4.6 Article

Assessment of Potential Nutrient Release from Phosphate Rock and Dolostone for Application in Acid Soils

期刊

PEDOSPHERE
卷 28, 期 1, 页码 44-58

出版社

SCIENCE PRESS
DOI: 10.1016/S1002-0160(17)60437-5

关键词

citric acid; dissolution rate; leaching solution; particle-size fraction; release kinetics; slow-release fertilizer

资金

  1. Applied Research and Multi-sectorial Program (FIAM) - Italian Cooperation and Development Agency (ICDA) [5.2.1]
  2. Polytechnic University of Marche, Italy

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Finding alternative local sources of plant nutrients is a practical, low-cost, and long-term strategy. In this study, laboratory column experiments were conducted in a completely randomized design to evaluate the feasibility of using phosphate rock and dolostone as fertilizers or acid-neutralizing agents for application in tropical acid soils. The dissolution rates of different particle-size fractions (0.063-0.25, 0.25-0.5, and 0.5-2 mm) of both rocks were studied by citric acid solution at pH 4 and 2 and water, with extraction times of 1, 3, 5, 7, 12, 24, 72, 144, 240, and 360 h. The results showed that the dissolution of both rocks depended on the particle size, leaching solution, and extraction time. The dissolution rate of rock-forming minerals increased as the specific surface area increased, corresponding to a decrease in particle size. In all cases, the release kinetics was characterized by two phases: 1) a first stage of rapid release that lasted 24 h and would ensure short-term nutrient release, and 2) a second stage of slow release after 24 h, representing the long-term nutrient release efficiency. Both rocks were suitable as slow-release fertilizers in strongly acid soils and would ensure the replenishment of P, Ca, and Mg. A combination of fine and medium particle-size fractions should be used to ensure high nutrient-release efficiency. Much work could remain to determine the overall impact of considerable amounts of fresh rocks in soils.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据