Tải bản đầy đủ - 0trang
VIII. Functions of the Clay Minerals
THE CLAY MINERALS IN SOILS
nels for the movement of air and water, and they prevent movements
of soil materials by wind and water erosion.
The most effective soil aggregates are those that resist destruction by
mechanical means and by physicochemical reactions. I n order for soil
aggregates to be st.able, they must meet the following conditions:
1. They must be held together by effective binding agents.
2. They must resist swelling and dispersion on contact with water.
3. They must resist coalition with neighboring aggregates when wet.
Russell (1934, 1935) has suggested a plausible mechanism by which
aggregates are bound together by clays to fulfill the first of the above
conditions. According to Russell, the exchangeable cations, since they are
positive, attract the negative ends of water molecules postulated in the
Bernal-Fowler (1933) theory of hydrogen bonding (see Section VII-1).
This leaves the positive spots on the water molecules pointed away from
the exchangeable ions. These positive spots are attracted by the negatively charged neighboring clay mineral crystals. When the water films
become thinner by drainage or evaporation, the sheetlike crystals of the
clay minerals are pulled closer and closer together, with many of their
ffat faces oriented parallel to each other. The interlacing of chains of
overlapping clay mineral crystals forms an effective matrix for holding
clayey masses together. This theory agrees with the work of Sideri
(1936) and Henin (1937, 19381, who have found evidence of preferred
orientation in the clay mineral crystals of soil structural aggregates.
The observations of Gorkova (1939) and Peterson (1944, 1946a, 1947)
give further support to these theories concerning the binding of soil
aggregates by clay minerals. They found that montmorillonite, with its
greater surface and negative charge, was more effective than kaolinite
as a binding agent for structural aggregates. The work of Du tt (1947,
1948a) suggests the possibility of soluble silicates serving as binding
agents for aggregates. Organic residues appear to be responsible for
the second and third conditions necessary for the formation of stable
aggregates in soils. Russell (1935), Myers (1937), McCalla (1945),
Martin (1946), and Kroth and Page (1946) have suggested that polar
organic compounds serve as important binding agents in soil aggregates.
According to the hydrogen bonding theory of Bernal and Fowler (1933),
these polar substances could take the place of water molecules as linkages
between exchangeable cations and clay surfaces in the mechanism proposed by Russell (1935). Gieseking (1939) found that Wyoming bentonite and gelatin, two extremely lyophylic substaiices, reacted to f o m
a clay gelatin complex which was lyophobic. The dried aggregates from
this complex were extraordinarily difficult to crush and did not swell
J. E. GIESEKING
when they were again placed in contact with water. A complex of this
type is probably formed by attract,ions between many positive amino
spots on the gelatin molecule and the many negative spots on the montmorillonite crystals. In this way linkages with much bonding energy
could be formed which could be propagated on and on throughout t.he
system. The author has unpublished data on a number of aggregates
from various soil types which were treated with water solutions of
several different organic cations. After these aggregates were dried, they
were found to be very difficult to crush, even after placing them again
in contact with water for long periods of time. It appears, therefore,
that certain organic molecules react with the clay minerals to give complexes which resist dispersion.
The activity of microorganisms in soils is conducive to the formation
of stable aggregates. Myers and McCalla (1941) and Peele and Beale
(1941) noted that the maximum effect of microorganisms on soil structure
stability lagged behind the maximum microbial activity. They interpreted this to mean that excreted and/or secreted metabolic products of
the organisms were responsible for the beneficial effect on stabilization
of soil aggregates. These observations have been confirmed by McHenry
and Russell (1944), Martin (1945, 1946), and Kroth and Page (1946).
Kroth and Page emphasize the point that these products form physicochemical complexes with the clay minerals.
McCalla (1945) has observed that gums, waxes, and fats produced
by microorganisms are instrumental in stabilizing soil aggregates. Martin (1945) found that polysaccharides, arising from bacterial growth are
important stabilizing agents for soil aggregates. The casts of earthworms
were reported by Dutt (1948b) to be very stable.
