EFFECT OF SOIL PROPERTIES ON AVAILABILITY OF NITROGEN AND PHOSPHORUS IN SUBMERGED AND UPLAND SOIL - A REVIEW

Article Id: ARCC2091 | Page : 71 - 77
Citation :- EFFECT OF SOIL PROPERTIES ON AVAILABILITY OF NITROGEN AND PHOSPHORUS IN SUBMERGED AND UPLAND SOIL - A REVIEW.Agricultural Reviews.2009.(30):71 - 77
S. Sathya, G. James Pitchai and R. Indirani
Address : Department of Soil and Environment Agriculture College & Research Institute, Madurai 625 104, India

Abstract

Soil properties are playing a dominant role in nutrient transformation. In upland well aerated
soil transformation of nutrients varies from those in submerged condition. The rate of nitrification
is more in well aerated soils. Nitrate losses are common in submerged soils because of its higher
mobility. Mineralization of nitrogen increases with increase in temperature from 15-35oC. Soil
compaction increases the nitrogen use efficiency (NUE) and apparent nitrogen recovery (ANR).
Increasing nutrient content due to increase in bulk density owing to compaction makes more
nutrients available per unit volume of soil. Regarding P, fixation is a major problem which
affects its availability. The fixation of P in soil may be influenced by clay and exchangeable,
extractable, amorphous and crystalline forms of Al and Fe.Upland soils are normally well aerated
soil with water table of more than 3 M deep. Oxidation of nutrients is a major process in upland
soils, while reduction so in submerged soils, thus oxidation and reduction potential may be
affecting the availability of nutrients in most soil

