This article was downloaded by: [University of Hawaii at Manoa] On: 11 July 2013, At: 18:11 Publisher: Taylor & Francis Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK Journal of Plant Nutrition Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/lpla20 Responses of Coffee Seedlings to Calcium and Zinc Amendments to Two Hawaiian Acid Soils N. V. Hue a a Department of Tropical Plant and Soil Sciences, College of Tropical Agriculture and Human Resources, University of Hawaii, Honolulu, HI, USA Published online: 16 Aug 2006. To cite this article: N. V. Hue (2005) Responses of Coffee Seedlings to Calcium and Zinc Amendments to Two Hawaiian Acid Soils, Journal of Plant Nutrition, 27:2, 261-274, DOI: 10.1081/PLN-120027653 To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1081/pln-120027653 PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the Content ) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content. This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http:// www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
JOURNAL OF PLANT NUTRITION Vol. 27, No. 2, pp. 261 274, 2004 Responses of Coffee Seedlings to Calcium and Zinc Amendments to Two Hawaiian Acid Soils N. V. Hue* Department of Tropical Plant and Soil Sciences, College of Tropical Agriculture and Human Resources, University of Hawaii, Honolulu, HI, USA ABSTRACT Coffee orchards in Hawaii are planted on either volcanic ash-derived Andisols or highly weathered acid Oxisols and Ultisols. These soils are often low in phyto-available calcium (Ca) and zinc (Zn), which limit coffee production. To obtain the locally specific information required to remove these soil fertility restrictions, a bench-scale experiment was conducted with six Ca and two Zn treatments, factorially applied to an Andisol and an Ultisol. Three-month-old coffee (Coffea arabica) seedlings, cv. Guatamala, were transplanted (one per pot of 2 kg soil) and grown for 5 months under shaded *Correspondence: N. V. Hue, Department of Tropical Plant and Soil Sciences, College of Tropical Agriculture and Human Resources, University of Hawaii, Honolulu, HI 96822, USA; Fax: 808-956-3894; E-mail: nvhue@hawaii.edu. 261 DOI: 10.1081/PLN-120027653 Copyright & 2004 by Marcel Dekker, Inc. 0190-4167 (Print); 1532-4087 (Online) www.dekker.com
262 Hue greenhouse conditions. The results indicated that for maximum biomass production, soil ph should be raised to around 6.0 with lime (CaCO 3 ) or a combination of lime and gypsum (CaSO 4 2H 2 O) such that Mehlich 3-extractable Ca exceeds 1900 mg kg 1, and that healthy coffee seedlings require Ca 12 g kg 1, Zn> 15 mg kg 1, and aluminum (Al) <120 mg kg 1 in their leaves. Key Words: Coffee seedlings; Calcium deficiency; Zinc nutrition; Hawaii acid soils. INTRODUCTION Coffee has become an important crop to Hawaii s agriculture and economy since the demise of sugarcane (Saccharum officinarum) and the decline of pineapple (Ananas comosus) during the last decade. [1] The state s coffee production could have doubled and quality could have been higher if soil conditions (e.g., nematode reduction, balanced nutrients) had been optimized (D.P. Schmitt, personal communication, 2001). Hawaii s agricultural soils are dominated by volcanic ash-derived Andisols and highly weathered acid Oxisols and Ultisols. [2] These soils are characterized by low ph (acidic, ph < 5.5), inadequate basic nutrients, such as Ca and magnesium (Mg), and micronutrients, especially Zn, due to heavy leaching and/or strong adsorption. [3] For example, in a state-wide survey in 2000, Hue et al. [4] reported that most soils on which coffee was grown on the island of Oahu contained less than 1000 mg kg 1 Ca and 5 mg kg 1 Zn as extracted by the Mehlich 3 solution. These nutrient levels were marginally low for coffee based on the adequate levels proposed by Malavolta [5] of between 1200 and 1800 mg kg 1 exchangeable (NH 4 OAc-extractable) Ca (which is approximately equivalent to Mehlich 3-extractable Ca as determined for over 500 Hawaiian soil samples by our lab), and 4 6 mg kg 1 Zn as extracted by the Mehlich 1 solution, which often extracts much less soil Zn than the Mehlich 3 solution. In plants, Ca plays a major role in the structure and permeability of cell membranes as well as being essential for cell division and elongation. Thus, Ca deficiency results in the failure of terminal buds of shoots and apical tips of roots to develop, which causes plant growth to cease. Generally, Ca is rather immobile in the plant. Because of limited translocation of Ca in the phloem, fruits and storage organs suffer the most when Ca is inadequate. This explains why Ca deficiency is manifested as blossom-end rot in tomato and bitter pit in apple. [6] Adequate Ca levels in coffee leaves have been reported to be 8 15 g kg 1
