Cotton yield response to fertilizer phosphorus under a range of nitrogen management tactics

Nachimuthu, Gunasekhar; Schwenke, Graeme; Baird, Jonathan C.; McPherson, Annabelle; Mercer, Clarence; Sargent, Brad; Hundt, Andy; MacDonald, Bennett

doi:10.1016/j.crope.2022.09.004

Cited by 3 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In general, with P application rates of 90 and 135 kg ha −1 , the maximum NPEs were 1.94 and 2.15 kg kg −1 , respectively, which was 1.32-1.47 times higher than with no P application. Similar results were reported in maize [21], wheat [52], and cotton crops [14,53]. However, excessive P application with 180 kg ha −1 led to a decline in NPE because it exceeded the optimal demands of maize plants under salt conditions.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 80%

Effects of Phosphate Application Rate on Grain Yield and Nutrition Use of Summer Maize under the Coastal Saline-Alkali Land

Ma,

Yuan,

Shi

et al. 2023

Agronomy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Saline-alkali soil is a major threat to global food security. Phosphorus (P) fertilizer is essential for crop growth and yield production. Nevertheless, the optimal phosphate fertilizer application rates for summer maize under coastal saline–alkali soil are still unclear. A field experiment with five phosphate application rates (0, 45, 90, 135, and 180 kg ha−1, referred to as T1, T2, T3, T4, and T5, respectively) was conducted during the 2018–2020 summer maize seasons study the effects of phosphate rates on the grain yield, biomass, and nitrogen (N), P and potassium (K) accumulation, and N, P, and K physiological efficiency (denoted as NPE, PPE and KPE, respectively). Results showed that P application notably improved maize grain and biomass yield, the total uptake of N, P, K, and NPE and KPE across three seasons. As the P addition increased to 135 kg ha−1, the grain yield achieved a maximum of 7168.4 kg ha−1, with an average NPE of 2.15 kg kg−1, PPE of 0.19 kg kg−1, and KPE of 1.49 kg kg−1. However, PPE continuously decreased with the input of phosphate. P application rates exceeding 135 kg ha−1 were not considered effective due to a decline in grain yield, nutrient uptake, and NPE. Furthermore, the effect of the planting season was significant on the total uptake of N and K, and the use efficiency of N, P, and K. TOPSIS revealed that a phosphate application rate of 90–135 kg ka−1 was the optimal pattern for maize production. These results may give a theoretical basis for the phosphate management of maize production in saline–alkali soil.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 80%

Effects of Phosphate Application Rate on Grain Yield and Nutrition Use of Summer Maize under the Coastal Saline-Alkali Land

Ma,

Yuan,

Shi

et al. 2023

Agronomy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It is possible, that these lower Colwell P values were attributed to the higher soil pH levels. In soils with elevated pH, the efficiency of applied fertilizer phosphorus (P) is likely reduced, as indicated by recent studies highlighting the inconsistent response to applied P fertilizer in alkaline soils (Bell, 2014; Griffith & Guppy, 2015; Nachimuthu, Schwenke, Baird, et al., 2022; Nachimuthu, Schwenke, Mercer, et al., 2022).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Soil property differences and irrigated‐cotton lint yield—Cause and effect? An on‐farm case study across three cotton‐growing regions in Australia

Nachimuthu,

Palmer,

Hundt

et al. 2024

Soil Use and Management

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The average lint yield of irrigated cotton in Australia ranges from 2270 to 3700 kg/ha, but yields vary substantially between farms and also between fields on the same farm. Differences in soil properties may cause these yield variations. Identifying which factors are causal and what management can be implemented to mitigate the impacts should help optimize inputs and improve profits. During the 2018–2019 summer cotton‐growing season, a paired‐field comparison approach was used to investigate and improve the understanding of soil property‐induced irrigated cotton yield differences within five farms across three regions of NSW, Australia. The paired fields at each farm recorded an average lint yield difference of >284 kg/ha (measured in 2018–2019 or 5‐year average lint yield). Several soil properties differed between the paired fields at each farm comparison. The soil organic carbon stocks were higher in the higher‐yielding fields at all the farm comparisons and the normalized lint yield percentage was positively correlated with soil organic carbon stocks. Soil sodicity was higher in the lower‐yielding fields at 3 of the 5 comparisons. Results for most soil nutrient tests were above the recommended critical concentrations for Australian cotton production. A stepwise linear regression excluding soil nutrients that were above soil test critical values for crop response and below crop toxicity levels indicated the lint yield was positively correlated with SOC stocks and negatively correlated with sodicity and bulk density. No earthworms were detected during visual soil assessment or soil sampling across all the sites. Visual soil assessment was not a sensitive predictor of cotton crop performance. Comparing soil properties using a paired field approach may assist cotton growers in understanding the factors behind yield differences. A similar strip comparison approach could be adopted for within‐field variability by dividing the fields into discrete performance zones and assessing the soil properties of each zone separately.

show abstract

Effects of sowing dates and phosphorus levels on cotton growth and yield: soil analysis and implications

Tlatlaa,

Tryphone,

Nassary

2023

Front. Sustain. Food Syst.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study assessed the effects of sowing dates and phosphorus levels on cotton performance in Chato-Msilale village in Chato District, Tanzania. The soil analysis revealed that field exhibited slightly acidic soil with normal electrical conductivity but suffered from severe deficiencies in total nitrogen and organic carbon. The same field presents common issue of low cation exchange capacity, indicating limited nutrient-holding capacity. Furthermore, both fields displayed very low levels of total nitrogen (<0.1%), signaling a nitrogen deficiency. Available phosphorus was rated as medium (16.8 mg kg−1 soil). Trace elements fluctuated and could be managed based on specific crop requirements. The factors at different levels were: (1) sowing dates – (i) 25th November 2022, (ii) 15th December 2022, and (iii) 4th January 2023; and (2) Phosphorus levels – (i) control, (ii) 20 kg P ha−1, (iii) 40 kg P ha−1, and (iv) 60 kg P ha−1. Regarding cotton growth and yield, sowing dates significantly (p < 0.001) influenced plant height, gin turnout, lint yield, number of bolls per plant, and boll weight while phosphorus levels did not exhibit significant effects. Earlier sowing dates resulted in higher yields, albeit with variations in yield components. Interactions showed that growth and yields were only numerically higher in the middle sowing date at higher levels of phosphorus applied. Overall, these insights offer valuable guidance for optimizing cotton cultivation in Chato District, emphasizing the importance of selecting appropriate sowing dates for improved yields.

show abstract

Cotton yield response to fertilizer phosphorus under a range of nitrogen management tactics

Cited by 3 publications

References 22 publications

Effects of Phosphate Application Rate on Grain Yield and Nutrition Use of Summer Maize under the Coastal Saline-Alkali Land

Effects of Phosphate Application Rate on Grain Yield and Nutrition Use of Summer Maize under the Coastal Saline-Alkali Land

Soil property differences and irrigated‐cotton lint yield—Cause and effect? An on‐farm case study across three cotton‐growing regions in Australia

Effects of sowing dates and phosphorus levels on cotton growth and yield: soil analysis and implications

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About