7 ACEDTTY OF SOIL AND FERTSUZER BANDS
AS RELATED TO MANGANESE TOXICITY
AND MANGANESE UPTAKE BY POTATOES
AND OATS IN A GREENHOUSE

Thesis for the Degree of Ph. D.
MICHIGAN STATE UNWERSITY
RONALD PAUL WHTTE, SR“
1968

 

      

 

Hw‘

   
   

 

35 View;

 
  

B
5/2
#
¢§

:3-‘13";

L 1 3.1 it. 1i A 1’

Michigan State 1

 

v -'=— ‘

a.

This is to certify that the

thesis entitled
Acidity of Soil and Fertilizer Bands as Related to
Manganese Toxicity and Manganese Uptake by
Potatoes and Oats in the Greenhouse

presented by

Ronald Paul White, Sr.

has been accepted towards fulfillment
of the requirements for

ii degree in Wee

5,60%?

Major professor

 

Date July 23) 1968

0-169

Uaivezsity

”a” ' " TM“
1 ‘ ‘

 
 
 

amomc av ‘3'
HUAB & SflNS'
800K BINDERY INC.

LIBRARY BINDERS
Mill-an mm.-

 
   
     

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

   

ABSTRACT

ACIDITY OF SOIL AND FERTILIZER BANDS

AS RELATED TO MANGANESE TOXICITY AND

MANGANESE UPTAKE BY POTATOES AND OATS
IN A GREENHOUSE

“‘1'

‘0‘ 3'5. ‘

By Ronald Paul White, Sr.

This investigation was conducted in an effort to
determine the role of lime and fertilizer band acidity on
the yields and uptake of manganese by Norland and Sebago
potatoes grown on an acid soil suspected of containing
toxic concentrations of available manganese. Potatoes
' were grown in a greenhouse on a Montcalm-McBride sandy
loam (pH 4.7) with a complete banded fertilizer (nitrogen,
phosphorus and potassium). In addition to a treatment
containing only the basic fertilizer applications (here—
after called the "check") calcitic hydrate or dolomite
was mixed with the soil at 3 rates of lime. Treatments
of aluminum sulphate and/or manganous sulphate were added
to the banded fertilizer on unlimed soils.

Changes in the pH of the soil in contact with the

band, and at a place remote from the band, were observed by

l

 

Ronald Paul White. Sr.

direct contact of the electrodes with the soil. The fertil-
izer band residues were mixed with the soil after harvest-
ing the potatoes and the residual effects on the soil pH

and uptake of manganese by a following oat crop were meas- i
ured.

Symptoms of manganese toxicity. chlorosis and black

f—__.._.__ .

specks on the undersides of the leaves and on the stems.
were observed on the plants of the unlimed soils. Moreover.
the manganese concentrations in the vines were abnormally
high. These high levels of manganese were reduced ninefold
when the soil pH was increased to only 6.5 by lime and many
of the visual symptoms disappeared. In contrast. the man—
ganese concentrations in the vines increased somewhat when
manganese sulphate was added to the band. Intensified acid—
ification of the fertilizer band with the addition of alum-
inum sulphate barely changed the manganese uptake. The Nor-
land variety appeared more manganese-susceptible as was evi-
denced by its higher manganese concentrations and more in-
tense toxicity symptoms.

In the unlimed check the band pH was initially
slightly lower than the soil pH. This difference disap-

Peared after about two weeks. Manganese sulphate added

 

 

Ronald Paul White. Sr.

to the band had little effect on the band pH while with
aluminum sulphate the band pH was decreased to. and remained
at. about 3.5. Soil and band pH's increased with increasing
lime applications. With the lowest dolomite applications
the soil pH was raised to about 6.3 with essentially no in-
crease in the band pH. At the highest rate of calcitic
hydrate application the soil pH was 7.4 and the band pH
about 7.0. Mixing the band residues with the soil resulted
in a pH depression of about 0.2 pH units for all except the
aluminum sulphate treated soils. which were lowered about
0.4 pH units. Residual manganese resulted in significantly
higher manganese concentrations in the subsequent oat crap.
but the greater acidity from the aluminum residue was asso-
ciated with even greater manganese uptake.

Since the lowest rate of application of dolomite
resulted in a soil pH of 6.3 with essentially no change in
the band pH. the marked decrease in manganese uptake by po-
tatoes grown on this treatment suggested that the whole
soil was supplying toxic concentrations of available man-
ganese. Apparently soil manganese solubilized by the acid
solutions diffusing from the fertilizer bands was not a

major source of available manganese.

3

ACIDITY OF SOIL AND FERTILIZER BANDS
AS RELATED TO MANGANESE TOXICITY AND
MANGANESE UPTAKE BY POTATOES AND OATS

IN A GREENHOUSE

BY

Ronald Paul White, Sr.

A THESIS

Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
Department of Soil Science

1968

 

 

4f337o’
/«.2. 7~ £7

 

For Marilene

I dedicate this thesis to my wife. Without
her love. patience. and sacrifice it would
never have been accomplished.

M

 

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

A project such as this requires the assistance of
so many people it is impossible to thank each one individ—
ually. However I do wish to recognize the special help
of certain individuals.

Much appreciation is extended to Dr. Cook, Dr.
Robertson, Dr. Ellis, Dr. Knezek, and Dr. Good for serving
as members of my guidance committee and for all the time
and help they so freely offered.

I wish also to acknowledge Jim Melton, for his
assistance in plant analysis determinations; Mrs. Nelly
Galuzzi, for her help in computer programming and statis-
tical analysis; the members of the soil testing lab, for
their help in soil and plant tissue analysis determina—
tions; and Max McKenzie for his help in the greenhouse

phase of this work.

Most especially, I sincerely thank Dr. E. C. Doll,
my advisor, for his guidance, his encouragement, his help
and his apparently inexhaustible patience. His excellent
example and ability were strong influences in the comple
ontinue in

tion of this work and in my determination to c

the field of research.

iii

 

 

 

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page Ft
3
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS.................. iii T],
L:
e
LIST OF TABLES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . vi 1
LIST OF FIGURES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ix ~
INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
Manganese Toxicity in Plants . . . . . . . . 3
Factors Influencing Toxicity . . . . . . . . 6
Mn Toxicity in Potatoes. . . . . . . . . . . 9
Soil Manganese . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Soil pH Measurements . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
Soil Chemical Reactions Resulting from
Fertilizer Bands . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
METHODS AND MATERIALS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
Greenhouse Procedures. . . . . . . . . . . . 25
Plant Tissue Analysis. . . . . . . . . . . . 29
Technique for Direct Contact Measurements
of Soil and Band pH. . . . . . . . . . . 30
Soil Samples . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . -31
Statistical Analysis Procedures. . . . . . . 31
iv

 

 

TABLE OF CONTENTS (cont.)

Page
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION . . . . 33
Potato CrOp. . . . . . . . . . 33
Visual Symptoms. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
Yields of Potato Vines . . . . . . . . . . . 34
Treatment Effects on Tubers. . . . . . . . . 37
Mineral Contents of the Vines. . . . . . . . 37
Soil and Fertilizer Band Direct Contact pH

Measurements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
Evaluation of the Method . . . . . . . . . . 46

Soil Treatment Effects on Soil pH at the End
of the Potato Growth Period. . . . . . . 48

Treatment Effects on Soil and Band pH Levels
During Potato Growth Period. . . . . . . 50
Oat Crop . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
Yields of Oats . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
Mineral Content of the Oat Tissue. . . . . . 67
CONCLUSIONS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73
BIBLIOGRAPHY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79
APPENDIX 0 o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o 85

 

 

 

 

Table

LIST OF TABLES

Rates of application and sources of lime and
banded fertilizer treatments applied for a
greenhouse potato crop to samples of a
Montcalm-McBride sandy loam soil . . . . .

Yields of Norland and Sebago potato vines at
two dates of harvest as affected by rates
and sources of lime and additions of alum-
inum sulphate and manganous sulphate to
the fertilizer band. . . . . . . . . . . .

Magnesium concentrations in and uptake by
Norland and Sebago potato vines at two
harvest dates as affected by rates and
sources of lime and additions of aluminum
sulphate and manganous sulphate to the
banded fertilizer. . . . . . . . . .

Manganese concentrations in and uptake by
Norland and Sebago potato vines at two
harvest dates as affected by rate and
source of lime and additions of aluminum
sulphate and manganous sulphate to the
fertilizer band. . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Soil pH levels measured by direct contact and
1:1 soilzwater dilution as affected by rates
and sources of lime and additions of alum-
inum sulphate and manganous sulphate to the
fertilizer band 103 days after planting
potatoes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Oven dry weights of oat tissue at two harvest
dates as affected by mixing the resxdues
from the fertilizer bands in the treatments
originally applied for the potatoes. . . . .

vi

Page

26

35

39

43

45

66

vvv w 5",?

 

. fi;.F-’T“"_‘ ‘

,. .«Eff

 

LIST OF TABLES (cont.)
Table Page

7. Magnesium and Mn concentrations and uptake by
oats at two harvest dates as affected by
mixing the residues from the fertilizer
bands in the treatments originally applied
for potatoes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68

Appendix

1A. Yields of Norland and Sebago potato tubers
after 90 days growth as affected by ratio
and source of lime and additions of aluminum
sulphate and manganous sulphate to the fer-
tilizer bands. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86

2A. Phosphorus concentrations in and uptake by
Norland and Sebago potato vines at two
dates of harvest as affected by ratio and
source of lime and additions of aluminum
sulphate and manganous sulphate to the
fertilizer band. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87

3A. Calcium concentrations in and uptake by
Norland and Sebago potato vines at two dates
of harvest as affected by rates and source
of lime and additions of aluminum sulphate
and manganous sulphate to the fertilizer
band . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88

4A. Potassium concentrations in and uptake by
Norland and Sebago potato vines at two dates
of harvest as affected by rates and source
of lime and additions of aluminum sulphate
and manganous sulphate in the fertilizer

band . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89
5A. Aluminum concentrations in Norland potato vines

after 90 days growth as affected by rates and

source of lime and additions of aluminum sul-

phate and manganous sulphate to the fertil- 90

izer band. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

vii

 

LIST OF TABLES (cont.)

appendix

Table

6A.

7A.

8A.

9A.

10A.

Soil test levels in soil core removed from
center of pots 103 days after planting po—
tatoes as affected by rates and source of
lime and additions of aluminum sulphate
and manganous sulphate to the fertilizer
band . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Soil test levels in samples obtained after
mixing residue of fertilizer band throughout
the soil after harvesting the potatoes .

Soil pH measurements by direct contact at two
locations within a given soil at 3 different
times during the growth period of the oats
as affected by residues of treatments
applied prior to potato crop . . . . . . . .

Potassium and calcium concentrations in and
uptake by oats at two different dates of
harvest as affected by residues of treat—
ments applied prior to potato crop . . . . .

Soil test levels after harvesting oats (317
days after planting potatoes) as affected by
residues of treatments applied prior to oat
crop . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

viii

Page

91

92

93

94

95

 

 

 

Figure

LIST OF FIGURES

Changes in soil and fertilizer band pH levels
with time on unlimed soils receiving only
the banded fertilizer . . . . . . . . . .

Changes in soil and fertilizer band pH levels
with time on unlimed soils containing
aluminum sulphate in the fertilizer band.

Changes in soil and fertilizer band pH levels
with time on unlimed soils containing
aluminum sulphate and manganous sulphate
in the fertilizer band. . . . . . . . . .

Changes in soil and fertilizer band pH levels
with time on unlimed soils containing man—

ganous sulphate in the fertilizer band.

Changes in the soil and fertilizer band pH

levels with time on soils receiving one half

times the lime requirement as dolomite. .

Changes in soil and fertilizer band pH levels
with time on soils receiving 1 times the
lime requirement as dolomite. . . . . . .

Changes in the soil and fertilizer band pH
levels with time on soils receiving 2 times
the lime requirement as dolomite. . . . .

Changes in soil and fertilizer band pH levels
with time on soils receiving one half times
the lime requirement as calcitic hydrate.

ix

Page

55

56

57

58

59

6O

61

62

 

 

 

913T OF FIGURES (cont.)

figure

9. Changes in soil and fertilizer
with time on soils receiving
lime requirement as calcitic

10. Changes in soil and fertilizer
with time on soils receiving
lime requirement as calcitic

Page.
band pH levels
1 times the
hydrate. . . . . 63
band pH levels
2 times the
hydrate. . . . . 64

 

ACIDITY OF SOIL AND FERTILIZER BANDS
AS RELATED TO MANGANESE TOXICITY AND
MANGANESE UPTAKE BY POTATOES AND OATS

IN A GREENHOUSE
INTRODUCTION

Many of the potatoes in Northern Michigan are
grown on acid sandy soils needing heavy fertilization
for optimum production. When heavily fertilized and
frequently irrigated, these soils become depleted of
bases (calcium and magnesium) and thus are strongly acid.

The 'Norland' variety of potatoes (Solanum tuber-
osum) was developed on alkaline soils, and when grown on
these acid soils has been observed to die prematurely
following the development of bladk spots, leaf roll, and
necrotic areas. Berger and Gerloff (1947) attributed
similar symptoms to manganese (Mn) toxicity on potatoes
grown on the acid soils of Wisconsin. Some of the symp-
toms Observed on the Norland variety in Michigan also re-
sembled Mg deficiency observed on the Sebago variety of

POtatoes as reported by Doll and Hossner (1964).
1

 

 

One or more of the following factors could have

caused.these abnormal growth symptoms: a) Mn and possibly
aluminum (A1) toxicity due to large amounts of soluble soil
Mn and Al in these strongly acid soils. b) increased solu-
bility of soil Mn and Al due to the strongly acid solution
diffusing from banded fertilizers and c) Mg deficiency due
to strong acidity and the low level of available Mg in these
soils.
Consequently. the greenhouse experiment reported

herein was conducted to determine the effect of:

1) rate of application and source of lime on growth and

Mn uptake by Norland and Sebago potatoes.

2) rate of application and source of lime on soil pH and

the pH in the fertilizer band.

3) additions of soluble Mn and Al to the fertilizer band
on the growth and Mn uptake by the two varieties. and

on the pH of the fertilizer bands. and

4) the residual effects of mixing the fertilizer band
residues with the soil on the growth and Mn uptake by

oats and on the soil pH.

 

REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE

Manganese Toxicity in Plants

Manganese (Mn) toxicity symptoms have been described
for a number of plants including barley (Williams and Vlamis.
1957 and 1957a). wheat (L6hnis. 1960). tobacco (Hiatt and
Ragland. 19637and Hurley. Pritchett and Breland. 1956). alf-
alfa (Ouellette and Dessureaux. 1958; and Sutton and Halls-
worth. 1958). beans and peas (Morris and Pierre. 1949). po-
tatoes (Berger and Gerloff. 1947 and 1947a; and Struckmeyer
and Berger. 1950) and on other plants (Hewitt. 1963; and
L5hnis. 1951). The symptoms most often appear first on the
older parts of the plant which usually contain the highest
concentrations of Mn. Translocation of Mn within the plant
is slight (Jackson. 1967). Toxicity seems to be directly
related to the Mn concentration in the leaves. although the
level at which toxicity symptoms begin to develop varies
both between different species and within the same species
lander different environmental conditions. Soil solution or

ruitrient solution levels containing more than one part per

 

 

million (ppm) Mn have produced toxicity symptoms in legumes

(Morris and Pierre. 1949). potatoes (Struckmeyer and Berger.
1950; Berger and Gerloff. 1947 and 1947a) and barley (Wil-
liams and Vlamis. 1957).

Toxic concentrations of Mn in the edges of the leaves
may be 10 times those in the interveinal areas of leaves
(Hewitt. 1963). Legume leaves were reported to contain 3 to
5 times as much Mn as the stems (Morris and Pierre. 1949).
Reported leaf concentrations of Mn at which toxicity symptoms
have occurred are 3000 ppm in tobacco (Hiatt and Ragland.
1963). and more than 300 ppm for snapbeans and barley (Lahnis.
1960). Chapman (1962) suggests that concentrations of Mn
above 473 ppm in potato petioles at tuber setting time may
be toxic. L5hnis (1951) observed no symptoms of Mn toxicity
on potatoes at leaf concentrations of 1700 ppm Mn. Berger
and Gerloff (1947) reported Mn toxicity symptoms on potatoes
twhen the vines contained 693 ppm Mn when grown in a nutrient
solution containing 3 ppm Mn. A solution concentration of
1. ppm Mn yielded normal plants containing 313 ppm Mn in the

‘viuaes after 66 days of growth.
Marked differences in tolerance to high levels of Mn

among varieties have been observed within the same species.

 

 

 

 

Ouellette and Généreux (1965) report differential tolerance

among 6 varieties of potatoes. and varietal differences have
also been reported for alfalfa (Dessureaux and Ouellette.
1958; and Ouellette and Dessureaux. 1958). wheat (Neenan.
1960) and ryegrass (Vose and Randall. 1962). The root ca—
tion exchange capacity has been suggested as a factor in the
tolerance of ryegrass to Al and Mn toxicity (Vose and Randall.
1962). and the resistance to Mn toxicity produced in crosses
of alfalfa seems to be inherited (Dessureaux and Ouellette.
1958).

Mn toxicity symptoms in potatoes have been described
by Berger and Gerloff (1947) as follows:

The first symptom of manganese toxicity or stem
streak necrosis is the appearance of dark brown
streaks on the lower stem at the base of the pet—
ioles. A pale yellow chlorosis develops in areas
between the veins on the lower leaves and quite
often small brown necrotic areas. irregular in
shape. also appear between the veins near the
midrib on the leaflets. As the necrosis becomes
more severe. many long. narrow brown streaks will
be found on the lower portions of the stem and

even on the petioles. The necrotic streaks also
effect the inner tissues of the stem. The affected
parts become extremely brittle. the petioles break
off with a slight touch. and the chlorotic leaves
finally dry and fall from the plant. The streaking
of the stem and subsequent leaf dropping proqress
upward on the plant until the terminal bud becomes
necrotic and the plant dies prematurely.

   

Factors Influencing Mn Toxicity

Sutton and Hallsworth (1958) report increased Mn
toxicity on alfalfa at high light intensities. Williams
and Vlamis (1957) found less toxicity with short days and
lower temperatures. while L5hnis (1951) reported that beans
were more tolerant to high Mn levels at higher temperatures.

Most applications of Ca to soils are as liming ma-
terials so the effects of Ca on Mn toxicity usually are con-
founded with changes in soil pH. Increased Mn toxicities
occurring when CaSO4 is added to a soil are often due to a
decrease in soil pH (Hurley et al.. 1956; and Morris. 1948).
Stewart and Leonard (1963) reported that adding CaCl2 with
MnSO4 resulted in greater Mn uptake by citrus than did MnSO4
alone on both acid and alkaline soils.

Increasing the Ca supply while maintaining soil pH
constant reduced Mn uptake by alfalfa in a nutrient solution.
JDecreasing the soil pH while maintaining a constant Ca level
also lowered Mn uptake (Sutton and Halsworth. 1958). These
(effects suggest direct ion competition. but ion competition
i1; not the only factor involved. since with increased Ca

snipply Ouellette and Dessureaux (1958) showed decreased Mn

tOJticity and decreased transport of Mn from alfalfa roots.

 

.,--‘1 V—‘n‘i” '

 

 

 

 

 

vflflJJa the water-soluble and total Ca levels in the roots in-

creased. Water-soluble Mn in roots decreased but total Mn
in roots did not. leading them to suggest that water-soluble
Ca in the roots favors immobilization of the excess Mn in
the roots by precipitation;

Williams and Vlamis (1957) reported decreased Mn up-
take by barley over a wide range of solution Mn levels ob-
tained by increasing the macro-salt concentration of a Hoag-
land's solution from 1/5 to full strength. In a later study
(Vlamis and Williams. 1962) single salts were superimposed
over a weak balanced nutrient solution and Mn uptake was re-
duced by the nitrate and sulphate salts of Ca. Mg. and NH4+.
However. Ca. Mg. and NH4+ phosphates were much less effective
in reducing Mn uptake and Na and K phosphates increased Mn
uptake. Iron and H reduced Mn uptake most effectively. The
authors suggest that increased Mn uptake with the Na and K

phosphate may have been due to phosphate effects on Fe avail-

ability.

Argawala et al. (1964) found that the yields of barley

were influenced by the Fe/Mn ratio in the nutrient solution.
arui stressed that the levels of Mn and Fe in the solution

were more critical than the Fe/Mn ratio in determining Mn

 

uptake. Other workers (see Hewitt. 1963) have reported that

the Fe/Mn ratio was more important than the Mn level in de—
termining Mn uptake.

Hurley et a1. (1956) found less Mn in tobacco leaves
when Mg was applied to the soil. The effects of Mg on Mn
toxicity both in the field and in solution cultures was
studied by Lohnis (1960). Additions of Mg to a Mg-deficient
acid soil reduced both the severity of Mn toxicity and the
uptake of Mn by beans. yet had no effect on the exchangeable
soil Mn. By increasing Mg and Ca levels in solution cultures
at different levels of Mn. the Mn content and injury to snap
beans was reduced. With rape. Mn uptake was reduced only at
toxic levels of solution Mn. With solutions high in Mn and
low in Mg. oats exhibited only Mg deficiency symptoms. yet
increasing Mg levels markedly reduced the Mn contents of the
plants. The Mn content of wheat. barley and rye was decreased
‘when Mg was added to solutions high in Mn. but the Mn content
of mangolds. alfalfa. and flax was not decreased. Symptoms
(of Mg deficiency appeared distinctly different from those of
Phi. and both symptoms were observed on the same plants in

some cases .

 

Mn Tox1city on Potatoes

Smith (1937) investigated the effects of soil reac-
tion on the yields and quality of potatoes. By adding lime
or sulphuric acid to a soil at pH 5.4—5.7. soil pH levels
from 4.75 to 8.00 were established in the field; potatoes
were then grown for four years. Less vigorous top growth.
chlorosis and early death occurred on the most strongly
acid plots compared with the medium pH plots. The same
plant symptoms occurred on the very alkaline plots also. but
premature death was not as rapid. Total tuber yields. as
well as yields of No. one size and the number of tubers per
plant were reduced on plots of pH 4.8 or lower and on the
soils above pH 7.2. Generally no significant yield differ—
ences occurred between those plots ranging from 4.8 to 7.1
in soil pH.

The symptoms observed on the potatoes on the very
acid plots are very similar to those used to describe Mn
toxicity on potatoes. whereas the symptoms occurring on the
plants on the high pH soils might have been those of Mg de—
ficiency. The use of hydrated lime to increase the soil pH

to 8.00 may have disturbed the Ca/Mg balance in the soil.

 

 

10

Stem streak necrosis. a common problem on Northern
Wisconsin's acid potato fields. was studied by Berger and
Gerloff (1947 and 1947a). Neither high amounts of Al in a
solution culture nor a solution without A1 at pH 4.0 pro—
duced the stem streak necrosis on the potato plants. Levels
of Mn from 3 to 200 ppm Mn in the nutrient solutions repro-
duced the plant symptoms observed in the field. Increasing
levels of Mn in the solutions caused both earlier appearance
and increased severity of the plant symptoms. The plant
symptoms appeared at 47 days in the 3 ppm Mn solution. at
31 days in the 10 ppm solution and at 9 days at the 200 ppm
Mn solution level. The Mn concentrations in the vines.
measured after 66 days of growth. were 693. 1354. and 9958
ppm Mn reSpectively.

Liming of the soil in a greenhouse experiment cor-
rected the abnormal plant symptoms. while additions of Ca
and Mg sulphates intensified them. Lower levels of soluble
Mn were found in the limed potato fields than in adjacent
unlimed fields exhibiting these abnormal plant symptoms.

Ouellette and Generaux (1965) compared the effects
of Mn toxicity on six varieties of potatoes both in the field

and in nutrient solutions. Toxicity symptoms varied both on

 

'j—L‘,

L, 1- 1.14...- L'.

 

 

11

different parts of the plants and in intensity among the dif—
ferent varieties. The greatest varietal differences in symp-
toms were noted on the stems and the least on the leaves.

The different stem symptoms were: tiny black spots on the
Keswick variety. necrotic lesions on the Cherokee variety.
large. numerous brownish spots on Green Mountain. Katahdin.
and Kennebec varieties and no stem symptoms on the Norgleam
variety. The petioles had essentially the same symptoms as
did the stems. but the petioles of the Norgleam variety had

a streaking effect. The Cherokee and Green Mountain varie—
ties had the most brittle petioles and thus lost their leaves
first. while the Norgleam and Katahdin petioles were consid-
erably less brittle than the others.

The leaves of the Norgleam and Cherokee varieties
had large greyish spots. The Keswick leaves were riddled
with tiny dark brown spots and darkened veins. The leaves
of the other three varieties had dark brown spots and nec—
rotic streaks on the veins.

Plants grown in a solution containing 250 ppm Mn
died after 43—69 days. or at a "physiological age" which
varied from 43—55%. The "physiological age" was defined

as the age of the plants when death occurred in the 250

 

12

ppm Mn solution divided by the age of the plants at maturity
in the non—toxic (0.5 ppm Mn) solution times 100 to express
as percentage. In this way. the toxicity effects on the dif—
ferent varieties could be evaluated on an equal basis since
the normal growth periods of the varieties differed. Those
varieties showing the most severe visual symptoms were not
necessarily the first to die.

Decreasing tuber yields. decreasing specific gravity
of the tubers. and increasing leaf Mn concentrations were
observed in a field experiment as applications of 0. 50. and

500 lbs/A of MnSO were applied. The application of 500 lbs/A

4

of MnSO4 reduced the yield of the Cherokee variety from 218
to 121 boisseau/Ac (approximately bu/A) and increased the Mn

in the leaves of the Keswick variety from 280 ppm to 974 ppm.

Soil Manganese

The forms of Mn in soils are controlled by three
factors: physical conditions. chemical conditions. and bio-
logical activity (Heintze and Mann. 1949). Manganese exists

. . ++. .
in 50115 as the soluble bivalent Mn ion and as the increas—

ingly more insoluble higher oxides of Mn203. and Mn02.

 

-—Muw
- .4",

.‘1—_Wd!=9' '22"! .‘I .221“

'fi—F

 

 

13

Another important form of Mn is that held in a complexed form
by soil organic matter (Beckwith. 1955; Broadbent and Ott.
1957; Heintze. 1957; Hemstock and Low. 1953; and Himes and
Barber. 1957). All of these forms tend toward an equilibrium
under a given set of soil conditions.

Divalent Mn in the soil solution plus that displaced

by §.NH OAc is usually considered to be available to plants

4
(Fujimoto and Sherman. 1948; and Leeper. 1947). Estimates
of the availability of the oxides vary. Bromfield (1958) dem-
onstrated that MnO produced by Corynebacterium sp. in a liquid
media was available to plant roots. and also showed that root
washings contained substances which would dissolve MnO. Tri-
valent Mn in soils is probably not available to plants and
tetravalent Mn is likely even lower in availability (Russell.
1961). Manganese chelated with soil organic matter is rela-
tively unavailable to plants (Walker and Barber. 1960).
Certain soil organisms oxidize Mn most rapidly in
well aerated soils that test between pH 6.0 and 7.5. Reduc—
tion of Mn by some anerobic organisms occurs over a wide pH
range under reduced oxygen tension (Leeper. 1947). The addi-
tion of organic matter. reducing in nature. to a soil will
result in the reduction of higher oxides of Mn to the more

available Mn forms. This reaction is more rapid at lower pH

 

1315-} ‘3' *1") 1'1." IIV'Tn’m—h .
‘ ‘ ——-—— 145959!!!” _-mm =-. , , .. , m

 

 

14

levels due to the increasing ease of reduction of Mn oxides
at low pH levels (Fujimoto and Sherman. 1948). Hemstock and
Low (1953) reported oxides of Mn were formed directly. with—
out the initial formation of Mn(OH)2. and that Mn retention
in the soil they studied was due to oxidation and not to ad-
sorption on the soil colloids. Added fertilizer Mn can be
converted into unavailable forms within two hours (Wain.
Silk and Wills. 1943). Unpublished data obtained by Alex
Kozakiewicz at Michigan State University indicated that 150
ppm of the 400 ppm Mn added to an organic soil was unavail-
able to an immediate extraction for exchangeable plus easily
reduceable Mn. The Mn held was believed to be held in a
complexed form.

"Active Mn" refers to the exchangeable Mn plus that
which is dissolved by a dilute acid or some mild reducing
agent such as neutral quinol or hydroquinone (Marsh and
Powers. 1945; and Russell. 1961). Chelated or complexed Mn
is usually extracted by adding a divalent cation that is
held more strongly than Mn. such as Zn (Reid and Miller.
1963; and Weir and Miller. 1962) or Cu (Beckwith. 1955) or
by extraction with buffered pyrophosphates (Heintze and Mann.

1949: and Weir and Miller. 1962). No single extractant for

 

 

.4.

 

 

 

15

soil Mn is specific for any given form due to the number of
different forms of Mn present in soils in differing degrees
of crystallhuty under different soil conditions (Heintze and
Mann. 1949; Reid and Miller. 1963; and Weir and Miller. 1962).
Morris (1948) studied the Mn status of 25 acid soils
and their effects on the growth of sweet clover and lespedeza.
Exchangeable Mn in these soils ranged from 1.2 to 638 ppm.
The average amount of waterwsoluble Mn in those soils below
pH 5.2 was 2.1 ppm; in those between pH 5.2 and 5.4. 1.0 ppm;
and in those above ph 5.4. 0.5 ppm Mn. Of 14 soils which
contained less than 100 lbs. of exchangeable Mn per acre.
the average water—soluble Mn concentration was 0.6 ppm; on
11 soils which contained more than 100 lbs. per acre the
average water-soluble Mn was 2 ppm. He found no correlation
between exchangeable soil Mn and soil pH. On those soils
containing high amounts of water—soluble Mn both clover and
leapedeza exhibited Symptoms of Mn toxicity and contained
high Mn concentrations.
Additions of CaCO3 increased the soil pH. reduced
water-soluble Mn and increased plant growth. whereas addi-

tions of CaSO decreased the pH. increased the water—soluble

4

Mn and decreased plant growth in spite of increased Ca levels

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

U51

wat

 

16

in some plants. The Mn concentration in sweet clover was re—
duced from 502 to 37 ppm by adding CaCO3 which raised the
soil pH from 4.81 to 5.26. The equivalent amount of Ca as
CaSO4 reduced the pH to 4.71 while the plant Mn increased

to 586 ppm.

Soil pH Measurements

Soil pH as an empirical measurement is not without
problems. but is extremely useful. especially for comparison
purposes (Coleman and Thomas. 1967). The measured pH of a
soil sample varies depending on the sample preparation.
Usually the sample is diluted with distilled water (soil:
water ratio 1:1) and the pH determined in the suspension.

A dilute salt solution mixed with the soil sample. such as

. + .
0.1 M CaCl displaces some of the adsorbed H ions and

2
results in a lower pH value than that in distilled water.
Schofield and Taylor (1955) suggest 0.01 M CaCl2 for the
measurement of soil pH. By measuring the Ca concentration
in the supernatant liquid one can calculate the lime poten—

tial. defined as (pH—l/ZpCa). which represents the mean ac—

tivity of Ca(OH)2 in the sample.

