil solution
87
and P in soil solution
88
at Hyslop and Saddle Butte.
5.3. Effect of P application on soil test P, TP,
at Hyslop and Saddle Butte.
LIST OF TABLES
Page
2.1. Coefficients of variation for lime rates and P rates at 0-15
and 0-2.5 cm depths.
3.1
Regression model of dry matter accumulation by heat units for five
grass species by heat unit.
25
51
3.2 Dry matter production and nutrient content of five grass
species by heat unit.
52
3.3 Uptake of N, P, K, S, Ca, and Mg at physiological maturity for five
55
grass species.
4.1
Seed yield and straw yield three year averages for tall fescue and
perennial ryegrass by K application, residue management and K fertility.
4.2 Logistic growth model parameters for foliar K response
of TF and PR to soil K.
73
74
Correlation of foliar K in TF and PR with Ca and Mg.
74
Analysis of variance for the effect of lime and P
application on select P availability parameters
at Saddle Butte and Hyslop sites.
89
5.2 Soil and solution pH at Saddle Butte and Hyslop
90
.3
I
as effected by lime treatments.
5.3
Correlation coefficients for metals in soil solution vs soil
solution and 1:2 pH for Hyslop and Saddle Butte sites.
91
NUTRIENT MANAGEMENT AND CYCLING
IN GRASS SEED CROPS
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
Seed production is important to Oregon's agricultural economy in both number
of acres and dollar value. Grass and legume seed crops occupied 500,000 acres in
Oregon in 1993 with gross sales of over $200,000,000 (Miles, 1993). Grass and
legume seed production accounts for seven percent of Oregon's agricultural
commodity sales.
Grass seed is produced throughout Oregon. Kentucky bluegrass is predominant
in Eastern and Southwestern Oregon while the Willamette Valley produces primarily
perennial ryegrass, annual ryegrass and tall fescue. Cool wet springs and poorly
drained soils make the Willamette valley ideal for grass seed production. Grass seed
crops are also well suited to the Willamette Valley's better drained soils but must
compete for acreage with a wide variety of vegetable, nursery, fruit and grain crops.
)uring 1993, 368,630 acres of grass seed were grown in the Willamette valley
iiaking it the primary seed producing region in the state (Young, 1994b).
Perennial ryegrass, annual ryegrass and tall fescue each ranked in Oregon's top
twenty agricultural commodity gross dollars sales in 1993. Perennial ryegrass and tall
fescue account for 43% of the grass and legume seed acreage in 1993 and 50% of
gross sales dollars (Miles, 1994). These two grasses are primarily grown in Benton,
Lane, Linn, Marion, Polk and Yamhill counties. Linn county produces more than
three times the tall fescue and perennial ryegrass seed than any other county.
Linn County's dominance of grass seed acreage results from the large area of
poorly drained soils that occupy its western portion. Combined with poorly drained
soils is a climate conducive to grass seed production. Winters are cool with high
temperatures between 40° and 50° F and low temperatures between 20° and 30°.
Precipitation exceeds transpiration from November through March. Soils are at or
near saturation during winter and early spring. Above ground grass growth during
winter is minimal because temperatures are low.
7
Spring in the Willamette Valley brings a gradual warming with a
corresponding increase in grass growth. During late April and May. cool-season
grasses flower, switching from vegetative to reproductive growth. Flowering may
continue into June depending on temperature and precipitation. Grass seed harvest
occurs in late June and July. Once harvest occurs, cool-season grasses become
dormant because little moisture is available for growth. They remain dormant through
the dry warm months of July, August, September and October. Fall precipitation
initiates limited amounts of grass growth but cool temperatures prevent significant
amounts of growth.
During fall, late winter and early spring, cool-season root growth occurs
depending on soil temperature. Cell division in root tips of cool-season grasses has
been found at temperatures as low as zero degrees centigrade (Stucky, 1941),
indicating roots are capable of growth during winter. Depending on year, active root
number where cool-season grasses are grown for turf, peaks in May or June then
decreases through summer with a secondary peak in late October or early November
Koski, 1983). Similar patterns would be expected in grass seed fields since water is
vailable and optimal temperatures exist during the spring and late fall. Root growth
easona1it\ in cool-season grasses is needed to understand nutrient uptake.
Total root number in the top 10 cm of soil for tall fescue and perennial
ryegrass varies between 20% and 90% and is dependent on stand age, season and
method of measurement (Koski, 1983). Most researchers find 50-80% of total root
length in the top 10 cm of soil and this varies seasonally (Garwood, 1967: Wilkinson
and Mays, 1979: Garwood and Sinclair, 1979). Roots initiated in the fall or winter
remain active for 4-10 months while those formed in the summer remain active for
one to three (Garwood, 1967: Parson and Robson, 1981). The large amount of roots
in the top six inch for perennial ryegrass and tall fescue may help explain the
effectiveness of 0-6 inch soil samples.
Root to shoot ratios (R:S) have been shown to have higher in tall fescue than
perennial ryegrass (Davidson, 1969). Tall fescue has also been shown to have higher
dry matter yields than perennial ryegrass when these grasses are grown for seed
(Horneck et al., 1988). Tall fescue will produce between 8.000 and 20.000 lb
a1
where as perennial ryegrass will produce 4,000 to 10,000 lb a1. Greater dry matter
production and higher R:S, indicates a more extensive root system may exist for
fescue. Differences in dry matter production and root mass between grass species, has
implications for straw management and nutrient uptake.
Tillering and fertile tiller number are integral to high seed yields. Fertile tiller
number controls seed yield barring late season deficiencies or drought (Young, 1988).
Residue management effects fertile tiller number not seed weight or seed number per
tiller (Stanwood, 1974: Smoliak and Johnston, 1968). Tillering in cool-season grasses
can be controlled by light intensity (Mitchell, 1953: Troughton, 1960: Robson, 1972:
Spirtz et al., 1972: Stanwood, 1974: Parsons and Robson, 1981: Ensigh, 1983).
l)ecreases in fertile tiller number, due to shading from straw, was thought to be the
reason for lower seed yields when residues are not burned after seed harvest
Stanwood, 1974).
Traditionally after seed harvest straw left on the field was burned. This
process is termed "open field burning". Open field burning was used to dispose of
straw, recycle selective nutrients, control volunteer seedlings, manage crown size and
control disease. Burning was economical and easy for a grass seed grower to
perform. Burning residues recycled nutrients such as K, Ca, Mg and P. Other
nutrients such as N and S were volatilized and lost from the field. Alternatives such
as baling straw, propane burning and composting had been considered economically
unfeasible to grass seed growers.
During the late 1980's and early 1990's, a change occurred from open field
burning to systems that removed straw. Straw disposal method changes were
precipitated by complaints about smoke and a smoke caused multiple fatality accident
on I-S. This accident resulted in a temporary moratorium on open field burning and
caused the legislature to limit the maximum acres that could be annually burned.
Since 1985, the number of acres open field burned in the Willamette Valley has
4
decreased from 214,787 to 73,075 (Young, 1994a). Since 1987, grass seed acres in
the Willamette valley have increased 21% (Young, 1994b).
The transition from open field burning to straw management systems where
residue is harvested occurred over the last five years. Once straw is removed after
seed harvest the general practice is to "crew cut" or flail chop standing residues as
close to the soil's surface as possible then vacuum sweep the field. Several variations
have been tried. Some growers, instead of crew cutting and vacuum sweeping,
propane burned their fields while others tried urea-sulfuric acid attempting to
eliminate residues on the field. Some growers crew cut and leave the remaining
residue on the field.
Harvesting straw depletes the soil nutrient supply, especially K, because large
amounts of high K content residue are annually removed. Residue management also
effects surface rooting. Root mass has been shown to decrease in only the surface 2.5
cm depth where residue has been harvested as compared to open field burning
Stanwood, 1974). Consequences rooting changes have on fertile tiller number, seed
ield and nutrient uptake is unclear.
Soil temperature and moisture differences may exist between burned and fields
where straw is mechanically removed. Field studies have been conducted on native
prairies demonstrating burning's effect on temperature. Soil temperature differences of
one to five degrees centigrade for burned vs clipped plots have been measured
(Hulbert, 1968). Burned plots were higher in soil temperatures throughout the
growing season but as the season progressed differences narrowed. Soil moisture
effects due to differences in straw management are currently being investigated in
Oregon (Chastain and Young, 1994). Differences in soil temperature and moisture
due to residue management may influence grass growth.
Current trends in residue management for tall fescue and perennial ryegrass
production are to finely chop back the entire straw load and let it decompose on the
soil surface. A flail chopper is used to grind straw finely enough so that it will settle
to the soil surface. Chopping back straw and leaving the residue is similar to open
field burning from a nutrient cycling stand point. K is recycled, nutrients such as N
and S which were volatilized in a burn are also recycled. Straw readily decomposes
and releases nutrients prior to next years crop demand. Because nutrients are
recycled, soil depletion and luxury consumption are of minimal concern unless seed
ield is affected.
Recycling of nutrients by open field burning in the Willamette Valley
minimized the need for grass seed fertilization for nutrients other than N and S.
Nutrients such as N and S are mobile in soil and able to leach as well as being
volatilized when straw is burned, thus they require annual application. Elements such
as P, Ca and Mg were recycled in an open field burn and are required by cool-season
grasses in small amounts, thus fertilization need was small. Potassium was also
recycled when grass seed fields were burned, but because of the large amounts of K
used by cool-season grasses it is an element that is continually applied.
Fertilization with sulphur, phosphorous and potassium for fine fescue, tall
I cscue, Kentucky bluegrass, orchardgrass and perennial ryegrass has historically been
eated similarly by Oregon State University and the grass seed growing community.
I ertilizer guides (FG) 6 (Doerge et al., 1982), 36 (Doerge et al.,1983), 44 (Doerge et
al.. 1982b). 45 (Doerge, et al., 1982c), and 46 (Doerge et al., 1982d) for these grasses
have identical critical levels for P and K. The critical level for P is 25 ppm and 100
ppm for K. Similar critical levels for P and K were also used in pasture fertilizer
guides: FG 16 (Gardner et al., 1984a) for grass pastures, FG 1 (Gardener et al.,
1984b) for white clover-grass pastures and FG 4 (Jackson et al., 1983) for subclovergrass pastures. Critical soil nutrient levels for grass seed crops were established with
no published research and based on a system which burned straw. Thus, they do not
account for differences between grass species in dry matter production or straw K
content. Systems that harvest straw must economically and environmentally balance
nutrient removal rates, soil test levels, fertilization and seed yield.
In contrast to fertilizer recommendations, soil pH recommendations by grass
species are made in OSU fertilizer guides. Kentucky bluegrass and orchardgrass
6
guides recommend a soil critical level pH of 6.0 where as the tall fescue and
perennial ryegrass guides recommend a critical soil pH of 5.5. Generally, OSU
recommends a critical soil pH above the point where yields will be negatively
affected. Lime is either top dressed to an established field or incorporated prior to a
new seeding. Lime incorporation at seeding is preferred to later surface applications.
Surface lime applications are assumed to be less effective than incorporation because
of
lower maximum recommended rates (2 t
a1
vs 5 t a') and lime's immobility in
soil. A surface lime application will effect soil pH in only the top one to two cm.
Little soil fertility research had been conducted for grass seed crops until a
nutrient status survey of 77 fields in the Willamette valley was completed in 1987
(1-Torneck et al., 1988). The survey precipitated questions regarding grass nutrition.
The primary questions dealt with soil pH, P and K. Soil pH in the survey was lower
than University guidelines while P and K levels were substantially higher. Soil P
lcvels in the top six inch averaged 80 ppm where K levels averaged 300 ppm and
i1 pH 5.2. Soil P and K levels were higher in the surface inch and pH was lower.
ugh soil test P and K levels in grass seed fields where high were puzzling, since no
:ocumentcd P deficiency exists for Willamette Valley grass seed fields. Explanations
br high soil test levels such as "substitution of P for lime" was given by fieldmen
and growers. "University recommendations are too conservative" was another reason
given for high soil test levels.
Soil test results should be the basis for lime, P and K fertilizer
recommendations. High P levels found in the soil survey and the higher P
concentrations in the surface inch compared to lower depths, raised the question
whether a traditional six inch or a surface one inch soil sample was appropriate to
asses fertilizer needs. Nutrient stratification could be effecting availability considering
possible root restrictions due to poor drainage. Soil sampling theory is known for "the
more subsamples that are combined the more consistent soil test results are."
Increases in sampling intensity should therefore decrease sample variability. Fertilizer
placement such as banding should theoretically increase soil variability making a
7
representative sample more difficult to obtain. The effect fertilizer and lime additions
has on increasing soil test variability in grass seed fields is unknown.
Cool-season grasses in the Willamette Valley could be more responsive to
fertilizer than OSU fertilizer guides predicted. Soil sampling problem as to not
getting reliable soil test results or not representing current nutrient distribution may
be influencing a soil tests effectiveness. Simultaneously to extension questions
regarding soil nutrient levels, growers asked 'what happens when we harvest straw
instead of burning?" Grass species and varieties differences regarding uptake and
consequent removal of plant nutrients needs to be documented. The amount of N, P,
S and K utilized by grass seed crops was of immediate concern. These questions
resulted in our interest to document grass nutrient uptake.
Perennial crop growth is complex. Temperature, plant kinetics, plant age,
environmental conditions and crop management all effect growth. When yield is
affected crop uptake and removal are likely to follow. Fertilization practices should
be adjusted based on soil tests to maximize yield yet minimize environmental effect.
The objectives of this research were to determine nutrient uptake of five cooleason grass species. Differences between tall fescue and perennial ryegrass varieties
as to when nutrient uptake occurs and quantity needed were also to be investigated.
In an attempt to answer questions, generated from the grass seed survey regarding
high soil test levels, two studies were designed to answer, how tall fescue and
perennial ryegrass respond to lime, P and K. The effect liming, P placement and P
rate has on P and pH soil test variability would be measured.
References
Chastain, I. and W. Young, 1994. Winter seminar.
Davidson, R.L. 1969. Effect of root/leaf temperature differentials on root/shoot ratios
in some pasture grasses and clover. Ann. Bot 33:561-569.
I)oerge, TA., H. Gardner and T.L. Jackson. 1982b. FG 44: Blue grass seed. Oregon
State Univ. Extn. Ser. Corvallis, Oregon.
l)oerge, l.A., H. Gardner and T.L. Jackson. 1982. FG 6: Fine fescue seed. Oregon
State Univ. Extn. Ser. Corvallis, Oregon.
Doerge, T.A., H. Gardner, T.L. Jackson and H. Youngberg. 1982c. FG 45: Orchard
grass seed. Oregon State Univ. Extn. Ser. Corvallis, Oregon.
[)oerge, l.A., H. Gardner, T.L. Jackson, and H. Youngberg. 1982d. FG 46: Perennial
ryegrass. Oregon State Univ. Extn. Ser. Corvallis, Oregon.
)oerge, T.A., H. Gardner and H. Youngberg. 1983. FG 36: Tall fescue seed. Oregon
State Univ. Extn. Ser. Corvallis, Oregon.
nsign, RD., V.D. Hickey and M.D. Bernardo. 1983. Seed yield of Kentucky
bluegrass as affected by post-harvest residue removal. Agron. J. 75:549-551.
Gardner, H., T.L. Jackson and W.S. McGuire. 1984a. FG 16: Perennial grass
pastures. Oregon State Univ. Extn. Ser. Corvallis, Oregon.
Gardner, H., T.L. Jackson and W.S. McGuire. 1984b. FG 1: Irrigated clover-grass
pastures. Oregon State Univ. Extn. Ser. Corvallis, Oregon.
Garwood, E.A. 1967. Seasonal variation in appearance and growth of grass roots J.
Br. Grassl. Soc. 22:121-130.
.
Garwood, E.A. and J. Sinclair. 1979. Use of water by 6 grass species. 2. Root
distribution and use of soil water. J. Agric. Sci. 93:25-35.
Horneck, D.A., and J.M. Hart. 1988. A survey of nutrient uptake and soil test values
in perennial ryegrass and turf type tall fescue fields in the Willamette Valley.
In: H.W. Youngberg (ed.). 1988 Seed Production Research. Dept. of Crop
Science, EXT/CrS 74. p. 13-14. Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR.
Hulbert, L.C. 1969. Fire and litter effects in undisturbed bluestem prairie in Kansas.
Ecol. 50:874-878.
Jackson, T.L., E.H. Gardner, W.S. McGuire and T.E. Bedell. 1983. FG 4: Subclover-.
grass pasture. Oregon State Univ. Extn. Ser. Corvallis, Oregon.
Koski, A.J. 1983. Seasonal Rooting Characteristics of five cool season grasses. M.S.
Thesis Ohio St. Univ.
Miles, S.D., 1994. 1993 Oregon county and state agricultural estimates. Special report
790. Oregon State Univ. Extn. Ser. Corvallis OR.
Mitchell, K.J. 1953. Influence of light and temperature on growth of ryegrass (Lolium
spp.). 1. Pattern of vegetative development. Physiologia Plantarum. 6:21-46
Parsons, A.J. and M. Robson. 1981. Seasonal changes in the physiology of S24
Perennial ryegrass (Lolium perenne L). 3. Partition of assimilates between root
and shoot during the transition from vegetative to reproductive growth. Ann.
Bot. 48:733-744.
Robson, M.J. 1972. The effect of temperature on the growth of S.170 fescue (Festuca
arundinacea). J. Appi. Ecol. 9:643-653.
'heffer, K.M. and J.K. Dunn. 1981. Anatomy, drought survival and rooting depth of
cool season turf grasses. Agron. Abstr. p. 128.
Smoliak, S. and A. Johnston. 1968. Germination and early growth of grasses at four
root-zone temperatures. Can. J. P1. Sci. 48:119-127.
Spiertz, J.H.J. and J. Ellen. 1972. The effect of light intensity on some morphological
aspects of the crop perennial ryegrass (Lolium perenne L. var. "Cropper") and
its effect on seed production. Neth. J. Agric. Sci. 20:232-246.
Stanwood, P.C. 1974. Influence of post-harvest management practices on plant
growth and seed yield of cool season grasses. M.S. Thesis. Oregon St. Univ.
Stuckey, I.H. 1941. Seasonal growth of grass roots. Am. J. Bot. 28:486-491.
Troughton, A. 1960. Further studies on the relationship between shoot and root
systems of grasses. J. Br. Grassl. Soc. 15:41-47.
Wilkenson, S.R. and D.A. Mays. 1979. Mineral Nutrition. pp. 41-74. In R.C. Buckner
and L.P. Bush (ed.) Tall Fescue. No. 20. Am. Soc. Agron. Madison, WI.
I0
Young, B. 1988. Personnel communication. Oregon State Univ.
Young, W.C. 1994a. Willamette Valley grass seed production and burning data.
1986-93. Personnel communication. Oregon State Univ.
Young, B. 1994b. Seed production. Iii Crop and soil news/notes. 8:2. pp. 6-8. Oregon
State Univ.
CHAPTER 2
THE INFLUENCE OF SAMPLING INTENSITY, LIMING, P-RATE AND
METHOD OF P APPLICATION ON P SOIL TEST VALUES
Introduction
The variability of soil testing results can be assigned to three sources: (1)
sampling error; (2) selection error; and (3) analytical error. Analytical error has been
lound to range from 5 to 10% (Graham, 1959). Selection error is the error that may
incur during sample processing such as grinding and drying. Selection error may or
may not be minimal depending on soil type and the processing methods used.
Sampling errors in soil testing have been found to be of a much greater magnitude
than analytical errors associated with laboratory procedures (Cline, 1944). With
improvement of analytical techniques and instrumentation, the difference between
sampling and analytical errors has hypothetically increased since 1944, because
ampling techniques have remained relatively unchanged.
A decision must be made by researchers and growers about the time and cost
f sampling compared to accuracy when deciding upon sampling intensity. A random
sampling pattern is typically used in field research plots, whereas growers' fields are
usually sampled systematically. Sampling within soil types and across large areas
with random, systematic and composite samples has been reviewed previously by
several authors (Petersen and Calvin, 1982; Sabbe and Marx, 1987). A systematic,
zig-zag pattern produces more reliable results than a random pattern (Petersen and
Calvin, 1982; Sabbe and Marx, 1987). Management, erosion and number of soil types
within a field are of much greater importance than field size in contributing to
sampling error (Graham, 1959). Kunkel et al.. (1971) sampled 24 small uniform
fields between 0.093 and 1.26 hectares in size and found coefficients of variation of
20 to 40% for P soil test levels within a field. These results indicated the importance
of soil heterogeneity on experimental data, and the possible invalidation of results
due to block by treatment interactions.
12
Addition of soil amendments and fertilizers increases soil heterogeneity,
especially where fertilizers have been banded. Sampling intensities must be adjusted
to account for this increased variation. Hooker (1976) found that 7 and 104
subsamples were required to obtain a representative sample with equal deviations
where P was broadcast and banded, respectively. Reed and Rigney (1947) analyzed a
uniform soil for P and determined that four samples were necessary to obtain
accuracy within ± 6 mg P/kg soil. On a nonuniform soil, 19 cores were necessary for
the same accuracy. To estimate pH, 7 cores for uniform soil and 18 for nonuniform
soil were necessary to be within 0.1 and 0.2 pH units respectively. Kunkel et al..
(1971) confirmed that a large number of subsamples are needed to obtain results
within 25% of the mean, even on small fields. They also determined that more
samples were needed to obtain a representative sample for soil P than for K.
Soil sampling is an integral part of soil testing. The heterogeneity of soils and
a samples' failure to represent field conditions can render analytical results useless. A
'epresentative soil sample is therefore a prerequisite for meaningful analytical results
Lnd an accurate fertilizer recommendation. The objectives of this study were to: (1)
measure sampling variation for Bray-Pl, Olsen P and pH at four sampling intensities;
(2) determine the influence of lime and P additions on sampling error (3) measure
changes in soil test P with altered PH; and (4) compare Bray-P 1 and Olsen P
extractants for detecting P additions.
13
Materials and Methods
The experiment was initiated in the fall of 1988 near Shedd, Oregon. The
experimental site was on a Bashaw clay soil (typic pelloxerert) with a Bray-P 1 of 8
mg/kg and a 2:1 water:soil pH of 5.2. A split plot design was used with three
replications in a randomized complete block arrangement. The main plots were limed
with 0 and 4.5 t CaCO3 equiv./ha. Subplots were rates of 0, 26.5, 53 and 79.5 kg
P/ha applied as either a surface band or broadcast. Subplot size was 9.1 m by 2.4 m.
Lime was applied and incorporated in the fall of 1988 prior to planting.
Perennial ryegrass (Lolium perenne) was seeded in 30 cm rows. Carbon was surface
banded over the rows at planting and the field was treated with 2.7 kg ai diuronlha.
After planting P was either surface broadcast or banded using phosphoric acid.
For soil sampling, each plot was overlaid with a 6.1 m by 2.4 m rectangle,
with lines every 30.4 cm using PVC pipe and nylon twine (Figure 2.1). Random
ample points were permanently marked for each sampling intensity so that the same
pot was sampled for each plot. Four sampling intensities (5, 10, 20 and 40 cores per
ample)
ere used for the 0-15 cm depth. A 0-2.5 cm sample was also taken at the
40 core intensity. Banded plots were also sampled systematically at the 40 core
intensity with 50% of the subsamples taken within the band.
Soil samples were air dried and ground to pass a 2 mm sieve. Each sample
was analyzed for pH (2:1, water:soil), Bray P-i and Olsen P (colormetrically) as
described by Horneck et al. (1989).
Means and standard deviations were calculated for each treatment over three
replications to examine variability. Data was subjected to analysis of variance to
differentiate between treatments.
14
Results and Discussion
Increasing sampling intensity from 5 to 40 random samples did not decrease
sampling error. P means or sampling errors by either Bray (Figure 2.2) or Olsen (data
not shown) extractants did not differ significantly between sampling intensities. Soil
pH means and sampling errors also did not change with sampling intensity (Figure
2.3). This is in contrast to previous work which has shown that sample variation
decreases as the number of subsamples is increased (Kunkel et al., 1971; Hooker,
1976). Breaking down the data in the current study into individual treatments showed
no trend toward decreased sampling error with increased sampling intensity. These
results suggest that a soil sample with 5 subsamples represented field-plot conditions
as well as one that contained 40. The number of samples and number of cores per
sample needed to represent a small field plot within a single soil type may not be
important if plots are sampled in an identical random pattern. Since no difference
'xisted between sampling intensities, Figures 2.4, 2.5, 2.7, and 2.8 contain data from
he 40 subsample intensity only.
Banding P has been shown to increase soil variability and result in higher
sampling errors than where P was broadcast (Hooker, 1976). This experiment showed
soil test P means and variability between broadcast and banded plots to be similar
using either the Bray-P 1 or Olsen extractants (Figure 2.5, LSD 0.05, Bray=l.7,
Olsen=3.6). A systematic sampling procedure, where one half the sample is obtained
within the fertilizer band, would increase the number of samples taken in space
where P had been applied, and thus was expected to increase soil test P values over a
random sample. No differences were observed between the random and systematic
samplings (Figure 2.4, LSD 0.05, Bray=1 .9, Olsen=4.0). The lack of differences
between band and broadcast and sampling method could be the result of a large soil
P buffering capacity and soil P fixation. However, since P fertilization increased
extractable P (Figure 2.6, LSD 0.05, Bray=2.4, Olsen=5.0), this should not be the
15
case. Possibly, the differences were hidden in the soil's natural variability and not
detectable after one P application.
Liming significantly increased pH to 6.4 and significantly decreased Olsen soil
test P (Figure 2.8, LSD 0.05, Bray=17, Olsen=3.6). The same trend was apparent for
Bray P but the differences were not significant. The addition of lime (Figures 2.2,
2.7) or P (Figure 2.6) did not increase soil P heterogeneity, as indicated by uniform
and randomness of sampling error bars for Bray P (Figures 2.2, 2.6, 2.7) and Olsen P
(Figure 2.7). Data from Olsen P is not all shown because it behaved the similarly as
Bray P. Liming has been shown to produce a more favorable microbial environment.
resulting in increased immobilization of P, perhaps accounting for the lower soil test
P when lime was applied (Dahl, 1977).
Olsen P and Bray P were highly correlated, with Bray P being approximately
one half of Olsen P for all samples (Figure 2.9). This is probably due to the high pH
(8.5) of the Olsen extracting solution and the resultant dissolution of iron and
aluminum phosphates which may then precipitate as hydroxides (Olsen and Sommers.
I 982). The possibility also exists for ligand exchange with the hydroxyl ion and
nteractions with organic phosphates.
Coefficients of variation (CV) averaged 3% and 24% for pH and P,
respectively (Table 2.1). Analytical errors calculated from soil standards analyzed
with the samples were 1.1% and 5-7% for pH and P, respectively. By subtracting
analytical errors from total error, an estimate of sampling error can be determined.
This results in approximately 2% and 20% error due to sampling for pH and P.
respectively. No discernible trend in CV was evident for P rates and lime treatments.
Any increase in variation due to P rate (Figure 2.6) was not observed in CV. Sample
variation for the 0-2.5 cm depth tended to be lower than the 0-15 cm for soil P, but
higher for pH.
16
Summary and Conclusions
Liming and P application had no effect on sampling errors after a single
application. Liming significantly decreased Olsen P. with Bray P showing the same
trend. Soil test P increased with P rate for both Olsen and Bray soil tests. Olsen P
was highly correlated and twice Bray P (r=0.8). Increasing sampling intensity from 5
to 40 subsamples did not decrease sampling error.
Based on this study a soil that is by appearances relatively heterogeneous
within a single soil type can be sampled within small areas with low sampling
intensities.
2.4 m
PVC PIPE
Figure 2.1. Method of random sampling.
17
mg/kg 30
20
10
0
10
20
40
50/50
SAMPLING INTENSITY (SAMPLES/PLOT)
Figure 2.2. Relationship between Bray-Kurtz and sampling error with sampling
intensity for the unlimed plots. (Error bars represent one standard deviation)
18
SOIL
pH
.1
/
5
10
20
40
50/50
SAMPLING INTENSITY (SAMPLES/PLOT)
Figure 2.3. Effect of soil pH and sampling error by sampling intensity for unlimed
plots. (Error bars represent one standard deviation)
1')
mg/kg 40
0 BRAY-KURTZ
OLSEN P
30
20
I'll
0
RANDOM
50/50
Figure 2.4. Relationship of Bray-Kurtz and Olsen P with random and systematic
sampling for banded plots. (Error bars represent one standard deviation)
20
mg/kg 40
BRAY-KURTZ
OLSEN P
30
20
10
0
BAND
BROADCAST
Figure 2.5. Relation of Bray-Kurtz and Olsen P with P application method. (Error
bars represent one standard deviation)
21
mg/kg 40
BRAY-KURTZ
OLSEN P
30
20
10
0
26.5
53
79.3
P APPLIED kg/ha
Fig 2.6. Relation of Bray-Kurtz and Olsen P with P rate. (Error bars represent one
standard deviation)
22
my/kg 30
20
10
5
10
20
40
50/50
SAMPLING INTENSITY (SUBSAMPLE/SAMPLE)
Figure 2.7. Relationship between Bray-Kurtz and sampling error with sampling
intensity for limed plots. (Error bars represent one standard deviation)
mg/kg 40
BRAY-KURTZ
OLSEN P
30
20
10
0
UNLIMED
LIMED
Figure 2.8. Effect of liming on Olsen and Bray-Kurtz levels. (Error bars represent
one standard deviation)
24
mg/kg 50
40
00
00 000
r=0.80**
00
30
00
0
006o8
osoo
0
20
0 0
0
0 0
9
0
0
00
0
10
0
20
BRAV-KURTZ (mg/kg)
10
Fig 2.9. Correlation of Olsen with Bray-Kurtz. **significt at 0.1 level.
30
"S
TABLE 2.1 Coefficients of variation for lime rates and P rates at 0-15 and 0-2.5 cm
depths.
*L± LIMED
**LO UNLIMED
BRAY-KURTZ
pH
P Rate
L0**
L+*
L+
LO
kg/ha
........................
%
OLSEN
L+
LO
.......................
0-15 cm DEPTH
0
2
3
37
36
19
23
26.5
3
3
17
32
5
21
53
3
4
33
27
28
19
79.3
3
3
32
28
37
34
2.8
3.3
29.8
30.8
22.3
24.3
average
0-2.5 cm DEPTH
0
1
6
29
22
20
14
26.5
3
3
25
25
12
23
53
4
5
24
22
33
13
79.3
4
3
19
19
21
27
average
3
4.3
24
22
21.5
19.3
STANDARDS:
LAST 6 MONTHS
1.5
7.3
10.9
WITHIN ANALYSIS
1.1
5.1
7.5
26
References
Cline, M. G. 1944. Principles of soil sampling. Soil Sci. 58:275-288.
Dahi, R. C. 1977. Soil organic phosphorous. Jn: N. C. Brady (ed). Advances in
Agronomy. 29:83-117. International Rice Institute. Manilla, Philippines.
Graham. E. R. 1959. Soil Testing. Univ. Mo. Agric. Exp. Sta. Bull. No. 734.
Hooker, M. L. 1976. Sampling intensities required to estimate available N and P in
five Nebraska soil types. Univ. Ne. M.S. Thesis.
Horneck, D. A., J. M. Hart, K. Topper, and B. Koepsell. 1989. Methods of soil
analysis used in the soil testing laboratory at Oregon State University. In Press.
Kunkel, R., C. D. Moore, T. S. Russell, and N. Holstad. 1971. Soil heterogeneity and
potato fertilizer recommendations. Amer. Pot. J. 48:163-173.
Petersen, R. G. and L. D. Calvin. 1986. Sampling. hi: A. Klute. (ed.) Methods of soil
analysis, 2nd edn. Part 1, pp. 33-52. Amer. Soc. of Agron, Madison, WI.
eed, J. F. and J. A. Rigney. 1947. Soil sampling from fields of uniform and nonuniform appearance and soil types. J. Amer. Soc. Agron. 39:26-40.
Sabbe, W. E. and D. B. Marx. 1987. Soil sampling: spatial and temporal variability.
in: J. R. Brown (ed.) Soil testing: sampling, correlation, and interpretation, pp.
1-14. Soil Sci. Soc. Amer. Madison, WI.
27
CHAPTER 3
UPTAKE OF N, P, K, 5, Ca, Mg, Zn, Mn, Cu AND B
BY Cool-season GRASSES
Introduction
Nutrient management for seed production of cool-season forage and turf
grasses is constrained by the lack of reported research. The problem is compounded
by the proliferation of new cultivars and changes in residue management that
influence nutrient cycling. Fertilizer trials on a variety of soil types, grass species and
residue management systems is not currently economically feasible.
