Winter wheat response to nitrogen fertilizer form and placement in southern Alberta

Middleton, A. B.; Bremer, E.; McKenzie, Ross H.

doi:10.4141/s03-028

Cited by 20 publications

(29 citation statements)

References 8 publications

(12 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Similar to an earlier study (Middleton et al 2004), CRU was less effective than urea or ammonium nitrate when surface broadcast in early spring. The release of N from CRU was likely delayed by dry conditions and poor soil contact when applied to the soil surface, as indicated by the recovery of unaltered granules late in the season .…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 84%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Controlled-release urea for winter wheat in southern Alberta

McKenzie¹,

Bremer²,

Middleton³

et al. 2007

Can. J. Soil. Sci.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

. Controlled-release urea for winter wheat in southern Alberta. Can. J. Soil Sci. 87: 85-91. The recent development of low-cost controlled-release urea (CRU) may provide additional options for N fertilization of winter wheat (Triticum aestivum L.). Two field experiments were conducted over 3 yr at three locations in southern Alberta to evaluate different options of applying CRU to winter wheat. In the first experiment, three N fertilizers (20-day CRU, 40-day CRU and urea) were seed-placed and side-banded at the time of seeding at 0, 30, 60, 90 and 120 kg N ha -1 . Stand densities were substantially reduced by seedrow application of urea at rates greater than 30 kg N ha -1 , but were unaffected by seedrow application of CRU, even at the highest rate of N application. When N fertilizer was side-banded, stand densities were unaffected by fertilizer type or N rate. Yield gains due to N application were reduced by application of high rates of seed-placed urea, but similar for other treatments. Grain protein concentration and N uptake were also similar for CRU and seed-placed urea. In the second experiment, three N fertilizers (CRU, urea and ammonium nitrate) were broadcast at 30 kg N ha -1 in early spring on plots that had received 0, 30 or 60 kg N ha -1 of CRU at the time of seeding. Inadequate release of spring broadcast CRU was indicated by reduced grain protein concentrations relative to conventional N fertilizers. Under the conditions experienced in our study, CRU substantially increased the maximum safe rate of seed-placed urea, provided minimal benefits to N response relative to side-banded urea, and was less effective than conventional N fertilizers when broadcast in early spring. . Trois années durant, les auteurs ont effectué deux expériences sur le terrain à trois endroits du sud de l'Alberta afin d'évaluer les diverses possibilités de bonification du blé d'hiver avec de l'ULL. Pour la première expérience, ils ont appliqué trois engrais N (ULL 20 jours, ULL 40 jours et urée) avec la semence ou en bande latérale au moment des semis à raison de 0, 30, 60, 90 ou 120 kg de N par hectare. L'application d'urée aux lignes de semis à un taux de plus de 30 kg de N par hectare diminue sensiblement la densité du peuplement, mais cela n'est pas le cas quand on utilise de l'ULL, même aux taux les plus élevés. Quand l'engrais N est appliqué en bande latérale, le type d'engrais et le taux d'application n'affectent pas la densité du peuplement. L'application d'une quantité élevée d'urée avec la semence réduit les gains de rendement associés à l'application d'un engrais N, mais les autres traitements donnent des gains analogues. L'ULL et l'application d'urée avec la semence donnent aussi une concentration de protéines dans le grain et un taux d'absorption du N similaires. Lors de la deuxième expérience, les auteurs ont appliqué trois engrais N (ULL, urée et nitrate d'ammonium) à la volée à raison de 30 kg de N par hectare au début du printemps sur des parcelles bonifiées avec 0, 30 ou 60 kg de N par hectare sous forme d'UL...

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 84%

“…1). The level of protection provided by CRU in this study was greater than in a similar study conducted from 1999 to 2000 (Middleton et al 2004). In that study, stand densities were reduced by seedrow application of CRU at rates of 60 or 90 kg N ha -1 .…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 62%

