Determination of plant-available micronutrients by the Mehlich 3 soil extractant – a proposal of critical values
J. Zbíralhttps://doi.org/10.17221/564/2016-PSECitation:Zbíral J. (2016): Determination of plant-available micronutrients by the Mehlich 3 soil extractant – a proposal of critical values . Plant Soil Environ., 62: 527-531.
Soil testing in the Czech Republic is based on the use of the Mehlich 3 method for determination of macronutrients and diethylentriaminepentaacetic acid (DTPA) and hot-water extraction for determination of micronutrients. Since inductively coupled plasma optical emission spectrometers have become commonly used in soil testing laboratories, Mehlich 3 extractant could be used very effectively also for a simultaneous micronutrient determination. To take full advantage of the universal Mehlich 3 extractant, new criteria for evaluation of the content of micronutrients in this extractant are needed. The criteria presented in this study were obtained by a simple calculation of criteria from the relationships between the Mehlich 3 extractant and the extraction methods for which the criteria were available (DTPA for copper, zinc, manganese, iron and hot-water extraction for boron). The first calculated estimates of the criteria were pre-validated and slightly adjusted to minimize the difference between the frequency of the samples in each category after determination and evaluation by the compared methods. Further adjustment of the presented critical values with respect to the field and pot experiments will be necessary in the future.Keywords:
agriculture soil, extraction procedure, available microelements, result evaluation
Berger K. C., Truog E. (1939): Boron Determination in Soils and Plants. Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Analytical Edition, 11, 540-545 https://doi.org/10.1021/ac50138a007Čižmárová E., Zbíral J., Obdržálková E. (2016): Extraction of some heavy metals by Mehlich 3. Prague, Report 30.01/2016 Central Institute for Supervising and Testing in Agriculture – National Reference Laboratory. (In Czech)Eckert D. J., Watson M. E. (1996): Integrating the mehlich‐3 extractant into existing soil test interpretation schemes 1. Communications in Soil Science and Plant Analysis, 27, 1237-1249 https://doi.org/10.1080/00103629609369629Jones J. Benton (1990): Universal soil extractants: Their composition and use. Communications in Soil Science and Plant Analysis, 21, 1091-1101 https://doi.org/10.1080/00103629009368292Juráni B., et al. (1990): A Complex Method for Plant Nutrition. Chapter 10. Micronutrient Fertilization. Prague, Institute for Scientific and Technical Information in Agriculture, 137. (In Czech)Matejovic Igor, Durackova Anna (1994): Comparison of mehlich 1‐, 2‐, and 3‐, calcium chloride‐, bray‐, olsen‐, enger‐, and schachtschabel‐extractants for determinations of nutrient in two soil types. Communications in Soil Science and Plant Analysis, 25, 1289-1302 https://doi.org/10.1080/00103629409369115Mehlich A. (1978): New extractant for soil test evaluation of phosphorus, potassium, magnesium, calcium, sodium, manganese and zinc 1. Communications in Soil Science and Plant Analysis, 9, 477-492 https://doi.org/10.1080/00103627809366824Mehlich A. (1984): Mehlich 3 soil test extractant: A modification of Mehlich 2 extractant. Communications in Soil Science and Plant Analysis, 15, 1409-1416 https://doi.org/10.1080/00103628409367568Minca K. K., Basta N. T., Scheckel K. G. (2013): Using the Mehlich-3 Soil Test as an Inexpensive Screening Tool to Estimate Total and Bioaccessible Lead in Urban Soils. Journal of Environment Quality, 42, 1518- https://doi.org/10.2134/jeq2012.0450Norvell W. A., Lindsay W. L. (1972): Reactions of DTPA Chelates of Iron, Zinc, Copper, and Manganese with Soils1. Soil Science Society of America Journal, 36, 778- https://doi.org/10.2136/sssaj1972.03615995003600050027xOstatek-Boczynski Zofia A., Lee-Steere Peimaneh (2012): Evaluation of Mehlich 3 as a Universal Nutrient Extractant for Australian Sugarcane Soils. Communications in Soil Science and Plant Analysis, 43, 623-630 https://doi.org/10.1080/00103624.2012.643845Rayment G.E., Lyons D.J. (2011): Soil Chemical Methods – Australasia. Australia, Csiro Publishing, 199.Sims J. T. (1989): Comparison of mehlich 1 and mehlich 3 extractants for P, K, Ca, Mg, Mn, Cu and Zn in atlantic coastal plain soils 1. Communications in Soil Science and Plant Analysis, 20, 1707-1726 https://doi.org/10.1080/00103628909368178Wendt J. W. (1995): Evaluation of the Mehlich 3 soil extractant for upland Malawi soils. Communications in Soil Science and Plant Analysis, 26, 687-702 https://doi.org/10.1080/00103629509369328Wolf Ann M., Baker D. E. (1985): Comparisons of soil test phosphorus by Olsen, Bray P1, Mehlich I and Mehlich III methods 1. Communications in Soil Science and Plant Analysis, 16, 467-484 https://doi.org/10.1080/00103628509367620Trávník K., Zbíral J., Němec P. (1999): Agrochemical soil testing – Mehlich III. Brno, Central Institute for Supervising and Testing in Agriculture. (In Czech)Zbíral J., Němec P. (1998): Comparison of some methods for determination of copper, zinc, manganese and iron in soils. Rostlinná výroba, 44: 443–447.Zbíral J. (1999): Comparison of some extracting methods for determination of sulphur in soils of the Czech Republic. Rostlinná výroba, 45: 1–7.Zbíral J., Němec P. (1999): Comparison of Mehlich II and Mehlich III extraction for determination of available phosphorus, potassium, magnesium and calcium in soils of the Czech Republic. Rostlinná výroba, 45: 1–7.Zbíral J. (2000): Analysis of Mehlich III soil extracts by ICP-AES. Rostlinná výroba, 46: 141–146.Zbíral Jirí, Němec Pavel (2000): Data presentation, interpretation, and communication. Communications in Soil Science and Plant Analysis, 31, 2171-2182 https://doi.org/10.1080/00103620009370574Zbíral J., et al. (2001): Comparison of Extractants for Determination of Nutrients in Soils of the Czech Republic. Brno, Central Institute for Supervising and Testing in Agriculture.Zbíral Jiří, Němec Pavel (2009): Comparison of Some Soil Extractants for Determination of Boron. Communications in Soil Science and Plant Analysis, 40, 96-105 https://doi.org/10.1080/00103620802625641