Certain plants appear to be responsible for the production of organic
substances which are sorbed on the clay mineral surfaces of soil aggregates and thereby render these aggregates resistant to the attack of
water. Numerous investigations have shown that any cropping system
which adds organic matter to soils, especially systems involving sod
crops with their fibrous root systems, are responsible for highly stable
soil aggregates. Among these investigations have been those of Elson
(1940), Woodruff (1940), Johnston e t al. (1942), Gelzer (1943), Wilson
and Browning (1945), Feng and Browning (1946) , Olmstead (1946) , and
Shauffer (1946). Norman (1946) has suggested that the enormous activity of rhizosphere bacteria around grass roots may be responsible for
this effect of the sod crops.
There has been much discussion concerning the importance of binding
agents in soil aggregate stabilizations. The clay minerals and organic
materials serve well as binding agents. More emphasis needs to be placed
THE CLAY MINERALS IN SOILS
on mechanisms whereby neighboring aggregates are held apart. The
most important aspect of the mechanism of soil aggregate stabilization
is the stabilization of the clay minerals on the surface of the aggregates
so that they will not exert an attraction or binding force between neighboring aggregates. The first, step toward aggregation must be the development of weakened cleavage zones in the clayey mass of the soil
material. After this has been accomplished by the growth of plant
roots, by animal activity, by the formation of ice crystals, by shrinkage
from dehydration, or by other mechanical means, it. would seem t h a t the
negative clay minerals in the faces along these cleavage zones might
become inactivated by the sorption of positively charged hydrous oxides
and organic substances. This should prevent the dispersion of the clay
mineral crystals in the zones of incipient cleavage and the subsequent
coalition of neighboring aggregates after removal of the original mechanical condition responsible for the first cleavage. Sideri (1936, 1938)
suggests that humus coats the surfaces of soil aggregates. Kroth and
Page (1946), however, found the organic materials in soil aggregates to
be quite uniformly distributed throughout the aggregate. They compared the nitrogen contents of the shells of a number of aggregates with
the nitrogen contents of their centers and found in every case a slightly
higher percentage of nitrogen in the shells. The significance of this small
difference is questionable, but their results seem to indicate that the clay
minerals in the surface of soil aggregates are stabilized by sorbed organic
cations. More conclusive evidence is needed t o establish the certainty
of this mechanism of surface stabilization of soil aggregates.
There have been several suggestions concerning the stabilization of
soil aggregates by means of irreversible -colloidal cementing agents.
Williams (1935), Sideri (1936), and Kubiena (1938) give the general
impression that freshly formed hydrated organic substances are sorbed
on mineral surfaces, and when these organic substances become dehydrated, they will not again hydrate on later contact with water. Thus,
these irreversible organic substances serve as cementing agents between
mineral particles. Lutz (1936) has proposed a somewhat analogous role
for the hydrated iron oxides.
Clay mineralogy and clay physicochemistry have developed almost
entirely during the last two decades. I n this short period, remarkable
progress has been made towards a better understanding of the clay
minerals and their intricate activities. There still remains much to be
accomplished, however, in the way of more refined and more precise
studies of these minerals.
J . E. GIESEKING
The reactions of the clay minerals are determined by the amount and
nature of their external, internal, and voided surfaces. More refined
methods are needed to determine these properties of the clay mineral
The clay minerals vary in the vigor with which they enter into
physicochemical reactions. They also vary in their capacities to hold
various sorbed substances. More precise methods for the quantitative
estimation of the clay minerals are needed in order to be able to predict
the nature of the react*ionsof the clay mineral mixtures commonly found
Combinations between the clay minerals and sorbed substances have
properties which are often greatly different from the properties of the
components. Further data is needed to reveal the importance of sorbed
substances in changing the properties of the clay minerals.
The clay minerals have been shown to be extremely important in
plant-soil relationships. More studies are needed to reveal the nature,
mechanism, and extent of the physicochemical reactions of the clay
minerals which influence plant growth. Some of these reactions are desirable and others are undesirable. Studies need to be extended to show
how the undesirable reactions can be siippressed and how the desirable
reactions can be enhanced.
Past developments in clay mineralogy have very closely paralleled
the development of physical methods of analysis. Some of the newer
techniques involving x-ray and electron diffraction can be expected to
be helpful in furthering research on the clay minerals. The use of radioactive and mass “tagged” isotopes in studying the physicochemical reactions of the clay minerals promises ta give results which will permit
more definite interpretations than have been possible with some of the
Agafonoff, V. 1935. Trans. Intern. Congr. Soil Sci. 3rd Congr., Oxjord 3, 74-78.
Albrecht, W.A. 1946a. Soil Sci. 61,265-271.
Albrecht, W.A. 1946b. Soil Sci. 62, 23-31.
Aldrich, D. G.,Hellman, N. N., and Jackson, M.L. 1944. Soil Sci. 57, 215-231.
Alexander, L. T.,Hendricks, S. B., and Nelson, R. A. 1939. Soil Sci, 48,273-279.
Allaway, W.H. 1948. Soil Sci. SOC.Am., Proc. 13.
Am. SOC. Testing Materials. 1945. Card Index of X-Ray Diffraction Data for
Chemical Analysis, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
Ardenne, M., Endell, K., and Hofmann, U. 1940. Ber. deut. keram. Ges. 21, 209-227.
Attoe, 0. J. 1947. Soil Sci. SOC.Am., Proc. 11, 145-149.
Attoe, 0.J., and Truog, E. 1946. Soil Sci. SOC.
Am., Proc. 10, 81-86.
Raver, L.D. 1948. Soil Physics. 2nd ed. Wiley, New York.
THE CLAY MINERALS I N SOILS
Bernal, J. D., and Fowler, R. H. 1933. .I. Chem. Phys. 1, 515-548.
Bradfield, R. 1932. J. Phys. Chem. 36, 340-347.
Bradley, W. F. 1945a. Am. Mineral. 30, 704-713.
Bradley, W. F. 1945b. J. Am. Chem. SOC.67, 975-981.
Bradley, W. F., and Grim, R. E. 1948. J. Phys. Colloid Chem. 52, 1404-1413.
Bray, R. H. 1937. Soil Sci. 43, 1-14.
Bray, R. H. 1942. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 64, 954-963.
Bray, R. H., and DeTurk, E. E. 1939. Soil Ski. SOC.Am., Proc. 3, 101-106.
Bray, R. H., and Dickman, S. R. 1941. Soil Sci.SOC.
Am., Proc. 6, 312-320.
Bray, R. H., Grim, R. E., and Kerr, P. F. 1935. Bull. Geol. SOC.Am. 46, 1909-1926.
Buehrer, T. F., Robinson, D. O., and Deming, J. M. 1948. Soil Sci. SOC.Am., Proc.
Chaminade, R. 1936. Ann. agron. 6,818-830.
Chaminade, R. 1940. Compt. rend. 210, 264-266.
Clark, G. L., Grim, R. E., and Bradley, W. F. 1937. 2.Krist. A96, 322-324.
Coleman, N. T., and Mehlich, A. 1948. Soil Sci. SOC.Am., Proc. 13.
Coleman, R. 1944. Soil Sci. SOC.Am., Proc. 9, 72-78.
Coleman, R., and Jackson, M. L. 1945. Soil Sci. SOC.Am., Proc. 10, 381-391.
Cross, P. C., Burnham, P., m d Leighton, P. A. 1937. J . Am. Chem. SOC.59, 11341147.
Davidson, R. C., Ewing, F. J., and Shiite, R. S. 1943. Natl. Petroleum News, 35,
Dean, L. A., and Rubins, E. J. 1947. Soil Sci. 63, 377-406.
Debye, P. 1929. Polar Molecules. Chemical Catalogue Co., New York.
Debye, P., and Falkenhagen, H. 1928. Physile. 2. 29, 121-132.
DeTurk, E. E., Wood, L. K., and Bray, R. H. 1943. Soil Sci. 55, 1-12.
Dickman, S. R., and Bray, R. H. 1941. Soil Sci. 52, 263-273.
Dutt, A. K. 1947. Soil Sci.SOC.Am., Proc. 12, 497-501.
Dutt, A. K. 1948a. Soil Sci. 65, 309-319.
Dutt, A. K. 1948b. J. Am. SOC.Agron. 4 4 407-410.
Edelman, C. H., and Favejee, J. Ch. L. 1940. 2.KrisL. 102, 417-431.
Elson, J. 1940. Soil Sci. SO, 339-355.
Ensminger, L. E. 1942. Sbil Sci. 54, 191-197.
Ensminger, L. E. 1948. Soil Sci. SOC.Am., Proc. 13.
Ensminger, L. E., and Gieseking, J. E. 1939. Soil Sci. 48, 467-473.
