ISSN e:2007-4034 / ISSN print: 2007-4034

English | Español

     

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Vol. 24, issue 3 Septiembre - Diciembre 2018

ISSN: ppub: 1027-152X epub: 2007-4034

Scientific article

Appropriate leaf sampling period for nutrient diagnosis in three mango cultivars

http://dx.doi.org/10.5154/r.rchsh.2017.09.035

Salazar-García, Samuel 1 * ; Medina-Torres, Raúl 2 ; Ibarra-Estrada, Martha Elva 3 ; González-Valdivia, José 3

  • 1Instituto Nacional de Investigaciones Forestales, Agrícolas y Pecuarias-Campo Experimental Santiago Ixcuintla. Entronque Carretera Internacional México-Nogales km 6, Santiago Ixcuintla, Nayarit, C. P. 63300, MÉXICO.
  • 2Universidad Autónoma de Nayarit, Unidad Académica de Agricultura. Carretera Tepic-Compostela km 9, Apdo. Postal 49, Xalisco, Nayarit, C. P. 63780, MÉXICO.
  • 3Investigadores independientes. MÉXICO

Corresponding author: salazar.avocado@gmail.com, tel. (55)3871-8700 ext. 84426.

Received: September 22, 2017; Accepted: April 03, 2018

This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License view the permissions of this license

Funding:

    Abstract

    In Nayarit, Mexico, it is common to perform leaf analyses in mango for nutrient diagnosis; however, the appropriate period to carry out leaf sampling is unknown, so procedures extrapolated from other producing regions are used, which leads to incorrect diagnoses. The aim of this research was to identify the appropriate leaf sampling period (ALSP) in 'Ataúlfo', 'Kent' and 'Tommy Atkins' mangos grown without irrigation. From 2006 to 2007 we worked with commercial orchards in the north, center and south of Nayarit. In 'Ataúlfo' and 'Kent' the spring (SpVF) and summer vegetative flushes (SuVF) were considered, and in 'Tommy Atkins' the SpVP and autumn one (AVF). Leaf samplings were performed monthly, starting when the leaf reached 5 cm in length and concluding upon its abscission. For each nutrient, a mathematical model was obtained to generate functions that predicted its concentration during the life of the leaf. Subsequently, we calculated the derivatives of each function, which enabled us to identify the period in which the concentration of nutrients presented the least variation and thus define the ALSP. In 'Ataúlfo', the ALSP for the SpVF and SuVF was from 9 to 11 and 3.3 to 5.3 months of age, respectively; in 'Kent', this period was from 8 to 10.5 (SpVF) and 3.2 to 5.0 (SuVF) months, and in 'Tommy Atkins' it corresponded to leaves from 8.7 to 12.2 (SpVF) and 8.6 to 9.4 (AVF) months. The mathematical procedure used was adequate to identify the ALSP in the three mango cultivars.

    Keywords:Mangifera indica; vegetative flushes; mineral nutrition; leaf analysis

    Introduction

    Studies on leaf nutrient concentration in mango have been focused on variations due to age, leaf position (Koo & Young, 1972; Pathak & Pandey, 1976), soil type, cultivar effect, and differences between terminal shoots with and without fructification (Samra, Chadha, & Thakur, 1978; Young & Koo, 1971). In addition, the results have varied according to the vegetative flush, sampling season (Rajput, Chadha, & Thakur, 1985) and phenological stage in which the leaf sampling is carried out (Ponchner, Rojas, & Bornemisza, 1993).

    Avilán (1971) described two critical phases of the concentration of nutrients in 'Kent' mango grown in Venezuela. In the first, an increase in the leaf nutrient concentration begins with the end of the harvest period and extends until flowering; in the second, there is a decrease in the amount of nutrients, which coincides with the formation of the fruit and is the most critical. However, Castro-López, Salazar-García, González-Durán, Medina-Torres, and González-Valdivia (2012) found different results in the cv. Ataúlfo, Kent and Tommy Atkins in Mexico since the concentration of nutrients in leaves of the spring vegetative flush (SpVF) was more affected by the later stages of flower development (cauliflower stage before anthesis), while in summer (SuVF) or autumn vegetative flush (AVF) leaves, nutrient changes occurred to a greater extent due to fruit growth (Castro-López et al., 2012). However, there must be a period of minimum variation in the concentration of most nutrients, which would be adequate to perform leaf sampling for nutrient diagnosis purposes (Salazar-García, González-Durán, & Ibarra-Estrada, 2015).

    The main criterion for determining the appropriate time for leaf sampling is that the nutrient concentration is stable. However, this is obtained from descriptive graphs, so the identification of the period of least nutrient variation is visual (Quiñones, Soler, & Legaz, 2013). This makes it difficult to determine the exact stage of stability, since only the dates in which leaf nutrient analysis was performed are given, and generally the interval between samplings is very broad (Benítez-Pardo, Hernández-Montoya, Osuna-Enciso, Valenzuela-López, & Galván-Piña, 2003; Young & Koo, 1971).

