000864339 001__ 864339
000864339 005__ 20210130002519.0
000864339 0247_ $$2doi$$a10.1071/SR18223
000864339 0247_ $$2ISSN$$a0004-9573
000864339 0247_ $$2ISSN$$a1446-568X
000864339 0247_ $$2ISSN$$a1838-675X
000864339 0247_ $$2ISSN$$a1838-6768
000864339 0247_ $$2WOS$$aWOS:000475314600002
000864339 037__ $$aFZJ-2019-04135
000864339 082__ $$a640
000864339 1001_ $$00000-0002-2057-6491$$aKoch, Maximilian$$b0$$eCorresponding author
000864339 245__ $$aInsights into 33phosphorus utilisation from Fe- and Al-hydroxides in Luvisol and Ferralsol subsoils
000864339 260__ $$aCollingwood, Victoria$$bCSIRO$$c2019
000864339 3367_ $$2DRIVER$$aarticle
000864339 3367_ $$2DataCite$$aOutput Types/Journal article
000864339 3367_ $$0PUB:(DE-HGF)16$$2PUB:(DE-HGF)$$aJournal Article$$bjournal$$mjournal$$s1571645939_26207
000864339 3367_ $$2BibTeX$$aARTICLE
000864339 3367_ $$2ORCID$$aJOURNAL_ARTICLE
000864339 3367_ $$00$$2EndNote$$aJournal Article
000864339 520__ $$aThere is currently relatively little available information on subsoil phosphorus (P) use for crop production as a function of soil order. In this study, a rhizobox experiment was performed using subsoils of two reference soil groups, an Orthic Ferralsol and a Haplic Luvisol. To evaluate the immediate P uptake by wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) from different subsoil P pools during 14 days of growth, subsoil bands were spiked with KH2PO4 solution associated to Fe-hydroxide (33P-Fe), to Al-hydroxide (33P-Al), in free form (33P-OrthoP), or in trace amounts without any additional 31P (33P-NoP). At the beginning of the experiment, the soil water content was set at 75% of water-holding capacity, corresponding to an initial soil matric potential of −12 ± 1 kPa. During plant growth, soil moisture decreased in both soils, but soil matric potentials in both soils did not drop below field capacity (−33 kPa; pF 2.5). The shoot dry weights of the Ferralsol were 1.2 to 1.8 times those of the Luvisol. Despite elevated soil P availability in the Luvisol, shoot P concentrations did not differ between the two soils. The amount of 33P taken up by the shoots from the oxide phases was 15% to 40% greater in the Ferralsol treatments than in those in the Luvisol treatments. It was concluded that the more favourable physical soil conditions facilitated 33P uptake from both oxidic phases from the Ferralsol subsoil relative to the Luvisol subsoil, despite better P phytoavailability in the latter.
000864339 536__ $$0G:(DE-HGF)POF3-255$$a255 - Terrestrial Systems: From Observation to Prediction (POF3-255)$$cPOF3-255$$fPOF III$$x0
000864339 588__ $$aDataset connected to CrossRef
000864339 7001_ $$0P:(DE-HGF)0$$aGuppy, Christopher$$b1
000864339 7001_ $$0P:(DE-Juel1)129427$$aAmelung, Wulf$$b2
000864339 7001_ $$0P:(DE-HGF)0$$aGypser, Stella$$b3
000864339 7001_ $$0P:(DE-Juel1)145865$$aBol, Roland$$b4
000864339 7001_ $$0P:(DE-HGF)0$$aSeidel, Sabine$$b5
000864339 7001_ $$0P:(DE-Juel1)164361$$aSiebers, Nina$$b6
000864339 773__ $$0PERI:(DE-600)2600572-4$$a10.1071/SR18223$$gVol. 57, no. 5, p. 447 -$$n5$$p447 - 458$$tSoil research$$v57$$x1838-675X$$y2019
000864339 8564_ $$uhttps://juser.fz-juelich.de/record/864339/files/27_2019_Soil%20Research_Rhizo%20hydroxide.pdf$$yRestricted
000864339 8564_ $$uhttps://juser.fz-juelich.de/record/864339/files/27_2019_Soil%20Research_Rhizo%20hydroxide.pdf?subformat=pdfa$$xpdfa$$yRestricted
000864339 909CO $$ooai:juser.fz-juelich.de:864339$$pVDB:Earth_Environment$$pVDB
000864339 9101_ $$0I:(DE-588b)5008462-8$$6P:(DE-Juel1)129427$$aForschungszentrum Jülich$$b2$$kFZJ
000864339 9101_ $$0I:(DE-588b)5008462-8$$6P:(DE-Juel1)145865$$aForschungszentrum Jülich$$b4$$kFZJ
000864339 9101_ $$0I:(DE-588b)5008462-8$$6P:(DE-Juel1)164361$$aForschungszentrum Jülich$$b6$$kFZJ
000864339 9131_ $$0G:(DE-HGF)POF3-255$$1G:(DE-HGF)POF3-250$$2G:(DE-HGF)POF3-200$$3G:(DE-HGF)POF3$$4G:(DE-HGF)POF$$aDE-HGF$$bErde und Umwelt$$lTerrestrische Umwelt$$vTerrestrial Systems: From Observation to Prediction$$x0
000864339 9141_ $$y2019
000864339 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0200$$2StatID$$aDBCoverage$$bSCOPUS
000864339 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0100$$2StatID$$aJCR$$bSOIL RES : 2017
000864339 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0199$$2StatID$$aDBCoverage$$bClarivate Analytics Master Journal List
000864339 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0110$$2StatID$$aWoS$$bScience Citation Index
000864339 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0150$$2StatID$$aDBCoverage$$bWeb of Science Core Collection
000864339 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0111$$2StatID$$aWoS$$bScience Citation Index Expanded
000864339 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)1060$$2StatID$$aDBCoverage$$bCurrent Contents - Agriculture, Biology and Environmental Sciences
000864339 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)1050$$2StatID$$aDBCoverage$$bBIOSIS Previews
000864339 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)9900$$2StatID$$aIF < 5
000864339 9201_ $$0I:(DE-Juel1)IBG-3-20101118$$kIBG-3$$lAgrosphäre$$x0
000864339 980__ $$ajournal
000864339 980__ $$aVDB
000864339 980__ $$aI:(DE-Juel1)IBG-3-20101118
000864339 980__ $$aUNRESTRICTED