Citation
The fate of fertilizer-N applied to a Florida citrus soil

Material Information

Title:
The fate of fertilizer-N applied to a Florida citrus soil
Creator:
Hagillih, Daniel Apollo, 1946-
Publication Date:
Language:
English
Physical Description:
vii, 103 leaves : ill. ; 28 cm.

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords:
Citrus fruits -- Fertilizers -- Florida ( lcsh )
Dissertations, Academic -- Horticultural Science -- UF
Horticultural Science thesis Ph. D
Nitrogen fertilizers -- Florida ( lcsh )
Soils -- Florida ( lcsh )
Soils -- Nitrogen content ( lcsh )
City of Gainesville ( local )
Citrus trees ( jstor )
Soil science ( jstor )
Nitrogen ( jstor )
Genre:
bibliography ( marcgt )
non-fiction ( marcgt )

Notes

Thesis:
Thesis--University of Florida.
Bibliography:
Bibliography: leaves 91-102.
General Note:
Typescript.
General Note:
Vita.
Statement of Responsibility:
by Daniel Apollo Hagillih.

Record Information

Source Institution:
University of Florida
Holding Location:
University of Florida
Rights Management:
Copyright [name of dissertation author]. Permission granted to the University of Florida to digitize, archive and distribute this item for non-profit research and educational purposes. Any reuse of this item in excess of fair use or other copyright exemptions requires permission of the copyright holder.
Resource Identifier:
030282721 ( ALEPH )
06359223 ( OCLC )
AAB7462 ( NOTIS )
AA00004908_00001 ( sobekcm )

Downloads

This item has the following downloads:

fateoffertilizer00hagi.pdf

fateoffertilizer00hagi_0055.txt

fateoffertilizer00hagi_0062.txt

fateoffertilizer00hagi_0088.txt

fateoffertilizer00hagi_0024.txt

fateoffertilizer00hagi_0075.txt

fateoffertilizer00hagi_0041.txt

fateoffertilizer00hagi_0081.txt

fateoffertilizer00hagi_0059.txt

fateoffertilizer00hagi_0069.txt

fateoffertilizer00hagi_0095.txt

fateoffertilizer00hagi_0056.txt

fateoffertilizer00hagi_0018.txt

fateoffertilizer00hagi_0000.txt

fateoffertilizer00hagi_0097.txt

fateoffertilizer00hagi_0003.txt

fateoffertilizer00hagi_0066.txt

fateoffertilizer00hagi_0001.txt

fateoffertilizer00hagi_0108.txt

fateoffertilizer00hagi_0038.txt

fateoffertilizer00hagi_0087.txt

fateoffertilizer00hagi_0007.txt

fateoffertilizer00hagi_0083.txt

AA00004908_00001_pdf.txt

fateoffertilizer00hagi_0093.txt

fateoffertilizer00hagi_0048.txt

fateoffertilizer00hagi_0052.txt

fateoffertilizer00hagi_0034.txt

fateoffertilizer00hagi_0008.txt

fateoffertilizer00hagi_0112.txt

fateoffertilizer00hagi_0084.txt

fateoffertilizer00hagi_0065.txt

fateoffertilizer00hagi_0012.txt

fateoffertilizer00hagi_0106.txt

fateoffertilizer00hagi_0063.txt

fateoffertilizer00hagi_0109.txt

fateoffertilizer00hagi_0091.txt

fateoffertilizer00hagi_0005.txt

fateoffertilizer00hagi_0107.txt

fateoffertilizer00hagi_0036.txt

fateoffertilizer00hagi_0004.txt

fateoffertilizer00hagi_0072.txt

fateoffertilizer00hagi_0009.txt

fateoffertilizer00hagi_0078.txt

fateoffertilizer00hagi_pdf.txt

fateoffertilizer00hagi_0074.txt

fateoffertilizer00hagi_0029.txt

fateoffertilizer00hagi_0089.txt

fateoffertilizer00hagi_0086.txt

fateoffertilizer00hagi_0102.txt

fateoffertilizer00hagi_0037.txt

fateoffertilizer00hagi_0079.txt

fateoffertilizer00hagi_0105.txt

fateoffertilizer00hagi_0111.txt

fateoffertilizer00hagi_0049.txt

fateoffertilizer00hagi_0053.txt

fateoffertilizer00hagi_0047.txt

fateoffertilizer00hagi_0031.txt

fateoffertilizer00hagi_0025.txt

fateoffertilizer00hagi_0046.txt

fateoffertilizer00hagi_0019.txt

fateoffertilizer00hagi_0058.txt

fateoffertilizer00hagi_0070.txt

fateoffertilizer00hagi_0023.txt

fateoffertilizer00hagi_0076.txt

fateoffertilizer00hagi_0010.txt

fateoffertilizer00hagi_0067.txt

fateoffertilizer00hagi_0051.txt

fateoffertilizer00hagi_0096.txt

fateoffertilizer00hagi_0061.txt

fateoffertilizer00hagi_0043.txt

fateoffertilizer00hagi_0080.txt

fateoffertilizer00hagi_0002.txt

fateoffertilizer00hagi_0006.txt

fateoffertilizer00hagi_0035.txt

fateoffertilizer00hagi_0020.txt

fateoffertilizer00hagi_0011.txt

fateoffertilizer00hagi_0042.txt

fateoffertilizer00hagi_0071.txt

fateoffertilizer00hagi_0094.txt

fateoffertilizer00hagi_0044.txt

fateoffertilizer00hagi_0077.txt

fateoffertilizer00hagi_0026.txt

fateoffertilizer00hagi_0113.txt

fateoffertilizer00hagi_0022.txt

fateoffertilizer00hagi_0040.txt

fateoffertilizer00hagi_0092.txt

fateoffertilizer00hagi_0057.txt

fateoffertilizer00hagi_0103.txt

fateoffertilizer00hagi_0073.txt

fateoffertilizer00hagi_0033.txt

fateoffertilizer00hagi_0039.txt

fateoffertilizer00hagi_0060.txt

fateoffertilizer00hagi_0098.txt

fateoffertilizer00hagi_0027.txt

fateoffertilizer00hagi_0014.txt

fateoffertilizer00hagi_0016.txt

fateoffertilizer00hagi_0015.txt

EYAGIZDRF_1I0M2F_xml.txt

fateoffertilizer00hagi_0104.txt

fateoffertilizer00hagi_0064.txt

fateoffertilizer00hagi_0090.txt

fateoffertilizer00hagi_0017.txt

fateoffertilizer00hagi_0099.txt

fateoffertilizer00hagi_0100.txt

fateoffertilizer00hagi_0021.txt

fateoffertilizer00hagi_0013.txt

fateoffertilizer00hagi_0045.txt

fateoffertilizer00hagi_0101.txt

fateoffertilizer00hagi_0054.txt

fateoffertilizer00hagi_0032.txt

fateoffertilizer00hagi_0068.txt

fateoffertilizer00hagi_0082.txt

AA00004908_00001.pdf

fateoffertilizer00hagi_0110.txt

fateoffertilizer00hagi_0028.txt

fateoffertilizer00hagi_0030.txt

fateoffertilizer00hagi_0050.txt

fateoffertilizer00hagi_0085.txt


Full Text




















THE FATE OF FERTILIZER-N APPLIED TO
A FLORIDA CITRUS SOIL







By

Daniel Apollo Hagillih


A DISSERTATION PRESENTED TO THE
GRADUATE COUNCIL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA
IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS
FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY



UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA


1980


_f _




THE FATE OF FERTILIZER-N APPLIED TO
A FLORIDA CITRUS SOIL
By
Daniel Apollo Hagillih
A DISSERTATION PRESENTED TO THE
GRADUATE COUNCIL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA
IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS
FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA
1980


ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The author wishes to express his gratitude and appre
ciation to Dr. R.C.J. Koo, the chairman of his supervisory
committee, for his patient guidance in the execution of
this research and the preparation of the manuscript.
Throughout the graduate training of the author, Dr. Koo
strived to imprint on the author an appreciation of the
scientific method in research.
The author is equally indebted to Dr. A.H. Krezdorn,
Professor Emeritus of Fruit Crops, who had been the Chair
man of his supervisory committee. Even in retirement, Dr.
Krezdorn continued to serve on this committee and to will
ingly give of his time, counsel and support. To Dr. W.S.
Castle, a member of his committee, the author owes a debt
of gratitude and appreciation for his valuable contribu
tion in suggestions, counsel and involvement in ail phases
of this study.
Sincere appreciation is extended to Dr. N. Gammon,
Jr., Professor Emeritus of Soil Chemistry, for his construc
tive criticism and counsel particularly in the soil aspect
of the research. The author also wishes to thank Dr. D.A.
Graetz for his assistance in the analysis of soil samples.


The graduate training of the author was sponsored by
the Agricultural Research Corporation of the Sudan. Towards
the end of his training, the Department of Fruit Crops
offered the author a graduate assistantship. Ke grate
fully acknowledges the financial support from both.
Finally, the author wishes to thank Ms. Janice L.
Cambridge for her companionship and encouragement through
out the duration of this study.
in


TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
. 1
LITERATURE REVIEW
. 3
Nitrogen Balance and Its Major Components .
. 3
Considerations for Increasing the
Efficiency of N Usage by Citrus Trees .
. 7
Analytical Procedures for N Balance
Components
Isotope Approach to N Utilization
by Citrus Trees
. 15
MATERIALS AND METHODS
. 18
Experimental Site
. 18
Experimental Design
. 13
Field Sampling Procedures
. 24
Samle Preparation and Analysis
. 27
Statistical Analysis
. 29
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
. 30
Experiments 1 and 2
. 30
Experiment 3
. 70
CONCLUSIONS
. 87
LITERATURE CITED
. 91
BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH
. 103
iv


Abstract of Dissertation Presented to the
Graduate Council of the University of Florida in
Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements
for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy
THE FATE OF FERTILIZER-N APPLIED TO
A FLORIDA CITRUS SOIL
By
Daniel Apollo Hagillih
March 1980
Chairman: Dr. R.C.J. Koo
Major Department: Horticultural Science
The fate of fertilizer-N applied to Astatula fine sand
was studied by the destructive Sampling of 1-year-old 'Pine
apple' orange (Citrus sinensis [L.] Osbeck) trees on 'Alemow'
(C. macrophylla Wester), and through soil chemical analysis,
using the difference method. The fall-winter study involved
unfertilized control, isobutylidene diurea (IBDU) and NH^NO^
sources in a factorial combination with no irrigation, low
and high irrigation levels. Nitrogen source and irrigation
treatments lasted for 14 and 6 weeks, respectively. The
spring study involved only the 3 N sources and lasted for
6 weeks. Leaf and fruit sampling of bearing 'Pineapple'
orange trees, fertilized with the same N sources, and soil
v


Chemical analysis of the unreplicated tree plots were also
used. Soil water content in all experiments was determined
by a neutron probe.
The results indicated that growth parameters of the
young trees, including percent trunk diameter increase, dry
weights of component parts and the entire tree, showed no
statistical differences attributed to N source, apparently
because of the short duration of the studies. There was,
however, a trend for IBDU and NH^NCu fertilization to re
sult in greater dry matter, particularly in the more succu
lent aerial parts. This was apparent in the leaves of the
fertilized trees which were statistically greater than those
of unfertilized trees.
There was a highly significant relationship between
N source and N concentration and total N of tree parts,
and total N of the entire tree. In every case, the order
of N absorption was NH^NO^- > IBDU-fertilized > control
trees. This confirms that a soluble source such as NH^NO-,
is more readily absorbed in the short-term than a controlled
release form of N. It is suggested that this trend may nor
prevail in the long-term.
Irrigation level did not statistically affect tree
growth and N content parameters, and soil N content in the
fall-winter study. The narrow range and short duration of
the irrigacin treatments were probably not sufficient to
elicit treatment responses.
vi


Nitrogen balance data showed that 66 and 30% of ap
plied N from IBDU and NE^NO^, respectively, were retained
in the 0- to 6G-cm soil profile. Twenty-five and 45% from
the same respective sources were accounted for in the young
trees. Total apparent N recovery in the soil-plant sys
tem was 91 and 76% for IBDU- and NH^NO^-N, respectively.
The deficit was assumed to have been leached and/or lost to
the atmosphere.
There was no difference in fruit yield between IBDU-
and NH^NO^-fertiiized bearing trees. Fertilized trees,
however, yielded 4 times as much as the control. Fruit
N concentration and removal and leaf N concentration were
in the order of NH^NO^- > IBDU-fertilized > unfertilized
tree. The absence of replication precluded the establish
ment of a plausible N balance. Nevertheless, 40% of the
applied N was estimated to be contained in the fruits and
leaves.
High N recoveries on experimental plots involving young,
nonbearing, and bearing trees suggest chat substantial leach
ing of N may not be a major route for N loss from citrus
groves established on deep, well-drained soils when reason
able rates of fertilizer-N are applied over the root zone.
The potential for a single application of IBDU to
young cirrus trees, which are normally fertilized several
times a year, needs further study.
vi 1


INTRODUCTION
Florida's sandy soils planted to citrus are character
ized by low native fertility which necessitates the regu
lar addition of fertilizer nutrients to maintain a com
mercial level of production. Such an edaphic environment
is also conducive to the substantial leaching of mineral N
by rainfall and irrigation (114). Soil tests which measure
N carry-over from previous N additions are of little value
in these soils. As a result, the replacement of nutrients,
including N, lost from the soil is generally dependent up
on an evaluation of the need of the crop.
The N requirement of commercial citrus cultivars is
based on many long-term investigations in which tree growth
and yield were related to fertilizer rate, source, time of
application and leaf N content. Nitrogen uptake by the
citrus tree is considered to be a small part of the total
N loss from the deep, sandy soils of central Florida (100) .
The efficiency of tree N utilization, i.e., the propor
tion of N used by the tree compared to that applied, has
been estimated to be 25-30%. As a result, there is public
and grower concern regarding the quantitative extent of the
leaching loss of N applied to citrus. Leached N represents
an irretrievable loss of a costly resource and may
1


2
contribute to the NO^ pollution of underground water and
to lake eutrophication.
No meaningful N balance studies, i.e., accounting
quantitatively for the fate of N applied to citrus soils
as a fertilizer, have been done in Florida as they have in
California (29, 68, 69). In order to enhance our under
standing of N use in Florida soils planted to citrus, it
is essential that the fate of fertilizer-N be studied.
The primary objective of this research was to make a
quantitative accounting of fertilizer-N applied to bearing
and young trees on a deep, well-drained sandy soil of the
Florida ridge area, where much of the citrus in Florida is
grown. A second objective was to evaluate isobutylidene
diurea (IBDU) as a controlled-release N fertilizer source
for citrus.


LITERATURE REVIEW
Nitrogen Balance and Its Major Components
Preliminary Remarks
Important sources for the N in the soil solution in
clude fertilizer-N additions and net mineralization. Other
sources also likely to add some N to the soil solution in
clude rainfall, irrigation water, biological fixation, dif
fusion of atmospheric ammonia into the soil surface, direct
absorption of atmospheric ammonia by plant leaves, and
transformations involved in the N cycle (80, 125). Major
sources of N removal from the soil solution are plant up
take, leaching, net fixation in the soil and denitrifica
tion. Smaller losses of N in most agricultural soils in
clude gaseous losses through ammonia volatilization and
physical removal by wind and animals.
Attempts to account for the fate of applied N in the
soil-plant-atmosphere continuum have yielded some useful
information, but it is rare that a complete quantitative
recovery of applied N is obtained (2, 50, 97). Calculation
of a N balance for a field system is particularly diffi
cult because of the many possible fates of N in soils (65),
and because of the physical difficulties encountered in
3


4
obtaining quantitative data for some of the major compo
nents of a N balance such as leaching, plant uptake and
residual N (8, 97).
Leaching of N
Leaching has been defined as the movement of solutes
from one soil zone to another by percolated water (107).
Leaching of N is important because it represents the loss
of a costly resource and because it may contribute to en
vironmental pollution.
Few measurements have been reported giving accurate
data concerning nutrient loss from agricultural lands by
leaching (34). Most of the mineral N lost by leaching in
citrus orchards is in the NO^ form (42, 51). The extent
of NO^ loss from the soil-plant system depends on the fer
tilizer material, soil type, plant species, rainfall and
management practices. High infiltration rates and lev;
water storage capacities of sandy soils make them espe
cially subject to NO^ leaching. Other factors which in
fluence the magnitude of NO^ leaching include evaporation,
nutrient concentration, depth of rooting, N reserves, min
eralization of the soil, nitrification of the NH^-N and
soil temperature (113).
In California, the proportion of N applied to citrus
leached annually as NO., ranged from 45 (8) to 90% (51).
These high NO^ leaching losses, however, occurred under
conditions of excessive irrigation on well-drained soils


5
atypical of many irrigated areas in arid zones. In a deep
sandy Florida soil, split application of 200 kg/ha of N
annually to a mature citrus grove did not result in NO-j
leaching even when the rainfall was high (35) Studies in
volving a single annual application of N to evaluate the
magnitude of NO^ leaching loss from citrus plantings in
Florida have not been done.
Plant Cycling of N
Information on the N content of an entire citrus tree
is meager. The size of the mature tree makes the destruc
tive biomass sampling a difficult and costly task (111).
In forest tree studies, where there is a commercial inter
est in the wood, biomass sampling procedures for the tree
are more highly developed (9, 66, 91, 126). Also, with
citrus, leaf N content is considered an adequate index of
the N status of the tree. The commercial adoption of leaf
analysis as a guide to fertilization of citrus has report
edly reduced N usage by about 50% in California (31).
A few studies on total citrus trae N content have been
reported, but very often these studies were lacking in ade
quate replication (5, 63, 100, 121). In Florida, it was
estimated that a 15-year-old orange tree absorbed only 25-
30% of applied N (100). Of this amount, 33% is returned
to the soil during the year through shedding of old leaves,
flowers and young fruits, 50% is removed in the crop of
fruit, and about 15% goes into permanent structures in the


6
form of new twigs and trunk enlargement. Data from a
single 19-year-old grapefruit (Citrus paradisi Macf.) tree
in Florida (5) indicated that the N content of component
tree parts on a % dry weight basis in descending order was
leaves, immature fruit, twigs less than 1.3 cm diameter,
fibrous roots, large roots, limbs up to 1.3 cm diameter
and trunk.
A series of studies to determine the N content of
'Valencia' orange trees have been reported from California
(19,20, 121). One study showed that a 10-year-old tree
contained 200 g of N in the leaves (19), while another
study indicated that nearly one-half of the N content of
the tree was in the leaves (20) Wallace et al_. (121)
reported that a 14-year-old 'Valencia' orange tree contained
673 g of N. The authors did not, however, indicate how
much N was applied so that it is difficult to relate this
figure to trees of similar age elsewhere. Apparently, a
significant amount of N added to the soil is removed by
citrus fruits (59, 131). Zidan and Wallace (131) reported
that a mature 'Washington' navel orange fruit with a fresh
weight of 192 g contained 394 mg of N while a 'Valencia'
orange fruit of 165 g contained 327 mg.
Residual Soil N
A part of the N balance which is the most difficult to
account for because of spatial variability is the amount of
N remaining in the soil at any given sampling time.


7
Sampling and analysis of the soil material for NO^N (1, 3,
51, 61, 81, 82) and/or total N (36, 84, 102) is commonly
used to measure soil N content but large samples are usu
ally required to achieve an acceptable degree of accuracy.
The variation in residual soil N content, both within and
among experimental units, has been reported to decrease
with increasing depth in the soil profile (79). Also, the
variability of virgin land has been reported to be less for
N than similar areas of cultivated land (7).
In a Florida study involving an orchard of mature
citrus trees, the soil nutrient content was the least vari
able in samples collected below the tree dripline as com
pared to other sampling locations (11). Nevertheless, it
was demonstrated that a large number of samples was re
quired to reduce the variation regardless of the sampling
location.
Considerations for Increasing the
Efficiency of N Usage by Citrus trees
General Concepts
Optimizing N use by citrus trees appears to involve
the development of management programs which prevent the
excessive loss of NO^ by leaching without sacrificing fruit
yield, size, and quality (29). It has been suggested that
optimum management could be achieved by applying only the
amount of N needed to sustain high fruit production, with


8
leaf analysis being used as a guide to determine the proper
rate (32, 90). Differences in citrus cultivar N require
ments and soil types, however, dictate an approach in which
timing, rate, placement, N source and water regime must
be considered in the efficient use of fertilizer-N.
One approach to increasing the efficiency of N use
has been to split the annual application of N (17, 35, 88).
This is supported by a Florida experiment conducted under
high rainfall conditions (35). In terms of citrus fruit
productivity, however, other studies (17, 88) indicated
that a single application of fertilizer-N applied during
the drier portion of the year, in winter, gave the same
yield response compared to 2 applications per year.
Another approach is the foliar application of N in
the form of low-biuret urea. Studies from California (29,
30) indicated that foliar application of N was associated
with lower NCu leaching potential than was soil applica
tion. In general, foliar-applied N, under the low rainfall
conditions of California, was found to be as effective as
soil-applied N for fruit production (29, 30). This approach
may not be suitable in Florida where frequent rains may
wash away the N applied to the foliage. Efficient N use
may require the application of nominal rates to the soil,
supplementing this with foliar-applied N.
It has been suggested that in future studies, split
soil application of N be a treatment along with foliar-soil
combinations (54). A major limitation in foliar application


9
of N, however, is that it is energy intensive especially
if frequent applications are necessary.
Concept of Controlled Release N Fertilizers and IBDU
The concept of the controlled release of N to increase
fertilizer-N efficiency has been amply reviewed (62, 74,
76, 77, 85, 106). The basic approaches are the development
of compounds of limited solubility, use of coated granules,
and formulation of ammoniacal fertilizers with nitrifica
tion inhibitors. The objectives of such fertilizer-N forms
are to minimize the immobilization, leaching and volatili
zation losses of soil-applied N, and to release an adequate
amount of available N to satisfy the crop requirement. How
ever, because of higher costs, these fertilizers are being
used primarily in turfgrass, ornamentals, home grounds,
nursery fields, and for other specialty situations.
Isobutylidene diurea is a condensation product of urea
and iso-butyraldehyde patented in Japan as a slow-release
N source. Hamamoto (41) described its preparation and
physical properties in greater detail. His review of the
studies conducted in Japan showed that the large granule of
IBDU was effective in preventing high N leaching loss when
applied to paddy soils. By using IBDU with green tea
(Camellia sinensis [L.] Kuntze) plants Hamamoto (41) re
ported that one application was enough to get average yields
and thus save labor. The conversion of IBDU to plant avail
able form appears to result from the dissolution of IBDU


10
granules. The rate of dissolution is strongly influenced
by particle size (41). Fine sized IBDU granules release
larger amounts of N than coarse granules. This was ob
served in an incubation study (48), for turfgrasses (116,
117), and for flue-cured tobacco (Nicotiana tabacum L.)
(71). Hughes (48) confirmed Hamamoto's (41) findings that
IBDU-N release was greater at low pH values and high tem
peratures. In evaluating IBDU for 'Merion' Kentucky blue
grass (Poa pratensis L.), Moberg et al. (72) indicated that
a uniform growth response was possible from 2 applications
of IBDU as compared to 3 of UREX (a urea-paraffin product).
Studies in citrus or other tree crops with IBDU have not
as yet been reported.
Analytical Procedures for
N Balance Components
Leached N Sampling and Analysis
Soil N losses from leaching have generally been stud
ied in lysimeter experiments or in controlled field drain
age plots by measuring the N content of the effluent water
(43). In citrus, lysimeter studies have largely been lim
ited to young trees in the greenhouse. Such studies can
provide useful basic information, but they are limited in
scope because of the difficulty of extrapolating the data
to orchard conditions (39). Moreover, a major shortcoming
of lysimeters is the retention of more moisture than


11
corresponds with field capacity, resulting in the danger of
anaerobiosis and denitrification (23).
In mature citrus orchards, several approaches have
been made for estimating the leaching of fertilizer-N.
Wander (123) analyzed water samples from the lower edges
of citrus plantings located on slopes in Florida. Be
cause the actual amount of water used by mature citrus
trees and the exact rainfall in the local area was not
known, however, it was difficult to translate such water
analyses into figures representing actual amounts of N lost
by drainage.
Various systems of drain lines and tiles have been
devised in which data obtained by effluent water analysis
and water discharge rates are used to calculate the amount
of N leached. The amount of NO^-N in the drainage from
citrus groves has been determined by this procedure in
California (26, 60) and Florida (16, 18). However, the
reliability of this approach for monitoring subsurface
NO^-N losses has been questioned (108).
Several investigators have used porous ceramic cups to
collect soil solution samples from citrus groves (10, 26,
35, 60). This procedure was found to be useful for esti
mating the potential for NO^ pollution in a Florida citrus
grove (35). The procedure also gave a reasonable estimate
of the amount of NO^-N leached from a millet (Pennisetum
typhoides L.) plot (37). However, this procedure has been


12
criticized because of the difficulty of providing enough
water samples for chemical analysis and the requirement
for a suction device. A new vacuum extractor was developed
to surmount these difficulties but its usefulness has been
limited by operational problems (27).
A new approach to calculating the leaching of NO^ from
the root zone of crops is based on a comparison of the be
havior of NO^ and Cl ions in the drainage or percolating
waters that have moved below the root zone (82, 83).
Changes in the ratio of these ions were used to calculate
the amount of NO^ leached. In unsaturated soils where the
determination of NO^ and Cl concentrations in the percola
ting water is difficult these concentrations were deter
mined in a saturation extract. In both cases NO^ and Cl-
ratios were found to be satisfactory in estimating NO^
leached below the root zone of crops.
Residual Soil N Sampling and Analysis
Soil samples from citrus orchards are obtained using
various sampling techniques. For cores greater than 6 m
in length, a power-driven 45-cm diameter auger is often
used (82) When samples are taken to only 6 m, a truck-
mounted hydraulically powered sampler is frequently pre
ferred. Most sampling in citrus orchards is conducted to
shallower depths, generally not exceeding 4 or 5 m. In
such cases, conventional sampling soil tubes or augers are
used.


13
Several analytical procedures have been adopted to
determine residual soil N. For total N determination, 2
methods have gained general acceptance: the Kjeldahl
method which is essentially a wet-oxidation procedure, and
the Dumas method which is fundamentally a dry-oxidation pro
cedure (12). Residual soil N is also determined by analyz
ing the soil for exchangeable NH^ and NO^ ions using steam
distillation procedures (13). Recent trends in quantita
ting residual soil N, however, have involved the determina
tion of NO^ (67) and NH* (4) ions in saturation extracts
using specific ion activity electrodes.
Soil Water Measurement
Nitrogen is absorbed by plant roots from the soil solu
tion. The soil water content is important, therefore, not
only because of its function as a solvent but also because
its mass movement is directly related to the leaching of the
soil profile.
Soil water content is measured by several techniques,
each with advantages and disadvantages. One technique used
extensively in loam- to clay-textured soils is based upon
the tensiometer (92, 93, 95, 105). The information fur
nished by tensiometers tends to be qualitative. Tensio
meters are generally used for determining timing and dura
tion of irrigation and have not been found to be particu
larly useful for sandy soils (52, 56).


14
Electrical-resistance blocks are not extensively used
on sandy soils (64, 105) because gypsum blocks operate most
reliably in the drier portion of the soil water content
spectrum. In the sandy Florida soils, the available water
is relatively small, and soil water should be maintained
above 65% of field capacity. Under these conditions gyp
sum blocks are not particularly suitable.
For direct quantitative measurement of soil water by
volume, 2 methods are used. The gravimetric procedure in
volves the calculation of a volumetric water content from
the weight of the water in a soil sample and the soil bulk
density (46, 64, 94). Rapid, large-scale soil water con
tent sampling by this technique is laborious and time-
consuming.
The neutron scattering method is a faster and equally
accurate method as compared to the gravimetric procedure
(14, 15, 40, 104). The method has been found to be useful
in studying patterns of soil water depletion in Florida
citrus groves (53).
Plant Tissue Sampling and Analysis
The leaf is the most commonly sampled tissue to deter
mine the N status of a citrus tree (31, 32, 99, 101). As
a result, techniques in leaf sampling and analytical pro
cedures have been highly developed. The entire mature tree,
however, is rarely sampled to determine its total N content.


15
One approach for determining the N content of the tree is
to uproot the entire tree. The tree is then fractionated
into various component parts and the N content of sample
parts determined after oven-drying and grinding. This
approach has been tried in Florida (5) and in California
(19, 20). Another approach has involved making a. periodic
weight and chemical determination of all the blossoms,
leaves and fruits that fall from citrus trees. Wallace
et al. (121) used this approach to obtain data which were
then combined with similar information for harvested fruits,
new leaves and twigs, to obtain a measure of the nutrient
content of the tree.
Isotope Approach to N
Utilization by Citrus Trees
The use of isotopes in tree nutrition research was
discussed by Walker (118) and Hauck (44). The advantages
of this technique include the direct measurement of trans
port velocities and separation of newly absorbed nutrients
from those already present in the various components of the
ecosystem (96).
14
Nitrogen occurs in nature m 2 stable isotopes, N and
N^. Only recently has it been possible, as the result of
advances in cryogenic techniques whereby nitric oxide gas
is liquefied and then distilled, to separate the 2 isotopes
with relative ease (21). Nitrogen^5 fertilizer formula
tions are those which have been enriched with excess N^"


16
15 14
while N -depleted fertilizers, also known as N ferti
lizers, are those from which much N^~> has been removed.
Studies using as a tracer are commonplace in agro
nomic crops because the plants are relatively shallow-
rooted (6, 49, 50, 73, 112, 127, 128, 130). Deeper-rooted
forest and fruit trees do not lend themselves to N balance
studies using N^ (66, 75). The high cost of the tracer
has largely restricted its use to laboratory and greenhouse
studies with young trees and strongly affected the size of
the experiment and the experimental design. Furthermore,
the procedure requires the use of expensive instrumentation
to which many laboratories may not have access. Neverthe
less, such studies have been reported for young apple
(Malus sylvestris Mill.) trees (24, 38, 45) and nonbearing
prune (Prunus domestica L.) trees (124).
Greenhouse studies with citrus using N^ were reported
by Wallace (119, 120) and Wallace et al. (122). Wallace
(119) found that growth complications and variability in
plant material resulted in conventional methods being in
ferior to the isotopic technique in studying the influence
of temperature on N absorption and translocation. His qual
itative investigation (120) showed that NO-^-N was 2 to 5
times as readily absorbed from soil as was NH^-N by 8-week-
old cuttings of 'Eureka' lemon (C. limn L.). NitrogenS
appeared in the leaves of a 3-year-old tree 4-7 days after
application to the tree (122).


17
After this initial interest, no studies in citrus
with N^ have been reported until recently. Kubota and
coworkers (57, 58) investigated the behavior of N supplied
in early spring and early summer on 9-year-old 'Satsuma'
mandarin (C. unshiu Marcovitch) trees. In the spring ex
periment, N^ was detected in rootlets and leaves 3 and 7
days, respectively, after the application. Seventy-five per
cent of absorbed was found in the aerial parts of the
15
tree. In the summer study, N was detected in rootlets
and spring leaves the next day after application, indica
ting a faster absorption of N in summer. Ninety-two percent
15
of the N was distributed m the above ground parts. A
review of N^ studies on citrus in Japan was recently
presented by Yuda (129).
15 15
Both N depleted and N enriched fertilizer materials
have been reported to give accurate and precise measurement
of tracer N in plant tissue (23, 103). No studies with
N depleted fertilizers, however, appear to have been re
ported with citrus.


MATERIALS AND METHODS
Experimental Site
Experiments for this study were conducted on an Asta-
tula fine sand site 24 km from Lake Alfred, Florida. The
soil is a Typic Quartzipsamment of the Entisols (47).
Typically, it is well-drained with a low water and miner
al nutrient retaining capacity.
Experimental Design
Experiment 1
Two factors, N source and irrigation, were examined
in this experiment. Levels of the N source factor in
cluded no N control, IBDU-N, and NH^NO^-N, while those of
the irrigation factor were no irrigation, low and high
irrigations. It was desired to study these treatments in
a factorial arrangement; however, it was not possible to
physically establish the experiment in this manner because
of the limitation imposed by the irrigation treatment.
Therefore, the 1-year-old 'Pineapple' orange (Citrus sin
ensis [L.] Osbeck) trees on 'Alemow' (C. macrophylla Wester)
rootstock were spaced at 3 x 3 m in 2 rows on July 13, 1978,
using a modified split plot design (Fig. 1). The field
layout consisted of 3 replications with irrigation level
18


Fig. 1. Planting plan and statistical design.


20


21
as the main plot treatment. The size of each main plot
was determined by 6-m lengths of perforated sprinkler pipe
used to apply the irrigation treatments. Each main plot,
therefore, had 4 trees, 2 on each side of the pipe. Each
single tree plot received one level of the N treatment but
4 replications of each N treatment were randomly dis
tributed over the 3 irrigation main plots. Thirty-six trees
were used in the experiment.
Fertilizer-N from IBDU and NK^NO-, sources at the rate
of 201.6 g/tree was hand broadcast in a 3 x 3 area around
each tree on September 28, 1978, 11 weeks after the trees
were planted. Trees in control plots were not fertilized.
Irrigation treatment was not started until November 27, 1978,
after rainfall had tapered off. Soil water content was
used to schedule irrigation. Approximately 0.75 cm of ir
rigation water was applied whenever the average soil water
content fell below 4% by volume in the 0- to 60-cm soil
profile of the high irrigation plots. The high irrigation
plots were irrigated twice as often as the low irrigation
plots which also received 0.75 cm of irrigation water on
each application. A rain gauge at the experimental site
and an irrigation flow-meter were used to monitor water
supply. When the flow-meter malfunctioned 1500-ml cans
were placed in the plots for collection and measurement of
the amount of irrigation water delivered.
The experiment was terminated on January 9, 1979, be
cause of freeze damage. Fertilizer-N and the first


22
irrigation had been applied 14 and 6 weeks, respectively,
prior to the termination of the experiment. The trees un
der low irrigation had received a total of 2.20 cm of ir
rigation water in 3 irrigations while those under high ir
rigation had received 4.95 cm in 6 irrigations. For the
entire period of the experiment, the nonirrigated plots
had received 20.17 cm of rainfall; the low and high irriga
tion plots had received a combined total of 22.37 and 25.12
cm of rainfall and irrigation, respectively.
Experiment 2
This experiment was initiated to clarify certain re
sults obtained in Experiment 1. The total N content of
NH^NO^-fertilized trees was 42% higher than that of the
IBDU-fertilized trees. Moveover, the complicating effect
of the freeze damage on N absorption was not known. It
was decided to determine if the same trend in N absorption
would prevail during the warm spring weather.
Nine unused trees planted at the same time as those
in Experiment 1 had been left unfertilized from the sum
mer of 1978 through March, 1979. The 3 replications of
single tree plots were arranged in a randomized complete
block design, having as treatments unfertilized control,
IBDU and NH^NO^ as N sources. No irrigation treatment was
applied, however. Natural precipitation and routine


23
irrigation of the adjacent mature citrus grove provided
the only water supply.
Data from Experiment 1 indicated that NH4NO.j-ferti-
lized trees had higher N content than IBDU-fertilized
trees. The effect of the freeze damage on N absorption
from the 2 N sources was not known. It was necessary
therefore to establish if the same trend would be manifest
ed in warm weather. Hence, the trees in Experiment 2 were
deliberately grouped on the basis of their trunk diameter;
IBDU was applied to the largest trees, and NH^O^ to the
smallest trees. Control trees were intermediate. The
same rate of fertilizer-N in Experiment 1 was hand broad
cast in a 3 x 3 m area around the tree on March 23, 1979.
The experiment was terminated on May 8, 1979, 6 weeks after
fertilizer application.
Experiment 3
Three 16-year-oid 'Pineapple' orange trees in an
existing rate and fertilizer-N source study were used for
this experiment. The trees had been fertilized with the
same rate of NH^NO^ since April 5, 1973, until September 23,
1977. In the current experiment, one of the trees received
a total of 707.2 g of N per year, in 3 equal applications
on March 2, 1978, June 11, 1978, and October 25, 1978, as
IBDU. Another tree received the same rate of N as NH^NO^
on the sane dates. The fertilizer was applied by hand
broadcasting around the tree. Other nutrients were


24
adequately supplied to the fertilized trees. The third
tree which did not receive any fertilizer-N at the speci
fied dates was used in this experiment as the unfertilized
control.
In order to study N movement in uncropped land 1 cir
cular fallow plot 6 m in diameter, which corresponded to
the tree canopy diameter, was fertilized with IBDU on
October 25, 1978. Only one-third of the total annual ap
plication in the tree plots was used. Another similar
plot was fertilized with the same rate of N as NH^NO^. A
third plot was left unfertilized as a control. The 6 un
replicated plots in the experiment were subjected to the
routine management of the adjacent grove. The experiment
was terminated on February 17, 1979, 17 weeks after the
fall application of fertilizer-N, at which time the plots
had received 25.90 cm of rainfall and irrigation since
October 25, 1978. Evapotranspiration for the duration of
the study was estimated from climatological data (55).
Field Sampling Procedures
Soil Water Sampling
Changes in soil water content were measured with a
Nuclear-Chicago neutron probe (P-19) and a scaler (53).
One aluminum access tube for the probe was installed about
45 cm from every other tree in Experiments 1 and 2. In


25
Experiment 3, one tube was installed just inside the drip
line of each tree and at an equivalent distance from the
center of each fallow plot.
One-minute readings were taken at depth increments
of 15 cm, beginning at 15 cm. The readings were converted
to % water content by volume using a calibration curve
developed from previous sampling in the experimental area
(53). The water content of the surface 15 cm was deter
mined gravimetrically. A composite of duplicate 2.5 x
15 cm cores of soil per plot in the 3 experiments was col
lected and its gravimetric water content determined by
over-drying to constant weight at 105C. The water content
was transformed to a volume percentage by multiplying the
% weight by the average soil bulk density (1.54 g/cm^).
Water content in the soil profile was calculated by multi
plying the average volume ratio by the depth of the entire
profile and results expressed as cm of water.
Soil Sampling
A composite of duplicate 2.5-cm diameter soil core
samples was taken within 30 cm from the tree from 0-7 cm
and 7-15 cm, and thereafter at 15-cm increments down to
60 cm in Experiments 1 and 2. Soil samples were similarly
taken at the tree canopy dripline down to 120 cm in Experi
ment 3. In Experiment 1, samples were taken when cumula
tive rainfall exceeded 1.25 cm. After the initiation of
the irrigation treatment, samples were taken only at the


26
termination of the experiment. In' Experiment 2, samples
were taken after 2.28, 9.14 and 17.87 cm of cumulative
rainfall and irrigation. Samples were taken following more
than 4.87 cm of rainfall and/or irrigation in Experiment 3.
In order to prevent free movement of water from the
soil surface through the sample holes, each hole was filled
with white sand, obtained from elsewhere, and marked to
avoid future sampling in that immediate vicinity.
Plant Tissue Sampling
Tree growth measurements in Experiments 1 and 2 were
obtained by measuring the diameter of the trunks and the
destructive sampling of the tree. Tree trunks were painted
at a point 15 cm above the bud union and the initial and
final trunk diameter recorded. Trees were excavated by
digging a trench 60 cm from the tree and recovering the
root system as much as practical. Each tree was fraction
ated in the laboratory into 7 components: fibrous and
lateral roots, taproot, rootstock trunk, scion trunk,
crotch branches, green twigs and leaves. The root system
was rinsed in running tap water and the fresh and oven-dry
weight (70C) of each component obtained.
In the mature tree experiment, fruits were harvested
on February 17, 1979, and the total fresh weight recorded.
One 30-fruit sample from each tree was ground in a com-
muniting machine, and 2 subsamples oven-dried at 70C for
dry weight determination and chemical analysis.


27
The number of leaves on each mature tree was esti
mated by the following procedure. Leaves in a 30 x 30 cm
frame from 4 sides of the tree were stripped and the
average number in the frame determined. The leaves were
oven-dried for 48 hours at 70C and the total dry weight
determined. The total dry weight of the sampled leaves
was used to calculate the average dry weight of a leaf.
Tree height and tree width in 2 directions (north-south and
east-west) were also measured. The canopy surface area was
then calculated from the formula:
S = 2irW/3h2 [ (W/16+h2) 5- (W/4) 3 ]
where h = height and W = width of the tree (98). The
number of leaves on a tree was then estimated from a know
ledge of the canopy surface area.
Sample Preparation and Analysis
Soil Samples
All soil samples were air-dried and sieved through a
2 mm screen. Total soil N was determined by a semi-micro
Kjeldahl procedure using a salicylic-sulfuric acid mixture
(12). Soil samples from the 4 replications in Experiment
1 were combined for the determination of exchangeable NK*
and NO- by a steam-distillation procedure using Devarda
alloy and MgO (13). Samples were not sufficient for the
determination of these ions for the second sampling date


28
in Experiment 1 and for all samples in Experiments 2 and
3. Total N was expressed as % N on a dry weight basis and
NH^-N and NO-j-N as ppm. When a quantitative account for
N was being made, these values were converted to g or kg
of N in the soil profile. This was obtained as the product
3
of area, depth, average bulk density (1.54 g/cm ) and aver
age N concentration in the profile.
In Experiments 1 and 2, the N content of the profile
2
was calculated for the total area fertilized (90,000 cm )
but since the root system of the young trees occupied an
area less than 60 cm diameter, the N content was also cal-
2
culated for the latter area (2828 cm ). The depth used in
the calculations was 60 cm. For the mature tree experiment,
2
the area and depth were 28.28 m and 1.20 m, respectively.
The recovery of fertilizer-N was obtained by subtracting
the total soil profile N content of the unfertilized plot
from that of the fertilized plot. This value was expressed
as the percentage of the amount of N applied.
Plant Tissue Samples
All plant parts were ground in a Wiley Mill and passed
through a 20-mesh screen. Total N was determined by a
semi-micro Kjeldahl procedure using 0.5 g subsamples (12).
Nitrogen values were expressed both as % of dry weight and
in absolute amounts. The latter were obtained by multiply
ing % N by the total dry weight of the component part. The
recovery of fertilizer-N by the trees was obtained by


29
subtracting the total N content of the unfertilized tree
from that of the fertilized tree and the result expressed
as the percentage of the amount of N applied. In the ma
ture tree experiment, the N content of fruits and leaves
from the unfertilized tree was similarly substracted from
those of the fertilized tree.
Statistical Analysis
In Experiments 1 and 2, data pertaining to tree growth,
tissue N content, and soil total N content were submit
ted to analysis of variance. In Experiment 1, these data
were analyzed in a 3 x 3 factorial arrangement. Data for
Experiment 2 were treated as a randomized complete block
design. Significant differences were determined by Duncan's
multiple range test. Soil water data and those from the
mature tree experiment were not analyzed.


RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Experiments 1 and 2
Preliminary Remarks
Experiment 1 was prematurely terminated 14 weeks af
ter fertilizer application and 6 weeks following the first
irrigation because the trees were beginning to show the
effects of freeze damage. This was especially apparent in
the unfertilized control trees where extensive leaf drop
occurred. Since the complicating effect of the freeze
damage on N absorption was not known, and NH^NO^-fertilized
trees appeared to have higher N content in comparison to
IBDU-fertilized trees, Experiment 2 was started to deter
mine if the same trend would prevail in warm weather.
Therefore, the trees in Experiment 2 were deliberately
grouped such that IBDU-fertilized trees were larger in
trunk diameter than control and NH^NO^-fertilized trees
(Table 1).
Tree Growth Analysis
The young trees in both experiments generally showed
vigorous growth regardless of treatment. Trees fertilized
with NH^NO- and IBDU had denser canopies than the unfer
tilized control trees, and those fertilized with NK^NO^
30


Table 1. Effect of N source on the dry wt and growth of several tree component parts
z
Expt. N source
Root system
dry wt
Top
dry wt
g
Total
dry wt
Initial
trunk diam
(cm)
Final
trunk diam
(cm)
% trunk
diam
increase
Control
80.6ns
107.5ns
188.Ins
1.31ns
1.34ns
2.3ns
1 IBDU-N
86.1
129.1
215.2
1.42
1.47
3.6
nh4no3-n
99.2
134.3
233.5
1.41
1.46
3.5
Control
36.4b
50.2b
86.6b
0.88b
0.92b
4.6ns
2 IBDU-N
44.2a
66.8a
111.0a
1.03a
1.10a
6.8
NH.N0o-N
4 3
26.0b
44.7b
70.7b
0.78b
0.83b
6.4
ZMean separation
level; ns = not ¡
within column
significant.
for each
experiment
by Duncan's
multiple range
test, 5%


32
had darker foliage than IBDU-fertilized trees. Leaves
from the control trees in Experiment 1 were dull green and
began to shed toward the end of the study, indicating that
N was becoming a limiting factor (22) and the trees were
responding to the cold weather. Leaves from the control
trees in Experiment 2 were also dull green, but they did
not shed.
Ammonium nitrate and IBDU appeared to increase the
dry matter content of nearly all tree component parts as
compared to the control in Experiment 1 (Table 2). A dif
ference in dry matter content was particularly apparent in
the leaves collected from both of the fertilizer-N treat
ments which were statistically greater than the control.
The NH^NO^-fertilized trees showed numerically greater dry
weight values compared to the IBDU treatment in the more
succulent components of the tree, but they were not statis
tically different.
It is not plausible to compare the effect of N
sources on the growth of the tree parts in Experiment 2,
because of the initial tree size differences. Nevertheless,
there were differences (nonstatistical) particularly in
green twig dry weight indicating a greater response to
NH^NO^ fertilization as compared to the other treatments
(Table 2). Trees fertilized with NH^NO^ were the smallest
and yet had numerically greater green twig dry weight than
the rest. This trend was similar to the one in Experiment
1. Significant differences between treatments in fibrous


Table 2
Effect of N source on tree component part dry wt
z
Expt.
N source
Fibrous and
lateral roots
Taproot
Rootstock
trunk
Scion
trunk
Crotch
branches
Green
twigs
Leave-
Control
51.4ns
29.8ns
29.Ins
36.3ns
13.6ns
9.8ns
18.2b
1
IBDU-N
59.6
26.6
29.6
41.1
15.9
13.4
29.2a
nh4no3-n
60.9
38.3
29.8
36.3
20.8
15.9
31.4a
Control
24.9ab
11.5ns
16.3ns
15.3a
5. Ins
6.0ns
7.5b
2
IBDU-N
29.8a
14.4
16.3
15.4a
7.5
8.0
19.5a
NH.NO-.-N
16.5b
9.5
11.3
8.1b
4.1
8.1
13.lab
z
Mean separation within column for each experiment by Duncan's multiple range test,
5% level; ns = not significant.


34
and lateral roots, and the scion trunk in Experiment 2, but
not in Experiment 1, showed that these differences were a
reflection of the initial tree size differences in Experi
ment 2 rather than treatment effects.
Irrigation level did not statistically influence the
distribution of dry matter or the N content of the various
tree fractions in Experiment 1 (Table 3). There were no
significant interactions between N source and irrigation
level. Data related to irrigation level effects, except
for those in Table 3, have been omitted from this study be
cause irrigation level effects were not statistically dif
ferent and there were no irrigation level x N source in
teractions .
The dry weight of the total root system and the above
ground parts of the tree in Experiment 1 were consistently
highest for the NH^NO^ treatment (Table 1), followed by the
IBDU and control treatments; however, the data did not show
any statistical differences. Nitrogen source also had no
statistically significant effect on total tree dry weight
or % trunk diameter increase. Nevertheless, N fertiliza
tion resulted in larger % trunk diameter increase over the
control trees in both Experiments 1 and 2 (Table 1).
Trunk growth was greater in Experiment 2 than in Experi
ment 1 presumably because of the beneficial effect of the
warm spring weather on tree growth. Total tree dry weight
in Experiment 2 did not appear to have been altered by


Table 3. Effect of irrigation level on the N content and dry wt. of tree components.2
Irrigation
level
Fibrous and
lateral roots
Taproot
Rootstock
trunk
Scion
trunk
Crotch
branches
Green
twigs
Leaves
U IT j Vv L f
g
None
52.7ns
30.5ns
30.3ns
39.2ns
17.3ns
11.0ns
25.8ns
Low
61.4
31.1
28.0
37.9
16.1
13.1
24.3
High
57.7
32.6
30.1
37.6
16.9
15.0
28.7
In C/ v_/ 11C11 f
t> ary wu
None
1.70ns
0.88ns
0.70ns
0.68ns
0.79ns
1.55ns
3.0 3ns
Low
1.50
0.77
0.62
0.60
0.77
1.38
3.03
High
1.54
0.79
0.63
0.67
0.74
1.34
3.01
z
ns
not significant.


36
treatments presumably due to the short duration of the ex
periment. It reflected the trend in the initial trunk di
ameter measurements (Table 1) .
Irrigation level had no statistically significant ef
fect on the dry weight of the root or shoot system of the
trees in Experiment 1, or the dry weight and the % trunk
diameter increase of the tree. There was, however, a ten
dency towards greater trunk growth with an increase in
irrigation level. Koo (55) reported a similar trend for
mature citrus trees in Florida.
Several factors may have contributed to the absence of
an irrigation effect in Experiment 1. These would have in
cluded duration of the experiment, the quantity and fre
quency of irrigation as well as the time of year. The
trees were irrigated only during the last 6 weeks of the
experiment. It is possible that irrigated trees did not
have enough time to respond to the irrigation treatments.
Furthermore, it has been shown in Florida that extra water
applied to mature citrus trees between June and December,
the approximate period of this study, did not contribute
substantially to tree growth (55).
The lack of significant N source effects on tree
growth in Experiment 1 can possibly be attributed to a di
minished growth rate in winter (25) Also, the 14 weeks of
experimentation probably were not long enough for the
treatments to show their maximum effects on tree growth.