Keywords

References

  1. Antil, R. S. et al. (2002a). J. Indian Soc. Soil Sci., 50(2): 209-212.
  2. Antil, R. S. et al. (2002b). J. Indian Soc. Soil Sci., 50(1): 122-124.
  3. Arun Prasad, D. et al. (1997). J. Indian Soc. Soil Sci., 45(3): 537-541.
  4. Bajpai, R. K. et al. (2006). J. Indian Soc. Soil Sci., 54(1): 24-29.
  5. Balasubramaniam, P. et al. (2002). Madras Agric. J., 89(1-3): 131-133.
  6. Vol. 30, No. 1, 2009 77
  7. Bharat Singh et al., (2000). J . Indian Soc. Soil Sci., 48: 371-372.
  8. Bhatia, Arts et al (2003) J. Indian Soc. Soil Sci., 51: 194-197.
  9. Bheemaiah, K. and Ananthanarayana, R. (1984). J . Indian Soc. Soil Sci., 32: 766-767.
  10. Bopari, K. K. and Sharma. K. N. (2006). J. Indian Soc. Soil Sci., 54(1): 111-114.
  11. Carrasco, R. M. et al.(1992). Agri. Technica (Santiago), 52: 411-415.
  12. Chatterjee, A. et al.(2005). J. Indian Soc. Soil Sci., 53(1):128-132.
  13. Das, P. K. et al. (1993). J. Indian Soc. Soil Sci., 41(1): 51-55.
  14. Devarajan, L. and Raj. D. (1994). Madras Agric. J., 81(11): 633-634.
  15. Dhillon, N. S. et al. (2004). J. Indian Soc. Soil. Sci., 52(1): 17-22.
  16. Didar Singh, et al. (1997). J. Indian Soc. Soil Sci., 45(3): 449-455.
  17. Dongale, J. K. 1993. J. Indian Soc. Soil., 41(1): 62-66.
  18. Gerke, J. 1992. Comm Soil Sci. and Plant Analysis, 23: 601-612.
  19. Giovannini, G. et al. (1990). Soil Sci., 149: 344.
  20. Gupta , R. K. et al. (2003). J. Indian Soc. Soil Sci., 51(2): 203-205
  21. Gupta, S. K. et al. (1999). J. Indian Soc. Soil Sci., 47(3): 546-548.
  22. Kaistha, A. P. et al. (1997). J. Indian Soc. Soil Sci., 45(2): 261-264.
  23. Kamat, V. N. et al. (1982). J. Indian Soc. Soil Sci.,38: 381.
  24. Kuldip Singh et al. (1996). J. Indian Soc. Soil Sci., 44(3): 378 – 381.
  25. Laximinarayana, K. and Rajagopal. V. (2004). J. Indian Soc. Soil Sci., 52(1): 74 – 79.
  26. Majumdar, B. et al. (2007). Indian J. Agric. Sci., 77(6): 335-339.
  27. Mandal et al. (1975. Technical Bulletin. Indian Counsil of Agric. Res., 51.
  28. Marcos, E. et al. (1994). Sutdia Oecologica, 10: 11.
  29. Panda, N. and Koshy, M.M. (1982). Revised Soil Res. India, 1,60.
  30. Pandey, S. P. et al. (2000). J. Indian Soc. Soil. Sci., 48: 118-121.
  31. Prakash, N. N. et al. (1993). J. Indian Soc. Soil Sci., 37: 205-210.
  32. Purakayastha, T.J. and Chhonkar P.K. (2006). J. Indian Soc. Soil Sci.,54 (1): 80-85.
  33. Ravinder Singh et al. (1996). J. Indian Soc. Soil. Sci., 44(3): 381-386.
  34. Reichman, G. A. et al. (1966). Soil Sci. Soc. Ame.Proc., 35: 603.
  35. Santhy, P. et al. (2001). Madras Agric. J., 88(1-3): 26-31.
  36. Sanyal, S. K. and De Dutta. (1991). Adv. Soil Sci., 16:1.
  37. Sharma, P. K. and Mishra, B. (2001). J. Indian Soc. Soil. Sci., 49(3): 425-429.
  38. Sharma, R. P. and Verma, T. S. (2001). J. Indian Soc. Soil. Sci., 49(3): 407-412.
  39. Shibu, M. E. and Ghuman, B. S. (2001). J. Indian Soc. Soil Sci., 49: 666 -670.
  40. Sihag, D. et al. (2005).J. Indian Soc. Soil Sci., 53(1): 80-84.
  41. Singh, B.P et al. (1996). J. Indian Soc. Soil. Sci., 44(3): 437-440.
  42. Soni, R. and Singh J. P. (1994). J. Indian Soc. Soil Sci., 42(3): 369-372.
  43. Stevenson, F. J. (1982). Humus Chemistry, Genesis, Composition and Reaction. John Willey and Sons, New York, pp, 128.
  44. Subba Rao, A. D. et al. (1998). J. Indian Soc. Soil Sci., 46: 249-253.
  45. Sukhbir Singh and Tomar, N. K. (1996). J. Indian Soc. Soil. Sci., 44(3): 386-391.
  46. Sundararajan, M. and Kothandaraman, G. V. (1978). Madras Agric. J., 65: 513.
  47. Talashilkar, S. C. et al. (2006). J. Indian Soc. Soil Sci., 54(2): 174-178.
  48. Tek Chand and Tomar. N. K. (2007). J. Indian Soc. Soil Sci., 55(1): 30-35.
  49. Tisdale, S. L. et al. (1997). Soil Fertility and Fertilizers, 5th edition, Macmillan publishing Co., New Delhi. Pp. 144, 180, 198, 2001.
  50. Tomar, K. P. (1997). J. Indian Soc. Soil. Sci., 45: 256-261.
  51. Upadhyay, G. P. et al. (1993). J. Indian Soc. Soil Sci., 41: 434-439.
  52. Varinderpal Singh et al. (2006), J . Indian Soc. Soil Sci., 54 (2): 185-192.
  53. Yadav, B. H. and Vyas. K. K. (2006). J. Indian Soc. Soil Sci., 54(2): 158-162.
  54. Yadvinder Singh, J. P. S. et al. (2001). J. Indian Soc. Soil Sci., 49(2): 342-344.

Global Footprints