Soil & Tillage Research 216 (2022) 105257

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Soil & Tillage Research

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/still

Review

Factors influencing phosphorus placement and effects on yield and yield

parameters: A meta-analysis
Markus Freiling a, Sabine von Tucher a, b, Urs Schmidhalter a, *
a
Technical University of Munich, Chair of Plant Nutrition, Emil-Ramann-Straße 2, D-85354 Freising, Germany
b
Technical University of Munich, Institute for Crop Physiology, Alte Akademie 12, D-85354 Freising, Germany

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: As phosphorus (P) is a finite, non-renewable resource, it should be used as efficiently as possible. Different
Fertilizer placement placement methods (broadcast, band, deep band, and others) can optimize the P supply for plants. Therefore, this
Precision Farming meta-analysis evaluated 39 studies involving four major crops wheat (Triticum aestivum L.), maize (Zea mays L.),
Row crop
soybean (Glycine max L.), and oilseed rape (Brassica napus L.) concerning the effectiveness of different P
Sustainability
placement methods on yield, yield parameters, and P uptake. Most authors indicated yield advantages in wheat
Soil test phosphorus (STP)
and maize when P fertilization was applied in bands. This was confirmed by the meta-analysis indicating that
especially P application in the deep band leads to yield advantages in wheat and maize. Phosphorus placement’s
influence on yield, yield components, and P uptake was affected by external factors, such as the site, the year of
cultivation, and the crop variety. In the case of oilseed rape (Brassica napus L.), band application advantages were
also demonstrated. Broadcast P was the best overall application for soybean. Further research is needed to better
understand the interactions between pH, soil P content, P placement, and yield effects.

1. Introduction
Phosphorus (P) is an essential nutrient for plants (Heckenmüller
et al., 2014). The demand for P has been increasing in recent years due to
the growing population and changing human nutrition, both of which
have led to an expansion in the cultivation of crops (de Boer et al., 2019).
Since P is a limited, non-renewable resource (Roberts and Johnston,
2015), P should be used as efficiently as possible.
In many agricultural soils, the P availability is low (Zicker et al.,
2018), and fertilizer-P placement can be important to P use efficiency to
promote agronomic and environmental sustainability (Preston et al.,
2019).
Fertilizer placement affects crop P utilization, soil P dynamics, re­
sidual P concentration in different soil depths, and soil-plant in­
teractions (Arruda Coelho et al., 2019). Methods of fertilizer-P
application for annual agronomic crops can be broadly grouped into
broadcast and band application with point application much less com­
mon. Broadcast application of fertilizer-P may be with no incorporation
by tillage, as is common for no-till, or with incorporation (Table A.1).
Broadcast application is the easiest and most common method (Arruda
Coelho et al., 2019; Randall and Hoeft, 1988), but some version of band
application such as single band, double band, surface and deep bands, is
often more beneficial than broadcast P (Alam et al., 2018; Bashir et al.,
2015; Hansel et al., 2017b, 2017a; Lu et al., 2019; Preston et al., 2019;
Randall and Hoeft, 1988; Rehim et al., 2016; Smith et al., 2016). Besides,
P can be applied as a side band or mid row band (Grant and Flaten,
2019). Band application typically is simultaneous with planting and puts
fertilizer-P with a narrow width of application (e.g. <10 cm) within 10
cm of the seed row including with selected depths from 0 to > 20 cm. For
practical reasons, band application fertilizer-P in or near the seed row
with mechanized application is through spraying on or knifing in liquid
formulations such as with ammonium polyphosphate (Nkebiwe et al.,
2016; Preston et al., 2019) while broadcast application is mostly with
dry granulated forms such as with di- or mono-ammonium phosphate
but also with liquid forms in some cases. Struvite, another ammonium
phosphate fertilizer, has recently become available from P recycling
processes (Grant and Flaten, 2019). Rock phosphate may be used in
organic farming because it is considered an acceptable fertilizer source,
whereas other more soluble phosphate fertilizers are not permitted
(Grant and Flaten, 2019).

Abbreviations: Phosphorus (P), Soil test phosphorus (STP).

* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: schmidhalter@wzw.tum.de (U. Schmidhalter).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.still.2021.105257
Received 10 January 2021; Received in revised form 30 October 2021; Accepted 2 November 2021
Available online 14 November 2021
0167-1987/© 2021 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
M. Freiling et al.
This review outlines the best placement method for improved P ef­
ficiency to maximize yield and yield parameters of wheat (Triticum
aestivum L.), maize (Zea mays L.), soybean (Glycine max L.), and oilseed
rape (Brassica napus L.). These four crops represent mono- and dicoty­
ledonous plant species with different strategies of P uptake ranging with
narrow to wide row spacings.
This analysis addresses the effects of fertilizer-P placement on soil P
reactions, P uptake, growth, yield, and yield components for the four
crops. It addresses P placement interactions with different soil condi­
tions (pH, temperature, soil water content) as well as with fertilizer
sources and rates.
The following hypotheses and questions are addressed in the meta-
analysis:
• Band placement is better than broadcast P application
• Are there differences between the four crops?
• Which band placement method is best for which crop?
2. Methods
Data sets of the analyzed publications were compiled in the form of
tables. Only field experiments containing comparisons between broad­
cast and band P applications were included in the database to ensure
comparability of the P placement methods. The focus of this study was to
evaluate grain yields. The final data set included 407 broadcast vs. band
comparisons from 37 studies.
For the statistical analysis, the broadcast P application served as
control treatment and the different band placement methods were used
as experimental treatments. To determine the overall differences of the
mean yield, we used the log response ratio (expressed as the mean yield
ratio) used as the effect size, which is the natural log of the ratio of the
mean yields of the two placement methods (broadcast vs. band)
(Scheiner and Gurevitch, 2001). The log transformation can generate
normally distributed data (Hedges et al., 1999). To determine the yield
response, the ratio of the respective control treatment (broadcast) by the
respective P placement method (band, deep, etc.) was calculated. A ratio
less than one indicates that the band application is beneficial, a ratio
above one correspondingly the opposite. For testing the significant dif­
ference of 1, the 95% confidence intervals were calculated.
