All Issue

2018 Vol.63, Issue 1 Preview Page
March 2018. pp. 64-71
To improve the soil of reclaimed land, we added organic materials at a level of 3,000 kg/10 a. As a result, the electrical conductivity (EC) value of reclaimed soil decreased by 58%, the organic material content increased from 6.7 to 16.0 g/kg, the porosity increased from 1.57 to 1.31%, the soil hardness decreased from 20.2 to 17.9 mm and the plow layer was deepened from 19.8 to 26.8 cm. After these physiochemical improvements to the reclaimed soil, the growth phase of crops was improved compared to that of non-treatment crops. The height of kenaf (Hibiscus cannabinus L.) cultivated in the reclaimed land containing organic materials was increased by 18.8%. Especially, the improvement effects of pellet type manure compost and rice straw on kenaf were more preferable than those of other organic materials. When the kenaf was cultivated in the reclaimed land containing organic materials, the yield increased. The average yield of the treatment crops was 9,218 kg/10 a, 2.1 times higher than that of non-treatment crops. The most effective treatments to increase the yields were pellet type manure compost (10,848 kg/10 a, 148% increase), rice straw (120% increase) and chopped kenaf (95% increase). To increase the physicochemical enhancements to the reclaimed land soil and most improve yields, the most effective type of organic materials was the pellet. The organic material types that maintained a better growth phase and most increased the yield were the liquid and pellet types. When we used pellet type organic material, the plant height of kenaf was increased by 41% in comparison with that of the non-treatment crops and yield was increased by more than 122%. Additionally liquid type organic material improved the yield (by 127%).

  1. Bhardwaj, H. L., M. Rangappa, and C. L. Webber, III. 1995. Potential of kenaf as a forage. Proc. Int. Kenaf Assoc. Vonf. Irving, TX. 7 : 95-103.10.1111/j.1365-2389.1986.tb00036.x10.1111/j.1365-2389.1986.tb00035.x
  2. Chaney, K. and R. S. Swift. 1986. Studies on aggregates stability. Re-formation of soil aggregates. J. Soil Sci. 37 : 329-335.10.5333/KGFS.2007.27.2.079
  3. Cheng, W. J., H. J. Park, S. H. Eom, B. W. Kim, K. I. Sung, and D. H. Cho. 2007. Physiological characteristics of Kenaf (Hibiscus cannabinus L.). J. Korean Grassl. Sci. 27(2) : 79-84.
  4. Cho, N. K., C. K. Song, Y. I. Cho, and J. B. Ko. 2001. Effect of seeding date on forage yield and chemical composition of kenaf in Jeju. Krean J. Crop Sci. 46(6) : 439-442.
  5. Cho, N. K., C. K. Song, Y. I. Cho, and J. B. Ko. 2001. Effect of nitrogen rate on agronomic characteristics, forage yield and chemical composition of Kenaf on Jeju island. J. Korean Grassl. Sci. 21 : 59-66.
  6. Dao, T. H., W. Lonkerd, S. Rao, R. Meyer, and L. Pellack. 1989. Kenaf in a semi-arid environment and forage quality in Oklahoma. Argon, Abstr. p. 130.
  7. Hollowell, J. E., B. S. Baldwin, and D. L. Lang. 1996. Evaluation of kenafs a potential forage for the southern Unite States. Proc. 8th Ann. Inter. Kenaf Vonf. 34-38.
  8. Hwang, K. J., M. C. Kim, S. Y. Kang, J. G. Yu, S. T. Song, N. G. Park, and J. H. Kim. 2002, Study on adaption, dry matter yield and nutrient value of Kenaf (Hibiscus cannabinus L.) on Jeju province. J. Korean Grassl. Sci. 22(4) : 287-296.10.5333/KGFS.2002.22.4.287
  9. Killinger, G. B. 1969, Kenaf (Hibiscus cannabinus L.) a multi- use crop. Argon. J. 61 : 734-736.
  10. Lim, J. I., D. H. Kim, J. J. Lee, D. K. Kim, H. J. Lee, W. K. Min, D. J. Park, M. R. Huh, H. H. Chang, P. J. Kim, and S. Kim. 2011. Studies on the evaluation ogf kenaf as a bulking agent in livestock composting. J. Agri. & Life Sci. 45(2) : 21-28.
  11. Phillips, W. A., S. Rao, and T. Dao. 1989. Nutritive value of immature whole plant kenaf and mature kenaf tops for growing rumminsnts. Proc. Assoc. Advancement of industrial Crops. Peoria, IL. p. 17-22.
  12. Son, J. G. 1994. Soil Salt Prediction Modeling for the Estimation of Irrigation Water Requirements for Dry Field Crops in Reclaimed Tidelands. Journal of the Korean Society of Agricultural Engineers 36(2) : 96-110.
  13. Suriyajantratong, W., R. E. Tucker, R. E. Sigafus, and G. E. Mitchell, Jr. 1973. Kenaf and rice straw for sheep. J. Anim. Sci. 37 : 1251-1254.10.2527/jas1973.3751251x
  14. Swingle, R. S., A. R. Urias, J. C. Doyle, and R. L. Voigt. 1978. Chemical composition of kenaf forage and its digestibility by lambs and in vitro. J. Anim. Sci. 46 : 1346-1350.10.2527/jas1978.4651346x
  15. Tisdal, J. M. and J. M. Oades. 1982. Organic matter and water- stable aggregate in soil. J. Soil. Sci. 33 : 141-163.10.1111/j.1365-2389.1982.tb01755.x
  16. Waters, A. G. and J. M. Oades. 1991. Organic matter and water-stable aggregates. p. 163-175. In W. S. Wilson(ed.). Advanced in soil organic matter research. The impact on agriculture and the environment. Roy. Soc. Chem. Cambrige. UK.
  17. Webber, C. L. III and Bledsoe. 1993. Kenaf : Production, harvesting, processing and products. p. 416-421. New crops. Wiley, New York.
  18. Wing, J. M. 1967. Ensilability, acceptability and digestibility of kenaf. Feedstuffs 39 : 26.