Skip Navigation

Forestry 1973 46(1):55-69; doi:10.1093/forestry/46.1.55
© 1973 by Institute of Chartered Foresters
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by BENZIAN, B.
Right arrow Articles by SMITH, H. A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Editorial

Nutrient Concentrations of Healthy Seedlings and Transplants of Picea sitchensis and Other Conifers Grown in English Forest Nurseries

BLANCHE BENZIAN and H. A. SMITH

Rothamsted Experimental Station Harpenden, Herts., England

Concentrations of N, P, K, Mg, Ca, Mn were determined in whole-plant samples of healthy one-year seedlings and one-plus-one transplants of Picea sitchensis, Picea abies, Abies grandis, Tsuga heterophylla, and of seedlings only of Pinus nigra var. maritima. The samples were taken at the end of each of three consecutive growing seasons from plants grown in nursery beds on several contrasted soils in south-east England. Tops and roots were analysed separately in the last of the three years. The sampling formed part of a large experimental programme on nutrition problems in forest nurseries, and most of the data are supported by evidence from past detailed experiments.

N, P, Ca concentrations in Picea abies tended to be larger than in Picea sitchensis, and K concentrations smaller. Concentrations of all nutrients, except Mg, were larger in tops than in roots, those of N, P, and K larger in seedlings than in transplants. With few exceptions our analytical data agree well with those published elsewhere, either for nursery-grown trees or for trees raised in culture experiments, but there is not yet sufficient evidence that these nutrient ranges have any general validity.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer:
Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.