3. Effects of P placement on yield and yield parameters
Table A.2 (Appendix) presents a brief overview of the characteristics
Fig. 1. Effect of comparisons between broadcast P application with all band placement methods. Numbers in parentheses denote the number of observations. A ratio
of 1 means that there is no difference between broadcast and band applications while values < 1 indicate a higher yield for band methods. Values > 1 indicate a
higher yield for the broadcast P application. Values are mean effect sizes with 95% confidential intervals.
2
Soil & Tillage Research 216 (2022) 105257
of the field trial sites. The classification of soil test phosphorus (STP) in
Table A.2 is based on the interpretations of Mallarino (2003), Myla­
varapu and Miller (2014), Olsen and Dean (1965), Soltanpour (1991),
Moody (2007), Savoy (2009), and Menon et al. (1990).
Fig. 1 shows the effects of the comparison between broadcast P
application and all band placement methods for the selected crops. The
figure illustrates that band P application results in higher yields overall
compared to broadcast application. When looking at the individual
crops, the advantage of band application in contrast to broadcast P
application is also clear for wheat and maize. In soybean, no differences
were observed between broadcast and P placement methods, tending to
favor broadcast application. Rapeseed showed significantly higher
yields due to P placement in the band. However, since for rapeseed there
were only 17 comparisons and 2 studies, the findings should not be
overestimated.
3.1. Wheat
In comparing band to broadcast application, wheat grain yield was
higher with band in 76% of the studies and P uptake was greater with
band in 87,5% of the studies (Table A.3). In many cases, the higher P
uptake also resulted in significantly higher yield (Alam et al., 2003;
Chaudhary and Prihar, 1974; Kelley and Sweeney, 2007; Lu et al., 2019;
Matar and Brown, 1989a; Rehim et al., 2016, 2012a; Sander et al., 1990;
Sander and Eghball, 1999; Westerman and Edlund, 1985). In contrast to
band and deep band application, knife application was not significantly
different from broadcast application, but tended to have higher yields as
well (Fig. 2).
These advantages of banding occurred across a pH range of 5.7–8.4,
however, were observed at adequate soil P availability but also at low
soil P contents (Table A.2).
Depth of band application was often important to wheat yield with P
frequently applied in depths of 10–15 or 20–30 cm (Chaudhary and
Prihar, 1974; Kang et al., 2014; Kelley and Sweeney, 2007; Leikam et al.,
1983; Westerman and Edlund, 1985). Winter wheat responded partic­
ularly strongly to deep P application when the upper soil layers dried out
quickly (Chaudhary and Prihar, 1974; Kang et al., 2014; Singh et al.,
2005).
Varietal effects of deep banding were attributed to differences in the
root architecture (Schwab et al., 2006), a high root length density in the
upper soil layers contributed to improved P uptake (Manske et al.,
2000), deep application of fertilizer P promoted deep roots length and
weight (Kang et al., 2014). In addition, depending on the variety,
M. Freiling et al. Soil & Tillage Research 216 (2022) 105257

Fig. 2. Effect of comparisons between broadcast (BC) P application with different band placement methods for wheat. Numbers in parentheses denote the number of
observations. A ratio of 1 means that there is no difference between broadcast and band applications while values < 1 indicate a higher yield for band methods.
Values > 1 indicate a higher yield for the broadcast P application. Values are mean effect sizes with 95% confidential intervals.

besides modifying its root morphology on soils with low STP increased
physiological activities in the roots improved P uptake (Zou et al., 2018).
Phosphate dissolution by microorganisms such as Pseudomonas striata
and symbiosis with arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi were other strategies
of wheat that enhanced P uptake (Zaidi and Khan, 2005).
Various yield parameters were shown to be positively influenced by
P placement (band, deep band, placement to seed) as compared to
broadcast P application, e.g., dry matter (Barbieri et al., 2014; Lu et al.,
2019; Macleod et al., 1975), harvest index, tiller and ear number, grains
per ear and thousand grain weight (Bashir et al., 2015; Gökmen and
Sencar, 1999; Matar and Brown, 1989b, 1989a; McConnell et al., 1986;
Nuttall and Button, 1990; Nyborg and Hennig, 1969; Rehim et al., 2016;
Sander et al., 1990; Sander and Eghball, 1999; Westerman and Edlund,
1985; more information are in Table A.3).
Several authors demonstrated that P placement in the band signifi­
cantly increased grain and leaf P concentration (Rahim et al., 2010;
Rehim et al., 2012a, 2012b, 2016), with P uptake being particularly
increased on dry sites (Chaudhary and Prihar, 1974), and at low STP
(Bashir et al., 2015; Kelley and Sweeney, 2007; Leikam et al., 1983) and
rather seldom at optimal or high soil P contents (Leikam et al., 1983;
Westerman and Edlund, 1985).
3.2. Maize
In the comparison between P application in the band and broadcast
application, 73% of the studies showed higher grain yields and 86%
showed higher P uptake by band placement (Table A.4). Deep band
application exerted a positive influence on grain yield, while the 5 × 5
application method showed no significant differences compared to
broadcast application, but also tended to result in higher grain yields
(Fig. 3). Better plant growth in early stages of development and higher P
uptake due to P placement in the band were not predictive of higher
grain yield compared to broadcast P application (Mallarino et al., 1999;
Preston et al., 2019; Schwab et al., 2006), although higher P uptake due
to band placement sometimes led to higher grain yield (Alam et al.,
2018; Amin et al., 2004; Chaudhary and Prihar, 1974; Fernández and
White, 2012; Yost et al., 1979).
The advantages of band placement occurred particularly at sites with
(very) low STP levels (Alam et al., 2018; Amin et al., 2004; Howard
et al., 2002; Ma et al., 2013; Riedell et al., 2000; van der Eijk et al., 2006;
Yost et al., 1979). This suggests that at higher STP, the P placement
method is of minor relevance for yield. However, soil pH seemed to have
an even greater influence on the yield than the P placement method

Fig. 3. Effect of comparisons between broadcast (BC) P application with different band placement methods for maize. Numbers in parentheses denote the number of
observations. A ratio of 1 means that there is no difference between broadcast and band applications while values < 1 indicate a higher yield for band methods.
Values > 1 indicate a higher yield for the broadcast P application. Values are mean effect sizes with 95% confidential intervals.

3
M. Freiling et al.
(Alam et al., 2018; Kang and Yunusa, 1977; Szulc et al., 2020; van der
Eijk et al., 2006). It remains unclear to what extent the placement
method, STP, and pH in the soil interact and should therefore be further
investigated.
