Next Article in Journal
The Response of Soil pH and Exchangeable Al to Alum and Lime Amendments
Previous Article in Journal
Effect of Storage Conditions on Storability and Antioxidant Potential of Pears cv. ‘Conference’
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Agriculture
Volume 11
Issue 6
10.3390/agriculture11060546
agriculture-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Nitrogen Dynamics in Tropical Soils Treated with Liquid and Granular Urea Fertilizers

by
Ahmmed Md Motasim
,
Abd Wahid Samsuri
*,
Arina Shairah Abdul Sukor
and
Amin Mohd Adibah
Department of Land Management, Faculty of Agriculture, Universiti Putra Malaysia, Serdang 43400, Malaysia
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Agriculture 2021, 11(6), 546; https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture11060546
Submission received: 14 April 2021 / Revised: 27 May 2021 / Accepted: 7 June 2021 / Published: 14 June 2021
(This article belongs to the Section Agricultural Systems and Management)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
The mineralization of urea fertilizer mostly regulates the nitrogen dynamics in the soil. A laboratory-scale study was conducted to compare the nitrogen dynamics in two tropical soil series incubated with either liquid urea (LU) or granular urea (GU) at 0, 300, 400 or 500 mg/kg of soil. The soils samples used in the experiment were the Bungor and Selangor soil series which have a sandy clay loam and clay texture, respectively. The NH4+-N, NO3−-N concentration in the soils were measured for four weeks to determine the urea-N mineralization while ten pore volumes of water were used for the NH4+-N and NO3−-N leaching loss. At the same application rate, higher NH4+-N and NO3−-N concentrations were recorded in the LU applied soils throughout the incubation period in case of N mineralization. Urea-N recovery was higher in GU than LU treated soils in the first two weeks while no urea-N was present in both GU and LU treated soils after the third week of incubation. The leaching of N (NH4+-N and NO3−-N) was higher in GU treated soils than that of LU and leaching was increased with increased application rate in both LU and GU in both soils. The NH4+-N and NO3−-N concentrations were higher in the Selangor soil whereas the total N leaching loss was higher in Bungor soil. The results suggest that the LU was a better N fertilizer source than GU for rapid mineralization, quicker N availability and lower N leaching loss.

1. Introduction

The introduction Nitrogen (N) is an essential element for plants and it is a major constituent of chlorophyll, amino acids, adenosine triphosphate (ATP) and genetic materials and contributes 30–50% of crop yield increases worldwide [1,2,3]. Urea is the main N fertilizer source having significant impact to the global crop production [4]. It is the most widely used N fertilizer because it is user-friendly and having high N content (46%). Urea use covers around 73.4% of total N fertilizer utilization globally [5,6]. However, the alarming problem associated with the granular urea fertilizer use is its high nitrogen loss and low nitrogen use efficiency (NUE) which ranges from 10–50% [7]. The highest fraction of urea lost (64%) was detected when it was broadcast on the field [8] and without proper fertilizer management, over 50% of the nitrogen from urea cannot be assimilated by plants. Therefore, it becomes a potential source of environmental degradation such as water pollution, eutrophication, acid rain, ammonia volatilization loss, nitrous oxide emission, global warming and stratospheric ozone depletion [5,9]. Surface application of granular urea promotes significant gaseous loss [10,11] and N leaching loss [9] causing of lower N availability and ultimately low NUE of applied urea. However, increase of N availability and control N losses is inevitable in profitable and sustainable agriculture specially when crop suffers severe N deficiency and requires urgent N recovery. In this situation, faster N mineralization and minimizing N leaching loss can increase the NUE of applied urea.
Liquid urea (LU) had been recommended to use for the warm periods during a growing season for a quick recovery of N deficiency [12]. Since then, the use LU fertilizer as an alternative N source to granular urea (GU) is increasingly recommended for profitable cereal production as LU gives better performance in crop yield [13]. Walsh and Christiaens [14] compared LU with other two other liquid N fertilizers (urea ammonium nitrate and High NRG-N) and they found that LU was the more suitable N source in terms of N uptake, NUE and yield. Liquid urea was reported to be more eco-friendly, more efficient uptake and had 19% higher NUE [15] than the GU. Singh et al. [16] found higher growth, development, N uptake along with 20% higher wheat yield in LU application than broadcast GU. Application of liquid fertilizer may be more promising in fertilizer use efficiency and lower ecological consequences compared to granular fertilizer [17].
Faulty methods and improper scheduling of urea applications promote losses of nitrogen that lower the NUE of the GU [18]. It is a challenge to increase N availability and restrict leaching of N from urea application in soil. Judicious management of N fertilizer along with effective fertilizer placement can attain better mineralization, efficient uptake of nutrient, economic crop production and N losses minimization. Limited studies have been reported on the comparisons between LU and GU in terms of nitrogen mineralization when the fertilizers were applied to tropical acid soils. The main goal of this study was to evaluate N mineralization differences of LU and GU applied to two selected soil series, which would allow a better understanding of urea-base N loss mechanisms in tropical climate soils.

