HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Abstract Full Text Free Full Text (PDF) Free Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in ISI Web of Science Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (20) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Foley, B. J. Articles by Cooperband, L. R. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Foley, B. J. Articles by Cooperband, L. R. Agricola Articles by Foley, B. J. Articles by Cooperband, L. R. Related Collections Sustainable Agriculture Industrial Waste Water Management Soil Organic Matter

Paper Mill Residuals and Compost Effects on Soil Carbon and Physical Properties

University of Wisconsin, Department of Soil Science, 1525 Observatory Drive, Madison, WI 53706

View larger version (36K): [in a new window]   Fig. 1. Total soil carbon contents in plots amended at the high rates in 1998 and 1999. Paper mill residuals (PMR) was applied at 44.8 Mg ha-1 and paper mill residuals composted with bark (PMRB), paper mill residuals composted without a bulking agent (PMRC), and peat were applied at 78.4 Mg ha-1. Error bars, representing ± one standard deviation are included.

View larger version (30K): [in a new window]   Fig. 2. Field capacity (-33 J kg-1) and wilting point (-1500 J kg-1) water contents in plots measured one year after first amendment application (a, March 1999), one month after the second amendment application (b, June 1999), and one year after the second amendment application (c, April 2000). Treatments with the same letters were not significantly different for each matric potential ( = 0.05). Error bars represent ± one standard deviation. PMR, paper mill residuals; PMRB, paper mill residuals composted with bark; PMRC, paper mill residuals composted without a bulking agent.

View larger version (16K): [in a new window]   Fig. 3. Amendment effects on pore size distribution and air entry potential, with the regression between ln water potential and ln(/s). The slope of the line is related to the breadth of the soil pore size distribution. The y intercept estimates the air entry potential (e).

View larger version (51K): [in a new window]   Fig. 4. Plant-available water in high-rate treatments and the nonamended control from April 1999 to April 2000. Preamendment 1999 represents one year after the first application. Postamendment 1999 represents 1.5 mo after second application. Preamendment 2000 represents one year after the second amendment application. Treatments within each date with the same letter were not significantly different ( = 0.05). Error bars represent ± one standard deviation. PMR, paper mill residuals; PMRB, paper mill residuals composted with bark; PMRC, paper mill residuals composted without a bulking agent.

View larger version (19K): [in a new window]   Fig. 5. Linear relationship between total soil carbon (TC) and plant-available water (PAW) on three dates: one year after first amendment application (a, March 1999), one month after second amendment application (b, June 1999), and one year after second amendment application (c, April 2000). PMR, paper mill residuals; PMRB, paper mill residuals composted with bark; PMRC, paper mill residuals composted without a bulking agent.