Joiirital of Agriciilmrnl Science, Canlbritlge ( 1991), 117, 299-305.

Primed in Greai Britain 299

Ekect of phosphorus and aluminium in the response of

spring barley to soil acidity
B. W. BA C H E' AN D J. A. M. R OSS'
' Department of Geography, Cambridge CB2 3EN, UK
The Mncnulay LcinJ Use Research Institute, Aberdeen AB9 2QJ, UK
(Reviseil MS receive‹l 22 Ma y 19911

SUMMARY
Soil chemistry in relation to yield of spring barley {HorJeum vulgare, cv. Golden Promise) was
investigated in three field experiments in north-east Scotland in 1982. Previous treatments had
produced a range of soil pH values from 4 0 to 6 0 (measured in 10 mM-CaC1, solution). The
experiments demonstrated the values for soil acidity components below which yields were reduced.
Large additions or phosphate fertilizer allowed barley to withstand larger concentrations of soluble
‹ind exchangeable aluminium (the principal acid soil toxin), thus decreasing the critical soil pH from
5 2 to 4 8 (corresponding to about 5 9 and 5 5 if measured in a water suspension), and increasing the
critical soluble Al concentration from 10 to 50 pts and the critical Al saturation of the cation-
exchange complex from 0 025 to 0 1.

I NT R O D U CTI O N
Of the crops commonly grown in Scotland, barley is
the most sensitive to soil acidity. At one time, liming
soils to pH 6 5 (in water) was recommended, but the
more frequent occurrence of manganese deficiency in
barley at higher soil pH values (A.H. Sinclair,
personal communication), the apparcnt recent re-
duction in optimum soil pH for barley shown in
demonstration plots at the Craibstone Estate of the
North of Scotland College of Agriculture, and the
increasing costs of lime, indicated that a reappraisal
of the growth of the barley crop in relation to soil
‹icidity was needed. Decreased growth and yield in
‹icid soil conditions are usually caused by chemical
conditions associated with acidity, particularly alu-
mini uni toxicity and sometimes phosphate
deficiency (Foy 1984). There appear to be no
measurements of soluble or exchangeable aluminium
concentrations in soils in relation to field crop growth
in Britain, although some have been reported for pot
experiments (Bache & Crooke 1981).
This paper reports grain yields of spring-sown
b‹irley in 1982, from three field experiments which
included variations in soil acidity among their
treatments. I n addition to soil pH, the yields were
considered in relation to nitrogen and phosphate
trcatnients in the field experiments, and to the
concentrations of exchangeable and soluble alumin-
ium in the soils.
E X P E R I M E NTA L M ET HO DS
Field trials
The three field trials used for this investigation were
set up in the Grampian Region of Scotland by
agronomists at the former Macaulay Institute for Soil
Research some years ago, on soils of the
Countesswells
and Foud land series described by G lentworth & M ui r
(1963). The treatments applied, shown in Table 1,
had resulted in considerable soil pH differences by
1982, and in that year these trials were cropped with
spring barley (Hordeum vulgare, cv. Golden
Promise). Cus- tomary crop management treatments
for the north- east of Scotland were used, and the
trials were harvested with a plot combine to produce
the yield data reported here.
Soil analysis
Surface soil (0—20 cm) samples were taken from the
plots after harvest, in September 1982. Field-moist
subsamples were stored in a refrigerator and analysed
within a few days of sampling. They were passed
through a 6 mm sieve, equilibrated with 10 mri
calcium chloride solution at a 1 : 1 soil: solution ratio
for an hour with end-ovcr-end shaking, and the
suspension pH measured. The suspensions were
filtered, and calcium and aluminium concentrations
were determined on the clear filtrates. Further
 Table 1. Brief details of field trials with spring barley (Hordeum vulgare, cv. Golden Promise) in Grampian Region, Scotland; sown April 1982, harvested
September 1982

Plot
numbers & . 1982
Experiment no. & site Soil series Design, treatments & cropping size treatments

