DOCSLIB.ORG

Diagnosis of Soil Related Crop Problems

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Diagnosis of Soil Related Crop Problems DIAGNOSIS OF SOIL RELATED CROP PROBLEMS Second version Spring 2020 Gerard J.M. Oomen .............................................................................................................................. 6 Diagnosis of soil related crop problems ................................................................................ 1 Introduction ................................................................................................................. 7 How to use this document ............................................................................................... 7 Organic agriculture ........................................................................................................ 8 Diagnosis of individual plants ........................................................................................... 10 Finding causes of poor performance. ............................................................................... 10 During Germination and emergence ............................................................................ 10 Between emergence and flowering ............................................................................... 10 During Flowering and ripening ..................................................................................... 12 Causes of poor performance ............................................................................................ 12 Too low plant density and too weak seedlings ................................................................... 13 Causes not related to soil properties............................................................................. 13 Causes related to soil properties and what can be done ................................................... 14 1. Soil organisms may have eaten seeds and seedings before emergence ................ 14 2. Emerging plants may have been affected by soil or seed borne diseases. ............. 14 3. Seeds did not germinate simultaneously ......................................................... 15 4. A part of the seeds and emerging plants may have suffocated ........................... 15 5. A part of the seeds could not penetrate a crust ................................................ 15 6. The seed was sown too deep ........................................................................ 15 7. The seed was sown too late or too early under cold and wet conditions ................ 15 Availability of water ..................................................................................................... 17 Possible causes of water shortage and what can be done ................................................. 17 1. Top soil is too loose after tillage .................................................................... 17 2. The soil does not retain enough water ............................................................ 18 3. Cappilary rise is impeded. ............................................................................ 19 4. Too much water is lost by run off .................................................................. 19 5. Too much water is lost by unnecessary evapo-transpiration ............................... 20 6. Water uptake is impeded by an infection of the root system .............................. 21 Availability of oxygen in soil .......................................................................................... 21 Possible causes and what can be done ......................................................................... 22 1. Sealing/slaking of soil surface ....................................................................... 22 2. Compaction of top soil ................................................................................. 22 3. Low permeability of sub soil ......................................................................... 22 4. High water table. ........................................................................................ 23 Availability of nutrients ................................................................................................. 23 Soil tests ................................................................................................................. 23 By a soil test laboratory ......................................................................................... 23 Quick Field tests ................................................................................................... 24 Diagnostic field experiments/pot experiments ............................................................ 24 Visible symptoms of deficiency ................................................................................ 25 Availability of nitrogen .................................................................................................. 27 What can be done ..................................................................................................... 28 To increase nitrogen fixation ................................................................................... 28 To reduce leaching of nitrogen beyond root zone ........................................................ 29 1. Increase water and nitrate retention .............................................................. 29 2. Support preferential flow of water ................................................................. 30 3. Reduce nitrate content in soil low by growing catch crops .................................. 30 4. Avoid an over-fertilisation ............................................................................ 30 To reduce losses by volatilisation ............................................................................. 31 1. from solid manure ...................................................................................... 31 2. from liquid manure and slurry ...................................................................... 31 3. from crop residues...................................................................................... 31 To reduce losses by denitrification ............................................................................ 31 1. Improve drainage ....................................................................................... 32 2. Prevent sealing of soil surface....................................................................... 32 3. Improve soils structure................................................................................ 