Interpretation of leaf contents by Beaufils ranges

The determination of the Beaufils ranges consists in optimal ranges of nutrients for the assessment of leaf nutrients (Table 3 and 4). This method consists of determining the ranges by means of statistical models of the relationship between leaf concentrations and DRIS index, and, Beaufils (1973) found that from the optimal values of DRIS index were determined intervals of standard deviation of DRIS index for each range of nutritional assessment. Following this criterion, the range that would include the nutrients that would be deficiency was below — 4/3 standard deviation (s); deficiency-prone between — 4/3 to 2/3 s; sufficient between — 2/3 to 2/3 s and a excess-prone 2/3 to 4/3 s; excessive greater than 4/3 s (Table 3).

Thus, it creates the Beaufils ranges, which can be used to interpretate the nutrient concentration in chemical analysis of leaves (Table 3 and 4). As such use, recommended for the specific regions where they were certain, because if extrapolated to other region, it is expected that the results do not follow a favorable response.

Nutrient

Norm

Deficiency

Tendency

to

deficiency

Sufficient

Tendency

to

excess

Excess

g kg’1

N

NL

<42.5

42.5 — 43.9

43.9 — 46.7

46.7 — 48.1

>48.1

F value

<42.6

42.6 — 43.9

43.9 — 46.7

46.7 — 48.1

>48.1

P

NL

<2.5

2.5 — 2.8

2.8 ‘ 3.3

3.3 — 3.5

>3.5

F value

<2.5

2.5 — 2.8

2.8 — 3.3

3.3 — 3.5

>3.5

K

NL

<17.2

17.2 — 19.0

19.0 — 22.6

22.6 — 24.4

>24.4

F value

<17.2

17.2 — 19.0

19.0 — 22.6

22.6 — 24.4

>24.4

Ca

NL

<25.2

25.2 — 27.5

27.5 — 32.1

32.1 — 34.4

>34.4

F value

<25.3

25.3 — 27.5

27.5 — 32.0

32.0 — 34.3

>34.3

Mg

NL

<3.6

3.6 — 4.0

4.0 — 4.8

4.8 — 5.3

>5.3

F value

<3.6

3.6 — 4.0

4.0 — 4.8

4.8 — 5.2

>5.2

S

NL

<4.8

4.8 — 8.7

8.7 — 16.5

16.5 — 20.4

>20.4

F value

<5.2

5.2 — 8.9

8.9 — 16.3

16.3 — 20.0

>20.0

mg kg’1

B

NL

<40.8

40.8 — 53.6

53.6 — 79.4

79.4 — 92.2

>92.2

F value

<41.2

41.2 — 53.8

53.8 — 79.2

79.2 — 91.8

>91.8

Zn

NL

<21.7

21.7 — 24.9

24.9 — 31.2

31.2 — 34.4

>34.4

F value

<21.8

21.8 — 24.9

24.9 — 31.2

31.2 — 34.3

>34.3

Cu

NL

<3.9

3.9 — 9.8

9.8 — 22.0

22.0 — 27.9

>27.9

F value

<3.7

3.7 — 9.8

9.8 — 22.0

22.0 — 28.1

>28.1

Mn

NL

<14.9

14.9 — 33.4

33.4 — 70.8

70.8 — 89.3

>89.3

F value

<14.9

14.9 — 33.4

33.4 — 70.8

70.8 — 89.4

>89.4

Fe

NL

<52.3

52.3 — 80.2

80.2 — 136.5

136.5 — 164.4

>164.4

F value

<52.6

52.6 — 80.4

80.4 — 136.3

136.3 — 164.1

>164.1

Serra et al. (2012)

Nutrient

Norm

Deficiency

Deficiency — p rone

Sufficient

Excess-

prone

Excess

% of plots

N

NL

19.44

15.74

38.89

9.26

16.67

F value

19.44

15.74

39.81

8.33

16.67

P

NL

7.41

19.44

45.37

12.04

15.74

F value

7.41

19.44

45.37

12.04

15.74

K

NL

16.67

14.81

44.44

13.89

10.19

F value

16.67

14.81

44.44

13.89

10.19

Ca

NL

19.44

17.59

46.30

7.41

9.26

F value

19.44

17.59

43.52

10.19

9.26

Mg

NL

12.04

9.26

31.48

18.52

28.70

F value

12.04

9.26

31 .48

14.81

32.41

S

NL

2.78

54.63

21.30

11.11

10.19

50.93

20.37

2.78

18.52

F value

7.41

% of plots

B

NL

13.89

33.33

32.41

9.26

11.11

F value

14.81

32.41

32.41

9.26

11.11

Zn

NL

25.00

25.93

25.93

10.19

12.96

F value

25.93

25.00

25.93

8.33

14.81

Cu

NL

0.00

36.11

42.59

11.11

10.19

F value

0.00

37.96

40.74

11.11

10.19

Mn

NL

0.00

22.22

55.56

11.11

11.11

F value

0.00

22.22

55.56

11.11

11.11

Fe

NL

0.93

37.04

50.00

2.78

9.26

F value

0.93

37.04

50.00

2.78

9.26

Serra et al. (2012)

Table 4. Percentage of plots diagnosed by Beaufils ranges as deficient, deficiency-prone, sufficient, excess-prone or excess leaf nutrient contents of cotton, based on the criteria of natural log transformation (NL) and F value (Serra et al., 2012).

2. Conclusion

The DRIS developed by Beaufils (1973) had among its objectives, to correct the problem of correlation with the sampling time of the plant nutrients, and using dual ratio that promote the relationship among. Hence, improving efficacy of plant nutritional diagnosis allows the determination of the evaluation of the nutritional balance.

With the advent of Diagnose and Recommendation Integrated System (DRIS) by Beaufils (1973), researchers were setting to this system of nutritional diagnosis in order to increase their efficiency. However, evolution has brought a number of possibilities for calculation of DRIS’ norms and functions, that are needed to be tested to determine the best combination of methodology.

The use of DRIS is still being widely disseminated in the world, DRIS brings results consistently good in assessing the nutritional status of plants, showing the nutritional balance, a fact which is not observed with traditional systems (sufficiency range and critical level).