Maize roots shallower, which leads to a higher rooting in the topsoil
(Richardson et al., 2011) and can form symbioses with arbuscular
mycorrhizal fungi to further enhance P uptake (Khalil et al., 1994). Jing
et al. (2010) and Ma et al. (2013) concluded that improved growth,
nutrient uptake, and grain yield are related to localized nutrient-induced
(P plus ammonium) root proliferation and that increased root growth is
important to improve nutrient uptake and maximize grain yield.
Different yield parameters were shown to be positively affected by P
placement (band, deep band, 5 × 5) as compared to broadcast P appli­
cation, e.g., dry matter (Alam et al., 2018; Amin et al., 2004; Borges and
Mallarino, 2001; Buah et al., 2000a; Ma et al., 2013; Mallarino et al.,
1999; Schwab et al., 2006), straw yield (Chaudhary and Prihar, 1974),
number of kernels per ear (Szulc et al., 2020), ear leaf P, grain P content
(Preston et al., 2019), total P content of corn ear leaves (Eckert and
Johnson, 1985), plant height (Chaudhary and Prihar, 1974; Yost et al.,
1979), and leaf area (Ma et al., 2013; Yost et al., 1979).
3.3. Soybean
When band and broadcast P placement methods were compared,
44% of the studies reported higher yields and 100% higher P uptake
from band application (Table A.5). Fig. 4 illustrates that there was no
yield difference (broadcast vs. deep band) or even a slight yield
advantage of the broadcast application (broadcast vs. 5 × 5).
P uptake was frequently increased with band placement compared to
broadcast P application, but this did not usually lead to higher yields
(Borges and Mallarino, 2003, 2000; Farmaha et al., 2011; Ham et al.,
1973; Hansel et al., 2017b; Rosa et al., 2020; Rosa and Ruiz Diaz, 2015).
Under good growing conditions for plants, a larger soil volume is made
accessible by roots (e.g. through symbiosis with arbuscular mycorrhizal
fungi). This could be a more critical factor than P placement for P uptake
in the late growth phase, and differences in total P uptake could also be
due to different soybean varieties used (Hansel et al., 2017b). Soybean
develops a finer root system under low soil P conditions and produces
thinner roots (Fernandez and Rubio, 2015).
The yield parameters dry matter, plant height, the number of grains,
and P concentration were often increased by P placement in the band but
rarely resulted in increased yield (Borges and Mallarino, 2003, 2000;
Ham et al., 1973; Hansel et al., 2017b; Rosa et al., 2020; Rosa and Ruiz
Fig. 4. Effect of comparisons between broadcast (BC) P application with different band placement methods for soybean. Numbers in parentheses denote the number
of observations. A ratio of 1 means that there is no difference between broadcast and band applications while values < 1 indicate a higher yield for band methods.
Values > 1 indicate a higher yield for the broadcast P application. Values are mean effect sizes with 95% confidential intervals.
4
Soil & Tillage Research 216 (2022) 105257
Diaz, 2015). P placement directly to soybean seed could be beneficial if
STP was optimum or lower (Buah et al., 2000b; Ham et al., 1973).
STP and pH varied considerably across all publications. This leaves
open the question of whether positive influences of band placement can
be achieved. On the other hand, one might argue based on the literature
that the broadcast application is the best option for the grain yield of
soybeans.
3.4. Oilseed rape
All five publications highlighted the positive effects of band place­
ment on grain yield (Bailey and Grant, 1990; Karamanos et al., 2002;
Nuttall and Button, 1990; Nyborg and Hennig, 1969; Su et al., 2015).
The test sites’ soil conditions varied considerably, from very low to very
high STP and pH between 5.7 and 7.8. Nuttall and Button (1990) showed
that yield differences between N and P fertilizers’ placement methods
were not exceptionally high. Maximum yields were achieved with the
placement of 2.5 cm from the seed, and oilseed rape reacted best to
fertilizer-P if the fertilizer was applied in the band or near the seed
(Bailey and Grant, 1990). In these studies, a combined N and P fertil­
ization was used, in some cases, including potassium (K).
Rapeseed has an efficient P uptake due to the strong reduction of the
rhizosphere pH and the exudation of citric acid (Grinsted et al., 1982;
Hoffland et al., 1989). However, root length and the microbial com­
munity in the rhizosphere also play an important role in the P uptake of
rapeseed (Solaiman et al., 2007). Bailey and Grant (1990) observed
significantly higher P with band placement compared to broadcast P
application. Significantly higher P uptake with band placement
compared to a control of no P fertilization was shown by Su et al. (2015).
STP varied between optimal and very high and pH between 5.7 and 7.5
at these sites (Table A.6).
P placement in the band had a positive influence on the yield pa­
rameters dry matter, straw yield, grain and straw P content, number of
leaves, number of plants, plant height, and oil content (Bailey and Grant,
1990; Nuttall and Button, 1990; Nyborg and Hennig, 1969; Su et al.,
2015).
However, due to the lack of data, no meta-analysis was performed for
rapeseed.
4. P placement relationships among crops and influencing
factors
For wheat and maize, band placement of P (especially deep) often led
M. Freiling et al.
to higher yields and is therefore recommended. Based on the results,
band placement is also recommended for oilseed rape. In soybean, band
placement effects on yield were inconsistent, so broadcast P application
is recommended.
Many authors found that band P placement resulted in increased
yields compared to broadcast P application in wheat (Bashir et al., 2015;
Campbell et al., 1996; Gökmen and Sencar, 1999; Kang et al., 2014;
Kelley and Sweeney, 2007; Leikam et al., 1983; Lu et al., 2019; Macleod
et al., 1975; Matar and Brown, 1989a; Rehim et al., 2016, 2012b).
Various yield components (e.g., dry matter and thousand grain weight)
were positively affected by band P application compared to broadcast
application (e.g. Barbieri et al., 2014; Chaudhary and Prihar, 1974;
McConnell et al., 1986; Westerman and Edlund, 1985; more information
is given in Tables A.3, A.4, A.5, and A.6). P uptake was often increased
by P placement in the band, but did not always result in higher yields
(see also Tables A.3 to A.6).
Phosphorus availability is strongly affected by the soil water content,
temperature, physical-chemical surface properties, soil pH, and redox
potential (Shen et al., 2011) and therefore needs to be considered as well
in comparing broadcast versus band application.