Economic, agronomic and environmentally sound nutrient management requires
an understanding of differences in dry matter accumulation and nutrient concentration
between cool-season grass varieties and species. Matching fertilization to crop need
can be estimated by measuring crop uptake patterns. Fertilizer needs to be applied
nrior to plant demand but close enough that losses to groundwater or erosion are
ninimized.
Once growth and uptake patterns are known species and cultivar specific
iertilizer rates and timing can be approximated. Nutrient uptake for the annual
grasses, wheat, and corn are well documented and used in extension and industry
programs with producers. Producers of grass for seed and hay can use similar
information for fertilizer timing in cool-season forage and turf grasses.
The continued application of fertilizer when soil tests were three times Oregon
State Extension recommendations for cool-season grasses added to the interest of
documenting grass nutrient uptake through a growing season. Results from a survey
of 77 tall fescue and perennial ryegrass fields in the Willamette Valley showed
average soil test P to be 80 ppm and K to be 300 ppm (Horneck & Hart., 1988). The
established critical level for P is 25 ppm and 100 ppm for K (Doerge et al.,1982a:
Doerge et al.,1982b:Doerge et al.,1982c: Doerge et al.,1982d: Doerge et al.,1983).
Previous work showed that phosphorous concentrations in tall fescue and
perennial ryegrass tissue remain constant across soil test level making P uptake
dependent on dry matter production instead of soil test level, or fertilizer applied
(Horneck et al.,1992b). Cool-season grasses such as tall fescue and perennial ryegrass
when grown to maturity, have low P concentrations. 0.1 to 0.2% (Kelling and
Matocha. 1990). Concentrations tend to be lower where these grasses are grown in
cooler environments (Gerwing et al., 1991: Horneck et al., 1992b) and more variable
in warmer climates (Hillard et al., 1992).
Potassium is used by grasses in variable amounts. Tall fescue straw at seed
harvest will contain between 50 to 300 lb K
a1
depending on dry matter produced.
Potassium concentration at maturity will vary between 0.50% to 3.0% depending on
soil test level (Horneck et al. ,1992a: Kuhlmann, 1990). Changes in K soil test level
will effect plant K concentration as well the nutrition of other minerals such as Ca
and Mg (Grunes et al., 1992: Orlovius, 1992).
Nitrogen, P, K and S are nutrients most commonly applied to grass seed crops.
Nitrogen should be managed to meet crop demand as well as safeguard ground water.
I o insure efficient N use by plants, N must be applied close to peak demand at rates
matching crop uptake. Sulphur and nitrogen, because of their mobility in soil, are
upplied annually. Sulfur is less mobile in the soil and has a lower crop need than N.
Sulfur also in not a current environmental concern which combine to make fertilizer
timing less critical. Potassium and P are applied in the fall. The application of P and
K should be based on soil tests.
Rarely are cool-season grasses fertilized with Zn, Cu, Mn or B. Increasing
fertilizer purity, high yields and continued cropping history may create deficiencies
and a requirement for micronutrient fertilization in the future. Micronutrient
concentrations in grass species may increase where industrial and municipal wastes
have been applied to the soil. Metal concentrations reported here should provide
reference concentrations at several points during the growing season.
Objectives of this study are to compare dry matter accumulation and nutrient
uptake differences at five sampling dates between five grass species. Differences in
mineral uptake within tall fescue and perennial ryegrass species are also examined.
29
When nutrient uptake occurs relative to drymatter and how concentration changes
over a growing season is important for making fertilizer decisions.
30
Materials and Methods
Seven varieties, selected from a variety trial with four replications, were
sampled during 1988 from initiation of spring growth to physiological maturity for
seed production. The variety trial Was arranged in a random complete block design
and had been harvested for two previous seasons. Varieties sampled were Linn and
Pennfine perennial ryegrass (Lolium perenne); Fawn (pasture) and Rebel (turf-type)
tall fescue (Festuca arundinacea); Newport Kentucky bluegrass (Poa pratensis);
Potomac orchardgrass (Dactylis glomerata); and Pennlawn fine fescue (Festuca ruba).
Residue management after the 1987 harvest included straw removal followed
by propane flaming of the remaining stubble. Nitrogen was applied in the fall of 1987
across grass species at a rates of 32 lb a' and in the spring of 1988 prior to the
February, 23 sampling at 110, 80 and 140 lb a' for perennial ryegrass plus fine
lèscue, tall fescue plus orchardgrass and Kentucky bluegrass, respectively. Weed
control for each individual grass species was performed to conventional standards.
Whole plant samples were clipped from three feet of row from each of four
replications, dried, ground and analyzed for kjeldahl N and P. A perchioric digest was
analyzed by atomic absorption for K, Ca, Mg, Zn, Cu, Mn, colormetricaly with
azomethine-H for B and turbidimetrically for S. A 0.5 g sample was used for analysis
to decrease analysis sampling error. Growth of perennial ryegrass, and Kentucky
bluegrass was insufficient to sample on February, 23. Data were analyzed in AN OVA
as an unbalanced split-plot with the split being heat units. Linear models were
calculated with SAS though a single intercept to determine dry matter accumulation
differences between grasses (Engelstad, 1968). A single intercept linear model was
used to compare dry matter accumulation rates between grasses. Differences between
grass species and varieties within species was tested. Sigmoidal or individual linear
models could be used to accomplish the same objective. The single intercept model
was chosen for its simplicity.
n
Growing degree days, or heat units (HU) based on 0 degrees centigrade, from
January 1, were measured and plotted on graph X axis to enable future comparison
between years and growth stage. Heat units were calculated by taking the maximum
and minimum air temperatures and dividing by two, then summing across days. The
lowest air temperature used was 0 degrees centigrade and negative values were
corrected to zero. Grass growth during Oregon winters is controlled by temperature.
Cool-season grasses have been shown to grow at temperatures as low as 0 degrees
centigrade. The use of heat units instead of days should yield better estimates of
when fertilizers need to be applied in any given year. Heat units for harvest dates
were 250 HU (February 23), 378 HU (March 12), 564 HU (April 2 ), 819 HU (April
27) and 1470 HU (June 17). Sampling dates were concentrated in the early growing
season where fertilizers are more likely to be applied.
Normalized uptake was calculated to visualize nutrient uptake relative to dry
matter production or growth. Normalized uptake was calculated by taking uptake at
ll the sampling dates and dividing by uptake at 1470 HU. The product is then
multiplied by 100 to put results on a percent basis. Normalized uptake was then
statistically analyzed in ANOVA at each date.
Soil test levels from 0-6 inch for the plot area were pH
ppm, K
144 ppm and Ca
5.0, Bray-Pi - 154
4.9 meq 100g'. Based on OSU fertilizer guides pH was
below the 5.5 optimum for these grasses (Doerge et al., 1983), especially for
Kentucky bluegrass (Doerge et al., 1982b) and orchardgrass (Doerge et al., 1982c)
which recommend pH to exceed 6.0. Seed yield was not measured separately, but was
included in June biomass harvest, 1470 HU. Previous years' seed yields for this site
are reported by Youngberg and Young, 1988. Seed yields at this site in 1986 and
1987 are comparable to Western Oregon industry standards.
32
Results
Grass growth, in this study followed a sigmoidal or exponential pattern
depending on grass species when measured against time or days. Growth plotted
against heat units yields linear response curves (Fig. 3.1). Kentucky bluegrass,
between 250 - 1470 HU was the only grass to have a distinctly sigmoidal shaped
growth response curve (Fig. 3.1). Dry matter leveled off between 819 and 1470 HU
for Kentucky bluegrass, where the other six grasses maintained linearity through 1470
F-lU.
Dry matter accumulation for the seven grasses initiates at approximately 200
HU (Fig. 3.1). Little dry matter accumulates between 200 and 400 HU. Differences in
growth between grass species and varieties become apparent at 500 HU. Six of the
grasses accumulated 40-50% of their total dry matter by 800 HU, Newport was the
highest at 62% (Fig 3.1). The tall fescue varieties had the most growth and Kentucky
bluegrass the least at all the harvest dates. Dry matter at the final harvest varied
)etween 5427 lb
a1
for Kentucky bluegrass and 15879 lb a for Fawn tall fescue.
I'awn was significantly greater in dry matter than Rebel, the two tall fescue varieties,
at 1470 HU, p=O.OS (Table 3.2). The two perennial ryegrass varieties were not
different in dry matter production at 1470 HU, p=O.lO. Linn, perennial ryegrass
however, averaged 1182 lb
a1
more dry matter than turf type Pennfine.
Dry matter production was variable between blocks with differences of 100%
at the final sampling date. Variation at the early sampling dates between replications
exceed 700%. Variability is caused by the irregular growth of cool-season grasses.
They tend to grow in clumps, leaving areas within rows with either a high or low
plant population. Average plant density does not exist.
Dry matter accumulation was estimated with a model. A linear model with a
common intercept was used to determine differences in growth rate between grasses
(Table 3.1). Slope in the model is a measure of above ground dry matter
accumulation rate. The seven grass varieties varied in dry matter accumulation rate
on
from 4.84 lb a' HU1 to 13.32 lb
a1 HU1
and were divided into four groups.
Kentucky bluegrass had the lowest dry matter accumulation rate, Fawn tall fescue the
highest, Rebel Tall fescue the second highest and the remaining 4 grasses (Table 3.1).
The model under estimated dry matter production for orchard grass, fine fescue and
perennial ryegrass (Fig 3.1). Kentucky bluegrass and orchard grass had the poorest fit
to the model. Both Kentucky bluegrass and orchard grass had R2=0.84 with the other
three grass species ranging from R2=0.89 to 0.98 The sigmoidal growth curve of
Kentucky bluegrass and orchardgrass resulted in a lower degree of fit to the linear
model.
The tall fescue varieties were significantly different in dry matter accumulation
rate and both had higher dry matter accumulation rates than the other grasses (Table
3.1). The two perennial ryegrass varieties did not differ in dry matter accumulation
rate at p=O.lO but were different at p=0.lS. Linn and Fawn, the forage varieties, had
higher accumulation rates within species than the corresponding turf varieties
pennfine and Rebel.
Consistent trends between grasses and across sampling dates for N are difficult
10
discern. Nitrogen concentration tended to increase and decrease between sampling
date with out much pattern (Table 3.2). Nitrogen concentration between 819 and 1470
HU was dependent on grass species. Nitrogen concentration remained constant
between 819 and 1470 HU for tall fescue. During this period, N concentration in
perennial ryegrass and orchardgrass decreased and increased in Kentucky bluegrass
and fine fescue. At maturity, fine fescue had 3.05% N, which was greater than
Kentucky bluegrass at 2.57% N, both had higher N concentrations at maturity than
the other three grass species. Linn perennial ryegrass had a lower N concentration at
1470 HU than the other grasses.
Nitrogen uptake, except fine fescue, follows the same ranking observed in dry
matter production. Nitrogen uptake at 1470 HU is divided into four groups, Fawn tall
fescue at 304 lb a, fine fescue and Rebel tall fescue averaging 256 lb
orchardgrass at 203 lb
a1
a1,
and perennial ryegrass and Kentucky bluegrass which
34
averaged 142 lb
a1
(Table 3.3). The exception to N uptake following dry matter is
fine fescue which had 3.05% N at 1470 HU where the rest of the grasses averaged
1.83% N. The high N content of fine fescue makes it a moderate producer of dry
matter at 8659 lb
a1
and a high user of at N 265 lb
a1
(Table 3.3).
Average sulphur concentration fell from 0.3% to 0.14% over the growing
eason (Table 3.2). Significant differences in S concentration between grasses exist at
il1 sampling dates narrowing as grasses matured. Since S concentrations were similar
between grasses at 1470 HU, S uptake was similar to dry matter production at 1470
1-lU (Table 3.3). Sulfur uptake at 1470 HU ranged from 22.3 for Fawn tall fescue to
.6 lb a' for Kentucky bluegrass, the highest and lowest in dry matter production.
respectively.
Potassium concentration in all seven grasses increased during the period 250
through 819 HU then decreased during 819 to 1470 HU (Table 3.2). Concentration at
78 HU averaged 2.3% across grasses, 2.9% at 819 HU and 1.9% at 1470 HU.
)rchard grass was consistently higher in K concentration across sampling dates. Linn
perennial ryegrass was significantly lower in K than the other grasses at maturity.
Potassium concentration within a species between the tall fescue and perennial
ryegrass varieties were significantly, p=O.lO, different at 1470 HU (Table 3.2).
Pennfine and Rebel, the turf type varieties, were higher in K concentration than the
forage varieties Linn and Fawn, respectively. They were not consistently different
throughout the growing season.
Potassium uptake at the final harvest ranged from 121 lb a for Kentucky
bluegrass to 295 lb a' for Fawn tall fescue (Table 3.3). Tall fescue and orchardgrass
were higher in K uptake than perennial ryegrass fine fescue and Kentucky blue grass
at 1470 HU. Within grass species, the tall fescue and perennial ryegrass varieties
were not significantly different in K uptake. Higher dry matter levels by the forage
varieties and higher K concentrations for the turf result in no difference in K uptake.
Phosphorous, Mg and Ca concentration remained relatively constant or
decreased gradually over growing season (Table 3.2). Perennial ryegrass had the
35
highest P concentrations of the seven grasses at 819 HU and the lowest at 1470 HU.
Fine fescue and Kentucky bluegrass were higher in P concentration than the other
three species at 1470 HU. The tall fescue varieties were not different from each other
at 1470 HU.
Phosphorous uptake at 1470 HU varied between 12.3 lb a' and 30.6 lb a for
Linn and Fawn, respectively (Table 3.3). Fine fescue utilized 29.9 lb a* The two
perennial ryegrass varieties had the lowest P uptake averaging 14.0 lb a1 and did not
differ from each other. Phosphorous uptake for Linn perennial ryegrass at 12.3 lb
a1
was significantly less than Kentucky bluegrass at 18.9 lb a'. Phosphorous uptake for
Pennfine was less than Kentucky bluegrass but the difference was not significant
(Table 3.3). Fawn tall fescue at 30.6 lb P
a1
was significantly more than Rebel at
22.6 lb a*
Calcium concentrations varied between sampling dates (Table 3.2). Few
differences in Ca concentration were observed between grasses. Calcium uptake at
I 470 HU was divided into a low group, Kentucky bluegrass and fine fescue averaging
5.2 lb a. and a high group consisting of the other three grass species, averaging
31.1 lb a' (Table 3.3). These Ca levels represent a ton of lime per acre every 15 and
30 years to replace the Ca removed in straw and seed for the high and low groups.
respectively.
Magnesium concentrations were consistent across samplings for each grass.
Rebel tall fescue was higher in Mg concentration than the other six grasses at all
sampling dates. Fawn tall fescue and Orchardgrass tended to be higher in Mg
concentration than Kentucky bluegrass, fine fescue and perennial ryegrass. Both
perennial ryegrass varieties had 0.11 % Mg at maturity. Magnesium uptake ranged
from 23.0 lb a' for tall fescue to 5.56 lb
a1
for Kentucky bluegrass. Tall fescue and
perennial ryegrass did not differ within species. Magnesium uptake differences
followed dry matter because of the consistency between grasses (Table 3.2).
The micronutrients Zn, Cu, Mn and B as well as Ca, Mg, S and P tended to
decrease in concentration with increased growth or heat units. Concentration
0
variability between grasses also tended to decrease with increased growth.
Micronutrient concentration and uptake data is intended to provide reference for
future work. Grasses are not currently being fertilized with micronutrients in Oregon
except via bio-solids or manures.
Zinc concentrations varied between 20-32 ppm in the early growing season.
Early season (250-564 HU) Zn concentrations tended to increase or decrease between
sampling without any pattern. However, as the season progressed to 1470 HU Zn
levels became less variable and decreased to less than 15 ppm (Table 3.2). Six of the
seven grasses contained between 0.1-0.2 lbs/a Zn at the final sampling. Kentucky
bluegrass took up significantly less Zn, 0.07 lbs/a at 1470 HU, than the other grasses.
Manganese concentrations varied between grass species throughout the growing
season (Table 3.2). Manganese concentration decreased from 150-325 ppm to 100-225
ppm from 250 HU to 1470 HU as a result of early uptake then dilution in dry matter.
Fine fescue and orchardgrass were consistently high in Mn concentration. Kentucky
}luegrass did not demonstrate elevated Mn concentrations compared to the other
rasses. Manganese uptake at 1470 HU was separated into 3 groups with orchardgrass
the highest (2.5 lb ad), and Kentucky bluegrass the lowest (0.6 lb a1). The remaining
erasses utilized between 1 and 2 lb
a1
Mn.
Copper concentration varied between 3 and 11 ppm for these grasses and in
general decreased from an average 6 ppm to 3 ppm over the growing season (Table
3.2). Orchardgrass however, decreased from 11 ppm to 3 ppm. Copper concentrations
remained constant between 819 and 1470 HU (Table 2). Because Cu concentrations
between grasses were similar at 1470 HU differences, in Cu uptake are attributed to
dry matter accumulation. Cu uptake by these grasses ranged from 0.02 to 0.05 lb a1.
Boron concentration decreased through the first four sampling dates then
increased (Table 3.2). Boron concentration varied between 1 and 11 ppm at 250 HU,
1-4 ppm at 519 HU and 6-9 ppm at 1470 HU. Tall fescue and Kentucky bluegrass
tended to have the lowest B concentrations, but this was variable between sampling
dates. The grasses were divided into three groups for B uptake with Kentucky
o -,
-'I
bluegrass the lowest at 0.05 lb a' at 1470 HU. The mid-range group Rebel tall
fescue, perennial ryegrass and fine fescue, varied between 0.07 to 0.09 lb a1. Fawn
tall fescue and Orchardgrass had 0.11 and 0.1 lb B a' at 1470 HU, respectively.
Normalization of data is a simple way to determine when nutrient uptake
occurs relative to growth or dry matter production (Fig. 3.2-3.8). When Nutrient
accumulation occurs relative to observed growth is important for making fertilizer
decisions. Growth is the visual indicator that growers use to decide N, P, K and S
fertilizer timing. Normalized uptake of the seven cool-season grasses studied is
divided into two groups, grasses that accumulate nutrients in advance of drymatter
and grasses where uptake and growth occurs in close proximity to each other.
Nutrient uptake is species and nutrient specific. Grasses tended to accumulate P and
K farther in advance of growth than N and S.
Nutrient uptake and dry matter production closely coincided for Tall fescue
Fig 3.2 and 3.3), Kentucky bluegrass (Fig. 3.4) and fine fescue (Fig. 3.5).
\Jormalized uptake curves for these grasses were linear when compared to grasses
that accumulate nutrients prior to growth. Nitrogen uptake rate decreased between 569
md 819 FlU then increased between 819 and 1470 HU. Nitrogen uptake also tended
to lag behind dry matter in this group at 819 HU. Fine fescue for example had
accumulated 50% of its dry matter at 819 HU, but only 31% N. Fine fescue had
accumulated 29% N by 569 HU. Fawn tall fescue had accumulated 50% of both dry
matter and N at 819 HU. Sulfur uptake closely coincides with dry matter for tall
fescue (Fig 3.2 and 3.3). Sulfur uptake for fine fescue and Kentucky bluegrass
precedes growth by 15%. Potassium uptake at 819 HU occurred 12% to 15% in
advance of dry matter production. Fawn (Fig 3.2), the only pasture grass in this
group, accumulated K 30% in advance of dry matter at 819 HU.
Perennial ryegrass (Fig 3.6 and 3.7) and orchardgrass (Fig 3.8) are the grasses
where nutrient uptake precedes growth or dry matter production. Normalized nutrient
uptake curves are sigmoidal shaped compared to grasses where uptake and growth
coincide. Uptake and drymatter occurs at the same rate prior to 400 HU. Uptake
0
precedes dry matter once 500 HU have been accumulated. Linn perennial ryegrass
accumulated 38% of its drymatter at 819 HU but 50% S, 73% K, 95% N and 140%
P. Phosphorous uptake precedes K, N and S. Sulphur in this group of grasses was the
only nutrient which uptake coincided with dry matter.
Discussion
Tall fescue and perennial ryegrass varieties differ in their intended usage. Fawn
and Linn are pasture varieties, where as Rebel and Pennfine are newer varieties bred
for turf. The forage varieties, bred for dry matter yield, produced more dry matter
than the turf varieties. Turf varieties tend to be higher in nutrient concentration than
forage.
The reasons for the inconsistent behavior of N concentration between grasses
and sampling dates is unclear. Further research is needed to determine whether late N
uptake in grasses like fine fescue and Kentucky bluegrass is necessary for current
years seed yield or fall growth and next seasons seed. Late season N uptake may be
related to fine fescue and Kentucky bluegrass producing stolens. Late season N
uptake would coincide with spring N mineralization. Nitrogen concentration needs for
seed yield are complicated by these grasses being bred for turf Turf color requires
High N, whether this same level of N is needed to produce good seed yields in
Llnknown. Late N use may be luxury consumption relative to seed yield. Higher
nutrient concentration of turf varieties for elements such as N and K is observed
through out this study.
Differences in N concentration and uptake early in the growing season can be
used in making N fertilizer rate and timing decisions. Perennial ryegrass and
orchardgrass accumulated 60-90% of their N by 819 HU (Fig. 3.6 to 3.8). In contrast,
the remaining grasses accumulated 3 1-52% (Fig. 3.2 to 3.5) of their total N by 819
HU. Nitrogen fertilization for perennial ryegrass and orchardgrass production should
occur in the spring prior to 819 HU. Nitrogen applications for the other grass species
studied can be delayed if late season N is needed for seed production. The early N
uptake of perennial ryegrass makes timing of split N applications difficult because
80% of its N has been taken up prior to 819 HU. The other grasses studied would
require 40-50% N application at 200 to 300 HU with the rest applied at or near 819
40
HU. During Oregon's wet winter months N applications need to be closely matched to
grass demand to maximize N uptake, fertilizer efficiency and minimize N losses.
These grasses tend to be good N scavengers, evidenced by N-rates for tall
fescue totaling 122 lb a' and N uptake averaging 275 lb a1. Nitrogen rates are
difficult to recommend from this study since there is an incomplete understanding on
N required for seed yield compared to N needed to maintain a green field.
The reason potassium concentration increases over much of the growing season
ibilowed by a decrease after 819 HU is unclear. A possible explanation is that during
later growth stages K is being diluted in dry matter. In addition, the dilution may be
compounded by surface K being unavailable due to soil moisture depletion since soil
tests indicate adequate K at the surface. Potassium concentration was higher in turf
than forage varieties.
Normalizing K to express uptake as percent of total, shows that 80% of K
uptake for these grasses occurs between 378 and 819 HU. Potassium, P and S
èrtilization for grass seed production normally occurs in the fall or early spring. The
mmobilitv of K in soil minimizes the need for split or late season applications.
Typical straw P concentration average less than 0.1% at seed harvest in July
Ibr tall fescue and perennial ryegrass (Homeck et al., 1991). The elevated P levels in
this study for tall fescue at 1470 HU are attributed to seed being included at final
harvest. Perennial ryegrass P levels dropped from the highest of the seven grasses at
819 HU to the lowest at 1470. The reason for this decline is unknown. Other grasses
such as Kentucky bluegrass and fine fescue increased in P concentration while the
remaining grasses decreased slightly.
The high Mn concentration in orchardgrass may be linked to low soil pH, 5.0,
at this site. Elevated Mn concentrations in soil solution are one of the principle
reasons for yield reduction in low pH soils. Orchardgrass and Kentucky bluegrass
have higher soil pH requirements than the other grasses in this study and would thus
be more likely to respond to lime and possibly more susceptible to Mn toxicity.
41
Kentucky bluegrass did not show elevated Mn levels. With a lime application, Mn
levels in orchardgrass would be expected to decrease.
42
Summary and Conclusions
Dry matter accumulation varied between grasses and was linear. Concentration
of P. Ca. Mg and S remained constant or fell gradually over the growing season. The
tall fescue and perennial ryegrass forage varieties were higher in dry matter than the
turf The turf varieties tended to be higher in N, P and K. Tall fescue was higher in K
than perennial ryegrass. Turf grasses tended to accumulate some nutrients after 819
Iju.
Nutrient accumulation for these grasses was divided into two groups. Perennial
ryegrass and orchardgrass which accumulated nutrients in advance of growth and Tall
fescue, Kentucky bluegrass and fine fescue which nutrient uptake coincided with dry
matter.
Fertilization requirements is dependent on grass variety and species. S is
generally taken up early, prior to 500 HU and would need to applied between 200
nd 400 HU. Potassium is utilized later, 800 HU, but is applied in the fall making
ming less critical. Potassium demand varies by species and variety. Turf and high
iry matter grasses such as tall fescue will require more K than Kentucky bluegrass
and perennial ryegrass.
Nitrogen amounts are difficult to specify from this study. Timing of N to
insure fertilizer efficiency can be recommended. Perennial ryegrass and orchard grass
need all N applied prior to 800 HU. The other grasses could have an application of
30-40% of spring N applied after 800 HU.
43
20000
2 15000
5000
C
['I
200
600
1000
1400
HEAT UNITS
- Fawn,TF
v Pennlawn,FF
o LinnPR
Newport,BG
Potomac,OG x Rebel,TF
a
D Pennfine,PR
Figure 3.1. Dry matter accumulation for five grass species by heat unit.
44
100
680
Q)
N
---------
1-
-I
40
20
1
--P
-,
600
1000
1400
Heat Units
Figure 3.2. Normalized uptake of N, P. K and S for Fawn, tall fescue by heat unit.
45
100
0
1-.r----,Th.*-
1::
-
I
N40
2O
200
600
1000
1400
Heat Units
Figure 3.3. Normalized uptake of N. P, K and S for Rebel, tall fescue by heat unit.
46
100
1iI
ctj
a-
r;iii
a)
N
0
IsI
20
z
PIII]
600
1000
1400
Heat Units
Figure 3.4. Normalized uptake of N, P. K and S for Newport, Kentucky bluegrass by
heat unit.
47
100
80
(
N40
ci)
EW
ç2o
600
1000
1400
Heat Units
Figure 3.5. Normalized uptake of N, P. K and S for Permiawn, fine fescue by heat
unit.
48
150
o
125
aioo
50
z025
Pills]
600
1000
1400
Heat Units
Figure 3.6. Normalized uptake of N, P. K and S for Linn, perennial ryegrass by heat
unit.
49
8O
ct
II
°-60
-,
N40
2O
-
-I-.ff--_-----
-I
4-- --f'!--'I
I!AiIS]
600
1000
1400
Heat units
Figure 3.7. Normalized uptake of N, P. K and S for Pennfine, perennial ryegrass by
heat unit.
50
100
80
a-o
N40
a)
20
600
1000
1400
Heat Units
Figure 3.8. Normalized uptake of N. P. K and S for Potomac. orchardgrass by heat
unit.
heat unit.
Table 3.1. Regression model of dry matter accumulation by heat units for five grass species by
GRASS
REGRESSION COEFFICIENT
----- lb a HU1 ----------
INTERCEPT
MODEL USED
-2056
Tall fescue (Fawn)
11.89A***
Perennial ryegrass (Linn)
7.40
Kentucky bluegrass
4.32 D***
Perennial ryegrass (Pennfine)
6.28 C***
Fine fescue
6.91 C***
Orchardgrass
6.79 C***
Tall fescue (Rebel)
9.94 B***
DRY WT.
a
MODEL
= 0.97
R2
+b1X1+b2X2...b7X7
*** Significant at P=0.0l
U-'
H
Table 3.2. Dry matter production and nutrient content of five grass species by heat unit.
Sampling
GRASS
Tall fescue, Fawn
Perennial ryegrass,
Linn
----------------------- 1-IFATUNITS ------------------------250
378
564
819
147()
25(1
378
DRY MATTER
1470
%
----------
238
1726
4074
7301
15879
3.04
3.14
3.08
1.90
2.00
0
337
646
1469
1564
4006
3390
11394
5427
2.65
3.38
3.37
3.03
2.19
-.--
1.06
2.57
1278
2521
2093
2731
3760
4331
5290
5366
9841
2.84
2.40
3.29
3.08
3.08
3.01
3.69
2.93
2.48
1.83
2.44
2.05
8659
11726
12521
1717
3.45
4.24
3.11
P11 OS PH 0 RO US
%
Linn
819
N ITROGEN
---------- lb/a -----------
Kentucky Bluegrass
0
Perennial ryegrass,
Penntine
()
443
Fine fescue
186
1321
Orchard grass
303
851
Tall fescue, Rebel
710
1370
LSD (0.10) across samplings and grasses
Tall fescue, Fawn
Perennial ryegrass,
564
(1.29
0.27
0.26
0.20
-.---
0.26
0.29
0.29
0.31
0.26
0.25
0.33
0.22
Kentucky Bluegrass
-.--0.33
Perennial ryegrass,
Pennfine
-.--0.28
Fine fescue
0.25
0.24
Orchard grass
0.33
0.33
Tall fescue, Rebel
0.20
0.26
LSD (0.10) across samplings and grasses
1.68
3.05
1.66
1.98
0.47
POTASSIUM
------------
0.24
1.74
%
2.72
2.95
3.04
2.88
1.87
0.11
1.84
0.27
0.34
2.03
2.48
2.25
2.83
2.66
2.25
0.34
0.16
0.35
0.17
0.18
0.05
2.02
1.72
2.78
2.39
2.79
2.33
3.26
2.76
3.26
2.55
3.27
2.83
0.23
0.29
0.25
-.-1.82
2.45
1.94
1.55
1.84
2.03
2.02
2.18
0.29
Ui
t\)
Table 3.2. Continued.
----------------------- HEATUNITS
Sampling
Tall fescue, Fawn
Perennial ryegrass,
Linn
250
378
564
819
1470
250
378
0.36
0.40
0.25
0.36
0.18
0.18
0.16
0.14
0.14
-.---.---
0.42
0.39
0.52
0.48
0.45
0.34
0.47
0.44
-.
-.
0.15
0.14
0.16
0.14
0.15
0.13
0.11
0.44
0.35
0.42
0.42
0.44
0.37
0.28
0.34
0.44
-.
0.13
0.22
0.26
0.14
0.13
0.20
0.23
0.16
0.13
0.19
0.22
0.15
0.13
0.14
0.19
0.11
0.31
0.42
0.45
0.12
0.40
0.36
0.30
0.19
0.14
-.---
0.25
0.26
0.28
0.24
0.21
-.--0.27
0.26
0.21
0.32
0.29
0.34
0.33
and grasses
0.28
0.24
0.29
0.30
0.24
0.19
0.23
0.24
-.---
0.19
0.10
0.10
0.15
0.19
0.014
ZINC
% ------------
Kentucky Bluegrass
Perennial ryegrass,
Pennfine
Fine fescue
Orchard grass
Tall fescue, Rebel
LSD (0.10) across samplings
1470
0.27
SULFUR
Linn
819
CALCIUM
MAGNESIUM
----------% ------------------------ % ----------
Kentucky Bluegrass
Perennial ryegrass,
Pennfine
-.--0.62
Fine fescue
0.23
0.31
0.33
0.34
Orchard grass
Tall fescue, Rebel
0.31
0.40
LSD (0.10) across samplings and grasses
Tall fescue, Fawn
Perennial ryegrass,
564
ppm ----------
21.3
20.5
28.8
24.0
11.8
0.15
0.10
26.8
22.5
30.5
25.0
19.3
17.3
14.3
13.0
0.16
0.12
0.16
0.16
0.038
30.0
31.5
23.0
21.5
23.0
31.0
20.3
22.8
23.5
17.3
15.0
14.0
15.3
14.3
12.3
6.7
30.0
28.0
20.3
15.8
Ui
w
Table 3.2. Continued.
Sampling
250
378
564
819
1470
250
378
MANGANESE
Tall fescue, Fawn
Perennial ryegrass,
Linn
190
160
119
235
209
152
164
152
163
142
189
125
192
221
112
Kentucky Bluegrass
Perennial ryegrass,
Pennfine
246
Fine fescue
290
345
320
Orchard grass
303
Tall fescue, Rebel
199
189
LSD (0.10) across samplings and grasses
Tall fescue, Fawn
Perennial ryegrass,
Linn
208
320
236
270
159
162
142
6.5
BORON
ppm
1.0
3.0
-.-.-
4.0
0.8
Kentucky Bluegrass
Perennial ryegrass,
Pennfine
-.4.5
Fine fescue
9.0
4.5
11.3
5.3
Orchard grass
Tall fescue, Rebel
6.8
1.5
LSD (0.10) across samplings and grasses
1470
ppm ----------
5.3
40.4
819
COPPER
------------ ppm ----------204
564
7.0
10.8
5.0
6.0
5.3
3.3
3.2
4.8
6.3
4.4
5.4
2.8
3.3
3.0
4.0
5.0
6.3
8.3
5.3
4.5
6.2
6.7
4.9
3.5
3.0
3.5
3.5
3.4
3.5
3.4
4.0
0.63
-----------0.3
6.3
4.3
0.3
2.3
0.8
8.3
8.3
2.3
2.0
2.8
5.3
0.8
0.5
1.5
1.3
7.5
8.3
9.3
6.5
1.8
Ui
Table 3.3. Uptake of N, P, K, S. Ca and Mg at physiological maturity for five grass species.