 

 

17

Chapman. Axley and Curtis (1940) were able to obtain
reproducible pH measurements on soils at various moisture
levels. including those approaching the air dry state. by
simply inserting the glass and calomel electrodes firmly in-
to the moist soil. The pH measurements of each of the 50
soils tested was reproducible at moisture contents between
the moisture equivalent and the sticky point. To obtain
reproducible pH measurements the electrodes had to be in
complete contact with the moist soil and drifting of the pH
reading was minimized by "conditioning of the electrode."
This was done by inserting the electrode into the soil 3 or
4 times at various places before taking the final pH reading.
For any one soil. considerable differences in moisture con-
tent in the range of the sticky point had little effect on
the pH measurement; however. the pH measured in a 1:2.5 soil:
‘water suSpension was significantly higher than that measured
‘by direct contact. No differences in pH were observed be-
tween the values obtained 5 minutes after rewetting air-dry
soil samples and those taken up to 3 days later. In nearly
all cases. the pH of a soil in its moist condition directly
from the field and the direct contact pH after air-drying

and rewetting did not differ materially.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

18

Soil Chemical Reactions
Resulting from Fertilizer Bands

The banding of fertilizers in soils leads to condi-
tions in and around the fertilizer band that are not present
with broadcast applications or exist only at extremely re—
duced intensities around the individual fertilizer particles.
Lindsay and Stephenson (1959) studied the reaction of mono-
calcium phosphate (MCP) both in a water system and in a
Hartsells fine sandy loam.

When MCP was dissolved in excess water. a metastable
solution of newly formed dicalcium phosPhate (DCP) dihydrate
and undissolved MCP was formed. This solution persisted for
at least 24 hours after which the DCP slowly lost water and
anhydrous DCP precipitated. The resulting solution was in
equilibrium with anhydrous DCP and undissolved MCP (a triple-
point solution— pH 1.48).

The soil solution at various distances from a band
of MCP in the soil was sampled by means of layers of filter
‘paper imbedded in the soil. Water moved from the soil (0.8
Inoisture equivalent) to the band and dissolved the MCP creat-
ing a wetted front adjacent to the band closely approximat—

.ing that of the metastable triple-point solution. As this

 

‘-~ .__A —fi
01’

 

 

 

highly concentrated solution moved away from the band Fe. Al
and Mn present in the soil were dissolved. The authors sug—
gest that as the solution became diluted by more soil and
the pH increased. many compounds of these dissolved sub-
stances may have reprecipitated.

No dissolved Mn was detected in the filter paper 5 cm
from the band at the end of one day. The Mn concentration in
this layer increased to 616 ppm after 2 days and then declined
to 55 ppm after 42 days. But after 42 days the Mn level in
the soil layer 20 cm from the band reached 588 ppm.

The pH in the layer of soil 0—5 cm from the band was
2.88 after 1 day and increased to 2.95 after 42 days. while
the pH in the 15-20 cm layer was 5.56 initially and decreased
to 3.72 after 42 days.

The concentrations of Fe and Al dissolved by the
wetted front were several thousand times higher than the
concentrations normally found in soils and the Mn concentra-
tions were 1/10 those of the Fe and Al. Mn tended to accum-
ulate some distance away from the band. while Fe and Al moved
against the solution gradient accumulating in the filter

papers adjacent to the band.

H
1.wfie,dflld

 

"?‘"F¥'~I‘* _

s whfigannmc '

 

 

 

20

To simulate the movement of a triple point solution
(TPS) away from the fertilizer band into new volumes of soil.
Lindsay and Stephenson (1959a) added successive increments
of two soils to a TPS (initial pH - 1.01) all the while main—
taining the same soi1:solution ratio for each new volume of
soil added. The amounts of Fe. A1. and Mn dissolved by the
successive extractions were then compared with the amounts
dissolved by 3 extractions with 6 §_HC1 on similar soil
samples.

With each successive soil increment added to the TPS
the pH of the extracting solution increased slightly and large
amounts of Fe. Al and Mn were dissolved. The Hartsells soil
(pH 4.6) released more Fe and A1 than did the Rosebud soil
(pH 7.6). but the Rosebud released the most Mn. The Mn ex-
tracted by the TPS was nearly as great as that extracted by
the HCl treatments. but HCl extracted considerably more Fe
and Al than did the TPS. With successive extractions the
solutions became supersaturated with respect to certain phos—
;phate compounds which then precipitated. However. no evi—
cience was obtained that any precipitation of Mn compounds

occurred .

 

 

- .JFA
y“. p-' 'FY
' 3" . ‘3'.“ -V..\ “w”
__ N
_ . -.~-

”way ‘4'

Tv

‘ t. _.
.4“. _'..-.‘ 1

 

    

. 'A ..-—.~—u._,fi.~dl..—u

     

21

When all the MCP is dissolved a TPS ceases to exist;
however the authors predicted that water would continue to
move from the soil into the fertilizer zone. thus the ferti-
lizer solution would be diluted with more of the soil volume.
They suggest that the Ca status of the soil would strongly
influence the types of phosphate compounds expected to pre-
cipitate as the reactions proceed.

Blanchar and Caldwell (1966) placed fertilizer mix-
tures in the bottom of cylinders 9 cm in diameter and then
alternately covered them with layers of filter paper and 1
cm layers of Nicollet clay loam (pH 5.8) to a depth of 7 cm.
The fertilizers consisted of P32 tagged MCP. tagged MCP plus
NH Cl and tagged MCP plus KCl. After 2 weeks of incubation

4

the layers of soil were analyzed for pH and P. K. Ca. NH4+

and Cl. Moncalcium phosphate resulted in a reduction of soil
pH up to 3 cm away from the fertilizer. while the pH was re-
duced the full 7 cm distance from the band with the other
two treatments. The movement of Ca from the fertilizer zones
followed the same pattern as did the pH changes. Phosphorus
did.not move more than 4 cm distance in any treatment.

Oats were planted in funnels containing Nicollet soil.

'The roots which grew out of the bottom of the funnels were

 

 

 

then placed directly above samples of the fertilizers and

above samples from the soil zones located 1. 2. 3. and 4 cm
from the fertilizers in an attempt to evaluate P uptake from
these zones. The observed root damage. apparently due to
the high salt concentrations in each sample. prevented sig-
nificant P32 uptake by the plants.

The oat roots did not grow into any soil zone 0-4 cm
from the fertilizers containing NH4C1 or KCl. nor into the
0—2 cm zone when MCP alone was the fertilizer. Corn plants.
grown in test tubes containing these same fertilizer combin-
ations in the bottom of the tubes filled with soil. did not
produce any roots within average distances of 2. 8. and 6 cm

from MCP. MCP plus NH Cl and MCP plus KCl respectively.

4
In the second phase of their investigation (Blanchar
and Caldwell. 1966a) 8.5 cm by 20 cm plexiglass cylinders
filled with a Dakota soil containing pellets of these same
fertilizers were incubated for 2 weeks. and then leached with
0. 2. 4. and 8 cm of water. Bottomless Dixie cups containing
soil and corn seeds were placed directly on top of the leached
scul.columns. After 2 weeks growth the plants were harvested

aand analyzed for P32 uptake. The columns leached with 4 cm

(of water were Split in half lengthwise for root observations

is,

 

£1

m ar‘ A";

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

ing
tan

the

What
fert.‘
Stric

theSe

with 4

feIt1'11

 

 

23

and soil samples were taken above. below. and to the side of
the fertilizer pellet for phosphorus analysis.

Only the first increment of leaching increased plant
dry matter production. and only trace amounts of fertilizer
P were taken up from the unleached columns. Significant up- F“
take of P occurred in those columns leached with 2 or more
cm of water. Ammonium chloride increased P uptake from MCP.

No roots grew below the level of the fertilizer pel-

.-—.-4-u- stay-3.!

let in the unleached columns. but roots penetrated both
deeper into the soil and closer to the pellets with increased
leaching. No roots grew within 5 cm of the pellets contain-
ing either NH4C1 or KCl. In the unleached columns this dis—
tance was reduced to 0.5-l cm with a 2 cm leaching and with
the 4 cm leaching roots grew throughout the pellet area.

Each of the fertilizer combinations created a some-
What concreated sphere of soil 2-3 cm in diameter around the
fertilizer pellet which. in the case of MCP. strongly re-
stricted root growth. Leaching decreased the strength of
these concretions.

The levels of water soluble P in the soils leached

vvith 4 cm of water were found to be 2000 ppm 1 cm below the

.fertilizer pellets. 1000 ppm 2 cm below. 500 ppm at 3 cm.

 

 

 

100 ppm at 5 cm and 10 ppm P 5.5-6 cm below the pellets. The

gradients of water soluble P above and beside the pellets were

much steeper. dr0pping to 10 ppm P only 2 cm from the pellets.

In those cylinders containing NH4C1 and KCl and leached with
4 cm of water. root accumulations occurred in the soil zones
containing 500 - 1000 ppm P.

It appears that not only are the conditions around a
fertilizer band drastically different from the rest of the
soil volume. but that leaching of water through the band is

necessary before plant roots are able to even exist in this

area. let alone utilize the nutrients placed there.

 

 

 

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Greenhouse Procedures

A Montcalm—McBride sandy loam was crOpped in a i.-
greenhouse to evaluate the effects of the rate and source [
of lime and additions of aluminum sulphate and manganous E
sulphate to the fertilizer bands on the growth and mineral 1,,

uptake by potatoes and oats.

The soil tested pH 4.7. lime requirement 5.5 tons

 

per acre (Shoemaker. McLean and Pratt. 1961). 117 ppm avail—
able P (Bray P1) and 118. 472. and 23 ppm of K. Ca. and Mg
resPectively (ammonium acetate extraction). The water-
extractable Mn content of the soil was 10 ppm. and 50 ppm

of Mn was extracted with 0.1 N_HC1 in 10 minutes.

The experiment was designed as a randomized complete
block split plot design with four replications. Ten soil
treatments were the main factors and two varieties of po-
tatoes (Norland and Sebago) were the sub—plot factors.

For the low. medium. and high lime treatments (Table
l). the required amount of finely ground lime was thoroughly

25

 

 

 

Calc

Rate
to i

Ilime

3
CaCo

75% £3}

4
Cat:
03

 

 

TABLE l.--Rates of application and sources of lime and
banded fertilizer treatments supplied for a
greenhouse potato drop to samples of a Montcalm—
McBride sandy loam soil.

SOIL TREATMENTS

 

 

 

 

Mixed with Soil Banded
Lime Source Ratel 5-20-20 Al Mn
Fertilizer
T/A7 ----------- lbs/A ------------
None ---- 1000 None None
None ---- 1000 50 None
" ---- 1000 None 30
" ---- 1000 50 30
Dolomite3 2.75 1000 None None
" 5.5 1000 " "
" 11.0 1000 " "
Calcitic
hydrate 2.75 1000 None None
ll 5 . 5 1000 II II
" 11.0 1000 " "
1Rates expressed as equivalent to 90% CaCO lime. Referred

to in text as low. medium. and high.

2 . . .
Lime requirement of SOll--5.5 T/A of 90% CaCO

lime.

3

‘3CaCO equivalent--104. 250 ppm Mg. 100% passed 20 mesh.
75%.passed 100 mesh.

4CaC03 equivalent--l3l. 3 ppm Mg. pulverized hydrated lime.

rrrr1

. . ‘rfl‘s. ‘m'
.

V
g o '5.
.‘o'f
< .-
fii
f
‘33
"1"
A.
’3
.p.
a

-.
’3
M

“an" ' :

 

 

27

mixed with 30 pounds of air—dry soil which had been passed
through a 3/8"—mesh screen. Earthenware pots of four gallon
capacity lined with polyethylene bags served as greenhouse
containers. The soil in all pots was brought to 10% mois—
ture and incubated for 10 days.

Fertilizer. prepared by mixing reagent grades of

Ca(H2PO oH20. KCl. and NH NO . were applied in all pots

4)2 4 3
in a circular band 6" in diameter and 3" below the soil sur-
face at a rate equivalent to 1000 pounds per acre (pp2m) of
a 5-20—20 fertilizer. For the appropriate treatments (Table
l). reagent grade aluminum sulphate (Al treatment) and man-
ganous sulphate (Mn treatment) were banded with the fertilizer.
Two 4" long plastic tubes (l/2"I.D.) were placed up-
right in each pot. The lower end of one tube was placed di-
rectly on the fertilizer band. while the lower end of the
second tube was placed at the same depth but in the center
of the pot (3" away from the fertilizer band). These tubes
were used for direct contact pH measurements and were stop—
pered when not in use. The soils were brought to 20% mois—
ture and allowed to incubate again with drying for 10 days

before planting potatoes.

 

 

 

28

0f the two potato varieties planted. the Norland is
an early maturing red variety developed on alkaline soils.
while the Sebago is a late maturing round white potato com-
monly grown in Michigan. Five Sprouted eyes. scooped from

tubers of both varieties. were planted in each pot about 2

l 9'- .23!"

inches directly above the circular fertilizer band.

Muzak “ v

Each pot was watered daily with distilled water. and
weighed once each week to maintain a soil moisture content
of 10%. The winter daylength was extended to 14 hours by
supplemental flourescent lighting. After 50 days. NH4N03
was added in solution at a rate of 25 ppm N to each pot.

One month after planting. each pot was thinned to
3 plants and then to 2 plants after 48 days. The smallest
plant in each pot was harvested at 68 days. dried at 655C
and weighed. The single remaining plant was harvested. dried.
and weighed after 90 days. All tubers were removed from the
soil for a yield measurement.

Eight months after adding lime. the dry soil in each
pot was thoroughly remixed and brought to 10% moisture. No
fertilizer was added. In the pots of 2 replications two

plastic tubes were inserted in each pot for duplicate direct

soil pH measurements. Thirty-five Gary oat seeds were

 

 

 

 

 

29

 

planted.in each pot. After 30 days. NH4NO3 was added in
solution to each soil at a rate to supply 50 ppm N. The
cat plants growing in the pots which had contained the Se-
bago variety of potatoes were harvested after 40 days and

after 70 days in the pots where Norlands had been grown. rt

All samples were dried at 65°C and weighed.

 

Plant Tissue Analysis

The dried vine samples from the 68 and 90 day po-
tato harvests were ground to pass a 20 mesh seive. and dup—
licate samples of the tissue were digested in nitric and
perchloric acid. The Ca. Mn. and Mg content in the digests
was determined using a Perken-Elmer 303 atomic absorption
spectrophotometer. Potassium was determined using a Coleman
flame photometer and P colorimetrically by Method IV of Jack-
son (1958). The aluminum content was determined in some of
the digests by the aluminon method (Jackson. 1958) after in-
terfering anions had been removed from the extracts by the
method proposed by Page and Bingham (1962).

One gram samples of the oat tissue. ground to pass a

20 mesh seive. were dry ashed by the method of Peech as

 

 

 

 

 

 

3O

 

reported by Jackson (1958). Twenty-five ml of 1 N HCl added
to the samples did not completely dissolve the ash. appar—
ently due to the conversion of some of the Mn to insoluble

MnO by HCl (Kendall. 1937). Three drops of 30% H added

2 202
to each sample dissolved the residue. The solutions were F-h
then filtered to remove silica and made to 100 m1 volume

with 0.1 N_HC1. The Ca. Mg. and Mn content was determined

in the extracts using a Puken-Elmer Model 290 atomic absorp-

 

tion spectrophotometer. Potassium in the extracts was de-

termined with a Coleman flame photometer.

