4.7 Article

Straw management, crop rotation and nitrogen source effect on carbon and nitrogen dynamics: A laboratory study

Journal

PLANT AND SOIL
Volume 325, Issue 1-2, Pages 243-253

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s11104-009-9975-3

Keywords

C and N mineralization; Chicken manure; Clean fallow; N2O emissions; N-2 emission; Sesbania spp.

Funding

  1. Cinvestav (Mexico)
  2. 'Instituto Tecnologico de Sonora' (ITSON) (Mexico)
  3. Mexican Academy of Science 2007
  4. 'Consejo Nacional de Ciencia y Tecnologia' (CONACyT, Mexico)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Straw incorporation, crop rotation and organic fertilizer applications have been proposed to counter the negative effects of straw burning, inorganic N fertilizer application and intensive agriculture practices for wheat production in the state of Sonora (M,xico). A laboratory study was done to investigate how these alternative agriculture practices applied for 9 years affected carbon dioxide (CO2), nitrous oxide (N2O) and nitrogen (N-2) emissions and inorganic N in soil. Emission of CO2 decreased 1.2 times in soil burned compared to soil where residue was incorporated, but emissions of N-2 increased 4.1 times and the increase in inorganic N or the N mineralization rate 1.4 times. Including Sesbania spp. in the crop rotation reduced N mineralization rate 1.2 times when residue was burned, but increased it 1.5 times when it was incorporated compared to clean fallow or the cultivation of maize. Fertilizing soil with urea increased the N mineralization rate 4.9 times and the N2O emission 2 times while chicken manure increased it 11.4 times and 3.7 times, respectively, compared to the unamended soil when residue was burned. It was found that burning of crop residue increased N mineralization and N-2 emissions, but decreased microbial activity. Addition of chicken manure increased emissions of N2O and CO2 and concentrations of NO (3) (-) .

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available