    The use of mathematical functions and their respective derivatives have been useful in determining the appropriate leaf sampling period (ALSP) since they help identify the stage in which the least variation in nutrient concentration occurs during the life of the leaf. This procedure was used to establish the ALSP in 'Hass' avocado (Salazar-García et al., 2015). However, no information in this regard was found for mango.

    In the state of Nayarit, Mexico, leaf analyses are increasingly used to diagnose the nutrient status of mango orchards. However, the dates to collect the leaves are determined a priori, without considering the age of the leaves or the vegetative flush they come from, or extrapolated from other regions. Therefore, the aim of this research was to identify the appropriate period for leaf sampling of rainfed 'Ataúlfo', 'Kent' and 'Tommy Atkins' mangos for the purpose of nutrient diagnosis.

    Materials and methods

    The research was conducted during 2006 and 2007 in seven rainfed commercial orchards of the cvs. Ataúlfo (two orchards), Kent (three orchards) and Tommy Atkins (two orchards) established at 8 x 8 m in the municipalities of Acaponeta (northern zone), San Blas and Tepic (central zone) and Compostela (southern zone) in Nayarit (Table 1). In this region, the climate is sub-humid warm (García, 1998), and the maximum and minimum average temperatures are 28 and 18 °C, respectively. Rainfall occurs from June to October (1,089 to 1,324 mm) and the precipitation of the driest month is less than 50 mm.

    Table 1. Location and characteristics of mango orchards.

    Cultivar Location, municipality Coordinates Elevation (masl) Age (years) Soil classification
    Ataúlfo Atonalisco, Tepic NL 21° 36’ 46.9’’ WL 104° 49’ 43.6’’ 601 12 Chromic luvisol
    Chacala, Compostela NL 21° 10’ 20.3’’ WL 105° 10’ 32.7’’ 42 11 Eutric cambisol
    Kent Buenavista, Acaponeta NL 22° 27’ 44’’ WL 105° 26’ 55.8’’ 11 10 Eutric cambisol
    Las Palmas, San Blas NL 21° 37’ 05.0’’ WL 105° 09’ 30.1’’ 139 20 Humic acrisol
    Chacala, Compostela NL 21° 10’ 05.2’’ WL 105° 10’ 31.5’’ 54 17 Eutric cambisol
    Tommy Atkins Buenavista, Acaponeta NL 22° 27’ 44’’ WL 105° 26’ 55.8’’ 14 18 Eutric cambisol
    Chacala, Compostela NL 21° 10’ 14.3’’ WL 105° 09’ 52.2’’ 38 17 Eutric cambisol

    Soil analysis

    At the beginning of the study (May 2006), 10 trees were randomly selected in each orchard and from each one a sample composed of four subsamples (one for each cardinal point) was obtained from the tree’s drip zone, from 0-30 cm deep, since it is where there is the greatest abundance of fine roots (Salazar-García, Ramírez-Murillo, & Gómez-Aguilar, 1993). From the 40 sub-samples, a composite sample was obtained and analyzed for its physical and chemical characteristics in a laboratory accredited by the North American Proficiency Testing (NAPT) program of the Soil Science Society of America. Soil properties determined were: texture; pH (1:2 water) (McLean, 1982); organic matter by the method of Walkley and Black (Nelson & Sommers, 1982); N-inorganic (Dahnke, 1990); P-Bray (Bray & Kurtz, 1945); K, Ca, Mg and Na extracted with ammonium acetate (Doll & Lucas, 1973); Fe, Zn, Cu and Mn by the DTPA method (Lindsay & Norvell, 1978), and B by the hot water method and Azometina-H (Bingham, 1982). Nutrients were quantified with an atomic absorption spectrophotometer (Thermo Series S, Madison, Wisconsin, USA), with the exception of P and B, which were determined in a spectrophotometer (Genesys™ 20, Thermo Scientific, Madison, Wisconsin, USA).

    Leaf sampling

    In each orchard, trees were identified that, according to the grower, had an annual production ≥ 100 kg, which surpasses the current average (11 t·ha-1) of mango in the region (Servicio de Información Agroalimentaria y Pesquera [SIAP], 2016). Of these trees, 20 were randomly selected and in each one 20 shoots of each vegetative flush were tagged in a bud-breaking stage (zero day). In each mango cultivar, two vegetative flushes were studied. Their starting dates were: January 5 for the SpVF (Ataúlfo, Kent and Tommy Atkins), June 22 for the SuVF (Ataúlfo and Kent) and September 21 for the AVF (Tommy Atkins). Once the zero day was established, the days after leaf sprouting (DALS) were counted until abscission.

    Monthly leaf samplings were made for each vegetative flush, alternating between odd- and even-numbered trees (10 trees per sampling date), which started when the leaf was ≥ 5 cm long and ended when senescence and abscission occurred. To avoid contamination of the leaves by the soil, they were attached from the petiole, with a cotton thread, to the shoot that held them. In each sampling, 20 healthy, complete (lamina + petiole) leaves were collected per tree from the six and seven basipetal positions. In total, 15 leaf samplings of the SpVF were performed in the three mango cultivars (from February 2006 to April 2007), 12 samplings from the Ataúlfo and Kent cultivars of the SuVF (from August 2006 to July 2007) and 12 samplings from the Tommy Atkins cultivar of the AVF (October 2006 to September 2007). Additionally, in each sampling the length of the lamina of 10 leaves from each tree was measured.

    The leaves were washed and dried in a forced-air oven at 65 °C for 48 h. Subsequently, they were ground in a stainless-steel mill (MF10, IKA®), sieved in mesh no. 1.0 (35 holes·cm-2) and sent to the aforementioned laboratory to determine the concentrations of N-total, NO3, P, K, Ca, Mg, S, Fe, Cu, Mn, Zn and B. N-total was determined by the semi-microKjeldahl method (Alcántar-González, & Sandoval-Villa, 1999; Bremner & Mulvaney, 1982), which is based on the wet oxidation of organic matter using sulfuric acid and a catalyst, while for NO3 the nitration method with salicylic acid was used (Alcántar-González, & Sandoval-Villa, 1999; Etchevers et al., 2000). The K was extracted with distilled water and quantified in an atomic absorption spectrophotometer (ICE 3000™, Thermo Scientific) (Alcántar-González, & Sandoval-Villa, 1999; Etchevers et al., 2000). The P and S were determined using the vanadate-yellow molybdate and turbidimetry methods, respectively. The B was determined by the azomethine-H calcination method (Enríquez, 1989) with a spectrophotometer (Genesys™ 20, Thermo Scientific, Madison, Wisconsin, USA). For Ca, Mg, Cu, Fe, Mn and Zn, the HNO3+HCl microwave digestion method was used (Alcántar-González, & Sandoval-Villa, 1999; Etchevers et al., 2000). These last nutrients were quantified by atomic absorption in a spectrophotometer (ICAP 7200™, Thermo Scientific).

    Determination of appropriate leaf sampling period

    In this determination, the procedure described by Salazar-García et al. (2015) was used. For each orchard and vegetative flush, mathematical functions were generated using DALS as an independent variable and the concentrations of each nutrient as dependent variables. The general equation was: Nutrient = β0 + β1D + β2D2 + β3D3 + β4D4 + β5D5; where D are the days after sprouting and β the mathematical coefficients. Subsequently, for each nutrient, the best mathematical function was selected by order of response (from the first to the sixth order) with the "Stepwise" procedure of the Statistical Analysis System (SAS Institute, 2009). The criteria for choosing the best functions were: 1) highest R2 value, 2) lowest mean squared error (MSE) and 3) Mallows's Cp value (Draper & Smith, 1981; Neter, Li, & Kutner, 1985). Once the best functions were identified, their mathematical coefficients (β0,…, βn) were calculated by the REG procedure (SAS Institute, 2009). The predicted values for each day of the nutrient evolution were calculated by substituting the DALS value in the general equation.

    Once the best mathematical functions of each nutrient were selected, the derivatives for each day were calculated. The values obtained were plotted in SigmaPlot (Systat Software Inc., 2006) to identify the periods of least variation, referred to here as having greater stability, of each nutrient. The values can be positive or negative, and as they approach zero the rate of change in the concentration of each nutrient is lower; therefore, the criterion to determine the ALSP was that the result of the derivative was equal or close to zero (Granville, Smith, & Longley, 1963). Then, for each mango cultivar, a table was prepared with the periods of greatest stability for macro and micronutrients, as well as the ALSP for each vegetative flush.

    Results and discussion

    Soil properties

    There were some differences in the soil characteristics of the mango orchards where the study was carried out (Table 2). The Chacala and Atonalisco orchards had the most clayey textures. Soil pH varied from 4.7 in Chacala to 6.7 in Las Palmas, and in the 'Tommy Atkins' and 'Kent' (Buenavista) orchards it was within the limits in which mango thrives (5.0 to 6.5) (Chávez-Contreras, Vega-Piña, Tapia-Vargas, & Miranda-Salcedo, 2001). On the other hand, in the 'Ataúlfo' orchards, the most acidic pH values were recorded (4.7 to 4.9); this type of soil tends to favor leaf nutrient deficiencies, mainly Ca and Mg (Salazar-García, 2002). No salinity problems were detected. As for organic matter, only in the Buenavista orchards was the content very low. Additionally, low and very low concentrations of Ca, Mg, Zn and B were evident, and that of Mn was classified as moderately high to very high.

    Table 2. Soil properties (from 0-30 cm deep) of the mango orchards.