This effect (higher yields with P application in band) seemed to occur
independent of soil pH (Alam et al., 2003; Chaudhary and Prihar, 1974;
Kang et al., 2014; Kelley and Sweeney, 2007; Leikam et al., 1983; Matar
and Brown, 1989a; Peterson et al., 1981; Rehim et al., 2016, 2012b;
Sander et al., 1990; Singh et al., 2005; Westerman and Edlund, 1985),
but it should be noted that the effect of P placement on wheat was
influenced by site and year of cultivation (Campbell et al., 1996;
Gökmen and Sencar, 1999; Kelley and Sweeney, 2007; Matar and
Brown, 1989a; McConnell et al., 1986; Peterson et al., 1981; Sander
et al., 1990; Sander and Eghball, 1999; Westerman and Edlund, 1985).
Soils in which no differences between P placement methods have been
reported had either very high or very low pH (Gökmen and Sencar,
1999; Jarvis and Bolland, 1990; Lu et al., 2019; Rahim et al., 2010;
Rehim et al., 2012a; Stecker et al., 1988). For maize; however, yield
differences between placement methods were observed at sites with low
pH (Szulc et al., 2020; van der Eijk et al., 2006), while no differences
were detected in soils with high pH (Alam et al., 2018; Kang and Yunusa,
1977). Since pH at sites where soybean and oilseed rape were grown
varied considerably, it remains unclear whether pH interacted with P
placement to influence yield.
In wheat, band application of P often led to yield advantages and is
therefore recommended. This is particularly striking given that wheat is
not a row crop. However, P’s deep band placement was beneficial in
soils that dried out (quickly) in the upper layer (Chaudhary and Prihar,
1974; Kang et al., 2014; Singh et al., 2005). In dry periods, band
fertilization is, therefore, more effective than the broadcast application
of phosphorus in terms of nutrient uptake and dry matter yield (Popp,
1998; Szulc et al., 2020). As a result of climate change and the associated
rise in temperature, this placement method could become even more
critical in the future. The investigations of Rahim et al. (2010) and
Rehim et al., (2016, 2012a, 2012b) showed that water supply played an
essential role, and thus soil moisture was also crucial in the effect of P
placement.
In wheat, maize, and soybean, benefits of P placement methods were
often found on soils characterized by low to very low STP (e.g., Alam
et al., 2018, 2003; Chaudhary and Prihar, 1974; Eckert and Johnson,
1985; Howard et al., 2002; Hussein, 2009; Kang et al., 2014; Kelley and
Sweeney, 2007; Ma et al., 2013; Matar and Brown, 1989b; Rehim et al.,
2016, 2012b; Riedell et al., 2000; Sander et al., 1990; Singh et al., 2005;
Szulc et al., 2020; van der Eijk et al., 2006; Yost et al., 1979). In oilseed
rape, STP did not appear to influence the efficacy of band placement
versus broadcast application (Bailey and Grant, 1990; Nuttall and But­
ton, 1990; Su et al., 2015). Yield advantages from band placement of P
for wheat, maize, and oilseed rape were more significant above a specific
fertilizer rate (Amin et al., 2004; Bailey and Grant, 1990; Howard et al.,
2002; Jarvis and Bolland, 1990; Kang and Yunusa, 1977; Lu and Miller,
5
Soil & Tillage Research 216 (2022) 105257
1993; Matar and Brown, 1989a; Nyborg and Hennig, 1969). The band
placement of P in the soil minimizes the contact between soil and fer­
tilizer, thus slowing down the transformation of soluble P into sparingly
soluble and, therefore, less available forms (Grant and Flaten, 2019).
In cold soil conditions, P placement near the seed is particularly
important to avoid P deficiency in early growth phases (Sheppard and
Racz, 1985). Popp (1998) found that band application at soil tempera­
tures of 10 ◦ C was more efficient than broadcast application, resulting in
higher yields. This yield advantage decreased with increasing soil tem­
perature (Sheppard and Racz, 1985). However, the influence of soil
temperature on P placement on yield or yield components was not part
of the investigated field experiments.
Root development appeared to significantly influence the extent of P
placement in the band (Jing et al., 2010; Kang et al., 2014; Ma et al.,
2013; Schwab et al., 2006). Maize and soybean can form a symbiosis
with mycorrhiza and thus improve P uptake (Khalil et al., 1994).
Moreover, P fertilizer placement methods modify root growth and in­
fluence crop yield (Popp, 1998). Gahoonia et al. (1999) found that the
root hair length of different cereals in treatments without P fertilization
strongly differentiated, but when 10 kg P ha–1 was applied, no differ­
ences in root hair length were found between varieties. Some varieties
reacted more sensitively to deep band P placement, with differences in
their root morphology (Schwab et al., 2006). This interaction between
root development and the P placement method should be further
investigated with different crops and varieties.
Lu et al. (2019) and Macleod et al. (1975) demonstrated that optimal
P placement is influenced by the P and N fertilizer source, with P
availability increased by local fertilizer application. Synergistic effects
became apparent in wheat when N and P were applied together (Leikam
et al., 1983). However, Howard et al. (2002) showed that maize’s yield
response was not consistently higher with the N and P’s combined
placement. Lu et al. (2019) showed that diammonium phosphate could
be applied slightly farther from the seed row than monocalcium phos­
phate because of its movement capacity. The consequence is that the
fertilizer source should be considered when placing P fertilizers or N and
P fertilizers.
The soil optimal fertilizer placement is further determined by the soil
P content, the application rate of phosphate, the tillage system, and the
prevailing climate conditions (Randall and Hoeft, 1988; Roberts and
Johnston, 2015).
5. Conclusions
Positive effects on yield parameters through P placement in the band
often resulted in higher grain yield of wheat and maize. For oilseed rape,
placement of P was also advantageous, while for soybean, the broadcast
application is recommended. As shown by the meta-analysis, P appli­
cation in the deep band often leads to higher yields in wheat and maize.
The P band placement frequently increased P uptake compared to a
broadcast application. This positive effect also led to higher grain yield
in many cases. However, a few authors showed that higher P uptake in
early growth stages did not necessarily lead to higher grain yields.