Nutrient
N
P
K
S
Ca
Mg
UPTAKE AT 1470 HU
GRASS
lb/a
--------------56
52
23
43
27
48
56
22.5
12.6
5.6
10.8
8.2
232
262
22.3
16.7
5.6
15.9
9.9
17.9
19.9
34
3.1
6.7
2.3
Tall fescue, Fawn
Perennial ryegrass,Linn
Kentucky Bluegrass
Perennial ryegrass,Pennfine
Fine fescue
Orchard grass
Tall fescue, Rebel
304
30.6
295
123
141
162
12.2
18.9
15.7
265
203
247
29.9
20.8
22.6
175
121
184
176
LSD (0.10)
47
4.8
17.1
23.7
u-I
u-i
56
References
Doerge, T.A., H. Gardner and T.L. Jackson. 1982. FG 6: Fine fescue seed. Oregon
State Univ. Extn. Ser. Corvallis, Oregon.
Doerge. T.A., H. Gardner and T.L. Jackson. 1982b. FG 44: Blue grass seed. Oregon
State Univ. Extn. Ser. Corvallis, Oregon.
1)oerge. l.A., H. Gardner, T.L. Jackson and H. Youngberg. 1982c. FG 45:
Orchardgrass seed. Oregon State Univ. Extn. Ser. Corvallis, Oregon.
I)oerge. T.A., H. Gardner and H. Youngberg. 1983. FG 36: Tall fescue seed. Oregon
State Univ. Extn. Ser. Corvallis, Oregon.
l)oerge, l.A., H. Gardner T.L. Jackson, and H. Youngberg. 1982d. FG 46: Perennial
ryegrass. Oregon State Univ. Extn. Ser. Corvallis, Oregon.
1ngelstad. O.P., 1968. Use of multiple regression in fertilizer evaluation. Agron. J.
60:3 pp.327-329.
ierwing. J.. R. Gelderman and E. Twidwell. 1991. Nitrogen and phosphorous
fertilization of cool-season grass. S. Dakota St. Univ. Brookings S. Dakota.
irunes, D.W., J.W. Huang. F.W. Smith, P.K. Joo and D.A. Hewes. 1992. Potassium
effects on minerals and organic acids in three cool-season grasses. J. Plant
Nutr. 15:1007-10025.
Ilillard, J.B., V.A. Haby and F.M. Hons. 1992. Annual ryegrass response to limestone
and phosphorous on an ultisol. J. plant Nutr. 15:1253-1268.
Horneck, D.A., and J.M. Hart. 1988. A survey of nutrient uptake and soil test values
in perennial ryegrass and turf type tall fescue fields in the Willamette Valley.
Iii: H.W. Youngberg (ed.). 1988 Seed Production Research. Dept. of Crop
Science, EXT/CrS 74. p. 13-14. Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR.
Horneck, D.A., J.M. Hart. 1 992b. Third-year response of tall fescue and perennial
ryegrass to lime and phosphorus during a four year study. pp. 6-8. In: W.C.
Young III (ed.) 1991, Seed Production Research. Dept. of Crop Science.
EXT/CrS 89. Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR.
57
Horneck, D.A., J.M. Hart. W.C. Young III and T.B. Silberstein. 1992a. Potassium for
grass seed nutrition. pp. 3-6. In: W.C. Young III (ed.) 1991. Seed Production
Research. Dept. of Crop Science, EXT/CrS 80. Oregon State University,
Corvallis, OR.
Kuhlmann. K., 1990. Importance of the subsoil for the K nutrition of crops. Plant and
Soil. 127:129-136.
()rlovius, K., 1992. Potash fertilization of grassland with special consideration of K
removals. Potash review. 1:1-7
Youngberg, H.W., W.C. Young. 1990. Oregon forage and turf grass variety seed trial,
1986-87. Dept. of Crop Science, Oregon State University, Corvallis,
OR.Ext/CrS 80. Corvallis Or.
CHAPTER 4
EFFECT OF SOIL K ON
PERENNIAL RYEGRASS AND TALL FESCUE
Introduction
Grass seed is grown on 370.000 acres in the Willamette Valley. Oregon. Tall
fescue and perennial ryegrass accounted for 50% of the acreage and 100,000.000
dollars in gross sales during 1993. Tall fescue and perennial ryegrass produce 5,000 to
20,000 kg straw ha1 per year. Historically, residues left after seed harvest were
burned which recycled elements such as K. Over the last five years changes to
systems that harvest straw have interrupted nutrient cycling that occurred with
Nurning. Potassium once left on the field is now being removed in straw. During 1985
ver 200.000 acres were burned in Oregon, by 1993 only 70,000 acres were burned.
he decrease in burned acreage is more dramatic when considering grass seed acreage
rom 1987 to 1993 increased 21%. Soil K can be significantly influenced after a
ingle years residue management (Horneck et al., 1991). Soil K and K removal rates
have been studied in grasslands (Orlovius, 1992), but only recently in grass seed
lelds.
A survey of 77 Willamette Valley perennial ryegrass and tall fescue field's in
1 987 showed K soil tests averaged 300% of Oregon State University
recommendations (Horneck & Hart, 1988). Current OSU fertilizer guides state 100 mg
kg1
as K soil test critical level for perennial ryegrass and tall fescue (Doerge et al..
1982 Doerge et al., 1983). Grass seed crops utilize between 50 and 400 kg K ha'
depending on grass type, variety and soil test K. Uptake when soil tests were 144 mg
K kg' varied between 196 kg K ha1 for perennial ryegrass and 300 kg K ha' for tall
fescue (Horneck et al., 1993).
Spring wheat K uptake has been shown to occur from different layers in the
soil depending on K soil test (Kuhlmann, 1990). Potassium utilized by wheat from the
subsoil was dependent on topsoil K. Where surface K levels were high less K was
obtained from subsoil. However, when surface soil K levels were low wheat was able
59
to obtain a higher percentage of its K from the subsoil. To get an adequate prediction
of K response subsoil and surface K levels need to be measured.
Perennial ryegrass and tall fescue differ in dry matter production, K uptake
and K concentration at seed harvest (Horneck et al., 1993). TaIl fescue produces more
dry matter and has higher K concentrations than perennial ryegrass. Potassium
concentration in tall fescue and perennial ryegrass increases to 32.5 g
kg1
during the
late winter and spring months then decreases to less than 20 g K kg prior to seed
harvest. This increase then decrease depending on grass maturity was observed where
soil test K was 144 mg kg1. Conversely, Ca and Mg gradually decreased over the
growing season for tall fescue and perennial ryegrass.
Potassium concentrations required for cool-season grass seed growth are
unknown. Survey results indicate that the 100 mg kg1 K critical soil test level are
thought by growers to be conservatively below grass need even though a K deficiency
n cool-season grass production has never been documented in the Willamette Valley,
)regon.
Logistic growth models are useful to describe how these grasses respond to soil
K. Logistic growth models have been used to describe tall fescue and perennial
ivegrass response to N applications (Overman and Wilkenson. 1992 Overman and
Wilkenson. 1993). Models have also been used to describe nitrogen application
spacing in fescue pastures (Vigil et al.,1993). Logistic growth models in this study
were used to approximate affect soil test K has on K concentration in tall fescue and
perennial ryegrass from field trials.
The objectives of this study are to determine the responsiveness of tall fescue
and perennial ryegrass to soil test K. From these results fertilizer recommendations
will be estimated.
Materials and methods
Four sites planted to perennial ryegrass and tall fescue with high and low soil
test K were located in the Willamette Valley, OR. Each site was treated with open
field burn and vacuum sweep residue management treatments, in combination with
potassium fertilization, K-0 and K-+. Initial 0-15 cm K soil test levels for the two tall
fescue sites were 218 and 55 mg kg* The two perennial ryegrass sites had 164 and
78 mg K kg1. Fall K-+ rates were 33.5 kg ha for 1988 and 1989 and 100 kg ha' in
1990. The high K tall fescue site was located on Woodburn SiL a fine-silty, mixed.
mesic Aquultic Argixeroll. The remaining three sites were Dayton SiL fine,
montmorillonitic, mesic, Typic Albaqualfs. The tall fescue cultivars were Martin and
Rebel II and the perennial ryegrass were Regal and Pleasure. Straw yield, seed yield
and soil test levels were sampled annually at each site. Sites were soil sampled in
June at the 0-2.5 and 0-15 cm depths, 1990 soil sampling also included samples to a
depth of 60 cm. Tissue and seed samples were analyzed for K, Ca and Mg. Soil
samples were analyzed for 2:1 pH, Bray-Pi, K, Ca and Mg as described by Horneck
et al., 1989. At the 218 mg K kg site the annual burn plots were moved after the
1 989 harvest as the result of the stand being destroyed from the burn.
Data was analyzed in ANOVA in a factorial arrangement with years as the first
split. The second split was fertility which were sites chosen for K level. Grass type,
straw management and K application were the remaining factors taken in sequence.
Experimental comparisons between fertility for factors such as seed and straw yield
have been confounded with site and variety differences.
Logistic response models (EQ 1) used to estimate foliar K concentration as a
function of soil test level (5) have three parameters: K(max) the maximum, R a slope
factor and N(0) the minimum. Model parameters were calculated using PCNONLIN
version 4.2. The rate function, equation 2, of delta straw to delta soil is the first
derivative of equation 1.
61
Straw K concentration =
K(max
I +(K(max)-N(0))
N(0)
(1)
*
e
Straw K concentration / Soil = R*S((K(max)S)/K(max))
(2)
62
Results and discussion
Three year average seed yields were not affected by K application (Table 4.1).
In addition, seed yield averaged across entire experiment produced no difference
between K-+ at 1499 kg seed
ha1
and K-U at 1487 kg seed ha1. Similarly, straw
management did not affect seed yield. Seed yield response to K fertilization, though
not significant, was evident where residues were removed (vacuum sweep: K-+=1289
kg ha', K-0=1235 kg ha'). However, three year averages show no significant
advantage to K fertilization where residues were removed at either the low or high K
soil test sites for either tall fescue or perennial ryegrass (Table 4.1).
Perennial ryegrass yielded more seed than tall fescue, 1601 kg
ha1
vs 1384 kg
hafl, respectively. Seed yield was affected by year and fertility (location). The high K
sites tended to have higher seed yields but this outcome was dependent on year and
grass. Seed yield differences between years appear to be linked to climatical factors
not stand age. Tall fescue seed yields were 1126 kg
ha1
in 1989, 1741 kg ha' in 1990
and 1285 kg ha1 in 1991.
Potassium concentration in the seed was affected by fertility, grass type and
straw management. Differences in K due to treatments were small (Fig 4.1). Mean K
concentration was 5.3 g K kg' seed for this study with a 5.5% coeficient of variation
(CV). Because of low the low CV, least significant differences were 0.12 g K kg'
seed. Perennial ryegrass seed had higher K concentrations than tall fescue, 5.4 g K kg
seed vs 5.2 g K kg1 seed, respectively. Potassium concentration in seed for the
straw management treatments averaged 5.4 g K
kg1
for the burned treatments and 5.2
g K kg (p=O.O5) where residues were removed. Seed from the high K sites had K
concentrations averaging 5.6 g K kg' while average seed K concentration at the low
K sites was 5.0 g K
kg1
seed. Potassium concentrations across fertility is confounded
by location and grass variety. Seed K concentration was not effected by K application
when averaged across fertility. However, the fertility by K application and straw by K
application interactions were significant (p=O.OS). Potassium applications increased
(33
seed K concentration only at the low fertility sites from 4.8 g
kg1
to 5.1 g kg1. Seed
K concentration increased from 5.0 g kg' to 5.4 g kg due to K applications where
residues were harvested, K fertilization had no effect where residues were burned.
Potassium fertilization had no effect on seed K at the high K sites or where residues
were burned.
Potassium uptake in the seed averaged 5.12 kg ha1 with a maximum of 10 kg
1ia. Grass type, fertility and K application did not affect K uptake in seed. Soil test K
did not effect seed K level or K uptake (Fig. 4.1). Where residues were removed K
uptake by seed was 6.2 kg K ha compared to burned treatments with 5.7 kg K ha*
Several four way and the five way interactions were significant for seed K uptake
(pO.l 0). Significant interactions between years and fertility are not surprising due to
climatical differences between years and its effect on seed yield. Differences between
sites and varieties contribute to interactions with fertility. Differences in seed K
concentration due to treatments, though statistically significant, are of minimal
importance when considering total K removal where residues are harvested. Removal
where straw is burned, while still less than 10 kg K
ha1,
is the primary K loss from
the field.
Straw yield increased from 4463 kg ha' in 1989 to 8337 kg ha' in 1991
averaged across grasses and treatments. Perennial ryegrass straw yield significantly
increased from 3830 kg ha' in 1989 to 7060 kg
yield increased from 5095 kg
ha1
ha1
in 1991 while tall fescue straw
to 9613 kg ha1. Increases in straw yield appears
linked to stand age and less dependent on climatical factors than seed yield. Tall
fescue produced more straw, 7936 kg had, than perennial ryegrass. 5712 kg ha'.
Straw management and K application did not effect dry matter. The K application by
fertility interaction was significant at p=0.07. Potassium fertilization at the high K
sites depressed straw yield (K-+6694 kg ha', K0=r6808) where at the low K sites
fertilization tended to increase straw yield (K-+=6951 kg ha', K-06839 kg ha').
Three year straw yield averages for the vacuum sweep treatments were higher at all
four sites where K was applied (Table 4.1). Conversely annual burn straw yields were
64
lower at all four sites where K was applied. These differences result in a significant
(p=O.O7) K application by fertility interaction.
Potassium concentration in tall fescue and perennial ryegrass straw was
affected by soil test K, grass type, straw management and K application (Fig. 4.1). A
significant Fertility by K application interaction showed that K concentration in tall
fescue and perennial ryegrass straw increased with K application at the low K sites.
Potassium applications at the high K sites did not effect straw K concentration. Tall
fescue at the low K sites had K concentrations averaging 5.9 g K
straw was harvested and 8.6 g K
kg1
kg1
straw where
where straw was burned.
Potassium concentration in perennial ryegrass straw at the low K sites behaved
similarly to tall fescue. Where perennial ryegrass residues were removed K
concentrations averaged 6.6 g K
kg1
kg1
straw and where residues were burned 9.5 g K
straw. Lower K levels due to vacuum sweeping appear to be the result of lower
soil K. Soil test K at the low K perennial ryegrass site was 49 mg K
kg1
soil where
residues were harvested and 69 mg K kg where residues were burned. Straw K
concentration independent of year is a function of soil test K (Fig. 4.1)
Soil K at the 2.5 cm and 15 cm depths were affected (p=zO.05) by residue
management. The three year 2.5 cm soil K average for all the burned plots was 304
mg K
kg1
soil, the vacuum sweep treatments averaged 188 mg K kg1 soil. Tall
fescue because of larger amounts of dry matter and higher K concentrations in straw
affected soil K levels more than perennial ryegrass. Tall fescue 15 cm soil tests were
394 mg K kg' soil where residues had been burned. Where residues were harvested
soil K was 201 mg K kg' soil, a difference of 193 mg K
kg1
soil. Three year
averages for the perennial ryegrass treatments differed by 39 mg K kg' soil at 15 cm.
Potassium concentration in tall fescue and perennial ryegrass straw increased
with increasing soil test K at the low K sites. Potassium concentration in tall fescue
and perennial ryegrass was unaffected by soil test K at the high K sites. Potassium
concentration in tall fescue and perennial ryegrass were similar to each other when
65
soil tests were below 100 mg K kg' soil. Where fertility was high, perennial ryegrass
averaged 13.4 g K kg' where as tall fescue averaged 21.9 g K kg (Table 4.2. Fig.
4.1). Potassium concentrations are soil test dependent. Differences between grasses in
this study are confounded by location. However, based on earlier uptake work, turf
type tall fescue will be higher in K concentration than turf type perennial ryegrass
(Homeck et al., 1993). Foliar K of 13.4 g kg' and 21.9 g kg' for perennial ryegrass
and tall fescue represents K at harvest, respectively, K concentrations during winter
and spring will be higher.
Logistic growth models (EQ. 1) can be used to predict straw K concentration
relative to soil test K (Fig 4.2, Table 4.2). Logistic growth models help us understand
how perennial ryegrass and tall fescue respond to K. The model parameter N(0) is
predicted even though no concentrations below 4 g K kg exist in this study. For
adequate growth perennial ryegrass and tall fescue probably need 5 g K kg in straw
at harvest. Potassium straw concentration in tall fescue and perennial ryegrass respond
similarly to soil K when soil tests are below 100 mg kg' (Fig 4.2). Potassium
concentrations in perennial ryegrass and tall fescue straw behave differently when soil
test K exceeds 100 mg K kg soil (Table 4.2). Tall fescue and perennial ryegrass
reach maximum K concentration at different soil test K. The similarities and
differences between tall fescue and perennial ryegrass are evident in the predicted
model parameters. Similar slopes (R) and N(0) in the logistic growth model between
grass species reinforce the similarity of K concentrations to soil test K (Table 4.2). A
predicted maximum K concentration for tall fescue of 21.9 g kg' and for perennial
ryegrass had 13.4 g kg* Maximum K concentration was the only model parameter
that was different between the two grass species.
Change in straw K concentration relative to soil test K (E. 2) is plotted in
Figure 4.3. Perennial ryegrass and tall fescue reach maximum rate of K concentration
change at 45 mg K
kg1
soil and 90 mg K
kg1
soil test K, respectively. These peaks
are where soil K has its largest effect on tissue K concentration and is the inflection
point from the logistic growth model. Growth due to additional K has ceased,
66
therefore additional K to the plant either via fertilizers or increased soil test K is not
being diluted but used to increase K concentration in the straw. Rate of change in
straw K concentration due to increased soil K, decreases because foliar K
concentration as it approaches its maximum changes with decreasing efficiency. The
law of diminishing returns continues until soil K no longer has an effect on straw K.
Maximum K concentration is reached. Maximum K concentration in straw at harvest
br perennial ryegrass occurred at 200 mg K
kg1
soil and 325 mg
kg1
for tall fescue.
Potassium uptake by tall fescue and perennial ryegrass in straw is effected by
K level and dry matter production. Tall fescue not only has higher K concentration it
also produces more dry matter than perennial ryegrass. These differences between
perennial ryegrass and tall fescue species are reflected in K uptake and the fertility by
grass interaction (Fig. 4.4). tall fescue and perennial iyegrass were similar in K uptake
at low fertility sites but significantly different at the high sites. Tall fescue can
remove in excess of 300 kg K
ha1
where perennial ryegrass has the potential to
remove 100 kg K ha1. Potassium uptake in figure 4.4 is what is removed when straw
is swathed at a 10 -15 cm height, crew cutting then vacuum sweeping removes
additional K. Potassium uptake response to soil K is dependent on year because dry
matter increased with year. Foliar K seems to be more independent of year. Open
field burning or chopping back straw is a 25-300 kg
ha1
K application depending on
soil test and the amount of dry matter. Straw's effect on soil K was emphasized by
straw management (vacuum sweep=135 mg kg1, bum=l 74 mg kg') increasing soil K
at p=O.O5 where as K fertilization did not (K-+=160 mg kg1, K-0=150 mg kg1).
Open field burning or chopping back straw is in effect a 25-300 kg
ha1
K
application depending on grass species, soil test and dry matter produced. Straw's
effect on soil K was emphasized by open field burning increasing soil K where K
fertilization did not. Soil test K levels above 50 mg
100 mg
kg1
kg1
for perennial ryegrass and
are associated with Luxury consumption where the plant is taking up
more K than is necessary for it to manufacture seed or straw. Why grass varieties,
species and cultivars use different amounts of K in unclear. The preference for K over
Ca Na. and Mg may be linked to soil mobility, preference for charge balance and a
lack of plant root regulation (Table 4.3). Whether higher foliar K concentration
improves winter hardiness or disease resistance has yet to be determined.
Straw K concentrations as low as 3.5 g K kg straw were observed in this
study. A K concentration of 6 g K kg has been shown to be necessary to maintain K
specific metabolic processes in perennial ryegrass in a greenhouse study (Baily, 1989).
Low K concentrations decreased straw yield when soil test K was below 100 ppm and
only showed indications of effecting seed yield where straw was removed. Seed yield
and straw yield tended to increase with K application, at the low the low K sites,
where straw was harvested due to lower tissue and soil K concentrations..
Potassium concentration in residue effected Ca and Mg concentrations (Table
4.3). Potassium's affects on Ca and Mg has been measured by Grunes et al., 1992)
Magnesium and Ca concentration were negatively correlated with K in straw at
harvest. Magnesium had correlation coefficients with K of -0.86 for perennial ryegrass
and -0.90 for tall fescue. Calcium was not as correlated with K as Mg with correlation
coefficients averaging -0.61. Calcium and Mg were positively correlated with each
other.
Summary and Conclusions
Managing straw K concentration is of minimal importance where open field
burning and chopping back straw are used to manage residues because K is recycled.
Ierennial ryegrass can take up 112 kg K
ha1
when soil tests are greater than 150 mg
K kg1
soil. Potassium concentration will not increase when soil tests exceed 150 mg
K kg1
soil. When soil test are less than 100 mg
ha1
kg1
K, a K application of 30-50 kg K
should supply enough K for vegetative and reproductive growth in perennial
ryegrass. When K soil tests are greater than 100 mg K
kg1
soil, a K application is
unwarranted.
Tall Fescue can utilize 300 kg K ha when soil tests are in excess of 300 mg
kg1
K. Tall fescue utilizes more K than perennial ryegrass. Higher K concentrations
dnd more dry matter yields a larger potential for K uptake with tall fescue. Tall fescue
nd perennial ryegrass K concentration have the same slope in their response to soil
cst K. Potassium concentration will not increase when soil tests exceed 325 mg K kg
soil. Potassium concentrations above 10.0 g
kg1
are not needed for seed or
vegetative yield. Fertilizer applications of 50-100 kg K ha' should only be considered
for tall fescue when soil tests are below 150 mg kg* When soil K is above 150 mg
kg', K fertilization will only increase K content and uptake in the straw.
30
a
0)
a,
0
20
U)
U)
Cl)
o10
S
1.
4-.
C')
0
0
100
200
300
400
0-15 cm Soil K, mg/kg
TALL FESCUE
TF SEED
500
EJ PERENNIAL RYE
OPR SEED
Figure 4.1. Effect of soil K on straw and seed K for tall fescue and perennial
ryegrass.
70
25
a)
20
r2=.85 --------- TALL
FESCUE
-
15
--- r2=.69 -------------
10
H
PERENIAL
RYEGRASS
I'
Cl)
5
iI
0
100
200
300
400
0-15 cm Soil K, mg/kg
Figure 4.2. Predicted straw K for tall fescue and perennial ryegrass from soil K.
71
D)
-
D)
0(I)
I
0
100
200
300
400
0-15cm Soil K, mg/kg
Figure 4.3. Rate of change for straw K for tall fescue and perennial ryegrass due to
soil K
72
350
-c
-
300
U
250
H
0
D150
100
a
H
50
0
100
200
300
400
500
0-15 cm SOIL K, mg/kg
- TALL FESCUE
PERENNIAL RYE
Figure 4.4. Effect of soil K on straw K uptake for pereimial ryegrass and tall fescue.
73
Table 4.1 Seed yield arid straw yield three year averages for tall fescue and perennial
rvegrass by K application, residue management and K fertility.
Treatments ----------
1ERT
GRASS
RESIDUE
KAPP n
SEED
STRAWY
-kgha1
low
TF
FC
K-+
12
1289
7822
low
TF
FC
K-U
12
1235
7698
low
TF
AB
K-+
12
1268
7778
lOW
TF
AB
K-U
12
1260
8370
low
PR
FC
K-+
12
1528
5558
low
PR
FC
K-U
12
1503
5460
low
PR
AB
K-+
12
1531
6198
low
PR
AB
K-U
12
1536
6277
high
TF
FC
K-+
12
1655
8796
high
TF
FC
K-U
12
1572
8465
high
IF
AB
K-+
12
1339
7117
high
TF
AB
K-U
12
1449
7435
high
PR
FC
K-+
12
1659
5887
high
PR
FC
K-U
12
1659
5364
high
PR
AB
K-+
12
1716
5433
high
PR
AB
K-U
12
1675
5514
NS
NS
LSD 0.05 within grass and fertility
FC=flailchop and vacuum sweep, AB=annual burn
FERT=K fertility
74
Table 4.2. Logistic Growth model parameters for foliar K response of TF and PR to
soil K.
Model parameter
Estimate
TF
Standard Error
PR
TF
PR
---gKkgstraw--K(Max)
21.9**
13.4**
0.559
0.342
2.9
2.7
0.706
0.746
(0)
g kg1 straw per mg kg' soil
R (Slope)
0.217
0.322
0.046
0.0655
** Significant at p=O.OS
[able 4.3. Correlation of foliar K in TF and PR with Ca and Mg.
GRASS
TYPE
PR
TF
nutrient
Mg
K
---------------------------------- r -------------0.86***
0.68***
0.545***
0.80***
0.58***
Mg
I
Significant at p=O.O5
Ca
Mg
Ca
75
References
Bailey, J. S., 1989. Potassium-sparing effect of calcium in perennial ryegrass. J. Plant
Nutrition. 12:1019-1027.
Doerge, T.A.. H. Gardner, T.L. Jackson, and H Youngberg. 1982. Perennial ryegrass.
FG 46. Or. St. Univ., Corvallis, OR.
Doerge. TA., H. Gardner, and H Youngberg. 1983. Tall fescue. FG 36. Or. St. Univ..
Corvallis, OR.
Grunes, D.L., J.W. Huang, F.W. Smith, P.K. Joo, and D.A. Hewes. 1992. Potassium
effects on minerals and organic acids in three cool season grasses. J Plant Nutr.
15: 1007-10025.
1-lorneck. D.A., and J.M. Hart. 1988. A survey of nutrient uptake and soil test values
in perennial ryegrass and turf type tall fescue fields in the Willamette Valley.
jfl: H.W. Youngberg (ed.). 1988 Seed Production Research. Dept. of Crop
Science, EXT/CrS 74. p. 13-14. Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR.
Torneck. D.A., J.M. Hart, and W.C. Young III. 1993. Uptake of N.P.K and S by five
cool-season grass species. 111J992 Seed production research at Oregon State
University. W.C. Young III ed. Dept. Crop and Soil Sci, Or St Univ. Ext/CrS
93. pp. 20-23.
ilomeck. D.A., J.M. Hart, W.C. Young III and T.B. Silberstein. 1991. Potassium for
grass seed production. th 1990 Seed production research at Oregon State
University. W.C. Young III ed. Dept. Crop and Soil Sci, Or St Univ. Ext/CrS
4/91. pp. 20-23.
Kuhimanri, H., 1990. Importance of the subsoil for the K nutrition of crops. Plant and
Soil. 127:129-136.
Orlovius, K. 1992. Potash fertilization of grassland with special consideration of K
removals. Potash Review. 1:1-8
Overman, A.R., and S.R. Wilkenson. 1992. Model evaluation for perennial grasses in
the Southern United States. 1992. Agron J. 84:523-529.
Overman, A.R., and S.R. 1993. Wilkenson.Modeling tall fescue cultivar response to
applied nitrogen. Agron J. 85:1156-1158.
76
Vigil, M.F., D.E. Kissel, M.L. Cabrera, C.W. Raczkowski. 1993. Optimal spacing of
surface-banded nitrogen on Fescue. Soil Sci Soc Am J 57:1629-1633.
77
CHAPTER 5
SOLUTION P [N TWO SOILS AMENDED
WITH LIME AND P
Introduction
Results from a 1987 survey of Willamette Valley grass seed fields showed
stratification of P and soil pH within the surface 15 cm of soil. Soil pH averaged 0.2
pH units lower for 2.5 cm samples than observed in 15 cm samples. The survey also
showed a majority of the 77 fields sampled had pH values less than 5.2 and P levels
greater than 50 mg kg1 (Horneck and Hart, 1988). The average Bray-Pi soil test in
the survey was 80 mg kg1. Recent concerns regarding P in surface waters broadens P
management to an environmental concern. Oregon Extension recommendations are
that soil pH should be above 5.5 and no fertilizer P is recommended when soil P is
greater than 25 mg kg1. Growers continue to apply an average of 45 kg
soil tests in excess of 50 mg P
kg1
ha1
P despite
(Hart et al., 1988). The continued P application by
rass seed growers when Bray-P 1 soil tests average more than twice critical levels is
\'hat prompted this study.
Soil pH is cited as a regulator of P availability (Brady,1984). Where soil pH is
high, Ca precipitates P from the soil solution. When pH is low, Fe and Al are the
main P complexers. Thus, a soil pH of 6.5-7.0 should be ideal for P availability. The
relationship between P availability and the presence of complexing elements is not
well defined and probably soil specific. Jia and Dahnke, 1994, showed that soil pH
and liming had little effect on P and conventional P soil tests.
Phosphorus (P) is logically a limiting element in cool-season grass nutrition
due to its immobility in cool wet soils. Cool-season grasses in Oregon are grown on
soils that are saturated much of winter and spring with soil temperatures below 5 to
100 C. During summer and fall cool-season grasses are dormant when soils in Western
Oregon are dry and warm. However, no response to P has been observed on low (<12
mg kg1) soil test fields (Horneck et al., 1992) where pereimial ryegrass has been
grown for seed.
78
Perennial ryegrass seed yields at Saddle Butte, Oregon did not respond to P
applications or placement when the Bray-Pl was 12 mg P kg' soil. Seed yield where
no P was applied in 1989 averaged 1091 kg ha* Where P was applied at 34. 68 and
102 kg P
ha1
seed yields averaged 1012, 1015 and 947 kg had, respectively.
Interactions between placement and P-rate were not significant. Seed yields in 1990 at
Saddle Butte averaged 1417 kg
ha1
but also showed no response to P-rate or P
placement. Tall fescue seed yields at Hyslop, Oregon have not responded, as
expected. to P applications where Bray-P 1 was 80 mg P kg soil.
The lack of yield response to P fertilization by these grasses and the inability
of the Bray-P 1 to predict P responses relative to current critical levels led to
investigation of the soil solution. The soil solution is the plants primary source of P.
Interactions of inorganic, mineral and organic P forms with elements in the soil
solution are not well understood. Conventional P soil tests such as the Bray-P 1 and
1sen (NaHCO3) need to account for variation in plant P accessibility to adequately
predict plant responses.
Since neither lime or P applications increased seed yield the objectives for this
project were to: 1) Assess soil lime and pH affects on soil solution nutrient
concentrations. 2) Evaluate the effect of P rate with varying soil pH on soil solution
nutrient concentrations. 3) Investigate why perennial ryegrass was not responding to P
applications at Saddle Butte, Oregon, the low P site.
79
Materials and methods
Two experimental sites with low soil pH (5.2) were established with perennial
turf-type grasses for seed production. Perennial ryegrass was seeded (Lolium perenne
cv SR 4000) in Bashaw clay (typic pelloxerert) at Saddle Butte, Oregon where 15 cm
Bray-P was 12 mg kg* Tall fescue (Festuca arundinacea cv Falcon) was seeded in
\Voodburn silt loam (aquultic Argixeroll) at the Oregon State University Hyslop Crop
and Soil Science Farm where 15 cm soil test P was 60 mg kg* A split plot design
was used with three and four replications in a factorial arrangement for Saddle Butte
and Hyslop, respectively. The main plots were lime with 0, 4.5 and 9 Mg ha1. The 9
Mg ha lime rate was incorporated prior to planting in 1989. The 4.5 Mg ha lime
rate was surface applied in the fall of 1990. Subplots were annual P rates of 0, 34, 68
and 102 kg P ha and P application method, banded (spring and fall) and broadcast.
Ilyslop and Saddle Butte were both annually treated with oxyfluoren and diuron in the
fall in combination with spot spraying by hand with glyphosate. Nitrogen was applied
at 45 kg N
ha1
in the fall and 134 kg
ha1
in the spring as ammonium sulfate.
