Search Results

You are looking at 81 - 90 of 564 items for :

  • "physical properties" x
  • Refine by Access: All x
Clear All
Full access

Rita L. Hummel, Craig Cogger, Andy Bary, and Robert Riley

production. These changes include pH, soluble salts, nutrients, and potentially phytotoxic materials, as well as physical properties such as AP and WHC. In this research, we manufactured three container substrates by cocomposting biosolids with three locally

Full access

Ajay Nair and Brandon Carpenter

plant analysis. Soil Sci. Soc. Amer., Madison, WI Dumroese, R.K. Heiskanen, J.H. Englund, K. Tervahauta, A. 2011 Pelleted biochar: Chemical and physical properties show potential use and a substrate in container nurseries Biomass Bioenergy 35 2018 2027

Full access

Susan L. Barkley, Jonathan R. Schultheis, Sushila Chaudhari, Suzanne D. Johanningsmeier, Katherine M. Jennings, Van-Den Truong, and David W. Monks

content and similar yields to Beauregard ( La Bonte et al., 2008 ). A second objective of this research was to compare chemical and physical properties (color, texture, DM, and sugar content) and consumer acceptability of ‘Evangeline’ and ‘Covington

Free access

Jaroslav Ďurkovič, František Kačík, Miroslava Mamoňová, Monika Kardošová, Roman Longauer, and Jana Krajňáková

mechanical and physical properties to the cell walls of this stock type. Taken together, the micropropagated plants reached significantly higher values for 13 traits (32.5%), primarily associated with the relative proportion of Glc and the macromolecular

Free access

Jennifer Moore-Kucera, Anita Nina Azarenko, Lisa Brutcher, Annie Chozinski, David D. Myrold, and Russell Ingham

, because nutrient cycling is largely driven by microbial functioning. These fractions are considered more responsive to changes in C inputs compared with measurements using total SOM. Table 1. Soil biological, chemical, and physical properties to be

Free access

Linda L. Taylor, Alexander X. Niemiera, Robert D. Wright, and J. Roger Harris

result of the acidifying nature of peat. The objective of this work was to determine the effects of storage time on PTS chemical and physical properties and on plant growth. Specifically, the effect of storage on PTS pH, EC, CEC, C:N, particle size

Full access

Christopher Y. Choi, Werner Zimmt, and Gene Giacomelli

Aqueous foam was developed to serve as a barrier to conductive, convective, and radiative heat transfer. Through the use of a bulking agent, the physical properties of gelatin-based foam were more stable, adhesive, biodegradable, and long lasting. The phytotoxicity, possible environmental hazard and removal of the foam were also considered. Resistance to freezing-thawing, heating-evaporation, and wind were evaluated. Studies to determine the foam's long-term stability under field weather conditions were completed. The handling and performance characteristics of the foam necessary for development of this application were determined. Factors that affect the physical properties and the utilization of the foam were quantified. These included the proportions of the foam components, the mixing temperature of the prefoam solution, the application temperature, and the rate of foam generation. The newly developed foam might be ideal for freeze and frost protection in agriculture.

Free access

Lamprini Tassoula, Maria Papafotiou, Georgios Liakopoulos, and Georgios Kargas

characteristics. Physical and chemical properties of the substrates and their components ( Fig. 2 ; Tables 1 and 2 ) were measured in three samples, which were mixed and taken as one measurement. The physical properties were determined after saturating for 48 h

Free access

Maria Papafotiou, Niki Pergialioti, Lamprini Tassoula, Ioannis Massas, and Georgios Kargas

Quality Assurance Organization (FCQAO), 1994 ] by the methods of Peech (1965) and Bower and Wilcox (1965) , respectively. The physical properties of the substrates were determined after 48 h saturation. Samples were prepared by the methods described in

Free access

Dennis B. McConnell and Wayne H. Smith

Three foliage plants, Dracaena fragrans, Peperomia obtusifolia and Schefflera arboricola were grown in 24 different mixes. Potting mixes were formulated using yard waste compost from two sources, a commercial mix (Metro 300) and a prepared mix (peat: pine bark sand). All potting mixes produced acceptable plants with no phytotoxicity associated with any mix. Only minor differences were discerned in the growth rate of P. obtusifolia and S. arboricola.

The growth rate of D. fragrans showed the greatest response to potting mix formulations. Plants in a standard potting mix (P/PB/S) used in the industry for D. fragrans grew slower than plants in many of the mixes containing various fractions of yard waste compost. Chemical and physical properties of the potting mixes used showed physical properties had the greatest variability. Overall, the best growth for all 3 plants was in a potting mix composed of 87.5% Metro 300/12. 5% YWC#1 and worst growth was in YWC#2 (100% composted (live oak leaves).