Published in Agron. J. 96:971-977 (2004).
© American Society of Agronomy
677 S. Segoe Rd., Madison, WI 53711 USA
INTEGRATED SOIL AND CROP MANAGEMENT
Barley Biomass and Grain Yield and Canola Seed Yield Response to Land Application of Wood Ash
Shane J. Pattersona,
Surya N. Acharyab,*,
James E. Thomasa,
Al B. Bertschic and
Richard L. Rothwelld
a Dep. of Biol. Sci., Univ. of Lethbridge, Lethbridge, AB T1K 3M4, Canada
b Agric. and Agri-Food Canada, Lethbridge Res. Cent., P.O. Box 3000, Lethbridge, AB T1J 4B1, Canada
c Alberta-Pacific Forest Industries, Inc., Boyle, AB T0A 0M0, Canada
d Dep. of Renewable Resour., Univ. of Alberta, Edmonton, AB T6G 2P5, Canada
* Corresponding author (acharya{at}agr.gc.ca).
Received for publication February 27, 2003.
 |
ABSTRACT
|
|---|
Wood ash is considered a waste product that accumulates from the burning of wood waste for energy production. Field studies were conducted on acidic Boralf and Eutrochrept soils and in the greenhouse using material from the surface of these soils in randomized complete block designs to evaluate the effectiveness of wood ash as a liming material for improving crop production. For the greenhouse study, soil was treated with the equivalent of 0 to 200 t ha–1 (w/w) wood ash. Barley (Hordeum vulgare L.) yielded up to 50% more dry matter in this study. Based on these findings, a 3-yr field study was done to determine the effect of single applications of 6, 12.5, and 25 t ha–1 wood ash to Boralf soils in central Alberta. Significant increases in barley dry matter and grain yield and oil seed yields of canola (Brassica rapa L.) were observed when soil was supplemented with 12.5 or 25 t ha–1 along with N fertilizer. Increases of 72 and 50% in barley dry matter and grain yield were observed while canola oilseed yield increased 124% due to wood ash application. Applications up to 25 t ha–1 did not have a deleterious effect on biomass or seed production in barley or canola crops. Results show that land application of wood ash increased pH and nutrient content of acid soils while having a beneficial effect on crop production. Land application of wood ash can provide timber companies with a viable alternative to landfill disposal.
Abbreviations: ICP-AES, inductively coupled plasma atomic emission spectrometry
|
INTRODUCTION
|
|---|
AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTION in central parts of the Canadian prairies is limited by many factors, including nutrient deficiencies and soil acidity. To overcome these problems, crop producers apply fertilizers and agricultural lime. While liming is a common practice in many acid soil regions, transportation and cost of lime in western Canada have limited its use. Wood ash produced by pulp and paper mills have many properties that would benefit agricultural crop production, such as a high pH (
13) and nutrient content, which make it a good alternative to other available liming agents.
Wood ash is produced by pulp and paper mills from the incineration of hog fuel that consists of waste wood, knots, and bark. Agronomic benefits resulting from land application of pulp and paper mill by-products such as biosolids from effluent treatment systems or wood ash from energy systems have been widely studied in Europe (Karsisto, 1979), the United States (Vance, 1996; Mitchell and Black, 1997), and more recently in Canada (Lickacz, 2002). For centuries, farmers have recycled wood ash during the clearing of forests to increase arable lands. As a result, yields in these cleared areas often increased because of ash-induced changes in soil pH and chemical composition (Hopkins, 1910; Giovannini et al., 1993). Applications of ash at rates less than 50 t ha–1 in greenhouse and field studies increased dry matter in oat (Avena sativa L.) (Krejsl and Scanlon, 1996), wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) (Etiegni et al., 1991a; Huang et al., 1993), bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) (Krejsl and Scanlon, 1996), barley (Hordeum vulgare L.), and alfalfa (Medicago sativa L.) (Meyers and Kopecky, 1998), as well as other forage crops (Naylor and Schmidt, 1989; Muse and Mitchell, 1995; Meyers and Kopecky, 1998).