32 4. Avoid compaction ....................................................................................... 32 5. Avoid deep incorporation ............................................................................. 32 6. Avoid freezing of green manure crops ............................................................ 32 Availability of phosphorus ............................................................................................. 32 Possible measures to improve availability of phosphorus .............................................. 33 1. Improvement of soil structure ...................................................................... 33 2. Support mycorrhizae ................................................................................... 33 3. Increase of pH of acid soils .......................................................................... 34 4. Decrease of pH in alkaline soils .................................................................... 34 5. Application of inorganic phosphate fertilisers ................................................... 34 6. Import of organic phosphorus ....................................................................... 34 7. Creation of hot spots ................................................................................... 34 8. Increase of organic matter content to reduce fixation ....................................... 34 9. Increase of C/P ratio of organic matter ........................................................... 34 10. Redistribution of organic phosphorus ............................................................. 35 Availability of potassium. .............................................................................................. 35 Possible measures to reduce losses .......................................................................... 36 1. Reduction of leaching .................................................................................. 36 2. growing less potassium rich crops ................................................................. 36 Possible measures to improve availability of potassium ................................................ 36 1 Stimulation of weathering ............................................................................ 36 2 Import of feed, bedding material and manure................................................. 36 3 More precise fertilisation .............................................................................. 36 4 In case of potassium fixation: adapt crops to availability of potassium ................. 36 Availability of sulfur ..................................................................................................... 37 Possible measures to improve availability of sulphur ................................................... 38 1 reduction of Leaching by growing catch crops. ................................................. 38 2 Import in feed, bedding, manure and inorganic fertilisers ................................. 38 3 Use local sources .......................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • List M - Soils - German and French Equivalents of English Terms
    LIST M - SOILS - GERMAN AND FRENCH EQUIVALENTS OF ENGLISH TERMS AMERICAN GERMAN FRENCH AMERICAN GERMAN FRENCH Acrisols Acrisol Sol-mediterraneen Gray podzolic soils Podsolierter grauer Podzol Albolls Boden Alfisols Gray warp soils Paternia Sol-peu-evolue or Alluvial soils Auen-Boden Sol-d’alluvions Sol-d’alluvions Alpine meadow soils Alpiner Wiesen- Sol-hydromorphe Gray wooded soils boden Ground-water podzols Gley-Podsol Podzol Andepts Ground-water Grundwasser- Laterite Andosols Andosol Sol-peu-evolue laterite soils Laterite roche- Grumosols Grumosol Vertisol volcanique Half bog soils Anmoor Tourbe Aqualfs Halomorphic soils Salz-Boden Sol-halomorphe Aquents Halosols Halosols Sal-halomorphe Aquepts Hemists Aquods High moor Hochmoor Tourbe Aquolls Histosols Aquox Humic gley soils Humus Gley Boden Aquults Sol-humique-a-gley Arctic tundra soils Arktische Tundra Sol-de-toundra Humic soils Humus-reiche- Sol-riche-en- Boden Boden humus Arenosols Arenosol Sol-brut sable Humods Arents Hydromorphic soils Hydromorpher- Sol-hydro- Argids Boden morphique Aridisols Inceptisols Azonal soils Roh-Boden Sol-brut Intrazonal soils Intrazonaler Boden Sol Black earth use Schwarzerde Chernozem Kastanozems Chernozems Krasnozems Krasnozem Krasnozem Bog soils Moorboden Tourbe laterites Laterit-Boden Sol-lateritique Boreal frozen taiga Sol-gele Latosols Latosol Sol-ferralitique soils Lithosols Gesteins-roh-Boden Sol-squelettique Boreal taiga and Sol Low-humic gley soils forest soils Luvisols Luvisols Sol lessivage Brown desert steppe Burozem Sierozem Mediterranean
    [Show full text]
  • 19Th World Congress of Soil Science Working Group 1.1 the WRB
    19th World Congress of Soil Science Working Group 1.1 The WRB evolution Soil Solutions for a Changing World, Brisbane, Australia 1 – 6 August 2010 Table of Contents Page Table of Contents ii 1 Diversity and classification problems of sandy soils in subboreal 1 zone (Central Europe, Poland) 2 Finding a way through the maze – WRB classification with 5 descriptive soil data 3 Guidelines for constructing small-scale map legends using the 9 World Reference Base for Soil Resources 4 On the origin of Planosols – the process of ferrolysis revisited 13 5 Orphans in soil classification: Musing on Palaeosols in the 17 World Reference Base system 6 Pedometrics application for correlation of Hungarian soil types 21 with WRB 7 The classification of Leptosols in the World Reference Base for 25 Soil Resources 8 The World Reference Base for Soils (WRB) and Soil 28 Taxonomy: an initial appraisal of their application to the soils of the Northern Rivers of New South Wales 9 A short guide to the soils of South Africa, their distribution and 32 correlation with World Reference Base soil groups ii Diversity and classification problems of sandy soils in subboreal zone (Central Europe, Poland) Michał Jankowski Faculty of Biology and Earth Sciences, Nicolaus Copernicus University, Toruń, Poland, Email [email protected] Abstract The aim of this study was to present some examples of sandy soils and to discuss their position in soil systematics. 8 profiles represent: 4 soils widely distributed in postglacial landscapes of Poland (Central Europe), typical for different geomorphological conditions and vegetation habitats (according to regional soil classification: Arenosol, Podzolic soil, Rusty soil and Mucky soil) and 4 soils having unusual features (Gleyic Podzol and Rusty soil developed in a CaCO 3-rich substratum and two profiles of red-colored Ochre soils).
    [Show full text]
  • Report for 1981 - Part 1
    Soil Survey Of England And Wales (1982) Thank you for using eradoc, a platform to publish electronic copies of the Rothamsted Documents. Your requested document has been scanned from original documents. If you find this document is not readible, or you suspect there are some problems, please let us know and we will correct that. Report for 1981 - Part 1 Full Table of Content Soil Survey of England and Wales D. Mackney Soil Survey of England and Wales , D. Mackney (1982) Report For 1981 - Part 1, pp 219 - 242 - DOI: https://doi.org/10.23637/ERADOC-1-128 - This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. Report for 1981 - Part 1 pp 1 Soil Survey Of England And Wales (1982) SOIL SURVEY OF ENGLAND AND WALES D. MACKNEY Stff Head of Survey D. Mackney, B.sc. Hdquoterc hst Anglia B. W. Avery, B.sc. C. A. H. Hodge, B.sc. B. Claydctr, E.sc, R. C. O. Burtoo, M.sc. R. D. Grren, M.sc. W. M. Corbett, M.sc- A. J. Thomasoo, M.rc. R. Evans, Pn.D. R. S. Seale, M.a. MiuraWhlt Midlands P, Bullock, PE.D. E.sc. P. J. lrvclaDd, Pn.D. J- M. Hodgson, C. P. Murphy, B.sc. J, M. Rag& B.sc, G, R. Beard, B.sc, Infonution Srst.nt H. G€orge, B.rc. Mrs Mary E. hoctor D. G. M. HaU, B.sc. F. W. H€a!,ea, B.sc. J. M. Hollis, Lsc. Catogaphers R. J- A. Jofts, Ps.D. E. M. Thomson R.
    [Show full text]
  • Review of the Evidence Base for the Status and Change of Soil Carbon Below 15 Cm from the Soil Surface in England and Wales
    Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Research project final report Project title Review of the evidence base for the status and change of soil carbon below 15 cm from the soil surface in England and Wales Sub-Project iii of Defra Project SP1106: Soil carbon: studies to explore greenhouse gas emissions and mitigation Defra project code SP1106 Contractor SKM Enviros Organisations Rothamsted Research / North Wyke Cranfield University British Geological Survey Report authors Andy Gregory ([email protected]), Andy Whitmore, Guy Kirk, Barry Rawlins, Karl Ritz, Phil Wallace. Project start date October 2010 Sub-project end date March 2011 Sub-project iii: Review of the evidence base for the status and change of soil carbon below 15 cm from the soil surface in England and Wales Executive summary The world‟s soils contain more carbon (C), predominantly in organic matter (OM), than the atmosphere and terrestrial plants combined. Our knowledge of soil C is largely restricted to the topsoil, but more than half of soil C is stored at depths lower than 15 cm in the subsoil. Subsoil C represents a little-understood component of the global C cycle, with potential implications with respect to predicted changes in climate; it is important that the level of understanding of subsoil C in England and Wales is clarified and that potential knowledge gaps are identified. The overall aim of this review was to evaluate the current status and dynamics of subsoil C in England and Wales by reviewing the best-available evidence and by sensible extrapolation. Further objectives sought to review the source and stability of subsoil C in general, to identify the key gaps in knowledge, and to seek evidence on how subsoil C may respond to imposed (soil management) or natural (climate change) changes in contributing factors in the future.
    [Show full text]
  • Annex: Soil Groups, Characteristics, Distribution and Ecosystem Services
    Status of the World’s Main Report Soil Resources Annex Soil groups, characteristics, distribution and ecosystem services © FAO | Giuseppe Bizzarri © FAO INTERGOVERNMENTAL TECHNICAL PANEL ON SOILS Disclaimer and copyright Recommended citation: FAO and ITPS. 2015. Status of the World’s Soil Resources (SWSR) – Main Report. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations and Intergovernmental Technical Panel on Soils, Rome, Italy The designations employed and the presentation of material in this information product do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) concerning the legal or development status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. The mention of specific companies or products of manufacturers, whether or not these have been patented, does not imply that these have been endorsed or recommended by FAO in preference to others of a similar nature that are not mentioned. The views expressed in this information product are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of FAO. ISBN 978-92-5-109004-6 © FAO, 2015 FAO encourages the use, reproduction and dissemination of material in this information product. Except where otherwise indicated, material may be copied, downloaded and printed for private study, research and teaching purposes, or for use in non-commercial products or services, provided that appropriate acknowledgement of FAO as the source and copyright holder is given and that FAO’s endorsement of users’ views, products or services is not implied in any way.
    [Show full text]
  • Conversion of Some Soil Types, Subtypes, and Varieties Between the Taxonomic Classification System of Soils of the Czech Republi
    Soil & Water Res., 5, 2010 (4): 172–185 Conversion of Some Soil Types, Subtypes, and Varieties between the Taxonomic Classification System of Soils of the Czech Republic and the World Reference Base for Soil Resources Jitka SLÁDKOVÁ Research Institute for Soil and Water Conservation, Prague, Czech Republic Abstract: The article illustrates the compatibility of the Czech Republic Taxonomic Soil Classification System vali- dated in the CR with the international World Reference Base for Soil Resources. It utilises the archive data on the soil types, subtypes, and varieties from the General survey of agricultural soils in the Czech Republic and soil profiles from new soil survey on the pilot area of Litoměřice district. It indicates the possibilities of the future refinement of both systems. Keywords: refinement of soil classification systems; soil conversions; TKSP CR, WRB The World Reference Base for Soil Resources (WRB) and database background papers with the sources had already progressed under the auspices of the from other European countries. The system has been International Union of Soil Sciences (IUSS) since constantly applied and further improved during the the eighties of the last century, and in 1998 it shaped current innovative soil survey of the CR (Němeček up into a form of the concrete proposal (Deckers et al. 2001). 2000; ISSS-ISRIC-FAO 1998; IUSS Working Group The article briefly introduces the basic principles WRB 2006, 2007; Nachtergaele et al. 2000). In of both systems used, compares them and facilitates that year, WRB was adopted as the European Union the orientation in WRB. With the help of some soil system for soil correlation.
    [Show full text]
  • On the Origin of Planosols – the Process of Ferrolysis Revisited
    On the origin of Planosols – the process of ferrolysis revisited Eric Van Ranst A, Alemayehu Regassa Tolossa B, Mathijs Dumon A, Jean-Thomas Cornelis C, Jozef Deckers D A Department of Geology and Soil Science, Ghent University, Belgium, E-mail: [email protected] B Department of Soil Science, Jimma University, Ethiopia C Soil Science Unit, Université Catholique de Louvain, Belgium D Department of Land Management, K.U.Leuven, Belgium Abstract Planosols have been recognized as a Major Soil Group right from the beginning in the legend of the FAO Soil Map of the World. Also in WRB system it maintained that position at Reference Soil Group level on the account that a major pedogenetic process, ferrolysis, is underlaying the severe stagnic properties that characterize this group. With the recent introduction of Stagnosols in WRB it appears that a serious overlap has been introduced at Reference Soil Group level. This paper aims to throw new light on the genesis of Planosols, drawing from new soil surveys conducted in the south-western Ethiopian highlands. The conclusion is that it is highly unlikely that ‘ferrolysis’ can be called in to explain the genesis of Planosols in the Ethiopian highlands. As Ethiopia is one of the mainstays of Planosols, it is suggested that WRB rethinks its strategy on soils with stagnic properties as there is room for rationalization. Key Words Planosols, Stagnic properties, Ferrolysis, Stagnosols. Introduction International soil correlation of Planosols The Reference Soil Group of Planosols holds soils with surface horizons that are bleached and light-coloured or have a stagnic colour pattern, show signs of periodic water stagnation and abruptly overly a dense, slowly permeable subsoil with significantly more clay than the surface horizons (Driessen et al .
