Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorTyler, Ray
dc.contributor.authorDeRosa, Edith
dc.contributor.authorClark, Lee J.
dc.contributor.authorDoerge, Tom
dc.contributor.authorStroehlein, Jack
dc.contributor.authorHansson, Bengt
dc.date.accessioned2012-04-20T18:59:38Z
dc.date.available2012-04-20T18:59:38Z
dc.date.issued1986-03
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10150/219811
dc.descriptionThe 1985 and 1986 Cotton Reports have the same publication and P-Series numbers.en_US
dc.description.abstractBoligrow (an aluminum sulfate material from Sweden), gypsum and soil sulfur were evaluated as amendments on soil where differential water uptake had historically been a problem. A crop of cotton was grown and the yield of cotton was taken to determine if an economical change was effected by the amendments. Statistically there was no difference between treatments. A soil analysis indicated that sodium was not a problem in this soil, so texture was probably more related to the differential water uptake problem than was the chemical makeup of the soil.
dc.language.isoen_USen_US
dc.publisherCollege of Agriculture, University of Arizona (Tucson, AZ)en_US
dc.relation.ispartofseries370063en_US
dc.relation.ispartofseriesSeries P-63en_US
dc.subjectAgriculture -- Arizonaen_US
dc.subjectCotton -- Arizonaen_US
dc.subjectCotton -- Fertilityen_US
dc.titleSoil Amendment Demonstration on Cotton, Greenlee Countyen_US
dc.typetexten_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.contributor.departmentDepartment of Soilsen_US
dc.contributor.departmentUniversity of Agriculture in Swedenen_US
dc.contributor.departmentBoliden Corp.en_US
dc.identifier.journalCotton: A College of Agriculture Reporten_US
refterms.dateFOA2018-08-26T12:29:10Z
html.description.abstractBoligrow (an aluminum sulfate material from Sweden), gypsum and soil sulfur were evaluated as amendments on soil where differential water uptake had historically been a problem. A crop of cotton was grown and the yield of cotton was taken to determine if an economical change was effected by the amendments. Statistically there was no difference between treatments. A soil analysis indicated that sodium was not a problem in this soil, so texture was probably more related to the differential water uptake problem than was the chemical makeup of the soil.


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Name:
370063-235-236.pdf
Size:
22.53Kb
Format:
PDF

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record