4.4 Article

Nitrogen Placement and Source Effects on Nitrous Oxide Emissions and Yields of Irrigated Corn

Journal

JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
Volume 42, Issue 2, Pages 312-322

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.2134/jeq2012.0315

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Agrium Inc.
  2. Calgary
  3. Alberta
  4. Agrotain International, St. Louis, MO
  5. Fluid Fertilizer Foundation
  6. ARS GRACEnet project

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Limited information is available on how N fertilizer placement affects soil nitrous oxide (N2O) emissions under irrigated conditions in the semiarid western United States. Our objective was to compare surface banding near corn row and broadcasting of three N sources (urea, polymer-coated urea [PCU], and stabilized urea [SU] containing urease and nitrification inhibitors) on N2O emissions from a clay loam soil under sprinkler-irrigated continuous corn production. The N fertilizers were applied at a rate of 202 kg N ha(-1) to strip-till (2010 and 2011) and no-till (2011) corn at crop emergence, with similar to 19 mm irrigation water applied the next day. Band-applied N had a 1.46-fold greater N2O emission than broadcast N averaged over N sources and three studies. Soil N2O-N emissions from urea were 1.48- and 1.74-fold greater than from PCU and SU, respectively, when averaged over N placement and studies. The N placement x source interaction was not significant. Averaged across studies, grain yield and N uptake did not vary with N placement, whereas grain yields were greater for SU than PCU but were not different from urea. Nitrous oxide emissions per unit of N applied, per unit of grain yield, and per unit N uptake were 59, 49, and 47% greater, respectively, with banded than with broadcast N fertilizer. These studies show that N placement and N source selection are important manageable factors that can affect N2O emissions and need to be considered when developing N2O mitigation practices in irrigated cropping systems in the semiarid western United States.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available