Skip to main content
Log in

Influence of washing on elemental analysis of leaves of fieldgrown crop plants

  • Published:
Plant and Soil Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Summary

Information is limited on soil contamination of leaves from field-grown row crops, especially with respect to aluminum (Al) analyses. The objective of this study was to determine the influence of washing leaf samples with either deionized water or detergent solution on elemental analyses for several agronomic crop plants. The crop plants sampled were corn (Zea mays L.), soybean (Glycine max L. Merr.), grain sorghum (Sorghum bicolor L. Moench), and wheat (Triticum aestivum L.). The crops were grown on a range of soil types, soil pH values, and tillage practices. Samples of upper leaves and lower leaves were collected separately. The samples were either not washed, washed with deionized water, or washed with detergent solution. After drying, grinding, and digesting, the samples were analyzed for Al, nitrogen (N), phosphorus (P), potassium (K), calcium (Ca), magnesium (Mg), iron (Fe), manganese (Mn), zinc (Zn), and copper (Cu). For all crop plants and conditions studied, there was no effect on measured N, P, K, Ca, Mg, Mn, Zn, or Cu concentrations, but measured Al and Fe concentrations were influenced by washing. In general, washing had a greater effect on Al analyses than on Fe analyses. Soybean samples were most affected by washing, while wheat samples seemed to be least affected. The results reflected greater contamination of lower leaves than upper leaves. Decontamination procedures appear necessary prior to Al and Fe analyses of field-grown crop plants.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Beckett P H T, Wollan E, Cawse P A, Hislop J S and Williams D R 1978 The use of grasses as indicators of environmental pollution. Plant and Soil 49, 691–695.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Brown J C and Jones W E 1977 Fitting plants nutritionally to soils. I. Soybeans. Agron. J. 69, 399–404.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Brown J C and Jones W E 1977 Fitting plants nutritionally to soils. II. Cotton. Agron. J. 69, 405–409.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Brown J C and Jones W E 1977 Fitting plants nutritionally to soils. III. Sorghum. Agron. J. 69, 410–414.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Duncan R R 1981 Variability among sorghum genotypes for uptake of elements under acid soil field conditions. J. Plant Nutr. 4, 21–32.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Duncan R R 1982 Concentration of critical nutrients in tolerant and susceptible sorghum lines under acid soil field conditions. Proc. 1st International Symposium on Genetic Specificity of Mineral Nutrition of Plants. Belgrade, Yugoslavia.

  7. Jones J Benton Jr and Steyn W J A 1973 Sampling, handling, and analyzing plant tissue samples.In Soil Testing and Plant Analysis. Leo M Walsh and James D Beaton. Soil Sci. Soc. Am., Madison, Wisconsin. pp 249–270.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Karlen D L 1982 Nutrient concentration and field variation within southern soybean germplasm grown on acid Norfolk soil. Commun. Soil Sci. Plant Anal. 13, 335–350.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Marbut C F 1935 Soils of the United States. Part III.In Atlas of American Agriculture. Ed. O E Baker. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Murphy J and J P Riley 1962 A modified single solution method for the determination of phosphate in natural waters. Anal. Chim. Acta. 27, 31–36.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Nicholas D J D, Lloyd-Jones C P and Fisher D J 1957 Some problems associated with determining iron in plants. Plant and Soil 8, 367–377.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Saiki Hiroshi and Maeda Osamu 1982 Cleaning procedures for removal of external deposits from plant samples. Environ. Sci. Technol. 16, 536–539.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Smith Paul F, Reuther Walter and Specht Alston W 1950 Mineral composition of chlorotic organe leaves and some observations on the relation of sample preparation technique to the interpretation of results. Plant Physiol. 25, 496–506.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Sonnerveld C and van Dijk P A 1982 The effectiveness of some washing procedures on the removal of contaminants from plant tissue samples of glasshouse crops. Commun. Soil Sci. Plant Anal. 13, 487–496.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Taylor George A 1956 The effectiveness of five cleaning procedures in the preparation of apple leaf samples for analysis. Proc. Am. Soc. Hort. Sci. 67, 5–9.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Wallace A, Kinnear J, Cha J W and Romney E M 1980 Effect of washing procedures on mineral analysis and their cluster analyses for orange leaves. J. Plant Nutr. 2, 1–9.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Wilson D O 1984 Determination of aluminum in plant tissue digests using a catechol violet colorimetric method. Commun. Soil Sci. Plant Anal. 15, 1269–1279.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Hargrove, W.L., Ohki, K. & Wilson, D.O. Influence of washing on elemental analysis of leaves of fieldgrown crop plants. Plant Soil 88, 93–100 (1985). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02140668

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02140668

Key words

Navigation