Water regime affects soil N2O emission and tomato yield grown under different types of fertilisers

Vitale, Luca; Tedeschi, Anna; Polimeno, Franca; Ottaiano, Lucia; Maglione, Giuseppe; Arena, Carmen; Marco, Anna De; Magliulo, Vincenzo

doi:10.4081/ija.2017.989

Cited by 11 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 22 publications

(27 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, our wet weight of tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum Mill) subjected to the application of seaweed fertilizer is in the range of 3.52-4.36 kg m −2 , which reveals the enhancement by 1.8-2.2 compared with the previously reported weights (Alawathugoda and Dahanayake, 2015). On the other hand, it does not reach the yield level of tomato (Solanum lycopersicum L.) treated with organic mineral fertilizer at the dose of 80 t ha −1 with the equivalent of 8 kg m −2 (Vitale et al, 2017) and Sainto tomato (CTX 201) treated with bioorganic fertilizer at the dose of 9 kg m −2 (Liu et al, 2015).…”

Section: The Effects Of Seaweed Fertilizer On Tomato Qualitymentioning

confidence: 55%

Responses of soil microbial communities to a short-term application of seaweed fertilizer revealed by deep amplicon sequencing

Wang

Chen

et al. 2018

Applied Soil Ecology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Numerous studies have reported soil damage from chemical fertilizer application and an obvious promotional effect of seaweed fertilizer fermented with Sargassum horneri on the growth of tomato roots and seedlings due to its alginate oligosaccharide. However, few studies have assessed the effects of the fermented seaweed fertilizer on ecological environment and microorganisms in soil. Herein, our objective is to uncover microbial and soil environmental responses to Sargassum horneri-fermented seaweed fertilizer. After treated tomato-planting plots with Sargassum horneri fermented seaweed fertilizer, soil bacterial community compositions based on 16S rRNA gene amplicon sequencing, enzyme activities in soil and crop yield were analyzed. The bacterial α-diversity was strongly influenced by seaweed fertilizer amendment after 60 days. Non-metric multidimensional scaling (NMDS) analysis showed that a difference in bacterial community compositions between day 0 and day 60 was obvious for soil treated with seaweed fertilizer. The community variation could be caused by invertase activity and dehydrogenase activity in canonical correlation analysis (CCA). Protease activity, polyphenol oxidase activity and urease activity showed an obvious correlation with community variation in the Mantel test. The fertilization increased tomato yield by 1.48-1.83 times, Vc content by 1.24-4.55 times and lycopene content by 1.20-2.33 times. In the present study, a possible reason for bacterial community variation was discovered, which will provide an economical dilution rate of seaweed fertilizer for optimal crop yield and quality. Meanwhile, our study will be beneficial for developing a possible substitute for chemical fertilizer and an improved understanding of soil microbial functions and soil sustainability.

show abstract

Section: The Effects Of Seaweed Fertilizer On Tomato Qualitymentioning

confidence: 55%

Responses of soil microbial communities to a short-term application of seaweed fertilizer revealed by deep amplicon sequencing

Wang

Chen

et al. 2018

Applied Soil Ecology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…We carefully selected the temperature range from 17 • C to 37 • C because this range provides the optimum temperature for nitrification activity carried out by both AOA and AOB, and also represents the temperature range often used in recent studies to inhibit nitrification in different agriculture and pasture soils [7,25,26]. A total of 288 different scenarios were studied representing four different concentrations of DCD and DMPP (0.2 mg kg −1 , 0.6 mg kg −1 , 1.2 mg kg −1 , and 1.8 mg kg −1 of dry soil, respectively), with a control (no application of NIs) incubated at four different temperatures (17 • C, 23 • C, 30 • C, and 37 • C), imposed upon eight cropland and non-cropland soils exhibiting different soil nitrification responses.…”

Section: Soil Incubation and Nitrification Potential Measurementmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Regarding the inhibition effect of DCD and DMPP, previous studies suggest an application rate, of DCD ≥5 kg NI ha −1 and DMPP ≥1 kg NI ha −1 , is necessary for an efficient N 2 O reduction in various grassland and agriculture soils [7,[16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24]. Moreover, the effectiveness and persistence of these NIs are associated with temperature [20], and other soil processes (i.e., mineralization, microbial assimilation, sorption) and therefore, to environmental and edaphic properties [7,[25][26][27][28][29][30]. The picture that emerges from these studies is that the persistence of both DCD and DMPP varies from a few weeks to months, depending upon the soil temperature [7,31].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Soil Nitrification Potential Influences the Performance of Nitrification Inhibitors DCD and DMPP in Cropped and Non-Cropped Soils