Responses of Coffee Seedlings to Calcium and Zinc Amendments 263 (M.A. Nagao, personal communication, 1999) and approximately 10 g kg 1. [5] The specific critical Ca level likely varies with plant cultivars. [7] Plant Zn, on the other hand, is involved in many enzymatic activities. Zinc is important in the synthesis of the amino acid tryptophane, a component of some proteins and a precursor of the growth hormone indoleacetic acid. [8] Thus, Zn deficiency causes the shortening of internodes and smaller-than-normal (rosette) leaves. [9] In coffee, Zn deficiency results in smaller beans with low quality, [10] which corresponds to a leaf Zn level below 15 mg kg 1. [5] The objectives of this study were (i) to quantify the critical levels of Ca and Zn in coffee seedlings grown on Hawaii s soils, and (ii) to identify soil amendments that effectively eliminate these growth-limiting factors. MATERIALS AND METHODS Soil Properties and Treatments The soils used were an Andisol (Thixotropic, isothermic, clayey, Typic Hydrudand, Kealakekua series) from Kona, Hawaii island, where gourmet coffee has been produced for the past half century, and an acid Ultisol (Oxidic, isothermic, clayey, Humoxic Tropohumult, Leilehua series), Oahu island, formerly planted to sugarcane and on which coffee orchards have recently been established. In the unamended state, the Andisol had a ph of 5.2, 600 mg kg 1 Mehlich 3-extractable Ca, 31 cmol c kg 1 CEC (measured with NH 4 OAc, ph 7.0); and the Ultisol, ph 4.9, 480 mg kg 1 extractable Ca, 15.0 cmol c kg 1 CEC. The liming curves for the two soils are presented in Fig. 1. Because of the irreversible hydrophobicity of the Hydrudands when dried, the Andisol was kept slightly moist at all times (its moisture content and dry weight were determined from subsamples). The soils were screened to pass a 3-mm sieve and amended with Ca or Ca plus Zn as follows. Six treatments contained only Ca and the Ca amounts and sources were (1) unamended control, (2) 4 cmol c kg 1 CaCO 3, (3) 8 cmol c kg 1 CaCO 3, (4) 4 cmol c kg 1 CaSO 4, (5) 8 cmol c kg 1 CaSO 4, (6) 4 cmol c kg 1 CaCO 3, þ4 cmol c kg 1 CaSO 4. These treatments would allow a separation of Al toxicity from Ca deficiency. Six additional treatments contained 5 mg kg 1 Zn as ZnSO 4 7H 2 O in addition to the Ca levels. Basal fertilizers included (in mg kg 1 ) 280 N as urea, 155 P and 195 K as KH 2 PO 4 and 24 Mg as MgSO 4. The soils and amendments/ fertilizers were mixed thoroughly under dry (or slightly moist) conditions,
264 Hue 7.5 7.0 6.5 Soil ph 6.0 5.5 5.0 Kealakekua Andisol Leilehua Ultisol 4.5 0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 CaCO 3 added, g kg -1 Figure 1. Lime requirement curves of the Kealakekua Andisol and Leilehua Ultisol used to grow coffee in Hawaii. the water was added to field water holding capacity and the treated soils were incubated for two weeks. Three-month-old seedlings (about 15 cm tall) of Coffea arabica cv. Guatamala free of nematodes from Kona, Hawaii Island, were transplanted one per pot containing 2 kg soil. A split-split-plot experimental design was used, with soil series as the main plot, Zn amendment as the subplot, and Ca amendment as the sub-sub plot. Each treatment was replicated three times. The coffee seedlings were grown in a glasshouse, which had an average (over the growing period) day temperature of 28 C and night temperature of 20 C, solar energy of 7 MJ m 2 day 1 (under 50% shading with a green plastic cloth). Chemical and Statistical Analyses The coffee seedlings were harvested after five months of growth. Roots and shoots were separated and their dry weights recorded. Finely ground (<0.42 mm diameter or 60-mesh) tissue samples (0.20 g) of dry leaves (the fourth and fifth leaves from the growing point) and roots were ashed at 500 C for 4 h until the ash turned whitish gray. The residue was mixed with 5 ml of 1 M HNO 3 and heated slowly at 120 C until dryness (this step was taken to ensure a complete dissolution of metal oxides). The residue was subsequently re-dissolved in 20 ml of 0.1 M HCl and filtered through Whatman No. 2 filter paper before nutrient analysis using an inductively coupled plasma spectrometer (ICP).
