Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
(tons/acre (tons/acre)
2009 UCD drip-irrigated tomato trial : Comparison of fertigation with ammonium sulfate and calcium nitrate
Eight weekly fertigations, seasonal total of 170 lb N/acre - ammonium sulfate (21-0-0) - calcium nitrate (15.5-0-0-19 Ca)
2009 UCD drip-irrigated tomato trial : Comparison of fertigation with ammonium sulfate and calcium nitrate
15,000
ammonium sulfate calcium nitrate
Petiole NO3-N
12,000
(PPM)
9,000 6,000 3,000 0 9-Jun 16-Jun 23-Jun 30-Jun 7-Jul 14-Jul 21-Jul
Sample date
2009 UCD drip-irrigated tomato trial : Comparison of fertigation with ammonium sulfate and calcium nitrate
15,000
ammonium sulfate calcium nitrate
Petiole NO3-N
12,000
(PPM)
40
Sample date
ammonium sulfate calcium nitrate
Soil NO3-N
30
(PPM)
Sample date
21-Jul
2009 UCD drip-irrigated tomato trial : Comparison of fertigation with ammonium sulfate and calcium nitrate
2009 UCD drip-irrigated tomato trial : Comparison of fertigation with ammonium sulfate and calcium nitrate
210 lb Ca / acre was applied with calcium nitrate - why no difference in fruit Ca ?
210 lb Ca / acre was applied with calcium nitrate - why no difference in fruit Ca ? Processing tomato fruit quality survey :
0.40 Fruit Ca (%) 0.30 0.20 0.10 0.00 0 2 4 6 Leaf Ca (%)
210 lb Ca / acre was applied with calcium nitrate - why no difference in fruit Ca ? Processing tomato fruit quality survey :
0.40 Fruit Ca (%) 0.30 0.20 0.10 0.00 0 2 4 6 Leaf Ca (%)
Ca moves in transpirational flow in xylem, so leaf Ca is high surface wax on fruit limits transpiration, limiting Ca in xylem flow; Ca does not move in phloem
Two field soils wetted with a solution of humic acid and 10-34-0 - all products at 2 lb active ingredient/acre Incubated in sealed jars for 7 days CO2 released by microbial respiration measured
mg of carbon mineralized Soil with 0.8% organic matter P + Humics P fertilizer alone Humic effects significant ? 5.9 5.5 Soil with 2.5% organic matter 11.0 11.2
yes
no
Phospholipid fatty acids increased ? Soil with 0.8% organic matter fungi bacteria actinomycetes yes yes yes Soil with 2.5% organic matter no no no
Plant dry weight (g) Soil 1 No P or Humic Humic only Humic effects significant ? P only Humic + P Humic effects significant ? 0.21 0.26 no 2.08 1.77 no Soil 2 0.50 0.53 no 1.89 1.70 no Soil 3 0.79 0.89 no 2.69 3.16 yes Soil 4 1.06 1.21 no 2.74 2.88 no
Pretransplant banding of 10-34-0 with / without humic acids Humic rates of 1 and 3 lb active ingredient / acre Five 100 reps per treatment
2008 :
% in plant Plant dry wt (g) Fertilizer + Humics @ I lb/acre Fertilizer + Humics @ 3 lb/acre Fertilizer alone Humic effects significant ? 88 87 87 no N 4.6 4.7 4.6 no P 0.42 0.42 0.39 no K 3.4 3.5 3.4 no
2009 :
% in leaf Plant dry wt (g) Fertilizer + Humics @ I lb/acre Fertilizer + Humics @ 3 lb/acre Fertilizer alone Humic effects significant ? 21 22 22 no N 5.6 5.6 5.7 no P 0.63 0.64 0.68 no K 2.4 2.4 2.4 no
At harvest :
2008 Mkt yield (tons/acre) Fertilizer + Humics @ I lb/acre Fertilizer + Humics @ 3 lb/acre Fertilizer alone Humic effects significant ? 50.9 51.8 52.7 no
2009 Solids Mkt yield Solids (o brix) (tons/acre) (o brix) 5.5 5.5 5.6 no 42.2 45.6 44.2 no 5.5 5.5 5.6 no