United States Office of Water EPA 822/R-93-001 b
Environmental Protection (WH-586) November 1992
Agency
vyEPA Technical Support Document
for Land Application
of Sewage Sludge
Volume II
-------
TECHNICAL SUPPORT DOCUMENT
FOR
LAND APPLICATION OF SEWAGE SLUDGE
VOLUME II
APPENDICES
Prepared for
Office of Water
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
401 M Street SW
Washington, DC 20460
Prepared by
Eastern Research Group
110 Hartwell Avenue
Lexington, MA 02173
November 1992
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
VOLUME II
Page
APPENDIX A 40 CFR PART SOS STANDARDS FOR THE USE OR
DISPOSAL OF SEWAGE SLUDGE, SUBPARTS A,
B, AND D A-l
APPENDIX B JUSTIFICATION FOR DELETION OF POLLUTANTS FROM
THE FINAL STANDARDS FOR THE USE OR DISPOSAL
OF SEWAGE SLUDGE B-l
APPENDIX C PLANT UPTAKE TABLES C-l
APPENDIX D ANIMAL UPTAKE TABLES D-l
APPENDIX E RESULTS OF THE PLANT PHOTOTOXICITY LITERATURE
SEARCH E-l
*
APPENDIX F PHOTOTOXICITY DATA FROM FIELD
EXPERIMENTS WITH SLUDGE F-l
APPENDIX G ACCUMULATION OF POLLUTANT IN TREATED SOIL,
AND CALCULATION OF SQUARE WAVE FOR THE
GROUND WATER PATHWAY G-l
APPENDIX H PARTITIONING OF POLLUTANTS AMONG AIR, WATER,
AND SOLIDS IN SOIL H-l
APPENDIX I DERIVATION OF FIRST-ORDER COEFFICIENT FOR
LOSSES TO LEACHING 1-1
APPENDIX J INPUT PARAMETERS USED TO DERIVE REFERENCE
APPLICATION RATES FOR PATHWAYS 12 THROUGH 14 J-l
APPENDIX K JUSTIFICATION FOR THE ANNUAL APPLICATION RATE
FOR DOMESTIC SEPTAGE IN THE STANDARDS FOR THE
USE OR DISPOSAL OF SEWAGE SLUDGE K-l
APPENDIX L CALCULATION OF THE AMOUNT OF SEWAGE SLUDGE USED
OR DISPOSED FOR THE PART 503 FREQUENCY OF
MONITORING REQUIREMENTS L-l
-------
APPENDIX A
40 CFR Part 503 Standards for the Use or Disposal
of Sewage Sludge, Subparts A, B, and D
-------
Federal Register / VoL 58. No. 32 / Friday. February 19. 1S93 / Rules and Regulations B387
Subchapter O in chapter I of title 40
of the Code of Federal Regulations is
amended by adding part 503, which
reads as follows:
SUBCHAPTER O-SEWAGE SLUDGE
PART 503—STANDARDS FOR THE
USE OR DISPOSAL Or SEWAGE
SLUDGE
Subpart A—General Provisions
Sec.
503.1 Purpose and applicability,
503.2 Compliance period.
503.3 Permits and direct enforceability
503.4 Relationship to other regulations.
503.5 Additional or more stringent
requirements.
503.6 Exclusions.
503.7 Requirement for a person who
prepares sewage sludge.
SC3.8 Sampling and analysis.
503.9 General definitions.
Subpart B—Land Application
503.10 Applicability.
503.11 Special definitions.
503.13 General requirements.
503.13 Follutaat limits.
503.1* Management practices.
503.15 Operational standards—pathogens
and vector attraction reduction.
503.16 Frequency of monitoring.
503.17 Recordkeeping.
503.18 Reporting.
Subpart C—Surface Disposal
503.20 Applicability.
503.21 Special definitions.
503.22 General requirements.
503.23 Pollutant limits {other than domestic
septage).
503.24 Management practices.
503.25 Operational standards—pathogens
snd vector attraction reduction.
503.26 Frequency of monitoring.
503.27 Recordkeeping!
503.28 Reporting.
Subpart D—Pathogens and Vector
Attraction Reduction
503.30 Scope.
503.31 Special definitions.
503.32 Pathogens.
503.33 Vector attraction reduction.
Subpart E—Incineration
503.40 Applicability.
503.41 Special definitions.
503.42 General requirements.
503.43 Pollutant limits.
5C3.44 Operational standard—total '
hydrocarbons. .*
503.45 Management practices.
503 46 Frequency of monitoring,
503.47 Recordkeeping.
503.48 Reporting.
Appendix A to Part 503—Procedure to
Determine the Annual Whole Sludge
Application Rate for a Sewage Sludge
Appendix B to Part 503—Pathogen
Treatment Processes
Authority: Sections 405 (d) and (e) of the
Clean Water Act, as amended by Pub. L. 95-
217, Sec. 54(d), 91 Stat. 1591 (33 U.S.C. 1345
(d) and (e)); and Pub. L. 100—4, Title IV. Sec.
406 (a), (b). 101 Stat.. 71. 72 (33 U.S.C 1251
ef seq.).
Subpart A—General Provisions
§ 503.1 Purpose and applicability.
(a) Purpose. (1) This part establishes
standards, which consist of general
requirements, pollutant limits,
management practices, and operational
_ standards, for the final use or disposal
of sewage sludge generated during the
treatment of domestic sewage in a
treatment works. Standards are included
in this part for sewage sludge applied to
the land, placed on a surface disposal
site, or fired in a sewage sludge
incinerator. Also included in this part
are pathogen and alternative vector
attraction reduction requirements for
sewage sludge applied to the land or
placed on a surface disposal site.
(2} In addition, the standards in this
part include the frequency of
monitoring and recordkeeping
requirements when sewage sludge is
applied to the land, placed on a surface
disposal site* or fired in a sewage sludge
incinerator. Also included in this part
are reporting requirements for Class I
sludge management facilities, publicly
owned treatment works (PQTWs) with a
design flow rate equal to or greater than
one million gallons.per day, and POTWs
that serve 10,000 people or more.
(b) Applicability. (1) This part applies
to any person who prepares sewage *
sludge, applies sewage sludge to the
land, or fires sewage sludge to a sewage
sludge incinerator and to the owner/
operator of a surface disposal site.
(2) This part applies to sewage sludge
applied to the land, placed on a surface - _
disposal site, or fired in a sewage sludge "
incinerator.
(3) This part applies to the exit gas
from a sewage sludge incinerator stack.
A-l
-------
9388 Federal Register / Vol. 58, No. 32 / Friday, February 19, 1993 / Rules and Regulations
(4) This part applies to land where
towage sludge is applied, to a surface
disposal site, and to a sewage sludge
incinerator.
§5C3.2 Compliance period.
(a) Compliance with the standards in
this part shall be achieved as
expeditiously as practicable, but in no
ctM later than February 19,1994. When
compliance with the standards requires
construction of new pollution control -
facilities, compliance with the standards
shall be achieved as expeditiously as
practicable, but in no case later than
February 19,1995.
. (b) The requirements for frequency of
monitoring, recordkeeping, and
repotting in this part for total
hydrocarbons in the exit gas from a
sewage sludge incinerator are effective
Februaiy 19,1994 or. if compliance
with the operational standard for total
hydrocarbons in this part requires the
construction of new pollution control
facilities, Februaiy 19.1995.
(c) All other requirements for
frequency of monitoring, recordkeeping,
and reporting in this part are effective
on July 20,1993.
S 503J Permits and direct enforceability.
(a) Permits. The requirements in this
part may be implemented through a
permit:
(1) Issued to a "treatment works
treating domestic sewage", as defined in
40CFR 122.2, in accordance with 40
CFR parts 122 and 124 by EPA or by a
State that has a State sludge
management program approved by EPA
in accordance with 40 CFR part 123 or
40 CFR part 501 or
(2) Issued under subtitle C of the
Solid Waste Disposal Act; part C of the
Safe Drinking Water Act; the Marine
Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries
Act of 1972; or the Clean Air Act.
"Treatment works treating domestic
sewage" shall submit a permit
application in accordance with either 40
CFR 122.21 or an approved State
program.
(b) Direct enforceability. No person
shall use or dispose of sewage sludge
through any practice for which
requirements are established in this part
except in accordance with such
requirements.
$503.4 Relationship to other regulations.
Disposal of sewage sludge in a
municipal solid waste landfill unit, as
defined in 40 CFR 258.2, that complies
with the requirements in 40 CFR part
258 constitutes compliance with section
405(d) of the CWA. Any person who
prepares sewage sludge that is disposed
in a municipal solid waste landfill unit
shall ensure that the sewage sludge
meets the requirements in 40 CFR part
258 concerning the quality of materials
disposed in a municipal solid waste
landfill unit.
§503.5 Additional or more stringent
requirements.
(a) On a case-by-case basis, the
permitting authority may impose
requirements for the use or disposal of
sewage sludge in addition to or more
stringent than the requirements in this
part when necessary to protect public
health and the environment from any
adverse effect of a pollutant in the
sewage sludge.
(b) Nothing in this part precludes a
State or political subdivision thereof or
interstate agency from imposing
requirements for the use or disposal of
sewage sludge more stringent than the
requirements irithis part or from
imposing additional requirements for
the use or disposal of sewage sludge.
§503.6 Exclusions.
(a) Treatment processes. This part
does not establish requirements for
processes used to treat domestic sewage
. or for processes used to treat sewage
sludge prior to final use or disposal,
except as provided in § 503.32 and
§503.33.
(b) Selection of a use or disposal
practice. This part-does not require the
selection of a sewage sludge use or
disposal practice. The determination of
the manner in which sewage sludge is
used or disposed is a local
determination.
(c) Co-firing of sewage sludge. This
part does not establish requirements for
sewage sludge corfired in an incinerator
with other wastes or for the incinerator
in which sewage sludge and other
wastes are co-fired. Other wastes do not
include auxiliary fuel, as defined in 40
CFR 503.41(b), fired in a sewage sludge
incinerator.
(d) Sludge generated at an industrial
facility. This part does not establish
requirements for the use or disposal of
sludge generated at an industrial facility
during the treatment of industrial
wastewater, including sewage sludge .
generated during the treatment of
industrial wastewater combined with
domestic sewage..
(e) Hazardous sewage sludge. This
part does not establish requirements for
the use or disposal of sewage sludge
determined to be hazardous in
accordance with 40 CFR part 261.
(f) Sewage sludge with nigh PCB
concentration.This part does not
establish requirements for the use or
disposal of sewage sludge with a
concentration of polychlorinated
biphenyls (PCBs) equal to or greater
than 50 milligrams per kilogram of total
solids'(dry weight basis).
(g) Incinerator ash. This part does not
establish requirements for the use or
disposal of ash generated during the
firing of sewage sludge in a sewage
sludge incinerator.
(h) Grit and screenings. This part does
not establish requirements for tne use or
disposal of grit (e.g., sand, gravel,
cinders, or other materials with a high
specific gravity) or screenings (e.g.,
relatively large materials such as rags)
generated during preliminary treatment
of domestic sewage in a treatment
works.
(i) Drinking water treatment sludge.
This part does not establish
requirements for the use or disposal of
sludge generated during the treatment of
either surface water or ground water
used for drinking water.
(j) Commercial and industrial septage.
This part does not establish
requirements for the use or disposal of
commercial septage, industrial septage,
a mixture of domestic septage and
commercial septage, or a mixture of
domestic septage and industrial septage.
§503.7 Requirement (of ¦ person who
preparee sewage sludge.
Any person who prepares sewage
sludge shall ensure that the applicable
requirements in this part are met when
the sewage sludge is applied to the land,
placed on a surface disposal site, or
fired in a sewage sludge incinerator.
§ 503.8 Sampling end analysis.
(a) Sampling. Representative samples
of sewage sludge that is applied to the
land, placed on a surface disposal site,
or fired in a sewage sludge incinerator
shall be collected and analyzed.
(b) Methods. The materials listed
below are incorporated by reference in
this part. These incorporations by
reference were approve'd by the Director
of the Federal Register in accordance
with 5 U.S.C. {52(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
The materials are incorporated as they
exist on the date of approval, and notice
of any change in these materials will be
published in the Federal Register. They
are available for inspection at the Office
of the Federal Register, 7th Floor, suite .
700,800 North Capitol Street, NW.,
Washington, DC, and at the Office of
Water Docket, room L-102, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, 401
M Street, SW., Washington, DC Copies
may be obtained from the standard -
producer or publisher listed in the
regulation. Methods in the materials
listed below shall be used to-analyze 1
samples of sewage sludge.
A-2
-------
Federal Register / VoL 58. No. 32 / Friday, February 19, 1993 / Rules and Regulations 8389
(1) Enteric viruses. ASTM
Designation: D 4994-89, "Standard
Practice for Recovery of Viruses From
Wastewater Sludges", 1992 Annual
Book of ASTM Standards: Section 11—
Water and Environmental Technology,
ASTM, 1916 Race Street, Philadelphia,
PA 19103-1187.
(2) Fecal coliform. Part 9221E. or Part
9222 D., "Standard Methods for the
Examination of Water and Wastewater"
18th Edition, 1992, American Public
Health Association, 1015 15th Street,
NW., Washington, DC 20005.
(3) Helminth ova. Yanko, W.A.,
"Occurrence of Pathogens in
Distribution and Marketing Municipal
Sludges", EPA 600/1-87-014,1987.
National Technical Information Service,
5285 Port Royal Road, Springfield,
Virginia 22161 (PB 88-154273/AS).
(4) Inorganic pollutants: "Test
Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste,
Physical/Chemical Methods", EPA
Publication SW-846, Second Edition
(1982) with Updates I (April 1984} and
II (April 1985) and Third Edition
(November 1986) with Revision I
(December 1987). Second Edition and
Updates I and II are available from the
National Technical Information Service,
5285 Port Royal Road, Springfield,
Virginia 22161 (PB-87-120-291). Third
Edition and Revision I are available
from Superintendent of Documents,
Government Printing Office, 941 North
Capitol Street, NE., Washington, DC
20002 (Document Number 955-001—
00000-1).
(5). Salmonellasp. bacteria. Part 9260
D., "Standard Methods for the
Examination of Water and Wastewater"
18th Edition, 1992, American Public
Health Association, 1015 15th Street,
NW., Washington, DC 20005; or
Kenner, B.A. and H.P. Clark,
"Detection and enumeration of
Salmonella and Pseudomonas
aeruginosa". Journal of the Water
Pollution Control Federation, Vol. 46,
no. 9, September1974, pp. 2163-2171.
Water Environment Federation, 601
Wythe Street, Alexandria, Virginia
22314.
(6) Specific oxygen uptake rate. Part
2710 B., "Standard Methods for the
Examination of Water and Wastewater"
18th Edition, 1992, American Public
Health Association,. 1015 15th Street,
NW., Washington, DC 20005.
(7) Total, fixed, and volatile solids.
Part 2540 G., "Standard Methods for the
Examination of Water and Wastewater"
18th Edition, 1992, American Public .
Health Association, 1015 15th Street, .
NW., Washington, DC 20005.
$ 503.9 General definition*.
(a) Apply sewage sludge or sewage
sludge applied to the land means land
application of sewage sludge. ,
lb) Base flood is a flood that has a one
percent" chance of occurring in any
given year (i.e., a flood with a
magnitude equalled once in 100 years).
(c) Class I sludge management facility'
is any publicly owned treatment works
(POTW), as defined in 40 CFR 501.2,
required to have an approved
pretreatment program under 40 CFR
403.8(a) (including any POTW located
in a State that has elected to assume
local program responsibilities pursuant
to 40 CFR 403.10(e)) and any treatment
works treating domestic sewage, as
defined in 40 CFR 122.2, classified as a
Class I sludge management facility by
the EPA Regional Administrator, or, in
.the case of approved State programs, the
Regional Administrator in conjunction
with the State Director, because of the
potential for its sewage sludge use or
disposal practice to affect public health
and the environment adversely.
(d) Cover crop is a small grain crop,
such as oats, wheat, or barley, not grown
for harvest.
(e) CWA means the Clean Water Act
(formerly referred to as either the
Federal Water Pollution Act or the
Federal Water Pollution Control Act
Amendments of 1972), Public Law 92-
500, as amended by Public Law 95-217,
Public Law 95-576, Public Law 96-483,
Public Law 97—117, and Public Law
100-4.
(f) Domestic septage is either liquid or .
solid material removed from a septic
tank, cesspool, portable toilet, Type m
marine sanitation device, or similar -
treatment works that receives only
domestic sewage. Domestic septage does
not include liquid or solid material
removed from a septic tank, cesspool, or
similar treatment works that receives
either commercial wastewater or
industrial wastewater and does not
include grease removed from a grease
trap at a restaurant.
(g) Domestic sewage is waste and
wastewater from humans or household
operations that is'discharged to or
otherwise enters a treatment works.
(h) Dry weight basis means calculated
on the basis of having been dried at 105
degrees Celsius until reaching a
- constant-mass (i.e., essentially 100
percent solids content).
(i) EPA means the United States
Environmental Protection Agency.
(j) Feed crops are crops produced
primarily for consumption by animals.
(k) Fiber crops are crops such as flax
and cotton.
(1) Food crops are crops consumed by
humans. These include, but are not
limited to, fruits, vegetables, and
tobacco.
(m) Ground water is water below the
land surface in the saturated zone.
(n) Industrial wastewater is
wastewater generated in a commercial
or industrial process.
(o) Municipality means a city, town,
borough, county, parish, district,
association, or other public body
(including an interrounicipal Agency of
two or more of the foregoing entities)
created by or under State law; an Indian
tribe or an authorized Indian tribal
organization having jurisdiction over
sewage sludge management; or a
designated and approved management
Agency under section 208 of the CWA,
as amended. The definition includes a
special district created tinder State law,
such as a water district, sewer district,
sanitary district, utility district, drainage
district, or similar entity, or an
integrated waste management facility as
defined in section 201(e) of the CWA, as
amended, that has as one of its principal
responsibilities the treatment, transport,
use, or disposal of sewage sludge.
(p) Permitting authority is either EPA
or a State with an EPA-approved sludge
management program.
(q) Person is an individual,
association, partnership, corporation,
municipality, State or Federal agency, or
an agent or employee thereof.
(r) Person who prepares sewage
sludge is either the person who
generates sewage sludge during the
treatment of domestic sewage in a
treatment works or the person who
derives a material from sewage sludge.
(s) Place sewage sludge or sewage
sludge placed means disposal of sewage
sludge on a surface disposal site.
(t) Pollutant is an organic substance,
an inorganic substance, a combination
of organic and inorganic substances, or
a pathogenic organism that, after
discharge and upon exposure, ingestion,
inhalation, or assimilation into an*
organism either directly from the
environment or indirectly by ingestion
through the food chain, could, on the
basis of information available to the
Administrator of EPA, cause death, _
disease, behavioral abnormalities,
cancer, genetic mutations, physiological
malfunctions (including malfunction in
reproduction), or physical deformations
in either organisms or offspring of the.
organisms.
(u) Pollutant limit is a numerical
value that describes the amount of a.,,»..
pollutant allowed per unit amount of "
sewage sludge (e.g., milligrams per ......
kilogram of total solids); the amount of
a pollutant that can be applied to a unit. i
area of land (e.g., kilograms per hectare);
or the volume of a material that can be .
A-3
-------
9390 Federal Register / Vol. 58, No. 32 / Friday, February 19, 1993 / Rules and Regulations
applied to a unit area of land (e.g.,
gallons par acre).
(v) Runoff la rainwater, leachate, or
other liquid that drains overland on any
part of a land surface and runs off of the
land surface.
(w) Sewage sludge is solid, semi-solid,
or liquid residue generated during the
treatment of domestic sewage in a
treatment works. Sewage sludge
includes, but i* not limited to, domestic
septage; scum or solids removed in
primary, secondary, or advanced
wastewater treatment processes; and a
material derived from sewage sludge.
Sewage sludge does not include ash
generated during the firing of sewage
sludge in a sewage sludge incinerator or
grit and screenings generated during
preliminary treatment of domestic
sewage in a treatment works.
(x) State is one of the United States of
America, the District of Columbia, the
Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the
Virgin Islands, Guam, American Samoa,
the Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands,
the Commonwealth of the Northern
Mariana Islands, and an Indian Tribe
eligible for treatment as a State pursuant
to regulations promulgated under the
authority of sertion 518(e) of the CWA. '
(y) Store or storage of sewage sludge
is the placement of sewage sludge on
land on which the sewage sludge
remains for two years or less. This does
not include the placement of sewage
sludge on land for treatment.
(r) Treat or treatment of sewage
sludge is the preparation of sewage
sludge for final use or disposal. This
includes, but is not limited to,
thickening, stabilization, and
dewatering of sewage sludge. This does
not include storage of sewage sludge.
(aa) Treatment works is either a
federally owned, publicly owned, or
privately owned device or system used
to treat (including recycle and reclaim)
either domestic sewage or a
combination ofdomestic sewage and
industrial waste of a liquid nature.
(bb) Wetlands means those areas that
are inundated or saturated by surface
water or ground water at a frequency
and duration to support, and that under
, normal circumstances do support, a
prevalence of vegetation typically
adapted for life in saturated soil
conditions. Wetlands generally include
swamps, marshes, bogs, and similar
areas.
Subpart B—Land Application
§503.10 Applicability. .
(a) This subpart applies to any person
who prepares sewage sludge that is
applied to the land, to any person who
applies sewage sludge to the land, to
sewage sludge applied to the land, and
to the land on which sewage sludge is
applied.
(b)(1) Bulk sewage sludge. The general
requirements in § 503.12 and the
management practices in § 503.14 do
hot apply when bulk sewage sludge is '
applied to the land if the bulk sewage
sludge meets the pollutant
concentrations in § 503.13(b)(3), the
Class A pathogen requirements in
§ 503.32(a), and one of the vector
attraction reduction requirements in
§ 503.33 (b)(1) through (b)(8).
(2) The Regional Administrator of
EPA or, in the case of a State with an
approved sludge management program,
the State Director, may apply any or all
of the general requirements in $ 503.12
and the management practices in
$ 503.14 to.the bulk sewage sludge in
§ 503.10(b)(1) on a case-by-case basis
after determining that the general
requirements or management practices
are needed to protect public health and
the environment from any reasonably
anticipated adverse effect that may
occur from any pollutant in the bulk
sewage sludge^
(c)(1) The general requirements in
§ 503.12 and the management practices
in § 503.14 do not apply when a bulk
material derived from sewage sludge is
applied to the land if the derived bulk
material meets the pollutant
concentrations in § 503.13(b)(3), the
Class A pathogen requirements in
§ 503.32(a), and one of the vector
attraction reduction requirements in
§ 503.33 (b)(1) through (b)(8).
(2) The Regional Administrator of
EPA or, in the case of a State with an .
approved sludge management program,
the State Director, may apply any or all
of the general requirements in § 503.12
or the management practices in § 503.14
to the bulk material in § 503.10(c)(1) on
a case-by-case basis after determining
that the general requirements or
management practices are needed to
protect public health and the
environment from any reasonably
anticipated adverse effect that may
occur from any pollutant in the bulk
sewage sludge.
(d) The requirements in this subpart .
do not apply when a bulk material
derived from sewage sludge is applied
to the land if the sewage sludge from
which the bulk material is derived
meets the pollutant concentrations in
$ 503.13(b)(3), the Class A pathogen
requirements in § 503.32(a), and one of .
the vector attraction reduction -
requirements in §503.33 (b)(1) through '
(b)(8).
(e) Sewage sludge sold or given away .
in a bag or other container for
application to the land. The general
requirements in $ 503.12 and the
management practices in § 503.14 do
not apply when sewage sludge is sold or
given away in a bag or other container
for application to the land if the sewage
sludge sold or given away in a bag or
other container for application to the
land ipeets the pollutant concentrations
in § 503.13(b)(3), the Class A pathogen
requirements in $ 503.32(a), and one of
the vector attraction reduction
requirements in § 503.33 (b)(1) through
(b)(8).
(f) The general requirements in
§ 503.12 and the management practices
in § 503.14 do not apply when a
material derived from sewage sludge is
sold or given away in a bag or other
container for application to the land if
the derived material meets the pollutant
concentrations in § 503.13(b)(3), the
Class A pathogen requirements in
§ 503.32(a), and one of the vector
attraction reduction requirements in
§ 503.33 (b)(1) through (b)(8).
(g) The requirements in this subpart
do not apply when a material derived
from sewage sludge is sold or given
away in a bag or other container for
application to the land if the sewage
sludge from which the material is
derived meets the pollutant
concentrations in § 503.13(b)(3), the
Class A pathogen requirements in
§ 503.32(a), and one of the vector
attraction reduction requirements in
§ 503.33 (b)(1) through (b)(8).
S 503.11 Special definitions.
(a) Agricultural land is land on which
a food crop, a feed crop, or a fiber crop
is grown. This includes range land and
land used as pasture.
(b) Agronomic rate is the whole
sludge application rate (dry weight
basis) designed:
(1) To provide the amount of nitrogen
needed by the food crop, feed crop, fiber
crop, cover crop, or vegetation grown on
the land; and
(2) To minimize the amount of
nitrogen in the sewage sludge that
passes below the root zone of the crop
or vegetation grown on the land to the .
ground water.
(c) Annual pollutant loading rate is
the maximum amount of a pollutant that
can be applied to a unit area of land
during a 365 day period.
. (d) Annual whole sludge application
rate is the maximum amount of sewage
sludge (dry weight basis) that can be
applied to a unit area of land during a
365 day period. .
(e) Bulk sewage sludge is sewage
sludge that is not sold or given away in
a bag or other container for application
to the land.
A-4
-------
reaerm negisier / vui. do, ixu. o*. t ruiuv, ruuruary ia, ia»o / nuies ana Regulations
»3Mi
(f) Cumulative pollutant loading rate
is the maximum amount of an inorganic
pollutant that can be applied to an area
of land.
(g) Forest is a tract of land thick with ¦¦
trees and underbrush.
(h) Land application is the spraying or
spreading of sewage sludge onto the
land surface; the injection of sewage
sludge below the land surface; or the
incorporation of sewage sludge into the
soil so that the sewage sludge can either
condition the soil or fertilize crops or
vegetation grown in the soil.
(i) Monthly average is the.arithmetic
mean of all measurements taken during
the month.
(j) Other container is either an open
or closed receptacle. This includes, but
is not limited to, a bucket, a box, a
carton, and a vehicle or trailer with a
load capacity of one metric ton or less.
(k) Pasture is land on which animals
feed directly on feed crops such as
legumes, grasses, grain stubble, or
stover.
(1) Public contact site is land with a
high potential for contact by the public.
This includes, but is not limited to,
public parks, ball fields, cemeteries,
plant nurseries, turf farms, and golf
courses.
(m) Range land is open land with
indigenous vegetation.
(n) Reclamation site is drastically
disturbed land that is reclaimed using
sewage sludge. This includes, but is not
limited to, strip mines and construction
sites.
§503.12 General requirements.
(a) No person shall apply sewage
sludge to the land except in accordance
with the requirements in this subpart.
(b) No person shall apply bulk sewage
sludge subject to the cumulative .
pollutant loading rates in § 503.13(b)(2)
to agricultural land, forest, a public
contact site, or a reclamation site if any
of the cumulative pollutant loading
rates in § 503.13(b)(2) has been reached.
(c) No person shall apply domestic
septage to agricultural land, forest, or a
reclamation site during a 365 day period
if the annual application rate in
§ 503.13(c) has been reached during that .
period.
(d) The person who prepares bulk
sewage sludge that is applied to
agricultural land, forest, a public contact
site, or a reclamation site shall provide
the person who applies the bulk sewage
sludge written notification of the
concentration of total nitrogen (as N on
a dry weight basis) in the bulk sewage ~
sludge. •
(e)(1) The person who applies sewage
sludge to the land shall obtain
information needed to comply with the
requirements in this subpart.
(2)(i) Before bulk sewage sludge
subject to the cumulative pollutant
loading rates in § 503.13(b)(2) is applied
to the land, the person who proposes to
- apply the bulk sewage sludge shall
contact the permitting authority for the
State in which the-bulk sewage sludge
will be applied to determine whether
bulk sewago sludge subject to the
cumulative pollutant loading rates in
§ 503.13(b)(2) has been applied to the
site since July 20,1993.
(ii) If bulk sewage sludge subject to
the cumulative pollutant loading rates
in § 503.13(b)(2) has not been applied to
the site since July 20,1993, the
cumulative amount for each pollutant
listed in Table 2 of § 503.13 may be
applied to the site in accordance with
§ 503.13(a)(2)(i).
(iii) If bulk sewage sludge subject to
the cumulative pollutant loading rates
in § 503.13(b)(2) has been applied to the
site since July 20,1993, and the
cumulative amount of each pollutant
applied to the site in the bulk sewage
sludge since that date is known, the
cumulative amount of each pollutant
applied to the site shall be used to
determine the additional amount of
each pollutant that can be applied to the
site in accordance with § 503.13(a)(2)(i).
(iv) If bulk sewage sludge subject to
the cumulative pollutant loading rates
in § 503.13(b)(2) has been applied to the
site since July 20,1993, ana the
cumulative amount of each pollutant
applied.to the site in the bulk sewage
sludge since that date is not known, an
additional amount of each pollutant
shall not be applied to the site in
accordance with § 503.13(a)(2)(i).
(f) When a person who prepares bulk
sewage sludge provides the bulk sewage
sludge to a person,who applies the hulk
sewage sludge to the land, the person
who prepares the bulk sewage sludge
shall provide the person who applies
the sewage sludge notice and necessary
information to comply with the
requirements in this subpart.
(g) When a person who prepares
sewage sludge provides the sewage
sludge to another person who prepares
the sewage sludge, the person who
provides the sewage sludge shall
provide the person who receives the
sewage sludge notice and necessary
information to comply with the
requirements in this subpart
(n) The person who applies bulk
sewage sludge to the land shall provide
the owner or lease holder of the land on
which the bulk sewage sludge is applied
notice and necessary information to
comply with the requirements in this
subpart.
(ij Any person who prepares bulk
sewage sludge that is applied to land in
a State other than the State in which the
bulk sewage sludge is prepared shall
provide written notice, prior to the
initial application of bulk sewage sludge
to the land application site by the
applier, to the permitting authority for
the State in which the bulk sewage
sludge is proposed to be applied. The
notice shall include:
(1) The location, by either street
address or latitude and longitude, of
each land application site.
(2) The approximate time period bulk
sewage sludge will be applied to the
site.
(3) The name, address, telephone
number, and National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System permit
number (if appropriate) for the person
who prepares the bulk sewage sludge.
(4) The name, address, telephone
number, and National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System permit
number (if appropriate) for the person
who will apply the bulk sewage sludge.
(j) Any person who applies bulk
sewage sludge subject to the cumulative
pollutant loading rates in § S03.13(b)(2)
to the land shall provide written notice,
prior to the initial application of bulk
sewage sludge to a land application site
by the applier, to the permitting
authority for the State in which the bulk
sewage sludge will be applied and the
permitting authority shall retain and
provide access to the notice. The notice
shall include:
(1) The location, by either street
address or latitude and longitude, of the
land application site.
(2) The name, address, telephone
number, and National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System permit
number (if appropriate) of the person
who will apply the bulk sewage sludge.
$503.13 PollutantIkniU.
(a) Sewage sludge. (1) Bulk sewage
sludge or sewage sludge sold or given
away in a bag or other container shall
not be applied to the land if the
concentration of any pollutant in the
sewage sludge exceeds the ceiling
concentration for the pollutant in Table
1 of § 503.13."*
(2) If bulk sewage sludge is applied to
agricultural land, forest, a public contact
site, or a reclamation site, either:
(i) The cumulative loading rate for
each pollutant shall not exceed the
cumulative pollutant loading rate for the
pollutant in Table 2 of § 503.13; or
(ii) The concentration of each
pollutant in the sewage sludge shall not
exceed the concentration for the
pollutant in Table 3 of § 503.13.
(3) If bulk sewage sludge is applied to
a lawn or a home garden, the
concentration of each pollutant in the
A-5
-------
9382 Federal Register / Vol. 58, No. 32 / Friday, February 19, 1993 / Rules and Regulations
sewage sludge shall not exceed the
concentration for the pollutant in Table
3 of S 503.13.
(4) If sewage sludge is sold or given
away In a bag or other container for
application to the land, either:
(i) The concentration of each
pollutant in tha sewage sludge shall not
exceed the concentration for the
pollutant in Table 3 of 5 503.13; or
(!i) The product of the concentration
of each pollutant in the sewage sludge
and the annual whc'.a sludge
application rate for the sewage sludge
shall not cause the annual pollutant
loading rate for the pollutant in Table 4
of S 503.13 to be exceeded. The
procedure used to determine the annual
whole sludge application rate is
praaented in appendix A of this part.
(b) Pollutant concentrations and
loading rates—sewage sludge.
(1) Ceiling concentrations.
Table 1 of §503.13.—Ceiling
Concentrations
Table 3 of § 503.13.—Pollutant
Concentrations—Continued
Pe&rtart
CeOng concentration
(mUUgmme per Mk>-
gram)'
Aruric
75
Cadmium
85
tSvrymkwn
3000
CSfXMf
4300
Lead
640
Mtrctxy
5?
Mofy&danum
75
Mcxel
420
Selenium
100
7600
'Dry weight basic.
(2) Cumulative poll
rates.
nt loading
Table 2 of §503.13.—Cumulative
Pollutant Loading Rates
Pofcjtrot
Cumulative poSutam
loading rale (Mtocrmms
pec hectare)
Aimtjc
41
&0r*jm
39
Ommum
3000
Copp*
1500
Laad _
300
Masevry __
17
Molybdenum —¦
18
NlcVol
420
Selenium
100
Z!nc
2800
(3) Pollutant concentrations.
Table 3 of § 503.13.—PoauTANT
CONCENTRATIONS
Pdkam
AiserJc .
Cadmium
Ovwraom.
Cosxmr _
Morthiy average cor>-
ear&sinns {mtaoranw
pork&ogismj'
41
39
1200
1500
PoOuta.it
MontNy average ccn-
canmaonc (m&iaanw
per Hk&Bmp
Laad ———«
900
Mercury ,
17
Molybdenum,
18
NtcfclH
420
Selenium .
96
Zinc
2800
' Dry weight basis.
(4) Annual pollutant leading rates.
Table 4 of §503.13.—Annual
Pollutant Loading Rates
Pollutant
, Annua! pollutant loadng
lata (Uiograms per nec-
tar* par 365 day period)
Aisenle
3L0
Cadmium '.—
1.9
Owomlum
150
Copper
75
Laad
15
Memuy
0.85
Molybdenum
0.90
Nickel
21
Selenium
5JO
Zinc
140
(c) Domestic septage.
The annual application rate for
domestic septage applied to agricultural
land, forest, ora reclamation site shall
not exceed the annual application rate
calculated using equation (1).
AAR=
N
0.0026
Eq.(U
Where:
AAR=Annual application rate in gallons per
• acre per 365 day period.
N=Amount of nitrogen in pounds per aero
•per 365 day period needed by the crop
or vegetation grown on tha land.
5503.14 Management practice*.
(a) Bulk sewage sludge shall not be
applied to the land if it is likely to
adversely affect a threatened or
endangered species listed under section
4 of the Endangered Species Act or its
designated critical habitat.
(b) Bulk sewage sludge shall not be
applied to agricultural land, forest, ¦
public contact site, or a reclamation site
that is flooded, frozen, or snow-covered
so that the bulk sewage sludge enters a
wetland or other waters of the United
States, as defined in 40 CFR 122.2,
except as provided in a permit issued
pursuant to section 402 or 404 of the
CWA.
(c) Bulk sewage sludge shall not be
applied to agricultural land, forest, or a
reclamation site that is 10 meters or less
from waters of the United States, as
defined in 40 CFR 122.2, unless
otherwise specified by the permitting
authority.
(d) Bulk sewage sludge shall be
applied to agricultural land, forest, a
public contact site, or a reclamation sit
at a whole sludge application rate that
is equal to or less than the agronomic
rate for the bulk sewage sludge, unless
in the case of a reclamation site,
otherwise specified by the permitting
authority.
(e) Either a label shall be affixed to tl
bag or other container in which sewage
sludge that is sold or given away for
application to the land, or an
information sheet shall be provided to
the person who receives sewage sludge
sold or given away in an other contain!
for application to the land. The label oi
information sheet shall contain the
following information:
(1) The name and address of the
person who prepared the sewage sltidg
that is sold or given away in a bag or
other container for application to the
land.
(2) A statement that application of th
sewage sludge to the land is prohibited
except in accordance with the
instructions on the label or information
sheet.
(3) The annual whole sludge
application rate for the sewage sludge
that does not cause any of the annual
pollutant loading rates in Table 4 of
§ 503.13 to be exceeded.
f503,15 Operational etandard*—
pathogens and vector attraction reduction.
{a} Pathogens—sewage sludge.
(1) The Class A pathogen
requirements in § 503.32(a) or the Class
B pathogen requirements and site
restrictions in § 503.32(b) shall be met
when bulk sewage sludge is applied to
agricultural land, forest, a public contac
site, or a reclamation site.
(2) The Class A pathogen : *
requirements in § 503.32(a) shall be met
when bulk sewage sludge is applied to
a lawn or a home garden.
- (3) The Class A pathogen
requirements in § 503.32(a) shall be met
when sewage sludge is sold or given
away in a bag or other container for
application to the land.
(b) Pathogens—domestic septage.
The requirements in either § 503.32
(c)(1) or (c)(2) shall be met when ;
domestic septage is applied to
agricultural land, forest, or a
reclamation site.
(c) Vector attraction reduction—
sewage sludge. •'
(1) One ofthe vector attraction
reduction requirements in § 503.33 -
(b)(1) through (b)(10) shall be met when
bulk sewage sludge is applied to
agricultural land, forest, a public contact
site, or a reclamation site. • ••••••
A-6
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 58, No. 32 / Friday, February 19, 1993 / Rules and Regulations 9393
(2) One of the vector attraction
reduction requirements in § 503.33
(b)(1) through (b)(8) shall be met when
bulk sewage sludge is applied to a lawn ,
or a home garden.
(3) One of the vector attraction
reduction requirements in § 503.33
(b)(1) through (b)(8) shall be met when
sewage sludge is sold or given away in
a bag or other container for application
.to the land.
(d) Vector attraction reduction—
domestic septage. The vector attraction
reduction requirements in
§ 503.33(b)(9), (b)(10). or (b)(12) shall be
met when domestic septage is applied to
agricultural land, forest, or a
reclamation site.
S 503.16 Frequency of monitoring.
(a) Sewage sludge. (1) The frequency
of monitoring for the pollutants listed in.
Table 1, Table 2, Table 3 and Table 4
of § 503.13; the pathogen density
requirements in § 503.32(a) and in
§ 503.32(b)(2) through (b)(4); and the
vector attraction reduction requirements
§ 503.33 (b)(1) through § 503.33(b)(8)
shall be the frequency in Table 1 of
§503.16.
Table. 1 of §503.16.—Frequency of
Monitoring—land Application
Amount ot sewage
sludga' (metric tons per
365 day period)
Frequency
Greater than zero but
less than 290.
Equal to or greater than
290 but less than
1.500.
Equal to or greater than
1,500 but less than
15,000.
Equal to or greater than
15.000.
Once per year.
Once per quarter (lour
timos per year).
Once per SO days (six
times per year).
Once per month (12
times per year).
1 Either the amount 01 bulk sewage sludge applied
to Die land or the amount o) sewage sludge received
by a person who prepares sewage sludge that Is
sold or given away In a bag or other container for
application to the land (dry weight basis).
(2) After the sewage sludge has been
monitored for two years at the frequency
in Table 1 of § 503.16, the permitting
authority may reduce the frequency of
monitoring for pollutant concentrations
and for the pathogen density
requirements in § 503.32 (a)(5)(ii) and
(a)(S)(iii), but in no case shall the
frequency of monitoring be less than
once per year when sewage sludge is
applied to the land.
.(b) Domestic septage. If either the
pathogen requirements in § 503.32(c)(2)
cr the vector attraction reduction
requirements in § 503.33(b)(12) are met
when domestic septage is applied to
agricultural land, forest, or a
reclamation site, each container of
domestic septage applied to the land
shall be monitored for compliance with
those requirements.
(Approved by the Office of Management and
, Budget under control number 2040-0157)
§ 503.17 Recordkeeping.
(a) Sewage sludge. (1) The person who
prepares the sewage sludge in
§ 503.10(b)(1) or (e) shall develop the
following information and shall retain
the information for five years:
(1) The concentration of each
pollutant listed in Table 3 of § 503.13 in
the sewage sludge.
(ii) The following certification
statement:
"I certify, under penalty of law, that the
Class A pathogen requirements in § 503.32(a).
and the vector attraction reduction
requirement in (insert one of the vector
attraction reduction requirements in
S 503.33(b)(1) through § 503.33(b)(8)] have
been met. This determination has been made
under my direction and supervision in
accordance with the system designed to
ensure that qualified personnel properly
gather and evaluate the information used to
determine that the pathogen requirements
and vector attraction reduction requirements
have been met I am aware that there are
significant penalties for false certification
including the possibility of fine and
imprisonment."
(iii) A description of how the Class A
pathogen requirements in § 503.32(a) are
met.
(iv) A description of how one of the
vector attraction reduction requirements
in § 503.33 (b)(1) through (b)(8) is met.
(2) The person who derives the
material in § 503.10 (c)(1) or (f) shall
develop the following information and
shall retain the information for five
years:
(i) The concentration of each
pollutant listedln Table 3 of § 503.13 in
the material.
(ii) The following certification
statement:
"1 certify, under penalty of law, that the
Class A pathogen requirements in § 503.32(a)
and the vector attraction reduction
requirement in [insert one of the vector
attraction reduction requirements in S 503.33
(b)(1) through (b)(6)] have been met This
determination has been made under my
direction and supervision in accordance with
the system designed to ensure that qualified '
personnel properly gather and evaluate the
"information used to determine that the
pathogen requirements and the vector
attraction reduction requirements have been
met I am aware that there are significant
penalties for false certification including the
possibility of fine and imprisonment."
(iii) A description of how the Class A
pathogen requirements in § 503.32(a) are
met.
(iv) A description of how one of the
vector attraction reduction requirements
in § 503.33 (b)(1) through (b)(8) is met.
(3) If the pollutant concentrations in
§ 503.13(b)(3), the Class A pathogen
requirements in $ 503.32(a), and the
vector attraction reduction requirements
in either $ 503.33 (b)(9) or (b)(10) are
met when bulk sewage sludge is applied
to agricultural land, forest, a public
contact site, or a reclamation site:
(i) The person who prepares the bulk
sewage sludge shall develop the
following information and shall retain
the information for five years.
(A) The concentration of each
pollutant listed in Table 3 of $ 503.13 in
the bulk sewage sludge.
(B) The following certification
statement:
"I certify, under penalty of law, that the
pathogen requirements in $ 503.32(a) have
been met. This determination has been made
under my direction and supervision in
accordance with the system designed to
ensure that qualified personnel properly
gather and evaluate the information used to
determine that the pathogen requirements
have been met I am aware that there are
significant penalties for false certification
including the possibility of fine and
imprisonment"
(C) A description of how the pathogen
requirements in $ 503.32(a) are met
(ii) The person who applies the bulk
sewage sludge shall develop the
following information and shall retain
the information for five years.
(A) The following certification
statement:
"I certify, under penalty of law, that the
management practices in $ 503.14 and the
vector attraction reduction requirement in
(insert either $ 503.33 (b)(9) or (b)(10)] have
been met. This determination has been made
under my direction and supervision in
accordance with the system designed to
ensure that qualified personnel properly
gather and evaluate the information used to
determine that the management practices and
vector attraction reduction requirements have
been met I am aware that there are
significant penalties for false certification
including fine and imprisonment"
(B) A description of how the
management practices in § 503.14 are
met for each site on which bulk sewage
sludge is applied.
(C) A description of how the vector
attraction reduction requirements in
either § 503.33(b)(9) or (b)(10) are met
for each site on which bulk sewage
sludge is applied.
(4) If the pollutant concentrations in
§ 503.13(b)(3) and the Class B pathogen
requirements in $ 503.32(b) are met
when bulk sewage sludge is applied to
agricultural land, forest, a public contact
site, or a reclamation site:
(i) The person who prepares the bulk
sewage sludge shall develop the
following information and shall retain
the information for five years:
A-7
-------
9394 Federal Register / Vol. 53, Wo. 32 / Friday, February 19, 1993 / Rules and Regulations
(A) The concentration of each
pollutant listed in Table 3 of § 502.13 in
tho bulk sewage sludge.
(B) The following certification
statement:
"I certify under, penalty of law, that She
Class B pathogen requirement* in S503.32(b)
acd ths vector attraction reduction
requirement in I insert ono of the vector
attraction reduction requirements in §503-33
(bXD through (b)(B) if ooe of those
requirement! Is net] have been met This
da'.ermlnatlos bet been made under my
direction and supervision in accordance with
the system daslgncd to ensure that qualified
personnel property gather end evaluate the
information used to detennine that the
pethogaa requirements (and vector attrectlon
reduction rsquireinsots if applicable) have
been met. 1 am aware that there are
significant penalties fix false certification
including the pot slhllity of One and
imprisonment**
(C) A description of how the Class B
pathogen requirements in $ 503.32(b)
ere mat.
(D) When one of the vector attraction
reduction requirements in S 503.33
(b)(1) through (b)(8) is met. a description
cf how the vector attraction reduction
requirement is met.
slies the bulk
op the
following information and shall retain
the information for five years.
(A) The following certification
statement;
"I certify, under penalty of law, that the
management practices in § 503.14, the site
restriction* in § 503.32(b)(5), and the vector
attraction reduction requirements in (insert
either S 503-33 (bX9) or (bKlO), if one of those
requirements is met) have been met for each
site on which bulk sewage sludge Is applied.
This determination has been made under my
direction and supervision in accordance with
the system designed to ensure that qualified
personnel properly gather and evatuate the •
information used to determine that the
management practices and site restrictions -
(and the vector attraction reduction
requirements if applicable) have been met. I
am aware that there are significant penalties
for false certification including the
possibility of fine and imprisonment."
(B) A description of how the ••
management practices in 5 503.14 are
mat for each site on which bulk sewage
shidge is applied.
(CJ A description of how ths site
restrictions In $ 503.32(b)(5) are met for
each site on which bulk sewage sludge
issppliod.
(D) Whan the vector attraction
reduction requirement in either S 503.33
(b)(9) or (b)(10) is met, a description of
how the vector attraction reduction
requirement is met
l5) If the requirements in
S 503.13(a)(2)(i) are met when bulk -
sewage sludge is applied to agricultural
land, forest, a public contact site; or a
reclamation site:
(i) The person who prepares tha bulk
sewage sludge shall develop ths
following information and shall retain
the information for five yeas*.
(A) The concentration of each
pollutant listed in Table 1 of § 503.13 in
the bulk aewage sludge.
(B) The following certification
statement:
~I certify, under penalty of law, that the
pathogen requirements in (insert either
$ 503.32(a) or $ 503.32(b)) and the vector
attraction reduction requirement in (insert
one of the vector attraction reduction
requirements in S 503.33 (b)(1) through (b)(8)
if one of those requirements is mat] have
been met. This determination has been made
under my direction and supervision in
accordance with the system designed to
ensure that qualified personnel properly
gather and evaluate the information used to
determine that the pathogen requirements
(and vector attraction reduction
requirements) have been met I am aware that
there are significant penalties far false
certification inchiding the possibility of fine
and imprisonment"
(C) A description of how the pathogen
requirements in either § 503.32 (a) or fbj
are met, *
(D) When one of the vector attraction
requirements in § 503.33 (b)(1) through
(b)(8) is met, a description of how the
vector attraction requirement is met.
(ii) The person who applies the bulk
sewage sludge shall develop the
following information, retain the
information In $503.17 (a)(5){ii)(A)
through (a)(5)(ii)(G) indefinitely, and
retain the information in § 503.1?
(a)(5)(ii)(H) through ja)(5)(ii}(M) for five
years.
(A) The location, by either street
address or latitude and longitude, of
each site on which bulk sewage-sludge
is applied.
(B) The number of hectares in each
site on which bulk sewage sludge is
applied.
(C) The date and time bulk sewage
sludge is applied to each site.
(D) The cumulative amount of each
pollutant (i.e., kilograms) listed in Table
2 of S 503 .13 In the bulk sewage sludge
applied to each site, including the
amount in $ 503.12(eM2)(iii).
(E) The amount of sewage sludge (i.e.,
metric tons) applied to each site.
(F) The following certification
statement:
"I certify, under penalty of law, that the
requirements to obtain Information in
S 503.12(e)(2) have been met Car each site on
which bulk sewage shidge is applied. This
determination has been made under my "
direction and supervitton in accordance with
the system designed to ensure that qualified
personnel properly gather and evaluate the
information used to determine that tha
requirements to obtain iofoima&ta have been
met. 1 am aware that there are significant
penalties for falsa certification Including fine
and imprisonment"
(G) A description of how the
requirements to obtain information in
§ 503.12(e)(2) are met
(H) The following certification
statement:
"1 certify, under penalty of law, that the
management practice* in $50X14 have been
met for eech site on which bulk sewege
sludge is applied. Thia determination has
been made undw my direction and
supervision in accordance with tha system
designed to ensure that qualified personnel
properly gather and evaluate the information
used to determine that the management
practices'have been met I am aware that
there are significant penalties for false
certification including fine end
Imprisonment**
(I) A description of how the
management practices in § 503.14 are
met for each site on which bulk sewage
sludge is applied.
(J) ihe following certification
statement when the bulk sewage sludge
meets die Class B pathogen
requirements in § 503.32(b);
"I certify, under penalty of law, that the
site restrictions in $ 503 .32{bXS) have been
met. This determination has been mads
under my direction and supervision in
accordance with the system designed to
ensure that qualified personnel properly
gather and evaluate the information used to
determine that the site restrictions have bean
met I am aware that there are significant
penalties for false certification including fine
and imprisonment"
(K) A description of how the site
restrictions in § 503.32(b)(5) are met for
each site on which Class B*bulk sewage
sludge is applied.
(L)The following certification
statement when the vector attraction
reduction requirement in either $ 503.33
(b)(9) or (bXlO) is met:
"I certify, under penalty of law, that the
vector attraction reduction requirement in
(insert either §S03J33(bM9) or $ 503,33(bXlO})
has been met This determination has been
made under my direction and supervision in ¦
accordance with the system designed to
ensure that qualified personnel properly
gather and evaluate the Information used to
determine that the vector attraction reduction
requirement has been met 1 am aware that .
there are significant penalties far false
certification including the possibility of fine •
and imprisonment"
(M) If the vector attraction reduction
requirements in either $ 503.33 (b)(9) or
(b)(l0) are met, e description of how the
requirements are met.
(6) If the requirements in
§ 503.13(a)(4)(ii) are met when sewage
sludge is sold or given away in a bag or
A-8
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 58, No. 32 / Friday, February 19, 1993 / Rules and Regulations
9395
¦other container for application to the
land, the person who prepares the
sewage sludge that is sold or given away
- in a bag or other container shall develop
the following information and shall
- retain the information for five years:
-------
post-graduata degree in the natural
sciences or engineering who has
sufficient training and experience in
ground-water hydrology and related
fields, as may be demonstrated by State
registration, professional certification,
or completion of accredited university
programs, to make sound professional
judgments regarding ground-water
monitoring, pollutant fate and transport,
and corrective action.
(m) Seismic impact zone is an area
that has a 10 percent or greater
probability that the horizontal ground
level acceleration of the rock in the area
exceeds 0.10 gravity once in 250 years.
(n) Sewage sludge unit is land on
which only sewage sludge is placed for
final disposal. This does not include
land oa which sewage sludge is either
stored or treated. Land does not include
waters of the United States, as defined
in 40 CFR 122.2.
(c) Sewage sludge unit boundary is
the outermost perimeter of an active
sewage sludge unit
fpj Surface disposal site is an area of
land that contains one or more active
sewage sludge units.
(q) Unstable area is land subject to
natural or human-induced forces that
may damage the structural components
of an active sewage sludge unit This
includes, but is not limited to, land on
which the soils are subject to mass
movement.
|50X22 General requirements.
(a) No person shall place sewage
sludge on an active sewage sludge unit
unless the requirements in this subpart
are met.
(b) An active sewage sludge unit
located within 60 meters of a fault that
has displacement in Holocene time;
located in an unstable area; or located
in a wetland, except as provided in a
permit issued pursuant to section 402 of
the CWA, shall cl ose by (insert date one
year after the effective date of this Final
rule], unless, in the case of an active
sewage sludge unit located within 60
meters of a fault that has displacement
In Holocene time, otherwise specified
by theperraitting authority.
(c) The owner/operator of an active
sewage sludge unit shall submit a
written closure and post closure plan to
the permitting authority 180 days prior
to the date that the active sewage sludge
unit closes. The plan shall describe how
the sewage sludge unit will be closed
and, at a minimum, shall include;
(1) A discussion of how the leachate
collection system will be operated and
maintained for three years after the
sewage sludge unit closes if the sewage
sludge unit has a liner and leachate
collection system.
(2) A description r ' 'ju« system used
to monitor for methane gas in the air in
any structures within the surface
disposal site and in the air at the
property line of the surface disposal
site, as required in § 503.24(j)(2).
(3) A discussion of how public access
to the surface disposal site will be
restricted for three years after the last
sewage sludge unit in the surface
disposal site closes.
(d) The owner of a surface disposal
site shall provide written notification to
the subsequent owner of the site that
sewage sludge was placed on the land.
S 503.23 Pollutant limits (otfier than
domestic septage).
(a} Active sewage sludge unit without
a liner and leachate collection system.
tl) Except as provided in § S03.23
(a)(2) and (b), the concentration of each
pollutant listed in Table 1 of § 503.23 in
sewage sludge placed on an active
sewage sludge unit shall not exceed the
concentration for the pollutant in Table
1 of §503.23.
Table 1 of §503.23.—Pollutant Con-
CENTHAiiof©—Active Sewage Sludge
Unit Without a Liner and Leachate
Collection
Table 2 of § 503.23.—Pollutant Con-
centrations—Active Sewage Sludge
UNrr Without a Liner and Leachate
Collection System That Has a Unit
Boundary to Property Line Dis-
tance Less Than 150 Meters
Concentration
Pollutant
(ntftigtamc par
kilograms')
73
Chromium ............
600
420
, ••
1 Dry weight basis.
(2) Except as provided in § 503.23(b),
the concentration of each pollutant
listed in Table 1 of § 503.23 in sewage
sludge placed on an active sewage
sludge unit whose boundary is less than
150 meters from the property line of the
surface disposal site shall not exceed
the concentration determined using the
following procedure.
(i) The actual distance from the active
sewage sludge unit boundary to the
property line of the surface disposal site
shall be determined.
(ii) The concentration of each
pollutant listed in Table 2 of § 503.23 in
the sewage sludge shall not exceed the
concentration in Table 2 of § 503.23 that
corresponds to the actual distance in
S 503.23(a)(2)(i).
PoRutam concentration1
property if*
Amnio
CtHT»-
mium
(mgftg)
Nfckal
(mgftg)
Distance (iMM)
0 to In* than 25
30
200
210
25 to let! man SO
34
220
240
SO to lass than 75
39
260
270
75 to lass than
100
46
300
320
100 id lass than
125
53
360
390
125 to last than
150
62
450
420
'Dty wight
(b) Active sewage sludge unit without
a liner and leachate collection system—
site-specific limits.
(1) At the time of permit application,
the owner/operator of a surface disposal
site may request site-specific pollutant
limits in accordance with § 503.23(b)(2)
for an active sewage sludge unit without
a liner and leachate collection system
when the existing values for site
parameters specified by the permitting
authority are different from the values
for those parameters used to develop the
pollutant limits in Table 1 of § 503.23
and when the permitting authority
determines that site-specific pollutant
limits are appropriate for the active
sewage sludge unit
(2) The concentration of each
pollutant listed in Table 1 of § 503.23 in
sewage sludge placed on an active
• sewage sludge unit without a liner and
leachate collection system shall not
exceed either the concentration for the
pollutant determined during a site-
specific assessment, as specified by the
permitting authority, or the existing
concentration of the pollutant in the
sewage sludge, whichever is lower.
$503.24 Management practices.
(a) Sewage sludge shall not be placed
on an active sewage sludge unit if it is
likely to adversely affect a threatened or.
endangered species listed under section
4 of the Endangered Species Act or its
designated critical habitat
: (b) An active sewage sludge unit shall
not restrict the flow of a base flood.
(c) When a surface disposal site is
located in a seismic impact zone, an
active sewage sludge unit shall be
designed to withstand the maximum
recorded horizontal ground level
acceleration.
(d) An active sewage sludge unit shall
be located 60 meters or more from a
fault that has displacement in Holocene
A-10
-------
Federal Register / VoL 58. No. 32 / Friday, February 19, 1993 / Rules and Regulations 9397
time, unless otherwise specified by the
permitting authority.
(e) An active sewage sludge unit shall
not be located in an unstable area.
(f) An active sewage sludge unit shall
not be located in a wetland; except as
provided in a permit issued pursuant to
section 402 or 404 of the CWA.
(g)(1) Run-off from an active sewage
sludge unit shall be collected and shall
be disposed in accordance with
* National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System permit
requirements and any other applicable
requirements.
12) The run-off collection system for
an active sewage sludge unit shall have
the capacity to handle run-off from a 24-
hour, 25-year storm event
(h)The leachate collection system for
an active sewage sludge unit that has a
liner and leachate collection system
'shall be operated and maintained during
the period the sewage sludge unit is
active and for three years after the
sewage sludge unit closes.
(i) Leachate from an active sewage
sludge unit that has a liner and leachate
collection system shall be collected end
shall be disposed in accordance with
the applicable requirements during the
period the sewage sludge unit is active
and for three years after the sewage
sludge unit closes.
(j)(l) When a cover is placed on an
active sewage sludge unit, the
concentration of methane gas in air in
any structure within the surface
disposal site shall not exceed 25 percent
of the lower explosive limit for methane
gas during the period that the sewage
sludge unit is active and the
concentration of methane gas in air at
the property line of the surface disposal
site shall not exceed the lower explosive
limit for methane gas during the period
lhat the sewage sludge unit is active.
t2) When a final cover is placed on a
sewage sludge unit at closure, the
concentration of methane gas in air in
any structure within the surface
disposal site shall not exceed 25 percent
of the lower explosive Emit for methane
gas fo.r three years after the sewage
sludge unit closes and the concentration
of methane gas in air at die property line
xjfthe surface disposal site shall not
exceed the lower explosive limit for
methane gas for three years after the .
sewage sludge unit closes, -unless
otherwise specified by the permitting
authority.
5(k) A food crop, a feed-crop, or a Tiber
crop shai! not be grown tm an active
sewage sludge unit, unless die owner/
operator of the surface (fispossl site
demonstrates to the permitting authority
that through management practices
public health and the environment are
protected from any reasonably
anticipated adverse effects of pollutants
in sewage sludge when craps are grown.
(1) Animals shall not be grazed on an
active sewage sludge unit, unless the
owner/operator of the surface disposal
site demonstrates to the permitting
authority that through management
practices public health and the
environment are protected from any
reasonably anticipated adverse effectsof
pollutants in sewage sludge when
animals are grazed.
(m) Public access to a surface disposal
site shall be restricted for the period that
the surface disposal site contains an
active sewage sludge unit and for three
years after the last active sewage sludge
unit in the surface disposal site closes.
(n)(l) Sewage sludge placed nn an
active sewage sludge unit shall not
contaminate an aquifer.
(2) Results ofa ground-water
monitoring program developed by a
qualified ground-water scientist or a
certification by-e qualified ground-water
scientist shell be used to demonstrate
that sewage sludge placed on an active
sewage sludge unit does not
contaminate a? aquifer.
J S032S Operational standard*—
pathogens and vector attraction reduction.
(a) Pathogens-rsewage sludge (other
than domestic septage). Hie Class A
pathogens requirements in § 503.32(a) or
one of the Class B pathogen
requirements in § 503.32 (b){2) through
(b)(4) shall be met when sewage slndge
is placed on an active sewage sludge
unit, unless die vector attraction
reduction requirement in § 503.33(b)(ll)
is met.
0>) Vector attraction reduction—
sewage sludge (other than domestic
septage). One of the vector attraction
reduction requirements in §303.33
(b)(1) -through (bHll) shall be met-when
sewage sludge is placed on an active
¦sewage sludge unit.
{c) vector attraction reduction— *
domestic septage. One of the vector
attraction reduction requirement in
§ 503.33 (b)(9) through (b)(12) shall be
met when domestic septage is placed on
an active sewage sludge nmL
S50&26 frequencyoftnonltodng.
(a) Sewage sludge fatherthan .
domestic septage).
(1) The frequency of monitoring far
the pollutants in Tables 1 end 2 of
§ 503.23; the pathogen density
requirements in $503J2(a)and in
$ 503.32 (b)(2) through (b)(4): and the
vector attraction reduction requirements
in §503.33 (b)(1) through {b)(8) for
sewage sludge placed on an active
eewage sludge unit shall be the
frequency in Table 1 of $ 503.26.
Table 1 of §503.26.—Frequency of
Monitoring—Surface Disposal
Amount d sewage
atudga' (metric tons par
365 day period)
' Frequency -
6caaiar twn wo but
Jaaa»ian290.
Equal toargcaelaraian
290 but IMS than
1,800.
Equal to or greater Stan
1.500 but Isss than
15.000.
Equal to or graator than
15,000.
Once par yaar.
Onca per quadar .(tour
Vmaa par year).
Once per 40 days {six
«mes par year).
Once par month ti2
¦maaperyeai).
'Amount of mmm sludge placed on an active
sewaga sludge unit (diy-walght bast#).
{2) After the sewage sludge has been
monitored far two years at die frequency
in Table 1 of $ 503.26, the permitting
authority may reduce the frequency of
monitoring for pollutant concentrations
and for the pathogen density
requirements in §503.32 {aXSHii) and
' (a)(5)(iii), but in no case shall the
frequency of monitoring be less than
once per year when sewage sludge is
placed on an active sewage sludge unit
(b) Domestic septage. If the vector
attraction reduction requirements in
§ 503.33(b)(12) are met when domestic
septage is placed on an active sewage . .
sludge unit, each container of domestic
septage shall he monitored for
compliance with those requirements.
(c) Air. Air in structures within a
surface disposal site and at the property
line of the surface disposal aita shafl be
monitored continuously for methane gas
during the period that the-surface
disposal site contains an active sewage
sludge unit on which the sewage sludge
is covered and for three years after a
sewage sludge unit closes when a final .
cover is placed on the sewage sludge.
(Approved liy the Office of Management-and
Budget under control number 2640-0157)
$503.27 Recordkeeping.
(a) When sewage sludge {other than
domestic septage) is placed on an active '
sewage sludge unit:
(1) The person who prepares the
sewage sludge-shall develop the
following information and shall retain
the information far five years.
(i) The concentration of each
polluiant listed in Table 1 of $ 503.23 in
the sewage sludge when the pollutant -
concentrations in Table 1 of § 503.23 are
met
<(ii) The fallowing certification
statement:
"I certify, under penalty of law, thai the
pathogen requirements in Jinsert J 503.32(a),
$ 503.32(b)(2), $ 503.32(b)(3). or $ SO3^20>)(«)
when one of those requirements is met) and
the vector attraction'reduction-requirements
in Imsert one of die vector attraction
A-ll
-------
•S3S8 Federal Register / Vol. 58. No. 32 / Friday, February 19, 1993 / Rules and Regulations
Subpart D—Pathogens and Vactor
Attraction Reduction
1503JO Scop*.
(a) tills subpart contains the
requirements for a sewage sludge to be
classified either Class A or Class B with
respect to pathogens.
. (b) This subpart contains the site
restrictions for land on which a Class B
sewage sludge is applied.
(c) This subpart contains the pathogen
requirements for domestic septage
applied to agricultural land, forest, or a
reclamation site.
(d) This subpart contains alternative
vector attraction reduction requirements
for sawage sludge that is applied to the
land or placed on a surface disposal site.
IS0SL31 Special deflaMom.
(a) Aerobic digestion is the
biochemical decomposition of organic
matter in sewage sludge into carbon
dioxide and water by microorganisms in
the presence of air.
(b) Anaerobic digestion is the
biochemical decomposition of organic
matter in sewage sludge into methane
gas and carbon dioxide by
microorganisms in the absence of air.
(c) Density of microorganisms is the
number of microorganisms per unit
mass of total solids (dry weight) in the
sewage sludge.
(d) Land with a high potential for
public exposure is land that the public
uses frequently. This includes, but is
not limited to, a public contact site and
a reclamation site located in a populated
area (e.g. a construction site located in
a city).
(e) Land with a low potential for
public exposure is land that the public
. uses infrequently. This includes, but is
not limited to, agricultural land, forest,
and a reclamation site located in an
unpopulated area (e.g., a strip mine
located in a rural area).
(f) Pathogenic organisms are disease-
causing organisms. These include, but
are not limited to, certain bacteria,
protozoa, viruses, and viable helminth
ova.
(g) pH means the logarithm of the
reciprocal of the hydrogen ion
concentration.
(h) Specific oxygen uptake rate
(SOUR) is the mass of oxygen consumed
per unit time per unit mass of total
solids (dry weight basis) in the sewage
sludge.
(i) Total solids are the materials in
sewage sludge that remain as residue
when the sewage sludge is dried at 103
to 105 degrees Celsius.'
(J) Unstabilized solids are organic
materials in sewage sludge that have not
been treated in either an aerobic or
anaerobic treatment process.
(k) Vector attraction is the
characteristic of sewage sludge that -
attracts rodents, flies, mosquitos, or
other organisms capable of transporting
infectious agents. . , •
(1) Volatile solids is the amount of the
total solids in sewage sludge lost when
the sewage sludge is combusted at S50
degrees Celsius in the presence of
excess air.
A-12
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 58, No. 32 / Friday, February 19, 1993 / Rules and Regulations
9399
§503.32 Pathogen*.
(a) Sewage sludge—Class A. (1) The
requirement in § 503.32(a)(2) and the
requirements in either § 503.32(a)(3),
(a)(4), (a)(5), (a)(6), (a}(7). or (a)(8) shall
be met for a sewage sludge to be
classified Class A with respect to
pathogens.
(2) The Class A pathogen
requirements in § 503.32 (a)(3) through
(a)(8) shall be met either prior to
meeting or at the same time the vector
attraction reduction requirements in
§ 503.33, except the vector attraction
reduction requirements in $ 503.33
(b)(6) through (b)(8), are met.
(3) Class A—Alternative 1. (i) Either
the density of fecal coliform in the
sewage sludge shall be less than 1000
Most Probable Number per gram of total
solids (dry weight basis), or the density
of Salmonella sp. bacteria in the sewage
sludge shall be lesrthan-three Most
Probable Number per four grams of total
solids (dry weight basis) at the time the
sewage sludge is used or disposed; at
the time the sewage sludge is prepared
for sale or give away in a bag or other
container for application to the land; or
at the time the sewage sludge or
material derived from sewage sludge is
prepared to meet the requirements in
§ 503.10 (b), (c), (e), or (f).
(ii) The temperature of the sewage
sludge that is used or disposed shall be
maintained at a specific value for a
period of time.
(A) When the percent solids of the
sewage sludge is seven percent or
higher, the temperature of the sewage
sludge shall be 50 degrees Celsius or
higher; the time period shall be 20
minutes or longer; and the temperature
and time period shall be determined
using equation (2), except when small
particles of sewage sludge are heated by
either warmed gases or an immiscible
liquid.
D=
131,700,000
10o.i«n.
Eq. (2)
seconds, but less than 30 minutes, the
temperature and time period shall be
determined using equation (2).
(D) When the percent solids of the
sewage sludge is less than seven
percent; the temperature of the sewage
sludge is 50 degrees Celsius or higher;
and the time period is 30 minutes or
longer, the temperature and time period
shall be determined using equation (3).
50.070,000-
D=
100140a
Eq. (3)
Where,
D=tirae in days.
t=tomperature in degrees Celsius.
(B) When the percent solids of the
sewage sludge is seven percent or higher
and small particles of sewage sludge are
heated by either warmed gases or an
immiscible liquid, the temperature of
the sewage sludge shall be 50 degrees
Celsius or higher; the time period shall
be 15 seconds or longer; and the
temperature and time period shall be
determined using equation (2).
(C) When the percent solids of the
sewage sludge is less than seven percent
and the time period is at least 15
Where,
D=time in days.
t=temperature in degrees Celsius.'
(4) Class A—Alternative 2. (i) Either
the density of fecal coliform in the
sewage sludge shall be less than 1000
Most Probable Number per gram of total
solids (dry weight basis), or the density-
of Salmonella sp. bacteria in the sewage
sludge shall be less than three Most
Probable Number per four grams of total
solids (dry weight basis) at the time the
sewage sludge is used or disposed; at
the time the sewage sludge is prepared
for sale or giveaway in a bag or other
container for application to the land; or
at the time the sewage sludge or
material derived from sewage sludge is
prepared to meet the requirements in
§ 503.10 (b), (c). (e). or (f).
(ii) (A) The pH of the sewage sludge
that is used or disposed shall be raised
to above 12 and shall remain above 12
for 72 hours.
(B) The temperature of the sewage
sludge shall be above 52 degrees Celsius
for 12 hours or longer during the period
that the pH of the sewage sludge is
above 12.
(C) At the end of the 72 hour period
during which the pH of the sewage
sludge is above 12, the sewage sludge
shall be air dried to achieve a percent
solids in the sewage sludge greater than
50 percent.
(5) Class A—Alternative 3. (i) Either
the density of fecal coliform in the
sewage sludge shall be less than 1000
Most Probable Number per gram of total
solids (dry weight basis), or the density
of Salmonella sp. bacteria in sewage
sludge shall be less than three Most
Probable Number per four grams of total
solids (dry weight basis) at the time the
sewage sludge is used or disposed; at
the time the sewage sludge is prepared
for sale or give away in a bag or other
container for application to the land; or
at the time the sewage sludge or
materia] derived from sewage sludge is
prepared to meet the requirements in
§ 503.10 (b), (c). (e), or (f).
(ii) (A) The sewage sludge shall be
analyzed prior to pathogen treatment to
- determine whether the sewage sludge
contains enteric viruses.
(B) When the density of enteric
viruses in the aewage sludge prior to
pathogen treatment is less than one
Plaque-forming Unit per four grams cf
total solids (dry weight basis), the
sewage sludge is Class A with respect to
enteric viruses until the next monitoring
episode for the sewage sludge.
(C) When the denuty of enteric
viruses in the sewage sludge prior to
pathogen treatment is equal to or greatsr
than one Plaque-forming Unit per four
grams of total solids (dry weight basis),
the sewage sludge is Class A with
respect to enteric viruses when the
• density of enteric viruses in the sewage
sludge after pathogen treatment is less
than one Plaique-fonning Unit per four
grams of total solids (dry weight basis)
and when the values or ranges of values
for the operating parameters for the
pathogen treatment process that
produces the sewage sludge that meets
the enteric virus density requirement
are documented.
(D) After the enteric virus reduction
in paragraph (a)(5)(ii)(C) of this section
is demonstrated for the pathogen
treatment process, the sewage sludge
continues to be Class A with respect to
enteric viruses when the values for the
pathogen treatment process operating
parameters are consistent with the
values or ranges of values documented
in paragraph (a)(5)(ii)(C) of this section.
(iii)(A) The sewage sludge shall be
analyzed prior to pathogen treatment to
determine whether the sewage sludge
contains viable helminth ova.
(B) When the density of viable
helminth ova in the sewage sludge prior
to pathogen treatment is less than one
per four grams of total solids (dry
weight basis), the sewage sludge is Class
A with respect to viable helminth ova
until the next monitoring episode for
the sewage sludge.
(C) When the density of viable
helminth ova in the sewage sludge prior
to pathogen treatment is equal to or
greater than one per four grams of total
solids (dry weight basis), the sewage
sludge is Class A with respect to viable
helminth ova when the density of viable
helminth ova in the sewage sludge after
pathogen treatment is less than one per
four grains of total solids (dry weight
basis) and when the values or ranges of
values for the operating parameters for
the pathogen treatment process that
produces the sewage sludge that meets
the viable helminth ova density
requirement are documented.
ID) After the viable helminth ova
reduction in paragraph (a)(5)(iii)(C) of
this section is demonstrated for the
pathogen treatment process, the sewage
A-13
-------
9400 Federal Register / Vol. 58, No. 32 / Friday, February 19, 1993 / Rules and Regulations
sludga continues to be Class A with
respect to viable helminth ova when the
values for the pathogen treatment
process operating parameters are
consistent with the values or ranges of
values documented in paragraph
(a}(5)(iii){C) of this section.
(6) Class A—Alternative 4. (i) Either
the density of fecal colifbrm in the
sawage sludge shall be less than 1000
Most Probable Number per gram of total
solids (dry weight basis), or the density
of Salmonella sp. bacteria in the sewage
sludge shall be less than three Most
Probable Number per four grams of total
solids (dry weight basis) at the time the
sawage sludge is used or disposed; at
the time the sewage sludge is prepared
for sale or give away in a bag or other
container for application to the land; or
at the time the sewage sludge or
material derived from sewage sludge is
prepared to meet the requirements in
§ 503.10 (b), (c), (e), or (f).
(ii) The density of enteric viruses in
the sewage sludge shall be less than one
Plaoue-forming Unit per four grams of
total solids (dry weight basis) at the time
the sewage sludge is used or disposed;
at the time the sewage sludge is
prepared for sale or give away in a bag
or other container for application to the
land; or at the time the sewage sludge
or material derived from sewage sludge
is prepared to meet the requirements in
S 503.10 (b), (c), (e). or (f). unless .
otherwise specified by the permitting
authority.
(iii) The density of viable helminth
ova in the sewage sludge shall be less
than one per four grams of total solids
(dry weight basis) at the time the sewage
sludge is used or disposed; at the time
the sewage sludge is prepared for sale or
give away in a bag or other container for
application to the land; or at the time
the sewage sludge or material derived
from sewage sludge is prepared to meet
the requirements in 5 503.10 (b). (c), (e),
or (f)> unless otherwise specified by the
permitting authority.
(7) Class A—Alternative 5. (i) Either
the density of fecal coliform in the
sewage sludge shall be less than 1000
Most Probable Number per gram of total
solids (dry weight basis), or the density
of Salmonella, sp. bacteria in the sewage
sludge shall be less than three Most
Probable Number per four grams of total
solids (dry weight basis) at the time the
sewage sludge is used or disposed; at
the time the sewage sludge is prepared
for salo or given away in a bag or other
container for application to the land; or
at the time the sewage sludge or
material derived from sawage sludge is
prepared to meet the requirements in
§ 503.10(b), (c), (e), or (f).
(ii) Sewage sludge that is used or
disposed shall be treated in one of the
Processes to Further Reduce Pathogens
described in appendix B of this put.
(8) Class A—Alternative 6. (i) Either
the density of fecal coliform in the
sewage sludge shall be less than 1000
Most Probable Number per gram of total
solids (dry weight basis), or the density
of Salmonella, sp. bacteria in the sewage
sludge shall be less than three Most
Probable Number per four grams of total
solids (dry weight basis) at the time the
sewage sludge is used or disposed; at
the time the sewage sludge is prepared
for sale or given away in a beg or other
container for application to the land; or
at the time the sewage sludge or
material derived from sewage sludge is
prepared to meet the requirements in
§ 503.10(b), (c), (e), or (f).
(ii) Sewage sludge that is used or
disposed shall be treated in a process
that is equivalent to a Process to Further
Reduce Pathogens, as determined by'the
permitting authority.
(b) Sewage sludge—Class B. (l)(i) The
requirements in either § 503.32(b)(2),
(b)(3), or (b)(4) shall be met for a sewage
sludge to be classified Class B with
respect to pathogens.
(ii) The site restrictions in
§ 503.32(b)(5) shall be met when sewage
sludge that meets the Class B pathogen
requirements in § 503.32(b)(2), (b)(3), or
(b)(4) is applied to the land.
(2) Class B—Alternative 1.
(i) Seven samples of the sewage
sludge shall be collected at the time the
sewage sludge is used or disposed.
(ii) The geometric mean of the density
of fecal coliform in the samples
collected in paragraph (b)(2)(i) of this
section shall be less than either
2,000,000 Most Probable Number per
gram of total solids (dry weight basis) or
2,000,000 Colony Forming Units per
gram of total solids (dry weight basis).
• (3) Class B—Alternative 2. Sewage
sludge that is used or disposed shall be
treated in one of the Processes to
Significantly Reduce Pathogens
described in appendix B of this part.
(4) Class B—Alternative 3. Sewage
sludge that is used or disposed shall be
treated in a process that is equivalent to
a Process to Significantly Reduce
Pathogens, as determined by the
permitting authority.
(5) Site Restrictions, (i) Food crops
with harvested parts that touch the
sewage sludge/soil mixture and are
totally above the land surface shall not
be harvested for 14 months after
application of sewage sludga
(ii) Food crops with harvested parts
below the surface of the land shall not
be harvested for 20 months after
application of sewage sludge when the
sewage sludge remains on the land
surface for four months or longer prior
to incorporation into the soil.
(iii) Food crops with harvested parts
below the surface of the land shall not
be harvested for 38 months after
application of sewage sludge when the
sewage sludge remains on the land
surface for less than four months prior
to incorporation into the soil
(iv) Food crops, feed crops, and fiber
crops shall not be harvested for 30 days
after application of sewage sludge. *
(v) Animals shall not be allowed to
graze on the land for 30 days after
application of sewage sludge.
(vi) Turf grown on land where sewage
sludge is applied shall not be harvested
for one year after application of the
sewage sludge when the harvested turf
is placed on either land with a high
potential for public exposure or a lawn,
unless otherwise specified by the
permitting authority.
(vii) Public access to land with a high
potential for public exposure shall be
restricted for one year after application
of sewage sludge.
(viii) Public access to land with a low
potential for public exposure shall be
restricted for 30 days after application of
sewage sludge.
(c) Domestic septage. (1) The site
restrictions in § 503.32(b)(5) shall be
met when domestic septage is applied to
agricultural land, forest, or a
reclamation site; or
(2) The pH of domestic septage
applied to agricultural land, forest, or a
reclamation site shall be raised to 12 or
higher by alkali addition and, without
the addition of more alkali, shall remain
at 12 or higher for 30 minutes and the
site restrictions in § 503.32 (b)(5)(i)
through (b)(5)(iv) shall be met.
S 503.33 Vector attraction reduction.
(a)(1) One of the vector attraction
reduction requirements in §503.33
(b)(1) through (b)(lG) shall be met when
bulk sewage sludge is applied to
agricultural land, forest, a public contact
site, or a reclamation site.
(2) One of the vector attraction
reduction requirements in S 503.33
(b)(1) through (b)(8) shall be met when
bulk sewage sludge is applied to a lawn
or a home garden.
(3) One of the vector attraction
reduction requirements in $ 503.33
(b)(1) through (b)(8) shall be met when
sewage sludge is sold or given away in
a bag or other container for application
to the land.
(4) One of the vector attraction
reduction requirements in $ 503.33
(b)(1) through (b)(ll) shall be met when .
sewage sludge (other than domestic
A-14
-------
Federal Register I Vol, 58, No. 32 / Friday, Febr^-y ii, 1993 / Rules smd Regulations 9401
septage) is placed on an active sewage
sludge unit.
(5) One of the vector attraction
reduction requirements in § S03.33
(b)(9), (b)(10), or (b)(12) shall be met
when domestic septage is applied to
agricultural land, forest, or a
reclamation site and one of the vector
attraction reduction requirements in
S 503.33 (b)(9) through (b)(12) shall be
met when domestic septage is placed on
an active sewage sludge unit
(b)(1) The mass of volatile solids in
the sewage sludge shall be reduced by
a minimum of 38 percent (see
calculation procedures in
"Environmental Regulations and
Technology—Control of Pathogens and
Vector Attraction in Sewage Sludge",
EPA-625/R-92/013,1992, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency,
Cincinnati, Ohio 45268).
(2) When the 38 percent volatile
solids reduction requirement in
§ 503.33(b)(1) cannot be met for an
anaerobically digested sewage sludge,
vector attraction reduction can be
demonstrated by digesting a portion of
the previously digested sewage sludge
anaerobically in the laboratory in a *
bench-scale unit for 40 additional days
at a temperature between 30 and 37
degrees Celsius. When at the end of the
40 days, the volatile solids in the
period is reduced by less than 17
percent, vector attraction reduction is
achieved.
(3) When the 38 percent volatile '
solids reduction requirement in
§ 503.33(b)(1) cannot be met for an
aerobically digested sewage sludge,
vector attraction reduction can be
demonstrated by digesting a portion of
the previously digested sewage sludge
that has a percent solids of two percent
or less aerobically in the laboratory in
a bench-scale unit for 30 additional days
at 20 degrees Celsius. When at the end
of the 30 days, the volatile solids in the
sewage sludge at the beginning of that
period is reduced by less than 15
percent, vector attraction reduction is
achieved.
(4) The specific oxygen uptake rate
(SOUR) for sewage sludge treated in an
aerobic process snail be equal to or less
than 1.5 milligrams of oxygen per hour
per gram of total solids (dry weight
basis) at a temperature of 20 degrees
Celsius.
(5) Sewage sludge shall be treated in
an aerobic process for 14 days or longer.
During that time, the temperature of the
sewage sludge shall be higher than 40
degrees Celsius and the average
temperature of the sewage sludge shall
be higher then 45 degrees Celsius.
(6) The pH of sewage sludge shall be
raised to 12 or higher by alkali addition
and, without the addition of more alkali,
shall remain at 12 or higher for two
hours and then at ll,s or higher for an
additional 22 hours.
(7) The percent solids of sewage
sludge that does not contain
unstabilized solids generated In a
primary wastewater treatment process
shall be equal to or greater than 75 ...
percent based on the moisture content
and total solids prior to mixing with .
other materials.
(8) The percent solids of sewage
sludge that contains unstabilized solids
generated in a primary wastewater
treatment process shall be equal to or
greater than 90 percent based on the
moisture content and total solids prior
to mixing with other materials,
(9)(i) Sewage sludge shall be injected-
below the surface of the land.
(ii) No significant amount of the
sewage sludge shall be present on the
land surface within one hour after the
sewage sludge is injected.
(iiij When the sewage sludge that is
injected below the surface of the land is
Class A with respect to pathogens, the
sewage sludge shall be injected below -
the land surface within eight hours after
being discharged from the pathogen,
treatment process.
(10)(i) Sewage sludge applied to the
land surface or placed on a surface
disposal site shall be incorporated into
the soil within six hours after
application to or placement on the land.
(11) When sewage sludge that is
incorporated into the soil is Class A
with respect to pathogens, the sewage
sludge shall be applied to or placed on
the land within eight hours after being
discharged from the pathogen treatment
process.
(11) Sewage sludge placed on an
active sewage sludge unit shall be
covered with soil or other material at
the end of each operating day.
(12) The pH of domestic septage shall
be raised to 12 or higher by alkali
addition and, without the.addition of
more alkali, shall remain at 12 or higher
for 30 minutes.
A-15
-------
APPENDIX B
Justification for Deletion of Pollutants from the Final
Standards for the. Use or Disposal of Sewage Sludge
-------
JUSTIFICATION FOR THE DELETION OF POLLUTANTS FROM THE
FINAL STANDARDS FOR THE USE OR DISPOSAL OF SEWAGE SLUDGE
CONTENTS
Page
1. INTRODUCTION B-5
2. ORGANIC POLLUTANTS-LAND APPLICATION AND B-7
SURFACE DISPOSAL
2.1 Criteria for the Deletion of an Organic Pollutant B-7
2.2 Evaluation B-7
2.2.1 Introduction B-7
2.2.2 Criterion 1 B-8
2.23 Criterion 2 B-9
2.2.4 Criterion 3 B-10
2.2.4.1 Land Application Comparison B-ll
2.2.4.2 Surface Disposal Comparison B-16
2.3 Evaluation Results B-17
2.4 Conclusions B-18
2.4^1 Land Application B-19
2.4.2 Surface Disposal B-21
3. INORGANIC POLLUTANTS—SURFACE DISPOSAL B-23
3.1 Introduction . B-23
3.2 Evaluation—Sewage Sludge B-23
3.3 Evaluation—Domestic Septage B-24
3.4 Conclusions B-26
3.4.1 Sewage Sludge B-26
3.4.2 Domestic Septage B-26
ATTACHMENTS
A Revised Mean Application Rates for Land Application B-27
B Summary Statistics for EPA's Study on the Quality of
Domestic Septage B-31
B-l
-------
JUSTIFICATION FOR THE DELETION OF POLLUTANTS FROM THE
FZNAL STANDARDS FOR THE USE OR DISPOSAL OF SEWAGE SLUDGE
*
Office of Science and Technology
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
401 M Street, S.W.
Washington, D.C. 20460
November 16, 1992
B-3
-------
SECTION ONE
INTRODUCTION
On February 6, 1989, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) proposed Standards for the Use or Disposal of Sewage Sludge
(40 CFR Part 503) in the Federal Register (54 FR 5746). Xncluded
in those standards were pollutant limits for different sewage
sludge use or disposal practices.
Several commenters on the proposed Standards for the Use or
Disposal of Sewage Sludge recommended that some of the organic
pollutants for which pollutant limits were proposed be deleted from
the final standards. The main reason for this recommendation was
that the pollutants are either banned or restricted for use in the
United States.
Because of the comments received on the proposal,, EPA decided
to evaluate all of the organic pollutants in the proposed Part 503
standards for land application of sewage sludge and for placement
of sewage sludge on a surface disposal site to determine whether to
delete any of those pollutants from the final Part 503 standards.
This paper discusses the criteria the Agency used to evaluate each
organic pollutant; presents the results of the evaluations; and
provides the Agency's conclusion about deleting organic pollutants
from the final Part 503 standards.
The Agency also evaluated the inorganic pollutants for surface
disposal for deletion from the final Part 503 regulation. This
paper presents the results of that evaluation and EPA's conclusions
about deleting inorganic pollutants from the surface disposal
subpart in the final Part 503 regulation.
B-5
-------
SECTION TWO
ORGANIC POLLUTANTS - LAND APPLICATION AND SURFACE DISPOSAL
2.1 Criteria for the Deletion of An Organic Pollutant.
The Agency used three criteria to evaluate whether to delete
an organic pollutant from the final Part 503 regulation. For an
organic pollutant to be deleted from the regulation for a
particular use or disposal practice., one of the following three
criteria had to be satisfied.
1. The pollutant has been banned for use in the United
States; has restricted use in the United States; or is not
manufactured for use in the United States.
2. Based on the results of the National Sewage Sludge Survey
(NSSS), the pollutant has a low percent detect in sewage
sludge.
3. Based on data from the«NSSS, the limit for an organic
pollutant in the Part 503 exposure assessment by use or
disposal practice is not expected to be exceeded in sewage
sludge that is used or disposed^
The evaluation for each of the organic pollutants for which
pollutant limits were published in the proposed Part 503 standards
using the above three criteria is presented below.
2.2 Evaluation
2.2.1 Introduction
The first step in the evaluation of organic pollutants is to
identify the organic pollutants for which limits were proposed in
the February 6, 1989, proposal (54 FR 5746) for land application of
sewage sludge and for placement of sewage sludge on a surface
disposal site. These pollutants are presented below in Table 1 by
use or disposal practice.
Limits for organic pollutants also were proposed in Part 503
for distribution and marketing of sewage sludge and for sewage
sludge placed on a monofill. The requirements for land application
and distribution and marketing are combined in the final Part 503
regulation as are the requirements for placement of sewage sludge
on a monofill and placement of sewage sludge on a surface disposal
site. For this reason, the organic pollutants presented below for
land application include the organic pollutants in the proposal for
distribution and marketing and the organic pollutants for surface
disposal include the organic pollutants in the proposal for a
monofill.
B-7
-------
TABLE 1 - PART 503 ORGANIC POLLUTANTS BY USE OR DISPOSAL
PRACTICE
Pollutant
Use or Disposal Practice
LA SD
Aldrin/dieldrin (total)
Benzene
Benzo(a)pyrene
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate
Chlordane
DDT/DDE/DDD (total)
Heptachlor
Hexachlorobenzene
Hexachlorobutadiene
Lindane
N-Nitrosodimethylamine
Polychlorinated biphenyls
Toxaphene
Trichloroethy1ene
x
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
LA - land application
SD - surface disposal
The next step is to evaluate each of the organic pollutants
using the above three criteria.
2.2.2 Criterion l
The organic pollutants listed in Table 2 have been banned for
use in the United States; have restricted uses in the United
States; or are not manufactured for use in the United States.
B-8
-------
TABLE 3 - PERCENT DETECT FOR ORGANIC POLLUTANTS
Pollutant
Number of
POTWs
Percent
Detect*
Aldrin/dieldrin (total)
Benzene
Benzo(a)pyrene
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate
Chlordane
DDT/DDE/DDD (total)
Heptachlor
Hexachlorobenzene
Hexachlorobutadiene
Lindane
N-Nitrosodimethylamine
Polychlorinated biphenyls
Toxaphene
Trichloroethylene
177
178
178
17 8~
177
177
177
178
178
177
178
177
177
178
8
0
3
63
0
3
0
0
0
0
0
19
0
1
* Estimated percent detect in sewage sludge used or disposed at
publicly owned treatment works nationwide. From "Statistical
Support Documentation for the 4Q CFR Part 503 Final Standards for
the Use or Disposal of Sewage Sludge", Volume I, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Washington, D.C., November 11, 1992.
A review of the above information indicates that all of the
pollutants, except aldrin/dieldrin (total),
bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate, and polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs),
satisfy Criteria 2 for the deletion of an organic pollutant from
the final Part 503 standards because the pollutants have a low
percentage of detection (i.e., five percent or less) nationwide.
Aldrin/dieldrin (total), bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate, and PCBs do
not satisfy this criterion because they have a percent detect
higher than five percent. - —
2.2.4 Criterion 3
For the Criterion 3 evaluation, the 99th percentile
concentrations (see Table 7-11 in the report referenced in Table 4)
from the NSSS were compared to the pollutant limits from the final
Part 503 exposure assessment by use or disposal practice. For land
application, the comparison was made by comparing annual pollutant
loading rates. For surface disposal, pollutant concentrations from
the final Part 503 exposure assessment were compared to the 99th
percentile pollutant concentrations.
The 99th percentile concentrations from the NSSS were
determined using the SM-ML procedure, except for
bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate. For bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate, the
MLE procedure was used to determine the 99th percentile
concentration because the data for that pollutant appeared to be
distributed log normally. The 99th percentile concentrations are
presented in Table 4 and the comparisons using those concentrations
B-10
-------
TABLE 2 - ORGANIC POLLUTANTS THAT HAVE BEEN BANNED, HAVE
RESTRICTED <&E, OR ARE NOT MANUFACTURED
Pollutant
Reference
Aldrin/dieldrin (total)
Chlordane
DDT/DDE/DDD (total)
Heptachlor
Lindane
N-Nitrosodimethylamine
Polychlorinated biphenyls
40 CFR Part 761
*
*
*
*
*
**
Toxaphene *
* See "Suspended, Cancelled, and Restricted Pesticides, 20T-1002,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, February 1990.
** See "1992 Directory of Chemical Producers", SRI International,
Menlo Par, California, 1992.
These eight pollutants satisfy the first criterion for
deletion of an organic pollutant*from the final Part 503 standards
for land application of sewage sludge and for placement of sewage
sludge on an active sewage sludge unit.
2.2.3 Criterion 2
The percent detect from the National Sewage Sludge Survey
(NSSS) for each of the organic pollutants in the proposed Part 503
standards for land application of sewage sludge and for placement
of sewage sludge on an active sewage sludge unit is presented in
Table 3.
B-9
-------
are presented below.
TABLE 4 - 99TH PERCENTILE CONCENTRATIONS
Pollutant
Units 99th Percentile Concentration*
Aldrin/dieldrin (total)
Benzene
Benzo(a)pyrene
Bis(2-ethylhexy1) phthalate
Chlordane
DDT/ DDE / DDD (total)
Heptachlor
Hexachlorobenz ene
Hexachlorobutadiene
Lindane
N-Nitrosodimethylamine
Polychlorinated biphenyls
Toxaphene
Trichloroethylene
mg /kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
43
1000
210
43
43
9.1
7.4
7.0
1.8
0.14
0.14
0.18
0.074
7.0
* From "Statistical Support Documentation for the 40 CFR, Part 503
Standards for the Use or Disposal of Sewage", Volume I, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C., November 11,
1992. Values are on dry weight basis - and are reported in two
significant figures.
2.2.4.1 Land Application Comparison
For the purpose of comparing annual pollutant loading rates
for land application, the annual whole sludge application rates in
Table 5, which are from the NSSS (see Attachment A), were used in
equation (1) below with the 99th percentile concentration from the
NSSS to determine the calculated annual pollutant loading rates.
The comparisons of the calculated annual pollutant loading rates to
the annual pollutant loading rates from the Part 503 exposure
assessment are presented Tables 6 through 9.
TABLE 5 - ANNUAL WHOLE SLUDGE APPLICATION RATES
Type of Land
Annual Whole Sludge Application Rate*
Agricultural
Forest
Public contact site
Reclamation site
7
26
18
74
* Metric tons per hectare per 3 65 day period (dry weight
basis).
B-ll
-------
APLR = C X AWSAR x 0.001
(1)
where,
APLR
AWSAR
0.001
Annual pollutant loading rate in kilograms per hectare
per 365 day period.
pollutant concentration in milligrams per kilograms
(dry weight basis).
Annual whole sludge application rate in metric tons per
hectare per 365 day period (dry weight basis).
A conversion factor.
Agricultural land;
TABLE 6 - COMPARISON OF ANNUAL LOADS FOR AGRICULTURAL LAND
Pollutant
Aldrin/dieldrin (total)
Benzo(a)pyrene
Chlordane
DDT/DDE/DDD (total)
Heptachlor
Hexachl orobe ..zene
Hexachlorobutadiene
Lindane
N-Nitrosodirot. chylamine
Polychlorinated biphenyls
Toxaphene
Trichloroethyxene
APLR (Exposure)
ka/ha/365
0.027
0.15
0.86
1.2
0.074
0.29
6.0
0.84
0.021
0.046
0.10
100
APLR (NSSS)
ka/ha/3 65
0.00051
0.30
0.012
0.00098
0.00098
0.30
0.30
0.0012
1.4
0.063
0.049
0.05
The annv.al pollutant loading rate for benzo (a) pyrene,
hexachlorobenzene, N-Nitrosodimethylamine, and FCBs calculated
using the 99th percentile, concentration for each pollutant from the
NSSS and an annual whole sludge application rate of seven metric
tons per hectare per 365 day period is greater than the annual
pollutant loading rate for those pollutants from the Part 503
exposure assessment. For this reason, those pollutants do not
satisfy Criterion 3 for application of sewage sludge to
agricultural land.
B-12
-------
Forest:
TABLE 7
COMPARISON OF ANNUAL LOADS FOR FORESTS
Pollutant
Aldrin/dieldrin (total)
Benzo(a)pyrene
Chlordane
DDT/DDE/DDD(total}
Heptachlor
Hexachlorobenzene
Hexachlorobutadiene
Lindane
N-Nitrosodimethylamine ,
Polychlorinated biphenyls
Toxaphene
Tri ch1oroethy1ene
APLR (Exposure)
ka/ha/365
0.027
0.15
0.86
1.2
0.074
0.29
6.0
0.84
0.021
0.046
0.10
100
APLR (NSSS)
ka/ha/365
0.0019
1.1
0.046
0.0036
0.0036
1.1
1.1
0.0046
5.4
0.23
0.19
0.18
The annual pollutant loading rate for benzo(a)pyrene,
hexachlorobenzene, N-Nitrosodimethylamine, PCBs, and toxaphene
calculated using the 99th percentile concentration from the NSSS
and an annual whole sludge application rate of 26 metric tons per
hectare per 365 day period is greater than the annual pollutant
loading rate for those pollutants from the Part 503 exposure
assessment. For this reason, those pollutants do not satisfy
Criterion 3 for application of sewage sludge to forests.
Public contact site;
TABLE 8
COMPARISON OF ANNUAL LOADS FOR PUBLIC CONTACT SITES
Po]lutant
Aldrin/dieldrin (total)
Benzo(a)pyrene
Chlordane
DDT/DDE/DDD(total)
Heptachlor
Hexachlorobenzene
Hexachlorobutadiene
Lindane
N-Nitros odimethy1amine
Polychlorinated biphenyls
Toxaphene
Trichloroethy1ene
APLR (exposure)
ka/ha/365
0.027
0.15
0.86
1.2
0.074
0.29
6.0
0.84
0.021
0.046
0.10
100
APLR (NSSS)
ka/ha/365
0,
0,
0.
0.
0,
0013
77
032
0025
0025
0.77
0.77
0.
3,
0.
0.
0.
0032
7
16
12
13
B-13
-------
<
The annual pollutant loading rate for benzo(a)pyrene,
hexachlorobenzene, N-Nitrosodimethylamine, PCBs, and toxaphene
calculated using the 99th percentile concentration from the NSSS
and an annual whole sludge application rate of 18 metric tons per
hectare per 365 day period exceeds the annual pollutant loading
rate for those pollutants from the Part 503 exposure assessment.
For this reason, those pollutants do not satisfy Criterion 3 for
application of sewage sludge to a public contact site.
Reclamation site:
TABLE 9 - COMPARISON OF ANNUAL LOADS FOR RECLAMATION SITES
Pollutant;
Aldrin/dieldrin (total)
Benzo(a)pyrene
Chlordane
DDT/DDE/DDD(total)
Heptachlor
Hexachlorobenzene
Hexachlorobutadiene
Lindane
N-Nitrosodimethylamine
Polychlorinated biphenyls
Toxaphene
Trichloroethylene
APLR (Exposure)
kq/ha/365
0. 027
0.15
0.86
1.2
0.074
0.29
6.0
0.84
. 0.021
0. 046
0.10
100
APLR (NSSS)
kq/ha/365
0.0054
3.1
0.13
0. 010
0.010
3.1
3.1
0.013
15
0.67
0.54
0.51
The annual pollutant loading rates for benzo(a)pyrene,
hexachlorobenzene, N-Nitrosodimethylamine, PCBs, and toxaphene
calculated using the 99th percentile concentration for each
pollutant from the NSSS and an annual whole sludge application rate
of 74 metric tons per hectare per 365 day period exceed the annual
pollutant loading rates for those pollutants from the Part 503
exposure assessment. For this reason, those pollutants do not
satisfy Criterion 3 for application of sewage sludge to a
reclamation site.
Annual pollutant loading rates for organic pollutants" are
included in the final Part 503 exposure assessment only for land
application of sewage sludge. Those rates are the same for all
types of land on which sewage sludge is applied. For this reason,
results of the above evaluation were combined to determine which
pollutants satisfy Criterion 3 for land application of sewage
sludge. When this is done, the pollutants that do not satisfy
Criterion 3 for land application of sewage sludge are
benzo(a)pyrene, hexachlorobenzene, N-Nitrosodimethylamine, PCBs,
and toxaphene.
B-14
-------
Sewage sludge sold or given-awav in a bag or other container for
application to the land (formerly distribution and marketing^:
The Part 503 exposure assessment contains limits for organic
pollutants for sewage sludge sold or given-away in a bag or other
container for application to the land. These limits are annual
pollutant loading rates.
Sewage sludge sold or given-away in a bag or other container
for application to the land may be applied to all types of land.
For this reason, the annual whole sludge application rates used to
calculate the annual pollutant loading rates for the above land
application comparison also were used to calculate the annual
pollutant loading rates for sewage sludge sold or given-away in a
bag or other container for application to the land.
For the purpose of comparing annual pollutant loading rates
for sewage sludge sold or given-away in a bag or other container
for application to the land, the highest annual whole sludge
application rate (i.e., 74 metric tons per hectare per 365 day
period) from the land application comparison was used in equation
(2) below along with the 99th percentile concentrations from the
NSSS to calculate annual pollutant loading rates. Results of the
comparison of the calculated annual pollutant loading rates to the
annual pollutant loading rates for sewage sludge sold or given-away
in a bag or other container for application to the land from the
Part 503 exposure assessment are presented in Table 10.
APLR = C X AWSAR X 0.001 (2)
where,
APLR = annual pollutant loading rate in kilograms per hectare
per 3 65 day period.
C = pollutant concentration in milligrams per kilogram of
sewage sludge (dry weight basis).
AWSAR = annual whole sludge application rate in metric tons per
hectare per 365 day period (dry weight basis).
0.001 = a conversion factor.
B-15
-------
TABLE 10 - COMPARISON OP ANNUAL LOADS FOR SEWAGE SLUDGE SOLD
OR GIVEN AWAY IN A BAG OR OTHER CONTAINER FOR
APPLICATION TO THE LAND
Pollutant
APLR (Exposure)
ka/hectare/3 65
APLR (NSSS)
ka/hectare/3 65
Aldrin/dieldrin (total)
Benzo(a)pyrene
Chlordane
DDT/DDE/DDD (total)
Heptachlor
Hexachlorobenzene
Hexachlorobutadiene
Lindane
Polychlorinated biphenyls
Toxaphene
0. 027
0.15
0.86
1.2
0.074
0.29
6.0
0.84
0. 046
0.10
3.1
0.13
0.010
0.010
3.1
3.1
0.013
0.67
0.54
0.0054
The annual pollutant loading rate calculated using the 99th
percentile concentration for benzo(a)pyrene, hexachlorobenzene,
PCBs, and toxaphene from the NSSS and an annual whole application
rate of 74 metric tons per hectare per 365 day period exceeds the
annual pollutant loading rate for those pollutants from the Part
503 exposure assessment. For this reason, those pollutants do not
satisfy Criterion 3 for sewage sludge sold or given away in a bag
or other container for application to the land.
2.2.4.2 Surface Disposal
For this disposal practice, the 99th percentile concentrations
from the NSSS were compared to the Part 503 pollutant
concentrations from the exposure assessment for an active sewage
sludge unit without a liner and leachate collection system. This
comparison is presented in Table 11.
B-16
-------
TABLE 11 - COMPARISON OF ORGANIC POLLUTANT CONCENTRATIONS FOR
SURFACE DISPOSAL
Pollutant
Concentration* Concentration
Exposure - ma/kg NSSS - mq/kcr
Benzene
Benzo(a)pyrene
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate
Chlordane
DDT/DDE/DDD (total)
Lindane
N-Nitrosodimethylamine
Polychlorinated biphenyls
Toxaphene
Trichloroethylene
140
7.0
>100,000
>100,000
>100,000
>100,000
43
1000
1.8 •
0.14
0.18
28,000
0. 088
210
110
26,000
9,500
9.1
7.4
7.0
* Active sewage sludge unit without a liner and leachate
collection system.
N-Nitrosodimethylamine does not satisfy Criterion' 3 for
placement of sewage sludge on an ^active sewage sludge unit because
the 99th percentile concentration for that pollutant from the NSSS
exceeds the concentration for that pollutant from the Part 503
exposure assessment. All of the other organic pollutants for this
practice satisfy Criterion 3.
2.3 Evaluation results
Following are the results of the evaluation of the organic
pollutants for which pollutant limits were published in the
proposed Part 503 standards to determine which of those pollutants,
if any, to delete from the final Part 503 standards:
o Eight of the organic pollutants for which pollutant limits
were published in the proposed Part 503 regulation for land
application of sewage sludge and placement of sewage sludge on
a surface disposal site have been banned for use in the United
States; have.been restricted for use in the United States; or
are not manufactured in the United States. They are:
aldrin/dieldrin (total), chlordane, DDT/DDE/DDD (total),
heptachlor, lindane, N-Nitrosodimethylamine, polychlorinated
biphenyls, and toxaphene. These pollutants satisfy Criterion
1.
o The percent detect from the NSSS for the organic pollutants
for which limits were proposed for land application of sewage
sludge and placement of sewage sludge on a surface disposal
site are low (i.e., five percent or less), except for
aldrin/dieldrin (total), bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate, and
polychlorinated biphenyls. All of the other organic
pollutants for which limits were proposed satisfy Criterion 2.
B-17
-------
o With the exception of benzo(a)pyrene, hexachlorobenzene, N-
Nitrosodimethylamine, PCBs, and toxaphene, the annual
pollutant loading rate for the organic pollutants calculated
using the 99th percentile concentration for each pollutant
from the NSSS and an annual whole application rate from the
NSSS is below the Part 503 exposure assessment annual
pollutant loading rate for each organic pollutant for sewage
sludge applied to agricultural land, forest, a public contact
site, or a reclamation site. For land application of sewage
sludge, benzo(a)pyrene, hexachlorobenzene, N-
Nitrosodimethylamine, PCBs, and toxaphene do not satisfy
Criterion 3.
o With the exception of benzo(a)pyrene, hexachlorobenzene,
PCBs, and toxaphene, the annual pollutant loading rate for the
organic pollutants calculated using the 99th percentile
concentration for each pollutant from the NSSS and an annual
whole sludge application rate from the NSSS is below the final
Part 503 exposure assessment annual pollutant loading rate for
each organic pollutant for sewage sludge sold or given-away in
a bag c other container for application to the land (formerly
distribution and marketing). For sewage sludge sold or given
away in a bag or otjier container, benzo (a) pyrene,
hexachlorobenzene, PCBs, and toxaphene do not satisfy
Criterion 3.
o With ;the exception of N-Nitrosodimethylamine, the 99th
percentile pollutant concentration from the NSSS is below the
Part 50' exposure assessment concentration for each organic
polluta.-t: in sewage sludge placed on an active sewage sludge
unit without a liner and leachate collection system. For this
practic N-Nitrosodimethylamine does not satisfy Criterion 3.
2.4 Conclusions
Based on the results of the above evaluations, the Agency is
deleting organic pollutants from the final Part 503 regulation, as
indicated below, for the appropriate use or disposal practice. EPA
concluded that because those organic pollutants satisfy one of the
three criteria discussed above, public health and the environment
are protected from the reasonably anticipated adverse effects of
the organic pollutants in sewage sludge without establishing limits
for the pollutants in the final Part 503 regulation.
B-18
-------
2.4.1
Application to agricultural land, forest, a public
contact site, or a reclamation site - pollutants deleted:
Pollutant
Criteria Met
Aldrin/dieldrin (total)
Benzo(a)pyrene
Chlordane
DDT/DDE/DDD(total)
Heptachlor
Hexachlorobenzene
Hexachlorobutadiene
Lindane
N-Nitrosodimethylamine
Polychlorinated biphenyls
Toxaphene -
Trichloroethylene
1 and 3
2
1, 2, and 3
1, 2, and 3
1, 2, and 3
2
2 and 3
1, 2, and 3
1 and 2
1
1 and 2
2 and 3
Organic pollutant remaining: none.
Sewage sludge sold or qjven-awav in a baa or other container for
application to the land YformerJv distribution and marketing^ -
pollutants deleted:
Organic pollutants remaining: none
As indicated above, PCBs were deleted from the final Part 503
regulation for land application because Criterion 1 is satisfied.
PCBs are restricted for use in the United States. They can be used
only in closed systems and the disposal of PCBs is closely
regulated under the Toxic Substances Control Act (40 CFR Part 7 61) .
Based on the results of the National Sewage Sludge Survey
(NSSS) , PCBs did not satisfy Criterion 2. PCBs are estimated to be
detected in sewage sludge that is used or disposed at 19 percent of
the publicly owned treatment works nationwide. To satisfy
Criterion 2, the percent detect had to be five percent or less.
PCBs also did not satisfy Criterion 3. If PCBs had been
Pollutant
Criteria Met
Aldrin/dieldrin (total)
Benzo(a)pyrene
Chlordane
DDT/DDE/DDE (total)
Heptachlor
Hexachlorobenzene
Hexchlorobutadiene
Lindane
Polychlorinated biphenyls
Toxaphene
1 and 3
2
1, 2, and 3
1, 2, and 3
1, 2, and 3
2
2 and 3
1, 2, and 3
¦ 1
1 and 2
B-19
-------
regulated, the pollutant limit for PCBs based on results of the
exposure assessment would be 0.046 kilograms per hectare per 365
day period. The annual pollutant loading rate (APLR) delivered to
each hectare of land assuming a concentration of PCBs in the sewage
sludge equal to the 99th percentile concentration from the NSSS
(i.e., 9.1 milligrams per kilogram) and an annual whole sludge
application rate of 7, 18, 26, and 74 metric tons per hectare for
agricultural land, forest, a public contact site, and a reclamation
site, respectively, would be 0.063, 0.16, 0.23, and 0.67 kilograms
per hectare, respectively.
For application to agricultural land, which is by far the most
widely used land for application of sewage sludge, the above APLR
calculated using the 99th percentile PCB concentration is higher
than the pollutant limit for PCBs that would have been in the final
Part 503 regulation by only 37 percent. The APLRs for the other
types of land are higher than the potential Part 503 APLR by larger
factors. However, this is mitigated by the fact that sewage sludge
only is applied to forest, a public contact site, or a reclamation
site at most every three to five years. In the case of a
reclamation site, sewage sludge is applied to the site at most
three times during the period that the land is a reclamation site.
*
Another factor that mitigates the calculated APLRs is the use
of the 99th percentile concentration for PCBs from the NSSS to
calculate the APLRs. This concentration represents, to a large
extent, outlier values for PCBs and, therefore, is conservative.
If the more reasonable worst case 90th percentile concentration for
PCBs (i.e., 1.9 milligrams per kilogram) is used to calculate the
APLRs, the annual amounts delivered to a hectare of land are 0.013,
0.034, 0.049, and 0.14 kilograms for agricultural land, forest, a
public contact site, and reclamation site, respectively. In this
case,the calculated APLRs for agricultural land and forest satisfy
Criterion 3, the APLR for a public contact site is only slightly
higher than the exposure assessment value for PCBs (i.e., 0.046
kilograms per hectare per 365 day period), and the APLR for a
reclamation site does not satisfy Criterion 3.
EPA is committed to re-evaluate the decision not to regulate
PCBs in the final Part 503 regulation during the next review of the
regulation (i.e., Round II). EPA expects the concentration of PCBs
in sewage sludge to continue to decrease. In addition, EPA will
re-evaluate the toxicity of PCB congeners through use of a toxicity
equivalent factor system. Both of these factors will be considered
in Round II.
B-20
-------
2.4.2
Surface disposal - pollutant deleted:
Pollutant
Benzene
Benzo(a)pyrene
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate
Chlordane
DDT/DDE/DDD (total)
Lindane
N-Nitrosodixnethylamine
Polychlorinated biphenyls
Toxaphene
Trichloroethy1ene
Organic pollutants remaining:
Criteria Met
2 and 3
2 and 3
- ----- 3 ;
1, 2, and 3
1, 2, and 3
1, 2, and 3
1 and 2
1 and 3
1, 2, and 3
2 and 3
none
B-21
-------
SECTION THREE
INORGANIC POLLUTANTS - SURFACE DISPOSAL
3.1 Introduction
After reviewing results of the exposure assessment for surface
disposal, the Agency decided to evaluate the inorganic pollutants
to determine whether to include limits in the final Part 503
regulation for all of the inorganic pollutants for which limits
were included in the proposed Part 503 regulation. This evaluation
was done for both sewage sludge and domestic septage. Results the
evaluations and the Agency's conclusions based on those results are
presented below.
3.2 Evaluation - Sewage Sludge
The evaluation to determine whether to include limits for
inorganic pollutants in sewage sludge placed on an active sewage
sludge unit in the final Part 503 regulation consisted of comparing
the limits from the Part 503 exposure assessment to the 99th
percentile concentration for a pdllutant from the NSSS. Results of
this comparison are present in Table 12.
B-23
-------
TABLE 12 - COMPARISON OF INORGANIC POLLUTANT CONCENTRATIONS
FOR SEWAGE SLUDGE
Concentration Concentration Concentration
Pollutant (ma/kg) fmq/kq) fmq/kcM
Arsenic
75
73
>100,000
Cadmium
85
>100,000
>100,000
Chromium
1200
600
>100,000
Copper
4300
46,000
>100,000
Lead
840
>100,000
>100,000
Mercury
58
>100,000
>100,000
Nickel
420
690
>100,000
1 - From "Statistical Support Documentation £or the 40 CFR, Part
503 Final Standards for the Use or Disposal of Sewage Sludge,
Volume I, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington,
D.C., November 11,1992. Pollutant concentrations are dry
weight 99th percentile concentrations.
2 - From F .t 503 exposure assessment for an active sewage sludge
unit without a liner and leachate collection system (dry
weight basis) - see technical support document for the Part
503 surface disposal requirements.
3 - From Part 503 exposure assessment for an active sewage sludge
unit with a liner and leachate collection system (dry weight
basis) - see technical support document for the Part 503
surface lisposal requirements.
Results of the above comparison indicate that the 99th
percentile t "lutant concentrations are much lower than the Part
503 exposure assessment concentrations for an active sewage sludge
unit without a liner and leachate collection system, except for
arsenic, chromium, and nickel. In the case of arsenic, chromium,
and nickel, the 99th percentile concentration is either higher than
or very close to the exposure assessment concentrations for those
pollutants.
The above results also indicate that the 99th percentile
pollutant concentrations are much lower than the Part 503 exposure
assessment concentrations for an active sewage sludge unit with a
liner and leachate collection system. In this case, all of the
99th percent?le concentrations are at least an order of magnitude
lower than the exposure assessment concentrations.
3.3 Evaluation - Domestic Septage
The evaluation to determine whether to include limits in the
final Part 50.3 regulation for inorganic pollutants in domestic
septage placed on an active sewage sludge unit consisted of
comparing the limit from the Part 503 exposure assessment for
sewage sludge placed on an active sewage sludge unit to the 98th
percentile concentration for a pollutant in domestic septage (see
B-24
-------
Attachment B). Results of this comparison are presented in Table
13.
TABLE 13 - COMPARISON OF INORGANIC POLLUTANT CONCENTRATIONS FOR
DOMESTIC SEPTA6E
Pollutant
Concentration Concentration Concentration
(ma/ka^ (roa/kcM (ma/ken
Arsenic
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
30
25
110
2600
100
0.
50
91
73
>100,000
600
46,000
>100,000
>100,000
690
>100
>100
>100
>100
>100
>100
>100
,000
,000
,000
,000
,000
,000
,000
1 - Concentration on a dry weight basis (see page 26 in Attachment
B).
2 - From Part 503 exposure assessment for an active sewage sludge
unit without a liner and leachate collection system (dry
weight basis) - see the technical support document for the
Part 503 surface disposal requirements.
3 - From Part 503 exposure assessment for an active sewage sludge
unit with a liner and leachate collection system (dry weight
basis) - see the technical support document for the Part 503
surface disposal requirements.
4 - Concentration is the minimum level value (i.e., highest
_ detection limit value) because arsenic was not detected in any
of the collected domestic septage samples.
Results of the above comparison indicate that the 98th
percentile pollutant concentrations are lower than the Part 503
exposure assessment concentrations for sewage sludge placed on an
active sewage sludge unit both with and without a liner and
leachate collection system. The 98th percentile concentration that
is the closest to the Part 503 concentration is the value for
arsenic when compared to the Part 503 exposure assessment
concentration for an active sewage sludge unit without a liner and
leachate collection system. As indicated in a footnote above,
arsenic was not detected in any of the domestic septage samples
collected and analyzed. The concentration for arsenic in the table
is the minimum level value (i.e., the highest detection limit) for
arsenic in the domestic septage samples collected and analyzed.
B-25
-------
3.4 Conclusions
3.4.1 Sewage Sludge
After comparing the 99th percentile concentrations to the Part
503 exposure assessment concentrations for an active sewage sludge
unit without a liner and leachate collection system, the Agency
concluded that limits only should be included- in the final Part 503
regulation for arsenic, chromium, and nickel. Limits are not
needed in the final regulation to protect public health and the
environment from cadmium, copper, lead, and mercury in the sewage
sludge because the 99th percentile concentration is much lower than
the exposure assessment concentration for each of those pollutants.
In this case, the concentration of cadmium, copper, lead, and
mercury in the sewage sludge is not expected to exceed the exposure
assessment concentration for those pollutants. Consequently, there
are no pollutant limits for cadmium, copper, lead, and mercury in
the final Part 503 regulation for an active sewage sludge without
a liner and leachate collection system.
The Agency also concluded that no limits are needed in the
final Part 503 regulation for inorganic pollutants in sewage sludge
placed on an active sewage sludge unit with a liner and leachate
collection system to protect public health and the environment
because the 99th percentile concentrations are much lower than the
exposure assessment concentrations for the inorganic pollutants.
The concentration of each of the inorganic pollutants in sewage
sludge is not expected to exceed the exposure assessment
concentration for the pollutant. Consequently, there are no
pollutant limits in the final Part 503 regulation for sewage sludge
placed on an active sewage sludge unit with a liner and leachate
collection system.
3.4.2 Domestic Septage
After comparing the 98th percentile domestic septage
concentrations to the Part 503 exposure assessment concentrations
for an active sewage sludge unit both with and without a liner and
leachate collection, the Agency concluded that limits are not
needed in the final Part 503 regulation to protect public health
and the environment from the reasonably anticipated of arsenic,
cadmium, chromium, copper, lead, mercury, and nickel in domestic
septage placed on an active sewage sludge unit because the 98th
percentile concentrations are lower than the Part 503 exposure
assessment concentrations for those pollutants. In this case, the
concentration of each of those pollutants is not expected to exceed
the exposure assessment concentration for each pollutant.
Consequently, there are no limits for inorganic pollutants in the
final Part 503 regulation for domestic septage placed on either an
active sewage sludge without a liner and leachate collection system
or an active sewage sludge unit with a liner and leachate
collection system.
B-26
-------
MEMORANDUM
Date:
November 10,1992
To:
Bob Southworth, EPA
From: Anne Jones and Matt Murphy, ERG
Re:
Revised Mean Application Rates for Land Application
We have calculated weighted mean application rates for agricultural land application,
land application to forest sites and public contact sites, and land reclamation. The following
methodology was used to derive these numbers.
First, we used the analytical survey rather than the larger questionnaire survey for the
following reason. A question on numbers of applications was critical to the calculation of
application rates. However, respondents frequently, and fairly consistently, misinterpreted this
question. We made corrections (based on call backs) to the question on number of applications,
as well as to other questions that affected application rates, to many of the analytical survey
observations. Thus a larger proportion of the analytical survey had application rates based on
corrected data than the questionnaire survey. Because we had more confidence in a greater
proportion of data in the analytical questionnaire, we preferred to use this questionnaire.
Second, because of some remaining problems with the question on number of
applications we limited the number of applications to 10, that is, we allowed this number to
range up to 10, but where any number exceeded 10, it was set to 10. This was felt to be a very
conservatively high estimate of numbers of applications. We feel that, if anything, this
assumption would tend to somewhat overstate actual application rates in most cases.
Finally, we deleted one observation, which was a POTW practicing land reclamation.
This POTW was applying sewage sludge at over 1,600 dmt/ha. The sewage sludge fails ceiling
concentrations, but even if it passed, it is highly unlikely that this application rate would be
allowed under Subpart B. The mean application rate shown in the following tables reflects the
deletion of this observation.
Attachment A
B-27
-------
We then ran the Univariate Procedure in SAS to obtain the weighted means discussed
below and presented in the attached tables.
The results of this analysis are as follows: agricultural rates average about 7 dmt/ha;
rates at forest sites average 26 dmt/ha; rates at public contact sites average 19 dmt/ha; and rates
at reclamation sites average 74 dmt/ha, as shown in the attached tables.
B-28
-------
Variable*MTHAYR
Welght= ANAL_WT
Moments
The SAS System
NEWUSE=AG
Univariate Procedure
Quantiles(Def=5)
11s50 Tuesday, November 10, 1992 1
Extremes
N
87
Sum Wgts
3691
100% Max
290
99%
290
Lowest
ObS
Mean
6.768121
Sum
24981.14
75% Q3
16.3666
95%
53.4717
0.026904(
40)
Std Oev
104,9951
Variance
11023.97
50% Med
7.53312
90%
43.719
0.026904(
39
Skewness
•
Kurtosls
25% Q1
1.61424
10%
0.13452
0.026904(
73
USS
1117136
CSS
948061.1
0% Min
0,026904
5%
0.035872
0.035872?
72)
CV
1551.318
Std Mean
11.25665
1%
0.026904
0.035872<
7) J
T:Mean=0
0.801255
Pr>ITI
0.5493
Range
289.9731
Nub 0
87
Num > 0
87
Q3-Q1
14.75236
M(Slgn)
43.5
Pr>"IMi
0.0001
Mode
0.026904
Sgn Rank
1914
Pr>=ISl
0,0001
Highest
53.4717(
58.5162(
61.2066(
75.33121
290 (
ObS
19)
51 j
9}
50)
25)
Missing Value
Count 2
% Count/Nobs 2.25
Variable=MTHAYR
Welght= ANAL_WT
The SAS System
NEWUSE=FOR -----
Univariate Procedure
11:50 Tuesday, November 10, 1992 3
Moments
Quantiles(Def
=5)
N
2
Sum Wgts
12
100% Max
33.63
99%
33.63
Lowest
Mean
26.06325
Sum
312.759
75% Q3
33.63
95%
33.63
18.4965(
Std Oev
26.21199
Variance
687.0685
60% Med
26.06325
90%
33.63
33.63)
Skewness
9
Kurtosis
25% Q1
18.4965
10%
18.4965
• '
USS
8838.584
CSS
687.0685
0% Mln
18.4965
5%
18.4965
, j
CV
100.5707
Std Mean
18.53468
1%
18.4965
• 1
T:Maan=0
1.406189
Pr>ITI
0.3935
Range
15.1335
Num *= 0
2
Num » 0
2
Q3-01
15.1335
M(Sign)
1
Pr>«IMI
o.sooo
Mode
18.4965
Sgn Rank
1.5
Pr>«=ISI
0.5000
Extremes
Obs Highest
2*
i!
18,49651
33.63(
ObS
-------
VarlablfMTHAYR
Weight" ANALJfT
Moments
The SAS Syste*
NEWISE-POBC
Univariate Procedure
Quantiles(Def*5)
11:50 Tu««diy, Noveabsr 10, 1992 S
Extreaes
N
11
Sua Wg's
74
100% Max
* 6.194
99%
246.194
Lowest
Obs
Highest
Obs
Mean
10.87404
Sun-
1381.879
' 14854.16
75% Q3
1..4.6582.
•95%
246.194
0.38114(
111
1C2.011(
7]
std Dev
121,8776
Varianca
50% Med
55.1532
90%
230.2534
4.0356
10
116.584?
6
skewness
#
Kurtosis
25% Q1
44.7279
10%
4.0356
44,72791
9
124.6552?
2
US3
174346.9
CSS
148541.6
0% Min
0.38114
5%
0.38114
51,0055?
8
i 230.2534?
5'
CV
652.6581
Std Mean
36.74749
1%
0.38114
55.1532(
4
i 246.194(
1
T:Hean=0
0.508172
Pr>lTI
0.6224
Range
245.8129
Nub *« 0
11
Num > 0
11
Q3-Q1
79.9273
M(Sign)
5.5
Pr>«IHl
0.0010
Mode
55.1532
Sgn Rank
33
Pr>»iSI
0.0010
Variable*MTHAYR
Weight- ANALJTT
Moments
Missing Value
count 2
% Count/Nobs 15,38
The SA3 System
NEVflJSE=RECL
Univariate Procedure
Quantiies{Def=5)
11:50 Tuesday, November 10, 1982 7
Extremes
M
7
Sun Wgts
17
100% Max
420.7113
99%
420.7113
Lowest
Obs
Highest
Obs
Mean
74.07916
Sun
1259.346
75% Q3
100.89
95%
420.7113
451
7
65,91481
3]
Std Oev
147.885
Variance
21869.97
50% Med
65.9148
90%
420.7113
45
6
65.9146
4
Skewness
Kurtosis
25% Q1
45
10%
45
65.9148
5
65.9148
5
uss
224511.1
CSS
131219.8
0% Min
45
5%
45
65.9148
4
100.89
2
CV
199.631
Std Mean
55.89527
1%
45
65.9148
3
420.7113
1
T:Mean«0
1.325321
Pr>ITt
0.2333
Range
375.7113
Nub *= 0
7
Nun > 0
7
Q3-Q1
55.89
M(Sign)
3.5
Pr>«IMI
0.0156
Mode
65,9148
Sgn Rank
14
Pr>»isi
0.0156
-------
$ A \
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460
:^0V 6 ISS2
OFFICE OF
WATER
MEMORANDUM
Subject: Summary Statistics for EPA's Study on the Quality of Domestic Septage
From: Charles E. White, Statistician
Statistical Analysis Section
4^
To: Alan Rubin, Chief
Sludge Risk Assessment Branch
Through: Henry D. Kahn, Chief
Statistical Analysis Section
At your request, I will present and document summary statistics based on EPA's
Study on the Quality of Domestic Septage. These summary statistics will include basic
statistics on pollutants of concern, other requested pollutants, and the estimated relationship
between Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen and Ammonia. EPA's Study on the Quality of Domestic
Septage (1991) was conducted in order to support the development of hydraulic loading
rates for the land application of domestic septage under the 40 CFR Part 503 Final Rule for
Sewage Sludge Use or Disposal. This loading rate is intended to be a protective and
affordable method for regulating the beneficial reuse of septage. Development of the
loading rate itself will not be discussed in this memo.
There are two basic results from these analyses. First, truckloads of domestic septage
are not expected to contain pollutant concentrations as high as could be found in sewage
sludge used or disposed from Publicly Owned Treatment Works that practice secondary or
better wastewater treatment. Second, Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen is found to be approximately
43% Ammonia in wet domestic septage.
Nine trucks delivering domestic septage to the Madison Metropolitan Sewerage
District (MMSD) in Madison, Wisconsin were each sampled once. As septage was being
discharged, a grab sample was collected and delivered to the MMSD lab for splitting,
labeling, icing, and shipping to appropriate labs under contract to the EPA. Each
Results
Data
B-31
Attachment B
-------
independent sample was physically analyzed for 324 pollutants. Only data regarding
pollutants of concern and some data for pollutants that are also micro-nutrients will be
considered in this report.
Physical Analytical Procedures
Physical analytical methods used here are the same as those used for the National
Sewage Sludge Survey (NSSS), though some pollutants are reported differently. Individual
PCB aroclors were reported in the NSSS; total PCB aroclors are reported here. Aldrin and
Dieldrin were reported separately in the NSSS; the totals for Aldrin and Dieldrin are
reported here. Total Chlordane is reported in the NSSS; the alpha and gamma portions of
chlordane are reported here. DDT, DDS, and DDD are reported separately in the NSSS;
totals for DDT, DDS, and DDD are reported here. Lindane is reported in the NSSS;
Lindane (Gamma-BHC) is reported here.
Some pollutant concentrations were not measured above the Minimum Level for the
particular pollutant Minimum Levels are a form of "detection limit" used in physical
analytical methods developed for the Office of Science and Technology. Under contract,
each contractor lab must demonstrate that it is able to achieve the Minimum Levels stated
for the particular EPA method to be used, in general, a Minimum Level is defined as the
lowest concentration at which the physical analytical process can be-reliably calibrated.
Pollutant concentrations not measured above the Minimum Level for a particular pollutant
are not reported; the Minimum Level is reported instead.
Statistical Methods for Basic Summary Statistics
Statistical analysis methods were primarily selected to estimate a concentration level
for each pollutant such that, under certain assumptions, "most" septage concentrations for
a particular pollutant will be below it's respective level, i.e., we are primarily estimating
percentiles. These methods will also be used to characterize both wet and dry weight
pollutant concentration measurements, mixed with "detection limits." Substitution and
Maximum Likelihood Methods will be used to estimate summary statistics. One overall
assumption of this study is that residential septage samples across the country follow
approximately the same probability distributions for pollutant concentrations as those
distributions found in the area around Madison, Wisconsin. Additional statistical
assumptions are discussed in the section on the Substitution Method, in the section on the
Maximum Likelihood Method for estimating summary statistics in. the presence of censored,
or "non-detect," data and in the section on estimating the relationship between Ammonia
and Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen.
Drv Weight Conversion
Physical analyses were conducted on liquid septage samples. However, both because
pollutants are assumed to be concentrated in the solid phase of the septage sample and
B-32
-------
because pollutants were reported this way in the NSSS, a dry weight conversion is also used
in presentation of these data.' More detailed discussion of the reasons for dry weight
conversion and analyses in support of this practice are presented in the Statistical Support
Document for the 40 CFR Part 503 Final Ride for Sewage Sludge Use or Disposal. Conversion
of a concentration reported in ug/1 is illustrated below:
Let: Pollutant Concentration for Sample i = x( ng/1
Solids Concentration for Sample i = yi mg/1
Dry Weight Pollutant Concentration in jig/kg - ms)
kg ;
(1,000, OOQr,)
* (—5—
*
Substitution Methods
The substitution methods used here make no assumptions about the probability
distributions of the pollutant concentration data, but they do make assumptions about the
concentration of pollutants in samples where pollutants could not be measured above their
"detection limit." The first of two substitution methods used assumes that pollutant
concentrations, in samples where pollutants could not be measured, are at the "detection
limit." The second substitution method assumes that pollutant concentrations, in samples
where pollutants could not be measured, are zero. Together, these two substitution methods
give a kind of upper and lower bound on non-parametric summary statistics for pollutant
concentrations in septage. More detailed discussion of these methods and the reasons for
their selection are presented in the Statistical Support Document for the 40 CFR Part 503
Final Rule for Sewage Sludge Use or Disposal. „
Tables of wet weight summary statistics developed using these substitution methods
are presented on pages 13 through 23 and tables of dry weight summary statistics developed
using these substitution methods are presented on pages 27 through 36.
Maximum T.ilrelihnnri Fstimatfon
The maximum likelihood estimation (MLE) procedure used here assumes pollutant
concentrations are approximate^ lognormal in probability distribution. When this
assumption is true, estimates produced using this procedure will be more efficient than those
produced without assumptions about probability distributions. The procedure uses sample
B-33
-------
size, measured pollutant concentrations, and the range of possible values for "detection limit"
data in order to pick optimum estimates for the log mean and log variance of a two
parameter lognormal distribution. If the assumption of a lognormal distribution is not
closely approximated, this procedure is expected to produce good estimates for upper
percentiles while the mean and variance estimates may not be optimal.
The two parameter lognormal distribution is fully described by the log mean and log
variance, or the mean and standard deviation. Any desired summary statistic can be
calculated using an appropriate pair of sufficient statistics. More detailed discussion of this
method and the reasons why it was selected are presented in Statistical Support Document
for the 40 CFR Part 503 Final Rule for Sewage Sludge Use or Disposal (1992).
In order to assess the quality of the MLEs, cumulative probability distributions were
plotted for both the wet and diy weight distributions. Each plot shows the estimated
cumulative distribution for all three estimation methods. The substitution methods are
illustrated with points for each observation. The probability plotting position for each point
is determined by a ranking procedure developed by Blom. The line indicating the estimated
lognormal distribution is a plot of the 10th through 90th percentiles. These plots do not
indicate any obvious deviations from the assumption that the pollutant concentration data
are approximately lognormal in distribution. 'These plots are presented in the appendix.
Tables for wet weight summary statistics are presented on pages 10 through 12 and
tables for diy weight summary statistics are presented on pages 24 through 26. Pollutants
measured above their sample specific Minimum Level, or "detection limit," one time or less
are not included in these tables as it is not possible to obtain MLEs under those conditions.
Note that truckloads of domestic septage are not expected to contain pollutant
concentrations as high as could be found in sewage sludge used or disposed from Publicly
Owned Treatment Works that practice secondary or better wastewater treatment This
statement is based on the previously mentioned distributional assumptions of the MLE
estimation procedure and the additional assumption that domestic septage trucks across the
country have approximately the same probability distribution for pollutant concentrations as
domestic septage in trucks found in the area around Madison, Wisconsin. This result is
found by comparing the 98th percentile estimates from the National Sewage Sludge Survey,
presented in Statistical Support Documentation for the 40 CFR, Part 503 Final Standards for
the Use or Disposal of Sewage Sludge (1992), to 98th percentile estimates developed here for
diy weight concentrations of septage.
Statistical Methods for Estimating the Relationship Between Ammonia & TKN
Ammonia is the constituent of Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen (TKN) that is immediately
available for plant uptake. Over time, Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen is expected to completely
break down into Ammonia. The purpose of this analysis is to assist in determining an
B-34
-------
Relation of Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen to Ammonia:
100 A o
-*
SO
70
appropriate hydraulic loading rate for
domestic septage that allows sufficient
nitrogen for crop growth while not allowing
for so much nitrogen that crop growth
would be adversely affected. The loading
rate itself will be estimated in another
document
The observed relationship between
the Ammonia and the Total Kjeldahl
Nitrogen data indicates, as expected, that
both pollutants increase together. A
statistical model was fit to these data that
assumes the concentration of Ammonia is
zero when the- concentration of TKN is-
zero, that the Ammonia concentration will"
increase in a linear fashion as TKN
increases, that the Ammonia concentrations
about that line are approximately normal in
distribution, and that the deviations from
that line are independent and identically
distributed. Under these assumptions.
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen is approximately 43% Ammonia in wet domestic septage.
30
20 -
20
<0 80 100 120
TotC* XjikMM
140 160 180
U* jTj
1NTEKCEP
TKN
1
1
6.292426
0.377705
13.34986889
0.12061931
0.471
3.131
0.6517
0.0166
Variable
DF
Variable
Label
1KTERCEP
TKN
1
1
Intercept
Total Kjeldahl nitrogen
Evaluation
Assumptions
o f
For the
assumption that the
concentration of
Ammonia is zero
when the
concentration of TKN
is zero, a model was
fit that estimated a
non-zero constant
when TKN is zero and
a hypothesis test was
conducted that failed
to reject the
hypothesis that the
constant was
statistically different
than zero. The
B-35
-------
Analysis of Variance
Source
Model
Error
U Total
OF
Sui of
Squares
Mean
Square
1 20124.3*510 20126.3*510
8 2787.88530 3*8.48566
9 22912.230*0
F Value
57.768
Prat»F
0.0001
Boot USE
Dap Mean
C.V.
Variable OF
18.66777
42.72000
63.69797
R-square
Adj 8-sq
0.8783
0.S631
Parameter Estiaates
Par«M
Estii
iter
¦te
TK*
Variable OF
0.4272*7
Standard
Error
0.05622261
T for HO:
ParaMeter^O
7.599
Prob > !T
i' i
0.0001
Variable
Label
TICK
1 Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Analysis of Variance
table for this model
indicates that the
intercept term is not
statistically significant
at the 0.05 level. The
significance test used
is robust to many
departures from
assumptions.
For the
assumption of
linearity, both the
Analysis of Variance
table for the model
with an intercept term
and for the
without an intercept
term indicate that a
statistically significant linear relationship exists between Ammonia and TKN. Again, the
significance test used is robust to many
departures from assumptions.
For the assumption that
Ammonia concentrations about that line
are approximately normal in
distribution, the Shapiro-Wilk test for
the normal distribution fails to reject the
hypothesis that the residuals from the
fitted line come from a normal
distribution. Residuals are the
arithmetic difference between the
observed concentration of Ammonia at
a particular TKN concentration and the
Ammonia concentration predicted by
the statistical model. Further evidence
is that the plot of the residuals versus
their expected position in a normal
distribution, a normal scores plot, is
approximately linear.
For the assumption that
deviations from the line are
Relation of Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen to Ammonia:
Normal Score! "lot of Rcsiduoh from Regression
Rs&xH
lIMs e't mq/l
B-36
-------
Independent, the physical process of sampling from different truck loads of septage would
tend to make the sample results independent
For the assumption that deviations from the line are identically distributed, the plot
of residuals versus observed Ammonia values does not appear to indicate strong deviation
from this assumption.
Relation of Total Kjeldohl Nitrogen to Ammonia:
B«a*duai* Versus OtoHKVd VokM*
30
20
ft
s
o 0
-20
-30 H
' l " 'i l ¦ i ' i H ¦ ¦ ¦ 1 ¦ i ' ' I ¦ ' " I ' i ' ¦ 1 " ' 1 I ' 1 ' 1 I ' 1 ' 'I
0 to 20 JO 40 SO 60 70 AO 90 100
-------
References
Biom, G. (1958), Statistical Estimates and Transformed Beta Variables, New York: John
Wiley & Sons, Inc.
USEPA (1992), Statistical Support Documentation for the 40 CFR, Part 503 Final Standards
for the Use or Disposal of Sewage Sludge
B-38
-------
Appendix A
Summary Statistics
«
B-39
-------
Wet Weight Concentrations of Pollutants in Septage:
Summary Statistics fro® Maximum Likelihood Estimation
'Units
Sample
Log
Log
Pollutant
Size
Non-Detect
Mean
Variance
ALDRIN/DIELDRIN(TOTAL)
UG/L
9
7
-4.872
15.2471
AMMONIA (AS N)
MG/L
9
0
3.231
2.5560
CADMIUM
UG/L
9
6
1.207
1.1385
CHROMIUM
UG/L
9
1
3.494
0.8888
COPPER
UG/L
9
0
5.373
1.8551
DDT, DDE»ODD (TOTAL)
UG/L
9
7
-2.783
6.1436
LEAD
UG/L
9
6
3.642
0.5873
LINDANE(GAMMA-BHC)
UG/L
9
7
-2.360
0.2981
MERCURY
UG/L
9
4
-1.348
2.7855
NICKEL
UG/L
9
4
3.747
0.3319
NITRATE+NITRITE (AS N)
MG/L
9
2
-1.345
1.0699
PERCENT SOLIDS
t
9
0
-0.488
2.8024
SELENIUM
UG/L
9
7
0.442
5.4810
TOTAL KJELDAHL NITROGEN
MG/L
9
0
4.284
0.9236
TOTAL PHOSPHOROUS
MG/L
9
0
2.960
1.2521
ZINC
UG/L
9
0
7.806
2.1128
10
-------
Wet Weight Concentrations of Pollutants in Septage:
Summary Statistics from Maximum Likelihood Estimation
Standard
Coefficient
Deviation of
Standard
of
Pollutant
Units
Mean
the Mean
Deviation
Variation
ALDRIN/DIELDRIN(TOTAL)
UG/L
15.7000
10700.000
32100.000
2050.0000
AMMONIA (AS N)
MG/L
90.8000
104.0000
313.0000
3.4500
CADMIUM
UG/L
5.9100
2.8700
8.6100
1.4600
CHROMIUM
UG/L
51.3000
20.5000
61.4000
1.2000
COPPER
UG/L
545.0000
422.0000
1270.0000
2.3200
DDT,DDI,DDD(TOTAL)
UG/L
1.3300
9.5900
28.8000
21.6000
LEAD
UG/L
51.2000
15.3000
45.8000
0.8940
LINDANE(GAMMA-BHC)
UG/L
0.1100
0.0215
0.0646
0.5890
MERCURY
UG/L
1.0500
1.3600
4.0800
3.9000
NICKEL
UG/L
50.0000
10.5000
31.4000
0.6270
NITRATE+NITRITE (AS N)
MG/L
0.4450
0.2050
0.6160
1.3800
PERCENT SOLIDS
%
2.4900 .
3.2700
9.8100
3.9300
SELENIUM
UG/L
24.1000
124.0000
373.0000
15.5000
TOTAL KJELDAHL NITROGEN
MG/L
115.0000
47.3000
142.0000
1.2300
TOTAL PHOSPHOROUS
MG/L
36.1000
19.0000
57.0000
1.5800
ZINC
UG/L
7060.0000
6350.0000
19000.000
2.7000
11
-------
Wet Weight Concentrations of Pollutants in Septage:
Summary Statistics from Maximun Likelihood Estimation
/
90th
95 th
98th
Pollutant
Units
Median
Percentile
Percentile
Percentile
ALDRIN/DIELDRIN(TOTAL)
UG/L
0.0077
1.1600
4.7200
23.
4000
AMMONIA (AS N)
MG/L
25.3000
197.0000
351.0000
676.
0000
CADMIUM
UG/L
3. 400.
13.2000
19.3000
30.
0000
CHROMIUM
UG/L
32.9000
111.0000
155.0000
228.
0000
COPPER
UG/L
216.0000
1240.0000
2030.0000
3540.
0000
DDT,DDE f DDD(TOTAL)
UG/L
0.0619
1.4900
3.6500
10.
1000
LEAD
UG/L
38.2000
102.0000
135.0000
184.
0000
LINDANE(GAMMA-BHC)
UG/L
0.0944
0.1900
0.2320
0.
2900
MERCURY
UG/L
0.2600
2.2200
4.0400
8.
0200
NICKEL
UG/L
42.4000
88.9000
109.0000
138.
0000
NITRATE+NITRITE (AS N)
MG/L
0.2610
0.9840
1.4300
2.
1800
PERCENT SOLIDS
%
0.6140
5.2800
9.6400
19.
1000
SELENIUM
UG/L
1.5600
31.5000
73.2000
191.
0000
TOTAL KJELDAHL NITROGEN
MG/L
72.5000
249.0000 "
352.0000
523.
0000
TOTAL PHOSPHOROUS
MG/L
19.3000
81.3000
122.0000
192.
0000
ZINC
UG/L
2460.0000
15900.000
26800.000
48700.000
-------
Wet Weight Concentrations of Pollutants in Septage:
Summary Statistics from Substitution Methods
Pollutant-ALDRIN/DIELDRIN (TOTAL) — Sample Size«=9 — Units=UG/L
Substitution
Method
Standard Coefficient
Deviation of Standard of
Mean the Mean Deviation Variation
Minimum Median Maximum
SM-ML
SM-0
0.4480
0.3610
0.2660
0.2800
0.7980
0.8400
178.0
232.0
0.1000
0.0000
0.1000
0.0000
2.500
2.500
Pollutant-ALPHA-CHLORDANE — Sample Size=9 — Units«UG/L
Substitution
Method
Standard Coefficient
Deviation of Standard of
Mean the Mean Deviation Variation
Minimum
Median Maximum
SM-ML
SM-0
0.1090
0.0000
0.0093
0.0000
0.0280
0.0000
25.6
0.1000
0.0000
0.1000
0.0000
0.184
OjOOO
Substitution
Method
Pollutant-AMMONIA (AS N) — Sample Size«9 — Units«MG/L
Standard Coefficient
Deviation of Standard of
Mean the Mean Deviation Variation
Minimum Median Maximum
SM-ML
SM-0,
42.7000 9.4900 28.5000 66.7
42.7000 9.4900 28.5000 66.7
0.4800 45.0000 100.000
0.4800 45.0000 100.000
-------
Wet Weight Concentrations of Pollutants in Septage:
Summary Statistics from Substitution Methods
Pollutant-ARSENIC — Sample Size»9 — Units-UG/L
Substitution
Method
Standard Coefficient
Deviation of Standard of
Mean the Mean Deviation Variation
Minimus Median Haximum
SM-ML
SM-0
20.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0
20.0000
0.0000
20.0000
0.0000
20.000
0.000
Pollutant-BENZENE — Sample Size-7 — Units-UG/L
p-
Substitution
Method
SM-ML
SM-0
• Standard Coefficient
Deviation of Standard of
Mean the Mean Deviation Variation
11.4000
0.0000
1.4300
0.0000
3.7800
0.0000
33.. 1
Minimum
10.0000
0.0000
Median Maximum
10.0000
0.0000
20.000
0.000
Substitution
Method
Pollutant-BENZO(A)PYRENE — Sample Size«9 — Units-UG/L
Standard Coefficient
Deviation of Standard of
Mean the Mean Deviation Variation
Minimum
Median Maximum
SM-ML
SM-0
11.1000
0.0000
1.1100
0.0000
3.3300
0.0000
30.0
10.0000
0.0000
10.0000
0.0000
20.000
0.000
-------
Wet Weight Concentrations of Pollutants In Septage:
Summary Statistics from Substitution Methods
Polltttant=BER¥LLIUM — Sample Size=9 — Unlts=UG/L
Substitution
Method
Standard Coefficient
Deviation of Standard of
Mean the Mean Deviation Variation
Minimum Median Maximum
SM-ML
SM-0
5.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0
5.0000
0.0000
5.0000
0.0000
5.000
0.000
Pollutant«BIS(2-ETH¥LHEX¥L) PHTHALATE — Sample Size-»9 — UnitS"=UG/L
Standard Coefficient
Substitution Deviation of Standard of
Method Mean the Mean Deviation Variation
Minimum
Median Maximum
b.
SM-ML
SM-0
11.1000
0.0000
1.1100
0.0000
3.3300
0.0000
30.0
10.0000
0.0000
10.0000
0.0000
20.000
0.000
Pollutant-CADMIUM — Sample Slze-9 — Units«UG/L
Substitution
Method
Standard
Deviation of Standard
Mean the Mean Deviation
Coefficient
of
Variation
Minimum Median Maximum
SM-ML
SM-0
7.1300
3.8000
1.4900
2.1700
4.4700
6.5000
62.7
171.0
5.0000
0.0000
5.0000
0.0000'
18.4 00
18.400
I
-------
Wet Height Concentrations of Pollutants in Septage:
Summary Statistics from Substitution Methods
Pollutant-CHROHIUH — Sample Size-9 — Units«UG/L
Substitution
Method
Standard Coefficient
Deviation of Standard of
Mean the Mean Deviation Variation
Minimum Median Maximum
SM-ML
SM-0
46.7000
45.6000
12.7000
13.1000
38.1000
39.4000
81.6
86.5
10.0000
0.0000
33.5000
33.5000
128.000
128.000
Pollutant-COPPER — Sample Size-9 — Units*UG/L
Standard Coefficient
Substitution Deviation of Standard of
Method Mean the Mean Deviation Variation
Minimum
Median Maximum
SM-ML 503.0000 223.0000 669.0000 133.0 62.0000 115.0000 1850.000
SM-0 503.0000 223.0000 669.0000 133.0 62.0000 115.0000 1850.000
Pollutant-DDT,DDE,DDD(TOTAL) — Sample Size~9 — Units-UG/L ——
Substitution
Method
Standard coefficient
Deviation of Standard of
Mean the Mean Deviation Variation
Minimum
Median Maximum
SM-ML
SM-0
0.6850
0.4220
0.2810
0.3230
0.8440
0.9690
123.0
230.0
0.3380
0.0000
0.3380
0.0000
2.880
2.880
-------
Wet Weight Concentrations of Pollutants In Septage:
Summary statistics from Substitution Methods
Pol lutant=GAMMA-CHIX)RDANE — Sample Size»9 — Units=UG/L
Substitution
Method
Standard Coefficient
Deviation of Standard of
Mean the Mean Deviation Variation
Minimum Median Maximum
SM-ML
SM-0
0.1230
0.0000
0.0104
0.0000
0.0313
0.0000
25.4
0.1130
0.0000
0.1130
0.0000
0.207
0.000
Pollutant-HEPTACHLOR — Sample Slze»9 — Units=UG/L —
Substitution
Method
Standard Coefficient
Deviation of Standard of
Mean the Mean Deviation Variation
Minimum Median Maximum
SM-ML
SM-0
0.0896
0.0278
0.0209
0.0278
0.0626
0.0833
69.9
300.0
0.0630
0.0000
0.0630
0.0000
0.250
0.250
Substitution
Method
Pollutant-HEXACHLOROBENZENE — Sample Size«9 — Units-UG/L
Standard Coefficient
Deviation of Standard of
Mean the Mean Deviation Variation
Minimum Median Maximum
SM-ML 11.1000 1.1100 3.3300 30.0 10.0000 10.0000 20.000
SM-0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 . 0.OOOO 0.0000 0.000
-------
Wat Weight Concentrations of Pollutants in Septages
Summary Statistics fro* Substitution Methods
Pollutant-HEXACHLOROBUTADIENE — Sample Size-9 — Units-UG/L
Substitution
Method
Standard Coefficient
Deviation of Standard of
Mean the Mean Deviation Variatici
Minimum Median Maximum
SM-HL
SM-0
11.1000
0.0000
1.1100
0.0000
3.3300
0.0000
30.0
10.0000
0.0000
10.0000
0.0000
20'. 000
0.000
Pollutant-LEAD — Sanple Size-9 — Units=UG/L
Substitution
Method
Standard Coefficient
Deviation of Standard of
Mean the Mean Deviation Variation
Minimum
Median Maximum
SM-ML
SM-0
63.4000
30.1000
8.0800
15.7000
24.2000
47.1000
38.2
157.0
50.0000
0.0000
50.0000
0.0000
121.000
121*. 000
Substitution
Method
Pollutant-LINDANE(GAMMA-BHC) — Sample Size=9 — Units-UG/L
Mean
Standard Coefficient
Deviation of Standard of
the Mean Deviation Variation
Minimum Median Maximum
SM-ML
SM-0
0.1620
0.0417
0.0170
0.0295
0.0511
0.0884
31.6
212.0
0.1250
0.0000
0.1380
0.0000
0.253
0.250
-------
Wet Weight Concentrations of Pollutants in Septage:
Summary Statistics from Substitution Methods
Pollutant=MERCTJRY — Sample Size-9 — Units«UG/L
Substitution
Method
Standard Coefficient
Deviation of Standard of
Mean the Mean Deviation Variation
Minimum Median Maximum
SM-ML
SM-0
0.8220
0.7330
0.4200
0.4380
1.2600
1.3100
153.0
179.0
0.2000
0.0000
0.3000
0.3000
4'. 050
4.050
Pollutant**MOIiYBDlNUM ~ Sample Size»9 — Units=UG/L
Substitution
Method
Standard Coefficient
Deviation of Standard of
Mean the Mean Deviation Variation
Minimum Median Maximum
SM-ML
SM-0
10.5000
1.6000
0.4890
1.6000
1.4700
4.8000
14.0
300.0
10.0000
0.0000
10.0000
0.0000
14.400
14.400
Pollutant-N-NITROSODIMETHYLAMINE — Sample Size~9— Unita=UG/L
Substitution
Method
Standard Coefficient
Deviation of Standard of
Mean the Mean Deviation Variation
Minimum Median Maximum
SM-ML
SM-0
55.6000
0.0000
5.5600
0.0000
16.7000
0.0000
30.0
50.0000
0.0000
50.0000
0.0000
100.000
0.000
-------
Substitution
Method
Wet Weight Concentrations of Pollutants in Septage:
Summary Statistics from Substitution Methods
Pollutant-NICKEL — Sample Size-9 — Units-UG/L
Standard Coefficient
Deviation of Standard of
Mean the Mean Deviation Variation
Minimum Median Maximum
SM-ML
SM-0
54.5000
36.7000
7.8300
13.2000
23.5000
39.7000
43.1
108.0
40.0000
0.0000
41.6000
41.6000
105.000
105.000
Pollutant-NITRATE+NITRITE (AS N) — Sample Size-9 -- Units»MG/L
Substitution
Method
Standard Coefficient
Deviation of Standard of
Mean the Mean Deviation Variation
Minimum
Median Maximum
W
6i
o
SM-ML
SM-0
0.3890
0.3670
0.0964
0.1050
0.2890
0.3160
74*. 4
86.2
"0.1000
0.0000
0.2000
0.2000
0.900
0.900
Substitution
Method
Pollutant-PCB(TOTAL) — Sample Size-9 — Units-UG/L
Standard Coefficient
Deviation of Standard of
Mean the Mean Deviation Variation
Minimum
Median Maximum
SM-ML
SM-0
1.9100
0.0000
0.1630
0.0000
0.4890
0.0000
25.6
1.7500
0.0000
1.7500
0.0000
3.220
0.000
-------
Wet Weight Concentrations of Pollutants in Septage:
Summary Statistics from Substitution Methods
... Pollutant-PERCENT SOLIDS — Sample Size=9 -- Units®' %«
Standard Coefficient
Substitution Deviation of Standard of
Method Mean the Mean Deviation Variation Minimum Median Maximum
SM-ML 2.2100 1.5100 4.5400 205.0 0.0653 0.6580 14.200
SM-0 2.2100 1.5100 4.5400 205.0 0.0653 0.6580 14.200
— — Pollutant=SELENIUM — Sample Size»9 — Units=UG/L — *-
Standard Coefficient
Substitution Deviation of Standard of
Method Mean the Mean Deviation Variation Minimum Median Maximum
SM-ML 20.8000 6.6400 19.9000 95.6 5.0000 5.0000 50.000
SM-0 6.9400 4.6000 13.8000 199.0 0.0000 0.0000 32.000
— Pollutant-TOTAL KJELDAHL NITROGEN — Sample Size=9 — Units>=MG/L
Standard Coefficient
Substitution Deviation of Standard of
Method Mean the Mean Deviation Variation Minimum Median Maximum
SM-ML 96.4000 19.2000 57.6000 59.7 9.0000 115.0000 175.000
SM-0 96.4000 19.2000 57.6000 59.7 9.0000 115.0000 175.000
-------
Wet Weight Concentrations of Pollutants in Septage:
Summary Statistics from Substitution Methods
Pdllutant-TOTAL PHOSPHOROUS — Sample Size-9 — Units«HG/L
Substitution
Method
Standard Coefficient
Deviation of Standard of
Mean the Mean Deviation Variation
Minimum Median Maximum
SM-ML
SM-0
27.6000
27.6000
5.7400
5.7400
17.2000
17.2000
62.3
62.3
1.7000
1.7000
32.0000
32.0000
48.000
48.000
Substitution
Method
Pollutant-TOXAPHENE — Sample Size-9 — Units-UG/L
Standard Coefficient
Deviation of Standard of
Mean the Mean Deviation Variation
Minimum Median Maximum
w
i
Ui
SM-ML
SM-0
11.3000
0.0000
1.6700
0.0000
5.0100
0.0000
44.3
0.9100
0.0000
11.4000
0.0000
20.900
01000
Substitution
. Method
Pollutant-TRICHLOROETHEHE
Sample Size=7 — Units«UG/L
Standard Coefficient
Deviation of Standard of
Mean the Mean Deviation Variation
Minimum Median Maximum
SM-ML
SM-0
11.4000
0.0000
1.4300
0.0000
3.7800
0.0000
33.1
10.0000
0.0000
10.0000
0.0000
20.000
0.000
-------
Wet Weight Concentrations of Pollutants in Septage:
Summary statistics from Substitution Methods
— —- Pollutant=ZINC — Sample Size=9 — Units=UG/Ii
Standard Coefficient
Substitution Deviation of Standard of
Method Mean the Mean Deviation Variation Minimum Median Maximum
SM-ML 5300.0000 2420.0000 7270.0000 137.0 182.0000 3190.0000 23800.000
SM-0 5300.0000 2420.0000 7270.0000 137.0 182.0000 3190.0000 23800.000
-------
Dry Weight Concentrations of Pollutants in Septage;
Summary Statistics fro* Maximum Likelihood Estimation
/
Units
Sample
Log
Log
Pollutant
Size
Non-Detect
Mean
Variance
ALDRIN/DIELDRIN(TOTAL)
UG/KG
9
7
0.741
8.92238
AMMONIA (AS H)
MG/KG
9
0
8.325
3.90825
CADMIUM
MG/K'
9,
6
-1.766
5.86238
CHROMIUM
MG/KG
9
1
1.542
2.39400*
COPPER
MG/KG
9
0
3.559
4.39988
DDT f DDE,DDD(TOTAL)
UG/KG
9
7
1.665
7.27425
LEAD
MG/KG
9
6
0.561
3.87225
LINDANE(GAMMA-BHC)
UG/KG
9
7
0.967
2.14650
MERCURY
MG/KG
9
4
-3.571
2.86875
NICKEL
MG/KG
9
4
1.330
1.57612
NITRATE+NITRITE (AS N)
MG/KG
9
2
3.522
0.82463
PERCENT SOLIDS
%
9
0
-0.488
2.80237
SELENIUM
MG/KG ~
9
7
-2.098
6.97725
TOTAL KJELDAHL NITROGEN
MG/KG
9
0
9.378
2.81813
TOTAL PHOSPHOROUS
MG/KG
9
0
8.054
1.42312
ZINC
MG/KG
9
0
5.992
1.05525
-------
Dry Weight Concentrations of Pollutants in Septage:
Summary Statistics from Maximum Likelihood Estimation
Standard
Coefficient
Deviation of
Standard
of
Pollutant
Units
Mean
the Mean
Deviation
Variation
ALDRIN/DIELDRIN(TOTAL)
UG/KG
182.0000
5240.0000
15700.000
86.6000
AMMONIA (AS N)
MG/KG
29100.000
67800.000
203000.00
6.9900
CADMIUM
MG/KG
3.2100
20.0000
60.0000
18.7000
CHROMIUM
MG/KG
15.5000
16.3000
48.8000
3.1600
COPPER
MG/KG
317.0000
948.0000
2840.0000
8.9700
DDT,DDE,ODD(TOTAL)
UG/KG
201.0000
2540.0000
7620.0000
38.0000
LEAD
MG/KG
12.1000
27.8000
83.3000
6.8600
LINDANE(GAMMA-BHC)
UG/KG
7.6900
7.0500
21.1000
2.7500
MERCURY
MG/KG
0.1180
0.1600
0.4810
4.0800
NICKEL
MG/KG
8.3200
5.4300
16.3000
1.9600
NITRATE+NITRITE (AS N)
MG/KG
51.1000
19.3000
57.9000
1.1300
PERCENT SOLIDS
%
2.4900
3.2700
9.8100
3.9300
SELENIUM
MG/KG
4.0200
43.8000
131.0000
32i7000
TOTAL KJELDAHL NITROGEN
MG/KG
48400.000
64000.000
192000.00
3.9700
TOTAL PHOSPHOROUS
MG/KG
6410.0000
3790.0000
11400.000
1;7700
ZINC
MG/KG
678.0000
309.0000
928.0000
1.3700
-------
Dry Weight Concentrations of Pollutants in Septage:
Summary Statistics froa Maxiaua Likelihood Estivation
/ "
90th
95th
98th
Pollutant
units
Median
Percentile
Percentile
Percentile
ALDRIN/DIELDRIN(TOTAL)
UG/KG
2.1000
97.4000
! 286.0000
972.0000
AMMONIA (AS H)
MG/KG
4130.0000
52300.000
107000.00
240000.00
CADMIUM
MG/KG
0.1710
3.8400
9.1800
24.8000
CHROMIUM
MG/KG
4.6700
34.1000
59.6000
112.0000
COPPER
MG/KG
35.1000
520.0000
1110.0000
2620.0000
DDT,DDE,DDD(TOTAL)
UG/KG
5.2900
169.0000
447.0000
1350.0000
LEAD
MG/KG
1.7500
22.0000
44.6000
100.00O0
LINDANE(GAMMA-BHC)
UG/KG
2.6300
17.3000
29.3000
53.4000
MERCURY
MG/KG
0.0281
0.2480
0.4560
0.9140
NICKEL
MG/KG
3.7800
19.0000
29.8000
49.9000
NITRATI+NITRITE (AS N)
MG/KG
33.9000
109.0000
151.0000
219.0000
PERCENT SOLIDS
%
0.6140
5.2800
9.6400
19.1000
SELENIUM
MG/KG
0.1230
3.6600
9.4600
27.9000
TOTAL SCJELDAHL NITROGEN
MG/KG
11800.000
102000.00
187000.00
372000.00
TOTAL PHOSPHOROUS
MG/KG
3150.0000
14600.000
22400.000
36500.000
ZINC
MG/KG
400.0000
1500.0000
2170.0000
3300.0000
-------
Dry Weight Concentrations of Pollutants in Septage:
Summary Statistics from Substitution Methods
Pollatant-ALDRIM/DIILDRIM(TOTAL) — Sample Size«9 — Units=UG/KG
Substitution
Method
Standard Coefficient
Deviation of Standard of
Mean the Mean Deviation Variation
Minimum
Median Maximum
SM-ML
SM-0
77.200
38.000
36.300
35.900
109.000
108.000
141.0
283.0
8.55000
0.00000
17.6000
0.0000
325.00
325.00
Pollutant-ALPHA-CHLORDANE — Sample Size-9 — Units-UG/KG
Substitution
Method
Standard • Coefficient
Deviation of Standard of
Mean the Mean Deviation Variation
Minimum
Median Maximum
SM-ML
SM-0
44.100
0.000
19.500
0.000
58.500
0.000
133.0
0.70400
0.00000
15.2000
0.0000
153.00
0.00
Substitution
Method
Pollutant—AMMONIA (AS N) — Sample Size-9 — Units=MG/KG
Standard
Deviation of Standard
Coefficient
of
Mean the Mean Deviation Variation
Minimum
Median Maximum
SM-ML 12700.000 6390.000 19200.000 151.0 77.50000 8210.0000 61300.00
SM-0 12700.000 6390.000 19200.000 151.0 77.50000 8210.0000 61300.00
-------
Dry Weight Concentrations of Pollutants in Septage:
Summary Statistics from Substitution Methods
Substitution
Method
SM-ML
SM-0
Substitution
Method
SM-ML
SM-0
Pollutant-ARSENIC — Sample Size«9 — Units-MG/KG
Standard Coefficient
Deviation of Standard of
Mean the Mean Deviation Variation
8.710
0.000
3.920
0.000
11.800
0.000
135.0
Minimum
0.14100
0.00000
Pollutant-BENZINE — Sample Size-7 — Units«UG/KG
Standard Coefficient
Deviation of Standard of
Mean the Mean Deviation Variation
1540.000
0.000
519.000
0.000
1370.000
0.000
89.1
Minimum
"70.40000
0.00000
Median
Maximum
3.0400
'30.60
0.0000
0.00
Median Maximum
1080.0000
0.0000
4330.00
' 0.00
Substitution
Method
Pollutant-BENZO(A)PYRENE — Sample Size-9 — Units«UG/KG
Standard Coefficient
Deviation of Standard of
Mean the Mean Deviation Variation
Minimum
Median Maximum
SM-ML .4420.000 1950.000 5840.000 132.0 70.40000 1520.0000 15300.00
SM-0 0.000 0.000 0.000 . 0.00000 0.0000 0.00
-------
Dry Weight Concentrations of Pollutants in Septage:
Summary Statistics from Substitution Methods
pollutant-BERYLLIUM — Sample Size-9 — Units=MG/KG
Substitution
Method *
Standard Coefficient
Deviation of Standard of
Mean the Mean Deviation Variation
Minimum
Median Maximum
SM-ML
SM-0
2.180
0.000
0.981
0.000
2.940
0.000
135.0
0.03S20
0.00000
0.7600
0.0000
7.66
0.00
Pollutant-BIS(2-ETHYLHEXYL) PHTHALATE — Sample Slze»9 — Units-UG/KG
Substitution
Method
Standard Coefficient
Deviation of Standard of
Mean the Mean Deviation Variation
Minimum
Median Maximum
w
i
u*
\o
SM-ML 4420.000 1950.000 5840.000 1J2.0 70.40000 1520.0000 15300.00
SM-0 0.000 0.000 0.000 . 0.00000 0.0000 0.00
Pollutant-CADMIUM — Sample Size»9 — Units-MG/KG
Substitution
Method
Standard Coefficient
Deviation of Standard of
Mean the Mean Deviation Variation
Minimum
Median Maximum
SM-ML
SM-0
2.430
0.632
0.954
0.349
2.860
1.050
118.0
166.0
0.03520
0.00000
0.9950
0.0000
7.66
2.77
/
-------
Substitution
Method
Dry Weight Concentrations of Pollutants in Septage:
Summary Statistics froa Substitution Methods
- Pollutant-CHROHIUM — Sample Siz©»9 — Units»MG/KG
Standard Coefficient
Deviation of Standard of
Mean " the Mean Deviation Variation
Minimum
Median Maximua
SM-ML
SM-0
10.900
9.360
3.640
3.800
10.900
11.400
100.0
122.0
0.22600
0.00000
7.6300
6.9200
35.30
35.30
Pollutant-COPPER ~ Sample Size«9 — Units-MG/KG
Substitution
. Method
Standard Coefficient
Deviation of Standard of
Mean the Mean Deviation Variation
Minimum
Median Maximum
SM-ML
SM-0
113.000
113.000
40.900
40.900
123.000
123.000
108.0
108.0
0.81000
0.81000
105.0000
105.0000
328.00
328.00
Substitution
Method
Pollutant—DDT,DDE,DDD(TOTAL) ~ Sanple Size»9 — Units-UG/KG
Standard Coefficient
Deviation of Standard of
Mean the Mean Deviation Variation
Minimum
Median Maximum
SM-ML 176.000 64.500 194.000 110.0 2.38000 69.3000 518.00
SM-0 33.800 28.100 84.400 250.0 0.00000 0.0000 254.00
-------
Dry Weight Concentrations of Pollutants in Septage:
Summary Statistics from Substitution Methods
Pollutant«GAMMA-CHI0RDANE — Sample Size=9 — Unlts=UG/KG
Substitution
Method
Standard Coefficient
Deviation of Standard of
Mean the Mean Deviation Variation
Minimum
Median Maximum
SM-ML
SM-0
49.800
0.000
22.000
0.000
66.100
0.000
133.0
0.79600
0.00000
17.2000
0.0000
173.00
0.00
Substitution
Method
Pollutant-HEPTACHLOR — Sample Size«9 — Unlts»UG/KG
Standard Coefficient
Deviation of Standard of
Mean the Mean Deviation Variation
Minimum
Median Maximum
SM-ML
SM-0
32.000
5.690
12.400
5.690
37.100
17.100
116.0
300.0
0.44400
0.00000
9.5700
0.0000
96.50
51.20
Substitution
Method
Pollutant-HEXACHLOROBENZENE — Sample Slze=9 — Units=UG/KG
Standard Coefficient
Deviation of Standard of
Mean the Mean Deviation Variation
Minimum
Median Maximum
SM-ML 4420.000 1950.000 5840.000 132.0 70.40000 1520.0000 15300.00
SM-0 0.000 0.000 0.000 . 0.00000 0.0000 0.00
-------
Dry Weight Concentrations of Pollutants in Septage:
Summary Statistics froa Substitution Methods
Poliutant-HEXACHLOROBUTADIENE — Sample Size«9 — Units-UG/KG
Substitution
Method
Standard Coefficient
Deviation of Standard of
Mean the Mean Deviation Variation
Minimum
Median Maximum
SM-ML 4420.000 1950.000 5840.000 132.0 70.40000 1520.0000 15300.00
SM-0 0.000 0.000 0.000 . 0.00000 0.0000 0.00
Pollutant-LEAD — Sample Size»9 — Units=MG/KG —
Substitution
Method
Standard Coefficient
Deviation of Standard of
Mean the Mean Deviation Variation
Minimum
Median Maximum
SM-ML
SM-0
23.800
3.960
9.600
2.730
28.800
8.200
121.0
207.0
0.35200
0.00000
7.6000 76.60
0.0000 '24.80
Pollutant-LINDANE(GAMMA-BHC) — Sample Size**9 — Units-UG/KG
Standard Coefficient
Substitution Deviation of Standard of
Method „ Mean the Mean Deviation Variation
Minimum
Median Maximum
SM-ML
SM-0
61.900
2.560
26.700
2.450
80.000
7.340
129.0
287.0
0.88000
0.00000
22.1000
0.0000
211.00
22.10
-------
Dry Weight Concentrations of Pollutants in Septage:
Summary Statistics from Substitution Methods
Pollutant»MERCURY — Sample Size=9 — Units=MG/KG
Substitution
Method
Standard Coefficient
Deviation of Standard of
Mean the Mean Deviation Variation
Minimum
Median Maximum
SM-ML
SM-0
0.138
0.059
0.044
0.037
0.132
0.112
95.4
189.0
0.00211
0.00000
0.0760
0.0021
0.35
0.35
Pollutant-MOLYBDENUM — Sample Siz#«*9 — Units-MG/KG
Substitution
Method
Standard Coefficient
Deviation of Standard of
Mean the Mean Deviation Variation
Minimum
Median Maximum
SM-ML
SM-0
4.460
0.328
1.950
0.328
5.850
0.984
131.0
300.0
0.07040
0.00000
1.5200
0.0000
15.30
"2.95
Pollutant-N-NITROSODIMETHYLAMINE — Sample Size»9 ~ Units=UG/KG
Substitution
Method
Standard Coefficient
Deviation of Standard of
Mean the Mean Deviation Variation
Minimum
Median. Maximum
SM-ML 22100.000 9740.000 29200.000 132.0 352.00000 7600.0000 76600.00
SM-0 0.000 0.000 0.000 . 0.00000 0.0000 0.00
-------
substitution
Method
Dry Weight Concentrations of Pollutants in Septage:
Summary Statistics from Substitution .Methods
Pollutant-NICKEL — Sample Size-9 — Units-MG/KG
Standard Coefficient
Deviation•of Standard of
Mean the Mean Deviation Variation
Minimum
Median Maximum
SM-ML
SM-0
18.900
4.470
7.800
2.870
23.400
8.620
124.0
193.0
0.56200
0.00000
6.0800
0.5620
61.30
26.80
PollUtant-NITRATE+NITRITE (AS N) — Sample Size»9 — Units«=MG/KG
Standard Coefficient
Substitution Deviation of Standard of
Method Mean the Mean Deviation Variation
Minimum
Median Maximum
SM-ML
SM-0
68.600
36.400
17.200
11.600
51.700
34.900
75.. 4
95.9
6.34000
0.00000
53.1000
32.4000
153.00
91.20
— Follutant**pCB (TOTAL) — Sample Size-9 — Units-UG/KG
Standard Coefficient
Substitution Deviation of Standard of
Method Mean the Mean Deviation Variation Minimum Median Maximum
SM-ML 771.000 341.000 1020.000 133.0 12.30000 266.0000 2680.00
SM-0 0.000 0.000 0.000 . 0.00000 0.0000 0.00
-------
Dry Weight Concentrations of Pollutants in Septage:
Summary Statistics from Substitution Methods
Pollutant»SELENIUM — Sample Size=9 — Units=MG/KG
Substitution
Method
Standard Coefficient
Deviation of Standard of
Mean the Mean Deviation Variation
Minimum
Median Maximum
SM-ML
SM-0
4.370
0.487
1.240
0.335
3.720
1.000
85.2
206.0
0.03520
0.00000
2.7400
0.0000
10.20
2.74
PollUtant-TOTAL KJELDAHL NITROGEN — Sample Size-9 — Units»MG/KG
Substitution
Method
Standard Coefficient
Deviation of Standard of
Mean the Mean Deviation Variation
Minimum
Median Maximum
SM-ML 23600.000 8350.000 25100.000 10.6.0 218.00000 13000.0000 84200.00
SM-0 23600.000 8350.000 25100.000 106.0 218.00000 13000.0000 84200.00
Substitution
Method
Pollutant-TOTAL PHOSPHOROUS — Sample Size»9 — Unlts=MG/KG
, Standard Coefficient
Deviation of Standard of
Mean the Mean Deviation Variation
Minimum
Median Maximum
SM-ML 4580.000 1050.000 3150.000 68.7 176.00000 3500.0000 10700.00
SM-0 4580.000 1050.000 3150.000 68.7 176.00000 3500.0000 10700.00
-------
Dry Height Concentrations of Pollutants in Septage:
Summary Statistics fro* Substitution Methods
Pollutant-TOXAPHENE — Sample Size»9 — Units-UG/KG
Substitution
Method
SM-ML
SM-0
M«an
3240.000
0.000
Standard Coefficient
Deviation of Standard of
the Mean Deviation Variatici
1600.000
0.000
4800.000
0.000
148.0
Minimum
Median Maximum
80.10000 1390.0000 15500.00
0.00000 0.0000 0.00
w
I
On
OS
— Pollutant-TRICHLOROETHENE — Sample Size=7 — Units=UG/KG
Substitution
Method
SM-ML
SM-0
Standard Coefficient
Deviation of Standard of
Mean the Mean Deviation Variation
1540.000
0.000
519.000
0.000
1370.000
0.000
sa. i
Minimum
70.40000
0.00000
Median Maximum
1080.0000
0.0000
4330.00
0.00
Pollutant»ZlNC — Sample Size-9 — Units«MG/KG
Substitution
Method
Standard Coefficient
Deviation of Standard of
Mean the Mean Deviation Variation
Minimum
Median Maximum
SM-ML
SM-0
570.000
570.000
146.000
146.000
439.000
439.000
77.1
77.1
43.70000
43.70000
433.0000
433.0000
1290.00
1290.00
I
-------
Appendix B
Graphics
B-67
-------
Cumulative Frequency for Total Aldrin/Dieldrin (ug/i)
r.o-
o.t
t.o
O.J
o.a
c
u
« 0.7
tt
I
| 0.8
*
* 0,5-
F
r
« 0.«*
u
n 0.3
e
1
0.2
1 2
Coneen troti on (»f/l}
SYU0OL
ULE
SU-Ul o o o SU-O
Cumulative Frequency for Total Aldrin/Dieldrin (ug/kg)
0.1
o.o-l
—¦—r—1r
too
SYMBOL
200
Coneentralio# (uj/kg)
IILE • • • SU-UL © o o SU-
300
400
B-68
-------
r.o-
0.9
0.8
c
u
m 0.7
8
I
? 0.8
Cumulative Frequency for Ammonia (AS N) (mg/1)
e 0.5
F
r
e 0.4
-------
Cumulative Frequency for Cadmium (ug/l)
SYMBOL
8
r| . ¦ I i' - I 1 ' . . I 1 ' ' , ' ' ' 1 ¦ '
10 11 12 13 1* 15 16
Concintrat ion (ug/l )
Wit
• • Sil-Ul O o o SM-0
Cumulative Frequency for Cadmium (mg/kg)
SYUBOL
Conctntration (ng/k $)
IU_g ¦ • • SU-UL OOO SU-
B-70
-------
Cumulative Frequency for Chromium (ug/I)
20
1 i 11 1 "
30
SYUB01
+ 0-
50
60
70
80
—r"
90
too 110
Concentration (u^/Ii
Ul£
SU-UL o o o SU-0
Cumulative Frequency for Chromium (mg/kg)
10
STUBQL
—¦—.—?—.—r —>—•—'—¦—'—• • • '
.20 *
Concentration (B9/k9)
IILE • • • SU-UL o a a SU-0
B-71
-------
Cumulative Frequency for Copper (ug/I)
i.o:
0.9
0.8
0.7-
0.6'
o.s-
0.4"
0.3"
0.2"
o.t-
o.o-
, - . , i,i ¦ , ¦ ' ' .— ' I ¦ 1 ' , ' ' ' I ' ' 1 ¦ ' 1 ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' —r
100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 .1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 1700 1800 19CC
SYMBOL
Conc«ntfat ion (ug/I!
IILE * * • • SU-Ul o o o SU-0
Cumulative Frequency for Copper (mg/kg)
1.0:
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.$
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0i0
¦ < '
100
SYMBOL
' I ¦ ' 1 >
200 300 400
Coneeotrot ion (mg/kfl!
• • • su-lil oao SH-0
500
S00
B-72
-------
Cumulative Frequency for Total DDT, DDE, and DDD (ug/1)
• Si
0
2
t
Concentration (u§/I)
SYMBOL UlE . • • • SU-Ul O o o SM-0
Cumulative Frequency for "Tbtal DDT, DDE, and DDD (ug/kg)
0
500
too
E00
300
400
200
Concentration (ug/kg)
SYMBOL ULE • • • SU-UL o o o SU-O
B-73
-------
Cumulative Frequency for Total Kjeldah! Nitrogen (mg/1)
100
SYMBOL
200
Concen trot ion (ng/i)
UtE • * * SU-UL o O o SU-0
300
Cumulative Frequency for "Total l^eldahl Nitrogen (mg/kg)
0
,9
8
7
S
5
4
3
0-2
0.1
0.0
' i ' ' I ' ' ' ' I
10000 20000 30000
SYUBOL
40000 50000 60000 70000
Coneentrot ion (ag/kg)
80000 90000 100000 1 10000
ULE
• • SU-UL o a o SU-0
B-74
-------
1.0H
0.9
C °"8
u
a
J 0.7
o
t
: o.6
r 0-5
*
-------
Cumulative Frequency for Lindane (Gamma—BHC) (ug/I)
J.cH
0.8-
C
u
« 0.7-
it
I
f 0.5:
I
V
* 0.5:
F
0.* :
¦ 3
0.3-
0,2
0.1
n n -I
0.00 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0,10 0.12 0.1* 0.16 0.18 0.20 0.22 0.24 0.26
Conctntrotion (ug/I)
SYMBOL UU . • • * SU-Ul a o a SU-O
Cumulative Frequency for Lindane (Gamma—BHC) (ug/kg)
0.3
i ¦ — ¦ M| ¦—i ¦ ' « i — r
0 100 200 300
Concentration (ug/kg)
SYMBOL HLE • • * SM-IIL 0 0 0 SU-0
B-76
-------
Cumulative Frequency for Mercury (ug/l)
y 0.7
? 0.*
StUSQl
a 3
Coneentrotion (ug/l)
Ul£ • • • * SU-UL O O o SU-0
Cumulative Frequency for Mercury (mg/kg)
¦ 0.7
0-00 0.02 0.0* 0.06 0.08 0.10 0.12 0.1* 0.t6 0.18 0.20 0.22 0.2* 0.26 0.28 0.30 0.32 0.3* 0.36
Ceneentrot ion («ij/kg)
SYMBOL ' ' Ul£ " * • * SU-Ul 0 0 0 S«-0
B-77
-------
Cumulaltive Frequency for Nickel (ug/0
50 60
Conetnlrot io'n (uq/l1
40
srl|80t MIE , • • • SM-Ul 000 SU-0
Cumulative Frequency for Nickel (mg/kg)
' o
Concen tret ion
SYMBOL . HIE * • * SM-HL . ° ° ° SU-Q
B-78
-------
i.o:
0.9'
0.8"
€
u
m 0.7-
u
I
0 „ .
t 0. S
*
e 0.5-
F
r
e 0.4-
1
H
S 0.3-
c
y
0.2-
0,1
0,0-L
Cumulative Frequency for Nitrate + Nitrite (mg/l)
" 0.7
0. t
Q . 2
Q.I
SYMBOL
Q.4 0.5 06
Concentration («g/f)
VILE ¦ • • • SB-Ut
1.0
O O O SU-0
Cumulative Frequency for Nitrate + Nitrite (mg/kg)
i" '
ISO
T"""
10
20
30
40
50
SYMBOL
» I • > l ' I ¦ " ' " I ' " 1 ' I , J 1 1
$0 70 80 90 100 110 120
Conctairat ion (mq/kq)
- IRE * * • SU-UL o o o SU-0
-'¦T ' 1
130
¦ i ¦
140
180
B-79
-------
Cumulative Frequency for Total Phosphorous (mg/1)
9
8
0.7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0.0
T
T
r-r-.
20
T
80
70
Concmtrotion («g/l )
SYMBOL "IE - * * • SH-Ml 0 0 0 SK-0
Cumulative Frequency for Total Phosphorous (mg/kg)
.0
.J
.8
.7
6
0.5
0.4:
0.3
0.2
. I
14000 ISOOO
1000 2000 3000
Cencentration Jog/kg}
SYMBOL HLE • • • SH-Mt. ° ° ° . S«-0
B-80
-------
Cumulative Frequency for Selenium (ug/l)
0.3"
0.1 -i
SYMBOL
Concentration (ug/l)
UlE • • • SU-UL 0OO SH-0
Cumulative Frequency for Selenium (mg/kg)
a 0.7
t 0.8
10
11
SYMBOL
Concintrotion (ag/kq)
IILE • • • SU-UL o o o SU-0
B-81
-------
Cumulative Frequency for Zinc (ug/l)
i.o:
0 toooo 20000 3 00 01
Con c «n t r a tIon (ug/l)
SYMBOL HUE • • • SU-ML o o o SU-Q
Cumulative Frequency for Zinc (mg/kg)
i.o:
0.9
0-8
c
II
« 0.7
u
I
• 0.5
r
r
* 0.4
<1
u
t 0.3
c
r
0.2
0.1
°'°\ • ¦ ¦ ¦ I ¦ ¦ ' ¦ I ¦ ¦ ' • I ¦ ' ' ' I ¦ ' ¦ ¦ I ' ' ' ¦ I • • ¦ ¦ I ¦ ' ¦ ¦ I ¦ • ¦ ¦ I - I ' ' ' ' I ' ' ' ¦ !¦¦¦')
0 100 200 300 iOO S00 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1S00
Conccntrot ion (ag/kj )
SYMBOL HIE « * • SM-UL o O o su-0
B-82
-------
Cumulative Frequency for Percent Solids (%)
i.o-
0.9-
a-
0.5-
0.2"
o.i-
0.01
15
10 11 12
Concentration (%)
MT.P • • • SM-ML O O O SM-0
B-83
-------
Appendix C
Data Listing
-------
Wet Weight Concentrations of Pollutants in Septage
Pollutant=ALDRIN/DIELDRIN (TOTAL)
EPA
Sample Quantified Minimum
Number
Amount
Level
Units
19974
•
0.100
UG/L
19975
m
0.100
UG/L
19976
•
0.100
UG/L
19977
2.50
•
UG/L
19978
0.75
•
UG/L
19979
«
0.184
UG/L
19980
•
0*100
UG/L
19981
•
0.100
UG/L
19982
• :
0.100
UG/L
PollUtant=ALPHA-CHLORDANE
EPA
Sample
Number
Quantified *
Amount
Minimum
Level
Units
19974
19975
19976
19977
19978
19979
19980
19981
19982
0.100
0.100
0.100
0.100
0.100
0.184
0.100
0.100
0.100
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
Pollutant=AMMONXA (AS U)
EPA
Sample
Number
19974
19975
19976
19977
19978
19979
19980
19981
19982
Quantified
Amount
45.00
0.48
40.00
11.00
45.00
33.00
56.00
54.00
100.00
Minimum
Level
Units
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
B-85
-------
Wet Weight Concentrations of Pollutants in Septage
¦ pollutant=ARSENIC
EPA
Sample
Quantified
Minimum
Number
Amount
Level
Units-
19974
•
20.000
UG/L
19975
•
20.000
UG/L
19976
«
20.000
UG/L
19977
•
20.000
UG/L
19978
•
20.000
UG/L
19979
•
20.000
UG/L
19980
•
20.000
UG/L
19981
•
20.000
UG/L
19982
•
20.000
UG/L
Pollutant=BENZENE
EPA
Sample
Quantified
Minimum
Number
AlflOllTti*
Level
Units
19974
• *
10.000
UG/L
19977
•
10.000
UG/L
19978
•
10.000
UG/L
19979
*
20.000
UG/L
19980
•
10.000
UG/L
19981
•
10.000
UG/L
19982
•
10.000
UG/L
Pollutant=BENZO(A)PYKENE
EPA
Sample Quantified Minimum
Number Amount Level
Units
19974
19975
19976
19977
19978
19979
19980
19981
19982
10.000
10.000
10.000
10.000
10.000
20.000
10.000
10.000
10.000
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
R-86
-------
Wet Weight Concentrations of Pollutants in Septage
p0llutant=BERYLLIUM — -
EPA
Sample
Number
19974
19975
19976
19977
19978
19979
19980
19981
19982
Quantified
Amount
Minimum
Level
Units
5.000
UG/L
5.000
UG/L
5.000
UG/L
5.000
UG/L
5.000
UG/L
5.000
UG/L
5.000
UG/L
5.000
UG/L
5.000
UG/L
¦ Pollutant=BIS (2-ETHYLHEXYL) PHTHALATE
EPA
Sample
Quantified *
Minimum
Number
Amount
Level
Units
19974
10.000
UG/L
19975
•
10.000
UG/L
19976
•
10.000
UG/L
19977
•
10.000
UG/L
19978
•
10.000
UG/L
19979
•
20.000
UG/L
19980
•
10.000
UG/L
19981
•
10.000
UG/L
19982
•
10.000
UG/L
Pollutant=CADMIUM
EPA
Sample
Number
19974
19975
19976
19977
19978
19979
19980
19981
19982
Quantified
Amount
9.40
6
18
40
40
Minimum
Level
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
Units
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
B-87
-------
Wet Weight Concentrations of Pollutants in Septage
—«— Pollutant=CHROMIUM
EPA
Sample
Quantified
Minimum
Number
Amount
Level
Units
19974
53.90
UG/L
19975
•
10.000
UG/L
19976
12.10
•
UG/L
19977
32.10
•
UG/L
19978
81.60
•
UG/L
19979
128.00
•
UG/L
19980
33.50
•
UG/L
19981
50.20
•
UG/L
19982
18.70
•
UG/L
Follutant=coppER
EPA
Sample
Quantified*
Minimum
Number
Amount
Level
Units
19974
1340.00
•
UG/L
19975
77. i0
•
UG/L
19976
80.30
•
UG/L
19977
115.00
•
UG/L
19978
758.00
.
UG/L
19979
174.00
.
UG/L
19980
1850.00
.
UG/L
19981
62.00
.
UG/L
19982
69.60
•
UG/L
Pollutant=DDT, DDE,DDD(TOTAL)
EPA
Sample
Number
Quantified
Amount
1 n mu to
Level
Units
19974
19975
19976
19977
19978
19979
19980
19981
19982
0.92
2.88
0.338
0.338
0.338
0.338
0.338
0.338
0.338
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
B-S8
-------
Wet Weight Concentrations of Pollutants in Septage
Pollutant=GAMM&-CHLORDANE
EPA
Sample Quantified Minimum
Number
Amount
Level
Units
19974
•
0.113
UG/L
19975
•
0.113
UG/L
19976
•
0.113
UG/L
19977
•
0.113
UG/L
19978
*
0.113
UG/L
19979
•
0.207
UG/L
19980
•
0.113
UG/L
19981
. t
0.113
UG/L
19982
. r
0.113
UG/L
Pol lutant=HEPTACHLOR
EPA
Sample Quantified * Minimum
Number
Amount
Level
Units
19974
0.25
9
UG/L
19975
•
0.063
UG/L
19976
0.063
UG/L
19977
•
0.063
UG/L
19978
•
0.063
UG/L
19979
•
0.115
UG/L
19980
m
0.063
UG/L
19981
•
0.063
UG/L
19982
•
0.063
UG/L
r*-»i i /"*trr ADAQtm w\rc*
" FOX XU u^lllSiAACn Il/JKUB£XiZ£ri£
EPA
Sample
Quantified
Minimum
Number
Amount
Level
Units
19974
•
10.000
UG/L
19975
•
10.000
, UG/L
19976
•
10.000
UG/L
19977
10.000
UG/L
19978
•
10.000
UG/L
19979
20.000
UG/L
19980
•
10.000
UG/L
19981
•
10.000
UG/L
19982
0
10.000
UG/L
B-89
-------
Wet Weight Concentrations of Pollutants in Septage
Pollutant=HEXACHLOROBUTADIENE .
EPA
Sample
Quantified
Minimum
Number
Amount
Level
Units
19974
•
10.000
UG/L
19975
«
10.000
UG/L
19976
•
10.000
UG/L
19977
•
10.000
UG/L
19978
10.000
UG/L
19979
20.000
UG/L
19980
•
10.000
UG/L
19981
•
10.000
UG/L
19982
• :
10.000
UG/L
Pollutant=LEAD
SPA
Sample
Number
Quantified
Amount
Minimum
Level
Units
19974
19975
2Q976
-2977
19978
"•Q979
1V980
19981
19982
121.00
70
79
30
30
50.000
50.000
50.000
50.000
50.000
50.000
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
Pol lut ant=LINDANE ( GAMMA-BHC)
J3PA
Sample
Number
19974
19975
19976
19977
19978
19979
19980
19981
19982
Quantified
Amount
13
25
Minimum
Level
0.138
0.138
0.138
•
0.138
0.253
0.138
0.138
Units
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
B-90
-------
Wet Weight Concentrations of Pollutants, in Septage
=MERCORY
EPA
Sample
Quantified
Number
Amount
Level
Units
19974
•
0.200
UG/L
19975
•
0.200
UG/L
19976
•
0.200
UG/L
19977
0.30
UG/L
19978
•
0.200
U<3/L
19979
1.30
•
UG/L
19980
0.45
• -
UG/L
19981
0.50
• ^
UG/L
19982
4.05
.
UG/L
—————
Pollutant=MOLYBDENUM —
EPA
Sample
Quantified '
Minimum
Number
Amount
Level
Units
19974
14.40
•
UG/L
19975
•
10.000
UG/L
19976
10.000
UG/L
19977
•
10.000
UG/L
19978
*
10.000
UG/L
19979
*
10.000
UG/L
19980
•
10.000
UG/L
19981
m
10.000
UG/L
19982
¦
10.000
UG/L
Pollutant=N-NITRQSODIMETHYLAMINE
EPA
Sample
Quantified
Minimum
Number
Amount
Level
Units
19974
•
50.000
UG/L
19975
*
50.000
UG/L
19976
•
50.000
UG/L
19977
•
50.000
UG/L
19978
•
50.000
UG/L
19979
•
100.000
UG/L
19980
•
50.000
UG/L
19981
*
50.000
UG/L
19982
.
50.000
UG/L
B-91
-------
Wet Weight Concentrations of Pollutants in Septage
PollUtailt=NICKEL
EPA
Sample
Quantified
Mxnomum
Number
Amount
Level
Units
19974
•
40.000
UG/L
19975
•
40.000
UG/L
19976
•
40.000
UG/L
19977
79.80
•
UG/L
19978
61.80
.
UG/L
19979
105.00
•
UG/L
19980
41.90
.
UG/L
19981
.
40.000
UG/L
19982
41.60
.
UG/L
Pollutant=NITRATE+NITRITE (AS N)
EPA
Sample Quantified, Minimum
Number Amount Level Units
19974
19975
19976
19977
19978
19979
19980
19981
19982
0.20
m
0.90
0.20
0.60
0.60
0.60
0.20
MG/L
0•100 MG/L
0.100 MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
Pollutant=PCB(TOTAL)
EPA
Sample Quantified Minimum
Number Amount Level Units
19974
19975
19976
19977
19978
19979
19980
19981
19982
1,
1.
1.
1.
1.
3,
1.
1.
1.