Ensminger, L. E., and Gieseking, J. E. 1941. Soil Sci. 51, 125-132.
Ensminger, L. E., and Gieseking, J. E. 1942. 53, 205-209.
Erickson, A. E. 1948. Doctor’s Thesis, Univ. of Illinois.
Favejee, J. Ch. L. 1939a. 2.K G t . 101, 259-270.
Favejee, J. Ch. L. 1939b. 2.Krist. 100, 425-436.
Feng, C. L., and Browning, G. M. 1946. Soil Sci. Moc. Am., Proc. 11, 67-73.
Fowler, R. H., and Bernal, J. D. 1933. Trurts. Faraday SOC.29, 1049-1056.
Gelzer, F. J. 1943. Pedology U.SS.R. 9-10, 62-71.
Gieseking, J. E. 1939. Soil AS&. 47, 1-13.
Gieseking, J. E., and Jenny, H. 1936. Sozl Iclci. 42, 273-280.
Gorkova, I. M. 1939. Pedology U.S.S.R. 10, 65-83.
Graham, E. R. 1941. Soil Sci. 51, 65-71.
Grim, R. E. 1935. Bull. Am. Cerawb. SOC.14, 113-119, 129-134, 170-176.
Grim, R. E. 1939. Ill. Slate Qeol. Survey, Circ. No. 49.
Grim, R. E. 1942. J. Geol. SO, 225-275.
J. E. GIESEKING
Grim, R. E., Allaway, W. H., and Cuthbert, F. L. 1947. J . Am. Ceram. SOC.30, 137145.
Grim, R. E., Bray, R. H., and Bradley, W. F. 1937. Am. Mineral. 22, 813-829.
Grim, R. E., and Rowland, R. A. 1942. Am. Mineral. 27, 746-761, 801-818.
Gruner, J. W. 1932. Z. Krist. 83, 75-88.
Gruner, J. W. 1934. Am. Mineral. 19, 557-575.
Hadding, A. 1923. 2.Krist. 58, 108-112.
Hauser, E. A. 1939. Colloidal Phenomenon. McGraw-Hill, New York.
Hellman, N. N., and Jackson, M. L. 1944. Soil Sci. SOC.Am., Proc. 8, 135-143.
Hendricks, S. B. 1939. Am. Mineral. 24, 529-539.
Hendricks, S. B. 1941. J . Phys. Chem. 45, 65-81.
Hendricks, S. B., and Alexander, L. T. 1939. Soil Sci. 48, 257-271.
Hendricks, S. B., and Fry, W. H. 1930. Soil Sci: 29, 457-479.
Rendricks, S. B., and Jefferson, M. E. 1938. Am. Mineral. 23, 851-862.
Hendricks, S. B., Nelson, R. A., and Alexander, L. T. 1940. J . Am. Chem. Soc. 62,
Henin, S. 1937. Compt. rend. 204, 1498-1499.
Henin, 8. 1938. fitude physico-chemique de la stabilite structurale des terres. Monograph National Center of Agronomic Research, Paris, 50.
Hofmann, U., Endell, K., and Wilm., D. 1933. 2.Krist. 86, 340-348.
Hoover, C. D. 1945. SoilSn'. SOC.Am., Proc. 9, 66-71.
Hosking, J. 8. 1940. J . Council Sci. Znd. Research 13, 206-216.
Humbert, R. P. 1942. Bull. Am. Ceram. SOC.21, 260-263.
Humbert, R. P., and Shaw, B. 1941. Soil Sci. 52, 481-487.
Jackson, M. L., Mackie, W. Z., and Pennington, R. P. 1946. Soil Sci. SOC. Am.,
Proc. 11, 57-63.
Jackson, M. L., Pennington, R. P., and Mackie, W. Z. 1948. Soil Sci. Soc. Am.,
Jeffries, C. D. 1946. Soil Sci. s b c . Am., Proc. 11, 211-212.
Jeffries, C. D., and Anthony, R. D. 1948. Proc. Am. SOC.Hort. Sci. 5 1 , 271-286.
Am., Proc. 13.
Jeffries, C. D., and Yearick, L. G. 1948. Soil Sci. SOC.
Jenny, H. 1932. J. Phys. Chem. 36, 2217-2258.
Jenny, H., and Ayers, A. D. 1939. Soil Sci. 48,443-459.