2. Materials and Methods

The soils samples used in this study were the Bungor (fine, kaolinitic, isohyperthermic, typic paleudult) and Selangor (very fine, alluvium, isohypertermic, typic endoaquepts) soil series which belong to the order of Ultisols and Inceptisols, respectively, according to the USDA Soil Taxonomy. The Bungor soil was sampled at the field station of the Faculty of Agriculture, Universiti Putra Malaysia (03°00′12.6″ N; 101°47′22.4″ E) while the Selangor soil was sampled from Sungai Besar, Selangor (03°42′20.1″ N; 100°58′08.0″ E). The soils were sampled from the top 15 cm depth and were air-dried, ground and sieved through a 2.00 mm sieve. The soils were analysed for total N using the dry combustion method on a LECO-TruMac, LECO Corporation, St. Joseph, USA [19] CNS analyser, cation exchange capacity (CEC) using the leaching method [20], soil particle distribution using the pipette method [21], the gravimetric water content was determined at field capacity [22] and pH was determined in 2.5 (soil: water) ratio and measured using Metrohm827 pH meter, Metrohm AG, Herisau, Switzerland. The properties of both soils are shown in Table 1.
The incubation study was conducted in laboratory at a room temperature lit with fluorescent light to determine N mineralization during four weeks of incubation. The LU and GU fertilizers were applied to the surface of the two soils placed in 100 cm3 plastic pots at either 0, 300, 400 or 500 mg/kg soil. Freshly prepared 1.20% (w/v), 1.60% (w/v) and 2.00% (w/v) of urea solution @ 2.5 mL/100 g soil were applied at either 300, 400 or 500 mg/kg soil, respectively, in 50 g of sieved air-dried soil and kept open to maintain the aerobic condition. The moisture content was maintained at field capacity during the incubation period by adding water to maintain the initial weight. The N mineralization was analyzed weekly following destructive technique [24]. In this method, 20 g soil was extracted with 40 mL of potassium chloride-phenyl mercuric acetate (KCl-PMA) solution that was distilled with micro-Kjeldhal steam distillation unit and titrated against 0.01 N HCl solution. The urea-N was estimated by extracting 20 g soil with 40 mL of KCl-PMA solution. The solution was reacted with coloring reagents (Di-acetyl monoxime and Thio-semi-carbazide) and the color intensity was measured with calibrated spectrophotometer (CECIL, CE1011, CECIL Instruments Limited, Cambridge, England, UK) at 528 nm wavelength [25]. The amount of N (%) remaining in the soil at the end of the incubation was measure using LECO-Trumac CNS analyser as mentioned above.
The leaching study was done by using leachate tubes (10 cm diameter and 60 cm height) with 100 g of sieved air-dried soil. The soil columns were wetted over night by adding distilled water and the moisture content was maintained at field capacity. After two days of treatment application, 100 mL of distilled water was added and the leached solution was collected up to 10 pore volumes [26]. The leached solutions were analyzed for NH4+-N and NO3−-N concentration [24]. The temperature of the incubation room was maintained at 25 ± 0.5 °C throughout the study. The experiment was conducted as a complete factorial design and the experimental units were arranged in a completely randomized design with four replicates.

Statistical Analysis

The data were statistically analyzed as a complete factorial experimental design with Statistical Analysis Software (SAS) 9.4 (SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC, USA (2013) [27] and differences between treatment means were compared using the least significant difference (LSD) test at the 5% level of significance.

