Fertilizer P Uptake Determined by Soil P Fractionation and Phosphatase Activity

  • Yonathan RedelEmail author
  • Siobhan Staunton
  • Paola Durán
  • Liliana Gianfreda
  • Cornelia Rumpel
  • María de la Luz MoraEmail author
Research Article


The aim of this study was to determine if three cereal crops differed in their behavior to take up soil and fertilizer P, with emphasis on the relationship between phosphatase activity and P fractionation. We used a vertical rhizobox experiment with wheat, oat, and barley sown on Chilean Andisol (Barros Arana Series) with low P availability under greenhouse conditions. Plants were fertilized with the equivalent of 100 kg P ha−1 of triple superphosphate (TSP) or rock phosphate (RP). Plant biomass was determined for each of the three cereal plant species. Additionally, phosphatase (P-ase) activity in roots, soil in presence of roots (soil+R), and soil in absence of roots (soil−R) after 60-day growth were evaluated, and soil P fractionation was determined using the Hedley procedure. Fertilizer increased both P uptake and biomass production, particularly in shoots. The P uptake efficiency (∆P uptake between fertilized and unfertilized treatment/P input) was low (4.6%) and similar for both fertilizers for oat, but RP was more efficient for wheat (> 30%) and even more so for barley (nearly threefold), due the higher shoot P concentration of RP fertilized plants, which could be attributable to a major P-ase activity in plants fertilized with RP. Despite, fertilizer P was most clearly identified in labile inorganic soil fractions with Olsen P being greater after TSP addition than RP. In particular, plants showed contrasting soil+R P-ase activity inducing differences in soil+R P speciation, increasing labile NaHCO3-Pi and NaOH-Pi fractions with TSP. Strong relationships were found between the sum of labile Pi fractions and P uptake. We conclude that slower release of RP has a positive impact on P-ase activity and leads to better fertilizer efficiency than TSP, especially for barley.


Phosphorus Wheat Oat Barley Phosphatase activity 



The authors thank to Dr. Fernando Borie for his help in revising and reviewing this manuscript. We also thank the economic support of FONDECYT Iniciation No. 11121619 and ECOS-CONICYT C13U02 Grants.

Supplementary material

42729_2019_24_MOESM1_ESM.docx (313 kb)
ESM 1 (DOCX 312 kb)


