1 / 78

Foliar Nutrient Analysis Foliage collection and interpretation of laboratory results

Foliar Nutrient Analysis Foliage collection and interpretation of laboratory results. Operational fertilization decision-making. Forest level considerations Stand level considerations operational factors biological factors species stand structure crown conditions insect/disease

ivo
Download Presentation

Foliar Nutrient Analysis Foliage collection and interpretation of laboratory results

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Foliar Nutrient Analysis Foliage collection and interpretation of laboratory results

  2. Operational fertilization decision-making • Forest level considerations • Stand level considerations • operational factors • biological factors • species • stand structure • crown conditions • insect/disease • nutrient status

  3. Foliar analysis as a planning tool • Foliar analysis can be used to: • confirm N deficiency

  4. Foliar analysis as a planning tool • Foliar analysis can be used to: • confirm N deficiency • identify secondary nutrient deficiencies (e.g., S, B)

  5. Foliar analysis as a planning tool • Foliar analysis can be used to: • confirm N deficiency • identify secondary nutrient deficiencies (e.g., S, B) • make appropriate fertilizer prescriptions

  6. Foliar analysis as a planning tool • Foliar analysis can be used to: • confirm N deficiency • identify secondary nutrient deficiencies (e.g., S, B) • make appropriate fertilizer prescriptions • assess post-fertilization nutrient uptake and foliar nutrient balance

  7. How much foliar sampling is needed?

  8. How much foliar sampling is needed? • Foliar sampling should only be undertaken on candidate sites that satisfy other forest- and stand-level selection criteria

  9. How much foliar sampling is needed? • Foliar sampling should only be undertaken on candidate sites that satisfy other forest- and stand-level selection criteria • Strategically allocate foliar sampling expenditures

  10. How much foliar sampling is needed? • Foliar sampling should only be undertaken on candidate sites that satisfy other forest- and stand-level selection criteria • Strategically allocate foliar sampling expenditures • Utilize foliar nutrient data and/or fertilization growth response results from similar nearby stands

  11. How much foliar sampling is needed? • Foliar sampling should only be undertaken on candidate sites that satisfy other forest- and stand-level selection criteria • Strategically allocate foliar sampling expenditures • Utilize foliar nutrient data and/or fertilization growth response results from similar nearby stands • Stratify candidate blocks into homogeneous combinations (species, age, BEC, stand history, stand conditions)

  12. How much foliar sampling is needed? • Foliar sampling should only be undertaken on candidate sites that satisfy other forest- and stand-level selection criteria • Strategically allocate foliar sampling expenditures • Utilize foliar nutrient data and/or fertilization growth response results from similar nearby stands • Stratify candidate blocks into homogeneous combinations (species, age, BEC, stand history, stand conditions) • Collect representative composite foliage samples from each major combination

  13. How much foliar sampling is needed? • Foliar sampling should only be undertaken on candidate sites that satisfy other forest- and stand-level selection criteria • Strategically allocate foliar sampling expenditures • Utilize foliar nutrient data and/or fertilization growth response results from similar nearby stands • Stratify candidate blocks into homogeneous combinations (species, age, BEC, stand history, stand conditions) • Collect representative composite foliage samples from each major combination • Operational fertilization projects comprised of a small number of large and uniform blocks will require a relatively small amount of foliar sampling

  14. Factors affecting interpretation of foliar nutrient data

  15. Factors affecting interpretation of foliar nutrient data • Foliar sampling protocol

  16. Foliar Sampling Protocol

  17. Foliar Sampling Protocol • Sample during the dormant season

  18. Seasonal change in foliar %N in Douglas-fir foliage Sampling period Moderate deficiency May Dec June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Month

  19. Foliar Sampling Protocol • Sample during the dormant season • Sample current year’s foliage

  20. Foliar Sampling Protocol • Sample during the dormant season • Sample current year’s foliage • Collect foliage from between top 1/4 and bottom 1/2 of live crown

  21. Foliar Sampling Protocol • Sample during the dormant season • Sample current year’s foliage • Collect foliage from between top 1/4 and bottom 1/2 of live crown • Collect foliage from healthy, representative trees

  22. Do not collect foliage from unhealthy trees!!!

  23. Foliar Sampling Protocol • Sample during the dormant season • Sample current year’s foliage • Collect foliage from between top 1/4 and bottom 1/2 of live crown • Collect foliage from representative trees • Collect foliage from at least 20 trees per stand or stratum

