Response of Cotton and Corn to Deep Placement of Fertilizer and Deep Tillage

Patrick, W. H.; Sloane, L. W.; Phillips, Sherman A.

doi:10.2136/sssaj1959.03615995002300040024x

Cited by 24 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, based on seed cotton yield and leaf K concentrations, deep placement of K fertilizer proved no better than surface application and, in the one year measured, leaf deficiency symptoms were more severe when K was deep placed rather than surface applied. These results agree with those of Patrick et al (1959), who found no advantage to deep placement vs. surface placement of N-P-K fertilizer to corn (Zea mays L.) and cotton grown on a Gallion silt loam soil (finesilty, mixed, thermic, aerie Typic Hapludalfs) with a plowpan, provided the crops were all deep tilled. Our conclusions are also supported by recent work that showed cotton roots located 30 to 60 em deep were less effective in P uptake than roots in the surface 30 em of soil (Nayakekorala and Taylor, 1990).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 90%

Subsoiling and Potassium Placement Effects on Water Relations and Yield of Cotton

Reeves

Mullins

1995

Agronomy Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Deep placement of K fertilizer may alleviate late‐season K deficiency of cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.) on soils adequate in surface soil K but low in subsoil K. This 2‐yr study in Alabama evaluated effects of deep tillage (in‐row subsoiling) and K fertilizer placement on yield, leaf K deficiency, soil water depletion, and stomatal conductance of cotton grown on a soil with a root‐restricting hardpan. The Norfolk sandy loam (fine‐loamy, siliceous, thermic Typic Kandiudults) soil tested medium for K in the top 15 cm and low at greater depths. Treatments were: (i) no K, no subsoiling; (ii) no K, subsoiled; (iii) surface application (84 kg K ha−1), no subsoiling; (iv) surface application, subsoiled; and (v) deep placement in the subsoiled channel. Surface application without subsoiling resulted in the greatest soil water content (0‐ to 80‐cm depth); deep placement, the lowest. Stomatal conductance was highest with no‐K, no subsoiling and lowest with K (surface or deep), subsoiled. There was no evidence of K or drought stress‐induced stomatal closure, and stomatal closure was not related to severity of leaf K deficiency. All three K treatments increased leaf K concentration at early bloom. Subsoiling without K fertilizer increased plant size and severity of leaf K deficiency; with surface K, subsoiling more than doubled total leaf area but did not affect leaf K deficiency. Within subsoiled treatments, leaf K deficiency was more severe with deep placement of K than with surface application. Subsoiling, especially with K fertilizer, maximized seed cotton yield in both years (avg. 3261 kg ha−1) but reduced stomatal conductance. Stomatal closure and premature leaf senescence are not the likely mechanism for late‐season leaf K‐deficiency in cotton. Although subsoiling was necessary to maximize cotton yields on this Coastal Plain soil with a root‐restricting hardpan, deep placement of K fertilizer was not superior to surface application.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 90%

Subsoiling and Potassium Placement Effects on Water Relations and Yield of Cotton

Reeves

Mullins

1995

Agronomy Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In Louisiana, Patrick et al (1959) found that 0.3-m deep moldboard plowing or 0.35-m deep chiseling increased yields on silt loam soils that had high bulk density layers just below plow depth. When soil horizons below compacted zones were infertile or acidic, deep application of fertilizer or lime was beneficial.…”

Section: Plowpan Soilsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…None of the soil types involved (seven in Iowa, five in Illinois) had pronounced plowpan layers, although subsoiling was a common crop production practice on these soils. Like Patrick et al (1959), they stated that deep application offertilizer and lime was beneficial when those amendments were needed. Deep tillage increased crop yields most when artificially produced compact zones were immediately below the plow layer.…”

Section: Plowpan Soilsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Advances in Soil Science

1985

Advances in Soil Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…It had less effect on naturally compact soils, possibly because compact zones were too thick for tillage tools to completely penetrate them. Like Patrick et al (1959), they stated that deep application offertilizer and lime was beneficial when those amendments were needed. In Connecticut, De Roo (1961) found that shattering the plowpan produced only small increases in tobacco (Nicotiana tobacum) yields even though the plowpan severely limited penetration of roots.…”

Section: Plowpan Soilsmentioning

confidence: 99%