Paper · 2024 · Agriculture

Variable-Rate Fertilization for Summer Maize Using Combined Proximal Sensing Technology and the Nitrogen Balance Principle

Peng Zhou; Yazhou Ou; Wei Yang; et al.

6
claims
11
verbatim quotes
8
citations
1
research areas
✓
Open access · cc-by

Abstract

Soil is a heterogeneous medium that exhibits considerable variability in both spatial and temporal dimensions. Proper management of field variability using variable-rate fertilization (VRF) techniques is essential to maximize crop input–output ratios and resource utilization. Implementing VRF technology on a localized scale is recommended to increase crop yield, decrease input costs, and reduce the negative impact on the surrounding environment. This study assessed the agronomic and environmental viability of implementing VRF during the cultivation of summer maize using an on-the-go detector of soil total nitrogen (STN) to detect STN content in the test fields. A spatial delineation approach was then applied to divide the experimental field into multiple management zones. The amount of fertilizer applied in each zone was determined based on the sensor-detected STN. The analysis of the final yield and economic benefits indicates that plots that adopted VRF treatments attained an average summer maize grain yield of 7275 kg ha−1, outperforming plots that employed uniform-rate fertilization (URF) treatments, which yielded 6713 kg ha−1. Through one-way ANOVA, the yield p values of the two fertilization methods were 6.406 × 10−15, 5.202 × 10−15, 2.497 × 10−15, and 3.199 × 10−15, respectively, indicating that the yield differences between the two fertilization methods were noticeable. This led to an average yield increase of 8.37% ha−1 and a gross profit margin of USD 153 ha−1. In plots in which VRF techniques are utilized, the average nitrogen (N) fertilizer application rate is 627 kg ha−1. In contrast, in plots employing URF methods, the N fertilizer application rate is 750 kg ha−1. The use of N fertilizer was reduced by 16.4%. As a result, there is a reduction in production costs of USD 37.5 ha−1, achieving increased yield while decreasing the amount of applied fertilizer. Moreover, in plots where the VRF method was applied, STN was balanced despite the reduced N application. This observation can be deduced from the variance in summer maize grain yield through various fertilization treatments in a comparative experiment. Future research endeavors should prioritize the resolution of particular constraints by incorporating supplementary soil data, such as phosphorus, potassium, organic matter, and other pertinent variables, to advance and optimize fertilization methodologies.

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 6

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

VRF plots yielded 7275 kg ha−1 maize grain, above URF plots at 6713 kg ha−1.

Taxon
summer maizeZea mayse0
Treatment
VRF treatmentse0
Outcome
grain yielde0
Direction
outperforminge0
Value
7275 kg ha−1e0
Qualifier
6713 kg ha−1e0
Comparator
uniform-rate fertilization (URF) treatmentse0

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

Zea mays
Zea mays · TaxonAkwugo · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“plots that adopted VRF treatments attained an average summer maize grain yield of 7275 kg ha−1, outperforming plots that employed uniform-rate fertilization (URF) treatments, which yielded 6713 kg ha−1”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 947–1148 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

VRF increased average yield by 8.37% ha−1.

Taxon
Summer MaizeZea mayst0
Treatment
Variable-Rate Fertilizationt0
Outcome
yielde0
Direction
increasee0
Value
8.37% ha−1e0

Not reportedComparator

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

Zea mays
Zea mays · TaxonAkwugo · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“an average yield increase of 8.37% ha−1”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1413–1452 · show in text ↑
t0

“Variable-Rate Fertilization for Summer Maize”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–44 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

VRF reduced nitrogen fertilizer use by 16.4%.

Taxon
Summer MaizeZea mayst0
Treatment
Variable-Rate Fertilizationt0
Outcome
use of N fertilizere0
Direction
reducede0
Value
16.4%e0

Not reportedComparator

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

Zea mays
Zea mays · TaxonAkwugo · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The use of N fertilizer was reduced by 16.4%”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1707–1751 · show in text ↑
t0

“Variable-Rate Fertilization for Summer Maize”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–44 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

VRF maintained balanced soil total nitrogen despite less N application.

Taxon
Summer MaizeZea mayst0
Treatment
VRF methode0
Outcome
STNe0
Direction
balancede0
Qualifier
despite the reduced N applicatione0

Not reportedComparator

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

Zea mays
Zea mays · TaxonAkwugo · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“in plots where the VRF method was applied, STN was balanced despite the reduced N application”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1912–2005 · show in text ↑
t0

“Summer Maize”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 32–44 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

VRF yielded a gross profit margin of USD 153 ha−1.

Taxon
Summer MaizeZea mayst0
Outcome
gross profit margine0
Value
USD 153 ha−1e0

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

Zea mays
Zea mays · TaxonAkwugo · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“a gross profit margin of USD 153 ha−1”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1457–1494 · show in text ↑
t0

“Summer Maize”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 32–44 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

VRF reduced production costs by USD 37.5 ha−1.

Taxon
Summer MaizeZea mayst0
Treatment
Variable-Rate Fertilizationt0
Outcome
production costse0
Direction
reductione0
Value
USD 37.5 ha−1e0

Not reportedComparator

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

Zea mays
Zea mays · TaxonAkwugo · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“a reduction in production costs of USD 37.5 ha−1”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1775–1823 · show in text ↑
t0

“Variable-Rate Fertilization for Summer Maize”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–44 · show in text ↑

fertilization · nutrient: content · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results

1,164 papers: 1,026 positive, 138 negative or no effect

1,025 papers in the same direction as this paper · 127 in the opposite direction · 11 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. negative
  2. negative
  3. negative

1,160 papers more in this group

See all 1,164 papers →

fertilization · yield · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results

3,908 papers: 3,485 positive, 423 negative or no effect

3,484 papers in the same direction as this paper · 338 in the opposite direction · 85 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. no effect
  2. negative
  3. no effect

3,904 papers more in this group

See all 3,908 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.