Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-tf8b9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-29T10:48:47.076Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

On the influence of the carbon: nitrogen ratios of organic material on the mineralisation of nitrogen

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

H. L. Jensen
H. L. Jensen
Affiliation:
(Rothamsted Experimental Station, Harpenden1.)
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Organic materials with a C: N ratio ranging from about 85: 1 to about 10: 1 were submitted to nitrification tests in an acid and in an alkaline soil during a period of 6 months. In the acid soil only pea pod meal, with a C: N ratio of 13·3: 1 showed an increase in inorganic N over control; in the alkaline soil the limit above which no nitrification will occur within a period of 6 months was at C: N = 26: 1; below this limit the rate of nitrification increased rapidly with decreasing C: N ratio. Unnitrified N was left behind in a quantity corresponding to 1·5–2·2 per cent, of the original material, the percentage being higher in the case of materials rich in N.

All the materials tended to increase the content of “a-humus” in the soil, though not to the same extent or in the same manner. More “a-humus” was produced in the alkaline than in the acid soil, except in the case of farmyard manure. Straw, sweet clover, lupin and farmyard manure apparently acted both through their lignin content and through the synthesising action of microorganisms, since they increased the amounts of both N and methoxyl in humus. Mycelium of Polyporus contains a fraction possessing the properties of “humic acid,” rich in N, but devoid of methoxyl, which persists in the soil.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 19 , Issue 1 , January 1929 , pp. 71 - 82
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1929

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

(1)Anderson, J. A.Soil Sci. (1926), 21, 115–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(2)Barthel, C. and Bengtsson, N. Meddel No. 311 fr.Centralanst. f.forsoksv. p.jordbruksomr. (1926). Bakt. Avd. no. 44.Google Scholar
(3)Bengtsson, N.Soil Sci. (1924), 18, 255–278.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(4)Dennstedt, M.Abderhalden's Handb. der Biol. Arbeitsmethoden, Abt. 1 (1921), 3, 485–503.Google Scholar
(5)Doryland, C. J. T.North Dakota Agric. Exp. Sta. Bull. (1916), 116.Google Scholar
(6)Dv Torr, M. S. Thesis, University of Cambridge. (1924).Google Scholar
(7)Fischer, F.Die Naturwissenschaften (1921), 9, 958–965.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(8)Hutchinson, H. B. and Richards, E. H.J. Min. Agric. (1921), 28, 398.Google Scholar
(9)Iversen, K.Tidsskr.f. Planteavl. (1927), 33, 557–752.Google Scholar
(10)Waksman, S. A.J. Agric. Sci. (1924), 14, 555–562.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(11)Waksman, S. A. and Heukelekian, O.J. Biol. Chem. (1925), 66, 323–342.Google Scholar
(12)Waksman, S. A.Soil Sci. (1926), 22, 221–232, 323–333, 421–436.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(13)Waksman, S. A.Cellulosechemie. (1927), 8, no. 9–10.Google Scholar
(14)Waksman, S. A. and Tenney, F. G.Soil Sci. (1927), 24, 317–333.CrossRefGoogle Scholar