IMPACT OF SULFUR FERTILIZATION ON DIFFERENT FORMS AND BALANCE OF SOIL SULFUR AND THE NUTRITION OF WHEAT IN WHEAT-SOYBEAN CROPPING SEQUENCE IN<i>TARAI</i>SOIL

Singh, S. P.; Singh, Rashmi; Singh, Manju; Singh, Vijay

doi:10.1080/01904167.2013.867987

Cited by 21 publications

(20 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In a rice study, Singh Shivay et al (2014) estimated SUE to be 29.8% following application of 45 kg S ha –1 , which was lower than an average of 34.2% SUE for S rates ranging from 15 to 45 kg ha –1 . Singh et al (2014) recovered 11 to 18% of the applied S in wheat grain. However, prior studies reported much lower SUE in cereals.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Haque et al (2015) also made a similar observation and reported SUE for rice ( Oryza sativa L.) to be less than 10%. Singh et al (2014) analyzed S balance and noted that between 11 and 18% of S applied was taken up by wheat ( Triticum aestivum L.). The low SUE could be attributed to leaching of S from the soil profile, S retained in the crop residues and adsorbed to clay hydrous oxides and anion exchange sites (Singh et al, 2014).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Singh et al (2014) analyzed S balance and noted that between 11 and 18% of S applied was taken up by wheat ( Triticum aestivum L.). The low SUE could be attributed to leaching of S from the soil profile, S retained in the crop residues and adsorbed to clay hydrous oxides and anion exchange sites (Singh et al, 2014). In the same study, it was observed that between 25 and 40% of the applied S could not be accounted for in the soil, crop grain and/or residues.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

World Sulfur Use Efficiency for Cereal Crops

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Sulfur (S) is an essential plant nutrient needed for higher crop yields and improved nutritional value. In recent decades, the occurrence of S deficiency has increased and fertilizer S use may steadily increase. This may lead to inefficient crop utilization of S and result into negative footprints on the environment. The objective of this work was to estimate world fertilizer sulfur use efficiency (SUE) for major cereal crops grown around the world. A 10‐yr data set (2005–2014) was obtained from the Food and Agriculture Organization, the US Geological Survey, and an array of other published research articles. Statistical analysis was performed using MS Excel to obtain total area for world and cereal crops, grain yield, and fertilizer S applied. The difference method [(Total grain S – grain S derived from the soil)/S applied] was used to compute world SUE. Cereal crops included in this study were barley (Hordeum vulgare L.), maize (Zea mays L.), rice (Oryza sativa L.), millet (Pennisetum glaucum L.), wheat (Triticum aestivum L.), sorghum (Sorghum bicolor L.), rye (Secale cereale L.), and oat (Avena sativa L.). Cereal production increased from 2669 M Mg in 2005 to 3346 M Mg in 2014. Sulfur use efficiency for cereal crops was estimated to be 18%. This low SUE may be attributable to S leaching from the soil profile, immobilization, retention in residues, and adsorption. As increased quantities of fertilizer S are likely to be applied in future to meet the ever‐growing demand for food, SUE could decline below 18%. Core Ideas World sulfur use efficiency for cereal crops is unknown. World sulfur use efficiency for cereal crops was estimated to be 18%. More precision agriculture research is necessary to improve sulfur use efficiency for cereal crops. Reasons for low sulfur use efficiency include sulfur; leaching, adsorption, retention in residues, and immobilization as well as failure to adhere to sound agronomic practices and 4R concepts.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

World Sulfur Use Efficiency for Cereal Crops

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Applications of S fertilizer have also had mixed results. Divito, Echeverria, Andrade, and Sadras (2015) reported increased yields with S application, while Singh et al (2014) reported no response to S fertilizer. …”

Section: Soybean Response Following Cornmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Again, this could point to the lack of a good relationship between fertilizer treatments and plant S concentrations. Similarly, when S fertilizer was applied to wheat in a wheat-soybean rotation, no significant differences were reported in soybean S concentrations (Singh et al, 2014 Nutrient concentration and total plant tissue weights were used to calculate total plant uptake of P, S, and Zn (Table 11). Although significant differences were observed in plant nutrient concentrations, all treatments were similar when total plant uptake was calculated [P (P = 0.52), S (P = 0.49), and Zn (P = 0.60)].…”

Section: Soybean Response Following Cornmentioning

confidence: 99%

Co-Granulated and Blended Zinc Fertilizer Comparison for Corn and Soybean

Caldwell¹,

Nelson²,

Nathan³

2016

JAS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A new co-granulated formulation of monoammonium phosphate (MAP) including S and Zn could allow for more uniform nutrient distribution. A six site-year study evaluated the effects of blended phosphorus (P) sources [MAP and diammonium phosphate (DAP)] and zinc amounts (0, 2.2, and 5.6 kg Zn ha ) also showed no significant effect on yield. Applications of P or Zn generally increased their concentrations in post-harvest soil samples. Fertilizer applied for corn indicated some differences in soybean plant nutrient concentrations, but it had no effect on total plant nutrient uptake, grain yield or quality. At Novelty, soybean plant Zn concentration was greater at 5.6 kg Zn ha -1 compared to 2.2 kg Zn ha -1 , while Albany showed an increase in whole soybean plant Zn concentration with SuperZn compared to ZnSO 4 . Carry-over fertilizer from corn showed limited effects on soybean response the following year.

show abstract