Samples for soil solution extraction were collected in the spring of 1991. Thirty
to 40 subsamples per plot were taken at the 0-2.5 cm depth. The three lime and the 0
and 34 kg P
ha1
broadcast treatments were sampled at both sites. Samples were
immediately refrigerated and extracted within 24 hours. Custom 100 ml centrifuge
cups similar to ones described by Adams et al. (1980) were filled with wet soil and
spun at 1000 g for one hour. Two solution extracts were combined into a single
sample. Weights of samples and centrifuge cups were taken prior to extraction.
Samples from the centrifuge cups were oven dried at 105 C for 48 hours and weighed
after extraction to determine percentage of water extracted. After solution extraction
the unused soil was air dried and analyzed conventionally for Bray-P 1, NaHCO3-P,
1:2 pH, K. Ca, and Mg (Horneck et al., 1989).
Solution extracts were analyzed immediately for pH. After pH measurement
solutions were frozen, then as time allowed thawed and analyzed for orthophosphate
(P) and nitrate as described by Horneck et al. (1989). The solutions were also
analyzed for total phosphorus (TP), Ca, Mg, K, Na, S, B, Zn, Cu, Mn, Fe, and Al by
inductively coupled plasma (ICE). Organic P
(P0) was calculated by subtracting P
from TP. SAS was used to compute correlation coefficients, ANOVA and mean
separations. Because of differences in mineralogy, crop grown, drainage and Bray-Pi
levels the two sites were analyzed independent of each other.
E31
Results and Discussion
The Bashaw soil at Saddle Butte is reported to have 55% to 70% clay
dominated by montmorillonite, while the Woodburn at Hyslop has 10 to 20% clay
(Patching. 1987). Water contents prior to extraction for the Bashaw and Woodburn
soils represent close to field capacity. Saddle Butte soil samples averaged 42% water
on an oven dry weight basis before extraction and 36% after. The soils from Hyslop
averaged 25% water prior to extraction and 19% after. Differences in water content
reflect known differences in mineralogy and clay content of the two soils.
The effects of lime and P will primarily be viewed independently since few
significant interactions existed between lime application and P rate (Table 5.1). Lime
application increased soil and solution pH (Table 5.2). The 9 Mg ha' lime rate
increased soil pH from 4.8 to 6.4 at both Saddle Butte and Hyslop. The 4.5 Mg ha
surface application increased soil pH to 5.3 at Saddle Butte and 5.4 at Hyslop. A
larger separation in solution pH due to lime treatments was observed compared to soil
pH. Solution and soil pH were similar where lime was applied (Table 5.2). Solution
pH for the unlimed treatments were lower than soil pH by 0.74 at Saddle Butte and
0.54 at Hyslop. The similarity between soil pH and solution pH where lime was
added is thought to be the result of continued buffering by undissolved lime. Where
lime had not been added CaCO3 was not present lowering the buffering capability of
soil solution pH. Lime has been shown to persist for over three years depending on
incorporation and initial soil pH (Doerge and Gardner, 1985)
Increased pH due to lime applications decreased the solubility of Mn, Al. Fe
and Zn compounds (Fig 5.1.). Solution metal concentrations were significantly
changed by liming and a function of either soil or solution pH (Table 5.3, Fig. 5.1).
Metals that did not have significant correlation coefficients such as Fe, and Cu still
appear to be related to pH. The relationship shown in Figure 1, where, maximum
concentration increases as pH decreases, indicates metal solubility is controlled by soil
pH. A similar relationship exists for the Saddle Butte site except for aluminum
82
concentration which was constant across soil pH. Poor correlations exist between soil
pH and Mg, Fe, Al and CU, either from lack of concentration dependency or higher
and wider concentration ranges at low pH with lower and narrower ranges at higher
pH. Correlation coefficients measure linear variability and are a poor indicator of this
type of variability.
Soil pH and solution pH produced similar correlations for metal arid base
concentration in soil solutions. Manganese was negatively correlated with soil pH (r=-
.82) and solution pH (-0.89) at Saddle Butte (Table 5.3). Iron, Al and Zn, when
significant, were also negatively correlated with both soil and solution pH. Copper
and Mg concentration were not correlated with pH. Calcium concentration in soil
solution was positively correlated with both soil and solution pH at both Saddle Butte
and Hyslop. Potassium concentration was positively correlated with soil and solution
p1-I at Saddle Butte and negatively correlated with soil and solution pH at Hyslop.
soil
and solution pH closely agreed in predicting metal and base concentration in soil
o1ution at these two locations.
Soil solution P levels were affected by lime and P-application (Table 5.1, Fig.
.2 and 5.3). The 4.5 Mg ha' lime application decreased P in solution at Hyslop.
compared to the unlimed treatment, with a similar trend observable at Saddle Butte
(Fig 5.2). Previous research at Saddle Butte showed lime application decreased
NaHCO1-P (Horneck et al., 1990). Lime application at Saddle Butte did not
significantly effect P.
or soil test P.
Lime decreased soil test P at Hyslop (Fig 5.2). Bray-PU Olsen and P all
decreased when lime was applied at Hyslop. A similar trend was observed in
at
Saddle Butte but not for the Bray-P 1 or Olsen soil tests. This outcome was originally
hypothesized to be the result of increased organic-P levels, however, Figure 5.2 shows
and TP in solution were not affected by lime treatment. Lime may be supplying
enough Ca and Mg to temporarily precipitate P in soil solution. This hypothesis is
reinforced by the 4.5 Mg ha surface lime application having a more pronounced
effect than the 9 Mg ha rate. The 9 Mg haa application equilibrated with the bulk
83
soil since it had been applied 2 years prior to sampling. The surface lime application
was applied the previous fall, having only 6 months to equilibrate. Lime incorporation
increases lime reaction rate (Doerge and Gardner, 1985).
Phosphorous application increased P, Bray-Pl and Olsen at Hyslop and Saddle
Butte. The increase in P from 0.07 mg l' to 0.2 mg t' due to P application at Hyslop
is accompanied by a significant decrease in
These changes result in no difference
in TP. P) at Saddle Butte was not effected by P application. P for all treatments at
both sites are above the Cmn established for perennial ryegrass at 0.01 mmol m3
(Breeze et al., 1984). Critical P for cool-season grasses is 25 mg P
kg1
for the Bray-
P1 and 15 ppm for the Olsen P soil test. soil The 2.5 cm soil samples were a poor
indicator of initial P since Hyslop had 82 mg
kg1
Bray-P 1 and Saddle Butte was 21
rng kg while P levels was similar at 0.075 mg 1* Bray-P 1 increased almost 40 mg
kg' at Hyslop from P application, where the increase was 6 mg kg' at Saddle Butte.
1-lowever, the relative percent increase for the two sites was similar. Percent P
increased to 0.2 mg l at Hyslop and 0.10 mg
11
at Saddle Butte from P application.
[he larger increase at Hyslop may be due to this soil being less likely to fix P or just
poorly buffered at higher Bray-P 1 than Saddle Butte.
Using the assumption that a hectare 2.5 cm weighs 373,333 kg ha' and using
the water content prior to extraction with a homogeneous 0.075 mg P
there was 11.6 g P
gP
ha1
ha1
1.1
concentration.
available for plant uptake as P at Saddle Butte. There was 7.0
available at Hyslop because of the lower water content. This is substantially
below the daily peak demand for perennial ryegrass and tall fescue. Using data from
chapter three, peak demand is 249 g P ha
d1
and lasts for approximately 45 days.
Estimates made using TP in solution yield 77.3 g P ha' at Saddle Butte. Since no
response to P was observed these soils have to be well buffered to supply P to the
root to meet demand.
Correlation coefficients of Bray-P 1 and NaHCO3-P with P were r=0.59 and
0.55, at Hyslop and r=0.50 and 0.60 at Saddle Butte, respectively. Correlations
indicate that conventional soil tests are linked to solution P levels at these two sites.
84
At the Hyslop site iron was correlated with P (r=-0.58). Iron reduction and oxidation
may be controlling P solubility. The flux of Fe2 and Fe3 may make P available
during the wet winter months.
In this paper organic-P is derived by subtracting P from TP. Organic-P at
Saddle Butte averaged 0.36 mg P U1, 400% of P. High
levels may explain the lack
f growth response from P application at this site. TP was correlated with P at Saddle
Butte (r=0.53) but not at Hyslop (r=0.07). Hyslop
levels averaged 0.2 118 mg P U'
which was 160% of P. NaI-1CO3-P was almost twice as high as Bray-P 1 at the Saddle
Butte site where as NaHCO3-P was 70% of Bray-P 1 at Hyslop. The increase in
extractable P by NaHCO3 compared to Bray-P 1 at Saddle Butte may be linked to the
extraction of
by NaHCO3. Cleavage and hydrolization of pyrophosphate bonds may
he involved. The Olsen soil test may be a better indicator of organic P availability
than the Bray-P 1 and helping explain the lack of plant response to P fertilization at
Saddle Butte.
The lime by P interaction for
(p0.05) at Saddle Butte is unexplainable and
causes the same trend in TP (p=0. 1). The Lime by P interaction at Hyslop for Olsen-P
result from the two lime rates decreasing Olsen-P the same.
85
Summary and Conclusions
Lime application either incorporated or topdressed were both effective in
increasing bulk soil and soil solution pH. Metal concentration decreased and bases
increased as pH increased from lime applications. Saddle Butte had 4 times the
amount of
than P in the soil solution. High solution
may explain the lack of
plant response to P fertilization at this site. Both Saddle Butte and Hyslop had
P=O.075 rng P
11
when no P was applied. NaHCO3-P, 25 mg kg1, better reflected P
availability at Saddle Butte than the Bray-Pi, 12 mg kg* Phosphorous applications
increased solution orthophosphate, Bray-P 1 and NaHCO3-P. Phosphorous applications
had few other consistent affects in changing soil solution nutrient concentrations.
0)
0)
0.2
a,
E
a)
0
0.15
C0
1.2
E
4-.
0.1
LJ
a) C.)
0
C'j
iJ
E
C
0
0C
0.05
O
-a
w-o
'7El
0.4
'j0
K7
C 00
0
C 0C 0 C)
I.-
4.5
5
5.5
6
6.5
7
7.5
CN
[I
a) U-
c
pH
soil
Bulk
oAI
MnoCuvFe
Zn
soil
in
concentrations
Al
and
Fe,
Cu.
Mn.
Zn.
on
pH
soil
of
Effect
5.1
Figure
at
Hyslop.
solution
,12O
-
HYSLOP
0100
SADDLE
0
0)
80
________
-
04E
a-
w60
-..-----r.-- -D
Cl)
0
-c
40
-._ - _ -
C
0.2
__4" s.r
ct
>'
0
a-
Ct
ci
0
0
4.5
9
0
4.5
9
LIME RATE, Mg/ha
Pi
BRAY-P1
LIIIPo
LIIITP
0LSEN
Figure 5.2 Effect of lime application on Soil test P.
Hyslop and Saddle Butte.
TP and P in soil solution at
a,
1100
a,
E
I
Ca)
u,60
0
C',
0
40
C-
ii
>
U
[I]
0
33
0
P-rate kg/ha
Figure 5.3 Effect of P application on soil test P. TP.
Hyslop and Saddle Butte.
33
and P. in soil solution at
Table 5.1. Analysis of variance table for the effect of lime and P application
on soil solution pH and select P availability paranieters at Saddle Butte and Hyslop sites.
Saddle Butte site
pH
Pi
DF
Po
TP
Bray
Olsen
Sum of squares
Total
17
22.24
0.023
0.54
0.66
909
1521
Block
2
0.53
0.0047
0.018
0.031
332
423
Lime
2
14.79**
0.0013
0.046
0.035
0.78
3.11
P
1
0.63
0.0047*
0.016
0.037
288**
648**
LXP
2
2.1
0.00041
0.21**
0.23*
30.3
37.3
Error
10
4.07
0.0118
0.26
0.32
258
409
pH
Pi
Po
TP
Bray
Olsen
Hyslop site
DF
Sum of squares
Total
23
32.54
0.201
1.01
0.87
11346
5778
Block
3
4.23
0.0149
0.051
0.011
1580
955
Lime
2
24.87**
0.0316**
0.0076
0.0646
756**
493**
P
1
0.19
0.0921**
0.148*
0.0067
7176**
3082**
LXP
2
0.090
0.0148
0.121
0.072
329
434**
Error
15
3.15
0.0471
0.688
0.72
1505
813
*significant at p=O.lO, **sjgnjfjcafl at p=O.O5
[able 52. Soil and solution pH at Saddle Butte and Hyslop as effected by
lime treatments.
Hyslop
Sol*
Saddle Butte
Lime
Soil
Mgha'
------------ pH ---------
0
4.79
4.05
4.75
4.21
4.5
5.38
5.55
5.30
4.98
9.0
6.35
6.53
6.45
6.40
LSD 0.05
0.38
0.59
0.54
0.94
* Soil solution extract
Soil
Sol*
Table 5.3. Correlation coefficients for metals in soil solution v soil solution and 1:2 pH for Hyslop and
Saddle Butte sites.
K
Ca
Mg
Zn
Cu
Mn
Fe
Al
r----------------------------------------------------
Saddle Butte Site
Solution pH
0.5 8* *
0.86**
-0.21
0.78**
0.27
0.89**
1:2 Soil pH
0.58**
0.98**
-0.20
0.7O**
0.21
0.82**
Solution pH
0.47**
0.86**
-0.09
0.83**
-0.11
O.73**
0.16
0.63**
1:2 Soil pH
0.38*
0.92**
-0.01
0.82**
-0.15
0.71**
0.14
0.61**
-0.30
0.40*
-0.09
-0.13
Flysiop Site
**
significant at p=O.05, * significant at p=O.lO
92
References
Adams, F., C. Burmester, N.y. Hue, and F.L Long. 1980. A comparison of columndisplacement and centrifuge methods for obtaining soil solutions. Soil Sci. Soc.
Am. J. 44:733-735.
Breeze. V.G., A. Wild, M. Hopper and H. Jones. 1984.The uptake of phosphate by
plants from flowing nutrient solution. J. Exp. Bot. 35:1210-1221.
Brady, N.C.,1984. The nature and properties of soils. 9th edition. Macmillan, New
York. pp327-36l.
Doerge, T. A., and H. E. 1985. Reacidification of two lime amended soils in Western
Oregon. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 49:680-685.
1-lart, J.M., D.A. Horneck. R.P. Dick, M. E. Mellbye. G. A. Gingrich, R.E. Costa and
K.L. Wilder. 1988. Willamette valley turf type tall fescue and turf type
perennial ryegrass seed nutrient survey. Soil and Water News. 3:2. Oregon
state University Extension Service. Corvallis OR.
F-Iillard. J.B., V.A. Haby and F.M. Hons. 1992. Annual ryegrass response to limestone
and P on an Ultisol. J. Plant Nutrition. 15:1253-1268.
1-lorneck. D.A., and J.M. Hart. 1988. A survey of nutrient uptake and soil test values
in perennial ryegrass and turf type tall fescue fields in the Willamette Valley.
p. 13-14. In H.W. Youngberg (ed.) 1988 Seed Production Research. Dept. of
Crop Science, EXT/CrS 74. Oregon State University. Corvallis, OR.
Horneck. D.A., J.M. Hart. 1992. Third year response of tall fescue and perennial
ryegrass to lime and phosphorus during a four year study. pp. 15-16. in W.C.
Young III (ed.) 1991, Seed Production Research. Dept. of Crop Science,
EXT/CrS 89. Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR.
Horneck, D.A., J.M. Hart and D.C. Peek. 1990. The influence of sampling intensity,
liming, P rate and method of P application on P soil test values.
Communication of Soil Science and Plant Analysis. 21:13-16 pp 1079-1090.
Horneck, D.A., J.M. Hart, K. Topper, and B. Koepsell. 1989. Methods of soil
analysis used in the Soil Testing Laboratory at Oregon State University. SM
89:4. Agric. Exp. Sta. OSU. 21 pages.
Jia. Z.J. and W.C. Dahnke. 1994. Influence of soil pH on the availability of
phosphorous. Submitted to Soil Sci Soc Am.
93
Patching, W.R. 1987. Soil Survey of Lane County area, Oregon. USDA. Soil
Conservation Service.
94
CHAPTER 6
FURTHER ACTION
Grass seed management is currently evolving toward a system where all the
straw is chopped and returned to the field. The consequences of K removal under this
system are negligible. Further research needs to be conducted on the consequences of
K luxury consumption in grass seed production. Do high K levels effect winter
hardiness? Disease resistance? Are high K levels variety dependent with in a grass
type? Several studies could accomplish this. For example, a survey of grass seed
fields of the same variety for tissue K% and soil K may fill in the gaps in the model
described in this paper. A growth chamber study in sand with varying K rates could
accomplish similar objectives.
Producers tend to manage grass seed fields as if they are annual crops instead
of perennial. How fertilization benefits current years growth as well as next years,
needs to be better understood.
Nitrogen management and tiller development links need to be investigated.
When does fertile tiller development and initiation occur in the plant? Should we be
applying nitrogen at harvest to initiate next years growth, or does this stress the plant
due to summer drought and decrease future seed yield? Would a summer or late
spring N application break dormancy and promote vegetative growth at the cost of
seed yield? These grasses may be growing during the summer just not in above
ground foliage. Some '5N work looking at N efficiencies and where in the plant
different N timing applications go may answer these questions. Perhaps perennial
ryegrass and tall fescue are good scavengers of N because it is needed for next years
growth. Looking at summer soil tests for nitrate and ammonium, N in the soil profile
has either been washed away by earlier rains or been utilized by the grass seed crop.
If the latter is true there are few grass seed farmers over applying N from an
environmental stand point.
95
Bibliography
Adams, F., C. Burmester, N.V. Hue, and F.L Long. 1980. A comparison of columndisplacement and centrifuge methods for obtaining soil solutions. Soil Sci. Soc.
Am. J. 44:733-735.
Bailey. J. S., 1989. Potassium-sparing effect of calcium in perennial ryegrass. J. Plant
Nutrition. 12:1019-1027.
Brady. N.C.,1984. The nature and properties of soils. 9th edition. Macmillan, New
York. pp327-361.
Breeze, V.G., A. Wild, M. Hopper and H. Jones. 1984. The uptake of phosphate by
plants from flowing nutrient solution. J. Exp. Bot. 35:1210-1221.
Chastain, T. and W. Young, 1994. Winter seminar.
Cline, M. G. 1944. Principles of soil sampling. Soil Sci. 58:275-288.
Dahl, R. C. 1977. Soil organic phosphorous.jn: N. C. Brady (ed). Advances in
Agronomy. 29:83-117. International Rice Institute. Manilla, Philippines.
Davidson. R.L. 1969. Effect of root/leaf temperature differentials on root/shoot ratios
in some pasture grasses and clover. Ann. Bot. 33:561-569.
Doerge, T. A., and H. E. 1985. Reacidification of two lime amended soils in Western
Oregon. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 49:680-685.
Doerge, T.A., H. Gardner and T.L. Jackson. 1982. FG 6: Fine fescue seed. Oregon
State Univ. Extn. Ser. Corvallis, Oregon.
Doerge, T.A., H. Gardner and T.L. Jackson. 1982b. FG 44: Blue grass seed. Oregon
State Univ. Extn. Ser. Corvallis. Oregon.
Doerge, T.A., H. Gardner, T.L. Jackson and H. Youngberg. 1982c. FG 45:
Orchardgrass seed. Oregon State Univ. Extn. Ser. Corvallis, Oregon.
Doerge, T.A., H. Gardner and H. Youngberg. 1983. FG 36: Tall fescue seed. Oregon
State Univ. Extn. Ser. Corvallis. Oregon.
Doerge, T.A., H. Gardner T.L. Jackson. and H. Youngberg. 1982d. FG 46: Perennial
ryegrass. Oregon State Univ. Extn. Ser. Corvallis, Oregon.
96
Engeistad. O.P., 1968. Use of multiple regression in fertilizer evaluation. Agron. J.
60:3 pp. 327-329.
Ensign, R.D., V.D. Hickey and M.D. Bemardo. 1983. Seed yield of Kentucky
bluegrass as affected by post-harvest residue removal. Agron. J. 75:549-551.
Gardner. H., T.L. Jackson and W.S. McGuire. 1984a. FG 16: Perennial grass
pastures. Oregon State Univ. Extn. Ser. Corvallis, Oregon.
Gardner, H., T.L. Jackson and W.S. McGuire. 1984b. FG 1: Irrigated clover-grass
pastures. Oregon State Univ. Extn. Ser. Corvallis, Oregon.
Garwood. E.A. 1967. Seasonal variation in appearance and growth of grass roots . J.
Br. Grassl. Soc. 22:121-130.
Garwood. E.A. and J. Sinclair. 1979. Use of water by 6 grass species. 2. Root
distribution and use of soil water. 3. Agric. Sci. 93 :25-35.
Gerwing. J., R. Gelderman and E. Twidwell. 1991. Nitrogen and phosphorous
fertilization of cool-season grass. S. Dakota St. Univ., Brookings S. Dakota.
Graham, E. R. 1959. Soil Testing. Univ. Mo. Agric. Exp. Sta. Bull. No. 734.
Grunes, D.W., J.W. Huang, F.W. Smith, P.K. J00 and D.A. Hewes. 1992. Potassium
effects on minerals and organic acids in three cool-season grasses. J. Plant
Nutr. 15:1007-1025.
Hart, J.M., D.A. Horneck, R.P. Dick, M. E. Mellbye, G. A. Gingrich, R.E. Costa and
K.L. Wilder. 1988. Willamette Valley turf type tall fescue and turf type
perennial ryegrass seed nutrient survey. Soil and Water News. 3:2. Oregon
State University Extension Service. Corvallis, OR.
Hillard, J.B., V.A. Haby and F.M. Hons. 1992. Annual ryegrass response to limestone
and phosphorous on an ultisol. J. Plant Nutr. 15:1253-1268.
Hooker, M. L. 1976. Sampling intensities required to estimate available N and P in
five Nebraska soil types. Univ. Ne. M.S. Thesis.
Horneck, D.A., and J.M. Hart. 1988. A survey of nutrient uptake and soil test values
in perennial ryegrass and turf type tall fescue fields in the Willamette Valley.
in: H.W. Youngberg (ed.). 1988 Seed Production Research. Dept. of Crop
Science, EXT/CrS 74. p. 13-14. Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR.
97
Horneck, D.A., J.M. Hart. 1992b. Third-year response of tall fescue arid perennial
ryegrass to lime and phosphorus during a four year study. pp. 6-8. j.u: W.C.
Young III (ed.) 1991, Seed Production Research. Dept. of Crop Science,
EXT/CrS 89. Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR.
Ilorneck, D.A., J.M. Hart and D.C. Peek. 1990. The influence of sampling intensity,
liming, P rate and method of P application on P soil test values.
Communication of Soil Science and Plant Analysis. 21:13-16 pp. 1079-1090.
Ilorneck. D. A., J. M. Hart, K. Topper, and B. Koepsell. 1989. Methods of soil
analysis used in the soil testing laboratory at Oregon State University. In Press.
1-lorneck. D.A., J.M. Hart, and W.C. Young III. 1993. Uptake of N. P, K and S by
five cool-season grass species. liii 992 Seed production research at Oregon
State University. W.C. Young III ed. Dept. Crop and Soil Sci, Or St Univ.
Ext/CrS 93. pp. 20-23.
Ilorneck, D.A., J.M. Hart, W.C. Young Ill and T.B. Silberstein. 1991. Potassium for
grass seed production. iii 1990 Seed production research at Oregon State
University. W.C. Young III ed. Dept. Crop and Soil Sci, Or St Univ. Ext/CrS
4/91. pp. 20-23.
1-lomeck, D.A., J.M. Hart. W.C. Young III and T.B. Silberstein. 1992a. Potassium for
grass seed nutrition. pp. 3-6. j: W.C. Young III (ed.) 1991. Seed Production
Research. Dept. of Crop Science, EXT/CrS 80. Oregon State University,
Corvallis, OR.
Hulbert. L.C. 1969. Fire and litter effects in undisturbed bluestem prairie in Kansas.
Ecol. 50:874-878.
Jackson. T.L., E.H. Gardner, W.S. McGuire and T.E. Bedell. 1983. FG 4: Subclovergrass pasutre. Oregon State Univ. Extn. Ser. Corvallis, Oregon.
Jia, Z.J. and W.C. Dahnke. 1994. Influence of soil pH on the availability of
phosphorous. Submitted to Soil Sci Soc Am.
Koski, A.J. 1983. Seasonal Rooting Characteristics of five cool season grasses. M.S.
Thesis Ohio St. Univ.
Kuhlmann, K., 1990. Importance of the subsoil for the K nutrition of crops. Plant and
Soil. 127:129-136.
Kunkel, R., C. D. Moore. T. S. Russell, and N. Holstad. 1971. Soil heterogeneity and
potato fertilizer recommendations. Amer. Pot. J. 48:163-173.
Miles, S.D. 1994. 1993 Oregon county and state agricultural estimates. Special report
790. Oregon State Univ. Extn Ser. Corvallis OR.
Mitchell, K.J. 1953. Influence of light and temperature on growth of ryegrass (Lolium
spp.). 1. Pattern of vegetative development. Physiologia Plantarum. 6:21-46.
Orlovius. K., 1992. Potash fertilization of grassland with special consideration of K
removals. Potash Review. 1:1-7.
Overman. A.R. and S.R. Wilkenson. 1992. Model evaluation for perennial grasses in
the Southern United States. 1992. Agron. J. 84:523-529.
Overman. A.R., and S.R. Wilkenson. 1993. Modeling tall fescue cultivar response to
applied nitrogen. Agron. J. 85:1156-1158.
Parsons. A.J. and M. Robson. 1981. Seasonal changes in the physiology of S24
Perennial ryegrass (Lolium perenne L). 3. Partition of assimilates between root
and shoot during the transition from vegetative to reproductive growth. Ann.
Bot. 48:733-744.
Patching. W.R. 1987. Soil Survey of Lane County area, Oregon. USDA, Soil
Conservation Service.
Petersen. R.G. and L.D. Calvin. 1986. Sampling. i.n: A. Klute. (ed.) Methods of soil
analysis, 2nd edn. Part 1, pp. 33-52. Amer. Soc. of Agron., Madison, WI.
Reed, J.F. and J.A. Rigney. 1947. Soil sampling from fields of uniform and nonuniform appearance and soil types. J. Amer. Soc. Agron. 39:26-40.
Robson. M.J. 1972. The effect of temperature on the growth of S.170 fescue (Fesiuca
arundinacea). J. Appl. Ecol. 9:643-653.
Sabbe, W. E. and D. B. Marx. 1987. Soil sampling: spatial and temporal variability.
in: J. R. Brown (ed.) Soil testing: sampling, correlation, and interpretation, pp.
1-14. Soil Sci. Soc. Amer. Madison, WI.
Sheffer, K.M. and J.K. Dunn. 1981. Anatomy, drought survival and rooting depth of
cool season turf grasses. Agron. Abstr. p.128.
Smoliak, S. and A. Johnston. 1968. Germination and early growth of grasses at four
root-zone temperatures. Can. J. Pt. Sci. 48:119-127.
99
Spiertz, J.H.J. and J. Ellen. 1972. The effect of light intensity on some morphological
aspects of the crop perennial ryegrass (Lolium perenne L. var. 'Cropper") and
its effect on seed production. Neth. J. Agric. Sci. 20:232-246.
Stanwood. P.c. 1974. Influence of post-harvest management practices on plant
growth and seed yield of cool season grasses. M.S. Thesis. Oregon St. Univ.
Stuckey. 1.H. 1941. Seasonal growth of grass roots. Am. J. Bot. 28:486-491.
Froughton. A. 1960. Further studies on the relationship between shoot and root
systems of grasses. J. Br. Grass!. Soc. 15:41-47.
Vigil, M.F.. D.E. Kissel, M.L. cabrera, c.w. Raczkowski. 1993. Optimal spacing of
surface-banded nitrogen on Fescue. Soil. Sci. Soc. Am. J. 57:1629-1633.
Wilkenson, S.R. and D.A. Mays. 1979. Mineral Nutrition. pp. 41-74. In R.C. Buckner
and L.P. Bush (ed.) Tall Fescue. No. 20. Am. Soc. Agron. Madison, WI.
Young, W.
c.
1988. Personnel communication. Oregon. St.Univ.
Young, w.c. 1994a. Willamette Valley grass seed production and burning data,
1986-93. Personnel communication. Oregon. St.Univ.
Young, W. C.. 1994b. Seed production.
In
Crop and soil news/notes. 8:2. pp. 6-8.
Youngberg, H.W., W.C. Young. 1990. Oregon forage and turf grass variety seed trial,
1986-87. Dept. of Crop Science, Oregon State Univ., Corvallis, OR. Ext/CrS
80.
APPENDICIES
101
Appendix 1
Data from chapter 2
102
Appendix 1. Soil pH, Bray-Pi and Olsen P response to
applied P. lime, sampling intensity and depth.
DEPTH: 1=0-1, 2=0-6 INCHES
LIME: 1=NO, 2=LIME
P RATE lb/a: 1=30, 2=60, 3=90, 4=CHECK
P APPLIC: l=BAND, 2=BROADCAST, 3=CHECK
SAMPLE NO.: 1=5, 2=10, 3=20, 4=40, 5=50/50
DEPTH
P RATE
LIME
P APPLC.
SAMP NO.
Rep
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
I
3
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
I
1
2
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
1
3
1
1
3
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
3
1
1
3
3
1
1
3
2
1
1
1
1
2
3
1
1
1
2
1
3
1
1
2
1
3
1
1
2
1
3
1
1
2
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
1
1
1
3
1
2
3
2
2
2
1
2
2
2
4
4
4
3
1
1
1
I
1
I
1
1
1
3
3
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
3
1
3
1
1
1
1
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
pH
ppm
5.1
23
4.9
4.9
14
5.3
5.3
5.3
5.3
5.2
5.6
24
13
16
15
19
22
14
4.9
5.0
4.9
5.4
20
5.1
18
5.3
5.2
5.2
22
22
4.9
5.7
5.0
5.!
7.1
7.4
7.3
7.2
6.8
6.8
7.0
6.6
7.4
7.2
11
17
27
18
15
21
17
12
17
12
10
10
16
9
BRAY
ppm
39
29
38
36
23
21
31
40
28
29
34
29
50
36
28
29
30
22
37
34
26
33
26
25
26
31
23
24
42
16
19
13
16
20
13
35
23
7.5
14
31
7.1
24
7.3
18
46
25
7.1
Olsen
I f\
I
REP
DEPTH LIME
3
1
I
1
2
1
3
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
I
2
I
3
1
I
2
2
3
2
3
2
2
3
I
2
3
I
2
3
2
3
I
2
3
I
2
3
I
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
P RATE
3
7.1
13
4
6.8
7.2
7.7
7.2
7.2
24
20
3
4
3
4
3
4
3
3
4
4
4
4
4
1
1
I
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
1
3
1
1
1
3
1
1
1
3
1
1
1
3
1
3
1
3
I
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
1
1
1
1
4
4
4
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
3
1
3
1
3
1
2
2
2
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
1
3
I
1
3
1
1
3
1
1
3
2
1
3
2
1
1
4
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
3
1
1
1
SAMP NO. pH
1
1
1
P APPLC.
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
7.1
5.1
5.0
5.0
5.2
5.4
5.2
5.4
5.2
5.6
5.2
5.0
BRAY P OLSEN P
ppm
ppm
19
15
12
7
17
12
10
18
10
6
16
14
24
20
32
29
35
29
18
19
12
21
15
14
33
23
43
35
12
20
14
35
20
20
29
34
29
22
5.3
5.2
5.4
5.4
5.2
22
5.1
13
5.4
5.0
19
5.1
10
17
12
12
35
29
11
35
20
34
22
13
6
15
17
17
28
34
20
20
27
20
45
35
5.5
5.0
8
5.1
13
5.0
5.2
23
5.1
5.3
5.3
5.3
34
32
8
11
5.1
31
27
29
20
5.1
5.0
5.0
4.9
5.3
5.3
5.4
5.4
30
43
12
10
II
8
18
14
26
15
21
104
REP
DEPTH LIME
P RATE
P APPLC.
SAMP NO. pH
BRAY P OLSEN P
ppm
ppm
2
2
2
2
3
2
1
4
4
4
1
2
1
2
2
3
1
2
3
2
3
1
2
1
1
3
I
2
3
2
3
I
2
3
2
3
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
5.1
9
3
2
5.3
5.0
5.0
5.0
22
2
3
2
1
1
3
1
1
1
3
1
1
1
3
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
3
5
14
26
20
22
18
1
3
5.1
1
3
5.5
7
3
5.1
12
3
3
5.0
5.0
5.2
5.0
5.5
5.2
5.3
3
1
3
1
3
1
3
1
3
1
3
1
3
1
3
1
11
16
16
1
1
10
1
3
2
2
2
3
3
4.9
14
9
19
12
9
14
12
12
20
3
23
43
29
30
34
4.9
4.8
5.0
3
1
1
12
16
10
1
3
2
2
2
1
12
5.2
5.4
5.4
3
2
2
2
2
2
2
1
29
26
30
20
31
31
23
40
27
20
21
23
21
41
4
4
3
3
5.3
3
3
5.0
14
4
3
3
5.1
11
33
23
1
1
1
1
12
1
1
1
32
28
1
1
5.0
4.9
5.0
5.3
34
1
4
4
17
1
1
1
15
1
1
5.3
5.3
5.4
1
2
2
3
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
3
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
1
3
1
1
3
1
1
3
1
1
3
1
3
1
3
2
2
2
1
4
3
1
4
3
1
1
1
I
1
1
1
1
I
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
10
18
30
21
18
6
17
16
7
12
26
20
5.8
5.0
13
31
10
5.1
23
5.0
5.4
13
22
50
28
25
22
5.1
5.6
5.1
5.3
5.2
4.9
5.3
5.0
10
14
16
12
21
16
26
35
21
27
44
33
105
REP
2
2
7
7
7
7
7
2
2
7
2
2
3
DEPTH LIME
P RATE
P APPLC.
SAMP NO. pH
ppm
ppm
2
2
2
4
3
4
5.0
8
5
5.3
5.0
17
5
4.9
5.0
10
17
5
5.1
15
25
34
27
29
28
32
5
5.5
5.2
5.0
5.3
6.4
6.7
6.6
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
1
1
1
5
1
2
2
2
1
3
1
3
1
3
I
1
2
2
2
1
5
I
5
5
1
1
1
I
I
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
5
1
1
I
2
2
2
2
2
2
15
10
6.7
5.7
6.6
20
8
19
6.1
6.3
12
22
10
19
6.6
6.6
6.4
6.7
II
8
24
34
24
20
6.1
27
41
6.5
6.4
6.5
6.0
6.5
6.4
6.5
6.5
6.4
6.0
6.2
6.7
6.4
6.2
5.9
6.2
6.6
16
24
15
23
IS
24
22
6.7
1
1
2
I
2
1
2
1
1
I
1
I
3
I
3
1
3
1
1
I
1
2
2
2
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
3
1
2
I
I
1
26
6.1
I
I
21
13
6.2
1
4
4
4
25
1
1
3
12
9
6.1
3
3
29
44
10
1
I
2
2
2
20
1
3
3
II
10
12
9
I
3
BRAY P OLSEN P
10
18
19
13
18
22
23
22
22
32
23
6
15
13
26
10
18
18
21
8
8
15
7
15
13
9
12
8
10
17
22
20
29
19
18
29
20
20
30
106
DEPTH LIME
REP
P RATE
P APPLC.
SAMP NO. pH
BRAY P OLSEN P
ppm
ppm
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
3
2
3
I
2
3
I
2
I
2
3
2
3
2
3
I
2
2
I
2
2
3
2
3
1
4
I
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
6.4
6.5
9
9
2
2
2
2
6.1
33
2
14
2
6.3
6.3
4
4
3
2
6.1
3
2
6.2
2
4
3
2
6.1
3
3
3
14
12
10
6
22
24
49
20
22
21
20
17
2
2
2
1
1
3
1
1
3
1
I
3
2
1
2
2
2
3
I
3
6.6
6.4
6.5
6.8
5.9
6.4
6.8
I
3
6.1
10
1
3
6.4
6.0
6.4
6.7
6.6
11
16
14
9
24
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
1
1
3
3
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
3
3
1
3
3
I
3
3
3
3
3
1
3
3
3
2
2
2
3
3
3
4
4
3
3
3
3
4
3
3
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
3
1
3
1
4
4
4
3
1
4
1
1
I
4
6.1
6.3
6.1
6.4
6.4
6.5
6.3
5.9
6.5
6.5
6.5
6.5
6.1
6.0
6.6
6.0
6.4
6.2
6.5
6.6
6.8
6.4
6.3
11
23
10
20
8
18
21
7
16
8
18
24
20
32
20
II
21
21
17
29
12
22
9
21
45
60
22
15
11
18
15
23
9
6
12
9
10
7
10
20
8
21
11
9
14
9
16
22
19
22
22
22
22
36
21
16
22
11
19
21
18
32
10
10
24
17
107
REP
DEPTH LIME
P RATE
P APPLC.
SAMP NO. pH
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
3
3
2
2
2
4
3
4
4
3
3
4
4
4
4
4
4
1
I
5
BRAY P OLSEN P
ppm
1
2
3
I
2
3
I
2
2
I
2
3
I
2
3
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
3
5
1
1
2
2
2
3
2
3
2
3
I
23
14
19
16
26
11
23
6
16
11
22
20
25
32
22
20
11
13
5
5
6.1
5
6.4
6.3
6.4
14
17
17
10
5
5
ppm
45
20
12
6.6
6.5
6.2
5
5
I
6.5
6.5
6.3
6.4
6.2
6.1
6.6
6.0
19
11
31
28
27
108
Appendix 2
from chapter 3
Dita
109
Appendix 2.1 Drymatter and nutrient concentration of seven grasses
by days, heat uint, rep and grass type.
Grass type
1-Tall fescu, Fawn
2-Perennial ryegrass, Linn
3-Kentucky bluegrass, Newport
4-Perennial ryegrass, Pennfine
5-Fine fescue, Pennlawn
6-Orchardgrass, Potomack
7-Tall fescue, Rebel
DAYS
I-lU
REP GRASS DRYWT
kglha
N
P
K
Ca
Mg
S
Zn
Mn
Cu
B
%
%
%
%
%
%
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
54
250
1
1
301
2.77
0.24
2.67
0.27
0.17
0.43
22
202
5.0
6.0
54
250
2
1
255
2.82
0.21
2.56
0.25
0.18
0.37
20
194
5.0
6.0
54
250
3
1
252
3.58
0.26
2.92
0.23
0.17
0.37
23
179
5.0
7.0
54
250
4
1
258
3
0.26
2.71
0.32
0.19
0.44
20
240
6.0
7.0
71
378
1
1
1719
3.35
0.30
3.06
0.38
0.18
0.35
21
181
6.0
1.0
71
378
2
1
1353
3.29
0.30
3.07
0.35
0.18
0.4
20
179
6.0
0.0
71
378
3
1
2539
2.89
0.28
2.93
0.35
0.17
0.38
21
195
6.0
3.0
71
378
4
1
2123
3.04
0.29
2.73
0.34
0.17
0.32
20
206
6.0
0.0
92
564
1
1
4754
2.76
0.24
3.05
0.36
0.16
0.28
14
129
5.6
6.0
92
564
2
1
4691
3.65
0.32
2.86
0.5
0.15
0.27
44
198
5.5
6.0
92
564
3
1
4728
2.82
0.25
3.05
0.36
0.16
0.3
45
149
4.9
0.0
92
564
4
1
4075
3.1
0.27
3.2
0.38
0.18
0.33
12
165
5.2
0.0
117
819
1
1
6542
1.71
0.26
3.01
0.24
0.14
(1.17
19
108
4.0
1.0
117
819
2
1
8686
1.83
0.24
2.75
0.29
0.15
0.19
50
113
3.0
0.0
117
819
3
1
8272
2.14
0.27
2.86
0.27
(1.15
0.22
13
126
3.0
0.0
117
819
4
1
9206
1.93
0.26
2.9
0.2
0.13
0.16
14
128
3.0
0.0
168
1470
1
1
9689
2.56
0.27
2.01
0.43
0.15
0.16
15
109
3.2
6.0
168
147))
2
1
18125
1.95
0.19
1.75
0.35
0.14
0.13
10
88
3.2
6.0
168
1470
3
1
22423
2.26
0.23
1.83
0.34
0.14
0.14
11
121
3.3
8.0
168
1470
4
1
20901
1.21
0.12
1.9
0.33
0.14
0.14
11
104
3.1
5.0
71
378
1
2
104
2.73
0.26
2.24
0.52
0.15
0.3
27
201
5.0
3.0
71
378
2
2
139
3.26
0.31
2.08
(1.41
(1.16
0.23
28
240
6.0
6.0
71
378
3
2
793
1.98
0.20
1.41
0.37
0.14
0.23
26
260
4.0
3.0
71
378
4
2
472
2.61
0.27
1.61
1)39
0.13
(1.23
26
240
4.0
4.0
92
564
1
2
1315
3.27
0.28
2.67
0.5
0.15
1)27
20
170
4.5
4.0
92
564
2
2
1704
3.59
0.29
2.7
(1.59
0.17
0.3
27
155
4.9
5.0
92
564
3
2
1808
3.33
0.28
2.41
0.51
0.17
(1.27
23
260
4.0
4.0
92
564
4
2
1751
3.3
(1.31
2.14
0.47
0.15
0.27
52
250
4.0
4.0
117
819
1
2
4683
2.32
0.33
3.12
0.47
0.14
0.22
19
128
3.0
2.0
117
819
2
2
4261
2.36
0.32
2.97
0.47
0.15
0.22
22
179
3.0
4.0
117
819
3
2
3264
2.01
0.29
2.8
0.43
0.16
0.22
17
141
3.0
1.0
110
appendix 2.1. continued.
DAYS
FlU
DRYWT
N
P
K
kg/ha
%
REP
GRASS
4
2
5739
%
%
2.07
0.29
2.44
16683
1.15
0.12
11471
0.93
0.09
2
12009
1.61
0.16
4
2
10880
0.53
1
3
665
3.82
378
2
3
653
2.83
378
3
3
721
3.17
378
4
3
854
92
564
1
3
92
564
2
3
92
564
3
92
564
4
117
819
117
117
Ca
Mg
S
Zn
Mn
%
Cu
B
%
%
mg/kg
mg/kg
0.41
0.14
0.18
19
208
2.0
2.0
1.45
0.4
0.09
0.16
15
103
2.5
5.0
1.94
0.53
0.13
0.15
15
155
3.2
9.0
1.41
0.47
0.13
0.14
16
260
3.8
11.0
0.05
1.39
0.46
0.1
0.13
11
132
2.6
8.0
0.37
2.31
0.38
0.14
0.25
21
138
6.0
0.0
0.28
1.75
0.39
0.14
0.23
23
139
6.0
0.0
0.31
2.04
0.38
0.15
0.26
23
144
7.0
3.0
3.7
0.37
2.02
0.42
0.14
0.28
23
147
6.0
0.0
1680
2.69
0.27
2.2
0.5
0.13
0.24
30
165
5.1
1.0
1134
3.21
0.31
2.31
0.46
0.13
0.25
23
137
5.2
0.0
3
2446
3.01
0.29
2.31
0.48
0.14
0.24
23
149
5.4
0.0
3
1746
3.21
0.29
2.16
0.46
0.14
0.24
24
155
6.0
0.0
1
3
3524
2.26
0.34
2.82
(3.35
0.13
0.19
17
114
3.0
0.0
819
2
3
2618
2.47
0.37
2.71
0.33
0.12
0.2
17
124
3.0
0.0
819
3
3
4703
0.93
0.16
2.25
0.31
0.13
0.16
18
240
4.0
3.0
117
819
4
3
4340
1.3
0.20
2.84
0.36
0.12
0.19
17
131
3.0
0.0
168
1470
1
3
5964
1.22
0.19
2.16
0.5
(3.11
0.12
14
123
3.9
9.0
168
1470
2
3
4110
2.74
0.34
2.42
0.46
0.1
0.09
13
123
4.3
9.0
168
1470
3
3
7710
2.98
0.39
2.08
(1.39
0.1
0.1
12
104
3.6
7.0
168
1470
4
3
6528
3.32
0.45
2.32
0.39
0.1
0.1
13
105
4.2
8.0
171
5.0
4.0
117
819
168
1470
1
2
168
1470
2
2
168
1470
3
168
1470
71
378
71
71
71
mg/kg mg/kg
71
378
1
4
295
3.51
0.32
2.38
(1.42
0.13
0.32
28
71
378
2
4
265
3.01
0.28
2.31
1.33
0.15
0.29
28
171
5.0
4.0
71
378
3
4
704
2.58
0.27
1.8
0.34
0.14
0.22
30
260
5.0
6.0
71
378
4
4
721
2.27
(1.23
1.59
((.38
0.15
0.23
34
380
5.0
4.0
92
564
1
4
1334
2.56
0.22
3.14
0.35
(1.18
0.29
16
136
4.8
0.0
92
564
2
4
988
3.33
0.28
2.95
0.48
(1.15
0.26
21
156
4.8
3.0
92
564
3
4
1449
3.27
0.29
2.53
0.48
0.17
0.27
27
280
4.4
5.0
92
564
4
4
1956
3.14
0.26
2.54
0.46
0.15
0.28
28
260
3.9
1.0
117
819
1
4
3292
2.48
0.33
4.4
0.5
0.16
0.24
25
192
5.0
7.0
117
819
2
4
4333
2.6
0.34
3.05
0.42
0.14
0.23
24
172
4.0
5.0
117
819
3
4
5467
2.26
0.31
2.55
0.36
0.13
0.26
22
210
3.0
5.0
117
819
4
4
3750
2.59
0.37
3.02
0.48
0.15
0.23
20
181
2.0
4.0
168
1470
1
4
8892
1.7
(1.1$
1.58
0.48
0.11
0.14
15
130
3.1
7.0
168
1470
2
4
9618
2.3$
0.21
1.95
(1.49
((.13
((.19
18
133
4.2
7.0
168
1470
3
4
11552
0.93
(1.1(1
1.47
((.36
((.1
0.12
11
125
2.4
8.0
168
1470
4
4
14024
1.71
0.16
2.34
((.44
0.11
(1.19
12
11(1
3.8
8.0
54
250
1
5
62
3.67
0.25
1.57
((.22
0.13
0.22
30
290
7.0
13.0
54
250
2
5
75
2.85
0.21
1.9
0.25
0.13
0.3
30
320
7.0
9.0
54
250
3
5
217
3.89
0.29
1.91
0.21
0.13
0.27
29
260
7.0
7.0
111
appendix 2.1. continued.
DAYS
HU
REP
GRASS DRYWF
N
P
K
%
Ca
Mg
S
%
Mn
Cu
B
mg/kg mg/kg
Zn
%
%
%
%
mg/kg
mg/kg
54
250
4
5
480
3.38
0.26
1.88
0.22
0.14
0.26
31
290
7.0
7.0
71
378
1
5
913
2.39
0.23
1.75
0.29
0.12
0.2
25
280
5.0
3.0
71
378
2
5
1706
2.58
0.24
2.02
0.33
0.13
0.21
32
320
6.0
3.0
71
378
3
5
1711
2.51
0.26
1.65
0.32
0.14
0.2
34
350
7.0
6.0
71
378
4
5
1585
2.11
0.22
1.44
0.3
0.14
0.24
35
430
7.0
6.0
92
564
1
5
3294
3.14
0.26
2.55
0.32
0.12
0.25
32
290
6.2
0.0
92
564
2
5
2769
3.27
0.27
2.42
0.37
0.13
0.25
28
310
6.1
0.0
92
564
3
5
3082
2.76
0.23
2.08
0.34
0.13
0.21
30
330
5.8
3.0
92
564
4
5
2147
2.88
0.24
2.25
0.35
0.14
0.23
34
350
6.8
5.0
kg/ha
117
819
1
5
5066
2.62
0.34
2.55
0.27
0.12
0.19
22
260
3.0
0.0
117
819
2
5
5582
2.38
0.31
2.56
0.27
0.11
0.18
23
240
3.0
0.0
117
819
3
5
5049
1.21
0.14
2.34
0.64
0.14
0.18
25
280
3.0
1.0
117
819
4
5
3706
1.12
0.14
2.76
0.28
0.13
0.21
24
300
3.0
2.0
168
1470
1
5
9886
3.11
0.31
2.29
0.36
0.1
0.11
14
197
3.3
8.0
168
1470
2
5
9725
3.17
0.35
1.88
0.32
0.1
0.17
14
162
3.5
9.0
168
1470
3
5
8839
2.77
0.35
1.92
0.25
0.09
0.09
14
157
3.2
8.0
168
1470
4
5
10343
3.14
0.37
2.02
0.31
0(19
0.09
19
250
3.8
8.0
54
250
1
6
393
4.12
0.34
2.37
0.31
0.23
0.31
28
380
11.0
11.0
54
250
2
6
284
3.95
0.30
2.23
0.32
0.21
0.32
27
310
10.0
12.0
54
250
3
6
153
4.64
0.35
2.62
0.36
0.23
0.35
28
280
12.0
10.0
54
250
4
6
527
4.25
0.34
2.57
0.33
0.21
0.31
29
310
10.0
12.0
71
378
1
6
972
2.98
0.28
2.87
0.36
0.19
0.3
21
250
8.0
5.0
71
378
2
6
1275
3.63
0.33
2.83
0.34
0.2
0.32
22
260
8.0
5.0
71
378
3
6
659
3.51
0.38
2.88
0.3
0.19
0.28
24
350
8.0
5.0
71
378
4
6
908
3.04
0.31
2.53
0.37
0.21
0.25
25
350
9.0
6.0
92
564
1
6
2141
3.85
0.33
3.41
0.4
0.18
0.3
20
190
7.1
2.0
92
564
2
6
2220
3.97
0.37
3.51
0.43
0.19
0.31
20
174
6.5
2.0
92
564
3
6
2528
3.59
0.32
3.02
0.41
0.18
0.27
21
270
5.9
3.0
92
564
4
6
2486
3.33
0.31
3.1
0.42
0.21
0.27
20
310
7.4
4.0
117
819
1
6
6232
2.76
0.33
2.98
0.29
0.14
0.22
15
147
4.0
0.0
117
819
2
6
5015
2.56
0.27
3.11
(1.28
0.15
0.21
19
159
4.0
0.0
117
819
3
6
7354
2.44
0.3(1
3.4
0.26
0.13
0.22
15
154
3.0
0.0
117
819
4
6
5096
2.01
0.26
3.6
0.28
0.15
0.25
20
177
3.0
2.0
168
1470
1
6
9725
1.7
0.17
1.95
0.44
0.14
0.15
15
260
3.1
9.0
187
3.5
9.0
168
1470
2
6
7845
1.24
0.13
2.29
(1.44
0.16
(1.17
14
168
1470
3
6
18358
2.04
0.20
1.93
0.41
0.13
0.14
13
188
3.4
8.0
168
1470
4
6
16603
1.64
0.18
1.91
0.37
0.16
0.16
15
250
3.6
11.0
54
250
1
7
602
3.46
0.21
1.86
0.3
0.25
0.3
22
230
5.0
8.0
54
250
2
7
660
3.1
0.21
2.07
0.29
0.25
0.39
20
201
5.0
6.0
54
250
3
7
1348
2.89
0.19
1.97
(1.34
0.28
(1.33
21
195
5.0
7.0
112
appendix 2.1. continued.
DAYS
1-Hi
REP GRASS DRYWT
kg/ha
N
P
K
%
%
%
54
250
4
7
571
2.97
0.19
71
378
1
7
1125
2.7
0.22
71
378
2
7
1053
3.51
71
378
3
7
1985
3.23
71
3'78
4
7
1974
92
54
1
7
2599
92
564
2
7
92
5h4
3
92
564
4
117
819
117
819
117
Ca
Mg
S
%
%
%
Mn
Zn
mg/kg mg/kg
Cu
B
mg/kg mg/kg
1.86
0.29
0.24
0.34
18
171
5.0
6.0
2.19
0.4
0.23
0.32
20
184
5.0
0.0
0.27
2.49
0.38
0.22
0.32
20
162
5.0
1.0
0.30
2.58
0.41
0.23
0.37
23
210
6.0
3.0
2.89
0.25
2.28
0.39
0.23
0.32
23
198
5.0
2.0
2.95
0.22
2.52
0.36
0.21
0.28
17
161
5.2
3.0
2438
2.76
0.21
2.68
0.4
0.22
0.27
17
168
5.4
3.0
7
3399
3.01
0.23
2.95
0.46
0.22
0.33
15
145
4.7
0.0
7
3797
3.01
0.23
2.88
0.44
0.23
0.31
14
174
4.3
0.0
1
7
6197
2.23
0.25
3.06
0.39
0.22
0.29
17
125
4.0
0.0
2
7
5920
1.93
0.23
3.13
0.37
0.18
0.24
14
159
3.0
2.0
819
3
7
6010
1.93
0.25
2.44
0.27
0.16
0.22
15
127
3.0
1.0
117
819
4
7
5915
2.11
0.26
2.67
0.34
0.21
(1.21
14
155
4.0
2.0
168
1470
1
7
16012
1.46
0.13
1.85
0.46
0.19
(1.16
12
93
3.1
7.0
168
1471)
2
7
8579
2.26
(1.20
2.78
0.44
0.21
0.18
14
11(1
4.6
5.0
168
1470
3
7
13218
1.73
0.16
2.17
0.47
(1.2
(1.16
13
124
4.3
7.0
168
1470
4
7
18286
2.47
0.23
1.93
0.43
0.17
(1.13
10
121
3.9
7.0
113
Appendix 2.2 Nutrient uptake of seven grasses
by days, heat uint, rep and grass type
Grass type
1-Tall fescu, Fawn
2-Perennial ryegrass, Linn
3-Kentucky bluegrass, Newport
4-Perennial ryegrass, Penntlne
5-Fine fescue. Penniawn
6-Orchardgrass, Potomack
7-Tall fescue Rebel
DAYS
1-lU
REP
GRASS
N
P
K
Ca
kg/ha
kg/ha
kg/ha
kg/ha
Mg
S
kg/ha kg/ha
Zn
Mn
Cu
B
kg/ha
kg/ha
kg/ha
kg/ha
54
250
1
1
8.3
(1.7
8.0
0.8
0.5
1.3
0.007
0.061
0.002
0.002
54
250
2
1
7.2
0.5
6.5
0.6
0.5
0.9
0.005
0(149
0.001
0.002
54
250
3
1
9.0
0.7
7.4
0.6
0.4
0.9
0.006
0.045
0.001
0.002
54
250
4
1
7.7
0.7
7.0
0.8
0.5
1.1
0.005
0.062
0.002
0.002
71
378
1
1
57.6
5.2
52.6
6.5
3.1
6.0
0.036
0.311
0.010
0.002
71
378
2
1
44.5
4.1
41.5
4.7
2.4
5.4
0.027
(1.242
0.008
0.000
71
378
3
1
73.4
7.1
74.4
8.9
4.3
9.7
(1.053
0.495
0.015
0.008
71
378
4
1
64.5
6.2
57.9
7.2
3.6
6.8
0.042
0.437
0.013
0.000
92
564
1
1
131.1
11.4
145.0
17.1
7.6
13.3
0.067
0.613
0.027
0.029
92
564
2
1
171.4
15.0
134.2
23.5
7.0
12.7
0.206
0.929
0.026
0.028
92
564
3
1
133.4
11.8
144.2
17.0
7.6
14.2
(1.213
0.705
0.023
0.000
92
564
4
1
126.3
11.0
130.4
15.5
7.3
13.4
0.049
0.672
0.021
0.000
117
819
1
1
111.9
17.0
196.9
15.7
9.2
11.1
0.124
(1.707
0.026
0.007
117
819
2
1
159.0
20.8
238.9
25.2
13.0
16.5
(1.434
(1.982
0.026
0.000
117
819
3
1
177.0
22.3
236.6
22.3
12.4
18.2
0.108
1.042
0.025
0.000
117
819
4
1
177.7
23.9
267.0
18.4
12.0
14.7
0.129
1.178
0.028
0.000
168
1470
1
1
248.0
26.2
194.8
41.7
14.5
15.5
0.145
1.056
(1.031
0.058
168
147()
2
1
353.4
34.4
317.2
63.4
25.4
23.6
0.181
1.595
0.058
0.109
168
1470
3
1
506.8
51.6
410.3
76.2
31.4
31.4
0.247
2.713
0.074
0.179
168
1470
4
1
252.9
25.1
397.1
69.0 29.3
29.3
0.230
2.174
0.065
0.105
71
378
1
2
2.8
(1.3
2.3
0.5
0.2
0.3
0.003
(1.021
0.001
0.000
71
378
2
2
4.5
0.4
2.9
0.6
0.2
0.3
0.004
0.033
(1.001
0.001
71
378
3
2
15.7
1.6
11.2
2.9
1.1
1.8
(1.021
(1.206
0.003
0.002
71
378
4
2
12.3
1.3
7.6
1.8
0.6
1.1
0.012
0.113
0.002
0.002
92
564
1
2
43.0
3.7
35.1
6.6
2.0
3.5
0.026
0.223
0.006
(1.005
92
564
2
2
61.2
4.9
463)
10.1
2.9
5.1
(1.046
0.264
0.008
(1.009
92
564
3
2
60.3
5.1
43.6
9.2
3.1
4.9
0.042
(1.470
0.007
0.007
92
564
4
2
57.8
5.4
37.5
8.2
2.6
4.7
0.091
0.438
0.007
(1.007
117
819
1
2
108.6
15.5
146.1
22.0
6.6
10.3
0.089
(1.599
0.014
0.009
117
819
2
2
100.6
13.6
126.6
20.0
6.4
9.4
(1.094
(1.763
(1.013
0.017
117
819
3
2
65.6
9.5
91.4
14.0
5.2
7.2
0.055
0.46(1
(1.010
0.003
114
appendix 2.2. continued.
DAYS
FlU
REP
GRASS
P
N
kg/ha
117
819
168
168
K
kg/ha
kg/ha
Ca
Mg
S
kg/ha kg/ha kg/ha
Mn
Cu
B
kg/ha
kg/ha
kg/ha
kg/ha
10.3
0.109
1.194
0.011
0.011
66.7
15.0 26.7
0.250
1.718
0.042
0.083
60.8
14.9
17.2
0.172
1.778
0.037
0.103
169.3
56.4
15.6
16.8
0.192
3.122
0.046
0.132
5.4
151.2
50.0
10.9
14.1
0.120
1.436
0.028
0.087
2.5
15.4
2.5
0.9
1.7
0.014
0.092
0.004
0.000
18.5
1.8
11.4
2.5
0.9
1.5
0.015
0.091
0.004
0.000
22.8
2.2
14.7
2.7
1.1
1.9
0.017
0.104
0.005
0.002
4
2
118.8
16.6
140.0
23.5
1470
1
2
191.9
20.0
241.9
1470
2
2
106.7
10.3
222.5
168
1470
3
2
193.3
19.2
168
1470
4
2
57.7
71
378
1
3
25.4
71
378
2
3
71
378
3
3
8.0
Zn
71
378
4
3
31.6
3.2
17.3
3.6
1.2
2.4
0.020
0.126
0.005
0.000
92
564
1
3
45.2
4.5
37.0
8.4
2.2
4.0
0.050
0.277
0.009
0.002
92
564
2
3
36.3
3.5
26.2
5.2
1.5
2.8
0.026
0.155
0.006
0.000
92
564
3
3
73.7
7.1
56.5
11.7
3.4
5.9
0.056
0.364
0.013
0.000
92
564
4
3
56.0
5.1
37.7
8.0
2.4
4.2
0.042
0.271
0.010
0.000
117
819
1
3
79.6
12.0
99.4
12.3
4.6
6.7
1)060
0.402
0.011
0.000
117
819
2
3
64.7
9.7
70.9
8.6
3.1
5.2
0.1)45
0.325
0.008
0.00()
117
519
3
3
43.7
7.5
105.8
14.6
6.1
7.5
1)085
1.129
0.1)19
0.014
117
i9
4
3
56.4
8.7
123.3
15.6
5.2
8.2
0.074
0.569
0.013
0.000
168
1471)
1
3
72.8
11.3
128.8
29.8
6.6
7.2
0.083
1)734
0.023
1)054
168
1470
2
3
112.6
14.0
99.5
18.9
4.1
3.7
0.053
0.506
0.018
0.037
168
140
3
3
229.8
30.1
160.4
30.1
7.7
7.7
0.093
0.802
0.028
0.054
168
1470
4
3
216.7
29.4
151.5
25.5
6.5
6.5
0.085
0.685
0.027
0.052
71
378
1
4
10.4
0.9
7.0
1.2
0.4
0.9
0.008
0.050
0.001
0.001
71
378
2
4
8.0
0.7
6.1
3.5
0.4
0.8
1)007
0.045
0.001
0.001
71
378
3
4
18.2
1.9
12.7
2.4
1.0
1.5
0.021
1)183
0.004
0.004
71
378
4
4
16.4
1.7
11.5
2.7
1.1
1.7
0.025
0.274
0.004
0.003
92
5i4
1
4
34.2
2.9
41.9
4.7
2.4
3.9
0.021
0.181
0.006
0.000
92
564
2
4
32.9
2.8
29.1
4.7
1.5
2.6
0.021
1)154
0.005
1)1)03
92
564
3
4
47.4
4.2
36.6
7.0
2.5
3.9
0.039
0.406
0.006
0.007
92
564
4
4
61.4
5.1
49.7
9.0
2.9
5.5
1)055
0.509
0.008
0.002
117
819
1
4
81.6
10.9
144.8
16.5
5.3
7.9
1)082
0.632
0.016
1)023
117
819
2
4
112.7
14.7
132.2
18.2
6.!
10.0
0.11)4
0.745
0.017
0.022
117
819
3
4
123.6
16.9
139.4
19.7
7.1
14.2
1)120
1.148
0.016
0.027
117
819
4
4
97.1
13.9
113.3
18.0
5.6
8.6
0.075
0.679
0.008
0.015
168
1470
1
4
151.2
16.0
140.5
42.7
9.8
12.4
1)133
1.156
0.028
0.062
168
1470
2
4
228.9
2)).2
187.5
47.1
11.5
18.3
0.173
1.279
0.040 0.067
1.444
0.028
0.092
168
1470
3
4
107.4
11.6
169.8
41.6
11.6
13.9
1)127
168
1470
4
4
239.8
22.4
328.2
61.7
15.4
26.6
1)168
1.543
0.053
1)112
54
250
1
5
2.3
0.2
1.0
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.002
0.018
0.000
0.001
54
250
2
5
2.1
0.2
1.4
0.2
0.1
0.2
0.002
1)024
0.001
0.001
54
250
3
5
8.4
0.6
4.1
0.5
0.3
0.6
0.006
1)056
0.002
0.002
115
appendix 2.2. continued.
DAYS
KU
REP
GRASS
N
P
K
Ca
kg/ha
kg/ha
kg/ha
kg/ha
0.003
0.003
1.1
1.8
0.023
0.256
0.005
0.003
2.2
3.6
0.055
0.546
0.010
0.005
2.4
3.4
0.058
0.599
0.012
0.010
2.2
3.8
0.055
0.682
0.011
0.010
4.0
8.2
0.105
0.955
0.020
0.000
3.6
6.9
0.078
0.858
0.017
0.000
10.5
4.0
6.5
0.092
1.017
0.018
0.009
1.1
378
1
5
21.8
2.1
16.0
2.6
378
2
5
44.0
4.1
34.5
5.6
71
378
3
5
43.0
4.4
28.2
5.5
71
378
4
5
33.5
3,5
22.8
4.8
92
564
1
5
103.5
8.6
84.0
10.5
7.5
67.0
10.2
7.1
64.1
92
564
2
5
92
5t4
3
5
85.0
B
kg/ba
0.139
9.0
90.5
Cu
kg/ha
1.2
71
Mn
0.015
16.2
71
Zn
kg/ha
1.2
5
250
S
kg/ha
4
54
Mg
kg/ha kg/ha
0.7
92
564
4
5
61.9
5.2
48.3
7.5
3.0
4.9
0.073
0.752
0.015
0.011
117
819
1
5
132.7
17.2
129.2
13.7
6.1
9.6
0.111
1.317
0.015
0.000
117
819
2
5
132.8
17.3
142.9
15.1
6.1
10.0
0.128
1.340
0.017
0.000
117
819
3
5
61.1
7.1
118.1
32.3
7.1
9.1
0.126
1.414
0.015
0.005
117
819
4
5
41.5
5.2
102.3
10.4
4.8
7.8
0.089
1.112
0.011
0.007
168
1470
1
5
307.5
30.6
226.4
35.6
9.9
10.9
0.138
1.948
0.033
0.079
168
1470
2
5
308.3
34.0
182.8
31.1
9.7
16.5
0.136
1.575
0.034
0.088
168
1470
3
5
244.8
30.9
169.7
22.1
8.0
8.0
0.124
1.388
0.028
0.071
168
140
4
5
324.8
38.3
208.9
32.1
9.3
9.3
0.197
2.586
0.039
0.083
54
250
1
6
26.2
1.3
9.3
1.2
0.9
1.2
0.011
0.149
0.004
0.004
54
250
2
6
11.2
0.9
6.3
0.9
0.6
0.9
0.008
0.088
0.003
0.003
54
250
3
6
7.1
0.5
4.0
0.6
0.4
0.5
0.004
0.043
0.002
0.002
54
250
4
6
22.4
1.8
13.5
1.7
1.1
1.6
0.015
0.163
0.005
0.006
71
378
1
6
29.0
2.7
27.9
3.5
1.8
2.9
0.020
0.243
0.008
0.005
71
378
2
6
46.3
4.2
.36.1
4.3
2.6
4.1
0.028
0.332
0.010
0.006
71
378
3
6
23.1
2.5
19.0
2.0
1.3
1.8
0.016
(1.231
(1.005
0.003
71
378
4
6
27.6
2.8
23(1
3.4
1.9
2.3
0.023
0.318
(1.008
0.005
92
564
1
6
82.3
7.1
73.0
8.6
3.9
6.4
0.043
0.407
0.015
0.004
92
564
2
6
88.3
8.2
77.9
9.5
4.2
6.9
0.044
0.386
0.014
0.004
92
564
3
6
9(1.8
8.1
76.4
10.4
4.6
6.8
0.053
0.683
0.015
0.008
92
564
4
6
82.9
7.7
77.1
10.4
5.2
6.7
0.050
0.771
0.018
0.010
117
819
1
6
172.()
20.6
185.7
18.1
8.7
13.7
0.093
0.916
0.025
0.000
117
819
2
6
128.4
13.5
156.0
14.0
7.5
10.5
0.095
0.797
0.020 0.000
117
819
3
6
179.4
22.1
250.0
19.1
9.6
16.2
0.11(1
1.133
0.022
0.0(X)
117
819
4
6
102.4
13.3
183.5
14.3
7.6
12.7
0.102
0.902
0.015
0.010
168
1470
1
6
165.3
16.5
189.6
42.8
13.6
14.6
0.146
2.529
0.030
0.088
168
1470
2
6
97.3
10.2
179.6
34.5
12.6
13.3
0.110
1.467
((.027
((.071
168
147(1
3
6
374.5
36.7
354.3
75.3
23.9
25.7
((.239
3.451
0.062
0.147
168
1471)
4
6
272.3
20.9
317.1
61.4
26.6
26.6
((.249
4.151
0.060
0.183
116
appendix 2.2. continued.
