Effect of bioeffectors and recycled P-fertiliser products on the growth of spring wheat

Chemical and Biological Technologies in Agriculture

Table 7 Relative fertiliser efficiencies

P fertiliser	HK Kalke (n = 4)		UCPH (n = 5)		UPCH_2^a (n = 4)
P fertiliser	FE (% of TSP)	PE (% of TSP)	FE (% of TSP), first harvest	FE (% of TSP), second harvest	FE (% of TSP)
Negative control	0 a	0 a	0 a	0 a	0
Triple superphosphate	100 cd	100 b	100 c	100 cd	100 c
Superphosphate	104 cd	110 b	79 c	92 cd	103 c
Thomas phosphate	117 d	127 b	n.a.	n.a.	n.a.
Sewage sludge	86 c	96 b	76 c	106 d	80 b
Sewage sludge ash	24 b	31 a	18 ab	41 b	36 a
Fibre fraction of pig manure	n.a	n.a.	93 c	77 c	n.a.
SSA-enriched LD slag	117 d	108 b	n.a.	n.a.	n.a.
Compost of sewage sludge and garden/park waste	n.a.	n.a.	33 b	74 c	54 a

The efficiencies are calculated for the BE0 treatment only. Efficiencies are calculated relative to TSP as the positive control (see “Methods”). For each column, different letters after the mean values represent significantly different means (Tukey’s test, P < 0.05)
^aThis experiment was partly a replication of the UCPH experiment limited to five plants pot⁻¹ (see Additional file 1 for details)