In soils that tend to dry out more quickly, P application should be
made in the deep band. The benefit of band application of P is partic­
ularly evident at sites with (very) low STP. With soybean, oilseed rape,
and wheat, it is still unclear how pH and P placement interact with each
other. Only in maize, yield advantages of band placement on sites with
low pH become apparent. Further research is required to identify rea­
sons for this effect and determine how placement methods interact with
pH and soil P content. Because cultivated crops and individual varieties
react with different root development to P placement these interactions
should be investigated more precisely in the future.
Declaration of Competing Interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
M. Freiling et al.
interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence
the work reported in this paper.
Acknowledgments
This work has been funded by the German Federal Ministry of Edu­
cation and Research (BMBF) project InnoSoilPhos (No. 031B0509B) – in
the frame of the BonaRes-Program.
Appendix A. Supporting information
Supplementary data associated with this article can be found in the
online version at doi:10.1016/j.still.2021.105257.
References
Alam, Md, Bell, R., Salahin, N., Pathan, S., Mondol, A.T.M.A.I., Alam, M.J., Rashid, M.H.,
Paul, P.L.C., Hossain, M.I., Shil, N.C., 2018. Banding of Fertilizer Improves
Phosphorus Acquisition and Yield of Zero Tillage Maize by Concentrating
Phosphorus in Surface Soil. Sustainability 10, 3234. https://doi.org/10.3390/
su10093234.
Alam, S.M., Shah, S.A., Akhter, M., 2003. Varietal differences in wheat yield and
phosphorus use efficiency as influenced by method of phosphorus application.
Songklanakarin J. Sci. Technol. 25, 175–181.
Amin, R., Zaidi, A., Khan, R., Raza, G., 2004. Phosphorus placement “effect” on yield and
p uptake by corn under rainfed conditions. Pak. J. Agric. Res. Vol. 18, 94–98.
Arruda Coelho, M.J., Ruiz Diaz, D., Hettiarachchi, G.M., Dubou Hansel, F., Pavinato, P.S.,
2019. Soil phosphorus fractions and legacy in a corn-soybean rotation on Mollisols in
Kansas, USA. Geoderma Reg. 18, 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geodrs.2019.
e00228.
Bailey, L.D., Grant, C.A., 1990. Fertilizer placement studies on calcareous and non-
calcareous chernozemic soils: Growth, P-UP-take, oil content and yield of Canadian
rape. Commun. Soil Sci. Plant Anal. 21, 2089–2104. https://doi.org/10.1080/
00103629009368361.
Barbieri, P.A., Sainz Rozas, H.R., Covacevich, F., Echeverría, H.E., 2014. Phosphorus
Placement Effects on Phosphorous Recovery Efficiency and Grain Yield of Wheat
under No-Tillage in the Humid Pampas of Argentina. Int. J. Agron. 2014, 1–12.
https://doi.org/10.1155/2014/507105.
Bashir, S., Anwar, S., Ahmad, B., Sarfraz, Q., Khatk, W., Islam, M., 2015. Response of
Wheat Crop to Phosphorus Levels and Application Methods. J. Environ. Earth Sci.
Vol. 5, 151–155.
Borges, R., Mallarino, A.P., 2003. Broadcast and Deep-Band Placement of Phosphorus
and Potassium for Soybean Managed with Ridge Tillage. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 67,
1920–1927. https://doi.org/10.2136/sssaj2003.1920.
Borges, R., Mallarino, A.P., 2001. Deep Banding Phosphorus and Potassium Fertilizers for
Corn Managed with Ridge Tillage. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 65, 376–384. https://doi.org/
10.2136/sssaj2001.652376x.
Borges, R., Mallarino, A.P., 2000. Grain Yield, Early Growth, and Nutrient Uptake of No-
Till Soybean as Affected by Phosphorus and Potassium Placement. Agron. J. 92,
380–388.
Buah, S., Polito, T.A., Killorn, R., 2000a. No-tillage corn response to placement of
fertilizer nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium. Commun. Soil Sci. Plant Anal. 31,
3121–3133. https://doi.org/10.1080/00103620009370655.
Buah, S., Polito, T.A., Killorn, R., 2000b. No-Tillage Soybean Response to Banded and
Broadcast and Direct and Residual Fertilizer Phosphorus and Potassium
Applications. Agron. J. 92, 657–662. https://doi.org/10.2134/agronj2000.924657x.
Campbell, C.A., McLeod, J.G., Selles, F., Zentner, R.P., Vera, C., 1996. Phosphorus and
nitrogen rate and placement for winter wheat grown on chemical fallow in a Brown
soil. Can. J. Plant Sci. 76, 237–243. https://doi.org/10.4141/cjps96-043.
Chaudhary, M.R., Prihar, S.S., 1974. Comparison of Banded and Broadcast Fertilizer
Applications in Relation to Compaction and Irrigation in Maize and Wheat. Agron. J.
66, 560–564. https://doi.org/10.2134/agronj1974.00021962006600040024x.
de Boer, M.A., Wolzak, L., Slootweg, J.C., 2019. Phosphorus: Reserves, Production, and
Applications. In: Ohtake, H., Tsuneda, S. (Eds.), Phosphorus Recovery and Recycling.
Springer, Singapore, Singapore, pp. 75–100. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-
8031-9_5.
Eckert, D.J., Johnson, J.W., 1985. Phosphorus Fertilization in No-Tillage Corn
Production 1. Agron. J. 77, 789–792. https://doi.org/10.2134/
agronj1985.00021962007700050028x.
Farmaha, B.S., Fernández, F.G., Nafziger, E.D., 2011. No-Till and Strip-Till Soybean
Production with Surface and Subsurface Phosphorus and Potassium Fertilization.
Agron. J. 103, 1862–1869. https://doi.org/10.2134/agronj2011.0149.
Fernández, F.G., White, C., 2012. No-Till and Strip-Till Corn Production with Broadcast
and Subsurface-Band Phosphorus and Potassium. Agron. J. 104, 996–1005. https://
doi.org/10.2134/agronj2012.0064.
Fernandez, M.C., Rubio, G., 2015. Root morphological traits related to phosphorus-
uptake efficiency of soybean, sunflower, and maize. J. Plant Nutr. Soil Sci. 178,
807–815. https://doi.org/10.1002/jpln.201500155.