DAYS
KU
REP
GRASS
N
K
1'
kg/ha
kg/ha
Mg
S
kg/ha kg/ha kg/ha
Zn
Mn
Cu
B
kg/ha
kg/ha
kg/ha
kg/ha
1.8
1.5
1.8
0.013
0.138
0.003
0.005
13.7
1.9
1.6
2.6
0.013
0.133
0.003
0.004
26.6
4.6
3.8
4.4
0.028
0.263
0.007
0.009
10.6
1.7
1.4
1.9
0.010
0.098
0.003
0.003
2.5
24.6
4.5
2.6
3.6
0.022
0.207
0.006
0.000
2.8
26.2
4.0
2.3
3.4
0.021
0.171
0.005
0.001
64.1
6.0
51.2
8.1
4.6
7.3
0.046
0.417
0.012
0.006
57.0
4.9
45.0
7.7
4.5
6.3
0.045
0.391
0.010
0.004
76.7
5.7
65.5
9.4
5.5
7.3
0.044
0.419
0.014
0.008
7
67.2
5.1
65.4
9.8
5.4
6.6
0.041
0.410 0.013
0.007
7
102.4
7.8
100.3
15.6
7.5
11.2
0.051
0.493
0.016
0.000
54
250
1
7
54
250
2
7
20.5
1.4
54
250
3
7
39.0
2.6
54
250
4
7
17.0
1.1
71
378
1
7
30.4
71
378
2
7
37.0
71
378
3
7
71
378
4
7
92
564
1
7
92
564
2
92
564
3
20.8
1.3
kg/ha
Ca
11.2
92
564
4
7
114.4
8.7
109.4
16.7
8.7
11.8
0.053
0.661
0.016
0.000
117
819
1
7
138.2
15.5
189.6
24.2 13.6
18.0
0.105
0.775
0.025
0.000
117
819
2
7
114.2
13.6
185.3
21.9
10.7
14.2
0.083
(1.941
0.018
0.012
117
819
3
7
116.0
15.0
146.7
16.2
9.6
13.2
(1.090
0.763
0.018
0.006
117
819
4
7
124.8
15.4
157.9
20.1
12.4
12.4
(1.083
0.917
0.024
0.012
168
1470
1
7
233.8
20.8
296.2
73.7 30.4
25.6
0.192
1.489
0.05(1
0.112
168
1470
2
7
193.9
17.2
238.5
37.7
18.0
15.4
0.120
0.944
0.039
0.043
168
1470
3
7
228.7
21.1
286.8
62.1
26.4
21.1
0.172
1.639
0.057
0.093
168
1470
4
7
451.7
42.1
352.9
78.6
31.1
23.8
0.183
2.213
0.071
0.128
117
Appendix 2.3 Normalized nutrient uptake of seven grasses
by days, heat uint, rep and grass type
Grass type
1-Tall fescu, Fawn
2-Perennial Iyegrass, Lion
3-Kentucky bluegrass, Newport
4-Perennial rvegrass. Pennfine
5-Fine fescue, Pennlawn
6-Orchardgrass, Potomack
7-Tall fescue. Rebel
DAYS
1-lU
REP GRASS
N
P
K
Ca
Mg
S
Zn
Mn
Cu
B
%
%
%
%
%
%
%,
%
%
DRYW
%
54
250
1
1
3
3
4
2
4
8
5
6
5
3
3
54
250
2
1
2
2
2
1
2
4
3
3
2
1
1
54
250
3
1
2
1
2
1
1
3
2
2
2
1
1
54
250
4
1
3
3
2
1
2
4
2
3
2
2
1
71
378
1
1
23
20
27
16
21
39
25
29
33
3
18
71
378
2
1
13
12
13
7
10
23
15
15
14
0
7
71
378
3
1
14
14
18
12
14
31
22
18
21
4
11
71
378
4
1
26
25
15
10
12
23
18
20
20
0
10
92
1
1
53
44
74
41
52
86
46
58
86
49
49
2
1
48
44
42
37
28
54
114
58
44
26
26
92
54
54
54
3
1
26
23
35
22
24
45
86
26
31
0
21
92
564
4
1
50
44
33
22
25
46
21
31
33
0
19
92
117
819
1
1
45
65
101
38
63
72
86
67
84
11
68
117
819
2
1
45
61
75
40
51
70
240
62
45
0
48
117
819
3
1
35
43
58
29
40
58
44
38
34
0
37
117
819
4
1
70
95
67
27
41
50
56
54
43
0
44
168
147(1
1
1
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
168
1470
2
1
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
168
147(1
3
1
100
100
100
1(10
100
100
100
1(8)
100
100
100
168
147(1
4
1
100
100
100
100
101)
100
100
l0()
100
100
100
71
378
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
(1
1
71
378
2
2
4
4
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
1
1
71
378
3
2
8
8
7
5
7
11
11
7
7
2
7
71
378
4
2
21
23
5
4
6
8
10
8
7
2
4
92
564
1
2
22
18
15
10
13
13
11
13
14
6
8
92
564
2
2
57
48
21
17
19
30
27
15
23
8
15
92
564
3
2
31
26
26
16
20
29
22
15
16
5
15
92
564
4
2
100
100
25
16
24
33
76
30
25
8
16
117
819
1
2
57
77
60
33
44
39
36
35
34
11
28
117
819
2
2
94
132
57
33
43
54
54
43
35
17
37
117
819
3
2
34
49
54
25
33
43
29
15
21
2
27
118
appendix 2.3. continued.
DAYS
HU
N
REP
GRASS
4
2
206
%
117
819
168
1470
1
2
168
1470
2
2
168
1470
3
168
1470
71
378
71
378
71
378
71
378
92
92
P
K
Ca
Mg
S
Zn
%
%
%
%
%
%
306
93
47
74
10)
100
100
100
100
100
100
10)
2
100
100
100
4
2
100
100
1
3
35
22
2
3
16
3
3
4
3
564
1
564
2
92
554
92
564
117
Mn
Cu
B
%
%
%
DRYW
%
73
91
83
41
13
53
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
12
8
14
23
17
13
17
0
11
13
11
13
22
41
28
18
22
0
16
10
7
9
9
14
24
18
13
18
4
9
15
11
11
14
18
37
23
18
19
0
13
3
62
40
29
28
33
56
60
38
37
3
28
3
32
25
26
28
36
77
49
31
33
0
28
3
3
32
24
35
39
44
76
61
45
48
0
32
4
3
26
17
25
32
37
64
49
39
38
0
27
819
1
3
109
106
77
41
70
94
72
55
45
0
59
117
819
2
3
57
69
71
46
76
142
83
64
44
0
64
117
819
3
3
19
25
66
48
79
98
92
141
68
26
61
117
819
4
3
26
30
81
61
8)
126
87
83
47
0
66
168
1470
1
3
100
100
100
100
10)
100
100
100
100
100
100
168
1470
2
3
100
100
100
100
100
10)
100
100
100
100
100
168
1 470
3
3
100
10)
10)
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
168
147)
4
3
1 0))
100
1 0)
100
1 0)
100
100
100
100
10)
100
71
378
1
4
7
6
5
3
4
8
6
4
5
2
3
71
378
2
4
3
4
3
7
3
4
4
4
3
2
3
71
378
3
4
17
16
7
6
9
11
17
13
13
5
6
71
378
4
4
7
7
3
4
7
6
15
18
7
3
5
92
564
1
4
23
18
30
11
25
31
16
16
23
0
15
92
564
2
4
14
14
16
10
13
14
12
12
12
4
10
92
554
3
4
44
36
22
17
21
28
31
28
23
8
92
564
4
4
26
23
15
15
19
21
33
33
14
2
117
819
1
4
54
68
103
39
54
63
62
55
6)
37
37
117
819
2
4
49
73
70
39
53
55
60
58
43
32
45
117
819
3
4
115
147
82
47
62
103
95
8))
59
30
47
117
819
4
4
41
62
35
29
36
32
45
44
14
13
27
168
1470
1
4
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
10)
100
100
168
1470
2
4
10)
100
100
10)
10)
100
100
100
100
100
100
168
1470
3
4
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
168
1470
4
4
10)
100
10)
100
100
100
11)1)
10)
100
100
100
54
251)
1
5
1
1
0
C)
1
1
1
1
1
1
54
250
2
5
1
C)
I
1
1
1
2
2
2
1
1
54
250
3
5
3
2
2
2
4
7
5
4
5
2
2
14
1
119
appendix 2.3. continued.
DAYS
REP
1-lU
54
250
71
71
GRASS
N
P
K
Ca
Mg
S
Zn
Mn
%
%
%
%
%
%
1(
13
14
3
9
30
6
18
43
42
15
19
28
26
28
11
15
76
49
63
0
33
42
57
54
50
0
28
81
75
73
63
13
35
53
37
29
37
13
21
17
16
22
40
30
43
47
15
24
41
30
40
76
37
50
32
378
1
5
7
7
7
7
378
2
5
14
12
19
18
71
378
3
5
18
14
17
25
71
378
4
5
10
9
11
92
5t4
1
5
34
28
37
92
564
2
5
29
22
37
33
92
564
3
5
35
23
38
47
4
5
19
13
23
23
7
%
35
11
3
%
4
23
4
%
9
8
5
5
3
13
4
DRYW
B
Cu
5
5
92
564
117
819
1
5
43
56
57
38
61
89
81
68
47
0
51
117
819
2
5
43
51
78
48
63
61
94
85
49
0
57
117
819
3
5
25
23
70
146
89
114
102
102
54
7
57
117
819
4
5
13
14
49
32
52
84
45
43
28
9
36
168
1470
1
5
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
168
1470
2
5
100
10(1
100
100
100
101)
100
100
100
100
100
168
1471)
3
5
l0()
100
1(X)
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
168
140
4
5
100
1 00
10(1
101)
101)
1(11)
100
100
100
100
100
54
250
1
6
10
8
5
3
7
8
8
6
14
5
4
8
6
10
5
4
54
U
2
6
12
4
3
5
7
7
54
250
3
6
2
1
1
1
1
2
2
1
3
1
1
54
250
4
6
8
6
4
3
4
6
6
4
9
3
3
71
313
1
6
18
16
15
8
14
20
14
10
26
6
10
71
373
2
6
48
41
20
13
20
31
26
23
37
9
16
71
378
3
6
6
7
5
3
5
7
7
7
8
2
4
71
378
4
6
10
9
7
5
7
9
9
8
14
3
5
92
564
1
6
50
43
38
20
28
44
29
16
50
5
22
92
564
2
6
91
81
43
28
34
52
40
26
53
6
28
92
564
3
6
24
22
22
14
19
27
22
20
24
5
14
92
564
4
6
30
26
24
17
20
25
20
19
31
5
15
117
819
1
6
104
124
98
42
64
94
64
36
83
0
64
117
819
2
6
132
133
87
41
6))
79
87
54
73
0
64
117
819
3
6
48
60
71
25
40
63
46
33
35
(1
40
117
819
4
6
38
44
58
23
29
48
41
22
26
6
31
168
1470
1
6
101)
1(1(1
100
1(10
1(1(1
101)
1(10
1(11)
100
100
100
168
1470
2
6
11)1)
1(1(1
101)
1(1(1
1(1(1
100
100
100
100
100
100
168
1470
3
6
100
100
10))
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
168
1470
4
6
100
10))
100
100
1(1(1
11)))
100
100
100
100
1(1(1
54
251)
1
7
9
6
4
2
5
7
7
9
6
4
4
54
250
2
7
11
3
6
5
9
17
11
14
8
9
8
54
25))
3
7
17
12
9
7
14
21
16
16
12
10
10
120
appendix 2.3. continued.
DAYS
HU
REP
GRASS
N
P
%
K
Ca
Mg
S
%
%
%
%
Mn
Zn
%
%
DRYW
B
Cu
%
%
%
2
4
8
6
4
4
3
3
12
14
11
0
7
54
250
4
7
4
3
71
378
1
7
13
12
8
6
9
14
71
378
2
7
19
17
11
11
13
22
18
18
13
2
12
71
378
3
7
28
28
18
13
17
35
27
25
21
6
15
71
378
4
7
13
12
13
10
15
27
25
18
14
3
11
92
564
1
7
33
27
22
13
18
28
23
28
27
7
16
92
564
2
7
35
30
27
26
30
43
35
43
33
17
28
92
564
3
7
45
37
35
25
28
53
30
30
28
0
26
92
564
4
7
25
21
31
21
28
50
29
30
23
0
21
117
819
1
7
59
74
64
33
45
70
55
52
50
0
39
117
819
2
7
59
79
78
58
59
92
69
100
45
28
69
117
819
3
7
51
71
51
26
36
63
52
47
32
6
45
117
819
4
7
28
37
45
26
40
52
45
41
33
9
32
168
1470
1
7
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
168
1470
2
7
100
100
100
100
100
1(}()
100
100
100
100
100
168
1470
3
7
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
168
1470
4
7
100
100
100
100
100
100
10()
101)
100
100
100
3
121
Apendix 3
Data from chapter 4
122
Appendix 3.1. Soil test data from four K sites in chapter 4.
STRAW: 1-flail chop, 2-burn
FERTIliTY: 1-low, 2-high
YEAR: 1-1989, 2-1990, 3-1991
LOCATION: l=pughs if, 2_-pughs pr, 3=coons if. 4=glasser pr
GRASS: 1=lsll fescue, 2=perenniai ryegraes
straw 1=flail chop, 2=annual burn
K: 1= K added, 2=no K
SOIL TEST DATA
soil test data 0-2.5cm
pIt
YR
# rep
oc fert gr
St
K
pH
P
----mg/kg
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
6.6
soil test data (1-15 cm
K
20
Ca
Mg
pH
------ meq/lOOg--
K
P
----ingJkg----
Ca
Mg
--meq/lOOg--
70
12.3
1.10
5.5
19
55
7.8
1,30
1
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
6.7
14
66
12.0
1.10
5.8
13
55
8.6
1.40
1
3
3
1
1
1
1
1
6.7
9
62
14.4
1.10
5.6
7
51
9.9
1.30
1
4
4
1
1
1
1
1
6.4
9
90
12.7
1.60
5.7
6
55
9.4
1.80
1
5
1
1
1
1
1
2
6.1
18
51
9.8
1.00
5.4
18
59
7.2
1.50
1
6
2
1
1
1
1
2
6.4
10
55
10.9
0.94
5.5
9
55
7.8
1.30
1
7
3
1
1
1
1
2
6.4
9
59
12.4
1.20
6.2
8
55
11.6
1.20
1
8
4
1
1
1
1
2
6.5
7
66
12.3
1.40
5.7
6
66
9.2
1.70
1
9
1
1
1
1
2
1
6.8
21
90
13.0
0.85
5.8
19
59
8.6
1.00
1
10
2
1
1
1
2
1
6.3
15
66
11.2
1.00
5.5
11
51
7.9
1.40
1
11
3
1
1
1
2
1
6.3
13
117
12.7
1.20
5.5
9
78
7.1
1.30
1
12
4
1
1
1
2
1
6.9
9
70
14.4
0.98
5.9
8
59
8.7
1.30
1
13
1
1
1
1
2
2
7.0
18
59
15.8
0.82
6.3
19
62
11.4
1.10
1
14
2
1
1
1
2
2
6.4
12
62
12.3
1.30
5.8
9
59
9.8
1.60
1
15
3
1
1
1
2
2
6.2
10
70
13.4
1.20
5.2
9
7(1
8.8
1.40
1
16
4
1
1
1
2
2
6.3
9
59
10.8
1.10
5.5
7
59
7.7
1.50
1
33
1
3
2
1
1
1
4.7
76
265
3.4
0.66
4.7
71
238
4.4
0.83
1
34
2
3
2
1
1
1
4.9
86
296
3.3
(1.67
4.8
73
211
3.6
0.65
1
35
3
3
2
1
1
1
5.0
120
367
3.3
0.68
5.0
104
328
3.9
0.67
1
36
4
3
2
1
1
1
4.9
133
378
2.7
0.68
4.9
124
374
0.0
0.54
1
37
1
3
2
1
1
2
4.8
80
254
3.6
0.74
4.9
73
238
4.3
0.81
1
38
2
3
2
1
1
2
4.8
110
285
3.1
0.67
4.8
77
226
3.7
0.69
1
39
3
3
2
1
1
2
4.8
120
386
3.0
0.62
5.0
104
328
3.7
0.65
1
40
4
3
2
1
1
2
5.0
142
324
3.0
0.56
4.8
113
296
2.9
0.48
1
41
1
3
2
1
2
1
4.6
75
640
4.3
0.98
4.7
64
296
4.6
0.94
1
42
2
3
2
1
2
1
4.8
111
1326
3.7
(1.84
4.7
89
538
4.1
0.79
1
43
3
3
2
1
2
1
4.8
130
1049
4.1
0.89
4.7
113
550
3.7
0.68
1
44 4
3
2
1
2
1
4.8
158
1482
2.9
0.75
4.6
130
542
2.8
0.53
1
45
1
3
2
1
2
2
4.8
86
948
4.0
0.96
4.7
66
308
4.0
0.81
1
46
2
3
2
1
2
2
4.6
100
679
4.5
1.10
4.8
86
476
4.0
0.73
123
Appendix 3.1. Continued.
SOIL TEST DATA
YR
#
soil test data 0-15 cm
soil test data 0-2.5 cm
pit
rep bc
[en
gr
K
St
p1-I
P
K
Ca
Mg
pH
------ me9/100g--
----mg/kg
P
K
Ca
Mg
--meq/lOOg--
----mg/kg----
1
47
3
3
2
1
2
2
5.0
137
1178
3.6
0.86
4.7
101
566
3.8
0.70
1
48
4
3
2
1
2
2
4.9
167
1404
3.2
0.76
4.6
125
558
2.9
0.52
I
17
I
2
2
2
1
1
5.6
61
191
6.5
0.46
7.1
78
230
15.8
0.48
5.2
0.64
1
18
2
2
2
2
1
1
5.5
61
207
6.6
0.53
5.2
63
137
1
19
3
2
2
2
1
1
6.2
67
215
10.4
0.68
5.5
74
199
6.4
0.67
1
20
4
2
2
2
1
1
5.5
58
121
6.7
0.62
5.9
82
140
10.0
0.59
1
21
1
2
2
2
1
2
6.9
80
195
15.4
0.44
6.4
74
156
11.6
0.57
1
22
2
2
2
2
1
2
5.6
58
164
7.1
0.60
5.4
60
140
6.3
0.73
1
23
3
2
2
2
1
2
6.1
68
222
9.8
0.60
5.8
72
195
8.1
0.79
1
24
4
2
2
2
1
2
6.4
72
218
11.0
0.51
6.1
56
160
9.3
0.62
1
25
1
2
2
2
2
1
5.6
63
222
7.3
0.65
5.7
61
133
8.2
0.70
1
26
2
2
2
2
2
1
5.7
75
277
7.4
0.58
5.5
70
179
7.8
0.68
1
27
3
2
2
2
2
1
5.4
59
215
7.6
0.72
5.2
54
137
6.2
0.92
1
28
4
2
2
2
2
1
5.7
55
152
6.1
0.68
5.5
55
152
6.1
0.71
1
29
1
2
2
2
2
2
5.8
70
285
8.1
0.66
55
69
215
7.8
0.76
1
30
2
2
2
2
2
2
5.9
79
332
10.0
0.68
6.1
69
215
9.9
0.55
1
31
3
2
2
2
2
2
5.5
64
218
7.0
0.87
5.5
57
172
6.6
0.96
1
32
4
2
2
2
2
2
5.5
72
269
6.5
0.81
5.5
64
222
5.9
0.79
1
49
1
4
1
2
1
1
6.8
16
55
11.4
0.82
5.5
16
51
6.6
0.97
1
50
2
4
1
2
1
1
6.6
19
55
11.7
0.78
5.9
18
51
8.3
(1.93
1
51
3
4
1
2
1
1
6.8
26
59
12.6
1)96
5.5
28
59
7.1
1.30
1
52
4
4
1
2
I
1
7.2
29
59
17.1
0.91
6.2
29
66
10.6
1.10
1
53
1
4
1
2
1
2
7.2
14
51
15.2
0.85
5.9
14
47
6.6
0.84
1
54
2
4
1
2
1
2
6.4
7
51
10.2
0.94
6.0
18
51
8.9
1.00
1
55
3
4
1
2
1
2
6.7
27
55
12.9
0.89
5.5
30
47
7.2
1.10
1
56
4
4
1
2
1
2
6,8
31
51
17.2
1.00
5.9
30
62
8.9
1.20
1
57
1
4
1
2
2
1
7.2
27
70
15.2
0.85
5.9
20
82
9.2
0.14
1
58
2
4
1
2
2
1
7.0
26
82
12.8
0.72
5.8
20
66
8.0
1.0(1
1
59
3
4
1
2
2
1
6.6
27
78
11.2
1.10
5.9
26
90
9.0
1.20
1
61)
4
4
1
2
2
1
6.7
4!
66
12.2
1.1))
6.))
35
62
9.2
1.3(1
1
61
1
4
1
2
2
2
6.8
27
59
11.5
().7
6.1
1$
55
8,9
(1.94
1
62
2
4
1
2
2
2
6.7
26
66
11.6
0.95
5.8
22
62
79.0
1.10
1
63
3
4
1
2
2
2
6.4
32
62
11.3
1.11)
5.9
29
59
9.2
1.30
1
64
4
4
1
2
2
2
6.4
41
78
11.5
1.20
5.8
36
66
9.0
1.30
2
1
I
1
1
1
1
1
6.3
22
70
12.3
0.93
5.9
21)
43
11.6
1.01)
2
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
6.3
16
66
13.0
0.89
5.4
19
59
8.7
1.00
2
3
3
1
1
1
1
1
6.7
9
51
17.0
1.00
5.3
9
55
8.9
1.20
2
4
4
1
1
1
1
1
6.4
8
51
14.3
1.40
5.4
8
55
92
1.80
2
5
1
1
1
1
1
2
6.2
21
47
12.0
1.0))
5.6
19
43
8.7
1.20
124
Appendix 3.1. Continued.
SOIL TEST DATA
YR
#
soil test data 0-15 cm
soil test data 0-2.5 cm
pit
rep bc
fert
gr
K
si
pH
K
P
----mg/kg
Ca
Mg
pH
------ meq/I DOg--
K
P
Ca
Mg
--meq/IOOg--
----mg/kg----
1
1
1
2
6.4
12
55
13.9
1.10
5.6
10
47
9.7
1.30
1
1
1
1
2
6.5
8
62
14.1
1.20
5.6
7
51
11.6
1.50
4
1
1
1
1
2
6.6
8
62
15.0
1.40
5.5
7
51
9.6
1.60
9
1
1
1
1
2
1
6.7
23
70
13.0
0.92
5.9
20
74
10.6
ft95
10
2
1
1
1
2
1
6.1
16
78
11.3
1.20
56
13
66
79
1.40
11
3
1
1
1
2
1
6.1
11
109
12.3
1.30
5.6
11
74
8.6
1.40
12
4
1
1
1
2
1
6.1
12
98
12.1
1.30
5.6
7
74
8.7
1.30
2
13
1
1
1
1
2
2
6.2
22
82
10.7
1.00
5.9
23
59
9.2
1.00
2
14
2
1
1
1
2
2
6.1
11
62
12.7
1.40
5.2
ID
51
7.0
1.50
2
15
3
1
1
1
2
2
6.3
14
94
14.0
1.20
5.9
7
86
12.4
1.40
2
16
4
1
1
1
2
2
6.0
8
113
11.3
1.30
5.4
S
82
7.8
1.30
2
33
1
3
2
1
1
1
5.3
72
238
5.7
(1.68
5.3
70
226
6.0
(1.83
2
34
2
3
2
1
1
1
5.5
52
218
6.9
0.56
5.1
68
215
4.3
0.71
2
35
3
3
2
1
1
1
6.2
102
332
12.4
0.65
5.8
92
316
7.1
0.66
2
36
4
3
2
1
1
1
5.7
118
293
7.2
0.49
5.3
125
308
4.3
0.47
2
37
1
3
2
1
1
2
5.3
70
172
5.8
0.65
5.2
71
168
5.4
0.75
2
38
2
3
2
1
1
2
5.6
79
199
7.4
0.66
5.3
79
211
5.5
0.61
2
39
3
3
2
1
I
2
5,7
121
277
7.8
0.52
5.3
108
265
4.8
0.54
2
40
4
3
2
1
1
2
5.4
117
254
6.8
(1.47
5.1
117
257
3.7
(1.47
2
41
1
3
2
1
2
1
5.3
73
413
5.9
0.62
4.9
62
269
4.2
0.68
2
42
2
3
2
1
2
1
5.4
71
390
5.8
(1.66
5.5
66
347
6.4
0.74
2
43
3
3
2
1
2
1
5.4
112
562
6
0.62
4.7
89
269
3.9
0.58
2
44
4
3
2
1
2
1
5.6
122
519
7
0.52
4.8
93
335
3.3
0.46
2
45
1
3
2
1
2
2
5.1
66
335
5.5
0.65
4.9
57
230
4.4
0.73
2
46
2
3
2
1
2
2
5.4
59
491
5.5
0.65
4.9
69
335
4.1
0.66
2
47
3
3
2
1
2
2
5.7
101
488
8.6
(1.6
4.8
89
343
4.0
0.60
2
48
4
3
2
1
2
2
5.6
113
542
6
0.56
4.9
108
363
3.4
0.50
2
17
1
2
2
2
1
1
6.2
59
296
11.6
0.41
5.9
71
176
11.1
0.53
2
18
2
2
2
2
1
1
4.9
64
355
5.5
0.50
5.1
60
172
6.1
0.53
2
19
3
2
2
2
1
1
5.8
71
374
10.1
0.55
5.5
66
226
7.4
0.67
2
20
4
2
2
2
1
1
5.1
60
332
5.8
0.44
5.6
54
195
8.0
0.54
2
21
1
2
2
2
1
2
6.0
68
257
10.1
0.45
5.8
72
168
9.5
0.52
2
22
2
2
2
2
1
2
4.9
71
320
6.4
0.55
5.2
62
168
6.6
0.58
2
23
3
2
2
2
1
2
5.9
66
289
10.5
0.56
5.7
60
191
8.5
0.68
2
24 4
2
2
2
1
2
5.2
59
355
8.0
0.52
5.1
54
164
7.9
0.48
2
25
1
2
2
2
2
1
5.2
78
324
9.2
0.50
5.5
68
195
7.9
0.57
2
26
2
2
2
2
2
1
5.3
77
359
6,1)
0.72
5.4
59
187
7.7
0.72
2
27
3
2
2
2
2
1
5.2
51
289
6.9
0.6(1
5.1
48
164
7.4
0.71
2
6
2
2
7
3
2
8
2
2
2
2
1
125
Appendix 3.1. Continued.
SOIL TEST DATA
pit
YR
soil test data 0-15 cm
soil test data 0-2.5 cm
# rep
bc
gr
fert
K
st
pH
P
K
Ca
Mg
pH
----mg/kg ------ meq/lOOg--
K
P
----mg/kg----
Ca
Mg
--meq/lOOg--
2
28
4
2
2
2
2
1
5.1
57
300
6.2
0.56
5.2
67
183
5.8
0.60
2
29
1
2
2
2
2
2
5.5
73
242
7.2
0.51
5.1
62
183
6.7
0.63
2
30
2
2
2
2
2
2
5.1
89
371
6.9
0.57
5.2
68
195
6.3
0.55
2
31
3
2
2
2
2
2
5.4
58
328
7
0.73
5.3
54
230
6.9
0.95
2
32
4
2
2
2
2
2
5.3
61
238
5.8
0.55
5.1
59
164
4.8
0.64
2
49
1
4
1
2
1
1
5.9
19
59
8.4
0.8
5.7
16
55
6.9
0.87
2
50
2
4
1
2
1
1
6.3
24
82
10.5
1.1
5.8
23
55
8.0
0.84
2
51
3
4
1
2
1
1
6.5
33
74
10.9
0.92
6.1
28
51
8.5
0.96
2
52
4
4
1
2
1
1
7
38
78
17.3
0.92
6.2
39
62
10.6
1.00
2
53
1
4
1
2
1
2
6.2
19
55
9.5
0.76
6.1
19
43
8.4
0.88
2
54
2
4
1
2
1
2
5.9
25
59
8.3
0.81
5.6
24
62
7.0
0.93
2
55
3
4
1
2
1
2
6.4
39
86
10.8
0.84
5.6
40
70
7.2
0.98
2
56
4
4
1
2
1
2
6.8
37
62
13.1
0.89
5.4
34
62
6.5
1.20
2
57
1
4
1
2
2
1
6.2
39
160
8.7
0.86
5.6
20
105
6.4
0.82
2
58
2
4
1
2
2
1
6.7
31
113
11.4
0.81
6.1
24
105
8.6
0.92
2
59
3
4
1
2
2
1
6.6
35
70
12.3
0.95
5.9
28
55
8.2
1.00
2
60
4
4
1
2
2
1
6.9
38
70
16.5
1
6.3
32
66
9.9
1.20
2
61
1
4
1
2
2
2
6.3
32
160
8.5
0.81
5.7
2(1
82
6.6
0.89
2
62
2
4
1
2
2
2
7.3
27
94
13.3
0.87
5.6
26
70
6.7
0.95
2
63
3
4
1
2
2
2
6.3
39
70
10.5
1
5.8
31
59
8.3
1.10
2
64
4
4
1
2
2
2
6.5
44
78
10.6
0.98
5.9
34
70
9.3
1.30
3
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
5.8
27
62
7.6
1.10
5.1
21
27
4.5
1.30
3
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
6.0
22
86
8.8
1.10
5.5
16
31
5.8
(1.99
3
3
3
1
1
1
1
1
5.9
14
101
11.1
1.2(1
5.7
10
51
7.8
1.10
3
4
4
1
1
1
I
6(1
tO
70
9.6
1.50
5.8
8
43
8.0
1.70
3
5
1
1
1
1
1
2
6.0
29
66
8.4
1.11)
5.6
22
35
5.7
1.10
3
6
2
1
1
1
1
2
6.2
19
51
10.9
1.10
5.5
16
31
6.6
1.1(1
3
7
3
1
1
1
1
2
6.0
13
86
1(1.1
1.40
5.3
9
39
6.5
1.30
3
8
4
1
1
1
1
2
6.1
12
62
1(1.3
1.5(1
5.5
8
43
6.7
1.60
3
9
1
1
1
1
2
1
6.3
32
94
9.8
1.10
5.7
24
47
7.0
1.00
3
10
2
1
1
1
2
1
5.6
19
137
7.0
1.4(1
5.1
14
47
4.6
1.40
3
11
3
1
1
1
2
1
5.7
19
94
8.7
1.40
5.2
12
43
4.9
1.20
3
12
4
1
1
1
2
1
5.5
13
66
7.1
1.30
5.4
9
43
5.6
1.40
1
3
13
I
1
1
1
2
2
5.8
29
78
8.1
1.10
5.6
22
31
5.1
1.00
3
14
2
1
I
1
2
2
5.7
21
74
8.1
1.60
5.2
13
43
5.8
1.40
3
15
3
1
1
1
2
2
6.2
13
82
11.2
1.10
6.1
12
55
10.2
1.10
3
16
4
1
1
2
2
5.7
16
148
7.3
1.40
5.3
11
55
6.1
1.30
3
33
1
3
2
1
1
5.3
84
382
5.6
0.65
5.0
78
293
4.7
0.73
1
1
126
Appendix 3.1. Continued.
