Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-g8jcs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T04:47:02.818Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Interactions of phosphorus, magnesium and zinc on the yield and nutrient content of maize

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

N. N. Agbim
N. N. Agbim
Affiliation:
Department of Agronomy, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, Colorado, U.S.A.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Five Zn-deficient soils designated A–E (pH 7·3–7·7) and a reference soil F (pH 7·6) were used in a glasshouse study on maize in which five fertilizer treatments: 75 μg P/g alone and together with all combinations of 0 and 5 μg/g of Mg and Zn and with 10 μg Mg + 5 μg Zn/g and a control were applied. The forage yield of soils A–E ranged from 2·5 to 2·9 g when no Zn was applied and from 5·1 to 5·6 g with added Zn, showing that Zn was the major limiting nutrient. Applied Mg significantly increased yield, the main exceptions being soils D and E which had the highest exchangeable Mg.

Addition of Mg to a P but not PZn treatment significantly increased P concentration and uptake. For soils B and E, Zn addition significantly depressed P concentration in maize. The P treatment significantly depressed Zn concentration but increased Mg concentration and uptake by maize. Although Mg application either depressed or had no effect on Mg content of maize, it caused a significant increase in Zn concentration and uptake. The correlation coefficient (r) between Zn and Mg in maize was – 0·61 (P < 0·001). Possibly, Mg was replacing Zn in the clay lattice or in its metallo-protein complex within the root.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 96 , Issue 3 , June 1981 , pp. 509 - 514
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1981

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

Barrows, H. L. & Gammon, N. Jr (1960). Effect of soil type and zinc concentration on growth, nutrient uptake, and magnesium translocation of seedling tung trees. Proceedings of the American Society for Horticultural Science 76, 287–299.Google Scholar
Jurinak, J. J. & Bauer, N. (1956). Thermodynamics of zinc adsorption on calcite, dolomite and magnesitetype minerals. Soil Science Society of America Proceedings 20, 466–471.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keefer, R. F. & Singh, R. N. (1968). The mechanism of phosphorus and zinc interaction in soils as revealed by corn growth and composition. International Congress of Soil Science Transactions 9th (Adelaide, Australia) II, 367–374.Google Scholar
Lindsay, W. L. & Norvell, W. A. (1969). Development of a DTPA micronutrient soil test. Agronomy Abstracts of the American Society of Agronomy, p. 84.Google Scholar
Lucas, R. E. & Knezek, B. D. (1972). Climatic and soil conditions promoting micronutrient defiencies in plants. In Micronutrients in Agriculture (ed. Dinauer, R. C.), pp. 265–288. Wisconsin: Soil Science Society of America Inc.Google Scholar
Merrill, S. Jr, Potter, G. F. & Brown, R. T. (1953). Responses of tung trees on lakeland fine sand to less common elements. Proceedings of the American Society for Horticultural Science 62, 94–102.Google Scholar
Olsen, S. R. (1972). Micronutrient interactions. In Micronutrients in Agriculture (ed. Dinauer, R. C.), pp. 243–264. Wisconsin: Soil Science Society of America Inc.Google Scholar
Olsen, S. R. & Dean, L. A. (1965). Phosphorus. In Methods of Soil Analysis, Part 2 (ed. Black, C. A.), pp. 1035–1049. Wisconsin: Soil Science Society of America Inc.Google Scholar
Safaya, N. M. (1976). Phosphorus-zinc interaction in relation to absorption rates of phosphorus, zinc, copper, manganese and iron in maize (Zea maysL.). Soil Science Society of America Journal 40, 719–722.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Safaya, N. M. & Gupta, A. P. (1979). Differential susceptibility of maize cultivars to zinc deficiency. Agronomy Journal 71 132–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Seatz, L. F. (1960). Zinc availability and uptake by plants as affected by the calcium and magnesium saturation and phosphorus content of the soil. International Congress of Soil Science Transactions 7th (Madison, Wisconsin) II, 271–280.Google Scholar
Shear, C. B. (1958). Responses of tung trees in sand and soil cultures to ratios of ammonium to nitrate nitrogen and levels of potassium and zinc. Proceedings of the American Society for Horticultural Science 72, 224–239.Google Scholar
Smith, P. F. (1953). Heavy-metal accumulation by citrus roots. Botanical Gazette 114, 426–436.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, P. F., Reuther, W., Specht, A. W. & Hrnciar, G. (1954). Effect of differential nitrogen, potassium and magnesium supply to young Valencia orange trees in sand culture on mineral composition especially of leaves and fibrous roots. Plant Physiology 29, 349–355.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Thorne, D. W. (1957). Zinc deficiency and its control. Advances in Agronomy 9, 31–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Truog, E., Goates, R. J., Gerloff, R. J. & Berger, K. C. (1947). Magnesium-phosphorus relationships in plant nutrition. Soil Science 63, 18–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walkley, A. & Black, C. A. (1934). An examination of the Degtjareff method of determining soil organic matter and a proposed modification of the chromic acid titration method. Soil Science 37, 29–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zimmerman, M. (1947). Magnesium in plants. Soil Science 63, 1–12.Google Scholar