Landfilling has been the primary practice for disposing of wood ash generated by the pulp and paper industry. Approximately 10% of 2.7 Mt of wood ash produced in the United States is applied to crop land; the remaining 90% is landfilled (Campbell, 1990). In Alberta, approximately 180000 t of wood ash are generated annually from pulp and paper mills, with very little (less than 20%) being land-applied (Lickacz, 2002). Hence, wood ash constitutes a significant untapped resource with potential to benefit the agricultural industry. However, in addition to essential macronutrients and micronutrients required for plant growth, wood ash also contains metals like Cd and Zn and potentially low levels of chloride, dioxins, furans, and polycylic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) (Someshwar, 1996). Levels of these compounds are strongly dependant on fuel source. For example, high levels of dioxins and furans in wood ash have been associated with coastal mills burning wood laden with salt water (Campbell, 1990; Someshwar, 1996). Strict environmental regulations and prohibitive costs associated with landfilling demand alternative, less costly, and sustainable methods of disposal for wood ash such as application to agricultural land (Campbell, 1990; Mitchell and Black, 1997).
Although the use of wood ash as a soil amendment has been well documented in the United States and Europe (Vance, 1996; Mitchell and Black, 1997), few studies have been conducted on Canadian soils. This lack of research in Canada has resulted in regulators being reluctant to classify wood ash as a soil amendment until benefits resulting from its application have been demonstrated. The focus of this study was to determine the effect of wood ash applications on the growth of barley and canola grown on the Boralf (Luvisolic) and Eutrochrept (Brunisolic) soils of central Alberta. Specifically, the effects of wood ash applications on barley and canola production, the length of time these applications are effective in the field, and whether application of N fertilizer has a synergistic effect on increasing the benefits from wood ash applications were examined. A greenhouse study (Bertschi, 2000) was designed to assess potential application rates for use in the field study. The liming value of the wood ash was not separated from its nutrient value in this study.
|
MATERIALS AND METHODS
|
|---|
Wood Ash
The Kraft pulp mill that supplied the wood ash for this study produces about 16000 t annually through the incineration of wood waste (wood, bark, and knots). This wood ash was analyzed for chemical properties by EnviroTest Laboratories (Calgary, AB) using the methods outlined by Carter (1993). A list of these properties is presented in Table 1.
Site Description
The soil collected for the greenhouse study and the land used for the field study were under continuous hay production before the present set of studies began. Soils were collected for both studies from land near the Kraft mill site at 54°55' latitude and 112°52' longitude, about 200 km northeast of Edmonton, AB. The region is made up of approximately 10% Eutrochrept (Eutric Brunisolic) soils and nearly 40% Boralf (Othic Gray Luvisolic) soils (Canadian Dep. of Agric., 1972). Both soils originally developed under forest cover and are slightly to strongly acidic. These soils are considered to be low in nutrient content and require additional fertilizer inputs for optimum crop production (Canadian Dep. of Agric., 1972).
Greenhouse Study
For the greenhouse study, soil material from the surface 15 cm was collected from Eutrochrept and Boralf soils. All soil samples were air-dried at 22°C and ground to pass through a 2-mm sieve before use. Properties of the soils used in the greenhouse study are presented in Table 2.
Wood ash used in the greenhouse study was dried at 22°C, ground, and passed through a 2-mm sieve. The resulting ash was then mixed with soil in a cement mixer for 5 min to ensure a thorough blend. Ten wood ash application rates were used in the greenhouse study; each was applied on a dry weight basis to achieve mixtures of soil and 0, 0.5, 0.75, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 10% (w/w) wood ash equivalent to 0, 10, 15, 20, 40, 60, 80, 100, 120, and 200 t ha–1. Loading rates for the two soil types were replicated four times in standard 15-cm pots and kept on benches in a greenhouse cycling a 16-h day and a constant temperature of 22 (±2) °C.
The two-row malting barley ‘Harrington’ was the test crop in this study. Five barley seeds were planted per pot and thinned to three plants after germination. Treatments were replicated four times (benches represented individual blocks) in the greenhouse and were watered every second day with deionized water to avoid inputs of additional nutrients and trace metals and to minimize any chance of leaching. Pots were rearranged after each watering to minimize differential effect of temperature and lighting within the greenhouse. Plants were grown for 90 d, harvested separately from each pot, dried at 55°C for 3 d and weighed to determine dry matter yield.