Jenny, H., and Overstreet, R. 1939s. J . Phys. Chem. 43, 1185-1196.
Jenny, H., and Overstreet, R. 1939b. Soil Sci. 47, 257-272.
Jenny, H., Overstreet, R., and Ayers, A. D. 1939. Soil Sci. 48, 9-24.
Jenny, H., and Reitemeier, R. F. 1935. J. Phys. Chem. 39, 593-604.
Jenny, H., and Smith, G. D. 1935. Soil Sci. 39, 377-389.
Joffe, J. S., and Levine, A. K. 1947. Soil Sci. 63, 241-247.
Johnston, J. R., Browning, G. M., and Russell, M. B. 1942. Soil Sci. SOC.Am., Proc.
Kelley, W. P. 1927. Proc. First Intern. Congr. Soil Sci. 4, 483-489.
Kelley, W. P., Dore, W. H., and Brown, S. M. 1931. Soil Sci. 31, 25-55.
Kelley, W. P., Dore, W. H., and Page, J. B. 1941. Soil Sci. 51, 101-194.
Kelley, W. P., Dore, W. H., Woodford, A. O., and Brown, S. M. 1939. Soil Sci. 48,
Kelley, W. P., Jenny, H., and Brown, S. M. 1936. Soil Sci. 41, 259-274.
Kelley, W. P., Woodford, A. 0 , Dore, W. H., and Brown, S. M. 1939. Soil Sci. 47,
Kelly, J. B.,and Midgley, A. R. 1942. Soil Sci. 55, 167-176.
THE CLAY MINERALS IN SOILS
Kroth, E. M., and Page, J. B. 1946. Boil Sci. SOC.
Am., Proc. 11, 27-34.
Kubiena, W.L. 1938. Micropedology. Collegiate Press, Ames, Iowa, p. 156
Kurtz, T., DeTurk, E. E., and Bray, R. H. 1916. Soil Sci. 61. 111-124.
LeChatelier, H. 1887. 2. physik. Chem. 1, 396-402.
Lemberg, J. 1876. 2. deut. geol. Ges. 28, 535-547.
Low,P.F.,and Black, C. A. 1947. Soil Sci. SOC.Am., Proc. 12, 180-183.
Lute, J. F. 1936. Soil Sci. SOC.Am., Proc. 1, 43-45.
McAuliffe, C. D., Hall, N. S., Dean, L. A., and Hendricks, S.B. 1947. Soil Sci. SOC.
Am. Proc. 12, 119-123.
McCalla, T.M. 1945. Soil Sci. 59, 287-297.
MacEwan, D. M. C. 1944. Nature 154, 577-578.
MacEwan, D.M. C. 1946. J . SOC.Chem. Ind. London 65, 298-306.
McHenry, J. R.,and Russell, M. B. 1944. Soil Sci. 57, 351-357.
McLean, E.O.,and Marshall, C. E. 1948. Soit Sci. SOC.Am., Proc. 13.
Maegdefrau, E., and Hofmann, U. 1937. 2. Krist. 98, 31-59.
Marshall, C. E. 1935a. 2. Krist. 90, 8-34.
Marshall, C.E. 1935b. 2. Krkt. 91, 433-449.
Marshall, C.E. 1936. Science Progress 119, 422-433.
Marshall, C.E. 1937. J . Phys. Chem. 41,935-942.
Marshall, C. E.,and Bergman, W. E. 1942. J . Phys. Chem. 46, 52-61.
Marshall, C. E.,Humbert, R. P., Shaw, B. T., and Caldwell, 0. G. 1942. Soil Sci.
Marshall, C. E., and McLean, E. 0. 1947. Soil Sci. SOC.Am., Proc. 12, 172-175.
Martin, J. C., Overstreet, R., and Hoagland, D. R. 1946. Soil Sci. SOC.Am., Proc.
Martin, J. P. 1945. Soil Sci. 59, 163-174.
Martin, J. P. 1946. Soil Sci. 61, 157-166.
Mattson, S. 1930. Soil Sci. 30, 459-495.
Mattson, S. 1931. Soil Sci. 32, 343-365.
Murphy, H. F. 1939. Hilgardia 12, 341-382.
Myers, H. E. 1937. Soil Sci. 44, 331-359.
Myers, H. E.,and McCalla, T.M. 1941. Soil Sci. 51, 189-200.