Mukhtar

Lin

2019

Agronomy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The application of nitrification inhibitors (NIs) shows promise in prolonging the ammonium presence in soil with beneficial effects for agriculture ecosystems and climate change mitigation. Although the inhibitory effect (IE) of NIs has been studied in the presence of various environmental and edaphic conditions, little is known about the effect of soil nitrification potential (NP) on the effectiveness of NIs. Here, laboratory-scale experiments were conducted to investigate the effect of the variation in soil NP rates, among land-use type and temperature, on the performance of two nitrification inhibitors, dicyandiamide (DCD) and 3,4-dimethypyrazole phosphate (DMPP), at four NI application rates imposed upon eight cropland and non-cropland soils. We found that the IE of DCD and DMPP were organized according to soil NP rates. Nevertheless, NP was lower in non-cropped soil than in cropped systems, and DMPP-based inhibition was higher than DCD. The IE of both NIs decreased with NP and the amount of NI required to achieve an IE ≈ 50%, was significantly reduced for soils that exhibited the lowest NP rates, especially for DMPP. However, the temperature did not appear to have a major influence on IE of both DCD and DMPP, demonstrating the potential of NIs to inhibit nitrification for a wider temperature range, dependent on the NI application rate. Our findings provide evidence that change in soil NP rate has important influences on the efficacy of NI which required great consideration for N-fertilizer optimization with the application of nitrification inhibitors.

show abstract

“…In some cultivated areas, the average N rate is 352 kg ha −1 during the rice season, which is much higher than the suggested optimum rate 5 . Moreover, a considerable amount of N fertilizer is highly prone to losses through leaching, nitrification, denitrification and volatilization, 6 and N is easily wasted as surface runoff during flooding irrigation of paddy fields. A series of environmental problems, including greenhouse gas emissions, soil acidification, eutrophication and a loss of biodiversity, 7 result from excessive N fertilization.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 93%

Controlled‐release urea improved rice yields by providing nitrogen in synchrony with the nitrogen requirements of plants

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BACKGROUND Excessive application of nitrogen (N) fertilizer and low nitrogen‐use efficiency (NUE) are prevalent problems in rice production. Controlled‐release urea (CRU) is widely adopted to increase rice yields, but the synchronicity of N release from CRU with uptake of N by plants has rarely been studied. A 2‐year field experiment involving CRU and urea applications at three different N rates (240, 192 and 144 kg N ha−1, equal to 100%, 80% and 60% of the recommended rate, respectively) was performed to compare their effects on N uptake, soil N content and rice yields. RESULTS The successive release curves of CRU in the soil matched the corresponding N uptake curves of rice plants, and significant linear correlations were observed. Grain yield and N uptake under the CRU treatment increased by 5.25–7.88% and 7.13–17.94% than urea treatments, at the same N rate, and no obvious difference was found between CRU60% and Urea100%. CRU80% and CRU60% presented the highest NUE. The contents of ammonium‐nitrogen (NH4+‐N), nitrate‐nitrogen (NO3‐‐N), and total N and the chlorophyll relative value – SPAD (Soil Plant Analysis Development) values – of the leaves under the CRU treatments were significantly higher than those under the urea treatments from heading to harvest. The contents of exchangeable sodium ion (Na+) and calcium ion (Ca2+) and the cation exchange capacity increased in response to CRU. CONCLUSION CRU increased rice yields by providing N strongly in synchrony with the N requirements of the plants, and applying CRU at 192 kg N ha−1 was an effective strategy to conserve N fertilizer, increase soil N contents and enhance NUE. © 2021 Society of Chemical Industry

show abstract

Water regime affects soil N2O emission and tomato yield grown under different types of fertilisers

Cited by 11 publications

References 22 publications

Responses of soil microbial communities to a short-term application of seaweed fertilizer revealed by deep amplicon sequencing

Responses of soil microbial communities to a short-term application of seaweed fertilizer revealed by deep amplicon sequencing

Soil Nitrification Potential Influences the Performance of Nitrification Inhibitors DCD and DMPP in Cropped and Non-Cropped Soils

Controlled‐release urea improved rice yields by providing nitrogen in synchrony with the nitrogen requirements of plants

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About