37
Patten and Domoto (78) and Miller (70) recently showed that
N treatments had no significant effect on apple tree growth
during the first growing season.
In Experiment 1, N source statistically altered the
pattern of dry matter distribution (Table 4). A greater
proportion of the total dry weight was located in the tap
root of the NH .NO-,-fertilized and control trees as com-
4 o
pared to the IBDU-treated trees. Both NH^NO^- and IBDU-
fertilized trees had statistically greater proportion of
their dry weight distributed in the crotch branches in com
parison to control trees. The % dry weight of the scion
trunk of the NH^NO^-treated trees was less than that of
either the control or the IBDU-treated trees. The fact
that the dry weight distribution was similar to the actual
dry weight of certain tree parts (Table 2) makes it doubt
ful that all of these were true treatment differences.
Moreover, treatment means in dry weight were not statis
tically different except for the leaves. Some of the sig
nificant treatment differences may very well be a reflec
tion of initial differences in the trees. Nevertheless,
there was a trend for NH^NO^-treated trees to have a
greater dry matter in crotch branches, green twigs and
leaves in comparison to IBDU-fertilized and control trees.
As was the case with the dry weight of the tree fractions,
irrigation level did not significantly affect the distri
bution of dry matter.


Table 4
Effect of N source on tree dry wt distribution
z
Expt.
N source
Fibrous and
lateral roots
Taproot
Rootstock
trunk
total tree
Scion
trunk
Crotch
branches
Green
twigs
Leaves
dry wt -
Control
26.86ns
15.54A
15.54a
19.19A
6.85b
5.20ns
10.46ns
1
IBDU-N
27.32
12.27B
13.86ab
19.47A
7.36ab
6.06
13.60
nh4no3-n
25.92
16.51A
12.83b
15.81B
8.70a
6.74
13.61
Control
28.71ns
13.28ns
18.78a
17.71a
5.92ns
6.88b
8.66b
2
IBDU-N
27.26
12.97
14.71b
13.87b
6.78
7.17b
17.59a
nh4no3-n
23.29
13.48
16.03b
11.40b
5.74
11.40a
18.58a
Z i
Mean separation within column for each experiment by Duncan's multiple range text, 1%
(capital letters) and 5% (lower case letters) level; ns = not significant.


39
The distribution of dry weight was similar in Experi
ments 1 and 2 (Table 4). In Experiment 2, the control
trees had proportionally more of their dry weight in the
rootstock and scion trunks as compared to the fertilized
trees. The % dry weight in the green twigs of the control
trees was, however, significantly less than in the NH^NO^-
treated trees; but the greatest difference was in the leaf
fraction. The % dry matter in the leaves of the fertilized
trees was about twice as much as in the unfertilized con
trol trees. Furthermore, the leaves of the fertilized
trees in Experiment 2 represented a higher % of the total
than in Experiment 1. This is a reasonable expectation be
cause of the stronger growth flush in the spring than in
the fall-winter.
Tree N Content and Distribution
The main effects of the N sources in Experiment 1
showed that the N concentrations were highly significantly
different in all component parts of the tree, with. NH^NO^-
treated trees having the highest values followed by the
IBDU-treated and control trees (Table 5). Nitrogen con
centration was generally highest in leaves followed by
fibrous and lateral roots, green twigs, taproot, crotch
branches, rootstock trunk, and scion trunk. This order is
similar to the data of Barnette et al. (5) for a mature
tree of a different cultivar. Furthermore, the N con
centrations in the current study were higher than the


Table 5. Effect of N source on N concn of tree component parts
z
Expt.
N source
Fibrous
lateral
and
roots
Taproot
Rootstock
trunk
Scion
trunk
Crotch
branches
Green
twigs
Leaves
Control
0.81C
0.39C
0.37C
0.39C
0.48C
0.77C
2.31C
1
IBDU-N
1.65B
0.84B
0.64B
0.66B
0.74B
1.58B
3.01B
nh4no3-n
2.29A
1.20A
0.93A
0.88A
1.07A
1.92A
3.75A
Control
0.83C
0.40C
0.47c
0.54c
0.49C
0.72C
2.04C
2
IBDU-N
1.37B
0.67B
0.58b
0.65b
0.6 6B
1.38B
3.72B
nh4no3~n
2.4 5A
1.37A
1.00a
0.98a
1.25A
2.18A
5.18A
z ...
Mean separation within column for each experiment by Duncan's
multiple range test, 1%
(capital letters)
and 5% (lower case letters)
level.


41
values reported by Barnette et al. (5). Such differences
are not unusual when a young, vigorously growing tree is
compared to a mature, fruiting tree (99). Also, the rate
of N application in the current study was higher.
No significant differences due to irrigation level
were detected in the N concentration of the various tree
components-(Table 3).
The results obtained in Experiment 2 were consistent
with those in Experiment 1 in that the order of N concen
tration in all tree parts was NH^NO^- > I3DU-N > control
(Table 5). Except for rootstock and scion trunks, these
values were significantly different from one another at the
1% level. The N concentration for all tree parts was
higher in the NH^NO^-treated trees than in their counter
parts in Experiment 1, particularly in the leaves, fibrous
and lateral roots, and in the taproot. It would not be un
reasonable to assume that these relatively higher concen
trations were partly a consequence of concentration ef
fects, in view of the smaller trees assigned to the NH^NO^
treatment. Also, the higher soil temperature in the spring
could have been conducive to more N absorption by the
trees.
The total amount of N in a tree part, the product of
the dry weight of that part and the N concentration on a
dry weight basis, was not statistically affected by irri
gation level in Experiment 1. There was, however, a
statistically significant relationship between N source and


42
total N content of tree parts (Table 6). Numerically, the
trend was similar to the N concentration in that NH^NO^-
fertilized trees had the highest values followed by IBDU-
fertilized and control trees. The data were, however, less
consistent statistically.
The N content of the tree parts was reflected in the
total amount of N in the tree (Fig. 2). Differences due
to N source were highly significant with NH^NO^-treated
trees containing about 3 and 1.5 times greater total N than
the control and IBDU-treated trees, respectively. No sta
tistically significant differences were detected due to ir
rigation level.
In Experiment 2, the total amount of N in each tree
part (Table 6) and consequently in the entire tree (Fig.
2) was lower than in Experiment 1 probably because of the
smaller trees used in Experiment 2. No meaningful impor
tance can be attached to the statistical differences in
Experiment 2 in the total N content because of the inequal
ity of tree sizes. Despite the fact that the trees selected
for the IBDU treatment were larger and had 1.6 times the dry
weight of the NH^NO^-treated trees, total N in the NH4NO^-
fertilized trees was 1.05 times that of the IBDU-fertilized
trees. Equivalent biomass, including the root system, would
absorb more N from NH^NO^ than it would from IBDU in a short
period as in Experiment 1.


Table 6. Effect of N source on total N content of tree component parts.2
Expt.
N source
Fibrous and
Taproot
Rootstock
Scion
Crotch
Green
Leaves
lateral roots trunk trunk branches twigs
g
Control
0.445B
0.115B
0.108B
0.14 0B
0.066B
0.078B
0.468B
1
IBDU-N
1.044AB
0.222B
0.193A
0.270A
0.123B
0.209A
0.954A
nh4no3-n
1.488A
0.461A
0.270A
0.315A
0.221A
0.302A
1.277A
Control
0.225B
0.046ns
0.077ns
0.083ns
0.025ns
0.043C
0.154b
2
IBDU-N
0.431A
0.096
0.094
0.101
0.050
0.110B
0.719a
nh4no3-n
0.451A
0.130
0.113
0.079
0.050
0.176A
0.690a
2
Mean separation within column for each experiment by Duncan's multiple range test, 1%
(capital letters) and 5% (lower case letters) level; ns = not significant.


Relationship between N source and total tree N content.
Mean separation by Duncan's multiple range test 1% (capi
tal letters) and 5% (lower case letters).
Fig. 2.


TREE TOTAL N ,
1
CONTROL
IB DU-N
NH4N0 3 -N
4^
U1


46
There was no significant relationship between the dis
tribution of N in the various tree parts and irrigation
level in Experiment 1. Nitrogen source significantly af
fected the distribution of N in the taproot and scion trunk
(Table 7). Regardless of N source, 30-34% of total tree N
was located in fibrous and lateral roots. Leaves repre
sented only 10-13% of the total dry matter of the tree but
contained 30-33% of the total N in the tree. These figures
correspond to those reported in earlier work for mature
citrus trees (20, 63). Sixty, 57, and 55% of the total N
in the tree were found in the aerial parts of the control,
I3DU- and NH4N03-fertilized trees, respectively. This may
suggest that the more readily available the N source, re
sulting in luxury consumption, the greater the proportion
of N stored in the root system (86).
As in Experiment 1, N source significantly affected
the distribution of N in Experiment 2 (Table 7). Compared
to Experiment 1, however, the proportion of N was greater
in leaves and less in the fibrous and lateral roots of the
fertilized trees than the control. The proportion of N
in the taproot of NH^NO^-fertilized trees was higher than
for IBDU-fertilized and control trees in both experiments.
Whether it is a characteristic of citrus trees to accumu
late NH^NO^-N in the taproot or some factor related to the
time of sampling needs further investigation. In contrast
to the data in Experiment 1, 57, 67 and 66% of the total N


Table 7. Effect of N source on N distribution
z
Expt.
N source
Fibrous and
lateral roots
Taproot
Rootstock
trunk
Scion
trunk
;al tree
Crotch
branches
Green
twigs
Leaves
o LO T
Control
30.89ns
8.07b
7.53ns
9.79a
4.39ns
5.49ns
33.81ns
1
IBDU-N
34.07
7.56b
6.46
9.63a
4.03
6.81
31.24
nh4no3-n
33.37
10.69a
6.45
7.58b
5.04
6.89
29.92
Control
34.96a
7.15ns
11.97a
12.90a
3.88ns
6.68b
23.95B
2
IBDU-N
26.92b
5.99
5.87b
6.30b
3.12
6.87b
44.90A
NH.NO--N
26.08b
7.69
6.69b
4.67b
2.96
10.42a
40.85A
2
Mean separation within column for each experiment by Duncan's multiple range test, 1%
(capital letters) and 5% (lower case letters) level; ns = not significant.


48
in the tree were found in the aerial parts of control, IBDU-
and NH^NO^-treated trees, respectively. The greater pro
portion of total N in the aerial parts of the fertilized
trees in the spring than in the fall-winter may reflect the
more vigorous growth activity in the spring. Also, trans
location of N from roots may be greater in the spring. The
difference probably resulted from a lower activity of the
nitrate reducing enzyme system during periods of low soil
temperature in the winter (38).
Soil Profile Content and Distribution of N
Soil samples in Experiment 1 were taken to the 45-cm
depth after 1.42 and 2.26 cm of cumulative rainfall on
October 3 and October 19, 1978, respectively. Analysis of
the first set of samples indicated that NO^-N from NH^NO,
had moved to this zone (Fig. 3-A). As a result the sam
pling depth was extended to 60 cm. A third set of samples
was collected after 4.87 cm of cumulative rainfall on
October 31, 1978. After the initiation of the irrigation
treatments, a fourth set of soil samples was obtained on
January 9, 1979.
At the first sampling (Fig. 3-A), there was evidence
that some NO^-N from NH^NO^ had moved down to the 45-cm
depth while NH^-N from the same source had only moved to
the 30~cm depth. A greater proportion of the NH^-N was
still retained in the 0- to 15-cm zone. Only a small
amount of NH^-N from IBDU had moved to the 30 cm depth


Fig. 3.
Effect of N source on the exchangeable NH^ and
NO3 soil content. A, B, and C correspond'to the
1st, 3rd and final soil sampling dates on October
3, October 31, 1978, and January 9, 1979, respec
tively. (Expt. 1).


EXCHANGEABLE SOIL N (PPm)
10-
0-15 15*30 30-45 45-60


51
presumably because of the sparingly soluble nature of IBDU
which remained in the surface soil. Eighty-five percent of
the applied N from NH^NO^ was accounted for in the 0- to
45-cm depth at the first sampling. The difficulty of ex
tracting IBDU with 1 N KC1 precluded the determination of
NH+ and NO^ in the 0- to 15-cm depth. The total N proce
dure, however, indicated that 94% of the applied N from
IBDU remained in the 0- to 45-cm depth at the first sampling.
These trends in inorganic N concentrations were also
revealed in the soil total N content in that values for
the fertilized plots were higher than those for the control
plots (Fig. 4-A). Soil samples were not sufficient for the
determination of exchangeable NH^ and NO^ at the second
sampling. Nevertheless, there was an indication that N
from NH^NO^ had probably moved past the 45-cm depth (Fig.
4-A) .
At the third sampling it was apparent that NH^-N and
NO^-N from NH^NO^ had leached down to the 45- to 60-cm
depth (Fig. 3-B). This suggests that at least a part of
the downward movement involved the un-ionized NH^NO-,
fertilizer. The well-drained nature of Astatula fine sand,
and its low organic matter content could have been factors
contributing to this movement. Some NH^-N and NO^-N from
IBDU had also moved down to the 60-cm zone, but on a smal
ler scale relative to NH^NO^.
Ninety-one percent of


Fig. 4. Effect of N source on soil total N at the 1st (A)
and 2nd (B) sampling dates on October 3 and Octo
ber 19, 1978, respectively. Mean separation with
in depth by Duncan's multiple range test, 1%.
(Expt. 1).


SOIL N, % DRY WT
53


54
the applied N from IBDU remained in the 0- to 60-cm depth
at the third sampling; 82% of the NH^NO^-N could be ac
counted for in the same zone. Data for soil total N (Fig.
5-A), although less consistent in the 15- to 45-cm depth
than those for exchangeable NH^ and NO^, supported the
trend in the downward movement of N from both fertilizer
sources.
The final soil sampling was completed 14 weeks after
the trees were fertilized. Much of the N from NH^NO^ had
been depleted from the soil profile (Fig. 3-C). Only 30%
of the applied N from this source remained in the 0- to
60-cm zone. A part of the depletion could be attributed to
root absorption. Soil water contents (Table 9) were gener
ally below the maximum water storage capacity; however,
rainfall events of 5.0, 1.3 and 2.6 cm on December 28,
December 29, 1978, and January 3, 1979, respectively,suggest
that leaching of some NH^NO^-N may have occurred beyond the
60-cm depth. Furthermore, provisions were not made in
this study for the determination of gaseous losses of N
which may have also occurred. As in the previous samplings
the concentrations of exchangeable NH^ and NO~ from IBDU
in the 15- to 60-cm depth were lower than those from NH4NC>3
(Fig. 3-C). There was also no indication of IBDU-N having
been leached beyond the 60-cm depth since 66% of the applied
N could be accounted for within this depth. In comparison
to the other N sources, a greater proportion of the IBDU-N
was retained in the surface soil (Fig. 5-B).


Fig. 5. Effect of N source on soil total N at the 3rd (A)
and 4th (B) sampling dates on October 31, 1978, and
January 9, 1979, respectively. Mean separation within
depth by Duncan's multiple range test, 1% (capital let
ters) and 5% (lower case letters). (Expt. 1) .


SOIL N, % DRY WT


57
Table 8. Quantitative estimates of evaporation and evapo-
transpiration from mature tree plots.
Period
Rainfall &
irrigation,
cm
Class "A" pan
evaporation
cm/day
Evapotrans-
piration
cm/day
Potential
net leach
ing cm
H2OZ
Oct.
Nov.
1978
25-
9,
4.87
0.39
0.22
+1.35
Nov.
Dec.
1978
9-
12,
2.63
0.32
0.23
-4.96
Dec.
1978-
Feb.
1979
12,
17,
18.40
0.27
0.13
+ 9.69
z
Excess water (+) and deficit (-) to effect percolation.


58
Table 9. Soil water content of young tree plots 24 hr.
after a rainfall or irrigation event.
Sampling
date
Cumulative rainfall
and irrigation, cm
Soil water
(0-60cm),
cm
Field capacity
(0-60cm),cm
Oct.
1978
3,
1.42
3.91
4.18
Oct.
1978
19,
2.26
3.47
4.18
Oct.
1978
31,
4.87
3.77
4.18
Jan.
1979
9,
25.12
4.00
4.18


59
In Experiment 2, sets of soil samples were taken 3
times on April 2, April 27 and May 4, 1979, following 2.28,
9.14 and 17.87 cm, respectively, of cumulative rainfall
and irrigation. These samples were not sufficient for the
determination of exchangeable NH^ and NO^. Soil total N
concentrations in this experiment were higher than those
from Experiment 1 (Figs. 6-8). Contamination from the
regular fall (1978) and spring (1979) fertilization of
adjacent mature trees may have contributed to the higher
soil values in Experiment 2 as compared to Experiment 1.
As in Experiment 1, however, there was a trend towards
decreased soil N content with increasing cumulative rain
fall and irrigation (Figs. 6-8).
At the first sampling there was an indication of
some NK^NO^-N having moved to the 60-cm depth (Fig. 6),
while only a small amount of IBDU-N may have moved to the
30-cm depth. Some N from IBDU appeared to have reached
to the 45-cm depth as indicated by the bulge at the second
sampling (Fig. 7), but the data from Experiment 1 (Fig. 3B-
C) suggest that this could be a sampling error or error
inherent in the soil total N procedure. As in Experiment
1, a higher proportion of the N from IBDU, relative to the
other sources, was still retained at the surface soil at
the last sampling (Fig. 8).


.08
2.28 cm cumulative rainfall and irrigation
>- .06
or
o
.04
o
CO
.02
0
I I L |
0-15 15-30 30-45 45-60
DEPTH, cm
Fig. 6. Effect of N source on total soil N at the 1st sampling on April 2,
1979. Mean separation by Duncan's multiple range test, 1%. (Expt. 2). ^
o


SOIL N, % DRY WT
Fig. 7. Effect of N source on total soil N at the 2nd sampling on April 27,
1979. Mean separation by Duncan's multiple range test, 1%.
(Expt. 2).


SOIL N, % DRY WT
Fig. 8. Effect of N source on total soil N at the 3rd sampling on March 4,
1979. Mean separation by Duncan's multiple range test 5%. (Expt. 2).
CTl
KJ



63
Recovery of Fertilizer-N in the Soil-Plant System
The recovery of fertilizer-N in the soil profile and
in the tree was calculated by subtracting the N content of
the control from the fertilized plots and expressing it as
a percent of the amount of N applied. For the NH^NO^ treat
ment in Experiment 1, both soil total N and inorganic N were
used in the calculations. Data for the inorganic N procedure
indicated that, after 14 weeks, 30% of N apparently remained
in the 0- to 60-cm soil profile where NH^NO^ had been applied
(Table 10). Sixty-six and 41% of N from the IBDU and NH^NO^
sources, respectively, remained in this zone when the cal
culations were based on soil total N values. The discrep
ancy in the NH^NO^-N figures could have resulted from the
larger errors inherent in the total N procedure as compared
to the inorganic N procedure (12, 13).
In Experiment 2, where the initial soil total N con
tents were higher as compared to Experiment 1, the total
amount of N in the 0- to 60-cm depth was also greater
(Table 10). On the basis of total N calculations, 70 and
62% of the applied N were present in the soil from IBDU and
NH^NO^ sources, respectively. Higher soil N recoveries in
this experiment in comparison to those in Experiment 1
probably represented the difference in duration of each
experiment, 6 and 14 weeks, respectively.
The relatively high N recoveries from soil where IBDU
had been applied in both experiments suggested very little,


Table 10. Nitrogen balance sheet and apparent applied N recovery
z
Expt.
N rate N source
Plant
Soil(0-
60cm)
%
N recovery
Total N
Solu-
Plant
Soil
Total
ble N
Total
N
Solu-
ble N
Total
N
Solu-
ble N
- g
Control
1.420
1422.036
8.572




201.6g/ IBDTJ-N
90,000cm
3.015
1555.091

0.79
65.99

66.78

1 (14
weeks)
nh4no3-n
4.295
1505.196
53.014
1.42
41.25
30.57
42.67
31.99
Control
1.420
44.691
0.267





6.33g/ IBDU-N
2828cm
3.015
48.873

25.19
65.99
--
91.18

nh4no3-n
4.295
47.305
1.666
45.41
41.25
30.57
86.66
75.98
Control
0.643
2628.330






201.6g/ IBDU-N
90,000cm
1.601
2769.727

0.47
7Q.17

70.64

2 (6
nh4no3-n
1.689
2753.083

0.52
61.92
r-
62.44

weeks)
Control
0.643
82.588





6.33g/
2 828cni
IBDU-N
1.601
87.031

15.13
70.17

85. Q3

(T\
nh4no3~n
1.689
86.508

16.52
61.92

78.74

Recovery of N obtained as the difference in total N between unfertilized and fertilized
tree plots and expressed as a % of the amount of N applied.


65
if any, leaching loss of N from this source. Some leaching
of N from NH^NO^ may have occurred. Other complex processes
involved in N reactions, including denitrification and other
gaseous losses, may have contributed to lower soil recover
ies of N from NH^NO^ relative to IBDU.
The recovery of N by the tree was calculated for the
2
total area fertilized (90,000 cm ); but as the root sys
tem occupied a circular area of less than 60 cm diameter
2
(2828 cm ), N recovery was also calculated for the latter
area. In Experiment 1, on the basis of the smaller area,
25 and 45% of the N added were recovered in those trees
fertilized with IBDU and NH^NO^, respectively. It was only
0.79 and 1.42% for the same respective sources when the
larger area was the basis of calculation. The differences
in N recoveries from the 2 areas imply a higher efficiency
of N use if the fertilizer is applied on a smaller area
around the tree rather than on a larger one where the po
tential for N loss may be great.
It has been suggested that plant recovery of N by
the difference method generally yielded higher values com
pared to the tracer procedure, presumably because ferti
lization may stimulate additional N uptake from soil
sources (109). This might have contributed to the high N
recoveries, particularly where NH^NO^ was the source. The
higher tree recovery of NH^NO^-N appeared to be related to


66
the ready availability of this fertilizer in comparison to
IBDU, a greater proportion of which was retained in the
surface soil.
On the basis of the smaller area calculations, trees
fertilized with IBDU and NH^NO^ in Experiment 2 recovered
only 15 and 16%,respectively of the applied N (Table 10).
Recoveries from the respective sources were 0.47 and 0.52%
for the large area. The lower tree recovery of applied N
in Experiment 2 vs. Experiment 1 was partly related to the
smaller trees used in the former experiment and partly be
cause the experiment was run only for 6 weeks. The trees
did not therefore have enough time to absorb N to the same
extent as in Experiment 1. Also, the narrow range in the
recovery of applied N seemed to be due to the fact that
IBDU-fertilized trees were larger than NH^NO^-fertilized
trees. If NH^NO^-fertilized trees had been of equal size,
the difference in the recovery between the 2 fertilizer
sources could have been larger.
A common approach for comparing the relationship of
fertilizer sources with mineral nutrient absorption by
plants in the vegetative growth phase is to relate the to
tal dry matter of the plant to its total nutrient content,
i.e., dry weight/total nutrient ratio. The lower this ratio,
the greater the nutrient absorption from that source. As
suming the ratio is linear with time, the N status of the
trees was projected by plotting the ratio data for


Fig. 9
Projection of relative tree absorption of N from IBDU and
NH^NO^ sources with time. (Expts. 1 and 2).


RATIO DRY WT / N


69
Experiments 1 and 2 (Fig. 9). Theoretically, up to 26
weeks after fertilizer-N application NH4NC>3-N would con
tinue to be absorbed more than IBDU-N, but after 28 weeks
the reverse would be expected. There is evidence that the
period of extended availability from soluble N sources,
after the initial flush of growth of vegetable crops,
approaches that of the more slowly available N sources
(115). In view of the extremely soluble nature of NH^NO^,
however, most of the N will have probably been depleted
from the soil after 26 weeks.
Total apparent N recovery in the soil-plant system in
Experiment 1 amounted to 76 and 91 for NH4N03~ and IBDU-N,
respectively (Table 10). The total N procedure indicated
a higher recovery of N from the NH4NC>3 plots in comparison
to the soluble N procedure. The apparently variable total
N recovery was probably due to the larger errors associated
with the use of the total N procedure in soil analysis vs.
the soluble N approach (12, 13).
In Experiment 2, where only soil total N was analyzed,
85 and 78% of the added N from IEDU and NH4NO^, respec
tively, were apparently recovered in the soil-plant system
when the small area was the basis of calculation. It was
not possible to account for the deficit in N balance in
both experiments. Nevertheless, soil N data in Experiment
1 (Fig. 3A-C) and rainfall events of 5.0, 1.3 and 2.6 cm with
in a 6-day period imply that some leaching of N, at least from


70
NH^NO^, may have contributed to the deficit. Processes
involved in the N cycle, including denitrification and
other gaseous losses of N may also have been reflected in
the unaccounted for part of the balance.
Experiment 3
Nitrogen Distribution in Bearing Orange Trees
Fruit yield and estimate of leaf number
Each of the control, IBDU- and NH^NO^-fertilized trees
showed fresh fruit yields of 0.7, 3.7 and 3.7 field boxes
of 40.8 kg, respectively (Table 11). These data indicated
that yields can be severely limited by a lack of N. Ni
trogen-fertilized trees had about 4 times as much total
fruit dry weight as the control tree. The unreplicated
nature of the experiment, however, precluded the establish
ment of definite conclusions pertaining to the yield data.
Nevertheless, it is generally accepted that increased N
supply results in increased citrus fruit yield. Data from
a Florida experiment (87) with 'Pineapple' orange showed
that as the rate of N was increased, up to 202 kg/ha/year,
yield increased.
The estimated leaf number of the fertilized trees was
in reasonable agreement with the 70,200 leaves estimated
by Barnette et al_. (5) for a grapefruit tree in Florida,
but lower than the 92,708 leaves sampled from a 12-year-old
'Valencia' orange tree in California (110).
Trees in the


Table 11. Mature tree plot yield and N content parameters, and residual soil N.
Treatment
Boxes
fruit/
tree
z
Total
fruit
dry wt/
tree,kg
Fruit N
content
% dry wt
N re
moved in
fruits
g
Esti
mated
total
leaf no.
Leaf N
content
% dry wt
Total
leaf
N, g
Soil N,
(0-120 cm)
kg/ploty
Unfertilized
tree
0.7
8.734
0.58
50.657
52,504
1.84
124.900
17.510
IBDU-
fertilized
tree
3.7
34.635
0.71
245.908
81,285
2.17
201.100
17.824
NH4N03-
3.7
35.598
0.74
263.425
73,273
2.36
194.600
17.719
fertilized
tree
2
Field box of fruit equals 40.8 kg.
^Plot area: 6 m diam.


72
California study were, however, larger as indicated by
their height and width. The control tree in the current
study had a lower leaf number than either of the fertilized
trees by virtue of a lesser leaf density which can be at
tributed to a lack of N.
Fruit and leaf N content
Several approaches have been used to determine citrus
fertilizer needs. One school of thought advocates return
ing to the soil the amount of nutrients removed in the crop
of fruit. Embleton et al. (33) considered this approach
unsound, particularly with respect to the less mobile nu
trients. Nevertheless, because they represent part of the
N balance sheet, data related to crop removal of N when
combined with leaf analytical data have a significant po
tential for guidance in the N management of citrus groves.
The concentration of N in the fruit from the ferti
lized trees was higher than that of the unfertilized trees
(Table 11). As a result, when both total fruit dry weight
and N concentration are considered, the amount of N re
moved in fruit was in the order of NH^NO^- > IBDU-fertilized
> control trees. Five times more N was removed in fruit
from fertilized trees as compared to the control tree.
Reitz (89) reported that in Florida 36.3 kg of N are re
moved in every 20,400 kg of fresh fruit. Recalculation
of the data in Table 11 indicates that 32.2 and 29.9 kg
of N would be removed in 20,400 kg of fruit from the NH^NO^
and IBDU-fertilized trees, respectively.


73
Leaf N concentration followed the same trend as in the
fruit. Nitrogen concentration for the 3 single-tree plots
was in the order: NH^NO^- > IBDU-fertilized > unfertilized
trees. This clearly reflected the more rapid absorption of
NH^NO^-N over IBDU-N and the control. The total amount of
N in the leaves was, however, slightly larger for the IBDU-
treated tree because of its greater leaf number. It is
doubtful if the greater leaf number is related to IBDU
fertilization since the duration of the experiment was
short. The total amount of N in the leaves of the fertilized
trees was in agreement with the 200 g of N reported by Cam
eron and Appleman (20) for a 10-year-old 'Valencia' orange
tree. This close agreement lends added credence to the pro
cedure used in this study for estimating the leaf number.
Soil Total N Content and Distribution
Fertilized fallow plots received 33% (235.7 g/b m dia
meter area) of the total annual amount of fertilizer-N ap
plied to the fertilized tree plots (707.2 g/tree). Three
sets of soil samples were collected: on November 9, December
11, 1978, and February 16, 1979. These sampling dates corres
pond to cumulative rainfall and irrigation of 4.87, 7.50 and
25.90 cm, respectively, since October 25, 1978. Samples were
not sufficient for the determination of exchangeable NH^ and
NO^; hence, only the total N procedure was used.
At the first sampling, some N from both IBDU and NH^NO^
appeared to have moved at least down to the 45-cm depth in


74
the fallow plots (Fig. 10). The amount of NH^NO^-N
leached, as reflected by the lower concentration in the 0-
to 15-cm depth and higher concentration in the 15- to 45-
cm zone, was greater than that of IBDU-N. In the ferti
lized tree plots, NH^NO^-N appeared to be depleted rapidly
from the 0- to 15-cm zone, while a considerable amount of
IBDU still remained in this zone (Fig. 11). The apparent
rapid depletion of NH^NO^-N from this zone could be attri
buted to root absorption in view of the readily available
nature of NH^NO^ fertilizer. Higher N concentrations, par
ticularly for the IBDU treatment, in the 75- to 105-cm
depth, as compared to the control, could have been due to
the residual N from previous applications.
Data for the second sampling date (Fig. 12) suggest
that some N from both fertilizer sources has leached to the
120-cm depth in the fertilized plots. Soil water contents
(Table 12) and evapotranspiration data (Table 8) also tend
to support this. Since the movement of N, particularly
NO^-N, in uncropped soils is closely related to water move
ment in the profile (106), it is likely that some N leached
past the 120-cm depth. In the mature tree plots, there was
evidence that some N had moved at least to the 75-cm
depth when NH^NO^ was the fertilizer applied (Fig. 13). It
is difficult to trace the movement of N in the soil pro
file in the presence of a tree, however, because of root
absorption.-


Fig. 10. Effect of N source on total soil N of fallow plots at the 1st sampling
on November 9, 1978. (Expt. 3).


Fig. 11. Effect of N source on total soil N of tree plots at the 1st sampling on
November 9, 1978. (Expt. 3).
CTl


SOIL N, % DRY WT
.06-
.0 4 -
.02 -
0 -
Fig. 12.
7. 50 c m of cumulative rainfall and irrigation
* FALLOW CONTROL
o o FALLOW I B DU-N
0 -15 15-30 30-45 45-60 60^75 75-90 9 0-105 105-120
DEPTH,cm
Effect of N source on total soil N of fallow plots at the 2nd sampling
on December 11, 1978. (Expt. 3).


Table 12. Soil water
irrigation
content in the
event.
mature tree
plots 24
hr. after a
rainfall
or
Cumulative Depth
Soil water content, % by vol

rainfall cm
and
Unfertilized
IBDU
nh4no3
Unfertilized
IBDU
nh4no3
irrigation
fallow
fallow
fallow
tree
tree
tree
cm
0-15
6.89
6.96
7.74
6.45
5.17
4.14
15-30
5.88
6.27
6.01
4.66
3.41
3.82
30-45
6.06
5.94
5.81
5.10
3.76
3.30
4.87 45-60
5.99
5.78
6.00
4.61
4.42
4.30
60-75
5.86
6.02
5.95
4.13
4.88
2.89
75-90
5.98
5.92
6.42
3.93
4.44
2.52
90-105
6.57
6.08
6.38
3.55
4.20
2.48
105-120
6.26
6.30
6.62
3.51
3.42
4.47
Profile water content,
7.41
7.38
7.63
5.38
5.05
4.18
cm
0-15
5.05
5.72
5.46
3.62
5.32
3.79
15-30
6.60
9.90
7.42
3.05
5.18
4.70
30-45
6.67
8.80
6.11
4.06
3.06
3.53
7.50 45-60
6.43
6.91
8.35
3.10
4.76
4.04
60-75
7.13
8.63
7.15
5.03
6.11
4.45
75-90
6.60
7.43
7.91
3.97
4.48
4.39
90-105
7.23
7.73
8.20
3.43
4.24
4.07
105-120
7.84
7.97
8.15
3.49
5.46
3.66
*4
00


Table 12 (continued)
Cumulative
Depth
cm
Soil water content, %
by vol.
rainfall
Unfertilized
IBDU
nh4no3
Unfertilized
IBDU NH4N3
and
irrigation
cm
fallow
fallow
fallow
tree
tree tree
Profile water
content, cm
8.02
9.45
8.80
4.45
5.78
4.88
0-15
5.28
5.16
4.92
5.85
3.94
4.86
15-30
6.62
7.64
6.65
6.11
4.80
6.55
30-45
6.41
6.55
6.31
6.05
5.36
5.94
25.90 45-60
6.21
6.75
6.24
6.14
5.54
6.41
60-75
6.21
6.65
6.84
6.14
6.24
6.58
75-90
6.14
6.58
6.82
6.70
6.58
6.75
90-105
6.25
7.21
6.73
6.27
6.51
6.93
105-120
6.18
6.70
6.85
6.62
6.81
6.65
Profile water
content, cm
7.39
7.98
7.70
7.50
5.86
7.59


Fig. 13. Effect of N source on total soil N of tree plots at the 2nd sampling on
December 11, 1978. (Expt. 3).


81
As in Experiments 1 and 2, soil total N content gener
ally decreased with time in the tree plots partly because
of tree absorption of N. At the last sampling, almost all
of the applied NH^NO^-N in the fallow and tree plots had
dissipated from the 0- to 15-cm depth, but considerable
IBDU-N remained (Figs. 14 and 15).
Recovery of Fertilizer-N in the Soil, Fruit and Leaf
The recovery of applied N in the soil, fruit and leaf
was calculated by the difference procedure used in both
Experiments 1 and 2. Compared to the young tree experi
ments however, less confidence can be expected in the N
recovery data for Experiment 3. The absence of replica
tions in the mature tree experiment precluded the estab
lishment of plausible conclusions. Furthermore, since the
trees had been fertilized for several years it is diffi
cult to separate the effect of previous fertilization on
N contents of tree- parts and the soil. The use of an
empirical procedure in the estimate of leaf total N and
the large sampling and analytical errors associated with
the soil total N procedure are additional factors which
reduce the confidence in the N recovery data.
Nevertheless, the N recovery data (Table 13) may serve
a useful purpose in stimulating additional research. The
proportion of applied N recovered in the 0- to 120-cm soil
depth of the IBDU- and NH^NO^-fertilized mature tree plots
was 44 and 30%, respectively. The fruits accounted for
27 and 30% of applied N, and the leaves, 11 and 10%


Fig. 14. Effect of N source on total soil N of fallow plots at the 3rd sampling
on February 16, 1979. (Expt. 3).


.00
25.90 cm of cumulative rainfall and irrigalion
o
CO
.02
* CONTROL TREE
0 1 1 1 1 i i i i
0-15 15-30 30-4 5 4 5-60 60-75 75-90 90-105 105-120
DEPTH ,cm
Fig. 15. Effect of N source on total soil N of tree plots at the 3rd sampling
on February 16, 1979. (Expt. 3).


84
Table 13.
Apparent
plots.z
applied N
recovery
(%) in mature tree
Treatment
Fruits
Leaves
Soil Total
IBDU-fertilized 27.60
tree
NH^NO-^-f ertilized 30.08
tree
10.77 44.00 82.77
9.85 29.55 69.48
Calculated from the difference in N content, for each N
balance component, between the control and fertilized tree
plots and expressed as the % of the amount of N applied.


85
for the same respective sources. The apparent total re
covery of applied N when fruits, leaves and the soil are
considered amounted to 83% for the IBDU treatment, and 69%
for the NH^NO^ treatment.
It is suggested that the deficits in the N balance
could be partly accounted for in the permanent structures
of the tree. Smith (100) estimated that 31% of the total
N was found in the leaves of 15-year-old 'Valencia' orange
trees in Florida. On this basis, control, IBDU- and NH^NO^-
treated trees in this experiment would contain 402, 648
and 627 g of N, respectively. It was also indicated that
42% of the total N of the tree was found in parts other
than leaves and fruit (100). On the basis of this assump
tion 13 and 12% of the applied N would be expected to be in
tree parts other than fruits and leaves for IBDU- and NH^NO,-
treated trees, respectively. When these figures are added
to the measured recovery of applied N, 95 and 81% of ap
plied N from IBDU and NH^NO^ sources, respectively, could
be accounted for in the soil-plant system. No account
could be made for the remaining 5-19%.
These apparently high recoveries of applied N may in
dicate that the trees had absorbed some N already present
in the soil in addition to that applied in this study.
Also, substantial leaching of N may not have been signifi
cant. Although the potential for the leaching of N exis
ted (Table 8), the large root systems of the mature t
rees


86
may have absorbed a greater portion of the applied N as
it moved in the soil profile.
In view of the low nutrient retaining capacity of
Florida soils planted to citrus, it has often been sugges-
t ed that the efficiency of N utilization by citrus is very
low (25-30%). In the current study, however, higher re
coveries for both young (45%) and bearing (40%) trees are
reported when NH^NO^ was the N source. These high recover
ies imply that citrus trees may be absorbing a greater pro
portion of fertilizer-N than previously suspected. The
unreplicated nature and short duration of the mature tree
experiment, however, call for additional adequately repli
cated experiments. Moreover, it would be beneficial to in
vestigate the N balance of young citrus trees over a period
longer than the ones used in this study.


CONCLUSIONS
1. Growth parameters of young citrus trees in short-term
experiments, trunk diameter increase, and dry weights
of tree component parts and the entire tree, showed no
statistical differences due to N sources. There was
a trend, however, for N from IBDU and NH^NO^ sources to
result in greater dry matter, particularly in the more
succulent aerial parts, when compared to the control.
Leaves from fertilized trees in both fall-winter and
spring studies were statistically greater in total dry
weight than those from the unfertilized leaves. The
apparent lack of statistical differences in growth
parameters due to N source was probably related to the
short duration of the studies. The trees did not have
sufficient time to respond to the treatments.
2. The dry weights of certain tree components as a percent of
the total plant were statistically different due to N
source, but it is doubtful if they were true differ
ences because the pattern of dry matter distribution
paralleled that of the dry matter. These differences
were probably the result of selective use of different
size trees for each N source.
87


88
3. There was a highly significant relationship between N
source and N concentration and total N of component
tree parts, and total N content of the entire tree.
In every case, the order was NH^NO^- > IBDU-fertilized
> control trees. This confirms that a soluble N source
such as NH^NO^ is more readily absorbed by the trees
in the short-term than a controlled release form of N.
Other investigations, however, suggested that the ab
sorption of N from both fertilizer sources might be
different in longer periods.
4. Regardless of N source, 30-34% of the total tree N was
distributed in fibrous and lateral roots, and 30-33% in
the leaves. This illustrates the importance of recover
ing the entire root system as much as practical in
studies of this nature.
5. A greater proportion of the total N in the fertilized
tree was distributed in the aerial parts in the spring
study than in the fall-winter study, indicating that
N absorption and translocation to the aerial parts was
greater in spring.
6. Data related to tree growth and N content parameters,
and soil total N content did not reveal any statistical
differences due to irrigation level in the fall-winter
study. The narrow range and short duration of irriga
tion treatments were probably not sufficient to elicit
responses to the treatments.


89
2
7. Nitrogen balance data, based on the 2828 cm plot area,
showed that total apparent N recovery in the soil-
plant system was 91 and 76% for IBDU- and NH^NO^-N,
respectively. Sixty-six and 30% of applied N from
IBDU and NH^NO^ sources, respectively, were retained
in the 0- to 60-cm soil profile. Twenty-five and 45%
from the same respective sources could be accounted for
in the young trees. The remaining 9-24% was presumed
to have been leached or lost to the atmosphere.
8. In the bearing tree study, no difference was detected
in fruit yield between IBDU and NH^NO^ sources. Fer
tilized trees, however, had about 4 times as much
yield as the unfertilized tree.
9. The relatively high recovery of applied N in young and
bearing trees suggest that substantial leaching of N
may not be a major route for N loss from citrus groves
established on deep-well drained soils when the ferti
lizer is applied over the root zone at reasonable
rates.
10.A major portion of IBDU-N was retained in the Q- to
15-cm depth, yet the growth response of the IBDU-
fertilized young trees was similar to that of NH^NO^-
fertilized trees. There is, therefore, a potential for
a single application of IBDU to nonbearing young citrus
trees which are normally fertilized several times a


90
order to establish if a single application of IBDU is
feasible from the standpoint of economy and horticul
tural considerations.


LITERATURE CITED
1. Adriano, D.C., F.H. Takatori, P.F. Pratt, and O.A.
Lorenz. 1972. Soil N balance in selected row-
crop sites in Southern California. J. Environ.
Qual. 1:278-283.
2. Allison, F.E. 1955. The enigma of soil nitrogen bal
ance sheets. Adv. Agron. 7:214-250.
3. Avnimelech, Y., and J. Raveh. 1976. Nitrate leakage
from soils differing in texture and nitrogen
load. J. Environ. Qual. 5:79-81.
4. Banwart, W.L., M.A. Tabatabai, and J.M. Bremner. 1972.
Determination of ammonium in soil extracts and
water samples by an ammonia electrode. Comm. Soil
Sci. Plant Anal. 3:449-458.
5.Barnette, R.M., E.F. Debusk, J.B. Hester, and H.W.
Jones. 1931. The mineral analysis of a nineteen-
year-old 'Marsh' seedless grapefruit. Citrus
Indus. 12(3):5-6, 34.
6.Bartholomew, W.V., L.B. Nelson, and C.H. Werkman.
1950. The use of nitrogen isotope N-15 in field
studies with oats. Agron. J. 42:100-103..
7.
Biggar, J.W. 1978. Spatial variability of N in soils,
p. 201-211. In D.R. Neilsen, and J.G. Macdonald
(eds.). Nitrogen in the environment. Vol. I.
Nitrogen behavior in field soil. Acad. Press,
N.Y., San Francisco, Lond.
Bingham, F.T., S. Davis, and E. Shade. 1971. Water
relations, salt balance, and nitrate leaching
losses of a 960-acre citrus watershed. Soil
Sci. 112:410-418.
9. Bjorkman, E., G. Lundeberg, and H. Nommik. 1967.
Distribution and balance of N-15 labelled ferti
lizer nitrogen applied to young pine trees
(Pinus sylvestris L.). Studia Forestalia Seu-
cica, 43:1-23.
91


92
10. Bower, C.A., and L.V. Wilcox. 1969. Nitrate content
of the Upper Rio Grande as influenced by nitrogen
fertilization of adjacent irrigated lands. Proc.
Soil Sci. Soc. Amer. 33:971-973.
11. Brams, E.A., and J.G.A. Fiskell. 1967. Variability
of root and soil analyses of a 'Valencia' grove
sampled in January. Proc. Fla. State Hort. Soc.
80:32-37.
12. Bremner, J.M. 1965. Total nitrogen. p. 1149-1178.
In C.A. Black (ed.). Methods of soil analysis.
Part 2. Agronomy 9. Amer. Soc. Agron., Madison,
Wise.
13. 1965. Inorganic forms of nitrogen. p.
1179-1237. In C.A. Black (ed.). Methods of
soil analysis. Part 2. Agronomy 9. Amer. Soc.
Agron., Inc., Madison, Wise.
14. Cahoon, G.A., and L.H. Stolzy. 1959. Estimating root
density in citrus orchards by the neutron modera
tion method. Proc. Amer. Soc. Hort. Sci. 74:
322-327.
15. 1960. Citrus root density in relation
to water use. Calif. Citrog. 45:318, 323.
16. Calvert, D.V. 1975. Nitrate, phosphate, and potas
sium movement into drainage lines under 3 soil
management practices. J. Environ. Qual. 4:
183-186.
17. and H.J. Reitz. 1964. Effects of rate
and frequency of fertilizer applications on
yield and quality of 'Valencia' oranges in the
Indian River area. Proc. Fla. State Hort. Soc.
77:36-41.
18. and H.T. Phung. 1971. Nitrate-nitrogen
movement into drainage lines under different
soil management systems. Proc. Soil and Crop
Sci. Soc. Fla. 31:229-232.
19. Cameron, S.H., and O.C. Compton. 1945. Nitrogen in
bearing orange trees. Proc. Amer. Soc. Hort.
Sci. 46:60-68.
, and D. Appleman. 1933. The distribution
of total nitrogen in the orange tree. Proc.
Amer. Soc. Hort. Sci. 30:341-348.
20.


Full Text
THE FATE OF FERTILIZER-N APPLIED TO
A FLORIDA CITRUS SOIL
By
Daniel Apollo Hagillih
A DISSERTATION PRESENTED TO THE
GRADUATE COUNCIL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA
IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS
FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA
1980

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The author wishes to express his gratitude and appre¬
ciation to Dr. R.C.J. Koo, the chairman of his supervisory
committee, for his patient guidance in the execution of
this research and the preparation of the manuscript.
Throughout the graduate training of the author, Dr. Koo
strived to imprint on the author an appreciation of the
scientific method in research.
The author is equally indebted to Dr. A.H. Krezdorn,
Professor Emeritus of Fruit Crops, who had been the Chair¬
man of his supervisory committee. Even in retirement, Dr.
Krezdorn continued to serve on this committee and to will¬
ingly give of his time, counsel and support. To Dr. W.S.
Castle, a member of his committee, the author owes a debt
of gratitude and appreciation for his valuable contribu¬
tion in suggestions, counsel and involvement in all phases
of this study.
Sincere appreciation is extended to Dr. N. Gammon,
Jr., Professor Emeritus of Soil Chemistry, for his construc¬
tive criticism and counsel particularly in the soil aspect
of the research. The author also wishes to thank Dr. D.A.
Graetz for his assistance in the analysis of soil samples.

The graduate training of the author was sponsored by
the Agricultural Research Corporation of the Sudan. Towards
the end of his training, the Department of Fruit Crops
offered the author a graduate assistantship. Ke grate¬
fully acknowledges the financial support from both.
Finally, the author wishes to thank Ms. Janice L.
Cambridge for her companionship and encouragement through¬
out the duration of this study.
in

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
. . 1
LITERATURE REVIEW
. . 3
Nitrogen Balance and Its Major Components .
. . 3
Considerations for Increasing the
Efficiency of N Usage by Citrus Trees . .
. . 7
Analytical Procedures for N Balance
Components
Isotope Approach to N Utilization
by Citrus Trees
. . 15
MATERIALS AND METHODS
. . 18
Experimental Site
. . 18
Experimental Design
. . 13
Field Sampling Procedures
. . 24
Samóle Preparation and Analysis
. . 27
Statistical Analysis. . .
. . 29
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
. . 30
Experiments 1 and 2
. . 30
Experiment 3
. . 70
CONCLUSIONS
. . 87
LITERATURE CITED
. . 91
BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH
. . 103
iv

Abstract of Dissertation Presented to the
Graduate Council of the University of Florida in
Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements
for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy
THE FATE OF FERTILIZER-N APPLIED TO
A FLORIDA CITRUS SOIL
By
Daniel Apollo Hagillih
March 1980
Chairman: Dr. R.C.J. Koo
Major Department: Horticultural Science
The fate of fertilizer-N applied to Astatula fine sand
was studied by the destructive Sampling of 1-year-old 'Pine¬
apple' orange (Citrus sinensis [L.] Osbeck) trees on ’Alemow'
(C. macrophylla Wester), and through soil chemical analysis,
using the difference method. The fall-winter study involved
unfertilized control, isobutylidene diurea (IBDU) and NH^NO^
sources in a factorial combination with no irrigation, low
and high irrigation levels. Nitrogen source and irrigation
treatments lasted for 14 and 6 weeks, respectively. The
spring study involved only the 3 N sources and lasted for
6 weeks. Leaf and fruit sampling of bearing 'Pineapple'
orange trees, fertilized with the same N sources, and soil
v

Chemical analysis of the unreplicated tree plots were also
used. Soil water content in all experiments was determined
by a neutron probe.
The results indicated that growth parameters of the
young trees, including percent trunk diameter increase, dry
weights of component parts and the entire tree, showed no
statistical differences attributed to N source, apparently
because of the short duration of the studies. There was,
however, a trend for IBDU and NH^NCu fertilization to re¬
sult in greater dry matter, particularly in the more succu¬
lent aerial parts. This was apparent in the leaves of the
fertilized trees which were statistically greater than those
of unfertilized trees.
There was a highly significant relationship between
N source and N concentration and total N of tree parts,
and total N of the entire tree. In every case, the order
of N absorption was NH^NO^- > IBDU-fertilized > control
trees. This confirms that a soluble source such as NH^NO-,
is more readily absorbed in the short-term than a controlled
release form of N. It is suggested that this trend may nor
prevail in the long-term.
Irrigation level did not statistically affect tree
growth and N content parameters, and soil N content in the
fall-winter study. The narrow range and short duration of
the irrigación treatments were probably not sufficient to
elicit treatment responses.
vi

Nitrogen balance data showed that 66 and 30% of ap¬
plied N from IBDU and NE^NO^, respectively, were retained
in the 0- to 6G-cm soil profile. Twenty-five and 45% from
the same respective sources were accounted for in the young
trees. Total apparent N recovery in the soil-plant sys¬
tem was 91 and 76% for IBDU- and NH^NO^-N, respectively.
The deficit was assumed to have been leached and/or lost to
the atmosphere.
There was no difference in fruit yield between IBDU-
and NH^NO^-fertiiized bearing trees. Fertilized trees,
however, yielded 4 times as much as the control. Fruit
N concentration and removal and leaf N concentration were
in the order of NH^NO^- > IBDU-fertilized > unfertilized
tree. The absence of replication precluded the establish¬
ment of a plausible N balance. Nevertheless, 40% of the
applied N was estimated to be contained in the fruits and
leaves.
High N recoveries on experimental plots involving young
nonbearing, and bearing trees suggest chat substantial leach
ing of N may not be a major route for N loss from citrus
groves established on deep, well-drained soils when reason¬
able rates of fertilizer-N are applied over the root zone.
The potential for a single application of IBDU to
young cirrus trees, which are normally fertilized several
times a year, needs further study.
vi 1

INTRODUCTION
Florida's sandy soils planted to citrus are character¬
ized by low native fertility which necessitates the regu¬
lar addition of fertilizer nutrients to maintain a com¬
mercial level of production. Such an edaphic environment
is also conducive to the substantial leaching of mineral N
by rainfall and irrigation (114). Soil tests which measure
N carry-over from previous N additions are of little value
in these soils. As a result, the replacement of nutrients,
including N, lost from the soil is generally dependent up¬
on an evaluation of the need of the crop.
The N requirement of commercial citrus cultivars is
based on many long-term investigations in which tree growth
and yield were related to fertilizer rate, source, time of
application and leaf N content. Nitrogen uptake by the
citrus tree is considered to be a small part of the total
N loss from the deep, sandy soils of central Florida (100) .
The efficiency of tree N utilization, i.e., the propor¬
tion of N used by the tree compared to that applied, has
been estimated to be 25-30%. As a result, there is public
and grower concern regarding the quantitative extent of the
leaching loss of N applied to citrus. Leached N represents
an irretrievable loss of a costly resource and may
1

2
contribute to the NO^ pollution of underground water and
to lake eutrophication.
No meaningful N balance studies, i.e., accounting
quantitatively for the fate of N applied to citrus soils
as a fertilizer, have been done in Florida as they have in
California (29, 68, 69). In order to enhance our under¬
standing of N use in Florida soils planted to citrus, it
is essential that the fate of fertilizer-N be studied.
The primary objective of this research was to make a
quantitative accounting of fertilizer-N applied to bearing
and young trees on a deep, well-drained sandy soil of the
Florida ridge area, where much of the citrus in Florida is
grown. A second objective was to evaluate isobutylidene
diurea (IBDU) as a controlled-release N fertilizer source
for citrus.

