New Tools for the Analysis and Characterization of Slow-Release Fertilizers

Sartain, J. B.; Hall, William L.; Littell, R. C.; Hopwood, E. W.

doi:10.1021/bk-2004-0872.ch013

Cited by 17 publications

(43 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A linear relationship was employed because we had inadequate data and no theoretical rationale to support a more complex nonlinear relationship. Sartain et al (2004) used a similar approach of fitting N release data from controlled‐release fertilizers in a laboratory soil incubation procedure to an exponential equation that rises to a maximum, and then correlating N release during the soil incubation with N release in an accelerated (high temperature) laboratory extraction procedure.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of a Quick Test to Assess Polymer‐Coated Urea Prill Damage

2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Polymer‐coated ureas (PCUs) can reduce N leaching in potato (Solanum tuberosum L.) production while maintaining yields. However, damage to the polymer coating during handling increases N release and potentially affects leaching and crop response. A 2‐yr study was conducted to develop a quick test of PCU damage, compare its results with N release under field conditions, and determine damage effects on N uptake and yield in field experiments. A 24‐h water immersion procedure was developed to measure N release differences from two sources of the PCU fertilizer Environmentally Smart Nitrogen (ESN) handled in different ways: ESN(C), dealer grade undamaged control, and ESN(A), damaged by air boom spreader application. Nitrogen release from ESN(A) was more rapid in both the 24‐h test and during in situ soil incubation. Quick test results were positively correlated with N release during the first 7 d of field incubation (R2 = 0.91, adjusted R2 = 0.86). Differences in prill damage between ESN(C) and ESN(A) were greater in 2010 than 2011. Limited crop response differences occurred in 2011, but in 2010 petiole nitrate‐N was more stable and higher late in the season for ESN(C) than ESN(A), and tuber, vine, and total N uptake were significantly greater for ESN(C). Tuber yield and size were not significantly affected by ESN damage. Based on these results, the quick test provides an accurate assessment of potential differences in N release during the growing season due to coating damage and can be used to evaluate leaching potential and possible need for fertigation.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of a Quick Test to Assess Polymer‐Coated Urea Prill Damage

2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In most cases this mass balance approach obviates the need for sample sizes larger than 1 g (25-30 granules) compared with those used in other methods to overcome sample heterogeneity [e.g., 30 g sample by Sartain et al (2004)]. We found almost identical B release curves (in Supplementary information) for four 1 g replicates of a micronutrient fertilizer, with a propensity for heterogeneity, due to its low inclusion rate of 0.5% B co-compacted in potassium chloride.…”

Section: Analysis Of Fertilizer Residue and Mass Balancementioning

confidence: 99%

A column perfusion test to assess the kinetics of nutrient release by soluble, sparingly soluble and coated granular fertilizers

Baird

Silva

Degryse

et al. 2019

J. Plant Nutr. Soil Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In recent years, innovations in fertilizer research have principally been in the design of products to supply more timely plant nutrients and mitigate detrimental losses to the environment. In the development of these fertilizers, a laboratory method to comparatively screen a large number of formulations for the rate of nutrient release is a critical first step in formulation optimization to significantly reduce time spent on pot and field trials, reducing costs considerably. Currently, given the absence of a standard laboratory method for all fertilizers, adaptions of a method for coated fertilizers from the International Organization for Standardization (2017) ISO 21263 and other column tests are being used which are often complex and/or require manual sampling which can be laborious, time consuming and costly. The method presented here evaluates the dynamic release in real time by continuously perfusing samples in columns utilizing an automated sample accumulation system for short‐term and long‐term release studies and eliminates the need for soil/sand packing of columns. Mass balance is accounted for by analysing the residue after dissolution and the amount released is expressed as a % of the total nutrient content in the product. This method is reliable, uncomplicated and cost‐effective and has been used to test uncoated soluble fertilizers, nanofertilizers, fertilizers with newly developed coating technologies and other slowly soluble fertilizers, to assess the effect of variables like coating chemistry and thickness, fertilizer composition or fertilizer particle size on release rate.

show abstract

“…A recent report on the efforts of the Controlled Release Fertilizer Task Force (established by the Association of American Plant Food Control Officials in 1994) described their proposal for the analysis and characterisation of slowrelease fertilisers (Sartain et al 2004). The procedure, based on increasingly aggressive extractions to isolate nutrients that would become available over time, has been applied to commercially available materials such as sulfurcoated urea, isobutylidene diurea, and urea-formaldehyde polymers.…”

Section: Urease-basedmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A greater awareness of the processes that cause nitrogen loss will increase the efficiency of fertiliser application and therefore improve farm profitability (Weier 1994;Strong and Mason 1999). The efficiency of urea fertilisers can be increased through the use of inhibitors or slow release systems, which include chemical additives that modify the environment of the granule microsite or inhibit the activity of urease or nitrification (Watson 2000;Sartain et al 2004). Analytical methods that allow quantification of nitrogenous chemical species significant to soil and related matrices should form important tools for future investigation and enhanced understanding of these processes.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The determination of urea in soil extracts and related samples—a review

2004

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although the dominant methods for the determination of urea in clinical applications incorporate selective enzymatic hydrolysis of urea, the determination of urea in soil extracts is complicated by the presence of urease inhibitors. The spectrophotometric determination of urea with an acidic solution diacetyl monoxime and semicarbazide is a viable option but traditional manual procedures are time-consuming. New variations on these procedures, based on microplates or flow-injection analysis methodologies, allow a far greater number of samples to be analysed with high precision and sensitivity.

show abstract

New Tools for the Analysis and Characterization of Slow-Release Fertilizers

Cited by 17 publications

References 0 publications

Evaluation of a Quick Test to Assess Polymer‐Coated Urea Prill Damage

Evaluation of a Quick Test to Assess Polymer‐Coated Urea Prill Damage

A column perfusion test to assess the kinetics of nutrient release by soluble, sparingly soluble and coated granular fertilizers

The determination of urea in soil extracts and related samples—a review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About