4.2 Article

Laboratory Methods for the Estimation of Soil Apparent N Mineralization and Wheat N Uptake in Calcareous Soils

期刊

SOIL SCIENCE
卷 179, 期 2, 页码 84-94

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/SS.0000000000000047

关键词

Mineralizable N; N uptake; Mediterranean climate; aerobic incubation; chemical extraction

资金

  1. National Institute of Agricultural and Food Research and Technology [RTA2009-00028]
  2. Department for Environment Planning, Agriculture and Fisheries of the Basque Government
  3. Department of Education, Language Policy and Culture of the Basque Government

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Estimating soil N mineralization is important for determining the amount of N fertilizer needed to obtain optimum yields at minimal environmental and economic costs. The aim of this work was to determine the most appropriate laboratory method for the estimation of N mineralization during a winter wheat-growing season in calcareous soils under a humid Mediterranean climate. Laboratory methods were developed involving three chemical extractants, CaCl2, KCl, and NaHCO3, and several soil-drying and extraction temperatures. Soil N indexes calculated based on extractions were compared with potentially mineralizable N (No). Moreover, soil mineralization indexes estimated from both chemical extractions and aerobic incubation were related to apparent N mineralization and wheat N uptake in a pot experiment. The mineralization index estimated from an extraction with KCl boiled at 100 degrees C (HotKCl) was the index that best correlated with No and the apparent mineralization under greenhouse conditions. The combination of preplant soil mineral N and the HotKCl N mineralization index was more strongly correlated with wheat N uptake than soil mineral N data alone. Consequently, estimation of N mineralization using HotKCl extraction is the most appropriate methodology for establishing N fertilizer use recommendations for wheat cultivation in calcareous soils under Mediterranean conditions.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据