Responses of Coffee Seedlings to Calcium and Zinc Amendments 265 Soil subsamples, before planting and after harvest, were air dried, thoroughly mixed and screened to pass a 1-mm sieve for chemical analysis. Soil ph was determined by equilibrating 20 g soil with 20 ml of deionized water for 30 min, and measuring the slurry ph with a ph meter equipped with a pair of glass/calomel electrodes. Mehlich 3-extractable nutrients were obtained by shaking 2.0 g soil with 25 ml of the Mehlich 3 solution [11] for 5 min and filtering through Whatman No. 6S filter paper. Calcium, Zn, and many other nutrients in the filtrate were measured with the ICP. Statistics Effects of soil amendments (gypsum, lime, and Zn) on soil properties and coffee growth and nutrient content were analyzed via the analysis of variance (ANOVA) and least significant difference (LSD) mean comparison, using the SAS software (SAS Inst., Cary, NC). Regression analysis was performed with the Sigma Plot 2001 program (SPSS, Inc., Chicago, IL). RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Effects of Calcium and Zinc Amendments on Soil Properties Lime amendments at 4 and 8 cmol c kg 1 raised soil ph from 5.1 to 5.7 and 6.2 in the Andisol, and from 5.0 to 5.7 and 6.0 in the Ultisol, respectively (Table 1). The results were virtually identical to those predicted by the liming curves (Fig. 1). In contrast, gypsum applications did not change soil ph in the Andisol, but lowered soil ph by about 0.2 units in the Ultisol (Table 1). This can be partly explained by a 10-fold difference in extractable Al:KCl-extractable Al averaged 0.18 cmol c kg 1 in the control Andisol and 1.8 cmol c kg 1 in the control Ultisol. Extractable Al was reduced significantly by lime, but was increased slightly by application of 8 cmol c kg 1 gypsum to the Ultisol (Table 1). Relative to the control, a combination of 4 cmol c kg 1 lime and 4 cmol c kg 1 gypsum raised soil ph slightly; this treatment also reduced extractable Al to nil in the Andisol and by half, to 0.95 cmol c kg 1, in the Ultisol (Table 1). Mehlich 3-extractable Ca increased from approximately 590 mg kg 1 in the control to 1260 and 1840 mg kg 1 when lime or gypsum was applied to the Andisol at 4 and 8 cmol c kg 1, respectively (Table 1A). Despite a much higher solubility of gypsum over lime, the Ca sources did not significantly affect Ca extractability, which averaged about 80% of
266 Hue Table 1A. Soil ph and Mehlich 3-extractable nutrients of the Kealakekua Andisol from Kona (average of levels prior to planting and after harvest). Treatment Ca K Mg Mn P Zn Rate KCl-ext. Al Source (cmol (cmol c kg 1 c kg 1 ) ph (mg kg 1 ) ) No-Zn added Control 5.1 606 318 184 4.8 4.1 3.3 0.20 Lime (L) 4 5.8 1,258 370 172 4.0 4.2 3.7 0.01 8 6.2 1,789 221 167 2.9 4.9 3.7 BD a Gypsum 4 5.3 1,285 308 162 4.2 4.8 3.8 0.10 8 5.2 1,802 222 180 4.2 5.2 3.4 0.10 Lþgypsum (4 þ 4) 5.6 1,985 272 214 3.6 5.0 3.4 0.01 þ 5mgkg 1 Zn added Control 5.2 572 312 181 5.2 4.3 4.1 0.16 Lime (L) 4 5.7 1,239 337 172 4.4 4.1 5.1 BD 8 6.3 1,760 205 196 3.4 4.9 7.0 BD Gypsum 4 5.1 1,270 282 162 4.8 4.4 4.2 0.16 8 5.3 1,860 294 167 5.4 4.8 6.9 0.10 L þ gypsum (4 þ 4) 5.5 1,824 319 203 4.7 4.7 6.8 0.02 a BD: below detection limits. Table 1B. Soil ph, and Mehlich 3-extractable nutrients of the Leilehua Ultisol from