Abstract
Rainfall-adapted irrigation (RAI), the application of controlled-release nitrogen fertilizer (CRNF), and deep placement of nitrogen fertilizer can contribute to the improvement of resource utilization efficiency. Nevertheless, the interactive effects of these factors on nitrogen loss via runoff and leaching from paddy fields remain ambiguous. Consequently, a two-year field experiment was conducted to evaluate the interactive effects of four nitrogen management strategies on nitrogen losses through runoff and leaching from paddy fields and rice yield under RAI when compared to conventional flooding irrigation (CI). Compared to CI, RAI significantly reduced total nitrogen loss via runoff (−49.8%) and leaching (−35.9%) by lowering volume of runoff and leaching. Compared to conventional nitrogen application (surface application of common urea with 240 kg N ha−1), deep placement of CRNF with 192 kg N ha−1 decreased floodwater nitrogen concentration, reducing total nitrogen loss by 46.8% via runoff and 50.9% via leaching. Importantly, RAI combined with deep placement of CRNF with 192 kg N ha−1 minimized nitrogen losses through leaching and runoff from paddy fields and maximized grain yield (8251 kg ha−1) by improving nitrogen accumulation in rice. Collectively, RAI combined with deep-placed CRNF with an 80% nitrogen rate could reduce non-point source pollution from paddy fields.
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 9
Claim · model-written summary
Rainfall-adapted irrigation significantly reduced total nitrogen loss via runoff by 49.8% compared with conventional flooding irrigation in rice paddy fields.
- Taxon
- rice
Oryza sativae2 - Treatment
- RAIe1
- Outcome
- total nitrogen losse1
- Direction
- reducede1
- Value
- −49.8%e1
- Qualifier
- runoffe1
- Comparator
- CIe1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“Compared to CI, RAI significantly reduced total nitrogen loss via runoff (−49.8%) and leaching (−35.9%) by lowering volume of runoff and leaching”
e2“by improving nitrogen accumulation in rice”
Claim · model-written summary
Rainfall-adapted irrigation significantly reduced total nitrogen loss via leaching by 35.9% compared with conventional flooding irrigation in rice paddy fields.
- Taxon
- riceOryza sativae2
- Treatment
- RAIe1
- Outcome
- total nitrogen losse1
- Direction
- reducede1
- Value
- −35.9%e1
- Qualifier
- leachinge1
- Comparator
- CIe1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“Compared to CI, RAI significantly reduced total nitrogen loss via runoff (−49.8%) and leaching (−35.9%) by lowering volume of runoff and leaching”
e2“by improving nitrogen accumulation in rice”
Claim · model-written summary
Deep placement of CRNF at 192 kg N ha−1 reduced total nitrogen loss via runoff by 46.8% compared with conventional nitrogen application in rice paddy fields.
- Taxon
- riceOryza sativae2
- Treatment
- deep placement of CRNF with 192 kg N ha−1e3
- Outcome
- total nitrogen losse3
- Direction
- reducinge3
- Value
- 46.8%e3
- Qualifier
- runoffe3
- Comparator
- conventional nitrogen applicatione3
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e2“by improving nitrogen accumulation in rice”
e3“Compared to conventional nitrogen application (surface application of common urea with 240 kg N ha−1), deep placement of CRNF with 192 kg N ha−1 decreased floodwater nitrogen concentration, reducing total nitrogen loss by 46.8% via runoff and 50.9% via leaching”
Claim · model-written summary
Deep placement of CRNF at 192 kg N ha−1 reduced total nitrogen loss via leaching by 50.9% compared with conventional nitrogen application in rice paddy fields.
- Taxon
- riceOryza sativae2
- Treatment
- deep placement of CRNF with 192 kg N ha−1e3
- Outcome
- total nitrogen losse3
- Direction
- reducinge3
- Value
- 50.9%e3
- Qualifier
- leachinge3
- Comparator
- conventional nitrogen applicatione3
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e2“by improving nitrogen accumulation in rice”
e3“Compared to conventional nitrogen application (surface application of common urea with 240 kg N ha−1), deep placement of CRNF with 192 kg N ha−1 decreased floodwater nitrogen concentration, reducing total nitrogen loss by 46.8% via runoff and 50.9% via leaching”
Claim · model-written summary
Deep placement of CRNF at 192 kg N ha−1 decreased floodwater nitrogen concentration in rice paddy fields compared with conventional nitrogen application.