    [Show full text]
  • Minimising Compaction in a Shallow Cultivation System
    CRANFIELD UNIVERSITY W.C.T. CHAMEN THE EFFECTS OF LOW AND CONTROLLED TRAFFIC SYSTEMS ON SOIL PHYSICAL PROPERTIES, YIELDS AND THE PROFITABILITY OF CEREAL CROPS ON A RANGE OF SOIL TYPES SCHOOL OF APPLIED SCIENCES PhD THESIS Academic year: 2010-2011 Supervisors: Dr A.M. Mouazen Prof R.J. Godwin April 2011 CRANFIELD UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF APPLIED SCIENCES PhD THESIS Academic year: 2010-2011 W.C.T. CHAMEN The effects of low and controlled traffic systems on soil physical properties, yields and the profitability of cereal crops on a range of soil types Supervisors: Dr A.M. Mouazen Prof R.J. Godwin April 2011 This thesis is submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy © Cranfield University 2011. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced without the written permission of the copyright owner. Abstract Soil compaction is an inevitable consequence of mechanised farming systems whose machines are degrading soils to the extent that some are considered uneconomic to repair. A number of mitigating actions have been proposed but their ability to reduce or avoid damage has not been well tested. The aim of this research was to determine whether actions to reduce damage have been, or are likely to be effective and to assess whether the practice of controlled traffic farming (confining all field vehicles to the least possible area of permanent traffic lanes) has the potential to be a practical and cost effective means of avoidance. The literature confirmed that soil compaction from field vehicles had negative consequences for practically every aspect of crop production.
    [Show full text]
  • Woburn Experimental Farm Soil and Field Maps
    Woburn Experimental Farm Soil and Field Maps DOI: 10.23637/ws-soil-maps-01 Prepared by: Watts, C. W., Glendining, M.J. and Castells-Brooke, N. I. D, Rothamsted Research, Harpenden, Herts, AL5 2JQ, UK. Published by: Rothamsted Research Date: 2017 Description: • Page 1: Cover Page • Page 2: Woburn Experimental Farm Soil Texture • Page 3: Woburn Experimental Farm Soil Series • Page 4: Complete Legend to Soil Series Revised 2017 • Page 5: Woburn Farm Field Map • Page 6: Woburn Farm OS map, including Stackyard Site: Woburn Experimental Station, Latitude 52.02 N, Longitude 0.62 W Cite as: Watts, C.W., Glendining, M.J. and Castells-Brooke, N.I.D., Rothamsted Research (2017) Woburn Experimental Farm Soil and Field Maps. Rothamsted Research. 10.23637/ws-soil-maps-01 Funding: Rothamsted Research receives strategic funding from the UK Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council (BBSRC). The Rothamsted Long-term Experiments National Capability is supported by the BBSRC Grant BBS/E/C/000J0300 and the Lawes Agricultural Trust. Licence and conditions of re-use: These plans are published under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International licence. CC BY 4.00 You are free to adapt, copy, redistribute these plans but must provide appropriate credit using the provided citation, including the DOI and indicate any changes made. You must not apply additional restrictions on the licence. Woburn Experimental Farm Soil Series Revised legend 2017 Sub-group Map Series Name Broad Approximate Major Soil Group Soil Group Soil Sub-group Series Description
    [Show full text]
  • A Brief Review of Soil Systematics in Germany
    Korean J. Soil Sci. Fert. 43(1), 113-118 (2010) Note A Brief Review of Soil Systematics in Germany Rog-Young Kim, Jwa-Kyung Sung, Seok-Cheol Kim, Byoung-Choon Jang, and Yeon-Kyu Sonn* Division Soil & Fertilizer Management, National Academy of Agricultural Science, RDA, Suwon, Republic of Korea Due to diverse soil-forming environments and different purposes of the soil classification, numerous soil classification systems have been developed worldwide. The World Reference Base for Soil Resources (WRB) and the Soil Taxonomy of the United States are well-known in Korea. However, the German Soil Systematics based on somewhat different principles from the two former systems is little-known. The objective of this paper is therefore to give a short overview of the principles of the German Soil Systematics. The German Soil Systematics consists of a six-level hierarchical structure which comprises soil divisions, soil classes, soil types, soil subtypes, soil varieties, and soil subvarieties. Soils in Germany are firstly classified into one of four soil divisions according to the soil moist regime: terrestrial soils, semi-terrestrial soils, semi-subhydric/ subhydric soils,andpeats. Terrestrial soils are subdivided into 13 soil classes based on the stage of soil formation and the horizon differentiation. Semi-terrestrial soils are differentiated into four classes regarding the source of soil moist: groundwater, freshwater, saltwater, and seaside. Semi-subhydric/subhydric soils are subdivided into two classes: semi-subhydric and subhydric soils. Peats are classified into two classes of natural and anthropogenic origins. Classes can be compared to orders of the U.S. Taxonomy. Classes are subdivided into 29 soil types with regard to soil forming-processes for terrestrial soils,into17typeswith regard to the soil formation for semi-terrestrial soils, into five types with regard to the content of organic matter for semi-subhydric/subhydric soils, and also into five types with regard to peat-forming processes for peats.
