Abstract
Experiments conducted over three seasons in southern New South Wales tested the effects of concentrating anhydrous ammonia (AA) and urea fertiliser in bands occupying ~3.5% of the topsoil volume. Yield responses to applied nitrogen (N) were small or negative in a drought but larger (17 kg grain kg–1 N fertiliser) in favourable seasons. There was no consistent difference between AA and urea effects on yield, grain protein or efficiency of fertiliser-N recovery, and there were no consistent differences arising from banding depth or application time. Gaseous loss of ammonia to the atmosphere was negligible from urea granules or AA injected into the soil as gas or liquid. Soil ammonium concentration was >700 µg N g–1 in bands of ~5 cm diameter when measured 6 days after AA application but halved within 5 weeks due to nitrification. Within 1 day of banding AA or urea at sowing, pHwater in the bands rose from 6 to 8.5, leading to transient changes in microbial activity and populations. Immediately after banding, microbial biomass carbon and numbers of protozoa fell by about half, but numbers of ammonia- and nitrite-oxidisers were unchanged. Five weeks later, microbial biomass carbon and protozoa had partly recovered whereas numbers of ammonia- and nitrite-oxidisers increased 5–10-fold. After 7 months, there was a small reduction in microbial diversity in the bands, shown by analysis of fatty acid methyl esters. Seedling growth was slower where N fertiliser was applied in concentrated bands than when mixed throughout the topsoil, supporting previous research showing that roots avoid bands of highly concentrated ammonium. Banding thus provided a slow-release form of N to wheat crops, thereby reducing excessive seedling growth and the risks of haying-off.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher. Read at the source ↗
The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.
Claims 18
Claim · model-written summary
Nitrogen yield responses were small or negative under drought.
- Taxon
- wheat
Triticum aestivumt0 - Treatment
- applied nitrogen (N)e0
- Outcome
- Yield responsese0
- Direction
- small or negativee0
- Qualifier
- droughte0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“wheat”
e0“Yield responses to applied nitrogen (N) were small or negative in a drought”
Claim · model-written summary
Nitrogen yield responses reached 17 kg grain per kg nitrogen fertilizer in favorable seasons.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- N fertilisere0
- Outcome
- Yield responsese0
- Direction
- largere0
- Value
- 17 kg grain kg–1 N fertilisere0
- Qualifier
- favourable seasonse0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“wheat”
e0“Yield responses to applied nitrogen (N) were small or negative in a drought but larger (17 kg grain kg–1 N fertiliser) in favourable seasons.”
Claim · model-written summary
AA and urea did not consistently differ in yield.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- AAe0
- Outcome
- yielde0
- Direction
- no consistent differencee0
- Comparator
- ureae0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“wheat”
e0“There was no consistent difference between AA and urea effects on yield, grain protein or efficiency of fertiliser-N recovery”
Claim · model-written summary
AA and urea did not consistently differ in grain protein.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- AAe0
- Outcome
- grain proteine0
- Direction
- no consistent differencee0
- Comparator
- ureae0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“wheat”
e0“There was no consistent difference between AA and urea effects on yield, grain protein or efficiency of fertiliser-N recovery”
Claim · model-written summary
AA and urea did not consistently differ in fertilizer N recovery efficiency.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- AAe0
- Outcome
- efficiency of fertiliser-N recoverye0
- Direction
- no consistent differencee0
- Comparator
- ureae0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“wheat”
e0“There was no consistent difference between AA and urea effects on yield, grain protein or efficiency of fertiliser-N recovery”
Claim · model-written summary
Banding depth did not consistently alter fertilizer outcomes.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- banding depthe0
- Outcome
- no consistent differencese0
- Direction
- no consistent differencese0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“wheat”
e0“there were no consistent differences arising from banding depth or application time.”
Claim · model-written summary
Application time did not consistently alter fertilizer outcomes.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- application timee0
- Outcome
- no consistent differencese0
- Direction
- no consistent differencese0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“wheat”
e0“there were no consistent differences arising from banding depth or application time.”
Claim · model-written summary
Ammonia loss was negligible from soil-applied urea granules or AA.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- urea granules or AA injected into the soil as gas or liquide0
- Outcome
- Gaseous loss of ammonia to the atmospheree0
- Direction
- negligiblee0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“wheat”
e0“Gaseous loss of ammonia to the atmosphere was negligible from urea granules or AA injected into the soil as gas or liquid.”