LITERATURE REVIEW
Nitrogen Balance and Its Major Components
Preliminary Remarks
Important sources for the N in the soil solution in¬
clude fertilizer-N additions and net mineralization. Other
sources also likely to add some N to the soil solution in¬
clude rainfall, irrigation water, biological fixation, dif¬
fusion of atmospheric ammonia into the soil surface, direct
absorption of atmospheric ammonia by plant leaves, and
transformations involved in the N cycle (80, 125). Major
sources of N removal from the soil solution are plant up¬
take, leaching, net fixation in the soil and denitrifica¬
tion. Smaller losses of N in most agricultural soils in¬
clude gaseous losses through ammonia volatilization and
physical removal by wind and animals.
Attempts to account for the fate of applied N in the
soil-plant-atmosphere continuum have yielded some useful
information, but it is rare that a complete quantitative
recovery of applied N is obtained (2, 50, 97). Calculation
of a N balance for a field system is particularly diffi¬
cult because of the many possible fates of N in soils (65),
and because of the physical difficulties encountered in
3

4
obtaining quantitative data for some of the major compo¬
nents of a N balance such as leaching, plant uptake and
residual N (8, 97).
Leaching of N
Leaching has been defined as the movement of solutes
from one soil zone to another by percolated water (107).
Leaching of N is important because it represents the loss
of a costly resource and because it may contribute to en¬
vironmental pollution.
Few measurements have been reported giving accurate
data concerning nutrient loss from agricultural lands by
leaching (34). Most of the mineral N lost by leaching in
citrus orchards is in the NO^ form (42, 51). The extent
of NO^ loss from the soil-plant system depends on the fer¬
tilizer material, soil type, plant species, rainfall and
management practices. High infiltration rates and lev;
water storage capacities of sandy soils make them espe¬
cially subject to NO^ leaching. Other factors which in¬
fluence the magnitude of NO^ leaching include evaporation,
nutrient concentration, depth of rooting, N reserves, min¬
eralization of the soil, nitrification of the NH^-N and
soil temperature (113).
In California, the proportion of N applied to citrus
leached annually as NO., ranged from 45 (8) to 90% (51).
These high NO^ leaching losses, however, occurred under
conditions of excessive irrigation on well-drained soils

5
atypical of many irrigated areas in arid zones. In a deep
sandy Florida soil, split application of 200 kg/ha of N
annually to a mature citrus grove did not result in NO-j
leaching even when the rainfall was high (35) . Studies in¬
volving a single annual application of N to evaluate the
magnitude of NO^ leaching loss from citrus plantings in
Florida have not been done.
Plant Cycling of N
Information on the N content of an entire citrus tree
is meager. The size of the mature tree makes the destruc¬
tive biomass sampling a difficult and costly task (111).
In forest tree studies, where there is a commercial inter¬
est in the wood, biomass sampling procedures for the tree
are more highly developed (9, 66, 91, 126). Also, with
citrus, leaf N content is considered an adequate index of
the N status of the tree. The commercial adoption of leaf
analysis as a guide to fertilization of citrus has report¬
edly reduced N usage by about 50% in California (31).
A few studies on total citrus trae N content have been
reported, but very often these studies were lacking in ade¬
quate replication (5, 63, 100, 121). In Florida, it was
estimated that a 15-year-old orange tree absorbed only 25-
30% of applied N (100). Of this amount, 33% is returned
to the soil during the year through shedding of old leaves,
flowers and young fruits, 50% is removed in the crop of
fruit, and about 15% goes into permanent structures in the

6
form of new twigs and trunk enlargement. Data from a
single 19-year-old grapefruit (Citrus paradisi Macf.) tree
in Florida (5) indicated that the N content of component
tree parts on a % dry weight basis in descending order was
leaves, immature fruit, twigs less than 1.3 cm diameter,
fibrous roots, large roots, limbs up to 1.3 cm diameter
and trunk.
A series of studies to determine the N content of
'Valencia' orange trees have been reported from California
(19,20, 121). One study showed that a 10-year-old tree
contained 200 g of N in the leaves (19), while another
study indicated that nearly one-half of the N content of
the tree was in the leaves (20) . Wallace et al_. (121)
reported that a 14-year-old 'Valencia' orange tree contained
673 g of N. The authors did not, however, indicate how
much N was applied so that it is difficult to relate this
figure to trees of similar age elsewhere. Apparently, a
significant amount of N added to the soil is removed by
citrus fruits (59, 131). Zidan and Wallace (131) reported
that a mature 'Washington' navel orange fruit with a fresh
weight of 192 g contained 394 mg of N while a 'Valencia'
orange fruit of 165 g contained 327 mg.
Residual Soil N
A part of the N balance which is the most difficult to
account for because of spatial variability is the amount of
N remaining in the soil at any given sampling time.

7
Sampling and analysis of the soil material for NO^N (1, 3,
51, 61, 81, 82) and/or total N (36, 84, 102) is commonly
used to measure soil N content but large samples are usu¬
ally required to achieve an acceptable degree of accuracy.
The variation in residual soil N content, both within and
among experimental units, has been reported to decrease
with increasing depth in the soil profile (79). Also, the
variability of virgin land has been reported to be less for
N than similar areas of cultivated land (7).
In a Florida study involving an orchard of mature
citrus trees, the soil nutrient content was the least vari¬
able in samples collected below the tree dripline as com¬
pared to other sampling locations (11). Nevertheless, it
was demonstrated that a large number of samples was re¬
quired to reduce the variation regardless of the sampling
location.
Considerations for Increasing the
Efficiency of N Usage by Citrus trees
General Concepts
Optimizing N use by citrus trees appears to involve
the development of management programs which prevent the
excessive loss of NO^ by leaching without sacrificing fruit
yield, size, and quality (29). It has been suggested that
optimum management could be achieved by applying only the
amount of N needed to sustain high fruit production, with

8
leaf analysis being used as a guide to determine the proper
rate (32, 90). Differences in citrus cultivar N require¬
ments and soil types, however, dictate an approach in which
timing, rate, placement, N source and water regime must
be considered in the efficient use of fertilizer-N.
One approach to increasing the efficiency of N use
has been to split the annual application of N (17, 35, 88).
This is supported by a Florida experiment conducted under
high rainfall conditions (35). In terms of citrus fruit
productivity, however, other studies (17, 88) indicated
that a single application of fertilizer-N applied during
the drier portion of the year, in winter, gave the same
yield response compared to 2 applications per year.
Another approach is the foliar application of N in
the form of low-biuret urea. Studies from California (29,
30) indicated that foliar application of N was associated
with lower NCu leaching potential than was soil applica¬
tion. In general, foliar-applied N, under the low rainfall
conditions of California, was found to be as effective as
soil-applied N for fruit production (29, 30). This approach
may not be suitable in Florida where frequent rains may
wash away the N applied to the foliage. Efficient N use
may require the application of nominal rates to the soil,
supplementing this with foliar-applied N.
It has been suggested that in future studies, split
soil application of N be a treatment along with foliar-soil
combinations (54). A major limitation in foliar application

9
of N, however, is that it is energy intensive especially
if frequent applications are necessary.
Concept of Controlled Release N Fertilizers and IBDU
The concept of the controlled release of N to increase
fertilizer-N efficiency has been amply reviewed (62, 74,
76, 77, 85, 106). The basic approaches are the development
of compounds of limited solubility, use of coated granules,
and formulation of ammoniacal fertilizers with nitrifica¬
tion inhibitors. The objectives of such fertilizer-N forms
are to minimize the immobilization, leaching and volatili¬
zation losses of soil-applied N, and to release an adequate
amount of available N to satisfy the crop requirement. How¬
ever, because of higher costs, these fertilizers are being
used primarily in turfgrass, ornamentals, home grounds,
nursery fields, and for other specialty situations.
Isobutylidene diurea is a condensation product of urea
and iso-butyraldehyde patented in Japan as a slow-release
N source. Hamamoto (41) described its preparation and
physical properties in greater detail. His review of the
studies conducted in Japan showed that the large granule of
IBDU was effective in preventing high N leaching loss when
applied to paddy soils. By using IBDU with green tea
(Camellia sinensis [L.] Kuntze) plants Hamamoto (41) re¬
ported that one application was enough to get average yields
and thus save labor. The conversion of IBDU to plant avail¬
able form appears to result from the dissolution of IBDU

10
granules. The rate of dissolution is strongly influenced
by particle size (41). Fine sized IBDU granules release
larger amounts of N than coarse granules. This was ob¬
served in an incubation study (48), for turfgrasses (116,
117), and for flue-cured tobacco (Nicotiana tabacum L.)
(71). Hughes (48) confirmed Hamamoto's (41) findings that
IBDU-N release was greater at low pH values and high tem¬
peratures. In evaluating IBDU for 'Merion' Kentucky blue
grass (Poa pratensis L.), Moberg et al. (72) indicated that
a uniform growth response was possible from 2 applications
of IBDU as compared to 3 of UREX (a urea-paraffin product).
Studies in citrus or other tree crops with IBDU have not
as yet been reported.
Analytical Procedures for
N Balance Components
Leached N Sampling and Analysis
Soil N losses from leaching have generally been stud¬
ied in lysimeter experiments or in controlled field drain¬
age plots by measuring the N content of the effluent water
(43). In citrus, lysimeter studies have largely been lim¬
ited to young trees in the greenhouse. Such studies can
provide useful basic information, but they are limited in
scope because of the difficulty of extrapolating the data
to orchard conditions (39). Moreover, a major shortcoming
of lysimeters is the retention of more moisture than

11
corresponds with field capacity, resulting in the danger of
anaerobiosis and denitrification (23).
In mature citrus orchards, several approaches have
been made for estimating the leaching of fertilizer-N.
Wander (123) analyzed water samples from the lower edges
of citrus plantings located on slopes in Florida. Be¬
cause the actual amount of water used by mature citrus
trees and the exact rainfall in the local area was not
known, however, it was difficult to translate such water
analyses into figures representing actual amounts of N lost
by drainage.
Various systems of drain lines and tiles have been
devised in which data obtained by effluent water analysis
and water discharge rates are used to calculate the amount
of N leached. The amount of NO^-N in the drainage from
citrus groves has been determined by this procedure in
California (26, 60) and Florida (16, 18). However, the
reliability of this approach for monitoring subsurface
NO^-N losses has been questioned (108).
Several investigators have used porous ceramic cups to
collect soil solution samples from citrus groves (10, 26,
35, 60). This procedure was found to be useful for esti¬
mating the potential for NO^ pollution in a Florida citrus
grove (35). The procedure also gave a reasonable estimate
of the amount of NO~-N leached from a millet (Pennisetum
typhoides L.) plot (37). However, this procedure has been

12
criticized because of the difficulty of providing enough
water samples for chemical analysis and the requirement
for a suction device. A new vacuum extractor was developed
to surmount these difficulties but its usefulness has been
limited by operational problems (27).
A new approach to calculating the leaching of NO^ from
the root zone of crops is based on a comparison of the be¬
havior of NO^ and Cl ions in the drainage or percolating
waters that have moved below the root zone (82, 83).
Changes in the ratio of these ions were used to calculate
the amount of NO^ leached. In unsaturated soils where the
determination of NO^ and Cl concentrations in the percola¬
ting water is difficult these concentrations were deter¬
mined in a saturation extract. In both cases NO^ and Cl-
ratios were found to be satisfactory in estimating NO^
leached below the root zone of crops.
Residual Soil N Sampling and Analysis
Soil samples from citrus orchards are obtained using
various sampling techniques. For cores greater than 6 m
in length, a power-driven 45-cm diameter auger is often
used (82) . When samples are taken to only 6 m, a truck-
mounted hydraulically powered sampler is frequently pre¬
ferred. Most sampling in citrus orchards is conducted to
shallower depths, generally not exceeding 4 or 5 m. In
such cases, conventional sampling soil tubes or augers are
used.

13
Several analytical procedures have been adopted to
determine residual soil N. For total N determination, 2
methods have gained general acceptance: the Kjeldahl
method which is essentially a wet-oxidation procedure, and
the Dumas method which is fundamentally a dry-oxidation pro¬
cedure (12). Residual soil N is also determined by analyz¬
ing the soil for exchangeable NH^ and NO^ ions using steam
distillation procedures (13). Recent trends in quantita¬
ting residual soil N, however, have involved the determina¬
tion of NO^ (67) and NH* (4) ions in saturation extracts
using specific ion activity electrodes.
Soil Water Measurement
Nitrogen is absorbed by plant roots from the soil solu¬
tion. The soil water content is important, therefore, not
only because of its function as a solvent but also because
its mass movement is directly related to the leaching of the
soil profile.
Soil water content is measured by several techniques,
each with advantages and disadvantages. One technique used
extensively in loam- to clay-textured soils is based upon
the tensiometer (92, 93, 95, 105). The information fur¬
nished by tensiometers tends to be qualitative. Tensio¬
meters are generally used for determining timing and dura¬
tion of irrigation and have not been found to be particu¬
larly useful for sandy soils (52, 56).

14
Electrical-resistance blocks are not extensively used
on sandy soils (64, 105) because gypsum blocks operate most
reliably in the drier portion of the soil water content
spectrum. In the sandy Florida soils, the available water
is relatively small, and soil water should be maintained
above 65% of field capacity. Under these conditions gyp¬
sum blocks are not particularly suitable.
For direct quantitative measurement of soil water by
volume, 2 methods are used. The gravimetric procedure in¬
volves the calculation of a volumetric water content from
the weight of the water in a soil sample and the soil bulk
density (46, 64, 94). Rapid, large-scale soil water con¬
tent sampling by this technique is laborious and time-
consuming.
The neutron scattering method is a faster and equally
accurate method as compared to the gravimetric procedure
(14, 15, 40, 104). The method has been found to be useful
in studying patterns of soil water depletion in Florida
citrus groves (53).
Plant Tissue Sampling and Analysis
The leaf is the most commonly sampled tissue to deter¬
mine the N status of a citrus tree (31, 32, 99, 101). As
a result, techniques in leaf sampling and analytical pro¬
cedures have been highly developed. The entire mature tree,
however, is rarely sampled to determine its total N content.

15
One approach for determining the N content of the tree is
to uproot the entire tree. The tree is then fractionated
into various component parts and the N content of sample
parts determined after oven-drying and grinding. This
approach has been tried in Florida (5) and in California
(19, 20). Another approach has involved making a. periodic
weight and chemical determination of all the blossoms,
leaves and fruits that fall from citrus trees. Wallace
et al. (121) used this approach to obtain data which were
then combined with similar information for harvested fruits,
new leaves and twigs, to obtain a measure of the nutrient
content of the tree.
Isotope Approach to N
Utilization by Citrus Trees
The use of isotopes in tree nutrition research was
discussed by Walker (118) and Hauck (44). The advantages
of this technique include the direct measurement of trans¬
port velocities and separation of newly absorbed nutrients
from those already present in the various components of the
ecosystem (96).
14
Nitrogen occurs in nature m 2 stable isotopes, N and
N^. Only recently has it been possible, as the result of
advances in cryogenic techniques whereby nitric oxide gas
is liquefied and then distilled, to separate the 2 isotopes
with relative ease (21). Nitrogen^5 fertilizer formula¬
tions are those which have been enriched with excess N^"

16
15 14
while N -depleted fertilizers, also known as N ferti¬
lizers, are those from which much has been removed.
Studies using as a tracer are commonplace in agro¬
nomic crops because the plants are relatively shallow-
rooted (6, 49, 50, 73, 112, 127, 128, 130). Deeper-rooted
forest and fruit trees do not lend themselves to N balance
studies using (66, 75). The high cost of the tracer
has largely restricted its use to laboratory and greenhouse
studies with young trees and strongly affected the size of
the experiment and the experimental design. Furthermore,
the procedure requires the use of expensive instrumentation
to which many laboratories may not have access. Neverthe¬
less, such studies have been reported for young apple
(Malus sylvestris Mill.) trees (24, 38, 45) and nonbearing
prune (Prunus domestica L.) trees (124).
Greenhouse studies with citrus using were reported
by Wallace (119, 120) and Wallace et al. (122). Wallace
(119) found that growth complications and variability in
plant material resulted in conventional methods being in¬
ferior to the isotopic technique in studying the influence
of temperature on N absorption and translocation. His qual¬
itative investigation (120) showed that NO-^-N was 2 to 5
times as readily absorbed from soil as was NH^-N by 8-week-
old cuttings of 'Eureka' lemon (C. limón L.). Nitrogen"^
appeared in the leaves of a 3-year-old tree 4-7 days after
application to the tree (122).

17
After this initial interest, no studies in citrus
with N^ have been reported until recently. Kubota and
coworkers (57, 58) investigated the behavior of N supplied
in early spring and early summer on 9-year-old 'Satsuma'
mandarin (C. unshiu Marcovitch) trees. In the spring ex¬
periment, N^ was detected in rootlets and leaves 3 and 7
days, respectively, after the application. Seventy-five per¬
cent of absorbed N^ was found in the aerial parts of the
15
tree. In the summer study, N was detected in rootlets
and spring leaves the next day after application, indica¬
ting a faster absorption of N in summer. Ninety-two percent
15
of the N was distributed m the above ground parts. A
review of N^ studies on citrus in Japan was recently
presented by Yuda (129).
15 15
Both N— depleted and N— enriched fertilizer materials
have been reported to give accurate and precise measurement
of tracer N in plant tissue (23, 103). No studies with
N— depleted fertilizers, however, appear to have been re¬
ported with citrus.

MATERIALS AND METHODS
Experimental Site
Experiments for this study were conducted on an Asta-
tula fine sand site 24 km from Lake Alfred, Florida. The
soil is a Typic Quartzipsamment of the Entisols (47).
Typically, it is well-drained with a low water and miner¬
al nutrient retaining capacity.
Experimental Design
Experiment 1
Two factors, N source and irrigation, were examined
in this experiment. Levels of the N source factor in¬
cluded no N control, IBDU-N, and NH^NO^-N, while those of
the irrigation factor were no irrigation, low and high
irrigations. It was desired to study these treatments in
a factorial arrangement; however, it was not possible to
physically establish the experiment in this manner because
of the limitation imposed by the irrigation treatment.
Therefore, the 1-year-old 'Pineapple' orange (Citrus sin¬
ensis [L.] Osbeck) trees on 'Alemow' (C. macrophylla Wester)
rootstock were spaced at 3 x 3 m in 2 rows on July 13, 1978,
using a modified split plot design (Fig. 1). The field
layout consisted of 3 replications with irrigation level
18

Fig. 1. Planting plan and statistical design.


21
as the main plot treatment. The size of each main plot
was determined by 6-m lengths of perforated sprinkler pipe
used to apply the irrigation treatments. Each main plot,
therefore, had 4 trees, 2 on each side of the pipe. Each
single tree plot received one level of the N treatment but
4 replications of each N treatment were randomly dis¬
tributed over the 3 irrigation main plots. Thirty-six trees
were used in the experiment.
Fertilizer-N from IBDU and NK^NO-, sources at the rate
of 201.6 g/tree was hand broadcast in a 3 x 3 area around
each tree on September 28, 1978, 11 weeks after the trees
were planted. Trees in control plots were not fertilized.
Irrigation treatment was not started until November 27, 1978,
after rainfall had tapered off. Soil water content was
used to schedule irrigation. Approximately 0.75 cm of ir¬
rigation water was applied whenever the average soil water
content fell below 4% by volume in the 0- to 60-cm soil
profile of the high irrigation plots. The high irrigation
plots were irrigated twice as often as the low irrigation
plots which also received 0.75 cm of irrigation water on
each application. A rain gauge at the experimental site
and an irrigation flow-meter were used to monitor water
supply. When the flow-meter malfunctioned 1500-ml cans
were placed in the plots for collection and measurement of
the amount of irrigation water delivered.
The experiment was terminated on January 9, 1979, be¬
cause of freeze damage. Fertilizer-N and the first

22
irrigation had been applied 14 and 6 weeks, respectively,
prior to the termination of the experiment. The trees un¬
der low irrigation had received a total of 2.20 cm of ir¬
rigation water in 3 irrigations while those under high ir¬
rigation had received 4.95 cm in 6 irrigations. For the
entire period of the experiment, the nonirrigated plots
had received 20.17 cm of rainfall; the low and high irriga¬
tion plots had received a combined total of 22.37 and 25.12
cm of rainfall and irrigation, respectively.
Experiment 2
This experiment was initiated to clarify certain re¬
sults obtained in Experiment 1. The total N content of
NH^NO^-fertilized trees was 42% higher than that of the
IBDU-fertilized trees. Moveover, the complicating effect
of the freeze damage on N absorption was not known. It
was decided to determine if the same trend in N absorption
would prevail during the warm spring weather.
Nine unused trees planted at the same time as those
in Experiment 1 had been left unfertilized from the sum¬
mer of 1978 through March, 1979. The 3 replications of
single tree plots were arranged in a randomized complete
block design, having as treatments unfertilized control,
IBDU and NH^NO^ as N sources. No irrigation treatment was
applied, however. Natural precipitation and routine

23
irrigation of the adjacent mature citrus grove provided
the only water supply.
Data from Experiment 1 indicated that NH4NO.j-ferti-
lized trees had higher N content than IBDU-fertilized
trees. The effect of the freeze damage on N absorption
from the 2 N sources was not known. It was necessary
therefore to establish if the same trend would be manifest¬
ed in warm weather. Hence, the trees in Experiment 2 were
deliberately grouped on the basis of their trunk diameter;
IBDU was applied to the largest trees, and NH^O^ to the
smallest trees. Control trees were intermediate. The
same rate of fertilizer-N in Experiment 1 was hand broad¬
cast in a 3 x 3 m area around the tree on March 23, 1979.
The experiment was terminated on May 8, 1979, 6 weeks after
fertilizer application.
Experiment 3
Three 16-year-oid 'Pineapple' orange trees in an
existing rate and fertilizer-N source study were used for
this experiment. The trees had been fertilized with the
same rate of NH^NO^ since April 5, 1973, until September 23,
1977. In the current experiment, one of the trees received
a total of 707.2 g of N per year, in 3 equal applications
on March 2, 1978, June 11, 1978, and October 25, 1978, as
IBDU. Another tree received the same rate of N as NH^NO^
on the same dates. The fertilizer was applied by hand
broadcasting around the tree. Other nutrients were

24
adequately supplied to the fertilized trees. The third
tree which did not receive any fertilizer-N at the speci¬
fied dates was used in this experiment as the unfertilized
control.
In order to study N movement in uncropped land 1 cir¬
cular fallow plot 6 m in diameter, which corresponded to
the tree canopy diameter, was fertilized with IBDU on
October 25, 1978. Only one-third of the total annual ap¬
plication in the tree plots was used. Another similar
plot was fertilized with the same rate of N as NH^NO^. A
third plot was left unfertilized as a control. The 6 un¬
replicated plots in the experiment were subjected to the
routine management of the adjacent grove. The experiment
was terminated on February 17, 1979, 17 weeks after the
fall application of fertilizer-N, at which time the plots
had received 25.90 cm of rainfall and irrigation since
October 25, 1978. Evapotranspiration for the duration of
the study was estimated from climatological data (55).
Field Sampling Procedures
Soil Water Sampling
Changes in soil water content were measured with a
Nuclear-Chicago neutron probe (P-19) and a scaler (53).
One aluminum access tube for the probe was installed about
45 cm from every other tree in Experiments 1 and 2. In

25
Experiment 3, one tube was installed just inside the drip¬
line of each tree and at an equivalent distance from the
center of each fallow plot.
One-minute readings were taken at depth increments
of 15 cm, beginning at 15 cm. The readings were converted
to % water content by volume using a calibration curve
developed from previous sampling in the experimental area
(53). The water content of the surface 15 cm was deter¬
mined gravimetrically. A composite of duplicate 2.5 x
15 cm cores of soil per plot in the 3 experiments was col¬
lected and its gravimetric water content determined by
over-drying to constant weight at 105°C. The water content
was transformed to a volume percentage by multiplying the
% weight by the average soil bulk density (1.54 g/cm^).
Water content in the soil profile was calculated by multi¬
plying the average volume ratio by the depth of the entire
profile and results expressed as cm of water.
Soil Sampling
A composite of duplicate 2.5-cm diameter soil core
samples was taken within 30 cm from the tree from 0-7 cm
and 7-15 cm, and thereafter at 15-cm increments down to
60 cm in Experiments 1 and 2. Soil samples were similarly
taken at the tree canopy dripline down to 120 cm in Experi¬
ment 3. In Experiment 1, samples were taken when cumula¬
tive rainfall exceeded 1.25 cm. After the initiation of
the irrigation treatment, samples were taken only at the

26
termination of the experiment. In' Experiment 2, samples
were taken after 2.28, 9.14 and 17.87 cm of cumulative
rainfall and irrigation. Samples were taken following more
than 4.87 cm of rainfall and/or irrigation in Experiment 3.
In order to prevent free movement of water from the
soil surface through the sample holes, each hole was filled
with white sand, obtained from elsewhere, and marked to
avoid future sampling in that immediate vicinity.
Plant Tissue Sampling
Tree growth measurements in Experiments 1 and 2 were
obtained by measuring the diameter of the trunks and the
destructive sampling of the tree. Tree trunks were painted
at a point 15 cm above the bud union and the initial and
final trunk diameter recorded. Trees were excavated by
digging a trench 60 cm from the tree and recovering the
root system as much as practical. Each tree was fraction¬
ated in the laboratory into 7 components: fibrous and
lateral roots, taproot, rootstock trunk, scion trunk,
crotch branches, green twigs and leaves. The root system
was rinsed in “running tap water and the fresh and oven-dry
weight (70°C) of each component obtained.
In the mature tree experiment, fruits were harvested
on February 17, 1979, and the total fresh weight recorded.
One 30-fruit sample from each tree was ground in a com-
muniting machine, and 2 subsamples oven-dried at 70°C for
dry weight determination and chemical analysis.

27
The number of leaves on each mature tree was esti¬
mated by the following procedure. Leaves in a 30 x 30 cm
frame from 4 sides of the tree were stripped and the
average number in the frame determined. The leaves were
oven-dried for 48 hours at 70°C and the total dry weight
determined. The total dry weight of the sampled leaves
was used to calculate the average dry weight of a leaf.
Tree height and tree width in 2 directions (north-south and
east-west) were also measured. The canopy surface area was
then calculated from the formula:
S = 2irW/3h2 [ (W/16+h2) 5- (W/4) 3 ]
where h = height and W = width of the tree (98). The
number of leaves on a tree was then estimated from a know¬
ledge of the canopy surface area.
Sample Preparation and Analysis
Soil Samples
All soil samples were air-dried and sieved through a
2 mm screen. Total soil N was determined by a semi-micro
Kjeldahl procedure using a salicylic-sulfuric acid mixture
(12). Soil samples from the 4 replications in Experiment
1 were combined for the determination of exchangeable NK*
and NO- by a steam-distillation procedure using Devarda
alloy and MgO (13). Samples were not sufficient for the
determination of these ions for the second sampling date

28
in Experiment 1 and for all samples in Experiments 2 and
3. Total N was expressed as % N on a dry weight basis and
NH^-N and NO-j-N as ppm. When a quantitative account for
N was being made, these values were converted to g or kg
of N in the soil profile. This was obtained as the product
3
of area, depth, average bulk density (1.54 g/cm ) and aver¬
age N concentration in the profile.
In Experiments 1 and 2, the N content of the profile
2
was calculated for the total area fertilized (90,000 cm )
but since the root system of the young trees occupied an
area less than 60 cm diameter, the N content was also cal-
2
culated for the latter area (2828 cm ). The depth used in
the calculations was 60 cm. For the mature tree experiment,
2
the area and depth were 28.28 m and 1.20 m, respectively.
The recovery of fertilizer-N was obtained by subtracting
the total soil profile N content of the unfertilized plot
from that of the fertilized plot. This value was expressed
as the percentage of the amount of N applied.
Plant Tissue Samples
All plant parts were ground in a Wiley Mill and passed
through a 20-mesh screen. Total N was determined by a
semi-micro Kjeldahl procedure using 0.5 g subsamples (12).
Nitrogen values were expressed both as % of dry weight and
in absolute amounts. The latter were obtained by multiply¬
ing % N by the total dry weight of the component part. The
recovery of fertilizer-N by the trees was obtained by

29
subtracting the total N content of the unfertilized tree
from that of the fertilized tree and the result expressed
as the percentage of the amount of N applied. In the ma¬
ture tree experiment, the N content of fruits and leaves
from the unfertilized tree was similarly substracted from
those of the fertilized tree.
Statistical Analysis
In Experiments 1 and 2, data pertaining to tree growth,
tissue N content, and soil total N content were submit¬
ted to analysis of variance. In Experiment 1, these data
were analyzed in a 3 x 3 factorial arrangement. Data for
Experiment 2 were treated as a randomized complete block
design. Significant differences were determined by Duncan's
multiple range test. Soil water data and those from the
mature tree experiment were not analyzed.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Experiments 1 and 2
Preliminary Remarks
Experiment 1 was prematurely terminated 14 weeks af¬
ter fertilizer application and 6 weeks following the first
irrigation because the trees were beginning to show the
effects of freeze damage. This was especially apparent in
the unfertilized control trees where extensive leaf drop
occurred. Since the complicating effect of the freeze
damage on N absorption was not known, and NH^NO^-fertilized
trees appeared to have higher N content in comparison to
IBDU-fertilized trees, Experiment 2 was started to deter¬
mine if the same trend would prevail in warm weather.
Therefore, the trees in Experiment 2 were deliberately
grouped such that IBDU-fertilized trees were larger in
trunk diameter than control and NH^NO^-fertilized trees
(Table 1).
Tree Growth Analysis
The young trees in both experiments generally showed
vigorous growth regardless of treatment. Trees fertilized
with NH^NO- and IBDU had denser canopies than the unfer¬
tilized control trees, and those fertilized with NK^NO^
30

Table 1. Effect of N source on the dry wt and growth of several tree component parts
z
Expt. N source
Root system
dry wt
Top
dry wt
g
Total
dry wt
Initial
trunk diam
(cm)
Final
trunk diam
(cm)
% trunk
diam
increase
Control
80.6ns
107.5ns
188.Ins
1.31ns
1.34ns
2.3ns
1 IBDU-N
86.1
129.1
215.2
1.42
1.47
3.6
nh4no3-n
99.2
134.3
233.5
1.41
1.46
3.5
Control
36.4b
50.2b
86.6b
0.88b
0.92b
4.6ns
2 IBDU-N
44.2a
66.8a
111.0a
1.03a
1.10a
6.8
NH-NO-.-N
4 3
26.0b
44.7b
70.7b
0.78b
0.83b
6.4
ZMean separation
level; ns = not ¡
within column
significant.
for each
experiment
by Duncan's
multiple range
test, 5%

32
had darker foliage than IBDU-fertilized trees. Leaves
from the control trees in Experiment 1 were dull green and
began to shed toward the end of the study, indicating that
N was becoming a limiting factor (22) and the trees were
responding to the cold weather. Leaves from the control
trees in Experiment 2 were also dull green, but they did
not shed.
Ammonium nitrate and IBDU appeared to increase the
dry matter content of nearly all tree component parts as
compared to the control in Experiment 1 (Table 2). A dif¬
ference in dry matter content was particularly apparent in
the leaves collected from both of the fertilizer-N treat¬
ments which were statistically greater than the control.
The NH^NO^-fertilized trees showed numerically greater dry
weight values compared to the IBDU treatment in the more
succulent components of the tree, but they were not statis¬
tically different.
It is not plausible to compare the effect of N
sources on the growth of the tree parts in Experiment 2,
because of the initial tree size differences. Nevertheless,
there were differences (nonstatistical) particularly in
green twig dry weight indicating a greater response to
NH^NO^ fertilization as compared to the other treatments
(Table 2). Trees fertilized with NH^NO^ were the smallest
and yet had numerically greater green twig dry weight than
the rest. This trend was similar to the one in Experiment
1. Significant differences between treatments in fibrous

Table 2
Effect of N source on tree component part dry wt
z
Expt.
N source
Fibrous and
lateral roots
Taproot
Rootstock
trunk
Scion
trunk
Crotch
branches
Green
twigs
Leave-
Control
51.4ns
29.8ns
29.Ins
36.3ns
13.6ns
9.8ns
18.2b
1
IBDU-N
59.6
26.6
29.6
41.1
15.9
13.4
29.2a
nh4no3-n
60.9
38.3
29.8
36.3
20.8
15.9
31.4a
Control
24.9ab
11.5ns
16.3ns
15.3a
5. Ins
6.0ns
7.5b
2
IBDU-N
29.8a
14.4
16.3
15.4a
7.5
8.0
19.5a
NH.NO,-N
16.5b
9.5
11.3
8.1b
4.1
8.1
13.lab
2
Mean separation within column for each experiment by Duncan's
5% level; ns = not significant.
multiple range test,

34
and lateral roots, and the scion trunk in Experiment 2, but
not in Experiment 1, showed that these differences were a
reflection of the initial tree size differences in Experi¬
ment 2 rather than treatment effects.
Irrigation level did not statistically influence the
distribution of dry matter or the N content of the various
tree fractions in Experiment 1 (Table 3). There were no
significant interactions between N source and irrigation
level. Data related to irrigation level effects, except
for those in Table 3, have been omitted from this study be¬
cause irrigation level effects were not statistically dif¬
ferent and there were no irrigation level x N source in¬
teractions .
The dry weight of the total root system and the above¬
ground parts of the tree in Experiment 1 were consistently
highest for the NH^NO^ treatment (Table 1), followed by the
IBDU and control treatments; however, the data did not show
any statistical differences. Nitrogen source also had no
statistically significant effect on total tree dry weight
or % trunk diameter increase. Nevertheless, N fertiliza¬
tion resulted in larger % trunk diameter increase over the
control trees in both Experiments 1 and 2 (Table 1).
Trunk growth was greater in Experiment 2 than in Experi¬
ment 1 presumably because of the beneficial effect of the
warm spring weather on tree growth. Total tree dry weight
in Experiment 2 did not appear to have been altered by

Table 3. Effect of irrigation level on the N content and dry wt. of tree components.2
Irrigation
level
Fibrous and
lateral roots
Taproot
Rootstock
trunk
Scion
trunk
Crotch
branches
Green
twigs
Leaves
U L j Vv L f
g
None
52.7ns
30.5ns
30.3ns
39.2ns
17.3ns
11.0ns
25.8ns
Low
61.4
31.1
28.0
37.9
16.1
13.1
24.3
High
57.7
32.6
30.1
37.6
16.9
15.0
28.7
In C/ v_/ 11C11 f
t> cijly wu.
None
1.70ns
0.88ns
0.70ns
0.68ns
0.79ns
1.55ns
3.0 3ns
Low
1.50
0.77
0.62
0.60
0.77
1.38
3.03
High
1.54
0.79
0.63
0.67
0.74
1.34
3.01
z
ns
not significant.

36
treatments presumably due to the short duration of the ex¬
periment. It reflected the trend in the initial trunk di¬
ameter measurements (Table 1) .
Irrigation level had no statistically significant ef¬
fect on the dry weight of the root or shoot system of the
trees in Experiment 1, or the dry weight and the % trunk
diameter increase of the tree. There was, however, a ten¬
dency towards greater trunk growth with an increase in
irrigation level. Koo (55) reported a similar trend for
mature citrus trees in Florida.
Several factors may have contributed to the absence of
an irrigation effect in Experiment 1. These would have in¬
cluded duration of the experiment, the quantity and fre¬
quency of irrigation as well as the time of year. The
trees were irrigated only during the last 6 weeks of the
experiment. It is possible that irrigated trees did not
have enough time to respond to the irrigation treatments.
Furthermore, it has been shown in Florida that extra water
applied to mature citrus trees between June and December,
the approximate period of this study, did not contribute
substantially to tree growth (55).
The lack of significant N source effects on tree
growth in Experiment 1 can possibly be attributed to a di¬
minished growth rate in winter (25) . Also, the 14 weeks of
experimentation probably were not long enough for the
treatments to show their maximum effects on tree growth.

37
Patten and Domoto (78) and Miller (70) recently showed that
N treatments had no significant effect on apple tree growth
during the first growing season.
In Experiment 1, N source statistically altered the
pattern of dry matter distribution (Table 4). A greater
proportion of the total dry weight was located in the tap¬
root of the NH.NO-.-fertilized and control trees as com-
4 o
pared to the IBDU-treated trees. Both NH^NO^- and IBDU-
fertilized trees had statistically greater proportion of
their dry weight distributed in the crotch branches in com¬
parison to control trees. The % dry weight of the scion
trunk of the NH^NO^-treated trees was less than that of
either the control or the IBDU-treated trees. The fact
that the dry weight distribution was similar to the actual
dry weight of certain tree parts (Table 2) makes it doubt¬
ful that all of these were true treatment differences.
Moreover, treatment means in dry weight were not statis¬
tically different except for the leaves. Some of the sig¬
nificant treatment differences may very well be a reflec¬
tion of initial differences in the trees. Nevertheless,
there was a trend for NH^NO^-treated trees to have a
greater dry matter in crotch branches, green twigs and
leaves in comparison to IBDU-fertilized and control trees.
As was the case with the dry weight of the tree fractions,
irrigation level did not significantly affect the distri¬
bution of dry matter.

Table 4
Effect of N source on tree dry wt distribution
z
Expt.
N source
Fibrous and
lateral roots
Taproot
Rootstock
trunk
total tree
Scion
trunk
Crotch
branches
Green
twigs
Leaves
dry wt -
Control
26.86ns
15.54A
15.54a
19.19A
6.85b
5.20ns
10.46ns
1
IBDU-N
27.32
12.27B
13.86ab
19.47A
7.36ab
6.06
13.60
nh4no3-n
25.92
16.51A
12.83b
15.81B
8.70a
6.74
13.61
Control
28.71ns
13.28ns
18.78a
17.71a
5.92ns
6.88b
8.66b
2
IBDU-N
27.26
12.97
14.71b
13.87b
6.78
7.17b
17.59a
nh4no3-n
23.29
13.48
16.03b
11.40b
5.74
11.40a
18.58a
Z i
Mean separation within column for each experiment by Duncan's multiple range text, 1%
(capital letters) and 5% (lower case letters) level; ns = not significant.

39
The distribution of dry weight was similar in Experi¬
ments 1 and 2 (Table 4). In Experiment 2, the control
trees had proportionally more of their dry weight in the
rootstock and scion trunks as compared to the fertilized
trees. The % dry weight in the green twigs of the control
trees was, however, significantly less than in the NH^NO^-
treated trees; but the greatest difference was in the leaf
fraction. The % dry matter in the leaves of the fertilized
trees was about twice as much as in the unfertilized con¬
trol trees. Furthermore, the leaves of the fertilized
trees in Experiment 2 represented a higher % of the total
than in Experiment 1. This is a reasonable expectation be¬
cause of the stronger growth flush in the spring than in
the fall-winter.
Tree N Content and Distribution
The main effects of the N sources in Experiment 1
showed that the N concentrations were highly significantly
different in all component parts of the tree, with. NH^NO^-
treated trees having the highest values followed by the
IBDU-treated and control trees (Table 5). Nitrogen con¬
centration was generally highest in leaves followed by
fibrous and lateral roots, green twigs, taproot, crotch
branches, rootstock trunk, and scion trunk. This order is
similar to the data of Barnette et al. (5) for a mature
tree of a different cultivar. Furthermore, the N con¬
centrations in the current study were higher than the

Table 5. Effect of N source on N concn of tree component parts
z
Expt.
N source
Fibrous
lateral
and
roots
Taproot
Rootstock
trunk
Scion
trunk
Crotch
branches
Green
twigs
Leaves
Control
0.81C
0.39C
0.37C
0.39C
0.48C
0.77C
2.31C
1
IBDU-N
1.65B
0.84B
0.64B
0.66B
0.74B
1.58B
3.01B
nh4no3-n
2.29A
1.20A
0.93A
0.88A
1.07A
1.92A
3.75A
Control
0.83C
0.40C
0.47c
0.54c
0.49C
0.72C
2.04C
2
IBDU-N
1.37B
0.67B
0.58b
0.65b
0.6 6B
1.38B
3.72B
nh4no3~n
2.4 5A
1.37A
1.00a
0.98a
1.25A
2.18A
5.18A
zMean separation within column for
each experiment by
Duncan's
multiple
range test
, 1%
(capital
letters)
and 5% (lower case letters)
level.

41
values reported by Barnette et al. (5). Such differences
are not unusual when a young, vigorously growing tree is
compared to a mature, fruiting tree (99). Also, the rate
of N application in the current study was higher.
No significant differences due to irrigation level
were detected in the N concentration of the various tree
components-(Table 3).
The results obtained in Experiment 2 were consistent
with those in Experiment 1 in that the order of N concen¬
tration in all tree parts was NH^NO^- > I3DU-N > control
(Table 5). Except for rootstock and scion trunks, these
values were significantly different from one another at the
1% level. The N concentration for all tree parts was
higher in the NH^NO^-treated trees than in their counter¬
parts in Experiment 1, particularly in the leaves, fibrous
and lateral roots, and in the taproot. It would not be un¬
reasonable to assume that these relatively higher concen¬
trations were partly a consequence of concentration ef¬
fects, in view of the smaller trees assigned to the NH^NO^
treatment. Also, the higher soil temperature in the spring
could have been conducive to more N absorption by the
trees.
The total amount of N in a tree part, the product of
the dry weight of that part and the N concentration on a
dry weight basis, was not statistically affected by irri¬
gation level in Experiment 1. There was, however, a
statistically significant relationship between N source and

42
total N content of tree parts (Table 6). Numerically, the
trend was similar to the N concentration in that NH^NO^-
fertilized trees had the highest values followed by IBDU-
fertilized and control trees. The data were, however, less
consistent statistically.
The N content of the tree parts was reflected in the
total amount of N in the tree (Fig. 2). Differences due
to N source were highly significant with NH^NO^-treated
trees containing about 3 and 1.5 times greater total N than
the control and IBDU-treated trees, respectively. No sta¬
tistically significant differences were detected due to ir¬
rigation level.
In Experiment 2, the total amount of N in each tree
part (Table 6) and consequently in the entire tree (Fig.
2) was lower than in Experiment 1 probably because of the
smaller trees used in Experiment 2. No meaningful impor¬
tance can be attached to the statistical differences in
Experiment 2 in the total N content because of the inequal¬
ity of tree sizes. Despite the fact that the trees selected
for the IBDU treatment were larger and had 1.6 times the dry
weight of the NH^NO^-treated trees, total N in the NH4NO^-
fertilized trees was 1.05 times that of the IBDU-fertilized
trees. Equivalent biomass, including the root system, would
absorb more N from NH^NO^ than it would from IBDU in a short
period as in Experiment 1.

Table 6. Effect of N source on total N content of tree component parts.2
Expt.
N source
Fibrous and
Taproot
Rootstock
Scion
Crotch
Green
Leaves
lateral roots trunk trunk branches twigs
g
Control
0.445B
0.115B
0.108B
0.14 0B
0.066B
0.078B
0.468B
1
IBDU-N
1.044AB
0.222B
0.193A
0.270A
0.123B
0.209A
0.954A
nh4no3-n
1.488A
0.4 61A
0.270A
0.315A
0.221A
0.302A
1.277A
Control
0.225B
0.046ns
0.077ns
0.083ns
0.025ns
0.043C
0.154b
2
IBDU-N
0.431A
0.096
0.094
0.101
0.050
0.110B
0.719a
nh4no3-n
0.451A
0.130
0.113
0.079
0.050
0.176A
0.690a
2
Mean separation within column for each experiment by Duncan's multiple range test, 1%
(capital letters) and 5% (lower case letters) level; ns = not significant.

Relationship between N source and total tree N content.
Mean separation by Duncan's multiple range test 1% (capi¬
tal letters) and 5% (lower case letters).
Fig. 2.

TREE TOTAL N ,
1
CONTROL
IB DU-N
NH4N0 3 -N
4^
U1

46
There was no significant relationship between the dis¬
tribution of N in the various tree parts and irrigation
level in Experiment 1. Nitrogen source significantly af¬
fected the distribution of N in the taproot and scion trunk
(Table 7). Regardless of N source, 30-34% of total tree N
was located in fibrous and lateral roots. Leaves repre¬
sented only 10-13% of the total dry matter of the tree but
contained 30-33% of the total N in the tree. These figures
correspond to those reported in earlier work for mature
citrus trees (20, 63). Sixty, 57, and 55% of the total N
in the tree were found in the aerial parts of the control,
I3DU- and NH^NO^-fertilized trees, respectively. This may
suggest that the more readily available the N source, re¬
sulting in luxury consumption, the greater the proportion
of N stored in the root system (86).
As in Experiment 1, N source significantly affected
the distribution of N in Experiment 2 (Table 7). Compared
to Experiment 1, however, the proportion of N was greater
in leaves and less in the fibrous and lateral roots of the
fertilized trees than the control. The proportion of N
in the taproot of NH^NO^-fertilized trees was higher than
for IBDU-fertilized and control trees in both experiments.
Whether it is a characteristic of citrus trees to accumu¬
late NH^NO^-N in the taproot or some factor related to the
time of sampling needs further investigation. In contrast
to the data in Experiment 1, 57, 67 and 66% of the total N

Table 7. Effect of N source on N distribution
z
Expt.
N source
Fibrous and
lateral roots
Taproot
Rootstock
trunk
Scion
trunk
;al tree
Crotch
branches
Green
twigs
Leaves
o tU T
Control
30.89ns
8.07b
7.53ns
9.79a
4.39ns
5.49ns
33.81ns
1
IBDU-N
34.07
7.56b
6.46
9.63a
4.03
6.81
31.24
nh4no3-n
33.37
10.69a
6.45
7.58b
5.04
6.89
29.92
Control
34.96a
7.15ns
11.97a
12.90a
3.88ns
6.68b
23.95B
2
IBDU-N
26.92b
5.99
5.87b
6.30b
3.12
6.87b
44.90A
NH.NO--N
26.08b
7.69
6.69b
4.67b
2.96
10.42a
40.85A
2
Mean separation within column for each experiment by Duncan's multiple range test, 1%
(capital letters) and 5% (lower case letters) level; ns = not significant.

48
in the tree were found in the aerial parts of control, IBDU-
and NH^NO^-treated trees, respectively. The greater pro¬
portion of total N in the aerial parts of the fertilized
trees in the spring than in the fall-winter may reflect the
more vigorous growth activity in the spring. Also, trans¬
location of N from roots may be greater in the spring. The
difference probably resulted from a lower activity of the
nitrate reducing enzyme system during periods of low soil
temperature in the winter (38).
Soil Profile Content and Distribution of N
Soil samples in Experiment 1 were taken to the 45-cm
depth after 1.42 and 2.26 cm of cumulative rainfall on
October 3 and October 19, 1978, respectively. Analysis of
the first set of samples indicated that NO^-N from NH^NO,
had moved to this zone (Fig. 3-A). As a result the sam¬
pling depth was extended to 60 cm. A third set of samples
was collected after 4.87 cm of cumulative rainfall on
October 31, 1978. After the initiation of the irrigation
treatments, a fourth set of soil samples was obtained on
January 9, 1979.
At the first sampling (Fig. 3-A), there was evidence
that some NO^-N from NH^NO^ had moved down to the 45-cm
depth while NH^-N from the same source had only moved to
the 30~cm depth. A greater proportion of the NH^-N was
still retained in the 0- to 15-cm zone. Only a small
amount of NH^-N from IBDU had moved to the 30 cm depth

Fig. 3.
Effect of N source on the exchangeable NH^ and
NO3 soil content. A, B, and C correspond'to the
1st, 3rd and final soil sampling dates on October
3, October 31, 1978, and January 9, 1979, respec¬
tively. (Expt. 1).

