Download full-text


Available from: Vilson A Klein, Oct 08, 2015
67 Reads
  • Agronomy journal 01/1975; 67(2). DOI:10.2134/agronj1975.00021962006700020005x · 1.44 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Approximately one-half the soil in New Brunswick has naturally compacted subsoil and can benefit from deep-ripping. These soils are strongly acidic and pose chemical barriers to root proliferation even after deep-ripping. Therefore we determined the feasibility of placing large quantities of dry agricultural limestone in the subsoil during a deep-ripping operation. A gravity-feed applicator was attached to the frame of a commercial heavy duty subsoiler. The applicator released 60% of the limestone at 0.25 m depth below the soil surface, 25% at 0.55 m and 15% at 0.75 m depth. In the fall of 1991, a research station loam was deep-ripped to a depth of 0.85 m and limestone was applied to the subsoil at 30 and 55 Mg ha−1. Trenches were dug perpendicular to the direction of deep-ripping immediately after deep-ripping and 1 year later. Soil samples were taken on a 0.1 m grid to a depth of 1 m and a width of 0.6 m. Chemical analysis of the soils for their acid soluble Ca concentration was used as the criterion to assess the distribution of limestone in the soil profile. The applicator successfully placed limestone into the highly compacted subsoil; however, large variations in subsoil Ca concentrations occurred. Soil Ca concentrations were not significantly different (P>0.05) in the 2 years. They were, however, significantly affected by rate of limestone application, horizontal displacement from the tine and sample depth. The application of 55 Mg ha−1 resulted in about ten times more subsoil volume with increased Ca concentrations than when 30 Mg ha−1 was applied. Highest soil Ca concentrations occurred in the 0.5–0.8 m depth layer. Soil Ca concentrations were highest near the tine and decreased with increasing horizontal distance from the tine. Very little enrichment occurred in the 0.2–0.5 m depth layer.
    Soil and Tillage Research 11/1995; DOI:10.1016/0167-1987(95)00500-5 · 2.62 Impact Factor