Fertilizer research

, Volume 40, Issue 3, pp 185–191 | Cite as

Adsorbed phosphorus partitioning in some benchmark soils from Northeast Brazil

  • J. O. Agbenin


The partitioning of adsorbed P between labile and non-labile pools by soils is fundamental to the residual effect of fertilizer-P added to soils. The main objective of the study was to determine the partitioning of adsorbed P between the labile and non-labile phases by some benchmark soils of northeast Brazil for which is little is known. Surface and subsurface samples of several soils: Non-Calcic Brown soil and Planosol (Haplustalfs), Cambisol (Ustropept), Lithosols (Orthents) and Alluvial soil (Tropaquept) were equilibrated with varying concentrations of KH2PO4. The readily exchangeable portion of the adsorbed P was determined by anion exchange resin (AER). Considerable hysteresis was observed between adsorbed P and AER-P. To quantify the extent of the hysteresis, a critical P concentration (Pcrit), the amount of P adsorbed at zero desorption by AER, was defined. The Pcrit of the soils averaged across the soil depths followed the order: Non-Calcic Brown soil > Planosol > Alluvial > Cambisol > Lithosol. The Pcrit correlated with clay and oxalate Fe (Feo). The P affinity index (K) estimated by Langmuir adsorption model accounted for 66% of the variance in Pcrit. A sequential extraction with 0.5M NaHCO3, 0.1M NaOH and 11.5M HC1 to remove the labile, moderately labile and non-labile P forms respectively, indicated that between 63 and 99% of adsorbed P was in the labile pool (AER-P + HCO3-P + OH-P), suggesting that the soils might have high potential for residual fertilizer-P responses.

Key words

critical P concentration desorption labile P non-labile P 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Agbenin J O and Tiessen H (1994a) Phosphorus transformations in a toposequence of Lithosols and Cambisols from semiarid NE Brazil. Geoderma 62: 345–362Google Scholar
  2. Agbenin JO and Tiessen H (1994b) Effect of soil properties on the differential phosphate adsorption and buffer capacities of soils from northeast Brazil. Soil Sci 157: 36–45Google Scholar
  3. Amer FD, Bouldin R, Black CA and Duke FR (1955) Characterization of soil phosphorus by anion exchange resin and32P equilibration. Plant and soil 6: 391–408Google Scholar
  4. Bache BW and Ireland C (1980) Desorption of phosphate from soils using anion exchange resins. J Soil Sci 31: 297–306Google Scholar
  5. Barrow NJ (1980) Differences amongst a wide ranging collection of soils in the rate of reaction with phosphate. Aust J Soil Res 18: 215–224Google Scholar
  6. Barrow NJ (1985) Reactions of anions and cations with variable charge soils. Adv Agron 38: 183–230Google Scholar
  7. Bar-Yosef B, Kafkalfi U, Rosenberg R and Sposito G (1988) Phosphorus adsorption by kaolinites and montmorillonite. 1. Effect of time, ionic strength and pH. Soil Sci Soc Am J 52: 1580–1585Google Scholar
  8. Cabrera F, De Arambari P, Madrid L and Toca GG (1981) Desorption of phosphorus from iron oxide in relation to pH and porosity. Geoderma 26: 203–216Google Scholar
  9. Evans RL and Jurinak J J (1976) Kinetics of phosphate release from a desert soil. Soil Sci 121: 205–211Google Scholar
  10. Fixen PE and Ludwick AE (1982) Residual available phosphate in near-neutral and alkaline soils. 1. Solubility and capacity relationships. Soil Sci Soc Am J 46: 332–334Google Scholar
  11. Goedert WJ 1983 Management of Cerrado soils: a review. J Soil Sci 34: 405–428Google Scholar
  12. Gunary D and Sutton CD (1967) Soil factor affecting uptake of phosphate. J Soil Sci 18: 167–173Google Scholar
  13. Hingston RJ, Posner AM and Quirk JP (1974) Anion adsorption by goethite and gibbsite. 11. Desorption of anion from oxide surfaces. J Soil Sci 25: 16–26Google Scholar
  14. Hislop IJ and Cooke IJ (1968) Anion exchange resin as a means of assessing soil phosphate status technique: A laboratory technique. Soil Sci 105: 8–11Google Scholar
  15. Muns DN and Fox RL (1976) The slow reaction which continues after phosphate adsorption. Kinetics and equilibrium in some tropical soils. Soil Sci Soc Am J 40: 46–51Google Scholar
  16. Murphy J and Riley JP (1962) A modified single solution for the determination of phosphorus in natural waters. Anal Chim Acta 27: 31–36Google Scholar
  17. Russel JS, Kamprath EJ and Andrew CS (1988) Phosphorus sorption of subtropical acid soils as influenced by the nature of the cation suite. Soil Sci Soc Am J 52: 1407–1410Google Scholar
  18. Ryan J, Hassan HM, Baasiri M and Tabbara HS (1985) Availability and transformation of applied phosphorus in calacreous Lebanese soils. Soil Sci Soc Am J 48: 74–77Google Scholar
  19. Sibbesen E (1978) An investigation of the anion exchange resin method for soil phosphate extraction. Plant and Soil 50: 305–321Google Scholar
  20. Smillie GW, Curtin D and Syers JK (1987) Influence of exchangeable calcium on phosphate retention by weakly acid soils. Soil Sci Soc Am J 51: 1169–1172Google Scholar
  21. Stewart JWB and McKercher RB (1982) Phosphorus cycle. In: Burns RG and Slater JH (eds) Experimental Microbial Ecology, pp 221–238. Blackwell Scientific Publ., Oxford, LondonGoogle Scholar
  22. Taylor RW and Ellis BG (1978) A mechanism to describe P adsorption on soil and anion resin surfaces. Soil Sci Soc Am J 42: 432–436Google Scholar
  23. Vaidyanathan LV and Talibudeen O (1970) Rate processes in the desorption of phosphate from soils by ion exchange resins. J Soil Sci 21: 173–178Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1995

Authors and Affiliations

  • J. O. Agbenin
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Soil Science, Institute for Agricultural ResearchAhmadu Bello UniversityZariaNigeria

Personalised recommendations