Gahoonia, T.S., Nielsen, N.E., Lyshede, O.B., 1999. Phosphorus (P) acquisition of cereal
cultivars in the field at three levels of P fertilization. Plant Soil 211, 269–281.
6
Soil & Tillage Research 216 (2022) 105257
Gökmen, S., Sencar, Ö., 1999. Effect of Phosphorus Fertilizers and Application Methods
on the Yield of Wheat Grown Under Dryland Conditions. Tr. J. Agric. For. 23,
393–399.
Grant, C.A., Flaten, D.N., 2019. 4R Management of Phosphorus Fertilizer in the Northern
Great Plains. J. Environ. Qual. 48, 1356–1369. https://doi.org/10.2134/
jeq2019.02.0061.
Grinsted, M.J., Hedley, M.J., White, R.E., Nye, P.H., 1982. Plant-induced changes in the
rhizosphere of rape (Brassica napus var. Emerald) seedlings. I. pH change and the
increase in P concentration in the soil solution. N. Phytol. 91, 19–29. https://doi.
org/10.1111/j.1469-8137.1982.tb03289.x.
Ham, G.E., Nelson, W.W., Evans, S.D., Frazier, R.D., 1973. Influence of Fertilizer
Placement on Yield Response of Soybeans 1. Agron. J. 65, 81–84. https://doi.org/
10.2134/agronj1973.00021962006500010025x.
Hansel, F.D., Amado, T.J.C., Ruiz Diaz, D.A., Rosso, L.H.M., Nicoloso, F.T., Schorr, M.,
2017a. Phosphorus Fertilizer Placement and Tillage Affect Soybean Root Growth and
Drought Tolerance. Agron. J. 109, 2936–2944. https://doi.org/10.2134/
agronj2017.04.0202.
Hansel, F.D., Ruiz Diaz, D.A., Amado, T.J.C., Rosso, L.H.M., 2017b. Deep Banding
Increases Phosphorus Removal by Soybean Grown under No-Tillage Production
Systems. Agron. J. 109, 1091–1098. https://doi.org/10.2134/agronj2016.09.0533.
Heckenmüller, M., Narita, D., Klepper, G., 2014. Global Availability of Phosphorus and
Its Implications for Global Food Supply: An Economic Overview. Kiel. Work. Paper
1897, 1–26.
Hedges, L.V., Gurevitch, J., Curtis, P.S., 1999. The meta-analysis of response ratios in
experimental ecology. Ecology 80, 1150–1156.
Hoffland, E., Findenegg, G., NELEMANS, J., 1989. Solubilization of rock phosphate by
rape. II. Local root exudation Phosphate uptake shallow Mar. Carbonate Sediment.:
Org. Acids a Response P-starvation. Plant Soil 113, 161–165.
Howard, D.D., Essington, M.E., Logan, J., 2002. Long-Term Broadcast and Banded
Phosphorus Fertilization of Corn Produced Using Two Tillage Systems. Agron. J. 94,
51–56. https://doi.org/10.2134/agronj2002.0051.
Hussein, A., 2009. Phosphorus use efficiency by two varieties of corn at different
phosphorus fertilizer application rates. Res. J. Appl. Sci. 4, 85–93.
Jarvis, R.J., Bolland, M.D.A., 1990. Placing superphosphate at different depths in the soil
changes its effectiveness for wheat and lupin production. Fertil. Res. 22, 97–107.
https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01116183.
Jing, J., Rui, Y., Zhang, F., Rengel, Z., Shen, J., 2010. Localized application of
phosphorus and ammonium improves growth of maize seedlings by stimulating root
proliferation and rhizosphere acidification. Field Crops Res. 119, 355–364. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.fcr.2010.08.005.
Kang, B.T., Yunusa, M., 1977. Effect of Tillage Methods and Phosphorus Fertilization on
Maize in the Humid Tropics 1. Agron. J. 69, 291–294. https://doi.org/10.2134/
agronj1977.00021962006900020022x.
Kang, L., Yue, S., Li, S., 2014. Effects of Phosphorus Application in Different Soil Layers
on Root Growth, Yield, and Water-Use Efficiency of Winter Wheat Grown Under
Semi-Arid Conditions. J. Integr. Agric. 13, 2028–2039. https://doi.org/10.1016/
S2095-3119(14)60751-6.
Karamanos, R.E., Harapiak, J., Flore, N.A., 2002. Fall and early spring seeding of canola (
Brassica napus L.) using different methods of seeding and phosphorus placement.
Can. J. Plant Sci. 82, 21–26. https://doi.org/10.4141/P01-095.
Kelley, K.W., Sweeney, D.W., 2007. Placement of Preplant Liquid Nitrogen and
Phosphorus Fertilizer and Nitrogen Rate Affects No-Till Wheat Following Different
Summer Crops. Agron. J. 99, 1009–1017. https://doi.org/10.2134/
agronj2006.0240.
Khalil, S., Loynachan, T.E., Tabatabai, M.A., 1994. Mycorrhizal dependency and nutrient
uptake by improved and unimproved corn and soybean cultivars. Agron. J. 86,
949–958. https://doi.org/10.2134/agronj1994.00021962008600060005x.
Leikam, D.F., Murphy, L.S., Kissel, D.E., Whitney, D.A., Moser, H.C., 1983. Effects of
Nitrogen and Phosphorus Application Method and Nitrogen Source on Winter Wheat
Grain Yield and Leaf Tissue Phosphorus. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 47, 530–535. https://
doi.org/10.2136/sssaj1983.03615995004700030028x.
Lu, D., Song, H., Jiang, S., Chen, X., Wang, H., Zhou, J., 2019. Integrated Phosphorus
Placement and Form for Improving Wheat Grain Yield. Agron. J. 111, 1998–2004.
https://doi.org/10.2134/agronj2018.09.0559.
Lu, S., Miller, M.H., 1993. Determination of the most efficient phosphorus placement for
field-grown maize (Zea mays L.) in early growth stages. Can. J. Soil. Sci. 73,
349–358. https://doi.org/10.4141/cjss93-037.
Ma, Q., Zhang, F., Rengel, Z., Shen, J., 2013. Localized application of NH4 +-N plus P at
the seedling and later growth stages enhances nutrient uptake and maize yield by
inducing lateral root proliferation. Plant Soil 372, 65–80. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s11104-013-1735-8.
