Inter Soil Test Results

Interpreting Soil Test Results
What Do All the Numbers Mean?

Pam Hazelton and Brian Murphy
This book is available from CSIRO PUBLISHING through our secure online
ordering facility at http://www.publish.csiro.au or from:
Customer Service
CSIRO PUBLISHING
PO Box 1139
Collingwood Victoria 3066
Australia
Telephone
Local call
Fax
Email
+61 3 9662 7666

1300 788 000 (Australia only)
+61 3 9662 7555
publishing.sales@csiro.au
Pam Hazelton and NSW Department of Natural Resources 2007

The sample pages following are provided solely for information purposes and may not be
reproduced, stored or transmitted in any form or by any means without prior permission of
the copyright owner. Contact CSIRO PUBLISHING for all permission requests.
Interpreting Soil Test Results: What Do All the Numbers Mean?, by Pam Hazelton and Brian Murphy
Published by CSIRO PUBLISHING, 2007, 160pp.
Foreword
At the University of Adelaide (and I imagine it is the same at all Australian universities)
we get regular requests from students and others (mainly advisers and consultants in soil
management) for advice on how to interpret soils data. Typically, we get inquiries about
soil-test results obtained from fertilizer companies, engineering reports on clay
reactivity, heavy-metal concentrations in municipal and industrial waste-products,
bore- and dam-water analyses, soil water contents and hydraulic conductivities. The
units accompanying such data invariably appear as a dogs breakfast of the Systme
International mixed with colloquial names dating back to the early 20th century
(e.g. bags, bushels, quintals, milliequivalents, etc). Naturally, people ask whether a good
Australian textbook exists to guide us through the minefield of numbers we face out
there. Well, here it is a friendly book containing exemplar tables and units with plenty
of explanatory text to guide you through the quagmire of colloquial terms in soil science
that we need to extricate ourselves from. This omnibus reference-text falls between a
classical methods manual and a book of results with typical generalisations to be drawn
from them. It gives users of soil data some yardsticks up against which the significance
or importance of the numbers they obtain in standard soil tests can be assessed. For
many users of Australian soils data this book will come as a lifeline, and we will certainly
add it to the reading lists for our students.
Drs Cameron Grant and Jock Churchman
Australian Society of Soil Science Inc. Publications Committee

http://www.publish.csiro.au
060603Soil Test Results 6pp.ind5 5
15/3/07 10:48:58
Introduction
Soils are a valuable resource and a critical component in many of the environmental and
economic issues facing todays society. Understanding soils and interpreting soil data is
especially relevant for many environmental and land management issues facing the
community. These issues include urban development, control of salinity, clearing of
native vegetation, prevention of land degradation, control of water and wind erosion,
irrigation development, the management of effluent disposal and the management of
acid sulfate soils.
However, soil science is a specialised field and can be complex. When writing or
examining land assessment or environment reports it is often difficult and time
consuming to find interpretation of the soil data. These guidelines were compiled to
assist in overcoming this problem and are designed for workers in all categories of land
use management. The information in this book was collated from a wide range of
reference material.
The interpretations and values provided in this text are not intended for specific
advice on particular problems or issues, but provide a general background on the variety
of soil tests available and how the results from these tests may be interpreted. They are
not intended to be used as a replacement for specific professional advice.

15/3/07 10:49:00
1
Soil sampling
1.1 Where, how and when to sample

To characterise soils at a site, a suitable sampling design is required. Sampling design
depends on:
the landscape or location from which samples are being taken
the purpose for which samples are being taken
the resources available to take and test the samples.
The basic questions to be considered are:

When is the best time to sample?

Where should the soil be sampled?
How many samples are required?
What spatial pattern should be used to take the samples?
What depths should be sampled?
For general sampling purposes, the basis for making these decisions is discussed in
Petersen and Calvin (1986), Beattie and Gunn (1988), Rayment and Higginson (1992),
McBratney (1993), Brown (1999), and Chapman and Atkinson (2007). If contaminated
sites are to be sampled then there are some special problems in sampling soils. These
need to be taken into account to ensure that the samples are representative of the site.
These problems are discussed in Laslett and McBratney (1995).
However, there are some general sampling patterns that are frequently used,
including:
regular grid
regular transect (often used when there is thought to be a trend in a particular
direction)

