Cargando…

Assessment of productivity, nutrient uptake and economic benefits of rice under different nitrogen management strategies

BACKGROUND: Integrating a chemical nitrogen (N) fertilizer with an organic fertilizer and using slow-release mechanism are important N management strategies to increase the N utilization efficiency (NUE) and grain yield of rice. However, the performances of both N management strategies on the produc...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Yang, Guoying, Ji, Hongting, Liu, Hongjiang, Zhang, Yuefang, Chen, Liugen, Zheng, Jianchu, Guo, Zhi, Sheng, Jing
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: PeerJ Inc. 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7395599/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32821541
http://dx.doi.org/10.7717/peerj.9596
_version_ 1783565429641314304
author Yang, Guoying
Ji, Hongting
Liu, Hongjiang
Zhang, Yuefang
Chen, Liugen
Zheng, Jianchu
Guo, Zhi
Sheng, Jing
author_facet Yang, Guoying
Ji, Hongting
Liu, Hongjiang
Zhang, Yuefang
Chen, Liugen
Zheng, Jianchu
Guo, Zhi
Sheng, Jing
author_sort Yang, Guoying
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Integrating a chemical nitrogen (N) fertilizer with an organic fertilizer and using slow-release mechanism are important N management strategies to increase the N utilization efficiency (NUE) and grain yield of rice. However, the performances of both N management strategies on the productivity, the nutrient absorption and utilization efficiency, and the economic benefits of rice have not yet been comprehensively evaluated. METHODS: A 2-year field experiment was conducted with seven N management strategies without fertilizer (control), 100% conventional N fertilizer (conventional compound fertilizer and urea) (N(100)), 75% conventional N fertilizer with 25% organic–inorganic compound fertilizer (N(75)+OICF(25)), 50% conventional N fertilizer with 50% organic–inorganic compound fertilizer (N(50)+OICF(50)), 100% organic–inorganic compound fertilizer (OICF(100)), slow-release compound fertilizer with urea (SRCF+U), compound fertilizer with sulfur-coated urea (CF+SCU). The responses of the productivity, the nutrient absorption and utilization efficiency, and the economic benefits of rice to the different N management strategies were evaluated. RESULTS: CF+SCU performed comparably or better than N(100), judging by the grain yield (GY), the N, phosphate (P) and potassium (K) agronomic efficiency (NAE, PAE and KAE), and the apparent N, P and K recovery efficiency (ANRE, APRE and AKRE). SRCF+U significantly increased the GY by an average of 7.7%, the NAE and the ANRE by 23.8 and 26.7%, the PAE and the APRE by 90.6 and 109.3%, and the KAE and the AKRE by 74.2 and 57.7%. The higher GY and nutrient utilization efficiency when using SRCF+U were attributed to the higher total biomass and total nutrient absorption. N(75)+OICF(25) and N(50)+OICF(50) produced a comparable grain yield than N(100), whereas a significant yield reduction was observed when using OICF(100). Compared with N(100), N(75)+OICF(25) resulted in a comparable or higher fertilizer use efficiency (0.3 and 4.7% for NAE and ANRE, 0.3 and 3.2% for PAE and APRE, 0.3 and −2.8% for KAE and AKRE). However, the fertilizer use efficiency when using N(50)+OICF(50) and OICF(100) were lower than with N(100). The highest net return (NR) (5,845.03 yuan ha(−1)) and benefit to cost (B:C) ratio (0.34) were obtained when using SRCF+U. The NR and the B:C ratio when using N(75)+OICF(25) were slightly higher than when using N(100.) However, N(50)+OICF(50) and OICF(100) significantly decreased the NR and the B:C ratio compared with N(100) by 14.5 and 12.1% and by 35.1 and 29.0%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: SRCF+U and CF+SCU enhanced the crop productivity, the nutrient uptake and utilization efficiency, and the economic benefits compared with N(100.) The comprehensive performance of SRCF+U was better than that of CF+SCU. N(75)+OICF(25) produced almost similar productivity, nutrient uptake and use efficiency compared with N(100). It demonstrated that N(75)+OICF(25) stabilized the grain yield production of rice and reduced the input of chemical N fertilizer.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7395599
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher PeerJ Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-73955992020-08-18 Assessment of productivity, nutrient uptake and economic benefits of rice under different nitrogen management strategies Yang, Guoying Ji, Hongting Liu, Hongjiang Zhang, Yuefang Chen, Liugen Zheng, Jianchu Guo, Zhi Sheng, Jing PeerJ Agricultural Science BACKGROUND: Integrating a chemical nitrogen (N) fertilizer with an organic fertilizer and using slow-release mechanism are important N management strategies to increase the N utilization efficiency (NUE) and grain yield of rice. However, the performances of both N management strategies on the productivity, the nutrient absorption and utilization efficiency, and the economic benefits of rice have not yet been comprehensively evaluated. METHODS: A 2-year field experiment was conducted with seven N management strategies