Field Study
The field trial site was located at approximately 54°55' latitude and 112°52' longitude northeast of Edmonton, AB. Soil characteristics analyzed for the site used in the field study are listed in Table 2. The study site was located on gently undulating 2 to 4% slopes consisting mainly of moderately fine, mixed, acid-to-neutral, loam, Boralf (Orthic Gray Luvisol); smaller areas consisted of very coarse, mixed Eutrochrept (Degraded Eutric Brunisol) (Canadian Dep. of Agric., 1972). The site was divided into three replicates (blocks); one replicate was located in the northeast (NE), one in the northwest (NW), and one in the southeast (SE) portions of a quarter section (SE1/4 22-68-19W4th); each of the areas was classified as a Boralf. Dimensions of the plots in the NW and SE replicates (blocks) were 50 by 100 m while plots in the NE replicate were 30 by 100 m.
Wood ash was applied at rates of 6, 12.5, and 25 t ha–1 (dry weight) to achieve mixtures of soil and 0.25, 0.5, and 1% wood ash in the top 0.2 m. All treatments were randomized in each of the three blocks. Wood ash used in the field study was stockpiled at the research site from March 1998 to mid-May 1998. Ash was applied to the field plots starting in mid-May 1998 and completed the first week of June using a side-discharge GEHL Scavenger Manure Spreader (Model 1330, GEHL Co., West Bend, WI) calibrated to apply wood ash at 6, 12.5, and 25 t ha–1. The ash was incorporated using three passes with a breaking disc to a depth of 0.2 m and allowed to incubate for 5 d before first-year seeding occurred. Each of the wood ash plots was further divided into three sections for seeding crops. A 3-m buffer zone was used to separate the three crops and wood ash treatments used in the study. The buffer zone was rototilled bimonthly to a depth of 0.2 m.
The two barley cultivars used in the field study were a two-row malting barley Harrington and a six-row barley ‘Lacombe’, which are commonly used in the area for silage and feed grain. A Polish canola, ‘Maverick’, was chosen for the study because of its early maturity. All crops were seeded perpendicular to wood ash treatments during the last week of May in a continuous rotation (i.e., canola–canola–canola) for the 3 yr of the study (1998–2000). Barley cultivars were seeded at a rate of 112 kg ha–1 using a John Deere Air Seeder (Model 610/787, John Deere, Moline, IL) while the canola was seeded at a rate of 7.8 kg ha–1 using a Valmar Airflo Seeder (Model 1255, Valmar Airflo, Elie, MB, Canada).
Nitrogen was the only additional fertilizer applied during the 3 yr of the field study. Soil samples were collected from the top 0.2 m and analyzed for available soil NO3–N (Mulvaney, 1996). Half of each plot was banded with urea (46–0–0) at N rates of 56, 103, and 108 kg ha–1 in 1998, 1999, and 2000, respectively, to provide 130 kg N ha–1 in the 0.2-m depth. Each year, weeds in the canola plots were controlled by using the pre-emergent granular herbicide Edge {ethalfluralin [N-ethyl-N-(2-methyl-2-propenyl)-2,6-dinitro-4-(trifluoromethyl)benzenamine]; 1.25 kg a.i. ha–1} and by spraying Lontrel 360 [clopryalid (3,6-dichloro-2-pyridinecarboxylic acid); 100 g a.i. ha–1] with Poast Ultra (sethoxydim {2-[1-(ethoxyimino)butyl]-5-[2-(ethylthio)propyl]-3-hydroxy-2-cyclohexen-1-one}; 144 g a.i. ha–1) and Merge (0.5% v/v) in early July. Weeds were controlled in the barley plots using Refine Extra (trifensulfuron methyl + tribenuron methyl; 15 g a.i. ha–1) and Assert (imazamethabenz {2-[4,5-dihydro-4-methyl-4-(1-methylethyl)-5-oxo-1H-imidazol-2-yl]-4(or 5)-methylbenzoic acid}; 400 g a.i. ha–1). Due to late maturity, a preharvest application of Roundup {glyphosate [N-(phosphonomethyl)glycine]; 880 g a.e. ha–1} was used in early September 1998 to desiccate the barley and canola crops.