    [Show full text]
  • Soil Classification
    National Soil Resources Institute: Information paper The National Soil Map and Soil Classification Dick Thompson Document v2.01 The National Soil Map and Soil Classification Copyright © Cranfield University, 2007 Introduction This document is designed to accompany the national soil map legend and briefly describes the constituent soil associations of the 1:250 000 (quarter inch to 1 mile) soil map of England and Wales held by Cranfield University. The soil classification, outlined briefly below, is treated more fully in Avery (1980) and in the revised classification of soil series by Clayden and Hollis (1984). The national soil map (or ‘Natmap’) is based on published soil maps1 which cover a quarter of the land at scales of 1:25 000, 1:63 360 or 1:100 000 and on reconnaissance mapping of previously unsurveyed areas. The legend shows geographic soil associations identified by the most frequently occurring soil series and by combinations of ancillary series. The map units are further identified by number codes and are coloured by dominant soil subgroups (or groups), of which sixty seven are recognised. The numbers of each code indicate the predominant major soil group, group and subgroup. Thus, association 651a is dominated by soils of the Belmont series belonging to subgroup 6.51, the Ironpan subdivision of soil group 6.5, Stagnopodzols which are part of major group 6, Podzolic soils. The legend also lists for each unit: 1. The geological materials influencing soil characteristics; 2. Important soil properties and conditions affecting rooting depth cultivations and Drainage; 3. Cropping and other information; 4. Percentage and area of England and Wales covered by the soil associations.
    [Show full text]
  • Modelling of the Interface Between the Geosphere and the Biosphere: Discharge Through a Soil Layer
    KEMAKTA AR 88-23 MODELLING OF THE INTERFACE BETWEEN THE GEOSPHERE AND THE BIOSPHERE: DISCHARGE THROUGH A SOIL LAYER by Mark Elert Ann-Charlotte Argärde Ann—Margret Ericsson December 1988 KEMAKTA KONSULT AB . PIPERSGATAN 27 • S 112 28 STOCKHOLM • SWEDEN TEL 08-54 06 80 • TELEX 15660 KEMAKTA S - 1 - TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF FIGURES LIST OF TABLES SAMMANFATTNING SUMMARY 1 INTRODUCTION 1 2 RADIONUCLIDES 3 3 PROCESSES 4 3.1 Physical processes 4 3.2 Chemical processes 4 3.3 Biological processes 6 4 AREA STUDIED 9 4.1 Hydrology of the area studied 9 4.2 Chemical and biological conditions in the 10 discharge area 5 HYDROLOGY 11 5.1 Methods 12 5.2 Input data 13 5.3 Results 15 5.4 Discussion 19 6 MODELLING OF RADIONUCLIDE TRANSPORT 20 6.1 Methods 20 6.1.1 The model used 20 6.1.2 Cases calculated 20 6.2 Data on physical properties 23 6.2.1 Density and porosity 23 6.2.2 Effective diffusivity 23 6.2.3 Dispersion length 24 6.2.4 Water flows 25 6.3 Data on chemical factors 25 6.3.1 Soils 25 6.3.2 Clay 27 6.3.3 Till 27 - 11 - 6.4 Derivation of K,-values 2S 6.5 Retardation factors 29 6.6 Discussion of input data 30 6.7 Results 32 6.7.1 Case A 32 6.7.2 Case B 39 6.7.3 Case C 45 6.7.4 Sens i tivi ty analysis of dispersion lengch 45 6.8 Discussion of results 4S 7 CONCLUSIONS 50 NOTATIONS 52 REFERENCES 53 APPENDIX 1 Model descriptions Al: 1 1 Two-dimensional Finite Element Model Al:1 2 The TRUMP model Al:2 APPENDIX 2 The environmental chemistry of the radionuclides studied 1.
    [Show full text]