3. Results

3.1. NH4+-N and NO3−-N Concentrations

At the same application rate, higher NH4+-N and NO3−-N concentrations were recorded in LU treated soils compared to the GU in both soils. The NH4+-N concentrations decreased while NO3−-N concentrations increased with increasing incubation time and both concentrations increased with increasing application rates. Among the two soils, NH4+-N and NO3−-N concentrations were higher in Selangor soil than Bungor soil when compared at the same rate of LU and GU applications. The NH4+-N concentrations were high in the first week and then decreased gradually to the fourth week in Bungor and Selangor soils. Similar patterns were recorded from both LU and GU treated soils. On the other hand, the NO3−-N concentrations were low in the first week and then it increased gradually throughout the whole incubation time in Selangor soil. However, in Bungor soil, the NO3−-N concentrations were low in the first week and then gradually increased and peaked at the third week before it became lower at the fourth week of the incubation. Similar results were observed in both LU and GU treated soils.
In Bungor soil series, the amount of NH4+-N concentration and rate of urea mineralization (%) in the soils were higher in the first week of incubation and then gradually decreased until the fourth week of incubation, both for LU and GU treatments (Figure 1A). In GU400 treated soils, 13.31%, 8.67%, 5.79% and 5.05% of urea mineralized to NH4+-N in the 1st, 2nd, 3rd and 4th week of incubation, respectively, which were the highest among the GU treatments in respective weeks. The mineralization rates increased with increased GU application rates. In LU400 treated soils, 18.35%, 8.91%, 5.92% and 3.46% of urea were mineralized to NH4+-N in the 1st, 2nd, 3rd and 4th week of incubation, respectively, and similar to the GU, the mineralization rates increased with increased LU application rates. In the first two weeks of incubation, the mineralization rates were higher in LU than GU but in the last two weeks, the mineralization rates were higher in GU than LU treated soils. The lowest concentration and rate of urea mineralization (%) to NO3−-N in the Bungor soils were measured in the first week and the values increased gradually until the third week of incubation and then the values decreased at the fourth week of incubation (Figure 2A). The same patterns were observed in both GU and LU treated soils. The highest rate of NO3−-N mineralization (%) in the GU treated soils was highest in the GU300 when compared at the same week of incubation. Similarly, the highest rate (%) of NO3−-N mineralization in the LU treated soils was found in the LU300 treated soils. The rate of NO3−-N mineralization (%) was higher in the LU than GU treated soils when compared at the same incubation week and application dosage (Figure 2).
In Selangor soil, the amount of NH4+-N concentrations were highest in the first week of incubation for both LU and GU treated soils, and the values decreased gradually until the fourth week of incubation (Figure 1B). In GU400 treated soils, 22.75%, 15.54%, 9.17% and 5.13% of urea mineralized to NH4+-N in 1st, 2nd, 3rd and 4th week of incubation, respectively, which were the highest among the GU treatments in respective weeks. The mineralization rates increased with GU application rate. Similarly, the LU400 treated soils mineralized 26.35%, 15.80%, 7.73% and 24.54% of urea to NH4+-N in the 1st, 2nd, 3rd and 4th week of incubation, respectively, which were the highest among the LU treatments in respective weeks and the rate of urea mineralization to NH4+-N increased with the increased LU application rate similar to what was observed on the GU treated soils. However, the concentration and rate (%) of urea conversion to NO3−-N in Selangor soil were lowest in the first week of incubation and then increased gradually until the fourth week of incubation (Figure 2B). The highest rate of urea conversion to NO3−-N among the GU and LU treated soils were recorded in the GU300 and LU300 soils, respectively. When compared at the same application rate and incubation week, the rate of urea conversion to NO3−-N in the LU treated soils were higher than the GU treated soils.

3.2. Urea-N Remaining (%) in the Soil

The amount of urea-N remaining in both soils decreased with time with higher amount of remaining urea-N recorded in the GU than the LU treated soils when compared at the same application rate. The urea-N concentrations in both soils were higher in soils receiving higher rates of urea application. The amounts of urea-N remaining in both soils were high in the first week of incubation and gradually decreased up to the second week after which no more urea-N was detected. The higher amount of urea-N was remained in GU than LU treated soils meaning that NH4+-N and of NO3−-N conversion was the slowest in GU treated soils. The urea-N remained was highest in the first week for all the treated soils whose were continued to the second week and no urea-N was present in GU and LU treated soils after the third week of incubation in both soils. In Bungor soil, the amounts of urea-N remaining in the soil were the highest in the first week, and then decreased gradually from the second week of incubation in LU and GU treated soils (Figure 3A).
However, the percentages of urea-N remaining in the soils treated with higher GU rates were higher than those with lower application rates in the first and second week of incubation and after third week of incubation, no urea-N was detected in any of the treated soils. In LU treated soils, the percentages of urea-N remaining were higher in the first week and lower in the second week but equal in application rates at each week and after third week of incubation, no urea-N was detected like GU treated soils. In Selangor soil series, the amounts of urea-N remaining in the soil were the highest in the first week, and then decreased gradually from the second week of incubation in LU and GU treated soils (Figure 3B). The percentages of urea-N remaining in the soils treated with higher GU rates were higher than those with lower application rates in the first and second week of incubation and after that, no urea-N was detected in any of the treated soils. The percentages of urea-N remaining in the soils treated with higher LU rates were higher than those with lower application rates in the first week but equal in application rates in the second week of incubation and after third week of incubation, no urea-N was detected like GU treated soils. The amount of urea-N remaining in Selangor soils were significantly (p < 0.05) higher than that of Bungor during the first and second week of incubation when compared at the same application rate for both GU and LU treatments.