To determine dry matter production, samples from the barley cultivars were collected during the soft dough stage (before ripening occurred), 70 d after seeding in 1998, 72 d in 1999, and 72 d in 2000. Samples were dried at 55°C until constant weight for determination of dry matter. In the first year of the study (1998), dry matter yield was only determined for Lacombe barley grown on the ash-treated plots and a control plot where no soil amendments were applied. Dry matter yield was determined for Lacombe and Harrington barley from all plots in the last two years of the study (1999–2000). Dry matter yield was not determined for the ‘Maverick’ canola. Grain yield was determined for all three crops after 107, 103, and 105 d postseeding in 1998, 1999, and 2000, respectively. Grain yield data were not determined for plots where no soil amendments were added in 1998.
Dry matter yield was estimated on whole plant samples clipped 0.05 m above the ground from an area of 0.25 by 0.25 m2. Weeds, when present, were separated at the site and removed from the samples before crop dry matter was estimated. Weed control was good in 1998 and 1999. In 2000, however, wild oat (Avena fatua L.) and buckwheat (Polygonum convolvulus L.) were present in the field plots. Weed populations were approximately 2% of Lacombe and 5% of Harrington barley plots and were similar in all replications. About 5% buckwheat infested Maverick canola plots in 2000. All plant samples were collected and dried at 55°C until constant weights were observed for dry matter determination.
Barley and canola seed from each plot were harvested using a Wintersteiger Nurserymaster Elite combine. Multiple seed samples were harvested from standard 9-m2 areas (1.5 by 6m). Seed samples were dried at 55°C for 3 d, cleaned using an Almaco Seed Cleaner (Allan Machine Co., Nevada, IA), and then weighed to determine grain and oilseed yield.
Soil Chemical Analyses
All soil samples were analyzed by EnviroTest Laboratories (Calgary, AB). Samples were dried at 40°C and ground using a flail-type grinder to pass through a 2-mm sieve. Ground samples were then analyzed for available NO3, PO4, K, S, B, Cu, Fe, Mn, Cd, and Zn (Janzen, 1993; Sen Tran and Simard, 1993). Soil pH measurements were made in water and 0.01 M CaCl2 suspensions using a 1:2 soil/water ratio (Hendershot et al., 1993), and soil density was determined (Culley, 1993).
Soil samples were prepared for available NO3 + NO2 and available SO4 analyses using the methods outlined by Mulvaney (1996) for NO3 + NO2 and Kowalenko (1993) for available SO4. A reciprocating shaker (Eberbach Model 6000, Eberbach Corp., Ann Arbor, MI) was used for sample extraction for N and S analysis, using deionized water and 0.01 M CaCl2; the soluble NO3 + NO2, and SO4 were analyzed using a Technicon Autoanalyzer (Technicon Instruments Corp., Tarrytown, NY) for NO3 and NO2 analysis while SO4–S was analyzed using inductively coupled plasma atomic emission spectrometry (ICP-AES). Analysis of P and K was done using a modified Kelowna extraction (NH4OAc + NHF + HOAc) (Oian et al., 1994); P was analyzed using a Technicon Autoanalyzer and K measured using a flame photometer (Bates and Richards, 1993). A DTPA extraction was used for the metals Cu, Fe, Mn, and Zn, which were then analyzed by ICP-AES (Liang and Karamanos, 1993). Total Cd and Zn in the soil samples were extracted using the USEPA 3050 method consisting of a nitric and hydrochloric acid digestion and analyzed using ICP-AES. Boron (BHWS) was extracted in hot water (100°C for 5 min) (Keren, 1996) and analyzed using ICP-AES (Gupta, 1993).
Climatic Information
The Athabasca region of Alberta, Canada, normally receives approximately 503 mm of total precipitation annually based on a 30-yr average from 1971 to 2000 (Environment Canada, 2002). Precipitation data obtained from Environment Canada (Environment Canada, personal communication, 2002) showed that during the 3 yr (1998, 1999, and 2000) this study was conducted, the amount of precipitation was 32, 15, and 24% lower than the long-term average, respectively. The average temperature from May to August during the course of the study was similar to the 30-yr average for the area. The average annual temperature for the region was 2.6, 3.0, and 4.0°C while the average growing season temperature from June to September was 14.5, 14.2, and 15.2°C for 1998, 1999, and 2000, respectively (Environment Canada, personal communication, 2002).
