Abstract
In order to clarify the effects of urea-ammonium nitrate solution (UAN) on the yield, nitrogen-use efficiency (NUE), and N 2 O emissions of summer maize under the condition of water and fertilizer integration, different types of nitrogen fertilizer were selected, namely, ordinary urea (urea) and UAN. Our results showed that the application of UAN was beneficial to improve the dry matter accumulation and the distribution of summer maize. Compared with urea treatment, the total nitrogen accumulation of UAN treatment was increased by 15.8%, and the harvest index was increased by 5.5%. The partial productivity, agronomic use efficiency, and recovery rate of nitrogen for UAN treatment were also increased by 9.1, 19.8, and 31.2%, respectively, compared to those of urea treatment. The soil nitrogen dependence rate treated with UAN was significantly decreased by 13.6%, compared to that of urea treatment. In addition, UAN was beneficial to reduce N 2 O emissions. The N 2 O warming potential (GWP N2O ) and N 2 O greenhouse gas intensity (GHGI N2O ) of urea treatment were 39.3 and 52.4% higher, compared to those of UAN treatment. The improvement of dry matter accumulation and distribution and nitrogen efficiency for UAN treatment were beneficial to increase the grain yield by 9.1%, compared to that of urea treatment. In conclusion, under the fertigation, the application of UAN favors higher yield and nitrogen uptake, with less soil nitrogen residue, higher NUE, and better environmental effect.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by. 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 11
Claim · model-written summary
UAN improved dry matter accumulation and distribution of summer maize relative to urea
- Treatment
- UANe0
- Outcome
- dry matter accumulation and the distributione0
- Direction
- improvee0
- Comparator
- urea treatmente1
Zea maysOrganisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the application of UAN was beneficial to improve the dry matter accumulation and the distribution of summer maize”
e1“Compared with urea treatment, the total nitrogen accumulation of UAN treatment was increased by 15.8%, and the harvest index was increased by 5.5%”
Claim · model-written summary
UAN increased total nitrogen accumulation of summer maize by 15.8% relative to urea
- Treatment
- UANe1
- Outcome
- total nitrogen accumulatione1
- Direction
- increasede1
- Value
- 15.8%e1
- Comparator
- urea treatmente1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the application of UAN was beneficial to improve the dry matter accumulation and the distribution of summer maize”
e1“Compared with urea treatment, the total nitrogen accumulation of UAN treatment was increased by 15.8%, and the harvest index was increased by 5.5%”
Claim · model-written summary
UAN increased harvest index of summer maize by 5.5% relative to urea
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the application of UAN was beneficial to improve the dry matter accumulation and the distribution of summer maize”
e1“Compared with urea treatment, the total nitrogen accumulation of UAN treatment was increased by 15.8%, and the harvest index was increased by 5.5%”
Claim · model-written summary
UAN increased the partial productivity of nitrogen by 9.1 relative to urea
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the application of UAN was beneficial to improve the dry matter accumulation and the distribution of summer maize”
e2“The partial productivity, agronomic use efficiency, and recovery rate of nitrogen for UAN treatment were also increased by 9.1, 19.8, and 31.2%, respectively, compared to those of urea treatment”
Claim · model-written summary
UAN increased the agronomic use efficiency of nitrogen by 19.8 relative to urea
- Treatment
- UANe2
- Outcome
- agronomic use efficiencye2
- Direction
- increasede2
- Value
- 19.8e2
- Comparator
- urea treatmente2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the application of UAN was beneficial to improve the dry matter accumulation and the distribution of summer maize”
e2“The partial productivity, agronomic use efficiency, and recovery rate of nitrogen for UAN treatment were also increased by 9.1, 19.8, and 31.2%, respectively, compared to those of urea treatment”
Claim · model-written summary
UAN increased the recovery rate of nitrogen by 31.2% relative to urea
- Treatment
- UANe2
- Outcome
- recovery rate of nitrogene2
- Direction
- increasede2
- Value
- 31.2%e2
- Comparator
- urea treatmente2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the application of UAN was beneficial to improve the dry matter accumulation and the distribution of summer maize”
e2“The partial productivity, agronomic use efficiency, and recovery rate of nitrogen for UAN treatment were also increased by 9.1, 19.8, and 31.2%, respectively, compared to those of urea treatment”
Claim · model-written summary
UAN decreased the soil nitrogen dependence rate of summer maize by 13.6% relative to urea, a significant change
- Treatment
- UANe3
- Outcome
- soil nitrogen dependence ratee3
- Direction
- decreasede3
- Value
- 13.6%e3
- Comparator
- urea treatmente3
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the application of UAN was beneficial to improve the dry matter accumulation and the distribution of summer maize”
e3“The soil nitrogen dependence rate treated with UAN was significantly decreased by 13.6%, compared to that of urea treatment”
Claim · model-written summary
UAN reduced N2O emissions from summer maize compared with urea
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the application of UAN was beneficial to improve the dry matter accumulation and the distribution of summer maize”
e4“In addition, UAN was beneficial to reduce N 2 O emissions”
e5“The N 2 O warming potential (GWP N2O ) and N 2 O greenhouse gas intensity (GHGI N2O ) of urea treatment were 39.3 and 52.4% higher, compared to those of UAN treatment”
Claim · model-written summary
The N2O warming potential of urea was 39.3% higher than that of UAN
- Treatment
- ureae5
- Outcome
- N 2 O warming potentiale5
- Direction
- highere5
- Value
- 39.3e5
- Comparator
- UAN treatmente5
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the application of UAN was beneficial to improve the dry matter accumulation and the distribution of summer maize”
e5“The N 2 O warming potential (GWP N2O ) and N 2 O greenhouse gas intensity (GHGI N2O ) of urea treatment were 39.3 and 52.4% higher, compared to those of UAN treatment”
Claim · model-written summary
The N2O greenhouse gas intensity of urea was 52.4% higher than that of UAN
- Treatment
- ureae5
- Outcome
- N 2 O greenhouse gas intensitye5
- Direction
- highere5
- Value
- 52.4%e5
- Comparator
- UAN treatmente5
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the application of UAN was beneficial to improve the dry matter accumulation and the distribution of summer maize”
e5“The N 2 O warming potential (GWP N2O ) and N 2 O greenhouse gas intensity (GHGI N2O ) of urea treatment were 39.3 and 52.4% higher, compared to those of UAN treatment”
Claim · model-written summary
UAN increased grain yield of summer maize by 9.1% relative to urea
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the application of UAN was beneficial to improve the dry matter accumulation and the distribution of summer maize”
e6“The improvement of dry matter accumulation and distribution and nitrogen efficiency for UAN treatment were beneficial to increase the grain yield by 9.1%, compared to that of urea treatment”
The same questions in other papers
urea ammonium nitrate · environment: emissions · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
4 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- no effect
- positive
3 papers more in this group
See all 7 papers →urea ammonium nitrate · nutrient: content · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
5 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- negative
- positive
- positive
3 papers more in this group
See all 7 papers →urea ammonium nitrate · yield · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
17 papers in the same direction as this paper · 6 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- positive
- no effect
21 papers more in this group
See all 25 papers →nitrogen · molecular: metabolites · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
46 papers in the same direction as this paper · 95 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
138 papers more in this group
See all 142 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.