    Ataúlfo Kent Tommy Atkins
    Property Atonalisco Chacala Buenavista Chacala Las Palmas Buenavista Chacala
    Texture Cl1 Cl Lo S-C-L Cl Lo Cl
    pH (1:2) 4.9 SA 4.7 SA 5.1 SA 6.6 MoAc 6.7 N 6.4 MoAc 5.5 SA
    EC (dS·m-1) 0.170 0.08 0.60 0.16 0.11 0.26 0.08
    O.M. (%) 3.0 MoH 3.4MoH 1.2 MoL 4.7 VeH 3.6 H 1.4 MoL 3.7 H
    CEC (meq(100 g-1) 7.59 7.47 4.9 15.0 18.9 5.86 9.90
    mg.kg-1
    N-Inorganic 11.4 M 15.6 M 81.4 VeH 17.7 M 8.94 MoL 6.23 MoL 12.2 M
    P-Bray 23.4 MoH 25.2 MoH 62.1 VeH 10.8 MoL 6.98 L 9.2 MoL 13.1 M
    K 357 M 108 L 384 M 218 MoL 346 M 227 MoL 225 MoL
    Ca 572 L 687 L 572 L 2404 MoH 2432 MoH 858 L 1230 MoL
    Mg 174 L 160 L 56 VeL 280 MoL 323 M 71 VeL 332 M
    Na 68 L 34 VeL 33 VeL 38 VeL 41 VeL 31 VeL 36 VeL
    Fe 18.6 M 17.4 M 53.4 H 8.56 MoL 7.14 MoL 56.8 H 25.9 MoH
    Zn 0.78 L 0.42 L 0.40 L 0.44 L 0.53 L 0.75 L 0.84 MoL
    Mn 29 MoH 73.1 VeH 47.9 H 23.8 MoH 28.9 MoH 60.5 VeH 98.4 VeH
    Cu 0.43 MoL 2.42 H 1.63 MoH 2.05 MoH 1.26 MoH 1.45 MoH 1.47 MoH
    B 0.42 MoL 0.63 M 0.55 MoL 0.81 M 0.63 M 0.61 M 0.78 M
    1Cl: clayey; Lo: loamy; S-C-L: silty-clay-loam; SA: strongly acidic; MoAc: moderately acidic; N: neutral; VeL: very low; L: low; MoL: moderately low; M: medium; MoH: moderately high; H: high; VeH: very high; StH: strongly high and ModA: moderately acidic; EC: electrical conductivity; O.M.: organic matter content; CEC: cation exchange capacity.

    Appropriate leaf sampling period

    As the results of leaf analysis vary with vegetative flush and sampling time, Rajput et al. (1985) suggest establishing an adequate sampling period for each flush to avoid erroneous results. In the present work, the periods of leaf nutrient stability (PLNS) showed differences among the mango cultivars, as well as among their corresponding vegetative flushes (Table 3).

    Table 3. Period of leaf nutrient stability in days (PLNS, shaded cells) and appropriate leaf sampling period (ALSP, cells between vertical thick lines) for each vegetative flush of 'Ataulfo' and 'Kent' mangos.

    Ataúlfo Spring PLNS ALSP
    August September October November December Date DALS1
    N, P, K, Ca, Mg, S 249-331 October 8-December 2 276-331
    Fe, Cu, Mn, Zn, B 276-336 276-331
    Summer PLNS ALSP
    August September October November December Date DALS
    N, P, K, Ca, Mg, S 94-170 September 30- November 29 100-160
    Fe, Cu, Mn, Zn, B 100-160 100-160
    Kent Spring PLNS ALSP
    August September October November December Date DALS
    N, P, K, Ca, Mg, S 241-316 September 3-November 17 241-316
    Fe, Cu, Mn, Zn, B 215-318 241-316
    Summer PLNS ALSP
    August September October November December Date DALS
    N, P, K, Ca, Mg, S 96-150 September 27- November 19 96-150
    Fe, Cu, Mn, Zn, B 75-157 96-150
    1Days after leaf sprouting.

    ‘Ataúlfo’. In the SpVF, the PLNS for N, P, K, Ca and Mg was from 249 to 331 DALS (Table 3; Figure 1A), and for S from 175 to 226 DALS. In the case of micronutrients, PLNS occurred between 276 and 236 DALS (Table 3; Figure 1B). Although the Mn concentration did not present stability, this period applies to this nutrient. Therefore, for both macro and micronutrients, the ALSP was delimited from October 8 to December 2 (276 to 331 DALS).

    Figure 1. Leaf length, value of the derivative and periods of nutrient stability (space between the vertical lines) for macro (A and C) and micronutrients (B and D) in 'Ataúlfo' mango. Data from two orchards.

    For the SuVF, macronutrients stabilized between 94 and 170 DALS (Table 3; Figure 1C) and micronutrients between 100 and 160 DALS (Table 3; Figure 1D). In both cases, the ALSP was from September 30 to November 29 (100 to 160 DALS; Table 3). In this case, as in the SpVF, the PLNS of the micronutrients was fitted to Mn even though in this nutrient there was not a period of stability.

    For the 'Manila' mango grown in Veracruz, Mexico, leaf sampling is recommended in June-July or August-September, when the spring leaves are four to seven months old (Mosqueda-Vázquez et al., 1996). When comparing these results with those obtained from cv. Ataúlfo no coincidence was found, since in 'Ataúlfo' the ALSP for the SpVF was when the leaves were from nine to eleven months of age. The foregoing evidences the need to obtain specific information for each mango cultivar and cultivation condition.

    ‘Kent’. In this cultivar, the PLNS in the SpVF for macronutrients was from 241 to 316 DALS (Table 3; Figure 2A) and for micronutrients between 215 and 318 DALS (Table 3; Figure 2B). As in 'Ataúlfo', S did not show a PLNS that coincided with the other macronutrients; however, between 241 and 316 DALS the value of its derivative showed a lower change rate. The instability of S could be caused by the frequent chemical sprayings that contain this element to control diseases such as anthracnose and powdery mildew (Espinoza-Aburto et al., 2006).

    Figure 2. Leaf length, value of the derivative and periods of nutrient stability (space between the vertical lines) for macro (A and C) and micronutrients (B and D) in 'Kent' mango. Data from three orchards.

    In the SuVF, the PLNS for macro and micronutrients was between 96 and 150 DALS and 75 to 157 DALS, respectively (Table 3; Figures 2D and 2C). According to the above, the ALSP was from September 26 to November 19 (96 to 150 DALS) (Table 3). Leaf samplings are appropriate with leaf ages between eight to ten months (spring leaves) and three to five months (summer leaves). These results do not coincide with those reported by Benítez-Pardo et al. (2003), who for the same mango cultivar, but in the state of Sinaloa (located north of Nayarit), recommend analyzing leaves from two to four months of age, although they did not specify the type of vegetative flush studied; in addition, this sampling period was proposed with a visual (graphic) criterion, not a mathematical one.

    ‘Tommy Atkins’. The PLNS of the SpVF for macronutrients occurred from 195 to 370 DALS and from 261 to 365 DALS for micronutrients (Table 4; Figures 3A and 3B). For the AVF, the PLNS for macro and micronutrients was from 256 to 282 DALS and 258 to 284 DALS, respectively (Table 4; Figures 3C and 3D). Accordingly, the ALSP of the SpVF was from September 23 to January 5 (261 to 365 DALS) and from June 6 to 30 (258 to 282 DALS) for the AVF (Table 4). This last result differs from that mentioned by Rajput et al. (1985), since they suggest that in subtropical climates the month for sampling AVF leaves is October (April in the northern hemisphere).

    Figure 3. Leaf length, value of the derivative and period of nutrient stability (space between the vertical lines) for macro (A and C) and micronutrients (B and D) in 'Tommy Atkins' mango. Data from two orchards.

    Table 4. Period of leaf nutrient stability in days (PLNS, shaded cells) and appropriate leaf sampling period (ALSP, cells between vertical thick lines) for each vegetative flush of cv. Tommy Atkins.

    Spring PLNS ALSP
    July August September October November December January Date DALS1
    N, P, K, Ca, Mg, S 195-370 September 23-January 5 261-365
    Fe, Cu, Mn, Zn, B 261-365 261-365
    Autumn PLNS ALSP
    May June July August September October November Date DALS
    N, P, K, Ca, Mg, S 256-282 June 6-30 258-282
    Fe, Cu, Mn, Zn, B 258-284 258-282
    1Days after leaf sprouting.

    No information was found available on sampling periods for mango SuVF leaves, probably because the SpVF, which occurs after flowering, is the most important in most mango-producing regions.

    Conclusions

    The periods of greatest stability of the leaf nutrient concentration differed among the three mango cultivars studied, their vegetative flushes and the nutrient in question. The mathematical procedure used in this research was adequate to identify the appropriate period to perform leaf samplings for the analysis of the majority of nutrients in the three main mango cultivars (Ataulfo, Kent and Tommy Atkins) in Nayarit, Mexico.

    Acknowledgments

    • The authors thank the National Institute of Forestry, Agriculture and Livestock Research, the Mixed Fund of the State of Nayarit (project 2005-C01-25/A-1) and the National Council of Science and Technology-Institutional Regional Promotion Fund for Scientific, Technological and Innovation Development (project 115830) for funding. In addition, Mariela Castro López is thanked for her technical support, as are the producers Alvino Hernández, Juan J. Salazar, Armando Arrambide, Santos Ramos, Benito Carrillo and Alberto Ramos for making their orchards available for this research.

    References

    Alcántar-González, G., & Sandoval-Villa, M. (1999). Manual de análisis químico de tejido vegetal. Chapingo, México: Sociedad Mexicana de la Ciencia del Suelo, A.C.