EXCHANGEABLE SOIL N (PPm)
10-
0-15 15*30 30-45 45-60

51
presumably because of the sparingly soluble nature of IBDU
which remained in the surface soil. Eighty-five percent of
the applied N from NH^NO^ was accounted for in the 0- to
45-cm depth at the first sampling. The difficulty of ex¬
tracting IBDU with 1 N KC1 precluded the determination of
NH+ and NO^ in the 0- to 15-cm depth. The total N proce¬
dure, however, indicated that 94% of the applied N from
IBDU remained in the 0- to 45-cm depth at the first sampling.
These trends in inorganic N concentrations were also
revealed in the soil total N content in that values for
the fertilized plots were higher than those for the control
plots (Fig. 4-A). Soil samples were not sufficient for the
determination of exchangeable NH^ and NO^ at the second
sampling. Nevertheless, there was an indication that N
from NH^NO^ had probably moved past the 45-cm depth (Fig.
4-A) .
At the third sampling it was apparent that NH^-N and
NO^-N from NH^NO^ had leached down to the 45- to 60-cm
depth (Fig. 3-B). This suggests that at least a part of
the downward movement involved the un-ionized NH^NO-,
fertilizer. The well-drained nature of Astatula fine sand,
and its low organic matter content could have been factors
contributing to this movement. Some NH^-N and NO^-N from
IBDU had also moved down to the 60-cm zone, but on a smal¬
ler scale relative to NH^NO^.
Ninety-one percent of

Fig. 4. Effect of N source on soil total N at the 1st (A)
and 2nd (B) sampling dates on October 3 and Octo¬
ber 19, 1978, respectively. Mean separation with¬
in depth by Duncan's multiple range test, 1%.
(Expt. 1).

SOIL N, % DRY WT
53

54
the applied N from IBDU remained in the 0- to 60-cm depth
at the third sampling; 82% of the NH^NO^-N could be ac¬
counted for in the same zone. Data for soil total N (Fig.
5-A), although less consistent in the 15- to 45-cm depth
than those for exchangeable NH^ and NO^, supported the
trend in the downward movement of N from both fertilizer
sources.
The final soil sampling was completed 14 weeks after
the trees were fertilized. Much of the N from NH^NO^ had
been depleted from the soil profile (Fig. 3-C). Only 30%
of the applied N from this source remained in the 0- to
60-cm zone. A part of the depletion could be attributed to
root absorption. Soil water contents (Table 9) were gener¬
ally below the maximum water storage capacity; however,
rainfall events of 5.0, 1.3 and 2.6 cm on December 28,
December 29, 1978, and January 3, 1979, respectively,suggest
that leaching of some NH^NO^-N may have occurred beyond the
60-cm depth. Furthermore, provisions were not made in
this study for the determination of gaseous losses of N
which may have also occurred. As in the previous samplings
the concentrations of exchangeable NH^ and NO~ from IBDU
in the 15- to 60-cm depth were lower than those from NH4NC>3
(Fig. 3-C). There was also no indication of IBDU-N having
been leached beyond the 60-cm depth since 66% of the applied
N could be accounted for within this depth. In comparison
to the other N sources, a greater proportion of the IBDU-N
was retained in the surface soil (Fig. 5-B).

Fig. 5. Effect of N source on soil total N at the 3rd (A)
and 4th (B) sampling dates on October 31, 1978, and
January 9, 1979, respectively. Mean separation within
depth by Duncan's multiple range test, 1% (capital let¬
ters) and 5% (lower case letters). (Expt. 1) .

SOIL N, % DRY WT

57
Table 8. Quantitative estimates of evaporation and evapo-
transpiration from mature tree plots.
Period
Rainfall &
irrigation,
cm
Class "A" pan
evaporation
cm/day
Evapotrans-
piration
cm/day
Potential
net leach¬
ing , cm
H2OZ
Oct.
Nov.
1978
25-
9,
4.87
0.39
0.22
+1.35
Nov.
Dec.
1978
9-
12,
2.63
0.32
0.23
-4.96
Dec.
1978-
Feb.
1979
12,
17,
18.40
0.27
0.13
+ 9.69
z
Excess water (+) and deficit (-) to effect percolation.

58
Table 9. Soil water content of young tree plots 24 hr.
after a rainfall or irrigation event.
Sampling
date
Cumulative rainfall
and irrigation, cm
Soil water
(0-60cm),
cm
Field capacity
(0-60cm),cm
Oct.
1978
3,
1.42
3.91
4.18
Oct.
1978
19,
2.26
3.47
4.18
Oct.
1978
31,
4.87
3.77
4.18
Jan.
1979
9,
25.12
4.00
4.18

59
In Experiment 2, sets of soil samples were taken 3
times on April 2, April 27 and May 4, 1979, following 2.28,
9.14 and 17.87 cm, respectively, of cumulative rainfall
and irrigation. These samples were not sufficient for the
determination of exchangeable NH^ and NO^. Soil total N
concentrations in this experiment were higher than those
from Experiment 1 (Figs. 6-8). Contamination from the
regular fall (1978) and spring (1979) fertilization of
adjacent mature trees may have contributed to the higher
soil values in Experiment 2 as compared to Experiment 1.
As in Experiment 1, however, there was a trend towards
decreased soil N content with increasing cumulative rain¬
fall and irrigation (Figs. 6-8).
At the first sampling there was an indication of
some NK^NO^-N having moved to the 60-cm depth (Fig. 6),
while only a small amount of IBDU-N may have moved to the
30-cm depth. Some N from IBDU appeared to have reached
to the 45-cm depth as indicated by the bulge at the second
sampling (Fig. 7), but the data from Experiment 1 (Fig. 3B-
C) suggest that this could be a sampling error or error
inherent in the soil total N procedure. As in Experiment
1, a higher proportion of the N from IBDU, relative to the
other sources, was still retained at the surface soil at
the last sampling (Fig. 8).

.08
2.28 cm cumulative rainfall and irrigation
>- .06
or
o
.04
o
CO
.02
0
I I L |
0-15 15-30 30-45 45-60
DEPTH, cm
Fig. 6. Effect of N source on total soil N at the 1st sampling on April 2,
1979. Mean separation by Duncan's multiple range test, 1%. (Expt. 2). ^
o

SOIL N, % DRY WT
Fig. 7. Effect of N source on total soil N at the 2nd sampling on April 27,
1979. Mean separation by Duncan's multiple range test, 1%.
(Expt. 2).

SOIL N, % DRY WT
Fig. 8. Effect of N source on total soil N at the 3rd sampling on March 4,
1979. Mean separation by Duncan's multiple range test 5%. (Expt. 2).
*>•

63
Recovery of Fertilizer-N in the Soil-Plant System
The recovery of fertilizer-N in the soil profile and
in the tree was calculated by subtracting the N content of
the control from the fertilized plots and expressing it as
a percent of the amount of N applied. For the NH^NO^ treat¬
ment in Experiment 1, both soil total N and inorganic N were
used in the calculations. Data for the inorganic N procedure
indicated that, after 14 weeks, 30% of N apparently remained
in the 0- to 60-cm soil profile where NH^NO^ had been applied
(Table 10). Sixty-six and 41% of N from the IBDU and NH^NO^
sources, respectively, remained in this zone when the cal¬
culations were based on soil total N values. The discrep¬
ancy in the NH^NO^-N figures could have resulted from the
larger errors inherent in the total N procedure as compared
to the inorganic N procedure (12, 13).
In Experiment 2, where the initial soil total N con¬
tents were higher as compared to Experiment 1, the total
amount of N in the 0- to 60-cm depth was also greater
(Table 10). On the basis of total N calculations, 70 and
62% of the applied N were present in the soil from IBDU and
NH^NO^ sources, respectively. Higher soil N recoveries in
this experiment in comparison to those in Experiment 1
probably represented the difference in duration of each
experiment, 6 and 14 weeks, respectively.
The relatively high N recoveries from soil where IBDU
had been applied in both experiments suggested very little,

Table JO. Nitrogen balance sheet and apparent applied N recovery
z
Expt.
N rate N source
Plant
Soil(0-
60cm)
%
N recovery
Total N
Solu-
Plant
Soil
Total
ble N
Total
N
Solu-
ble N
Total
N
Solu-
ble N
- g
Control
1.420
1422.036
8.572
—
—
—
—
201.6g/ IBDTJ-N
90,000cm
3.015
1555.091
—
0.79
65.99
—
66.78
—
1 (14
weeks)
nh4no3-n
4.295
1505.196
53.014
1.42
41.25
30.57
42.67
31.99
Control
1.420
44.691
0.267
—
—
—
—
—
6.33g/„ IBDU-N
2828cm
3.015
48.873
—
25.19
65.99
--
91.18
—
nh4no3-n
4.295
47.305
1.666
45.41
41.25
30.57
86.66
75.98
Control
0.643
2628.330
—
—
—
—
—
—
201.6g/ „ IBDU-N
90,000cm
1.601
2769.727
—
0.47
7Q.17
—
70.64
—
2 (6
nh4no3-n
1.689
2753.083
—
0.52
61.92
62.44
—
weeks)
Control
0.643
82.588
—
—
—
—
—
6.33g/„
2 828cni
IBDU-N
1.601
87.031
—
15.13
70.17
—
85. Q3
—
cn
nh4no3~n
1.689
86.508
—
16.52
61.92
—
78.74
—
“Recovery of N obtained as the difference in total N between unfertilized and fertilized
tree plots and expressed as a % of the amount of N applied.

65
if any, leaching loss of N from this source. Some leaching
of N from NH^NO^ may have occurred. Other complex processes
involved in N reactions, including denitrification and other
gaseous losses, may have contributed to lower soil recover¬
ies of N from NH^NO^ relative to IBDU.
The recovery of N by the tree was calculated for the
2
total area fertilized (90,000 cm ); but as the root sys¬
tem occupied a circular area of less than 60 cm diameter
2
(2828 cm ), N recovery was also calculated for the latter
area. In Experiment 1, on the basis of the smaller area,
25 and 45% of the N added were recovered in those trees
fertilized with IBDU and NH^NO^, respectively. It was only
0.79 and 1.42% for the same respective sources when the
larger area was the basis of calculation. The differences
in N recoveries from the 2 areas imply a higher efficiency
of N use if the fertilizer is applied on a smaller area
around the tree rather than on a larger one where the po¬
tential for N loss may be great.
It has been suggested that plant recovery of N by
the difference method generally yielded higher values com¬
pared to the tracer procedure, presumably because ferti¬
lization may stimulate additional N uptake from soil
sources (109). This might have contributed to the high N
recoveries, particularly where NH^NO^ was the source. The
higher tree recovery of NH^NO^-N appeared to be related to

66
the ready availability of this fertilizer in comparison to
IBDU, a greater proportion of which was retained in the
surface soil.
On the basis of the smaller area calculations, trees
fertilized with IBDU and NH^NO^ in Experiment 2 recovered
only 15 and 16%,respectively of the applied N (Table 10).
Recoveries from the respective sources were 0.47 and 0.52%
for the large area. The lower tree recovery of applied N
in Experiment 2 vs. Experiment 1 was partly related to the
smaller trees used in the former experiment and partly be¬
cause the experiment was run only for 6 weeks. The trees
did not therefore have enough time to absorb N to the same
extent as in Experiment 1. Also, the narrow range in the
recovery of applied N seemed to be due to the fact that
IBDU-fertilized trees were larger than NH^NO^-fertilized
trees. If NH^NO^-fertilized trees had been of equal size,
the difference in the recovery between the 2 fertilizer
sources could have been larger.
A common approach for comparing the relationship of
fertilizer sources with mineral nutrient absorption by
plants in the vegetative growth phase is to relate the to¬
tal dry matter of the plant to its total nutrient content,
i.e., dry weight/total nutrient ratio. The lower this ratio,
the greater the nutrient absorption from that source. As¬
suming the ratio is linear with time, the N status of the
trees was projected by plotting the ratio data for

Projection of relative tree absorption of N from IBDU and
NH^NO^ sources with time. (Expts. 1 and 2).
Fig. 9.

RATIO DRY WT / N

69
Experiments 1 and 2 (Fig. 9). Theoretically, up to 26
weeks after fertilizer-N application NH4NC>3-N would con¬
tinue to be absorbed more than IBDU-N, but after 28 weeks
the reverse would be expected. There is evidence that the
period of extended availability from soluble N sources,
after the initial flush of growth of vegetable crops,
approaches that of the more slowly available N sources
(115). In view of the extremely soluble nature of NH^NO^,
however, most of the N will have probably been depleted
from the soil after 26 weeks.
Total apparent N recovery in the soil-plant system in
Experiment 1 amounted to 76 and 91 for NH4N03~ and IBDU-N,
respectively (Table 10). The total N procedure indicated
a higher recovery of N from the NH4NC>3 plots in comparison
to the soluble N procedure. The apparently variable total
N recovery was probably due to the larger errors associated
with the use of the total N procedure in soil analysis vs.
the soluble N approach (12, 13).
In Experiment 2, where only soil total N was analyzed,
85 and 78% of the added N from IEDU and NH4NO^, respec¬
tively, were apparently recovered in the soil-plant system
when the small area was the basis of calculation. It was
not possible to account for the deficit in N balance in
both experiments. Nevertheless, soil N data in Experiment
1 (Fig. 3A-C) and rainfall events of 5.0, 1.3 and 2.6 cm with¬
in a 6-day period imply that some leaching of N, at least from

70
NH^NO^, may have contributed to the deficit. Processes
involved in the N cycle, including denitrification and
other gaseous losses of N may also have been reflected in
the unaccounted for part of the balance.
Experiment 3
Nitrogen Distribution in Bearing Orange Trees
Fruit yield and estimate of leaf number
Each of the control, IBDU- and NH^NO^-fertilized trees
showed fresh fruit yields of 0.7, 3.7 and 3.7 field boxes
of 40.8 kg, respectively (Table 11). These data indicated
that yields can be severely limited by a lack of N. Ni¬
trogen-fertilized trees had about 4 times as much total
fruit dry weight as the control tree. The unreplicated
nature of the experiment, however, precluded the establish¬
ment of definite conclusions pertaining to the yield data.
Nevertheless, it is generally accepted that increased N
supply results in increased citrus fruit yield. Data from
a Florida experiment (87) with 'Pineapple' orange showed
that as the rate of N was increased, up to 202 kg/ha/year,
yield increased.
The estimated leaf number of the fertilized trees was
in reasonable agreement with the 70,200 leaves estimated
by Barnette et al_. (5) for a grapefruit tree in Florida,
but lower than the 92,708 leaves sampled from a 12-year-old
'Valencia' orange tree in California (110).
Trees in the

Table 11. Mature tree plot yield and N content parameters, and residual soil N.
Treatment
Boxes
fruit/
treez
Total
fruit
dry wt/
tree,kg
Fruit N
content
% dry wt
N re¬
moved in
fruits
g
Esti¬
mated
total
leaf no.
Leaf N
content
% dry wt
Total
leaf
N, g
Soil N,
(0-120 cm)
kg/ploty
Unfertilized
tree
0.7
8.734
0.58
50.657
52,504
1.84
124.900
17.510
IBDU-
fertilized
tree
3.7
34.635
0.71
245.908
81,285
2.17
201.100
17.824
NH4N03-
3.7
35.598
0.74
263.425
73,273
2.36
194.600
17.719
fertilized
tree
2
Field box of fruit equals 40.8 kg.
^Plot area: 6 m diam.

72
California study were, however, larger as indicated by
their height and width. The control tree in the current
study had a lower leaf number than either of the fertilized
trees by virtue of a lesser leaf density which can be at¬
tributed to a lack of N.
Fruit and leaf N content
Several approaches have been used to determine citrus
fertilizer needs. One school of thought advocates return¬
ing to the soil the amount of nutrients removed in the crop
of fruit. Embleton et al. (33) considered this approach
unsound, particularly with respect to the less mobile nu¬
trients. Nevertheless, because they represent part of the
N balance sheet, data related to crop removal of N when
combined with leaf analytical data have a significant po¬
tential for guidance in the N management of citrus groves.
The concentration of N in the fruit from the ferti¬
lized trees was higher than that of the unfertilized trees
(Table 11). As a result, when both total fruit dry weight
and N concentration are considered, the amount of N re¬
moved in fruit was in the order of NH^NO^- > IBDU-fertilized
> control trees. Five times more N was removed in fruit
from fertilized trees as compared to the control tree.
Reitz (89) reported that in Florida 36.3 kg of N are re¬
moved in every 20,400 kg of fresh fruit. Recalculation
of the data in Table 11 indicates that 32.2 and 29.9 kg
of N would be removed in 20,400 kg of fruit from the NH^NO^
and IBDU-fertilized trees, respectively.

73
Leaf N concentration followed the same trend as in the
fruit. Nitrogen concentration for the 3 single-tree plots
was in the order: NH^NO^- > IBDU-fertilized > unfertilized
trees. This clearly reflected the more rapid absorption of
NH^NO^-N over IBDU-N and the control. The total amount of
N in the leaves was, however, slightly larger for the IBDU-
treated tree because of its greater leaf number. It is
doubtful if the greater leaf number is related to IBDU
fertilization since the duration of the experiment was
short. The total amount of N in the leaves of the fertilized
trees was in agreement with the 200 g of N reported by Cam¬
eron and Appleman (20) for a 10-year-old 'Valencia' orange
tree. This close agreement lends added credence to the pro¬
cedure used in this study for estimating the leaf number.
Soil Total N Content and Distribution
Fertilized fallow plots received 33% (235.7 g/b m dia¬
meter area) of the total annual amount of fertilizer-N ap¬
plied to the fertilized tree plots (707.2 g/tree). Three
sets of soil samples were collected: on November 9, December
11, 1978, and February 16, 1979. These sampling dates corres¬
pond to cumulative rainfall and irrigation of 4.87, 7.50 and
25.90 cm, respectively, since October 25, 1978. Samples were
not sufficient for the determination of exchangeable NH^ and
NO^; hence, only the total N procedure was used.
At the first sampling, some N from both IBDU and NH^NO^
appeared to have moved at least down to the 45-cm depth in

74
the fallow plots (Fig. 10). The amount of NH^NO^-N
leached, as reflected by the lower concentration in the 0-
to 15-cm depth and higher concentration in the 15- to 45-
cm zone, was greater than that of IBDU-N. In the ferti¬
lized tree plots, NH^NO^-N appeared to be depleted rapidly
from the 0- to 15-cm zone, while a considerable amount of
IBDU still remained in this zone (Fig. 11). The apparent
rapid depletion of NH^NO^-N from this zone could be attri¬
buted to root absorption in view of the readily available
nature of NH^NO^ fertilizer. Higher N concentrations, par¬
ticularly for the IBDU treatment, in the 75- to 105-cm
depth, as compared to the control, could have been due to
the residual N from previous applications.
Data for the second sampling date (Fig. 12) suggest
that some N from both fertilizer sources has leached to the
120-cm depth in the fertilized plots. Soil water contents
(Table 12) and evapotranspiration data (Table 8) also tend
to support this. Since the movement of N, particularly
NO^-N, in uncropped soils is closely related to water move¬
ment in the profile (106), it is likely that some N leached
past the 120-cm depth. In the mature tree plots, there was
evidence that some N had moved at least to the 75-cm
depth when NH^NO^ was the fertilizer applied (Fig. 13). It
is difficult to trace the movement of N in the soil pro¬
file in the presence of a tree, however, because of root
absorption.-

Fig. 10. Effect of N source on total soil N of fallow plots at the 1st sampling
on November 9, 1978. (Expt. 3). -J

Fig. 11. Effect of N source on total soil N of tree plots at the 1st sampling on
November 9, 1978. (Expt. 3).
CTl

SOIL N, % DRY WT
.06-
.0 4 -
.02 -
0 -
Fig. 12.
7. 50 c m of cumulative rainfall and irrigation
* * FALLOW CONTROL
o o FALLOW I B DU-N
0 -15 15-30 30-45 45-60 60^75 75-90 9 0-105 105-120
DEPTH,cm
Effect of N source on total soil N of fallow plots at the 2nd sampling
on December 11, 1978. (Expt. 3).

Table 12. Soil water
irrigation
content in the
event.
mature tree
plots 24
hr. after a
rainfall
or
Cumulative Depth
Soil water content, % by vol
•
rainfall cm
and
Unfertilized
IBDU
NH4N03
Unfertilized
IBDU
nh4no3
irrigation
fallow
fallow
fallow
tree
tree
tree
cm
0-15
6.89
6.96
7.74
6.45
5.17
4.14
15-30
5.88
6.27
6.01
4.66
3.41
3.82
30-45
6.06
5.94
5.81
5.10
3.76
3.30
4.87 45-60
5.99
5.78
6.00
4.61
4.42
4.30
60-75
5.86
6.02
5.95
4.13
4.88
2.89
75-90
5.98
5.92
6.42
3.93
4.44
2.52
90-105
6.57
6.08
6.38
3.55
4.20
2.48
105-120
6.26
6.30
6.62
3.51
3.42
4.47
Profile water content,
7.41
7.38
7.63
5.38
5.05
4.18
cm
0-15
5.05
5.72
5.46
3.62
5.32
3.79
15-30
6.60
9.90
7.42
3.05
5.18
4.70
30-45
6.67
8.80
6.11
4.06
3.06
3.53
7.50 45-60
6.43
6.91
8.35
3.10
4.76
4.04
60-75
7.13
8.63
7.15
5.03
6.11
4.45
75-90
6.60
7.43
7.91
3.97
4.48
4.39
90-105
7.23
7.73
8.20
3.43
4.24
4.07
105-120
7.84
7.97
8.15
3.49
5.46
3.66
*4
00

Table 12 (continued)
Cumulative
Depth
cm
Soil water content, %
by vol.
rainfall
Unfertilized
IBDU
nh4no3
Unfertilized
IBDU NH4N°3
and
irrigation
cm
fallow
fallow
fallow
tree
tree tree
Profile water
content, cm
8.02
9.45
8.80
4.45
5.78
4.88
0-15
5.28
5.16
4.92
5.85
3.94
4.86
15-30
6.62
7.64
6.65
6.11
4.80
6.55
30-45
6.41
6.55
6.31
6.05
5.36
5.94
25.90 45-60
6.21
6.75
6.24
6.14
5.54
6.41
60-75
6.21
6.65
6.84
6.14
6.24
6.58
75-90
6.14
6.58
6.82
6.70
6.58
6.75
90-105
6.25
7.21
6.73
6.27
6.51
6.93
105-120
6.18
6.70
6.85
6.62
6.81
6.65
Profile water
content, cm
7.39
7.98
7.70
7.50
5.86
7.59

Fig. 13. Effect of N source on total soil N of tree plots at the 2nd sampling on
December 11, 1978. (Expt. 3).

81
As in Experiments 1 and 2, soil total N content gener¬
ally decreased with time in the tree plots partly because
of tree absorption of N. At the last sampling, almost all
of the applied NH^NO^-N in the fallow and tree plots had
dissipated from the 0- to 15-cm depth, but considerable
IBDU-N remained (Figs. 14 and 15).
Recovery of Fertilizer-N in the Soil, Fruit and Leaf
The recovery of applied N in the soil, fruit and leaf
was calculated by the difference procedure used in both
Experiments 1 and 2. Compared to the young tree experi¬
ments , however, less confidence can be expected in the N
recovery data for Experiment 3. The absence of replica¬
tions in the mature tree experiment precluded the estab¬
lishment of plausible conclusions. Furthermore, since the
trees had been fertilized for several years it is diffi¬
cult to separate the effect of previous fertilization on
N contents of tree- parts and the soil. The use of an
empirical procedure in the estimate of leaf total N and
the large sampling and analytical errors associated with
the soil total N procedure are additional factors which
reduce the confidence in the N recovery data.
Nevertheless, the N recovery data (Table 13) may serve
a useful purpose in stimulating additional research. The
proportion of applied N recovered in the 0- to 120-cm soil
depth of the IBDU- and NH^NO^-fertilized mature tree plots
was 44 and 30%, respectively. The fruits accounted for
27 and 30% of applied N, and the leaves, 11 and 10%

Fig. 14. Effect of N source on total soil N of fallow plots at the 3rd sampling
on February 16, 1979. (Expt. 3).

.00
25.90 cm of cumulative rainfall and irrigalion
o
CO
.02
* * CONTROL TREE
0 1 1 1 1 i i i i
0-15 15-30 30-4 5 4 5-60 60-75 75-90 90-105 105-120
DEPTH ,cm
Fig. 15. Effect of N source on total soil N of tree plots at the 3rd sampling
on February 16, 1979. (Expt. 3).

84
Table 13.
Apparent
plots.z
applied N
recovery
(%) in mature tree
Treatment
Fruits
Leaves
Soil Total
IBDU-fertilized 27.60
tree
NH^NO-^-f ertilized 30.08
tree
10.77 44.00 82.77
9.85 29.55 69.48
Calculated from the difference in N content, for each N
balance component, between the control and fertilized tree
plots and expressed as the % of the amount of N applied.

85
for the same respective sources. The apparent total re¬
covery of applied N when fruits, leaves and the soil are
considered amounted to 83% for the IBDU treatment, and 69%
for the NH^NO^ treatment.
It is suggested that the deficits in the N balance
could be partly accounted for in the permanent structures
of the tree. Smith (100) estimated that 31% of the total
N was found in the leaves of 15-year-old 'Valencia' orange
trees in Florida. On this basis, control, IBDU- and NH^NO^-
treated trees in this experiment would contain 402, 648
and 627 g of N, respectively. It was also indicated that
42% of the total N of the tree was found in parts other
than leaves and fruit (100). On the basis of this assump¬
tion 13 and 12% of the applied N would be expected to be in
tree parts other than fruits and leaves for IBDU- and NH^NO,-
treated trees, respectively. When these figures are added
to the measured recovery of applied N, 95 and 81% of ap¬
plied N from IBDU and NH^NO^ sources, respectively, could
be accounted for in the soil-plant system. No account
could be made for the remaining 5-19%.
These apparently high recoveries of applied N may in¬
dicate that the trees had absorbed some N already present
in the soil in addition to that applied in this study.
Also, substantial leaching of N may not have been signifi¬
cant. Although the potential for the leaching of N exis¬
ted (Table 8), the large root systems of the mature t
rees

86
may have absorbed a greater portion of the applied N as
it moved in the soil profile.
In view of the low nutrient retaining capacity of
Florida soils planted to citrus, it has often been sugges-
t ed that the efficiency of N utilization by citrus is very
low (25-30%). In the current study, however, higher re¬
coveries for both young (45%) and bearing (40%) trees are
reported when NH^NO^ was the N source. These high recover¬
ies imply that citrus trees may be absorbing a greater pro¬
portion of fertilizer-N than previously suspected. The
unreplicated nature and short duration of the mature tree
experiment, however, call for additional adequately repli¬
cated experiments. Moreover, it would be beneficial to in¬
vestigate the N balance of young citrus trees over a period
longer than the ones used in this study.

CONCLUSIONS
1. Growth parameters of young citrus trees in short-term
experiments, trunk diameter increase, and dry weights
of tree component parts and the entire tree, showed no
statistical differences due to N sources. There was
a trend, however, for N from IBDU and NH^NO^ sources to
result in greater dry matter, particularly in the more
succulent aerial parts, when compared to the control.
Leaves from fertilized trees in both fall-winter and
spring studies were statistically greater in total dry
weight than those from the unfertilized leaves. The
apparent lack of statistical differences in growth
parameters due to N source was probably related to the
short duration of the studies. The trees did not have
sufficient time to respond to the treatments.
2. The dry weights of certain tree components as a percent of
the total plant were statistically different due to N
source, but it is doubtful if they were true differ¬
ences because the pattern of dry matter distribution
paralleled that of the dry matter. These differences
were probably the result of selective use of different
size trees for each N source.
87

88
3. There was a highly significant relationship between N
source and N concentration and total N of component
tree parts, and total N content of the entire tree.
In every case, the order was NH^NO^- > IBDU-fertilized
> control trees. This confirms that a soluble N source
such as NH^NO^ is more readily absorbed by the trees
in the short-term than a controlled release form of N.
Other investigations, however, suggested that the ab¬
sorption of N from both fertilizer sources might be
different in longer periods.
4. Regardless of N source, 30-34% of the total tree N was
distributed in fibrous and lateral roots, and 30-33% in
the leaves. This illustrates the importance of recover¬
ing the entire root system as much as practical in
studies of this nature.
5. A greater proportion of the total N in the fertilized
tree was distributed in the aerial parts in the spring
study than in the fall-winter study, indicating that
N absorption and translocation to the aerial parts was
greater in spring.
6. Data related to tree growth and N content parameters,
and soil total N content did not reveal any statistical
differences due to irrigation level in the fall-winter
study. The narrow range and short duration of irriga¬
tion treatments were probably not sufficient to elicit
responses to the treatments.

89
2
7. Nitrogen balance data, based on the 2828 cm plot area,
showed that total apparent N recovery in the soil-
plant system was 91 and 76% for IBDU- and NH^NO^-N,
respectively. Sixty-six and 30% of applied N from
IBDU and NH^NO^ sources, respectively, were retained
in the 0- to 60-cm soil profile. Twenty-five and 45%
from the same respective sources could be accounted for
in the young trees. The remaining 9-24% was presumed
to have been leached or lost to the atmosphere.
8. In the bearing tree study, no difference was detected
in fruit yield between IBDU and NH^NO^ sources. Fer¬
tilized trees, however, had about 4 times as much
yield as the unfertilized tree.
9. The relatively high recovery of applied N in young and
bearing trees suggest that substantial leaching of N
may not be a major route for N loss from citrus groves
established on deep-well drained soils when the ferti¬
lizer is applied over the root zone at reasonable
rates.
10.A major portion of IBDU-N was retained in the Q- to
15-cm depth, yet the growth response of the IBDU-
fertilized young trees was similar to that of NH^NO^-
fertilized trees. There is, therefore, a potential for
a single application of IBDU to nonbearing young citrus
trees which are normally fertilized several times a

90
order to establish if a single application of IBDU is
feasible from the standpoint of economy and horticul¬
tural considerations.

LITERATURE CITED
1. Adriano, D.C., F.H. Takatori, P.F. Pratt, and O.A.
Lorenz. 1972. Soil N balance in selected row-
crop sites in Southern California. J. Environ.
Qual. 1:278-283.
2. Allison, F.E. 1955. The enigma of soil nitrogen bal¬
ance sheets. Adv. Agron. 7:214-250.
3. Avnimelech, Y., and J. Raveh. 1976. Nitrate leakage
from soils differing in texture and nitrogen
load. J. Environ. Qual. 5:79-81.
4. Banwart, W.L., M.A. Tabatabai, and J.M. Bremner. 1972.
Determination of ammonium in soil extracts and
water samples by an ammonia electrode. Comm. Soil
Sci. Plant Anal. 3:449-458.
5.Barnette, R.M., E.F. Debusk, J.B. Hester, and H.W.
Jones. 1931. The mineral analysis of a nineteen-
year-old 'Marsh' seedless grapefruit. Citrus
Indus. 12(3):5-6, 34.
6.Bartholomew, W.V., L.B. Nelson, and C.H. Werkman.
1950. The use of nitrogen isotope N-15 in field
studies with oats. Agron. J. 42:100-103..
7.
Biggar, J.W. 1978. Spatial variability of N in soils,
p. 201-211. In D.R. Neilsen, and J.G. Macdonald
(eds.). Nitrogen in the environment. Vol. I.
Nitrogen behavior in field soil. Acad. Press,
N.Y., San Francisco, Lond.
Bingham, F.T., S. Davis, and E. Shade. 1971. Water
relations, salt balance, and nitrate leaching
losses of a 960-acre citrus watershed. Soil
Sci. 112:410-418.
9. Bjorkman, E., G. Lundeberg, and H. Nommik. 1967.
Distribution and balance of N-15 labelled ferti¬
lizer nitrogen applied to young pine trees
(Pinus sylvestris L.). Studia Forestalia Seu-
cica, 43:1-23.
91

92
10. Bower, C.A., and L.V. Wilcox. 1969. Nitrate content
of the Upper Rio Grande as influenced by nitrogen
fertilization of adjacent irrigated lands. Proc.
Soil Sci. Soc. Amer. 33:971-973.
11. Brams, E.A., and J.G.A. Fiskell. 1967. Variability
of root and soil analyses of a 'Valencia' grove
sampled in January. Proc. Fla. State Hort. Soc.
80:32-37.
12. Bremner, J.M. 1965. Total nitrogen. p. 1149-1178.
In C.A. Black (ed.). Methods of soil analysis.
Part 2. Agronomy 9. Amer. Soc. Agron., Madison,
Wise.
13. . 1965. Inorganic forms of nitrogen. p.
1179-1237. In C.A. Black (ed.). Methods of
soil analysis. Part 2. Agronomy 9. Amer. Soc.
Agron., Inc., Madison, Wise.
14. Cahoon, G.A., and L.H. Stolzy. 1959. Estimating root
density in citrus orchards by the neutron modera¬
tion method. Proc. Amer. Soc. Hort. Sci. 74:
322-327.
15. . 1960. Citrus root density in relation
to water use. Calif. Citrog. 45:318, 323.
16. Calvert, D.V. 1975. Nitrate, phosphate, and potas¬
sium movement into drainage lines under 3 soil
management practices. J. Environ. Qual. 4:
183-186.
17. , and H.J. Reitz. 1964. Effects of rate
and frequency of fertilizer applications on
yield and quality of 'Valencia' oranges in the
Indian River area. Proc. Fla. State Hort. Soc.
77:36-41.
18. , and H.T. Phung. 1971. Nitrate-nitrogen
movement into drainage lines under different
soil management systems. Proc. Soil and Crop
Sci. Soc. Fla. 31:229-232.
19. Cameron, S.H., and O.C. Compton. 1945. Nitrogen in
bearing orange trees. Proc. Amer. Soc. Hort.
Sci. 46:60-68.
, and D. Appleman. 1933. The distribution
of total nitrogen in the orange tree. Proc.
Amer. Soc. Hort. Sci. 30:341-348.
20.

93
21. Carlton, A.B., and A.A.R. Hafez. 1973. N-14 nitrogen
fertilizer tracing experiments in San Joaquin
Valley. Calif. Agr. 27(11):10-13.
22. Chapman, H.D. 1968. Mineral nutrition of citrus. p.
127-289. In W. Reuther, L.D. Batchelor, and H.J.
Webber (eds.). Citrus industry, Rev. ed. II.
Univ. Calif., Div. Agr. Sci., Berkeley, Calif.
23. Colman, E.A. 1946. A laboratory study of lysimeter
drainage under controlled soil moisture tension.
Soil Sci. 62:365-382.
24. Cooper, D.R., D.G. Hill-Cottingham, and C.P. Lloyd-
Jones. 1976. Distribution and identity of
labelled products following autumn application
of N-15-labelled urea or potassium nitrate fer¬
tilizers to apple trees. J. Sci. Food Agr.
27:266-272.
25. Cooper, W.C., A Peynado, J.R. Furr., R.H. Hilgeman,
G.A. Cahoon, and S.B. Boswell. 1963. Tree
growth and fruit quality of 'Valencia' oranges
in relation to climate. Proc. Amer. Soc. Hort.
82:180-192.
26. DeVitt, D., J. Letey, L.J. Lund, and J.W. Blair. 1976.
Nitrate-nitrogen movement through soil as affected
by soil profile characteristics. J. Environ.
Qual. 5:283-288.
27. Duke, H.R., and H.R. Haise. 1973. Vacuum extractors
to assess deep percolation losses and chemical
constituents of water. Proc. Soil Sci. Soc.
Amer. 37:963-964.
28. Edwards, P.P., and R.D. Hauck. 1974. Nitrogen-15-
depleted versus nitrogen-15-enriched ammonium sul¬
fate as tracers in nitrogen uptake studies.
Proc. Soil Sci. Soc. Amer. 38:765-767.
29. Embleton, T.W., and W.W. Jones. 1978. Nitrogen fer¬
tilizer management programs, nitrate-pollution
potential, and orange productivity. p. 275-
295. In D.R. Nielsen and J.G. MacDonald (eds.).
Nitrogen in the environment. Vol. I. Nitrogen
behavior in field soil. Acad. Press., N.Y.,
San Francisco, Lond.
. 1974. Foliar-applied nitrogen for citrus.
J. Environ. Qual. 3:338-391.
30.

94
31. , and R.L. Branson. 1974. Leaf analysis
proves useful in increasing efficiency of nitrogen
fertilization of oranges and reducing nitrate
pollution potential. Comm. Soil Sci. Plant
Anal. 5(5):437-442.
32. , C.K. Labanauskas, and W. Reuther. 1973.
Leaf analysis as a diagnostic tool and guide to
fertilization. p. 183-210, 447-495. In W.
Reuther (ed.). Citrus industry, Rev. ed. III.
Univ. Calif. Div. Agr. Sci., Berkeley, Calif.
33. , H.J. Reitz, and W.W. Jones. 1973. Citrus
fertilization. p. 122-182. In W. Reuther (ed.).
Citrus industry, Rev. ed. III. Univ. Calif.
Div. Agr. Sci., Berkeley, Calif.
34. Erickson, A.E., and B.G. Ellis. 1971. The nutrient
content of drainage water from agricultural
land. Mich. State Univ. Agr. Expt. Sta., East
Lansing, Res. Bull. 31.
35. Forbes, R.B., C.C. Hortenstine, and F.W. Bistline.
1974. Nitrogen, Potassium and soluble salts
in the soil solution in a Blanton fine sand.
Soil and Crop Sci. Soc. Fla. 33:202-204.
36. Gallagher, P.E., and W.V. Bartholomew. 1964. Com¬
parison of nitrate production and other proce¬
dures in determining nitrogen availability in
southeastern Coastal Plain soils. Agron. J.
56:179-184.
37. Graetz, D.A., L.C. Hammond, and J.M. Davidson. 1974.
Nitrate movement in a Eustis fine sand planted to
millet. Proc. Soil and Cron Sci. Soc. Fla. 33:
157-160. "
38. Grasmanis, V.O., and D.J.D. Nicholas. 1971. Annual
uptake of N-15-labelled ammonia and nitrate in
young ’Jonathan' MM104 apple trees grown in solu¬
tion culture. Plant and Soil. 35:95-112.
39. Hagillih, D.A. 1976. The effect of citrus rootstocks
and irrigation level on the efficiency of mineral
nutrient absorption. MS Thesis, Univ. of Fla.,
Gainesville.
40. Hajdukovic, M., M. Jakovljevic, and V. Vagand. 1967.
Comparison of 3 methods of measuring soil mois¬
ture. p. 117-124. In A. Guillon (ed.). Iso¬
tope and radiation techniques in soil physics
and irrigation studies. Proc. Symp. Intern.
Atomic Energy Agency, Vienna.

95
41. Hamamoto, A.D. 1966. Isobutylidene diurea as a slow
acting nitrogen fertilizer and the studies in
this field in Japan. Proc. no. 90. The Ferti¬
lizer Soc., Lond.
42. Harding, R.B., T.W. Embleton, and W.W. Jones. 1963.
Leaching and gaseous loss of N from some non¬
filled California soils. Calif. Citrog. 48:
317-324.
43. Harmsen, G.W., and G.J. Kokenbrander. 1965. Soil in¬
organic nitrogen. p. 43-92. In W.V. Bartholomew,
and F.E. Clark (eds.). Soil nitrogen. Agronomy
10. Amer. Soc., Agron., Madison, Wise.
44. Hauck, R.D. 1967. The use of N-15 in forest soil-
fertilizer nitrogen investigations. p. 64-71.
In G.W. Gengston, R.H. Brendemuehl, W.L. Prit¬
chett, and W.H. Smith (eds.). Forest fertiliza¬
tion — Theory and practice. Tenn. Valley Auth.,
Muscle Shoals, Al.
45. Hill-Cottingham, D.G., and C.P. Lloyd-Jones. 1975.
Nitrogen-15 in apple nutrition investigations.
J. Sci. Food Agr. 26:165-173.
46. Holt, R.F., G.R. Blake, W.B. Wocrhees, D.H. Boelter,
and A.S. Robertson. 1961. Soil moisture survey
of some representative Minnesota soils. U.S.D.A.
ARS, 41-48.
47. Huckle, H.F., F. Sodek, III, and V.W. Carlisle. 1978.
Soil temperature classes, coatings, taxadjuncts
and series correlations. p. 33-43. In V.W.
Carlisle and F.L. Moritz (eds.). Florida soil
identification handbook. Univ. Fla. Coop. Ext.
Serv., Gainesville.
48. Hughes, T.D. 1976. Nitrogen release from isobuty¬
lidene diurea: Soil pH and fertilizer particle
size. Agron. J. 68:103-106.
49. Ito, 0., and K. Kumazawa. 1976. N assimilation in
sunflower leaves and upward and downward transport
of N. Soil Sci. Plant. Nutr. 22 (2):181-189.
50. Jansson, S.L. 1963. Balance sheet and residual ef¬
fects of fertilizer nitrogen in a 6-year-old
study with N-15. Soil Sci. 95:31-37.
Jones, W.W., and P.F. Pratt. 1972. Nitrates below
root zone in Upper Santa Ana Easin orchards.
Citrog. 57 (12) :464-466.
51.

96
52. Koo, R.C.J. 1953. A study of soil moisture in re¬
lation to absorption and transpiration by citrus.
Ph.D. Diss., Univ. Fla., Gainesville.
53. . 1961. The distribution and uptake of soil
moisture in citrus groves. Proc. Fla. State
Hort. Soc. 74:86-90.
54. . 1978. Critique . . . Nitrogen fertilizer
management programs, nitrate-pollution potential,
and orange productivity. p. 303-307. In D.R.
Nielsen and J.G. MacDonald (eds.). Nitrogen in
the environment. Vol. I. Nitrogen behavior in
field soil. Acad. Press, N.Y., San Francisco,
Lond.
55. . 1969. Evapotranspiration and soil mois¬
ture determination as guides to citrus irriga¬
tion. Proc. First Citrus Symp. 111:1725-1730.
56. , and L.C. Hammond. 1964. A comparison of
gravimetric, tensiometric and neutron scattering
methods of measuring water in Lakeland fine sand.
Proc. Soil and Crop Sci. Soc. Fla. 24:63-68.
57. Kubota, S., T. Kato, S. Akao, and C. Bunya. 1976. N-
15 absorption and translocation by Satsuma manda¬
rin trees. III. Behavior of N supplied in early
spring. Chem. Abstr. 95 (5) :31961y.
58. , A. Tadashi, S. Akao, and C. Bunya. 197 6 .
N-15 absorption and translocation by Satsuma man¬
darin trees. IV. Behavior of N supplied in
early summer. Chem. Abstr. 85(5):3192z.
59. Labanauskas, C.K., and M.F. Handy. 1972. Amounts of
nutrients removed by 'Valencia' orange in a
California grove. HortScience. 7:510-511.
60. Letey, J., J.W. Blair, D. Devitt, L.J. Lund, and P.
Nash. 1971. Nitrate-nitrogen in effluent from
agricultural tile drains in California. Hil-
gardia. 45 (9) :289-319.
61. Lund, L.J., D.C. Adriano, and P.F. Pratt. 1974. Ni¬
trate concentration in deep cores as related to
profile characteristics. J. Environ. Qual.
3:78-82.
Lunt, O.R. 1971. Controlled-release fertilizers:
Achievements and potential. J. Agr. Food Chem.
19:797-800. 1
62.

97
63. Marchal, J., and J.J. Lacoeuille. 1969. Bilan mineral
du mandarinier 1Wilking'. Influence de l'etat
vegetatif de 11arbre sur sa composition minerale.
Fruit d'Outre-Mer. 24:299-318.
64. Marsh, A.W. 1973. Irrigation. p. 230-279. In W.
Reuther (ed.). Citrus Industry, Rev. ed. III.
Univ. Calif. Div. Agr. Sci.
65. McGarity, J.W., and J.A. Rajaratnam. 1973. Appara¬
tus for the measurement of losses of N as gas
from the field and simulated field environments.
Soil Biol. Biochem. 5:121-131.
66. Mead, D.J. 1971. Movement of added N and P in a
pine forest ecosystem. Ph.D. Diss., Univ. of
Fla., Gainesville.
67. Milham, P.J., A.S. Awad, R.E. Pauli, and J.H. Bull.
1970. Analysis of plants, soils and waters for
nitrate by using an ion-selective electrode.
Analyst. 95:751-757.
68. Miller, R.J., and D.W. Wolfe. 1978. Nitrogen inputs
and outputs: A valley basin study. p. 163-172.
In D.R. Nielsen and J.G. MacDonald (eds.).
Nitrogen in the environment. Vol. I. Nitrogen
behavior in field soil. Acad. Press, N.Y.,
San Francisco, Lond.
69. , and R.B. Smith. 1976. Nitrogen balance
in the San Joaquin Valley. J. Environ. Qual.
5:274-278.
70. Miller, S.S. 1979. Effect of nitrogen fertilization
and cultural systems on growth and N levels in
'Delicious' apple trees. HortScience. 14(3):
540 (Abstr.).
71. Miner, G.S., J.P. Lilly, and D.L. Terry. 1978. Ni¬
trogen release characteristics of isobutylidene
diurea and its effectiveness as a source of N for
flue-cured tobacco. Agron. J. 70:434-438.
72. Moberg, E.L., D.V. Waddington, and J.M. Duich. 1970.
Evaluation of slow-release N sources on 'Merion'
Kentucky blue grass. Proc. Soil Sci. Soc. Amer.
34:335-339.
Muhammad, S., and K. Kumazawa. 1972. Use of optical
spectrographic N-15 analyses to trace N applied
at the heading stage of rice. Soil Sci. Plant
Nutr. 18 (4):143-146.
73.

98
74. Nelson, L.B., and R.D. Hauck. 1965. Nitrogen fertili
zers: Progress and Problems. Agr. Sci. Rev.
3:38-47.
75. Overrein, L.N. 1969. Lysimeter studies on tracer N
in forest soil: 2. Comparative losses of N
through leaching and volatization after the addi¬
tion of urea-, ammonium-, and nitrate-N-15.
Soil Sci. 107:149-159.
76. Parr, J.F. 1967. Biochemical considerations for
increasing the efficiency of fertilizer nitrogen.
Soil and Fert. 30:207-213.
77. . 1973. Biochemical considerations for
maximizing the efficiency of fertilizer nitrogen.
J. Environ. Qual. 2:75-84.
78. Patten, K.D., and P.A. Domoto. 1979. Effect of
trickle irrigation and nitrogen injection on
apple trees. HortScience, 14(3):538 (Abstr.).
79. Petersen, R.G., and L.D. Calvin. 1965. Sampling, p.
54-72. In C.A. Black (ed.). Methods of soil
analysis. Part I. Agronomy 9. Amer Soc. Agron.
Madison, Wise.
80. Power, J.F. 1968. What happens to fertilizer nitro¬
gen in the soil? J. Soil and Water Conservn.
23(1):10-12.
81. Pratt, P.D., W.W. Jones, and V.E. Hursaker. 1972.
Nitrate in deep soil profiles in relation to
fertilizer rates and leaching volume. J. Envi-
ron. Qual. 1:97-102.
82. , L.J. Lund, and J.M. Rible. 1978. An ap¬
proach to measuring leaching of nitrate from
freely drained irrigated fields. p. 223-265.
In D.R. Nielsen and J.G. MacDonald (eds.).
Nitrogen in the environment. Vol. I. Nitrogen
behavior in field soil. Acad. Press, N.Y.,
San Francisco, Lond.
83. , S. David, and R.G. Sharpless. 1976. A
4-year field trial with animal manures. I.
Nitrogen balances and yields. Hilgardia. 44(5):
99-112.
Pritchett, W.L., C.F. Eno, and M.N. Malik. 1959.
The nitrogen status of the mineral soils of
Florida. Proc. Soil Sci. Soc,. Amer. 23:127-130.
84.

99
85. Rajendra, P., G.B. Rajale, and B.A. Lakhide. 1971.
Nitrification retarders and slow-release nitrogen
fertilizers. Adv. Agron. 23:337-3-3.
86. Raper, C.D., Jr., D.L. Osmond, M. Wann, and W.W. Weeks.
1978. Interdependence of root and shoot activi¬
ties in determining nitrogen uptake of roots.
Bot. Gaz. 139 (3) :289-294.
87. Reese, R.L., and R.C.J. Koo. 1975. N and K effects
on leaf analysis, tree size, and yield of three
major Florida orange cultivars. J. Amer. Soc.
Hort. Sci. 100:195-198.
88. Reitz, H.J. 1956. Timing fertilization of citrus in
the Indian River area. Proc. Fla. State Hort.
Soc. 69:58-64.
89. . 1961. Citrus needs adequate nutrition.
Better crops with plant food 45(4):10-14,
TT.
90. , C.D. Leonard, I. Stewart, R.C.J, Koo, C.A.
Anderson, R.L. Reese, D.V. Calvert, and P.F.
Smith. 1972. Recommended fertilizer and nutri¬
tional sprays for citrus. Univ. Fla. Agr. Exp.
Bul. 536C.
91. Rennie, P.J. 1966. A forest sampling procedure for
nutrient uptake studies. Commonwealth Forest
Rev. 45:119-128.
92. Richards, J.E. 1954. Performance of tensiometers
under citrus trees on Lakeland fine sand. MS
Thesis, Univ. Fla., Gainesville.
93. Richards, L.A.. , and M.R. Huberty. 1941. Moisture
studies under citrus using tensiometers. Proc.
Amer. Soc, Hort. Sci. 30:73-79.
94. , and C.H. Wadleigh. 1952. Soil water and
plant growth. p. 73-251. In B.T. Shaw (ed.).
Soil physical conditions and plant growth.
Agronomy Mono. II. Acad. Press Inc., New York, N.Y.
95. Richards, S.J., and A.W. Marsh. 1961. Irrigation
based on soil suction measurements. Proc. Soil
Sci. Soc. Amer. 25:65-69.
Reikerk, H., and S.P. Gessel. 1965. Mineral cycling
in a Douglas fir forest stand. Health Phys.
11:1363-1369.
96.

