AGRONOMIJAS VÄSTIS - Latvijas LauksaimniecÄ«bas universitÄte

More documents

Recommendations

Info

<strong>AGRONOMIJAS</strong> VĒSTIS (Latvian Journal of Agronomy), No.10, LLU, 2008Table 1. The effect of soils of different genesis on the chemical composition of the soil solution,mg kg -1 (V÷žaičiai, average 1992-2003)SoilSiteCa ++ CationsMg ++ K + Σ- -SO 4Anions-NO 3 Cl - ΣTotalΣArenosolsPerloja [pH 5.1] 117.3 13.1 3.8 134.2 139.1 41.2 22.2 202.5 336.7Trakų Vok÷ [pH 5.9] 112.1 24.0 5.2 141.3 176.3 38.0 25.2 239.5 380.8AlbeliuvisolsSamališk÷ [pH 5.2] 103.4 10.5 2.7 116.6 176.3 38.1 24.9 239.3 355.9V÷žaičiai [pH 5.2] 92.3 8.40 2.3 103.0 143.4 38.3 31.2 212.9 315.9Podzols Juknaičiai [pH 5.6] 117.3 12.3 2.7 132.3 61.2 48.4 36.3 145.9 278.2LuvisolsV÷žaičiai [pH 6.0] 95.7 11.7 3.3 110.7 134.3 31.9 32.1 488.3 599.0Rumokai [pH 6.4] 90.1 15.6 2.6 108.3 111.4 66.2 54.0 231.6 339.9Planosols Dubingiai [pH 6.2] 160.2 15.9 3.6 179.7 70.7 52.2 19.2 142.1 321.8CambisolsDotnuva [pH 7.1] 112.4 11.4 2.5 126.3 118.6 45.3 49.6 213.5 339.8Upyt÷ [pH 7.4] 98.4 16.5 2.7 117.6 150.9 49.5 38.8 239.2 356.8LSD 05 9.36 1.17 0.16 3.14 4.86 9.26 1.55 3.52 2.36The concentration of chlorine (Cl - ) in lysimetric water was markedly lower than that ofsulphates or nitrates. Their concentration depended on soil pH. In the lysimetric water of DubingiaiPlanosols the content of chlorides was the lowest 19.2 mg kg -1 , and in that of Rumokai Luvisolsthe highest 54.0 mg kg -1 .The total sum (concentration)of ions studied. The effect of soil genesis on the total sum ofions tested was considerable. Although the total concentration of ions tested in the lysimetric waterwas affected by soil genesis, the soil formation site had a greater effect. The total ion concentrationin lysimetric water taken from Rumokai Luvisols was 339.9 mg kg -1 , and that of the same Luvisolspresent in V÷žaičiai 599.0 mg kg -1 . While comparing soils differing in texture according to theconcentration of tested ions in the lysimetric water no great differences were found, the soilformation site had a greater effect than texture.The effect of soil genesis on the content of biogenic matter in lysimetric water. Calculationswere done to determine the effects of soil genesis on the chemical composition of lysimetric waterand the relationships revealed are presented in Table 2. We tried to express soil genesis by theagrochemical indicators of the soil. These calculations suggest that various soil agrochemicalindicators had a diverse effect on the contents of the investigated ions in lysimetric water. As wecan see from the data in Table 2, in general all the ions tested were more affected by the humuscontent in the soil and some of the tested ions by other soil indicators.Table 2. Correlation coefficients between soil agrochemical indicators and the content of biogenicmatters in the lysimetric waterResearched factorsCa ++ Mg ++ K + Ions-NO 3- -SO 4 Cl -In soil: humus 0.742 0.715 -0.363 0.518 -0.639 0.868pH 0.396 0.153 -0.085 0.278 -0.519 -0.115P 2 O 5 0.125 -0.427 -0.025 0.100 -0.443 0.225K 2 O 0.125 0.128 -0.243 0.103 -0.277 0.075Ca 0.245 0.324 -0.089 -0.076 -0.284 0.039Mg 0.083 0.517 0.117 0.172 -0.268 0.168Note. Number of pairs n = 48. Statistically significant limit of the correlation coefficients r >0.2640.In the table significant correlation coefficients are present in bold type.Apart from the afore