LAUSR.org creates dashboard-style pages of related content for over 1.5 million academic articles. Sign Up to like articles & get recommendations!

Contrasting effects of inhibitors and biostimulants on agronomic performance and reactive nitrogen losses during irrigated potato production

Photo from wikipedia

Abstract Urea is the dominant form of nitrogen (N) fertilizer used globally. Various additives have been designed for co-application with urea to improve performance of N-intensive crops including potato (Solanum… Click to show full abstract

Abstract Urea is the dominant form of nitrogen (N) fertilizer used globally. Various additives have been designed for co-application with urea to improve performance of N-intensive crops including potato (Solanum tuberosum L.). Few if any studies have compared ‘inhibitor’ additives with ‘biostimulants’ designed to enhance plant growth or microbial activity. Over two potato growing seasons (2015–2016) in an irrigated loamy sand in Minnesota, we quantified agronomic performance and N losses as both nitrate (NO3−) and nitrous oxide (N2O) in treatments receiving urea, with and without additives including: nitrification inhibitors dicyandiamide (DCD) or 3,4-dimethylpyrazole phosphate (DMPP), alone or combined with the urease inhibitor N-(n-butyl) thiophosphoric triamide (NBPT), or a biostimulant containing N-fixing microbes (NFM) by itself or combined with an amino acid blend (AAB). The biostimulants produced modest (˜10%) improvements in tuber yield, under limited conditions, compared to urea alone. However, NFM increased N2O emissions by 32–56%, in contrast to the inhibitors, which decreased N2O emissions by 42–75%. Compared to urea alone, the inhibitors tended to increase soil ammonium and decrease soil NO3− concentrations; however, no differences in soil inorganic N in the upper 0.3 m of the profile were observed with the biostimulants. During the growing season with greater rates of soil water flux (2015), none of the inhibitors decreased NO3− leaching, while NFM increased NO3− leaching by 23%. When AAB was combined with NFM, reactive N losses did not differ from the urea-only treatment. Biostimulants can have unintended impacts on reactive N losses and should be used with caution pending additional study to better understand their effects on biological processes, and to quantify their performance in other agro-ecosystems.

Keywords: effects inhibitors; inhibitors biostimulants; performance; contrasting effects; nitrogen; agronomic performance

Journal Title: Field Crops Research
Year Published: 2019

Link to full text (if available)


Share on Social Media:                               Sign Up to like & get
recommendations!

Related content

More Information              News              Social Media              Video              Recommended



                Click one of the above tabs to view related content.