Benefits and Risks for the Environment and Crop Production with Application of Nitrification Inhibitors in China

Gao, Jichao; Luo, Junyu; Lindsey, Stuart; Shi, Yunfeng; Sun, Zhaolin; Wei, Zhanbo; Wang, Lingli

doi:10.1007/s42729-020-00378-9

Cited by 22 publications

(20 citation statements)

References 63 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…(c) Regional and national level meta-analyses were included (e.g. Aguilera et al 2013, Gao et al 2021 due to their extensive geographical scope. However, meta-analyses with small regional scope (i.e.…”

Section: Eligibility Criteriamentioning

confidence: 99%

Synthesizing the evidence of nitrous oxide mitigation practices in agroecosystems

Grados

Butterbach‐Bahl

Chen

et al. 2022

Environ. Res. Lett.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Nitrous oxide (N2O) emissions from agricultural soils are the main source of atmospheric N2O, a potent greenhouse gas, and key ozone-depleting substance. Several agricultural practices with potential to mitigate N2O emissions have been tested worldwide. However, to guide policymaking for reducing N2O emissions from agricultural soils, it is necessary to better understand the overall performance and variability of mitigation practices and identify those requiring further investigation. We performed a systematic review and a second-order meta-analysis to assess the abatement efficiency of N2O mitigation practices from agricultural soils. We used 27 meta-analyses including 41 effect sizes based on 1119 primary studies. Technology-driven solutions (e.g., enhanced-efficiency fertilizers, drip irrigation, and biochar) and optimization of fertilizer rate have considerable mitigation potential. Agroecological mitigation practices (e.g., organic fertilizer and reduced tillage), while potentially contributing to soil quality and carbon storage, may enhance N2O emissions and only lead to reductions under certain pedoclimatic and farming conditions. Other mitigation practices (e.g., lime amendment or crop residue removal) led to marginal N2O decreases. Despite the variable mitigation potential, evidencing the context-dependency of N2O reductions and tradeoffs, several mitigation practices may maintain or increase crop production, representing relevant alternatives for policymaking to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and safeguard food security.

show abstract

Section: Eligibility Criteriamentioning

confidence: 99%

Synthesizing the evidence of nitrous oxide mitigation practices in agroecosystems

Grados

Butterbach‐Bahl

Chen

et al. 2022

Environ. Res. Lett.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It has been reported that sulfate (SO 4 - ) is possibly reduced to thiosulfate (S 2 O 3 2- ), which is a nitrification inhibitor [ 13 ]. Moreover, the synergistic effect of anions and NIs might improve the inhibition effect of NIs [ 14 ]. In addition, DCD was more widely used in some countries especially in New Zealand as it was less volatile, easily souble in water and relatively cheaper than other NIs [ 15 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of combined nitrification inhibitors on soil nitrification, maize yield and nitrogen use efficiency in three agricultural soils

Cui

Li²,

Wu³

et al. 2022

PLoS ONE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Application of nitrification inhibitors (NIs) with nitrogen (N) fertilizer is one of the most efficient ways to improve nitrogen use efficiency (NUE). To fully understand the efficiency of NIs with N fertilizer on soil nitrification, yield and NUE of maize (Zea mays L.), an outdoor pot experiment with different NIs in three soils with different pH was conducted. Five treatments were established: no fertilizer (Control); ammonium sulfate (AS); ammonium sulfate + 3, 4-dimethyl-pyrazolate phosphate (DMPP) (AD); ammonium sulfate + nitrogen protectant (N-GD) (AN); ammonium sulfate + 3, 4-dimethyl-pyrazolate phosphate + nitrogen protectant (ADN). The results showed that NIs treatments (AD, AN and ADN) significantly reduced soil nitrification in the brown and red soil, especially in AD and ADN, which decreased apparent nitrification rate by 28% - 44% (P < 0.05). All NIs treatments significantly increased yield and NUE of maize in three soils, especially ADN in the cinnamon soil and AD in the red soil were more efficiency, which significantly increased maize yield and apparent nitrogen recovery by 5.07 and 6.81 times, 4.39 and 8.16 times, respectively. No significant difference on maize yield was found in the brown soil, but AN significantly increased apparent nitrogen recovery by 70%. Given that the effect of NIs on both soil nitrification and NUE of maize, DMPP+N-GD was more efficient in the cinnamon soil, while N-GD and DMPP was the most efficiency in the brown and red soil, respectively. In addition, soil pH and soil organic matter play important role in the efficiency of NIs.

show abstract

“…Activated sludge practices that have a total nitrogen (TN) release limit should denitrify it (Holmes et al, 2019). Several benefits have been documented, that is, reduction in nitrate effluent concentration, reduction in oxygen demand, reduction of rising sludge in SSTs, retrieval of alkalinity, high reactor pH, reduced aggression to concrete (J. Gao et al, 2021; Ranatunga et al, 2018). Nitrification and aerobic denitrification could be considered an ecofriendly process.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Systematic review: External carbon source for biological denitrification for wastewater

Ahmed

Rind

2022

Biotech & Bioengineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Nitrogen mitigation is serious environmental issue around the globe. Several methods for wastewater treatment have been introduced, but biological denitrification has been recommended, particularly with addition of the best external carbon source. The key sites of denitrification are wetlands; it can be carried out with different methods. To highlight the aforementioned technology, this paper deals to review the literature to evaluate biological denitrification and to demonstrate cost effective external carbon sources. The results of systematic review disclose the denitrification process and addition of different external carbon sources. The online literature exploration was accomplished using the most well‐known databases, that is, science direct and the web of science database, resulting 625 review articles and 3084 research articles, published in peer‐reviewed journals between 2015 and 2021 were identified in first process. After doing an in‐depth literature survey and exclusion criteria, we started to shape the review from selected review and research articles. A number of studies confirmed that both nitrification and denitrification are significant for biological treatment of wastewater. The studies proved that the carbon source is the main contributor and is a booster for the denitrification. Based on the literature reviewed it is concluded that biological denitrification with addition of external carbon source is cost effective and best option in nitrogen mitigation in a changing world. Our study recommends textile waste for recovery of carbon source.

show abstract

Benefits and Risks for the Environment and Crop Production with Application of Nitrification Inhibitors in China

Cited by 22 publications

References 63 publications

Synthesizing the evidence of nitrous oxide mitigation practices in agroecosystems

Synthesizing the evidence of nitrous oxide mitigation practices in agroecosystems

Effects of combined nitrification inhibitors on soil nitrification, maize yield and nitrogen use efficiency in three agricultural soils

Systematic review: External carbon source for biological denitrification for wastewater

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About