- Taxon
- riceOryza sativae2
- Treatment
- deep placement of CRNF with 192 kg N ha−1e3
- Outcome
- floodwater nitrogen concentratione3
- Direction
- decreasede3
- Comparator
- conventional nitrogen applicatione3
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e2“by improving nitrogen accumulation in rice”
e3“Compared to conventional nitrogen application (surface application of common urea with 240 kg N ha−1), deep placement of CRNF with 192 kg N ha−1 decreased floodwater nitrogen concentration, reducing total nitrogen loss by 46.8% via runoff and 50.9% via leaching”
Claim · model-written summary
Rainfall-adapted irrigation combined with deep placement of CRNF minimized nitrogen losses through leaching and runoff from paddy fields.
- Taxon
- riceOryza sativae2
- Treatment
- RAI combined with deep placement of CRNF with 192 kg N ha−1e4
- Outcome
- nitrogen lossese4
- Direction
- minimizede4
- Setting
- paddy fieldse4
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e2“by improving nitrogen accumulation in rice”
e4“RAI combined with deep placement of CRNF with 192 kg N ha−1 minimized nitrogen losses through leaching and runoff from paddy fields and maximized grain yield (8251 kg ha−1) by improving nitrogen accumulation in rice”
Claim · model-written summary
Rainfall-adapted irrigation combined with deep placement of CRNF maximized rice grain yield at 8251 kg ha−1.
- Taxon
- riceOryza sativae2
- Treatment
- RAI combined with deep placement of CRNF with 192 kg N ha−1e4
- Outcome
- grain yielde4
- Direction
- maximizede4
- Value
- 8251 kg ha−1e4
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e2“by improving nitrogen accumulation in rice”
e4“RAI combined with deep placement of CRNF with 192 kg N ha−1 minimized nitrogen losses through leaching and runoff from paddy fields and maximized grain yield (8251 kg ha−1) by improving nitrogen accumulation in rice”
Claim · model-written summary
Rainfall-adapted irrigation combined with deep placement of CRNF increased rice grain yield by improving nitrogen accumulation in rice.
- Taxon
- riceOryza sativae2
- Treatment
- RAI combined with deep placement of CRNF with 192 kg N ha−1e4
- Outcome
- grain yielde4
- Qualifier
- improving nitrogen accumulatione2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e2“by improving nitrogen accumulation in rice”
e4“RAI combined with deep placement of CRNF with 192 kg N ha−1 minimized nitrogen losses through leaching and runoff from paddy fields and maximized grain yield (8251 kg ha−1) by improving nitrogen accumulation in rice”
Claim · model-written summary
The combination of rainfall-adapted irrigation and deep-placed CRNF at 80% nitrogen rate could reduce non-point source pollution from rice paddy fields.
- Taxon
- riceOryza sativae2
- Outcome
- non-point source pollutione5
- Setting
- paddy fieldse5
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e2“by improving nitrogen accumulation in rice”
e5“could reduce non-point source pollution from paddy fields”
The same questions in other papers
nitrogen · environment: emissions · Oryza sativa (rice)Results differ
40 papers in the same direction as this paper · 20 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- negative
- no effect
57 papers more in this group
See all 61 papers →fertilization · environment: emissions · Oryza sativa (rice)Results differ
72 papers in the same direction as this paper · 35 in the opposite direction
- negative
- no effect
- negative
104 papers more in this group
See all 108 papers →rainfall · nutrient: content · Oryza sativa (rice)Positive and negative results
5 papers in the same direction as this paper · 3 in the opposite direction
- negative
- no effect
- negative
5 papers more in this group
See all 9 papers →rainfall · yield · Oryza sativa (rice)Positive and negative results
28 papers in the same direction as this paper · 21 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- negative
- negative
47 papers more in this group
See all 51 papers →irrigation · environment: emissions · Oryza sativa (rice)Positive and negative results
108 papers in the same direction as this paper · 17 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- negative
- no effect
123 papers more in this group
See all 127 papers →irrigation · nutrient: content · Oryza sativa (rice)Positive and negative results
118 papers in the same direction as this paper · 24 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- negative
- negative
140 papers more in this group
See all 144 papers →nitrogen · nutrient: content · Oryza sativa (rice)Positive and negative results
408 papers in the same direction as this paper · 52 in the opposite direction · 3 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- negative
- no effect
460 papers more in this group
See all 464 papers →fertilization · nutrient: content · Oryza sativa (rice)Positive and negative results
931 papers in the same direction as this paper · 56 in the opposite direction · 5 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- positive
- positive
989 papers more in this group
See all 993 papers →8 of 12 groups shown: named compounds and organisms first, then groups whose results differ (checked claim by claim), then those with positive and negative results, then the smaller groups.
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.