Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rcrh6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-03T19:57:34.706Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A comparison of the effects of prilled urea, used alone or with a nitrification or urease inhibitor, with those of ‘Nitro-Chalk’

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

G. A. Rodgers ,
A. Penny  and
M. V. Hewitt
G. A. Rodgers
Affiliation:
Soils and Plant Nutrition Department, Rothamsted Experimental Station, Harpenden, Herts, AL5 2JQ
A. Penny
Affiliation:
Soils and Plant Nutrition Department, Rothamsted Experimental Station, Harpenden, Herts, AL5 2JQ
M. V. Hewitt
Affiliation:
Soils and Plant Nutrition Department, Rothamsted Experimental Station, Harpenden, Herts, AL5 2JQ
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Prilled urea, with or without a nitrification inhibitor (dicyandiamide, DCD) or urease inhibitor (hydroquinone), was compared with ‘Nitro-Chalk’ as a nitrogen fertilizer for winter oil-seed rape in field experiments on a clay loam soil at Rothamsted in 1984 and 1985. Each was tested when supplying 50 kg N/ha to the seed bed; each was also broadcast in early spring to supply 150 kg N/ha as either a single dressing or two equal dressings, the form of nitrogen being the same as that applied in the seed bed.

Seed-bed nitrogen increased plant growth during autumn and winter in both years but increased yield only in 1985.

Scorching of plant leaves was severe in spring after application of urea or urea plus DCD given as a single dressing, but was much less with urea plus hydroquinone or when the dressings were divided. DCD inhibited nitrification of fertilizer nitrogen but had little effect on yield compared with urea alone. Ammonia volatilization losses were reduced by urea plus hydroquinone but, irrespective of the type of fertilizer applied, loss was always less than 3% of the nitrogen applied. Soil pH rose rapidly after urea application and thereafter fell slowly, whereas pH fell immediately after application of ‘Nitro-Chalk’. Neither dicyandiamide nor hydroquinone affected the pH changes after urea application. Overall, grain yields from urea were 90%, whereas those from urea plus hydroquinone were 97%, of those obtained from ‘Nitro-Chalk’. Dividing the spring dressings of urea-nitrogen increased yield in 1985 compared with a single dressing, but not in 1984. Yields from divided and single dressings of ‘Nitro-Chalk’ were similar. Oil and protein yields generally showed the same patterns of response to the fertilizer treatments as were shown by grain yields.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 106 , Issue 3 , June 1986 , pp. 515 - 526
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1986

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

Anon. (1984). Western Europe: urea use in perspective. Nitrogen 149, 24–26.Google Scholar
Ashworth, J., Widdowson, F. V., Penny, A., Gibbs, A. J., Hodgkinson, R. A. & Hewitt, M. V. (1982). Results from an experiment on permanent grass evaluating the cumulative effects of aqueous urea, injected alone or with a nitrification inhibitor, with those of ‘Nitro-Chalk’. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 98, 141–154.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barker, A. V. & Mills, H. A. (1980). Ammonium and nitrate nutrition of horticultural crops. Horticultural Reviews 2, 395–423.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barraclough, P. B., Ashton, R. W., Doran, J. L., Green, N. D. & Kent, R. J. (1985). Root growth of winter oilseed rape. Rothamsted Experimental Station, Report for 1984, p. 183.Google Scholar
Bundy, L. G. & Bremner, J. M. (1974 a). Effects of urease inhibitors on nitrification in soils. Soil Biology and Biochemistry 6, 27–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bundy, L. G. & Bremner, J. M. (1974 b). Effects of nitrification inhibitors on transformations of urea nitrogen in soils. Soil Biology and Biochemistry 6, 369–376.Google Scholar
Chapman, H. D. & Liebig, G. F. (1952). Field and laboratory studies of nitrite accumulation in soils. Soil Science Society of America Proceedings 16, 276–282.Google Scholar
Church, B. M. (1985). Use of fertilizers in England and Wales 1984. Rothamsted Experimental Station, Report for 1984, pp. 277–284.Google Scholar
Dawkins, T. C. K. (1983). Some factors in successful cropping. 2. Oilseed rape. Span, 03 1983, 116–117.Google Scholar
Fenn, L. B. & Kissel, D. E. (1973). Ammonia volatilization from surface application of ammonium compounds on calcareous soils. 1. General theory. Soil Science Society of America Proceedings 37, 855–859.Google Scholar
Franck, E. Von & Becker, F. A. (1982). Results of long-term field trials to optimize N fertilization of winter rape. Landwirtschaftliche Forschung 35, 109–118.Google Scholar
Gasser, J. K. R. (1964). Urea as a fertilizer. Soils and Fertilizers 27, 175–180.Google Scholar
Hageman, R. H. (1980). Effect of form of nitrogen on plant growth. In Nitrification inhibitors – Potentials and limitations (ed. Stelly, M.), pp. 47–62. Madison, Wisconsin: American Society of Agronomy.Google Scholar
Hollies, J. D. & Bosdet, N. J. (1982). Growing oilseed rape. Farm Advisory Note No. 19, 17 pp. ICI Agricultural Division, Billingham.Google Scholar
Holmes, M. R. J. (1980). Nutrition of the Oilseed Rape Crop, 158 pp. Barking, England: Applied Science Publishers.Google Scholar
Jansson, S. L. & Persson, J. (1982). Mineralization and immobilization of soil nitrogen. In Nitrogen in Agricultural Soils (ed. Stevenson, F. J.), pp. 229–252. Madison, Wisconsin: American Society of Agronomy.Google Scholar
Marshall, W. G. & Debell, D. S. (1980). Comparison of four methods of measuring volatilization losses of nitrogen following urea fertilization of forest soils. Canadian Journal of Soil Science 60, 549–563.Google Scholar
Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (1983). Oilseed rape. A.D.A.S. booklet No. 2278, 42 pp.Google Scholar
Mudahar, M. S. & Hignett, T. P. (1982). Energy and fertilizer. International Fertilizer Development Center, Technical Bulletin T-20, 44–46.Google Scholar
Mulvaney, R. L. & Bremner, J. M. (1978). Use of p-benzoquinone and hydroquinone for retardation of urea hydrolysis in soils. Soil Biology and Biochemistry 10, 297–302.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mulvaney, R. L. & Bremner, J. M. (1981). Control of urea transformations in soils. In Soil Biochemistry, Vol. 5 (ed. Paul, E. A. and Ladd, J. N.), pp. 153–196. New York: Marcel Dekker Inc.Google Scholar
Nelson, D. W. (1982). Gaseous losses of nitrogen other than through denitrification. In Nitrogen in Agricultural Soils (ed. Stevenson, F. J.), pp. 327–363. Madison, Wisconsin: American Society of Agronomy.Google Scholar
Ogilvy, S. (1985). Nitrogen for winter oilseed rape. High Mowthorpe Experimental Husbandry Farm, Annual Review for 1985, pp. 28–33.Google Scholar
Rodgers, G. A. & Pruden, G. (1984). Field estimation of ammonia volatilisation from 15N-labelled urea fertilizer. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 35, 1290–1293.Google Scholar
Rodgers, G. A., Widdowson, F. V., Penny, A. & Hewitt, M. V. (1984). Comparison of the effects of prilled urea, used alone or with urease or nitrification inhibitors, with those of ‘Nitro-Chalk’ on ryegrass leys. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 103, 671–685.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Slangen, J. H. G. & Kerkhoff, P. (1984). Nitrification inhibitors in agriculture and horticulture: a literature review. Fertilizer Research 5, 1–76.Google Scholar
Whitear, J. (1984). Seedbed fertilizer for oilseed rape. AgTec 1984, 12–13.Google Scholar
Zeleny, L. & Coleman, D. A. (1937). Rapid determination of oil content and oil quality in flaxseed. United States Department of Agriculture, Technical Bulletin No. 554, 38 pp.Google Scholar