Technique for Direct Contact
Measurements of Soil and Band_pH

 

 

Throughout the growing period measurements of the
pH in the soils and in the fertilizer bands were made by
inserting the glass electrode of a Beckman Model N pH meter
into each tube so that it was in direct contact with either
the soil or the fertilizer band at the base of the tube.
The calomel electrode inserted into the surface of the moist
soil completed the circuit. The effect of the previous read-

ing was minimized by wiping the glass electrode after each

 

 

31

measurement and by either taking all the band or all the soil

pH readings successively. At the end of the growth period of

the potatoes the soil pH tube was removed and the direct
contact pH of the soil immediately below the tube position
taken to determine if any packing of the soil at the end of

the tube had affected the pH measurements.

Soil Samples

After removing the center soil pH tube. a 1" core of
soil. to the depth of the pot. was removed from the position
occupied by the plastic tube. After mixing the soil in each
pot. prior to planting the oats. representative soil samples
were obtained from each pot. and then again after harvesting
the oats. All of the samples were analyzed for pH. lime re-
quirement P. K. Ca. and Mg by the Soil Testing Laboratory.

Soil Science Department. Michigan State University.

Statistical Analysis Procedures

Data were statistically analyzed utilizing a Con—

trolled Data Corporation (CDC) 3600 digital computer.- Data

   

 

32

from.the potato experiment and all of the soil test data were
subjected to analyses of variance using a split plot design
with soil treatments as the main factor and varieties as the
subfactors. All of the direct contact soil pH data were ana-
lyzed using a split-split plot design with the pH measure-
ments in the two different tubes as the sub-subfactors. The
data obtained from the oats at the two different dates of
harvest and the Al analysis on the Norland potato tissue

were analyzed separately by means of a randomized complete
block design with 10 soil treatments and 4 replications.

The "honest significant difference" (hsd) as pro-
posed by Tukey (Steel and Torrie. 1960) was calculated from
the results of the analysis of variance. Larger differences
between means are required for significance using an hsd ra-
ther than an lsd but the chances of making a Type I error

are greatly lessened when comparing any two means.

"_. .-.' _

 

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

A greenhouse experiment with both Norland and Sebago
potatoes was conducted to evaluate the effects of liming and
of including aluminum sulphate and manganous sulphate in the
fertilizer bands on the soil and on the growth and Mn uptake
by potatoes. and to duplicate the apparent Mn toxicity symp-
toms previously observed on potatoes growing in the farmer's
fields. The residual effects of these treatments were eval-
uated by growing oats on these same soils after the potatoes

had been harvested.

Potato Crop

 

Visual Symptoms

 

The visual symptoms that developed in the greenhouse
on the Norland variety were very similar to those observed
in farmers' fields. Severe leaf roll. black Specks on the
stems and undersides of the leaves and necrotic areas on the
leaf margins were prevalent on those plants grown in unlimed

33

 

. an. 24A,-' 1

 

 

 

 

fit a r,
With
all 1
than

bages
as Con

“use

 

34

soil. Liming considerably reduced the occurrence of the
symptoms. At the high rates of calcitic hydrate the symp-
toms observed were more typical of reported Mg deficiency
symptoms: yellowing of the lower leaves and necrotic spot-
ting occurring throughout the leaf surface area of the older
leaves rather than primarily along the edges (Houghland.
1949).

Sebago plants grown on the unlimed soils exhibited
essentially the same symptoms as did the Norlands but with
less intensity. They also develOped the symptoms of appar-

ent Mg deficiency at the higher levels of calcitic hydrate.

Yields of Potato Vines

Higher vine yields were obtained with the Sebago
than with the Norland variety. on all treatments (Table 2).
With the exception of the check treatment on the Sebagos.
all treatments yielded more at the final (90 day) harvest
than at the initial (68 day) harvest. The low yield of Se-
bagos noted on the Al treated soil at the initial harvest
as compared with the check is probably not significant.

since the yield was higher than the check at the final

 

«I;

 

.mocmeUmmuu saw as smegma omnomum mo ¢\mne oooe mo namemsesem

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

H
so.m Hm.~ m: m: museum> m GHQDA3 unmeummue
Amo.ov on:
mm.oa mo.¢ om.m om.m = o.HH :
mH.oH ha.o mm.m mH.N = m.m =
ee.se em.m Hm.m sm.e mcoz ms.~ messes;
oeufloamu
mo.ma hm.m mo.o mm.m = o.HH :
oH.HH m¢.oa ¢¢.m hm.¢ : m.m =
nm.ma ha.oa mb.¢ mm.m mcoz mn.m muHEoHoo
mm.m mo.n o¢.¢ mv.m 0m+om = oz+Hm
5 No.m Om.m Nv.o om.m om = :2
3 HH.oH mo.o mm.m mm.m om osoz Hm
hm.m mo.m mo.o No.m II T: mcoz
uuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu unmed\muuunuuunuuunuuuunnt «\mne <\e
comm
mwmo om mhmo mo whmo om mmmo mo Hmnmaauuom
. . omxaz pmaammm
ou mcofluflpod . Amman:
ommnom pcmauoz Hm.
coaumoflammd mo comm
humwum> mucmfiummna

 

.ocmn Hmnwaflunmm may on encamHSm
moocmmcme ocm mumsmaom Escfleoam mo mcoHDHocm pom mafia mo mmUHDOm pom mmumn an
caboommm mm umw>nmn mo mmumo o3u um mmcw> oumuom ommnom pom pcmHHoz mo moawflwll.~ mamme

 

 

 

 

36

harvest. Otherwise. the A1 and Mn treatments had no signif-
icant effects on vine yields.

Applications of dolomite tended to increase the final
yields of Norlands and significantly increased the final
yields of Sebagos as compared with the check treatment. with

the exception of the low rate (2.75 T/A CaCO equivalent).

3
applications of calcitic hydrate reduced yields of the ini-
tial harvest on both varieties and of the final harvest of
Norlands. Final Sebago yields increased significantly with
applications of calcitic hydrate as compared with the check
treatment. The yield depressions observed with calcitic
hydrate treatments at the initial harvest. as compared with
the check treatment. are probably related to the low level
of available soil Mg observed on these treatments (Table 6A.
appendix). The Norland yields were also depressed at the
final harvest while the Sebagos were not. Some bias was

introduced in the data by choosing the smallest plant in

each pot for the initial harvest.

 

   

 

37

Treatment Effects on Tubers

Although yields of tubers grown in pots in a green-
house may not accurately refleCt the yield patterns one might
obtain in the field. due to the confining nature of the pots
and differences in growth conditions. all tubers in each pot
were harvested after the final vine harvest. Only about two
tubers in each pot exceeded 2" in size. partly due to the
fact that only one of the plants was allowed to grow the
full 90 days. Additions of aluminum sulphate and/or mangan-
ous sulphate tended to decrease yields from the check
slightly. as did applications of dolomite lime (Table 1A.
appendix). Yields were markedly decreased. especially on
the Norlands. by applications of calcitic hydrate. The char—
acteristic red color of the Norlands on the unlimed treat-
ments tended to fade considerably with increasing rates of
either source of lime. The coloration of the Sebagos was

much duller in appearance when calictic hydrate was applied.

Mineral Contents of the Vines

The data for the vine concentrations and uptake of

(Za. K. and P of both varieties are presented in the appendix

 

 

 

 

 

38

and will not be discussed except as related to the specific
objectives of this investigation (tables 2A. 3A. and 4A.
appendix).

Both varieties had about equal concentrations of Mg
in the vines at either harvest. but due to higher yields.
the Sebagos contained more Mg (Table 3). Vine Mg concentra-
tions and Mg uptake tended to increase for both varieties
from the initial to the final harvest. except on the A1 and/
or Mn treatments. On these treatments the Mg concentrations
of the Norlands were about the same at both harvests and
those of the Sebagos tended to decline slightly at the final
harvest. Compared with the check. additions of aluminum
sulphate and/or manganous sulphate to the band had little
effect on the plant Mg concentrations or Mg uptake.

Additions of dolomite resulted in significant in—
creases over the check in both Mg concentrations and Mg up-
take. In addition. the high rate of dolomite (11 T/A CaCO3
equivalent) resulted in a significant increase in both Mg
concentration and Mg uptake over the low rate of dolomite.
Although the Sebagos actually took up more Mg from the dolo-
mite treatments. because of their greater yields. than did

the Norlands. the Norlands had the higher Mg concentrations

in the vines.

 

 

 

39

.mucmeummuu Ham

as smegma omsomum mo «\mna oooe mo ucmsm>esem

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

H
m.mm m.me m.mm m.mH mom.o mme.o mom.o mme.o sumeum> m segues mscmsummue
Amo.oo em:
e.m n.m ¢.o H.o omo.o aho.o mHo.o moo.o = o.HH =
H.na o.¢H ¢.m m.m moa.o Hm~.o mca.o mmo.o : m.m :
m.mo o.>m o.mH m.ma mom.o mm~.o ovm.o nom.o mcoz mh.m sumac»:
oeueoemo
w.vna m.vm m.moa H.oe omm.H amo.H mno.H oem.a : o.HH =
o.oma v.mw o.mm m.oo ANH.H mm>.o vmh.a o~¢.a = m.m =
N.HMH o.mw o.on m.n¢ mmo.a mmh.o Hmm.a Hmm.H ocoz m>.m ouflEoHoo
m.mm ¢.Hm m.>H m.HH Hom.o mH¢.o omm.o mmm.o om+om : CZ+H¢
o.hm n.mm ¢.>H m.HH Nam.o Ham.o mmm.o hmm.o on = as
m.¢m «.mm v.mH o.mH ocm.o mom.o mom.o mom.o om mcoz Hm
m.mm m.am e.mm e.ma mmg.o omm.o omo.o mem.o II II wcoz
uuuuuuuu nade\msnnuutunu tuununuusmems sup swuuauun ¢\mne «\e
comm
mhmo mhmo ammo mmmp mxmc ammo mhmo mhmo Hmnwaflunmm owxflz
om we _om mo om mo om we on mcosuseem awesome
. . Hmflumumz
ommnwm ocmauoz ommnmm ccmHuoz coflumoflammd mo mumm
mxmumo oz coaumuucoocoo oz mucmEDmmna

 

.HmNHHHuHmm cocoon can ou conflmaom moocmocme pom confimasm ESCHESHM mo
mcoflufloom pom mafia mo mmoHSOm cam mmumu an Umuomwmm mm mmumo umw>nmn 03» um
mmcfl> oumuom ommnmw pom pcmHHoz >9 wxmumo pom CH mcoflumuucmocoo Eoflmmcmmzll.m mamQE

 

 

reduce

calcit
trat iox
hydrat.
though
both v
higher
Ciency
Compa r
1eVe1 ,
and up
from t
the Se

they h

rePOrt
M9 or

greats

howeve

UnlimE

 

 

 

 

40

Compared with the check. calcitic hydrate tended to
reduce the Mg contents of both varieties. The high rate of
calcitic hydrate resulted in significantly lower Mg concen-
trations in the vines than with the low level of calcitic
hydrate. The decrease in Mg uptake on these same treatments.
though only significant with the Sebagos. was very marked in
both varieties. These low plant Mg levels occurring with the
higher calcitic hydrate treatments would confirm the Mg defi-
ciency symptoms noted on the plants grown in these treatments.
Comparing the two varieties at the high calcitic hydrate
level. the Norlands exhibited both lower Mg concentrations
and uptake suggesting that they are not able to absorb Mg
from the soil at low soil Mg levels as efficiently as can
the Sebagos. Yet when Mg was present in adequate amounts.
they had the higher Mg concentrations in the vines.

Extension Bulletin E 550 (Michigan State University)
reports that sandy soils testing below 33 ppm exchangeable
Mg or having an exChangeable K to exchangeable Mg ratio
greater than 4/1 might be Mg deficient.

This soil tested 23 ppm Mg with a K/Mg ratio of 5/1;
however. the Mg concentrations in the potato vines on the

unlimed treatments appeared to be adequate for normal growth

 

 

 

(I)

 

 

 

41

(Doll and Hossner. 1964). One possible reason why plants

were able to obtain as much Mg on the unlimed soils at this
low a soil test Mg level is suggested by the findings of
Hossner (1965) and Christensen (1968). who reported increased
soil Mg availability with decreasing soil pH. The acid solu-
tion from the fertilizer bands could have dissolved some of
the unavailable soil Mg in the vicinity of these bands render-
ing it available to the plants. As will be shown later. the
fertilizer band pH levels of the calcitic hydrate treatments
were above those of the unlimed treatments.

The increased Mg concentrations in the plants on the
dolomite treatments jrscdue to the increased soil Mg levels
resulting from the solubilization of the dolomite (Table 6A.
appendix). Calcium concentrations in the vines were decreased
over those of the check by applications of dolomite (Table 3A.
appendix).

The marked decreases in Mg concentrations and Mg up-

take by plants grown on the medium (5.5 T/A CaCO equivalent)

3
and high calcite hydrate treatments appears partly due to the
-influence of this source of lime on the soil Ca/Mg ratio.

Large increases in soil Ca availability apparently resulted

in such an imbalanced Ca/Mg ratio that the plants could not

 

 

   

 

42

absorb sufficient Mg for normal growth. The Ca concentra—
tions in the vines and the Ca levels in the soil were signif—
icantly increased by the calcitic hydrate applications (Tables
3A and 6A. appendix). In addition. available soil Mg levels
tended to decrease below the level of the check with additions
of calcitic hydrate even though less total Mg had been taken
up from these soils by the plants. Christenson (1968) also
reports less available soil Mg with increasing soil pH.

Data from a liming experiment in the field on this
same soil. indicated that Norland potato petiole Ca concen-
trations were also decreased and Mg concentrations increased
by applications of dolomite and petiole Mg concentrations de-
creased and Ca concentrations increased by applications of
calcitic hydrate as compared with the unlimed soil (unpub-
lished data of R° P. White. Michigan State University).

The Mn concentrations and Mn uptake by the vines were
higher in the Norland vines and increased markedly from the
initial to the final harvest (Table 4). Due to the higher
yields. Mn uptake was greater in the Sebagos at each harvest.

Additions of aluminum sulphate and/or manganous sul-
phate tended to slightly increase the Mn concentrations in

130th varieties at the initial harvest. while only the Al plus

giw-Je lee—pm._¢. W,

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.mucmEumonu Ham ca omocmn omlomlm mo «\mna oooa mo ucmam>flsoma
so.m em.e so.m e~.n need one Moos ems museum> m canoes mucmsnmmue
Amo.ov ems
mm.H .mm.o mm.o om.o oma moa boa mma : o.HH =
oo.m oa.a mm.o eg.o mmm boa mom now = m.m =
as.s mo.m mm.m em.e omm mmm mmm oss maoz me.m menses;
UHDHUHMO
ma.o mm.m mo.v oo.H meg now 009 mam : o.HH =
om.m em.v mm.m mv.m 0mm mas was omm : m.m =
m>.o mo.m em.m HH.N mam mom Nmn mom wcoz mn.m muHEoHoo
mm.o¢ Hm.cm mo.¢m mo.mH Nome mmmm mesh megs om+om = cz+H<
3 em.mm mw.¢~ mo.mm em.ma meme moom Nome Nome om = a:
4 mh.ov mn.mH mm.m~ om.mH onoc omom mmao mmmc om mcoz Hm
mo.mm hm.HN mo.mm oo.ma omme momm oomo mmom II II mcoz
llllllllllll ucme\oEIIIIIII Illlusoflmz who amount: «\mna 4\B
Ucmm
h m x
n no m mo m mo mxmo mhmp mhmo mamo mxmo nonmaeuumm omxez
om mo om mo om mo om mm on mcoHufloom oweamm<
anewmumz
oomnmm oceanoz ommnmm occauoz coaumoflamm< mo comm
mxmumo oz coflumuucoocoo :2 mucmEumeB

 

.ccmn umNHHHuumm mnu ou oumnmaom moocmmcms com mumnmaom Edcfleoam mo
mGOADHUom pom mefla mo mUHSOm can open >9 Umuommmm mm mmumo umm>umn o3u um
mocfl> oumuom oomnmm can cowauoz >9 mxmum: can Ce mcoflumuucmocou mmmcmmomZII.v mam<

 

111).