without fertilizer (control), 100% conventional N fertilizer (conventional compound fertilizer and urea) (N(100)), 75% conventional N fertilizer with 25% organic–inorganic compound fertilizer (N(75)+OICF(25)), 50% conventional N fertilizer with 50% organic–inorganic compound fertilizer (N(50)+OICF(50)), 100% organic–inorganic compound fertilizer (OICF(100)), slow-release compound fertilizer with urea (SRCF+U), compound fertilizer with sulfur-coated urea (CF+SCU). The responses of the productivity, the nutrient absorption and utilization efficiency, and the economic benefits of rice to the different N management strategies were evaluated. RESULTS: CF+SCU performed comparably or better than N(100), judging by the grain yield (GY), the N, phosphate (P) and potassium (K) agronomic efficiency (NAE, PAE and KAE), and the apparent N, P and K recovery efficiency (ANRE, APRE and AKRE). SRCF+U significantly increased the GY by an average of 7.7%, the NAE and the ANRE by 23.8 and 26.7%, the PAE and the APRE by 90.6 and 109.3%, and the KAE and the AKRE by 74.2 and 57.7%. The higher GY and nutrient utilization efficiency when using SRCF+U were attributed to the higher total biomass and total nutrient absorption. N(75)+OICF(25) and N(50)+OICF(50) produced a comparable grain yield than N(100), whereas a significant yield reduction was observed when using OICF(100). Compared with N(100), N(75)+OICF(25) resulted in a comparable or higher fertilizer use efficiency (0.3 and 4.7% for NAE and ANRE, 0.3 and 3.2% for PAE and APRE, 0.3 and −2.8% for KAE and AKRE). However, the fertilizer use efficiency when using N(50)+OICF(50) and OICF(100) were lower than with N(100). The highest net return (NR) (5,845.03 yuan ha(−1)) and benefit to cost (B:C) ratio (0.34) were obtained when using SRCF+U. The NR and the B:C ratio when using N(75)+OICF(25) were slightly higher than when using N(100.) However, N(50)+OICF(50) and OICF(100) significantly decreased the NR and the B:C ratio compared with N(100) by 14.5 and 12.1% and by 35.1 and 29.0%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: SRCF+U and CF+SCU enhanced the crop productivity, the nutrient uptake and utilization efficiency, and the economic benefits compared with N(100.) The comprehensive performance of SRCF+U was better than that of CF+SCU. N(75)+OICF(25) produced almost similar productivity, nutrient uptake and use efficiency compared with N(100). It demonstrated that N(75)+OICF(25) stabilized the grain yield production of rice and reduced the input of chemical N fertilizer. PeerJ Inc. 2020-07-29 /pmc/articles/PMC7395599/ /pubmed/32821541 http://dx.doi.org/10.7717/peerj.9596 Text en © 2020 Yang et al. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, reproduction and adaptation in any medium and for any purpose provided that it is properly attributed. For attribution, the original author(s), title, publication source (PeerJ) and either DOI or URL of the article must be cited.
spellingShingle Agricultural Science
Yang, Guoying
Ji, Hongting
Liu, Hongjiang
Zhang, Yuefang
Chen, Liugen
Zheng, Jianchu
Guo, Zhi
Sheng, Jing
Assessment of productivity, nutrient uptake and economic benefits of rice under different nitrogen management strategies
title Assessment of productivity, nutrient uptake and economic benefits of rice under different nitrogen management strategies
title_full Assessment of productivity, nutrient uptake and economic benefits of rice under different nitrogen management strategies
title_fullStr Assessment of productivity, nutrient uptake and economic benefits of rice under different nitrogen management strategies
title_full_unstemmed Assessment of productivity, nutrient uptake and economic benefits of rice under different nitrogen management strategies
title_short Assessment of productivity, nutrient uptake and economic benefits of rice under different nitrogen management strategies
title_sort assessment of productivity, nutrient uptake and economic benefits of rice under different nitrogen management strategies
topic Agricultural Science
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7395599/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32821541
http://dx.doi.org/10.7717/peerj.9596
work_keys_str_mv AT yangguoying assessmentofproductivitynutrientuptakeandeconomicbenefitsofriceunderdifferentnitrogenmanagementstrategies
AT jihongting assessmentofproductivitynutrientuptakeandeconomicbenefitsofriceunderdifferentnitrogenmanagementstrategies
AT liuhongjiang assessmentofproductivitynutrientuptakeandeconomicbenefitsofriceunderdifferentnitrogenmanagementstrategies
AT zhangyuefang assessmentofproductivitynutrientuptakeandeconomicbenefitsofriceunderdifferentnitrogenmanagementstrategies
AT chenliugen assessmentofproductivitynutrientuptakeandeconomicbenefitsofriceunderdifferentnitrogenmanagementstrategies
AT zhengjianchu assessmentofproductivitynutrientuptakeandeconomicbenefitsofriceunderdifferentnitrogenmanagementstrategies
AT guozhi assessmentofproductivitynutrientuptakeandeconomicbenefitsofriceunderdifferentnitrogenmanagementstrategies
AT shengjing assessmentofproductivitynutrientuptakeandeconomicbenefitsofriceunderdifferentnitrogenmanagementstrategies