Paper · 2011

Effects of Irrigation and Nitrogen Supply Levels on Nitrogen Uptake and Fertilizer Nitrogen Loss of Spring Wheat on No-tillage with Stubble Standing Farmland

YU Hua-lin

12
claims
24
verbatim quotes
0
citations
2
research areas
—
Not open access

Abstract

A combination of careful irrigation and nitrogen(N) management is needed to improve N uptake efficiency and to minimize fertilizer N loss in the arid oasis agricultural area of northwest China.A field experiment was conducted to investigate the effects of different irrigation and N application rates on plant N uptake,soil nitrate nitrogen(NO-3-N) distribution in soil profile and fertilizer N loss on no-tillage farmland with standing stubble in the oasis region of Shiyang river basin,Gansu province.The experiment followed a completely randomized split-plot design,taking flood irrigation(conventional irrigation(327 mm),20% water-saving irrigation(261 mm),40% water-saving irrigation(196 mm)) and N fertilizer application rates(0,140,221,300 kg/hm2) as the main-plot and split-plot,respectively.Under the experimental condition,nitrogen contents in grain yield increased from 1.55% to 1.71%,and plant N uptake increased from 134 kg/hm2 to 190 kg/hm2 within amount of irrigation water increased from 196 mm to 327 mm.Nitrogen contents in grain yield and in straw yield,and plant N uptake did not increase significantly when N rate was above 221 kg/hm2.Compared with no N application,the increases of plant N uptake,in 300,221,140 kg/hm2,were 47%,37% and 18%,respectively.At harvesting stage,the NO-3-N contents in 0-60 cm depth soil profiles decreased with the amounts of irrigation and increased with N supplies,and irrigation and nitrogen supply levels had not evidently affect on NO-3-N contents below 0-60 cm depth in soil.Compared with no N application,the increases of fertilizer N loss,in 300,221,140 kg/hm2,were 186,137,94 kg/hm2,respectively.

Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher.

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 12

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Grain nitrogen content rose from 1.55% to 1.71% as irrigation rose from 196 to 327 mm.

Taxon
Spring WheatTriticum aestivumt0
Treatment
irrigation water increased from 196 mm to 327 mme0
Outcome
nitrogen contents in grain yielde0
Direction
increasede0
Value
1.55% to 1.71%e0
Comparator
196 mme0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“nitrogen contents in grain yield increased from 1.55% to 1.71%,and plant N uptake increased from 134 kg/hm2 to 190 kg/hm2 within amount of irrigation water increased from 196 mm to 327 mm”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 833–1020 · show in text ↑
t0

“Spring Wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 100–112 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Plant N uptake rose from 134 to 190 kg/hm2 as irrigation rose from 196 to 327 mm.

Taxon
Spring WheatTriticum aestivumt0
Treatment
irrigation water increased from 196 mm to 327 mme0
Outcome
plant N uptakee0
Direction
increasede0
Value
134 kg/hm2 to 190 kg/hm2e0
Comparator
196 mme0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“plant N uptake increased from 134 kg/hm2 to 190 kg/hm2 within amount of irrigation water increased from 196 mm to 327 mm”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 900–1020 · show in text ↑
t0

“Spring Wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 100–112 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectnot significant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Grain and straw N contents and plant N uptake did not increase significantly above 221 kg/hm2 N.

Taxon
Spring WheatTriticum aestivumt0
Treatment
N rate was above 221 kg/hm2e0
Outcome
Nitrogen contents in grain yield and in straw yield,and plant N uptakee0
Direction
did not increasee0
Comparator
221 kg/hm2e0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Nitrogen contents in grain yield and in straw yield,and plant N uptake did not increase significantly when N rate was above 221 kg/hm2.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1021–1156 · show in text ↑
t0

“Spring Wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 100–112 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Plant N uptake increased 47% at 300 kg/hm2 N versus no N.

Taxon
Spring WheatTriticum aestivumt0
Treatment
300e0
Outcome
plant N uptakee0
Direction
increasese0
Value
47%e0
Comparator
no N applicatione0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Compared with no N application,the increases of plant N uptake,in 300,221,140 kg/hm2,were 47%,37% and 18%,respectively.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1156–1275 · show in text ↑
t0

“Spring Wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 100–112 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Plant N uptake increased 37% at 221 kg/hm2 N versus no N.

Taxon
Spring WheatTriticum aestivumt0
Treatment
221e0
Outcome
plant N uptakee0
Direction
increasese0
Value
37%e0
Comparator
no N applicatione0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Compared with no N application,the increases of plant N uptake,in 300,221,140 kg/hm2,were 47%,37% and 18%,respectively.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1156–1275 · show in text ↑
t0

“Spring Wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 100–112 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Plant N uptake increased 18% at 140 kg/hm2 N versus no N.

