|
|
REPORT Performance of Ammonium Chloride Product Client: Mr Zafar Iqbal Malik INTRODUCTION This is a report on the analysis and performance of an Ammonium Chloride product supplied to me for testing purposes by Mr Zafar Iqbal Malik, of Islamabad Pakistan. This product was produced by his company, and has been treated by an undisclosed method. The product was purported to temporarily lower (acidify) the pH of alkaline cropping soils with small applications of the product, thus alleviating problems caused by alkaline soils. The client requested that the product be analysed by a laboratory to identify its generic composition and the percentage of available Nitrogen and Chloride. The client also requested that I field-trial the product in an alkaline cropping soil, and measure any changes in pH and effects on other available soil mineral elements. LABORATORY TESTING The product was tested in a laboratory using wet-chemistry to identify the elements Nitrogen and Chloride that made up its composition, and the percentages of these elements. The products generic name was also identified. The product is generically Ammonium Chloride. The percentage of Nitrogen (in an ammonium form) is: 23.4% The percentage of Chloride is: 59.0% Please refer to the laboratory report in the appendix. FIELD TESTING The product was tested in a field situation on a farming property and area known to the author for its alkaline soils. This area is Jardine, and its approximately 30 Km North of Rockhampton in Central Queensland, Australia. The property is a dairy farm. The chosen site was a river flat which had been cultivated for the production of irrigated Annual Ryegrass and Shaftal Clover for winter feed of milking cows. The soil type is a grey loam with Serpentine origins. It is noted for its hard-setting structure, deficiencies of available Zinc and Copper due to high pH, and deficiencies of available Potassium due to high levels of exchangeable Magnesium. Please refer to the soil test dated 19th April for the status of the test site before treatment with the product. Methodology A test site was selected in the middle of this paddock of a size of 10 mē. This area was pegged out for easy identification. It was planted with ryegrass and clover, and was subject to a number of irrigations as was the remainder of the paddock. No pre-plant or top-dressing with fertiliser was done during the testing period. 30 small cores were taken from this area to make up a composite sample for laboratory testing. This became the first test, dated 19th April. The treated test area was treated with 10 grams of the product, which is consistent with the recommended rate of 4 Kg (4,000 grams) per Acre (4,000 mē). The product was broadcast over the test area and was incorporated into the first few centimetres of soil. The area was irrigated on the same day. 2 days later, on 21st April, a second composite sample was taken from this area. This was again made up of 30 small cores, and was forwarded to the laboratory for testing. 12 days later, on 3rd May, a third and final composite sample was taken from the test area. The area had been irrigated several times since the last sample was taken. This final sample was forwarded to the laboratory for testing. Results The temporary effects on pH were quite dramatic. Within 2 days of application, the pH had dropped from 7.4 to 6.8. After 14 days it had risen again to 7.2. Nitrate Nitrogen had gone from 24 ppm to 45 ppm, then reduced again to 24 ppm. I would not put great value on this, as this is to be expected after an application of what is in truth a nitrogen-based fertiliser. A slight effect on available Potassium was also noted, with an increase from 90ppm to 96ppm, then to 108ppm. There was also a reduction in available Magnesium from 158ppm, to 125ppm, to 126ppm. This may or may not have been due to the application of the product, but it was certainly a positive sign in this situation were excessive Magnesium and deficiencies in Potassium are a problem.Levels of available Zinc remained the same throughout the testing period. Available Copper increased over the course of the testing period from 0.24ppm, to 0.40ppm, to 0.44ppm. Available Manganese increased from 0.37ppm to 0.90ppm to 1.24ppm. Chloride increased from 28ppm to 76ppm, but then reduced again to 44ppm. Comments on results The temporary acidification of the alkaline soil has the potential to release available trace elements from insoluble compounds into the soil solution where they are available for uptake by plant roots. This would certainly be of value especially in broadacre situations where the application of large amounts of trace elements on an annual basis is not economical or practical. It could be assumed that further applications of the product at flowering or fruit/pod/grain-fill stages could be made to again release some insoluble trace elements if this was considered necessary by plant tissue testing. The noted increase in available Copper and Manganese in this situation was notable. These results cannot be considered conclusive, as these elements are available in such small quantities, but they are notable enough to indicate that an expected increase in their availability could well be expected. The dramatic decrease in pH gives further weight to this. The lack of change in Zinc availability was probably due to the level of the pH at the start of the test. pH 7.4 is not extremely high from a Zinc-availability perspective. Perhaps if the starting level was higher, an increase in availability could be expected. The increase in Chloride could well be a matter of concern depending on the initial chloride status of the soil, as well as the level of sodium and salinity (Electrical Conductivity, or E.C.). In this particular situation it was not a problem, as the level never rose above what you would call a 'danger level' for the crop that was planted. In susceptible crops like tobacco it could well be a matter of concern. The evidence that the increase appears to be only temporary is a positive sign. Under irrigation it is likely that this free chloride could combine with available sodium cations, and leach through the profile in a sodium chloride solution. MARKET POTENTIAL This product appears to the author to have a definite market potential in situations where a production increase can be gained by a temporary acidification of an alkaline soil. The major problem caused by alkaline soils is the unavailability of sufficiently high levels of the trace elements Zinc, Copper and Manganese. Deficiencies of these elements are common in high-pH cropping soils, and cause productivity losses due to deficiencies, or profitability losses due to the cost of purchasing and applying trace elements on an annual basis. Permanently lowering pH with high applications of sulfur is far too expensive to ever be considered a viable proposition. The most valuable market placement of this product would be in the semi-intensive and extensive cropping industries where irrigation and/or rainfall is expected at planting time and at fruit/pod/grain-fill time. The product will certainly require water to activate it. Experiments could also be done with deep-placement of the product at 50-100mm below the seed in a rain-grown (dry land) situation. The major advantages of the product are:
|
