Advertisement

Nutrient Cycling in Agroecosystems

, Volume 65, Issue 2, pp 115–127 | Cite as

Ecochemical effects of phonolite rock powder, dolomite and potassium sulfate in a spruce stand on an acidified glacial loam

  • K. von Wilpert
  • M. Lukes
Article

Abstract

In a field experiment, the ecochemical effects of soil amelioration withdolomite, phonolite rock powder and fertilization with potassium sulfate werecompared. By dolomite and phonolite the acid-neutralizing capacity of the soiland the pH level should be stabilized. In addition, the correction of a latentpotassium deficiency in spruce stands at acidified glacial loams was intended.In comparison to fertilizing with potassium sulfate liming as well as theapplication of phonolite rock powder showed a prominent improvement of the soilchemical status already within the first 4–5 years. Both treatmentsincreased the base saturation, the dolomite to a depth of 60 cm,the phonolite to a depth of 30 cm. At the limed plot, strongnitrate leaching occurred with peaks at 80 cm soil depth higherthan the EU threshold for drinking water. In the phonolite plot this alsooccurred, but the nitrate concentrations remained lower. The silicate rockpowder reacted more slowly than dolomite. Thus, we can state that silicate rockpowder can be an alternative to conventional liming in regions where the risk ofnitrate mobilization is high and especially at water preservation areas wherespecial care has to be observed. But the phonolite which was used in thisexperiment released a considerable amount of sodium, which disturbed theamelioration effect. In practice, it would be better to use a silicate rockpowder with a low sodium content. Fertilization with potassium sulfate provideda fast nutritional effect but displayed no potential for soil chemicalamelioration.

Dolomite Field conditions Nitrate leaching Phonolite Potassium deficiency Potassium sulfate Rock powder Soil chemical status 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Beese F. and Meiwes K.J. 1995. 10 JahreWaldkalkung–Stand und Perspektiven. Allg. Forst. Zeitschr. 50/17: 946–949.Google Scholar
  2. Blum W.E.H., Herbinger B., Mentler A., Ottner F., Unger E. and Wenzel W.W. 1989a. ZurVerwendung von Gesteinsmehlen in der Landwirtschaft. I Chemisch-mineralogische Zusammensetzung und Eignung von Gesteinsmehlen als Düungemittel. Z. Pflanzenernähr. Bodenk. 152: 421–425.Google Scholar
  3. Blum W.E.H., Herbinger B., Mentler A., Ottner F., Pollak M.F., Unger E. et al. 1989b. Zur Verwendung von Gesteinsmehlen in der Landwirtschaft. II Wirkung von Gesteinsmehlen als Bodenverbesserungsmittel. Z. Pflanzenernähr. Bodenk. 152: 427–430.Google Scholar
  4. Deutschmann G. 1996. New aspects of buffering processes in stony soils. Chemosphere. 36: 1149–1154.Google Scholar
  5. Eckardt F.E.W. 1979. Über die Einwirkung heterotropher Mikroorganismen auf die Zersetzung silikatischer Minerale. Z. Pflanzenernähr. Bodenk. 142: 434–445.Google Scholar
  6. Evers F.H. 1991. Forest Fertilization – Present State and History with Spatial Reference to South German Conditions. Fertilizer Research 27: 71–86.Google Scholar
  7. Federal Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Forestry 1990. Bundesweite Bodenzustandserhebung im Wald. Bonn, Germany, 147 pp.Google Scholar
  8. Hildebrand E.E. 1994. The heterogeneous distribution of mobile ions in the rhizosphere of acid forest soils: facts, causes and consequences. J. Environ. Sci. Health A. 29(9): 1973–1992.Google Scholar
  9. Hildebrand E.E. and Schack-Kirchner H. 1995. Der Einfluß derKorngröße oberflächig ausgebrachter Dolomite auf Lösungsverhalten und vertikale Wirkungstiefe. Forst. u. Holz. 45/6: 139–142.Google Scholar
  10. Hildebrand E.E. and Schack-Kirchner H. 2000. Initial effects of lime and rock powder application on soil solution chemistry in a dystric cambisol. Nutrient Cycling in Agroecosystems 56: 69–78.Google Scholar
  11. Huwe B. and Totsche K.U. 1995. Deterministic and stochastic modeling of water, heat and nitrogen dynamics on different scales with WHNSIM. Journal of Contaminant Hydrology 3/4: 265–284.Google Scholar
  12. Jongmans A.G., Van Breemen N., Lundström U., Van Hees W., Finlay R.D., Srinivasan M. et al. 1997. Rock eating fungi. Nature 389: 682–683.Google Scholar
  13. Mengel K. 1991. Ernährung und Stoffwechsel der Pflanze. Fischer, Jena, 466 pp.Google Scholar
  14. von Mersi W., Kuhnert-Fingernagel R. and Schinner F. 1992. The influence of rock powders on microbial activity of three forest soils. Z. Pflanzenernähr. Bodenk. 155: 29–33.Google Scholar
  15. Sauter U. and Forest K. 1987. Hinweise für den Einsatz von Silikatgesteinsmehlen zurWaldbodenverbesserung. Der. Forst. u. Holzwirt. 42: 27–30.Google Scholar
  16. SAS Institute Inc., SAS/STAT 1990. User's Guide, Version 6. Cary, NC, 943 pp. 1.Google Scholar
  17. Schüler G. 1992. Erste Auswirkung der Bodenschutzkalkung auf den Sickerwasserchemismus in versauerten Waldokösystemen Der vergleichende Kompensationsversuch mit verschiedenen Puffersubstanzen zur Minderung der Auswirkungen von Luftschadstoffeinträgen in Waldökosystemen. Mitt. der Forstl. Versuchsanstalt Rheinland-Pfalz Vol. 21., pp. 27–67.Google Scholar
  18. von Wilpert K. and Hildebrand E.E. 1994. Stoffeintrag und Waldernährung in Fichtenbeständen Baden-Wuerttembergs. Forst. u. Holz. 49: 632–692.Google Scholar
  19. von Wilpert K., Schack-Kirchner H., Hoch R., Günther S., Hildebrand E.E., Kottke I. et al. 1996. Verteilung und Aktivität von Mykorrhizen in Abhängigkeit von der Nährelement-, Wasserund Sauerstoffverfügbarkeit. FZKA-PEF 146: 1–90.Google Scholar
  20. Wimmenauer W. 1989. Gesteine und Minerale. In: Willmanns O. et al. (eds), Der Kaiserstuhl. Eugen Ulmer, Stuttgart, pp. 39–88.Google Scholar
  21. Zöttl H.W. and Hüttl R. 1985. Schadsymptome und Ernährungszustand von Fichtenbeständen im südwestdeutschen Alpenvorland. Allg. Forstzeitschr. 9/19: 197–199.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • K. von Wilpert
    • 1
  • M. Lukes
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Soil Science and Forest NutritionForest Research Station Baden-WürttembergGermany

Personalised recommendations