Plant and Soil

, Volume 196, Issue 2, pp 289–294

Phosphorus acquisition and cycling in crop and pasture systems in low fertility tropical soils

  • D. K. Friesen
  • I. M. Rao
  • R. J. Thomas
  • A. Oberson
  • J. I. Sanz

Abstract

Soil-plant processes which enhance P acquisition and cycling in low-P Oxisols were investigated in a crop rotations and ley pasture systems experiment on the Colombian eastern plains. Comparison of rooting patterns indicated that, despite low available P at depth, there are important differences in root size and distribution among native savanna, introduced forage and crop species which affect their ability to acquire P from these soils. Differences in crop/forage residue decomposition and P release rates suggest that managing the interaction of residue with soil may help slow P fixation reactions. Despite these differences, soil P fractionation measurements indicate that applied P moves preferentially into labile inorganic P pools, and then only slowly via biomass production and microbes into organic P pools under both pastures and crop rotations.

litter decomposition Oxisols phosphorus fractionation root distribution root length savannas 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Barber S A 1984 Soil Nutrient Bioavailability. John Wiley, New York. 398 p.Google Scholar
  2. Gale, M R and Grigal, D F 1987 Vertical root distribution of northern tree species in relation to successional status. Can. J. For. Res. 17, 829-834.Google Scholar
  3. Lynch J P and Beebe S E 1995 Adaptation of beans (Phaseolus vulgarisL.) to low phosphorus availability. HortScience 30, 1165-1171.Google Scholar
  4. Oberson A, Friesen D K, Tiessen H, Moir J and Borrero G 1995 Phosphorus transformations in improved pastures. InAnnual Report 1994 Tropical Lowlands Program. pp 182-187. Working Doc. No. 148, CIAT, Cali, Colombia.Google Scholar
  5. Olsen S R and Sommers L E 1982 Phosphorus. InMethods of Soil Analysis, Part 2, Chemical and Microbiological Properties. Eds. A L Page, R H Miller and D R Keeney. pp 403-430. Agronomy 9 (2nd edition), ASA-SSSA, Madison, Wisconsin.Google Scholar
  6. Pandey S, Ceballos H, Magnavoca R, Bahía Filho A F C, Duque-Vargas J and Vinasco L E 1994 Genetics of tolerance to soil acidity in tropical maize. Crop Sci. 34, 1511-1514.Google Scholar
  7. Pellet D and El-Sharkawy M A 1993 Cassava varietal response to phosphorus fertilization. II. Phosphorus uptake and use efficiency. Field Crops Res. 35, 13-20.Google Scholar
  8. Rao I M, Zeigler R S, Vera R and Sarkarung S 1993 Selection and breeding for acid-soil tolerance in crops: Upland rice and tropical forages as case studies. BioScience 43, 454-465.Google Scholar
  9. Rao I M, Ayarza M and Herrera P 1997a Root distribution and production in native and introduced pastures in the south American savannas. InProc. Vth Symp. Int. Soc. Root Research. Kluwer Academic Publishers, The Netherlands. (in press).Google Scholar
  10. Rao I M, Borrero V, Ricaurate J, Garcia R and Ayarza M A 1997b Adaptive attributes of tropical forage species to acid soils. III. Differences in phosphorus acquisition and utilization as influenced by varying phosphorus supply and soil type. J. Plant Nutr. 20, 155-180.Google Scholar
  11. Swift M J (ed.) 1984 Soil biological processes and tropical soil fertility: A proposal for a collaborative programme of research. Biology International Special Issue 5, 1-37.Google Scholar
  12. Thomas G W 1982 Exchangeable cations. InMethods of Soil Analysis, Part 2, Chemical and Microbiological Properties. Eds. A L Page, R H Miller and D R Keeney. pp 159-165. Agronomy 9 (2nd edition), ASA-SSSA, Madison, Wisconsin.Google Scholar
  13. Thomas R J and Asakawa N M 1993 Decomposition of leaf litter from tropical forage grasses and legumes. Soil Biol. Biochem. 25, 1351-1361.Google Scholar
  14. Tiessen H and Moir J O 1993 Characterization of available P by sequential extraction. InSoil Sampling and Methods of Analysis. Ed. M R Carter. pp 75-86. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL.Google Scholar
  15. Vepraskas M J and Hoyt D G 1988 Comparison of the trench-profile and core methods for evaluating root distributions in tillage studies. Agron. J. 80, 166-172.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1997

Authors and Affiliations

  • D. K. Friesen
    • 1
    • 2
  • I. M. Rao
    • 1
  • R. J. Thomas
    • 1
  • A. Oberson
    • 1
    • 3
  • J. I. Sanz
    • 1
  1. 1.Centro Internacional de Agricultura Tropical (CIAT)CaliColombia
  2. 2.International Fertilizer Development CenterMuscle ShoalsUSA
  3. 3.Swiss Federal Institute of TechnologyZürichSwitzerland

Personalised recommendations