Macleod, L.B., Sterling, J.D.E., Macleod, J.A., 1975. Effects Of Rate, Source And Method
Of Application Of N, P And K On Growth, Nutrient Uptake and Yield Of Barley. Can.
J. Soil. Sci. 55, 61–67. https://doi.org/10.4141/cjss75-009.
Mallarino, A.P., 2003. Interpreting results of the Mehlich-3 ICP Soil Phosphorus Test.
Integr. Crop Manag. 490, 178–179.
Mallarino, A.P., Bordoli, J.M., Borges, R., 1999. Phosphorus and Potassium Placement
Effects on Early Growth and Nutrient Uptake of No-Till Corn and Relationships with
Grain Yield. Agron. J. 91, 37–45. https://doi.org/10.2134/
agronj1999.00021962009100010007x.
Manske, G.G.B., Ortiz-Monasterio, J.I., Ginkel, M.V., Gonzalez, R.M., Rajaram, S.,
Vlek, P.L.G., 2000. Traits associated with improved P-uptake efficiency in CIMMYT’s
semidwarf spring bread wheat grown on an acid Andisol in Mexico. Plant Soil 221,
189–204.
M. Freiling et al.
Matar, A.E., Brown, S.C., 1989a. Effect of rate and method of phosphate placement on
productivity of durum wheat in mediterranean environments: I. Crop yields and P
uptake. Fertil. Res. 20, 75–82. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01055431.
Matar, A.E., Brown, S.C., 1989b. Effect of rate and method of phosphate placement on
productivity of durum wheat in a Mediterranean climate: II. Root distribution and P
dynamics. Fertil. Res. 20, 83–88. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01055432.
McConnell, S.G., Sander, D.H., Peterson, G.A., 1986. Effect of Fertilizer Phosphorus
Placement Depth on Winter Wheat Yield. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 50, 148–153. https://
doi.org/10.2136/sssaj1986.03615995005000010028x.
Menon, R.G., Chien, S.H., Hammond, L.L., 1990. Development and evaluation of the Pi
soil test for plant-available phosphorus. Commun. Soil Sci. Plant Anal. 21,
1131–1150. https://doi.org/10.1080/00103629009368295.
Moody, P.W., 2007. Interpretation of a single-point P buffering index for adjusting
critical levels of the Colwell soil P test. Soil Res 45, 55–62. https://doi.org/10.1071/
SR06056.
Mylavarapu, R., Miller, R., 2014. In: Sikora, F.J., Moore, K.P. (Eds.), Mehlich-1. Soil Test
Methods From the Southeastern United States, pp. 95–100.
Nkebiwe, P.M., Weinmann, M., Bar-Tal, A., Müller, T., 2016. Fertilizer placement to
improve crop nutrient acquisition and yield: A review and meta-analysis. Field Crops
Res. 196, 389–401. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fcr.2016.07.018.
Nuttall, W.F., Button, R.G., 1990. The Effect Of Deep Banding N And P Fertilizer On The
Yield Of Canola (Brassica napus L.) And Spring Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.). Can. J.
Soil. Sci. 70, 629–639. https://doi.org/10.4141/cjss90-066.
Nyborg, M., Hennig, A.M.F., 1969. Field Experiments With Different Placements Of
Fertilizers For Barley, Flax And Rapeseed. Can. J. Soil. Sci. 49, 79–88. https://doi.
org/10.4141/cjss69-009.
Olsen, S., Dean, L., 1965. Phosphorus 1. In: Norman, A.G. (Ed.), Methods of Soil Analysis.
Part 2. Chemical and Microbiological Properties. American Society of Agronomy,
Soil Science Society of America, pp. 1035–1049.
Peterson, G.A., Sander, D.H., Grabouski, P.H., Hooker, M.L., 1981. A New Look at Row
and Broadcast Phosphate Recommendations for Winter Wheat 1. Agron. J. 73,
13–17. https://doi.org/10.2134/agronj1981.00021962007300010004x.
Popp, M., 1998. Wirkung der Phosphatplatzierung auf Wurzelwachstum und
-aufnahmeleistung sowie die Phosphorernährung der Zuckerrübe. Technische
Universität München,, München.
Preston, C.L., Ruiz Diaz, D.A., Mengel, D.B., 2019. Corn Response to Long-Term
Phosphorus Fertilizer Application Rate and Placement with Strip-Tillage. Agron. J.
111, 841–850. https://doi.org/10.2134/agronj2017.07.0422.
Rahim, A., Ranjha, A.M., Waraich, E.A., 2010. Effect of phosphorus application and
irrigation scheduling on wheat yield and phosphorus use efficiency. Soil Environ. 29,
15–22.
Randall, G.W., Hoeft, R.G., 1988. Placement Methods for Improved Efficiency of P and K
Fertilizers: A Review. J. Prod. Agric. 1, 70–79. https://doi.org/10.2134/
jpa1988.0070.
Rehim, A., Farooq, M., Ahmad, F., Hussain, M., 2012a. Band Placement of Phosphorus
Improves the Phosphorus Use Efficiency and Wheat Productivity under Different
Irrigation Regimes. Int. J. Agric. Biol. 14, 727–733.
Rehim, A., Hussain, M., Abid, M., Zia-Ul-Haq, M., Ahmad, S., 2012b. Phosphorus use
efficiency of trititicum aestivum l. as affected by band placement of phosphorus and
farmyard manure on calcareous soils. Pak. J. Bot. 44, 1391–1398.
Rehim, A., Hussain, M., Hussain, S., Noreen, S., Doğan, H., Zia-Ul-Haq, M., Ahmad, S.,
2016. Band-application of phosphorus with farm manure improves phosphorus use
efficiency, productivity, and net returns of wheat on sandy clay loam soil. Turk. J.
Agric. 40, 319–326. https://doi.org/10.3906/tar-1505-133.
Richardson, A.E., Lynch, J.P., Ryan, P.R., Delhaize, E., Smith, F.A., Smith, S.E.,
Harvey, P.R., Ryan, M.H., Veneklaas, E.J., Lambers, H., Oberson, A., Culvenor, R.A.,
Simpson, R.J., 2011. Plant and microbial strategies to improve the phosphorus
efficiency of agriculture. Plant Soil 349, 121–156. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11104-
011-0950-4.
Riedell, W.E., Beck, D.L., Schumacher, T.E., 2000. Corn Response to Fertilizer Placement
Treatments in an Irrigated No-Till System. Agron. J. 92, 316–320.
