Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorElliot, James Robertsonen_US
dc.date.accessioned2014-03-14T20:50:31Z
dc.date.available2014-03-14T20:50:31Z
dc.date.issued2006-12-15en_US
dc.identifier.otheretd-12202006-213850en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10919/36337
dc.description.abstractNitrogen deficiency is characteristic of many mid-rotation loblolly pine (Pinus taeda L.) plantations in the Piedmont region of the southeastern USA. Fertilization with urea is the most common method used to correct this deficiency. Previous studies show that urea fertilization produces a rapid pulse of available nitrogen (N) with only a portion being utilized by plantation trees. Controlled release fertilizers release available N more slowly over a longer period of time and therefore may result in greater uptake efficiency. The objective of this study was to compare Nitroform®, a urea-formaldehyde controlled release N fertilizer versus urea and a control by measuring the effects of the two fertilizer treatments on N availability and loss as: total KCl extractable-N, total ion exchange membrane-N (IEM-N), N mineralization, and N volatilization, in a mid-rotation loblolly pine plantation in the Piedmont of Virginia. In addition, mid-summer and mid-winter fertilizations were compared to assess fertilizer uptake as a function of season. After the summer fertilization, Nitroform® significantly increased total KCl-extractable N, IEM-N, and N mineralization for two to three months over urea and the control. Three hundred times more N volatilized from urea than from controlled release Nitroform®. Interestingly, seven months after the summer application, the controlled release Nitroform® showed marked immobilization for three months while urea demonstrated greater N mineralization. After the winter application, fertilization with urea demonstrated greater soil inorganic N concentrations for two to three months over Nitroform®, very little N was immobilized, and volatilization was only 10 times that of Nitroform®. After summer and winter fertilizations, both fertilizer treatments significantly increased soil inorganic N concentrations and N volatilization over controls, however did not significantly increase N mineralization over controls when average response was tested over the entire sampling period. In addition to the fertilizer effects measured, a thinning only treatment was also incorporated into this study with soil N-availability indices compared to a control with no thinning or fertilization. The results from the thinning only treatment demonstrated no significant increases over the control in total KCl extractable-N, IEM-N, N-mineralization, or N volatilization when average responses were tested over the entire sampling period.en_US
dc.publisherVirginia Techen_US
dc.relation.haspartJRElliot_ETD_01-16-08.pdfen_US
dc.rightsI hereby certify that, if appropriate, I have obtained and attached hereto a written permission statement from the owner(s) of each third party copyrighted matter to be included in my thesis, dissertation, or project report, allowing distribution as specified below. I certify that the version I submitted is the same as that approved by my advisory committee. I hereby grant to Virginia Tech or its agents the non-exclusive license to archive and make accessible, under the conditions specified below, my thesis, dissertation, or project report in whole or in part in all forms of media, now or hereafter known. I retain all other ownership rights to the copyright of the thesis, dissertation or project report. I also retain the right to use in future works (such as articles or books) all or part of this thesis, dissertation, or project report.en_US
dc.subjection exchange membraneen_US
dc.subjectmineralizationen_US
dc.subjectvolatilizationen_US
dc.subjectcontrol releaseen_US
dc.subjectureaformen_US
dc.subjectureaen_US
dc.subjectnitrogenen_US
dc.subjectfertilizationen_US
dc.subjectloblolly pineen_US
dc.subjectPinus taedaen_US
dc.titleEffects of a Control Release Nitrogen Fertilizer and Thinning on the Nitrogen Dynamics of a Mid-Rotation Loblolly Pine Stand in the Piedmont of Virginiaen_US
dc.typeThesisen_US
dc.contributor.departmentForestryen_US
dc.description.degreeMaster of Scienceen_US
thesis.degree.nameMaster of Scienceen_US
thesis.degree.levelmastersen_US
thesis.degree.grantorVirginia Polytechnic Institute and State Universityen_US
thesis.degree.disciplineForestryen_US
dc.contributor.committeechairFox, Thomas R.en_US
dc.contributor.committeememberAust, Wallace Michaelen_US
dc.contributor.committeememberAllen, H. Leeen_US
dc.contributor.committeememberBurger, James A.en_US
dc.identifier.sourceurlhttp://scholar.lib.vt.edu/theses/available/etd-12202006-213850/en_US
dc.date.sdate2006-12-20en_US
dc.date.rdate2008-01-16
dc.date.adate2008-01-16en_US


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record