Interlaboratory and Intralaboratory Testing of Soil Sulfate Analysis in Mollisols of the Pampas

Autores
Russi, Daniela; Gutiérrez Boem, Flavio Hernán; Prystupa, Pablo; Rubio, Gerardo
Año de publicación
2012
Idioma
inglés
Tipo de recurso
artículo
Estado
versión publicada
Descripción
Sulfur (S) deficiencies in grain and forage crops have been detected in many agricultural regions of the world, but soil tests are not commonly used as the basis for S fertilizer recommendation programs. Errors of measurements of soil sulfate were determined to assess whether the variation among and within soil-testing laboratories could be a factor that prevent the adoption of soil testing to assess soil sulfate availability. Subsamples of 10 selected soils (Mollisols) from the Pampas (Argentina) were sent in two batches to five soil-testing laboratories. Laboratories were unaware of the existence of subsamples and performed routine sulfate analysis as if these soils came from 60 different fields. Soil sulfate ranged from 3.3 to 20.6 mg kg-1. One laboratory reported sulfate values greater than the other ones, having a mean bias of 4.1 mg kg-1 S sulfate (SO4). The other four laboratories reported similar sulfate values when soils had low sulfate availability (less than 10 mg S kg-1), even when they used different extractants. Considering only these four laboratories, average interlaboratory coefficients of variations ranged from 6 to 24% for the 10 soils. Within-laboratory mean coefficients of variation (CVs) ranged from 12 to 22%. However, mean absolute errors of all laboratories were less than 1.2 mg kg-1 S-SO4. Two laboratories reported different sulfate values for the two batches of shipment (an average difference of 4.7 and 3.8 mg kg-1 of S-SO4). Laboratories using different extractants obtained similar results, suggesting that using the same extractant is not a prerequisite to standardize laboratory results in these soils. Differences between laboratories in our study were smaller than in other interlaboratory comparisons for soil sulfate. These differences could be easily detected and corrected if laboratories participate in an interlaboratory control system. The observed low mean absolute errors suggested that, in general, all laboratories achieve acceptable precision when evaluating within the same batch of determinations. Differences between batches of shipment (within laboratory error) stressed the importance of using reference material for internal quality control. © 2012 Copyright Taylor and Francis Group, LLC.
Fil: Russi, Daniela. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina. Universidad de Buenos Aires. Facultad de Agronomía. Departamento de Ingeniería Agrícola y Uso de la Tierra. Cátedra de Fertilidad y Fertilizantes; Argentina
Fil: Gutiérrez Boem, Flavio Hernán. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina. Universidad de Buenos Aires. Facultad de Agronomía. Departamento de Ingeniería Agrícola y Uso de la Tierra. Cátedra de Fertilidad y Fertilizantes; Argentina
Fil: Prystupa, Pablo. Universidad de Buenos Aires. Facultad de Agronomía. Departamento de Ingeniería Agrícola y Uso de la Tierra. Cátedra de Fertilidad y Fertilizantes; Argentina
Fil: Rubio, Gerardo. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina. Universidad de Buenos Aires. Facultad de Agronomía. Departamento de Ingeniería Agrícola y Uso de la Tierra. Cátedra de Fertilidad y Fertilizantes; Argentina
Materia
Soil Fertility
Sulfur
Testing Methodologies
Nivel de accesibilidad
acceso abierto
Condiciones de uso
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.5/ar/
Repositorio
CONICET Digital (CONICET)
Institución
Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas
OAI Identificador
oai:ri.conicet.gov.ar:11336/59854

id CONICETDig_83672eac906b3e40393bf0d929180362
oai_identifier_str oai:ri.conicet.gov.ar:11336/59854
network_acronym_str CONICETDig
repository_id_str 3498
network_name_str CONICET Digital (CONICET)
