2023
DOI: 10.1016/j.catena.2022.106908
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Evaluating fall application of soil amendments to mitigate phosphorus losses during spring snowmelt

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

0
9
2

Year Published

2024
2024
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5

Relationship

2
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 5 publications
(11 citation statements)
references
References 53 publications
0
9
2
Order By: Relevance
“…A recent field study conducted under Canadian prairie field conditions reported a decrease in dissolved reactive phosphorus (DRP) loads in snowmelt runoff with fall application of alum, gypsum, or Epsom salt to field plots. The decrease in snowmelt DRP load in this study was <20% and not statistically significant in an unmanured site, but >42% in a manured site with differences being significant only with Epsom salt amendment (Lasisi, Kumaragamage, et al., 2023). More information on P forms and speciation changes is needed to better understand the mechanisms responsible for the reduction in P loss to snowmelt with fall‐amended soils.…”
Section: Introductioncontrasting
confidence: 59%
See 4 more Smart Citations
“…A recent field study conducted under Canadian prairie field conditions reported a decrease in dissolved reactive phosphorus (DRP) loads in snowmelt runoff with fall application of alum, gypsum, or Epsom salt to field plots. The decrease in snowmelt DRP load in this study was <20% and not statistically significant in an unmanured site, but >42% in a manured site with differences being significant only with Epsom salt amendment (Lasisi, Kumaragamage, et al., 2023). More information on P forms and speciation changes is needed to better understand the mechanisms responsible for the reduction in P loss to snowmelt with fall‐amended soils.…”
Section: Introductioncontrasting
confidence: 59%
“…In brief, the mean snowmelt DRP concentrations across sampling days were 0.73 ± 0.31, 0.61 ± 0.17, 0.57 ± 0.22, and 0.51 ± 0.24 mg L −1 in unamended, alum‐amended, gypsum‐amended, and Epsom salt‐amended plots, respectively. The snowmelt DRP concentrations and loads (calculated as the product of DRP concentration and snowmelt volume) in alum‐, gypsum‐, and Epsom salt‐amended soils were less than in unamended soils; however, the differences were significant only for DRP load in the Epsom‐salt amended plot (Lasisi, Kumaragamage, et al., 2023), with a 62% lower cumulative DRP load than that of control treatment. The cumulative snowmelt DRP load from alum and gypsum‐amended treatments was 51% and 48% lower, respectively, than the control treatment, even though not statistically significant.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 98%
See 3 more Smart Citations