15/3/07 10:49:00

I n t e r p r e t i n g S o i l Te s t R e s u l t s
completely random
stratified sampling where samples are taken on the basis of:
landforms
sections of a paddock, especially if a paddock has different soils or landform
elements within it
areas of different management histories
some other stratifying factor
stratified random sampling, where the samples within each stratifying unit are
randomised
herring-bone grid (for contaminated sites).
Once collected, samples for nutrient analyses may be bulked to give a composite
sample. Generally, bulking should be done only when the samples come from a relatively
uniform area, or what is thought to be a relatively uniform area. Petersen and Calvin
(1986), Tiller (1992), McBratney (1993), and Laslett and McBratney (1995) discuss the
limitations of bulking samples and the recommended procedures to follow.
Another difficulty in sampling is the problem of temporal viability, where results for
samples or measurements taken at one time may be different to results for samples or
measurements taken at another time. Some obvious examples are:
Measuring infiltration in a tilled paddock. The infiltration is much higher before
rainfall packs the soil down and crusts the surface.
Measuring salinity on a site after a large amount of rainfall. After rainfall the soil
solution may be diluted, compared with the solution measured after a dry period.
Sampling soils immediately after adding fertiliser or soil ameliorants such as lime
or gypsum.
These difficulties need to be considered when sampling soils or making
measurements on soils and when interpreting the results of any tests carried out.
Sampling through time is required, or, alternatively, the conditions when measurements
are made or samples are taken should be standardised (or at least recorded). For
example, some soils require specialised sampling techniques such as the following:
For best practice sampling procedures for acid sulfate soil refer to Ahern et al.
(1998, 2004) and subsequent version updates as they occur.
Sampling soils for rapidly metabolised chemical species such as nitrate (NO3 )
(see Peverill et al. 1999).
1.2 The number of samples required to produce a soil map

The number of samples or ground observations needed to produce a soil map or to do an
investigation will vary with the local characteristics of the site. Factors that influence the
number of samples required include:
geology
landform

15/3/07 10:49:00
Soil sampling
land use history

purpose for which the investigation is being done.
There are general guidelines on the number of samples required to produce a reliable
map (Reid 1988). It should be remembered that these are general guidelines and their
applicability will be influenced by the factors outlined in Section 1, Soil Sampling. The
number of samples required is usually expressed as the number of samples or
observations per cm2 of the map (see Table 1.1).
Table 1.1. Number of observations for 1 km2
(1 km2 = 1000 1000 m)
Recommended range
Scale
1:5000
1:10000
1:25000
1:50000
1:100000
1:250000
1:500000
Minimum acceptable range
at density of
1 cm 2 of map
at density of
0.5 cm 2 of map
at density of
0.25 cm 2 of map
400
100
16
4
1
0.16
0.04
200
50
8
2
0.5
0.08
0.02
100
25
4
1
0.25
0.04
0.01
Source: Reid (1988).
Tables 1.21.3 are a general guide to the minimum number of samples required for
1 km2 of land at different map scales. Different criteria apply for investigations of areas
less than 1 km2.
The relationship between soil survey effort and map scale has been derived by Dent
and Young (1981). It estimates the effort required in days in the field to develop a soil
map at different scales. The actual effort will vary depending on such factors as existing
information, the complexity and predictability of the soil patterns and difficulties of
access. Nor do these estimates consider the purpose for which a soil map is being
developed. Nor do they take account of modern methods of soil survey using remote
sensing and geographic information systems (Gunn et al. 1988; Gessler et al. 1995). They
are intended to indicate the relative effort required for a detailed soil map at the scale
and thus represent a maximum value. Therefore, these are only broad guidelines.

15/3/07 10:49:00

Table 1.2. Recommended intensities of investigation based on map scale (DLWC 2000)
Scale
Area shown by Typical land use

1 cm2 of map types
Site and soil

observations
Site and soil

profile
descriptions
Profiles with
laboratory analyses
1:100000
100 ha =
1 km2
land capability and 0.51.0 per km2

planning/identifying
areas of major soil
limitations
0.10.2 per km2
0.21.0 per 25 km2
1:50000
25 ha
land capability and 24 per km2

planning/identifying
areas of major soil
limitations
0.51.0 per km2
0.040.20 per km2
1:25000
6.25 ha
agriculture/broad
scale planning
618 per km2
1.53.0 per km2
0.10.5 per km2
1:10000
1.0 ha
intensive
agriculture/low
intensity urban
0.51.0 per km2
1020 per km2
0.54.0 per km2
1:5000
0.25 ha
intensive
agriculture/
moderately
intensive urban
24 per ha
0.51.0 per ha
0.040.20 per ha
1:1000
100 m2
intensive agriculture 50100 per ha

and urban
development
1020 per ha
0.54 per ha
Table 1.3. Soil survey effort as minimum number of days in the field for different scales
Days in the field per km2
Days required for a