3.3. Leaching Loss of N (NH4+-N and NO3−-N) from Applied Urea

The leaching loss NH4+-N and NO3−-N was recorded higher in GU than that of LU treated soils in both Bungor and Selangor soil series and the leaching loss was increased with increased application rate of urea (Figure 4 and Figure 5). In the 2nd and 3rd pores, the leaching loss was higher and later drastically lower in both soil series.
In Bungor soil series, NH4+-N leaching was low in first two pores which not significant among the treatments (p > 0.05). After 2nd pore, it jumped extremely and after that gradually low. In 6th pore and onward, it was lower. In 3rd–5th pore, significantly higher amount of NH4+-N was lost by leaching from GU treated soils than that of LU in corresponding rate of applications (Figure 5A). The highest cumulative NH4+-N concentration was recorded 71.71 (mg/kg) in leachate from GU500 treated soil and this value was 64.58 (mg/kg) from LU500 treated soil (Table 2). In Selangor soil series, after the 1st pore, NH4+-N leaching was drastically high until 3rd pore before it became drastically low at 4th pore onwards. The higher NH4+-N leaching loss was recorded in GU treatment than that of LU in corresponding application rates in first 5 pore volumes and later irregular and had no significant differences (Figure 5B). The cumulative NH4+-N leaching was higher in GU treated soils than that of LU and increased with the increased rate of urea application. The highest cumulative NH4+-N concentration was recorded 30.63 (mg/kg) in leachate from GU500 treated soil and it was 26.98 (mg/kg) from LU500 treated soil (Table 2).
The leaching loss of NO3−-N was recorded higher in 2nd pore volume and later drastically low. In first three pore volumes, the significantly higher NO3−-N was lost from GU treated soils than that of LU with corresponding rate of urea application and later insignificant and uneven. The cumulative loss of NO3−-N was found higher in GU treated soils than that of LU and increased with the increased rate of application (Figure 5A). The highest cumulative NO3−-N concentration was recorded 16.55 (mg/kg) in leachate from GU500 treated soil and it was 14.82 (mg/kg) recorded from LU500 treated soil (Table 2).
The leaching loss of NO3−-N was recorded higher in 2nd pore volume and later drastically low. In first two pore volumes, the significantly higher NO3−-N was lost from GU treated soils than that of LU with corresponding rate of urea application and later insignificant and irregular. In 7th volume, NO3−-N leaching lost was quite higher in GU treated soils, but it was statistically not significant. The cumulative loss of NO3−-N was found higher in GU treated soils than that of LU and leaching loss increased with increased rate of urea applications (Figure 5B). The highest cumulative NO3−-N concentration was recorded 22.76 (mg/kg) in leachate from GU500 treated soil and it was 20.74 (mg/kg) from LU500 treated soil (Table 2). The cumulative leaching loss of NH4+-N was higher in Bungor soil series whereas leaching loss of NO3−-N was higher in Selangor soil series. The higher rate of urea application got into more leaching loss trouble than lower application rate.

3.4. Total Remaining N (%) in the Soils

The total remaining N (%) in the soils are presented in the Figure 6 after thirtieth day of incubation.
The remaining total N in the soil was higher in LU treated soils than GU while compared at the equal rate of application. The remaining N in soil was proportional to the application rate of urea. In Bungor soil series, the highest remaining N was found in soil applied with 500 mg/kg urea whereas the lowest value was in the soil applied with 300 mg/kg urea in both LU and GU applications (Figure 6A). The remaining N in soil increased with the increased application rate of both LU and GU in the soil. In Selangor soil series, the highest remaining N was found in soil applied with 500 mg/kg urea whereas the lowest value was in the soil applied with 300 mg/kg urea in both LU and GU applications (Figure 6B) alike to Bungor soil series. The total remaining N in LU treated soils were higher than GU application as same as Bungor soil series. However, the total remaining N in Selangor soil series was much higher than that of Bungor at the end of incubation in case of both LU and GU applications.
The NH4+-N and NO3−-N concentrations were higher in LU treated soils than that of GU (Figure 1 and Figure 2) whereas remaining urea-N (Figure 3) and NH4+-N and NO3 –N leaching (Figure 4 and Figure 5) was higher in the GU treated soils than that of LU applications. Therefore, the total remaining N in the soils at the end of the incubation period was higher in the LU applications (Figure 6). In addition, the total remaining N in the Selangor soil was much higher than Bungor soil treated with both LU and GU application at the end of incubation.