  24. Foliar sampling layout Road x x x x x x x x Line 2 x x Line 1 x x x x x x /01 x x x x /02

  25. Foliar Sampling Protocol • Sample during the dormant season • Sample current year’s foliage • Collect foliage from between top 1/4 and bottom 1/2 of live crown • Collect foliage from representative trees • Collect foliage from at least 20 trees per stand or stratum • For routine diagnoses, combine equal amounts of foliage from individual trees into one composite sample per stratum

  26. Foliar Sampling Protocol • Sample during the dormant season • Sample current year’s foliage • Collect foliage from between top 1/4 and bottom 1/2 of live crown • Collect foliage from representative trees • Collect foliage from at least 20 trees per stand or stratum • For routine diagnoses, combine equal amounts of foliage from individual trees into one composite sample per stratum • Keep samples cool until foliage is dried

  27. Factors affecting interpretation of foliar nutrient data • Foliar sampling protocol • Site ecological characteristics

  28. from DeLong (2003)

  29. from DeLong (2003)

  30. Factors affecting interpretation of foliar nutrient data • Foliar sampling protocol • Site ecological characteristics • Laboratory analytical methodology

  31. Relationship between foliar N analytical methodologiesdry combustion vs. wet digestion

  32. Relationship between foliar S analytical methodologies dry combustion vs. wet digestion

  33. Accounting for differences in laboratory analytical methodology • Differences may be large enough to affect interpretation

  34. Accounting for differences in laboratory analytical methodology • Differences may be large enough to affect interpretation • Nutrient interpretative criteria do not account for differences in methodology

  35. Accounting for differences in laboratory analytical methodology • Differences may be large enough to affect interpretation • Nutrient interpretative criteria do not account for differences in methodology • Known differences in laboratory analytical results can be used to “normalize” foliar data prior to interpretation

  36. Accounting for differences in laboratory analytical methodology • Differences may be large enough to affect interpretation • Nutrient interpretative criteria do not account for differences in methodology • Known differences in laboratory analytical results can be used to “normalize” foliar data prior to interpretation • “Normalization” requires inter-laboratory comparisons

  37. Accounting for differences in laboratory analytical methodology • Differences may be large enough to affect interpretation • Nutrient interpretative criteria do not account for differences in methodology • Known differences in laboratory analytical results can be used to “normalize” foliar data prior to interpretation • “Normalization” requires inter-laboratory comparisons • The “normalization” process does not make inferences about the quality of foliar nutrient data

  38. Inter-laboratory comparisonPacific Soil Analysis vs. Ministry of Environment

  39. Inter-laboratory comparisonPacific Soil Analysis vs. Ministry of Environment • 50 previously collected Pl foliage samples were selected

  40. Inter-laboratory comparisonPacific Soil Analysis vs. Ministry of Environment • 50 previously analyzed foliage samples were used • Samples were selected to cover a broad range of species and foliar nutrient levels

  41. Inter-laboratory comparisonPacific Soil Analysis vs. Ministry of Environment • 50 previously analyzed foliage samples were used • Samples were selected to cover a broad range of species and foliar nutrient levels • Each sample was thoroughly mixed and split into two sub-samples

  42. Inter-laboratory comparisonPacific Soil Analysis vs. Ministry of Environment • 50 previously analyzed foliage samples were used • Samples were selected to cover a broad range of species and foliar nutrient levels • Each sample was thoroughly mixed and split into two sub-samples • One sub-sample was shipped to each lab in December 2012

  43. Inter-laboratory comparisonPacific Soil Analysis vs. Ministry of Environment • 50 previously analyzed foliage samples were used • Samples were selected to cover a broad range of species and foliar nutrient levels • Each sample was thoroughly mixed and split into two sub-samples • One sub-sample was shipped to each lab in December 2012 • For each nutrient, laboratory results were reviewed and subjected to regression analysis

  44. Inter-laboratory comparisonPacific Soil Analysis vs. Ministry of Environment • 50 previously analyzed foliage samples were used • Samples were selected to cover a broad range of species and foliar nutrient levels • Each sample was thoroughly mixed and split into two sub-samples • One sub-sample was shipped to each lab in December 2012 • For each nutrient, laboratory results were reviewed and subjected to regression analysis • Based on previous research, equations were selected to “normalize” foliar nutrient data

  45. Inter-laboratory comparisonPacific Soil Analysis vs. Ministry of Environment • 50 previously analyzed foliage samples were used • Samples were selected to cover a broad range of species and foliar nutrient levels • Each sample was thoroughly mixed and split into two sub-samples • One sub-sample was shipped to each lab in December 2012 • For each nutrient, laboratory results were reviewed and subjected to regression analysis • Based on previous research, equations were selected to “normalize” foliar nutrient data • An Excel spreadsheet was developed to facilitate “normalization” for practitioners

  46. Laboratory foliar N comparison PSAI vs. MoE

More Related