100 km 100 km area
km2 per day in the field
1:5000
40.078
400000
0.025
1:10000
13.496
135 500
0.075
Scale
1:15000
7.140
71 400
0.140
1:20000
4.545
45 500
0.220
1:25000
3.201
32000
0.312
1:30000
2.404
24000
0.416
1:50000
1.078
10 800
0.928
1:100000
0.363
3600
2.755
1:250000
0.086
860
11.613
1:500000
0.029
300
34.487
1:1000000
0.010
100
102.415

15/3/07 10:49:01
5
Soil chemical properties
5.1 Soil acidity

5.1.1
pH
The pH is a measure of soil acidity or alkalinity that gives an indication of the activity of
the hydrogen ion (H+) and hydroxyl ion (OH) in a water solution. Both these ions have
a high chemical activity. Their chemical activity is lowest when the solution or soil is
close to a neutral pH of 7.0. The pH characterises the chemical environment of the soil
and may be used as a guide to suitability of soils for various pasture and crop species.
Soil pH is also an indicator of the chemical processes that occur in the soil, and is a guide
to likely deficiencies and/or toxicities (Slattery et al. 1999). Dragun (1998) also provides
guidelines for interpreting soil pH values for environmental evaluation.
5.1.2
Measurement of pH
Soil pH is usually measured in water or in 0.01M CaCl2 solution at a ratio of one part of
soil to five parts of water by weight. Because these two methods can give quite different
values, statements of pH measurement must show whether the measurement was
obtained in water or 0.01M CaCl2 solution to be meaningful. The conversion below is a
general guide only and is dependent on soil type and conditions.
pH soil/water (1:5) = pH CaCl2 (1:5) + (0.51.0)
Soil pH can be measured in the field using Raupach Indicator (Raupach and Tucker
1959). This measurement usually corresponds to 1:5 pH in water 0.5 pH units (see
Table 5.1). However in practice, variation in the age of Raupach indicator used for field
measurements can result in a wider variation to 1.0. Care should be taken to ensure the
indicator used is within its use-by date. Calibrated pH meters are more reliable.

15/3/07 10:49:21
60
Table 5.1. General interpretation of pH measured in water (1:5 soil/water ratio)

*, test for calcium carbonate (CaCO3 ). Iron and zinc may be deficient. **, with increasing acidity exchangeable aluminium increases
to toxic levels, cadmium and heavy metals become available and molybdenum becomes increasingly unavailable.
pH
Ratings
>9.0
very strongly alkaline
9.08.5
strongly alkaline
8.47.9
moderately alkaline*
7.87.4
mildly alkaline
7.36.6
neutral
6.56.1
slightly acid
6.05.6
moderately acid
5.55.1
strongly acid
5.04.5
very strongly acid**
Source: Bruce and Rayment (1982).
Tables 5.2, 5.3 and Figure 5.1 are general guidelines for pasture and crops.
Table 5.2. Soil pH and lime in pasture establishment
Molybdenum can be limiting in acid soils because of low availability.
Soil pH (1:5 H2O)
Treatment
Above 6.0
Lime or molybdenum (Mo) usually not required.
5.56.0
Lime not usually needed; consider using Mo.
4.56.0
Lime pellet legume seed; use Mo.
4.04.5
Lime pellet legume seed using lime-super, or sow seed into a band of lime; use Mo.
Below 4
Apply lime to raise soil pH; lime pellet legume seed using lime-super or sow seed into a
band of lime; use Mo.
Source: Glendinning (1986).
Table 5.3. Critical acidity and aluminium levels for crops and pastures
*EC (electrical conductivity) 1:5 in dS/m; sub. refers to subterranean.
Very sensitive
plants
Sensitive plants
Tolerant plants
Very tolerant
plants
Examples of plants
barrel medic
canola
lucerne
wheat
wheat
sensitive phalaris phalaris
barley
sub. clover
cocksfoot
perennial rye
lupins
triticale
oats
serradella
pH (CaCl2 ) below which yield declines
4.34.7
depending on
soil group
4.14.5
4.04.3
depending on soil depending on
group
soil group
4.04.2
depending on
soil group
Extractable Al in CaCl2 solution above

which yield declines
0.10.4 ppm
0.40.8 ppm
0.81.6 ppm
1.62.7 ppm
Exchangeable Al as
a percentage of
cation exchange
capacity
916
1621
2132
3243
812
812
1221
2130
0.52
26
610
1016
*EC <0.07
(infertile soils low
CEC);
EC 0.070.23
(most fertile soils);
EC >0.23 (fertiliser
bands, saline soils)
Source: Geeves et al. (1990); Fenton et al. (1993); Fenton and Helyar (2007).