Roberts, T.L., Johnston, A.E., 2015. Phosphorus use efficiency and management in
agriculture. Resour., Conserv. Recycl. 105, 275–281. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
resconrec.2015.09.013.
Rosa, A.T., Ruiz Diaz, D.A., 2015. Fertilizer Placement and Tillage Interaction in Corn
and Soybean Production. Kans. Agric. Exp. Station Res. Rep. 1, 1–9. https://doi.org/
10.4148/2378-5977.1049.
Soil & Tillage Research 216 (2022) 105257
Rosa, A.T., Ruiz Diaz, D.A., Hansel, F.D., 2020. Phosphorus fertilizer optimization is
affected by soybean varieties and placement strategy. J. Plant Nutr. 43, 2336–2349.
https://doi.org/10.1080/01904167.2020.1771583.
Sander, D.H., Eghball, B., 1999. Planting Date and Phosphorus Fertilizer Placement
Effects on Winter Wheat. Agron. J. 91, 707–712. https://doi.org/10.2134/
agronj1999.914707x.
Sander, D.H., Penas, E.J., Eghball, B., 1990. Residual Effects of Various Phosphorus
Application Methods on Winter Wheat and Grain Sorghum. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 54,
1473–1478. https://doi.org/10.2136/sssaj1990.03615995005400050043x.
Savoy, H., 2009. Interpreting Mehlich 1 and 3 Soil Test Extractant Results for P and K in
Tennessee. Biosystems Engineering and Soil Science 1–3.
Scheiner, S.M., Gurevitch, J., 2001. Design and analysis of ecological experiments.
Oxford University Press,.
Schwab, G.J., Whitney, D.A., Kilgore, G.L., Sweeney, D.W., 2006. Tillage and Phosphorus
Management Effects on Crop Production in Soils with Phosphorus Stratification.
Agron. J. 98, 430–435. https://doi.org/10.2134/agronj2005.0050.
Shen, J., Yuan, L., Zhang, J., Li, H., Bai, Z., Chen, X., Zhang, W., Zhang, F., 2011.
Phosphorus Dynamics: From Soil to Plant. Plant Physiol. 156, 997–1005. https://doi.
org/10.1104/pp.111.175232.
Sheppard, S.C., Racz, G.J., 1985. Shoot And Root Response Of Wheat To Band And
Broadcast Phosphorus At Varying Soil Temperatures. Can. J. Soil. Sci. 65, 79–88.
https://doi.org/10.4141/cjss85-009.
Singh, D.K., Sale, P.W.G., Routley, R.R., 2005. Increasing phosphorus supply in
subsurface soil in northern Australia: Rationale for deep placement and the effects
with various crops. Plant Soil 269, 35–44. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11104-004-
2475-6.
Smith, D.R., Harmel, R.D., Williams, M., Haney, R., King, K.W., 2016. Managing Acute
Phosphorus Loss with Fertilizer Source and Placement: Proof of Concept. Agric.
Environ. Lett. 1, 1–4. https://doi.org/10.2134/ael2015.12.0015.
Solaiman, Z., Marschner, P., Wang, D., Rengel, Z., 2007. Growth, P uptake and
rhizosphere properties of wheat and canola genotypes in an alkaline soil with low P
availability. Biol. Fertil. Soils 44, 143–153. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00374-007-
0188-8.
Soltanpour, P.N., 1991. In: Lal, R., Stewart, B.A. (Eds.), Determination of Nutrient
Availability and Elemental Toxicity by AB-DTPA Soil Test and ICPS. Soil Restoration,
Advances in Soil Science, Springer New York, New York, NY, pp. 165–190. https://
doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4612-3144-8_3.
Stecker, J.A., Sander, D.H., Anderson, F.N., Peterson, G.A., 1988. Phosphorus Fertilizer
Placement and Tillage in a Wheat-Fallow Cropping Sequence. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J.
52, 1063–1068. https://doi.org/10.2136/sssaj1988.03615995005200040031x.
Su, W., Liu, B., Liu, X., Li, X., Ren, T., Cong, R., Lu, J., 2015. Effect of depth of fertilizer
banded-placement on growth, nutrient uptake and yield of oilseed rape (Brassica
napus L.). Eur. J. Agron. 62, 38–45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eja.2014.09.002.
Szulc, P., Wilczewska, W., Ambroży-Deręgowska, K., Mejza, I., Szymanowska, D., Kobus-
Cisowska, J., 2020. Influence of the depth of nitrogen-phosphorus fertiliser
placement in soil on maize yielding. Plant Soil Environ. 66, 14–21. https://doi.org/
10.17221/644/2019-PSE.
van der Eijk, D., Janssen, B., Oenema, O., 2006. Initial and residual effects of fertilizer
phosphorus on soil phosphorus and maize yields on phosphorus fixing soils. A case
study in south-west Kenya. Agric., Ecosyst. Environ. 116, 104–120. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.agee.2006.03.018.
Westerman, R.L., Edlund, M.G., 1985. Deep Placement Effects of Nitrogen and
Phosphorus on Grain Yield, Nutrient Uptake, and Forage Quality of Winter Wheat’.
Agron. J. 77, 803–809.
Yost, R.S., Kamprath, E.J., Lobato, E., Naderman, G., 1979. Phosphorus Response of Corn
on an Oxisol as Influenced by Rates and Placement. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 43,
338–343. https://doi.org/10.2136/sssaj1979.03615995004300020020x.
Zaidi, A., Khan, S., 2005. Interactive Effect of Rhizotrophic Microorganisms on Growth,
Yield, and Nutrient Uptake of Wheat. J. Plant Nutr. 28, 2079–2092. https://doi.org/
10.1080/01904160500320897.
Zicker, T., von Tucher, S., Kavka, M., Eichler-Löbermann, B., 2018. Soil test phosphorus
as affected by phosphorus budgets in two long-term field experiments in Germany.
Field Crops Res. 218, 158–170. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fcr.2018.01.008.
Zou, C.-Q., Deng, Y., Teng, W., Tong, Y.-P., Chen, X.-P., 2018. Phosphorus Efficiency
Mechanisms of Two Wheat Cultivars as Affected by a Range of Phosphorus Levels in
the Field. Front. Plant Sci. 9, 1614. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2018.01614.