## 4 Discussion  
The SM was a better source of macronutrients (especially N, P, and K) compared to the EBLS (Table 1), which is why higher Kjeldahl N, Olsen P, and exchangeable K concentrations were recorded in the SM-treated soil compared to the control and to the EBLS-treated soil (Table 2). In contrast, higher micronutrient concentrations were determined in the EBLS compared to the SM (Table 1), and this also influenced the soil DTPA-extractable concentrations of Fe, Mn, and Zn, which were higher in the EBLS-treated soil compared to the SM-treated soil (Table 2). According to [PERSON] (1996) [20], the different organic byproducts of vegetal origin (e.g., leaves of different annual or perennial plant species) significantly differ in their N, P, and K contents. It was found that the N content varied from 0.25% (in the leaves of _Lactuca sativa_ L.) to 2.45% (in the leaves of _Medicago sativa_ L.), while the P content fluctuated from 0.05% (in the leaves of _Pisum sativuum_ var. saccharatum L.) to 0.50% (in the leaves of _Medicago sativa_ L.) and the K content varied from 0.30% (in the leaves of _Avena sativa_ L.) to 2.10% (in the leaves of _Medicago sativa_ L.) [20]. Based on these ranges of nutrient concentrations from materials from other plant species, EBLS is a relatively moderate source of N (containing 1.31% of N) for crops, a poor source of P (containing 0.08% of P), and a very poor source of K (containing only 0.31% of K) (Table 1). Especially for fruit crops (such as _Olea europaea_ L.), in which high K demands exist (particularly in \"on-years\" with high crop loads, where high quantities of K are removed after fruit collections), EBLS as an organic fertilizer seems to be of limited importance to satisfying the necessary macronutrient needs (especially for K and, afterwards, for P and N). In contrast, SM seems to be a good source of macronutrients (especially of K and N, containing 2.99% and 2.63%, respectively) and a moderate source of P (containing 0.16%) (Table 1). [PERSON] (1996) [20] supports the idea that the different kinds of animal manures (from chickens, cows, horses, sheep, pigs, and goats) differ significantly in their nutrient content. It was found that the highest N content was determined in goat manure (2.77%) and the lowest in pig and cow manures (approximately 0.50-0.55%). [PERSON] et al. (2020) [5] found that goat manure's N, P, and K contents were 2.80%, 0.13%, and 2.54%, respectively, i.e., they were similar to those determined in our study for SM (2.63% for \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**Treatments**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**Suc.**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**Glu.**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**Fru.**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**Man.**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Suc./Fru.**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Non-Translocated**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Translocated/Total**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Translocated/Non-Sugars (Fru. + Glu.)**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Passages (Suc. + Man.)**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Translocated/Total**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Translocated/Non-Sugars**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Total Sugars**} \\ \hline \multicolumn{10}{c}{\% D.W.} \\ \hline SM & 1.74 a & 2.59 b & 0.60 ab & 1.87 b & 0.48 a & 3.19 b & 3.62 ab & 0.38 a & 1.11 ab & 9.70 a \\ \hline EBLS & 1.45 a & 3.01 ab & 0.84 a & 2.13 b & 0.38 a & 3.85 ab & 3.58 ab & 0.38 a & 0.93 ab & 10.07 a \\ \hline SM + EBLS & 1.53 a & 2.91 b & 0.59 b & 2.94 a & 0.44 a & 3.50 b & 4.47 a & 0.45 a & 1.28 a & 10.47 a \\ \hline CONTROL & 0.97 b & 3.63 a & 0.78 a & 2.44 ab & 0.22 b & 4.41 a & 3.40 b & 0.34 a & 0.77 b & 10.50 a \\ \hline \end{tabular}  
* The numbers represent the means of six replicates (N = 6). The different letters in the same column symbolize statistically significant differences among the treatments, according to [PERSON]’s multiple range test for \(p\leq 0.05\). Suc = sucrose; Glu = glucose; Man = mannitol; SM = sheep manure; EBLS = organic material (litter) from evergreen broadleaf species, i.e., from _Quercus_ sp.  
\end{table}