  1. Aguilera P, Cornejo P, Borie F, Barea JM, von Baer E, Oehl F (2015) Diversity of arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi associated to Triticum aestivum L. plants growing in an andosol with phytotoxic aluminum levels. Agric Ecosyst Environ 186:178–184CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Álvarez E, Fernández-Sanjurjo MJ, Núñez A, Seco N, Corti G (2012) Aluminium fractionation and speciation in bulk and rhizosphere of a grass soil amended with mussel shells or lime. Geoderma 173–174:322–329CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Balemi T, Negisho K (2012) Management of soil phosphorus and plant adaptation mechanisms to phosphorus stress for sustainable crop production: a review. J Soil Sci Plant Nutr 12:547–561CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Borie F, Zunino H (1983) Organic matter - phosphorus associations as a sink in P-fixation processes in allophanic soils of Chile. Soil Biol Biochem 15:599–603CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Cabeza R, Myint K, Steingrobe B, Cs S, Schulze J, Claassen N (2017) Phosphorus fractions depletion in the rhizosphere of young and adult maize and oilseed rape plants. J Soil Sci Plant Nutr 17:824–838CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Calabi-Floody M, Velásquez G, Gianfreda L, Saggar S, Bolan N, Rumpel C, Mora ML (2012) Improving bioavailability of phosphorous from cattle dung by using phosphatase immobilized on natural clay and nanoclay. Chemophere 89:644–655CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Ciereszko I, Balwicka H, Żebrowska E (2017) Acid phosphatases activity and growth of barley, oat, rye and wheat plants as affected by Pi deficiency. Open Plant Sci J 10:110–122CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Crème A, Rumpel C, Gastal F, Mora ML, Chabbi A (2016) Effects of grasses and a legume grown in monoculture or mixture on soil organic matter and phosphorus forms. Plant Soil 402:117–128CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Dick WA, Tabatabai MA (1977) Determination of orthophosphate in aqueous solutions containing labile organic and inorganic phosphorus compounds. J Environ Qual 6:82–85CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Durán P, Jorquera M, Viscardi S, Carrion VJ (2017) Screening and characterization of potentially suppressive soils against Gaeumannomyces graminis under extensive wheat cropping by chilean indigenous communities. Front Microbiol 8:1–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. George P, Gregory J, Robinson JS, Buresh RJ (2002) Changes in phosphorus concentrations and pH in the rhizosphere of some agroforestry and crop species. Plant Soil 246:65–73CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. George TS, Giles CD, Menezes-Blackburn D et al (2017) Organic phosphorus in the terrestrial environment: a perspective on the state of the art and future priorities. Plant Soil 427:191–208CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Gianfreda L (2015) Enzymes of importance to rhizosphere processes. J Soil Sci Plant Nutr, pp 283–306Google Scholar
  14. Hedley H, Stewart J, Chauhan B (1982) Changes in organic and inorganic soil phosphorus fractions induced by cultivation practices and by laboratory incubations. Soil Sci Soc Am J 46:970–976CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Hedley M, Kirk G, Santos M (1994) Phosphorus efficiency and the forms of soil-phosphorus utilized by upland rice cultivars. Plant Soil 158:53–62CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Machado C, Furlani A (2004) Root phosphatase activity, plant growth and phosphorus accumulation of maize genotypes. Sci Agric 61:216–223CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Margalef O, Sardans J, Fernández-Martínez M, Molowny-Horas R, Janssens IA, Ciais P, Goll D, Richter A, Obersteiner M, Asensio D, Peñuelas J (2017) Global patterns of phosphatase activity in natural soils. Sci Rep 7:1337CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Martinez OA, Crowley DE, Mora ML, Jorquera MA (2015) Short-term study shows that phytase-mineralizing rhizobacteria inoculation affects the biomass, phosphorus (P) uptake and rhizosphere properties of cereal plants. J Soil Sci Plant Nutr 15:153–166Google Scholar
  19. Mora L, Demanet R, Acuña JJ, Viscardi S, Jorquera M, Rengel Z, Durán P (2017) Aluminum-tolerant bacteria improve the plant growth and phosphorus content in ryegrass grown in a volcanic soil amended with cattle dung manure. Appl Soil Ecol 115:19–26CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Murphy J, Riley JP (1962) A modified single solution method for the determination of phosphate in natural waters. Anal Chim Acta 27:31–36CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Mutuo P, Smithson P, Buresh R, Okalebo R (1999) Comparison of phosphate rock and triple superphosphate on a phosphorus- deficient Kenyan soil. Commun Soil Sci Plant Anal 30:1091–1103CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Nuruzzaman M, Lambers H, Bolland M, Veneklaas E (2006) Distribution of carboxylates and acid phosphatase and depletion of different phosphorus fraction in the rhizosphere of a cereal and three grain legumes. Plant Soil 281:109–120CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. ODEPA (2015) Cultivos anuales: superficie, producción y rendimientos. Oficina de Estudios y Políticas Agrarias (ODEPA), Santiago, Chile. Available at (accessed december 2015)
  24. Olsen SR, Sommers LE (1982) Phosphorus. In: Page AL, Miller RH, Deeney DR (eds) Methods of soil analysis. Part, vol 2. ASA, Madison, pp 403–430Google Scholar
  25. Paredes C, Menezes-Blackburn D, Cartes P, Gianfreda L, Mora ML (2011) Phosphorus and nitrogen fertilization effect on phosphorus uptake and phosphatase activity in ryegrass and tall fescue grown in Chilean Andisol. Soil Sci 176:245–251Google Scholar
  26. Redel Y, Rubio R, Rouanet J, Borie F (2007) Phosphorus bioavailability affected by tillage and crop rotation on a Chilean volcanic derived Ultisol. Geoderma 139:388–396CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Redel Y, Rubio R, Godoy R, Borie F (2008) Phosphorus fractions and phosphatase activity in an Andisol under different forest ecosystems. Geoderma 145:216–221CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Redel Y, Cartes P, Demanet R, Velásquez G, Poblete-Grant P, Bol R, Mora ML (2016) Assessment of phosphorus status influenced by Al and Fe compounds in volcanic grassland soils. J Soil Sci Plant Nutr 16:485–501Google Scholar
  29. Rubio R, Moraga E, Borie F (1990) Acid phosphatase activity and vesicular-arbuscular infection associated with roots of four wheat cultivars. J Plant Nutr 13:585–598CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Sarapatka B, Dudova L, Krskova M (2004) Effect of pH and phosphate supply on acid phosphatase activity in cereal roots. Biologia 59:127–131Google Scholar
  31. Tabatabai M, Bremner Y (1969) Use of p-nitrophenyl phosphate for assay of soil phosphatase activity. Soil Biol Biochem 1:301–315CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Velasquez G, Calabi-Floody M, Poblete-Grant P, Rumpel C, Demanet R, Condron L, Mora ML (2016a) Fertilizer effects on phosphorus fractions and organic matter in Andisols. J Soil Sci Plant Nutr 16:294–304Google Scholar
  33. Velasquez G, Ngo P, Rumpel C, Calabi-Floody M, Redel Y, Turner B, Condron L, Mora ML (2016b) Chemical nature of residual fraction derived from Hedley fractionation in Andisols. Geoderma 271:27–31CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Zoysa AKN, Loganathan P, Hedley MJ (1997) A technique for studying rhizosphere processes in tree crops: soil phosphorus depletion around camellia (Camellia japonica L.) roots. Plant Soil 190:253–265CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Zoysa AKN, Loganathan P, Hedley MJ (1999) Phosphorus utilization efficiency and depletion of phosphate fractions in the rhizosphere of three tea (Camellia sinenesis L.) clones. Nutr Cycl Agroecosyst 53:189–201CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Sociedad Chilena de la Ciencia del Suelo 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Yonathan Redel
    • 1
    Email author
  • Siobhan Staunton
    • 2
  • Paola Durán
    • 1
    • 3
  • Liliana Gianfreda
    • 4
  • Cornelia Rumpel
    • 5
  • María de la Luz Mora
    • 1
    Email author
  1. 1.Scientific and Technological Bioresource Nucleus (BIOREN-UFRO)Universidad de La FronteraTemucoChile
  2. 2.Eco & Soils, University of Montpellier, INRA, IRD, CiradSupAgroMontpellierFrance
  3. 3.Biocontrol Research LaboratoryUniversidad de la FronteraTemucoChile
  4. 4.Department of AgricultureUniversity of Naples Federico IINaplesItaly
  5. 5.CNRSInstitute of Ecology and Environment of Paris (UMR UMPC-UPEC-CNRS-INRA-IRD)Thiverval-GrignonFrance

Personalised recommendations