<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<mods xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/mods/v3" version="3.1" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.loc.gov/mods/v3 http://www.loc.gov/standards/mods/v3/mods-3-1.xsd">
  <titleInfo>
    <title>Physical, chemical and mineralogical characteristics of commercially available Eppawela and Gafsa Rock Phosphates</title>
  </titleInfo>
  <name type="personal">
    <namePart>Dissanayake A</namePart>
    <role>
      <roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">creator</roleTerm>
    </role>
  </name>
  <name type="personal">
    <namePart>Jayalath Chandani</namePart>
  </name>
  <typeOfResource>text</typeOfResource>
  <originInfo>
    <place>
      <placeTerm type="code" authority="marccountry">xx</placeTerm>
    </place>
    <publisher>Bulletin of the rubber research Institute of Sri Lanka</publisher>
    <dateIssued>1995</dateIssued>
    <dateIssued encoding="marc">9999</dateIssued>
    <issuance>monographic</issuance>
  </originInfo>
  <language>
    <languageTerm authority="iso639-2b" type="code">und</languageTerm>
  </language>
  <physicalDescription>
    <form authority="marcform">print</form>
    <extent>13-May</extent>
  </physicalDescription>
  <abstract>Physical, chemical and mineralogical charecteristics of commercially available Eppawela Rock Phosphate (ERP) was compared with a well known rock phosphate, Gafsa from Tunisia. The phosphate content of Eppawela material was low, around 16;and is two times lesser than Gafsa. Also, the extractable P in ERP was two times lesser than that of Gafsa, indicating its inferiority as a P source. A high amount of silica was present in the Eppawela material as an impurity and it therefore requires to ensure the quality control measures in a systematic way before requires to ensure the quality control measures in a systematic way before it is marketed.</abstract>
  <recordInfo>
    <recordCreationDate encoding="marc">220216</recordCreationDate>
  </recordInfo>
</mods>