    Avilán, R. L. (1971). Variaciones de los niveles de N, P, K y Ca en las hojas de mango (Mangifera indica L.) a través de un ciclo de producción. Agronomía Tropical, 21(1), 3-10. Retrieved from http://www.sian.inia.gob.ve/revistas_ci/Agronomia%20Tropical/at2101/arti/avilan_l.htm

    Benítez-Pardo, D., Hernández-Montoya, M., Osuna-Enciso, M. T., Valenzuela-López, M., & Galván-Piña, B. (2003). Muestreo y análisis foliar relacionados con fenología en mango en el sur de Sinaloa, México. Terra, 21(2), 73-283. Retrieved from http://www.redalyc.org/articulo.oa?id=57315595013

    Bingham, F. T. (1982). Boron. In: Miller, R. H., Keeney, D. R., & Page, A. L. (Eds.), Methods of soil analysis, part 2 (pp. 431-446). Madison, WI, USA: American Society of Agronomy and Soil Science Society of America.

    Bray, R. H., & Kurtz, L. T. (1945). Determination of total, organic and available phosphorus in soil. Soil Science, 59, 39-45. Retrieved from http://garfield.library.upenn.edu/classics1987/A1987J041400001.pdf

    Bremner, J. M., & Mulvaney, C. S. (1982). Total nitrogen. In: Page, A. L., Miller, R. H., & Keeney, D. R. (Eds), Methods of soil analysis. Agronomy no. 9. Part. 2 (pp. 595-694). Madison, WI, USA: American Society of Agronomy and Soil Science Society of America .

    Castro-López, M. G., Salazar-García, S., González-Durán, I. J. L., Medina-Torres, R., & González-Valdivia, J. (2012). Evolución nutrimental foliar en tres cultivares de mango en Nayarit, México. Revista Mexicana de Ciencias Agrícolas, 3(4), 685-700. Retrieved from http://www.scielo.org.mx/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S2007-09342012000400005

    Chávez-Contreras, X., Vega-Piña, A., Tapia-Vargas, L. M., & Miranda-Salcedo, M. A. (2001). Mango, su manejo y producción en el trópico seco de México. Michoacán, México: Instituto Nacional de Investigaciones Forestales, Agrícolas y Pecuarias.

    Dahnke, W. C. (1990). Testing soils for available nitrogen. In: Westerman, R. L. (Ed.), Soil Testing and Plant Analysis (pp. 120-140). Madison, WI, USA: American Society of Agronomy and Soil Science Society of America .

    Doll, E. C., & Lucas, R. E. (1973). Testing soil for potassium, calcium and magnesium. In: Walsh, L. M., & Beaton, J. D. (Eds.), Soil Testing and Plant Analysis (pp. 133-152). Madison, WI, USA: Soil Science Society of America.

    Draper, N. R., & Smith, H. (1981). Applied Regression Analysis. USA: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

    Enríquez, R. S. (1989). Análisis de Boro en suelos y plantas mediante el método de azometina-H. Terra, 7, 13-20.

    Espinoza-Aburto, J., Arias-Suárez, J. F., Miranda-Salcedo, M. A., Rico-Ponce, H. R., Mercado, J., López-Acosta, A., Vargas-Gómez, E., & Teniente-Oviedo, R. (2006). Guía práctica para la producción de mango en Michoacán. Michoacán, México: Instituto Nacional de Investigaciones Forestales, Agrícolas y Pecuarias .

    Etchevers, B. J. D., Goijberg, G., López, R. R. M., Padilla, C. J., Alvarado-López, J., Hidalgo, M. C., Cruz, H. M. L., Guerrero P. A., Gutiérrez, B., & Miranda C. E. (2000). Manual de procedimientos analíticos para análisis de suelos y plantas del laboratorio de fertilidad de suelos. Texcoco, México: Instituto de Recursos Naturales - Colegio de Postgraduados.

    García, E. (1998). Climas (clasificación de Köppen, modificado por García), escala 1:1,000,000. México: Comisión Nacional para el Conocimiento y Uso de la Biodiversidad (CANABIO).

    Granville, W. A., Smith, P. F., & Longley, W. R. (1963). Elements of the differential and integral calculus. USA: John Wiley & Sons Inc.

    Koo, R. C. J., & Young, T. W. (1972). Effect of age and position on the mineral composition of mango leaves. USA. Proceeding of the American Society for Horticultural Science, 97, 792-794.

    Lindsay, W. L., & Norvell, W. A. (1978). Development of a DTPA soil test for zinc, iron, manganese, and copper. Soil Science Society of America Journal, 42(3), 421-428. doi:10.2136/sssaj1978.03615995004200030009x

    McLean, E. O. (1982). Soil pH and lime requirement. In: Page, A. L., Miller, R. H., & Keeney, D. R. (Eds.), Methods of Soil Analysis, Part 2. (pp. 133-152). Madison, WI, USA: American Society of Agronomy and Soil Science Society of America .