   

 

 

 

44

Mn banded treatment significantly increased the Mn concentra-
tion over that of the check at the final harvest. At the
final harvest manganous sulphate added to the band tended

to increase the Mn concentration over that of the check in
the Norlands but not in the Sebagos. The Al treatment re-
sulted in Mn concentrations lower than the check in both
varieties at both harvests.

The trends in Mn uptake for the A1 and/or Mn banded
treatments were essentially the same as those of the Mn con—
centration data. except that none of the differences were
significant when compared with the check.

Additions of either source of lime at all rates of
application drastically reduced the Mn concentrations and
Mn uptake by the vines of both varieties at either harvest.
Increasing the rates of lime resulted in decreasing Mn con-
centrations and Mn uptake for each application. and calcitic
hydrate was the most effective in this respect due to the
resulting higher soil pH levels (Table 5).

The Mn concentrations in the vines of all the unlimed
treatments were considerably in excess of any toxicity levels
noted in the literature review. Since the water soluble Mn

<=ontent of the unlimed soil was 10 ppm. which is in excess

 

45

TABLE 5.—-Soil pH levels measured by direct contact and 1:1
soilzwater dilution as affected by rates and source
of lime and additions of aluminum sulphate and man-
ganous sulphate to the fertilizer band 103 days
after planting potatoes.

 

 

 

 

 

Treatments Direct Contact 191
. . Soi1:Water
Material Rate Of Application Dilution
Applied Additions to Tube Tube
Mixed Fertilizer in place removed
Band
T/A lbs/A
Check None None 5.10 4.96 5.07
A1 None 50 5.07 4.75 5.01
Mn " 30 5.05 4.85 5.07
A1+Mn " 50+30 5.00 4.78 4.96
Dolomite 2.75 None 6.37 6.31 6.28
" 5.5 " 6.72 6.75 6.63
" 11.0 " 6.72 6.81 6.85
Calcitic
hydrate 2.75 None 6.45 6.53 6.86
" 5.5 " 7.36 7.31 7.63
" 11.0 " 7.40 7.64 8.01
hsd (0.05)
Treatments with varieties combined 0.35 0.49 0.21

 

1Equivalent of 1000 lbs/A of 5-20-20 handed in all treatments.

 

 

x

- [3.9 ‘ * -

 

of levels reported to cause Mn toxicity in potatoes grown in
nutrient solutions (Berger and Gerloff. 1947; Smith. 1937).
high plant Mn levels would be expected on the unlimed treat-

men 128 .

 

The Mn concentrations in the vines of the dolomite
treated soils at the final harvest were about 700 ppm. which
Berger and Gerloff (1947) reported to be toxic for potatoes.
but below the vine Mn level of 1400 ppm at which thnis (1951)
observed no toxicity symptoms. As shown by Ouellette and
Genéreux (1965). varietal differences are important in determ-
ining the levels of Mn concentrations in the plants which re-
sult in toxicity symptoms.

No direct evidence was obtained either by plant symp-
tnoms or nutrient content to suggest Al was responsible for

tlie toxicity symptoms noted (Table 5A. appendix).

Soil and Fertilizer Band Direct Contact
pH Measurements

Evaluation of the Method

Although some difficulties were encountered in measur-

ing pfli'by direct contact of the electrodes with the soil and

 

 

 

47

the fertilizer bands. this method proved very useful. The

condition of the glass electrode was affected by the previous

sample so that pH readings could not be taken until drifting

of the meter needle had ceased. This drifting was especially

noticeable when measuring a high pH after a low pH. Washing "*
the elctrode between samples in an attempt to reduce the ‘
drift did not seem to improve the situation. nor did wiping

the electrode with a damp cloth. In fact. simply wiping the

electrode with the dry palm of the hand resulted in reproduc-

ible readings.

The soil pH measurements made by direct contact and
those determined in the laboratory in a 1:1 soi1:water sus-
pension were quite consistent (Table 5). except that direct
<:ontact soil pH readings were lower than those in water at
pfii levels above 6.7. This may be due to the high concentra—
tuions of H+ ions bound closely adjacent to soil colloids
\vriich are not free to diffuse throughout the solution upon
dilution with water.

The precision of duplicate pH measurements of a
gidlen soil by the direct contact method was very good. There
were Ina significant differences in the soil pH readings

taker: in the two tubes placed in the soils of two replications

 

m1 is

at

(11

he

 

 

48

during the oat growth period (Table 8A. appendix). The mean
pH measurements for any one soil treatment taken at three
different times during the oat crop were very consistent.
No explanation is offered for the high soil pH levels ob-

served by the direct contact method on the unlimed soils as

.. tan!" 9‘
e“
;.

compared with the lower pH levels measured after harvesting

the oats (Table 10A. appendix).

‘wmmmzfi " ‘ 1|
..

Soil Treatment Effects on Soilng
at the End of the Potato Growth Period

There were no significant decreases in the soil pH
levels in the center of the pots 3" horizontally away from
the fertilizer bands 103 days after planting the potatoes
(Table 5). although the Al band treatment did give the low-
est readings with each method of determination. Both Lindsay
and Stephenson (1959) and Blanchar and Caldwell (1966) found
pH decreases from solutions diffusing from fertilizer bands
at distances greater than this. Blanchar and Caldwell (1966)
did not present pH data for the soil samples they obtained
horizontally away from the fertilizer pellets in soil columns

leached with 4 cm of water. but the P concentration data

 

49

from these samples suggest that. with leaching. movement of
the solution from the band occurred primarily in a downward
direction. Although the soils in this present experiment
‘were not truly leached by additions of water. due to lack
of drainage in the pots. it would seem that the daily addi-
tions of water would tend to enhance the downward movement
of the solution moving out of the band. thus reducing lat—
eral diffusion.

Significantly different increases in soil pH were
noted both between the check treatment and the low rate of
either source of lime as well as between the low and high
rates of lime. The soil pH at the low rate of lime was the
same for both sources of lime as measured by the direct con-
tact method. At the medium and high rates of lime soil pH
levels were higher with calcitic hydrate than with dolomite
due to the faster rate of reaction of Ca(OH)2 as compared
with the crystaline double salt of Ca—Mg carbonate in dolo—

mite.

 

 

 

 

 

50

Treatment Effects_on Soil and
Band pH Levels During Potato
Growth Period

The first complete soil and band pH measurements were
made 6 days after planting the potatoes or about 16 days after
adding the fertilizer. Random measurements of the band pH in
levels. determined about one day after planting. indicated

that the pH levels in the fertilizer bands were about 1 pH

unit lower than the values reported on the 6th day after

”it"... hi I! JOE“ “

planting (Figures 1-10). The data of Lindsay and Stephenson
(1959) would suggest that band pH levels were even lower im-
mediately after adding the fertilizer to the soil.

In the check treatment (Figure 1) the soil pH and
the band pH both approached a pH of 5 after about 15 days
and thereafter were relatively constant. Since the soil and
band pH levels were not significantly different between 14
and 42 days. one would not expect to find much more dissolved
Al or Mn in the band area than throughout the rest of the
soil volume unless large amounts of Al and Mn had been dis—
solved at the initially low band pH and the Mn had not yet
precipitated as suggested by Lindsay and Stephenson (1959a).

The tendency for soil pH levels to rise on the 56th

day occurred on essentially all treatments and apparently

 

 

 

 

 

 

51

‘was the result of making pH measurements shortly after add-
ing water. The soil pH levels had decreased again at 103
days (Table 5) .

The addition of aluminum sulphate to the band (Figure
2) depressed the band pH to 3.5. thus one would expect to F“-

find much higher levels of Al and Mn dissolved from the soil

aw _'._.l‘-'-__'L L” ' .

in this band area. The pH of the band containing aluminum

sulphate plus manganous sulphate (Figure 3) was also reduced

. m‘fl‘fi"
- I

to 3.5 indicating that the added manganous sulphate had no
added effect on the band pH. The similarity of the pH levels
noted between the Mn treatment and that of the check treat-
ment confirm this observation (Figure 4).

Although there was a tendency for the soil pH levels
to decline with time. it is difficult to evaluate whether
this was an effect of the fertilizer bands or due to other
factors such as microbial action. changes in nutrient status
or greenhouse environmental effects. If there had been any
significant pH effect resulting from the fertilizer bands it
would have been most marked in the Al treated soils. and there
was no real evidence of this.

All of the band pH levels tended to increase with

time. as would be expected. as the fertilizer solutions

 

IT

a.

la:

 

52

diffused from the band. However. repeated forcing of the
electrode into the band would tend to move the electrode
through the band so that one would measure more of a band-
soil mixture as the experiment progressed.

With the application of the low rate of dolomite
(Figure 5) the soil pH was increased from 5 to 6.5 with
essentially no effect on the band pH. This change in soil
pH. however. had a tremendous effect on the Mn contents in
the vines (Table 4). This suggests that the main source of
the Mn in the plants was the available Mn in the soil volume
throughout the whole root zone and not from the fertilizer
band area. This also suggests that the plants were not feed—
ing heavily from the fertilizer band. The medium and high
rates of dolomite (Figures 6 and 7) resulted in only slight
additional increases in soil and band pH levels. But note
that these higher rates resulted in band pH levels higher
than the soil pH in the check treatment.

Application of the low rate of calcitic hydrate
(Figure 8) resulted in a band pH slightly above that of the
ggil in the check treatment. a marked increase in the soil
pH and a tremendous decrease in the plant Mn contents (Table

4). The medium rate (Figure 9) resulted in an additional

   

 

 

 

53

slight.increase in band pH and again raised the soil pH.

The most marked change in the band pH with a lime treatment

occurred with calcitic hydrate at the high rate (Figure 10).

where the band pH was raised above 6.5 as compared with the

soil pH of about 5.0 in the standard treatment. P““
This influence of lime on the band pH is important i

in three ways. first it reduces the solubilization of soil

“‘l ‘1." Ir’ 5"“ ‘

A1 and Mn around a fertilizer band. second it reduces the
H+ ion concentration below a level that might prevent plant
roots from surviving in the band area and utilizing the nu-
trients of a fertilizer band and third. it reduces the re-
sidual acidity of the band so that mixing the fertilizer
residue into the soil by plowing results in less increased
acidity.

Just when and how actively the plant roots were able
to feed from the fertilizer band areas can not be determined
from this experiment since no non-banded treatments or tracer
elements were employed. In view of the lack of feeding by
plants from the soil zones adjacent to fertilizers. until
leaching had occurred. in the work of Blanchar and Caldwell
(1966 and 1966a). one questions just when the potato roots

were able to penetrate and feed from these fertilizer zones.

 

 

 

54

Because the pots had no drainage. no actual leaching could
occur. although daily additions of water would tend to accel-
erate movement of the concentrated fertilizer solutions from
the bands. Since some increases in plant Mn were noted on
the A1 and/or Mn treatments in both potato varieties at the
68 day harvest. it would appear that the roots were able to
feed somewhat from the soil zones influenced by the bands at
this time. The low pH level of the A1 treated bands makes
one question whether roots could function in this immediate
area. Once the salt effects were sufficiently reduced
through diffusion and leaching plant roots should have been
able to function in all the other treatment bands with their

higher pH levels.

 

 

 

55

.ponaawuuow poorer oru Saco wca>wuoou mason pwswac:
co oswu Lugs mHo>oH no page umuwawuuou one Hwom cw mowcmsu .H ousuwa

ozEa: E 96
om 9 cm cm 3

 

q

. u 1 d .

 

2a

 

 

 

 

56

8

.pcmb uoaaaauuow any cw comrade» Escaeoam wcacaoucoo mHHom
omEHHco co usau rues mHm>uH on page nouaaauuom one Haom ca «cognac .N ouswfim

 

gigging
om cm 8 S
- Td - u u
I m
|II||IIIII|"\\\\
/ s - .
:a

 

 

.usmn umuaawuuow
as» aw dunnoaom asocowsws can ouunoasm assassam madcanucoo wagon
voswao: so mafia rugs mHo>oH so pomp uouwafiuuom can Hwom ow mowcwro .m ouswam

2.22 E 23
8 cm 9 R 8 S

a u a 1 a .

 

57

 

 

 

 

.pcma nouuaauuom osu ca muonoflom msocomcos wswcuuucoo wagon
poEHHca :0 mafia saga mHo>oH mo coon wouwawuumu pom Haom cu oowcmro .e ousuwm

2:25; 55 2a
8 8 9 R cm 9

q d u u 11 N

 

 

58

 

 

 

 

 

.ouweoaov no ucoaouusoou 9...: 05 no.5... was: 26 $545.30» «Soc
so as: suds 0.250." no pawn peanut—ow can Show any 5 mumcmru .m muse:

2:23 E 9.3
8 R Q R ow. Q

 

 

 

q d I d 1 d
L
N
9
5
\\.
\\
l""ll' “‘I‘“
/ I...
L

 

 

 

dues—goo no ucoaouuocou as: on”. use: H waft—"moo..—
mzom so we: :33 39,3 no pann— uouaduuow can Goo a.“ newsman .0 95»:

2.5 E are
8 cm 9 R cm 9

E

q u N a u 4

 

 

 

   

 

61

.wuasoaoo ww unwawuasowu oEaa one wwsau N msaaawowu waaow
so usau ruaa waw>wa mo pawn nwuaaauuwm vow aaow wnu ca wwwcwro .5 wuswam

SEE: SE 95
8 R 9 R ow oa

_ N J1 1 N a

 

III-

x... X...

 

 

 

/.=o.m . /

 

 

 

dunno»; uauaoaw wan: woo agaouwu
aa u ouww ucoauuaocwu uEaa 05 woe—an w
w ow so Qua a a3 waw>wa no pawn uwuaaauuww vow aaow c
a woman—8 .
a wan—mam

8 2.5 E 95
R 9 R om
ea

1
i
1. I
U
1

 

“ “‘
ll .. m

-||‘|“"
|"|“

Fee

62

ft dew

 

 

 

 

63

.wuwuvhr oauaoawo ww ucoswuasoou oaaa ecu wwsau a wea>aw00h
waaow so wEau roar waw>wa no pawn nouaaauuwu new aaow ea wwwcwro .m case.»

@2222 E are
8 R 9 R 8 ca

1 1 u d u d

 

I'll-I"

r. as

 

 

 

;7_ 7.151": ’4’. '~ 33

 

64

.wuwuomn oauaoawu ww unwEwuaoowu wEaa wru wwEau N mca>awowu
waaow co wEau ruas waw>wa no new» wouaaauuwu paw aaow Ca wwmcwro .oa unawam

8225...: «E was
8 R 9 R om oa

 

H I I .I d d

Il|EnIlI I,

 

 

 

1‘.

WE

WY.

e

 

65

Oat Crop

Oats are quite resistant to Mn toxicity (Hewitt.
1963). Oats were therefore planted in the same soils as
were the potatoes. after mixing the residues from the fertil-
izer bands throughout the soils. to evaluate the residual
effects of the soil treatments on plant growth and Mn and
Mg uptake and to evaluate the residual acidity effects of

the band residues.

