4.7 Article

Rhizodeposition of nitrogen by red clover, white clover and ryegrass leys

Journal

SOIL BIOLOGY & BIOCHEMISTRY
Volume 33, Issue 4-5, Pages 439-448

Publisher

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/S0038-0717(00)00183-8

Keywords

pasture; red clover; rhizodeposition; roots; ryegrass; white clover

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Correct assessment of the rhizodeposition of N in grassland is essential for the evaluation of biological Nz-fixation of legumes, for the total N balance of agro-ecosystems, and for the pre-cropping value of grasslands. Using a leaf-feeding technique by which plants were N-15 labelled while growing in mezotrons in the field, the rhizodeposition of N by unfertilised red clover, white clover and perennial ryegrass growing in pure stands was shown to amount to 64, 71 and 9 g N m(-2), respectively, over two complete growing seasons. The corresponding values for red clover and white clover growing in mixtures with ryegrass were 89 and 12 g N m(-2). respectively. The rhizodeposited N compounds. including fine roots, constituted more than 80% of the total plant-derived N in the soil, and in all cases exceeded the amount of N present in stubble. In the mixtures of red clover-ryegrass and white clover-ryegrass and the pure stands of red clover. white clover and ryegrass. respectively, the rhizodeposition constituted a 1.05. 1.5, 1.26, 2.21 and 2.77 fold increase over the total N in the shoots harvested during the two production years. In pure stands and mixtures of clover, 84 and 92%, respectively, of this N derived from biological N-2 fixation. It is concluded that rhizodeposition provides a very substantial input of N to the legume-based grassland systems with great consequences for ecosystem N balance and turnover. Furthermore, the amount of atmospheric-derived N in the rhizodeposits may exceed that in the harvested shoots. (C) 2001 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.

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