750
750
750
750
750
218
750
750
750
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
B-92
-------
Wet Weight Concentrations of Pollutants in Septage
Pollutant=SELENIUM
SPA
Sample Quantified Minimum
Number
Amount
Level
Units
19974
•
50.000
UG/L
19975
•
5.000
UG/L
19976
•
5.000
UG/L
19977
•
5.000
UG/L
19978
•
5.000
UG/L
19979
30.50
•
UG/L
19980
•
5.000
UG/L
19981
•
50.000
UG/L
19982
32.00
•
UG/L
Pollutant=TOTAL KJELDAHL NITROGEN
EPA
Sample
Quantified *
Minimum
Number
Amount
Level
Units
19974
142.00
•
MG/L
19975
9.00
•
MG/L
19976
55.00
•
MG/L
19977
31.00
•
MG/L
19978
70.00
•
MG/L
19979
119.00
•
MG/L
19980
115.00
•
MG/L
19981
175.00
•
MG/L
19982
152.00
*
MG/L
tjCTrtC TOfilSrtTTG
rOiiUwanu-ivlAJj
rnUo JrnUKU U d
EPA
Sample
Quantified
Minimum
Number
Amount
Level
Units
19974
32.00
•
MG/L
19975
1.70
•
MG/L
19976
7.00
•
MG/L
19977
25.00
•
MG/L
19978
12.00
•
MG/L
19979
48.00
•
MG/L
19980
36.00
•
MG/L
19981
46.00
•
MG/L
19982
41.00
•
MG/L
B-93
-------
Wet Weight Concentrations of Pollutants in Septage
— Pollutant=ZINC
EPA
Sample
Quantified
Minimum
Number
Amount
Level
Units
19974
5990.00
•
UG/L
19975
182.00
•
UG/L
19976
519.00
•
UG/L
19977
6210.00
•
UG/L
19978
. 1120.00
•
UG/L
19979
23800.00
•
UG/L
19980
3810.00
•
UG/L
19981
2850.00
* ,
UG/L
19982
3190.0.0
•
UG/L
*
B-95
-------
Wet Weight Concentrations of Pollutants in Septage
Pollutant=TOTAL SOLIDS
EPA
Sample
Quantified
Minimum
Number
Amount
Level
Units
19974
4880.00
•
MG/L
19975
733.00
•
MG/L
19976
653.00
•
MG/L
19977
142000.00
•
MG/L
19978
2310^00
•
MG/L
19979
18500.00
•
MG/L
19980
11300.00
•
MG/L
19981
6580.00
•
MG/L
19982
11700.0.0
•
MG/L
Pollutant=TOXAPHENE
EPA
Sample
Quantified*
Minimum
Number
Amount
Level
Units
19974
•
11.375
UG/L
19975
•
11.375
UG/L
19976
•
0.910
UG/L
19977
•
11.375
UG/L
19978
•
11.375
UG/L
19979
•
20.920
UG/L
19980
•
11.375
UG/L
19981
•
11.735
UG/L
19982
•
11.375
UG/L
Pol lut ant=TRI CHLQROETHENE
EPA
Sample
Quantified
Minimum
Number
Amount
Level
Units
19974
•
10.000
UG/L
19977
•
10.000
UG/L
19978
•
10.000
UG/L
19979
•
20.000
UG/L
19980
•
10.000
UG/L
19981
•
10.000
UG/L
19982
•
10.000
UG/L
B-94
-------
APPENDIX C
Plant Uptake Tables
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
TABLE C-l UPTAKE OF ARSENIC BY FORAGE C-l
TABLE C-2 UPTAKE OF ARSENIC BY GARDEN FRUIT C-2
TABLE C-3 UPTAKE OF ARSENIC BY GRAINS AND CEREALS C-3
TABLE C-4 UPTAKE OF ARSENIC BY LEAFY VEGETABLES C-4
TABLE C-5 UPTAKE OF ARSENIC BY LEGUMES C-5
TABLE C-6 UPTAKE OF ARSENIC BY POTATOES C-6
TABLE C-7 UPTAKE OF ARSENIC BY ROOTS C-7
TABLE C-8 UPTAKE OF ARSENIC BY SWEET CORN .C-8
TABLE C-9 UPTAKE OF CADMIUM BY FORAGE C-9
«
TABLE C-10 UPTAKE OF CADMIUM BY GARDEN FRUITS C-12
TABLE C-ll UPTAKE OF CADMIUM BY GRAINS/CEREALS C-14
TABLE C-12 UPTAKE OF CADMIUM BY LEAFY VEGETABLES C-16
TABLE C-13 UPTAKE OF CADMIUM BY LEGUMES C-22
TABLE C-14 UPTAKE OF CADMIUM BY POTATOES i C-24
TABLE C-1S UPTAKE OF CADMIUM BY ROOTS C-26
TABLE C-16 UPTAKE OF CADMIUM BY SWEET CORN C-29
TABLE C-17 UPTAKE OF COPPER BY FORAGE C-30
TABLE C-18 UPTAKE OF COPPER BY GARDEN FRUITS C-34
TABLE C-19 UPTAKE OF COPPER BY GRAINS/CEREALS C-36
TABLE C-20 UPTAKE OF COPPER BY LEAFY VEGETABLES C-38
TABLE C-21 UPTAKE OF COPPER BY LEGUMES C-42
TABLE C-22 UPTAKE OF COPPER BY POTATOES C-44
I
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS (cont.)
Page
TABLE C-23 UPTAKE OF COPPER BY ROOTS C-45
TABLE C-24 UPTAKE OF COPPER BY SWEET CORN C-47
TABLE C-25 UPTAKE OF LEAD BY FORAGE C-48
TABLE C-26 UPTAKE OF LEAD BY GARDEN FRUITS C-49
TABLE C-27 UPTAKE OF LEAD BY GRAINS/CEREALS C-51
TABLE C-28 UPTAKE OF LEAD BY LEAFY VEGETABLES C-53
TABLE C-29 UPTAKE OF LEAD BY LEGUMES C-56
TABLE C-30 UPTAKE OF LEAD BY POTATOES C-57
TABLE C-31 UPTAKE OF LEAD BY ^OOTS C-58
TABLE C-32 UPTAKE OF LEAD BY SWEET CORN C-60
TABLE C-33 UPTAKE OF MERCURY BY GARDEN FRUITS C-61
TABLE C-34 UPTAKE OF MERCURY BY GRAINS/CEREALS C-62
TABLE C-3S UPTAKE OF MERCURY BY LEAFY VEGETABLES C-63
TABLE C-36 UPTAKE OF MERCURY BY LEGUMES C-64
TABLE C-37 UPTAKE OF MERCURY BY POTATOES . C-65
TABLE C-38 UPTAKE OF MERCURY BY ROOTS C-66
TABLE C-39 UPTAKE OF MOLYBDENUM BY FORAGE C-67
TABLE C-40 UPTAKE OF MOLYBDENUM BY GRAINS/CEREALS C-70
TABLE C-41 UPTAKE OF MOLYBDENUM BY LEGUMES C-72
TABLE C-42 UPTAKE OF NICKEL BY FORAGE C-73
TABLE G-43 UPTAKE OF NICKEL BY GARDEN FRUITS C-75
TABLE C-44 UPTAKE OF NICKEL BY GRAINS/CEREALS C-77
II
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS (cont.)
Page
TABLE C-45 UPTAKE OF NICKEL BY LEAFY VEGETABLES C-78
TABLE C-46 UPTAKE OF NICKEL BY LEGUMES C-82
TABLE C-47 UPTAKE OF NICKEL BY POTATOES C-84
TABLE C-48 UPTAKE OF NICKEL BY ROOTS . . C-86
TABLE C-49 UPTAKE OF NICKEL BY SWEET CORN C-89
TABLE C-SO UPTAKE OF SELENIUM BY FORAGE C-90
TABLE C-Sl UPTAKE OF SELENIUM BY GARDEN FRUITS C-91
TABLE C-S2 UPTAKE OF SELENIUM BY GRAINS/CEREALS C-92
TABLE C-53 UPTAKE OF SELENIUM BY LEAFY VEGETABLES C-93
TABLE C-S4 UPTAKE OF SELENIUM BY LEGUMES C-94
TABLE C-55 UPTAKE OF SELENIUM BY POTATOES C-95
TABLE C-56 UPTAKE OF SELENIUM BY ROOTS C-96
TABLE C-S7 UPTAKE OF ZINC BY FORAGE C-97
TABLE C-S8 UPTAKE OF ZINC BY GARDEN FRUITS C-102
TABLE C-59 UPTAKE OF ZINC BY GRAINS/CEREALS C-104
TABLE C-60 UPTAKE OF ZINC BY LEAFY VEGETABLES C-106
TABLE C-61 UPTAKE OF ZINC BY LEGUMES C-110
TABLE C-62 UPTAKE OF ZINC BY POTATOES C-112
TABLE C-63 UPTAKE OF ZINC BY ROOTS C-113
TABLE C-64 UPTAKE OF ZINC BY SWEET CORN C-115
in
-------
TABLE C-1
UPTAKE OF ARSENIC BY FORAGE
Study
Chemical
Application
tissue -
Uptake
Type
Plant/
Form
Soli
Rates
Concentration
Slope
Reference/
(1)
Tissue
Applied
PH
(kg/ha)
ftig/g DW)
(2)
Comments
A
Natural Forage
Sludge
N.R.
0
<0.25
0.001
Baxter eta!., 1983
3.03
<0.25
•
A
Rape
Sludge
N.R.(3)
0
0.37
0.9
Anderson & Nilsson,
0.4
0.73
1972, p.176
C-t
-------
TABLE C-2
UPTAKE OF ARSENIC BY GARDEN FRUITS
study
Type
(1)
Plant/
Tissue
Chemical
Form
Applied
soli
PH
Application
Rates
(kg/ha)
Tissue
Concentration
(PO'QDW)
Uptake
Slope
(2)
Reference/
Comments
C
Tomato/Fruit
Lead arsenate
7.5
CM
0.1
0.1
0.001
BMngetai, 1978, p.96.
C
Broccoli/Fruit
Arsenic acid
N.R.
200
0.4
0.002
PytosA Wootson, 1982.
No control data given for
soB or plant tissue.
Slope calculated without
controls.
c
Tomato/Fruit
Arsenic acid
N.R.
200
0.11
0.001
Pyias £ Woolson, 1982.
No control data given for
soi or plant tissue.
Slope calculated without
controls.
c
Pea/Grain
Arsenic
N.R.
0
30(3
0.01
0.18
0.001
Walsh at at, 1977.
c
Pea/Pod
Arsenic
N.R.
0
300
0.05
0.88
0.003
Walsh et at, 1977.
C-2
-------
TABLE C-3
UPTAKE OF ARSENIC BY GRAINS AND CEREALS
Study
Chemical
Application
Tissue
Uptake
Type
Plant/
Form
Soli
Rates
Concentration
Slope
Referencef
W
Tissue
Applied
PH
(kg/ha)
(pg/g DW)
(2)
Comments
C
Miltet
Lead arsenate
7.5
6.2
0.2
0.013
ElMng et al„ 1978, p.96.
62
0.9
C-3
-------
TABLE C-4
UPTAKE OF ARSENIC BY LEAFY VEGETABLES
Study
Type
(1)
Plant/
Tissue
Chemical
Form
Applied
soli
pH
Application
Rates
(kg/ha)
Tissue
Concentration
(lig/g DW)
Uptake
Slope
12)
Reference/
Comments
A
Swiss Chard
Sludge _
5.5
0
1.47
0.16,
0.66
0.340
Furretal, 1976, p. 87.
A
Swiss Chard
Sludge
6.5
0
1.47
0.63
0.16
0.001
Furretal., 1976, p. 87.
C
Swiss Chard
Lead arsenate
N.R.
18.8
107.2
0,001
0.37
0.004
Chlsholm, 1972, p. 586.
C
Cabbage
Lead arsenate
7.5
6.2
62
0.1
0.1
0.001
BMng el a!., 1978, p.96.
C
Cabbage
Arsenic acid
N.R.
200
*
<0.01
0.001
Py/es & Woolson, 1982.
No control data given for
soB or plant tissue.
Slope calculated without
controls.
C
Swiss Chard
Arsenic acid
N.R.
200
1
0.005
PylesS, Woolson, 1982.
No control data given for
soB or plant tissue.
Slope calculated without
controls.
C
Lettuce
Arsenic acid
N.R.
200
0.55
0.003
Pyles S Woolson, 1982.
No control data given for
soB or plant tissue.
Slope calculated without
controls.
C-4
-------
TABLE C-5
UPTAKE OF ARSENIC BY LEGUMES
Study
Typo
W
Plant/
Tissue
Chemical
Form
Applied
Soil
PH
Application
Rates
(kg/ha)
Tissue
Concentration
(pg/g DW)
Uptake
Slope
(2)
Reference/
Comments
c
Green Bean/
Grain
Lead arsenate
N.R.
49
245
0.05
0.22
0.001
Chisholm, 1972, p. 586.
c
Green Bean/
Grain
Lead arsenate
N.R.
49
245
0.08
0.17
. 0.001
Chisholm, 1972, p. 586.
c
Green Bean/
Grain
Lead arsenate
N.R.
18.8
107.2
0.001
0.06
0.001
Chisholm, 1972, p. 586.
c
Bush Bean/
Grain
Lead arsenate
7.5
6.2
62
0.1
0.1
0.001
Bfving et al., 1978, p.96.
c
Green Bean/
Grain
Arsenic acid
N.R.
200
t
0.14
0.001
Pyles & Woolson, 1982.
No control data given for
soil or plant tissue.
Slopa calculated without
controls.
c
Bean/Grain
Arsenic
N.R.
0
300
0.01
0.07
0.001
Walsh etal, 1977.
c
Bean/Pod
Arsenic
N.R.
0
300
0.27
0.79
0.002
Walsh etal, 1977.
C-5
-------
TABLE C-6
UPTAKE OF ARSENIC BY POTATOES
Study
Type
(1)
Plant/
Tissue
Chemical
Form
Applied
Soil
pH
Application
Rates
(kg/ha)
Tissue
Concentration
(MO'fl DW)
Uptake
Slope
(2)
Reference/
Comments
c
Potato/Tuber
Lead arsenate
N.R.
48
245
0.05
0.11
0.001
Chlsholm, 1972, p. 586.
c
Potato/Peel
Lead arsenate
N.R.
49
245
0.08
0.56
0.002
Chlsholm, 1972, p. 586.
c
Potato/Tuber
Lead arsenate
N.R.
18.8
107.2
0.001
. 0.09
0.001
Chisholm, 1972, p. 586.
. c
Potato/Peel
Lead arsenate
N.R.
18.8
107.2
0.001
1.1
0.012
Chlsholm, 1972, p. 586.
c
Potato/Tuber
Lead arsenate
7.5
6.2
62
0.1
0.1
0.001
ElMng at a/., 1978, p.96.
c
Potato/Tuber
Arsenic acid
N.R.
200
t
1.19
0.006
PytBS & Woolson, 1982.
No control data grven for
soil or plant tissue.
Slope calculated without
controls.
c
Potato/Tuber
Sodium arsenate
5.5
0
45
SO
180
720
0.1
0.1
0.002
0.002
0.005
0.001
Stevens etal, 1972.
Soil treated with
Fe($0(4))(3).
c
Potato/Tuber
Sodium arsenate
5.5
0
45
90
180
720
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.4
0.006
0.001
Stevens et al, 1972.
Soil treated with
Al(2) (SO (4)) (3).
C-6
-------
TABLE C-7
UPTAKE OF ARSENIC BY ROOTS
Study
Type
0)
Plant/
Tissue
Chemical
Form
Applied
Soil
PH
Application
Rates
(kg/ha)
Tissue
Concentration
(MO/0 DW)
Uptake
Slope
(2)
Reference/
Comments
C
Carrot/Tuber
Lead arsenate
N.R.
49
245
0.05
0.27
0.001
Chisholm, 1972, p. 586.
c
Carrot/Tuber
Lead arsenate
N.R.
18.8
107.2
0.001
0.26
0.003
Chisholm, 1972, p. 586.
c
Tumipnuber
Lead arsenate
N.R.
18.8
107.2
0.001
0.1
0.001
Chisholm, 1972, p. 586.
c
Tumip/Peel
Lead arsenate
N.R.-
18.8
107.2
0.001
1.08
0.012
Chisholm, 1972, p. 586.
c
Carrot/Tuber
Lead arsenate
7.5
6.2
62
0.1
0.9
0.014
Elfving et al„ 1978, p.96.
c
Onions/Butt)
Lead arsenate
7.5
6.2
* 62
0.1
0.4
0.005
ElMngetal., 1978, p.96.
c
Beet/Tuber
Arsenic acid
N.R.
200
0.86
0.004
Pyles & Woolson, 1982.
No control data given for
soil or plant tissue.
Slope calculated without
controls.
-------
TABLE C-a
UPTAKE OF ARSENIC BY SWEET CORN
Study
Type
(1)
Plant/
Tissue
Chemical
Form
Applied
Soil
pH
Application
Rates
(kg/ha)
Tissue
Concentration
(Pfl/flDW)
Uptake
Slope
(2)
Reference/
Comments
C
Com/Grain
Lead arsenate
N.R.
49
245
0.05
0.07
0.001
Chisholm, 1972, p. 586.
C
Com/Grain
Lead arsenate
N.R.
18.8
107.2
0.001
0.04
0.001
Chisholm, 1972, p. S86.
c
Sweet Corn/
Grain
Arsenic acid
N.R.
200
<0.01
0.001
Pyles & Woolson, 1982.
No contmi data given for
sot or plant tissue.
Slope calculated without
controls.
c-e
-------
TABLE C-9
UPTAKE OF CADMIUM BY FORAGE
Study
Chemical
Application
Tissue
Uptake
Type Plant/
Form
Soli
Rates
Concentration
Slope
Reference/
(1) Tissue
Applied
PH
(kg/ha)
(pg/g DW)
(2)
Comments
A Natural Forage
Sludge
N.R.
0.78
0.11
1.702
Baxter et at., 1983
1.35
1.08
Means reported
A Pea/Vine
Sludge
5.3
0
0.02
0.049
Dowdy & Larson,
0.83
0.13
1975.
1.66
0.16
3.32
0.2
A Com/Leaf
Sludge
5.3
0.000
0.026
0.339
Dowdy & Larson,
0.830
0.027
1975.
1.660
0.61
3.320
1.32
A Com/Forage
Sludge
5.4
0
1
1.330
Giordano, Mortvedt,
0.008
2.3
Mays, 1975, p. 394.
1.6
3.3
1972 data used.
. 3.2
5.3
A Com
Sludge
5.4
0
1
0.255
Giordano, Mortvedt,
2.5
3.7
Mays, 1975, p. 394.
5
3.5
1972 data used.
10
4.1
A Bean/Vine
Compost
5.4
0
0.5
0.001
Giordano, Mortvedt,
0.8
0.5
Mays, 1975, p. 394.
1.6
0.5
1972 data used.
3.2
0.5
A Bean/Vine
Compost
5.4
0
0.5
0.059
Giordano, Mortvedt,
2.5
1.1
Mays, 1975, p. 394.
5
1.2
1972 data used.
10
1.2
A Com
Compost
5.4
0
1.1
0.688
Giordano, Mortvedt,
1.6
3
Mays, 1975, p. 394.
3.2
3.9
1973 data used.
6.4
5.7
A Com
Sludge
5.4
0
1.1
0.299
Giordano, Mortvedt,
5
5.9
Mays, 1975, p. 394.
10
6.6
1973 data used.
20
7.9
A Bean/Vine
Compost
5.4
0
0.3
0.130
Giordano, Mortvedt,
1.6
0.4
Mays, 1975, p. 394.
3.2
0.4
1973 data used.
6.4
0.4
C-9
-------
TABLE C-9 (cont.)
UPTAKE OF CADMIUM BY FORAGE (cont.)
Study
Chemical
Application
Tissue
Uptake
Type
Plant/
Form
Soil
Rates
Concentration
Slope
Referencef
(1)
Tissue
Applied
PH
(kg/ha)
(MO'ODWJ
(2)
Comments
A
Bean/Vine
Siudge
5.4
0
0.3
0.042
Giordano. Mortvedt,
5
1.1
Mays, 1975, p. 394.
10
1.1
1973 data used.
20
1.3
A
Corn/Leaf
Sludge
5.2-5.6
0
0.83
2.510
Pepper etal, 1983,
Limed
0.75
3.68
p. 272
1.5
6.73
Sultan-corn type.
3
8.45
A
Com/Leaf
Sludge
4.5-4.6
0
1.01
2.276
Pepper etal, 1983,
Limed
0.75
5.11
p. 272
1.5
7.45
Sultan-corn type.
3
8.3
A
Com/Leaf
Sludge
5.1-5.6
«
0
0.2
1.651
Pepper et el, 1983,
Limed
0.75
0.66
p. 272.
1.5
2.08
Puyallup-com type.
.
3
4.96
A
Com/Leaf
Sludge
4.4-4.6
0
0.2
0.926
Pepper etal, 1983,
Unlimed
0.75
1.2
p. 272.
1.5
1.5
Puyallup-com type.
3
3.09
A
Com
Sludge
7.0
0
0.05
0.077
Heffron et al, 1980,
21.56
1.7
p. 59.
A
Com
Sludge
5.4
0
0.29
0.142
Telford etal, 1982.
25.3
3.88
A
Com/Grain
Sludge
5.9-6.0
0
0.01
0.001
Rapppaport et al,
0.9
0.01
1987. 1984 data used.
1.8
0.01
A
Com
Sludge
5.9-6.0
0
0.03
0.022
Rapppaport et al.
0.9
0.13
1987. 1984 data used.
:
1.8
0.07
A
Barley
.Sludge
5.9-6.0
0
0.12
0.110
Rapppaport et al.
0.9
0.13
1987.1984 data used.
1.8
0.14
A
Sweet Com/
Sludge
6.5
0
0.28
0.139
Hemphill et al, 1982.
Leaf
1.5
0.49
Portland sludge
A
Sweet Com/
Sludge
6.5
0
0.28
0.001
Hemphill et al, 1982.
Leaf
1.5
0.22
Rockcreek sludge.
C-10
-------
TABLE C-9 (coiit.)
UPTAKE OF CADMIUM BY FORAGE (cont.)
Study
Type
Plant/
Tissue
Chemical
Form
Applied
Solt
PH
Application
Rates
(kg/ha)
Tissue
Concentration
(pg/gDW)
Uptake
Slope
(2)
Reference/
Comments
A
Sweet Com/
Leaf
Sludge
6.5
0
0.21
0.28 ,
0.24
0.001
Hemphill et at, 1982.
Salem sludge.
A
Ryegrass
Liquid sludge
6.5
0.6
4.52
0.11
0.3
0.048
¦Carlton Smith, 1988.
Means of S years used.
Sandy loam.
A
Ryegrass
Bed-dried
Sludge
6.5
0.6
12.57
0.11
0.28
0.014
Carlton Smith. 1988.
Means of 4 years used.
Sandy loam.
A
Ryegrass
Liquid sludge
6.7
1.4
6.7
0.19
0.48
0.055
Carlton Smith, 1988.
Means of 5 years used.
Clay.
A
Ryegrass
Bed-dried
Sludge
6.7
*1.4
15.12
0.17
0.48
0.023
Carlton Smith, 1988.
Means of 4 years used.
Clay.
A
Ryegrass
Liquid sludge
8.0
1.44
5.86
0.04
0.13
0.020
Carlton Smith, 1988.
Means of 5 years used.
Calcareous loam.
A
Ryegrass
Bed-dried
Sludge
8.0
1.5
22.12
0.05
0.35
0.015
Carlton Smith, 1988.
Means of 4 years used.
Calcareous loam.
A
Bariey/l_eaf
Sludge
6.2-6.4
0
23
0.67
0.76
0.004
Sommers et al, 1991.
Ohio data used.
C-11
-------
TABLE C-10
UPTAKE OF CADMIUM BY GARDEN FRUITS
Study
Type
(1)
Plant/
Tissue
Chemical
Form
Applied
Soil
PH
Application
Rates
(kg/ha)
Tissue
Concentration
(pg/fl DW)
Uptake
Slope
(2)
Reference/
Comments
A
Cantaloupe/
Fruit
Sludge
4.6-6.0
0
11
18
25
0.636
Giordano et al., 1979
Year 3 (1977)
No heat, no lime
A
Broccoli/
Fruit
Sludge
4.7-6,2
0
11
0.27
0.89
0.056
Giordano et al., 1979
Year 2 (1976)
No heat
A
Eggplant/
Fruit
Sludge
4.7-6,2
0
11
0.54
1.64
0.100
Giordano et al., 1979
Year 2 (1976)
No heat
A
Tomato/
Fruit
Sludge
4.7-6.2
0
11
0.52
1.04
0.047
Giordano et al., 1979
Year 2 (1976)
No heat
A
Pepper/
Fruit
Sludge
4,7-6.2
e
28
0.364
Giordano et al., 1979
Year 3 (1977)
No heat, no lime
A
Squash/
Fruit
Sludge
5.1-6.0
0
11
0.15
0.27
0.011
Giordano et al, 1979
Year 1(1979)
No heat. Yellow
Crookneck squash
A
Pepper/
Fruit
Sludge
5.1-6.0
0
11
0.3
1.3
0.081
Giordano et a/., 1979
Year 1 (1979)
No heat. California
Wonder Variety
A
Pea/Grain
Sludge
5.3
. 0
0.83
1.66
3.32
0.03
0.04
0.04
0.04
0.002
Dowdy & Larson,
1975.
A
Tomato/Fruit
Sludge
5.3
0
0.83
1.66
3.32
0.08
0.2
0.33
0.33
0.074
Dowdy & Larson,
1975.
A
Pea/Pod
Sludge
5.3
0.000
0.830
1.660
3.320
0.020
0.080
0.080
0.060
0.008
Dowdy & Larson,
1975.
A
Tomato/Fruit
Sludge
6.6
0
0.7
1.4
0.39
0.55
0.5
0.079
Keeferetal, 1986.
Blue Plains sludge.
Early huffing.
C-12
-------
TABLE C-10 (cont)
UPTAKE OF CADMIUM BY GARDEN FRUITS (cont.)
Shidy
Chemical
Application
Tissue
Uptake
Type Plant/
Form
Soil
Rates
Concentration
Slope
Reference/
(1) Tissue
Applied
PH
(kg/ha)
flifl/g DW)
(2)
Comments
A Tomato/Fruit
Sludge
6.6
0
0.32
0.057
Keefer et at, 1986.
0.7
0.4
Blue Plains sludge.
1.4
0.4
Late fruiting.
A Tomato/Fruit
Sludge
7.1
0
0.39
0.018
Keefer et at, 1986.
3.1
0.75
Huntington sludge.
6.2
0.5
Earty fruiting.
A Tomato/Fruit
Sludge
7.1
0
0.32
0.029
Keefer et at, 1986.
3.1
0.4
Huntington sludge.
6.2
0.5
Late fruiting.
A Tomato/Fruit
Sludge
6.9
0
0.39
0.114
Keefer et at, 1986.
0.7
0.4
Martinsburg sludge.
. 1-4
0.55
Early fruiting.
A Tomato/Fruit
Sludge
6.9
0
0.32
0.079
Keefer et at, 1986.
0.7
0.45
Martinsburg sludge.
1.4
0.43
Late fruiting.
A Tomato/Fruit
Sludge
6.3
0
0.39
0.325
Keefer et el, 1986.
0.4
0.45
Parkersburg sludge.
0.8
0.65
A Tomato/Fruit
Sludge
6.3
0
0.32
0.001
Keefer et al, 1986.
0.4
0.43
Parkersburg sludge.
0.8
0.26
A Tomato/Fruit
Sludge
N.R.
0
0.9
0.053
Lue-Hing et al, 1984.
4
1.3
1977 data used.
8
1.5
Nu-Earth.
16
1.9
20
2
C-13
-------
TABLE C-11
UPTAKE OF CADMIUM BY GRAINS/CEREALS
Study
Type
(D
Plant/
Tissue
Chemical
Form
Applied
Soil
pH
Application
Rates
(kg/ha)
Tissue
Concentration
(|ig/0 DW)
Uptake
Slope
(2)
Reference/
Comments
A
Wheat/Grain
Sludge
N,R.(3)
0
1.5
6
0.066
0.159
0.19
0.017
Sabey & Hart, 1975.
A
Corn/Grain
Sludge
4.9-6.5
0
38.6
0.010
0.170
0.004
Lisketal, 1982.
A
Com/Grain
Sludge
5.2-5.6
0
0.75
1.5
3
0.27
0.41
0.6
0.41
0.045
Pepper et al, 1983,
p. 272
Sultan-com type.
A
Com/Grain
Sludge
4.5-4.6
0
0.75
1.5
3
0.29
0.5
0.5
0.61
0.094
Pepper etal, 1983,
p. 272
Sultan-com type.
A
Com/Grain
Sludge
5.1-5.6
0
0.75
1.5
3
0.12
0.27
0.43
0.64
0.173
Pepper etal, 1983,
p. 272.
PuyaUup-com type.
A
Corn/Grain
Sludge
4.4-4.6
0
0.75
1.5
3
0.16
0.2
0.39
0.37
0.076
Pepper etal, 1983,
p. 272.
PuyaUup-com type.
A
Com/Earleaf
Sludge
5.9-6.0
0
0.9
1.8
0.07
0.07
0.06
0.001
Rapppaport et at, 1987.
1984 data used.
A
Wheat/Grain
Liquid sludge
6.5
0.6
4.52
0.13
0.29
0.041
Carlton Smith, 1988.
Means of 5 years used.
Sandy loam.
A
Wheat/Grain
Bed-dried
Sludge
6.5
0.6
12.57
0.14
0.33
0.016
Cartton Smith, 1988.
Means of 4 years used.
Sandy loam.
A
Wheat/Grain
Liquid sludge
6.7
1.4
6.7
0.26
0.52
0.049
Carlton Smith, 1988.
Means of 5 years used.
Clay.
A
Wheat/Grain
Bed-dried
Sludge
6.7
1.4
15.12
0.26
0.55
0.021
Carlton Smith, 1988.
Means of 4 years usfid.
Clay.
C-14
-------
TABLE C-11 (cont.)
UPTAKE OF CADMIUM BY GRAINS/CEREALS (cont.)
Study Chemical Application ISiue Uptake
Type Plant/ Form Soli Rates Concentration Slope Reference/
I (1) Tissue Applied pH
-------
TABLE C-12
UPTAKE OF CADMIUM BY LEAFY VEGETABLES
Study
Type
(D
Plant/
Tissue
Chemical
Form
Applied
Soil
PH
Application
Rates
Tissue
Concentration
(PO'0 DW)
Uptake
Slope
(2)
Reference/
Comments
A
Kale
Sludge
8.4
5.49
1.669
0,304
Giordano & Mays, 1977
Year 1
Decatur sludge
A
Kale
Sludge
8.4
3.92
0.004
0.001
Giordano & Mays, 1977
Year 1
Tusoumbla sludge
A
Lettuce
Sludge
8.4
5.49
7.576
1.380
Giordano & Mays, 1977
Yearl
Decatursludge
A
Lettuce
Sludge
8.4
3.92
2.391
0.610
Giordano & Mays, 1977
Yearl
Tuscumbia sludge
A
Spinach
Sludge
8.4
§.49
1.801
0.328
Giordano & Mays, 1977
Yearl
Decatursludge
A
Spinach
- Sludge
8.4
3.92
0.004
0.001
Giordano & Mays, 1977
Yearl
Tuscumbia sludge
A
Lettuce
Sludge
8.4
5.49
5.929
1.080
Giordano & Mays, 1977
Yearl
Decatursludge
A
Lettuce
Sludge
8.4
3.92
1.439
0.367
Giordano & Mays, 1977
Yearl
Tuscumbia sludge
A
Lettuce
Sludge
5.6
1.26
0,5544
0.440
Schauereta, 1980
Yearl
Warwick sludge
A
Lettuce
Sludge
5.6
1.26
2.457
1.850
Schauereta, 1980
Yearl
Warwick sludge
A
Swiss Chard
Sludge
5.7
0.84
1.000
1.190
Chaneyetal., 197Bb
Backriver sludge
A
Swiss Chard
.. Sludge
5.6
2.24
2.200
0.982
Chaneyetal., 1978b
Blue Plains slu dge
A
Swiss Chard
Digconrepost
6.6
1.5
0.900
0.600
Chaneyetal., 1978b
A
Swiss Chard
Dried DC
5.5
3.3
23.298
7.060
Chaneyetal, 1978c
C-16
-------
TABLE C-12 (cont.)
UPTAKE OF CADMIUM BY LEAFY VEGETABLES (cont.)
Study
Type
(V
Plant/
Tissue
Chemical
Form
Applied
Soil
pH
Application
Rates
(kg/ha)
Tissue
Concentration
(Mfl'fl DW)
Uptake
Slope
(2)
Reference/
Comments
A
Swiss Chard
Sludge
4.9
0.76
0.897
1.180
Chaney & Homick, 1978
CAST 1980
City 4 sludge
A
Swiss Chard
Sludge
6.0
0.78
0.095
0.122
Chaney & Homick, 1978
CAST 1980
City 4L sludge
A
Swiss Chard
Sludge
4.9
1.48
0.049
0.033
Chaney & Homick, 1978
CAST 1980
City 9 Sludge
A
Swiss Chard
Sludge
6.3
1.95
0.630
0.323
Chaney & Homick, 1978
CAST 1980
City 9L sludge
A
Swiss Chard
Sludge
5.5
*9.00
25.830
2.870
Chaney & Homick, 1978
CAST 1980
City 13 sludge
A
Swiss Chard
Sludge
6.2
6.92
2.484
0.359
Chaney & Homick, 1978
CAST 1980
City 13L sludge
A
Swiss Chard
Sludge
5.5
3.19
4.530
1.420
Chaney £ Homick, 1978
CAST 1980
City 1 sludge
A
Swiss Chard
Sludge
6.2
4.43
1.675
0.378
Chaney & Homick, 1978
CAST 1980
City 1L sludge
A
Swiss Chard
Sludge
6.6
2.47
0.785
0.318
Chaney & Homick, 1978
CAST 1980
City 1H sludge
A
Swiss Chard
Sludge
5.9
0.32
0.115
0.359
Chaney & Homick, 1978
CAST 1980
City 19H sludge
A
Swiss Chard
Sludge
6.7
12.65
1.505
0.119
Chaney & Homick, 1978
CAST 1980
City 39H sludge
A
Lettuce
Heat-Treated
Sludge
5.3-5.4
0
3
1.26
2.62
0.453
Chaney of al, 19 82
Romaino Lettuce
'1981 data
C-17
-------
TABLE C-12 (cont.)
UPTAKE OF CADMIUM BY LEAFY VEGETABLES (cont.)
Study
Type
(D
Plant/
Tissue
Chemical
Form
Applied
Soli
PH
Application
Rates
(kg/ha)
Tissue
Concentration
(Ma'g DW)
Uptake
Slope
(2)
Reference/
Comments
A
Lettuce
Heat-Treated
Sludge
6.2
0
3
0.62
0.93
0.103
Chaneyetal, 1982
Romaine Lettuce
•1981 data
A
Lettuce
Nu-Earth
5.3-5.6
0
21
1.26
30.6
1.397
Chaneyetal, 1982
Romaine Lettuce
'1981 data
A
Lettuce
Nu-Earth
6.2-6.6
0
21
0.62
6.34
0.272
Chaneyetal, 1982
Romaine Lettuce
"1981 data
A
Swiss Chard
Heat-Treated
Sludge
5.7
0
3
0.7
1.63
0.310
Chaneyetal., 1982
•1978 data
A
Swiss Chard
Heat-Treated
Sludge
6.7-6.8
*
0
3
0.33
0.98
0.217
Chaneyetal. 1982
•1978 data
A
Swiss Chard
Nu-Earth
5.7-6.3
0
21
0.7
1.63
0.044
Chaneyetal., 1982
•1978 data
A
Swiss Chard
Nu-Earth
6.7
0
21
0.33
0.98
0.031
Chaneyetal., 19 82
•1978 data
A
Cotlard Greens
Heat-Treated
Sludge
5.5-5.6
0
3
0.62
0.54
0.001
Chaneyetal., 1982
'1980 data
A
Collard Greens
Heat-Treated
Sludge
6.4-6.3
0
3
0.53
0.42
0.001
Chaneyetal., 1982
'1980 data
A
Cotlard Greens
Nu-Earth
5.5-6.3
0
21
0.62
2.86
0.107
Chaneyetal., 1982
'1980
A
Collard Greens
Nu-Earth
6.4-6.8
0
21
0.53
2.2
0.080
Chaneyetal., 1982
•1980
A
Lettuce
Sludge
4.6-6.0
0
11
1.18
8.4
0.656
Giordano et a!., 1979
Year 3 (1977)
No heat, no lime
Bibb lettuce
A
Lettuce
Sludge
4.6-6.0
0
11
0.88
2.25
0.125
Giordano et at, 1979
Year 3 (1977)
No heat, no Ume
Romaine lettuce
C-18
-------
TABLE C-12 (cont.)
UPTAKE OF CADMIUM BY LEAFY VEGETABLES (cont.)
Study
Type Plant/
(1) Tissue
Chemical
Form
Applied
Soli
pH
Application
Rates
(kg/ha)
Tissue
Concentration
(pg/g DW)
Uptake
Slope
(2)
Reference/
Comments
A Lettuce
Sludge
4.6-6.0
0
11
0.95
3.1
0.195
Giordano et al., 1979
Year 3(1977)
No heat, no lime
Boston Lettuce
A Cabbage
Sludge
4.6-6.0
0
11
0.19
0.35
0.015
Giordano et at., 1979
Year 3 (1977)
No heat, no Ime
A Lettuce
Sludge
4.7-6.2
0
11
0.86
3.56
0.245
Giordano et al., 1979
Year2 (1976)
No heat
Great Lakes Lettuce
A Lettuce
Sludge
5.1-6.0
, 0
11
0.3
10.4
0.918
Giordano et al., 1979
Year 3 (1977)
No heat, no Hme
Great Lakes Lettuce
A Lettuce
Sludge
5.8
0
0.84
0.6
1.7
1.310
Chaneyetal., 1978
Romalne Lettuce
. Backrivar sludge
A Lettuce
Sludge
8.0
0
2.24
0.6
2.5
0.848
Chaneyetal., 1978
Romalne lettuce
Blue Plains sludge
A Lettuce
Sludge
6.7
0
1.5
0.6
1.1
0.333
Chaneyetal,, 1978
Romaine lettuce
DlgCompost
A Lettuce
Sludge
5.6
0
5.04
0.6
26.4
5.119
Chaney et al,, 1978
Romalne lettuce
Mimrganite
A Lettuce
Sludge
5.5
0
3.3
0.6
11.6
3.333
Chaneyetal., 1978
Romalne lettuce
Dried DC
A Lettuce
Sludge
6.5
0
0.83
1.66
3.32
0.61
1.28
1.72
2.67
0.607
Dowdy & Larson,
1975.
A Turnip/Greens
Sludge
5.8
0
3
5.1
1.000
3.600
• 4.400
0.680
MMer & Boswel,
1979, p. 1361.
C-19
-------
TABLE C-12 (cont.)
UPTAKE OF CADMIUM BY LEAFY VEGETABLES (cont.)
Study
Chemical
Application
Tissue
Uptake
Type
Plant/
Form
Soil
Rates
Concentration
Slope
Reference/
(1>
Tissue
Applied
pH
(kg/ha)
(pg/gDW)
(2)
Comments
A
Cabbage
Sludge
6.6
0
0.08
0.014
Keeferetal, 1986.
0.7
0.12
Blue Plains sludge.
1.4
0.1
A
Cabbage
Sludge
7.1
0
0.08
0.010
Keeferetal, 1986,
3.1
0.11
Huntington sludge.
6.2
0.14
A
Cabbage
Sludge
6.9
0
0.08
0.014
Keeforet al, 1986.
0.7
0.12
Martinsburg sludge.
1.4
0.1
A
Cabbage
Sludge
6.3
0
0.08
0.138
Keeferetal, 1986,
0.4
0.14
Parkensburg sludge.
0.8
0.19
A
Lettuce
Composted
N.R.
*
0
0.5
0.664
Chang etaL, 1978
Sludge
1.6
2.2
2.9
3.1
5.7
4.4
A
Swiss Chard
Composted
N.R.
0
0.2
0.337
Chang eta!., 1978
Sludge
1.6
0.4
2.9
0.7
5.7
2.1
A
Turnip/Greens
Composted
N.R.
0
1.0
0.414
Chang et at., 1978
Sludge
1.2
1.2
2.2
2.7
4.3
2.6
A
Lettuce
Liquid sludge
6.5
0.6
0.77
0.406
Carlton Smith, 1988.
4.52
2.36
Means of 5 years used.
Sandy loam.
A
Lettuce
Bed-dried
6.5
0.6
0.73
0.129
Carlton Smith, 1988.
Sludge
12.57
2.27
Means of 4 years used.
. Sandy loam.
A
Lettuce
Liquid sludge
6.7
1.4
5.72
0.313
Carlton Smith, 1988.
6.7
7.38
Means of 5 years used.
Clay.
A
Lettuce
Bed-dried
6.7
1.4
4.65
0.079
Cartton Smith, 1988.
Sludge
15.12
5.74
Means of 4 years used.
Clay.
A
Lettuce
Liquid sludge
8.0 .
1.44
0.63
0.172
Cartton Smith, 1988.
5,86
1.39
Means of 5 years used.
Calcareous loam.
-
C-20
-------
TABLE C-12 (cont.)
UPTAKE OF CADMIUM BY LEAFY VEGETABLES (cont.)
Study
Typo
m
Plant/
Tissue
Chemical
Form
Applied
Soli
PH
Application
Rates
(kg/ha)
Tissue
Concentration
(lHj/flDW)
Uptake
Slope
(2)
Referencef
Comments
A
Lettuce
Bed-dried
Sludge
8.0
1.5
22.12
0.62
1.99
0.066
Carfton Smith, 1988.
Means of 4 years used.
Calcareous loam.
A
Cabbage
Liquid sludge
6.5
0.6
4.52
0.11
0.15
0.010
Carfton Smith, 1988.
Means of 5 years used.
Sandy loam.
A
Cabbage
Bed-dried
Sludge
6.5
0.6
12.57
0.12
0.23
0.009
Carlton Smith, 1988.
Means of 4 yearn used.
Sandy loam.
A
Cabbage
Liquid sludge
6.7
1.4
6.7
<
0.27
0.28
0.002
Carfton Smith, 1988.
Means of 5 years used.
Clay.
A
Cabbage
Bed-dried
Sludge
6.7
1.4
15.12
0.25
0.29
0.003
Carfton Smith, 1988.
Means of 4 years used.
Clay.
A
Cabbage
Liquid sludge
8.0
1.44
5.88
0.05
0,15
0.023
Carfton Smith, 1988.
Means of S years used.
Calcareous loam.
A
Cabbage
Bed-dried
Sludge
8.0
1.5
22.12
0.05
0.39
0.016
Carfton Smith, 1988.
Means of 4 years used.
Calcareous loam.
A
Spinach
Sludge
N.R.
0
4
8
16
20
5.4
11.9
18.8
16.9
14.6
0.405
Lue-HIng et al, 1984.
1977 data used.
Nu-Earth.
A
Swiss Chard
Sludge
N.R.
0
4
8
16
20
2.2
4.9
8.4
7
10.2
0.323
Lue-Hing et al, 1964.
1977 data used.
Nu-Earth.
C-21
-------
TABLE C-13
UPTAKE OF CADMIUM BY LEGUMES
Study
Chemical
Application
Tissue
Uptake
Type
Plant/
Form
Soil
Rates
Concentration
Slope
Reference/
(1)
Tissue
Applied
PH
(kfl/ha)
(|jg/g DW)
(2)
Comments
A
Bean/
Sludge
5.1-6.0
0
0.1
0.009
Giordano at at, 1979
Grain
11
0.2
Year 1 (1979)
No heat
Contender variety
A
Bean/Pod
Compost
5.4
0
0.2
0.001
Giordano, Mortvedt,
0.8
0.2
Mays, 1975, p. 394.
1.6
0.2
1972 data used.
3.2
0.1
A
Bean/Pod
Sludge
5.4
0
0.2
0.001
Giordano, Mortvedt,
2.5
0.2
Mays, 1975, p. 394.
5
0.2
1972 data used.
10
0.2
A
Bean/Pod
Compost
5.4
9
0.1
0.001
Giordano, Mortvedt,
1.6
0.1
Mays, 1975, p. 394.
3,2
0.1
1972 data used.
6.4
0.1
A
Bean/Pod
- Sludge
5.4
0
0,1
0.004
Giordano, Mortvedt,
5
0.2
Mays, 1975, p. 394.
10
0.2
1972 data used.
20
0.2
A
Green Bean/
Sludge
6.6
0
0.1
0.001
Keeferetai, 1986.
Pod & Seed
0.7
0.1
Blue Plains sludge.
1.4
0.1
A
Green Bean/
Sludge
7.1
0
0.1
0.001
Keeferetai, 1986.
Pod & Seed
3.1
0.1
Huntington sludge.
6.2
0.1
A
Green Bean/
Sludge
6.9
0
0.1
0.001
Keeferetai, 1986.
Pod & Seed
0.7
0.1
Martinsburg sludge.
1.4
0.1
A
Green Bean/
Sludge
6.3
0
0.1
0.001
Keeferetai, 1986.
Pod & Seed
0.4
0.1
Parkersburg sludge.
0.8
0.1
A
Green Bean/
Sludge
N.R.
0
0.1
0.012
Lue-Hing et at, 1984.
Pod & Seed
4
0.1
1977 data used.
8
0.2
Nu-Earth.
16
0.3
20
0.3
C-22
-------
TABLE C-13 (coilt.)
UPTAKE OF CADMIUM BY LEGUMES (cont.)
Study
Chemical
Application
Tissue
Uptake
Type
Plant/
Form
Soli
Rates
Concentration
Slope
Reference/
(V
Tissue
Applied
pH
(kg/ha)
(Pfl'O DW)
(2)
Comments
A
Soybean/
Limed digested
7.3-7.5
0.1
0.28
0.001
Cheney et al, 1977.
Grain
sludge
0.3
0.14
For control used
0.54
0.25
calcareous soil data.
0.66
0.2
Cheney's values are
1.08
0.05
means of 3 reps.
1.42
0.1
A
Soybean/
Limed raw
7.3-7.7
0.1
0.28
0.001
Chaneyetal, 1977.
Grain
sludge
0.28
0.14
For control used
0.32
0.09
calcareous soil data.
0.74
0.07
Chaney's values are
means of 3 reps.
A
Soybean/
Raw sludge
6.6-7.3
0.1
0.280
0.001
Chaneyetal, 1977.
Grain
compost
0.4
0.190
For control used
, 0.76
0.190
calcareous soil data.
1.26
0.220
Chaney's values are
2.620
0.280
means of 3 reps.
4.820
0.250
A
Soybean/
Heat treated
5.9-6.0
0.140
0.140
0.027
Chaneyetal, 1977.
Grain
sludge
0.860
0.110
Chaney's values are
High pH
1.260
0.190
means of 3 reps.
2.840
0.20
A
Soybean/
Heat treated
5.3-5.6
0.140
0.340
0.001
Chaneyetal, 1977.
Grain
sludge
0.780
0.240
Chaney's values are
LowpH
1.220
o acn
0.210
rt
means of 3 reps.
2.860 0.230
C-23
-------
TABLE C-14
UPTAKE OF CADMIUM BY POTATOES
Study
Type
(1)
Plant/
Tissue
Chemical
Form
Applied
Soli
PH
Application
Rates
(kg/ha)
Tissue
Concentration
(ua'g DW)
Uptake
Slope
(2)
Reference/
Comments
A
Potato/
Tuber
Sludge
4.7-6.2
0
11
0.11
0.1
0.001
Giordano etal., 1979
Year 2 (1976)
No heat
A
Potato
Sludge
5.3
0
0.83
1.66
3.32
0.12
0.11
0.021
0.23
0.038
Dowdy 4 Larson,
1975.
A
Potato/
Tuber
Liquid sludge
6.5
0.6
4.52
0.15
0.19
0.01
Cariton Smith, 1988.
Means of 5 years used.
Sandy loam.
A
Potato/
Tuber
Bed-dried
Sludge
6.5
0.6
12.57
*
0.16
0.2
0.003
Caetton Smith. 1988.
Means of 4 years used.
Sandy loam.
A
Potato/
Tuber
Liquid sludge
6.7
1.4
6.7
0.52
0.49
0.001
Cariton Smith, 1988.
Means ofS years used.
Clay.
A
Potato/
Tuber
Bed-dried
Sludge
6.7
1.4
15.12
0.53
0.41
0.001
Cariton Smith, 1988.
Means of 4 years used.
Clay.
A
Potato/
Tuber
Liquid sludge
8.0
1.44
5.86
0.06
0.12
0.014
Cariton Smith, 1988.
Means of 5 years used.
Calcareous loam.
A
Potato/
Tuber
Bed-dried
Sludge
8.0
1.5
22.12
0.06
0.15
0.004
Cariton Smith, 1988.
Means of 4 years used.
Calcareous loam.
C
Potato/
Tuber
Organic, metal
contaminated
soil
6.6
39.2
0.29
0.007
Harris etal, 1978.
Vanessa-potato type.
C
Potato/
Tuber
Organic, metal
contaminated
soil
6.6
39.2
0.2
0.005
Harris etal, 1978.
PenVand SaveSn-potato
type.
C
Potato/
Tuber
Organic, metal
contaminated
soil
6.6
39.2
0.41
0.010
Harris etal, 1978.
Home Guard-potato type.
C
Potato/
Tuber
Organic, metal
contaminated
soil
6.6
39.2
0.15
0.004
Harris etal, 1978.
Desiree-potato type.
C-24
-------
TABLE C-14 (cont.)
UPTAKE OF CADMIUM BY POTATOES (cont.)
Study
Type
Plant/
Tissue
Chemical
Form
Applied
son
pH
Application
Rates
(kg/ha)
Tissue
Concentration
(pg/g DW)
Uptake
Slope
(2)
Reference/
Comments
c
Potato/
Tuber
Organic, metal
contaminated
sot)
6.6
39.2
0.32
0.008
Harris et al, 1978.
King Edward-potato type.
c
Potato/
Organic, metal
6.6
39.2
0.32
0.008
Harris at at, 1978.
Tuber contaminated Majestic-potato type.
C-25
-------
TABLE C-15
UPTAKE OF CADMIUM BY ROOTS
Study
Type
(1)
Plant/
Tissue
Chemical
Form
Applied
Soli
PH
Application
Rates
(kg/ha)
Tissue
Concentration
(pg/g DW)
Uptake
Slope
(2)
Reference/
Comments
A
Carrot/Tuber
Sludge
4.6-6.0
0
11
0.96
2.29
0.121
Giordano et el., 1979
Year3 (1977)
No heat, no lime
A
Carrot
Sludge
5.3
0
0.83
1.66
3.32
0.48
0.69
0.95
1.15
0.202
Dowdy & Larson.
1975.
A
Radish
Sludge
5.3
0
0.83
1.66
3.32
0.13
0.14
0.18
0.31
0.056
Dowdy & Larson,
1975.
A
Radish/Tuber
Sludge
6.6
0
J0.7
1.4
0.53
0.66
0.68
0.107
Keeferetal, 1986.
Blue Plains sludge.
A
Carrot/Tuber
Sludge
6.6
0
0.7
1.4
0.2
0.32
0.2
0.001
Keeferetal, 1986.
Blue Plains sludge.
A
Radish/Tuber
Sludge
7.1
0
3.1
6.2
0.53
0.79
0.77
0.039
Keeferetal, 1986.
Huntington sludge.
A
Carrotfluber
Sludge
7.1
0
3.1
6.2
0.200
0.200
0.200
0.001
Keeferetal, 1986.
Huntington sludge.
A
Radish/Tuber
Sludge
6.9
0
0.7
1.4
0.53
0.51
0.57
0.029
Keeferetal, 1986.
Martinsburg sludge.
A
Carrotfluber
Sludge
6.9
0
0.7
1.4
0.2
0.46
0.2
0.001
Keeferetal, 1986.
Martinsburg sludge.
A
Radish/Tuber
Sludge
6.3
0
0.4
0.8
0.53
0.35
0.39
0.001
Keeferetal, 1986.
Parkersburg sludge.
A
Carrot/Tuber
Sludge
6.3
0
0.4
0.8
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.001
Keeferetal, 1986.
Parkersburg sludge.
A
Radish
Composted
Sludge
N.R.
0
1.6
0.5
0.7
0.432
Chang eta!., 1978
2.9 1.9
5.7 2.8
C-26
-------
TABLE C-15 (cont.)
UPTAKE OF CADMIUM BY ROOTS (cont.)
Study
Typo
W
Plant/
Tissue
Chemical
Form
Applied
Son
pH
Application
Rates
(kg/ha)
Tissue
Concentration
(Mfl'O DW)
Uptake
Slope
(2)
Reference/
Comments
A
Radish/Tuber
Composted
Sludge
N.R.
0
1.6
2.9
5.7
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.9
0.123
Chang et al. 1978
A
Carrot/Tuber
Composted
Sludge
N.R.
0
1.6
2.9
5.7
0.4
0.9
1.6
2.4
0.358
Chang etaL, 1978
A
Carrot
Composted
Sludge
N.R.
0
1.6
2.9
5.7 .
0.5
1.6
2.5
3.9
0.594
Chang etal., 1978
A
Turnip/Tuber
Composted
Sludge
N.R.
*
0
1.2
2.2
4.3
0.2
0.3
0.3
0.4
0.043
Chang etaL, 1978
A
Ryegrass
Liquid sludge
6.5
0.6
4.52
0.11
0.3
0.048
Carlton Smith, 1988.
Means of 5 years used.
Sandy loam.
A
Red Beet/
Tuber
Liquid sludge
6.5
0.6
4.52
0.29
0.63
0.087
Carlton Smith, 1988.
Means of 5 years used.
Sandy loam.
A
Red Beet/
Tuber
Bed-dried
Sludge
0.5
0.6
12.57
0.23
0.69
0.038
Carlton Smith, 1988.
Means of 4 years used.
Sandy loam.
A
Red Beet/
Tuber
Liquid sludge
6.7
1.4
6.7
1.0
1.22
0.042
Carlton Smith, 1988.
Means of 5 years used.
Clay.
A
Red Beet/
Tuber
Bed-dried
Sludge
6.7
1.4
15.12
0.8
1.26
0.034
Carlton Smith, 1988.
Means of 4 years used.
Clay.
A
Red Beet/
Tuber
Liquid sludge
8.0
1.44
5.86
0.1
0.26 '
0.036
Carlton Smith, 1988.
Means of 5 years used.
Calcareous loam.
A
Red Beet/
Tuber
Bed-dried
Sludge
8.0
1.5
22.12
0.1
0.49
0.018
Carlton Smith, 1988.
Means of 4 years used.
Calcareous loam.
C-27
-------
TABLE C-15 (cont.)
UPTAKE OF CADMIUM BY ROOTS (cont.)
Study
Chemical
Application
Tissue
Uptake
Type
Plant/
Form
Soli
Rates
Concentration
Slope
Reference/
(D
Tissue
Applied
PH
(Kgiha)
(Mg'S DW)
(2)
Comments
A
Beet/
Sludge
N.R.
0
0.5
0.078
Lue-Hing et a/, 1984.
Tuber
4
1
1977 data used.
8
1
Nu-Earth.
16
2
20
2
A
Carrot/
Sludge
N.R.
0
1
0.061
Lue-Hing et al, 1984,
Tuber
4
1.3
1977 data used.
8
1.3
Nu-Earth.
16
1.8
20 1,7
t
C-28
-------
TABLE C-16
UPTAKE OF CADMIUM BY SWEET CORN
Study
Typo Plant/
(1) Tissue
Chemical
Form
Applied
Soil
pH
Application
Rates
(kg/ha)
Tissue
Concentration
(pg/g DW)
Uptake
Slope
(2)
Reference/
Comments
A
Sweet Corn/
Grain
Sludge
5.1-6.0
0
11
0.1
1.8
0.155
Giordano et a!., 1979
Year 1(1979)
No heat
Silver Queen com
A
Sweet Com/
Grain
Sludge
S.3
0
0.83
1.66
3.32
0.02
0.02
0.03
0.05
0.01
Dowdy & Larson, 1975.
A
Sweet Corn/
Grain
Compost
S.4
0
0.8
1.6
3.2
0.3
0.7
0.9
1.1
0.236
Giordano, Mortvedt,
Mays, 1975, p. 394.
1972 data used.
A
Sweet Com/
Grain
Sludge
5.4
0
«
2.5
5
1°
0.3
0.9
1
1.2
0.08
Giordano, Mortvedt,
Mays, 1975, p. 394.
1972 data used.
A
Com/Grain
Compost
5.4
0
1.6
3.2
6.4
0.5
0.5
0.6
0.8
0.05
Giordano, Mortvedt,
Mays, 1975, p. 394.
1973 data used.
A
Com/Grain
Sludge
5.4
0
5
10
20
0.5
0.7
1.1
1
0.026
Giordano, Mortvedt,
Mays, 1975, p. 394.
1973 data used.
A
Sweet Com/
Grain
Sludge
6.6
0
0.7
1.4
0.08
0.16
0.17
0.064
Keeferetal, 1986.
Blue Plains sludge.
A
Sweet Com/
Grain
Sludge
7.1
0
3.1
6.2
0.08
0.1
0.15
0.011
Keeferetal, 1986.
Huntington sludge.
A
Sweet Com/
Grain
Sludge
6.S
0
0.7
1.4
0.08
0.11
0.18
0.071
Keeferetal, 1986.
Martinsburg sludge.
A
Sweet Com/
Grain
Sludge
6.3
0
0.4
0.8
0.08
0.11
0.16
0.1
Keeferetal, 1986.
Parkersburg sludge.
A
Sweet Com/
Grain
Sludge
6.5
0
1.5
0.05
0.09
0.026
Hemphill et el, 1982.
Portland sludge.
A
Sweet Com/
Grain
Sludge
6.5
0
1.5
C-29
0.05
0.1
0.333
Hemphill et al, 1982.
Rockcreek sludge.
-------
TABLE C-17
UPTAKE OF COPPER BY FORAGE
Study
Type
(1)
Plant/
Tissue
Chemical
Form
Applied
soil
pH
Application
Rates
(kg/ha)
Tissue
Concentration
(MS'g DW)
Uptake
Slope
(2)
Reference/
Comments
A
Natural Forage
Sludge
N.R.
13.2
27.1
2.28
12.5
0.738
Baxter et a/., 1983
Means reported
A
Com/Leaf
Sludge
6.6
0.000
152
304
8.0
6.1
4.9
0.001
Rappaport, 1987.
1984 Ma.
A
Com/Leaf
Sludge
6.6
0
152
304
7.80
7.7
8.2
0.001
Rappaport, 1987.
1985 data.
A
Com
Sludge
6.6
0
152
304
4.90
5.3
4.5
0.001
Rappaport, 1987.
1984 data.
A
Com
Sludge
6.6
O
152
304
6.60
6.9
6.7
0.003
Rappaport, 1987.
1985 data.
A
Barley
Sludge
6.6
0
152
304
1.0
2.5
2.8
0.006
Rappaport, 1987.
1985 data.
A
Orchardgrass
Sludge
6.6-7.2
0
50
9.58
10.72
0.023
Alberid, 1989.
A
Quackgrass
Sludge
6.6-7.2
0
50
5.96
8.55
0.052
Alberid, 1989.
A
Bird's Foot
Trefoil
Sludge
6.6-7.2
0
50
10.83
11.8
0.019
Alberid, 1989.
A
Tall Fescue
Sludge
6.6-7.2
0
50
7.17
8.22
0.021
Alberid, 1989.
A
Com/Leaf
Sludge
5.3-6.5
2
70
132
5.4
7.1
8
0.020
Sheaffer et al, 1979.
Application rata
based on measured
DTPA sol
values. Ambient
data (1976) used.
A
Com
Sludge
5.3-6.5
2
70
132
7.3
7.6
9.6
0.017
Sheaffer etal, 1979.
Application rata
based on measured
DTPA sol
values. Ambient
data (1976) used.
C-3Q
-------
TABLE C-17 (cont.)
UPTAKE OF COPPER BY FORAGE (cont.)
Study
Chemical
Application
Tissue
Uptake
Type
Plant/
Form
Soli
Rates
Concentration
Slope
Rmfaranca/
W
Tissue
Applied
pH
(kg/ha)
(|ig/g DW)
(2)
Comments
A
Clover
Sludge
5.3-6.3
2
7.3
0.051
Shea/far etal, 1S79.
70
10.1
Arrowfeaf clover.
132
13.9
A
Clover
Sludge
5.3-6.3
2
7.1
0.018
Sheatfer etal, 1979.
70
8.4
Crimson cfover.
132
9.4
A
Com/Leaf
Sludge
7.0-7.1
0
9.50
0.001
Webber etal, 1983,
67
9.5
p. 190-193.
Brantford site.
A
Com
Sludge
5.8-6.3
0
4.9 0
0.05
Webber etal, 1983,
12
5.5
p. 190-193.
Burfngton site.
A
Com/Leaf
Sludge
6.1-6.6
«
0
9.40
0.001
Webber etal,
53
6.9
1983, p. 190-193.
Gait site.
A
Com/Leaf
Sludge
5.7-6.1
0
9. 00
0.07
Webber at al,
10
9.7
1983, p. 190-193.
Georgetown site.
A
Com/Leaf
Sludge
6.2-6.3
0
9.70
0.001
Wobbaratal,
33
9.5
1983, p. 190-193.
Guelph site.
A
Com/Leaf
Sludge
6.4-6.6
0
7.20
0.001
Webber etal,
59
6
1983, p. 190-193.
Kitchener site.
A
Com/Leaf
Sludge
6.5
0
8.0
0.001
Webber etal,
111
7.8
1983, p. 190-193:
Stratford s.te.
A
Sudax
Sludge
5.0-6.0
0
6.10
0.031
KeSingetat,
5.4
7.2
1977, p. 353.
10.8
6.4
Mngton site.
21.5
7.3
43
6.6
86
9.4
A
Sudax
Sludge
5.3-6.2
0
5.10
0.087
KeSing et al,
•
5.4
8
1977, p. 353.
10.8
9.5
Jona$v3e site.
21.5
11.5
43
12.3
86
14.1
C-31
-------
TABLE C-17 (cont.)
UPTAKE OF COPPER BY FORAGE (cont.)
Study
Chemical
Application
Tissue
Uptake
Type
Plant/
Form
Soil
Rates
Concentration
Slope
Reference/
m
Tissue
Applied
pH
(kg/ha)
(Mg/fl DW)
(2)
Comments
A
Com
Sludge
5.0-6.0
0
2.20
0.022
KeBng et at,
5.4
2.1
1977, p. 353.
10.8
2.2
Butlngton site-
21.5
2.5
4th year.
43
2.8
86
4
A
Corn
Sludge
5.3-6.2
0
2.20
0.012
KeBng et at. 1977,
5.4
2.1
p. 3 S3.
10.8
2.1
JonesvSe-
21.5
2
3rd crop.
43
2.6
86
3.1
A
Ryegrass
Liquid sludge
6.5
42
6.40
0.071
Cariton Smith, 1988,
120
*
11.9
Means of 5 years
used. Sandy loam.
A
Ryegrass
Bed-dried
6.5
34
6.40
0.040
Cariton Smith, 1988.
Sludge
257
15.4
Means of 4 years
used. Sandy bam.
A
Ryegrass
Liquid sludge
6.7
50
8.4
0.037
Carlton Smith, 1988.
147
13.5
Means of 5 years
used. Clay.
A
Ryegrass
Bed-dried
6.7
50
8.2
0.022
Cariton Smith, 1988.
Sludge
290
13.5
Means of 4 years
used. Clay.
A
Ryegrass
Liquid sludge
8.0
33
9.6
0.034
Cariton Smith, 1988.
113
12.3
Means of 5 years
used.
Calcareous loam.
A
Ryegrass
Bed-dried
8.0
33
9.3
0.021
Cariton Smith, 1988.
Sludge
381 .
16.7
Means of 4 years
used.
Calcareous loam.
A
Barley/Leaf
Sludge
6.2-6.4
0
4.23
0.003
Sommers et al, 1991.
135
4.63
Ohio data used.
B
Rape
Sludge
5.6
0
25.75
0.001
Narwaletal, 1983.
34.35
7.19
1st harvest.
68.7
6.95
B
Rape
Sludge
6.0
0
11.27
0.001
Narwaletal, 1983.
34.35
7.02
1st harvest.
68.7
7.54
C-32
-------
TABLE C-17 (cont.)
UPTAKE OF COPPER BY FORAGE (cont.)
Study
Type
W
Plant/
Tissue
Chemical
Form
Applied
Soil
PH
Application
Rates
(kg/ha)
Tissue
Concentration
(Mfl'fl DW)
Uptake
Slope
(2)
Refarm w/
Comments
B
Rape
Sludge
7.5
0
34.35
68.7
6.88
7
14.47
0.110
Narwalatal. 1983.
1st harvest.
5
Rape
Sludge
5.6
0
34.35
68.7
19.35
12.36
8.7
0.001
Narwalatal, 1983.
2nd harvest.
B
Rape
Sludge
6.0
0
34.35
68.7
17.71
8.51
9.01
0.001
Narwal of al, 1983.
2nd harvest.
B
Raps
Sludge
*7.5
0
34.35.
68.7
*
8.37
8.78
13.09
0.069
Narwalatal, 1983.
2nd harvest.
C-33
-------
TABLE C-18
UPTAKE OF COPPER BY GARDEN FRUITS
Study
Chemical
Application
Tissue
Uptake
Type
Plant/
Form
Soil
Rates
Concentration
Slope
Reference/
(1)
Tissue
Applied
PH
(kg/ha)
(Pfl/fl DW)
(2)
Comments
A
Tomato/Fruit
Sludge
5.9-7.1
0
9.3
0.056
Keeferetal, 1986.
17
11.6
Blue Plains sludge.
34
11.2
Early fruiting.
A
Tomato/Fruit
Sludge
5.9-7.1
0
8.6
0.038
Keeferetal, 1986.
17
12.7
Blue Plains sludge.
34
9.9
Late fruiting.
A
Tomato/Fruit
Sludge
5.9-7.1
0
9.3
0.007
Keeferetal, 1986.
342
11.9
Huntington sludge.
684
14.3
Early fruiting.
A
Tomato/Fruit
Sludge
5.9-7.1
0
8.6
0.003
Keeferetal, 1986.
342
9.7
Huntington sludge.
684
10.6
Late fruiting.
A
Tomato/Fruit
Sludge
5.9-7.1
tf
9.3
0.042
Keeferetal, 1986.
24
10
Martinsburg sludge.
48
11.3
Early fmiting.
A
Tomato/Fruit
-Sludge
5.9-7.1
0
8.6
0,054
Keeferetal, 1986.
24
11.4
Martinsburg sludge.
48
11.2
Late fruiting.
A
Celery
Sludge
7.3
0
4.3
0.001
Peterson et al, 1989.
11.05
6.1
22.1
5
44.2
4.6
A
Tomato/Fruit
Sludge
7.3
0
16.2
0.001
Peterson et al, 1989.
11.05
18.6
22.1
15.7
44.2
15.9
A
Tomato/Fruit
Sludge
5.9-7.1
0
9.3
0.0145
Keeferetal, 1986.
11
12.9
Parkersburg sludge.
22
12.5
Early fruiting.
A
Tomato/Fruit
Sludge
5.9-7.1
0
8.6
0.068
Keeferetal, 1986.
11
11.9
Parkersburg sludge.
22
10.1
Late fruiting.
A
Tomato/Fruit
Sludge
N.R.
0
17
0.036
Lue-Hing et al. 1984.
26
17
1977 data used.
52
19
Nu-Earth.
103
26
-
129
18
C-34
-------
TABLE C-18 (cont.)
UPTAKE OF COPPER BY GARDEN FRUITS (cont.)
Study
Type
(1)
Plant/
Tissue
Chemical
Form
Applied
Soil
pH
Application
Rates
(kg/ha)
Tissue.
Concentration
(pg/g DW)
Uptake
Slope
(2)
Reforence/
Comments
B
Green Pepper/
Sludge
6,4
0
5.8
0.021
Furretal, 1981.
Fruit
249
11
Add soil, 2nd year.
B
Green Pepper/
Sludge
6.4
0
7.1
0.01
Furretal, 1981.
Fruit
249
9.6
Neutral soil, 2nd year.
B
Pea/Grain
Sludge
6.4
0
4.6
0.014
Furretal, 1981.
249
8.2
Acid soil, 2nd year.
B
Pea/Grain
Sludge
6.4
0
6.1
0.012
Furretal, 1981.
249
9.1
Neutral soil, 2nd year.
C-35
-------
TABLE C-19
UPTAKE OF COPPER BY ©RAINS/CEREALS
Study
Chemical
Application
Tissue
Uptake
Type
Plantf
Form
Soil
Rates
Concentration
Slope
Reference/
(1)
Tissue
Applied
PH
(kg/ha)
(Mg'fl DW)
(2)
Comments
A
Com/Grain
Sludge
6.6
0
4.5
0.001
Rappaport, 1987.
152
3.8
1984 data.
304
3.9
A
Com/Grain
Sludge
6.6
0
2.2
0.004
Rappaport, 1987.
152
2.9
1985 data.
304
2.3
A
Corn/Grain
Sludge
5.3-6.5
2
1.1
0.004
Sheafferetal, 1979.
70
1.7
Application rate based
132
1.6
on measured DTPA
soil values. Ambient
temp, data (1976) used.
A
Oats/Grain
Sludge
5.3-6.3
2
1.5
0.008
Sheafferetal, 1979.
7P
2.6
132
2.5
A
Rye/Grain
Sludge
5.3-6.3
2
4.5
0.017
Sheafferetel, 1979.
70
6.6
132
6.7
A
Wheat/Grain
Sludge
5.3-6.3
2
2.1
0.012
Sheafferetal, 1979.
70
3.2
132
3.7
A
Wheat/Grain
Sludge
N.R.(3)
0
3.5
0.007
Sabey and Hart, 1975,
90
4.46
p. 255.
360
5.96
A
Rye/Grain
Sludge
5,0-6.0
0
3.9
0.08
Keltinget al, 1977,
5.4
5.8
p. 353.
10.8
7
Arlington site.
21.5
8.2
43
9.4
86
11.7
A
Rye/Grain
Sludge
5.3-6.2
0
5.6
0.042
Kellingetal. 1977,
5.4
5.3
p. 353.
10.8
5.5
Jonesville site.
21.5
5.7
43
7
86
8.9
A
Com/Grain
Sludge
5.0-6.0
0
1.4
0.001
Kellingetal, 1977,
5.4
1.4
p. 353
10.8
1.2
Burtington site-4th year.
21,5
1.1
43
1.2
86
1.2
C-36
-------
TABLE C-19 (cont.)
UPTAKE OF COPPER BY GRAINS/CEREALS (cont.)
Study
Type
P>
Plant/
Tissue
Chemical
Form
Applied
Soil
PH
Application
Rates
(kg/ha)
Tissue
Concentration
(M0/0 DW)
Uptake
Slope
(2)
Reference/
Comments
A
Wheat/Grain
Liquid sludge
6.5
42
120
5
7
0.026
e
Carlton Smith, 19B8.
Means of 5 years used.
Sandy loam.
A
Wheat/Grain
Bed-dried
Sludge
6.5
34
257
5
8
0.013
Carlton Smith, 1988.
Means of 4 years used.
Sandy loam.
A
Wheat/Grain
Liquid sludge
6.7
50
147
6
7
0.010
Carlton Smith, 1988.
Means of 5 years used.
Clay.
A
Wheat/Grain
Bed-dried
Sludge
6.7
50
290
6
8
0.008
Carlton Smith, 1988.
Means of 4 years used.
Clay.
A
Wheat/Grain
Liquid sludge
8.0
33
113
5
6
0.013
Carfton Smith, 1988.
Means of 5 years used.
Calcareous loam.
A
Wheat/Grain
Bed-dried
Sludge
8.0
33
381
5
7
0.006
Carlton Smith, 1988.
Means of 4 years used.
Calcareous loam.
A
Bartey/Grain
Sludge
6.2-6.4
0
135
3.49
3.55
0.001
Sommers et at, 1991.
Ohio data used.
C-37
-------
TABLE C-20
UPTAKE OF COPPER BY LEAFY VEGETABLES
Study
Type
CD
Plant/
Tissue
Chemical
Form
Applied
Soil
pH
Application
Rates
(kgfha)
Tissue
Concentration
(tig/A DW)
Uptake
Slope
m
Reference/
Comments
A
Lettuce
Heat-Treated
Sludge
5.3-5.4
0
90
7.7
11.5
0.042
Chaneyetel., 1982
Romaine Lettuce
A
Lettuce
Heat-Treated
Sludge
6.2
0
90
7.5
10.5
0.033
Chaney etal., 1982
Romaine Lettuce
A
Lettuce
Nu-Earth
5.3-5.6
0
116
7.7
10.7
0.026
Chaney et a/., 1982
Romaine Lettuce
A
Lettuce
Nu-Earth
6.2-6.6
0
116
7.5
8.7
0.01
Chaney etal, 1982
Romaine Lettuce
A
Swiss Chard
Heat-Treated
Sludge
5.7
0
90
10.3
21.2
0.121
Chaney etal., 1982
A
Swiss Chard
Heat-Treated
Sludge
6.7-6.8
0
90
10.8
16.4
0.062
Chaneyetel., 1982
A
Swiss Chard
Nu-Earth
5.7-6.3
0
116
10.3
15.8
0.047
Chaney etal., 1982
A
Swiss Chard
Nu-Earth
6.7
0
116
10.8
13.9
0.027
Chaney etal., 1982
A
Collard Greens
Heat-Treated
Sludge
5.5-5.6
0
90
5.5
7.5
0.022
Chaney etal., 1982
A
Collard Greens
Heat-Treated
Sludge
6.3-6.4
0
90
4.5
6.9
0.027
Chaney etal., 1982
A
Collard Greens
Nu-Earth
5.5-6.3
0
116
5.5
6.4
0.008
Chaney etal., 1982
A
Collard Greens
Nu-Earth
6.4-6.8
0
116
4.5
5.9
0.012
Chaney etal., 1982
A
Cabbage
Sludge
5.9-7.1
0
17
34
3.1
3.4
3.3
0.006
Keefer et al, 1986.
Blue Plains sludge.
A
Cabbage
Sludge
5.9-7.1
0
342
684
3.1
4.1
4.4
0.002
Keefer etal, 1986.
Huntington sludge.
A
Cabbage
Sludge
5.9-7.1
0
24
48
3.1
3.7
3.4
0.006
Keefer etal, 1986.
Martinsburg sludge.
C-38
-------
TABLE C-20 (cont.)
UPTAKE OF COPPER BY LEAFY VEGETABLES (cont.)
Study
Chemical
Application
Tissue
Uptake
Type
Plant/
Form
Soil
Rates
Concentration
Slope
Reference/
W
Tissue
Applied
pH
(kg/ha)
(|ig/g DW)
(2)
Comments
A
Cabbage
Sludge
5,9-7.1
0
3.1
0.027
Keeferetal, 1986.
•
11
3.4
Parkersburg sludge.
22
3.7
A
Cabbage
Sludge
7.3
0
2.9
0.001
Peterson et at, 1989.
11.05
3.4
22.1
3.1
44.2
3.1
A
Lettuce
Sludge
7.3
0
18.8
0.001
Peterson et at, 1989.
11.05
16.4
22.1
16.1
44.2
15.7
A
Lettuce
Liquid sludge
6.5
42
11
0.064
Carlton Smith, 1988.
120
16
Means of 5 years used.
C
Sandy loam.
A
Lettuce
Bed-dried
6.5
34
8
0.049
Carlton Smith, 1988.
Sludge
257
19
Megns of 4 years used.
Sandy loam.
A
Lettuce
Liquid sludge
6.7.
50
18
0.001
Carlton Smith, 1988.
147
18
Means of 5 years used.
Clay.
A
Lettuce
Bed-dried
6.7
50
17
0.001
Carlton Smith, 1988.
Sludge
290
16
Means of 4 years used.
Clay.
A
Lettuce
Liquid sludge
8.0
33
13
0.013
Carlton Smith, 1988.
113
14
Means of 5 years used.
Calcareous loam.
A
Lettuce
Bed-dried
8.0
33
13
0.009
Carlton Smith, 1988.
Sludge
381
16
Means of 4 years used.
Calcareous loam.
A
Cabbage
Liquid sludge
6.5
42
3.7
0.015
Carlton Smith, 1988.
120
4.9
Means of 5 years used.
Sandy loam.
A
Cabbage
Bed-dried
6.5
34
3.8
0.008
Carlton Smith, 1988.
Sludge
257
5.6
Means of 4 years used.
Sandy loam.
A
Cabbage
Liquid sludge
6.7
50
3.3
0.015
Carlton Smith, 1988.
147
4.8
Means of 5 years used.
Clay.
C-39
-------
TABLE C-20 (cont.)
UPTAKE OF COPPER BY LEAFY VEGETABLES (cont.)
Study
Type
(1)
Plant/
Tissue
Chemical
Form
Applied
Soli
pH
Application
Rates
(kg/ha)
Tissue
Concentration
(Mg/g DW)
Uptake
Slope
(2)
Reference/
Comments
A
Cabbage
Bed-dried
Sludge
6.7
50
290
3.2
4.6
0.006
Carlton Smith, 1988.
Means of 4 years used.
Clay.
A
Cabbage
Liquid sludge
8.0
33
113
2.8
3.8
0.023
Carlton Smith, 1988.
Means of 5 years used.
Calcareous loam.
A
Cabbage
Bed-dried
Sludge
8.0
33
381
2.8
5.8
0.009
Carlton Smith, 1988.
Means of 4 years used.
Calcareous loam.
A
Spinach
Sludge
N.R.
0
26
52
103
129*
13
17
20
18
18
0.029
Lue-Hing et al, 1984.
1977 data used.
Nu-Earth.
A
Swiss Chard
Sludge
N.R,
0
26
52
103
129
21
29
36
27
32
. 0.048
Lue-Hing et al, 1984.
1977 data used.
Nu-Earth.
B
Lettuce
Sludge
5.8-7.7
0
19.8
39.6
79.2
17.2
26.3
18.5
16.3
0.001
Hueetal, 1988.
Akaka Andept soil.
B
Lettuce
Sludge
8.2-8.4
0
19.8
39.6
79.2
21
24
31.8
36
0.197
Hueetal, 1988.
Lualualei Vertical soil.
B
Lettuce
Sludge
5.4-8.1
0
19.8
39.6
79.2
26.5
27.2
24.8
21.3
0.001
Hue et al, 1988.
Wahiawa Oxisol soil.
B
Lettuce
Sludge
6.4
0
249
6.7
8.7
0.008
Furretal, 1981.
Acid soil, 2nd year.
C-40
-------
TABLE C-20 (cont.)
UPTAKE OF COPPER BY LEAFY VEGETABLES (cont.)
Study
Chemical
Application
Tissue
Uptake
Type
Plant/
Form
Soil
Rates
Concentration
Slope
Reform ca/
Tissue
Applied
pH
(kg/ha)
(Mfl/O DW)
(2)
Comments
s
Spinach
Sludge
6.4
0
4.2
0.031
Furretal, 1981.
249 •
12
Add soil, 2nd year.
i
Lettuce
Sludge
6.4
0
6.S
.0.011
Furretal, 1981.
249
9.3
Neutral soil, 2nd year.
8
Spinach
Sludge
6.4
0
5.3
0.023
Furretal, 1981.
249
11.1
Neutral soil, 2nd year.
C-41
-------
TABLE C - 21
UPTAKE OF COPPER BY LEGUMES
Study
Chemical
Application
Tissue
Uptake
Type
Plant/
Form
Soli
Rates
Concentration
Slope
Reference/
(1)
Tissue
Applied
PH
(kg/ha)
(pg/g DW)
(2)
Comments
A
Green Bean/
Sludge
5.9-7.1
0
10.5
0.001
Keeferetal, 1986.
Grain
17
9.8
Blue Plains sludge.
34
9.5
A
Green Bean/
Sludge
5.9-7.1
0
10.5
0.001
Keeferetal, 1986.
Grain
342
10
Huntington sludge.
684
10.9
A
Green Bean/
Sludge
5.9-7.1
0
10.5
0.001
Keeferetal, 1986.
Grain
24
10.4
Mertinsburg sludge.
48
10.3
A
Green Bean/
Sludge
5.9-7.1
0
10.5
0.001
Keeferetal, 1986.
Grain
11
11.3
Parkersburg sludge.
22
10.4
A
Snap Bean/
Sludge
5.3-6.5
*
0
2.9
0.009
Dowdy etal, 1978,
Grain
130
8
p. 255.
/
269
8.3
3rd year data used.
520
8.5
A
Snap Bean/
Sludge
5.3-6.5
0
4.1
0.013
Latterell et al, 1978,
Grain
26.3
6.7
p. 255.
52.6
7.4
66
8
105
8.8
132
8.4
263
8.6
A
Bean/
Sludge
7.3
0
10.7
0.339
Peterson et al, 1989.
Grain
11.05
9.9
22.1
15.1
44.2
24.5
A
Green Bean/
Sludge
N.R.
0
10
0.001
Lue-Hing et al, 1984.
Pod & Seed
26
10
. 1977 data used.
52
10
Nu-Earth.
103
9
129
9.
A
Soybean/
Limed digested
7.3-7.5
14
14.8
0.001
Chaneyetal, 1977.
Grain
sludge
21
13.8
For control, used
26
13.4
calcerous soil
38
12.7
data. Chaney's
56
12.6
values are
74
13.5
means of 3 reps.
042
-------
TABLE C - 21 (cont.)
UPTAKE OF COPPER BY LEGUMES (cont)
Study
Chemical
Application
Tissue
Uptake
Type
Plant/
Form
Soil
Rates
Concentration
Slope
Roferonca/
W
Tissue
Applied
PH
(kg/ha)
(iig/g DW)
(2)
Comments
A
Soybean/
Limed raw
7.3-7.7
14
14.8
0.001
Chaneyetal, 1977.
Grain
sludge
25
14.3
For control, used
25
14.1
calcemus soil
47
13.2
data. Cheney's
values are
means of 3 reps.
A
Soybean/
Raw sludge
6.6-7.3
14
14.8
0.001
Chaneyetal, 1977.
Grain
compost
23
13.2
For control, used
33
12.7
calcemus soil
38
13
data. Chaney's
97
13.5
values are
172
13.3
means of 3 reps.
A
Soybean/
Heat treated
5.9-6.0
1?
14.5
0.001
Chaneyetal, 1977.
Grain
sludge
37
14.3
Chaney's values are
High pH
40
14.1
means of 3 reps.
78
13.7
A
Soybean/
Heat treated
5.3-5.6
13
13.7
0.001
Chaneyetal, 1977.
Grain
sludge
34
13.2
Chaney's values are
LowpH
46
12.4
means of 3 reps.
87 11
C-43
-------
TABLE C-22
UPTAKE OF COPPER BY POTATOES
Study
Type
d)
Plant/
Tissue
Chemical
Form
Applied
Soil
pH
Application
Rates
(kg/ha)
Tissue
Concentration
ftiflffl DW)
Uptake
Slope
(2)
Reference/
Comments
A
Potato/Tuber
Liquid sludge
6.5
42
120
0.15
0.19
0.001
Carlton Smith, 1988.
Means of 5 years used.
Sandy loam.
A
Potato/Tuber
Bed-dried
Sludge
6,5
34
257
0.16
0.2
0.001
Carlton Smith, 1988.
Means of 4 years used.
Sandy loam.
A
Potato/Tuber
Liquid sludge
6.7
50
147
0.52
0.61
0.001
Carfton Smith, 1988.
Means of 5 years used.
Clay..
A
Potato/Tuber
Bed-dried
Sludge
6.7
50
290
0.53
0.41
0.001
Carlton Smith, 1988.
Means of 4 years used.
Clay.
A
Potato/Tuber
Liquid sludge
8.0
si
113
0.05
0.116
0.001
Carfton Smith, 1988.
Means of 5 years used.
Calcareous loam.
A
Potato/Tuber
Bed-dried
Sludge
8.0
33
381
0.06
0.15
0.001
Carlton Smith, 1988.
Means of 4 years used.
Calcareous loam.
B
Sweet Potato/
Tuber
Sludge
6.4
0
249
3.4
5.2
0.007
Furretal, 1981.
Acid soil, 2nd year.
B
Sweet Potato/
Tuber
Sludge
6.9
0
249
4.6
5.9
0.005
Furretal, 1981.
Neutral soil, 2nd year.
C
Potato/Tuber
Organic, metal
contaminated soil
6.6
1504
7.71
0.005
Harris et at, 1978.
Vanessa-potato type.
C
Potato/Tuber
Organic, metal
contaminated soil
6.6
1504
0.55
0.006
Harris etal, 1978.
Pentland Javelin-
potato type.
C
Potato/Tuber
Organic, metal
contaminated soil
6.6
1504
8.55
0.006
Harris etal, 1978.
Home Guard-
potato type.
C
Potato/Tuber
Organic, metal
contaminated soil
6.6
1504
8.33
0.006
Harris etal, 1978.
Desirve-potato type.
C
Potato/Tuber
Organic, metal
contaminated soil
6.6
1504
6.76
0.004
Hams et al, 1978.
King Edward-
potato type.
C
Potato/Tuber
Organic, metal
contaminated soil
6.6
1504
9.03
0.006
Hams etal, 1978.
Majestic-potato type.
C-44
-------
TABLE C-23
UPTAKE OF COPPER BY ROOTS
Study
Type
Plant/
Tissue
Chemical
Form
Applied
Soli
PH
Application
Rates
(kg/ha)
Tissue
Concentration
(pg/g DW)
Uptake
Slope
(2)
Reference/
Comments
A
Radish/Tuber
Sludge
5.9-7.1
0
17
34
3.9
4.7
4.4
0.015
Keeferetat, 1986.
Blue Plains sludge.
A
Carrot/Tuber
Sludge
5.9-7.1
0
17
34
7.5
6.5
7.1
0.001
Keeferetal, 1986.
Blue Plains sludge.
A
Radish/Tuber
Sludge
5.9-7.1
0
342
684
3.9
5.4
6.4
0.004
Keeferetal, 1986.
Huntington sludge.
A
Carrot/Tuber
Sludge
5.9-7.1
0
342
684
7.5
7.5
12.5
0.007
Keeferetal, 1986.
Huntington sludge.
A
Radish/Tuber
Sludge
5.9-7.1
0
24
48
3.9
4.1
4.5
0.013
Keeferetal, 1986.
Martinsburg sludge.
A
Carrot/Tuber
Sludge
5.9-7.1
0
24
48
7.5
7.8
7.8
0.006
Keeferetal, 1986.
Martinsburg sludge.
A
Radish/Tuber
Sludge
5.9-7.1
0
11
22
3.9
2.4
2.6
0.001
Keeferetal, 1986.
Parkersburg sludge.
A
Carrot/Tuber
Sludge
5.9-7.1
0
11
22
7.5
7
6.2
0.001
Keeferetal, 1986.
Parkersburg sludge.
A
Onion/Bulb
Sludge
7.3
0
11.05
22.1
44.2
6.2
5.6
6.1
4.6
0.001
Peterson et al, 1989.
A
Red Beet/
Tuber
Liquid sludge
6.5
42
120
7.4
8.4
0.013
Carlton Smith, 1988.
Means of 5 years used.
Sandy loam.
A
Red Beet/
Tuber
Bed-dried
Sludge
6.5
34
257
7.2
8.9
0.008
Carlton Smith, 1988.
Means of 4 years used.
Sandy loam.
A
Red Beet/
Tuber
Liquid sludge
6.7
50
147
8.8
8.9
0.001
Carlton Smith, 1988.
Means of 5 years used.
Clav
C-45
-------
TABLE C-23 (cont.)
UPTAKE OF COPPER BY ROOTS (cont.)
Study
Chemical
Application
Tissue
Uptake
Type
Plant/
Form
Soil
Rates
Concentration
Slope
Reference/
(1)
Tissue
Applied
pH
(kg/ha)
ftig/g DW)
(2)
Comments
A
Red Beet/
Bed-dried
6.7
50
8.6
0.001
Carlton Smith, 1988.
Tuber
Sludge
290
• 8.8
Means of 4 years used.
Clay.
A
Red Beet/
Liquid sludge
8.0
33
7.6
0.013
Carlton Smith, 1988.
Tuber
113
8.6
Means of 5 years used.
Calcareous loam.
A
Red Beet/
Bed-dried
8.0
33
7.1
0.007
Carlton Smith, 1988.
Tuber
Sludge
381
9.4
Means of 4 years used.
Calcareous loam.
B
Kohlrabi/
Sludge
6.4
0
1.3
0.012
Furretal, 1981.
Tuber
249
4.3
Neutral soil, 2nd year.
B
Turnip/
Sludge
6.9
0
1.8
0.024
Furretal, 1981.
Tuber
249
*
7.8
Neutral soil, 2nd year.
C-46
-------
TABLE C-24
UPTAKE OF COPPER BY SWEET CORN
Study
Chemical
Application
Tissue
Uptake
Type
Plant/
Form
son
Rates
Concentration
Slope
Reference/
Tissue
Applied
PH
(kg/ha)
(pg/g DW)
(2)
Comments
A
Sweet Com/
Sludge
5.9-7.1
0
2.9
0.001
Keeferetel, 1986.
Grain
17
3.1
Blue Plains sludge.
34
2.6
A
Sweet Com/
Sludge
5.9-7.1
0
2.9
. 0.001
¦ Keeferetel, 1986.
Grain
342
2.7
Huntington sludge.
684
2.9
A
Sweet Corn/
Sludge
5.9-7.1
0
2.9
0.002
Keeferetel, 1986.
Grain
24
3.1
Martinsburg sludge.
48
3
A
Sweet Com/
Sludge
5.9-7.1
0
2.4
0.005
Keeferetel, 1986.
Grain
11
3
Parkersburg sludge.
22
*
3
C-47
-------
TABLE C-25
UPTAKE OF LEAD BY FORAGE
Study
Type
(1)
Plant/
Tissue
Chemical
Form
Applied
Soli
PH
Application
Rates
(kg/ha)
Tissue
Concentration
(MB'fl DW)
Uptake
Slope
(2)
Reference/
Comments
A
Natural Forage
Sludge
N.R.
17.531
31.8
2.3
0.75
0.001
Baxter et at., 1983
A
Ryegrass
Liquid Sludge
6.5
56.8
132.8
2.0
2.2
0.003
Carlton Smith, 1988.
Means of
S years used.
Sandy loam.
A
Ryegrass
Bed-dried
Sludge
6.5
56.6
218.6
1.7
2
0.002
Carfton Smith, 1988.
Means of
4 years used.
Sandy loam.
A
Ryegrass
Liquid Sludge
6.7
63.0
154,4
•
1.9
2
0.001
Carfton Smith, 1988.
Means of
5 years used.
Clay.
A
Ryegrass
Bed-dried
Sludge
6.7
62.4
225.4
2.2
2,7
0.003
Carlton Smith, 1988.
Means of
4 years used.
Clay.
A
Ryegrass
Liquid Sludge
8.0
111.2
159.6
3.5
3.6
0.002
Carlton Smith, 1988.
Means of
5 years used.
Calcareous loam.
A
Ryegrass
Bed-dried
Sludge
8.0
110.6
331
3.3
3.8
0.002
Carlton Smith, 1988.
Means of
4 years used.
Calcareous loam.
A
Com
Sludge
5.3-5.6
0.0
156
312
624
3.4
1.5
1.1
2.5
0.001
Giordano et a/., 1975.
A
Com
Sludge
5.3
0.0
58
116
232
3.5
5
5
4
0.001
Dowdy & Larson, 1975.
A
Reed Canary
Grass
Liquid
sludge
6.2-7.4
0
22
0.8
2.5
0.073
Duncomb ef a/., 1982.
C-48
-------
TABLE C-26
UPTAKE OF LEAD BY GARDEN FRUITS
Study
Chemical
Application
Tissue
Uptake
Type
Plant/
Form
Soil
Rates
Concentration
Slope
Reference/
(*>
Tissue
Applied
PH
(kg/ha)
(|ig/g DW)
(2)
Comments
A
Pea/Grain
Sludge
5.3
0
<0.1
0.001
•
Dowdy & Larson, 1975.
58
<0.1
116
<0.1
232
<0.1
A
Tomato/Fruit
Sludge
5.3
0
<0.4
0.001
Dowdy & Larson, 1975.
58
<0.4
116
<0.4
232
<0.4
A
Ccm/Grain
Sludge
5.3
0
<0.2
0.001
Dowdy & Larson, 1975.
58
<0.2
116
<0.2
232
<0.2
A
Pea/Pod
Sludge
5.3
9
0.4
0.001
Dowdy & Larson, 1975.
58
0.4
116
0.4
232
0.6
A
Tomato/Fruit
Sludge
5.9-6.6
0
0.76
0.001
KeeferetaL, 1986.
25
0.68
Blue Plains sludge.
50
0.82
Early fruiting.
A
Tomato/Fruit
Sludge
5.9-6.8
0
0.93
0.001
KeeferetaL, 1986.
25
0.4
Blue Plains sludge.
50
0.62
Late fruiting.
A
Tomato/Fruit
Sludge
5.9-7.1
0
0.76
0.007
KeeferetaL, 1986.
33
0.62
Huntington sludge.
66
1.24
Early fruiting.
A
Tomato/Fruit
Sludge
5.9-7.1
0
0.93
0.011
KeeferetaL, 1986.
33
1.58
Huntington sludge..
66
1.64
Lete Milting.
A
Tomato/Fruit
Sludge
5.9-6.3
0
0.76
0.002
KeeferetaL, 1986.
32
0.56
Martinsburg sludge.
64
0.82
Early fruiting.
A
Tomato/Fru'rt
Sludge
5.9-6.3
0
0.83
0.001
KeeferetaL, 1986.
32
0.96
Martinsburg sludge.
64
0.46
Late fruiting.
A
Tomato/Fruit
Sludge
5.9-6.6
0
0.76
0.001
KeeferetaL, 1986.
55
0.82
Parkersburg sludge.
110
0.7
Early fruiting.
C-49
-------
TABLE C-26 (cont.)
UPTAKE OF LEAD BY GARDEN FRUITS (cont.)
Study
Chemical
Application
Tissue
Uptake
Type
Plant/
Form
Soli
Rates
Concentration
Slope
Reference/
(1)
Tissue
Applied
PH
(kg/ha)
(Mfl/g DW)
(2)
Comments
A
Tomato/Fruit
Sludge
5.9-6.6
0
0.93
0.003
Keeferetal., 1986.
55
1.42
Parkersburg sludge.
110
1.24
Late fruiting.
C-50
-------
TABLE C-27
UPTAKE OF LEAD BY GRAINS/CEREALS
Study
Chemical
Application
Tissue
Uptake
Typ«
Plant/
Form
Soil
Rates
Concentration
Slope
Reference/
W
Tissue
Applied
PH
(kg/ha)
(MO/0 DW)
(2)
Comments
A
Wheat/Grain
Liquid Sludge
6.5
56.8
0.80
0.001
Carlton Smith, 1988,
132.8
0.8
Means of 5 years used.
Sandy loam.
A
Wheat/Grain
Bed-dried
6.5
56.6
0.80
0.001
Cartton Smith, 1988.
Sludge
218.6
O.i
Means of 4 years used.
Sandy loam.
A
Wheat/Grain
Liquid Sludge
6.7
63.0
0.80
0.001
Carlton Smith, 1988.
154.4
0.8
Means of 5 years used.
Clay.
A
Wheat/Grain
Bed-dried
6.7
62.4
0.90
0.001
" Carlton Smith, 1988.
Sludge
225.4
1
Means of 4 years used.
Clay.
A
Wheat/Grain
Liquid Sludge
8.0
111.2
0.80
0.001
Carlton Smith, 1988.
159.6
0.8
Means of 5 years used.
Calcareous loam.
A
Wheat/Grain
Bed-dried
8.0
110.6
0.90
0.001
Carlton Smith, 1988.
Sludge
331
1
Means of 4 years used.
Calcareous loam.
A
Com/Grain
Sludge
5.3-5.6
0.0
0.9
0.001
Giordano et a!., 1975.
156
0.5
312
0.6
624
1
A
Com/Grain
Sludge
5,3
0.0
<0.2
0.001
Dowdy & Larson, 1975.
58
<0.2
116
<0.2
232
<0.2
A
Oat/Grain
Limed digested
7.3-7.5
20.0
0.38
0.004
Chaneyetal, 1977.
sludge
29
0.27
For control, used
33
0.36
calcareous soil data.
42.6
0.97
Cheney's values
59.8
0.51
am means of 3 reps.
73,4
0.54
A
Oat/Grain
Limed raw
7.3-7.7
20.2
0.38
0.002
Chaneyetal, 1977.
sludge
27.6
0.4
For control, used
31.8
0.36
calcareous soil data.
.
51.8
0.44
. Cheney's values
are means of 3 reps.
C-51
-------
TABLE G-27 (cont.)
UPTAKE OF LEAD BY GRAINS/CEREALS (cont.)
Study
Chemical
Application
Tissue
Uptake
Type
Plant/
Form
Soli
Rates
Concentration
Slope
Reference/
(1)
Tissue
Applied
PH
(kg/ha)
ftig/g DW)
(2)
Comments
A
Oat/Grain
Raw sludge
6.6-7.3
20.2
0.38
0.001
Chaney et al, 1977.
compost
33
0.37
For control, used
43.8
0.46
calcareous soil data.
63
0.46
Cheney's values
112.2
0.39
am means of 3 reps.
186.6
0.51
A
Oat/Grain
Heat treated
5.9-6.0
21.4
0.57
0.001
Chaney et al, 1977.
sludge
47
0.36
Cheney's values
High pH
48.8
0.03
am means of 3 mps.
88.8
0.03
A
Oat/Grain
Heat treated
5.3-5.6
21.4
0.38
0.004
Chaney etal, 1977.
sludge
43.8
0.36
Cheney's values
LowpH
52.8
0.4
am means of 3 reps.
92.8
0.67
C-52
-------
TABLE C-28
UPTAKE OF LEAD BY LEAFY VEGETABLES
Study
Typo
(1)
Plant/
Tissue
Chemical
Form
Applied
Soil
pH
Application
Rates
(kg/ha)
Tissue
Concentration
(m'a DW)
Uptake
Slope
(2)
Reference/
Comments
A
Lettuce
Heat-Treated
Sludge
5.3-5.4
0
81
1
1
0.001
Chaneyetal., 1982
Romaina Lettuce
A
lettuce
Heat-Treated
Sludge
6.2
0
81
1,1
1
0.001
Chaneyetal., 1982
Remain* Lettuce
A
Lettuce
Nu-Earth
5.3-5.6
0
87
1
1.1
0.001
Cheney et at.. 1982
Romalne Lattice
A
Lettuce
Nu-Earth
6.2-6.6
0
87
1.1
0.6
0.001
Chaneyetal., 1982
Romalne Lettuce
A
Swiss Chard
Heat-Treated
Sludge
5.7
0
81
3.4
2.1
0.001
Chaneyetal., 1982
A
Swiss Chard
Heat-Treated
Sludge
6.7-6.8
«0
81
2,7
1.5
0.001
Chaneyetal., 1982
A
Swiss Chard
Nu-Earth
5.7
0
87
3.4
1.2
0.001
Chaneyetal., 1982
A
Swiss Chard
Nu-Earth
6.7-6.8
0
87
2.7
1.5
0.001
Chaneyetal., 1982
A
Collard
Greens
Heat-Treated
Sludge
5.5-5.6
0
81
2.4
1.9
0.001
Chaneyetal., 1982
A
Collard
Greens
Heat-Treated
Sludge
6.4-6.3
0
81
1.9
2.5
0.007
Chaneyetal., 1982
A
Collard
Greens
Nu-Earth
5.5-6.3
0
87
2.4
2.2
0.001
Chaneyetal., 1982
A
Collard
Greens
Nu-Earth
6.4-6.8
0
87
1.9
1.9
0.001
Chaneyetal., 1982
A
Lettuce
Liquid Sludge
6.5
56.8
132.8
1.3
1.6
0.004
Carlton Smith, 1988.
Means of 5 years used.
Sandy ham.
A
Lettuce
Bed-dried
Sludge
6.5
56.6
218.6
0.9
0.9
0.001
CaMon Smith, 1988.
Means of 4 years used.
Sandy loam.
A
Lettuce
Liquid Sludge
6.7
63
154.4
2.28
2.34
0.001
Cariton Smith, 1988.
Means of S years used.
day.
C-53
-------
TABLE C-28 (cont.)
UPTAKE OF LEAD BY LEAFY VEGETABLES (cont.)
Study
Type
(1)
Plant/
Tissue
Chemical
Form
Applied
Soil
PH
Application
Rates
(kg/ha)
Tissue
Concentration
(Mg/g DW>
Uptake
Slope
(2)
Reference/
Comments
A
Lettuce
Bed-dried
Sludge
6.7
62.4
225.4
1.7
2.7
0.006
Carlton Smith, 1988.
Means of 4 years used.
day.
A
Lettuce
Liquid Sludge
8.0
111.2
159.6
3.9
3.5
0.001
Cariton Smith, 1988.
Means of 5 yearn used.
Calcareous team.
A
Lettuce
Bed-dried
Sludge
8.0
110,6
331
3.4
3.4
0.001
Carlton Smith, 1988.
Means of 4 years used.
Calcareous ham.
A
Cabbage
Liquid Sludge
6.5
56.8
132.8
•
0.7
0.9
0.003
Cariton Smith, 1988.
Means of 5 years used.
Sandy loam.
A
Cabbage
Bed-dried
Sludge
6.5
56.6
218.6
0.8
0.8
0.001
Cariton Smith, 1988,'
Means of 4 yearn used.
Sandy ham.
A
Cabbage
Liquid Sludge
6.7
63
154.4
0.7
0.7
0.001
Cariton SnM, 1988.
Means ofS years used.
Clay.
A
Cabbage
Bed-dried
Sludge
6.7
62.4
225.4
0.8
0.8
0.001
Cariton Smith, 1988.
Means of 4 years used.
day.
A
Cabbage
Liquid Sludge
8.0
111.2
159.6
1.0
1.1
0.002
Carlton.Smith, 1988.
Means of 5 years used.
Calcareous loam.
A
Cabbage
Bed-dried
Sludge
8.0
110.6
331
1.0
1.1
0.001
Carlton Smith, 1988.
Means of 4 years used.
Calcareous ham.
A
Lettuce
Sludge
5.3
0
58
116
232
1.1
1.4
0.7
0.8
0.001
Dowdy & Larson,
1975.
A
Turnip Greens
Sludge
5.2-5.8
0
57
114
7.8
10.5
12.3
0.039
Mtter&Boswet,
1979.
A
Cabbage
Sludge
5.9-6.6
0
25
50
0.58
0.38
0.52
0.001
Keefaretal., 1986.
Blue Plains sludge.
C-54
-------
TABLE C-28 (cont.)
UPTAKE OF LEAD BY LEAFY VEGETABLES (cont.)
Study
Chemical
Application
Tissue
Uptake
Type
Plant/
Form
Soli
Rates
Concentration
Slope
Raforenco/
(1)
Tissue
Applied
PH
(kg/ha)
(Mg/g DW)
(2)
Comments
A
Cabbage
Sludge
5.9-7.1
0
0.58
0.001
Kaeferetal., 1986.
33
0.74
Huntington sludge.
66
0.52
A
Cabbage
Sludge
5.9-6.3
0
0.58
0.004
Keeferetat., 1986.
32
0.8
MarVnsburg sludge.
64
0.84
A
Cabbage
Sludge
5.9-6.6
0
0.58
0.003
Kaeferetal., 1986.
55
0.72
Parkersturg sludge.
110
0.88
C-55
-------
TABLE C-29
UPTAKE OF LEAD BY LEGUMES
Study
Chemical
Application
Tissue
Uptake
Type
Plant/
Form
soli
Rates
Concentration
Slope
Reference/
(D
Tissue
Applied
PH
(kg/ha)
(Mfl/Q DW>
(2)
Comments
A
Bush Bean/
Sludge
5.3-5.6
0
1.4
0.001
Giordano et ai, 1975.
Pod
156
1.4
312
1.2
624
1.2
A
Green Bean/
Sludge
5.9-6.6
0
0.83
0.001
Keeferetal., 1S86.
Pod & Seed
25
0.66
Blue Plains sludge.
50
0.46
A
Green Bean/
Sludge
5.9-7.1
0
0.83
0.006
Keeferetal., 1986.
Pod & Seed
33
0.54
Huntington sludge.
66
1.2
A
Green Bean/
Sludge
5.9-6.3
0
0.83
0.001
Keeferetal., 1986.
Pod & Seed
32
0.86
Martinsburg sludge.
64
tf
0.8
A
Green Bean/
Sludge
5.9-6.6
0
0.83
0.001
Keeferetal., 1986.
Pod & Seed
55
0.8
Parkersburg sludge.
110
0.98
A
Soybean/
Limed digested
7.3-7.5
20.2
0.35
0.003
Chaney et al. 1977.
Grain
sludge
29.8
0.99
For control, used
53
0.73
used calcareous soil
42.6
0.29
data. Cheney's values
59.8
0.58
are means of 3 mps.
73.4
0.73
A
Soybean/
Limed raw
7.3-7.7
20.2
0.35
0.001
Chaney etal, 1977.
Grain
sludge
27.6
0.62
For control, used
31.8
0.57
used calcareous soil
51.8
0.4
data. Chaney's values
are means of 3 mps.
A
Soybean/
Raw sludge
6.6-7.3
20.2
0.35
0.001
Cheney et el, 1977.
Grain
compost
33
0.56
For control, used
43.8
0.38
used calcareous soil
63
0.46
data. Chaney's values
112.2
0.57
am means of 3 mps.
186.6
0.29
A
Soybean/
Heat treated
5.9-6.0
21.4
0.25
0.001
Chaney etal, 1977.
Grain
sludge
4
0.62
Chaney's values am
High pH
48.8
0.29
means of 3 mps.
88.8
0.27
A
Soybean/
Heat treated
5.3-5.6
21.4
0.75
0.001
Chaney etal, 1977.
Grain
sludge
43.8
0.38
Chaney's values am
LowpH
52.8
0.25
means of 3 mps.
92.8
0.38
C-56
-------
TABLE C-30
UPTAKE OF LEAD BY POTATOES
Study
Typo
<*>
Plant/
Tissue
Chemical
Form
Applied
son
pH
Application
Rates
(kg/ha)
Tissue
Concentration
(pg/g DW)
Uptake
Slope
(2)
Raforance/
Comments
A
Potatofl"uber
Sludge
5.3
0
56
116
232
<0.4
<0.4
<0.4
0.7
0.001
Dowdy & Larson,
1975
C
Potato/Tuber
Organic-metal
contaminated
soil
6.6
1742
0.41
0.001
Harris at all, 1978.
Vanessa-potato type.
C
Potato/Tuber
Organic-metal
contaminated
soil
6.6
1742
0.55
0.001
Harris at all, 1978.
Pentland Javelin-
potato K20
c
Potato/Tuber
Organic-metal
contaminated
soil
6.6
1742
*
0.26
0.001
Hams et all, 1978.
Home Guard-
potato type.
c
Potato/Tuber
Organic-metal
contaminated
soil
6.6
1742
1.04
0.001
Harris et all, 1978.
Desiree-potato type.
c
Potato/Tuber
Organic-metal
contaminated
soil
6.6
1742
0.66
0.001
Harris et all, 1978.
King Edward-
potato type.
c
Potato/Tuber
Organic-metal
contaminated
soil
6.6
1742
0.29
0.001
Harris et all, 1978.
Majestic-potato type.
C-57
-------
TABLE C-31
UPTAKE OF LEAD BY ROOTS
Study
Type
(1)
Plant/
Tissue
Chemical
Form
Applied
Soil
PH
Application
Rates
(kg/ha)
Tissue
Concentration
(Mfl'fl DW)
Uptake
Slope
(2)
Reference/
Comments
A
Red Beet/
Tuber
Liquid Sludge
6.5
56.8
132.8
0.7
0.9
0.003
Carlton Smith, 1988.
Means of 5 years used.
Sandy bam.
A
Red Beet/
Tuber
Bed-dried
Sludge
6.5
56.6
218.6
0.8
• 0.9
0.001
Carlton Smith, 1988.
Means of 4 years used.
Sandy loam.
A
Red Beet/
Tuber
Liquid Sludge
6.7
63
154.4
0.7
0.8
0.001
Carlton Smith, 1988.
Means of 5 years used.
Clay.
A
Red Beet/
Tuber
Bed-dried
Sludge
6.7
62.4
225.4
0.8
0.8
0.001
Carlton Smith, 1988.
Means of 4 years used.
Clay.
A
Red Beet/
Tuber
Liquid Sludge
8.0
111.2
159.6
1.1
1.1
0.001
Carlton Smith, 1988.
Means of 5 years used.
Calcareous loam.
A
Red Beet/
Tuber
Bed-dried
Sludge
8.0
110.6
331
1.1
1.1
0.001
Carlton Smith, 1988.
Means of 4 years used.
Calcareous loam.
A
Carrot/
Tuber
Sludge
5.3
0
58
116
232
<0.4
<0.4
0.9
0.9
0.002
Dowdy & Larson, 1975.
A
Radish/
Tuber
Sludge
5.3
0
58
116
232
0.5
<0.4
0.4
0.7
0.001
Dowdy & Larson, 1975.
A
Radish/
Tuber
Sludge
5.9-6.6
0
25
50
0.7
0.62
0.56
0.001
Keefer et al., 1986.
Blue Plains sludge.
A
Carrot/
Tuber
Sludge
5.9-6.6
0
25
50
1.78
0.6
2.24
0.009
Keefer et el., 1986.
Blue Plains sludge.
A
Radish/
Tuber
Sludge
5.9-7.1
0
33
66
0.7
0.58
0.86
0.002
Keefer et ah, 1986.
Huntington sludge.
A
Carrot/
Tuber
Sludge
5.9-7.1
0
33
66
1.78
1.24
1
0.001
Keefer eta!., 1986.
Huntington sludge.
C-58
-------
TABLE C-31 (cont.)
UPTAKE OF LEAD BY ROOTS (COflt.)
Study
Chemical
Application
Tissue
Uptake
Type
Plant/
Form
Soil
Rates
Concentration
Slope
Reference/
(D
Tissue
Applied
pH
(kg/ha)
(Mfl'fl DW)
(2)
Comments
A
Radish
Sludge
5.9-6.3
0
0.7
0.002
Keefer et al, 1986.
32
0.76
Martinsburg sludge.
64 .
0.82
A
Carrot
Sludge
5.9-6.3
0
1.78
0.001
Keefer et at, 19B6.
32
1.4
Martinsburg sludge.
64
1.1
A
Radish/
Sludge
5.9-6.6
0
0.7
0.003
Keefer eta!., 1986.
Tuber
55
0.92
Parkersburg sludge.
110
0.96
A
Carrot/
Sludge
5.9-6.6
0
1.78
0.001
Keefer etal., 1986.
Tuber
55
1.4
Parkersburg sludge.
110
*
1.26
C-59
-------
TABLE C-32
UPTAKE OF LEAD BY SWEET CORN
Study
Chemical
Application
Tissue
Uptake
Type
Plant/
Form
Soil
Rates
Concentration
Slope
Reference/
(1)
Tissue
Applied
PH
(kg/ha)
(Mfl/flDW)
(2)
Comments
A
Sweet Com/
Sludge
5.9-6.6
0
<0.1
0.001
Keeferet aL. 1986.
Grain
25
<0.1
Blue Plains sludge.
50
<0.1
A
Sweet Com/
Sludge
5.9-7.1
0
<0.10
0.001
Keeferet aL, 1986.
Grain
33
<0.10
Huntington sludge.
66
<0.10
A
Sweet Com/
Sludge
5.9-6.3
0
<0.10
0.001
Keeferet al., 1986.
Grain
32
<0.10
Martinsburg sludge.
64
<0.10
A
Sweet Com/
Sludge
5.9-6.6
0
<0.10
0.001
Keeferet al., 1986.
Grain
55
<0.10
Parkersburg sludge.
110
<0.10
C-60
-------
TABLE C-33
UPTAKE OF MERCURY BY GARDEN FRUITS
Study
Type
W
Plant/
Tissue
Chemical
Form
Applied
Soil
PH
Application
Rates
(kg/ha)
Tissue
Concentration
(lig/gDW)
Uptake
Slope
(2)
Reference/
Comments
A
Broccoli/Fruit
Sludge
6.8
0
0.7804
0.0031
0.0169
0.018
Cappon, C.T. 1981.
A
Cauliflower
Sludge
6.8
0
0.7804
0.0051
0.0109
0.007
Cappon, C.T. 1981.
A
Cucumber/
Fruit
Sludge
6.8
0
0.7804
0.0012
0.0046
0.004
Cappon, C.T. 1981.
Slicing cucumber.
A
Cucumber/
Fruit
Sludge
6.8
0
0.7804
0.0080
0.0047
0.001
Cappon, C.T. 1981
Pickling cucumber.
A
Pumpkin/
Fruit
Sludge
6.8
0
0.7804
0.0007
0.0025
0.002
Cappon, C.T. 1981
A
Tomato/
Fruit
Sludge
6.8
0
*0.7804
0.0015
0.0075
0.008
Cappon, C.T. 1981
B
Tomato/
Fruit
Sludge
5.3-7.1
0
2.34
0.1
0.2
0.043
Furr& Kelly
1976, p. 87.
C-61
-------
TABLE C-34
UPTAKE OF MERCURY BY GRAINS/CEREALS
Study
Chemical
Application
Tissue
Uptake
Type
Plant/
Form
Soil
Rates
Concentration
Slope
Reference/
(1)
Tissue
Applied
PH
(kg/ha)
(|ig/g DW)
(2)
Comments
B
Millet/Grain
Sludge
5.3-7.1
0
0.4
0.0427
Furr& Kelly
2.34
0.5
1976, p. 87.
C-62
-------
TABLE C -35
UPTAKE OF MERCURY BY LEAFY VEGETABLES
Study
Type
Plant/
Tissue
Chemical
Form
Applied
Soil
pH
Application
Rates
(kSAia)
Tissue
Concentration
(HS/g DW)
Uptake
Slope
(2}
Reference/
Comments
A
Cabbage
Sludge
e.8
0
0.7804
0.0029
0.0139
0.014
Cappon, C.T. 1981.
A
Lettuce
Sludge
6.8
0
0.7804
0.0029
0.0328
0.038
Camion, C.T. 19B1
A
Lettuce
Sludge
6.8
0
0.7804
0.0046
0.0405
0.046
Cappon, C.T. 1981
A
Parsley
Sludge
6.8
0
0.7804
0.0025
0.0077
0.007
Cappon, C.T. 1981
A
Swiss Chard
Sludge
5.5
0
1.3
1
0.53
0.001
Furr & Stoewsand,
. 1976, p. 87.
A
Swiss Chard
Sludge
6.5
«0
1.3
1
0.93
0.001
Futr& Stoewsand,
1976, p. 87.
A
Swiss Chard
Sludge
5.5-6.0
0
0.09
0.2
0.1
0.001
Chaney et at, 1978.
Blue Plains sludge.
A
Swiss Chard
Sludge
5.5-6.0
0
0.336
0.2
<0.05
0.001
Chaney etal, 1978.
Blue Plains compost.
B
Cabbage
Sludge
5.3-7.1
0
2.62
0.3
0.2
0.001
Furr & Kelly
1976, p. 87.
C-63
-------
TABLE C-36
UPTAKE OF MERCURY BY LEGUMES
Study
Chemical
Application
Tissue
Uptake
Type
Plant/
Form
Soil
Rates
Concentration
Slope
Reference/
(1)
Tissue
Applied
pH
(kg/ha)
(lifl/flDW)
(2)
Comments
A
Bush Bean/
Sludge
6.8
0
0.0036
0.001
Cappon, C.T. 1981.
Pod
0.7804
0.0045
A
Bush Bean/
Sludge
6.8
0
0.0001
0.001
Cappon, C.T. 1981.
Grain
0.7804
0.0004
B
Bush Bean/
Sludge
5.3-7.1
0
0.300
0.001
Furr& Kelly
Grain
2.62
0.100
1976, p. 88
C-64
-------
TABLE C-37
UPTAKE OF MERCURY BY POTATOES
Study
Chemical
Application
Tissue
Uptake
Type
Plant/
Form
Soli
Rates
Concentration
Slope
Reference/
<1)
Tissue
Applied
PH
(kg/ha)
(VQl0 DW)
(2)
Comments
B
Potato/Tuber
Sludge
5.3-7.1
0
0.1
0.001
FurrA Kelly
2.34
0.1
1976, p. 87.
C-65
-------
TABLE C-38
UPTAKE OF MERCURY BY ROOTS
Study
Type
(1)
Plant/
Tissue
Chemical
Form
Applied
Soil
pH
Application
Rates
(kg/ha)
Tissue
Concentration
(Mfl/0 DW)
Uptake
Slope
(2)
Reference/
Comments
A
Beet/Tuber
Sludge
6.8
0
0.7804
0.0025
0.0072
0.006
Cappon, C.T. 1981.
A
Onion/Bulb
Sludge
6.8
0
0.7804
0.0067
0.0171
0.013
Cappon, C.T. 1981
A
Radishfluber
Sludge
6.8
0
0.7804
0.0013
0.0066
0.007
Cappon, C.T. 1981
Red radish.
A
Radish/Tuber
Sludge
6.8
0
0.7804
0.0008
0.0043
0.004
Cappon, C.T. 1981
White radish.
B
Carrot/Tuber
Sludge
5.3-7.1
0
2.62
0.1
0.04
0.001
Furr & Kelly
1976, p. 87.
B
Onion/Bulb
Sludge
5.3-7.1
0
2.34
0.1
0.2
0.043
Furr & Kelly
1976, p. 87.
C-66
-------
TABLE C-39
UPTAKE OF MOLYBDENUM BY FORAGE
Study
Chemical
Application
Tissue
Uptake
Type
Plant/
Form
Soil
Rates
Concentration
Slope
Reference/
Tissue
Applied
PH
(kg/ha)
(pg/g DW)
(2)
Comments
A
Com
Sludge
4.6-5.3
0
1.9
0.683
Pierzynski & Jacobs
33
29.8
1986. Yearl,
66
47
Experiment 1.
A
Com
Sludge
4.7-6.4
0
7.5
2.486
Pierzynski & Jacobs
63
265
1986. Year 2,
141
365
Experiment 1.
A
Com
Sludge
5.0-6.9
0
6
5.106
Pierzynski & Jacobs
63
300
1986. Year 3,
141
724
Experiment 1.
A
Com/Leaf
Sludge
4.6-5.3
0
3
0.909
Pierzynski & Jacobs
33
40.5
1986. Yearl.
66
63
Experiment 1.
A
Com/Leaf
Sludge
4.7-6.4
0
2.2
1.723
Pierzynski & Jacobs
63
137
1986. Year 2.
141
247
Experiment 1.
A
Corn/Leaf
Sludge
5.0-6.9
0
8.8
4.907
Pierzynski & Jacobs
63
265
1986. Year 3,
141
697
Experiment 1.
A
Soybean
Sludge
4.6-5.3
0
2.7
0.814
Pierzynski & Jacobs
33
43.9
1986. Yearl,
66
56.4
Experiment 1.
A
Soybean
Sludge
4.7-6.4
0
3.1
2.257
Pierzynski & Jacobs
63
140
1986. Year 2,
141
321
Experiment 1.
A
Soybean
Sludge
5.0-6.9
0
5.4
3.229
Pierzynski & Jacobs
63
185
1986. Year 3,
141
459
Experiment 1.
A
Soybean/
Sludge
4.6-5.3
0
2.1
0.768
Pierzynski & Jacobs
Leaf
33
38.1
1986. Yearl,
66
52.8
Experiment 1.
A
Soybean/
Sludge
4.7-6.4
0
2.4
1.893
Pierzynski & Jacobs
Leaf
63
103
1986. Year 2,
141
268
Experiment 1.
.A
Soybean/
Sludge
5.0-6.9
0
9.3
3.164
Pierzynski & Jacobs
Leaf
63
158
1986. Year 3,
141
452
Experiment 1.
C-67
-------
TABLE C-39 (cont.)
UPTAKE OF MOLYBDENUM BY FORAGE (cont.)
Study
Type
(1)
Plant/
Tissue
Chemical
Form
Applied
Soil
pH
Application
Rates
(kg/ha)
Tissue
Concentration
(pg/g DW)
Uptake
Slope
(2)
Reference/
Comments
A
A
Com
Com
Sludge
Sludge
4.6-5.4
4.7-6.5
0
42
0
291
300
6.6
92.7
6.6
730
330
2.050
1.739
Pierzynski & Jacobs
1986. Year 1,
Experiment 2.
Pierzynski & Jacobs
1986. Year 2,
Experiment 2.
A
Com
Sludge
5,0-7,1
0
291
300
6.6
1300
630
3.293
Pierzynski & Jacobs
1986. Year 3,
Experiment 2.
A
Com/Leaf
Sludge
4.6-5.4
0
42
6.4
122
2.752
Pierzynski & Jacobs
1986. Year 1.
Experiment 2.
A
Com/Leaf
Sludge
4.7-6.5
0
29*1
300
6.4
462
197
1.072
Pierzynski & Jacobs
1986. Year 2,
Experiment 2.
A
Com/Leaf
Sludge
5.0-7.1
0
291
300
6.4
804
130
1.506
Pierzynski & Jacobs
1986. Year 3,
Experiment 2.
A
Bromegrass
Sludge
N.R.(3)
0
4.08
0.33
1.85
0.375
Soon & Bates, 1985.
Used means of cuts
1&2. Calcium
enriched sludge.
A
Bromegrass
Sludge
N.R.
0
9.44
0.33
1.4
0.113
Soon & Bates, 1985.
Used means of cuts
1 & 2. Feme chloride
enriched sludge.
A
Bromegrass
Sludge
N.R.
0
10.8
0.33
1.155
0.076
Soon & Bates, 1985.
Used means of cuts
1 & 2. Aluminum sulfate
enriched sludge.
A
Com
Sludge
N.R.
0
9.68
0.24
0.67
0.044
Soon & Bates, 1985.
Connestoga. Calcium
enriched sludge.
A
Com
Sludge
N.R.
0
10
0.24
0.28
0.004
Soon & Bates, 1985.
Connestoga.
Ferric chloride
enriched sludge.
C-68
-------
TABLE C-39 (cont.)
UPTAKE OF MOLYBDENUM BY FORAGE (cont.)
Study
Typ«
0)
Plant/
Tissue
Chemical
Form
Applied
Soil
pH
Application
Rates
(kg/ha)
Tissue
Concentration
(Pfl'flDW)
Uptake
Slope
(2)
Reference/
Comments
A
Com
Sludge
N,R,
0
12.16
0.24
0.28
0.003
Soon & Bates, 1985.
Connestoga.
Aluminum sulfate
enriched sludge.
A
Com/
Forage
Sludge
N.R.
0
6.08
1.01
3.67
0.438
Soon & Bates.
Caledon. Calcium
enriched sludge.
A
Com/
Forage
Sludge
N.R.
0
11.92
1.01
0.65
0.001
Soon & Bates.
Caledon,
Ferric chloride
enriched sludge.
A
Comt
Forage
Sludge
N.R.
0
12.72
1.01
0.72
0.001
Soon & Bates.
Culsdon.
Aluminum sulfate
enriched sludge.
B
Alfalfa
Sludge
6.0-6.6
40
88
188
201
486
659
2.887
Pierzynski & Jacobs
1986. 2nd cutting.
B
Alfalfa
Sludge
7.0-7.5
40
88
188
487
876
895
2.367
Pierzynski & Jacobs
1986. 2nd cutting.
B
Alfalfa
Sludge
7.7-8.2
40
88
188
483
773
944
2.901
Pierzynski & Jacobs
1986. 2nd cutting.
C-69
-------
TABLE C-40
UPTAKE OF MOLYBDENUM BY GRAINS/CEREALS
Study
Type
(1)
Plant/
Tissue
Chemical
Form
Applied
Soli
PH
Application
Rates
(kg/ha)
Tissue
Concentration
(KB/flDW)
Uptake
Slope
(2)
Reference/
Comments
A
Com/Grain
Sludge
4.6-5.3
0
33
66
0.2
1.5
2
0.027
Pierzynski & Jacobs
1986. Year 1,
Experiment 1.
A
Com/Grain
Sludge
4.7-6.4
0
63
141
0.4
3.7
5.7
0,037
Pierzynski & Jacobs
1986. Year 2,
Experiment 1.
A
Com/Grain
Sludge
5.0-6.9
0
63
141
0.6
3.6
6.9
0.045
Pierzynski & Jacobs
1986. Year 3,
Experiment 1.
A
Corn/Grain
Sludge
4.6-5.4
0
42
0.5
3.6
0.074
Pierzynski & Jacobs
1986. Year 1,
Experiment 2.
A
Com/Grain
Sludge
4.7-6.5
#
0
291
300
0.5
12
6.3
0.029
Pierzynski & Jacobs
1986. Year 2,
Experiment 2.
A
Com/Grain
- Sludge
5.0-7.1
0
291
300
0.5
16.5
9.2
0.041
Pierzynski & Jacobs
1986. Year3,
Experiment 2.
A
Corn/Grain
Sludge
N.R.
0
9.68
0.13
0.25
0.012
Soon & Bates, 1985.
Connestoga.
Calcium
enriched sludge.
A
Com/Grain
Sludge
N.R,
0
10
0.13
0.17
0.004
Soon & Bates, 1985.
Connestoga.
Ferric chloride
enriched sludge.
A
Corn/Grain
Sludge
N.R.
0
12.2
0.13
0,18
0.004
Soon & Bates, 1985.
Connestoga.
Aluminum sulfate
enriched sludge.
A
Corn
Sludge
N.R.
0
6.08
0.25
0.73
0.079
Soon & Bates.
Caledon. Calcium
enriched sludge.
A
Corn
Sludge
N.R.
0
11.92
0.25
0.25
0.001
Soon & Bates.
Caledon.
Feme chloride
enriched sludge.
C-70
-------
TABLE C-40 (cont.)
UPTAKE OF MOLYBDENUM BY GRAINS/CEREALS (cont.)
Study
Type
(1)
Plant/
Tissue
Chemical
Form
Applied
Soli
PH
Application
Rates
(kg/ha)
Tissue
Concentration
(Wj/flDW)
Uptake
Slope
(2)
Reference/
Comments
A
Com
Sludge
N.R.
0
12.72
0.25
0.29
0.003
Soon & Bates.
Caledon.
Aluminum sulfate
enriched sludge.
B
Com
Sludge
6.0-6.6
40
88
188
74
315
329
1.482
Pierzynski & Jacobs
1986. 2nd cutting.
B
Com/Grain
Sludge
7.0-7.5
40
88
188
260
403
383
0.674
Pierzynski & Jacobs
1986. 2nd cutting.
B
Com/Grain
Sludge
7.7-8.2
40
88
168
273
470
362
0.346
Pierzynski & Jacobs
1986. 2nd cutting.
C-71
-------
TABLE C-41
UPTAKE OF MOLYBDENUM BY LEGUMES
Study
Chemical
Application
Tissue
Uptake
Type
Plant/
Form
Soil
Rates
Concentration
Slope
Reference/
(1)
Tissue
Applied
pH
(kg/ha)
(Hg/B DW)
(2)
Comments
A
Soybean/
Sludge
4.6-5.3
0
14.3
1.632
Pieizynski & Jacobs,
Grain
33
70.9
1986. Year 1,
66
122
Experiment 1.
A
Soybean/
Sludge
4.7-6.4
0
8.9
1.649
Pieizynski & Jacobs,
Grain
63
107
1986. Year 2,
141
241
Experiment 1.
A
Soybean/
Sludge
5.0-6.9
0
19.9
1.578
Pieizynski & Jacobs,
Grain
63
114
1986. Year 3,
141
242
Experiment 1.
B
Soybean/
Sludge
6.0-6.6
40
300
4.213
Pierzynski & Jacobs,
Grain
88
800
1986. 2nd cutting.
188
986
B
Soybean/
Sludge
7.0-7.5
40
736
2.005
Pierzynski & Jacobs,
Grain
88
1010
1986. 2nd cutting.
188
1070
B
Soybean/
Sludge
7.7-8.2
40
391
1.887
Pierzynski & Jacobs,
Grain
88
585
1986. 2nd cutting.
188
692
C-72
-------
TABLE C-42
UPTAKE OF NICKEL BY FORAGE
Study
Type
0)
Plant/
Tissue
Chemical
Form
Applied
Soli
PH
Application
Rates
(kg/ha)
Tissue
Concentration
(pg/g DW)
Uptake
Slope
(2)
Reference/
Comments
A
Natural Forage
Sludge
N.R.
9.75
15
<0.57
2.8
0.425
Baxter etal., 1983
Means reported
A
Reed Canary
Grass
Sludge
6.2-7.4
0
1.3
2.4
2.6
0.154
Duncomb et at., 1982.
A
Com/Forage
Sludge
6.2-7.4
0
1.1
1
0.9
0.001
Duncomb et al., 1982.
A
Com
Sludge
6.6
0
8.6
17.2
0.23
0.36
0.54
0.018
Rappaport et al., 1987.
Year 1.
A
Com
Sludge
6.6
0
8.6
47.2
0.75
1.32
1.33
0.034
Rappaport et al., 1987.
Year 1.
A
Com/Forage
Sludge
6.6
0
8.6
17.2
0.54
0.66
0.66
0.007
Rappaport et al., 1987.
Year 2.
A
Barley
Sludge
6.6
0
8.6
17.2
0.51
0.92
0.74
0.013
Rappaport et al., 1987.
Year 2.
A
Ryegrass
Liquid Sludge
6.5
71.4
84.7
3.2
7.6
0.331
Carlton Smith, 1988.
Mean of 5 years used.
Sandy loam.
A
Ryegrass
Bed-dried
Sludge
6.5
70.3
108.5
3.2
7.8
0.12
Carlton Smith, 1988.
Mean of 4 years used.
Sandy loam.
A
Ryegrass
Liquid Sludge
6.7
85.2
101.6
3.8
7.7
0.238
Carlton Smith, 1988.
Mean of 5 years used.
Clay.
A
Ryegrass
Bed-dried
Sludge
6.7
85.1
140.9
3.7
7.7
0.072
Carlton Smith, 1988.
Mean of 4 years used.
Clay.
A
Ryegrass
Liquid Sludge
8.0
23.7
40.2
1.6
3.9
0.139
Carlton Smith, 1988.
Mean of 5 years used.
Calcareous loam.
A
Ryegrass
Bed-dried
Sludge
8.0
23.9
126.9
1.5
14
0.121
Carlton Smith, 1988.
Mean of 5 years used.
Calcareous loam.
C-73
-------
TABLE C-42 (cont.)
UPTAKE OF NICKEL BY FORAGE (cont.)
Study
Type
(1)
Plant/
Tissue
Chemical
Form
Applied
Soil
pH
Application
Rates
(K0/ha)
tissue
Concentration
(HO/flDW)
Uptake
Slope
(2)
Reference/
Comments
B
Rape
Sludge
5.6
0
2.3
4.6
1.34
0.46
0.93
0.001
Narwaletai, 1983.
First harvest.
B
Rape
Sludge
6
0
2.31
4.62
0.24
0.3
0.38
0.03
Narwaletai., 1983.
First harvest.
B
Rape
Sludge
7.5
0
2.31
4.62
0.11
0.3
0.46
0.076
Narwaletai, 1983.
First harvest.
B
Rape
Sludge
5.6
0
2,31
4,62
t
3.75
1.42
1.73
0.001
Narwaletai, 1983.
Second harvest.
B
Rape
Sludge
6
0
2.31
4.62
1.3*
0.62
0.81
0.001
Narwal et al., 1983.
Second harvest.
B
Rape
Sludge
7.5
0
2.31
0.49
0.38
0.001
Narwaletai, 1983.
Second harvest.
4.62 0.37
C-74
-------
TABLE C-43
UPTAKE OF NICKEL BY GARDEN FRUITS
Study
Chemical
Application
Tissue
Uptake
Type
Plant/
Form
Soli
Rates
Concentration
Slope
Reference/
(1)
Tissue
Applied
PH
(kg/ha)
(Mfl/0 DW)
(2)
Comments
A
Tomato/Fruit
Sludge
5.9-6.6
0
0.61
0.001
Keefereta!., 1986.
8
0.65
Blue Plains sludge.
16
0.35
A
Tomato/Frurt
Sludge
5.9-6.6
0
0.43
0.001
Keefereta!., 1986.
8
0.6
Blue Plains sludge.
16
0.4
A
Tomato/Fruit
Sludge
5.9-7.1
0
0.61
0.001
Keefereta!.. 1986.
1270
0.5
Huntington sludge.
2540
0.5
Early fruiting.
A
Tomato/Fruit
Sludge
5.9-7.1
0
0.43
0.001
Keefereta!., 1986.
1270
0.55
Huntington sludge.
2540
0.45
Late fruiting.
A
Tomato/Fruit
Sludge
5.9-6.9
«
0
0.61
0.083
Keefereta!., 1986.
2
0.6
Martinsburg sludge.
4
0.94
Early fruiting.
A
Tomato/Fruit
Sludge
5.9-6.9
0
0.43
0.093
Keefereta!., 1986.
2
0.65
Martinsburg sludge.
4
0.8
Late fruiting.
A
Tomato/Fruit
Sludge
5.9-6.3
0
0.61
0.003
Keefereta!., 1986.
24
0.6
Parkersburg sludge.
48
0.75
Early fruiting.
A
Tomato/Fruit
Sludge
5.9-6.3
0
0.43
0.001
Keefereta!., 1986.
24
0.45
Parkersburg sludge.
48
0.4
A
Celery
Sludge
7.3
0
<0.3
0.001
Peterson et a!., 1989.
2.856
<0.3
5.712
<0.3
11.424
<0.3
9
A
Tomato/Fruit
Sludge
7.3
0
<0.3
0.001
Peterson et al„ 1989.
2.856
<0.3
5.712
<0.3
11.424
<0.3
A
Tomato/Fruit
Sludge
N.R.
0
1.1
0.022
Lue-Hing et al, 1984.
9
1.3
1977 data used.
17
1.1
Nu-Earth.
34
2.2
43
1.8
C-75
-------
TABLE C-43 (cont.)
UPTAKE OF NICKEL BY GARDEN FRUITS (cont.)
Study
Chemical
Application
Tissue
Uptake
Type
Plant/
Form
Soil
Rates
Concentration
Slope
Reference/
(1)
Tissue
Applied
pH
(kg/ha)
(Mfl/g DW)
(2)
Comments
B
Green Pepper/
Sludge
6.4
0
0.4
0.05
Furretal., 1981.
Fruit
38
2.3
B
Green Pepper/
Sludge
6.9
0
0.4
0.029
Furretal., 1981.
Fruit
38
1.5
B
Pea/Grain
Sludge
6.4
0
1.7
0.095
Furretal., 1981.
38
5.3
B
Pea/Grain
Sludge
6.9
0
1.3
0.029
Furretal., 1981.
38 2.4
C-76
-------
TABLE C-44
UPTAKE OF NICKEL BY GRAINS/CEREALS
Study
Type
W
Plant/
Tissue
Chemical
Form
Applied
Soli
PH
Application
Rates
(kg/ha)
Tissue
Concentration
(MSlQ DW)
Uptake
Slope
(2)
Referencef
Comments
A
Com/Grain
Sludge
6.2-7.4
0
1.1
0.6
0.4
0.001
Duncomb et al., 1982
A
Com/Grain
Sludge
6.6
0
8.6
17.2
0.39
1.04
1.34
0.055
Rappaport of al., 1987.
Year 1.
A
Com/Grain
Sludge
6.6
0
8.6
17.2
0.11
0.34
0.37
0.015
Rappaport et al., 1987.
Year 2.
A
Com
Sludge
6.6
0
8.6
17.2
0.14
0.18
0.18
0.002
Rappaport et al., 1987.
Year 2.
A
Wheat/Grain
Liquid Sludge
6.5
71-4
84.7
1.5
1.8
0.023
Carlton Smith, 1988.
Mean of S years used.
Sandy loam.
A
Wheat/Grain
Bed-dried
Sludge
6.5
70.3
108.5
1.3
1.5
0.005
Carlton Smith, 1988.
Mean of 4 years used.
Sandy loam.
A
Wheat/Grain
Liquid Sludge
6.7
85.2
101.6
1.6
1.4
0.001
Carlton Smith, 1988.
Mean of 5 years used.
Clay.
A
Wheat/Grain
Bed-dried
Sludge
6.7
85.1
140.9
0.9
1.4
0.009
Carlton Smith, 1988.
Mean of 4 years used.
Clay.
A
Wheat/Grain
Liquid Sludge
8.0
23.7
40.2
0.8
0.9
0.006
Carlton Smith, 1988.
Mean of 5 years used.
Calcareous loam.
A
Wheat/Grain
Bed-dried
Sludge
8.0
23.9
126.9
0.9
1.1
0.002
Carlton Smith, 1988.
Mean of 4 years used.
Calcareous loam.
C-77
-------
TABLE C-43 (cont.)
UPTAKE OF NICKEL BY GARDEN FRUITS (cont)
Study
Chemical
Application
Tissue
Uptake
Type
Plant/
Form
Soil
Rates
Concentration
Slope
Reference/
(1)
Tissue
Applied
PH
(kg/ha)
(pg/g DW)
(2)
Comments
B
Green Pepper/
Sludge
6.4
0
0.4
0.05
Furretal.. 1981.
Fruit
38
2.3
B
Green Pepper/
Sludge
6.9
0
0.4
0.029
Furretal., 1981.
Fruit
38
1.5
B
Pea/Grain
Sludge
6.4
0
1.7
0.095
Furretal., 1981.
38
5.3
B
Pea/Grain
Sludge
6.9
0
1.3
0.029
Furretal., 1981.
38
*
2.4
C-76
-------
TABLE C-44
UPTAKE OF NICKEL BY GRAINS/CEREALS
Study
Typ«
W
Plant/
Tissue
Chemical
Form
Applied
Soil
PH
Application
Rates
(kg/ha)
Tissue
Concentration
(pg/g DW)
Uptake
Slope
(2)
Reference/
Comments
A
Com/Grain
Sludge
6.2-7.4
0
1.1
0.6
0.4
0.001
Duncomb etal., 1982
A
Com/Grain
Sludge
6.6
0
8.6
17.2
0.39
1.04
1.34
0.055
Rappaport et al., 1987.
Year 1.
A
Com/Grain
Sludge
6.6
0
8.6
17.2
0.11
0.34
0.37
0.015
Rappaport et al., 1987.
Year 2.
A
Com
Sludge
6.6
0
8.6
17.2
0.14
0.18
0.18
0.002
Rappaport et al., 1987.
Year 2.
A
Wheat/Grain
Liquid Sludge
6.5
71.4
84.7
1.5
1.8
0.023
Carlton Smith, 1988.
Mean of 5 years used.
Sandy loam.
A
Wheat/Grain
Bed-dried
Sludge
6.5
70.3
108.5
1.3
1.5
0.005
Carlton Smith, 1988.
Mean of 4 years used.
Sandy loam.
A
Wheat/Grain
Liquid Sludge
6.7
85.2
101.6
1.6
1.4
0.001
Carlton Smith, 1988.
Mean of 5 years used.
Clay.
A
Wheat/Grain
Bed-dried
Sludge
6.7
85.1
140.9
0.9
1.4
0.009
Carlton Smith, 1988.
Mean of 4 years used.
Clay.
A
Wheat/Grain
Liquid Sludge
8.0
23.7
40.2
0.8
0.9
0.006
Carlton Smith, 1988.
Mean of S years used.
Calcareous loam.
A
Wheat/Grain
Bed-dried
Sludge
8.0
23.9
126.9
0.9
1.1
0.002
Cartton Smith, 1988.
Mean of 4 years used.
Calcareous loam.
C-77
-------
TABLE C-45
UPTAKE OF NICKEL BY LEAFY VEGETABLES
Study
Type
(1)
Plant/
Tissue
Chemical
Form
Applied
Soil
PH
Application
Rates
(kg/ha)
Tissue
Concentration
(Pfl'fl DW)
Uptake
Slope
(2)
Reference/
Comments
A
Swiss Chard
Nu-Earth
*5.7-6.3
0
0.6
2.9
11.9
15.000
Chaneyetal., 1982
A
Swiss Chard
Nu-Earth
6.7
0
0.6
1.7
6
7.167
Chaneyetal., 1982
A
Collard Greens
Heat-Treated
Sludge
*5.5-5.6
0
8
2.9
2.4
0.001 ;
Cheney at al., 1982
A
CoIIard Greens
Heat-Treated
Sludge
*6.4-6.3
0
8
1.8
1.5
0.001
Chaneyetal, 1982
A
Collard Greens
Nu-Earth
*5.5-6.3
0
0.6
2.9
4.2
2.167
Chaneyetal., 1982
A
Collard Greens
Nu-Earth
*6.4-6.8
0
6.6
1.8
3.9
3.500
Chaneyetal., 1982
A
Lettuce
Heat-Treated
Sludge
*5.3-5.4
0
8
1.8
2.4
0.075
Chaneyetal., 1982
Romaine Lettuce
A
Lettuce
Heat-Treated
Sludge
*6.2-5.4
0
8
1.6
0,8
0.001
Chaneyetal., 1982
Romaine Lettuce
A
Lettuce
Nu-Earth
*5.3-5.6
0
0.6
1.8
4,5
4.500
Chaney et el., 1982
Romaine Lettuce
A
Lettuce
Nu-Earth
*6.2-6.6
0
0.6
1.6
1.6
0.001
Chaneyetal., 1982
Romaine Lettuce
A
Swiss Chard
Heat-Treated
Sludge
5.7
0
8
2.9
8.3
0.675
Chaney et al.. 1982
A
Swiss Chard
Heat-Treated
Sludge
*6.7-6.8
0
8
1.7
1.5
0.001
Chaneyetal., 1982
A
Cabbage
Sludge
5.9-6.6
0
8
16
0.2
0.22
0.6
0.025
Keefer et al., 1986.
Blue Plains sludge.
A
Cabbage
Sludge
5.9-7.1 ,
0
1270
2540
0.2
0.22
0.26
0.001
Keefer etaL, 1986.
Huntington sludge.
A
Cabbage
Sludge
5.S-6.9
0
2
4
0.2
0.3
022
0,005
Keefer etaL, 1986.
Martinsburg sludge.
C-78
-------
TABLE C-45 (cont.)
UPTAKE OF NICKEL BY LEAFY VEGETABLES (cont.)
Study
Chemical
Application
Tissue
Uptake
Type
Plant/
Form
Soil
Rates
Concentration
Slope
Reference/
(D
Tissue
Applied
PH
(kg/ha)
(jjg/g DW)
(2)
Comments
A
Cabbage
Sludge
5.9-6.3
0
0.2
0.003
Keeferetal., 1986.
24
0.2
Parkersburg sludge.
48
0.32
A
Cabbage
Sludge
7.3
0
<0.3
0.002
Peterson et al., 1989.
2.856
1.2
5.712
0.5
11.424
0.6
A
Lettuce
Sludge
7.3
0
2
0.001
Peterson et al., 1989.
2.856
2.6
5.712
1.9
11.424
1.8
A
Lettuce
Liquid Sludge
6.5
71.4
1.3
0.023
Carlton Smith, 1988.
JB4.7
1.6
Mean of 5 years used.
Sandy loam.
A
Lettuce
Bed-dried
6.5
70.3
0.9
0.001
Carlton Smith, 1988.
Sludge
108.5
0.9
Mean of 4 years used.
Sandy loam.
A
Lettuce
Liquid Sludge
6.7
85.2
2.3
0.001
Carlton Smith, 1988.
101.6
2.3
Mean of 5 years used.
Clay.
A
Lettuce
Bed-dried
6.7
85.1
1.7
0.018
Carlton Smith, 1988.
Sludge
140.9
2.7
Mean of 4 years used.
Clay.
A
Lettuce
Liquid Sludge
8.0
23.7
1.2
0.018
Carlton Smith, 1988.
40.2
1.5
Mean of 5 years used.
Calcareous loam.
A
Lettuce
Bed-dried
8.0
23.9
1.3
0.012
Carlton Smith, 1988.
Sludge
126.9
2.5
Mean of 4 years used.
Calcareous loam.
A
Cabbage
Liquid Sludge
6.5
71.4
4
0.053
Carlton Smith, 1988.
84.7
4.7
Mean of 5 years used.
Sandy loam.
A
Cabbage
Bed-dried
6.5
70.3
3.9
0.001
Carlton Smith, 1988.
Sludge
108.5
3.6
Mean of 4 years used.
•
Sandy loam.
A
Cabbage
Liquid Sludge
6.7
85.2
2
0.110
Carlton Smith, 1988.
101.6
3.8
Mean of 5 years used.
Clay.
A
Cabbage
Bed-dried
6.7
85.1
2.1
0.030
Carlton Smith, 1988.
Sludge
140.9
3.8
Mean of 4 years used.
C-79
-------
TABLE C-45 (cont)
UPTAKE OF NICKEL BY LEAFY VEGETABLES (cont.)
Study
Type
(1)
Plant/
Tissue
Chemical
Form
Applied
Soli
PH
Application
Rates
(kg/ha)
Tissue
Concentration
(MS/0 DW)
Uptake
Slope
(2)
Reference/
Comments
Clay.
A
Cabbage
Liquid Sludge
8.0
23.7
40.2
0.9
1.6
0.042
Carlton Smith, 1988.
Mean of 5 years used.
Calcareous loam.
A
Cabbage
Bed-dried
Sludge
8.0
23.9
126.9
1
3.2
0.021
Cartton Smith, 1988.
Mean of 4 years used.
Calcareous loam.
A
Spinach
Sludge
N.R,(3)
0
9
17
34
43
2.9
3
4.7
4.8
4.2
0.037
Lue-Hing et al, 1984.
1977 data used.
Nu-Earth.
A
Swiss Chard
Sludge
N.R.
*
0
9
17
34
43
2
1.4
1.7
2.8
4
0.051
Lue-Hing et al, 1984.
1977 data used.
Nu-Earth.
A
Romaine
Sludge
5.75-7.7
0
3.8
1.7
0.7
0.001
Chaney et al., 1982.
Limed raw sludge.
A
Romaine
Sludge
5.75-7.7
0
3.4
1.7
0.5
0.001
Chaney etai., 1982.
Digested sludge.
A
Romaine
Sludge
5.75-7.6
0
45
1.7
0.6
0.001
Chaney etai, 1982.
Compost sludge.
A
Romaine
Sludge
5.75-6.9
0
45
1.7
0.6
0.001
Chaney etai., 1982.
Compost sludge.
A
Romaine
Sludge
5.75-5.8
0
8.3
1.7
1.6
0.001
Chaney et ah, 1982.
Heat treated sludge.
A
Roma'ne
Sludge
5.75-6.1
0
59
1.7
3.05
0.023
Chaney etai., 1982.
Nu-Earth.
A
Swiss Chard
Sludge
5.75-7.7
0
3.8
2.3
0.8
0.001
Chaney etai., 1982.
Umed raw sludge.
A
Swiss Chard
Sludge
5.75-7.6
0
3.4
2.3
1.2
0.001
Chaney etai., 1982.
Digested sludge.
A
Swiss Chard
Sludge
5.75-7.7
0
45
2.3
0.8
0.001
Chaney et ai., 1882.
Composted sludge.
A
Swiss Chard
Sludge
5.75-6.9
0
8.3
2.3
4.9
0.313
Chaney et al., 1982.
Heat treated sludge.
C-80
-------
TABLE C-45 (cont.)
UPTAKE OF NICKEL BY LEAFY VEGETABLES (cont.)
Study
Type
(1)
Plant/
Tissue
Chemical
Form
Applied
Soil
PH
Application
Rates
(kg/ha)
Tissue
Concentration
(lig/g DW)
Uptake
Slope
(2)
Reference/
Comments
A
Swiss Chard
Sludge
5.75-5.8
0
59
2.3
8.95
0.113
Cheney etal., 1982.
Nu Earth sludge.
A
Cotlard Greens
Sludge
5.75-7.7
0
3.8
5
5.6
0.158
Chaneyetal., 1982.
Umed raw sludge
A
CoHard Greens
Sludge
5.75-7.6
0
3.4
5
6.6
0.471
Chaneyetal., 1982.
Digested sludge.
A
Cotlard Greens
Sludge
5.75-6.9
0
45
5
6.3
0.029
Chaneyetal., 1982.
Composted sludge.
A
Coltard Greens
Sludge
5.75-5.8
0
B3
5
7.2
0.027
Chaneyetal., 1982.
Heat treated sludges
A
CoHard Greens
Sludge
5.75-6.1
0
*59
5
6.15
0.019
Chaneyetal., 1982.
Nu Earth sludge.
B
Lettuce
Sludge
N.R.
0
1.3
2.6
5.2
2.1
2.5
2.2
2
0.001
Hue etal., 1988.
Akaka Andept-
soil type.
B
Lettuce
Sludge
N.R.
0
1.3
2.6
5.2
5.1
6.9
7.3
5.8
0.068
Hue et al, 1988.
Lualualei Vertisol-
soil type.
B
Lettuce
Sludge
N.R.
0
1.3
2.6
5.2
4.8
10.4
12.4
17.2
2.251
Hue etal., 1988.
Wahiawa Oxisol-
soil type.
B
Lettuce
Sludge
6.4
0
38
0.6
3
0.063
Fun-etal., 1981.
B
Lettuce
Sludge
6.9
0
38
0.8
1.7
0.024
Furretal., 1981.
B
Spinach
Sludge
6.4
0
38
1
3.9
0.076
Furretal., 1981.
B
Spinach
Sludge
6.9
0
38
0.7
3
0.061
Fun-etal., 1981.
C-81
-------
TABLE C-46
UPTAKE OF NICKEL BY LEGUMES
Study
Chemical
Application
Tissue
Uptake
Type
Plant/
Form
Soli .
Rates
Concentration
Slope
Reference/
(1)
Tissue
Applied
PH
(Kama)
(MO/0 DW)
(2)
Comments
A
Green Bean/
Sludge
5.9-6.6
0
0.24
0.001
Keefer et al., 19B6.
Pod & Seed
8
0.26
Blue Plains sludge.
16
0.18
A
Green Bean/
Sludge
5.9-7.1
0
0.24
0.001
Keefer eta!., 1986.
Pod & Seed
1270
0.14
Huntington sludge.
2540
0.24
A
Green Bean/
Sludge
5.9-6.9
0
0.24
0.125
Keefer etaL. 1986.
Pod & Seed
2
0.3
Martinsburg sludge.
4
0.74
A
Green Bean/
Sludge
5.9-6.3
0
0.24
0.005
Keefer etaL, 1986.
Pod & Seed
24
0.3
Parkersburg sludge.
48
0.48.
A
Bean/Grain
Sludge
7,3
A
1.5
0.09
Peterson et al., 1989.
2.856
2.3
5.712
2.1
11.424
2.7
A
Green Bean/
Sludge
N.R.
0
2.1
0.119
Lue-Hing et al, 1984.
Pod & Seed
9
2.8
1977 data used.
17
4.4
Nu-Earth.
34
6.1
43
7.1
A
Soybean/
Limed
7.3-7.5
22.6
7.41
0.23
Cheney et el., 1977.
Grain
Digested
22.6
2
Por control, used cal-
Sludge
20.6
8.25
careous soil data.
19.2
7.16
Cheney's values are
23.8
10.37
means of 3 reps.
24.6
7.48
A
Soybean/
Limed Raw
7.3-7.7
22.6
7.41
0.502
Chaney et al., 1977.
Grain
Sludge
22.4
6.27
Por control, used cal-
23.8
7.29
careous soil data.
22
6.42
Chaney's values ere
means of 3 reps.
A
Soybean/
Raw Sludge
6.6-7.3
22.6
7.41
0.001
Chaney etaL, 1977.
Grain
Compost
24
8.72
Por control, uted cal-
28.2
6.69
careous soB data.
37.2
7.47
Chaney's values are
*
56.6
6.96
means of 3 reps.
80
4.15
C-82
-------
TABLE C-46 (cont.)
UPTAKE OF NICKEL BY LEGUMES (cont.)
Study
Chemical
Application
Tissue
Uptake
Type
Plant/
Form
Soli
Rates
Concentration
Slope
Reference/
Tissue
Applied
PH
(kg/ha)
Oig/g DW)
(2)
Comments
A
Soybean/
Heat Treated
5.9-6.0
24.6
8.13
0.198
, Cheney eta!., 1977.
Grain
Sludge
28
7.21
Cheney's values are
High pH
20.4
5.69
means of 3 reps.
20.4
6.4
A
Soybean/
Heat Treated
5.3-5.6
21.6
6.81
0.152
Chaney et el.. 1977.
Grain
Sludge
23.8
9.49
Cheney's values are
LowpH
26
7.74
means of 3 reps.
25.4
7.78
C-83
-------
TABLE C-47
UPTAKE OF NICKEL BY POTATOES
Study
Type
(1)
Plant/
Tissue
Chemical
Form
Applied
Soli
PH
Application
Rates
(kg/ha)
Tissue
Concentration
(Mfl/fl DW)
Uptake
Slope
(2)
Reference/
Comments
A
Potato/Tuber
Liquid Sludge
6.5
71.4
84.7
1.5
1.7
0.015
Carlton Smith, 1988.
Mean of 5 years used.
Sandy loam.
A
Potato/Tuber
Bed-dried
Sludge
6.5
70,3
108.5
1.5
1.7
0.005
Carlton Smith, 1988.
Mean of 4 years used.
Sandy loam.
A
Potato/Tuber
Liquid Sludge
6.7
85.2
101,6
1.2
1.7
O.03
Carlton Smith, 1988.
Mean of 5 years used.
Clay.
A
Potato/Tuber
Bed-dried
Sludge
6.7
85.1
140.9
1
1.4
0.007
Carlton Smith, 1988.
Mean of. 4 years used.
Clay.
A
Potato/Tuber
Liquid Sludge
8.0
2t7
40.2
0.6
0.6
0.001
Carlton Smith, 1988.
Mean of 5 years used.
Calcareous ham.
A
Potato/Tuber
Bed-dried
Sludge
8.0
23.9
126.9
0.7
0.8
0.001
Carlton Smith, 1988.
Mean of 4 years used.
Calcareous loam.
B
Sweet Potato/
Tuber
Sludge
6.4
0
38
0.3
1.2
0.024
Furret a!., 1981.
B
Sweet Potato/
Tuber
Sludge
6.9
0
38
0.1
0.5
0.011
FurretaL, 1981.
C
Potato/Tuber
Organic, metal
contaminated
soil
6.6
368
4
0.011
Harris et at, 1978.
Vanessa-potato type.
c
Potato/Tuber
Organic, metal
contaminated
soil
6.6
368
4.75
0.013
Harris et al, 1978.
Portland Javelin-potato
type.
c
Potato/Tuber
Organic, metal
contaminated
soil
6.6
368
4.25
0.012
Harris et al, 1978.
Home Guard-potato
type.
c
Potato/Tuber
Organic, metal
contaminated
soil
6.6
368
4.01
0.011
Harris et al, 1978.
Desiree-potato type.
c
Potato/Tuber
Organic, metal
contaminated
soil
6.6
368
3.47
0.009
Harris et at, 1978.
King Edward-potato
type.
C-84
-------
TABLE C-47 (cont.)
UPTAKE OF NICKEL BY POTATOES (cont.)
Study
Type
W
Plant/
Tissue
Chemical
Form
Applied
son
PH
Application
Rates
(kg/ha)
Tissue
Concentration
(lHj/g DW)
Uptake
Slope
(2)
Reference/
Comments
c
Potato/Tuber
Organic, metal
contaminated
soil
6.6
368
5.46
0.015
Harris et el. 1978.
Majestic-potato
type.
C-85
-------
TABLE C-48
UPTAKE OF NICKEL BY ROOTS
Study
Chemical
Application Tissue
Uptake
Type
Plant/
Form
Soil
Rates Concentration
Slope
Reference/
(D
Tissue
Applied
PH
(kg/ha)
-------
TABLE C-48 (cont.)
UPTAKE OF NICKEL BY ROOTS (cont.)
Study
Chemical
Application
Tissue
Uptake
Type
Plant/
Form
Soil
Rates
Concentration
Slope
Reference/
Tissue
Applied
pH
(kg/ha)
(ra/g dw)
(2)
Comments
A
Onion/Bulb
Sludge
6.8
0
285
570
1140
2.5
6.3
7.5
18.8
0.014
Williams, 1977.
A
Onion/Bulb
Sludge
7.3
0
2.856
5.712
11.424
<0.3
<0.3
<0.3
<0.3
0.001
Peterson et at., 1989.
A
Red Beet/Tuber Liquid Sludge
6.5
71.4
84.7
3.4
3.9
0.038
Carlton Smith, 1988.
Mean of 5 years used.
Sandy loam.
A
Red Beet/Tuber
Bed-dried
Sludge
6.5
70.3
1
-------
TABLE C-48 (cont.)
UPTAKE OF NICKEL BY ROOTS (cont.)
Study
Chemical
Application
Tissue
Uptake
Type
Plant/
Form
Soil
Rates
Concentration
Slope
Reference/
(1)
Tissue
Applied
pH
(kg/ha)
(Pfl/fl DW)
(2)
Comments
B
Kohlrabi/Tuber
Sludge
6.9
0
0.2
0.024
Furretal.. 1981.
38
1.1
B
Turnipfiuber
Sludge
6,4
0
0.7
0.061
FurretaL, 1981,
38
3
B
Turnip/Tuber
Sludge
6.9
0
0.2
0.018
Furretal., 1981.
38
0.9
C-88
-------
TABLE C-49
UPTAKE OF NICKEL BY SWEET CORN
Study
Chemical
Application
Tissue
Uptake
Type
Plant/
Form
Soil
Rates
Concentration
Slope
Reference/
Tissue
Applied
PH
(kg/ha)
(pg/g DW)
(2)
Comments
A
Sweet Com/
Sludge
5.9-6.6
0
0.17
0.001
Keeferetal., 1986.
Grain
8
0.52
Blue Plains sludge.
16
0.1
A
Sweet Com/
Sludge
5.9-7.1
0
0.17
0.001
Keeferetal., 1986.
Grain
1270
0.14
Huntington sludge.
2540
0.42
A
Sweet Com
Sludge
5.9-6.9
0
0.17
0.001
Keeferetal., 1986.
2
0.12
Martinsburg sludge.
4
0.14
A
Sweet Com/
Sludge
5.9-6.3
0
0.17
0.001
Keeferetal., 1986.
Grain
24
0.32
Parkersburg sludge.
48
t
0.12
C-89
-------
TABLE C-50
UPTAKE OF SELENIUM BY FORAGE
Study
Type
(D
Plant/
tissue
Chemical
Form
Applied
Soli
PH
Application
Rates
(kg/ha)
Tissue
Concentration
(pg/g DW)
Uptake
Slope
(2)
Reference/
Comments
A
Barley
Sludge
5.8-7.0
0
3.64
<0.05
0.08
0.008
Logan etal., 1987.
¦ Greenfield.
A
Bailey
Sludge
7
0
3.6
0.06
0.05
0.001
Logan etal., 1987.
Domino.
B
Millet
Sludge
6.8
0
1.446
0.04
0.06
0.014
Fun'etal, 1980.
Kalamazoo sludge/
Tee1 soil.
i
Millet
Sludge
5.5
0
0.03
0.001
Fun-etal, 1980.
1.111 0.03 Indianapolis sludge/
Darien Soil.
C-90
-------
TABLE C-51
UPTAKE OF SELENIUM BY GARDEN FRUITS
Study
Type
W
Plant/
Tissue
Chemical
Form
Applied
Soil
PH
Application
Rates
(kg/ha)
Tissue
Concentration
(M0/a DW)
Uptake
Slope
(2)
Reference/
Comments
A
Broccoli/Fruit
Sludge
6.8
0
0.7804
0.016
0.026
0.013
Cappon, C.T. 1981.
A
Cauliflower
Sludge
6.8
0
0.7804
0.025
, 0.0348
0.012
Cappon, C.T. 1981.
A
Cucumber/Fruit
Sludge
6.8
0
0.7804
0.006
0.0102
0.006
Cappon, C.T. 1981.
Slicing cucumber.
A
Cucumber/Fruit
Sludge
6.8
0
0.7804
0.005
0.0076
0.004
Cappon, C.T. 1981.
Pickling cucumber.
A
Pumpkin/Fruit
Sludge
6.8
0
0.7804
0.012
0.0183
0.008
Cappon, C.T. 1981.
A
Tomato/Fruit
Sludge
6.8
.0
0.7804
0.026
0.0564
0.039
Cappon, C.T. 1981.
B
Tomato/Tuber
Sludge
6.8
0
1.446
0.03
0.08
0.035
Furretat, 1980.
Kalamazoo sludge/
Teel soil.
B
Tomato/Fruit
Sludge
5.5
0
1.111
0.01
0.02
0.009
Furretal, 1980.
Indianapolis sludge/
Darien Soil.
C-91
-------
TABLE C-52
UPTAKE OF SELENIUM BY GRAINS/CEREALS
Study
Type
(1)
Plant/
Tissue
Chemical
Form
Applied
Soil
pH
Application
Rates
(kortia)
Tissue
Concentration
(Mfl/fl DW)
Uptake
Slope
(2)
Reference/
Comments
A
Barley/Grain
Sludge
5.8-7.0
0
3,6
0.05
0.05
0.001
Logan et al., 1987.
Greenfield.
A
Barley/Grain
Sludge
7
0
3.6
<0.05
<0.05
0.001
Logan et al., 1987.
Domino.
B
MIIIet/Grain
Sludge
6.8
0
1.446
0.03
0.11
0.055
Fun- et al, 1980.
Kalamazoo sludgef
Teelsoil.
B
Millet/Grain
Sludge
5.5
0
1.111
0.02
0.03
0.009
Furretal, 1980.
Indianapolis sludge/
Darien Soil.
C-92
-------
TABLE C-53
UPTAKE OF SELENIUM BY LEAFY VEGETABLES
Study
Type
(1)
Plant#
Tissue
Chemical
Form
Applied
Soli
PH
Application
Rates
(kg/ha)
Tissue
Concentration
(pg/g DW)
Uptake
Slope
(2)
Reference/
Comments
A
Swiss Chard
Sludge
6.1-7.8
0
4.17
8.34
0.06
0.08
0.08
0.002
Logan etaL, 1987.
Romona.
A
Cabbage
Sludge
6.8
0
0.7804
0.0120
0.0348
0.029
Cappon, C.T. 1981.
A
Lettuce
Sludge
6.8
0
0.7804
0.0150
0.0234
0.011
Cappon, C.T. 1981.
A
Lettuce
Sludge
6.8
0
0.7804
0.0121
0.0414
0.038
Cappon, C.T. 1981.
A
Pareley
Sludge
6.8
0
0.7804
0.0048
0.0043
0.001
Cappon, C.T. 1981.
B
Cabbage
Sludge
6.8
'0
1.446
0.07
0.1
0.021
Furretal. 1980.
Kalamazoo sludge/
Teel soil.
B
Cabbage
Sludge
S.5
0
1.111
0.03
0.03
0.001
Furretal, 1980.
Indianapolis sludge/
Datien Soil.
C-93
-------
TABLE C-54
UPTAKE OF SELENIUM BY LEGUMES
Study
Type
(1)
Plant/
Tissue
Chemical
Form
Applied
Soil
PH
Application
Rates
(fcflflw)
Tissue
Concentration
(pg/g DW)
Uptake
Slope
(2)
Referencef
Comments
A
Bush Bean/
Pod
Sludge
6.8
0
0.7804
0.0084
0.0174
0.012
Cappon, C.T. 1981.
A
Bush Bean/
Seed
Sludge
6.8
0
0.7804
0.0012
0.0110
0.013
Cappon, C.T. 1981.
B
Bean/
Grain
Sludge
5.5
0
1.111
0.02
0.05
0.027
Furretal, 1980.
Indianapolis sludge/
Darien Soil.
B
Bean/
Grain
Sludge
6.8
0
1.446
«
0.04
0.12
0.055
Furretal, 1980.
Kalamazoo sludge/
Tee! Soil.
C-94
-------
TABLE C4!5
UPTAKE OF SELENIUM BY POTATOES
Study
Chemical
Application
Tissue
Uptake
Type
Plant/
Form
Soil
Rates
Concentration
Slope
ReferenceI
<1)
Tissue
Applied
PH
(kg/ha)
(Uflfg DW)
(2)
Comments
B
Potato/Tuber
Sludge
6.8
0
0.03
0.048
Furretal, 1980.
1.446
0.1
Kalamazoo sludge/
Teel soil.
B
Potato/Tuber
Sludge
5.5
0
0.01
0.009
Furretal, 1980.
1.111 0.02 . Indianapolis sludge/
Darien Soil.
C-95
-------
TABLE C-56
UPTAKE OF SELENIUM BY ROOTS
Study
Type
(1)
Plant/
Tissue
Chemical
Form
Applied
Soil
pH
Application
Rates
(kg/ha)
Tissue
Concentration
(M0/gDW}
Uptake
Slope
(2)
Reference/
Comments
A
Radish/Tuber
Sludge
6.1-7.8
0
4.17
8.34
0.2
0.21
0.22
0.002
Logan et al., 1987.
Romona.
A
Beet/Tuber
Sludge
6.8
0
0.7804
0.0033
0.0078
0.006
Cappon, C.T. 1981.
A
Onion/Bulb
Sludge
6.8
0
0.7804
0.0273
0.0467
0.025
Cappon, C.T. 1981.
A
Radish/Tuber
Sludge
6.8
0
0.7804
0.0271
0.0565
0.038
Cappon, C.T. 1981.
B
Carrotfluber
Sludge
6.8
0
1.446
0.04
0.11
0.048
Furret at, 1980.
Kalamazoo sludge/
Tee! soil.
B
Onion/Bulb
Sludge
6.8
0
1.446
0.02
0.08
0.042
Furret al, 1980.
Kalamazoo sludge/
Teal soII.
B
Carrot/Tuber
Sludge
5.S
0
1.111
0.02
0.03
0.009
Furret al, 1980.
Indianapolis sludge/
Darten Soil.
B
Onion/Buib
Sludge
5.5
0
1.111
0.01
0,02
0.009
Furret al, 1980.
Indianapolis sludge/
Darten Soil.
C-96
-------
TABLE CS7
UPTAKE OF ZINC BY FORAGE
Study
Chemical
Application
Tissue
Uptake
Type
Plant/
Form
Soli
Rates
Concentration
Slope
Reference/
(1)
Tissue
Applied
PH
(kg/ha)
(pg/g DW)
(2)
Comments
A
Natural Forage
Sludge
N.R.
45.5
11.7
1.412
Baxter et al., 1983
90.9
75.8
Means reported
A
Barley
Sludge compost
7.2-7.5
0
20.3
0.031
Chang eta!, 1983.
80
23.5
Domino loam.
160
29
1976.
320
30
A
Barley
Sludge compost
7.0-7.1
0
14.2
0.038
Chang etal, 1983.
160
20
Domino loam.
320
22.5
1977.
640
30.2
A
Barley
Sludge compost
7.1-7.3
0
17.9
0.027
Chang etal, 1983.
240
17.1
Domino loam.
480
20.4
1978.
960
43
A
Barley
Sludge compost
6.8-7.1
0
23,3
0.021
Chang et al, 1983.
.
320
29.2
Domino loam.
640
27.6
1979.
1280
51
A
Barley
Sludge compost
6.6-7.2
0
21.1
0.008
Chang etal, 1983.
500
25.9
Domino loam.
800
31.6
1980.
1600
33.6
A
Barley
Sludge compost
6.4-7.1
0
20.7
0.010
Chang etal, 1983.
480
15.6
Domino loam.
960
29.5
1981.
1920
40.7
A
Barley
Liquid sludge
5.3-6.1
0
16.5
0.108
Chang etal, 1983.
67.7
28.8
Domino loam.
130.4
31.8
1977.
252.4
48.8
A
Barley
Liquid sludge
5.3-5.8
0
18.4
0.014
Chang etal, 1983.
135.4
41.5
Domino loam.
440.8
29.2
1978.
504.8
34.6
A
Barley
Liquid sludge
5.6-6.6
0
16.1
0.033
Chang etal, 1983.
203.1
25
Domino loam.
391.2
34.3
1979.
757.2
41.2
C-97
-------
TABLE C-57 (cont.)
UPTAKE OF ZINC BY FORAGE (cont.)
Study
Chemical
Application
Tissue
Uptake
Type
Plant/
Form
Soil
Rates
Concentration
Slope
Reference/
{1)
Tissue
Applied
pH
(kg/ha)
flifl/gDW)
(2)
Comments
A
Barley
Liquid sludge
5.8-6.8
0
20.1
0.01S
Chang etal, 1983.
270.8
29.9
Domino loam.
521.6
46.8
1980.
1009.6
37.9
A
Barley
Liquid sludge
5.8-6.9
0
24.6
0.019
Chang et el, 1983.
338.5
37.9
Domino loam.
652
41.4
1981.
1262
51.4
A
Barley
Sludge composted
7.2-7.5
0
18.3
0.034
Chang et*l, 1983.
80
19.4
Greenfield sandy loam.
160
19.8
1976.
320
27.5
A
Barley
Sludge composted
7.0-7.1
0
12.5
0.016
Chang etal, 1983.
160
21.8
Greenfield sandy loam.
320
22.8
1977.
640
24.5
A
Barley
Sludge composted
7.1-7.3
0
25
0.014
Chang et al, 1983.
240
23
Greenfield sandy loam.
480
33.4
1978.
960
36.5
A
Barley
Sludge composted
6.8-7.1
0
21.2
0.013
Chang etal, 1983.
)
320
31.5
Greenfield sandy loam.
640
33
1979.
1280
39.4
A
Barley
Sludge composted
6.6-7.2
0
17.8
0.013
Chang etal, 1983.
500
31.5
Greenfield sandy loam.
800
33
1980.
1600
39.4
A
Barley
Sludge composted
6.4-7.1
0
22.4
0.017
Chang et al, 1983.
580
47.1
Greenfield sandy loam.
960
55.9
1981.
1920
57.3
A
Barley
Liquid sludge
5.3-6.1
0
26.1
0.117
Chang et si. 1983.
66.8
31
Greenfield sandy loam.
132.5
49.5
1977.
248.7
53
A
Barley
~quid sludge
5.3-6.2
0
19.6
0,072
Chang etal, 1983.
133.6
35.3
Greenfield sandy loam.
265
57.3
1978.
497.4
49.6
C-98
-------
TABLE C-57 (cont.)
UPTAKE OF ZINC BY FOIRAGE (cont.)
Study
Chemical
Application
Tissue
Uptake
Type
Plant/
Form
Soli
Rates
Concentration
Slope
Reference/
Tissue
Applied
PH
(kg/ha)
(pg/gDW)
(2)
Comments
A
Barley
Liquid sludge
5.6-6.6
0
18.4
0.031
Chang et al, 1983.
200.4
32.1
Greenfield sandy loam.
397.5
35.2
1979.
746.1
43.7
A
Barley
Liquid sludge
5.8-6.8
0
18.4
0.024
Chang et al, 1983.
•
267.2
32.1
Greenfield sandy loam.
530
35.2
1980.
994.8
43.7
A
Barley
Liquid sludge
5.5-6.9
0
20.9
0.047
Chang etal, 1983.
334
43.2
Greenfield sandy loam.
662.5
50.6
1981.
1243.5
81.9
A
Corn/Leaf
Sludge
7.4
•o
14.5
0.084
Hinesly et al. 1982.
432
39.9
1978.
770
61.3
1204
118
A
Com
Sludge
7.4
0
6.12
0.1 S3
Hinesly et al, 1982.
432
32.9
1978.
770
79.3
1204
192
A
Com/Leaf
Sludge
7.4
0
14.8
0.201
Hinesly et al, 1982.
1979.
200
75
390
73
• 606
139
A
Com
Sludge
7.4
0
• 5.47
0.305
Hinesly etal, 1982.
200
36.5
1979.
390
93.2
606
190
A
Com/Leaf
Sludge
7.4
0
13.7
0517
Hinesly etal, 1982.
268
49.2
1980.
321
76
537
130
A
Com
Sludge
7.4
0
10.4
0.245
Hinesly etal, 1982.
268
51.7
1980.
321
109
537 204
C-99
-------
TABLE C-57 (cont)
UPTAKE OF ZINC BY FORAGE (cont.)
Study
Chemical
Application
Tissue
Uptake
Type
Plant/
Form
Soil
Rates
Concentration
Slope
Reference/
(D
Tissue
Applied
PH
(kg/ha)
(pg/gDW)
(2)
Comments
A
Com
Sludge
5.3-6.5
0
22
0.576
Dowdy & Larson, 1975.
120
79
241
186
482
293
A
Corn
Sludge
5.9-6.0
0
21
0.023
Rappaport et al, 1987.
124
18
Year 1 (1984).
248
28
A
Com
Sludge
5.9-6.0
0
14
0.157
Rappaport et al, 1987.
124
50
Year 1 (1984).
248
53
A
Com
Sludge
5.9-6.0
0
14
0.069
Rappaport et af, 1987.
124
27
Year 2 (1985).
24$
31
A
Com
Sludge
5.9-6.0
0
10
0.141
Rappaport et al, 1987.
124
37
Year 2 (1985).
248
45
A
Com
Sludge
5.7
0
28
0.099
Hemphill et at, 1982.
81
36
Portland sludge.
A
Com
Sludge
5.7
0
28
0.029
Hemphill et al, 1982.
35
29
Rockcreek sludge,
A
Com
Sludge
5.7
0
28
0.001
Hemphill et at, 1982.
30
25
Salem sludge.
A
Ryegrass
Liquid sludge
6.5
232
25
0.264
Carlton Smith, 1988.
395
68
Means of 5 years used.
Sandy loam.
A
Ryegrass
Bed-dried
6.5
232
24
0.091
Carlton Smith, 1988,
Sludge
606
58
Means of 4 years used.
Sandy loam.
A
Ryegrass
Liquid sludge
6.7
276
29
0.188
Cariton Smith, 1988.
494
70
Means of 5 years used.
Clay.
A
Ryegrass
Bed-dried
6.7
276
28
0.073
Cariton Smith, 1988.
Sludge
702
59
Means of 4 years used.
Clay.
A
Ryegrass
Liquid sludge
8.0
138
35
0.123
Cariton Smith, 1988.
292
54
Means of 5 years used.
Calcareous loam.
G-100
-------
TABLE C-57 (cont.)
UPTAKE OF ZINC BY FORAGE (cont.)
Study
Chemical
Application
fissile
Uptake
Type
Plant/
Form
Soil
Rates
Concentration
Slope
Reference/
W
Tissue
Applied
pH
(kg/ha)
(pg/g DW)
(2)
Comments
A
Ryegrass
Bed-dried
8.0
138
34
0.061
Cartton Smith, 1988.
Sludge
776
73
Means of 4 years used.
Calcareous loam.
A
Barley/Leaf
Sludge
6.2-6.4
0
18.6
0.001
Sommers et al, 1991.
480 15J Ohio data used.
C-101
-------
TABLE C-58
UPTAKE OF ZINC BY GARDEN FRUITS
Study
Type
(1)
Plant/
Tissue
Chemical
Form
Applied
Soil
PH
Application
Rates
(kg/ha)
Tissue
Concentration
(MO'O DW)
Uptake
Slope
(2)
Reference/
Comments
A
Squash/Fruit
Sludge
5.1-6.0
0
403
18
21
0.005
Giordano et a!, 1979.
Year 1(1975).
A
Pepper/Fruit
Sludge
5.1-6.0
0
403
36
45
0.022
Giordano et al, 1979.
Year 1 (1975).
A
Broccoli/Fruit
Sludge
4.7-6.2
0
403
87
99
0.030
Giordano et al, 1979.
Year2 (1976).
A
Eggplant/Fruit
Sludge
4.7-6.2
0
403
15
22
0.017
Giordano et al, 1979.
Year2 (1976).
A
Tomato/Fruit
Sludge
4.7-6.2
0
403
26
40
0.035
Giordano et al, 1979.
Year 2 (1976).
A
Cantaloupe/
Fruit
Sludge
4.6-6.7
0
403
18
25
0.017
Giordano et al, 1979.
Year3 (1977).
A
Pepper/Fruit
Sludge
4.6-6.7
0
403
29
33
0.010
Giordano et ai, 1979.
Year 3 (1977).
A
Pea/Grain
Sludge
5.3-6.5
0
120
241
482
70
106
105
130
0.111
Dowdy & Larson,
1975.
A
Tomato/Fruit
Sludge
5.3-6.5
0
120
241
482
9
18
22
31
0.044
Dowdy & Larson,
1975.
A
Pea/Pod
Sludge
5.3-6.5
0
120
241
482
28
95
106
134
0.197
Dowdy & Larson,
1975.
A
Tomato/Fruit
Sludge
5.3-6.5
0
81
162
42
59
52
0.062
Keeferetal. 1986.
Blue Plains sludge.
Early fmiting.
A
Tomato/Fruit
Sludge
5.3-6.5
0
81
162
38
51
47
0.056
Keeferetal, 1986.
Blue Plains sludge.
Late fruiting.
A
Tomato/Fruit
Sludge
5.3-6.5
0
238
476
42
60
65
0.048
Keeferetal, 1986.
Huntington sludge.
Early fruiting.
C-102
-------
TABLE C-58 (cont.)
UPTAKE OF ZINC BY GARDEN FRUITS (cont.)
Study
Chemical
Application
Tissue
Uptake
Typo
Plant/
Form
Soil
Rates
Concentration
Slope
Reference/
(1)
Tissue
Applied
pH
(kg/ha)
(pg'o dw)
(2)
Comments
A
Tomato/Fruit
Sludge
5.3-6.5
0
38
0.048
Keeferetal, 1986.
238
48
Huntington sludge.
476
46
Late fruiting.
0
42
A
Tomato/Fruit
Sludge
5.3-6.5
176
44
0.004
Kaefer et al, 1986.
352
46
Martinsburg sludge.
Early fruiting.
0
38
A
Tomato/Fruit
Sludge
5.3-6.5
176
47
0.026
Kaefer et at, 1986.
352
47
Martinsburg sludge.
Late fruiting.
0
42
A
Tomato/Fruit
Sludge
5.3-6.5
63
52
0.127
Keeferetal, 1986.
126
58
Parkersburg sludge.
Early fruiting.
0
38
A
Tomato/Fruit
Sludge
5.3-6.5
63
48
0.063
Keeferetal, 1986.
.
126
46
Parkersburg sludge.
Late fruiting.
0
26
A
Celery
Sludge
7.3
36
45
0.001
Peterson et al, 1989.
71
31
143
31
0
31
A
Tomato/Fruit
Sludge
7.3
36
30
0.001
Peterson et al, 1989.
71
31
143
28
0
36
A
Tomato/Fruit
Sludge
N.R.
66
38 .
0.020
Lue-Hing et al, 1984.
132
38
1977 data used.
265
43
Nu-Earth.
331
42
C-103
-------
TABLE C-59
UPTAKE OF ZINC BY GRAINS/CEREALS
Study
Type
(1)
Plant/
Tissue
Chemical
Form
Applied
Soil
PH
Application
Rates
(kg/ha)
Tissue
Concentration
(|ig/g DW)
Uptake
Slope
(2)
Reference/
Comments
A
Com/Grain
Sludge
7.4
0
432
770
1204
19.5
26.3
31.2
38
0.015
Hineslyetal, 1982.
1978.
A
Corn/Grain
Sludge
7.4
0
200
390
606
12.8
21
31.2
27.1
0.026
Hineslyetal, 1982.
1979.
A
Corn/Grain
Sludge
7.4
0
268
321
537
15.4
23.5
29.4
37.4
0.041
Hineslyetal, 1982.
1980.
A
Com/Grain
Sludge
5.3-6.5
0
120
241
482
41
47
48
65
0.049
Dowdy & Larson,
1975.
A
Com/Grain
Sludge
5.9-6.0
0
124
248
30
40
36
0.024
Rappaport et at,
1987.
Year 1 (1984).
A
Com/Grain
Sludge
5.9-6.0
0
124
248
17
28
26
0.036
Rappaport et al,
1987.
Year 2 (1985).
A
Wheat/Grain
Liquid sludge
6.5
232
395
29
59
0.184
Carlton Smith. 1988.
Means of 5 years
used. Sandy loam.
A
Wheat/Grain
Bed-dried
Sludge
6.5
232
606
30
62
0.86
Cartton Smith, 1988.
Means of 4 years
used. Sandy loam.
A
Wheat/Grain
Liquid sludge
6.7
276
494
32
54
0.101
Carlton Smith, 1988.
Means of 5 years
used. Clay.
A
Wheat/Grain
Bed-dried
Sludge
6.7
276
702
31
55
0.056
Carlton Smith, 1988.
Means of 4 years
used. Clay.
A
Wheat/Grain
Liquid sludge
8.0
138
292
38
49
0.071
Carlton Smith, 1988.
Means of 5 years
used.
Calcareous loam.
C-104
-------
TABLE C-S9 (c ont.)
UPTAKE OF ZINC BY GRAINS/CEREALS (cont.)
Study
Type
CD
Plant/
Tissue
Chemical
Form
Applied
Soil
PH
Application
Rates
{kg/ha)
Tissue
Concentration
(pg/g DW)
Uptake
Slope
12)
Reference/
Comments
A
Wheat/Grain
Bed-dried
Sludge
8.0
138
776
40
61
0.033
Carlton Smith, 1988.
Means of 4 years
used.
Calcareous loam.
A
Barley/Grain
Sludge
6,2-6.4
CD
© O
19.9
0.008
0.008
Sommers et al, 1991.
Ohio data used.
C-105
-------
TABLE C-60
UPTAKE OF ZINC BY LEAFY VEGETABLES
Study
Type
m
Plant/
Tissue
Chemical
Form
Applied
Soli
PH
Application
Rates
(kg/ha)
Tissue
Concentration
(Mfl'fl DW)
Uptake
Slope
(2)
Reference/
Cgmments
A
Lettuce
Heat-Treated
Sludge
5.3-5.4
0
297
76
225
0.502
Chaneyetal, 1982
Romaine Lettuce
A
Lettuce
Heat-Treated
Sludge
6.2
0
297
39
67
0.094
Chaneyetal, 1982
Romaine Lettuce
A
Lettuce
Nu-Earth
5.3-5.6
0
414
76
242
0.401
Chaneyetal, 1982
Romaine Lettuce
A
Lettuce
Nu-Earth
6.2-6.6
0
414
39
74
0.085
Chaneyetal., 1982
Romaine Lettuce
A
Swiss Chard
Heat-Treated
Sludge
5.7
0
297
97
420
1.088
Chaneyetal, 1982
A
Swiss Chard
Heat-Treated
Sludge
6.7-6.8
0
297
38
115
0.259
Chaneyetal, 1982
A
Swiss Chard
Nu-Earth
5.7
0
414
97
420
0.78
Chaney et at., 1982
A
Swiss Chard
Nu-Earth
6.7-6.8
0
414
38
115
0.186
Chaneyetal, 1982
A
Collard Greens
Heat-Treated
Sludge
5.5-5.6
0
297
47
170
0.414
Chaneyetal, 1982
A
Collard Greens
Heat-Treated
Sludge
6.3-6.4
0
297
37
74
0.125
Chaneyetal, 1982
A
Collard Greens
Nu-Earth
5.5-6.3
0
414
47
88
0.099
Chaneyetal., 1982
A
Collard Greens
Nu-Earth
6.4-6.8
0
414
37
75
0.092
Chaneyetal, 1982
A
Lettuce
Sludge
6.0
0
305.8
47
419
1.216
Chaneyetal, 1978
Romaine Lettuce
A
Lettuce
Sludge
6.0
0
301.3
47
307
0.863
Chaneyetal, 1978
Romaine Lettuce
A
Lettuce
Sludge
6.0
0
208.3
47
75
0.134
Chaney et a!., 1978
Romaine Lettuce
A
Lettuce
Sludge
6.0
0
79.5
47
187
1.761
Chaneyetal, 1978
Romaine Lettuce
C-106
-------
TABLE C-60 (cont.)
UPTAKE OF ZINC BY LEAFY VEGETABLES (cont.)
Study
Typo
W
Plant/
Tissue
Chemical
Form
Applied
Soil
pH
Application
Rates
(kg/ha)
Tissue
Concentration
(pg/g DW)
Uptake
Slope
(2)
Reference/
Comments
A
Lettuce
Sludge
6.0
0
72.2
47
209
2.244
Chaneyetal., 1978
Romaine Lettuce
A
Lettuce
Sludge
5.1-6.0
0
403
54
131
0.191
Giordano et al, 1979.
Year 1 (1975).
Great Lakes lettuce.
A
Lettuce
Sludge
4.7-6.2
0
403
48
74
0.065
Giordano et al, 1979.
Year 2 (1976).
Great Lakes lettuce.
A
Lettuce
Sludge
4.6-6.7
0
403
46
103
0.141
Giordano et al, 1979.
Year 3 (1977).
Bibb lettuce.
A
Lettuce
Sludge
4.6-6.7
0
403
35
53
0.045
Giordano et al, 1979.
Year 3 (1977).
Romaine lettuce.
A
Lettuce
Sludge
4.6-6.7
0
403
29
116
0.216
Giordano et al, 1979.
Year3 (1977).
Boston lettuce.
A
Cabbage
Sludge
4.6-6.7
0
403
48
59
0.027
Giordano et al, 1979.
Year3 (1977).
A
Lettuce
Sludge
5.3-6.5
0
120
241
482
21
94
155
225
0.415
Dowdy & Larson,
1975
A
Cabbage
Sludge
5.3-6.5
0
81
162
27
28
23
0.006
Keeferetal, 1986.
Blue Plains sludge.
A
Cabbage
Sludge
5.3-6.5
0 '
238
476
27
26
26
0.001
Keeferetal, 1986.
Huntington sludge.
A
Cabbage
Sludge
5.3-6.5
0
176
352
27
35
33
0.017
Keeferetal, 1986.
Martinsburg sludge.
A
Cabbage
Sludge
5.3-6.5
0
63
126
27
41
51
0.19
Keeferetal, 1986.
Parkersburg sludge.
C-107
-------
TABLE C-60 (cont.)
UPTAKE OF ZINC BY LEAFY VEGETABLES (cont.)
Study
Type
CU
Plant/
Tissue
Chemical
Form
Applied
Soil
PH
Application
Rates
(kg/ha)
Tissue
Concentration
(pg/g DW)
Uptake
Slope
(2)
Reference/
Comments
A
Tumip/Greens
Sludge
5.2-5.8
0
170
340
83
346
421
0.994
Miller & Boswell,
1979.
A
Cabbage
Sludge
7.3
0
36
71
143
30
33
32
32
0.009
Peterson et el, 1989.
A
Lettuce
Sludge
7.3
0
36
71
143
85
108
85
98
0.039
Peterson et at, 1989,
A
Lettuce
Liquid sludge
6.5
238
395
59
103
0.27
Carlton Smith, 1988.
Means of 5 years used.
Sandy loam.
A
Lettuce
Bed-dried
Sludge
6.5
232
606
57
91
0.091
Carlton Smith, 1988.
Means of 4 years used.
Sandy loam.
A
Lettuce
Liquid sludge
6.7
276
484
80
135
0.252
Carlton Smith, 1988.
Means of 5 years used.
Clay.
A
Lettuce
Bed-dried
Sludge
6.7
276
702
75
106
0.073
Carlton Smith, 1988.
Means of 4 years used.
Clay.
A
Lettuce
Liquid sludge
8.0
138
292
64
74
0.065
Carlton Smith, 1988.
Means of 5 years used.
Calcareous loam.
A
Lettuce
Bed-dried
Sludge
8.0
138
776
67
80
0.02
Carlton Smith. 1988.
Means of 4 years used.
Calcareous loam.
A
Cabbage
Liquid sludge
6.5
232
395
395
36
0.067
Carlton Smith, 1988.
Means of 5 years used.
. Sandy loam.
A
Cabbage
Bed-dried
Sludge
6.5
232
606
26
33
0.032
Carlton Smith, 1988.
Means of 4 years used.
Sandy loam.
C-108
-------
TABLE C-60 (cont.)
UPTAKE OF ZINC BY LEAFY VEGETABLES (cont.)
Study
Type
W
Plant/
Tissue
Chemical
Form
Applied
Soli
pH
Application
Rates
(kg/ha)
Tissue
Concentratioii
(jig/g DW)
Uptake
Slope
(2)
Reference/
Comments
A
Cabbage
Liquid sludge
6.7
276
494
23
41
0.083
Carlton Smith, 1988.
Means of 5 years used.
Clay.
A
Cabbage
Bed-dried
Sludge
6.7
276
702
21
38
0.04
Cartton Smith, 1988.
Means of 4 years used.
Clay.
A
Cabbage
Liquid sludge
8.0
138
292
2
32
0.045
Carlton Smith, 1988.
Means of 5 years used.
Calcareous loam.
A
Cabbage
Bed-dried
Sludge
8.0
138
776
*
25
48
0.036
Cartton Smith, 1988.
Means of 4 years used.
Calcareous loam.
A
Spinach
Sludge
N.R.(3)
0
66
132
265
331
166
310
523
358
365
0.487
Lue-Hing et at, 1984.
1977 data used.
Nu-Earth.
A
Swiss Chard
Sludge
N.R.
0
66
132
265
331
78
148
234
141
225
0.283
Lue-Hing et al, 1984.
1977 data used.
Nu-Earth.
C-109
-------
TABLE C-61
UPTAKE OF ZINC BY LEGUMES
Study
Chemical
Application
Tissue
Uptake
Type
Plant/
Form
Soli
Rates
Concentration
Slope
Reference/
(1)
Tissue
Applied
PH
(kg/ha)
(Mfl/flDW)
(2)
Comments
A
Bean/Pod
Sludge
5.1-6.0
0
31
0.05
Giordano et al, 1979.
403
51
Year 1 (1975).
A
Bean/Grain
Sludge
5.1-6.0
0
64
0.022
Giordano et at, 1979.
403
73
Year 1(1975).
A
Green Bean/
Sludge
5.3-6.5
0
39
0.001
Keeferetal, 1986.
Grain
81
35
Blue Plains sludge.
162
38
A
Green Bean/
Sludge
5.3-6.5
0
39
0.017
Keeferetal, 1986.
Grain
476
47
238
35
A
Green Bean/
Sludge
5.3-6.5
0
39
0.014
Keeferetal, 1986.
Grain
17f
42
Martinsburg sludge.
352
44
A
Green Bean/
Sludge
5,3-6.5
0
39
0.024
Keeferetal, 1986.
Grain
S3
42
Parkersburg sludge.
126
42
A
Green Bean/
Sludge
7.3
0
38
0.018
Peterson et al, 1989.
Grain
36
52
71
49
143
44
A
Green Bean/
Sludge
N.R.
0
34
0.006
Lue-Hing et al, 1984.
Pod & Seed
66
36
1977 data used.
132
38
Nu-Earth.
265
36
331
37
A
Soybean/
Limed digested
7.3-7.5
70.6
39.5
0.02
Chaneyetal, 1977.
Grain
sludge
107.4
43.5
For control used cal-
87.2
43.1
careous soil data.
132.4
40.4
Chaney's values are
179.2
43.9
means of 3 reps.
225.2
44.1
A
Soybean/
Limed raw
7.3-7.7
70.6
39.5
0.027
Chaneyetal, 1977.
Grain
sludge
95.8
42.3
For control used cal-
95
42.2
careous soil data.
151.8 42.4 Cheney's values are
means of 3 reps.
C-110
-------
TABLE C-61 (cont.)
UPTAKE OF ZINC BY LEGUMES (cont.)
Study
Chemical
Application
Tissue
Uptake
Type
Plant/
Form
Soli
Rates
Concentration
Slope
Reference/
<*>
Tissue
Applied
pH
(leg/ha)
(pg/0 DW)
(2)
Comments
A
Soybean/
Raw sludge
6.6-7.3
70.6
39.5
0.026
Chaneyetal, 1977.
Grain
compost
101.4
44.8
For control used cal-
125.4
44.1
careous soil data.
196.4
47.5
Cheney's values are
318.8
45.9
means of 3 reps.
525.6
54.5
A
Soybean/
Heat treated
5.9-6.0
75.2
44
0.055
Chaneyetal, 1977.
Grain
sludge
150.2
48.5
Cheney's values are
HiflhpH
170.4
52
means of 3 reps.
298.4
56.5
A
Soybean/
Heat treated
5.3-5.6
78.2
44.8
0.032
Chaneyetal, 1977.
Grain
sludge
144.6
57
Cheney's values are
LowpH
176
51.6
means of 3 reps.
325
55.3
C-111
-------
TABLE C-62
UPTAKE OF ZINC BY POTATOES
Study
Type
(1)
Plant/
Tissue
Chemical
Form
Applied
Soil
PH
Application
Rates
(kgftia}
Tissue
Concentration
ftig/g DW)
Uptake
Slope
(2)
Reference/
Comments
A
Potato/Tuber
Sludge
4.7-6.2
0
403
16
19
0.007
Giordano et al, 1979.
Year2 (1976}.
A
Potato/Tuber
Sludge
5.3-6.5
0
120
241
482
24
31
41
53
0.061
Dowdy & Larson,
1975.
A
Potato/Tuber
Liquid sludge
6.5
232
395
13
16
0.018
Carlton Smith, 1988.
Means of 5 years used.
Sandy loam.
A
Potato/Tuber
Bed-dried
Sludge
6.5
232
606
*
13
16
0.008
Cartton Smith, 1988.
Means of 4 years used.
Sandy loam.
A
Potato/Tuber
Liquid sludge
6.7
276
494
15
18
0.014
Carfton Smith, 1988.
Means of 5 years used.
Clay.
A
Potato/Tuber
Bed-dried
Sludge
6.7
276
702
15
17
0.005
Cartton Smith, 1988.
Means of 4 years used.
Clay.
A
Potato/Tuber
Liquid sludge
8.0
138
292
7
9
0.013,
Carfton Smith, 1988.
Means of 5 years used.
Calcareous loam.
A
Potato/Tuber
Bed-dried
Sludge
8.0
138
776
8
12
0.006
Carlton Smith, 1988.
Means of 4 years used.
Calcareous loam.
C
Potato/Tuber
Organic, metal
contaminated soil
6.6
3622
36.2
0.01
Harris et al, 1978.
Vanessa-potato type.
C
Potato/Tuber
Organic, metal
contaminated soil
6.6
3622
48
0.013
Harris etal, 1978.
Pentland Javelin-
-potato type.
C
Potato/Tuber
Organic, metal
contaminated soil
6.6
3622
55.2
0.015
Harris etal, 1978.
Home Guard-
-potato type.
.0
PotatoHuber
Organic, metal
contaminated soil
6.6
3622
52.7
0.015
Harris etal, 1978.
Desiree-potato type.
C
Potato/Tuber
Organic, metal
contaminated soil
6.6
3622
36.2
0.010
Harris et at, 1978.
King Edward-potato type.
C
Potato/Tuber
Organic, metal
contaminated soil
6.6
3622
43.7
0.012
Harris etal, 1978.
Majestic-potato type.
C-112
-------
TABLE C-63
UPTAKE OF ZINC BY ROOTS
Study
Type
Plant/
Tissue
Chemical
Form
Applied
Soil
pH
Application
Rates
(kg/ha)
Tissue
Concentration
(pg/g DW)
Uptake
Slope
(2}
Reference/
Comments
A
Carrot/Tuber
Sludge
4.6-6.7
0
403
29
30
0.001
Giordano etal, 1979.
Year 3 (1977).
A
Carrol/Tuber
Sludge
5.3-6.5
0
120
241
482
23
53
72
104
0.164
Dowdy & Larson, 1975.
A
Radish/Tuber
Sludge
5.3-6.5
0
120
241
482
37
40
50
98
0.131
Dowdy & Larson, 1975.
A
Radish/Tuber
Sludge
5.3-6.5
0
81
162
42
43
43
0.006
Keeferetai, 1986.
Blue Plains sludge.
A
Carrotn"uber
Sludge
5.3-6.5
0
81
162
99
232
103
0.025
Keeferetai, 1986.
Blue Plains sludge.
A
RadishTTuber
Sludge
5.3-6.5
0
238
476
42
52
42
0.08
Keeferetai, 1986.
Huntington sludge.
A
Carrot/Tuber
Sludge
5.3-6.5
0
238
476
99
67
51
0.001
Keeferetai, 1986.
Huntington sludge.
A
RadtshATuber
Sludge
5.3-6.5
0
176
352
42
52
61
0.054
Keeferetai, 1986.
Martimburg sludge.
A
Carrot/Tuber
Sludge
5.3-6.5
0
176
352 .
99
84
83
0.004
Keeferetai, 1986.
Martinsburg sludge.
A
Radish/Tuber
Sludge
5.3-6.5
0
63
126
42
65
68
0.206
Keeferetai, 1986.
Parkersburg sludge.
A
Carrot/Tuber
Sludge
5.3-6.5
0
63
126
99
66
60
0.001
Keeferetai, 1986.
Parkersburg sludge.
A
Onion/Bulb
Sludge
7.3
0
36
71
143
35
31
29
31
0.001
Peterson at al, 1989.
C-113
-------
TABLE C-63 (cont.)
UPTAKE OF ZINC BY ROOTS (cont.)
Study
Chemical
Application
Tissue
Uptake
Type
Plant/
Form
Soil
Rales
Concentration
Slope
Reference/
(1)
Tissue
Applied
pH
(Kg/ha)
(MB'fl DW)
(2)
Comments
A
Red Beet/Tuber
Liquid sludge
6,5
232
27
0.184
Carlton Smith, 1988.
395
57
Means of S years used.
Sandy loam.
A
Red Beet/Tuber
Bed-dried
6.5
232
25
0.048
Carlton Smith, 1988.
Sludge
606
43
Means of 4 years used.
Sandy loam.
A
Red Beet/Tuber
Liquid sludge
6.7
276
31
0.193
Carlton Smith, 1988.
494
73
Means of 5 years used.
Clay.
A
Red Beet/Tuber
Bed-dried
6.7
276
30
0.054
Carlton Smith, 1988.
Sludge
702
53
Means of 4 years used.
Clay.
A
Red Beet/Tuber liquid sludge
8.0
138
26
0.039
Ca/lton Smith, 1988.
292
32
Means of S years usstf.
Calcareous loam.
A
Red Beet/Tuber
Bed-dried
8,0
138
25
0.009
Carlton Smith, 1988.
Sludge
776
32
Means of 4 years used.
Calcareous loam.
A
Beet/Tuber
Sludge
N.R.
0
29
0.087
Lue-Hing et at, 1984.
66
37
1977 data used.
132
44
Nu-Earth.
265
51
331
60
A
Carrot/Tuber
Sludge
N.R.
0
26
0.019
Lue-Hing et al, 1984.
66
21
1977 data used.
132
27
Nu-Earth.
265
29
331
30
C-114
-------
TABLE C-64
UPTAKE OF ZINC BY SWEET CORN
Study
Chemical
Application
Tissue
Uptake
Type
Plant/
Form
Soil
Rates
Concentration
Slope
Reference/
Tissue
Applied
PH
(kg/ha)
(MO/0 DW)
(2)
Comments
A
Sweet Com/
Sludge
5.1-6.0
0
25
0.037
Giordano et al, 1979.
Grata
403
40
Year 1(1975).
A
Sweet Com/
Sludge
5.3-6.5
0
24
0.019
Keeferetal, 1986.
Grain
81
26
Blue Plains sludge.
162
27
A
Sweet Com/
Sludge
5.3-6.5
0
24
0.001
Keeferetal, 1986.
Grain
238
25
Huntington sludge.
476
24
A
Sweet Com/
Sludge
5.3-6.5
0
24
0.02
Keeferetal, 1986.
Grain
176
29
Martinsburg sludge.
352
31
A
Sweet Com/
Sludge
5.3-6.5
* 0
24
0.095
Keeferetal, 1986.
Grain
63
30
Parkersburg sludge.
126
35
A
Sweet Com/
* Sludge
5.7
0
40
0.062
Hemphill etal, 1982.
Grain
81
45
Portland sludge.
A
Sweet Com/
Sludge
5.7
0
40
0.001
Hemphill et al, 1982.
Grain
35
40
Rockcreek sludge.
A
Sweet Com/
Sludge
5.7
0
40
0.001
Hemphill et al, 1982.
Grain
30
39
Salem sludge.
C-115
-------
APPENDIX D
Animal Uptake Tables
-------
CONTENTS
Page
TABLE D-l UPTAKE OF CADMIUM BY ANIMALS D-3
TABLE D-2 UPTAKE OF MERCURY BY ANIMALS D-7
TABLE D-3 UPTAKE OF SELENIUM BY ANIMALS . . D-10
TABLE D-4 UPTAKE OF ZINC BY ANIMALS D-12
TABLE D-5 UPTAKE OF ALDRIN/DIELDRIN BY ANIMALS D-14
TABLE D-6 UPTAKE OF CHLORDANE BY ANIMALS D-16
TABLE D-7 UPTAKE OF DDT/DDD/DDE BY ANIMALS D-18
TABLE D-8 UPTAKE OF HEPTACHLOR BY ANIMALS D-20
TABLE D-9 UPTAKE OF HEXACHLOROBENZENE BY ANIMALS D-21
*
TABLE D-10 UPTAKE OF LINDANE BY ANIMALS D-23
TABLE D-ll UPTAKE OF PCBs BY ANIMALS D-24
TABLE D-12 UPTAKE OF TOXAPHENE BY ANIMALS D-25
D-l
-------
TABLE D-1 UPTAKE OF CADMRJM BY AMMALS
ThnxAMlvni
Cmmleal
Fen* Fed
4tttntfty
(m«Wiy)
F**4
^entity
(kgOWMey)
Ned
Cone.
<>••%)
f°l
Ttttvt CoMMrtntifii
ptfCMt
WMlrtun
t%j
Tleswe
Cone.
(»%DW)
HI
Uptake
Hopi
m
RefsfMtee
Ueed
III
m
rwwWfi
H
M
H
fbj
to*taww)
Wl
n»|i
CatlJ*
9
Kidney
8
Sludge amended diet
077
031
77.02
134899913
0638 Boyeretal, 1961 (p286) 1
h
123
20
77.02
8 70322019
CatU«
6
Kidney
1
Sludge emended diet
•>14
1.19
1.277 Johnson et el. 1981 (p.112) 1
h
ij.fi
1455
Cattle
12
Kidney
4
PI
2
18
0.1111
270
48
77.02
1174 93473
1033.943 Vremsnetal. 1966 1
h.l.m
4
152
18
8.4444
2250
680
77.02
9791.12272
cattle
8
Kidney
2
ra
2
20
0.1
300
130
77.02
23108
296783.733 Vramen et el. 1986 1
h.l.n
2
32
20
1.8
8060
700
77.02
468281.8
Cattle
8
Kidney
2
Hatter sludge
2
20
0.1
300
130
77.02
23106
280489.291 Vramen etal. 1966 1
h,n
1
10
21
0.4762
1670
77.02
128623.4
Cttt*
8
Kidney
2
Sewege sludge
2
20
0.1
300
130
77.02
23106
53914.000 Vramen et el., 1966 1
h,n
2
6
21
0.2857
430
70
77.02
33118.6
Cattle
8
Muscle
6
Sludge emended diet
0.77
0.02
70.62
0.06807352
0.003 Boyeret el. 1961 (p.286) 1
h
12.3
0.03
70.62
0.10211028
CetBe
8
Muscle
3
Sludge amended diet
0.14
0.01
0.002 Johnson et «L, 1981 (p.112) 1
h
10.6
0.03
Cattle
12
Muscle
12
01
2
18
0.1111
5
1
70.62
17.0183799
0.001 Vremsnetal., 1986 1
h.l.m
12
152
5.4444
*
4
1
70.32
13.8147033
Cattle
8
Muscle
2
PI
2
20
0.1
2
0
70.82
6.80735194
11.346 Vramanetal. 1986 1
h.l.n
2
32
20
1.8
7
1
70.62
23.8257318
Cattle
8
Muscle
2
Harbor sludge
2
20
0.1
2
0
70.62
6.80735194
18.095 Viemen et el. 1966 1
h,n
1
10
21
0.4782
4
70.62
13.6147039
Ctttl*
8
Muscle
2
Sewege sludge
2
20
0.1
2
0
70.62
6.80735194
18.327 Vramen et el.. 1986 1
h.n
2
6
21
0.2857
3
1
70.62
10.2110279
Cattle
8
Liver
6
Sludge amended diet
0.77
0.06
68.99
0.2579813
0.397 Boyeretel., 1981 (p.286)
2
h
12.3
1.5
68.99
4.83714931
Cattle
6
Uvtr
6
Sludge amended diet
0.14
0.19
0.452 Johnson et el.. 1981 (p.112)
2
h
10.6
4.92
Cattle
12
Liver
4
0)
2
18
0.1111
65
14
68.99
209.609603
454.692 Vramen et el.. 1986
2
h.l.m
4
152
18
8.4444
1240
200
68.99
3998.71009
Cattle
8
Uvtr
2
01
2
20
0.1
60
20
68.99
193.485972
3095.776 Vremsnetal., 1986
2
W,n
2
32
20
1.6
1500
160
68.99
4837.14931
Cattle
Cattle
8 Liver
8 Liver
2 Haiter sludge
1
2 Sewage sludge
2
10
20 0.1
21 0.4762
20
0.1
60
160
60
20
20
68.99 193.485972
6899 515.962593
66.99 193.485972
857.216 Vramen etal, 1968
694.565 Vrsmsn et •!., 1986
h.n
h.n
-------
TABLE D-1 UPTAKE OF CADMIUM BY ANIMALS (coot)
1 Species
Tissue Analyzed
Chemical
Pollutant
Feed
Feed
Tlaaue Concentration
percent
Tltaue
Uptake
Reference
Used
Fuotiwta |
N
N
Form Fed
quantity
quantity
Cone.
range
moMure
Cone.
Slope
In
wfwiicw 1
[l]
[b]
(mg/day)
(kg DWfday)
(Ms/g)
(pgfgWW)
(dl
l-H-l
«*)
IPO'S DW)
EL—
B
|k|
Cattle
Cattle
Cattle
Cattle
Sheep
ISheep
[Sheep
iheep
P»0
Swine
Swine
Plfl
Ene
ne
:ne
Swine
Chicken
2
6
21
0.2857
100
30
68.99
322.47662
12
Milk
12
12
PI
2
152
18
18
0.1111
8.4444
0.26
0.39
87.30
87.30
2.04724409
3.07086614
0.123 Vremanetal., 1966
e
Milk
4
4
ra
2
32
20
20
0.1
1.6
0.15
0.20
87.30
87.30
1.18110236
1.57480315
0.262 Vremanetal., 1986
8
Milk
4
2
Harbor sludge
2
10
20
21
0.1
0.4762
0.15
0.10
87.30
87.30
1.18110236
0.78740157
0.001 Vremanetal., 1986
8
Milk
4
4
Sewage sludge
2
6
20
21
0.1
0.2857
0.15
0.20
87.30
87.30
1.18110236
1.57480315
2.120 Vremanetal., 1966
5
9
Kidney
Sludg* grown com silage
0.05
1.7
5.4
18.5
7.939 Heffron et al . 1960 (p.60)
5
9
Bone
Sludge grown corn silage
0.05
1.7
0.01
0.02
0.006 Heffron et al.. 1980 (p.60)
5
9
Liver
Sludge grown corn silage
0.05
1.7
1.2
5.8
2.788 Hedronetal., 1980 (p.60)
S
9
Muscle
Sludge grown com silage
0.05
1.7
0.005
0.01
0.003 Heflron at al., 1980 (p.60)
10
Liver
CdCI(2)
0.23
241
10.12
0.07
0.4
17
71.06
71.06
71.06
0.24187975
1.38217001
58.7422253
6.316 Sharma et al., 1979
12
Liver
CdC1(2)
0.36
78.6
0
12.98
71.06
71.06
0
44.8514167
0.573 Osunaetal., 1961 (p.1545)
Experiment 1
12
Liver
Sludge amended diet
012
147.3
0
3.15
71.06
71.06
0
10.8845888
0.074 Osunaetal., 1961 (p.1545)
. Experiment 1
NR
Kidney
CdC1(2)
0.23
2.41
10.12
0.2
10.97
42.30
74.73
74.73
74.73
0.56356924
43.4111595
167.392165
16.6S9 Stoma atal.. 1979
12
Kidney
CdCI(2)
0.36
78.6
0
61.95
80.06
80.06
0
310.682046
3.971 Osunaetal., 1961 (p.1545)
Experiment 1
12
Kidney
Sludge amended diet
0.12
147.3
0 .
23.49
60.06
80.06
0
117.80341
0800 Osunaetal., 1961 (p.1545)
Experiment 1
12
Muscle
CdCI(2)
0.36
78.6
0
0
71.95
71.95
0
0
0.001 Osunaetal., 1981 (p.1545)
Experiment 1
12
Muscle
Sludge amended diet
0.12
147.3
0
0
71.95
71.95
.0
0
0.001 Osunaetal., 1981 (p.1S45)
Experiment 1
6
Kidney
CdS0(4).8H(2)0
0.18
0.39
5.052 Leach atal., 1979
6 h.l.m
6 h.l.n
6 h,n
6 h.n
3 h,o
h.o
3 h,o
3 h,o
I
•.8
*.g
i
•.8
•.0
•.8
•.8
-------
TABLE D-1 UPTAKE OF CADMIUM BY ANIMALS (coot)
m
3 IS
12,18
4St8
7.490 Laach «t it, 1879
Expmbmrt2
85
30,8
928
385.8
007
3.07
1207
48.07
7.523 lMChrt«(.,1S79
Bqp«dnwnt3
17.1
273.8
708.3
540.7
0.22
3.22
1222
48.22
CMdwn 12-15 KMnty
0,23
4.75
15,13
87.19
1,837 U*ch«t»I„ 1979
Experiment 1
0.18
3.18
12.18
48.18
1.858 U*ch Mat, 1979
E*p*fimM2
0.07
307
1207
48.07
1.8
Uvw
28.5
91.8
299
33.47
41.82
203.54
4.051 1979
Experiments
0.22
3.22
12.22
48.22
CMclan 12-15 Uv«r
75.48 0.25672372
75,48 0.57049715
75.46 1.07171984
0.057 9hamta«t«l.,1979
0083
0,140
0.283
0.32
1.68
13.08
Mutch
0.014 iMdi (tlL, 1979
Experiment 1
0.18
3.18
1218
48.18
0.07
0.15
0.28
0.75
0,132 iMChMM.. 1978
0.22
3.22
12.22
48.22
0.12
0.57
1.88
8.48
Chicken 12-15 Mtaclt
0.003 8h«m*MM. 1979
51.10 0.28584887
51.10 0.28829857
51.10 0.30874847
0.13
0.14
0.15
CdClffl
0.32
1.88
13,06
0.001 Uach (til, 1979
Experiment 2
0.05
0.08
0.07
0.13
0.07
3.07
1107
48.07
0,002 U#ef»«t«t„ 1979
0.18
0.22
ticket! 12-15 Egg
-------
TABLE D-1 UPTAKE OF CADMIUM BY ANIMALS (cont)
Species
Tissue Analyzed
Chemical
Pollutant
Feed
Feed
Tltsue Concentration
percent
Tissue
Uptake
Reference
Ueed
Footnote
N
N
Conn Fed
quantity
quantity
Cone.
range
moisture
Cone.
Slope
In
nfiitncii
JSL
JL
(mg/day)
(kg DW/day)
(Wg)
Ic]
(lig/gWW)
Idl
(«•)
(*)
(W/gDW)
m
m
J!L
|Gulnea Pig 4 Muscle [1
Guinea Pig 4 Muscle (r]
Guinea Pig 4 Liver M
Gulne* Pig 4 Liver [rj
Guinea Pig 4 Kidney M
Gulne* Pig 4 Kidney [r]
322
1222
4822
1.2
3.3
1.2
4.1
1.2
3.3
1.2
4.1
1.2
3.3
1.2
4.1
0.13
0.14
0.22
0.1
0.07
0.1
0.05
2.0
1.8
2.0
24
6.2
7.4
6.2
10.6
Experiments
0.001 Furretd., 1876b
0.001 Furretd., 1976b
0.001 Furretd., 1976b
0.138 Furretd. 1976b
0.571 Furretd., 1976b
1.517 Furretd., 1976b
h,P
h,q
h.P
h,q
h.P
h.Q
Footnote*
a Number of animals studied,
b Number of templet eneiyzed.
c Where pollutant quantity and feed quantity are given, tad concentration * (pollutant quantity)/(tad quantity).
d If it It not tpecHled If tttauoconeontiatlon it wet or dry weight, then It it treated contervativety at being leported at wet weight and then converting to dry weight Referenced at footnote *.
* Not specified whether feme concentration It wet or dry weight
f Tissue concentration either reported at dry weight or converted from wet to dry weight using: dry weight concei illation * (wet weight conc*ntratk>ny((100 - percent moMurey 100)
g Feed concentration wet weight No conversion performed because no tad moisture data available. Not converting results In conservative output
h Feed concentration dry weight
i Feed concentration not specified. No conversion performed.
j Uptake slope «(dry weight tissue oomenliaUon)/(tadc
-------
TABLE D-Z UPTAKE OF MERCURY BY ANIMALS
SmcIm
CfcMftSeH
NmM
rwvBR
(nsMay}
rm
quantity
(kiDWMfy)
r**«
Cane.
WW
fci
C0RCifl%aU4M
mMurn
m
TH«M
Cmc.
imm
n
UfMa
f||yg
n
HifwwKa
Utatf
1*
n
H
M
N
M
waww>
M
ranf«
C«-J
CtO*
8
Musd*
a«&#
002
001
0003876 John** at «l, 1961
IMS
h
26
002
Cafifa
12
Muada
12
PI
02
18
0.01111
3
1
7062
1021102791
40 844112 Vrarran at*, 1986
1.3,4,5
h,l,m
12
1.7
18
0 09444
4
1
70.62
13.61470368
Catta
8
Mtneit
2
ro
02
20
0.01
2
0
70.62
680735194
0.001 Vramanatal, 1983
1M5
h.l.n
2
1.7
20
0.065
2
1
70.62
6.80735194
Ca«a
8
Mind*
a
Harbor tludga
0.2
20
0.01
2
0
70.62
8.80735194
0.001 Vramanatal.. 1968
1,3,4,5
h,n
i
3.1
21
0,14782
1
70.62
3.40367567
8
Muada
2
Sawagatkidga
02
20
0,01
2
0
70.62
8.60735194
0.001 Viaman at al., 1966
1.3.4,5
h,n
2
1,2
21
0,05714
2
1
70,82
6.80735194
Catta
6
KkJnay
Sudga
0.02
0.09
0.755814 Jotiwonatal., 1981
1,3.4,5
h
2.8
204
Catta
12 KMrwy
4
10
0.2
18
0.01111
9
48
* 77.02
39.16448066
783.28962 Vramanatal,, 1986
1.3.4.5
WLm
4
1.7
16
0.09444
24
880
77.02
104.4386423
Catta
8
Wdnar
2
n
0.2
20
0.01
5
1
77,02
21.75805048
42S3.5686 Vraman at al., 1968
1.M.5
hj,n
2
1.7
20
0.085
79
7
77,02
343.7771976
Cc8l«
8
Kkhwy
2
Haftor sludge
0.2
20
0.01
5
1
77.02
21.75805048
1422.9313 Viaman at 1988
1.3,4,5
M
1
3.1
21
0,14762
50
77.02
217.5605046
CatSa
8
KMnay
2
Sawagatludga
0.2
20
0.01
5
1
77.02
21.75805048
2030.7514 Vramanatal.. 1966
1.3.4,5
h,n
2
1.2
21
0.05714
27
5
77.02
117.4934726
Catta
6
Uwr
Sludg*
0.02
0.01
0.1007752 Jotmaon at al., 1981
2.3,4,5
h
26
0.27
Call)*
12 Uvar
4
ffl
0.2
18
0.01111
7
1
68.98
22.57336343 118.09158 VmrnnataL, 1986
2,3.4.5
h,l,m
4
1.7
18
0.09444
10
2
68.99
32,24786204
CMS* 8 Uv«r
C«tSa 8 Uwr
Cattl* 8 Uwr
R
Hilfcor tlurfga
Stwwgttlutffl*
02
1.7
0 2
3.1
0.2
1.2
20 0.01 3 1 68.96 9.574296613 968.8283 Vramanatal., 1966 2,3,4,5 ttf,n
20 0.065 28 7 68.99 83.84392132
20 0.01 3 1 88.99 9.874298613 257.7S813 Vramanatal., 1988 2,3,4,5 h.n
21 0.14782 14 88.99 45.14672688
20 0.01 3 1 6890 9.674298613 410.42479 Viaman at al., 1986 2,3,4,5 h.n
21 0.05714 9 3 68.99 29.02269564
-------
TABLE D-2. UPTAKE OF MERCURY BY ANIMALS (cont.)
Specks
Tissue Anatyred
Ckamkal
Pollutant
Faad
Faad
Tlnua Concentration
pifCfnt
Tissue
Uptaka
Kflfwrmci
UMtf
Footnote I
N
[a]
i:
Form Fad
quantity
(mgMay)
quantity
(kgDWMay)
Cone,
(Wfl)
n
(HlfgWW)
tdl
range
m
moftfcire
(%»
Cone.
(yg/gOW)
m
Slope
1
In
Pi
leftiences 1
CaWa
12
Milk
12
12
PI
0.2
17
18
18
0.01111
0.09444
2.3
OS
0.03
0.10
87,3
87.3
18.11023622
7.086614173
0.001 Vramanatal., 1968
6,7
h,l,m
Cattle
e
Milk
4
4
PI
0,2
1.7
20
20
0.01
0.065
0.5
0,8
0.1
87.3
87.3
3.837007874
4.724409449
10.498688 Viwnan at al„ 1968
8.7
h,l,n
Cattle
8
Milk
4
2
Harbdf sludge
02
3.1
20
21
0.01
0.14762
0.5
24
0
87,3
87.3
3.937007874
18.6976378
106,71046 Viaman at •!., 1966
8,7
h,n I
Cattla
8
Milk
4
4
Sewaga sludge
0.2
1.2
20
2!
0.01
0,05714
0.5
1.3
0.5
87.3
87.3
3.937007874
10.23622047
133.61966 Vramanatal.. 1986
6.7
h,n I
Qulnaa Pig
4
Miada
M
1.0
0.93
0.64
0.10
7,7142857 Furratal., 1976b
3.4,5
h.o.p I
Qulnaa Pig
4
Muscle
M
1.0
0.54
0.64
0.48
0.3913043 Furratal,, 1876b
3,4,5
h.o.q
Qulnaa Pig
4
Uvar
[o]
1.0
0.83
•»
0.44
0.41
0,4285714 Furratal., 19786
3.4.5
h.o.p
Guinea Pig
4
Uvar
M
1.0
0.54
0.44
0.39
0.1088957 Furratal.. 1976b
3.4,5
h.o.q
Guinea Pig
4
Kidney
M
1.0
0.93
0.10 0.001 Furratal., 1975b
0.27
3,4,5
ft,o,p
S
1
o
4
Kidney
M
1.0
0.54
0.10 0.001 Furratal.. 1B78b
0.20
3.4,5
h.o.q
Footnotas:
¦ Numbar of animate ftudlad.
b Numbaroriamplaaanalyzad.
c Whara pollutant quantity and toad quantity ara gifted conoantration* (pollutant qu«ntity)/(faad quantity).
d fftlsnottpaclMirtltswconoantrltlonbwMordiyMlgtitttmfttetraaMconiaivativalyasMngrapoMatwrtvmlgMandthmconvartinatodrywaight Ratoanoadatfootnotaa.
a Not apadffad whathar ttwua wmcaiitiaUon la w«t or dry watflht
f Ttaua concanftafon althaf raportad a« dry watght of oottvartad from wat to dry watgM ualng: dry walght toncKratlwi«(wat walgM «mc«ntraUon)/((100 - parcant moWurayiQO)
B Faad conoantralion wat tMigtt No cortvrakxi parformad baeana no had moMum data available. Not eonvartlng ratutt* In awaaivativa output
h Faad eoncantratfon dry waight
I Faad eoncanMkm not spacMad. No conversion pafformad.
j llpttka tlopa - (drywatght tttwa eonoanfcaBonyffaed concentration). Units ar» (ijg^liitarrtffrtluua DWyOjgH**lut»ntfg-dt«t). Denominator units my ba CW, WW
-------
M 3.
i5
03
S
2
« n
* SI
itt I
IIS s
D-9
-------
TABLE D4. UPTAKE OF SELENIUM BY ANIMALS
1 Species
mm
Tlaaue Analyied
N
i
Ji
CtMrolCll
Form Fed
Pollutant
quantity
(mgfday)
FMd
quantity
(kg DWfdty)
Feed
Cone.
(Wfl)
[C]
Tlssus Concentration
(pg/flWW)
[dl
rsngs
(~M
motatura
(*)
Tleaue
Cone.
(MfltDW)
Uptake
Slop*
Reference
UMd
In
ikl
Footnote
IPtfl
Mute la
Natural diet
0.027
0.493
0.034
0.521
71.95
71.95
0.12121212
1.8573975
3.7257197 Kyetal., 1973
aa cited In MAS, 1980 (p.339)
3,4,5.6,7
h
Pig
Mind*
Sodium telefilta
0.04
0.44
0.12
0.48
71.95
71.95
0.42780749
1.71122995
3.2065561 Ky at al„ 1973
as cited In NAS, 1960 (p.339)
3.4,5.6,7
h
PlB
llvar
Sodium eelenits
0.04
0.44
061
0.84
71.08
71.06
2.10780926
2.90255701
1.9868694 Kyetal., 1973
aa cited In NAS, 1980 (p.339)
3,4,5,6,7
h
jPto
Kidney
Sodium aelanlte
0.04
0.44
2.14
2.17
60.06
80.06
10.7321966
10.8626479
0.3781284 Kyetal., 1973
am cited In NAS, 1960 (p.339)
3.4,5,6.7
h
iGulnea Pig
4
Kid nay
[1]
0.08
006
1.61
1.68
0.001 Fuiret at., 1976b (pp.8748)
3,5,8,7
h,l,m
Guinea Pig
4
Muscle
[1]
008
0.06
0.38
0.37
0.5 Fuir at al., 1976b (pp.6748)
3,5,6.7
h.l.m
(Guinea Pig
4
Uv*r
N
0.08
0.06
rt
1.12
0.90
11 Fuir at al, 1976b (pp.8748)
3,5.6.7
M,m
Imoum (mala)
5
18
Heart
Sodium aalanit*
0.06
3.06
0.22
1.29
73
73
0.81481481
4.77777778
1.3209677 Schroeder & Mitchener, 1972 (p.62)
3,5.6,7
9.0
Iwoum (mala)
10
51
Heart
Sodium aalanata
0.06
3.06
0.10
0.59
73
73
0.37037037
2.18518519
0.0049383 Sdtiooder* Mltchener, 1972 (p.62)
3,5.6,7
fl.P
Mouaa (famala)
23
18
11 -t
ntfl
Sodium eel*nlt*
006
3.06
0.24
1.20
73
73
088886889
4.44444444
1.1851852 Schroedw ft Mltchener, 1972 (p.62)
3,5.6,7
9
Mouse (female)
10
43
Heart
Sodium aelenlte
0.06
3.06
0.19
0.48
73
73
07037037
1.7037037
0.3333333 Schroedw« Mltchener, 1972 (p.62)
3,5,6,7
9
Moue* (mala)
5
18
LVer
Sodium eelenlte
0.06
3.06
0.55
1.92
71
71
1.69656172
6.82068966
1.5747126 Sdireedw t Mltchener, 1972 (p.62)
3,5,6,7
0
Mow* (mala)
19
51
Liver
Sodium aalanlta
0.06
3.06
0.15
1.54
71
71
0.51724136
5.31034483
1.5977011 Sdmedar t Mltchener, 1072 (p.62)
3,5,6,7
g
Mouse (famala)
23
16
Uw
Sodium aalanKa
0.06
3.06
0.54
2.58
71
71
1.86206897
8.89655172
2.3448276 Schroeder,« Mltchener. 1972 (p.62)
3,5,6.7
9
Mouaa (hmala)
19
43
Uv*r
Sodium eelenlts
0.06
3.06
022
0.76
71
71
0.75862069
2.62066906
0.6206897 Schroeder ft MKchanar, 1972 (p.62)
3,5.6,7
0
¦Moum (mala)
S
18
Kidney
Sodium aalanlta
0.06
3.06
0.95
234
77
77
4.13043476
10.173913
2.0144928 Schroeder & Mitchener, 1972 (p.62)
3,5,8,7
0
¦Mouaa (mala)
19
51
Kidney
Sodium aalenlte
0.06
3.06
0.44
2.05
77
77
1.91304348
6.91304348
2.3333333 Schroeder ft Mltch*n*r. 1972 (p.62)
3,5,6,7
9
-------
TABLE D4. UPTAKE OF SELENIUM BY AMMALS (coot)
TlaeueAMlyied
Chemical
PolMutf
Feed
Feed
Deewe Ccnc**trsOon
Ttseue
Uptake
Om4
i wvnui
N
H
Fen* Fed
$uen«y
vnnotf
Cone.
range
WOlftMf
Cone.
Slop#
In
refereocM
(kgDWfdty)
(Iff)
(PfiWVO
w
CW9DW)
(•}
fc]
M
m
D
M
Mouse (female)
23
Kidney
Sodium seleolte
0.08
1.18
77
5.17301304
1.057971
Schroffter & Michmtr, 1072 (p.62)
3,5,8,7
9
1S
3.08
1.92
77
8.34782809
Mouse (female)
19
Kidney
Sodium selenMe
0.08
0.58
77
Z43478281
0.4837881 SchroedertMNchener, 1972(p.82)
3,5,8.7
8
43
3.08
0.88
77
as28oeeo8
Cattle
8
Kidney
Sludge amended diet
0
1.35
77.02
5.87487383
05119541 Boyeretsl., 1981 (p.288)
3.5.8,7
h
1.7
1.55
77.02
8.74499585
Cattle
6
Uver
Sludge amended diet
0
(X42
88.89
1.35440181
1.1960804 Boyeretal., 1981 (p.288)
3,5,8,7
h
1.7
1.05
88.80
3.38800451
Cattle
8
Muscle
Sludge emended diet
0
0.23
70.82
0.78284547
0.1401514 Boyeretal, 1981 (p.288)
3,5,8,7
h
1.7
030
7082
1.02110279
Footnote*:
¦ Number of animate studied.
b Number of ssmples analyzed. «
e Where pollutant quantity and feed quantity are given, feed concentration * (pollutant quintltyVCeed quantity).
d If It Is not epedfled If beeue concentration is wet or dtywelgM, then It Is heeled eoneeivativelyes being reported as wet weight and then converting to diy weight Referenced as footnote e.
e Not specified whether tissue concentration Is wet or dry weight
f Tlesue concentration either (eported as diy weight or converted from wet todiy weight using: diy weight concentration* (wet weight conoenttatlon)/((100-percent moMursyi 00)
g Feed cunoentiaUuo wet weight No conversion performed because no feed moisture data available. Not converting results In conservative output
h Feed concentration diy weight
I Feed concentration not speeffled. No conversion performed.
J Uptake elope «(diy weight Heeue a»ifirtiaUmiy(Teed ojieiitiatimi). Units are (pg-pollutantfg-tistue DWyGigfollutentfgdleQ. Denominator units my be DW, WW or unspecified (see footnotes g.h,* I),
k Used In' Indicates that the study Is used for calculating the following food group uptake slope: 1 beef; 2 beef liver; 3 lemb; 4 pork; 5 poultry; 8 dairy; 7 eggs.
I Guinea plge fed selenium In Swiss chard grown In aewage sludge,
m Soil pH6.5
n Soil pHS.5
o Mice aleo fed 2 pgfe sodium tellurite,
p Mice aleo fed 2 pg/g potaaslum tellutate and 5 pg/g chromium.
Note: percent moisture data from USOA, 1963. Deta for mouse tissue approdmatsd from data on other spedee.
-------
TABLE D-4. UPTAKE OF ZINC BY ANIMALS
Specie*
Tlnue Analyzed
Chemical
Pollutant
Feed
Peed
Tissue Concentration
percent
Thane
Uptake
Raterente
ttaed
Footnote
N
M
Pom Fad
quantity
quantity
Cone.
range
mohture
Cone,
Stop*
In
rafaffoncea
(kg OW/day)
IW*I
(M9*WW)
m
<%l
(MADW)
h
M
[c|
M
_JL_
JL
M
Cattle
Cattle
C«tti«
Cattle
Cattle
Cattle
Sheep
Sheep
Sheep
Sheep
we
Pig
Plfl
6 Kidney
8 Kidney
6 Liver
6 Uvef
6 Muscle
6 Muscle
5 Kidney
9
5 Bone
9
5 live?
9
5 Muscle
9
12 Kidney
12 Uvef
12 Mute*
Mallard duck 6 Kidney
Mallard duck 6 Uvef
Milted duck 6 Boot mute)*
S Sludge
5
6 Sludge
6
6 Sludge
6
8 Sludge
6 Sludge
S
3 Sludge
3
Sludge-grown com iSage
Sludge-grtwn com silage
Studge-giowi ccottihge
Studg*gra«n earn silage
Sludge-grown com allege
Sfudge-grovm com silage
Sludge-grown com silage
ZnCO<3)
ZnCO<3)
ZnCO(3)
36
235
26.3
236
36
235
263
236
36
235
26.3
236
19
68
19
66
19
19
68
183.4
7737
183.4
773,7
183.4
7737
0
3000
6000
9000
12000
O
3000
8000
9000
12000
19.1
19.9
35.8
36.2
668
68.4
24,03
37.4
37,8
51.3
13.99
1Z49
27
413
453
311
519
54
401
483
461
340
14
77.62 85.34405719 0.017963 Boyer at al„ 1981 (pp.286-289) 1,6 H
7762 86.91887739
S3 0.014308 Johmonetal., 1961 (p.112) 1,6 h
96
6899 115.4466301 0.006482 Boyeretil., 1961 (pp.286-289) 2,6 h
68.99 116.7365366
143 0.001 Johnson etel., 1961 (p112) 2,6 h
132
70.62 227.3655548 0.027368 Boyeretal., 1981 (pp.286-289) 1,6 h
70,62 232.8114364
340 0.001 Johnson atal., 1961 (p. 112) 1,6 h
267
3271 17.63265 Heffron etal, 1980,1960(p.69) 3 h.l
4135
625 0.755102 Heffron etal, 1980,1980 03,69) h,l
682
1523 2.122449 Heffron etal., I960, I960 (p.69) 3 h,l
1627
106 0877551 Heffron etal., 1980,1980 (p.68) 3 h,l
151
8006 120.5115346 0.113588 Osunaetal, 1961 4 e.l
8006 187.5626861
7106 130.6150657 0.079025 Osuna «•!., 1981 ' 4 e,l
71.06 1772633034
71.95 49.87522282 0.001 Osuna etal., 1961 . 4 e.i
71.95 44.52762923
74.73 1068460625 0.116343 Gasatway and Buss, 1972 (p.1,115) 5,7 i
74.73 1634.34903
74.73 1792.639493
74.73 1230.70835
74.73 2053 818757
73,59 204,4680045 0.079768 Gassawayand Bus*, 1972 (p.1,115) 5.7 i
73.59 1518.364256
73.59 1828 852707
73.59 1745.550928
73.58 1287.38114
75.46 57.04971475 000489 Gatsaway end Buss, 1972 (p.1,115) 5,7 I
-------
TABLE 0-4. UPTAKE OF ZMC BY AMMALS (com)
SfMCtol
Tissue Analyze*
CImBlSSi
Fee*
Fee*
T)ng|
THum
Uptake
Rafwewce
Utetf
- *
H
H
FmmM
*Mn«y
VWriHy
Ceoe.
range
wtotw
Cewc.
Wepe
to
rifMMCM
(mfMey)
(kg OWMey)
In*)
(wfgvwv)
(~#•)
«*»
M
(b)
f°i
fdl
in
D)
M
3000
32
75 48
13039834®
8000
30
75.48
122.2493888
9000
34
75.48
138 5493073
12000
31
75.48
126.3243884
Qulneeplg
4
Kidney
Stodge-grown chard
156.0
19
0.003619 Furretal, 1978b (pp.87-88)
h,o
4
850
22
m
2
1050
22
n
Guinea pig
4
Liver
Sludge-grown chard
159.0
28
0.001 Furretal. 1976b (pp.87-88)
Ko
4
850
30
m
2
1050
27
n
Qulneeplg
4
Muscle
Sludge-grown chard
159.0
15
0.001 Furretal., 1976b (pp.87-88)
h.o
4
850
13
m
2
1050
16
n
Footnote*
a Number of animals studied,
b Number o( samples analyzed.
c Whan pollutant quantity and tod quantity ara given, tod concentration «(pollutant quantttyV(tod quantity).
d If R la not epecflled If tissue ooreentralfon la wat or dry weight, then It Is treated conservatively as being reported ee wet weight and then converting to dry weight Referenced as footnote e.
a Not specified whether tissue concentration is wit or dry weight
f Tissue oonoentrsUon either repotted at dry weight or oonverted from wet to dry weight using: dry weight ooi>ce{iUa»un «(vwtwelglit ixmuoiiUaliuiiy((100-percent moltluteyiOO)
g Feed concentration wat weight No conversion performed beceuse no tod moisture data available. Not converting results in conaacvaOv* output
h Feed concentration dry weight
I Feed concentration not specified. No conversion performed.
| Uptake slope ¦ (dry weight tissue oo»oentiatlu
-------
TABLE D-5. UPTAKE OF ALDRINfDIELDRIN BY ANIMALS
Species
Tlw Analyzed
Clwmlcal
Form Fed
Pollutant
quantity
(mo/day)
Feed
quantity
(kg OW/day)
Fted
Cone.
Ms)
Tissue Concentration
(MB/flWW)
percent
moisture
m
Tissue
Cone.
(m!§m
JL
Uptake
Slope
Reference
Used
In
Footnoti
references
Cattle
Milk fat
DieWrin
3.25
18
57
41.8604651 12.6801 Braund et al.,1969
at cited in Fries, 1962 (p. 15)
4.8
e,h
Cattle
Fat-
AkJrin
SO
31
20.21
38.8519865 0.77704 Rumsey & Bond, 1947
as cited In Fries, 1982 (p. 15)
1,4
e,U
Cattte
Fat
Aldrin
10
25
49 1.93333 Clabom, 1958 (pp. 18-23)
78
1.4
0
Cattle
Fat
Tech. AJdrin 60%
2.5
5
5.2 S.12 Clabom, 1958 (pp.18-23)
18
1.4
0
Cattle
Fat
Oletdrtn
1
2,5
10
25
6 2.80902 Clabom, 1956 (pp.18-23)
14.3
44
75
1,4
0
Sheep
Fat
DteWrln
25
SO
128 2.6 Davidson. 1970
191 as cited In Fries, 1982 (p. 15)
3,4
e,h
Sheep
Fat
AJdrln
5
10
25
17 1.53333 Oabom, 1956 (pp.18-23)
55
78
3,4
9
Sheep •
Fat
Tech. Aid fin 60%
2.5
5
4.7 0.52 Cttbom, 1958 (pp.18-23)
6
3,4
0
Sheep
Fat
Oeldrin
1
2.5
10
25
6 2.80902 Clabom, 1956 (pp.18-23)
14.3
44
75
3.4
a
Rat (male)
Uwf
OiekWn
0.1
1
10
0.0159
0.015S
1.476
71
71
71
0.05482758 0.52925 Walker at at, 1969
005344828 as cited In EPA, 1980a (p.c-14)
5.08965517
2,5
l,m
Rat (female)
Liver
DWdrin
0.1
1
10
0.0348
0.42%
2.965
71
71
71
0.12 1.00069 Walker etal., 1969
1:48103448 as Med In EPA, 1900a (p.c-14)
10.2241379
2,5
l.m
Rat (male)
Uver
DieWrin
0.1
1
10
0.0258
1.493
19.72
71
71
71
006931034 6.90968 Walter etal., 1969
5.14827586 at dted In EPA, '19608 (p.c-14)
68
2.5
l,m
Rat (female)
Uwr
Mdrtn
0.1
1
10
0.8974
13.90
57.81
71
71
71
3.09448276 118072 Walker etal, 1969
47.8310345 a« cited In EPA, 1980a (p.c-14)
193.344828 .
2.5
l.m
-------
TABLE D-5. UPTAKE OF ALDRlWDtELDRIN BY ANtMALS (coot)
Sotdet
Tissue Analyzed
Chemical
foUutMit
Feed
Ned
Tissue CoflcefltratfoA
percent
Ttosue
Upteke
Reference
Used
Footnote
N
N
Form Fed
quantity
quantity
Cone.
range
idoMuti
Cone.
Sfepe
In
references
(mg/dey)
(kg DWMty)
(m^s)
(MrtWW)
W
c%>
0MDW)
[«]
IM
IC1
r
-------
TABLE D4. UPTAKE OF CHLOROANE BY ANIMALS
Speelet
Cattle
Cattle
Cow
Cattle
Cattle
Cattle
Cattle
Cattle
Sheep
Thuue Analyied
N
S
1 Body fat
1 Body fat
Fat
1 Milk tat
1 Mltkfat
1 Milk fat
1 Milk fat
1 Milk fist
Fat
Chemical
Form Fad
Pollutant
quantity
(mgMay)
Faed
quantity
(kg DW/day)
chlordane
ctitofdane
Faed
Cone.
Cw>a)
Tlaaiie Concentration
(wj/aww)
Wl
rang*
(~V)
percent
moMura
(*)
TlniM
Cone.
imm
n
Uptake
Slope
Reffepence
Used
In
ruotnuta
refeunee*
1
10
100
1
10
100
10
25
1
10
100
1
10
100
1
10
100
1
10
100
1
10
100
10
25
0.24
1.40
2.65
0.47
1.18
3.97
0.19
0.87
1.82
0.32
1.53
2.98
0.33
2.1
3.78
0.43
2,53
4.58
0.48
2.64
4.85
20.21 0.30078957 0.025198 Doraugh and Hemken, 1973 1,2,3,4,5 W
20.21 1.75480584
20.21 3.3212182
20.21 0.58904625 0.042096 Doraugh and Hemken, 1973 1,2,3,4,5 l,l
20 21 1.47888207
20.21 4.97558085
13 0.333333 Ctabom, 1956
18
1,2,3,4,5 g
57 0.44186047 0.032719 Dorough and Hemken, 1973 8,7
57 2.02325581
57 4 23255814
57 0.74418805 0.052343 Ooraugh and Hemken, 1973 6,7
57 3.55813953
57 8.93023256
57 0.76744188 0.065298 Doraugh and Hemken, 1973 8,7
57 4.88372093
57 8.74418805
67 1 0.07844 Doraugh and Hemken, 1973 6,7
57 5.88372093
57 10.6511628
57 1.11627907 0.084189 Doraugh and Hemken, 1973 6,7
57 8.139S3488
57 11.2790698
18 -0.26667 Ctabom, 1956
12
l.t.m
M,o
M,p
M.q
Footnote*:
• Numb* of animate studied.
blti filial m a iMitwa uaImaJ
NUftlDCf Of templet ansfyZQa.
e When pollutant quantity and feed quantity are given, teed concentration * (pollutant quantltyy{feed quantity).
-------
TABLE D-J. UPTAKE OF CHLORDANE BY ANIMALS (oont)
SptcSes
Ttestte Analyzed
Chemical
PoVuta*
Feed
Feed
Ttsmte Concentration
percent
Tissue
Uptake
Reference
UMd
r f M ri ¦
rwwvw
N
N
Form Fad
quantity
quantity
Ceoc.
rang*
moisture
Cone.
Wop*
la
(mgMay)
(kgDWfttay)
(WrtWW)
(H-)
t%)
(WaWV)
ill
_£L
-£L
n
J.
U
d If X t« not specified If tissue concentration is w«< or dry weight, then I it tratted cons«(Yit)vely a* being reported *s wot weight and then converting to dry weight Referenced it footnote •.
e Not specified whether tissue concentretkxi is wet or dry weight
f Tissue ooooentiatlon either reported a* dry weight of converted from wet to dry weight using: dry weight concentration »(w*t weight concentratlon)/((100 • percent moWureyiOO)
g Feed concentration wet weight No conversion pertbtmed because no teed moisture data available. Not converting re*ult* In conservative output
h Feed concentration dty weight
I Feed concentration not specified. No convection performed.
] Uptake slope «(dry weight tissue conoentrstlony(feed concentration). Units are (pg-poButant/g-t issue DW)/(pg-pollutant/g-dlet). Denominator units my be DW, WW or unspeclfled (see footnote* g,h, & I)
k 'Vised In" indicates that the study is used for calculating the following food group uptake slope: 1 beef fat; 2 beef liver; 3 lamb fat; 4 pork fat; 5 poultry fat; 8 dairy fat; 7 eggs.
I Cattle ted HCS 3260 technical grade chkxdane In gelatin capsules
m Tissue samples analyzed after 3 days
n Tissue samples analyzed after 7 days
o Tissue sample* analyzed after 15 days
p Tissue samples analyzed after 30 days
q Tissue sample* analyzed after 60 days
Note: percent moisture data from US.DA, 1963. Used heavy cream data for milk fat. *
-------
TABLE D-7. UPTAKE OF DDTADDDTODE BY ANIMALS
SoetiM
Tlisue Analyzed
Chemical
Pollutant
Feed
Feed
Tlttue Concentnrtion
percent
Tlitue
Uptake
Reference
Used
Footnote
N
N
FofmFed
quantity
quantity
Cone
rang*
molttun
Cone.
Slope
In
nfwtftctt
(mgMay)
(kg DW/day)
(WW
(W/flWW)
(~H
(*)
fttfflDW)
|»l
-JStr
Wl
m
m
W
Cow
Cattle
Cow
Cow
Cattle
Sheep
Sheep
Sheep
Fat
3 BodyW
M Ilk fat
MMctat
3 MHktat
Fat
Fat
Fat
Sum owl (male) 2
12
Hen
Hen
. liver
Uwr
Hen
Egg y°«<
DDT
ODE
DDE
DOT
DOE
DDE
DOT
DDT
DOT
DDT
DDT
Bam owl
2 Egg*
12
DDE
10
25
0.62
3.1
1.40
1.40
0.62
3.1
0.068
0.83
10
25
0
2.83
0.004
0.05
0,15
0.45
0.0
1.0
2.5
5.0
.' 7.5
10.0
0.0
1.0
2S
5.0
7.5
10,0
0
283
1.37
7.98
6.76
1.21
2.13
10.43
0.36
1.08
0.80
112.0
0,17
0.25
0,45
0.67
5.8
6.6
0.7
24.4
62.7
117.0
1.0
1.6
2.6
4.6
5.7
5.9
0.25
12
6.8 2.346667 Oabom, 1956 (p.21)
42
20,21 1.717(50714
20.21 10.0012533
3.340422 Fries and Manmr, 1876
57 15.7209302 11.22924 Frietetai., 1969
at cited in Fries 1982 (p.15)
57 2,81395349 2.009967 Frie* et al., 1969
a> cited h Frie* 1962 (p. 15)
57 4.95348837
57 24.255814
22.54 0.484756
22.54 1.39426801
3.1
15
73.83 3.05693542 150.1463
7383 427.970959
7.783196 File* and Manow, 1978
6.834847 Harriaonetal., 1970
at cited in Frie* 1962 (p. 15)
2.213124 Hantton et al, 1970
at cited In Frtaa 1982 (p. 15)
0.793333 Oabom, 1956 (p.21)
1963 (p.237)
73.59 0.64369557
73.59 0.94661113
73.59 1.70390004
73.59 2.53691783
4.09426 Cummlngs et at., 1966 41967
at cited In Bewiue, 1976 (p.87)
73.59 21.9613783 40.58902 Smith et el, 1970
73.59 24.9905339 atcKedh Bmemn, 1976 (p.87)
73.59 36.7285119
73.59 92.3892485
73.59 237.410072
73.59 443.01401
51.10 2.04498978 1.081822 Smith etal., 1970
51.10 3.27198364 et cited In Bevenoe, 1976 (p.87)
51.10 5.31697342
51.10 9.40695297
51.10 11.6564417
51.10 12.0654397
73.70 0.95057034 15.76686 MendenhaBetai., 1983(p.238)
73.70 45.6273764
1.4 0
1,4 •,«,!
4,6 e,h
4,8 e,h
4,6 e.l.t
3,4 e.l
3,4 •,!
3.4 h
4.5 B,m,n
2,5 a,l,o
2,5 e,l,p
-------
TABLE D-7. UPTAKE OF DDT/DDWIMJE BY ANIMALS (coot)
Seed**
Tissue Analyzed
Chetnfcai
Pottoant
Feed
Feed
THsue Concentration
percent
metature
Tissue
Uptake
R*m«ac«
lH*d
Footnote
N
N
Form Fad
fuantKy
quantity
Cone.
range
Cone.
•lop#
In
(mgMay)
(kgDWAJay)
WU
(WflWW)
(~V)
(*)
(pgfflDW)
J2L
Jb|
-j£l_
fdl
P
m
M
2 Egg.
12
DOG
0
2.83
0.40
41
73.70 1.52091255 54.54863 MendenhalataL, 1083 (p.238)
73.70 155.893538
Footnote*:
¦ Number of animate studied,
b Number of aamples analyzed.
0 Where polutant quantity and feed quantity are given, feed concentration «(pollutant quantKyy(feed quantity).
d If kie not specified *tle^ concentration Is wet or dry weight, thank la treated con*etvativelyae being repotted aewat Might and then converting to thy weight Referenced s* footnote e.
e Not speckled whether tissue oonoentntlon la wt» or dry weight
f Tkaua oonoent/ation either reported aa dry weight or converted from wet to dry weight ualng: dry weight concentration « (wot weight concentntlon)/((100 • percent moisturayiOO)
g Feed concentration wet weight No conversion performed became no feed moisture data avakebia. Not converting reauka in coneervative output
h Feed concentration dry weight
1 Feed concentration not speckled. No convection performed.
J Uptaka slope "(dry weight tissue conoentrationy(foed concentration). Unite are (pg-polutant/g-tie»ue CWy(pg-pollutant/g-dlet). Denominator unit* my be DW, WW or unspecified (see footnote* g,h, 8t I),
k D*ed in" Indicate* that the atudy la uaed for calculating the following food group uptime dope: 1 beef fat; 2 beef Hver; 3 lamb tat; 4 pork fat; 5 poultry fat; 8 dairy fat; 7 egg*.
I Cow* aleo fed aam* doe* rates of hexachiorobenzene. Authors do not believe an Interaction occurred,
m Dsaue concentration* are geometric meat* of 9 samples, reported by authors,
n Feed concentration* are geometric meana of 2 aamples, reported by authors,
o Feed range 0.004-0.035; uaed lower value to be coneervative.
p Lindane and dieldrin also in feed.
q Feed conoentiationa are geometric meana of 13 aamples, reported by authors,
r Tissue concentration* are geometric means of 13 samples, reported by authors,
a Feed concentrations are geometric meana of 10 aampie*, reported ty authors,
t 1975 data,
u 1970 data.
Note: percent moisture data from USDA, 1983. Used chicken data for bam owt and hen ticsue, and heavy cream data for mikM.
-------
TABLE M. UPTAKE OF HEPTACHLOR BY ANIMALS
TlniM
moMure
(*)
Cone.
(Mfg)
Slop*
baby cow
20.21 8.69635819 7.139324034 Brace at al, 1965 (p.64)
20.21 18.42336132
20.21 104.6497055
20.21 367.7152525
0.5
1.5
1.4.5
14.7
83.5
293.4
Body fit
20.21 1.554079459 8.179365571 Bovardetal., 1971., ny((100 - percent moWuieyiOO)
g Feed concentration wat weight No oon>«reion performed beceute no feed moitture data availabla. Not converting retulti In conMrvatlv* output
h Feed concentration dry weight
I Feed concentration not ipectfted. No converaion performed.
) Uptake alope »(dry weight tlaaue «ui memi Ho«>)/(feed concentration). Unta are (pg-poOutantfg-tinua CWy(POi>oltutent/a-dtet). Denominator unMa my be CW, WW or unapeeffled (eea footnote! g.h, 81).
kUaadtf indteatee lhat the atudy la ueed for calculating the following food group uptake elope: 1 beef tat 2 beef liver; 3 lamb M; 4 pork tat 5 poultry tat 8 dairy tat 7 egg*.
I Cowa alao fad aame doae ratea of DDE. Author* do not beHeve an Interaction occurred
Note: percent moWura data from UStM, 1963. Uaad heavy craam data for mHkht
-------
TABLE W. UPTAKE OF H0CACHLOROSENZENE BY ANIMALS
IfhaaeJMyxetf I
CfllfflllCll
Pm***
ft+t
ITtlWW C«IUtritHMu
ii
M
w
—II—
-JL.
JL
Cow
Cow
ShMp
Chfckan
CMekw, bnitar
Chldon, htti
CMdm
CMcktn
ChlcfeM
CMckwi
3 BodyW
3 MMcM
BodyW
Body fit
Fit
Fat
Bodyf*
E00f0»«
Eggyo**
ESO
Hca
.1 -1
HC8
HC8
HCS
HC8
HCS
HCB
HCB
HCB
HCS
082
31
a«
0.1
1
10
100
0.02
0.08
0.7
7
340
0.02
0.08
0.7
7
340
1.91
880
2.12
8.01
0.8
7.5
75.0
650.0
0.7
0.7
S
29
528
0.2
0.3
20
15
167
2021 2383783682 3.481922 Friw «nd Mtitow, 1978 (p.477)
20.21 11028051
57 4.930232558 8.48099 Fit** MdMwiW, 1978^.477)
57 20,95348837
2254 1181890008
22.54 9.882418731
2254 98.82418731
2254 839.1427834
28.91 0.984687323
2891 01984667323
28.91 7.033338022
28.91 40.79336053
51.10 0.408997855
51.10 0.813496833
51.10 4.08997955
51.10 30.87484863
U4
2,4,8 »,U
8.352518 AvrahvnltndSM*. 1972 3,4 ».l
n cM ki Booth ft Me DawM. 1975 (p.583)
5.642788 FAO-WHO, 1989 S i,i
t* dwd in Booth ft Me Dosw«, 1975 ft>.583)
13 0#ncUiMra«t«L,
ss eSsd h Oewwf, 1884
38 0#neWiMrattaL,
¦ cM in Connor, 1964 (p.46)
2691 7427204951 2184472 FAO-WHO, 1980
m cited in Booth ft Mc Oawill, 1975 (p.593)
4.312415 FAO-WHO. 1968
n cited in Booth ft Me DowM, 1975 (p.583)
S m
5 n
5 «.f
7 •,!
51.10 341.5132024 1.004451 FAO-WHO. 1969 7 t,i
« cited ki Booth ft Me Dawn*, 1975 fc593)
8.5 DtjunctttMrettal., 7 o
Footnote*:
a Numbw of ankrah studM.
b Numb*r of nmptM «n«lyz«d.
c Wh«f» po#ut»nt quKitty »nd f*«d quantity am gtwn, had concartrttlon»(poOutant qmrrttty)/(f»«d quintity).
d Kit I* fK**pac«id if ttaua concentration i»\w«t or <*yw»igHtt>*n It it ti»«t»dcon»fv*th^»sbaU>g™p<^i«^ weight and thin oonwtJng to dry Rafofaooad a* footnote a.
• Not «p«c#iad whether tittua concentration i» wet of diywitflht
f TiiauetimKwfteBon either lepoitedaidiyMWiQM or oofWMtedtn^wattodiyyiriflM using: d
-------
TABLE D-S. UPTAKE OF HEXACHLOROBENZENE BY ANIMALS (cont)
Species
Tissue Analyzed
Chemical
Pollutant
Peed
Peed
Tissue Concentration
percent
Tissue
Uptake
Reference
Used
Footnote
N
N
Fern Fed
quantity
quantity
Com.
range
moisture
Cone.
Slope
In
nfiniicci
(mg/day)
(kgDWfday)
(Wo)
(pgfgWW)
(~H
(%)
IWdDW)
[a]
JSL
Icl
tdl
in
JL
ja_
h Feed concentration drywetght
i Food concentration not specified. No conversion performed.
I Uptake dope «(dry weight tissue concentratfony(feed ccncentialion). Unit* are (pg-pollutantfg-tissue OW)/(|/g-poHutantfg-dlot). Denominator units my be OW, WW or unspecified (tea footnotes g,h, & I),
k Used In" indicates that the study is used for calculating the following food group uptake slope: 1 beef tat; 2 beef liver; 3 lamb tat 4 pork tat; 5 poultry tat; 6 dairy tat; 7 eggs.
I Caws also fed same dose rates of ODE. Authors do not believe an interaction occurred,
m Dry waight uptake slope range of 11-13 repotted. Used higher to be conservative,
n Dry weight uptake slope range of 21-38 repotted. Used higher to be conservative,
o Dry weight uptake slope range of 4.5-6.5 repotted. Used higher to be conservative.
Note: percent moisture data from USOA, 1963. Used heevycreem data for milk tat
-------
TABLE D-10. UPTAKE OF LINDANE BY ANIMALS
•cede*
Ttes«ie Analyzed
Chtmteal
wi r
Form Fed
Poltatant
quantity
(mgMay)
Feed
4»MtKy
(kg DWMty)
Feed
Cenc.
(pgW
rci
TI«s«m Concentration
pemnt
moisture
<%>
TlttM
Cone.
(nttm
m
Uptake
ttepe
m
deference
Used
In
M
Footnote
N
M
N
(WO WW)
fdl
rvtg%
(~W
Cow
Fat
Undent
1
10
100
20
8.3
111.0
1.117297
Ctabom, 1B50(p.28)
1.2.3.4.W.7
0
Footnotes:
a Number of animals studied,
b Number of samples analyzad.
0 Where pollutant quantity and feed quantity are glwn, feed concentration'(pollutant quantltyy(feed quantity).
d If It Is not apecMed If tissue concentration Is vwt or dry weight, then ( la treated conservatively as being reported as wet weight and then converting to dryweight Referenced as footnote a.
a Not spedled whether tissue concentration Is wet or dry weight
f Tissue concentration ether reported aerfty weight or converted tram wet to dry weight using: dry weight oonoentiatlon »(wet weight conoentrationy((100 • percent moistureyiOO)
g Feed concentration wst¥«ighL No conversion performed because no feed moisture data available. Not converting reeulta in conservative output
h Feed concentration dry weight
1 Feed concentration not spedAed. No conversion performed.
j Uptake slope* (dry Might tissue conoentratlony(feed concentration). Units are (po-podutant/g-tissue DWy(«H»»utant/g<«at). Denominator unla my be CNV. WW or unspecified (see. footnotes g,h, 1I)-
k "Used InT indicates that the study is usad tor calculating the following food group uptake slope: 1 beef fat; 2 beef liver; 3 lamb Cat; 4 pork tat; 5 poultry fat; 6 dairy fat; 7 eggs.
Note: percent moisture data from USOA, 1963
-------
TABLE D-11. UPTAKE OF POLYCHLORINATED BIPHENYLS BY ANIMALS
FMd
quantity
(kg DW/day)
Tissue Concentration
Tissue
Cone.
WgDW)
Uptake
Slop*
Reference
(lig/gWW)
Cow
Body tat
12.4
41.7
20.21 52.2621882 4.21469 Fries rial., 1973 (p.119)
1,2,3,4,5 a,h,l
Cow
Milk fat
60.9
57 141.627907 11.4216 Fries etal, 1973 (p.119)
12.4
2,3,4,5,6,7 e,h,l
Cattle
Milk tat
0.22
0.43
0.87
1.0
1.8
3.7
57 2.3255814 9.71869 Wlllet, 1975
57 4.16604651
57 8.60465116
2,3,4,5,6,7 a,h
as cited in Fries, 1962 (p.15)
Footnotes:
a Number of animals studied,
b Number of samples analyzed.
c Where polutant quantity and feed quantity are given, feed concentration « (pollutant quantity)/(feed quantity).
d If It la not specified If tissue cooccr Nation is wet or dry weight, then It Is treated conservatively as being reported as wet weight and then converting to dry welgiit Referenced as footnote e.
a Not specified whether tissue concentration Is wet or dry weight
f Tissue oonoertration either reported as dry weight or oonverted from wet to dry weight using: dry weight concentration « (wet weight conoentratk>ny((100 - percent moietureyiOO)
g Feed oonoentration wet weight No conversion performed because no feed moisture data available. Not converting results in oonservath* output
h Feed concentration dry weight
I Faed concentration not speclied. No oonverslon performed.
J Uptake slope • (dry weight tissue oonoentratlon)/(toed oonoentration). Units are (pg-pollutant/g4asue CWy(pg-pollutant/g-diet). Denominator units my be DW, WW or unspecified (see footnotes g,h, & I),
k 'Used In" Indicates that the stud/ is used for calculating the foikwring food group uptake slope: 1 beef fat; 2 beef liver; 3 lamb fat: 4 pork 1st: 5 poultry fat: 6 dairy fat; 7 eggs.
I Tissue concentration is arithmetic mean reported by authors.
Note: percent moisture data from USDA, 1963. Used heavy creem data for milk fat.
-------
|s 2
ll|-
2
r
* 5
S 3 S
8 2 2 2
5- ^ ^
* •»
¥ V
* *
« %
o o
ooo ooo ooo
8888 883 888 888
feSfefc 8 8 8 fcfcfc BSE
OO^ft OOO OOO © O I
*28
O 0 « • o N *r O h- * O K ^
n n 08
e e
S I
C4 N N N
* 3 & &
£
eft
ft* i
O TJ #«.
D-25
-------
APPENDIX E
Results of the Plant Phytotoxicity Literature Search
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
TABLE E-l CHROMIUM PHYTOTOXICITY DATA E-l
TABLE E-2 COPPER PHYTOTOXICITY DATA E-10
TABLE E-3 NICKEL PHYTOTOXICITY DATA E-62
TABLE E-4 ZINC PHYTOTOXICITY DATA E-86
PHYTOTOXICITY REFERENCES E-174
I
-------
TABLE E-1. CHROMIUM PHYTOTOXICITY DATA
Plant Name
Scientific
Name
Variety
Parts
Cultivation
PH
Soil Type
Barley
Hordeum vulgare
leaves
Cherry
Prunus cerasus
fruit
field
Corn
Zea mays
leaves,stalks,grain,husks,cobs
Mushroom
Cantharellus cibarius
Oak, English
Quercus robur
leaves
field
Oak
Quercus spp.
leaves
field
Oats
Avena sativa
leaves
solution
leaves.stems
serpentine soil
Oranges
Citrus sinensis
leaves
greenhouse
field
pots
Pear
Pyrus communis
fruit,pericarp,peel
field
Potato
Solanum tuberosum
tubers
•
Tobacco
Nicotiana tabacum
leaves.roots
serpentine soil
Wheat
Triticum spp.
leaves
Corn
Zea mays
greenhouse
6.8
Warsaw sandy loam
limed
Rye
Seceale cereal
greenhouse
6.8
Warsaw sandy loam
limed
Corn
Zea mays
greenhouse
6.5
Warsaw sandy loam
Rye
Seceale cereal
greenhouse
6.5
Warsaw sandy loam
Corn
Zea mays
grain
field
6.3
Sable silty clay loam
6.8
Cisne silt loam
6.0-6.3
Ipava silt loam
6.2-6.3
Drummer silty clay loam
6
Muscatine silt loam
6.2
Hartsburg silty clay loam
tops
greenhouse
5.5
Hart8ell fine sandy loam
-------
TABLE E l. CHROMIUM PHYTOTOXICITY DATA tcon't)
Plant Name
Treatment
Concentration in soil
Loading rate
plant tissue concentration
deficiency | normal | toxic •
Barley
7.60 ppm
Cherry
,032ppm
Com
.44-2.07 4.0-8.0
Mushroom
.058-.135
Oak, English
3
Oak
4
Oats
0.4-3.0 252
3.0-11.0
Oranges
.20-1.00
<10
.20-<1.00
Pear
.03.85
Potato
0.002
Tobacco
4-14 18,-34
Wheat
4.5-14.8
Corn
fertilized
<.4
plain sludge
58ppm
.7-1.6
Cr sludge
404-1444
2.3-7.2
Rye
fertilized
0.8
plain sludge
58
1.3
Cr sludge
404-1444
3.2-5.1
Corn
fertilized
<3
sludge
58
<3
Cr sludge
358-697
3-8.0
inorganic
350-700
46
Rye
fertilized
<3
sludge
58
<3
Cr sludge
358-697
4.8-9.5
inorganic
350-700
25.1-58.1
Corn
.094 ug/g
0,11 ug/g
*
.059.193ug/g
¦059-.118ufl/fl
0.068 ug/g
.094 ug/g
sludge A
68-1360
1.2-5,4
sludge 8
3-50
.6-3,5
compost
3-50
.7-2.8
NaCrO
1-320
1.4-1.6 2.5-29.0
E-2
-------
TABLE E-1. CHROMIUM PHYTOTOXICITY DATA (oon't)
Plant Name
phytotoxicity deficiency
phytotoxicity
reference
typo | symptoms
type I symptoms
Barley 35
Cherry 35
Corn visual stunted,leave- * roll & "urple " 35
Mushrpon • 35
Oak, English"1 ' 35
Oak " 35
Oat* visual stunted,brownish-red leaves 35
35
Oranges 35
35
35
Pear 35
Potato "35
Tobacco visual stem retarded,no inflorescence 35
Wheat 35
Corn 44
44
yield reduction was attributed to others 44
Ryo 44
44
yield reduction was attributed to others 44
Com 45
45
45
yield reduction,lowest yield in crop #1 45
Rye 45
45
45
yield reduction 45
Com 187
187
187
187
187
187
169
169
169
yield reduction from 55 to 1 fl/pot 169
-------
TABLE E-1. CHROMIUM PHYTOTOXICITY DATA (con't)
Plant Nama
Scientific
Name
Variety
Parts
Cultivation
PH
Soil Type
Jubilee
leaves, kernels
field
5.8-7.1
Willamette silt loam
Swiss chard
Beta vulgaris
Fordhook Giant
greenhouse
5.6-5.9
Chalmers silty clay loam and
Russel silt loam
Rye grass
Lolium perenne
greenhouse
5.6-5.9
Chalmers silty clay loam and
Russel silt loam
Soybean
Glycine max
Corsoy
seedling tissue
pot
5.9
Nicollet loam soil
Sorghum
sorghum bicolor
Moench
leaves,root,grain,stem
field
5.8-7.2
Haynie fine sand loam
6.9-7.7
Haynie fine sand loam
Winter wheat
Triticum aestivum
roots,grain
field
5.8-7.2
Haynie fine sand loam
6.9-7.7
Haynie fine.sand loam
Oat
Harmon
root,seed,stem
field
Lucerne
Medicago sativa
Wairau
whole
pot
5
Waitarere sand
5.1-5.8
Waitarere sand
6.6
Waitarere sand .
5.2
Levin silt loam
5.4-6.0
Levin silt loam
6.8
Levin silt loam
Tomato
Lycopersicon esculentum
Money maker
leaves,fruit,root
pot
4.6-6.9
Soybean
Glycine max
stem.leaves.seeds.pods
pot
Ritzville silt loam
Grass
timothy,brpwn top
field
6.05
clay & sandy loam
sweet vernal,blue
6.2
clay & sandy loam
Alfalfa & red clover
field
6.05
clay & sandy loam
6.2
clay & sandy loam
Various
shoots
field
serpentine soil
Wheat
Triticum aestivum
HDM 1553
stem
field
8
clay
tops
pot
5.0-5.5
Orentano histosol
E-4
-------
TABLE E-1. CHROMIUM PHYTOTOXICITY DATA (oon't)
IPlant Noma
Treatment
Concentration in coil
Loading rate
plant tissue concentration
deficiency | normal | toxic
CrSO$
5-320
1.3-1.4 2.4-2.8
control
0
1.3-2.1
control
.87-1.0 mmol/kg
,18-.19mmol/kg
tannery waste
1.23-13.7mm ol/kg
.12-.22mmol/kg
Swiss chard
control
12 mg/kg
8.9
drilling fluid
96-402 mg/kg
8.0-12.2
Rya grass
control
12 mg/kg
7.5
drilling fluid
96-402 mg/kg
8.3-10.9
Soybean
Na2Cr20
0-40 mg/kg
.7-1.1
sludge
0-432 mg/kg
.7-.9
Sorghum
fertilized
29.34
0.398
sludge
47.7
0.2
Winter wheat
fertilized
29.34
15.47
sludge
47.7
17.26
Oat
control
.8.1-9.6
43
25% sludge
20.3
72
50% sludge
27.5
56
Lucerne
0
15
.75-9.1
5-40% sludge
19.25-49
.1-6.5
100% sludge
100
.1-2.6
0
30
.1-.9
5-40% sludge
33.5-58
.1-4.7
100% sludge
100
.1-1.0
Tomato
sludge
470
0-459 kg/ha
15
Soybean
control
59
0.095
Cr solution
2.5 ug/g
0.15
Grass
control
.18-.78
.13-1.63
sludge
.30.94
1.39-5.84 kg/ha
.11-2.07
Alfalfa & red clover
control
.18-.78
.47-3.96
sludge
.30-.94
1.39-5.84 kg/ha
.38-7.93
Various
natural
92-737
0-70
Wheat
control
17
0
7.94
50% sludge
41.8
9.52
66% sludge
46.6
10.6
100% sludge
55
12.16
10 ton/ha sludge
27
.45 kg/ha
11.08
20 ton/ha sludge
31
.90 kg/ha
20.76
control
27.8
5
fly ash 2%
25.6
4.1
-------
TABLE E-1. CHROMIUM PHYTOTOXICITY DATA (con't)
Plant Name
phytotoxicity deficiency
phytotoxicity
reference
type | symptoms
type
I symptoms
yield (eduction fiom 56 to 25 g/pot
Swiss chard
Rye grass
Soybean
Sorghum
Winter wheat
Oat
Lucerne
Tomato
Soybean
Grass
Alfalfa & red clover
Various
Wheat
169
169
226
226
176
176
176
176
57
57
127
127
127
127
73
73
73
261
261
261
261
261
261
262
27
27
147
147
147
147
5
29
29
29
23
29
29
186
186
E-6
-------
TABLE E*1, CHROMIUM PHYTOTOXiCITY DATA (oon't)
Plant Name
Scientific
Vanity
Parts
Cultivation
PH
Sot) Type
Nsma
6.1-8.3 lamporacchio fluvisol
7.5-8.0 Guardia regosol
-------
TABLE E-1. CHROMIUM PHYTOTOXICITY DATA (con't)
Plant Name
Treatment
Concentration in soil
Loading rate
plant tissua concentration
deficiency | normal | toxic •
fly ash 5%
20.3
4.3
control
25,7
3.2
fly ash 2%
21,8
3.1
fly ash B%
18.2
2.8
control
13.9
4.9
fly ash 2%
14.4
3.2
fly ash 5%
21,1
4.1
E-8
-------
TABLE E-1, CHROMIUM PHYTOTOXICITy DATA Icon't)
Plant Name
phytotoxicity doficiency
phytotoxicity
refartnca I
typo | symptoms
typo
I symptoms
t
86
86
86
86
86
86
86
-------
TABLE £-2. COPPER PHYTOTOXICITY DATA
Plant Name
Scientific
Variety
Parts
Cultivation
PH
Name
Alfalfa
Apple
Avocado
Barley
Cacao
Cauliflower
Cherry
Lemon
Orange
Clovar.red
Clover,subterranean
Coffee
Currant,black
Grapes
Oats
Peach
Pear
Pecan
Pineapple
Plum
Potato
Rye
Timothy
Tomato
Tung
Wheat
Corn
Barley
Reed canarygrass
Corn
Medicago saliva
Malus spp.
Porsaa amarioana
Hordeum vulgare
Theobroma cacao
Brassica oleracea botrytis
Prunus cerasus
Citrus limon
Citrus sinensis
Trifollum pratense
Trifolium subterraneum
Coffea spp.
Ribas nigrum ,
Vitis spp.
Avena sativa
Prunus persica
Pyrus communis
Carya lllinoensis
Ananas comosus
Prunus domestica
Solarium tuberosum
Secale cereale
Phleum pratensa
Lycoparsicon esculentum
Aleurites fordi
Triticum spp.
Zea mays
Hordeum vulgare
Phalaris arundinacea
Zea mays
steamsjeaves.tops
tops
leaves
leaves
grain
leaves
leaves
leaves
leaves
leaves, Valencia and Navel leaves
tops
loaves,tops
beans
leaves
leaves
leaves,straw.tops,grain,
leaves
leaves,wood,bark
leaves
leaves
apical leaves
tubers
grain
tops
leaves
fruit
fruit
leaves
straw.grain,wheat germ
earleaf
Henry
earleaf,grain,stovar
silage
field
control
field
field
field
field
field
field
field
field
culture
control
field
field
field
field
field
solution
field
field
field
. field
field
field
field
field .
greenhouse
control
field
field
field
controled 5.8-6.2
5.7-6.0
5.7-6.0
field 6.6
field 6.6
field 5.9-6.6
field 5.9-6.6
E-10
-------
TABLE E-2. COPPER PHYTOTOXICITY DATA (con't)
jPlant Name
Soil Typo
Treatment | Concentration In soH
Loading rate
Alfalfa
Apple
Avocado
Barley
Cacao
CauHflowar
Chaffy
Lemon
Orange
Clover, red
Clovar.subterranaan
Coffee
Currant.black
Grapes
Oats
Peach
Pear
Pecan
Pineapple
Plum
Potato
Rya
Timothy
Tomato
Tuna
Wheat
Corn
Barley
Reed canarygrass
Corn
Bojac loamy sand
Davidson clay loam
Groseclose silt bam
Acredale silt loam
Acredale silt loam
Hublersburg clay loam
Hublersburg ckay loam
304 kg/ha
304 kg/ha
36.6 kg/ha
7.6 kg/ha
-------
TABLE E-2. COPPER PHYTOTOXICITY DATA (con't)
Plant Name
plant tissue concentration
phytotoxicity deficiency
deficiency
I normal | toxio
type
I symptoms
Alfalfa
5.10-11.5
6-16.4
Apple
1.0-4.0
3.2-23.0
visual
necrotic spots,shoots die
Avocado
4-11
Barley
6.2-11.9
Cacao
11-15
Cauliflower
4.8-5.4
Cherry
5-200
Lemon
3.9
8.4-8.6
visual
multiple budding.gum pockets
Orange
<4.00
5-20 >20.00
visual
dark greeen leaves, bumpy fruit
<4.00
4-20
visual
dark greeen leaves,bumpy fruit
.70-1.60
3.20-15
visual
dark greeen leaves,bumpy fruit
Clovor.red
7.6-16.4
Ctover.subterranean
<3.00
3-32
visual '
become light, no cente( markings
Coffee
8.0-20.0
Currant.black
2-4
7.5-10.00
visual
leaves turn pale & mottled
Grapes
1.0-5.4
2.6-30.0
visual
Oats
<3.0
7-8
visual
leaves roll& yellow-gray spots
1-2.5
1.1-8.8
visual
leaves roll& yellow-gray spots
Peach
7-16
Pear
1.2-6.7
5-100
visual
stunted,terminal leaves die.unfruit
Pecan
21-28
Pineapple
8.6-11.5
Hum
3.0-4.0
7.0-9.0
visual
terminal buds die,leaves go yellow
Potato
2.5-5.5
Rye
<.5
<2.0
visual
Timothy
6.4
Tomato
3.1-12.3
13.0-37.0
15.0-25.0
Tung
2.6-3.1
4.8-5.7
visual
foliage is chlorotic & dwarfed
Wheat
1.5 (grain)
3-16.7 (gr)
visual
Leaves roll,yellow,die,dry to gray
Corn
6.1-9.6mg/kg
6.1-9.1mg/kg
8.8-10.5mg/k
4.9-8.2mg/kg
Barley
1,0-2.8mg/kg
Reed canarygrass
8.9-32.3ug/g
Com • 4.2-6.2ug/g
E-12
-------
TABLE E-2. COPPER PHOTOTOXICITY DATA (oon't)
Plant Name
phvtotoxicltv
reference
two 1 symptoms
Alfalfa
35
35
Apple
35
Avocado
35
Barley
35
Cacao
35
Cauliflower
35
Cherry
35
Lemon
35
Orange
visual
chlorosis of the foHage,yellow
35
35
35
Clover,red
35
Clover.subterranean
35
Coffae
35
Currant,black
35
Grapas
35
Oats
35
35
Paach
35
Pear
35
Pecan
35
Pineapple
35
Hum
35
Potato
35
Rye
35
Timothy
35
Tomato
35
35
,
35
Tung
•
35
Wheat
35
Corn
197
197
197
196
Barley
196
Raed canarygrass
none reported
213
Corn
none reported
213
-------
TABLE E-2. COPPER PHYTOTOXICITY DATA (oon't)
Plant Name
Scientific
Variety
Parts
Cultivation
PH
Name
Rye
Corn
Seceale cereal
Zea mays
greenhouse 6.8
greenhouse 6.8
greenhouse 6.5
Rye
Seceale cereal
greenhouse 6.5
Bermuda grass Cynodon dactyton
Corn
Tall Fescue
Alfalfa
Lettuce
Zea mays
Festuca arundinacea
Medicago sativa
Lactuca sativa
grain
longlfolia
tops
tops
shoots
field
field
pots
pots
greenhouse
5.7-6.6
5.4-6.2
4.2-5.3
6.3
6.8
6.0-6.3
6.2-6.3
6
6.2
7.1-7.5
6.1-7.5
5.5-6.0
7.1-7.7
6.1-7.5
5.5-6.0
7.5
5.7
Wheat
Triticum aestivum
Inia
leaves,grain
greenhouse 7.5
5.7
E-14
-------
TABLE E-2. COPPER PHYTOTOXfCITY DATA (con't)
jPlent Name
Soil Typo
Treatment
Concentration in soil
Loading rate
limed Warsaw sandy loam
fertilized
sludge
46 ppm
,
Cu sludge
120-343 ppm
Rye i
lirnsd Warsaw landy lot..
fertilized
sludge
46 ppm
Cu sludge
120-343 ppm
Corn
Warsaw sandy loam
fertilized
sludge
46
Cu sludge
88-160
inorganic
75-150
Rye
Warsaw sandy loam
fertilized
sludge
46
Cu sludge
88-160
inorganic
75-160
Bermuda grass
Cecil sandy clay loam
control
1
Cecil sandy clay loam
fertilized
1
Cecil sandy clay loam
sludge
1-4
Corn
Sable silty clay loam
Cisne silt loam
Ipava silt loam
Drummer silty clay loam
Muscatine silt loam
Hartsburg silty clay loam
Tall Fescue
fin» silty
3.9
fine silty
sludge
19.2
stripped mind
sludge
25.2
Alfalfa
fine silty
3.9
fine silty
sludge
19.2
stripped mind
sludge
25.2
Lettuce
Domino silt loam
0-10
20-80
160-640
Redding fine sandy loam
0-10
20-80
160-640
Wheat
Domino silt loam
0-10
20-80
160-640
Redding fine sandy loam
0-10
-------
TABLE E-2. COPPER PHYTOTOXICITY DATA (con't)
Plant Name
plant tissue concentration
phytotoxicity deficiency
deficiency
| normal | toxic
type I symptoms
4.4-10.4
6.5-24.3
>30
Rye 7.5
12.1
>42
Corn 4.4-10.4
6.5-24.3
16.7-22.8
12.7-41.0
Ryo 7.5
12.1
14.7-17.4
23.9-37.9
12
7
6-8
2.69 ug/g
2.68 ug/g
2.6-4.41 ug/g
2.18-3.22ug/g
2.49 ug/g
1.67 ug/g
9.7
9.6-15.0
8.6-11.6
16
19.1-20.5
15.1-17.8
6.2-6.4 ug/g
6.6-7.9 ug/g
8.2-3;3 ug/g
6.8-7.3 ug/g
6.1-8.9 ug/g
7.6-10.7 ug/g 10.7-18.3ug/g
10.7-11.6ug/g
11.9-14.8ug/g
13.9-15.4ug/g 15.4-21. Oug/g
10.1-10.7ug/g
E-16
Bermuda grass
Corn
Tall Fescue
Alfalfa
Lettuce
Wheat
-------
TABLE E-2. COPPER PHYTOTOXICITY DATA (eon't)
Plent Name
phytotoxicltv
reference
type
I symptom*
44
44
yield reduction 44
Rye 44
44
yield reduction 44
Corn ' 45
45
yield reduction 45
yield reduction 45
Rye 45
45
45
yield _ reduction 45
Bermuda grass, . 240
240
240
Com 187
187
187
187
187
187
Tall Fescue 230
230
230
Alfalfa 230
230
230
Lettuce 167 ¦
167
yield significant yield reduction 167
167
167
yield significant yield reduction 167
Wheat 167
167
yield significant yield reduction 167
167
-------
TABLE E-2. COPPER PHYTOTOXICITY DATA (con't)
Plant Name
Scientific
Variety
Parts
Cultivation
PH
Name
Snap bean
Phasaolus vulgaris
Tendergreen
beans,leaves
leaves, edible tissue
field
field
5,3
5.3
Carrots
Lettuce
Peas
Potatoes
Radishes
Sweet corn
Tomatoes
Wheat
Pearl Millet
Daucus carota sativa
Lactuca sativa
Pisum sativum
Solanum tuberosum
Raphanus sativus
Zea mays
Lycopersicon esculentum
Triticum aestivum
Pennisetum americanum
Scarlet Nantes
Grand Rapids
Wando
Norland
Sparkler
NK-199
Fantastic
Centurk
tubers
leaves
fruit,vines,pods
tubers
tubers
grain,leaves
fruit
grain
leaves
field
field
field
field
field
field
field
field
field
5.3
S.3
5.3
5.3
5.3
5.3
5.3
5.3-6.9
Red Oak
Quercus ruba
leaves
field
5.3-6.9
Black Walnut
JuQlans nigra
leaves
field
5.3-6.9
Wheat
Triticum aestivum
shoots, roots
pots
greenhouse
5.2
>6.5
Uttla bluestem
Black-eyed Susan
Corn
Oats
Wheat
Artdropogon scoparius
Rudbeckia hirta
Zea mays
Avana sativa
Triticum aestivum
Dekalb XL-43
Norline
Arthur
shoots,roots, whole
shoots,roots, whole
seedlings,grain,stover
grain
greenhouse
greenhouse
field
field
grain
field
4.8
7.82
4.8
5.6
6
6.3
5.6
*6
6.3
5.6
6
E-18
-------
TABLE E-2, COPPER PHYTOTOXfCITY DATA (con'tl
Plant Name
Soil Type
Treatment
Concentration In soil
Loading rate
20-80
160-640
Snap bean
Hubbard coarse sand
Hubbard coarse sand
control
single
anual
0
26.3-105kg/ha
66.0-263kg/ha
Carrots
Hubbard coarse sand
Lettuce
Hubbard coarse sand
Peas
Hubbard coarse sand
Potatoes
Hubbard coarse sand
Radishes
Hubbard coarse sand
Swaet corn
Hubbard coarse sand
Tomatoes
Hubbard coarse sand
Wheat
Truckton loamy sand
Pearl Millet
Downar sand
fertilized
unfertilized
sludge
517ug/g sludge
Red Oak
Downar sand
fertilized
unfertilized
sludge
517ug/g sludge
Black Walnut
Downer sand
fertilized
unfertilized
sludge
517ug/g sludge
Wheat
Redding fine sandy loam
Redding fine sendy loam
clay loam
control
0-2 cm depth
18-20cm depth
100-200 ug/g
100-200 ug/g
Little bluestem
rural Plainfield sand
37.73-47.11
urban Oakvills sand
47.25
100 ug/g
Black-eyed Susan
rural Plainfield sand
84.88
200 ug/g
Com
sandy
no sludge
.6-1.0
sandy
56 metric tons
29-35
sandy
112metric tons
58-66
Oats
sandy
no sludge
.6-1.0
sandy
56 metric tons
29-35
sandy
112matric tons
58-66
Wheat
sandy
no sludge
.6-1.0
sandy
56 metric tons
29-35
-------
TABLE E-2. COPPER PHYTOTOXICITY DATA (con't)
Plant Name
plant tissue concentration I phytotoxicity deficiency
deficiency | normal I toxic I type | symptoms
10.6-10.9ug/fl
11.8-42.0us/fl
Snap bean
11 Ufl/fl
8.2-10.0 ug/g
11.8-12.2 ug/g
10.8-12.0 ug/g
Carrots
<.3-1,5
lettuce
1.6-11.9
Peas
5.9-22.8
Potatoes
8.6-19.0
Radishes
<.3
Sweet corn
8.5-15.8
Tomatoes
<.3
Wheat
3.50-5.96 ug/g
Pearl Millet
5.8-7.8 ug/g
5.2-6.6 ug/g
5.4-10.3 ug/g
Red Oak
5.8 ug/g
6.2 ug/g
6.0-6.6 ug/g
Black Walnut
5.6 ug/g
5.1 ug/g
6.4-7.8 ug/g
Wheat
* •
6.5
8.4
7.2
Little bluestom
• »
50.59 209.5
Black-eyed Susan
¦ •
Com
3.6-7,2 '
10.5-14.2
11.6-16.8
Oats
1.5
2.6
2.5
Wheat
2.1
3.2
E-20
-------
TABLE E-2. COPPER PHYTOTOXtCITY DATA «oon*t>
Plant Name
phytotoxicltv
reference |
type | symptom*
167
yield significant yield reduction
167
Snap bean
58
138
138
138
Carrots
56
Lettuce
56
Peas
56
Potatoes
56
Radishes
56
Sweet corn
56
Tomatoes
56
Wheat
206
Pearl Millet
128
128
128
Red Oak
128
128
128
Black Walnut
128
128
128
Wheat
yield reduction
15
yield reduction
15
126
126
126
Little bluestam
yield 25% yield reduction
164
yield reduction of up to 68%
164
Black-eyed Susan
yield ' total mortality
164
Corn
212
212
212
Oats
212
212
919
Wheat 212
-------
TABLE E-2. COPPER PHYTOTOXICITY DATA (con't)
Plant Name
Scientific
Name
Variety
Parts
Cultivation
PH
6.3
Rye
Secale cereale
Balboa
grain
field
5.6
A
O
6.3
Crimson clover
Trifolium incarnatum
Auburn
whole
field
5.6
ft
o
6.3
Arrowleaf clover
Trifolium vesiculosum
Yuchi
whole
field
5.6
C
O
6.3
Carrots
Daucus carota
Danvars
tubers,shoots
field
5.5-5.8
Radishes
Raphanus sativus
Cherry belle
tubar8,shoots
field
5.5-5.8
Tomato
Lycopersicon esculentum
New Yorker
fruit
field
5.5-5.8
Lettuce
Lactuca sativa
Salad Bowl
leaves
field
5.5-5.8
Bromegras8
Bromus inermis
Leyess
field
*6.7-7.9
Corn
Zea mays
stover
field
6.7-7.9
Pioneer 3369A
leaves.grain
field
low
Grain sorghum
Sorghum bicolor
Funk G-522
leaves.grain
field
low.
Soybeans
Glycine max
Centennial
seedlings leaves seeds
field.
. low
Winter wheat
Triticum spp.
Anza
straw
field
7.6
Swiss chard
Beta vulgaris
Ford Hook Giant
greenhouse
7.7
7
/
5.5
Sweet corn
Zea mays
Jubilee
plant, seeds
field
Alfalfa
Medicago sativa
Ranger
leaves.stems
field
Wheat
Triticum vulgare
Fremont .
plant, seeds
field
Fodder rape
Bra8sica napus
Kenton
greenhouse
5.6
o
7.5
Barley
Hordeum vulgare
Larker
greenhouse
4.0-6.4
Rye Grass
Lolium multiflorum
Westerwool
greenhouse
4.0-6.4
Corn
Zea mays
Pioneer 3S17
leaves, grain
field
7.6-8.1
E-22
-------
TABLE E-2. COPPER PHYTOTOXIOTY DATA (oon't)
pant Nairn
Soil Typo
Treatment
Concentration in soil
Loading rate
sandy
112m«lric tons
58-66
Ry#
sandy
no sludge
.6-1,0
sandy
56 metric tons
29-35
sandy
112matric tons
58-66
Crimson clover
sandy
no sludge
.6-1.0
sandy
56 metric tons
29-35
sandy
112metric tons
58-66
Arrowlaaf clover
sandy
no sludge
.6-1.0
tandy
56 metric tons
23-35
sandy
112metric tons
58-66
Carrots
Ejridgehompton silt loam
1.6-13.8
Radishes
Bridgehampton silt loam
1.6-13.8
Tomato
Bridgehampton silt loam
1.6-13.8
lettuce
Bridgehampton silt loam
1.6-13.8
Bromegrass
Conestoga loam
NH4N03
sludge low
sludge high
Corn
Conestoga loam
fine sandy loam
NoN
NH4N03
Ca sludga
Al sludge
Fe sludge
6-13 kg/ha
9-18 kg/ha
13-18 kg/ha
Groin sorghum
fine sandy loam
Soybeans
fina sandy loam
Wintar wheat
Omni silty clay
40-62
86.2 kg/ha
Swiss chard
Domino silt loam
•1-.4
6.0-40.0
Hanford sandy loam
,2-.6
6.0-40.0
Redding fine sand
.05-.4
6.0-40.0
Sweet corn
fine silt
8-25
Alfalfa
fine silt
8-25
Wheat
fine silt
8-25
Fodder rape
sandy
sandy
sandy
687 mg/kg
Bailey
marginally productive soil
dredged material
Rye Grass
marginally productive soil
dredged material
Corn
calcareous strip-mined spoil
control
sludga
2.3-6.8 mg/kg
2.7-39.6mg/kg
-------
TABLE E-2. COPPER PHYTOTOXICITY DATA (oon'tl
Plant Name
plant tissue concentration
phytotoxicitv deficiency
deficiency
| normal J toxic
type | symptoms
Rye
Crimson clover
Arrowleaf clover
Carrots
Radishes
Tomato
Lettuce
Bromegrass
Corn
Grain sorghum
Soybeans
Winter wheat
Swiss chard
Sweet corn
Alfalfa
Wheat
Fodder rape
Barley
Rye Grass
Corn
3.7
4.5
6.6
6.7
7.1
8.4
9.4
7.3
10.1
13.9
3-11
9-22
10-13
11-17
5.9-11
7.3-10.1
9.3-14.4
4.3-8.0
6.1-9.4
6.0-9.6
6.7-11.6
6.3-9.6
11.3-13.5
8.5-11.0
10.5-29.5
2.0-3.2
12-19 mg/kg
4-14 mg/kg
12-23 mg/kg
8.5-9.5
8.-12
8.0-9.5'
6.95-25.75
7.02-17.71
6.88-14.47
6-21
9-39
9-16
10-15
E-24
-------
TABLE E-2. COPPER PHYTOTOXICITY DATA (con't)
Plant Name
phytotoxicity
reference
type I symptoms
•
212
Rya
212
212
212
Crimson clover
212
Arrowleaf clover
Carrots
Radishes
Tomato
Lettuce
Bromegrass
Corn
Grain sorghum
Soybeans
Winter wheat
Swiss chard
Sweat corn
Alfalfa
Wheat
Fodder rape
Barley
Rya Grass
Corn
212
212
212
212
212
211
211
211
211
224
224
224
224
224
224
224
224
143
143
143
32
242
242
242
24
24
24
173
173
173
41
41
188
188
-------
TABLE E-2. COPPER PHYTOTOXICITY DATA (con't)
Plant Name
Scientific
Name
Variety
Parts
Cultivation
PH
Jubilee
leaves, kernels
field
5.8-7.1
Swiss chard
Beta vulgaris
Fordhook Giant
greenhouse
5.6-5.9
Rye Grass
Lolium perenne
greenhouse
5.6-5.9
Upland cotton
Gossypium hirsutum
leaves, seeds
field
8.2
Timothy
Phleum pratense
field
6.3
6.1
Corn
Zea mays
Pioneer 3192
leaves.grain
leaves, grain
field
field
7
>6.5
>6.5
>6.5
Soybean Glycine max Corsoy
Sorghum Sorghum bicolor Moench
Winter wheat Triticum
Splash pine Pinus elliottii
Wheat Triticum aestivum Vergina
seeding tissue
root, leaves, stems.grain
.root, grain
pine needles'
whole
pot
field
field
field,
field
5.9
6.9-7.2
5.8-7.2
6.9-7.7
5.8-7.2
4.8-5.1
4.9-5.3
4.8-5.2
E-26
-------
TABLE E-2. COPPER PHYTOTOXfCITY DATA (oon't)
Plant Nama
Soil Type
Treatment
Concentration in soil
Loading rate
Willamette silt loam
control
8-1 lumol/kg
tannery waste
8-13 umol/kg
Swiss chard
Chalmers silt clay loam ac'
control
13 mg/kg
Russel silt loan
urilling fluid
10-163 mg/kg
Rye Grass " '
Chalmers silt clay loam and
control
13 mg/kg
Russel silt loam
drilling fluid
10-163 mg/kg
Upland cotton
Pima clay loam
control
fertilized
sludge
Timothy
Oalhousie clay loam
control
fertilized
pig manure
sludge
St. Bernard sandy loam
control
fertilized
pig manure
sludge
Corn
Davidson silty clay
CuS04
334-415 kg/ha
Guernsey silt loam
control
pig manure
sludge
Bertia fine sandy loam
control
pig manure
sludge
Starr-Dyke clay loam
control
pig manure
sludge
Soybaan
Nicollet loam soil
CuS04
0-40 mg/kg
sludge
0-107 mg/kg
Sorghum
Hynie fine sandy loam •
fertilized
0,6
Hynie fina sandy loam
sludge
2.9
Winter wheat
Hynie fine sandy loam
fertilized
0.6
Hynie fina sandy loam
sludge
2.9
Splash pine
Troup fine sandy loam
control
O.S
0
Troup fina sandy loam
low sludge
1.2-2.4
11-34 kg/ha
Troup fine sandy loam
high sludge
1.7-2.6
4S-56 kg/ha
Wheat
control
50-80 mg/kg
low Zn polution
100^300
med Zn polution
300-600
-------
TABLE E-2. COPPER PHYTOTOXICITY DATA (con't)
Plant Name
plant tissue concentration
phytotoxicitv deficiency
deficiency
| normal | toxic
¦
type | symptoms
Swiss chard
Rye Grass
Upland cotton
Timothy
Corn
Soybean
Sorghum
Winter wheat
Splash pine
Wheat
.07-.08 mmol/kg
.06-.09 mmol/kg
7.7 mg/kg
7.6-21.4 mg/kg
6.1 mg/kg
7.7-15.5mg/kg
8.1 mg/kg
10.7 mg/kg
9.2-10.1 mg/kg
3.9-5.1 mg/kg
4.4-5.8 mg/kg
2.7-5.0 mg/kg
3.4-5.2 mg/kg
3.8-5.2 mg/kg
3.6-5.1 mg/kg
3.7-5.1 mg/kg
3.8-5.9 mg/kg
9.7-10.4 mg/kg
8.9-9.3 mg/kg
10.1-10.7mg/kg
9.5-10.7 mg/kg
6.5-9.1 mg/kg
7.6-10.1 mg/kg
7.6-10.0 mg/kg
8.8-10.5 mg/kg
9.2-10.2 mg/kg
9.0-11.1 mg/kg
3.2-4.0
3.3-9.4
12.8
27.5 .
8
13
3.6
4.1-4.5
4.1-4.3
E-28
-------
TABLE E-2. COPPER PHYTOTOXICfTY DATA (oon'l)
P)«nt Name
phytotowcity
reference
typo I symptom#
226
226
Swii« chard 176
176
RyaGrass 176
176
Upland cotton 259
259
259
Timothy 257
257
257
257
257
257
257
257
Corn 183
184
184
184
184
184
184
184
184
184
Soybean 57
57
Sorohum , 127
127
Winter wheat 127
127
Splash pine 144
144
144
Wheat 61
visual reduced growth 61
visual reduced growth,chlorotic,stunted 61
-------
TABLE E-2. COPPER PHYTOTOXICITY DATA (con't)
Plant Name
Scientific
Name
Variety
Parts
Cultivation
PH
Oat
Harmon
root,seed,stem
field
Sudangrass
Sorghum bicolor
Piper
whole
field
5.23
5.18
5.77-6.38
Corn
Zea mays
leaves, roots, stems, husks
field
6.2
Perennial ryegrass
Loluim perenne
pot
4.3-5.26
4.76-5.72
6.16-7.11
Wheat
straw.kernels
greenhouse
8.1
6.5
field
8.1
Brome-alfalfa
whole
greenhouse
8.1
6.5
Soybean
Glycine max
Bragg
seed,pod wall, stem
greenhouse
6.2
Ransom '
seed,pod wall,stem
greenhouse
6.2
Maize
Zea mays
whole
pot
E-30
-------
TABLE E-2. COPPER CYTOTOXICITY DATA (oon'D
Plant Name
SoH Typa
Treatment
Concentration In soil
Loading rate
high Zn polution
800-1200
Oat
control
25 % sludge
50% sludge
5.2-8.7
16.6
10.3
Sudangrass
Wahiawa silty clay
Wahiawa silty clay
Wahiawa silty clay
control
fertilized
sludge
Corn
Warsaw silt loam
control
51
sludge
843
1075 tons/ha
Perennial ryegrass
acid clay loam
Control
sludge
sludge
0
4-8%
0.12
acid clay loam
Control
sludga
sludge
0
4-8%
0.12
acid clay loam
Control
sludge
sludge
0
4-8%
0.12
Wheat
Lakeland calcareous fina
control
sludge
0
12.15-121.5 kg/ha
Red River noncalcaraoua fina
control
sludga
0
12.15-121.5 kg/ha
Lakeland calcareous fine
control
sludge
0
198-396 kg/ha
Broma-alfalfa
Lakeland calcareous fina
control
sludge
0
12.15-121.5 kg/ha
Red River noncalcareous fine
control
sludge
0
12.15-121.5 kg/ha
Soybean
Enon sandy loam
control
low sludge
high sludge
0
10-20 kg/ha
30 kg/ha
Enon sandy loam
control
low sludga
high sludge -
0
10-i0 kg/ha
30 kg/ha
Maize
sand
control
low saturation sludge
low saturatrion sludga
high saturation sludga
high saturation sludge
2.5
5.1-10.2
20.3-40.7
5.1-10.2
20.3-40.7
-------
\
TABLE E-2. COPPER PHYTOTOXICITY DATA (con't)
Rant Name
plant tissue concentration
phytotoxicity deficiency
deficiency
| normal | toxic
type | symptoms
Oat
Sudangrass
Corn
Perennial ryegrass
Wheat
Brome-alfalfa
Soybean
Maize
8
27
22
24
20
17-20
10
40
15
20-30
30
10
20-30
35
10
15-20
30
1.78
1.83-3.13
2.4
1.68-3.38
1.7-2.7
2.5-8.3
7.9
7.9-15.0
5.2
5.9-12.9
5.66
7.93-8.96
10.66
3.8
5.73-6.33
7.16
6-9.0
7-9.0
8-13.0
9-13.0
15-36.0
E-32
-------
TABLE E-2. COPPER PHYTOTOXfCtTY DATA (oon't)
Plant Nemo
phytotoxicity
reference |
type
1 symptoms
visual
1/6natural size,(aw reach maturity
61
Oat
73
,
73
'
I
73
Sudangrass
104
104
104
Com
125
125
Perennial ryegrass
19
19
19
Wheat
Broma-alfalfa
Soybean
Maize
yield
significant reduction
19
19
19
19
19
19
270
270
270
270
270
270
270
270
270
270
202
202
202
202
202
202
79
79
79
79
79
-------
TABLE E-2. COPPER PHYTOTOXICITY DATA (con't)
Plant Name
Scientific
Name
Variety
Parts
Cultivation
PH
Lettuce
Imperial 847
tops
pot
Onions
Early flat Baretta
bulbs
pot
field
Lettuce
Imperial 847
tops
greenhouse
Lucerne
Medicago satuva
Wairau
whole
pot
5
5.1-5.6
. 6.6
5.2
5.4-6.0
6.8
Tomato
Lycopersicon esculentum
Money maker
Lea ves.fruit, root
p6t
4.6-6.9
fruit
pot
4.6-6.6
6.6-6.9
6.6-6.7
Sweet corn
Zea mays
Jubilee
leaves,kernels
field
5.4
4.7-5.1
'
5.1-5.2
5.1-5.3
5.1
Soybean
Glycine max
stem,leaves,seeds,pods
pot
Barley
Hordeum vulgara
Julia
tops
sand
Ryegrass
Lolium perenne
S24
tops
greenhouse
6
7.6
Lettuce
Lactuca sativa
Grand rapids
leaves
pots
6.7
E-34
-------
TABLE E-2. COPPER PHYTOTOXICITY DATA (con't)
Plant Nem«
Soil Type
Treatment
Concentration In soil
Loading rate
Lettuce
loamy, fine sand
control
0
low sludge
1,31-6.55 kg/ha
high sludge
6.55-11.79 kg/ha
Onions
loamy, fine sand
control
0
low sludge
1.31-6.55 kg/ha
high sludge
6.55-11.79 kg/ha
loamy fine sand
control
0
sludge
1.31-23.58kg/ha
Lattucs
sandy loam
control
0
sludge
1.31-106.11 kg/ha
heated sludge
3.93-11.79 kg/ha
Lucerne
Waitarere sand
0
12
Waitarere sand
5-40% sludge
26.9-131.2
Waitarere sand
100% sludge
310
Levin silt loam
0
28
Levin silt loam
5-40% sludge
42.1-140.8
Levin silt loam
100% sludge
310
Tomato
sludge
380
0-388.8 kg/ha
0
0
25-75% sludge
97.2-291.6 kg/ha
100% sludge
388.8 kg/ha
Sweet corn
Willamette silt loam
control
Willamette silt loam
fertilized
Willamette silt loam
Portland sudge
28-55 lb/acre
Willamette silt loam
Rock Creek sludge
27-54 lb/acre
Willamette silt loam
Salem sludge
11-21 lb/acre
Soybean
Ritzville silt loam
control
31
Cu solution
2.5 ug/g
Batley
washed silver sand
CuS04
3.1-13.6
.
CuS04
34-100
Ryegrass
sandy soil
control
0
salt
13.7-110 mg/kg
sludge
'
13.7-110 mg/kg
heavy clay soil
control
0
salt
13.7-110 mg/kg
sludge
13.7-110 mg/kg
Lettuce
very fine non-calcareous
control
31
0
low sludge
43.45-86.9 kg/ha
high sludge
173.8 kg/ha
-------
TABLE E-2. COPPER PHYTOTOXICITY DATA (con't)
Plant Name
plant tissue concentration
phytotoxicity deficiency
deficiency
| normal | toxic
type I symptoms
Lettuce .
Onions
Lettuce
Lucerne
Tomato
Sweet corn
Soybean
Barley
Ryegrass
Lettuce
6
9-12.5
12.5-14
4.5
6-6.5
6.5-7
4.5
4.25-4.5
6.9
8.7-18.7
8.1-10.8
15
16-22
15
9-24.0
8.5-35
12-20.0
28
13
18-20
22
9
6-7.0
12-13.0
11-12.0
10-11.0
3.9
1.7
18.2-20.3
12.4
14.2-20.9
14.8-19.9
9.2
12.6-21.3
9.3-18.0
5.6
7.8-8.7
12.8
36-100
E-36
-------
TABLE E-2. COPPER PHYTOTOXICITY DATA {con'tj
|p1emt Name
phytotoxlcitv
reference |
type I symptoms
Lettuce
54
54
54
Onions
54
54
LoltUCS
Lucerne
Tomato
Sweet com
Soybean
Barley
Ryegrass
visual'
death
Lettuce
54
54
54
53
53
53
261
261
261
261
261
261
262
262
262
262
121
121
121
121
121
27
27
6
6
43
43
43
43
43
43
271
271
271
-------
TABLE E-2. COPPER PHYTOTOXICITY DATA (con't)
Plant Name
Scientific
Name
Variety
Parts
Cultivation
PH
Carrots
Daucus carota
Amstal
tubers
pots
6.7
Peas
Pisum sativum
Thomas Laxton
fruit
pots
6.7
Tomato
Lycopersicon esculentum
shoots
greenhouse
5.33
7.96-8.09
8,01-8.11
Grass
timothy.brown top
field
6.05
sweet vernal,blue
6.2
Alfalfa & red clover
field
6.05
6.2
Duckweed
whole
solution
, 4
4.5
5
Various
shoots
field
Oats
Avena sativa
Selma
leaves
pot
6.6
6.2
7.5
Highbush blueberry
Vaccinium corymbosum
Blueray
pot
3.9-7.1
Subterranean clover
Trifolium subterraneum
tops
field
Arctotheca calendula
tops
field
Holcus lanatus
tops
field
•
Lolium perenne
tops
field
Planlago lanceolato
tops
field
Subterranean clover
Trifolium subterraneum
Mt. Barker'
tops
greenhouse
5.6-6.3
Silver beat
Beat vulgaris
Fordhook Giant
tops
greenhouse
5.6-6.3
E-38
-------
TABLE E-2. COPPER PHOTOTOXICITY DATA (oon't)
Plant Name
Soil Typo
Treatment
Concentration In soil
loading rata
Carrots
very fine non-calcareous
control
31
0
low sludga
43.45-86.9 kg/ha
high sludge
173.8 kg/ha
Peas,
vory fine non-cslcareou:
control
31
0
>
low sludge
43.45-86.9 kg/ha
high sludge
173.8 kg /ha
Tomato
Elkton silt loam
control
72.4
Elkton silt loam
low 2-6% sludga
73,46-75.58
Elkton silt loam
high 8-10% sludga
76,64-77.70
Grass
clay and sandy loam
control
.81-8.39
clay and sandy loam
sludga
.66-11.06
17.87-30.44 kg/ha
Alfalfa & red clover
clay and sandy loam
control
.81-8.39
clay and sandy loam
sludge
.66-11,06
17.87-30.44 kg/ha
Duckweed
Huthar's medium
1.0-10
*
Huthar's medium
1.0-10
Mother's medium
1.0-10
Various
serpentina soil
natural
37-144
Oats
sandy loam
control
10.6
nitrate compound
28.7
sandy soil
control
21.5
nitrate compound
30.1
organic soil
control
28
nitrate compound
49.5
Highbush blueberry
peat
control
low CuS04
2 g/pot
high CuS04
4 g/pot
Subterranean clover
orchard soil
155 mg/kg
orchard soil
155 trig/kg
orchard soil
155 mg/kg
orchard soil
155 mg/kg
orchard soil
155 mg/kg
Subterranean clover
orchard
12 degrees
195 mg/kg
22 degrees
195 mg/kg
ore mineralized
12 degrees
9 mg/kg
22 degrees
9 mg/kg
Silver beat
orchard
12 degrees
195 mg/kg
22 degrees
195 mg/kg
ore mineralized
12 degrees
9 mg/kg
22 degrees
9 mg/kg
E-39
-------
TABLE E-2. COPPER PHYTOTOXICITY DATA (con't)
Plant Name
plant tissue concentration
phvtotoxicitv deficiency
deficiency
I normal | toxic
type | symptoms
Carrots
Peas
Tomato
Grass
Alfalfa & red clover
Duckweed
Various
Oats
Highbush blueberry
Subterranean clover
Subterranean clover
Silver beat
3.6
5.5-6.7
7.5
5.3
8.4-8.9
9.5
41
24.6-27.1
30.9-33.8
5.2-17.4
6.7-19.2
7.2-14.2
8.6-15.2
31.8 prop, metal uptak
18.2 PMUT
5.5 PMUT
2.0-30
4.04-5.93
3.15-6.36
1.83-8.58
3.05-10.48
2.97-9.24
4.82-12.87
1.0-7
4-8.9
5.5-9.9
34.6-42.2 PMUT
32.5-37.1 PMUT
30.4-33.2 PMUT
22-30
27-36
35-40
12.0-43
12.0-34
21
30
9.5
13.7
77
134
6.9
9.2
E-40
-------
TABLE E-2. COPPER PHOTOTOXICITY DATA (con't)
Plant Name
phytotosdclty
reference
type I «ymptom«
Carroti
Peas
Tomato
Grass
Alfalfa & red clover
Duckweed
Various
Oats
visual
visual
visual
became pale and dark green
became pals and dark green
became pals and dark green
Highbush blueberry
Subterranean clover
Subterranean clover
Silver beat
yield
yield
yield
yield
yield
probable yield reduction
probable yield reduction
probable yield reduction
probable yield reduction
probable yield reduction
271
271
271
271
271
271
62
62
62
147
147
147
147
168
168
168
S
17
17
17
17
17
17
87
87
87
161
161
161
161
161
161
161
161
161
161
161
161
161
E-41
-------
TABLE E-2. COPPER PHYTOTOXICITY DATA (con't)
Plant Nama
Scientific
Variety
Parts
Cultivation
PH
Name
Radishes
Rhaphanus sativus
Long Scarlet
tops
greenhouse
5.6-6.3
4.77-6.57
3.6-4.83
5.6-8.00
4.9-6.9
Silver boat
Beta vulgaris
Fordhook Giant
tops
greenhouse
4,8-6.75
3.6-5.05
4.3-5.95
5.35-7.75
4.8-6.65
Radishas
Rhaphanus sativus
Long scarlet
tops
greenhouse
'
Corn
Zea mays
Asgrow UH7
whole
greenhouse
6.3
5.9
6.5
Lettuce
Lactuca sativa
Grand Rapids
whole
greenhouse
6.3
Forcing
5.9
6.5
Oats
Avena sativa
Garry
straw
field
5.09
5.84
6
Soybean
Glycine max
Clark
shoots
field
6.9
• 6.6
6.4
5.9-7.4
7.0-7.7
6.9-7.6
5.8-7.1
5.7-6.0
5.1-5.3
ff.4-6.6
5.7-5.9
Sunflower Helianthus annuus 894A whola (told 7.2-7.4
E-42
-------
TABLE E-2. COPPER PHYTOTOXiCTTY DATA (oon't)
Plant Name
Soil Type
Treatment
Concentration in soil
Loading rate
Radiahsa
orchard
12 degrees
195 mg/kg
22 degrees
195 mg/kg
ore mineralized
12 degrees
9 mg/kg
22 degrees
9 mg/kg
various
control
43-295
various
sulfure
43-295
various
CaC03
43-295
various
waterlogging
43-295
Silverbeat
various
control
43-295
various
Sulfure
43-295
various
Gypsum
43-295
various
CaC03
43-295
various
waterlogging
43-295
Dystric Xeropsamment
sulfate
250 mg/kg '
Radishes
Dystric Xeropsamment
sulfate
250 mg/kg
Com
Granville loam
control
0-480
fertilized
0-480
sludge
0-480+12
Rideau ciay
sludge
0-480 +12
Rideau clay
sludge + lime
0-480 + 12
Lettuce
Granville loam
sludge
0-480 + 12
Rideau clay
sludge
0-480+12
Ridaau clay
sludge + lime
0-480 + 12
Oata
peat
CuS04
22-1177
13-1659 ug/g
muck
CuS04
152-1187
135-1745 ug/g
mucky peat
CuS04
158-583
81-1063 ug/g
Soybean
Sassafras fine sandy loam
control
0
Sassafras fine sandy loam
sludge
123.2 kg/ha
Sassafras fine sandy loam
sludge
246.4 kg/ha
Christiana fine sandy loam
control
0
Christiana fine sandy loam
limed-digested
14.5-116 kg/ha
Christiana fine sandy loam
limed-raw
15.5-62.0 kg/ho
Christiana fine sandy loam
limed-composted
15.3-184.1 kg/ha
Christiana fine sandy loam
heated
22.6-90.5 kg/ha
Christiana fine sandy loam
heated
22.6-90.5 kg/ha
Christiana fine sandy loam
Nu-earth
58-116 kg/ha
Christiana fine sandy loam
Nu-earth
58-116 kg/ha
Sunflower
irrigated loamy fine sand
control
0
Cu Sulfate
3,0 kg/ha
E-43
-------
TABLE E-2. COPPER PHYTOTOXICITY DATA (con't)
Plant Name
plant tissue concentration
phytotoxicity deficiency
deficiency
| normal | toxic
type I symptoms
Radishes
Silver beat
19
26
6.5
6.8
16
39
13
20
63
63
68
35
74
Radishes
Com
Lettuce
Oats
Soybean
Sunflower
4.5
2.4-3.1
4.3-5.0
4.6-5.5
3.1-5.4
12.8
11.3-15.7
11.0-12.9
8.0-9.6
4.8-5.4
6.0-7.4
8.1-8.7
8.6-8.9
9.0-9.5
7.4-8.1
7.9-8.5
7.4-8.0 '
7.0-7.6
7.0-7.9
6.6-8.3
7.6-8.2
7.1-7.5
9.8
10.5
5.7-8.6
4.9-5.5
13.8-22.0
E-44
-------
TABLE E-2. COPPER PHYTOTOXfCITY DATA (cxm'tj
[Plant Nam*
phytotoxicity
reference I
type I symptoms
Radishes
161
161
161
¦
•
161
162
162
162
162
Silver bsat
162
162
162
162
162
yield death of en plants
162
Radishes
yield death of all plants
162
Corn
yield 23-50% reduction in yield
146
yield 25-49.6% reduction in yield
146
146
146
146
Lettuce
yield 20.7-58.6% reduction in yield
146
146
146
Oats ¦
7
7
7
Soybean
89
89
89
89
89
89
89
89
89
89
89
Sunflower 93
93
E-45
-------
TABLE E-2. COPPER PHYTOTOXICITY DATA (con't)
Plant Name
Scientific
Variety
Parts
Cultivation
PH
Name
6.0-6.3
8.4
6.0-6.2
Bailey
Hordeum vulgar#
M ariout
gram
field
Oats
Wheat
Chard
Carrots
Baans
Cabbage
Avena sativa
Triticum aastivum
Beta vulgaris
Daucus carota
Phalaolus vulgaris
Brassica oleracea
Clintford
Potomac
stover
stover
Fordhook Giant Swiss whole
Gold Pak 128
leaves
field
field
field
field
Tender crop
Golden Acre
fruit
leaves
pot
' pot
5.3
4.7-4.9
4.4-4.5
5.3
6.4-6.5
6.5-6.6
. 5
,6.5
6.7
5.4
6.7
5
6.5
6.7
5.4
6.7
5
6.5 ,
6.7
5.4
6.7
5.11
5.08
5.11
5.05
5.89
5.79
5.89
5.79
5
5.3
5
5.3
E-46
-------
TABLE £-2. COPPER PHYTOTOXICITY DATA (eon't)
Plant Name
Soil Type
Treatment
Concentration in toil
Loading rate
dry loamy fins sand
control
0
Cu Sulfate
3.0 kg/ha
dry fine sandy loam
control
0
Cu Sulfate
3.0 kg/ha
irrigated fine sandy loam
control
0
Cu Sulfate
3.0 kg/ha
Barlay
Dublin loam
Oakland sludge control
0
Dublin loam
low sludge
27-54 kg/ha
Dublin loam
high sludge
81-108 kg/ha
Dublin loam
Pacheo sludge control
0
Dublin loam
low sludge
8.1-16.2 kg/ha
Dublin loam
high sludge
24.3-40.5 kg/ha
Oats
Galestown Evesboro loamy sand
control
DTPA; 3.1
Galestown Evesboro loamy sand
control + lime
1,9
•
Galestown Evesboro loamy sand
limo raw
3,4
Galestown Evesboro loamy sand
digested
6.3
Galestown Evesboro loamy sand
limed + digested
7.4
Wheat
Galestown Evasboro loamy sand
control
DTPA: 3.1
Galestown Evesboro loamy sand
control+lima
1.9
Galestown Evesboro loamy sand
lime raw
3.4
Galestown Evesboro loamy sand
digested
6.3
Galestown Evesboro loamy sand
limed + digested
7.4
Chard
Galestown Evesboro loamy sand
control
DTPA: 3.1
Galestown Evesboro loamy sand
control+lime
1.9
Galestown Evesboro loamy sand
lime raw
3.4
Galestown Evesboro loamy sand
digested .
6.3
Galestown Evesboro loamy sand
limed 4- digested
7.4
Carrots
peat
control
12.6-30.8
peat
low CuS04
83,0-209.5
peat
mad CuS04
113.4-669.0
peat
high CuS04
338.0-1659
.muck
control
135.4-170,7
muck
low CuS04
244.1-292.7
muck
mad CuS04
311.8-610.3
muck
high CuS04
746.4-1745.0
Beans
Arkport fine sandy loam
peat
. 42.35
Arkport fine sandy loam
sludge
107
Cabbage
Arkport fine sandy loam
peat
42.35
Arkport fine sandy loam
sludge
107
E-47
-------
TABLE E-2. COPPER PHYTOTOXICITY DATA (con't)
Plant Name
plant tissue concentration
phytotoxicity deficiency
deficiency
| normal | toxic
type | symptoms
Barley
Oats
Wheat
Chard
Carrots
Beans
Cabbage
8.8
8.8
18.2
17.9
8.8
8
10
11.0-12
10.0-13.0
10
12.0-13.0
13.0-14.0
2.6
3.1
2.7
3.5
3.3
2.1
2.1
2.4
3.2
2.8
14
19.2
23
27.2
25.8
3.77
4.95
5.74
6.82
17.26 '
16.08
11.55
7.62
3.2
3.6
.6-3.0
1.8-2.9
E-48
-------
TABLE E-2. COPPER PHYTOTOXfCITY DATA (con't)
Ijplant Name
phvtotoxicitv
reference I
i
typo
1 symptoms
¦
Barley
Oats
Wheat
Chard
Carrots
Beans
Cabbage
93
93
93
93
93
93
246
246
246
246
246
246
214
214
214
214
214
214
214
214
214
214
214
214
214
214
214
157
157
157
157
157
157
157
157
68
68
68
68
E-49
-------
TABLE E-2. COPPER PHYTOTOXICITY DATA (con't)
Plant Name
Scientific
Name
Variety
Parts
Cultivation
PH
Carrots
Daucus carota
Scarlet Nantes
tubers
pot
5
5.3
Millet
Echinochloa crusgalli
Japanese
edilbe tissue
pot
5
5.3
Onions
Allium cepa
Downing Yellow Sweet
fruit
pot
5
Spanish
5.3
Potatoes
Solarium tuberosum
Katahidin
tubers
pot
5
5.3
Tomatoes
Lycopersicon esculentum
Vendor
fruit
pot
5
5.3
Celery
Apium graveolens
Utah 52-70
leaves
field
6.88
5.68
6.91
Ryegrass
lolium perenne
whole
field
5.4
Timothy
Phleum pratense
Meadow grass
Poa annua
5.9
Perennial ryegrass
Lolium perenne
Melle
leaves
pot
7
Wheat
Triticum aestivum
HDM1553
stem
field
8
Cabbage
Brassica Parachinensis
Flowering Chinese
leaves
pot
6.35
5.8-6.32
5.82-6.27
6.55-7.32
•
6.18-7.33
Tomatoes
Lycopersicon esculentum
Fireball
leaves
sand
Wheat
Triticum aestivum
tops
pot
5.0-5.5
E-50
-------
TABU £-2. COPPER PHYTOTOXICtTY DATA (oon'tj
Plant Nemo
Soil Type
Treatment
Concentration in coil
Loading rata
Carrota
Arkport fine sandy loam
peat
42.35
Arkport fine sandy loam
sludge
107
Millet
Arkport fine sandy loam
peat
42.35
Arkport fine snndy loam
oludga-
107
Oniont ' '
Arkport fine sandy loam
peat
42.35
Arkport fine sandy loam
sludge
107
Potatoes
Arkport fine sandy loam
peat
42.35
Arkport fine sandy loam
sludge
107
Tomatoes
Arkport fine sandy loam
peat
42.35
Arkport fine sandy loam
sludga
107
Celery
muck soil
control
46
muck soil
high metal soil
657
muck soil
limed high metal soil
575
Ryegrass
Devon sandy clay
control
0
Timothy
pig slurry low
50-100 m3/ha
Meadow grass
pig slurry high ^
200 m3/ha
Devon clay
control
0
pig slurry low
50-100 m3/ha
pig slurry high
200 m3/ha
Perennial ryegrass
Sutton sandy foam
control
39
0
low sludg
229
medium sludge
409
132 kg/ha
high sludga
715
Wheat
clay
control
23.4
0
50% sludge
38.2
66% sludge
63.8
100% sludga
77.2
10 tons/ha sludge
40.1
4.28 kg/ha
20 tons/ha sludga
72.8
8.56 kg/ha
Cabbage
radyellow podzol soil
control
22.33
radyellow podzol soil
activated sludge
32.5-50.0
tedyellow podzol soil
digested sludge
14.25-86.75
redyellow podzol soil
chicken manura
18.5-37.S
radyellow podzol soil
pig manure
52.5-75.0
Tomatoes
Hoagland solution
control
0
CuS04
3
CuS04
6
Wheat
Orentano histosol
control
44.5
fiy ash 2%
46.2
E-51
-------
TABLE E-2. COPPER PHYTOTOXICITY DATA
-------
TABLE 6*2. COPPER PHYTOTOX1CTTY DATA ioon't)
|Pl«nt Namo
r
phytotoxicity
reference
type | symptoms
Carrots
68
68
Millet
68
68
Onions
68
Potatoes
Tomatoes
Celery
Ryegrass
Timothy
Moadow grass
Perennial ryegrass
Wheat
yield
yield
yield
28% reduciton
43% reduction
57% reduciton
Cabbage
Tomatoes
Wheat
visual
visual
yield
yield
small,short,young budding stage
opaque granulate deposits
33% reduced dry weight
62% reduced dry weight
68
68
68
68
68
16
16
16
182
182
182
182
182
182
50
50
50
50
29
29
29
29
29
29
36
36
36
36
36
193
193
193
186
186
E-53
-------
TABLE E-2. COPPER PHYTOTOXICITY DATA (con't)
Rant Name
Scientific
Variety
Parts
Cultivation
PH
Name
6.1-8.3
7.5-8.0
Bush bean Phaseolus vulgaris improved trifoliate leaves solution 4
Tendergreen
8
4
8
Soybean Glycine max Coker 237 leaves field 6
Spinach Spinacia oleracea Symphony leaves field 6
.5.09
Bush bean Phaseolus vulgaris Bulgarian leaves field 6.33
Corn Zea mays Pioneer 3369A whole pot 6.4
6.3
' 6.2
Hiflhbush blueberry Vaccinium corymbosium Blueray whole pot 3.8-4.0
4.6-5.0
5.4-6.4
E-54
-------
TABLE E-2. COPPER PHOTOTOXICITY DATA (oon't)
jPlent Noma
Soil Type
Treatment
Concentration in toil
Loading rate
Lamporecchio fluvigol
fly ash 5%
47.9
control
S5.3
fly ash 2%
46.9
fly ash 5%
42.4
Guardia rsgosol
control
28.2
fly ash 2%
34.4
fly ash 5%
42
Bush bean
solution
control
0
CuS04
O.OOOI
CuS04
0.00025
solution
control
0
CuS04
0.0001
CuS04
0.00025
N-deficient solution
control
0
CuS04
0.0001
CuS04
0.00025
N-deficient solution
control
0
CuS04
0.0001
CuS04
0.00025
Soybean
loamy sand
control
0
CuS04
5.6 kg/ha
Cu-EDTA
.4-.7 kg/ha
Cu-heptogluconate
,2-.5 kg/ha
Spinach
muck peat
control
158.1
0
Cu solution
212.6
81 ug/g
Cu solution
316.9
Cu solution
582.5
1063 ug/g
peat
control
22.4
0
Cu solution
125.7
13 ug/g
Cu solution
359.8
Cu solution
1177.1
1659 ug/g
Bush bean
sand,loam,clay
control
.69 umol/kg
sewage sludge
22.4 umol/kg
Corn
various
control
0
various
CuS04
169-183 kg/ha
various
sludge
169-183 kg/ha
Highbush blueberry
Tempelton silt loam
control
Tempelton silt loam
control
Tempelton silt loam
control
E-55
-------
TABLE E-2. COPPER PHOTOTOXICITY DATA (con't)
Plant Name
plant tissue concentration
phytotoxicity deficiency
deficiency
| normal | toxic
type | symptoms
Bush bean
Soybean
Spinach
Bush bean
Corn
Highbush blueberry
17.8
17.5
13.5
11.9
21.5
16.4
16.2
5.9
3.2
14.2
16.7
6.5
6.2
9.7
13.9
10
12
11
10.0-15
16.03
14.73
15.32
15.9
9.85
11.58
15.76
19.3
4.0-6.0
6.0-14.0
5.0-9.0
7.5-8.0
7.0-9.0
3.0-6.0
17.9
49.8
45.4
26
495.0 nmol/g
E-56
-------
TABLE E-2. COPPER PHYTOTOXIOTY DATA (oon'l)
Plant Name
phytotoxicity
reference
type I symptom*
Bush bean
yield 17% reduced by dry weight of leaf
yield 73% reduced dry weight of leaf
yield 21 % reduced dry weight of leaves
yield 84% reduced dry weight of leaves
Soybean
Spinach
Bush bean
Corn
Highbush blueberry
possible yield reduction
86
80
88
86
86
86
86
253
253
253
253
253
253
253
253
253
253
253
253
114
114
114
114
165
165
165
165
165
165
165
165
82
82
129
129
129
86
86
86
E-57
-------
TABLE E-2. COPPER PHYTOTOXICITY DATA (con't)
Plant Name
Scientific
Variety
Parts
Cultivation
PH
Name
Barley
Oats
Wheat
Flax
Canola
Hordeum vulgare
Avena sativa
Triticum aestivum
Linum usitatissimum
Brassica campestris
Conquest
Hudson
Neepawa
Dufferin
Torch
greenhouse
greenhouse
greenhouse
greenhouse
greenhouse
3.8-4.0
4.6-5.0
5.4-6.4
3.8-4.0
4.6-5.0
5.4-6.4
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
E-58
-------
TABLE i-2, COPPER PHYTOTOXICITY DATA Coon't)
Plant Name
Soil Typo
Treatment
Concentration in coH | Loading rata
Tempelton silt loam
CuS04
2 g/m3
Tempelton silt loam
CuS04
2 g/m3
Tempelton silt loam
CuS04
2g/m3
Tempelton silt loam
CuS04
4 g/m3
Tempolton silt loam
CuS04
4 g/m3
Tempelton silt loam
CuS04
4 g/m3
Barley
Cu deficient soil
CuS04
0-5.8 ugig
Oats
Cu deficient soil
CuS04
0-5.8 ug/g
Wheat
Cu deficient soil
CuS04
0-11.5 ug/fl
Flax
Cu deficient soil
CuS04
0-64 ug/g
Cenola
Cu deficient soil
CuS04
«
0-16 ug/g
E-59
-------
TABLE E-2. COPPER PHYTOTOXICITY DATA (con't)
Plant Name
plant tissue concentration
phytotoxicity deficiency
deficiency
| normal toxic
type
I symptoms
10.0-11.0
•
9.0-10.0
3.5-7.5
12.5-13.5
10.0-12.0
4.0-9.0
Barley
1.3-2.3
2.3-3.7
visual
bending,gray leaf margins,necrotic
Oats
1.1-1.7
1.7-2.5
visual
bending, whitish margins,necrotic
Wheat
1.4-3.0
3.0-4.9
visual
bending,grayish margins,necrotic
Flax
1.0-2.4
2.4-3.5
visual
interveinal chlorosis,obtuse stem
Canola
1.2-1.7
1.7-2.7
visual
interveinal chlorosis,large leaves
E-60
-------
TABLE E-2. COPPER PHYTOTOXfCfTY DATA (con't)
IjPlant Namo
phytotoxicitv
reference (
type
I symptoms
JZZJ
SB
86
as
86
86
86
Barley
159
Oats
159
Wheat
159
Flax
159
Canola
159
E-61
-------
TABLE E-3. NICKEL PHYTOTOXICITY DATA
Plant Name
Scientific
Variety
Parts
Cultivation
PH
Soil Type
Name
Alfalfa
Medicago sativa
tops
field
Alyssum
Alyssum berthollnii
leaves,seeds
field
Apricot
Prunus armeniaca
fruit
field
Barley
Hordeum vulgare
leaves
field
Bean
Phaseolus spp.
seeds
field
Bog asphodel
Narthecium spp.
leaves,stems
field
Buckwheat
Fagopyrum spp.
seeds
field
Bulrush
Scirpus caespitosus
leaves,stems
field
Cabbage
Brassica oleracea capitala
tops
field
Carrot
Oaucus carota sativa
roots,leaves
field
Cherry
Prunus cerasus
fruit
field
Citrus fruits
citrus spp.
leaves
greenhouse
field
pots
Clover,bur
Medicago hispida
tops
field
Clover,red
Trifolium pretense
tops
field
Coffee
Coffea spp.
beans *
field
Corn
Zea mays
grain
field
Cress,water
Rorippa nasturtium-aquaticum
tops,leaves
field
Rg
Reus carica
fruit
field
Grasses
Anthoxanthum odoratum
sweet vernal
tops
field
various spp.
tops
field
Heather Heath
Calluna vulgaris
tOp8
field
Erica cinerea ¦;
tops
field
Erica tetralix
tops
field
Mushroom
- Cantharellus cibarius
buttons
field
Oats
Avena sativa
leaves,grain,tops
field
pots
Onion
Allium cepa
bulbs
field
Pea
Pisum sativum
seeds
field
Pear
Pyrus communis
fruit
field
Potato
Solanum tuberosum
tubers
field
Rice
Oryza sativa
grain
field
Sedge
Carex spp.
tops
field
Soybean
Glycine soja
seeds
field
Spinach
Spinacia oleracea
tops
field
Squash
Cucurbita spp.
fruit
field
Tea
Camillia sinensis
leaves
field
Timothy
Phleum pretense
tops
field
E-62
-------
TABLE E-3. NICKEL PHYTOTOXICITY DATA (con't)
iPloot Name
Treatment
Concentration in toil
Loading rats
plant tissue concentration
1
deficiency
1 normal I toxio
Alfalfa
1-4
Alyssum
4000
Apricot
0.65
Barley
4-6
Bean
0.59
Bog asphodel
.4-5.3
Buckwheat
1.34
Bulrush
.3-3.0
Cabbage
3.3
Carrot
1.8
Cherry
0.5
Citius fruits
.4-1.0
.4-4.0
.7-1.8
Clover,bur
1.0-2.0
Clover,red
1.9
Coffee
0.4
Corn
0.14
Cress,water
0.13
fig
1.2
Grasses
.7-1.7
.2-56.0
Heather Heath
.6-2.6
1.5-1.7
1.1-1.5
Mushroom
3.5
Oats
7-134
84-340
Onion
0.16
Pea
2
Pear
1.3
Potato
.08-.37
Rice
0.02
Sedge
.20-3.2
Soybean
3.9
Spinach
2.4
Squash
4.6
Tea
3.0-5.0
Timothy
0.46
E-63
-------
TABLE E-3. NICKEL PHYTOTOXICITY DATA (con't)
Plant Name
phytotoxicity deficiency
phytotoxicity
reference
type | symptoms
type | symptoms
Alfalfa
35
Alyssum
35
Apricot
35
Barley
35
Bean
35
Bog asphodel
35
Buckwheat
35
Bulrush
35
Cabbage
35
Carrot
35
Cherry
35
Citrus fruits
Visual Chlorosis,necrosis,death
35
35
35
Clover.bur
\
35
Clover,red
35
Coffee
«
.35
Corn
35
Cress,water
35
Fig
35
Grasses
35
35
Heather Heath
35
35
35
Mushroom
35
Oats
35
35
Onion
35
Pea
35
Pear
35
Potato
*
35
Rice
35
Sedge
35
Soybean
35
Spinach
35
Squash
35
Tea
35
Timothy
35
E-64
-------
TABLE E-3. NICKEL PHOTOTOXICITY DATA (con't)
Plant Name
Scientific
Name
Variety
Perts
Cultivation
PH
Soil Type
Tomato
Lycopersicon esculentum
fruit
field
Walnut
Juglans reQia
leaves,meats
field
Wheat
Triticum tpp.
grain
field
Corn
Zea mays
earleafs,grain
field
5.8-6.2
Bojac loamy sand
5.7-6.0
Davidson clay loam
5.7-6.0
Groseclose silt loam
earleafs,grain,stover
field
6.6
Acredale silt loam
Barley
Hordeum vulgare
Henry
silage
field
6.6
Acredale silt loam
Corn
Zea mays
greenhouse
6.8
limed Warsaw sandy loam
Rye
Seceale cerfcal
greenhouse
6.8
limed Warsaw sandy loam
Corn
Zea mays
greenhouse
6.5
Warsaw sandy loam
Rye
Seceale cereal
greenhouse
6.5
Warsaw sandy loam
Tall fsscue
Festuca arundinacea
tops
p0t8
7.1-7.7
fine silty
6.1-7.5
fine silty
5.5-6.0
stripped mined
Alfalfa
Medicago sativa
tops
pots
7.1-7.7
fine silty
6.1-7.5
fine silty
5.5-6.0
stripped mined
Lettuce
Lactuca sativa
longifolia
shoots
greenhouse
7.5
Domino silt loam
5.7
.Redding fine sandy loam
Wheat
Triticum aestivum
Inia
leaves grain
greenhouse
7.5
Domino silt loam
5.7
Redding fine sandy loam
E-65
-------
TABLE E-3. NICKEL PHYTOTOXICITY DATA (con't)
Plant Name
Treatment
Concentration in soil
Loading rate
plant tissue concentration
deficiency normal | toxic
Tomato
.01-.15
Walnut
.9-5.0
Wheat
.35-35.0
Corn
.54-1 .Omg/kg
.2-.41mg/kg
.28-.46mg/kg
17.2 kg/ha
.23-1.3mg/kg
Barley
17.2 kg/ha
,51-.92mg/kg
Corn
fertilized
<4.5
sludge
22 ppm
<4.5
Ni sludged
37-81 ppm
5.7-15.5
Rye
fertilized
<4.5
sludge
22 ppm
5
Ni sludge
37-81 ppm
15.4-34.1
Com
fertilized
<4.5
sludge
22
<4.5
Ni sludge
22-36
4.6-6.5
inorganic
15-30
4.5-5.5
Rye
fertilized
4.5
sludge
22
5
Ni sludge
22-36
10.1-15.3 >20.9
inorganic
15-30
5.5-14.1
Tali fescue
1.3
4.1
sludge
7.9
2.8-3.8
sludge
12.2
4.2-9.0
Alfalfa
1.3
5.7
sludge
7.9
5.5-6.1
sludge
12.2
5.6-14.8
Lettuce
0-10
4.5-6.8 ug/g
20-80
9.5-23 ug/g
160-640
29-61 ug/g 61-166ug/g
0-10
3.5-9.9 ug/g
20-80
19-41 ug/g 41-241 ug/g
160-640
345-1150ug/g
Wheat
0-10
3.2-3.4 ug/g
20-80
3.6-4.3 ug/g
160-640
6.8-18 ug/g 18-41 ug/g
0-10
2.3-4.3 ug/g
20-80
5.7-46 ug/g >46 ug/g
E-66
-------
TABU E-3, NICKEL PHYTOTOXICiTY DATA {con'O
OPIant Name
phytotoxlcitv deficiency
phototoxicity
reference
I
type | symptoms
type I symptom*
Tomato
Walnut
Wheat
Corn
Bariey
Corn
Rya
Corn
Rya
Tall fescuo
Alfalfa
Lettuce
yield
yield
reduction attributed to other
reduction attributed to other
yield
reduction
Wheat
yield
yield
yield
yield
yield
significant yield reduction
significant yield reduction
significant yield reduction
significant yield reduction
significant yield reduction
35
35
35
197
197
197
196
196
44
44
44
44
44
44
45
45
45
45
45
45
45
45
230
230
230
230
230
230
167
167
167
167
167
167
167
167
167
167
167
E-67
-------
TABLE E-3. NICKEL PHYTOTOXICITY DATA (con't)
Plant Name
Scientific
Name
Variety
Parts
Cultivation
PH
Soil Type
Corn
Zea mays
grain
field
6.3
Sable silty clay loam
6.8
Cisne silt loam
6.0-6.3
Ipava silt loam
6.2-6.3
Drummer silty clay loam
6
Muscatine silt loam
6.2
Hartsburg silty clay loam
Forage,grain
field
5.4
Sango sil
Bush Bean
Phaseolus vulgaris
vines,pods
field
5.4
Sango sil
Pearl Millet
Pennisetum americanum
leaves
«
field
5.3-6.9
Downer sand
Red Oak
Queracus ruba
leaves
field
5.3-6.9
Downer sand
Black Walnut
Jufllans nigra
leaves
field
5.3-6.9
Downer sand
Wheat
Triticum aestivum
pots
5.2
Redding fine sandy loam
<6.5
Redding fine sandy loam
Corn
Zea mays
Dekalb XL-43
seedlings, grain.stover
field
5.6
sandy
6
sandy
6.3
sandy
Oats
Avena estiva
Norline
grain
field
5.6
sandy
6
sandy
6.3
sandy
Rye
Secale cereale
Balboa
grain
field
5.6
sandy
•
6
sandy
6.3
sandy
Wheat
Triticum aestivum
Arthur
grain
field
5.6
sandy
6
sandy
6.3
sandy
Crimson clover
Trifolium incarnatum
Auburn
whole
field
5.6
sandy
E-68
-------
TABLE E-3. NICKEL PHYTOTOXICtTY DATA (oon't)
JPlint Name
Treatment
Concentration in toil
Loading rate
plant tissue concentration
deficiency i normal I toxic
160-640
125-294 ug/g
Corn
0.91 ug/g
0.78 ug/g
-
.49-.58ug/g
• •
.79-1.43ug/g
•
0.78 ug/g
1.03 ug/g
control
1.1
4.4
ZnS04
1.3-1.9
3.0-3.6
compost
1.3-2.1
2.4-4.6
sludge
1.4-2.1
2.6-4.5
Bush Bean
control
1.1
5
ZnS04
1.3-1.9
4.1-4.6
compost
1.3-2.1
3.7-4.8
sludge
1.4-2.1
.9-5.8
Pearl Millet
fertilized
.4-4.9
unfertilized
.2-7.5
sludge
69 ug/g sludge
.9-5.9
Red Oak
fertilized
1.1
unfertilized
1.5
sludge
69 ug/g sludge
1.3-2.0
Black Walnut
fertilized
1.3
unfertilized
1.1
sludge
69 ug/g sludge
1.2-1.8
Wheat
20-80 ug/g
« •
20-80 ug/g
• •
Corn
no sludge
.2-.4
1.2
56 metric tons
1.3-1.7
1.6
112metric tons
2.5-2.8
2.1
Oats
no sludge
•2-.4
0.7
56 metric tons
1.3-1.7
5.3
112metric tons
2.5-2.8
6.9
Rye
no sludge
•2-.4
0.4
56 metric tons
1.3-1.7
1.1
112metric tons
2.5-2.8
1.9
Wheat
no sludge
.2-,4
0.4
56 metric tons
1.3-1.7
1.3
112metric tons
2.5-2.8
2.2
Crimson clover
no sludge
•2-.4
1.4
E-69
-------
TABLE E-3. NICKEL PHYTOTOXICITY DATA (con't)
Plant Name
phytotoxicity deficiency
phytotoxicity
reference
type | symptoms
type | symptoms
yield significant yield reduction 167
Corn 187
187
187
187
187
187
74
74
74
74
Bush Bean 74
74
74
74
Pearl Millet 128
128
128
Red Oak 128
128
128
Black Walnut 128
128
128
Wheat yield reduction 15
15
Corn '212
212
212
Oats 212
212
212
Rye 212
212
212
Wheat 212
212
212
Crimson clover 212
E-70
-------
TABLE E-3. NICKEL PHYTOTOXICITY DATA (con't)
Plant Name
Scientific
Name
Variety
Parts
Cultivation
PH
Soil Type
6
sandy
6.3
sandy
Arrowleaf clover
Trlfolium vaslculosum
Yuchi
whole
field
5.6
sandy
6
sandy
6.3
sandy
Carrots
Caucus carota
Danvers
tubers,shoots
field
5.5-5.8
Bridgehampton silt loam
Radishes
Rsphanus sativus
Cherry belle
tubers.shoots
field
5.5-5.8
Bridgehampton silt loam
Tomato
Lycopersicon esculantum
New Yorker
fruit
field
5.5-5.8
Bridgehampton silt loam
Lettuce
Lactuca sativa
Salad Bowl
leaves
field
5.5-5.8
Bridgehampton silt loam
Bromegrass
Bromus inermis
Leyess
field
6.7-7.9
Conestoga loam
Corn
Zea mays
stover
field
6.7-7.9
Conestoga loam
Fescue grass
Fertuca arundinacea
pot
6.5
Norfolk fine loamy
Cecil sandy clay loam
Norfolk fine loamy
Norfolk fine loamy
Winter wheat
Triticum spp.
Anza
straw
field
7.6
Omni silty clay
Swiss chard
Beta vulgaris
Fordhook Giant
greenhouse
7.7
Domino silt loam
7
Hanford sandy loam
5.5
Redding fine sandy loam
Fodder rape
Brassica napus
Kenton
greenhouse
5.6
sandy
6
sandy
7.5
sandy
Barley
Hordeum vulgare
Larker
greenhouse
4.0-6.4
marginally productive soil
Rye grass
Lolium multiflorum
Westerwool
greenhouse
4.0-6.4
marginally productive soil
Corn
Zea mays
Pioneer 3517
leaves, grain
field
7.6-8.1
calcareous strip-mined spoil
Fodder rape
Brassica napus
Kenton
greenhouse
5.6
sandy
6
sandy
7.5
sandy
Swiss chard
Beta vulgaris
Fordhook Giant
greenhouse
5.6-5.9
Chalmers silty clay loam and
Russel silt loam
Rye grass
Lolium perenne
greenhouse
5.6-5.9
Chalmers silty clay loam and
E-71
-------
TABLE E-3. NICKEL PHYTOTOXICITY DATA (con't)
jPlant Name
Treatment
Concentration in soil
Loading rate
plant tissue concentration
deficiency | normal I toxic
56 metric tons
1.3-1.7
2.9
112metric tons
2.5-2.8
3.5
Arrowleaf clover
no sludge
,2-A
2.3
56 metric tons
1.3-1.7
6.5
112metric tons
2.5-2.8
10.7
Carrots
.3-3.2
5-11
Radishes
.3-3.2
4-22
Tomato
.3-3.2
1.6-6.9
Lettuce
.3-3.2
5.2-9.6
Bromegrass
NH4N03
.7-1.3
.7:8
Ca sludge
.6-44.5
2.6-6.0
Al sludge
4.5-5.2
.8-1.7
Fe sludge
1.2-3.0
.6-1.1
Corn
no N
0.8
Ca sludge
.6-27.8
2.3
Fescue grass
6.5-18
5-10
surface
11.2-31.6
incorporated
5.4-8.2
Winter wheat
93-106
20.6 kg/ha
<5.0
Swiss chard
.6-6.6
.4-200.0
5-39 mg/kg
1.4-32.0
.4-200.0
100-41 Omg/kg
.6-43.0
.4-200.0
100-340 mg/kg
Fodder rape
46 mg/kg
.46-3.75
.24-1.30
.11-.49
Barley
dredged material
.37-2.9
Rye grass
dredged material
1.4-10.8
Corn
control
4.4-5.7
.4-2.6
sludge
3.9-11.3
.5-2.6
Fodder rape
control
20.4 mg/pot
39.6 ug/pot
sludge
26.2-31.9mg/pot
35.2-51.4ug/pot
control
20.4 mg/pot
24.9 ug/pot
sludge
26.2-31.9mg/pot
18.1-24.0ug/pot
control
20.4 mg/pot
9.2 ug/pot
sludge
26.2-31.9mg/pot
12.8-18.3 ug/pot
Swiss chard
control
15 mg/kg
4.4 mg/kg
drilling fluids
9-18 mg/kg
4.4-13.0 mg/kg
Rye grass
control
15 mg/kg
4.4 mg/kg
E-72
-------
TABLE E-3. NICKa PHOTOTOXICITY DATA (con'l)
[Plant Name
phytotoxicitv deficiency
phytotoxicJtv
reference 1
I
type | symptoms
type | symptoms
212
212
Arrowleaf clover 212
212
212
Carrots 211
Radishes 211
Tomato 211
Lettuca 211
Bromegrass 224
224
224
224
Corn 224
224
Fescue grass « 123
123
123
123
Winter wheat 32
Swiss chard 242
yield reduction 242
yield reduction 242
Fodder rape 173
173
173
Barley 41
Rye grass 41
Corn 188
188
Fodder rape 215
215
215
215
215
215
Swiss chard 176
176
Ryegrass 176
E-73
-------
TABLE E-3. NICKEL PHYTOTQXICITY DATA (con't)
Plant Name
Scientific
Name
Variety i
Parts
Cultivation
PH
Soil Type
Upland cotton
Gossypium hirsutum
seeds
field
8.2
Russel silt loam
Pima clay loam
Soybean
Sorghum
Winter wheat
Oat
Glycine max
Sorghum bicolor
Triticum aestivum
Corsoy
Moench
Harmon
seedling tissue
root,leaves,stem,grain
root,grain
root,seed,stem
pot
field
field
field
5.9
6.9-7.7
5.8-7.2
6.9-7.7
5.8-7.2
Nicollet loam soil
Haynie fine sand loam
Haynie fine sand loam
Haynie fine sand loam
Haynie fine sand loam
Corn
Zea mays
leaves,roots,stems,husks
field
6.2
Warsaw silt loam
Perennial ryegrass
Loluim perenne
pot
4.3-5.26
4.76-5.72
6.16-7.11
acid clay loam
acid clay loam
acid clay loam
Soybean
Glycine max
Bragg
seed,pod wall,stem
greenhouse
6.2
Enon sandy loam
Ransom
seed,pod walls,stem
greenhouse
6.2
Enon sandy loam
Oat
Avena sativa
Victory
roots
greenhouse
5.2-7.0
solution
Lettuce
Imperial 847
tops
pot
laomy fine sand
Onions
Early flat Baretta
bulbs
pot
loamy fine sand
Lettuce
Imperial 847
tops
field
loamy fine sand
E-74
-------
TABLE E-3. NICKEL PHYTOTOXtCITY DATA (con't)
Ptant Name
Treatment
Concentration In foil
Loading rate
plant tissue concentration
deficiency I normal I toxic
drilling fluids
9-18 mg/kg
4.1-6.3 mg/kg
Upland cotton
control
1.05 mg/kg
fertilized
1.38 mg/kg
Soybean
sludge
¦ •
.70-1.08mg/kg
• ' NiCI2
0-40 mg/kg
2.8-10.6
Sorghum
fertilized
12.31-15.96
0.053
sludge
11.90-18.58
0.059
Winter wheat
fertilized
12.31-15.96
3.18
sludge
11.90-18.58
4.53
Oat
control
5.7-10.4
14
25% sludge
7.5
21
50% sludge
8.6
17
Corn
control
71.5
2
6ludge
147
1990 ton /ha
2
Perennial ryegrass
control
0
20
sludge
4-8%
225-300
sludge
0.12
350
control
0
15
sludge
4-8%
200-280
sludge
0.12
300
control
0
10
sludge
4-8%
115-200
sludge
0.12
250
Soybean
control
0
8.1
low sludge
2.8-5.6 kg/ha
11.83-13.83
high sludge
8.4 kg/ha
15.93
control
0
3.3
low sludge
2.8-5.6 kg/ha
9.30-14.5
high sludge
8.4 kg/ha
20.26
Oat
OuM
.2-.4umol/gDWh
5-15 uM
.7-1.3 umol/gDWh
20-30 uM
1.8 umol
Lettuce
control
0
1.5
low sludge
.34-1.7
2.0-4
high sludge
1.7-3.06
4.0-6
Onions
control
0
4.5
low sludge
.34-1.7
5.5-7.5
high sludge
1.07-3.06
7.5-10
Lettuce
control
0
1
E-75
-------
TABLE E-3. NICKEL PHYTOTOXICITY DATA (con't)
Plant Name
phytotoxicity deficiency
phytotoxicity
reference
type | symptoms
type | symptoms
176
Upland cotton 259
259
259
Soybean 57
Sorghum 127
127
Winter wheat 127
127
Oat 73
73
73
Corn 125
125
Perennial ryegrass • 19
yield decreases yield 19
yield reduction in yield 19
19
yield decreases yield 19
yield reduction in yield 19
19
19
yield reduction in yield 19
Soybean 202
202
202
202
202
202
Oat 4
4
4
Lettuce 54
54
54
Onions 54
54
54
Lettuce 54
E-76
-------
TABLE E-3. NICKEL PHYTOTOXJCITY DATA (oon't)
Plant Name
Scientific
Name
Variety
Parti
Cultivation
PH
Son Type
Onion
Early flat Bsratta
bulbs
field
loamy fine tand
Lettuce
Imperial 847
tops
greenhouse
sandy loam
Lucarne
Medicago sativa
Wairau
whole
pot
5
Waitarare sand
5.1-5,6
Wattarera sand
6.6
Waitarere sand
5.2
Levin silt loam
5.4-6.0
Levin silt loam
6.8
Levin silt loam
Tomato
Lycopersicon escuientum
Money maker
leaves,fruit.root
pot
4.6-6.9
fruit
pot
4.6-6.6
6.6-6.9
6.6-6.7
Soybean
Glycine max
stem,leaves,seeds,pods
pot
Riteville silt loam
Barlay
Hordeum vulgare
Julia
tops
sand
washed Silver sand
Ryegrass
Lollum perenne
S24
tops
pot
6
sandy soil
7.6
heavy clay soil
Tomato
Lycoperaicon escuientum
shoots
greenhouse
5.33
Elkton silt loam
7.96-8.09
Elkton silt loam
8.01-8.11
Elkton silt loam
Grass
timothy,brown top
field
,6.05
day & sandy loams
sweet vernal,blue
6.2
clay & candy loams
Alfalfa Ss red clover
field
6.05
clay & sandy loams
6.2
clay & sandy loams
Barley
Hordeum vulgare
Onda
shoots
solution
solution
Alyssum murale
laavas
field
serpentine soil
Rumex scutatus
leaves
field
serpentina soil
Corn
Zea mays
Asgrow UH7
whole
greenhouse
6.3
Grenville loam
E-77
-------
TABLE E-3. NICKEL PHYTOTOXICITY DATA (con't)
Plant Name
Treatment
Concentration in soil
Loading rate
plant tissue concentration
deficiency I normal I toxic
sludge
.34-6.12
1.0-2
Onion
control
0
0.5
sludge
.
.34-6.12
0.75
Lettuce
control
0
1.46
sludge
.34-27.54 kg/ha
1.78-44.8
heated
1.02-3.06 kg/ha
1.79-2.69
Lucerne
0
7
3.5
5-40% sludge
8.25-17.0
2.1-3.5
100% sludge
32
1.8
0
12
.5-2
5-40% sludge
13,0-20
.5-3.25
100% sludge
32
.1-2
Tomato
sludge
210
0-189 kg/ha
3.4
0
0
0.7
25-75% sludge
47.25-141.75 kg /ha
.95-1.9
100% sludge
189 kg/ha
2.4
Soybean
Control
28
0.62
Ni solution
2.5 ug/g
14.3
Barley
NiCI2
2-8.9
10.8-13.0
NiCI2
24-90
250-850
Ryegrass
control
0
2.47
salt
2.5-20 ma/kg
4.65-54.4
sludge
2.5-20 mg/kg
4.17-11.3
control
0
2.3
salt
2.5-20 mg/kg
2.7-13.9
sludge
2.5-20 mg/kg
2.8-4.9
Tomato
control
154.6
14.91
low 2-6% sludge
157.6-163.7
8.81-8.84
high 8-10% sludge
166.8-169.8
9.82-10.68
Grass
control
.26-2.5
.64-4.10
sludge
.49-3.05
1.26-2.51 kg/ha
.57-5.89
Alfalfa & red clover
control
.26-2.5
2.24-5.71
sludge
.49-3.05
1.26-2.51 kg/ha
2.55-5.92
Barley
ONi
0-100 ppb
1.0 uM Ni
100-400 ppb
natural
728-2093
• 10317
natural
728-2093
<252 ppm
Com
control
0-480
0.6 1.6-78.1
fertilized
0-480
0.6 1.5-166.1
E-78
-------
TABLE E-3. NICKEL PHYT0T0X1CITY DATA (con't)
Onion
Lettuce
Lucerno
Tomato
Soybean
Barley
Ryegrass
visual
death
Tomato
Grass
Alfalfa & red clover
Barley yield/visual 30% less/less green.smaller
Corn
yield
yield
none mentioned
32-91% reduction in yield
22-97.6% reduction in yield
[Plant Name
phytotoxioitv deficiency
phytotoxicity
reference
type I symptoms
type 1 symptoms
54
54
54
53
53
53
261
261
261
261
261
261
262
262
262
262
27
27
6
6
43
43
43
43
43
43
62
62
62
147
147
147
147
21
21
5
5
146
146
E-79
-------
TABLE E-3. NICKEL PHYTOTOXICITY DATA (oon't)
Plant Name
Scientific
Name
Variety
Parts
Cultivation
PH
Soil Type
5.9
Rideau clay
6.5
Rideau clay
Lettuce
Lactuca sativa
Grand Rapilds
whole
greenhouse
6.3
Grenville loam
Forcing
5.9
Rideau clay
6.5
Rideau clay
Soybeen
Glycine max
Clark
shoots
field
6.9
Sassafras sandy loam
6.6
Sassafras sandy loam
6.4
Sassafras sandy loam
5.9-7.4
Christiana fine sandy loam
7.0-7.7
Christiana fine sandy loam
6.9-7.6
Christiana fine sandy loam
5.8-7.1
Christiana fine sandy loam
5.7-6.0
Christiana fine sandy loam
5.1-5.3
Christiana fine sandy loam
6.4-6.6
Christiana fine sandy loam
5.7-5.9
Christiana fine sandy loam
Beans
Phaleolus vulgaris
Tender crop
fruit
pots
5
Arkport fine sandy loam
5.3
Arkport fine sandy loam
Cabbage
Brassica oleracea
Golden Acre
leaves
pots
5
Arkport fine sandy loam
5.3
Arkport fine sandy loam
Carrots
Daucus carota
Scarlet Nantes
tubers
pots
5
Arkport fine sandy loam
5.3
Arkport fine sandy loam
Millet
Echinochloa crusgalli
Japanese
edible tissue
P0t8
5
Arkport fine sandy loam
5.3
Arkport fine sandy loam
Onions
Allium cepa
Downing Yellow Sweet
fruit
pots
5
Arkport fine sandy loam
Spanish
5.3
Arkport fine sandy loam
Potatoes
Solanum tuberosum
Katahdin
tubers
pots
5
Arkport fine sandy loam
•
5.3
Arkport fine sandy loam
Tomatoes
Lycopersicon esculentum
Vendor
fruit
pots
5
Arkport fine sandy loam
5.3
Arkport fine sandy loam
Celery
Apium graveolens
Utah 52-70
leaves
field
6.88
muck soil
5.68
muck soil
6.91
muck soil
Perennial ryegrass
Lolium perenne
Melle
leaves
pot
7
Sutton sandy loam
Lettuce
Lactuca sativa
Climax
solution
6.2
Hoagland solution
E-80
-------
TABLE E-3. NfCKEL PHOTOTOXICITY DATA (con't)
Plant Noma
Treatment
Concentration in soH
Loading rate
plant tissue concentration
deficiency I normal | toxic
sludge
0-480 + 1
0.5 1.5-19.1
sludge
0-480 + 1
.6-1.4 21.9-637.8
sludge+lime
0-480+1
0.4 1.2-6.8
Lettucs
sludge
0-480 + 1
1.3 6.1-133.1
sludge
0-480+1
1.3-51.0 3619
sludge+lime
0-480 + 1
1.6-31.8
Soybean
control
0
2.5-2.8
sludge
9.52 kg/ha
3.8-4.6
sludge
19.04 kg/ha
5.1-6.1
control
0
5.8-8.2
limed-digested
.84-6.72 kg/ha
3.7-6.9
limed-raw
.95-3.81 kg/ha
3.2-4.4
limed-compost
11.26-135 kg/ha
2.5-7.8
heated sludge
2.07-8.29 kg/ha
4.4-7.7
heated sludge
2.07-8.29 kg/ha
7.9-12.6
Nu-Earth
15.1-30.2 kg/ha
7.6-7.7
Nu-Carth
15.1-30.2 kg/ha
9.6-11.3
Beans
peat
15.31
3.9
sludge
28.9
11.3
Cabbage
peat
15.31
1.9-2.1
sludge
28.9
3.3-10.0
Carrots
peat
15.31
2.7
sludge
28.9
3.8
Millet
peat
15.31
1.4
sludge
28.9
1.9
Onions
peat
15.31
2.2
sludge
28.9
3
Potatoes
peat
15.31
0.6
sludge
28.9
1.6
Tomatoes
peat
15.31
0.5
sludge
28.9
1.3
Celery
control
54
5
high metal soil
6000
78
limed high metal soil
5550
66
Perennial ryegrass
control
43
0
11
low sludge
86-129
46-79
medium sludge
210-372
356 kg/ha
90 126-222
high sludge
537
305
Lettuce
20 ueg/l 20-45 ueg/l
E-81
-------
TABLE E-3. NICKEL PHYTOTOXICITY DATA (con't)
Plant Name
phytotoxicity deficiency
phytotoxicity
reference
type | symptoms
type I symptoms
yield 19.6-88% reduction in yield 146
yield 71.4-88.9% reduction in yield 146
yield 15.3-42% reduction in yield 146
Lettuce yield 31-41% reduction in yield 146
yield 20.9% reduction in yield 146
146
Soybean 89
89
89
89
89
89
89
89
89
89
89
68
68
68
68
68
68
68
.68
68
68
68
68
68
68
16
visual stunting,cupping,& foliar necrosis 16
16
50
50
yield 28% reduction 50
yield 57% reduction 50
Lettuce yield 70% reduced root length 10
Beans
Cabbage
Carrots
Millet
Onions
Potatoes
Tomatoes
Celery
Perennial ryegrass
E-82
-------
TABLE E-3. NICKEL PHOTOTOXICITY DATA (con't)
Plent Noma
Scientific
Name
Variety
Parts
Cultivation
PH
Soil Typo
Tomato
Lyeoperiieon esculantum
Fireball
leaves
sand
Hoagland solution
Soybean
Glycine max
Haroor
leaves
sand
Hoagland solution
Wheat
Triticum aestivum
•
tops
pot
5.0-5,5
6.1-8.3
7.5-8,0
Orentano histosol
Lamporecchio fluvisol
Guardia regosol
Paas
Pisum sativum
Dark Skin Prafaction
Laxton's Progress
perlita
partite
Hoaglands solutions
Hoaglands solution
Corn
Zaa mays
Pioneer 3369A
whole
pot
pot
6.4
6.3
6.2
7.3-8.1
various
various
various
various
E-83
-------
TABLE E-3. NICKEL PHYTOTOXICITY DATA (con't)
Plant Name
Treatment
Concentration In soil
Loading rate
plant tissue concentration
deficiency | normal | toxic
Tomato
control
0
• •
NiS04
1.5
• «
NiS04
7.5
• •
NiS04
37.5
• •
Soybean
control
0
• •
NiS04
0.3
• •
NiS04
0.9
• •
NiS04
1.5
* •
Wheat
control
24.1
6.7
fly ash 2%
29
7.7
fly ash 5%
30.2
6.8
control
53.8
11.7
fly ash 2%
42.7
9.6
fly ash 5%
38.4
7.7
control
23.1
16.4
fly ash 2%
26.6
12.2
fly ash 5%
28.8
9.1
Peas
control
0
0
NiS04
10-100 umol
8.5-40.1
NiS04
1000 umol
« a
control
0
0
NiS04
10-100 umol
9.9-53.7
NiS04
1000 umol
« «
Corn
control
0
<.1-2.7
NiS04
14.5-16.4 kg/ha
<.1-2.7
sludge
14.5-16.4 kg/ha
<.1-2.7
Ni(N03)2
20.0-44.0
3.0-5.5
Ni(N03)2
53.0-54.0
4.2-6.4
Ni(N03)2
74.0-90.0
4.5-7.1
E-84
-------
TABLE E-3. NICKEL PHOTOTOXICITY DATA (con't)
Plant Name
phytotoxioity deficiency
phytotoxicity
reference 1
type (symptoms
type I symptoms
I
Tomato
Soybean
Wheat
visual
visual
visual
44,3% loaf area Injury-necrosis
57.9% leaf area injury-necrosis
death 91% yield reduction
Peas
visual
visual
extreme leaf necrosis & abscission
extreme leaf necrosis & abscission
Corn
193
193
193
193
193
193
193
193
186
186
186
186
186
186
186
186
186
179
179
179
179
179
179
129
129
129
207
207
207
E-85
-------
10:21 AM 11/9/92
TABLE E-4. ZINC PHYT0T0XICITY DATA
Plant Name
Sciantifio
Name
Variety
Parts
Cultivation
PH
Alfalfa
Madicago sativa
tops,top half of shoots
field
control
Apple
Malus spp.
leaves,stems
field
Apricot
Prunus armonlaca
leaves,stems
field
Avocado
Persea americana
leaves
field
Clover,Subter.
Trifolium subterraneum
leaves
field
tops
solution
Corn
Zea mays
leaves
field
Flax
Linum usitatissimum
tops
pots
Oata
Avnna sativa
teaves,ptant
sand
Orange
Citrus sinensis
leaves
field
Peach
Prunus persica
!eaves,stems
field
Pear
Pyrus communis
leaves
field
Pecan
Carya illinoansis
leaves,leaftets.petioles,shoots
field
Pineapple
Ananas comosus
leaves.stems
field
Potato
Solanum tuberosum
leaves
field
Tomato
Lycopersicon esculentum
leaVfes
field
sand
solution
Tung
Aleurites fordi
leaves,petiolos
field
sand
Walnut
Juglans regia
leaves,stoma
field
Corn
Zea mays
earleaf,grain
controled
5.8-6.2
5.7-6.0
5.7-6.0
oarleaf ,grai n, sto var
field
6.6
Barley
Hordeum vulgaro
Hanry
silage
field
6.6
Reed canarygrass
Phalaris arundinacea
field
5.9-6.6
Com
Zea mays
field
5.9-6.6
Radish
Raphanus sativus
Cherry Belle
leaf,tuber
field
Swiss Chard
Beta vulgare
Fordhook
field
Corn
Zea mays
stover,grain
field
6.2
,
greenhouse
6.8
Rye
Seceale cereal
greenhouse
6.8
Corn
Zea mays
•
greenhouse
6.5
E-86
-------
TABLE E-4. ZINC PHYTOTOXiCITY DATA (oon't)
Plant Name
Soil Type
Treatment
Concentration in toil
Loading rata
Alfalfa
Apple
Apricot
Avocado
Clover,Subter.
Corn
Flax
Oats
Orange
Peach
Pear
Pecan
Pineapple
Potato
Tomato
Turg
Walnut
Corn
Barley
Reed canarygrass
Corn
Radish
Swiss Chard
Corn
Rye
Corn
Bojac loamy sand
• Davidson clay loam
Groseclose silt loam
Acredala silt loam
Acredale silt loam
Hublersburg clay loam
Hublersburg clay loam
Ramona sandy loam
Ramona sandy loam
Waukegan fine silty over loam
limed Warsaw sandy loam
limed Warsaw sandy loam
Warsaw sandy loam
fertilized
sludge
Zn sludge
fertilized
sludge
Zn sludge
fertilized
950 mg/kg
950 mg/kg
113
410-1302
113
410-1302
248 kg/ha
248 kg/ha
73.0 kg/ha
30.6 kg/ha
106-384 kg/ha
E-87
-------
TABLE E-4. ZINC PHYTGTOXICITY DATA (corTO
Plant Name
plant tissue concentration
phytotoxicity deficiency
deficiency |
normal 1
toxic
tVP#
I symptoms
Alfalfa
8
13.8
visual
13
39-48
visual
Apple
1.2-54
4-80
visual
small stiff and mottled leaves
Apricot
24-30
19-31
visual
Avocado
4-15
50
visual
Clover,Subter.
<15
visual
24-25
76-90
visual
Corn
9-15.1
15-36
visual
light yellow streaks,chlorotic strip
Flax
18
32-83
visual
grayish-brown spots,turns white
Oats
<20
20
1700-7500
visual
turn pale green,collapsed areas,gray
Orange
3.8-26
7.8-200
200-300
visual
leaves become chlorotic.mottled
Peach
3.5-25.4
66.0-140
visual
mottling.narrow crinkled leaves
Pear
9,9
16
visual
Pecan
traca-7.0
66-202
visual
yellow mottling,rosettes
Pineapple
4-26
4-44
visual
Potato
30-87
Tomato
6.0-8.7
13
* visual
slow growth,brownish chlorosis,curl
14.4
26.9
visual
slow growth,brownish chlorosis,curl
9-15
65-198
526-1489
visual
slow growth,brownish chlorosis,curl
Tung
3.6-26
15.7-229
visual
leaf bronzing,necrosis,spotting
485
Walnut
11*22
16-30
visual
Corn
56-71 mg/kg
21-28mg/kg
22-48mg/kg
10-53mg/kg
Barley
12-35mg/kg
Reed canarygrass
41.14-90.19ug/g
Corn
18.32-45.15ug/g
Radish
425 mg/kg
Swiss Chard
610 mg/kg
Corn
18.5-154 mg/kg
26-42 ppm
164-225 ppm
¦
296-959 ppm
Rye
45
-
125
396-948ppm
Corn
26-42
E-88
-------
TABLE E-4. ZINC PHYTOTOXICITY DATA (oon't)
Plant Nam#
phytotoxiclty
reference
two 1 «vmotom»
Alfalfa
35
35
Apple
35
Apricot
35
Avocado
35
Clover,Subtar.
35
35
Corn
35
Flax
35
Oats
visual leaves show iron chlorosis
35
Orange
visual leaves show iron chlorosis
35
Poach
35
Pear
35
Paean
35
Pineapple
35
Potato
*
35
Tomato
35
35
visual
35
Tung
35
visual
35
Walnut
35
Corn
197
197
197
196
Barley
196
Reed canarygrass
none reported
213
Corn
none reported
213
Radish
none reported
34
Swiss Chard
none reported
34
Corn
no significant differences
12
44
44
yield up to 78% reduction
44
Rya
44
44
yield up to 57% reduction
44
Corn 45
£-89
-------
TABLE E-4. ZINC PHYTOTOXICITY DATA (con't)
Plant Name
Scientific
Variety
Parts
Cultivation
PH
Name
Rye Seceale cereal greenhouse 6.5
Corn Zea mays leaf,grain field 5.0-5.9
6.8-7.7
6.7-7.6
Bermuda grafts Cynodon dactylon field 5.7-6.0
5.4-6.0
4.2-5.3
6.1-6.6
5.8-6.2
4.8-5.2
Tall fescue Festuca arundinacea tops « pots 7.1-7.7
6.1-7.5
I 5.5-6,0
Alfalfa Medicago sativa tops pots 7.1-7.7
6.1-7.5
5.5-6.0
Corn Zea mays grain field 6.3
6.8
6.0-6.3
6.2-6.3
6
6.2
Lettuce Lactuca sativa longifolia shoots greenhouse 7.5
5.7
Wheat Triticum aestivum Inia leaves, grain greenhouse 7.5
5.7
E-90
-------
TABLE E-4. ZfNC PHYTOTOXICITY DATA (oon't)
Plant Nams
Soil Typo
Treatment
Concentration In toil
Loading rate
sludge
113
Zn sludge
327-618
inorganic
300-600
Rya
Warsaw sandy loam
fertilized
sludge
113
Zn sludge
327-618
inorganic
300-600
Com
Blount silt loam
12.1-277.2
Blount silt loam
5.99-227
Blount silt loam
4.82-140
Bermuda grass
nonlimed Cecil sandy clay loam
control
1-4
nonlimed Cecil sandy clay loam
fertilized
1-4
nonlimed Cecil sandy clay loam
sludge
34-54
limed Cecil sandy clay loam
control
1-6
limed Cecil sandy clay loam
fertilized
1-8
limed Cecil sandy clay loam
sludge .
26-43
Tall fescue
fine silty
7.5
fina silty
sludge
506.7
stripped mined
sludge
543.4
Alfalfa
fine silty
7.5
fine silty
sludge
506.7
stripped mined
sludge
543.4
Corn
Sable silty clay loam
Cisne silt loam
Ipava silt loam
Drummer silty clay loam
Muscatine silt loam
Hartsburg silty clay loam
Lettuce
Domino silt loam
0-10
20-80
160-640
Redding fine sandy loam
0-10
20-80
160-640
Wheat
Domino silt loam
0-10
20-80
160-640
Redding fine sandy loam
0-10
20-80
E-91
-------
TABLE E-4. ZINC PHYTOTOXtCITY DATA (con't)
Plant Name
plant tissue concentration
phytotoxicity deficiency
deficiency | normal | toxic
type I symptoms
164-225
280-520
273-591
Rye 45
125
317-833
564-1031
28.3-381
23-145
18.3-115
33
10
34-285
27
19
34-192
50.3
52.4-54.2
51.6-62.7
103.5
92.6-108.3
141.8-237.9
16.4 ug/g
18.8 ug/g
15.7-20.1 ug/g
18.6-20.7 ug/g
16.9 ug/g
17.1 ug/g
78-98ug/g
105-146ug/g
190-380ug/g 380-1265ug/g
139-172ug/g
195-520ug/g
1058-1973ug/g
Wheat 63-67 ug/g
68-87 ug/g
108-189 ug/g 189-412 ug/g
58-70 ug/g
76-131 ug/g
E-92
Com
Bermuda grass
Tall fescue
Alfalfa
Corn
Lettuce
-------
TABLE E-4. ZINC PHYTOTOXICtTY DATA (con't)
Plant Name
phytotoxieitv
reference K
typa
I symptom*
1
yield
yield
Rye
yield
yield
Corn
Bermuda grass
Tall fescue
Alfalfa
Corn
Lettuce
yield
yield
Wheat
yield
45
reduction 45
reduction 45
45
45
reduction 45
reduction 45
no significant differences 111
no significant differences 111
no significant differences 111
240
240
240
240
240
240
230
230
230
230
230
230
187
187
187
187
187
187
167
167
significant yield reduction 167
167
167
significant yield reduction 167
167
167
significant yield reduction 167
167
167
E-93
-------
TABLE E-4. ZINC PHYT0T0XIC1TY DATA (coiVt)
Plant Name
Scientific
Name
Variety
Parts
Cultivation
PH
Snap bean
Phaseolus vulgaria
Tendergreen
beans.laaves
field
5.3
leaves,edible tissue
field
5.3
Barley
Hordeum vulgare
Liberty
greenhouse
7.2
Corn
Zea mays
forage,grain
field
5.4
Bush beans
Phaseolus vulgaris
vines,pods
field
5.4
Corn
Zea mays
forage,grain
field
5.4
Bush beans
Phaseolus vulgaris
vines, pods
field
5.4
Carrots
Daucus carota sotiva
Scarlet Nantes
tuhers
field
5.3
Lettuce
Lactuca sativa
Grand Rapids
leaves
field
5.3
Pass
Pisum sativum
Wando
fruit,vines,pods
field
5.3
Potatoes
Solanum tuberosum
Norland
tubers
field
5.3
Radishes
Raphanus sativus
Sparkler
tubers
field
5.3
Sweet corn
Zea mays
NIC-199
grain,leaves
field
5.3
Tomatoes
Lycoparsicon esculentum
Fantastic
fruit
field
5.3
Wheat
Triticum aestivum
Centurk
grain
field
5.3
Corn
Zea mays
tops
greenhouse
5.5
leaves,grain
field
nuetral
Pearl millot
Pennisetum Americanum
leaves
field
5.3-6.9
E-94
-------
TABLE E-4, ZINC PHYTOTOWCtTY DATA (oon't)
Plant Name
Soil Typo
Treatment
J Concentration in soil
Loading rate
160-640
Snap bean
Hubbard coarse sand
1520 kg/ha
Hubbard coarse saw1
control
0
. single
149-597 kg/ha
• 1
anuel
379-151 Skg/ha
Barley
Humus loam coarse sand
Corn
Sango si)
control
4
0
ZnSo4
28-106
40-160 ppm
Compost
32-80
40-160
Sludge
29-93
40-160
Bush beano
Sango sil
control
4
0
ZnS04
28-106
40-160
Compost
32-80
40-160
Sludge
29-93
40-160
Corn
Sango sil
control
6
0
ZnSo4 »
53-164
80-320
Compost
70-156
80-320
Sludge
68-206
80-320
Bush beans
Sango sil
control
6
0
ZnS04
53-164
80-320
Compost
70-156
80-320
Sludge
68-206
80-320
Carrots
Hubbard coarse sand
Lettuce
Hubbard coarse sand
Peas
Hubbard coarse sand
Potatoes
Hubbard coarse sand
Radishes
Hubbard coarse sand
Sweet corn
Hubbard coarse sand
Tomatoes
Hubbard coarse sand
Wheat
Truckton loamy sand
Corn
Hartsell fine sandy loam
Sludge A
70-1400
Sludge B
11-210
Compost
6-120
ZnS04
12-1400
control
0
Blount silt loam
none
72-83
middle
124-270
maximum
257-451
Pearl millet
Downer sand
fertilized
E-95
-------
TABLE E-4. ZINC PHYTOTOXICITY DATA (con't)
Plant Nama
plant tissue concentration
phytotoxicity deficiency
deficiency | normal I toxic
type | symptoms
Snap baan
Barley
Corn
Bush bedns
Corn
224-655ug/g
112-115 ug/g
29.5-32.3 ug/g
57.2-60.4 ug/g
58.5-117.4ug/g
106-295
41
227-475
77-100
94-97
60
184-328
52-84
158
53
>655 ug/g
126-184
202-241
Bush beans
48
55-61
211-225
Carrots
23-103
Lettuce
21-225
Peas
49-327
Potatoes
24-53
Radishes
37-98
Sweet corn
22-293
Tomatoes
9-31
Wheat
34.8-54.2
Corn
196-508
60-186
31-92
104
14-18
21-42
23-112
45-145
Paarl millet
56 ug/g
328-499
164-189
509-1025
305-634
313
1604-10178
E-96
-------
TABLE E-4. ZINC PHOTOTOXICITY DATA (con't)
jjplant Naroo
phytotoxicity
referencej
tvp#
1 symptom*
yield
significant yield reduction
167
Snap bean
58
none mentioned
138
none mentioned
138
none mentioned
138
Barley
124
Corn
74
74
74
74
Bush beans
74
yield
vine & pod yield reduction
74
74
yield
pod yield reduction
74
Corn
74
yield
up to 59% yieltf reduciton
74
74
74
Bush beans
74
yield
up to 99% yield reduction
74
74
74
Carrots
56
Lettuce
56
Peas
56
Potatoes
56
Radishes
56
Sweet corn
56
Tomatoes
56
Wheat
206
Com
169
yield
reduciton attributed elsewhere
169
169
yield
reduction of 10-96%
169
169
96
96
96
Pearl millet 128
E-97
-------
TABLE E-4. ZINC PHYT0T0XIC1TY DATA (oon't)
Plant Name
Scientific
Variety
Parts
Cultivation
PH
Name
Red oak
Querous ruba
leaves
field 5.3-6.9
Black Walnut Juglans nigra
leaves
field 5.3-6.9
Wheat
Lettuce
Triticum aestivum
Lactuca sativa
Bibb
leaves
pots
field
5.2
>6.5
Romaine
leaves
field
Boston
leaves
field
Cabbage
Brassica oleracee
capitata
edible parts
field
E-98
6.5
6.5
6.5
6.5
-------
TABLE E-4. ZINC PHYTOTOXtCiTY DATA (con't)
Plant Nemo
So# Type
Treatment
Concentration in soil
Loading rate
"
unferliliied
sludge
2154ug/g sludge
Red oak
Downer sand
fertilized
unfertilized
sludge
2154ug/g sludge
Black Walnut
Downer sand
fertilized
unfertilized
sludge
2154ug/g sludge
Wheat
Redding fine sandy loam
100-200 ug/g
100-200 ug/g
lettuce
Sango si!
Sango sil
Sango sil
no limeino heat
heat
sludge
sludge.heat
limed : no heat
heat .
sludge
sludge.heat
no lime:no heat
Cabbage
Sango si I
Sango sil
Sango sil
Sango si!
Sango sil
heat
sludge
sludge,haat
limed : no heat
heat
sludge
siudgs,heat
no lime:no heat
heat
sludge
sludge,heat
limed: no heat
heat
sludge
sludge,heat
no lime:no haat
heat
sludge
sludge, heat
limed : no heat
E-99
-------
TABLE E-4. ZINC PHYTOTOXICITY DATA (oon't)
Plant Name
plant tissue concentration
phvtotoxicity deficiency
deficiency | normal I toxic
type | symptoms
47-61 ug/g
51-81 u0/fl
Red oak ' 20
25
22-24
Black Walnut 29 ug/g
43 ug/g
37-47 ug/g
Wheat
• «
Lettuce 46
74
103
121
43
40
68
93
35
43
53
128
31
49
51
79
29
88
116
125
31
50
63
64
Cabbage 29
34
46
41
48
E-100
-------
TABLE E-4. ZINC PHYT0T0X1CJTY DATA (oon't)
Plant Name
phvtotoxicitv
reference
typo | symptoms
128
128
Red oak
128
•
128
128
Black Walnut
128
128
128
Wheat
yield reduction
15
15
Lattuce
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
Cabbage 75
75
75
75
75
E-101
-------
TABLE E-4. ZINC PHYTOTOXICITY DATA (con't)
Plant Name
Scientific
Variety
Parts
Cultivation
PH
Name
Carrot Daucus carota sotiva edible parts field
6.5
Cantaloupe Cucumis melo Hal's Best edible parts field
6.5
edible parts field
6.5
Lettuce lactuea sativa Great lakes leaves field
Corn Zea mays Silver Queen edible tiasue.foliage ' field
Squash Cucurbits pepo Yellow edible tissue .foliage field
Crookneck
E-102
Pepper Capsicum spp. California
Wonder
-------
TABtE E-4. ZINC PHYT0T0X1CITY DATA (oon't)
Plant Name
SoH Type
Treatment
Concentration in toll
Loading rata
Carrot
Cantaloups
Popper
Lettuce
Com
Squash
Sango sil
Sango sil
Sango sil
Sango sil
Sango sil
Sango sil
Sango sil
Sango sil
Sango sil
heat
sludge
sludge,heat
no linwno heat
heat
sludge
sludge,heat
limed: no heat
heat
sludge
sludge, heat
no lime:no heat
heat
sludge
sludge,heat
limad: no haat^
heat
sludge
sludge, heat
no limemo heat
heat
sludge
sludga.haat
limed : no heat
heat
sludge
sludge,heat
no heat
heat
sludge
sludge,heat
no haat
heat
sludge
sludge, heat
no heat
heat
sludge
sludga.haat
E-103
-------
TABLE E-4, ZINC PHYTOTOXICITY DATA (con't)
Plant Name
plant tissue concentration
phytotoxicity deficiency
deficiency I normal I toxic
type | symptoms
64
59
53
Carrot 22
20
> 29
25
39
34
30
40
Cantaloupe 18
15
20
24
18
12
25
30
Pepper 24
33
29
29
29
26
33
37
Lettuce 48-54
41-44
74-131
70-142
Corn 52
54
142
178
Squash 48
88
120
121
E-104
-------
TABLE E*4. ZINC PHVTOTOXfCITY DATA foon't)
Rant Name
phvtotoxicitv
reference j
tvpe
I symptoms
I
Carrot
Cantaloupe
Pepper
Lettuce
Corn
Squash
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
E-105
-------
TABLE E-4, ZINC PHYTOTOXICITY DATA (con'tj
Plant Name
Scientific
Name
Variety
Parts
Cultivation
PH
Pepper
Capsicum spp.
California
Wonder
edible tissue.foliage
field
Beans
Phaseolus vulgaris
Contender
edible tissue.foliage
field
Broccoli
Brassica oleraeea
edible tissue
field
Eggplant
Solarium melongena Black Beauty
edible tissue,foliage
field
Tomatoes
Lycopersicon esculentum Better Boy
edibl# tissue,foliage
field
Potatoes
Solanum tuberosum red Irish
edible tissue.foliage
field
Little bluestem Amfropogen scoparius
Black-eyed Susan Rudbeckia hirta
Wheat Triticum aestivum
whole
whole
shoots,roots
greenhouse 4.8
7.82
greenhouse 4.8
7.82
greenhouse
Corn
Oats
• Wheat
Zaa mays
A vena sativa
Triticum aestivum
Dekald XL-43
Norlina
Arthur
seedlings.grain, stovers
grain
gram
field
field
field
5.6
6
6,3
5.6
6
6.3
5.6
6
E-106
-------
TABLE E-4, ZINC PHOTOTOXICITY DATA {con'tl
Plant Name
Soil Type
Treatment
Concentration In soil
Loading rate
Poppar
Sango eil
no heat
haat
sludge
T
sludge,heat
Beans
Sango sll
no haat
heat
sludgo
sludge,heat
Broccoli
Sango sil
no haat
heat
sludge
sludga.heat
Eggplant
Sango sil
no heat
heat
sludga
sludge,heat .
Tomatoes
Sango sil
no haat
heat
sludge
sludge,heat
Potatoes
Sango sil
no haat
heat
sludga
sludga.heat
Littla bluestem
rural Plainfield sand
ZnCI2
2000-4000ug/fl
urban Oakvilla sand
ZnCI2
2000-4000ug/g
Black-eyed Susan
rural Plainfield sand
ZnCI2
2000-4000ug/g
urban Oakville sand
ZnCI2
2000-4000ug/g
Wheat
clay loam
control
0-2 cm depth
18-20cm depth
Corn
sandy
no sludge
1.0-1.6
sandy
56 metric tons
42.0-52.0
sandy
112 metric tons
84.0-99.0
Oats
sandy
no sludge
1.0-1.6
sandy
56 metric tons
42.0-52.0
sandy
112 metric tons
84.0-99.0
Wheat
sandy
no sludga
1.0-1.6
sandy
56 metric tons
42.0-52.0
E-107
-------
TABLE E-4. ZINC PHYTQTOXICITY DATA (con't)
Plant Name
plant tissue concentration
phytotoxicity deficiency
deficiency I normal I toxic
type | symptoms
Pepper 71
64
96
109
Beans 37
46
71
62
Broccoli 87
93
99
130
Eggplant 21
19
22
25
Tomatoes 38
41
32
47
Potatoes 27
39
33
65
Uttle bluestem
Black-eyed Susan
Wheat 52
81.1
87,5
Corn 42-86
289-405
331-411
Oats 13
39
42
Wheat 19
61
E-108
-------
TABLE E-4. ZINC PHYTOTOXICITY DATA toon't)
Plant Name
phvtotoxicity
reference
typo I eymptomi
Popper
75
75
75
75
Baans
75
75
75
75
Broccoli
75
75
75
75
Eggplant
75
75
75
*
75
Tomatoas
75
75
75
75
Potatoes
75
•
75
75
75
Little bluestam
yield lack of germination
164
yield lack of germination
164
Black-eyed Susan
yield lack of germination
164
yield lack of germination
164
Wheat
126
126
126
Com
Oats
Wheat
212
212
212
212
212
212
212
212
E-109
-------
TABLE E-4. ZINC PHYTOTOXICITY DATA (con't)
Plant Nama
Scientific
Name
Variety
Parts
Cultivation
PH
6.3
Rye
Secale cereale
Balboa
grain
field
5.6
&
D
6.3
Crimson clover
Trifolium incarnatum
Auburn
whole
field
5.6
e
O
6.3
Arrowleaf clover
Trifolium vesiculosum
Yuchi
whole
field
5.6
£
o
6.3
Carrots
Oaucus carota
Danvers
tubers,shoots
field
5.5-5.8
Radishes
Raphamis sativus
Cherry bells
tubers, shoots
field
5.5-5.8
Tomatoes
Lycopersicon esculentum
New Yorker
fruit
field
5.5-5.8
Lettuce
Lactuca sativa
Salad bowl
leaves
field
5.5-5.8
Brome grass
Bromus inermis
Leyas
field
6.7-7.9
Corn
Zea mays
<1
grain
field
6.7-7.9
leaves, kernels
field
5.7
Fescue grass
Festuca arundinacea
pot
6.5
6.5
6.5
6.5
Corn
Zea mays
Pioneer 3369A
leaves
field
low
Grain Sorghum
Sorghum bicolor
Funk G-522
leaves
field
low
Soybeans
Glycine max
Centennial
seedlings
field
low
Barley
Hordeum vulgare
Barsoy
leaves,straw, grain
pot
6
Brigos
leaves, straw,grain
pot
6
E-110
-------
TABLE E-4. ZINC PHYTOTOXfCITY DATA feon't}
Pfoot Name
Soil Type
Treatment
Concentration in soil
loading rate
sandy
112 metric tons
84.0-99.0
Rye
sandy
no sludge
1.0-1.6
sandy
56 metric torts
42.0-52.0
sandy
112 metric tons
84.0-99.0
Crimson clovor
sandy
no sludge
1.0-1.6
sandy
56 metric tons
42.0-52.0
sandy
112 metric tons
84.0-99.0
Arrowleaf clover
sandy
no sludge
1.0-1.6
sandy
56 metric tons
42.0-52.0
sandy
112 metric tons
84.0-99.0
Carrots
Bridgehampton silt loam
2.3-11,7
Radishes
Bridgehampton silt loam
2.3-11.7
Tomatoes
Bridgehampton silt loam
2.3-11.7
Lettuca
Bridgehampton silt loam
2.3-11.7
Broma grass
Conestoga loam
NH4N03
sludge low „
sludge high
4-7
45-249
Corn
Conastoga loam
NH4N03
6-9
Ca sludge
32-89
27-59
Al sludge
66-156
38-87
re sludge
63-92
23-38
Willamette silt loam
control
NHSO
Portland sludge
Rock Creek sludge
Salum sludge
2800mg/kg
2200mg/kg
1670mgflqj
Fescue grass
Norfolk fine loamy
Cecil sandy clay loam
Norfolk fine loamy
swine sludge
76 kg/ha
Norfolk fine loamy
municipal sludge
88 kg /ha
Corn
fine sandy loam
Grain Sorghum
fine sandy loam
Soybeans
fine sandy loam
Barley
Ramona sandy loam
Ramona sandy loam
control
sludge low
sludga high
control
sludge low
sludge high
E-111
-------
TABLE E-4, ZINC PHYTOTOXICITY DATA (con't)
Plant Name
plant tissue concentration
phytotoxicity deficiency
deficiency | normal | toxic
type | symptoms
72
Rye
21
91
94
Crimson clover
50
102
112
Arrowleaf clover
51
187
312
Carrots
23-79
Radishes
62-164
Tomatoes
35-49
Lettuce
46-133
Brome grass
17-25
19-27
26-31
Com
21
22-24
20-27
25-30
26-41
33-62
53-84
41-70
29-66
Fescue grass
15-43
22-50
18-46
20-47
Com
37-200
Grain Sorghum
50-200
Soybeans
45-223
Barley
30
41
52
24
31
61
400-707
778-1188
E-112
-------
TABLE E-4. ZINC PHYT0T0X1CITY DATA (con't)
Plant Name
phytotoscicitv
I
typo I ivmptom*
212
Rya
212
212
•
212
Crimson clover
212
Arrowteaf clover
Carrots
Radishes
Tomatoes
Lettuce
Broma grass
Corn
Fescue grass
Corn
Grain Sorghum
Soybeans
Barley
yield
reduction in certain years
yield/visual to 48% raduciton/ chtorosis/death
212
212
212
212
212
211
211
211
211
224
224
224
224
224
224
224
92
92
92
92
92
123
123
123
123
143
143
143
31
31
31
31
31
31
E-113
-------
TABLE E-4. ZINC PHYTOTOXICITY DATA (con'l)
Plant Name
Scientific
Namo
Variety
Parts
Cultivation
PH
Florida 103
leaves,straw,grain
pot
6
Larker
leaves,straw,grain
pot
6
Briggs
leavos.straw,grains
pot
7.1
7.8
Winter wheat
Triticum spp.