Yields of Oats

The high rate of calcitic hydrate was the only
treatment to significantly reduce the oat yield (Table 6)
from that of the check treatment at the 40 day harvest
(Sebago pots). No significant yield differences were noted
at the 70 day harvest (Norland pots). and yields were about
triple those of the 40 day harvest.

Severe symptoms of Mg deficiency were noted on the
unlimed and the calcitic hydrate treatments at the early
stage of growth but later disappeared. as is often observed

(Ferrari and Sluijmans. 1955; and Christenson. 1968).

 

TABLE 6.--Oven dry weights of oat tissue at two harvest dates
as affected by mixing the residues from the fertil-
izer bands in the treatments originally applied for

66

the potatoes.

 

 

Treatments Growth Period

 

 

Rate of Application

 

 

 

fiatiiggl 40 days 70 days
Pp Mi ed Additions to '
x Fertilizer Band
T/A lbs/A --g dry weight-—-
None —- -— 12.80 35.15
Al None 50 11.77 37.72
Mn " 30 12.50 36.00
Al+Mn “ 50+30 12.87 37.32
Dolomite 2.75 None 12.45 36.57
" 5.5 " 10.97 36.45
" 11.0 " 11.35 36.92
Calcitic
hydrate 2.75 None 11.47 40.02
" 5.5 " 10.90 39.15
" 11.0 " 9.45 35.45
hsd (0.05)
Treatments within a variety 2.99 ns

 

1Equivalent of 100 lbs. of 5-20-20 handed in all treatments
prior to planting potatoes.

1». -§£5
.

 

 

67

Mineral Contents of the Oat Tissue

 

The data obtained for the Ca and K concentrations
and uptake by the oats are presented in the appendix and
will not be specifically discussed (Table 9A. appendix).

The Al and/or Mn banded treatments had no effect
on the Mg concentrations or uptake by the oats at either
harvest when compared with the check treatment (Table 7).

Dolomite applications resulted in very large increases in

 

plant Mg concentrations and uptake. while applications of
calcitic hydrate resulted in a progressive decrease in Mg
concentrations and Mg uptake.

As was noted with the potatoes. the low levels of
available soil Mg on the unlimed treatments were not low
enough to be limiting for yields as is evidenced by the
yield data and the Mg concentrations in the plant tissue
(Tables 6 and 7). Christenson (1968) reports a tissue level
of 0.16% Mg for oats grown in the greenhouse as the critical
level for development of deficiency symptoms. but notes that
Mg levels may be considerably reduced before yields are af-
fected. Tissue Mg levels below 0.16% were noted only on the
medium and high rates of calcitic hydrate where both soil Mg
levels (Table 10a. appendix) and yields were lower than on

the unlimed treatments.

 

.woouwuom ocaucwam on MOaHm mucmauwmuu aam Ca cocoon o~uomlm mo m\wna oooa mo ucwam>aoom

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

N
.wumo mcauowam on HOaHm cwxaEGH hawuwamEou waaowllmowo oumuom new cmaammw wusmfiuwouaa
v.m mm.~ mma oom m.om m.m ama.o 0mo.o .huwauw> m camuaz wucwEumeB
Amo.oc ems
m.m mm.a 00a oca 0.0m v.m maa.o mmo.o = o.aa =
m.a 00.0 on me m.am a.ma Nma.o oma.o : 0.0 =
m.m an.o N0 00 a.h0 m.om m0a.o mna.o ocoz mh.m sumac»:
vauaoawo
0.m 00.0 mm mm 0.mmm o.0h mv0.o om0.o = o.aa =
a.N 00.0 mm mm o.0mm o.m> m¢0.o m00.o = 0.0 =
N.m no.0 mm mm 0.0ma v.mn mmm.o omm.o wcoz mn.m wuaEanm
m.mv m¢.ma mnaa omoa ¢.m0 «.mm mma.o m0~.o om+om : GS+am
8 a.mm 0n.m omm mm0 0.0m N.mm mmm.o m0m.o om = :2
6 m.a¢ No.oa moaa mmm 0.00 m.¢~ mma.o oaN.o om mcoz am
m.¢m no.0 mom m0¢ 0.a0 m.om oma.o ocm.o In In mcoz
Inluom\ozul Ilnnemmnll Iluom\mzll unmamB huc * ¢\wna <\B
wmwc wmmc whwc wmwc whwc wch whmc mhwc Nccwm
on ow on oc on ow oh 0% Hmuaaauuom cmxaz
0» macauaccm awauwuwz
ceauwuu ceauwuu
m . .
wxwu D Icmucoo mxwumb Icmocoo GOauwoaammm mo muwm
owwcwocwz Enawmcmwz awucmEuwwHB
we

.wwoumuom ecu How cwaammw haawcamano
wucmEuwouu or» ca wccwn Hwnaaauuwm emu Eonm wwscawmu emu mcaxae >9 cwuoommm
ww wmumc uww>uw£ 03» um wuwo an mxwumo cow wcoaumuucmucoo :2 com anmmcmwzll.b mamma

 

 

 

.woouwuom ocaucwam ou HOHHQ wucmEuonu aaw ca cocoon omlomlm mo «\wna oooa mo ucoaw>aoom

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

N
.quO ocaucwam ou Heaum coxanu hamumameoo waaowllmouo ouwuom wow coaammw mucoEuonBa
e.w mm.m mma oom m.om m.m ama.o wao.o .sumaum> m canoes monogamous
Amo.ov om:
m.m m~.a m0a oga o.om ¢.m maa.o mmo.o = o.aa :
m.a om.o om mo m.am a.ma Nma.o oma.o : m.m :
m.m an.o mm mm a.so m.om wwa.o mea.o mcoz me.~ ensues:
oauaoawo
0.m 00.o mo mm 0.mmm o.0h mV0.o om0.o : o.aa =
a.N 00.0 mm mm o.0mm o.m> mo0.o m00.o = m.m =
m.m mo.o mm mm m.0oa ¢.mn mmm.o oom.o ocoz mn.m oDaEanm
m.mo mo.ma mnaa omoa ¢.o0 N.om mma.o m0m.o om+om = oz+am
8 _a.mm 0n.m omo mo0 0.0m «.mm mom.o m0~.o on = :2
,o m.ao No.oa moaa moo 0.o0 m.¢m mma.o oam.o om 0:02 am
o.¢m no.0 mom m0¢ 0.a0 m.om oma.o ocm.o II II ocoz
Illuom\ozll IIIIEQQIII Iluom\ozll unoao3 mac x. «\wna m\a
wmwc wmwc wmwc wmwc wmwc wmwc whwc w>mc Nccwm
oh oc on oo on 0% on ow Houaaauuom coxaz
0» wcoauaccm awawouwz
noduwuu Goduwnu
m . .
mxwu D Icoocoo mxwums Icmocou c0auwoaammm mo ouwm
mwocmmcmz anwocomz wucwfiumoua

a

 

I),
I

 

 

 

.wmouwuom ecu How cmaammw >aawcaoauo
wucmEuonu may ca wccwn Honaaauuom as» Scam woocawwu on» ocaxae an couoommw
ww wouwc uwm>uw£ 03» um wuwo an mxwumo com wcoaumuucoocoo oz can anwmcowzsl.> mamma

 

 

in
How
PPm
tem
samp
sang
of t I
tair
the

6A

 

Pot

10A

bet
bar

Ere

 

 

69

The increase in soil Mg levels noted after mixing
the fertilizer residues (Tables 6A and 7A. appendix) may be
the result of mixing. throughout the soil. some unavailable
soil Mg brought into an available form by the acid solution
in the area of the fertilizer bands (Christenson. 1968).
However. at these very low soil Mg levels. changes of 20
ppm Mg are within the range of experimental error for de-
terminations made at different times. The precision of
samples analyzed as a group (as were the samples of each
sampling date) appears much greater than this. Thus some
of the increase in soil Mg noted between the samples ob-
tained after the potatoes and those obtained after mixing
the residues with the soil may be experimental error (Tables
6A and 7A. appendix).

The same relationships between the Ca and Mg levels
in the plants and in the soils that were observed on the
potatoes were also noted with the oats (Tables 7 and 9A and
10A. appendix).

Plant Mn concentrations and uptake increased markedly
between 40 and 70 days (Table 7). When the residue of the
banded Mn fertilizer was mixed with the soil the Mn concen-

tration in the oats was significantly increased at both

   

70

'harvests as compared with the check treatment. Manganese
concentrations significantly higher than those due to the
Mn band were observed with A1 and Al plus Mn treatments

Which resulted in the same plant Mn concentrations. The

uptake data followed essentially the same trends as did

 

r
the plant Mn concentrations.

Either source of lime drastically reduced Mn con-
centrations and Mn uptake. Both lime sources resulted in T
a trend for decreasing Mn concentrations and uptake at the i

two lower rates of application. but unlike the potatoes
both Mn concentrations and Mn uptake increased in both har-
vests with the application of the highest rate of calcitic
hydrate as compared with the lower two rates.

Mixing the residues from the fertilizer bands
throughout the soil resulted in a lowering of soil pH
levels about 0.2 pH units on all treatments except those
containing Al in the band. where the change in pH tended
to be slightly greater (Tables 6A and 7A. appendix). The
data for Mn concentrations and uptake by the plants suggest
that the increased soil Mn availability on the Al and the
Al plus Mn treatments was related to these increases in

soil acidity which could have come from two possible

 

 

 

71

sources. First. any A1 in the band which had not reacted
with the soil. when mixed with the rest of the soil. would
tend to depress the soil pH thus reducing some of the Mn
oxides in the soil. But this would mean that only a small
pH change was responsible for the large increase in Mn
availability (Table 7).

The other possibility is that the very low pH levels
of the solutions diffusing from the Al and the A1 plus Mn
treated bands dissolved large amounts of soil Mn and A1
which remained in an available form to be distributed
throughout the soil upon mixing. Both of these processes
probably contributed to the decreased pH and increased Mn
availability evidenced by the increased plant Mn concentra-
tions and uptake.

It is very difficult to understand why increases
in Mn concentrations and Mn uptake occurred at the highest
rates of calcitic hydrate because of the decreasing avail-
ability of Mn occurring as soil pH increases. The greater
Mn concentrations were not due to lower yields on these
treatments since Mn uptake also increased. Manganese up—
take has been shown to increase with decreasing Mg levels

in nutrient solutions (thnis. 1960). In addition one

1".

 

 

72

wonders if the fact that Mn can substitute for Mg in many
of the plant enzyme systems is not in some way related to
this increased Mn uptake at these very low soil and plant
Mg levels (Nason and McElroy. 1963).
It appeared that soil K was a limiting factor;
therefore minimal yield differences due to applications
of dolomite occurred on the 40 day harvest and none occurred
at the 70 day harvest. Soil K levels were considerably re—
duced by the potato crop and the growth of the oats reduced
them even more (Tables 6A. 7A. and 10A. appendix).
Unpublished data of R. P. White. Michigan State
University demonstrated that. on a sandy loam soil. green-
house oat yields increased with soil test K levels up to
at least 150 ppm; at this level the K concentration in the
tissue was 5%. The soil test K levels in the soils and the

K levels in the oat tissue of the present experiment were

considerably below these levels.(Tables 9A and 10A. appendix).

Although the soils in the Norland pots had higher soil K
levels prior to planting the oats than did the Sebago pots.
the longer growth period of the oats in the Norland pots

reduced the soil K levels below those of the Sebago pots.

5'

 

s‘

i]
c;

“s

 

CONCLUSIONS

The Sebago plants had higher vine yields than did
the Norlands on all treatments. Applications of dolomite
tended to increase the final vine yields of the Norland
variety and significantly increased the final vine yields
of the Sebago variety as compared with the check treatment.
With the exception of the low rate which resulted in yields
higher than the check. applications of calcitic hydrate re-
duced yields of the initial harvest on both varieties and
of the final harvest of the Norlands. Though all final
Sebago vine yields were higher than those of the check.
the medium and high calcitic hydrate treatments reduced
vine yields as compared with the low rate. These vine
yield reductions occurring on the calcitic hydrate treat-
ments were attributed to Mg deficiency apparently result—
ing from an imbalance in the soil Ca/Mg ratio due to the
calcitic hydrate applied. This was evidenced by lower soil
Mg levels. deficient levels of Mg in the plant tissue. and

visual Mg deficiency symptoms on these treatments.

73

 

ei‘.

fa:

the

in

ra;

   

74

Norland vines had higher vine Mn concentrations
than did the Sebagos on all treatments. but the Sebago
plants took up the most Mn due to their higher yields.
Both sources of lime at all rates drastically reduced both
vine Mn concentrations and uptake. Levels of plant Mn and
uptake decreased with increasing rates of lime. with cal-
citic hydrate being the most effective in this respect.

Soil pH levels increased with increasing rates of
either source of lime and calcitic hydrate. due to its
faster rate of reaction. resulted in higher soil pH levels
than did dolomite.

The same liming effects were noted on the pH levels
in the fertilizer bands. Increasing rates of dolomite
raised band pH levels so that at the high rate of dolomite
the band pH was about 0.5 pH units above the pH of the
check band. Band pH levels were most strongly increased
by applications of calcitic hydrate. The medium rate of
calcitic hydrate resulted in a band pH level equivalent to
that of the high rate of dolomite. while the high rate of
calcitic hydrate caused the band pH level to rise nearly 2

pH units above that of the band in the check treatment.

 

75

Compared with the check treatment. additions of
aluminum sulphate and manganese sulphate to the fertilizer
bands had no apparent significant effects on the vine yields
of either variety. Manganous concentrations in the plants
were the highest when aluminum sulphate plus manganous sul-
phate was added to the bands. Banded aluminum sulphate
treatments resulted in Mn concentrations higher than those
of the check at the initial harvest for both varieties but
lower concentrations at the final harvest. while additions
of manganous sulphate to the band resulted in Mn concentra-
tions higher than the check in the Norlands at both harvests
and for the initial harvest of the Sebagos. Plant uptake
data followed the same trends.

The pH level of the bands containing manganous sul-
phate was essentially the same as that of the bands of the
check treatment throughout the experimental period. about
4.8. The addition of aluminum sulphate to the band. with
or without manganous sulphate reduced the band pH to about
3.5.

Mixing the residues from the fertilizer bands
throughout the soil. prior to planting the oats. resulted

in a lowering of the soil pH on all treatments; the A1

 

a1

0C(

Cal

 

 

76

treated residue with or without added Mn caused the greatest
pH depression. Oat tissue Mn levels were significantly in-
creased over the check treatment by mixing the band residue
of the Mn treatment. However mixing the residue of the Al
treatment resulted in a significantly higher Mn content

than did the Mn treatment. demonstrating that the residual
acidity of the fertilizer band was a more important factor
influencing soil Mn availability than was the added Mn.

It was apparent that the main problem in the field
was Mn toxicity. This was confirmed in the greenhouse by
the high vine Mn concentrations that occurred along with
the appearance of Mn toxicity symptoms on the plants grown
in the unlimed soils.

Although the soil tested low in available soil Mg.
and increasing levels of available Mg have been shown to
depress Mn uptake (thnis. 1960). the Mn toxicity was so
severe it is doubtful whether additions of Mg to the soil.
without a change in soil pH. would have reduced the high
plant Mn concentrations to less than toxic levels.

The lack of substantial increases in vine Mn uptake
occurring when aluminum sulphate was added to the band.

causing a reduction in the band pH. or when manganous

 

 

sulphate was added to the band. indicates that the Mn tox—

icity resulted from the large amount of available soil Mn
present throughout the whole soil volume. rather than due

to soil Mn solubilized by the acidity of the solutions dif-
fusing from the fertilizer bands. This interpretation is
further supported by the high level of water—extractable
soil Mn in the original soil sample. and the marked decrease
in Mn uptake that occurred on the limed soils and. most spe—
cifically. by the decrease in Mn uptake that occurred on the
low dolomite treatment. where the soil pH was increased to
6.5 with essentially no change in the pH of the fertilizer
band as compared with the unlimed check treatment.

