Recovery of phosphorus fertilizer in potato as affected by application strategy and soil type

Abstract

Phosphorus (P) fertilizers are usually supplied prior to or at planting of potato even though most P is taken up 40 to 80 d after emergence. This may lead to inefficient P use as a result of P leaching or fixation in the soil. This study evaluates the effects of split P application at multiple times during the growth period according to the plant's need for P. Potato (Solanum tuberosum L. cv. Ditta) was grown in pots in climate chambers, and radioactive 32P isotope was used to distinguish between the fertilizer and soil‐derived P sources. Two soils were tested in combination with five application rates of P, and the plants were harvested at four dates. The results show that the recovery of P fertilizer can be significantly enhanced if the P supply is split. The result also showed that the proportion of soil‐derived P, accumulated in the plant, was significantly reduced both when more fertilizer P was applied to the soil and when P supply was split into several applications. The positive effects of multiple P applications on the P recovery were greatest in the soil with low P status and low buffer capacity.

Response of potato crop to selected nutrients in central and eastern highlands of Kenya

“…This has been attributed to the volcanic ash parent material as well as continued use of acidifying fertilizers such as ammoniabased fertilizers (FAO, 2001;Pansu & Gautheyrou, 2003;Recke et al, 1997;Spaargaren, 2008). Phosphorous is largely affected by the soil pH in which it is bound by the Al and Fe ions in low pH (Ekelöf et al, 2014;Ndou, 2017). As a result, P was found to be a limiting nutrient to potato growth and yields as indicated by the percentage yield reduction from NPKSB treatment.…”

Mineralization of soluble P fertilizers and insoluble rock phosphate in response to phosphate-solubilizing bacteria and poultry manure and their effect on the growth and P utilization efficiency of chilli (<i>Capsicum annuum</i> L.)

“…It has been suggested that the production of P fertilizer from RP is estimated to peak within the next 30 years because of the rising costs of synthetic fertilizers presently available on the market (Cordell et al, 2009;Beardsley, 2011;Ekelöf et al, 2014). The application of RPs directly to the soils has yielded some positive results in acidic soils, but the efficacy of such material is almost negligible in neutral and alkaline soils (Begum et al, 2004).…”

Clustering of the chemical properties of small‐scale farm soils to develop fertilizer blend ratios

“…(2020) (Equation ) as follows: $$$$\begin{equation}{N}_i = \frac{{\left( {{\mathrm{NR\ }} \times {\mathrm{\ Yt}}} \right)}}{{{\mathrm{RE}}}}\ - \ \frac{{\left( {{S}_i\ \times \ {E}_i} \right)}}{{{\mathrm{RE}}}},\end{equation}$$$$where N i is the potato nutrient requirement for N, P, or K, NR is the N, P or K requirement for a t ha −1 of potato (Westermann, 2005), Yt is the targeted potato yield (40 t ha −1 ), S i is the soil nutrients calculated from mean chemical analysis within the clusters from survey data using Equation (). E i is the efficiency of soil nutrients, which is estimated from the ratio of nutrient uptake (kg ha −1 ) to soil test value for available nutrient, derived from the nutrient omission plots (Mugo et al., 2021) and RE is the recovery of nutrients from applied fertilizer soil nutrient, estimated from literature (Ekelöf et al., 2014; Ierna & Mauromicale, 2019; Sharma & Sud, 2001). $$$$\begin{equation}{\mathrm{Soil\ nutrient\ }}({\mathrm{kg\ ha}}^{ - 1})\ = \frac{{{\mathrm{Soil\ test\ }}\left( {{\mathrm{mg\ kg}}^{ - 1}} \right)\ \times {\mathrm{\ bulk\ density\ }}({\mathrm{g}}/{\mathrm{cm}}^3)\ \times {\mathrm{\ sample\ depth\ }}\left( {{\mathrm{cm}}} \right)}}{{10}}.\ \end{equation}$$$$…”