A comparison of two methods of mechanical analysis of soil used by SNLCS/EMBRAPA and IAC

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Jorge, José Antonio
Data de Publicação: 2014
Outros Autores: Paula, José Lopes de, Menk, Joao Roberto Ferreira
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: por
Título da fonte: Pesquisa Agropecuária Brasileira (Online)
Texto Completo: https://seer.sct.embrapa.br/index.php/pab/article/view/15884
Resumo: Thirty-two samples of soil, with clay content ranging from 7.4% to 92.9%, were analysed through the pippete and the densimeter methods, according to EMBRAPA and IAC procedures. No significant differences for clay were found in the pippete method for both laboratories. On the other hand, silt and fine sand-content results were significantly higher at the level of 5% for the IAC procedures. Coarse sand-content results were lower for the IAC procedures. For the densimeter method, the results were significatly different at the level of 5%, being lower for the IAC procedures for silt and coarse sand, and higher for clay and fine sand.
id EMBRAPA-4_db5daec94990e0499780271abb132ff9
oai_identifier_str oai:ojs.seer.sct.embrapa.br:article/15884
network_acronym_str EMBRAPA-4
network_name_str Pesquisa Agropecuária Brasileira (Online)
repository_id_str
spelling A comparison of two methods of mechanical analysis of soil used by SNLCS/EMBRAPA and IACComparação de dois métodos de analise granulométrica de solos utilizados pelo SNLCS/EMBRAPA e IACsoil physics; analytical procedures; pippete; densimeter; dispersionfísica do solo; procedimentos analíticos; pipeta; densímetro; dispersãoThirty-two samples of soil, with clay content ranging from 7.4% to 92.9%, were analysed through the pippete and the densimeter methods, according to EMBRAPA and IAC procedures. No significant differences for clay were found in the pippete method for both laboratories. On the other hand, silt and fine sand-content results were significantly higher at the level of 5% for the IAC procedures. Coarse sand-content results were lower for the IAC procedures. For the densimeter method, the results were significatly different at the level of 5%, being lower for the IAC procedures for silt and coarse sand, and higher for clay and fine sand.Trinta e duas amostras de solo, com teores oscilando entre 7,4% e 92,9% de argila, foram submetidas à análise granulométrica pelo método da pipeta e do densímetro, seguindo os procedimentos do IAC e do SNLCS/EMBRAPA. Para o método da pipeta, não houve diferenças significativas entre os resultados das duas Instituições quanto à fração argila; para as frações silte e areia fina, os resultados foram maiores para o IÀC, com diferenças significativas ao nível de 5%; para a fração areia grossa, as diferenças entre os resultados foram significativas a 5%, com os valores mais baixos para o IAC. Para o método do densímetro, os valores obtidos foram diferentes e significativos a 5% e mais altos para o IAC quanto às frações argila e areia fina, e significativos a 5% e mais baixos para o IAC para a fração silte e areia grossa.Pesquisa Agropecuaria BrasileiraPesquisa Agropecuária BrasileiraJorge, José AntonioPaula, José Lopes deMenk, Joao Roberto Ferreira2014-04-17info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionapplication/pdfhttps://seer.sct.embrapa.br/index.php/pab/article/view/15884Pesquisa Agropecuaria Brasileira; v.20, n.7, jul. 1985; 865-871Pesquisa Agropecuária Brasileira; v.20, n.7, jul. 1985; 865-8711678-39210100-104xreponame:Pesquisa Agropecuária Brasileira (Online)instname:Empresa Brasileira de Pesquisa Agropecuária (Embrapa)instacron:EMBRAPAporhttps://seer.sct.embrapa.br/index.php/pab/article/view/15884/9967info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess2014-04-17T11:54:25Zoai:ojs.seer.sct.embrapa.br:article/15884Revistahttp://seer.sct.embrapa.br/index.php/pabPRIhttps://old.scielo.br/oai/scielo-oai.phppab@sct.embrapa.br || sct.pab@embrapa.br1678-39210100-204Xopendoar:2014-04-17T11:54:25Pesquisa Agropecuária Brasileira (Online) - Empresa Brasileira de Pesquisa Agropecuária (Embrapa)false
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv A comparison of two methods of mechanical analysis of soil used by SNLCS/EMBRAPA and IAC
Comparação de dois métodos de analise granulométrica de solos utilizados pelo SNLCS/EMBRAPA e IAC
title A comparison of two methods of mechanical analysis of soil used by SNLCS/EMBRAPA and IAC
spellingShingle A comparison of two methods of mechanical analysis of soil used by SNLCS/EMBRAPA and IAC
Jorge, José Antonio
soil physics; analytical procedures; pippete; densimeter; dispersion
física do solo; procedimentos analíticos; pipeta; densímetro; dispersão
title_short A comparison of two methods of mechanical analysis of soil used by SNLCS/EMBRAPA and IAC
title_full A comparison of two methods of mechanical analysis of soil used by SNLCS/EMBRAPA and IAC
title_fullStr A comparison of two methods of mechanical analysis of soil used by SNLCS/EMBRAPA and IAC
title_full_unstemmed A comparison of two methods of mechanical analysis of soil used by SNLCS/EMBRAPA and IAC
title_sort A comparison of two methods of mechanical analysis of soil used by SNLCS/EMBRAPA and IAC
author Jorge, José Antonio
author_facet Jorge, José Antonio
Paula, José Lopes de
Menk, Joao Roberto Ferreira
author_role author
author2 Paula, José Lopes de
Menk, Joao Roberto Ferreira
author2_role author
author
dc.contributor.none.fl_str_mv

dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Jorge, José Antonio
Paula, José Lopes de
Menk, Joao Roberto Ferreira
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv soil physics; analytical procedures; pippete; densimeter; dispersion
física do solo; procedimentos analíticos; pipeta; densímetro; dispersão
topic soil physics; analytical procedures; pippete; densimeter; dispersion
física do solo; procedimentos analíticos; pipeta; densímetro; dispersão
description Thirty-two samples of soil, with clay content ranging from 7.4% to 92.9%, were analysed through the pippete and the densimeter methods, according to EMBRAPA and IAC procedures. No significant differences for clay were found in the pippete method for both laboratories. On the other hand, silt and fine sand-content results were significantly higher at the level of 5% for the IAC procedures. Coarse sand-content results were lower for the IAC procedures. For the densimeter method, the results were significatly different at the level of 5%, being lower for the IAC procedures for silt and coarse sand, and higher for clay and fine sand.
publishDate 2014
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2014-04-17
dc.type.none.fl_str_mv
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv https://seer.sct.embrapa.br/index.php/pab/article/view/15884
url https://seer.sct.embrapa.br/index.php/pab/article/view/15884
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv por
language por
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv https://seer.sct.embrapa.br/index.php/pab/article/view/15884/9967
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Pesquisa Agropecuaria Brasileira
Pesquisa Agropecuária Brasileira
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Pesquisa Agropecuaria Brasileira
Pesquisa Agropecuária Brasileira
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Pesquisa Agropecuaria Brasileira; v.20, n.7, jul. 1985; 865-871
Pesquisa Agropecuária Brasileira; v.20, n.7, jul. 1985; 865-871
1678-3921
0100-104x
reponame:Pesquisa Agropecuária Brasileira (Online)
instname:Empresa Brasileira de Pesquisa Agropecuária (Embrapa)
instacron:EMBRAPA
instname_str Empresa Brasileira de Pesquisa Agropecuária (Embrapa)
instacron_str EMBRAPA
institution EMBRAPA
reponame_str Pesquisa Agropecuária Brasileira (Online)
collection Pesquisa Agropecuária Brasileira (Online)
repository.name.fl_str_mv Pesquisa Agropecuária Brasileira (Online) - Empresa Brasileira de Pesquisa Agropecuária (Embrapa)
repository.mail.fl_str_mv pab@sct.embrapa.br || sct.pab@embrapa.br
_version_ 1793416686983970816

Registros relacionados