    Mosqueda-Vázquez, R., de los Santos-Rosa, F., Becerra-León, E. N., Cabrera-Míreles, H., Ortega-Zaleta, D. A., & del Ángel-Pérez, A. L. (1996). Manual para cultivar mango en la planicie costera del golfo de México. Veracruz: Instituto Nacional de Investigaciones Forestales, Agrícolas y Pecuarias.

    Nelson, D. W., & Sommers, L. E. (1982). Total carbon, organic carbon and organic matter. In: Page, A. L., Miller, R. H., & Keeney, D. R. (Eds.), Methods of Soil Analysis, Part 2 (pp. 539-594). Madison, WI, USA: American Society of Agronomy and Soil Science Society of America .

    Neter, J., Li, W., & Kutner, M. H. (1985). Applied linear statistical models. USA: McGraw-Hill.

    Pathak, R. A., & Pandey, R. M. (1976). Sampling for mineral content in leaves of mango cultivar 'Dashehari'. Scientia Horticulturae, 5(3), 255-264. doi: 10.1016/0304-4238(76)90090-X

    Ponchner, S., Rojas, R., & Bornemisza, E. (1993). Variación estacional de nutrimentos en árboles de mango (Mangifera indica L.) en tres suelos del Pacífico seco de Costa Rica. I. macronutrimentos. Agronomía Costarricense, 17(2), 21-30. Retrieved from http://www.mag.go.cr/rev_agr/v17n02_021.pdf

    Quiñones, A., Soler, E., & Legaz, F. (2013). Determination of foliar sampling conditions and standard leaf nutrient levels to assess mineral status of loquat tree. Journal of Plant Nutrition, 36(2), 284-298. doi: 10.1080/01904167.2012.739248

    Rajput, M. S., Chadha K. L., & Thakur, R. S. (1985). Standardization of leaf sample size for nutrient analysis in mango. Indian Journal of Horticulture, 42, 210-212.

    Salazar-García, S. (2002). Nutrición del aguacate, principios y aplicaciones. México: Instituto Nacional de Investigaciones Forestales, Agrícolas y Pecuarias - Instituto de la Potasa y el Fósforo.

    Salazar-García, S., González-Durán, I. J. L., & Ibarra-Estrada, M. E. (2015). Identification of the appropriate leaf sampling period for nutrient analysis in ‘Hass’ avocado. HortScience, 50(1), 130-136. Retrieved from http://hortsci.ashspublications.org/content/50/1/130.full.pdf+html

    Salazar-García, S., Ramírez-Murillo, P. E., & Gómez-Aguilar R. (1993). Desarrollo radical de portainjertos de mango en función del cultivar injertado, la edad del árbol y la textura del suelo. Revista Fitotecnia Mexicana, 16, 12-20.

    Samra, J. S., Chadha K. L. , & Thakur, R. S. (1978). Comparison of some mango cultivars in terms of their macro-nutrient status in fruiting and non-fruiting terminals. Indian Journal of Horticulture, 35, 184-187.

    Servicio de Información Agroalimentaria y Pesquera (SIAP). (2016). Atlas agroalimentario 2016. México, D.F.: Secretaría de Agricultura, Ganadería, Desarrollo Rural, Pesca y Alimentación.

    Statistical Analysis System (SAS Institute). (2009). SAS user’s guide version 9.1. Cary: Author.

    Systat Software Inc. (2006). SigmaPlot: Exact graphs and data analysis. U.S.A: Author.

    Young, T. W., & Koo, R. C. (1971). Variations in minerals of Florida mango leaves. U.S.A.: Florida State Horticultural Society.

    Figures:

    Figure 1. Leaf length, value of the derivative and periods of nutrient stability (space between the vertical lines) for macro (A and C) and micronutrients (B and D) in 'Ataúlfo' mango. Data from two orchards.
    Figure 2. Leaf length, value of the derivative and periods of nutrient stability (space between the vertical lines) for macro (A and C) and micronutrients (B and D) in 'Kent' mango. Data from three orchards.
    Figure 3. Leaf length, value of the derivative and period of nutrient stability (space between the vertical lines) for macro (A and C) and micronutrients (B and D) in 'Tommy Atkins' mango. Data from two orchards.