68/29 Countesswells 4 replicates in 4 randomized blocks. 18 treatments: 2 lime x 2 P rates 72, None
Craigiebuckler, field 2431 (sandy loam on granitic initially x 3 N forms annually, basal K. 46 m'
till)
6 extra misc. treatments. Barley 1968—9, grass 1969 ploughed out 1981,
barley 1982
78/4 Foudland 2replicates in 4 randomized blocks (lime and N confounded with 36, N additions
Westerton of rolla, (loam on slate till) blocks). 90 m' basal P & K
Rothienorman 3lime rates initially, 6 N rates and basal P & K annually. Continuous
barley
78/ 12 Countesswells 1 replicate in 3 randomised blocks. (lime rates confounded with 45, P&N
Craigiebuckler, field 2428 (sandy loam on granitic blocks). 5 lime x 3 P rates x 3 N rates, basal K. Continuous barley 64 m' additions
till) basal K

D.
J

M
R
OS
S

Effecl of phosphorus and nluminium on syring barley 301

Grain yieldt / ha DM

Soil pH
Fig. 1. B:irley grit in yield (t/ha dry matter) in relation to soil pH in dilute CaCI, solution. (a) Expt 78/ 12, low P (J); moderate P (P) ; high P (J). (fi) Expt 68/29, low P
( ), high P (@). (c) Expt 78/4, N additions: zero (o ), 30 kg/ha (@), 90 kg/ha (P), 150 kgJha (R).
 5(
•
)
4.
-
5
4
0
-

35 4-0 4-5 5-0 55

Soil pAl
Fig. 2. Rel‹ttionship between soil pH and pAl with different lime and phosphate treatments. Expt 68/29: UP IO). UP, (D), L, P (Q), L, P, (J). Expt 78/4, Q ; Exp 78/12,
‹g'.
Soil pH
 302 B. W. B A C H E A N D J. A. M. R OSS

0 0'2 0-4 0.6 08

6
- .0 Al saturaiion
l '0
-

Fig. 3. Relationship between grain yield of winter barley (t/ha) and the Al saturation of the cation—exchange complex.
Expt 68/29, 0 ; Expt 78/ 12, G.

