Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7czq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T23:55:06.907Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effects of Nitrogen, Phosphorus, Potassium and Magnesium on Growth of the Oil Palm

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 October 2008

R. H. V. Corley  and
C. K. Mok
R. H. V. Corley
Affiliation:
Oil Palm Genetics Laboratory, Layang-Layang, Johore, Malaysia
C. K. Mok
Affiliation:
Chemara Research Station, Layang-Layang, Johore, Malaysia
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Potassium application appeared to increase dry matter production and yield of oil palms, primarily by increasing leaf area, while nitrogen increased both leaf area and net assimilation rate. Responses to phosphorus and magnesium were harder to interpret. Production of vegetative dry matter attained a fairly constant level at the higher rates of fertilizer application, while the ratio of bunch yield to total dry matter production was little affected by fertilizer treatments. The importance of these results for oil palm breeding, and their possible value in diagnosing fertilizer requirements, are briefly discussed.

Type
Research Article
Information
Experimental Agriculture , Volume 8 , Issue 4 , October 1972 , pp. 347 - 353
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1972

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Bouma, D. (1970a). Ann. Bot. 24, 1131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bouma, D. (1970b). Proc. Xlth Int. Grassland Congress.Google Scholar
Corley, R. H. V., Hardon, J. J. & Tan, G. Y. (1971a). Euphytica 20, 307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Corley, R. H. V., Gray, B. S. & Ng, S. K. (1971b). Expl Agric. 7, 129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Driessche, R. Van Den & Wareing, P. F. (1966). Ann. Bot. 30, 673.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hardon, J. J., Corley, R. H. V. & Ooi, S. C. (in press). Euphytica 21.Google Scholar
Hartley, C. W. (1967). The Oil Palm. London: Longmans.Google Scholar
Humble, G. D. & Hsiao, T. C. (1969). Pl. Physiol. 44, 230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nevins, D. J. & Loomis, R. S. (1970). Crop Sci. 10, 21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ng, S. K. (1970). Oléagineux. 25, 637.Google Scholar
Rosenquist, E. A. (1962). J.W. Afr. Inst. Oil Palm Res. 3, 291.Google Scholar
Sparnaaij, L. D., Rees, A. R. & Chapas, L. C. (1963). J.W. Afr. Inst. Oil Palm Res. 4, 111.Google Scholar
Vyvyan, M. C. (1957). Ann. Bot. 21, 479.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Watson, D. J. (1956). The Growth of Leaves. (Ed. Milthorpe, F. L.). London: Butterworths.Google Scholar
Watson, D. J. (1958). Ann. Bot. 22, 37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Williams, W. A., Loomis, R. S. & Lepley, C. R. (1965). Crop Sci. 5, 215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar