Search

Aluminum (Al) toxicity imposes a significant limitation to crop production in South Western Australia. This paper examines the impact of surface-applied lime and gypsum on soil solution chemistry in the short term (1 year) and the long-term (10 years) in water limited environments. In the experiments, we measured soil solution chemistry using a paste extract on soil profile samples collected to a depth of 50 cm. We then used the chemical equilibrium model MINTEQ to predict the presence and relative concentrations of Al species that are toxic to root growth (Al associated with Al3+ and AlOH2 or Toxic-Al) and less non-toxic forms of Al bound with sulfate, other hydroxide species and organic matter. A feature of the soils used in the experiment is that they have a low capacity to adsorb sulfate. In the short term, despite the low amount of rainfall (279 mm), sulfate derived from the surface gypsum application is rapidly leached into the soil profile. There was no self-liming effect, as evidenced by there being no change in soil solution pH. The application of gypsum, in the short term, increased soil solution ionic strength by 524–681% in the 0–10 cm soil layer declining to 75–109% in the 30–40 cm soil layer due to an increase in soil solution sulfate and calcium concentrations. Calcium from the gypsum application displaces Al from the exchange sites to increase soil solution Al activity in the gypsum treatments by 155–233% in the short term and by 70–196% in the long term to a depth of 40 cm. However, there was no effect on Toxic-Al due to Al sulfate precipitation. In the long term, sulfate leaching from the soil profile results in a decline in soil solution ionic strength. Application of lime results in leaching of alkalinity into the soil profile leading to a decreased Toxic-Al to a depth of 30 cm in the long term, but it did not affect Toxic-Al in the short term. Combining an application of lime with gypsum had the same impact on soil solution properties as gypsum alone in the short term and as lime alone in the long term. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]