15/3/07 10:49:21
Soil chemical proper ties
61
Fig. 5.1. Optimum pH range for a variety of plants.

15/3/07 10:49:22
62
5.1.3
Aluminium toxicity
Test when pH (CaCl2) is <4.7 (Cregan 1980; Slattery et al. 1999) and see Table 5.3.
Aluminium extracted in 0.01 M CaCl2.
5.1.4
Manganese toxicity
Manganese toxicity affects the metabolism of the plant causing chlorosis and necrosis of
leaf tissue. Many soils have substantial amounts of manganese. However, it is only when
this manganese is released into the soil solution and becomes available that the plants are
affected. This release of manganese is favoured by hot, dry conditions that usually
happen in summer. This variation in manganese levels during the season makes it
difficult to interpret soil tests for manganese. Leaf tissue tests can be used to test for
manganese toxicity. For further information see Fenton et al. (1993).
Critical levels of manganese that begin to affect yield of sensitive species are as
follows:
Exchangeable Mn >0.03 cmol (+)/kg soil
Mn extracted by 0.01M CaCl2, 1:5 solution >65 ppm.
Sensitive species include lucerne, medics, white clover, strawberry clover and canola
(Fenton et al. 1993 and Fenton and Helyar 2007).
5.1.5
Expected rates of acidification
The expected rate of acidification will vary between land uses. The rate will be increased
by:
Higher inputs of nitrogen, especially as nitrate (NO3 ). Nitrate can be added as
fertiliser or by including legumes in the pasture or crop rotation as the legumes
fix nitrogen from the atmosphere and produce ammonium ion (NH4+) that in
turn is converted to nitrate in the soil.
Increased deep drainage that leaches nitrate from the soil. This occurs because the
leaching of nitrate also removes cations such as calcium from the soil. The annual
rainfall will also affect the rate of leaching.
High levels of removal of biomass and plant material from the soil as occurs with
the production of hay.
Indicative acidification rates for a wide range of pasture and crop rotations are
presented in Slattery et al. (1999), which indicate the expected acidification rate of the
stated land management practices. Whether soils become acidic and to what depth will
depend on their initial pH and their buffering capacity (see Table 5.4).

15/3/07 10:49:22
63
Table 5.4. Expected rate of acidification based on the recommended guide for lime requirement
General, minimum application rates of lime required to neutralise the acidification for several agricultural systems in NSW are
given. These rates are based on the assumption that sufficient fertiliser is used to maintain a good clover balance in all pastures.
Lime required to counter

acidification (kg/ha/yr)
Location and rainfall
Farming system
Plains (<500 mm/yr)
crop or crop/pasture
75
Coastal and tablelands (>500 mm/yr)
perennial pasture
100
Southern tablelands (>500 mm/yr)
perennial pasture
annual pasture
25% crop/75% annual pasture
150
200
250
Southern slopes (>500 mm/yr)
perennial pasture
annual pasture
50% crop/50% annual pasture
cropping
150
200
250
300
Irrigation or high rainfall (>1000 mm/yr)
low acidifying N fertiliser

(100300 kg/ha)
high acidifying N fertiliser (>300 kg/ha)
450
Additions for hay removal (based on kg

of lime per tonne of produce)
1000
grass hay: 25
clover hay: 40
lucerne hay: 70
Adapted from Fenton et al. (1993), and Fenton and Helyar (2007).
Paddock strips may be used to test for lime response. This involves adding lime to
one or several small strips in a paddock. The responses to lime may then be observed.
5.1.6
Buffering capacity
Buffering capacity is the ability of a soil to resist changes in pH. It increases with cation
exchange capacity and organic matter content. For example, a clayey soil with a high
cation exchange capacity will acidify more slowly than a sandy soil. A sandy soil with a
low cation exchange capacity can acidify very quickly.
Helyar et al. (1990) derived a buffering capacity equation, which can be used for the
whole profile. This equation is used to demonstrate the likely range in buffering capacity
values as a general guideline.
Another article by Ridley et al. (1990) on acidification of undergrazed annual and
perennial grass-based pastures shows that permanent perennial pastures acidify more
slowly than permanent annual pastures.
5.1.7
Influence of soil pH (water) on nutrient availability
The soil pH affects the availability of various nutrients, toxic elements and chemical
species to plant roots. The pH is therefore a very good guide to some expected nutrient
deficiencies and toxic effects (Brady 1984; McKenzie et al. 2004: 16). For detailed
diagnostic purposes reference should be made to specific texts such as Peverill et al. (1999)
and other specialised literature on individual nutrients and toxic chemical species.
As a general guide, the solubility and availability to plants of the following elements
is strongly affected by pHwater:
Element
Phosphorus
pH at which availability is reduced

