Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Eighteen soils from northwestern Switzerland were used to study the value of seven universal extractants (CaCl2; DB‐DTPA; Mehlich 1, 2, and 3; Morgan‐Wolf; and NH4OAc‐EDTA) for predicting plant available potassium (K) as compared to a bioassay (a modified Neubauer test with winter rye). These extractants were evaluated on the basis of K uptake by the bioassay test and the soil K status. In order to create the sufficiency level of exchangeable K for plant growth, soils were treated with 0, 20, 40, 80, and 160 mg K/kg of soil. The range of K uptake by the bioassay tests was between 89.2 and 403.0 mg/kg of soil for the control pots, and 136.6 to 495.8 for the K treatments with optimal conditions for plant growth. The average amounts of K extracted by the seven universal extractants, in ascending order, were: CaCl2 < Morgan‐Wolf < Mehlich 1 < Mehlich 2 < NH4OAc‐EDTA < Mehlich 3 < DB‐DTPA. The highest simple correlation with K uptake versus the bioassay test was obtained with the DB‐DTPA (r = 0.89) extractant and the lowest with the Mehlich 1 (r = 0.53) extractant. The DP‐DTPA, NH4OAc‐EDTA and Mehlich 3‐K procedures showed an advantage over K procedures based on water soluble and exchangeable K pools in the investigated soils in order to predict the amount of plant‐available K. A simple regression and the Cate‐Nelson graphic method offer the possibility of assessing the soil‐K status using K values obtained by these universal extractants and to calibrate them against K forms as follows: exchangeable, water soluble, and non‐exchangeable.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Grzebisz et al. (1993) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: