Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rcrh6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-30T16:07:08.195Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Ammonia loss from urea in grassland and its mitigation by the new urease inhibitor 2-NPT

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 March 2016

M. SCHRAML ,
R. GUTSER ,
H. MAIER  and
U. SCHMIDHALTER
M. SCHRAML*
Affiliation:
Chair of Plant Nutrition, Department of Plant Sciences, Technische Universität München, Emil-Ramann-Straße 2, 85350 Freising, Germany
R. GUTSER
Affiliation:
Chair of Plant Nutrition, Department of Plant Sciences, Technische Universität München, Emil-Ramann-Straße 2, 85350 Freising, Germany
H. MAIER
Affiliation:
Deutscher Wetterdienst, Agrarmeteorologie Weihenstephan, Alte Akademie 16, 85354 Freising, Germany
U. SCHMIDHALTER
Affiliation:
Chair of Plant Nutrition, Department of Plant Sciences, Technische Universität München, Emil-Ramann-Straße 2, 85350 Freising, Germany
*
*To whom all correspondence should be addressed. Email: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Following the surface application of granulated urea to grassland, high ammonia (NH3) losses of up to 30% have been reported. The addition of a urease inhibitor (UI) to urea granules could be a way to abate these losses. Field experiments were conducted at two intensive grassland sites in 2007 and 2008 to evaluate the potential of the new UI N-(2-nitrophenyl) phosphoric triamide (2-NPT; concentrations of 0·75, 1·0 and 1·5 g N/kg) to reduce NH3 emissions resulting from the application of granulated urea. Ammonia losses were continuously measured on plots fertilized with urea, urea + 2-NPT, calcium ammonium nitrate and a control (0N). The measurements were made with a dynamic chamber system. All measurement periods were started after a period of precipitation with a following rainless period being forecasted. Results over measurement periods of 10 days following fertilization are presented. Ammonia losses following the application of granulated urea varied between 4·6 and 11·8 kg N/ha, corresponding to 4·2 up to 14·0% of the applied nitrogen. The addition of 2-NPT to urea granules at three concentrations significantly reduced NH3 losses by 69–100%. Comparable losses of NH3 were observed for urea containing the UI 2-NPT as well as calcium ammonium nitrate, and were not significantly different from the control treatment. No relationships between losses, meteorological factors and soil moisture were observed. The addition of the UI 2-NPT to urea granules applied on grassland effectively reduced NH3 losses.

Type
Crops and Soils Research Papers
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 154 , Issue 8 , November 2016 , pp. 1453 - 1462
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2016 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Black, A. S., Sherlock, R. R. & Smith, N. P. (1987). Effect of timing of simulated rainfall on ammonia volatilization from urea, applied to soil of varying moisture content. Journal of Soil Science 38, 679–687.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bouwman, A. F. & Van Vuuren, D. P. (1999). Global Assessment of Acidification and Eutrophication of Natural Ecosystems. RIVM report 402001012. Bithoven, The Netherlands: National Institute of Public Health and the Environment.Google Scholar
Dawar, K., Zaman, M., Rowarth, J. S., Blennerhassett, J. & Turnbull, M. H. (2011). Urease inhibitor reduces N losses and improves plant-bioavailability of urea applied in fine particle and granular forms under field conditions. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment 144, 41–50.Google Scholar
Ernst, J. W. & Massey, H. F. (1960). The effects of several factors on volatilization of ammonia formed from urea in the soil. Soil Science Society of America Journal 24, 87–90.Google Scholar
Gee, G. W. & Bauder, J. W. (1986). Particle size analysis. In Methods of Soil Analysis – Part 1: Physical and Mineralogical Methods, 2nd edn (Ed. Klute, A.), pp. 383–411. Madison, WI: American Society of Agronomy & Soil Science Society of America.Google Scholar
Hucke, A., Niclas, H.-J., Wozniak, H., Michel, H.-J. & Schuster, C. (2010). N-phenylphosphoric Acid Triamides, Method for the Production thereof and their use as Agents for Regulating or Inhibiting Enzymatic Urea Hydrolysis. US Patent. Alexandria, VA: United States Patent and Trademark Office, PCT No.: PCT/EP2005/001157. Available from: http://www.google.co.uk/patents/US7855189 (accessed 15 October 2015).Google Scholar
IFADATA (2015). World Nitrogen Fertilizer Consumption 2013. Paris, France: IFA. Available from: http://ifadata.fertilizer.org/ucSearch.aspx (accessed 12 July 2015).Google Scholar
IUSS Working Group WRB (2007). World Reference Base for Soil Resources 2006. First Update 2007. World Soil Resources Reports No. 103. Rome: FAO.Google Scholar
Kandeler, E. & Gerber, H. (1988). Short-term assay of soil urease activity using colorimetric determination of ammonium. Biology and Fertility of Soils 6, 68–72.Google Scholar
Khalil, M. I., Buegger, F., Schraml, M., Gutser, R., Schmidhalter, U. & Richards, K. G. (2009). Gaseous nitrogen losses from a Cambisol cropped to spring wheat with urea sizes and placement depths. Soil Science Society of America Journal 73, 1335–1344.Google Scholar
Loeppert, R. H. & Suarez, D. L. (1996). Carbonate and gypsum. In Methods of Soil Analysis – Part 3: Chemical Methods (Eds Sparks, D. L., Page, A. L., Helmke, P. A., Loeppert, R. H., Soltanpour, P. N., Tabatabai, M. A., Johnston, C. T. & Sumner, M. E.), pp. 437–474. Madison, WI: Soil Science Society of America, Inc. and American Society of Agronomy.Google Scholar
Medina, R. & Radel, R. J. (1988). Mechanisms of urease inhibition. In Ammonia Volatilization from Urea Fertilizers (Eds Bock, B. R. & Kissel, D. E.), pp. 137–174. Bulletin Y-206. Muscle Shoals, AL: National Fertilizer Development Center.Google Scholar
Misselbrook, T. H., Nicholson, F. A., Chambers, B. J. & Johnson, R. A. (2005). Measuring ammonia emissions from land applied manure: an intercomparison of commonly used samplers and techniques. Environmental Pollution 135, 389–397.Google Scholar
Ni, K., Pacholski, A. & Kage, H. (2014). Ammonia volatilization after application of urea to winter wheat over 3 years affected by novel urease and nitrification inhibitors. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment 197, 184–194.Google Scholar
Pihlatie, M. K., Christiansen, J. R., Aaltonen, H., Korhonen, J. F. J., Nordbo, A., Rasilo, T., Benanti, G., Giebels, M., Helmy, M., Sheehy, J., Jones, S., Juszczak, R., Kiefoth, R., Lobo-Do-Vale, R., Rosa, A. P., Schreiber, P., Serca, D., Vicca, S., Wolf, B. & Pumpanen, J. (2013). Comparison of static chambers to measure CH4 emissions from soils. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology 171–172, 124–136.Google Scholar
R Development Core Team (2011). R: a Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing.Google Scholar
Saggar, S., Singh, J., Giltrap, D. L., Zaman, M., Luo, J., Rollo, M., Kim, D. G., Rys, G. & Van Der Weerden, T. J. (2013). Quantification of reductions in ammonia emissions from fertiliser urea and animal urine in grazed pastures with urease inhibitors for agriculture inventory: New Zealand as a case study. Science of the Total Environment 465, 136–146.Google Scholar
Sanz-Cobena, A., Misselbrook, T., Camp, V. & Vallejo, A. (2011). Effect of water addition and the urease inhibitor NBPT on the abatement of ammonia emission from surface applied urea. Atmospheric Environment 45, 1517–1524.Google Scholar
Schofield, R. K. & Taylor, A. W. (1955). The measurement of soil pH. Soil Science Society of America Journal 19, 164–167.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sherlock, R. R., Freney, J. R., Bacon, P. E. & Van Der Weerden, T. J. (1995). Estimating ammonia volatilization from unsaturated urea fertilized and urine affected soils by an indirect method. Fertilizer Research 40, 197–205.Google Scholar
Sommer, S. G., Schjoerring, J. K. & Denmead, O. T. (2004). Ammonia emission from mineral fertilizers and fertilized crops. Advances in Agronomy 82, 557–622.Google Scholar
Van Breemen, N., Burrough, P. A., Velthorst, E. J., Van Dobben, H. F., De Wit, T., Ridder, T. B. & Reijnders, H. F. R. (1982). Soil acidification from atmospheric ammonium sulphate in forest canopy throughfall. Nature 299, 548–550.Google Scholar
Van Der Weerden, T. J. & Jarvis, S. C. (1997). Ammonia emission factors for N fertilizers applied to two contrasting grassland soils. Environmental Pollution 95, 205–211.Google Scholar
Watson, C. J. (2000). Urease Activity and Inhibition – Principles and Practice. Proceedings No. 454. Colchester, UK: The International Fertiliser Society.Google Scholar
Watson, C. J., Stevens, R. J. & Laughlin, R. J. (1990). Effectiveness of the urease inhibitor NBPT (N-(n-butyl) thiophosphoric triamide) for improving the efficiency of urea for ryegrass production. Fertilizer Research 24, 11–15.Google Scholar
Watson, C. J., Poland, P., Miller, H., Allen, M. D. B., Garrett, M. K. & Christianson, C. B. (1994). Agronomic assessment and 15N recovery of urea amended with the urease inhibitor nBTPT (N-(n-butyl) thiophosphoric triamide) for temperate grassland. Plant and Soil 161, 167–177.Google Scholar
Wendland, M., Diepolder, M. & Capriel, P. (2012). Leitfaden für die Düngung von Acker- und Grünland, 10th edn. LfL-Information. Freising, Germany: Bayerische Landesanstalt für Landwirtschaft, Freising-Weihenstephan.Google Scholar
Zaman, M. & Blennerhassett, J. D. (2010). Effects of the different rates of urease and nitrification inhibitors on gaseous emissions of ammonia and nitrous oxide, nitrate leaching and pasture production from urine patches in an intensive grazed pasture system. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment 136, 236–246.Google Scholar
Zhu, T., Pattey, E. & Desjardins, R. L. (2000). Relaxed eddy-accumulation technique for measuring ammonia volatilization. Environmental Science & Technology 34, 199–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar