Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rcrh6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T03:57:13.175Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Effects of spray application of urea fertilizer at stem extension on winter wheat: N recovery and nitrate leaching

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 October 2002

R. J. READMAN
Affiliation:
Crop and Environment Research Centre, Harper Adams University College, Newport, Shropshire, TF10 8NB, UK
C. P. BECKWITH
Affiliation:
Crop and Environment Research Centre, Harper Adams University College, Newport, Shropshire, TF10 8NB, UK
P. S. KETTLEWELL
Affiliation:
Crop and Environment Research Centre, Harper Adams University College, Newport, Shropshire, TF10 8NB, UK

Abstract

A field experiment was carried out at Harper Adams in Shropshire to investigate the effect of supplying the spring N application to winter wheat as different proportions of urea as a solution, rather than as conventional soil-applied solid urea, on N recovery in the above-ground crop, autumn soil mineral N and nitrate leaching over the subsequent winter. A solid ammonium nitrate treatment was also included to represent alternative commercial practice to solid urea. Treatments were repeated on the same plots over the 3 years 1992, 1993 and 1994. N recovery was measured in all 3 years by difference in N uptake between fertilized and unfertilized plots, and in 1993 for selected treatments, N was applied as 15N-labelled fertilizer to determine direct uptake of fertilizer N in the crop and soil. Both urea sprays and solid soil N applications were labelled with 15N. Urea sprays were split over several days to reduce scorch, whereas solid fertilizer was applied as a single dressing. For some urea spray treatments, apparent N recovery in the above-ground crop in 1992 and 1994 was less compared with soil-applied N treatments. These urea spray treatments were applied in the morning rather than the evening, and gaseous losses, most likely by volatilization, are suggested. In 1992 application of a large proportion of N as urea sprays, such that application of some N as urea solution was delayed to around GS 37, was associated with an increase in physiological N use efficiency. In 1993, there was no difference in direct or apparent recovery of fertilizer N in the crop or soil for N applied as ammonium nitrate, solid urea or as urea sprays. Mean nitrate concentration in the drainage water at 1 m was elevated for all N treatments in all years, but only in 1992 did nitrate concentration and leaching loss decrease with increasing proportion of N applied as urea sprays. It may therefore be possible to reduce gaseous losses by application of urea sprays under cool conditions in the evening and exploit the increased physiological N use efficiency for urea sprays applied later, such that total fertilizer N applied and N losses are reduced.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
© 2002 Cambridge University Press

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.)