4. Discussion

When urea is applied to soils, it undergoes the hydrolysis process by adsorbing water to produce NH4+ and HCO3− [28]. The whole process is catalyzed by the urease enzyme. Soil moisture was reported to be a significant factor for starting the hydrolysis process of urea [29]. The NH4 can be either adsorbed by soil colloids or can be further transformed to NO3 and NH3 depending on soil conditions. In the LU, the urea has been hydrolyzed even prior to soil application whereas the urea in GU must be hydrolyzed after application before it can be transformed to NH4. Rapid hydrolysis happens in few days and about 80% of applied urea can be hydrolyzed within the first 4 days after application [30,31]. Urea mineralization in LU was the faster than GU -applied soil. The urea in the LU applied soil is uniformly distributed throughout the soil because it is in a liquid form. Therefore, more NH4+ are adsorbed by the soil colloids and this can inhibit further transformation of NH4+ to ammonia gas [32]. In a previous study we observed lower the NH3 volatilization loss in LU treated soil than GU treated soil [11]. This can be the reason why higher concentration of NH4+-N and NO3−-N was measured in the LU than GU treated soil in this study. Surface application of urea as in the GU applied soil promotes higher NH4+-N transformation to higher NH3 volatilization loss [33]. The urea mineralization process influenced the amount of urea-N remaining in the soils. The urea-N remaining from the applied urea in the soil is lower if the NH4-N mineralization is higher and and the nitrification process is faster [34]. The LU had a faster N mineralization and more NH4+ mineralized compared to the GU and therefore the LU had lower urea-N remaining in the soils.
The concentration of NH4+-N and NO3−-N were higher in Selangor than Bungor soil for both GU and LU treatments. The clayey Selangor soil series (Inceptisols) may had adsorbed more NH4+-N than the sandier Bungor soil series (Ultisols) because it had higher CEC (16.48 cmol+/kg) than the Bungor (5.78 cmol+/kg) soils. Soil colloids such as clay particles can be negatively or positively charged and, therefore, they can adsorb both cations and anions. As such, clay particles contribute to the cation and anion exchange capacity of soils [35].
The results of our study revealed that significantly (p ≤ 0.05) higher NH4+-N leaching loss was detected from GU than LU treated soils. The first few pore volumes had the higher NH4+-N because the urea hydrolysis was high in the first few days of its application before it become low [30]. The rapid hydrolysis of urea promotes higher N leaching [36,37]. The urea in the GU applied soil was more localized compared to the LU soil which was more uniformly distributed throughout the soil. In other words, the urea was more concentrated but over a smaller amount of soil and therefore the leaching loss was more in the GU applied soil [38]. The NH4+-N leaching was higher in Bungor soil series than that Selangor soil (Table 2) because the Selangor soil had higher CEC which can enable the soil to adsorb more NH4+-N. The clayey Selangor also had higher water holding capacity that can hold more NH4+ ions and reduced leaching of NH4+-N [38]. In the Selangor soils, the abundance of NH4+-N can be transformed to NO3−-N by the nitrification process [36]. Gioacchini et al. [37] also reported higher N leaching in light textured (sandy loam) soil than relatively heavy textured (clay loam) soil.
The NO3−-N leaching was recorded higher in GU treated soils than in of LU treated soils and the NO3−-N leaching also increased with increasing rate of urea applications. The highest leaching of NO3−-N was found in the 2nd pore volume of the incubation study. The concentration of urea in the GU applied soil was more localized and this encouraged higher NO3−-N leaching [39] compared to the LU applied soil where the urea was more uniformly distributed throughout the soil. The LU was distributed evenly throughout the soil column quickly resulting in lower NO3−-N leaching. Tripolskaja et al. [40] found higher leaching loss of NO3−-N from simple granular NPK fertilizer than liquid N fertilizers (Liquid fertilizer Lyderis 9-9-9 and Liquid fertilizer UAN 32). Both the concentration and the leaching of NO3−-N was higher in the Selangor soils than the Bungor soils. The Selangor soils which have higher CEC (16.48 cmol+/kg) would repel more negatively charged anionic NO3− than Bungor soil which had lower CEC (5.78 cmol+/kg) and the same results have been reported by other researchers who compared the NO3−-N.leaching from soil of different CEC values [36,41]. The total N (NH4+-N and NO3−-N) loss through leaching was higher in Bungor soil series than in Selangor soil series (Table 2). Ulen and Aronsson [42] also recorded higher N leaching loss in light textured soil than fine textured soil.
The total N remaining was higher in the clayey Selangor soil series than sandy Bungor soils applied with both LU and GU at the end of incubation, possibly because of the greater CEC of Selangor soils that can absorb more NH4+-N. According to the results of this study, the LU had higher concentrations of NH4+-N and NO3−-N as well as lower leaching loss because higher N mineralization in the LU applied soils and higher adsorption of NH4+-N by the soil particles.