spelling Interlaboratory and Intralaboratory Testing of Soil Sulfate Analysis in Mollisols of the PampasRussi, DanielaGutiérrez Boem, Flavio HernánPrystupa, PabloRubio, GerardoSoil FertilitySulfurTesting Methodologieshttps://purl.org/becyt/ford/4.1https://purl.org/becyt/ford/4Sulfur (S) deficiencies in grain and forage crops have been detected in many agricultural regions of the world, but soil tests are not commonly used as the basis for S fertilizer recommendation programs. Errors of measurements of soil sulfate were determined to assess whether the variation among and within soil-testing laboratories could be a factor that prevent the adoption of soil testing to assess soil sulfate availability. Subsamples of 10 selected soils (Mollisols) from the Pampas (Argentina) were sent in two batches to five soil-testing laboratories. Laboratories were unaware of the existence of subsamples and performed routine sulfate analysis as if these soils came from 60 different fields. Soil sulfate ranged from 3.3 to 20.6 mg kg-1. One laboratory reported sulfate values greater than the other ones, having a mean bias of 4.1 mg kg-1 S sulfate (SO4). The other four laboratories reported similar sulfate values when soils had low sulfate availability (less than 10 mg S kg-1), even when they used different extractants. Considering only these four laboratories, average interlaboratory coefficients of variations ranged from 6 to 24% for the 10 soils. Within-laboratory mean coefficients of variation (CVs) ranged from 12 to 22%. However, mean absolute errors of all laboratories were less than 1.2 mg kg-1 S-SO4. Two laboratories reported different sulfate values for the two batches of shipment (an average difference of 4.7 and 3.8 mg kg-1 of S-SO4). Laboratories using different extractants obtained similar results, suggesting that using the same extractant is not a prerequisite to standardize laboratory results in these soils. Differences between laboratories in our study were smaller than in other interlaboratory comparisons for soil sulfate. These differences could be easily detected and corrected if laboratories participate in an interlaboratory control system. The observed low mean absolute errors suggested that, in general, all laboratories achieve acceptable precision when evaluating within the same batch of determinations. Differences between batches of shipment (within laboratory error) stressed the importance of using reference material for internal quality control. © 2012 Copyright Taylor and Francis Group, LLC.Fil: Russi, Daniela. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina. Universidad de Buenos Aires. Facultad de Agronomía. Departamento de Ingeniería Agrícola y Uso de la Tierra. Cátedra de Fertilidad y Fertilizantes; ArgentinaFil: Gutiérrez Boem, Flavio Hernán. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina. Universidad de Buenos Aires. Facultad de Agronomía. Departamento de Ingeniería Agrícola y Uso de la Tierra. Cátedra de Fertilidad y Fertilizantes; ArgentinaFil: Prystupa, Pablo. Universidad de Buenos Aires. Facultad de Agronomía. Departamento de Ingeniería Agrícola y Uso de la Tierra. Cátedra de Fertilidad y Fertilizantes; ArgentinaFil: Rubio, Gerardo. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina. Universidad de Buenos Aires. Facultad de Agronomía. Departamento de Ingeniería Agrícola y Uso de la Tierra. Cátedra de Fertilidad y Fertilizantes; ArgentinaTaylor2012-10info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionhttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501info:ar-repo/semantics/articuloapplication/pdfapplication/pdfapplication/pdfapplication/pdfhttp://hdl.handle.net/11336/59854Russi, Daniela; Gutiérrez Boem, Flavio Hernán; Prystupa, Pablo; Rubio, Gerardo; Interlaboratory and Intralaboratory Testing of Soil Sulfate Analysis in Mollisols of the Pampas; Taylor ; Communications in Soil Science and Plant Analysis; 43; 19; 10-2012; 2535-25430010-3624CONICET DigitalCONICETenginfo:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/doi/10.1080/00103624.2012.711875info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/url/https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00103624.2012.711875info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccesshttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.5/ar/reponame:CONICET Digital (CONICET)instname:Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas2025-09-29T10:24:30Zoai:ri.conicet.gov.ar:11336/59854instacron:CONICETInstitucionalhttp://ri.conicet.gov.ar/Organismo científico-tecnológicoNo correspondehttp://ri.conicet.gov.ar/oai/requestdasensio@conicet.gov.ar; lcarlino@conicet.gov.arArgentinaNo correspondeNo correspondeNo correspondeopendoar:34982025-09-29 10:24:30.656CONICET Digital (CONICET) - Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicasfalse
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Interlaboratory and Intralaboratory Testing of Soil Sulfate Analysis in Mollisols of the Pampas
title Interlaboratory and Intralaboratory Testing of Soil Sulfate Analysis in Mollisols of the Pampas
spellingShingle Interlaboratory and Intralaboratory Testing of Soil Sulfate Analysis in Mollisols of the Pampas
Russi, Daniela
Soil Fertility
Sulfur
Testing Methodologies
title_short Interlaboratory and Intralaboratory Testing of Soil Sulfate Analysis in Mollisols of the Pampas
title_full Interlaboratory and Intralaboratory Testing of Soil Sulfate Analysis in Mollisols of the Pampas
title_fullStr Interlaboratory and Intralaboratory Testing of Soil Sulfate Analysis in Mollisols of the Pampas
title_full_unstemmed Interlaboratory and Intralaboratory Testing of Soil Sulfate Analysis in Mollisols of the Pampas
title_sort Interlaboratory and Intralaboratory Testing of Soil Sulfate Analysis in Mollisols of the Pampas
dc.creator.none.fl_str_mv Russi, Daniela
Gutiérrez Boem, Flavio Hernán
Prystupa, Pablo
Rubio, Gerardo
author Russi, Daniela
author_facet Russi, Daniela
Gutiérrez Boem, Flavio Hernán
Prystupa, Pablo
Rubio, Gerardo
author_role author
author2 Gutiérrez Boem, Flavio Hernán
Prystupa, Pablo
Rubio, Gerardo
author2_role author
author
author
dc.subject.none.fl_str_mv Soil Fertility
Sulfur
Testing Methodologies
topic Soil Fertility
Sulfur
Testing Methodologies
purl_subject.fl_str_mv https://purl.org/becyt/ford/4.1
https://purl.org/becyt/ford/4
dc.description.none.fl_txt_mv Sulfur (S) deficiencies in grain and forage crops have been detected in many agricultural regions of the world, but soil tests are not commonly used as the basis for S fertilizer recommendation programs. Errors of measurements of soil sulfate were determined to assess whether the variation among and within soil-testing laboratories could be a factor that prevent the adoption of soil testing to assess soil sulfate availability. Subsamples of 10 selected soils (Mollisols) from the Pampas (Argentina) were sent in two batches to five soil-testing laboratories. Laboratories were unaware of the existence of subsamples and performed routine sulfate analysis as if these soils came from 60 different fields. Soil sulfate ranged from 3.3 to 20.6 mg kg-1. One laboratory reported sulfate values greater than the other ones, having a mean bias of 4.1 mg kg-1 S sulfate (SO4). The other four laboratories reported similar sulfate values when soils had low sulfate availability (less than 10 mg S kg-1), even when they used different extractants. Considering only these four laboratories, average interlaboratory coefficients of variations ranged from 6 to 24% for the 10 soils. Within-laboratory mean coefficients of variation (CVs) ranged from 12 to 22%. However, mean absolute errors of all laboratories were less than 1.2 mg kg-1 S-SO4. Two laboratories reported different sulfate values for the two batches of shipment (an average difference of 4.7 and 3.8 mg kg-1 of S-SO4). Laboratories using different extractants obtained similar results, suggesting that using the same extractant is not a prerequisite to standardize laboratory results in these soils. Differences between laboratories in our study were smaller than in other interlaboratory comparisons for soil sulfate. These differences could be easily detected and corrected if laboratories participate in an interlaboratory control system. The observed low mean absolute errors suggested that, in general, all laboratories achieve acceptable precision when evaluating within the same batch of determinations. Differences between batches of shipment (within laboratory error) stressed the importance of using reference material for internal quality control. © 2012 Copyright Taylor and Francis Group, LLC.
