评估土壤pH值和石灰需求方法和推荐石灰率在美国土地授予机构的六种参考土壤

John D. Jones, Robert O. Miller, John T. Spargo, Frank J. Sikora, Manbir K. Rakkar, Nathan A. Slaton, Deanna L. Osmond
{"title":"评估土壤pH值和石灰需求方法和推荐石灰率在美国土地授予机构的六种参考土壤","authors":"John D. Jones,&nbsp;Robert O. Miller,&nbsp;John T. Spargo,&nbsp;Frank J. Sikora,&nbsp;Manbir K. Rakkar,&nbsp;Nathan A. Slaton,&nbsp;Deanna L. Osmond","doi":"10.1002/saj2.70116","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Soil pH and liming recommendations that address the soils, crops, and liming materials have been developed and adopted by land grant universities since the early 20th century. We inventoried land grant institution soil pH and lime requirement (LR) measurement methods for 1980 and 2020 and examined differences in lime rate recommendations for six reference soils using a survey developed by members of the Fertilizer Recommendation Support Tool initiative. Laboratory analysis for six acidic soils with a range of properties was shared with scientists requesting a lime recommendation for each, assuming a 0- to 15-cm soil depth, 6.5 target pH, and lime material having 100% effective calcium carbonate equivalence. Soil pH methods, LR methods, and lime rate recommendations were documented for 48, 41, and 34 states, respectively. The most widely used pH method was a 1:1 soil–water ratio (34 states, 71%). Thirty-one states use one or more buffer solutions to determine LR with the most widely used being the Sikora (10 states), Mehlich (10 states), and Shoemaker, McLean, and Pratt (nine states) buffers. Forty lime rate recommendations from 34 states for each soil were summarized with median rates ranging from 2242 to 9079 kg ha<sup>−1</sup> and coefficients of variation ranging from 41% to 73%. The reasons for high LR variability are likely due to different calibrations as no strong trends for LR method or region were observed. Efforts are needed to develop and harmonize lime recommendations to provide accurate and transparent guidance, especially for states sharing common soils and boundaries.</p>","PeriodicalId":101043,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings - Soil Science Society of America","volume":"89 5","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://acsess.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/saj2.70116","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Assessment of soil pH and lime requirement methods and recommended lime rates for six reference soils across US land grant institutions\",\"authors\":\"John D. Jones,&nbsp;Robert O. Miller,&nbsp;John T. Spargo,&nbsp;Frank J. Sikora,&nbsp;Manbir K. Rakkar,&nbsp;Nathan A. Slaton,&nbsp;Deanna L. Osmond\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/saj2.70116\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Soil pH and liming recommendations that address the soils, crops, and liming materials have been developed and adopted by land grant universities since the early 20th century. We inventoried land grant institution soil pH and lime requirement (LR) measurement methods for 1980 and 2020 and examined differences in lime rate recommendations for six reference soils using a survey developed by members of the Fertilizer Recommendation Support Tool initiative. Laboratory analysis for six acidic soils with a range of properties was shared with scientists requesting a lime recommendation for each, assuming a 0- to 15-cm soil depth, 6.5 target pH, and lime material having 100% effective calcium carbonate equivalence. Soil pH methods, LR methods, and lime rate recommendations were documented for 48, 41, and 34 states, respectively. The most widely used pH method was a 1:1 soil–water ratio (34 states, 71%). Thirty-one states use one or more buffer solutions to determine LR with the most widely used being the Sikora (10 states), Mehlich (10 states), and Shoemaker, McLean, and Pratt (nine states) buffers. Forty lime rate recommendations from 34 states for each soil were summarized with median rates ranging from 2242 to 9079 kg ha<sup>−1</sup> and coefficients of variation ranging from 41% to 73%. The reasons for high LR variability are likely due to different calibrations as no strong trends for LR method or region were observed. Efforts are needed to develop and harmonize lime recommendations to provide accurate and transparent guidance, especially for states sharing common soils and boundaries.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":101043,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Proceedings - Soil Science Society of America\",\"volume\":\"89 5\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://acsess.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/saj2.70116\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Proceedings - Soil Science Society of America\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://acsess.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/saj2.70116\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Proceedings - Soil Science Society of America","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://acsess.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/saj2.70116","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

自20世纪初以来,土地授予大学已经开发并采用了针对土壤、作物和石灰材料的土壤pH值和石灰建议。我们盘点了1980年和2020年土地授予机构土壤pH值和石灰需求(LR)测量方法,并使用肥料推荐支持工具倡议成员开展的调查,检查了六种参考土壤石灰含量建议的差异。科学家们分享了对六种酸性土壤的实验室分析,并要求每种土壤推荐石灰,假设土壤深度为0至15厘米,目标pH值为6.5,石灰材料具有100%有效碳酸钙当量。分别记录了48、41和34个州的土壤pH值方法、LR方法和石灰含量建议。最广泛使用的pH法是1:1的土水比(34个州,71%)。31个州使用一种或多种缓冲溶液来确定LR,其中使用最广泛的是Sikora(10个州),Mehlich(10个州)和Shoemaker, McLean, and Pratt(9个州)缓冲液。总结了34个州针对每种土壤提出的40种石灰施用量建议,中位数为2242 ~ 9079 kg ha - 1,变异系数为41% ~ 73%。LR高变异性的原因可能是由于不同的校准,因为没有观察到LR方法或区域的强烈趋势。需要努力制定和协调石灰建议,以提供准确和透明的指导,特别是对拥有共同土壤和边界的国家。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Assessment of soil pH and lime requirement methods and recommended lime rates for six reference soils across US land grant institutions

Assessment of soil pH and lime requirement methods and recommended lime rates for six reference soils across US land grant institutions

Assessment of soil pH and lime requirement methods and recommended lime rates for six reference soils across US land grant institutions

Soil pH and liming recommendations that address the soils, crops, and liming materials have been developed and adopted by land grant universities since the early 20th century. We inventoried land grant institution soil pH and lime requirement (LR) measurement methods for 1980 and 2020 and examined differences in lime rate recommendations for six reference soils using a survey developed by members of the Fertilizer Recommendation Support Tool initiative. Laboratory analysis for six acidic soils with a range of properties was shared with scientists requesting a lime recommendation for each, assuming a 0- to 15-cm soil depth, 6.5 target pH, and lime material having 100% effective calcium carbonate equivalence. Soil pH methods, LR methods, and lime rate recommendations were documented for 48, 41, and 34 states, respectively. The most widely used pH method was a 1:1 soil–water ratio (34 states, 71%). Thirty-one states use one or more buffer solutions to determine LR with the most widely used being the Sikora (10 states), Mehlich (10 states), and Shoemaker, McLean, and Pratt (nine states) buffers. Forty lime rate recommendations from 34 states for each soil were summarized with median rates ranging from 2242 to 9079 kg ha−1 and coefficients of variation ranging from 41% to 73%. The reasons for high LR variability are likely due to different calibrations as no strong trends for LR method or region were observed. Efforts are needed to develop and harmonize lime recommendations to provide accurate and transparent guidance, especially for states sharing common soils and boundaries.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信