Oahu (average of levels prior to planting and after harvest). Treatment Ca K Mg Mn P Zn Rate KCl-ext. Al Source (cmol (cmol c kg 1 c kg 1 ) ph (mg kg 1 ) ) No-Zn added Control 5.0 476 348 217 23 32 5.2 1.87 Lime (L) 4 5.7 1,032 327 226 17 27 4.8 0.26 8 6.0 1,469 295 198 12 30 4.2 0.01 Gypsum 4 4.9 1,180 341 187 19 34 5.0 1.90 8 4.7 1,567 307 201 22 40 6.9 2.10 L þ gypsum (4 þ 4) 5.2 1,419 301 192 15 34 6.6 1.00 þ 5mgkg 1 Zn added Control 5.0 478 313 198 18 32 8.1 1.72 Lime (L) 4 5.7 999 296 171 15 27 8.5 0.24 8 6.0 1,475 265 201 11 31 8.9 0.01 Gypsum 4 4.9 1,052 292 178 18 29 8.2 1.90 8 4.7 1,580 274 162 20 30 8.4 2.22 L þ gypsum (4 þ 4) 5.2 1,503 306 192 15 34 8.9 0.90
Responses of Coffee Seedlings to Calcium and Zinc Amendments 267 the added Ca. Similar observations can be made for the Ultisol, of which extractable Ca increased from 477 mg kg 1 in the control to 1066 and 1502 mg kg 1 in the low and high Ca treatments (Table 1B). Relative Ca extractability was about 70% for the Ultisol, perhaps because more Ca had been taken up by coffee seedlings during their five-month growth period. Addition of 5 mg kg 1 Zn increased Mehlich 3-extractable Zn by about 40% in the Andisol (from an average of 3.55 to 5.68 mg kg 1, Table 1A), and by about 60% in the Ultisol (from 5.45 to 8.50 mg kg 1, Table 1B). Calcium additions seemed to increase extractable Zn in the Andisol, but not in the Ultisol (Table 1). (This difference might have been due to reduced nutrient uptake by coffee seedlings in the Andisol.) Although manganese (Mn) and phosphorus (P) were not the variables of interest in this experiment, it should be noted that extractable Mn was decreased slightly with lime and increased slightly with gypsum amendments (Table 1). The changes in Mn solubility are consistent with the effects of treatments on the ph changes discussed earlier. Furthermore, Mn levels ranged from 2.9 to 5.4 mg kg 1 in the Andisol and from 11 to 23 mg kg 1 in the Ultisol. Extractable P levels were unaffected by the Ca and Zn treatments, but were quite different between the two soils. Average P was 4.6 mg kg 1 in the Andisol and 31.6 mg kg 1 in the Ultisol (Table 1). This was due mainly to the very high P sorption of the Andisol (1500 2000 mg kg 1 added P is required to attain 0.20 mg PL 1 in the soil solution; Hue, unpublished data). Effects of Calcium and Zinc Amendments on Coffee Biomass and Tissue Nutrient Composition In the strong adsorption and nutrient poor Andisol, the additions of lime and/or gypsum increased coffee biomass many fold relative to the no Ca control (Fig. 2). For example, in the no-zn added set of treatments, the 8 cmol c kg 1 lime and the 4:4 lime:gypsum combination treatments had total biomass (roots þ shoots) of 2.35 g plant 1 and 2.25 g plant 1 vs. 0.38 g plant 1 in the control. Nutrient composition in leaves (Table 2A) and roots (Table 2B) supports the contention that Ca was a major growth-limiting factor in this soil. For example, leaf Ca increased from 6.5 g kg 1 in the no-zn control to 10.7 and 10.2 g kg 1 in the treatments with 8 cmol c kg 1 lime and 4:4 lime:gypsum treatments, respectively (Table 2A). Differences in Ca levels in coffee roots were even more distinct: 3.4 g kg 1 in the control vs. 9.4 and 9.6 g kg 1 in the high lime and lime:gypsum treatments (Table 2B).
