Uptake of elemental or sulfate-S from fall- or spring-applied co-granulated fertilizer by corn—A stable isotope and modeling study

Degryse, Fien; Silva, Rodrigo C. da; Baird, Roslyn; Beyrer, Tryston; Below, Frederick E.; McLaughlin, Michael J.

doi:10.1016/j.fcr.2017.07.015

Cited by 28 publications

(52 citation statements)

References 37 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…According to Degryse et al (2016), a smaller particle size provides a larger contact surface, resulting in a greater possibility of reacting with the soil solution, thereby favoring elemental S oxidation uptake and, consequently, plant development. In addition, elemental S sources are subordinate to abiotic and biotic factors that affect the microbial activity, which influences supply to the plant during its life cycle (Brahim et al, 2017;Degryse et al, 2017).…”

Section: Crop Development and Yieldmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Fertilizers that provide S in the form of sulfate can be readily absorbed. On the other hand, S is only absorbed after undergoing the oxidation process, which may be favorable for a balanced and continuous supply during the crop cycle (Degryse et al, 2016;Degryse et al, 2017). This study evaluated the nutritional quality, yield, and storage protein modulation in soybean grains in response to the S levels and sources in a dystrophic Ultisol.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Sulfur modulates yield and storage proteins in soybean grains

Ibañez

Santos

Lapaz

et al. 2021

Sci. agric. (Piracicaba, Braz.)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study evaluated the nutritional quality, yield, and storage protein modulation in soybean grains in response to levels and sources of sulfur (S) in a dystrophic Ultisol. We used five levels of S (0, 50, 100, 150 and 200 mg kg-1) and four sources of S (elemental S pastille-ESPA, gypsum-GY, gypsite-GI and elemental S powder-ESPO). Plants treated with 50 mg kg-1 of GY, GI, and ESPO and 200 mg kg-1 of ESPA had the largest grain yield values. Low S supply resulted in lower yields for all S sources tested. Sulfur deficiencies were observed at all levels for ESPA, resulting in lower concentrations of globulin and higher concentration of glutelin and albumin in the grains, possibly because the S content in the leaf was below the range adequate for soybean, leading to in lower yield values. In general, the application of S sources (GY, GI, and ESPO) increased all protein fractions. The results show that proper application of S is essential to optimize soybean yield and increase storage proteins in the grains. The granulometry of ESPA and ESPO fertilizers was a key factor for the availability of S to soybean plants. This study presents relevant information on S fertilization of soybeans, which could provide better grain nutritional quality and increased storage proteins with benefits to animal health.

show abstract

Section: Crop Development and Yieldmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sulfur modulates yield and storage proteins in soybean grains

Ibañez

Santos

Lapaz

et al. 2021

Sci. agric. (Piracicaba, Braz.)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…As a result, a low S rate often suffices to fulfill the nutritional requirements of plants (Salvagiotti et al, 2017). Fertilizing soil with S is intended to sustain available SO 4 2--S contents, which can amount to more than 70 % of the total S uptake by plants, and also to replenish soil S removed by grain harvest (Degryse et al, 2018).…”

Section: Influence Of S Application Rate On Crop Yieldmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, Fano (2015) found elemental S to be more efficient than gypsum in increasing wheat yield. These conflicting results call for further, deeper investigation of the influence of S sources on crop response by determining whether sources containing S readily available for plants to take up (e.g., gypsum, single superphosphate) or those requiring prior oxidation in soil (e.g., elemental S) are more efficient (Broch et al, 2011;Degryse et al, 2018). As a slow-release fertilizer, elemental S allows increased S application rates to be used due to its marked residual effect and lower potential for short-term losses; both of these aspects increase efficient use of S, especially in high-rainfall environments and sandy soils (Degryse et al, 2018).…”

Section: Influence Of S Source On Crop Responsementioning

confidence: 99%

“…These conflicting results call for further, deeper investigation of the influence of S sources on crop response by determining whether sources containing S readily available for plants to take up (e.g., gypsum, single superphosphate) or those requiring prior oxidation in soil (e.g., elemental S) are more efficient (Broch et al, 2011;Degryse et al, 2018). As a slow-release fertilizer, elemental S allows increased S application rates to be used due to its marked residual effect and lower potential for short-term losses; both of these aspects increase efficient use of S, especially in high-rainfall environments and sandy soils (Degryse et al, 2018). However, several studies have found no correlation between soil available SO 4 2--S and crop grain yield (Rheinheimer et al, 2005;Osório Filho et al, 2007;Lucas et al, 2013) not even at available SO 4 2--S contents below these critical levels.…”