aluminium using 8-hydroxyquinoline (Bache &

Sharp 1976). Bnrle y yield in relation to soil yH measured th CaCl,

R ES U L TS
Bnrle)! yielJ in relation to treatments applied
Mean grain dry matter yields for the lime, phosphate
and nitrogen treatment combinations are summarized
in Table 2.
In Expt 68/29 the effects of the initial lime and
phosphate treatments applied in 1969 were highly
significant (Table 2). Of the nitrogen forms applied
to the preceding grass crops, Nitro-chalk and urea
made no significant difference to the barley test crop
but ammonium sulphate significantly reduced barley
yield in all but the limed plots.
In Expt 78/4 the nitrogen treatments applied in
1982 provided the main effect on yield. The effect of
lime was small and non-significant at low rates of
applied N, but was greater at the higher rates of
applied N, especially 120 and 150 kg/ha.
In Expt 78/ 12 nitrogen rates had small non-
significant effects, the rate of application of lime
(reflected in soil pH, below) gave the main effect.
The small effect of phosphate at low lime rates was
not statistically significant.
The data for all plots of the three field trials are
shown in Fig. 1.
In Expt 78/ 12 (Fig. 1 a) yield decreased linearly
with pH below a critical value of c. 5 1 —5-2. The
equation of the line drawn on the graph is
Yield = — 19 4 + 4 76 pH.
The non-significance of the phosphate effect was
probably because the soil had a reasonable phosphate
status and the amounts of P applied (20, 40 and
60 kg/ha P) did not affect it greatly. The non-
significance of the nitrogen effcct (Table 2) is
perhaps more surprising, and indicates the overriding
effect of soil pH on yield. Some of the plots in this
experiment gave patchy growth, later shown to be
caused by variation of acidity within a plot.
Experiment 68/29 received no nitrogen fertilizer in
1982, the crop relying on residues from the
ploughed- out grass. This may explain the low yields
even on the high-P, high-pH plots. Fig. 1 (b) shows
very clearly the effects of zero lime (all points with
pH < 5 0) and the massive dose of phosphate (c. 2000
kg P/ha) applied in 1969. The interaction between
these two
 Effect of phosphorus und nluminium on spring barley
0 0.2
Al sai uration
Fig. 4. Dependence of soil pH in the Al saturation of the cation—exchange complex. Expt 68/29,
effects is the most interesting, however, in that data
from the P, plots show a critical pH of c. 5 2, similar
to Expt 78/ 1 2, whereas those from the P, plots show
‹i critical pH of c. 4 8. Linear regressions wcrc fitted
separately to the 12 P„ points and the 12 P, points of
the zero lime treatments ; they gave the following
equations, which are plotted on Fig. 1 (b j :
for P„, yield = — 14 047 + 3 414 pH ;
for P„ yield = — 22-300 + 5 501 pH.
Although the slopes of these lines are not
significantly different, if the lines are given a
common slope the intercepts then differ significantly
(P < 0 05) :
for P„ yield = — 18-68 + 4 457 pH ;
for P„ yield = — 17 45 + 4 457 pH.
1 n Expt 78/4, ‹i significant drop in yield at low pH
only occurred at the highest N rates and again the
critical pH was c. 5-2. It is not clear why a pH effect
was not shown at the low N rates, but it was probably
because nitrogen w‹is limiting yield more than soil
pH.
It should be emphasized that the pH values
reported here were measured at a low soil: solution
ratio after adding 10 mM calcium chloride solution,
because
303
0.4 0.6 08
; Expt 78/ 11, J.
there are good reasons for thinking that this is close
to the pH experienced by plant roots (Bache 1977).
pH values in water suspensions suffer more
variability in measurement, and for these soils they
would be 0-5—0 7 units higher than the values
reported here.
Barle y yielâ in relation to soil aluminium frurtinns
A number of functions involving soil aluminium
concentrations were investigated. These were: (i) pAl
= — log o„ A where o is the activity of the Al'* ion in
the dilute CaCl, equilibrations, taking the mean of
the moist and dry soil results [the activity was
calculated by standard physiochemical methods
(Bache 1974), for which the activity and hydrolysis
corrections amount to c. 0-5 of the pAl term, i.c. pA1
= — log m ,+ 0-5, where m , is the solution A1
concentration in mol/ 1] ; (ii) the activity ratio
n„/c„ ;
(iii) 1-0 M-KCl-extracted exchangeable Al, mmol( +
)/ kg soil ; (iv) the degree of saturation of the cation
— exchange complex with Al, i.e. Exch Al/CEC,
where CEC is the cation—exchange capacity
calculated as the sum of exchangeable cations
extracted with 1 0 M- KCl.
The relationship of pA1 to yield is very similar to
304 B. W. B A C H E A N D J. A . M. R OSS

that of soil pH to yield (and is therefore not shown) reasons for the effect of added P on yield: (i) a
because of the strong association between pAl and straightforward correction of P deficiency ; (ii) a
direct soil pH as shown in Fig. 2. Functions (ii) and (iii) soil effect in precipitating Al and thus
incidentally gave no improvements in the yield relationship, and raising pH because Al is the
principal soil acid ; (iii) an will not be discussed further. The Al saturation of the indirect soil effect by
changing the position of the cation—exchange complex, function (iv), is relatively slope of the pH—pA1
curve ; (iv) a direct plant nutrition easy to measure and is a more basic soil chemical effect in which
more P allows the crop to withstand property than the solution concentration. The re- greater Al
concentrations. I n the limed plots where lationship between it and yield is shown in Fig. 3, and acidity
had been eliminated, the P addition increased with soil pH in Fig. 4, for Expts 68/29 and 78/ 12. yield
(Table 2) showing a general P deficiency in the Although therc is a lot of scatter in the data, Fig. 3 soil,
and thereby confirming (i). The pH—pAl graph in shows that Al saturation > c. 0 I reduced yield of
Fig. 2 shows that P additions change the position of
Golden Promise barley on these soils. This corre- the soil on the curve, without altering its slope or
sponds to pAl 4 8, or an Al concentration of 50 pri in intercept. This would seem to eliminate (iii) but
an extract where the Ca concentration was 80 mM. Confirm (ii). P appeared to be neutralizing soil
acidity (Yield data in relation to Al for Expt 78/4 are not (aluminium) essentially as a liming material
would. shown because nitrogen was the main determinant of This was shown further by a reduction in the
mean yield.) exchangeable Al in the unlimed plots from 22 1 to
14 6 mmol(+ )/kg by the addition of P. The crop yield
data in Fig. 1 (ft) show a lower cri tica1 pH in the

D I SC U SS I O N AN D CO NC L U S I O presence of added P. So, because the form of the soil pH