The Norland variety appeared more susceptible to Mn
toxicity than did the Sebago variety. as demonstrated by
both higher concentrations of Mn in the vines and more se-
vere toxicity symptoms.

No real evidence was obtained that the plants grown
on the unlimed treatments were Mg deficient; however. both
the oats and the potatoes grown at the medium and high
levels of calcitic hydrate were deficient in Mg as indicated
by the low Mg concentrations in the tissue and visual symp—

toms of Mg deficiency. The large additions of Ca in these

 

 

78

treatments upset the Ca/Mg balance in both the soil and
the plant as was shown by both soil tests and the mineral
contents of the tissue.

To eliminate Mn toxicity on this soil it appears
necessary to lime the soil with about 5 tons of dolomite
in order to bring the soil pH to a level of 6.0 to 6.5.
where it should be maintained by correcting residual acid-
ity from banded fertilizers with additions of lime as in—
dicated by future soil tests.

Allowing the soil pH to decrease to very low levels
(below 5) is an unwise practice. Not only might yields be
reduced by toxic concentrations of Mn. A1. and possibly H+
ions. but Schafer (1968) suggests that when soils reach
these low pH levels there may be an irreversible disintegra-
tion of some soil colloids. He indicates that restoration
of the soil to its former condition may be both expensive

and time consuming.

 

 

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Argawala, S. C.. C. P. Sharma, and A. Kumor. 1964. Inter-
relationship of iron and manganese supply in growth,
chlorophyll and iron porphyrin enzymes in barley
plants. Plant Physiology. 39:603-609.

Beckwith. R. S. 1955. Metal complexes in Soils. Austral—
ian J. Agr. Res. 6:685—698.

Berger, K. C. and G. C. Gerloff. 1947. Manganese toxicity
of potatoes in relation to strong soil acidity.
Soil Sci. Soc. Amer. Proc. 12:310-314.

Berger, K. C. and G. C. Gerloff. 1947a. Stem streak necro-
sis of potatoes in relation to soil acidity. Amer.
Potato Jour. 24:156—162.

Blanchar, R. W. and A. C. Caldwell. 1966. Phosphate-
Ammonium-moisture relationships in soils: I. Ion
concentrations in static fertilizer zones and ef-
fects on plants. Soil Sci. Soc. Amer. Proc. 30:
39-43.

Blanchar, R. W. and A. C. Caldwell. 1966a. Phosphate-
Ammonium—moisture relationships in soils: II. Ion
concentrations in leached fertilizer zones and ef-
fects on plants. Soil Sci. Soc. Amer. Proc. 30:
43—48.

Broadbent, F. E. and J. B. Ott. 1957. Soil organic matter-
metal complexes: I. Factors affecting retention
of various cations. Soil Sci. 83:419—427.

Bromfield, S. M. 1958. The properties of a biologically
formed manganese oxide, its availability to oats,
and its solution by root washings. Plant and Soil.
9:325—337.

79

 

 

80

Chapman. H. D. 1967. Plant analysis values suggestive of
nutrient status of selected cr0ps. p. 77-92. 22.
Soil testing and plant analysis. Part II. Soil
Sci. Soc. of Amer.. Madison.

Chapman. H. D.. J. H. Axley and D. S. Curtis. 1940. The
determination of pH at soil moisture contents ap-
proximating field conditions. Soil Sci. Soc. Amer.
Proc. 5:191-200.

Christenson. D. R. 1968. Magnesium release and uptake from
selected Michigan soils. Ph.D. Thesis. Mich. State
Univ.

Coleman. N. T. and G. W. Thomas. 1967. The basic chemistry
of soil acidity. p. 1-41. ‘Ig R. W. Person and F.
Adams (ed.) Soil Acidity and Liming. Amer. Soc.
Agron.. Madison.

Dessureaux. L. and G. J. Ouellette. 1958. Tolerance of
alfalfa to manganese toxicity in sand culture. Can.
Jour. Soil Sci. 38:8-13.

Doll. E. C. and L. R. Hossner. 1964. Magnesium deficiency
as related to liming and potassium levels in acid
sandy podzols. Int. Congr. Soil Sci.. Trans. 8th
(Bucharest). IV:907-911.

Ferrari. T. J. and C. M. J. Sluijmans. 1955. Mottling and
magnesium deficiency in oats and their dependence
on various factors. Plant and Soil. 6:262-299.

Fujimoto. C. K. and G. D. Sherman. 1948. Behavior of Man-
ganese in the Soil and the Manganese cycle. Soil
Sci. 66:131-145.

Heintze. S. C. 1957. Studies on soil manganese. J. Soil
Sci. 8:287—300.

Heintze. S. G. and P. J. G. Mann. 1949. Studies on Soil
Manganese. J. of Agr. Sci. 39:80-95.

 

 

 

 

81

Hemstock. G. A. and P. F. Low. 1953. Mechanisms responsible
for the retention of manganese in the colloidal frac-
tion of soil. Soil Sci. 76:331-343.

Hewitt. E. J. 1963. The essential nutrient elements: re-
quirements and interactions in plants. p. 137-329.
£2.F- C. Steward (ed.) Plant Physiology: a treatise.
III. Inorganic nutrition of plants. Academic Press.
New York.

Hiatt. A. J. and T. L. Ragland° 1963., Manganese Toxicity
of Burley Tobacco. Agron. Jour. 55:47—49.

Himes. F. L. and S. A. Barber. 1957. Chelating ability of
soil organic matter. Soil Sci. Soc. Amer. Proc.
21:368-373.

Hossner. L. R. 1965. Release of Mg by leaching from ver—
miculite. mica and prochlorite. Ph.D. Thesis.
Mich. State Univ.

Houghland. G. V. V. 1949. Nutrient deficiencies in the po-
tato. p. 219-244. ‘Ig Hunger signs in cr0ps- a sym-
posium. H. B. Sprague Ed. The National Fertilizer
Association and the America Society of Agronomy.
Wash. D. C. 3rd Ed.

Hurley. B. D.. W. L. Pritchett and H. L. Breland. 1956.
The effect of various soil treatments on the mangan-
ese content of cigar-wrapper tobacco leaves. The
Soil and Cr0p Sci. Soc. Fla. Proc. 16:230-237.

Jackson. M. L. 1958. Soil Chemical Analysis. Prentice-Hall
Inc. New Jersey. p. 148-151.

Jackson. W. A. 1967. Physiological effects of soil acidity.
p. 43-124. .Ig R. W. Person and F. Adams (ed.) Soil
Acidity and Liming. Amer. Soc. of Agron.. Madison.

Kendall. James. F. R. S. 1937. Smith's Inorganic Chemistry.
D. Appleton—Century Company Inc. New York. p. 886.

Leeper. G. W. 1947. The forms and reactions of manganese
in the soil. Soil Sci. 63:79—94.

 

 

 

82

Lindsay. W. L. and H. F. Stephenson. 1959. Nature of the
reactions of monocalcium phosphate monohydrate in
soils: The solution that reacts with the soil.
Soil Sci. Soc. Amer. Proc. 23:12—18.

Lindsay. W. L. and H. F. Stephenson. 1959a. Nature of the
Reactions of Monocalcium Phosphate Monohydrate in
Soils: II. Dessolution and precipitation reactions
involving iron. aluminum.manganese and calcium.
Soil Sci. Soc. Amer. Proc. 23:18-22.

Lahnis. Marie P. 1951. Manganese Toxicity in field and
market garden crops. Plant and Soil III: 193-222.

L5hnis. Marie P. 1960. Effect of Magnesium and Calcium
supply on the uptake of manganese by various crop
plants. Plant and Soil XII:339-376.

Marsh. A. W. and W. L. Powers. 1945. Responses of plants
to additions of manganese to some Oregon Soils. J.
Amer. Soc. Agron. 37:1—8.

Michigan State University. 1966. Co-operative Extension
Service. Department of Soil Science. Fertilizer
recommendations for Michigan vegetables and field
crops. Extension Bulletin E—550.

Morris. H. D. 1948. The soluble manganese content of acid
soils and its relation to the growth and manganese
content of sweet clover and lespedeza. Soil Sci.
Soc. Amer. Proc. 13:362—371.

Morris. H. D. and W. H. Pierre. 1949. Minimum concentra-
tions of manganese necessary for injury to various
legumes in culture solutions. Agron. Jour. 41:
107—112.

Nason. A. and W. D. McElroy. 1963. Modes of action of the
essential mineral elements. p. 451—536. 22 F. C.
Steward (ed.) Plant Physiology: A treatise. III.
Inorganic nutrition of plants. Academic Press.
New York.

5

,w ‘1'“

 

 

   

83

Neenan. M. 1960. The effects of soil acidity on the growth
of cereals with particular reference to the differen—
tial reaction of varieties thereto. Plant and Soil
12:324—338.

Ouellette. G. J. and L. Dessureaux. 1958. Chemical composi-
tion of alfalfa as related to degree and tolerance
to manganese and aluminum. Can. Jour. Plant Sci.
38:206-214.

Ouellette. G. J. et Ganéreux. 1965. Influence de l'intoxi-
cation manganique sur six varietés de pomme de terre.
Can. Jour. Soil Sci. 45:24-32.

Page. A. L. and F. T. Bingham. 1962. Determination of Al
(III) in plant materials and soil extracts. Soil
Sci. Soc. Amer. Proc. 26:351-355.

Reid. A. S. J. and M. H. Miller. 1963. The manganese cycle
in soil. II. Forms of soil manganese in equilib-

rium with solution manganese. Can. Jour. Soil Sci.
43:250-259.

Russell. Sir J. E. 1961. Soil conditions and plant growth.
Ninth Ed. John Wiley and Sons Inc. N.Y.. N.Y. p.
516.

Schafer. J. W. Jr. 1968. Nitrogen carrier induced changes
in chemical. mineralogical and microbial properties
of a sandy loam soil. Ph.D. Thesis. Michigan State
Univ.

Schofield. R. K. and A. W. Taylor. 1955. The measurement
of soil pH. Soil Sci. Soc. Amer. Proc. 19:164-167.

Shoemaker. H. E.. E. O. McLean and P. F. Pratt. 1961.
Buffer methods for determining lime requirement of
soils with appreciable amounts of extractable A1.
Soil Sci. Soc. Amer. Proc. 25:274-277.

Smith. Ora. 1937. Effect of Soil reaction on growth.
yield and market quality of potatoes. Cornell
Univ. Agric. Exp. Sta. Bull. 664. 21 p.

Steele, R. D. G. and J. H. Tory. 1960. Principles and Pro-

cedures of Statistics. McGraw—Hill Book Co. Inc.
New York. Pp. 109-110.

 

 

84

Stewart. I. and C. D. Leonard. 1963. Effects of various
salts on the availability of zinc and manganese to
citrus. Soil Sci. 95:149—154.

Struckmeyer. B. E. and K. C. Berger. 1950. Histological
structure of potato stems and leaves as influenced
by manganese toxicity. Plant Physiol. 25:114-119.

Sutton. C. D. and E. G. Hallsworth. 1958. Studies on the
nutrition of forage Legumes. I. The toxicity of
low pH and high manganese supply to luscerne. as
affected by climatic factors and calcium supply.
Plant and Soil IX: 305-317.

Vlamis. J. and D. E. Williams. 1962. Ion competition in
manganese uptake by barley plants. Plant Physiol.
37:650—655.

Vose. P. B. and P. Randall. 1962. Resistance to aluminum
and manganese toxicities in plants related to var—
iety and cation exchange capacity. Nature 196385-86.

Wain. R. L.. B. J. Silk and B. C. Wells. 1943. The fate of
manganese sulphate in alkaline soils. Jour. Agr.
Sci. 33:17—22.

Walker. J. M. and S. A. Barber. 1960. The availability of
chelated Mn to millet and its equilibria with other
forms of Mn in the soil. Soil Sci. Soc. Amer. Proc.
24:485—488.

Weir. C. C. and M. H. Miller. 1962. The manganese cycle
in soil. I. Isotopic—exchange reactions of Mn—54
in an alkaline soil. Can. Jour. of Soil Sci. 42:
104—114.

Williams. D. E. and J. Vlamis. 1957. Manganese toxicity in
standard culture solutions. Plant and Soil VIII:
183:193.

Williams. D. E. and J. Vlamis. 1957a. The effect of sili-
con on the yield and manganese—54 uptake and distri-
bution in the leaves of barley plants grown in cul-
ture solutions. Plant Physiol. 32:404-409.

 

APPENDIX

 

86

TABLE 1A.--Yields of Norland and Sebago potato tubers after
90 days growth as affected by ratio and source of
lime and additions of aluminum sulphate and man-
ganous sulphate to the fertilizer bands.

 

Treatments

 

Rate of Application

 

Variety

 

 

gatiizzl Norland Sebago
pp Mixed Additions to l
Fertilizer Bands
T/A lbs/A -dg dry weight--
Check None None 246 190
Al None 50 190 180
Mn " 30 228 168
Al + Mn " 50+30 192 152
Dolomite 2.75 None 226 156
" 5.5 " 206 144
" 11.0 " 198 164
Calcitic
hydrate 2.75 None 174 177
ll 5 .5 ll 86 91
" 11.0 " 62 91
hsd (0.05)
Treatments within a variety 65 65

 

1Equivalent of 1000 lbs/A of 5-20—20 banded

in all treatments.

