Paper · 2025 · Plants

Optimizing Nitrogen Supplementation: Timing Strategies to Mitigate Waterlogging Stress in Winter- and Spring-Type Canola

Haochen Zhao; Onusha Sharmita; Abu Bakar Siddique; et al.

6
claims
13
verbatim quotes
2
citations
2
research areas
✓
Open access · cc-by

Abstract

Canola is an important rotation crop in Australia's high-rainfall zone (HRZ), where frequent waterlogging occurs. Due to its lack of aerenchyma, canola is more vulnerable to waterlogging. Recent studies have shown that nitrogen supplementation can benefit crop growth under waterlogging stress. However, limited reports have addressed the physiological responses and macronutrient changes in either winter or spring canola with strategically timed fertilizer applications. This study investigated the physiological and elemental responses of two canola genotypes to nitrogen application at different timings during waterlogging stress. By imposing waterlogging stress in pot-based trials for 21 days using spring-type (Dynatron) and winter-type (Nizza) canola, our results demonstrated that nitrogen application one week prior to the onset of waterlogging marginally improved soil plant analysis development (SPAD) values in the two types of canola, but only significantly enhanced stomatal conductance along with reduced photosynthetic efficiency in Dynatron at the end of waterlogging, indicating genotypic differences. Furthermore, applying fertilizer a week before waterlogging enhanced macronutrient accumulation in Dynatron, including phosphorus, potassium, magnesium, and calcium. In contrast, Nizza only exhibited a significant increase in magnesium accumulation. Fertilizer application had no effect on reducing Mn and Fe accumulation in canola, indicating that Mn and Fe toxicity, typically associated with soil waterlogging, was not a contributing factor in nitrogen-induced waterlogging alleviation. Collectively, our results demonstrated genotype-specific nutrient dynamics, which should be considered in nitrogen-induced waterlogging alleviation.

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

Pre-waterlogging nitrogen marginally improved SPAD in both canola types.

Treatment
nitrogen application one week prior to the onset of waterlogginge0
Outcome
soil plant analysis development (SPAD) valuese0
Direction
improvede0

Not reportedComparator

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

Brassica napus var. napus
Brassica napus var. napus · Taxoncontri from Yonezawa-Shi, Yamagata, Japan · CC BY-SA 2.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“nitrogen application one week prior to the onset of waterlogging marginally improved soil plant analysis development (SPAD) values in the two types of canola”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 791–948 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Pre-waterlogging nitrogen increased stomatal conductance in Dynatron.

Material
Dynatrone0
Treatment
nitrogen application one week prior to the onset of waterlogginge1
Outcome
stomatal conductancee0
Direction
enhancede0

Not reportedComparator

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

Brassica napus var. napus
Brassica napus var. napus · Taxoncontri from Yonezawa-Shi, Yamagata, Japan · CC BY-SA 2.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“only significantly enhanced stomatal conductance along with reduced photosynthetic efficiency in Dynatron at the end of waterlogging”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 954–1086 · show in text ↑
t0

“Winter- and Spring-Type Canola”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 90–120 · show in text ↑
e1

“nitrogen application one week prior to the onset of waterlogging”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 791–855 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Pre-waterlogging nitrogen reduced photosynthetic efficiency in Dynatron.

Material
Dynatrone0
Treatment
nitrogen application one week prior to the onset of waterlogginge1
Outcome
photosynthetic efficiencye0
Direction
reducede0

Not reportedComparator

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

Brassica napus var. napus
Brassica napus var. napus · Taxoncontri from Yonezawa-Shi, Yamagata, Japan · CC BY-SA 2.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“only significantly enhanced stomatal conductance along with reduced photosynthetic efficiency in Dynatron at the end of waterlogging”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 954–1086 · show in text ↑
t0

“Winter- and Spring-Type Canola”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 90–120 · show in text ↑
e1

“nitrogen application one week prior to the onset of waterlogging”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 791–855 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Pre-waterlogging fertilizer enhanced phosphorus, potassium, magnesium, and calcium accumulation in Dynatron.

Material
Dynatrone0
Treatment
applying fertilizer a week before waterlogginge0
Outcome
macronutrient accumulation in Dynatron, including phosphorus, potassium, magnesium, and calciume0
Direction
enhancede0

Not reportedComparator

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

Brassica napus var. napus
Brassica napus var. napus · Taxoncontri from Yonezawa-Shi, Yamagata, Japan · CC BY-SA 2.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“applying fertilizer a week before waterlogging enhanced macronutrient accumulation in Dynatron, including phosphorus, potassium, magnesium, and calcium.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1135–1287 · show in text ↑
t0

“Winter- and Spring-Type Canola”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 90–120 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Nizza had increased magnesium accumulation after fertilizer application.

Material
Nizzae0
Treatment
Fertilizer applicatione1
Outcome
magnesium accumulatione0
Direction
increasee0

Not reportedComparator

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

Brassica napus var. napus
Brassica napus var. napus · Taxoncontri from Yonezawa-Shi, Yamagata, Japan · CC BY-SA 2.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Nizza only exhibited a significant increase in magnesium accumulation.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1301–1371 · show in text ↑
t0

“Winter- and Spring-Type Canola”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 90–120 · show in text ↑
e1

“Fertilizer application had no effect on reducing Mn and Fe accumulation in canola”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1372–1453 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Fertilizer did not reduce Mn or Fe accumulation in canola.

Treatment
Fertilizer applicatione0
Outcome
Mn and Fe accumulatione0
Direction
no effecte0

Not reportedComparator

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

Brassica napus var. napus
Brassica napus var. napus · Taxoncontri from Yonezawa-Shi, Yamagata, Japan · CC BY-SA 2.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Fertilizer application had no effect on reducing Mn and Fe accumulation in canola”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1372–1453 · show in text ↑

flooding · nutrient: content · Brassica napus (oilseed rape)Positive and negative results

4 papers: 1 positive, 3 negative or no effect

3 in the opposite direction

  1. negative
  2. negative
  3. negative
See all 4 papers →

flooding · physiology: photosynthesis · Brassica napus (oilseed rape)Positive and negative results

9 papers: 1 positive, 8 negative or no effect

7 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction

  1. negative
  2. positive
  3. negative

5 papers more in this group

See all 9 papers →

nitrogen · physiology: photosynthesis · Brassica napus (oilseed rape)Positive and negative results

19 papers: 13 positive, 6 negative or no effect

5 papers in the same direction as this paper · 13 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

15 papers more in this group

See all 19 papers →

flooding · growth · Brassica napus (oilseed rape)Positive and negative results

30 papers: 6 positive, 24 negative or no effect

5 papers in the same direction as this paper · 24 in the opposite direction

  1. negative
  2. positive
  3. negative

26 papers more in this group

See all 30 papers →

nitrogen · growth · Brassica napus (oilseed rape)Positive and negative results

82 papers: 65 positive, 17 negative or no effect

64 papers in the same direction as this paper · 17 in the opposite direction

  1. negative
  2. no effect
  3. negative

78 papers more in this group

See all 82 papers →

fertilization · nutrient: content · Brassica napus (oilseed rape)Positive and negative results

109 papers: 95 positive, 14 negative or no effect

94 papers in the same direction as this paper · 13 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. negative
  2. no effect
  3. negative

105 papers more in this group

See all 109 papers →

nitrogen · physiology: gas exchange · Brassica napus (oilseed rape)Results agree

6 papers: 6 positive, 0 negative or no effect

5 papers in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

2 papers more in this group

See all 6 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.