NS —pAl relationship is unaltered by added P, P must
Acid soil infertility is a complex problem. In the be allowing the crop to withstand higher Al at the
absence of manganese toxicity in these naturally lower pH values, thus confirming (iv).
acidic, strongly leached, Mn-deficient soils, it usually Finally, we can interpolate two critical pH values
involves the interaction of pH, Al toxicity and P from Fig. 1, and two corresponding critical pAl and
deficiency, and in some instances also Ca deficiency Al saturation values from Fig. 2 and Fig. 4:
(Foy 1984). It has often proved difficult to separate
these effccts. Hydrogen ion concentrations yer se, as at low P,
reflected in pH, are generally thought to be irrelevant PH 5 1—5 2, pAl = 5'2—5 3 (ni ,
at pH > 4. The main pH effect on mineral soils is (Al saturation = 0 025)
caused by Al toxicity. The Ca effect is almost always at high P,
confused with pH because commercial liming pH = 4 7—4-8, pAl = 4 7—4 9 (m„ a 50 pM).
materials both add Ca and raise pH. When Ca is (Al saturation — 0- 1)
added in a form that does not affect pH, such as
gypsum (CaSO,) for example, it usually has no effect These experiments demonstrated that crop response
(Soon 1988), unless Ca is extremely dehcient as on the to soil acidity is not adequately described by
soil pH Brazilian cerrado soil studied by Ritchey et af. (1982). measurements, but must take
account of both It is virtually impossible to separate the effects of Al soluble/exchangeable aluminium
and of phosphatc. and P, because these two elements interact with each They also defined critical
pH and critical Al con- other both in the soil and in the plant. In a pot centrations for
one barley variety, under both high P
experiment with barley, Bache & Crooke (1981) and low P conditions.
found that the critical acidity level, whether indicated
by pH or soil Al measurements, was linearly related to The authors are grateful to J. W. S. Reith and P. W.
the available soil P. This effect of P was confirmed in Dyson for designing the original field trials, to R. H.
E. the field experiments reported here. I nkson for the statistical computations, and to K.
The phosphate interactions were demonstrated Stark for laboratory analyses.
most clearly in Expt 68/29. There are four possible

R E F E R ENC ES
CACHE, B. W. (1974). Soluble aluminium and calcium— 487—492. Stroudsburg, PA: Dowden, Hutchinson and
aluminium exch‹inge in relation to the pH of dilute Ross.
calcium chloride suspensions of acid soils. Journal of Soil BACHE, B. W. & CsooKE, W. M . (1981). Interactions between
Science 25, 320—332. aluminium, phosphorus and pH in the response of barley
BACHE, B. W. (1977). Soil Reaction. In Enc ycloyeJia of Soil to soil acidity. Plant ait‹l Soil 61, 365—375.
Scieitce (Eds R. W. Fairbridge & C. W. Finkl), pp. B•CHE, B. W. & SHARP, G.S. (1976). Soluble polymeric
 Effect of yliosyltorus and aluminium on spring barley 305

hydro.xy—alumiiiiuni ions in acid soils. Jotirnul of Soil method for determining micro quantities of calcium in
Sciriicr 27, 164-174. biological materials. Analytical Biochemistry 20, 155—166.
FoY, C.D. (1984). Physiological effects of hydrogen, RiTCHEY, K. D., SicVA, J.E. & COSTA, U.F. (1982).
Calcium aluminium and manganese toxicities in ‹icid soils. I n Soil deficiency in clayey B horizons of savanna Oxisols.
Soil
A‹i‹lil,t cuul Liming, 2nd ed n (Ed. F. Adams). Madison, Scieitce 133, 378—382.
WI : Anicric‹in Society of Agronomy. Soon, Y.K. (1988). Interactions between calcium amend-
G H.NTwoaTii, R. & MUIR, J. W. (1963). F/ie Soils of I/ie ments and phosphate on the response of alfalfa and barley
Coiiziirj arnimtl Abrrilec•it, In veriirie anJ Fruserburgli. growing in acid soils. Communications in Soil Science an J
Edinburgh : H MSO. Pl‹iiti Anal ysis 19, 1343—1353.
Rxx’ Swxkilx, B. C. & CHAUNAx, U. P. S. (1967). A new