Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-dlnhk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T22:24:27.827Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Metabolism of nitrogen during long-term incubation of soil treated with fresh and rotted organic materials

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

A. H. Cornfield
A. H. Cornfield
Affiliation:
Imperial College, London, S.W. 7
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The metabolism of nitrogen during incubation, at 28° C. for 184 days, of a soil treated with 1% by weight of five different bulky organic manures and 0·5% calcium carbonate was studied.

1. Ammonia and nitrite could not be detected at any sampling date with any treatment, hence nitrate levels in treated soils compared with that in the control soil indicated the extent of mineralization or fixation of nitrogen.

2. A good straw compost (carbon/nitrogen ratio, C/N, 20·6) was the only material which showed mineralization of nitrogen over practically the whole of the incubation period.

3. Rotted farmyard manure (C/N 15–6) caused a small, whilst fresh grass (C/N 22·6), caused a fair amount of nitrogen fixation in the early stages, but there was a small overall mineralization of nitrogen by the final sampling.

4. A poor straw compost (C/N 42·5) and straw (C/N 147·0) both caused considerable fixation of nitrogen in the early stages. With continuing incubation the bulk of the nitrogen fixed by the poor compost, but only a small portion of that fixed by the straw, was released.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 53 , Issue 3 , December 1959 , pp. 327 - 329
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1959

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

Allison, F. E. & Sterling, L. D. (1949). Soil Sci. 67, 239.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barnes, T. W. (1953). J. Agric. Sci. 43, 365.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bremner, J. M. & Shaw, K. (1957). J. Sci. Fd Agric. 8, 341.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cornfield, A. H. (1958). Plant and Soil, 10, 183.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cornfield, A. H. (1952). J. Sci. Fd Agric. 3, 343.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crowther, E. M. & Mirchandani, T. J. (1931). J. Agric. Sci. 21, 493.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Daji, J. A. (1934). J. Agric. Sci. 24, 15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gainey, P. L. (1936). Soil Sci. 42, 157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hamence, J. H. (1951). Analyst, 76, 563.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hutchinson, H. B. & Richards, E. H. (1921). J. Minist. Agric. 28, 398.Google Scholar
Owen, O., Rogers, D. W. & Winsor, G. W. (1950). J. Agric. Sci. 40, 185.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Winsor, G. W. & Pollard, A. G. (1956). J. Sci. Fd Agric. 7, 134, 142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar