Abstract
Due, in part, to the relative paucity of published comparisons based on field generated data, there is still poor agreement regarding the relative merits of lime requirement indices based on exchangeable Al and those based on pH. The objective of this study was to compare such indices using results obtained from long-term field experiments. Data were obtained over 22 site-years from lime trials conducted on clay (Typic Haplorthox) and sandy loam (Plinthic Paleudult) soils differing widely in organic carbon content. Relative maize (Zea mays L.) yields were used to compare the prognostic value of soil pH with indices obtained using exchangeable Al and exchangeable acidity (Al + H). Both within and across soils, pH proved to be markedly inferior to Al based indices. Exchangeable acid saturation of the effective cation exchange capacity, a readily obtained and popular index of lime requirement in some countries, proved as effective as less easily acquired indices based on exchangeable Al per se. The findings reported are consistent with those of many glasshouse studies and support the viewpoint that indices based on Al or acid saturation should replace pH as a measure of lime requirement.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Abruna F, Pearson R W and Perez-Escolar R 1975 Lime response of corn and soybeans grown on typical Oxisols and Ultisols of Puerto Rico. Soil Manage. Trop. Am. Proc. Semin. 261–282.
Adams F 1984 Crop response to lime in the southern United States. In Soil Acidity and Liming. Second Edition. Ed. F Adams. pp 211–265. Agronomy 12, Am. Soc. Agron. Madison, WI.
Awad A S, Edwards D G and Milham P J 1976 Effect of pH and phosphate on soluble soil aluminium and on growth and composition of Kikuyu grass. Plant and Soil 45, 531–542.
Cate R B and Nelson L A 1965 A rapid method for correlation of soil test analyses with plant response data. Tech. Bull. No. 1. ISFEI series, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC.
Farina M P W and Channon P 1988 Acid-subsoil amelioration. 1. A comparison of several mechanical procedures. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 52, 169–175.
Farina M P W, Channon P and Sumner M E 1981 A glasshouse comparison of several lime requirement indexes for maize. Crop Prod. 10, 129–135.
Farina M P W, Sumner M E, Plank C O and Letzsch W S 1980 Exchangeable aluminium and pH as indicators of lime requirement for corn. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 44, 1036–1041.
Foy C D 1984 Physiological effects of hydrogen, aluminum and manganese toxicities in acid soil. In Soil Acidity and Liming. Second Edition. Ed. F Adams. pp 57–97. Agronomy 12, Am. Soc. Agron. Madison, WI.
Fox R H 1979 Soil pH, aluminum saturation, and corn grain yield. Soil Sci. 127, 330–334.
Friesen D K, Miller M H and Juo A S R 1980 Liming and lime-phosphorus-zinc interactions in two Nigerian Ultisols. II. Effects on maize root and shoot growth. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 44, 1127–1232.
Hoyt P B and Nyborg M 1987 Field calibration of liming responses of four crops using soil pH, Al and Mn. Plant and Soil 102, 21–25.
Hume L J, Ofsoski N J and Reynolds J 1988 Influence of pH, exchangeable aluminium and 0.02 M CaCl2-extractable aluminium on the growth and nitrogen-fixing activity of white clover (Trifolium repens) in some New Zealand soils. Plant and Soil 111, 111–119.
Kamprath E J 1970 Lime requirements of soils — Inactive toxic substances or favourable pH range. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. Proc. 34, 364.
Kamprath E J 1984 Crop response to lime on soils in the tropics. In Soil Acidity and Liming. Second Edition. Ed. F Adams. pp 349–368. Agronomy 12, Am. Soc. Agron. Madison, WI.
Kennedy J A and Powell H K J 1986 Colorimetric determination of aluminum (III) with chrome azurol S and the reactivity of hydrolysed aluminium species. Anal. Chim. Acta. 18, 329–333.
Krizek D T and Foy C D 1988 Role of water stress in differential aluminum tolerance of two barley cultivars grown in an acid soil. J. Plant Nutr. 11, 351–368.
Martini J A, Kochhann R A, Gomes E P and Langer F 1977 Response of wheat cultivars to liming in some high Al Oxisols of Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil. Agron. J. 69, 612–616.
McLean E O 1970 Lime requirements of soils — Inactive toxic substances or favourable pH range. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. Proc. 34, 363–364.
McLean E O and Brown J R 1984 Crop response to lime in the Midwestern United States. In Soil Acidity and Liming. Second Edition. Ed. F Adams. pp 267–304. Agronomy 12, Am. Soc. Agron. Madison, WI.
Noble A D, Fey M V and Sumner M E 1988 Calcium-aluminum balance and the growth of soybean roots in nutrient solutions. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 52, 1651–1656.
Reeve N G and Sumner M E 1970 Lime requirements of Natal Oxisols based on exchangeable aluminum. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. Proc. 34, 595–598.
Shainberg I, Sumner M E, Miller W P, Farina M P W, Pavan M A and Fey M V 1989 Use of gypsum on soils: A review. Adv. Soil Sci. 9, 1–111.
Sumner M E and Farina M P W 1986 Phosphorus interactions with other nutrients and lime in field cropping systems. Adv. Soil Sci. 5, 201–236.
Thomas G W and Hargrove W L 1984 The chemistry of soil acidity. In Soil Acidity and Liming. Second Edition. Ed. F Adams. pp 4–56. Agronomy 12, Am. Soc. Agron. Madison. WI.
Webber M D, Hoyt P B and Corneau D 1982 Soluble Al, exchangeable Al, base saturation and pH in relation to barley yield on Canadian acid soils. Can. J. Soil Sci. 62, 397–405.
Wright R J 1989 Soil aluminum toxicity and plant growth. Comm. Soil Sci. Plant Anal. 20, 1479–1497.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1991 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Farina, M.P.W., Channon, P. (1991). A field comparison of lime requirement indices for maize. In: Wright, R.J., Baligar, V.C., Murrmann, R.P. (eds) Plant-Soil Interactions at Low pH. Developments in Plant and Soil Sciences, vol 45. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-011-3438-5_52
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-011-3438-5_52
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-010-5520-8
Online ISBN: 978-94-011-3438-5
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive