SSSAJ Journal of Natural Resources and Life Sciences Education
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


Published in Soil Sci Soc Am J 50:230-233 (1986)
© 1986 Soil Science Society of America
677 S. Segoe Rd., Madison, WI 53711 USA
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Hart, S. C.
Right arrow Articles by Campbell, R. G.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Hart, S. C.
Right arrow Articles by Campbell, R. G.
Agricola
Right arrow Articles by Hart, S. C.
Right arrow Articles by Campbell, R. G.

Predicting Loblolly Pine Current Growth and Growth Response to Fertilization1

S. C. Hart, Dan Binkley and R. G. Campbell2

ABSTRACT

Various indices of N and P availability were tested for correlation with current stem volume growth and growth response to N + P fertilization of loblolly pine (Pinus taeda L.) plantations in the Coastal Plain of North Carolina. Although no single index or combination of indices significantly correlated with stem volume growth in unfertilized plots, several soil variables correlated well with growth in the fertilized plots (r = 0.79 for extractable soil Al, and r = 0.73 for NH+4-N extracted by a boiling salt solution). Of the soil variables, only extractable soil Al correlated significantly with growth response to N + P fertilization. Volume growth in the unfertilized plots was the best predictor of growth response to fertilization (r = –0.82). Combining one of the P availability indices (double-acid extractable or ion exchange resin PO4-P) with growth in the unfertilized plots significantly increased the model's correlation with growth response (R = 0.88 and 0.93, respectively).


NOTES

1 Contribution from the School of Forestry and Environmental Studies, Duke Univ., Durham, NC 27706.

2 Former Graduate Student and Assistant Professor, School of Forestry and Environmental Studies, Duke Univ., Durham, NC, 27706, and Forest Soils Specialist, Weyerhaeuser Co., New Bern, NC, respectively. Current address of senior author is Dep. of Plant and Soil Biology, Univ. of California, Berkeley, CA 94720.

Received for publication July 9, 1985. Accepted for publication July 23, 1985.







HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
The SCI Journals Agronomy Journal Crop Science
Journal of Natural Resources
and Life Sciences Education
Vadose Zone Journal
Journal of Plant Registrations Journal of
Environmental Quality
The Plant Genome
Copyright © 1986 by the Soil Science Society of America.