Controlled Release Urea Improved Nitrogen Use Efficiency, Yield, and Quality of Wheat

Yang, Yuechao; Zhang, Min; Zheng, Lei; Cheng, Dongdong; Liu, Ming; Geng, Yan

doi:10.2134/agronj2010.0343

Cited by 109 publications

(71 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…According to Yang et al (2011), volatilization of NH 3 from the sulfur-coated nitrogen fertilizer depends on the thickness of the coating (capsule) in relation to the granule size, because the total N content of urea coated with sulfur can decrease from 46% to 30 to 42%. However, nutrients in sulfur coated fertilizers can be released quickly, in less than 3 months (Trenkel, 2010).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Volatilization of ammonia in stabilized slow-release nitrogen fertilizer under controlled conditions

Ribeiro¹,

Andrade²,

Henrique³

et al. 2016

Aust J Crop Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The loss of nitrogen through volatilization leads research to the search for new technologies that release nutrients in a manner synchronized with the crop demand, minimizing losses and increasing efficiency of its use in agriculture, as is the case with the stabilized slow-release nitrogen fertilizer. This work sought to evaluate the losses of volatilized N-NH 3 in stabilized slow-release nitrogen fertilizer applied to the soil. The treatments followed a 5 × 3 × 2 factorial as follows: five nitrogen fertilizer sources (conventional urea -CU; urea combined with zeolite -UZ; sulfur coated urea -US; NBPT coated urea -U NBPT , and urea combined with organic material -OU); three application times; and two managements (surface and incorporated applications) with three replications. The experiment was conducted using a collection chamber to capture NH 3 for 25 days, with samples taken at 2, 4, 7, 9,

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Volatilization of ammonia in stabilized slow-release nitrogen fertilizer under controlled conditions

Ribeiro¹,

Andrade²,

Henrique³

et al. 2016

Aust J Crop Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Marketable yield was higher with CRU than other treatments, but the authors noted N release in CRU was dependent on temperature and moisture, so the results could differ depending on location and weather. In studies by Yang et al (2011) in northern China and by Beres et al (2010) in Canada that examined CRU effects on wheat yield and quality, the NUE and yield of wheat was improved with the use of CRU compared with urea, but wheat protein content did not differ with CRU compared with other sources.…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 97%

“…In contrast, several studies have found that CRU provides a significant yield benefit as compared with urea and other fertilizer types (Beres et al 2010;Ziadi et al 2011;Yang et al 2011). A 3-yr potato production study in eastern Quebec (Ziadi et al 2011) found CRU to be a promising N source to increase potato yield and NUE.…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The intent is to reduce the risk of N losses, thus improving N use efficiency and reducing potential negative environmental damage. Several studies have examined the environmental and agronomic impacts of using CRU with varied results (Nelson et al 2008Beres et al 2010;Cahill et al 2010;Hyatt et al 2010;Malhi et al 2010;Mckenzie et al 2010;Blackshaw et al 2011;Ziadi et al 2011;Yang et al 2011).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

An economic study of controlled release urea and split applications of nitrogen as compared with non-coated urea under conventional and reduced tillage management

et al. 2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

study of controlled release urea and split applications of nitrogen as compared with non-coated urea under conventional and reduced tillage management. Can. J. Plant Sci. 93: 523Á534. To evaluate the use of controlled-release urea (CRU) as a beneficial management practice for nitrogen management of wheat, barley, and canola, a multi-location study was conducted from 2004 to 2006 in a range of agro-environments across western Canada. The objective was to evaluate the relative economic performance of CRU and non-coated urea (NCU) for their effects on seed yield and quality, costs and net revenue (NR) using conventional tillage (CT) and reduced tillage (RT) management under varying environmental conditions. The NR was estimated as the income remaining after paying for all cash costs, ownership costs on machinery and buildings, and labour. The main factor affecting crop yield and NR was N application rate. In general, application of NCU produced similar or higher net revenues than that of CRU, split fertilizer applications or a blend of NCU and CRU. There were some limited situations where the use of split applications, CRU or CRU in a blend with the NCU increased crop yield as compared with NCU; however, the increased yield was not sufficient to cover the extra costs of CRU or the split application. The impact of tillage system on crop yield and NR was not consistent. Net revenue was higher under CT than RT for certain crops in some regions, but not in all regions or for all crops. Overall, NR analysis indicated that use of CRU did not provide an economic benefit over the use of NCU.

show abstract

“…Furthermore, controlled release fertilizer technologies, by regulating the time of N release from fertilizers, has the potential to reduce leaching losses of nitrate in soil [14,27,30,31]. Many studies have found that the application of controlled release N fertilizer significantly increased the NUE and yields of crops [11,40]. Zhang et al [42] reported that the yields of both rice and oilseed rape with applied CRU increased by 6.9 % each, even when the CRU rate was reduced by 20 % relative to common urea.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of different fertilization managements on nitrate accumulation in a Mollisol of Northeast China

Zhang

et al. 2016

Chem. Biol. Technol. Agric.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background:In a continuous spring maize system in Northeast China, the accumulation and succession characteristics of nitrate in Mollisol with four fertilization treatments, including no fertilization (CK), farmers' conventional fertilization (FC), recommendation fertilization (RF), and controlled release fertilizer application (CRF), were compared over a 6-year field plot trial.Results: On average, the RF and CRF treatments decreased nitrate nitrogen by 16.6 and 39.5 % in the 0-90 cm soil layer, respectively, and maintained a relatively high maize grain yield, as compared to the FC treatment. The accumulation of nitrate nitrogen was more obvious in the CRF treatment compared with the other fertilizer treatments under the arid climate. However, the high precipitation resulted in the leaching of nitrate nitrogen into the deeper soil layer in all the fertilizer treatments. The maximum of nitrate nitrogen in the 0-90 cm soil layer was 81.4 kg N/ha at a nitrogen fertilizer rate of 250 kg N/ha in the long-term trial, which was within the rational and safe level for groundwater. Conclusions:The best fertilization strategy to decrease nitrate accumulation in soil should consider both soil characteristics and precipitation.

show abstract

Controlled Release Urea Improved Nitrogen Use Efficiency, Yield, and Quality of Wheat

Cited by 109 publications

References 14 publications

Volatilization of ammonia in stabilized slow-release nitrogen fertilizer under controlled conditions

Volatilization of ammonia in stabilized slow-release nitrogen fertilizer under controlled conditions

An economic study of controlled release urea and split applications of nitrogen as compared with non-coated urea under conventional and reduced tillage management

Effect of different fertilization managements on nitrate accumulation in a Mollisol of Northeast China

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About