Anza
straw,grain
field
7.6
Swiss chard
Beta vulgaris
Fordhook Giant
greenhouse
7.7
T
5.5
Sweet corn
Zea mays
Jubilee
plant,seeds
field
Alfalfa
Medicago sativa
Banger
leaves,stems
field
Wheat
Triticum vulgare
Fremont
plant,seeds
field
Corn
Zea mays
Prida 110
leaves,kernels
field
6.5
6.5
Fodder rape
Brassica napus
Kenton
greenhouse
5.6
s
W
7.5
Barley
Hordaum vulgare
Larker
greenhouse
4.0-6.4
Rye grass
Lolium multiflorum
Westerwool
greenhouse
4.0-6.4
Barley
Hordeum vulgare
leaves
field
5,5-7,0
Corn
Zea mays
Pioneer 3517
leaves.grain
field
7.6-8.1
Jubilee
leaves,kernels
field
5.8-7.1
Fodder rape
Brassica napus
Kenton
greenhouse
5.6
E-114
-------
TABLE E-4. ZINC PHYTOTOXICITY DATA (oon't)
Plant Name
Soil Typo
Treatment
J Concentration in soil
Loading rata
Ramona sandy loam
control
sludge low
sludge high
Ramona sandy loam
control
sludge low
sludge high
Greenfield sandy loam
control
sludge low
sludge high
Domino loam soil
control
sludge low
sludge high
Winter wheat
Omni silty clay
88-177
567 kg/ha
Swiss chard
Domino sKl loam
Hanford sandy loam
Bedding fina sand
20-160'
20-160
20-160
Swaat corn
fine silty
25-74
Alfalfa
fine silty
25-74
Whaat
fine silty
25-74
Corn
Sulton silt loam
limed
unlimed
0-443 fcg/hs
0-448 kg/ha
Puyallup fine sandy loam
limed
unlimed
0-448 kg /ha
0-448 kg/ha
Foddar rapa
sandy
sandy
sandy
417mg/kg sludge
417mg/kg sludge
417mg/kg sludge
Barley
Marginally productive soil
dredged material
Rya grass
Marginally productive soil
dredged material
Barley
Domino loam soil
compost
liquid
2000 kg/ha
2000 kg/ha
Greenfield sandy loam ,
compost
liquid
2000 kg/ha
2000 kg/ha
Corn
calcareous strip-mined spoil
control
sludge
3.4-9.5mg/kg
3.6-114mg/kfl
Willamette silt loam
control
NH4N03n
tannery waste
11-14umol/kg
9 umol/kg
9-26umol/kg
Foddar rape
sandy
control
sludge
125 mg/pot
240-354mg/pot
E-115
-------
TABLE E-4. ZINC PHYTOTOXICITY DATA (con't)
Plant Name
plant tissue concentration
phytotoxicity deficiency
deficiency | normal | toxic
type (symptoms
Winter wheat
Swiss chard
Sweet com
Alfalfa
Wheat
Corn
Fodder rapa
Barley
Rye grass
Barley
Corn
Fodder rape
29
SI
121
26
35
67
16
26
57
16
23
32
22-45
80-170
75-250
31-67
21-38
23-75
26.8-342.6
28.0-587.7
27.3-508.7
28.7-677.3
34.8-70.5
21.8-41.2
17.6-27.8
24-200
41-258
14.2-51.0
16.1-51.4
12.5-57.3
18.4-81.9
13-33
34-200
.44-.46mmol/kg
,43-.46mmol/kg
.55-.67mmol/ka
1318 ug/pot
1698-2545ug/pot
250-360
300-600
200-291
E-116
-------
TABLE E-4. ZINC PHYTOTOXIOTY DATA (con't)
gPlant Noma
phytotoxicity
reference
type
I symptom®
Winter wheat
Swiss chard
Sweet corn
Alfalfa
Wheat
Corn
Fodder rape
Barley
Rye grass
Barley
Corn
Fodder rape
yield
yield
reduction
reduction
visual
chlorosis
31
31
31
31
31
31
31
31
31
31
31
31
32
242
242
242
24
24
24
18S
185
185
18S
173
173
173
41
41
33
33
33
33
188
188
226
226
226
215
215
-------
TABLE E-4. ZINC PHYTOTOXICITY DATA (con'ti
Plant Name
Scientific
Variety
Parts
Cultivation
PH
Name
Swiss chard
Rye grass
Upland cotton
Beta vulgaris
Lolium perenne
Gossypium hirsutum
Fordhook Giant
leaves,seeds
6
7.5
greenhouse 5.6-S.9
greenhouse S.6-5.9
field 8.2
Timothy
Phleum pretense
field
6.3
6.1
Tomato
Ball pepper
Cos lettuce
Head lettuce
Lycopereicon lycopersium Tropic
Capsicum annuum
Lactuca sativa
Lactuca sativa
California
Wondar
Cos Paris White
leaves, fruit
leavas.fruit
leaves
Great Lakes 118 leaves
greenhouse
greenhouse
greenhouse
greenhouse
7.9
7.8
7,6
6.9
7
6.5
7.9
7.8
7.6
6.9
7
6.5
7.9
7.8
7.6
6.9
7
6.5
7.9
7.8
E-118
-------
TABLE E-4. ZINC PHVT0T0X1CITY DATA (con't)
Plant Name
SoMType
Treatment
Concentration In soil
Loading rate
sandy
control
sludge
125 mg/pot
240-354mg/pot
.
! . I
sandy
control
¦ . sludge
125 mg/pot
240-354mg/pot
Swiss chard
Chalmers silty clay loam and
control
62 ma/kg
Russet silt loam
drilling fluid
35-6170mg/kg
Rye grass
Chalmers silty clay loam and
control
62 mg/kg
Russal silt loam
drilling fluid
35-6170mg/kg
Upland cotton
Pima clay loam
control
fertilized
sludge
Timothy
Dalhousio clay loam
St. Bernard sandy loam
control
fertilized
pig manure
sludge
control
fertilized
pig manure
sludge
S«
\i
CI
o
Las Virgines 1 fine loamy
Las Virgines II (ins loamy
Domino 1 fine loamy
Domino II fina loamy
Graanfield 1 coarse-loamy
Greenfield II coarsa-loamy
-
Bellpeppar
Las Virgines 1 fins loamy
Las Virgines II fina loamy
Domino 1 fine loamy
Domino II fine loamy
Graanfiald 1 coarse-loamy
Greenfield II coarse-loamy •
Cos lettuce
Las Virgines 1 fina loamy
Las Virgines II fine loamy
Domino 1 fine loamy
Domino II fina loamy
Greenfield 1 coarsa-loamy
Greenfield II coarsa-loamy
Head lettuce
Las Virgines 1 fine loamy
Las Virgines II fine loamy
-------
TABLE E-4. ZINC PHYT0T0XIC1TY DATA (con't)
Plant Name
plant tissue concentration
phytotoxicity deficiency
deficiency | normal | toxic
type | symptoms
1177 ug/pot
1025-1322ug/pot
641 ug/pot
749-1157ug/pot
Swiss chard 72 mg/kg
72-2072 mg/kg
Rye grass 43 mg/kg
43-995mg/kg
Upland cotton 42.8 mg/kg
39.5 mg/kg
41.1-49.1 mg/kg
Timothy 19-30 mg/kg
19-25 mg/kg
20-27 mg/kg
19-29 mg/kg
22-29 mg/kg
21-28 mg/kg
23-34 mg/kg
24-33 mg/kg
Tomato 22
20
68
99.5
92.3
121
Bell pepper 178.8
108
242.8
205
195.3
195.8
Cos lettuce 52.5
58
75.8
137
116.3
354
Head lettuce 53.5
57.3
E-120
-------
TABLE E*4. ZINC PHVTOTOXSCrTY DATA (oon'i)
¦Plant Name
phytotoxicity
reference
F
type I symptoms
215
215
215
215
Swiss chard 176
176
Ryegrass 176
176
Upland cotton 253
259
259
Timothy 257
257
257
257
257
257
257
257
Tomato 122
122
122
122
122
122
Bell pepper 122
122
122
122
122
122
Cos lettuce 122
122
122
122
122
122
Head lettuce 122
122
C_1
-------
TABLE E-4. ZINC PHYTOTOXICITY DATA (con't)
Plant Name
Scientific
Variety
Parts
Cultivation
PH
Name
7.6
6.9
7
6.5
Radishes Raphanus sativus Cherry Belle leaves,tubers greenhouse 7.9
7.8
7.6
6.9
7
6.5
Potato Solanum tuberosum Gold Russet leaves.tuber greenhouse 7.9
7.8
7.6
6.9
7
6.5
Corn Zea mays Golden' leaves greenhouse 7.9
Bantam 7.8
7.6
6.9
7
6.5
Wheat Triticum aestivum Anza leaves,seeds greenhouse 7.9
7.8
7.6
6.9
7
6.5
Swiss chard Beta vulgaris Large White leaves greenhouse 7.9
7.8
7.6
6.9
7
6.5
Broccoli Brassica oleracea Green Comet leaves.fruit - greenhouse 7.9
7.8
7.6
6.9
7
E-122
-------
TABLE E-4. ZJNC PHYT0T0X1CITY DATA (oon'U
Treatment
Concentration In toil
Domino I fine loamy
Domino II fine loamy
Greenfield I coarse-loamy
Greenfield II coarse-loamy
Radishes Las Virgines I fine loamy
Las Virgines II fine loamy
Domino I fine loamy
Domino II fine loamy
Greenfield I coarse-loamy
Greenfield II coarse-loamy
Potato Las Virgines I fine loamy
Las Virgines II fine loamy
Domino I fine loamy
Domino II fine loamy
Greenfield I coarse-loamy
Greenfield II coarse-loamy
Corn Las Virgines I fine loamy
Las Virgines II fine loamy
Domino I fine loamy
Doming II fine loamy
Greenfield I coarse-loamy
Greenfield II coarse-loamy
Wheat Las Virgines I fine loamy
Las Virgines II fine loamy
Domino I fine loamy
Domino II fine loamy
Greenfield I coarse-loamy
Greenfield II coarse-loamy
Swiss chard Las Virgines I fine loamy
Las Virgines II fine loamy
Domino I fine loamy
Domino II fine loamy
Greenfield I coarse-loamy
Greenfield II coarse-loamy
Broccoli Las Virgines I fine loamy
Las Virgines II fine loamy
Domino I fine loamy
Domino II fine loamy
Greenfield I coarse-loamy
E-123
-------
TABLE E-4. ZINC PHYTOTOXICITY DATA
-------
TABLE E-4. ZINC PHYTOTOXfCITY DATA (oon't)
[(Ptent Nimo
phvtotoxicitv
reference I
L -
typo
I symptoms
Radishes
Potato
Corn
Wheat
Swiss chard
Broccoli
122
122
122
122
122
122
122
122
122
122
122
122
122
122
122
122
122
122
122
122
122
122
122
122
122
122
122
122
122
122
122
122
122
122
122
122
122
122
122
E-12S
-------
TABLE E-4. ZINC PHYTOTOXICITY DATA (con't)
Plant Name
Scientific
Name
Variety
Parts
Cultivation
PH
6.5
Carrot
Daucus carota
Imperator
leaves, tubers
greenhouse
7.9
7.8
7.6
6.9
7
6.5
Beet
Beta vulgaris
Red Detroit
leaves,tubers
greenhouse
7.9
7.8
7.6
•
6.9
7
6.5
Corn
Zea mays'
leaves,grain
field
7
Pioneer 3192
leaves,grain
field
>6.5
>6.5
>6.5
Glycine max Corsoy Seedling tissue pot 5.9
Zea mays leaves,grain field
6.9-7.7
5.8-7.2
6.9-7.7
5.8-7.2
6.S
5.1-5.5
7.58
7.06
8.53
Soybean
Corn
Sorghum Sorghum bicolor Moenoh roots,leaves,stem,grain field
Winter wheat Triticum aestivum grain, roots field
Corn Zea mays field
Lettuce Lactuca sativa whole - field
E-126
-------
TABLE £-4. ZINC PHYTOTOXKITY DATA (oon't)
Plint Name
Soil Type
Treatment
Concentration In soil
Loading rata
Greenfield II coarse-loamy
Carrot
Las Virgines 1 fine loamy
Las Virglnes 11 fine loamy
Domino 1 fine loamy
Domino II fine loamy
Greenfield 1 coarse-loamy
Greenfield II coarse-loamy
•
Beet
Las Virgines 1 fine loamy
Las Virgines 11 fine loamy
Domino I fine loamy
Domino II fine loamy
Greenfield 1 coarse-loamy
Greenfield II coarea-loamy
«
Com
Davidson silty clay
control
ZnS04
695-897kg/ha
Guernsey silt loam
control
pig manure
CuS04
Bertie fine sandy loam
control
pig manure
CuS04
Starr-Dyke clay loam
control
pig manure
CuS04
Soybean
Nicollet loam soil
ZnS04
0-72 mg/kg
sludge
0-92 mg/kg
Com
Blount silt loam
control
68
1/4 max sludge
188
1/2 max sludge
326
maximum
454
Sorghum
Haynie fine sandy loam
fertilized
0.8
Haynie fine sandy loam
sludge
10.2
Winter wheat
Haynie fine sandy loam
fertilized
0.8
Haynie fins sandy loam
sludge
10.2
Corn
Bount silt loam
control
0
Bount silt loam
sludge
0-23S8 kg/ha
Lettuce
land fill
control
2169
land fill
sludge
1824
clay
control
117
-------
TABLE E-4. ZINC PHYTOTOXICITY DATA (con't)
Plant Name
plant tissue concentration
phvtotoxicity deficiency
deficiency | normal | toxic
type | symptoms
288
Carrot 51
47.8
91
109.5
98.5
155.5 1
Beet 51.8
48.3
286.3
446.5
363.5
1023.3
Corn 19.2-19.6 mg/kg
21.1-54.3mg/kg
45
41
38-39
45
37
44-48
25
17
25-26
Soybean 32-55
32-112
Corn 14.5-28.3
32.0-84.4
43.7-156.1
61.8-281.8 188.8-217.2
Sorghum 50
101
Winter wheat 28
56
Corn 28-60
85-381
Lettuce 26.93
39.21
11.3
E-128
-------
TABLE E-4. ZINC PHVT0T0X1CITY DATA {con'tf
Plant Name
phytotoxicity
reference |
typo J symptom*
122
Carrot
122
122
122
122
Bast
Corn
Soybean
Com
Sorghum
Winter wheat
Corn
Lettuce
yield/visual yield reduction/delayed flowering
122
122
122
122
122
122
122
122
183
183
184
184
184
184
184
184
184
184
184
57
57
95
95
95
95
127
127
127
127
94
94
72
72
72
p.i?n
-------
TABLE E-4. ZINC PHYTOTOXICITY DATA (con't)
Plant Name
Scientific
Variety
Parts
Cultivation
PH
Name
8.06
6.8
6.86
6.74
7,32
Tomato Lycopersicon esculentum fruit field 7.56
7.06
8.53
8.06
6.8
6.86
6.74
7.32
Wheat Tritlcum aestivum grain,whole field 7.56
7.06
8.53
8.06
6.8
6.86
6.74
7.32
Onion Allium cepa root, whole field 7.56
7.06
8.53
8.06
6.8
6.86
6.74
7.32
Radish Raphanus sativa root,whole field 7.56
7.06
8.53
8.06
' 6.8
6.86
6.74
7.32
• Splash pine Pinus elliotttii pine needles field 4.8-5.1
4.9-5.3
E-130
-------
TABLE E-4. ZINC PHOTOTOXICITY DATA (oon't)
jPfant Name
Soil Typo
Treatment
Concentration In toil
Loading rats
Tomato
Wheat
Onion
Radish
Splash pins
clay
sludge
ISO
brown loam
control
178
brown loam
sludge
335
black top soil
•control
97
black top soil
sludga
200
land fill
control
2169
land fW
sludge
1824
clay
control
117
clay
sludge
150
brown loam
control
176
brown loam
sludge
335
black top soil
control
97
black top soil
sludga
200
land fill
control
2169
land fill
sludge
1824
day
control
117
clay
sludge
150
brown loam
control
176
brown loam
sludga
335
black top soil
control
97
black top soil
sludge
200
land fill
control
2169
land fill
sludga
1824
clay
control
117
clay
sludge
150
brown loam
control
176
brown loam
sludga
335
black top soil
control
97
btack top soil
sludge
200
land fill
control
2169
land fill
sludge
1824
clay
control
117
clay
sludga
150
brown loam
control
176
brown loam
sludge
335
black top soil
control
97
black top soil
sludge
200
Troup fine sandy loam
control
0.9
Troup fine sandy loam
low sludga
7,7-12.6
49-146 kg/ha
-------
TABLE E-4. ZINC PHYTOTOXICITY DATA (con't)
Plant Name
plant tissue concentration
phytotoxicity deficiency
deficiency | normal | toxic
type J symptoms
10.14
25.4
14.07
8.76
6.75
Tomato 2.99
3.45
2.14
2.68
2.87
2.74
2.04
2.65
Wheat 233.3
148.4
50.3
78
77.9
67.6
50.9
59.6
Onion 10.19
11.38
4.29
6.06
12.91
6.52
6.09
7.17
Radish 6.67
6.07
7.58
11.05
6.89
9.42
4.44
7.01
Splash pine 36
41-74
E-132
-------
TABLE E-4. ZINC PHYTOTOXICITY DATA (con't)
Plent Nemo
phvtotoxicity
refsrenco
tVPO
1 symptomi
Tomato
Wheat
Onion
Radish
Splash pina
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
144
144
E-133
-------
TABLE E-4, ZINC PHYTOTOXICITY DATA (con't)
Plant Name
Scientific
Name
Variety
Parts
Cultivation
PH
4.8-5.2
Oats
Harmon
root,seed,stem
field
Sudangrass
Sorghum bicolor
Piper
whole
field
5.32
5.18
5.77-6.38
Corn
Zea mays
stems,roots,leaves,husks,grain
field
6.2
Perennial ryegrass
Loluim porenna
pot
4.3-5.26
4.76-5.72
6.16-7.11
Swiss chard
Tobacco
Wheat
Beta vulgaris
Nicotians tabacum
Brome alfalfa
perennial ryegrass
Virginia 115 and
Island gold
leavas
leaves
kernols,straw
whole
pot
field
greenhouse
field
greenhouse
pot
4.9-5.5
5.2-6.2
5.2-5.8
5.2-5.7
5.1-5.7
5.9-6.2
8.1
6.5
8.1
8.1
6.5
5.5
E-134
-------
TABLE E-4, ZtNC PHYTOTOXtCtTY DATA (oon't)
Plinl Name
Soil Type
Treatrrwnt
Concentration In toil
Loading rate
Troup fine sandy loam
high sludge
8.3-13.3
195-244 kg/ha
Oats
control
25-31.1
25 % sludge
42.8
50% sludge
81.4
Sudangrass
Wahiawa silty clay
control
Wahiawa silty clay
fertilized
Wahiawa silty clay
sludge
Corn
Warsaw silt loom
control
158
sludge
2065
1010 tons/ha
Perennial ryegrass
Acid clay loam
Control
0
sludge
4-8%
sludge
0.12
Add clay loam
Control
0
sludge
4-8%
sludge
0.12
Acid clay loam
Control
0
sludge
4-8%
sludge
0.12
Swiss chard
Puyallup sandy loom
sludge
40-145
0-246 kg/ha
Sultan silt loam
sludge
50-150
0-248 kg/ha
Schalcar muck
sludge
95-185
0-246 kg/ha
Chehalis clay loam
sludge
75-195
0-246 kg/ha
Olympic clay loam
sludge
70-225
0-246 kg/ha
Tobacco
fins sandy loam
control
0
Zn sulfate
6.7-20.1 kg/ha
Zn sulfate
26.8-40.2 kg/ha
Wheat
Lakeland calcareous fine
control
0
sludge
87.75-877.5 kg/ha
Red River noncalcareous fine
control
0
sludge
87.75-877.5 kg/ha
Lakeland calcareous fine •
control
0
sludge
824-1648 kg/ha
Bronte alfalfa
Lakeland calcareous fine
control
0
sludge
87.75-877.5 kg/ha
Red River noncalcareous fine
control
0
sludge
87.75-877.5 kg/ha
perennial ryegrass
sandy soil
control
89 mg/pot
sludge
712 mg/pot
126 g/pot
sulfate
712 mg/pot
E-135
-------
TABLE E-4. ZINC PHYTOTOXICITY DATA (con't)
Plant Name
plant tissue concentration
phytotoxicitv deficiency
deficiency ] normal | toxic
type |symptoms
Oats
Sudangrass
Corn
Perennial ryegrass
Swiss chard
Tobacco
Wheat
Brome alfalfa
perennial ryegrass
73-85
42
68
99
129
176
115-172
165
320
80
250-365
60-75
200-300
40
100-150
250
.10 .86 mg/g
.10-.86 mg/g
.60-1.3 mg/g
.10-.60 mg/g
.10-.40 mg/g
16.8-27.0
22.1-53.8
43.2-114.6
15.9
23.0-52.0
30.3
30.9-64.5
32-44
45-96
14
22.0-61.0
21
33-66
35 mg/pot
68 mg/pot
150 mg/pot
500
400-450
E-138
-------
TABLE E-A. ZINC PHYTOTOXfCITY DATA (oon't)
jjPtant Name
phytotoxicitv
reference
type I symptom®
144
Oats
73
73
73
Sudsngrass
104
Corn
Perennial ryagrass
yield
yield
yield reduces again
yield reduces again
Swiss chard
Tobacco
Wheat
Brome alfalfa
perennial ryegrass
104
104
125
125
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
134
134
134
134
134
80
80
80
270
270
270
270
270
270
270
270
270
270
55
55
55
E-137
-------
TABLE E-4. ZINC PHYTOTOXICITY DATA (con't)
Plant Name
Scientific
Name
Variety
Parts
Cultivation
PH
Soybean
Glycine max
Bragg
seed, pod wall, stem
greenhouse
6.2
Ransom
seed, pod wall, stem
greenhouse
6.2
White pine
Pinus strobus
leaves, roots
greenhouse
Red maple •
Acer rubrum
leaves, roots
greenhouse
Norway spruce
Picea abie's
leaves,roots
greenhouse
.
Lettuce
Imperial 847
tOp8
pot
Onions
Early flat Baretta
I
bulbs
pot
Lettuce
Imperial 847
tops
field
Onions
Early flat Baretta
bulbs
field
Lettuce
Imperial 847
top8
greenhouse
Lucerne
Medicago sativa
Wairau
whole .
pot
5
5.1-5.6
6.6
5.2
5.4-6.0
6.8
Tomato Lycoparsicon esculentum Money maker leaves,fruit,root pot 4.6-6.9
fruit pot 4.6-6.6
6.6-6.9
6.6-6.7
E-138
-------
TABLE E-4. ZINC PHYTOTOXtCITY DATA (oon't)
Ptant Name
Soil Type
Treatment
Concentration in toH
Loading rate
combination
712 mg/pot
Soybean
Enon sandy loam
control
0
low sludge
12.2-24.4 kg/ha
high sludge
36.6 kg/ha
Enon sandy loam
control
0
low sludge
12.2-24.4 kg/ha
high sludge
36.6 kg/ha
White pine
sand
Zn solution
0
6.25-50 ug/1
100-400 ug/l
Red maple
sand
Zn solution
0
6.25-50 ug/l
100-400 ug/l
Norway spruce
sand
Zn solution
0
6.25-50 ug/l
100-400 ug/l
Lettuce
loamy fine sand
Control
0
low sludge
3.68-18.4 kg/ha
high 6ludge
18.4-33.12 kg/ha
Onions
ioarny fins sand
control
/\
V
low sludge
3.68-18.4 kg/ha
high sludge
18.4-33.12 kg/ha
Lettuce
loamy fine sand
control
0
sludge
3.68-66.24 kg/ha
Onions
loamy fine sand
control
0
sludge
3.68-66.24 kg/ha
Lettuce
sand loam
control
0
sludge
3.68-289.08
heated sludge
11.04-33.12
Lucerne
Waitarere sand
0
37
Waitarere sand
5-40% sludge
95.15-502.2
Waitarere sand
100% sludge
1200
Levin silt loam
0
65
Levin silt loam
5-40% sludge
121.75-519
Levin sjlt loam
100% sludge
1200
Tomato
sludge
380
0-378 kg/ha
0
0
25-75% sludge
94.5-283.5 kg/ha
100% sludge
378 kg/ha
F-iaa
-------
TABLE E-4. ZINC PHYTOTOXICITY DATA (con't)
Plant Name
plant tissue concentration
phytotoxicity deficiency
deficiency 1 normal | toxic
type I symptoms
Soybean
White pina
Red mapta
Norway spruca
Lettuce
Onions
Lettuce
Onions
Lettuce
Lucerne
Tomato
17 mg/pot
53.33
60.66-62.33
61.3
52
57.33-57.66
63.33
98.8
128.3-433.8
647.1-1005.5
49.3
147.5-381.3
260.8-385.8
133.8
165.0-242,5
0
50
87-220
220-300
35
60-120
120-180
40
40
17
14-18
55
85-698
117-169
80-180
130-880
150-350
84
110-280
170
62
46
42-51
56
1005.5-2650
421.3
621.3
496.3-1625.0
E-140
-------
TABLE E*4. ZiHC PHYTOTOXtC{TY DATA (con't)
Plant Name
phytotoxfeity
| roforenoe
type
I symptom#
I
55
Soybean 202
202
202
202
202
202
White pine 166
166
visual foliar toxicity/interveinal chlorosis 166
Red maple 166
visual (oliar toxicity/interveinal chlorosis 166
166
Norway spruce 166
visual foliar toxicity/ stunted growth 166
visual foliar toxicity/stuntad growth 166
Lettuce 54
54
54
Onions 54
54
54
Lettuce 54
54
Onions 54
54
Lettuce 53
53
53
Lucerne 261
261
261
261
261
261
Tomato 262
262
262
262
E-141
-------
TABLE £-4. ZINC PHYTOTOXICITY DATA (con't)
Plant Name
Scientific
Name
Variety
Parts
Cultivation
PH
Sweet corn
Soybean
Zea mays
Glycine max
Picas abies
Jubilee
leaves, kernels
stem,leaves,seeds,pods
needles
field
pot
field
5.4
4.7-5.1
5.1-5.2
5.1-5.3
5.1
Endive
Chicorium endivia
Florida Deepheart
leaves
greenhouse
4.5-4.9
Barley
Hordaum vulgare
Julia
tops
sand
•
Rye grass
Lolium perenna
S24
tops
greenhouse
6
7.6
Lettuce
Lactuca sativa
Grand rapids
r
leaves
pots
6.7
Carrots
Daucus carota
Amstel
tubers
pots
6.7
Peas
Pisum sativum
Thomas Laxton
fruit
pots
6.7
Tomato
Lycopersicon esculentum
shoots
greenhouse
5.33
7,96-8.09
8.01-8.11
Lettucs lop# 4.9
7.7
E-142
-------
TABLE E-4. ZINC PHYTOTOXICITY DATA (can't)
~
Plant Nema
Sofl Typo
Treatment
Concentration in toil
Loading rate
Sweet corn
Soybean
Ertdiva
Barley
Rye grass
Lettuce
Carrots
Peas
Tomato
Lettuce
Willamette silt loam
Willamette silt loam
Willamette silt loam
WWamotto silt loai .
Willamette silt loam
Rizville silt loam
Merrimac loamy sand and
Suffleld loam and
Hadley silt loam
washed silver sand
sandy soil
heavy clay soil
very line non-calcareous
very fine non-calcareous
very fine non-calcareous
Elkton silt loam
Elkton silt loam
Elkton silt loam
Steinhof sandy loam
Erlach soil
control
fertilized
Portland sludge
Rock Creek sludge
Salem sludge
control
Zn solution
control
polluted
control
ZnS04
ZnS04
sludge
sludge -I- ZnS04
sludge + ZnS04
ZnS04
ZnS04
control
salt
sludge
control
salt
sludge
control
low sludge
high sludge
control
low sludge
high sludge
control
low sludge
high sludge
control
low 2-6% sludge
high 8-10% sludge
NaN03
NaN03
74
3.5-12.6
430-1500
99
99
99
82.2
88.7-101.8
108.3-114.9
0-60
60-144
60-144
144-475
88-177 Ib/iicre
40-80 'b/acre
26-52 lb/acre
2.5 ug/g
100-400 mg/kfl
800 mg/kg
16 mg/kg
100-400+ 16 mg/kg
800 + 16 mg/kg
51-410 mg/kg
51-410 mg/kg
0
51-410 mg/kg
51-410 mg/kg
0
160.6-321.2 kg/ha
642.4 kg/ha
0
160.6-321.2 kg/ha
642.4 kg/ha
0
160.6-321.2 kg/ha
642.4 kg/ha
E-143
-------
TABLE E-4. ZINC PHYTOTOXICITY DATA (con't)
Plant Name
plant tissue concentration
phytotoxicity deficiency
deficiency j normal | toxic
type I symptoms
Sweet corn 47
54-59
130-164
108-118
79-95
Soybean 12.1
10.4
65
30-70
Endive 250
500-900
115-1500
290
600-1000
1500
Barley 124-220
2000-19000
69
117-1001
99-232
32.4
62.4-163
55.4-100.7
35
135-181
320
11
35-43
53
83
52-61
67
334.6
87.5-101.4
114-119.2
50-200
200-800
75-200
200-1000
E-144
Rye grass
Lettuce
Carrots
Peas
Tomato
Lettuce
-------
TA.BCE E»4. ZINC CYTOTOXICITY DATA (con't)
Plant Nemo
phytotoxicity
reference |
type
I »ymptoms
Sweat coin
121
121
121
121
121
Soybean
27
27
112
112
Endive
165
yield
6-57.5% reduction
165
yield
54% reduction/death
165
165
yield
23,5-41% reduction
165
yield
64% reduction
165
Barley
6
visual
death
6
Rye orass
43
43
43
43
43
43
Lettuce
271
271
271
Carrots
271
271
271
Peas
271
,
271
271
Tomato 82
62
62
Lettuce 78
visual phytotoxic 78
78
visual phytotoxic 78
F.I ill?
-------
TABLE E-4. ZINC PHYTOTOXICITY DATA (con't)
Plant Name
Scientific
Name
Variety
Parts
Cultivation
PH
6.9
Red clover
tops
5.7
7.3
Grass
Alfalfa & Red clover
Wheat
Triticum aestivum
timothy.brown top
sweet vernal,blue
Gamenya
seedlings
field
field
solution
6.05
6.2
6.05
6.2
3.5-6.0
Dwarf beans
Phaseolus vulgaris
Limburgse vroege
leaves
solution
Various
Oats
Avena sativa
Selma
shoots
leaves
field
pot
6.6
6.2
7.5
Eucalyptus
Eucalyptus maculata
Hook
leaves
greenhouse
6.5-7.5
Eucalyptus marginata
Donn
leaves
greenhouse
6.5-7.5
Eucalyptus patens
Benth
leaves
greenhouse
6.5-7.5
Wheat
Triticum eastivum
Gamenya
leaves
greenhouse
6.5-7.5
Highbush blueberry
Vaccinium corymbosum
Blueray
pot
3.9-7.1
E-146
-------
TABLE E-4. ZINC PHYTOTOXICITY DATA (oon't)
jplarrt Name
Soil Typo
Treatment
Concentration in «oN
Loading rate
La C Katanga soil
NaN03
144-210
210-350
Red clover
Gansemoos soil
control
68 -
low NaN03
77-106
high NaN03
219
Erlach soil
control
61
low NaN03
70-96
high NaN03
202
Grass
clay and sandy loams
control
.4-4.5
clay and sandy loams
sludge
.6-5.94
27.39-62.77 kg/ha
Alfalfa & Red clover
clay and sandy loams
control
.4-4.5
clay and sandy loams
sludge
.6-5.94
27.39-62.77 kg/ha
Wheat
solution
control
0
sulfate
.05-1 .OuM half plant
sulfate
1.0 uM whole plant
Dwarf beans
Hoaglands ZnS04 solution
0-1.9
3,8-15.3
*19.1-30.6
Various
serpentine soil
natural
30-79
Oats
sandy loam
control
36.9
nitrate compound
67.4
sandy aoil
control
20.8
nitrate compound
46.4
organic soil
control
72.9
nitrate compound
122.2
Eucalyptus
sand
control
0
sulfate
50-200 ug/3kg
sulfate
600-1200 ug/3 kg
sand
control
0
sulfate
50-200 ug/3kg
sulfate
600-1200 ug/3 kg
sand
control
0
sulfate
50-200 ug/3kg
sulfate
600-1200 ug/3 kg
Wheat
sand
control
0 .
sulfate
50-200 ug/3kg
sulfate
600-1200 ug/3 kg
Highbush blueberry
peat
control
low MnCI2
4 g/pot
E-147
-------
TABLE E-4. ZINC PHYTOTOXICITY DATA (con't)
Plant Name
plant tissue concentration
phytotoxicity deficiency
deficiency 1 normal | toxic
type (symptoms
75-200
200-425
Red clover
132
235-428
1364
57
61-70
94
Grass
15.8-31.7
14.9-29.5
Alfalfa & Red clover
19.9-39.3
15.8-50.1
Wheat
11.0-15
18-47
62-72
Dwarf beans
25-35
50-226 226-300
226-500
Various
18-75
Oats
13.5-27.3
62.3-126.9
10.3-23.7
90.0-330.9
20.5-37.3
38.0-56.7
Eucalyptus
9.1
visual/yield necrotic,purple/2% shoot weight
5.5-7.5
visual/yield necrotic,purple/4% shoot weight
12.4-29.9
2.6
visual/yield necrotic,purple/26% shoot weight
2.0-2.4
visual/yield necrotic,purple/29% shoot weight
15.2-36.6
5.2
visual/yield necrotic,purple/3% shoot weight
3.8-6.8
visual/yield necrotic,purple/16% shoot weight
13.8-28.4
¦
Wheat
4.8
visual/yield necrotic,purple/5% shoot weight
4.4-5.8
visual/yield necrotic,purple/8% shoot weight
17.4-25.4
Highbush blueberry
25-37
32-49
E-148
-------
TABLE E-4, ZINC PHYTOTOXfCtTY DATA (oon't)
Plant Name 1 phytotoxicity
reference 1
|
1 typa | «ymptoma
78
visual phytotoxio
78
Red clover
78
- ,
78
yield 71.4% yield reduction
78
78
78
78
Grass
147
147
Alfalfa & Bed clover
147
147
Wheat
142
142
142
Dwarf beans
243
yield 20-30% reduction in shoot length
243
yield 20-55% reduction In shoot length
243
Various
5
Oats
17
17
17
17
17
17
Eucalyptus
51
51
51
51
51
51
51
51
51
Whaat
51
51
51
Highbush blueberry
87
87
E-149
-------
TABLE E-4. ZINC PHYTOTOXICITY DATA (con't)
Plant Name
Scientific
Variety
Parts
Cultivation
PH
Name
Corn
Zea mays
Asgrow UH7
whole
greenhouse
6.3
5.9
6.5
Lettuce
Lactuca sativa
Grand Rapids Forcing
whole
greenhouse
6.3
5.9
6.5
Barley
Hordeum vulgare
straw
field
6.0-7.4
4.5-5.5
Oats Avena sativa Garry straw
Soybean Glycine max Clark shoots I
Sunflower Helianthus annuus 894A whole
6.0-6.3
8.4
6.0-6.2
8arley Hordeum vulgare Mariout grain field 5.3
4.7-4.9 .
E-1S0
field 5.09
5.84
6
field 6.9
6.6
6.4
5.9-7.4
7.0-7.7
6.9-7.6
5.8-7.1
5.7-6.0
5.1-5.3
6.4-6.6
5.7-5.9
field 7.2-7.4
-------
TABLE E-4. ZINC PHYT0T0X1C1TY DATA {oon't)
Plant Name
Soil Type
Treatment
Concentration In toil
Loading rats
Corn
Lettuce
Barley
Oats
Soybean
Sunflower
Barley
high MnCI2
8 g/pot
Granville loam
control
0-480 ppm
fertilized
0-480 ppm
sludge
0-480 +18 ppm
Rideau clay
sludge
0-480 +18 ppm
Rfdeeu clay
sludge + lime
0-480 +18 ppm
Grenville loom
sludge
0-480 +18 ppm
Rideau clay
sludge
0-480 +18 ppm
Rideau clay
sludge + lime
0-480 +18 ppm
Dublin loam
Pacheco sludge control
0
low sludge
21.6-64.8 kg/ha
high sludge
86.4-108 kg/ha
Dublin loam
Oakland sludge control
0
low sludge
172.8-518.4 kg/ha
high sludge
691.2 kg/ha
peat
CuS04
54
0
muck
CuS04
85
0
mucky peat
CuS04
46
0
Sassafras sandy loam
control
0
Sassafras sandy loam
sludge
246.4 kg/ha
Sassafras sandy loam
sludge
492.8 kg/ha
Christiana fine sandy loam
control
0
Christiana fine sandy loam
limed-digested
35.8-286.3 kg/ha
Christiana fine sandy loam
limed-raw
33.5-134.2 kg/ha
Christiana fine sandy loam
limed-compost
40.9-491.2 kg/ha
Christiana fine sandy loam
heated sludge
74.5-297.9 kg/ha
Christiana fine sandy loam
heated sludge
74.5-297.9 kg/ha
Christiana fine sandy loam
Nu-Earth
207-414 kg/ha
Christiana fine sandy loam
Nu-Earth
207-414 kg/ha
irrigated loamy fine sand
control
0
Zn sulfate
5 kg/ha
dry loamy fine sand
control
0
Zn sulfate
5 kg/ha
dry fine sandy loam
control
0
Zn sulfate
5 kg/ha
irrigated fine sand
control
0
Zn sulfate
5 kg/ha
Dublin loam
Oakland sludge control
0
Dublin loam
low sludge
176-352 kg/ha
E-151
-------
TABLE E-4. ZINC PHYTOTOXICITY DATA (con't)
Plant Name
plant tissue concentration
phytotoxicity deficiency
deficiency | normal | toxic
type |symptoms
Corn
Lettuce
Barley
Oats
Soybean
Sunflower
Barley
40-54
48-709
28-292
28-260
37-190
21-107
75-159
87-241
61-217
30.5-97.6
43.7-92.7
41.5-89.3
37.1-116.0
76.2-461.6
113.0-820.1
54.9-66.5
43.1-53.7
65.4-76.2
24-26
80-103
134-165
29-70
35-46
31-37
40-54
57-62
85-153
70-74
81-95
42
54
39
48
22
24
56
67
38
46-47
436
469
259-578
417-1821
-------
TABLE E-4. ZINC PHYTOTOXICITY DATA (con't)
Plant Name
phytotoxicity
reference
type
I symptoms
87
Corn 146
yield 20% yield reduction 146
146
yield 12% yield reduction 146
146
Lettuce yield 32-81% yield reduction 146
yield 54.7-95% yield reduction 146
146
Barley 245
245
245
245
245
245
Oats 7
7
7
Soybean • 89
89
89
89
89
89
89
89
89
89
89
Sunflower 93
93
93
93
93
93
93
93
B«d«y 246
246
-------
TABLE E-4. ZINC PHYTOTOXICITY DATA (con't)
Plant Name
Scientific
Variety
Parts
Cultivation
PH
Name
Oats
Wheat
Chard
Snapbeans
Avena sativa
Triticum aestivum
Beta vulgaris
Clintford
Potomac
stover
stover
Fordhook Giant Swiss whole
Bush Blue Lake 47
field
field
field
field
4.4-4.5
5.3
6.4-6.5
6.5-6.6
5
6.5
6.7
5.4
6.7
5
6.5
6.7
5.4
6.7
5 '
6.5
6.7
5.4
6.7
6.6
6.7
6.7
Bush bean
Cabbage
Carrots
Phaseolus vulgaris Tender crops beans
Brassica oleracea Golden Acre leaves
Daucus carota Scarlet Nantes tubers
pots
pots
pots
5
5.3
5
5.3
5
-------
TABLE E-4, ZINC PHYTOTOXICITY DATA (con't)
Plant Name
Soil Type
Treatment
Concentration in soil
Loading rats
Dublin loam
high sludge
528-704 kg/ha
Dublin loam
Pacheco sludge control
0
Dublin loam
low sludge
19.8-39.6 k j/ha
: ,
Dublin loam
high sludga
59.4-95? kg/ha
Oats " '
Galestown Evesboro loamy sand
control
DTPA: 3.7
Galestown Evesboro loamy sand
control + lima
3.4
Galestown Evesboro loamy sand
limed-raw
4.2
Galestown Evesboro loamy sand
digested
10.2
Galestown Evesboro loamy sand
limed-digested
14.5
Wheat
Galestown Evesboro loamy sand
control
DTPA: 3.7
Galestown Evesboro loamy sand
control + lime
3.4
Galestown Evesboro loamy sand
limed-raw
4.2
Galestown Evesboro loamy sand
digested
10.2
Galestown Evesboro loamy sand
limed-digested
14.5
*
Chard
Galestown Evesboro loamy sand
control
DTPA: 3.7
Galestown Evesboro loamy sand
control + lima
3.4
Galestown Evesboro loamy sand
limed-raw
4.2 .
Galestown Evesboro loamy sand
digested
10.2
Galestown Evesboro loamy sand
limed-digested
• 14.5
Snapbeans
Pope silt loam
control
0
ZnSQ4
5.6-11.2 kg/ha
ZnCI2
11.2 kg/ha
ZnO
11.2 kg/ha
Zn chelate
11.2 kg/ha
Chenango silt loam
control
0
ZnS04
5.6-11.2 kg/ha
ZnC12
11.2 kg/ha
ZnO
11.2 kg/ha
Zn chelate
11.2 kg/ha
Leek Kill Channery silt loam
control
0
ZnS04
5.6-11.2 kg/ha
ZnCI2
11.2 kgiha
ZnO
11.2 kg/ha
Zn chelate
11.2 kg/ha
Buth bean
Arkport fine *and loam
peat
162
Arkport fine sand loam
tludge
357
Cabbage
Arkport fins sand loam
peat
162
Arkport fine sand loam
sludge
357
Carrots
Arkport fine taod loam
peat
162
-------
TABLE E-4. ZINC PHYTOTOXICITY DATA (con't)
Plant Name
plant tissue concentration
phytotoxicity deficiency
deficiency | normal | toxic
type | symptoms
65-70
31
31-32
35-39
Oats 35.3
20.5
5.3
171.2
71.4
Wheat 42.8
42.2
5.3
76.4
69.7
Chard 142
158
53
322
254
Snapbeans 32
44.0-62.4
51.6
45.8
34.6
21.2
19.8-24.4
23
22.2
20.6
22
22.4-24.2
24.8
23.2
23.2
Bush bean 44
79
Cabbage 68-204
1086-1640
Carrots 122
-------
TABLE E-4. ZINC PHYTOTOXICITY DATA (con't)
Plant Name
phytotoxicity
reference
type 1 symptoms
246
246
246
246
Oats 214
214
214
214
214
Wheat 214
214
214
214
214
Chard 214
214
214
214
214
Snapbeans 20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
Bash bean 68
68
Cabbo&e 68
68
Carrot! 68
-------
TABLE E-4. ZINC PHYTOTOXICITY DATA (con't)
Plant Name
Scientific
Name
Variety
Parts
Cultivation
PH
5.3
Millet
Echinochloa crusigalli
Japanese
edible tissue
pots
5
5.3
Onions
Allium cepa
Downing Yellow Sweet
fruit
pots
S
Spanish
5.3
Potatoes
Solarium tuberosum
Katahdin
tubers
pots
5
5.3
Tomatoes
Lycopersicon asculentum
Vendor
fruit
pots
S
5.3
Cocoa
Theobroma cacao
Amazon
seedlings
pot
6.4
Amolonado
seedlings
pot
6.4
Bush beans
Phaseolus vulgaris
Contender
leaves
solution
5
Celery
Apium graveolens
Utah 52-70
leaves
field
6.88
5.68
6,91
.Perennial ryegrass
Lolium perenno
Melle
leaves
pot
7
Wheat
Triticum aestivum
HDM1553
stem
field
8
Lettuce
Lactuca sativa
Climax
solution
6.2
Cabbage
Brassica Perachinensis
flowering Chinese
leaves
pot
6.35
5.8"6.32
5.82-8.27
6.55-7.32
6.18-7.33
-------
TABLE E-4. ZINC PHYTOTOXICITY DATA (con't)
Plant Name
Soil Type
Treatment
Concentration in soil
Loading rate
Millet
Onions
Potatoes
Tomatoes
Cocoa
Bush beans
Celery
Perennial ryegrass
Wheat
Lettuce
Cabbage
Arkport fine
Arkport fine
Arkport fine
Arkport fine
Arkport fine
Arkport fine
Arkport fine
Arkport fine
Arkport fine
sandy
sand
sand
sand
sand
sand
sand
sand
sand
sand
loam
loam
loam
loam
loam
loam
loam
loam
loam
loam
sandy loam
Hoaglands solution
muck soil
muck soil
muck soil
Sutton sandy loam
clay
Hoogland solution
redyeflow podzol soil
redyeNow podzol sot)
redytUow podzol soM
radyaUow podzol soil
redyotlow podzol soil
sludge
peat
sludge
peat
sludge
peat
sludge
peat
sludge
control
ZnS04
ZnS04
control
ZnS04
ZnS04
control
low ZnSQ4
medium ZnS04
high ZnS04
control
high metal soil
limed high metal soil
control
low sludge
medium sludge
high sludge
control
50% sludga
66% sludga
100% sludga
10 ton/ha sludge
20 ton/ha sludge
control
activated sludge
digested sludge
chicken manure
pig manure
357
162
357
162
357
162
357
162
357
0
5.0-10.0
20-50
0
5.0-10.0
20-50
190
287
265
148
309-446
707-1307
1979
22.2
34.6
80
85.2
47
81.8
68
51.082.0
81.0-204.5
8.33-55.5
55.75-70.25
2 uM/141
6.6 uM/141
9.6 uM/141
13.5 uM/141
342 kg/ha
5.62 kg/ha
11.24 kg/ha
-------
TABLE E-4. ZINC PHYTOTOXICITY DATA (con't)
Plant Name
plant tissue concentration
phytotoxicity deficiency
deficiency | normal I toxic
type | symptoms
Millet
Onions
Potatoes
Tomatoes
Cocoa
30
20-24
20
16-18
Bush beans
Celery
Perennial ryegrass
Wheat
Lettuce
Cabbage
56
290
491
288
174
34
35
18.1
17.4
46-54
36-76
70
115
77
92
86
89
140
76.38
84.86
94.86
117.61
91.1
104.54
<63 ueg/l
450-500
300
250-400
125-300
100-125
visual sickle shapes leaves
visual sickle shapes leaves
visual sickle shapes leaves
visual sickle shapes leaves
150
160
143-186
247-390
425
>63 ueg/l
500-525
480-1470
500
-------
TABLE E-4. ZINC PHYTOTOXICITY DATA (con't)
Plant Name
phytotoxicity
reference
type
I symptoms
Millet
Onions
Potatoes
Tomatoes
Cocoa
Bush beans -
Calory
Perennial ryegrass
Wheat
yield
yield
yield
yield
yield
21 % growth reduction in loaves
21% growth reduction In leaves
0-10% reduction
10-40% reduction
40-60% reduction
Lettuce
Cabbage
yield
yield
visual
visual
$0% reduced root length
10% yield reduction
small,short,young budding stoge
opaque ecankiata deposits
68
68
68
68
68
68
68
68
68
39
39
39
39
39
39
205
205
205
205
16
16
16
50
50
50
50
29
29
29
29
29
29
10
9
36
36
36
36
36
-------
TABLE E-4. ZINC PHOTOTOXICITY DATA (con't)
Plant Name
Scientific
Name
Variety
Parts
Cultivation |
PH
Wheat
Triticum aestivum
WH-147
whole
pots
7.9
Corn
Zea mays
shoot
greenhouse
Barley Hordeum vulgare
Brittlebush Encelia (arinosa
Wheat Triiicum aestivum
Corn Zea mays
UC 566
tops
leaves
tops
Early American
shoots
greenhouse 7.9
5
greenhouse 7.9
5
pots 5.0-5.5
6.1-8.3
7.5-8.0
pot
-------
TABLE E-4. ZINC PHYTOTOXICITY DATA (con't)
Plant Name
Soil Type
Treatment
Concentration in soil
Loading rate
Wheat
loamy sand soil
control
0-.01 kg/ha
farm yard manure
.25-1.2 kg/ha
dhaincha
.1-.6 kg/ha
wheat straw
.04-.36 kg/ha
Corn
Chalmers Indiana
control
0
sludge
340 kg/ha
Celina Michigan
control
0
sludge
340 kg/ha
Celina Ohio
control
0
sludge
340 kg/ha
Piano Wisconsin
control
0
sludge
340 kg/ha
Barley
Arizo sandy loam
control
fly ash 2-8%
•
Redding loam
control
fly ash 2-8%
Brittlebush
Arizo sandy loam
control
fly ash 2-8%
Redding loam
control
fly ash 2-8%
Wheat
Orentano histosol
control
208.8
fly ash 2%
181
fly ash 5%
183
Lamporecchio fluvisol
control
169.1
fly ash 2%
143
fly ash 5%
143.1
Guardia regosol
control
64.6
fly ash 2%
88.8
•
fly ash 5%
110
Corn
Low carbonate clay loam
control
0
low ZnS04
2.5 mg/kg
medium ZnS04
5 mg/kg
high ZnS04
10 mg/kg
medium carbonate sandly loam
control
0
low Zr»S04
2.5 mg/kg
medium ZnS04
5 mgflcg
high ZnS04
10 mgJkg
high carbonate day loom
control
0
low ZnS04 2.S mg/kg
C.1H1
-------
TABLE E-4. ZINC PHYTOTOXICITY DATA (con't)
Plant Name
plant tissue concentration
phytotoxicity deficiency
deficiency | normal | toxic
type Isymptoms
Wheat 14.30-61.97
18.11-70.07
17.64-72.93
13.82-51.92
Corn 1.33 umol/g
6.10 umol/g
1.24 umol/g
2.91 umol/g
1.44 umol/g
2.15 umol/g
2.38 umol/g
5.46 umol/g
Barley 280-325
50-110
125-140
80-85
Brittlebush 290-320
100-150
200-270
120-170
Wheat 51.9
51.2
47.8
34.4
33.2
32.9
36.3
35.4
33.4
Corn 183
224
333
460
118
171
238
293
53
84
-------
TABLE E-4. ZINC PHYTQTOXICITY DATA (con'tl
Rant Name
phytotoxieity
reference
type I symptoms
Wheat
195
195
195
195
Com
171
Barley
Brittlabush
Wheat
Corn
171
171
171
171
171
171
171
63
63
63
63
63
63
63
63
186
186
186
186
186
186
186
186
186
178
178
178
178
178
178
178
178
178
178
-------
TABLE E-4. ZINC PHYTOTOXICITY DATA (con't)
Plant Nama
Scientific
Variety
Parts
Cultivation
PH
Name
Mol 17 x H98
leaves
field
7.4
Oh545x B73
leaves
field
7.4
Pioneer 3369A
whole
pot
Highbush blueberry Vaccinium corymbosium Blueray
whole
pot
Corn
Zea mays
FRM017 x H98
shoots
greenhouse
6.6-6.7
6.2-6.6
5.8-6.4
6.2-6.4
6.1-6.3
6.5-6.6
6.2-6.3
6.2-6.4
6.3-6.5
6.3-6.4
6.4-6.5
5.7-6.2
6.4
6.3
6.1-6.5
6.2-6.4
6.2-6.3
6.0-6.6
3.8-4.0
4.6-5.0
5.4-6,4
3.8-4.0
4.6-5.0
5.4-6.4
3.8-4.0
4.6-5.0
5.4-6.4
5.5-7.1
7.0-7.4
E-166
-------
TABLE E-4. ZINC PHYTOTOXICITY DATA (con't)
Plant Name
Soil Type
Treatment
Concentration in soil
Loading rate
Highbuih blueberry
Corn
medium ZnS04
Smgflcg
high ZnS04
10 mg/kg
Blount silt loam
control
73-79
0
1/4 sludge
200-268
634-723 kg/ha
112 sludge
321-390
1269-1446 kg/ha
max sludge
537-606
2537-2891 kg/ha
Blount sift loam
control
73-79
0
114 sludge
200-268
634-723 kg/ha
112 sludge
321-390
1269-1446 kg/ha
max sludge
537-606
2537-2891 kg/ha
Rutledge
control
0
Rutledge
ZnS04
- 457-470 kg/ha
Rutledge
sludge
457-470 kg/ha
Evesboro
control
0
Evesboro
ZnS04
- 457-470 kg/ha
Evesboro
sludge
457-470 kg/ha
Downer
control
0
Downer
ZnS04
" 457-470 kg/ha
Downar
sludge
457-470 kg/ha
Collington
control
. 0
Codington
ZnS04
" 457-470 kg/ha
Collington
sludge
457-470 kg/ha
Manor
control
0
Manor
ZnS04
- 457-470 kg/ha
Manor
sludge
457-470 kg/ha
Myera villa
control
0
MyersvHIe
ZnS04
" 457-470 kg/ha
Myersville
sludge
457-470 kg/ha
Tempelton silt loam
control
Tempolton silt loam
control
Tompalton silt loam
control
Tempelton silt loem
ZnS04
4 g/m3
Tempelton tilt loam
ZnS04
4 g/m3
Tempelton silt loam
ZnS04
4 g/m3
Tempelton loam
ZnS04
8 g/m3
Tempelton »Ht loam
ZnS04
8 g/m3
Tempelton sit loam
ZnS04
8 g/m3
various
control
36-120
various
control + Rma
f 4 J»"»
-------
TABLE E-4. ZINC PHYTOTOXICITY DATA (con't)
Plant Name
plant tissue concentration
phytotoxicity deficiency
deficiency I normal | toxic
type | symptoms
98
123
15.9-19.3
51.6-S6.5
77.6-89.3
138-173
13.7-14.8
39.9-49.2
61.3-76.0
118-139
17-23
81 166
71-122
18-19
152
46-60 350
17-19
123-145
65-72
14-17
131-175
80-107
15-18
113-144
70-85
15-17
86-100
76-95
Highbush blueberry 32-36
42-47
26-39
45-47
50-55
30-47
57-59
56-62
34-51
Corn 22-108
28-74
-------
TABLE E-4. 2INC PHYTOTOXICITY DATA fcon't)
(Plant Name
phytotoxicity
reference
1
type
I symptoms
yield
yield
40% reduction
53% reduction
Highbush blueberry
Com
178
178
98
98
98
98
98
98
98
98
129
129
129
129
129
129
129
129
129
129
129
129
129
129
129
129
129
129
86
86
86
86
86
86
86
86
86
151
151
-------
TABLE E-4. ZINC PHYTOTOXICITY OATA (con't)
Plant Nam#
Scientific
Variety
Parts
Cultivation
PH
Name
3.6-7.5
5.8-7.3
Swiss chard Beta vulgaris Fordhook Giant greenhouse 5.5-7.1
7.0-7.4
3.6-7.5
5.8-7.3
Ryegrass S24 pots 4.7-5.8
6.0-7.8
4.9-5.7
5.9-7.3
4.7-5.8
6.1-7.2
4.6-5.6
6.0-7.4
5.3-6.0
6.2-7.3
4.9-5.2
6.0-7.4
4.9-5.5
5.8-7.2
5.5-5.6
6.2-7.0
4.9-5.5
5.9-7.3
5.3-5.7
6.3-7.2
-------
TABLE E-4. ZINC PHYTOTOXICITY DATA (con't)
Plant Nam#
Soil Type
Treatment
Concentration in soil
Loading rate
various sludge 30-500
various sludge + lime
Swiss chard various control 36-120
various control + lime
various sludge 90-500
various sludge + lime
Ryegrass silty clay loam no sludge 57
silty clay loam no sludge 57
silty clay loam low metal sludge 86
silty clay loam low metal sludge 86
silty clay loam Zn sludge 470
silty clay loam Zn sludge 470
silty clay loam Cu sludge 70
silty clay loam Cu sludge 70
silty clay loam Ni sludge 86
silty clay loam Ni sludge 86
sandy loam no sludge 42
sandy loam no sludge 42
sandy loam low metal sludge 64
sandy loam low metal sludge 64
sandy loam Zn sludge 360
sandy loam Zn sludge 360
sandy loam Cu sludge 57
sandy loam Cu sludge 57
sandy loam Ni sludge 80
sandy loam Ni sludge 80
-------
TABLE E-4. ZINC PHYTOTOXICITY DATA (con't)
Plant Name
plant tissue concentration
phytotoxicity deficiency
deficiency | normal | toxic
type | symptoms
68-726
68-232
Swiss chard 53-159
32-46
78-1810
51-142
Ryegrass 47-49
31-43
152-204
57-111
1190 2840
389-945
156-170
63-120
124-150
60-91
30-34
25-42
120-143
61-137
1240-1525
443-1140
188-210
63-142
110-183
51-92
-------
TABLE E-4. ZINC PHYTOTOXICITY DATA (con'tl
Plant Name
phytotoxicity
reference
type I symptoms
none mentioned
151
151
Swiss chard
151
• ' none mentioned
151
151
151
Ryegrass
210
210
210
210
yield 50-100% yield reduction
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
-------
PHYTOTOXICITY REFERENCES
1) Allen, Herbert E., Richard H. Hall, and Thomas D. Brisbin.1980. Metal Speciation. Effects on Aquati
Toxicity. Environ. Sci. Technol. 14 (4): 441-442.
2) Anderson, A., and K. O. Nilsson.1972. Enrichment of Trace Elements from Sewage Sludge Fertilized
in Soils & Plants. AMBIO 1 :176-179.
3) Antonovics, J, A. D. Bradshaw, and R. G. Turner.1971. Heavy Metal Tolerance in Plants. Advances ir
Ecological Research 7 :l-85.
4) Aschmann, S. G., and R. J. Zasoski.1987. Nickel and rubidium uptake by whole oat plant in solution
culture. Phvsiologia Plantarum 71 :191-196.
5) Babalonas, Dimitrios, Stylianos Karataglis, and Vasilios Kabassakalis.1984. The Ecology of Plant
Populations Growing on Serpentine Soils. Phvton 24 (2) :225-238.
6) Beckett, P.H.T., and R. D. Davis.1988. Upper Critical levels of Toxic Elements in Plants. New Phvtol.
79 :95-106.
7) Belanger, A., M. Levesque, and S. P. Mathur.1986. The Effect of Residual Copper Levels on the
Nutrition and Yield of Oats Grown in Microplots on Three Organic Soils. Commun. in Soil Sci. Plant
Anal. 17 (1) :85-96.
8) Berrow, M. L., and G. A. Reaves.1985. Extractable Copper Concentrations in Scottish Soils. Journal <
Soil Science 36 (1) :31-43.
9) Berry, Wade L., and Arthur Wallace.1989. Zinc Phytotoxicity: Physiological Responses and Diagnostic
Criteria for Tissues and Solutions. Soil Science 147 (6) :390-397.
10) Berry, Wade L., and Arthur Wallace.1989. Interaction of the Yield Response Surface of Lettuce witl
High and Toxic Concentrations of Zinc and Nickel. Soil Science 147 (6) :398-400.
11) Biddappa, C. C, H. H. Khan, O. P. Joshi, and P. Manikandan.1988. Effect of Heavy Metal on
Micronutrient nutrition of Coconut. Current Science 57 (20) : 1111-1113.
12) Bidwell, A.M., and R.H. Dowdy.1987. Cadmium and Zinc Available to Corn following Termination <
' Sewage Sludge Application. Journal of Environmental Quality 16 (4) :438-442.
13) Bingham, F. T., A.L. Page, RJ. Mahler, and T. J. Ganje.1976. Yield and Cadmium Accumulation of
Forage Species in Relation to Cadmium Content of Sludge-amended Soil. Journal of Environmental
Quality 5 (1) :57-60.
14) Bingham, Frank T.1979. Bioavailability of Cd to Food Crops in Relation to Heavy Meatl Content of
Sludge-Amended Soil. Environmental Health Perspectives 28 : 39-43. .
E-174
-------
15) Bingham, F. T., A. L. Page, G. A. Mitchell, and J. E. Strong.1979. Effects of Liming on Acid Soil
Amended with Sewage Sludge Enriched with Cd,Cu, Ni, and Zn on Yield and Cd Content of Wheat
Grain. Journal of Environmental Quality 8 (2): 202-207.
16) Bisessar, S.1989. Effects of Lime on Nickel Uptake and Toxicity in Celery Grown on Muck Soil
Contaminated by a Nickel Refinery. The Science of the Total Environment 84 :83-90.
17) Bjerre, Gerda Krog, and Hans-Henrik Schierup.1985. Uptake of six heavy metals by oat as influenc*
by soil type and additions of cadmium, lead, zinc, and copper. Plant and Soil 88 :57-69.
18) Boggess, Sam F., John J. Hassett, and D. E. Koeppe.1978. Effect of soil phosphorus fertility level oi
the uptake of cadmium by maize. Environ. Pollut. 15 :265-270.
19) Bolton, J.1975. Liming Effects on the Toxicity of Perennial Ryegrass of a Sewage Sludge
contaminated with Zinc, Nickel, Copper, and Chromium. Environ. Pollut. 9 :295-304.
20) Boyle, John F., and Cyril B. Smith.1985. Growth and Leaf Elemental Composition of Snapbeans as
Affected by Applied Zinc and Interacting Fertilizers. Commun. in Soil Sci. Plant Anal. 16 (5) :501-507.
21) Brown, Patrick H., Ross M. Welch, Earle E. Caiy, and Ron T. Checkai.1987. Beneficial Effects of
Nickel on Plant Growth. Journ. of Plant Nutrition 10 (9-16) :2125-2135.
22) Burton, K. W., E. Morgan, and A. Roig.1984. The influence of heavy metals upon the growth of
sitka-spruce in South Wales forest. II. Greenhouse experiments. Plant and Soil 78 : 271-282.
23) Burton, K. W., E. Morgan, and A. Roig.1986. Interactive effects of Cadmium, Copper, & Nickel on
the growth of Stika spruce & studies of metal uptake from nutrient solutions. New Phvtologist 103
(3):549-557.
24) Campbell, W. F., R. W. Miller, J. H. Reynolds, and T. M. Schreeg.1983. Alfalfa, Sweetcom, and
Wheat Responses to Long-Term Application of Municipal Waste Water to Cropland. Journal of
Environmental Quality 12 (2) :243-248.
25) Carlson, R. W., F. A. Bazzaz, and G. L. Rolfe.1975. The Effects of Heavy Metals on Plants: II. Net
Photosynthesis & Transpiration of whole corn & Sunflower Plants treated with Pb, Cd, Ni, & Tl. Envir.
Res. 10 (1) :113-121.
26) Carlson, Roger W., and F. A. Bazzaz.1977. Growth reduction in American Sycamore(Plantanus
occidentals L.) caused by Pb-Cd interaction. Environ. Pollut. 12 :243-253.
27) Cataldo, D. A., and R. E. Wildung.1978. Soil and Plant Factors Influencing the Accumulation of
Heavy Metals by Plants. Environmental Health Perspectives 27 :149-159.
28) Cha, J. W., and A. Wallace.1989. Interactions involving Copper Toxicity & Phosphorus deficiency in
Bush Bean Plants grown in solutions of high and low pH. Soil Sci. 147 (6) :430-431.
E-175
-------
29) Chakrabarti, C., and T. Chakrabarti.1988. Effects of Irrigation with Raw and Differentially Diluted
Sewage and Application of Primary Settled Sewage Sludge on Wheat Plant Growth Crop Yield, Enzynatii
Changes and Trace Element Uptake. Environmental Pollution 51 :2l9-235.
30) Chang, A. C., A. L. Page, and F. T. Bingham.1980. Re-utilization of municipal wastewater sludges-
metals and nitrate. Journal Water Pollution Control Federation 53 (2): 237-245.
31) Chang, A. C., A. L. Page, K. W. Foster, and T. E. Jones.1982. A Comparison of Cadmium and Zinc
Accumulation by Four Cultivars of Barley Grown in Sludge-Amended Soils Journal of Environmental
Quality 11 (3) :409-412.
32) Chang, A. C., A. L. Page, and F. T. Bingham.1982. Heavy Metal Absorption by Winter Wheat
Following Termination of Cropland Sludge Applications. Journal of Environmental Quality 11 (4)
:705-708.
33) Chang, A. C., A. L. Page, J. E. Wameke, M. R. Resketo, and T. E. Jones.1983. Accumulation of
Cadmium and Zinc in Barley Grown on Sludge-Treated Soils: A Long-Term Field Study.. Journal of
Environmental Quality 12 (3) :391-397.
34) Chang, A.C., A.L.Page, and J.E. Wameke.1987. Long-term Sludge Applications on Cadmium and
Zinc Accumulation in Swiss Chard and Radish. Journal of Environmental Quality 16 (3) :217-221.
35) Chapman, H. D. (ed.) 1966. Diagnostic criteria for plants and Soils. 2nd Ed. Quality Printing Co..
Inc., Abilene, TX.
36) Cheung, Y. H., and M. H. Wong.1983. Utilisation of Animal Manures and Sewage Sludges for
Growing Vegetables. Agricultural Wastes 5 :63-81.
37) Christensen, T. H., and J. C. Tjell.1984. Interpretation of experimental results on cadmium crop
uptake from sewage sludge amended soil. "Symposium in processing and use of sewage sludge, ed. L.
Hermite, P. Jett, and H. J. Derdrecht. Netherlands: D. Reidel Publishing Company. 358-369.
38) Chu, L. M., and M. H. Wong.1984. Application of Refuse Compost: Yield & Metal Uptake of three
Different Food Crops. Conserv. & Recvcl. 7 (2-4) :221-234.
39) Chude,V. O., and G. O. Obigbesan.1983. Effect of Zinc Application on the Dry Matter Yield Upta!
and Distribution of Zinc and Other Mirconutrients in Cocoa. Commun. in Soil Sci. Plant Anal. 14 (10)
-.989-1004.
40) Coker, E. G., and P. J. Matthews.1983. Metals in Sewage Sludge & their Potential Effects in
Agriculture. Wat. Sci. & Tech. 15 :209-225.
41) Combs, S.M., R. H. Dowdy, S. C. Gupta, W.E. Larson, and R. G. Gast.1983. The Agricultural
Potential of Dredged Materials as Evaluated by Elemental Composition of Growing Plants. Journal of
Environmental Quality 12 (3) :381-387.
E-176
-------
42) Coppola, S., S. Dumontet, M. Pontonio, G. Basile, and P. Marino.1988. Effect of Cadmium-bearing
Sewage Sludge on crop plants and microorganisms in two different soils. Agriculture. Ecosystems nnt^
Environment 20 :181-194.
43) Cottenie, A., L. Kiekend, and G. Van Landschoot.1983. Problems of the mobility and predictability
heavy metal uptake by plants. Processing Sewage Sludge Third International Symposium. Brighton. Sep
27-30:124-131.
44) Cunningham, J.D., J.A. Ryan, and D.R. Keeney.1975. Phototoxicity in and Metal Uptake from Soil
Treated with Metal-Amended Sewage Sludge. Journal of Environmental Quality 4 (4) :455-460.
45) Cunningham, J.D., J.A. Ryan, and D.R. Keeney.1975. Phytotoxicity and Metal Uptake of Metals
Added to Soils as Inorganic Salts or in Sewage Sludge. Journal of Environmental Quality 4 (4) :460-462.
46) Daniels, R. R., B. Esther Struckmeyer, and L. A. Peterson.1972. Copper Toxicity in Phaseolus vulga
as influenced by Iron Nutrition. I. Anatomical Study. Amer. Soc. Hort. Sci. J. 97 (2) :249-254,
47) Daniels, R. R., B. Esther Struckmeyer, and L. A. Peterson.1973. Copper Toxicity in Phaseolus
Vulgaris as Influenced by Iron Nutrition. II. Elemental & Electron Mircoprobe Analyses. Amer. Soc. He
Sci. J. 98 (1) :31-34,
48) Daniels, R. R., and B. Esther Strackmeyer.1973. Copper Toxicity in Phaseolus vulgaris as influences
by Iron Nutrition. III. Partial alleviation by succinic acid 2,2-dimethlyhydrazide. Amer. Soc. Hort. Sci. J.
(5) :449-452.
49) Davis, R. D. and P. H. Beckett.1978. Upper Critical Levels of toxic Elements in Plants. II. Critical
Levels of Copper in Young Barley, Wheat, Rape, Lettuce & Ryegrass, and of Nickel & Zinc in young
Barley & Ryegrass. New Phvtologist 80 (1) :23-32.
50) Davis, R. D., and C. H. Carlton-Smith.1984. An Investigation into Phytotoxicity of Zinc, Copper, an
Nickel Using Sewage Sludge of Controlled Metal Content." Environmental Pollution series B 8 :163-185.
51) Dell, B., and S. A. Wilson.1985. Effect of zinc supply on growth of three species of Eucalyptus
seedlings and wheat. Plant and Soil 88 :377-384.
52) Denny, H. J. and D. A. Wilkins.1987. Zinc Tolerance in Betula spp. I. Effect of external concentrati
on Zinc on growth and uptake. New Phvtologist 106 (3) :517-524.
53) De Vries, M.P.C., and K. G. Tiller.1978. The effect of sludges form two Adelaide sewage treatment
plants on the growth of and heavy metal concentration in lettuce. Australian Journal of Experimental
Agriculture and Animal Husbandry 18 :143-147.
54) De Vries, M.P.C., and K. G. Tiller.1987. Sewage Sludge as a soil amendent with special reference t<
Cd, Cu, Mn, Ni, Pb, and Zn comparison of results from experiments conducted inside and outside a
grasshouse. Environ Pollut. 16 :231-240.
55) Dijkshoorn, W., and J. E. M. Lampe.1975. Availability for ryegrass of cadmium and zinc form
dressings of sewage sludge. Neth. J. Aerie. Sci. 23 :338-344.
E-177
-------
56) Dowdy, R. H., and W. E. Larson.1975. The Availability of Sludge-borne Metals to Various Vegetabli
Crops. Journal of Environmental Quality 4 (2) :278-282.
57) Dowdy, R. H., and G. E. Ham.1977. Soybean Growth and Elemental Content as Influenced by Soil
Amendments of Sewage Sludge and Heavy Metals: Seedling Studies. Agronomy Journal 69 :300-303.
58) Dowdy, R. H.,W. E. Larson, J. M. Titrud, and J. J. Latterell.1978. Growth and Metal Uptake of Sna
Beans Grown on Sewage Sludge-amended Soil: A Four Year Field Study. Journal of Environmental
Quality 7 (2) :252-257.
59) Dowdy, R. H., P. K. Morphew, and C. E. Clapp.1981. The relationship between the Concentration o
Cadmium in Corn Leaves and Corn Stover Grown on Sludge Amended Soils. In Proc. Fourth Ammual
Madison Conf. Aopl. Res. Pract. Munic. Ind. Waste Univ. Wisconsin—Extension. 466-477.
60) Dudas, M. J., and S. Pawluk. 1975. Trace Element in Sewage Sludge & Metal Uptake by Plants
Grown on Sludge Amended Soils. Can. J. Soil Sci. 55 :239-243.
61) Eleftheriou, E.P., and S. Karataglis.1989. Ultrastructural and Morphologgjcal Characteristics of
Cultivated Wheat Growning on Copper-Polluted Fields. Botanica Acta 102 :134-340.
62) Elliott, Herschel A., and Leslie M. Singer.1988. Effect of Water Treatment Sludge on Growth and
Elemental compostion of Tomato Shoots. Commun. in Soil Sci. Plant Anal. 19 (3) :345-354.
63) Elseewi, Ahmed A., I. R. Straughan, and A. L. Page.1980. Sequential Cropping of Fly Ash-Amendec
Soils: Effects on Soil Chemical Properties and Yield and Elemental Composition of Plants. The Science
of the Total Environment 15 :247-259.
64) Rowers, T. J., and A. R. Yeo.1986. Ion Relations of Plants under Drought and Salinity. Aust. J. Plai
Physiol. 13 :75-91.
65) Foy, Charles D., Edward H. Lee, and Stephanie B. Wilding.1987. Differential Aluminum Tolerances
of Two Barley Cultivars Related to Organic acids in their roots. Journal of Plant Nutrition 10 (9-16)
:1089-1101.
66) Foy, C. D., D. H. Smith, Jr., and L. W. Briggle.1987. Tolerances of Oat Cultivars to an acid soil higl
in Exchangeable Aluminum. Journal of Plant Nutrition 10 (9-16): 1163-1174.
67) Francois, L. E.1986. Effect of Excess Boron on Broccoli, Cauliflower, & Radish. J. Amer. Soc. Hort.
Sci. Ill (4) -.494-498.
68) Furr,A. Keith, William C. Kelly, Carl A. Bache, Walter H. Gutenmann, and Donald J. Iisk.1976.
Multielement Absorption by Crops Grown in Pots on Municipal Sludge-Amended Soil. J. Agric. Food
Chem. 24. (4) :889-892.
69) Furr, A. K., T. F. Parkinson, D. C. Elfving, C. A. Bache, W. H. Gutenmann, G. J. Doss, and D. J.
Lisk.1981. Elemental Content of Vegetables & Apple Trees Grown on Syracuse Sludge-Amended Soils. J
Aerie. Food Chem. 29 :156-160.
E-178
-------
70) Garcia, W. J.1974. Pysical Chemical Characteristics & Heavy Metal Content of Corn Grown on
Sludge Treated Strip Mined Soil. J. Aerie. Food Chem. 22 : 810-815.
71) Garcia, W. J.1979. Translocation & Accumulation of Seven Heavy Metals in Tissues of Corn Plants
(Zea Mays) Grown on Sludge Treated Strip Mined Soil. J. Aerie. Food Chem. 27 : 1088-1094.
72) Garcia, William J., Charles W. Blessin, Gearge E. Inglett, and William F. Kwolek.1981. Metal
Accumulation and Crop Yield for a variety of Edible Crops grown in Diverse Soil Media Amended with
Sewage Sludge. Environmental Science and Technoloev 15 (7) :793-804.
*
73) Gillies, J. A., R. L. Kushwaha, C. P. Hwang, and R. J. Ford.1989. Heavy Metal residues in soil and
crops from applications of anaerobically digested sludge. Research Journal WPCF 61 (11-12) :1673-167i
74) Giordano, P. M., J. J. Mortvedt, and D. A. Mays.1975. Effect of Municipal Wastes on Crop Yields
and Uptake of Heavy Metals. Journal of Environmental Quality 4 (3) :394-399.
75) Giordano, P. M., D. A. Mays, and A. D. Beheljr.1979. Soil Temperature Effects on Uptake of
Cadmium and Zinc by Vegetables Grown on Sludge-Amended Soil. Journal of Environmental Quality 8
(2) :233-236.
76) Golden, M. J. and J. Freedman.1978. Zinc Toxicity in Corn as a Result of Geochemical Anomaly.
Plant & Soil 50 (1) : 151-159.
77) Gonclaves, M. L. S. Simoes, M. F. C. Vilhena, and M. Antonia Sampayo.1988. Effect of Nutrients,
Temperature and Light on Uptake of Cadmium by Selenastrum Capriconutum Printz. Wat. Res. 22 (11)
:1429-1435.
78) Gupta, S. K.ly«4. Importance of Soil Solution Compostion in Deciding the Best Suitable Analytical
Criteria for Guidelines on Maximum Tolerable Metal Load and in Assessing Bio-significance of Metals ii
soil. Recherche Ak nom. en Suiesse 23 (3) :209-225.
79) Gupta, S. K.1987. Interrelationships between degree of metal binding capacity of sludge and metal
concentration in plants. International Conference on Heavy Metals in the Environment. New Orleans 1
(Sept):417-420.
80) Gupta, Umesh C., and W. J. Arsenault.1986. Boron and Zinc Nutrition of Tobacco Grown in Prince
Edward Island. Can. J. Soil Science 66 (2) :67-71.
81) Gupta, V. K., A. P. Gupta, and H. Raj.1983. Micronutrient contents and yield of Lentil & Maize as
Influenced by direct & Residual application of Organic Manure & Zinc. Indian J. Aerie. Sci. 53 (9)
:826-830.
82) Hardiman, R. T., B. Jacoby, and A. Banin.1984. Factors affecting the distibution of cadmium, coppe
and lead and their effect upon yield and zinc content in bush bean. Plant and Soil 81 :17-27.
83) Harris, Mary R., Stephen J. Harrison, and Nicholas W. Lepp.1984. Seasonal Variations in teh metal
content of Amenity Crass and ite use as an Indiator of reclamation treatment preformance. The Science
of the Total Environment 34 : 267-287.
E-179
-------
84) Hassett, J. J., J. E. Miller, and D. E. Koeppe.1976. Interaction of lead and cadmium on maize roof
growth and uptake of lead and cadmium by roots. Environ. Pollut. 11 : 297-302.
85) Hatch, D. J., L. H. P. Jones, and R. G. Burau.1988. The Effect of pH on the uptake of cadmium by
four plant species grown in flowing solution culture. Plant and Soil 105 :121-126.
86) Haynes, R. J., and R. S. Swift.1985. Effects of soil acidification on the chemical extractability of Fe,
Mn, Zn, and Cu and the growth and micronutrient uptake of highbush blueberry plants. Plant and Soil 84
:201-212.
87) Haynes, R. J., and R. S. Swift.1985. Effects of liming on the extractability of Fe, Mn, Zn, and Cu fro
a peat medium and the growth and micronutrient uptake of highbush blueberry plants. Plant and Soil 84
:213-223.
88) Heale, E. L., and D. P. Ormrod.1982. Effects of nickel and copper on Acer rubrum, Cornus
stolonifers, Lonicera tatarica, and Pinus resinosa. Can. J. Bot. 60 :2674-2681.
89) Heckman, J. R., J. S. Angle, and R. L. Chaney.1987. Residual Effects of Sewage Sludge on Soybean:
I. Accumulation of Heavy Metals. Journal of Environmental Quality 16 (2):113-117.
90) Hemkes, O. J., A. Kemp, and L. W. Van Broekhoven.1983. Effects of applications of sewage sludge
and fertilizer nitrogen on cadmium and lead contents of grass. Neth. J. Agric. Sci. 31 :227-232.
91) Hemming, B. C.1986. Mictobial-Iron interactions in the plant rhizosphere. An overview. Journal of
Plant Nutrition 9 (3-7) :505-521.
92) Hemphill, D. D., Jr., T. L. Jackson, L. W. Martin, G. L. Kiernnec, D. Hanson, and V. V. Volk.1982.
Sweet Corn Response to Application of Three Sewage Sludges. Journal of Environmental Quality 11 (2)
:191-196.
93) Hilton, B. R., and J. C. Zubriski.1985. Effects of Sulfur, Zinc, Iron, Copper, Manganese, and Boron
Applications on Sunflower Yield and Plant Nutrient Concentration. Commun. Soil Sci. Plant Anal. 16 (4)
:411-425.
94) Hinesly, T. D., R. L. Jones, E. L. Ziegler, and J. J. Tyler.1977. Effects of Anual and Accumulative
Applications of Sewage Sludge on Assimilation of Zinc and Cadmium by Corn. Environmental Science ai
Technology 11 (2) :182-188.
95) Hinesly, T. D., D. E. Alexander, E. L. Ziegler, and G. L. Barrett.1978. Zinc and Cd Accumulation bj
Corn Inbreds Grown on Sludge Amended Soil. Agronomy Journal 70 :425-428.
96) Hinsely, T. D., E. L. Ziegler, and G. L. Barrett.1979. Residual Effect of Irrigating Corn with Digest)
Sewage Sludge. Journal of Environmental Quality 8 (1) :35-38.
97) Hinesly, T. D., K. E. Redborg, E. L. Ziegler, and J. D. Alexander.1982. Effect of Soil cation Exchan
capacity on the uptake of Cadmium by Corn. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 46 : 490-497.
E-180
-------
98) Hinesly, T. D., D. E. Alexander, K. E. Redborg, and E. L. Ziegler.1982. Differential Accumulations <
Cadmium and Zinc by Corn Hybrids Grown on Soil Amended with Sewage Sludge. Agronomy Journal 7<
(May-June ) :469-474.
99) Hinesly, Thoas D., Kurt E. Redborg, Richard I. Pietz, and Eugene L. Ziegler.1984. Cadmium and zi
Uptake be Corn (Zea mays L.) with Repeated Applications of Sewage Sludge. Journal of Agricultural an
Food Chemistry 32 :155-163.
100) Hoikal, M. M., W. L. Berry, A. Wallace, and D. Herman.1989. Alleviation of Nickel Toxicity by
Calcium Salinity. Soil Sci. 147 (6): 413-415.
101) Horiguchi, T., and S. Morita.1987. Mechanism of Manganese Toxicity and Tolerance of Plants; VI.
Effect of Silicon on Alleviation of Manganese Toxicity of Barley. Journal of Plant Nutrition 10 (17)
:2299-2310.
102) Horiguchi, T.1988. Mechanism of Manganese Toxicity and tolerance of Plants VII. Effect of Light
Intensity on Manganese-induced Chlorosis. Journal of Plant Nutrition 11 (3) :235-246.
103) Hue, M.V.I 988. A Possible Mechanism for Manganese Phytotoxicity in Hawaii Soils Amended with
Low-Manganese Sewage Sludge. Journal of Environmental Quality 17 (3) :473-479.
104) Hue, N. V.1988. Residual Effects of Sewage-Sludge Application on plant and soil-profile chemical
compostion. Commun. in Soil Sci. Plant Anal. 19 (14):1633-1643.
105) Ismail, Abdel Samad S., and F. Awad.1986. Effect of Certain Ions on Growth and Uptake of Iron ai
Zinc by Barley Seedlings Grown on Alluvial Soil. Journal of Plant Nutrition 9 (3-7) :297-306.
106) Jana, Sasadhar, and Alofe Bhattachaijee.1988. Effects of combinations of heavy metal pollutants or
Cuscuta reflexa. Water. Air, and Soil Pollution 42 : 303-310.
107) John, Matt K., and C. J. Van Laerhoven.1976. Differential Effects of Cadmium on Lettuce Varietie
Environ. Pollut. 10 :163-173.
108) Johnson, M. S., T. McNeilly, and P. D. Putwain.1977. Revegetation of metalliferous mine spoil
contaminated by lead and Zinc. Environ. Pollut. 12 : 261-277.
109) Jones, K. C.1989. Cadmium in cereal grain and herbage from long-term experimental plots at
Rothamsted, UK Environmental Pollution 57 : 199-216.
110) Jones, M. D., and T. C. Hutchinson.1988. Nickel Toxicity in Mycorrhizal birch seedlings infected
with Lactarius rufus of Scleroderma flavidum I. Effects on growth, photosynthesis, respiration &
transpiration. New Phvtologist 108 (4): 451-459.
111) Jones, Robert L., T.D. Hinesly, E.L. Ziegler and J J. Tyler.1975. Cadmium and Zinc Contents of
Corn Leaf and Grain Produced by Sludge-amended Soil. Journal of Environmental Quality 4 (4) :509-514
E-181
-------
112) Kanerva, Tina, Osmo Sarin, and Pekka Nuorteva.1988. Aluminum, Iron, Zinc, Cadmium, and
Mercury in some indicator plants growing in South Finnish forest areas with different degrees of damage
Ann. Bot. Fennici. 25 :275-279.
\
113) Karamanos, R. E., J. G. Fradette, and P. d. Gerwing.1985. Evaluationof Copper & Manganese
Nutritionof Spring Wheat Grown on Organic Soils. Can. J. Soil Sci. 65 (1) :133-148.
114) Karlen, D. L., and P. G. Hunt.1985. Copper, Nitrogen, and Rhizobium Japonicum Relationships in
Determinate Soybean. Journal of Plant Nutrition 8 (5):395-404.
115) Kayode, G. O. 1985. Responses of yield, components of yield and nutrient content of maize to
soil-applied zinc in tropical rainforest and savannah regions. J. aerie. Sci. 105 :135-139.
116) Keefer, R. F., R. N. Singh, D. J. Horvath, and A. R. Khawaja.1979. Heavy Metal Availability to pis
from sludge application. Compost Sci. 20 (3) :31-35.
117) Kelly, M. G., and B. A. Whitton.1989. Relationship between accumulation and toxicity of zinc in
Stigeoclonium (Chaetophorales, Chlorohpyta). Phvcoloeia 28 (4): 512-517.
118) Kempton, S., R. M. Sterrritt, and J. N. Lester.1987. Heavy Metal Removal in Primary Sedimentaio
I. The Influence of Metal Solubility. The Science of the Total Environment. 63 :231-246.
119) Kempton, S., R. M. Sterrritt, and J. N. Lester.1987. Heavy Metal Removal in Primary Sedimentaio
II. The Influence of Metal speciation and particle size distribution. The Science of The Total Environme:
63 :247-258.
120) Khan, Samiullah, and N. Nazar Khan.1983. Influence of lead and cadmium on the growth and
nutrient concentration of tomato and egg-plant. Plant and soil 74 : 387-394.
121) Kiemnec, G. L., D.D. Hemphilljr., M. Hickey, T. L. Jackson, and V. V: Volk.1990. Sweet corn Yie
and Tissue Metal Concentration after Seven Years of Sewage Sludge Applications. J. Prod. Aerie. 3 (2)
:232-237.
122) Kim, S. J., A. C. Chang, A. L. Page, and J. E. Warneke.1988. Relative Concentration of Cadmium
and Zinc in Tissue of Selected Food Plants Grown on Sludge-Treated Soils. Journal of Environmental
Quality 17 (4) :568-573.
123) King, Larry D.1981. Effect of Swine Manure Lagoon Sludge and Municipal Sewage Sludge on
Growth, Nitrogen Recovery, and Heavy Metal Content of Fescuegrass. Journal of Environmental Oualifr
10 (4) :465-472.
124) Kirkham, M. B.1975. Uptake of Cadmium and Zinc from Sludge by Barley Grown under Four
Different Sludge Irrigation Regimes. Journal of Environmental Quality 4 (3) :423-426.
125) Kirkham, M. B.1975. Trace Elements in Corn Grown on Long-Term Sludge Disposal Site.
Environmental Science and Technoloev 19 (8) :765-768.
E-182
-------
126) Kirkham, M. B.1980. Characteristics of Wheat Grown with Sewage Sludge Placed at Different Soil
Depths. Journal of Environmental Quality 9 (1) :13-18.
127) Kirkham, M. B.1983. Elemental Content of Soil, Sorghum and Wheat on Sludge- Injected
Agricultural Land. Agriculture. Ecosystems and Environment 9 :281-292.
128) Korcak, R. F., F. R. Gouin, and D. S. Fanning.1979. Metal Content of Plants and Soils in a Tree
Nursery Treated with Composted Sludge. Journal of Environmental Quality 8 (1) :63-68.
129) Korcak, R. F., and D. S. Fanning.1985. Availability of Applied Heavy Metals as a Function of Type
of Soil Material and Metal Source. Soil Science 140 (l):23-34.
130) Korner, Lena E., Ian M. Moller, and Paul Jensen.1987. Effects od Ca and other divalent cations on
uptake of Ni by excised barley roots. Fhvsiol. Plantarum 71 :49-54.
131) Krause, Georg H. M., and Hildegard Kaiser.1977. PLant Response to Heavy Metals and Sulphur
Dioxide. Environ. Pollut. 12 :63-71.
132) Kriedemann, P. E., and J. E. Anderson.1988. Growth and Photosynthetic Responses to Manganes
and Copper Deficiencies in Wheat and Barley Grass. Aust. J. Plant Physiol. 15 :429-46.
133) Kumar, V., V. S. Ahlawat, and R. S. Antil.1985. Interactions of Nitrogen & Zinc in Pearl Millet. 1.
Effect of Nitrogen and zinc Levels on Dry Matter Yield & Concentration & Uptake of Nitrogen & zinc i:
Pearl Millet. Soil Sci. 139 (4): 351-356.
134) Kuo, S., E. J. Jellum, and A. S. Baker.1985. Effects of Soil Type, Liming , and Sludge Applications
on Zinc and Cadmium Availability to Swiss Chard. Soil Science 139 (2)122-130.
135) Kuwabara, James S.1985. Phosphorus-Zinc Interactive Effects on Growth By Selenastrum
capricornutum (Chlorophyta). Environ. Sci. Technol. 19 (5): 417-421.
136) Lake, D. L., P. W. W. Kirk, and J. N. Lester.1989. Heavy Metal Solids Association in Sewage Slud§
Wat. Res. 23 (3): 285-291.
137) Lambert, D. H.1982. Response of sweetgum to mycorrhizae, phosphorus, copper, zinc, and scwag<
sludge. Can J. For. Res. Vol. 12 :1024-1027.
138) Latterell, J.J., R. H. Dowdy, and W. E. Larson.1978. Correlation of Extractable Metals and Metal
Uptake of Snap Beans Grown on Soil Amended with Sewage Sludge. Journal of Environmental Quality 7
(3) :435-440.
139) Leininen, Kari P.1989. Hie Influence of Soil Preparation on the Levels of Aluminum, Manganese,
Iron, Copper, Zinc, Cadmium, and Mercury in Vaccinium Myrtillus. Chemosphere 18 (7-8) :1581-1587.
140) Lexmond, T. M.1980. The Effect of Soil pH on Copper Toxicity of forage Maize Grown under Fick
Conditions. Neth. J. Agric. Sci. 28 (3) :164-184.
E-183
-------
141) Lexraond, T. M., and P.D. J. Van der Vorm.1981. The Effect of pH on Copper Toxicity to
Hydroponically Grown Maize. Neth. J. Aerie. Sci. 29 (3) :217-238.
142) Loneragan, J. F., G. J. Kirk, and M. J. Webb.1987. Translocation and Function of Zinc in Roots.
Journal of Plant Nutrition 10 (9-16) :1247-1254.
143) Lutrick, M. C., W. K. Robertson, and J. A. Cornell.1982. Heavy Applications of Liquid-Digested
Sludge on Three Ultisols: II. Effects on Mineral Uptake and Crop Yield. Journal of Environmental
Quality 11 (2) :283-287.
144) Lutrick, M. C., H. Riekerk, and J. A. Cornell.1986. Soil and Splash Pine Response to Sludge
Applications in Florida. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 50 :447-451.
145) Macfie, Sheila M., Gregory J. Taylor, Keith Briggs, and John Hoddinott.1989. Differential tolerance
of manganese among cultivars of Triticum aestivum. Can. J. Bot. 67 :1305-1308.
146) MacLean, A. J., and A. J. Dekker.1978. Availability of Zinc, Copper, and Nickel to Plants grown in
Sewage-Treated Soils. Can. J. Soil Sci 58 (Aug.) :381-389.
147) MacLean, K.S., A. R. Robinson, and H. M. MacConnell.1987. The Effect of Sewage Sludge on the
Heavy Metal Content of soils and Plant tissue. Commun. in Soil Sci. Plant Anal. 18 (11) :1303-1316.
148) Mahler, R.J., F.T. Bingham, and A.L.Page.1978. Cadmium-Enriched Sewage Sludge Application to
Acid and Calcareous Soils: Effect on Yield and Cadmium Uptake by Lettuce and Chard. Journal of
Environmental Quality 7 (2) :274-281.
149) Mahler, Richard J., J. A. Ryan, and T. Reed.1987. Cadmium Sulfate Application to Sludge-Amendei
Soils. I. Effect on Yield and Cadmium Availability to Plants. The Science of the Total Environment 67 :
117-131.
r
150) Mahler, Richard J., and James A. Ryan.1988. Cadmium Sulfate Application to sludge-amended soils
II. Extraction of Cd, Zn and Mn from solid phases. Commun. in Soil Sci. Plant Anal. 19. (15) :1747-1770.
151) Mahler, Richard J., and J. A. Ryan.1988. Cadmium Sulfate Application to Sludge-Amended Soils:
III. Relationship between treatment ans plant available Cadmium, Zinc, and Manganese. Commun. in Soi
Sci. Plant Anal. 19 (15): 1771-1794.
152) Marks, M. J., J. H. Williams, and C. G. Chumbley.1977. Field experiments testing the effects of
metal contaminated sewage sludges on some vegetable crops. Inorganic pollution and agriculture: 235-251
153) Marschner, H. and I. Cakmar.1986. Mechanicm of Phosphorus Induced Zinc-deficiency in cotton 2.
Evidence for impaired shoot control of Phosphorus uptake & Translocation under zinc-deficiency.
Phvsiologia Plantarum 68 (3): 491-496.
154) Marsh, D. B. and L. Waters, Jr. 1985. Critical deficiency & toxicity levels of tissue zinc in relationto
cowpea growth & N92) fixation. J. Amer. Soc. Hort. Sci. 110 (3) :365-370.
E-184
-------
155) Mascanzoni, Daniel.1988. Influence of Lime and Nutrient Treatments on Plant Uptake of Mn, Cc
Ni, Zn, and Sr. Swedish J. Agric. Res. 18 :185-189.
156) Mathur, S. P., A. Belanger, R. B. Sanderson, M. Valk, and E. N. Knibbe.1984. The influence of
variations in soil copper on the yield and nutrition of spinach grown in microplots on two organic soils.
Commun. in Soil Sci. Plant Anal. 15 (6) :695-706.
157) Mathur,S. P., and A. Belanger.1987. The Influence of Variation in Soil Copper on the Yield and
Nutrition of Carrots Grown in MircoplotS on Two Organic Soils. Commun. in Soil Sci. Plant Anal. 18 (6
:615-624.
158) Matt, K. John, and C. J. Van Laerhoven.1976. Differential Effects of Cadmium on Lettuce Varieti
Environ. Pollut. 10 :163-173.
159) McAndrew, D.W., L.A. Loewen-Rudgers, and G. J. Racz.1984. A growth chamber study of copper
nutrition of cereal and oil seed crops in organic soil. Can. J. Plant Sci. 64 (July): 505-510.
160) Mench, M., J. Tancogne, A. Gomez, and C. Juste.1989. Cadmium bioavailability to Nicotiana
tabacum L., Nicotiana rustica L., and Zea mays L. grown in soil amended or not amended with cadmiun
nitrate. Biol. Fertil. Soil 8 :48-53.
161) Merry, R. H., K. G. Tiller, and A. M. Alston.1986. The effects of contamination of Soil with coppc
lead, and arsenic on the growth and composition of plants: I. Effects of season, genotype, soil tempcratu
and fertilizers. Plant and Soil 91 :115-128.
162) Merry, R. H., K. G. Tiller, and A. M. Alston.1986. The effects of soil contamination with copper,
lead, and arsenic on the growth and compostion of plants: II Effects of source of contamination, varying
soil pH, and prior aterlogging. Plant and Soil. 59 :255-269.
163) Milbocker, D C. 1974. Zinc Toxicity to Plants grown in Media containing Poly Rubber. Hort.
Science 9 (6.1) :54jo46.
164) Miles, L. J., and G. R. Parker.1979. Heavy Metal Interation for Andropogon scoparius and
Rudbeckia hirta Grown on Soil from Urban and Rural sites with Heavy Metal Additions. Journal of
Environmental Quality 8 (4) :443-449.
165) Milner, Paula* and Allen V. Barker.1989. Factors affecting Zinc Concentrations in Plant Grown in
Sludge-Amended Soils. Commun. in Soil Sci. Plant Anal. 20 (1-2) :1-21.
166) Mitchell, Cynthia D., and Thomas A. Fretz.1977. Cadmium and Zinc Toxicity in White Pine, Red
Maple, and Norway Spruce. J. Amer. Soc. Hort. Sci. 102 (1) :81-84.
167) Mitchell, G.A., F.T. Bingham, and A.L. Page.1978. Yield and Metal Composition of Lettuce and
Wheat Grown on Soil Amended with Sewage Sludge Enriched with Cadmium, Copper, Nickel, and Zim
Journal of Environmental Quality 7 (2):165-171.
168) Mo, S. C., D. S. Choi, and J. W. Robinson.1988. A Study of the Uptake by Duckweed of Aluminui
Copper, and Lead From Aqueous Solution. J. Environ. Sci. Health. A23 (2):139-156.
E-185
-------
169) Mortvedt, J. J., and P. M. Gioradano.1975. Response of Corn to Zinc and Chromium in Municipal
Wastes Applied to Soil. Journal of Environmental Quality 4 (2) :170-174.
170) Mukherji, S. and B. Das Gupta.1972. Characterization of copper Toxicity in Lettuce Seedlings.
Phvsiologia Plantarum. 27 (2) -.126-129.
171) Mullins, G. L., L. E. Sommers, and S. A. Barber.1986. Modeling the Plant Uptake of Cadmium and
Zinc from Soils Treated with Sewage Sludge. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 50:1245-1250.
172) Munns, Rana, and Annie Termaat.1986. Whole-plant Responses fo Salinity. Aust. J. Plant Physiol. 13
: 143-60.
173) Narwal, R.P., B. R. Singh, and A. R. Panhwar.1983. Plant Availability of Heavy Metals in a
Sludge-Treated Soil: I. Effect of Sewage Sludge and Soil pH on the Yield and Chemical Composition of
Rape. Journal of Environmental Quality 12 (3) .*358-365.
174) Nasu, Y. and M. Kugimoto.1981. Lemna (Duckweed) as an Indicator of Water Pollution. I. The
Sensitivity of Lemna paucicostata to Heavy Metals. Arch. Env. Cont. & Toxic. 10 (2): 159-170.
175) Naylor, L. M., M. Barmasse, and R. C. Loehr.1987. Uptake of Cadmium & Zinc by Corn on
Sludge-Treated soils. Biocvcle 28 (4): 37-41.
176) Nelson, Darrell W., Shyilon L. Liu, and Lee E. Sommers.1984. Extractability and Plant Uptake of
Trace Elements from Drilling Fluids. Journal of Environmental Quality 13 (4) :562-566.
177) Nicholls, M. K. and T. McNeilly.1985. The Performance of Agrostis-Capillaris L. genotypes,
Differing in Copper Tolerance, In Ryegrass Swards on Normal soil. New Phvtologist. 101 (1) :207-217.
178) Orabi, A. A., T. El-Kobbia, and A. I. Fathi.1985. Zinc-phosphorus relationship in the nutrition of
corn plant as affected by the total carbonate content of the soil. Plant and Soil 83 :317-321.
179) Ormrod, D. P.1977. Cadmium and Nickel Effects on Growth and Ozone Sensitivity of Pea. Water.
Air, and Soil Pollution 8 :263-270.
180) Otte, M. L., J. Rozema, L. Koster, M. S. Haarsma, and R. A. Broekman.1989. Iron plaque on roots
of Aster tripolium L.: Interatcion with zinc uptake. New Phvtol. Ill : 309-317.
181) Pal, A. R., D. P. Motiramani, G. S. Rathore, K. N. Bansal, and S. B. Gupta.1989. A model to predict
the zinc status of soils for maize. Plant and Soil 116 :49-55.
182) Parkinson, R. J., and Rosemary Yells.1985. Copper content of soil and herbage following pig slurry
application to grassland. J. Agric. Sci. 105 :183-185.
183) Payne, G. G., D. C. Martens, C. Winarko, and N. F. Perera.1988. Form and Availability of Copper
and Zinc following Long-Term Copper Sulfate and Zinc Sulfate Applications. Journal of Environmental
Quality 17 (4) :707-711.
E-186
-------
184) Payne, G. G., D. C. Martens, E. T. Kornegay, and M. D. Lindemann.1988. Availability and Form o
Copper in Three Soils following Eight Anual Applications of Copper-Enriched Swine Manure. Journal o
Environmental Quality 17 (4) :740-746.
185) Pepper, I. L., D. F. Bezedicek, A. S. Baker, and J. M. Sims.1983. Silage Corn Uptake of
Sludge-Applied Zinc and Cadmium as Affected by Soil pH. Journal of Environmental Quality 12 (2)
.•270-275.
186) Petruzzelli, G., L. Lubrano, and S. Cervelli.1987. Heavy Metal Uptake by Wheat Seedlings Grown ii
Fly Ash-amended Soils. Water. Air, and Soil Pollution 32 .*389-395.
187) Pietz, R. I., J. R. Peterson, C.Lue-hingand and L. F. Welch.1978. Variability in Concentration of
Twelve Elements in Corn Grain. Journal of Environmental Quality 7 (1) :106-110.
188) Pietz, R. I., J. R. Peterson, T. D. Hinesly, E. L. Ziegler, K. E. Redborg, and C. Lue-Hing.1983.
Sewage Sludge Application to Calcareous Strip-Mined spoil: II. Effect on Spoil and Corn Cadmium,
Copper, Nickel, and Zinc. Journal of Environmental Quality 12 (4) :463-467.
189) Poschenrieder, Charlotte, Benet Gunse, and Juan Barcelo.1989. Influence of Cadmium o Water
Relations, Stomatal Resistance, and Abscisic Acid content in expanding bean leaves. Plant Phvsiol. 90
:1365-1371.
190) Powell, M. J., M. S. Davis, and D. Francis.1988. Effects of Zinc on meristem size and proximity of
root hairs and jylem elements to root tip in a Zinc-tolerant and a Non-tolerant Cultivar of Festuca rubra
L. Annals of Botany 61 :723-726.
191) Preer, James R., Harkewal S. Sekhon, Bernard R. Stephens, and Margaret S. Collins.1980. Factors
Affecting Heavy Metal Content of Garden Vegetables. Environmental Pollution 1 :95-104.
192) Proctor. J. and II D. McGowan.1976. Influence of Magnesium on Nickel Toxicity. Nature 260 :134.
193) Prokipcak, B., and D. P. Ormrod.1986. Visible Injury and Growth Response of Tomato and Soybea
to Combinations of Nickel, Copper, and Ozone. Water. Air, and Soil Pollution 27 :329-340.
194) Rai, U. N., and P. Chandra.1989. Removal of heavy meatals from polluted waters by hydrodictyon
reticulatum (linn.) Lagerheim. The Science of the Total Environment 87/88 :509-515.
195) Raj, Hans, and V. K. Gupta.1986. Influence of Organic Manures and Zinc on Wheat Yield and Zn
Concentration in Wheat. Agricultural Wastes 16 :255-263.
196) Rappaport B.D., Martens D.C., Reneau R.B.Jr., and T.W. Simpson.1987. Metal Accumulation in
Corn and Barley Grown on a Sludge-amended Typic Ochraqualf. Journal of Environmental Quality 16
(l):29-33.
197) Rappaport, B.D., Martens D.C., Reneau R.B.,Jr., and T.W. Simpson.1987. Metal Availability in
Sludge-amended Soils Elevated Metal Levels. Journal of Environmental Quality 17 (l):42-47.
198) Rauser, W. E.1973. Zinc Toxicity in Hydroponic Culture. Can. J. Bot. 51 (2): 301-304.
E-187
-------
199) Rauser, W. E. 1978. Early Effects of Phytotoxic Burdens of Cadmium, cobalt, Nickel & zinc in
White Beans. Can. J. Bot. 56 (15) :1744-1749.
200) Reber, H. H.1989. Threshold levels of cadmium for soil respiration and growth of spring wheat
(Triticum aestivum L.) and difficulties with their determination. Biol. Fertil. Soils 7 :152-157.
201) Reddy, M. R., and S. J. Dunn.1983. 'Heavy Metal and Micronutrient Uptake in Soybeans as
Influenced by Sewage Sludge Amendment. The Science of the Total Environment 30 :85-98.
202) Reddy, Muchha R., and Samuel J. Dunn.1986. Heavy-Metal Absorption by Soybean on Sewage
Sludge Treated Soil. J. Aerie. Food Chem. 34 :750-753.
203) Ritter, W. D. and R. P. Eastburn.1978. The Uptake of Heavy Metals from Sewage Sludge applied to
Land by Corn and Soybeans. Communic in Soil Sci. and Plant Anal. 9 (9) :799-811.
204) Robb, J.1981. Early Cytological Effects of zinc Toxicity in White Bean Leaves. Ann. Bot. 47 (6)
:829-834,
205) Ruano, A., Ch. Poschenrieder, and J. Barcelo.1988. Growth and Biomass Partitioning in Zinc-Toxic
Bush Bean. Journal of Plant Nutrition 11 (5):577-588.
206) Sabey, B. R., and W. E. Hart.1975. Land Application of Sewage Sludge: I. Effect on Growth and
Chemical Composition of Plants. Journal of Environmental Quality 4 (2) :252-256.
207) Sadiq, Muhammad.1985. Uptake of Cadmium, Lead, and Nickel by Corn Grown in Contaminated
Soils. Water. Air, and Soil Pollution. 26 :185-190.
208) Salam, M. A., and S. Subramanian.1989. Differential-Effects of Plant Charaters on Grain-Yield
under 2 levels of Zinc Fertilization in Rice. Indian J. Aerie. Sci. 59 (4): 265-266.
209) Samman, Y. and A. Wallace.1983. Possible Plant Toxicity Resulting from High Level Applications ol
Zinc EDTA. J. Plant Nutrition 6 (6) :491-500.
210) Sanders, J. Roger, Stephen P. Mc Grath, and Trevor McM. Adams.1986. Zinc, Copper and Nickel
Concentrations in Ryegrass Grown on Sewage Sludge-contaminated Soils of Different pH. J. Sci. Food
Aerie. 37 .*961-968.
211) Schauer, P. S., W. R. Wright, and J. Pelchat.1980. Sludge-borne Heavy Metal Availability and
Uptake by Vegetable Crops under Field Conditions. Journal of Environmental Quality 9 (1) :69-73.
212) Sheaffer, C. C., A. M. Decker, R. L. Chaney, and L. W. Douglass.1979. Soil Temperature and Sewag
Sludge Effects oh Metals in Crop Tissue and Soils. Journal of Environmental Quality 8 (4) :455-459.
213) Sidle, R.C., J.E. Hook, and L.T. Kardos.1976. Heavy Metal Application and Plant Uptake in a Land
Disposal System for Waste Water. Journal of Environmental Quality 5. (1) :97-102.
214) Sikora, Lawrence J., Rufus L. Chaney, Nicholas H. Frankos, and Charles M. Murray.1980. Metal
Uptake of Crops Grown over Entrenched Sewage Sludge. J. Agric. Food Chem. 28 :1281-1285.
E-188
-------
215) Singh, B. R., and R. P. Narwal.1984. Plant availability of Heavy Metals in Sludge-Treated Soil:
ILMetal Extractability Compared with Plant Metal Uptake. Journal of Environmental Quality 13 (3)
:344-349.
216) Singh, D. N., H. S. Srivastava, and Rana P. Singh.1988. Nitrate assimilation in pea leaves in the
presence of cadmium. Water. Air, and Soil Pollution. 42 :l-5.
217) Singh, J. P., B. Singh, and S. P. S.- Karwasra.1988. Yield & Uptake response od lettuce to Cadmii
as influenced by mitrogen applications. Fert. Res. 18. (1): 49-56.
218) Singh, S. Shah.1981. Uptake of cadmium by lettuce as influenced by its addition to a soil as inorg
forms or in sewage sludge. Can. J. Soil Sci. 61 :19-28.
219) Smeulder, F., A. Cremers. and J. Sinnaeve.1983. In situ Immobilization of Heavy Metals with
Tetraethylonepentamino (tetren) in Natural Soils & its Effect on Toxicity & Plant Growth. II. Effect of
complex Formation with tetren on Copper & Zinc uptake in Corn from Nutrient Solutions. Plant & So
70 (1) :49-57.
220) Smeulders, F., and S. C. Van De Geijn.1983. In situ immobilization of heavy metals with
tetraethylenepentamine (tetren) in natural soils and its effect on toxicity and plant growth. III. Uptake
mobility of copper and its tetren-complex in corn plants. Plant and Soil 70 (1) :59-68.
221) Smilde, K. W., W. Van Driel, and B. Van Luit.1982. Constraints in cropping heavy metal
contaminated fluvial sediments. The Science of the Total Environment 25 :225-244.
222) Smith, G. C., and E. Brennan.1984. Response of Silver Maple Seedlings to an acute dose of Rool
Applied Cadmium. For. Sci. 30 (3) :582-586.
223) Soliman, M. H.1976. Ph-Dependent Heterosis of Heavy Metal-Tolerant & Non-Tolerant Hybrid <
the Monkey Rower Mimilis Guttatus. Nature 262 :49-51.
224) Soon, Y. K., T. E. Bates, and J. R. Moyer.1980. Land Applications of Chemically Treated Sewage
Sludge: III. Effects on soil and Plant Heavy Metal Content. Journal of Environmental Quality 9 (3)
:497-504.
225) Stephenson, T. and J. N. Lester.1987. Heavy metal behaviour during the activated sludge process
Insoluble metal removal mechanisms. The Science of the Total Environment 63 :215-230.
226) Stomberg, A. L., D. D. Hemphill, Jr., and V. V. Volk.1984. Yield and Elemental Concentration c
Sweet Corn Grown on Tannery Waste-Amended Soils. Journal of Environmental Quality 13 (1):162-16<
227) Street, Jimmy J., W.L. Lindsay, and B.R. Sabey.1977. Solubility and Plant Uptake of Cadmium ir
Soil Amended with Cadmium and Sewage Sludge. Journal of Environmental Quality 6 (1) :72-77.
228) Street, Jimmy J., B. R. Sabey, and W.L. Iindsay.1978. Influence of pH, Phosphorus, Cadmium,
Sewage Sludge, and Incubation Time on the Solubility and Plant Uptake of Cadmium. Journal of
Environmental Quality 7 (2) :286-290.
E-189
-------
229) Stroinski, A., and Z. Szczotka.1989. Effect of Cadmium and Phytophthora infestrans on polyamine
levels in potato leaves. Physiol. Plant 77 (2) :244-246.
230) Stucky, Donald J., and Tommie S. Newnan.1977. Effect of Dried Anaerobically Digested Sewage
Sludge on Yield and Element Accumulation in Tall Fescue and Alfalfa. Journal of Environmental Quality
6 (3) :271-274.
231) Swiader, John M.1985. Iron and Zinc absorption characteristics and copper inhibitions in
cucurbitaceae. Journal of Plant Nutrition 8 (10) :921-931.
232) Takkar, P. N., and M. S. Mann.1978. Toxic Levels of Soil & Plant Zinc for Maize and Wheat. Plan
& Soil 49 (3) :667-669.
233) Taleisnikgertel, E. and M. Tal.1986. Potassium Utilization & Fluxed in Wild Salt-Tolerant Relative!
of the Cultivated Tomato. Phvsiologia Plantarum 67 (3): 415-420.
234) Taylor, Gregory J., and Charles D. Foy.1985. Differential uptake and toxicity of ionic and chelated
copper in Triticum aestivum. Can. J. Bot. 63 :1271-1275.
235) Taylor, Gregory J.1987. Exclusion of metals from the symplasm: a possible mechanism of metal
tolerance in higher plants. Journal of Plant Nutrition 10 (9-16): 1213-1222.
236) Taylor, Gregory J.1988. The physiology of aluminum tolerance in higher plants. Commun. in Soil S
Plant Anal. 19 (7-12) :1179-1194.
237) Thompson, J. S., R. L. Harlow, and J. F. Whitney.1983. Copper(I)-olefin coplexes. suppoer for the
proposed role of copper in the ethylene effect in plants. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 105 (11) :3522-3527.
238) Tiwari, R. C., and J. Adinarayana.1985. The effect of rate of application of nitrogen fertilizer on sc
copper uptake by barley under unirrigated conditions. J. Aerie. Sci. 104 :583-587.
239) Touchton, J. T. and F. C. Boswell.1975. Use of sewage sludge as a greenhouse soil amendment. I:
Effects of soil chemical constituents and pH. Agriculture and Environment 2 :229-241.
240) Touchton, J.T., Larry D. King, Henry Bell, and H.D. Morris.1976. Residual Effect of Liquid Sewag
Sludge on Coastal Bermudagrass and Soil Chemical Properties. Journal of Environmental Quality 5 (2)
:161-164.
241) Traynor, Mary F., and Bernard D. Knezek.1973. Effects of Nickel and Cadmium Contaminated
Soils on Nutrient Composition of Corn Plants. Trace Substances in Environmental Health-VII 7 :83-87.
242) Valdares, J. M. A. S., M. Gal, V. Mingelgrin, and A. L. Page.1983. Some Heavy Metals in Soils
Treated with Sewage Sludge,Their Effects on Yield, and their uptake by Plants. Journal of Environments
Quality 12 (1) :49-57.
243) Van Assche, F., C. Cardinaels and H. Clijsters.1988. Induction of Enzyme Capacity in Plants as a
Result of Heavy Metal Toxicity: Dose-Response Relations in Phaseolus Vulgaris L. Treated with Zinc ai
Cadmium. Environmental Pollution 52 :103-115.
E-190
-------
244) Van der Geijin, S. C. and F. Smeulders.1983. In situ Immobilization of Heavy Metals with
Tetraethylonepentamino (tetren) in natural soils & its Effect on Toxicity & Plant Growth. III. Uptake
Mobility of copper & its tetren coplex in Corn Plants. Plant & Soil 70 (1): 59-68.
245) Vlamis, J., D. E. Williams, J. E. Corey, A. L. Page, and T. J. Ganje.1985. Zinc and Cadmium U]
by Barley in Field Plots Fertilized Seven Years with Urban and Suburban Sludge. Soil Science 139 (1)
:81-87.
246) Vlamis, J., D. E. Williams, K. Fong, and J. E. Corey.1987. Metal Uptake by Barley from Field PI
Fertilized with Sludge. Soil Science 126 (1) :49-55.
247) Vocke, R. W., K. L. Sears, J. J. OToole, and R. B. Wildman.1980. Growth Responnses of select
Freshwater Algea to trace elements & scrubber ash slurry generated by coal-fired power plants. Watci
Res. 14 (2) :141-151.
248) Wallace, A., E. M. Romney, J. W. Cha, and S. M. Soufi.1976. Some Effects of Chromium Toxici
on Bush Bean Plants Grown in Soil. Plant & Soil 44 (2) :471-473.
249) Wallace, A., E. M. Romney, J. W. Cha, S. M. Soufi, and F. M. Chaudry.1977. Nickel Phytotoxici
relationship to sc'' pH manipulation & Chelating agents. Communic. in Soil Sci. & Plant Anal. 8 (9)
:757-764.
250) Wallace, A., and R. T. Mueller.1980. Effect of Steam Sterilization of Soil on Trace Metal Toxicil
Bush Beans. J. Plant Nutrition 2 (1-2) :123-126.
251) Wallace, A., E. M. Romney, R. T. Mueller, & O. R. Lunt.1980. Influence of Environmental Stre
on Response of bush Bean Plants to Excess Copper. J. Plant Nutrition 2 (1-2) :39-49.
252) Wallace, A., E. M. Romney, and G. V. Alexander.1981. Miltiple Trace Element Toxicity in Planl
Plant Nutrition 3 (' 1): 257-263.
253) Wallace, A.1984. Effect of Phosphorus Deficiency and Copper Excess on Vegetative Growth of E
Bean Plants in Solution Culture at Two Different Solution pH Levels. Journal of Plant Nutrition 7 (1-'
:603-608.
254) Wallace, Arthur.1989. Interactions of Excesses of Copper and Salinity on Vegetative Growth of E
Beans at Two Different pH levels in Solution Culture. Soil Science 147 (6) :426-429.
255) Wallace, A., arid W. L. Berry.1989. Dose-Response curves for Zinc, Cadmium, & Nickel in
Combinations of one,-two, or three. Soil Sci. 147 (6) :410-410.
256) Walsh, L. M., W. H. Erhardt, and H. D. Seibel.1972. Copper Toxicity in snapbeans. J. Environ.1
1 (2) :197-199.
257) Warman, P. R.1986. Effects of Fertilizer, Pig Manure, and Sewage sludge on Timothy and Soils.
Journal of Environmental Quality 15 (2) :95-100.
E-191
-------
258) Warman, P. R.1990. Fertilization with Manures & Legume Intercrops & their influence on Brassica
& Tomato growth, & on Tissue & Soil Copper, Manganese & Zinc. Biol. Aerie. Hortic. 6 (4): 325-335.
259) Watson, J. E., I. L. Pepper, M. Unger, and W. H. Fuller.1985. Yields and Leaf Elemental
Composition of Cotton Grown on Sludge Amended Soil. Journal of Environmental Quality 14 (2)
:174-177.
260) Webber, L. R., and E. G. Beauchamp.1979. Cadmium concentration and distribution in corn grown
on a calcareous soil for three years after three annual sludge applications. J. Environ. Sci. Health B 14 (5)
:459-474.
261) Wells, N., and J. S. Whitton.1976. Influence of dried digested sewage sludge on yield and element
composition on lucerne. N.Z. Journal of Agricultural Research 19 :331-341.
262) Wells, N., and J. S. Whitton.1977. Element composition of tomatoes grown on four soils mixed with
sewage sludge. Journal of Experimental Agriculture 5 :363-369.
263) Williams, C. H., and D. J. David.1973. The Effect of Phosphate on the Cadmium Content of soils &
Plants. Austr. J. Soil Res. 11 :43-56.
264) Williams, C. H., and D. J. David.1976. The accumulation in Soil of Cadmium residues from
Phosphate Fertilizers & their Effect on the Cadmium content in the Plants. Soil Sci. 121 :86-93.
265) Williams, C. H., and D. J. David.1977. Some effects of Distribution of Cadmium & Phophate in the
root zone on the Cd content of Plants. Austr. J. Soil Res. 15 :59-68.
266) Williams, J. H.1977. Effect of soil pH on the toxicity of zinc and nickel to vegetable crops.
Inorganic pollution and agriculture :211-218.
267) Williams, J. H.1982. Zinc, Copper, and Nickel- Safe Limits in Sludge Treated Soils. Commission o
the European Community's Concerted Action on Treatment and Use of Sewage Sludge at Stevenage.UK.
:l-7.
268) Wong, M. H., W. M. Lau, S. W. Li, and C. K. Tang.1983. Root growth of 2 grass species on iron or
tailings at elevated levels of manganese, Iron, and copper. Env. Research 30 (1) :26-33.
269) Yla-Mononen, Leena, Pekka Salminen, Heikki Wuorenrinne, Esa Tulisalo, and Pekka
Nuorteva.1989. Levels of Fe, Al, Zn, and Cd in Formica aquilonia, F. poluctena and Myrmica ruginodis
(Hymenoptera, Fomicidae) collected in the vicinity of spruces showing different degrees of needle-loss.
Annales Entomoloeici Fennici 55 :57-61.
270) Zwarich, M. A., and J. G. Mills.1979. Effects of Sewage Sludge Application on the Heavy Metal
Content of Wheat and Forage Crops. Can. J. Soil Science 59 (2) :231-239.
271) Zwarich, M. A., and J. G. Mills.1982. Heavy Metal Accumulation by some Vegetable Crops Grown
on Sewage Sludge- Amended Soil. Can. J. Soil. Sci. 62 (May):243-247. .
E-192
-------
APPENDIX F
Phototoxicity Data from Field Experiments with Sludge
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
TABLE F-l CHROMIUM DATA F-l
TABLE F-2 COPPER DATA F49
TABLE F-3 NICKEL DATA F-ll5
TABLE F-4 ZINC DATA F-205
I
-------
TABLE F-1. CHROMHJM DATA
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
LITERATURE
PLANT
SLUDGE
VOLSOUDS
A!
Co
Cd
CITATION
NAME
CULTIVAR
PH
%
%
%
mo/ko
1
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2
HtNESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
3 .
, . HtNESLY 1985
«.:)RN .
3.4
263
4
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
5
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
6
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
7
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
8
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
9
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
10
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
11
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
12
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
13
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
14
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
15
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
16
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
17
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
18
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
19
HINESLY 1985
CORN
A
O.T
263
20
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
21
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
22
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
23
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
24
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
25
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
26
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
27
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
28
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
29
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
30
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
31
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
32
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
33
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
34
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
35
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
36
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
37
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
38
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
ilHUiilkll. F-1
-------
TABLE F-1 (cont.)
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
Cr
Cu
Fa
N
Ni
P
Pb
Zn
SOLIDS
BIOLOGICAL
mn/kfl
mfl/kg
%
%
mq/kfl
mn/kfl
mn/kfl
mo/kq
CONTNT
PROCESSING
1
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
2
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
3
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
4
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
5
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
6
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
7
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
8
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
9
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
10
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
11
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
12
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
13
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
14
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
15
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
16
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
17
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
18
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
19
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
20
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
21
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
22
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
23
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
24
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
25
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
26
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
27
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
28
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
29
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
30
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
31
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
32
2963
. 1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
33
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3£
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
34
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
35
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
36
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
37
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
38
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
F-2
-------
TABLE F-1 (oont.)
SLUDGE
ANNLSLUDGE
CUMML SLUDGE
YEARS
SOIL
son.
SAND
CHEMICAL
LOADNG RATE
LOADNG RATE
SINCE LAST
TAXONOMIC
SERIES
SOIL
CONTENT
STABtUZATN
Mo/ha
Ma/ha
APPLICATN
NAME
NAME
TEXTURE
%
1
CENT POLY. FECU
0
0
NA
BLOUNT
SiL
2
CENT POLY, FECL3
0
0
NA
BLOUNT
SIL
3
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
0
NA
BLOUNT
SiL
4
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
0
NA
BLOUNT
SIL
5
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
0
NA
BLOUNT
SiL
e
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
0
NA
BLOUNT
SiL
7
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
0
NA
BLOUNT
SiL
8
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
0
NA
BLOUNT
SiL
9
CENT POLY, FECL3
0
0
NA
BLOUNT
SiL
10
CENT POLY, FECL3
0
0
NA
BLOUNT
SiL
11
CENT POLY. FECL3
14.5
31.8
0
BLOUNT
SiL
12
CENT POLY. FECL3
11.1
42.9
0
BLOUNT
SiL
13
CENT POLY. FECL3
15.3
58.2
0
BLOUNT
SiL
14
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
58.2
1
BLOUNT
SiL
15
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
58.2
2
BLOUNT
SiL
16
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
58.2
3
BLOUNT
SiL
17
CENT POLY, FECL3
0
58.2
4
BLOUNT
SiL
18
CENT POLY, FECL3
0
58.2
5
BLOUNT
SiL
19
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
58.2
6
BLOUNT
SiL
20
CENT POLY, FECL3
0
58.2
7
BLOUNT
SiL
21
CENT POLY. FECL3
29
63.6
0
BLOUNT
SiL
22
CENT POLY. FECL3
22.2
85.8
0
BLOUNT
SiL
23
CENT POLY. FECL3
30.6
116.4
0
BLOUNT
SiL
24
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
.116.4
1
BLOUNT
SiL
25
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
116.4
2
BLOUNT
SiL
26
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
116.4
3
BLOUNT
SiL
27
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
116.4
4
BLOUNT
SiL
28
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
116.4
5
BLOUNT
SiL
29
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
116.4
6
BLOUNT
SiL
30
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
116.4 '
7
BLOUNT
SiL
31
CENT POLY. FECL3
57.8
127
0
BLOUNT
SiL
32
CENT POLY. FECL3
44.4
171.4
0
BLOUNT
SiL
33
CENT POLY. FECL3
61.1
232.5
0
BLOUNT
SiL
34
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
232.5
1
BLOUNT
SiL
35
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
232.5
1
BLOUNT
SiL
36
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
232.5
1
BLOUNT
SiL
37
CENT POLY, FECL3 .
0
232.5
BLOUNT
SiL
38
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
232.5
1
BLOUNT
SiL
-------
TABLE F-1 (cont.)
SILT
CLAY
SOIL
SOIL
CUMM CR
SOIL CR
PLANT CR
PLANT
CONTENT
CONTENT
CEC
OC
SOIL
LOADING
SOIL
CONCENTRTN
CONCENTRTN
TISSUE
%
%
cmol/kg
%
pH
RATE (kg/ha)
EXTRACTANT
ma/kn
mq/ka
SAMPLED
1
0.85
7.8
0
HCL-HF
39
1
LEAF
2
0.9
6.9
0
HCL-HF
36
1.3
LEAF
3
0.94
7.6
0
HCL-HF
50
0.9
LEAF
4
0.93
7.6
0
HCL-HF
35
<.6
LEAF
5
0.92
7.8
0
HCL-HF
54
0.7
LEAF
6
0.87
7.5
0
HCL-HF
48
<.6
LEAF
7
0.9
7.6
0
HCL-HF
45
1.3
LEAF
8
0.88
7.5
0
HCL-HF
54
<.6
LEAF
9
0.73
7.6
0
HCL-HF
49
<.6
LEAF
10
1
7.4
0
HCL-HF
40
<.1
LEAF
11
1.06
7.7
133
HCL-HF
74
0.8
LEAF
12
1.11
6.9
146
HCL-HF
57
1.5
LEAF
13
1.18
7.5
168
HCL-HF
73
1.2
LEAF
14
1.4
7.5
168
HCL-HF
75
<.6
LEAF
15
1.16
7.6
168
HCL-HF
82
1.6
LEAF
16
1.08
7.5
168
HCL-HF
82
<.6
LEAF
17
1.18
7.7
168
HCL-HF
75
0.8
LEAF
18
1.23
7.6
168
HCL-HF
95
<.6
LEAF
19
1.09
7.5
168
HCL-HF
89
<.6
LEAF
20
1.32
7.3
168
HCL-HF
63
0.2
LEAF
21
1.38
7.6
265
HCL-HF
109
1
LEAF
22
1.12
7
292
HCL-HF
74
1.4
LEAF
23
1.29
7.4
335
HCL-HF
116
1.6
LEAF
24
1.83
7.3
335
HCL-HF
97
0.7
LEAF
25
1.36
7.5
335
HCL-HF
114
0.6
LEAF
26
1.34
7.2
335
HCL-HF
99
0.7
LEAF
27
1.6
7.4
335
HCL-HF
107
0.9
. LEAF
28
1.31
7.3
335
HCL-HF
145
<•6
LEAF
29
1.54
7.1
335
HCL-HF
104
<.6
LEAF
30
1.62
7.1
335
HCL-HF
87
<.1
LEAF
31
1.62
7.6
• 529
HCL-HF
180
1
LEAF
32
1.63
6.8
583
HCL-HF
135
1.1
LEAF
33
1.94
7.3
- 670
HCL-HF
176
1
LEAF
34
2.5
7.2
670
HCL-HF
199
0.6
LEAF
35
1.83
7.3
670
HCL-HF
175
1.2
. LEAF
36
1.88
7.2
670
HCL-HF
175
<.6
LEAF
37
2.03
7.3
670
HCL-HF
180
1.1
LEAF
38
1.6
7.1
670
HCL-HF
207
<.6
LEAF
F-4
-------
TABLE F»1 (oont.)
EXPERIMENTAL
YIELD
YIELD
YIELD
YIELD
PROTOCOL
REDUCTION
COMPONENT
REDUCTION
COMPONENT
METAL
SUMMARY
%
MEASURED
%
MEASURED
PHYTOTOXICITY
•
1
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
2
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
3
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
4
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
5
SLUDGE. HELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
6
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
7
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
8
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
9
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
10
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
11
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
NA
STOVER
NO
12
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
13
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
14
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
15
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
16
SLUDGE. HELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
17
SLUDGE. HELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
18
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
19
SLUDGE, HELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO.
20
SLUDGE, HELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
21
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
NA
STOVER
NO
22
SLUDGE. HELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
23
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
24
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
. STOVER
NO
25
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
28
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
27
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
28
SLUDGE, HELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
29
SLUDGE. HELD. MATURITY
0 •
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
30
SLUDGE, HELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
31
SLUDGE. HELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
NA
STOVER
NO
32
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
33
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
34
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
35
SLUDGE. HELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
36
SLUDGE, HELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
37
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
38
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
-------
TABLE F-1 (cont.)
LOCATION
OF
COMMENTS
STUDY
1
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
2
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
3
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
4
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
5
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
6
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
7
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
8
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
9
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
10
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
11
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
12
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
13
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
14
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
15
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
16
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
17
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
18
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
19
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
20
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
21
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
22
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
23
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
24
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
25
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
26
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
27
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
28
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
29
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
30
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
31
•
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
32
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
33
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
34
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
35
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
36
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
37
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
38
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
-------
TABLE F-1 (oont.)
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
LITERATURE
PLANT
SLUDGE
VOL SOLIDS
Al
Ca
Cd
CITATION
NAME
CULTIVAR
PH
%
%
%
m
-------
TABLE F-1 (cont.)
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
Cr
Cu
Fo
N
Ni
P
Pb
Zn
SOLIDS
BIOLOGICAL
mn/ko
mfl/kfl
%
%
mfl/kn
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
CONTNT
PROCESSING
39
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
40
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
41
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
42
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
43
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
44
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
45
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
46
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
47
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
48
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
49
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
50
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
51
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION -
52
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
53
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
54
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
55
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
56
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
57
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
58
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
59
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
60
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
61
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
62
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
63
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
64
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
65
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
66
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
67
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
68
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
69
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
•3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
70
2963
. 1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
71
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
72
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
73
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
74
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
75
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
76
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
F-8
-------
TABLE F-1 (eonU
SLUDGE
ANNL SLUDGE
CUMML SLUDGE
YEARS
SOIL
SOIL
SAND
CHEMICAL
LOADNG RATE
LOADNG RATE
SINCE LAST
TAXONOMIC
SERIES
SOIL
CONTENT
STABIUZATN
Ma/ha
Mo/ha
APPLICATN
NAME
NAME
TEXTURE
%
39
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
232.5
1
BLOUNT
SiL
40
CENT POLY, FECL3
0
232.5
1
BLOUNT
SiL
41
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
0
NA
ELLIOT
SIL
42
CENT POLY, FECL3
0
0
NA
ELLIOT
SiL
43
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
0
NA
ELUOT
SiL
44
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
0
NA
ELLIOT
SiL
45
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
0
NA
ELLIOT
SiL
48
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
0
NA
ELLIOT
SiL
47
CENT POLY, FECL3
0
0
NA
ELLIOT
SiL
48
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
0
NA
ELLIOT
SiL
49
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
0
NA
ELLIOT
SiL
50
CENT POLY, FECL3
0
0
NA
ELUOT
SIL
51
CENT POLY. FECL3
14.5
31.8
0
ELUOT
SiL'
52
CENT POLY. FECL3
11.1
42.9
0
ELLIOT
SiL
53
CENT POLY, FECL3
15.3
58.2
0
ELLIOT
SiL
54
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
58.2
1
ELLIOT
SiL
55
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
58.2
2
ELUOT
SiL
56
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
58.2
3
ELLIOT
SiL
57
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
58.2
4
ELUOT
SiL
58
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
58.2
5
ELUOT
SiL
59
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
58.2
6
ELUOT
SiL
60
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
58.2
7
ELUOT
SiL
61
CENT POLY, FECL3
29
63.6
0
ELUOT
SiL
62
CENT POLY. FECL3
22.2
85.8
0
ELLIOT
SiL
63
CENT POLY. FECL3
30.6
116.4
0
ELUOT
SiL
64
CENT POLY, FECL3
0
116.4
1
ELUOT
SiL
65
CENT POLY, FECL3
0
116.4
2
ELLIOT
SiL
66
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
116.4
3
ELUOT
SiL
67
CENT POLY, FECL3
0
116.4
4
ELUOT
SiL
68
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
116.4 .
5
ELUOT
SiL
69
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
116.4
6
ELLIOT
SiL
70
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
116.4
7
ELUOT
SiL
71
CENT POLY, FECL3
57.8
127
0
ELLIOT
SiL
72
CENT POLY, FECL3
44.4
171.4
0
ELUOT
SiL
73
CENT POLY. FECL3
61.1
232.5
0
ELUOT
SiL
74
CENT POLY. FECL3
69.8
302.3
0
ELLIOT
SiL
75
CENT POLY. FECL3
54
356.3
0
ELLIOT
SiL
76
CENT POLY, FECL3
72
428.3
0
ELLIOT
SiL
-------
TABLE F-1 (cont.)
SILT
CLAY
SOIL
SOIL
CUMM CR
SOIL CR
PLANT CR
PLANT
CONTENT
CONTENT
CEC
OC
SOIL
LOADING
SOIL
CONCENTRTN
CONCENTRTN
TISSUE
%
%
cmol/kg
%
pH
RATE (kq/ha)
EXTRACTANT
nrifl/kfl
mn/kfl
SAMPLED
39
1.54
7.1
670
HCL-HF
126
<.6
LEAF
40
/
1.84
7
670
HCL-HF
121
0.2
LEAF
41
1.64
7.6
0
HCL-HF
31
1
LEAF
42
1.61
6.8
0
HCL-HF
37
2.2
LEAF
43
1.54
7.2
0
HCL-HF
40
1.1
LEAF
44
1.53
7.2
0
HCL-HF
34
<.6
LEAF
45.
1.54
7
0
HCL-HF
42
2.1
LEAF
46
1.51
7
0
HCL-HF
41
<.6
LEAF
47
1.58
7.4
0
HCL-HF
38
2.7
LEAF
48
1.54
7.2
0
HCL-HF
50
<.6
LEAF
49
1.51
7
0
HCL-HF
60
<.6
LEAF
50
1.62
7
0
HCL-HF
37
<.1
LEAF
51
1.64
7.3
133
HCL-HF
64
1
. LEAF
52
1.84
6.8
146
HCL-HF
73
1.5
LEAF
53
1.74
7.1
168
HCL-HF
65
0.9
LEAF
54
2.18
7.1
223
HCL-HF
73
<.6
LEAF
55
1.86
7.2
266
HCL-HF
74
0.6
LEAF
56
1.67
7.2
321
HCL-HF
74
<.6
LEAF
57
1.83
7.5
321
HCL-HF
88
<.6
LEAF
58
1.55
7.2
321
HCL-HF
90
<.6
LEAF
59
1.68
7
321
HCL-HF
81
0.7
LEAF
60
1.89
7.1
321
HCL-HF
71
<.1
LEAF
61
1.97
7.8
265
HCL-HF
121
1.2
LEAF
62
1.81
7
292
HCL-HF
96
1.3
LEAF
63
1.88
7.3
335
HCL-HF
106
1.4
LEAF
64
2.21
7.3
440
HCL-HF
99
<.6
LEAF
65
1.99
7.4
525
HCL-HF
116
2.9
, LEAF
66
1.89
7.3
635
HCL-HF
112
<.6
LEAF
67
1.94
7.4
635
HCL-HF
102
2.1
LEAF
68
1.72
7.4
635
HCL-HF
155
<.6
LEAF
69
1.79
7.2
• 635
HCL-HF
110
<.6
LEAF
70
1.87
7.2
635
HCL-HF
91
<.1
LEAF
71
2.23
7.5
. 529
HCL-HF
216
1.2
LEAF
72
2.22
6.4
583
HCL-HF
145
1.2
LEAF
73
2.28
6.5
670
HCL-HF
174
1
. LEAF
74
2.61
6.5
880
HCL-HF
188
<.6
LEAF
75
2.74
6.5
1050
HCL-HF
242
1
LEAF
76
2.94
5.9
1269
HCL-HF
248
<.6
LEAF
F-10
-------
TABLE F-1 (cont)
EXPERIMENTAL
YIELD
YIELD
YIELD
YIELD
PROTOCOL
REDUCTION
COMPONENT
REDUCTION
COMPONENT
METAL
SUMMARY
%
MEASURED
%
MEASURED
wrroToxicgY
39
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
40
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
41
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
42
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
43
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
44
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
45
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
46
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
47
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
48
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
49
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
50
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
51
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
NA
STOVER
NO
52
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
53
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
54
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
55
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
58
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
57
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
A
V
STOVER
NO
58
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
59
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
60
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
61
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
NA
STOVER
NO
62
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY.
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
63
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
64
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
65
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
66
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
67
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
68
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0 •
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
69
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
70
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
71
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
NA
STOVER
NO
72
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
73
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
74
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
75
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
76
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
F-11
-------
TABLE F-1 (cont.)
LOCATION
OF
COMMENTS
STUDY
39
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
40
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
41
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
42
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
43
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
44
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
45
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
46
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
47
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
48
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
49
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
50
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
51
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
52
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
53
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
54
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
55
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
56
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
57
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
58
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
59
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
60
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
61
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
62
JOLIET.. ILLINOIS
63
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
64
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
65
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
66
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
67
JOUET. ILLINOIS
68
JOUET. ILLINOIS
69
.
JOUET. ILLINOIS
70
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
71
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
72
JOUET. ILLINOIS
73
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
74
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
75
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
76
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
F-12
-------
TABLE F-1 (oorrt.)
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
LITERATURE
PLANT
SLUDGE
VOLSOUDS
Al
Ca
Cd
CITATION
NAME
CULTIVAR
PH
%
%
%
77
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
78
H1NESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
79
. HINESLY 1985
. ')RN .
3.4
263
80
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
81
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
82
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
83
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
84
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
85
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
86
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
87
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
88
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
89
HINESLY 1985
CORN
• 3.4
263
90
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
91
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
92
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
93
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
94
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
95
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
96
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
97
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
98
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
99
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
100
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
101
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
102
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
103
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
104
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
105
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
106
HINESLY 1985
. CORN
3.4
263
107
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
108
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
109
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
110
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
111
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
112
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
113
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
114
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
F-13
-------
TABLE F-1 (cont.)
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
Cr
Cu
Fe
N
Ni
P
Pb
Zn
SOLIDS
BIOLOGICAL
mfl/ka
ma/kfl
%
%
mq/ka
mn/kn
ma/ka
mq/kn
CONTNT
PROCESSING
77
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
78
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
79
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
80
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
81
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
82
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
83
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
84
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
85
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
86
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
87
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
88
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
89
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
90
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
91
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
92
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
93
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
94
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
505p
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
95
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
96
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
97
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
98
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
99
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
100
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
101
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
102
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
103
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
104
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
105
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
106
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
107
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
•3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
108
2963
. 1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
109
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
110
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
111
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
112
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03.
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
113
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
114
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
F-14
-------
TABLE F-1 (corvt.)
SLUDGE
ANNLSLUDGE
CUMML SLUDGE
YEARS
SOIL
SOIL
SAND
CHEMICAL
LOADNG RATE
LOADNG RATE
SINCE LAST
TAXONOMIC
SERIES
SOIL
CONTENT
STABIUZATN
Ma/ha
Mo /ha
APPLICATN
NAME
NAME
TEXTURE
%
77
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
428.3
1
ELLIOT
SIL
78
CENT POLY, FECL3
0
428.3
2
ELLIOT
SIL
79
CENT POLY, FECL3
0
428.3
3
ELLIOT
SiL
80
CENT POLY, FECL3
0
428.3
4
ELLIOT
SIL
81
CENT POLY, FECL3
0
0
NA
PLAINFIELD
SL
82
CENT POLY, FECL3
o
0
NA
PLAINFIELD
SL
83
CENT POLY, FECL3
0
0
NA
PLAINFIELD
SL
84
CENT POLY, FECL3
0
0
NA
PLAINFIELD
SL
85
CENT POLY, FECL3
0
0
NA.
PLAINFIELD
SL
88
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
0
NA
PLAINFIELD
SL
87
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
0
NA
PLAINFIELD
SL
88
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
0
NA
PLAINFIELD
SL
89
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
0
NA
PLAINFIELD
SL
90
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
0
NA
PLAINFIELD
SL
91
CENT POLY. FECL3
14.5
31.8
0
PLAINFIELD
SL
92
CENT POLY, FECL3
11.1
42.9
0
PLAINFIELD
SL
93
CENT POLY. FECL3
15.3
58.2
0
PLAINFIELD
SL
94
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
58.2
1
PLAINFIELD
SL
95
CENT POLY, FECL3
0
58.2
2
PLAINFIELD
SL
96
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
58.2
3
PLAINFIELD
SL
97
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
58.2
4
PLAINFIELD
SL
98
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
58.2
5
PLAINFIELD
SL
99
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
58.2
6
PLAINFIELD
SL
100
CENT POLY, FECL3.
0
58.2
7
PLAINFIELD
SL
101
CENT POLY. FECL3
29
63.6
0
PLAINFIELD
SL
102
CENT POLY, FECL3
22.2
85.8
0
PLAINFIELD
SL
103
CENT POLY, FECL3
30.6
116.4
0
PLAINFIELD
SL
104
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
116.4
1
PLAINFIELD
SL
105
CENT POLY, FECL3
0
116.4
2
PLAINFIELD
SL
106
CENT POLY, FECL3
0
116.4'
3
PLAINFIELD
SL
107
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
116.4
4
PLAINFIELD
SL
108
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
116.4
5
PLAINFIELD
SL
109
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
116.4
6
PLAINFIELD
SL
110
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
116.4
7
PLAINFIELD
SL
111
CENT POLY. FECL3
57.8
127
0
PLAINFIELD
SL
112
CENT POLY, FECL3
44.4
171.4
0
PLAINFIELD
SL
113
CENT POLY, FECL3
61.1
232.5
0
PLAINFIELD
SL
114
CENT POLY, FECL3
69.8
302.3
0
PLAINFIELD
SL
F-15
-------
TABLE F-1 (cont.)
SILT
CLAY
SOIL
SOIL
CUMM CR
SOIL CR
PLANT CR
PLANT
CONTENT
CONTENT
CEC
OC
SOIL
LOADING
SOIL
CONCENTRTN
CONCENTRTN
TISSUE
%
%
cmol/kg
%
pH
RATE (kfl/ha)
EXTRACTANT
ma/ka
ma/ka
SAMPLED
77
3.92
5.9
1269
HCL-HF
294
0.6
LEAF
78
3.77
5.8
1269
HCL-HF
432
<.6
LEAF
79
2.6
6.1
1269
HCL-HF
193
0.6
LEAF
80
3.2
6.1
1269
HCL-HF
220
0.2
LEAF
81
0.39
7.8
0
HCL-HF
22
1.1
LEAF
82
0.17
7.1
0
HCL-HF
16
1.4
LEAF
83
0.26
7.3
0
HCL-HF
23
1
LEAF
84
0.27
6.8
0
HCL-HF
25
<.6
LEAF
85
0.33
7.6
0
HCL-HF
31
0.8
LEAF
86
0.27
7.5
0
HCL-HF
22
<.6
LEAF
87
0.29
7.5
0
HCL-HF
16
2.4
LEAF
88
0.42
7.4
0
HCL-HF
29
<.6
LEAF
89
0.49
7.4
0
HCL-HF
38
0.7
. LEAF
90
0.64
7.3
0
HCL-HF
25
0.2
LEAF
91
0.36
7.6
133
HCL-HF
67
1.2
LEAF
92
0.28
7.1
146
HCL-HF
38
0.9
LEAF
93
0.61
7.4
168
HCL-HF
48
1.2
LEAF
94
0.91
7.3
223
HCL-HF
58
0.7
LEAF
95
0.56
7.4
266
HCL-HF
59
0.8
LEAF
96
0.58
7.1
321
HCL-HF
55
<.6
LEAF
97
0.45
7.5
321
HCL-HF
43
1.3
LEAF
98
0.34
7.7
321
HCL-HF
55
<.6
LEAF
99
0.47
7.4
321
HCL-HF
85
0.6
LEAF
100
0.83
7.4
321
HCL-HF
52
0.6
LEAF
101
0.58
7.5
265
HCL-HF
129
1.7
LEAF
102
0.44
6.9
292
HCL-HF
56
1.4
LEAF
103
0.81
7.1
. 335
HCL-HF
83
1
LEAF
104
0.95
6.8
440
HCL-HF
83
0.6
LEAF
105
0.75
7.1
525
HCL-HF
103
1.3
LEAF
106
0.96
7.1
635
HCL-HF
69
<•6
LEAF
107
0.59
6.9
635
HCL-HF
91
1.3
LEAF
108
0.89
7
635
HCL-HF
90
<.6
LEAF
109
0.81
7.1
- 635
HCL-HF
105
0.8
LEAF
110
0.52
7.1
635
HCL-HF
39
<.1
LEAF
111
0.9
7.6
529
HCL-HF
273
1
. LEAF
112
0.6
6.6
583
HCL-HF
93
1.1
LEAF
113
2.4
6.8
670
HCL-HF
226
1.2
LEAF
114
1.85
6.5
880
HCL-HF
93
<.6
LEAF
F-16
-------
TABLE F-l (cont)
EXPERIMENTAL
YIELD
YIELD
YIELD
YIELD
PROTOCOL
REDUCTION
COMPONENT
REDUCTION
COMPONENT
METAL
SUMMARY
%
MEASURED
%
MEASURED
PHYTOTOXICITY
77
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY '
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
78
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
79
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
80
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
81
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
NA
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
82
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
83
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
84
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
85
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
86
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
87
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
88
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
89
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
90
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
91
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
NA
STOVER
NO
92
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
93
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
94
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
95
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
98
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
97
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
98
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
99
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
100
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
101
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
NA
GRAIN
NA
STOVER
NO
102
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
103
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
104
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
105
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
106
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0 .
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
107
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
108
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
109
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
110
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
.0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
111
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
NA
GRAIN
NA
STOVER
NO
112
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
113
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
114
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
F-17
-------
TABLE F-1 (cont.)
LOCATION
OF
COMMENTS
STUDY
77
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
78
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
79
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
80
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
81
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
82
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
83
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
84
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
85
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
86
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
87
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
88
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
89
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
90
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
91
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
92
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
93
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
94
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
95
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
96
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
97
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
98
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
99
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
100
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
101
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
102
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
103
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
104
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
105
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
106
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
107
.
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
108
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
109
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
110
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
111
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
112
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
113
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
114
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
F-18
-------
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
«
too
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
TABLE F-1 (cortt.)
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
LITERATURE
PLANT
SLUDGE
VOL SOLIDS
Al
Ca
CITATION
NAME
CULTIVAR
j*L
%
%
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
HINESLY 1985
HINESLY 1985
HINESLY 1985
TORN
(. JRN
CORN
3.4
3.4
3.4
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
C.1 a
-------
TABLE F-1 (cont.)
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
Cr
Cu
Fe
N
Ni
P
Pb
Zn
SOLIDS
BIOLOGICAL
mg/ka
ma/kg
%
%
mg/ka
mg/kg
mg/ka
mg/ka
CONTNT
PROCESSING
115
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
116
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
117
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
118
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
119
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
120
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
121
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
122
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
123
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
124
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
125
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
126
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
127
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
128
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
129
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
130
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
131
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
132
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
133
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
134
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
135
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
136
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
137
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
138
2846
1311
4.2 .
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
. 2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
139
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
140
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
141
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
142
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
143
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
144
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
145
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
146
2846
. 1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
147
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
148
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
149
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
150
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
151
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
152
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
F-20
-------
TABLE F-1 (cont.)
SLUDGE
ANNLSLUDGE
CUMML SLUDGE
YEARS
SOIL
SOIL
SAND
CHEMICAL
LOADNG RATE
LOADNG RATE
SINCE LAST
TAXONOVKC
SERIES
SOIL
CONTENT
STABIUZATN
Mfl/ha
Ma/ha
APPLICATN
NAME
NAME
TEXTURE
*
115
CENT POLY. FECL3
54
356.3
0
PLAINFIELD
SL
116
CENT POLY, FECL3
72
428.3
0
PLAINFIELD
SL
117
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
428.3
1
PLAINFIELD
SL
118
CENT POLY, FECL3
0
428.3
2
PLAINFIELD
SL
119
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
428.3
3
PLAINFIELD
SL
120
CENT POLY, FECL3
0
428.3
4
PLAINFIELD
SL
121
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
0
NA
BLOUNT
SIL
122
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
0
NA
BLOUNT
SiL
123
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
0
NA
BLOUNT
SiL
124
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
0
NA
BLOUNT
SiL
125
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
0
NA
BLOUNT
SiL
126
CENT POLY. FECL3
26.2
40.1
0
BLOUNT
SiL
127
CENT POLY. FECL3
8.1
48.2
0
BLOUNT
SiL"
128
CENT POLY. FECL3
14.7
62.9
0
BLOUNT
SiL
129
CENT POLY. FECL3
17.7
80.6
0
BLOUNT
SiL
130
CENT POLY. FECL3
13.1
93.7
0
BLOUNT
SiL
131
CENT POLY. FECL3
52.4
80.2
0
BLOUNT
SiL
132
CENT POLY. FECL3
16.2
96.4
0
BLOUNT
SiL
133
CENT POLY. FECL3
29.4
125.8
0
BLOUNT
SiL
134
CENT POLY. FECL3
35.4
161.2
0
BLOUNT
SiL
135
CENT POLY. FECL3
26.2
187.4
0
BLOUNT
SiL
136
CENT POLY. FECL3
104.8
160.4
0
BLOUNT
SiL
137
CENT POLY. FECL3
32.4
192.8
0
BLOUNT
SiL
138
CENT POLY. FECL3
58.8 .
251.6
0
BLOUNT
SiL
139
CENT POLY. FECL3
70.8
322.4
0
BLOUNT
SiL
140
CENT POLY. FECL3
52.4
374.8
0
BLOUNT
SiL
141
CENT POLY, FECL3
0
0
NA
ELUOT
SiL
142
CENT POLY, FECL3
0
0
NA
ELLIOT
SiL
143
CENT POLY, FECL3
0
0
NA
EULIOT
SiL
144
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
0
NA
ELUOT
SiL
145
CENT POLY, FECL3
0
0
NA
ELUOT
SiL
146
CENT POLY, FECL3
0
0
NA
ELUOT
SiL
147
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
0
NA
ELUOT
. SiL
148
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
0
NA
ELUOT
SiL
149
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
0
NA
ELLIOT
SiL
150
CENT POLY, FECL3
0
0
NA
ELLIOT
SiL
151
CENT POLY, FECL3
0
0
NA
ELUOT
SiL
152
CENT POLY. FECL3
26.2
40.1
0
ELLIOT
SiL
F-21
-------
TABLE F-1 (cont.)
SILT
CLAY
SOIL
SOIL
CUMM CR
SOIL CR
PLANT CR
PLANT
CONTENT
CONTENT
CEC
OC
SOIL
LOADING
SOIL
CONCENTRTN
CONCENTRTN
TISSUE
%
%
cmol/kg
%
pH
RATE (kg/ha)
EXTRACTANT
mg/kg
mg/kg
SAMPLED
115
1.78
6.1
1050
HCL-HF
218
1.3
LEAF
116
1.96
6.2
1269
HCL-HF
224
0.7
LEAF
117
2.84
6
1269
HCL-HF
268
0.9
LEAF
118
3.35
5.9
1269
HCL-HF
522
<.6
LEAF
119
2.1
6.2
1269
HCL-HF
234
<.6
LEAF
120
3.03
6.1
1269
HCL-HF
352
0.3
LEAF
121
1.19
NA
0
HCL-HF
36
1
LEAF
122
1.01
7.1
0
HCL-HF
28
1.1
LEAF
123
0.93
7.5
0
HCL-HF
47
1.2
LEAF
124
1.05
7.7
0
HCL-HF
40
0.6
LEAF
125
1.07
7.3
0
HCL-HF
47
0.9
LEAF
126
1.29
NA
138
HCL-HF
54
1
LEAF
127
1.06
7.2
148
HCL-HF
50
1.1
LEAF
128
1.1
7.6
167
HCL-HF
83
0.9
LEAF
129
1.29
7.6
218
HCL-HF
71
0.6
LEAF
130
1.17
7.6
261
HCL-HF
103
1.3
LEAF
131
1.38
NA
276
HCL-HF
71
1
LEAF
132
1.15
7.1
296
HCL-HF
56
0.9
LEAF
133
1.29
7.6
334
HCL-HF
95
1.6
LEAF
134
1.58
7.6
436
HCL-HF
93
<.6
LEAF
135
1.75
7.5
521
HCL-HF
146
0.7
LEAF
136
1.63
NA
551
HCL-HF
110
1
LEAF
137
1.28
6.9
591
HCL-HF
96
1.1
LEAF
138
1.59
7.5
667
HCL-HF
150 .
1.1
LEAF
139
1.9
7.5
872
HCL-HF
142
0.7
LEAF
140
2.56
7.3
1042
HCL-HF
329
0.7
LEAF
141
1.51
NA
0
HCL-HF
31
0.9
LEAF
142
1.34
7
0
HCL-HF
27
1
LEAF
143
1.29
7.2
0
HCL-HF
47
1.2
LEAF
144
1.45
7.1
0
HCL-HF
35
0.9
LEAF
145
1.3
7.6
0
HCL-HF
48
<.6
LEAF
146
1.3
7
0
HCL-HF
48
<.6
LEAF
147
1.41
7.2
. o
HCL-HF
45
<.6
LEAF
148
1.32
6.7
0
HCL-HF
49
<.6
LEAF
149
1.38
7
0
HCL-HF
44
<.6
. LEAF
150
1.69
7
0
HCL-HF
38
0.2
LEAF
151
1.48
7.4
0
HCL-HF
45
NA
LEAF
152
1.52
NA
138
HCL-HF
53
1
LEAF
F-22
-------
TABLE F-1 (cont.)
EXPERIMENTAL
YIELD
YIELD
YIELD
YIELD
PROTOCOL
REDUCTION
COMPONENT
REDUCTION
COMPONENT
METAL
SUMMARY
%
MEASURED
%
MEASURED
PHYTOTOXICITY
115
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY '
0
. GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
116
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
117
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
118
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
119
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
120
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
121
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
NA
STOVER
NO
122
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
123
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
124
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
125
SLUDGE. HELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
126
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
NA
STOVER
NO
127
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
Nb
128
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
37*
STOVER
•NO
129
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
60*
GRAIN
0
STOVER
•NO
130
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
28*
GRAIN
0
STOVER
•NO
131
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
NA
STOVER
NO
132
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
133
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
(I
CM
CM
i
STOVER
9N0
134
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
135
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
136
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
NA
STOVER
NO
137
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
138
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
139
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
140
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
141
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
NA
STOVER
NO
142
SLUDGE, HELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
143
SLUDGE, HELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
144
SLUDGE. HELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
145
SLUDGE, HELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
146
SLUDGE. HELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
147
SLUDGE, HELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
148
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
149
SLUDGE. HELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
150
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
151
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
152
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
NA
STOVER
NO
-------
TABLE F-1 (cont.)
LOCATION
OF
COMMENTS
STUDY
115
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
116
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
117
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
118
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
119
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
120
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
121
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
122
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
123
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
124
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
125
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
126
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
127
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
128
•DOSE RESPONSE AND TISSUE CR CONCENTRATION NOT CONSISTENT
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
129
*DOSE RESPONSE AND TISSUE CR CONCENTRATION NOT CONSISTENT
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
130
¦DOSE RESPONSE AND TISSUE CR CONCENTRATION NOT CONSISTENT
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
131
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
132
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
133
*DOSE RESPONSE AND TISSUE CR CONCENTRATION NOT CONSISTENT
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
134
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
135
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
136
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
137
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
138
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
139
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
140
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
141
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
142
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
143
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
144
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
145
.
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
146
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
147
\ ,
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
148
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
149
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
150
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
151
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
152
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
F-24
-------
TABLE F-1 (oonU
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
LITERATURE
PLANT
SLUDGE
VOL SOUDS
Al
Ca
Cd
CITATION
NAME
CULT1VAR
PH
%
%
%
mg/kg
153
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
154
H1NESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
155
HINESLY 1985
» )RN .
3.2
265
156
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
157
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
158
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
159
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
160
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
161
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
162
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
163
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
164
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
165
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
166
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
167
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
168
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
169
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
170
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
171
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
172
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
173
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
174
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
175
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
176
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
.265
177
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
178
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
179
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
180
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
181
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
182
HINESLY 1985
. CORN
3.2
265
183
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
184
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
185
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
186
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
187
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
188
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
189
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
190
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
F-25
-------
TABLE F-1 (cont.)
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
Cr
Cu
Fe
N
Ni
P
Pb
Zn
SOLIDS
BIOLOGICAL
mg/kg
ma/ka
%
%
mq/kn
ma/ka
mq/ka
mo/ka
CONTNT
PROCESSING
153
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
154
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
155
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
156
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
157
2846
1311
4.2 .
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
158
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
159
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
160
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
161
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
162
2846
• 1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
163
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
164
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
165
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
166
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
167
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
168
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
169
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
170
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
171
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
172
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
173
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
174
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
175
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
176 :
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
: 1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
177
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
178
2840
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
179
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
180
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
181
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
182
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
183
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
184
2846
. 1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
185
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
186
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
187
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
188
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
189
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
190
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
F-26
-------
TABLE F-1 (oofit.)
SLUDGE
ANNLSLUDGE
CUMML SLUDGE
YEARS
SOIL
SOIL
SAND
CHEMICAL
LOADNG RATE
LOADNG RATE
SINCE LAST
TAXONOMJC
SERIES
SOIL
CONTENT
STABIUZATN
Mo/ha
Mg/ha
APPLICATN
NAME
NAME
TEXTURE
%
153
CENT POLY, FECL3
8.1
48.2
0
ELLIOT
SIL
154
CENT POLY, FECL3
14.7
62.9
0
ELUOT
SiL
155
CENT POLY. FECL3
17.7
80.6
0
ELLIOT
SIL
156
CENT POLY. FECL3
13.1
93.7
0
ELUOT
SiL
157
CENT POLY. FECL3
17.8
111.5
0
ELUOT
SiL
158
CENT POLY, FECL3
0
111.5
1
ELUOT
SiL
159
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
111.5
2
ELUOT
SiL
160
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
111.5
3
ELUOT
SiL
161
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
111.5
4
ELUOT
SiL
162
CENT POLY, FECL3
0
111.5
5
ELLIOT
SiL
163
CENT POLY. FECL3
52.4
80.2
0
ELUOT
SiL
164
CENT POLY. FECL3
16.2
96.4
0
ELUOT
SiL
165
CENT POLY, FECL3
29.4
125.8
0
ELUOT
SiL'
166
CENT POLY. FECL3
35.4
161.2
0
ELUOT
SiL
167
CENT POLY. FECL3
26.2
187.4
0
ELUOT
SiL
168
CENT POLY. FECL3
35.6
223
0
ELUOT
SiL
169
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
223
1
ELUOT
SiL
170
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
223
2
ELUOT
SiL
171
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
223
3
ELUOT
SiL
172
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
223
4
ELUOT
SiL
173
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
223
5
ELUOT
SiL
174
CENT POLY. FECL3
104.8
160.4
0
ELUOT
SiL
175
CENT POLY. FECL3
32.4
192.8
0
ELUOT
SiL
176
CENT POLY, FECL3
58.8
251.6
0
ELUOT
SiL
177
CENT POLY. FECL3
70.8
322.4
0
ELUOT
SiL
178
CENT POLY. FECL3
52.4
374.8
0
ELUOT
SiL
179
CENT POLY, FECL3
71.2
446
0
ELUOT
SiL
180
CENT POLY, FECL3
0
446
1
ELLIOT
SiL
181
CENT POLY, FECL3
0
446
2
ELUOT
SiL
182
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
446 ¦
3
ELUOT
SiL
183
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
446
4
ELUOT
SiL
184
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
446
5
ELUOT
SiL
185
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
0
NA
PLAINFIELD
SL
186
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
0
NA
PLAINFIELD
SL
187
CENT POLY, FECL3
0
0
NA
PLAINFIELD
SL
188
CENT POLY, FECL3
0
0
NA
PLAINFIELD
SL
189
CENT POLY, FECL3
0
0
NA
PLAINFIELD
SL
190
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
0
NA
PLAINFIELD
SL
F-27
-------
TABLE F-1 (cont.)
SILT
CLAY
SOIL
SOIL
CUMM CR
SOIL CR
PLANT CR
PLANT
CONTENT
CONTENT
CEC
OC
SOIL
LOADING
SOIL
CONCENTRTN
CONCENTRTN
TISSUE
%
%
cmol/kg
%
pH
RATE (kg/ha)
EXTRACTANT
mo/kfl
ma/ka
SAMPLED
153
1.4
6.9
148
HCL-HF
42
0.9
LEAF
154
1.35
7.2
167
HCL-HF
64
1.7
LEAF
155
1.58
7.4
218
HCL-HF
65
2
LEAF
156
1.54
7.1
261
HCL-HF
84
<.6
LEAF
157
1.64
6.9
318
HCL-HF
99
0.6
LEAF
158
1.69
6.9
318
HCL-HF
94
1.4
LEAF
159
1.91
7
318
HCL-HF
116
<.6
LEAF
160
1.66
7.3
318
HCL-HF
110
<.6
LEAF
161
2.05
7.1
318
HCL-HF
¦100
<.1
LEAF
162
1.95
7.2
318
HCL-HF
78
NA
LEAF
163
1.71
NA
276
HCL-HF
65
1.1
LEAF
164
1.57
6.9
296
HCL-HF
51
1
LEAF
165
1.57
7.3
334
HCL-HF
85
1.6
LEAF
166
1.79
7.1
436
HCL-HF
83
0.9
' LEAF
167
1.93
6.9
521
HCL-HF
117
<.6
LEAF
168
2.09
6.6
634
HCL-HF
99
1.2
LEAF
169
2.37
6.4
634
HCL-HF
145
1
LEAF
170
2.4
6.4
634
HCL-HF
235
1.8
LEAF
171
2.4
6.8
634
HCL-HF
173
<.6
LEAF
172
2.38
6.8
634
HCL-HF
122
0.2
LEAF
173
2.48
7.2
634
HCL-HF
131
NA
LEAF
174
2.06
NA
551
HCL-HF
91
1
LEAF
175
2
6.4
591
HCL-HF
106
1.1
LEAF
176 :
1.76
6.4
667
HCL-HF
106
1.9
LEAF
177
2.67
6.2
872
HCL-HF
149
0.6
LEAF
178
2.72
6.1
1042
HCL-HF
235
0.8
LEAF
179
3.53
5.4
1268
HCL-HF
311
1.9
LEAF
180
3.35
5.5
1268
HCL-HF
272
0.6
LEAF
181
3.29
5.8
1268
HCL-HF
314
2.6
LEAF
182
2.68
6
1268
HCL-HF
207
<.6
LEAF
183
3.02
6
1268
HCL-HF
179
0.2
LEAF
184
2.2
6.3
1268
HCL-HF
132
NA
LEAF
185
0.36
NA
0
HCL-HF
12
1.1
LEAF
186
0.17
7
0
HCL-HF
13
1.4
LEAF
187
0.21
7.2
0
HCL-HF
22
1.2
. LEAF
188
0.42
7.1
0
HCL-HF
19
<.6
LEAF
189
0.44
7
0
HCL-HF
29
<.6
LEAF
190
0.56
6.9
0
HCL-HF
15
<.6
LEAF
F-28
-------
TABLE F-1 (conU
EXPERIMENTAL
YIELD
YIELD
YIELD
YIELD
PROTOCOL
REDUCTION
COMPONENT
REDUCTION
COMPONENT
METAL
SUMMARY
%
MEASURED
%
MEASURED
PHYTOTOXICITY
153
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
154
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
155
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
60*
GRAIN
0
STOVER
•NO
156
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
28*
GRAIN
0
STOVER
•NO
157
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
158
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
159
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
160
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
161
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
162
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
163
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
NA
STOVER
NO
164
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
165
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
16S
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
167
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
168
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
169
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
170
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
171
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
172
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
173
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
174
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
NA
STOVER
NO
175
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
176
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
: NO
177
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
178
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
179
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
180
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
181
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
182
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
183
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
184
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
185
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
NA
STOVER
NO
186
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
187
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
188
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
189
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
190
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
F-29
-------
TABLE F-1 (cont.)
LOCATION
OF
COMMENTS
STUDY
153
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
154
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
155
•DOSE RESPONSE AND TISSUE CR CONCENTRATION NOT CONSISTENT
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
156
*DOSE RESPONSE AND TISSUE CR CONCENTRATION NOT CONSISTENT
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
157
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
158
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
159
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
160
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
161
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
162
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
163
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
164
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
165
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
166
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
167
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
168
JOLIET. ILLINOIS.
169
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
170
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
171
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
172
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
173
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
174
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
175
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
176
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
177
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
178
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
179
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
180
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
181
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
182
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
183
.
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
184
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
185
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
186
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
187
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
188
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
189
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
190
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
F-30
-------
TABLE F-1 (oont.)
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
LITERATURE
PLANT
SLUDGE
VOL SOLIDS
Al
Ca
Cd
CITATION
NAME
CULTIVAR
PH
%
%
%
ma/ka
191
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
192
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
193
HINESLY 1985
w RN .
3.2
265
194
• 1 HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
195
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
196
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
197
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
198
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
199
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
200
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
201
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
202
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
203
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
204
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
20S
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
206
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
207
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
208
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
209
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
210
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
211
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
212
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
213
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
214
HINESLY: 1985
CORN
3.2
265
215
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
216
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
217
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
218
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
219
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
220
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
221
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
222
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
223
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
224
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
225
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
226
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
227
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
228
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
P-31 ,
-------
TABLE F-1 (cont.)
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
Cr
Cu
Fe
N
Ni
P
Pb
Zn
SOUDS
BIOLOGICAL
mg/kg
mg/kg
%
%
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
CONTNT
PROCESSING
191
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
192
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
193
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
194
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
195
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
196
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
197
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
198
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
199
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT,. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
200
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
201
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
202
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
203
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
204
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
205
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
206
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
207
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
208
2846
• 1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
209
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
210
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
211
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
212
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
213
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
214
2846
1311
4.2
: 5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
215
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
216
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
217
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
218
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
219
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
220
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
221
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
• 3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
222
2846
. 1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
223
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
. 3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
224
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
225
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
226
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03.
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
227
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
228
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
F-32
-------
TABLE F-1 (cont.)
SLUDGE
ANNLSLUDGE
CUMML SLUDGE
YEARS
SOIL
SOIL
SAND
CHEMICAL
LOADNG RATE
LOADNG RATE
SINCE LAST
TAXONOMIC
SERIES
SOIL
CONTENT
STABIUZATN
Mg/ha
Mg/ha
APPUCATN
NAME
NAME
TEXTURE
%
191
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
0
NA
PLAINFIELD
SL
192
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
0
NA
PLAINFIELD
SL
193
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
0
NA
PLAINFIELD
SL
194
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
0
NA
PLAINFIELD
SL
195
CENT POLY, FECL3
0
0
NA
PLAINFIELD
SL
196
CENT POLY, FECL3
26.2
40.1
0
PLAINFIELD
SL
197
CENT POLY. FECL3
8.1
48.2
0
PLAINFIELD
SL
198
CENT POLY. FECL3
14.7
62.9
0
PLAINFIELD
SL
199
CENT POLY. FECL3
17.7
80.6
0
PLAINFIELD
SL
200
CENT POLY. FECL3
13.1
93.7
0
PLAINFIELD
SL
201
CENT POLY. FECL3
17.8
111.5
0
PLAINFIELD
SL
202
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
111.5
1
PLAINFIELD
SL
203
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
111.5
2
PLAINFIELD
SL'
204
CENT POLY, FECL3
0
111.5
3
PLAINFIELD
SL
205
CENT POLY, FECL3
0
111.5
4
PLAINFIELD
SL
206
CENT POLY, FECL3
0
111.5
5
PLAINFIELD
SL
207
CENT POLY. FECL3
52.4
80.2
0
PLAINFIELD
SL
208
CENT POLY. FECL3
16.2
96.4
0
PLAINFIELD
SL
209
CENT POLY. FECL3
29.4
125.8
0
PLAINFIELD
SL
210
CENT POLY. FECL3
35.4
161.2
0
PLAINFIELD
SL
211
CENT POLY, FECL3
26.2
187.4
0
PLAINFIELD
SL
212
CENT POLY. FECL3
35.6
223
0
PLAINFIELD
SL
213
CENT POLY, FECL3
0
223
1
PLAINFIELD
SL
214
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
223
2 :
PLAINFIELD
SL
215
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
223
3
PLAINFIELD
SL
216
CENT POLY, FECL3
0
223
4
PLAINFIELD
SL
217
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
223
5
PLAINFIELD
SL
218
CENT POLY, FECL3
104.8
160.4
0
PLAINFIELD
SL
219
CENT POLY, FECL3
32.4
192.8
0
PLAINFIELD
SL
220
CENT POLY. FECL3
58.8
251.6 .
0
PLAINFIELD
SL
221
CENT POLY. FECL3
70.8
322.4
0
PLAINFIELD
SL
222
CENT POLY, FECL3
52.4
374.8
0
PLAINFIELD
SL
223
CENT POLY. FECL3
71.2
446
0
PLAINFIELD
SL
224
CENT POLY, FECL3
0
446
1
PLAINFIELD
SL
225
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
446
2
PLAINFIELO
SL
226
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
446
3
PLAINFIELD
SL
227
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
446
4
PLAINFIELD
SL
228
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
446
5
PLAINFIELD
SL
F-33
-------
TABLE F-1 (cont.)
SILT
CLAY
SOIL
SOIL
CUMM CR
SOIL CR
PLANT CR
PLANT
CONTENT
CONTENT
CEC
OC
SOIL
LOADING
SOIL
CONCENTRTN
CONCENTRTN
TISSUE
%
%
cmol/kg
%
pH
RATE (kg/ha)
EXTRACTANT
ma/kq
ma/kg
SAMPLED
191
0.48
7
0
HCL-HF
34
0.8
LEAF
192
0.75
7
0
HCL-HF
54
1.2
LEAF
193
0.76
7
0
HCL-HF
46
0.7
LEAF
194
1.21
6.9
0
HCL-HF
46
0.4
LEAF
195
0.84
7.1
0
HCL-HF
53
NA
LEAF
196
0.31
NA
138
HCL-HF
29
1.2
LEAF
197
0.44
7.2
148
HCL-HF
37
1.4
LEAF
198
0.63
7.3
167
HCL-HF
68
1.2
LEAF
199
0.67
7.5
218
HCL-HF
52
1.2
LEAF
200
0.78
7
261
HCL-HF
97
1.3
LEAF
201
0.8
7
318
HCL-HF
87
1.7
LEAF
202
0.99
6.6
318
HCL-HF
105
6.2
LEAF
203
1.42
7.1
318
HCL-HF
135
0.9
LEAF
204
1.71
7.2
318
HCL-HF
179
<.6
LEAF
205
1.82
7.2
318
HCL-HF
153
0.8
LEAF
206
1.96
7.1
318
HCL-HF
119
NA
LEAF
207
0.43
NA
276
HCL-HF
47
1.5
LEAF
208
0.51
7.1
296
HCL-HF
60
1
LEAF
209
0.94
7
334
HCL-HF
106
1.2
LEAF
210
1.16
7.2
436
HCL-HF
102
0.8
LEAF
211
1.4
7
521
HCL-HF
151
4
LEAF
212
1.75
6.4
634
HCL-HF
183
0.8
LEAF
213
2
6.3
634
HCL-HF
189
0.8
LEAF
214
2.16
6.8
634
HCL-HF
207
<.6
: LEAF
215
2.02
6.8
634
HCL-HF
250
0.7
LEAF
216
2.33
7.1
634
. HCL-HF
212
<.1
LEAF
217
1.66
7
634
HCL-HF
199
NA
. LEAF
218
0.73
NA
551
HCL-HF
115
1
LEAF
219
0.57
6.8
591
HCL-HF
75
1.3
LEAF
220
1.3
6.7
667
HCL-HF
136
1.2
LEAF
221
1.42
6.6
. 872
HCL-HF
169
0.8
LEAF
222
2.4
6.4
1042
HCL-HF
341
<.6
LEAF
223
2.76
6.1
. 1268
HCL-HF
327
0.6
LEAF
224
3.44
5.8
1268
HCL-HF
344
3.6
LEAF
225
3.16
5.9
1268
HCL-HF
452
1.3
. LEAF
226
3.28
6.2
1268
HCL-HF
334
0.7
LEAF
227
3.1
6.4
1268
HCL-HF
347
<.1
LEAF
228
3.15
6.5
1268
HCL-HF
379
NA
LEAF
F-34
-------
TABLE F-1 (corn.)
EXPERIMENTAL
YIELD
YIELD
YIELD
YIELD
PROTOCOL
REDUCTION
COMPONENT
REDUCTION
COMPONENT
METAL
SUMMARY
%
MEASURED
%
MEASURED
PHYTOTOXICITY
191
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
192
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
193
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
194
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
195
SLUDGE, Fl£LD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
196
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
NA
STOVER
NO
197
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
198
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
199
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
60*
GRAIN
0
STOVER
•NO
200
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
60*
GRAIN
0
STOVER
•NO
201
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
202
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
203
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
204
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
205
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO .
206
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
207
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
NA
GRAIN
NA
STOVER
NO
208
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
209
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
210
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
211
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
212
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
213
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
214
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
215
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
216
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
217
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
218
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
NA
STOVER
NO
219
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
220
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
221
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
222
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
223
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
224
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
225
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
226
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
227
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
228
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
F-35
-------
TABLE F-1 (cont.)
LOCATION
OF
COMMENTS
STUDY
191
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
192
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
193
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
194
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
195
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
196
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
197
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
198
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
199
¦DOSE RESPONSE AND TISSUE CR CONCENTRATION NOT CONSISTENT
JOUET. ILLINOIS
200
•DOSE RESPONSE AND TISSUE CR CONCENTRATION NOT CONSISTENT
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
201
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
202
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
203
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
204
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
205
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
206
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
207
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
208
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
209
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
210
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
211
. JOLIET. ILLINOIS
212
^ JOLIET. ILLINOIS
213
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
214
JOUET. ILLINOIS
215
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
216
-
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
217
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
218
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
219
JOUET, ILLINOIS
220
JOLIET, ILUNOIS
221
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
222
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
223
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
224
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
225
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
226
JOUET. ILLINOIS
227
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
228
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
F-36
-------
TABLE F-1 {cont.)
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
LITERATURE
PLANT
SLUDGE
VOL SOLIDS
Al
Ca
Cd
CITATION
NAME
CULT1VAR
PH
%
%
%
mo/kg
229
CHAKRABARTI, C. & T. CHAKRABARTI, 1988. *29
WHEAT
HDM1553
8.4
230
CHAKRABARTI, C. & T. CHAKRABARTI, 1988. #2<>
WHEAT
HDM1553
231
CHAKRABARTI, C. & T. CHAKRABARTI, 1988. P »
V» EAT .
HDM 1553
232
• GILLIES ETAL 1989
OAT
HARMON
4.6
233
GILLIES ET AL 1989
OAT
HARMON
4.6
234
GILLIES ET AL 1989
OAT
HARMON
4.6
235
KIRKHAM 1983
SORGHAM
MOENCH.
6.7
29.2
236
KIRKHAM 1983
SORGHAM
MOENCH.
6.7
29.2
237
HAM &DOWDY 1978
SOYBEAN
MERRILL
1.41
4.98
12
238
HAM 4DOWDY 1978
SOYBEAN
MERRILL
1.41
4.98
12
239
HAM & DOWDY 1978
SOYBEAN
MERRILL
1.41
4.98
12
240
HAM &D0WDY 1978
SOYBEAN
MERRILL
1.41
4.98
12
241
HAM &D0WDY 1978
SOYBEAN
MERRILL
1.41
4.98
12
242
HAM &D0WDY 1978
SOYBEAN
MERRILL
1.41
4.98
12
243
HAM &D0WDY 1978
SOYBEAN
MERRILL
1.41
4.98
12
244
HAM &D0WDY 1978
SOYBEAN
MERRILL
1.41
4.98
12
245
HAM &D0WDY 1978
SOYBEAN
MERRILL
1.41
4.98
12
246
HAM &D0WDY 1978
SOYBEAN
MERRILL
1.41
4.98
12
247
WEBBER 1972
RED BEET
248
WEBBER 1972
RED BEET
249
WEBBER 1972
RED BEET
250
WEBBER 1972
RED BEET
251
WEBBER 1972
RED BEET
252
WEBBER 1972:
RED BEET
253
WEBBER 1972
CELERY
254
WEBBER 1972
CELERY
255
WEBBER 1972
CELERY
256
WEBBER 1972
CELERY
257
WEBBER 1972
CELERY
258
WEBBER 1972
CELERY
259
PIETZETAL. 1991
' CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
1.4
3.3
265
260
PIETZETAL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
1.4
3.3
265
261
PIETZETAL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
1.4
3.3
265
262
PIETZETAL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
1.4
3.3
160
263
PIETZETAL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
1.4
3.3
160
264
PIETZETAL 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
20
3.1
0.71
71
265
PIETZETAL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
20
3.1
0.71
71
266
PIETZETAL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3377
7.6
30
3.1
0.71
71
F-37
-------
TABLE F-1 (cont.)
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
Cr
Cu
Fs
N
Ni
P
Pb
Zn
SOLIDS
BIOLOGICAL
mq/ka
ma/kg
%
%
ma/kfl
mo/kfl
ma/kfl
ma/kfl
CONTNT
PROCESSING
229
HID
10
30
Well Water(Control)
230
45
428
562
Wall Water + 10 t/ha sludge
231
45
428
562
Well Water + 20 t/ha sludge
232
191
143
26.3
27200
194
420
233
191
143
26.3
27200
194
420
234
191
143
26.3
27200
194
420
235
851
375
35.6
21300
124
1890
236
851
375
35.6
21300
124
1890
237
1100
2020
1.6
2.73
4.4
4.37
2560
2130
AIR DRY
ANAEROBIC DIGESTED
238
1100
2020
1.6
2.73
4.4
4.37
2560
2130
AIR DRY
ANAEROBIC DIGESTED
239
1100
2020
1.6
2.73
4.4
4.37
2560
2130
AIR DRY
ANAEROBIC DIGESTED
240
1100
2020
1.6
2.73
4.4
4.37
2560
2130
AIR DRY
ANAEROBIC DIGESTED
241
1100
2020
1.6
2.73
4.4
4.37
2560
2130
AIR DRY
ANAEROBIC DIGESTED
242
1100
2020
1.6
2.73
4.4
4.37
2560
2130
AIR DRY
ANAEROBIC DIGESTED
243
1100
2020
1.6
2.73
4.37
2560
2130
AIR DRY
ANAEROBIC DIGESTED
244
1100
2020
1.6
2.73
4.4
4.37
2560
2130
AIR DRY
ANAEROBIC DIGESTED
245
1100
2020
1.6
2.73
4.4
4.37
2560
2130
AIR DRY
ANAEROBIC DIGESTED
246
1100
2020
1.6
2.73
4.4
4.37
2560
2130
AIR DRY
ANAEROBIC DIGESTED
247
248
240
1100
210
3000
249
9750
795
130
900
250
9750
795
130
900
251
240
1100
210
3000
252
9750
795
130
900
253
254
240
1100
210
3000
255
9750
795
130
900
256
9750
795
130
900
257
240
1100
210
3000
258
9750
795
130
900
259
3505
1471
4.3
4.5
425
3.42
850
3600
0.054
SECONDARY, ANAER DIGEST, LAGOON
260
3505
. 1471
4.3
4.5
425
3.42
850
3600
0.052
SECONDARY, ANAER DIGEST. LAGOON
261
3505
1471
4.3
4.5
425
3.42
850
3600
0.052
SECONDARY, ANAER DIGEST, LAGOON
262
3505
1471
4.3
4.5
425
3.42
850
3600
0.05
SECONDARY. ANAER DIGEST. LAGOON
263
3505
1471
4.3
4.5
425
3.42
850
3600
0.046
SECONDARY. ANAER DIGEST. LAGOON
264
775
460
2.2
0.5
116
0.87
293
1100
0.66-
SECONDARY, ANAER DIGEST. LAGOON
265
775
460
2.2
0.5
116
0.87
293
1100
0.65
SECONDARY, ANAER DIGEST, LAGOON
266
775
460
2.2
0.5
116
0.87
293
1100
0.3
SECONDARY. ANAER DIGEST, LAGOON
F-38
-------
TABLE F-1 (conU
SLUDGE
ANNLSLUDGE
CUMMC SLUDGE
YEARS
SOIL
SOIL
SAND
CHEMICAL
LOADNG RATE
LOADNG RATE
SINCE LAST
TAXONOMIC
SERIES
SOIL
CONTENT
STABIUZATN
Mg/ha
Mo/ha
APPUCATN
NAME
NAME
TEXTURE
%
229
Clayty
230
10
10
0
Clayey
231
20
20
0
CIay ay
232
0
0
233
75
75
234
150
150
235
0
0
Tvpic Udifluvsnt
Haynia
fina sandy loam
236
32
128
Tvpic Udifluvent
Haynia
fina sandy loam
237
0
0
0
TYPIC TAPLUDOLL
WAUKEGAN
SIL
238
25
25
0
TYPIC TAPLUDOLL
WAUKEGAN
SiL
239
50
50
0
TYPIC TAPLUDOLL
WAUKEGAN
SiL
240
100
100
0
TYPIC TAPLUDOLL
WAUKEGAN
SiL
241
200
200
0
TYPIC TAPLUDOLL
WAUKEGAN
SiL-
242
0
0
TYPIC TAPLUDOLL
WAUKEGAN
SiL
243
25
25
1
TYPIC TAPLUDOLL
WAUKEGAN
SiL
244
50
50
1
TYPIC TAPLUDOLL
WAUKEGAN
SiL
245
100
100
1
TYPIC TAPLUDOLL
WAUKEGAN
SiL
246
200
200
1
TYPIC TAPLUDOLL
WAUKEGAN
SiL
247
0
0
0
248
125.5
125.5
2
249
125.5
125.5
2
250
125.5
125.5
2
251
31.4
94.2
0
252:
31.4
94.2
: 0
253
0
0
0
254
125.5
125.5
2
255
125.5
125.5
2
256
125.5
125.5
2
257
31.4
94.2
0
258
31.4
94.2
0
259
POLYMER,FECL3
0
0
0
STRIP MINE SPOIL
260
P0LYMER.FECL3
0
0
0
STRIP MINE SPOIL
261
P0LYMER.FECL3
0
0
0
STRIP MINE SPOIL
262
POLYMER,FECL3
0
0
0
STRIP MINE SPOIL
263
POLYMER,FECL3
0
0
0
STRIP MINE SPOIL
264
POLYMER,FECL3
0
0
0
STRIP MINE SPOIL
265
POLYMER,FECL3
0
0
0
STRIP MINE SPOIL
266
P0LYMER.FECL3
0
0
0
STRIP MINE SPOIL
F-39
-------
TABLE F-1 (cont.)
SILT
CLAY
SOIL
SOIL
CUMM CR
SOIL CR
PLANT CR
PLANT
CONTENT
CONTENT
CEC
OC
SOIL
LOADING
SOIL
CONCENTRTN
CONCENTRTN
TISSUE
%
%
cmol/kg
%
pH
RATE (ko/ha)
EXTRACTANT
mo/kfl
ma/ka
SAMPLED
229
0.7
8
HCL04/HN03
17
3
Earhaad
230
0.7
8
HCL04/HN03
27
3.1
Earhaad
231
0.7
8
HCL04/HN03
31
3.4
Earhead
232
28
9.6
43
Root
233
72
Root
234
56
Root
235
7
0
0.2
0.398
Laavas
236
5.9
108.9
0.24
0.2
Leavas
237
6.5
0
N.L.
3.3
LEAF
238
6.5
28
N.L.
3.6
LEAF
239
6.5
55
N.L.
6.9
LEAF
240
6.5
110
N.L.
7.4
LEAF
241
6.5
220
N.L.
11.9
LEAF
242
6.5
0
N.L.
0.7
LEAF
243
6.5
28
N.L.
0.7
LEAF
244
6.5
55
N.L.
0.8
LEAF
245
6.5
110
N.L.
0.6
LEAF
246
6.5
220
N.L.
0.5
LEAF
247
6.1
0
.5 M HOAC
N.R.
248
NR
29
.5 M HOAC
N.R.
249
NR
552
.5 M HOAC
N.R.
250
NR
1104
.5 M HOAC
N.R.
251
NR
22
.5 M HOAC
N.R.
252
NR
104
.5 M HOAC
N.R.
253
6.1
0
.5 M HOAC
N.R.
254
NR
29
.5 M HOAC
N.R.
255
NR
552
.5 M HOAC
N.R.
256
NR
1104
.5 M HOAC
N.R.
257
NR
22
.5 M HOAC
N.R.
258
NR
104
.5 M HOAC
N.R.
259
0.44
7.5
• 0
0.1 M HO
6.5
0.67
LEAF
260
0.36
7.5
0
0.1 M HCI
5.2
0.79
LEAF
261
0.36
7.5
0
0.1 M HCI
4.2
6.47
LEAF
262
0.46
7.5
0
0.1 M HCI
5.3
6.03
LEAF
263
0.46
7.5
0
0.1 M Ha
4.97
7.15
. LEAF
264
0.73
7.5
0
0.1 M HCI
4.03
0.44
LEAF
265
0.73
7.5
0
0.1 M HCI
10.5
0.3
LEAF
266
0.7
7.5
0
0.1 M HCI
9.17
0.24
LEAF
F-40
-------
TABLE F-1 (oonU
EXPERIMENTAL
YIELD
YIELD
YIELD
YIELD
PROTOCOL
REDUCTION
COMPONENT
REDUCTION
COMPONENT
METAL
SUMMARY
%
MEASURED
%
MEASURED
PHYT OT OXtCITY
229
SALT, FIELD. MATURITY
0
Whole Plant
0
GRAIN
230
SALT. FIELD. MATURITY
0
Whole Plant
0
GRAIN
231
SALT. FIELD, MATURITY
0
Whole Plant
0 .
GRAIN
232
FIELD. SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
233
FIELD. SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
234
FIELD. SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
235
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
NOT REPORTED
236
FIELD. SLUDGE, MATURITY
NOT REPORTED
237
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
238
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
239
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
240
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
241
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
242
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
243
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
244
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
245
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
246
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
247
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
NO
248
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
NO
249
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
NO
250
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
NO
251
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
NO
252
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
NO
253
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
STALKS
NO
254
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
STALKS
NO
255
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
STALKS
NO
256
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
STALKS
NO
257
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
STALKS
NO
258
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
0
STALKS
NO
259
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
260
FIELD. SLUDGE. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
261
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
262
FIELD. SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
263
FIELD. SLUDGE. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
264
FIELD. SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
265
FIELD, SLUDGE. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
266
FIELD. SLUDGE. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
F-41
-------
TABLE F-1 (cont.)
LOCATION
OF
COMMENTS
STUDY
229
India
230
India
231
India
232
Canada
233
Canada
234
Canada
235
Manhattan, Kansas
236
Manhattan, Kansas
237
MINNESOTA
238
MINNESOTA
239
MINNESOTA
240
MINNESOTA
241
MINNESOTA
242
MINNESOTA
243
MINNESOTA
244
MINNESOTA
245
MINNESOTA
246
MINNESOTA
247
LEEDS. U.K.
248
LEEDS. U.K.
249
LEEDS. U.K.
250
LEEDS. U.K.
251
LEEDS, U.K.
252
LEEDS. U.K.
253
LEEDS, U.K.
254
LEEDS. U.K.
255
LEEDS. U.K.
256
LEEDS. U.K.
257
LEEDS. U.K.
258
LEEDS, U.K.
259
FULTON COUNTY. ILLINOIS
260
FULTON COUNTY, ILLINOIS
261
,
FULTON COUNTY; ILLINOIS
262
FULTON COUNTY; ILLINOIS
263
FULTON COUNTY. ILLINOIS
264
FULTON COUNTY. ILLINOIS
265
FULTON COUNTY. ILLINOIS
266
FULTON COUNTY. ILLINOIS
F-42
-------
TABLE F-1 (cont.)
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
LITERATURE
PLANT
SLUDGE
VOL SOUDS
Al
Ca
Cd
CITATION
NAME
CULTIVAR
PH
%
%
%
ma/ka
267
PIETZETAL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3377
7.6
20
0.67
3.9
53
268
PIETZETAL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
1.4
3.3
265
269
PIETZETAL. 1991
_ RN .
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
1.4
3.3
265
270
- PIETZETAL. 1991 .
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
1.4
3.3
265
271
PIETZETAL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
1.4
3.3
160
272
PIETZETAL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
1.4
3.3
160
273
PIETZETAL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
20
3.1
0.71
71
274
PIETZETAL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
20
3.1
0.71
71
275
PIETZETAL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3377
7.6
30
3.1
0.71
71
276
PIETZETAL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3377
7.6
20
0.67
3.9
53
277
PIETZETAL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
1.4
3.3
265
278
PIETZETAL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
1.4
3.3
265
279
PIETZETAL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
1.4
. 3.3
265
280
PIETZETAL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
1.4
3.3
160
281
PIETZETAL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
1.4
3.3
160
282
PIETZETAL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
20
3.1
0.71
71
283
PIETZETAL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
20
3.1
0.71
71
284
PIETZETAL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3377
7.6
30
3.1
0.71
71
285
PIETZETAL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3377
7.6
20
0.67
3.9
53
286
PIETZETAL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
1.4
3.3
265
287
PIETZETAL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
1.4
3.3
265
288
PIETZETAL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
1.4
3.3
265
289
PIETZETAL, 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
1.4
3.3
160
290
PIETZETAL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
1.4
3.3
160
291
PIETZETAL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
20
3.1
0.71
71
292
PIETZETAL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
20
3.1
0.71
71
293
PIETZETAL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3377
7.6
30
3.1
0.71
71
294
PIETZETAL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3377
7.6
20
0.67
3.9
53
F-43
-------
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
279
280
281
282
283
284
285
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
294
TABLE F-1 (cant.)
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
Cr
Cu
Fe
N
Ni
Pb
Zn
SOLIDS
BIOLOGICAL
mq/kg
mg/kq
%
%
mq/kg
mg/kg
mq/kg
mg/kq
CONTNT
PROCESSING
679
454
1.9
0.5
121
0.62
259
1146
0.69
SECONDARY. ANAER DIGEST. LAGOON
3505
1471
4.3
4.5
425
3.42
850
3600
0.054
SECONDARY. ANAER DIGEST, LAGOON
3505
1471
4.3
4.5
425
3.42
850
3600
0.052
SECONDARY. ANAER DIGEST. LAGOON
3505
1471
4.3
4.5
425
3.42
850
3600
0.052
SECONDARY. ANAER DIGEST, LAGOON
3505
1471
4.3
4.5
425
3.42
850
3600
0.05
SECONDARY. ANAER DIGEST. LAGOON
3505
1471
4.3
4.5
425
3.42
850
3600
0.046
SECONDARY. ANAER DIGEST. LAGOON
775
460
2.2
0.5
116
0.87
293
1100
0.66
SECONDARY, ANAER DIGEST. LAGOON
775
460
2.2
0.5
116
0.87
293
1100
0.65
SECONDARY, ANAER DIGEST. LAGOON
775
460
2.2
0.5
116
0.87
293
1100
0.3
SECONDARY. ANAER DIGEST, LAGOON
679
454
1.9
0.5
121
0.62
259
1146
0.69
SECONDARY. ANAER DIGEST, LAGOON
3505
1471
4.3
4.5
425
3.42
850
3600
0.054
SECONDARY. ANAER DIGEST. LAGOON
3505
1471
4.3
4.5
425
3.42
850
3600
0.052
SECONDARY. ANAER DIGEST. LAGOON
3505
1471
4.3
4.5
425
3.42
850
3600
0.052
SECONDARY, ANAER DIGEST. LAGOON
3505
1471
4.3
4.5
425
3.42
850
3600
0.05
SECONDARY. ANAER DIGEST. LAGOON
3505
1471
4.3
4.5
425
3.42
850
3600
0.046
SECONDARY. ANAER DIGEST, LAGOON
775
460
2.2
0.5
116
0.87
293
1100
0.66
SECONDARY. ANAER DIGEST. LAGOON
775
460
2.2
0.5
116
0.87
293
1100
0.65
SECONDARY. ANAER DIGEST. LAGOON
775
460
2.2
0.5
116
0.87
293
1100
0.3
SECONDARY. ANAER DIGEST. LAGOON
679
454
1.9
0.5
121
0.62
259
1146
0.69
SECONDARY. ANAER DIGEST. LAGOON
3505
1471
4.3
4.5
425
3.42
850
3600
0.054
SECONDARY. ANAER DIGEST. LAGOON
3505
1471
4.3
4.5
425
3.42
850
3600
0.052
SECONDARY. ANAER DIGEST. LAGOON
3505
1471
4.3
4.5
425
3.42
850
3600
0.0S2
SECONDARY, ANAER DIGEST. LAGOON
3505
1471
4.3
4.5
425
3.42
850
3600
0.05
SECONDARY. ANAER DIGEST. LAGOON
3505
1471:
4.3
4.5
425
3.42
850
3600
0.046
SECONDARY. ANAER DIGEST, LAGOON
775
460
2.2
0.5
116
0.87
293
1100
0.66
SECONDARY. ANAER DIGEST, LAGOON
775
460
2.2
0.5
116
0.87
293
1100
0.65
SECONDARY, ANAER DIGEST. LAGOON
775
460
2.2
0.5
116
0.87
293
1100
0.3
SECONDARY, ANAER DIGEST. LAGOON
679
454
1.9
0.5
121
0.62
259
1146
0.69
SECONDARY. ANAER DIGEST. LAGOON
F-44
-------
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
279
280
281
282
283
284
285
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
294
TABLE F-1 (oont.)
SLUDGE
ANNLSLUDGE
CUMML SLUDGE
YEARS
SOIL
SOtL
SAND
CHEMICAL
LOADNG RATE
LOADNG RATE
SINCE LAST
TAXONOMIC
SERIES
SOU.
CONTENT
STABIUZATN
Mg/ha
Mfl/ha
APPUCATN
NAME
NAME
TEXTURE
POLYMER,FECU
STRIP MINE SPOIL
POLYMER,FECL3
17.4
115.3
STRIP MINE SPOIL
POLYMER,FECL3
11.4
126.7
STRIP MINE SPOIL
POLYMER,FECL3
16.8
143.5
STRIP MINE SPOIL
P0LYMER.FECL3
17.9
161.4
STRIP MINE SPOIL
POLYMER,FECL3
16.8
178.2
STRIP MINE SPOIL
P0LYMER.FECL3
16.8
195
STRIP MINE SPOIL
POLYMER,FECL3
16.8
211.8
STRIP MINE SPOIL
POLYMER,FECL3
16.8
228.6
STRIP MINE SPOIL
P0LYMER.FECL3
16.8
245.4
STRIP MINE SPOIL
POLYMER,FECL3
34.8
235.7
STRIP MINE SPOIL
POLYMER,FECL3
22.8
258.5
STRIP MINE SPOIL
P0LYMER.FECL3
34.9
293.4
STRIP MINE SPOIL
P0LYMER.FECL3
35.8
329.2
STRIP MINE SPOIL
POLYMER,FECL3
33.6
362.8
STRIP MINE SPOIL
POLYMER,FECL3
33.6
396.4
STRIP MINE SPOIL
POLYMER,FECL3
33.6
430
STRIP MINE SPOIL
POLYMER,FECL3
33.6
463.6
STRIP MINE SPOIL
P0LYMER.FECL3
33.6
497.2
STRIP MINE SPOIL
POLYMER,FECL3
69.8
471.4
STRIP MINE SPOIL
POLYMER,FECL3
45.5
516.9
STRIP MINE SPOIL
P0LVMER.FECL3
68.8
585.7
STRIP MINE SPOIL
P0LYMER.FECL3
71.7
657.4
STRIP MINE SPOIL
POLYMER,FECL3
67.2
724.6
STRIP MINE SPOIL
POLYMER,FECL3
67.2
791.8
STRIP MINE SPOIL
POLYMER, FECL3
67.2
859
STRIP MINE SPOIL
POLYMER,FECL3
67.2
926.2
STRIP MINE SPOIL
P0LYMER.FECL3
67.2
993.4
STRIP MINE SPOIL
F-45
-------
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
279
280
281
282
283
284
285
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
294
TABLE F-1 (cont.)
SILT
CLAY
SOIL
SOIL
CUMM CR
SOIL CR
PLANT CR
CONTENT
CONTENT
CEC
OC
SOIL
LOADING
SOIL
CONCENTRTN
CONCENTRTN
%
%
cmol/kq
%
J*
RATE (kg/ha)
EXTRACTANT
mg/kq
mg/kfl
0.7
7.5
0.1 M HCI
13.7
1.66
0.94
7.5
438.2
0.1 M HCI
27.6
0.8
0.67
7.5
473.2
0.1 M HCI
16.8
1.14
0.67
7.5
534.4
0.1 M HCI
13.8
2.96
0.87
7.5
577.8
0.1 M HCI
20.7
6.78
0.87
7.5
616.8
0.1 M HCI
16.7
6.25
1.41
7.5
654.7
0.1 M HCI
24
0.43
1.41
7.5
699.5
0.1 M HCI
28.3
0.43
1.25
7.5
747.6
0.1 M HCI
27.4
0.4
1.25
7.5
759
0.1 M HCI
33.8
1.03
1.56
7.5
876.4
0.1 M HCI
62.9
0.69
1.56
7.5
946.3
0.1 M HCI
42.9
0.67
1.04
7.5
1068.8
0.1 M HCI
33.4
1.95
1.04
7.5
1155.5
0.1 M HCI
52.7
6.32
1.48
7.5
1233.6
0.1 M HCI
41.5
3.64
1.48
7.5
1309.5
0.1 M HCI
43.7
0.39
2.15
7.5
1399
0.1 M HCI
54.7
0.29
2.15
7.5
1495.2
0.1 M HCI
51.4
0.2
1.9
7.5
1518
0.1 M HCI
71
1.58
3.02
7.5
1752.7
0.1 M HCI
118.8
0.77
1.58
7.5
1892.6
0.1 M Ha
88.8
0.51
1.58
7.5
2137.5
0.1 M HO
55.1
2.11
2.38
7.5
2311
0.1 M HCI
107.7
3.98
2.38
7.5
2467.2
0.1 M HO
79.6
10.6
3.47
7.5
2618.9
0.1 M HCI
99.8
0.43
3.47
7.5
2797.9
0.1 M HCI
89.7
0.27
2.77
7.5
2990.4
0.1 M HCI
93.9
0.45
2.77
7.5
3036
0.1 M HO
114
1.31
F-46
-------
TABLE F-1 (oont.)
EXPERIMENTAL
YIELD
YIELD
YIELD
YIELD
PROTOCOL
REDUCTION
COMPONENT
REDUCTION
COMPONENT
METAL
SUMMARY
%
MEASURED
%
MEASURED
PHYTOTOXICITY
267
FIELD. SLUDGE, MATURITY '
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
268
FIELD, SLUDGE. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
269
FIELD. SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
270
FIELD. SLUDGE. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
271
FIELD. SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
272
FIELD. SLUDGE. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
273
FIELD, SLUDGE. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
274
FIELD. SLUDGE. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
275
FIELD. SLUDGE. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
276
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
277
FIELD. SLUDGE. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
278
FIELD. SLUDGE. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
279
FIELD, SLUDGE. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
280
FIELD. SLUDGE. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
281
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
282
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
283
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
284
FIELD. SLUDGE. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
285
FIELD. SLUDGE. MATURITY
43.7
GRAIN
0
STOVER
286
FicLD. SLUDGE. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
287
FIELD. SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
288
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
289
FIELD, SLUDGE. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
290
FIELD. SLUDGE. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
291
FIELD. SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
292
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
293
FIELD. SLUDGE. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
294
FIELD. SLUDGE, MATURITY
59.2
GRAIN
0
STOVER
F-47
-------
TABLE F-1 (cont.)
LOCATION
OF
COMMENTS
STUDY
267
FULTON COUNTY, ILLINOIS
268
*
FULTON COUNTY, ILLINOIS
269
FULTON COUNTY, ILLINOIS
270
FULTON COUNTY, ILLINOIS
271
FULTON COUNTY. ILLINOIS
272
FULTON COUNTY, ILLINOIS
273
FULTON COUNTY, ILLINOIS
274
FULTON COUNTY. ILLINOIS
275
FULTON COUNTY, ILLINOIS
276
FULTON COUNTY. ILLINOIS
277
FULTON COUNTY, ILLINOIS
278
FULTON COUNTY. ILLINOIS
279
FULTON COUNTY. ILLINOIS
280
FULTON COUNTY. ILLINOIS
281
FULTON COUNTY. ILLINOIS
282
FULTON COUNTY, ILLINOIS
283
FULTON COUNTY. ILLINOIS
284
FULTON COUNTY, ILLINOIS
285
FULTON COUNTY, ILLINOIS
286
FULTON COUNTY, ILLINOIS
287
FULTON COUNTY. ILLINOIS
288
FULTON COUNTY. ILLINOIS
289
FULTON COUNTY. ILLINOIS
290 :
FULTON COUNTY. ILLINOIS
291
FULTON COUNTY. ILLINOIS
292
FULTON COUNTY. ILLINOIS
293
FULTON COUNTY. ILLINOIS
294
FULTON COUNTY. ILLINOIS
F-48
-------
TABLE F-2. COPPER DATA
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
LITERATURE
PLANT
SLUDGE
VOL SOLIDS
At
Ca
Cd
Cr
Cu
CITATION
NAME
CULTIVAR
PH
%
%
%
mg/kg
mo/ka
mfl/ka
1
GIORDANO AND MAYS 1977
BEANS
2
GIORDANO AND MAYS 1977
BEANS
6.6
2.5
50
350
730
3 .¦
GIORDANO AND MAYS 1977
BEANS
6.1
1.7
40
400
520
4
GIORDANO AND MAYS 1977
OKRA
5
GIORDANO AND MAYS 1977
OKRA
6.6
2.5
50
350
730
6
GIORDANO AND MAYS 1977
OKRA
6.1
1.7
40
400
520
7
GIORDANO AND MAYS 1977
PEPPERS
8
GIORDANO AND MAYS 1977
PEPPERS
6.6
2.5
50
350
730
9
GIORDANO AND MAYS 1977
PEPPERS
6.1
1.7
40
400
520
10
GIORDANO AND MAYS 1977
TOMATO
11
GIORDANO AND MAYS 1977
TOMATO
6.6
2.5
50
350
730
12
GIORDANO AND MAYS 1977
TOMATO
6.1
1.7
40
400
520
13
GIORDANO AND MAYS 1977
SQUASH
14
GIORDANO AND MAYS 1977
SQUASH
6.6
2.5
50
350
730
15
GIORDANO AND MAYS 1977
SQUASH
6.1
1.7
40
400
520
16
GIORDANO AND MAYS 1977
TURNIP
17
GIORDANO AND MAYS 1977
TURNIP
6.6
2.5
50
350
730
18
GIORDANO AND MAYS 1977
TURNIP
6.1
1.7 .
40
400
520
19
GIORDANO AND MAYS 1977
KALE
20
GIORDANO AND MAYS 1977
KALE
6.6
2.5
50
350
730
21
GIORDANO AND MAYS 1977
KALE
6.1
1.7
40
400
520
22
GIORDANO AND MAYS 1977
OKRA
23
GIORDANO AND MAYS 1977
OKRA
6.6
2.5
50
350
730
24
GIORDANO AND MAYS 1977
OKRA
6.1
1.7
40
400
520
25
GIORDANO AND MAYS 1977
PEPPER
26
GIORDANO AND MAYS 1977
PEPPER
6.6
2.5
50
350
730
27
GIORDANO AND MAYS 1977
PEPPER
6.1
1.7
40
400
520
28
GIORDANO AND MAYS 1977
TOMATO
29
GIORDANO AND MAYS 1977
TOMATO
6.6
2.5
50
350
730
30
GIORDANO AND MAYS 1977
TOMATO
6.1
1.7
40
400
520
31
GIORDANO AND MAYS 1977
SQUASH
32
GIORDANO AND MAYS 1977
SQUASH
6.6
2.5
50
350
730
33
GIORDANO AND MAYS 1977
SQUASH
6.1
1.7
40
400
520
34
GIORDANO AND MAYS 1977
LETTUCE
35
GIORDANO AND MAYS 1977
LETTUCE
6.6
2.5
50
350
730
36
GIORDANO AND MAYS 1977
LETTUCE
6.1
1.7
40
400
520
37
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
F-49
-------
TABLE F-2 (cont.)
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
Fa
N
Ni
P
Pb
Zn
SOLIDS
BIOLOGICAL
CHEMICAL
%
%
mg/kg
mg/ka
mg/kg
mg/kg
CONTNT
PROCESSING
STABILIZATN
1
2
1.7
2.3
20
1.6
530
1800
3
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
4
5
1.7
2.3
20
1.6
530
1800
6
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
7
8
1.7
2.3
20
1.6
530
1800
9
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
10
11
1.7
2.3
20
1.6
530
1800
12
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
13
14
1.7
2.3
20
1.6
530
1800
15
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
16
17
1.7
2.3
20
1.6
530
1800
I
18
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
19
20
1.7
2.3
20
1.6
530
1800
21
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
22
23
1.7
2.3
20
1.6
530
1800
24
1.5
2:1
40
1.3
1600
1800
25
26
1.7
2.3
20
1.6
530
1800
27
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
28
29
1.7
2.3
20
1.6
530
1800
30
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
31
•
32
1.7
2.3
20
1.6
530
1800
33
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
34
35
1.7
2.3
20
1.6
530
1800
36
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
37
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
F-50
-------
TABLE F-2 (ooot.)
ANNLSLUDGE
CUMML SLUDGE
YEARS
SOIL
SOIL
SAND
SILT
CLAY
SOIL
LOADNG RATE
LOADNG RATE
SINCE LAST
TAXONOMIC
SERIES
SOIL
CONTENT
CONTENT
CONTENT
CEC
Mg/ha
Mg/ha
APPLICATN
NAME
NAME
TEXTURE
%
%
%
cmol/kg
1
0
0
SANGO
SiL
2
112
112
0
SANGO
SiL
3
112
112
0
SANGO
SiL
4
0
0
SANGO
SiL
5
112
112
0
SANGO
SiL
6
112
112
0
SANGO
SiL
7
0
0
SANGO
SiL
8
112
112
0
SANGO
SiL
9
112
112
0
SANGO
SiL
10
0
0
SANGO
SiL
11
112
112
0
SANGO
SiL
12
112
112
0
SANGO
SiL
13
0
0
SANGO
SiL
'
14
112
112
0
SANGO
SiL
15
112
112
0
SANGO
SiL
16
0
0
SANGO
SiL
17
112
112
0
SANGO
SiL
18
112
112
0
SANGO
SiL
19
0
n
SANGO
SiL
20
112
112
0
SANGO
SiL
21
112
112
0
SANGO
SiL
22
0
0
SANGO
SiL
23
112
112
1
SANGO
SiL
24
112
112
SANGO
SiL
25
0
0
SANGO
SiL
26
112
112
1
SANGO
SiL
27
112
112
1
SANGO
SiL
28
0
0
SANGO
SiL
29
112
112
1
SANGO
SiL
30
112
112
1
SANGO
SiL
31
0
0
SANGO
SiL
32
112
112
1
SANGO
SiL
33
112
112
1
SANGO
SiL
34
0
0
SANGO
SiL
35
112
112
1
SANGO
SiL
36
112
112
1
SANGO
SiL
37
0
0
NA
BLOUNT
SiL
F-51
-------
TABLE F-2 (cont.)
SOIL
CUMM CU
SOIL CU
PLANT CU
PLANT
YIELD
OC
SOIL
LOADING
SOIL
CONCENTRTN
CONCENTRTN
TISSUE
DESCRIPTION OF
REDUCTION
%
pH
RATE (kg/ha)
EXTRACTANT
mo/kg
mo/ko
SAMPLED
EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN
%
1
6.4
0
0.5 M HCL
4
6
LEAF
FIELD. SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
2
6.4
82
0.5 M HCL
41
7.8
LEAF
FIELD. SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
3
6.4
58
0.5 M HCL
17
5.8
LEAF
FIELD. SLUDGE, MATURITY
14.3*
4
6.4
0
0.5 M HCL
4
6.9
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE. MATURITY
0
5
6.4
82
0.5 M HCL
41
10
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
•
CO
00
6
6.4
58
0.5 M HCL
17
7.1
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
8.3 •
7
6.4
0
0.5 M HCL
4
19
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
8
6.4
82
0.5 M HCL
41
21
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
9
6.4
58
0.5 M HCL
17
18
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
13"
10
6.4
0
0.5 M HCL
4
19
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
11
6.4
82
0.5 M HCL
41
22
LEAF
FIELD. SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
12
6.4
58
0.5 M HCL
17
18
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
13
6.4
0
0.5 M HCL
4
14
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY-
0
14
6.4
82
0.5 M HCL
41
19
LEAF
FIELD. SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
15
6.4
58
0.5 M HCL
17
15
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE. MATURITY
0
16
6.4
0
0.5 M HCL
4
6.3
LEAF
FIELD. SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
17
6.4
82
0.5 M HCL
41
9.4
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
18
6.4
58
0.5 M HCL
17
7.3
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
19
6.4
0
0.5 M HCL
4
6
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE. MATURITY
0
20
6.4
82
0.5 M HCL
41
8.1
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
21
6.4
58
0.5 M HCL
17
7.6
LEAF
FIELD. SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
22
5.8
0
0.5 M HCL
4
15.4
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE. MATURITY
0
23
5.8
82
0.5 M HCL
41
14.1
LEAF
FIELD. SLUDGE. MATURITY
0
24
5.8
58
0.5 M HCL
17
14.1
LEAF
FIELD. SLUDGE. MATURITY
0
25
5.8
0
0.5 M HCL
4
14.7
LEAF
FIELD. SLUDGE. MATURITY
0
26
5.8
82
0.5 M HCL
41
15.4
LEAF
FIELD. SLUDGE. MATURITY
0
27
5.8
58
0.5 M HCL
17
15.4
LEAF
FIELD. SLUDGE, MATURITY
25*
28
5.8
0
0.5 M HCL
4
21.4
LEAF
FIELD. SLUDGE. MATURITY
0
29
5.8
82
0.5 M HCL
41
19.4
LEAF
FIELD. SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
30
5.8
58
0.5 M HCL
17
22.8
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE. MATURITY
0
31
5.8
0
0.5 M HCL
4'
16.1
LEAF
FIELD. SLUDGE. MATURITY
0
32
5.8
82
0.5 M HCL
41
12.1
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
33
5.8
58
0.5 M HCL
17
9.4
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
21.1*
34
5.8
0
0.5 M HCL
4
17.4
LEAF
FIELD. SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
35
5.8
82
0.5 M HCL
41
18.1
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE. MATURITY^
0
36
5.8
58
0.5 M HCL
17
12.7
LEAF
FIELD. SLUDGE. MATURITY
0
37
0.85
7.8
0
HCL-HF
22
9
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
F-52
-------
TABLE F-2 (cont.)
YIELD
YIELD
YIELD
COMPONENT
REDUCTION
COMPONENT
METAL
MEASURED
%
MEASURED
PHYTOTOXICITY
1
EDIBLE PART
NO
2
EDIBLE PART
NO
3
EDIBLE PART
•NO
4
EDIBLE PART
NO
5
EDIBLE PART
•NO
6
EDIBLE PART
•NQ
7
EDIBLE PART
NO
8
EDIBLE PART
NO
9
EDIBLE PART
•NO
10
EDIBLE PART
NO
11
EDIBLE PART
NO
12
EDIBLE PART
NO
13
EDIBLE PART
NO
14
EDIBLE PART
NO
15
EDIBLE PART
NO
16
EDIBLE PART
NO
17
EDIBLE PART
NO
18
EDIBLE PART
NO
19
EDIBLE PART
NO
20
EDIBLE PART
NO
21
EDIBLE PART
NO
22
EDIBLE PART
NO
23
EDIBLE PART
NO
24
EDIBLE PART
NO
25
EDIBLE PART
NO
26
EDIBLE PART
NO
27
EDIBLE PART
•NO
28
EDIBLE PART
NO
29
EDIBLE PART
NO
30
EDIBLE PART
NO
31
EDIBLE PART
NO
32
EDIBLE PART
NO
33
EDIBLE PART
•NO
34
EDIBLE PART
NO
35
EDIBLE PART
NO
36
EDIBLE PART
NO
37
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
F-53
-------
TABLE F-2 (cont.)
COMMENTS
LOCATION
1
2
3
•NOT TESTED STATISTICALLY. MAY BE ATTRIBUTED TO WET SEASON/INSECTS
4
' 5
•NOT TESTED STATISTICALLY, MAY BE ATTRIBUTED TO WET SEASON/INSECTS
6
•NOT TESTED STATISTICALLY, MAY BE ATTRIBUTED TO WET SEASON/INSECTS
7
8
9
•NOT TESTED STATISTICALLY. MAY BE ATTRIBUTED TO WET SEASON/INSECTS
10
11
12
•
13
.
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
¦JO-..
i)lw I
22
23
24
25
26
27
•NOT TESTED STATISTICALLY. MAY BE ATTRIBUTED TO WET SEASON/INSECTS
28
29
30
31
*
32
33
•NOT TESTED STATISTICALLY. MAY BE ATTRIBUTED TO WET SEASON/INSECTS
34
35
36
37
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
F-54
-------
TABLE P2 (cont.)
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUOGE
LITERATURE
PLANT
SLUDGE
VOL SOLIDS
Al
Co
Cd
Cr
Cu
CITATION
NAME
CULTIVAR
PH
%
%
%
mo/ko
mo/ko
mo/ka
38
KINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
39
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
40 .
HINfcSLY 1985
CORN
•
3.4
263
2963
1422
41
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
42
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
43
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
44
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
45
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
46
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
47
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
48
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
49
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
50
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
• 2963
1422
51
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
52
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
53
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
54
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
55
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
56
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
57
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
58
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
59
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
60
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
61
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
62
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
63
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
64
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
65
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
66
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
67
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
68
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
69
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
70
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
71
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
72
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
73
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
74
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
F-S5
-------
TABLE F-2 (cont.)
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
Fe
N
Ni
P
Pb
Zn
SOLIDS
BIOLOGICAL
CHEMICAL
%
%
ma/kg
mn/kfl
mfl/kn
mfl/ko
CONTNT
PROCESSING
STAB) LIZ ATN
38
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
39
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
40
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
41
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
42
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
43
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
44
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
¦ 45
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
46
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
47
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
48
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
49
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
50
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
51
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
52
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
53
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
54
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
55
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
56
4.5
5.9
316
3.5 .
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
57
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
58
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
59
4.5
5.9
3.16
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
60
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
61
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
62
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
63
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
64
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
65
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
66
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
67
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
68
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
69
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
70
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
71
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
72
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
73
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
74
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
F-56
-------
TABLE F-2 (oont.)
ANNL SLUDGE
CUMML SLUDGE
YEARS
SOIL
SOIL
SANO
SILT
CLAY
SOIL
LOADNG RATE
LOADNG RATE
SINCE LAST
TAXONOMIC
SERIES
SOIL
CONTENT
CONTENT
CONTENT
CEC
Mo/ha
Ma/ha
APPLICATN
NAME
NAME
TEXTURE
%
%
%
cmol/ko
38
0
0
NA
BLOUNT
SiL
39
0
0
NA
BLOUNT
SiL
40
0
0
NA
BLOUNT
SiL
41
0
0
NA
BLOUNT
SiL
42
0
0
NA
BLOUNT
SIL
43
0
0
NA
BLOUNT
SiL
44
0
0
NA
BLOUNT
SiL
45
0
0
NA
BLOUNT
SiL
46
0
0
NA
BLOUNT
SiL
47
14.5
31.8
0
BLOUNT
SiL
48
11.1
42.9
0
BLOUNT
SiL
49
15.3
58.2
0
BLOUNT
SiL
50
0
58.2
1
BLOUNT
SiL
51
0
58.2
2
BLOUNT
SiL
52
0
58.2
3
BLOUNT
SiL
53
0
58.2
4
BLOUNT
SiL
54
0
58.2
5
BLOUNT
SiL
55
0
58.2
6
BLOUNT
SiL
56
0
58.2
1
BLOUNT
SiL
57
29
63.6
0
BLOUNT
SiL
58
22.2
85.8
0
BLOUNT
SiL
59
30.6
116.4
0
BLOUNT
SiL
60
0
116.4
1
BLOUNT
SiL
61
0
116.4
2
BLOUNT
SiL
62
0
116.4
3
BLOUNT
SiL
63
0
116.4
4
BLOUNT
SiL
64
0
116.4
5
BLOUNT
SiL
65
0
116.4
6
BLOUNT
SiL
66
0
116.4
• 7
BLOUNT
SiL
67
57.8
127
0
BLOUNT
SiL
68
44.4
171.4
0
BLOUNT
SiL
69
61.1
232.5
0
BLOUNT
SiL
70
0
232.5
1
BLOUNT
SiL
71
0
232.5
BLOUNT
SiL
72
0
232.5
1
BLOUNT
SiL
73
0
232.5
1
BLOUNT
SiL
74
0
232.5
1
BLOUNT
SiL
F-57
-------
TABLE F-2 (oont.)
SOIL
CUMM CU
SOIL CU
PLANT CU
PLANT
YIELD
OC
SOIL
LOADING
SOIL
CONCENTRTN
CONCENTRTN
TISSUE
DESCRIPTION OF
REDUCTION
%
pH
RATE (kg/ha)
EXTRACTANT
mfl/kq
mn/k(i
SAMPLED
EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN
%
38
0.9
6.9
0
HCL-HF
20
11.8
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
39
0.94
7.6
0
HCL-HF
28
9.3
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
40
0.93
7.6
0
HCL-HF
22
11.4
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
41
0.92
7.8
0
HCL-HF
24
7
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
42
0.87
7.5
0
HCL-HF
21
10.6
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
0
43
0.9
7.6
0
HCL-HF
25
6.1
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
44
0.88
7.5
0
HCL-HF
26
3.4
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
45
0.73
7.6
0
HCL-HF
22
8.3
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
46
1
7.4
0
HCL-HF
28
8.5
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
47
1.06
7.7
51.5
HCL-HF
42
11.4
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
48
1.11
6.9
59.8
HCL-HF
28
12.2
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
49
1.18
7.5
70
HCL-HF
42
8.7
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
50
1.4
7.5
70
HCL-HF
40
9.6
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY.
0
51
1.16
7.6
70
HCL-HF
42
7.7
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
52
1.08
7.5
70
HCL-HF
38
7.9
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
53
1.18
7.7
70
HCL-HF
45
5.9
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
54
1.23
7.6
70
HCL-HF
44
3.8
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
55
1.09
7.5
70
HCL-HF
36
8.8
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
56
1.32
7.3
70
HCL-HF
45
8.6
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
57
1.38
7.6
103
HCL-HF
60
11.9
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
0
58
1.12
7
119.6
HCL-HF
38
14
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
0
59
1.29
7.4
140
HCL-HF
57
8.7
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
0
60
1.83
7.3
140
HCL-HF
67
9.7
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
61
1.36
7.5
140
HCL-HF
56
9.8
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
62
1.34
7.2
140
HCL-HF
49
7.9
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
63
1.6
7.4
140
HCL-HF
64
6.9
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
0
64
1.31
7.3
140
HCL-HF
68
3.9
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
65
1.54
7.1
140
HCL-HF
48
8.6
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
0
66
1.62
7.1
140
HCL-HF
67
8.9
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
67
1.62
7.6
206
HCL-HF
102
10.7
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
68
1.63
6.8
239
HCL-HF
63
14.9
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
69
1.94
7.3
280
HCL-HF
91
9.4
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
,0
70
2.5
7.2
280
HCL-HF
116
11.2
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
71
1.83
7.3
280
HCL-HF
91
10.3
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
72
1.88
7.2
280
HCL-HF
88
9.2
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
73
2.03
7.3
280
HCL-HF
106
7.3
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
74
1.6
7.1
280
HCL-HF
94
4.5
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
F-58
-------
TABLE F-2 (oont.)
YIELD
YIELD
YIELD
COMPONENT
REDUCTION
COMPONENT
METAL
MEASURED
%
MEASURED
PHYTOTOXICfTY
38
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
39
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
40
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
41
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
42
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
43
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
44
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
45
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
46
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
47
GRAIN
NA
STOVER
NO
48
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
49
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
50
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
51
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
52
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
53
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
54
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
55
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
56
GRAIN
A
STOVER
NO
57
GRAIN
NA
STOVER
NO
58
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
59
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
60
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
61
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
62
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
63
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
64
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
65
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
66
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
67
GRAIN
NA
STOVER
NO
68
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
69
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
70
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
71
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
72
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
73
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
74
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
F-59
-------
TABLE F-2 (cont.)
COMMENTS
LOCATION
38
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
39
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
40
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
41
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
42
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
43
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
44
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
45
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
46
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
47
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
48
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
49
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
50
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
51
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
52
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
53
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
54
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
55
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
56
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
57
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
58
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
59
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
60
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
61
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
62
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
63
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
64
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
65
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
66
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
67
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
68
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
69
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
70
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
71
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
72
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
73
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
74
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
F-60
-------
TABLE F-2 (oonU
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
LITERATURE
PLANT
SLUDGE
VOL SOLIDS
Al
Ca
Cd
Cr
Cu
CITATION
NAME
CULT1VAR
PH
%
%
%
mo/ko
mo/ko
mp/kg
75
HINESLY1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
76
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
77,•
. HINEJLY1985
CORN
•
3.4
263
2963
1422
78
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
79
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
80
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
81
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
82
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
83
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
84
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
85
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
86
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
87
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
' 2963
1422
88
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
89
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
90
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
91
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
92
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4 .
263
2963
1422
93
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
94
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
95
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
96
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
97
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
98
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
99
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
100
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
101
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
102
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
103
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
104
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
105
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
106
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
107
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
108
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
109
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
110
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
111
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
F-61
-------
TABLE F-2
-------
TABLE F-2 (oont.)
ANNLSLUDGE
CUMML SLUDGE
YEARS
SOIL
son.
SAND
SILT
CLAY
SOIL
LOADNG RATE
LOADNG RATE
SINCE LAST
TAXONOMIC
SERIES
SOIL
CONTENT
CONTENT
CONTENT
CEC
Mo/ha
Mo/ha
APPLICATN
NAME
NAME
TEXTURE
*
%
*
cmol/ka
75
0
232.5
1
BLOUNT
SiL
76
0
232.5
1
BLOUNT
SiL
77
0
0
NA
ELLIOT
SiL
78
0
0
NA
ELLIOT
SiL
79
0
0
NA
ELLIOT
SiL
80
0
0
NA
ELLIOT
SiL
81
0
0
NA
ELUOT
SiL
82
0
0
NA
ELLIOT
SiL
83
0
0
NA
ELLIOT
SiL
84
0
0
NA
ELUOT
SiL
85
0
0
NA
ELLIOT
SiL
86
0
0
NA
ELLIOT
SiL
87
14.5
31.8
0
ELLIOT
SiL
•
88
11.1
42.9
0
ELUOT
SiL
89
15.3
58.2
0
ELUOT
SIL
90
0
58.2
1
ELUOT
SiL
91
0
58.2
2
ELLIOT
SiL
92
0
58.2
3
ELUOT
SiL
93
0
58.2
4
ELLIOT
SiL
94
0
58.2
5
ELUOT
SiL
95
0
58.2
6
ELUOT
SiL
96
0
58.2
7
¦
ELUOT
SiL
97
29
63.6
0
ELLIOT
SiL
98
22.2
85.8
0
ELUOT
SiL
99
30.6
116.4
0
ELUOT
SiL
100
0
116.4
1
ELLIOT
SiL
101
0
116.4
2
ELLIOT
SiL
102
0
116.4
3
ELUOT
SiL
103
0
116.4
4
ELUOT
SiL
104
0
116.4
5
ELUOT
SiL
105
0
116.4
6
ELLIOT
SiL
106
0
116.4
7
ELUOT
SiL
107
57.8
127
0
ELUOT
SiL
108
44.4
171.4
0
ELUOT
SiL
109
61.1
232.5
0
ELUOT
SiL
110
69.8
302.3
0
ELUOT
SiL
111
54
356.3
0
ELLIOT
SiL
F-63
-------
TABLE F-2 (cont.)
SOIL
CUMM CU
SOIL CU
PLANT CU
PLANT
YIELD
OC
SOIL
LOADING
SOIL
CONCENTRTN
CONCENTRTN
TISSUE
DESCRIPTION OF
REDUCTION
%
pH
RATE (ka/ha)
EXTRACTANT
ma/kg
ma/kfl
SAMPLED
EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN
%
75
1.54
7.1
280
HCL-HF
62
8.8
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
76
1.84
7
280
HCL-HF
86
8.7
. LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURI1Y
0
77
1.64
7.6
0
HCL-HF
19
10.2
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
78
1.61
6.8
0
HCL-HF
27
11.6
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
79
1.54
7.2
0
HCL-HF
26
5.8
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
80
1.53
7.2
0
HCL-HF
20
11.1
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
81
1.54
7
0
HCL-HF
22
9.5
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
0
82
1.51
7
0
HCL-HF
18
8
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
83
1.58
7.4
0
HCL-HF
23
5.3
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
0
84
1.54
7.2
0
HCL-HF
26
3.7
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
85
1.51
7
0
HCL-HF
19
8.6
LEAF
SLUDGE, HELD, MATURITY
0
86
1.62
7
0
HCL-HF
26
7.8
LEAF-
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
87
1.64
7.3
51.5
HCL-HF
39
13.2
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
88
1.84
6.8
59.8
HCL-HF
32
9.6
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
89
1.74
7.1
70
HCL-HF
39
7.5
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
90
2.18
7.1
70
HCL-HF
32
9.8
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
91
1.86
7.2
70
HCL-HF
44
8.6
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
92
1.67
7.2
70
HCL-HF
38
6.9
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
93
1.83
7.5
70
HCL-HF
49
6.4
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
94
1.55
7.2
70
HCL-HF
44
4
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
95
1.68
7
70
HCL-HF
36
9.1
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
96
1.89
7.1
70
HCL-HF
51
7.7
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
97
1.97
7.8
103
HCL-HF
65
12.8
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
0
98
1.81
7 '
119.6
HCL-HF
41
12.7
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
99
1.88
7.3
140
HCL-HF
64
9.9
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
100
2.21
7.3
140
HCL-HF
62
9.9
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
101
1.99
7.4
140
HCL-HF
59
9.9
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
0
102
1.89
7.3
140
HCL-HF
56
8
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
103
1.94
7.4
140
HCL-HF
61
7.8
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
104
1.72
7.4
140
HCL-HF
68
4.4
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
0
105
1.79
7.2
140
HCL-HF
50
8.4
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
106
1.87
7.2
140
HCL-HF
54
8.7
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
107
2.23
7.5
206
HCL-HF
150
6.4
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
108
2.22
6.4
239.2
HCL-HF
64
13.9
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
109
2.28
6.5
280
HCL-HF
92
5.6
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
0
110
2.61
6.5
397
HCL-HF
112
9
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
111
2.74
6.5
482
HCL-HF
117
12.4
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
0
F-64
-------
TABLE F-2 (oont)
YIELD
YIELO
YIELD
COMPONENT
REDUCTION
COMPONENT
METAL
MEASURED
%
MEASURED
PHYTOTOXICITY
75
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
76
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
77
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
78
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
79
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
80
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
81
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
82
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
83
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
84
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
85
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
86
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
87
GRAIN
NA
STOVER
NO
88
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
89
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
90
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
91
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
92
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
93
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
94
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
95
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
. 96
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
97
GRAIN
NA
STOVER
NO
98
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
99
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
100
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
101
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
102
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
103
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
104
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
105
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
106
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
107
GRAIN
NA
STOVER
NO
108
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
109
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
110
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
111
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
F-65
-------
TABLE F-2 (cont.)
COMMENTS
LOCATION
75
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
76
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
77
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
78
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
79
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
80
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
81
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
82
. JOLIET, ILLINOIS
83
JOUET, ILLINOIS
84
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
85
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
86
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
87
JOUET, ILLINOIS
88
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
89
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
90
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
91
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
92
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
93
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
94
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
95
JOUET, ILUNOIS
96
JOUET. ILLINOIS
97
JOLIET. ILUNOIS
98
JOLIET, ILUNOIS
99
JOUET. ILUNOIS
100
JOUET, ILLINOIS
101
JOUET, ILUNOIS
102
JOLIET, ILUNOIS
103
JOLIET, ILUNOIS
104
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
105
•
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
106.
JOUET. ILLINOIS
107
JOLIET. ILUNOIS
108
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
109
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
110
JOUET. ILLINOIS
111
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
F-60
-------
TABLE F-2 (oont.)
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
LITERATURE
PLANT
SLUDGE
VOL SOLIDS
Al
Ca
Cd
Cr
Cu
CITATION
NAME
CULTIVAR
dH
%
%
%
mafoa
mo/ko
mfl/ko
112
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
113
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
114
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
115
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
116
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
117
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
118
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
119
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
120
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
121
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
122
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
123
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
124
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
125
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
126
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
127
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
CO
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
129
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
130
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
131
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
132
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
133
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
134
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
135
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963.
1422
136
HINESLY 1985
CORN
¦
3.4
263
2963
1422
137
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
138
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
139
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
140
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
141
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
142
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
143
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
144
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
145
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
146
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
147
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
148
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
F-67
-------
TABLE F-2 (cont.)
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUOGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
Fe
N
Ni
P
Pb
Zn
SOLIDS
BIOLOGICAL
CHEMICAL
%
%
mo/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
CONTNT
PROCESSING
STABILIZATN
,
112
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
113
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
114
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
115
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
116
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
117
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
118
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
119
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
120
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
121
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
122
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
123
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
124
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
125
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
126
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
127
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
128
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
129
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
130
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
131
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
132
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
133
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
134
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
135
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
136
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
137
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
138
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
139
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
140
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
141
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
142
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059 '
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC OIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
143
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
144
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
145
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
146
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
147
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
148
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
F-68
-------
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
TABLE F-2 (oont.)
ANNL SLUDGE
CUMML SLUDGE
YEARS
SOIL
SOIL
SAND
SILT
CLAY
LOADNG RATE
LOADNG RATE
SINCE LAST
TAXONOMIC
SERIES
SOIL
CONTENT
CONTENT
CONTENT
Mg/ha
Mfl/ha
APPLICATN
NAME
NAME
TEXTURE
%
%
%
72
428.3
ELUOT
SiL
428.3
ELUOT
SiL
428.3
ELLIOT
SiL
428.3
ELUOT
SiL
428.3
ELUOT
SiL
NA
PLAINRELD
SL
NA
PLAINFIELD
SL
NA
PLAINFIELD
SL
NA
PLAINFIELD
SL
NA
PLAINFIELD
SL
NA
PLAINFIELD
SL
NA
PLAINFIELD
SL
NA
PLAINFIELD
SL
NA
PLAINFIELD
SL
NA
PLAINFIELD
SL
14.5
31.8
PLAINFIELD
SL
11.1
42.9
PLAINFIELD
SL
15.3
58.2
PLAINFIELD
SL
58.2
PLAINFIELD
SL
58.2
PLAINFIELD
SL
58.2
PLAINFIELD
SL
58.2
PLAINRELD
SL
58.2
PLAINFIELD
SL
58.2
PLAINFIELD
SL
58.2
PLAINRELD
SL
29
63.6
PLAINRELD
SL
22.2
85.8
PLAINRELD
SL
30.6
116.4
PLAINRELD
SL
116.4
PLAINRELD
SL
116.4
PLAINRELD
SL
116.4
PLAfNRELD
SL
116.4
PLAINRELD
SL
116.4
PLAINRELD
SL
116.4
PLAINRELD
SL
116.4
PLAtNRELD
SL
67.8
127
PLAINRELD
SL
44.4
171.4
PLAtNRELD
SL
c_«o
-------
TABLE F-2
-------
TABLE F-2 (cont.)
YIELD
YIELD
YIELD
COMPONENT
REDUCTION
COMPONENT
METAL
MEASURED
%
MEASURED
PHYTOTOXICITY
112
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
113
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
114
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
115
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
116
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
117
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
118
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
119
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
120
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
121
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
122
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
123
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
124
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
125
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
126
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
127
GRAIN
NA
STOVER
NO
128
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
129
GRAIN
0
STOVER 1
NO
130
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
131
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
132
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
133
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
134
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
135
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
136
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
137 •
GRAIN
NA
STOVER
NO
138
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
139
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
140
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
141
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
142
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
143
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
144
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
145
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
146
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
147
GRAIN
NA
STOVER
NO
148
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
F-71
-------
TABLE F-2 (cont.)
COMMENTS
LOCATION
112
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
113
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
114
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
115
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
116
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
117
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
118
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
119
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
120
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
121
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
122
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
123
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
124
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
125
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
126
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
127
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
128
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
129
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
130
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
131
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
132
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
133
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
134
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
135
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
136
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
137
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
138
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
139
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
140
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
141
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
142
JOUET, ILLINOIS
143
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
144
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
145
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
146
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
147
JOUET, ILLINOIS
148
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
F-72
-------
TABLE F-2 (cont.)
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
LITERATURE
PLANT
SLUDGE
VOL SOLIDS
Al
Ca
Cd
Cr
Cu
CITATION
NAME
CULTIVAR
PH
%
%
%
mg/ka
mg/ka
ma/ko
149
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
150
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
151
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
152
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
153
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
154
HINESLY 1985
CORN j
3.4
263
2963
1422
155
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
156
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
157
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
158
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
159
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
160
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
161
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
162
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
163
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
164
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
165
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
166
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
167
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
168
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
169
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
170
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
171
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
172
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
173
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
174
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
175
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
'2846
1311
176
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
177
HINESLY 1985
CORN
•
3.2
265
2846
1311
178
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
178
HINESLY 1985
CORN
•
3.2
265
2846
1311
180
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
181
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
182
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
183
HtNESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
12846
1311
184
H»N£SLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
185
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
P.73
-------
TABLE F-2 (cont.)
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUOGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
Fa
N
Ni
P
Pb
Zn
SOLIDS
BIOLOGICAL
CHEMICAL
%
%
ma/kfl
ma/kq
mn/ka
ma/kfl
CONTNT
PROCESSING
STABILIZATN
.
149
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
150
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
151
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
152
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
153
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
154
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
155
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
156
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
157
4.2
5.5
305 j
3.3
1169 j
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
158
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
159
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
160
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FEC13
161
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
162
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
163
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
164
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
165
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
166
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
167
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
168
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
169
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
170
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
171
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
172
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
173
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
174
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
175
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
176
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
177
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAER0&|£ DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
178
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, 1 >N£EB$BlC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
179
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
180
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
181
4.2
5.5.
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
182
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
183
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
184
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
185
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
F-74
-------
TABLE F-2 (cont.)
ANNL SLUDGE
CUMML SLUDGE
YEARS
SOIL
SOIL
SAND
SILT
CLAY
SOIL
LOADNG RATE
LOADNG RATE
SINCE LAST
TAXONOMIC
SERIES
SOIL
CONTENT
CONTENT
CONTENT
CEC
Mo/ba
Mg/ha
APPLICATN
NAME
NAME
TEXTURE
%
%
%
cmol/kg
149
61.1
232.5
0
PLAINFIELD
SL
150
69.8
302.3
0
PLAINFIELD
SL
151
54
356.3
0
PLAINFIELD
SL
152
72
428.3
0
PLAINFIELD
SL
153
0
428.3
1
PLAINFIELD
SL
154
0
428.3
2
PLAINFIELD
SL
155
0
428.3
3
PLAINFIELD
SL
156
0
428.3
4
PLAINFIELD
SL
157
G
0
NA
BLOUNT
SiL
158
0
0
NA
BLOUNT
SiL
159
0
0
NA
BLOUNT
SiL
160
0
0
NA
BLOUNT
SiL
161
0
0
NA
BLOUNT
SiL
162
26.2
40.1
0
BLOUNT
SiL
163
8.1
48.2
0
BLOUNT
SIL
164
14.7
62.9
0
BLOUNT
SiL
165
17.7
80.6
0
BLOUNT
SiL
166
13.1
93.7
0
BLOUNT
SIL
167
52.4
80.2
0
BLOUNT
SIL
168
16.2
96.4
0
BLOUNT
SiL
169
29.4
125.8
0
BLOUNT
SIL
170
35.4
161.2
0
BLOUNT
SiL
171
26.2
187.4
0
BLOUNT
SIL
172
104.8
160.4
0
BLOUNT
SiL
173
32.4
192.8
0
BLOUNT
SIL
174
58.8
251.6
0
BLOUNT
SIL
175
70.8
322.4
0
BLOUNT
SIL
176
52.4
374.8
0
BLOUNT
SIL
177
0
0
NA
*
ELLIOT
. SIL
178
0
0
NA
ELLIOT
SIL
179
0
0
NA
*
ELLIOT
SiL
180
0
0
NA
ELUOT
SiL
.
181
0
0
NA
ELLIOT '
SiL
182
0
0
NA
ELLIOT
SiL
183
0
0
NA
ELLIOT
SIL
184
0
0
NA
ELUOT
SH.
185
0
0
NA
EUJOT
SIL
-------
TABLE F-2 (cont.)
SOIL
CUMM CU
SOIL CU
PLANT CU
PLANT
YIELD
OC
SOIL
LOADING
SOIL
CONCENTRTN
CONCENTRTN
TISSUE
DESCRIPTION OF
REDUCTION
%
pH
RATE (kg/ha)
EXTRACTANT
mo/kg
mo/kg
SAMPLED
EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN
%
149
2.4
6.8
397
HCL-HF
118
11.1
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
0
150
1.85
6.5
482
HCL-HF
60
11.9
• LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
151'
11/8
6.1
609
HCL-HF
104
13.2
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
0
152
1.96
6.2
609
HCL-HF
116
15.3
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
153
2.84
6
609
HCL-HF
164
9.3
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
0
154
3.35
5.9
609
HCL-HF
245
5.9
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
155
2.1
6.2
609
HCL-HF
150
9.9
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
156
3.03
6.1
609
HCL-HF
224
7.1
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
157
1.19
NA
0
HCL-HF
20
8.9
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
158
1.01
7.1
0
HCL-HF
15
11.2
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
159
0.93
7.5
0
HCL-HF
19
10.3
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
160
1.05
7.7
0
HCL-HF
20
9.8
LEAF
SLUDGE; FIELD, MATURITY '
0
161
1.07
7.3
0
HCL-HF
22
10.6
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
0
162
1.29
NA
52
HCL-HF
30
9.4
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
163
1.06
7.2
58
HCL-HF
24
11.7
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
164
1.1
7.6
67
HCL-HF
35
6.9
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
0
165
1.29
7.6
96
HCL-HF
39
11.8
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
60*
166
1.17
7.6
117
HCL-HF
47
10.4
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
28*
167
1.38
NA
105
HCL-HF
44
9.7
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
168
1.15
7.1
116
HCL-HF
27
12.6
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
0
169
1.29
7.6
135
HCL-HF
45
6.2
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
0
170
1.58
7.6
192
HCL-HF
52
9.9
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
171
1.75
7.5
235
HCL-HF
75
11.3
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
172
1.63
NA
210
HCL-HF
66
9.3
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELb, MATURITY
0
173
1.28
6.9
232
HCL-HF
50
14.3
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
174
1.59
7.5
270
HCL-HF
76
6.1
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
175
1.9
7.5
384
HCL-HF
78
11.1
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
176
2.56
7.3
469
HCL-HF
133
13.1
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
177
1.51
NA
0
HCL-HF
19
9
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
178
1.34
7
0
HCL-HF
13
10.1
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
179
1.29
7.2
0
HCL-HF
18
4.6
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
180
1.45
7.1
0
HCL-HF
19
10
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
181
1.3
7.6
0
HCL-HF
22
8.3
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
182
1.3
7
0
HCL-HF
19
8.3
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
183
1.41
7.2
0
HCL-HF
20
8
LEAF
SLUDGE, HELD, MATURITY
0
184
1.32
6.7
0
HCL-HF
24
6.5
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
185
1.38
7
0
HCL-HF
23
8.4
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
0
F-76
-------
TABLE F-2 (cont.)
YIELO
YIELD
YIELD
COMPONENT
REDUCTION
COMPONENT
METAL
MEASURED
%
MEASURED
PH YTOT OXICITY
149
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
150
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
151
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
152
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
153
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
154
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
155
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
156
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
157
GRAIN
NA
STOVER
NO
158
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
159
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
160
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
161
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
162
GRAIN
NA
STOVER
NO
163
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
164
GRAIN
37*
STOVER
•NO
165
GRAIN
0
STOVER
•NO
166
GRAIN
0
STOVER
•NO
167
GRAIN
NA
STOVER
NO
168
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
169
GRAIN
22*
STOVER
•NO
. 170
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
171
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
172
GRAIN
NA
STOVER
NO
173
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
174
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
175
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
176
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
177
GRAIN
NA
STOVER
NO
178
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
179
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
180
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
181
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
182
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
183
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
184
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
185
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
F-77
-------
149
ISO
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
TABLE F-2 (cont.)
COMMENTS
LOCATION
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
•DOSE RESPONSE AND TISSUE 2N CONCENTRATION NOT CONSISTENT
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
¦DOSE RESPONSE AND TISSUE ZN CONCENTRATION NOT CONSISTENT
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
"DOSE RESPONSE AND TISSUE ZN CONCENTRATION NOT CONSISTENT
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
•DOSE RESPONSE AND TISSUE ZN CONCENTRATION NOT CONSISTENT
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
F-78
-------
TABLE F-2 (cont.)
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
LITERATURE
PLANT
SLUDGE
VOL SOLIDS
Al
Ca
Cd
Cr
Cu
CITATION
NAME
CULTIVAR
pH
%
%
%
mo/kfl
mn/kn
mg/kg
186
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
187
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
188
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
189
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
190
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
191
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
192
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
193
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
194
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
195
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
196
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
197
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
198
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
199
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
200
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
201
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
202
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
203
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
204
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
205
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
200
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
207
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2840
1311
208
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
209
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
210
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2840
1311
211
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2840
1311
212
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
*2840
1311
213
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2840
1311
214
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
205
2840
1311
215
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2840
1311
216
HINESLY 1985
CORN
*
3.2
265
2840
1311
217
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2840
1311
218
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2840
1311
219
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2840
1311
220
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
*2840
1311
221
HtNESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2840
1311
222
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
-------
TABLE F-2 (oont.)
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
Fe
N
Ni
P
Pb
Zn
SOLIDS
BIOLOGICAL
CHEMICAL
%
%
mg/kn
mfj/ko
mo/kfl
mn/ko
CONTNT
PROCESSING
STABILIZATN
,
186
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
187
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
188
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
189
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
190
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
191
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
192
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
193
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
194
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
195
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
196
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
197
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
198
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
199
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
200
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
201
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TPTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
202
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
203
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
204
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
205
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
206
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
207
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
208
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
209
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
210
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
211
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
212
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
213
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
214
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
215
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
216
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
217
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
218
4.2
5.5.
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
219
4.2
9.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
220
4.2
6.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
221
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
222
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
F-80
-------
TABLE F-2 (oont.)
ANNL SLUDGE
CUMML SLUDGE
YEARS
son.
SOIL
SAND
SILT
CLAY
son.
LOADNG RATE
LOADNG RATE
SINCE LAST
TAXONOMIC
SERIES
SOIL
CONTENT
CONTENT
CONTENT
CEC
Mo/ha
Mg/ha
APPUCATN
NAME
NAME
TEXTURE
%
%
%
cmol/ko
186
0
0
NA
ELLIOT
SiL
187
0
0
NA
ELLIOT
S1L
188
26.2
40.1
0
ELLIOT
SIL
189
8.1
48.2
0
ELUOT
SiL
190
14.7
62.9
0
ELLIOT
SIL
191
17.7
80.6
0
ELLIOT
SIL
192
13.1
93.7
0
ELLIOT
SIL
193
. 17.8
111.5
0
ELLIOT
SiL
194
0
111.5
1
ELLIOT
SiL
195
0
111.5
2
ELLIOT
SIL
196
0
111.5
3
ELLIOT
SIL
197
0
111.5
4
ELLIOT
SiL
198
0
111.5
5
ELLIOT
SiL
199
52.4
80.2
0
ELLIOT
SiL
200
16.2
96.4
0
ELLIOT
SiL
201
29.4
125.8
0
ELLIOT
SiL
202
35.4
161.2
0
ELUOT
SiL
203
26.2
187.4
0
ELUOT
SiL
204
35.6
223
0
ELLIOT
SiL
205
0
223
1
ELLIOT
SiL
206
0
223
2
ELLIOT
SiL
207
0
223
3
ELLIOT
SiL
208
0
223
4
ELUOT
SiL
209
0
223
5
ELUOT
SiL
210
104.8
160.4
0
ELUOT
SiL
211
32.4
192.8
0
ELLIOT
SiL
212
58.8
251.6
0
ELLIOT
SiL
213
70.8
322.4
0
ELLIOT
SiL
214
52.4
374.8
0
ELLIOT
• SiL
215
71.2
446
0
ELLIOT
SiL
216
0
446
1
ELUOT
SiL
217
0
446
2
ELLIOT
SiL
218
0
446
3
ELUOT
SiL
219
0
446
4
ELUOT
SiL
220
0
446
5
ELLIOT
SiL
221
0
0
NA
PLAINFIELD
SL
222
0
0
NA
PLAINFIELD
SL
F-81
-------
TABLE F-2 (cont.)
SOIL
CUMM C'J
SOIL CU
PLANT CU
PLANT
YIELD
OC
SOIL
LOADING
SOIL
CONCENTRTN
CONCENTRTN
TISSUE
DESCRIPTION OF
REDUCTION
%
pH
RATE (kfl/hal
EXTRACTANT
mg/kfl
mn/kfl
SAMPLED
EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN
%
186
1.69
7
0
HCL-HF
23
8.3
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
187
1.48
7.4
0
HCL-HF
22
NA
¦ LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
188
1.52
NA
i 52
HCL-HF
30
9.6
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
0
189
1.4
6.9
58
HCL-HF
20
10.7
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
190
1.35
7.2
67
HCL-HF
27
6.2
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
191
1.58
7.4
96
HCL-HF
36
9.8
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
60"
192
1.54
7.1
117
HCL-HF
52
13.2
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
28*
193
1.64
6.9
146
HCL-HF
50
9.7
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
194
1.69
6.9
146
HCL-HF
54
9.7
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
195
1.91
7
146
HCL-HF
45
4.8
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
196
1.66
7.3
146
HCL-HF
67
6.8
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
0
197
2.05
7.1
146
HCL-HF
63
6.4
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
198
1.95
7.2
146
HCL-HF
48
NA
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
199
1.71
NA
105
HCL-HF
38
10.8
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
200
1.57
6.9
116
HCL-HF
28
12.4 *
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
201
1.57
7.3
135
HCL-HF
41
5.8
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
202
1.79
7.1
192
HCL-HF
46
10.3
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
203
1.93
6.9
235
HCL-HF
64
11.7
LEAF
.SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
204
2.09
6.6
292
HCL-HF
80
14.7
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
0
205
2.37
6.4
292
HCL-HF
96
10.6
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
206
2.4
6.4
292
HCL-HF
101
6.1
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
207
2.4
6.8
292
HCL-HF
108
8.1
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
208
2.38
6.8
292
HCL-HF
91
6.8
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
209
2.48
7.2
292
HCL-HF
89
NA
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
0
210
2.06
NA
210
HCL-HF
60
10.4
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
211
2
6.4
232
HCL-HF
50
11
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
0
212
1.76
6.4
270
HCL-HF
56
6.2
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
213
2.67
6.2
384
HCL-HF
90
11.7
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
214
2.72
6.1
469
HCL-HF
115
12.2
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
215
3.53
5.4
584
HCL-HF
171
11.6
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
0
216
3.35
5.5
584
HCL-HF
171
11.3
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
217
3.29
5.8
584
HCL-HF
148
8.7
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
• 218
2.68
6
584
HCL-HF
140
8.9
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
219
3.02
6
584
HCL-HF
188
8.2
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
220
2.2
6.3
584
HCL-HF
97
NA
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
221
0.36
NA
0
HCL-HF
7
7.3
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
0
222
0.17
7
0
HCL-HF
7
10.4
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
0
F-82
-------
TABLE F-2 (oort.)
YIELD
YIELD
YIELD
COMPONENT
REDUCTION
COMPONENT
METAL
MEASURED
%
MEASURED
PHYTOTOXICITY
186
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
187
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
188
GRAIN
NA
STOVER
NO
189
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
190
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
191
GRAIN
0
STOVER
•NO
192
GRAIN
0
STOVER
•NO
193
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
194
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
195
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
196
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
197
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
198
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
199
GRAIN
NA
STOKER
NO
200
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
201
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
202
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
203
GRAIN
C
STOVER
NO
204
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
205
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
206
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
. 207
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
208
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
209
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
210
GRAIN
NA
STOVER
NO
211
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
212
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
213
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
214
GRAIN
0
STOVER .
NO
215
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
216
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
217
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
218
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
219
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
220
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
221
GRAIN
NA
STOVER
NO
222
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
F-83
-------
TABLE F-2 (cont.)
COMMENTS
LOCATION
186
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
187
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
188
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
189
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
190
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
191
•DOSE RESPONSE AND TISSUE ZN CONCENTRATION NOT CONSISTENT
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
192
•DOSE RESPONSE AND TISSUE ZN CONCENTRATION NOT CONSISTENT
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
193
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
194
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
195
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
196
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
197
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
198
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
199
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
200
«
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
201
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
202
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
203
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
204
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
205
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
206
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
207
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
208
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
209
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
210
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
211
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
212
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
213
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
214
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
215
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
216
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
217
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
218
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
219
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
220
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
221
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
222
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
F-84
-------
TABLE F-2 (com.)
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
LITERATURE
PLANT
SLUDGE
VOL SOLIDS
Al
Ca
Cd
Cr
Cu
CITATION
NAME
CULTIVAR
PH
%
S
%
mo/kg
ma/kg
mg/kg
223
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
224
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
225
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
226
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
227
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
228
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
229
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
230
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311 .
231
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
232
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
233
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
234
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
235
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
236
HINESLY 1985
CORN
*
3.2
265
2846
1311
237
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
238
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
239
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
240
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
241
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
2S5
2846
1311
242
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
243
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
244
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
245
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
240
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
247
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
248
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
249
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
'2846
1311
250
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
251
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
252
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
253
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
254
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
255
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
256
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
257
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
258
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
259
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
F-85
-------
TABLE F-2 (cont.)
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
Fe
N
Ni
P
Pb
Zn
SOLIDS
BIOLOGICAL
CHEMICAL
%
%
mo/kfl
mq/ka
ma/kg
ma/ka
CONTNT
PROCESSING
STABIUZATN
,
223
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
224
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
225
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
226
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
227
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
228
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
229
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
230
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
231
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
232
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
233
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
234
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
235
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
236
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
237
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
238
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
239
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
240
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
241
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
242
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
243
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
244
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
245
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
246
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
247
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
248
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
249
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
250
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
251
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
252
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
253
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
254
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
255
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
256
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
257
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
258
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
259 I 4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
F-86
-------
TABLE F-2 (cont.)
ANNL SLUDGE
CUMML SLUDGE
YEARS
SOIL
SOIL
SAND
SILT
CLAY
SOIL
LOADNG RATE
LOADNG RATE
SINCE LAST
TAXONOMIC
SERIES
SOIL
CONTENT
CONTENT
CONTENT
CEC
Ma/ha
Mo/ha
APPUCATN
NAME
NAME
TEXTURE
%
%
%
cmd/ko
223
0
0
NA
PLAINRELD
SL
224
0
0
NA
PLAINRELD
SL
225
0
0
NA
PLAINRELD
SL
226
0
0
NA
PLAINRELD
SL
227
0
0 .
NA
PLAINRELD
SL
228
0
0
NA
PLAINRELD
SL
229
0
0
NA
PLAINRELD
SL
230
0
0
NA
PLAINRELD
SL
231
0
0
NA
PLAINRELD
SL
232
26.2
40.1
0
PLAINRELD
SL
233
8.1
48.2
0
PLAINRELD
SL
234
14.7
62.9
0
PLAINRELD
SL
235
17.7
80.6
0
PLAINRELD
SL
236
13.1
93.7
0
PLAINRELD
SL
237
17.8
111.5
0
PLAINRELD
SL
238
0
111.5
1
PLAINRELD
SL
239
0
111.5
2
PLAINRELD
SL
240
0
111.5
A
o
PLAINRELD
SL
241
0
111.5
4
PLAINRELD
SL
242
0
111.5
5
PLAINRELD
SL
243
52.4
80.2
0
PLAINRELD
SL
244
16.2
96.4
0
PLAINRELD
SL
245
29.4
125.8
0
PLAINRELD
SL
246
35.4
161.2
0
PLAINRELD
SL
247
26.2
187.4
0
PLAINRELD
SL
248
35.6
223
0
PLAINRELD
SL
249
0 J
223
1
PLAINRELD
SL
250
0
223
2
PLAINRELD
SL
251
0
223
3
PLAINRELD
. SL
252
0
223
4
PLAINRELD
SL
253
0
223
5
PLAINRELD
SL
254
104.8
160.4
0
PLAINRELD
SL
255
32.4
192.8
0
PLAINRELD'
SL
256
58.8
251.6
0
PLAINRELD
SL
257
70.8
322.4
0
PLAINRELD
SL
258
52.4
374.8
0
PLAINRELD
SL
259
71.2
446
0
PLAINRELD
SL
F-87
-------
TABLE F-2 Icont.)
SOIL
CUMM CU
SOIL CU
PLANT CU
PLANT
YIELD
OC
SOIL
LOADING
SOIL
CONCENTRTN
CONCENTRTN
TISSUE
DESCRIPTION OF
REDUCTION
%
pH
RATE (kg/ha)
EXTRACTANT
mg/ka
ma/kg
SAMPLED
EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN
%
223
0.21
7.2
0
HCL-HF
6
7.9
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
224
0.42
7.1
0
HCL-HF
9
7
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
225
0.44
7
0
HCL-.HF
14
5.7
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
226
0.56
6.9
0
HCL-HF
6
7.7
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
227
0.48
7
0
HCL-HF
14
4.6
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
228
0.75
7
0
HCL-HF
7
4.5
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
229
0.76
7
0
HCL-HF
22
7.2
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
230
1.21
6.9
0
HCL-HF
24
5.6
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
231
0.84
7.1
0
HCL-HF
30
NA
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
232
0.31
NA
52
HCL-HF
23
9.1
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
233
0.44
7.2
58
HCL-HF
23
12.4
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
234
0.63
7.3
67
HCL-HF
33
5.9
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
235
0.67
7.5
96
HCL-HF
28
8.1
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
60*
236
0.78
7
117
HCL-HF
45
11.1
LEAF
SLUDGE! FIELD. MATURITY
60*
237
0.8
7
146
HCL-HF
42
9.7 *
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
238
0.99
6.6
146
HCL-HF
62
7.8
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
239
1.42
7.1
146
HCL-HF
71
3
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
240
1.71
7.2
146
HCL-HF
92
6.5
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
241
1.82
7.2
146
HCL-HF
93
7.3
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
242
1.96
7.1
146
HCL-HF
69
NA
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
243
0.43
NA
105
HCL-HF
35
9.6
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
NA
244
0.51
7.1
116
HCL-HF
26
12.4
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
245
0.94
7
135
HCL-HF .
53
7.9
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
246
1.16
7.2
192
HCL-HF
57
10
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
247
1.4
7
235
HCL-HF
65
10.6
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
248
1.75
6.4
292
HCL-HF
99
13
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
249
2
6.3
292
HCL-HF
111
9.7
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
250
2.16
6.8
292
HCL-HF
102
5.3
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
251
2.02
6.8
292
HCL-HF
151
8.4
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
252
2.33
7.1
292
HCL-HF
146
6.9
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
253
1.66
7
292
HCL-HF
124
NA
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
254
0.73
NA
210
HCL-HF
61
9.9
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
255
0.57
6.8
232
HCL-HF
33
14.8
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
256
1.3
6.7
270
HCL-HF
73
8.8
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
257
1.42
6.6
384
HCL-HF
77
13.3
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
258
2.4
6.4
469
HCL-HF
162
14.7
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
259
2.76
6.1
584
HCL-HF
155
17.2
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
F-88
-------
TABLE F-2 (cont.l
YIELD
YIELD
YIELD
COMPONENT
REDUCTION
COMPONENT
METAL
MEASURED
%
MEASURED
PHYTOTOXICITY
223
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
224
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
225
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
226
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
227
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
228
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
229
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
230
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
231
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
232
GRAIN
NA
STOVER
NO
233
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
234.
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
235
GRAIN
0
STOVER
•NO
236
GRAIN
0
STOVER
•NO
237
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
238
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
239
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
240
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
241
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
242
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
243
GRAIN
NA
STOVER
NO
. 244
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
245
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
246
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
247
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
248
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
249
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
250
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
251
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
252
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
253
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
254
GRAIN
NA
STOVER
NO
255
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
256
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
257
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
258
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
259
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
-------
TABLE F-2 (cont.)
COMMENTS
LOCATION
223
JOUET, ILLINOIS
224
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
225
JOUET, ILLINOIS
226
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
227
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
228
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
229
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
230
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
231
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
232
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
233
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
234
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
235
•DOSE RESPONSE AND TISSUE ZN CONCENTRATION NOT CONSISTENT
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
236
•DOSE RESPONSE AND TISSUE ZN CONCENTRATION NOT CONSISTENT
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
237
•
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
238
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
239
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
240
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
241
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
242
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
243
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
244
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
245
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
246
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
247
JOUET. ILLINOIS
248
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
249
JOLIET. ILUNOIS
250
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
251
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
252
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
253
JOUET, ILLINOIS
254
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
255
JOLIET. ILUNOIS
256
JOUET. ILUNOIS
257
JOLIET, ILUNOIS
258
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
259
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
F-90
-------
TABLE F-2 (cont.)
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
LITERATURE
PLANT
SLUDGE
VOL SOLIDS
Al
Ca
Cd
Cr
Cu
CITATION
NAME
CULTIVAR
PH
%
%
%
ma/ka
ma/ka
ma/ka
260
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
261
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
262
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
263
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
264
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
265
DAVIS 1981
HERBAGE
1040
266
DAVIS 1981
HERBAGE
1040
267
DAVIS 1981
HERBAGE
1040
268
DAVIS 1981
HERBAGE
1040
269
DAVIS 1981
HERBAGE
1040
270
DAVIS 1981
HERBAGE
1040
271
DAVIS 1981
HERBAGE
1040
272
DAVIS 1981
HERBAGE
1040
273
DAVIS 1981
HERBAGE
"
1040
274
DAVIS 1981
HERBAGE
<
1040
275
DAVIS 1981
HERBAGE
1040
270
DAVIS 1981
HERBAGE
1040
277
DAVIS 1981
HERBAGE
1040
278
DAVIS 1981
HERBAGE
1040
279
DAVIS 1981
HERBAGE
1040
280
HAM &DOWDY 1978
SOYBEAN
MERRILL
1.41
4.98
12
1100
2020
281
HAM &DOWDY 1978
SOYBEAN
MERRILL
1.41
4.98
12
1100
2020
282
HAM &DOWDY 1978
SOYBEAN
MERRILL
1.41
4.98
12
1100
2020
283
HAM &DOWDY 1978
SOYBEAN
MERRILL
4.98
12
1100
2020
284
HAM &DOWDY 1978
SOYBEAN
MERRILL
1.41
4.98
12
1100
2020
285
HAM &DOWDY 1978
SOYBEAN
MERRILL
1.41
4.98
12
1100
2020
286
HAM &D0WDY 1978
SOYBEAN
MERRILL
1.41
4.98
12
*1100
2020
287
HAM &D0WDY 1978
SOYBEAN
MERRILL
1.41
4.98
12
1100
2020
288
HAM ft DOWDY 1978
SOYBEAN
MERRILL
1.41
4.98
12
1100
2020
283
HAM &DOWDY 1978
SOYBEAN
MERRILL
1.41
4.98
12
1100
2020
290
KING ft MORRIS 1972
RYE
1.42
453
291
KING ft MORRIS 1972
RYE
1.42
453
292
KING ft MORRIS 1972
RYE
1.42
453
293
KING ft MORRIS 1972
RYE
1.42
453
294
KING ft MORRIS 1972
RYE
1.42
453
295
KfNG ft MORRIS 1972
RYE
1.42
453
29 S
KING ft MORRIS 1972
RYE
1.42
453
Ml
-------
TABLE F-2 (cont.)
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
Fe
N
Ni
P
Pb
Zn
SOLIDS
BIOLOGICAL
CHEMICAL
%
%
ma/kg
mo/kfl
mq/kfl
mn/kfl
CONTNT
PROCESSING
STABILIZATN
•
260
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
261
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
262
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
263
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
264
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
265
DIGESTED
266
DIGESTED
267
DIGESTED
268
DIGESTED
269
DIGESTED
270
DIGESTED
271
DIGESTED
272
DIGESTED
273
DIGESTED
274
DIGESTED
275
DIGESTED
276
DIGESTED
277
DIGESTED
278
DIGESTED
279
DIGESTED
280
1.6
2.73
4.4
4.37
2560
2130
AIR DRY
ANAEROBIC DIGESTED
281
1.6
2.73
4.4
4.37
2560
2130
AIR DRY
ANAEROBIC DIGESTED
282
1.6
2.73
4.4
4.37
2560
2130
AIR DRY
ANAEROBIC DIGESTED
283
1.6
2.73
4.4
4.37 :
2560
2130
AIR DRY
ANAEROBIC DIGESTED
284
1.6
2.73
4.4
4.37
2560
2130
AIR DRY
ANAEROBIC DIGESTED
285
1.6
2.73
4.4
4.37
2560
2130
AIR DRY
ANAEROBIC DIGESTED
286
1.6
2.73
4.4
4.37
2560
2130
AIR DRY
ANAEROBIC DIGESTED
287
1.6
2.73
4.4
4.37
2560
2130
AIR DRY
ANAEROBIC DIGESTED
288
1.6
2.73
4.4
4.37
2560
2130
AIR DRY
ANAEROBIC DIGESTED
289
1.6
2.73
4.4
4.37
2560
2130
AIR DRY
ANAEROBIC DIGESTED
290
2.96
25
0.79
2415
0.06
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
291
2.96
25
0.79
2415
0.06
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
292
2.96
25
0.79
2415
0.06
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
293
2.96
25
0.79
2415
0.06
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
294
2.96
25
0.79
2415
0.06
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
295
2.96
25
0.79
2415
0.06
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
296
2.96
25
0.79
2415
0.06
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
F-92
-------
TABLE F-2 (cont.)
ANNL SLUDGE
CUMML SLUDGE
YEARS
SOIL
SOIL
SAND
SILT
CLAY
SOIL
LOADNG RATE
LOADNG RATE
SINCE LAST
TAXONOMIC
SERIES
. SOIL
CONTENT
CONTENT
CONTENT
CEC
Ma/ha
Mg/ha
APPLICATN
NAME
NAME
TEXTURE
%
%
%
cmol/kg
260
0
446
1
PLAINFIELD
SL
261
0
446
2
PLAINFIELD
SL
262
0
446
3
PLAINFIELD
SL
263
0
446
4
PLAINFIELD
SL
264
0
446
5
PLAINFIELD
SL
265
0
0
0
LANDFILL CAP
CLAY
266
53
53
0
LANDFILL CAP
CLAY
267
107
107
0
LANDFILL CAP
CLAY
268
213
213
0
LANDFILL CAP
CLAY
269
426
426
0
LANDFILL CAP
CLAY
270
0
0
1
LANDFILL CAP
CLAY
271
53
53
1
LANDFILL CAP .
CLAY
272
107
107
1
LANDFILL CAP
CLAY
273
213
213
1
LANDFILL CAP
«
CLAY
274
426
426
1
LANDFILL CAP
CLAY
275
0
0
2
LANDFILL CAP
CLAY
276
53
53
2
LANDFILL CAP
CLAY
277
107
107
2
LANDFILL CAP
CLAY
278
213
213
2
LANDFILL CAP
CLAY
279
426
426
2
LANDFILL CAP
CLAY
280
0
0
0
TYPIC TAPLUDOLL
WAUKEGAN
SIL
281
25
25
0
TYPIC TAPLUDOLL
WAUKEGAN
SIL
282
50
50
0
TYPIC TAPLUDOLL
WAUKEGAN
SIL
283
100
100
0
TYPIC TAPLUDOLL
WAUKEGAN
SIL
284
200
200
0
TYPIC TAPLUDOLL
WAUKEGAN
SIL
285
0
0
1
TYPIC TAPLUDOLL
WAUKEGAN
SIL
286
25
25
1
TYPIC TAPLUDOLL
WAUKEGAN
SIL
287
50
50
1
TYPIC TAPLUDOLL
WAUKEGAN
SIL
288
100
100
1
TYPIC TAPLUDOLL
WAUKEGAN
. SIL
289
200
200
1
TYPIC TAPLUDOLL
WAUKEGAN
SIL
290
0
0
0
TYPIC HAPLUDULT
CECIL
SCL
291
26.5
26.5
0
TYPIC HAPLUDULT
CECIL
SCL
.
292
52.5
52.5
0
TYPIC HAPLUDULT
CECIL '
SCL
293
60
60
0
TYPIC HAPLUDULT
CECIL
SCL
294
120
120
0
TYPIC HAPLUDULT
CECIL
SCL
295
0
0
0
TYPtC HAPLUDULT
CECU.
SCL
296
15.1
41.6
0
TYPIC HAPLUDULT
CECIL
SCL
M3
-------
TABLE F-2 (cont.)
SOIL
CUMM CU
SOIL CU
PLANT CU
PLANT
YIELD
OC
SOIL
LOADING
SOIL
CONCENTRTN
CONCENTRTN
TISSUE
DESCRIPTION OF
REDUCTION
%
dH
RATE (kg/ha)
EXTRACTANT
mq/ko
mn/ko
SAMPLED
EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN
%
260
3.44
5.8
584
HCL-HF
199
13.3
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
261
3.16
5.9
584
HCL-HF
17:
8.6
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
262
3.28
6.2
584
HCl-HF
202
10.9
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
0
263
3.1
6.4
584
HCL-HF
236
8.3
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
264
3.15
6.5
584
HCL-HF
236
NA
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
265
7.9
0
4.8
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
266
7.9
55
5
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY.
0
267
7.9
111
6
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
268
7.9
222
7
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE. MATURITY
0
269
7.9
443
6.5
LEAF
FIELD. SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
270
7.9
0
7.4
LEAF
FIELD. SLUDGE. MATURITY
0
271
7.9
55
7.3
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
272
7.9
111
6.2
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE. MATURITY
0
273
7.9
222
5
LEAF
FIELD. SLUDGE. MATURITY
0
274
7.9
443
5.5
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
275
7.9
0
i 5
LEAF
FIELD. SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
276
7.9
55
5
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
277
7.9
111
4.9
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
278
7.9
222
4.8
LEAF
FIELD. SLUDGE. MATURITY
0
279
7.9
443
5.3
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
280
6.5
0
N.L.
5
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
281
6.5
50
N.L.
6
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
282
6.5
100
N.L.
9
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE. MATURITY
0
283
6.5
200
N.L.
10
LEAF
FIELD. SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
284
6.5
400
N.L
15
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE. MATURITY
0
285
6.5
0
N.L.
17
LEAF
FIELD. SLUDGE. MATURITY
0
288
6.5
50
N.L.
15
LEAF
FIELD. SLUDGE. MATURITY
0
287
6.5
100
N.L.
14
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE. MATURITY
0
288
6.5
200
N.L.
11
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
289
6.5
400
N.L.
10
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
290
5.2
0
NR
NR
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
291
NR
13
NR
NR
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
•
CO
. 292
NR
26
NR
NR
FIELD. SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
293
NR
34
NR
NR
FIELD. SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
294
NR
68
NR
NR
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
295
5.2
0
NR
10
FORAGE
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
296
5.1
32
NR
11
FORAGE
FIELD. SLUDGE, MATURITY
41 •
F-94
-------
TABLE F-2 (cont.)
YIELD
YIELD
YIELD
COMPONENT
REDUCTION
COMPONENT
METAL
MEASURED
%
MEASURED
PH YTOT OXICITY
260
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
261
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
262
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
263
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
264
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
265
BIOMASS
266
BIOMASS
267
BIOMASS
268
BIOMASS
26S
BIOMASS
270
BIOMASS
271
BIOMASS
272
BIOMASS
273
BIOMASS
•
274
BIOMASS
275
BIOMASS
276
BIOMASS
277
BIOMASS
\
278
BIOMASS
279
BIOMASS
280
GRAIN
.281
GRAIN
282
GRAIN
283
GRAIN
284
GRAIN
285
GRAIN
286
GRAIN
287
GRAIN
288
GRAIN
289
GRAIN
290
FORAGE
NO
291
FORAGE
NO*
292
FORAGE
NO
293
FORAGE
NO
294
FORAGE
NO
295
FORAGE
NO
296
FORAGE
NO*
F-95
-------
TABLE F-2 (cont.)
,
COMMENTS
LOCATION
260
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
261
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
262
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
263
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
264
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
265
YIELDS DRAMATICALLY INCREASED BY SLUDGE ON LANDFILL CAP (HERBAGE=OATS/RYE)
UNITED KINGDOM
266
YIELDS DRAMATICALLY INCREASED BY SLUDGE ON LANDFILL CAP (HERBAGE =OATS/RYE)
UNITED KINGDOM
267
YIELDS DRAMATICALLY INCREASED BY SLUDGE ON LANDFILL CAP (HERBAGE = OATS/RYE)
UNITED KINGDOM
268
YIELDS DRAMATICALLY INCREASED BY SLUDGE ON LANDFILL CAP (HERBAGE-OATS/RYE)
UNITED KINGDOM
269
YIELDS DRAMATICALLY INCREASED BY SLUDGE ON LANDFILL CAP (HERBAGE-OATS/RYE)
UNITED KINGDOM
270
YIELDS DRAMATICALLY INCREASED BY SLUDGE ON LANDFILL CAP (HERBAGE = OATS/RYE)
UNITED KINGDOM
271
YIELDS DRAMATICALLY INCREASED BY SLUDGE ON LANDFILL CAP (HERBAGE » OATS/RYE>
UNITED KINGDOM
272
YIELDS DRAMATICALLY INCREASED BY SLUDGE ON LANDFILL CAP (HERBAGE-OATS/RYE)
UNITED KINGDOM
273
YIELDS DRAMATICALLY INCREASED BY SLUDGE ON LANDFILL CAP (HERBAGE-OATS/RYE) 1
UNITED KINGDOM
274
YIELDS DRAMATICALLY INCREASED BY SLUDGE ON LANDFILL CAP (HERBAGE-OATS/RYE)
UNITED KINGDOM
275
YIELDS DRAMATICALLY INCREASED BY SLUDGE ON LANDFILL CAP (HERBAGE«= OATS/RYEI
UNITED KINGDOM
276
YIELDS DRAMATICALLY INCREASED BY SLUDGE ON LANDFILL CAP (HERBAGE-OATS/RYE)
UNITED KINGDOM
277
YIELDS DRAMATICALLY INCREASED BY SLUDGE ON LANDFILL CAP (HERBAGE-OATS/RYE)
UNITED KINGDOM
278
YIELDS DRAMATICALLY INCREASED BY SLUDGE ON LANDFILL CAP (HERBAGE - OATS/RYE)
UNITED KINGDOM
279
YIELDS DRAMATICALLY INCREASED BY SLUDGE ON LANDFILL CAP (HERBAGE - OATS/RYE)
UNITED KINGDOM
280
MINNESOTA
281
MINNESOTA
282
MINNESOTA
283
MINNESOTA
284
MINNESOTA
285
MINNESOTA
286
MINNESOTA
287
MINNESOTA
288
MINNESOTA
289
MINNESOTA
290
GEORGIA
291
•DOSE RESPONSE NOT CONSISTENT
GEORGIA
292
GEORGIA
293
GEORGIA
294
GEORGIA
295
GEORGIA
296
•DOSE RESPONSE & TISSUE CU CONCENTRATION ARE NOT CONSISTENT. PH<5.5
GEORGIA
F-96
-------
TABLE F-2 (cont.)
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
LITERATURE
PLANT
SLUDGE
VOL SOLIDS
Al
Ca
Cd
Cr
Cu
CITATION
NAME
CULTIVAR
PH
%
%
%
mo/kfl
mo/kfl
mn/kfl
297
KING & MORRIS 1972
RYE
1.42
453
298
KING & MORRIS 1972
RYE
1.42
453
299
KING & MORRIS 1972
RYE
1.42
453
300
KING & MORRIS 1972
RYE
1.42
453
301
KING & MORRIS 1972
RYE
1.42
453
302
KING & MORRIS 1972
RYE
1.42
453
303
KING & MORRIS 1972
RYE
1.42
453
304
KING & MORRIS 1972
RYE
1.42
453
305
WEBBER 1972
RED BEET
306
WEBBER 1972
RED BEET
240
1100
307
WEBBER 1972
RED BEET
175
11300
308
WEBBER 1972
RED BEET
175
11300
309
WEBBER 1972
RED BEET
240
1100
310
WEBBER 1972
RED BEET
it
175
11300
311
WEBBER 1972
CELERY
312
WEBBER 1972
CELERY
240
1100
313
WEBBER 1972
CELERY
175
11300
314
WEBBER 1972
CELERY
175
11300
315
WEBBER 1972
CELERY
240
1100
316
WEBBER 1972
CELERY
175
11300
317
WEBBER 1972
CELERY
318
WEBBER 1972
319
PIETZETAL. 1983
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
1.4
3.3
307
3505
1471
320
PIETZ ET AL. 1983:
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
1.4
3.3
307
3505
1471
321
PIETZ ET AL. 1983
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
1.3
3.3
307
3505
1471
322
PIETZETAL. 1983
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
1.6
3.3
307
3505
1471
323
PIETZETAL. 1983
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
1.5
3.3
307
3505
1471
324
PIETZETAL. 1983
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
1.4
3.3
307
3505
1471
325
PIETZETAL. 1983
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
1.4
3.3
307
3505
1471
326
PIETZETAL 1983
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
1.3
3.3
307
3505
1471
327
PIETZETAL 1983
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
1.6
3.3
307
3505
1471
328
PIETZETAL 1983
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
1.5
3.3
307
3505
1471
329
PIETZETAL 1983
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
1.4
3.3
307
3505
1471
330
PIETZETAL 1983
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
1.4
3.3
307
3505
1471
331
PIETZETAL 1983
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
1.3
3.3
307
5505
1471
332
PIETZETAL 1983
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
1.6
3.3
307
3505
1471
333
PtETZETAL 1983
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
1.5
3.3
307
3505
1471
F-97
-------
TABLE F-2 (cont.)
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
Fe
N
Ni
P
Pb
Zn
SOLIDS
BIOLOGICAL
CHEMICAL
%
%
ma/kg
mo/ka
mn/kg
mq/ka
CONTNT
PROCESSING
STABILIZATN
,
297
2.96
25
0.79
2415
0.06
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
298
2.96
25
0.79
2415
0.06
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
299
2.96
25
0.79
2415
0.06
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
300
2.96
25
0.79
2415
0.06
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
301
2.96
23
0.79
2415
0.06
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
302
2.96
25
0.79
2415
0.06
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
303
2.96
25
0.79
2415
0.06
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
304
2.96
25
0.79
2415
0.06
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
305
306
210
3000
307
104
3900
308
104
3900
309
210
3000
310
104
3900
311
*
312
210
3000
313
104
3900
314
104
3900
315
210
3000
316
104
3900
317
318
319
5.1
5.1
369
3.42
1258
4872
0.04
SECONDARY. ANAER DIGEST. LAGOON
POLYMER,FECL3
320
5.1
5.1
369
3.42
1258
4872
0.04
SECONDARY. ANAER DIGEST, LAGOON
P0LYMER.FECL3
321
5.1
5.1
369
3.42
1258
4872
0.04
SECONDARY, ANAER DIGEST, LAGOON
POLYMER,FECL3
322
5.1
5.1
369
3.42
1258
4872
0.04
SECONDARY. ANAER DIGEST. LAGOON
POLYMER,FECL3
323
5.1
5.1
369
3.42
1258
4872
0.04
SECONDARY, ANAER DIGEST, LAGOON
POLYMER,FECL3
324
5.1
5.1
369
3.42
1258
4872
0.04
SECONDARY, ANAER DIGEST, LAGOON
P0LYMER.FECL3
325
5.1
5.1
369
3.42
1258
4872
0.04
SECONDARY, ANAER DIGEST. LAGOON
POLYMER,FECL3
326
5.1
5.1
369
3.42
1258
4872
0.04
SECONDARY, ANAER DIGEST, LAGOON
POLYMER,FECL3
327
5.1
5.1
369
3.42
1258
4872
0.04
SECONDARY, ANAER DIGEST. LAGOON
P0LYMER.FECL3
328
5.1
5.1
369
3.42
1258
4872
0.04
SECONDARY, ANAER DIGEST, LAGOON
POLYMER, FECL3
329
5.1
5.1
369
3.42
1258
4872
0.04
SECONDARY, ANAER DIGEST, LAGOON
P0LYMER.FECL3
330
5.1
5.1
369
3.42
1258
4872
0.04
SECONDARY, ANAER DIGEST, LAGOON
POLYMER, FECL3
331
5.1
5.1
369
3.42
1258
4872
0.04
SECONDARY, ANAER DIGEST, LAGOON
POLYMER,FECL3
332
5.1
5.1
369
3.42
1258
4872
0.04
SECONDARY, ANAER DIGEST, LAGOON
P0LYMER.FECL3
333
5.1
5.1
369
3.42
1258
4872
0.04
SECONDARY, ANAER DIGEST, LAGOON
P0LYMER.FECL3
F-98
-------
TABLE F-2 (cont.)
ANNL SLUDGE
CUMML SLUDGE
YEARS
SOIL
SOIL
SAND
SILT
CLAY
SOIL
LOADNG RATE
LOADNG RATE
SINCE LAST
TAXONOMIC
SERIES
SOIL
CONTENT
CONTENT
CONTENT
CEC
Mgftia
Mg/ha
APPUCATN
NAME
NAME
TEXTURE
%
%
%
cmol/ko
297
30
82.5
0
TYPIC HAPLUDULT
CECIL
SCL
298
60
120
0
TYPIC HAPLUDULT
CECIL
SCL
299
120
240
0
TYPIC HAPLUDULT
CECIL
SCL
300
0
0
0
TYPIC HAPLUDULT
CECIL
SCL
301
15.1
41,6
0
TYPIC HAPLUDULT
CECIL
SCL
302
30
82.5
0
TYPIC HAPLUDULT
CECIL
SCL
303
60
120
0
TYPIC HAPLUDULT
CECIL
SCL
304
120
240
0
TYPIC HAPLUDULT
CECIL
SCL
305
0
0
0
306
125.5
125.5
A
4.
307
125.5
125.5
2
308
125.5
125.5
2
309
31.4
94.2
0
310
31.4
94.2
0
«
311
0
0
0
312
125.5
125.5
2
313
125.5
125.5
2
314
125.5
125.5
2
315
31.4
94.2
0
316
31.4
94.2
0
317
318
319
0
0
STRIP MINE SPOIL
12.6
320
0
0
; STRIP MINE SPOIL
12.6
321
0
0
STRIP MINE SPOIL
12.6
322
0
0
STRIP MINE SPOIL
12.6
323
0
0
STRIP MINE SPOIL
12.6
324
3
3
STRIP MINE SPOIL
12.6
325
12.8
15.8
0
STRIP MINE SPOIL
12.6
326
12.4
28.1
0
STRIP MINE SPOIL
12.6
327
14.3
42.4
0
STRIP MINE SPOIL
12.6
328
19.5
61. S
0
STRIP MINE SPOIL
.
12.6
329
6
6
0
STRIP MINE SPOIL
12.6
330
25.5
31.6
0
STRIP MINE SPOIL
12.0
331
29.8
61.3
0
STRIP MINE SPOtL
12.6
332
28.6
89.9
0
STRIP MINE SPOIL
12.6
333
39
128.9
0
STRIP MINE SPOIL
12.6
F-99
-------
TABLE F-2 (cont.)
SOIL
CUMM CU
SOIL CU
PLANT CU
PLANT
YIELD
OC
SOIL
LOADING
SOIL
CONCENTRTN
CONCENTRTN
TISSUE
DESCRIPTION OF
REDUCTION
%
PH
RATE (kg/ha)
EXTRACTANT
mfl/kfl
mq/kq
SAMPLED
EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN
%
297
NR
64
NR
12.5
-ORAGE
FIELD, SLUDGE. MATURITY
0
298
4.5
102
NR
14.5
• .-•ORAGE
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
299
4.2
184
NR
20
FORAGE
FIELD. SLUDGE, MATURITY
80
300
LIMED
0
NR
10.2
FORAGE
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
301
LIMED
32
NR
10.2
FORAGE
FIELD, SLUDGE. MATURITY
0
302
LIMED
64
NR
11.5
FORAGE
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
303
LIMED
102
NR
12
FORAGE
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
304
LIMED
184
NR
16
FORAGE
FIELD. SLUDGE. MATURITY
58
305
6.1
0
.5 M HOAC
1.1
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
306
NR
138
.5 M HOAC
7.3
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
307
NR
502
.5 M HOAC
36
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
308
NR
1004
.5 M HOAC
76
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
64
309
NR
104
.5 M HOAC
6
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
0
310
NR
502
.5 M HOAC
14.5
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
311
6.1
0
.5 M HOAC
1.1
•
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
312
NR
138
.5 M HOAC
7.3
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
313
NR
502
.5 M HOAC
36
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
0
314
NR
1004
.5 M HOAC
76
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
315
NR
104
.5 M HOAC
6
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
316
NR
502
.5 M HOAC
14.5
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
0
317
318
319
0.25
7.8
0
0.1 M HCI
3.3
12
LEAF
FIELD. SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
- 320
0.25
7.8
0
0.1 M HCI
3.6
16
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
321
0.33
7.8
0
0.1 M HCI
2.3
12
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
322
0.33
7.8
0
0.1 M HCI
6.8
13
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE. MATURITY
0
323
0.33
7.8
0
0.1 M HCI
4
9
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
324
0.33
7.8
2.8
0.1 M HCI
2.7
15
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE. MATURITY
0
325
0.27
7.8
25
0.1 M HCI
5.3
10
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE. MATURITY
0
326
0.41
7.8
48
0.1 M HCI
7.8
11
LEAF
FIELD. SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
327
0.41
7.8
73
0.1 M HCI
14.6
13
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
328
0.59
7.8
107
0.1 M HCI
9.4
11
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
329
0.35
7.8
5.6
0.1 M HCI
3.3
16
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
330
0.3
7.8
50
0.1 M HCI
5.6
10
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE. MATURITY
0
331
0.3
7.8
96
0.1 M HCI
19.4
11
LEAF
FIELD. SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
332
0.5
7.8
146
0.1 M HCI
19.5
13
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE. MATURITY
0
333
0.5
7.8
214
0.1 M HCI
14
13
LEAF
FIELD. SLUDGE. MATURITY
0
F-100
-------
TABLE F-2 (cont.)
YIELD
YIELD
YIELD
COMPONENT
REDUCTION
COMPONENT
METAL
MEASURED
%
MEASURED
PH YT OT OXICITY
297
FORAGE
NO
298
FORAGE
NO
299
FORAGE
POSSIBLE
300
FORAGE
NO
301
FORAGE
NO
302
FORAGE
NO
303
FORAGE
NO
304
FORAGE
POSSIBLE
305
TOTAL BIOMASS
NO
306
TOTAL SIOMASS
NO
307
TOTAL BIOMASS
NC
308
TOTAL BIOMASS
POSSIBLE
309
TOTAL BIOMASS
NO
310
TOTAL BIOMASS
«
NO
311
STALKS
NO
312
STALKS
NO
313
STALKS
NO
314
STALKS
NO
315
STALKS
NO
316
STALKS
NO
317
. 318
319
GRAIN
0
STOVER
320
GRAIN
0
STOVER
321
GRAIN
0
STOVER
322
GRAIN
0
STOVER
323
GRAIN
0
STOVER
324
GRAIN
0
STOVER
325
GRAIN
0
STOVER
326
GRAIN
0
STOVER
327
GRAIN
0
STOVER
328
GRAIN
0
STOVER
329
GRAIN
0
STOVER
330
GRAIN
0
STOVER
331
GRAtN
0
STOVER
332
GRAIN
0
STOVER
333
GRAfN
0
STOVER
F-101
-------
TABLE F-2 (cont.)
COMMENTS
LOCATION
297
GEORGIA
298
GEORGIA
299
PH<5.5 ( = 4.2)
GEORGIA
300
GEORGIA
301
GEORGIA
302
GEORGIA
303
GEORGIA
304
LOADING IN EXCESS OF AGRONOMIC RATES. PH UNKNOWN AND QUESTIONABLE
GEORGIA
305
LEEDS, U.K.
306
LEEDS, U.K.
307
•
LEEDS, U.K.
308
HIGH CU SLUDGE (11300 MG/KGIBLENDED WITH LOWER ZN SLUDGE WAS USED
LEEDS, U.K.
309
LEEDS, U.K.
310
LEEDS, U.K.
311
LEEDS, U.K.
312
LEEDS, U.K.
313
LEEDS, U.K.
314
LEEDS, U.K.
315
LEEDS. U.K.
316
LEEDS, U.K.
317
318
319
FULTON CO., ILLINOIS
320
FULTON CO., ILLINOIS
321
FULTON CO., ILLINOIS
322
FULTON CO., ILLINOIS
323
FULTON CO., ILLINOIS
324
FULTON CO., ILLINOIS
325
FULTON CO., ILLINOIS
326
FULTON CO., ILLINOIS
327
FULTON CO., ILLINOIS
328
FULTON CO., ILLINOIS
329
FULTON CO., ILLINOIS
330
FULTON CO.. ILLINOIS
331
FULTON CO., ILLINOIS
332
FULTON CO., ILLINOIS
333
FULTON CO., ILLINOIS
F-102
-------
TABLE F-2 (cont.)
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
LITERATURE
PLANT
SLUDGE
VOL SOLIDS
Al
Ca
Cd
Cr
Cu
CITATION
NAME
CULTIVAR
PH
%
%
%
mg/kn
mn/ko
mo/kg
334
PIETZ ET AL. 1983
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
1.4
3.3
307
3505
1471
335
PIETZ ET AL. 1983
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
1.4
3.3
307
3505
1471
336
PIETZ ETAL. 1983
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
1.3
3.3
307
3505
1471
337
PIETZ ETAL. 1983
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
1.6
3.3
307
3505
1471
338
PIETZ ET AL. 1983
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
1.5
3.3
307
3505
1471
339
PIETZ ETAL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
1.4
3.3
265
3505
1471
340
PIETZ ETAL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
1.4
3.3
265
3505
1471
341
PIETZ ET AL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
1.4
3.3
265
3505
1471
342
PIETZ ET AL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
1.4
3.3
265
3505
1471
343
PIETZ ETAL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
1.4
3.3
265
3505
1471
344
PIETZ ETAL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
1.4
3.3
ISO
3505
1471
345
PIETZ ETAL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
1.4
3.3
160
3505
1471
346
PIETZ ETAL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
20
3.1
0.71
71
775
460
347
PIETZ ET AL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
20
3.1
0.71
71
775
460
348
PIETZ ETAL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3377
7.6
30
3.1
0.71
71
775
460
349
PIETZ ETAL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3377
7.6
20
0.67
3.9
53
679
454
350
PIETZ ETAL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
1 .4
3.3
265
3505
1471
351
PIETZ ETAL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
3.3
265
3505
1471
352
PIETZ ETAL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
3.3
265
3505
1471
353
PIETZ ETAL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
3.3
265
3505
1471
354
PIETZ ETAL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
3.3
265
3505
1471
355
PIETZ ET AL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
3.3
160
3505
1471
358
PIETZ ETAL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
3.3
160
3505
1471
357
PIETZ ET AL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
20
3.1
0.71
71
775.
460
358
PIETZ ET AL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
20
3.1
0.71
71
775
460
359
PIETZ ETAL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3377
7.6
30
3.1
0.71
71
775
460
360
PIETZ ETAL 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3377
7.6
20
0.67
3.9
53
"679
454
361
PIETZ ETAL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
3.3
265
3505
1471
362
PIETZ ETAL 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
3.3
265
3505
1471
363
PIETZ ET AL 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
3.3
265
3505
1471
364
PIETZ ETAL 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
3.3
265
3505
1471
365
PfETZ ET AL 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
3.3
265
3505
1471
366
PIETZ ETAL 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
3.3
160
3505
1471
367
PIETZ ET AL 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
3.3
160
3505
1471
368
PIETZ ETAL 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
20
3.1
0.71
71
775
460
369
PfETZ ETAL 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
20
3.1
0.71
71
775
460
370
. P*ET2 ETAL 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3377
7.6
30
3.1
0.71
71
775
460
F-103
-------
TABLE F-2 (cont.)
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
Fe
N
Ni
P
Pb
Zn
SOLIDS
BIOLOGICAL
CHEMICAL
%
%
ma/ka
ma/ka
ma/ka
ma/ka
CONTNT
PROCESSING
STABILIZATN
¦
334
5.1
5.1
389
3.42
1258
4872
0.04
SECONDARY, ANAER DIGEST, LAGOON
P0LYMER.FECL3
335
5.1
5.1
369
3.42
1258
4872
0.04
SECONDARY, ANAER DIGEST, LAGOON
P0LYMER.FECL3
336
5.1
5.1
369
3.42
1258
4872
0.04
SECONDARY, ANAER DIGEST. LAGOON
POLYMER,FECL3
337
5.1
5.1
369
3.42
1258
4872
0.04
SECONDARY, ANAER DIGEST, LAGOON
POLYMER,FECL3
338
5.1
5.1
369
3.42
1258
4872
0.04
SECONDARY, ANAER DIGEST, LAGOON
P0LYMER.FECL3
33S
4.3
4.5
425
3.42
850
3600
0.045
SECONDARY, ANAER DIGEST, LAGOON
POLYMER, FECL3
340
4.3
4.5
425
3.42
850
3600
0.05
SECONDARY, ANAER DIGEST, LAGOON
POLYMER,FECL3
341
4.3
4.5
425
3.42
850
3600
0.054
SECONDARY, ANAER DIGEST, LAGOON
P0LYMER.FECL3
342
4.3
4.5
425
3.42
850
3600
0.052
SECONDARY, ANAER DIGEST, LAGOON
POLYMER,FECL3
343
4.3
4.5
425
3.42
850
3600
0.052
SECONDARY, ANAER DIGEST, LAGOON
POLYMER,FECL3
344
4.3
4.5
425
3.42
850
3600
0.05
SECONDARY, ANAER DIGEST, LAGOON
P0LYMER.FECL3
345
4.3
4.5
425
3.42
850
3600
0.046
SECONDARY, ANAER DIGEST, LAGOON
POLYMER,FECL3
346
2.2
0.5
116
0.87
293
1100
0.66
SECONDARY. ANAER DIGEST, LAGOON
POLYMER,FECL3
347
2.2
0.5
116
0.87
293
1100
0.65
SECONDARY, ANAER DIGEST. LAGOON
POLYMER,FECL3
348
2.2
0.5
116
0.87
293
1100
0.3
SECONDARY, ANAER DIGEST, LAGOON
P0LYMER.FECL3
349
1.9
0.5
121
0.62
259
1146
0.69
SECONDARY, ANAER DIGEST, LAGOON
POLYMER,FECL3
350
4.3
4.5
425
3.42
850
3600
0.045
SECONDARY, ANAER DIGEST, LAGOON
P0LYMER.FECL3
351
4.3
4.5
425
3.42
850
3600
0.05
SECONDARY, ANAER DIGEST, LAGOON
POLYMER,FECL3
352
4.3
4.5
425
3.42
850
3600
0.054
SECONDARY, ANAER DIGEST, LAGOON
P0LYMER.FECL3
353
4.3
4.5
425
3.42
850
3600
0.052
SECONDARY, ANAER DIGEST, LAGOON
POLYMER, FECL3
354
4.3
4.5
425
3.42
850
3600
0.052
SECONDARY, ANAER DIGEST. LAGOON
POLYMER,FECL3
355
4.3
4.5
425
3.42
850
3600
0.05
SECONDARY, ANAER DIGEST, LAGOON
P0LYMER.FECL3
356
4.3
4.5
425
3.42
850
3600
0.046
SECONDARY, ANAER DIGEST, LAGOON
POLYMER,FECL3
357
2.2
0.5
116
0.87
293
1100
0.66
SECONDARY, ANAER DIGEST, LAGOON
POLYMER,FECL3
358
2.2
0.5
116
0.87
293
1100
0.65
SECONDARY. ANAER DIGEST, LAGOON
POLYMER,FECL3
359
2.2
0.5
116
0.87
293
1100
0.3
SECONDARY, ANAER DIGEST. LAGOON
P0LYMER.FECL3
360
1.9
0.5
121
0.62
259
1146
0.69
SECONDARY, ANAER DIGEST, LAGOON
POLYMER,FECL3
361
4.3
4.5
425
3.42
850
3600
0.045
SECONDARY, ANAER DIGEST, LAGOON
POLYMER,FECL3
362
4.3
4.5
425
3.42
850
3600
0.05
SECONDARY, ANAER DIGEST. LAGOON
P0LYMER.FECL3
363
4.3
4.5
425
3.42
850
3600
0.054
SECONDARY. ANAER DIGEST, LAGOON
POLYMER,FECL3
364
4.3
4.5
425
3.42
850
3600
0.052
SECONDARY, ANAER DIGEST, LAGOON
POLYMER, FECL3
365
4.3
4.5
425
3.42
, 850
3600
0.052
SECONDARY, ANAER DIGEST, LAGOON
P0LYMER.FECL3
366
4.3
4.5
425
3.42
850
3600
0.05
SECONDARY, ANAER DIGEST, LAGOON
POLYMER,FECL3
367
4.3
4.5
425
3.42
850
3600
0.046
SECONDARY. ANAER DIGEST. LAGOON
POLYMER,FECL3
368
2.2
0.5
116
0.87
293
1100
0.66
SECONDARY, ANAER DIGEST, LAGOON
P0LYMER.FECL3
369
2.2
0.5
116
0.87
293
1100
0.65
SECONDARY, ANAER DIGEST, LAGOON
P0LYMER.FECL3
370
2.2
0.5
116
0.87
293
1100
0.3
SECONDARY, ANAER DIGEST, LAGOON
P0LYMER.FECL3
F-104
-------
TABLE F-2 (oont.)
ANNL SLUDGE
CUMML SLUDGE
YEARS
SOIL
SOIL
SAND
SILT
CLAY
SOIL
LOADNG RATE
LOADNG RATE
SINCE LAST
TAXONOMIC
SERIES
SOIL
CONTENT
CONTENT
CONTENT
CEC
Mg/ha
Mg/ha
APPLICATN
NAME
NAME
TEXTURE
%
%
%
cmol/kg
334
11.9
11.9
0
STRIP MINE SPOIL
12.6
335
51
62.9
0
STRIP MINE SPOIL
12.6
336
59.6
122.5
0
STRIP MINE SPOIL
12.6
337
57.1
179.6
0
STRIP MINE SPOIL
12.6
338
78
257,6
0
STRIP MINE SPOIL
12.6
339
0
0
0
STRIP MINE SPOIL
340
0
0
0
STRIP MINE SPOIL
341
0
0
0
STRIP MINE SPOIL
342
0
0
0
STRIP MINE SPOIL
343
0
C
0
STRIP MINE SPOIL
344
0
0
0
STRIP MINE SPOIL
345
0
0
0
STRIP MINE SPOIL
346
0
0
0
STRIP MINE SPOIL
347
0
0
0
STRIP MINE SPOIL
348
0
0
0
STRIP MINE SPOIL
349
0
0
0
STRIP MINE SPOIL
350
16.1
78
0
STRIP MINE SPOIL
351
19.9
97.9
0
STRIP MINE SPOIL
352
17.4
115.3
0
STRIP MINE SPOIL
353
11.4
126.7
0
STRIP MINE SPOIL
354
16.8
143.5
0
STRIP MINE SPOIL
355
17.9
161.4
0
STRIP MINE SPOIL
356
16.8
178.2
0
STRIP MINE SPOIL
357
16.8
:195
0
STRIP MINE SPOIL
358
16.8
211.8
0
STRIP MINE SPOIL
359
16.8
228.6
0
STRIP MINE SPOIL
360
16.8
245.4
0
STRIP MINE SPOIL
361
32.2
161.1
0
STRIP MINE SPOIL
362
39.8
200.9
0
STRIP MINE SPOIL
363
34.8
235.7
0
STRIP MINE SPOIL
364
22.8
258.5
0
STRIP MINE SPOIL
365
34.9
293.4
0
STRIP MINE SPOIL
366
35.8
329.?
0
STRIP MME SPOIL
367
33.6
362.8
0
STRIP MINE SPOIL
368
33.6
396.4
0
STRIP MINE SPOIL
369
33.6
430
0
STRtP MtNE SPOfL
370
33.6
463.6
0
STRIP MINE SPOIL
F-105
-------
TABLE F-2 (cont.)
SOIL
CUMM CU
SOIL CU
PLANT CU
PLANT
YIELD
OC
SOIL
LOADING
SOIL
CONCENTRTN
CONCENTRTN
TISSUE
DESCRIPTION OF
REDUCTION
%
PH
RATE (kg/ha)
EXTRACTANT
mg/ka
mq/ka
SAMPLED
EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN
%
334
0.33
7.8
11.2
0.1 M HCI
3.7
11
LEAF
FIELD. SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
335
0.33
7.8
100
0.1 M HCI
6.
11
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
336
0.76
7.8
192
0.1 M5 HQ
39.6
12
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
337
0.76
7.8
292
0.1 M HCI
32.6
14
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
338
1.22
7.8
428
0.1 M HCI
29.8
15
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
339
0.33
7.5
0
0.1 M HCI
11.7
8
LEAF
FIELD. SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
340
0.44
7.5
0
0.1 M HCI
9.5
10
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE. MATURITY
0
341
0.44
7.5
0
0.1 M HCI
11.5
14
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE. MATURITY
0
342
0.36
7.5
0
0.1 M HCI
13.3
12
LEAF
FIELD. SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
343
0.36
7.5
0
0.1 M HCI
11.9
9
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE. MATURITY
0
344
0.46
7.5
0
0.1 M HCI
14.3
8
LEAF
FIELD. SLUDGE. MATURITY
0
345
0.46
7.5
0
0.1 M HO
16.4
11
LEAF
FIELD. SLUDGE. MATURITY
0
346
0.73
7.5
0
0.1 M HCI
18.8
11
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
347
0.73
7.5
0
0.1 M HCI
24.6
10
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE. MATURITY
0
348
0.7
7.5
0
0.1 M HCI
26.2
6
LEAF
FIELD. SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
349
0.7
7.5
0
0.1 M HCI
29.3
9
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
350
0.59
7.5
140
0.1 M HCI
19.8
8
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
29.5
351
0.94
7.5
175
0.1 M HCI
23.4
9
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE. MATURITY
NA
352
0.94
7.5
206
0.1 M HCI
51
11
LEAF
FIELD. SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
353
0.67
7.5
228
0.1 M HCI
41.5
12
LEAF
FIELD. SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
354
0.67
7.5
264
0.1 M HCI
38.2
7
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
355
0.87
7.5
289
0.1 M HCI
50.6
8
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
356
0.87
7.5
313
0.1 M HO
51.2
15
LEAF
FIELD. SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
357
1.41
7.5
334
0.1 M HCI
72.1
11
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE. MATURITY :
0
358
1.41
7.5
351
0.1 M Ha
80.1
10
LEAF
FIELD. SLUDGE. MATURITY
0
359
1.25
7.5
373
0.1 M Ha
76.2
6
LEAF
FIELD. SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
360
1.25
7.5
387
0.1 M HCI
69.7
9
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
361
0.94
7.5
280
0.1 M HCI
40.5
10
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
21.5
362
0.94
7.5
350
0.1 M Ha
37.2
13
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE. MATURITY
NA
363
1.56
7.5
412
0.1 M HCI
103
14
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
364
1.56
7.5
456
0.1 M HCI
89
13
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE. MATURITY
0
365
1.04
7.5
528
0.1 M HO
84.4
12
LEAF
FIELD. SLUDGE. MATURITY
0
366
1.04
7.5
578
0.1 M HCI
106
10
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
367
1.48
7.5
626
0.1 M HCI
112
14
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
368
1.48
7.5
668
0.1 M HCI
128
11
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
369
2.15
7.5
702
0.1 M HCI
148
13
LEAF
FIELD. SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
370
2.15
7.5
746
0.1 M. HCI
123
5
LEAF
FIELD. SLUDGE. MATURITY
0
F-106
-------
TABLE F-2 (cont.)
YIELD
YIELD
YIELD
COMPONENT
REDUCTION
COMPONENT
METAL
MEASURED
%
MEASURED
PH YTOTOXICITY
334
GRAIN
0
STOVER
335
GRAIN
0
STOVER
336
GRAIN
0
STOVER
337
GRAIN
0
STOVER
338
GRAIN
0
STOVER
339
GRAIN
0
STOVER
340
GRAIN
0
STOVER
341
GRAIN
0
STOVER
342
GRAIN
0
STOVER
343
GRAIN
0
STOVER
344
GRAIN
0
STOVER
345
GRAIN
0
STOVER
346
GRAIN
0
STOVER
347
GRAIN
0
STOVER
348
GRAIN
0
STOVER
349
GRAIN
0
STOVER
350
GRAIN
0
STOVER
351
GRAIN
NA
STOVER
352
GRAIN
0
STOVER
353
GRAIN
0
STOVER
354
GRAIN
0
STOVER
355
GRAIN
0
STOVER
356
GRAIN
0
STOVER
357
GRAIN
0
STOVER
358
GRAIN
0
STOVER
359
GRAIN
0
STOVER
360
GRAIN
0
STOVER
361
GRAIN
0
STOVER
362
GRAIN
NA
STOVER
363
GRAIN
0
STOVER
364
GRAIN
0
STOVER
365
GRAIN
0
STOVER
366
GRAIN
0
STOVER
367
GRAIN
0
STOVER
368
GRAIN
0
STOVER
369
GRAIN
0
STOVER
370
GRAIN
0
STOVER
F-107
-------
TABLE F-2 (cont.l
COMMENTS
LOCATION
334
FULTON CO.. ILLINOIS
335
FULTON CO., ILLINOIS
336
FULTON CO., ILLINOIS
337
FULTON CO., ILLINOIS
338
FULTON CO., ILLINOIS
339
FULTON CO., ILLINOIS
340
FULTON CO., ILLINOIS
341
FULTON CO., ILLINOIS
342
FULTON CO., ILLINOIS
343
FULTON CO., ILLINOIS
344
FULTON CO., ILLINOIS
345
FULTON CO., ILLINOIS
346
FULTON CO., ILLINOIS
347
FULTON CO., ILLINOIS
348
«
FULTON CO.. ILLINOIS
349
FULTON CO.. ILLINOIS
350
FULTON CO., ILLINOIS
351
FULTON CO., ILLINOIS
352
FULTON CO., ILLINOIS
353
FULTON CO., ILLINOIS
354
FULTON CO.. ILLINOIS
355
FULTON CO.. ILLINOIS
356
!
FULTON CO., ILLINOIS
357
FULTON CO., ILLINOIS
358
FULTON CO., ILLINOIS
359
FULTON CO., ILLINOIS
360
FULTON CO., ILLINOIS
361
FULTON CO., ILLINOIS
362
FULTON CO., ILLINOIS
363
FULTON CO., ILLINOIS
364
FULTON CO., ILLINOIS
365
FULTON CO., ILLINOIS
366
FULTON CO.. ILLINOIS
367
FULTON CO.. ILLINOIS
368
FULTON CO., ILLINOIS
369
FULTON CO., ILLINOIS
370
FULTON CO., ILLINOIS
F-108
-------
TABLE F-2 (conU
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
LITERATURE
PLANT
SLUDGE
VOL SOLIDS
At
Ca
Cd
Cr
Cu
CITATION
NAME
CULTIVAR
OH
%
%
%
mfl/Jcg
mg/kg
ma/kfl
371
PIETZET AL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3377
7.6
20
0.67
3.9
53
679
454
372
PIETZETAL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
1.4
3.3
265
3505
1471
373
PIETZET AL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
1.4
3.3
265
3505
1471
374
PIETZETAL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
1.4
3.3
265
3505
1471
375
PIETZ ET AL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
1.4
3.3
265
3505
1471
376
PIETZ ET AL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
1.4
3.3
265
3505
1471
377
PIETZ ET AL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
1.4
3.3
160
3505
1471
378
PIETZETAL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
1.4
3.3
160
3505
1471
379
PIETZETAL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
20
3.1
0.71
71
775
460
380
PIETZETAL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
20
3.1
0.71
71
775
460
381
PIETZETAL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3377
7.6
30
3.1
0.71
71
775
460
382
PIETZETAL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3377
7.6
20
0.67
3.9
53
679
454
i
CL1AO
-------
TABLE F-2 (cont.)
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
Fe
N
Ni
P
Pb
Zn
SOLIDS
BIOLOGICAL
CHEMICAL
%
%
ma/kg
mo/kg
ma/ka
ma/ka
LCONTNT
PROCESSING
STABILIZATN
,
371
1.9
0.5
121
0.62
259
1146
0.69
SECONDARY, ANAER DIGEST, LAGOON
POLYMER,FECL3
372
4.3
4.5
425
3.42
850
3600
0.045
SECONDARY, ANAER DIGEST, LAGOON
POLYMER,FECL3
373
4.3
4.5
425
3.42
850
3600
0.05
SECONDARY, ANAER DIGEST, LAGOON
POLYMER,FECL3
374
4.3
4.5
425
3.42
850
3600
0.054
SECONDARY, ANAER DIGEST, LAGOON
P0LYMER.FECL3
375
4.3
4.5
425
3.42
850
3600
0.052
SECONDARY, ANAER DIGEST, LAGOON
P0LYMER.FECL3
376
4.3
4.5
425
3.42
850
3600
0.052
SECONDARY, ANAER DIGEST, LAGOON
POLYMER,FECL3
377
4.3
4.5
425
3.42
850
3600
0.05
SECONDARY. ANAER DIGEST, LAGOON
POLYMER,FECL3
378
4.3
4.5
425
3.42
850
3600
0.046
SECONDARY, ANAER DIGEST. LAGOON
POLYMER,FECL3
379
2.2
0.5
116
0.87
293
1100
0.66
SECONDARY, ANAER DIGEST, LAGOON
POLYMER,FECL3
380
2.2
0.5
113
0.87
293
1100
0.65
SECONDARY, ANAER DIGEST. LAGOON
P0LYMER.FECL3
381
2.2
0.5
116
0.87
293
1100
0.3
SECONDARY, ANAER DIGEST, LAGOON
POLYMER, FECL3
382
1.9
0.5
121
0.62
259
1146
0.69
SECONDARY, ANAER DIGEST, LAGOON
POLYMER,FECL3
F-110
-------
371
372
373
374
375
376
377
378
379
380
381
382
TABLE F-2 (cont.l
ANNLSLUDGE
CUMML SLUDGE
YEARS
SOIL
SOIL
SAND
SILT
CLAY
SOIL
LOADNG RATE
LOADNG RATE
SINCE LAST
TAXONOMIC
SERIES
SOIL
CONTENT
CONTENT
CONTENT
CEC
Mg/ha
Mg/ha
APPLICATN
NAME
NAME
TEXTURE
%
%
%
cmol/kq
33.6
497.2
STRIP MINE SPOIL
64.3
321.9
STRIP MINE SPOIL
79.7
401.6
STRIP MINE SPOIL
69.8
45.5
471.4
516.9
STRIP MINE SPOIL
STRIP MINE SPOIL
68.8
585.7
STRIP MINE SPOIL
71.7
657.4
STRIP MINE SPOIL
67.2
724.6
STRIP MINE SPOIL
67.2
791.8
STRIP MINE SPOIL
67.2
859
STRIP MINE SPOIL
67.2
926.2
STRIP MINE SPOIL
67.2
993.4
STRIP MINE SPOIL
M11
-------
TABLE F-2 (cont.)
SOIL
CUMM CU
SOIL CU
PLANT CU
PLANT
YIELD
OC
SOIL
LOADING
SOIL
CONCENTRTN
CONCENTRTN
TISSUE
DESCRIPTION OF
REDUCTION
%
pH
RATE (kg/ha)
EXTRACTANT
ma/kg
mn/kfl
SAMPLED
EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN
%
371
1.9
7.5
774
0.1 M HCI
131
8
LEAF
FIELD. SLUDGE, MATURITY
43.7
372
1.22
7.5
560
0.1 M HCI
63.7
11
. LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
23
373
3.02
7.5
,700
0.1 M HCI
74.2
18
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
NA
374
3.02
7.5
824
0.1 M HCI
203
19
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
375
1.58
7.5
912
0.1 M HCI
176
17
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
376
1.58
7.5
1056
0.1 M HCI
140
15
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
377
2.38
7.5
1156
0.1 M HCI
204
13
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
378
2.38
7.5
1252
0.1 M HCI
200
17
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
379
3.47
7.5
1336
0.1 M HCI
262
12
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
380
3.47
7.5
1404
0.1 M HCI
240
14
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
381
2.77
7.5
1492
0.1 M HCI
229
6
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
382
2.77
7.5
1548
0.1 M HCI
201
7
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
59.2
F-112
-------
TABLE F-2 (cont.l
YIELD
YIELD
YIELD
COMPONENT
REDUCTION
COMPONENT
METAL
MEASURED
%
MEASURED
PHYT0T0XIC1TY
371
GRAIN
0
STOVER
372
GRAIN
0
STOVER
373
GRAIN
NA
STOVER
374
GRAIN
0
STOVER
375
GRAIN
0
STOVER
376
GRAIN
0
STOVER
377
GRAIN
0
STOVER
378
GRAIN
0
STOVER
379
GRAIN
0
STOVER
380
GRAIN
0
STOVER
381
GRAIN
0
STOVER
382
GRAIN
0
STOVER
.
M13
-------
TABLE F-2 (cont.)
COMMENTS
LOCATION
371
FULTON CO., ILLINOIS
372
FULTON CO.. ILLINOIS
373
FULTON CO.. ILLINOIS
374
FULTON CO.. ILLINOIS
375
FULTON CO.. ILLINOIS
376
FULTON CO.. ILLINOIS
377
FULTON CO., ILLINOIS
378
FULTON CO., ILLINOIS
379
FULTON CO., ILLINOIS
380
FULTON CO., ILLINOIS
381
FULTON CO.. ILLINOIS
382
FULTON CO., ILLINOIS
F-114
-------
TABLE F-3. NICKEL DATA
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUOGE
LITERATURE
PLANT
SLUDGE
VOL SOLIDS
Al
Ca
Cd
Cr
Cu
CITATION
NAME
CULTIVAR
DH
%
%
%
mg/kg
mp/kfl
mn/ka
1
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
CORN
SILVER QUEEN
6.1
1.7
40
400
520
2
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
CORN
SILVER QUEEN
6.1
1.7
40
400
520
3
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
CORN
SILVER QUEEN
6.1
1.7
40
400
520
4
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
CORN
SILVER QUEEN
6.1
1.7
40
400
520
5
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
CORN
SILVER QUEEN
6.1
1.7
40
400
520
6
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
CORN
SILVER QUEEN
6.1
1.7
40
400
520
7
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
CORN
SILVER QUEEN
6.1
1.7
40
400
520
8
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
CORN
SILVER QUEEN
6.1
1.7
40
400
520
9
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
CORN
SILVER QUEEN
6.1
1.7
40
400
520
10
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
CORN
SILVER QUEEN
6.1
1.7
40
400
520
11
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
CORN
SILVER QUEEN
6.1
1.7
40
400
520
12
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
CORN
SILVER QUEEN
6.1
1.7
40
400
520
13
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
CORN
SILVER QUEEN
6.1
40
400
520
14
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
CORN
SILVER QUEEN
6.1
1.7
40
400
520
15
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
CORN
SILVER QUEEN
6.1
1.7
40
400
520
16
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
CORN
SILVER QUEEN
6.1
1.7
40
400
520
17
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
CORN
SILVER QUEEN
6.1
1.7
40
400
520
18
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
CORN
SILVER QUEEN
6.1
1.7
40
400
520
19
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
CORN
SILVER QUEEN
6.1
1.7
40
400
520
. 20
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
CORN
SILVER QUEEN
6.1
1.7
40
400
520
21
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
CORN
SILVER QUEEN
6.1
1.7
40
400
520
22
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
CORN
SILVER QUEEN
6.1
1.7
40
400
520
23
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
CORN
SILVER QUEEN
6.1
1.7
40
400
520
24
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
CORN
SILVER QUEEN
6.1
1.7
40
400
520
25
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
CORN
SILVER QUEEN
6.1
1.7
40
400
520
26
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
CORN
SILVER QUEEN
6.1
1.7
40
400
520
27
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
CORN
SILVER QUEEN
6.1
1.7
40 .
400
520
28
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
CORN
SILVER QUEEN
8.1
1.7
40
400
520
29
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
BEANS
WHITE HALF RUNNER
6.1
1.7
40
400
520
30
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
BEANS
WHITE HALF RUNNER
6.1
1.7
40
400
520
31
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
BEANS
WHITE HALF RUNNER
6.1
1.7
40
400
520
32
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
BEANS
WHITE HALF RUNNER
8.1
1.7
40
400
520
33
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
BEANS
WHITE HALF RUNNER
6.1
1.7
40
400
520
34
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
BEANS
WHITE HALF RUNNER
6.1
1.7
40
400
520
35
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
BEANS
WHITE HALF RUNNER
6.1
1.7
40 •
400
520
30
GIOflDANO&MAYS 1977
BEANS
WHITE HALF RUNNER
6.1
1.7
40
400
520
37
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
BEANS
WHITE HALF RUNNER
6.1
1.7
40
400
520
38
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
BEANS
WHITE HALF RUNNER
6.1
1.7
40
400
520
F-115
-------
TABLE F-3 (cont.)
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
Fe
N
Ni
P
Pb
Zn
SOLIDS
BIOLOGICAL
CHEMICAL
%
%
ma/kg
mq/kn
mg/kg
mq/kfl
CONTNT
PROCESSING
STABILIZATN
1
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
2
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
3
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
4
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
5
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
6
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
7
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
8
1:5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
9
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
10
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
11
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
12
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
13
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
14
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
15
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
16
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
17
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
18
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
19
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
20
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
21
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
22
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
23
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
24
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
25
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
26
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
27
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
28
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
29
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
30
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1800
1800
31
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
32
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
33
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
34
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
35
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
36
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
37
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
38
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
F-116
-------
TABLE F-3 (cont.)
ANNL SLUDGE
CUMML SLUDGE
YEARS
SOIL
SOIL
CONTENT
CONTENT
CONTENT
I.OADNG RATE
LOADNG RATE
SINCE LAST
TAXONOMIC
SERIES
SOIL
%
%
%
Mg/ha
Mg/ha
APPLICATN
NAME
NAME
TEXTURE
1
0
0
SANGO
SiL
2
50
50
0
SANGO
SiL
3
100
100
0
SANGO
SiL
4
200
200
0
SANGO
SiL
5
0
0
SANGO
SiL
6
0
0
SANGO
SiL
7
50
50
1
SANGO
SiL
8
100
100
1
SANGO
SiL
9
200
200
1
SANGO
SiL
10
50
100
0
SANGO
SiL
11
100
200
0
SANGO
SiL
12
200
400
0
SANGO
SiL
13
0
0
SANGO
SiL
14
0
0
'SANGO
SiL
15
50
50
2
SANGO
SiL
16
100
100
2
SANGO
SiL
17
200
200
2
SANGO
SiL
18
50
150
0
SANGO
SiL
19
100
300
0
SANGO
SiL
20
200
600
0
SANGO
SiL
21
0
0
SANGO
SiL
22
0
0
SANGO
SiL
23
50
50
3
SANGO
SiL
24
100
100
3
SANGO
SiL
25
200
200
3
SANGO
S)L
26
50
200
0
SANGO
SiL
27
100
400
0
SANGO
SiL
28
200
800
0
SANGO
SIL
29
0
0
SANGO
SiL
30
50
50
0
SANGO
SiL
31
100
100
0
SANGO
SiL
32
200
200
0
SANGO
SIL
33
0
0
SANGO
SiL
34
0
0
SANGO
SiL
35
SO
50
1
SANGO
SIL
30
100
100
1
SANGO
SN.
37
200
200
1
SANGO
SiL
38
50
100
0
SANGO
SiL
F-117
-------
TABLE F-3 (cont.)
SOIL
SOIL
CUMM Ni
SOIL Ni
PLANT Ni
PLANT
DESIGN
CEC
OC
SOIL
LOADING
SOIL
CONCENTRTN
CONCENTRTN
TISSUE
SUMMARY
cmol/kg
%
pH
RATE (ko/ha)
EXTRACTANT
ma/kfl
mo/ko
SAMPLED
1
4.9
0
0.5 M HCI
1.1
4.4
FORAGE
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
2
5.3
, 2
0.5 M 1 11
1.8
2.,
FORAGE
FIELD, SLL'DGE, MATURITY
3
5.3
4
0.5 M . CI
1.4
4.5
FORAGE
FIELD, 3LUDGE, MATURITY
4
5.6
8
0.5 M HCI
2.1
3.1
FORAGE
FIELD. SLUDGE, MATURITY
5
4.9
0
0.5 M HCI
0.8
1.5
FORAGE
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
6
4.9
0
0.5 M HCI
0.7
1.4
FORAGE
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
7
5.3
2
0.5 M HCI
1
2.3
FORAGE
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
8
5.3
4
0.5 M HCI
1.5
1.7
FORAGE
FIELD. SLUDGE. MATURITY
9
5.6
8
0.5 M HCI
1.8
2.2
FORAGE
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
10
5.6
4
0.5 M HCI
1.9
2
FORAGE
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
11
5.6
8
0.5 M HCI
1.9
1.7
FORAGE
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
12
5.6
16
0.5 M HO
4.5
1.6
FORAGE
FIELD, SLUDGE. MATURITY
13
6.5
0
0.5 M HCI
1.2
1.1
FORAGE
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
14
6.5
0
0.5 M HCI
1.3
1.4
FORAGE
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
15
5.2
2
0.5 M HCI
1.7
.1.3
FORAGE
FIELD, SLUDGE. MATURITY
16
5.6
4
0.5 M HCI
1.9
1.2
FORAGE
FIELD. SLUDGE, MATURITY
17
5.9
8
0.5 M HCI
2.3
1.2
FORAGE
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
18
6
6
0.5 M HCI
2.3
1.2
FORAGE
FIELD, SLUDGE. MATURITY
19
5.9
12
0.5 M HCI
3
1.6
FORAGE
FIELD, SLUDGE. MATURITY
20
6.3
24
0.5 M HCI
6.3
1.2
FORAGE
FIELD. SLUDGE. MATURITY
21
6.3
0
DTPA
0.1
0.8
FORAGE
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
22
5.8
0
DTPA
0.1
0.8
FORAGE
FIELD. SLUDGE, MATURITY
23
5.5
2
DTPA
0.3
0.9
FORAGE
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
24
5.7 :
4
DTPA
0.4
1
FORAGE
FIELD. SLUDGE. MATURITY
25
6.1
8
DTPA
0.5
1.2
FORAGE
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
26
5
8
DTPA
0.6
0.8
FORAGE
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
27
5.3
16
DTPA
0.7
0.9
FORAGE
FIELD. SLUDGE, MATURITY
28
5.7
32
DTPA
1.5
1.2
FORAGE
FIELD, SLUDGE. MATURITY
29
4.9
0
0.5 M HO
1.1
5
VINES
FIELD. SLUDGE, MATURITY
30
5.3
2
0.5 M HCI
1.8
6.7
VINES
FIELD, SLUDGE. MATURITY
31
5.3
4
0.5 M HCI
1.4
5.5
VINES
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
32
5.6
8
0.5 M HCI
2.1
5.8
VINES
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
33
4.9
0
0.5 M HCI
0.8
2.9
VINES
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
34
4.9
0
0.5 M HQ
0.7
2
VINES
FIELD. SLUDGE. MATURITY
35
5.3
2
0.5 M Ha
1
6.7
VINES
FIELD. SLUDGE. MATURITY
36
5.3
4
0.5 M HCI
1.5
6.4
VINES
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
37
5.6
8
0.5 M HCI
1.8
5.3
VINES
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
38
5.6
4
0.5 M HCI
1.9
4.5
VINES
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
F-118
-------
TABLE F-3 (cont.)
YIELD
YIELD
YIELD
YIELD
REDUCTION
COMPONENT
REDUCTION
COMPONENT
METAL
%
MEASURED
%
MEASURED
PHYTOTOXICITY
•
1
0
STOVER
NO
2
0
STOVER
NO
3
0
STOVER
NO
4
0
STOVER
NO
5
0
STOVER
NO
6
0
STOVER
NO
7
0
STOVER
NO
8
0
STOVER
NO
9
0
STOVER
NO
10
0
STOVER
NO
11
0
STOVER
NO
12
0
STOVER
NO
13
0
STOVER
NO
14
0
STOVER
•
NO
15
. 0
STOVER
NO
16
0
STOVER
NO
17
0
STOVER
NO
18
0
STOVER
I
NO
19
0
STOVER
NO
20
0
STOVER
NO
21
0
STOVER
NO
22
0
STOVER
NO
23
11.3*
STOVER
•NO
24
0
STOVER
NO
25
0
STOVER
NO
28
14.2*
STOVER
•NO
27
17.6*
STOVER
•NO
28
0
STOVER
.
NO
29
0
VINES
0
. PODS
NO
30
0
VINES
17.7*
PODS
•NO
31
0
VINES
35.3*
PODS
•NO "
32
0
VINES
55 •
PODS
•NO
33
0
VINES
0
PODS
NO
34
0
VINES
0
PODS
NO
35
0
VtNES
25.4*
POOS
•NO
36
0
VINES
0
PODS
NO
37
0
VINES
28.5*
PODS
•NO
3B
0
VINES
0
POOS
NO
-------
TABLE F-3 (oont.)
LOCATION
COMMENTS
OF
STUDY
1
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
2
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
3
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
4
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
5
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
6
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
7
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
8
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
9
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
10
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
n
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
12
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
13
MUSCLE SCHOALES. AL
14
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
15
MUSCLE SCHOALES. AL
16
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
17
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
18
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
19
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
20
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
21
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
22
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
23
* DOSE RESPONSE & TISSUE Nl NOT CONSISTENT
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
24
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
25
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
26
¦TISSUE Nl INCONSISTENT. ANNUAL LOADING EXCEEDS AGRONOMIC RATES, SOIL PH<5.5
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
27
•TISSUE Nl INCONSISTENT, ANNUAL LOADING EXCEEDS AGRONOMIC RATES. SOIL PH<5.S
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
28
MUSCLE SCHOALES. AL
23
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
30
•TISSUE Nl CONCENTRATION NOT COMMENSURATE WITH PHYTOTOXICITY CRITERIA
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
31
•TISSUE Nl CONCENTRATION NOT COMMENSURATE WITH PHYTOTOXICITY CRITERIA
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
32
•TISSUE Nl CONCENTRATION NOT COMMENSURATE WITH PHYTOTOXICITY CRITERIA
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
33
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
34
MUSCLE SCHOALES. AL
35
•DOSE RESPONSE & TISSUE Nl CONCENTRATION INCONSISTANT
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
36
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
37
•DOSE RESPONSE & TISSUE Nl CONCENTRATION INCONSISTANT
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
38
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
F-120
-------
TABLE F-3 (cont.)
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
LITERATURE
PLANT
SLUDGE
VOL SOLIDS
Al
L Ca
Cd
Cr
Cu
CITATION
NAME
CULTIVAR
PH
%
%
%
mg/kg
mo/kfl
mu/kq
39
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
BEANS
WHITE HALF RUNNER
6.1
1.7
40
400
520
40
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
8EANS
WHITE HALF RUNNER
6.1
1.7
40
400
520
41
GIOROANO&MAYS 1977
BEANS
WHITE HALF RUNNER
6.1
1.7
40
400
520
42
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
BEANS
WHITE HALF RUNNER
6.1
1.7
40
400
520
43
GIOROANO&MAYS 1977
BEANS
WHITE HALF RUNNER
6.1
1.7
40
400
520
44
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
BEANS
WHITE HALF RUNNER
6.1
1.7
40
400
520
45
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
BEANS
WHITE HALF RUNNER
6.1
1.7
40
400
520
46
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
BEANS
WHITE HALF RUNNER
6.1
1.7
40
400
520
47
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
BEANS
WHITE HALF RUNNER
6.1
1.7
40
400
520
48
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
BEANS
WHITE HALF RUNNER
6.1
1.7
40
400
520
49
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
BEANS
WHITE HALF RUNNER
6.1
1.7
40
400
520
50
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
BEANS
WHITE HALF RUNNER
6.1
1.7
40
400
520
51 i,
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
BEANS
WHITE HALF RUNNER
6.1
1.7
40
400
520
52
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
BEANS
WHITE HALF RUNNER
6.1
.
1.7
40
400
520
53
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
BEANS
WHITE HALF RUNNER
6.1
1.7
40
400
520
54
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
BEANS
WHITE HALF RUNNER
6.1
1.7
40
400
520
55
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
BEANS
WHITE HALF RUNNER
0.1
1.7
40
400
520
56
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
BEANS
WHITE HALF RUNNER
6.1
1.7
40
400
520
57
GIORDANO & MAYS 1977
BEANS
58
GIORDANO & MAYS 1977
BEANS
6.6
2.5
50
350
730
59
GIORDANO & MAYS 1977
BEANS
6.1
1.7
40
400
520
60
GIORDANO & MAYS 1977
OKRA
61
GIORDANO & MAYS 1977
OKRA
6.6
2.5
50
350
730
62
GIORDANO & MAYS 1977
OKRA
: 6.1
1.7
40
400 :
520
63
GIORDANO & MAYS 1977
PEPPERS
64
GIORDANO & MAYS 1977
PEPPERS
6.6
2.5
50
350
730
65
GIORDANO & MAYS 1977
PEPPERS
6.1
1.7
40 .
400
520
66
GIORDANO & MAYS 1977
TOMATO
•
67
GIORDANO 6 MAYS 1977
TOMATO
6.6
2.5
50
350
730
68
GIORDANO & MAYS 1977
TOMATO
6.1
1.7
40
400
520
69
GIORDANO & MAYS 1977
SQUASH
70
GIORDANO & MAYS 1977
SQUASH
6.6
2.5
50
350
730
71
GIORDANO & MAYS 1977
SQUASH
6.1
1.7
40
400
520
72
GIORDANO & MAYS 1977
TURNIP
73
GIORDANO (• MAYS 1977
TURNIP
6.6
2.5
50 •
350
730
74
GIORDANO & MAYS 1977
TURNfP
6.1
1.7
40
400
520
75
GIORDANO <. MAYS 1977
KALE
76
GIORDANO & MAYS 1977
KALE
6.6
2.5
50
350
730
p.151
-------
TABLE F-3 (ccjnt.)
'if- .
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
Fe
N
Ni
P
Pb
Zn
SOLIDS
BIOLOGICAL
CHEMICAL
%
%
mg/ko
mg/kg
mo/ka
ma/kg
CONTNT
PROCESSING
STABILIZATN
39
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
40
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
41
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
42
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
43
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
44
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
45
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
46
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
47
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
48
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
49
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
50
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
51
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
52
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
1
53
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
54
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
55
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
56
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
57
58
1.7
2.3
20
1.6
530
1800
59
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
60
61
1.7
2.3
20
1.6
530
1800
62 .
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
63
64
1.7
2.3
20
1.6
530
1800
65
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
66
67
1.7
2.3
20
1.6
530
1800
68
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
69
70
1.7
2.3
20
1.6
530
1800
71
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
72
73
1.7
2.3
20
1.6
530
1800
74
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
75
76
1.7
2.3
20
1.6
530
1800
F-122
-------
TABLE F-3
-------
TABLE F-3 (cont.)
SOIL
SOIL
CUMM Ni
SOIL Ni
PLANT Ni
PLANT
DESIGN
CEC
OC
SOIL
LOADING
SOIL
CONCENTRTN
CONCENTRTN
TISSUE
SUMMARY
cmol/kg
%
pH
RATE (kg/ha)
EXTRACTANT
mg/kg
mo/kg
SAMPLED
39
5.6
8
0.5 M HCI
1.9
4.8
VINES
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
40
5.6
. 16
o.5 m
4.5
7.
VINES
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
41.
,
6.5
0
0.5 M iCI
1.2
2.9
VINES
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
42
' '
6.5
0
0.5 M HCI
1.3
2.5
VINES
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
43
5.2
2
0.5 M HCI
1.7
5.3
VINES
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
44
5.6
4
0.5 M HCI
1.9
4.7
VINES
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
45
5.9
8
0.5 M HCI
2.3
5
VINES
FIELD. SLUDGE, MATURITY
46
6
6
0.5 M HCI
2.3
5.5
VINES
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
47
5.9
12
0.5 M HCI
3
5.9
VINES
FIELD. SLUDGE, MATURITY
48
6.3
24
0.5 M HCI
6.3
5.7
VINES
FIELD. SLUDGE. MATURITY
49
6.3
0
DTPA
0.1
2.2
VINES
FIELD. SLUDGE, MATURITY
50
5.8
0
DTPA
0.1
2.2
VINES
FIELD. SLUDGE, MATURITY
51
5.5
2
DTPA
0.3
4.5
VINES
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
52
5.7
4
DTPA
0.4
4.9
VINES
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
53
6.1
8
DTPA
0.5
.3.7
VINES
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
54
5
8
DTPA
0.6
4.4
VINES
FIELD. SLUDGE, MATURITY
55
5.3
16
DTPA
0.7
4.6
VINES
FIELD. SLUDGE. MATURITY
56
5.7
32
DTPA
1.5
5.5
VINES
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
57
r6.4
0
0.5 M HCL
1
2.6
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE. MATURITY
58
6.4
2.2
0.5 M HCL
2.7
3.5
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
59
6.4
4.4
0.5 M HCL
1.8
2.4
LEAF
FIELD. SLUDGE. MATURITY
60
6.4
0
0.5 M HCL
1
1.9
LEAF
FIELD. SLUDGE, MATURITY
61
6.4
2.2
0.5 M HCL
2.7
2.8
LEAF
FIELD. SLUDGE. MATURITY
62
6.4
4.4
0.5 M HCL
1.8
1.8
LEAF
FIELD. SLUDGE, MATURITY
63
6.4
0
0.5 M HCL
1
1.7
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
64
6.4
2.2
0.5 M HCL
2.7
2.7
LEAF
FIELD. SLUDGE, MATURITY
65
6.4
4.4
0.5 M HCL
1.8
2.1
LEAF
FIELD. SLUDGE, MATURITY
66
6.4
0
0.5 M HCL
1
1.5
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE. MATURITY
67
6.4
2.2
0.5 M HCL
2.7
2.3
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
68
6.4
4.4
0.5 M HCL
1.8
1.6
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
69
6.4
0
0.5 M HCL
1
1.7
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
70
6.4
2.2
0.5 M HCL
2.7
4
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE. MATURITY
71
6.4
4.4
0.5 M HCL
1.8
2.2
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
72
6.4
0
0.5 M HCL
1
2.9
LEAF
FIELD. SLUDGE, MATURITY
73
6.4
2.2
0.5 M HCL
2.7
4
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE. MATURITY
74
6.4
4.4
0.5 M HCL
1.8
2.9
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
75
6.4
0
0.5 M HCL
1
1.8
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
76
6.4
2.2
0.5 M HCL
2.7
3.5
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE. MATURITY
F-124
-------
TABLE F-3 (cont.)
YIELD
YIELD
YIELD
YIELD
REDUCTION
COMPONENT
REDUCTION
COMPONENT
METAL
%
MEASURED
%
MEASURED
PHYTOTOXICITY
39
0
VINES
0
PODS
NO
40
0
VINES
60.4*
PODS
•NO
41
0
VINES
0
PODS
NO
42
0
VINES
0
PODS
NO
43
30.8*
VINES
37.5*
PODS
•NO
44
0
VINES
0
PODS
NO
45
0
VINES
0
PODS
NO
46
0
VINES
0
PODS
NO
47
0
VINES
0
PODS
NO
48
0
VINES
0
PODS
NO
49
0
VINES
0
PODS
NO
50
0
VINES
0
PODS
NO
51
26.2*
VINES
0
PODS
•NO
52
14.5*
VINES
0
PODS
•NO
53
0
VINES
0
" PODS
NO
54
27*
VINES
0
PODS
•NO
55
36*
VINES
36.8*
PODS
•NO
56
32.8*
VINES
42.8*
,PODS
•NO
57
0
EDIBLE PART
NO
58
0
EDIBLE PART
NO
59
14.3*
EDIBLE PART
•NO
60
0
EDIBLE PART
NO
61
8.3*
EDIBLE PART
•NO
62
•
CO
CO
EDIBLE PART
:
•NO
63
0
EDIBLE PART
NO
64
0
EDIBLE PART
NO
65
13*
EDIBLE PART
•NO
66
0
EDIBLE PART
NO
67
0
EDIBLE PART
NO
68
0
EDIBLE PART
NO
69
0
EDIBLE PART
NO .
70
0
EDIBLE PART
NO
71
0
EDIBLE PART
NO
72
0
EDIBLE PART
NO
73
0
EDIBLE PART
NO
74
0
EDIBLE PART
NO
75
0
EDtBLE PART
NO
76
0
EDIBLE PART
NO
F-125
-------
TABLE F-4 (cont.)
YIELD
YIELD
REDUCTION
COMPONENT
METAL
%
MEASURED
PHYTOTOXICITY
COMMENTS
381
NO
382
NO
383
NO
,
384
NO
385
NO
386
NO
387
NO
388
NO
389
NO
390
NO
391
NO
392
NO
393
NO
394
NO
395
NO
396
NO
397
NO
398
NO
399
NO
400
NO
401
NO
402
NO
403
NO
404
NO
405
NO
406
NO
407
NO
408
NO
409
NO
410
NO
411
NO
412
NO
413
NO
414
NO
415
NO
416
NO
417
NO
418
NO
F-280
-------
TABLE F-4 (cont.)
SOIL Zn
PLANT Zn
PLANT
YIELD
YIELD
SOIL
CONCENTRTN
CONCENTRTN
TISSUE
DESCRIPTION OF
REDUCTION
COMPONENT
EXTRACTANT
malka
mu/ko
SAMPLED
EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN
%
MEASURED
381
212
Leaf
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
Grain
382
68
14.5
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
NOT REPORTED
383
68
18
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
NOT REPORTED
384
08
18.5
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
NOT REPORTED
385
68
16
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
NOT REPORTED
38S
68
28.3
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
NOT REPORTED
387
68
14.6
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
NOT REPORTED
388
68
22.4
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
NOT REPORTED
389
68
17.5
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
NOT REPORTED
390
68
17.2
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
NOT REPORTED
391
68
20
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
NOT REPORTED
392
68
19.8
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
NOT REPORTED
393
68
17.4
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
NOT REPORTED
394
68
16.8
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
NOT REPORTED
395
68
17.1
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
NOT REPORTED
390
68
16.7"
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
NOT REPORTED
397
68
18.8
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
NOT REPORTED
398
08
15.2
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
NOT REPORTED
399
68
12.9
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
NOT REPORTED
400
68
16
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
NOT REPORTED
401
68
15.4
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
NOT REPORTED
402
188
78.2
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
NOT REPORTED
403
188
84.4
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
NOT REPORTED
404
188
63.6
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
NOT REPORTED
405
188
43.2
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
NOT REPORTED
406
188
64.7
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
NOT REPORTED
407
188
BO.2
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
NOT REPORTED
408
188
54.5
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
NOT REPORTED
409
188
58.2
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
NOT REPORTED
410
188
51.5
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
NOT REPORTED
411
188
40.3
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
NOT REPORTED
412
188
48.8
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
NOT REPORTED
413
188
48.4
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
NOT REPORTED
414
188
37.2
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
NOT REPORTED
415
188
32.5
SLUDGE. FKLD. MATURITY
NOT REPORTED
410
188
35.4
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
NOT REPORTED
417
188
40.8
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
NOT REPORTED
418
188
35.6
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
NOT REPORTED
F-279
-------
TABLE F-4 (com.)
SAND
SILT
CLAV
SOIL
SOIL
CUMM Zn
CONTENT
CONTENT
CONTENT
CEC
OC
SOIL
LOADING
*
%
*
cmol/kfl
%
pH
RATE (ko/hal
381
1201
382
383
384
385
386
387
388
389
390
391
392
393
394
395
398
«
397
398
399
400
401
402
403
404
405
408
407
408
409
410
411
412
413
414
415
416
417
418
F-278
-------
TABLE F-4 (cont.)
SLUDGE
ANNLSLUDGE
CUMML SLUDGE
YEARS
SOIL
SOIL
CHEMICAL
LOADNG RATE
LOADNG RATE
SINCE LAST
TAXONOMIC
SERIES
SOIL
STABIUZATN
Ma/ha
Ma/ha
APPLICATN
NAME
NAME
TEXTURE
381
53
153
0
Aerie Ochraqualf
Blount
silt loam
382
0
7
Aerie Ochraqualf
Blount
silt loam
383
0
7
Aerie Ochraqualf -
Blount
¦ilt loam
384
0
7
Aerie Ochraqualf
Blount
silt loam
38S
0
7
Aerie Ochraqualf
Blount
silt loam
386
0
7
Aerie Ochraqualf
Blount
silt loam
387
0
7
Aerie Ochraqualf
Blount
silt loam
388
0
7
Aerie Ochraqualf
Blount
silt loam
389
0
7
Aerie Ochraqualf
Blount
silt loam
390
0
7
Aerie Ochraqualf
Blount
silt loam
391
0
7
Aerie Ochraqualf
Blount
silt loem
392
0
7
Aerie Ochraqualf
Blount
silt loam
393
0
7
Aerie Ochraqualf
Blount
silt loam
394
0
7
Aerie Ochraqualf
Blount
silt loam
395
0
7
Aerie Ochraqualf
Blount
silt loam
390
0
"
7
Aerie Ochraqualf
Blount
silt loam
397
0
7
Aerie Ochraqualf
Blount
silt loam
398
0
7
Aerie Ochraqualf
Blount
silt loam
399
0
7
Aerie Ochraqualf
Blount
silt loam
400
0
7
Aerio Ochraqualf
Blount
silt loem
401
0
7
Aario Ochraqualf
Blount
silt loam
402
17.75
7
Aerio Ochraqualf
Blount
sHt loam
403
17.75
7
Aerio Ochraqualf
Blount
silt loam
404
17.75
7
Aerio Ochraqualf
Blount
silt loam
405
17.75
7
Aerio Oohraqualf
Blount
silt loam
408
17.75
7
Aerio Ochraqualf
Blount
silt loam
407
17.75
7
Aaric Ochraqualf
Blount
silt loam
408
17.75
7
Aerio Oohraqualf
Blount
silt loam
409
17.75
7
Aerio Ochraqualf
Blount
silt loam
410
17.75
7
Aerio Ochraqualf
Blount
tilt loam
411
17.75
7
Aerio Ochraqualf
Blount
silt loam
412
17.75
7
Aerio Ochraqualf
Blount
silt loam
413
17.75
7
Aerio Ochraqualf
Blount
«#t loam
414
17.75
7
Aerio Oohraqualf
Blount
•St loam
415
17.75
7
Aerie Ochraqualf
Blount
sttlosm
410
17.75
7
Aerio Oohraqualf
Blount
sHt losm
417
17.75
7
Aerio Oohraqualf
Blount
iM loam
418
17.75
7
Aerie Ochraqualf
Blount
silt loam
F-277
-------
TABLE F-4 Icont.)
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
Cr
Cu
Fa
N
Ni
P
Pb
Zn
SOLIDS
BIOLOGICAL
ma/ko
ma/ko
%
%
mn/ko
mcj/ka
ma/ka
ma/kg
CONTNT
PROCESSING
381
Liquid dioestsd sludge
382
Control
383
Control
384
Control
385
Control
386
Control
387
Control
388
Control
389
Control
390
Control
391
Control
392
Control
393
Control
394
Control
395
Control
398
*
Control
397
Control
398
Control
399
Control
400
Control
401
Control
402
One-quarter maximum
403
One-quarter maximum
404
One-quarter maximum
405
One-quarter maximum
406
One-quarter maximum
407
One-quarter maximum
408
One-quarter maximum
409
One-quarter maximum
410
One-quarter maximum
411
One-quarter maximum
412
One-quarter maximum
413
One-quarter maximum
414
One-quarter maximum
415
One-quarter maximum
416
One-quarter maximum
417
One-quarter maximum
418
One-quarter maximum
F-276
-------
TABLE F-4 (cont.)
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
LITERATURE
PLANT
SLUDGE
VOL SOLIDS
Al
Ca
Cd
CITATION
NAME
CULTIVAR
PH
%
%
%
mg/ka
381
Hinaaly, T.D. at al., 1977. f94
Corn
382
Hinaalv. T.D. at al.. 1978. #95
Corn
0h43
383
Hinaaly. T.D. at al.. 1978. #95
Corn
R806
384
Hinstly, T.D. at al.. 1978. #95
Corn
H98
385
Hinaaly, T.D. at al.. 1978. #95
Corn
A619
388
Hinasly, T.D. at al.. 1978. #95
Corn
Mo17
387
Hinaaly, T.D. at al., 1978. #95
Corn
0h545
388
Hinaaly. T.D. at al.. 1978. #95
Corn
B37
389
Hinaaly, T.D. at al.. 1978. #95
Corn
R805
390
Hinaaly, T.D. at al.. 1978. #95
Corn
Va26
391
Hinaaly. T.D. at al., 1978. #95
Corn
H100
392
Hinaaly, T.D. at al., 1978. #95
Corn
B73
393
Hinaaly, T.D. at al., 1978. #95
Corn
B14
394
Hinaaly, T.D. at al., 1978. #95
Corn
A632
395
Hinaaly, T.D. at al., 1978. #95
Corn
N28
396
Hinaaly, T.D. at al.. 1978. #95
Com
W64A
397
Hinaaly, T.D. at al., 1978. #95
Com
R802A
398
Hinaaly, T.D. at al., 1978. #95
Corn
H99
399
Hinaaly, T.D. at al., 1978. #95
Corn
H96
400
Hinaaly, T.D. at al., 1978. #95
Corn
R177
401
Hinaaly, T.D. at al., 1978. #95
Com
B77
402
Hinaaly, T.D. at al., 1978. #95
Corn
0h43
403
Hinaaly, T.D. at al., 1978. #95
Com
R806
: 404
Hinaaly, T.D. at al., 1978. #95
Com
H98
405
Hinaaly. T.D. at al., 1978. #95
Com
A619
400
Hinaaly, T.D. at al., 1978. #95
Com
Mo17
407
Hinaaly, T.D. at al., 1978. #95
Com
0H545
408
Hinaalv. T.D. at al.. 1978. #95
Com
B37
409
Hinaaly, T.D. at al.. 1978. #95
Corn
R805
410
Hinaalv. T.D. at al.. 1978. #95
Com
Va26
411
Hinaalv. T.D. at al., 1978. #95
Com
H100
412
Hinaalv. T.D. at al., 1978. #95
Com
B73
413
Hinaalv. T.D. at al., 1978. #95
Com
B14
414
Hlnaaiv. T.D. at al., 1978. #95
Com
A632
415
Hinaalv. T.D. at al., 1978. #95
Com
N28
416
Hhtativ. T.D. at at.. 1978. #95
Com
W64A
417
Hin*riv. T.D. at ai., 197t. #95
Com
R802A
41*
Htrwriv. T.D. at ai.. 1978. #95
Corn
K9S
F-275
-------
TABLi F-4 (com.)
LOCATION
OF
STUDY
343
India
344
Canada
345
Canada
346
Canada
347
Canada
348
Canada
349
Canada
350
Canada
35!
Baltavilla, MD
3S2
Baltavilla, MD
353
Baltavilla. MD
354
Baltavilla, MD
355
Baltavilla, MD
356
Baltavilla, MD
357
Baltavilla, MD
. 358
Baltavilla, MD
359
Baltavilla, MD
360
Baltavilla, MD
361
Baltavilla. MD
362
Baltavilla, MD
363
Baltavilla. MO
364
Baltavilla, MD
365
Baltavilla, MD
366
Baltavilla, MD
367
Baltavilla, MD
368
Baltavilla, MD
369
Baltavilla, MD
370
371
372
373
374
375
376
377
378
379
Jollat, III.
380
Joliat, 111.
F-274
-------
TABLE F-4 (cont.)
YIELD
YIELD
REDUCTION
COMPONENT
METAL
%
MEASURED
PHYTOTOXICITY
COMMENTS
343
0
GRAIN ,
NO
344
NO
345
NO
346
NO
347
NO
348
NO
349
NO
350
NO
351
NO
352
NO
,
353
NO
354
NO
355
NO
356
NO
357
NO
358
NO
359
NO
360
NO
361
NO
362
NO
363
NO
364
NO
365
NO
366
NO
367
NO
368
NO
369
NO
370
NO
371
NO
372
NO
373
NO
374
NO
375
NO
376
NO
377
NO
378
NO
378
NO
380
NO
F-273
-------
TABLE F-4 (cont.l
SOIL Zn
PLANT Zn
PLANT
YIELD
YIELD
SOIL
CONCENTRTN
CONCENTRTN
TISSUE
DESCRIPTION OF
REDUCTION
COMPONENT
EXTRACTANT
mo/kfl
ma/ka
SAMPLED
EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN
%
MEASURED
343
HCL04/HN03
81.8'
88.14
Earhssd
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
Whole Plant
344
42.8
30
Stem
0
GRAIN
345
81.4
43
Stem
0
GRAIN
346
25.2
15
Stam
0
GRAIN
347
28.4
Leaf
0
Leaf
348
42.6
Leaf
0
Leaf
349
51.9
Leaf
0
Leaf
350
78.7
Leaf
0
Leaf
351
46
Shoota
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
Shoots
352
40
Shoots
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
0
Shoots
353
35
Shoota
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
Shoota
354
45
Shoota
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
Shoots
355
44
Shoots
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
0
Shoota
356
34
Shoota
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
Shoots
357
31
Shoots
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
Shoots
358
37
Shoots
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
Shoots
359
54
Shoots
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
Shoots
360
50
Shoots
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
0
Shoots
361
46
Shoots
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
Shoots
362
40
Shoots
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
Shoots
363
48
Shoots
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
Shoots
364
57
Shoots
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
Shoots
365
62
Shoots
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
Shoots
366
62
Shoots
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
Shoots
367
85
Shoots
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
Shoots
368
106
Shoots
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
Shoots
369
153
Shoots
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
Shoots
370
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
371
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
372
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
373
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
374
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
375
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
376
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
377
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
378
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
379
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
Grain
380
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
Grain
F-272
-------
TABLE F-4 (cont.)
SAND
SILT
CLAY
SOIL
SOIL
CUMM Zn
CONTENT
CONTENT
CONTENT
CEC
OC
SOIL
LOADING
%
cmol/ka
%
pH
RATE (ka/ha)
343
•
0.7
8
344
36.7
34S
35.7
346
28
347
2-2.5
5.9-6.2
6.7
348
2-2.5
5.9-6.2
20.1
349
2-2.5
5.9-6.2
26.8
350
2-2.5
5.9-6.2
40.2
351
7
352
7.4
353
7.6
354
7.7
355
7.6
356
6.9
357
7.4
358
7.6
359
5.8
360
6.1
361
6.8
362
7
363
7.1
364
5.8
365
5.7
366
6
367
5.2
368
5.3
369
5.1
370
0
371
0
372
0
373
80
374
197
375
300
376
159
377
394
378
600
379
317
340
787
F-271
-------
TABLE F-4 (cont.l
SLUDGE
ANNL SLUDGE
CUMML SLUDGE
YEARS
SOIL
SOIL
CHEMICAL
LOADNG RATE
LOADNG RATE
SINCE LAST
TAXONOMIC
SERIES
SOIL
STABILIZATN
Ma/ha
Mg/ha
APPLICATN
NAME
NAME
TEXTURE
343
20
20
0
Clayey
344
75
75
345
150
150
346
0
0
347
1981
Orthic Podzol
Lyndale
Sandy Loam
348
1981
Orthic Podzol
Lyodale
Sandy Loam
349
1981
Orthic Podzol
Lyndale
Sandy Loam
350
1981
Orthic Podzol
Lyndale
Sandy Loam
351
56
56
1976
Typic Paleudults
Christiana
fine sandy loam
352
112
112
1976
Typic Paleudults
Christiana
fine sandy loam
353
224
224
1976
Typio Palaudults
Christiana
fine sandy loam
354
336
336
1976
Typic Palaudults
Christiana
fine sandy loam
355
448
448
1976
Typic Palaudults
Chriatiana
fine sandy loam
356
56
56
1976
Typic Palaudults
Christiana
fine sandy loam
357
112
112
1976
Typic Palaudults
Christiana
fine sandy loam
358
224
224
1976
Typio Palaudults
Chriatiana
fine sandy loam
359
56
56
1976
Typic Paleudults
Chriatiana
fine sandy loam
360
112
112
1976
Typic Pataudulta
Chriatiana
fine sandy loam
361
224
224
1976
Typic Paleudulta
Christiana
fine sandy loam
362
448
448
1976
Typio Palaudults
Christiana
fine sandy loam
363
672
672
1976
Typic Palaudults
Christiana
fine sandy loam
364
66
56
1976
Typic Paleudults
Christiana
fine sandy loam
365
112
112
1976
Typic Paleudults
Christiana
fine sandy loam
366
224
: 224
1976
Typic Paleudults
Christiana
fine sandy loam
367
56
56
1976
Typio Paleudulta
Chriatiana
fine sandy loam
368
112
112
1976
Typio Paleudults
Chriatiana
fine anndy loam
369
224
224
1976
Typic Palaudults
Chriatiana
fine sandy loam
370
0
0
0
Aerio Ochraqualf
Blount
silt loam
371
0
0
0
Aerie Ochraqualf
Blount
silt loam
372
0
0
0
Aerie Ochraqualf
Blount
siit loam
373
13
13
0
Aerie Ochraqualf
Blount
silt loam
374
12
25
0
Aerio Ochraqualf
Blount
silt loam
375
14
38
0
Aerie Ochraqualf
Blount
silt loam
376
26
26
0
Aerie Ochraqualf
Blount
silt loam
377
24
50
0
Aerio Ochraqualf
Blount
silt loam
378
27
77
0
Aerie Ochraqualf
Blount
silt loam
379
52
52
0
Aerie Ochraqualf
Blount
silt loam
380
48
100
0
Aerio Ochraqualf
Blount
silt loam
F-270
-------
TABLE F-4 (cont.)
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
Cr
Cu
Te
N
Ni
P
Pb
Zn
SOLIDS
BIOLOGICAL
mg/kg
%
%
mg/kg
mg/ka
mg/kg
mg/kg
CONTNT
PROCESSING
343
45
428
562
Well Water + 20 t/ha sludge
344
191
143
26.3
27200
194
420
Sludge
345
191
143
26.3
27200
194
420
Sludge
34S
0.05
0.073
0.086
23.8
0.094
0.313
Irrigation Water
347
N.P.K.S. Fertilizer
348
N.P.K.S. Fertilizer
349
N.P.K.S. Fertilizer
350
N.P.K.S. Fertilizer
351
259
15
217
633
Limed-digeated
352
259
15
217
639
Limed-digested
353
259
15
217
639
Limed-digested
354
259
15
217
639
Limed-digeated
355
259
15
217
039
Limed-digeated
358
277
17
215
599
Limed-Raw
357
277
17
215
599
timed-Raw
358
277
* 17
215
599
Umed-Raw
359
274
201
272
731
Limed-Compoat
360
274
201
272
731
Limed-Compoat
301
274
201
272
731
Umed-Compoat
302
274
201
272
731
Umed-Compoat
303
274
201
272
731
Limed-Compoat
304
404
37
300
1330
Haat-Traated, High pH
305
404
37
300
1330
Heat-Treated, High pH
300
404
37
300
1330
Heat-Treated, High pH
307
404
37
300
1330
Heat-Treated, Low pH
308
404
37
300
1330
Haat-Traated, Low pH
309
404
37
360
1330
Haat-Traated, Low pH
370
Liquid digaated sludge
371
Liquid digested aludga
372
Liquid digested aludga
373
Liquid digaated sludge
374
Liquid digaated sludge
375
Liquid digaated sludge
370
Liquid digested sludge
377
Liquid digested tkidge
378
Liquid digested skidqe
378
Liquid digested sludge
380
Liquid digested studoe
F-269
-------
TABLE F-4 (cont.)
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
LITERATURE
PLANT
SLUDGE
VOL SOLIDS
Al
Ca
Cd
CITATION
NAME
CULTIVAR
PH
%
%
%
mg/kfl
343
Chakrabarti, C. and T. Chakrabarti, 1988. #29
Whaat
HDM1553
344
Gilllea. J.A. at al.. 1989. #73
Oat
Harmon
4.6
34S
Gilliea, J.A. at al.. 1989. #73
Oat
Harmon
4.6
346
Gilliaa. J.A. at al., 1989. #73
Oat
Harmon
0.014
347
Gupta, Umeah C., and W.J. Araanault, 1986. #80
Tobacco
348
Gupta, Umaah C„ and W.J. Araanault, 1986. #80
Tobacco
349
Gupta, Umaah C., and W.J. Araanault, 1986. #80
Tobacco
3SO
Gupta, Umaah C„ and WJ. Araanault, 1986. #80
Tobacco
351
Heckman, J.R. at al., 1987. #89
Soybean
Merr.
5.9
352
Haokman, J.R. at al., 1987. #89
Soybean
Merr.
5.9
353
Haokman, J.R. at al., 1987. #89
Soybean
Merr.
5.9
354
Haokman, J.R. at al., 1987. #89
Soybean
Merr.
5.9
355
Hackman, J.R. at al.. 1987. #89
Soybean
Merr.
5.9
356
Hackman, J.R. at al., 1987. #89
Soybean
Merr.
4.9
357
Hackman, J.R. at al., 1987. #89
Soybean
Merr.
4.9
358
Hackman, J.R. at al., 1987. #89
Soybean
Marr.
4.9
359
Hackman, J.R. at al., 1987. #89
Soybean
Marr.
7.2
360
Haokman, J.R. at al., 1987. #89
Soybean
Marr.
7.2
361
Hackman, J.R. at al.. 1987. #89
Soybean
Marr.
7.2
362
Haokman, J.R. at al., 1987. #89
Soybean
Marr.
7.2
363
Haokman. J.R. at al.. 1987. #89
Soybean
Merr.
7.2
364
Hackman. J.R. at al., 1987. #89
Soybean
Merr.
8.3
365
Hackman, J.R. at al., 1987. #89
Soybean
Merr.
8.3
366
Haokman, J.R. at al., 1987. #89
Soybean
Merr.
8.3
367
Hackman, J.R. at al., 1987. #89
Soybean
Merr.
8.3
368
Haokman. J.R. at al.. 1987. #89
Soybean
Merr.
8.3
369
Haokman. J.R. at al.. 1987. #89
Soybean
Merr.
8.3
370
Hinaalv, T.D.atal., 1977. #94
CORN
371
Hlnaalv, T.D. at al., 1977. #94
CORN
372
Hinaalv. T.D.atal., 1977. #94
CORN
373
Hlnaalv. T.D. at al., 1977. #94
CORN
374
Hinaalv. T.D.atal.. 1977. #94
CORN
375
Hinaalv. T.D.atal., 1977. #94
CORN
376
Hinaalv. T.D. at al., 1977. #94
CORN
377
Hinaalv, T.D. at al., 1977. #94
CORN
378
Hinaalv. T.D.atal., 1977. #94
CORN
379
Hinaalv, T.D. at al., 1977. #94
Corn
380
Hinaalv, T.D. at al., 1977. #94
Corn
F-268
-------
TABLE F-4 Ccont.)
LOCATION
OF
STUDY
30S
JOUET, ILLINOIS
306
JOUET, ILLINOIS
307
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
308
JOUET, ILLINOIS
309
JOUET. ILLINOIS
310
JOUET. ILLINOIS
311
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
312
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
313
JOUET, ILLINOIS
314
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
315
JOUET, ILLINOIS
318
JOUET, ILLINOIS
317
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
318
JOUET, ILLINOIS
319
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
" 320
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
321
JOUET, ILUNOIS
322
JOUET, ILLINOIS
323
JOUET, ILLINOIS
324
JOUET, ILLINOIS
32S
JOUET, ILLINOIS
328
JOUET, ILUNOIS
327
JOUET, ILLINOIS
328
JOUET, ILUNOIS
329
JOUET, ILLINOIS
330
JOUET, ILUNOIS
331
JOLIET. ILUNOIS
332
JOUET, ILUNOIS
333
JOUET, ILLINOIS
334
JOUET, ILLINOIS
335
JOUET. ILUNOIS
336
JOUET, ILLINOIS
337
JOUET, ILUNOIS
338
JOUET, ILUNOIS
339
JOUET, ILLINOIS
340
JOUET, HLINOtS
341
India
342
IncSa
F*2$7
-------
TABLE F-4 (cont.)
YIELD
YIELD
REDUCTION
COMPONENT
METAL
%
MEASURED
PHYTOTOXICITY
COMMENTS
305
0
STOVER
NO
306
0
STOVER
NO
'
307
0
STOVER
NO
,
308
NA
STOVER
NO
309
0
STOVER
NO
310
0
STOVER
NO
311
0
STOVER
•NO
•DOSE RESPONSE AND TISSUE ZN CONCENTRATION NOT CONSISTENT
312
0
STOVER
•NO
•DOSE RESPONSE AND TISSUE ZN CONCENTRATION NOT CONSISTENT
313
0
STOVER
NO
314
0
STOVER
NO
315
0
STOVER
NO
316
0
STOVER
NO
317
0
STOVER
NO
318
0
STOVER
NO
319
NA
STOVER
NO
320
0
STOVER
NO
321
0
STOVER
NO
322
0
STOVER
NO
323
0
STOVER
NO
324
0
STOVER
NO
325
0
STOVER
NO
326
0
STOVER
NO
327
0
STOVER
NO
328
0
. STOVER
NO
329
0
STOVER
NO
330
NA
STOVER
NO
331
0
STOVER
NO
332
0
STOVER
NO
333
0
STOVER
NO
334
0
STOVER
NO
335
0
STOVER
NO
336
0
STOVER
NO
337
0
STOVER
NO
338
0
STOVER
NO
339
0
STOVER
NO
340
0
STOVER
NO
341
0
GRAIN
NO
342
0
GRAIN
NO
F-266
-------
TABLE F-4 (com.)
SOIL Zn
PLANT Zn
PLANT
1 YIELD
YIELD
SOtt.
CONCENTRTN
CONCENTRTN
TISSUE
DESCRIPTION OF
REDUCTION
COMPONENT
EXTRACTANT
ma/ko
mo/ka
SAMPLED
EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN
%
MEASURED
305
HCL-HF
77
52
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
306
HCL-HF
81
39
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
307
HCL-HF
90
NA
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
308
HCL-HF
61
38
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
309
HCL-HF
88
42
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
310
HCL-HF
125
94
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
311
HCL-HF
111
92
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
60*
GRAIN
312
HCL-HF
165
11
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
60"
GRAIN
313
HCL-HF
149
151
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
314
HCL-HF
193
102
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
315
HCL-HF
238
76
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
310
HCL-HF
314
93
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
317
HCL-HF
305
57
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
318
HCL-HF
234
NA
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
319
HCL-HF
60
52
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
NA
GRAIN
320
HCL-HF
122
80 •
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
321
HCL-HF
192
171
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
322
HCL-HF
243
96
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
323
HCL-HF
238
176
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
324
HCL-HF
336
435
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
325
HCL-HF
335
188
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
328
HCL-HF
320
154
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
327
HCL-HF
544
153
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
328
HCL-HF
462
119
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
329
HCL-HF
431
NA
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELO, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
330
HCL-HF
265
87
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
331
HCL-HF
133
124
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
332
HCL-HF
227
133
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
333
HCL-HF
293
136
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
334
HCL-HF
506
396
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
335
HCL-HF
500
540
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
336
HCL-HF
589
356
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
337
HCL-HF
623
192
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
338
HCL-HF
623
310
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
339
HCL-HF
723
225
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
340
HCL-HF
753
NA
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
341
HCL04/HN03
22.2
43.32
Earhaad
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
Whols Plant
342
HCL04/HN03
47
60.54
Earhssd
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
Whols Plant
F-265
-------
TABLE F-4 (cont.)
SAND
SILT
CLAY
SOIL
SOIL
CUMM Zn
CONTENT
CONTENT
CONTENT
CEC
OC
SOIL
LOADING
%
%
%
cmol/kg
%
pH
RATE (ka/ha)
305
0.76
7
0
306
1.21
6.9
0
307
0.84
7.1
0
308
0.31
NA
225
309
0.44
7.2
259
310
0.63
7.3
314
311
0.67
7.5
402
312
0.78
7
463
313
0.8
7
531
314
0.99
6.6
531
315
1.42
7.1
531
316
1.71
7.2
531
317
1.82
7.2
531
318
1.96
7.1
531
319
0.43
NA
449
320
*
0.51
7.1
517
321
0.94
7
628
322
1.16
7.2
804
323
1.4
7
926
324
1.75
6.4
1063
325
2
6.3
1063
326
2.16
6.8
1063
327
2.02
6.8
1063
328
2.33
7.1
:1063
329
1.66
7
1063
330
0.73
NA
898
331
0.57
6.8
1033
332
1.3
6.7
1257
333
1.42
6.6
1607
334
2.4
6.4
1852
335
2.76
6.1
2130
336
3.44
5.8
2130
337
3.16
5.9
2130
338
3.28
6.2
2130
339
3.1
6.4
2130
340
3.15
6.5
2130
341
0.7
8
342
0.7
8
F-264
-------
TABLE F*4 («mlj
SLUDGE
ANNLSLUDGE
CUMML SLUDGE
YEARS
SOH.
SOU.
CHEMICAL
LOADNG RATE
LOADNG RATE
SINCE LAST
TAXONOMIC
SERIES
SOIL
STABIUZATN
Ma/ha
Ma/ha
APPUCATN
NAME
NAME
^JEIOUBE^
305
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
0
NA
PLAINFIELD
LS
300
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
0
NA
PLAINFIELD
LS
307
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
0
NA
.
PLAINFIELD
LS
308
CENT POLY. FECL3
26.2
40.1
0
PLAINFIELD
LS
309
CENT POLY. FECL3
8.1
48.2
0
PLAINFIELD
LS
310
CENT POLY. FECL3
14.7
62.9
0
PLAINFIELD
LS
311
CENT POLY. FECL3
17.7
80.6
0
PLAINFIELD
LS
312
CENT POLY. FECL3
13.1
93.7
0
PLAINFIELD
LS
313
CENT POLY. FECL3
17.8
111.5
0
PLAINFIELD
LS
314
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
111.5
1
PLAINFIELD
LS
315
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
111.5
2
PLAINFIELD
LS
316
CENT POLY, FECL3
0
111.5
3
PLAINFIELD
LS
317
CENT POLY, FECL3
0
111.5
4
PLAINFIELD
LS
318
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
111.5
5
PLAINFIELD
LS
319
CENT POLY. FECL3
52.4
80.2
0
PLAINFIELD
LS
320
CENT POLY, FECL3
16.2
96.4
0
PLAINFIELD
LS
321
CENT POLY, FECL3
29.4
125.8
0
PLAINFIELD
LS
322
CENT POLY, FECL3
35.4
161.2
0
PLAINFIELD
LS
323
CENT POLY. FECL3
26.2
187.4
0
PLAINFIELD
LS
324
CENT POLY. FECL3
35.6
223
0
PLAINFIELD
LS
325
CENT POLY, FECL3
0
223
1
PLAINFIELD
LS
326
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
223
2
PLAINFIELD
LS
327
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
223
3
PLAINFIELD
LS
328
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
223
4
PLAINFIELD
LS
* 329
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
223
5
PLAINFIELD
LS
330
CENT POLY. FECL3
104.8
160.4
0
PLAINFIELD
LS
331
CENT POLY. FECL3
32.4
192.8
0
PLAINFIELD
LS
332
CENT POLY. FECL3
58.8
251.6
0
PLAINFIELD
LS
333
CENT POLY, FECL3
70.8
322.4
0
PLAINFIELD
LS
334
CENT POLY. FECL3
52.4
374.8
0
PLAINFIELD
LS
335
CENT POLY, FECL3
71.2
446
0
PLAINFIELD
LS
336
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
446
1
PLAINFIELD
LS
337
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
446
2
PLAINFIELD
LS
338
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
446
3
PLAINFIELD
LS
339
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
446
4
PLAINFIELD
LS
340
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
446
5
PLAINFIELD
LS
341
Clayey
342
10
10
0
Clayey
F-263
-------
TABLE F-4 (cont.)
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
Cr
Cu
Fa
N
Ni
P
Pb
Zn
SOLIDS
BIOLOGICAL
ma/ka
mo/kfl
%
%
ma/ka
ma/ka
ma/ka
mg/ka
CONTNT
PROCESSING
305
2846
1311
4.2 .
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
306
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
307
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
308
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
309
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
310
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
311
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
312
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
313
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
314
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
31S
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
316
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
317
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
318
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
319
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
320
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
. 305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
321
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
322
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
323
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
324
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
325
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
326
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
327
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
328
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305 :
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
329
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC OIGESTION
330
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
331
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
332
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
333
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
334
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
335
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
336
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
337
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
338
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
339
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
340
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
341
N/P
10
30
Wall Watar(Control)
342
45
428
562
Well Watar +10 t/ha aludna
F-262
-------
TABLE F-4 (oorrt.)
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
LITERATURE
PLANT
SLUDGE
VOL SOUOS
Al
Ca
Cd
CITATION
NAME
CULTIVAR
PH
%
%
%
mo A: a
305
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
308
HINESLY 1985
CORN
1
3.2
265
307
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
308
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
309
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
310
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
311
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
312
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
313
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
314
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
315
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
318
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
317
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
318
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
319
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
320
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
321
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
322
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
323
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
324
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
325
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
326
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
327
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
328
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
: 265
329
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
330
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
331
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
332
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
333
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
334
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
335
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
336
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
337
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
338
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
339
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
340
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
341
Chakrabarti, C. and T. Chakrabarti, 1988. #29
Wheat
HDM1553
8.4
342
Chakrabarti. C. and T. Chakrabarti, 1988. #29
Wheat
HDM1553
F-261
-------
TABLE F-4 (cont.)
LOCATION
OF
STUDY
267
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
268
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
269
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
270
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
271
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
272
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
273
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
274
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
275
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
276
JOUET, ILLINOIS
277
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
278
JOUET, ILLINOIS
279
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
280
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
281
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
* 282
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
283
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
284
JOUET. ILLINOIS
28S
JOUET. ILUNOIS
286
JOUET. ILLINOIS
287
JOUET. ILUNOIS
288
JOLIET. ILUNOIS
289
JOLIET. ILUNOIS
: 290
JOLIET, ILUNOIS
291
JOLIET, ILUNOIS
292
JOUET. ILUNOIS
293
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
294
JOUET. ILUNOIS
295
JOLIET. ILUNOIS
296
JOUET. ILUNOIS
297
JOLIET, tLLINOIS
298
JOLIET. ILUNOIS
299
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
300
JOLIET. ILUNOIS
301
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
302
JOLIET. ILUNOIS
303
JOLIET. ILUNOIS
304
JOUET. ILLINOIS
F-260
-------
TABLE F-4 (com.)
YIELD
YIELD
REDUCTION
COMPONENT
METAL
*
MEASURED
PHYTOTOXICITY
COMMENTS
287
0
STOVER
•NO
•DOSE RESPONSE AND TISSUE ZN CONCENTRATION NOT CONSISTENT
2S8
0
STOVER
•NO
•DOSE RESPONSE AND TISSUE ZN CONCENTRATION NOT CONSISTENT
209
0
STOVER
NO
270
0
STOVER
NO
271
0
STOVER
NO
272
0
STOVER
NO
273
0
STOVER
NO
274
0
STOVER
NO
27S
NA
STOVER
NO
270
0
STOVER
NO
277
0
STOVER
NO
278
0
STOVER
NO
279
0
STOVER
NO
280
0
STOVER
NO
281
0
STOVER
NO
282
0
STOVER
NO
283
0
STOVER
NO
284
0
STOVER
NO
286
0
STOVER
NO
288
NA
STOVER
NO
287
0
STOVER
NO
288
0
STOVER
NO
289
0
STOVER
NO
290
: 0
STOVER
NO
291
0
STOVER
NO
292
0
STOVER
NO
293
0
STOVER
NO
294
0
STOVER
NO
295
0
STOVER
NO
296
0
STOVER
NO
297
NA
STOVER
NO
298
0
STOVER
NO
299
0
STOVER
NO
300
0
STOVER
NO
301
0
STOVER
NO
302
0
STOVER
NO
303
0
STOVER
NO
304
0
STOVER
NO
F-259
-------
TABLE F-4 (cont.l
SOIL Zn
PLANT Zn
PLANT
YIELD
YIELD
SOIL
CONCENTRTN
CONCENTRTN
TISSUE
DESCRIPTION OF
REDUCTION
COMPONENT
EXTRACTANT
mo/kg
ma/kn
SAMPLED
EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN
%
MEASURED
267
HCL-HF
138
70
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
60*
GRAIN
268
HCL-HF
156
192
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
28*
GRAIN
269
HCL-HF
206
92
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
270
HCL-HF
180
89
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
271
HCL-HF
202
43
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
272
HCL-HF
215
44
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
273
HCL-HF
219
27
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
274
HCL-HF
167
NA
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
275
HCL-HF
159
72
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
276
HCL-HF
131
97
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
277
HCL-HF
143
89
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
278
HCL-HF
171
112
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
279
HCL-HF
216
139
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
280
HCL-HF
270
191
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
281
"HCL-HF
294
163
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
282
HCL-HF
394
119
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
283
HCL-HF
351
107
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
284
HCL-HF
287
70
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
285
HCL-HF
303
NA
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
286
HCL-HF
215
97
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
287
HCL-HF
215
160
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
288
HCL-HF
193
175
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
289
HCL-HF
333
149
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
290
HCL-HF
368
268
LEAF
: SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
291
HCL-HF
553
294
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
292
HCL-HF
543
278
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
293
HCL-HF
594
204
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
294
HCL-HF
442
171
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
295
HCL-HF
482
141
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
296
HCL-HF
331
NA
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
297
HCL-HF
55
19
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
298
HCL-HF
24
17
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
299
HCL-HF
22
23
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
300
HCL-HF
32
22
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
301
HCL-HF
43
20
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
302
HCL-HF
46
32
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
303
HCL-HF
55
17
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
304
HCL-HF
75
34
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
F-258
-------
TABLE F-4 loom.)
SAND
SH.T
CLAY
SO*.
SOK.
CUMM Zn
CONTENT
CONTENT
CONTENT
CEC
OC
SOU.
LOADING
%
%
%
cmol/ka
%
PH
RATE ikalh*)
267
1.58
7.4
402
268
1.54
7.1
463
289
1.64
6.9
531
270
1.69
6.9
531
271
1.91
7
531
272
1.66
7.3
531
273
2.05
7.1
531
274
1.95
7.2
531
275
1.71
NA
449
276
1.57
6.9
517
277
1.57
7.3
628
278
1.79
7.1
804
279
1.93
6.9
926
280
2.09
6.6
1063
281
2.37
6.4
1063
282
to
2.4
6.4
1063
283
2.4
6.8
1063
284
2.38
6.8
1063
285
2.48
7.2
1063
286
2.06
NA
898
287
2
6.4
1033
288
1.76
6.4
1257
289
2.67
6.2
1607
290
2.72
6.1
1852
291
3.53
5.4
2130
292
3.35
5.5
2130
293
3.29
5.8
2130
294
2.68
6
2130
29S
3.02
6
2130
296
2.2
6.3
2130
297
0.36
NA
0
298
0.17
7
0
299
0.21
7.2
0
300
0.42
7.1
0
301
0.44
7
0
302
0.56
6.9
0
303
0.48
7
0
304
0.75
7
0
F-257
-------
TABLE F-4 (cont.)
SLUDGE
ANNLSLUDGE
CUMML SLUDGE
YEARS
SOIL
SOIL
CHEMICAL
LOADNG RATE
LOADNG RATE
SINCE LAST
TAXONOMIC
SERIES
SOIL
STABIUZATN
Ma/ha
Ma/ha
APPLICATN
NAME
NAME
TEXTURE
267
CENT POLY, FECL3
17.7
80.6
0
ELLIOT
SiL
268
CENT POLY. FECL3
13.1
93.7
0
ELLIOT
SiL
269
CENT POLY. FECL3
17.8
111.5
0
ELLIOT
SiL
270
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
111.5
1
ELLIOT
SiL
271
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
111.5
2
ELLIOT
SiL
272
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
111.5
3
ELLIOT
SiL
273
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
111.5
4
ELLIOT
SiL
274
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
111.5
5
ELLIOT
SiL
276
CENT POLY. FECL3
52.4
80.2
0
ELLIOT
SiL
276
CENT POLY. FECL3
16.2
96.4
0
ELLIOT
SiL
277
CENT POLY. FECL3
29.4
125.8
0
ELLIOT
SiL
278
CENT POLY, FECL3
35.4
161.2
0
ELLIOT
SiL
279
CENT POLY, FECL3
26.2
187.4
0
ELLIOT
SiL
280
CENT POLY. FECL3
35.6
223
0
ELLIOT
SiL
281
CENT POLY, FECL3
i 0
223 !
1
ElUOT
SiL
282
CENT POLY, FECL3
0
* 223
2
ELLIOT
SiL
283
CENT POLY, FECL3
0
223
3
ELLIOT
SiL
284
CENT POLY, FECL3
0
223
4
ELLIOT
SiL
285
CENT POLY, FECL3
0
223
5
ELLIOT
SiL
286
CENT POLY. FECL3
104.8
160.4
0
ELLIOT
SiL
287
CENT POLY. FECL3
32.4
192.8
0
ELLIOT
SiL
288
CENT POLY. FECL3
58.8
251.6
0
ELLIOT
SiL
289
CENT POLY. FECL3
70.8
322.4
0
ELLIOT
SiL
: 290
CENT POLY. FECL3
52.4
374.8
0
ELLIOT
SiL
291
CENT POLY. FECL3
71.2
446
0
ELLIOT
SiL
292
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
446
1
ELUOT
SiL
293
CENT POLY, FECL3
0
446
2
ELLIOT
SiL
294
CENT POLY, FECL3
0
446
3
ELLIOT
SiL
295
CENT POLY, FECL3
0
446
4
ELLIOT
SiL
296
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
446
5
ELLIOT
SiL
297
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
0
NA
PLAINFIELD
LS
298
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
0
NA
PLAINFIELD
LS
299
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
0
NA
PLAINFIELD
LS
300
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
0
NA
PLAINFIELD i
LS
301
CENT POLY, FECL3
0
0
NA
PLAINFIELD
LS
302
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
0
NA
PLAINFIELD
LS
303
CENT POLY, FECL3
0
0
NA
PLAINFIELD
LS
304
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
0
NA
PLAINFIELD
LS
F-256
-------
TABLE F-4 (cow.)
SLUOGE
SLUOGE
SLUOGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUOGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUOGE
Cr
Cu
Fa
N
Ni
P
Pb
Zn
SOUOS
BIOLOGICAL
mo/ka
ma/ka
%
%
ma/ka
ma/ka
ma/ka
ma/ka
CONTNT
PROCESSING
267
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
208
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169 ¦
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
269
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
270
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
271
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
272
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
273
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
274
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
275
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
276
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
277
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
278
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
279
. 2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
280
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
281
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
282
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
* 305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
283
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
284
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
285
284S
1311
4.2
*6.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
286
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
287
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
288
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
289
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
290
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
291
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
292
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
293
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
294
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
295
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
296
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
297
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
298
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
299
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
300
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
301
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
302
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
303
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
304
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
F-255
-------
TABLE F-4 (cont.)
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
LITERATURE
PLANT
SLUDGE
VOL SOLIDS
Al
Ca
Cd
CITATION
NAME
CULTIVAR
PH
%
%
%
mo/ko
267
HINESLY 1985
CORN
•
3.2
265
268
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
269
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
270
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
271
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
272
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
273
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
274
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
275
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
276
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
277
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
278
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
279
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
280
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
281
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
282
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
283
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
284
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
285
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
286
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
287
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
288
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
289
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
290
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
291
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
292
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
293
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
294
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
295
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
296
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
297
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
298
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
299
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
300
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
301
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
302
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
303
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
304
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
F-254
-------
TABLE F-4 (cont.)
LOCATION
OF
STUDY
229
JOUET, ILLINOIS
230
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
231
JOUET, ILLINOIS
232
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
233
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
234
JOUET, ILLINOIS
236
JOUET, ILLINOIS
230
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
237
JOUET, ILLINOIS
238
JOUET, ILUNOIS
239
JOUET, ILLINOIS
240
JOUET, ILLINOIS
241
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
242
JOUET, ILLINOIS
243
JOLIET, ILUNOIS
" 244
JOUET, ILLINOIS
246
JOUET, ILUNOIS
246
JOUET, ILLINOIS
24?
JOUET, ILLINOIS
248
JOLIET, ILUNOIS
249
JOUET, ILLINOIS
2S0
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
251
JOUET. ILUNOIS
262
JOUET, ILLINOIS
253
JOUET, ILLINOIS
254
JOUET, ILLINOIS
255
JOLIET, ILUNOIS
256
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
257
JOUET, ILLINOIS
258
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
259
JOUET. ILLINOIS
260
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
261
JOUET, ILLINOIS
262
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
263
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
264
JOUET, ILLINOIS
265 ,
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
266 '
JOLIET. ILUNOIS
F-253
-------
TABLE F-4 (cont.l
YIELD
YIELD
REDUCTION
COMPONENT
METAL
%
MEASURED
PHYTOTOXICITY
COMMENTS
229
0
STOVER
NO
230
0
STOVER
NO
231
0
STOVER
NO
232
0
STOVER
NO
233
NA
STOVER
NO
234
0
STOVER
NO
23S
0
STOVER
NO
236
0
STOVER
NO
237
0
STOVER
NO
238
NA
STOVER
NO
239
0
STOVER
NO
240
37*
STOVER
•NO
•DOSE RESPONSE AND TISSUE ZN CONCENTRATION NOT CONSISTENT
241
0
STOVER
•NO
•DOSE RESPONSE AND TISSUE ZN CONCENTRATION NOT CONSISTENT
242
0
STOVER
•NO
•DOSE RESPONSE AND TISSUE ZN CONCENTRATION NOT CONSISTENT
243
NA
STOVER
NO
244
0
STOVER
NO
24S
22*
STOVER
•NO
•DOSE RESPONSE AND TISSUE ZN CONCENTRATION NOT CONSISTENT
246
0
STOVER
NO
247
0
STOVER
NO
248
NA
STOVER
NO
249
0
STOVER
NO
250
0
STOVER
NO
251
0
STOVER
NO
252
: 0
STOVER
NO
253
NA
STOVER
NO
254
0
STOVER
NO
255
0
STOVER
NO
256
0
STOVER
NO
257
0
STOVER
NO
258
0
STOVER
NO
259
0
STOVER
NO
260
0
STOVER
NO
261
0
STOVER
NO
262
0
STOVER
NO
263
0
STOVER
NO
264
NA
STOVER
NO
265
0.