5. Conclusions

The LU application resulted in in higher soil NH4+-N and NO3−-N concentrations and lower leaching loss from both soils compared to the GU fertilization. In addition, the LU performed better in the clayey Selangor soil than the sandy clay Bungor soil because the former had higher concentrations of available NH4+-N and NO3−-N and lower leaching loss of NH4+-N and NO3−-N. Therefore, the use of LU would benefit the farmers because it would have higher NUE than the GU. However, the results should be confirmed by glasshouse study.

Author Contributions

All authors contributed significantly to develop, procedure and writing—reviewing and editing. A.M.M. conducted the experiment, investigation, formal analysis, visualization, writing—original draft of the manuscript. Editing and approval of final version of the manuscript by A.W.S., A.S.A.S. and A.M.A. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

The first author was sponsored by the NATP Phase-II project of Bangladesh Agricultural Research Council (BARC) for his PhD study. This study was sponsored by a grant from BARC (Grant number–6282521-10201).

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

Not any.

Acknowledgments

The authors are thanks to the Universiti Putra Malaysia (UPM) and Soil Resources Development Institute (SRDI), People’s Republic of Bangladesh for their support in conducting this research.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors have no conflict of interest to publish this manuscript.

References

  1. Cropnuts Nitrogen—Nutrient Management|Mosaic Crop Nutrition. Available online: https://www.cropnutrition.com/nutrient-management/nitrogen (accessed on 17 May 2020).
  2. Erisman, J.W.; Sutton, M.A.; Galloway, J.; Klimont, Z.; Winiwarter, W. How a century of ammonia synthesis changed the world. Nat. Geosci. 2008, 1, 636–639. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Leghari, S.J.; Wahocho, N.A.; Laghari, G.M.; HafeezLaghari, A.; MustafaBhabhan, G.; HussainTalpur, K.; Bhutto, T.A.; Wahocho, S.A.; Lashari, A.A. Role of Nitrogen for Plant Growth and Development: A review. Adv. Environ. Biol. 2016, 10, 209–218. [Google Scholar]
  4. Kira, O.; Shaviv, A.; Dubowski, Y. Science of the Total Environment Direct tracing of NH3 and N2O emissions associated with urea fertilization approaches, using static incubation cells. Sci. Total Environ. 2019, 661, 75–85. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. Sutton, M.A.; Oenema, O.; Erisman, J.W.; Leip, A.; van Grinsven, H.; Winiwarter, W. Too much of a good thing? Nature 2011, 472, 156–161. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  6. Heffer, P.; Prud’homme, M. Short-Term Fertilizer Outlook 2016–2017; International Fertilizer Industry Association: Paris, France, 2016. [Google Scholar]
  7. Almaz, M.G.; Halim, R.A.; Martini, M.Y.; Samsuri, A.W. Integrated application of poultry manure and chemical fertiliser on soil chemical properties and nutrient uptake of maize and soybean. Malays. J. Soil Sci. 2017, 21, 13–28. [Google Scholar]
  8. Rochette, P.; Angers, D.A.; Chantigny, M.H.; Macdonald, J.D.; Bertrand, N. Reducing ammonia volatilization in a no-till soil by incorporating urea and pig slurry in shallow bands. Nutr. Cycl. Agroecosyst. 2009, 71–80. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Puga, A.P.; Grutzmacher, P.; Cerri, C.E.P.; Ribeirinho, V.S.; de Andrade, C.A. Biochar-based nitrogen fertilizers: Greenhouse gas emissions, use efficiency, and maize yield in tropical soils. Sci. Total Environ. 2020, 704, 135375. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Lichiheb, N.; Myles, L.T.; Personne, E.; Heuer, M.; Buban, M.; Nelson, A.J.; Koloutsou-Vakakis, S.; Rood, M.J.; Joo, E.; Miller, J.; et al. Implementation of the effect of urease inhibitor on ammonia emissions following urea-based fertilizer application at a Zea mays field in central Illinois: A study with SURFATM-NH 3 model. Agric. For. Meteorol. 2019, 269–270, 78–87. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Motasim, A.M.; Samsuri, A.W.; Shairah, A.S.A.; Adibah, A.M. Gaseous Nitrogen Losses from Tropical Soils with Liquid or Granular Urea Fertilizer Application. Sustainability 2021, 13, 3128. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Wesley, T.L.; Lamond, R.E.; Martin, V.L.; Duncan, S.R. Effects of late-season nitrogen fertilizer on irrigated soybean yield and composition. J. Prod. Agric. 1998, 11, 331–336. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Walsh, O.S.; Christiaens, R.J.; Pandey, A. Applying Liquid Nitrogen in spring wheat. Fluid J. 2014, 22–1, 4–8. [Google Scholar]