    Tables:

    Table 1. Location and characteristics of mango orchards.
    Cultivar Location, municipality Coordinates Elevation (masl) Age (years) Soil classification
    Ataúlfo Atonalisco, Tepic NL 21° 36’ 46.9’’ WL 104° 49’ 43.6’’ 601 12 Chromic luvisol
    Chacala, Compostela NL 21° 10’ 20.3’’ WL 105° 10’ 32.7’’ 42 11 Eutric cambisol
    Kent Buenavista, Acaponeta NL 22° 27’ 44’’ WL 105° 26’ 55.8’’ 11 10 Eutric cambisol
    Las Palmas, San Blas NL 21° 37’ 05.0’’ WL 105° 09’ 30.1’’ 139 20 Humic acrisol
    Chacala, Compostela NL 21° 10’ 05.2’’ WL 105° 10’ 31.5’’ 54 17 Eutric cambisol
    Tommy Atkins Buenavista, Acaponeta NL 22° 27’ 44’’ WL 105° 26’ 55.8’’ 14 18 Eutric cambisol
    Chacala, Compostela NL 21° 10’ 14.3’’ WL 105° 09’ 52.2’’ 38 17 Eutric cambisol
    Table 2. Soil properties (from 0-30 cm deep) of the mango orchards.
    Ataúlfo Kent Tommy Atkins
    Property Atonalisco Chacala Buenavista Chacala Las Palmas Buenavista Chacala
    Texture Cl1 Cl Lo S-C-L Cl Lo Cl
    pH (1:2) 4.9 SA 4.7 SA 5.1 SA 6.6 MoAc 6.7 N 6.4 MoAc 5.5 SA
    EC (dS·m-1) 0.170 0.08 0.60 0.16 0.11 0.26 0.08
    O.M. (%) 3.0 MoH 3.4MoH 1.2 MoL 4.7 VeH 3.6 H 1.4 MoL 3.7 H
    CEC (meq(100 g-1) 7.59 7.47 4.9 15.0 18.9 5.86 9.90
    mg.kg-1
    N-Inorganic 11.4 M 15.6 M 81.4 VeH 17.7 M 8.94 MoL 6.23 MoL 12.2 M
    P-Bray 23.4 MoH 25.2 MoH 62.1 VeH 10.8 MoL 6.98 L 9.2 MoL 13.1 M
    K 357 M 108 L 384 M 218 MoL 346 M 227 MoL 225 MoL
    Ca 572 L 687 L 572 L 2404 MoH 2432 MoH 858 L 1230 MoL
    Mg 174 L 160 L 56 VeL 280 MoL 323 M 71 VeL 332 M
    Na 68 L 34 VeL 33 VeL 38 VeL 41 VeL 31 VeL 36 VeL
    Fe 18.6 M 17.4 M 53.4 H 8.56 MoL 7.14 MoL 56.8 H 25.9 MoH
    Zn 0.78 L 0.42 L 0.40 L 0.44 L 0.53 L 0.75 L 0.84 MoL
    Mn 29 MoH 73.1 VeH 47.9 H 23.8 MoH 28.9 MoH 60.5 VeH 98.4 VeH
    Cu 0.43 MoL 2.42 H 1.63 MoH 2.05 MoH 1.26 MoH 1.45 MoH 1.47 MoH
    B 0.42 MoL 0.63 M 0.55 MoL 0.81 M 0.63 M 0.61 M 0.78 M
    1Cl: clayey; Lo: loamy; S-C-L: silty-clay-loam; SA: strongly acidic; MoAc: moderately acidic; N: neutral; VeL: very low; L: low; MoL: moderately low; M: medium; MoH: moderately high; H: high; VeH: very high; StH: strongly high and ModA: moderately acidic; EC: electrical conductivity; O.M.: organic matter content; CEC: cation exchange capacity.
    Table 3. Period of leaf nutrient stability in days (PLNS, shaded cells) and appropriate leaf sampling period (ALSP, cells between vertical thick lines) for each vegetative flush of 'Ataulfo' and 'Kent' mangos.
    Ataúlfo Spring PLNS ALSP
    August September October November December Date DALS1
    N, P, K, Ca, Mg, S 249-331 October 8-December 2 276-331
    Fe, Cu, Mn, Zn, B 276-336 276-331
    Summer PLNS ALSP
    August September October November December Date DALS
    N, P, K, Ca, Mg, S 94-170 September 30- November 29 100-160
    Fe, Cu, Mn, Zn, B 100-160 100-160
    Kent Spring PLNS ALSP
    August September October November December Date DALS
    N, P, K, Ca, Mg, S 241-316 September 3-November 17 241-316
    Fe, Cu, Mn, Zn, B 215-318 241-316
    Summer PLNS ALSP
    August September October November December Date DALS
    N, P, K, Ca, Mg, S 96-150 September 27- November 19 96-150
    Fe, Cu, Mn, Zn, B 75-157 96-150
    1Days after leaf sprouting.
    Table 4. Period of leaf nutrient stability in days (PLNS, shaded cells) and appropriate leaf sampling period (ALSP, cells between vertical thick lines) for each vegetative flush of cv. Tommy Atkins.
    Spring PLNS ALSP
    July August September October November December January Date DALS1
    N, P, K, Ca, Mg, S 195-370 September 23-January 5 261-365
    Fe, Cu, Mn, Zn, B 261-365 261-365
    Autumn PLNS ALSP
    May June July August September October November Date DALS
    N, P, K, Ca, Mg, S 256-282 June 6-30 258-282
    Fe, Cu, Mn, Zn, B 258-284 258-282
    1Days after leaf sprouting.