Nagelschmidt, G., Desai, A. D., and Muir, A. 1940. J . Agr. Sci. 30, 639-653.
Nitzsch, W. v. 1940. Kolloid-2. 93, 110-115.
Nitzsch, W. v., and Czeratzki, W. 1940. 2. Pjlunz. Diin. 18, 1-40.
Noll, W. 1932. Hydrothermale Synthese des Muscovits. Ein Beitrag zur Frage dw
Serieitbildung in Tonschiefern. Fachgruppe IV (Geologie und Mineralogie) Nr
20, Weidmannsche Buchhandlung, Berlin.
Noll, W. 1935. Neues Jahrb. Mineral., Geol. A70, 65-115.
Noll, W. 1936. Mineralog. u. petrog. Mitt. 48, 210-247.
Norman, A. G. 1946. Soil Sci. SOC.Am., Proc. 11, 9-15.
Norton, F. H. 1939. J . Am. Cerarn. Soc. 22, 54-63.
Olmstead, L.B. 1946. Soil Sci. SOC.Am., Proc. 11, 89-92.
Orcel, M. J. 1926. Compt. rend. 183, 565-567.
Orcel, M. J., and Caillere, S. 1933. Compt. rend. 197, 774-777.
Oulton, T.D. 1948. J. Phys. Colloid Chem. 52, 1296-1314.
Page, J. B., and Baver, L. D. 1940. Soil Sci. SOC.Am., Proc. 4, 150-155.
Pauling, L. 1930a. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U S . 16, 123-129.
Pauling, L. 1930b. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S. 16, 578482.
Pearson, R. W., and Ensminger, L. E. 1948. Soil Sci. SOC.Am., Proc. 13.
J. E. GIESEKING
Peech, M., and Bradfield, R. 1934. A m . Soil Survey Assoc. Bull. 15, 101-106
Peele, T.C.,and Beale, 0. W. 1941. Soil SCi. SOC.Am.. Proc. 6. 176-182.
Perkins, A. T. 1948. Soil Sci. 65, 185-191.
Peterson, J. B. 1944. Soil Sci. SOC.Am., Proe. 9. 37-48
Peterson, J. B. 1946a. Soil Sci. 61,247-256.
Peterson, J. B. 1946b. Soil Sci. 61, 465-475.
Peterson, J. B. 1947. Soil Sci. Soc. AWL.,Proc. 12, 29-34.
Raney, W. A.,and Hoover, C. D. 1946. Soil Sci. SOC.Am., Pror. 11, 231-237.
Ravikovitch, S. 1934. Soil Sci. 38, 219-239,279-290.
Ross, C.S.,and Kerr, P. F. 1931. J . Sediment. Petrol. 1, 55-65.
Russell, E.W. 1934. Trans. Roy. SOC.London A233, 361-389.
Russell, E.W. 1935. Trans. Intern. Congr. Soil Sci., 3rd Congr. Oxford 1, 26-29.
Russell, M.B., and Haddock, J. L. 1940. Soil Sci. Sop. Am., Proc. 5, 90-94.
Scarseth, G. D. 1935. J. A m . SOC.Agron. 27, 596-616.
Schachtschabel, P. 1938. Forschungsdienst 6,319-332.
Schachtschabel, P. 1940. Kolloid-Beiheftc 51, 199-276.
Schofield, R. K. 1940. Trans. Brit. Cwam. SOC.39, 147-158.
Fedletsky, I. D. 1939a. Compt. rend. arad. sn'. U.R.S.S. 25, 207-209.
Sedletzky, I. D. 1939b. Compt. r m d . acad. sci. U.R.S.S. 23, 258-262.
Sedletzky, I. D. 1939~.Compt. rend. acad. sci. U.R.S.S. 22, 510-514.
Sedletzky, I. D. 1940. Compt. rend. acad. #xi.U.R.S.S. 26, 154-155.
Sedletzky, I. D.,and Yussupova, S. 1940. Compt. l e n d . nmrl. nri. U.R.S.S. 26, 244246.
Shaw, B. T. 1942. J . Phys. Chem. 46, 1032-1043.
Sideri, D.I. 1936. Soil Sci. 42, 461-481.
Sideri, D.I. 1938. Soil Sci. 46, 129-137,267-271.
Sideri, D.I., and Liamina, A. N. 1942. Soil Sci. 54, 83-100.
Sieling, D.H. 1946. Soil Sci. SOC.Am., Proc. 11, 161-170.
Stanford, G. 1947. Soil Sd.Soe. Am., Proc. 12, 167-171.
Stanford, G., and Pierre, W. H. 1947. Soil Sci. SOC.Am., Pror. 11, 155-160.
Stauffer, R.S. 1946. J . Am. SOC.Agron. 38, 1010-1017.
Stout, P. R. 1940. Soil Sci. Soc. Am., Proc. 4, 177-182.
Thompson, H. S. 1850. J. R o y . Agr. Sor. England 11, 68-74.
Toth, S. J. 1937. Soil Sci. 44,299-314.
Volk, G. W. 1938. Soil Sci. 45, 263-276.
Way, J. T. 1850. J. Roy. Agr. SOC.England 11, 313-379.
Wear, J. I., Steckel, J. E., Fried, M., and White, J. L. 1948. Soil Sci. 66, 111-117.
White, J. L.,and Jackson, M. L. 1946. Soil Sci. SOC.Am., Proc. 11, 150-154.
Whiteside, E.P.,and Marshall, C. E. 1944. M o . AQT.Expt. Sta. Research Bull. 386.
Wiegner, G. 1935. Trans. Intern. Congr. Soil Sci., 3rd Congr. Ozford 3, 5-28.
Wiklander, L. 1946. Ann. Roy. Agr. Coll. Suwden 14.
Wiklander, L. 1949. Unpublished.
Wiklander, L.,and Gieseking, J. E. 1949. Unpublished.
Williams, W. R. 1935. Pedology U.S.S.R. Nos. 5 and 6,755-762.
Wilson, H.A.,and Browning, G. M. 1945. Soil Sci. SOC.Am., Proc. 10, 51-57.
Wood, L. K.,and DeTurk, E. E. 1941. Soil Sci. SOC.Am., Proc. 5, 152-161.
Woodruff, C. M. 1940. Soil Sci. SOC.Am., Proc. 4, 13-19.
WILLIAM J . WHITE
Dominion Forage Crops Laboratory. University of Saskatchewan]
I . Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
I1. Seed Setting and Production . . . . . . . . .
1. Tripping and Its Necessity
. . . . . . .
2. Self- and Cross-Pollination and Seed Setting . . . .
3 . Tripping and Cross-Pollinating Agencies . . . . . .
a . Rain, Wind. Antomatic and Mechanical Tripping
b . Tripping Insects . . . . . . . . . . . . .
4 . Factors Influencing Bee Visitation . . . . . . . . .
5 . Soil. Climatic and Vegetat.ive Growth Factors . .
6. Injurious Insects . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
a . Lygus Bugs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
b . Control of Lyguw Bugs . . . . . . . . . .
c . Other Insects . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
I11. Progress in Methods of Breeding . . . .
. . . . .
1. Breeding Characteristics . . . . . . . . . . .
2 . Utilizing Hybrid Vigor . . . . . . . . . . . .
3. Methods of Testing for Combining Ability . . . . .
4 . Selection Procedures for Certain Characteristics . . .
IV . Conquering Some Diseases
. . . . . . . . . . . .
1. Bacterial Wilt. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2. Black Stem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
V . Summary and Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . .
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . 206
. . . . . . 207
. . . . . . 208
. . . . . . 210
. . . . . . 210
. . . . 215
. . . . . . 218
. . . . . . 219
. . . . . . 222
. . . . . . 224
. . . . .
. . . . .
. . . . .
I . INTRODUCTION
Medicago sativa L., known by its Arabic name. alfalfa. in the United
States and Canada but commonly called lucerne in other parts of the
world. is generally regarded as one of the world’s most valuable cultivated forage crops . Few if any crops are equal to it in capacity to
produce heavy yields of highly nutritious palatable feed . The excellent
soil-improving ability of the crop is also generally recognized . A combination of desirable attributes as a forage plant and adaptation to a
wide diversity of soil and climatic conditions has led to the use of alfalfa
in the world to an extent probably exceeding th a t of any other single
WM. J. WHITE
legume or grass species. It is utilized as a cultivated crop on every
inhabited continent and in many countries extending from near polar
regions to the tropics.