mentioned humus content in the soil, the calcium content in lysimetricwater was also affected by soil pH. And this is right, since calcium content in the soil determinessoil pH. The magnesium content in lysimetric water was affected by the content of phosphates,calcium, and magnesium in the soil. The content of calcium and magnesium in the soil and thecontent of magnesium in lysimetric water made a positive correlation, and with soil phosphates anegative correlation. Potassium content in lysimetric water did not correlate strongly with any ofthe soil agrochemical indicators, except humus content.40
<strong>AGRONOMIJAS</strong> VĒSTIS (Latvian Journal of Agronomy), No.10, LLU, 2008Of the tested anions, only the sulphate content in lysimetric water was affected by all thesoil agrochemical indicators tested. The contents of nitrates and chlorides in lysimetric water didnot correlate strongly with soil agrochemical indicators, except the humus content in the soil.ConclusionsLong-term research of the effects of different soil genesis under changed environmentalconditions (soil monoliths were delivered to the Lithuania) on the concentration of biogenicelements in lysimetric water led to the following conclusions:-the concentration of biogenic elements in lysimetric water depended on soil genesis andtexture. Soil podzolization processes are more intensive in West and East Lithuania’s soilscompared with Central Lithuania’s soils. More rapid leaching of biogenic elements occurred inlighter-textured soils compared with heavier-textured soils prevailing in Central Lithuania.- the concentration of biogenic elements in lysimetric water was influenced by differentsoil genesis. While comparing soils differing in texture according to the concentration of testedions in the lysimetric water no great differences were found the soil formation site had a greatereffect than texture. The total ion concentration in lysimetric water taken from Rumokai Luvisolswas 339.9 mg kg -1 , and that of the same Luvisols present in V÷žaičiai 599.0 mg kg -1 .- the concentration of calcium (Ca ++ ) ions in lysimetric water was determined to be thehighest of all cations tested 109.9 mg kg - 1 or 86 %, of magnesium (Mg ++ ) made up about 11 %, ofpotassium 3 % from the total amount of cations tested. The concentration of sulphate (SO 4- - ) ionsin lysimetric water was identified to be the highest 128.2 mg kg - 1 or 54 %, of nitrates (NO 3 - ) madeup 32 %, of chlorides (Cl - ) 14 % from the total content of anions tested.- out of the tested agrochemical indicators, the humus content in the soil had the greatesteffect on the concentration of biogenic elements in lysimetric water.References1. Adomaitis T. ir kt. (2002) Maisto medžiagų išplovimas karsto zonos dirvožemiuose // Žemdirbyst÷:mokslo darbai / LŽI, LŽŪU. - Akademija, , t.79, 198-205. (In Lithuanian)2. Čiuberkien÷ D., Ežerinskas V. (2000) Agrocheminių rodiklių ir maisto medžiagų migracijos kitimaiįvairiai kalkintame ir tręštame dirvožemyje // Žemdirbyst÷: mokslo darbai. – Akademija, 71, 32-48. (InLithuanian)3. Ežerinskas V. (1995) Kalkinimo ir tręšimo įtaka augalų maisto medžiagų išplovimui // Žemdirbyst÷:mokslo darbai. – Dotnuva -Akademija, 50, 32-39. (In Lithuanian)4. Gaigalis., Račkauskait÷ A. (2001) Azoto ir fosforo išplovimo ekosistemose ypatumai // Vandens ūkioinžinerija: mokslo darbai, 16/38. Kaunas-Akademija. Vilainiai, 