Taxon
Spring WheatTriticum aestivumt0
Treatment
140 kg/hm2e0
Outcome
plant N uptakee0
Direction
increasese0
Value
18%e0
Comparator
no N applicatione0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Compared with no N application,the increases of plant N uptake,in 300,221,140 kg/hm2,were 47%,37% and 18%,respectively.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1156–1275 · show in text ↑
t0

“Spring Wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 100–112 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Soil nitrate in the 0–60 cm profile decreased as irrigation increased.

Taxon
Spring WheatTriticum aestivumt0
Treatment
amounts of irrigatione0
Outcome
NO-3-N contents in 0-60 cm depth soil profilese0
Direction
decreasede0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“the NO-3-N contents in 0-60 cm depth soil profiles decreased with the amounts of irrigation”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1295–1386 · show in text ↑
t0

“Spring Wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 100–112 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Soil nitrate in the 0–60 cm profile increased with N supply.

Taxon
Spring WheatTriticum aestivumt0
Treatment
N suppliese0
Outcome
NO-3-N contents in 0-60 cm depth soil profilese0
Direction
increasede0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“the NO-3-N contents in 0-60 cm depth soil profiles decreased with the amounts of irrigation and increased with N supplies”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1295–1416 · show in text ↑
t0

“Spring Wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 100–112 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Irrigation and N supply had no evident effect on nitrate below 60 cm.

Taxon
Spring WheatTriticum aestivumt0
Treatment
irrigation and nitrogen supply levelse0
Outcome
NO-3-N contents below 0-60 cm depth in soile0
Direction
had not evidently affecte0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“irrigation and nitrogen supply levels had not evidently affect on NO-3-N contents below 0-60 cm depth in soil”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1421–1530 · show in text ↑
t0

“Spring Wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 100–112 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Fertilizer N loss increased by 186 kg/hm2 at 300 kg/hm2 N versus no N.

Taxon
Spring WheatTriticum aestivumt0
Treatment
300e0
Outcome
fertilizer N losse0
Direction
increasese0
Value
186e0
Comparator
no N applicatione0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Compared with no N application,the increases of fertilizer N loss,in 300,221,140 kg/hm2,were 186,137,94 kg/hm2,respectively.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1531–1655 · show in text ↑
t0

“Spring Wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 100–112 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Fertilizer N loss increased by 137 kg/hm2 at 221 kg/hm2 N versus no N.

Taxon
Spring WheatTriticum aestivumt0
Treatment
221e0
Outcome
fertilizer N losse0
Direction
increasese0
Value
137e0
Comparator
no N applicatione0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Compared with no N application,the increases of fertilizer N loss,in 300,221,140 kg/hm2,were 186,137,94 kg/hm2,respectively.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1531–1655 · show in text ↑
t0

“Spring Wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 100–112 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Fertilizer N loss increased by 94 kg/hm2 at 140 kg/hm2 N versus no N.

Taxon
Spring WheatTriticum aestivumt0
Treatment
140 kg/hm2e0
Outcome
fertilizer N losse0
Direction
increasese0
Value
94 kg/hm2e0
Comparator
no N applicatione0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Compared with no N application,the increases of fertilizer N loss,in 300,221,140 kg/hm2,were 186,137,94 kg/hm2,respectively.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1531–1655 · show in text ↑
t0

“Spring Wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 100–112 · show in text ↑

irrigation · molecular: metabolites · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results

38 papers: 14 positive, 24 negative or no effect

23 papers in the same direction as this paper · 14 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

34 papers more in this group

See all 38 papers →

irrigation · nutrient: content · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results

103 papers: 74 positive, 29 negative or no effect

73 papers in the same direction as this paper · 29 in the opposite direction

  1. negative
  2. negative
  3. negative

99 papers more in this group

See all 103 papers →

nitrogen · molecular: metabolites · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results

166 papers: 114 positive, 52 negative or no effect

51 papers in the same direction as this paper · 114 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

162 papers more in this group

See all 166 papers →

irrigation · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results

989 papers: 798 positive, 191 negative or no effect

797 papers in the same direction as this paper · 184 in the opposite direction · 7 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. negative
  2. no effect
  3. negative

985 papers more in this group

See all 989 papers →

nitrogen · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results

2,061 papers: 1,737 positive, 324 negative or no effect

323 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1,737 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

2,057 papers more in this group

See all 2,061 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.