Mar. 1, 1925 
Effect of Sulphur and Gypsum on Palouse Silt Loam 457 
CaO, P 2 0 5 , and other soil constituents.” doubt on the accuracy of all of the 
The extent to which the supply of cal- calcium data obtained from the soil 
cium in Palouse silt loam may be extracts in experiment 1. 
depleted by the use of sulphur is The results obtained from experi- 
brought out in the data presented in ment 2 show that all of the sulphur 
Table V. treatments caused a marked loss of 
Table V. —Amount of calcium in drainage water , teachings , and soil extracts 
Pot 
No. 
Treatment (pounds 
per acre) 
•Experiment 1 (field pots)—calcium in pounds 
per 2,000,000 pounds of soil 
Experiment 2 (green¬ 
house pot)—calcium 
in pounds per 2,000,- 
000 pounds of soil 
De¬ 
cember 
Janu¬ 
ary 
and 
Febru¬ 
ary 
March 
and 
June 
Total 
for 
five 
months 
Soil ex¬ 
tracts 
Total 
water- 
soluble 
calci¬ 
um 
Teach¬ 
ings 
Soil ex¬ 
tracts 
Total 
water- 
soluble 
calci¬ 
um 
1 
Control^__ 
52.9 
43.9 
36.1 
132.9 
625.7 
758.6 
56.4 
556.4 
612.8 
2 
_do_ 
41.8 
32.4 
62.7 
136.9 
487.3 
624.2 
78.6 
574.9 
653.5 
Average.. 
47.3 
38.1 
49.4 
134.9 
556.5 
691.4 
67.5 , 
565.6 
633.1 
3 
Uninoculated sulphur 
186.__ 
44.0 
41.4 
56.3 
141.7 
547.2 
688.9 
138.2 
, 579.8 
718.0 
4 
.do.-__ 
44.7 
33.2 
89.5 
167.4 
495.6 
663.0 
176.0 
552.6 
^28.6 
Average_ 
44.3 
37.3 
72.9 
154.5 
521.4 
675.9 
157.1 
566.2 
723.3 
5 
Inoculated sulphur 189 _ 
46.1 
86.9 
68.3 
151.3 
543.1 
694.4 
150. / 0 
635.6 
785.6 
6 
.do___ 
39.9 
30.5 
91.7 
162.1 
526.6 
688.7 
126.3 
552.6 
678.9 
Average_ 
43.0 
33.7 
80.0 
156.7 
534.8 
691.5 
138.1 
594.1 
732.2 
7 
Uninoculated sulphur 
1000-.-——.- 
44.8 
38.2 
129,4 
212.4 
404.7 
617.1 
458.2 
646.7 
4,104.0 
8 
42.8 
30.2 
94.2 
167.2 
353.1 
520.3 
432.8 
548.9 
981.7 
i 
Average.. 
43.8 
34.2 
111.8 
189.8 
378.9 
568.7 
445.5 
597.8 
1,043.3 
9 
Inoculated sulphur 
1015 -,-h.. 
61.1 
36.2 
163.7 
261.0 
351.1 
612.1 
455.8 
557.5 
1,013.3 
10 
46.3 
35.0 
103.9 
185.2 
417.1 
602.3 
421.0 
495.6 
916.6 
Average.. 
53.7 
— i - 
35.6 
133.8 
223.1 
384.1 
607.2 
438.4 
526.5 
964.9 
11 
Gypsum 1000.- 
107.6 
141.0 
34.4 
283.0 
561.7 
844.7 
90.6 
631.9 
722.5 
12 
112.8 
152.2 
33.9 
298.9 
541.1 
840.0 
328.4 
646.7 
975.1 
Average_— 
110.2 
146.6 
34.1 
290.9 
551.4 
842.3 
209.5 
639.3 
848.8 
For three njonths the amount of 
calcium appearing in the drainage 
water collected from the field pots was 
practically the same for all of the 
sulphur treatments. This, however, 
should be expected, because up to this 
time no appreciable sulphofication had 
taken place. As the sulphur was changed 
to sulphate it might be expected that 
some of the sulphuric acid would react 
with the calcium in the soil. This is 
demonstrated by the amount of cal¬ 
cium appearing in the March and June 
drainage from the soils treated with 
sulphur. It is difficult to explain 
why the high sulphur treatments 
caused such small amounts of calcium 
to be present in the soil extracts. 
The determinations for the duplicate 
control soils show a wide variation 
which tend to throw a shadow of 
calcium in the teachings. This is 
especially true for the high sulphur 
additions. Under the conditions of 
the greenhouse experiment the 7 data 
secured support the belief that sul¬ 
phur rapidly depletes the supply of 
calcium in the soil. Further ex¬ 
perimentation is needed, however, 
to confirm this statement for field 
conditions. 
Working with various lime com¬ 
pounds, including calcium sulphate, 
Broughton 7 reached the conclusion 
that there is nothing in the soil to 
attract calcium' in the form of the 
sulphate because CaS0 4 moves through 
the different depths in a solid column. 
7 Broughton, L. B. how lime is distributed through and lost from soils, factors influenc- 
G THE DIFFUSION AND DEPLETION OF LIME IN SOILS. Md. AgT. Exp. Sta. Bill. 166, p. 285-334. 1912. 
19974—251 —-5 