100
97. Roston, E.D. 1977. Measuring N loss for denitrifi¬
cation. Calif. Agr. 31(1):12-13.
98. Rothpart, H.A. 1964. Mechanical design and system
handbook. McGraw-Hill Book Co., New York.
99. Smith, P.F. 1966. Leaf analysis of citrus. p. 208-
228. In N.F. Childers (ed.). Temperate to
tropical fruit nutrition. 2nd ed. Horticultural
Publications, Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, New
Jersey.
100. . 1963. Nitrogen—in citrus fertilization.
Citrus Indus. 44(1):9-10.
101. . 1967. Nutritional responses of citrus
grown in a humid climate. Proc. XVII Intern.
Congr. 3:197-214.
102. Spencer, W.F.A., MacKenzie, and F.G. Viets, Jr. 1966.
The relationship between soil tests for available
nitrogen and nitrogen uptake by various irrigated
crops in the western states. Proc. Soil Sci. Soc.
Amer. 30:480-485.
103. Starr, J.L., F.E. Broadbent, and P.R. Stout. 1974.
A comparison of N-15-depleted and N-15-enriched
fertilizers as tracers. Proc. Soil Sci. Soc.
Amer. 38:266-267.
104. Stolzy, L.H., and G.A. Cahoon. 1957. A field-cali¬
brated portable neutron rate meter for measuring
soil moisture in citrus orchards. Proc. Soil
Sci. Soc. Amer. 21:571-575.
105. , and T.E. Szuskiew. 1957. Measurement of
soil moisture. Calif. Agr. ll(4):21-22, 37.
106. Terman, G.L., and S.E. Allen. 1970. Leaching of solu¬
ble and slow-release N and K fertilizers from
Lakeland sand under grass and fallow. Proc.
Soil and Crop Sci. Soc. Fla. 30:130-140.
10 7. Terry, D.L., and C.B. McCants. 1970. Quantitative
prediction of leaching in field soils. Proc.
Soil Sci. Soc. Amer. 34:271-276.
108. Thomas, G.W., and B.J. Barfield. 1974. The unrelia¬
bility of tile effluent for monitoring subsurface
nitrate-nitrogen losses from soils. J. Environ.
Qual. 3:183-185.

101
109.
110.
111.
112.
113.
114.
115.
116.
117.
118.
119.
120.
Tucker, T.C., and R.D. Hauck. 1978. Removal of N by
various irrigated crops. p. 135-167. In P.F.
Pratt (ed.). Proceedings of the national confer¬
ence on the management of nitrogen in irrigated
agriculture. Univ. Calif., Div. Agr. Sci., Davis,
Calif.
Turrel, F.M. 1961. Growth of photosynthetic area of
citrus, Bot. Gaz. 122:285-298.
, M.J. Garber, W.W. Jones, W.C. Cooper, and
R.H. Young. 1969. Growth equations and curves
for citrus trees. Hilgardia. 39 (16):429-445.
Tyler, K.B., and F.E. Broadbent. 1958. N uptake by
ryegrass from 3 tagged ammonium fertilizers.
Proc. Soil Sci. Soc. Amer. 22:231-234.
Van Schreven, D.A. 1970. Leaching of nitrogen and
potassium in polders reclaimed from Lake Ijssel.
Plant and Soil. 33:629-643.
Volk, G.M. 1975. Fertilizers and fertilization.
Univ. Fla. Exten. Serv., Bul 183-B.
, 1954. The value of organic nitrogen in
vegetable fertilizers. Proc. Fla. State Hort.
Soc. 67:153-157. '
, and G.C. Horn. 197 5. Response curves of
various turfgrasses to application of several
controlled-release nitrogen sources. Agron. J.
67:201-204.
, and A.E. Duderk. 1976. Abnormal color
response of turf ryegrass to top-dressed isobuty-
lidene diurea. Agron. J. 68:534-536.
Walker, L.C. 1958. Isotope trace methods in tree
nutrition. 1st North American Forest Soils
Confr. Agr. Exp. Sta. Mich. State Univ., East
Lansing. ~ ~
Wallace, A. 1953. N absorption and translocation by
citrus cuttings at different root temperatures.
Proc. Amer. Soc. Hort. Sci. 61:89-94.
. 1954. Ammonium and nitrate N absorption
by citrus. Soil Sci. 78:89-94.
, W.H. Cameron, and R.T. Mueller. 1951.
Seasonal use and loss of nutrients and dry matter
in orange trees. Proc. Amer. Soc. Hort. Sci.
58:5-10.
121.

102
122. , Z.I. Zidan, R.T. Mueller, and C.P. North.
1954. Translocation of N in citrus trees. Proc.
Amer. Soc. Hort. Sci. 64:87-104.
123. Wander, I.W. 1951. Soil correlations—Composition of
water draining from grove areas. Univ. Fla.
Agr. Exp. Sta. Ann. Rept.
124. Weinbaum, S.A., M.L. Merwin, and T.T. Muraoka. 1978.
Seasonal variation in nitrate uptake efficiency
and distribution of absorbed nitrogen in non¬
bearing prune trees. J. Amer. Soc. Hort. Sci.
103:516-519.
125. Weir, C.C. 1969. Investigations on the mineral nutri¬
tion of citrus in the Caribbean area. Univ. West
Ind., St. Augustine. Tech. Bui. 2.
126. White, E.H., and W.L. Prichett. 1970. Water table
control and fertilization for pine production in
the flatwoods. Univ. Fla. Agr. Exp. Sta. Bui.
74 3 . *
127.Yonemaya, T., and K. Kumazawa. 1974. A kinetic study
of assimilation of N-15-labelled ammonium in rice
seedling roots. Plants and Cell Physiol. 15:
655-661. *
12 8. , K. Komamura, and K. Jumazawa. 1975. N
transport in intact corn roots. Soil Sci. Plant
Nutr. 21(4):371-377.
129. Yuda, E. 1977. Nutritional problems in citrus cul¬
ture in Japan. Proc. Int. Soc. Citriculture.
1:5-9.
130. Zamyatina, V.B., N.I. Borisova, N.M. Varyushkina, S.V.
Burtzeva, and L.I. Kirpaneva. 1968. Investiga¬
tions on the balance and use of N-15-tagged
fertilizer nitrogen by plants in soils. 9th
Intern. Congr. Soil Sci. Trans. II:513-521.
Zidan, Z.I., and A. Wallace. 1954. Concentrations of
5 macronutrient elements in orange fruits col¬
lected at different stages of maturity. Proc.
Amer. Soc. Hort. Sci. 63:53-58.
131.

BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH
Daniel Apollo Hagillih was born January 1, 1946, at
Maridi, Sudan, where he attended his elementary school. He
pursued his intermediate and secondary school studies at
Comboni College, Khartoum, Sudan, until 1962. He then
enrolled at the University of Khartoum until 1965. In
1966, he studied French at Lovanium University, Zaire, and
became a teacher. Later, he attended the University of
Khartoum again and graduated in 1972 with the degree of
Bachelor of Science in Agriculture.
Since then he has been employed as a research assis¬
tant in the Horticultural Section of the Agricultural
Research Corporation of the Sudan. In 1974, this body
sponsored his graduate training in the Department of Fruit
Crops of the University of Florida where he obtained the
degree of Master of Science in 1976. He continued to pur¬
sue his graduate training in this department where he is
currently a candidate for the degree of Doctor of Philoso¬
phy.
Daniel Apollo Hagillih is a member of the Agricultural
Society and the Horticultural Society of the Sudan.
103

I certify that I have read this study and that in my
opinion it conforms to acceptable standards of scholarly
presentation and is fully adequate, in scope and quality,
as a dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy.
R.C.J. Koo, Chairman
Professor of Horticultural
Science
I certify that I have read this study and that in my
opinion it conforms to acceptable standards of scholarly
presentation and is fully adequate, in scope and quality,
as a dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy.
A.H. Kre
Professo
cultural 'Science
Horti-
I certify that I have read this study and that in my
opinion it conforms to acceptable standards of scholarly
presentation and is fully adequate, in scope and quality,
as a dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy.
W.S. Castle
Assistant Professor of Horti¬
cultural Science

I certify that I have read this study and that in my
opinion it conforms to acceptable standards of scholarly
presentation and is fully adequate, in scope and quality,
as a dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy.
N. Gammon, Jr. [/
Professor Emeritus of Soil
Science
This dissertation was submitted to the Graduate Fac¬
ulty of the College of Agriculture and to the Graduate
Council, and was accepted as partial fulfillment of the
requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy.
March 1980
cuk &
Dean/7 College of Agriculture
Dean, Graduate School

UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA
3 1262 08554 2933




PAGE 1

7+( )$7( 2) )(57,/,=(51 $33/,(' 72 $ )/25,'$ &,7586 62,/ %\ 'DQLHO $SROOR +DJLOOLK $ ',66(57$7,21 35(6(17(' 72 7+( *5$'8$7( &281&,/ 2) 7+( 81,9(56,7< 2) )/25,'$ ,1 3$57,$/ )8/),//0(17 2) 7+( 5(48,5(0(176 )25 7+( '(*5(( 2) '2&725 2) 3+,/2623+< 81,9(56,7< 2) )/25,'$

PAGE 2

$&.12:/('*(0(176 7KH DXWKRU ZLVKHV WR H[SUHVV KLV JUDWLWXGH DQG DSSUHn FLDWLRQ WR 'U 5&.RR WKH FKDLUPDQ RI KLV VXSHUYLVRU\ FRPPLWWHH IRU KLV SDWLHQW JXLGDQFH LQ WKH H[HFXWLRQ RI WKLV UHVHDUFK DQG WKH SUHSDUDWLRQ RI WKH PDQXVFULSW 7KURXJKRXW WKH JUDGXDWH WUDLQLQJ RI WKH DXWKRU 'U .RR VWULYHG WR LPSULQW RQ WKH DXWKRU DQ DSSUHFLDWLRQ RI WKH VFLHQWLILF PHWKRG LQ UHVHDUFK 7KH DXWKRU LV HTXDOO\ LQGHEWHG WR 'U $+ .UH]GRUQ 3URIHVVRU (PHULWXV RI )UXLW &URSV ZKR KDG EHHQ WKH &KDLUn PDQ RI KLV VXSHUYLVRU\ FRPPLWWHH (YHQ LQ UHWLUHPHQW 'U .UH]GRUQ FRQWLQXHG WR VHUYH RQ WKLV FRPPLWWHH DQG WR ZLOOn LQJO\ JLYH RI KLV WLPH FRXQVHO DQG VXSSRUW 7R 'U :6 &DVWOH D PHPEHU RI KLV FRPPLWWHH WKH DXWKRU RZHV D GHEW RI JUDWLWXGH DQG DSSUHFLDWLRQ IRU KLV YDOXDEOH FRQWULEXn WLRQ LQ VXJJHVWLRQV FRXQVHO DQG LQYROYHPHQW LQ DLO SKDVHV RI WKLV VWXG\ 6LQFHUH DSSUHFLDWLRQ LV H[WHQGHG WR 'U 1 *DPPRQ -U 3URIHVVRU (PHULWXV RI 6RLO &KHPLVWU\ IRU KLV FRQVWUXFn WLYH FULWLFLVP DQG FRXQVHO SDUWLFXODUO\ LQ WKH VRLO DVSHFW RI WKH UHVHDUFK 7KH DXWKRU DOVR ZLVKHV WR WKDQN 'U '$ *UDHW] IRU KLV DVVLVWDQFH LQ WKH DQDO\VLV RI VRLO VDPSOHV

PAGE 3

7KH JUDGXDWH WUDLQLQJ RI WKH DXWKRU ZDV VSRQVRUHG E\ WKH $JULFXOWXUDO 5HVHDUFK &RUSRUDWLRQ RI WKH 6XGDQ 7RZDUGV WKH HQG RI KLV WUDLQLQJ WKH 'HSDUWPHQW RI )UXLW &URSV RIIHUHG WKH DXWKRU D JUDGXDWH DVVLVWDQWVKLS .H JUDWHn IXOO\ DFNQRZOHGJHV WKH ILQDQFLDO VXSSRUW IURP ERWK )LQDOO\ WKH DXWKRU ZLVKHV WR WKDQN 0V -DQLFH / &DPEULGJH IRU KHU FRPSDQLRQVKLS DQG HQFRXUDJHPHQW WKURXJKn RXW WKH GXUDWLRQ RI WKLV VWXG\ LQ

PAGE 4

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

PAGE 5

$EVWUDFW RI 'LVVHUWDWLRQ 3UHVHQWHG WR WKH *UDGXDWH &RXQFLO RI WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ RI )ORULGD LQ 3DUWLDO )XOILOOPHQW RI WKH 5HTXLUHPHQWV IRU WKH 'HJUHH RI 'RFWRU RI 3KLORVRSK\ 7+( )$7( 2) )(57,/,=(51 $33/,(' 72 $ )/25,'$ &,7586 62,/ %\ 'DQLHO $SROOR +DJLOOLK 0DUFK &KDLUPDQ 'U 5&.RR 0DMRU 'HSDUWPHQW +RUWLFXOWXUDO 6FLHQFH 7KH IDWH RI IHUWLOL]HU1 DSSOLHG WR $VWDWXOD ILQH VDQG ZDV VWXGLHG E\ WKH GHVWUXFWLYH 6DPSOLQJ RI \HDUROG n3LQHn DSSOHn RUDQJH &LWUXV VLQHQVLV >/@ 2VEHFNf WUHHV RQ n$OHPRZn & PDFURSK\OOD :HVWHUf DQG WKURXJK VRLO FKHPLFDO DQDO\VLV XVLQJ WKH GLIIHUHQFH PHWKRG 7KH IDOOZLQWHU VWXG\ LQYROYHG XQIHUWLOL]HG FRQWURO LVREXW\OLGHQH GLXUHD ,%'8f DQG 1+A12A VRXUFHV LQ D IDFWRULDO FRPELQDWLRQ ZLWK QR LUULJDWLRQ ORZ DQG KLJK LUULJDWLRQ OHYHOV 1LWURJHQ VRXUFH DQG LUULJDWLRQ WUHDWPHQWV ODVWHG IRU DQG ZHHNV UHVSHFWLYHO\ 7KH VSULQJ VWXG\ LQYROYHG RQO\ WKH 1 VRXUFHV DQG ODVWHG IRU ZHHNV /HDI DQG IUXLW VDPSOLQJ RI EHDULQJ n3LQHDSSOHn RUDQJH WUHHV IHUWLOL]HG ZLWK WKH VDPH 1 VRXUFHV DQG VRLO Y

PAGE 6

&KHPLFDO DQDO\VLV RI WKH XQUHSOLFDWHG WUHH SORWV ZHUH DOVR XVHG 6RLO ZDWHU FRQWHQW LQ DOO H[SHULPHQWV ZDV GHWHUPLQHG E\ D QHXWURQ SUREH 7KH UHVXOWV LQGLFDWHG WKDW JURZWK SDUDPHWHUV RI WKH \RXQJ WUHHV LQFOXGLQJ SHUFHQW WUXQN GLDPHWHU LQFUHDVH GU\ ZHLJKWV RI FRPSRQHQW SDUWV DQG WKH HQWLUH WUHH VKRZHG QR VWDWLVWLFDO GLIIHUHQFHV DWWULEXWHG WR 1 VRXUFH DSSDUHQWO\ EHFDXVH RI WKH VKRUW GXUDWLRQ RI WKH VWXGLHV 7KHUH ZDV KRZHYHU D WUHQG IRU ,%'8 DQG 1+A1&X IHUWLOL]DWLRQ WR UHn VXOW LQ JUHDWHU GU\ PDWWHU SDUWLFXODUO\ LQ WKH PRUH VXFFXn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

PAGE 7

1LWURJHQ EDODQFH GDWD VKRZHG WKDW DQG b RI DSn SOLHG 1 IURP ,%'8 DQG 1(A12A UHVSHFWLYHO\ ZHUH UHWDLQHG LQ WKH WR *FP VRLO SURILOH 7ZHQW\ILYH DQG b IURP WKH VDPH UHVSHFWLYH VRXUFHV ZHUH DFFRXQWHG IRU LQ WKH \RXQJ WUHHV 7RWDO DSSDUHQW 1 UHFRYHU\ LQ WKH VRLOSODQW V\Vn WHP ZDV DQG b IRU ,%'8 DQG 1+A12A1 UHVSHFWLYHO\ 7KH GHILFLW ZDV DVVXPHG WR KDYH EHHQ OHDFKHG DQGRU ORVW WR WKH DWPRVSKHUH 7KHUH ZDV QR GLIIHUHQFH LQ IUXLW \LHOG EHWZHHQ ,%'8 DQG 1+A12AIHUWLLL]HG EHDULQJ WUHHV )HUWLOL]HG WUHHV KRZHYHU \LHOGHG WLPHV DV PXFK DV WKH FRQWURO )UXLW 1 FRQFHQWUDWLRQ DQG UHPRYDO DQG OHDI 1 FRQFHQWUDWLRQ ZHUH LQ WKH RUGHU RI 1+A12A ,%'8IHUWLOL]HG XQIHUWLOL]HG WUHH 7KH DEVHQFH RI UHSOLFDWLRQ SUHFOXGHG WKH HVWDEOLVKn PHQW RI D SODXVLEOH 1 EDODQFH 1HYHUWKHOHVV b RI WKH DSSOLHG 1 ZDV HVWLPDWHG WR EH FRQWDLQHG LQ WKH IUXLWV DQG OHDYHV +LJK 1 UHFRYHULHV RQ H[SHULPHQWDO SORWV LQYROYLQJ \RXQJ QRQEHDULQJ DQG EHDULQJ WUHHV VXJJHVW FKDW VXEVWDQWLDO OHDFKn LQJ RI 1 PD\ QRW EH D PDMRU URXWH IRU 1 ORVV IURP FLWUXV JURYHV HVWDEOLVKHG RQ GHHS ZHOOGUDLQHG VRLOV ZKHQ UHDVRQn DEOH UDWHV RI IHUWLOL]HU1 DUH DSSOLHG RYHU WKH URRW ]RQH 7KH SRWHQWLDO IRU D VLQJOH DSSOLFDWLRQ RI ,%'8 WR \RXQJ FLUUXV WUHHV ZKLFK DUH QRUPDOO\ IHUWLOL]HG VHYHUDO WLPHV D \HDU QHHGV IXUWKHU VWXG\ YL

PAGE 8

,1752'8&7,21 )ORULGDnV VDQG\ VRLOV SODQWHG WR FLWUXV DUH FKDUDFWHUn L]HG E\ ORZ QDWLYH IHUWLOLW\ ZKLFK QHFHVVLWDWHV WKH UHJXn ODU DGGLWLRQ RI IHUWLOL]HU QXWULHQWV WR PDLQWDLQ D FRPn PHUFLDO OHYHO RI SURGXFWLRQ 6XFK DQ HGDSKLF HQYLURQPHQW LV DOVR FRQGXFLYH WR WKH VXEVWDQWLDO OHDFKLQJ RI PLQHUDO 1 E\ UDLQIDOO DQG LUULJDWLRQ f 6RLO WHVWV ZKLFK PHDVXUH 1 FDUU\RYHU IURP SUHYLRXV 1 DGGLWLRQV DUH RI OLWWOH YDOXH LQ WKHVH VRLOV $V D UHVXOW WKH UHSODFHPHQW RI QXWULHQWV LQFOXGLQJ 1 ORVW IURP WKH VRLO LV JHQHUDOO\ GHSHQGHQW XSn RQ DQ HYDOXDWLRQ RI WKH QHHG RI WKH FURS 7KH 1 UHTXLUHPHQW RI FRPPHUFLDO FLWUXV FXOWLYDUV LV EDVHG RQ PDQ\ ORQJWHUP LQYHVWLJDWLRQV LQ ZKLFK WUHH JURZWK DQG \LHOG ZHUH UHODWHG WR IHUWLOL]HU UDWH VRXUFH WLPH RI DSSOLFDWLRQ DQG OHDI 1 FRQWHQW 1LWURJHQ XSWDNH E\ WKH FLWUXV WUHH LV FRQVLGHUHG WR EH D VPDOO SDUW RI WKH WRWDO 1 ORVV IURP WKH GHHS VDQG\ VRLOV RI FHQWUDO )ORULGD f 7KH HIILFLHQF\ RI WUHH 1 XWLOL]DWLRQ LH WKH SURSRUn WLRQ RI 1 XVHG E\ WKH WUHH FRPSDUHG WR WKDW DSSOLHG KDV EHHQ HVWLPDWHG WR EH b $V D UHVXOW WKHUH LV SXEOLF DQG JURZHU FRQFHUQ UHJDUGLQJ WKH TXDQWLWDWLYH H[WHQW RI WKH OHDFKLQJ ORVV RI 1 DSSOLHG WR FLWUXV /HDFKHG 1 UHSUHVHQWV DQ LUUHWULHYDEOH ORVV RI D FRVWO\ UHVRXUFH DQG PD\

PAGE 9

FRQWULEXWH WR WKH 12A SROOXWLRQ RI XQGHUJURXQG ZDWHU DQG WR ODNH HXWURSKLFDWLRQ 1R PHDQLQJIXO 1 EDODQFH VWXGLHV LH DFFRXQWLQJ TXDQWLWDWLYHO\ IRU WKH IDWH RI 1 DSSOLHG WR FLWUXV VRLOV DV D IHUWLOL]HU KDYH EHHQ GRQH LQ )ORULGD DV WKH\ KDYH LQ &DOLIRUQLD f ,Q RUGHU WR HQKDQFH RXU XQGHUn VWDQGLQJ RI 1 XVH LQ )ORULGD VRLOV SODQWHG WR FLWUXV LW LV HVVHQWLDO WKDW WKH IDWH RI IHUWLOL]HU1 EH VWXGLHG 7KH SULPDU\ REMHFWLYH RI WKLV UHVHDUFK ZDV WR PDNH D TXDQWLWDWLYH DFFRXQWLQJ RI IHUWLOL]HU1 DSSOLHG WR EHDULQJ DQG \RXQJ WUHHV RQ D GHHS ZHOOGUDLQHG VDQG\ VRLO RI WKH )ORULGD ULGJH DUHD ZKHUH PXFK RI WKH FLWUXV LQ )ORULGD LV JURZQ $ VHFRQG REMHFWLYH ZDV WR HYDOXDWH LVREXW\OLGHQH GLXUHD ,%'8f DV D FRQWUROOHGUHOHDVH 1 IHUWLOL]HU VRXUFH IRU FLWUXV

PAGE 10

/,7(5$785( 5(9,(: 1LWURJHQ %DODQFH DQG ,WV 0DMRU &RPSRQHQWV 3UHOLPLQDU\ 5HPDUNV ,PSRUWDQW VRXUFHV IRU WKH 1 LQ WKH VRLO VROXWLRQ LQn FOXGH IHUWLOL]HU1 DGGLWLRQV DQG QHW PLQHUDOL]DWLRQ 2WKHU VRXUFHV DOVR OLNHO\ WR DGG VRPH 1 WR WKH VRLO VROXWLRQ LQn FOXGH UDLQIDOO LUULJDWLRQ ZDWHU ELRORJLFDO IL[DWLRQ GLIn IXVLRQ RI DWPRVSKHULF DPPRQLD LQWR WKH VRLO VXUIDFH GLUHFW DEVRUSWLRQ RI DWPRVSKHULF DPPRQLD E\ SODQW OHDYHV DQG WUDQVIRUPDWLRQV LQYROYHG LQ WKH 1 F\FOH f 0DMRU VRXUFHV RI 1 UHPRYDO IURP WKH VRLO VROXWLRQ DUH SODQW XSn WDNH OHDFKLQJ QHW IL[DWLRQ LQ WKH VRLO DQG GHQLWULILFDn WLRQ 6PDOOHU ORVVHV RI 1 LQ PRVW DJULFXOWXUDO VRLOV LQn FOXGH JDVHRXV ORVVHV WKURXJK DPPRQLD YRODWLOL]DWLRQ DQG SK\VLFDO UHPRYDO E\ ZLQG DQG DQLPDOV $WWHPSWV WR DFFRXQW IRU WKH IDWH RI DSSOLHG 1 LQ WKH VRLOSODQWDWPRVSKHUH FRQWLQXXP KDYH \LHOGHG VRPH XVHIXO LQIRUPDWLRQ EXW LW LV UDUH WKDW D FRPSOHWH TXDQWLWDWLYH UHFRYHU\ RI DSSOLHG 1 LV REWDLQHG f &DOFXODWLRQ RI D 1 EDODQFH IRU D ILHOG V\VWHP LV SDUWLFXODUO\ GLIILn FXOW EHFDXVH RI WKH PDQ\ SRVVLEOH IDWHV RI 1 LQ VRLOV f DQG EHFDXVH RI WKH SK\VLFDO GLIILFXOWLHV HQFRXQWHUHG LQ

PAGE 11

REWDLQLQJ TXDQWLWDWLYH GDWD IRU VRPH RI WKH PDMRU FRPSRn QHQWV RI D 1 EDODQFH VXFK DV OHDFKLQJ SODQW XSWDNH DQG UHVLGXDO 1 f /HDFKLQJ RI 1 /HDFKLQJ KDV EHHQ GHILQHG DV WKH PRYHPHQW RI VROXWHV IURP RQH VRLO ]RQH WR DQRWKHU E\ SHUFRODWHG ZDWHU f /HDFKLQJ RI 1 LV LPSRUWDQW EHFDXVH LW UHSUHVHQWV WKH ORVV RI D FRVWO\ UHVRXUFH DQG EHFDXVH LW PD\ FRQWULEXWH WR HQn YLURQPHQWDO SROOXWLRQ )HZ PHDVXUHPHQWV KDYH EHHQ UHSRUWHG JLYLQJ DFFXUDWH GDWD FRQFHUQLQJ QXWULHQW ORVV IURP DJULFXOWXUDO ODQGV E\ OHDFKLQJ f 0RVW RI WKH PLQHUDO 1 ORVW E\ OHDFKLQJ LQ FLWUXV RUFKDUGV LV LQ WKH 12A IRUP f 7KH H[WHQW RI 12A ORVV IURP WKH VRLOSODQW V\VWHP GHSHQGV RQ WKH IHUn WLOL]HU PDWHULDO VRLO W\SH SODQW VSHFLHV UDLQIDOO DQG PDQDJHPHQW SUDFWLFHV +LJK LQILOWUDWLRQ UDWHV DQG OHY ZDWHU VWRUDJH FDSDFLWLHV RI VDQG\ VRLOV PDNH WKHP HVSHn FLDOO\ VXEMHFW WR 12A OHDFKLQJ 2WKHU IDFWRUV ZKLFK LQn IOXHQFH WKH PDJQLWXGH RI 12A OHDFKLQJ LQFOXGH HYDSRUDWLRQ QXWULHQW FRQFHQWUDWLRQ GHSWK RI URRWLQJ 1 UHVHUYHV PLQn HUDOL]DWLRQ RI WKH VRLO QLWULILFDWLRQ RI WKH 1+A1 DQG VRLO WHPSHUDWXUH f ,Q &DOLIRUQLD WKH SURSRUWLRQ RI 1 DSSOLHG WR FLWUXV OHDFKHG DQQXDOO\ DV 12 UDQJHG IURP f WR b f 7KHVH KLJK 12A OHDFKLQJ ORVVHV KRZHYHU RFFXUUHG XQGHU FRQGLWLRQV RI H[FHVVLYH LUULJDWLRQ RQ ZHOOGUDLQHG VRLOV

PAGE 12

DW\SLFDO RI PDQ\ LUULJDWHG DUHDV LQ DULG ]RQHV ,Q D GHHS VDQG\ )ORULGD VRLO VSOLW DSSOLFDWLRQ RI NJKD RI 1 DQQXDOO\ WR D PDWXUH FLWUXV JURYH GLG QRW UHVXOW LQ 12M OHDFKLQJ HYHQ ZKHQ WKH UDLQIDOO ZDV KLJK f 6WXGLHV LQn YROYLQJ D VLQJOH DQQXDO DSSOLFDWLRQ RI 1 WR HYDOXDWH WKH PDJQLWXGH RI 12A OHDFKLQJ ORVV IURP FLWUXV SODQWLQJV LQ )ORULGD KDYH QRW EHHQ GRQH 3ODQW &\FOLQJ RI 1 ,QIRUPDWLRQ RQ WKH 1 FRQWHQW RI DQ HQWLUH FLWUXV WUHH LV PHDJHU 7KH VL]H RI WKH PDWXUH WUHH PDNHV WKH GHVWUXFn WLYH ELRPDVV VDPSOLQJ D GLIILFXOW DQG FRVWO\ WDVN f ,Q IRUHVW WUHH VWXGLHV ZKHUH WKHUH LV D FRPPHUFLDO LQWHUn HVW LQ WKH ZRRG ELRPDVV VDPSOLQJ SURFHGXUHV IRU WKH WUHH DUH PRUH KLJKO\ GHYHORSHG f $OVR ZLWK FLWUXV OHDI 1 FRQWHQW LV FRQVLGHUHG DQ DGHTXDWH LQGH[ RI WKH 1 VWDWXV RI WKH WUHH 7KH FRPPHUFLDO DGRSWLRQ RI OHDI DQDO\VLV DV D JXLGH WR IHUWLOL]DWLRQ RI FLWUXV KDV UHSRUWn HGO\ UHGXFHG 1 XVDJH E\ DERXW b LQ &DOLIRUQLD f $ IHZ VWXGLHV RQ WRWDO FLWUXV WUDH 1 FRQWHQW KDYH EHHQ UHSRUWHG EXW YHU\ RIWHQ WKHVH VWXGLHV ZHUH ODFNLQJ LQ DGHn TXDWH UHSOLFDWLRQ f ,Q )ORULGD LW ZDV HVWLPDWHG WKDW D \HDUROG RUDQJH WUHH DEVRUEHG RQO\ b RI DSSOLHG 1 f 2I WKLV DPRXQW b LV UHWXUQHG WR WKH VRLO GXULQJ WKH \HDU WKURXJK VKHGGLQJ RI ROG OHDYHV IORZHUV DQG \RXQJ IUXLWV b LV UHPRYHG LQ WKH FURS RI IUXLW DQG DERXW b JRHV LQWR SHUPDQHQW VWUXFWXUHV LQ WKH

PAGE 13

IRUP RI QHZ WZLJV DQG WUXQN HQODUJHPHQW 'DWD IURP D VLQJOH \HDUROG JUDSHIUXLW &LWUXV SDUDGLVL 0DFIf WUHH LQ )ORULGD f LQGLFDWHG WKDW WKH 1 FRQWHQW RI FRPSRQHQW WUHH SDUWV RQ D b GU\ ZHLJKW EDVLV LQ GHVFHQGLQJ RUGHU ZDV OHDYHV LPPDWXUH IUXLW WZLJV OHVV WKDQ FP GLDPHWHU ILEURXV URRWV ODUJH URRWV OLPEV XS WR FP GLDPHWHU DQG WUXQN $ VHULHV RI VWXGLHV WR GHWHUPLQH WKH 1 FRQWHQW RI n9DOHQFLDn RUDQJH WUHHV KDYH EHHQ UHSRUWHG IURP &DOLIRUQLD f 2QH VWXG\ VKRZHG WKDW D \HDUROG WUHH FRQWDLQHG J RI 1 LQ WKH OHDYHV f ZKLOH DQRWKHU VWXG\ LQGLFDWHG WKDW QHDUO\ RQHKDOI RI WKH 1 FRQWHQW RI WKH WUHH ZDV LQ WKH OHDYHV f :DOODFH HW DOB f UHSRUWHG WKDW D \HDUROG n9DOHQFLDn RUDQJH WUHH FRQWDLQHG J RI 1 7KH DXWKRUV GLG QRW KRZHYHU LQGLFDWH KRZ PXFK 1 ZDV DSSOLHG VR WKDW LW LV GLIILFXOW WR UHODWH WKLV ILJXUH WR WUHHV RI VLPLODU DJH HOVHZKHUH $SSDUHQWO\ D VLJQLILFDQW DPRXQW RI 1 DGGHG WR WKH VRLO LV UHPRYHG E\ FLWUXV IUXLWV f =LGDQ DQG :DOODFH f UHSRUWHG WKDW D PDWXUH n:DVKLQJWRQn QDYHO RUDQJH IUXLW ZLWK D IUHVK ZHLJKW RI J FRQWDLQHG PJ RI 1 ZKLOH D n9DOHQFLDn RUDQJH IUXLW RI J FRQWDLQHG PJ 5HVLGXDO 6RLO 1 $ SDUW RI WKH 1 EDODQFH ZKLFK LV WKH PRVW GLIILFXOW WR DFFRXQW IRU EHFDXVH RI VSDWLDO YDULDELOLW\ LV WKH DPRXQW RI 1 UHPDLQLQJ LQ WKH VRLO DW DQ\ JLYHQ VDPSOLQJ WLPH

PAGE 14

6DPSOLQJ DQG DQDO\VLV RI WKH VRLO PDWHULDO IRU 12A1 f DQGRU WRWDO 1 f LV FRPPRQO\ XVHG WR PHDVXUH VRLO 1 FRQWHQW EXW ODUJH VDPSOHV DUH XVXn DOO\ UHTXLUHG WR DFKLHYH DQ DFFHSWDEOH GHJUHH RI DFFXUDF\ 7KH YDULDWLRQ LQ UHVLGXDO VRLO 1 FRQWHQW ERWK ZLWKLQ DQG DPRQJ H[SHULPHQWDO XQLWV KDV EHHQ UHSRUWHG WR GHFUHDVH ZLWK LQFUHDVLQJ GHSWK LQ WKH VRLO SURILOH f $OVR WKH YDULDELOLW\ RI YLUJLQ ODQG KDV EHHQ UHSRUWHG WR EH OHVV IRU 1 WKDQ VLPLODU DUHDV RI FXOWLYDWHG ODQG f ,Q D )ORULGD VWXG\ LQYROYLQJ DQ RUFKDUG RI PDWXUH FLWUXV WUHHV WKH VRLO QXWULHQW FRQWHQW ZDV WKH OHDVW YDULn DEOH LQ VDPSOHV FROOHFWHG EHORZ WKH WUHH GULSOLQH DV FRPn SDUHG WR RWKHU VDPSOLQJ ORFDWLRQV f 1HYHUWKHOHVV LW ZDV GHPRQVWUDWHG WKDW D ODUJH QXPEHU RI VDPSOHV ZDV UHn TXLUHG WR UHGXFH WKH YDULDWLRQ UHJDUGOHVV RI WKH VDPSOLQJ ORFDWLRQ &RQVLGHUDWLRQV IRU ,QFUHDVLQJ WKH (IILFLHQF\ RI 1 8VDJH E\ &LWUXV WUHHV *HQHUDO &RQFHSWV 2SWLPL]LQJ 1 XVH E\ FLWUXV WUHHV DSSHDUV WR LQYROYH WKH GHYHORSPHQW RI PDQDJHPHQW SURJUDPV ZKLFK SUHYHQW WKH H[FHVVLYH ORVV RI 12A E\ OHDFKLQJ ZLWKRXW VDFULILFLQJ IUXLW \LHOG VL]H DQG TXDOLW\ f ,W KDV EHHQ VXJJHVWHG WKDW RSWLPXP PDQDJHPHQW FRXOG EH DFKLHYHG E\ DSSO\LQJ RQO\ WKH DPRXQW RI 1 QHHGHG WR VXVWDLQ KLJK IUXLW SURGXFWLRQ ZLWK

PAGE 15

OHDI DQDO\VLV EHLQJ XVHG DV D JXLGH WR GHWHUPLQH WKH SURSHU UDWH f 'LIIHUHQFHV LQ FLWUXV FXOWLYDU 1 UHTXLUHn PHQWV DQG VRLO W\SHV KRZHYHU GLFWDWH DQ DSSURDFK LQ ZKLFK WLPLQJ UDWH SODFHPHQW 1 VRXUFH DQG ZDWHU UHJLPH PXVW EH FRQVLGHUHG LQ WKH HIILFLHQW XVH RI IHUWLOL]HU1 2QH DSSURDFK WR LQFUHDVLQJ WKH HIILFLHQF\ RI 1 XVH KDV EHHQ WR VSOLW WKH DQQXDO DSSOLFDWLRQ RI 1 f 7KLV LV VXSSRUWHG E\ D )ORULGD H[SHULPHQW FRQGXFWHG XQGHU KLJK UDLQIDOO FRQGLWLRQV f ,Q WHUPV RI FLWUXV IUXLW SURGXFWLYLW\ KRZHYHU RWKHU VWXGLHV f LQGLFDWHG WKDW D VLQJOH DSSOLFDWLRQ RI IHUWLOL]HU1 DSSOLHG GXULQJ WKH GULHU SRUWLRQ RI WKH \HDU LQ ZLQWHU JDYH WKH VDPH \LHOG UHVSRQVH FRPSDUHG WR DSSOLFDWLRQV SHU \HDU $QRWKHU DSSURDFK LV WKH IROLDU DSSOLFDWLRQ RI 1 LQ WKH IRUP RI ORZELXUHW XUHD 6WXGLHV IURP &DOLIRUQLD f LQGLFDWHG WKDW IROLDU DSSOLFDWLRQ RI 1 ZDV DVVRFLDWHG ZLWK ORZHU 1&X OHDFKLQJ SRWHQWLDO WKDQ ZDV VRLO DSSOLFDn WLRQ ,Q JHQHUDO IROLDUDSSOLHG 1 XQGHU WKH ORZ UDLQIDOO FRQGLWLRQV RI &DOLIRUQLD ZDV IRXQG WR EH DV HIIHFWLYH DV VRLODSSOLHG 1 IRU IUXLW SURGXFWLRQ f 7KLV DSSURDFK PD\ QRW EH VXLWDEOH LQ )ORULGD ZKHUH IUHTXHQW UDLQV PD\ ZDVK DZD\ WKH 1 DSSOLHG WR WKH IROLDJH (IILFLHQW 1 XVH PD\ UHTXLUH WKH DSSOLFDWLRQ RI QRPLQDO UDWHV WR WKH VRLO VXSSOHPHQWLQJ WKLV ZLWK IROLDUDSSOLHG 1 ,W KDV EHHQ VXJJHVWHG WKDW LQ IXWXUH VWXGLHV VSOLW VRLO DSSOLFDWLRQ RI 1 EH D WUHDWPHQW DORQJ ZLWK IROLDUVRLO FRPELQDWLRQV f $ PDMRU OLPLWDWLRQ LQ IROLDU DSSOLFDWLRQ

PAGE 16

RI 1 KRZHYHU LV WKDW LW LV HQHUJ\ LQWHQVLYH HVSHFLDOO\ LI IUHTXHQW DSSOLFDWLRQV DUH QHFHVVDU\ &RQFHSW RI &RQWUROOHG 5HOHDVH 1 )HUWLOL]HUV DQG ,%'8 7KH FRQFHSW RI WKH FRQWUROOHG UHOHDVH RI 1 WR LQFUHDVH IHUWLOL]HU1 HIILFLHQF\ KDV EHHQ DPSO\ UHYLHZHG f 7KH EDVLF DSSURDFKHV DUH WKH GHYHORSPHQW RI FRPSRXQGV RI OLPLWHG VROXELOLW\ XVH RI FRDWHG JUDQXOHV DQG IRUPXODWLRQ RI DPPRQLDFDO IHUWLOL]HUV ZLWK QLWULILFDn WLRQ LQKLELWRUV 7KH REMHFWLYHV RI VXFK IHUWLOL]HU1 IRUPV DUH WR PLQLPL]H WKH LPPRELOL]DWLRQ OHDFKLQJ DQG YRODWLOLn ]DWLRQ ORVVHV RI VRLODSSOLHG 1 DQG WR UHOHDVH DQ DGHTXDWH DPRXQW RI DYDLODEOH 1 WR VDWLVI\ WKH FURS UHTXLUHPHQW +RZn HYHU EHFDXVH RI KLJKHU FRVWV WKHVH IHUWLOL]HUV DUH EHLQJ XVHG SULPDULO\ LQ WXUIJUDVV RUQDPHQWDOV KRPH JURXQGV QXUVHU\ ILHOGV DQG IRU RWKHU VSHFLDOW\ VLWXDWLRQV ,VREXW\OLGHQH GLXUHD LV D FRQGHQVDWLRQ SURGXFW RI XUHD DQG LVREXW\UDOGHK\GH SDWHQWHG LQ -DSDQ DV D VORZUHOHDVH 1 VRXUFH +DPDPRWR f GHVFULEHG LWV SUHSDUDWLRQ DQG SK\VLFDO SURSHUWLHV LQ JUHDWHU GHWDLO +LV UHYLHZ RI WKH VWXGLHV FRQGXFWHG LQ -DSDQ VKRZHG WKDW WKH ODUJH JUDQXOH RI ,%'8 ZDV HIIHFWLYH LQ SUHYHQWLQJ KLJK 1 OHDFKLQJ ORVV ZKHQ DSSOLHG WR SDGG\ VRLOV %\ XVLQJ ,%'8 ZLWK JUHHQ WHD &DPHOOLD VLQHQVLV >/@ .XQW]Hf SODQWV +DPDPRWR f UHn SRUWHG WKDW RQH DSSOLFDWLRQ ZDV HQRXJK WR JHW DYHUDJH \LHOGV DQG WKXV VDYH ODERU 7KH FRQYHUVLRQ RI ,%'8 WR SODQW DYDLOn DEOH IRUP DSSHDUV WR UHVXOW IURP WKH GLVVROXWLRQ RI ,%'8

PAGE 17

JUDQXOHV 7KH UDWH RI GLVVROXWLRQ LV VWURQJO\ LQIOXHQFHG E\ SDUWLFOH VL]H f )LQH VL]HG ,%'8 JUDQXOHV UHOHDVH ODUJHU DPRXQWV RI 1 WKDQ FRDUVH JUDQXOHV 7KLV ZDV REn VHUYHG LQ DQ LQFXEDWLRQ VWXG\ f IRU WXUIJUDVVHV f DQG IRU IOXHFXUHG WREDFFR 1LFRWLDQD WDEDFXP /f f +XJKHV f FRQILUPHG +DPDPRWRnV f ILQGLQJV WKDW ,%'81 UHOHDVH ZDV JUHDWHU DW ORZ S+ YDOXHV DQG KLJK WHPn SHUDWXUHV ,Q HYDOXDWLQJ ,%'8 IRU n0HULRQn .HQWXFN\ EOXH JUDVV 3RD SUDWHQVLV /f 0REHUJ HW DO f LQGLFDWHG WKDW D XQLIRUP JURZWK UHVSRQVH ZDV SRVVLEOH IURP DSSOLFDWLRQV RI ,%'8 DV FRPSDUHG WR RI 85(; D XUHDSDUDIILQ SURGXFWf 6WXGLHV LQ FLWUXV RU RWKHU WUHH FURSV ZLWK ,%'8 KDYH QRW DV \HW EHHQ UHSRUWHG $QDO\WLFDO 3URFHGXUHV IRU 1 %DODQFH &RPSRQHQWV /HDFKHG 1 6DPSOLQJ DQG $QDO\VLV 6RLO 1 ORVVHV IURP OHDFKLQJ KDYH JHQHUDOO\ EHHQ VWXGn LHG LQ O\VLPHWHU H[SHULPHQWV RU LQ FRQWUROOHG ILHOG GUDLQn DJH SORWV E\ PHDVXULQJ WKH 1 FRQWHQW RI WKH HIIOXHQW ZDWHU f ,Q FLWUXV O\VLPHWHU VWXGLHV KDYH ODUJHO\ EHHQ OLPn LWHG WR \RXQJ WUHHV LQ WKH JUHHQKRXVH 6XFK VWXGLHV FDQ SURYLGH XVHIXO EDVLF LQIRUPDWLRQ EXW WKH\ DUH OLPLWHG LQ VFRSH EHFDXVH RI WKH GLIILFXOW\ RI H[WUDSRODWLQJ WKH GDWD WR RUFKDUG FRQGLWLRQV f 0RUHRYHU D PDMRU VKRUWFRPLQJ RI O\VLPHWHUV LV WKH UHWHQWLRQ RI PRUH PRLVWXUH WKDQ

PAGE 18

FRUUHVSRQGV ZLWK ILHOG FDSDFLW\ UHVXOWLQJ LQ WKH GDQJHU RI DQDHURELRVLV DQG GHQLWULILFDWLRQ f ,Q PDWXUH FLWUXV RUFKDUGV VHYHUDO DSSURDFKHV KDYH EHHQ PDGH IRU HVWLPDWLQJ WKH OHDFKLQJ RI IHUWLOL]HU1 :DQGHU f DQDO\]HG ZDWHU VDPSOHV IURP WKH ORZHU HGJHV RI FLWUXV SODQWLQJV ORFDWHG RQ VORSHV LQ )ORULGD %Hn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f DQG )ORULGD f +RZHYHU WKH UHOLDELOLW\ RI WKLV DSSURDFK IRU PRQLWRULQJ VXEVXUIDFH 12A1 ORVVHV KDV EHHQ TXHVWLRQHG f 6HYHUDO LQYHVWLJDWRUV KDYH XVHG SRURXV FHUDPLF FXSV WR FROOHFW VRLO VROXWLRQ VDPSOHV IURP FLWUXV JURYHV f 7KLV SURFHGXUH ZDV IRXQG WR EH XVHIXO IRU HVWLn PDWLQJ WKH SRWHQWLDO IRU 12A SROOXWLRQ LQ D )ORULGD FLWUXV JURYH f 7KH SURFHGXUH DOVR JDYH D UHDVRQDEOH HVWLPDWH RI WKH DPRXQW RI 12A1 OHDFKHG IURP D PLOOHW 3HQQLVHWXP W\SKRLGHV /f SORW f +RZHYHU WKLV SURFHGXUH KDV EHHQ

PAGE 19

FULWLFL]HG EHFDXVH RI WKH GLIILFXOW\ RI SURYLGLQJ HQRXJK ZDWHU VDPSOHV IRU FKHPLFDO DQDO\VLV DQG WKH UHTXLUHPHQW IRU D VXFWLRQ GHYLFH $ QHZ YDFXXP H[WUDFWRU ZDV GHYHORSHG WR VXUPRXQW WKHVH GLIILFXOWLHV EXW LWV XVHIXOQHVV KDV EHHQ OLPLWHG E\ RSHUDWLRQDO SUREOHPV f $ QHZ DSSURDFK WR FDOFXODWLQJ WKH OHDFKLQJ RI 12A IURP WKH URRW ]RQH RI FURSV LV EDVHG RQ D FRPSDULVRQ RI WKH EHn KDYLRU RI 12A DQG &O LRQV LQ WKH GUDLQDJH RU SHUFRODWLQJ ZDWHUV WKDW KDYH PRYHG EHORZ WKH URRW ]RQH f &KDQJHV LQ WKH UDWLR RI WKHVH LRQV ZHUH XVHG WR FDOFXODWH WKH DPRXQW RI 12A OHDFKHG ,Q XQVDWXUDWHG VRLOV ZKHUH WKH GHWHUPLQDWLRQ RI 12A DQG &O FRQFHQWUDWLRQV LQ WKH SHUFRODn WLQJ ZDWHU LV GLIILFXOW WKHVH FRQFHQWUDWLRQV ZHUH GHWHUn PLQHG LQ D VDWXUDWLRQ H[WUDFW ,Q ERWK FDVHV 12A DQG &O UDWLRV ZHUH IRXQG WR EH VDWLVIDFWRU\ LQ HVWLPDWLQJ 12A OHDFKHG EHORZ WKH URRW ]RQH RI FURSV 5HVLGXDO 6RLO 1 6DPSOLQJ DQG $QDO\VLV 6RLO VDPSOHV IURP FLWUXV RUFKDUGV DUH REWDLQHG XVLQJ YDULRXV VDPSOLQJ WHFKQLTXHV )RU FRUHV JUHDWHU WKDQ P LQ OHQJWK D SRZHUGULYHQ FP GLDPHWHU DXJHU LV RIWHQ XVHG f :KHQ VDPSOHV DUH WDNHQ WR RQO\ P D WUXFN PRXQWHG K\GUDXOLFDOO\ SRZHUHG VDPSOHU LV IUHTXHQWO\ SUHn IHUUHG 0RVW VDPSOLQJ LQ FLWUXV RUFKDUGV LV FRQGXFWHG WR VKDOORZHU GHSWKV JHQHUDOO\ QRW H[FHHGLQJ RU P ,Q VXFK FDVHV FRQYHQWLRQDO VDPSOLQJ VRLO WXEHV RU DXJHUV DUH XVHG

PAGE 20

6HYHUDO DQDO\WLFDO SURFHGXUHV KDYH EHHQ DGRSWHG WR GHWHUPLQH UHVLGXDO VRLO 1 )RU WRWDO 1 GHWHUPLQDWLRQ PHWKRGV KDYH JDLQHG JHQHUDO DFFHSWDQFH WKH .MHOGDKO PHWKRG ZKLFK LV HVVHQWLDOO\ D ZHWR[LGDWLRQ SURFHGXUH DQG WKH 'XPDV PHWKRG ZKLFK LV IXQGDPHQWDOO\ D GU\R[LGDWLRQ SURn FHGXUH f 5HVLGXDO VRLO 1 LV DOVR GHWHUPLQHG E\ DQDO\]n LQJ WKH VRLO IRU H[FKDQJHDEOH 1+A DQG 12A LRQV XVLQJ VWHDP GLVWLOODWLRQ SURFHGXUHV f 5HFHQW WUHQGV LQ TXDQWLWDn WLQJ UHVLGXDO VRLO 1 KRZHYHU KDYH LQYROYHG WKH GHWHUPLQDn WLRQ RI 12A f DQG 1+r f LRQV LQ VDWXUDWLRQ H[WUDFWV XVLQJ VSHFLILF LRQ DFWLYLW\ HOHFWURGHV 6RLO :DWHU 0HDVXUHPHQW 1LWURJHQ LV DEVRUEHG E\ SODQW URRWV IURP WKH VRLO VROXn WLRQ 7KH VRLO ZDWHU FRQWHQW LV LPSRUWDQW WKHUHIRUH QRW RQO\ EHFDXVH RI LWV IXQFWLRQ DV D VROYHQW EXW DOVR EHFDXVH LWV PDVV PRYHPHQW LV GLUHFWO\ UHODWHG WR WKH OHDFKLQJ RI WKH VRLO SURILOH 6RLO ZDWHU FRQWHQW LV PHDVXUHG E\ VHYHUDO WHFKQLTXHV HDFK ZLWK DGYDQWDJHV DQG GLVDGYDQWDJHV 2QH WHFKQLTXH XVHG H[WHQVLYHO\ LQ ORDP WR FOD\WH[WXUHG VRLOV LV EDVHG XSRQ WKH WHQVLRPHWHU f 7KH LQIRUPDWLRQ IXUn QLVKHG E\ WHQVLRPHWHUV WHQGV WR EH TXDOLWDWLYH 7HQVLRn PHWHUV DUH JHQHUDOO\ XVHG IRU GHWHUPLQLQJ WLPLQJ DQG GXUDn WLRQ RI LUULJDWLRQ DQG KDYH QRW EHHQ IRXQG WR EH SDUWLFXn ODUO\ XVHIXO IRU VDQG\ VRLOV f