  14. Walsh, O.S.; Christiaens, R.J. Relative Efficacy of Liquid Nitrogen Fertilizers in Dryland Spring Wheat. Int. J. Agron. 2016, 2016. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  15. McLaughlin, M.J.; McBeath, T.M.; Smernik, R.; Stacey, S.P.; Ajiboye, B.; Guppy, C. The chemical nature of P accumulation in agricultural soils-implications for fertiliser management and design: An Australian perspective. Plant Soil 2011, 349, 69–87. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Singh, J.; Mahal, J.S.; Manes, G.S.; Singh, M. Development and evaluation of nitrogen (liquid Urea) applicator for straw mulched no-till wheat residue simultaneously. Agric. Eng. Intern. CIGR J. 2013, 15, 30–38. [Google Scholar]
  17. Da Silva, M.J.; Magalhães, H.C.J.; Graziano, F.P.S. Liquid fertilizer application to ratoon cane using a soil punching method. Soil Tillage Res. 2017, 165, 279–285. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Zhao, M.; Tian, Y.; Ma, Y.; Zhang, M.; Yao, Y.; Xiong, Z.; Yin, B.; Zhu, Z. Mitigating gaseous nitrogen emissions intensity from a Chinese rice cropping system through an improved management practice aimed to close the yield gap. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 2015, 203, 36–45. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. LECO. LECO Corporation, USA. Available online: https://www.leco.com/about-us/corporate/approved-methods (accessed on 30 November 2018).
  20. Chapman, H.D. Cation-exchange capacity. Methods Soil Anal. Part 2 Chem. Microbiol. Prop. 1965, 9, 891–901. [Google Scholar]
  21. Teh, C.B.S.; Talib, J. Soil and Plant Analyses Vol. I Soil Physics Analyses; Department of Land Management, Faculty of Agriculture, Universiti Putra Malaysia: Serdang, Malaysia, 2006; Volume 1, ISBN 983-3455-64-6. [Google Scholar]
  22. Tan, K.H. Determination of soil water. In Soil Sampling, Preparation, and Analysis, 2nd ed.; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2005; Volume 1, ISBN 9780849334993. [Google Scholar]
  23. Min, L.W. Reconnaissance Soil Survey of Raub-Temerloh-Jerantut Region Northwest Pahang; Soil Science Division, Research Branch, Division of Agriculture, Ministry of Agriculture and Co-Operatives: Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, 1967; Volume 2. [Google Scholar]
  24. Keeney, D.R.; Nelson, D.W. Nitrogen—Inorganic Forms. Methods Soil Anal. Part 2. Chem. Microbiol. Prop. 1982, 5, 643–698. [Google Scholar]
  25. Douglas, L.A.; Bremner, J.M. Extraction and colorimetric determination of urea in soils. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 1970, 34, 859–862. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Zadeh, F.S. Sorption-Desorption, Degradation and Leaching of Napramide in Selected Malaysian Soils; University Putra Malaysia: Serdang, Malaysia, 2010. [Google Scholar]
  27. SAS Institute Inc. SAS® 9.4 Statements Reference; SAS Institute Inc.: Cary, NC, USA, 2013; p. 476. [Google Scholar]
  28. Mariano, E.; de Sant, A.F.C.R.; Bortoletto-Santos, R.; Bendassolli, J.A.; Trivelin, P.C.O. Ammonia losses following surface application of enhanced-efficiency nitrogen fertilizers and urea. Atmos. Environ. 2019, 203, 242–251. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Abera, G.; Wolde-Meskel, E.; Beyene, S.; Bakken, L.R. Nitrogen mineralization dynamics under different moisture regimes in tropical soils. Int. J. Soil Sci. 2012, 7, 132. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  30. Cardenas, L.M.; Scholefield, D.; Clark, I.M.; Hirsch, P.R. Potential mineralization and nitrification in volcanic grassland soils in Chile. Soil Sci. Plant Nutr. 2013. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  31. Bundy, L.G. Managing Urea-Containing Fertilizers. In Proceedings of the Fertilizer Dealer Meeting, Madison, WI, USA, 27 November–6 December 2001; pp. 1–6. [Google Scholar]
