No abstract

Fly ash samples from five power stations in Western Australia and Queensland, and two soils used for horticulture in Western Australia, were evaluated for a series of physical and chemical properties. Soils were comprised primarily of coarse sand-sized particles, whereas most of the fly ashes were primarily fine sand- and silt-sized particles. Hydraulic conductivities in the fly ashes were 105- to 248-fold slower than in the soils. The water-holding capacities of fly ashes at "field capacity" were three times higher than those of the soils. Extractable P in the fly ashes (except Tarong and Callide) were 20- to 88-fold higher than in the soils. The pH showed considerable variation among the different sources of fly ash, with samples from Muja being the most acidic (pH = 3.8; 1:5 in CaCl2 extract) and from Gladstone the most alkaline (pH = 9.9). The toxicity characteristic leaching procedure (TCLP) values indicate that the potential for release of trace elements from the fly ashes was well below regulatory levels. When applied at sufficient rates (e.g., to achieve 10% w/w in surface layers) to sandy soils, fly ash altered texture and increased water-holding capacity. Depending on the source of fly ash used, such amendments could also provide P and aid nutrient retention by increasing the phosphorus retention index (PRI) and/or cation exchange capacity (CEC). The considerable variability in physical and chemical properties among the fly ash samples evaluated in the present study supports the notion that field trials are essential to the future development of soil amendment strategies making use of any particular source of fly ash.

Soil acidity or aluminum (Al) toxicity is a major limitation to crop production. In this paper, we examine the effects of surface-applied lime and gypsum on soil profile chemical properties that affect Al toxicity in short-term (1 year), medium-term (2 years and 8 months) and long-term (10 years) experiments. Sulfate applied to the soil surface as gypsum was leached rapidly to a depth of 40 cm in the short-term despite relatively low amounts (279 mm) of rainfall. In the medium and long-term experiments, 28–54% of the sulfate applied as gypsum was retained in the 0–50 cm soil layer due to adsorption and precipitation reactions. The combined application of lime and gypsum increased soil calcium, to a depth of 30 cm in the short-term and to a depth of 50 cm in the medium and long-terms. Increases in soil sulfate and calcium were associated with greater electrical conductivity to a depth of 50 cm for all sampling times. Application of lime alone had no impact on soil Al, pH, and calcium in the soil layers below 10 cm in the short and medium terms. In the long-term, increasing the rate of lime application from 2 to 8 t L ha−1 increased soil pH in the 10–20 cm soil layer while soil Al decreased to a depth of 30 cm. The combined use of lime and gypsum decreased soil Al in the 30–50 cm soil layer in the medium-term and the 20–30 cm soil layer in the long-term which was more than when only lime was applied. Hence, we recommend the use of lime plus gypsum for treating soils with subsoil Al toxicity. Additionally, soil Al measurements are a more sensitive measurement of the impact of surface application lime and lime plus gypsum than soil pH.

No abstract

Surface (0–10 cm) and subsoil (soil layers below 10 cm) acidity and resulting aluminum (Al) toxicity reduce crop grain yields. In South Western Australia (SWA), these constraints affect 14.2 million hectares or 53% of the agricultural area. Both lime (L, CaCO3) and gypsum (G, CaSO4) application can decrease the toxic effect of Al, leading to an increase in crop grain yields. Within the region, it is unclear if G alone or the combined use of L and G has a role in alleviating soil acidity in SWA, due to low sulfate S (SO4–S) sorption properties of the soil. We present results from three experiments located in the eastern wheatbelt of SWA, which examined the short-term (ST, 2 growing seasons), medium-term (MT, 3 growing seasons), and long-term (LT, 7 growing seasons over 10 years) effects of L and G on grain yield and plant nutrient concentrations. Despite the rapid leaching of SO4–S and no self-liming impact, it was profitable to apply G, due to the significant ST grain yield responses. The grain yield response to G developed even following relatively dry years, but declined over time due to SO4–S leaching. At the LT experimental site had received no previous L application, whereas, at the ST and MT sites, L had been applied by the grower over the previous 5–10 years. For the LT site, the most profitable treatment for wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) grain yield, was the combined application of 4 t L ha−1 with 2 t G ha−1. At this site, the 0–10 cm soil pHCaCl2 was 4.6, and AlCaCl2 was greater than 2.5 mg kg−1 in the 10–30 cm soil layer. In contrast, at the ST and MT sites, the pHCaCl2 of 0–10 cm soil layer was ≥5.5; it was only profitable to apply G to the MT site where the soil compaction constraint had been removed by deep ripping. The use of L increases soil pHCaCl2, resulting in the improved availability of anions, phosphorus (P) in the LT and molybdenum (Mo) at all sampling times, but reduced availability of cations zinc (Zn) in the LT and manganese (Mn) at all sampling. The application of G reduced Mo concentrations, due to the high SO4–S content of the soil.