Nitrogen Release from Coated Urea Fertilizers in Different Soils

Cahill, Sheri; Osmond, Deanna L.; Israel, Daniel W.

doi:10.1080/00103621003721437

Cited by 29 publications

(21 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Previous experimentation (Cahill et al, 2010a) demonstrated that time was a factor and since our objective was to compare NH 4 -N and NO 3 -N at each time interval, standard deviations were used to compare products. Error bars for data points from the laboratory incubation are based on the standard deviation of replicates of each product treatment at each sampling date.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The procedure for this aerobic incubation experiment to measure conversion of NH 4 -N to NO 3 -N was adapted from Cahill et al (2010a). A composite soil sample from each 2015 maize trial site was collected at depth of 0 to 20 cm from unfertilized plots and mixed in a large plastic bucket.…”

Section: Laboratory Incubationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Distilled water was added to each bag to bring the moisture level to 80% of field capacity, after which they were then sealed and placed in an incubator at a relatively constant temperature of 23 to 26°C. Bags were aerated once weekly, which previously was demonstrated to provide sufficient carbon dioxide and oxygen exchange (Gordon 1988), and weighed to determine moisture loss (Cahill et al, 2010a;Gordon 1988). Additional distilled water was added to bags with a weight decrease of 5% or more to maintain ~80% field capacity.…”

Section: Laboratory Incubationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Evaluation of Nitrogen‐Loss Prevention Amendments in Maize and Wheat in North Carolina

et al. 2017

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Core Ideas Fertilizer additives to decrease N losses did not provide consistent yield advantages. Plots treated with N‐loss products did not increase N use efficiency or N uptake. Agronomic optimum N rates observed in the field aligned with North Carolina recommendations. To reduce environmental losses of N and increase crop use, it is critical to optimize N fertilization rates and determine if N‐loss prevention amendments increase yields. Research objectives were to: (i) determine N‐release patterns of three N‐loss amendments (urea ammonium nitrate [UAN] treated with NBPT+DCD, nitrapyrin, or an organo‐Ca) and UAN through a laboratory incubation; (ii) determine effectiveness of these four products for maize (Zea mays L.) and winter wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) produced in two to three regions of North Carolina; and (iii) determine agronomic optimum N rate for wheat and corn compared to state‐recommended rates. Nitrogen release was measured in three soils (coastal plain, piedmont, and mountains) during the incubation experiment. Field experiments were randomized complete block designs (four replications of six maize N rates and five wheat N rates), with each rate applied as one of four product treatments (UAN and UAN+ one of three N‐loss prevention amendments). In the incubation experiment, soils treated with UAN+nitrapyrin or UAN+NBPT+DCD delayed nitrification longer than soils treated with UAN or UAN+organo‐Ca. There was no significant effect of product on maize grain yield (coastal plain and mountains) and wheat yield (coastal plain and piedmont). A year × product interaction occurred for maize grain yield in the piedmont. Agronomic optimum N rates mostly aligned with current North Carolina N fertilizer recommendations. Despite positive laboratory results, N‐loss amendments did not have a significant effect on yield in 9 of 10 site‐years, indicating that proper N rates are a more effective nutrient management strategy.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Laboratory Incubationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Laboratory Incubationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Evaluation of Nitrogen‐Loss Prevention Amendments in Maize and Wheat in North Carolina

et al. 2017

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The literature highlights that the moisture‐release mechanism of ESN can make application timing difficult. An incubation study at a constant moisture level confirmed that ESN released N more slowly than UAN (7–42 days depending on soil type) (Cahill et al, 2010a). However, in the field and particularly in rain‐fed conditions, inconsistent patterns of N cycling and plant uptake can reduce synchronization between N availability and crop demand (Dell et al, 2014).…”

mentioning

confidence: 97%

Evaluation of Environmentally Smart Nitrogen in Winter Wheat in North Carolina

Rajkovich

Osmond

Weisz

et al. 2017

Crop Forage & Turfgrass Mgmt

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Core Ideas Environmentally Smart Nitrogen (ESN) and ESN mixtures with ammonium sulfate did not increase grain yield over urea–ammonium nitrate. Effects of ESN timing varied due to year and physiographic region. Environmentally Smart Nitrogen does not appear to provide agronomic benefit to wheat in North Carolina. Winter wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) field trials were conducted from 2013 to 2015 to evaluate effectiveness of Environmentally Smart Nitrogen (ESN) in two different physiographic regions in North Carolina: Coastal Plain and Piedmont. Trials were designed to (i) determine the effectiveness of ESN alone or in blend with ammonium sulfate compared with standard fertilizer applications; and (ii) identify optimum timing of application. At plant, all plots received starter fertilizer as urea–ammonium nitrate (UAN) at the rate of 30 lb N acre−1. An additional 105 lb N acre−1 was applied as one of six treatments in the winter (late January through early February) and/or spring (early March). Winter treatments consisted of 100% ESN, or blends with ESN providing either 75 or 50% of total N (ammonium sulfate provided the remainder). A fourth treatment consisted of spring ESN application providing 50% of the total N (the remainder from ammonium sulfate). Two final treatments provided N from UAN and ammonium sulfate, either as split application (late winter and early spring) or spring application. Compared with fertilizer applications without ESN, ESN treatments did not differ for grain or straw yield, or grain, straw, or crop N uptake in the Piedmont. In the Coastal Plain, 2013–2014 ESN treatments returned higher yields when applied in spring than in winter applications; spring‐applied treatment without ESN had higher yields than ESN treatments. In 2014 to 2015, there were no yield differences between the ESN treatments and the non‐ESN treatments. Environmentally Smart Nitrogen does not appear to provide an agronomic benefit to wheat production in North Carolina.

show abstract

“…Slow/controlled release fertilizers have been based on urea-aldehyde resins, polyvinylidene chloride [14][15][16], hydrogel nanocomposites [17,18], kaolin-chitosan systems [19,20], polysulfones [21,22], polyamides [23], polyesters [24], polyvinyl alcohol [25], polyurethanes [26,27], and other hybrid systems [28]. Current trends focus on biopolymers [29].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Synthesis Optimization and Characterization of Microencapsulated N-P-K Slow-Release Fertilizers

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Slow-release microencapsulated N, P, and K fertilizer synthesis was optimized and the products exhaustively characterized. Four NPK formulations with nutrient mass ratios of 1:0:0, 1:1:0, 1:1:1, and 2:1:1 were characterized following European Council Regulation 2003/2003 for fertilizers as well as ICP-AES, 1 H-NMR, FT-IR, HPLC, elemental analysis, XPS, SEM, dynamic light scattering, thermogravimetry, differential thermogravimetry, activity index, and leaching rate. These fertilizers have good slow-release properties and decrease waste and crop contaminants, improving environmental protection. Compared to classic granulated fertilizers, plant nutrient availability was improved allowing reduced application. Nutrient leaching parameters describing four different kinetic models were evaluated.

show abstract

Nitrogen Release from Coated Urea Fertilizers in Different Soils

Cited by 29 publications

References 18 publications

Evaluation of Nitrogen‐Loss Prevention Amendments in Maize and Wheat in North Carolina

Evaluation of Nitrogen‐Loss Prevention Amendments in Maize and Wheat in North Carolina

Evaluation of Environmentally Smart Nitrogen in Winter Wheat in North Carolina

Synthesis Optimization and Characterization of Microencapsulated N-P-K Slow-Release Fertilizers

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About