Statistical Analysis
A randomized complete block design was used for both the greenhouse and field studies. Data on total biomass in the greenhouse study and total biomass and seed yield for the three crops in the field study were subjected to analysis of variance using SAS ANOVA software (SAS Inst., 2001). Results for each year of the field study were analyzed separately for the main effects and interactions; statements of significance within the text are at the P 
0.05 level unless otherwise specified. When the F test was significant, statistical differences among means were determined using Fisher's Protected LSD test at a level of P = 0.05.
|
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
|
|---|
Soil Characteristics
In addition to a high pH and 52% calcium carbonate equivalence, wood ash from the Kraft pulp mill also contained B, Ca, K, Mg, P, S, Zn, and other elements with potential to supplement plant growth (Table 1); e.g., each megagram of wood ash used in this study contained 30 kg of K, 85.9 kg of Ca, 8 kg of S, and 0.56 kg of Mg available for plant growth. Similar observations of wood ash chemical properties have been made by others (Vance, 1996; Meyers and Kopecky, 1998), indicating that wood ash may be a good alternative for improving crop performance in soils with a low pH. In the field studies, increases in available K and S in particular were noted in the postapplication Boralf soil samples examined following addition of 6, 12, and 25 t ha–1 wood ash while little or no change in the concentration of available B, Zn, and Cd could be seen (Table 2).
Greenhouse Study
Data from the greenhouse study indicate that wood ash treatments significantly affected Harrington barley dry matter production (Table 3). The effect of wood ash application was significant and positive in both soil types for biomass production. All wood ash treatments applied to the Eutrochrept and Boralf soil material increased barley dry matter production significantly from the no-ash control; increases ranged from 17.5 to 49.6% (Table 3). Even when plants were grown in pots treated with equivalent of 200 t ha–1 wood ash, significant increases in barley dry matter yield were observed relative to the control. This study conducted in a greenhouse setting indicated that application of wood ash on acidic soils could have a positive influence on crops grown under field conditions. The high application rates (200 t ha–1) did not have a harmful effect on crop growth but should be considered carefully due to the potential effect on water quality when applied in the field.
View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Table 3. Mean dry matter yield of Harrington barley in a greenhouse study of wood ash treatments for Eutrochrept and Boralf soils.
|
|
Field Study
In most cases, wood ash treatments resulted in significant increases in dry matter yield relative to control treatments for Lacombe and Harrington barley (Table 4). The exceptions were 6 and 25 t ha–1 wood ash without N for Harrington barley and 6 t ha–1 wood ash without N for Lacombe barley in 1999 (Table 4). When Lacombe barley was grown in plots with N plus ash, dry matter production increased from 23 to 72% in 1998, 28 to 57% in 1999, and 26 to 42% in 2000 when compared with the control plots. Ash-only treatments (without N) resulted in dry matter increases of 6 to 22.5% in 1999 and 23.2 to 45% in 2000. A similar trend also was observed for dry matter production of Harrington barley in 1999 and 2000 when the cultivar was grown in soil supplemented with wood ash regardless of N treatment. Harrington barley dry matter production increased 61 to 67% in 1999 and 52 to 65% in 2000 when plots were supplemented with wood ash and N fertilizer. Ash treatments resulted in Harrington barley dry matter increases of 10 to 28% in 1999 and 51 to 69% in 2000 (Table 4).
View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Table 4. Mean for whole-plant dry matter yield of Lacombe and Harrington barley samples harvested from wood ash–treated plots with and without added N fertilizer.
|
|
Harrington barley and Maverick canola produced significant increases in grain and oilseed yield when supplemented with ash and N fertilizer relative to controls (Table 5). For Lacombe barley, the 25 t ha–1 ash plus N significantly increased grain yield during the test period (Table 5). Among the values that were significantly different from the control, N plus ash treatments resulted in Lacombe grain yield increases of 39 to 50% in 1998, 21% in 1999, and 18% in 2000. Similar increases in grain yield were observed in N plus wood ash–treated plots seeded with Harrington barley and Maverick canola, respectively: 16 to 34% in 1998, 22 to 40% in 1999, and 21 to 32% in 2000 for Harrington barley and in 33 to 41% in 1998, 79 to 123% in 1999, and 47 to 103% in 2000 for Maverick canola (Table 5). In general, treatments consisting of only wood ash applications during the last 2 yr of the study (1999 to 2000) did not result in significant differences in grain or oilseed yield. The exception to this trend was in 1999 when Harrington barley yield was significantly greater (P 0.05) in the 6 and 12.5 t ha–1 treatments relative to control. These values, however, were not significantly different from those obtained for the 25 t ha–1 wood ash treatment. With rare exceptions, significant differences in dry matter production (Table 4), grain, or oilseed yield (Table 5) were observed between the 12.5 and 25 t ha–1 application rates with or without the additional N fertilizer. The exceptions were only in N-treated Lacombe barley plots in 1998 and 1999 where 25 t ha–1 wood ash produced significantly more dry matter than 12.5 t ha–1 (Table 4).
The field study shows that addition of wood ash to Boralf soils in central Alberta resulted in an increase in dry matter, grain, and oilseed yield. Differences among wood ash applications greater than 10 t ha–1 often were not significant in dry matter yield for barley in both the greenhouse and field studies. Grain yields were seldom significantly different between the two high-ash treatments in the field trial. These results suggest that maximum returns can be obtained at low (less than 25 t ha–1) ash application rates.
While positive effects of wood ash have been widely observed, differing views exist about advantages of applying wood ash at rates exceeding 40 t ha–1. From greenhouse experiments, Meyers and Kopecky (1998) reported significant increases in dry matter yield of alfalfa and barley at application rates from 50 to 90 t ha–1. In another study, applications in excess of 40 t ha–1 (320 and 640 t ha–1) wood ash had detrimental effects on wheat biomass and growth of poplar (Populus sp.) (i.e., calliper and height) in the greenhouse (Etiegni et al., 1991a, 1991b). The authors of this study suggested that economics in addition to agronomic considerations (i.e., lime requirement or fertilizer recommendations) would most likely limit wood ash applications greater than 40 t ha–1 under field conditions. Naylor and Schmidt (1989) found minimal alfalfa yield differences in wood ash treatments between 11.7 and 17.0 t ha–1. In their study, alfalfa yields were lower at 22.6 t ha–1 wood ash than at 11.7 or 17.0 t ha–1; however, they suggested that greater rates may provide longer-term benefits.
Our results show that increased barley dry matter yield can be obtained over the short term (in <4 yr) as a result of a single ash application and annual N fertilizer applications. This finding corroborates earlier studies on alfalfa (Naylor and Schmidt, 1986, 1989; Meyers and Kopecky, 1998), barley (Meyers and Kopecky, 1998), oat (Krejsl and Scanlon, 1996), and wheat (Etiegni et al., 1991a). These studies attribute crop responses to wood ash application to changes in soil pH and addition of nutrients like P, K, and S provided by wood ash application. Changes in plant productivity seen in our study likely resulted from similar chemical properties associated with the wood ash used and its interaction with the acidic soil.
During the last 2 yr of our study, no significant increases in grain or oilseed yield were observed in plots treated only with ash (no N fertilizer). This was probably due to N deficiencies in the soil but could also be due to deficiencies or imbalances in other nutrients such as K and Mg, which are required for plant growth (Havlin et al., 1999).
Weather may also have played a significant role in influencing grain and dry matter yield of the three crops included in the field study. Monthly temperatures over the study period (1998 to 2000) were relatively similar to the 30-yr average for the area. However, monthly precipitation fell below the long-term average (Environment Canada, 2002). Reduced levels of precipitation during this period may have reduced the production capability of our experimental plots.
|
CONCLUSION
|
|---|
Change from landfill waste disposal to alternative uses such as land application for many by- or co-products such as wood ash can lead to benefits being observed in agriculture. Applications of wood ash based on agronomic principles such as lime requirement or fertility recommendations have the potential to increase yields in dry matter, grain, and oilseed, resulting in economic benefits for both the producer and end user. In our study, single applications of wood ash resulted in long-term increases in plant productivity. Use of low application rates, less than 25 t ha–1, have potential to increase net returns through improved agricultural production and, if managed properly (i.e., application rates based on fertility, plant needs, or lime requirements), can be a sustainable alternative to agricultural lime, with many economic and environmental benefits.
