Fertilizer research

, Volume 8, Issue 1, pp 85–90 | Cite as

Comparing the effectiveness of fertilizers

  • NJ Barrow


The effectiveness of different sources of the same nutrient should be compared using plots of yield versus fertilizer applied to find how much more of the less-effective source is needed to provide the same yield. This gives the same result as measuring the relative response to the two fertilizers — provided response is defined as the instantaneous slope of the yield-fertilizer curve rather than the yield produced by a given amount of fertilizer. In most cases, and especially for immobile nutrients, the relative effectiveness, measured as suggested, will not be affected by the level of application. It is reasonable to assume this simple case until this assumption can be disproved — rather than assuming a more complicated case in the first instance.

Key words

agronomic effectiveness fertilizer response relative effectiveness substitution rates 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Barrow NJ and Campbell NA (1972) Methods of measuring residual value of feritilizers. Aust J Exp Agric Anim Husb 12, 502–510Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Black CA and Scott CO (1956) Fertilizer evaluation. 1. Fundamental principles. Soil Sci Soc Amer Proc 20, 176–179Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bolan NS, Robson AD and Barrow NJ (1983) Plant and soil factors including mycorrhizal infection causing sigmoidal response of plants to applied phosphorus. Plant and Soil 73, 187–201Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bolland MDA and Bowden JW (1984) The initial and residual value for subterranean clover of phosphorus from crandallite rock phosphates, apatite rock phosphates and superphosphate. Fert Res 5, 295–307Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Brennan RF, Gartrell JW and Robson AD (184) Reaction of copper with soil affecting its availability to plants. III. Effect of incubation temperature. Aust J Soil Res 22, 165–171Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Colwell JD (1983) Fertilizer requirements. In: Soils: An Australian Viewpoint (Ed. CSIRO Div. Soils). CSIRO: Melbourne/Academic PressGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Engelstad OP, Jugsujinda A and De Datta S (1974) Response by flooded rice to phosphate rocks varying in citrate solubility. Soil Sci Soc Amer Proc 38, 524–529Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    van Burg PFJ (1963) The agricultural evaluation of nitrophosphates with particular reference to the direct and cumulative phosphate affects, and the interaction between water solubility and granule size. The Fert Soc Proc No. 75Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    van Burg PFJ, Dilz K and Prins WH (1982) Agricultural value of various nitrogen fertilizers. Nethl Nitrogen Tech Bull No. 13Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Martinus Nijhoff/Dr W. Junk Publishers 1985

Authors and Affiliations

  • NJ Barrow
    • 1
  1. 1.CSIRO, Division of Animal ProductionWembleyAustralia

Personalised recommendations