Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-8ctnn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T11:18:01.314Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Studies of a Scottish drift soil. II

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

William Gammie Ogg
Affiliation:
(Department of Agricultural Research, University of Aberdeen.)
James Hendrick
Affiliation:
(Department of Agricultural Research, University of Aberdeen.)

Extract

1. Craibstone soil—a glacial drift soil which has not undergone very profound weathering and is free from calcium carbonate—has a considerable absorptive power for ammonia from a solution of sulphate of ammonia.

2. It was found possible to make a mechanical analysis of a large quantity of this soil without the use of acid and alkali, and although the separation into fractions was by no means perfect, a very fair comparison was obtained of the absorptive capacities of the different fractions.

3. The absorptive power per unit weight of the fractions, as would be naturally expected, increases with the decrease in size of the particles, reaching a maximum in the case of “clay.”

4. “Fine silt” and “silt” have also a high absorptive power. This may be partly due to the presence of organic matter, but allowing for that, these fractions have a high power of absorption.

5. It was not the object of these experiments to draw any detailed conclusions as to the relation between surface and absorptive power, but it seems probable, from the results obtained, that the absorptive power is not determined by surface alone, and that the chemical composition of the fractions has an influence on the absorptive power.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1920

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)Journ. Agr. Sc. 1916, 8, 111130.Google Scholar
(2)Journ. Agr. Sc. 1916, 7, 458469.Google Scholar
(3)Journ. Agr. Sc. 1906, 1, 470.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(4)Trans. Chem. Soc. 1904, 96, 950.Google Scholar
(5)Compt. rehdus, 1909, 149, 10871089.Google Scholar
(6)Trans. Chem. Soc. 1907, 91, 677687.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(7)Bul. XXIV, 1904, U.S. Bureau of Soils.Google Scholar