SOIL TEST DATA
YR
soil test data 0-15 cm
soil test data 0-2.5 cm
pit
# rep bc feet gr
st
K
pH
P
K
----mg/kg---3
34
2
3
2
1
1
1
5.2
Ca
Mg
pH
K
P
Ca
Mg
--meq/lOOg--
----mg/kg----
--meq/lOOg--
85
386
5
0.57
5.2
78
277
4.9
0.68
0.58
5.1
95
293
4.6
0.61
0.43
5.3
124
343
4.9
0.45
3
35
3
3
2
1
1
1
5.4
122
503
5.1
3
36
4
3
2
1
1
1
5.7
165
495
6.6
3
37
1
3
2
1
1
2
5.1
101
445
5.1
0.67
5.1
70
222
5.1
0.79
3
38
2
3
2
1
1
2
5.3
94
382
5.1
0.59
5.2
81
238
4.7
0.65
3
39
3
3
2
1
1
2
5.3
145
519
4.7
0.54
5.2
110
281
4.9
0.58
5.2
0.51
5.2
123
293
4.4
0.53
3
40
4
3
2
1
1
2
5.6
151
449
3
41
1
3
2
1
2
1
5.3
8t
519
4.6
0.66
5.0
65
332
3.9
0.65
3
42
2
3
2
1
2
1
5.2
91
550
4.5
0.63
5.1
77
327
4.7
0.67
3
43
3
3
2
1
2
1
5.2
112
585
3.7
0.68
5.0
96
363
3.3
0.60
3
44
4
3
2
1
2
1
5.2
128
554
3.4
0.51
5.1
116
421
3.5
0.50
69
464
4
0.64
5.1
67
296
3.9
0.70
85
542
4.2
0.67
5.0
71
332
4.0
0.69
0.65
3
45
1
3
2
1
2
2
5.3
3
46
2
3
2
1
2
2
5.3
3
47
3
3
2
1
2
2
5.2
117
558
3.2
0.63
5.1
96
320
3.9
3
48
4
3
2
1
2
2
5.4
126
616
4.0
0.64
5.0
109
371
3.5
0.60
3
17
1
2
2
2
1
1
6.5
79
382
11.6
0.50
5.7
84
176
8.3
0.43
3
18
2
2
2
2
1
1
5.1
68
527
3.6
0.41
5.1
61
242
5.0
0.42
3
19
3
2
2
2
1
1
5.4
78
382
5.9
0.41
5.4
76
234
6.0
0.53
3
20
4
2
2
2
1
1
5.0
52
335
4.0
0.35
5.2
57
176
6.1
0.44
3
21
1
2
2
2
1
2
5.9
74
218
8.2
0.34
5.7
75
140
7.7
0.40
3
22
2
2
2
2
1
2
5.2
57
363
4.1
0.46
5.0
60
164
4.6
0.44
3
23
3
2
2
2
1
2
5.5
70
304
6.1
0.44
5.4
67
164
6.2
0.49
3
24
4
2
2
2
1
2
6.0
64
285
8.4
0.43
5.4
5.7
164
6.6
0.42
3
25
1
2
2
2
2
1
5.4
74
515
4.9
0.52
5.3
68
246
6.1
0.48
3
26
2
2
2
2
2
1
5.2
92
335
5.1
0.46
5.3
68
230
6.1
0.49
3
27
3
2
2
2
2
1
5.3
71
503
4.8
0.68
5.0
64
211
4.5
0.59
3
28
4
2
2
2
2
1
5.2
61
398
4.8
0.6
5.1
61
211
4.6
0.52
3
29
1
2
2
2
2
2
5.2
68
374
4.7
0.53
5.2
63
172
6.3
0.50
3
30
2
2
2
2
2
2
5.9
68
363
8.5
0.51
5.2
75
191
6.3
0.49
3
31
3
2
2
2
2
2
5.2
54
378
5.6
0.72
5.1
55
183
5.4
0.70
3
32
4
2
2
2
2
2
5.2
76
417
4.2
0.73
5.2
59
187
5.7
0.62
3
49
1
4
I
2
1
1
6.3
21
82
9.5
0.82
5.8
17
31
6.1
0.92
3
50
2
4
1
2
1
1
6.3
24
59
10.7
0.87
6.1
17
31
7.3
1.00
3
51
3
4
1
2
1
1
6.4
30
66
10.8
0.92
6.1
24
43
7.1
1.10
3
52
4
4
1
2
1
1
6.3
41
78
11.4
0.95
6.1
41)
43
8.2
1.10
3
53
1
4
1
2
1
2
6.3
18
47
IC)
0.91
5.9
15
31
6.1
0.97
3
54
2
4
1
2
1
2
6.1
27
62
7.5
1.00
5.8
22
31
5.8
(1.93
127
Appendix 3.1. Continued.
SOIL TEST DATA
YR
#
soil test data 0-15 cm
soil test data 0-2.5 cm
pIt
rep bc
fert
gr
st
K
pH
K
P
Ca
Mg
pH
------ meq/lOOg--
P
K
Ca
Mg
--tneq/lOOg--
----mg/kg----
----mg/kg
3
55
3
4
1
2
1
2
6.0
32
47
8.8
0.87
5.6
31
27
6.1
0.90
3
56
4
4
1
2
1
2
6.6
40
70
13.7
0.96
5.7
37
39
5.6
1.20
3
57
1
4
1
2
2
1
6
34
179
7.8
I
5.8
22
86
5.8
1.00
34
144
12.7
1
6.4
22
59
6.6
0.88
1.2
6.4
32
86
7.0
1.30
3
58
2
4
1
2
2
1
6.5
3
59
3
4
1
2
2
1
6.4
36
148
6.7
3
60
4
4
1
2
2
1
6.4
52
265
10.8
1.30
6.4
37
105
8.5
1.20
3
61
1
4
1
2
2
2
6.4
28
152
7.6
0.91
6.4
16
47
6.6
1.10
3
62
2
4
1
2
2
2
6.4
28
82
9.1
1
6.2
22
43
6.9
0.95
172
9.3
1.2
6.0
32
47
6.9
1.40
66
10.5
0.97
6.1
36
39
8.1
1.00
3
63
3
4
1
2
2
2
6
45
3
64
4
4
1
2
2
2
6.3
41
128
Appendix 3.2. Straw yield components from four K sites in chapter4.
STRAW: 1-flail chop, 2-burn
FERTILITY: 1-low, 2-high
YEAR: 1-1989, 2-1990, 3-1991
LOCATION: 1=pughs tf, 2=pughs pr, 3=coorts tf, 4=glasser pr
GRASS: 1=tall fescue. 2=perennial ryegrass
straw 1=flail chop, 2=annual burn
K: 1= K added, 2=no K
Straw at harvest
straw
pit
YR
#
rep bc
fert
gr
St
K
yld
kg/ha
K
Ca
Mg
P
TN
Kup
Caup
Mgup
Pup
kg/ha
kg/ha
kg/ha
kg/ha
%
%
%
%
%
0.86
43.31
19.57
15.55
4.30
43.63
18.97
14.52
5.06
45.64
17.94
13.03
3.15
0.87
56.06
20.91
15.95
4.85
0.95
29.53
16.83
13.41
5.29
0.08
0.89
31.38
14.95
11.27
3.63
0.22
0.10
0.91
55.10
20.48
15.69
7.13
0.24
0.09
1.11
45.63
19.77
15.31
5.85
0.32
0.23
0.10
0.97
61.88
17.71
12.43
5.52
0.33
0.24
0.09
0.73
44.89
16.96
12.55
4.70
1.30
0.28
0.20
0.13
1.01
100.41
21.77
15.26
10.07
5947
1.08
0.29
0.21
0.10
0.79
64.40
17.46
12.33
5.95
6023
(1.95
0.34
0.23
0.10
0.90
57.09
20.71
13.87
6.02
2
6037
0.96
0.31
0.25
0.09
1.18
58.11
18.48
14.83
5.43
2
5717
1.16
0.33
0.23
0.09
1.05
66.60
19.06
13.02
5.15
2
2
6301
1.02
0.32
0.21
0.10
0.89
64.10
20.35
13.38
6.30
1
1
1
5238
1.88
0.27
0.17
0.08
0.89
98.74
13.95
8.85
4.19
1
1
1
5840
2.18
0.29
0.17
0.11
0.90
127.55
16.90
10.16
6.42
2
1
I
I
4944
2.18
0.28
0.17
0.08
1.10
107.97
13.69
8.48
3.96
2
1
1
1
4117
2.47
0.30
0.16
0.06
0.82
101.63
12.43
6.74
2.47
3
2
1
1
2
5061
1.93
0.29
0.18
0.12
0.96
97.79
14.65
9.07
6.07
3
2
1
1
2
5362
1.96
0.27
0.17
0.07
1.03
104.88
14.28
9.06
3.75
3
3
2
1
1
2
5679
2.18
0.39
0.20
0.10
0.88
123.61
22.15
11.19
5.68
40
4
3
2
I
I
2
55(8)
2.18
0.25
0.14
0.12
0.93
119.73
13.50
7.60
6.60
41
1
3
2
1
2
1
4863
1.87
0.21
0.17
(1.10
0.98
90.95
10.3()
8.09
4.86
42
2
3
2
1
2
1
3146
1.96
0.25
0.17
0.09
1.18
61.72
7.72
5.23
2.83
1
43
3
3
2
1
2
1
4036
2.10
0.24
0.15
0.07
0.91
84.69
9.82
6.09
2.83
1
44
4
3
2
1
2
1
584
2.05
0.23
0.15
0.06
0.91
11.98
1.35
0.88
0.35
1
45
1
3
2
1
2
2
3994
1.70
0.22
0.15
0.11
1.30
67.87
8.88
6.13
4.39
1
46
2
3
2
1
2
2
3086
1.81
0.19
0.13
0.09
0.75
55.75
5.76
4.11
2.78
1
1
1
6139
0.71
0.32
0.25
0.07
1
1
1
1
5618
0.78
0.34
0.26
0.09
1.08
1
1
1
1
5248
0.87
0.34
0.25
0.06
0.74
I
1
1
1
1
6926
0.81
0.30
0.23
0.07
1
1
1
1
1
2
4806
0.61
0.35
0.28
0.11
6
2
1
1
1
1
2
4542
0.69
0.33
0.25
1
7
3
1
1
1
1
2
7129
0.77
0.29
1
8
4
1
1
1
1
2
6502
0.70
0.30
1
9
1
1
1
1
2
1
5519
1.12
1
10
2
1
1
1
2
1
5217
0.86
1
11
3
1
1
1
2
1
7747
1
12
4
1
1
1
2
1
1
13
1
1
1
1
2
2
1
14
2
1
1
1
2
1
15
3
1
1
1
2
1
16
4
1
1
1
1
33
1
3
2
1
34
2
3
2
1
35
3
3
1
36
4
3
1
37
1
1
38
2
1
39
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
3
2
1
3
1
1
4
4
1
5
1
129
Appendix 3.2. Continued.
Straw at harvest
straw
pit
YR
#
rep bc
fert gr
st
K
yld
kg/ha
K
Ca
Mg
P
TN
Kup
Caup
Mgup
Pup
kg/ha
kg/ha
kg/ha
kg/ha
%
%
%
%
%
0.24
0.14
0.10
0.72
76.37
9.02
5.26
3.74
1
47
3
3
2
1
2
2
3740
2.04
1
48
4
3
2
1
2
2
2461
2.10
0.26
0.14
0.11
1.03
51.73
6.30
3.53
2.71
1
17
1
2
2
2
1
1
2726
1.37
0.38
0.15
0.07
0.89
37.47
10.40
4.05
1.91
1
18
2
2
2
2
1
1
5505
1.32
0.36
0.13
0.10
0.86
72.56
19.86
7.33
5.51
1
19
3
2
2
2
1
1
6458
1.21
0.35
0.13
0.11
1.32
78.05
22.34
8.10
7.10
1.49
0.41
0.15
0.09
1.25
69.91
19.27
7.20
4.22
1.33
0.35
0.13
0.10
1.05
43.38
11.33
4.08
3.26
4.21
1.86
1
20
4
2
2
2
1
1
4688
1
21
1
2
2
2
1
2
3255
1
22
2
2
2
2
1
2
2656
1.34
0.39
0.16
0.07
0.93
35.68
10.47
1
23
3
2
2
2
1
2
5908
1.32
0.34
0.14
0.10
0.98
77.88
20.32
8.01
5.91
1
24
4
2
2
2
1
2
5587
1.31
0.36
0.14
0.08
1.09
72.92
20.27
7.58
4.47
1.19
0.31
0.11
0.08
0.84
44.79
11.69
4.24
3.01
1.25
0.32
0.12
0.11
0.93
31.82
8.12
3.00
2.80
3.81
1
25
1
2
2
2
2
1
3768
1
26
2
2
2
2
2
1
2548
1
27
3
2
2
2
2
1
3814
1.38
0.35
0.14
0.11)
0.92
52.64
13.28
5.47
1
28
4
2
2
2
2
1
3678
1.33
0.29
0.13
0.10
0.94
48.75
11)80
4.61
3.68
1
29
1
2
2
2
2
2
3621
1.18
0.31
0.10
0.11
0.97
42.58
11.09
3.80
3.98
0.31
0.12
0.07
0.90
43.73
10.57
3.98
2.37
1
30
2
2
2
2
2
2
3383
1.29
1
31
3
2
2
2
2
2
3633
1.26
0.31
0.13
0.07
0.82
45.70
11.28
4.74
2.54
1
32
4
2
2
2
2
2
4619
1.24
0.33
0.14
0.08
1.00
57.17
15.21
6.26
3.70
1
49
1
4
1
2
1
1
4855
0.91
0.38
0.19
0.10
1.07
44.08
18.33
9.44
4.86
1
50
2
4
1
2
1
1
2641
0.94
0.34
0.17
0.09
1.00
24.89
8.92
4.46
2.38
0.91
0.33
0.19
0.11)
0.95
26.34
9.67
5.42
2.90
1)88
0.36
0.18
1)06
1.03
29.86
12.04
6.22
2.03
31.75
16.16
8.28
5.47
1
51
3
4
1
2
1
1
291)1
1
52
4
4
I
2
1
1
3377
1
53
1
4
1
2
1
2
4559
0.70
0.35
0.18
0.12
1)97
1
54
2
4
1
2
1
2
3876
0.85
0.43
0.20
0.06
1)91
33.00
16.82
7.74
2.33
1
55
3
4
1
2
1
2
3083
0.91
0.38
0.23
0.11
0.93
27.99
11.77
6.94
3.39
1
56
4
4
1
2
1
2
3040
0.89
0.40
0.20
0.08
0.95
26,99
12.11
6.15
2.43
1
57
1
4
1
2
2
1
3758
1.16
0.34
0.17
0.09
1.09
43.78
12.69
6.25
3.38
0.18
0.10
0.84
31.95
10.20
5.31
2.97
0.98
47.15
12.06
6.47
2.93
1
58
2
4
1
2
2
1
2966
1.08
0.34
1
59
3
4
1
2
2
1
3664
1.2)
0.33
(1.18
0.08
1
61)
4
4
1
2
2
1
3697
1.32
1)37
0,18
0.09
1)64
48.86
13.57
6.81
3.33
1
61
1
4
1
2
2
2
3516
1J.9)
0.33
0.16
(1.11
(1.97
34.74
11.65
5.58
3.87
1
62
2
4
1
2
2
2
3157
1.04
0.35
0.18
(1.11
11.96
32.75
10.92
5.57
3.47
1.12
0.36
0.17
0.08
1.07
46.63
14.96
7.15
3.34
(1.12
1.00
38.25
12.09
6.01
4.14
1
63
3
4
1
2
2
2
4173
1
64
4
4
1
2
2
2
3451
1.11
(1.35
0.17
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
9304
0.74
0.32
0.20
68.85
29.77
18.61
0.00
0.42
0.28
0.14
33.78
22.52
11.26
0.00
35.11
17.55
0.00
2
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
8042
2
3
3
1
1
1
1
1
10326
0.59
0.34
0.17
60.92
2
4
4
1
1
1
1
1
7668
0.51
0.24
0.15
39.11
18.40
11.50
0.00
2
5
1
1
1
1
1
2
7258
0.43
0.29
0.16
31.21
21.05
11.61
0.00
130
Appendix 3.2. Continued.
Straw at harvest
straw
pit
YR
#
rep bc
fert
gr
st
K
yld
K
Ca
Mg
P
TN
Kup
Caup
Mgup
Pup
%
%
kg/ha
kg/ha
kg/ha
kg/ha
%
%
%
2
6
2
1
1
1
1
2
8678
0.30
0.25
0.12
26.03
21.70
10.41
0.00
2
7
3
1
1
1
1
2
6968
0.35
0.31
0.17
24.39
21.60
11.85
0.00
26.95
14.37
0.00
kg/ha
2
8
4
1
1
1
1
2
8982
0.40
0.30
0.16
35.93
2
9
1
1
1
1
2
1
8850
0.88
0.27
0.15
77.88
23.90
13.28
0.00
2
10
2
1
1
1
2
1
10398
0.68
0.21
0.12
70.71
21.84
12.48
0.00
2
11
3
1
1
1
2
1
9464
0.82
0.27
0.12
77.60
25.55
11.36
0.00
2
12
4
1
1
1
2
1
8936
0.61
0.24
0.14
54.51
21.45
12.51
0.00
27.70
15.19
0.00
12.17
0.00
2
13
1
1
1
1
2
2
8934
0.80
0.31
0.17
71.47
2
14
2
1
1
1
2
2
9364
0.41
0.26
0.13
38.39
24.35
2
15
3
1
1
1
2
2
10830
0.47
0.25
0.14
50.90
27.08
15.16
0.00
2
16
4
1
1
1
2
2
9042
0.82
0.27
0.15
74.14
24.41
13.56
0.00
2
33
1
3
2
1
1
1
10046
2.24
0.31
0.16
225.03
31.14
16.07
0.00
2
34
2
3
2
1
1
1
10518
2.50
0.32
0.20
262.95
33.66
21.04
0.00
2
35
3
3
2
1
1
1
9428
2.35
0.32
0.17
221.56
30.17
16.03
0.00
2
36
4
3
2
1
1
1
8300
2.25
0.27
0.12
186.75
22.41
9.96
0.00
2
37
1
3
2
1
1
2
10776
1.85
0.26
0.13
199.36
28.02
14.01
0.00
2
38
2
3
2
I
1
2
7428
2.43
0.29
0.15
180.50
21.54
11.14
0.00
28.02
12.65
0.00
2
39
3
3
2
1
1
2
9038
2.08
0.31
0.14
187.99
2
40
4
3
2
1
1
2
9772
2.58
0.30
0.14
252.12
29.32
13.68
0.00
2
41
1
3
2
1
2
1
9816
1.57
0.24
0.12
154.11
23.56
11.78
0.00
2
42
2
3
2
1
2
1
9368
1.84
0.22
0.13
172.37
20.61
12.18
0.00
2
43
3
3
2
1
2
1
9240
1.58
0.19
0.11
145.99
17.56
10.16
0.00
2
44
4
3
2
1
2
1
7432
1.88
0.29
0.13
139.72
21.55
9.66
0.00
2
45
1
3
2
1
2
2
11368
1.76
0.20
0.11
200.08
22.74
12.50
0.00
2
46
2
3
2
1
2
2
9918
1.71
0.26
0.12
169.6()
25.79
11.90
0.00
2
47
3
3
2
1
2
2
7402
1.80
0.21
0.12
133.24
15.54
8.88
0.00
2
48
4
3
2
1
2
2
8218
1.95
0.31
0.15
160.25
25.48
12.33
0.00
2
17
1
2
2
2
1
1
5450
1.39
0.40
0.12
75.76
21.80
6.54
0.00
2
18
2
2
2
2
1
1
5192
1.40
0.46
0.11
72.69
23.88
5.71
0.00
2
19
3
2
2
2
1
1
3688
1.42
0.40
0.11
52.37
14.75
4.06
0.00
2
20 4
2
2
2
1
1
5272
1.15
0.39
0.12
60.63
20.56
6.33
0.00
2
21
2
2
2
1
2
4264
1.59
0.43
0.15
67.80
18.34
6.40
0.00
1
2
22
2
2
2
2
1
2
6018
0.84
0.38
0.09
50.55
22.87
5.42
0.00
2
23
3
2
2
2
1
2
3768
1.58
0.52
0.13
59.53
19.59
4.9(3
0.00
2
24
4
2
2
2
1
2
3398
1.28
0.40
0.13
43.49
13.59
4.42
0.00
0.12
2
25
1
2
2
2
2
1
6752
1.60
0.49
108.03
33.08
8.10
0.00
2
26
2
2
2
2
2
1
5090
1.20
0.33
0.09
61.1)8
16.80
4.58
0.00
2
27
3
2
2
2
2
1
6452
1.50
0.52
0.13
96.78
33.55
8.39
0.00
131
Appendix 3.2. Continued.
Straw at harvest
pit
YR
straw
# rep
bc
fert gr
St
K
yld
K
kg/ha
Ca
Mg
P
TN
Kup
Caup
Mgup
Pup
%
%
kg/ha
kg/ha
kg/ha
kg/ha
%
%
%
4
2
2
2
2
1
6032
1.19
0.32
0.10
71.78
19.30
6.03
0.00
29
1
2
2
2
2
2
5970
1.31
0.37
0.11
78.21
22.09
6.57
0.00
30
2
2
2
2
2
2
4756
1.15
0.38
0.08
54.69
18.07
3.80
0.00
2
31
3
2
2
2
2
2
6440
1.37
0.35
0.11
88.23
22.54
7.08
0.00
2
32
4
2
2
2
2
2
5858
1.27
0.28
0.09
74.40
16.40
5.27
0.00
2
49
1
4
1
2
1
1
5810
0.64
0.46
0.15
37.18
26.73
8.72
0.00
2
50
2
4
1
2
1
1
7284
0.73
0.42
0.13
53.17
30.59
9.47
0.00
2
51
3
4
1
2
1
1
6810
0.71
0.46
0.15
48.35
31.33
10.22
0.00
2
52
4
4
1
2
1
1
6312
0.82
(1.52
0.14
51.76
32.82
8.84
0.00
2
53
1
4
1
2
1
2
7290
0.72
0.35
0.15
52.49
25.52
10.94
0.00
2
54
2
4
1
2
1
2
6456
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
2
55
3
4
1
2
1
2
6378
0.44
0.31
0.12
28.06
19.77
7.65
0.00
2
56
4
4
1
2
1
2
5852
0.58
0.38
0.11
33.94
22.24
6.44
0.00
2
57
1
4
1
2
2
1
8046
1.06
0.38
0.13
85.31
30.58
10.46
0.00
2
58
2
4
1
2
2
1
8684
0.86
0.32
0.11
74.68
27.79
9.55
0.00
2
59
3
4
1
2
2
1
8536
1.33
0.27
0.12
113.53
23.05
10.24
0.00
2
28
2
2
2
60
4
4
1
2
2
1
6888
1.25
0.38
0.14
86.10
26.17
9.64
0.00
2
61
1
4
1
2
2
2
6984
0.78
0.27
0.09
54.48
18.86
6.29
0.00
2
62
2
4
1
2
2
2
8898
0.49
0.31
0.09
43.60
27.58
8.01
0.00
2
63
3
4
1
2
2
2
7828
0.59
0.41
(1.11
46.19
32.09
8.61
0.00
2
64
4
4
1
2
2
2
7368
0.82
(1.25
0.08
60.42
18.42
5.89
0.00
3
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
9172
0.67
0.27
0.16
0.08
61.45
24.76
14.68
7.34
3
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
7001)
0.71
0.33
0.17
0.09
49.70
23.10
11.90
6.30
3
3
3
1
1
1
1
1
8647
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
3
4
4
1
1
1
1
1
9784
0.59
0.44
0.23
0.11
57.73
43.05
22.50
10.76
3
5
1
1
1
1
1
2
9925
0.42
0.32
0.18
0.09
41.69
31.76
17.87
8.93
3
6
2
1
1
1
1
2
9026
0.46
0.34
0.18
0.10
41.52
30.69
16.25
9.03
3
7
3
1
1
1
1
2
9744
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
3
8
4
1
1
1
1
2
8825
0.46
0.48
0.22
0.12
40.60
42.36
19.42
10.59
3
9
1
1
1
1
2
1
7401
0.86
0.30
0.15
0.10
63.65
22.20
11.10
7.40
3
10
2
1
1
1
2
1
7400
0.85
0.39
(1.18
0.10
62.90
28.86
13.32
7.40
3
11
3
1
1
1
2
3
12
4
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
2
1
8483
1.07
0.44
0.19
0.11
90.77
37.33
16.12
9.33
1
7982
0.78
0.40
0.18
0.10
62.26
31.93
14.37
7.98
2
9172
0.62
0.35
0.17
0.11
56.86
32.10
15.59
10.09
3
13
1
3
14
2
1
1
1
2
2
9611
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
3
15
3
1
1
1
2
2
10195
0.73
0.33
0.15
0.10
74.43
33.64
15.29
10.20
3
16
4
1
1
1
2
2
9222
0.92
0.31
(1.17
0.10
84.84
28.59
15.68
9.22
3
33
3
2
1
1
1
13012
2.80
0.30
0.18
0.20
364.35
39.04
23.42
26.02
1
132
Appendix 3.2. Continued.
Straw at harvest
pit
YR
straw
# rep
bc feri gr
st
K
yid
K
Ca
Mg
P
TN
Kup
Caup
Mgup
Pup
%
kg/ha
kg/ha
kg/ha
kg/ha
kg/ha
%
%
%
%
3
34
2
3
2
1
1
1
12192
2.09
0.20
0.14
0.10
254.80
24.38
3
35
3
3
2
1
1
1
11414
3.08
0.26
0.17
0.21
351.55
3
36
4
3
2
1
1
1
10509
2.77
0.31
0.16
0.19
291.09
3
37
1
3
2
1
1
2
12094
1.99
0.29
0.17
0.15
3
38
2
3
2
1
1
2
10874
2.85
0.33
0.22
0.18
3
39
3
3
2
1
1
2
11073
2.41
0.31
0.19
3
40
4
3
2
1
1
2
8929
2.49
0.39
3
41
1
3
2
1
2
1
9825
2.16
0.26
3
42
2
3
2
1
2
1
9869
1.68
0.20
17.07
12.19
29.68
19.40
23.97
32.58
16.81
19.97
240.67
35.07
20.56
18.14
309.91
35.88
23.92
19.57
0.19
266.85
34.33
21.04
21.04
0.18
0.18
222.33
34.82
16.07
16.07
0.21
0.15
212.23
25.55
20.63
14.74
0.12
0.09
165.80
19.74
11.84
8.88
3
43
3
3
2
1
2
1
9201
2.41
0.19
0.11
0.12
221.75
17.48
10.12
11.04
3
44
4
3
2
1
2
1
8027
2.71
0.27
0.14
0.16
217.52
21.67
11.24
12.84
3
45
1
3
2
1
2
2
9197
2.52
0.22
0.13
0.15
231.77
20.23
11.96
13.80
3
46
2
3
2
1
2
2
10359
2.13
0.22
0.12
0.10
220.65
22.79
12.43
10.36
3
47
3
3
2
1
2
2
10811
2.20
0.17
0.11
0.13
237.84
18.38
11.89
14.05
3
48
4
3
2
1
2
2
8669
2.24
0.32
0.16
0.14
194.19
27.74
13.87
12.14
3
17
1
2
2
2
1
1
8387
1.49
0.38
0.10
0.16
124.97
31.87
8.39
13.42
3
18
2
2
2
2
1
1
6582
1.35
0.27
0.08
0.12
88.86
17.77
5.27
7.90
3
19
3
2
2
2
1
1
8328
1.27
0.32
0.10
0.13
105.77
26.65
8.33
10.83
3
20
4
2
2
2
1
1
8368
1.68
0.40
0.12
0.17
140.59
33.47
10.04
14.23
3
21
1
2
2
2
1
2
7629
1.39
0.38
0.10
0.16
106.04
28.99
7.63
12.21
3
22
2
2
2
2
1
2
6388
1.28
0.28
0.09
0.12
81.77
17.89
5.75
7.67
3
23
3
2
2
2
1
2
7961
1.38
0.31
0.10
0.13
109.86
24.68
7.96
10.35
3
24
4
2
2
2
1
2
7540
1.51
0.38
0.11
0.15
113.86
28.65
8.29
11.31
3
25
1
2
2
2
2
1
7106
1.23
0.38
0.10
0.12
87.41
27.00
7.11
8.53
3
26
2
2
2
2
2
1
6991
1.25
0.30
0.08
0.12
87.38
20.97
5.59
8.39
3
27
3
2
2
2
2
1
6602
1.27
0.38
0.11
0.13
83.84
25.09
7.26
8.58
3
28
4
2
2
2
2
1
6372
1.29
0.25
0.08
0.10
82.19
15.93
5.10
6.37
3
29
1
2
2
2
2
2
6682
1.27
0.29
0.09
0.11
84.86
19.38
6.01
7.35
3
30
2
2
2
2
2
2
7245
1.24
0.30
0.08
0.11
89.84
21.74
5.80
7.97
3
31
3
2
2
2
2
2
6473
1.45
0.31
0.10
0.14
93.86
20.07
6.47
9.06
3
32
4
2
2
2
2
2
7498
1.30
0.27
0.09
0.12
97.48
20.24
6.75
9.00
3
49
1
4
1
2
1
1
7165
0.49
0.36
0.11
0.07
35.11
25.79
7.88
5.02
3
50
2
4
1
2
1
1
7222
0.53
0.31
0.10
0.08
38.28
22.39
7.22
5.78
3
51
3
4
1
2
1
1
5713
0.52
0.36
0.11
0.09
29.71
20.57
6.28
5.14
3
52
4
4
1
2
1
I
6616
0.51
0.37
0.11
0.09
33.74
24.48
7.28
5.95
3
53
1
4
1
2
1
2
6765
(L3()
0.46
0.12
(1.09
20.3()
31.12
8.12
6.09
3
54
2
4
1
2
1
2
5484
(1.4(1
(1.43
(1.13
(3. 11)
21.94
23.58
7.13
5.48
133
Appendix 3.2. Continued.
Straw at harvest
pit
Straw
YR # rep bc fert
gr
St
K
yld
kgjha
P
TN
Kup
Caup
Mgup
Pup
%
%
%
%
%
kg/ha
kg/ha
kgjha
kg/ha
K
Ca
Mg
3
55
3
4
1
2
1
2
6246
0.45
0.41
0.13
0.11
28.11
25.61
8.12
6.87
3
56
4
4
1
2
1
2
6497
0.41
0.34
0.12
0.11
26.37
22.35
7.56
6.84
3
57
1
4
1
2
2
1
7076
0.81
0.22
0.08
0.07
57.09
15.78
5.74
4.85
3
58
2
4
1
2
2
1
7145
0.72
0.24
0.09
0.08
51.23
16.84
6.10
5.40
3
59
3
4
1
2
2
1
6940
0.91
0.24
0.08
0.07
63.11
16.44
5.49
5.10
3
60
4
4
1
2
2
1
6974
1.11
0.22
0.08
0.10
77.64
15.54
5.46
6.67
3
61
1
4
t
2
2
2
7979
1.00
0.20
0.08
0.07
79.44
15.82
6.72
5.60
3
62
2
4
1
2
2
2
6674
0.53
0.22
0.07
0.09
35.60
t4.87
4.68
5.86
3
63
3
4
1
2
2
2
8042
0.89
0.20
0.09
0.09
71.74
15.70
7.01
7.04
3
64
4
4
1
2
2
2
7264
0.69
0.24
0.08
(1.08
50.42
17.36
5.62
5.86
134
Appendix 3.3. Seed yield components from four K sites in chapter 4.