PAGE 21

(OHFWULFDOUHVLVWDQFH EORFNV DUH QRW H[WHQVLYHO\ XVHG RQ VDQG\ VRLOV f EHFDXVH J\SVXP EORFNV RSHUDWH PRVW UHOLDEO\ LQ WKH GULHU SRUWLRQ RI WKH VRLO ZDWHU FRQWHQW VSHFWUXP ,Q WKH VDQG\ )ORULGD VRLOV WKH DYDLODEOH ZDWHU LV UHODWLYHO\ VPDOO DQG VRLO ZDWHU VKRXOG EH PDLQWDLQHG DERYH b RI ILHOG FDSDFLW\ 8QGHU WKHVH FRQGLWLRQV J\Sn VXP EORFNV DUH QRW SDUWLFXODUO\ VXLWDEOH )RU GLUHFW TXDQWLWDWLYH PHDVXUHPHQW RI VRLO ZDWHU E\ YROXPH PHWKRGV DUH XVHG 7KH JUDYLPHWULF SURFHGXUH LQn YROYHV WKH FDOFXODWLRQ RI D YROXPHWULF ZDWHU FRQWHQW IURP WKH ZHLJKW RI WKH ZDWHU LQ D VRLO VDPSOH DQG WKH VRLO EXON GHQVLW\ f 5DSLG ODUJHVFDOH VRLO ZDWHU FRQn WHQW VDPSOLQJ E\ WKLV WHFKQLTXH LV ODERULRXV DQG WLPH FRQVXPLQJ 7KH QHXWURQ VFDWWHULQJ PHWKRG LV D IDVWHU DQG HTXDOO\ DFFXUDWH PHWKRG DV FRPSDUHG WR WKH JUDYLPHWULF SURFHGXUH f 7KH PHWKRG KDV EHHQ IRXQG WR EH XVHIXO LQ VWXG\LQJ SDWWHUQV RI VRLO ZDWHU GHSOHWLRQ LQ )ORULGD FLWUXV JURYHV f 3ODQW 7LVVXH 6DPSOLQJ DQG $QDO\VLV 7KH OHDI LV WKH PRVW FRPPRQO\ VDPSOHG WLVVXH WR GHWHUn PLQH WKH 1 VWDWXV RI D FLWUXV WUHH f $V D UHVXOW WHFKQLTXHV LQ OHDI VDPSOLQJ DQG DQDO\WLFDO SURn FHGXUHV KDYH EHHQ KLJKO\ GHYHORSHG 7KH HQWLUH PDWXUH WUHH KRZHYHU LV UDUHO\ VDPSOHG WR GHWHUPLQH LWV WRWDO 1 FRQWHQW

PAGE 22

2QH DSSURDFK IRU GHWHUPLQLQJ WKH 1 FRQWHQW RI WKH WUHH LV WR XSURRW WKH HQWLUH WUHH 7KH WUHH LV WKHQ IUDFWLRQDWHG LQWR YDULRXV FRPSRQHQW SDUWV DQG WKH 1 FRQWHQW RI VDPSOH SDUWV GHWHUPLQHG DIWHU RYHQGU\LQJ DQG JULQGLQJ 7KLV DSSURDFK KDV EHHQ WULHG LQ )ORULGD f DQG LQ &DOLIRUQLD f $QRWKHU DSSURDFK KDV LQYROYHG PDNLQJ D SHULRGLF ZHLJKW DQG FKHPLFDO GHWHUPLQDWLRQ RI DOO WKH EORVVRPV OHDYHV DQG IUXLWV WKDW IDOO IURP FLWUXV WUHHV :DOODFH HW DO f XVHG WKLV DSSURDFK WR REWDLQ GDWD ZKLFK ZHUH WKHQ FRPELQHG ZLWK VLPLODU LQIRUPDWLRQ IRU KDUYHVWHG IUXLWV QHZ OHDYHV DQG WZLJV WR REWDLQ D PHDVXUH RI WKH QXWULHQW FRQWHQW RI WKH WUHH ,VRWRSH $SSURDFK WR 1 8WLOL]DWLRQ E\ &LWUXV 7UHHV 7KH XVH RI LVRWRSHV LQ WUHH QXWULWLRQ UHVHDUFK ZDV GLVFXVVHG E\ :DONHU f DQG +DXFN f 7KH DGYDQWDJHV RI WKLV WHFKQLTXH LQFOXGH WKH GLUHFW PHDVXUHPHQW RI WUDQVn SRUW YHORFLWLHV DQG VHSDUDWLRQ RI QHZO\ DEVRUEHG QXWULHQWV IURP WKRVH DOUHDG\ SUHVHQW LQ WKH YDULRXV FRPSRQHQWV RI WKH HFRV\VWHP f 1LWURJHQ RFFXUV LQ QDWXUH P VWDEOH LVRWRSHV 1 DQG 1A 2QO\ UHFHQWO\ KDV LW EHHQ SRVVLEOH DV WKH UHVXOW RI DGYDQFHV LQ FU\RJHQLF WHFKQLTXHV ZKHUHE\ QLWULF R[LGH JDV LV OLTXHILHG DQG WKHQ GLVWLOOHG WR VHSDUDWH WKH LVRWRSHV ZLWK UHODWLYH HDVH f 1LWURJHQA IHUWLOL]HU IRUPXODn WLRQV DUH WKRVH ZKLFK KDYH EHHQ HQULFKHG ZLWK H[FHVV 1A

PAGE 23

ZKLOH 1 GHSOHWHG IHUWLOL]HUV DOVR NQRZQ DV 1 IHUWLn OL]HUV DUH WKRVH IURP ZKLFK PXFK 1Aa! KDV EHHQ UHPRYHG 6WXGLHV XVLQJ DV D WUDFHU DUH FRPPRQSODFH LQ DJURn QRPLF FURSV EHFDXVH WKH SODQWV DUH UHODWLYHO\ VKDOORZ URRWHG f 'HHSHUURRWHG IRUHVW DQG IUXLW WUHHV GR QRW OHQG WKHPVHOYHV WR 1 EDODQFH VWXGLHV XVLQJ 1A f 7KH KLJK FRVW RI WKH WUDFHU KDV ODUJHO\ UHVWULFWHG LWV XVH WR ODERUDWRU\ DQG JUHHQKRXVH VWXGLHV ZLWK \RXQJ WUHHV DQG VWURQJO\ DIIHFWHG WKH VL]H RI WKH H[SHULPHQW DQG WKH H[SHULPHQWDO GHVLJQ )XUWKHUPRUH WKH SURFHGXUH UHTXLUHV WKH XVH RI H[SHQVLYH LQVWUXPHQWDWLRQ WR ZKLFK PDQ\ ODERUDWRULHV PD\ QRW KDYH DFFHVV 1HYHUWKHn OHVV VXFK VWXGLHV KDYH EHHQ UHSRUWHG IRU \RXQJ DSSOH 0DOXV V\OYHVWULV 0LOOf WUHHV f DQG QRQEHDULQJ SUXQH 3UXQXV GRPHVWLFD /f WUHHV f *UHHQKRXVH VWXGLHV ZLWK FLWUXV XVLQJ 1A ZHUH UHSRUWHG E\ :DOODFH f DQG :DOODFH HW DO f :DOODFH f IRXQG WKDW JURZWK FRPSOLFDWLRQV DQG YDULDELOLW\ LQ SODQW PDWHULDO UHVXOWHG LQ FRQYHQWLRQDO PHWKRGV EHLQJ LQn IHULRU WR WKH LVRWRSLF WHFKQLTXH LQ VWXG\LQJ WKH LQIOXHQFH RI WHPSHUDWXUH RQ 1 DEVRUSWLRQ DQG WUDQVORFDWLRQ +LV TXDOn LWDWLYH LQYHVWLJDWLRQ f VKRZHG WKDW 12A1 ZDV WR WLPHV DV UHDGLO\ DEVRUEHG IURP VRLO DV ZDV 1+A1 E\ ZHHN ROG FXWWLQJV RI n(XUHNDn OHPRQ & OLPQ /f 1LWURJHQf6 DSSHDUHG LQ WKH OHDYHV RI D \HDUROG WUHH GD\V DIWHU DSSOLFDWLRQ WR WKH WUHH f

PAGE 24

$IWHU WKLV LQLWLDO LQWHUHVW QR VWXGLHV LQ FLWUXV ZLWK 1A KDYH EHHQ UHSRUWHG XQWLO UHFHQWO\ .XERWD DQG FRZRUNHUV f LQYHVWLJDWHG WKH EHKDYLRU RI 1 VXSSOLHG LQ HDUO\ VSULQJ DQG HDUO\ VXPPHU RQ \HDUROG n6DWVXPDn PDQGDULQ & XQVKLX 0DUFRYLWFKf WUHHV ,Q WKH VSULQJ H[n SHULPHQW 1A ZDV GHWHFWHG LQ URRWOHWV DQG OHDYHV DQG GD\V UHVSHFWLYHO\ DIWHU WKH DSSOLFDWLRQ 6HYHQW\ILYH SHUn FHQW RI DEVRUEHG ZDV IRXQG LQ WKH DHULDO SDUWV RI WKH WUHH ,Q WKH VXPPHU VWXG\ 1 ZDV GHWHFWHG LQ URRWOHWV DQG VSULQJ OHDYHV WKH QH[W GD\ DIWHU DSSOLFDWLRQ LQGLFDn WLQJ D IDVWHU DEVRUSWLRQ RI 1 LQ VXPPHU 1LQHW\WZR SHUFHQW RI WKH 1 ZDV GLVWULEXWHG P WKH DERYH JURXQG SDUWV $ UHYLHZ RI 1A VWXGLHV RQ FLWUXV LQ -DSDQ ZDV UHFHQWO\ SUHVHQWHG E\
PAGE 25

0$7(5,$/6 $1' 0(7+2'6 ([SHULPHQWDO 6LWH ([SHULPHQWV IRU WKLV VWXG\ ZHUH FRQGXFWHG RQ DQ $VWD WXOD ILQH VDQG VLWH NP IURP /DNH $OIUHG )ORULGD 7KH VRLO LV D 7\SLF 4XDUW]LSVDPPHQW RI WKH (QWLVROV f 7\SLFDOO\ LW LV ZHOOGUDLQHG ZLWK D ORZ ZDWHU DQG PLQHUn DO QXWULHQW UHWDLQLQJ FDSDFLW\ ([SHULPHQWDO 'HVLJQ ([SHULPHQW 7ZR IDFWRUV 1 VRXUFH DQG LUULJDWLRQ ZHUH H[DPLQHG LQ WKLV H[SHULPHQW /HYHOV RI WKH 1 VRXUFH IDFWRU LQn FOXGHG QR 1 FRQWURO ,%'81 DQG 1+A12A1 ZKLOH WKRVH RI WKH LUULJDWLRQ IDFWRU ZHUH QR LUULJDWLRQ ORZ DQG KLJK LUULJDWLRQV ,W ZDV GHVLUHG WR VWXG\ WKHVH WUHDWPHQWV LQ D IDFWRULDO DUUDQJHPHQW KRZHYHU LW ZDV QRW SRVVLEOH WR SK\VLFDOO\ HVWDEOLVK WKH H[SHULPHQW LQ WKLV PDQQHU EHFDXVH RI WKH OLPLWDWLRQ LPSRVHG E\ WKH LUULJDWLRQ WUHDWPHQW 7KHUHIRUH WKH \HDUROG n3LQHDSSOHn RUDQJH &LWUXV VLQn HQVLV >/@ 2VEHFNf WUHHV RQ n$OHPRZn & PDFURSK\OOD :HVWHUf URRWVWRFN ZHUH VSDFHG DW [ P LQ URZV RQ -XO\ XVLQJ D PRGLILHG VSOLW SORW GHVLJQ )LJ f 7KH ILHOG OD\RXW FRQVLVWHG RI UHSOLFDWLRQV ZLWK LUULJDWLRQ OHYHO

PAGE 26

)LJ 3ODQWLQJ SODQ DQG VWDWLVWLFDO GHVLJQ

PAGE 28

DV WKH PDLQ SORW WUHDWPHQW 7KH VL]H RI HDFK PDLQ SORW ZDV GHWHUPLQHG E\ P OHQJWKV RI SHUIRUDWHG VSULQNOHU SLSH XVHG WR DSSO\ WKH LUULJDWLRQ WUHDWPHQWV (DFK PDLQ SORW WKHUHIRUH KDG WUHHV RQ HDFK VLGH RI WKH SLSH (DFK VLQJOH WUHH SORW UHFHLYHG RQH OHYHO RI WKH 1 WUHDWPHQW EXW UHSOLFDWLRQV RI HDFK 1 WUHDWPHQW ZHUH UDQGRPO\ GLVn WULEXWHG RYHU WKH LUULJDWLRQ PDLQ SORWV 7KLUW\VL[ WUHHV ZHUH XVHG LQ WKH H[SHULPHQW )HUWLOL]HU1 IURP ,%'8 DQG 1.A12 VRXUFHV DW WKH UDWH RI JWUHH ZDV KDQG EURDGFDVW LQ D [ DUHD DURXQG HDFK WUHH RQ 6HSWHPEHU ZHHNV DIWHU WKH WUHHV ZHUH SODQWHG 7UHHV LQ FRQWURO SORWV ZHUH QRW IHUWLOL]HG ,UULJDWLRQ WUHDWPHQW ZDV QRW VWDUWHG XQWLO 1RYHPEHU DIWHU UDLQIDOO KDG WDSHUHG RII 6RLO ZDWHU FRQWHQW ZDV XVHG WR VFKHGXOH LUULJDWLRQ $SSUR[LPDWHO\ FP RI LUn ULJDWLRQ ZDWHU ZDV DSSOLHG ZKHQHYHU WKH DYHUDJH VRLO ZDWHU FRQWHQW IHOO EHORZ b E\ YROXPH LQ WKH WR FP VRLO SURILOH RI WKH KLJK LUULJDWLRQ SORWV 7KH KLJK LUULJDWLRQ SORWV ZHUH LUULJDWHG WZLFH DV RIWHQ DV WKH ORZ LUULJDWLRQ SORWV ZKLFK DOVR UHFHLYHG FP RI LUULJDWLRQ ZDWHU RQ HDFK DSSOLFDWLRQ $ UDLQ JDXJH DW WKH H[SHULPHQWDO VLWH DQG DQ LUULJDWLRQ IORZPHWHU ZHUH XVHG WR PRQLWRU ZDWHU VXSSO\ :KHQ WKH IORZPHWHU PDOIXQFWLRQHG PO FDQV ZHUH SODFHG LQ WKH SORWV IRU FROOHFWLRQ DQG PHDVXUHPHQW RI WKH DPRXQW RI LUULJDWLRQ ZDWHU GHOLYHUHG 7KH H[SHULPHQW ZDV WHUPLQDWHG RQ -DQXDU\ EHn FDXVH RI IUHH]H GDPDJH )HUWLOL]HU1 DQG WKH ILUVW

PAGE 29

LUULJDWLRQ KDG EHHQ DSSOLHG DQG ZHHNV UHVSHFWLYHO\ SULRU WR WKH WHUPLQDWLRQ RI WKH H[SHULPHQW 7KH WUHHV XQn GHU ORZ LUULJDWLRQ KDG UHFHLYHG D WRWDO RI FP RI LUn ULJDWLRQ ZDWHU LQ LUULJDWLRQV ZKLOH WKRVH XQGHU KLJK LUn ULJDWLRQ KDG UHFHLYHG FP LQ LUULJDWLRQV )RU WKH HQWLUH SHULRG RI WKH H[SHULPHQW WKH QRQLUULJDWHG SORWV KDG UHFHLYHG FP RI UDLQIDOO WKH ORZ DQG KLJK LUULJDn WLRQ SORWV KDG UHFHLYHG D FRPELQHG WRWDO RI DQG FP RI UDLQIDOO DQG LUULJDWLRQ UHVSHFWLYHO\ ([SHULPHQW 7KLV H[SHULPHQW ZDV LQLWLDWHG WR FODULI\ FHUWDLQ UHn VXOWV REWDLQHG LQ ([SHULPHQW 7KH WRWDO 1 FRQWHQW RI 1+A12AIHUWLOL]HG WUHHV ZDV b KLJKHU WKDQ WKDW RI WKH ,%'8IHUWLOL]HG WUHHV 0RYHRYHU WKH FRPSOLFDWLQJ HIIHFW RI WKH IUHH]H GDPDJH RQ 1 DEVRUSWLRQ ZDV QRW NQRZQ ,W ZDV GHFLGHG WR GHWHUPLQH LI WKH VDPH WUHQG LQ 1 DEVRUSWLRQ ZRXOG SUHYDLO GXULQJ WKH ZDUP VSULQJ ZHDWKHU 1LQH XQXVHG WUHHV SODQWHG DW WKH VDPH WLPH DV WKRVH LQ ([SHULPHQW KDG EHHQ OHIW XQIHUWLOL]HG IURP WKH VXPn PHU RI WKURXJK 0DUFK 7KH UHSOLFDWLRQV RI VLQJOH WUHH SORWV ZHUH DUUDQJHG LQ D UDQGRPL]HG FRPSOHWH EORFN GHVLJQ KDYLQJ DV WUHDWPHQWV XQIHUWLOL]HG FRQWURO ,%'8 DQG 1+A12A DV 1 VRXUFHV 1R LUULJDWLRQ WUHDWPHQW ZDV DSSOLHG KRZHYHU 1DWXUDO SUHFLSLWDWLRQ DQG URXWLQH

PAGE 30

LUULJDWLRQ RI WKH DGMDFHQW PDWXUH FLWUXV JURYH SURYLGHG WKH RQO\ ZDWHU VXSSO\ 'DWD IURP ([SHULPHQW LQGLFDWHG WKDW 1+12MIHUWL OL]HG WUHHV KDG KLJKHU 1 FRQWHQW WKDQ ,%'8IHUWLOL]HG WUHHV 7KH HIIHFW RI WKH IUHH]H GDPDJH RQ 1 DEVRUSWLRQ IURP WKH 1 VRXUFHV ZDV QRW NQRZQ ,W ZDV QHFHVVDU\ WKHUHIRUH WR HVWDEOLVK LI WKH VDPH WUHQG ZRXOG EH PDQLIHVWn HG LQ ZDUP ZHDWKHU +HQFH WKH WUHHV LQ ([SHULPHQW ZHUH GHOLEHUDWHO\ JURXSHG RQ WKH EDVLV RI WKHLU WUXQN GLDPHWHU ,%'8 ZDV DSSOLHG WR WKH ODUJHVW WUHHV DQG 1+A2A WR WKH VPDOOHVW WUHHV &RQWURO WUHHV ZHUH LQWHUPHGLDWH 7KH VDPH UDWH RI IHUWLOL]HU1 LQ ([SHULPHQW ZDV KDQG EURDGn FDVW LQ D [ P DUHD DURXQG WKH WUHH RQ 0DUFK 7KH H[SHULPHQW ZDV WHUPLQDWHG RQ 0D\ ZHHNV DIWHU IHUWLOL]HU DSSOLFDWLRQ ([SHULPHQW 7KUHH \HDURLG n3LQHDSSOHn RUDQJH WUHHV LQ DQ H[LVWLQJ UDWH DQG IHUWLOL]HU1 VRXUFH VWXG\ ZHUH XVHG IRU WKLV H[SHULPHQW 7KH WUHHV KDG EHHQ IHUWLOL]HG ZLWK WKH VDPH UDWH RI 1+A12A VLQFH $SULO XQWLO 6HSWHPEHU ,Q WKH FXUUHQW H[SHULPHQW RQH RI WKH WUHHV UHFHLYHG D WRWDO RI J RI 1 SHU \HDU LQ HTXDO DSSOLFDWLRQV RQ 0DUFK -XQH DQG 2FWREHU DV ,%'8 $QRWKHU WUHH UHFHLYHG WKH VDPH UDWH RI 1 DV 1+A12A RQ WKH VDQH GDWHV 7KH IHUWLOL]HU ZDV DSSOLHG E\ KDQG EURDGFDVWLQJ DURXQG WKH WUHH 2WKHU QXWULHQWV ZHUH

PAGE 31

DGHTXDWHO\ VXSSOLHG WR WKH IHUWLOL]HG WUHHV 7KH WKLUG WUHH ZKLFK GLG QRW UHFHLYH DQ\ IHUWLOL]HU1 DW WKH VSHFLn ILHG GDWHV ZDV XVHG LQ WKLV H[SHULPHQW DV WKH XQIHUWLOL]HG FRQWURO ,Q RUGHU WR VWXG\ 1 PRYHPHQW LQ XQFURSSHG ODQG FLUn FXODU IDOORZ SORW P LQ GLDPHWHU ZKLFK FRUUHVSRQGHG WR WKH WUHH FDQRS\ GLDPHWHU ZDV IHUWLOL]HG ZLWK ,%'8 RQ 2FWREHU 2QO\ RQHWKLUG RI WKH WRWDO DQQXDO DSn SOLFDWLRQ LQ WKH WUHH SORWV ZDV XVHG $QRWKHU VLPLODU SORW ZDV IHUWLOL]HG ZLWK WKH VDPH UDWH RI 1 DV 1+A12A $ WKLUG SORW ZDV OHIW XQIHUWLOL]HG DV D FRQWURO 7KH XQn UHSOLFDWHG SORWV LQ WKH H[SHULPHQW ZHUH VXEMHFWHG WR WKH URXWLQH PDQDJHPHQW RI WKH DGMDFHQW JURYH 7KH H[SHULPHQW ZDV WHUPLQDWHG RQ )HEUXDU\ ZHHNV DIWHU WKH IDOO DSSOLFDWLRQ RI IHUWLOL]HU1 DW ZKLFK WLPH WKH SORWV KDG UHFHLYHG FP RI UDLQIDOO DQG LUULJDWLRQ VLQFH 2FWREHU (YDSRWUDQVSLUDWLRQ IRU WKH GXUDWLRQ RI WKH VWXG\ ZDV HVWLPDWHG IURP FOLPDWRORJLFDO GDWD f )LHOG 6DPSOLQJ 3URFHGXUHV 6RLO :DWHU 6DPSOLQJ &KDQJHV LQ VRLO ZDWHU FRQWHQW ZHUH PHDVXUHG ZLWK D 1XFOHDU&KLFDJR QHXWURQ SUREH 3f DQG D VFDOHU f 2QH DOXPLQXP DFFHVV WXEH IRU WKH SUREH ZDV LQVWDOOHG DERXW FP IURP HYHU\ RWKHU WUHH LQ ([SHULPHQWV DQG ,Q

PAGE 32

([SHULPHQW RQH WXEH ZDV LQVWDOOHG MXVW LQVLGH WKH GULSn OLQH RI HDFK WUHH DQG DW DQ HTXLYDOHQW GLVWDQFH IURP WKH FHQWHU RI HDFK IDOORZ SORW 2QHPLQXWH UHDGLQJV ZHUH WDNHQ DW GHSWK LQFUHPHQWV RI FP EHJLQQLQJ DW FP 7KH UHDGLQJV ZHUH FRQYHUWHG WR b ZDWHU FRQWHQW E\ YROXPH XVLQJ D FDOLEUDWLRQ FXUYH GHYHORSHG IURP SUHYLRXV VDPSOLQJ LQ WKH H[SHULPHQWDO DUHD f 7KH ZDWHU FRQWHQW RI WKH VXUIDFH FP ZDV GHWHUn PLQHG JUDYLPHWULFDOO\ $ FRPSRVLWH RI GXSOLFDWH [ FP FRUHV RI VRLO SHU SORW LQ WKH H[SHULPHQWV ZDV FROn OHFWHG DQG LWV JUDYLPHWULF ZDWHU FRQWHQW GHWHUPLQHG E\ RYHUGU\LQJ WR FRQVWDQW ZHLJKW DW r& 7KH ZDWHU FRQWHQW ZDV WUDQVIRUPHG WR D YROXPH SHUFHQWDJH E\ PXOWLSO\LQJ WKH b ZHLJKW E\ WKH DYHUDJH VRLO EXON GHQVLW\ JFPAf :DWHU FRQWHQW LQ WKH VRLO SURILOH ZDV FDOFXODWHG E\ PXOWLn SO\LQJ WKH DYHUDJH YROXPH UDWLR E\ WKH GHSWK RI WKH HQWLUH SURILOH DQG UHVXOWV H[SUHVVHG DV FP RI ZDWHU 6RLO 6DPSOLQJ $ FRPSRVLWH RI GXSOLFDWH FP GLDPHWHU VRLO FRUH VDPSOHV ZDV WDNHQ ZLWKLQ FP IURP WKH WUHH IURP FP DQG FP DQG WKHUHDIWHU DW FP LQFUHPHQWV GRZQ WR FP LQ ([SHULPHQWV DQG 6RLO VDPSOHV ZHUH VLPLODUO\ WDNHQ DW WKH WUHH FDQRS\ GULSOLQH GRZQ WR FP LQ ([SHULn PHQW ,Q ([SHULPHQW VDPSOHV ZHUH WDNHQ ZKHQ FXPXODn WLYH UDLQIDOO H[FHHGHG FP $IWHU WKH LQLWLDWLRQ RI WKH LUULJDWLRQ WUHDWPHQW VDPSOHV ZHUH WDNHQ RQO\ DW WKH

PAGE 33

WHUPLQDWLRQ RI WKH H[SHULPHQW ,Qn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n DWHG LQ WKH ODERUDWRU\ LQWR FRPSRQHQWV ILEURXV DQG ODWHUDO URRWV WDSURRW URRWVWRFN WUXQN VFLRQ WUXQN FURWFK EUDQFKHV JUHHQ WZLJV DQG OHDYHV 7KH URRW V\VWHP ZDV ULQVHG LQ fUXQQLQJ WDS ZDWHU DQG WKH IUHVK DQG RYHQGU\ ZHLJKW r&f RI HDFK FRPSRQHQW REWDLQHG ,Q WKH PDWXUH WUHH H[SHULPHQW IUXLWV ZHUH KDUYHVWHG RQ )HEUXDU\ DQG WKH WRWDO IUHVK ZHLJKW UHFRUGHG 2QH IUXLW VDPSOH IURP HDFK WUHH ZDV JURXQG LQ D FRP PXQLWLQJ PDFKLQH DQG VXEVDPSOHV RYHQGULHG DW r& IRU GU\ ZHLJKW GHWHUPLQDWLRQ DQG FKHPLFDO DQDO\VLV

PAGE 34

7KH QXPEHU RI OHDYHV RQ HDFK PDWXUH WUHH ZDV HVWLn PDWHG E\ WKH IROORZLQJ SURFHGXUH /HDYHV LQ D [ FP IUDPH IURP VLGHV RI WKH WUHH ZHUH VWULSSHG DQG WKH DYHUDJH QXPEHU LQ WKH IUDPH GHWHUPLQHG 7KH OHDYHV ZHUH RYHQGULHG IRU KRXUV DW r& DQG WKH WRWDO GU\ ZHLJKW GHWHUPLQHG 7KH WRWDO GU\ ZHLJKW RI WKH VDPSOHG OHDYHV ZDV XVHG WR FDOFXODWH WKH DYHUDJH GU\ ZHLJKW RI D OHDI 7UHH KHLJKW DQG WUHH ZLGWK LQ GLUHFWLRQV QRUWKVRXWK DQG HDVWZHVWf ZHUH DOVR PHDVXUHG 7KH FDQRS\ VXUIDFH DUHD ZDV WKHQ FDOFXODWHG IURP WKH IRUPXOD 6 LU:K > :Kf :f @ ZKHUH K KHLJKW DQG : ZLGWK RI WKH WUHH f 7KH QXPEHU RI OHDYHV RQ D WUHH ZDV WKHQ HVWLPDWHG IURP D NQRZn OHGJH RI WKH FDQRS\ VXUIDFH DUHD 6DPSOH 3UHSDUDWLRQ DQG $QDO\VLV 6RLO 6DPSOHV $OO VRLO VDPSOHV ZHUH DLUGULHG DQG VLHYHG WKURXJK D PP VFUHHQ 7RWDO VRLO 1 ZDV GHWHUPLQHG E\ D VHPLPLFUR .MHOGDKO SURFHGXUH XVLQJ D VDOLF\OLFVXOIXULF DFLG PL[WXUH f 6RLO VDPSOHV IURP WKH UHSOLFDWLRQV LQ ([SHULPHQW ZHUH FRPELQHG IRU WKH GHWHUPLQDWLRQ RI H[FKDQJHDEOH 1.r DQG 12 E\ D VWHDPGLVWLOODWLRQ SURFHGXUH XVLQJ 'HYDUGD DOOR\ DQG 0J2 f 6DPSOHV ZHUH QRW VXIILFLHQW IRU WKH GHWHUPLQDWLRQ RI WKHVH LRQV IRU WKH VHFRQG VDPSOLQJ GDWH

PAGE 35

LQ ([SHULPHQW DQG IRU DOO VDPSOHV LQ ([SHULPHQWV DQG 7RWDO 1 ZDV H[SUHVVHG DV b 1 RQ D GU\ ZHLJKW EDVLV DQG 1+A1 DQG 12M1 DV SSP :KHQ D TXDQWLWDWLYH DFFRXQW IRU 1 ZDV EHLQJ PDGH WKHVH YDOXHV ZHUH FRQYHUWHG WR J RU NJ RI 1 LQ WKH VRLO SURILOH 7KLV ZDV REWDLQHG DV WKH SURGXFW RI DUHD GHSWK DYHUDJH EXON GHQVLW\ JFP f DQG DYHUn DJH 1 FRQFHQWUDWLRQ LQ WKH SURILOH ,Q ([SHULPHQWV DQG WKH 1 FRQWHQW RI WKH SURILOH ZDV FDOFXODWHG IRU WKH WRWDO DUHD IHUWLOL]HG FP f EXW VLQFH WKH URRW V\VWHP RI WKH \RXQJ WUHHV RFFXSLHG DQ DUHD OHVV WKDQ FP GLDPHWHU WKH 1 FRQWHQW ZDV DOVR FDO FXODWHG IRU WKH ODWWHU DUHD FP f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f 1LWURJHQ YDOXHV ZHUH H[SUHVVHG ERWK DV b RI GU\ ZHLJKW DQG LQ DEVROXWH DPRXQWV 7KH ODWWHU ZHUH REWDLQHG E\ PXOWLSO\n LQJ b 1 E\ WKH WRWDO GU\ ZHLJKW RI WKH FRPSRQHQW SDUW 7KH UHFRYHU\ RI IHUWLOL]HU1 E\ WKH WUHHV ZDV REWDLQHG E\

PAGE 36

VXEWUDFWLQJ WKH WRWDO 1 FRQWHQW RI WKH XQIHUWLOL]HG WUHH IURP WKDW RI WKH IHUWLOL]HG WUHH DQG WKH UHVXOW H[SUHVVHG DV WKH SHUFHQWDJH RI WKH DPRXQW RI 1 DSSOLHG ,Q WKH PDn WXUH WUHH H[SHULPHQW WKH 1 FRQWHQW RI IUXLWV DQG OHDYHV IURP WKH XQIHUWLOL]HG WUHH ZDV VLPLODUO\ VXEVWUDFWHG IURP WKRVH RI WKH IHUWLOL]HG WUHH 6WDWLVWLFDO $QDO\VLV ,Q ([SHULPHQWV DQG GDWD SHUWDLQLQJ WR WUHH JURZWK WLVVXH 1 FRQWHQW DQG VRLO WRWDO 1 FRQWHQW ZHUH VXEPLWn WHG WR DQDO\VLV RI YDULDQFH ,Q ([SHULPHQW WKHVH GDWD ZHUH DQDO\]HG LQ D [ IDFWRULDO DUUDQJHPHQW 'DWD IRU ([SHULPHQW ZHUH WUHDWHG DV D UDQGRPL]HG FRPSOHWH EORFN GHVLJQ 6LJQLILFDQW GLIIHUHQFHV ZHUH GHWHUPLQHG E\ 'XQFDQnV PXOWLSOH UDQJH WHVW 6RLO ZDWHU GDWD DQG WKRVH IURP WKH PDWXUH WUHH H[SHULPHQW ZHUH QRW DQDO\]HG

PAGE 37

5(68/76 $1' ',6&866,21 ([SHULPHQWV DQG 3UHOLPLQDU\ 5HPDUNV ([SHULPHQW ZDV SUHPDWXUHO\ WHUPLQDWHG ZHHNV DIn WHU IHUWLOL]HU DSSOLFDWLRQ DQG ZHHNV IROORZLQJ WKH ILUVW LUULJDWLRQ EHFDXVH WKH WUHHV ZHUH EHJLQQLQJ WR VKRZ WKH HIIHFWV RI IUHH]H GDPDJH 7KLV ZDV HVSHFLDOO\ DSSDUHQW LQ WKH XQIHUWLOL]HG FRQWURO WUHHV ZKHUH H[WHQVLYH OHDI GURS RFFXUUHG 6LQFH WKH FRPSOLFDWLQJ HIIHFW RI WKH IUHH]H GDPDJH RQ 1 DEVRUSWLRQ ZDV QRW NQRZQ DQG 1+A12AIHUWLOL]HG WUHHV DSSHDUHG WR KDYH KLJKHU 1 FRQWHQW LQ FRPSDULVRQ WR ,%'8IHUWLOL]HG WUHHV ([SHULPHQW ZDV VWDUWHG WR GHWHUn PLQH LI WKH VDPH WUHQG ZRXOG SUHYDLO LQ ZDUP ZHDWKHU 7KHUHIRUH WKH WUHHV LQ ([SHULPHQW ZHUH GHOLEHUDWHO\ JURXSHG VXFK WKDW ,%'8IHUWLOL]HG WUHHV ZHUH ODUJHU LQ WUXQN GLDPHWHU WKDQ FRQWURO DQG 1+A12AIHUWLOL]HG WUHHV 7DEOH f 7UHH *URZWK $QDO\VLV 7KH \RXQJ WUHHV LQ ERWK H[SHULPHQWV JHQHUDOO\ VKRZHG YLJRURXV JURZWK UHJDUGOHVV RI WUHDWPHQW 7UHHV IHUWLOL]HG ZLWK 1+A12 DQG ,%'8 KDG GHQVHU FDQRSLHV WKDQ WKH XQIHUn WLOL]HG FRQWURO WUHHV DQG WKRVH IHUWLOL]HG ZLWK 1.A12A

PAGE 38

7DEOH (IIHFW RI 1 VRXUFH RQ WKH GU\ ZW DQG JURZWK RI VHYHUDO WUHH FRPSRQHQW SDUWV ] ([SW 1 VRXUFH 5RRW V\VWHP GU\ ZW 7RS GU\ ZW J 7RWDO GU\ ZW ,QLWLDO WUXQN GLDP FPf )LQDO WUXQN GLDP FPf b WUXQN GLDP LQFUHDVH &RQWURO QV QV ,QV QV QV QV ,%'81 QKQRQ &RQWURO E E E E E QV ,%'81 D D D D D 1+1R1 E E E E E =0HDQ VHSDUDWLRQ OHYHO QV QRW c ZLWKLQ FROXPQ VLJQLILFDQW IRU HDFK H[SHULPHQW E\ 'XQFDQnV PXOWLSOH UDQJH WHVW b

PAGE 39

KDG GDUNHU IROLDJH WKDQ ,%'8IHUWLOL]HG WUHHV /HDYHV IURP WKH FRQWURO WUHHV LQ ([SHULPHQW ZHUH GXOO JUHHQ DQG EHJDQ WR VKHG WRZDUG WKH HQG RI WKH VWXG\ LQGLFDWLQJ WKDW 1 ZDV EHFRPLQJ D OLPLWLQJ IDFWRU f DQG WKH WUHHV ZHUH UHVSRQGLQJ WR WKH FROG ZHDWKHU /HDYHV IURP WKH FRQWURO WUHHV LQ ([SHULPHQW ZHUH DOVR GXOO JUHHQ EXW WKH\ GLG QRW VKHG $PPRQLXP QLWUDWH DQG ,%'8 DSSHDUHG WR LQFUHDVH WKH GU\ PDWWHU FRQWHQW RI QHDUO\ DOO WUHH FRPSRQHQW SDUWV DV FRPSDUHG WR WKH FRQWURO LQ ([SHULPHQW 7DEOH f $ GLIn IHUHQFH LQ GU\ PDWWHU FRQWHQW ZDV SDUWLFXODUO\ DSSDUHQW LQ WKH OHDYHV FROOHFWHG IURP ERWK RI WKH IHUWLOL]HU1 WUHDWn PHQWV ZKLFK ZHUH VWDWLVWLFDOO\ JUHDWHU WKDQ WKH FRQWURO 7KH 1+A12AIHUWLOL]HG WUHHV VKRZHG QXPHULFDOO\ JUHDWHU GU\ ZHLJKW YDOXHV FRPSDUHG WR WKH ,%'8 WUHDWPHQW LQ WKH PRUH VXFFXOHQW FRPSRQHQWV RI WKH WUHH EXW WKH\ ZHUH QRW VWDWLVn WLFDOO\ GLIIHUHQW ,W LV QRW SODXVLEOH WR FRPSDUH WKH HIIHFW RI 1 VRXUFHV RQ WKH JURZWK RI WKH WUHH SDUWV LQ ([SHULPHQW EHFDXVH RI WKH LQLWLDO WUHH VL]H GLIIHUHQFHV 1HYHUWKHOHVV WKHUH ZHUH GLIIHUHQFHV QRQVWDWLVWLFDOf SDUWLFXODUO\ LQ JUHHQ WZLJ GU\ ZHLJKW LQGLFDWLQJ D JUHDWHU UHVSRQVH WR 1+A12A IHUWLOL]DWLRQ DV FRPSDUHG WR WKH RWKHU WUHDWPHQWV 7DEOH f 7UHHV IHUWLOL]HG ZLWK 1+A12A ZHUH WKH VPDOOHVW DQG \HW KDG QXPHULFDOO\ JUHDWHU JUHHQ WZLJ GU\ ZHLJKW WKDQ WKH UHVW 7KLV WUHQG ZDV VLPLODU WR WKH RQH LQ ([SHULPHQW 6LJQLILFDQW GLIIHUHQFHV EHWZHHQ WUHDWPHQWV LQ ILEURXV

PAGE 40

7DEOH (IIHFW RI 1 VRXUFH RQ WUHH FRPSRQHQW SDUW GU\ ZW ] ([SW 1 VRXUFH )LEURXV DQG ODWHUDO URRWV 7DSURRW 5RRWVWRFN WUXQN 6FLRQ WUXQN &URWFK EUDQFKHV *UHHQ WZLJV /HDYH &RQWURO QV QV ,QV QV QV QV E ,%'81 D QKQRQ D &RQWURO DE QV QV D ,QV QV E ,%'81 D D D 1+121 E E ODE ] 0HDQ VHSDUDWLRQ ZLWKLQ FROXPQ IRU HDFK H[SHULPHQW E\ 'XQFDQnV PXOWLSOH UDQJH WHVW b OHYHO QV QRW VLJQLILFDQW

PAGE 41

DQG ODWHUDO URRWV DQG WKH VFLRQ WUXQN LQ ([SHULPHQW EXW QRW LQ ([SHULPHQW VKRZHG WKDW WKHVH GLIIHUHQFHV ZHUH D UHIOHFWLRQ RI WKH LQLWLDO WUHH VL]H GLIIHUHQFHV LQ ([SHULn PHQW UDWKHU WKDQ WUHDWPHQW HIIHFWV ,UULJDWLRQ OHYHO GLG QRW VWDWLVWLFDOO\ LQIOXHQFH WKH GLVWULEXWLRQ RI GU\ PDWWHU RU WKH 1 FRQWHQW RI WKH YDULRXV WUHH IUDFWLRQV LQ ([SHULPHQW 7DEOH f 7KHUH ZHUH QR VLJQLILFDQW LQWHUDFWLRQV EHWZHHQ 1 VRXUFH DQG LUULJDWLRQ OHYHO 'DWD UHODWHG WR LUULJDWLRQ OHYHO HIIHFWV H[FHSW IRU WKRVH LQ 7DEOH KDYH EHHQ RPLWWHG IURP WKLV VWXG\ EHn FDXVH LUULJDWLRQ OHYHO HIIHFWV ZHUH QRW VWDWLVWLFDOO\ GLIn IHUHQW DQG WKHUH ZHUH QR LUULJDWLRQ OHYHO [ 1 VRXUFH LQn WHUDFWLRQV 7KH GU\ ZHLJKW RI WKH WRWDO URRW V\VWHP DQG WKH DERYHn JURXQG SDUWV RI WKH WUHH LQ ([SHULPHQW ZHUH FRQVLVWHQWO\ KLJKHVW IRU WKH 1+A12A WUHDWPHQW 7DEOH f IROORZHG E\ WKH ,%'8 DQG FRQWURO WUHDWPHQWV KRZHYHU WKH GDWD GLG QRW VKRZ DQ\ VWDWLVWLFDO GLIIHUHQFHV 1LWURJHQ VRXUFH DOVR KDG QR VWDWLVWLFDOO\ VLJQLILFDQW HIIHFW RQ WRWDO WUHH GU\ ZHLJKW RU b WUXQN GLDPHWHU LQFUHDVH 1HYHUWKHOHVV 1 IHUWLOL]Dn WLRQ UHVXOWHG LQ ODUJHU b WUXQN GLDPHWHU LQFUHDVH RYHU WKH FRQWURO WUHHV LQ ERWK ([SHULPHQWV DQG 7DEOH f 7UXQN JURZWK ZDV JUHDWHU LQ ([SHULPHQW WKDQ LQ ([SHULn PHQW SUHVXPDEO\ EHFDXVH RI WKH EHQHILFLDO HIIHFW RI WKH ZDUP VSULQJ ZHDWKHU RQ WUHH JURZWK 7RWDO WUHH GU\ ZHLJKW LQ ([SHULPHQW GLG QRW DSSHDU WR KDYH EHHQ DOWHUHG E\

PAGE 42

7DEOH (IIHFW RI LUULJDWLRQ OHYHO RQ WKH 1 FRQWHQW DQG GU\ ZW RI WUHH FRPSRQHQWV ,UULJDWLRQ OHYHO )LEURXV DQG ODWHUDO URRWV 7DSURRW 5RRWVWRFN WUXQN 6FLRQ WUXQN &URWFK EUDQFKHV *UHHQ WZLJV /HDYHV 8 ,7 M 9Y / I J 1RQH QV QV QV QV QV QV QV /RZ +LJK ,Q & YB & I W! DU\ ZX 1RQH QV QV QV QV QV QV QV /RZ +LJK ] QV QRW VLJQLILFDQW

PAGE 43

WUHDWPHQWV SUHVXPDEO\ GXH WR WKH VKRUW GXUDWLRQ RI WKH H[n SHULPHQW ,W UHIOHFWHG WKH WUHQG LQ WKH LQLWLDO WUXQN GLn DPHWHU PHDVXUHPHQWV 7DEOH f ,UULJDWLRQ OHYHO KDG QR VWDWLVWLFDOO\ VLJQLILFDQW HIn IHFW RQ WKH GU\ ZHLJKW RI WKH URRW RU VKRRW V\VWHP RI WKH WUHHV LQ ([SHULPHQW RU WKH GU\ ZHLJKW DQG WKH b WUXQN GLDPHWHU LQFUHDVH RI WKH WUHH 7KHUH ZDV KRZHYHU D WHQn GHQF\ WRZDUGV JUHDWHU WUXQN JURZWK ZLWK DQ LQFUHDVH LQ LUULJDWLRQ OHYHO .RR f UHSRUWHG D VLPLODU WUHQG IRU PDWXUH FLWUXV WUHHV LQ )ORULGD 6HYHUDO IDFWRUV PD\ KDYH FRQWULEXWHG WR WKH DEVHQFH RI DQ LUULJDWLRQ HIIHFW LQ ([SHULPHQW 7KHVH ZRXOG KDYH LQn FOXGHG GXUDWLRQ RI WKH H[SHULPHQW WKH TXDQWLW\ DQG IUHn TXHQF\ RI LUULJDWLRQ DV ZHOO DV WKH WLPH RI \HDU 7KH WUHHV ZHUH LUULJDWHG RQO\ GXULQJ WKH ODVW ZHHNV RI WKH H[SHULPHQW ,W LV SRVVLEOH WKDW LUULJDWHG WUHHV GLG QRW KDYH HQRXJK WLPH WR UHVSRQG WR WKH LUULJDWLRQ WUHDWPHQWV )XUWKHUPRUH LW KDV EHHQ VKRZQ LQ )ORULGD WKDW H[WUD ZDWHU DSSOLHG WR PDWXUH FLWUXV WUHHV EHWZHHQ -XQH DQG 'HFHPEHU WKH DSSUR[LPDWH SHULRG RI WKLV VWXG\ GLG QRW FRQWULEXWH VXEVWDQWLDOO\ WR WUHH JURZWK f 7KH ODFN RI VLJQLILFDQW 1 VRXUFH HIIHFWV RQ WUHH JURZWK LQ ([SHULPHQW FDQ SRVVLEO\ EH DWWULEXWHG WR D GLn PLQLVKHG JURZWK UDWH LQ ZLQWHU f $OVR WKH ZHHNV RI H[SHULPHQWDWLRQ SUREDEO\ ZHUH QRW ORQJ HQRXJK IRU WKH WUHDWPHQWV WR VKRZ WKHLU PD[LPXP HIIHFWV RQ WUHH JURZWK

PAGE 44

3DWWHQ DQG 'RPRWR f DQG 0LOOHU f UHFHQWO\ VKRZHG WKDW 1 WUHDWPHQWV KDG QR VLJQLILFDQW HIIHFW RQ DSSOH WUHH JURZWK GXULQJ WKH ILUVW JURZLQJ VHDVRQ ,Q ([SHULPHQW 1 VRXUFH VWDWLVWLFDOO\ DOWHUHG WKH SDWWHUQ RI GU\ PDWWHU GLVWULEXWLRQ 7DEOH f $ JUHDWHU SURSRUWLRQ RI WKH WRWDO GU\ ZHLJKW ZDV ORFDWHG LQ WKH WDSn URRW RI WKH 1+ 12IHUWLOL]HG DQG FRQWURO WUHHV DV FRP R SDUHG WR WKH ,%'8WUHDWHG WUHHV %RWK 1+A12A DQG ,%'8 IHUWLOL]HG WUHHV KDG VWDWLVWLFDOO\ JUHDWHU SURSRUWLRQ RI WKHLU GU\ ZHLJKW GLVWULEXWHG LQ WKH FURWFK EUDQFKHV LQ FRPn SDULVRQ WR FRQWURO WUHHV 7KH b GU\ ZHLJKW RI WKH VFLRQ WUXQN RI WKH 1+A12AWUHDWHG WUHHV ZDV OHVV WKDQ WKDW RI HLWKHU WKH FRQWURO RU WKH ,%'8WUHDWHG WUHHV 7KH IDFW WKDW WKH GU\ ZHLJKW GLVWULEXWLRQ ZDV VLPLODU WR WKH DFWXDO GU\ ZHLJKW RI FHUWDLQ WUHH SDUWV 7DEOH f PDNHV LW GRXEWn IXO WKDW DOO RI WKHVH ZHUH WUXH WUHDWPHQW GLIIHUHQFHV 0RUHRYHU WUHDWPHQW PHDQV LQ GU\ ZHLJKW ZHUH QRW VWDWLVn WLFDOO\ GLIIHUHQW H[FHSW IRU WKH OHDYHV 6RPH RI WKH VLJn QLILFDQW WUHDWPHQW GLIIHUHQFHV PD\ YHU\ ZHOO EH D UHIOHFn WLRQ RI LQLWLDO GLIIHUHQFHV LQ WKH WUHHV 1HYHUWKHOHVV WKHUH ZDV D WUHQG IRU 1+A12AWUHDWHG WUHHV WR KDYH D JUHDWHU GU\ PDWWHU LQ FURWFK EUDQFKHV JUHHQ WZLJV DQG OHDYHV LQ FRPSDULVRQ WR ,%'8IHUWLOL]HG DQG FRQWURO WUHHV $V ZDV WKH FDVH ZLWK WKH GU\ ZHLJKW RI WKH WUHH IUDFWLRQV LUULJDWLRQ OHYHO GLG QRW VLJQLILFDQWO\ DIIHFW WKH GLVWULn EXWLRQ RI GU\ PDWWHU

PAGE 45

7DEOH (IIHFW RI 1 VRXUFH RQ WUHH GU\ ZW GLVWULEXWLRQ ] ([SW 1 VRXUFH )LEURXV DQG ODWHUDO URRWV 7DSURRW 5RRWVWRFN WUXQN WRWDO WUHH 6FLRQ WUXQN &URWFK EUDQFKHV *UHHQ WZLJV /HDYHV GU\ ZW &RQWURO QV $ D $ E QV QV ,%'81 % DE $ DE QKQRQ $ E % D &RQWURO QV QV D D QV E E ,%'81 E E E D QKQRQ E E D D = L 0HDQ VHSDUDWLRQ ZLWKLQ FROXPQ IRU HDFK H[SHULPHQW E\ 'XQFDQnV PXOWLSOH UDQJH WH[W b FDSLWDO OHWWHUVf DQG b ORZHU FDVH OHWWHUVf OHYHO QV QRW VLJQLILFDQW