With such a wide distribution and use under extremely diversified
environmental conditions the problems of production and utilization are
many and varied. Some problems are more or less local or regional in
nature, such as cold resistance or soil nutrient deficiencies, while others,
of which seed sett.ing is a good example, are more universal in occurrence.
Diseases and insect pests are universal problems.
Solution of some of the problems by cultural or management practices
or by breeding better varieties has already resulted in expanded utilization of the crop. Further expansion and increased production will undoubtedly follow as research on the factors limiting production and
utilization establishes ways and means of elimination or control of the
Investigations involving alfalfa cover a wide diversity of subjects and
the literature is indeed voluminous. Consequently in the preparation of
this review limitation of space necessitated a choice between a sketchy
coverage of many topics or a more comprehensive consideration of a few
selected phases. The latter alternative was chosen. The subjects selected
are those on which there has been rather extensive investigation and
noteworthy advances in the past decade, but by no means does the selection of subjects represent only those fields in which recent advances have
been made. Other recent or fairly recent reviews, however, have dealt
with topics not covered in this review. Atwood (1947) has summarized
the cytogenetic literature on the crop. Klinkowski (1933) has reviewed
the early and modern history of the distribution and utilization of the
crop in the world. An abstract review of the alfalfa literature for the
period 1925 to 1930 covering several subjects has been presented by the
Imperial Bureau of Plant Genetics: Herbage Plants (1931). Tysdal and
Westover (1937) have dealt with earlier improvement work.
11. SEEDSETTINGAND PRODUCTION
Alfalfa is notoriously erratic in respect to seed production. I n many
extensive areas where the crop is widely utilized for hay and pasture
the yields of seed are so low and undependable that practically no acreage
is devoted to seed production. Thus dependence for a large portion of
the seed requirements of a region, nation, or continent generally falls
upon relatively few, often rather restricted areas where for some reason
or reasons yields are comparatively dependable. Stewart (1926) emphasizes this fact by stating that from “80 to 90 per cent of all alfalfa
seed in North America is grown in eleven areas. Six of these are small
and concentrated; the remaining five are more extensive but production
of seed is less intensive.” Even within major seed growing areas violent
interannual and interfield yield fluctuations occur. I n Utah, for example,
in 1926, the production amounted to 20,000,000 lbs., but in each of
several recent years it has only been about 4,000,000 lbs. (Tysdal, 1946).
Investigations over the past several decades have served to reveal the
multiplicity of factors influencing seed setting and seed yield, and contributing to the variability from area to area, field to field, and year to
year. T o understand and interpret the role of various factors it has
been necessary first to gain a knowledge of the biology and functioning
of the alfalfa flower. To this fundamental information the influences of
soil, climate, beneficial and injurious insects, disease, and management
practices can be added.
1. Tripping and I t s Necessity
The anthers, anther filaments, stigma, style and ovary, collectively
called the staminal or sexual column, are enclosed by the two keel petals
which are united along one edge and held firmly together along the other
two free edges. The filaments of nine of the ten anthers are united t o
form a tube which practically surrounds the ovary and style and exerts
a strong forward pressure. Whenever a force separates the two keel
petals even slightly along their free edges, the restraining mechanism is
released and the staminal column is violently snapped (tripped) forward
from the pressure exerted by the tube. Upon tripping the upper end
of the staminal column makes a strong impact with the standard (banner) petal and comes to rest on it several degrees from the original
upright position. The process of release of the staminal column from
the keel is known as tripping.
Although tripping has been observed for many decades the fundamental nature of the process to seed setting has been a matter of controversy even fairly recently. Carlson (1935) and Brink and Copper
(1936) maintained that a considerable proportion of flowers set seed
without tripping. Recently Tysdal (1946) drew attention to the fact
that t.he procedure used by Brink and Cooper was open to question.
Ufer (1932), Armstrong and White (1935), Hadfield and Calder (1936),
Knowles (1943), and Tysdal (1940, 1946) concluded that a t most only
a very small percentage of flowers set pods without first tripping. Both
Tysdal (1940) and Knowles (1943) report on detailed observations
covering many individual flowers on large populations of p1ant.s over
extensive periods of time and a variety of soil and climatic conditions.
Their data show that about 1 per cent of untripped flowers may set pods.
These observations and conclusions are further supported by the high