268 Hue Treatment L + Gypsum 4 + 4 Gypsum 8.0 cmol c kg -1 4.0 Coffee grown on the Andisol Roots Roots + Shoots CaCO 3 (L) 8.0 cmol c kg -1 4.0 Control L + Gypsum 4 + 4 Gypsum 8.0 cmol c kg -1 4.0 8.0 CaCO 3 (L) cmol c kg -1 4.0 Control + 5.0 mg/kg Zn as ZnSO 4.7H 2 O No Zn added 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 Biomass, g seedling -1 Figure 2. Biomass of coffee seedlings grown on the Andisol from Kona, Hawaii, as a function of Ca and Zn amendments. In contrast to Ca effects, Zn addition did not increase, or even slightly decreased, biomass production (Fig. 2). Given the low extractable (and presumably plant-available) Zn in this soil, a growth increase due to Zn addition would have been expected. Perhaps, the soil retained or adsorbed Zn so strongly that most of the added Zn was not available to the coffee seedlings. Leaf Zn levels seem to support this explanation: they ranged between 8 and 12 mg kg 1 in the no-zn treatments and between 11 and 15 mg kg 1 in the Zn-added treatments (Table 2A). These Zn levels were considered deficient, especially for coffee seedlings (Bittenbender, personal communication, 2002). If the plant growth
Responses of Coffee Seedlings to Calcium and Zinc Amendments 269 Table 2A. Nutrient composition in leaves of coffee grown on the Andisol (Kealakekua series) from Kona, Hawaii. Treatment Al B Ca Cu K Mg Mn P Zn Rate Source (cmol c kg 1 ) (mg kg 1 ) No-Zn added Control 84 71 6,500 7.1 40,100 2,900 202 550 12 Lime (L) 4 110 51 9,100 7.1 33,300 3,300 216 850 9 (cmol c kg 1 ) 8 74 50 10,700 5.2 26,500 2,600 138 910 9 Gypsum 4 96 50 9,800 5.2 34,000 3,100 214 820 11 (cmol c kg 1 ) 8 81 65 10,200 5.2 25,800 2,700 200 1,100 10 L þ gypsum (4 þ 4) 82 56 10,200 5.3 26,400 2,750 150 970 8 þ5mgkg 1 Zn added Control 70 48 6,600 5.9 33,300 3,500 183 710 15 Lime (L) 4 104 68 9,480 7.3 34,100 3,500 203 840 14 8 74 60 11,800 6.9 27,800 2,800 128 1,200 14 Gypsum 4 104 68 9,800 5.2 30,000 3,000 204 980 14 8 78 58 10,600 7.9 27,200 2,800 216 1,200 11 L þ gypsum (4 þ 4) 95 58 11,300 8.4 28,000 3,300 204 1,450 13 Table 2B. Nutrient composition in roots of coffee grown on the Andisol (Kealakekua series) from Kona, Hawaii. Treatment Al B Ca Cu K Mg Mn P Zn Rate Source (cmol c kg 1 ) (mg kg 1 ) No-Zn added Control 2,300 34 3,400 20 39,400 8,800 112 590 114 Lime (L) 4 1,900 31 6,500 33 40,500 11,200 90 990 71 8 1,600 57 9,400 24 36,300 11,000 77 950 66 Gypsum 4 2,600 39 6,400 27 38,600 10,700 147 830 43 8 1,600 36 9,900 31 35,700 10,500 105 990 43 L þ gypsum (4 þ 4) 2,000 30 9,600 33 36,200 11,700 78 1,000 52 þ 5mgkg 1 Zn added Control 2,300 32 4,400 29 41,800 11,800 110 840 82 Lime (L) 4 1,750 57 5,700 29 41,500 12,400 103 810 91 8 1,500 24 9,600 26 35,500 12,000 75 1,200 183 Gypsum 4 2,200 38 8,000 37 39,500 9,600 143 930 104 8 1,300 40 8,900 30 35,500 11,700 174 1,300 143 L þ gypsum (4 þ 4) 2,300 31 10,400 32 35,600 12,700 130 1,230 119
270 Hue follows a sigmoidal pattern, as discussed by Black, [12] then a small addition of a limiting nutrient may not result in any increase in biomass. It is interesting to note that the high rate of gypsum and the lime:gypsum combination of the added Zn treatments did not produce as much biomass as the high lime treatment (Fig. 2). There are no compelling explanations for these results, except to speculate that K Ca imbalance might be a possibility as indicated by the results of Table 2. Aluminum toxicity caused by high gypsum addition was unlikely because the Andisol contained very little KCl-extractable Al, and plant Al levels did not show any consistent pattern and were rather low by coffee nutrition standards. [5] In the high Al and low Ca Ultisol, the additions of Ca, except for the 8 cmol c kg 1 gypsum, increased biomass more than 2 fold (Fig. 3). For example, in the no-zn treatments, coffee biomass increased from Treatment L + Gypsum 4 + 4 Gypsum 8.0 cmol c kg -1 4.0 CaCO 3 (L) cmol c kg -1 Control 8.0 4.0 L + Gypsum 4 + 4 Gypsum 8.0 cmol c kg -1 4.0 Coffee grown on the Ultisol Roots Roots + Shoots + 5.0 mg kg -1 Zn as ZnSO 4.7H 2 O 8.0 CaCO 3 (L) cmol c kg -1 4.0 Control No Zn added 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 Biomass, g seedling -1 Figure 3. Biomass of coffee seedlings grown on the Ultisol from central Oahu, Hawaii, as a function of Ca and Zn amendments.
Responses of Coffee Seedlings to Calcium and Zinc Amendments 271 0.92 g plant 1 in the control to 1.15 and 1.93 g plant 1 in the 4 and 8 cmol c kg 1 lime, respectively. Such increases can be attributed mainly to improved Ca nutrition of leaves (Table 3A) and roots (Table 3B). In the high gypsum (8 cmol c kg 1 ) treatment, soil ph was lowered and Al probably reached toxic levels, resulting in reduced biomass. Tissue Al (Table 3) seemed to support this reasoning. Leaf Al concentrations increased from about 90 mg kg 1 in the control to about 135 mg kg 1 in the 8 cmol c kg 1 gypsum (Table 3A). Root Al levels, which were 20 30 fold higher than leaf Al, ranged from 3500 3800 mg kg 1 in the control to 3800 3900 mg kg 1 in the 8 cmol c kg 1 gypsum treatment. For comparison, the limed treatments averaged 3000 mg kg 1 Al in roots (Table 3B). Thus, unlike the Andisol, Al toxicity could inhibit coffee growth in the Ultisol if not properly amended. Zinc additions did not significantly change biomass production (Fig. 3). The effect was similar to that in the Andisol, but perhaps for a different reason. Based on Zn levels in the soil (Table 1B), coffee leaves (Table 