STOVER
NO
266
0
STOVER
NO
F-252
-------
TABLE F-4 (cont.l
SOIL Zn
PLANT Zn
PLANT
YIELD
YIELD
SOIL
CONCENTRTN
CONCENTRTN
TISSUE
DESCRIPTION OF
REDUCTION
COMPONENT
EXTRACTANT
ma/kn
rrwAo
SAMPLED
EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN
%
MEASURED
229
HCL-HF
472 .
260
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
230
HCL-HF
804
246
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
231
HCL-HF
442
382
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
232
HCL-HF
639
124
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
233
HCL-HF
73
27
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
234
HCL-HF
72
18
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
235
HCL-HF
67
20
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
238
HCL-HF
72
22
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
237
HCL-HF
69
14
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
238
HCL-HF
106
42
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
233
HCL-HF
103
43
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
240
HCL-HF
113
45
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
241
HCL-HF
147
64
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
60*
GRAIN
242
HCL-HF
150
70
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
• '
00
GRAIN
243
HCL-HF
174
57
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
244
HCL-HF
122
67*
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
245
HCL-HF
166
88
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
24S
HCL-HF
196
83
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
247
HCL-HF
250
112
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
248
HCL-HF
241
72
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
249
HCL-HF
220
115
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
250
HCL-HF
270
130
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
251
HCL-HF
308
117
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
252
: HCL-HF
432
179
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN :
253
HCL-HF
85
28
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
254
HCL-HF
68
22
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
255
HCL-HF
84
22
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
256
HCL-HF
70
31
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
257
HCL-HF
74
19
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
258
HCL-HF
79
25
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
259
HCL-HF
80
21
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
260
HCL-HF
74
24
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
261
HCL-HF
81
27
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
262
HCL-HF
77
22
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
263
HCL-HF
81
NA
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
264
HCL-HF
102
55
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
265
HCL-HF
105
52
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
266
HCL-HF
96
63
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
F-251
-------
TABLE F-4 (cont.)
SAND
SILT
CLAY
SOIL
SOIL
CUMM Zn
CONTENT
CONTENT
CONTENT
CEC
OC
SOIL
LOADING
%
%
%
cmol/ka
%
pH
RATE (kg/ha)
229
2.84
6
2167
230
3.35
5.9
2167
231
2.1
6.2
2167
232
3.03
6.1
2167
233
1.19
NA
0
234
1.01
7.1
0
23S
0.93
7.5
0
236
1.05
7.7
0
237
1.07
7.3
0
238
1.29
NA
225
239
1.06
7.2
259
240
1.1
7.6
314
241
1.29
7.6
402
242
,
1.17
7.6
463
243
1.38
NA
449
244
tt
1.15
7.1
517
245
1.29
7.6
628
246
1.58
7.6
804
247
1.75
7.5
926
248
1.63
NA
898
249
1.28
6.9
1033
250
1.59
7.5
1257
251
1.9
7.5
1607
252
2.56
7.3
1852
253
1.51
NA
0
254
1.34
7
0
255
•
1.29
7.2
0
256
1.45
7.1
0
257
1.3
7.6
0
258
1.3
7
0
259
1.41
7.2
0
260
1.32
6.7
0
261
1.38
7
0
262
1.69
7
0
263
1.48
7.4
0
264
1.52
NA
225
265
1.4
6.9
259
266
1.35
7.2
314
F-250
-------
TABLE F-4 (oont.)
SLUDGE
ANNLSLUDGE
CUMML SLUDGE
YEARS
SOIL
SON.
CHEMICAL
LOADNG RATE
LOADNG RATE
SINCE LAST
TAXONOMIC
SERIES
SOIL
STABIUZATN
Mo/ha
Mo/ha
APPUCATN
NAME
NAME
TEXTURE
223
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
428.3
1
PLAINFIELD
LS
230
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
428.3
2
PLAINFIELD
LS
231
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
428.3
3
.
PLAINFIELD
LS
232
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
428.3
4
PLAINFIELD
LS
233
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
0
NA
BLOUNT
SiL
234
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
0
NA
BLOUNT
SiL
235
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
0
NA
BLOUNT
SiL
230
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
0
NA
BLOUNT
SiL
237
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
0
NA
BLOUNT
SiL
238
CENT POLY. FECL3
26.2
40.1
0
BLOUNT
SiL
239
CENT POLY. FECL3
8.1
48.2
0
BLOUNT
SiL
240
CENT POLY. FECL3
14.7
62.9
0
BLOUNT
SiL
241
CENT POLY. FECL3
17.7
80.6
0
BLOUNT
SiL
242
CENT POLY. FECL3
13.1
93.7
0
BLOUNT
SiL
243
CENT POLY. FECL3
52.4
80.2
0
BLOUNT
SiL
244
CENT POLY. FECL3
16.2
96.4
0
BLOUNT
SiL
245
CENT POLY. FECL3
29.4
125.8
0
BLOUNT
SiL
246
CENT POLY. FECL3
35.4
161.2
0
BLOUNT
SiL
247
CENT POLY, FECi.3
26.2
187.4
SJ
BLOUNT
SiL
248
CENT POLY. FECL3
104.8
160.4
0
BLOUNT
SiL
249
CENT POLY. FECL3
32.4
192.8
0
BLOUNT
SiL
250
CENT POLY. FECL3
58.8
251.6
0
BLOUNT
SiL
251
CENT POLY. FECL3
70.8
322.4
0
BLOUNT
SiL
252
CENT POLY. FECL3
52.4
374.8
0
BLOUNT
: SiL
253
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
0
NA
ELLIOT
SiL
254
CENT POLY, FECL3
0
0
NA
ELLIOT
SiL
255
CENT POLY, FECL3
0
0
NA
ELUOT
SiL
256
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
0
NA
ELUOT
SiL
257
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
0
NA
ELLIOT
SiL
258
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
0
NA
ELLIOT
SiL
259
CENT POLY, FECL3
0
0
NA
ELLIOT
SiL
260
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
0
NA
ELLIOT
SiL
261
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
0
NA
ELUOT
SiL
262
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
0
NA
ELLIOT
SiL
263
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
0
NA
ELLIOT
SiL
264
CENT POLY. FECL3
26.2
40.1
0
ELLIOT
SiL
265
CENT POLY. FECL3
8.1
48.2
0
ELLIOT
SiL
266
CENT POLY. FECL3
14.7
62.9
0
ELLIOT
SiL
F-249
-------
TABLE F-4 (cont.)
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
Cr
Cu
Fa
N
Ni
P
Pb
Zn
SOUDS
BIOLOGICAL
ma/ka
ma/kfl
%
%
ma/ka
ma/ka
ma/ka
ma/ka
CONTNT
PROCESSING
229
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
230
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
231
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
232
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
233
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
234
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT; ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
235
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
236
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
237
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
238
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
239
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
240
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
241
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
242
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
243
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
244
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
• 305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
245
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
246
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
247
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
248
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
249
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
250
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
251
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
252
2846
1311
4.2 :
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
253
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
254
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
255
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
256
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
257
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
258
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
259
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
260
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
261
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
262
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
263
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
264
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
265
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
266
2846
1311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
F-248
-------
TABLE F-4 (oonU
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
LITERATURE
PLANT
SLUDGE
VOL SOUDS
Al
Ca
Cd
CITATION
NAME
CULTIVAR
pH
%
%
S
moftp
229
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
283
230
HINE3LY 1985
CORN
3.4
283
231
HINESLY 1985
CORN
.
3.4
283
232
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
283
233
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
285
234
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
285
235
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
285
230
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
285
237
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
285
238
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
285
239
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
285
240
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
241
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
242
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
243
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
244
HINESLY 1995
CORN
3.2
265
245
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
246
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
247
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
235
248
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
249
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
250
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
251
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
252
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
253
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
254
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
255
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
258
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
257
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
258
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
259
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
280
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
281
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
282
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
283
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
284
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
285
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
288
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
F-247
-------
TABLE F-4 icont.)
LOCATION
OF
STUDY
191
JQLIET, ILLINOIS
192
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
193
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
194
JOUET, ILLINOIS
195
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
198
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
197
JOUET, ILLINOIS
198
JOUET. ILUNOIS
199
JOUET, ILUNOIS
200
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
201
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
202
JOUET, ILLINOIS
203
JOUET, ILLINOIS
204
JOUET, ILLINOIS
205
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
" 208
JOLIET, ILUNOIS
207
JOUET, ILUNOIS
208
JOLIET. ILUNOIS
208
JOUET. ILUNOIS
210
JOUET, ILUNOIS
211
JOUET, ILUNOIS
212
JOUET. ILUNOIS
213
JOUET, ILUNOIS
214
JOUET, ILUNOIS
215
JOUET, ILUNOIS
216
JOLIET. ILUNOIS
217
JOUET. ILLINOIS
218
JOUET. ILUNOIS
219
JOUET. ILUNOIS
220
JOUET, ILUNOIS
221
JOUET, ILUNOIS
222
JOUET, ILLINOIS
223
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
224
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
225
JOUET, ILUNOIS
226
JOLIET. ILUNOIS
227
JOLIET. ILUNOIS
228
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
F-246
-------
TABLE F-4 (cont.l
YIELD
YIELD
REDUCTION
COMPONENT
METAL
%
MEASURED
PHYTOTOXICITY
COMMENTS
191
0
STOVER
NO
192
0
STOVER
NO
193
0
STOVER
NO
194
0
STOVER
NO
195
0
STOVER
NO
196
0
STOVER
NO
197
0
STOVER
NO
198
0
STOVER
NO
199
0
STOVER
NO
200
0
STOVER
NO
201
0
STOVER
NO
202
0
STOVER
NO
203
NA
STOVER
NO
204
0
STOVER
NO
205
0
STOVER
NO
208
0
STOVER
NO
207
0
STOVER
NO
208
0
STOVER
NO
209
0
STOVER
NO
210
0
STOVER
NO
211
0
STOVER
NO
212
0
STOVER
NO
213
NA
STOVER
NO
214 :
0
STOVER
NO
216
0
STOVER
NO
218
0
STOVER
NO
217
0
STOVER
NO
218
0
STOVER
NO
219
0
STOVER
NO
220
0
STOVER
NO
221
0
STOVER
NO
222
0
STOVER
NO
223
NA
STOVER
NO
224
0
STOVER
NO
225
0
STOVER
NO
228
0
STOVER
NO
227
0
STOVER
NO
228
0
STOVER
NO
F-245
-------
TABLE F-4 (cont.l
SOIL Zn
PLANT Zn
PLANT
YIELD
YIELD
SOIL
CONCENTRTN
CONCENTRTN
TISSUE
DESCRIPTION OF
REDUCTION
COMPONENT
EXTRACTANT
mn/ko
ma/ka
SAMPLED
EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN
%
MEASURED
191
HCL-HF
428
212
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
192
HCL-HF
551
148
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
193
HCL-HF
40
22
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
NA
GRAIN
194
HCL-HF
30
14
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
195
HCL-HF
33
18
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
196
HCL-HF
23
19
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
197
HCL-HF
33
24
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
198
HCL-HF
21
24
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
199
HCL-HF
24
15
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
200
HCL-HF
35
20
LEAF .
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
201
HCL-HF
51
31
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
202
HCL-HF
58
28
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
203
HCL-HF
130
70
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
204
HCL-HF
70
46
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
205
HCL-HF
102
66
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
206
HCL-HF
158
43'
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
207
HCL-HF
104
36
LEAF 1
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
208
HCL-HF
104
44
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
209
HCL-HF
93
30
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
210
HCL-HF
137
45
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
211
HCL-HF
143
73
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
212
HCL-HF
129
42
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
213
HCL-HF
244
111
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
NA
GRAIN
214
HCL-HF
117
80
LEAF
: SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
215
HCL-HF
• 168
164
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
216
HCL-HF
175
103
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
217
HCL-HF
165
66
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
218
HCL-HF
139
90
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
219
HCL-HF
166
41
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
220
HCL-HF
199
51
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
221
HCL-HF
203
100
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
222
HCL-HF
139
52
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
223
HCL-HF
500
138
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
NA
GRAIN
224
HCL-HF
180
155
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
225
HCL-HF
449
239
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
226
HCL-HF
248
143
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
227
HCL-HF
323
307
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
228
HCL-HF
374
513
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
F-244
-------
TABLE F-4 (cont.)
SAND
SILT
CLAY
SOIL
SOIL
CUMM Zn
CONTENT
CONTENT
CONTENT
CEC
OC
SOIL
LOADING
%
%
%
cmol/kfl
*
pH
RATE (ka/ha)
191
2.6
6.1
2167
192
3.2
6.1
2167
193
.
0.39
7.8
0
194
0.17
7.1
0
195
0.26
7.3
0
19S
0.27
6.8
0
197
0.33
7.6
0
198
0.27
7.5
0
199
0.29
7.5
0
200
0.42
7.4
0
201
0.49
7.4
0
202
0.64
7.3
0
203
0.36
7.6
213
204
0.28
7.1
261
20S
0.61
7.4
323
206
%
0.91
7.3
323
207
0.G6
7.4
323
208
0.58
7.1
323
209
0.45
7.5
323
210
0.34
7.7
323
211
0.47
7.4
323
212
0.83
7.4
323
213
0.58
7.5
425
214
0.44
6.9
521
216
0.81
7.1
645
210
0.95
6.8
645
217
0.75
7.1
645
218
0.96
7.1
645
219
0.59
6.9
645
220
0.89
7
645
221
0.81
7.1
645
222
0.52
7.1
645
223
0.9
7.6
850
224
0.6
6.6
1042
225
2.4
6.8
1290
226
1.85
6.5
1649
227
1.78
6.1
1894
228
1.96
6.2
2167
F-243
-------
TABLE F-4 (cont.)
SLUDGE
ANNLSLUDGE
CUMML SLUDGE
YEARS
SOIL
SOIL
CHEMICAL
LOADNG RATE
LOADNG RATE
SINCE LAST
TAXONOMIC
SERIES
SOIL
STABILIZATN
Ma/ha
Ma/ha
APPLICATN
NAME
NAME
TEXTURE
191
CENT POLY. FECL3
' 0
428.3
3
ELUOT
SIL
192
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
428.3
4
ELLIOT
SiL
193
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
0
NA
PLAINFIELD
LS
194
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
0
NA
PLAINFIELD
LS
195
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
0
NA
PLAINFIELD
LS
196
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
0
NA
PLAINFIELD
LS
197
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
0
NA
PLAINFIELD
LS
198
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
0
NA
PLAINFIELD
LS
199
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
0
NA
PLAINFIELD
LS
200
CENT POLY, FECL3
0
0
NA
PLAINFIELD
LS
201
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
0
NA
PLAINFIELD
LS
202
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
0
NA
PLAINFIELD
LS
203
CENT POLY. FECL3
14.5
31.8
0
PLAINFIELD
LS
204
CENT POLY. FECL3
11.1
42.9
0
PLAINFIELD
LS
205
CENT POLY. FECL3
15.3
58.2
0
PLAINFIELD
LS
206
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
58.2
1
PLAINFIELD
LS
207
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
58.2
2
PLAINFIELD
LS
208
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
58.2
3
PLAINFIELD
LS
209
CENT POLY, FECL3
0
58.2
4
PLAINFIELD
LS
210
CENT POLY, FECL3
0
58.2
5
PLAINFIELD
LS
211
CENT POLY, FECL3
0
58.2
6
PLAINFIELD.
LS
212
CENT POLY, FECL3
0
58.2
7
PLAINFIELD
LS
213
CENT POLY, FECL3
29
63.6
0
PLAINFIELD
LS
214
CENT POLY. FECL3
22.2
85.8
0
PLAINFIELD
LS
215
CENT POLY. FECL3
30.6
116.4
0
PLAINFIELD
LS
216
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
116.4
1
PLAINFIELD
LS
217
CENT POLY, FECL3
0
116.4
2
PLAINFIELD
LS
218
CENT POLY, FECL3
0
116.4
3
PLAINFIELD
LS
219
CENT POLY, FECL3
0
116.4
4
PLAINFIELD
LS
220
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
116.4
5
PLAINFIELD
LS
221
CENT POLY, FECL3
0
116.4
6
PLAINFIELD
LS
222
CENT POLY, FECL3
0
116.4
7
PLAINFIELD
LS
223
CENT POLY. FECL3
57.8
127
0
PLAINFIELD
LS
224
CENT POLY, FECL3
44.4
171.4
0
PLAINFIELD
LS
225
CENT POLY. FECL3
61.1
232.5
0
PLAINFIELD
LS
226
CENT POLY. FECL3
69.8
302.3
0
PLAINFIELD
LS
227
CENT POLY. FECL3
54
356.3
0
PLAINFIELD
LS
228
CENT POLY. FECL3
72
428.3
0
PLAINFIELD I LS
F-242
-------
TABLE F-4 (cont.)
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
Cr .
Cu
Fe
N
Ni
P
Pb
Zn
SOLIDS
BIOLOGICAL
ma/ko
mg/ka
%
%
mo/ko
mo/ko
ma/ka
mo/kg
CONTNT
PROCESSING
191
2963
1422
4.5 -
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
192
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
193
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
. 2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
194
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5069
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
195
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
196
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
197
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
198
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
199
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
- 5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
200
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
201
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1136
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
202
2963
1422
4.5*
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
203
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
204
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.6
1136
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
205
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
20fi
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
*316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
207
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
208
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
209
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
210
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1136
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
211
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
212
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.6
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
213
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
6059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
214
2963
1422
: 4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
: 0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
216
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
218
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1136
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
217
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
218
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
6059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
219
2963
1422
4.S
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
220
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
221
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
6059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC OIGESTION
222
2863
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
223
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.6
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
224
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
225
2963
1422
4.5
SS
316
3.5
1135
6059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROOC DIGESTION
226
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.6
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
227
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.6
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DWESTION
228
2363
1422
4.5
6.9
316
3.6
1135
5059
0.03 I 2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
F-241
-------
TABLE F-4 (cont.l
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
LITERATURE
PLANT
SLUDGE
VOL SOLIDS
Al
Ca
Cd
CITATION
NAME
CULTIVAR
PH
%
%
%
ma/ka
191
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
192
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
193
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
194
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
195
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
196
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
197
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
198
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
199
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
200
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
201
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
202
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
203
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
204
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
205
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
20S
HINESLY 1985
CORN
,
3.4
263
207
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
208
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
209
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
210
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
211
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
212
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
213
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
214
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263 :
215
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
218
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
217
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
218
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
219
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
220
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
221
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
222
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
223
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
224
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
225
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
226
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
227
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
228
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
F-240
-------
TABLE F-4 (cont.J
LOCATION
OF
STUDY
153
JOUET, ILLINOIS
154
JOUET, ILLINOIS
155
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
15S
JOUET, ILLINOIS
157
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
158
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
159
JOUET, ILLINOIS
160
JOUET, ILLINOIS
161
JOUET, ILLINOIS
162
JOUET, ILLINOIS
163
JOUET, ILUNOIS
164
JOUET, ILUNOIS
165
JOLIET, ILUNOIS
168
JOUET, ILLINOIS
167
JOUET, ILLINOIS
168
JOUET, ILLINOIS
169
JOLIET. ILUNOIS
170
JOLIET, ILUNOIS
171
JOUET, ILLINOIS
172
JOUET, ILUNOIS
173
JOUET, ILUNOIS
174
JOUET, ILUNOIS
175
JOUET. ILUNOIS
176
JOUET. ILUNOtS
177
JOUET, ILUNOIS
178
JOUET. ILUNOIS
179
JOUET, ILUNOIS
180
JOUET. ILUNOIS
181
JOUET, ILUNOIS
182
JOUET. ILUNOIS
183
JOUET. ILUNOIS
184
JOUET. ILUNOtS
185
JOUET, ILUNOIS
186
JOUET. ILUNOIS
187
JOUET. ILUNOIS
188
JOUET. ILLINOIS
189
JOUET, ILUNOtS
190
JOUET, ILLINOIS
F-238
-------
TABLE F-4 (cont.)
YIELD
YIELD
REDUCTION
COMPONENT
METAL
%
MEASURED
PHYTOTOXICITY
COMMENTS
153
0
STOVER
NO
154
0
STOVER
NO
155
0
STOVER
NO
156
0
STOVER
NO
157
0
STOVER
NO
-
158.
0
STOVER
NO
159
0
STOVER
NO
•
160
0
STOVER
NO
161
0
STOVER
NO
162
0
STOVER
NO
163
NA
L STOVER
NO
164
0
STOVER
NO
1S5
G
STOVcR
NO
166
0
STOVER
NO
167
0
STOVER
NO
168
0
STOVER
NO
169
0
STOVER
NO
»
170
0
STOVER
NO
171
0
STOVER
NO
172
0
STOVER
NO
173
NA
STOVER
NO
174
0
STOVER
NO
175
0
STOVER
NO
176
0
STOVER
NO
177
0
STOVER
NO
178
0
STOVER
NO
179
0
STOVER
NO
180
0
STOVER
NO
181
0
STOVER
NO
182
0
STOVER
NO
183
NA
STOVER
NO
184
0
STOVER
NO
185
0
STOVER
NO
186
0
STOVER
NO
187
0
STOVER
NO
188
0
STOVER
NO
189
0
STOVER
NO
190
0
STOVER
NO
F-238
-------
TABLE F-4 (cont.)
SOIL Zn
PLANT Zn
PLANT
YIELD
YIELD
SOIL
CONCENTRTN
CONCENTRTN
TISSUE
DESCRIPTION OF
REDUCTION
COMPONENT
EXTRACTANT
mo/kfl
mn/kg
SAMPLED
EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN
%
MEASURED
153
HCL-HF
64
51
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
154
HCL-HF
81
28
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
155
HCL-HF
75
20
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
156
HCL-HF
75
28
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
157
HCL-HF
73
29
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
158
HCL-HF
70
26
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
159
HCL-HF
66
16
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
160
HCL-HF
79
19
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
161
HCL-HF
80
28
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
162
HCL-HF
84
26
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
163
HCL-HF
127
105
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
164
HCL-HF
136
67
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
165
HCL-HF
132
40
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
166
HCL-HF
185
63
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
167
HCL-HF
152
68
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
168
HCL-HF
143
38
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
169
HCL-HF
151
37
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
170
HCL-HF
187
30
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
171
HCL-HF
144
72
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
172
HCL-HF
187
42
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
173
HCL-HF
226
124
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
174
HCL-HF
179
102
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
175
HCL-HF
207
84
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
: 176
HCL-HF
228
64
: LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
177
HCL-HF
210
78
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
178
HCL-HF
214
46
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
179
HCL-HF
200
43
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
180
HCL-HF
263
27
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
181
HCL-HF
196
67
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
182
HCL-HF
184
56
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
183
HCL-HF
418
168
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
184
HCL-HF
259
187
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
185
HCL-HF
315
147
LEAF
. SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
186
HCL-HF
386
95
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
187
HCL-HF
375
205
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
188
HCL-HF
468
323
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
189
HCL-HF
582
193
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
190
HCL-HF
673
279
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
F-237
-------
TABLE F-4 (cont.)
SAND
SILT
CLAY
SOIL
SOIL
CUMM Zn
CONTENT
CONTENT
CONTENT
CEC
OC
SOIL
LOADING
%
%
%
cmol/kg
%
PH
RATE (ko/ha)
153
1.64
7.6
0
154
1.61
6.8
0
155
1.54
7.2
0
156
1.53
7.2
0
157
1.54
7
0
158
1.51
7
0
159
1.58
7.4
0
160
1.54
7.2
0
.161
1.51
7
0
162
1.62
7
0
163
1.64
7.3
213
164
1.84
6.8
261
165
1.74
7.1
323
166
2.18
7.1
323
167
1.86
7.2
323
168
1.67
7.2
323
169
1.83
7.5
323
170
1.55
7.2
323
171
1.68
7
323
172
1.89
7.1
323
173
1.97
7.8
425
174
1.81
7
521
175
1.88
7.3
645
176
2.21
7.3
645
177
1.99
7.4
645
178
1.89
7.3
645
179
1.94
7.4
645
180
1.72
7.4
645
181
1.79
7.2
645
182
1.87
7.2
645
183
2.23
7.5
850
184
2.22
6.4
1042
185
2.28
6.S
1290
188
2.61
6.6
1649
187
2.74
6.6
1894
188
2.94
5.9
2167
189
3.92
5.9
2167
190
3.77
S.S
2167
F-236
-------
TABLE F-4 (cont.)
SLUDGE
ANNL SLUDGE
CUMML SLUDGE
YEARS
SOIL
SOIL
CHEMICAL
LOADNG RATE
LOADNG RATE
SINCE LAST
TAXONOMIC
SERIES
SOIL
STABILIZATN
Ma/ha
Mo/ha
APPLICATN
NAME
NAME
TEXTURE
153
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
0
NA
ELLIOT
SiL
154
CENT POLY, FECL3
0
0
NA
ELLIOT
SiL
155
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
0
NA
ELLIOT
SiL
156
CENT POLY, FECL3
0
0
NA
ELLIOT
SiL
157
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
0
NA
ELLIOT
SiL
158
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
0
NA
ELLIOT
SiL
159
CENT POLY, FECL3
0
0
NA
ELLIOT
SiL
160
CENT, POLY, FECL3
0
0
NA
ELLIOT
SiL
161
CENT POLY, FECL3
0
0
NA
ELLIOT
SiL
162
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
0
NA
ELLIOT
SiL
163
CENT POLY, FECL3
14.5
31.8
0
ELLIOT
SiL
164
CENT POLY. FECL3
11.1
42.9
0
ELLIOT
SiL
165
CENT POLY, FECL3
15.3
58.2
0
ELLIOT
SiL
166
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
58.2
1
ELLIOT
SiL
167
CENT POLY, FECL3
0
58.2
2
ELLIOT
SiL
168
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
58.2
3
ELLIOT
SiL
169
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
58.2
4
ELLIOT
SiL
170
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
58.2
5
ELLIOT
SiL
171
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
58.2
6
ELLIOT
SiL
172
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
58.2
7
ELLIOT
SiL
173
CENT POLY. FECL3
29
63.6
0
ELLIOT
SiL
174
CENT POLY, FECL3
22.2
85.8
0
ELLIOT
SiL
175
CENT POLY, FECL3
30.6
116.4
0
ELLIOT
SiL
176
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
116.4
1
: ELLIOT
SiL
177
CENT POLY, FECL3
0
116.4
2
ELLIOT
SiL
178
CENT POLY, FECL3
0
116.4
3
ELLIOT
SiL
179
CENT POLY, FECL3
0
116.4
4
ELLIOT
SiL
180
CENT POLY, FECL3
0
116.4
5
ELLIOT
SiL
181
CENT POLY, FECL3
0
116.4
6
ELLIOT
SiL
182
CENT POLY, FECL3
0
116.4
7
ELLIOT
SiL
183
CENT POLY, FECL3
57.8
127
0
ELLIOT
SiL
184
CENT POLY, FECL3
44.4
171.4
0
ELLIOT
SiL
185
CENT POLY. FECL3
61.1
232.5
0
ELLIOT
SiL
186
CENT POLY. FECL3
69.8
302.3
0
•
ELLIOT
SiL
187
CENT POLY. FECL3
54
356.3
0
ELLIOT
SiL
188
CENT POLY, FECL3
72
428.3
0
ELLIOT
SiL
189
CENT POLY, FECL3
0
428.3
1
ELLIOT
SiL
190
CENT POLY, FECL3
0
428.3
2
ELLIOT
SiL
F-235
-------
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
TABLE F-4 (cont)
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
Cr
Cu
Fe
N
Ni
Pb
Zn
SOLIDS
BIOLOGICAL
mg/kg
mg/kq
%
%
mg/kg
mg/kq
mg/kg
mg/kg
CONTNT
PROCESSING
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
2S63
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316.
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059.
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
: 0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2N0 TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
F-234
-------
TABLE F-4 (cont.)
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
LITERATURE
PLANT
SLUDGE
VOL SOLIDS
Al
Ca
Cd
CITATION
NAME
CULTIVAR
PH
%
%
%
mp/ktj
153
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
154
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
155 .
. HINESLY 19E5
CORN
3.4
263
(56
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
157
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
158
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
159
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
160
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
161
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
162
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
163
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
164
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
165
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
166
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
167
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
168
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
169
HINESLY 1985
* CORN
3.4
263
170
HINESLY 1985
CORN
i
3.4
263
171 >
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
172
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
173
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
174
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
175
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
176
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263 .
177
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
178
HINESLY 1985
CORN
1
3.4
263
179
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
180
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
181
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
182
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
183
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
184
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
185
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
186
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
187
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
188
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
189
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
190
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
F-233
-------
TABLE F-4 (cont.)
LOCATION
OF
STUDY
115
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
116
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
117
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
118
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
119
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
120
JOUET, ILLINOIS
121
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
122
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
123
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
124
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
125
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
126
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
127
' JOLIET, ILLINOIS
128
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
129
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
130
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
131
JOUET, ILLINOIS
132
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
133
JOUET, ILLINOIS
134
JOUET, ILLINOIS
135
JOUET, ILLINOIS
136
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
137
JOUET, ILLINOIS
138
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
139
JOUET, ILLINOIS
140
JOUET. ILLINOIS
141
JOUET. ILLINOIS
142
JOUET. ILLINOIS
143
JOUET. ILLINOIS
144
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
145
JOUET. ILLINOIS
146
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
147
JOUET, ILLINOIS •
148
JOUET. ILUNOIS
149
JOUET. ILLINOIS
150
JOUET. ILUNOIS
151
JOUET, K.UNOS
152
JOUET. ILUNOIS
F-232
-------
TABLE F-4 (cont.)
YIELD
YIELD
REDUCTION
COMPONENT
METAL
%
MEASURED
PHYTOTOXICITY
COMMENTS
115
0
STOVER
NO
116
0
STOVER
NO
117
0
STOVER
NO
118
0
STOVER
NO
119
0
STOVER
NO
120
0
STOVER
NO
121
0
STOVER
NO
122
0
STOVER
NO
123
NA
STOVER
NO
124
0
STOVER
NO
125
0
STOVER
NO
126
0
STOVER
NO
127
0
STOVER
NO
128
0
STOVER
NO
129
0
STOVER
NO
130
0
STOVER
NO
131
0
STOVER
NO
132
0
STOVER
NO
133
NA
STOVER
NO
134
0
STOVER
NO
135
0
STOVER
NO
136
0
STOVER
NO
137
0
STOVER
NO
138
0
STOVER
NO
139
0
STOVER
NO
i
140
0
STOVER
NO
141
0
STOVER
NO
142
0
STOVER
NO
143
NA
STOVER
NO
144
0
STOVER
NO
145
0
STOVER
NO
146
0
STOVER
NO
147
0
STOVER
NO
148
0
STOVER
NO
149
0
STOVER
NO
150
0
STOVER
NO
151
0
STOVER
NO
152
0
STOVER
NO
F-231
-------
TABLE F-4 (cont.)
SOIL Zn
PLANT Zn
PLANT
YIELD
YIELD
SOIL
CONCENTRTN
CONCENTRTN
TISSUE
DESCRIPTION OF
REDUCTION
COMPONENT
EXTRACTANT
ma/ka
ma/ka
SAMPLED
EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN
%
MEASURED
115
HCL-HF
82
21
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
116
HCL-HF
79
28
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
117
HCL-HF
84
22
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
118
HCL-HF
73
35
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
119
HCL-HF
66
21
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
120
HCL-HF
81
20
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
121
HCL-HF
89
32
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
122
HCL-HF
87
25
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
123
HCL-HF
138
80
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
124
HCL-HF
124
57
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
125
HCL-HF
130
47
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
126
HCL-HF
169
46
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
127
HCL-HF
143
31
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
128
HCL-HF
154
28
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
129
HCL-HF
147
22
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
130
HCL-HF
180
26
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
131
HCL-HF
134
46
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
132
HCL-HF
159
34
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
133
HCL-HF
195
112
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
134
HCL-HF
167
85
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
135
HCL-HF
168
58
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
136
HCL-HF
270
55
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
137
HCL-HF
201
63
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
i 138
HCL-HF
200
38
: LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
139
HCL-HF
215
33
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
' GRAIN
140
HCL-HF
267
25
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
141
HCL-HF
178
50
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
142
HCL-HF
240
43
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
143
HCL-HF
319
145
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
144
HCL-HF
257
108
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
145
HCL-HF
327
112
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
146
HCL-HF
451
113
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
147
HCL-HF
314
84
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
148
HCL-HF
319
57
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
149
HCL-HF
351
45
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
150
HCL-HF
379
34
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
151
HCL-HF
236
62
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
152
HCL-HF
313
43
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
F-230
-------
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143.
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
TABLE F-4 (cont.)
SAND
CONTENT
SILT
CONTENT
CLAY
CONTENT
SOIL
CEC
SOIL
OC
SOIL
%
%
%
cmol/kg
%
0.94
0.93
0.92
0.87
0.9
0.88
0.73
1
1.06
1.11
1.18
1.4
1.16
1.08
1.18
1.23
1.09
1.32
1.38
1.12
1.29
1.83
1.36
1.34
1.6
1.31
1.54
1.62
1.62
1.63
1.94
2.5
1.83
1.88
2.03
1.6
1.54
1.84
7.6
7.6
7.8
7.5
7.6
7.5
7.6
7.4
7.7
6.9
7.5
7.5
7.6
7.5
7.7
7.6
7.5
7.3
7.6
7
7.4
7.3
7.5
7.2
7.4
7.3
7.1
7.1
7.6
6.8
7.3
7.2
7.3
7.2
7.3
7.1
7.1
RATE (kg/ha)
F-229
-------
TABLE F-4 (oont.)
SLUDGE
ANNLSLUDGE
CUMML SLUDGE
YEARS
SOIL
SOIL
CHEMICAL
LOADNG RATE
LOADNG RATE
SINCE LAST
TAXONOMIC
SERIES
SOIL
STABILIZATN
Ma/ha
Mg/ha
APPLICATN
NAME
NAME
TEXTURE
115
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
0
NA
BLOUNT
SiL
116
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
0
NA
BLOUNT
SiL
117
CENT POLY, FECL3
0
0
NA
BLOUNT
SiL
118
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
0
NA
BLOUNT
SiL
119
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
0
NA
BLOUNT
SiL
120
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
0
NA
BLOUNT
SiL
121
CENT POLY, FECL3
0
0
NA
BLOUNT
SiL
122
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
0
NA
BLOUNT
SiL
123
CENT POLY, FECL3
14.5
31.8
0
BLOUNT
SiL
124
CENT POLY, FECL3
11.1
42.9
0
BLOUNT
SiL
125
CENT POLY, FECL3
15.3
58.2
0
BLOUNT
SiL
126
CENT POLY, FECL3
0
58.2
1
BLOUNT
SiL
127
CENT POLY, FECL3
0
5S.2
2
BLOUNT
SiL
128
CENT POLY, FECL3
0
58.2
3
BLOUNT
SiL
129
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
58.2
4
BLOUNT
SiL
130
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
58.2
5
BLOUNT
SiL
131
CENT POLY, FECL3
0
£8.2
6
BLOUNT
SiL
132
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
58.2
7
i
BLOUNT
SiL
133
CENT POLY, FECL3
29
63.6
0
BLOUNT
SiL
134
CENT POLY. FECL3
22.2
85.8
0
BLOUNT
SiL
135
CENT POLY, FECL3
30.6
116.4
0
BLOUNT
SiL
136
CENT POLY, FECL3
0
116.4
1
BLOUNT
SiL
137
CENT POLY, FECL3
0
116.4
2
BLOUNT
SiL
138
CENT POLY, FECL3
0
116.4
3
BLOUNT
SiL
139
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
116.4
4
BLOUNT
SiL
140
CENT POLY, FECL3
0
116.4
5
BLOUNT
SiL
141
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
116.4
6
BLOUNT
SiL
142
CENT POLY, FECL3
0
116.4
7
BLOUNT
SiL
143
CENT POLY, FECL3
57.8
127
0
BLOUNT
SiL
144
CENT POLY. FECL3
44.4
171.4
0
BLOUNT
SiL
145
CENT POLY, FECL3
61.1
232.5
0
• BLOUNT
SiL
146
CENT POLY, FECL3
0
232.5
1
BLOUNT
SiL
147
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
232.5
1
BLOUNT
SiL
148
CENT POLY, FECL3
0
232.5
1
BLOUNT
SiL
149
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
232.5
1
BLOUNT
SIL
150
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
232.5
1
BLOUNT
SIL
151
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
232.5
1
BLOUNT
SiL
152
CENT POLY, FECL3
0
232.5
1
BLOUNT
SIL
F228
-------
HE
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
TABLE F-4 (cont.)
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
Cr
Cu
Fe
N
Ni
Pb
Zn
SOLIDS
BIOLOGICAL
mo/kg
mg/kg
%
%
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
CONTNT
PROCESSING
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
2963
1 .22
4.5
5.9
316
_3 5
3.i"
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
.1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316"
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
F-227
-------
TABLE F-4 (com.)
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
LITERATURE
PLANT
SLUDGE
VOL SOLIDS
A)
Co
Cd
CITATION
NAME
CULTIVAR
PH
%
*
%
mo/ka
115
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
116
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
117
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
118
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
119
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
120
HINESLY 1885
CORN
3.4
263
121
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
122
HtNESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
123
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
124
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
125
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
126
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
127
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
128
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
129
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
130
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
131
HINESLY 1985
. CORN
3.4
263
132
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
133
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
134
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
135
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
233
136
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
137
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
138
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
139
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
140
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
141
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
142
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
143
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
144
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
145
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
146
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
147
HINESLY 1985
CORN
,
3.4
263
148
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
149
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
150
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
151
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
152
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
F*226
-------
TABLE F-4 (cont.)
LOCATION
OF
STUDY
77
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
78
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
79
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
80
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
81
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
82
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
83
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
84
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
85
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
86
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
87
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
88
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
89
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
90
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
91
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
92
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
93
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
94
MUSCLE SCHOALES. AL
95
MUSCLE SCHOALES. AL
96
MUSCLE SCHOALES. AL
97
MUSCLE SCHOALES. AL
98
MUSCLE SCHOALES. AL
99
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
100
MUSCLE SCHOALES. AL
101
MUSCLE SCHOALES. AL
102
MUSCLE SCHOALES. AL
103
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
104
MUSCLE SCHOALES. AL
105
MUSCLE SCHOALES. AL
106
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
107
MUSCLE SCHOALES. AL
108
MUSCLE SCHOALES. AL
109
MUSCLE SCHOALES. AL
110
MUSCLE SCHOALES. AL
111
MUSCLE SCHOALES. AL
112
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
113
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
114
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
F-225
-------
TABLE F-4 (cont.)
YIELD
YIELD
REDUCTION
COMPONENT
METAL
%
MEASURED
PHYTOTOXICITY
COMMENTS
77
NO
78
NO
79
NO
80
NO
81
NO
82
NO
83
•NO
•NOT TESTED STATISTICALLY, MAY BE ATTRIBUTED TO WET SEASON/INSECTS
84
NO
85
NO
•
86
NO
87
NO
88
NO
89
•NO
•NOT TESTED STATISTICALLY, MAY BE ATTRIBUTED TO WET SEASON/INSECTS
90
NO
91
NO
92
>
NO
93
NO
«
94
NO
95
•NO
•AUTHORS STATE YIELD REDUCTIONS NOT ATTRIBUTABLE TO METALS
96
NO
97
NO
98
NO
99
•NO
•AUTHORS STATE YIELD REDUCTIONS NOT ATTRIBUTABLE TO METALS
: 100
NO
101
NO
102
NO
103
•NO
•AUTHORS STATE YIELD REDUCTIONS NOT ATTRIBUTABLE TO METALS
104
NO
•
105
NO
106
NO
107
NO
108
NO
109
NO
110
NO
111
NO
•
112
NO
113
0
STOVER
NO
114
0
STOVER
NO
F-224
-------
TABLE F-4 (oont.)
SOIL Zn
PLANT Zn
PLANT
YIELD
YIELD
SOIL
CONCENTRTN
CONCENTRTN
TISSUE
DESCRIPTION OF
REDUCTION
COMPONENT
EXTRACTANT
mn/ka
ma/ka
SAMPLED
EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN
%
MEASURED
77
0.5 M HCL
89
113
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
EDIBLE PART
78
0.5 M HCL
5
56
LEAF
FIELD. SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
EDIBLE PART
79
0.5 M HCL
97
53
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
EDIBLE PART
80
0.5 M HCL
89
76
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
EDIBLE PART
81
0.5 M HCL
5
61
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
EDIBLE PART
82
0.5 M HCL
97
153
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
EDIBLE PART
83
0.5 M HCL
89
130
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
25*
EDIBLE PART
84
0.5 M HCL
5
36
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
EDIBLE PART
85
0.5 M HCL
97
79
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
EDIBLE PART
86
0.5 M HCL
89
61
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
EDIBLE PART
87
0.5 M HCL
5
112
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
EDIBLE PART
88
0.5 M HCL
97
233
LEAF
FIELD. SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
EDIBLE PART
89
0.5 M HCL
89
287
LEAF
FIELD. SLUDGE. MATURITY
21.1 •
EDIBLE PART
90
0.5 M HCL
5
109
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
EDIBLE PART
91
0.5 M HCL
97
166
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
EDIBLE PART
92
0.5 M HCL
89
316
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
EDIBLE PART
93
.5 M HCL
2
54 .
LEAF
FIELD. SLUDGE. MATURITY
0
TOTAL PLANT
94
.5 M HCL
2.9
44
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
TOTAL PLANT
95
.5 M HCL
112.8
142
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
15.4"
TOTAL PLANT
96
.5 M HCL
74.2
131
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
TOTAL PLANT
97
.5 M HCL
2
71
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
TOTAL PLANT
98
.5 M HCL
2.9
64
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
TOTAL PLANT
99
.5 M HCL
112.8
96
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
10*
TOTAL PLANT
: 100
.5 M HCL
74.2
109
: LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
: TOTAL PLANT
101
.5 M HCL
2
37
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
TOTAL PLANT
102
.5 M HCL
2.9
46
LEAF
FIELD. SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
TOTAL PLANT
103
.5 M HCL
112.8
62
LEAF
FIELD. SLUDGE, MATURITY
12.5*
TOTAL PLANT
104
.5 M HCL
74.2
71
LEAF
FIELD. SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
TOTAL PLANT
105
.5 M HCL
2
52
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
TOTAL PLANT
106
.5 M HCL
2.9
54
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
TOTAL PLANT
107
.5 M HCL
112.8
178
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
TOTAL PLANT
108
.5 M HCL
74.2
142
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
TOTAL PLANT
109
.5 M HCL
2
48
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
TOTAL PLANT
110
.5 M HCL
2.9
88
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
TOTAL PLANT
111
.5 M HCL
112.8
121
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
TOTAL PLANT
112
.5 M HCL
74.2
120
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
TOTAL PLANT
113
HCL-HF
72
42
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
114
HCL-HF
83
24
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
F-223
-------
TABLE F-4 (cont.)
SAND
SILT
CLAY
SOIL
SOIL
CUMM Zn
CONTENT
CONTENT
CONTENT
CEC
OC
son.
LOADING
%
%
%
omot/kg
%
PH
RATE (kg/ha)
77
6.4
202
78
5.8
0
79
5.8
202
80
5.8
202
81
5.8
0
82
5.8
202
83
5.8
202
84
5.8
0
° 85
5.8
202
86
5.8
202
87
5.8
0
88
5.8
202
89
5.8
202
90
5.8
0
91
5.8
202
92
. 5.8
202
93
w
5.1
0
94
)
5.1
0
95
5.1
403
96
5.1
403
97
5.1
0
98
5.1
0
99
5.1
403
100
5.1
403
101
5.1
0
102
5.1
0
103
5.1
403
104
5.1
403
105
5.1
0
106
5.1
0
107
5.1
403
108
5.1
403
109
5.1
0
110
5.1
0
111
5.1
403
112
5.1
403
113
0.85
7.8
0
114
0.9
6.9
0
F-222
-------
TABLE F-4 (cont.)
SLUDGE
ANNLSLUDGE
CUMML SLUDGE
YEARS
SOIL
SOIL
CHEMICAL
LOADNG RATE
LOADNG RATE
SINCE LAST
TAXONOMIC
SERIES
SOIL
STABILIZATN
Mg/ha
Mg/ha
APPLICATN
NAME
NAME
TEXTURE
77
112
112
0
SANGO
SiL
78
. 0
SANGO
SiL
79.
112
>2
SANGO
SiL
80
' •
112
112
1
SANGO
SiL
81
0
0
SANGO
SiL
82
112
112
1
SANGO
SiL
83
112
112
1
SANGO
SiL
84
0
0
SANGO
SiL
85
112
112
1
SANGO
SiL
86
112
112
1
SANGO
SiL
87
0
0
SANGO
SiL
88
112
112
1
SANGO
SiL
89
112
112
1
SANGO
SiL
90
0
0
SANGO
SiL
91
112
112
1
SANGO
SiL
92
112
112
1
SANGO
SiL
93
0
* 0
SANGO
SiL
94
0
0
SANGO
SiL
95
224
224
0
SANGO
SiL
96
224
224
0
SANGO
SiL
97
0
0
SANGO
SiL
98
0
0
SANGO
SiL
99
224
224
0
SANGO
SiL
100
224
224
0
SANGO
SiL
101
0
0
SANGO
SiL
102
0
0
SANGO
SiL
103
224
224
0
SANGO
SiL
104
224
224
0
SANGO
SiL
105
0
0
SANGO
SiL
106
0
0
SANGO
SiL
107
224
224
0
SANGO
SiL
108
224
224
0
SANGO
SiL
109
0
0
SANGO
SiL
110
0
0
SANGO
SiL
111
224
224
0
SANGO
SiL
112
224
224
0
SANGO
SiL
113
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
0
NA
BLOUNT
SiL
114
CENT POLY. FECL3
0
0
NA
BLOUNT
SiL
F-221
-------
TABLE F-4 (cont.l
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
Cr
Cu
Fo
N
Ni
P
Pb
Zn
SOLIDS
BIOLOGICAL
mo/ko
mo/ko
%
%
mo/ko
mo/ko
mo/ko
mo/ko
CONTNT
PROCESSING
77
400
520
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
78
79
350
730
1.7
2.3
20
1.6
530
1800
80
400
520
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
81
82
350
730
1.7
2.3
20
1.6
530
1800
83
400
520
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
84
85
350
730
1.7
2.3
20
1.6
530
1800
86
400
520
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
87
88
350
730
1.7
2.3
20
1.6
530
1800
89
400
520
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
90
91
350
730
1.7
2.3
20
1.6
530
1800
92
400
520
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
93
350
730
1.7
2.3
2Q
16000
530
1800
94
350
730
1.7
2.3
20
16000
530
1800
95
350
730
1.7
2.3
20
16000
530
1800
96
350
730
1.7
2.3
20
16000
530
1800
97
350
730
1.7
2.3
20
16000
530
1800
98
350
730
1.7
2.3
20
16000
530
1800
99
350
730
1.7
2.3
20
16000
530
1800
100
350
730
1.7
2.3
: 20
16000
530
1800
101
350
730
1.7
2.3
20
16000
530
1800
102
350
730
1.7
2.3
20
16000
530
1800
103
350
730
1.7
2.3
20
16000
530
1800
104
350
730
1.7
2.3
20
16000
530
1800
105
350
730
1.7
2.3
20
16000
530
1800
106
350
730
1.7
2.3
20
16000
530
1800
107
350
730
1.7
2.3
20
16000
530
1800
108
350
730
1.7
2.3
20
16000
530
1800
109
350
730
1.7
2.3
20
16000
530
1800.
110
350
730
1.7
2.3
20
16000
530
1800
111
360
730
1.7
2.3
20
16000
530
1800
112
350
730
1.7
2.3
20
16000
530
1800
113 .
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
114
2963
1422
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
F-220
-------
TABLE F-4 (cont.)
•
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
LITERATURE
PLANT
SLUDGE
VOL SOLIDS
Al
Ca
Cd
CITATION
NAME
CULTIVAR
PH
%
%
%
ma/kg
77
GIORDANO & MAYS 1977
KALE
6.1
1.7
40
78
GIORDANO & MAYS 1977
OKRA
79
GIORDANO & MAYS 1977
OKRA
6.6
2.5
50
80
GIORDANO & MAYS 1977
OKRA
6.1
1.7
40
81
GIORDANO & MAYS 1977
PEPPER
82
GIORDANO & MAYS 1977
PEPPER
6.6
2.5
50
83
GIORDANO & MAYS 1977
PEPPER
6.1
1.7
40
84
GIORDANO & MAYS 1977
TOMATO
85
GIORDANO & MAYS 1977
TOMATO
6.6
2.5
50
86
GIORDANO & MAYS 1977
TOMATO
6.1
1.7
40
87
GIORDANO & MAYS 1977
SQUASH
88
GIORDANO & MAYS 1977
SQUASH
6.6
2.5
50
89
GIORDANO & MAYS 1977
SQUASH
6.1
1.7
40
90
GIORDANO & MAYS 1977
LETTUCE
K
91
GIORDANO & MAYS 1977
. LETTUCE
6.6
2.5
50
92
GIORDANO & MAYS 1977
LETTUCE
6.1
1.7
40
93
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
1ETTUCE
6.6
2.5
50
94
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
LETTUCE
6.6
2.5
50
95
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
LETTUCE
6.6
2.5
50
96
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
LETTUCE
6.6
2.5
50
97
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
PEPPER
6.6
2.5
50
98
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
PEPPER
6.6
2.5
50
99
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
PEPPER
6.6
2.5
50
100
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
PEPPER
6.6
2.5
50
101
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
BEAN
6.6
2.5
50
102
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
BEAN
6.6
2.5
50
103
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
BEAN
6.6
2.5
50
104
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
BEAN
6.6
2.5
50
105
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
CORN
6.6
2.5
50
106
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
CORN
6.6
2.5
50
107
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
CORN
6.6
2.5
50
108
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
CORN
6.6
2.5
50
109
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
SQUASH
6.6
2.5
50
110
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
SQUASH
6,6
2.5
50
111
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
SQUASH
6.6
2.5
50
112
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
SQUASH
6.6
2.5
50
113
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
114
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
F-219
-------
TABLE F-4 (oont.)
LOCATION
OF
STUDY
39
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
40
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
41
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
42
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
43
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
44
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
45
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
48
MUSCLE SCHOALES. AL
47
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
48
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
49
MUSCLE SCHOALES. AL
50
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
51
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
52
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
53
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
54
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
55
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
58
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
57
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
58
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
59
MUSCLE SCHOALES. AL
60
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
61
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
62
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
63
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
64
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
65
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
66
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
67
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
68
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
69
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
70
MUSCLE SCHOALES. AL
71
MUSCLE SCHOALES. AL
72
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
73
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
74
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
75
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
76
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
F-218
-------
TABLE F-4 (cont.)
YIELD
YIELD
REDUCTION
COMPONENT
METAL
%
MEASURED
PHYTOTOXICITY
COMMENTS
39
0
PODS
NO
40
60.4*
PODS
•NO
•DOSE RESPONSE & TISSUE CONCENTRATION INCONSISTANT
41
0
PODS
NO
42
0
PODS
NO
43
37.5*
PODS
•NO
•DOSE RESPONSE NOT CONSISTANT, PH<5.5
44
0
PODS
NO
45
0
PODS
NO
46
0
PODS
NO
47
0
PODS
NO
48
0
PODS
NO
49
0
PODS
NO
50
0
PODS
NO
51
0
PODS
•NO
•DOSE RESPONSE & TISSUE ZN CONCENTRATION NOT CONSISTANT
52
0
PODS
•NO
•DOSE RESPONSE & TISSUE ZN CONCENTRATION NOT CONSISTANT
53
0
PODS
NO
54
0
PODS
POSSIBLE
SOIL PH<5.5. SLUDGE LOADING EXCEEDS AGRONOMIC RATES
55
36.8
PODS
POSSIBLE
SOIL PH < 5.5, SLUDGE LOADING EXCEEDS AGRONOMIC RATES
56
42.8
PODS
POSSIBLE
SLUDGE LOADING EXCEEDS AGRONOMIC RATES
57
NO
58
NO
59
•NO
•NOT TESTED STATISTICALLY. MAY BE ATTRIBUTED TO WET SEASON/INSECTS
60
NO
61
•NO
•NOT TESTED STATISTICALLY, MAY BE ATTRIBUTED TO WET SEASON/INSECTS
62
•NO :
•NOT TESTED STATISTICALLY, MAY BE ATTRIBUTED TO WET SEASON/INSECTS
63
NO
64
NO
65
•NO
•NOT TESTED STATISTICALLY, MAY BE ATTRIBUTED TO WET SEASON/INSECTS
66
NO
67
NO
68
NO
69
NO
•
70
NO
71
NO
72
NO
73
NO
74
NO
75
NO
76
NO
I
F-217
-------
TABLE F-4 (oonU
SOIL Zn
PLANT Zn
PUNT
YIELD
YIELD
SOIL
CONCENTRTN
CONCENTRTN
TISSUE
DESCRIPTION OF
REDUCTION
COMPONENT
EXTRACTANT
mo/ko
mfl/ka
SAMPLED
EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN
%
MEASURED
39
0.5 M KCI
75
230
VINES
FIELD. SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
VINES
40
0.5 M HCI
206
211
VINES
FIELD, SLUDGE. MATURITY
0
VINES
41
0.5 M HCI
7
53
VINES
FIELD, SLUDGE. MATURITY
0
VINES
42
0.5 M HCI
7
63
VINES
FIELD. SLUDGE. MATURITY
0
VINES
43
0.5 M H»
20
282
VINES
FIELD. SLUDGE. MATURITY
30.8*
VINES
44
0.5 M HCI
40
254
VINES
FIELD. SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
VINES
45
0.5 M Ha
62
296
VINES
FIELD. SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
VINES
46
0.5 M Ha
143
404
VINES
FIELD, SLUDGE. MATURITY
0
VINES
47
0.5 M HCI
261
410
VINES
FIELD, SLUDGE. MATURITY
0
VINES
48
0.5 M HCI
774
338
VINES
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
VINES
49
DTPA
2
42
VINES
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
VINES
50
DTPA
2
36
VINES
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
VINES
51
DTPA
9
128
VINES
FIELD. SLUDGE. MATURITY
26.2"
VINES
52
DTPA
19
141
VINES
FIELD. SLUDGE. MATURITY
14.5*
VINES
53
DTPA
25
128
VINES
FIELD. SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
VINES
54
DTPA
69
304
VINES
FIELD. SLUDGE, MATURITY
27
VINES
55
DTPA
77
325
VINES
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
36
VINES
56
DTPA
157
308
VINES
FIELD. SLUDGE. MATURITY
32.8
VINES
57
0.5 M HCL
5
40
LEAF
FIELD. SLUDGE. MATURITY
0
EDIBLE PART
58
0.5 M HCL
97
179
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
EDIBLE PART
59
0.5 M HCL
89
95
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
14.3*
EDIBLE PART
60
0.5 M HCL
5
41
LEAF
FIELD. SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
EDIBLE PART
61
0.5 M HCL
97
94
LEAF
FIELD. SLUDGE. MATURITY
8.3 •
EDIBLE PART
62
0.5 M HCL
89
: 55
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE. MATURITY
8.3*
EDIBLE PART
63
0.5 M HCL .
5
68
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
EDIBLE PART
64
0.5 M HCL
97
143
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
EDIBLE PART
65
0.5 M HCL
89
92
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
13*
EDIBLE PART
66
0.5 M HCL
5
49
LEAF
FIELD. SLUDGE. MATURITY .
0
EDIBLE PART
67
0.5 M HCL
97
77
LEAF
FIELD. SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
EDIBLE PART
68
0.5 M HCL
89
55
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE. MATURITY
0
EDIBLE PART
69
0.5 M HCL
5
93
LEAF
HELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
EDIBLE PART
70
0.5 M HCL
97
233
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
EDIBLE PART
71
0.5 M HCL
89
226
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
EDIBLE PART
72
0.5 M HCL
5
52
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE. MATURITY
0
EDIBLE PART
73
0.5 M HCL
97
194
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE. MATURITY
0
EDIBLE PART
74
0.5 M HCL
89
96
LEAF
FIELD. SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
EDIBLE PART
75
0.5 M HCL
5
33
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
EDIBLE PART
76
0.5 M HCL
97
161
LEAF
FIELD. SLUDGE. MATURITY
0
EDIBLE PART
F-216
-------
TABLE F-4 (cont.l
SAND
SILT
CLAY
SOIL
SOIL
CUMM Zn
CONTENT
CONTENT
CONTENT
CEC
OC
SOIL
LOADING
%
%
%
cmol/kg
%
PH
RATE (kg/ha)
39
5.6
360
40
5.6
720
41
¦
6.5
0
42
6.5
0
43
5.2
90
44
5.6
180
45
,
5.9
360
46
6
270
47
5.9
540
48
6.3
1080
49
6.3
0
50
5.8
0
51
•5.5
90
52
5.7
180
53
6.1
360
54
5
360
55
5.3
720
56
•
5.7
1440
57
6.4
0
58
6.4
202
59
6.4
202
60
6.4
0
61
6.4
202
62
6.4
202
63
6.4
0
64
6.4
202
65
6.4
202
66
6.4
0
67
6.4
202
68
6.4
202
69
•
6.4
0
70
6.4
202
71
6.4
202
72
6.4
0
73
6.4
202
74
6.4
202
75
6.4
0
76
6.4
202
F-215
-------
TABLE F-4 (oont.)
SLUDGE
ANNLSLUDGE
CUMML SLUDGE
YEARS
SOIL
SOIL
CHEMICAL
LOADNG RATE
LOADNG RATE
SINCE LAST
TAXONOMIC
SERIES
SOIL
_^jTAaU2£TN^
Ma/ha
Ma/ha
APPUCATN
NAME
NAME
_aBiT!>aTJRE_j=3
39
100
200
0
SANGO
SIL
40
200
400
0
SANGO
SIL
41
0
0
SANGO
SIL
42
0
0
SANGO
SIL
43
50
50
2
SANGO
SiL
44
100
100
2
SANGO
SIL
45
200
200
2
SANGO
SiL
46
50
150
0
SANGO
SiL
47
100
300
0
SANGO
SiL
48
200
600
0
SANGO
SiL
49
0
0
SANGO
SiL
50
0
0
SANGO
SiL
51
50
50
3
SANGO
SiL
52
100
100
3
SANGO
SiL
53
200
200
3
SANGO
SiL
54
50
200
0
SANGO
SiL
55
100
400
0
SANGO
SiL
56
200
800
0
SANGO
SiL
57
0
0
SANGO
SiL
58
112
112
0
SANGO
SiL
59
112
112
0
SANGO
SiL
60
0
0
SANGO
SiL
61
112
112
0
SANGO
SiL
62
112
112
0
SANGO
SiL
63
0
0
SANGO
SiL
64
112
112
0
SANGO
SiL
65
112
112
0
SANGO
SiL
66
0
0
SANGO
SiL
67
112
112
0
SANGO
SiL
68
112
112
0
SANGO
SiL
69
0
0
SANGO
SiL
70
112
112
0
SANGO
SiL
71
112
112
0
,
SANGO
SiL
72
0
0
SANGO
SiL
73
112
112
0
SANGO
SiL
74
112
112
0
SANGO
SiL
75 .
0
0
SANGO
SiL
76
112
112
0
SANGO
SiL
F-214
-------
TABLE F-4 (cont.)
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
Cr
Cu
Fa
N
Ni
P
Pb
Zn
SOLIDS
BIOLOGICAL
mq/ka
mo/kfl
%
%
mo/kfl
ma/kfl
mo/kfl
ma/ka
CONTNT
PROCESSING
39
400
520
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
40
400
520
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
41
400
520
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
42
400
520
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
43
400
520
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
44
400
520
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
45
400
520
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
46
400
520
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
47
400
520
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
48
400
520
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
• 49
400
520
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
50
400
520
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
51
400
520
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
•
52
400
520
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
53
400
520
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
54
400
520
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
55
400
520
. 1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
56
400
520
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
57
58
350
730
1.7
2.3
20
1.6
530
1800
59
400
520
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
60
61
350
730
1.7
2.3
20
1.6
530
1800
62
400
520
1.5
2.1:
40
1.3
1600
1800
63
64
350
730
1.7
2.3
20
1.6
530
1800
65
400
520
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
66
67
350
730
1.7
2.3
20
1.6
530
1800
68
400
520
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
69
70
350
730
1.7
2.3
20
1.6
530
1800
71
400
520
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
72
73
350
730
1.7
2.3
20
1.6
530
1800
74
400
520
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
75
76
350
730
1.7
2.3
20
1.6
530
1800
F-213
-------
TABLE F-4 (oont.)
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
LITERATURE
PLANT
SLUDGE
VOL SOUDS
Al
Ca
Cd
CITATION
NAME
CULTIVAR
PH
%
%
%
mfl/ka
39
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
BEANS
WHITE HALF RUNNER
6.1
1.7
40
40
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
BEANS
WHITE HALF RUNNER
6.1
1.7
40
41
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
BEANS
WHITE HALF RUNNER
6.1
1.7
40
42
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
BEANS
WHITE HALF RUNNER
6.1
1.7
40
43
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
BEANS
WHITE HALF RUNNER
6.1
1.7
40
44
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
BEANS
WHITE HALF RUNNER
6.1
1.7
40
45
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
BEANS
WHITE HALF RUNNER
6.1
1.7
40
46
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
BEANS
WHITE HALF RUNNER
6.1
1.7
40
47
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
BEANS
WHITE HALF RUNNER
6.1
1.7
AO
48
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
BEANS
WHITE HALF RUNNER
6.1
1.7
40
49
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
BEANS
WHITE HALF RUNNER
6.1
1.7
40
50
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
BEANS
WHITE HALF RUNNER
6.1
1.7
40
51
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
BEANS
WHITE HALF RUNNER
6.1
1.7
40
. 52
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
BEANS
WHITE HALF RUNNER
6.1
1.7
40
53
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
BEANS
WHITE HALF RUNNER
6.1
1.7
40
54
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
BEANS
WHITE HALF RUNNER
6.1
1.7
40
55
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
BEANS
WHITE HALF RUNNER
6.1
1.7
40
56
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
BEANS
WHITE HALF RUNNER
6.1
1.7
40
57
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
BEANS
58
GIORDANO & MAYS 1977
BEANS
6.6
2.5
50
59
GIORDANO & MAYS 1977
BEANS
6.1
1.7
40
60
GIORDANO & MAYS 1977
OKRA
61
GIORDANO & MAYS 1977
OKRA
6.6
2.5
50
: 62
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
OKRA
6.1
1.7
40
63
GIORDANO & MAYS 1977
PEPPERS
64
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
PEPPERS
6.6
2.5
50
65
GIORDANO & MAYS 1977
PEPPERS
6.1
1.7
40
66
GIORDANO & MAYS 1977
TOMATO
67
GIORDANO & MAYS 1977
TOMATO
6.6
2.5
50
68
GIORDANO & MAYS 1977
TOMATO
6.1
1.7
40
69
GIORDANO & MAYS 1977
SQUASH
70
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
SQUASH
6.6
2.5
50
71
GIORDANO & MAYS 1977
SQUASH
6.1
1.7
40
72
GIORDANO & MAYS 1977
TURNIP
73
GIORDANO & MAYS 1977
TURNIP
6.6
•
2.5
50
74
GIORDANO & MAYS 1977
TURNIP
6.1
1.7
40
75
GIORDANO & MAYS 1977
KALE
76
GIORDANO & MAYS 1977
KALE
6.6
2.5
50
F-212
-------
TABLE F-4 (cont.l
LOCATION
OF
STUDY
.
1
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
2
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
3
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
4
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
5
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
6
MUSCLE SCHOALES. AL
7
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
8
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
9
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
10
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
11
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
12
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
13
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
14
MUSCLE SCHOALES. AL
15
MUSCLE SCHOALES. AL
16
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
17
MUSCLE SCHOALES. AL
18
MUSCLE SCHOALES. AL
19
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
20
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
21
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
22
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
23
MUSCLE SCHOALES. AL
24
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
25
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
26
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
27
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
28
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
29
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
30
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
31 '
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
32
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
33
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
34
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
35
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
36
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
37
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
38
MUSCLE SCHOALES. AL
F-211
-------
TABLE F-4 (conU
YIELD
YIELD
REDUCTION
COMPONENT
METAL
%
MEASURED
PHYTOTOXtCITY
COMMENTS
1
NO
2
NO
3
NO
4
NO
S
NO
6
NO
7
NO
8
NO
9
NO
10
NO
11
NO
12
NO
13
NO
14
NO
15
NO
16
NO
17
NO
18
NO
I
19
NO
20
NO
21
NO
22
NO
23
•NO
•YIELD REDUCTION NOT CONSISTANT WITH DOSE RESPONCE RELATIONSHIP
24
NO
25
NO
26
POSSIBLE
ANNUAL LOADING EXCEEDS AGRONOMIC RATES. SOIL PH<5.5
27
POSSIBLE
ANNUAL LOADING EXCEEDS AGRONOMIC RATES, SOIL PH<5.5
28
NO
29
0
PODS
NO
30
17.7*
PODS
•
:z
o
•TISSUE ZN CONCENTRATION NOT COMMENSURATE WITH PHYTOTOXICITY CRITERIA
31
35.3 •
PODS
•NO
•TISSUE ZN CONCENTRATION NOT COMMENSURATE WITH PHYTOTOXICITY CRITERIA
32
55*
PODS
•NO
•TISSUE ZN CONCENTRATION NOT COMMENSURATE WITH PHYTOTOXICITY CRITERIA
33
0
PODS
NO
34
0
PODS
NO
35
25.4*
PODS
•NO
•DOSE RESPONSE & TISSUE CONCENTRATION INCONSISTANT
36
0
PODS
NO
37
28.5*
PODS
•NO
•DOSE RESPONSE & TISSUE CONCENTRATION INCONSISTANT
38
0
PODS
NO
F-210
-------
TABLE F-4 (cont.)
SOIL Zn
PLANT Zn
PLANT
YIELD
YIELD
SOIL
CONCENTRTN
CONCENTRTN
TISSUE
DESCRIPTION OF
REDUCTION
COMPONENT
EXTRACTANT
ma/kg
mo/kfl
SAMPLED
EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN
%
MEASURED
1
0.5 M HCI
4
41
FORAGE
FIELD. SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
STOVER
2
0.5 M HCI
29
94
FnRAGE
FIELD, SLi OGE, MATURITY
0
STOVER
3 .
0.5 M HCI .
53
95
k.;age •
FIELD. SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
STOVER
4
0.5 M HCI
93
97
FORAGE
FIELD. SLUDGE. MATURITY
0
STOVER
5
0.5 M HCI
6
47
FORAGE
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
STOVER
6
0.5 M HCI
6
53
FORAGE
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
STOVER
7
0.5 M HCI
18
153
FORAGE
FIELD, SLUDGE. MATURITY
0
STOVER
8
0.5 M HCI
54
184
FORAGE
FIELD, SLUDGE. MATURITY
0
STOVER
9
0.5 M HCI
73
207
FORAGE
FIELD. SLUDGE. MATURITY
0
STOVER
10
0.5 M HQ
68
225
FORAGE
FIELD, SLUDGE. MATURITY
0
STOVER
11
0.5 M HCI
75
202
FORAGE
FIELD. SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
STOVER
12
0.5 M HCI
206
241
FORAGE
FIELD, SLUDGE. MATURITY
0
STOVER
13
0.5 M HCI
7
28
FORAGE
FIELD. SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
STOVER
14
0.5 M HCI
7
28
FORAGE
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
STOVER
15
0.5 M HCI
20
98
FORAGE
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
STOVER
16
0.5 M HCI
40
94
FORAGE
FIELD, SLUDGE. MATURITY
0
STOVER
17
0.5 M HCI
62
130
FORAGE
FIELD, SLUDGE. MATURITY
0
STOVER
18
0.5 M HCI
143
172
FORAGE
FIELD. SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
STOVER
19
0.5 M HCI
261
221
FORAGE
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
STOVER
20
0.5 M HCI
774
250
FORAGE
FIELD. SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
STOVER
21
DTPA
2
30
FORAGE
FIELD. SLUDGE. MATURITY
0
STOVER
22
DTPA
2
46
FORAGE
FIELD. SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
STOVER
23
DTPA
9
130
FORAGE
FIELD. SLUDGE, MATURITY
11.3*
STOVER
24
DTPA
19 :
158
FORAGE
FIELD. SLUDGE. MATURITY
0
STOVER
25
DTPA
25
172
FORAGE
FIELD. SLUDGE. MATURITY
0
STOVER
26
DTPA
69
313
FORAGE
FIELD. SLUDGE. MATURITY
14.2
STOVER
27
DTPA
77
450
FORAGE
FIELD. SLUDGE. MATURITY
17.6
STOVER
28
DTPA
157
400
FORAGE
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
STOVER
29
0.5 M HO
4
60
VINES
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
VINES
30
0.5 M HCI
29
158
VINES
FIELD. SLUDGE. MATURITY
0
VINES
31
0.5 M Ha
53
189
' VINES
FIELD. SLUDGE. MATURITY
0
VINES
32
0.5 M HCI
93
164
VINES
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
VINES
33
0.5 M HCI
6
44
VINES
FIELD. SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
VINES
34
0.5 M HCI
6
48
VINES
FIELD, SLUDGE. MATURITY
0
VINES
35
0.5 M Ha
18
171
VINES
FIELD. SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
VINES
36
0.5 M HCI
54
184
VINES
FIELD. SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
VINES
37
0.5 M HCI
73
187
VINES
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
VINES
38
0.5 M HCI
68
225
VINES
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
VINES
F-209
-------
TABLE F-4 (ooot.)
SAND
SH.T
CLAY
SOIL
SOIL
CUMM Zn
CONTENT
CONTENT
CONTENT
CEC
oc
sou.
LOADING
%
%
%
omol/ko
%
pH
RATE (koTha)
1
4.9
0
2
5.3
90
3
5.3
180
4
5.6
360
5
4.9
0
6
*
4.9
0
7
5.3
90
8
5.3
180
9
5.6
360
10
5.6
180
11
5.6
360
12
5.6
720
13
6.5
0
14
6l5
0
15
5.2
90
16
5.6
180
17
5.9
360
18
6
270
19
5.9
540
20
6.3
1080
21
6.3
0
22
5.8
0
23
5.5
90
24
5.7
180
25
6.1
360
26
5
360
27
5.3
720
28
5.7
1440
29
4.9
0
30
5.3
90
31
.
5.3
180
32
5.6
360
33
4.9
0
34
4.9
0
35
5.3
90
36
5.3
180
37
<
5.6
360
38
5.6
180
F-208
-------
TABLE F-4 (cont.)
SLUDGE
ANNLSLUDGE
CUMML SLUDGE
YEARS
SOIL
SOIL
CHEMICAL
LOADNG RATE
LOADNG RATE
SINCE LAST
TAXONOMIC
SERIES
SOIL
STABILIZATN
Mg/ha
Mg/ha
APPLICATN
NAME
NAME
TEXTURE
1
0
0
SANGO
SiL
2
50
50
0
SANGO
SiL
3
100
100
0
SANGO
SiL
4
200
200
0
SANGO
SiL
5
0
0
SANGO
SiL
6
0
0
SANGO
SiL
7
50
50
1
SANGO
SiL
8
100
100
1
SANGO
SiL
9
200
200
1
SANGO
SiL
10
50
100
0
SANGO
SiL
11
100
200
0
SANGO
SiL
12
200
400
0
SANGO
SiL
13
0
0
SANGO
SiL
14
0
0
SANGO
SiL
15
50
50
2
SANGO
SiL
16
100
100
2
SANGO
SiL
17
200
200
2
SANGO
SiL
18
50
150
0
SANGO
SiL
19
100
300
0
SANGO
SiL
20
200
600
0
SANGO
SiL
21
0
0
SANGO
SiL
22
0
0
SANGO
SiL
23
50
50
3
SANGO
SiL
24
100
100
3
SANGO
SiL
25
200
200
3
SANGO
SiL
26
50
200
0
SANGO
SiL
27
100
400
0
SANGO
SiL
28
200
800
0
SANGO
SiL
29
0
0
SANGO
SiL
30
50
50
0
SANGO
SiL
31
100
100
0
SANGO
SiL
32
200
200
0
SANGO
SiL
33
0
0
SANGO
SiL
34
0
0
SANGO
SiL
35
50
50
1
SANGO
SiL
36
100
100
1
SANGO
SiL
37
200
200
1
SANGO
SiL
38
50
100
0
SANGO
SiL
-------
TABLE F-4 (cont.)
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
Cr
Cu
Fe
N
Ni
P
Pb
Zn
SOLIDS
BIOLOGICAL
mg/kg
mg/kg
%
%
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
CONTNT
PROCESSING
1
400
520
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
2
400
520
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
3
400
520
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
4
400
520
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
5
400
520
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
6
400
520
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
7
400
520
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
8
400
520
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
9
400
520
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
•
10
400
520
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
11
400
520
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
4 A
1 A
JAM
nw
520
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
13
400
520
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
14
400
520
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
15
400
520
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
16
400
520
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
17
400
520
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
18
400
520
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
19
400
520
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
20
400
520
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
21
400
520
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
22
. 400
520
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
23
400
520
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
24
400 :
520
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
: 1800
25
400
520
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
20
400
520
1.5 •
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
27
400
520
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
.
28
400
520
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
29
400
520
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
30
400
520
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
31
400
520
1.5
2.1
40
•1.3
1600
1800
32
400
520
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
33
400
520
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
34
400
520
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
35
400
520
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
•
38
400
520
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
37
400
520
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
38
400
520
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
F-206
-------
TABLE F-4. ZINC DATA
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
LITERATURE
PLANT
SLUDGE
VOL SOLIDS
Al
Ca
Cd
CITATION
NAME
CULTIVAR
PH
%
%
%
mg/kfl
1
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
CORN
SILVER QUEEN
6.1
1.7
40
2
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
CORN
SILVER QUEEN
6.1
1.7
40
3
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
CORN
SILVER QUEEN
6.1
1.7
40
4
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
CORN
SILVER QUEEN
6.1
1.7
40
5
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
CORN
SILVER QUEEN
6.1
1.7
40
6
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
CORN
SILVER QUEEN
6.1
1.7
40
7
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
CORN
SILVER QUEEN
6.1
1.7
40
8
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
CORN
SILVER QUEEN
6.1
1.7
40
9
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
CORN
SILVER QUEEN
6.1
1.7
40
10
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
CORN
SILVER QUEEN
6.1
1.7
40
11
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
CORN
SILVER QUEEN
6.1
1.7
40
12
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
CORN
SILVER QUEEN
6.1
1.7
40
13
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
CORN
SILVER QUEEN
6.1
1.7
40
14
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
CORN
SILVER QUEEN
6.1
1.7
40
15
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
CORN
SILVER QUEEN
6.1
40
16
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
CORN
SILVER QUEEN
6.1
1.7
40
17
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
CORN
SILVER QUEEN
6.1
1.7
40
18
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
CORN
SILVER QUEEN
6.1
1.7
40
19
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
CORN
SILVER QUEEN
6.1
1.7
40
20
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
CORN
SILVER QUEEN
6.1
1.7
40
21
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
CORN
SILVER QUEEN
6.1
1.7
40
22
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
CORN
SILVER QUEEN
6.1
1.7
40
23
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
CORN
SILVER QUEEN
6.1
1.7
40
24
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
CORN
SILVER QUEEN
6.1
1.7
40
25
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
CORN
SILVER QUEEN
6.1
1.7
40
26
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
CORN
SILVER QUEEN
6.1
1.7
40
27
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
CORN
SILVER QUEEN
6.1
1.7
40
28
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
CORN
SILVER QUEEN
6.1
1.7
40
29
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
BEANS
WHITE HALF RUNNER
6.1
1.7
40
30
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
BEANS
WHITE HALF RUNNER
6.1
1.7
40
31
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
BEAfclS
WHITE HALF RUNNER
6.1
1.7
40
32
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
BEANS
WHITE HALF RUNNER
6.1
1.7
40
33
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
BEANS
WHITE HALF RUNNER
6.1
1.7
40
34
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
BEANS
WHITE HALF RUNNER
6.1
1.7
40
35
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
BEANS
WHITE HALF RUNNER
6.1
1.7
40
36
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
BEANS
WHITE HALF RUNNER
6.1
1.7
40
37
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
BEANS
WHITE HALF RUNNER
6.1
1.7
40
38
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
BEANS
WHITE HALF RUNNER
6.1
1.7
40
-------
TABLE F-3
-------
TABLE F-3 (cont.)
YIELD
YIELD
YIELD
YIELD
REDUCTION
COMPONENT
REDUCTION
COMPONENT
METAL
%
MEASURED
%
MEASURED
PHYTOTOXICITY
533
NA
GRAIN
NA
STOVER
534 "
0
GRAIN
0
S OVER
535
0
i
-------
TABLE F-3 (cont.)
SOIL
SOIL
CUMM Ni
SOIL Ni
PUNT Ni
PLANT
DESIGN
CEC
OC
SOIL
LOADING
SOIL
CONCENTRTN
CONCENTRTN
TISSUE
SUMMARY
cmol/kg
%
pH
RATE (kg/ha)
EXTRACTANT
mq/kfl
ma/kg
SAMPLED
533
0.94
7.5
84
0.1 M H«
12.9
0.6
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE. MATURITY
534
1.56
7.5
100
0.1 M HCI
21.5
0.8
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
535
1.56
7.5
110
0.1 M HCI
23.9
3
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
536
1.04
7.5
126
0.1 M HCI
21.2
1.4
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
537
1.04
7.5
140
0.1 M HCI
24.9
2.8
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
538
1.48
7.5
154
0.1 M HCI
23.6
3.3
LEAF
FIELD. SLUDGE, MATURITY
539
1.48
7.5
162
0.1 M HCI
22.5
1.3
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
540
2.15
7.5
170
0.1 M HCI
33.1
1.9
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
541
2.15
7.5
180
0.1 M HCI
25.8
0.7
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
542
1.9
7.5
186
0.1 M HCI
31
1
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
543
1.22
7.5
148
0.1 M HCI
18.8
0.9
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
544
3.02
7.5
168
0.1 M HCI
18.8
0.9
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
545
3.02
7.5
200
0.1 M HCI
42.4
1.1
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
546
1.58
7.5
220
0.1 M HCI
39.9
3
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
547
1.58
7.5
252
0.1 M HCI
31.4
0.6
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
548
2.38
7.5
280
0.1 M HCI
44.8
2.3
LEAF
FIELD. SLUDGE. MATURITY
549
2.38
7.5
308
0.1 M HCI
39.1
12
LEAF
FIELD. SLUDGE. MATURITY
550
3.47
7.5
324
0.1 M HCI
47.4
1.6
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
551
3.47
7.5
340
0.1 M HCI
49.3
1.9
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE. MATURITY
552
2.77
7.5
360
0.1 M HCI
46.4
1.1
LEAF
FIELD. SLUDGE. MATURITY
553
2.77
7.5
372
0.1 M HCI
43.8
1
LEAF
FIELD. SLUDGE. MATURITY
F-202
-------
533
534
535
536
537
538
539
540
541
542
543
544
545
546
547
548
549
550
551
552
553
TABLE F-3 (cont.)
ANNL SLUDGE
CUMML SLUDGE
YEARS
SOIL
SOIL
CONTENT
CONTENT
CONTENT
LOADNG RATE
LOADNG RATE
SINCE LAST
TAXONOMIC
SERIES
SOIL
%
%
%
Mg/ha
Mfl/ha
APPLICATN
NAME
NAME
TEXTURE
39.8
200.9
STRIP MINE SPOIL
34.8
235.7
STRIP MINE SPOIL
22.8
258.5
STRIP MINE SPOIL
34.9
293.4
STRIP MINE SPOIL
35.8
329.2
STRIP MINE SPOIL
33.6
362.8
STRIP MINE SPOIL
33.6
396.4
STRIP MINE SPOIL
33.6
430
STRIP MINE SPOIL
33.6
463.6
STRIP MINE SPOIL
33.6
497.2
STRIP MINE SPOIL
64.3
321.9
STRIP MINE SPOIL
79.7
401.6
STRIP MINE SPOIL
69.8
471.4
STRIP MINE SPOIL
45.5
516.9
STRIP MINE SPOIL
68.8
585.7
STRIP MINE SPOIL
71.7
657.4
STRIP MINE SPOIL
67.2
724.6
STRIP MINE SPOIL
67.2
791.8
STRIP MINE SPOIL
67.2
859
STRIP MINE SPOIL
67.2
926.2
STRIP MINE SPOIL
67.2
993.4
STRIP MINE SPOIL
-------
533
534
535
536
537
538
539
540
541
542
543
544
545
546
647
548
549
550
551
552
553
TABLE F-3 (cont.)
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
Fa
N
Ni
Pb
Zn
SOLIDS
BIOLOGICAL
CHEMICAL
%
%
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
CONTNT
PROCESSING
STABILIZATN
4.3
4.5
425
3.42
850
3600
0.05
SECONDARY, ANAER DIGEST. LAGOON
P0LYMER.FECL3
4.3
4.5
425
3.42
850
3600
0.054
SECONDARY. ANAER DIGEST, LAGOON
P0LYMER.FECL3
4.3
4.5
425
3.42
850
3600
0.052
SECONDARY. ANAER DIGEST. LAGOON
P0LYMER.FECL3
4.3
4.5
425
3.42
850
3600
0.052
SECONDARY. ANAER DIGEST, LAGOON
POLYMER, FECL3
4.3
4.5
425
3.42
850
3600
0.05
SECONDARY. ANAER DIGEST, LAGOON
POLYMER,FECL3
4.3
4.5
425
3.42
850
3600
0.046
SECONDARY. ANAER DIGEST. LAGOON
POLYMER,FECL3
2.2
0.5
116
0.87
293
1100
0.66
SECONDARY, ANAER DIGEST. LAGOON
P0LYMER.FECL3
2.2
0.5
116
0.87
293
1100
0.65
SECONDARY, ANAER DIGEST. LAGOON
P0LYMER.FECL3
2.2
0.5
116
0.87
293
1100
0.3
SECONDARY. ANAER DIGEST, LAGOON
P0LYMER.FECL3
1.9
0.5
121
0.62
259
1146
0.69
SECONDARY. ANAER DIGEST. LAGOON
P0LYMER.FECL3
4.3
4.5
425
3.42
850
3600
0.045
SECONDARY. ANAER DIGEST. LAGOON
P0LYMER.FECL3
t.3
4.5
425
3.42
850
3600
0.05
SECONDARY. ANAER DIGEST. LAGOON
POLYMER,FECL3
4.3
4.5
425
3.42
850
3600
0.054
SECONDARY. ANAER DIGEST, LAGOON
POLYMER,FECL3
4.3
4.5
425
3.42
850
3600
0.052
SECONDARY. ANAER DIGEST. LAGOON
POLYMER,FECL3
4.3
4.5
425
3.42
850
3600
0.052
SECONDARY, ANAER DIGEST, LAGOON
P0LYMER.FECL3
4.3
4.5
425
3.42
850
3600
0.05
SECONDARY. ANAER DIGEST. LAGOON
POLYMER,FECL3
4.3
4.5
425
3.42
850
3600
0.046
SECONDARY. ANAER DIGEST. LAGOON
POLYMER,FECL3
2.2
0.5
116
0.87
293
1100
0.66
SECONDARY. ANAER DIGEST, LAGOON
POLYMER,FECL3
2.2
0.5
116
0.87
293
1100
0.65
SECONDARY, ANAER DIGEST. LAGOON
POLYMER, FECL3
2.2
0.5
116
0.87
293
1100
0.3
SECONDARY. ANAER DIGEST. LAGOON
POLYMER,FECL3
1.9
0.5
121
0.62
259
1146
0.69
SECONDARY. ANAER DIGEST. LAGOON
POLYMER.FECL3
MOO
-------
TABLE F-3 (cont.)
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
LITERATURE
PLANT
SLUDGE
VOL SOLIDS
Al
Ca
Cd
Cr
Cu
CITATION
NAME
CULTIVAR
pH
%
%
%
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
533
PIETZET AL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
3.3
265
3505
1471
534
PIETZET AL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
3.3
265
3505
1471
535
PIETZET AL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
3.3
265
3505
1471
536
PIETZET AL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
3.3
265
3505
1471
537
PIETZET AL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
3.3
160
3505
1471
538
PIETZET AL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
1.4
3.3
160
3505
1471
539
PIETZ ET AL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
20
3.1
0.71
71
775
460
540
PIETZET AL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
20
3.1
0.71
71
775
460
541
PIETZ ETAL 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3377
7.6
30
3.1
0.71
71
775
460
542
PIETZ ETAL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3377
7.6
20
0.67
3.9
53
679
454
543
PIETZET AL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
3.3
265
3505
1471
544
PIETZET AL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
3.3
265
3505
1471
545
PIETZET AL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
1.4
3.3
265.
3505
1471
546
PIETZET AL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
1.4
3.3
265
3505
1471
547
PIETZET AL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
1.4
3.3
265
3505
1471
548
PIETZET AL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
1.4
3.3
160
3505
1471
549
PIETZ ETAL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
1.4
3.3
160
3505
1471
550
PIETZET AL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
20
3.1
0.71
71
775
460
551
PIETZET AL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
20
3.1
0.71
71
775
460
552
PIETZET AL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3377
7.6
30
3.1
0.71
71
775
460
553
PIETZET AL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3377
7.6
20
0.67
3.9
53
679
454
-------
TABLE F-3 (cont.)
LOCATION
COMMENTS
OF
STUDY
495
FULTON COUNTY. ILLINOIS
496
FULTON COUNTY. ILLINOIS
497
FULTON COUNTY, ILLINOIS
498
FULTON COUNTY, ILLINOIS
499
FULTON COUNTY. ILLINOIS
500
FULTON COUNTY. ILLINOIS
501
FULTON COUNTY. ILLINOIS
502
FULTON COUNTY. ILLINOIS
503
FULTON COUNTY, ILLINOIS
504
•
FULTON COUNTY, ILLINOIS
505
FULTON COUNTY, ILLINOIS
508
FULTON COUNTY. ILLINOIS
507
FULTON COUNTY. ILLINOIS
508
FULTON COUNTY. ILLINOIS
509
FULTON COUNTY, ILLINOIS
510
FULTON COUNTY. ILLINOIS
511
FULTON COUNTY. ILLINOIS
512
i
FULTON COUNTY. ILLINOIS
513
FULTON COUNTY. ILLINOIS
514
FULTON COUNTY. ILLINOIS
515
FULTON COUNTY. ILLINOIS
518
FULTON COUNTY, ILLINOIS
517
FULTON COUNTY. ILLINOIS
518
FULTON COUNTY. ILLINOIS
519
FULTON COUNTY. ILLINOIS
520
FULTON COUNTY, ILLINOIS
521
FULTON COUNTY, ILLINOIS
522
•
FULTON COUNTY. ILLINOIS
523
FULTON COUNTY. ILLINOIS
524
FULTON COUNTY. ILLINOIS
525
«
• FULTON COUNTY. ILLINOIS
52S
.
FULTON COUNTY. ILLINOIS
527
FULTON COUNTY, ILLINOIS
528
FULTON COUNTY. ILLINOIS
529
FULTON COUNTY. ILLINOIS
530
FULTON COUNTY. ILLINOIS
531
FULTON COUNTY. ILUNOtS
532
FULTON COUNTY. (U-lNOiS
P-190
-------
TABLE F-3 (cont.)
YIELD
YIELD
YIELD
YIELD
REDUCTION
COMPONENT
REDUCTION
COMPONENT
METAL
%
MEASURED
%
MEASURED
PHYTOTOXICITY
495
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
496
0
^RAIN
0
t 'OVER
497
0
JRAIN
0
STOVER
' 498
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
499
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
500
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
501
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
502
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
503
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
504
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
505
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
506
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
507
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
508
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
509
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
510
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
511
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
512
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
513
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
514
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
515
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
516
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
517
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
518
0
GRAIN:
0
STOVER
519
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
520
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
521
29.5
GRAIN
0
STOVER
522
NA
GRAIN
NA
STOVER
523
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
524
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
525
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
526
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
527
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
528
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
529
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
530
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
531
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER.
532
21.5
GRAIN
0
STOVER
-------
TABLE F-3 (cont.)
SOIL
SOIL
CUMM Ni
SOIL Ni
PLANT Ni
PLANT
DESIGN
CEC
OC
SOIL
LOADING
SOIL
CONCENTRTN
CONCENTRTN
TISSUE
SUMMARY
cmol/kg
%
pH
RATE (ka/ha)
EXTRACTANT
mo/kfl
mo/kg
SAMPLED
495
12.6
0.33
7.8
0.8
0.1 M HCI
3.9
1.8
LEAF
FIELD. SLUDGE. MATURITY
496
12.6
0.27
7.8
5.1
0.1 M HCI
5.4
0.8
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE. MATURITY
497
12.6
0.41
7.8
11
0.1 M HCI
5.7
0.5
LEAF
FIELD. SLUDGE. MATURITY
498
12.6
0.41
7.8
18
0.1 M HCI
7.5
0.8
LEAF
FIELD. SLUDGE. MATURITY
499
12.6
0.59
7.8
28
0.1 M HCI
5.3
0.7
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE. MATURITY
500
12.6
0.35
7.8
1.6
0.1 M HCI
5.4
2.6
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
501
12.6
0.3
7.8
10.2
0.1 M HCI
5.7
0.7
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
502
12.6
0.3
7.8
22
0.1 M HCI
8.3
0.8
LEAF
FIELD. SLUDGE, MATURITY
503
12.6
0.5
7.8
36
0.1 M H»
8.9
0.7
LEAF
FIELD. SLUDGE. MATURITY
504
12.6
0.5
7.8
56
0.1 M HCI
7.1
0.9
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
505
12.6
0.33
7.8
3.2
0.1 M HCI
4.8
1.6
LEAF
FIELD. SLUDGE, MATURITY
506
12.6
0.33
7.8
20.4
0.1 M Ha
6
0.5
LEAF
FIELD. SLUDGE, MATURITY
507
12.6
0.76
7.8
44
0.1 M HCI
11.3
0.8
LEAF
HELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
508
12.6
0.76
7.8
72
0.1 M HCI
10.8
1.1
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
509
12.6
1.22
7.8
112
0.1 M HCI
13.2
0.9
LEAF
FIELD. SLUDGE. MATURITY
510
0.33
7.5
0
0.1 M Ha
7.9
0.6
LEAF
HELD. SLUDGE. MATURITY
511
0.44
7.5
0
0.1 M HCI
6
0.6
LEAF
HELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
512
0.44
7.5
0
0.1 M HCI
7
0.6
LEAF
HELD, SLUDGE. MATURITY
513
0.36
7.5
0
0.1 M HO
7.7
2.9
LEAF
FIELD. SLUDGE. MATURITY
514
0.36
7.5
0
0.1 M Ha
9.1
0.9
LEAF
HELD. SLUDGE, MATURITY
515
0.46
7.5
0
0.1 M Ha
7.6
1.8
LEAF
HELD, SLUDGE. MATURITY
516
0.46
7.5
0
0.1 M Ha
7.7
6
LEAF
HELD. SLUDGE. MATURITY
517
0.73
7.5
0
0.1 M HCI
7.9
1.6
LEAF
HELD. SLUDGE. MATURITY
518
0.73
7.5
0
0.1 M Ha
: 9.4
1.5
LEAF
HELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
519
0.7
7.5
0
0.1 M HCI
7.7
1.1
LEAF
HELD. SLUDGE, MATURITY
520
0.7
7.5
0
0.1 M Ha
9.8
1.3
LEAF
HELD. SLUDGE. MATURITY
521
0.59
7.5
37
0.1 M Ha
11.3
0.6
LEAF
HELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
522
0.94
7.5
42
0.1 M HCI
11.2
0.6
LEAF
HELD. SLUDGE. MATURITY
523
0.94
7.5
50
0.1 M HCI
15.8
0.7
LEAF
HELD. SLUDGE. MATURITY
524
0.67
7.5
55
0.1 M Ha
13.3
3.7 -
LEAF
HELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
525
0.67
7.5
63
0.1 M Ha •
9.6
1.9
LEAF
HELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
526
0.87
7.5
70
0.1 M Ha
15.2
2.6
LEAF
HELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
527
0.87
7.5
77
0.1 M HCI
12.9
5.2
LEAF
HELD, SLUDGE. MATURITY
528
1.41
7.5
81
0.1 M HCI
12.7
1.3
LEAF
FIELD. SLUDGE. MATURITY
529
1.41
7.5
85
0.1 M HCI
18.5
2.2
LEAF
HELD. SLUDGE, MATURITY
530
1.25
7.5
SO
0.1 M HCI
18.4
0.9
LEAF
HELD. SLUDGE, MATURITY
531.
1.25
7.5
93
0.1 M HCI
18.2
0.5
LEAF
HELD. SLUDGE. MATURITY
532
0.94
7.5
74
0.1 M HCI
14.4
0.6
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
F-196
-------
TABLE F-3 (cont.(
ANNLSLUDGE
CUMML SLUDGE
YEARS
SOIL
SOIL
CONTENT
CONTENT
CONTENT
LOADNG RATE
LOADNG RATE
SINCE LAST
TAXONOMIC
SERIES
SOIL
%
%
%
Mg/ha
Mg/ha
APPLICATN
NAME
NAME
TEXTURE
495
3
3
STRIP MINE SPOIL
496
12.8
15.8
0
STRIP MINE SPOIL
497
12.4
28.1
0
STRIP MINE SPOIL
498
14.3
42.4
0
STRIP MINE SPOIL
499
19.5
61.9
0
STRIP MINE SPOIL
600
6
6
0
STRIP MINE SPOIL
501
25.5
31.5
0
STRIP MINE SPOIL
502
29.8
61.3
0
STRIP MINE SPOIL
503
28.6
89.9
0
STRIP MINE SPOIL
504
39
128.9
0
STRIP MINE SPOIL
505
11.9
11.9
0
STRIP MINE SPOIL
506
51
62.9
0
STRIP MINE SPOIL
507
59.6
122.5
0
STRIP MINE SPOIL
508
57.1
179.6
0
STRIP MINE SPOIL
509
78
257.6
0
STRIP MINE SPOIL
510
0
0
0
STRIP MINE SPOIL
511
0
. 0
0
STRIP MINE SPOIL
512
0
0
0
STRIP MINE SPOIL
513
0
0
0
STRIP MINE SPOIL
514
0
0
0
STRIP MINE SPOIL
515
0
0
0
STRIP MINE SPOIL
516
0
0
0
STRIP MINE SPOIL
517
0
0
0
STRIP MINE SPOIL
518
0
0
0
STRIP MINE SPOIL
519
0
0
0
STRIP MINE SPOIL
520
0
0
0
STRIP MINE SPOIL
521
16.1
78
0
STRIP MINE SPOIL
522
19.9
97.9
0
STRIP MINE SPOIL
523
17.4
115.3
0
STRIP MINE SPOIL
524
11.4
126.7
0
STRIP MINE SPOIL
525
16.8
143.5
0
STRIP MINE SPOIL
526
17.9
161.4
0
STRIP MINE SPOIL
527
16.8
178.2
0
STRIP MINE SPOIL
528
16.8
195
0
STRIP MINE SPOIL
529
16.8
211.8
0
STRIP MINE SPOIL
530
16.8
228.6
0
STRIP MINE SPOIL
531
16.8
245.4
0
STRIP MINE SPOIL
532
32.2
161.1
0
STRIP MINE SPOIL
-------
TABLE F-3 (oont.l
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
Fa
N
Ni
P
Pb
Zn
SOLIDS
BIOLOGICAL
CHEMICAL
%
%
ma/kg
mg/kq
mg/kfl
mg/kg
CONTNT
PROCESSING
STABILIZATN
495
5.1
5.1
369
3.42
1258
4872
0.04
SECONDARY. ANAER DIGEST, LAGOON
POLYMER,FECL3
496
5.1
5.1
369
3.42
1258
4872
0.04
SECONDARY, ANAER DIGEST, LAGOON
POLYMER,FECL3
497
5.1
5.1
369
3.42
1258
4872
0.04
SECONDARY, ANAER DIGEST, LAGOON
P0LYMER.FECL3
498
5.1
5.1
369
3.42
1258
4872
0.04
SECONDARY, ANAER DIGEST, LAGOON
P0LYMER.FECL3
499
5.1
5.1
369
3.42
1258
4872
0.04
SECONDARY, ANAER DIGEST, LAGOON
POLYMER, FECL3
500
5.1
5.1
369
3.42
1258
4872
0.04
SECONDARY, ANAER DIGEST, LAGOON
POLYMER,FECL3
501
5.1
5.1
369
3.42
1258
4872
0.04
SECONDARY, ANAER DIGEST, LAGOON
POLYMER,FECL3
502
5.1
5.1
369
3.42
1258
4872
0.04
SECONDARY, ANAER DIGEST. LAGOON
POLYMER, FECL3
503
5.1
5.1
369
3.42
1258
4872
0.04
SECONDARY, ANAER DIGEST. LAGOON
POLYMER,FECL3 '
504
5.1
5.1
369
3.42
1258
4872
0.04
SECONDARY, ANAER DIGEST. LAGOON
POLYMER,FECL3
505
5.1
5.1
369
3.42
1258
4872
0.04
SECONDARY. ANAER DIGEST, LAGOON
POLYMER,FECL3
506
5.1
5.1
369
3.42
1258
4872
0.04
SECONDARY. ANAER DIGEST. LAGOON
POLYMER,FECL3
507
5.1
5.1
369
3.42
1258
4872
0.04
SECONDARY, ANAER DIGEST. LAGOON
.P0LYMER.FECL3
508
5.1
5.1
369
3.42
1258
4872
0.04
SECONDARY, ANAER DIGEST. LAGOON
POLYMER, FECL3
509
5.1
5.1
369
3.42
1258
4872
0.04
SECONDARY, ANAER DIGEST. LAGOON
POLYMER, FECL3
510
4.3
4.5
425
3.42
850
3600
0.045
SECONDARY. ANAER DIGEST, LAGOON
POLYMER,FECL3
511
4.3
4.5
425
3.42
850
3600
0.05
SECONDARY, ANAER DIGEST. LAGOON
P0LYMER.FECL3
512
4.3
4.5
425
3.42
850
3600
0.054
SECONDARY, ANAER DIGEST. LAGOON
P0LYMER.FECL3
513
4i3
4.5
425
3.42
850
3600
0.052
SECONDARY. ANAER DIGEST. LAGOON
POLYMER,FECL3
514
4.3
4.5
425
3.42
850
3600
0.052
SECONDARY. ANAER DIGEST. LAGOON
POLYMER,FECL3
515
4.3
4.5
425
3.42
850
3600
0.05
SECONDARY, ANAER DIGEST. LAGOON
POLYMER,FECL3
516
. 4.3
4.5
425
3.42
850
3600
0.046
SECONDARY. ANAER DIGEST. LAGOON
POLYMER, FECL3
517
2.2
0.5
116
0.87
293
1100
0.66
SECONDARY. ANAER DIGEST. LAGOON
POLYMER,FECL3
518
2.2
: 0.5
116
0.87
293
1100
0.65
: SECONDARY. ANAER DIGEST. LAGOON
POLYMER,FECL3
519
2.2
0.5
116
0.87
293
1100
0.3
SECONDARY. ANAER DIGEST. LAGOON
POLYMER,FECL3
520
1.9
0.5
121
0.62
259
1146
0.69
SECONDARY. ANAER DIGEST. LAGOON
POLYMER,FECL3
521
4.3
4.5
425
3.42
850
3600
0.045
SECONDARY, ANAER DIGEST. LAGOON
• POLYMER, FECL3
522
4.3
4.5
425
3.42
850
3600
0.05
SECONDARY. ANAER DIGEST. LAGOON
POLYMER, FECL3 •
523
4.3
4.5
425
3.42
850
3600
0.054
SECONDARY, ANAER DIGEST. LAGOON
POLYMER,FECL3
524
4.3
4.5
425
3.42
850
3600
0.052
SECONDARY. ANAER DIGEST. LAGOON
POLYMER, FECL3
525
4.3
4.5
425
3.42
850
3600
0.052
SECONDARY. ANAER DIGEST. LAGOON
P0LYMER.FECL3
526
4.3
4.5
425
3.42
850
3600
0.05
SECONDARY. ANAER DIGEST, LAGOON
P0LYMER.FECL3
527
4.3
4.5
425
3.42
850
3600
0.046
SECONOARY, ANAER DIGEST. LAGOON
POLYMER,FECL3
528
2.2
0.5
116
0.87
293
1100
0.66
SECONOARY, ANAER D4GEST. LAGOON
POLYMER,FECL3
529
2.2
0.5
116
0.87
293
1100
0.65
SECONDARY. ANAER DIGEST, LAGOON
~ POLYMER,FECU
530
2.2
0.5
116
0.87
293
1100
0.3
SECONOARY, ANAER DIGEST. LAGOON
POLYMER,FECL3
831
1.9
0.5
121
0.62
259
1146
0.69
SECONDARY. ANAER DIGEST. LAGOON
POLYMER, FECU
532
4.3
4.5
425 .
3.42
850
3600
0.045
SECONOARY. ANAER DIGEST. LAGOON
POLYMER.FECL3
-------
TABLE F-3 (cont.)
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
LITERATURE
PLANT
SLUDGE
VOL SOLIDS
Al
Ca
Cd
Cr
Cu
CITATION
NAME
CULTIVAR
PH
%
%
%
ma/ka
ma/ka
ma/ka
495
PIETZET AL. 1983
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
1.4
3.3
307
. 3505
1471
496
PIETZ ET AL. 1983
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
1.4
3.3
307
3505
1471
497
PIETZ ET AL. 1983
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
1.3
3.3
307
3505
1471
498
PIETZ ET AL. 1983
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
1.6
3.3
307
3505
1471
499
PIETZ ET AL. 1983
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
1.5
3.3
307
3505
1471
500
PIETZ ETAL. 1983
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
1.4
3.3
307
3505
1471
501
PIETZ ETAL. 1983
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
1.4
3.3
307
3505
1471
502
PIETZ ET AL. 1983
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
1.3
3.3
307
3505
1471
503
PIETZ ETAL. 1983
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
1.6
3.3
307
3505
1471
504
PIETZ ETAL. 1983
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
1.5
3.3
307
3505
1471
505
PIETZET AL. 1983
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
1.4
3.3
307
3505
1471
506
PIETZ ETAL. 1983
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
1.4
3.3
307
3505
1471
507
PIETZ ETAL. 1983
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
1.3
3.3
307
3505
1471
508
PIETZ ETAL. 1983
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
1.6
3.3
307
3505
1471
509
PIETZ ET AL. 1983
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
1.5
3.3
307
3505
1471
510
PIETZET AL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
1.4
3.3
265
3505
1471
511
PIETZET AL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
1.4
3.3
265
3505
1471
512
PIETZ ET AL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
1.4
3.3
265
3505
1471
513
PIETZ ETAL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
1.4
3.3
265
3505
1471
514
PIETZ ETAL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
1.4
3.3
265
3505
1471
515
PIETZ ETAL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
1.4
3.3
160
3505
1471
516
PIETZ ETAL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
1.4
3.3
160
3505
1471
517
PIETZ ETAL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
20
3.1
0.71
71
775
460
518
PIETZ ETAL 1991
: CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
20
: 3.1
0.71
71
775
460
519
PIETZ ETAL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3377
7.6
30
3.1
0.71
71
775
460
520
PIETZ ETAL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3377
7.6
20
0.67
3.9
53
679
454
521
PIETZ ET AL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
1.4
3.3
265
3505
1471
522
PIETZ ETAL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
1.4
3.3
265
3505
1471
523
PIETZET AL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
1.4
3.3
265
3505
1471
524
PIETZET AL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
1.4
3.3
265
3505
1471
525
PIETZ ET AL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER'3517
7.6
46
1.4
3.3
265
3505
1471
526
PIETZ ETAL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
1.4
3.3
160
3505
1471
527
PIETZ ET AL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
1.4
3.3
160
3505
1471
528
PIETZET AL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
20
3.1
0.71
71
775
460
529
PIETZ ETAL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
20
3.1
0.71
71
775
460
530
PIETZ ETAL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3377
7.6
30
3.1
0.71
71
775
460
531
PIETZET AL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3377
7.6
20
0.67
3.9
53
679
454
532
PIETZET AL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
1.4
3.3
265
3505
1471
-------
TABLE F-3 (cont.)
LOCATION
COMMENTS
OF
STUDY
457
WOODTHORNE, U.K.
458
WOODTHORNE. U.K.
459
WOODTHORNE, U.K.
460
SLUDGE UNUSUALLY HIGH IN Nl (5100) AND ZN (11400)
WOODTHORNE. U.K.
461
SLUDGE UNUSUALLY HIGH IN Nl (5100) AND ZN (11400)
WOODTHORNE. U.K.
462
WOODTHORNE, U.K.
463
WOODTHORNE, U.K.
464
SLUDGE UNUSUALLY HIGH IN Nl (5100) AND ZN (11400)
WOODTHORNE. U.K.
465
SLUDGE UNUSUALLY HIGH IN Nl (5100) AND ZN (11400)
WOODTHORNE. U.K.
466
•
MINNESOTA
467
MINNESOTA
468
MINNESOTA
469
MINNESOTA
470
MINNESOTA
471
MINNESOTA
472
MINNESOTA
473
MINNESOTA
474
i
MINNESOTA
475
MINNESOTA
476
LEEDS. U.K.
477
LEEDS. U.K.
478
HIGH Nl SLUDGE (5100 MG/KG)BLENDED WITH LOWER Nl SLUDGE WAS USED
LEEDS, U.K.
479
HIGH Nl SLUDGE (5100 MG/KG)BLENDED WITH LOWER Nl SLUDGE WAS USED
LEEDS. U.K.
480
LEEDS. U.K.
481
LEEDS, U.K.
482
LEEDS. U.K.
483
LEEDS. U.K.
484
•
LEEDS, U.K.
48S
HIGH Nl SLUDGE (5100 MG/KG)BLENDED WITH LOWER Nl SLUDGE WAS U'
LEEDS. U.K.
486
LEEDS. U.K.
487
•
LEEDS. U.K.
488
.
489
490
FULTON COUNTY. ILLINOIS
491
FULTON COUNTY, ILLINOIS
492
•
FULTON COUNTY. ILLINOIS
493
FULTON COUNTY. HUN CMS
494
FULTON COUNTY. ILLINOIS
C.1Q*)
-------
TABLE F-3 (cont.)
YIELD
YIELD
YIELD
YIELD
REDUCTION
COMPONENT
REDUCTION
COMPONENT
METAL
%
MEASURED
%
MEASURED
PHYTOTOXICITY
457
0
BULB
NO
458
0
1 EAF
NO
459
0
..EAF
'
NO
460
30
LEAF
POSSIBLE
461
96.3
LEAF
POSSIBLE
462
0
LEAF
NO
463
0
LEAF
NO
464
23.7
LEAF
POSSIBLE
465
28.4
LEAF
POSSIBLE
466
0
GRAIN
467
0
GRAIN
468
0
GRAIN
469
0
GRAIN
470
0
GRAIN
471
0
GRAIN
472
0
GRAIN
473
0
GRAIN
474
0
GRAIN
475
0
GRAIN
476
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
NO
477
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
NO
478
48
TOTAL BIOMASS
POSSIBLE
479
100
TOTAL BIOMASS
POSSIBLE
480 :
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
NO
481
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
NO
482
0
STALKS
NO
483
0
STALKS
NO
484
0
STALKS
NO
485
70
STALKS
POSSIBLE
486
0
STALKS
NO
487
0
STALKS
NO
488
489
490
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
491
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
492
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
493
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
494
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
-------
TABLE F-3 (cont.)
SOIL
SOIL
CUMM Ni
SOIL Ni
PLANT Ni
PLANT
DESIGN
CEC
OC
SOIL
LOADING
SOIL
CONCENTRTN
CONCENTRTN
TISSUE
SUMMARY
cmol/kg
%
pH
RATE (ka/ha)
EXTRACTANT
mn/kn
ma/kd
SAMPLED
457
1.2
7.2
1140
.5 M HOAC
68
NL
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
458
1.2
6.5
0
.5 M HOAC
4
NL
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
459
1.2
6.5
285
.5 M HOAC
36
NL
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
460
1.2
6.5
570
.5 M HOAC
55
NL
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
461
1.2
6.5
.1140
.5 M HOAC
101
NL
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
462
1.2
7
0
.5 M HOAC
4
NL
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
463
1.2
7
285
.5 M HOAC
36
NL
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
464
1.2
7
570
.5 M HOAC
55
NL
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
465
1.2
7
1140
.5 M HOAC
101
NL
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
466
6.5
0
N.L.
NR
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
467
6.5
11
N.L.
NR
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
468
6.5
22
N.L.
NR
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
469
6.5
44
N.L.
NR
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
470
6.5
88
N.L.
NR
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
471
6.5
0
N.L.
10
LEAF
SLUDGE, HELD, MATURITY
472
6.5
11
N.L.
NR
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
473
6.5
22
N.L.
13
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
474
6.5
44
N.L.
NR
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
475
6.5
88
N.L.
NR
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
476
6.1
0
.5 M HOAC
2.1
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
477
NR
26
.5 M HOAC
7
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
478
NR
251
.5 M HOAC
57
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
479
NR
502
.5 M HOAC
91
SLUDGE. HELD, MATURITY
480
NR
20
.5 M HOAC
6.2
SLUDGE, HELD, MATURITY
481
NR
31.4
.5 M HOAC
21
SLUDGE. HELD, MATURITY
482
6.1
0
.5 M HOAC
2.1
SLUDGE. HELD. MATURITY
483
NR
26
.5 M HOAC
7
SLUDGE, HELD. MATURITY
484
NR
251
.5 M HOAC
57
SLUDGE. HELD. MATURITY
485
NR
502
.5 M HOAC
91
SLUDGE. HELD, MATURITY
486
NR
20
.5 M HOAC
6.2
SLUDGE. HELD. MATURITY
487
NR
31.4
.5 M HOAC
21
SLUDGE, HELD. MATURITY
488
489
.
430
12.6
0.25
7.8
0
0.1 MHO
4.4
2.6
LEAF
FIELD,' SLUDGE, MATURITY
491
12.6
0.25
7.8
0
0.1 M Ha
5.4
0.4
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
492
12.6
0.33
7.8
0
0.1 M Ha
4.4
0.6
LEAF
HELD. SLUDGE, MATURITY
493 .
12.6
0.33
7.8
0
0.1 M Ha
5.7
0.6
LEAF
HELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
494
12.6
0.33
7 A
0
0.1 M Ha
2.5
0.5
LEAF
HELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
F-190
-------
TABLE F-3 (cont.)
ANNLSLUDGE
CUMML SLUDGE
YEARS
SOIL
SOIL
CONTENT
CONTENT
CONTENT
LOADNG RATE
LOADNG RATE
SINCE LAST
TAXONOMIC
SERIES
SOIL
%
%
%
Mg/ha
Ma/ha
APPLICATN
NAME
NAME
TEXTURE
457
224
224
11
LS
458
0
0
12
LS
459
56
56
12
LS
460
112
112
12
LS
461
224
224
12
LS
462
0
0
12
LS
463
56
56
12
LS
464
112
112
12
LS
465
224
224
12
LS
.
466
0
0
0
TYPIC TAPLUDOLL
WAUKEGAN
SiL
467
25
25
0
TYPIC TAPLUDOLL
WAUKEGAN
SiL
468
50
50
0
TYPIC TAPLUDOLL
WAUKEGAN
SiL
469
100
100
0
TYPIC TAPLUDOLL
WAUKEGAN
SiL
470
200
200
0
TYPIC TAPLUDOLL
WAUKEGAN
SiL
471
0
0
1
TYPIC TAPLUDOLL
WAUKEGAN
SiL
472
25
25
TYPIC TAPLUDOLL
WAUKEGAN
SiL
473
50
50
1
TYPIC TAPLUDOLL
WAUKEGAN
SiL
474
100
100
1
TYPIC TAPLUDOLL
WAUKEGAN
SiL
475
200
200
1
TYPIC TAPLUDOLL
WAUKEGAN
SiL
476
0
0
0
477
125.5
125.5
2
478
125.5
125.5
2
479
125.5
125.5
2
480
31.4
94.2:
0
481
31.4
94.2
0
482
0
0
0
483
125.S
125.5
2
484
125.5
125.5
2
485
125.5
125.5
2
486
31.4
94.2
0
487
31.4
94.2
0
•
488
489
490
0
0
STRIP MINE SPOIL
491
0
0
STRIP MINE SPOIL
c
492
0
0
STRIP MINE SPOIL
493
0
0
STRIP MINE SPOIL
494
0
0
STRIP MINE SPOIL
c 1 on
-------
TABLE F-3 (cont.)
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
Fa
N
Ni
P
Pb
Zn
SOLIDS
BIOLOGICAL
CHEMICAL
%
%
mg/kg
ma/kg
mg/ka
mg/kg
CONTNT
PROCESSING
STABILIZATN
457
5100
11400
AIR DRIED
458
5100
11400
AIR DRIED
459
5100
11400
AIR DRIED
460
5100
11400
AIR DRIED
461
5100
11400
AIR DRIED
462
5100
11400
AIR DRIED
463
5100
11400
AIR DRIED
464
5100
11400
AIR DRIED
465
5100
11400
AIR DRIED
466
1.6
2.73
4.4
4.37
2560
2130
AIR DRY
ANAEROBIC DIGESTED
467
1.6
2.73
4.4
4.37
2560
2130
AIR DRY
ANAEROBIC DIGESTED
468
1.6
2.73
4.4
4.37
2560
2130
AIR DRY
ANAEROBIC DIGESTED
469
1.6
2.73
4.4
4.37
2560
2130
AIR DRY
ANAEROBIC DIGESTED
470
1.6
2.73
4.4
4.37.
2560
2130
AIR DRY
ANAEROBIC DIGESTED
471
1.6
2.73
4.4
4.37
2560
2130
AIR DRY
ANAEROBIC DIGESTED
472
1.6
2.73
4.4
4.37
2560
2130
AIR DRY
ANAEROBIC DIGESTED
473
1.6
2.73
4.4
4.37
2560
2130
AIR DRY
ANAEROBIC DIGESTED
474
1.6
2.73
4.4
4.37
2560
2130
AIR DRY
ANAEROBIC DIGESTED
475
1.0
2.73
4.4
4.37
2560
2130
AIR DRY
ANAEROBIC DIGESTED
476
477
210
3000
478
3900
5100
479
3900
5100
480
210
3000
j
481
3900
5100
482
483
210
3000
484
3900
5100
485
3900
5100
486
210
3000
487
3900
5100
488
489
490
5.1
5.1
369
3.42
1258
4872
0.04
SECONDARY. ANAER DIGEST. LAGOON
P0LYMER.FECL3
491
5.1
5.1
369
3.42
1258
4872
0.04
SECONDARY, ANAER DIGEST. LAGOON
POLYMER,FECL3
492
5.1
5.1
369
3.42
1258
4872
0.04
SECONDARY, ANAER DKJEST. LAGOON
POLYMER.FECL3
493
5.1
5.1
369
3.42
1258
4872
0.04
SECONDARY, ANAER DKJEST. LAGOON
POLYMER,FECL3
494
5.1
5.1
369
3.42
1258
4872
0.04
SECONDARY, ANAER DIGEST. LAGOON
POLYMER.FECL3
C. Iftft
-------
TABLE F-3 (cont.)
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
LITERATURE
PLANT
SLUDGE
VOL SOLIDS
Al
Ca
Cd
Cr
Cu
CITATION
NAME
CULTIVAR
PH
%
%
%
mg/kg
ma/kg
mg/ka
457
WILLIAMS 1977
SWEDE
100
458
WILLIAMS 1977
LETTUCE
100
459
WILLIAMS 1977
LETTUCE
100
460
WILLIAMS 1977
LETTUCE
100
461
WILLIAMS 1977
LETTUCE
100
462
WILLIAMS 1977
LETTUCE
100
463
WILLIAMS 1977
LETTUCE
100
464
WILLIAMS 1977
LETTUCE
100
465
WILLIAMS 1977
LETTUCE
100
466
HAM &D0WDY 1978
SOYBEAN
MERRILL
1.41
4.98
12
1100
2020
467
HAM &DOWOY 1978
SOYBEAN
MERRILL
1.41
4.98
12
1100
2020
468
HAM &DOWDY 1978
SOYBEAN
MERRILL
1.41
4.98
12
1100
2020
469
HAM &D0WDY 1978
SOYBEAN
MERRILL
1.41
4.98
12 .
1100
2020
. 470
HAM &OOWDY 1978
SOYBEAN
MERRILL
1.41
4.98
12
1100
2020
471
HAM &DOWDY 1978
SOYBEAN
MERRILL
1.41
4.98
12
1100
2020
472
HAM &00WDY 1978
SOYBEAN
MERRILL
1.41
4.98
12
1100
2020
473
HAM &DOWDY 1978
SOYBEAN
MERRILL
1.41
4.98
12
1100
2020
474
HAM &DOWDY 1978
SOYBEAN
MERRILL
I
1.41
4.98
12
1100
2020
475
HAM &00WDY 1978
SOYBEAN
MERRILL
1.41
4.98
12
1100
2020
476
WEBBER 1972
RED BEET
477
WEBBER 1972
RED BEET
-
240
1100
478
WEBBER 1972
RED BEET
200
670
479
WEBBER 1972
RED BEET
200
670
480
WEBBER 1972
RED BEET
240
1100
481
WEBBER 1972
RED BEET
200
670
482
WEBBER 1972
CELERY
483
WEBBER 1972
CELERY
240
1100
484
WEBBER 1972
CELERY
200
670
485
WEBBER 1972
CELERY
200
670
486
WEBBER 1972
CELERY
240
1100
487
WEBBER 1972
CELERY
•
200
670
488
WEBBER 1972
CELERY
489
WEBBER 1972
CELERY
490
PIETZ ET AL. 1983
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
1.4
3.3
307
3505
1471
491
PIETZETAL. 1983
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
1.4
3.3
307
3505
1471
492
PIETZ ETAL. 1983
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
1.3
3.3
307
3505
1471
493
PIETZETAL. 1983
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
1.6
3.3
307
3505
1471
494
PIETZETAL. 1983
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
1.5
3.3
307
3505
1471
F-187
-------
TABLE F-3 (cont.)
LOCATION
COMMENTS
OF
STUDY
419
SLUDGE UNUSUALLY HIGH IN Nl (5100) AND ZN (11400)
WOODTHORNE. U.K.
420
SLUDGE UNUSUALLY HI<"H IN N' '5100) AND ZN (11400)
WOODTHORNE. U.K.
421
" ¦ : SLUDGE UNUSUALLY H>.H IN Ni ,-100) AND ZN (11400)
WOODTHORNE. U.K.
422
.1 •
WOODTHORNE, U.K.
423
SLUDGE UNUSUALLY HIGH IN Nl (5100) AND ZN (11400)
WOODTHORNE, U.K.
424
SLUDGE UNUSUALLY HIGH IN Nl (5100) AND ZN (11400)
WOODTHORNE. U.K.
425
SLUDGE UNUSUALLY HIGH IN Nl (5100) AND ZN (11400)
WOODTHORNE, U.K.
426
WOODTHORNE, U.K.
427
SLUDGE UNUSUALLY HIGH IN Nl (5100) AND ZN (11400)
WOODTHORNE. U.K.
428
SLUDGE UNUSUALLY HIGH IN Nl (5100) AND ZN (11400)
WOODTHORNE. U.K.
429
SLUDGE UNUSUALLY HIGH IN Nl (5100) AND ZN (11400)
WOODTHORNE, U.K.
430
WOODTHORNE, U.K.
431
WOODTHORNE. U.K.
432
WOODTHORNE. U.K.
433
SLUDGE UNUSUALLY HIGH IN Nl (5100) AND ZN (11400)
WOODTHORNE. U.K.
434
WOODTHORNE. U.K.
435
WOODTHORNE. U.K.
436
SLUDGE UNUSUALLY HIGH IN Nl (5100) AND ZN <11400)
WOODTHORNE, U.K.
437
SLUDGE UNUSUALLY HIGH IN Nl (5100) AND ZN (11400)
WOODTHORNE, U.K.
438
WOODTHORNE. U.K.
439
WOODTHORNE. U.K.
440
WOODTHORNE. U.K.
441
SLUDGE UNUSUALLY HIGH IN Nl (5100) AND ZN (11400)
WOODTHORNE. U.K.
442 :
WOODTHORNE. U.K. :
443
WOODTHORNE. U.K.
444
WOODTHORNE. U.K.
445
SLUDGE UNUSUALLY HIGH IN Nl (5100) AND ZN (11400)
WOODTHORNE. U.K.
446
WOODTHORNE. U.K.
447
WOODTHORNE. U.K.
448
WOODTHORNE. U.K.
449
SLUDGE UNUSUALLY HIGH IN Nl (5100) AND ZN (11400)
WOODTHORNE. U.K.
450
WOODTHORNE. U.K.
451
WOODTHORNE. U.K.
452
SLUDGE UNUSUALLY HIGH IN Nl (5100) AND ZN (11400)
WOODTHORNE. U.K.
453
SLUDGE UNUSUALLY HIGH IN Nl (5100) AND ZN (11400)
WOODTHORNE. U.K.
454
WOODTHORNE. U.K.
455
WOODTHORNE. U.K.
456
WOODTHORNE. U.K.
F-186
-------
TABLE F-3 (cont.)
YIELD
YIELD
YIELD
YIELD
REDUCTION
COMPONENT
REDUCTION
COMPONENT
METAL
%
MEASURED
%
MEASURED
PHYTOTOXICITY
419
94.5
ROOT
POSSIBLE
420
99.3
ROOT
POSSIBLE
421
100
ROOT
POSSIBLE
422
0
ROOT
NO
423
36
ROOT
POSSIBLE
424
69.4
ROOT
POSSIBLE
425
93.2
ROOT
POSSIBLE
426
0
ROOT TUBER
NO
427
86.1
ROOT TUBER
POSSIBLE
428
92.9
ROOT TUBER
POSSIBLE
429
96.7
ROOT TUBER
POSSIBLE
430
0
ROOT TUBER
NO
431
0
ROOT TUBER
NO
432
0
ROOT TUBER
NO
433
52.8
ROOT TUBER
POSSIBLE
434
0
BULB
NO
435
0
BULB
NO
436
77.6
BULB
POSSIBLE
437
93.9
BULB
POSSIBLE
438
0
BULB
NO
439
0
BULB
NO
440
0
BULB
NO
441
38.1
BULB
POSSIBLE
442
0
BULB
NO
443
0
BULB
NO
444
0
BULB
NO
445
99
BULB
POSSIBLE
446
0
BULB
NO
447
0
BULB
NO
448
0
BULB
NO
449
36.4
BULB
POSSIBLE
450
0
BULB
NO
451
0
BULB
,
NO
452
70.3
BULB
POSSIBLE
. 453
100
BULB
POSSIBLE
454
0
BULB
NO
455
0
BULB
NO
456
0
BULB
NO
F-185
-------
TABLE F-3 (cont.)
SOU.
SOIL
CUMM Ni
SOU. Ni
PLANT NI
PLANT
DESIGN
CEC
OC
SOIL
LOADING
SOIL
CONCENTRTN
CONCENTRTN
TISSUE
SUMMARY
cmol/ko
%
PH
RATE tko/ha)
EXTRACTANT
mfl/ko
mg/ko
SAMPLED
419
1.2
5.8
285
.5 M HO AC
29
N.L.
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
420
1.2
5.8
570
.5 M HOAC
50
N.L.
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
421
1.2
5.8
1140
.5 M HOAC
85
N.L.
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
422
1.2
6.6
0
.5 M HOAC
2
N.L.
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
423
1.2
6.6
285
.5 M HOAC
29
N.L.
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
424
1.2
6.6
570
.5 M HOAC
50
N.L.
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
425
1.2
6.6
1140
.5 M HOAC
85
N.L.
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
428
1.2
6.2
0
.5 M HOAC
NL
2.5
ROOT TUBER
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
427
1.2
6.2
285
.5 M HOAC
NL
2.5
ROOT TUBER
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
428
1.2
6.2
570
.5 M HOAC
NL
3.8
ROOT TUBER
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
429
1.2
6.2
1140
.5 M HOAC
NL
6.3
ROOT TUBER
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
430
1.2
7
0
.5 M HOAC
NL
1.3
ROOT TUBER
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
431
1.2
7
285
.5 M HOAC
NL
2.5
ROOT TUBER
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
432
1.2
7
570
.5 M HOAC
NL
6.3
ROOT TUBER
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
433
1.2
7
1140
.5 M HOAC
NL
5
ROOT TUBER
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
434
1.2
6.2
0
NL
NL
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
435
1.2
6.2
285
NL
NL
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
436
1.2
6.2
570
NL
NL
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
437
1.2
6.2
1140
NL
NL
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
438
1.2
7
0
NL
NL
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
439
1.2
7
285
NL
NL
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
440
1.2
7
570
NL
NL
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
441
1.2
7
1140
NL
NL
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
442
1.2
6.3
0
NL
6.3
BULB
: SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
443
1.2
6.3
285
NL
16.3
BULB
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
444
1.2
6.3
570
NL
23.8
BULB
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
445
1.2
6.3
1140
NL
NL
BULB
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
446
1.2
6.8
0
NL
2.5
BULB
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
447
1.2
6.8
285
NL
6.3
BULB
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
448
1.2
6.8
570
NL
7.5
BULB
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
449
1.2
6.8
1140
NL
18.8
BULB
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
450
1.2
6.7
0
.5 M HOAC
4
NL
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
451
1.2
6.7
285
.5 M HOAC
23
NL
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
452
1.2
6.7
570
.5 M HOAC
42
NL
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
453
1.2
6.7
1140
.5 M HOAC
68
NL
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
454
1.2
7.2
0
.5 M HOAC
4
NL
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
455
1.2
7.2
285
.5 M HOAC
23
NL
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
456
1.2
7.2
570
.5 M HOAC
42
NL
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
F-184
-------
419
420
421
422
423
424
425
426
427
428
429
430
431
432
433
434
435
436
437
438
439
440
441
442
443
444
445
446
447
448
449
450
451
452
453
454
455
456
TABLE F-3 (cont.)
ANNLSLUDGE
CUMML SLUDGE
YEARS
SOIL
SOIL
CONTENT
CONTENT
CONTENT
LOADNG RATE
LOADNG RATE
SINCE LAST
TAXONOMIC
SERIES
SOIL
%
%
_Mg/ha_
56
112
224
56
112
224
0
56
112
224
56
112
224
56
112
224
0
56
112
224
0
56
112
224
0
56
112
224
0
56
112
224
56
112
Mfl/ha
56
112
224
56
112
224
0
56
112
224
56
112
224
56
112
224
0
56
112
224
0
56
112
224
0
56
112
224
56
112
224
0
56
112
APPLICATN
NAME
NAME
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
TEXTURE
LS
LS
LS
LS
LS
LS
LS
LS
LS
LS
LS
LS
LS
LS
LS
LS
LS
LS
LS
LS
LS
LS
LS
LS
LS
LS
LS
LS
LS
LS
LS
LS
LS
LS
LS
LS
LS
LS
F-183
-------
TABLE F-3 (oont.)
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
F«
N
Ni
P
Pb
Zn
SOLIDS
BIOLOGICAL
CHEMICAL
%
%
mo/kfl
mg/ka
ma/ko
mo/ko
CONTNT
PROCESSING
STAB) LIZ ATN
419
5100
11400
AIR DRIED
420
5100
11400
AIR DRIED
421
5100
11400
AIR DRIED
422
5100
11400
AIR DRIED
423
5100
11400
AIR DRIED
424
5100
11400
AIR DRIED
425
5100
11400
AIR DRIED
426
5100
11400
AIR DRIED
427
5100
11400
AIR DRIED
428
5100
11400
AIR DRIED
429
5100
11400
AIR DRIED
430
5100
11400
AIR DRIED
431
5100
11400
AIR DRIED
432
5100
11400
AIR DRIED
433
5100
11400
AIR DRIED
434
5100
11400
AIR DRIED
435
5100
11400
AIR DRIED
436
5100
11400
AIR DRIED
437
5100
11400
AIR DRIED
438
5100
11400
AIR DRIED
439
5100
11400
AIR DRIED
440
5100
11400
AIR DRIED
441
5100
11400
AIR DRIED
442
5100
11400
AIR DRIED
443
5100
11400
AIR DRIED
444
5100
11400
AIR DRIED
445
5100
11400
AIR DRIED
446
5100
11400
AIR DRIED
447
5100
11400
AIR DRIED
448
5100
11400
AIR DRIED
449
5100
11400
AIR DRIED
450
5100
11400
AIR DRIED
451
5100
11400
AIR DRIED
452
5100
11400
AIR DRIED
453
5100
11400
AIR DRIED
454
5100
11400
AIR DRIED
455
5100
11400
AIR DRIED
456
5100
11400
AIR DRIED
MM
-------
TABLE F-3 (cont.)
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
LITERATURE
PLANT
SLUDGE
VOL SOLIDS
Al
Ca
Cd
Cr
Cu
CITATION
NAME
CULTIVAR
PH
%
%
%
ma/kg
ma/kg
ma/kfl
419
WILLIAMS 1977
CARROT
100
420
WILLIAMS 1977
CARROT
100
421
WILUAMS 1977
CARROT
100
422
WILLIAMS 1977
CARROT
100
423
WILLIAMS 1977
CARROT
100
424
WILLIAMS 1977
CARROT
100
425
WILUAMS 1977
CARROT
100
426
WILLIAMS 1977
BEET
100
4i7
WILLIAMS 1977
BEET
100
428
WILLIAMS 1977
BEET
100
429
WILLIAMS 1977
BEET
100
430
WILLIAMS 1977
BEET
100
431
WILLIAMS 1977
BEET
100
432
WILLIAMS 1977
BEET
100
433
WILLIAMS 1977
BEET
100
434
WILLIAMS 1977
ONION
100
435
WILLIAMS 1977
ONION
100
436
WILLIAMS 1977
ONION
i
100
437
WILLIAMS 1977
ONION
100
438
WILLIAMS 1977
ONION
•100
439
WILUAMS 1977
ONION
100
440
WILLIAMS 1977
ONION
100
441
WILLIAMS 1977
ONION
100
442
WILLIAMS 1977 :
ONION
100
443
WILUAMS 1977
ONION
100
444
WILLIAMS 1977
ONION
100
445
WILLIAMS 1977
ONION
100
446
WILLIAMS 1977
ONION
100
447
WILLIAMS 1977
ONION
100
448
WILUAMS 1977
ONION
100
449
WILLIAMS 1977
ONION
•
100
450
WILUAMS 1977
SWEDE
100
451
WILLIAMS 1977
SWEDE
100
452
WILLIAMS 1977
SWEDE
100
453
WILLIAMS 1977
SWEDE
100
454
WILLIAM9 1977
SWEDE
100
455
WILLIAMS 1977
SWEDE
100
456
WILLIAMS 1977
SWEDE
100
F-181
-------
TABLE F-3 (oonU
LOCATION
COMMENTS
OF
STUDY
381
YIELD NOT DETERMINED
KINGSTON, RHODE ISLAND
382
YIELD N'VT DETCRMINED
KINGSTON. RHODE ISLAND
383
YIELD 1 >T DETc .MINED
KINGSTON. RHODE ISLAND
384
YIELD NOT DETERMINED
KINGSTON. RHODE ISLAND
385
YIELD NOT DETERMINED
KINGSTON, RHODE ISLAND
386
YIELD NOT DETERMINED
KINGSTON. RHODE ISLAND
387
YIELD NOT DETERMINED
KINGSTON, RHODE ISLAND
388
YIELD NOT DETERMINED
KINGSTON. RHODE ISLAND
389
YIELD NOT DETERMINED
KINGSTON. RHODE ISLAND
390
YIELD NOT DETERMINED
KINGSTON. RHODE ISLAND
391
YIELD NOT DETERMINED
KINGSTON, RHODE ISLAND
392
YIELD NOT DETERMINED
KINGSTON. RHODE ISLAND
393
YIELD NOT DETERMINED
KINGSTON, RHODE ISLAND
394
YIELD NOT DETERMINED
KINGSTON. RHODE ISLAND
395
YIELD NOT DETERMINED
KINGSTON. RHODE ISLAND
398
YIELD NOT DETERMINED
KINGSTON. RHODE ISLAND
397
Virginia
398
Virginia
399
Virginia
400
Virginia
401
Virginia
402
Virginia
403
Virginia
404
Virginia
405
Virginia
406
Virginia
407
Virginia
408
Virginia
409
Virginia
410
Virginia
411
•
Virginia
412
Virginia
413
Virginia
414
Virginia
415
Atlantic Coastal Plain
416
Atlantic Coaatal Plain
417
Atlantic Coaatal Plain
418
WOODTHORNE, U.K.
F-180
-------
TABLE F-3 (cont.)
YIELD
YIELD
YIELD
YIELD
REDUCTION
COMPONENT
REDUCTION
COMPONENT
METAL
%
MEASURED
%
MEASURED
PHYTOTOXICITY
381
382
383
384
385
386
387
388
389
390
391
392
393
394
395
396
397
398
399
400
401
402
403
-
404
405
406
407
408
409
410
411
412
413
,
414
415
0
Stovar
416
39
Stover
417
29
Stovsr
418
0
ROOT
NO
F-179
-------
TABLE F-3 (com J
SOIL
SOIL
CUMM N1
SOU. NI
PLANT N!
PLANT
DESIGN
CEC
OC
SOIL
LOADING
SOIL
CONCENTRTN
CONCENTRTN
TISSUE
SUMMARY
cmot/ka
%
pH
RATE (ka/ha)
EXTRACTANT
ma/kg
mo/ka
SAMPLED
381
2.8
5.6
33
DTPA
1.8
6.2
Leaf
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
382
2.8
5.6
0
DTPA
0.9
5.6
Leaf
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
383
2.8
5.6
11
DTPA
2.1
7.6
Leaf
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
384
2.8
5.6
33
DTPA
3.2
9.6
Leaf
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
385
2.8
5.6
0
DTPA
0.6
4
Leaf
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
386
2.8
5.6
11
DTPA
1
9
Leaf
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
387
2.8
5.6
33
DTPA
1.8
14
Leaf
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
388
2.8
5.6
0
DTPA
0.9
20
Leaf
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
389
2.8
5.6
11
DTPA
2.1
21
Leaf
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
390
2.8
5.6
33
DTPA
3.2
22
Leaf
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
391
2.8
5.6
0
DTPA
0.6
5
Leaf
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
392
2.8
5.6
11
DTPA
1
5
Leaf
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
393
2.8
5.6
33
DTPA
1.8
7
Leaf
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
394
2.8
5.6
0
DTPA
0.9
8
Leaf
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
395
2.8
5.6
11
DTPA
2.1
8
Leaf
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
396
2.8
5.6
33
DTPA
3.2
11
Leaf
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
397
5.4
16
6.1
0
0.54
Earieaf
398
5.4
16
6.2
8.6
1.02
Earleaf
399
5.4
16
6.1
17.2
0.88
Earieaf
400
5.4
16
5.8
25.8
0.94
Earieaf
401
5.4
16
6
34.4
0.8
Earieaf
402
5.4
16
6
43
0.84
Earieaf
403
12.5
18
5.7
0
0.38
Earieaf
404
12.5
18:
6
8.6
0.41
Earieaf
405
12.5
18
5.8
17.2
0.36
Earieaf
406
12.5
18
5.9
25.8
0.31
Earieaf
407
12.5
18
5.9
34.4
0.2
Earieaf
408
12.5
18
5.9
43
0.23
Earieaf
409
9.3
25
5.7
0
0.28
Earieaf
410
9.3
25
6
8.6
0.39
Earieaf
411
9.3
25
5.9
17.2
*
0.42
Earieaf
412
9.3
25
5.9
25.8
0.35
Earieaf
413
9.3
25
5.9
34.4
0.36
Earieaf
414
9.3
25
5.9
43
0.46
Earieaf
415
6.9
23
6.6
0
0.54
Earieaf
416
6.9
23
6.6
8.6
0.66
Earieaf
417
6.9
23
6.6
17.2
0.66
Earieaf
418
1.2
5.8
0
.5 M HOAC
2
N.L.
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
F-178
-------
TABLE F-3 (cont.)
ANNL SLUDGE
CUMML SLUDGE
YEARS
SOIL
SOIL
CONTENT
CONTENT
CONTENT
LOADNG RATE
LOADNG RATE
SINCE LAST
TAXONOMIC
SERIES
SOIL
%
%
%
Mg/ha
Mg/ha
APPLICATN
NAME
NAME
TEXTURE
381
60
60
0
Typic Dystrochrept
Bridgehampton
silt loam
34
58
8
382
0
0
1
Tvpic Dystrochrept
Bridgehampton
silt loam
34
58
8
383
20
20
1
Typic Dystrochrept
Bridgohampton
silt loam
34
58
8
384
60
60
1
Typic Dystrochrept
Bridgehampton
silt loam
34
58
8
385
0
0
0
Typic Dystrochrept
Bridgehampton
silt loam
34
58
8
386
20
20
0
Typic Dystrochrept
Bridgehampton
silt loam
34
58
8
387
60
60
0
Typic Dystrochrept
Bridgehampton
silt loam
34
58
8
388
0
0
1
Typic Dystrochrept
Bridgehampton
silt loam
34
58
8
389
20
20
1
Typic Dystrochrept
Bridgehampton
silt loam
34
58
8 •
390
60
60
1
Typic Dystrochrept
Bridgehampton
silt loam
34
58
8
391
0
0
0
Typic Dystrochrept
Bridgehampton
silt loam
34
58
8
392
20
20
0
Typic Dystrochrept
Bridgehampton
silt loam
34
58
8
393
60
60
0
Typic Dystrochrept
Bridgehampton
silt loam
34
58
8
394
0
0
1
Typic Dystrochrept
Bridgehampton
silt loam
34
58
8
395
20
20
1
Typic Dystrochrept
Bridgehampton
silt loam
34
58
8
396
60
60
1
Typic Dystrochrept
Bridgehampton
silt loam
34
58
8
397
0
0
Typic Hapludult
Bojac
loamy sand
64
27.8
8.2
398
42
42
Typic Hapludult
Bojac
loamy sand
64
27.8
8.2
399
84
84
Typio Hapludult
Bojac
loamy sand
64
27.8
8.2
400
126
126
Typic Hapludult
Bojac
loamy sand
64
27.8
8.2
401
168
168
Typio Hapludult
Bojac
loamy sand
64
27.8
8.2
402
210
210
Typic Hapludult
Bojac
loamy sand
64
27.8
8.2
403
0
0
Rhodic Paleudult
Davidson
clay loam
15.3
47.1
37.6
404
42 :
42
Rhodic Paleudult
Davidson
clay loam
15.3
47.1
37.6 :
405
84
84
Rhodio Paleudult
Davidson
clay loam
15.3
47.1
37.6
406
126
126
Rhodic Paleudult
Davidson
clay loam
15.3
47.1
37.6
407
168
168
Rhodic Paleudult
Davidson
clay loam
15.3
.47.1
37.6
408
210
210
Rhodic Paleudult
Davidson
clay loam
15.3
47.1
37.6
409
0
0
Typic Hapludult
Groseclosa
silt loam
20.7
59.3
20
410
42
42
Typic Hapludult
Groseclosa
silt loam
20.7
59.3
20
411
84
84
Typic Hapludult
Grosaclosa
silt loam
20.7
59.3
20
412
126
126
Typic Hapludult
Grosaclosa
silt loam
20.7
59.3
20
413
168
168
Typic Hapludult
Groseclosa
silt loam
20.7
59.3
20
414
210
210
Typic Hapludult
Groseclosa
silt loam
20.7
59.3
20
415
0
0
Typic Ochraqualfs
Acredala
silt loam
37.8
•52.3
9.9
416
42
42
Typic Ochraqualfs
Acredala
silt loam
37.8
52.3
9.9
417
84
84
Typic Ochraqualfs
Acredale
silt loam
37.8
52.3
9.9
418
0
0
8
LS
F-177
-------
TABLE F-3 (com.)
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
Fa
N
Ni
P
Pb
Zn
SOUDS
BIOLOGICAL
CHEMICAL
%
%
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/ko
mg/ko
CONTNT
PROCESSING
STAB1UZATN
381
3
560
1630
ANAER0B1CALLY DIGESTED
382
3
560
1630
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
383
3
560
1630
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
384
3
560
1630
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
385
3
560
1630
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
386
3
560
1630
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
387
3
560
1630
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
388
3
560
1630
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
389
3
560
1630
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
390
3
560
1630
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
391
3
560
1630
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
392
3
560
1630
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
393
3
560
1630
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
394
3
560
1630
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
395
3
560
1630
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
396
3
560
1630
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
397
0
0
All sludge data in kg/ha
398
8.6
125
at matals applied to toils
399
17.2
248
from aludge application.
400
25.8
372
401
34.4
496
402
43
620
403
0
0
404
8.6
125
405
17.2
248
406
25.8
372
407
34.4
496
408
43
620
409
0
0
410
8.6
125
411
17.2
248
412
25.8
372
413
34.4
496
414
43
620
415
No tludga data givan
416
417
418
5100
11400
AIR DRIED
F-178
-------
TABLE F-3 (cont.)
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
LITERATURE
PLANT
SLUDGE
VOL SOLIDS
Al
Ca
Cd
Cr
Cu
CITATION
NAME
CULTIVAR
PH
%
%
%
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
381
Schauar, et al. 1980
Carrots
Danvers
4.7
67.5
21
2520
382
Schauer, at al. 1980
Carrots
Danvers
4.7
67.5
21
2520
383
Schauar, at al. 1980
Carrots
Danvers
4.7
67.5
21
2520
384
Schauar, et al. 1980
Carrots
Danvers
4.7
67.5
21
2520
385
Schauer, etal. 1980
Radishes
Cherrybelle
4.7
67.5
21
2520
386
Schauar, etal. 1980
Radishes
Cherrybelle
4.7
67.5
21
2520
387
Schauer, etal. 1980
Radishes
Cherrybelle
4.7
67.5
21
2520
388
Schauer, et al. 1980
Radishes
Cherrybelle
4.7
67.5
21
2520
389
Schauar, etal. 1980
Radishes
Cherrybelle
4.7
67.5
21
2520
390
Schauar, et al. 1980
Radishes
Cherrybelle
4.7
67.5
21
2520
391
Schauer, et al. 1980
Lettuce
Salad Bowl
4.7
67.5
21
2520
392
Schauar, etal. 1980
Lettuce
Salad Bowl
4.7
67.5
21
2520
393
Schauar, etal. 1980
Lettuce
Salad Bowl
4.7
67.5
21.
2520
394
Schauer, et al. 1980
Lettuce
Salad Bowl
4.7
67.5
21
2520
395
Schauer, et al. 1980
Lettuce
Salad Bowl
4.7
67.5
21
2520
396
Schauer, etal. 1980
Lettuce
Salad Bowl
4.7
67.5
21
2520
397
RAPPAPORT ET AL 1988
Corn
0
0
398
RAPPAPORT ET AL 1988
Corn
I
0.9
153
399
RAPPAPORT ET AL 1988
Corn
1.8
304
400
RAPPAPORT ET AL 1988
Corn
2.7
. 456
401
RAPPAPORT ET AL 1988
Corn
3.6
608
402
RAPPAPORT ET AL 1988
Corn
4.5
760
403
RAPPAPORT ET AL 1988
Corn
0
0
404
RAPPAPORT ET AL 1988
Corn:
0.9
153
405
RAPPAPORT ET AL 1988
Corn
1.8
304
406
RAPPAPORT ET AL 1988
Corn
2.7
456
407
RAPPAPORT ET AL 1988
Corn
3.6
608
408
RAPPAPORT ET AL 1988
Corn
4.5
760
409
RAPPAPORT ET AL 1988
Corn
0
0
410
RAPPAPORT ET AL 1988
Corn
0.9
153
411
RAPPAPORT ET AL 1988
Corn
1.8
304
412
RAPPAPORT ET AL 1988
Corn
2.7
456
413
RAPPAPORT ET AL 1988
Corn
3.6
608
414
RAPPAPORT ET AL 1988
Corn
4.5
760
415
RAPPAPORT ET AL 1987
Corn
416
RAPPAPORT ET AL 1987
Corn
417
RAPPAPORT ET AL 1987
Corn
418
WILLIAMS 1977
CARROT
100
F-175
-------
TABLE F-3 {oonU
LOCATION
COMMENTS
OF
STUDY
343
Saskatoon, Can
344
Baltavilla, MD
345
3altsvil(e. MD
346
• 1.- 1
8eltsvilla, MD
347
Belttvillo, MD
348
Baltavilla. MD
349
.
Baltavilla. MD
350
Baltavilla. MD
351
Baltavilla. MD
352
Baltavilla. MD
353
Beluvilla. MD
354
Baltavilla, MD
355
Baltavilla. MD
356
Baltavilla, MD
357
Baitavilla, MD
358
Baltavilla. MD
359
Baltavilla. MD
360
Baltavilla, MD
361
Baltavilla, MD
362
Beitaviila, MD
363
Baltavilla. MD
364
Baltavilla. MD
365
Baltavilla. MD
366
Baltavilla. MD
367
Baltavilla. MD
368
Baltavilla, MD
369
Manhattan, Kanaaa
370
Manhattan, Kanaaa
371
Dayton, Ohio
372
Dayton, Ohio
373
•
Oakland, CA
374
Oakland, CA
375
Oakland, CA
376
Oakland, CA
377
Oakland. CA
378
Oakland, CA
379
YIELD NOT DETERMINED
KINGSTON. RHODE ISLAND
380
YIELD NOT DETERMINED
KINGSTON. RHODE ISLAND
F-174
-------
TABLE F-3 (cont.)
YIELD
YIELD
YIELD
YIELD
REDUCTION
COMPONENT
REDUCTION
COMPONENT
METAL
%
MEASURED
%
MEASURED
PHYTOTOXICITY
343
0
Whole plant
344
0
Shoots
345
0
Shoots
346
0
Shoots
347
0
Shoots
348
0
Shoots
349
0
Shoots
350
0
Shoots
351
0
Shoots
352
0
Shoots
353
0
Shoots
354
0
Shoots
355
0
Shoots
356
0
Shoots
357
0
Shoots
358
0
Shoots
359
0
Shoots
360
0
Shoots
361
0
Shoots
362
0
Shoots
363
0
Shoots
364
0
Shoots
365
0
Shoots
366
0
Shoots
367
0
Shoots
368
0
Shoots
369
370
371
Leaves
372
Leaves
373
0
Grtin
374
0
Grain
375
0
Grain
376
0
Grain
377
0
Grain
378
0
Grain
379
380
F-173
-------
TABLE F*3 (oont.)
SOIL
SOIL
CUMM Ni
SOIL Nl
PLANTW
PLANT
DESIGN
CEC
oc
SOIL
LOADING
SOIL
CONCENTRTN
CONCENTRTN
TISSUE
SUMMARY
cmol/ka
%
pH
RATE (ko/ho)
EXTRACTANT
ma/kg
ma/ka
SAMPLED
343
35.7
8.6
17
Root
344
5.9
5.8
Shoot*
345
7.4
8.2
Shoots
346
7
6.9
Shoots
347
7.4
5.8
Shoots
348
7.6
3.7
Shoots
349
7.7
4.7
Shoots
350
7.6
3.3
Shoots
351
6.9
4.4
Shoots
352
7.4
3.2
Shoots
353
7.6
3.2
Shoots
354
5.8
7.8
Shoots
355
6.1
4.6
Shoots
356
6.8
4.8
Shoots
357
7
2.5
Shoots
358
7.1
3.3
Shoots
359
5.8
7.7
Shoots
360
5.7
4.4
Shoots
361
6
4.4
Shoots
362
5.2
12.6
Shoots
363
5.3
7.9
Shoots
364
5.1
9.8
Shoots
365
6.4
7.7
Shoots
366
6.6
7.6
Shoots
367
5.9
9.6
Shoots
368
5.7
11.3
Shoots
369
0.9
5.9
11.9
0.059
Lmvss
370
0.9
5.9
11.9
4.53
Roots
371
6.2
71.5
2
Lsavss
372
6.2
147
2
Leaves
373
0
93
<5.0
Straw
374
0
94
<5.0
Straw
375
5
106
<5.0
Straw
376
9.9
99
<5.0
Straw
377
15.5
104
<5.0
Straw
378
20.6
105
<5.0
Straw
379
2.8
5.6
0
DTPA
0.6
5.2
Leaf
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
380
2.8
5.6
11
DTPA
1
6
Leaf
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
F-172
-------
TABLE F-3 (cont.)
ANNLSLUDGE
CUMML SLUDGE
YEARS
SOIL
SOIL
CONTENT
CONTENT
CONTENT
LOADNG RATE
LOADNG RATE
SINCE LAST
TAXONOMIC
SERIES
SOIL
%
%
%
Ma/ha
Ma/ha
APPLICATN
NAME
NAME
TEXTURE
343
150
344
0
0
Typic Paleudults
Christiana
fine sandy loam
345
0
0
Typic Paleudults
Christiana
fine sandy loam
346
56
56
Typic Paleudults
Christiana
fine sandy loam
347
112
112
Typic Paleudults
Christiana
fine sandy loam
348
224
224
Typic Paleudults
Christiana
fine sandy loam
349
336
336
Typic Paleudults
Christiana
fine sandy loam
350
448
448
Typic Paleudults
Christiana
fine sandy loam
351
56
56
Typic Paleudults
Christiana
fine sandy loam
'
352
112
112
Typic Paleudults
Christiana
fins sandy loam
353
224
224
Typic Paleudults
Christiana
fine sandy loam
354
56
56
Typic Paleudults
Christiana
fine sandy loam
355
112
112
Typic Paleudults
Christiana
fins sandy loam
358
224
224
Typic Paleudults
Christiana
fine sandy loam
357
448
448
Typic Paleudults
Christiana
fine sandy loam
358
672
672
Typic Paleudults
Christiana
fine sandy loam
359
56
56
Typic Paleudults
Christiana
fine sandy loam
360
112
112
Typic Paleudults
Christiana
fine sandy loam
361
224
224
Typic Paleudults
Christiana
fine sandy loam
362
56
56
Typic Paleudults
Christiana
fine sandy loam
363
112
112
Typic Paleudults
Christiana
fine sandy loam
364
. 224
224
Typic Paleudults
Christiana
fine sandy loam
365
50
50
Typic Paleudults
Christiana
fine sandy loam
366
100
100
Typic Paleudults
Christiana
fine sandy loam
367
50
50
Typic Paleudults
Christiana
fine sandy loam
368
100
100
Typic Paleudults
Christiana
fine sandy loam
369
32
128
Typic Udifluvent
Haynle
fine sandy loam
0
370
32
128
Typic Udifluvent
Havnie
fine sandy loam
371
28
980
Warsaw
slit loam
372
0
0
Warsaw
silt loam
373
0
0
4
Fluvaiquentic Haplaquolls
Omni
silty clay
374
0+NPK
0+NPK
4
Fluvaquentic Haplaquolls
Omni
silty clay
375
33
33
4
Fluvaquentic Haplaquolls
Omni
silty clay
376
66
66
4
Ruvaquentic Haplaquolls
Omni
silty day
377
107
107
4
Fluvaquentic Haplaquolls
Omni
silty clay
378
147
147
4
Ruvaquentic Haplaquolls
Omni
silty clay
379
0
0
0
Typic Dystrochrept
Bridgehampton
silt loam
34
58
8
380
20
20
0
Typic Dystrochrept
Bridaehampton
silt loam
34
58
8
F-171
-------
TABLE F-3 (oont.)
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
Fe
N
N1
P
Pb
Zn
SOUDS
BIOLOGICAL
CHEMICAL
%
%
ma/ka
ma/ka
ma/ka
ma/ka
CONTNT
PROCESSING
STABILIZATN
343
26.3
6820
164
420
344
-
Control, low pH
345
Control, hlah pH
346
15
217
639
Limed-digested
347
15
217
639
Umod-digested
348
15
217
639
Limed-dlgested
349
15
217
639
Umed-digetted
350
15
217
639
Limed-digested
351
17
215
599
Umed-raw
352
17
215
599
Umed-raw
353
17
215
599
Li mod-raw
354
201
272
731
Umed-compost
355
201
272
731
Umed-compost
356
201
272
731
Umed-compost
357
201
272
731
Umed-compost
358
201
272
731
Umed-compost
359
37
360
1330
Haat-traatad, high pH
360
37
360
1330
Heat-treated, high pH
361
37
360
1330
Heat-treated, high pH
362
37
360
1330
Heat-treated, low pH
363
37
360
1330
Heat-treated, low pH
364
37
360
1330
Heat-treated, low pH
365
590
865
4140
Nu-Earth, high pH
366
590
865
4140
Nu-Earth, high pH
367
590
865
4140
Nu-Earth, low pH
368
590
865
4140
Nu-Earth, low pH
369
35.6
21300
124
1890
aerobically digested
370
35.6
21300
124
1890
aerobically digested
371
20370
24000
6940
8390
28t/ha/yr at 35 yeara
372
20370
24000
6940
8390
Control
373
.
No sludge data given
374
No sludge data given
375
No sludge data given
376
No sludge data given
377
No sludge data given
378
No sludge data given
379
3
560
1630
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
380
3
560
1630
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
F-170
-------
TABLE F-3 (cont.)
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
LITERATURE
PLANT
SLUDGE
VOL SOLIDS
Al
Ca
Cd
Cr
Cu
CITATION
NAME
CULTIVAR
PH
%
%
%
mg/kg
ma/kg
mg/kg
343
GILLIES ET AL 1989
Oat
Harmon
4.6
191
143
344
HECKMANETAL 1987
Soybean
Clark
345
HECKMANETAL 1987
Soybean
Clark
346
HECKMAN ET AL 1987
Soybean
Clark
5.9
259
347
HECKMANETAL 1987
Soybean
Clark
5.9
259
348
HECKMANETAL 1987
Soybean
Clark
5.9
259
349
HECKMANETAL 1987
Soybean
Clark
5.9
259
350
HECKMAN ET AL 1987
Soybean
Clark
5.9
259
351
HECKMAN ET AL 1987
Soybean
Clark
4.9
277
352
HECKMANETAL 1987
Soybean
Clark
4.9
277
353
HECKMANETAL 1987
Soybean
Clark
4.9
277
354
HECKMAN ET AL 1987
Soybean
Clark
7.2
274
355
HECKMAN ET AL 1987
Soybean
Clark
7.2 .
¦274
. 356
HECKMAN ET AL 1987
Soybean
Clark
7.2
274
357
HECKMAN ET AL 1987
Soybean
Clark
7.2
274
358
HECKMAN ET AL 1987
Soybean
Clark
7.2
274
359
HECKMAN ET AL 1987
Soybean
Clark
13.4
404
360
HECKMAN ET AL 1987
Soybean
Clark
I
13.4
-404
361
HECKMAN ET AL 1987
Soybean
Clark
13.4
404
362
HECKMANETAL 1987
Soybean
Clark
13.4
404
363
HECKMAN ET AL 1987
Soybean
Clark
13.4
404
364
HECKMAN ET AL 1987
Soybean
Clark
13.4
404
365
HECKMAN ET AL 1987
Soybean
Clark
210
1160
366
HECKMAN ET AL 1987
Soybean
Clark
210
1160
367
HECKMAN ET AL 1987
Soybean
Clark
210
1160
368
HECKMAN ET AL 1987
Soybean
Clark
210
1160
369
KIRKHAM 1983
Sorghum
Dekalb C-46 Plus
6.7
7770 mali
29.2
851
375
370
KIRKHAM 1983
Winter Wheat
Newton
6.7
7770 mo/1
29.2
851
375
371
KIRKHAM 1975
Corn
830
5900
6020
372
KIRKHAM 1975
Corn
830
5900
6020
373
CHANG ETAL 1982
Winter Weat
Anza
374
CHANG ETAL 1982
Winter Weat
Anza
375
CHANG ETAL 1982
Winter Weat
Anza
376
CHANG ET AL 1982
Winter Weat •
Anza
377
CHANG ETAL 1982
Winter Weet
Anza
378
CHANG ETAL 1982
Winter Weat
Anza
379
Schauer, etal. 1980
Carrots
Danvers
4.7
67.5
21
2520
380
Schauer, etal. 1980
Carrots
Danvers
4.7
67.5
21
2520
F-169
-------
TABLE F-3 (cont.)
LOCATION
COMMENTS
OF
STUDY
305
JOUET. ILLINOIS
308
JOUET. ILLINOIS
307
'
JOUET, ILLINOIS
308
¦ 1 •
JOUET. ILLINOIS
309
JOUET. ILUNOIS
310
JOUET. ILUNOIS
311
•DOSE RESPONSE AND TISSUE Nl CONCENTRATION NOT CONSISTENT
JOUET. ILUNOIS
312
•DOSE RESPONSE AND TISSUE Nl CONCENTRATION NOT CONSISTENT
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
313
JOUET. ILUNOIS
314
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
315
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
316
JOLIET. ILUNOIS
317
JOUET. ILUNOIS
318
JOUET, ILUNOIS
319
JOUET. ILUNOIS
320
JOLIET, ILUNOIS
321
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
322
JOUET. ILUNOIS
323
JOUET, ILLINOIS
324
JOUET. ILLINOIS
325
JOUET. ILUNOIS
326
JOUET, ILUNOIS
327
JOUET, ILUNOIS
328
JOUET, ILUNOIS
329
JOUET. ILUNOIS
330
JOLIET. ILUNOIS
331
JOLIET, ILUNOIS
332
JOUET, ILUNOIS
333
•
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
334
JOUET, ILUNOIS
335
.
JOUET, ILLINOIS
336
JOUET. ILLINOIS
337
JOUET. ILLINOIS
338
JOUET. ILUNOIS
339
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
340
JOLIET. ILUNOIS
341
Saskatoon, Can
342
Saskatoon. Can
F-168
-------
TABLE F-3 (cont.)
YIELD
YIELD
YIELD
YIELD
REDUCTION
COMPONENT
REDUCTION
COMPONENT
METAL
%
MEASURED
%
MEASURED
PHYTOTOXICITY
305
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
306
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
307
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
308
0
GRAIN
NA
STOVER
NO
309
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
310
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
311
60*
GRAIN
0
STOVER
•NO
312
60*
GRAIN
0
STOVER
•NO
313
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
314
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
315
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
316
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
317
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
318
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
319
NA
GRAIN
NA
STOVER
NO
320
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
321
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
322
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
323
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
324
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
325
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
326
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
327
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
328
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
329
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
330
0
GRAIN
NA
STOVER
NO
331
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
332
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
333
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
334
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
335
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
336
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
337
0
GRAIN
0
.STOVER
NO
338
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
339
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
340
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
341
0
Whols plant
342
0
Whole plant
C -1 CI
-------
TABLE F-3 (cont.)
SOIL
SOIL
CUMM Ni
SOIL Ni
PLANT Ni
PLANT
DESIGN
CEC
OC
SOIL
LOADING
SOIL
CONCENTRTN
CONCENTRTN
TISSUE
SUMMARY
cmol/ka
%
PH
RATE (kg/ha)
EXTRACTANT
ma/kg
mg/kg
SAMPLED
305
0.76
7
0
HCL-HF
19
<.6
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
306
1.21
6.9
0
HCL-HF
20
<.6
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
307
0.84
7.1
0
HCL-HF
24
<.6
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
308
0.31
NA
12.6
HCL-HF
15
1.3
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
309
0.44
7.2
13.4
HCL-HF
31
1.4
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
310
0.63
7.3
15.3
HCL-HF
12
0.9
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
311
0.67
7.5
21
HCL-HF
12
<.6
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
312
0.78
7
26.3
HCL-HF
20
0.8
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
313
0.8
7
34
HCL-HF
19
NA
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
314
0.99
6.6
34
HCL-HF
25
<.6
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
315
1.42
7.1
34
HCL-HF
35
<.6
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
316
1.71
7.2
34
HCL-HF
30
<.6
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
317
1.82
7.2
34
HCL-HF
34
<.6
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
318
1.96
7.1
34
HCL-HF
31
<.6
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
319
0.43
NA
25.2
HCL-HF
13
1.5
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
320
0.51
7.1
26.8
HCL-HF
20
1.1
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
321
0.94
7
30.6
HCL-HF
16
1.6
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
322
1.16
7.2
41.9
HCL-HF
22
<.6
LEAF
SLUDGE, HELD, MATURITY
323
1.4
7
52.5
HCL-HF
24
NA
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
324
1.75
6.4
68
HCL-HF
35
1.7
LEAF
SLUDGE. RELD. MATURITY
325
2
6.3
68
HCL-HF
32
2
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
326
2.16
6.8
68
HCL-HF
38
0.7
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
327
2.02
6.8
68
HCL-HF
51
0.7
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
328
2.33
7.1
68
HCL-HF
53
<•6
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
329
1.66
7
68
HCL-HF
45
<.6
LEAF
SLUDGE. RELD. MATURITY
330
0.73
NA
50.4
HCL-HF
21
1.3
LEAF
SLUDGE. RELD. MATURITY
331
0.57
6.8
53.5
HCL-HF
37
1.8
LEAF
SLUDGE. RELD. MATURITY
332
1.3
6.7
61.1
HCL-HF
16
1.2
LEAF
SLUDGE. RELD. MATURITY
333
1.42
6.6
83.7
HCL-HF
34
<.6
LEAF
SLUDGE. RELD. MATURITY
334
2.4
6.4
105
HCL-HF
40
2.8
LEAF
SLUDGE, RELD, MATURITY
335
2.76
6.1
135.9
HCL-HF
45 .
3.6
LEAF
SLUDGE. RELD. MATURITY
336
3.44
5.8
135.9
HCL-HF
49
1.6
LEAF
SLUDGE. RELD. MATURITY
337
3.16
5.9
135.9
HCL-HF
62
1.7
LEAF
SLUDGE. RELD. MATURITY
338
3.28
6.2
135.9
HCL-HF
52
0.9
LEAF
SLUDGE. RELD. MATURITY
339
3.1
6.4
135.9
HCL-HF
64
<.6
LEAF
SLUDGE. RELD. MATURITY
340
3.15
6.5
135.9
HCL-HF
70
NA
LEAF
SLUDGE. RELD. MATURITY
341
34.8
10.4
14
Root
342
36.7
7.5
21
Root
F-166
-------
TABLE F-3 (cont.)
ANNLSLUDGE
CUMML SLUDGE
YEARS
SOIL
SOIL
CONTENT
CONTENT
CONTENT
LOADNG RATE
LOADNG RATE
SINCE LAST
TAXONOMIC
SERIES
SOIL
%
%
%
Ma/ha
Mg/ha
APPLICATN
NAME
NAME
TEXTURE
30S
0
0
NA
PLAINFIELD
SL
306
0
0
NA
PLAINFIELD
SL
307
0
0
NA
PLAINFIELD
SL
308
26.2
40.1
0
PLAINFIELD
SL
309
8.1
48.2
0
PLAINFIELD
SL
310
14.7
62.9
0
PLAINFIELD
SL
311
17.7
80.6
0
PLAINFIELD
SL
312
13.1
93.7
0
PLAINFIELD
SL
313
17.8
111.5
0
PLAINFIELD
SL
•
314
0
111.5
1
PLAINFIELD
SL
315
0
111.5
2
PLAINFIELD
SL
316
0
111.5
3
PLAINFIELD
SL
317
0
111.5
4
PLAINFIELD
SL
318
0
111.5
5
PLAINFIELD
SL
319
52.4
80.2
0
PLAINFIELD
SL
320
16.2
96.4
0
PLAINFIELD
SL
321
29.4
125.8
0
PLAINFIELD
SL
. 322
35.4
161.2
0
PLAINFIELD
SL
323
26.2
187.4
0
PLAINFIELD
SL
324
35.6
223
0
PLAINFIELD
SL
325
0
223
1
PLAINFIELD
SL
326
0
223
2
PLAINFIELD
SL
327
0
223
3
PLAINFIELD
SL
: 328
0
223
4
PLAINFIELD
SL
329
0
223
5
PLAINFIELD
SL
330
104.8
160.4
0
PLAINFIELD
SL
331
32.4
192.8
0
PLAINFIELD
SL
332
58.8
251.6
0
PLAINFIELD
SL
333
70.8
322.4
0
PLAINFIELD
SL
334
52.4
374.8
0
PLAINFIELD
SL
335
71.2
446
0
PLAINFIELD
SL
336
0
446
1
PLAINFIELD
SL
337
0
446
2
PLAINFIELD
SL
338
0
446
3
PLAINFIELD
SL
339
0
446
4
PLAINFIELD
SL
•
340
0
446
5
PLAINFIELD
SL
341
0
342
75
-------
TABLE F-3 (cont.)
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
Fe
N
Ni
P
Pb
Zn
SOLIDS
BIOLOGICAL
CHEMICAL
%
%
ma/kg
mcr/kfi
mq/kti
ma/kg
CONTNT
PROCESSING
STABILIZATN
305
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
306
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
307
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
308
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
309
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
310
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
311
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
312
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
313
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
314
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
315
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
316
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
317
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
318
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
319
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
320
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
321
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
322
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
323
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
324
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
325
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
326
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
327
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
328
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
: 4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
: CENT POLY. FECL3
329
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
330
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
331
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
332
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
333
4.2
S.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
334
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
335
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
336
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
337
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
338
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
339
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
340
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
341
26.3
6620
164
420
342
26.3
6620
164
420
F-164
-------
TABLE F-3 (cont.)
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
LITERATURE
PLANT
SLUDGE
VOL SOLIDS
Al
Ca
Cd
Cr
Cu
CITATION
NAME
CULTIVAR
PH
%
%
%
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
305
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
306
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
307
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
308
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
309
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
310
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
311
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
312
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
313
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
314
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
315
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
316
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
317
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265-
2846
1311
318
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
319
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
320
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
321
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
322
HINESLY 1985
CORN
1
3.2
265
2846
1311
323
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
324
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
325
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
326
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
327
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
328
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
: 2846
1311
329
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
330
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
331
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
332
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
333
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
334
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
335
HINESLY 1985
CORN
•
3.2
265
2846
1311
336
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
337
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
338
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
339
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
340
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
341
GILLIES ETAL 1989
Oat .
Harmon
4.6
191
143
342
GILLIES ETAL 1989
Oat
Harmon
4.6
191
143
F-163
-------
TABLE F-3 (cont.)
LOCATION
COMMENTS
OF
STUDY
267
•DOSE RESPONSE AND TISSUE Nl CONCENTRATION NOT CONSISTENT
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
268
•DOSE RESPONSE AND TISSUF 11 CONCENTRATION NOT CONSIl ENT
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
269
JCiLIET, ILLINOIS
270
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
271
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
272
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
273
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
274
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
275
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
276
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
277
JOUET, ILLINOIS
278
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
279
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
280
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
281
JOUET, ILLINOIS
282
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
283
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
284
JOUET. ILUNOIS
285
. JOLIET. ILLINOIS
286
JOLIET. ILUNOIS
287
JOLIET. ILUNOIS
288
JOUET. ILUNOIS
289
JOLIET. ILUNOIS
: 290
•
JOUET. ILUNOIS
291
JOLIET, ILUNOIS
292
JOUET. ILUNOIS
293
JOUET. ILUNOIS
- 294
JOUET. ILUNOIS
295
JOUET. ILUNOIS
296
JOUET. ILLINOIS
297
JOUET. ILLINOIS
298
JOUET. ILUNOIS
2S9
JOUET. ILUNOIS
300
JOUET, ILLINOIS
301
JOUET. ILLINOIS
302
JOUET. ILUNOIS
303
JOUET, ILUNOIS
304
JOUET. ILLINOIS
-------
TABLE F-3 (cont.)
YIELD
YIELD
YIELD
YIELD
REDUCTION
COMPONENT
REDUCTION
COMPONENT
METAL
%
MEASURED
%
MEASURED
PHYTOTOXICITY
267
60*
GRAIN
0
STOVER
•NO
268
28*
GRAIN
0
STOVER
•NO
269
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
270
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
271
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
272
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
273
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
274
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
275
0
GRAIN
NA
STOVER
NO
276
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
277
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
278
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
279
0
GRAIN '
0
STOVER
NO
280
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
281
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
282
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
283
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
284
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
285
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
286
0
GRAIN
NA
STOVER
NO
287
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
288
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
289
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
290
0
GRAIN
0
: STOVER
NO
291
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
292
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
293
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
294
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
295
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
296
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
297
0
GRAIN
NA
STOVER
NO
298
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
299
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
300
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
301
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
302
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
303
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
304
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
-------
TABLE F-3 (cont.)
SOIL
SOIL
CUMM Ni
SOIL Ni
PLANT Ni
PLANT
DESIGN
CEC
OC
SOIL
LOADING
SOIL
CONCENTRTN
CONCENTRTN
TISSUE
SUMMARY
cmol/kg
%
pH
RATE (kg/ha)
EXTRACTANT
mn/kq
ma/ka
SAMPLED
267
1.58
7.4
21
HCL-HF
39
0.6
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
268
1.54
7.1
26.3
HCL-HF
32
0.9
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
269
1.64
6.9
34
HCL-HF
31
<.6
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
270
1.69
6.9
34
HCL-HF
32
0.8
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
271
1.91
7
34
HCL-HF
36
<.6
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
272
1.66
7.3
34
HCL-HF
33
<.6
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
273
2.05
7.1
34
HCL-HF
32
NA
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
274
1.95
7.2
34
HCL-HF
34
<.6
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
275
1.71
NA
25.2
HCL-HF
22
1.5
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
276
1.57
6.9
26.8
HCL-HF
29
1.3
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
277
1.57
7.3
30.6
HCL-HF
24
1.2
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
278
1.79
7.1
41.9
HCL-HF
41
O.S
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
279
1.93
6.9
52.5
HCL-HF
35
<.6
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
280
2.09
6.6
68
HCL-HF
37
1
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
281
2.37
6.4
68
HCL-HF
39
1.1
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
282
2.4
6.4
68
HCL-HF
49
0.7
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
283
2.4
6;8
68
HCL-HF
41
NA
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
284
2.38
6.8
68
HCL-HF
35
<.6
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
285
2.48
7.2
68
HCL-HF
44
<.6
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
286
2.06
NA
50.4
HCL-HF
27
1.3
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
287
2
6.4
53.5
HCL-HF
27
1.4
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
288
1.76
6.4
61.1
HCL-HF
30
1.2
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
289
2.67
6.2
83.7
HCL-HF
41
<•6
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
290
2.72
6.1
105:
HCL-HF
44
0.8
LEAR
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
291
3.53
5.4
135.9
HCL-HF
52
1.5
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
292
3.35
5.5
135.9
HCL-HF
55
1.7
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
293
3.29
5.8
135.9
HCL-HF
51
NA
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
294
2.68
6
135.9
HCL-HF
46
1
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
295
3.02
S
135.9
HCL-HF
47
0.7
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
296
2.2
6.3
135.9
HCL-HF
46
0.8
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
297
0.36
NA
0
HCL-HF
11
1.2
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
298
0.17
7
0
HCL-HF
12
1.6
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
299
0.21
7.2
0
HCL-HF
8
0.6
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
300
0.42
7.1
0
HCL-HF
13/
<•«
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
301
0.44
7
0
HCL-HF
16
0.7
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
302
0.S6
6.9
0
HCL-HF
33
<.6
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
303
0.48
7
0
HCL-HF
15
NA
LEAF
SLUDGE, F)ELD. MATURITY
304
0.75
7
0
HCL-HF
19
0.6
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
F-160
-------
TABLE F-3 (cont.)
ANNLSLUDGE
CUMML SLUDGE
YEARS
SOIL
SOIL
CONTENT
CONTENT
CONTENT
LOADNG RATE
LOADNG RATE
SINCE LAST
TAXONOMIC
SERIES
SOIL
%
%
%
Ma/ha
Mg/ha
APPLICATN
NAME
NAME
TEXTURE
- •
267
17.7
80.6
0
ELLIOT
SiL
268
13.1
93.7
0
ELLIOT
SIL
269
17.8
111.5
0
ELLIOT
SiL
270
0
111.5
1
ELLIOT
SiL
271
0
111.5
2
ELLIOT
SiL
272
0
111.5
3
ELLIOT
SiL
273
0
111.5
4
ELLIOT
SiL
274
0
111.5
5
ELLIOT
SiL
275
52.4
80.2
0
ELLIOT
SiL
•
276
16.2
96.4
0
ELLIOT
SiL
277
29.4
125.8
0
ELLIOT
SiL
278
35.4
161.2
0
ELLIOT
SiL
279
26.2
187.4
0
ELLIOT
SiL
280
35.6
223
0
ELLIOT
SiL
281
0
223
1
ELLIOT
SiL
282
0
223
2
ELLIOT
SiL
283
0
223
3
ELLIOT
SiL
284
0
223
4
ELLIOT
SiL
285
0
223
5
ELLIOT
SiL
286
104.8
160.4
0
ELLIOT
SiL
287
32.4
192.8
0
ELLIOT
SiL
288
. 58.8
251.6
0
ELLIOT
SiL
289
70.8
322.4
0
ELLIOT
SiL
290
52.4
374.8
0
ELLIOT
SiL
291
71.2
446
0
ELLIOT
SiL
292
0
446
1
ELLIOT
SiL
293
0
446
2
ELLIOT
SiL
294
0
446
3
ELLIOT
SiL
295
0
446
4
ELLIOT
SIL
296
0
446
5
ELLIOT
SiL
297
0
0
NA
PLAINFIELD
SL
298
0
0
NA
PLAINFIELD
SL
299
0
0
NA
PLAINFIELD
SL
300
0
0
NA
PLAINFIELD
SL
301
0
0
NA
PLAINFIELD
SL
>>
302
0
0
NA
PLAINFIELD
SL
303
0
0
NA
PLAINFIELD
SL
304
0
0
NA
PLAINFIELD
SL
-------
TABLE F-3 (cont.)
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
Fe
N
Ni
P
Pb
Zn
SOLIDS
BIOLOGICAL
CHEMICAL
%
%
mn/kfl
ma/kfl
mo/kn
ma/kg
CONTNT
PROCESSING
STABILIZATN
267
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
268
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
269
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
270
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
271
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
272
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
273
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
274
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
275
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
276
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
277
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
278
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
279
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
280
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
281
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
282
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
283
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
284
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
285
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
286
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
287
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
288
4.2
5.5.
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
289
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
290
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
291
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
292
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
293
4.2
5.6
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
294
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
295
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
296
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
297
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
298
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
299
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
300
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
301
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
302
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
303
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
304
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBtC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
F-158
-------
TABLE F-3 (cont.)
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
LITERATURE
PLANT
SLUDGE
VOL SOLIDS
Al
Ca
Cd
Cr
Cu
CITATION
NAME
CULTIVAR
PH
%
%
%
ma/ka
ma/ka
ma/kg
267
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
268
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
269
HINESLY 1985
CORN
•
3.2
265
2846
1311
270
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
271
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
272
HINESLY 1985
CORN
-
'
3.2
265
2846
1311
273
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
274
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
275
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
276
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
277
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
278
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
279
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
. 280
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
281
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
282
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
283
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
284
HINESLY 1985
CORN
I
3.2
265
2846
1311
285
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
286
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
287
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
288
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
289
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
290
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
291
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311 .
292
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
293
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
294
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
295
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
298
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
297
HINESLY 1985
CORN
•
3.2
265
2846
1311
298
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
299
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
300
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
301
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
302
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
303
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
304
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
-------
TABLE F-3 (cont.)
LOCATION
COMMENTS
OF
STUDY
229
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
230
JOUET, ILLINOIS
231
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
232
JOUET, ILLINOIS
233
JOUET, ILLINOIS
234
JOUET, ILLINOIS
235
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
236
JOLIET. ILUNOIS
237
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
238
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
239
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
240
eDOSE RESPONSE AND TISSUE Nl CONCENTRATION NOT CONSISTENT
JOUET. ILLINOIS
241
•DOSE RESPONSE AND TISSUE Nl CONCENTRATION NOT CONSISTENT
JOUET. ILLINOIS
242
*DOSE RESPONSE AND TISSUE Nl CONCENTRATION NOT CONSISTENT
JOUET. ILLINOIS
243
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
244
JOLIET. ILUNOIS
245
¦DOSE RESPONSE AND TISSUE Nl CONCENTRATION NOT CONSISTENT
JOUET. ILLINOIS
246
JOUET. ILLINOIS
247
JOUET. ILLINOIS
248
JOUET. ILUNOIS
249
JOUET. ILLINOIS
250
JOUET. ILLINOIS
251
JOUET. ILUNOIS
252
JOUET, ILUNOIS
253
JOUET, ILUNOIS
254
JOUET. ILLINOIS
255
JOUET. ILUNOIS
256
JOUET. ILUNOIS
257
JOUET. ILLINOIS
258
JOUET. ILUNOIS
259
•
JOUET. ILUNOIS
260
JOUET. ILLINOIS
261
JOUET. ItUNOtS
262
JOUET. ILUNOtS
263
JOUET. ILUNOtS
264
JOUET, ILUNOtS
265
JOUET. ILLINOIS
266
JOUET, ILUNOtS
F-156
-------
TABLE F-3 (cont.)
YIELD
YIELD
YIELD
YIELD
REDUCTION
COMPONENT
REDUCTION
COMPONENT
METAL
%
MEASURED
%
MEASURED
PHYTOTOXICITY
229
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
230
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
231
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
232
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
233
0
GRAIN
NA
STOVER
NO
234
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
,235
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
236
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
237
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
238
0
GRAIN
NA
STOVER
NO
239
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
240
0
GRAIN
37*
STOVER
•NO
241
60"
GRAIN
0
STOVER
•NO
242
28*
GRAIN
0
STOVER
•NO
243
0
GRAIN
NA
STOVER
NO
244
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
245
0
GRAIN
22*
STOVER
•NO
246
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
247
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
248
0
GRAIN
NA
STOVER
NO
249
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
250
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
251
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
252
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
253
0
GRAIN
NA
STOVER
NO
254
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
255
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
256
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
257
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
258
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
259
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
260
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
261
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
262
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
263
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
264
0
GRAIN
NA
STOVER
NO
265
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
266
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
-------
TABLE F-3 (cont.)
SOIL
SOIL
CUMM Ni
SOIL Ni
PLANT Ni
PLANT
DESIGN
CEC
OC
SOIL
LOADING
SOIL
CONCENTRTN
CONCENTRTN
TISSUE
SUMMARY
cmol/ka
%
pH
RATE (kg/ha)
EXTRACTANT
mg/kg
ma/kg
SAMPLED
229
2.84
6
135.5
HCL-HF
38
2.5
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
230
3.35
5.9
135.5
HCL-HF
73
1.7
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
231
2.1
6.2
135.5
HCL-HF
39
1.4
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
232
3.03
6.1
135.5
HCL-HF
63
<•6
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
233
1.19
NA
0
HCL-HF
22
1.3
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
234
1.01
7.1
0
HCL-HF
25
1.4
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
235
0.93
7.5
0
HCL-HF
25
1.1
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
236
1.05
7.7
0
HCL-HF
33
<.6
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
237
1.07
7.3
0
HCL-HF
21
0.8
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
238
1.29
NA
12.6
HCL-HF
26
1.3
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
239
1.06
7.2
13.4
HCL-HF
33
1.6
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
240
1.1
7.6
15.3
HCL-HF
29
0.9
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
241
1.29
7.6
21
HCL-HF
36
<.6
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
242
1.17
7.6
26.3
HCL-HF
29
0.7
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
243
1.38
NA
25.2
HCL-HF
29
1.2
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
244
1.15
7.1
26.8
HCL-HF
32
1.1
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
245
1.29
7.6
30.6
HCL-HF
28
0.9
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELO. MATURITY
246
1.58
7.C
41.9
HCL-HF
36
<.6
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
247
1.75
7.5
52.5
HCL-HF
36
0.6
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
248
1.63
NA
50.4
HCL-HF
31
1.2
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
249
1.28
6.9
53.5
HCL-HF
41
1.6
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
250
1.59
7.5
61.1
HCL-HF
38
0.9
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
251
1.9
7.5
83.7
HCL-HF
45
<.6
LEAF
SLUDGE. HELD. MATURITY
252
2.56
7.3
105
HCL-HF
48
0.9
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
253
1.51
NA
0
HCL-HF
20
1.3
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
254
1.34
7
0
HCL-HF
24
1.5
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
255
1.29
7.2
0
HCL-HF
25
0.7
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
256
1.45
7.1
0
HCL-HF
31
<•6
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
257
1.3
7.6
0
HCL-HF
20
0.6
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
258
1.3
7
0
HCL-HF
38
<.6
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
259
1.41
7.2
0
HCL-HF •
23
0.7
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
260
1.32
6.7
0
HCL-HF
24
0.6
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
261
1.38
7
0
HCL-HF
21
<.6
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
262
1.69
7
0
HCL-HF
23
<•6
LEAF
SLUDGE FIELD, MATURITY
263
1.48
7.4
0
HCL-HF
29
NA
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
264
1.52
NA
12.6
HCL-HF
22
1.2
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
265
1.4
6.9
13.4
HCL-HF
32
1
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
266
1.35
7.2
15 .3
HCL-HF
22
0.9
LEAF
SLUOGE. FtELD, MATURITY
P1B4
-------
TABLE F-3 (cont.)
ANNL SLUDGE
CUMML SLUDGE
YEARS
SOIL
SOIL
CONTENT
CONTENT
CONTENT
LOADNG RATE
LOADNG RATE
SINCE LAST
TAXONOMIC
SERIES
SOIL
%
%
%
Ma/ha
Ma/ha
APPLICATN
NAME
NAME
TEXTURE
229
0
428.3
1
PLAINFIELD
SL
230
0
428.3
2
PLAINFIELD
SL
231
0
428.3
3
PLAINFIELD
SL
232
0
428.3
4
PLAINFIELD
SL
233
0
0
NA
BLOUNT
SiL
234
0
0
NA
BLOUNT
SIL
235
0
0
NA
BLOUNT
SiL
236
0
0
NA
BLOUNT
SiL
237
0
0
NA
BLOUNT
SiL
•
238
26.2
40.1
0
BLOUNT
SiL
239
8.1
48.2
0
BLOUNT
SiL
240
14.7
62.9
0
BLOUNT
SiL
241
17.7
80.6
0
BLOUNT
SiL
.
242
13.1
93.7
0
BLOUNT
SiL
243
52.4
80.2
0
BLOUNT
SiL
244
16.2
96.4
0
BLOUNT
SiL
245
29.4
125.8
0
BLOUNT
SiL
246
35.4
161.2
0
BLOUNT
SiL
247
26.2
187.4
0
BLOUNT
SiL
248
104.8
160.4
0
BLOUNT
SiL
249
32.4
192.8
0
BLOUNT
SiL
250
. 58.8
251.6
0
BLOUNT
SiL
251
70.8
322.4
0
BLOUNT
SiL
252
52.4
374.8
0
BLOUNT
SiL
253
0
0
NA
ELLIOT
SiL
254
0
0
NA
ELLIOT
SiL
255
0
0
NA
ELLIOT
SiL
256
0
0
NA
ELLIOT
SiL
257
0
0
NA
ELLIOT
SiL
258
0
0
NA
ELLIOT
SiL
259
0
0
NA
*
ELLIOT
SiL
260
0
0
NA
ELUOT
SiL
261
0
0
NA
ELLIOT
SiL
262
0
0
NA
ELLIOT
SIL
263
0
0
NA
ELUOT
SiL
•
264
26.2
40.1
0
ELLIOT
SiL
265
8.1
48.2
0
ELLIOT
SiL
266
14.7
62.9
0
ELLIOT
SiL
-------
TABLE F-3 (cont.)
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
Fa
N
Ni
P
Pb
Zn
SOLIDS
BIOLOGICAL
CHEMICAL
%
%
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
CONTNT
PROCESSING
STABILIZATN
229
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
230
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
231
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
232
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
233
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
234
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
235
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
236
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
237
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
238
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
239
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
240
4.2
5.5
305
3.5
1169
476S
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
241
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
242
4.2
5.5
305
3.3 .
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
243
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
244
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
245
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
246
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
247
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
248
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
249
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
250
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
251
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
252
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION :
CENT POLY. FECL3
253
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
254
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
255
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
256
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
257
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
258
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
259
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
260
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
261
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
262
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
263
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
264
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
265
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
266
4.2
5.5
305
3.3
1169
4769
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
MB2
-------
TABLE F-3 (cont.)
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
LITERATURE
PLANT
SLUDGE
VOLSOLIDS
Al
Ca
Cd
: tCr ¦
Cu
CITATION
NAME
CULTIVAR
PH
% .
%
%
ma/ka
ma/kg
ma/ka
. • '
¦ •:.
• » .
229
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
230
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
231
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
232
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
233
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
234
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
23S
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
236
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
137
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
238
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
239
. HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
240
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
241
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
242
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
243
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
244
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
. 1311
245
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
246
HINESLY 1985
CORN
1
3.2
265
2846
1311
247
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
248
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
249
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
250
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
251
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
252
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
: 265
2846
1311
253
HINESLY 1985
CORN
.3.2
265
2846
1311
254
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
255
HINESLY 1986
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
256
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
257
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
258
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
259
HINESLY 1985
CORN
•
3.2
265
2846
1311
260
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
261
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
262
HINESLY 1985
CORN .
3.2
265
2846
1311
263
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
~2846
1311
264
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265'
2846
1311
265
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
266
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
1311
F-151
-------
TABLE F-3 (cont.)
LOCATION
COMMENTS
OF
STUDY
191
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
192
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
193 :
IOLIET, ILLINOIS
194
.1-1
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
195
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
196
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
197
JOUET, ILLINOIS
198
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
199
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
200
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
201
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
202
JOUET. ILLINOIS
203
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
204
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
205
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
206
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
207
JOUET. ILLINOIS
208
JOUET. ILLINOIS
209
JOLIET. ILUNOIS
210
JOUET. ILLINOIS
211
JOLIET. ILUNOIS
212
JOUET. ILUNOIS
213
JOUET, ILUNOIS
214
.
JOLIET. ILUNOIS
215
JOUET. ILUNOIS
216
JOUET. ILUNOIS
217
JOLIET. ILUNOIS
218
JOUET. ILUNOIS
219
JOUET. ILUNOIS
220
JOUET. ILUNOIS
221
•
JOLIET. ILUNOIS
222
JOUET. ILUNOIS
223
JOUET. ILUNOIS
224
JOUET. ILUNOIS
225
'
JOUET. ILUNOIS
226
JOUET, ILUNOIS
227
JOUET. KJJNOtt
228
JOUET. ILUNOIS
F-1SO
-------
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
TABLE F-3 (cont.)
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
LITERATURE
PLANT
SLUDGE
VOL SOLIDS
Al
Ca
Cd
; rCr
CITATION
NAME
CULTIVAR
PH
%
%
%
mg/kg
mn/kq
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.2
265
2846
C.1C1
-------
TABLE F-3 (cont.)
LOCATION
COMMENTS
OF
STUDY
191
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
192
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
193 :
•IOLIET, ILLINOIS
194
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
195
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
196
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
197
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
198
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
199
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
200
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
201
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
202
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
203
JOUET, ILLINOIS
204
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
205
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
206
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
207
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
208
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
209
JOUET. ILLINOIS
210
JOUET. ILLINOIS
211
JOUET. ILUNOIS
212
JOUET. ILUNOIS
213
JOUET. ILUNOIS
214
JOUET. ILUNOIS
216
JOUET. ILUNOIS
216
JOUET. ILUNOIS
217
JOUET. ILUNOIS
218
JOUET. ILUNOIS
219
JOUET. ILUNOIS
220
JOUET. ILUNOIS
221
•
JOUET. ILUNOIS
222
JOUET. ILUNOIS
223
JOUET. ILUNOIS
224
JOUET. ILUNOIS
225
JOUET. ILUNOIS
226
JOUET. ILLINOIS
227
JOUCT. ILUNOIS
228
J0U6T, ILLINOIS
F-150
-------
TABLE F-3 (cont.)
YIELD
YIELD
YIELD
YIELD
REDUCTION
COMPONENT
REDUCTION
COMPONENT
METAL
%
MEASURED
%
MEASURED
PHYTOTOXICITY
191 .
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
192
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
193
NA
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
194
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
195
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
196
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
197
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
198
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
199
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
200
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
201
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
202
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
203
0
GRAIN
NA
STOVER
NO
204
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
205
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
206
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
207
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
208
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
209
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
210
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
211
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
212
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
213
NA
GRAIN
NA
STOVER
NO
214
0
GRAIN
0 :
STOVER
NO
215
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
216
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
217
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
218
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
219
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
220
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
221
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
222
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
223
NA
GRAIN
NA
STOVER
NO
224
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
225 .
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
226
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
227
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
228
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
F-149
-------
TABLE F-3 (cont.)
SOIL
SOIL
CUMM Ni
SOIL Ni
PLANT Ni
PLANT
DESIGN
CEC
OC
SOIL
LOADING
SOIL
CONCENTRTN
CONCENTRTN
TISSUE
SUMMARY
cmol/kg
%
PH
RATE (kg/ha)
EXTRACTANT
mg/kfl
mq/ka
SAMPLED
191
2.6
6.1
135.5
HCL-HF
51
0.6
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
192
3.2
6.1
135.5
HCL-HF
68
<.6
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
193
0.39
7.8
0
HCL-HF
17
1.3
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
194
0.17
7.1
0
HCL-HF
14
1.2
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
195
0.26
7.3
0
HCL-HF
14
<.6
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
196
0.27
6.8
0
HCL-HF
10
<.6
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
197
0.33
7.6
0
HCL-HF
15
<.6
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
198
0.27
7.5
0
HCL-HF
14
0.8
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
199
0.29
7.5
0
HCL-HF
8
1.4
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
200
0.42
7.4
0
HCL-HF
14
<.6
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
201
0.49
7.4
0
HCL-HF
16
<.6
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
202
0.64
7.3
0
HCL-HF
20
<.6
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
203
0.36
7.6
12.1
HCL-HF
16
1.2
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
204
0.28
7.1
13.2
HCL-HF
22
1.4
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
205
0.61
7.4
14.5
HCL-HF
15
<.6
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
206
0.91
7.3
14.5
HCL-HF
16
" <.6
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
207
0.56
7.4
14.5
HCL-HF
17
<.6
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
208
0.58
7.1
14.5
HCL-HF
16
2
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
209
0.45
7.5
14.5
HCL-HF
9
0.8
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
210
0.34
7.7
14.5
HCL-HF
18
<.6
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
211
0.47
7.4
14.5
HCL-HF
19
1.6
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
212
0.83
7.4
14.5
HCL-HF
24
<.6
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
213
0.58
7.5
24.2
HCL-HF
16
1.6
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
214
0.44
6.9
: 26.4
HCL-HF
24
5.3
: LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
215
0.81
7.1
29
HCL-HF
18
3.4
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
216
0.95
6.8
29
HCL-HF
15
1.1
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
217
0.75
7.1
29
HCL-HF
22
<•6
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
218
0.96
7.1
29
HCL-HF
15
1.2
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
219
0.59
6.9
29
HCL-HF
15
1.6
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
220
0.89
7
29
HCL-HF
17
<.6
LEAF
SLUDGE, HELD, MATURITY
221
0.81
7.1
29
HCL-HF
17
<.6
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
222
0.52
7.1
29
HCL-HF
17
<.6
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
223
0.9
7.6
48.4
HCL-HF
43
1.4
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
224
0.6
6.6
52.7
HCL-HF
34
2
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
225
2.4
6.8
57.9
HCL-HF
32
2.4
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
226
1.85
6.5
82.1
HCL-HF
14
0.9
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
227
1.78
6.1
103.4
HCL-HF
32
<.6
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
228
1.96
6.2
135.5
HCL-HF
32
6.2
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
-------
TABLE F-3 (cont.)
ANNLSLUDGE
CUMML SLUDGE
YEARS
SOIL
SOIL
CONTENT
CONTENT
CONTENT
LOADNG RATE
LOADNG RATE
SINCE LAST
TAXONOMIC
SERIES
SOIL
%
%
%
Ma/ha
Ma/ha
APPLICATN
NAME
NAME
TEXTURE
191
0
428.3
3
ELLIOT
SiL
192
0
428.3
4
ELLIOT
SiL
193
0
0
NA
PLAINFIELD
SL
194
0
0
NA
PLAINFIELD
SL
195
0
0
NA
PLAINFIELD
SL
196
0
0
NA
PLAINFIELD
SL
197
0
0
NA
PLAINFIELD
SL
198
0
0
NA
PLAINFIELD
SL
199
0
0
NA
PLAINFIELD
SL
•
200
0
0
NA
PLAINFIELD
SL
201
0
0
NA
PLAINFIELD
SL
202
0
0
NA
PLAINFIELD
SL
203
14.5
31.8
0
PLAINFIELD
SL
204
11.1
42.9
0
PLAINFIELD
SL
205
15.3
58.2
0
i
PLAINFIELD
SL
206
0
58.2
1
"PLAINFIELD
SL
207
0
58.2
2
PLAINFIELD
SL
208
0
58.2
3
PLAINFIELD
SL
209
0
58.2
4
PLAINFIELD
SL
210
0
58.2
5
PLAINFIELD
SL
211
0
58.2
6
PLAINFIELD
SL
212
0
58.2
7
PLAINFIELD
SL
213
29
63.6
0
PLAINFIELD
SL
214
22.2
85.8
0
PLAINFIELD
SL
215
30.6
116.4
0
PLAINFIELD
SL
216
0
116.4
1
PLAINFIELD
SL
217
0
116.4
2
PLAINFIELD
SL
218
0
116.4
3
PLAINFIELD
SL
219
0
116.4
4
PLAINFIELD
SL
220
0
116.4
5
PLAINFIELD
SL
221
0
116.4
6
PLAINFIELD
SL
222
0
116.4
7
PLAINFIELD
SL
223
57.8
127
0
PLAINFIELD
SL
224
44.4
171.4
0
PLAINFIELD
SL
225
61.1
232.5
0
PLAINFIELD
SL
228
69.8
302.3
0
PLAINFIELD
SL
227
54
356.3
0
PLAINFIELD
SL
228
72
428.3
0
PLAINFIELD
SL
F-147
-------
TABLE F-3 (com.)
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
Fe
N
Ni
P
Pb
Zn
SOUOS
BIOLOGICAL
CHEMICAL
%
%
mo/ka
mfl/ko
mo/ko
mfl/ko
CONTNT
PROCESSING
STAB1UZATN
191
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
192
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
193
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
194
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
195
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
196
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
197
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
198
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
199
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
200
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
201
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
202
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
203
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
204
4.5
5.9
316
3.5 .
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
205
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
206
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
* 2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
207
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
208
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
209
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
210
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
211
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
212
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
213
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
214 :
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
: 0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
215
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
216
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
217
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
218
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
219
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
220
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
221
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
222
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
223
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
224
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
225
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
226
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
227
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
228
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
F-146
-------
TABLE F-3 (cont.)
A
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
LITERATURE
PLANT
SLUDGE
VOL SOLIDS
Al
Ca
Cd
Cr
Cu
CITATION
NAME
CULTIVAR
PH
%
%
%
mq/kg
ma/kfl
mn/ka
191
HINESLY 1985 .
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
192
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
193
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
194
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
195
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
196
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
197
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
198
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
199
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
200
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
201
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
202
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
203
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
204
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
205
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
206
HINESLY 1985
CORN
*
3.4
263
2963
1422
207
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
208
HINESLY 1985
CORN
I
3.4
263
2963
1422
209
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
210
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
211
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
212
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
213
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
214
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
215
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
216
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
217
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
218
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
219
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
220
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
221
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3:4
263
2963
1422
222
HINESLY. 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
223
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
224
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
225
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
226
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
227
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
228
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
F-145
-------
TABLE F-3 (oont.)
LOCATION
COMMENTS
OF
STUDY
153
J0L1ET. ILLINOIS
154
JOUET. ILLINOIS
155
JOUET. ILLINOIS
156
¦ •
JOUET. ILLINOIS
157
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
158
JOUET. ILLINOIS
159
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
160
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
161
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
162
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
163
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
164
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
165
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
166
JOUET. ILLINOIS
167
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
168
.
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
169
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
170
.
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
171
JOUET, ILLINOIS
172
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
173
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
174
JOUET, ILLINOIS
175
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
176:
JOLIET, ILLINOIS .
177
JOLIET. ILUNOIS
178
JOUET, ILLINOIS
179
JOUET. ILLINOIS
180
JOUET, ILLINOIS
181
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
182
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
183
JOUET. ILLINOIS
184
JOUET. ILLINOIS
185
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
186
JOUET. ILLINOIS
187
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
188
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
189
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
190
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
F-144
-------
TABLE F-3 (cont.)
YIELD
YIELD
YIELD
YIELD
REDUCTION
COMPONENT
REDUCTION
COMPONENT
METAL
%
MEASURED
%
MEASURED
PHYTOT OXICITY
153
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
154
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
155
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
156
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
157
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
158
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
159
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
160
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
161
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
162
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
163
0
GRAIN
NA
STOVER
NO
164
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
165
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
166
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
167
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
168
0
GRAIN
0 1
STOVER
NO
169
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
170
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
171
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
172
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
173
0
GRAIN
NA
STOVER
NO
174
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
175
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
176
0
GRAIN :
0
STOVER
NO
177
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
178
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
179
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
180
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
181
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
182
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
183
0
GRAIN
NA
STOVER
NO
184
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
185
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
186
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
187
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
188
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
189
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
190
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
F-143
-------
TABLE F-3 (oont.)
SOIL
SOIL
CUMM Ni
SOIL Ni
PLANT Nf
PLANT
DESIGN
CEC
OC
SOIL
LOADING
SOIL
CONCENTRTN
CONCENTRTN
TISSUE
SUMMARY
cmol/kg
%
pH
RATE (kg/ha)
EXTRACTANT
ma/kg
mafka
SAMPLED
•
153
1.64
7.6
0
HCL-HF
18
1.2
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
154
1.61
6.8
0
HCL-HF
23
0.8
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
155
1.54
7.2
0
HCL-HF
30
<.6
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
156
1.53
7.2
0
HCL-HF
28
0.6
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
157
1.54
7
0
HCL-HF
23
<.6
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
158
1.51
7
0
HCL-HF
25
0.7
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
159
1.58
7.4
0
HCL-HF
18
<.6
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
160
1.54
7.2
0
HCL-HF
29
<.6
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
161
1.51
7
0
HCL-HF
28
<.6
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
162
1.62
7
0
HCL-HF
31
<.6
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
163
1.64
7.3
12.1
HCL-HF
24
1.2
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
164
1.84
6.8
13.2
HCL-HF
24
0.6
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
165
1.74
7.1
14.5
HCL-HF
36
1.7
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
166
2.18
7.1
14.5
HCL-HF
28
<.6
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
167
1.86
7.2
14.5
HCL-HF
26
<.6
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
168
1.67
7.2
14.5
HCL-HF
30
*
O
00
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
169
1.83
7.5
14.5
HCL-HF
22
0.6
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
170
1.55
7.2
14.5
HCL-HF
30
<.6
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
171
1.68
7
14.5
HCL-HF
23
<.6
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
172
1.89
7.1
14.5
HCL-HF
36
<.6
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
173
1.97
7.8
24.2
HCL-HF
29
1.6
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
174
1.81
7
26.4
HCL-HF
40
1.3
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
175
1.88
7.3
29
HCL-HF
27
1.5
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
176
2.21
7.3
29
HCL-HF
36
: <.6
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
177
1.99
7.4
29
HCL-HF
26
<.6
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
178
1.89
7.3
29
HCL-HF
34
0.8
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
179
1.94
7.4
29
HCL-HF
26
2.4
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
180
1.72
7.4
29
HCL-HF
36
<.6
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
181
1.79
7.2
29
HCL-HF
27
<.6
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
182
1.87
7.2
29
HCL-HF
41
<.6
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
183
2.23
7.5
48.4
HCL-HF
37
1.2
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
184
2.22
6.4
52.7
HCL-HF
40
1.4
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
185
2.28
6.5
57.9
HCL-HF
36
1.2
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
186
2.61
6.5
82.1
HCL-HF
44
<.6
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
187
2.74
6.5
103.4
HCL-HF
41
<•6
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
188
2.94
5.9
135.5
HCL-HF
49
2.7
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
189
3.92
5.9
135.5
HCL-HF
60
1.4
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
190
3.77
5.8
135.5
HCL-HF
75
<.6
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
F-142
-------
TABLE F-3 (oont.)
ANNLSLUDGE
CUMML SLUDGE
YEARS
SOIL
SOIL
CONTENT
CONTENT
CONTENT
LOADNG RATE
LOADNG RATE
SINCE LAST
TAXONOMIC
SERIES
SOIL
%
%
%
Ma/ha
Mfl/ha
APPLICATN
NAME
NAME
TEXTURE
153
0
0
NA
ELLIOT
SiL
154
0
0
NA
ELLIOT
SiL
155
0
0
NA
ELLIOT
SiL
156
0
0
NA
ELLIOT
SiL
157
0
0
NA
ELLIOT
SiL
158
0
0
NA
ELLIOT
SiL
159
0
0
NA
ELLIOT
SiL
160
0
0
NA
ELLIOT
SiL
161
0
0
NA
ELLIOT
SiL
•
162
0
0
NA
ELLIOT
SiL
163
14.5
31.8
0
ELLIOT
SiL
164
11.1
42.9
0
ELLIOT
SiL
165
15.3
58.2
0
ELLIOT
SiL
166
0
58.2
1
ELLIOT
SiL
167
0
58.2
2
ELLIOT
SiL
168
0
58.2
3
" ELLIOT
SiL
169
0
58.2
4
ELLIOT
SiL
170
0
58.2
5
ELLIOT
SiL
171
0
58.2
6
ELLIOT
SiL
172
0
58.2
7
ELLIOT
SiL
173
29
63.6
0
ELLIOT
SiL
174
. 22.2
85.8
0
ELLIOT
SiL
175
30.6
116.4
0
ELUOT
SiL
176
0
116.4
1
ELLIOT
SiL
177
0
116.4
2
ELLIOT
SiL
178
0
116.4
3
ELLIOT
SiL
179
0
116.4
4
ELLIOT
SiL
.
ISO
0
116.4
5
ELLIOT
SiL
181
0
116.4
6
ELLIOT
SiL
182
0
116.4
7
ELLIOT
SiL
183
57.8
127
0
ELLIOT
SiL
184
44.4
171.4
0
ELLIOT
SiL
185
61.1
232.5
0
ELLIOT
SiL
186
69.8
302.3
0
ELLIOT
SiL
187
54
356.3
0
ELLIOT
SiL
138
72
428.3
0
ELLIOT
SiL
189
0
428.3
1
ELLIOT
SiL
190
0
428.3 .
2
1
ELLIOT
SiL
F-141
-------
TABLE F-3 (oont.)
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
Fa
N
N1
P
Pb
Zn
SOLIDS
BIOLOGICAL
CHEMICAL
%
%
mo/ko
mo/ko
mo/ko
mgflcg
CONTNT
PROCESSING
STABILIZATN
153
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
154
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
155
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
156
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
157
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
158
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
159
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
160
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
161
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
162
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
163
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
164
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
165
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
166
4.5
5.9
316
3.5.
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
167
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
168
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
" 2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
169
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
170
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
171
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
172
4.5
5.9
318
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
173
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
174
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
175
4.5
5.S
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
176
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
: 1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
177
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
178
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
179
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
180
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
181
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
182
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
183
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
184
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
185
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
186
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
187
4.S
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
188
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
189
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
190
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
F-140
-------
TABLE F-3 (oont.)
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
LITERATURE
PLANT
SLUDGE
VOL SOLIDS
Al
Ca
Cd
Cr
Cu
CITATION
NAME
CULTIVAR
pH
%
%
%
mg/ka
mn/ka
ma/kfl
153
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
154
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
155
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
156
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
157
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
158
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
159
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
160
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
161
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
162
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
163
HINESLY 1985
CORN
•
3.4
263
2963
1422
164
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
165
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
. 166
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
167
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
168
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
169
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
170
HINESLY 1985
CORN
I
3.4
263
2963
1422
171
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
172
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
173
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
174
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
175
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
176
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
177
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
178
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
179
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
180
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
181
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
182
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
183
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
184
HINESLY .1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
185
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
186
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
187
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
188
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
189
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
190
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
F-139
-------
TABLE F-3 (com.)
LOCATION
COMMENTS
OF
STUDY
115
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
116
joutrr. Illinois
117
.
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
118
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
119
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
120
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
121
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
122
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
123
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
124
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
125
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
126
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
127
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
128
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
129
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
130
•
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
131
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
132
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
133
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
134
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
135
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
136
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
137
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
138
: JOLIET, ILLINOIS
139
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
140
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
141
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
142
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
143
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
144
JOUET. ILLINOIS
145
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
146
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
147
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
148
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
149
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
150
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
151
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
152
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
F-138
-------
TABLE F-3 (cont.)
YIELD
YIELD
YIELD
YIELD
REDUCTION
COMPONENT
REDUCTION
COMPONENT
METAL
%
MEASURED
%
MEASURED
PHYTOTOXICITY
115
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
116
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
117
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
118
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
119
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
120
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
121
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
122
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
123
0
GRAIN
NA
STOVER
NO
124
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
125
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
126
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
127
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
128
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
129
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
130
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
131
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
132
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
133
0
GRAIN
NA
STOVER
NO
134
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
135
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
136
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
137
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
138
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
139
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
140
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
141
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
142
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
143
0
GRAIN
NA
STOVER
NO
144
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
145
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
146
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
147
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
148
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
149
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
150
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
151
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
152
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
F-137
-------
TABLE F-3 (oont.)
SOIL
SOIL
CUMM Ni
SOIL Ni
PLANT Ni
PLANT
DESIGN
CEC
OC
SOIL
LOADING
SOIL
CONCENTRTN
CONCENTRTN
TISSUE
SUMMARY
cmol/ka
%
pH
RATE (ko/ha)
EXTRACTANT
mo/ka
ma/ka
SAMPLED
115
0.94
7.6
0
HCL-HF
30
<.6
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
116
0.93
7.6
0
HCL-HF
31
<.6
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
117
0.92
7.8
0
HCL-HF
25
<.6
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
118
0.87
7.5
0
HCL-HF
27
0.7
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
119
0.9
7.6
0
HCL-HF
22
1.1
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
120
0.88
7.5
0
HCL-HF
30
<.6
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
121
0.73
7.6
0
HCL-HF
26
<.6
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
122
1
7.4
0
HCL-HF
36
<.6
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
123
1.06
7.7
12.1
HCL-HF
28
1.3
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
124
1.11
6.9
13.2
HCL-HF
20
1
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
125
1.18
7.5
14.5
HCL-HF
35
2.4
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
126
1.4
7.5
14.5
HCL-HF
42
<.6
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
127
1.16
7.6
14.5
HCL-HF
25
<.6
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
128
1.08
7.5
14.5
HCL-HF
33
0.9
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
129
1.18
7.7
14.5
HCL-HF
26
1.2
LEAF ¦
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
130
1.23
7.6
14.5
HCL-HF
32
* <.6
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
131
1.09
7.5
14.5
HCL-HF
27
<.6
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
132
1.32
7.3
14.5
HCL-HF
38
<.6
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
133
1.38
7.6
24.2
HCL-HF
28
1.4
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
134
1.12
7
26.4
HCL-HF
19
0.9
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
135
1.29
7.4
29
HCL-HF
44
2
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
136
1.83
7.3
29
HCL-HF
35
<.6
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
137
1.36
7.5
29
HCL-HF
21
<.6
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
138
1.34
7.2
29
HCL-HF
28
<.6 :
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
139
1.6
7.4
29
HCL-HF
26
0.8
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
140
1.31
7.3
29
HCL-HF
35
<.6
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
141
1.54
7.1
29
HCL-HF
27
<.6
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
142
1.62
7.1
29
HCL-HF
39
<.6
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
143
1.62
7.6
48.4
HCL-HF
37
1.2
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
144
1.63
6.8
52.7
HCL-HF
30
1.1
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
145
1.94
7.3
57.9
HCL-HF
42
2.3
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
146
2.5
7.2
57.9
HCL-HF
44
0.7
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
147
1.83
7.3
57.9
HCL-HF
36
<.6
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
148
1.88
7.2
57.9
HCL-HF
37
0.8
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
149
2.03
7.3
57.9
HCL-HF
33
0.8
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
150
1.6
7.1
57.9
HCL-HF
40
<.6
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
151
1.54
7.1
57.9
HCL-HF
28
<.6
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
152
1.84
7
57.9
HCL-HF
43
<.6
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
F-138
-------
TABLE F-3 (cont.)
ANNLSLUDGE
CUMML SLUDGE
YEARS
SOIL
SOIL
CONTENT
CONTENT
CONTENT
LOADNG RATE
LOADNG RATE
SINCE LAST
TAXONOMIC
SERIES
SOIL
%
%
%
L Mg/ha
Mg/ha
APPLICATN
NAME
NAME
TEXTURE
115
0
0
NA
BLOUNT
SiL
116
0
0
NA
BLOUNT
SiL
117
0
0
NA
BLOUNT
SiL
118
0
0
NA
BLOUNT
SiL
119
0
0
NA
BLOUNT
SiL
120
0
0
NA
BLOUNT
SiL
121
0
0
NA
BLOUNT
SiL
122
0
0
NA
BLOUNT
SiL
123
14.5
31.8
0
BLOUNT
SiL
•
124
11.1
42.3
0
BLOUNT
SiL
125
15.3
58.2
0
BLOUNT
SiL
126
0
58.2
1
BLOUNT
SiL
127
0
58.2
2
BLOUNT
SiL
128
0
58.2
3
BLOUNT
SiL
129
0
58.2
4
BLOUNT
SiL
130
0
58.2
5
* BLOUNT
SiL
131
0
58.2
6
BLOUNT
SiL
132
0
58.2
7
BLOUNT
SiL
133
29
63.6
0
BLOUNT
SiL
134
22.2
85.8
0
BLOUNT
SiL
135
30.3
116.4
0
BLOUNT
SiL
136
0
118.4
1
BLOUNT
SiL
137
0
116.4
2
BLOUNT
SiL
: 138
0
116.4
3
BLOUNT
SiL
139
0
116.4
4
BLOUNT
SiL
140
0
116.4
5
BLOUNT
SiL
141
0
116.4
6
BLOUNT
SiL
142
0
116.4
7
BLOUNT
SiL
143
57.8
127
0
BLOUNT
SiL
144
44.4
171.4
0
BLOUNT
SiL
145
61.1
232.5
0
BLOUNT
SiL
146
0
232.5
1
BLOUNT
SiL
147
0
232.5
1
BLOUNT
SiL
148
0
232.5
1
BLOUNT
SiL
149
0
232.5
1
BLOUNT
SiL
•
150
0
232.5
1
BLOUNT
SiL
151
0
232.5
1
BLOUNT
SiL
152
0
232.5
1
BLOUNT
SiL
F-135
-------
TABLE F-3 (cont.)
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
Fo
N
W
P
Pb
Zn
SOUDS
BIOLOGICAL
CHEMICAL
%
%
mg/kg
mg/ko
mg/ko
mfl/ko
CONTNT
PROCESSING
STABILIZATN
115
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
118
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
117
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
118
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
119
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
120
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
121
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
122
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
123
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
124
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
125
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
126
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
127
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
128
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
129
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
130
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
" 2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
131
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
132
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
133
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
134
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
135
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
136
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
137
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
:138
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
139
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
140
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
141
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
142
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
143
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
144
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
145
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
146
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
147
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
148
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
149
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
150
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
151
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
152
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
F-134
-------
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
128
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138:
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
TABLE F-3 (cont.)
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
LITERATURE
PLANT
SLUDGE
VOL SOLIDS
Al
Ca
Cd
Cr
Cu
CITATION
NAME
CULTIVAR
PH
%
%
%
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
F-133
-------
TABU F-3 (oont.)
LOCATION
COMMENTS
OF
STUDY
77
.
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
78
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
79
'
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
80
• •
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
81
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
82
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
S3
•NOT TESTED STATISTICALLY. MAY BE ATTRIBUTED TO WET SEASON/INSECTS
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
84
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
85
MUSCLE SCHOALES. AL
86
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
87
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
88
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
89
•NOT TESTED STATISTICALLY. MAY BE ATTRIBUTED TO WET SEASON/INSECTS
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
90
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
91
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
92
•
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
93
MUSCLE SCHOALES. AL
94
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
95
•AUTHORS STATE YIELD REDUCTIONS NOT ATTRIBUTABLE TO METALS
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
96
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
97
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
98
MUSCLE SCHOALES. AL
99
•AUTHORS STATE YIELD REDUCTIONS NOT ATTRIBUTABLE TO METALS
MUSCLE SCHOALES. AL
100
MUSCLE SCHOALES. AL
101
MUSCLE SCHOALES. AL
102
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
103
•AUTHORS STATE YIELD REDUCTIONS NOT ATTRIBUTABLE TO METALS
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
104
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
105
MUSCLE SCHOALES. AL
106
MUSCLE SCHOALES. AL
107
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
108
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
109
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
110
MUSCLE SCHOALES. AL
111
MUSCLE SCHOALES. AL
112
MUSCLE SCHOALES. AL
113
JOLIET. ILLINOIS
114
JOLIET, ILLINOIS
F-132
-------
TABLE F-3 (cont.)
YIELD
YIELD
YIELD
YIELD
REDUCTION
COMPONENT
REDUCTION
COMPONENT
METAL
%
MEASURED
%
MEASURED
PHYTOTOXICITY
77
0
EDIBLE PART
NO
78
0
EDIBLE PART
NO
79
0
EDIBLE PART
NO
80
0
EDIBLE PART
NO
81
0
EDIBLE PART
NO
82
0
EDIBLE PART
NO
83
25*
EDIBLE PART
•NO
84
0
EDIBLE PART
NO
85
0
EDIBLE PART
NO
86
0
EDIBLE PART
NO
87
0
EDIBLE PART
NO
88
0
EDIBLE PART
NO
89
21.1 •
EDIBLE PART
•NO
90
0
EDIBLE PART
NO
91
0
EDIBLE PART
NO
92
0
EDIBLE PART
NO
93
0
TOTAL PLANT
NO
94
0
TOTAL PLANT
NO
95
15.4'
TOTAL PLANT
O
z
•
96
0
TOTAL PLANT
NO
97
0
TOTAL PLANT
NO
98
0
TOTAL PLANT
NO
99
10*
TOTAL PLANT
•NO
100
0
TOTAL PLANT
NO
101
0
TOTAL PLANT
NO
102
0
TOTAL PLANT
NO
103
12.5*
TOTAL PLANT
•NO
104
0
TOTAL PLANT
NO
105
0
TOTAL PLANT
NO
106
0
TOTAL PLANT
NO
107
0
TOTAL PLANT
NO
108
0
TOTAL PLANT
NO
109
0
TOTAL PLANT
,
NO
110
0
TOTAL PLANT
NO
111
0
TOTAL PLANT
NO
112
0
TOTAL PLANT
NO
113
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
114
0
GRAIN
0
STOVER
NO
F-131
-------
TABLE F-3 (com.)
SOIL
son.
CUMM Ni
SOIL Ni
PLANT Ni
PUNT
DESIGN
CEC
OC
SOIL
LOADING
SOIL
CONCENTRTN
CONCENTRTN
TISSUE
SUMMARY
cmol/ko
%
pH
RATE (ko/ha)
EXTRACTANT
mo/kfl
mo/kg
SAMPLED
77
6.4
4.4
0.5 M HCL
1.8
2.4
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
79
5.8
0
0.5 M HCL
1
1.8
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
79
5.8
2.2
0.5 M HCL
2.7
1.7
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
80
5.8
4.4
0.5 M HCL
1.8
1.8
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
81
5.8
0
0.5 M HCL
1
2.3
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
82
5.8
2.2
0.5 M HCL
2.7
3
LEAF
FIELD. SLUDGE, MATURITY
83
5.8
4.4
0.5 M HCL
1.8
2.4
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
84
5.8
0
0.5 M HCL
1
2.5
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
85
5.8
2.2
0.5 M HCL
2.7
2.8
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
86
5.8
4.4
0.5 M HCL
1.8
2.2
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
87
5.8
0
0.5 M HCL
1
2.6
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE. MATURITY
88
5.8
2.2
0.5 M HCL
2.7
4.4
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
89
5.8
4.4
0.5 M HCL
1.8
2.9
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
90
5.8
0
0.5 M HCL
1
3.9
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE. MATURITY
91
5.8
2.2
0.5 M HCL
2.7
4.4
LEAF
FIELD. SLUDGE. MATURITY
92
5.8
4.4
0.5 M HCL
1.8
* 4.9
LEAF
FIELD. SLUDGE. MATURITY
93
5.1
0
.5 M HCL
0.6
3.5
LEAF
FIELD. SLUDGE, MATURITY
94
5.1
0
.5 M HCL
0.6
3
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
95
5.1
4.5
.5 M HCL
1.6
6.3
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
96
5.1
4.5
.5 M HCL
1.2
7.4
LEAF
FIELD. SLUDGE. MATURITY
97
5.1
0
.5 M HCL
0.6
4.6
LEAF
FIELD. SLUDGE. MATURITY
98
5.1
0
.5 M HCL
0.6
3.1
LEAF
FIELD. SLUDGE, MATURITY
99
5.1
4.5
.5 M HCL
1.6
3.3
LEAF
FIELD. SLUDGE, MATURITY
100
5.1
4.5
.5 M HCL
1.2
2.9
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
101
5.1
0
.5 M HCL
0.6
3.7
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
102
5.1
0
.5 M HCL
0.6
4.6
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
103
5.1
4.5
.5 M HCL
1.6
3.7
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
104
5.1
4.5
.5 M HCL
1.2
4.1
LEAF
FIELD. SLUDGE. MATURITY
105
5.1
0
.5 M HCL
0.6
2.2
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE. MATURITY
106
5.1
0
.5 M HCL
0.6
2.4
LEAF
FIELD. SLUDGE, MATURITY
107
5.1
4.5
.5 M HCL
1.6
2.2
LEAF
FIELD. SLUDGE. MATURITY
108
5.1
4.5
.5 M HCL
1.2
2.2
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
109
5.1
0
.5 M HCL
0.6
3
LEAF
FIELD. SLUDGE, MATURITY
110
5.1
0
.5 M HCL
0.6
3.3
LEAF
FIELD. SLUDGE, MATURITY
111
5.1
4.5
.5 M HCL
1.6
3.5
LEAF
FIELD. SLUDGE. MATURITY
112
5.1
4.5
.5 M HCL
1.2
3.3
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE. MATURITY
113
0.85
7.8
0
HCL-HF
24
1.2
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
114
0.9
6.9
0
HCL-HF
27
0.9
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
F-130
-------
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
TABLE F-3 (cont.)
ANNLSLUDGE
CUMML SLUDGE
YEARS
SOIL
SOIL
CONTENT
CONTENT
CONTENT
LOADNG RATE
LOADNG RATE
SINCE LAST
TAXONOMIC
SERIES
SOIL
%
%
%
Mg/ha
Mg/ha
APPLICATN
NAME
NAME
TEXTURE
112
112
SANGO
SiL
SANGO
SiL
112
112
SANGO
SiL
112
112
SANGO
SiL
SANGO
SiL
112
112
SANGO
SiL
112
112
SANGO
SiL
SANGO
SiL
112
112
SANGO
SiL
112
112
SANGO
SiL
SANGO
SiL
112
112
SANGO
SiL
112
112
SANGO
SiL
SANGO
SiL
112
112
SANGO
SiL
112
112
SANGO
SiL
SANGO
SiL
SANGO
SiL
224
224
SANGO
SiL
224
224
SANGO
SIL
SANGO
SiL
SANGO
SiL
224
224
SANGO
SiL
224
224
SANGO
SiL
SANGO
SiL
SANGO
SiL
224
224
SANGO
SiL
224
224
SANGO
SiL
SANGO
SiL
SANGO
SIL
224
224
SANGO
SiL
224
224
SANGO
SiL
SANGO
SiL
SANGO
SiL
224
224
SANGO
SiL
224
224
SANGO
SiL
NA
BLOUNT
SiL
NA
BLOUNT
SiL
F-129
-------
TABLE M (cart.)
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
Fa
N
Ni
P
Pb
Zn
SOUDS
BIOLOGICAL
CHEMICAL
%
%
rrva/ka
mo/kg
ma/ko
ma/ka
CONTNT
PROCESSING
STABIUZATN
77
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
78
79
1.7
2.3
20
1.6
530
1800
80
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
81
82
1.7
2.3
20
1.6
530
1800
83
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
84
85
1.7
2.3
20
1.6
530
1800
86
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
87
88
1.7
2.3
20
1.6
530
1800
89
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
90
91
1.7
2.3
20
1.6
530
1800
92
1.5
2.1
40
1.3
1600
1800
93
1.7
2.3
20
1.6
530
1800
94
1.7
2.3
20
1.6
530
1800
95
1.7
2.3
20
1.6
530
1800
96
1.7
2.3
20
1.6
530
1800
97
1.7
2.3
20
1.6
530
1800
98
1.7
2.3
20
1.6
530
1800
99
1.7
2.3
20
1.6
530
1800
100 :
1.7
2.3
20
1.6
530
1800
101
1.7
2.3
20
1.6
530
1800
102
1.7
2.3
20
1.6
530
1800
103
1.7
2.3
20
1.6
530
1800
104
1.7
2.3
20
1.6
530
1800
105
1.7
2.3
20
1.6
530
1800
106
1.7
2.3
20
1.6
530
1800
107
1.7
2.3
20
1.6
530
1800
108
1.7
2.3
20
1.6
530
1800
109
1.7
2.3
20
1.6
530
1800
110
1.7
2.3
20
1.6
530
1800
111
1.7
2.3
20
1.6
530
1800
112
1.7
2.3
20
1.6
530
1800
113
4.5
5.9
316
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY, FECL3
114
4.5
5.9
318
3.5
1135
5059
0.03
2ND TRTMNT. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
CENT POLY. FECL3
F-128
-------
TABLE F-3 (cont.)
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
LITERATURE
PLANT
SLUDGE
VOL SOLIDS
Al
Ca
Cd
Cr
Cu
CITATION
NAME
CULTIVAR
pH
%
%
%
malka
ma/kfl
mo/kfl
77
GIORDANO & MAYS 1977
KALE
6.1
1.7
40
400
520
78
GIORDANO & MAYS 1977
OKRA
79
GIORDANO & MAYS 1977
OKRA
6.6
2.5
50
350
730
80
GIORDANO & MAYS 1977
OKRA
6.1
1.7
40
400
520
81
GIORDANO & MAYS 1977
PEPPER
82
GIORDANO & MAYS 1977
PEPPER
6.6
2.5
50
350
730
83
GIORDANO & MAYS 1977
PEPPER
6.1
1.7
40
400
520
84
GIORDANO & MAYS 1977
TOMATO
85
GIORDANO & MAYS 1977
TOMATO
6.6
2.5
50
350
730*
86
GIORDANO & MAYS 1977
TOMATO
6.1
1.7
40
400
520
87
GIORDANO & MAYS 1977
SQUASH
88
GIORDANO & MAYS 1977
SQUASH
6.6
2.5
50
350
730
89
GIORDANO & MAYS 1977
SQUASH
6.1
1.7
40
400
520
90
GIORDANO & MAYS 1977
LETTUCE
91
GIORDANO & MAYS 1977
LETTUCE
6.6
2.5
50
350
730
92
GIORDANO & MAYS 1977
LETTUCE
6.1
1.7
40
400
520
93
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
LETTUCE
6.6
2.5
50
350
730
94
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
LETTUCE
6.6
2.5
50
350
730
95
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
LETTUCE
6.6
2.5
50
350
730
96
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
LETTUCE
6.6
2.5
50
350
730
97
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
PEPPER
6.6
2.5
50
350
730
98
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
PEPPER
6.6
2.5
50
350
730
99
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
PEPPER
6.6
2.5
50
350
730
100
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
PEPPER
6.6
2.5
50
350
730
101
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
BEAN
6.6
2.5
50
350
730
102
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
BEAN
6.6
2.5
50
350
730
103
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
BEAN
6.6
2.5
50
350
730
104
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
BEAN
6.6
2.5
50
350
730
105
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
CORN
6.6
2.5
50
350
730
106
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
CORN
6.6
2.5
50
350
730
107
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
CORN
6.6
2.5
50
350
730
108
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
CORN
6.6
2.5
50
350
730
109
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
SQUASH
6.6
2.5
50
350
730
110
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
SQUASH
6.6
2.5
50
350
730
111
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
SQUASH
6.6
2.5
50
350
730
112
GIORDANO&MAYS 1977
SQUASH
6.6
2.5
50
350
730
113
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
114
HINESLY 1985
CORN
3.4
263
2963
1422
C.1 07
-------
TABLE F-3 (cont.)
LOCATION
COMMENTS
OF
STUDY
39
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
40
•DOSE RESPONSE & TISSUE Nl CONCENTRATION INCONSISTANT
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
41
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
42
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
43
•DOSE RESPONSE NOT CONSISTANT, PH<5.5
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
44
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
45
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
46
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
47
MUSCLE SCHOALES. AL
48
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
49
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
50
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
51
•DOSE RESPONSE & TISSUE Nl CONCENTRATION NOT CONSISTANT
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
52
•DOSE RESPONSE & TISSUE Nl CONCENTRATION NOT CONSISTANT
MUSCLE SCHOALES. AL
53
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
54
•TISSUE Nl NOT CONSISTANT, SOIL PH<5.5, SLUDGE LOADING EXCEEDS AGRONOMIC RATES
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
55
•TISSUE Nl NOT CONSISTANT. SOIL PH<5.5, SLUDGE LOADING EXCEEDS AGRONOMIC RATES
MUSCLE SCHOALES. AL
56
•TISSUE Nl NOT CONSISTANT. SLUDGE LOADING EXCEEDS AGRONOMIC RATES
MUSCLE SCHOALES. AL
57
MUSCLE SCHOALES. AL
58
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
59
•NOT TESTED STATISTICALLY. MAY BE ATTRIBUTED TO WET SEASON/INSECTS
MUSCLE SCHOALES. AL
60
MUSCLE SCHOALES. AL
61
•NOT TESTED STATISTICALLY. MAY BE ATTRIBUTED TO WET SEASON/INSECTS
MUSCLE SCHOALES. AL
62
•NOT TESTED STATISTICALLY, MAY BE ATTRIBUTED TO WET SEASON/INSECTS
MUSCLE SCHOALES. AL
63
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
64
MUSCLE SCHOALES. AL
65
•NOT TESTED STATISTICALLY. MAY BE ATTRIBUTED TO WET SEASON/INSECTS
MUSCLE SCHOALES. AL
66
MUSCLE SCHOALES. AL
67
MUSCLE SCHOALES. AL
68
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
69
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
70
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
71
MUSCLE SCHOALES. AL
72
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
73
MUSCLE SCHOALES. AL
74
MUSCLE SCHOALES. AL
75
MUSCLE SCHOALES. AL
76
MUSCLE SCHOALES, AL
F-126
-------
TABLE F-4 (cont.l
LOCATION
OF
STUDY
381
Joliet, III.
382
Joliet, III.
383
Joliet. 111.
384
Joliet, III.
385
Jolist, III.
386
Joliet, III.
387
Joliet, III.
388
Joliet, III.
389
Joliet, III.
390
Joliet, III.
391
Joliet, IH.
392
Joliet, III.
393
Joliet, III.
394
Joliet, III.
395
Joliet, III.
* 396
Joliet. III.
397
Joliet, III.
398
Joliet, IH.
399
Joliet, HI.
400
Joliet, IH.
401
Joliet, III.
402
JoHet, III.
403
Joliet IH.
404
Joliet. IH.
405
Joliet. III.
406
Joliet III.
407
Joliet III.
408
JoHet. III.
409
Joliet III-
410
Joliet III.
411
Joliet 111.
412
Joliet. III.
413
Joliet HI.
414
Joliet III.
415
Joliet. 111.
416
Joliet, III.
417
Joliet, IH.
418
Joliet, III.
F-281
-------
TABLE F-4 {coot.)
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
LITERATURE
PLANT
SLUDGE
VOL SOLIDS
Al
Ca
Cd
CITATION
NAME
CULTIVAR
PH
%
S
%
mg/ko
*
419
Hinaaly, TJ3. at at., 197&. '95
Corn
H98
420
Hlnatty, T.O. at at., 1978. #95
Corn
R177
421
Hlnaaty, T.D. at at.. 1978. <95
Corn
B77
422
Hlnaalv. T.D. at at.. 1978. #95
Corn
OH43
423
Hlnaaty. T.D. at at.. 1978. #95
Corn
R80S
424
Hlnaaly, T.D. at at., 1978. #95
Corn
H98
425
Hlnaaly, T.D. at at.. 1978. #95
Corn
A619
428
Hlnaalv. T.D. at at., 1978. #95
Corn
Mo17
427
HInatty. T.D. at at.. 1978. #95
Corn
Oh545
428
Hlnaalv, T.D. at at., 1978. #95
Com
B37
429
Hlnaalv, T.D. at al.. 1978. #95
Corn
R805
430
Hlnaaly, T.D. at al., 1978. #95
Com
Va26
431
Hlnaalv, T.D. at al., 1978. #95
Com
H100
432
Hlnaaly, T.D. at al., 1978. #95
Corn
B73
433
Hlnaalv, T.D. at al., 1978. #95
Corn
B14
434
Hlnaaly, T.D. at at., 1978. #95
Corn
A632
435
Hlnaaly, T.D. at at., 1978. #95
Corn
N28
436
Hlnaaly, T.D. at al., 1978. #95
Corn
W64A
437
Hlnaaly, T.D. at al., 1978. #95
Cam
R802A
438
Hlnaaly, T.D. at at., 1978. #95
Corn
H99
439
Hlnaaly, T.D. at at., 1978. #95
Corn
H96
440
Hlnaaly, T.D. at at., 1978. #95
Corn
R177
441
Hlnaaly. T.D. at al., 1978. #95
Corn
B77
442
Hlnaalv, T.D. at at.. 1978. #95
Com
Oh43
443
Hlnaalv. T.D. at al.. 1978. #95
Com
R806
444
Hlnaalv, T.D. at at.. 1978. #95
Corn
H98
445
Hlnaaly, T.D. at al.. 1978. #95
Corn
A619
440
Hlnaaly, T.D. at at., 1978. #95
Corn
Mo 17
447
Hlnaalv, T.D. at at., 1978. #95
Corn
Oh545
448
Hlnaaly, T.D. at al., 1978. #95
Corn
B37
449
Hlnaalv, T.D. at al., 1978. #95
Com
R805
450
Hinaaly, T.D. at al., 1978. #95
Corn
Va26
451
Hlnaalv, T.D. at at.. 1978. #95
Corn
H100
452
Hlnaaly, T.D. at al.. 1978. #95
Corn
B73
453
Hlnaaly. T.D. at at.. 1978. #95
Corn
B14
454
Hlnaaly, T.D. at al., 1978. #95
Corn
A632
455
. Hinaaly. T.D. at al.. 1978. #95
Corn
N28
456
Hinaaly. T.D. at al.. 1978. #95
Corn
W64A
F-282
-------
423
424
42S
426
427
428
429
430
431
432
433
434
43S
436
437
438
439
440
441
442
443
444
445
446
447
448
449
450
451
452
453
454
455
456
TABLE F-4 (oont.)
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
Cr
Cu
Fa
N
Ni
Pb
Zn
SOLIDS
BIOLOGICAL
mg/kg
njj/kg^
%
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
CONTNT
PROCESSING
Ona-quartar maximum
One-quartar maximum
One-quartar maximum
One-half maximum
Ona-half maximum
Ons-half maximum
Ona-half maximum
One-half maximum
Ona-half maximum
One-half maximum
Ona-half maximum
Ona-half maximum
Ona-half maximum
Ona-half maximum
One-half maximum
One-half maximum
One-half maximum
One-half maximum
One-half maximum
One-half maximum
One-half maximum
One-half maximum
One-half maximum
Maximum
Maximum
Maximum
Maximum
Maximum
Maximum
Maximum
Maximum
Maximum
Maximum
Maximum
Maximum
Maximum
Maximum
Maximum
F-283
-------
TABLE F-4 (oonU
SLUDGE
ANNLSLUDGE
CUMML SLUDGE
YEARS
SOIL
SOIL
CHEMICAL
LOADMG RATE
LOADNG RATE
SINCE LAST
TAXONOMIC
SERIES
SOIL
STABIUZATN
Mo/ha
Mo/ha
APPLICATN
NAME
NAME
TEXTURE
419
17.75
7
Aerie Ochraqualf
Blount
•Ht loam
420
17.75
7
Aerie Ochraqualf
Blount
»Ht loam
421
17.75
7
Aerlc Ochraqualf •
Blount
¦ilt loam
422
35.5
7
Aaric Ochraqualf
Blount
tilt loam
423
35.5
7
Aerie Ochraqualf
Blount
•lit loam
424
35.5
7
Aerie Ochraqualf
Blount
tilt loam
425
35.5
7
Aerie Ochraqualf
Blount
lilt loam
426
35.5
7
Aerio Ochraqualf
Blount
•ilt loam
427
35.5
7
Aerie Ochraqualf
Blount
tilt loam
428
35.5
Aerie Ochraqualf
Blount
•ilt loam
429
35.5
7
Aerie Ochraqualf
Blount
tilt loam
430
35.5
7
Aaric Ochraqualf
Blount
•ilt loam
431
35.5
7
Aerie Ochraqualf
Blount
silt loam
432
35.5
7
Aario Ochraqualf
Blount
ailt loam
433
35.5
7
Aerie Ochraqualf
Blount
silt loam
434
35.5
7
Aerie Ochraqualf
Blount
silt loam
435
35.5
7
Aaric Ochraqualf
Blount
¦ilt loam
436
35.5
7
Aaric Ochraqualf
Blount
•ilt loam
437
35.5
7
Aaric Ochraqualf
Blount
¦ilt loam
438
35.5
7
Aerie Ochraqualf
Blount
silt loam
439
35.5
7
Aario Ochraqualf
Blount
•ilt loam
440
35.5
7
Aario Ochraqualf
Blount
•Ilt loam
441
35.5
7
Aario Ochraqualf
Blount
•ilt loam
442
71
Aerio Ochraqualf
Blount
•ilt loam :
443
71
7
Aario Ochraqualf
Blount
•Ilt loam
444
71
7
Aaric Ochraqualf
Blount
•ilt loam
445
71
7
Aario Ochraqualf
Blount
•ilt loam
446
71
7
Aaric Ochraqualf
Blount
•ilt loam
447
71
7
Aaric Ochraqualf
Blount
•ilt loam
448
71
7
Aaric Ochraqualf
Blount
•ilt loam
449
71
7
Aerie Ochraqualf
Blount
•ilt loam
450
71
7
Aaric Ochraqualf
Blount
•ilt loam
451
71
7
Aaric Ochraqualf
Blount
•ilt loam
452
71
7
Aaric Ochraqualf
Blount
silt loam
453
71
7
Aerie Ochraqualf
Blount
•ilt loam
454
71
7
Aerie Ochraqualf
Blount
silt loam
455
71
7
Aaric Ochraqualf
Blount
•ilt loam
456
71
7
Aerie Ochraqualf
Blount
silt loam
F-284
-------
419
420
421
422
423
424
42S
426
427
428
429
430
431
432
433
434
435
436
437
438
439
440
441
442
443
444
445
446
447
448
449
460
451
452
453
454
455
456
TABLE F-4 (cont.)
SAND
SILT
CLAY
SOIL
SOIL
CUMM Zn
CONTENT
CONTENT
CONTENT
CEC
cmol/kg
PC
%
SOIL
_Eti_
LOADING
RATE (kg/ha)
F-285
-------
TABLE F-4 (coo!.)
SOIL Zn
PLANT Zn
PUNT
YIELD
YIELD
SOIL
CONCENTRTN
CONCENTRTN
TISSUE
DESCRIPTION OF
REDUCTION
COMPONENT
EXTRACTANT
mo/ka
SAMPLED
EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN
%
MEASURED
419
188
43.3
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
NOT REPORTED
420
188
34.3
-SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
NOT REPORTED
421
188
32
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
NOT REPORTED
422
326
142.2
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
NOT REPORTED
423
326
156.1
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
NOT REPORTED
424
326
112.2
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
NOT REPORTED
425
326
62
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
NOT REPORTED
428
326
107.1
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
NOT REPORTED
427
326
89.2
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
NOT REPORTED
428
326
99
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
NOT REPORTED
429
326
91
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
NOT REPORTED
430
326
77.1
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
NOT REPORTED
431
326
65.9
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
NOT REPORTED
432
326
77.7
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
NOT REPORTED
433
326
71
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
NOT REPORTED
434
326
52.8
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
NOT REPORTED
435
326
56.7
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
NOT REPORTED
438
326
55.4
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
NOT REPORTED
437
326
85.3
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
NOT REPORTED
438
326
47.9
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
NOT REPORTED
439
326
63.5
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
NOT REPORTED
440
326
64.8
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
NOT REPORTED
441
326
43.7
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
NOT REPORTED
442
454
281.8
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
NOT REPORTED
443
454
268.2
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
NOT REPORTED
444
454
217.2
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
NOT REPORTED
445
454
193.3
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
NOT REPORTED
446
454
188.8
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
NOT REPORTED
447
454
170.6
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
NOT REPORTED
448
454
164.2
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
NOT REPORTED
449
454
148.1
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
NOT REPORTED
450
454
144.4
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
NOT REPORTED
451
454
140.1
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
NOT REPORTED
452
454
133.7
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
NOT REPORTED
453
454
130.2
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
NOT REPORTED
454
454
113
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
NOT REPORTED
455
454
109.4
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
NOT REPORTED
456
454
107.2
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
NOT REPORTED
F-286
-------
TABLE F-4 (cont.)
YIELD
YIELD
REDUCTION
COMPONENT
METAL
%
MEASURED
PHYTOTOXICITY
COMMENTS
419
NO
420
NO
421
NO
422
NO
423
NO
424
NO
425
NO
426
NO
427
NO
428
NO
429
NO
430
NO
431
NO
432
NO
i
433
NO
434
NO
435
NO
436
NQ
437
NO
438
NO
439
NO
440
NO
441
NO
442
NO
443
NO
444
NO
445
NO
446
NO
447
NO
.. 448
NO
449
NO
450
NO
451
NO
452
NO
453
NO
454
NO
455
NO
456
NO
J
F-287
-------
TABLE F-4 (cont.)
LOCATION
OF
STUDY
419
Joliet, III.
420
Joliet. HI.
421
Joint, HI.
422
Joltot, Ml.
423
Mat, IN.
424
Joliet, IN.
425
Joliet, III.
426
Joliet, ID.
427
JoliM. HI.
428
Joint, III.
429
Jollst, III.
430
Joliet, HI.
4S1
Joliet, III.
432
Joliet, HI.
433
Joliet, III.
* 434
J oil at, II.
43S
Joliet, HI.
43S
Joliet, III.
437
Joliet, HI.
438
Joliet, HI.
439
Joliet, HI.
440
JoKat, HI.
441
Joliet. HI.
442
Joliet, M.
443
Joliat, Kl.
444
JoUet, Kl.
445
JoNat, HI.
446
JoUet, M.
447
JoUet, Kl.
448
JoHet, M.
449
JoHet. II.
450
JoHet. M.
451
JoHet, II.
452
JoKat, M.
453
JoHet, M.
454
JoHet M.
455
J«Set.lt.
45$
JoSet, M.
F-2B8
-------
TABLE F-4 (cont.)
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
LITERATURE
PLANT
SLUDGE
VOL SOLIDS
Al
Ca
Cd
CITATION
NAME
CULTIVAR
PH
%
%
%
mg/kg
457
Hinesly, T.D. at al., 1978. #95
Corn
R802A
458
Hlne.lv, T.D. at al., 1978. #95
Corn
H99
459
Hinatly, T.D. at at., 1978. #95
Corn
H96
460
Hinaalv. T.D. at al.; 1978. #95
Corn
R177
461
Hinaaly, T.D. at al.. 1978. #95
Corn
B77
462
Hua, N.V., 1988. #104
Sudangraaa
Piper
0.97
5
463
Hua. N.V., 1988. #104
Sudangraaa
Piper
0.97
5
464
Hua. N.V., 1988. #104
Sudangraaa
Piper
0.97
5
465
Hua. N.V., 1988. #104
Sudangraaa
Piper
-
0.97
5
466
Kirkham. M.B., 1975 #125
Corn
467
Kirkham. M.B., 1975 #125
Corn
468
Kiikham. M.B., 1975 #125
Corn
830
469
Kiikham. M.B., 1983 #127
Sorghum
Dekalb C-46 Ptua
6.7
7770
29.2
470
Kiikham. M.B., 1983 #127
Sorghum
Dakalb C-46 Plua
6.7
7770
29.2
471
MacLaan, K.S. at al.. 1987. #147
Legume
8-17.6
472
MaoLaan, K.S. at al.. 1987. #147
Laguma
8-17.6
473
MacLaan, K.S. at al.. 1987. #147
GRASS
8-17.6
474
MaoLaan. K.S. at al.. 1987. #147
GRASS
8-17.6
475
Sikora, Lawrence J. at al., 1980. #214
Oata
Clintford
11.2
19
2
476
Slkora, Lawranca J. at al., 1980. #214
Oata
Clintford
6.9
22
18
477
Sikora. Lawranca J. at al., 1980. #214
Whaat
Potomac
11.2
19
2
478
Sikora, Lawranca J. at al., 1980. #214
Wheat
Potomao
6.9
22
18
479
Sikora, Lawranca J. at al., 1980. #214
Chard
Fordhook Giant Swiaa
11.2
19
2
480
Sikora, Lawranca J. at al., 1980. #214
Chard
Fordhook Giant Swiaa
6.9
22
18
481
Vlamia, J. at al., 1985. #245
Barley
MARIOUT
482
Vlamia. J. at al., 1985. #245
Bartay
MARIOUT
483
Vlamia. J. at al.. 1985. #245
Barley
MARIOUT
484
Vlamia. J. at al.. 1985. #245
Bartay
MARIOUT
485
Vlamia, J. at al.. 1985. #245
Barley
MARIOUT
486
Vlamia, J. at al.. 1985. #245
Bartay
MARIOUT
487
Vlamia. J. at al., 1985. #245
Bartay
MARIOUT
488
Vlamia. J. at al.. 1985. #245
Bartay
MARIOUT
489
Vlamia. J. at al.. 1985. #245
Bartay
MARIOUT
490
Vlamia, J. at al., 1985. #245
Bartay
MARIOUT
491
Vlamia, J. at al., 1985. #245
Bartay
MARIOUT
492
Vlamia. J. at al.. 1985. #245
Bartay
MARIOUT
493
Vlamia. J. at al., 1985. #245
Barley
MARIOUT
494
Vlamia, J. at al.. 1985. #245
Barley
MARIOUT
F-289
-------
TABLE F-4 (cont.)
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
Cr
Cu
Fa
N
Ni
P
Pb
Zn
SOLIDS
BIOLOGICAL
mg/ka
mg/kg
%
%
mg/kg
mo/kg
mg/kg
mfl/kg
CONTNT
PROCESSING
457
Maximum
458
Maximum
459
Maximum
460
Maximum
461
Maximum
462
440
5
29
640
463
440
5
29
640
464
440
5
29
640
465
440
5
29
640
466
control
467
supernatant
468
5900
6020
ND
24000
8390
aludge
469
851
375
35.6
21300
124
1890
Sludge-treated aoil
470
851
375
35.6
21300
124
1890
Control
471
31-130
398-678
28-56
288-684
610-1398
Treated with aludge
472
31-130
398-678
•28-56
288-684
610-1398
Untreated
473
31-130
398-678
28-56
288-684
610-1398
Treated with aludge
474
31-130
398-678
28-56
288-684
610-1398
Untreated
475
200
400
Limed raw aludge
476
627
2050
Dlgeeted aludge
477
200
400
Limed raw e)udge
478
627
2050
Digeeted aludge
479
200
400
Limed raw aludge
480
627
2050
Digested aludge
481
482
483
484
485
486
487
488
489
490
491
492
493
494
F-290
-------
TABLE F-4 (cont.)
SLUDGE
ANNLSLUDGE
CUMML SLUDGE
YEARS
SOIL
SOIL
CHEMICAL
LOADNG RATE
LOADNG RATE
SINCE LAST
TAXONOMIC
SERIES
SOIL
STABIUZATN
Mg/ha
Ma/ha
APPLICATN
NAME
NAME
TEXTURE
457
' 71
7
Aaric Ochraqualf
Blount
silt loam
458
71
7
Aerie Ochraqualf
Blount
silt loam
459
71
7
Aaric Ochraqualf -
Blount
silt loam
460
71
7
Aaric Ochraqualf
Blount
silt loam
461
71
7
Aaric Ochraqualf
Blount
silt loam
462
0
0
3
Tropaptic Eutrustox
Wahiawa
siity clay
463
45
45
3
Tropaptio Eutrustox
Wahiawa
silty clay
464
90
90
3
Tropaptic Eutrustox
Wahiawa
silty clay
465
180
180
0
Tropaptic Eutrustox
Wahiawa
silty clay
466
0
8
Warsaw
. silt loam
467
8
Warsaw
silt loom
468
1010
8
Warsaw
silt loam
469
32
128
Typio Udifluvant
Haynia
vf sandy loam
470
32
128
iTypio Udifluvant
Haynia
vf sandy loam
471
44.9(WET WT.)
44.9(WET WT.)
1-2 year*
CL, SL
472
0
0
1-2 yaara
CL.SL
473
CL, SL
474
CL, SL
475
Galaatown-Evasboro
loamy sand
476
477
478
479
480
481
0
0
DUBLIN
L
482
0
0
DUBLIN
L
483
0
0
DUBLIN
L
484
0
0
DUBLIN
L
485
0
0
DUBLIN
L
486
0
0
DUBLIN
L
487
0
0
DUBLIN
L
488
0
0
DUBLIN
L
489
0
0
DUBLIN
L
490
0
0
DUBLIN
L
491
0
0
DUBLIN
L
492
0
0
DUBLIN
L
493.
0
0 .
DUBLIN
L
494
0
0
DUBLIN
L
F-291
-------
TABLE F-4 (cont.)
SAND
SILT
CLAY
SOIL
SOIL
CUMM Zn
CONTENT
CONTENT
CONTENT
CEC
OC
SOIL
LOADING
xsaa^mmaK
%
%
cmol/ka
%
pH
RATE (kg/ha)
457
¦
458
459
,
460
461
462
1.14
5.32
0
463
1.22
5.77
29
464
1.34
6.03
58
465
1.6
6.38
116
466
21.1
3.9
6.2
467
5.9
468
5.9
10650
469
5.9
470
7
471
6.98
6.2
472
to
7.48
6.05
473
6.98
6.2
474
7.48
6.05
475
6.7
476
6.7
477
6.7
478
6.7
479
6.7
480
6.7
481
20
8.5
0
482
20
5.5
0
483
20
5.5
0
484
20
5.5
0
485
20
5.5
0
486
20
5.5
0
487
20
5.5
0
488
20
5.5
0
489
20
5.5
0
490
20
5.5
0
491
20
5.5
0
492
20
5.5
0
493
20
5.5
0
494
20
5.5
0
F-232
-------
TABLE F-4 (cont.)
SOIL Zn
PLANT Zn
PLANT
YIELD
YIELD
SOIL
CONCENTRTN
CONCENTRTN
TISSUE
DESCRIPTION OF
REDUCTION
COMPONENT
EXTRACTANT
mo/kg
mn/ko
SAMPLED
EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN
%
MEASURED
457
454
104.9
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
NOT REPORTED
458
454
102.9
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
NOT REPORTED
459
454
94.3
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
NOT REPORTED
460
454
88
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
NOT REPORTED
461
454
61.8
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
NOT REPORTED
462
DTPA
3.7
176
ABOVE GROUND
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
463
DTPA
8.1
ISO
ABOVE GROUND
sludge; field, maturity
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
464
DTPA
10.3
115
ABOVE GROUND
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
465
DTPA
13.6
172
ABOVE GROUND
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
466
TOTAL
158
67
LEAF '
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
NOT REPORTED
467
TOTAL
988
202
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
NOT REPORTED
468
TOTAL
2065
196
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
NOT REPORTED
469
10.2
37
Leaf
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
NOT REPORTED
470
0.8
37
Leaf
SLUDGE; FIELD, MATURITY
NOT REPORTED
471
.1 N HCL
2.57
28.4.
Above Ground
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
NOT REPORTED
472
.1 N HCL
2.2
25.9
Above Ground
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
NOT REPORTED
473
.1 N HCL
2.57
20.8
Above Ground
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
NOT REPORTED
474
.1 N HCL
2.2
23
Above Ground
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
NOT REPORTED
476
4.2
5.3
Stover
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
476
14.5
71.4
Stover
SLUDGE, FIELO, MATURITY
477
4.2
5.3
Stover
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
478
14.5
69.7
Stover
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
479
4.2
53
Whole
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
480
14.5
254
Whole
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
481
72
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
482
58
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
483
71
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
484
51
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
485
37
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
486
116
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
487
68
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
488
90
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
489
45
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
490
47
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
491
47
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
492
32
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
493
73
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
494
61
LEAF
SLUDGE. HELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
p ini
-------
TABLE F-4 (cont.)
YIELD
YIELD
REDUCTION
COMPONENT
METAL
%
MEASURED
PH YTOT OXICITY
COMMENTS
457
NO
458
NO
459
NO
460
NO
461
NO
462
NO
YIELD SIGNIFICANTLY INCREASED BY SLUDGE APPLICATION
463
NO
YIELD SIGNIFICANTLY INCREASED BY SLUDGE APPLICATION
464
NO
YIELD SIGNIFICANTLY INCREASED BY SLUDGE APPLICATION
465
NO
YIELD SIGNIFICANTLY INCREASED BY SLUDGE APPLICATION
466 .
NO
-
467
NO
468
NO
469
NO
470
NO
471
NO
472
NO
473
NO
474
NO
475
NO
476
NO
477
NO
478
NO
479
NO
480
NO
481
NO
482
NO
483
NO
484
NO
»
485
NO
486
NO
487
NO
481
NO
489
- NO
490
NO
491
NO
492
NO
493
NO
494
NO
F-2S4
-------
TABLE F-4 (cont.)
LOCATION
OF
STUDY
457
Joliet, 111.
4SS
Joliet, III.
459
Joint, III.
460
Joliet, III.
461
Joliet, III.
462
OAHU, HAWAII
463
OAHU, HAWAII
464
OAHU. HAWAII
465
OAHU, HAWAII
466
Dayton, Ohio
467
Dayton, Ohio
468
Dayton, Ohio
469
Manhattan, Karaaa
470
Manhattan, Kama*
471
Hetou county. Nova Scotia
472
Piotou county. Nova Scotia
473
Piotou county, Nova Scotia
474
Piotou county, Nova Sootia
475
Beltavilla, Maryland
476
Beltavilla, Maryland
477
Beltavilla, Maryland
478
Beltavilla, Maryland
479
Beltavilla, Maryland
480
Beltavilla, Maryland
481
BERKELEY, CALIFORNIA
482
BERKELEY, CALIFORNIA
483
BERKELEY, CAUFORNIA
484
BERKELEY, CAUFORNIA
488
BERKELEY, CAUFORNIA
486
BERKELEY. CAUFORNIA
487
BERKELEY. CALIFORNIA
488
BERKELEY, CAUFORNIA
489
BERKELEY, CALIFORNIA
490
BERKELEY. CALIFORNIA
491
BERKELEY. CAUFORNIA
492
BERKELEY. CALIFORNIA
493 :
BERKELEY. CALIFORNIA
494:
BERKELEY. CALIFORNIA
-------
TABLE F-4 (corn.)
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
LITERATURE
PLANT
SLUDGE
VOL SOLIDS
Al
Ca
Cd
CITATION
NAME
CULTIVAR
PH
%
%
%
mo/kg
495
Vlamia. J. at al.. 1985. #245
Barley
MARIOUT
37
496
Vlamia, J. at al., 1985. «24S
Barley
MARIOUT
37
497
Vlamia. J. at al.. 1985. f245
Barley
MARIOUT
37
498
Vlamia, J.atal., 1985. >245
Barley
MARIOUT
37
499
Vlamia, J.atal., 1985. #245
Barley
MARIOUT
37
600
Vlamia, J. at al., 1985. *245
Bariav
MARIOUT
37
501
Vlamia, J. at al., 1985. *245
Barley
MARIOUT
37
502
Vlamia, J. at al., 1985. *245
Barlay
MARIOUT
37
503
Vlamia, J.atal., 1985. *245
Bariav
MARIOUT
37
504
Vlamia, J. at al., 1985. *245
Bariav
MARIOUT
37
505
Vlamia, J.atal., 1985. *245
Bariav
MARIOUT
37
506
Vlamis. J. at d.. 1985. *245
Bariav
MARIOUT
37
507
Vlamia, J. et al., 1985. *245
Bariav
MARIOUT
37
508
Vlamia, J.atal., 1985. *245
Bariav
MARIOUT
37
509
Vlamia, J.atal., 1985. *245
Bariav
MARIOUT
37
510
Vlamia, J. at al., 1985. *245
Bariav
MARIOUT
37
511
Vlamia, J. at al., 1985. *245
Bariav
MARIOUT
37
512
Vlamia, J.atal., 1985. *245
Bariav
MARIOUT
37
513
Vlamia, J. at al.. 1985. *245
Bariav
MARIOUT
37
514
Vlamia. J. at al., 1985. *245
Bariav
MARIOUT
37
SIS
Vlamia. J. at al., 198S. *245
Bariav
MARIOUT
37
516
Vlamia. J. at 4.. 1985. *245
Bariav
MARIOUT
37
517
Vlamia. J. at al., 1985. *245
Bariav
MARIOUT
37
518
Vlamia. J. at al., 1985. *245
Bariav
MARIOUT
37
519
Vlamia, J. at al., 1985. *245
Bariav
MARIOUT
37
520
Vlamia. J. atal., 1985. *245
Bariav
MARIOUT
37
521
Vlamia. J. atal., 1985. *245
Bariav
MARIOUT
37
522
Vlamia. J. at al.. 1985. *245
Bariav
MARIOUT
37
523
Vlamia. J.atal., 1985. *245
Bariav
MARIOUT
37
524
Vlamia. J. at al.. 1985. *245
Bariav
MARIOUT
37
525
Vlamia. J. at a)., 1985. *245
Bariav
MARIOUT
37
526
Vlamia. J. at al., 1985. *245
Bariav
MARIOUT
37
527
Vlamia. J. at al.. 1985. *245
Bariav
MARIOUT
37
528
Vlamia. J. at al., 1985. *245
Bariav
MARIOUT
37
529
Vlamia. J. atal., 1985. *245
Bariav
MARIOUT
37
S30
Vlamia. J. at al., 1985. *245
Bariav
MARIOUT
S31
Vlamia, J. *t al., 1985. #245
Bariay
MARIOUT
532
VUmta. J. at at.. 1985. #245
Bariav
MARIOUT
F-290
-------
TABLE F-4 (cont.)
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
Cr
Cu
Fa
N
Ni
P
Pb
Zn
SOLIDS
BIOLOGICAL
mg/ka
ma/kg
%
%
mo/ko
mo/ko
mo/kfl
mg/kfl
CONTNT
PROCESSING
495
1470
600
2.2
3.3
180
1.6
1090
3910
0.2
PRIMARY
496
1470
600
2.2
3.3
180
1.6
1090
3910
0.2
PRIMARY
497
1470
600
2.2
3.3
180
1.6
1090
3910
0.2
PRIMARY
498
1470
600
2.2
3.3
180
1.6
1090
3910
0.2
PRIMARY
499
1470
600
2.2
3.3
180
1.6
1090
3910
0.2
PRIMARY
500
1470
600
2.2
3.3
180
1.6
1090
3910
0.2
SECONDARY
501
1470
600
2.2
3.3
180
1.6
1090
3910
0.2
SECONDARY
502
1470
600
2.2
3.3
180
1.6
1090
3910
0.2
PRIMARY
503
1470
600
2.2
3.3
180
1.6
1090
3910
0.2
PRIMARY
504
1470
600
2.2
3.3
180
1.6
1090
3910
0.2
PRIMARY
505
1470
600
2.2
3.3
180
1.6
1090
3910
0.2
PRIMARY
506
1470
600
2.2
3.3
180
1.6
1090
3910
0.2
PRIMARY
507
1470
600
2.2
3.3
180
1.6
1090
3910
0.2
SECONDARY
508
1470
600
2.2
3.3
180
1.6
1090
3910
0.2
SECONDARY
509
1470
600
2.2
3.3
180
1.6
1090
3910
0.2
PRIMARY
510
1470
600
2.2
3.3
180
1.6
1090
3910
0.2
PRIMARY
511
1470
600
2.2
3.3
180
1.6
1090
3910
0.2
PRIMARY
512
1470
600
2.2
3.3
180
1.6
1090
3910
0.2
PRIMARY
513
1470
600
2.2
3.3
180
1.6
1090
3910
0.2
PRIMARY
514
1470
600
2.2
3.3
180
1.6
1090
3910
0.2
SECONDARY
515
1470
600
2.2
3.3
180
1.6
1090
3910
0.2
SECONDARY
516
1470
600
2.2
3.3
180
1.6
1090
3910
0.2
PRIMARY
517
1470
600
2.2
3.3
180
1.6
1090
3910
0.2
PRIMARY
518
1470
600
2.2
3.3
180 :
1.6
1090
3910
0.2
PRIMARY
519
1470
600
2.2
3.3
180
1.6
1090
3910
0.2
PRIMARY
520
1470
600
2.2
3.3
180
1.6
1090
3910
0.2
PRIMARY
521
1470
600
2.2
3.3
180
1.6
1090
3910
0.2
SECONDARY
522
1470
600
2.2
3.3
180
1.6
1090
3910
0.2
SECONDARY
523
1470
600
2.2
3.3
180
1.6
1090
3910
0.2
PRIMARY
524
1470
600
2.2
3.3
180
1.6
1090
3910
0.2
PRIMARY
525
1470
600
2.2
3.3
180
1.6
1090
3910
0.2
PRIMARY
526
1470
600
2.2
3.3
180
1.6
1090
3910
0.2
PRIMARY
527
1470
600
2.2
3.3
180
1.6
1090
3910
0.2
PRIMARY
528
1470
600
2.2
3.3
180
1.6
1090
3910
0.2
SECONDARY
529
1470
600
2.2
3.3
180
1.6
1090
3910
0.2
SECONDARY
530
531
532
F-297
-------
TABLE F-4 (oont.)
SLUDGE
ANNL SLUDGE
CUMML SLUDGE
YEARS
SOIL
SOIL
CHEMICAL
LOADNG RATE
LOADNG RATE
SINCE LAST
TAXONOMIC
SERIES
SOIL
STABILIZATN
Ma/ha
Ma/ha
APPLICATN
NAME
NAME
TEXTURE
495
45
45
0
DUBLIN
L
496
45
90
0
DUBLIN
L
497
45
135
0
DUBLIN
L
498
45
180
0
DUBLIN
L
499
45
225
0
DUBLIN
L
500
45
270
0
DUBLIN
L
501
45
315
0
DUBLIN
L
502
90
90
0
DUBLIN
L
503
90
180
0
DUBLIN
L
504
90
270
0
DUBLIN
L
505
90
360
0
DUBLIN
L
500
90
450
0
DUBLIN
507
90
540
0
DUBLIN
L
508
90
630
0
;
DUBLIN
L
509
135
135
0
DUBLIN
L
510
135
« 270
0
DUBLIN
L
511
135
405
0
DUBLIN
L
512
135
540
0
DUBLIN
L
513
135
675
0
DUBLIN
L
514
135
810
0
DUBLIN
L
515
135
945
0
DUBLIN
L
518
180
180
0
DUBLIN
L
517
180
360
0
DUBLIN
L
518
180
540
0
DUBLIN
L
519
180
720
0
DUBLIN
L
520
180
900
0
DUBLIN
L
521
180
1080
0
DUBLIN
L
522
180
1260
0
DUBLIN
L
523
225
225
0
DUBLIN
I
524
225
450
0
DUBUN
L
525
226
675
0
DUBLIN
L
52S
225
900
0
DUBUN
L
527
225
1125
0
DUBUN
L
52*
225
1350
0
DUBUN
L
529
225
1575
0
DUBUN
L
530
0
0
-
DUBLIN
L
531
0
0
DUBLIN
L
532
0
0
DUBLIN
L
F-298
-------
TABLE F-4 (cont.)
SAND
SILT
CLAY
SOIL
SOIL
CUMM Zn
CONTENT
CONTENT
CONTENT
CEC
OC
SOIL
LOADING
%
%
%
cmol/kg
%
PH
RATE (ko/ha)
495
20
5
176
496
20
5
352
497
20
5
528
498
20
5
686
499
20
5
815
500
20
5
995
501
20
5
1210
502
20
5.2
352
503
20
5.2
704
504
20
5.2
1056
505
20
5.2
1373
506
20
5.2
1630
507
20
5.2
1989
508
20
5.2
2419
509
20
4.5
528
510
20
4.5
1056
511
20
4.5
1584
512
20
4.5
2058
513
20
4.5
2445
514
20
4.5
2984
515
20
4.5
3029
516
20
4.5
704
517
20
4.5
1408
518
20
4.5
2112
519
20
4.5
2746
520
20
4.5
3261
521
20
4.5
3979
522
20
4.5
4839
523
20
NR
880
524
20
NR
1760
525
20
NR
2640
526
20
NR
3432
527
20
NR
4076
528
20
NR
4974
529
20
NR
6050
530
20
5.5
0
531
20
5.5
0
532
20
5.5
0
-------
TABLE F-4 (cont.)
SOIL Zn
PLANT Zn
PLANT
YIELD
YIELD
SOIL
CONCENTRTN
CONCENTRTN
TISSUE
DESCRIPTION OF
REDUCTION
COMPONENT
EXTRACTANT
mo/ka
mo/ko
SAMPLED
EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN
%
MEASURED
495
76
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
496
81
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
497
90
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
498
100
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
499
127
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
500
147
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
501
149
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
502
92
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
503
85
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
504
115
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
505
131
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
506
127
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
507
333
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
508
236
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
509
81
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
510
153
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
511
215
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
512
259
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
513
351
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
514
435
LEAF
SLUDGE, HELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
515
462
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
516
113
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
517
150
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
: 518
248
: LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
519
341
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
520
402
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
521
455
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
522
820
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
523
NR
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
524
NR
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
525
NR
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
526
NR
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
527
NR
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
528
NR
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAtN
529
NR
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
630
45
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
531
41
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
532
52
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
F-ZOO
-------
TABLE F-4 (cont.)
YIELD
YIELD
REDUCTION
COMPONENT
METAL
%
MEASURED
PHYTOT OXICITY
COMMENTS
495
NO
496
NO
497
NO
•
498
NO
499
NO
500
NO
501
NO
502
NO
503
NO
504
NO
505
NO
506
NO
507
NO
508
NO
«
509
NO
510
NO
511
NO
512
NO
513
NO
514
NO
515
NO
516
NO
517
NO
518
MO
519
NO
620
NO
521
NO
522
NO
523
NO
524
NO
525
NO
526
NO
527
NO
S28
NO
529
NO
530
NO
531
;
NO
'
532
NO
I
-------
TABLE F-4 (cont.)
LOCATION
OF
495
BERKELEY. CALIFORNIA
496
BERKELEY. CALIFORNIA
497
BERKELEY. CALIFORNIA
498
BERKELEY. CALIFORNIA
499
BERKELEY. CALIFORNIA
500
BERKELEY. CALIFORNIA
501
BERKELEY, CAUFORNIA
502
BERKELEY, CAUFORNIA
503
BERKELEY, CAUFORNIA
504
BERKELEY, CALIFORNIA
505
BERKELEY, CALIFORNIA
506
BERKELEY, CALIFORNIA
507
BERKELEY, CAUFORNIA
508
BERKELEY, CAUFORNIA
509
BERKELEY, CAUFORNIA
510
BERKELEY, CAUFORNIA
S11
BERKELEY. CAUFORNIA
512
BERKELEY. CAUFORNIA
513
BERKELEY. CALIFORNIA
514
BERKELEY. CAUFORNIA
515
BERKELEY. CAUFORNIA
516
BERKELEY. CAUFORNIA
517
BERKELEY, CAUFORNIA
518
BERKELEY, CAUFORNIA
519
BERKELEY. CAUFORNIA
520
BERKELEY, CAUFORNIA
521
BERKELEY. CAUFORNIA
522
BERKELEY, CAUFORNIA
523
BERKELEY. CAUFORNIA
524
BERKELEY. CAUFORNIA
525
BERKELEY, CAUFORNIA
626
BERKELEY, CAUFORNIA
527
BERKELEY. CALIFORNIA
528
BERKELEY, CALIFORNIA
529
BERKELEY. CALIFORNIA
530
BERKELEY. CAUFORNIA
531
BERKELEY, CALIFORNIA
532
BERKELEY. CALIFORNIA
-------
TABLE F-4 (cont.)
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
LITERATURE
PLANT
SLUDGE
VOL SOLIDS
Al
Ca
Cd
CITATION
NAME
CULTIVAR
PH
%
%
%
ma/ko
533
Vlamia. J. et al., 1985. #245
Barley
MARIOUT
534
Vlamia, J. at al., 1985. #245
Barley
MARIOUT
535
Vlamia, J. at al., 1985. #245
Barley
MARIOUT
536
Vlamia, J. at al.. 1985. #245
Barley
MARIOUT
537
Vlamia, J. at al., 1985. #245
Barley
MARIOUT
538
Vlamia, J. at al., 1985. #245
Bertey
MARIOUT
539
Vlamia, J. at al., 1985. #245
Barley
MARIOUT
540
Vlamia, J. at al., 1985. #245
Berley
MARIOUT
541
Vlamia, J. at al„ 1985. #245
Barley
MARIOUT
542
Vlamia, J.etal., 1985. #245
Barley
MARIOUT
543
Vlamia, J. at al., 1985. #245
Barley
MARIOUT
544
Vlamia, J. at al., 1985. #245
Barley
MARIOUT
8
545
Vlamia, J. et al., 1985. #245
Barley
MARIOUT
8
546
Vlamia, J. at al., 1985. #245
Bertey
MARIOUT
8
547
Vlamia, J. at d.. 1985. #245
Barley
MARIOUT
8
548
Vlamia, J. at al.. 1985. #245
Barley
MARIOUT
8
549
Vlamia, J. at al.. 1985. #245
Barley
MARIOUT
8
550
Vlamia. J. at a).. 1985. #245
Barley
MARIOUT
8
551
Vlamia. J. at al.. 1985. #245
Barley
MARIOUT
8
552
Vlamia. J. at al., 1985. #245
Bartey
MARIOUT
8
553
Vlamia, J. at al., 1985. #245
Barley
MARIOUT
8
554
Vlamia, J. et at., 1985. #245
Barley
MARIOUT
8
555
Vlamia, J. at al.. 1985. #245
Bariey
MARIOUT
8
556
Vlamia, J. at al.. 1985. #245
Bartey
MARIOUT
8
557
Vlamia. J. at al.. 1985. #245
Barley
MARIOUT
8
558
Vlamia, J. at al.. 1985. #245
Barley
MARIOUT
8
559
Vlamia. J. at el.. 1985. #245
Barley
MARIOUT
8
560
Vlamia. J. atal.. 1985. #245
Bartey
MARIOUT
8
561
Vlamia. J. at al.. 1985. #245
Barley
MARIOUT
8
562
Vlamia, J. at al.. 1985. #245
Bartey
MARIOUT
8
563
Vlamia. J. et al.. 1985. #245
Bartey
MARIOUT
8
564
Vlamia, J. et el., 1985. #245
Bartey
MARIOUT
8
565
Vlamia, J. et al.. 1985. #245
Bertey
MARIOUT
8
566
Vlamia, J. et al., 1985. #245
Barley
MARIOUT
8
567
Vlamia, J. et al.. 1985. #245
Barley
MARIOUT
8
568
Vlamia. J. atal.. 1985. #245
Bartey
MARIOUT
8
569
Vlamia, J. et al., 1985. #245
Berley
MARIOUT
8
570 ;
Vlamia. J. et al.. 1985. #245
Barley
MARIOUT
8
c or»o
-------
TABLE F-4 (cont.l
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
Cr
Cu
Fe
N
Ni
P
Pb
Zn
SOLIDS
BIOLOGICAL
mg/ka
mg/kg
%
%
mg/ka
ma/kg
ma/kg
mo/kg
CONTNT
PROCESSING
533
534
535
536
537
538
539
540
541
542
543
544
40
180
1.2
1.1
40
0.4
250
440
1
COMPOSTED
545
40
180
1.2
1.1
40
0.4
250
440
1
COMPOSTED
540
40
180
1.2
1.1
40
0.4
250
440
1
COMPOSTED
547
40
180
1.2
1.1
40
0.4
250
" 440
1
COMPOSTED
548
40
180
1.2
1.1
40
0.4
250
440
1
COMPOSTED
549
40
180
1.2
1.1
40
0.4
250
440
1
COMPOSTED
550
40
180
1.2
1.1
40
0.4
250
440
1
COMPOSTED
551
40
180
1.2
1.1
40
0.4
250
440
1
COMPOSTED
552
40
180
1.2
1.1
40
0.4
250
440
1
COMPOSTED
553
40
180
1.2
1.1
40
0.4
250
440
1
COMPOSTED
554
40
180
1.2
1.1
40
0.4
250
440
1
COMPOSTED
555
40
180
1.2
1.1
40
0.4
250
440
1
COMPOSTED
550
40
180
1.2
1.1
40
0.4
250
440
1
COMPOSTED
557
40
180
1.2
1.1
40
0.4
250
440
1
COMPOSTED
558
40
180
1.2
1.1
40
0.4
250
440
1
COMPOSTED
559
40
180
1.2
1.1
40
0.4
250
440
1
COMPOSTED
560
40
180
1.2
1.1
40
0.4
250
440
1
COMPOSTED
501
40
180
1.2
1.1
40
0.4
250
440
1
COMPOSTED
562
40
180
1.2
1.1
40
0.4
250
440
1
COMPOSTED
563
40
180
1.2
1.1
40
0.4
250
440
1
COMPOSTED
564
40
180
1.2
1.1
40
0.4
250
440
1
COMPOSTED
565
40
110
1.2
1.1
40
0.4
250
440
1
COMPOSTED
566
40
180
1.2
1.1
40
0.4
250
440
1
COMPOSTED
567
40
180
1.2
1.1
40
0.4
250
440
1
COMPOSTED
568
40
180
1.2
1.1
40
0.4
250
440
1
COMPOSTED
569
40
180
1.2
1.1
40
0.4
250
440
1
COMPOSTED
570
40
ISO
1.2
1.1
40
0.4
250
440
1
COMPOSTED
F-304
-------
TABLE F-4 (cont.)
SLUDGE
ANNLSLUDGE
CUMML SLUDGE
YEARS
SOIL
SOIL
CHEMICAL
LOADNG RATE
LOADNG RATE
SINCE LAST
TAXONOMIC
SERIES
SOIL
STABILIZATN
Ma/ha
Ma/ha
APPUCATN
NAME
NAME
TEXTURE
533
0
0
DUBLIN
L
534
0
0
DUBLIN
L
535
0
0
•
DUBLIN
L
536
0
0
DUBLIN
L
537
0
0
DUBLIN
L
538
0
0
DUBLIN
L
539
0
0
DUBLIN
L
540
0
0
DUBLIN
L
541
0
0
DUBLIN
L
542
0
0
DUBLIN
L
543
0
0
DUBLIN
L
544
45
45
0
DUBLIN
L
545
45
90
0
DUBLIN
L
546
! 45
135
0
DUBLIN
L
547
45
180
0
DUBLIN
L
548
45
225
0
DUBLIN
L
549
45
270
0
DUBLIN
L
550
45
315
0
DUBUN
L
551
90
90
0
DUBLIN
L
552
90
180
0
DUBLIN
L
553
90
270
0
DUBLIN
L
554
90
360
0
DUBUN
L
555
90
450
0
DUBLIN
L
556
90
540
0
DUBUN
L
557
90
630
0
DUBLIN
L
558
135
135
0
DUBLIN
L
559
135
270
0
DUBLIN
L
560
135 .
405
0
DUBLIN
L
561
135
540
0
DUBUN
L
562
135
675
0
DUBLIN
L
563
135
810
0
DUBUN
L
564
135
945
0
DUBLIN
L
565
180
180
0
DUBUN
L
566
180
360
0
DUBLIN
L
567
180
540
0
DUBUN
L
568
180
720
0
DUBLIN
L
569
180
900
0
DUBLIN
L
570
180
1080
0
DUBLIN
L
p.^nc;
-------
TABLE F-4 (cont.)
SAND
SILT
CLAY
SOIL
SOIL
CUMM Zn
CONTENT
CONTENT
CONTENT
CEC
OC
SOIL
LOADING
%
cmol/ka
%
pH
RATE (ka/ha)
533
20
5.5
0
534
20
5.5
0
535
20
5.5
0
636
20
5.5
0
537
20
5.5
0
538
20
5.5
0
539
20
5.5
0
540
20
5.5
0
541
20
5.5
0
542
20
5.5
0
543
20
5.5
0
544
20
7
20
545
20
7
40
546
20
7
60
547
20*
7
92
548
20
7
109
543
20
7
130
550
20
7
152
551
20
7
40
552
20
7
79
553
20
7
119
554
20
7
183
555
20
7
218
556
20
7
259
557
20
7
302
558
20
7
59
559
20
7
119
560
20
7
178
561
20
7
275
562
20
7
326
563
20
7
318
564
20
7
454
565
20
7
99
566
20
7
111
567
20
7
297
568
20
7
426
533
20
7
494
570
20
7
577
F-308
-------
TABLE F-4 (cont.)
SOIL Zn
PLANT Zn
PLANT
YIELD
YIELD
SOIL
CONCENTRTN
CONCENTRTN
TISSUE
DESCRIPTION OF
REDUCTION
COMPONENT
EXTRACTANT
ma/tca
mfl/ko
SAMPLED
EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN
%
MEASURED
S33
37
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
534
31
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
535
98
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
536
57
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
537
69
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
538
39
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
539
43
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
540
44
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
541
28
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
542
96
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
543
45
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
544
66
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
545
46
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
546
52
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
547
46
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
548
44
Leaf
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
549
93
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
550
54
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
651
69
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
552
49
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
553
44
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
554
37
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
555
39
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
556
: 83
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
557
51
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
558
73
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
559
59
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
560
61
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
561
39
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
562
37
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
563
81
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
564
61
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
565
79
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
566
55
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
567
63
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
568
49
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
569
42
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
570
89
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
F-307
-------
TABLE F-4 (oom.)
YIELD
YIELD
REDUCTION
COMPONENT
METAL
%
MEASURED
PHYTOTOXfCtTY
COMMENTS
633
NO
534
NO
535
NO
,
536
NO
537
NO
538
NO
539
NO
540
NO
541
NO
542
NO
543
NO
544
NO
545
NO
546
NO
547
NO
548
NO
549
NO
550
NO
551
NO
582
NO
553
NO
554
NO
555
NO
:
558
NO
557
NO
558
NO
559
NO
560
NO
561
NO
562
NO
563
NO
564
NO
565
NO
566
NO
567
NO
568
NO
569
NO
570
NO
F-308
-------
TABLE F-4 (cont.)
LOCATION
OF
STUDY
533
BERKELEY, CALIFORNIA
534
BERKELEY. CALIFORNIA
535
BERKELEY. CALIFORNIA
536
BERKELEY, CAUFORNIA
537
BERKELEY. CALIFORNIA
538
BERKELEY, CALIFORNIA
539
BERKELEY, CALIFORNIA
540
BERKELEY. CALIFORNIA
541
BERKELEY, CALIFORNIA
542
BERKELEY. CALIFORNIA
543
BERKELEY. CALIFORNIA
544
BERKELEY, CALIFORNIA
545
BERKELEY, CALIFORNIA
548
BERKELEY. CALIFORNIA
547
BERKELEY, CALIFORNIA
548
BERKELEY. CAUFORNIA
549
BERKELEY. CAUFORNIA
550
BERKELEY, CAUFORNIA
551
BERKELEY. CALIFORNIA
552
BERKELEY, CALIFORNIA
553
BERKELEY. CAUFORNIA
554
BERKELEY. CALIFORNIA
555
BERKELEY. CALIFORNIA
556
BERKELEY. CALIFORNIA
557
BERKELEY. CALIFORNIA
558
BERKELEY. CALIFORNIA
559
BERKELEY. CALIFORNIA
560
BERKELEY. CALIFORNIA
561
BERKELEY. CALIFORNIA
562
BERKELEY. CALIFORNIA
563
BERKELEY, CAUFORNIA
564
BERKELEY. CALIFORNIA
565
BERKELEY. CAUFORNIA
566
BERKELEY, CALIFORNIA
567
BERKELEY, CAUFORNIA
568
BERKELEY. CALIFORNIA
569
BERKELEY. CAUFORNIA
570
BERKELEY. CALIFORNIA
F 309
-------
\
TABLE F-4 (corn.)
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
LITERATURE
PUNT
SLUDGE
VOL SOLIDS
Al
Ca
Cd
CITATION
NAME
CULTIVAR
PH
%
%
%
mo/kg
571
Vfamii, J.atal., 1985. *245
Barley
MARIOUT
8
572
VIMills* J. et al.. 1985. *245
Barloy
MARIOUT
8
573
Vlamla, J. at al.. 1985. #245
Barley
MARIOUT
8
574
Vlamli. J.atal., 1985. #245
Barlsy
MARIOUT
8
575
Vlamla. J.atal., 1985. #245
Barley
MARIOUT
8
576
VIamis, J. atal., 1985. #245
Barley
MARIOUT
8
577
Vlamla, J.atal., 1985. #245
Barley
MARIOUT
8
578
Vlamla, J.atal., 1985. #245
Barley
MARIOUT
8
579
Rappaport, B.D. at al., 1987. #197
Corn
Pioneer 3192
580
Rappaport, B.D. at al., 1987. #197
Corn
Pioneer 3192
581
Rappaport, B.O. at al„ 1987. #197
Corn
Pioneer 3192
582
Rappaport, B.D. at al., 1987. #197
Corn
Pioneer 3192
583
Rappaport, B.D. at al., 1987. #197
Corn
Pioneer 3192
584
Rappaport, B.D. at al., 1987. #197
Corn
Pionetf 3192
585
Rappaport, B.D. at al„ 1987. #197
Corn
Pioneer 3192
588
Rappaport, B.O. at al., 1987. #197
Corn
Pioneer 3192
587
Rappaport, B.D. at al., 1987. #197
Com
Pioneer 3192
588
Rappaport, BJ>. at al„ 1987. #197
Com
Pioneer 3192
589
Rappaport, B.D. atal., 1987. #197
Corn
Pioneer 3192
590
Rappaport, B.D. at al., 1987. #197
Com
Pioneer 3192
591
Rappaport, B.O. at al., 1987. #197
Com
Pioneer 3192
592
Rappaport, B.D. at al., 1987. #197
Com
Pioneer 3192
593
Rappaport, B.D. at al., 1987. #197
Com
Pioneer 3192
594
Rappaport B.D. at al., 1987. #197
.Com
Pioneer 3192
595
Rappaport, B.O. at al„ 1987. #197
Com
Pioneer 3192
596
Rappaport, B.O. at al., 1987. #197
Com
Pioneer 3192
597
BIDWELL AND DOWDY, 1987
CORN
139
598
BIDWELL AND DOWDY, 1987
CORN
139
599
BIDWELL AND DOWDY, 1987
CORN
139
600
BIDWELL AND DOWDY, 1987
CORN
139
601
BIDWELL AND DOWDY, 1987
CORN
139
602
BIDWELL AND OOWOY, 1987
CORN
139
603
BIDWELL AND DOWDY, 1987
CORN
139
604
BIDWELL AND OOWOY, 1987
CORN
139
605
BIDWELL AND DOWDY, 1987
CORN
139
606
BIDWELL AND DOWDY, 1987
CORN
139
607
BIDWELL AND DOWDY. 1987
CORN
139
608
BIDWELL AND DOWDY, 1987
CORN
139
F-310
-------
TABLE F-4 (cont.)
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
Cf
Cu
Fa
N
Ni
P
Pb
Zn
SOLIDS
BIOLOGICAL
mg/ko
malka
%
%
mg/kfl
mg/kg
mg/ko
mn/kg
CONTNT
PROCESSING
571
40
180
1.2
1.1
40
0.4
250
440
1
COMPOSTED
572
40
180
1.2
1.1
40
0.4
250
440
1
COMPOSTED
573
40
180
1.2
1.1
40
0.4
250
440
1
COMPOSTED
574
40
180
1.2
1.1
40
0.4
250
440
1
COMPOSTED
575
40
180
1.2
1.1
40
0.4
250
440
1
COMPOSTED
576
40
180
1.2
1.1
40
0.4
250
440
1
COMPOSTED
577
40
180
1.2
1.1
40
0.4
250
440
1
COMPOSTED
578
40
180
1.2
1.1
40
0.4
250
440
1
COMPOSTED
579
580
581
582
583
584
«
585
586
587
588
589
590
591
592
593
594
595
596
597
1987
598
1987
599
1987
600
1987
601
1987
602
1987
603
1987
604
1987
605
1987
606
1987
607
1987
608
1987
F-311
-------
TABLE F-4 (cont.)
SLUDGE
ANNLSLUDGE
CUMML SLUDGE
YEARS
SOIL
SOIL
CHEMICAL
LOADNG RATE
LOADNG RATE
SINCE LAST
TAXONOMIC
SERIES
SOIL
STABIUZATN
Mo/ha
Mo/ha
APPLICATN
NAME
NAME
TEXTURE
571
180
1260
0
DUBUN
L
572
225
225
0
DUBLIN
L
573
225
450
0
DUBUN
L
574
225
675
0
DUBUN
L
575
225
900
0
DUBUN
L
578
225
1125
0
DUBLIN
L
577
225
1350
0
DUBUN
L
578
225
1575
0
DUBLIN
L
579
Typic Hspludult
Bojac
loamy eand
580
Typic Hapludult
Bojac
loamy eend
581
Tvpio Hapludult
Bojac
loamy eend
582
Typic Hapludult
Bojac
loamy eand
583
Typio Hapludult
Bojac
loamy eend
584
•
Typio Hapludult
Bojac
loemy eand
585
Rhodic Paleudult
Davideon
clay loam
588
Rhodie Paleudult
Davidson
clay loam
587
Rhodic Paleudult
Davideon
day loam
588
Rhodic Palaudult
Davidaon
clay loam
589
Rhodio Paleudult
Davideon
clay loam
590
Rhodio Paleudult
Davidaon
clay loam
591
Typic Hapludult
Groeacloee
eilt loam
592
Tvpio Hapludult
Groeecloee
eilt loam
593
Typic Hapludult
Groeacloee
eilt loam
594
Tvpio Hapludult
Groeecloee
silt loam
595
Typio Hapludult
Groaecloee
eilt loem
598
Typic Hapludult
Groeecloee
eilt loam
597
0
1
Typic Hapludoll
Waukegan
silt loam
598
60
1
Typio Hapludoll
Waukeaan
eilt loem
599
120
1
Typic Hapludoll
Waukegan
silt loam
600
180
1
Typio Hapludoli
Waukegan
silt loam
601
0
2
Typio Hapludoll
Waukegan
silt loam
602
60
2
Typio Hapludoll
Waukegan
silt loam
603
120
2
Typic Hapludoll
Waukegan
silt loam
604
180
2
Typic Hapludoll
Waukegan
silt loam
605
0
3
Typic Hapludoll
Waukegan
eilt loam
606
60
3
Typic Hapludoll
Waukegan
eilt loem
607
120
3
Typic Hapludoll
Waukegan
silt loam
608
180
3
Typic Hapludoll
Waukeaan
silt loam
F-312
-------
TABLE F-4 (cont.)
SAND
SILT
CLAY
SOIL
SOIL
CUMM Zn
CONTENT
CONTENT
CONTENT
CEC
OC
SOIL
LOADING
%
%
%
cmol/ka
%
pH
RATE (ka/ha)
571
20
7
664
572
20
7
119
573
20
7
238
574
20
7
356
575
20
7
518
576
20
7
602
577
20
7
706
578
20
7
815
579
64
27.8
8.2
5.4
6.1
0
580
64
27.8
8.2
5.4
6.2
125
581
64
27.8
8.2
5.4
6.1
248
582
64
27.8
8.2
5.4
5.8
372
583
64
27.8
8.2
5.4
6
496
584
64
27.8
8.2
<6.4
6
620
585
15.3
47.1
37.6
12.5
5.7
0
588
15.3
47.1
37.6
12.5
6
125
587
15.3
47.1
37.6
12.5
5.8
248
588
15.3
47.1
37.6
12.5
5.9
372
589
15.3
47.1
37.6
12.5
5.9
496
590
15.3
47.1
37.6
12.5
5.9
620
591
20.7
59.3
20
9.3
5.7
0
592
20.7
E9.3
20
9.3
6
125
593
20.7
59.3
20
9.3
5.9
248
594
20.7
59.3
20 :
9.3
5.9
372
595
20.7
59.3
20
9.3
5.9
496
598
20.7
59.3
20
9.3
5.9
620
597
6.2
0
598
6.2
106
599
6.2
219
600
6.2
348
601
6.2
0
602
6.2
106
603
6.2
219
604
6.2
348
605
6.2
0
606
6.2
' 106
607
6.2
219
608
6.2
348
F-313
-------
TABLE F-4 (com.)
SOIL Zn
PLANT Zn
PLANT
YIELD
YIELD
SOIL
CONCENTRTN
CONCENTRTN
TISSUE
DESCRIPTION OF
REDUCTION
COMPONENT
EXTRACTANT
mfl/ka
mg/ko
—-jjjAMPLEO^^
EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN
%
MEASURED
571
68
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
572
84
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
573
58
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
574
66
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
575
51
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
576
46
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
577
88
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
578
77
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
579
66
Ear Leaf
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
580
69
Ear Leaf
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
581
68
Ear Laaf
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
582
56
Ear Leaf
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
583
60
Ear Leaf
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
584
71
Ear Leaf
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
585
21
Ear Leaf
'SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
588
21
Ear Leaf
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
587
25
Ear Leaf
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
588
26
Ear Leaf
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
589
28
Ear Leaf
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
590
27
Ear Leaf
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
591
22
Ear Laaf
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
592
28
Ear Laaf
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
593
39
Ear Leaf
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
: 594
40
: Ear Leaf
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
595
48
Ear Laaf
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
598
45
Ear Leaf
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
597
20
Stover
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
STOVER
598
89
Stover
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
STOVER
599
101
Stover
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
STOVER
600
140
Stover
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
STOVER
601
32
Stover
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
STOVER
802
73
Stover
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
STOVER
603
119
Stover
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
STOVER
604
153
Stover
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
STOVER
605
19
Stover
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
STOVER
606
67
Stover
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
STOVER
607
87
Stover
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
STOVER
608
121
Stover
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
STOVER
F-314
-------
TABLE F-4 (cont.)
YIELD
YIELD
REDUCTION
COMPONENT
METAL
%
MEASURED
PHYTOTOXICITY
COMMENTS
571
NO
572
NO
573
NO
574
NO
575
NO
576
NO
577
NO
578
NO
579
0
STOVER
NO
YIELD REDUCTION RESULTS INFERRED FROM AUTHOR'S WRITTEN STATEMENT
580
0
STOVER
NO
YIELD REDUCTION RESULTS INFERRED FROM AUTHOR'S WRITTEN STATEMENT
581
0
STOVER
NO
YIELD REDUCTION RESULTS INFERRED FROM AUTHOR'S WRITTEN STATEMENT
582
0
STOVER
NO
YIELD REDUCTION RESULTS INFERRED FROM AUTHOR'S WRITTEN STATEMENT
583
0
STOVER
NO
YIELD REDUCTION RESULTS INFERRED FROM AUTHOR'S WRITTEN STATEMENT
584
0
STOVER
NO
YIELD REDUCTION RESULTS INFERRED FROM AUTHOR'S WRITTEN STATEMENT
585
0
STOVER
NO
YIELD REDUCTION RESULTS INFERRED FROM AUTHOR'S WRITTEN STATEMENT
586
0
STOVER
NO
YIELD REDUCTION RESULTS INFERRED FROM AUTHOR'S WRITTEN STATEMENT
587
0
STOVER
NO
YIELD REDUCTION RESULTS INFERRED FROM AUTHOR'S WRITTEN STATEMENT
588
0
STOVER
NO
YIELD REDUCTION RESULTS INFERRED FROM AUTHOR'S WRITTEN STATEMENT
589
0
STOVER
NO
YIELD REDUCTION RESULTS INFERRED FROM AUTHOR'S WRITTEN STATEMENT
590
0
STOVER
NO
YIELD REDUCTION RESULTS INFERRED FROM AUTHOR'S WRITTEN STATEMENT
591
0
STOVER
NO
YIELD REDUCTION RESULTS INFERRED FROM AUTHOR'S WRITTEN STATEMENT
592
0
STOVER
NO
YIELD REDUCTION RESULTS INFERRED FROM AUTHOR'S WRITTEN STATEMENT
593
0
STOVER
NO
YIELD REDUCTION RESULTS INFERRED FROM AUTHOR'S WRITTEN STATEMENT
594
0
STOVER:
NO
YIELO REDUCTION RESULTS INFERRED FROM AUTHOR'S WRITTEN STATEMENT
595
0
STOVER
NO
YIELD REDUCTION RESULTS INFERRED FROM AUTHOR'S WRITTEN STATEMENT
596
0
STOVER
NO
YIELD REDUCTION RESULTS INFERRED FROM AUTHOR'S WRITTEN STATEMENT
597
0
GRAIN
NO
GRAIN YIELD REDUCTION FOUND NOT TO BE ASSOCIATED WITH METALS BY AUTHORS
598
0
GRAIN
NO
GRAIN YIELD REDUCTION FOUND NOT TO BE ASSOCIATED WITH METALS BY AUTHORS
599
0
GRAIN
NO
GRAIN YIELD REDUCTION FOUND NOT TO BE ASSOCIATED WITH METALS BY AUTHORS
600
0
GRAIN
NO
GRAIN YIELD REDUCTION FOUND NOT TO BE ASSOCIATED WITH METALS BY AUTHORS
601
0
GRAIN
NO
GRAIN YIELD REDUCTION FOUND NOT TO BE ASSOCIATED WITH METALS BY AUTHORS
602
43*
GRAIN
•NO
•GRAIN YIELO REDUCTION FOUND NOT TO BE ASSOCIATED WITH METALS BY AUTHORS
603
26*
GRAIN
•NO
•GRAIN YIELD REDUCTION FOUND NOT TO BE ASSOCIATED WITH METALS BY AUTHORS
604
24*
GRAIN
•NO
•GRAIN YIELD REDUCTION FOUND NOT TO BE ASSOCIATED WITH METALS BY AUTHORS
605
0
GRAIN
NO
606
22«
GRAIN
•NO
•GRAIN YIELD REDUCTION FOUND NOT TO BE ASSOCIATED WITH METALS BY AUTHORS
607
5*
GRAIN
•NO
•GRAIN YIELD REDUCTION FOUND NOT TO BE ASSOCIATED WITH METALS BY AUTHORS
608
8*
GRAIN
•NO
•GRAIN YIELD REDUCTION FOUND NOT TO BE ASSOCIATED WITH METALS BY AUTHORS
F-315
-------
TABLE F-4 (oont.)
LOCATION
OF
STUDY
571
BERKELEY, CALIFORNIA
572
BERKELEY. CALIFORNIA
573
BERKELEY, CALIFORNIA
574
BERKELEY. CALIFORNIA
575
BERKELEY, CALIFORNIA
576
BERKELEY. CALIFORNIA
577
BERKELEY. CALIFORNIA
578
BERKELEY, CALIFORNIA
579
COASTAL PLAIN VIRGINIA
580
COASTAL PLAIN VIRGINIA
581
COASTAL PLAIN VIRGINIA
582
COASTAL PLAIN VIRGINIA
583
COASTAL PLAIN VIRGINIA
684
COASTAL PLAIN VIRGINIA
585
PIEDMONT VIRGINIA
580
PIEDMONT VIRGINIA
587
PIEDMONT VIRGINIA
588
PIEDMONT VIRGINIA
688
PIEDMONT VIRGINIA
690
PIEDMONT VIRGINIA
691
FOOTHILLS VIRGINIA
592
FOOTHILLS VIRGINIA
593
FOOTHILLS VIRGINIA
694
FOOTHILLS VIRGINIA
696
FOOTHILLS VIRGINIA
698
FOOTHILLS VIRGINIA
597
MINNESOTA
598
MINNESOTA
599
MINNESOTA
600
MINNESOTA
601
MINNESOTA
602
MINNESOTA
603
MINNESOTA
604
MINNESOTA
605
MINNESOTA
606
MINNESOTA
607
MINNESOTA
608
MINNESOTA
F-316
-------
TABLE F-4 (cont.)
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
LITERATURE
PLANT
SLUDGE
VOL SOLIDS
Al
Ca
Cd
CITATION
NAME
CULTIVAR
PH
%
%
%
mg/kq
609
BIDWELL AND DOWDY. 1987
CORN
139
610
BIDWELL AND DOWDY. 1987
CORN
139
611
BIDWELL AND DOWDY. 1987
CORN
139
612
BIDWELL AND DOWDY. 1987
CORN
139
613
BIDWELL AND DOWDY. 1987
CORN
139
614
BIDWELL AND DOWDY. 1987
CORN
139
615
BIDWELL AND DOWDY. 1987
CORN
139
616
BIDWELL AND DOWDY. 1987
CORN
139
617
BIDWELL AND DOWDY. 1987
Com
618
BIDWELL AND DOWDY. 1987
Corn
619
BIDWELL AND DOWDY. 1987
Corn
620
BIDWELL AND DOWDY. 1987
Corn
621
RAPPAPORT ET AL 1987
Corn
622
RAPPAPORT ET AL 1987
Corn
623
RAPPAPORT ET AL 1987
Corn
624
CHANG ET AL 1983
BARLEY
i
72
53
625
CHANG ET AL 1983
BARLEY
72
53
626
CHANG ET AL 1983
BARLEY
72
53
627
CHANG ETAL 1983
BARLEY
72
53
628
CHANG ET AL 1983
BARLEY
72
53
629
CHANG ET AL 1983
BARLEY
72
53
630
CHANG ETAL 1983
BARLEY
72
53
631
CHANG ET AL 1983
BARLEY
72
53
632
: CHANG ET AL 1983
BARLEY
72
53
633
CHANG ET AL 1983
BARLEY
72
53
634
CHANG ET AL 1983
BARLEY
72
53
635
CHANG ET AL 1983
BARLEY
72
53
636
CHANG ET AL 1983
BARLEY
72
53
637
CHANG ET AL 1983
BARLEY
72
53
638
CHANG ET AL 1983
BARLEY
72
53
639
CHANG ETAL 1983
BARLEY
72
53
640
CHANG ETAL 1983
BARLEY
72
53
641
CHANG ET AL 1983
BARLEY
72
53
642
CHANG ET AL 1983
BARLEY
72
53
643
CHANG ETAL 1983
BARLEY
72
53
644
CHANG ET AL 1983
BARLEY
72
53
645
CHANG ETAL 1983
BARLEY
72
53
646
CHANG ETAL 1983
BARLEY
72
53
F-317
-------
TABLE F-4 (com.)
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
Cr
Cu
Fo
N
NJ
P
Pb
Zn
SOLIDS
BIOLOGICAL
mg/ko
mo/kg
%
%
mg/ko
mg/ko
mg/ko
mo/kg
CONTNT
PROCESSING
609
1987
610
1987
611
1987
612
1987
613
1987
614
1987
615
1987
616
1987
617
Control
618
Year 1, Year* 2 and 3
619
Yaar 1, Yaara 2 and 3
620
Yaar 1, Yaara 2 and 3
621
622
623
•
624
1437
896
0.5
373
0.8
1153
3548
60
AEROBICALLY DIG. COMPOSTED
625
1437
896
0.5
373
0.8
1153
3548
60
AEROBIC ALLY DIG. COMPOSTED
626
1437
896
0.5
373
0.8
1153
3548
60
AEROBICALLY DIG. COMPOSTED
627
1437
896
0.5
373
0.8
1153
3548
60
AEROBICALLY DIG. COMPOSTED
628
1437
896
0.5
373
0.8
1153
3548
60
AEROBICALLY DIG. COMPOSTED
629
1437
896
0.5
373
0.8
1153
3548
60
AEROBICALLY DIG. COMPOSTED
630
1437
896
0.5
373
0.8
1153
3548
60
AEROBICALLY DIG. COMPOSTED
631
1437
896
0.5
373
0.8
1153
3548
60
AEROBICALLY DIG. COMPOSTED
632
1437
896
0.5
373
0.8
1153
3548
: 60
AEROBICALLY DIG. COMPOSTED
633
1437
896
0.5
373
0.8
1153
3548
60
AEROBICALLY DIG. COMPOSTED
634
1437
896
0.5
373
0.8
1153
3548
60
AEROBICALLY DIG. COMPOSTED
635
1437
896
0.5
373
0.8
1153
3548
60
AEROBICALLY DIG. COMPOSTED
636
1437
896
0.5
373
0.8
1153
3548
60
AEROBICALLY DIG. COMPOSTED
637
1437
896
0.5
373
0.8
1153
3548
60
AEROBICALLY DIG. COMPOSTED
638
1437
896
0.5
373
0.8
1153
3548
60
AEROBICALLY DIG. COMPOSTED
639
1437
896
0.5
373
0.8
1153
3548
60
AEROBICALLY DIG. COMPOSTED
640
1437
896
0.5
373
0.8
1153
3548
60
AER08ICALLY DIG. COMPOSTED
641
1437
896
0.5
373
0.8
1153
3548
60
AEROBICALLY DIG. COMPOSTED
642
1437
896
0.5
373
0.8
1153
3548
60
AEROBICALLY DIG. COMPOSTED
643
1437
896
0.5
373
0.8
1153
3548
60
AEROBICALLY DIG. COMPOSTED
644
1437
896
0.5
373
0.8
1153
3548
60
AEROBICALLY DIG. COMPOSTED
645
1437
896
0.5
373
0.8
1153
3548
60
AEROBICALLY DIG. COMPOSTED
646
1437
896
0.5
373
0.8
1153
3548
60
AEROBICALLY DIG. COMPOSTED
F-318
-------
TABLE F-4 (oont.)
SLUDGE
ANNLSLUDGE
CUMML SLUDGE
YEARS
SOIL
SOIL
CHEMICAL
LOADNG RATE
LOADNG RATE
SINCE LAST
TAXONOMIC
SERIES
SOIL
STABILIZATN
Ma/ha
Ma/ha
APPLICATN
NAME
NAME
TEXTURE
609
0
4
Tvpic Haptudoll
Waukagan
silt loam
610
60
4
Typic Hapludoll
Waukagan
silt loam
611
120
4
Tvpic Hapludoll
Waukagan
silt loam
612
180
4
Typic Hapludoll
Waukagan
silt loam
613
0
5
Typic Hapludoll
Waukagan
silt loam
614
60
5
Typic Hapludoll
Waukagan
silt loam
61S
120
5
Typic Hapludoll
Waukagan
silt loam
616
180
5
Typic Hapludoll
Waukagan
silt loam
617
0
0
6
Typic Hapludoll
Waukagan
silt loam
618
30,15
60
6
Typic Hapludoll
Waukagan
silt loam
619
60,30
120
6
Typic Hapludoll
Waukagan
silt loam
620
90,45
180
6
Typic Hapludoll
Waukagan
silt loam
621
0
Typic Ochraqualfs
Acradala
silt loam
622
42
«
Typic Ochraqualfs
Aoradala
8ilt loam
623
84
Typic Ochraqualfs
Acradala
silt loam
624
0
0
0
XEROLLIC CALCIOTHID
DOMINO
LOAM
625
22.5
22.5
0
XEROLLIC CALCIOTHID
DOMINO
LOAM
626
45
45
0
XEROLUC CALCIOTHID
DOMINO
LOAM
627
90
90
0
XEROLLIC CALCIOTHID
DOMINO
LOAM
628
0
0
0
XEROLLIC CALCIOTHID
DOMINO
LOAM
629
22.5
45
0
XEROLLIC CALCIOTHID
DOMINO
LOAM
630
45
90
0
XEROLLIC CALCIOTHID
DOMINO
LOAM
631
90
180
0
XEROLUC CALCIOTHID
DOMINO
LOAM
632
0
0
0
XEROLLIC CALCIOTHID
DOMINO
LOAM
633
22.5
68
0
XEROLLIC CALCIOTHID
DOMINO
LOAM
634
45
135
0
XEROLLIC CALCIOTHID
DOMINO
LOAM
636
90
271
0
XEROLLIC CALCIOTHID
DOMINO
LOAM
636
0
0
0
XEROLUC CALCIOTHID
DOMINO
LOAM
637
22.5
90
0
XEROLLIC CALCIOTHID
DOMINO
LOAM
638
45
180
0
XEROLLIC CALCIOTHID
DOMINO
LOAM
639
90
361
0
XEROLLIC CALCIOTHID
DOMINO
LOAM
640
0
0
0
XEROLLIC CALCIOTHID
DOMINO
LOAM
641
22.5
113
0
XEROLLIC CALCIOTHID
DOMINO
LOAM
642
45
226
0
XEROLLIC CALCIOTHID
DOMINO
LOAM
643
90
451
0
XEROLLIC CALCIOTHID
DOMINO
LOAM
644
0
0
0
XEROLLIC CALCIOTHID
DOMINO
LOAM
645
22.5
135
0
XEROLUC CALCIOTHID
DOMINO
LOAM
646
45
271
0
XEROLLIC CALCIOTHID
DOMINO
LOAM
F-319
-------
TABLE F-4 (oorH.)
SANO
SILT
CLAY
SOIL
SOIL
CUMM Zn
CONTENT
CONTENT
CONTENT
CEC
OC
SOIL
LOADING
%
%
*
cmol/ka
%
RATE (kg/ha)
609
6.2
0
610
6.2
106
611
6.2
219
612
6.2
348
613
6.2
0
614
6.2
106
615
6.2
219
616
6.2
348
617
6.2
0
618
6.2
106
619
6.2
219
620
6.2
348
621
37.8
52.3
9.9
6.9
6.6
0
622
37.8
52.3
9.9
6.9
6.6
124
623
37.8
52.3
9.9
£9
6.6
248
624
40
7.5
0
625
40
7.4
80
626
40
7.4
160
627
40
7.2
320
628
40
7.1
0
629
40
7
160
630
40
7.1
320
631
40
7.1
640
632
40
7.3
0
633
40
7.2
240
634
40
7.1
480
635
40
7.1
960
636
40
7.1
0
637
40
7
320
638
40
6.9
640
639
40
6.8
1280
640
40
7.2
0
641
40
6.9
400
642
40
6.8
800
643
40
6.6
1600
644
40
7
0
645
40
16.9
480
646
40
6.6
960
F-320
-------
TABLE F-4 (cont.)
SOIL Zn
PLANT Zn
PLANT
YIELD
YIELD
SOIL
CONCENTRTN
CONCENTRTN
TISSUE
DESCRIPTION OF
REDUCTION
COMPONENT
EXTRACTANT
mo/Vo
mg/kg
SAMPLED
EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN
%
MEASURED
609
31
Stover
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
STOVER
610
88
Stover
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
STOVER
611
105
Stover
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
STOVER
612
107
Stover
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
0
STOVER
613
26
Stover
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
STOVER
614
112
Stover
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
STOVER
615
114
Stover
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
STOVER
616
154
Stover
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
0
STOVER
617
18.5
Stover
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
Stover
618
66.6
Stover
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
Stover
619
75.8
Stover
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
0
Stover
620
105
Stover
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
Stover
621
0.2
14
Earteaf
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
Stover
622
27
Earteaf
.SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
Stover
623
25
31
Earteaf
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
Stover
624
4 N HN03
20
LEAFi
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
625
4 N HN03
24
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
626
4 N HN03
29
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
627
4 N HN03
30
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
628
4 N HN03
14
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
629
4 N HN03
20
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
630
4 N HN03
23
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
631
4 N HN03
30
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
632
4 N HN03
18
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0 :
TOTAL BIOMASS
633
4 N HN03
17
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
634
4 N HN03
20
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
635
4 N HN03
43
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
636
4 N HN03
23
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
637
4 N HN03
29
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
638
4 N HN03
28
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
639
4 N HN03
51
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
640
4 N HN03
21
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
641
4 N HN03
26
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
642
4 N HN03
32
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
643
4 N HN03
34
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
644
4 N HN03
21
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
645
4 N HN03
26
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
646
4 N HN03
30
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
F-321
-------
TABLE F-4 (oont.l
YIELD
YIELD
REDUCTION
COMPONENT
METAL
%
MEASURED
PHYTOTOXICITY
COMMENTS
609
0
GRAIN
NO
610
0
GRAIN
NO
811
0
GRAIN
NO
812
0
GRAIN
NO
613
0
GRAIN
NO
614
0
GRAIN
NO
615
0
GRAIN
NO
616
0
GRAIN
NO
617
0
GRAIN
NO
618
0
GRAIN
NO
619
0
GRAIN
NO
620
0
GRAIN
NO
621
NO
622
NO
623
NO
624
NO
625
NO
626
NO
627
NO
628
NO
629
NO
630
NO
631
NO
632
NO
633
NO
634
NO
635
NO
636
NO
637
NO
638
NO
639
NO
640
NO
641
NO
642
NO
643
NO
644
NO
645
NO
646
NO
F-322
-------
TABLE F-4 (cont.)
LOCATION
OF
STUDY
609
MINNESOTA
610
MINNESOTA
611
MINNESOTA
612
MINNESOTA
613
MINNESOTA
614
MINNESOTA
615
MINNESOTA
616
MINNESOTA
617
MINNESOTA
618
MINNESOTA
619
MINNESOTA
620
MINNESOTA
621
Atlantic Coastal Plain
622
Atlantic Coastal Plain
623
Atlantic Coastal Plain
624
Rivarsida, California
625
Rivarslda, California
626
Rlvarsida, California
627
Rivarsida, California
628
Rivorsida, California
629
Rivarsida, California
630
Rivarsida, California
631
Rivarsida, California
632
Rivarsida, California:
633
Rivarsida, California
634
Rivarsida, California
635
Rivarsida, California
636
Rivarsida, California
637
Rivarsida, California
638
Rivarsida, California
639
Rivarsida, California
640
Rivarsida, California
641
Rivarsida, California
642
Rivarsida, California
643
Rivarsida, California
644
Rivarsida, California
645
Rivarsida, California
646
Rivarsida, California
F-323
-------
TABLE F-4 (cof>l.)
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
LITERATURE
PLANT
SLUDGE
VOL SOLIDS
Al
Ca
Cd
CITATION
NAME
CULTIVAR
PH
%
%
%
mo\a
647
CHANG ETAL 1983
BARLEY
72
53
648
CHANG ET AL 1983
BARLEY
72
53
649
CHANG ETAL 1983
BARLEY
72
53
650
CHANG ETAL 1983
BARLEY
72
53
651
CHANG ETAL 1983
BARLEY
72
53
652
CHANG ET AL 1983
BARLEY
72
53
653
CHANG ETAL 1983
BARLEY
72
53
654
CHANG ETAL 1983
BARLEY
72
53
655
CHANG ETAL 1983
BARLEY
72
53
656
CHANG ETAL 1983
BARLEY
72
53
657
CHANG ETAL 1983
BARLEY
72
53
658
CHANG ETAL 1983
BARLEY
72
53
659
CHANG ETAL 1983
BARLEY
72
53
660
CHANG ETAL 1983
BARLEY
72
53
661
CHANG ETAL 1983
BARLEY
72
53
662
CHANG ETAL 1983
BARLEY
72
53
663
CHANG ETAL 1983
BARLEY
72
53
664
CHANG ETAL 1983
BARLEY
72
53
665
CHANG ETAL 1983
BARLEY
72
53
666
CHANG ETAL 1983
BARLEY
72
53
667
CHANG ETAL 1983
BARLEY
72
53
668
CHANG ETAL 1983
BARLEY
72
S3
669
CHANG ETAL 1983
BARLEY
72
53
670
CHANG ET AL 1983
BARLEY
72
53
671
CHANG ETAL 1983
BARLEY
72
53
372
CHANG ET AL 1983
BARLEY
75
126
673
CHANG ET AL 1983
BARLEY
75
126
674
CHANG ET AL 1983
BARLEY
75
126
675
CHANG ETAL 1983
BARLEY
75
126
676
CHANG ET AL 1983
BARLEY
75
126
677
CHANG ETAL 1983
BARLEY
75
126
S78
CHANG ET AL 1983
BARLEY
75
126
679
CHANG ET AL 1983
BARLEY
75
126
680
CHANG ETAL 1983
BARLEY
75
126
681
CHANG ETAL 1983
BARLEY
75
126
682
CHANG ETAL 1983
BARLEY
75
126
683
CHANG ETAL 1983
BARLEY
75
126
684
CHANG ET AL 1983
BARLEY
75
126
F-324
-------
TABLE F-4 (cont.l
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
Cr
Cu
Fa
N
Ni
P
Pb
Zn
SOLIDS
BIOLOGICAL
ma/kg
ma/kg
%
%
ma/kfl
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/ka
CONTNT
PROCESSING
647
1437
896
0.5
373
0.8
1153
3548
60
AEROBICALLY DIG. COMPOSTED
648
1437
896
0.5
373
0.8
1153
3548
60
AEROBICALLY DIG. COMPOSTED
649
1437
896
0.5
373
0.8
1153
3548
60
AEROBICALLY DIG. COMPOSTED
650
1437
896
0.5
373
0.8
1153
3548
60
AEROBICALLY DIG. COMPOSTED
651
1437
896
0.5
373
0.8
1153
3548
60
AEROBICALLY DIG. COMPOSTED
652
1437
896
0.5
373
0.8
1153
3548
60
AEROBICALLY DIG. COMPOSTED
653
1437
896
0.5
373
0.8
1153
3548
60
AEROBICALLY DIG. COMPOSTED
654
1437
896
0.5
373
0.8
1153
3548
60
AEROBICALLY DIG. COMPOSTED
655
1437
896
0.5
373
0.8
1153
3548
60
AEROBICALLY DIG. COMPOSTED
656
1437
896
0.5
373
0.8
1153
3548
60
AEROBICALLY DIG. COMPOSTED
657
1437
896
0.5
373
0.8
1153
3548
60
AEROBICALLY DIG. COMPOSTED
658
1437
896
0.5
373
0.8
1153
3548
60
AEROBICALLY DIG. COMPOSTED
659
1437
896
0.5
373
0.8
1153
3548
60
AEROBICALLY DIG. COMPOSTED
660
1437
896
0.5
373
0.8
1153 .
3548
60
AEROBICALLY DIG. COMPOSTED
661
1437
896
0.5
373
0.8
1153
3548
60
AEROBICALLY DIG. COMPOSTED
662
1437
896
0.5
373
0.8
1153
3548
60
AEROBICALLY DIG. COMPOSTED
663
1437
896
0.5
373
0.8
1153
3548
60
AEROBICALLY DIG. COMPOSTED
664
1437
896
0.5
373
0.8
1153
3548
60
AEROBICALLY DIG. COMPOSTED
665
1437
896
0.5
373
0.8
1153
3548
60
AEROBICALLY DIG. COMPOSTED
666
1437
896
0.5
373
0.8
1153
3548
60
AEROBICALLY DIG. COMPOSTED
667
1437
896
0.5
373
0.8
1153
3548
60
AEROBICALLY DIG. COMPOSTED
668
1437
896
0.5
373
0.8
1153
3548
60
AEROBICALLY DIG. COMPOSTED
669
1437
896
0.5
373
0.8
1153
3548
60
AEROBICALLY DIG. COMPOSTED
670
1437 :
896
0.5
373
0.8
1153
: 3548
60
AEROBICALLY DIG. COMPOSTED
671
1437
896
0.5
373
0.8
1153
3548
60
AEROBICALLY DIG. COMPOSTED
672
2092
1600
8.5
592
1.5
781
4265
2.1
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
673
2092
1600
8.5
592
1.5
781
4265
2.1
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
674
2092
1600
8.5
592
1.5
781
4265
2.1
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
675
2092
1600
8.5
592
1.5
781
4265
2.1
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
676
2092
1600
8.5
592
1.5
781
4265
2.1
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
677
2092
1600
8.5
592
1.5
781
4265
2.1
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
678
2092
1600
8.5
592
1.5
781
4265
2.1
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
679
2092
1600
8.5
592
1.5
781
4265
2.1
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
680
2092
1600
8.5
592
1.5
781
4265
2.1
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
681
2092
1600
8.5
592
1.5
781
4265
2.1
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
682
2092
1600
8.5
592
1.5
781
4265
2.1
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
683
2092
1600
8.5
592
1.5
781
4265
2.1
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
684
2092
1600
8.5
592
1.5
781
4265
2.1
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
F-325
-------
TABLE F-4 (cont.l
SLUDGE
ANNL SLUDGE
CUMML SLUDGE
YEARS
SOIL
SOIL
CHEMICAL
LOADNG RATE
LOADNG RATE
SINCE LAST
TAXONOMIC
SERIES
SOIL
STABIUZATN
Mo/ha
Ma/ha
APPLtCATN
NAME
NAME
TEXTURE
647
90
541
0
XEROLUC CALCIOTHID
DOMINO
LOAM
648
0
0
0
TYPIC HALOXERALF
GREENFIELD
SANDY LOAM
649
22.5
22.5
0
TYPIC HALOXERALF
GREENFIELD
SANDY LOAM
650
45
45
0
TYPIC HALOXERALF
GREENFIELD
SANDY LOAM
651
90
90
0
TYPIC HALOXERALF
GREENFIELD
SANDY LOAM
652
0
0
0
TYPIC HALOXERALF
GREENFIELD
SANDY LOAM
653
22.5
45
0
TYPIC HALOXERALF
GREENFIELD
SANDY LOAM
654
45
90
0
TYPIC HALOXERALF
GREENFIELD
SANDY LOAM
655
90
180
0
TYPIC HALOXERALF
GREENFIELO
SANDY LOAM
656
0
0
0
TYPIC HALOXERALF
GREENFIELD
SANDY LOAM
657
22.5
68
0
TYPIC HALOXERALF
GREENFIELD
SANDY LOAM
658
45
135
0
TYPIC HALOXERALF
GREENFIELD
SANDY LOAM
659
90
271
0
TYPIC HALOXERALF
GREENFIELD
SANDY LOAM
660
0
0
0
TYPIC HALOXERALF
GREENFIELD
SANDY LOAM
661
22.5
90
0
TYPIC HALOXERALF
GREENFIELD
SANDY LOAM
662
45
180
0
TYPIC HALOXERALF
GREENFIELD
SANDY LOAM
663
90
361
0
TYPIC HALOXERALF
GREENFIELD
SANDY LOAM
664
0
0
0
TYPIC HALOXERALF
GREENFIELD
SANDY LOAM
665
22.5
113
0
TYPIC HALOXERALF
GREENFIELD
SANDY LOAM
666
45
226
0
TYPIC HALOXERALF
GREENFIELD
SANDY LOAM
667
90
451
0
TYPIC HALOXERALF
GREENFIELD
SANDY LOAM
668
0
0
0
TYPIC HALOXERALF
GREENFIELO
SANDY LOAM
669
22.6
135
0
TYPIC HALOXERALF
GREENFIELD
SANDY LOAM
670
45
271
0
TYPIC HALOXERALF
GREENFIELD
SANDY LOAM
671
90
541
0
TYPIC HALOXERALF
GREENFIELD
SANDY LOAM
672
0
0
0
XEROLUC CALCIOTHID
DOMINO
LOAM
673
16
16
0
XEROLUC CALCIOTHID
DOMINO
LOAM
674
30
30
0
XEROLUC CALCIOTHID
DOMINO
LOAM
675
60
60
0
XEROLUC CALCIOTHID
DOMINO
LOAM
676
0
0
0
XEROLUC CALCIOTHID
DOMINO
LOAM
677
16
32
0
XEROLUC CALCIOTHID
DOMINO
LOAM
678
30
61
0
XEROLUC CALCIOTHID
DOMINO
LOAM
679
60
120
0
XEROLUC CALCIOTHID
DOMINO
LOAM
680
0
0
0
XEROLUC CALCIOTHID
DOMINO
LOAM
681
16
47
0
XEROLUC CALCIOTHID
DOMINO
LOAM
682
30
92
0
XEROLUC CALCIOTHID
DOMINO
LOAM
683
60
180
0
XEROLUC CALCIOTHID
DOMINO
LOAM
684
0
0
0
XEROLUC CALCIOTHID
DOMINO
LOAM
F-326
-------
TABLE F-4 (cont.)
SAND
SILT
CLAY
SOIL
SOIL
CUMM Zn
1
CONTENT
CONTENT
CONTENT
CEC
OC
SOIL
LOADING
1
%
%
%
cmol/kfl
%
PH
RATE (kg/ha)
647
40
6.4
1920
648
16
6.3
0
649
16
6.5
80
650
16
6.6
160
651
16
6.7
320
652
16
6.3
0
653
16
6.5
160
654
16
6.5
320
655
16
6.5
640
656
16
6.6
0
657
16
7
240
658
16
6.9
480
659
16
6.9
960
660
. 16
6.7
0
661
16
6.8
320
662
16
6.7
640
663
16
6.7
1280
664
16
6.9
0
665
16
6.7
400
666
16
6.8
800
667
16
6.7
1600
668
16
7
0
669
16
6.7
480
670
16
6.6
960
671
16
6.3
1920
672
40
7.2
0
673
40
6.7
68
674
40
6
130
675
40
5.7
252
676
40
7.5
0
677
40
6.6
135
678
40
5.9
261
679
40
5.7
504
680
40
7.2
0
681
40
6.4
203
682
40
6
391
683
40
6.1
756
684
40
7.1
0
F-327
-------
TABLE F-4 (cont.)
SOIL Zn
PLANT Zn
PLANT
YIELD
YIELD
SOIL
CONCENTRTN
CONCENTRTN
TISSUE
DESCRIPTION OF
REDUCTION
COMPONENT
EXTRACTANT
mg/kg
mg/kg
SAMPLED
EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN
%
MEASURED
647
4NHN03
41
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
648
4 N HN03
16
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
649
4 N HN03
19
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
650
4 N HN03
20
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
651
4 N HN03
28
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
652
4 N HN03
13
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
653
4 N HN03
22
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
654
4 N HN03
23
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
655
4 N HN03
25
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
656
4 N HN03
25
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
657
4 N HN03
23
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
658
4 N HN03
33
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
659
4 N HN03
37
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
660
4 N HN03
21
LEAF
.SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
661
4 N HN03
32
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
662
4 N HN03
33
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
663
4 N HN03
39
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
664
4 N HN03
18
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
665
4NHN03
32
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
666
4 N HN03
33
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
667
4 N HN03
39
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
668
4 N HN03
22
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
669
4 N HN03
47
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
670
4 N HN03
56:
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
671
4 N HN03
57
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
672
4 N HN03
17
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
673
4 N HN03
29
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
674
4 N HN03
32
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
675
4NKN03
49
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
676
4 N HN03
18
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
677
4NHN03
42
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
678
4 N HN03
29
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
679
4 N HN03
35
LEAF
SLUDGE, HELD, MATURITY
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
680
4NHN03
16
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
681
4NHN03
25
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
682
4NHN03
34
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
TOTAL BK5MASS
683
4NKN03
41
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
684
4 N HN03
20
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
e. *»«¦»«
-------
TABLE F-4 (cont.)
YIELD
YIELD
REDUCTION
COMPONENT
METAL
%
MEASURED
PHYTOTOXICITY
COMMENTS
647
NO
848
NO
649
NO
650
NO
651
NO
652
NO
653
NO
654
NO
655
NO
356
NO
657
NO
658
'
NO
659
NO
660
NO
661
NO
662
NO
963
NO
664
NO
665
NO
666
NO
667
NO
668
NO
869
NO
670
NO
671
NO
672
NO
673
NO
674
NO
675
NO
676
NO
677
!
NO
678
NO
679
NO
680
NO
881
NO
682
NO
683
NO
684
NO
;
F-329
-------
TABLE F-4 (cont.)
LOCATION
OF
STUDY
647
Riverside, California
648
Riverside, California
649
Riverside, California
650
Riverside, California
est
Riverside, California
652
Riverside, California
653
Riverside, Celifornia
654
Riverside, California
655
Riverside, California
656
Riverside, California
657
Riverside, California
658
Riverside, California
659
Riverside, California
660
Riverside, California
661
Riverside, California
662
Riverside, California
663
Riverside. California
664
Riverside, California
665
Riverside, California
666
Riverside, California
667
Riverside, California
668
Riverside, California
669
Riverside, California
670
Rivsrslds, California :
671
Rlvsreide, California
672
Riverside, California
673
Riverside, California
674
Riverside, California
675
Riverside, California
676
Riverside, California
677
Riverside, California
678
Riverside, California
679
Rivertids, California
680
Riverside. California
681
Rivsrslds, California
682
Riverside, Cafiforola
683
Riverside, CeHfornia
684
Riverside, California
c
-------
TABLE F-4 (cont.)
,
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
LITERATURE
PLANT
SLUDGE
VOL SOLIDS
Al
Ca
Cd
CITATION
NAME
CULTIVAR
PH
%
%
%
mfl/ka
685
CHANG ETAL 1983
BARLEY
75
126
686
CHANG ETAL 1983
BARLEY
75
126
687
CHANG ETAL 1983
BARLEY
75
126
688
CHANG ETAL 1983
BARLEY
75
126
689
CHANG ETAL 1983
BARLEY
75
126
690 :
CHANG ET AL 1983
! BARLEY
75
126
691
CHANG ET AL 1983
BARLEY
75
126
692
CHANG ETAL 1983
BARLEY
75
150
693
CHANG ET AL 1983
BARLEY
75
150
694
CHANG ETAL 1983
BARLEY
75
150
695
CHANG ET AL 1983
BARLEY
75
150
696
CHANG ET AL 1983
BARLEY
75
150
697
CHANG ETAL 1983
BARLEY
75
150
698
CHANG ET AL 1983
BARLEY
«
75
150
699
CHANG ET AL 1983
BARLEY
75
150
700
CHANG ET AL 1983
BARLEY
75
150
701
CHANG ET AL 1983
BARLEY
75
150
702
CHANG ETAL 1983
BARLEY
75
150
703
CHANG ET AL 1983
BARLEY
75
150
704
CHANG ET AL 1983
BARLEY
75
150
705
CHANG ET AL 1983
BARLEY
75
150
706
CHANG ETAL 1983
BARLEY
75
150
707
CHANG ET AL 1983
BARLEY
75
150
708:
CHANG ET AL 1983
BARLEY
75
150
709
CHANG ETAL 1983
BARLEY
75
150
710
CHANG ET AL 1983
BARLEY
75
150
711
CHANG ET AL 1983
BARLEY
75
150
712
CHANG ET AL 1983
BARLEY
70
83
713
CHANG ET AL 1983
BARLEY
70
83
714
CHANG ETAL 1983
BARLEY
70
83
715
CHANG ET AL 1983
BARLEY
70
83
716
CHANG ET AL 1983
BARLEY
70
83
717
CHANG ETAL 1983
BARLEY
70
83
718
CHANG ETAL 1983
BARLEY
70
83
719
CHANG ETAL 1983
BARLEY
70
83
720
CHANG ET AL 1983.
BARLEY
70
83
721
CHANG ET AL 1983
BARLEY
70
83
722 i
CHANG ETAL 1983
BARLEY
70
83
-------
685
686
687
688
689
690
691
692
693
694
695
696
697
698
699
700
701
702
703
704
70S
706
707
708
709
710
711
712
713
714
715
71B
717
718
718
720
721
722
TABLE F-4 (cont.)
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
Cr
Cu
Fe
N
Ni
Pb
Zn
SOLIDS
BIOLOGICAL
"8*9
ma/kq
mq/kq
CONTNT
PROCESSING
2092
1600
8.5
592
1.5
781
4265
2.1
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
2092
1600
8.5
592
1.5
781
4265
2.1
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
2092
1600
8.5
592
1.5
781
4265
2.1
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
2092
1600
8.5
592
1.5
781
4265
2.1
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
2092
1600
8.5
592
1.5
781
4265
2.1
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
2092
1600
8.5
592
1.5
781
4265
2.1
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
2092
1600
8.5
592
1.5
781
4265
2.1
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
2053
1745
8.5
608
1.5
693
4368
2.1
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
2053
1745
8.5
608
1.5
693
4368
2.1
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
2053
1745
8.5
608
1.5
693
4368
2.1
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
2053
1745
8.5
608
1.5
693
4368
2.1
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
2053
1745
8.5
608
1.5
693
4368
2.1
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
2053
1745
8.5
608
1.5
693
4368
2.1
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
2053
1745
8.5
608
1.5
693
4368
2.1
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
2053
1745
8.5
608
1.5
693
4368
2.1
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
2053
1745
8.5
608
1.5
693
4368
2.1
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
2053
1745
8.5
608
1.5
693
4368
2.1
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
2053
1745
8.5
608
1.5
693
4368
2.1
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
2053
1745
8.5
608
1.5
693
4368
2.1
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
2053
1745
8.5
608
1.5
693
4368
2.1
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
2053
1745
8.5
608
1.5
693
4368
2.1
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
2053
1745
8.5
608
1.5
693
4368
2.1
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
2053
1745
8.5
608
1.5
693
4368
2.1
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
2053
1745
8.5
608
1.5
693
4368
2.1
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
2053
1745
8.6
608
1.5
693
4368
2.1
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
2053
1745
8.6
608
1.6
693
4368
2.1
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
2053
1745
8.5
608
1.6
693
4368
2.1
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
2561
1293
2561
1293
4.5
542
4.5
542
930
930
4154
2.8
4154
2.8
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
2561
1293
4.5
542
930
4154
2.8
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
2561
1293
4.6
542
930
4154
2.8
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
2561
1293
4.6
542
930
4154
2.8
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
2561
1293
4.5
542
930
4164
2.8
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
2561
1293
4.6
642
930
4154
2.8
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
2561
1293
4.5
642
930
4154
2.8
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
2561
1293
4.6
642
930
4154
2.8
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
2561
1293
2561
1293
4.5
642
930
4154
2.8
4.5
542
930
4154
2.8
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
-------
TABLE F-4 (cont.t
SLUDGE
ANNLSLUDGE
CUMML SLUDGE
YEARS
SOIL
SOIL
CHEMICAL
LOADNG RATE
LOADNG RATE
SINCE LAST
TAXONOMIC
SERIES
SOIL
STABILIZATN
Mg/ha
Ma/ha
APPLICATN
NAME
NAME
TEXTURE
685
16
34
0
XEROLLIC CALCIOTHID
DOMINO
LOAM
686
30
122
0
XEROLLIC CALCIOTHID
DOMINO
LOAM
687
60
240
0
XEROLLIC CALCIOTHID
DOMINO
LOAM
688
0
0
0
XEROLLIC CALCIOTHID
DOMINO
LOAM
689
16
50
0
XEROLLIC CALCIOTHID
DOMINO
LOAM
690
30
152
0
XEROLLIC CALCIOTHID
DOMINO
LOAM
491
60
300
0
: XEROLUC CALCIOTHID
DOMINO
LOAM
692
0
0
0
TYPIC HALOXERALF
GREENFIELD
SANDY LOAM
693
16
16
0
TYPIC HALOXERALF
GREENFIELD
SANDY LOAM
694
32
32
0
TYPIC HALOXERALF
GREENFIELD
SANDY LOAM
695
59
59
0
TYPIC HALOXERALF
GREENFIELD
SANDY LOAM
696
0
0
0
TYPIC HALOXERALF
GREENFIELD
SANDY LOAM
697
16
32
0
. TYPIC HALOXERALF
GREENFIELD
SANDY LOAM
698
32
64
0 .
TYPIC HALOXERALF
GREENFIELD
SANDY LOAM
699
59
119
0
TYPIC HALOXERALF
GREENFIELD
SANDY LOAM
700
0
0
0
TYPIC HALOXERALF
GREENFIELD
SANDY LOAM
701
16
48
0
TYPIC HALOXERALF
GREENFIELD
SANDY LOAM
702
32
96
0
TYPIC HALOXERALF
GREENFIELD
SANDY LOAM
703
59
177
0
TYPIC HALOXERALF
GREENFIELD
SANDY LOAM
704
0
0
0
TYPIC HALOXERALF
GREENFIELD
SANDY LOAM
705
16
64
0
TYPIC HALOXERALF
GREENFIELD
SANDY LOAM
706
32
128
0
TYPIC HALOXERALF
GREENFIELD
SANDY LOAM
707
59
236
0
TYPIC HALOXERALF
GREENFIELD
SANDY LOAM
708
0
0
0
TYPIC HALOXERALF
GREENFIELD
SANDY LOAM
709
16
80
0
TYPIC HALOXERALF
GREENFIELD
SANDY LOAM
710
32
160
0
TYPIC HALOXERALF
GREENFIELD
SANDY LOAM
711
59
295
0
TYPIC HALOXERALF
GREENFIELD
SANDY LOAM
712
0
0
0
XEROLLIC CALCIOTHID
DOMINO
LOAM
713
16
16
0
XEROLLIC CALCIOTHID
DOMINO
LOAM
714
33
33
0
XEROLLIC CALCIOTHID
DOMINO
LOAM
715
63
63
0
XEROLLIC CALCIOTHID
DOMINO
LOAM
716
0
0
0
XEROLLIC CALCIOTHID
DOMINO
LOAM
717
16
31
0
XEROLLIC CALCIOTHID
DOMINO
LOAM
718
33
66
0
XEROLUC CALCIOTHID
DOMINO
LOAM
719
63
126
0
XEROLLIC CALCIOTHID
DOMINO
LOAM
720
0
0
0
XEROLLIC CALCIOTHID
DOMINO
LOAM
721
16
47
0
XEROLLIC CALCIOTHID
DOMINO
LOAM
722
33
96
0
XEROLLIC CALCIOTHID
DOMINO
LOAM
-------
TABLE F-4 (cont.)
SAND
SILT
CLAY
SOIL
SOIL
CUMM Zn
CONTENT
CONTENT
CONTENT
CEC
OC
SOIL
LOADING
%
%
%
cmol/kfl
%
PH
RATE (kg/ha)
685
40
6.3
271
680
40
6
522
687
40
5.9
1008
686
40
7.3
0
689
40
6.1
339
690
40
5.9
652
691
40
5.5
1262
692
16
6.1
0
693
16
5.6
67
694
16
5.4
133
695
5.3
249
696
16
6.2
0
697
5.8
134
698
36
5.6
265
699
16
5.3
497
700
16
6.6
0
701
16
5.7
200
702
16
5.7
398
703
16
5.6
746
704
16
6.8
0
705
16
6
267
706
16
5.9
530
707
16
5.8
995
708
6.9
0
709
16
5.9
334
710
16
5.8
663
711
16
5.5
1244
712
40
7.4
0
713
40
6.9
65
714
40
6.4
140
716
40
6.1
252
716
40
5.7
0
717
40
6.8
130
718
40
6.6
279
719
40
6.3
503
720
40
7.1
0
721
40
6.9
196
722
40
6.6
419
-------
TABLE F-4 (cont.)
SOIL Zn
PLANT Zn
PLANT
YIELD
YIELD
SOIL
CONCENTRTN
CONCENTRTN
TISSUE
DESCRIPTION OF
REDUCTION
COMPONENT
EXTRACTANT
mg/kg
mg/kg
SAMPLED
EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN
%
MEASURED
685
4NHN03
30
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
«S6
4 N HN03
47
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
687
4 N HN03
38
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
, 0
TOTAL BIOMASS
688
4 N HN03
25
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
689
4 N HN03
38
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
690
4 N HN03
41
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
691
4 N HN03
51
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
692
4 N HN03
26
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
693
4 N HN03
31
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
694
4 N HN03
50
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
695
4 N HN03
53
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
696
4 N HN03
20
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
697
4 N HN03
35
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
698
4 N HN03
51
LEAF
•SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
699
4 N HN03
50
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
700
4 N HN03
18
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
701
4 N HN03
32
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
702
4 N HN03
35
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
703
4 N HN03
44
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
704
4 N HN03
18
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
705
4 N HN03
32
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
706
4 N HN03
35
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
707
4 N HN03
44
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
708
4 N HN03
21
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
709
4 N HN03
43
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
710
4 N HN03
51
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
711
4 N HN03
82
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
712
4 N HN03
29
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
713
4 N HN03
31
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
714
4 N HN03
32
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
715
4 N HN03
38
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
716
4 N HN03
20
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
717
4 N HN03
35
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
718
4 N HN03
37
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
719
4 N HN03
33
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
720
4 N HN03
23
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
721
4 N HN03
27
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
722
4 N HN03
27
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
-------
TABLE F-4 (cont.)
YIELD
YIELD
REDUCTION
COMPONENT
METAL
%
MEASURED
PHYTOTOXICITY
COMMENTS
685
NO
686
NO
687
NO
688
NO
689
NO
690
NO
631
NO
692
NO
693
NO
694
NO
695
NO
696
NO
697
NO
698
NO
699
NO
700
NO
701
NO
702
NO
703
NO
704
NO
705
NO
706
NO
707
NO
708
NO
709
NO
710
NO
711
NO
712
NO
713
NO
714
NO
715
NO
716
NO
717
NO
71»
NO
719
NO
720
NO
721
NO
722
NO
P-336
-------
TABLE F-4 (cont.)
LOCATION
OF
STUDY
685
Riverside, California
686
Riverside, California
687
Riverside, California
688
Riverside, California
689
Riverside, California
690
Riverside, California
691
Riverside, California
692
Riverside, California
693
Riverside, California
694
Riverside, California
69S
Riverside, California
696
Riverside, California
697
Riverside, California
698
Riverside, California
699
Riverside, California
700
Riverside, California
701
Riverside, California
702
Riverside, California
703
Riverside, California
704
Riverside, California
70S
Riverside, California
706
Riverside, California
707
Riverside, California
708
Riverside, California
709
Riverside, California
710
Riverside, California
711
Riverside, California
712
Riverside, California
713
Riverside, Cslifomia
714
Riverside, California
715
Riverside, Cslifornia
716
Riverside, Celifornla
717
Riverside, Cslifornia
718
Riverside, Cslifornia
719
Riverside, Cslifornia
720
Riverside, California
721
Riverside, California
722
Riverside, California
-------
TABLE F-4 (cont.)
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
LITERATURE
PLANT
SLUDGE
VOL SOLIDS
Al
Ca
Cd
CITATION
NAME
CULTIVAR
PH
%
%
%
mg/kg
723
CHANG ETAL 1983
BARLEY
70
83
724
CHANG ETAL 1983
BARLEY
70
83
725
CHANG ET AL 1983
BARLEY
70
83
726
CHANG ET AL 1983
BARLEY
70
83
727
CHANG ET AL 1983
BARLEY
70
83
728
CHANG ETAL 1983
BARLEY
70
83
729
Chang, A.C. et ml.. 1983 #33
BARLEY
70
83
730
Chang. A.C. et al.. 1983 #33
BARLEY
70
83
731
Chang, A.C. et al., 1983 #33
BARLEY
70
83
732
Chang, A.C. at at.. 1983 #33
BARLEY
70
86
733
Chang, A.C. at al., 1983 #33
BARLEY
70
86
734
Chang, A.C. at al.. 1983 #33
BARLEY
70
86
735
Chang. A.C. atal., 1983 #33
BARLEY
70
86
736
Chang, A.C. atal., 1983 #33
BARLEY
70
86
737
Chang, A.C. atal., 1983 #33
BARLEY
70
86
738
Chang, A.C. at al., 1983 #33
BARLEY
70
86
739
Chang, A.C. at al., 1983 #33
BARLEY
70
86
740
Chang, A.C. at al., 1983 #33
BARLEY
70
86
741
Chang, A.C. at al., 1983 #33
BARLEY
70
86
742
Chang, A.C. atal., 1983 #33
BARLEY
70
86
743
Chang. A.C. at al., 1983 #33
BARLEY
70
86
744
Chang, A.C. at al., 1983 #33
BARLEY
70
86
745
Chang, A.C. at al.. 1983 #33
BARLEY
70
86
746
Chang. A.C. at al., 1983 #33
BARLEY
70
86
747
Chang. A.C. at al., 1983 #33
BARLEY
70
86
748
Chang. A.C. atal., 1983 #33
BARLEY
70
86
749
Chang, A.C. at al., 1983 #33
BARLEY
70
86
750
Chang, A.C. at al., 1983 #33
BARLEY
70
86
751
Chang. A.C. at al., 1983 #33
BARLEY
70
86
752
Pepper.l.L. at al., 1988 #185
Com
Pride 110
763
Pepper.l.L. et al., 1988 #185
Corn
Prid*110
754
Peppef.l.L. et al., 1988 #185
Com
Pride 110
755
Peoper.l.L. et al., 1988 #185
Corn
Pride 110
756
Pepper.l.L. et ai., 1988 #185
Com
Pride 110
757
Peppef.l.L. et al.. 1988 #185
Com
Pride 110
75*
Peppef.l.L. at al.. 1988 #185
Com
Pride 110
759
PiPPM.I.L at ai.. 1988 #185
Com
Pride 110
760
Peppef.l.L. at 4.. 1988 #185
Com
Pride 110
-------
TABLE F-4 (cont.)
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
Cr
Cu
Fa
N
Ni
P
Pb
Zn
SOLIDS
BIOLOGICAL
ma/kg
%
%
mq/kfl
mg/kg
mo/kg
m a/kg
CONTNT
PROCESSING
723
2561
1293
4.5
542
1.1
930
4154
2.8
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
724
2561
1293
4.5
542
1.1
930
4154
2.8
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
725
2561
1293
4.5
542
1.1
930
4154
2.8
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
726
2561
1293
4.5
542
1.1
930
4154
2.8
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
727
2561
1293
4.5
542
1.1
930
4154
2.8
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
728
2561
1293
4.5
542
1.1
930
4154
2.8
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
729
2561
1293
4.5
542
1.1
930
4154
2.8
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
730
2561
1293
4.5
542
1.1
930
4154
2.8
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
731
2561
1293
4.5
542
1.1
930
4154
2.8
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
732
2639
1363
4.5
534
1.1
902
4002
2.8
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
733
2639
1363
4.5
534
1.1
902
4002
2.8
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
734
2639
1363
4.5
534
1.1
902
4002
2.8
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
735
2639
1363
4.5
534
1.1
902
4002
2.8
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
736
2639
1363
4.5
534
1.1
902 .
4002
2.8
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
737
2639
1363
4.5
534
1.1
902
4002
2.8
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
738
2639
1363
4.5
534
1.1
902
4002
2.8
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
739
2639
1363
4.5
534
1.1
902
4002
2.8
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
740
2639
1363
4.5
534
1.1
902
4002
2.8
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
741
2639
1363
4.5
534
1.1
902
4002
2.8
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
742
2639
1363
4.5
534
1.1
902
4002
2.8
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
743
2639
1363
4.5
534
1.1
902
4002
2.8
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
744
2639
1363
4.5
534
1.1
902
4002
2.8
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
745
2639
1363
4.5
534
1.1
902
4002
2.8
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
746
2639
1363
4.5
534
1.1
902
4002
2.8
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
747
2639
1363
4.5
534
1.1
902
4002
2.8
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
748
2639
1363
4.5
534
1.1
902
4002
2.8
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
749
2639
1363
4.5
534
1.1
902
4002
2.8
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
750
2639
1363
4.5
534
1.1
902
4002
2.8
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
751
2639
1363
4.5
534
1.1
902
4002
2.8
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
752
Unlimed sludge, 1976
753
Unlimad tludga, 1976
754
Unlimad aludga. 1976
755
Unlimad aludga, 1976
756
.
Unlimad aludga, 1976
757
Unlimad aludga, 1976
758
Unlimad sludge, 1976
759
Unlimad sludge, 1976
760:
Unlimad sludge, 1977
-------
TABLE F-4 (cont.)
SLUDGE
ANNLSLUDGE
CUMML SLUDGE
YEARS
SOIL
SOIL
CHEMICAL
LOADNG RATE
LOADNG RATE
SINCE LAST
TAXONOMIC
SERIES
SOIL
STABILIZATN
Ma/ha
Mq/ha
APPLICATN
NAME
NAME
TEXTURE
723
63
189
0
XEROLLIC CALCIOTHID
DOMINO
LOAM
724
0
0
1
XEROLLIC CALCIOTHID
DOMINO
LOAM
725
0
47
1
XEROLLIC CALCIOTHID
DOMINO
LOAM
726
0
96
1
XEROLLIC CALCIOTHID
DOMINO
LOAM
727
0
189
1
XEROLLIC CALCIOTHID
DOMINO
LOAM
728
0
0
2
XEROLLIC CALCIOTHID
DOMINO
LOAM
729
0
47
2
XEROLLIC CALCIOTHID
DOMINO
LOAM
730
0
96
2
XEROLLIC CALCIOTHID
DOMINO
LOAM
731
0
189
2
XEROLLIC CALCIOTHID
DOMINO
LOAM
732
0
0
0
TYPIC HALOXERALF
GREENFIELD
SANDY LOAM
733
16
16
0
TYPIC HALOXERALF
GREENFIELD
SANDY LOAM
734
32
32
0
TYPIC HALOXERALF
GREENFIELD
SANDY LOAM
73S
66
66
0
TYPIC HALOXERALF
GREENFIELD
SANDY LOAM
736
0
0
0
TYPIC HALOXERALF
GREENFIELD
SANDY LOAM
737
16
33
0
TYPIC HALOXERALF
GREENFIELD
SANDY LOAM
738
32
64
0
TYPIC HALOXERALF
GREENFIELD
SANDY LOAM
739
66
131
0
TYPIC HALOXERALF
GREENFIELD
SANDY LOAM
740
0
0
0
TYPIC HALOXERALF
GREENFIELD
SANDY LOAM
741
16
49
0
TYPIC HALOXERALF
GREENFIELD
SANDY LOAM
742
32
96
0
TYPIC HALOXERALF
GREENFIELD
SANDY LOAM
743
66
197
0
TYPIC HALOXERALF
GREENFIELD
SANDY LOAM
744
0
0
1
TYPIC HALOXERALF
GREENFIELD
SANDY LOAM
745
0
49
1
TYPIC HALOXERALF
GREENFIELD
SANDY LOAM
746
0
96
1
TYPIC: HALOXERALF
GREENFIELD
SANDY LOAM
747
0
197
1
TYPIC HALOXERALF
GREENFIELD
SANDY LOAM
748
0
0
2
TYPIC HALOXERALF
GREENFIELD
SANDY LOAM
749
0
49
2
TYPIC HALOXERALF
GREENFIELD
SANDY LOAM
760
0
96
2
TYPIC HALOXERALF
GREENFIELD
SANDY LOAM
751
0
197
2
TYPIC HALOXERALF
GREENFIELD
SANDY LOAM
762
0
Fhivantic HalpoxaroXa
Sultan
aMt loam
763
22.4
0
Fluvantio HalpoxatoNa
Sultan
adt loam
764
44.8
22.4
Fluvantio Haipox«ofli
Sultan
ailtloam
765
89.6
44.8
Fhivantic Halpoxafola
Sultan
silt loam
756
0
89.6
Aquie Xafofluvanta
PuyaHup
fina aaody loam
757
22.4
0
Aquic Xarofluvanla
PuyaNup
fma aandyloam
758
44.8
22.4
Aquio XaroNuvanta
Puyatfup
fina aandyloam
759
89.6
44.8
Aquic Xatofluvanta
PuyaNup
fina aandy loam
760
0
89.6
BuvanUc HatpoxafoNa
Sultan
alt loam
-------
TABLE F-4 (cont.l
SAND
SILT
CLAY
SOIL
SOIL
CUMM Zn
CONTENT
CONTENT
CONTENT
CEC
OC
SOIL
LOADING
%
%
%
cmol/kg
%
pH
RATE (kg/ha)
723
40
6.4
755
724
40
7.2
0
725
40
6.6
196
726
40
6.5
419
727
40
6.4
755
728
40
7.5
0
729
40
6.9
196
730
40
6.7
419
731
40
6.5
755
732
16
6
0
733
16
5.8
65
734
16
5.7
132
735
16
5.7
269
736
16
6.5
0
737
16
6.4
130
738
16
6.2
264
739
16
6.1
538
740
16
6.5
0
741
16
6.3
196
742
16
6.1
397
743
16
6
807
744
16
6.5
0
745
16
6.3
196
746
16
6.1
397 :
747
16
6
807
748
16
6.8
0
749
16
6.4
196
750
16
6.2
397
751
16
6.2
807
752
13.7
4.6
0
753
13.7
4.6
55
754
13.7
4.6
110
755
13.7
4.6
220
756
9.1
4.7
0
757
9.1
4.7
55
758
9.1
4.7
110
759
9.1
4.7
220
760
13.7
4.6
0
F-341
-------
TABLE F-4 (cont.)
SOIL Zn
PLANT Zn
PLANT
YIELD
YIELD
SOIL
CONCENTRTN
CONCENTRTN
TISSUE
DESCRIPTION OF
REDUCTION
COMPONENT
EXTRACTANT
mo/ko
mq/kg
SAMPLED
EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN
%
MEASURED
723
4 N HN03
39
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
724
4 N HN03
21
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
725
4 N HN03
28
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
726
4 N HN03
32
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
727
4 N HN03
35
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
728
4 N HN03
25
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
729
4 N HN03
31
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
730
4 N HN03
39
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
731
4 N HN03
41
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
732
4 N HN03
30
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
733
4 N HN03
26
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
734
4 N HN03
40
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
735
4 N HN03
52
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
730
4 N HN03
33
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
737
4 N HN03
33
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
738
4 N HN03
38
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
739
4 N HN03
39
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
740
4 N HN03
31
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
741
4 N HN03
31
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
742
4 N HN03
33
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
743
4 N HN03
38
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
744
4 N HN03
19
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
745
4 N HN03
28 •
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
740
4 N HN03
32
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
747
4 N HN03
34
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
748
4 N HN03
24
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
749
4 N HN03
37
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
760
4 N HN03
39
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
751
4NHN03
46
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
762
0
2.2
28
Laaf
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
763
55
10.3
114.7
Laaf
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
764
110
17
182.7
Laaf
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
765
220
49.4
423.9
Laaf
SLUOGE. FIELD. MATURITY
756
0
3.4
28.7
Laaf
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
757
55
8
136.6
Laaf
SLUOGE, FIELD, MATURITY
758
110
19.6
193
Laaf
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
759
220
34.6
375
L*a(
SLUOGE. FIELD, MATURITY
760
0
49.7
Lad
SLUOGE. FIELD. MATURITY
-------
TABLE F-4 (cont.l
YIELD
YIELD
REDUCTION
COMPONENT
METAL
%
MEASURED
PHYTOTOXICITY
COMMENTS
723
NO
724
NO
725
NO
726
NO
727
NO
728
NO
729
NO
730
NO
731
NO
732
NO
733
NO
734
NO
735
NO
736
NO
•
737
NO
738
NO
739
NO
740
NO
741
NO
742
NO
743
NO
744
NO
745
NO
746
NO
747
NO
748
NO
749
NO
750
NO
751
NO
752
NO
YIELD NOT DETERMINED
753
NO
YIELD NOT DETERMINED
754
NO
YIELD NOT DETERMINED
755
NO
YIELD NOT DETERMINED
756
NO
YIELD NOT DETERMINED
757
NO
YIELD NOT DETERMINED
758
NO
YIELD NOT DETERMINED
759
NO
YIELD NOT DETERMINED
760
NO
YIELD NOT DETERMINED
-------
TABLE F-4 (cont.)
LOCATION
OF
STUDY
723
Riverside, California
724
Riverside, California
725
Riverside, California
726
Rivarside, California
727
Riverside, California
728
Riverside, California
729
Rivarside, California
730
Riversida, California
731
Riverside, California
732
Riverside, California
733
Rivarside, California
734
Riverside, California
735
Riverside, California
736
Riverside, California
737
Riverside, California
738
Riverside, California
739
Rivarside, California
740
Riverside, California
741
Riverside, California
742
Riverside, California
743
Riverside, California
744
Riverslds, California
745
Rivarside, California
746
: Riverside, California
747
Rivarside, California
748
Riverside, California
749
Riverside, California
750
Riverside, California
751
Riverside. California
752
PuvaNup, Washington
753
PuyaNup, Washington
754
PuyaKop, Washington
755
PuvsMop, Washington
756
PuyaHuo, Washington
757
PuvaQup, Washington
758
PuvaNup, Washington
759
PuyaMop, Washington
760
Puvatloo. Washington
P 344
-------
TABLE F-4 (cont.)
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
LITERATURE
PLANT
SLUDGE
VOL SOLIDS
Al
Ca
Cd
CITATION
NAME
CULTIVAR
PH
%
%
%
ma/kg
761
Peppar.l.L. at al.. 1988 *185
Corn
Pride 110
762
Peppar.l.L. et al.. 1988 #185
Corn
Pride 110
763
Pepper,I.L. at al., 1988 #185
Corn
Pride 110
764
Pepper.l.L. at al.. 1988 #185
Corn
Pride 110
765
Pepper.l.L. et al., 1988 #185
Corn
Pride 110
766 :
Pappar.l.L. at al.. 1988 #185
Corn
Pride 110
767
Peppar.l.L. et al., 1988 #185
Corn
Pride 110
768
Schauer, P.S. at al.. 1980 #211
Lettuce
Salad Bowl
4.7
67.5
21
769
Schauer, P.S. et al., 1980 #211
Lettuce
Salad Bowl
4.7
67.5
21
770
Schauer, P.S. at al., 1980 #211
Lettuce
Salad Bowl
4.7
67.5
21
771
Schauer, P.S. et al.. 1980 #211
Lettuce
Salad Bowl
4.7
67.5
21
772
Schauer, P.S. et al., 1980 #211
Lettuce
Salad Bowl
4.7
67.5
21
773
Schouer, P.S. et el., 1980 #211
Lettuce
Salad Bowl
4.7
67.5
21
774
Schauer, P.S. et al., 1980 #211
: Radish
Chetrybelle
4.7
67.5
21
77S
Schauer, P.S. et al., 1980 #211
Radish
Cherrybelle
4.7
67.5
21
776
Schauer, P.S. et el.. 1980 #211
Radish
Cherrybelle
4.7
67.5
21
777
Schauer. P.S. at al.. 1980 #211
Radith
Cherrybelle
4.7
67.5
21
778
Schauer, P.S. et ai., 1980 #211
Radith
Cherrybelle
4.7
67.5
21
779
Schauer, P.S. at al., 1980 #211
Radith
Cherrybelle
4.7
67.5
21
780
Schauer, P.S. at al.. 1980 #211
' Carrot
ttenvere
4.7
67.5
21
781
Schauer, P.S. at al.. 1980 #211
Carrot
Oanvara
4.7
67.5
21
782
Schauer. P.S. at al.. 1980 #211
Carrot
Danvara
4.7
67.5
21
783
Schauer. P.S. at ai.. 1980 #211
Carrot
Danvare
4.7
67.5
21
784
Schauer, P.S. et al.. 1980 #211 :
Carrot
Danvara
4.7
67.5
21
785
Schauer, P.S. et al., 1980 #211
Carrot
Danvera
4.7
67.5
21
786
Latterell, J.J. at al.. 1978 #138
Snap Bean
Tendergreen
2.61
6
787
Lattarell, J.J. et al.. 1978 #138
Snap Bean
Tendergreen
2.61
6
788
Latterell, J.J. et al.. 1978 #138
Snap Baan
Tenderoraen
2.61
6
789
Lattarell. J.J. at al.. 1978 #138
Snap Baan
Tendergreen
2.61
6
790
Latterell. J.J. at al., 1978 #138
Snap Bean
Tendergreen
2.61
6
791
Lattarell, J.J. et al., 1978 #138
Snap Bean
Tendergreen
2.61
6
792
Latterell, J.J. et al., 1978 #138
Snap Bean
Tendergreen
2.61
6
793
Latterell, J.J. et al., 1978 #138
Snap Bean
Tendergreen
2.61
6
794
HAM &DOWOY 1978
SOYBEAN
MERRILL
1.41
4.98
12
795
HAM &DOWDY 1978
SOYBEAN
MERRILL
1.41
4.98
12
796
HAM &DOWDY 1978
SOYBEAN
MERRILL
1.41
4.98
12
797
HAM &DOWDY 1978
SOYBEAN
MERRILL
1.41
4.98
12
798
HAM &DOWDY 1978
SOYBEAN
MERRILL
1.41
4.98
12
-------
TABLE F-4 (oont.)
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
Cr
Cu
Fa
N
Ni
P
Pb
Zn
SOLIDS
BIOLOGICAL
mg/kg
ma/kg
%
%
ma/kg
ma/kg
mg/kg
mo/kg
CONTNT
PROCESSING
761
Unlimed sludge, 1977
762
Unlimed sludge, 1977
763
Unlimed sludge, 1977
784
Unlimed sludoe, 1977
765
Unlimed sludge, 1977
766
Unlimed sludge, 1977
767
Unlimed sludge, 1977
768
2520
560
1630
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
769
2520
560
1630
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
770
2520
560
1630
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
771
2520
560
1630
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
772
2520
560
1630
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
773
2520
560
1630
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
774
2520
560
1630
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
775
2520
560
1630
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
776
2520
S60
1630
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
777
2520
560
1630
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
778
2520
560
1630
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
779
2520
560
1630
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
780
2520
560
1630
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
781
2520
560
1630
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
782
2520
560
1630
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
783
2520
560
1630
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
784
2520
560
1630
: ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
785
2520
560
1630
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
786
110
190
15
510
1080
AnMrobieatly Digested
787
110
190
15
510
1080
AnaerobicaHv Digested
788
110
190
15
510
1080
ArteeroblcaNy Digested
789
110
190
15
510
1080
AnaerobicaMy Digested
790
110
190
15
510
1080
AnaerobicaMy Digested
791
110
190
15
510
1080
AnaerobfoaNv Digested
792
110
190
15
510
1080
Anaeroblcailv Dtgestsd
793
110
190
15
510
1080
AnaerobicaMy Digested
794
1100
2020
1.6
2.73
4.4
4.37
2560
2130
AW MY
ANAEROBIC DIGESTED
795
1100
2020
1.6
2.73
4.4
4.37
2560
2130
AffiDRY
ANAEROBIC DIGESTED
796
1100
2020
1.6
2.73
4.4
4.37
2500
2130
AW DRY
ANAEROBIC DIGESTED
797
1100
2020
1.6
2.73
4.4
4.37
2560
2130
AW DRY
ANAEROBIC DIGESTED
79®
1100
2020
1.6
2.73
4.4
4.37
2560
2130
AIR DRY
ANAEROBIC DtGESTED
-------
TABLE F-4 (cont.)
SLUDGE
ANNL SLUDGE
CUMML SLUDGE
YEARS
SOIL
SOIL
CHEMICAL
L0A0N6 RATE
LOADNG RATE
SINCE LAST
TAXONOMiC
SERIES
SOIL
STABIUZATN
Ma/ha
Mg/ha
APPLICATN
NAME
NAME
TEXTURE
761
22.4
Fluvantic Halpoxerotls
Sultan
silt loam
762
44.8
Fluventic Halpoxerolla
Sultan
silt loam
763
89.6
Fluvantic Hatpoxerolls
Sultan
silt loam
764
0
Aquic Xerofluvonts
Puyatlup
fine sandy loam
765
22.4
Aquic Xerofluvonts
Puyallup
fine sandy loam
766
44.8
Aquic Xeroftuvant8
Puyatlup
fine sandy loam
767
89.6
Aquic Xarofluvants
Puyallup
fine sandy loam
768
0
0
0
Tvpic Dystrochrapt
Bridgahampton
silt loam
769
20
20
0
Typic Dyitrochropt
Bridgehampton
silt loam
770
60
60
0
Typic Dystrochrapt
Bridgahampton
silt loam
771
0
0
1
Typic Dystrochrapt
Bridgahampton
silt loam
772
20
20
1
Typic Dystrochrapt
Bridgahampton
ailt loam
773
60
60
1
Typic Dystrochrapt
Bridgahampton
silt loam
774
0
0
0
Typic Dystrochrapt
Bridgahampton
silt loam
775
20
20
0
Typic Dystrochrapt
Bridgahampton
silt loam
776
60
60
0
Typic Dystrochrapt
Bridgahampton
silt loam
777
0
0
1
Typic Dystrochrapt
Bridgahampton
silt loam
778
20
20
1
Typio Dystrochrapt
Bridgahampton
silt loam
779
60
60
1
Typic Dystrochrapt
Bridgahampton
silt loam
780
0
0
0
Typic Dystrochrapt
Bridgehampton
silt loam
781
20
20
0
Typio Dystrochrapt
Bridgahampton
silt loam
782
60
60
0
Typic Dystroehrapt
Bridgahampton
silt loam
783
0
0
1
Typic Dystrochrapt
Bridgahampton
silt loam
784
20
20
1
Typic Dystrochrapt
Bridgahampton
: silt loam
786
60
60
1
Typio Dystrochrapt
Bridgahampton
silt loam
786
0
NA
Udorthantic HaploboroH
Hubbard
coarse sand
787
0
NA
Udorthantic Haploboroll
Hubbard
coarse sand
788
122
0
Udorthantic Haploboroll
Hubbard
coarse sand
789
225
0
Udorthantic Haploboroll
Hubbard
coaraa aand
790
450
0
Udorthantic Haploboroll
Hubbard
coarse sand
791
350
1
Udorthantic Haploboroll
Hubbard
coarsa aand
792
700
1
Udorthantic Haploboroll
Hubbaid
coaraa aand
793
1400
1
Udorthantic HaploboroH
Hubbard
coarse sand
794
0
0
0
TYPIC TAPLUDOLL
WAUKEGAN
SiL
795
25
25
0
TYPIC TAPLUDOLL
WAUKEGAN
SiL
796
SO
50
0
TYPIC TAPLUDOLL
WAUKEGAN
SiL
797
100
100
0
TYPIC TAPLUDOLL
WAUKEGAN
SiL
798
200
200
0
TYPIC TAPLUDOLL
WAUKEGAN
SiL
F-347
-------
TABLE F-4 (com.)
SAND
SILT
CLAY
SOIL
SOIL
CUMM Zn
CONTENT
CONTENT
CONTENT
CEC
OC
SOIL
LOADING
%
%
%
omol/ka
%
pH
RATE (kg/hal
761
13.7
4.6
55
762
13.7
4.6
110
763
13.7
4.6
220
764
9.1
4.7
0
765
9.1
4.7
55
766
9.1
4.7
110
767
9.1
4.7
220
768
34
58
8
2.8
5.6
0
769
34
58
8
2.8
5.6
33
770
34
58
8
2.8
5.6
99
771
34
58
8
2.8
5.6
0
772
34
58
8
2.8
5.6
33
773
34
58
8
2.8
5.6
99
774
34
58
8
«
2.8
5.6
0
775
34
58
8
2.8
5.6
33
776
34
58
8
2.8
5.6
99
777
34
58
8
2.8
5.6
0
778
34
58
8
2.8
5.6
33
779
34
58
8
2.8
5.6
99
780
34
58
8
2.8
5.6
0
781
34
58
8
2.8
5.6
33
782
34
58
8
2.8
5,6
99
783
34
58
8
2.8
5.6
0
784
34
58
8
2.8
5.6
33
785
34
58
8
2.8
5.6
99
786
1.2
5.3
0
787
1.2
5.3
0
788
1.2
5.3
149
789
1.2
5.3
298
790
1.2
5.3
597
791
1.4
5.3
379
792
1.9
5.3
756
793
3.2
5.3
1518
794
6.5
0
795
6.5
52.5
796
6.5
105
797
6.5
210
798
6.5
420
F-348
-------
TABLE F-4 (cont.)
SOIL Zn
PLANT Zn
PLANT
YIELD
YIELD
SOIL
CONCENTRTN
CONCENTRTN
TISSUE
DESCRIPTION OF
REDUCTION
COMPONENT
EXTRACTANT
mfl/ka
ma/kg
SAMPLED
EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN
%
MEASURED
761
112
136.8
Laaf
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
762
224
338
Leaf
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
763
448
587.7
Leaf
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
764
0
55.8
Leaf
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
765
112
186
Laaf
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
766
224
486.3
Laaf
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
767
448
677.3
Leaf
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
768
DTPA
3.4
50
Laaf
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
769
DTPA
5.9
66
Leaf
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
770
DTPA
11.7
90
Leaf
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
771
DTPA
4.6
46
Leaf
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
772
DTPA
8.2
73
Leaf
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
773
DTPA
15.2
133
Leaf
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
774
DTPA
3.4
62
Leaf
« SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
775
DTPA
5.9
73
Leaf
SLUDGE, RELD, MATURITY
776
DTPA
11.7
74
Leaf'
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
777
DTPA
4.6
70
Leaf:
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
778
DTPA
8.2
88
Leaf
SLUDGE. FI&D, MATURITY
779
DTPA
15.2
164
Leaf
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
780
DTPA
3.4
32
Leaf
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
781
DTPA
5.9
42
Leaf
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
782
DTrA
11.7
59
Leaf
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
783
DTPA
4.6
40
Leef
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
784
DTPA
8.2
55
Leaf
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
785
DTPA
15.2
79
Leaf
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
786
DTPA
32
Leaf
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
787
DTPA
30
Leaf
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
788
DTPA
57
Leaf
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
789
DTPA
59
Leaf
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
790
DTPA
60
Leaf
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
791
DTPA
59
Leaf
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
792
DTPA
92
Leaf
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
793
DTPA
117
Leaf
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
794
N.L.
205
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
795
N.L.
203
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
796
N.L.
223
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
797
N.L.
278
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
798
N.L.
331
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
F-349
-------
TABLE F-4 (com.)
YIELD
YIELD
REDUCTION
COMPONENT
METAL
%
MEASURED
PHYTOTOXICITY
COMMENTS
761
NO
YIELD NOT DETERMINED
762
NO
YIELD NOT DETERMINED
763
NO
YIELD NOT DETERMINED
764
NO
YIELD NOT DETERMINED
765
NO
YIELD NOT DETERMINED
766
NO
YIELD NOT DETERMINED
767
NO
YIELD NOT DETERMINED
768
NO
YIELD NOT DETERMINED
769
NO
YIELD NOT DETERMINED
770
NO
YIELD NOT DETERMINED
771
NO
YIELD NOT DETERMINED
772
NO
YIELD NOT DETERMINED
773
NO
YIELD NOT DETERMINED
774
NO
YIELD NOT DETERMINED
775
NO
YIELD NOT DETERMINED
776
NO
YIELD NOT DETERMINED
777
NO
YIELD NOT DETERMINED
778
NO
YIELD NOT DETERMINED
779
NO
YIELD NOT DETERMINED
780
NO
YIELD NOT DETERMINED
781
NO
YIELD NOT DETERMINED
782
NO
YIELD NOT DETERMINED
783
NO
YIELD NOT DETERMINED
784
NO
YIELD NOT DETERMINED
785
NO
YIELD NOT DETERMINED
786
NO
YIELD NOT DETERMINED
787
NO
YIELD NOT DETERMINED
788
NO
YIELD NOT DETERMINED
789
NO
YIELD NOT DETERMINED
790
NO
YIELD NOT DETERMINED
791
NO
YIELD NOT DETERMINED
792
NO
YIELD NOT DETERMINED
793
NO
YIELD NOT DETERMINED
794
NO
795
NO
796
NO
797
NO
798
NO
F-350
-------
TABLE F-4 (oont.)
LOCATION
OF
STUDY
761
Puyallup, Washington
762
Puyallup. Washington
763
Puyallup, Washington
764
Puyallup. Washington
76S
Puyallup, Washington
766
Puyallup, Washington
767
Puyallup, Washington
768
KINGSTON, RHODE ISLAND
769
KINGSTON, RHODE ISLAND
770
KINGSTON, RHODE ISLANO
771
KINGSTON. RHODE ISLAND
772
KINGSTON. RHODE ISLAND
773
KINGSTON, RHODE ISLAND
774
KINGSTON, RHODE ISLAND
778
KINGSTON, RHODE ISLAND
778
KINGSTON, RHODE ISLAND
777
KINGSTON, RHODE ISLAND
778
KINGSTON, RHODE ISLAND
779
KINGSTON, RHODE ISLAND
780
KINGSTON, RHODE ISLAND
781
KINGSTON, RHODE ISLAND
782
KINGSTON. RHODE ISLAND
783
KINGSTON. RHODE ISLAND
784
KINGSTON, RHOOE ISLAND
785
KINGSTON. RHODE ISLAND
786
Elk Rivar, Minna iota
787
Elk Rivar, Minnesota
788
Elk Rivar, Minnaaota
789
Elk Rivar. Minnaaota
790
Elk Rivar, Minnesota
791
Elk Rivar, Minnesota
792
Elk River, Minnesota
793
Elk Rivar, Minnesota
794
MINNESOTA
795
MINNESOTA
796
MINNESOTA
797
MINNESOTA
798
MINNESOTA
F-3S1
-------
TABLE F-4 (ocnt.1
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
LITERATURE
PLANT
SLUDGE
VOL SOLIDS
Al
Ca
Cd
CITATION
NAME
CULTIVAR
PH
%
%
%
mo/kg
799
HAM &DOWDY 1978
SOYBEAN
MERRILL
4.98
12
800
HAM iDOWDY 1978
SOYBEAN
MERRILL
4.98
12
801
HAM fcDOWDY 1978
SOYBEAN
MERRILL
4.98
12
802
HAM iDOWDY 1978
SOYBEAN
MERRILL
1.41
4.98
12
803
HAM &DOWDY 1978
SOYBEAN
MERRILL
4.98
12
804
WILLIAMS 1977
CARROT
805
WILLIAMS 1977
CARROT
808
WILLIAMS 1977
CARROT
807
WILLIAMS 1977
CARROT
808
WILUAMS 1977
CARROT
809
WILLIAMS 1977
CARROT
810
WILLIAMS 1977
CARROT
811
WILLIAMS 1977
CARROT
812
WILLIAMS 1977
BEET
»
813
WILLIAMS 1977
BEET
i
814
WILUAMS 1977
BEET
815
WILUAMS 1977
BEET
810
WILUAMS 1977
BEET
817
WILUAMS 1977
BEET
818
WILUAMS 1977
BEET
819
WILUAMS 1977
BEET
820
WILUAMS 1977
ONION
821
WILUAMS 1977
ONION
822
WILUAMS 1977
ONION
823
WILUAMS 1977
ONION
824
WILUAMS 1977
ONION
825
WILUAMS 1977
ONION
828
WILUAMS 1977
ONION
827
WILLIAMS 1977
ONION
828
WILLIAMS 1977
ONION
829
WILLIAMS 1977
ONION
830
WILUAMS 1977
ONION
831
WILUAMS 1977
ONION
832
WILUAMS 1977
ONION
833
WILUAMS 1977
ONION
834
WILUAMS 1977
ONION
835
WILLIAMS 1977
ONION
836
WILLIAMS 1977
SWEDE
1
F-352
-------
TABLE F-4 (cont.)
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
Cr
Cu
Fa
N
Ni
P
Pb
Zn
SOLIDS
BIOLOGICAL
mgAcfl
ma/kg
%
%
mfl/kg
mfl/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
CONTNT
PROCESSING
799
1100
2020
1.6
2.73
4.4
4.37
2560
2130
AIR DRY
ANAEROBIC DIGESTED
800
1100
2020
1.6
2.73
4.4
4.37
2560
2130
AIR DRY
ANAEROBIC DIGESTED
801
1100
2020
1.6
2.73
4.4
4.37
2560
2130
AIR DRY
ANAEROBIC DIGESTED
802
1100
2020
1.6
2.73
4.4
4.37
2560
2130
AIR DRY
ANAEROBIC DIGESTED
803
1100
2020
1.6
2.73
4.4
4.37
2560
2130
AIR DRY
ANAEROBIC DIGESTED
804
100
5100
11400
AIR DRIED
805
100
5100
11400
AIR DRIED
'
806
100
5100
11400
AIR DRIED
807
100
5100
11400
AIR DRIED
808
100
5100
11400
AIR DRIED
809
100
5100
11400
AIR DRIED
810
100
5100
11400
AIR DRIED
811
100
5100
11400
AIR DRIED
812
100
5100
-
11400
AIR DRIED
813
100
!
5100
11400
AIR DRIED
'
814
100
5100
11400
AIR DRIED
815
100
5100
11400
AIR DRIED
816
100
5100
11400
AIR DRIED
817
100
5100
11400
AIR DRIED
818
100
5100
11400
AIR DRIED
819
100
5100
11400
AIR DRIED
820
100
5100
11400
AIR DRIED
821
100
5100
11400
AIR DRIED
822
100
5100
11400
AIR DRIED
823
100
5100
11400
AIR DRIED
824
100
5100
11400
AIR DRIED
825
100
5100
11400
AIR DRIED
826
100
5100
11400
AIR DRIED
827
100
5100
11400
AIR DRIED
828
100
5100
11400
AIR DRIED
829
100
5100
11400
AIR DRIED
830
100
5100
11400
AIR DRIED
831
100
5100
11400
AIR DRIED
832
100
5100
11400
AIR DRIED
833
100
5100
11400
AIR DRIED
834
100
5100
11400
AIR DRIED
835
100
5100
11400
AIR DRIED
836
100
5100
11400
AIR DRIED
F-353
-------
TABCE M (com.)
SLUDGE
ANNLSLUDGE
CUMML SLUDGE
YEARS
SOIL
SOIL
CHEMICAL
LOADNG RATE
LOADNG RATE
SINCE LAST
TAXONOMIC
SERIES
SOIL
STABIUZATN
Mg/ha
Ma/ha
APPUCATN
NAME
NAME
TEXTURE
799
0
0
1
TYPIC TAPLUOOLL
WAUKEGAN
SiL
800
25
25
1
TYP1C TAPLUDOLL
WAUKEGAN
SIL
801
50
50
1
TYPIC TAPLUDOLL
WAUKEGAN
SiL
802
100
100
1
TYPIC TAPLUDOLL
WAUKEGAN
SiL
803
200
200
1
TYPIC TAPLUDOLL
WAUKEGAN
SiL
804
0
0
8
LS
805
56
56
8
LS
808
112
112
8
LS
807
224
224
8
LS
808
0
0
8
LS
809
56
56
8
LS
810
112
112
8
LS
811
224
224
8
LS
812
0
0
9
LS
813
56
56
9
LS
814
112
112
9
LS
815
224
224
9
LS
816
0
0
9
LS
817
56
56
9
LS
818
112
112
9
LS
819
224
224
9
LS
820
0
0
10
LS
821
56
56
10
LS
822
112
112
10
LS
823
224
224
10
LS
824
0
0
10
LS
825
56
56
10
LS
826
112
112
10
LS
827
224
224
10
LS
828
0
0
13
LS
829
56
56
13
LS
830
112
112
13
LS
831
224
224
13
LS
832
0
0
13
LS
833
56
56
13
LS
834
112
112
13
LS
835
224
224
13
LS
836
0
0
11
LS
F-3R4
-------
TABLE F-4 (cont.)
SAND
SILT
CLAY
SOIL
SOIL
CUMM Zn
CONTENT
CONTENT
CONTENT
CEC
OC
SOIL
LOADING
%
%
%
cmol/kg
%
pH
RATE (ka/ha)
799
6.5
0
800
6.5
52.5
801
6.5
105
802
6.5
210
803
6.5
420
804
1.2
5.8
0
805
1.2
5.8
640
806
1.2
5.8
1280
807
1.2
5.8
2560
808
1.2
6.6
0
809
1.2
6.6
640
810
1.2
6.6
1280
811
1.2
6.6
2560
812
«
1.2
6.2
0
813
1.2
6.2
640
814
t :
1.2
6.2
1280
815
1.2
6.2
2560
816
1.2
7
0
817
1.2
7
640
818
1.2
7
1280
819
1.2
7
2560
820
i
1.2
6.2
0
821
1.2
6.2
640
822
1.2
6.2
1280
823
1.2
6.2
2560
824
1.2
7
0
825
1.2
7
640
826
1.2
7
1280
827
1.2
7
2560
828
1.2
6.3
0
829
1.2
6.3
640
830
1.2
6.3
1280
831
1.2
6.3
2560
832
1.2
6.8
0
833
1.2
6.8
640
834
1.2
6.8
1280
835
1.2
6.8
2560
836
1.2
6.7
0
F-355
-------
TABU F-4 (coot.)
SOIL Zn
PLANT Zn
PUNT
YIELD
YIELD
SOIL
CONCENTRTN
CONCENTRTN
TISSUE
DESCRIPTION OF
REDUCTION
COMPONENT
EXTRACTANT
mo/ko
mo/kg
SAMPLED
EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN
%
MEASURED
799
N.L.
42
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
800
N.L.
64
LEAF
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
801
N.L.
66
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
802
N.L.
75
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
803
N.L.
64
LEAF
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
804
.5 M HOAC
29
N.L.
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
ROOT
805
.5 M HOAC
112
N.L.
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
94.5
ROOT
800
.5 M HOAC
212
N.L.
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
99.3
ROOT
807
.5 M HOAC
350
N.L.
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
100
ROOT
808
.5 M HOAC
29
N.L.
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
ROOT
809
.5 M HOAC
112
N.L.
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
36
ROOT
810
.5 M HOAC
212
N.L.
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
69.4
ROOT
811
.5 M HOAC
350
N.L.
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
93.2
ROOT
812
.5 M HOAC
NL
83
ROOT TUBER
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
ROOT TUBER
813
.5 M HOAC
NL
95
ROOT TUBER
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
86.1
ROOT TUBER
814
.5 M HOAC
NL
124
ROOT TUBER
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
92.9
ROOT TUBER
815
.5 M HOAC
NL
93
ROOT TUBER
SLUDGE, FIELO, MATURITY
96.7
ROOT TUBER
816
.5 M HOAC
NL
48
ROOT TUBER
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
ROOT TUBER
817
.5 M HOAC
NL
72
ROOT TUBER
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
ROOT TUBER
818
.5 M HOAC
NL
67
ROOT TUBER
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
ROOT TUBER
819
.5 M HOAC
NL
112
ROOT TUBER
SLUDGE, HELD. MATURITY
52.8
ROOT TUBER
820
NL
NL
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
BULB
821
NL
NL
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
BULB
822
NL
NL
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
77.6
: BULB
823
NL
NL
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
93.9
BULB
824
NL
NL
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
BULB
825
NL
NL
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
0
BULB
826
NL
NL
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
BULB
827
NL
NL
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
38.1
BULB
828
NL
46
BULB
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
BULB
829
NL
141
BULB
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
0
BULB
830
NL
139
BULB
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
BULB
831
NL
NL
BULB
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
99
BULB
832
NL
54
BULB
SLUDGE, FIELO. MATURITY
0
BULB
833
NL
71
BULB
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
BULB
834
NL
114
BULB
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
BULB
835
NL
136
BULB
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
36.4
BULB
836
.5 M HOAC
31
NL
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
BULB
F-356
-------
TABLE F-4 (cont.)
YIELD
YIELD
REDUCTION
COMPONENT
METAL
%
MEASURED
PH YTOTOXICITY
COMMENTS
799
NO
800
NO
801
NO
802
NO
803
NO
804
NO
805
POSSIBLE
SLUDGE UNUSUALLY HIGH IN Nl (5100) AND ZN (11400)
806
POSSIBLE
SLUDGE UNUSUALLY HIGH IN Nl (5100) AND ZN (11400)
807
POSSIBLE
SLUDGE UNUSUALLY HIGH IN Nl (5100) AND ZN (11400)
808
NO
809
POSSIBLE
SLUDGE UNUSUALLY HIGH IN Nl (5100) AND ZN (11400)
810
POSSIBLE
SLUDGE UNUSUALLY HIGH IN Nl (5100) AND ZN (11400)
811
POSSIBLE
SLUDGE UNUSUALLY HIGH IN Nl (5100) AND ZN (11400)
812
NO
«
813
POSSIBLE
SLUDGE UNUSUALLY HIGH IN Nl (5100) AND ZN (11400)
814
POSSIBLE
SLUDGE UNUSUALLY HIGH IN Nl (5100) AND ZN (11400)
815
POSSIBLE
SLUDGE UNUSUALLY HIGH IN Nl (5100) AND ZN (11400)
816
NO
817
NO
818
NO
819
POSSIBLE
SLUDGE UNUSUALLY HIGH IN Nl (5100) AND ZN (11400)
820
NO
821
NO
822
POSSIBLE
SLUDGE UNUSUALLY HIGH IN Nl (5100) AND ZN (11400)
823
POSSIBLE
SLUOGE UNUSUALLY HIGH IN Nl (5100) AND ZN (11400)
824
NO
825
NO
826
NO
827
POSSIBLE
SLUDGE UNUSUALLY HIGH IN Nl (5100) AND ZN (11400)
828
NO
829
NO
830
NO
831
POSSIBLE
SLUDGE UNUSUALLY HIGH IN Nl (5100) AND ZN (11400)
832
NO
833
NO
834
NO
835
POSSIBLE
SLUDGE UNUSUALLY HIGH IN Nl (5100) AND ZN (11400)
836
NO
F-357
-------
TABLE P-4 (com.)
LOCATION
OF
STUDY
799
MINNESOTA
800
MINNESOTA
801
MINNESOTA
802
MINNESOTA
803
MINNESOTA
804
WOODTHORNE. U.K.
805
WOODTHORNE, U.K.
808
WOODTHORNE, U.K.
807
WOODTHORNE, U.K.
80S
WOODTHORNE, U.K.
809
WOODTHORNE. U.K.
810
WOODTHORNE, U.K.
811
WOODTHORNE, U.K.
812
WOODTHORNE, U.K.
813
WOODTHORNE, U.K.
814
WOODTHORNE. U.K.
815
WOODTHORNE, U.K.
818
WOODTHORNE. U.K.
817
WOODTHORNE, U.K.
818
WOODTHORNE, U.K.
818
WOODTHORNE, U.K.
820
WOODTHORNE, U.K.
821
WOODTHORNE. U.K.
822
WOODTHORNE. U.K.
823
WOOOTHORNE, U.K.
824
WOODTHORNE, U.K.
825
WOODTHORNE, U.K.
826
WOODTHORNE, U.K.
827
WOODTHORNE, U.K.
828
WOODTHORNE, U.K.
829
WOODTHORNE, U.K.
830
WOODTHORNE, U.K.
831
WOODTHORNE, U.K.
832
WOODTHORNE. U.K.
833
WOODTHORNE. U.K.
834
WOODTHORNE, U.K.
835
WOOOTHORNE, U.K.
836
WOODTHORNE. U.K.
F-358
-------
TABLE F-4 (cont.l
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
LITERATURE
PLANT
SLUDGE
VOL SOLIDS
Al
Ca
Cd
CITATION
NAME
CULTIVAR
PH
%
%
%
mfl/kg
837
WILLIAMS 1977
SWEDE
838
WILUAMS 1977
SWEDE
839
WILLIAMS 1977
SWEDE
840
WILUAMS 1977
SWEDE
841
WILUAMS 1977
SWEDE
842
WILUAMS 1977
SWEDE
843
WILLIAMS 1977
SWEDE
844
WILLIAMS 1977
LETTUCE
845
WILLIAMS 1977
LETTUCE
846
WIUIAMS 1977
LETTUCE
847
WILLIAMS 1977
LETTUCE
848
WILUAMS 1977
LETTUCE
849
WILUAMS 1977
LETTUCE
850
WILUAMS 1977
LETTUCE
*
851
WILLIAMS 1977
LETTUCE
i
852
KING & MORRIS 1972
RYE
1.42
853
KING & MORRIS 1972
RYE
1.42
854
KING & MORRIS 1972
RYE
1.42
855
KING & MORRIS 1972
RYE
1.42
858
KING & MORRIS 1972
RYE
1.42
857
KING & MORRIS 1972
RYE
1.42
858
KING & MORRIS 1972
RYE
1.42
859
KING & MORRIS 1972
RYE
1.42
860
KING & MORRIS 1972
RYE
1.42
861
KING & MORRIS 1972
RYE
1.42
862
KING & MORRIS 1972
RYE
1.42
863
KING & MORRIS 1972
RYE
1.42
864
KING & MORRIS 1972
RYE
1.42
365
KING & MORRIS 1972
RYE
1.42
866
KING & MORRIS 1972
RYE
1.42
867
WEBBER 1972
RED BEET
868
WEBBER 1972
RED BEET
869
WEBBER 1972
RED BEET
870
WEBBER 1972
RED BEET
871
WEBBER 1972
RED BEET
872
WEBBER 1972
RED BEET
873
WEBBER 1972
CELERY
874
WEBBER 1972
CELERY
F-359
-------
TABU F-4 (cont.)
