Energieeinsatz und Energieeffizienz von Winterweizen bei unterschiedlicher mineralischer Stickstoffdüngung im Marchfeld

Moitzi, Gerhard; Spiegel, Heide; Sandén, Taru; Vuolo, Francesco; Essl, Laura; Neugschwandtner, Reinhard W.; Wagentristl, Helmut

doi:10.2478/boku-2020-0006

Cited by 8 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The low differences in GY in our study support this observation. Especially, as every work operation is costing time and fuel and is affecting the energy efficiency of the production system [7,8,51].…”

Section: Nitrogen Efficiencymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…But, fertilizer production energy is also the highest portion of the energy input in arable farming, even ahead of soil tillage [7]. The amount of fertilizer and the fertilizing strategy are influencing the energy efficiency, as shown for maize [8] and wheat [7]. An efficient N use is therefore a key indicator in sustainable plant production.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Efficiency of Mineral Nitrogen Fertilization in Winter Wheat under Pannonian Climate Conditions

et al. 2020

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Improvements in nitrogen (N) use efficiency in crop production are important for addressing the triple challenges of food security, environmental degradation and climate change. The three fertilizers, calcium ammonium nitrate (CAN), urea (Urea) and stabilized urea (Ureastab), were applied at a rate of 160 kg N ha−1 with two or three splits to winter wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) in the Pannonian climate region of eastern Austria. On average, over all fertilization treatments, the grain yield (GY) increased by about a quarter and the grain N concentration (GNC) doubled compared to the control without fertilization. Consequently, the grain N yield (NYGRAIN) was increased with N fertilization by 154%. The GY increased due to a higher grain density with no differences between N fertilizers but with a tendency of a higher grain yield with three compared to two splits. Three splits also slightly increased the GNC and consequently the NYGRAIN of CAN and Ureastab in one year. The removal of N fertilizer with the NYGRAIN (N surplus) was higher than the amount of applied fertilizer. Fertilization decreased the N use efficiency (NUE), the N uptake efficiency (NUpE) and the N utilization efficiency (NUtE) but increased the soil mineral nitrate (NO3-N) at harvest and the apparent N loss (ANL). Three compared to two applications resulted in a higher NO3-N at harvest but also a lower N surplus due to partly higher NYGRAIN. Consequently, the ANL was lower with three compared to two splits. Also, the NUpE and the apparent N recovery efficiency (ANRE) were higher with three splits. The best N treatment regarding highest above-ground biomass yield with lowest N surplus, N balance and ANL was the three-split treatment (50 CAN, 50 CAN, 60 liquid urea ammonium nitrate). Three splits can, under semi-arid conditions, be beneficial when aiming high-quality wheat for bread-making and also for reducing the N loss. Whereas, two splits are recommended when aiming only at high GY, e.g., for ethanol-wheat production.

show abstract

Section: Nitrogen Efficiencymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Efficiency of Mineral Nitrogen Fertilization in Winter Wheat under Pannonian Climate Conditions

et al. 2020

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The fertilization strategy influences the amount of used fossil energy. In organic farming systems, where no mineral NPK is used, the total energy input is up to 65% lower than in NPK systems [11,12], as mineral fertilization consumes a lot of energy [10,[13][14][15], especially as process energy for the fertilizer production. Therefore, low-input systems are mainly based on FYM [16] as low-input agricultural systems have a greater energy use efficiency and lower greenhouse gas emissions compared to high-input systems [17].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Energy Efficiency of Continuous Rye, Rotational Rye and Barley in Different Fertilization Systems in a Long-Term Field Experiment

