Adaptation of tropical forage species to acid soils: the influence of varying phosphorus supply and soil type on plant growth

Part of the Developments in Plant and Soil Sciences book series (DPSS, volume 64)


The present work compared the plant growth response of one tropical grass and three tropical legumes. The forages were grown in monoculture or in grass + legume associations at different levels of soil phosphorus (P). Two acid soils, both Oxisols, were used: one sandy and one clay loam. They were amended with soluble P at rates ranging from 0 to 50 kg ha-1. The forages, Brachiaria dictyoneura (grass), Arachis pintoi, Stylosanthes capitata and Centrosema acutifolium (legumes), were grown in the glasshouse. After 80 days of growth, biomass production, dry matter distribution, leaf area production, root length density, specific root length, and proportion of legume roots in an association were determined. The grass, grown either in monoculture or in association, responded more to applied P than did the three legumes in terms of both shoot and root production. At 50 kg P ha-1, the grass yield plant-1 in association with the three legumes was greatly enhanced, compared with that of grass in monoculture. The increase in size of grass plants in association, compared with that in monoculture, may have been caused by reduced competition from the legumes.

Key words

competition grass legume Oxisols phosphorus deficiency 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Bouma D 1983 Diagnosis of mineral deficiencies using plant tests. In Encyclopedia of Plant Physiology, Vol. 15 B, Inorganic Plant Nutrition. Eds. A Läuchili and R L Bieleski. pp 120–146. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Germany.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Fenster W E and Leon L A 1979 P fertilizer management for establishment and maintenance of improved pastures in acid and infertile soils of tropical America. In Pasture Production in Acid Soils of the Tropics. Eds. P A Sánchez and L E Tergas. pp 119–134. CIAT, Cali, Colombia.Google Scholar
  3. Haynes R J 1980 Competitive aspects of the grass-legume association. Adv. Agron. 33, 227–261.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Kerridge P C and Ratcliff D 1982 Comparative growth of four tropical pasture legumes and guinea grass with different phosphorus sources. Trop. Grassl. 16, 33–40.Google Scholar
  5. Ludlow M 1985 Photosynthesis and dry matter production in C3 and C4 pasture plants, with special emphasis on tropical C3 legumes and C4 grasses. Aust. J. Plant Physiol. 12, 557–572.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Newman E I 1966 A method of estimating the total length of roots in a sample. J. Appl. Ecol. 3, 139–145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Rao I M and Terry N 1989 Leaf phosphate status, photosynthesis and carbon partitioning in sugar beet. I. Changes in growth, gas exchange and Calvin cycle enzymes. Plant Physiol. 90, 814–819.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Rao I M, Ayarza M A, Thomas R J, Fisher M J, Sanz J I, Spain J M and Lascano C E 1992a Soil-plant factors and processes affecting productivity in ley farming. In Pastures for the Tropical Lowlands: CIAT’s Contribution. pp 145–175. CIAT, Cali, Colombia.Google Scholar
  9. Rao I M, Roca W M, Ayarza M A, Tabares E and Garcia R 1992b Somaclonal variation in plant adaptation to acid soil in the tropical forage legume Stylosanthes guianensis. Plant and Soil 146, 21–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Rao I M, Zeigler R S, Vera R and Sarkarung S 1993a Selection and breeding for acid-soil tolerance in crops: Upland rice and tropical forages as case studies. BioScience 43, 454–465.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Rao I M, Borrero V, Ayarza M A and Garcia R 1993b Adaptation of tropical forage species to acid soils: The influence of varying phosphorus supply and soil type on phosphorus uptake and use. In Plant Nutrition — from Genetic Engineering to Field Practice. Ed. N J Barrow. pp 345–348. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, The Netherlands.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Salinas J G and Garcia R 1985 Métodos Químicos para el Análisis de Suelos Acidos y Plantas Forrajeras. CIAT, Cali, Colombia. 87 P.Google Scholar
  13. Salinas J G and Saif S R 1990 Nutritional requirements of Andro-pogon gayanus. In Andropogon gayanus Kunth: A Grass for Tropical Acid Soils. Eds. J M Toledo, R Vera, C Lascano and J M Lenné. pp 99–155. CIAT, Cali, Colombia.Google Scholar
  14. Salinas J G, Kerridge P C and Schunke R M 1990 Mineral nutrition of Centrosema. In Centrosema: Biology, Agronomy and Utilization. Eds. R Schultze-Kraft and R J Clements. pp 119–149. CIAT, Cali, Colombia.Google Scholar
  15. Sánchez P A and Salinas J G 1981 Low-input technology for managing Oxisols and Ultisols in tropical America. Adv. Agron. 34, 279–406.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. SAS/STAT 1990 SAS/STAT User’s Guide. Version 6. SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC, USA. 1686 p.Google Scholar
  17. Svejcar T J and Boutton T W 1985 The use of stable carbon isotope analysis in rooting studies. Oecologia 67, 205–208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Thomas R J, Lascano C E, Sanz J I, Ara M A, Spain J M, Vera R R and Fisher M J 1992 The role of pastures in production systems. In Pastures for the Tropical Lowlands: CIAT’s Contribution. pp 121–144. CIAT, Cali, Colombia.Google Scholar
  19. Toledo J M and Fisher M J 1990 Physiological aspects of Andro-pogon gayanus and its compatibility with legumes. In Andro-pogon gayanus Kunth: a Grass for Tropical Acid soils. Eds. J M Toledo, R Vera, C Lascano and J M Lenné. pp 65–98. CIAT, Cali, Colombia.Google Scholar
  20. Toledo J M and Nores G A 1986 Tropical pasture technology for marginal lands of tropical America. Outlook Agric. 15, 2–9.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 1995

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Centro Internacional de Agricultura Tropical (CIAT)CaliColombia

Personalised recommendations