HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Abstract Full Text Free Full Text (PDF) Free Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in ISI Web of Science Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (10) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Sullivan, D. M. Articles by Cogger, C. G. Search for Related Content PubMed Articles by Sullivan, D. M. Articles by Cogger, C. G. Agricola Articles by Sullivan, D. M. Articles by Cogger, C. G. Related Collections Turfgrass

Food Waste Compost Effects on Fertilizer Nitrogen Efficiency, Available Nitrogen, and Tall Fescue Yield

^a Dep. of Crop and Soil Science, Oregon State Univ., Corvallis, OR 97331
^b Dep. of Statistics, Oregon State Univ., Corvallis, OR 97331
^c Dep. of Crop and Soil Sciences, Washington State Univ., Puyallup, WA 98371

View larger version (21K): [in a new window]   Fig. 1. Grass yield (a) and N uptake (b) for 1993 mid-season growth period (13 July–17 September). All compost treatments plotted with a common regression model because compost treatments were not significant at P = 0.05 (Tables 4 and 5). Yield and N uptake (left axis) are for same time period as yield accumulation rate and N uptake rate (right axis).

View larger version (25K): [in a new window]   Fig. 2. Grass yield (a) and N uptake (b) for the 1994 midseason growth period (5 April–23 Aug. 1994). Unique regression model for each compost treatment because compost treatments were significantly different at P = 0.05 (Tables 4 and 5). Yield and N uptake (left axis) are for same time period as yield accumulation rate and N uptake rate (right axis).

View larger version (25K): [in a new window]   Fig. 3. Grass yield (a) and N uptake (b) for the 1995 midseason growth period (13 April–29 Aug. 1995). Unique regression model for each compost treatment because compost treatments were significantly different at P = 0.05 (Tables 4 and 5). Yield and N uptake (left axis) are for same time period as yield accumulation rate and N uptake rate (right axis).