3A) and roots (Table 3B), it is believed that Zn was adequate for coffee growth in this Ultisol without Zn fertilization. Thus, Zn addition would not increase growth. [12] Table 3A. Nutrient composition in leaves of coffee grown on the Ultisol (Leilehua series) from Central Oahu, Hawaii. Treatment Al B Ca Cu K Mg Mn P Zn Rate Source (cmol c kg 1 ) (mg kg 1 ) No-Zn added Control 88 61 5,300 6.4 22,900 3,900 255 840 20 Lime (L) 4 90 63 10,300 4.1 24,400 3,100 228 740 25 8 95 57 12,500 3.0 23,500 2,900 204 710 15 Gypsum 4 78 71 8,500 6.5 26,500 3,700 263 940 19 8 129 75 8,600 5.2 21,200 3,300 285 580 28 L þ gypsum (4 þ 4) 87 67 11,000 6.1 24,400 3,000 226 880 17 þ5mgkg 1 Zn added Control 92 66 5,700 5.1 23,800 3,400 234 800 19 Lime (L) 4 98 70 10,400 6.9 24,600 3,900 225 970 28 8 84 74 11,400 6.6 25,900 3,000 185 870 17 Gypsum 4 79 53 8,700 6.9 25,200 3,600 248 920 21 8 138 76 8,800 3.9 22,200 3,400 291 690 25 L þ gypsum (4 þ 4) 89 72 11,200 6.3 27,700 3,400 231 890 15
272 Hue Table 3B. Nutrient composition in roots of coffee grown on the Ultisol (Leilehua series) from Central Oahu, Hawaii. Treatment Rate Al B Ca Cu K Mg Mn P Zn Source (cmol c kg 1 ) (mg kg 1 ) No-Zn added Control 3,500 39 2,600 39 22,200 6,300 114 930 102 Lime (L) 4 3,200 70 4,800 36 21,800 7,400 89 720 63 8 2,600 39 8,300 31 26,700 11,300 162 810 50 Gypsum 4 2,800 38 5,400 40 29,900 10,900 128 910 66 8 3,800 106 4,500 24 21,700 7,300 100 630 104 Lþgypsum (4 þ 4) 3,400 53 7,400 37 29,900 10,700 147 890 61 þ5mgkg 1 Zn added Control 3,800 26 2,900 40 24,300 6,900 113 880 150 Lime (L) 4 2,900 51 5,500 35 26,600 9,100 99 900 182 8 3,300 33 8,300 39 31,200 12,300 156 810 49 Gypsum 4 3,100 33 5,100 47 30,400 10,700 123 1,000 179 8 3,900 53 5,400 25 21,800 8,800 112 760 98 L þ gypsum (4 þ 4) 2,900 30 8,200 34 29,900 11,100 123 850 77 Relative biomass, % 100 r 2 = 0.49 90 (A) 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 6 8 10 12 Leaf Ca, g kg -1 Relative biomass, % 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 r 2 = 0.47 (B) 10 500 750 1000 1250 1500 1750 2000 Mehlich3-extractable Ca, mg kg -1 Figure 4. Relative biomass of coffee seedlings (Coffea arabica, cv. Guatamala) as a function of leaf Ca (A), and extractable soil Ca (B). Since Ca was a limiting factor for growth in both soils, relative biomass was combined (after setting the highest biomass in each soil to 100% and discarding the data that were affected by Al toxicity in the Ultisol) and plotted against leaf Ca (Fig. 4A) and soil Ca (Fig. 4B). Figure 4 allows us to predict that leaf Ca in young coffee seedlings must exceed 12 g kg 1 Ca to attain more than 90% of maximum growth (Fig. 4A). Such leaf Ca levels require an extractable soil Ca be above 1900 mg kg 1 (Fig. 4B).