Controlled-release urea for winter wheat in southern Alberta

McKenzie¹,

Bremer²,

Middleton³

et al. 2007

Can. J. Soil. Sci.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, winter survival was unaffected in other studies (Middleton et al 2004;Blackshaw 2004;Irvine et al 2010). Variation in the response to fall N fertilization may be due to differences in cold-tolerance among cultivars and in severity of cold temperature stress.…”

mentioning

confidence: 63%

“…However, in studies comparing urea and PCU applied at seeding for winter wheat, grain yield and protein concentration were similar as long as there was sufficient separation between the seed and applied urea (Middleton et al 2004;McKenzie et al 2007;Irvine et al 2010). The similar efficacy of PCU and urea in these studies was possibly due to relatively dry conditions and negligible over-winter N loss.…”

mentioning

confidence: 80%

“…In more humid regions of the prairies, spring broadcast ammonium nitrate was generally more effective than fall N application due to the greater risk of over-winter N loss (Grant et al 1985;Fowler and Brydon 1989a, b;Campbell et al 1991;Johnston and Fowler 1991a, b). For spring broadcast application, urea was less effective than ammonium nitrate in three of nine trials in a study by Fowler and Brydon (1989a), but equally effective in other studies (Campbell et al 1991;Middleton et al 2004;McKenzie et al 2007;Irvine et al 2010), despite the potential for volatilization losses of ammonia from broadcast urea (Harrison and Webb 2001).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Influence of N fertilization method on weed growth, grain yield and grain protein concentration in no-till winter wheat

Beres¹,

Harker²,

Clayton³

et al. 2010

Can. J. Plant Sci.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

. 2010. Influence of N fertilization method on weed growth, grain yield and grain protein concentration in no-till winter wheat. Can. J. Plant Sci. 90: 637Á644. Applying polymer-coated urea (PCU) instead of uncoated urea may benefit winter wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) production by reducing weed growth or increasing grain yield and protein concentration. Field trials were conducted for 3 yr under rainfed and irrigated conditions in Lethbridge and 2 yr under rainfed conditions in Lacombe to determine potential benefits of substituting urea with PCU for typical winter wheat production practices in Alberta. Four factors were included in each experiment: (1) urea type (urea, PCU and a 50:50 blend of urea and PCU), (2) application method (fall side-band vs. spring broadcast), (3) N rate (1) and 1.5 ) recommended N rate), and (4) herbicide application (none vs. full). Herbicide application substantially reduced weed biomass at all site-years, but only increased average grain yield by 9%. Dicot weed biomass was not affected by fertilizer treatment, but monocot weed biomass was less for fall banded than spring broadcast application and less for urea than PCU or blend at the 1 )N rate. Over all site-years, substitution of 50 or 100% of urea with PCU increased grain yield by an average of 4.3% and reduced protein concentration by 1.3%. Substitution of urea with PCU had the largest impact at the site-year with most severe drought stress, indicating that PCU benefits were probably due to factors other than reduced N loss. Further study is required to evaluate potential benefits from substitution of urea with PCU over a wide range of environmental conditions.

show abstract

Economic and Soil Environmental Benefits of Using Controlled‐Release Bulk Blending Urea in the North China Plain

Zhou

Shen

et al. 2017

Land Degrad Dev

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Crop production must be increased in order to ensure a sustainable food supply for the growing world population. Controlled‐release urea (CRU) improves nutrient use efficiency and saves labor, but its use in crop production is limited due to its high cost. Bulk blending urea (BBU) consists of both CRU and conventional urea and could be an excellent substitute or replacement for CRU. Nevertheless, its economic benefits and soil environment impact are unknown. A 3‐year field experiment was conducted to investigate the effects of two different nitrogen management practices in terms of economic benefits, soil mineral nitrogen availability, aggregate stability, and soil microbial communities. Split applications of conventional urea (UREA) and a single application of BBU were tested on winter wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) and summer maize (Zea mays L.) in the North China Plain between 2010 and 2013. Crop yields were measured after each harvest, and soil environmental parameters were determined after the 3‐year crop sequence. Relative to UREA, BBU significantly increased net revenue, soil inorganic nitrogen concentration, and the functional diversity of the soil microbial community without adverse effects on the soil bacterial community composition. On the other hand, BBU reduced the amount of soil macro‐aggregates and the mean weight diameter value of soil water‐stable aggregates. Although BBU showed great potential for improving wheat–maize cropping systems in the North China Plain, future studies should focus on optimizing the nitrogen dosage and the CRU ratio in BBU to decrease nitrogen leaching, avoid soil aggregate deterioration, and maintain crop yield. Copyright © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

show abstract

Winter wheat response to nitrogen fertilizer form and placement in southern Alberta

Cited by 20 publications

References 8 publications

Controlled-release urea for winter wheat in southern Alberta

Controlled-release urea for winter wheat in southern Alberta

Influence of N fertilization method on weed growth, grain yield and grain protein concentration in no-till winter wheat

Economic and Soil Environmental Benefits of Using Controlled‐Release Bulk Blending Urea in the North China Plain

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About