PAGE 46

7KH GLVWULEXWLRQ RI GU\ ZHLJKW ZDV VLPLODU LQ ([SHULn PHQWV DQG 7DEOH f ,Q ([SHULPHQW WKH FRQWURO WUHHV KDG SURSRUWLRQDOO\ PRUH RI WKHLU GU\ ZHLJKW LQ WKH URRWVWRFN DQG VFLRQ WUXQNV DV FRPSDUHG WR WKH IHUWLOL]HG WUHHV 7KH b GU\ ZHLJKW LQ WKH JUHHQ WZLJV RI WKH FRQWURO WUHHV ZDV KRZHYHU VLJQLILFDQWO\ OHVV WKDQ LQ WKH 1+A12A WUHDWHG WUHHV EXW WKH JUHDWHVW GLIIHUHQFH ZDV LQ WKH OHDI IUDFWLRQ 7KH b GU\ PDWWHU LQ WKH OHDYHV RI WKH IHUWLOL]HG WUHHV ZDV DERXW WZLFH DV PXFK DV LQ WKH XQIHUWLOL]HG FRQn WURO WUHHV )XUWKHUPRUH WKH OHDYHV RI WKH IHUWLOL]HG WUHHV LQ ([SHULPHQW UHSUHVHQWHG D KLJKHU b RI WKH WRWDO WKDQ LQ ([SHULPHQW 7KLV LV D UHDVRQDEOH H[SHFWDWLRQ EHn FDXVH RI WKH VWURQJHU JURZWK IOXVK LQ WKH VSULQJ WKDQ LQ WKH IDOOZLQWHU 7UHH 1 &RQWHQW DQG 'LVWULEXWLRQ 7KH PDLQ HIIHFWV RI WKH 1 VRXUFHV LQ ([SHULPHQW VKRZHG WKDW WKH 1 FRQFHQWUDWLRQV ZHUH KLJKO\ VLJQLILFDQWO\ GLIIHUHQW LQ DOO FRPSRQHQW SDUWV RI WKH WUHH ZLWK 1+A12A WUHDWHG WUHHV KDYLQJ WKH KLJKHVW YDOXHV IROORZHG E\ WKH ,%'8WUHDWHG DQG FRQWURO WUHHV 7DEOH f 1LWURJHQ FRQn FHQWUDWLRQ ZDV JHQHUDOO\ KLJKHVW LQ OHDYHV IROORZHG E\ ILEURXV DQG ODWHUDO URRWV JUHHQ WZLJV WDSURRW FURWFK EUDQFKHV URRWVWRFN WUXQN DQG VFLRQ WUXQN 7KLV RUGHU LV VLPLODU WR WKH GDWD RI %DUQHWWH HW DO f IRU D PDWXUH WUHH RI D GLIIHUHQW FXOWLYDU )XUWKHUPRUH WKH 1 FRQn FHQWUDWLRQV LQ WKH FXUUHQW VWXG\ ZHUH KLJKHU WKDQ WKH

PAGE 47

7DEOH (IIHFW RI 1 VRXUFH RQ 1 FRQFQ RI WUHH FRPSRQHQW SDUWV ] ([SW 1 VRXUFH )LEURXV ODWHUDO DQG URRWV 7DSURRW 5RRWVWRFN WUXQN 6FLRQ WUXQN &URWFK EUDQFKHV *UHHQ WZLJV /HDYHV &RQWURO & & & & & & & ,%'81 % % % % % % % QKQRQ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ &RQWURO & & F F & & & ,%'81 % % E E % % % QKQRaQ $ $ D D $ $ $ ] 0HDQ VHSDUDWLRQ ZLWKLQ FROXPQ IRU HDFK H[SHULPHQW E\ 'XQFDQnV PXOWLSOH UDQJH WHVW b FDSLWDO OHWWHUVf DQG b ORZHU FDVH OHWWHUVf OHYHO

PAGE 48

YDOXHV UHSRUWHG E\ %DUQHWWH HW DO f 6XFK GLIIHUHQFHV DUH QRW XQXVXDO ZKHQ D \RXQJ YLJRURXVO\ JURZLQJ WUHH LV FRPSDUHG WR D PDWXUH IUXLWLQJ WUHH f $OVR WKH UDWH RI 1 DSSOLFDWLRQ LQ WKH FXUUHQW VWXG\ ZDV KLJKHU 1R VLJQLILFDQW GLIIHUHQFHV GXH WR LUULJDWLRQ OHYHO ZHUH GHWHFWHG LQ WKH 1 FRQFHQWUDWLRQ RI WKH YDULRXV WUHH FRPSRQHQWV7DEOH f 7KH UHVXOWV REWDLQHG LQ ([SHULPHQW ZHUH FRQVLVWHQW ZLWK WKRVH LQ ([SHULPHQW LQ WKDW WKH RUGHU RI 1 FRQFHQn WUDWLRQ LQ DOO WUHH SDUWV ZDV 1+A12A ,'81 FRQWURO 7DEOH f ([FHSW IRU URRWVWRFN DQG VFLRQ WUXQNV WKHVH YDOXHV ZHUH VLJQLILFDQWO\ GLIIHUHQW IURP RQH DQRWKHU DW WKH b OHYHO 7KH 1 FRQFHQWUDWLRQ IRU DOO WUHH SDUWV ZDV KLJKHU LQ WKH 1+A12AWUHDWHG WUHHV WKDQ LQ WKHLU FRXQWHUn SDUWV LQ ([SHULPHQW SDUWLFXODUO\ LQ WKH OHDYHV ILEURXV DQG ODWHUDO URRWV DQG LQ WKH WDSURRW ,W ZRXOG QRW EH XQn UHDVRQDEOH WR DVVXPH WKDW WKHVH UHODWLYHO\ KLJKHU FRQFHQn WUDWLRQV ZHUH SDUWO\ D FRQVHTXHQFH RI FRQFHQWUDWLRQ HIn IHFWV LQ YLHZ RI WKH VPDOOHU WUHHV DVVLJQHG WR WKH 1+A12A WUHDWPHQW $OVR WKH KLJKHU VRLO WHPSHUDWXUH LQ WKH VSULQJ FRXOG KDYH EHHQ FRQGXFLYH WR PRUH 1 DEVRUSWLRQ E\ WKH WUHHV 7KH WRWDO DPRXQW RI 1 LQ D WUHH SDUW WKH SURGXFW RI WKH GU\ ZHLJKW RI WKDW SDUW DQG WKH 1 FRQFHQWUDWLRQ RQ D GU\ ZHLJKW EDVLV ZDV QRW VWDWLVWLFDOO\ DIIHFWHG E\ LUULn JDWLRQ OHYHO LQ ([SHULPHQW 7KHUH ZDV KRZHYHU D VWDWLVWLFDOO\ VLJQLILFDQW UHODWLRQVKLS EHWZHHQ 1 VRXUFH DQG

PAGE 49

WRWDO 1 FRQWHQW RI WUHH SDUWV 7DEOH f 1XPHULFDOO\ WKH WUHQG ZDV VLPLODU WR WKH 1 FRQFHQWUDWLRQ LQ WKDW 1+A12A IHUWLOL]HG WUHHV KDG WKH KLJKHVW YDOXHV IROORZHG E\ ,%'8 IHUWLOL]HG DQG FRQWURO WUHHV 7KH GDWD ZHUH KRZHYHU OHVV FRQVLVWHQW VWDWLVWLFDOO\ 7KH 1 FRQWHQW RI WKH WUHH SDUWV ZDV UHIOHFWHG LQ WKH WRWDO DPRXQW RI 1 LQ WKH WUHH )LJ f 'LIIHUHQFHV GXH WR 1 VRXUFH ZHUH KLJKO\ VLJQLILFDQW ZLWK 1+A12AWUHDWHG WUHHV FRQWDLQLQJ DERXW DQG WLPHV JUHDWHU WRWDO 1 WKDQ WKH FRQWURO DQG ,%'8WUHDWHG WUHHV UHVSHFWLYHO\ 1R VWDn WLVWLFDOO\ VLJQLILFDQW GLIIHUHQFHV ZHUH GHWHFWHG GXH WR LUn ULJDWLRQ OHYHO ,Q ([SHULPHQW WKH WRWDO DPRXQW RI 1 LQ HDFK WUHH SDUW 7DEOH f DQG FRQVHTXHQWO\ LQ WKH HQWLUH WUHH )LJ f ZDV ORZHU WKDQ LQ ([SHULPHQW SUREDEO\ EHFDXVH RI WKH VPDOOHU WUHHV XVHG LQ ([SHULPHQW 1R PHDQLQJIXO LPSRUn WDQFH FDQ EH DWWDFKHG WR WKH VWDWLVWLFDO GLIIHUHQFHV LQ ([SHULPHQW LQ WKH WRWDO 1 FRQWHQW EHFDXVH RI WKH LQHTXDOn LW\ RI WUHH VL]HV 'HVSLWH WKH IDFW WKDW WKH WUHHV VHOHFWHG IRU WKH ,%'8 WUHDWPHQW ZHUH ODUJHU DQG KDG WLPHV WKH GU\ ZHLJKW RI WKH 1+A12AWUHDWHG WUHHV WRWDO 1 LQ WKH 1+12A IHUWLOL]HG WUHHV ZDV WLPHV WKDW RI WKH ,%'8IHUWLOL]HG WUHHV (TXLYDOHQW ELRPDVV LQFOXGLQJ WKH URRW V\VWHP ZRXOG DEVRUE PRUH 1 IURP 1+A12A WKDQ LW ZRXOG IURP ,%'8 LQ D VKRUW SHULRG DV LQ ([SHULPHQW

PAGE 50

7DEOH (IIHFW RI 1 VRXUFH RQ WRWDO 1 FRQWHQW RI WUHH FRPSRQHQW SDUWV ([SW 1 VRXUFH )LEURXV DQG 7DSURRW 5RRWVWRFN 6FLRQ &URWFK *UHHQ /HDYHV ODWHUDO URRWV WUXQN WUXQN EUDQFKHV WZLJV J &RQWURO % % % % % % % ,%'81 $% % $ $ % $ $ QKQRQ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ &RQWURO % QV QV QV QV & E ,%'81 $ % D QKQRQ $ $ D 0HDQ VHSDUDWLRQ ZLWKLQ FROXPQ IRU HDFK H[SHULPHQW E\ 'XQFDQnV PXOWLSOH UDQJH WHVW b FDSLWDO OHWWHUVf DQG b ORZHU FDVH OHWWHUVf OHYHO QV QRW VLJQLILFDQW

PAGE 51

5HODWLRQVKLS EHWZHHQ 1 VRXUFH DQG WRWDO WUHH 1 FRQWHQW 0HDQ VHSDUDWLRQ E\ 'XQFDQnV PXOWLSOH UDQJH WHVW b FDSLn WDO OHWWHUVf DQG b ORZHU FDVH OHWWHUVf )LJ

PAGE 52

75(( 727$/ 1 &21752/ ,% '81 1+1 1 A 8

PAGE 53

7KHUH ZDV QR VLJQLILFDQW UHODWLRQVKLS EHWZHHQ WKH GLVn WULEXWLRQ RI 1 LQ WKH YDULRXV WUHH SDUWV DQG LUULJDWLRQ OHYHO LQ ([SHULPHQW 1LWURJHQ VRXUFH VLJQLILFDQWO\ DIn IHFWHG WKH GLVWULEXWLRQ RI 1 LQ WKH WDSURRW DQG VFLRQ WUXQN 7DEOH f 5HJDUGOHVV RI 1 VRXUFH b RI WRWDO WUHH 1 ZDV ORFDWHG LQ ILEURXV DQG ODWHUDO URRWV /HDYHV UHSUHn VHQWHG RQO\ b RI WKH WRWDO GU\ PDWWHU RI WKH WUHH EXW FRQWDLQHG b RI WKH WRWDO 1 LQ WKH WUHH 7KHVH ILJXUHV FRUUHVSRQG WR WKRVH UHSRUWHG LQ HDUOLHU ZRUN IRU PDWXUH FLWUXV WUHHV f 6L[W\ DQG b RI WKH WRWDO 1 LQ WKH WUHH ZHUH IRXQG LQ WKH DHULDO SDUWV RI WKH FRQWURO ,'8 DQG 1+1IHUWLOL]HG WUHHV UHVSHFWLYHO\ 7KLV PD\ VXJJHVW WKDW WKH PRUH UHDGLO\ DYDLODEOH WKH 1 VRXUFH UHn VXOWLQJ LQ OX[XU\ FRQVXPSWLRQ WKH JUHDWHU WKH SURSRUWLRQ RI 1 VWRUHG LQ WKH URRW V\VWHP f $V LQ ([SHULPHQW 1 VRXUFH VLJQLILFDQWO\ DIIHFWHG WKH GLVWULEXWLRQ RI 1 LQ ([SHULPHQW 7DEOH f &RPSDUHG WR ([SHULPHQW KRZHYHU WKH SURSRUWLRQ RI 1 ZDV JUHDWHU LQ OHDYHV DQG OHVV LQ WKH ILEURXV DQG ODWHUDO URRWV RI WKH IHUWLOL]HG WUHHV WKDQ WKH FRQWURO 7KH SURSRUWLRQ RI 1 LQ WKH WDSURRW RI 1+A12AIHUWLOL]HG WUHHV ZDV KLJKHU WKDQ IRU ,%'8IHUWLOL]HG DQG FRQWURO WUHHV LQ ERWK H[SHULPHQWV :KHWKHU LW LV D FKDUDFWHULVWLF RI FLWUXV WUHHV WR DFFXPXn ODWH 1+A12A1 LQ WKH WDSURRW RU VRPH IDFWRU UHODWHG WR WKH WLPH RI VDPSOLQJ QHHGV IXUWKHU LQYHVWLJDWLRQ ,Q FRQWUDVW WR WKH GDWD LQ ([SHULPHQW DQG b RI WKH WRWDO 1

PAGE 54

7DEOH (IIHFW RI 1 VRXUFH RQ 1 GLVWULEXWLRQ ] ([SW 1 VRXUFH )LEURXV DQG ODWHUDO URRWV 7DSURRW 5RRWVWRFN WUXQN 6FLRQ WUXQN DO WUHH &URWFK EUDQFKHV *UHHQ WZLJV /HDYHV R /2 7 &RQWURO QV E QV D QV QV QV ,%'81 E D QKQRQ D E &RQWURO D QV D D QV E % ,%'81 E E E E $ 1+121 E E E D $ 0HDQ VHSDUDWLRQ ZLWKLQ FROXPQ IRU HDFK H[SHULPHQW E\ 'XQFDQnV PXOWLSOH UDQJH WHVW b FDSLWDO OHWWHUVf DQG b ORZHU FDVH OHWWHUVf OHYHO QV QRW VLJQLILFDQW

PAGE 55

LQ WKH WUHH ZHUH IRXQG LQ WKH DHULDO SDUWV RI FRQWURO ,%'8 DQG 1+A12AWUHDWHG WUHHV UHVSHFWLYHO\ 7KH JUHDWHU SURn SRUWLRQ RI WRWDO 1 LQ WKH DHULDO SDUWV RI WKH IHUWLOL]HG WUHHV LQ WKH VSULQJ WKDQ LQ WKH IDOOZLQWHU PD\ UHIOHFW WKH PRUH YLJRURXV JURZWK DFWLYLW\ LQ WKH VSULQJ $OVR WUDQVn ORFDWLRQ RI 1 IURP URRWV PD\ EH JUHDWHU LQ WKH VSULQJ 7KH GLIIHUHQFH SUREDEO\ UHVXOWHG IURP D ORZHU DFWLYLW\ RI WKH QLWUDWH UHGXFLQJ HQ]\PH V\VWHP GXULQJ SHULRGV RI ORZ VRLO WHPSHUDWXUH LQ WKH ZLQWHU f 6RLO 3URILOH &RQWHQW DQG 'LVWULEXWLRQ RI 1 6RLO VDPSOHV LQ ([SHULPHQW ZHUH WDNHQ WR WKH FP GHSWK DIWHU DQG FP RI FXPXODWLYH UDLQIDOO RQ 2FWREHU DQG 2FWREHU UHVSHFWLYHO\ $QDO\VLV RI WKH ILUVW VHW RI VDPSOHV LQGLFDWHG WKDW 12A1 IURP 1+A12 KDG PRYHG WR WKLV ]RQH )LJ $f $V D UHVXOW WKH VDPn SOLQJ GHSWK ZDV H[WHQGHG WR FP $ WKLUG VHW RI VDPSOHV ZDV FROOHFWHG DIWHU FP RI FXPXODWLYH UDLQIDOO RQ 2FWREHU $IWHU WKH LQLWLDWLRQ RI WKH LUULJDWLRQ WUHDWPHQWV D IRXUWK VHW RI VRLO VDPSOHV ZDV REWDLQHG RQ -DQXDU\ $W WKH ILUVW VDPSOLQJ )LJ $f WKHUH ZDV HYLGHQFH WKDW VRPH 12A1 IURP 1+A12A KDG PRYHG GRZQ WR WKH FP GHSWK ZKLOH 1+A1 IURP WKH VDPH VRXUFH KDG RQO\ PRYHG WR WKH aFP GHSWK $ JUHDWHU SURSRUWLRQ RI WKH 1+A1 ZDV VWLOO UHWDLQHG LQ WKH WR FP ]RQH 2QO\ D VPDOO DPRXQW RI 1+A1 IURP ,%'8 KDG PRYHG WR WKH FP GHSWK

PAGE 56

)LJ (IIHFW RI 1 VRXUFH RQ WKH H[FKDQJHDEOH 1+A DQG 12 VRLO FRQWHQW $ % DQG & FRUUHVSRQGnWR WKH VW UG DQG ILQDO VRLO VDPSOLQJ GDWHV RQ 2FWREHU 2FWREHU DQG -DQXDU\ UHVSHFn WLYHO\ ([SW f

PAGE 57

(;&+$1*($%/( 62,/ 1 33Pf r

PAGE 58

SUHVXPDEO\ EHFDXVH RI WKH VSDULQJO\ VROXEOH QDWXUH RI ,%'8 ZKLFK UHPDLQHG LQ WKH VXUIDFH VRLO (LJKW\ILYH SHUFHQW RI WKH DSSOLHG 1 IURP 1+A12A ZDV DFFRXQWHG IRU LQ WKH WR FP GHSWK DW WKH ILUVW VDPSOLQJ 7KH GLIILFXOW\ RI H[n WUDFWLQJ ,%'8 ZLWK 1 .& SUHFOXGHG WKH GHWHUPLQDWLRQ RI 1+ DQG 12A LQ WKH WR FP GHSWK 7KH WRWDO 1 SURFHn GXUH KRZHYHU LQGLFDWHG WKDW b RI WKH DSSOLHG 1 IURP ,%'8 UHPDLQHG LQ WKH WR FP GHSWK DW WKH ILUVW VDPSOLQJ 7KHVH WUHQGV LQ LQRUJDQLF 1 FRQFHQWUDWLRQV ZHUH DOVR UHYHDOHG LQ WKH VRLO WRWDO 1 FRQWHQW LQ WKDW YDOXHV IRU WKH IHUWLOL]HG SORWV ZHUH KLJKHU WKDQ WKRVH IRU WKH FRQWURO SORWV )LJ $f 6RLO VDPSOHV ZHUH QRW VXIILFLHQW IRU WKH GHWHUPLQDWLRQ RI H[FKDQJHDEOH 1+A DQG 12A DW WKH VHFRQG VDPSOLQJ 1HYHUWKHOHVV WKHUH ZDV DQ LQGLFDWLRQ WKDW 1 IURP 1+A12A KDG SUREDEO\ PRYHG SDVW WKH FP GHSWK )LJ $f $W WKH WKLUG VDPSOLQJ LW ZDV DSSDUHQW WKDW 1+A1 DQG 12A1 IURP 1+A12A KDG OHDFKHG GRZQ WR WKH WR FP GHSWK )LJ %f 7KLV VXJJHVWV WKDW DW OHDVW D SDUW RI WKH GRZQZDUG PRYHPHQW LQYROYHG WKH XQLRQL]HG 1+A12 IHUWLOL]HU 7KH ZHOOGUDLQHG QDWXUH RI $VWDWXOD ILQH VDQG DQG LWV ORZ RUJDQLF PDWWHU FRQWHQW FRXOG KDYH EHHQ IDFWRUV FRQWULEXWLQJ WR WKLV PRYHPHQW 6RPH 1+A1 DQG 12A1 IURP ,%'8 KDG DOVR PRYHG GRZQ WR WKH FP ]RQH EXW RQ D VPDOn OHU VFDOH UHODWLYH WR 1+A12A 1LQHW\RQH SHUFHQW RI

PAGE 59

)LJ (IIHFW RI 1 VRXUFH RQ VRLO WRWDO 1 DW WKH VW $f DQG QG %f VDPSOLQJ GDWHV RQ 2FWREHU DQG 2FWRn EHU UHVSHFWLYHO\ 0HDQ VHSDUDWLRQ ZLWKn LQ GHSWK E\ 'XQFDQnV PXOWLSOH UDQJH WHVW b ([SW f

PAGE 60

62,/ 1 b '5< :7

PAGE 61

WKH DSSOLHG 1 IURP ,%'8 UHPDLQHG LQ WKH WR FP GHSWK DW WKH WKLUG VDPSOLQJ b RI WKH 1+A12A1 FRXOG EH DFn FRXQWHG IRU LQ WKH VDPH ]RQH 'DWD IRU VRLO WRWDO 1 )LJ $f DOWKRXJK OHVV FRQVLVWHQW LQ WKH WR FP GHSWK WKDQ WKRVH IRU H[FKDQJHDEOH 1+A DQG 12A VXSSRUWHG WKH WUHQG LQ WKH GRZQZDUG PRYHPHQW RI 1 IURP ERWK IHUWLOL]HU VRXUFHV 7KH ILQDO VRLO VDPSOLQJ ZDV FRPSOHWHG ZHHNV DIWHU WKH WUHHV ZHUH IHUWLOL]HG 0XFK RI WKH 1 IURP 1+A12A KDG EHHQ GHSOHWHG IURP WKH VRLO SURILOH )LJ &f 2QO\ b RI WKH DSSOLHG 1 IURP WKLV VRXUFH UHPDLQHG LQ WKH WR FP ]RQH $ SDUW RI WKH GHSOHWLRQ FRXOG EH DWWULEXWHG WR URRW DEVRUSWLRQ 6RLO ZDWHU FRQWHQWV 7DEOH f ZHUH JHQHUn DOO\ EHORZ WKH PD[LPXP ZDWHU VWRUDJH FDSDFLW\ KRZHYHU UDLQIDOO HYHQWV RI DQG FP RQ 'HFHPEHU 'HFHPEHU DQG -DQXDU\ UHVSHFWLYHO\VXJJHVW WKDW OHDFKLQJ RI VRPH 1+A12A1 PD\ KDYH RFFXUUHG EH\RQG WKH FP GHSWK )XUWKHUPRUH SURYLVLRQV ZHUH QRW PDGH LQ WKLV VWXG\ IRU WKH GHWHUPLQDWLRQ RI JDVHRXV ORVVHV RI 1 ZKLFK PD\ KDYH DOVR RFFXUUHG $V LQ WKH SUHYLRXV VDPSOLQJV WKH FRQFHQWUDWLRQV RI H[FKDQJHDEOH 1+A DQG 12a IURP ,%'8 LQ WKH WR FP GHSWK ZHUH ORZHU WKDQ WKRVH IURP 1+1&! )LJ &f 7KHUH ZDV DOVR QR LQGLFDWLRQ RI ,%'81 KDYLQJ EHHQ OHDFKHG EH\RQG WKH FP GHSWK VLQFH b RI WKH DSSOLHG 1 FRXOG EH DFFRXQWHG IRU ZLWKLQ WKLV GHSWK ,Q FRPSDULVRQ WR WKH RWKHU 1 VRXUFHV D JUHDWHU SURSRUWLRQ RI WKH ,%'81 ZDV UHWDLQHG LQ WKH VXUIDFH VRLO )LJ %f

PAGE 62

)LJ (IIHFW RI 1 VRXUFH RQ VRLO WRWDO 1 DW WKH UG $f DQG WK %f VDPSOLQJ GDWHV RQ 2FWREHU DQG -DQXDU\ UHVSHFWLYHO\ 0HDQ VHSDUDWLRQ ZLWKLQ GHSWK E\ 'XQFDQnV PXOWLSOH UDQJH WHVW b FDSLWDO OHWn WHUVf DQG b ORZHU FDVH OHWWHUVf ([SW f

PAGE 63

62,/ 1 b '5< :7

PAGE 64

7DEOH 4XDQWLWDWLYH HVWLPDWHV RI HYDSRUDWLRQ DQG HYDSR WUDQVSLUDWLRQ IURP PDWXUH WUHH SORWV 3HULRG 5DLQIDOO t LUULJDWLRQ FP &ODVV $ SDQ HYDSRUDWLRQ FPGD\ (YDSRWUDQV SLUDWLRQ FPGD\ 3RWHQWLDO QHW OHDFKn LQJ FP +2= 2FW 1RY 1RY 'HF 'HF )HE ] ([FHVV ZDWHU f DQG GHILFLW f WR HIIHFW SHUFRODWLRQ

PAGE 65

7DEOH 6RLO ZDWHU FRQWHQW RI \RXQJ WUHH SORWV KU DIWHU D UDLQIDOO RU LUULJDWLRQ HYHQW 6DPSOLQJ GDWH &XPXODWLYH UDLQIDOO DQG LUULJDWLRQ FP 6RLO ZDWHU FPf FP )LHOG FDSDFLW\ FPfFP 2FW 2FW 2FW -DQ

PAGE 66

,Q ([SHULPHQW VHWV RI VRLO VDPSOHV ZHUH WDNHQ WLPHV RQ $SULO $SULO DQG 0D\ IROORZLQJ DQG FP UHVSHFWLYHO\ RI FXPXODWLYH UDLQIDOO DQG LUULJDWLRQ 7KHVH VDPSOHV ZHUH QRW VXIILFLHQW IRU WKH GHWHUPLQDWLRQ RI H[FKDQJHDEOH 1+A DQG 12A 6RLO WRWDO 1 FRQFHQWUDWLRQV LQ WKLV H[SHULPHQW ZHUH KLJKHU WKDQ WKRVH IURP ([SHULPHQW )LJV f &RQWDPLQDWLRQ IURP WKH UHJXODU IDOO f DQG VSULQJ f IHUWLOL]DWLRQ RI DGMDFHQW PDWXUH WUHHV PD\ KDYH FRQWULEXWHG WR WKH KLJKHU VRLO YDOXHV LQ ([SHULPHQW DV FRPSDUHG WR ([SHULPHQW $V LQ ([SHULPHQW KRZHYHU WKHUH ZDV D WUHQG WRZDUGV GHFUHDVHG VRLO 1 FRQWHQW ZLWK LQFUHDVLQJ FXPXODWLYH UDLQn IDOO DQG LUULJDWLRQ )LJV f $W WKH ILUVW VDPSOLQJ WKHUH ZDV DQ LQGLFDWLRQ RI VRPH 1.A12A1 KDYLQJ PRYHG WR WKH FP GHSWK )LJ f ZKLOH RQO\ D VPDOO DPRXQW RI ,%'81 PD\ KDYH PRYHG WR WKH FP GHSWK 6RPH 1 IURP ,%'8 DSSHDUHG WR KDYH UHDFKHG WR WKH FP GHSWK DV LQGLFDWHG E\ WKH EXOJH DW WKH VHFRQG VDPSOLQJ )LJ f EXW WKH GDWD IURP ([SHULPHQW )LJ % &f VXJJHVW WKDW WKLV FRXOG EH D VDPSOLQJ HUURU RU HUURU LQKHUHQW LQ WKH VRLO WRWDO 1 SURFHGXUH $V LQ ([SHULPHQW D KLJKHU SURSRUWLRQ RI WKH 1 IURP ,%'8 UHODWLYH WR WKH RWKHU VRXUFHV ZDV VWLOO UHWDLQHG DW WKH VXUIDFH VRLO DW WKH ODVW VDPSOLQJ )LJ f

PAGE 67

FP FXPXODWLYH UDLQIDOO DQG LUULJDWLRQ RU R R &2 , / '(37+ FP )LJ (IIHFW RI 1 VRXUFH RQ WRWDO VRLO 1 DW WKH VW VDPSOLQJ RQ $SULO 0HDQ VHSDUDWLRQ E\ 'XQFDQnV PXOWLSOH UDQJH WHVW b ([SW f A R

PAGE 68

62,/ 1 b '5< :7 )LJ (IIHFW RI 1 VRXUFH RQ WRWDO VRLO 1 DW WKH QG VDPSOLQJ RQ $SULO 0HDQ VHSDUDWLRQ E\ 'XQFDQnV PXOWLSOH UDQJH WHVW b ([SW f

PAGE 69

62,/ 1 b '5< :7 )LJ (IIHFW RI 1 VRXUFH RQ WRWDO VRLO 1 DW WKH UG VDPSOLQJ RQ 0DUFK 0HDQ VHSDUDWLRQ E\ 'XQFDQnV PXOWLSOH UDQJH WHVW b ([SW f &7O .}f

PAGE 70

5HFRYHU\ RI )HUWLOL]HU1 LQ WKH 6RLO3ODQW 6\VWHP 7KH UHFRYHU\ RI IHUWLOL]HU1 LQ WKH VRLO SURILOH DQG LQ WKH WUHH ZDV FDOFXODWHG E\ VXEWUDFWLQJ WKH 1 FRQWHQW RI WKH FRQWURO IURP WKH IHUWLOL]HG SORWV DQG H[SUHVVLQJ LW DV D SHUFHQW RI WKH DPRXQW RI 1 DSSOLHG )RU WKH 1+A12A WUHDWn PHQW LQ ([SHULPHQW ERWK VRLO WRWDO 1 DQG LQRUJDQLF 1 ZHUH XVHG LQ WKH FDOFXODWLRQV 'DWD IRU WKH LQRUJDQLF 1 SURFHGXUH LQGLFDWHG WKDW DIWHU ZHHNV b RI 1 DSSDUHQWO\ UHPDLQHG LQ WKH WR FP VRLO SURILOH ZKHUH 1+A12A KDG EHHQ DSSOLHG 7DEOH f 6L[W\VL[ DQG b RI 1 IURP WKH ,%'8 DQG 1+A12A VRXUFHV UHVSHFWLYHO\ UHPDLQHG LQ WKLV ]RQH ZKHQ WKH FDOn FXODWLRQV ZHUH EDVHG RQ VRLO WRWDO 1 YDOXHV 7KH GLVFUHSn DQF\ LQ WKH 1+A12A1 ILJXUHV FRXOG KDYH UHVXOWHG IURP WKH ODUJHU HUURUV LQKHUHQW LQ WKH WRWDO 1 SURFHGXUH DV FRPSDUHG WR WKH LQRUJDQLF 1 SURFHGXUH f ,Q ([SHULPHQW ZKHUH WKH LQLWLDO VRLO WRWDO 1 FRQn WHQWV ZHUH KLJKHU DV FRPSDUHG WR ([SHULPHQW WKH WRWDO DPRXQW RI 1 LQ WKH WR FP GHSWK ZDV DOVR JUHDWHU 7DEOH f 2Q WKH EDVLV RI WRWDO 1 FDOFXODWLRQV DQG b RI WKH DSSOLHG 1 ZHUH SUHVHQW LQ WKH VRLO IURP ,%'8 DQG 1+A12A VRXUFHV UHVSHFWLYHO\ +LJKHU VRLO 1 UHFRYHULHV LQ WKLV H[SHULPHQW LQ FRPSDULVRQ WR WKRVH LQ ([SHULPHQW SUREDEO\ UHSUHVHQWHG WKH GLIIHUHQFH LQ GXUDWLRQ RI HDFK H[SHULPHQW DQG ZHHNV UHVSHFWLYHO\ 7KH UHODWLYHO\ KLJK 1 UHFRYHULHV IURP VRLO ZKHUH ,%'8 KDG EHHQ DSSOLHG LQ ERWK H[SHULPHQWV VXJJHVWHG YHU\ OLWWOH

PAGE 71

7DEOH 1LWURJHQ EDODQFH VKHHW DQG DSSDUHQW DSSOLHG 1 UHFRYHU\ ] ([SW 1 UDWH 1 VRXUFH 3ODQW 6RLO FPf b 1 UHFRYHU\ 7RWDO 1 6ROX 3ODQW 6RLO 7RWDO EOH 1 7RWDO 1 6ROX EOH 1 7RWDO 1 6ROX EOH 1 J &RQWURO f§ f§ f§ f§ J ,%'7-1 FP f§ f§ f§ ZHHNVf QKQRQ &RQWURO f§ f§ f§ f§ f§ Jf ,%'81 FP f§ f§ QKQRQ &RQWURO f§ f§ f§ f§ f§ f§ J f ,%'81 FP f§ 4 f§ f§ QKQRQ f§ f§ U f§ ZHHNVf &RQWURO f§ f§ f§ f§ f§ Jf FQL ,%'81 f§ f§ 4 f§ 7? QKQRaQ f§ f§ f§ f5HFRYHU\ RI 1 REWDLQHG DV WKH GLIIHUHQFH LQ WRWDO 1 EHWZHHQ XQIHUWLOL]HG DQG IHUWLOL]HG WUHH SORWV DQG H[SUHVVHG DV D b RI WKH DPRXQW RI 1 DSSOLHG

PAGE 72

LI DQ\ OHDFKLQJ ORVV RI 1 IURP WKLV VRXUFH 6RPH OHDFKLQJ RI 1 IURP 1+A12A PD\ KDYH RFFXUUHG 2WKHU FRPSOH[ SURFHVVHV LQYROYHG LQ 1 UHDFWLRQV LQFOXGLQJ GHQLWULILFDWLRQ DQG RWKHU JDVHRXV ORVVHV PD\ KDYH FRQWULEXWHG WR ORZHU VRLO UHFRYHUn LHV RI 1 IURP 1+A12A UHODWLYH WR ,%'8 7KH UHFRYHU\ RI 1 E\ WKH WUHH ZDV FDOFXODWHG IRU WKH WRWDO DUHD IHUWLOL]HG FP f EXW DV WKH URRW V\Vn WHP RFFXSLHG D FLUFXODU DUHD RI OHVV WKDQ FP GLDPHWHU FP f 1 UHFRYHU\ ZDV DOVR FDOFXODWHG IRU WKH ODWWHU DUHD ,Q ([SHULPHQW RQ WKH EDVLV RI WKH VPDOOHU DUHD DQG b RI WKH 1 DGGHG ZHUH UHFRYHUHG LQ WKRVH WUHHV IHUWLOL]HG ZLWK ,%'8 DQG 1+A12A UHVSHFWLYHO\ ,W ZDV RQO\ DQG b IRU WKH VDPH UHVSHFWLYH VRXUFHV ZKHQ WKH ODUJHU DUHD ZDV WKH EDVLV RI FDOFXODWLRQ 7KH GLIIHUHQFHV LQ 1 UHFRYHULHV IURP WKH DUHDV LPSO\ D KLJKHU HIILFLHQF\ RI 1 XVH LI WKH IHUWLOL]HU LV DSSOLHG RQ D VPDOOHU DUHD DURXQG WKH WUHH UDWKHU WKDQ RQ D ODUJHU RQH ZKHUH WKH SRn WHQWLDO IRU 1 ORVV PD\ EH JUHDW ,W KDV EHHQ VXJJHVWHG WKDW SODQW UHFRYHU\ RI 1 E\ WKH GLIIHUHQFH PHWKRG JHQHUDOO\ \LHOGHG KLJKHU YDOXHV FRPn SDUHG WR WKH WUDFHU SURFHGXUH SUHVXPDEO\ EHFDXVH IHUWLn OL]DWLRQ PD\ VWLPXODWH DGGLWLRQDO 1 XSWDNH IURP VRLO VRXUFHV f 7KLV PLJKW KDYH FRQWULEXWHG WR WKH KLJK 1 UHFRYHULHV SDUWLFXODUO\ ZKHUH 1+A12A ZDV WKH VRXUFH 7KH KLJKHU WUHH UHFRYHU\ RI 1+A12A1 DSSHDUHG WR EH UHODWHG WR

PAGE 73

WKH UHDG\ DYDLODELOLW\ RI WKLV IHUWLOL]HU LQ FRPSDULVRQ WR ,%'8 D JUHDWHU SURSRUWLRQ RI ZKLFK ZDV UHWDLQHG LQ WKH VXUIDFH VRLO 2Q WKH EDVLV RI WKH VPDOOHU DUHD FDOFXODWLRQV WUHHV IHUWLOL]HG ZLWK ,%'8 DQG 1+A12A LQ ([SHULPHQW UHFRYHUHG RQO\ DQG bUHVSHFWLYHO\ RI WKH DSSOLHG 1 7DEOH f 5HFRYHULHV IURP WKH UHVSHFWLYH VRXUFHV ZHUH DQG b IRU WKH ODUJH DUHD 7KH ORZHU WUHH UHFRYHU\ RI DSSOLHG 1 LQ ([SHULPHQW YV ([SHULPHQW ZDV SDUWO\ UHODWHG WR WKH VPDOOHU WUHHV XVHG LQ WKH IRUPHU H[SHULPHQW DQG SDUWO\ EHn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n WDO GU\ PDWWHU RI WKH SODQW WR LWV WRWDO QXWULHQW FRQWHQW LH GU\ ZHLJKWWRWDO QXWULHQW UDWLR 7KH ORZHU WKLV UDWLR WKH JUHDWHU WKH QXWULHQW DEVRUSWLRQ IURP WKDW VRXUFH $Vn VXPLQJ WKH UDWLR LV OLQHDU ZLWK WLPH WKH 1 VWDWXV RI WKH WUHHV ZDV SURMHFWHG E\ SORWWLQJ WKH UDWLR GDWD IRU

PAGE 74

)LJ 3URMHFWLRQ RI UHODWLYH WUHH DEVRUSWLRQ RI 1 IURP ,%'8 DQG 1+A12A VRXUFHV ZLWK WLPH ([SWV DQG f

PAGE 75

5$7,2 '5< :7 1

PAGE 76

([SHULPHQWV DQG )LJ f 7KHRUHWLFDOO\ XS WR ZHHNV DIWHU IHUWLOL]HU1 DSSOLFDWLRQ 1+1&!1 ZRXOG FRQn WLQXH WR EH DEVRUEHG PRUH WKDQ ,%'81 EXW DIWHU ZHHNV WKH UHYHUVH ZRXOG EH H[SHFWHG 7KHUH LV HYLGHQFH WKDW WKH SHULRG RI H[WHQGHG DYDLODELOLW\ IURP VROXEOH 1 VRXUFHV DIWHU WKH LQLWLDO IOXVK RI JURZWK RI YHJHWDEOH FURSV DSSURDFKHV WKDW RI WKH PRUH VORZO\ DYDLODEOH 1 VRXUFHV f ,Q YLHZ RI WKH H[WUHPHO\ VROXEOH QDWXUH RI 1+A12A KRZHYHU PRVW RI WKH 1 ZLOO KDYH SUREDEO\ EHHQ GHSOHWHG IURP WKH VRLO DIWHU ZHHNV 7RWDO DSSDUHQW 1 UHFRYHU\ LQ WKH VRLOSODQW V\VWHP LQ ([SHULPHQW DPRXQWHG WR DQG IRU 1+1a DQG ,%'81 UHVSHFWLYHO\ 7DEOH f 7KH WRWDO 1 SURFHGXUH LQGLFDWHG D KLJKHU UHFRYHU\ RI 1 IURP WKH 1+1&! SORWV LQ FRPSDULVRQ WR WKH VROXEOH 1 SURFHGXUH 7KH DSSDUHQWO\ YDULDEOH WRWDO 1 UHFRYHU\ ZDV SUREDEO\ GXH WR WKH ODUJHU HUURUV DVVRFLDWHG ZLWK WKH XVH RI WKH WRWDO 1 SURFHGXUH LQ VRLO DQDO\VLV YV WKH VROXEOH 1 DSSURDFK f ,Q ([SHULPHQW ZKHUH RQO\ VRLO WRWDO 1 ZDV DQDO\]HG DQG b RI WKH DGGHG 1 IURP ,('8 DQG 1+12A UHVSHFn WLYHO\ ZHUH DSSDUHQWO\ UHFRYHUHG LQ WKH VRLOSODQW V\VWHP ZKHQ WKH VPDOO DUHD ZDV WKH EDVLV RI FDOFXODWLRQ ,W ZDV QRW SRVVLEOH WR DFFRXQW IRU WKH GHILFLW LQ 1 EDODQFH LQ ERWK H[SHULPHQWV 1HYHUWKHOHVV VRLO 1 GDWD LQ ([SHULPHQW )LJ $&f DQG UDLQIDOO HYHQWV RI DQG FP ZLWKn LQ D GD\ SHULRG LPSO\ WKDW VRPH OHDFKLQJ RI 1 DW OHDVW IURP

PAGE 77

1+A12A PD\ KDYH FRQWULEXWHG WR WKH GHILFLW 3URFHVVHV LQYROYHG LQ WKH 1 F\FOH LQFOXGLQJ GHQLWULILFDWLRQ DQG RWKHU JDVHRXV ORVVHV RI 1 PD\ DOVR KDYH EHHQ UHIOHFWHG LQ WKH XQDFFRXQWHG IRU SDUW RI WKH EDODQFH ([SHULPHQW 1LWURJHQ 'LVWULEXWLRQ LQ %HDULQJ 2UDQJH 7UHHV )UXLW \LHOG DQG HVWLPDWH RI OHDI QXPEHU (DFK RI WKH FRQWURO ,%'8 DQG 1+A12AIHUWLOL]HG WUHHV VKRZHG IUHVK IUXLW \LHOGV RI DQG ILHOG ER[HV RI NJ UHVSHFWLYHO\ 7DEOH f 7KHVH GDWD LQGLFDWHG WKDW \LHOGV FDQ EH VHYHUHO\ OLPLWHG E\ D ODFN RI 1 1Ln WURJHQIHUWLOL]HG WUHHV KDG DERXW WLPHV DV PXFK WRWDO IUXLW GU\ ZHLJKW DV WKH FRQWURO WUHH 7KH XQUHSOLFDWHG QDWXUH RI WKH H[SHULPHQW KRZHYHU SUHFOXGHG WKH HVWDEOLVKn PHQW RI GHILQLWH FRQFOXVLRQV SHUWDLQLQJ WR WKH \LHOG GDWD 1HYHUWKHOHVV LW LV JHQHUDOO\ DFFHSWHG WKDW LQFUHDVHG 1 VXSSO\ UHVXOWV LQ LQFUHDVHG FLWUXV IUXLW \LHOG 'DWD IURP D )ORULGD H[SHULPHQW f ZLWK n3LQHDSSOHn RUDQJH VKRZHG WKDW DV WKH UDWH RI 1 ZDV LQFUHDVHG XS WR NJKD\HDU \LHOG LQFUHDVHG 7KH HVWLPDWHG OHDI QXPEHU RI WKH IHUWLOL]HG WUHHV ZDV LQ UHDVRQDEOH DJUHHPHQW ZLWK WKH OHDYHV HVWLPDWHG E\ %DUQHWWH HW DOB f IRU D JUDSHIUXLW WUHH LQ )ORULGD EXW ORZHU WKDQ WKH OHDYHV VDPSOHG IURP D \HDUROG n9DOHQFLDn RUDQJH WUHH LQ &DOLIRUQLD f 7UHHV LQ WKH

PAGE 78

7DEOH 0DWXUH WUHH SORW \LHOG DQG 1 FRQWHQW SDUDPHWHUV DQG UHVLGXDO VRLO 1 7UHDWPHQW %R[HV IUXLW WUHH ] 7RWDO IUXLW GU\ ZW WUHHNJ )UXLW 1 FRQWHQW b GU\ ZW 1 UHn PRYHG LQ IUXLWV J (VWLn PDWHG WRWDO OHDI QR /HDI 1 FRQWHQW b GU\ ZW 7RWDO OHDI 1 J 6RLO 1 FPf NJSORW\ 8QIHUWLOL]HG WUHH ,%'8 IHUWLOL]HG WUHH 1+1 IHUWLOL]HG WUHH )LHOG ER[ RI IUXLW HTXDOV NJ A3ORW DUHD P GLDP

PAGE 79

&DOLIRUQLD VWXG\ ZHUH KRZHYHU ODUJHU DV LQGLFDWHG E\ WKHLU KHLJKW DQG ZLGWK 7KH FRQWURO WUHH LQ WKH FXUUHQW VWXG\ KDG D ORZHU OHDI QXPEHU WKDQ HLWKHU RI WKH IHUWLOL]HG WUHHV E\ YLUWXH RI D OHVVHU OHDI GHQVLW\ ZKLFK FDQ EH DWn WULEXWHG WR D ODFN RI 1 )UXLW DQG OHDI 1 FRQWHQW 6HYHUDO DSSURDFKHV KDYH EHHQ XVHG WR GHWHUPLQH FLWUXV IHUWLOL]HU QHHGV 2QH VFKRRO RI WKRXJKW DGYRFDWHV UHWXUQn LQJ WR WKH VRLO WKH DPRXQW RI QXWULHQWV UHPRYHG LQ WKH FURS RI IUXLW (PEOHWRQ HW DO f FRQVLGHUHG WKLV DSSURDFK XQVRXQG SDUWLFXODUO\ ZLWK UHVSHFW WR WKH OHVV PRELOH QXn WULHQWV 1HYHUWKHOHVV EHFDXVH WKH\ UHSUHVHQW SDUW RI WKH 1 EDODQFH VKHHW GDWD UHODWHG WR FURS UHPRYDO RI 1 ZKHQ FRPELQHG ZLWK OHDI DQDO\WLFDO GDWD KDYH D VLJQLILFDQW SRn WHQWLDO IRU JXLGDQFH LQ WKH 1 PDQDJHPHQW RI FLWUXV JURYHV 7KH FRQFHQWUDWLRQ RI 1 LQ WKH IUXLW IURP WKH IHUWLn OL]HG WUHHV ZDV KLJKHU WKDQ WKDW RI WKH XQIHUWLOL]HG WUHHV 7DEOH f $V D UHVXOW ZKHQ ERWK WRWDO IUXLW GU\ ZHLJKW DQG 1 FRQFHQWUDWLRQ DUH FRQVLGHUHG WKH DPRXQW RI 1 UHn PRYHG LQ IUXLW ZDV LQ WKH RUGHU RI 1+A12A ,%'8IHUWLOL]HG FRQWURO WUHHV )LYH WLPHV PRUH 1 ZDV UHPRYHG LQ IUXLW IURP IHUWLOL]HG WUHHV DV FRPSDUHG WR WKH FRQWURO WUHH 5HLW] f UHSRUWHG WKDW LQ )ORULGD NJ RI 1 DUH UHn PRYHG LQ HYHU\ NJ RI IUHVK IUXLW 5HFDOFXODWLRQ RI WKH GDWD LQ 7DEOH LQGLFDWHV WKDW DQG NJ RI 1 ZRXOG EH UHPRYHG LQ NJ RI IUXLW IURP WKH 1+A12A DQG ,%'8IHUWLOL]HG WUHHV UHVSHFWLYHO\

PAGE 80

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n HURQ DQG $SSOHPDQ f IRU D \HDUROG n9DOHQFLDn RUDQJH WUHH 7KLV FORVH DJUHHPHQW OHQGV DGGHG FUHGHQFH WR WKH SURn FHGXUH XVHG LQ WKLV VWXG\ IRU HVWLPDWLQJ WKH OHDI QXPEHU 6RLO 7RWDO 1 &RQWHQW DQG 'LVWULEXWLRQ )HUWLOL]HG IDOORZ SORWV UHFHLYHG b JE P GLDn PHWHU DUHDf RI WKH WRWDO DQQXDO DPRXQW RI IHUWLOL]HU1 DSn SOLHG WR WKH IHUWLOL]HG WUHH SORWV JWUHHf 7KUHH VHWV RI VRLO VDPSOHV ZHUH FROOHFWHG RQ 1RYHPEHU 'HFHPEHU DQG )HEUXDU\ 7KHVH VDPSOLQJ GDWHV FRUUHVn SRQG WR FXPXODWLYH UDLQIDOO DQG LUULJDWLRQ RI DQG FP UHVSHFWLYHO\ VLQFH 2FWREHU 6DPSOHV ZHUH QRW VXIILFLHQW IRU WKH GHWHUPLQDWLRQ RI H[FKDQJHDEOH 1+A DQG 12A KHQFH RQO\ WKH WRWDO 1 SURFHGXUH ZDV XVHG $W WKH ILUVW VDPSOLQJ VRPH 1 IURP ERWK ,%'8 DQG 1+A12A DSSHDUHG WR KDYH PRYHG DW OHDVW GRZQ WR WKH FP GHSWK LQ