   

 

87

 

 

 

.mucmEummHu Ham

ca smegma omuomum mo «\mnH oooH «0 unmam>nsvm

H

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

v.5 v.m m: m: mg m: m: m: mumflum> m casufiB mucmEummHB
Amo.ov can
v.ha n.m o>.¢ om.¢ wH.o -.o ¢H.o mH.o = o.aa =
H.ma m.mH mn.¢ Hm.¢ mH.o mm.o ma.o ¢~.o = m.m. =
a.m~ s.mm mm.o Ha.m o~.o m~.o ma.o om.o maoz ms.~ mummy»:
owufloamo
m.m~ o.mm 00.0H N¢.h mH.o h~.o ma.o NN.o : o.HH =
m.Hm H.om mm.m mo.n ¢H.o m~.o wH.o 0H.o = m.m =
m.mm m.mm mm.@ mm.@ mH.o m~.o hH.o mH.o mcoz mn.~ muflEoHon
o.nH 0.0m Hm.m Hm.n mH.o m~.o mH.o mm.o om+om = cz+Hm
m.¢H m.om mH.n mm.o ha.o m~.o mH.o ma.o on = a:
H.@H m.mH om.m mm.n ha.o h~.o ¢H.o mm.o om mcoz H4
m.¢a m.mm om.n om.> ha.o wm.o hH.o om.o msoz wooz Momnu
uuuuuuuu ucmHm\msuuuuuuu uuuuuunmfimz has xwuuuu «\mnH «\s
mmmp wasp mmmc mhmc mhmp mhmp mhmp mmmo Hpcmm
om mm om mo om mm ow mo umuaafluumm pwxwz Umaammm
0» mcoHuflpcm . m
ommnwm pcmauoz ommnmm UGMHHOZ HMfluwu S
COHDMUAHmmm mo mama
mxmumo cofiumuucmocoo
monogamonm monogamosm mucmsummua

 

 

.Ucmn Hwnaafluuwm on» ou mumnmasm msocmmsme can mumgmHSm EscHEsHm mo mcoflu
lawns can mafia mo onSOm can mmumn an noncommm mm umm>umg mo mmumo 03» um

mmcfl> cumuomzommnmm cam ccmHuoz >Q wxmums can CH mcofiumnucwocou monogamonmll.mm mamms

mchLmTTfl TEN QEmF WC GUM—JON muflw mwumh >3 Uwuomwmm mm um0>hi
um. mOCfls. OUMUOQ OWNQGM DEM UGMHHOZ \nnm QMMUQB USN C..... WGOHUMHUCOUCOU EDHUHNUII.<M NQQEH

 

 

 

.mucmEummHu Ham

an smegma omnomum «0 «\mnH OOOH mo unmam>flsvm

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

H
mm mm m: om ms.o m>.o ms.o 65.0 sumflum> m cfinufl3 mucmsummua
Amo.ov 6mg
mvm om HNH an mm.~ hm.H m¢.m no.m = o.HH :
mmN moa Hoa om hh.u mo.m mm.¢ om.m = m.m =
mam was mom ooa mo.m ¢H.~ mm.m ~m.m mcoz ms.~ mamas»:
oflufloamo
omm mm nma mm oo.~ om.o mm.~ mm.~ = o.HH =
mma HHH mmH NHH H>.H mo.H «m.m mm.~ : m.m =
Nvm moa mmH om mm.H >0.H mm.m Hm.m mcoz mn.m muHEoHon
mom no H¢H Hm o~.~ om.o mH.m NH.N om+om = cz+am
8 fima 00H mva mm ¢N.N o~.H ¢~.m mm.m on = :2.
8 omH om mmH om mh.a No.0 mm.m mm.~ om mGOZ HG
nma mm gma mm om.~ no.H mm.m mm.m msoz mcoz xuwno
uuuuuuuu ucmHm\msunuuun uuuuuurmflm3 mus xwuuun «\mna «\a
mhmp mxmp m>~© wasp mhmw mhmp mhmc mmmv Hpcmm
om mo om mo om mo om mm HmNHHHuHoh Umxflz Umaammm
0» macauappm mawwumz
ommnmm pcmHHoz ommnmm vcmanoz H .
coaumoaammd mo mama
mxwumb cowumuucmocou
Esaoamo Esfloamo mucmEummHB

 

 

 

 

 

 

.Ucmn umuflafiunmm on» on wumnmasm moocmmsme can mumnmasm Boswesam mo
mcowuwoum cam mafia mo mUHSOm can mmumu an Umuommmm mm pmm>nmn mo mmumo 03»
um mmcfl> oumuom ommnmm cam psmauoz an mxmums new as mcoaumuucmocoo Esfloamoll.¢m mqmda

 

.mucmsummnu HHm :H smegma omuomum «0 <\mnH OOOH mo uqum>Hsum

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

H
ms. mnH m: ms vN.H mm.H «N.H mN.H humHym> m anuH3 musmaummue
Amo.ov 6m:
mow vwm «cm ovH om.o wm.o om.o ¢N.w = o.HH =
000 veg onm HmH o¢.o mm.n mm.n wH.n = m.m =
moo Hmm mam nmm ¢M.m gm.m mm.m nm.m wcoz mn.m oumnpmn
UHDHUHMU
vmm OHm omm mom mm.¢ mm.m m¢.m 5H.w = o.HH =
Hum who won nwm ¢O.m om.o o¢.m om.m = m.m =
hmo Hmm ngm mom mo.m N¢.m mm.m mw.m osoz mn.m muHEOHon
moo va nmm mgm mm.m mm.o mm.m mH.> 0m+om = QE+Hm
9 mom moo mmm mmm mo.n om.n mm.h mH.n on = :2
8 Now now mom mom om.o mo.h mm.h ¢¢.> om wooz Hm
nmm firm mmm mmm mo.m mm.o mm.m mH.h wcoz wcoz Homso
uuuuuuu pamHm\msnuuuunu uuuuuuanms Sun xTnu:- <\mnH ¢\e
mmmp mhmp mhmp mmmv mmmu mhmp mmmp mhmo Hucmm
om mm om mm om mo om mm uoNHHHuHmm owaz
0» mcoHuHucfi
ommnmm wcmHHoz ommnwm ccmHHoz UwHHmmc
GOHDMUHHmmd «0 Guam HwHHwaS
wxmumD COHumuucwoGou
EsHmmmuom EsHmmmuom muamaummna

 

.Ucmn HwNHHHuuom wsu CH mumanSm msocmmcme cam mumanSm EsaHeon mo mcoHp
IHUUm cam oEHH mo won50m cam mmumu an vmuommmm mm pmw>nmfl mo mound o3u um
mocH> oumuom omwnmm can pcMHHoz an oxmums com CH mcoHumnucwoaou EsHmmmuomll.<¢ mqmda

 

 

9O

 

TABLE 5A.--Aluminum concentrations in Norland potato vines

after 90 days growth as affected by rates and
source of lime and additions of aluminum sulphate
and manganese sulphate to the fertilizer band.

 

 

 

 

 

Treatments
Rate of Application Aluminum
. Concentration
Material
Applied . Additions to
Mixed Fertilizer Band
T/A lbs/A ----- ppm --------
Check None None 406
Al None 50 453
Mn " 30 330
Al+Mn “ 50+30 558
Dolomite 2.75 None 215
u 5.5 " 312
II 11.0 " 232
Calcitic
hydrate 2.75 None 185
n 5.5 " 135
n 11.0 " 214
hsd (0.05)
Treatments 279
% Coefficient of Variation 23%

 

1Equivalent of 100 lbs/A of 5-20-20 banded in all treatments.

\ witnlulll Tld inr uwC WUMDOW “CM MUUGH \Tna UUUUQWWN mm. WWOUMUQAW mCflUCMHm
NGUUQ fixfl-an MOH MUOHH W0 Hmwnacou EON“ nUONrOF—mhn 9M0” Hfiom EH. NH9>WH UWQU HH0W||-¢VW Qumran“

 

.QOCU oumuom on HOHHQ mquEummuu HHm CH UmUCmQ omlomlm mo <\mQH OOH mo quHm>HCUmH

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I: in IIIII mmllul II II in humHHm> m CHSDHB quEummHB
II II IIIII mHIIII I: II II quEDmmuu m CHsuH3 MumHHm>
mC mC II II mC. II mC . aumHum>
om NBH II II mm II Hm.o mucwfiummHB
Amo.ov was
. mH moHN hm «NH @HH o.o Ho.w = o.HH :
: mH mmmH mm mmH NHH 0.0 mm.> = m.m :
ma omHH mm mm amH o.o om.o mcoz ms.~ moans»:
UHuHUHmo
mom own mm ms mmH o.o mm.o : o.HH =
Hmm «mm mm db omH o.o no.0 _ : m.m :
mnH HHS on mm HMH m.H m~.m mCoz mn.m muHEoHon
mm nmv om mOH NMH w.m mm.¢ om+om : CS+H¢
1. mm gmm mm mm hMH m.m no.m om : C2
9 mm Hug he nOH mmH m.m Ho.m om mCoz Hm
mm CNC mm mm QCH H.m no.m mCoz mCoz xownu
uuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu smmuuuunnununuuuuus «\e «\mnH «\e
HUGmm
muom muom HmNHHHunmm cmtz UmHHmm<
ommnmm UCmHHoz DCmE ou mCoHuHUU¢ HmHumumz
m2 mu m ImHHCUmm mm .
M mEHH CoHumoHHmmm mo mumm
mquEummHB

 

.UCMQ HwNHHHuHom wry ou mumzmHCm mCOCmmCmE @Cm mumanCm ECCHECHM
mo mCoHunpm pCm mEHH mo mouCOm oCm mmumn ma Umuowmmm mm mmoumuom mCHquHm
Hmumm mmmp MOH muom mo nmquo Eoum Um>OEmH wnoo HHom CH mHm>0H pmmu HHomII.¢o Manda

 

 

H®NHHHUH®W m0 056

 

mGOUMUOQ wfiu mflfiuw®>Hmz kuhm HHOm Gnu USOCmSOHSU USMQ

Hmwu mCflXHE HMUNM UQCHMUQO QGHQEMW CH mHfl>0H Ummu HHOWII

. EVE qufl‘rfi

.mouu oumuom on CoHum mqusumouu HHm CH vaCwQ omlomum mo .mnH OOOH mo quHm>HCvm

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

H
I: II luule IIIII In I: II humHHm> m CHCuH3 quEummna
is I: mH mH In I: II quEummHu m CHCDH3 humHnm>
mC mC II II mC II mC humHum>
mm me I: II mm In H~.o mquEumwua
Amo.ov Um:
mm vam HNH mmH NCH o.o om.> = o.HH =
On mmmm mHH an mMH o.o m¢.> = m.m =
mm mmmH mm mNH HmH ~.o Hm.o mcoz ms.m momma»:
oHuHono
«mm omm mm SNH oCH o.o mm.o = o.HH =
-. mgm «mm mm mHH omH «.0 mm.@ = m.m =
., mmm mmn gm mHH mmH m.H mo.m mCoz mn.m muHEoHon
m” ma mHm 60H «MH com H.a mo.a om+om . Cs+Hm
mm ocv mm mHH mmH m.¢ on.¢ em = C2
NC onm >0H mmH mmH ¢.¢ nm.¢ om wCoz Hm
«a mH¢_ Ha moH omH m.m Hm.a mcoz mcoz Human
uuuuuuuuuuuuuuu smmuuuuuunuuuuuuuuu «\s «\mCH «\s
HUGmm
.MM.M. MM.M.. .... ...MMMM.H.. ..... .......
m2 mo A U H m ImHHCUmm mm D .u.©©< HCHHmumz
M mEHH COHumoHHmm¢ mo mumm
mquEumeB

 

.mmoumuom may mCHumm>nm£ umumm HHom may usozmsounu UCmQ
umNHHHuumm mo wspHmmn mCHxHE Hmumm meHmuno mmHmEmm CH mHm>mH ummu HHomII.<n mange

 

 

 

'DABLE 8Au-—Soil pH measurements by direct contact at two
locations within a given soil at 3 different
times during the growth period of the oats as
affected by residues of treatments applied
prior to potato crop.

 

93

 

 

 

Treatments

 

Rate of application

q

Days after
Planting Oats

 

 

 

 

Material
APPl led Mixed Additions to 31 44 62
Fertilizer Band
T/A le/A ----Soil pH2-—--
Check None None 5.61 5.45 5.43
Al None 50 5.42 5.48 5.40
Mn " 30 5.71 5.81 5.57
Al+Mn " 50+30 5.41 5.43 5.36
Dolomite 2.75 None 6.65 6.47 6.45
" 5.5 " 6.68 6.73 6.87
" 11.0 " 6.98 6.96 6.78
Calcitic
hydrate 2.75 None 6.88 6.50 6.75
" 5.5 " 7.21 7.08 7.30
" 11.0 " 7.37 7.26 7.25
hsd (0.05)
_Treatments 0.40 0.44 0.54
Differences in pH between tube positions ns ns ns

 

1Equivalent of 1000 lbs/A of 5—20-20 handed in all treatments

prior to potato crop.

ing oats.

Soils thoroughly mixed prior to plant-

2Each value is the average of l observation in each of two

tubes in each pot of two replications,

 

 

 

94

.mumo mCHuCMHm on CoHum hHSmCouonu waHE wHHom
10m mCHuCMHm ou HoHHm mquEumwuu HHm CH meCmQ omlomlm mo <\mQH OOOH mo quHm>HCvm

.mouo oumu

 

DC

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

H
mmH mm om.o SH.o mum omH mo.H mm.H humHum> m CHCDH3 mquEumouB
Amo.ov Um:
mmm mmH mm.H vm.H mCCH vmm NH.¢ om.m : o.HH =
mHo me om.H mm.H vovH NOm nm.m om.m : m.m :
aom mHH mm.H mm.H HOOH omv mm.~ ma.m maoz ms.m mumunsn
UHuHUHmo
mmm mm Hm.o mh.o 0mm CHC mm.~ Ho.m = o.HH =
mom mm ww.o mm.o mom mmg mm.m Ho.¢ = m.m =
mmm hm om.o m>.o mum mmw mm.~ om.m mCoz mn.m muHEoHoa
omm mCH mo.H mH.H mmm mom >¢.N mm.v om+om z Cz+H¢
mmw omH Hm.H o~.H hmm hmm mm.m om.¢ om = C2
Hmw NmH CH.H ~H.H mom mm¢ mm.m mo.¢ om mCoz H<
mmv omH mm.H NN.H th mHm mm.m ¢0.v mCoz wCoz Momnu
Iluom\mE|n IIIIEmmnll Illuom\mfill Illnemmlll <\mQH «\B
mxmp wasp mhmc wasp mmmp wasp mmmp m>~© HUCmm
on QC on QC on QC 08 CC HmNHHHuuwm waHz UmHHmmm
0» mCoHqup< .
HmHHmumz
mxmumo CoHumuu mxmumb CoHumnu
ICmoCoo ICwoCoo COHumoHHmmm mo mumm
ECHUHMU ECHmmmuom .mquEummHB

 

 

.mouo oumuom

on HoHum UmHHmmm mquEummuu mo mchHmwu mg pmuommmm mm umm>nm£ mo mound
CHCMMHU 03D um mumo >9 mxmums UCm CH mCOHumuquoCoo ECHUHmo ow ECHmmmuomll.mm MHmCB

 

.‘l—LCl—a HUUMC 8 EU hdfiv GUNC gHtfltflhfln. \‘fiul I. u 1 .

 

 

€95

 

.mouu oumuom mCHuCMHQ Ou uoHum duCoaumouu HHo CH

.uumo GCHUCMHQ cu uoHum poxHE >Hnmoouozu mHHom

vflflcmn ONIONIm wo (\nDH oooH no uchm>Hsva

 

 

 

 

unnunomnnun nu unuanInun a: un nunuo~.0uul auoHum> a CHCuHI ucoauuuua
nunIINHuuuu II unnIeNIIII a: nu nnIIMH.0Iun ucoaumouu a CHnuH3 HuOHHa>
nu nn a: un un a: un nu . un SuuHum>
II In HNH In nu a: In nu nu nucuaumoua
.m0.0. was
v e mmvN 00 we 5MH 0.0 00.5 0H.o : o.HH a
0 v 5m5H mm «0 0mH 0.0 00.5 05.5 s 0.0 n
ma HH HmHH o5 Ho oeH N.o mm.o 65.6 ocoz m5.~ manna» .
uHuHuHao
~m~ omw OHm 66 em ovH o.o no.5 o~.5 . o.HH .
mmm mmm mvm H5 0m NmH 0.0 00.0 m0.0 : m.m n
com va Vm5 05 mm 05H H.H ~m.0 mv.0 ocoz m5.~ muHeoHoa
mH 0 00¢ 05 em 0mH 0.¢ 00.¢ 05.v om+0m n Cz+H<
NH HH 00m 05 Nm CmH 0.m 00.v ~0.v on n c:
HH 5 05m «0 em 05H m.m m0.v 00.v 0m mcoz Hm
CH 0 mmv m5 0m 00H m.m 00.v ~0.¢ mcoz 0Coz Humau
<\mnH (\h
Havana”
moon muom muom muom muom muom uwNHHHuuwm vmth
ommnom ocmHuoz ommnwm ccmHuoz acme ommnmm pCMHuoz Du mCOHDvac pmHHdd<
mu m IoHHSUOm HMHCwumE
m: x wEHH mm CoHumoHHQQC Ho wuflm

 

 

 

 

mucwaummuh

.mouu uuo ou uoHum voHHmmm muCQEumuuu mo mvaHwou >3 uuuuowww
Au00umuom mCHuCuHm Houua u>mv 5Hm0 auuo mCHuno>umz Hound CHC>0H umuu HHomnntoH MACCB

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

"uuuuuuuuuuuuuuu