Claim · model-written summary
AA bands initially had soil ammonium above 700 micrograms N per gram.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- AA applicatione0
- Outcome
- Soil ammonium concentratione0
- Direction
- >e0
- Value
- >700 µg N g–1e0
- Qualifier
- 6 days after AA applicatione0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“wheat”
e0“Soil ammonium concentration was >700 µg N g–1 in bands of ~5 cm diameter when measured 6 days after AA application”
Claim · model-written summary
Soil ammonium in AA bands halved within five weeks due to nitrification.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Outcome
- Soil ammonium concentratione1
- Direction
- halvede0
- Value
- 5 weekse0
- Qualifier
- due to nitrificatione0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“wheat”
e0“but halved within 5 weeks due to nitrification.”
e1“Soil ammonium concentration was >700 µg N g–1 in bands of ~5 cm diameter when measured 6 days after AA application”
Claim · model-written summary
Banding AA or urea raised band pH from 6 to 8.5 within a day.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- banding AA or urea at sowinge0
- Outcome
- pHwater in the bandse0
- Direction
- rosee0
- Value
- 6 to 8.5e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“wheat”
e0“Within 1 day of banding AA or urea at sowing, pHwater in the bands rose from 6 to 8.5”
Claim · model-written summary
Immediately after banding, microbial biomass carbon and protozoa numbers fell about half.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- bandinge0
- Outcome
- microbial biomass carbon and numbers of protozoae0
- Direction
- felle0
- Value
- about halfe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“wheat”
e0“Immediately after banding, microbial biomass carbon and numbers of protozoa fell by about half”
Claim · model-written summary
Immediately after banding, ammonia and nitrite oxidizers were unchanged.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- bandinge1
- Outcome
- numbers of ammonia- and nitrite-oxidiserse0
- Direction
- unchangede0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“wheat”
e0“numbers of ammonia- and nitrite-oxidisers were unchanged.”
e1“there were no consistent differences arising from banding depth or application time.”
Claim · model-written summary
Five weeks later microbial biomass carbon and protozoa partly recovered.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Outcome
- microbial biomass carbon and protozoae0
- Direction
- partly recoverede0
- Qualifier
- Five weeks latere0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“wheat”
e0“Five weeks later, microbial biomass carbon and protozoa had partly recovered”
Claim · model-written summary
Five weeks later ammonia and nitrite oxidizers increased 5–10 fold.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Outcome
- numbers of ammonia- and nitrite-oxidiserse0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- 5–10-folde0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“wheat”
e0“numbers of ammonia- and nitrite-oxidisers increased 5–10-fold.”
Claim · model-written summary
Microbial diversity in bands was slightly reduced after seven months.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Outcome
- microbial diversity in the bandse0
- Direction
- reductione0
- Qualifier
- After 7 monthse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“wheat”
e0“After 7 months, there was a small reduction in microbial diversity in the bands”
Claim · model-written summary
Concentrated fertilizer bands slowed seedling growth relative to mixed fertilizer.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- N fertiliser was applied in concentrated bandse0
- Outcome
- Seedling growthe0
- Direction
- slowere0
- Comparator
- mixed throughout the topsoile0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“wheat”
e0“Seedling growth was slower where N fertiliser was applied in concentrated bands than when mixed throughout the topsoil”
Claim · model-written summary
The authors concluded banding gave wheat slow-release nitrogen and reduced excessive seedling growth and haying-off risk.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- Bandinge0
- Outcome
- a slow-release form of N to wheat cropse0
- Direction
- reducinge0
- Qualifier
- excessive seedling growth and the risks of haying-offe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“wheat”
e0“Banding thus provided a slow-release form of N to wheat crops, thereby reducing excessive seedling growth and the risks of haying-off.”
The same questions in other papers
ammonia · quality: protein · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
2 papers in the same direction as this paper · 2 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- positive
- positive
1 paper more in this group
See all 5 papers →ammonia · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
5 papers in the same direction as this paper · 15 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- no effect
- positive
17 papers more in this group
See all 21 papers →fertilization · growth · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
91 papers in the same direction as this paper · 663 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
751 papers more in this group
See all 755 papers →fertilization · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
3,114 papers in the same direction as this paper · 284 in the opposite direction · 39 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- positive
- positive
3,434 papers more in this group
See all 3,438 papers →Claims are grouped by organism, treatment and what was measured or targeted. A paper counts as positive when any of its claims in the group is positive.