Section: Influence Of S Source On Crop Responsementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Crop Yield Responses to Sulfur Fertilization in Brazilian No-Till Soils: a Systematic Review

Pias

Tiecher

Cherubin

et al. 2019

Rev. Bras. Ciênc. Solo

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Sulfur (S) fertilization recommendations for grain crops in Brazil were formerly established from studies on crops with a low yield potential grown on soils under conventional tillage (CT). However, the subsequent adoption of no-tillage (NT) altered S dynamics in the soil, making it necessary to carefully evaluate the applicability of these S fertilizer recommendations. In addition, the emergence of modern high-yield-potential genotypes, the successive application of concentrated low-sulfur fertilizers, and reduction in S atmospheric deposition have raised the likelihood of positive responses of crops to S fertilization. Available literature reports contrasting crop responses to S fertilization in Brazilian soils, ranging from substantial gains to slight yield losses depending on the particular crop, soil, and climate. The primary aim of this study was to examine available data for crop grain responses to S application in NT soils in order to ascertain whether existing recommendations established for Brazilian CT soils also hold for NT soils. A systematic review of data from 35 scientific publications spanning 58 crop harvests revealed a positive yield response to S fertilization in 31 % of the crop harvests, with an average yield increase of 16 %. Crops on soils with available SO 4 2--S contents above the critical level (viz., 7.5 mg dm -3 ) exhibited no positive response to S fertilization in any crop harvest (n = 18). Dry edible bean and corn were the most responsive crops, and canola and wheat, the least. For the trials with positive crop responses, a fertilizer rate of 26 kg ha -1 S sufficed to obtain at least 95 % of the maximum possible yield. In general, the S fertilization recommendations previously established for CT soil proved effective with grain crops on NT soils as a result of the critical levels of soil available SO 4 2--S and the fact that the recommended S rates are similar to those found in this study considering trials conducted under NT conditions only. However, existing recommendations could be improved by using additional criteria for soils with available SO 4 2--S contents below the critical level since a positive response was observed in 22 % (n = 18) and 92 % (n = 12) of the crop harvests under a subtropical and a tropical climate, respectively. Our results suggest that S fertilization must be prioritized in NT soils with available SO 4 2--S contents below 7.5 mg dm -3 in the 0.00-0.20 m layer, especially in tropical climate zones. In addition, regional fertilizer recommendation guidelines should consider crop type and yield expectation in order to facilitate more sustainable S management and increased crop yields in Brazil.

show abstract

Sugarcane response to polyhalite fertilizer in Brazilian Oxisols

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Polyhalite (PYH), (K 2 SO 4 ůMgSO 4 ů2CaSO 4 ů2H 2 O), contains four nutrients of great importance to sugarcane (Saccharum spp.), but has lower water solubility than traditional K fertilizers. Two studies were conducted to determine if PYH fertilizer (11.6% K) promoted sugarcane response comparable to other K fertilizers on highly weathered, acidic Oxisol soils in Brazil. A pot study compared PYH with potassium chloride (KCl, 50% K) and potassium sulfate (K 2 SO 4 , 40% K and 17% S), both amended to the same Ca, Mg, and S contents, applied at five rates ranging from 0 to 166 kg K ha −1 in limed and unlimed soil. A field study evaluated PYH with KCl applied in a 5-30-10 blend at planting followed by sidedress applications of K as PYH or KCl in the establishment year and two ratoon crops. In the pot study, there were minimal effects of fertilizer source and application rate on early growth in sugarcane while liming was detrimental. Uptake of K in the biomass was linear and similar among fertilizer sources. PYH increased S uptake and soil tests compared to KCl and K 2 SO 4. In the field study, KCl and PYH had similar sugarcane yield and quality with K uptake in both exceeding K applied and PYH increased S uptake and soil test SO 4-S. These studies confirm nutrient release from PYH to sugarcane was adequate and comparable to KCl and K 2 SO 4 , with some effect of PYH on nutrient uptake and soil test that did not affect sugarcane yield or quality.

show abstract

Uptake of elemental or sulfate-S from fall- or spring-applied co-granulated fertilizer by corn—A stable isotope and modeling study

Cited by 28 publications

References 37 publications

Sulfur modulates yield and storage proteins in soybean grains

Sulfur modulates yield and storage proteins in soybean grains

Crop Yield Responses to Sulfur Fertilization in Brazilian No-Till Soils: a Systematic Review

Sugarcane response to polyhalite fertilizer in Brazilian Oxisols

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About