Responses of Coffee Seedlings to Calcium and Zinc Amendments 273 Deficient levels of Zn and toxic levels of Al could not be clearly identified because of limited data. Only general observations can be made: good growth of coffee seedlings require a leaf Zn concentration >15 mg kg 1, and a leaf Al concentration <120 mg kg 1 (Tables 2A and 3A). Concentrations of Al and Ca in roots might be better indicators of toxicity and deficiency of these two elements (Tables 2B and 3B), but might not be practical because the plants would be damaged or killed by sampling actions. CONCLUSIONS Tropical soils represented by high sorbing and nutrient poor Andisols or highly weathered acid Ultisols can support good coffee growth if properly fertilized and managed. To have good coffee growth, soils should be amended with lime (CaCO 3 ) or a combination of lime and gypsum (CaSO 4 ) to attain a ph 6.0 with a Mehlich 3-extractable Ca 1900 mg kg 1. Healthy coffee seedlings, cv. Guatamala, required Ca 12 g kg 1,Zn 15 mg kg 1,andAl< 120 mg kg 1 in their leaves. REFERENCES 1. Hawaii Agricultural Statistics Service, 2002. http://www.nass.usda. gov/hi/speccrop/coffee.htm (accessed August 2002). 2. Hue, N.V.; Ikawa, H. Liming Acid Soils of Hawaii; Dept. Agron. Soil Sci., Coll. Tropical Agric. Human Resources, Univ. Hawaii: Honolulu, HI, 1994; Fact Sheet No. 1, 4 pp. 3. Silva, J.A.; Uchida, R. Plant Nutrient Management in Hawaii s Soils; Coll. Tropical Agric. Human Resources, Univ. Hawaii: Honolulu, HI, 2000; 158 pp. 4. Hue, N.V.; Schmitt, D.P.; Bittenbender, H.C.; Sipes, B.S. Optimizing the Soil Environment for Coffee Growth: A T-STAR Project Annual Report; Coll. Tropical Agric. Human Resources, Univ. Hawaii: Honolulu, HI, 2001, 12 pp. 5. Malavolta, E. Recent Advances in Coffee Nutrition and Fertilization in Brazil, International Coffee Assoc. Proceedings, Kona, HI, 1998; Vol. 3, 60 86. 6. Havlin, J.L.; Beaton, J.D.; Tisdale, S.L.; Nelson, W.L. Soil Fertility and Fertilizers, 6th Ed.; Prentice Hall: Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1999; 217 244.
274 Hue 7. Marchner, H. Functions of mineral nutrients: macronutrients. In Mineral Nutrition of Higher Plants; Academic Press: San Diego, CA, 1995; 229 312. 8. Marchner, H. Functions of mineral nutrients: micronutrients. In Mineral Nutrition of Higher Plants; Academic Press: San Diego, CA, 1995; 313 404. 9. Nagao, M.A.; Kobayashi, K.D.; Yasuda, G.M. Mineral Deficiency Symptoms of Coffee; Res. Ext. Series 073, Coll. Tropical Agric. Human Resources, Univ. Hawaii: Honolulu, HI, 1986; 15 pp. 10. Bittenbender, H.C.; Kobayashi, K.D. Farmer s bookshelf coffee. 2001. http://www2.ctahr.hawaii.edu/tpss/bookshelf/coffee/coffee. htm (accessed August 2002). 11. Mehlich, A. Mehlich 3 soil extractant: a modification of Mehlich 2 extractant. Commun. Soil Sci. Plant Anal. 1984, 15, 1409 1416. 12. Black, C.A. Nutrient supplies and crop yields: response curves. In Soil Fertility Evaluation and Control; Black, C.A., Ed.; Lewis: Boca Raton, FL, 1993; 1 73.
Request Permission or Order Reprints Instantly! Interested in copying and sharing this article? In most cases, U.S. Copyright Law requires that you get permission from the article s rightsholder before using copyrighted content. All information and materials found in this article, including but not limited to text, trademarks, patents, logos, graphics and images (the "Materials"), are the copyrighted works and other forms of intellectual property of Marcel Dekker, Inc., or its licensors. All rights not expressly granted are reserved. Get permission to lawfully reproduce and distribute the Materials or order reprints quickly and painlessly. Simply click on the "Request Permission/ Order Reprints" link below and follow the instructions. Visit the U.S. Copyright Office for information on Fair Use limitations of U.S. copyright law. Please refer to The Association of American Publishers (AAP) website for guidelines on Fair Use in the Classroom. The Materials are for your personal use only and cannot be reformatted, reposted, resold or distributed by electronic means or otherwise without permission from Marcel Dekker, Inc. Marcel Dekker, Inc. grants you the limited right to display the Materials only on your personal computer or personal wireless device, and to copy and download single copies of such Materials provided that any copyright, trademark or other notice appearing on such Materials is also retained by, displayed, copied or downloaded as part of the Materials and is not removed or obscured, and provided you do not edit, modify, alter or enhance the Materials. Please refer to our Website User Agreement for more details. Request Permission/Order Reprints Reprints of this article can also be ordered at http://www.dekker.com/servlet/product/doi/101081pln120027653