|
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
|
|---|
This research project was funded by Alberta-Pacific Forest Industries, Inc., and through NSERC in the form of an Industrial Postgraduate Scholarship awarded to Mr. Patterson. We thank Alberta Environment, EnviroTest Laboratories, and Gateway Research Organization for their contributions to the study. We also take this opportunity to thank the team members at Alberta Pacific and numerous others who contributed throughout the study period.
|
NOTES
|
|---|
LRC Contribution no. 387-03009.
|
REFERENCES
|
|---|
- Bates, T.E., and J.E. Richards. 1993. Available potassium. p. 59–64. In M.R. Carter (ed.) Soil sampling and methods of analysis. Can. Soc. of Soil Sci., Lewis Publ., Ann Arbor, MI.
- Bertschi, A.B. 2000. The growth response of Assiniboine poplar and Harrington barley to wood ash additions (Populus deltoidies, Hordeum vulgare). M.S. thesis. Univ. of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada.
- Campbell, A.G. 1990. Recycling and disposing of wood ash. Tappi J. 73:141–145.
- Canadian Department of Agriculture. 1972. Soil survey of the Tawatinaw map sheet (83-I). Alberta Soil Survey Rep. 29. Canadian Dep. of Agric., Soil Res. Inst., Univ. of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada.
- Carter, M.R. 1993. Soil sampling and methods of analyses. Can. Soc. of Soil Sci., Lewis Publ., Ann Arbor, MI.
- Culley, J.L.B. 1993. Density and compressibility. p. 529–540. In M.R. Carter (ed.) Soil sampling and methods of analysis. Can. Soc. of Soil Sci., Lewis Publ., Ann Arbor, MI.
- Environment Canada. 2002. Canadian climate normals 1971–2000: Athabasca Alberta. [Online]. Available at www.climate.weatheroffice.ec.gc.ca/Welcome_e.html (modified 31 Dec. 2002; verified 15 Mar. 2004). Environment Canada, Ottawa ON.
- Etiegni, L., A.G. Campbell, and R.L. Mahler. 1991a. Evaluation of wood ash disposal on agricultural land: I. Potential as a soil additive and liming agent. Commun. Soil Sci. Plant Anal. 22:243–256.
- Etiegni, L., A.G. Campbell, and R.L. Mahler. 1991b. Evaluation of wood ash disposal on agricultural land: II. Potential toxic effects on plant growth. Commun. Soil Sci. Plant Anal. 22:257–267.
- Giovannini, G., S. Benvenuti, S. Lucchesi, and M. Giachetti. 1993. Soil biota, nutrient cycling, and farming systems. Lewis Publ., Boca Raton, FL.
- Gupta, U.C. 1993. Boron, molybdenum, and selenium. p. 91–100. In M.R. Carter (ed.) Soil sampling and methods of analysis. Can. Soc. of Soil Sci., Lewis Publ., Ann Arbor, MI.
- Havlin, J.L., J.D. Beaton, S.L. Tisdale, and W.L. Nelson. 1999. Soil fertility and fertilizers: An introduction to nutrient management. 6th ed. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ.
- Hendershot, W.H., H. Lalande, and M. Duquette. 1993. Soil reaction and available acidity. p. 141–146. In M.R. Carter (ed.) Soil sampling and methods of analysis. Can. Soc. of Soil Sci., Lewis Publ., Ann Arbor, MI.
- Hopkins, C.G. 1910. Soil fertility and permanent agriculture. Ginn. and Co., New York.
- Huang, H., A.G. Campbell, R. Folk, and R.L. Mahler. 1993. Wood ash as a liming agent and soil additive for wheat: Field studies. Commun. Soil Sci. Plant Anal. 23(1/2):25–33.
- Janzen, H.H. 1993. Soluble salts. p. 161–166. In M.R. Carter (ed.) Soil sampling and methods of analysis. Can. Soc. of Soil Sci., Lewis Publ., Ann Arbor, MI.
