Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jkksz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T10:54:23.685Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Liquid manure as a grassland fertilizer. III. The effect of liquid manure on the yield and botanical composition of pasture, and its interaction with nitrogen, phosphate and potash fertilizers

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

A. D. Drysdale
A. D. Drysdale
Affiliation:
The Hannah Dairy Research Institute, Ayr
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

1. In an experiment conducted for the 3 years 1961-63 on a perennial rye-grass and white clover sward a split-plot design was used to investigate the effects of liquid manure (cow urine + water) and its interactions with various levels of nitrogen, phosphate and potash fertilizers on the yield of herbage and on the botanical composition of the sward.

2. On the average the liquid manure contained 0.26% N, 0.44% K and had a pH of 8.6.

3. The liquid manure treatments supplied 0, 50, 100, 200 and 400 lb. N/acre/year and 0, 87, 174, 349 and 697lb. K/acre/year. The fertilizer nitrogen treatments were 0, 100 and 200lb. N/acre; the potash treatments 0 and 166 lb. P/acre and the phosphate treatments 0 and 66lb. P/acre.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 65 , Issue 3 , December 1965 , pp. 333 - 340
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1965

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Blackman, G. E. & Templeman, W. G. (1938). Ann. Bot. Lond. (N.S.), 2, 765.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Castle, M. E. & Drysdale, A. D. (1962). J. Agric. Sci. 58, 165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dilz, K. & Mulder, E. G. (1962). Neth. J. Agric. Sci. 10, 1.Google Scholar
Doak, B. W. (1954). J. Agric. Sci. 44, 133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Donald, C. M. & Williams, C. H. (1954). Aust. J. Agric. Res. 5, 664.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Drysdale, A. D. (1963). J. Agric. Sci. 61, 353.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Drysdale, A. D. (1964). Ph.D. Thesis, University of Glasgow.Google Scholar
During, C. & McNaught, K. J. (1961). N.Z. J. Agric. Res. 4, 591.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dusserre, C. (1933). Landw. Jb. Schweiz. 47, 578.Google Scholar
Federer, W. T. (1955). Experimental Design. Theory and Application. New York: MacMillan Co.Google Scholar
Gisiger, L. (1950). J. Brit. Grassl. Soc. 5, 63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hendbick, J. (1915). Bull. N. Scot. Coll. Agric. no. 19.Google Scholar
McNeur, A. J. (1953). N.Z. J. Sci. Tech. 35, (A), 311.Google Scholar
Reid, D. (1961). J. Agric. Sci. 57, 231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reid, D. & Castle, M. E. (1965). J. Agric. Sci. 64, 185CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rheinwald, H. (1934). Landw. Jb. 80, 161.Google Scholar
Rossiter, R. C. (1964). Aust. J. Agric. Res. 15, 61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sprague, V. G. (1952). Proc. 6th Int. Grassl. Congr. Pennsylvania, 1, 443.Google Scholar
Thompson, F. B. & Coup, M. R. (1943). N.Z. J. Sci. Tech. 25 (A), 118.Google Scholar
VOigtländer, G. (1952). Z. Acker- u. PflBau. 94, 190.Google Scholar
Voisin, A. (1960). Better Grassland Sward. London: Crosby Lockwood and Son Ltd.Google Scholar
Volk, G. M. (1961). J. Agric. Fd Chem. 9, 280.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walker, T. W. (1956). Proc. 7th Int. Grassl. Congr. New Zealand, 157.Google Scholar
Wheeler, J. L. (1958). J. Brit. Grassl. Soc. 13, 196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wheeler, J. L. (1959). J. Brit. Grassl. Soc. 14, 55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilson, D. B. (1962). Canad. J. Plant Sci. 42, 270.CrossRefGoogle Scholar