Fil: Russi, Daniela. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina. Universidad de Buenos Aires. Facultad de Agronomía. Departamento de Ingeniería Agrícola y Uso de la Tierra. Cátedra de Fertilidad y Fertilizantes; Argentina
Fil: Gutiérrez Boem, Flavio Hernán. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina. Universidad de Buenos Aires. Facultad de Agronomía. Departamento de Ingeniería Agrícola y Uso de la Tierra. Cátedra de Fertilidad y Fertilizantes; Argentina
Fil: Prystupa, Pablo. Universidad de Buenos Aires. Facultad de Agronomía. Departamento de Ingeniería Agrícola y Uso de la Tierra. Cátedra de Fertilidad y Fertilizantes; Argentina
Fil: Rubio, Gerardo. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina. Universidad de Buenos Aires. Facultad de Agronomía. Departamento de Ingeniería Agrícola y Uso de la Tierra. Cátedra de Fertilidad y Fertilizantes; Argentina
description Sulfur (S) deficiencies in grain and forage crops have been detected in many agricultural regions of the world, but soil tests are not commonly used as the basis for S fertilizer recommendation programs. Errors of measurements of soil sulfate were determined to assess whether the variation among and within soil-testing laboratories could be a factor that prevent the adoption of soil testing to assess soil sulfate availability. Subsamples of 10 selected soils (Mollisols) from the Pampas (Argentina) were sent in two batches to five soil-testing laboratories. Laboratories were unaware of the existence of subsamples and performed routine sulfate analysis as if these soils came from 60 different fields. Soil sulfate ranged from 3.3 to 20.6 mg kg-1. One laboratory reported sulfate values greater than the other ones, having a mean bias of 4.1 mg kg-1 S sulfate (SO4). The other four laboratories reported similar sulfate values when soils had low sulfate availability (less than 10 mg S kg-1), even when they used different extractants. Considering only these four laboratories, average interlaboratory coefficients of variations ranged from 6 to 24% for the 10 soils. Within-laboratory mean coefficients of variation (CVs) ranged from 12 to 22%. However, mean absolute errors of all laboratories were less than 1.2 mg kg-1 S-SO4. Two laboratories reported different sulfate values for the two batches of shipment (an average difference of 4.7 and 3.8 mg kg-1 of S-SO4). Laboratories using different extractants obtained similar results, suggesting that using the same extractant is not a prerequisite to standardize laboratory results in these soils. Differences between laboratories in our study were smaller than in other interlaboratory comparisons for soil sulfate. These differences could be easily detected and corrected if laboratories participate in an interlaboratory control system. The observed low mean absolute errors suggested that, in general, all laboratories achieve acceptable precision when evaluating within the same batch of determinations. Differences between batches of shipment (within laboratory error) stressed the importance of using reference material for internal quality control. © 2012 Copyright Taylor and Francis Group, LLC.
publishDate 2012
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2012-10
dc.type.none.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501
info:ar-repo/semantics/articulo
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.none.fl_str_mv http://hdl.handle.net/11336/59854
Russi, Daniela; Gutiérrez Boem, Flavio Hernán; Prystupa, Pablo; Rubio, Gerardo; Interlaboratory and Intralaboratory Testing of Soil Sulfate Analysis in Mollisols of the Pampas; Taylor ; Communications in Soil Science and Plant Analysis; 43; 19; 10-2012; 2535-2543
0010-3624
CONICET Digital
CONICET
url http://hdl.handle.net/11336/59854
identifier_str_mv Russi, Daniela; Gutiérrez Boem, Flavio Hernán; Prystupa, Pablo; Rubio, Gerardo; Interlaboratory and Intralaboratory Testing of Soil Sulfate Analysis in Mollisols of the Pampas; Taylor ; Communications in Soil Science and Plant Analysis; 43; 19; 10-2012; 2535-2543
0010-3624
CONICET Digital
CONICET
dc.language.none.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/doi/10.1080/00103624.2012.711875
info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/url/https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00103624.2012.711875
dc.rights.none.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.5/ar/
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
rights_invalid_str_mv https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.5/ar/
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
application/pdf
application/pdf
application/pdf
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Taylor
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Taylor
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv reponame:CONICET Digital (CONICET)
instname:Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas
reponame_str CONICET Digital (CONICET)
collection CONICET Digital (CONICET)
instname_str Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas
repository.name.fl_str_mv CONICET Digital (CONICET) - Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas
repository.mail.fl_str_mv dasensio@conicet.gov.ar; lcarlino@conicet.gov.ar
_version_ 1844614242024554496
score 13.070432