39-46. (In Lithuanian)5. Herbst F., Stumpe H. (1984) Stickstoffnerbest und Sticktoffurrkung bei Dungerausbringung im Herst //Archiv Acker – und Bodenkunde, Bd. 28, 10, 603-6096. Tarakanovas P. (1999) Statistinių duomenų apdorojimo programų paketas „Selekcija“. – Vilnius, 57 (InLithuanian)7. Tarakanovas P., Raudonius S. (2003) Agronominių tyrimų duomenų statistin÷ analiz÷ taikantkompiuterines programas ANOVA, STAT, SPLIT-PLOT iš paketo SELEKCIJA ir IRRISTAT. -Akademija, 57 (In Lithuanian)8. Балзарявичене Я. (1998) Выщелачивание K 2 O и P 2 O 5 дренажным стоком орошаемыхдождеванием // Вопросы орошения сельскохозяйственных культур на орошаемых землях. –Вильнюс, 42-48.9. Умарова А.Б. и др. (1996) Закономерности формирования лизиметрического стока и балансанекоторых элементов в модельной дерново-подзолистой почве // Тезисы докладов II съездаобщества почвоведов. -Москва, -Книга I., 120-121.10. Ушакова Г.И. (1987) Влияние удобрении на миграцию химических элементов в профилеиллювиально-гумусново подзола // Почвоведение. –№ 7, 46-53.41
Page 1 and 2: LATVIJAS LAUKSAIMNIECĪBAS UNIVERSI
Page 4 and 5: AGRONOMIJAS VĒSTIS (Latvian Journa
Page 10: AGRONOMIJAS VĒSTIS (Latvian Journa
Page 90 and 91:
AGRONOMIJAS VĒSTIS (Latvian Journa
Page 92 and 93:
Page 94 and 95:
Page 96 and 97:
Page 98 and 99:
Page 100 and 101:
Page 102 and 103:
Page 104 and 105:
Page 106 and 107:
Page 108 and 109:
Page 110 and 111:
Page 112 and 113:
Page 114 and 115:
Page 116 and 117:
Page 118 and 119:
Page 120 and 121:
Page 122 and 123:
Page 124 and 125:
Page 126 and 127:
Page 128 and 129:
Page 130 and 131:
Page 132 and 133:
Page 134 and 135:
Page 136 and 137:
Page 138 and 139:
Page 140 and 141:
Page 142 and 143:
Page 144 and 145:
Page 146 and 147:
Page 148 and 149:
Page 150 and 151:
Page 152 and 153:
Page 154 and 155:
Page 156 and 157:
Page 158 and 159:
Page 160 and 161:
Page 162 and 163:
Page 164 and 165:
Page 166 and 167:
Page 168 and 169:
Page 170 and 171:
Page 172 and 173:
Page 174 and 175:
Page 176 and 177:
Page 178 and 179:
Page 180 and 181:
Page 182 and 183:
Page 184 and 185:
Page 186 and 187:
Page 188 and 189:
Page 190 and 191:
Page 192 and 193:
Page 194 and 195:
Page 196 and 197:
Page 198 and 199:
Page 200 and 201:
Page 202 and 203:
Page 204 and 205:
Page 206 and 207:
Page 208 and 209:
Page 210 and 211:
Page 212 and 213:
Page 214 and 215:
Page 216 and 217:
Page 218 and 219:
Page 220 and 221:
Page 222 and 223:
Page 224 and 225:
Page 226 and 227:
Page 228 and 229:
Page 230 and 231:
Page 232 and 233:
Page 234 and 235:
Page 236 and 237:
Page 238 and 239:
Page 240 and 241:
Page 242 and 243:
Page 244 and 245:
Page 246 and 247:
Page 248 and 249:
Page 250 and 251:
Page 252 and 253:
Page 254 and 255:
Page 256 and 257:
Page 258 and 259:
Page 260 and 261:
Page 262 and 263:
Page 264 and 265:
Page 266 and 267:
Page 268 and 269:
Page 270 and 271:
Page 272 and 273:
Page 274 and 275:
Page 276 and 277:
Page 278 and 279:
Page 280 and 281:
Page 282 and 283:
Page 284 and 285:
Page 286 and 287:
Page 288 and 289:
Page 290 and 291:
Page 292 and 293:
Page 294 and 295:
Page 296 and 297:
Page 298 and 299:
Page 300 and 301:
Page 302 and 303:
Page 304 and 305:
Page 306 and 307:
Page 308 and 309:
show all

AGRONOMIJAS VÄSTIS - Latvijas LauksaimniecÄ«bas universitÄte

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?

AGRONOMIJAS VÄSTIS - Latvijas LauksaimniecÄ«bas universitÄte