PAGE 81

WKH IDOORZ SORWV )LJ f 7KH DPRXQW RI 1+A12A1 OHDFKHG DV UHIOHFWHG E\ WKH ORZHU FRQFHQWUDWLRQ LQ WKH WR FP GHSWK DQG KLJKHU FRQFHQWUDWLRQ LQ WKH WR FP ]RQH ZDV JUHDWHU WKDQ WKDW RI ,%'81 ,Q WKH IHUWLn OL]HG WUHH SORWV 1+A12A1 DSSHDUHG WR EH GHSOHWHG UDSLGO\ IURP WKH WR FP ]RQH ZKLOH D FRQVLGHUDEOH DPRXQW RI ,%'8 VWLOO UHPDLQHG LQ WKLV ]RQH )LJ f 7KH DSSDUHQW UDSLG GHSOHWLRQ RI 1+A12A1 IURP WKLV ]RQH FRXOG EH DWWULn EXWHG WR URRW DEVRUSWLRQ LQ YLHZ RI WKH UHDGLO\ DYDLODEOH QDWXUH RI 1+A12A IHUWLOL]HU +LJKHU 1 FRQFHQWUDWLRQV SDUn WLFXODUO\ IRU WKH ,%'8 WUHDWPHQW LQ WKH WR FP GHSWK DV FRPSDUHG WR WKH FRQWURO FRXOG KDYH EHHQ GXH WR WKH UHVLGXDO 1 IURP SUHYLRXV DSSOLFDWLRQV 'DWD IRU WKH VHFRQG VDPSOLQJ GDWH )LJ f VXJJHVW WKDW VRPH 1 IURP ERWK IHUWLOL]HU VRXUFHV KDV OHDFKHG WR WKH FP GHSWK LQ WKH IHUWLOL]HG SORWV 6RLO ZDWHU FRQWHQWV 7DEOH f DQG HYDSRWUDQVSLUDWLRQ GDWD 7DEOH f DOVR WHQG WR VXSSRUW WKLV 6LQFH WKH PRYHPHQW RI 1 SDUWLFXODUO\ 12A1 LQ XQFURSSHG VRLOV LV FORVHO\ UHODWHG WR ZDWHU PRYHn PHQW LQ WKH SURILOH f LW LV OLNHO\ WKDW VRPH 1 OHDFKHG SDVW WKH FP GHSWK ,Q WKH PDWXUH WUHH SORWV WKHUH ZDV HYLGHQFH WKDW VRPH 1 KDG PRYHG DW OHDVW WR WKH FP GHSWK ZKHQ 1+A12A ZDV WKH IHUWLOL]HU DSSOLHG )LJ f ,W LV GLIILFXOW WR WUDFH WKH PRYHPHQW RI 1 LQ WKH VRLO SURn ILOH LQ WKH SUHVHQFH RI D WUHH KRZHYHU EHFDXVH RI URRW DEVRUSWLRQ

PAGE 82

)LJ (IIHFW RI 1 VRXUFH RQ WRWDO VRLO 1 RI IDOORZ SORWV DW WKH VW VDPSOLQJ RQ 1RYHPEHU ([SW f

PAGE 83

)LJ (IIHFW RI 1 VRXUFH RQ WRWDO VRLO 1 RI WUHH SORWV DW WKH VW VDPSOLQJ RQ 1RYHPEHU ([SW f &7O

PAGE 84

62,/ 1 b '5< :7 )LJ F P RI FXPXODWLYH UDLQIDOO DQG LUULJDWLRQ r r )$//2: &21752/ R R )$//2: % '81 A '(37+FP (IIHFW RI 1 VRXUFH RQ WRWDO VRLO 1 RI IDOORZ SORWV DW WKH QG VDPSOLQJ RQ 'HFHPEHU ([SW f

PAGE 85

7DEOH 6RLO ZDWHU LUULJDWLRQ FRQWHQW LQ WKH HYHQW PDWXUH WUHH SORWV KU DIWHU D UDLQIDOO RU &XPXODWLYH 'HSWK 6RLO ZDWHU FRQWHQW b E\ YRO f UDLQIDOO FP DQG 8QIHUWLOL]HG ,%'8 QKQR 8QIHUWLOL]HG ,%'8 QKQR LUULJDWLRQ IDOORZ IDOORZ IDOORZ WUHH WUHH WUHH FP 3URILOH ZDWHU FRQWHQW FP r

PAGE 86

7DEOH FRQWLQXHGf &XPXODWLYH 'HSWK FP 6RLO ZDWHU FRQWHQW b E\ YRO UDLQIDOO 8QIHUWLOL]HG ,%'8 QKQR 8QIHUWLOL]HG ,%'8 1+1r DQG LUULJDWLRQ FP IDOORZ IDOORZ IDOORZ WUHH WUHH WUHH 3URILOH ZDWHU FRQWHQW FP 3URILOH ZDWHU FRQWHQW FP

PAGE 87

)LJ (IIHFW RI 1 VRXUFH RQ WRWDO VRLO 1 RI WUHH SORWV DW WKH QG VDPSOLQJ RQ 'HFHPEHU ([SW f

PAGE 88

$V LQ ([SHULPHQWV DQG VRLO WRWDO 1 FRQWHQW JHQHUn DOO\ GHFUHDVHG ZLWK WLPH LQ WKH WUHH SORWV SDUWO\ EHFDXVH RI WUHH DEVRUSWLRQ RI 1 $W WKH ODVW VDPSOLQJ DOPRVW DOO RI WKH DSSOLHG 1+A12A1 LQ WKH IDOORZ DQG WUHH SORWV KDG GLVVLSDWHG IURP WKH WR FP GHSWK EXW FRQVLGHUDEOH ,%'81 UHPDLQHG )LJV DQG f 5HFRYHU\ RI )HUWLOL]HU1 LQ WKH 6RLO )UXLW DQG /HDI 7KH UHFRYHU\ RI DSSOLHG 1 LQ WKH VRLO IUXLW DQG OHDI ZDV FDOFXODWHG E\ WKH GLIIHUHQFH SURFHGXUH XVHG LQ ERWK ([SHULPHQWV DQG &RPSDUHG WR WKH \RXQJ WUHH H[SHULn PHQWV KRZHYHU OHVV FRQILGHQFH FDQ EH H[SHFWHG LQ WKH 1 UHFRYHU\ GDWD IRU ([SHULPHQW 7KH DEVHQFH RI UHSOLFDn WLRQV LQ WKH PDWXUH WUHH H[SHULPHQW SUHFOXGHG WKH HVWDEn OLVKPHQW RI SODXVLEOH FRQFOXVLRQV )XUWKHUPRUH VLQFH WKH WUHHV KDG EHHQ IHUWLOL]HG IRU VHYHUDO \HDUV LW LV GLIILn FXOW WR VHSDUDWH WKH HIIHFW RI SUHYLRXV IHUWLOL]DWLRQ RQ 1 FRQWHQWV RI WUHH SDUWV DQG WKH VRLO 7KH XVH RI DQ HPSLULFDO SURFHGXUH LQ WKH HVWLPDWH RI OHDI WRWDO 1 DQG WKH ODUJH VDPSOLQJ DQG DQDO\WLFDO HUURUV DVVRFLDWHG ZLWK WKH VRLO WRWDO 1 SURFHGXUH DUH DGGLWLRQDO IDFWRUV ZKLFK UHGXFH WKH FRQILGHQFH LQ WKH 1 UHFRYHU\ GDWD 1HYHUWKHOHVV WKH 1 UHFRYHU\ GDWD 7DEOH f PD\ VHUYH D XVHIXO SXUSRVH LQ VWLPXODWLQJ DGGLWLRQDO UHVHDUFK 7KH SURSRUWLRQ RI DSSOLHG 1 UHFRYHUHG LQ WKH WR FP VRLO GHSWK RI WKH ,%'8 DQG 1+A12AIHUWLOL]HG PDWXUH WUHH SORWV ZDV DQG b UHVSHFWLYHO\ 7KH IUXLWV DFFRXQWHG IRU DQG b RI DSSOLHG 1 DQG WKH OHDYHV DQG b

PAGE 89

)LJ (IIHFW RI 1 VRXUFH RQ WRWDO VRLO 1 RI IDOORZ SORWV DW WKH UG VDPSOLQJ RQ )HEUXDU\ ([SW f

PAGE 90

FP RI FXPXODWLYH UDLQIDOO DQG LUULJDOLRQ R &2 r r &21752/ 75(( L L L L '(37+ FP )LJ (IIHFW RI 1 VRXUFH RQ WRWDO VRLO 1 RI WUHH SORWV DW WKH UG VDPSOLQJ RQ )HEUXDU\ ([SW f

PAGE 91

7DEOH $SSDUHQW SORWV] DSSOLHG 1 UHFRYHU\ bf LQ PDWXUH WUHH 7UHDWPHQW )UXLWV /HDYHV 6RLO 7RWDO ,%'8IHUWLOL]HG WUHH 1+A12AI HUWLOL]HG WUHH &DOFXODWHG IURP WKH GLIIHUHQFH LQ 1 FRQWHQW IRU HDFK 1 EDODQFH FRPSRQHQW EHWZHHQ WKH FRQWURO DQG IHUWLOL]HG WUHH SORWV DQG H[SUHVVHG DV WKH b RI WKH DPRXQW RI 1 DSSOLHG

PAGE 92

IRU WKH VDPH UHVSHFWLYH VRXUFHV 7KH DSSDUHQW WRWDO UHn FRYHU\ RI DSSOLHG 1 ZKHQ IUXLWV OHDYHV DQG WKH VRLO DUH FRQVLGHUHG DPRXQWHG WR b IRU WKH ,%'8 WUHDWPHQW DQG b IRU WKH 1+A12A WUHDWPHQW ,W LV VXJJHVWHG WKDW WKH GHILFLWV LQ WKH 1 EDODQFH FRXOG EH SDUWO\ DFFRXQWHG IRU LQ WKH SHUPDQHQW VWUXFWXUHV RI WKH WUHH 6PLWK f HVWLPDWHG WKDW b RI WKH WRWDO 1 ZDV IRXQG LQ WKH OHDYHV RI \HDUROG n9DOHQFLDn RUDQJH WUHHV LQ )ORULGD 2Q WKLV EDVLV FRQWURO ,%'8 DQG 1+A12A WUHDWHG WUHHV LQ WKLV H[SHULPHQW ZRXOG FRQWDLQ DQG J RI 1 UHVSHFWLYHO\ ,W ZDV DOVR LQGLFDWHG WKDW b RI WKH WRWDO 1 RI WKH WUHH ZDV IRXQG LQ SDUWV RWKHU WKDQ OHDYHV DQG IUXLW f 2Q WKH EDVLV RI WKLV DVVXPSn WLRQ DQG b RI WKH DSSOLHG 1 ZRXOG EH H[SHFWHG WR EH LQ WUHH SDUWV RWKHU WKDQ IUXLWV DQG OHDYHV IRU ,%'8 DQG 1+A12 WUHDWHG WUHHV UHVSHFWLYHO\ :KHQ WKHVH ILJXUHV DUH DGGHG WR WKH PHDVXUHG UHFRYHU\ RI DSSOLHG 1 DQG b RI DSn SOLHG 1 IURP ,%'8 DQG 1+A12A VRXUFHV UHVSHFWLYHO\ FRXOG EH DFFRXQWHG IRU LQ WKH VRLOSODQW V\VWHP 1R DFFRXQW FRXOG EH PDGH IRU WKH UHPDLQLQJ b 7KHVH DSSDUHQWO\ KLJK UHFRYHULHV RI DSSOLHG 1 PD\ LQn GLFDWH WKDW WKH WUHHV KDG DEVRUEHG VRPH 1 DOUHDG\ SUHVHQW LQ WKH VRLO LQ DGGLWLRQ WR WKDW DSSOLHG LQ WKLV VWXG\ $OVR VXEVWDQWLDO OHDFKLQJ RI 1 PD\ QRW KDYH EHHQ VLJQLILn FDQW $OWKRXJK WKH SRWHQWLDO IRU WKH OHDFKLQJ RI 1 H[LVn WHG 7DEOH f WKH ODUJH URRW V\VWHPV RI WKH PDWXUH W UHHV

PAGE 93

PD\ KDYH DEVRUEHG D JUHDWHU SRUWLRQ RI WKH DSSOLHG 1 DV LW PRYHG LQ WKH VRLO SURILOH ,Q YLHZ RI WKH ORZ QXWULHQW UHWDLQLQJ FDSDFLW\ RI )ORULGD VRLOV SODQWHG WR FLWUXV LW KDV RIWHQ EHHQ VXJJHV W HG WKDW WKH HIILFLHQF\ RI 1 XWLOL]DWLRQ E\ FLWUXV LV YHU\ ORZ bf ,Q WKH FXUUHQW VWXG\ KRZHYHU KLJKHU UHn FRYHULHV IRU ERWK \RXQJ bf DQG EHDULQJ bf WUHHV DUH UHSRUWHG ZKHQ 1+A12A ZDV WKH 1 VRXUFH 7KHVH KLJK UHFRYHUn LHV LPSO\ WKDW FLWUXV WUHHV PD\ EH DEVRUELQJ D JUHDWHU SURn SRUWLRQ RI IHUWLOL]HU1 WKDQ SUHYLRXVO\ VXVSHFWHG 7KH XQUHSOLFDWHG QDWXUH DQG VKRUW GXUDWLRQ RI WKH PDWXUH WUHH H[SHULPHQW KRZHYHU FDOO IRU DGGLWLRQDO DGHTXDWHO\ UHSOLn FDWHG H[SHULPHQWV 0RUHRYHU LW ZRXOG EH EHQHILFLDO WR LQn YHVWLJDWH WKH 1 EDODQFH RI \RXQJ FLWUXV WUHHV RYHU D SHULRG ORQJHU WKDQ WKH RQHV XVHG LQ WKLV VWXG\

PAGE 94

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n HQFHV EHFDXVH WKH SDWWHUQ RI GU\ PDWWHU GLVWULEXWLRQ SDUDOOHOHG WKDW RI WKH GU\ PDWWHU 7KHVH GLIIHUHQFHV ZHUH SUREDEO\ WKH UHVXOW RI VHOHFWLYH XVH RI GLIIHUHQW VL]H WUHHV IRU HDFK 1 VRXUFH

PAGE 95

7KHUH ZDV D KLJKO\ VLJQLILFDQW UHODWLRQVKLS EHWZHHQ 1 VRXUFH DQG 1 FRQFHQWUDWLRQ DQG WRWDO 1 RI FRPSRQHQW WUHH SDUWV DQG WRWDO 1 FRQWHQW RI WKH HQWLUH WUHH ,Q HYHU\ FDVH WKH RUGHU ZDV 1+A12A ,%'8IHUWLOL]HG FRQWURO WUHHV 7KLV FRQILUPV WKDW D VROXEOH 1 VRXUFH VXFK DV 1+A12A LV PRUH UHDGLO\ DEVRUEHG E\ WKH WUHHV LQ WKH VKRUWWHUP WKDQ D FRQWUROOHG UHOHDVH IRUP RI 1 2WKHU LQYHVWLJDWLRQV KRZHYHU VXJJHVWHG WKDW WKH DEn VRUSWLRQ RI 1 IURP ERWK IHUWLOL]HU VRXUFHV PLJKW EH GLIIHUHQW LQ ORQJHU SHULRGV 5HJDUGOHVV RI 1 VRXUFH b RI WKH WRWDO WUHH 1 ZDV GLVWULEXWHG LQ ILEURXV DQG ODWHUDO URRWV DQG b LQ WKH OHDYHV 7KLV LOOXVWUDWHV WKH LPSRUWDQFH RI UHFRYHUn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n WLRQ WUHDWPHQWV ZHUH SUREDEO\ QRW VXIILFLHQW WR HOLFLW UHVSRQVHV WR WKH WUHDWPHQWV

PAGE 96

1LWURJHQ EDODQFH GDWD EDVHG RQ WKH FP SORW DUHD VKRZHG WKDW WRWDO DSSDUHQW 1 UHFRYHU\ LQ WKH VRLO SODQW V\VWHP ZDV DQG b IRU ,%'8 DQG 1+A12A1 UHVSHFWLYHO\ 6L[W\VL[ DQG b RI DSSOLHG 1 IURP ,%'8 DQG 1+A12A VRXUFHV UHVSHFWLYHO\ ZHUH UHWDLQHG LQ WKH WR FP VRLO SURILOH 7ZHQW\ILYH DQG b IURP WKH VDPH UHVSHFWLYH VRXUFHV FRXOG EH DFFRXQWHG IRU LQ WKH \RXQJ WUHHV 7KH UHPDLQLQJ b ZDV SUHVXPHG WR KDYH EHHQ OHDFKHG RU ORVW WR WKH DWPRVSKHUH ,Q WKH EHDULQJ WUHH VWXG\ QR GLIIHUHQFH ZDV GHWHFWHG LQ IUXLW \LHOG EHWZHHQ ,%'8 DQG 1+A12A VRXUFHV )HUn WLOL]HG WUHHV KRZHYHU KDG DERXW WLPHV DV PXFK \LHOG DV WKH XQIHUWLOL]HG WUHH 7KH UHODWLYHO\ KLJK UHFRYHU\ RI DSSOLHG 1 LQ \RXQJ DQG EHDULQJ WUHHV VXJJHVW WKDW VXEVWDQWLDO OHDFKLQJ RI 1 PD\ QRW EH D PDMRU URXWH IRU 1 ORVV IURP FLWUXV JURYHV HVWDEOLVKHG RQ GHHSZHOO GUDLQHG VRLOV ZKHQ WKH IHUWLn OL]HU LV DSSOLHG RYHU WKH URRW ]RQH DW UHDVRQDEOH UDWHV $ PDMRU SRUWLRQ RI ,%'81 ZDV UHWDLQHG LQ WKH 4 WR FP GHSWK \HW WKH JURZWK UHVSRQVH RI WKH ,%'8 IHUWLOL]HG \RXQJ WUHHV ZDV VLPLODU WR WKDW RI 1+A12A IHUWLOL]HG WUHHV 7KHUH LV WKHUHIRUH D SRWHQWLDO IRU D VLQJOH DSSOLFDWLRQ RI ,%'8 WR QRQEHDULQJ \RXQJ FLWUXV WUHHV ZKLFK DUH QRUPDOO\ IHUWLOL]HG VHYHUDO WLPHV D

PAGE 97

RUGHU WR HVWDEOLVK LI D VLQJOH DSSOLFDWLRQ RI ,%'8 LV IHDVLEOH IURP WKH VWDQGSRLQW RI HFRQRP\ DQG KRUWLFXOn WXUDO FRQVLGHUDWLRQV

PAGE 98

/,7(5$785( &,7(' $GULDQR '& )+ 7DNDWRUL 3) 3UDWW DQG 2$ /RUHQ] 6RLO 1 EDODQFH LQ VHOHFWHG URZ FURS VLWHV LQ 6RXWKHUQ &DOLIRUQLD (QYLURQ 4XDO $OOLVRQ )( 7KH HQLJPD RI VRLO QLWURJHQ EDOn DQFH VKHHWV $GY $JURQ $YQLPHOHFK < DQG 5DYHK 1LWUDWH OHDNDJH IURP VRLOV GLIIHULQJ LQ WH[WXUH DQG QLWURJHQ ORDG (QYLURQ 4XDO %DQZDUW :/ 0$ 7DEDWDEDL DQG -0 %UHPQHU 'HWHUPLQDWLRQ RI DPPRQLXP LQ VRLO H[WUDFWV DQG ZDWHU VDPSOHV E\ DQ DPPRQLD HOHFWURGH &RPP 6RLO 6FL 3ODQW $QDO %DUQHWWH 50 () 'HEXVN -% +HVWHU DQG +: -RQHV 7KH PLQHUDO DQDO\VLV RI D QLQHWHHQ \HDUROG n0DUVKn VHHGOHVV JUDSHIUXLW &LWUXV ,QGXV f %DUWKRORPHZ :9 /% 1HOVRQ DQG &+ :HUNPDQ 7KH XVH RI QLWURJHQ LVRWRSH 1 LQ ILHOG VWXGLHV ZLWK RDWV $JURQ %LJJDU -: 6SDWLDO YDULDELOLW\ RI 1 LQ VRLOV S ,Q '5 1HLOVHQ DQG -* 0DFGRQDOG HGVf 1LWURJHQ LQ WKH HQYLURQPHQW 9RO 1LWURJHQ EHKDYLRU LQ ILHOG VRLO $FDG 3UHVV 1< 6DQ )UDQFLVFR /RQG %LQJKDP )7 6 'DYLV DQG ( 6KDGH :DWHU UHODWLRQV VDOW EDODQFH DQG QLWUDWH OHDFKLQJ ORVVHV RI D DFUH FLWUXV ZDWHUVKHG 6RLO 6FL %MRUNPDQ ( /XQGHEHUJ DQG + 1RPPLN 'LVWULEXWLRQ DQG EDODQFH RI 1 ODEHOOHG IHUWLn OL]HU QLWURJHQ DSSOLHG WR \RXQJ SLQH WUHHV 3LQXV V\OYHVWULV /f 6WXGLD )RUHVWDOLD 6HX FLFD

PAGE 99

%RZHU &$ DQG /9 :LOFR[ 1LWUDWH FRQWHQW RI WKH 8SSHU 5LR *UDQGH DV LQIOXHQFHG E\ QLWURJHQ IHUWLOL]DWLRQ RI DGMDFHQW LUULJDWHG ODQGV 3URF 6RLO 6FL 6RF $PHU %UDPV ($ DQG -*$ )LVNHOO 9DULDELOLW\ RI URRW DQG VRLO DQDO\VHV RI D n9DOHQFLDn JURYH VDPSOHG LQ -DQXDU\ 3URF )OD 6WDWH +RUW 6RF %UHPQHU -0 7RWDO QLWURJHQ S ,Q &$ %ODFN HGf 0HWKRGV RI VRLO DQDO\VLV 3DUW $JURQRP\ $PHU 6RF $JURQ 0DGLVRQ :LVH ,QRUJDQLF IRUPV RI QLWURJHQ S ,Q &$ %ODFN HGf 0HWKRGV RI VRLO DQDO\VLV 3DUW $JURQRP\ $PHU 6RF $JURQ ,QF 0DGLVRQ :LVH &DKRRQ *$ DQG /+ 6WRO]\ (VWLPDWLQJ URRW GHQVLW\ LQ FLWUXV RUFKDUGV E\ WKH QHXWURQ PRGHUDn WLRQ PHWKRG 3URF $PHU 6RF +RUW 6FL &LWUXV URRW GHQVLW\ LQ UHODWLRQ WR ZDWHU XVH &DOLI &LWURJ &DOYHUW '9 1LWUDWH SKRVSKDWH DQG SRWDVn VLXP PRYHPHQW LQWR GUDLQDJH OLQHV XQGHU VRLO PDQDJHPHQW SUDFWLFHV (QYLURQ 4XDO DQG +5HLW] (IIHFWV RI UDWH DQG IUHTXHQF\ RI IHUWLOL]HU DSSOLFDWLRQV RQ \LHOG DQG TXDOLW\ RI n9DOHQFLDn RUDQJHV LQ WKH ,QGLDQ 5LYHU DUHD 3URF )OD 6WDWH +RUW 6RF DQG +7 3KXQJ 1LWUDWHQLWURJHQ PRYHPHQW LQWR GUDLQDJH OLQHV XQGHU GLIIHUHQW VRLO PDQDJHPHQW V\VWHPV 3URF 6RLO DQG &URS 6FL 6RF )OD &DPHURQ 6+ DQG 2& &RPSWRQ 1LWURJHQ LQ EHDULQJ RUDQJH WUHHV 3URF $PHU 6RF +RUW 6FL DQG $SSOHPDQ 7KH GLVWULEXWLRQ RI WRWDO QLWURJHQ LQ WKH RUDQJH WUHH 3URF $PHU 6RF +RUW 6FL

PAGE 100

&DUOWRQ $% DQG $$5 +DIH] 1 QLWURJHQ IHUWLOL]HU WUDFLQJ H[SHULPHQWV LQ 6DQ -RDTXLQ 9DOOH\ &DOLI $JU f &KDSPDQ +' 0LQHUDO QXWULWLRQ RI FLWUXV S ,Q : 5HXWKHU /' %DWFKHORU DQG +:HEEHU HGVf &LWUXV LQGXVWU\ 5HY HG ,, 8QLY &DOLI 'LY $JU 6FL %HUNHOH\ &DOLI &ROPDQ ($ $ ODERUDWRU\ VWXG\ RI O\VLPHWHU GUDLQDJH XQGHU FRQWUROOHG VRLO PRLVWXUH WHQVLRQ 6RLO 6FL &RRSHU '5 '* +LOO&RWWLQJKDP DQG &3 /OR\G -RQHV 'LVWULEXWLRQ DQG LGHQWLW\ RI ODEHOOHG SURGXFWV IROORZLQJ DXWXPQ DSSOLFDWLRQ RI 1ODEHOOHG XUHD RU SRWDVVLXP QLWUDWH IHUn WLOL]HUV WR DSSOH WUHHV 6FL )RRG $JU &RRSHU :& $ 3H\QDGR -5 )XUU 5+ +LOJHPDQ *$ &DKRRQ DQG 6% %RVZHOO 7UHH JURZWK DQG IUXLW TXDOLW\ RI n9DOHQFLDn RUDQJHV LQ UHODWLRQ WR FOLPDWH 3URF $PHU 6RF +RUW 'H9LWW /HWH\ //XQG DQG -: %ODLU 1LWUDWHQLWURJHQ PRYHPHQW WKURXJK VRLO DV DIIHFWHG E\ VRLO SURILOH FKDUDFWHULVWLFV (QYLURQ 4XDO 'XNH +5 DQG +5 +DLVH 9DFXXP H[WUDFWRUV WR DVVHVV GHHS SHUFRODWLRQ ORVVHV DQG FKHPLFDO FRQVWLWXHQWV RI ZDWHU 3URF 6RLO 6FL 6RF $PHU (GZDUGV 33 DQG 5' +DXFN 1LWURJHQ GHSOHWHG YHUVXV QLWURJHQHQULFKHG DPPRQLXP VXOn IDWH DV WUDFHUV LQ QLWURJHQ XSWDNH VWXGLHV 3URF 6RLO 6FL 6RF $PHU (PEOHWRQ 7: DQG :: -RQHV 1LWURJHQ IHUn WLOL]HU PDQDJHPHQW SURJUDPV QLWUDWHSROOXWLRQ SRWHQWLDO DQG RUDQJH SURGXFWLYLW\ S ,Q '5 1LHOVHQ DQG -* 0DF'RQDOG HGVf 1LWURJHQ LQ WKH HQYLURQPHQW 9RO 1LWURJHQ EHKDYLRU LQ ILHOG VRLO $FDG 3UHVV 1< 6DQ )UDQFLVFR /RQG )ROLDUDSSOLHG QLWURJHQ IRU FLWUXV (QYLURQ 4XDO

PAGE 101

DQG 5/ %UDQVRQ /HDI DQDO\VLV SURYHV XVHIXO LQ LQFUHDVLQJ HIILFLHQF\ RI QLWURJHQ IHUWLOL]DWLRQ RI RUDQJHV DQG UHGXFLQJ QLWUDWH SROOXWLRQ SRWHQWLDO &RPP 6RLO 6FL 3ODQW $QDO f &. /DEDQDXVNDV DQG : 5HXWKHU /HDI DQDO\VLV DV D GLDJQRVWLF WRRO DQG JXLGH WR IHUWLOL]DWLRQ S ,Q : 5HXWKHU HGf &LWUXV LQGXVWU\ 5HY HG ,,, 8QLY &DOLI 'LY $JU 6FL %HUNHOH\ &DOLI +5HLW] DQG :: -RQHV &LWUXV IHUWLOL]DWLRQ S ,QB : 5HXWKHU HGf &LWUXV LQGXVWU\ 5HY HG ,,, 8QLY &DOLI 'LY $JU 6FL %HUNHOH\ &DOLI (ULFNVRQ $( DQG %* (OOLV 7KH QXWULHQW FRQWHQW RI GUDLQDJH ZDWHU IURP DJULFXOWXUDO ODQG 0LFK 6WDWH 8QLY $JU ([SW 6WD (DVW /DQVLQJ 5HV %XOO )RUEHV 5% && +RUWHQVWLQH DQG ): %LVWOLQH 1LWURJHQ 3RWDVVLXP DQG VROXEOH VDOWV LQ WKH VRLO VROXWLRQ LQ D %ODQWRQ ILQH VDQG 6RLO DQG &URS 6FL 6RF )OD *DOODJKHU 3( DQG :9 %DUWKRORPHZ &RPn SDULVRQ RI QLWUDWH SURGXFWLRQ DQG RWKHU SURFHn GXUHV LQ GHWHUPLQLQJ QLWURJHQ DYDLODELOLW\ LQ VRXWKHDVWHUQ &RDVWDO 3ODLQ VRLOV $JURQ *UDHW] '$ /& +DPPRQG DQG -0 'DYLGVRQ 1LWUDWH PRYHPHQW LQ D (XVWLV ILQH VDQG SODQWHG WR PLOOHW 3URF 6RLO DQG &UR' 6FL 6RF )OD r *UDVPDQLV 9& DQG '-' 1LFKRODV $QQXDO XSWDNH RI 1ODEHOOHG DPPRQLD DQG QLWUDWH LQ \RXQJ n-RQDWKDQn 00 DSSOH WUHHV JURZQ LQ VROXn WLRQ FXOWXUH 3ODQW DQG 6RLO +DJLOOLK '$ 7KH HIIHFW RI FLWUXV URRWVWRFNV DQG LUULJDWLRQ OHYHO RQ WKH HIILFLHQF\ RI PLQHUDO QXWULHQW DEVRUSWLRQ 06 7KHVLV 8QLY RI )OD *DLQHVYLOOH +DMGXNRYLF 0 0 -DNRYOMHYLF DQG 9 9DJDQG &RPSDULVRQ RI PHWKRGV RI PHDVXULQJ VRLO PRLVn WXUH S ,[L $ *XLOORQ HGf ,VRn WRSH DQG UDGLDWLRQ WHFKQLTXHV LQ VRLO SK\VLFV DQG LUULJDWLRQ VWXGLHV 3URF 6\PS ,QWHUQ $WRPLF (QHUJ\ $JHQF\ 9LHQQD

PAGE 102

+DPDPRWR $' ,VREXW\OLGHQH GLXUHD DV D VORZ DFWLQJ QLWURJHQ IHUWLOL]HU DQG WKH VWXGLHV LQ WKLV ILHOG LQ -DSDQ 3URF QR 7KH )HUWLn OL]HU 6RF /RQG +DUGLQJ 5% 7: (PEOHWRQ DQG :: -RQHV /HDFKLQJ DQG JDVHRXV ORVV RI 1 IURP VRPH QRQn ILOOHG &DOLIRUQLD VRLOV &DOLI &LWURJ +DUPVHQ *: DQG *.RNHQEUDQGHU 6RLO LQn RUJDQLF QLWURJHQ S ,Q :9 %DUWKRORPHZ DQG )( &ODUN HGVf 6RLO QLWURJHQ $JURQRP\ $PHU 6RF $JURQ 0DGLVRQ :LVH +DXFN 5' 7KH XVH RI 1 LQ IRUHVW VRLO IHUWLOL]HU QLWURJHQ LQYHVWLJDWLRQV S ,Q *: *HQJVWRQ 5+ %UHQGHPXHKO :/ 3ULWn FKHWW DQG :+ 6PLWK HGVf )RUHVW IHUWLOL]Dn WLRQ f§ 7KHRU\ DQG SUDFWLFH 7HQQ 9DOOH\ $XWK 0XVFOH 6KRDOV $O +LOO&RWWLQJKDP '* DQG &3 /OR\G-RQHV 1LWURJHQ LQ DSSOH QXWULWLRQ LQYHVWLJDWLRQV 6FL )RRG $JU +ROW 5) *5 %ODNH :% :RFUKHHV '+ %RHOWHU DQG $6 5REHUWVRQ 6RLO PRLVWXUH VXUYH\ RI VRPH UHSUHVHQWDWLYH 0LQQHVRWD VRLOV 86'$ $56 +XFNOH +) ) 6RGHN ,,, DQG 9: &DUOLVOH 6RLO WHPSHUDWXUH FODVVHV FRDWLQJV WD[DGMXQFWV DQG VHULHV FRUUHODWLRQV S ,Q 9: &DUOLVOH DQG )/ 0RULW] HGVf )ORULGD VRLO LGHQWLILFDWLRQ KDQGERRN 8QLY )OD &RRS ([W 6HUY *DLQHVYLOOH +XJKHV 7' 1LWURJHQ UHOHDVH IURP LVREXW\n OLGHQH GLXUHD 6RLO S+ DQG IHUWLOL]HU SDUWLFOH VL]H $JURQ ,WR DQG .XPD]DZD 1 DVVLPLODWLRQ LQ VXQIORZHU OHDYHV DQG XSZDUG DQG GRZQZDUG WUDQVSRUW RI 1 6RLO 6FL 3ODQW 1XWU f -DQVVRQ 6/ %DODQFH VKHHW DQG UHVLGXDO HIn IHFWV RI IHUWLOL]HU QLWURJHQ LQ D \HDUROG VWXG\ ZLWK 1 6RLO 6FL -RQHV :: DQG 3) 3UDWW 1LWUDWHV EHORZ URRW ]RQH LQ 8SSHU 6DQWD $QD %DVLQ RUFKDUGV &LWURJ f

PAGE 103

.RR 5&$ VWXG\ RI VRLO PRLVWXUH LQ UHn ODWLRQ WR DEVRUSWLRQ DQG WUDQVSLUDWLRQ E\ FLWUXV 3K' 'LVV 8QLY )OD *DLQHVYLOOH 7KH GLVWULEXWLRQ DQG XSWDNH RI VRLO PRLVWXUH LQ FLWUXV JURYHV 3URF )OD 6WDWH +RUW 6RF &ULWLTXH 1LWURJHQ IHUWLOL]HU PDQDJHPHQW SURJUDPV QLWUDWHSROOXWLRQ SRWHQWLDO DQG RUDQJH SURGXFWLYLW\ S ,Q '5 1LHOVHQ DQG -* 0DF'RQDOG HGVf 1LWURJHQ LQ WKH HQYLURQPHQW 9RO 1LWURJHQ EHKDYLRU LQ ILHOG VRLO $FDG 3UHVV 1< 6DQ )UDQFLVFR /RQG (YDSRWUDQVSLUDWLRQ DQG VRLO PRLVn WXUH GHWHUPLQDWLRQ DV JXLGHV WR FLWUXV LUULJDn WLRQ 3URF )LUVW &LWUXV 6\PS DQG /& +DPPRQG $ FRPSDULVRQ RI JUDYLPHWULF WHQVLRPHWULF DQG QHXWURQ VFDWWHULQJ PHWKRGV RI PHDVXULQJ ZDWHU LQ /DNHODQG ILQH VDQG 3URF 6RLO DQG &URS 6FL 6RF )OD .XERWD 6 7 .DWR 6 $NDR DQG & %XQ\D 1 DEVRUSWLRQ DQG WUDQVORFDWLRQ E\ 6DWVXPD PDQGDn ULQ WUHHV ,,, %HKDYLRU RI 1 VXSSOLHG LQ HDUO\ VSULQJ &KHP $EVWU f \ $ 7DGDVKL 6 $NDR DQG & %XQ\D 1 DEVRUSWLRQ DQG WUDQVORFDWLRQ E\ 6DWVXPD PDQn GDULQ WUHHV ,9 %HKDYLRU RI 1 VXSSOLHG LQ HDUO\ VXPPHU &KHP $EVWU f] /DEDQDXVNDV &. DQG 0) +DQG\ $PRXQWV RI QXWULHQWV UHPRYHG E\ n9DOHQFLDn RUDQJH LQ D &DOLIRUQLD JURYH +RUW6FLHQFH /HWH\ -: %ODLU 'HYLWW //XQG DQG 3 1DVK 1LWUDWHQLWURJHQ LQ HIIOXHQW IURP DJULFXOWXUDO WLOH GUDLQV LQ &DOLIRUQLD +LO JDUGLD f /XQG /'& $GULDQR DQG 3) 3UDWW 1Ln WUDWH FRQFHQWUDWLRQ LQ GHHS FRUHV DV UHODWHG WR SURILOH FKDUDFWHULVWLFV (QYLURQ 4XDO /XQW 25 &RQWUROOHGUHOHDVH IHUWLOL]HUV $FKLHYHPHQWV DQG SRWHQWLDO $JU )RRG &KHP

PAGE 104

0DUFKDO DQG -/DFRHXLOOH %LODQ PLQHUDO GX PDQGDULQLHU n:LONLQJn ,QIOXHQFH GH OnHWDW YHJHWDWLI GH DUEUH VXU VD FRPSRVLWLRQ PLQHUDOH )UXLW Gn2XWUH0HU 0DUVK $: ,UULJDWLRQ S ,Q : 5HXWKHU HGf &LWUXV ,QGXVWU\ 5HY HG ,,, 8QLY &DOLI 'LY $JU 6FL 0F*DULW\ -: DQG -$ 5DMDUDWQDP $SSDUDn WXV IRU WKH PHDVXUHPHQW RI ORVVHV RI 1 DV JDV IURP WKH ILHOG DQG VLPXODWHG ILHOG HQYLURQPHQWV 6RLO %LRO %LRFKHP 0HDG '0RYHPHQW RI DGGHG 1 DQG 3 LQ D SLQH IRUHVW HFRV\VWHP 3K' 'LVV 8QLY RI )OD *DLQHVYLOOH 0LOKDP 3$6 $ZDG 5( 3DXOL DQG -+ %XOO $QDO\VLV RI SODQWV VRLOV DQG ZDWHUV IRU QLWUDWH E\ XVLQJ DQ LRQVHOHFWLYH HOHFWURGH $QDO\VW 0LOOHU 5DQG ': :ROIH 1LWURJHQ LQSXWV DQG RXWSXWV $ YDOOH\ EDVLQ VWXG\ S ,Q '5 1LHOVHQ DQG -* 0DF'RQDOG HGVf 1LWURJHQ LQ WKH HQYLURQPHQW 9RO 1LWURJHQ EHKDYLRU LQ ILHOG VRLO $FDG 3UHVV 1< 6DQ )UDQFLVFR /RQG DQG 5% 6PLWK 1LWURJHQ EDODQFH LQ WKH 6DQ -RDTXLQ 9DOOH\ (QYLURQ 4XDO 0LOOHU 66 (IIHFW RI QLWURJHQ IHUWLOL]DWLRQ DQG FXOWXUDO V\VWHPV RQ JURZWK DQG 1 OHYHOV LQ n'HOLFLRXVn DSSOH WUHHV +RUW6FLHQFH f $EVWUf 0LQHU *6 -3 /LOO\ DQG '/ 7HUU\ 1Ln WURJHQ UHOHDVH FKDUDFWHULVWLFV RI LVREXW\OLGHQH GLXUHD DQG LWV HIIHFWLYHQHVV DV D VRXUFH RI 1 IRU IOXHFXUHG WREDFFR $JURQ 0REHUJ (/ '9 :DGGLQJWRQ DQG -0 'XLFK (YDOXDWLRQ RI VORZUHOHDVH 1 VRXUFHV RQ n0HULRQn .HQWXFN\ EOXH JUDVV 3URF 6RLO 6FL 6RF $PHU 0XKDPPDG 6 DQG .XPD]DZD 8VH RI RSWLFDO VSHFWURJUDSKLF 1 DQDO\VHV WR WUDFH 1 DSSOLHG DW WKH KHDGLQJ VWDJH RI ULFH 6RLO 6FL 3ODQW 1XWU f

PAGE 105

1HOVRQ /% DQG 5' +DXFN 1LWURJHQ IHUWLOL ]HUV 3URJUHVV DQG 3UREOHPV $JU 6FL 5HY 2YHUUHLQ /1 /\VLPHWHU VWXGLHV RQ WUDFHU 1 LQ IRUHVW VRLO &RPSDUDWLYH ORVVHV RI 1 WKURXJK OHDFKLQJ DQG YRODWL]DWLRQ DIWHU WKH DGGLn WLRQ RI XUHD DPPRQLXP DQG QLWUDWH1 6RLO 6FL 3DUU -) %LRFKHPLFDO FRQVLGHUDWLRQV IRU LQFUHDVLQJ WKH HIILFLHQF\ RI IHUWLOL]HU QLWURJHQ 6RLO DQG )HUW %LRFKHPLFDO FRQVLGHUDWLRQV IRU PD[LPL]LQJ WKH HIILFLHQF\ RI IHUWLOL]HU QLWURJHQ (QYLURQ 4XDO 3DWWHQ .' DQG 3$ 'RPRWR (IIHFW RI WULFNOH LUULJDWLRQ DQG QLWURJHQ LQMHFWLRQ RQ DSSOH WUHHV +RUW6FLHQFH f $EVWUf 3HWHUVHQ 5* DQG /' &DOYLQ 6DPSOLQJ S ,Q &$ %ODFN HGf 0HWKRGV RI VRLO DQDO\VLV 3DUW $JURQRP\ $PHU 6RF $JURQ 0DGLVRQ :LVH 3RZHU -) :KDW KDSSHQV WR IHUWLOL]HU QLWURn JHQ LQ WKH VRLO" 6RLO DQG :DWHU &RQVHUYQ f 3UDWW 3' :: -RQHV DQG 9( +XUVDNHU 1LWUDWH LQ GHHS VRLO SURILOHV LQ UHODWLRQ WR IHUWLOL]HU UDWHV DQG OHDFKLQJ YROXPH (QYL URQ 4XDO //XQG DQG -0 5LEOH $Q DSn SURDFK WR PHDVXULQJ OHDFKLQJ RI QLWUDWH IURP IUHHO\ GUDLQHG LUULJDWHG ILHOGV S ,Q '5 1LHOVHQ DQG -* 0DF'RQDOG HGVf 1LWURJHQ LQ WKH HQYLURQPHQW 9RO 1LWURJHQ EHKDYLRU LQ ILHOG VRLO $FDG 3UHVV 1< 6DQ )UDQFLVFR /RQG 6 'DYLG DQG 5* 6KDUSOHVV $ \HDU ILHOG WULDO ZLWK DQLPDO PDQXUHV 1LWURJHQ EDODQFHV DQG \LHOGV +LOJDUGLD f 3ULWFKHWW :/ &) (QR DQG 01 0DOLN 7KH QLWURJHQ VWDWXV RI WKH PLQHUDO VRLOV RI )ORULGD 3URF 6RLO 6FL 6RF $PHU

PAGE 106

5DMHQGUD 3 *% 5DMDOH DQG %$ /DNKLGH 1LWULILFDWLRQ UHWDUGHUV DQG VORZUHOHDVH QLWURJHQ IHUWLOL]HUV $GY $JURQ 5DSHU &' -U '/ 2VPRQG 0 :DQQ DQG :: :HHNV ,QWHUGHSHQGHQFH RI URRW DQG VKRRW DFWLYLn WLHV LQ GHWHUPLQLQJ QLWURJHQ XSWDNH RI URRWV %RW *D] f 5HHVH 5/ DQG 5&.RR 1 DQG HIIHFWV RQ OHDI DQDO\VLV WUHH VL]H DQG \LHOG RI WKUHH PDMRU )ORULGD RUDQJH FXOWLYDUV $PHU 6RF +RUW 6FL 5HLW] +7LPLQJ IHUWLOL]DWLRQ RI FLWUXV LQ WKH ,QGLDQ 5LYHU DUHD 3URF )OD 6WDWH +RUW 6RF &LWUXV QHHGV DGHTXDWH QXWULWLRQ %HWWHU FURSV ZLWK SODQW IRRG f 77 &' /HRQDUG 6WHZDUW 5&.RR &$ $QGHUVRQ 5/ 5HHVH '9 &DOYHUW DQG 3) 6PLWK 5HFRPPHQGHG IHUWLOL]HU DQG QXWULn WLRQDO VSUD\V IRU FLWUXV 8QLY )OD $JU ([S %XO & 5HQQLH 3$ IRUHVW VDPSOLQJ SURFHGXUH IRU QXWULHQW XSWDNH VWXGLHV &RPPRQZHDOWK )RUHVW 5HY 5LFKDUGV -( 3HUIRUPDQFH RI WHQVLRPHWHUV XQGHU FLWUXV WUHHV RQ /DNHODQG ILQH VDQG 06 7KHVLV 8QLY )OD *DLQHVYLOOH 5LFKDUGV /$ DQG 05 +XEHUW\ 0RLVWXUH VWXGLHV XQGHU FLWUXV XVLQJ WHQVLRPHWHUV 3URF $PHU 6RF +RUW 6FL DQG &+ :DGOHLJK 6RLO ZDWHU DQG SODQW JURZWK S ,Q %7 6KDZ HGf 6RLO SK\VLFDO FRQGLWLRQV DQG SODQW JURZWK $JURQRP\ 0RQR ,, $FDG 3UHVV ,QF 1HZ
PAGE 107

5RVWRQ (' 0HDVXULQJ 1 ORVV IRU GHQLWULILn FDWLRQ &DOLI $JU f 5RWKSDUW +$ 0HFKDQLFDO GHVLJQ DQG V\VWHP KDQGERRN 0F*UDZ+LOO %RRN &R 1HZ
PAGE 108

7XFNHU 7& DQG 5' +DXFN 5HPRYDO RI 1 E\ YDULRXV LUULJDWHG FURSV S ,Q 3) 3UDWW HGf 3URFHHGLQJV RI WKH QDWLRQDO FRQIHUn HQFH RQ WKH PDQDJHPHQW RI QLWURJHQ LQ LUULJDWHG DJULFXOWXUH 8QLY &DOLI 'LY $JU 6FL 'DYLV &DOLI 7XUUHO )0 *URZWK RI SKRWRV\QWKHWLF DUHD RI FLWUXV %RW *D] 0*DUEHU :: -RQHV :& &RRSHU DQG 5+
PAGE 109

=, =LGDQ 57 0XHOOHU DQG &3 1RUWK 7UDQVORFDWLRQ RI 1 LQ FLWUXV WUHHV 3URF $PHU 6RF +RUW 6FL :DQGHU ,: 6RLO FRUUHODWLRQVf§&RPSRVLWLRQ RI ZDWHU GUDLQLQJ IURP JURYH DUHDV 8QLY )OD $JU ([S 6WD $QQ 5HSW :HLQEDXP 6$ 0/ 0HUZLQ DQG 77 0XUDRND 6HDVRQDO YDULDWLRQ LQ QLWUDWH XSWDNH HIILFLHQF\ DQG GLVWULEXWLRQ RI DEVRUEHG QLWURJHQ LQ QRQn EHDULQJ SUXQH WUHHV $PHU 6RF +RUW 6FL :HLU && ,QYHVWLJDWLRQV RQ WKH PLQHUDO QXWULn WLRQ RI FLWUXV LQ WKH &DULEEHDQ DUHD 8QLY :HVW ,QG 6W $XJXVWLQH 7HFK %XL :KLWH (+ DQG :/ 3ULFKHWW :DWHU WDEOH FRQWURO DQG IHUWLOL]DWLRQ IRU SLQH SURGXFWLRQ LQ WKH IODWZRRGV 8QLY )OD $JU ([S 6WD %XL r
PAGE 110

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n WDQW LQ WKH +RUWLFXOWXUDO 6HFWLRQ RI WKH $JULFXOWXUDO 5HVHDUFK &RUSRUDWLRQ RI WKH 6XGDQ ,Q WKLV ERG\ VSRQVRUHG KLV JUDGXDWH WUDLQLQJ LQ WKH 'HSDUWPHQW RI )UXLW &URSV RI WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ RI )ORULGD ZKHUH KH REWDLQHG WKH GHJUHH RI 0DVWHU RI 6FLHQFH LQ +H FRQWLQXHG WR SXUn VXH KLV JUDGXDWH WUDLQLQJ LQ WKLV GHSDUWPHQW ZKHUH KH LV FXUUHQWO\ D FDQGLGDWH IRU WKH GHJUHH RI 'RFWRU RI 3KLORVRn SK\ 'DQLHO $SROOR +DJLOOLK LV D PHPEHU RI WKH $JULFXOWXUDO 6RFLHW\ DQG WKH +RUWLFXOWXUDO 6RFLHW\ RI WKH 6XGDQ

PAGE 111

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n6FLHQFH +RUWL FHUWLI\ WKDW KDYH UHDG WKLV VWXG\ DQG WKDW LQ P\ RSLQLRQ LW FRQIRUPV WR DFFHSWDEOH VWDQGDUGV RI VFKRODUO\ SUHVHQWDWLRQ DQG LV IXOO\ DGHTXDWH LQ VFRSH DQG TXDOLW\ DV D GLVVHUWDWLRQ IRU WKH GHJUHH RI 'RFWRU RI 3KLORVRSK\ :6 &DVWOH $VVLVWDQW 3URIHVVRU RI +RUWLn FXOWXUDO 6FLHQFH

PAGE 112

, FHUWLI\ WKDW KDYH UHDG WKLV VWXG\ DQG WKDW LQ P\ RSLQLRQ LW FRQIRUPV WR DFFHSWDEOH VWDQGDUGV RI VFKRODUO\ SUHVHQWDWLRQ DQG LV IXOO\ DGHTXDWH LQ VFRSH DQG TXDOLW\ DV D GLVVHUWDWLRQ IRU WKH GHJUHH RI 'RFWRU RI 3KLORVRSK\ 1 *DPPRQ -U > 3URIHVVRU (PHULWXV RI 6RLO 6FLHQFH 7KLV GLVVHUWDWLRQ ZDV VXEPLWWHG WR WKH *UDGXDWH )DFn XOW\ RI WKH &ROOHJH RI $JULFXOWXUH DQG WR WKH *UDGXDWH &RXQFLO DQG ZDV DFFHSWHG DV SDUWLDO IXOILOOPHQW RI WKH UHTXLUHPHQWV IRU WKH GHJUHH RI 'RFWRU RI 3KLORVRSK\ 0DUFK FXN t 'HDQ &ROOHJH RI $JULFXOWXUH 'HDQ *UDGXDWH 6FKRRO

PAGE 113

81,9(56,7< 2) )/25,'$


UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA


xml version 1.0 encoding UTF-8
REPORT xmlns http:www.fcla.edudlsmddaitss xmlns:xsi http:www.w3.org2001XMLSchema-instance xsi:schemaLocation http:www.fcla.edudlsmddaitssdaitssReport.xsd
INGEST IEID EYAGIZDRF_1I0M2F INGEST_TIME 2011-10-06T21:01:10Z PACKAGE AA00004908_00001
AGREEMENT_INFO ACCOUNT UF PROJECT UFDC
FILES