2008
DOI: 10.1590/s0100-06832008000700019
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Interpretação de resultados analíticos de fósforo pelos extratores Mehlich-1 e Mehlich-3 em solos do Rio Grande do Sul

Abstract: RESUMOAs soluções extratoras multielementares possibilitam avaliar a disponibilidade de vários nutrientes de plantas no mesmo extrato; dentre estes o P merece especial atenção. As soluções Mehlich-1 (M 1 ) e Mehlich-3 (M 3 ) enquadram-se nesta categoria. Neste estudo, foram comparados os teores de P extraídos por estas soluções em 360 amostras de solos do Estado do Rio Grande do Sul. Os coeficientes de correlação entre os teores de P extraído pelas mesmas indicaram alto grau de associação e de significância. O… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

2
19
0
14

Year Published

2009
2009
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

3
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 23 publications
(35 citation statements)
references
References 13 publications
2
19
0
14
Order By: Relevance
“…However, in the clayey soil (LV), with lower remaining P (Table 1), the difference between the results in the comparison of the extractors was greater (much less for M1). In the sandy soils (LVA and LA) (Table 1), which is a condition for lower M1consumption, the extracted P contents approached, although statistically still lower, the levels of the resins ( the soil, e.g., of the clay content (Bortolon & Gianello, 2008), or more appropriate, remaining P (Simões Neto et al, 2009), to compare the results of available P extracted by consumption-sensitive extractors such as M1 and non-sensitive (or very little sensitive) extractants such as Ionic Resins. This tendency was explained by Gianello (2008b) andSimões Neto et al (2009), who mentioned the key influence of the soil clay content on the extraction capacity of M1 and AR.…”
Section: Effect Of Preferential Extraction Of P-ca and Of Mehlich-1 Cmentioning
confidence: 91%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…However, in the clayey soil (LV), with lower remaining P (Table 1), the difference between the results in the comparison of the extractors was greater (much less for M1). In the sandy soils (LVA and LA) (Table 1), which is a condition for lower M1consumption, the extracted P contents approached, although statistically still lower, the levels of the resins ( the soil, e.g., of the clay content (Bortolon & Gianello, 2008), or more appropriate, remaining P (Simões Neto et al, 2009), to compare the results of available P extracted by consumption-sensitive extractors such as M1 and non-sensitive (or very little sensitive) extractants such as Ionic Resins. This tendency was explained by Gianello (2008b) andSimões Neto et al (2009), who mentioned the key influence of the soil clay content on the extraction capacity of M1 and AR.…”
Section: Effect Of Preferential Extraction Of P-ca and Of Mehlich-1 Cmentioning
confidence: 91%
“…The literature reports that the extraction power of an extractor is exhausted or worn out, leading to the underestimation of the levels of available soil P, to the same extent as the clay content of the soil increases (Bortolon & Gianello, 2008) or remaining P decreases (Simões Neto et al, 2011) (Tables 1 and 7). …”
Section: Effect Of Preferential Extraction Of P-ca and Of Mehlich-1 Cmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Soil clay contents were measured with the densimeter method, with sample dispersion using 0.1 mol L -1 NaOH plus 2 hours of shaking. STP values were determined with four methods: P M1 , Mehlich-1 (Tedesco et al, 2004), which is the standard method for soil P extraction in the region; P M3 , Mehlich-3 (Bortolon & Gianello, 2008); P OX , ammonium oxalate at pH 3.0 (Schwertmann, 1964); and WEP (Self- Davis et al, 2009). The amounts of extractable Ca, Mg, Fe, and Al were also determined, using inductively coupled plasma optical emission spectrometry (ICP-OES), with the Optima 7300 DV spectrometer (Perkin Elmer, Wellesley, MA, USA).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The first one was used because it is the standard STP in the Southern Brazil and it is easy to include Fe+Al in the determination process, since ICP-OES is adopted in several laboratories. The second one was used because it has been tested in Southern Brazil as an alternative for Mehlich-1 (Bortolon & Gianello, 2008). The evaluation of different routine soil test P to calculate the DPS is important for developing a practical DPS measurement methodology, providing an analytical tool suitable for P management (Nair et al, 2004) and that can predict the risk of P losses by runoff, considering WEP as the potential P form to be lost.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Isso decorre, em parte, devido à baixa previsibilidade da necessidade de adubação fosfatada em solos que recebem fosfatos naturais e também devido às baixas quantidades de fósforo extraído em solos de textura argilosa, o que determina faixas de interpretação de teores de fósforo condicionadas à classificação textural dos solos (RHEINHEIMER et al, 2008). Dentre os métodos alternativos ao Mehlich-1, estão o Mehlich-3 e a resina de troca iônica em membrana, os quais foram testados em outras condições por diversos autores (MIOLA et al, 1999;BISSANI et al, 2002;BORTOLON & GIANELLO, 2006;BORTOLON & GIANELLO, 2008;SCHLINDWEIN & GIANELLO, 2008).…”
Section: Introductionunclassified