- Karsisto, M. 1979. Effect of forest improvement measures on activity of organic matter: II. Effect of ash fertilization. Suo 30:81–91.
- Keren, R. 1996. Boron. p. 603–626. In D.L. Sparks et al. (ed.) Methods of soil analysis. Part 3. Chemical methods. SSSA Book Ser. 5. SSSA and ASA, Madison, WI.
- Kowalenko, C.G. 1993. Extraction of available sulphur. p. 65–74. In M.R. Carter (ed.) Soil sampling and methods of analysis. Can. Soc. of Soil Sci., Lewis Publ., Ann Arbor, MI.
- Krejsl, J.A., and T.M. Scanlon. 1996. Evaluation of beneficial use of wood-fired boiler ash on oat and bean growth. J. Environ. Qual. 25:950–954.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
- Liang, J., and R.E. Karamanos. 1993. DTPA-extractable Fe, Mn, Cu, and Zn. p. 87–90. In M.R. Carter (ed.) Soil sampling and methods of analysis. Can. Soc. of Soil Sci., Lewis Publ., Ann Arbor, MI.
- Lickacz, G. 2002. Wood ash—an alternative liming material for agricultural soils. Agdex 534-2. Publishing Branch, Agric., Food and Rural Dev., Edmonton, AB, Canada.
- McGill, W.B., and C.T. Figueiredo. 1993. Total nitrogen. p. 201–212. In M.R. Carter (ed.) Soil sampling and methods of analysis. Can. Soc. of Soil Sci., Lewis Publ., Ann Arbor, MI.
- Meyers, N.L., and M.J. Kopecky. 1998. Industrial wood ash as a soil amendment for crop production. Tappi J. 81:123–130.
- Mitchell, C.C., and E.D. Black. 1997. Chapter 13: Land application of boiler wood ash in the southeastern United States. p. 204–224. In J.E. Rechcigl (ed.) Am. Chem. Soc., Washington, DC.
- Mulvaney, R.L. 1996. Nitrogen—inorganic forms. p. 1155–1157. In D.L. Sparks et al. (ed.) Methods of soil analysis. Part 3. Chemical methods. SSSA Book Ser. 5. SSSA and ASA, Madison, WI.
- Muse, J.K., and C.C. Mitchell. 1995. Paper mill boiler ash and lime by-products as soil liming materials. Agron. J. 87:432–438.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
- Naylor, L.M., and E. Schmidt. 1986. Agricultural use of wood ash as a fertilizer and liming material. Tappi J. 69:114–119.
- Naylor, L.M., and E. Schmidt. 1989. Paper mill wood ash as a fertilizer and liming material: Field trials. Tappi J. 72:199–203.
- Oian, P., J.J. Schoenaru, and R.E. Karamanos. 1994. Simultaneous extraction of available phosphorus and potassium with a new soil test: A modification of Kelowna extraction. Commun. Soil Sci. Plant Anal. 25:627–635.
- SAS Institute. 2001. SAS/STAT user's guide. Version 8.2. SAS Inst., Cary, NC.
- Sen Tran, T., and R.R. Simard. 1993. Mehlich III-extractable elements. p. 43–50. In M.R. Carter (ed.) Soil sampling and methods of analysis. Can. Soc. of Soil Sci., Lewis Publ., Ann Arbor, MI.
- Someshwar, A.V. 1996. Wood and combination wood-fired boiler ash characterization. J. Environ. Qual. 25:962–972.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
- Tiessen, H., T.L. Roberts, and J.W.B. Stewart. 1983. Carbonate analysis in soils and minerals by acid digestion and two-endpoint titration. Commun. Soil Sci. Plant Anal. 14(2):161–166.
- USEPA. 2003. Method 3051. Microwave assisted acid digestion of sediments, sludges, soils and oils [Online]. Available at http://www.epa.gov/epaoswer/hazwaste/test/pdfs/3051.pdf (modified 7 Jan 2003; verified 15 Apr. 2004). USEPA, Washington, DC.
- Vance, E.D. 1996. Land application of wood-fired and combination boiler ashes: An overview. J. Environ. Qual. 25:937–944.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
properties as determined by using methods outlined in