pH <5.0 and between 8.59.5

15/3/07 10:49:22
64
Nitrogen
Potassium
Sulfur
Calcium
Magnesium
Iron
Manganese
Boron
Copper and zinc
Molybdenum
Aluminium
5.1.8
pH <5.0 and >9.0

pH <5.0
pH <5.0
pH <5.0 and >9.0
pH <5.0 and >9.0
pH <7.5
pH <4.5 and >8.0
pH <4.5 and between 7.58.5
pH <4.5 and >8.0
pH <5.5
pH >5.5
Key references
Cregan (1980); Bruce and Rayment (1982); Glendinning (1986); Helyar et al. (1990); Ridley
et al. (1990); Fenton et al. (1993); Slattery et al. (1999); Fenton and Helyar (2007).
5.2 Exchangeable cations

5.2.1
Cation exchange capacity (CEC)
Cation exchange capacity is the capacity of the soil to hold and exchange cations. It
provides a buffering effect to changes in pH, available nutrients, calcium levels and soil
structural changes. As such it is a major controlling agent of stability of soil structure,
nutrient availability for plant growth, soil pH, and the soils reaction to fertilisers and
other ameliorants. A low CEC means the soil has a low resistance to changes in soil
chemistry that are caused by land use (see Table 5.5).
CEC units are usually expressed as centimoles of positive charge per kg of soil
[cmol(+)/kg)], which is numerically equivalent to the previously used unit of milliequivalents per 100 g (me/100 g). CEC is usually estimated by displacing the
exchangeable cations (Na, Ca, Mg, K) with another strongly adsorbed cation, and then
determining how much of the strongly adsorbed cation is retained by the soil. The
strongly adsorbed cation is supplied by reagents such as ammonium chloride,
ammonium acetate, silver thiourea, barium chloride and potassium chloride. Details of
these methods and their advantages and disadvantages are discussed in Rayment and
Higginson (1992) and Rengasamy and Churchman (1999).
Table 5.5. Ratings for cation exchange capacity
*, soils with CEC less than three are often low in fertility and susceptible to soil acidification.
Rating
CEC cmol (+)/kg
Very low
Low
Moderate
High
Very high
<6*
612
1225
2540
>40
Source: Metson (1961).

15/3/07 10:49:22
5.2.2
65
Exchangeable cations
The five most abundant cations in soils are calcium (Ca2+), magnesium (Mg2+),
potassium (K+), sodium (Na+) (see Table 5.6) and, in strongly acid soils, aluminium
(Al3+). The cations manganese (Mn2+), iron (Fe2+), copper (Cu2+) and zinc (Zn2+) are
usually present in amounts that do not contribute significantly to the cation
complement. Therefore, it is common practice to measure the concentrations of only the
five most abundant cations. These may be summed to give an approximate value of CEC
called the Effective CEC. The individual cations may then be expressed as a percentage
of the Effective CEC (Abbott 1989).
Table 5.6. Levels of exchangeable cations (cmol(+)/kg)
Cation
Very low
Low
Moderate
High
Very high
Na
00.1
0.10.3
0.30.7
0.72.0
>2
00.2
0.20.3
0.30.7
0.72.0
>2
Ca
02
25
510
1020
>20
Mg
00.3
0.31.0
13
38
>8
It has been suggested that the proportions of the various cations of the Effective CEC
(expressed as a percentage) are more relevant to plant performance than the actual levels
(see Table 5.7).
Table 5.7. A guide to desirable proportions of CEC of different cations for many plants
Cations
Ranges (% CEC)
Calcium
6580
Magnesium
1015
Potassium
15
Sodium
01
Aluminium
<5
Source: Abbott (1989).
Sandy soils and acid soils that have been strongly leached often have very low levels
of exchangeable calcium and magnesium, and plant growth may be limited as a result.
Also, exchangeable potassium levels below 0.2 cmol(+)/kg suggest that a plant response
to the application of potassium fertiliser is possible, particularly where heavy removal of
potassium by harvesting or grazing occurs (Abbott 1989).
Exchangeable Al only becomes significant at pH levels less than 5.5 in water or about
4.7 in CaCl2. The Al3+ cation can be toxic to roots and is one of the major reasons that
soil acidity can affect plant growth (see Section 5.1.3) (Cregan 1980; Fenton and Helyar
2007).
Soils that are high in sodium and magnesium show more dispersion than soils that
are high in sodium and calcium (Abbott 1989; Emerson and Bakker 1973) (see
Table 5.8).