STRAW: 1-flail chop, 2-burn
FERT1UTY: 1-tow, 2-high
YEAR: 1-1989, 2-1990, 3-1991
LOCATION: 1rpughs if, 2=pughs pr, 3=coons If, 4=glasser pr
GRASS: 1=tatI fescue, 2=perennial ryegrass
straw 1=flail chop, 2=annual burn
K: 1= K added, 2=no K
seed
pit
YR
# rep
ac fert gr
si
K
yld
kg/ha
SEED
SEED
K
TP
TN
Ca
%
%
%
%
2.40
0,17
Mg
%
Kup
Pup
kg/ha
kg/ha
0.16
8.16
Nup
kg/ha
Caup
kg/ha
6.40
38.40
2.72
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1600
0.51
0.40
1
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
1147
0.53
0.35
2.19
0,19
0.17
6.08
4.01
25,12
2,18
5.21
4.05
27.68
1.85
1
3
3
1
1
1
1
1
1158
0.45
0.35
239 0.16
0.17
1
4
4
1
1
1
1
1
1274
0.46
0.36
2.29
0.26
0.17
5.86
4.59
29.17
3.31
1
5
1
1
1
1
1
2
934
0.42
0.37
2.34
0.20
0.14
3.92
3.46
21.86
1.87
1
6
2
1
1
1
1
2
1044
0.43
0.34
2.23
0.18
0.16
4.49
3.55
23.28
1.88
1
7
.1
1
1
1
1
2
1481
0.44
0.36
2.42
0.19
0.15
6.52
5.33
35.84
2.81
6.05
4.89
29.75
3.35
5.03
3.77
25.03
2.17
1.55
1
8
4
1
I
1
1
2
1288
((47
0.38
2.31
0.26
0.15
1
9
1
I
1
1
2
1
1143
0,44
0.33
2.19
0.19
(1.14
1
10 2
1
1
1
2
1
1035
0.42
0.34
2.32
0.15
0.12
4.35
3.52
24,01
1
11
3
1
1
1
2
1
1632
0.45
0.36
2.23
0.20
0.12
7.34
5.88
36.39
3.26
1
12
4
1
1
1
2
1
1382
0.45
0.34
2.18
0.13
0.12
6.22
4.70
30.13
1.80
1
13
1
1
1
1
2
2
1101
0.45
0.34
2.25
0.18
(1.15
4.95
3.74
24.77
1.98
1
14
2
1
1
1
2
2
933
0.47
0.36
2.42
0.22
0.16
4.39
3.36
22.58
2.05
28.32
2.51
1
15
3
1
1
1
2
2
1253
(1.51
0.35
2.26
(1.20
(1.16
6.39
4.39
1
16
4
1
1
1
2
2
1386
(1.53
0.34
2.08
0.17
0.13
7.35
4.71
28.83
2.36
1
33
I
3
2
I
1
1219
0.46
0.35
2.46
0.26
(1.15
5.61
4.27
29.99
3.17
(1.14
(I. 12
7.32
5.73
40.25
2.23
0.24
(1.15
5.31
3.98
28.82
2.89
5.81
4.04
31.98
1.90
1
34
2
3
2
1
35
3
3
2
1
1
1
1
1591
0.46
0.36
2.53
1
1
1206
0.44
0.33
2.39
1
36
4
3
2
1
1
1
1264
0.46
0.32
2.53
0.15
0.14
1
37
1
3
2
1
1
2
1448
0.47
0.34
2.42
0.17
0.16
6.81
4.92
35.04
2.46
1
38
2
3
2
1
1
2
1198
0.46
0.37
2.84
0.21
0.16
5.51
4.43
34.02
2.52
1
39
3
3
2
1
1
2
1445
0.46
0.39
2.93
0.2(1
0.15
6.65
5.64
42.34
2.89
1
40
4
3
2
1
1
2
1162
0.47
0.33
2.58
0.15
0.14
5.46
3.83
29.98
1.74
(1.15
3.04
2.36
16.27
1.30
1.96
1
41
1
3
2
1
2
1
621
0.49
0.38
2.62
(1.21
1
42
2
3
2
1
2
I
851
(1.47
(1.34
2.47
(1.23
(1.15
4.00
2.89
21.02
1
43
.5
3
2
1
2
I
1089
0.42
0.29
2.26
0.17
(1.15
4.57
3.16
24.61
1.85
1.04
0.73
5.55
0.38
4
3
2
1
2
1
236
0.44
(1.31
2.35
0.16
(1.15
45
1
3
2
1
2
2
618
(1.49
0.34
2.36
0.19
(1.16
3.03
2.10
14.58
1.17
46
2
3
2
1
2
2
758
0.48
0.35
2.36
0.15
0.13
3.64
2.65
17.89
1.14
1
44
1
1
135
Appendix 3.3. Continued.
seed
pit
YR # rep bc fert
gr
K
st
yld
kg/ha
SEED
SEED
K
TP
TN
Ca
Mg
Kup
Pup
Nup
Caup
1
47
3
3
2
1
2
2
872
0.53
0.29
2.33
0.14
0.12
4.62
2.53
20.32
1.22
1
48
4
3
2
1
2
2
665
0.45
0.29
2.40
0.20
0.14
2.99
1.93
15.96
1.33
1
17
1
2
2
2
1
1
1220
0.51
0.34
2.03
0.17
0.16
6.22
4.15
24.77
2.07
1
18
2
2
2
2
1
1
1721
0.48
0.34
2.10
0.23
0.13
8.26
5.85
36.14
3.96
1
19
3
2
2
2
1
1
1486
0.48
0.33
2.04
0.21
0.17
7.13
4.90
30.31
3.12
1
20
4
2
2
2
1
1
1872
0.51
0.38
2.39
0.19
0.15
9.55
7.11
44.74
3.56
1
21
1
2
2
2
1
2
1357
0.52
0.34
2.10
0.18
0.14
7.06
4.61
28.50
2.44
1
22
2
2
2
2
1
2
1854
0.49
0.34
2.17
0.19
0.17
'3.08
6.30
40.23
3.52
1
23
3
2
2
2
1
2
1779
0.46
0.36
2.22
0.16
((.14
8.18
6.40
39,49
2.85
1
24
4
2
2
2
1
2
1332
0.49
0.37
2.16
0.20
0.15
6.53
4,93
28.77
2.66
1
25
1
2
2
2
2
1
1357
0.42
0.35
2.12
0.19
0.14
5.70
4.75
28.77
2.58
1
26
2
2
2
2
2
1
1398
0.47
0.37
2.17
0.16
0.14
6.57
5.17
30.34
2.24
1
27
3
2
2
2
2
1
2182
0.55
0.35
2.16
0.18
((.15
12.01)
7.64
47.13
3.93
1
28
4
2
2
2
2
1
1703
0.51
0.38
2.15
0.21
0.12
8.69
6.47
36.61
3.58
1
29
1
2
2
2
2
2
1555
0.47
0.35
2.07
0.18
(1.13
7.31
5.44
32.19
2.80
1
30
2
2
2
2
2
2
1229
0.52
0.34
2.01
0.24
0.15
6.39
4.18
24.70
2.95
1
31
3
2
2
2
2
2
2107
(1.47
0.34
1.99
0.16
0.16
9.9(1
7.16
41.93
3.37
1
32
4
2
2
2
2
2
1531
0.50
0.36
2.05
0.19
0.16
7.66
5.51
31.39
2.91
1
49
1
4
1
2
1
1
1910
(>44
0.34
2.32
0.21
0.17
8.4(1
6.49
44.31
4.01
1
50
2
4
1
2
1
1
1049
0.41
0.32
2.11
0.21
0.16
4.30
3.36
22.13
2.20
1
51
3
4
1
2
1
1
1045
(1,44
0.29
2.07
0.17
0.14
4.60
3.03
21.63
1.78
1
52
4
4
1
2
1
1
1030
(>42
0.35
2.26
0.16
0.15
4.33
3.61
23.28
1.65
1
53
1
4
1
2
1
2
1335
0.40
0.35
2.35
0.14
(1,13
5.34
4.67
31.37
1.87
1
54
2
4
1
2
1
2
1454
0.40
0.33
2.15
0.16
(1.14
5.82
4.80
31.26
2.33
1
55
3
4
1
2
1
2
1273
0.46
0.32
2.23
0.18
(1.15
5.86
4.07
28.39
2.29
1
56
4
4
1
2
1
2
1111
0.44
0.36
2.28
0.24
0.16
4.89
4.00
25.33
2.67
1
57
1
4
1
2
2
1
1264
0.44
0.32
2.19
0.25
0.16
5.56
4.04
27.68
3.16
1
58
2
4
1
2
2
1
878
0.42
0.32
2.16
0.14
0.13
3.69
2.81
18.96
1.23
1
59
3
4
1
2
2
1
1410
0.51
0.38
2.30
0.21
0.15
7.19
5.36
32.43
2.96
1
60
4
4
1
2
2
1
1223
(1.47
0.37
2.29
0.15
((.13
5.75
4,53
28.01
1.83
1
61
1
4
I
2
2
2
943
(3.46
0.36
2.29
0.20
0.14
4.34
3.39
21.59
1.89
1
62
2
4
1
2
2
2
1148
0.45
0.39
2.33
(1.19
0.15
5.17
4.48
26.75
2.18
1
63
3
4
1
2
2
2
1516
0.44
0.37
2.28
0.21
0.15
6.67
5.61
34.56
3.18
1
64
4
4
1
2
2
2
1264
0.43
(1.36
2.25
0.18
(1.14
5.44
4.55
28.44
2.28
1
1585
(>62
0.34
2.09
9.83
5.39
33.13
1546
0.61
0.34
2.15
9,43
5.26
33.24
1511
0.63
0.33
2.04
9.52
4.99
30.82
1314
0.62
0.39
2.25
8.15
5.12
29.57
211 1111
22211111
23311111
24411111
25111112
1374
136
Appendix 3.3. Continued.
seed
p0
YR # rep bc fert
gr
K
sE
yld
kg/ha
26211112
27311112
28411112
29111121
2
1
1347
2
2
1512
1
2
2
1369
1
1
2
2
1506
1
1
2
2
1392
1
1899
1
1
2
I
1
1
2
2
12
4
1
1
1
2
13
1
1
1
1
2
14
2
1
1
2
15
3
1
2
16
4
1
Ca
Mg
Kup
Pup
Nup
1487
1522
1
3
TN
1402
1642
2
11
TP
1416
I
10
2
K
SEED
1509
1
2
SEED
0.00
0.00
0.00
2339
0.61
0.33
2.lf
14.27
7.72
50.52
1969
0.62
0.35
2.24
12.21
6.89
44.11
1
1997
0.59
0.35
2.1
11.78
6,99
43.33
2
2022
0.59
0.33
2.0
11.93
6.67
42.26
2
33
1
3
2
1
1
2
34
2
3
2
1
1
2
35
3
3
2
1
1
2
36
4
3
2
1
1
2
37
1
3
2
1
1
2
38
2
3
2
1
1
2
1611
2
39
3
3
2
1
1
2
2011
2
40
4
3
2
1
1
2
1924
2
41
1
3
2
1
2
1
2136
2
42
2
3
2
1
2
1
1878
2
43
3
3
2
1
2
1
2163
2
44
4
3
2
1
2
1
1822
2
45
1
3
2
1
2
2
2491
2
46
2
3
2
1
2
2
2389
2
47
3
3
2
1
2
2
1483
1
1
2
48
4
3
2
1
2
2
2133
2
17
1
2
2
2
1
1
1691
0.64
0.31
1.65
10.82
5.24
27.90
2
18
2
2
2
2
1
1
1699
0.69
0.29
1.73
11.72
4.93
29.39
2
19
3
2
2
2
1
1
1191
0.75
0.3
1.63
8.93
3.57
19.41
2
20
4
2
2
2
1
1
1617
0.58
0.27
1.6
9.38
4.37
25.87
2
21
1
2
2
2
1
2
1573
0.6
0.31
1.66
9.44
4.88
26.11
2
22
2
2
2
2
1
2
1876
0.62
0.31
1.79
11.63
5.82
33.58
2
23
3
2
2
2
1
2
1263
058
(1.27
1.56
7.33
341
19.70
2
24
4
2
2
2
1
2
1028
0,5Q
0.32
1.86
6.07
3.29
19.12
2
25
1
2
2
2
2
1
1637
0.66
(1.28
1.46
10.80
4.58
23.90
2
26
2
2
2
2
2
1
1598
0.66
0.27
1.58
10.55
4.31
25.25
2
27
3
2
2
2
2
1
1841
0.65
0.29
1.66
11.97
5.34
30.56
Caup
137
Appendix 3.3. Continued.
seed
pit
YR
# rep bc fert gr
K
si
yld
28
4
2
2
2
29
1
2
2
30
2
2
2
31
3
TN
Mg
K
TP
1812
0.66
0.31
1.7
1196
5.62
30.80
kg/ha
2
SEED
SEED
Ca
Kup
Pup
Nup
2
2
1
2
2
2
2
1824
0.64
0.3
1.63
11.67
5.47
29.73
2
2
2
2
1684
0.65
0.27
1.54
10.95
4.55
25.93
2
2
2
2
2
1958
0.62
0.28
1.51
12.14
5.48
29.57
2
32
4
2
2
2
2
2
1836
0.67
0.33
1.82
12.30
6.06
33.42
2
49
1
4
1
2
1
1
1475
0.5
0.27
1.43
7.38
3.98
21.09
2
50
2
4
1
2
1
1
1501
0.51
0.29
1.59
7.66
4.35
23.87
2
51
3
4
1
2
1
1
1886
0.52
0.31
1.73
9.81
5.85
32.63
2
52
4
4
1
2
1
1
1523
0.51
0.32
1.79
7.77
4.87
27.26
2
53
1
4
1
2
1
2
1394
0.49
0.29
1.64
6.83
4.04
22.86
2
54
2
4
1
2
1
2
1377
0.46
0.3
1.68
6.33
4.13
23.13
2
55
3
4
1
2
1
2
1559
0.48
0.29
1.66
7.48
4.52
25.88
2
56
4
4
1
2
1
2
1535
0.51
0.35
1.88
7.83
5.37
28.86
2
57
1
4
1
2
2
I
1795
0.51
0.33
1.92
9.15
5.92
34.46
2
58
2
4
1
2
2
1
2(115
0.52
0.3
1.7
10.48
6.05
34.26
2
59
3
4
1
2
2
1
1550
0.58
0.31
1.66
8.99
4.81
25.73
2
60
4
4
1
2
2
1
1447
0.56
(1.31
1.7
8.11)
4.49
24.60
2
61
1
4
1
2
2
2
1501
0.5
0.28
1.55
7.51
4.2(1
23.27
2
62
2
4
1
2
2
2
1795
0.5
1)35
1.85
8.98
6.28
33.21
2
63
3
4
1
2
2
2
1663
(1.53
0.33
1.79
8.81
5.49
29.77
2
64
4
4
1
2
2
2
1415
(1.58
(1.33
1.71
8.21
4.67
24.20
Caup
3
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1176
0.49
13.34
0.31)
0.21
5.80
3.95
3.51
3
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
896
0.50
0.33
0.31
(1.21
4.51
2.95
2.73
3
3
3
I
1
1
1
1
1034
0.52
11.37
0.26
(1.21
5.38
3.80
2.67
3
4
4
1
I
1
1
1229
0.47
0.37
0.25
0.21
5.84
4.50
3.12
3
5
1
1
1
1
1
2
1139
0.49
0.36
0.26
0.21
5.59
4.14
3.00
3
6
2
1
1
1
1
2
1117
0.48
0.36
(1.31
0.21
5.39
4.03
3.41
3
7
3
1
1
1
1
2
1116
(1.47
0.35
0.3(1
0.22
5.21
3.94
3.34
3
8
4
1
1
1
1
2
1010
(1.47
0.36
0.27
0.22
4.73
3.60
2.76
3
9
1
1
1
I
2
1
836
0.52
0.38
0.30
0.311
4.44
3.24
2.57
3
10
2
1
1
1
2
1
1001
(1.48
0.36
0.23
0.2(1
4.83
3.63
2.81
3
11
3
1
1
1
2
1
1198
(1.47
0.36
(1.26
(1.21
5.66
4.32
3.12
3
12
4
1
I
1
2
I
982
(1.46
11.37
(1.27
(1.21
4,49
3.59
2.67
3
13
1
1
1
1
2
2
1176
1)49
0.42
0.28
0.22
5.81
4.94
3.24
3
14
2
1
1
1
2
2
1146
(1,44
(1.39
0.27
0.21
5.09
4.49
3.08
3
15
3
1
1
1
2
2
1228
(1.48
0.38
0.27
0.22
5.87
4.68
3.29
3
16
4
1
1
1
2
2
1125
0.46
0.36
0.26
0.21
5.22
4.01
2.91
3
33
1
3
2
1
1
1
1715
0.60
1)42
0.22
0.21
10.31
7.29
3.83
1
138
Appendix 3.3. Continued.
seed
pit
YR
# rep bc
fert
gr
st
K
yld
SEED
SEED
TN
Mg
K
TP
2
3
2
1
1
1
1521
0.57
0.39
0.21
0.21
8.64
5.97
3.22
35
3
3
2
1
1
1
1434
0.59
0.42
0.21
0.20
8.49
6.03
2.94
3
36
4
3
2
1
1
1
1709
0.58
0.41
0.23
0.19
9.97
7.07
3.98
3
37
1
3
2
1
1
2
1712
0.56
0.41
0.21
0.20
9.65
7.06
3.66
3
38
2
3
2
1
1
2
1315
0.64
0.46
0.23
0.24
8.39
6.02
3.01
3
39
3
3
2
1
1
2
1379
0.61
0.42
0.19
0.21
8.47
5.78
2.56
3
40
4
3
2
1
1
2
1648
0.61
0.42
0.24
0.20
9.99
6.91
3.98
3
41
1
3
2
1
2
1
1466
0.61
0.43
0.20
0.20
8.97
6.26
2.94
3
42
2
3
2
1
2
1
1347
0.54
0.40
0.21
0.20
7.27
5.44
2.82
5.97
2.73
kg/ha
3
34
3
Ca
Kup
Pup
Nup
Caup
3
43
3
3
2
1
2
1
1359
0.59
0.44
0.20
0.21
7.95
3
44
4
3
2
1
2
1
1108
0.66
0.42
0.21
0.20
7.29
4.61
2.30
3
45
1
3
2
1
2
2
1428
0.59
0.40
0.22
0.22
8.42
5.78
3.17
3
46
2
3
2
1
2
2
1565
0.66
0.35
0.23
0.23
10.32
5.50
3.61
3
47
3
3
2
1
2
2
1654
0,69
0.38
0.21
0.23
11.45
6.32
3.46
3
48
4
3
2
1
2
2
1340
0.68
0.39
0.19
0.22
9,15
5.23
2.53
3
17
1
2
2
2
1
1
1943
0.66
0.42
0.19
0.16
11.67
8.08
3.76
3
18
2
2
2
2
1
1
1713
0.56
0.37
0.19
0.15
9.60
6.37
3.17
3
19
3
2
2
2
1
1
2143
0.52
0.36
0.21
0.15
11.12
7.78
4.51
3
20
4
2
2
2
1
1
1623
0.56
0.40
0.17
0.16
9.17
6.46
2.81
0.58
0,39
0.21
0.16
11.26
7.47
3.98
3.40
3
21
1
2
2
2
1
2
1934
3
22
2
2
2
2
1
2
1799
0.55
0.39
0.19
0.16
9.82
6.98
3
23
3
2
2
2
1
2
1862
0.55
0.40
0.19
0.16
10.29
7.37
3.48
3
24
4
2
2
2
1
2
2258
(1.56
0.38
0.20
0.15
12.6$
8.55
4.48
3
25
I
2
2
2
2
1
1654
1)55
0.37
0.19
(1.15
9.14
6.14
3.11
3
26
2
2
2
2
2
1
2052
().6 I
0.40
0.19
0.15
12.49
8.26
3.97
3
27
3
2
2
2
2
1
1695
0.58
0.38
0.21)
0.16
9.76
6,41)
3.32
3
28
4
2
2
2
2
1
1670
1)59
0.38
0.19
0.15
9.93
6.40
3.18
3
29
1
2
2
2
2
2
1812
0.55
0.38
0.19
0.16
9.94
6.84
3.52
3
30
2
2
2
2
2
2
1523
0.62
(1.39
0.21
0.16
9.48
5.87
3.19
3
31
3
2
2
2
2
2
1478
0.58
0.39
0.19
0.16
8.64
5.70
2.83
3
32
4
2
2
2
2
2
1574
((.60
0.39
0.19
0.16
9.44
6.16
3.01
3
49
1
4
1
2
1
1
2130
((.53
0.38
0.22
0.17
11.18
8.01
4.77
3
51)
2
4
1
2
1
1
1255
(1.5$
(1.37
0.21
(1.17
7.23
4.64
2.66
3
51
3
4
1
2
1
1
1663
(1.53
(1.36
(1.23
(1.17
$77
5.92
3.83
0.56
3
52
4
4
1
1875
0.32
(1.24
0.16
10.43
6.06
4.58
3
53
1
4
1
2
1
2
2023
0.49
0.30
0.27
((.16
9.94
6.14
5.55
3
54
2
4
1
2
1
2
1444
0.48
0.31
0.27
((.17
6.93
4.51
3.92
1
2
1
139
Appendix 3.3. Continued.
seed
pit
YR
# rep toe
len
gr
St
K
yld
kg/ha
SEED
SEED
K
TP
TN
Ca
Mg
Kup
Pup
Nup
Caup
2
1885
0.51
0.37
0.24
0.18
9.68
7.05
4.50
1
2
1649
0.54
0.39
0.23
0.18
8.89
6.45
3.77
2
2
1
1682
0.63
0.38
0.20
0.18
10.67
6.43
3.37
1
2
2
1
1762
0.62
0.33
0.23
0.16
10.97
5.82
4.13
1
2
2
1
1666
0.61
0.36
0.20
0.17
10.14
6.02
3.30
4
1
2
2
1
1682
0.59
0.40
0.19
0.17
9.94
6.69
3.18
4
1
2
2
2
1700
0.61
0.37
0.21
0.18
10.45
6.23
3.62
2
4
1
2
2
2
1820
0.58
0.39
0.22
0.18
10.64
7.13
4.00
63
3
4
1
2
2
2
1882
0.60
0.34
0.22
0.16
11.38
6.39
4.13
64
4
4
1
2
2
2
1795
0.64
0.36
0.21
0.16
11.50
6.41
3.69
3
55
3
3
4
56
4
4
1
2
3
57
1
4
1
3
58
2
4
3
59
3
4
3
60
4
3
61
1
3
62
3
3
1
2
1
140
Appendix 4
Data from chapter 5
Appendix 4.1 Soil solution and soil test levels at Hyslop in chapter 5.
lime rate: 1=incorporatcd, 2=surface, 3=unlimed
P rate, lb/a: 1=30,2= zero
SOIL SOLUTION LEVELS
lim P rep pH
PO4
NO3
TP
SOIL. TEST LEVELS
S
K
CA
Mg
Zn
Mn
Cu
Fe
B
AL
Na
pH WOl'
K EOP
Ca
Mg
mg/I
mg/I
mg/I
mg/I
mg/i
mg/I
mg/i
mg/I
mg/I
mg/I
mg/I
mg/I
mg/I
mg/I
78.92
4.25
0.04
0.03
0.01
0.04
0.05
0.00
2.41
mg/kg mg/kg mg/k meq/lOOg6.2 141
242 92 10.5 0.75
1.69
6.3
98
-
1
1
1
6.55
0.39
0.42
0.46
68.35
8.43
1
1
2
5.34
0.14
1.25
0.47
41.96
18.21
55.44
3.36
0.04
0.17
0.02
0.04
0.09
0.27
1
1
3
6.79
0.28
0.00
0.51
85.37
15.77
110.51
6.73
0.03
0.06
0.04
0.04
0.07
0.42
2.74
6.5
1
1
4
6.81
0.21
0.23
0.12
48.98
10.81
62.20
3.54
0.02
0.05
0.00
0.02
0.05
0.00
2.55
6.6
1
2
1
6.41
0.07
0.29
0.50
93.07
19.24
106.43
6.02
0.02
0.09
0.01
0.02
0.05
0.05
2.02
1
2
2
6.52
0.07
0.00
0.49
57.82
13.81
78.27
4.25
0.03
0.03
0.02
0.03
0.12
0.33
2.47
1
2
3
7.07
0.09
0.00
0.39
50.24
11.09
68.92
3.54
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.01
0.00
0.00
2.05
7.1
1
2
4
6.74
0.10
0.00
0.16
63.65
10.51
79.30
4.25
0.01
0.01
0.00
0.01
0.05
0.04
2.46
2
1
1
5.44
0.07
0.00
0.28
77.22
11.82
83.31
4.96
0.05
0.54
0.01
0.04
0.07
0.21
2.20
2
I
2
4.54
0.09
0.00
0.10
120.96
15.92
138.69
7.79
0.08
0.76
0.03
0.04
0.07
0.88
2
1
3
6.70
0.17
0.00
0.07
49.31
15.71
72.07
4.25
0,03
0.06
0.05
0.04
0.07
0.49
2
1
4
5.47
0.12
0.00
0.79
70.30
10.61
72.72
4.60
0.06
0.08
0.00
0.01
0.05
0.00
2
2
1
5.98
0.03
0.00
0.08
88.28
13.37
95.83
4.25
0.08
0.47
0.00
0.04
0.05
2
2
2
4.10
0.07
0.00
0.27
119.97
23.40
131.53
9.03
0.07
0.46
0.05
0.07
2
2
3
5.78
0,05
0.00
(1.36
54.44
16.19
67.51
4.25
0.05
0.13
0.04
2
2
4
6.35
0.07
0.31
0.22
85.53
15.12
100.36
6.02
0.05
0.07
0.04
3
1
1
3.96
0.24
0.00
0.14
47.61
16.71
41.41
4.43
0.12
0.88
3
1
2
3.73
0.11
0.00
0.27
53.69
18.80
52.35
5.31
0.07
3
1
3
4.24
0.31
0.00
0.46
26.40
19.23
19.72
2.13
0.06
3
1
4
3.87
0.20
1.68
0.26
61.23
12.57
59.40
5,67
3
2
1
4.33
0.06
0.27
0.50
33.27
28.23
27.53
3
2
2
3.83
0.07
0.00
0.68
49.34
24.15
3
2
3
4.08
0.06
0.00
0.18
32.99
3
2
4
4.38
0.10
0.00
0.50
63.41
218
80
11.2
0.72
117
254
76
11.6
0.82
94
289
71
12.2
0.81
6.4
81
273
56
11.2
0.75
5.2
74
261
53
11.1
0.72
76
222
62
14.0
0.73
6.5
66
285
53
12.4
0.81
5.0
118
242
81
6.0
0.43
1.79
5.1
126
226
85
7.6
0.52
2.24
5.6
108
316
68
8.8
0.65
2.03
5.8
106
187
51
13.0
0.57
0.09
2.40
5.1
104
226
69
7.1
0.36
0.07
0.75
3.08
5.3
99
250
65
7.2
0.69
0.05
0.07
0.54
2.74
5.3
84
261
52
6.8
0.52
0.04
0.07
0.38
2.54
5.8
74
234
52
10.3
0.65
0.00
0.07
0.19
1.25
2.86
4.6
138
265
97
2.8
0.4
0.87
0.02
0.05
0.07
1.23
2.30
4.5
141
234
108
3.0
0.56
0.18
0.01
0.01
0.05
0.11
2.77
4.9
115
296
81
4.5
0.6
0.10
0.91
0.02
0.05
0.05
0.58
3.30
4.8
116
257
83
4.8
0.63
2.48
0.06
0.20
0.02
0.04
0.07
0.38
1.98
4.9
89
371
58
3.6
0.55
43.34
4.25
0.11
0.68
0.03
0.06
0.07
1.21
2.52
4.6
92
339
66
2.7
0.42
9.63
19.89
3.19
0.06
0.18
0.00
0.01
0.00
0.00
1.71
4.8
75
250
57
4.1
0.57
13.89
72.03
5.84
0.09
0.17
0.05
0.08
0.09
0.64
2.81
5.2
89
257
58
6.4
0.73
H
H
Appendix 4.2 Soil solution and soil test values from Saddle Butte in chapter 5.
lime: 1=incorporated, 2=surface, 3=unlimed
P:
1=30, 2= zero
SOIL TEST LEVELS
SOIL SOLUTION LEVELS
lini
P
rep
pH
PO4
NO3
TP
S
K
CA
Mg
Zn
Mn
Cu
Fe
B
mg/i
mg/i
mg/i
mg/i
mg/i
mg/I
mg/i
mg/i
mg/I
mg/i
AL
Na
p11
WOP
K
EOP
Ca
Mg
mg/I
mg/i
mg/i
mg/I
mg/i
I
2
3
6.68
0.07
46.06
0.64
154.44
25.62
198.92
24.26
0.02
0.13
0.06
0.07
0.07
0.56
10.84
6.4
9
234
17
26.3
3.4
1
2
2
6.12
0.06
70.95
0.09
169.94
19.15
211.73
28.69
0.01
0.48
0.00
0.01
0.00
0.00
11.68
6.2
20
218
33
25.8
3.4
1
2
1
6.22
0.10
2.43
0.43
106.14
14.26
117.84
16.82
0.07
037
0.08
0.07
0.09
0.74
7.41
6.9
16
230
30
32.7
3.2
1
1
3
6.93
0.09
39.46
0.31
114.48
15.77
169.91
21.61
0.02
0.07
0.06
0.05
0.07
0,70
6.17
6.4
15
168
26
28.6
3.4
I
I
2
5.14
0.12
9.34
0.44
171.44
15.15
160.46
20.37
0.09
0.15
0.02
0.01
0.00
0.00
6.47
5.8
30
195
43
22.5
3.3
I
I
1
7.00
0.12
2.08
0.43
161.31
19.95
182.56
22.49
0.03
0.03
0.07
0.04
0.05
0.56
10.55
7.0
19
176
39
32.5
3.7
2
2
3
4.20
0.05
20.55
0.31
148.98
15.92
150.08
26.39
0.13
3.97
0.05
0.07
0.07
0.80
10.13
5.1
12
172
22
19.8
4.1
2
2
2
4.29
0.05
29.82
0.44
171.50
12.52
167.77
30.46
0.08
3.86
0.00
0.03
0.00
0.06
8.16
5.0
14
160
25
19.6
3.9
2
2
1
4.40
0.06
45.91
0.13
151.92
19.80
169.52
29.75
0.18
400
0.05
0.08
0.07
0.52
14.66
5.4
12
199
21
22.3
4.4
2
1
3
6.08
0.12
3.73
0.76
12733
14.48
130.77
21.25
0.10
1.28
0.08
0.11
0.07
0.84
7.77
5.2
14
133
31
21.5
4.2
2
1
2
5.88
0.05
22.95
0.47
181.82
14.67
180.67
27.27
0.08
0.30
0.02
0.04
0.05
0.19
7.80
5.6
23
164
31
22.5
3.8
2
1
1
5.03
0.12
6.82
0.85
142.35
14.51
151.17
22.31
0.11
0.92
0.06
0.05
0.09
0.55
8.95
5.5
36
160
54
21.0
3.8
3
2
3
3.68
0.04
22.45
0.42
120.48
13.12
118.77
24.09
(1.10
3.88
0.03
0.07
0.05
0.65
9.55
4.3
10
183
22
15.1
3.9
3
2
2
3.89
0.04
41.65
0.46
119.13
13.39
124.97
25.86
0.11
4.13
0.00
0.05
0.05
0.28
10.45
4.8
14
164
22
18.3
4.1
3
2
1
5.30
0.17
7.79
0.73
113.86
16.95
114.91
19.13
0.13
2.09
0.09
0.07
0.09
0.51
12.54
5.1
21
187
31
18.6
3.8
3
1
3
4.34
0.10
22.75
0.37
131.13
15.22
136.34
24.26
0.12
2.78
0.06
0.10
0.07
0.91
10.77
4.9
13
137
27
17.9
4.1
3
1
2
4.10
0.12
16.33
(1.46
123.01
12.49
107.59
24.44
0.11
5.56
0.02
0.08
0.05
0.52
11.03
4.7
24
211
41
16.4
4.2
3
1
1
3.95
0.09
0.97
0.38
96.07
11.68
97.63
17.53
0.13
4.46
0.09
0.11
0.09
0.98
7.72
4.7
26
218
39
15.5
3.9
mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg --meq/IOOg--
H
NJ