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
Cr
Cu
Fa
N
Ni
P
Pb
Zn
SOLIDS
BIOLOGICAL
ma/ka
ma/ka
%
%
mo/ko
mo/kg
ma/ka
mg/ka
CONTNT
PROCESSING
837
100
5100
11400
AIR DRIED
838
100
5100
11400
AIR DRIED
839
100
5100
11400
AIR DRIED
840
100
5100
11400
AIR DRIED
841
100
5100
11400
AIR DRIED
842
100
5100
11400
AIR DRIED
843
100
5100
11400
AIR DRIED
844
100
5100
11400
AIR DRIED
845
100
5100
11400
AIR DRIED
846
100
5100
11400
AIR DRIED
847
100
5100
11400
AIR DRIED
848
100
5100
11400
AIR DRIED
849
100
5100
11400
AIR DRIED
850
100
5100
> 11400
AIR DRIED
851
100
5100
11400
AIR DRIED
852
453
2.96
25
0.79
2415
0.06
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
853
453
2.96
25
0.79
2415
0.06
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
854
453
2.96
25
0.79
2415
0.06
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
855
453
2.96
25
0.79
2415
0.06
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
858
453
2.96
25
0.79
2415
0.06
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
857
453
2.96
25
0.79
2415
0.06.
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
858
453
2.96
25
0.79
2415
0.06 :
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
859
453
2.96
25
0.79
2415
0.06
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
800
453
2.96
25
0.79
2415
0.06
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
861
453
2.96
25
0.79
2415
0.06
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
862
453
2.96
25
0.79
2415
0.06
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
863
453
2.96
25
0.79
2415
0.06
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
864
453
2.96
25
0.79
2415
0.06
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
865
453
2.96
25
0.79
2415
0.06
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
866
453
2.96
25
0.79
2415
0.06
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
867
868
240
1100
210
3000
869
60
4600
58
48000
870
60
4600
58
48000
871
240
1100
210
3000
872
60
4600
58
48000
873
874
240
1100
210
3000
F-360
-------
TABLE F-4 (cont.»
SLUDGE
ANNLSLUDGE
CUMML SLUDGE
YEARS
SOIL
SOIL
CHEMICAL
LOADNG RATE
LOADNG RATE
SINCE LAST
TAXONOMIC
SERIES
SOIL
STABILIZATN
Mo/ha
Mo/ha
APPLICATN
NAME
NAME
TEXTURE
837
56
56
11
LS
838
112
112
11
LS
839
224
224
11
LS
840
0
0
11
LS
841
56
56
11
LS
842
112
112
11
LS
843
224
224
11
LS
844
0
0
12
LS
845
56
56
12
LS
846
112
112
12
LS
847
224
224
12
LS
848
0
0
12
LS
849
56
56
12
LS
850
112
112
12 .
LS
851
224
224
12
LS
852
0
0
0
TYPIC HAPLUDULT
CECIL
SCL
853
26.5
26.5
0
TYPIC HAPLUDULT
CECIL
SCL
854
52.5
52.5
0
TYPIC HAPLUDULT
CECIL
SCL
855
60
60
0
TYPIC HAPLUDULT
CECIL
SCL
858
120
120
0
TYPIC HAPLUDULT
CECIL
SCL
857
0
0
0
TYPIC HAPLUDULT
CECIL
SCL
858
15.1
41.6
0
TYPIC HAPLUDULT
CECIL
SCL
859
30
82.5
0
TYPIC HAPLUDULT
CECIL
SCL
860
60
120
0
TYPIC HAPLUDULT
CECIL
SCL
861
120
240
0
TYPIC HAPLUDULT
CECIL
SCL
862
0
0
0
TYPIC HAPLUDULT
CECIL
SCL
863
15.1
41.6
0
TYPIC HAPLUDULT
CECIL
SCL
864
30
82.5
0
TYPIC HAPLUDULT
CECIL
SCL
865
60
120
0
TYPIC HAPLUDULT
CECIL
SCL
866
120
240
0
TYPIC HAPLUDULT
CECIL
SCL
867
0
0
0
868
125.5
125.5
2
869
-125.5
125.5
2
870
125.5
125.5
2
871
31.4
94.2
0
872
31.4
94.2
0
873
0
0
0
874
125.5
125.5
2
F-361
-------
TABLE M (oont.)
SAND
SILT
CLAY
SOIL
SOIL
CUMM Zn
CONTENT
CONTENT
CONTENT
CEC
OC
SOIL
LOADING
*
%
%
omol/ko
%
pH
RATE (ko/ha>
837
1.2
6.7
640
838
1.2
6.7
1280
839
1.2
6.7
2560
840
1.2
7.2
0
841
1.2
7.2
640
842
1.2
7.2
1280
843
1.2
7.2
2560
844
1.2
6.5
0
845
1.2
6.5
640
840
1.2
0.5
1280
847
1.2
0.5
2560
848
1.2
7
0
849
1.2
7
640
850
1.2
7
1280
851
1.2
7
2560
852
5.2
0
853
NR
71
854
NR
142
855
NR
ISO
858
NR
360
857
5.2
0
858
5.1
171
859
NR
342
800
4.5
486
861
4.2
972
802
LIMED
0
803
LIMED
171
804
UMED
342
805
UMED
486
800
UMED
972
807
6.1
0
808
NR
377
809
NR
1004
870
NR
2008
871
NR
283
872
NR
1004
873
6.1
0
874
NR
377
F-362
-------
TABLE F-4 (cont.)
SOIL Zn
PLANT Zn
PLANT
YIELD
YIELD
SOIL
CONCENTRTN
CONCENTRTN
TISSUE
DESCRIPTION OF
REDUCTION
COMPONENT
EXTRACTANT
mo/kg
mg/kg
SAMPLED
EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN
%
MEASURED
837
.5 M HOAC
90
NL
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
BULB
838
.5 M HOAC
168
NL
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
70.3
BULB
839
.5 M HOAC
278
NL
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
100
BULB
840
.5 M HOAC
31
NL
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
BULB
841
.5 M HOAC
90
NL
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
BULB
842
.5 M HOAC
168
NL
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
BULB
843
.5 M HOAC
278
NL
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
BULB
844
.5 M HOAC
47
NL
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
LEAF
845
.5 M HOAC
115
NL
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
LEAF
846
.5 M HOAC
194
NL
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
30
LEAF
847
.5 M HOAC
334
NL
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
96.3
LEAF
848
.5 M HOAC
47
NL
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
LEAF
849
.5 M HOAC
115
NL
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
LEAF
850
.5 M HOAC
194
NL
» SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
23.7
LEAF
851
.5 M HOAC
334
NL
¦;
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
28.4
LEAF
852
NR
NR
¦
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
FORAGE
853
NR
NR
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
34*
FORAGE
854
NR
NR
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
FORAGE
855
NR
NR
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
FORAGE
856
NR
NR
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
FORAGE
857
NR
32
FORAGE
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
FORAGE
858
NR
150
FORAGE
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
41 *
FORAGE
859
NR
232
FORAGE
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
FORAGE
860
NR
340
FORAGE
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
FORAGE
861
NR
775
FORAGE
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
80
FORAGE
862
NR
30
FORAGE
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
FORAGE
863
NR
106
FORAGE
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
FORAGE
864
NR
186
FORAGE
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
FORAGE
865
NR
251
FORAGE
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
FORAGE
866
NR
579
FORAGE
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
58
FORAGE
867
.5 M HOAC
8.9
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
868
.5 M HOAC
91
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
869
.5 M HOAC
465
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
58
TOTAL BIOMASS
870
.5 M HOAC
744
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
100
TOTAL BIOMASS
871
.5 M HOAC
61
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
872
.5 M HOAC
147
SLUDGE. FIELD. MATURITY
0
TOTAL BIOMASS
873
.5 M HOAC
8.9
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
STALKS
874
.5 M HOAC
91
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURiTY
0
STALKS
F-363
-------
TABLE F-4 (cont.)
YIELD
YIELD
REDUCTION
COMPONENT
METAL
%
MEASURED
PHYTOTOXICITY
COMMENTS
837
NO
838
POSSIBLE
SLUDGE UNUSUALLY HIGH IN Nl (5100) AND ZN (11400)
839
POSSIBLE
SLUDGE UNUSUALLY HIGH IN Nl (5100) AND ZN (11400)
840
NO
841
NO
842
NO
843
NO
844
NO
845
NO
848
POSSIBLE
SLUDGE UNUSUALLY HIGH IN Nl (5100) AND ZN (11400)
847
POSSIBLE
SLUDGE UNUSUALLY HIGH IN Nl (5100) AND ZN (11400)
848
NO
849
NO
850
POSSIBLE
SLUDGE UNUSUALLY HIGH IN Nl (5100) AND ZN (11400)
851
POSSIBLE
SLlIbGE UNUSUALLY HIGH IN Nl (5100) AND ZN (11400)
852
NO
;
853
NO*
•DOSE RESPONSE NOT CONSISTENT
854
NO
855
NO
858
NO
857
NO
858
NO*
'DOSE RESPONSE & TISSUE ZN CONCENTRATION ARE NOT CONSISTENT. PH<5.5
859
NO
i ,
860
NO
861
POSSIBLE
PH<5.5 (>4.2)
862
NO
863
NO
864
NO
865
NO
866
POSSIBLE
LOADING IN EXCESS OF AGRONOMIC RATES, PH UNKNOWN AND QUESTIONABLE
867
NO
868
NO
869
POSSIBLE
HIGH ZN SLUDGE (48000 MG/KGIBLENDED WITH LOWER ZN SLUDGE WAS USED
870
POSSIBLE
HIGH ZN SLUDGE (48000 MG/KG)BLENDED WITH LOWER ZN SLUDGE WAS USED
871
NO
872
NO
873
NO
874
NO
F-364
-------
TABLE F-4 (cont.)
LOCATION
OF
STUDY
837
WOODTHORNE, U.K.
838
WOODTHORNE, U.K.
839
WOODTHORNE, U.K.
840
WOODTHORNE, U.K.
841
WOODTHORNE, U.K.
842
WOODTHORNE, U.K.
843
WOODTHORNE, U.K.
844
WOODTHORNE, U.K.
84S
WOODTHORNE, U.K.
848
WOODTHORNE. U.K.
847
WOODTHORNE, U.K.
848
WOODTHORNE, U.K.
849
WOODTHORNE, U.K.
850
WOODTHORNE, U.K.
851
WOODTHORNE, U.K.
852
GEORGIA
853
GEORGIA
854
GEORGIA
855
GEORGIA
856
GEORGIA
857
GEORGIA
858
GEORGIA
859
GEORGIA
880
GEORGIA
881
GEORGIA
862
GEORGIA
863
GEORGIA
864
GEORGIA
865
GEORGIA
866
GEORGIA
867
LEEDS, U.K.
868
LEEDS, U.K.
869
LEEDS, U.K.
870
LEEDS, U.K.
871
LEEDS, U.K.
872
LEEDS, U.K.
873
LEEDS. U.K.
874
LEEDS. U.K.
F-365
-------
TABLE F-4 (com.)
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
LITERATURE
PLANT
SLUDGE
VOL SOLIDS
Al
Ca
Cd
CITATION
NAME
CULTIVAR
PH
%
%
%
mfl/ka
875
WEBBER 1972
CELERY
870
WEBBER 1972
CELERY
877
WEBBER 1972
CELERY
878
WEBBER 1972
CELERY
879
WEBBER 1972
CELERY
880
WEBBER 1972
881
PIETZETAL. 1983
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
1.4
3.3
307
882
PIETZETAL. 1983
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
1.4
3.3
307
883
PIETZ ET AL. 1983
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
1.3
3.3
307
884
PIETZETAL. 1983
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
1.6
3.3
307
885
PIETZETAL. 1983
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
1.5
3.3
307
886
PIETZETAL. 1983
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
1.4
3.3
307
887
PIETZETAL. 1983
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
1.4
3.3
307
888
PIETZETAL. 1983
CORN
PI0NEER.3517
7.6
46
1.3
3.3
307
889
PIETZETAL. 1983
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
1.6
3.3
307
890
PIETZETAL. 1983
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
1.5
3.3
307
891
PIETZETAL. 1983
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
1.4
3.3
307
892
PIETZ ET AL. 1983
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
1.4
3.3
307
893
PIETZETAL. 1983
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
1.3
3.3
307
894
PIETZETAL 1983
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
1.6
3.3
307
895
PIETZETAL. 1983
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
1.5
3.3
307
896
PIETZETAL. 1983
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
1.4
3.3
307
897
PIETZETAL. 1983
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
1.4
3.3
307
898
PIETZETAL. 1983
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
1.3
3.3
307
899
PIETZETAL. 1983
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
1.6
3.3
307
900
PIETZETAL. 1983
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
1.5
3.3
307
901
PIETZETAL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
1.4
3.3
265
902
PIETZETAL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
1.4
3.3
265
903
PIETZETAL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
1.4
3.3
265
904
PIETZETAL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
1.4
3.3
265
90S
PIETZETAL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
1.4
3.3
265
906
PIETZETAL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
1.4
3.3
160
907
PIETZETAL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
1.4
3.3
160
908
PIETZETAL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
20
3.1
0.71
71
909
PIETZ ET AL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
20
3.1
0.71
71
910
PIETZETAL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3377
7.6
30
3.1
0.71
71
911
PIETZETAL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3377
7.6
" 20
0.67
3.9
53
912
PIETZ ETAL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
1.4
3.3
265
F-366
-------
TABLE F-4 (cont.)
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
Cr
Cu
Fa
N
Ni
P
Pb
Zn
SOLIDS
BIOLOGICAL
ma/ka
ing/ko
%
%
ma/ka
mfl/ko
ma/ka
mg/kfl
CONTNT
PROCESSING
875
60
4600
58
48000
876
60
4600
58
48000
877
240
1100
210
3000
878
60
4600
58
48000
879
880
881
3505
1471
5.1
5.1
369
3.42
1258
4872
0.04
SECONDARY, ANAER DIGEST. LAGOON
882
3505
1471
5.1
5.1
369
3.42
1258
4872
0.04
SECONDARY. ANAER DIGEST, LAGOON
883
3505
1471
5.1
5.1
369
3.42
1258
4872
0.04
SECONDARY, ANAER DIGEST, LAGOON
884
3505
1471
5.1
5.1
369
3.42
1258
4872
0.04
SECONDARY, ANAER DIGEST, LAGOON
885
3505
1471
5.1
5.1
369
3.42
1258
4872
0.04
SECONDARY, ANAER DIGEST, LAGOON
888
3505
1471
5.1
5.1
369
3.42
1258
4872
0.04
SECONDARY, ANAER DIGEST, LAGOON
887
3505
1471
5.1
5.1
369
3.42
1258
4872
0.04
SECONDARY, ANAER DIGEST, LAGOON
888
3505
1471
5.1
5.1
369
3.42
1258
4872
0.04
SECONDARY, ANAER DIGEST, LAGOON
889
3505
1471
5.1
5.1
369
3.42
1258
4872
0.04
SECONDARY, ANAER DIGEST, LAGOON
890
3505
1471
5.1
5.1
369
3.42
1258
4872
0.04
SECONDARY. ANAER DIGEST, LAGOON
891
3505
1471
5.1
5.1
369
3.42
1258
4872
0.04
SECONDARY, ANAER DIGEST. LAGOON
892
3505
1471
5.1
5.1
369
3.42
1258
4872
0.04
SECONDARY. ANAER DIGEST, LAGOON
893
3505
1471
5.1
5.1
369
3.42
1258
4872
0.04
SECONDARY, ANAER DIGEST, LAGOON
894
3505
1471
5.1
5.1
369
3.42
1258
4872
0.04
SECONDARY, ANAER DIGEST, LAGOON
895
3505
1471
5.1
5.1
369
3.42
1258
4872
0.04
SECONDARY. ANAER DIGEST, LAGOON
896
3505
1471
5.1
5.1
369
3.42
1258
4872
0.04
SECONDARY, ANAER DIGEST, LAGOON
897
3505
1471
5.1
5.1
369
3.42
1258
4872
0.04
SECONDARY, ANAER DIGEST. LAGOON
898
3505
1471
5.1
5.1:
369
3.42
1258
4872
0.04
SECONDARY. ANAER DIGEST. LAGOON
899
3505
1471
5.1
5.1
369
3.42
1258
4872
0.04
SECONDARY, ANAER DIGEST, LAGOON
900
3505
1471
5.1
5.1
369
3.42
1258
4872
0.04
SECONDARY, ANAER DIGEST. LAGOON
901
3505
1471
4.3
4.5
425
3.42
850
3600
0.045
SECONDARY, ANAER DIGEST. LAGOON
902
3505
1471
4.3
4.5
425
3.42
850
3600
0.05
SECONDARY. ANAER DIGEST, LAGOON
903
3505
1471
4.3
4.5
425
3.42
850
3600
0.054
SECONDARY, ANAER DIGEST, LAGOON
904
3505
1471
4.3
4.5
425
3.42
850
3600
0.052
SECONDARY, ANAER DIGEST, LAGOON
905
3505
1471
4.3
4.5
425
3.42
850
3600
0.052
SECONDARY, ANAER DIGEST. LAGOON
906
3505
1471
4.3
4.5
425
3.42
850
3600
0.05
SECONDARY. ANAER DIGEST. LAGOON
907
3505
1471
4.3
4.5
425
3.42
850
3600
0.046
SECONDARY, ANAER DIGEST, LAGOON
908
775
460
2.2
0.5
116
0.87
293
1100
0.66
SECONDARY, ANAER DIGEST. LAGOON
909
775
460
2.2
0.5
116
"0.87
293
1100
0.65
SECONDARY. ANAER DIGEST. LAGOON
910
775
460
2.2
0.5
116
0.87
293
1100
0.3
SECONDARY. ANAER DIGEST. LAGOON
9*1
679
454
1.9
0.5
121
0.62
259
1146
0.69
SECONDARY, ANAER DIGEST, LAGOON
912
3505
1471
4.3
4.5
425
3.42
850
3600
0.045
SECONDARY, ANAER DIGEST, LAGOON
F-367
-------
TABLE F-4 (com.)
SLUDGE '
ANNL SLUDGE
CUMML SLUDGE
YEARS
son.
SOtL
CHEMICAL
LOADNG RATE
LOADNG RATE
SINCE LAST
TAXONOMtC
SERIES
SOIL
STABtUZATN
Ma/ha
Mo/ha
APPUCATN
NAME
NAME
TEXTURE
875
125.5
125.5
2
876
125.5
125.5
2
877
31.4
94.2
0
878
31.4
94.2
0
879
880
881
POLYMER,FECL3
0
0
STRIP MINE SPOIL
882
P0LYMER.FECL3
0
0
STRIP MINE SPOIL
883
POLYMER, FECL3
0
0
STRIP MINE SPOIL
884
P0LYMER.FECL3
0
0
STRIP MINE SPOIL
885
POLYMER,FECL3
0
0
STRIP MINE SPOIL
888
P0LYMER.FECL3
3
3
STRIP MINE SPOIL
887
POLYMER,FECL3
12.8
15.8
0
STRIP MINE SPOIL
888
P0LYMER.FECL3
12.4
28.1
0
STRIP MINE SPOIL
889
P0LYMER.FECL3
14.3
42.4
0
STRIP MINE SPOIL
890
POLYMER,FECL3
19.5
61.9
0
STRIP MINE SPOIL
891
POLYMER, FECL3
6
6
0
STRIP MINE SPOIL
892
P0LYMER.FECL3
25.5
31.5
0
STRIP MINE SPOIL
893
POLYMER,FECL3
29.8
61.3
0
STRIP MINE SPOIL
894
POLYMER,FECL3
28.6
89.9
0
STRIP MINE SPOIL
895
P0LYMER.FECL3
39
128.9
0
STRIP MINE SPOIL
896
P0LYMER.FECL3
11.9
11.9
0
STRIP MINE SPOIL
897
POLYMER,FECL3
51
62.9
0
STRIP MINE SPOIL
898
P0LYMER.FECL3
59.6 :
122.5
0
STRIP MINE SPOIL
899
P0LYMER.FECL3
57.1
179.6
0
STRIP MINE SPOIL
900
POLYMER,FECL3
78
257.6
0
STRIP MINE SPOIL
901
POLYMER,FECL3
0
0
0
STRIP MINE SPOIL
902
P0LYMER.FECL3
0
0
0
STRIP MINE SPOIL
903
P0LYMER.FECL3
0
0
0
STRIP MINE SPOIL
904
P0LYMER.FECL3
0
0
0
STRIP MINE SPOIL
905
POLYMER,FECL3
0
0
0
STRIP MINE SPOIL
906
P0LYMER.FECL3
0
0
0
STRIP MINE SPOIL
907
P0LYMER.FECL3
0
0
0
STRIP MINE SPOIL
908
POLYMER,FECL3
0
0
0
STRIP MINE SPOIL
909
P0LYMER.FECL3
0
0
0
STRIP MINE SPOIL
910
POLYMER, FECL3
0
0
0
STRIP MINE SPOIL
911
POLYMER,FECL3
0
0
0
STRIP MINE SPOIL
912
P0LYMER.FECL3
16.1
78
0
STRIP MINE SPOIL
F-368
-------
TABLE F-4 (cont.)
SAND
SILT
CLAY
SOIL
SOIL
CUMM Zn
CONTENT
CONTENT
CONTENT
CEC
OC
SOIL
LOADING
%
%
%
cmol/kfl
%
pH
RATE (kg/ha)
875
NR
1004
876
NR
2008
877
,
NR
283
878
NR
377
879
880
881
12.6
0.25
7.8
0
882
12.6
0.25
7.8
0
883
12.6
0.33
7.8
0
884
12.6
0.33
7.8
0
885
12.6
0.33
7.8
0
886
12.6
0.33
7.8
15
887
12.6
0.27
7.8
79
888
12*6
0.41
7.8
142
889
12.6
0.41
7.8
212
890
12.6
0.59
7.8
331
891
12.6
0.35
7.8
30
892
12.6
0.3
7.8
158
893
12.6
0.3
7.8
284
894
12.6
0.5
7.8
424
895
12.6
0.5
7.8
662
896
12.6
0.33
7.8
60
897
12.6
0.33
7.8
316
898
12.6
0.76
7.8
568
899
12.6
0.76
7.8
848
900
12.6
1.22
7.8
1324
901
0.33
7.5
0
902
0.44
7.5
0
903
0.44
7.5
0
904
0.36
7.5
0
905
0.36
7.5
0
906
0.46
7.5
0
907
0.46
7.5
0
908
0.73
7.5
0
909
0.73
7.5
0
910
0.7
7.5
0
911
0.7
7.5
0
912
0.59
7.5
415
F-369
-------
TABLE F-4 (oont.)
SOIL Zn
PLANT Zn
PLANT
YIELD
YIELD
SOIL
CONCENTRTN
CONCENTRTN
TISSUE
DESCRIPTION OF
REDUCTION
COMPONENT
EXTRACTANT
ma/ka
ma/ka
SAMPLED
EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN
%
MEASURED
875
.5 M HOAC
465
SLUDGE, FIELD. MATURITY
0
STALKS
876
.5 M HOAC
744
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
58
STALKS
877
.5 M HOAC
61
SLUDGE. FIELD, MATURITY
0
STALKS
878
.5 M HOAC
147
SLUDGE, FIELD, MATURITY
0
STALKS
879
880
881
0.1 M H«
3.4
15
LEAF
FIELD. SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
882
0.1 M Ha
4.5
13
LEAF
FIELD. SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
883
0.1 M Ha
3.9
21
LEAF
FIELD. SLUDGE. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
884
0.1 M Ha
9.5
33
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
885
0.1 M Ha
9.4
33
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
886
0.1 M Ha
4.3
34
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
887
0.1 M HCI
6.5
43
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
888
0.1 M Ha
20.8
74
LEAF
FIELD. SLUDGE. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
889
0.1 M Ha
30.6
109
LEAF
FIELD. SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
890
0.1 M HCI
18.1
81
LEAF
FIELD. SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
891
0.1 M Ha
3.7
43
LEAF
FIELD. SLUDGE. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
892
0.1 M HCI
9.1
51
LEAF
FIELD. SLUDGE. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
893
0.1 M Ha
50.3
93
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
894
0.1 M Ha
43.3
124
LEAF
FIELD. SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
895
0.1 M HO
32.6
132
LEAF
FIELD. SLUDGE. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
896
0.1 M Ha
3.6
80
LEAF
FIELD. SLUDGE. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
897
0.1 M Ha
10.3
72
LEAF
FIELD. SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
898
0.1 M Ha
114
121
: LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
899
0.1 M Ha
82
191
LEAF
RELD. SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
900
0.1 M Ha
77.5
200
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
901
0.1 M Ha
14
49
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
902
0.1 M Ha
20.4
65
LEAF
FIELD. SLUDGE. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
903
0.1 M Ha
25.8
42
LEAF
FIELD. SLUDGE. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
904
0.1 M HCI
22.5
54
LEAF
FIELD. SLUDGE. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
905
0.1 M Ha
22.3
53
LEAF
FIELD. SLUDGE. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
906
0.1 M Ha
28.1
34
LEAF
FIELD. SLUDGE. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
907
0.1 M Ha
33.4
56
LEAF
FIELD. SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
908
0.1 M Ha
42
88
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
909
0.1 M Ha
58.6
24
LEAF
FIELD. SLUDGE. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
910
0.1 M HCI
58.3
28
LEAF
FIELD. SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
911
0.1 M HCI
74.5
31
LEAF
FIELD, SLUDGE. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
912
0.1 M HCI
49.6
114
LEAF
FIELD. SLUDGE. MATURITY
29.5*
GRAIN
F-370
-------
TABLE F-4 (cont.)
YIELD
YIELD
REDUCTION
COMPONENT
METAL
%
MEASURED
PHYT OTOXICITY
COMMENTS
-
875
NO
876
POSSIBLE
HIGH ZN SLUDGE (48000 MG/KG)BLENDED WITH LOWER ZN SLUDGE WAS USED
877
NO
878
NO
879
•
880
881
0
STOVER
NO
882
0
STOVER
NO
883
0
STOVER
NO
884
0
STOVER
NO
885
0
STOVER
NO
886
0
STOVER
NO
887
0
STOVER
NO
888
0
STOVER
NO
«
889
0
STOVER
NO
390
0
STOVER
NO
891
0
STOVER
NO
892
0
STOVER
NO
893
0
STOVER
NO
894
0
STOVER
NO
895
0
STOVER
NO
896
0
STOVER
NO
897
0
STOVER
NO
898
0
STOVER
NO
899
0
STOVER
NO
900
0
STOVER
NO
901
0
STOVER
NO
902
0
STOVER
NO
903
0
STOVER
NO
904
0
STOVER
NO
905
0
STOVER
NO
906
0
STOVER
NO
907
0
STOVER
NO
908
0
STOVER
NO
909
0
STOVER
NO
910
0
STOVER
NO
911
0
STOVER
NO
912
0
STOVER
•NO
•DOSE RESPONSE AND TISSUE ZN CONCENRATION NOT CONSISTANT. OTHER FACTORS
F-371
-------
TABLE F-4 (con!.)
LOCATION
OF
STUDY
875
LEEDS, U.K.
876
LEEDS. U.K.
877
LEEDS, U.K.
878
LEEDS, U.K.
879
880
881
FULTON COUNTY, ILLINOIS
882
FULTON COUNTY. ILLINOIS
883
FULTON COUNTY. ILLINOIS
884
FULTON COUNTY. ILLINOIS
885
FULTON COUNTY, ILLINOIS
888
FULTON COUNTY, ILLINOIS
887
FULTON COUNTY, ILLINOIS
888
FULTON COUNTY, ILLINOIS
889
FULTON COUNTY, ILLINOIS
890
FULTON COUNTY, ILLINOIS
891
FULTON COUNTY. ILLINOIS
892
FULTON COUNTY. ILUNOIS
893
FULTON COUNTY, ILUNOIS
894
FULTON COUNTY, ILLINOIS
895
FULTON COUNTY, ILUNOIS
898
FULTON COUNTY. ILUNOIS
897
FULTON COUNTY. ILUNOIS
898
FULTON COUNTY. ILUNOIS
899
FULTON COUNTY. ILUNOIS
900
FULTON COUNTY. ILUNOIS
901
FULTON COUNTY, ILUNOIS
902
FULTON COUNTY. ILUNOIS
903
FULTON COUNTY. ILUNOIS
904
FULTON COUNTY. ILUNOIS
905
FULTON COUNTY, ILUNOIS
908
FULTON COUNTY, ILUNOIS
907
FULTON COUNTY, ILUNOIS
908
FULTON COUNTY. ILUNOIS
909
FULTON COUNTY. ILLINOIS
910
FULTON COUNTY, ILLINOIS
911
FULTON COUNTY. ILUNOIS
912
FULTON COUNTY. ILLINOIS
F-372
-------
913
914
915
916
917
918
919
920
921
922
923
924
925
926
927
928
929
930
931
932
933
934
935
936
937
938
939
940
941
942
943
944
TABLE F-4 (cont.)
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
LITERATURE
PLANT
SLUDGE
VOL SOLIDS
Al
Ca
CITATION
NAME
CULTIVAR
j>H_
%
%
%
PIETZET AL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
3.3
PIETZ ET AL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3517
7.6
46
3.3
PIETZ ET AL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3517
46
3.3
PIETZET AL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3517
46
3.3
PIETZ ETAL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3517
46
3.3
PIETZ ET AL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3517
46
3.3
PIETZET AL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3517
20
3.1
0.71
PIETZET AL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3517
20
3.1
0.71
PIETZET AL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3377
30
3.1
0.71
PIETZET AL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3377
20
0.67
3.9
PIETZ ETAL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3517
46
1.4
3.3
PIETZET AL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3517
46
1.4
3.3
PIETZET AL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3517
46
1.4
3.3
PIETZET AL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3517
46
1.4
3.3
PIETZET AL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3517
46
1.4
3.3
PIETZ ETAL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3517
46
1.4
3.3
PIETZET AL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3517
46
1.4
3.3
PIETZET AL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3517
20
3.1
0.71
PIETZET AL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3517
20
3.1
0.71
PIETZ ETAL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3377
30
3.1
0.71
PIETZ ET AL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3377
20
0.67
3.9
PIETZET AL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3517
46
1.4
3.3
PIETZ ETAL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3517
46
1.4
3.3
PIETZET AL. 1991
CORN
: PIONEER 3517
46
1.4
3.3
PIETZET AL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3517
46
1.4
3.3
PIETZ ETAL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3517
46
1.4
3.3
PIETZ ETAL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3517
46
1.4
3.3
PIETZ ETAL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3517
46
1.4
3.3
PIETZET AL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3517
20
3.1
0.71
PIETZ ET AL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3517
20
3.1
0.71
PIETZET AL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3377
30
3.1
0.71
PIETZ ETAL. 1991
CORN
PIONEER 3377
20
0.67
3.9
F-373
-------
913
914
915
916
917
918
919
920
921
922
923
924
925
928
927
928
929
930
931
932
933
934
935
936
937
938
939
940
941
942
943
944
TABLE F-4 (oont.)
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUOGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
Cr
Cu
Ft
N
Ni
Pb
Zn
SOLIDS
BIOLOGICAL
A
nwfl
-------
913
914
915
916
917
918
919
920
921
922
923
924
925
928
927
928
929
930
931
932
933
934
93S
938
937
938
939
940
941
942
943
944
TABLE F-4
-------
913
914
915
918
917
918
919
920
921
922
923
924
925
928
927
928
929
930
931
932
933
934
935
938
937
938
939
940
941
942
943
944
TABU F-4 (com.)
SAND
CONTENT
SILT
CONTENT
CLAY
CONTENT
SOIL
CEC
SOIL
OC
SOIL
cmol/Vg
0.94
0.94
0.87
0.87
0.87
0.87
1.41
1.41
1.25
1.25
0.94
0.94
1.58
1.58
1.04
1.04
1.48
1.48
2.15
2.15
1.9
1.22
3.02
3.02
1.58
1.58
2.38
2.38
3.47
3.47
2.77
2.77
pH
7.B
7.5
7.5
7.5
7.6
7.5
7.5
7.5
7.5
7.5
7.5
7.5
7.5
7.5
7.5
7.5
7.5
7.5
7.5
7.5
7.6
7.6
7.5
7.5
7.5
7.6
7.5
7.5
7.5
7.5
7.5
7.6
RATE tko/h«>
F-376
-------
TABLE F-4 (cont.)
SOIL Zn
PLANT Zn
PLANT
YIELD
YIELD
SOIL
CONCENTRTN
CONCENTRTN
TISSUE
DESCRIPTION OF
REDUCTION
COMPONENT
EXTRACTANT
ma/ka
ma/ka
SAMPLED
EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN
%
MEASURED
913
0.1 M HCI
59.7
101
LEAF
FIELD. SLUDGE, MATURITY
NA
GRAIN
914
0.1 M HO
133
97
LEAF
FIELD. SLUDGE. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
915
0.1 M Ha
90.6
76
LEAF
FIELD. SLUDGE. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
916
0.1 M Ha
82.2
53
LEAF
FIELD. SLUDGE, MATURITY
0
GRAIN
917
0.1 M Ha
118
60
LEAF
FIELD. SLUDGE. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
918
0.1 M Ha
113
94
LEAF
FIELD. SLUDGE. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
919
0.1 M Ha
171
88
LEAF
FIELD. SLUDGE. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
920
0.1 M Ha
196
34
LEAF
FIELD. SLUDGE. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
921
0.1 M Ha
175
41
LEAF
FIELD. SLUDGE. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
922
0.1 M Ha
174
38
LEAF
HELD. SLUDGE. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
923
0.1 M Ha
89.1
201
LEAF
FIELD. SLUDGE. MATURITY
21.5*
GRAIN
924
0.1 M Ha
102
197
LEAF
FIELD. SLUDGE. MATURITY
NA
GRAIN
925
0.1 M Ha
268
183
LEAF
FIELD. SLUDGE. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
926
0.1 M Ha
211
115
LEAF
FIELD. SLUDGE. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
927
0.1 M Ha
195
132
LEAF
FIELD. SLUDGE. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
928
0.1 M Ha
269
121
LEAF
FIELD. SLUDGE. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
929
0.1 M Ha
261
174
LEAF
FIELD. SLUDGE. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
930
0.1 M Ha
317
128
LEAF
HELD. SLUDGE. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
931
0.1 M Ha
326
55
LEAF
FIELD. SLUDGE. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
932
0.1 M Ha
293
42
LEAF
HELD. SLUDGE. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
933
0.1 M Ha
335
41
LEAF
HELD. SLUDGE. MATURITY
43.7*
GRAIN
934
0.1 M Ha
182
317
LEAF
HELD. SLUDGE. MATURITY
23*
GRAIN
935
0.1 M Ha
214
346
LEAF
HELD. SLUDGE. MATURITY
NA
GRAIN
936
0.1 M Ha
: 358
325
LEAF
HELD. SLUDGE.: MATURITY
0
GRAIN
937
0.1 M Ha
442
252
LEAF
HELD. SLUDGE. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
938
0.1 M Ha
332
245
LEAF
HELD. SLUDGE. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
939
0.1 M Ha
534
294
LEAF
FIELD. SLUDGE. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
940
0.1 M Ha
491
298
LEAF
HELD. SLUDGE. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
941
0.1 M Ha
689
195
LEAF
HELD. SLUDGE. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
942
0.1 M Ha
398
87
LEAF
FIELD. SLUDGE. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
943
0.1 M Ha
492
64
LEAF
FIELD. SLUDGE. MATURITY
0
GRAIN
944
0.1 M Ha
519
48
LEAF
FIELD. SLUDGE. MATURITY
59.2*
GRAIN
F-377
-------
913
914
91S
916
917
916
919
920
921
922
923
924
925
928
927
928
929
930
931
932
933
934
935
936
937
938
939
940
941
942
943
944
TABLE F-4 (oontj
YIELD
REDUCTION
YIELD
COMPONENT
METAL
MEASURED
PHYTOTOXICITY
COMMENTS
NA
STOVER
NO
STOVER
NO
STOVER
NO
STOVER
NO
STOVER
NO
STOVER
NO
STOVER
NO
STOVER
NO
STOVER
NO
STOVER
NO
STOVER
¦NO
'DOSE RESPONSE AND TISSUE ZN CONCENRATION NOT CONSISTANT. OTHER FACTORS
NA
STOVER
NO
STOVER
NO
STOVER
NO
STOVER
NO
STOVER
NO
STOVER
NO
STOVER
NO
STOVER
NO
STOVER
NO
STOVER
•NO
•DOSE RESPONSE AND TISSUE ZN CONCENRATION NOT CONSISTANT. OTHER FACTORS
STOVER
•NO
•DOSE RESPONSE AND TISSUE ZN CONCENRATION NOT CONSISTANT. OTHER FACTORS
NA
STOVER
NO
STOVER
NO
STOVER
NO
STOVER
NO
STOVER
NO
STOVER
NO
STOVER
NO
STOVER
NO
STOVER
NO
STOVER
•NO
•DOSE RESPONSE * TISSUE ZN CONCENTRATION NOT CONSISTENT. OTHER FACTORS
F-378
-------
TABLE F-4 (oont.)
LOCATION
OF
STUDY
913
FULTON COUNTY. ILLINOIS
914
FULTON COUNTY, ILLINOIS
915
FULTON COUNTY, ILLINOIS
916
FULTON COUNTY, ILLINOIS
917
FULTON COUNTY, ILLINOIS
918
FULTON COUNTY, ILLINOIS
919
FULTON COUNTY, ILLINOIS
920
FULTON COUNTY, ILLINOIS
921
FULTON COUNTY, ILLINOIS
922
FULTON COUNTY, ILLINOIS
923
FULTON COUNTY, ILLINOIS
924
FULTON COUNTY, ILLINOIS
925
FULTON COUNTY. ILLINOIS
926
FULTON COUNTY. ILLINOIS
927
FULTON COUNTY. ILLINOIS
928
FULTON COUNTY. ILLINOIS
929
FULTON COUNTY, ILLINOIS
930
FULTON COUNTY, ILLINOIS
931
FULTON COUNTY, ILLINOIS
932
FULTON COUNTY, ILLINOIS
933
FULTON COUNTY. ILLINOIS
934
FULTON COUNTY, ILLINOIS
935
FULTON COUNTY. ILLINOIS
936:
FULTON COUNTY. ILLINOIS
937
FULTON COUNTY. ILLINOIS
938
FULTON COUNTY. ILLINOIS
939
FULTON COUNTY, ILLINOIS
940
FULTON COUNTY, ILLINOIS
941
FULTON COUNTY, ILLINOIS
942
FULTON COUNTY, ILLINOIS
943
FULTON COUNTY, ILLINOIS
944
FULTON COUNTY. ILLINOIS
F-379
-------
APPENDIX G
Accumulation of Pollutant in Treated Soil, and Calculation of
Square Wave for the Ground Water Pathway
-------
-------
APPENDIX G
ACCUMULATION OF POLLUTANT IN TREATED SOIL, AND
CALCULATION OF "SQUARE WAVE" FOR GROUND-WATER PATHWAY
Derivation of reference application rates is based on the concept that both metals and
organic pollutants accumulate in soil with repeated application of sewage sludge. It is assumed
that all competing loss processes for pollutant in soil can be approximated as first-order, and
that coefficients describing the rate of loss to each process can be summed to yield a total or
"lumped" coefficient for first-order loss.
For organic pollutants, it is assumed that sewage sludge will be applied repeatedly until
steady-state is achieved. In other words, organic pollutants will accumulate in the soil until total
yearly losses through erosion, degradation, leaching, and volatilization (which are assumed to be
proportional to the concentration in soil) catch up with yearly loadings of pollutant to soil.
All loss processes are assumed to be first-order, and are combined into a "lumped" first-
order loss process for which losses at any time t can be described as:
£5 = - i^M, (1)
dt
where:
M, = mass of pollutant in treated soil at time t (kg/ha) ,
K^, = lumped, first-order loss rate for pollutant (yr~l)
Figure G-l shows expected concentrations of BAP in treated soil as a function of time,
based on a unit yearly loading of 1 kg/ha and a yearly total loss rate of 0.484. At the beginning
of each year, a new application of sludge raises the concentration by about 1 kg/ha. Subsequent
losses to leaching, degradation, erosion, and volatilization (at total estimated rate of *^,=0.484
yr"1) then reduce the concentration until the next year's application. If pollutant loading to
G-l
-------
2.8
2,8
2.4
1.8
1.6
1.4
I
fc.
at
I
0.8
0.6
0.4
18
20
14
16
10
12
0
4
6
8
2
Year
Figure G-l. BAP in soil by time (kg/ha), per annual loading (1 kg/ha).
G-2
-------
treated soil is approximated as a continuous process, the mass of pollutant in soil after t years of
sewage sludge applications can be approximated by:
M, = JAR e"^ dx
0 (2)
= M (i - e"^1)
where:
M, = mass of pollutant in treated soil at time t (kg/ha)
AR = annual loading of pollutant to soil (kg/ha *yr)
Ku,, = lumped, first-order loss rate for pollutant (yr1)
As t approaches infinity M, approaches AR/K^,, and yearly loss approaches yearly loading.
Figure G-2 plots annual losses of BAP as a function of the number of repeat
applications of sewage sludge (and 1 kg/ha.annual loading of BAP). As can be seen from the
graph, the theoretical limit of 1 kg/ha annual loss has been nearly achieved after about 10 years
of repeat applications. Because BAP has the lowest estimated total loss rate of any organic
pollutant considered in this analysis, other organic pollutants should approach steady-state
conditions more quickly. Calculation of reference application of pollutant is based on the
assumption that steady-state has been achieved.
For metals, the reference application of pollution is expressed in terms of cumulative
loadings. According to the loss coefficients calculated for metals in this analysis, arsenic is lost
most rapidly from treated soil, and lead least rapidly. Figure G-3 shows how the cumulative
loading of arsenic in treated soil would vary with SO years of repeat applications of sludge with 1
kg/ha loading of arsenic. With a total loss rate of 0.12 per year, arsenic approaches a steady-
state concentration equal to about 8 times its annual loading. Figure G-4 shows corresponding
yearly losses of arsenic. After about 10-20 years, yearly losses closely approximate yearly
loadings of 1 kg/ha. Lead, the least mobile of the metals evaluated, is depleted from treated
soil at an estimated annual rate of only 0.0073 per year. Under an idealized scenario of
unlimited applications of sludge (not used for this analysis) and a unit loading of 1 kg/ha, the
accumulation of lead in soil would be described by Figure G-S. Because of its low rate of loss,
G-3
-------
1.1
0.9
£
tn
0.8
I
3
&
m
0,7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.1
18 20
12
16
10
14
4
6
8
0
2
Ymt
Figure G-2. Annual loss of BAP from soil (kg/ha-yr), per annual loading (1 kg/ha).
G-4
-------
I
.a
u
'§
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 80 100
Year
Figure G-3. Arsenic in soil as function of time given 20 applications (1 kg/ha *yr).
G-5
-------
e
u
*2
I!
<
I
Year
Figure G-4. Loss of arsenic per year (kg/ha *yr), assuming limit of 20 applications
(1 kg/ha *yr).
G-6
-------
I
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
SO
20
0
10
30
40
Year
Figure G-5. Arsenic in soil as function of time, given unlimited applications (1 kg/ha).
G-7
-------
lead concentrations would increase significantly each year for the first 500-600 years of repeat
applications. As shown in Figure G-6, yearly losses would not begin to approximate yearly
loadings for several centuries.
Reference application rates of pollutant for metals are based on cumulative loadings to
treated soil, but the contamination of well-water or surface water bodies is also affected by the
period of time in which this cumulative loading takes place. Assumptions are therefore
required if maximum allowable cumulative loadings are to be calculated. It is assumed that
metals are loaded into treated soil through 20 consecutive, yearly applications of sewage sludge;
after 20 years, applications are discontinued. Figure G-7 and Figure G-8 show how these
assumptions affect the predicted concentration and annual losses of arsenic for these
calculations. With 20 consecutive loadings of arsenic at 1 kg/ha, yearly concentrations and losses
are expected to increase each year, until they reach a maximum of about 0.9 kg/ha in the 20th
year. Thereafter, annua! losses decline as the store of accumulated arsenic is depleted from the
soil. ,
Ideally, derivation of reference application rates would be based on functions similar to
the one graphed in Figure G-8, but for computational reasons a simplified loading is used as
input for the unsaturated zone (VADOFT) component of the ground-water model. It is
assumed that pollutant is loaded into the top of the unsaturated zone as a "square wave" of
constant magnitude and finite duration. To capture the risks associated with the peak rate at
which pollutant leaves the soil layer, the peak loss rate (calculated for the 20th year of
application) is used for the calculations. To conserve mass, the assumed duration of this loading
is constrained so that the product of the loss rate and the length of the square wave is equal to
the cumulative total mass of pollutant loading for the site. For arsenic, the peak loss rate is
calculated as:
L - 1- e(-*x>*20)
(3)
= 0.909(kg/ha-yi)
where:
_ maximum loss rate of pollutant (kg/ha »yr)
G-8
-------
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
I
S.
0.S
a
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
70
20
SO
60
0
10
30
40
Y«ar
Figure G-6. Total loss of arsenic per year, per annual loading (1 kg/ha).
G-9
-------
140
130
120
110
100
90
<£ 80 _
1 70 _
M go _
50
40
30
20
10
100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900
0
Yaar
Figure G-7. Lead In soil by time (kg/ha), given unlimited applications (1 kg/ha).
G-iO
-------
0 100 200 300 400 S00 600 700 800 900
Yaar
Figure G-8. Total loss of lead per year (hgrtia-yr), per annual loading (1 kgflha).
G-ll
-------
At this maximum rate, a cumulative loading of 20 kg/ha would be depleted in:
SAt(kg/h,) ,_M_ (4)
Lj^Ckg/hji-yr) 0.909
where:
L _ maximum loss rate of pollutant (kg/ha *yr)
The square wave thus computed for arsenic is included in Figure G-8.
As mentioned earlier, reference application rates for organic pollutants on land
application sites are derived for steady-state conditions. At steady state, the amplitude of the
"square wave" pulse for the groundwater pathway model is therefore equal to the unit loading of
pollutant (1 kg/ha) multiplied by the fraction of annual loss attributable to leaching. The length
of the square wave is equal to the length of the simulation (300 years). For landfills and surface
«
impoundments, both organic and metal pollutants are regulated based on the concentration of
pollutant in the sludge. Steady-state assumptions are therefore inappropriate, and the loading
of both organic and metal pollutants to the unsaturated zone is represented as a square wave.
In summary, all of the calculations in our derivation of reference application rates are based on
the assumption that pollutant losses to competing loss processes can be described as first-order.
All calculations within the mass balance, air pathway, and erosion pathway components of our
model are based on first-order loss processes. Calculation of a reference application rate for
the groundwater pathway also involves the assumption that losses are first-order, but a
simplifying step is required in executing the groundwater pathway model. For metals in land-
applied sewage sludge, and for both metals and organic pollutants in sewage sludge disposed in
landfills or surface impoundments, the pollutant pulse into the unsaturated zone is
approximated as a square wave. Dimensions of this square, wave pulse are set to approximate
conditions based on first-order, mass balance calculations.
G-12
-------
1 «
APPENDIX H
Partitioning of Pollutants Among Air, Water, and Solids in Soil
-------
APPENDIX H
PARTITIONING OF POLLUTANT AMONG AIR, WATER,
AND SOLIDS IN SOIL
Calculations used to derive reference application rates for ground water, surface water,
and air pathways are based on the assumption that equilibrium is maintained between
concentrations of pollutant in the air-filled pore space, the water-filled pore-space, and the solid
particles of soil. Equilibrium partitioning between dissolved and gaseous phases is described by
Henry's Law constants; partitioning between adsorbed and dissolved phases is described by soil-
water partition coefficients. From these assumptions and the definitions of concentration are
derived the equations used to describe partitioning.
and:
€,=
v.
•
+ M_ + M_
CW Oft
v.
+ V ~ V
*¦
c.
ss
concentration of adsorbed pollutant on soil particles (kg/kg)
M.
=
mass of adsorbed pollutant (1%)
M,
as
mass of soil (kg)
Q,
ss
concentration of dissolved pollutant in soil (kg/m3)
sa
mass of dissolved pollutant (kg)
V
* w
ss
volume of water in soil (m3)
C.
as
concentration of gaseous pollutant in soil (kg/m3)
M,„
as
mass of gaseous pollutant (kg)
v.
=
volume of air in soil (m3)
c,
—
total concentration of pollutant in soil (kg/m3)
M*
as
total mass of pollutant in soil (kg)
v,
as
total volume of soil (m3)
v,
—
volume of solids in soil (m3)
H-l
-------
The equilibrium distribution coefficient between adsorbed and dissolved phases (KD, m3/kg) can
be defined as:
.11
KD
/M„
(3)
_ H,VW
M.MW
where:
KD * partitioning coefficient between solids and liquids (1/kg)
Ma = mass of adsorbed pollutant (kg)
H = mass of soil (kg)
M- - mass of dissolved pollutant (kg)
Vw =s volume of water in soil (m3)
The dimensionless Henry's Law constant (A) describing the partitioning between gaseous and
dissolved phases is defined as:
i.lSl
c.
H
C. _
(4)
where:
vamw
Me, = mass of gaseous pollutant (kg)
V, « volume of air in soil (m3)
M,,, = mass of dissolved pollutant (kg)
Vw * volume of water in soil (ms)
The bulk density of soil (BD, kg/mJ) is defined as:
BD - ^ (5)
vt
where:
BD = bulk density of soil in mixing zone (kg/m3)
mass of soil (kg)
Vt = total volume of soil (m3)
H-2
-------
The air-filled porosity of soil (0J is defined as:
e. =
where:
as:
V.
air-filled porosity of soil (unitless)
volume of air in soil (mJ)
total volume of soil (ms)
where:
Vw
V,
water-filled porosity of soil (unitless)
volume of water in soil (m3)
total volume of soil (m3)
and, the total porosity of soil (0J is defined as:
= e + e
v«
where:
e%
total porosity of soil (unitless)
vt
total volume of soil (m3)
V. «
volume of air in sofl (m3)
e.
air-filled porosity of sofl (unitless)
water-filled porosity of soil (unitless)
The above definitions can be combined to yield:
Ct KD BD . 8
and:
and:
&
+ _=. + 0
H
— = BD KD + 0. + fi 0,
C_ "
H-3
-------
c. 0- .
» bd + ^ ^ (11)
where:
C, KD KD
C, = total concentration of pollutant in soil (kg/m3)
C. = concentration of gaseous pollutant in soil (kg/m3)
KD = soil-water distribution coefficient for pollutant (m'/kg)
BD = bulk density of soil (kg/m3)
H = nondiracnsional Henry's Law constant for the pollutant
0W = water-filled porosity of soil (unitiess)
0, ® air-filled porosity of soil (unitiess)
C. = concentration of dissolved pollutant in soil (kg * pollutant/m3)
C, = concentration of adsorbed pollutant in treated soil (kg/kg)
These relations are used throughout the calculations used to derive reference application rates.
Where diy-weight concentrations of pollutant in sewage sludge or sewage sludge-treated soil are
involved, the equations are modified slightly, based on the definition:
e—s
M.
I
M
*
Vt BD
(12)
.iL
BD
where:
Oh, = dry-wcigjit concentration of pollutant in soil (kg pollutant/kg)
Ma = total mass of pollutant in soQ (kg)
M, = mass of soil (kg)
V, = total volume of soil (m3)
BD = bulk density of soil (kg/ms)
C, = total concentration of pollutant in soil (kg/m3)
H-4
-------
*
APPENDIX I
Derivation of First-Order Coefficient for Losses to Leaching
-------
APPENDIX I
DERIVATION OF FIRST-ORDER COEFFICIENT
FOR LOSSES TO LEACHING
U.S. EPA (1987e) provides an equation for computing a first-order loss rate to leaching
for pollutant in treated soil:
w = —£!£— (i)
^ BD KD dj K '
where:
K^ — first-order loss rate coefficient for leaching (yr1)
NR = annual recharge rate (m/yr)
BD = bulk density of soil (kg/m3)
KD = soil-water distribution coefficient for pollutant (mJ/kg)
dj = depth of incorporation of sewage sludge (M)
«
This appendix describes a modified version of that equation.
The basic strategy for deriving a coefficient for first-order loss to leaching is to estimate
the mass of pollutant expected to be lost each year and divide by the available mass of pollutant.
The mass of pollutant that will be lost to leaching in any interval of time can be described by
the volume of water percolating through the treated soil multiplied by the average concentration
of pollutant in that water:
FA^ = NR Cj,,. 1,000 (2)
where:
FA<3W = flux of leached pollutant from treated soil (kg/ha *yr)
NR = recharge to ground water beneath the treated soil (m3/m2*yr, or rn/yr)
Cfc,. = concentration of pollutant in water infiltrating through the treated soil
(kg/m3)
1,000 = constant to convert units from (kg/m2*yr) to (kg/ha *yr)
1-1
-------
From Appendix H, the concentration of pollutant In leachate is related to the total
concentration (by volume) of pollutant in soil as:
where:
C. =» concentration of dissolved pollutant in soil (kg*poIiutant/m3)
C, = total concentration of pollutant in treated soil (kg/m3)
BD = bulk density of soil (kg/m3)
KD — soil-water distribution coefficient for pollutant (mJ/kg)
6W = water-filled porosity of soil (unitless)
ft = Henry's Law Constant for pollutant (unitless)
0, = air-filled porosity of soil (unitless)
This flux of pollutant must be translated into a first-order loss coefficient so that:
where:
t
total concentration of pollutant in treated soil (kg/m3)
time (yr)
first-order loss rate coefficient for leaching (yr"1)
Kfcc Is estimated with the approximation:
where:
M* =
t
At
K*e =
C,
first-order loss rate coefficient for leaching (yr"1)
total concentration of pollutant in treated soil (kg/m3)
time (yr)
one year
mass of pollutant in soil (kg)
-------
The volume of treated sofl beneath one square meter of soil surface ( m3/m2) is equal to
the depth to which sewage sludge has been incorporated into the soil (d* m). The total mass of
pollutant beneath one square meter of surface can therefore be described by:
(6)
= Ct Vt
" ci dj
Combining these equations with results from Appendix H yields:
s, « FAow = m (7)
Ct V, (BD KD + 8W + ft-O,) dj
*
1-3
-------
APPENDIX J
Input Parameters Used to Derive Reference Application Rates
for Pathways 12 through 14
-------
APPENDIX J
INPUT PARAMETERS USED TO DERIVE REFERENCE APPLICATION
RATES FOR PATHWAYS 12 THROUGH 14
This appendix discusses input parameters used to derive reference application rates for
land application.
J.1 SITE PARAMETERS
Values for input parameters used to characterize land application sites are listed in
Table J-l, and discussed below.
J.1.1 Area of Land Application Sit*
The land application site area (A ) of 1,074 ha is based on an analysis of the National
Sewage Sludge Survey (NSSS) and represents the 90th percentile of land area estimated to have
been treated by those FOTWs in the analytic component of the survey reporting the application
of sewage sludge to agricultural land.
J.U Watershed Area
The area of the watershed (A„) is assumed to be 440,300 ha, the mean size hydrologic
cataloguing unit as defined by the U.S Geological Survey (U.S. EPA, 1990a). It is assumed that
the entire watershed is used for agricultural purposes, so that the topography, cover, and other
characteristics of the remainder of the watershed are identical to those of the sludge
management area (SMA).
J-l
-------
TABLE J-1
SITE AND SLUDGE PARAMETERS FOR LAND APPLICATION
Sludge Management Area (A, ha)
Watershed Area (A^, ha)
Depth of Incorporation for Sewage Sludge (dj, in)
Lateral Distance to Well (m)
Width of Buffer Zone (m)
Wind Velocity (wm/sec)
Average Air Temperature (T, °K)
Number of Applications of Sewage Sludge
Yearly Loss to Soil Erosion (d,, m/yr)
1,074*
440,300b
0.15°
0
10
4.5d
288*
2C
0.00060*
* 90th percentile of land area estimated to be treated annually by those POTWs in the
analytic component of the National Sewage Sludge Survey.
k Mean size hydrologic cataloging unit (U.S. EPA, 1990a).
c U.S. EPA (1987e).
* Typical value for U.S. (U.S. EPA, 1990c).
* Federal Register (1986c).
' Typical site Ufe (U.S. EPA, 1983d).
* USDA (1987).
J-2
-------
J.13 Depth of Incorporation for Sludge
It is assumed that sewage sludge is incorporated into treated soil to a depth (dj) of 6
inches or 15 cm (U.S EPA, 1987e).
J.1.4 Distance to Well
As a worst-case exposure scenario, it is assumed that the highly exposed individual lives
at the down-gradient edge of the land application site: the distance from the down-gradient edge
of the SMA to the potential well is assumed to be 0 meters.
J.13 Width of Buffer Zone
The width of the buffer zone between the SMA and the nearest body of surface water is
assumed to be 10 meters. A buffer zone of identical width is also assumed to protect all
remaining surface water within the watershed.
J.1.6 Velocity of Wind at the Ground Surface
Wind velocity (w) affects the transport of volatilized pollutant from the site. A value of
4.5 m/see (10 mph) has been selected for wind velocity at the ground surface. This value
represents a typical annual wind speed in the United States (U.S. EPA, 1990c).
J.1.7 Air Temperature
The model air temperature (T) of 15°C represents the annual average for the U.S.
(Federal Register, 1986c).
J-3
-------
J.1.8 Number of Applications of Sludge
For organic pollutants, reference application rates are expressed as an annual loading
(kg/ha »yr) at which sewage sludge can be applied indefinitely without exceeding reference water
or air concentrations. For metals, reference application rates are expressed as a maximum
cumulative loading (kg/ha) independent of the number of times sewage sludge is applied.
Nevertheless, deriving reference application rates for metals requires that the number of
applications of sewage sludge be specified to determine the length of time required for pollutant
to be depleted from the site. It is assumed that the modeled land application site receives
annual applications of sewage sludge for 20 consecutive years. This value M is consistent with
the "useful life of application sites" described by U.S. EPA (1983d).
J.1.9 Yearly Loss of Soil to Erosion
The model erosion rate (d.) of 0.00060 m/yr represents a weighted average of annual soil
loss rates presented in the Soil Conservation Survey Summary Report (USDA, 1987). The
average value has been converted from 3.8 tons/acre *yr based on an assumed bulk density of
1,400 kg/m3 for treated soil.
32 SOIL PARAMETERS
The unsaturated zone is characterized by pore space containing both air and water,
whereas the pore space in the saturated zone contains water only! Because of differences in
fluid mechanics, these two zones require different equations and input parameters for tracking
pollutant transport A simplifying assumption used for deriving reference application rates is
that the basic soil characteristics (including soil type, porosity, and bulk density) of the two
zones are identical. Values for parameters describing the mixing, unsaturated, and saturated
soil zones are provided in Table J-2.
J-4
-------
TABLE J-2
SOIL AND HYDROLOGIC PARAMETERS
FOR LAND APPLICATION
Soil Type Sand
Porosity of Sewage Sludge/Soil 0.4*
Bulk Density of Sewage Sludge/Soil (kg/mJ) 1400b
Bulk Density of Soil in Unsaturated and Saturated Zones 1600°
(kg/mJ)
Saturated Hydraulic Conductivity of Soil (m/hr) 0.6 ld
Water Retention Parameters
0r 0.045s
a (m1) 14.5*
p 2.68*
«
Fraction of Organic Carbon in Soil or Sewage Sludge
Mixing Layer 0.01
Unsaturated Zone 0.001r
Saturated Zone 0.0001
Depth to Groundwater (m) Is
Net Recharge or Seepage (m/yr) 0.5b
Thickness of Aquifer (m) Is
Hydraulic Gradient 0.00S1
Total Suspended Solids in Surface Water (mg/1) 16*
' Todd (1980), Carsel and Panish (1988).
b Chaney (1992b).
c Based on porosity of C.4. Freeze and Cherry (1979).
d 95th percentile value from Carsel and Parrish (1988).
* Mean values reported for sand in Carsel and Panish (1988).
r Lower bound of range reported in Federal Register (1986c).
* Conservative value.
b Average of range reported in Federal Register (1986c).
1 Average value for groundwater surveyed in Federal Register (1986c).
' Geometric mean of values reported in U.S. EPA's STORET data base, U.S. EPA (1992a).
J-5
-------
JJ.1 Soil T^pe
The type of soil in the mixing zone, unsaturated and saturated zones affects the ability of
a pollutant to move vertically to the aquifer and laterally to a nearby well. In general, the
pollution potential of a soil is largely affected by the type of clay present, the shrink/swell
potential of that clay, and the grain size of the soil; that is, the less the day shrinks and swells
and the smaller the grain size of the soil, the less the pollution potential associated with that
soil. Soil types in the unsaturated zone in order of increasing pollution potential are: (1)
nonshrinWng clay, (2) day loam, (3) silty loam, (4) loam, (5) sandy loam, (6) shrinking clay, (7)
sand, (8) gravel, and (9) thin or absent soil (U.S. EPA, 1985a).
Sand has been selected as a reasonable worst case soil to use in model scenarios for
defining numerical reference application rates for sludge. Wherever possible values for
parameters describing soil characteristics for model simulations are based on values estimated
for sand. *
JJS2 Porosity of Sewage Sludge/Soil Mixture
Porosity is the ratio of the void volume of a given soil or rock mass to the total volume
of that mass. If the total volume is represented by V, and the volume of the voids by Vv, the
porosity can be defined as 0t=Vy / V,. Porosity is usually reported as a decimal fraction or
percentage, and ranges from zero (no pore space) to one (no solids). For soil types with small
particle sizes such as day, porosity increases to a maximum of around 05. Porosities of coarser
media like gravel decrease to a minimum of around 03.
For deriving reference application rates, a total porosity of 0.4 has been taken from
Todd (1980). This value is consistent with the average value for sand (0.43) reported in Carsel
and Farrish (1988). It is used to represent total porosity within the mixing unsaturated and
saturated soil zones.
J-6
-------
Effective porosity (0.) is calculated as the difference between the average saturated water
content and the approximate average residual water content, and refers to the amount of
interconnected pore space available for fluid flow. For deriving reference application rates,
average residual water content In the unsaturated zone is assumed to be less than 0.05, and
effective porosity has been approximated with the same value used for total porosity (0.4) in
mass balance and ground-water transport calculations.
J23 Bulk Density of Sludge/Soil
The bulk density of soil (BD) is defined as the mass of dry soil divided by its total (or
bulk) volume. Bulk density directly influences the retardation of solutes and is related to soil
structure. In general, as soils become more compact, their bulk density increases. Bulk density
can be related to the particle density and porosity of a given soil as:
*
BD = pm(l - fy (1)
where:
BD = bulk density of soil (kg/m3)
pm = particle density of soil (kg/m3)
8, = porosity of soil (imitless)
Typical mineral soils have particle densities of about 2,650 kg/m3 (Freeze and Cherry,
1979). This value and a soil porosity of 0.4 suggest a bulk density of about 1,600 kg/m3 for pure
soil, somewhat higher than the 1,300-1,500 kg/m3 range typically encountered for soil mixed with
sewage sludge (Chaney, 1992b). For deriving reference application rates, it is assumed that the
bulk density of the mixing zone is 1,400 kg/m3, and the bulk density of soil in the unsaturated
and saturated zones is 1,600 kg/m1.
J-7
-------
J2A Saturated Hydraulic Conductivity of Soil
Saturated hydraulic conductivity refers to the ability of soil to transmit water, which is
governed by the amount and interconnection of void spaces in the unsaturated or saturated
zones. These voids may occur as a consequence of inter-granular porosity, fracturing, or
bedding planes. In general, high hydraulic conductivities are associated with high potential for
pollution. The value for saturated hydraulic conductivity used for deriving reference application
rates (0.61 m/hr) is the 95th percentile of a probability distribution for hydraulic conductivity in
sand derived by Carsel and Parrish (1988). It thus represents a conservative or "reasonable
worst case" value.
J2S Unsaturated Hydraulic Conductivity of Soil
The hydraulic conductivity or effective permeability of soil in the unsaturated zone is a
function of its moisture content, which is in turn a function of pressure head. These
relationships are central to the simulation of water flow through the unsaturated zone. The
VADOFT model used to derive reference application rates accepts as inputs sets of data points
describing effective permeability-saturation curves and the saturation-pressure head curves.
Alternatively, it accepts van Genuchten water retention parameters defining the curves (U.S.
EPA, 1989c; Carsel and Parrish, 1988); this latter option is used for deriving reference
application rates.
Based on soils data from the USDA Soil Conservation Survey (SCS), Carsel and Parrish
(1988) derived distributions for the three parameters required (%, a, and ff) according to twelve
SCS textural classifications. Values used for deriving reference application rates (0.045,
14 J m'\ and 2.68 for a, and fi, respectively) correspond to mean values reported for sand.
J-8
-------
JJ2.6 Fraction of Organic Carbon in Soil or Sludge
The model combines the fraction of organic carbon in the soil with each pollutant's
organic carbon partition coefficient to determine the partitioning of pollutant between soil and
water. In general, a lower fraction of organic carbon implies greater mobility for organic
pollutants. The organic carbon content for sludge varies among sludge types, with mean values
for various types showing a relatively narrow range of 27.6-32.6 percent (U.S. EPA, 1983d). It is
conservatively assumed that soil within the upper IS on of the soil column (or "mixing zone")
contains 1 percent organic carbon. A value of 10~* has been selected for the fraction of organic
carbon in the unsaturated zone because it is a typical value for sand, and falls at the lower end
of the range (0.001-0.01) reported for soil beneath hazardous waste disposal facilities (Federal
Register, 1986c). The fraction of organic carbon (4e) in the saturated zone is expected to be
lower than that of the unsaturated zone, and has been assigned a value of 10"4, or one-tenth the
fraction assumed for the unsaturated zone.
«
J2.7 Depth to Ground Water
The depth to ground water is defined as the distance from the bottom of the mixing
zone to the water table. The water table is itself defined as the subsurface boundary between
the unsaturated zone (where the pore spaces contain both water and air) and the saturated zone
(where the pore spaces contain water only). It may be present in any type of medium and may
be either permanent or seasonal. The depth to ground water determines the distance a
pollutant must travel before reaching the aquifer, and affects the attenuation of pollutant
concentration during vertical transport. As this depth increases, attenuation also tends to
increase, thus reducing potential pollution of the ground water. A conservative value of 1 m is
assumed for the distance between treated soil and ground water.
J-9
-------
J3 HYDROLOGIC PARAMETERS
Key hydrologic parameters include net recharge or seepage, the thickness of the aquifer,
and the hydraulic gradient. Values used to derive reference application rates are included in
Table J-2 and discussed below.
JJ.l Net Recharge
The primary source of most ground water is precipitation, which passes through the
ground surface and percolates to the water table. Net recharge is the volume of water reaching
the water table per unit of land, and determines the quantity of water available for transporting
pollutants vertically to the water table and laterally within the aquifer. The greater the recharge
rate, the greater the potential for pollution, up to the point at which the amount of recharge is
large enough to dilute the pollutant. Beyond that point, the pollution potential ceases to
increase and may actually decrease (U.S. EPA, 1985b).
For land application sites, the selected net recharge rate (NR), (0.5 m/yr) represents the
average of a range of values presented in {Federal Register, 1986c).
JJ.2 Thickness of Aquifer
Saturated zones are considered aquifers unless they lack the permeability to yield
sufficient water. Only true aquifers are considered when selecting input parameters for
calculating reference application rates. For deriving reference application rates, the thickness of
the aquifer is assumed to be 1 m. This thickness is assumed to represent reasonable worst-case
conditions and has been selected as a matter of polity to ensure that reference application rates
for sewage sludge are sufficiently protective.
J-10
-------
333 Hydraulic Gradient
The hydraulic gradient is a function of the local topography, ground-water recharge
volumes and locations, and the influence of withdrawals (e.g., well fields). It is also very likely
to be indirectly related to properties of porous media. Although steep gradients are rarely
associated with very high conductivities, no functional relationship exists to express this
relationship.
The hydraulic gradient value selected for deriving reference application rates is 0.005
m/m or 0-5 percent, and is based on an average value for ground waters surveyed for the
Hazardous Waste Management System Land Disposal Restrictions Regulation (.Federal Register,
1986c).
S
J3A Total Suspended Solids
*
Calculating the amounts of pollutant partitioning to liquid and solid phases in surface
water requires a value for suspended solids content. Raw data for total suspended solids in
streams and rivers in the U.S. were obtained from the EPA's STORET data base, under the
field "Total Residue" (U.S. EPA, 1992a). The data consist of annual mean total residues for the
U.S. for the years 1903 through 1991. The geometric mean of these annual values is calculated
as 16.2 mg/1 and the median as 16.41 mg/1. A rounded value of 16 mg/1 is chosen for the total
suspended solids (TSS) content of the surface water modeled for this analysis.
J.4 CHEMICAL-SPECIFIC PARAMETERS
J.4.1 Distribution Coefficients
Pollutant transport in soil systems is influenced by interactions between the pollutant and
soil. The affinity of pollutants for soil particles may result from ion exchange on charged sites
or adsorption due to surface forces. When the soil's capacity to attract pollutant is exceeded,
J-ll
-------
soluble pollutants will move through the soil at the same velocity as the bulk leachate. The
affinity between a soil and a pollutant is characterized by the distribution coefficient (KD).
Representative KD values (1/kg or m3/kg) are defined as the equilibrium ratio of the pollutant
concentration in soil (mg/kg) to that in associated water (mg/1 or mg/m3). Values used for this
analysis are listed in Table J-3.
For organic pollutants KD is calculated from a pollutant's partition coefficient between
organic carbon and water:
KD = KOC fx (2)
where:
KD = equilibrium partition coefficient for pollutant (m3/kg)
KOC = organic carbon partition coefficient (m3/kg)
4e = fraction of soil consisting of organic carbon
«
As discussed in Section J.2.6, f^. values of 0.01, 0.001 and 0.0001 are assumed for the mixing,
unsaturated, and saturated zones, respectively.
The organic carbon partition coefficient for a pollutant is estimated from its octanol-
water partition coefficient, as measured in laboratory experiments. Values of KOC used to
determine reference application rates are shown in Table J-4, and are calculated from the
following regression equation by Hassett et al. (1983):
log(KOQ = 0.0884 + 0.909log(KOW) (3)
where:
KOW = octanol-water partition coefficient for pollutant
With the exception of PCBs, the KOW values used for this analysis have been obtained from
the CHEMEST procedures in the Graphical Exposure Modeling Systems (GEMS and
PCGEMS), U.S. EPA (1988d, 1989c).
J-12
-------
TABLE J-3
DISTRIBUTION COEFFICIENTS FOR ORGANIC AND INORGANIC POLLUTANTS
Within Sludge
Management Area
(l/kg)
Unsaturated
Zone
(l/kg)
Saturated
Zone
(l/kg)
Arsenic
20
20
20
Cadmium
431
431
431
Chromium
59
59
59
Copper
98
98
98
Lead
621
621
621
Mercury
330
330
330
Nickel
63
63
63
Benzene
1.06
0.106
0.0106
Benzo(a)pyrene
4,480
448
44.8
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate
541
54.1
5.41
Chlordane
1,330
133
133
DDT
7,720
772
112
Lindane
23.4
234
0.234
n-Nitrosodimethylamine
0.00371
0.000371
0.0000371
Polychlorinated biphenyls
15,100
1,510
151
Toxaphene
295
29.5
2.95
Trichloroethylene
1.94
0.194
0.0194
Note: The distribution coefficient for organic pollutants (KD) is the product of the organic
carbon partition coefficient (KOC) and the fraction of organic carbon in the medium (f^).
Assumes foe of 1 percent for mixing layer, and 0.1 percent and 0.01 percent in the
unsaturated and saturated soil zones, respectively. Distribution coefficients for metals are
geometric means of values reported for "sandy loam" soil in Gerritse et al. (1982).
J-13
-------
TABLE J-4
OCTANOL-WATER AND ORGANIC CARBON PARTITION COEFFICIENTS
FOR ORGANIC POLLUTANTS
Log of Octanol-
Water Partition
Coefficient*
Organic Carbon
Partition
Coefficient
Benzene
2.13
106
Benzo(a)pyrene
6.12
448,000
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate
5.11
54,100
Chlordane
5.54
133,000
DDT
6.38
772,000
Lindane
3.61
2,340
n-Nitrosodimethylamine
-0.57
0.371
Polychlorinated biphenyls*
*
6.70
1,510,000
Toxaphene
4.82
29,500
Trichloroethylene
2.42
194
* All values except for PCBs taken from the CHEMEST procedure of the Graphical Exposure
Modeling System (GEMS), U.S. EPA (1989c).
b KOC for organic pollutants derived from KOW with Equation 6 from Chapter IS of Hassett et
al. (1983): log(KOC)= 0.0884 + 0.909 log(KOW).
* Based on aroclor 1254, the most common PCB in sewage sludge. Derived from O'Connor
(1992) and representative values from Anderson and Parker (1990).
J-14
-------
Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) are a class of chemicals containing 209 possible
congeners. The most common constituent of PCB mixtures is Aroclor 1254, which is dominated
by penta-congeners, with about equal amounts of tetra- and hexa-congeners. In a well-aged soil
contaminated with PCBs, however, Aroclor 1260, which contains more penta- and hexa-
congeners than tetra-congeners, is more representative (O'Connor, 1992). To determine a
representative organic carbon partition coefficient for PCBs, an average has been calculated
from log KOW coefficients listed in Table J-5 (from Anderson and Parker, 1990). The log
KOW for the penta-congener has been estimated to be approximately 6.5 by noting that the log
KOW values are approximately linearly related to the number of chlorines in the congener.
Averaging that value with the hexa-congener value gives 6.7 for the log KOW. As with other
organic pollutants, the regression equation from Hassett et al. (1983) is used to convert this
KOW value to an estimate of KOC.
For metals, separate KD values are used to describe the partitioning between water and
soil within the mixing, unsaturated, and saturated zones, and the partitioning between water and
sediment in the surface water. Values for KD in the mixing zone and the soil zones are taken
from a study by Gerritse et al. (1982) and represent the results of laboratory tests with a sludge-
amended sandy loam topsoil. These values are listed in Table J-3, and represent geometric
means of the ranges provided by Gerritse et al. (1982). Partition coefficients for metals in
surface water are calculated according to the following regression equation provided in (U.S.
EPA, 1982c):
KDW = aTSS' (4)
where:
KD,. = partition coefficient for pollutant in stream (m3/kg)
TSS = total suspended solids content of the stream (mg/1)
a, /3 = pollutant-specific empirical constants
Values for the regression constants for each pollutant are based on data for streams (U.S. EPA,
1982c), and are presented in Table J-6. Estimates are based on an assumed Total Suspended
Solids (TSS) of 16 mg/1, as discussed in Section J.3.4.
J-15
-------
TABLE J-S
OCTANOL-WATER PARTITION COEFFICIENTS
FOR PCBs*
Congener
Number of Chlorines
Log KOW
2,4'
2
5.1
4
6.1
All Penta
5
6.5*
6
6.9
Average®
5J
6.7
* Source: Anderson and Parker (1990).
fc Estimated based on apparent linear relationship between number of chlorines on
congener and log KOW.
* log KOW values for penta- and hexa-congeners averaged for representative log KOW.
J-16
-------
TABLE 3-6
STATISTICAL PARAMETERS FOR PREDICTING
THE EQUILIBRIUM PARTITIONING OF METALS IN SURFACE WATER'
a
P
KB..
mgf
Arsenic
0.48x10s
-0.7286
63,700
Cadmium
4.00x10*
-1.1307
174,000
Chromium
3.36x10*
-0.9304
255,000
Copper
1.04x10*
-0.7436
132,000
Lead
0.31x10*
-0.1856
185,000
Mercury
2.91x10*
-1.1356
125,000
Nickel
0.49x10*
-0.5719
100,000
* Source: U.S. EPA (1982c).
1 KD„ as KDiW!=aTSS'. Assumes TSS=16 mg/l.
J-17
-------
J.4.2 Degradation Rates
Pollutant concentrations in the subsurface regime may be decreased by various
degradation processes, including abiotic hydrolysis and aerobic or anaerobic microbial
degradation. Although rates of hydrolysis are dependent only on pH and temperature (and can
be estimated with reasonable accuracy), estimates of rates for microbial degradation are fraught
with uncertainty. This uncertainty is due to many confounding influences in the field, such as
substrate availability (fraction of organic carbon present), temperature, the microbial
consortium, and microbial acclimation to a given pollutant. Nevertheless, the range of microbial
degradation rates obtained in the laboratory by measuring the rate of disappearance of a
pollutant in various soil and water grab samples, soil column studies, etc., provides a rough
estimate of the rate at which microbial activity is likely to degrade a particular pollutant in the
field.
As shown in Table J-7, this work utilises several sources for representative microbial
degradation rates. Where a range of values is reported by these sources, values from the lower
end of the range have been selected to derive estimates most protective of public health.
Studies of biodegradation in soil have been favored over studies of biodegradation in aquatic
environments. If estimates of only aerobic biodegradation rates are available for a given
pollutant, a half-life for anaerobic biodegradation has been conservatively estimated to be four
times longer (Howard et al., 1991a.) However, if available data fail to show any indication that
a pollutant degraded in a particular regime, a value of zero has been assumed for the
degradation rate.
For the zone of incorporation for land treated with sewage sludge, estimated rates of
degradation are based on studies of microbial degradation under anaerobic conditions.
For the unsaturated soil zone, aerobic microbial degradation and hydrolysis are assumed
to be the two dominant degradation processes. Lindane and trichloroethylene are the only two
compounds that undergo hydrolysis: since hydrolysis rates are for more accurately quantifiable
than microbial degradation rates, hydrolysis rates are used for these two chemicals. For the
other eight organic pollutants, 10 percent of the aerobic biodegradation decay rate is assumed to
J-18
-------
TABLE J-7
DEGRADATION RATES (K*,)
Aerobic
Degradation
Rate (yr-'r
Anaerobic
Degradation
Rate (yr'1)*
Unsaturated
Zone
Degradation
Rate (yr1)'
Saturated
Zone
Degradation
Rate (yr1)'
Benzene
16'
0f
1.6
0.8
Benzo(a)pyrene
0.48*
0.12"
0.048
0.084
Bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate
11?
0U
1.1
0.55
Chlordane
om
36*
0
18
DDT
0.041
2-5*
0.004
13
Lindane
1.2™
n
00
1.2
4.8
n-Nitrosodimethylamine
5.1°
13*
0.51
0.9
PCBs
0.063"
0.00063"
0.0063
0.0035
Toxaphene
6'
0.12
3.1
Trichloroethene
0.78*
33'
0.78
2.0
* Based on microbial degradation rates, except for lindane and trichloroethene, where hydrolysis rates
are used.
b Based on microbial degradation rates.
c Estimated as 10 percent of aerobic biodegradation rates. Hydrolysis rates for lindane and
trichloroethene assumed same as aerobic rates.
d Estimated as arithmetic average of the unsaturated zone degradation rates and the anaerobic
degradation rate.
* Vaishnav and Babeu (1987).
f Horowitz et al. (1982).
g Coover and Sims (1987).
h Anaerobic rate assumed to equal 25 percent of aerobic rate; see text for discussion.
1 Howard et al. (1991a).
' Shelton et aL (1984b).
k Castro and Yoshida (1971).
1 Stewart and Chisholm (1971).
m Ellington et al. (1988).
° Zhang et al. (1982).
° Tate and Alexander (1975).
p Fries (1982).
q Consensus value agreed upon by the PRC at their March 8, 1991 meeting.
' Howard (1991a).
» Dilling et al. (1975).
1 Bouwer and McCarthy (1983).
J-19
-------
be appropriate for the unsaturated zone. This decision is based on the observation that f„. tends
to decrease with depth in the soil, thereby reducing the amount of suitable substrate for
microbial populations which might degrade these chemicals (O'Connor, 1992).
In the saturated zone, all three degradation processes can occur because some ground
water is anaerobic and some aerobic. To capture this mix of processes, an arithmetic mean has
been calculated from the aerobic and anaerobic biodegradation decay rates discussed above.
For lindane and trichloroethylene, the only two chemicals where hydrolysis is a significant
degradation process, estimated anaerobic decay rates are significantly higher than hydrolysis
rates.
For FCBs, it is difficult to assign an anaerobic degradation rate. Highly chlorinated
congeners may be partially degraded very slowly in reducing conditions, but then oxidative
conditions must be established for further degradation to occur. Inadequate information on
anaerobic degradation rates exists in the scientific literature. For deriving reference application
<
rates, it is conservatively assumed that anaerobic degradation ofiPCBs occurs at 1 percent of the
aerobic biodegradation rate.
J.4.3 Molecular Weight
The values presented in Table J-8 are standard molecular weights for the pollutants of
concern. These weights are used in the vapor loss component of the mass-balance calculations.
JAA Henry5! Law Constants
Henry's Law constants are used to calculate the rate at which organic pollutants
volatilize from sludge. Determining appropriate values for these constants is complicated by the
wide variation in estimates provided by various sources. Table J-9 shows values taken from four
different sources, along with the value selected for this analysis. Whenever possible, values are
taken from Lyman et al. (1990); Otherwise values are taken from: the GEMS data base (U.S.
J-20
-------
TABLE J-8
MOLECULAR WEIGHTS FOR ORGANIC POLLUTANTS
Molecular Weight
Benzene 78.1
Benzo(a)pyrene 252.3
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate 390.6
Chlordane 409.8
DDT 354.5
Lindane 290.8
n-Nitrosodiraethylaroine 74.1
Polychlorinated biphenyls (Aroclor 1254) 325.1
Toxaphene 431.8
T richloroethylene * 131.4
* Calculated according to Wilke and Lee's method, as described in Lyman et al. (1990%
J-21
-------
TABLE J-9
HENRY'S LAW CONSTANTS
GEMSW>
(atmW/mol)
PCGEMSW)
(atnvmVmol)
Lyman et
»l.w
(atrn-raVmol)
Aquatic
Fatew
(atm-m'/mol)
Selected
Values®
(unitlesi)
Reference
Benzene
3.5xl0'J
5.6xl0'J (M)
5,5x»Oj
5.5xl0'J
2.3x10-'
-
9.4x10"3
3.0xl0'J
(c,e)
DDT
2.8x10-*
-
3Tfcd0*2
l.fixlO"5
1.6x10'
(d)
n-Nitrosodimethylaminc
6.5X10"4
2.6x10-'
* ~
3.3x10-'
1.1x10"'
(c)
Lindane
4.3x10"
1.4xl0'5
4.8xlO"T
_
2.0x10-'
(d)
Polychlorinated biphenyls
_
-
-
1.4x10*
(g)
Toxaphene
6,0*10" (M)
—
2.1xl0"1
2.5x10"*
(c)
Trichloroethylene
2.9xlOJ
1.0xl0*J (M)
1.0xl0's
9.1xl0'3
4.2xlOl
(d)
* CHEMEST procedure in U.S. EPA (1988d).
b Values estimated using H = VP/WSOL where VP is the vapor pressure and WSOL is the water solubility, unless designated as a
measurement (M).
6 CHEMEST procedure in U.S. EPA (1989c).
d Lyman, Reehl and Rosenblatt, Handbook of Chemical Property Estimation Methods. McGraw-Hill, 1990.
* U.S. EPA (1982b).
' Converted to non-dimensional value using H = H/(RT) where T = 288°K, R is the Universal Gas Constant and H is the dimensional Henry's
Law constant.
* Average values from Anderson and Parker (1990) adjusted to 15°C.
-------
EPA, 1988d), the PCGEMS data base (U.S. EPA, 1989c), or the Aquatic Fate Process Data for
Organic Priority Pollutants (U.S. EPA, 1982b). The decision process is as follows: if a value is
published in Lyman et al. (1990) it is used. If not, but if two values are similar, the mean of
those two values is used. If there is no value in Lyman et al. (1990) and no two values agree, a
measured value is chosen in preference to an estimated one. If only estimated, dissimilar values
are available, the value most conservative for ground water (i.e., the lowest Heniy's Law
constant) is chosen. This last circumstance occurs only for n-nitrosodimethylamine and bis(2-
ethylhexyl)phthalate.
Hie only exception to the decision process described above is for polychlorinated
biphenyls (PCBs), which include a variety of possible congeners with different chemical
characteristics. Anderson and Parker (1990) provides a compilation of nondimensional Henry's
Law constants for one penta-oongener and three hexa-congenere. To derive a representative
Henry's Law Constant for PCBs, the three values for hexa-congeners were averaged to a single
value which was then averaged with the penta-congener value to obtain the single constant
reported in Table J-9.
For all organic pollutants except PCBs, the dimensioned estimate of Henry's Law
Constant reported in Table J-9 has been converted to an equivalent nondimensional constant
based on an assumed temperature of 15 °C (288°K) and the following equation:
H = (5)
RT
where:
T = Temperature (assumed to be 288°K)
R = Universal Gas Constant (m3*atm/mol*K)
H = dimensional Heniy's law constant (mvitm/mol)
H = nondimensional Heniy's Law constant (unitless)
Because Anderson and Parker (1990) report nondimensional values for PCBs at 25 °C, the
average value derived from this source has been adjusted to an equivalent nondimensional value
at 15°C.
J-23
-------
J.45 Diffusion Coefficients
As discussed elsewhere In this report, the volatilization of pollutant from a land
application site is modeled with equations provided by Hwang and Faico (1986). These
equations require estimates for the diffusivity of each pollutant in air. Wilke and Lee's method
provides estimates for the diffusivity of each pollutant in air and Hayduk and Laudie's method
provides estimates for each pollutant's diffusivity in water (Lyman et al., 1990). The resulting
estimates, which are based on a temperature of 15°C, are listed in Table J-10.
JL4.fi Reference Water Concentrations for Ground Water
For the ground-water pathway of human exposure, reference application rates are
calculated based on the reference water concentration or adjusted reference water concentration
(RC,,, mg/1). Reference application rates for land application of sludge are calculated to result
in ground-water concentrations equal to or less than the RC^ at the receptor well. Values for
RC^, are listed in Table J-ll.
For all pollutants except n-nitrosodimethylamine, the reference water concentration for
ground water has been calculated by adjusting the maximum pollutant level for background
concentrations of pollutant expected in^ground water. For n-nitrosodimethylamine, the RC^
has been derived from the human cancer potency. It is assumed that the highly exposed
individual ingests 2 1 of water per day and weighs 70 kg. The RCp, for n-nitrosodimethylamine
is calculated based on a risk level of 10"4.
To ensure that well water does not exceed the MCL, any pre-existing ground-water
concentrations must be considered in addition to pollutant contributions from the surface
disposal of sewage sludge. Metals are ubiquitous in the environment, and can be expected to
occur naturally in ground water; values for background concentrations of inorganic pollutants in
ground water are taken from the National Inorganic and Radionuclides Survey, and presented in
Table J-ll. Where concentrations of a given metal in a particular sample fall beneath the limit
of detection, a value of 1/2 the detection limit has been assigned to the sample to derive these
J-24
-------
TABLE J-10
DIFFUSION COEFFICIENTS FOR CONTAMINANT IN AIR
Diffusivity in
Air
(cmVsec)*
Benzene
9.06 x 10'2
Benzo(a)pyrene
4.58 x 10"2
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate
3.27 x 10"2
Chlordane
4.51 x 10*2
DDT
4.13 x 10'2
Lindane
4.98 x 10'2
n-Nitrosodimethylamine
9.29 x 10 2
Polychlorinated biphenyls
5.69 x 10"2
Toxaphene
5.25 x 10"2
Trichloroethylene
8.18 x 10'2
* Calculated according to Wilke and Lee's method, as described in Lyman et al.
(1990).
J-25
-------
TABLE J-ll
ADJUSTED REFERENCE WATER CONCENTRATION FOR GROUND WATER
Reference Water
Concentration*
(mg/1)
Background
Concentration in
Ground
Water*
(mg/1)
Adjusted
Reference Water
Concentration'
(mg/1)
Arsenic
0.05
0.0032
0.0468
fjrimitini
0.005
0.0011
0.0039
Chromium
0.1
0.0014
0.0986
Copper
1.3
0.0499
1.2501
Lead
0.015
0.0035
0.0115
Mercury
0.002
0.0001
0.0019
Nickel
, 0.1
0.0030
0.097
Benzene
0.005
0
0.005
Beazo(*)pyreno
0.0002
0
0.0002
B is(2-eUiylhexy l)phthalate
0.004
0
0.004
CUordane
0.002
0
0.002
DDT
0.0102
0
0.0102
Lindane
0.0002
0
0.0002
n-Nitrosodime&ylamine4
0.00007
0
0.00007
PolychloriruUed biphenyla
0.000454
0
0.000454
Toxaphene
0.003
0
0.003
Trichloroethylene
0.005
0
0.005
1 All values except those far DDT and n-flitrosodimsthyltmine are based oil the maximum contaminant
level (MCL) under die Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA).
k National Inorganic and Radionuclides Survey
* Values represent the RWC less background concentrations (see Section A.5.4)
4 Calculated from human cancer potency at the 10-4 risk level.
J-26
-------
averages. Organic pollutants are less likely to be found in uncontaminated sources, so
background concentrations are assumed to equal zero.
J.4.7 Reference Water Concentration Cor Surface Water
The reference water concentration for the surface water pathway is based on either
human health criteria, adjusted for total background intake, or chronic fresh water criteria,
whichever is more limiting. The calculation of human health criteria for surface water is similar
to the calculation for ground water, with the additional exposure through fish consumption.
Concentration of pollutants in ingested fish are calculated from the expected concentration in
surface water, the bioconcentration factor (BCF) and a food chain multiplier (FM) for each
pollutant. The ratio between concentrations in the edible and total fish (P,) is also considered.
Estimated values for BCF and FM are listed in Table J-12. With the exception of PCBs,
the pollutant concentration in fillet is assumed equal to the pollutant concentration in the whole
fish (P{=1). This is a worst-case assumption, because many pollutants are known to
bioconcentrate in nonedible tissues and organs. Based on data for dioxin (Branson et al., 1985),
the concentration in the fillet for PCBs is assumed to be 50 percent of the concentration of the
whole fish (Pf - 05).
Table J-13 lists calculated human health criteria, chronic fresh water criteria, and the
limiting reference water concentration for each pollutant in surface water. The fresh water
criteria are based on chronic freshwater criteria from the latest Ambient Water Quality Criteria,
where available. Where chronic values are not available, acute values are substituted. If no
criteria are available, the Lowest Observable Adverse Effect Level (LOAEL) is used. For
chemicals with hardness-dependent chronic or acute freshwater criteria, a hardness of 100 mg/l
is assumed. The human body weight (BW) is set to 70 kg the water ingestion rate (Iw) at 2
I/day; and the daily consumption of fish (Ic) at 40 g/day (Javitz, 1980).
J-27
-------
TABLE J-12
DATA FOR REFERENCE WATER CONCENTRATIONS FOR SURFACE WATER
Bioconcentration
Factor*
(1/kg)
Food Chain
Multiplier*'
(unitless)
Arsenic
350
1
Cadmium
330
1
Chromium
130
1
Copper
120
1
Lead
180
1
Mercuiy
100
1
Nickel
50
1
Benzene
*
7.6
1
Benzo(a)pyrene
11,000
10
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate
1,700
10
Chlordane
3,700
10
DDT
17,000
10
Lindane
110
1
n-Nitrosodimethylamine
0.056
1
Polychlorinated biphenyls
31,000
10
Toxaphene
1,000
1
Trichloroethylene
13
1
* BCF values for inorganic contaminants are taken from U.S. EPA (1989b). BCF values
for organic contaminants are derived from the following regression equation, taken from
U.S. EPA (1990b): log(BCF) = 0.79 log^) - 0.40 - log(7.6/3.0). The logfK^) values are
presented in Table J-4.
Food chain multipliers are determined from the procedure in U.S. EPA (1990b),
assuming a Trophic Level of 3 for fish.
J-28
-------
TABLE J-13
DATA FOR REFERENCE WATER CONCENTRATIONS FOR SURFACE WATER
REFERENCE WATER CONCENTRATIONS FOR SURFACE WATER
Chronic
Freshwater
Reference
Application
Rates* (mg/1)
Human Health
Criteria*
(mg/1)
Limiting Reference
Water
Concentration
(mg/1)
Arsenic
1.90x10"'0
3.40xl0'2
1.90x10"'
Cadmium
1.10x10*
2.52xl0*3
1.10X10"4
Chromium
2.10X10'1
1.07x10"'
1.07x10''
Copper
1.20x10'* d
2.45x10°
1.20xl0"2
Lead
3.20xl0'J d
1.00x10*
3.20xl0"3
Mercury
1.20xl0"5
«
1.29x10-*
1.20x10"'
Nickel
1.60x10' d
4.17x10"'
1.60x10''
Benzene
5.30x10° •
1.15x10"'
1.15x10"'
Benzo(a)pyrene
_ r
9.82x10*
9.82x10"*
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate
_ r
1.77x10*
1.77xl0'2
Chlordane
4.30x10^
1.91xl0"7
1.91xl0"7
DDT
l.OOxlO"6
1.92xl0"7
1.92x10"'
Lindane
8.00x10-*
2.63xlO'J
8..00xl0's
n-Nitrosodimethylamine
5.85x10° •
6.86xl0'5
6.86x10"5
Polychlorinated biphenyls
1.40xl0*5
1.46x10"*
1.46X1C8
Toxaphene
2.00xl0'7
2.41x1c'
2.00x10''
T richloroethy lene
4.50x10' •
2.88x10"'
2.88x10"'
* Chronic fresh water criteria based upon latest Ambient Water Quality Criteria. Because chronic
values were not available for benzene, n-nitrosodimethylamine, and trichloroethylene, acute values
were used instead. No values were found for benzo(a)pyrene and bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate.
b Human health criteria calculated using assumed rates of water and fish consumption,
bioconcentration factors and food chain multipliers for fish.
c based on arsenic (V)
4 Hardness dependent (assumed 100 mg/1)
* No criteria available; value given is a LOAEL
f No criteria available.
J-29
-------
J.4.7 Bioconcentration Factors and Food Chain Multipliers
Bioaccumulation in surface water is the process by which aquatic organisms accumulate
pollutants, from both water and food, at concentrations higher than the ambient concentration.
The process by which a compound is absorbed from water through gill membranes or other
external body surfaces is teimed bioconcentration, and the measure of a chemical's tendency to
bioconcentrate is described by the bioconcentration factor. Biomagnification, in contrast,
denotes the process by which the concentration of a compound increases in different organisms
occupying successive trophic levels. The combined accumulation from these two sources is
represented by the bioaccumulation factor, which is calculated as the product of the
bioconcentration factor and a food chain multiplier (U.S. EPA, 1990b):
BAF - FM BCF (6)
where:
BAF = bioaccumulation factof (1/kg)
FM = food chain multiplier (kg/kg)
BCF = bioconcentration factor (1/kg)
The food chain multiplier and the bioconcentration factor are both derived from the
pollutant's octanol-water partition coefficient (KOW). In addition, the food-chain multiplier is a
function of the trophic level of the species under consideration. Based on a trophic level of 3
for fish, U.S. EPA (1990b) recommends the following values:
Range of Food Chain
LogfKOW) Multiplier
£5 1
5-5.5 10
£55 10
According to U.S. EPA (1990b), BCF values can be calculated from the log of KOW values
(based on a 3 percent lipid content) according to the following regression equation:
log (BCF) « 0.79 log (KOW) - 0.40 - log fM) (7)
J-30
-------
The BCF and the FM values used to derive criteria are listed in Table J-12. BCFs for
organic pollutants are calculated from the regression equation above using the KOW values
presented in Table J-4. For metals, BCF values are taken from U.S. EPA (1989b).
J.4.8 Reference Air Concentration
Reference application rates for the air pathway are derived based on calculations of
reference air concentrations (RC^ fig/m3) for each pollutant. Reference application rates are
calculated such that the concentration of each pollutant in ambient air at the point of
compliance is not expected to exceed the reference concentration.
Values for the reference air concentration of all organic pollutants are calculated from
the pollutants' estimated human cancer potencies, as summarized in Table J-14. Estimates are
based on a risk level of 1CF4 and a body weight of 70 kg. The highly exposed individual is
assumed to inhale 20 m3 of contaminated air daily for his or her entire lifetime.
J-31
-------
TABLE J-14
REFERENCE AIR CONCENTRATIONS
Human Cancer Potency
(mgfrg'day)*1
Reference Air
Concentrations*
Wm!)
Benzene
0.029
12.0
Benzo(a)pyrene
113
0.032
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate
0.0141
25.0
Chlordane
13
027
DDT
034
1.0
lindane
133
0.26
n-Nitrosodimethyi amine
51
0.0071
Polychlorinated biphenyls
7.7
0.045
Toxaphene
1.1
032
Trichloroethyiene
0.011
32.0
* Calculated from Human Cancer Potency based on a risk level of Iff4, body weight of 70
kg, and inhalation volume of 20 m3/day.
J-32
-------
*
APPENDIX K
Justification for the Annual Application for Domestic Septage
in the Standards for the Use or Disposal of Sewage Sludge
-------
JUSTIFICATION FOR THE ANNUAL APPLICATION RATE FOR DOMESTIC SEPTAGE
IN THE STANDARDS FOR THE USE OR DISPOSAL OF SEWAGE SLUDGE
Office of Science and Technology
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
401 N Street, S.W.
Washington, D.C. 20460
November 23, 1992
K-l
-------
JUSTIFICATION FOR THE ANNUAL APPLICATION RATI FOR DOMESTIC SEPTAGE
IN THE STANDARDS FOR THE USE OR DISPOSAL OF SEWAGE SLUDGE
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. INTRODUCTION 1
2. ANNUAL APPLICATION RATI 3
2.1 Equation 3
2.2 Amount of Nitrogen 3
2.3 Concentration of Available Nitrogen 3
2.4 Calculation of Annual Application Rate 5
2.5 Example Calculation 5
3. JUSTIFICATION FOR ANNUAL .APPLICATION RATE 7
K-2
-------
8ECTI0N ONE
INTRODUCTION
On February 6, 1989, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) proposed Standards for the Use or Disposal of Sewage Sludge
(40 CFR Part 503) in the Federal Register (54 £R 5746). Included
in those standards were pollutant limits for different sewage
sludge use or disposal practices.
In the Part 503 proposal, septage was included in the
definition of sewage sludge. For this reason, the requirements for
the use or disposal of sewage sludge also applied to the use or
disposal of septage. Several commenters on the proposal indicated
that it is not feasible for the use or disposal of septage to be
subject to the same requirements as the use or disposal of sewage
sludge. Those commenters indicated that the proposed Part 503
requirements were too costly for the use or disposal of septage.
Also, the requirements may have a negative affect on the
environment because they could lead to illegal use or disposal of
septage or result in a lower frequency of pumping for septic tanks.
After reviewing the comments on the Part 503 proposal, the
Agency decided to re-examine the pollutant limits for land
application of domestic septage. A new approach to the pollutant
limits was published in the Federal Register on November 9, 1990,
(55 FR 47240) and comments were requested on that approach.
Under the new approach, the volume (i.e., gallons) of domestic
septage that can be applied to an acre of land in a year would be
calculated using an equation in the final Part 503 regulation.
This volume would be based on the amount of nitrogen needed by the
crop or vegetation grown on the land where the domestic septage is
applied and on the concentration of available nitrogen.
There are two important aspects about the annual application
rate approach for land application of domestic septage. First, the
approach only applies to domestic septage. Domestic septage is
either liquid or solid material removed from a septic tank,
cesspool, portable toilet, Type III marine sanitation device, or
similar treatment works that receives only domestic sewage.
The annual application rate approach does not apply to land
application of commercial or industrial septage or to land
application of a combination of domestic septage and either
commercial or industrial septage. The reason for this is that the
final Part 503 regulation does not apply to the use or disposal of
commercial or industrial septage. Commercial and industrial
septage have characteristics that are different than the
characteristics of domestic septage. Because those characteristics
K-3
-------
are different, the pathway exposure analyses used to develop the
Part 503 land application pollutant limits, which were used to
justify the annual application rate for domestic septage, are not
applicable to the use or disposal of commercial and industrial
septage.
The second aspect is that the annual application rate approach
only is applicable to domestic septage applied to agricultural
land, forest, or a reclamation site. This approach does not apply
to domestic septage applied to a public contact site or placed on
a surface disposal site. In these two cases, the requirements in
the final Part 503 regulation for application of sewage sludge to
a public contact site and placement of sewage sludge on a surface
disposal site, respectively, have to be met.
Most of the commenters on the annual application approach for
domestic septage agreed with the approach. Several of the
commenters indicated that, in addition to limiting the volume of
domestic septage that can be applied to the land per year, the
domestic septage also must meet pathogen and vector attraction
reduction requirements. The Agency agrees and included pathogen
and vector attraction reduction requirements in the final Part 503
regulation for domestic septage applied to agricultural land,
forest, or a reclamation site. tThese requirements are discussed in
the technical support document for the Part 503 land application
requirements and in the technical support document for the Part 503
pathogen and vector attraction reduction requirements.
EPA decided to use the approach in the November 9, 1990,
notice for domestic septage applied to agricultural land, forest,
or a reclamation site in the final Part 503 regulation. This paper
discusses the equation in the final Part 503 regulation used to
calculate the annual application rate for land application of
domestic septage; presents an example that illustrates how to use
the equation; and presents results of an evaluation to determine
whether the annual application rate protects public health and the
environment from reasonably anticipated adverse effects of
pollutants in domestic septage that is applied to agricultural
land, forest, or a reclamation site.
K-4
-------
8ECTI0N TWO
ANNUAL APPLICATION RATE
2.1 Equation
The following equation is used to calculate the annual
application rate for domestic septage applied to agricultural land,
forest, or a reclamation site.
/ AAR = N (1)
ANC X 8.34
Where:
AAR = Annual application rate in millions gallons per acre per
year.
N = Amount of nitrogen needed by the crop or vegetation grown
on the agricultural land, forest, or reclamation site in
pounds per acre per year.
ANC = Available nitrogen concentration in milligrams per liter.
8.34 = A conversion factor.
2.2 Amount of Nitrogen
The amount of nitrogen needed depends on the crop or
vegetation grown on the land where the domestic septage is applied.
This amount is published for the crop yield desired by various
government agencies (e.g., the Agriculture Extension Service).
2.3 Concentration of Available Nitrogen
Various assumptions were made to determine the available
nitrogen concentration (ANC) in equation (1). These assumptions
are discussed below.
The available nitrogen concentration consists of the
concentration of ammonia-nitrogen in the domestic septage and the
concentration of organic nitrogen that becomes available over time.
Together, ammonia-nitrogen and organic nitrogen are Total Kjeldahl
Nitrogen (TKN). To determine the TKN concentration in domestic
septage, a sampling and analyses program was conducted. Nine
samples of domestic septage were collected and analyzed for TKN.
The Agency chose to use only data from these nine samples to
estimate the TKN concentration in domestic septage because EPA has
knowledge of how those samples were collected and how the samples
were analyzed.
K-5
-------
Summary statistics were developed for the analytical results
from the nine samples of domestic septage. This information is
presented in Appendix A.
As shown in Appendix A, the 95th percentile concentration for
TKN is 352 milligrams per liter. EPA believes that this value is
a conservative estimate of the TKN concentration in domestic
septage because 95 percent of the domestic septage is expected to
have a TKN concentration of 352 milligrams per liter or less. That
value is used, therefore, as the value for the TKN concentration in
domestic septage for this analysis.
The relationship between ammonia-nitrogen and TKN is
represented by equation (2), which was derived during the
development of the summary statistics for the analytical results of
the nine domestic septage samples.
Ammonia-N = TKN X 0.427247 (2)
Using equation (2) , the estimated ammonia-nitrogen concentration in
domestic septage is 150 milligrams per liter (i.e., 352 x
0.427247).
Subtracting the ammonia-ftitrogen concentration for the TKN
concentration leaves 202 milligrams per liter for organic nitrogen
in domestic septage. Fifty percent of the organic nitrogen is
assumed to become available to the crop or vegetation in the first
year after application of domestic septage; 20 percent in the
second year? 10 percent in the third year; and the remainder at
three percent per year until no more of the organic nitrogen from
a particular application of domestic septage remains. For the
purpose of this analysis, the concentration of organic nitrogen
available to the crop or vegetation in the fourth year and
subsequent years after application the domestic septage was assumed
to be zero because of the low concentration of organic nitrogen
remaining in those years.
Another assumption for the calculation of the available
nitrogen concentration is that the domestic septage is injected
below the land surface. In that case, none of the ammonia-nitrogen
is lost through volatilization. In addition, the Agency assumed
that none of the ammonia-nitrogen is lost through volatilization if
the pH of the domestic septage is raised to 12, which is one of the
alternative pathogen and vector attraction reduction requirements
in the final Part 503 regulation for domestic septage applied to
agricultural land, forest, or a reclamation site. These two
assumptions lead to a conservative estimate of the ammonia-nitrogen
available to the crop or vegetation grown on the land where the
domestic septage is applied.
The available nitrogen concentration used in equation (1) was
calculated as shown below.
K-6
-------
GIVEN: Domestic septage is injected below the land surface.
TKN =352 mg/1
NH3 = 150 mg/1
Organic-N = 202 mg/1
Year 1 Year 2 Year 3
Ammonia-N 150 150 150
Organic-N 101 101 101
41 41
21
Total 251 292 313
Beginning with the third year, the Agency assumes "steady
state conditions" are achieved with respect to the available
nitrogen concentration. After three years, the available nitrogen
concentration is equal to 313 milligrams per liter each year. This
is the value used in equation (1).
2.4 Calculation of Annual Application Rate
Substituting 313 milligrams per liter for ANC in equation (1)
results in the following equation:
AAR = N (3)
0.0026
Where:
AAR = annual application rate in gallons per acre per year.
N = amount of nitrogen needed by the crop or vegetation
grown on the land in pounds per acre per year.
0.0026 = a factor obtained by multiplying 313 mg/1 times
8.34/1,000,000.
Note that the annual application rate in equation (3) is in
gallons per acre per year not million gallons per acre per year.
Equation (3) is included in the land application subpart (Subpart
B) of the final Part 503 regulation.
2.5 Example Calculation
The following example illustrates how to calculate the annual
application rate for domestic septage applied to agricultural land,
forest, or a reclamation site using equation (3).
K-7
-------
GIVEN:
Number of acres in application site » 3
Amount of nitrogen needed by the crop = 100 pounds per acre
RATE:
Annual application rate « 100 x 3
0.0026
Annual application rate = 38,462 gallons x 3 acres
acre
Annual application rate for the site = 115,386 gallons
For this example, 115,386 gallons of domestic septage can be
applied to a three acre site on which a crop that requires 100
pounds of nitrogen per acre is grown. This is the application rate
for a single year. In subsequent years, the annual application
rate has to be re-calculated using the amount of nitrogen needed by
the crop or vegetation grown on the site that year.
K-8
-------
SECTION THREE
JUSTIFICATION FOR ANNUAL APPLICATION RATE
As discussed above, EPA decided to use the annual application
rate approach for the pollutant limit' in the final Part 503
regulation for domestic septage applied to agricultural land,
forest, or a reclamation site after receiving favorable comment on
this approach in the November 1990 Notice of Availability of Data
from the National Sewage Sludge Survey (55 £B 47210). To use that
approach, the Agency has to justify that applying domestic septage
at an annual application rate protects public health and the
environment from reasonably anticipated adverse effects of
pollutants in domestic septage. This justification is presented
below.
Step 1
The first step in the justification is to determine the
concentration of each pollutant listed in Table 2 of the final Part
503 regulation in domestic septage. EPA used the 95th percentile
estimate for the nine domestic septage samples discussed above for
those pollutant concentrations (see Attachment A) . The maximum
likelihood estimation (MLE) procedure was used to develop the 95th
percentile values. These values are presented below in Table 1.
TABLE 1 - POLLUTANT CONCENTRATIONS IN DOMESTIC SEPTAGE
Pollutant Concentration fma/1^*
Arsenic** 0.02
Cadmium 0.02
Chromium 0.16
Copper 2.0
Lead 0.14
Mercury 0.004
Molybdenum*** 0.02
Nickel 0.11
Selenium 0.07
Zinc 27
* Values are reported to two significant figures and may not
be the same as the values reported in Attachment A because of
rounding.
** Value is the detection limit because the pollutant was not
detected in any of the samples.
*** value is the maximum observed value for the nine samples
of domestic septage collected.
K-9
-------
Step 2
The second step is to calculate an annual application rate for
a high crop nitrogen requirement. For this justification, 300
pounds of nitrogen per acre for orchard grass was used. This is
considered a conservative value for the amount of nitrogen because
most crops require less than this amount of nitrogen. The annual
application rate for a 300 pound nitrogen requirement is:
Annual application rate = 300 (3)
0.0026
Annual application rate =¦» 116,000 gallons per acre
step ?
The third step of the justification is to calculate the annual
load for each of the pollutants listed in Table 1 above in the
domestic septage applied to the land. This was done using the
following equation:
AL = PC X AAR X 8.34 (4)
*
Where:
AL = annual loading rate for each pollutant in pounds per
acre per year.
PC * 95th percentile concentration for each pollutant in
milligrams per liter (see Table l above).
AAR = annual application rate in million gallons per acre
per year.
8.34 = a conversion factor.
The annual loading rates for the pollutants listed in Table 1
above calculated using an application rate of 116,000 gallons
(i.e., 0.116 million gallons) in equation (4) are presented in
Table 2.
K-10
-------
TABLE 2 - CALCULATED ANNUAL POLLUTANT LOADING RATES
Pollutant Concentrat ion f mg/1)* Loading Rate**
Arsenic
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Lead
Mercury
Molybdenum
Nickel
Selenium
Zinc
* From Table 1 above.
** Pounds'per acre per year - calculated using equation (4).
0.02
0.02
0.16
2.0
0.14
0.004
0.02
0.11
0.07
27
0.02
0.02
0.15
1.9
0.14
0.004
0.02
0.11
0.07
26
Step 4
The fourth and final step is to divide the annual pollutant
loading rate in Table 2 above into the cumulative pollutant loading
rate for the pollutant from Table 2 in the final Part 503
regulation. This provides the number of years that domestic
septage with the pollutant concentrations in Table 1 above can be
applied to the land at a rate of 116,000 gallons per year without
causing the cumulative pollutant loading rate for the pollutants in
Table 2 from the final Part 503 regulation to be exceeded. Results
of this calculation are presented below in Table 3.
TABLE 3 - YEARS DOMESTIC SEPTAGE CAM BE APPLIED TO THE LAND
Pollutant
Part 503 Loading Rate* Years**
Arsenic
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Lead
Mercury
Molybdenum
Nickel
Selenium
Zinc
36
32
2670
1335
267
15
16
373
89
2492
1800
1600
17800
702
1907
3750
800
3390
1271
96
* pounds per acre
** Part 503 cumulative pollutant loading rate in pounds per
acre divided by calculated annual loading rate (i.e., pounds
per acre per year) in Table 1 above.
K-ll
-------
As shown in Table 3, domestic septage with the pollutant
concentrations in Table 1 can be applied to agricultural land,
forest, or a reclamation site for 96 years at a rate of 116,000
gallons per year without causing any of the cumulative pollutant
loading rates in Table 2 of the final Part 503 regulation to be
exceeded. After 96 years, the cumulative pollutant loading rate
for zinc is exceeded.
The Agency concluded that domestic septage most likely will
not be applied to the same site for 96 years at a rate of 116,000
gallons per year. EPA also concluded that domestic septage will be
not applied to most sites at rate of 116,000 gallons per year
because the nitrogen requirement of the crop grown on the land most
likely will be less than 300 pounds, which is the amount of
nitrogen used to calculate the 116,000 rate.
For the above reasons and because a conservative value for
available nitrogen was used to calculate the constant in equation
(3) , the Agency concluded that public health and the environment
are protected from reasonably anticipated adverse effects of
arsenic, cadmium, chromium, copper, lead, mercury, molybdenum,
nickel, selenium, and zinc in domestic septage applied to
agricultural land, forest, or a reclamation site when the domestic
septage is applied at a rate that is equal to or less than the rate
calculated using equation (3) . Part 503 requires, therefore, that
the annual volume of domestic septage applied to agricultural land,
forest, or a reclamation site be equal to or less than the volume
determined using equation (3) above.
K-12
-------
im)
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460
MOV 6 I9S2
OFFCEOF
WATER
MEMORANDUM
Subject:
From:
To:
Through:
At your request, I will present and document summary statistics based on EPA's
Study on the Quality of Domestic Septage. These summary statistics will include basic
statistics on pollutants of concern, other requested pollutants, and the estimated relationship
between Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen and Ammonia. EPA's Study on the Quality of Domestic
Septage (1991) was conducted in order to support the development of hydraulic loading
rates for the land application of domestic septage under the 40 CFR Part 503 Final Rule for
Sewage Sludge Use or Disposal. This loading rate is intended to be a protective and
affordable method for regulating the beneficial reuse of septage. Development of the
loading rate itself will not be discussed in this memo.
Results
There are two basic results from these analyses. First, truckloads of domestic septage
are not expected to contain pollutant concentrations as high as could be found in sewage
sludge used or disposed from Publicly Owned Treatment Works that practice secondary or
better wastewater treatment Second, Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen is found to be approximately
43% Ammonia in wet domestic septage.
Data
Nine trucks delivering domestic septage to the Madison Metropolitan Sewerage
District (MMSD) in Madison, Wisconsin were each sampled once. As septage was being
discharged, a grab sample was collected and delivered to the MMSD lab for splitting,
labeling, icing, and shipping to appropriate labs under contract to the EPA. Each
Summary Statistics for EPA's Study on the Quality of Domestic Septage
Charles E. White, Statistician^^^^^
Statistical Analysis Section ^
Alan Rubin, Chief
Sludge Risk Assessment Branch
Henry D. Kahn, Chief [4^^!—
Statistical Analysis Section
K-13
ATTACHMENT A
-------
independent sample was physically analyzed for 324 pollutants. Only data regarding
pollutants of concern and some data for pollutants that are also micro-nutrients will be
considered in this report
Physical Analytical Procedures
Physical analytical methods used here are the same as those used for the National
Sewage Sludge Survey (NSSS), though some pollutants are reported differently. Individual
PCB aroclors were reported in the NSSS; total PCB aroclors are reported here. Aldrin and
Dieldrin were reported separately in the NSSS; the totals for Aldrin and Dieldrin are
reported here. Total Chlordane is reported in the NSSS; the alpha and gamma portions of
chlordane are reported here. DDT, DDS, and DDD are reported separately in the NSSS;
totals for DDT, DDS, and DDD are reported here. Lindane is reported in the NSSS;
Lindane (Gamma-BHC) is reported here.
Some pollutant concentrations were not measured above the Minimum Level for the
particular pollutant Minimum Levels are a form of "detection limit" used in physical
analytical methods developed for the Office of Science and Technology. Under contract
each contractor lab must demonstrate that it is able to achieve the Minimum Levels stated
for the particular EPA method to be used. In general, a Minimum Level is defined as the
lowest concentration at which the physical analytical process can be reliably calibrated.
Pollutant concentrations not measured above the Minimum Level for a particular pollutant
are not reported; the Minimum Level is reported instead.
Statistical Methods for Basic Summary Statistics
Statistical analysis methods were primarily selected to estimate a concentration level
for each pollutant such that, under certain assumptions, "most" septage concentrations for
a particular pollutant will be below it's respective level, Le., we are primarily estimating
percentiles. These methods will also be used to characterize both wet and dry weight
pollutant concentration measurements, mixed with "detection limits." Substitution and
Maximum Likelihood Methods will be used to estimate summary statistics. One overall
assumption of this study is that residential septage samples across the country follow
approximately the same probability distributions for pollutant concentrations as those
distributions found in the area around Madison, Wisconsin. Additional statistical
assumptions are discussed in the section on the Substitution Method, in the section on the
Maximum Likelihood Method for estimating summary statistics in the presence of censored,
or "non^detect," data and in the section on estimating the relationship between Ammonia
and Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen.
Drv Weight Conversion
Physical analyses were conducted on liquid septage samples. However, both because
pollutants are assumed to be concentrated in the solid phase of the septage sample and
K-14
-------
because pollutants were reported this way in the NSSS, a dry weight conversion is also used
in presentation of these data. More detailed discussion of the reasons for dry weight
conversion and analyses in support of this practice are presented in the Statistical Support
Document for the 40 CFR Part 503 Final Rule for Sewage Sludge Use or Disposal. Conversion
of a concentration reported in ug/1 is illustrated below:
Let Pollutant Concentration for Sample i - xt pg/1
Solids Concentration for Sample i « y, mg/1
Dry Weight Pollutant Concentration in pg/kg » 1»000>000 xngj
/1,000,000*^
• [——r*
Substitution Methods
The substitution methods used here make no assumptions about the probability
distributions of the pollutant concentration data, but they do make assumptions about the
concentration of pollutants in samples where pollutants could not be measured above their
"detection limit" The first of two substitution methods used assumes that pollutant
concentrations, in samples where pollutants could not be measured, are at the "detection
limit" The second substitution method assumes that pollutant concentrations, in samples
where pollutants could not be measured, are zero. Together, these two substitution methods
give a kind of upper and lower bound on non-parametric summary statistics for pollutant
concentrations in septage. More detailed discussion of these methods and the reasons for
their selection are presented in the Statistical Support Document for the 40 CFR Part 503
Final Rule for Sewage Sludge Use or Disposal.
Tables of wet weight summary statistics developed using these substitution methods
are presented on pages 13 through 23 and tables of dry weight summary statistics developed
using these substitution methods are presented on pages 27 through 36.
J fteffliood Estimation
The maximum likelihood estimation (MLE) procedure used here assumes pollutant
concentrations are approximately lognormal in probability distribution. When this
assumption is true, estimates produced using this procedure will be more efficient than those
produced without assumptions about probability distributions. The procedure uses sample
K-15
-------
size, measured pollutant concentrations, and the range of possible values for "detection limit"
data in order to pick optimum estimates for the log mean and log variance of a two
parameter lognormal distribution. If the assumption of a lognormal distribution is not
closely approximated, this procedure is expected to produce good estimates for upper
percentiles while the mean and variance estimates may not be optimal.
The two parameter lognormal distribution is fully described by the log mean and log
variance, or the mean and standard deviation. Any desired summary statistic can be
calculated using an appropriate pair of sufficient statistics. More detailed discussion of this
method and the reasons why it was selected are presented in Statistical Support Document
for the 40 CFR Part 503 Final Rule for Sewage Sludge Use or Disposal (1992).
In order to assess the quality of the MLEs, cumulative probability distributions were
plotted for both the wet and dry weight distributions. Each plot shows the estimated
cumulative distribution for all three estimation methods. The substitution methods are
illustrated with points for each observation. The probability plotting position for each point
is determined by a ranking procedure developed by Blom. The line indicating the estimated
lognormal distribution is a plot of the 10th through 90th percentiles. These plots do not
indicate any obvious deviations from the assumption that the pollutant concentration data
are approximately lognormal in distribution. These plots are presented in the appendix.
«
Tables for wet weight summary statistics are presented on pages 10 through 12 and
tables for dry weight summary statistics are presented on pages 24 through 26. Pollutants
measured above their sample specific Minimum Level, or "detection limit," one time or less
are not included in these tables as it is not possible to obtain MLEs under those conditions.
Note that truckloads of domestic septage are not expected to contain pollutant
concentrations as high as could be found in sewage sludge used or disposed from Publicly
Owned Treatment Works that practice secondary or better wastewater treatment. This
statement is based on the previously mentioned distributional assumptions of the MLE
estimation procedure and the additional assumption that domestic septage trucks across the
country have approximately the same probability distribution for pollutant concentrations as
domestic septage in trucks found in the area around Madison, Wisconsin. This result is
found by comparing the 98th percentile estimates from the National Sewage Sludge Survey,
presented in Statistical Support Documentation for the 40 CFR, Part 503 Final Standards for
the Use or Disposal of Sewage Sludge (2992), to 98th percentile estimates developed here for
dry weight concentrations of septage.
s
Statistical Methods for Estimating the Relationship Between Ammonia & TKN
Ammonia is the constituent of Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen (TKN) that is immediately
available for plant uptake. Over time, Total IQeldahl Nitrogen is expected to completely
break down into Ammonia. The purpose of this analysis is to assist in determining an
K-16
-------
appropriate hydraulic loading rate for
domestic septage that allows sufficient
nitrogen for crop growth while not allowing
for so much nitrogen that crop growth
would be adversely affected. The loading
rate itself will be estimated in another
document.
The observed relationship between
the Ammonia and the Total Kjeldahl
Nitrogen data indicates, as expected, that
both pollutants increase together. A
statistical model was fit to these data that
assumes the concentration of Ammonia is
zero when the concentration of TKN is
zero, that the Ammonia concentration will
increase in a linear fashion as TKN
increases, that the Ammonia concentrations
about that line are approximately normal in
distribution, and that the deviations from
that line are independent and identically
distributed. Under these assumptions,
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen is approximately 43% Ammonia in wet domestic septage.
Evaluation of
Assumptions
For the
assumption that the
concentration of
Ammonia is zero
when the
concentration of TKN
is zero, a model was
fit that estimated a
non-zero constant
when TKN is zero and
a hypothesis test was
conducted that failed
to reject the
hypothesis that the
constant was
statistically different
than zero. The
Relation of Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen to Ammonia:
too -j a
90
80
A
m
m
9
ft
30
20
10
0
too 120 i«o t«o tao
Total KjattaM NHroe«*
Unit»
Sourc#
Modal
Error
c Total
IHTERCfP
TIM
1HTEICEP
TKN
ttwlysia of Variant*
Sia of
or
1 3785.120*2
7 2782.12438
8 6487.24480
S9«ra
3785.12042
386.01777
r valua
9.806
Root NSC
Dap Naan
c.v.
Variant* BP
19.64733
42.72000
45.99095
8-aquir*
Ad] l-aq
0.5835
0.5240
Paraaatar Katlaataa
Variabla Of
Paraaatar
Cat(Mata
6.292426
0.377705
Variabla
Standard
Irror
13.1
0.12Q619S1
Intarcapt
Total Kjaldahl Nltrotan
T for HO:
ParaaataraQ
0.471
3.131
ProbM
0.0166
0.6517
0.0166
K-17
-------
Analysis of Variance
table for this model
indicates that the
intercept term is not
statistically significant
at the 0.05 level. The
significance test used
is robust to many
departures from
assumptions.
For the
assumption of
linearity, both the
Analysis of Variance
table for the model
with an intercept term
and for the model
without an intercept
term indicate that a
statistically significant linear relationship exists between Ammonia and TKN. Again, the
significance test used is robust to many
departures from assumptions.
For the assumption that
Ammonia concentrations about that line
are approximately normal in
distribution, the Shapiro-Wilk test for
the normal distribution fails to reject the
hypothesis that the residuals from the
fitted line come from a normal
distribution. Residuals are the
arithmetic difference between the
observed concentration of Ammonia at
a particular TKN concentration and the
Ammonia concentration predicted by
the statistical model. Further evidence
is that the plot of the residuals versus
their expected position in a normal
distribution, a normal scores plot, is
approximately linear.
For the assumption that
deviations from the line are
Analysis of Variance
Source
Nodal
Error
U Total
Of
Sm of
Squares
Square
toot NSC
Oep Naan
C.V.
Variable Of
T«3 1
Variable OF
tlOl 1
1 20124.34510 20124.34510
8 2787.88530 348.48566
9 22912.23040
f Value
57.748
18.66777
42.72000
43.69797
t-square
Adj C-*q
0.8783
0.8631
Paramter Istiaatee
Parameter
Eftiaatt
Standard
Error
0.427247 0.05622261
Variable
Label
Total Kjeldafil nitrogen
T for HO:
PeraaetersQ
7.599
Prober
0.0001
Prob » |T{
0.0001
Relation of Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen to Ammonia:
Normal ScorM PW trf Ra*«duc*i from ton
-30 -20
¦I'"
-10
0 to
Residual
20
30
40
OMi *r« mf/l
K-18
-------
independent, the physical process of sampling from different truck loads of septage would
tend to make the sample results independent
For the assumption that deviations from'the line are identically distributed, the plot
of residuals versus observed Ammonia values does not appear to indicate strong deviation
from this assumption.
Relation of Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen to Ammonia:
DomHmM 0b»"m4 Wum
20 -
*
• *o A
-10
-20
•JO
0 10 26 30 40 M
¦ . | ¦ 1111 ¦. i ¦ | ¦ 11 ¦ |
70 90 «0 100
Uniti or* wif/i
K-19
-------
References
Blom, G. (1958), Statistical Estimates and Transformed Beta Variables, New York: John
Wiley & Sons, Lac.
USEPA (1992), Statistical Support Documentation for the 40 CFR, Part 503 Final Standards
for the Use or Disposal of Sewage Sludge
K-20
-------
Appendix A
Summary Statistics
«
K-21
*
-------
Wet Height Concentrations of Pollutants in Septage:
Summary Statistics fro* Maxima Likelihood Estimation
t
Units
Sample
Log
Log
Pollutant
Size
Hon-Detect'
Mean
Variance
ALDRIN/DIELDRIN (TOTAL)
UG/L
9
7
-4.872
15.2471
AMMONIA (AS M)
MG/L
9
0
3.231
2.5560
CADMIUM
UG/L
9
6
1.207
1.1385
CHROMIUM
UG/L
9
1
3.494
0.8888
COPPER
UG/L
9
0
5.373
1.8551
DDT,DDE,DDD(TOTAL)
UG/L
9
7
-2.783
6.1436
L1AD
UG/L
9
6
3.642
0.5873
LINDANE(GAMMA-BHC)
UG/L
9
7
-2.360
0.2981
MERCURY
UG/L
9
4
-1.348
2.7855
NICKEL
UG/L
9
4
3.747
0.3319
NITRATE+NITRITE (AS N)
MG/L
9
2
—1.345
1.0699
PERCENT SOLIDS
1
9
0
-0.488
2.8024
SELENIUM
UG/L
9
7
0.442
5.4810
TOTAL KJELDAHL NITROGEN
MG/L
9
0
4.284
0.9236
TOTAL PHOSPHOROUS
MG/L
9
0
2.960
1.2521-
ZINC
UG/L
9
0
7.806
2.1128
-------
Wet Height Concentrations of Pollutants in Septage:
Susaary Statistics froa Maxiaua Likelihood Estimation
/
Standard
Coefficient
Deviation of
Standard
of
Pollutant
Units
Mean
the Mean
Deviation
Variation
ALDRIN/DIELDRIN (TOTAL)
UG/L
15.7000
10700.000
32100.000
2050.0000
AMMONIA (AS N)
MG/L
90.8000
104.0000
313.0000
3.4500
CADMIUM
UG/L
5.9100
2.8700
8.6100
1.4600
CHROMIUM
UG/L
51.3000
20.5000
61.4000
1.2000
COPPER
UG/L
545.0000
422.0000
1270.0000
2.3200
DDT,DDE,DDD(TOTAL)
UG/L
1.3300
9.5900
28.8000
21.6000
LEAD
UG/L
51.2000
15.3000
45.8000
0.8940
LINDANE(GAMMA-BHC)
UG/L
0.1100
0.0215
0.0646
0.5890
MERCURY
UG/L
1.0500
1.3600
4.0800
3.9000
NICKEL
UG/L
50.0000
10.5000
31.4000
0.6270
NITRATE+NITRITE (AS N)
MG/L
0.4450
0.2050
0.6160
1.3800
PERCENT SOLIDS
«
2.4900
. 3.2700
9.8100
3.9300
SELENIUM
UG/L
24.1000
124.0000
373.0000
15.5000
TOTAL KJELDAHL NITROGEN
MG/L
115.0000
47.3000
142.0000
1.2300
TOTAL PHOSPHOROUS
MG/L
36.1000
19.0000
57.0000
1.5800
ZINC
UG/L
7060.0000
6350.0000
19000.000
2.7000
-------
Met Weight Concentrations of Pollutants in Septage:
Summary Statistics from Maxima Likelihood Estimation
/
90th
95th
98th
Pollutant
Units
Median
Percentile
Percentile
Percentile
ALDRIN/DIELDRIH(TOTAL)
UG/L
0.0077
1.1600
4.7200
23.4000
AMMONIA (AS H)
MG/L
25.3000
197.0000
351.0000
676.0000
CADMIUM
UG/L
3.3400
13.2000
19.3000
30.0000
CHROMIUM
UG/L
32.9000
111.0000
155.0000
228.0000
COPPER
UG/L
216.0000
1240.0000
2030.0000
3540.0000
DDT,DDE,DDD(TOTAL)
UG/L
0.0619
1.4900
3.6500
10.1000
LEAD
UG/L
38.2000
102.0000
135.0000
184.0000
LINDANE (GAMMA-BHC)
UG/L
0.0944
0.1900
0.2320
0.2900
MERCURY
UG/L
0.260,0
2.2200
4.0400
8.0200
NICKEL
UG/L
42.4000
88.9000
109.0000
138.0000
HITRATE+HITRITE (AS N)
MG/L
0.2610
0.9840
1.4300
2.1800
PERCENT SOLIDS
%
0.6140
5.2800
9.6400
19.1000
SELENIUM
UG/L
1.S600
- 31.5000
73.2000
191.0000
TOTAL KJELDAHL NITROGEN
MG/L
72.5000
249.0000
352.0000
523.0000
TOTAL PHOSPHOROUS
MG/L
19.3000
81.3000
122.0000
192.0000
ZINC
UG/L
2460.0000
15900.000
26800.000
48700.000
i
-------
Wet Weight Concentrations of Pollutants in Septage:
Summary Statistics from Substitution Methods
Polltitant-ALDRIN/DIELDRIN(TOTAL) — Sample Size-9 ~ Unita-UG/L
Substitution
Method
Standard Coefficient
Deviation of Standard of
Mean the Mean Deviation Variation
Minimum
Median Maximum
SM-ML
SM-0
0.4480
0.3610
0.2660
0.2800
0.7980
0.8400
178.0
232.0
0.1000
0.0000
0.1000
0.0000
2.500
2.500
Pollutant'ALPHA-CHLORDANE — Sample Size«9 — Units«UG/L
Substitution
Method
Standard Coefficient
Deviation of Standard of
Mean the Mean Deviation Variation
Minimum
Median Maximum
5
to
LA
SM-ML
SM-0
0.1090
0.0000
0.0093
0.0000
0.0280
0.0000
25.6
0.1000
0.0000
0.1000
0.0000
0.184
0.000
Pollutant-AMHONIA (AS N) — Sample Size«9 — Units-MG/L
Substitution
Method
Standard Coefficient
Deviation of Standard of
Mean the Mean Deviation Variation
Minimum
Median Maximum
SM-ML
SM-0
42.7000
42.7000
9.4900
9.4900
28.5000
28.5000
66.7
66.7
0.4800
0.4800
45.0000
45.0000
100.000
100.000
-------
Wet Height Concentrations of Pollutants in Septage:
Summary Statistics from Substitution Hethods
Pollutant-ARSENIC — Sample Size-9 — Unita«UG/L
Substitution
Method
Standard Coefficient
Deviation of Standard of
Mean the Mean Deviation Variation
Minimum Median Maximum
SH-ML
SM-0
20.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0
20.0000
0.0000
20.0000
0.0000
20.000
0.000
*
to
o\
Substitution
Method
SM-ML
SM-0
Pollutant-BENZEHE — Sample Size-7 — Units-UG/L
Standard Coefficient
Deviation of Standard of
Mean the Mean Deviation Variation
Minimum Median Maximum
11.4000
0.0000
1.4300
0.0000
3.7800
0.0000
33.1
10.0000
0.0000
10.0000
0.0000
20.000
0.000
Pollutant-BENZO(A)PYRENE — Sample Size-9 — Units-UG/L
Standard Coefficient
Substitution Deviation of Standard of
Method Mean the Mean Deviation Variation Minimum Median Maximum
SM-ML 11.1000 1.1100 3.3300 30.0 10.0000 10.0000 20.000
SM-0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 . 0.0000 0.0000 0.000
-------
Wet Weight Concentrations of Pollutants in Septage:
Summary Statistics from Substitution Methods
-«*- Pollutant-BERYLLIUM — Sample Size-9 — Units=UG/L
Substitution
Method
Standard Coefficient
Deviation of Standard of
Mean the Mean Deviation Variation
Minimum
Median Maximum
SM-ML
SH-0
5.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0
5.0000
0.0000
5.0000
0.0000
5.000
0.000
s
Pollutant-BIS(2-ETHYLHEXYL) PHTHALATE — Sample Size-9 — Units«UG/L
Substitution
Method
SM-ML
SM-0
Standard Coefficient
Deviation of Standard of
Mean the Mean Deviation Variation
11.1000
0.0000
1.1100
0.0000
3.3300
0.0000
30.0
Minimum
10.0000
0.0000
Median Maximum
10.0000
0.0000
20.000
0.000
Substitution
Method
Pollutant-CADMIUM — Sample Size-9 — Units-UG/L
Standard
Deviation of Standard
Mean the Mean Deviation
Coefficient
of
Variation
Minimum
Median Maximum
SM-ML
SM-0
7.1300
3.8000
1.4900
2.1700
4.4700
6.5000
62.7
171.0
5.0000
0.0000
5.0000
0.0000
18.400
18.400
-------
Wet Height Concentrations of Pollutants in Septage:
Summary Statistic* fro* Substitution Methods
Pollutant-CHROMIUM — Sample Size-9 — Units-UG/L
Substitution
Method
Hem
Standard Coefficient
Deviation of Standard of
the Mean Deviation Variation
Minimus Median Makiaua
SM-ML
SH-0
46.7000
45.6000
12.7000
13.1000
38.1000
39.4000
81.6
86.5
10.0000
0.0000
33.5000
33.5000
128<000
128.000
Substitution
Method
— Pollutant-COPPER — Sample Size-9 — Units-UG/L
Standard Coefficient
Deviation of Standard of
Mean the Mean Deviation Variation
Minimum
Median Maximum
SM-ML 503.0000 223.0000 669.0000 133.0 62.0000 115.0000 1850.000
SM-0 503.0000 223.0000 669.0000 133.0 62.0000 115.0000 1850.000
Pollutant-DDT,DDE,DDD(TOTAL) — Sample Size-9 — Units-UG/L
Standard Coefficient
Substitution Deviation of Standard of
Method Mean the Mean Deviation Variation
Minimum Median Maximum
SM-ML
SM-0
0.6850
0.4220
0.2810
0.3230
0.8440
0.9690
123.0
230.0
0.3380
0.0000
0.3380
0.0000
2.880
2.880
-------
Wet Height Concentrations of Pollutants in Septage:
Siunary Statistics from Substitution Methods
Pollutant-GAMMA-CHLORDANE — Sample Size-9 ~ Units-UG/L
Substitution
Method
Mean
Standard Coefficient
Deviation of Standard of
the Mean Deviation Variation
Minimum Median Maxinun
SM-ML
SM-0
0.1230
0.0090
0.0104
0.0000
0.0313
0.0000
25.4
0.1130
0.0000
0.1130
0.0000
0.20?
0.000
N)
Substitution
Method
SM-ML
SM-0
Pollutant-HEPTACHLOR — Sample Siie-9 — Units«UG/L
Standard Coefficient
Deviation of Standard of
Mean the Mean Deviation Variation
0.0896
0.0278
0.0209
0.0278
0.0626
0.0833
69.9
300.0
Mininun
0.0630
0.0000
Median Maxinun
0.0630
0.0000
0.250
0^ 250
Substitution
Method
Pollutant*HEXACHL0ROBENZENE — Saaple Size-9 — Units-UG/L
Standard Coefficient
Deviation of Standard of
Mean the Mean Deviation Variation
Mininum
Median Maxinun
SM-ML
SM-0
11.1000
0.0000
1.1100
0.0000
3.3300
0.0000
30.0
10.0000
0.0000
10.0000
0.0000
20.000
0.000
-------
W*t Weight Concentration# of Pollutants in Septage:
Suaaary Statistics froa Substitution Methods
— PollutantrHEXACHLOROBUTADIENE — Saaple Size-9 — Unita-UG/L
Substitution
Method
Man
Standard Coefficient
Deviation of Standard of
the Mean Deviation Variation
Minimus
Median Maxima
SM-ML
SM-0
11.1000
0.0000
1.1100
0.0000
3.3300
0.0000
30.0
10.0000
0.0000
10.0000
0.0000
20.000
0.000
©
Substitution
Method
SM-ML
SM-0
—— Pollutant-LEAD -- Saaple Sise-9 — Units«U6/L
Standard Coefficient
Deviation of Standard of
Mean the Mean Deviation Variation
63.4000
30.1000
8.0800
15.7000
24.2000
47.1000
38.2
157.0
Minima Median Maximum
50.0000
0.0000
50.0000
0.0000
121.000
121*. 000
Substitution
Method
Pollutant-LINDANE(GAMMA-BHC) — Saaple Size-9 — Units-UG/L
Standard Coefficient
Deviation of Standard of
Mean the Mean Deviation Variation
Minimum Median Maximum
SM-ML
SM-0
0.1620
0.0417
0.0170
0.0295
0.0511
0.0884
31.6
212.0
0.1250
0.0000
0.1380
0.0000
0.253
0.250
-------
Wet Weight Concentrations of Pollutants in Septage:
Suaaary Statistics froa Substitution Methods
Pollutant-MERCURY — Saaple Size-9 — Units*»UG/L
Substitution
Method
Standard Coefficient
Deviation of Standard of
Mean the Mean Deviation Variation
Mininun
Median Maxiaua
SM-ML
SM-0
0.8220
0.7330
0.4200
0.4380
1.2600
1.3100
153.0
179.0
0.2000
0.0000
0.3000
0.3000
4.050
4.050
Po11utant-KOLY BDENUM — Saaple Size-9 — Units»UG/L
\
Substitution
Method
SM-ML
SM-0
Standard Coefficient
Deviation of Standard of
Mean the Mean Deviation Variation
10.5000
1.6000
0.4890
1.6000
1.4700
4.8O0O
14.0
300.0
Mininun Median Maxinum
10.0000
0.0000
10.0000
0.0000
14.400
14.400
PoUutant-N-NITROSODIMSTHYIAMXlfl — Saaple Size-9 ~ Units-UG/L
Standard Coefficient
Substitution Deviation of Standard of
Method Mean the Mean Deviation Variation Mininun Median Maxinun
SM-ML 55.6000 5.5600 16.7000 30.0 50.0000 50.0000 100.000
SM-0 0.0000 *80.0000 0.0000 . 0.0000 0.0000 0.000
-------
Wet Weight Concentration® of Pollutant® in Septage:
Summary Statistic® froa Substitution Methods
————— pollutant-HICKSL — Sample Size-9 — Units-UG/L
Substitution
Method
Standard Coefficient
Deviation of Standard of
Kean ttw Mean Deviation Variation
Mini.au* Median Maximum
SM-HL
SM-0
54.5000
36.7000
7.8300
13.2000
23.5000
39.7000
43.1
108.0
40.0000
0.0000
41.6000
41.6000
105.000
105.000
\
Pollutant-NITRATE+HITRITE (AS N) — Sample Size-9 — Units-MG/L
Substitution
Method
Standard Coefficient
Deviation of Standard of
Mean the Mean Deviation Variation
Minimum
Median Maximum
u>
w
SM-ML
SM-0
0.3890
0.3670
0.0964
0.1050
0.2890
0.3160
74.4
86.2
0.1000
0.0000
0.2000
0.2000
0.900
0|. 900
Substitution
Method
Pollutant-PCB(TOTAL) -- Sample Size-9 — Units-UG/L
Standard
Deviation of Standard
Mean the Mean Deviation
Coefficient
of
Variation
Minimum
Median Maximum
SM-ML
SM-0
1.9100
0.0000
0.1630
0.0000
0.4890
0.0000
25.6
1.7500
0.0000
1.7500
0.0000
3.220
0.000
-------
Wet Weight Concentrations of Pollutants in Septage:
Summary Statistics fro* Substitution Methods
Pollutant-PERCENT SOLIDS — Sample Size-9 — Onits=« i«
Substitution
Method
Standard Coefficient
Deviation of Standard of
Maan the Mean Deviation Variation
Minimum
Median Maximum
SM-ML
SM-0
2.2100
2.2100
1.5100
1.5100
4.5400
4.5400
205.0
205.0
0.0653
0.0653
0.6580
0.6580
14.200
14.200
Pollutant-SEXfNIUM — Sample Size-9 — Units-UG/L
Substitution
Method
Standard Coef ficient
Deviation of Standard of
Mean the Mean Deviation Variation
Minimum
Median Maximum
Ut
w
SM-ML
SM-0
20.8000
6.9400
6.6400
4.6000
19.9000
13.8000
95.6
199.0
5.0000
0.0000
5.0000
0.0000
50.000
32.000
Pollutanfc-TOTAL KJILDAHL NITROGEN — Sample Size-9 — Units-MG/L
Substitution
Method
Standard Coefficient
Deviation of Standard of
Mean the Mean Deviation Variation
Minimum
Median Maximum
SM-ML
SM-0
96.4000
96*4000
19.2000
19.2000
57.6000
57.6000
59.7
59.7
9.0000
9.0000
115.0000
115.0000
175.000
175.000
-------
Wet Height Concentrations of Pollutants in septage:
Suaaary Statistics froa Substitution Methods
P611utant"TOTAL PHOSPHOROUS — Saaple Size»9 — Units»HG/L
Substitution
Method
Mean
Standard Coefficient
Deviation of Standard of
the Mean Deviation Variation
Miniaua Median Maxiaua
SM-ML
SM-0
27.6000
27.6000
5.7400
5.7400
17.2000
17.2000
62.3
62.3
1.7000
1.7000
32.0000
32.0000
48.000
48.000
Pollutant-TOXAPHENE — Saaple Size-9 — Units-UG/L
Substitution
Method
Standard Coefficient
Deviation of Standard of
Mean the Mean Deviation Variation
Miniaun
Median Maxiaua
•f®
U)
4*
SM-ML
SM-0
11.3000
0.0900
1.6700
0.0000
5.0100
0.0000
44.3
0.9100
0.0000
11.4000
0.0000
20.900
0.000
Pollutant»TRICHL0ROETHEHE — Saaple Size-7 ~ Units-UG/L
Substitution
Method
Standard Coefficient
Deviation of Standard of
Mean the Mean Deviation Variation
Miniaua
Median Maxiaua
SM-ML
SM-0
11.4000
0.0000
1.4300
0.0000
3.7800
0.0000
33.1
10.0000
0.0000
10.0000
0.0000
20.000
0.000
-------
Wet Weight Concentrations of Pollutants in Septage:
Summary Statistics from Substitution Methods
pollutant-ZINC — Sample Size-9 — Units»UG/L —•
Standard Coefficient
Substitution Deviation of standard of
Method Mean the Mean Deviation Variation Minimum Median Maximum
SM-ML 5300.0000 2420.0000 7270.0000 137.0 182.0000 3190.0000 23800.000
SM-0 5300.0000 2420.0000 7270.0000 137.0 182.0000 3190.0000 23800.000
-------
Dipy Height Concentrations of Pollutants in Septage:
SUBuary Statistics fro* Maxima Likelihood Estivation
/
Sasple
Log
Log
Pollutant
Units
Size
Non-Detect
Mean
Variance
ALDRIN/ DIELDRIN (TOTAL)
UG/KG
9
7
0.741
8.9223B
AMHONIA (AS N)
MG/KG
9
0
8.325
3.90825
CADMIUM
MG/KG
9
6
-1.766
5.86238
CHROMIUM
MG/KG
9
1
1.542
2.39400
COPPER
MG/KG
9
0
3.559
4.39988
DDT,DDE gDDD(TOTAL)
UG/KG
9
7
1.665
7.27425
LEAD
MG/KG
9
6
0.561
3.87225
LINDANE(GAMMA-BKC)
UG/KG
9
7
0.967
2.14650
MERCURY
MG/KG
9
4
-3.571
2.86875
NICKEL
MG/KG
9
4
1.330
1.57612
NITRATE+HITRITE (AS M)
MG/KG
9
2
3.522
0.82463
PERCENT SOLIDS
«
9
0
-0.488
2.80237
SELENIUM
MG/KG
9
7
-2.098
6.97725
TOTAL KJELDAHL NITROGEN
MG/KG
9
0
9.378
2.81813
TOTAL PHOSPHOROUS
MG/KG
9
0
8.054
1.42312
ZINC
MG/KG
9
0
5.992
1.05525
-------
Dry Height Concentrations of Pollutants in Septage:
Suimary Statistics fro* Maxiaua Likelihood Estination
/
Standard
Coefficient
Deviation of
Standard
of
Pollutant
Units
Mean
the Mean
Deviation
Variation
ALDRIN/DIELDRIN (TOTAL)
UG/KG
182.0000
5240.0000
15700.000
86.6000
AMMONIA (AS H)
MG/KG
29100.000
67800.000
. 203000.00
6.9900
CADMIUM
MG/KG
3.2100
20.0000
60.0000
18.7000
CHROMIUM
MG/KG
15.5000
16.3000
48.8000
3.1600
COPPER
MG/KG
317.0000
948.0000
2840.0000
8.9700
DDT,DDE,DDD(TOTAL)
UG/KG
201.0000
2540.0000
7620.0000
38.0000
LEAD
MG/KG
12.1000
27.8000
83.3000
6.8600
LINDANE(GAMMA-BHC)
UG/KG
7.6900
7.0500
21.1000
2.7500
MERCURY
MG/KG
0.1180
0.1600
0.4810
4.0800
NICKEL
MG/KG
8.3200
5.4300
16.3000
1.9600
NITRATES-NITRITE (AS N)
MG/KG
51.1000
19.3000
57.9000
1.1300
PERCENT SOLIDS
*
2.4900
. 3.2700
9.8100
3.9300
SELENIUM
MG/KG
4.0200
43.8000
131.0000
32.7000
TOTAL KTELDAHL NITROGEN
MG/KG
48400.000
64000.000
192000.00
3.9700
TOTAL PHOSPHOROUS
MG/KG
6410.0000
3790.0000
11400.000
1.7700
ZINC
MG/KG
678.0000
309.0000
928.0000
1.3700
-------
Oiry Height Concentrations of Pollutants in Septage:
Suwiary Statistics fro* Maximum Likelihood Estimation
/
90th
95 th
98th
Pollutant
Units
Median
Percentile
Percentile
Percentile
ALDRIN/DIELDRIN(TOTAL)
UG/KG
2.1000
97.4000
286.0000
972.0000
AMMONIA (AS N)
MG/KG
4130.0000
52300.000
107000.00
240000.00
CADMIUM
MG/KG
0.1710
3.8400
9.1800
24.8000
CHROMIUM
MG/KG
4.6700
34.1000
59.6000
112.0000
COPPER
MG/KG
35.1000
520.0000
1110.0000
2620.0000
DDT,DDI,DDD(TOTAL)
UG/KG
5.2900
169.0000
447.0000
1350.0000
LEAD
MG/KG
1.7500
22.0000
44.6000
100.0000
LINDANE(GAMMA-BHC)
UG/KG
2.6300
17.3000
29.3000
53.4000
MERCURY
MG/KG
0.0281
0.2480
0.4560
0.9140
NICKEL
MG/KG
3.7800
19.0000
29.8000
49.9000
NITRATE+NITRITE (AS N)
MG/KG
33.9000
109.0000
151.0000
219.0000
PERCENT SOLIDS
t
0.6140
5.2800
9.6400
19.1000
SELENIUM
MG/KG
0.1230
« 3.6600
9.4600
27.9000
TOTAL KJELDAHL NITROGEN
MG/KG
11800.000
102000.00
187000.00
372000.00
TOTAL PHOSPHOROUS
MG/KG
3150.0000
14600.000
22400.000
36500.000
1INC
MG/KG
400.0000
1500.0000
2170.0000
3300.0000
-------
Dry Height Concentrations of Pollutants In Septage:
Summary Statistics fro* Substitution Methods
PollUtant-ALDRIN/DIBLDRIN(TOTAL) — Sample Size«9 — Units=UG/KG
Standard Coefficient
Substitution Deviation of Standard of
Method Mean the Mean Deviation Variation
Minimum
Median Maximum
SM-ML
SM-0
77.200
38.000
36.300
35.900
109.000
108.000
141.0
283.0
8.55000
0.00000
17.6000
0.0000
325.00
325.00
Pollutant-ALPHA-CHLORDANE — Sample Size-9 — Units-UG/KG
Substitution
Method
Standard • Coefficient
Deviation of Standard of
Mean the Mean Deviation Variation
Minimum
Median Maximum
SM-ML
SM-0
44.100
0.000
19.500
0.000
58.500
0.000
133.0
0.70400
0.00000
15.2000
0.0000
153.00
• 0.00
Pollutant-AMMONIA (AS N) — Sample Size-9 — Units*MG/KG
Substitution
Method
Standard Coefficient
Deviation of Standard of
Mean the Mean Deviation Variation
Minimum
Median Maximum
SM-ML 12700.000 6390.000 19200.000 151.0 77.50000 8210.0000 61300.00
SM-0 12700.000 6390.000 19200.000 151.0 77.50000 8210.0000 61300.00
-------
Dry Height Concentrations of Pollutants in Septage:
Summary Statistics from Substitution Methods
Pollutant-ARSENIC — Sample Size-9 — Units-HG/KG
Substitution
Method
Standard Coefficient
Deviation of Standard of
Ktan the Mean Deviation Variation
Minima
Median Maximum
SM-ML
SM-0
8.710
0.000
3.920
0.000
11.800
0.000
135.0
0.14100
0.00000
3.0400
0.0000
30.60
0.00
Pollutant"BENZENE — Sample Size*? — Units«UG/KG
\
Substitution
Method
Standard Coefficient
Deviation of Standard of
Mean the Mean Deviation Variation
Minimum
Median Maxiaua
E
o
SM-ML 1540.000 519.000 1370.000 89.1 70.40000 1080.0000 4330.00
SM-0 0.000 0.000 0.000 . 0.00000 0.0000 1 0.00
Substitution
Method
Pollutant-BENZO(A)PYRENE — Saaple Size-9 — Units-UG/KG
Standard Coefficient
Deviation of Standard of
Mean the Mean Deviation Variation
Minimum
Median Maxiaua
SM-ML 4420.000 1950.000 5840.000 132.0 70.40000 1520.0000 15300.00
SM-0 0.000 0.000 0.000 . 0.00000 0.0000 0.00
-------
Dry Weight Concentrations of Pollutants in Septage:
Summary Statistics fro* Substitution Methods
—? Pellutant-BERYLLIUM — Sample Size-9 — Units-MG/KG
Substitution
Method
Standard Coefficient
Deviation of Standard of
Mean the Mean Deviation Variation
Mininua
Median Maxiaua
SM-ML
SM-0
2.180
0.000
0.981
0.000
2.940
0.000
13S.0
0.03520
0.00000
0.7600
0.0000
7.66
0.00
Pollutant-BIS(2-ETHYLHEXYL) PHTHALATE — Sample Size-9 — Units-UG/KG
Substitution
Method
Standard Coefficient
Deviation of Standard of
Mean the Mean Deviation Variation
Minimum
Median Maximum
SM-ML 4420.000 1950.000 5840.000 132.0 70.40000 1520.0000 15300.00
SM-0 0.000 0.000 0.000 . 0.00000 0.0000 0.00
Substitution
Method
Pollutant-CADMIUM — Sample Size-9 — Units-MG/KG
Mean
Standard Coefficient
Deviation of Standard of
the Mean Deviation Variation
Mininun
Median Maximum
SM-ML
SM-0
2.430
0.632
0.954
0.349
2.860
1.050
118.0
166.0
0.03520
0.00000
0.9950
0.0000
7.66
2.77
-------
Dry Weight Concentrations of Pollutants in Septage:
Suaaary Statistics froa Substitution Methods
Pollutant-CHROMIUH — Saaple Size-9 — Units-HG/KG
Substitution
Method
Mean
Standard Coefficient
Deviation of Standard of
' the Mean Deviation Variation
Miniaua
Median Maxiaua
SM-ML
SM-0
10.900
9.360
3.640
3.800
10.900
11.400
100.0
122.0
0.22600
0.00000
7.6300
6.9200
35.30
35.30
Pollutant-COPPER — Saaple Size-9 — Units-MG/KG
Substitution
Method
Standard Coefficient
Deviation of Standard of
Mean the Mean Deviation Variation
Mlniaua
Median Maxiaua
SM-ML
SM-0
113.000
113.000
40.900
40.900
123.000
123.000
108.0
108.0
0.81000
0.81000
105.0000
105.0000
328.00
3?8.00
Pollutant-DDT,DDE,DDD(TOTAL) — Saaple Size-9 — Units-UG/KG
Substitution
Method
Standard
Deviation of Standard
Coefficient
of
Mean the Mean Deviation Variation
Miniaua
Median Maxiaua
SM-ML
SM-0
176.000
33.800
64.500
28.100
194.000
84.400
110.0
250.0
2.38000
0.00000
69.3000
0.0000
518.00
254.00
-------
Dry Height Concentrations of Pollutants in Septage:
Summary Statistics from Substitution Methods
P61lutant"GAMMA-CHLORDANE — Sample Size*9 — Units-UG/KG
Substitution
Method
Standard . Coefficient
Deviation of Standard of
Mean the Mean Deviation Variation
Minimum
Median Maximum
SM-ML
SM-0
49.000
0.000
22.000
0.000
66.100
0.000
133.0
0.79600
0.00000
17.2000
0.0000
173.00
0.00
Pollutant-HEPTACHLOR — Sample Size**9 — Units~UG/KG
Substitution
Method
Standard Coefficient
Deviation of Standard of
Mean the Mean Deviation Variation
Minimum
Median Maximum
SM-ML
SM-0
32.000
5.690
12.400
5.690
37.100
17.100
116.0
300.0
0.44400
0.00000
9.5700
0.0000
96.50
51.20
Pollutant-HEXACHLOROBENZENE — Sample Size«9 — Units-UG/KG
Substitution
Method
Standard Coefficient
Deviation of Standard of
Mean the Mean Deviation Variation
Minimum
Median Maximum
SM-ML 4420.000 1950.000 5840.000 132.0 70.40000 1520.0000 15300.00
SM-0 0.000 0.000 0.000 . 0.00000 0.0000 0.00
-------
Dry Weight Concentrations of Pollutants in Septage:
Suaaary Statistics from Substitution Methods
Pollutant-HEXACHLOROBUTADIENE — Saaple Size-9 — Units-UG/KG
Substitution
Method
Standard Coefficient
Deviation of Standard of
Mean the Mean Deviation Variation
Miniaua
Median Maximum
SM-ML 4420.000 1950.000 5840.000 132.0 70.40000 1520.0000 15300.00
SM-0 0.000 0.000 0.000 . 0.00000 0.0000 0.00
Pollutant-LEAD — Sample size«9 — Units-MG/KG
Substitution
Method
Standard Coefficient
Deviation of Standard of
Mean the Mean Deviation Variation
Minimum
Median Maximum
SM-ML
SM-0
23.800
3.960
9.600
2.730
28.800
8.200
121.0
207.0
0.35200
0.00000
7.6000
0.0000
76.60
24.80
Pollutant-LINDANl(GAMMA-BHC) — Saaple Size-9 — Units-UG/KG
Substitution
Method
Mean
Standard Coefficient
Deviation of Standard of
the Mean Deviation Variation
Miniaua
Median Maximum
SM-ML
SM-0
61.900
2.560
26.700
2.450
80.000
7.340
129.0
287.0
0.88000
0.00000
22.1000
O.COOO
211.00
22.10
-------
Dry Weight Concentrations of Pollutants in Septage:
Summary Statistics from Substitution Methods
—Pollutant-MERCURY — Sample Size-9 — Units-MG/KG —
Substitution
Methcd
Standard Coefficient
Deviation of Standard of
Mean the Mean Deviation Variation
Minimum
Median
Maximum
SM-ML
SM-0
0.138 0.044 0.132 95.4
0.059 0.037 0.112 189.0
0.00211
0.00000
0.0760
0.0021
0.35
0.35
Pollutant-HOLYBDENUM — Sample Size-9 —
Units-MG/KG
=-¦—-
Substitution
Method
Standard Coefficient
Deviation of Standard of
Mean the Mean Deviation Variation
*
Minimum
Median
Maximum
SM-ML
SM-0
4.460 1.950 5.850 131.0
0.328 0.328 0.984 300.0
0.07040
0.00000
1.5200
0.0000
15.30
'2.95
Pollutant-N-NITROSODIMETHYLAMIHE — Sample Size-9 — Units-UG/KG
Standard Coefficient
Substitution Deviation of Standard of
Method Mean the Mean Deviation Variation Minimum Median Maximum
SM-ML
SM-0
22100.000 9740.000 29200.000 132.0
0.000 0.000 0.000
352.00000 7600.0000 76600.00
0.00000 0.0000 0.00
-------
Dry Height Concentrations of Pollutants in Septage:
Suaaary Statistics froa Substitution Methods
—i— Pollutant-NICKEL — Saaple Size-9 — Units-MG/KG
Substitution
Method
Standard Coefficient
Deviation of Standard of
Nun the Mean Deviation Variation
Miniaua
Median Maxiaua
SM-ML
SM-0
18.900
4.470
7.800
2.870
23.400
8.620
124.0
193.0
0.56200
0.00000
6.0800
0.5620
61.30
26.80
Pollutant-NITRATE+NITMTE (AS N) -- Saaple Size-9 — Units-MG/KG
Substitution
Method
Standard Coefficient
Deviation of Standard of
Mean the Mean Deviation Variation
Miniaua
Median Maxiaua
SM-ML
SM-0
68.600
36.400
17.200
11.600
51.700
34.900
75.4
95.9
6.34000
0.00000
53.1000
32.4000
153.00
91.20
Pollutant-PCB(TOTAL) — Saaple Size-9 — Unlts-UG/KG
Substitution
Method
Standard Coefficient
Deviation of Standard of
Mean the Mean Deviation Variation
Miniaua
Median Maxiaua
SM-ML
SM-0
771.000
0.000
341.000
0.000
1020.000
0.000
133.0
12.30000
0.00000
266.0000 2680.00
0.0000 0.00
-------
Dry Height Concentrations of Pollutants in Septage:
Summary Statistics from Substitution Methods
-- Pollutant-SILiNIUM — Sample Size-9 — Units^MG/KG
Substitution
Method
Standard Coefficient
Deviation of Standard of
Mean the Mean Deviation Variation
Minimum
Median Maximum
SM-ML
SM-0
4.370
0.487
1.240
0.335
3.720
1.000
85.2
206.0
0.03520
0.00000
2.7400
0.0000
10.20
2.74
Pollutant-TOTAL KJELDAHL NITROGEN — Sample Size-9 — Units-MG/KG —
Substitution
Method
Standard Coefficient
Deviation of Standard of
Mean the Mean Deviation Variation
Minimum
Median Maximum
SM-ML 23600.000 8350.000 25100.000 106.0 218.00000 13000.0000 84200.00
SM-0 23600.000 8350.000 25100.000 106.0 218.00000 13000.0000 84200.00
Pollutant-TOTAL PHOSPHOROUS — Sample Size-9 — Units-MG/KG
Standard Coefficient
Substitution Deviation of Standard of
Method Mean the Mean Deviation Variation Minimum Median Maximum
SM-ML 4580.000 1050.000 3150.000 68.7 176.00000 3500.0000 10700.00
SM-0 4580.000 1050.000 3150.000 68.7 176.00000 3500.0000 10700.00
-------
Substitution
Method
Dry Weight Concentrations of Pollutants in Septage:
Summary Statistics from Substitution Methods
Pollutant-TOXAPHENE — Sample Size-9 — Units-UG/KG
Standard Coefficient
Deviation of Standard of
Itean the Mean Deviation Variation
Minimum
Median Maximum
SM-ML 3240.000 1600.000 4800.000 140.0 80.10000 1390.0000 15500.00
SM-0 0.000 0.000 0.000 . 0.00000 0.0000 0.00
Substitution
Method
Pollutant-TRICHLOROETHEHE — Saaple Size-7 — Units-UG/KG
Standard Coefficient
Deviation of Standard of
Mean the Mean Deviation Variation
Minimum
Median Maximum
SM-ML
SM-0
1540.000
0.000
519.000
0.000
1370.000
0.000
89.1
70.40000
0.00000
1080.0000
0.0000
4330.00
0.00
Pollutant-ZINC — Saaple Size-9 — Units«MG/KG
Standard Coefficient
Substitution Deviation of standard of
Method Mean the Mean Deviation Variation Minimum Median Maximum
SM-ML 570.000 146.000 439.000 77.1 43.70000 433.0000 1290.00
SM-0 570.000 146.000 439.000 77.1 43.70000 433.0000 1290.00
-------
Appendix B
Graphics
K-49
-------
Cumulative Frequency for Total Aldrin/Dleldrin (ug/1)
c
u
n
c
1
0
2
3
Concentration (ug/15
SYMBOL ULE • • • SU-Ul o o o SU-O
Cumulative Frequency for Total Aldrin/Dleldrin (ug/kg)
1,0
0.9
* 0.7
0.6
0 5
0,4
0.3
0.2
0 1
0.0
400
300
0
100
200
Coneentrat ion (ug/kg)
SYMBOL ULE • • • SU-UL o O o SU-0
K-50
-------
1.0-
0.9
0.8
C
u
"0.7
u
I
0
t 0.6
1
v
e 0.5
F
r
e 0.4
q
u
n 0.3
c
y
0.2
o. 1
o .0 H
Cumulative Frequency for Ammonia (AS N) (mg/1)
rTT
10
T-r
20
T-T-T-r
50
SYMBOL
1 i 1 1 ' i 1 , 1 i 1 1 1 I ' 1 ' i ' ' 1 i ' ¦ ' I ' ' 1 i 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 i 1 1 ' i
60 100 1 10 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 20
1.0"
0 . 9
0.8
C
u
m 0.7
u
I
a
t 0.6
i
v
e 0.5
F
r
t 0.4
q
u
n 0.3
c
y
0.2
0. 1
O.Oi
30 40
T-r
60
TTr
70
-r~rr
80
Concentration (mg/l)
ULE • • • SM-Ul o o o SM-0
Cumulative Frequency for Ammonia (AS N) (mg/kg)
•' i ¦ ¦
60000
• ' i • '
10000
20000
30000 40000
Concentration (mg/kg)
50000
7000'
SYMBOL
MLE
• • • SM-ML o o o SM-0
K-51
/
-------
Cumulative Frequency for Cadmium (ug/l)
0 9
C °'8
a
m
• 0 7
0
!
J 0 8
t
r 0 5
e
» 0 4
a
c
y 0,3
0 2
0,1-1
1,0
0,9
0,8
C
a
• 0,7
u
t
a „ „
( 0.6
i
v
e 0,5
F
e
« 0 .4
*
u
n 0.3
e
1
0,2
0. 1
3
i 1 1 11""
8 , 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 IS
Cancan t ra t i on (ug/l )
SYMBOL
MLE
SM-UL o o o SU-O
Cumulative Frequency for Cadmium (mg/kg)
0.0
SYMBOL
3*56
Concentration (mg/kg)
VILE - • • • SM-ML " ° o O SU-0
K-52
y
-------
i.o-
0 . 9
0 . 8
C
u
m 0 . 7
u
I
a
t 0.6
e 0.5
F
r
e 0.4
q
u
n 0.3
c
y
0.2-1
o.i-
0.0
Cumulative Frequency for Chromium (ug/l)
T-1
70
p-r-'
80
1.0*
0.9
0.8
C
u
m 0.7
u
I
a
t 0. 6
i
v
e 0.5
F
r
e 0.4
q
u
n 0.3
c
y
0.2
0. 1
0 . 0 H
10
20
30
SYMBOL
40
50
60
90
100
110
120
130
Concentrotion (ug/l)
MLE
SM-UL o o o SM-0
Cumulative Frequency for Chromium (mg/kg)
o •
-I—
30
—r
40
10
SYMBOL
20
Concentration (ng/kg)
MLE • • • SU-Ul o o o SM-0
K-53
-------
Cumulative Frequency for Copper (ug/l)
9
S
1
6
5
4
3
2
0. 1
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800,900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 1700 1800 1900
Conctntration (ug/l>
SYMBOL MIE • • • SM-ML o o o SM-0
Cumulative Frequency for Copper (mg/kg)
1,0
0,9
0.8
0 7
0 6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0,2
0, 1
0.0
500
300
Concentration (mg/kg)
200
100
SYMBOL MIE • • * SM-ML o o o SM-0
K-54
-------
Cumulative Frequency for total DDT, DDE, and DDD (ug/1)
0. t
Conctntroti on (u 9/I)
SYMBOL
WLE
• SM-UL o o o SH-Q
Cumulative Frequency for Total DDT, DDE, and DDD (ug/kg)
1.0-
0.9
0.8
c
u
« 0.7
u
I
a
t 0.6
i
v
e 0.5
F
r
e 0 . 4
<1
u
' 0.3
e
Sf
0.2
0.1-
O.Oi
t
60C
0
100
200
1 1 ¦
300
400
500
SYMBOL
Concentration (ug/kg)
MLE • • • SM-UL 000
SM-0
K-55
*
-------
Cumulative Frequency for Total Kjeidah! Nitrogen (mg/I)
t 0
0 9
0 8
0,7
0 6
0.5-1
0 4
0 > J
0.2
0, I
0 0
SYM80L
100 * 200
Concentration («g/l)
MLE * * • SM-yi o o o sy-o
30C
Cumulative Frequency for Total l^eldahl Nitrogen (mg/kg)
1.0
0,9
0.8
C
u
* 0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0. I
0.0
10000 20000 30000
SYMBOL
40000 50000 60000 70000 80000
Concentration (mg/kg)
Ml£ • • • SM-Ml o o o SM-0
I | ' r"~l 'I 1 1 1 1 I
90000 100000 t1000
K-56
/
-------
Cumulative Frequency for Lead (ug/1)
1 .0
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0. 1
* 60
120
110
130
100
80
90
70
50
30
40
10
20
0
Conc«ntrat ion (uq/ I )
SYMBOL MLE • • * SM-Ml o O O SM-0
Cumulative Frequency for Lead (mg/kg)
1.0
0.9
0.8
0 . 7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0. 1
0.0
60
50
40
30
Concent ration (ng/kg)
SYMBOL MIE • • • SU-UL O O O SU-0
K-57
~
-------
Cumulative Frequency for Lindane (Gamma—BHC) (ug/l)
1, 0
0 9
0 8
C
B
« 0 I
u
t 0 6
i
*
# 0 5
f
f
* 0 *
u
n 0.3
c
y
o 2
o 1
O-0-1! ¦ | . . . ' ¦ ¦ ¦ , | ' i . . I ¦ ' ' ',1 ' ' • ¦ I 1 ' ' ' I ' I
0,00 0,02 0.0* 0.06 0.08 O.tO 0.12 0.14 0.16 0.18 0.20 0.22 0.24 0.26
SYMBOL
Cone an t r a tion (ug/l)
ULE • • • SM-Ul O o o SM-0
Cumulative Frequency for Lindane (Gamma —BHC) (ug/kg)
1,0
0,9
0,8
0.7
0,6
0 5
0.4
0.3
0,2
0,1
0,0
SYMBOL
100 200
Coneentrot ion (ug/kg)
MLE • • • SM-ML O o O SM-0
300
K-58
-------
Cumulative Frequency for Mercury (ug/1)
! .0-
0 1 2 • 3 4 5
Concentrot ion (ug/l)
SYMBOL MIE • • • SH-UL O o o SM-Q
Cumulative Frequency for Mercury (mg/kg)
t .0
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0. 1
0.0
0.00 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.10 0.12 0.14 0.16 0.18 0.20 0.22
Concentration (mg/kg)
SYMBOL, • MLE • • • * SM-Ul - o o o sy-0
K-59
-------
Cumulaltive Frequency for Nickel (ug/I)
1=0'
0 9
C °'8'
u
m
f 0.7'
'06
¥
f 0 5
*
J 0 <'
ft
«
1 0,3'
0,2
0. t
10
20
—I 1 1 1
30
SYMBOL
—,—
*0
So
—T—
60
—i—
70
80
Conctntrotion (ug/I)
MIE • • • SU-Ul o o o Sil-0
90
Cumulative Frequency for Nickel (mg/kg)
,—p_
100
t 10
T-J—f
60
—rmr
20
SfMBGt
¦ ' 'I ' ' ' I 1
30 40 50
Concert trot ion (i»g/kg)
MIE • • * SU-Ul o o o SU-0
K-60
-------
Cumulative Frequency for Nitrate 4- Nitrite (mg/1)
SYMBOL
1,0"
0.9
0.8
0.7-
0.6 -
0.5-
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.4 , 0.5 0.6
Conc«n(rotion (Kg/I)
HLE • • • SU-UL o o o SU-0
Cumulative Frequency for Nitrate + Nitrite (mg/kg)
0.0
10
¦" I '
20
30
40
f-r-r
50
SYMBOL
» i ¦ ¦ ' "t * ¦ ¦ ¦ i ¦ i ¦ ¦ i * ¦ ¦ ¦ t ¦ ¦ ¦ 1 ) ¦
60 70 80 90 100 110
Conctntrotion (mg/kg)
MLE ' • • • SU-UL o O o SM-0
1 i ¦
120
'i
130
"»¦ i I
140
150 160
K-61
-------
Cumulative Frequency for Total Phosphorous (mg/1)
I 0
0 9
0.8
C
u
« 0 7
u
I
a
| 0 6
i
*
f 0 5
F
f
« 0.4
<1
u
I 0 3
c
1
0 2
0. t
0.0
' 1 1 I 1 1
10
"I J I 1 I I 1 I \ 1
4!) 50
¦i*—|"t i"i "r"1! i t fv \ i r'r i i i i i i | 'n-'t r
60 70 80
20
SYMBOL
30
90
Concentration (ag/l)
HIE • * • SM-Ul O o O SU-0
Cumulative Frequency for Total Phosphorous (mg/kg)
i.o:
0.9*
0,8
0,7
0,6
0.5
0.4
u
n 0.3
c
y
0 2
0. 1
0,0
' I ' ' 1 1 I ' ¦ ' ¦ I ' ' ' ¦ I 1 1 1 ' I ' ' ' ' [ ' ' ' 1 I ' ¦ ' 1 I ¦ • ¦ ¦ I , ¦ ¦ - . 1 ¦ ' I I'M ' ' I"
1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 10000 11000 12000 13000 14000 15000
i
0
SYUB01
Concentration (mg/kg)
ULE • • • SM-Ul. o o o SM-0
K-62
/
-------
Cumulative Frequency for Selenium (ug/1)
.1.0-
Conctn t r a t i on (ug/i)
SYMBOL HIE • • • SM-Ul o O O SM-0
Cumulative Frequency for Selenium (mg/kg)
1.0
0.9
0.8
C
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.0
10
a
9
7
5
0
2
6
3
*
1
Concentration (ng/kg)
SYMBOL MLE • • • SM-ML O o o SM-0
K-63
-------
Cumulative Frequency for Zinc (ug/l)
0
9
8
7
6
4
1
30000
20000
c
10000
0
Concentrat ion (ug/l)
SYMBOL MIE * * • SM-ML o o o SU-0
Cumulative Frequency for Zinc (mg/kg)
i.o-
0 . 0 *t; ¦ ¦ t ii, I "i ¦ ¦ I I ¦ ¦ ¦ ' I ¦ ' ¦ ¦ I ' ' I ' ' ' ' I ' ' ' ' I ' ' ' ' ' ¦ ' ' ¦ I ¦ • • • 1 • 1 • ' 1 " • '
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 * 700 800 900 1000 1 100 1200 1300 1*00 150£
Concentration (mg/kg)
SYMBOL • MLE • * • SM-UL ° ° o SM-0
K-64
~
-------
Cumulative Frequency for Percent Solids (%)
[ i i i i | i i i i | i i i i | i i i 111 11 i | i i i r | i i i i | ' ' i i | ' ' ' ' [ ' ' ' ¦ i ¦ ¦ • ¦ i 1 ¦ * * i * ¦ * * i
o 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
13 14 15
SYMBOL
Concentration (*)
MLE • • • SM-HL O O O SM-0
K-65
-------
Appendix C
Data Listing
K-66
-------
Wet Weight Concentrations of Pollutants in Septage
Pollutant=ALDRIN/DIELDRIN(TOTAL)
EPA
Sample
Number
Quantified
Amount
Minimum
Level
Units
19974
19975
19976
19977
19978
19979
19980
19981
19982
50
75
0.100
0.100
0.100
0.184
0.100
0.100
0.100
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
Pol lutant=»ALPHA-CHLORDANE
EPA
Sample
Number
19974
19975
19976
19977
19978
19979
19980
19981
19982
Quantified
Amount
Minimum
Level
0.100
0.100
0.100
0.100
0.100
0.184
0.100
0.100
0.100
Units
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
Pollutant-AMMONIA (AS N)
EPA
Sample
Number
19974
19975
19976
19977
19978
19979
19980
19981
19982
Quantified
Amount
45.00
0.48
40.00
11.00
45.00
33.00
56.00
54.00
100.00
Minimum
Level
Units
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
K-67
-------
Wet Weight Concentrations of Pollutants in Septage
— Poiiutant-ARSENie
EPA
Sample
Quantified
Minimum
Number
Amount
Ijevel
Units
19974
•
20.000
UG/L
19975
•
20.000
UG/L
19976
•
20.000
UG/L
19977
•
20.000
UG/L
19978
•
20.000
UG/L
19979
m
20.000
UG/L
19980
m
20.000
UG/L
19981
•
20.000
UG/L
19982
•
20.000
UG/L
Pollutant-BENZENE
EPA
Sample
Quantified
Minimum
Number
Amount *
Level
Units
19974
•
10.000
UG/L
19977
•
10.000
UG/L
19978
•
10.000
UG/L
19979
•
20.000
UG/L
19980
•
10.000
UG/L
19981
•
10.000
UG/L
19982
•
10.000
UG/L
Pollutant-BENZO(A)PY1EN1
EPA
Sample
Number
19974
19975
19976
19977
19978
19979
19980
195?81
19982
Quantified
Amount
il^ i2ft23S
Level
10.000
10.000
10.000
10.000
10.000
20.000
10.000
10.000
10.000
Units
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
K-68
-------
Wet Weight Concentrations of Pollutants in Septage
Pollutant'BERYLLIUM •
EPA
Sample Quantified Minimum
Number
Amount
Level
Units
19974
5.000
UG/L
19975
5.000
UG/L
19976
5.000
UG/L
19977
5.000
UG/L
19978
5.000
UG/L
19979
5.000
UG/L
19980
5.000
UG/L
19981
5.000
UG/L
19982
5.000
UG/L
• Pollutant=BIS(2-ETHYLHEXYL) PHTHALATE
EPA
Sample
Quantified
Minimum
Number
Amount*
Level
Units
19974
•
10.000
UG/L
19975
•
10.000
UG/L
19976
•
10.000
UG/L
19977
•
10.000
UG/L
19978
•
10.000
UG/L
19979
•
20.000
UG/L
19980
•
10.000
UG/L
19981
•
10.000
UG/L
19982
•
10.000
UG/L
Pollutant-CADMIUM
EPA
Sample
Number
19974
19975
19976
19977
19978
19979
19980
19981
19982
Quantified
Amount
9.40
6
18
40
40
Minimum
Level
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
Units
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
K-69
-------
Wat Weight Concentrations of Pollutants in Septage
Follutant-CHROMIUM
EPA
Sample
Quantified
Minimum
Number
Amount
Level
Units
19974
53.90
•
UG/L
1997S
.
10.000
UG/L
19976
12.10
«
UG/L
19977
32.10
•
UG/L
19978
81.60
•
UG/L
19979
128.00
•
UG/L
19980
33.50
•
UG/L
19981
50.20
«
UG/L
19982
18.70
•
UG/L
Pollutant-COPFER
EPA
Sample
Quantified
Minimum
Number
Amount,
Level
Units
19974
1340.00
•
UG/L
19975
77.10
•
UG/L
19976
80.30
UG/L
19977
115.00
•
UG/L
19978
758.00
•
UG/L
19979
174.00
m
UG/L
19980
1850.00
•
UG/L
19981
62.00
•
UG/L
19982
69.60
•
UG/L
Pollutant-DDT,DDE,DDD(TOTAL)
EPA
Sample
Number
19974
19975
19976
19977
19978
19979
19980
19981
19982
Quantified
Amount
0.92
2.88
Minimum
Level
0.338
0.338
0.338
0.338
0.338
0.338
0.338
Units
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
K-70
-------
Wet Weight Concentrations of Pollutants in Septage
Pollutant«GAMMA-CHLORDANE
EPA
Sample
Quantified Minimum
Number
Amount Level
Units
19974
0.113
UG/L
19975
0.113
UG/L
19976
0.113
UG/L
19977
0.113
UG/L
19978
0.113
UG/L
19979
0.207
UG/L
19980
0.113
UG/L
19981
0.113
UG/L
19982
0.113
UG/L
• Pollutant-HEPTACHLOR •
EPA
Sample Quantified Minimum
Number
Amount;
Level
Units
19974
0.25
•
UG/L
19975
•
0.063
UG/L
19976
•
0.063
UG/L
19977
•
0.063
UG/L
19978
•
0.063
UG/L
19979
0.115
UG/L
19980
0.063
UG/L
19981
•
0.063
UG/L
19982
•
0.063
UG/L
Pollutant-HEXACHLOROBENZENE
EPA
Sample
Quantified
Minimum
Number
Amount
Level
Units
29974
•
10.000
UG/L
19975
10.000
UG/L
19976
10.000
UG/L
19977
•
10.000
UG/L
19978
•
10.000
UG/L
19979
•
20.000
UG/L
19980
•
10.000
UG/L
19981
•
10.000
UG/L
19982
•
10.000
UG/L
K-71
-------
Wet Weight Concentrations of Pollutants in Septage
Pollutant-HEXACHLOROBUTADIENE
EPA
Sample
Quantified
Minimum
Number
Amount
Level
Units
19974
«
10.000
UG/L
19975
•
10.000
UG/L
19976
•
10.000
UG/L
19977
•
10.000
UG/L
19978
•
10.000
UG/L
19979
•
20.000
UG/L
19980
•
10.000
UG/L
19981
«
10.000
UG/L
19982
•
10.000
UG/L
Pollutant-LEAD
EPA
Sample
Number
19974
19975
19976
19977
19978
19979
19980
19981
19982
Quantified
Amount*
121.00
70.30
79.30
Minimum
Level
SO.000
50.000
50.000
50.000
50.000
50.000
Units
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
Pollutant-LINDAHE(GAMMA-BHC)
EPA
Sample
Quantified
Minimum
Number
Amount
Level
Units
19974
0.138
UG/L
19975
•
0.138
UG/L
19976
0.138
UG/L
19977
0.13
•
UG/L
19978
•
0.138
UG/L
19979
•
0.253
UG/L
19980
0.25
•
UG/L
19981
•
0.138
UG/L
19982
•
0.138
UG/L
K-72
-------
Wet Weight Concentrations of Pollutants in Septage
Pollutant^MERCURY
EPA
Sample
Quantified
Minimum
Number
Amount
Level
Units
19974
•
0.200
UG/L
19975
•
0.200
UG/L
19976
•
0.200
UG/L
19977
0.30
•
UG/L
19978
•
0.200
UG/L
19979
1.30
•
UG/L
19980
0.45
•
UG/L
19981
0.50
•
UG/L
19982
4.05
•
UG/L
Pollutant-MOLYBDENUM
EPA
Sample
Quantified
Minimum
Number
Amount *
Level
Units
19974
14.40
UG/L
19975
«
10.000
UG/L
19976
•
10.000
UG/L
19977
•
10.000
UG/L
19978
•
10.000
UG/L
19979
•
10.000
UG/L
19980
•
10.000
UG/L
19981
•
10.000
UG/L
19982
m
10.000
UG/L
Pollutant-N-NITROSODIMETHYIAMINE
EPA
Sample
Number
19974
19975
19976
19977
19978
19979
19980
19981
19982
Quantified
Amount
Minimus
Level
50
50
50
50
50
100
50
50
50
,000
,000
,000
,000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
Units
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
K-73
-------
Wet Weight Concentrations of Pollutants in Septage
Pollutant-NICKEL ¦
" EPA
Sample
Quantified
Minimum
Number
Amount
Level
Units
19974
•
40.000
UG/L
19975
•
40.000
UG/L
19976
*
40.000
UG/L
19977
79.80
•
UG/L
19978
61.80
•
UG/L
19979
105.00
«
UG/L
19980
41.90
.
UG/L
19981
•
40.000
UG/L
19982
41.60
•
UG/L
Pollutant=NITEATE+NITRITE (AS N)
EPA
Sample Quantified Minimum
Number Amount, Level Units
19974 0.20 . MG/L
19975 . 0.100 MG/L
19976 . 0.100 MG/L
19977 0.90 . MG/L
19978 0.20 . MG/L
19979 0.60 . MG/L
19980 0.60 . MG/L
19981 0.60 . MG/L
19982 0.20 . MG/L
- Pollutant-PCB(TOTAL) ~
EPA
Sample
Quantified
Minimum
Number
Amount
. Level
Units
19974
•
1.750
UG/L
19975
•
1.750
UG/L
19976
•
1.750
UG/L
19977
•
1.750
UG/L
19978
•
1.750
UG/L
19979
•
3.218
UG/L
19980
•
1.750
UG/L
19981
•
1.750
UG/L
19982
•
1.750
UG/L
K-74
-------
Wet Weight Concentrations of Pollutants in Septage
Pollutant=SELENIUM
EPA
Sample
Quantified
Minimum
Number
Amount
Level
Units
19974
•
50.000
UG/L
19975
•
5.000
UG/L
19976
•
5.000
UG/L
19977
•
5.000
UG/L
19978
•
5.000
UG/L
19979
30.50
•
UG/L
19980
•
5.000
UG/L
19981
•
50.000
UG/L
19982
32.00
•
(
UG/L
Pollutant-TOTAL KTELDAHL NITROGEN
EPA
Sample Quantified Minimum
Number Amount* Level Units
19974 142.00 . MG/L
19975 9.00 . MG/L
19976 ' 55.00 . MG/L
19977 31.00 . MG/L
19978 70.00 . MG/L
19979 119.00 . MG/L
19980 115.00 . MG/L
19981 175.00 . MG/L
19982 152.00 . MG/L
Pollutant-TOTAL PHOSPHOROUS
EPA
Sample Quantified Minimum
Number Amount Level Units
19974 32.00 . MG/L
19975 1.70 . MG/L
19976 7.00 . MG/L
19977 25.00 . MG/L
19978 12.00 . MG/L
19979 48.00 . MG/L
19980 36.00 . MG/L
19981 46.00 . MG/L
19982 41.00 . MG/L
K-75
-------
Wet Weight Concentrations of Pollutants in Septage
pollutant-TOTAL SOLIDS ¦-
EPA
Sample
Quantified
Minimum
Amount
Level
Units
19974
4880.00
•
MG/L
19975
733.00
•
MG/L
19976
€53.00
MG/L
19977
142000.00
MG/L
19978
2310.00
•
MG/L
19979
18500.00
•
MG/L
19980
11300.00
•
MG/L
19981
6580.00
•
MG/L
19982
11700.00
•
MG/L
Pollutant-TOXAPHENS
EPA
Sample
Quantified
Number
Amount
c
Level
Units
19974
•
11.375
UG/L
19975
m
11.375
UG/L
19976
#
0.910
UG/L
19977
•
11.375
UG/L
19978
•
11.375
UG/L
19979
•
20.920
UG/L
19980
*
11.375
UG/L
19981
•
11.735
UG/L
19982
•
11.375
UG/L
Pollutant-TRICHLOROETHENE
EPA
Sample
Quantified
Minimum
Number
Amount
Level
Units
19974
•
10.000
UG/L
19977
•
10.000
UG/L
19978
•
10.000
UG/L
19979
0
20.000
UG/L
19980
•
10.000
UG/L
19981
•
10.000
UG/L
19982
•
10.000
UG/L
K-76
S
-------
Wet Weight Concentrations of Pollutants in Septage
.— Pollutant«ZIHC
EPA
Sample
Quantified
Minimum
Number
Amount
Level
Units
19974
5990.00
•
UG/L
19975
182.00
•
UG/L
19976
519.00
•
DG/L
19977
6210.00
•
UG/L
19978
1120.00
•
UG/L
19979
23800.00
•
UG/L
19980
3810.00
.
UG/L
19981
2850.00
•
UG/L
19982
3190.00
•
UG/L
K-77
/
~
-------
APPENDIX L
Calculation of the Amount of Sewage Sludge Used or Disposed
for the Part 503 Frequency of Monitoring Requirements
-------
CALCULATION OF THE AMOUNT OF SEWAGE SLUDGE USED OR DISPOSED
FOR THE FART 503 FREQUENCY OF MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
Of£ic* of Science and Technology
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
401 M Street, S.W.
Washington, D.c. 20460
November 23, 1992
-------
CALCULATION OF THE AMOUNT OF SEWAGE SLUDGE USED OR DISPOSED
FOR THE PART 503 FREQUENCY OF MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
INTRODUCTION
The Standards for the Use or Disposal of Sewage Sludge in 40
CFR Part 503 contain frequency of monitoring requirements for land
application of sewage sludge, placement of sewage sludge on a
surface disposal site, and firing of sewage sludge in a sewage
sludge incinerator. These requirements indicate how often sewage
sludge has to be monitored for pollutant concentrations, pathogen
densities, and vector attraction reduction. They are based on the
amount of sewage sludge used or disposed during a 365 day period.
For land application, the frequency of monitoring requirements
are based either on the amount of bulk sewage sludge applied to the
land or the amount of sewage sludge received by a person who
prepares the sewage sludge for sale or give away in a bag or
similar enclosure for application to the land. As those amounts
increase, the frequency of monitoring increases.
For surface disposal and firing of sewage sludge in a sewage
sludge incinerator, the frequency of monitoring requirements are
based on the amount of sewage sludge placed on a surface disposal
site and the amount of sewage sludge fired in a sewage sludge
incinerator, respectively. For these two practices, the frequency
of monitoring also increases as the amount of sewage sludge used
or disposed increases.
This document discusses calculation of the amounts of sewage
sludge used or disposed for the Part 503 frequency of monitoring
requirements. The assumptions on which those requirements are
based and the calculations for the amounts used or disposed are
presented below. Also presented below are the Part 503 frequency
of monitoring requirements.
ASSUMPTIONS
o Wastewater is treated in "typical" secondary wastewater
treatment plant (i.e., primary settling followed by
• biological treatment followed by secondary settling).
o Sewage sludge is stabilized in an anaerobic digester
prior to use or disposal.
o Influent wastewater BOD5 concentration = 200 mg/1.
o Effluent wastewater BOD5 concentration = 30 mg/1.
o Influent wastewater TSS concentration = 200 mg/1.
o Effluent wastewater TSS concentration = 30 mg/1.
L-l
-------
o TSS percent removal in primary treatment process = 60.
o Percent volatile solids in the influent to digester = 60.
o Percent volatile solids reduction in digester = 38.
o Percent fixed solids in the influent to digester =40
o Solids concentration factor during
secondary settling = 0.9
CAI^PLATIONS FOR TREATMENT WORKS WITH A PLOW RATE OP ONE MGD
o TSS removal in primary treatment process:
Influent TSS x Flow rate x Conversion factor x Percent removal
200 mg/1 x 1 MGD x 8.34 x 0.6 * 1.000 pounds per dav.
o BOD5 removal through secondary settling process:
Influent BOD5 - Effluent B0D5 - 200 - 30 = 170 mg/1
Concentration removed x Flow rate x Conv. fact, x Cone. fact.
170 mg/1 x 1 MGD x 8.34 x 0.9 = 1.276 pounds per dav.
o Sewage sludge to the digester:
Primary settling sludge + secondary settling sludge = total
1,000 + 1,276 = 2.276 pounds per dav.
o Amount of sewage sludge used or disposed:
Fixed solids = total amount x percent of total solids.
Fixed solids * 2,276 x 0.4 *= 910 pounds per dav.
Volatile solids * total amount x percent of total solids x
percent remaining after digestion.
Volatile solids « 2,276 x 0.6 x (1.0 - 0.38) = 847 pounds/day
Total amount used or disposed «¦ Fixed solids + volatile
solids
910 + 847 = 1.757 pounds per dav
Total amount * 1,757 pounds x 365 davs x 1 metric ton
days year 2,200 pounds
Total amount for 1 MGD = 292 metric tons per year.
Lr2
-------
Report amount in two significant figures:
Use 290 metric tons per year for 1 -MGD treatment works fdrv
weight basis)
CALCULATION FOR A TREATMENT WORKS WITH A FLOW RATE OF FIVE MGD
Total amount = Amount for 1 MGD treatment works times 5
Total amount = 290 x 5 = 1.450 metric tons per year
Report amount in two significant figures:
Use 1.500 metric tons per year for five MGD treatment works
(drv weight basis)
CALCULATION FOR A TREATMENT WORKS WITH A FLOW RATE OF 50 MGD
Total amount = Amount for 1 MGD treatment works x 50
Total amount = 290 x 50 * 14.500 metric tons per year
Report amount in two significant figures:
*'
Use 15.000 metric tons per year for 50 MGD treatment works
(drv weight basis)
PART 503 FREQUENCY OF MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
Results of the above calculations were used as the basis for
the frequency of monitoring requirements in Part 503. Those
frequencies are presented below.
FREQUENCY OF MONITORING
Amount of sewage sludge used or disposed
(metric tons per 365 dav period-drv weight) Frequency
Greater than zero but
less than 290
once per year
Equal to or greater than
290 but less than 1,500
once per quarter
(four times per year)
Equal to or greater than
1,500 but less than 15,000
once per 60 days
(six time per year)
Equal to or greater than
15,000
once per month.
(12 times per year)
L-3
------- |