15/3/07 10:49:23
66
Table 5.8. Ca/Mg ratio

Ca/Mg ratio
Description
<1
Ca deficient
14
Ca (low)
46
balanced
610
Mg (low)
>10
Mg deficient
Source: Eckert (1987).
5.2.3
Base saturation
Base saturation (BS) is the percentage of cation exchange capacity that is saturated with
potassium, calcium, magnesium and sodium ions.
BS = (K+Ca+Mg+Na) 100/CEC
It provides an indication of how closely nutrient status approaches potential fertility.
This may be affected by variable charge of the clay minerals in the soil, and
interpretation of results can be difficult (see Rengasamy and Churchman 1999).
The range 6080% base saturation may be regarded as satisfactory for pastures, with
a tolerance value of 10% (see Tables 5.95.10).
Table 5.9. Ratings of base saturation
Range (% BS)
020
2040
4060
6080
>80
Rating
very low
low
moderate
high
very high
Table 5.10. Base saturation as a criterion of leaching

Base saturation figures for the soil profile may be regarded as an indication of intensity of leaching or extent of leaching, in the
sense of depletion of the exchangeable bases.
Range (% BS)
Rating
70100
very weakly leached
5070
weakly leached
3050
moderately leached
1530
strongly leached
015
very strongly leached
5.2.4
Key references
Metson (1961); Eckert (1987); Abbott (1989); Rengasamy and Churchman (1999).

15/3/07 10:49:23

Inter Soil Test Results

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Inter Soil Test Results

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Inter Soil Test Results

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Interpreting Soil Test Results

What Do All the Numbers Mean?

+61 3 9662 7666

Pam Hazelton and NSW Department of Natural Resources 2007

Pam Hazelton and NSW Department of Natural Resources 2007

Pam Hazelton and NSW Department of Natural Resources 2007

1.1 Where, how and when to sample

When is the best time to sample?

Pam Hazelton and NSW Department of Natural Resources 2007

1.2 The number of samples required to produce a soil map

Pam Hazelton and NSW Department of Natural Resources 2007

land use history

Minimum acceptable range

Source: Reid (1988).

Pam Hazelton and NSW Department of Natural Resources 2007

Area shown by Typical land use

Site and soil

Site and soil

land capability and 0.51.0 per km2

0.10.2 per km2

0.21.0 per 25 km2

land capability and 24 per km2

0.51.0 per km2

0.040.20 per km2

618 per km2

1.53.0 per km2

0.10.5 per km2

0.51.0 per km2

1020 per km2

0.54.0 per km2

intensive agriculture 50100 per ha

Days required for a

km2 per day in the field

Pam Hazelton and NSW Department of Natural Resources 2007

5.1 Soil acidity

Pam Hazelton and NSW Department of Natural Resources 2007

Table 5.1. General interpretation of pH measured in water (1:5 soil/water ratio)

very strongly alkaline

very strongly acid**

Source: Bruce and Rayment (1982).

Soil pH (1:5 H2O)

Lime or molybdenum (Mo) usually not required.

Lime not usually needed; consider using Mo.

Lime pellet legume seed; use Mo.

Source: Glendinning (1986).

pH (CaCl2 ) below which yield declines

Extractable Al in CaCl2 solution above

Pam Hazelton and NSW Department of Natural Resources 2007

Fig. 5.1. Optimum pH range for a variety of plants.

Pam Hazelton and NSW Department of Natural Resources 2007

Expected rates of acidification

Pam Hazelton and NSW Department of Natural Resources 2007

Lime required to counter

Location and rainfall

Plains (<500 mm/yr)

Coastal and tablelands (>500 mm/yr)

Southern tablelands (>500 mm/yr)

Southern slopes (>500 mm/yr)

Irrigation or high rainfall (>1000 mm/yr)

low acidifying N fertiliser