Hostname: page-component-5c6d5d7d68-wbk2r Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-08-06T18:36:04.287Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The response of grass for silage to sulphur application at 20 sites in Northern Ireland

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

R. J. Stevens  and
Catherine J. Watson
R. J. Stevens
Affiliation:
Agricultural and Food Chemistry Research Division, Department of Agriculture for Northern Ireland and The Queen's University of Belfast, Newforge Lane, Belfast, BT9 5PX
Catherine J. Watson
Affiliation:
Agricultural and Food Chemistry Research Division, Department of Agriculture for Northern Ireland and The Queen's University of Belfast, Newforge Lane, Belfast, BT9 5PX
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Twenty field site3 were selected for their potential sulphur-deficient status. The effect of sulphur at 10 kg S/ha per cut as gypsum or kieserite on the yield and composition of grass for silage given intensive fertilizer was measured at two or three cuts in 1985. Other incidental sulphur inputs in P and K fertilizers and organic manures were minimized. There were significant increases (P < 0·05) in dry-matter yield at ten harvests on five sites. At seven of the ten harvests gypsum and kieserite were equally effective, but at three harvests only kieserite gave significant yield increases. The drymatter yield increases occurred at all three cuts.

Using soil analyses to predict sulphur-deficient sites had limited success. The conclusions from this study were that soils with extractable sulphate values < 10 mg S/l had adequate reserves for three-cut silage while soils with values > 10 mg S/l had a 1 in 3 chance of being sulphur deficient. Using plant analyses to diagnose sulphur-deficient herbage had also limited success. In this study herbage with an N/S ratio > 14 was sulphur deficient while herbage with a ratio > 12 had a 1 in 2 chance of being deficient.

The proportion of sulphur responsive sites in this study is an overestimate for Northern Ireland as a whole. Most soils in this country have higher clay and organicmatter contents than the field sites. The application of organic manures in normal agricultural practice is likely to be an important source of sulphur to grass for cutting.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 107 , Issue 3 , December 1986 , pp. 565 - 571
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1986

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

Bailey, L. D. (1985). The sulphur status of eastern Canadian prairie soils: the relationship of sulphur, nitrogen and organic carbon. Canadian Journal of Soil Science 65, 179–186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bristow, A. W. & Garwood, E. A. (1984). Deposition of sulphur from the atmosphere and the sulphur balance in four soils under grass. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 103, 463–468.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cowling, D. W. & Jones, L. H. P. (1978). Sulphur and amino acid fractions in perennial ryegrass as influenced by soil andatmospherio supplies of sulphur. In Sulphur in Forages, Proceedings of a Symposium at Johnstown Castle, Wexford, An Foras Taluntais, Dublin, pp. 15–31.Google Scholar
Dijkshoorn, W. & Van Wijk, A. L. (1967). The sulphur requirements of plants as evidenced by the sulphur-nitrogen ratio in the organic matter. A review of published data. Plant and Soil 26, 129–157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jones, L. H. P., Cowling, D. W. & Lockyer, D. R. (1972). Plant-available andextractable sulphur in some soils of England and Wales. Soil Science 114, 104–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Millard, P., Sharp, G. S. & Scott, N. M. (1985). The effect of sulphur deficiency on the uptake and incorporation of nitrogen in ryegrass. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 105, 501–504.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (1981). The Analysis of Agricultural Materials RB427. London: H.M.S.O.Google Scholar
Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (1983). Lime and Fertiliser Recommendations No. 5. Grass and Forage Crops 1983/84. Booklet 2430. London: H.M.S.O.Google Scholar
Murphy, M. D. (1980). Much Irish grassland is deficient in sulphur. Farm and Food Research 11, 190–192.Google Scholar
Murphy, M. D., Brogan, J. C. & Kelly, D. (1978). Responses to sulphur on grassland. An Foras Taluntais Soils Research Report, pp. 24–25.Google Scholar
Scaife, A. & Burns, I. G. (1986). The sulphate-S/total S ratio in plants as an index of their sulphur status. Plant and Soil 91, 61–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scott, N. M. (1981). Evaluation of sulphate status of soils by plant and soil tests. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 32, 193–199.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scott, N. M. (1985). Sulphur responses in Scotland. Sulphur in Agriculture 9, 13–17.Google Scholar
Scott, N. M., Watson, M. E., Caldwell, K. S. & Inkson, R. H. E. (1983). Response of grassland to the application of sulphur at two sites in North-east Scotland. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 34, 357–361.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sinclair, A. G. (1973). An ‘Auto Analyzer’ method for determination of extractable sulphate in soil. New Zealand Journal of Agricultural Research 16, 287–292.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stevens, R. J. (1985). Evaluation of the sulphur status of some grasses for silage in Northern Ireland. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 105, 581–585.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tabatabai, M. A. & Bremner, J. M. (1970). An alkaline oxidation method for determination of total sulfur in soils. Soil Science Society of America Proceedings 34, 62–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weast, R. C. (1971). Handbook of Chemistry and Physics. 52nd edn.Ohio: The Chemical Rubber Company.Google Scholar