et al. 2021

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A goal in sustainable agriculture is to use fossil energy more efficiently in crop production. This 60-year-old experiment on a silt loam chernozem investigated effects of fertilization (unfertilized control, mineral fertilizer (NPK) and farmyard manure (FYM)) and rotation (continuous winter rye (CR), winter rye in rotation (RR), spring barley in rotation (SB) on diesel fuel consumption, total energy input (made of both direct and indirect inputs), crop yield, energy output, net-energy output, energy intensity, energy productivity and energy use efficiency. The input rates of fertilizer, herbicides and seeds were set constant during the experiment. Soil tillage was done with a moldboard plough with subsequent combined seedbed preparation and seeding. The mean calculated total energy input was highest in NPK with 11.28 GJ ha−1 and lowest in the unfertilized control with 5.00 GJ ha−1. Total energy input for FYM was intermediate with 6.30 GJ ha−1. With energetic consideration of NPK nutrients in FYM the total energy input increased to the level of NPK. The share of the fertilizer energy on the total energy input was 49% for NPK. Fertilization with FYM and NPK increased yield and energy output considerably, especially of CR and SB which attained about doubled values. Crop rotation also increased the yield and energy output, especially of unfertilized rye, which attained values increased by about 75%. Fertilization with FYM resulted in the highest energy efficiency as the net-energy output, the energy productivity and the energy use efficiency were higher but the energy intensity was lower compared to unfertilized controls and NPK. When the nutrients in FYM were also energetically considered, the energy efficiency parameters of FYM decreased to the level of the NPK treatment. Crop rotation increased the energy efficiency of winter rye compared to the monoculture.

show abstract

“…

Soil tillage is one of the highest energy and labor consumer in arable farming (Tabatabaeefar et al 2009, Szalay et al 2015. In conventional tillage systems with ploughing, more than 50% of total fuel consumption is usually used for soil preparation and seeding alone (Moitzi et al 2015). The establishment of winter wheat with no-tillage on a silty loam Chernozem could reduce both fuel consumption and work time by more than 85% compared to conventional tillage (Moitzi et al 2013).

…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Energy use efficiency rises with crop yield and can be improved by the nutrient management, i.e. the amount and kind of fertiliser (Moitzi et al 2020a). Deike et al (2008 found that crop yield and energy efficiency are much more affected by crop rotation than by tillage.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of tillage systems on energy input and energy efficiency for sugar beet and soybean under Pannonian climate conditions

Moitzi¹,

Neugschwandtner²,

Kaul³

et al. 2021

Plant Soil Environ.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Sustainable cropping systems require efficient usage of fossil energy. This study performed on a long-term field experiment in the Pannonian Basis investigated the energy efficiency of four tillage systems (mouldboard plough (MP), deep conservation tillage (CTd), shallow conservation tillage (CTs) and no-tillage (NT)) for sugar beet and soybean production, taking fuel consumption, total energy input (made up of both direct and indirect inputs), crop yield, energy output, net-energy output, energy intensity and energy use efficiency into account. The input rates of fertiliser, chemical plant protection, and seeds were set constant across years; whereas measured values of fuel consumption were used for all tillage treatments. NT required a considerably lower energy input than MP and CTd as no fuel is needed for tillage and just slightly more fuel for additional spraying of glyphosate. Anyhow, the energy efficiency parameters did not differ between tillage treatments, as theses parameters were mainly determined by energy output, which was considerably higher than the energy input. However, year effects on the energy efficiency were observed for both crops. Nitrogen fertilisation and diesel fuel consumption were identified as the most energy-intensive inputs. Consequently, the energy input for sugar beet was higher than that for soybean, which was identified as a low-input crop. But sugar beet attained a more than 4 times higher net-energy output, a 2.5 times higher energy use efficiency, and an energy intensity for yield production of less than 3 times those of soybean.

show abstract

Energieeinsatz und Energieeffizienz von Winterweizen bei unterschiedlicher mineralischer Stickstoffdüngung im Marchfeld

Cited by 8 publications

References 12 publications

Efficiency of Mineral Nitrogen Fertilization in Winter Wheat under Pannonian Climate Conditions

Efficiency of Mineral Nitrogen Fertilization in Winter Wheat under Pannonian Climate Conditions

Energy Efficiency of Continuous Rye, Rotational Rye and Barley in Different Fertilization Systems in a Long-Term Field Experiment

Effect of tillage systems on energy input and energy efficiency for sugar beet and soybean under Pannonian climate conditions

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About