  32. Rochette, P.; Angers, D.A.; Chantigny, M.H.; Gasser, M.O.; MacDonald, J.D.; Pelster, D.E.; Bertrand, N. NH3 volatilization, soil NH4+concentration and soil pH following subsurface banding of urea at increasing rates. Can. J. Soil Sci. 2013, 93, 261–268. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  33. Rochette, P.; Angers, D.A.; Chantigny, M.H.; Macdonald, J.D.; Bissonnette, N.; Bertrand, N. Ammonia volatilization following surface application of urea to tilled and no-till soils: A laboratory comparison. Soil Tillage Res. J. 2009, 103, 310–315. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Junejo, N.; Khanif, M.Y.; Hanfi, M.M.; Dharejo, K.A.; Wan, Z.W.Y. Reduced loss of NH3 by coating urea with biodegradable polymers, palm stearin and selected micronutrients. Afr. J. Biotechnol. 2011, 10, 10618–10625. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Mukhopadhyay, S.; Masto, R.E.; Tripathi, R.C.; Srivastava, N.K. Application of Soil Quality Indicators for the Phytorestoration of Mine Spoil Dumps; Elsevier Inc.: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2019; ISBN 9780128139134. [Google Scholar]
  36. Zuki, M.M.B.M. Nitrogen (N) Transformation of NBPT Treated Urea on Growth and Yield of Maize (Zea mays var. Thai Super Sweet). Master’s Thesis, Universiti Putra Malaysia, Serdang, Malaysia, 2020. [Google Scholar]
  37. Gioacchini, P.; Nastri, A.; Marzadori, C.; Giovannini, C.; Antisari, L.V.; Gessa, C. Influence of urease and nitrification inhibitors on N losses from soils fertilized with urea. Biol. Fertil. Soils 2002, 36, 129–135. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Omar, L.; Ahmed, O.H.; Muhamad, N.; Majid, A. Improving Ammonium and Nitrate Release from Urea Using Clinoptilolite Zeolite and Compost Produced from Agricultural Wastes. Sci. World J. 2015, 2015, 12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  39. Ma, Z.; Yue, Y.; Feng, M.; Li, Y.; Ma, X.; Zhao, X.; Wang, S. Mitigation of ammonia volatilization and nitrate leaching via loss control urea triggered H-bond forces. Sci. Rep. 2019, 9, 1–9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  40. Tripolskaja, L.; Verbylienė, I. The effect of different forms of nitrogen fertilizers on nitrogen leaching. Zemdirbyste 2014, 101, 243–248. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  41. Pedersen, A.; Stoumann, L.; Thorup-kristensen, K. A model analysis on nitrate leaching under different soil and climate conditions and use of catch crops. In Proceedings of the N Management in Agrosystems in Relation to the Water Framework Directive, Maastricht, The Netherlands, 24–26 October 2005; p. 1. [Google Scholar]
  42. Ulén, B.; Aronsson, H. Nitrogen and phosphorus leaching under the potential biennial oilseed plant Lepidium campestre L. in a field trial. Acta Agric. Scand. Sect. B Soil Plant Sci. 2018, 68, 555–561. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Agriculture 11 00546 g001 550
Figure 1. NH4+-N concentration (mg/kg) in Bungor (A) and Selangor (B) soils treated with different rate of LU and GU fertilizers during the four weeks of incubation. Vertical bars on the graphs show the standard errors.
Figure 1. NH4+-N concentration (mg/kg) in Bungor (A) and Selangor (B) soils treated with different rate of LU and GU fertilizers during the four weeks of incubation. Vertical bars on the graphs show the standard errors.
Agriculture 11 00546 g001
Agriculture 11 00546 g002 550
Figure 2. NO3--N concentration in Bungor (A) and Selangor (B) soils treated with different rate of LU and GU fertilizers during the four weeks of incubation. Vertical bars on the graphs show the standard errors.
Figure 2. NO3--N concentration in Bungor (A) and Selangor (B) soils treated with different rate of LU and GU fertilizers during the four weeks of incubation. Vertical bars on the graphs show the standard errors.
Agriculture 11 00546 g002
Agriculture 11 00546 g003 550
Figure 3. Urea-N remaining (%) in Bungor (A) and Selangor (B) soils treated with different rate of LU and GU fertilizers during the four weeks of incubation. Vertical bars on the graphs show the standard errors.
Figure 3. Urea-N remaining (%) in Bungor (A) and Selangor (B) soils treated with different rate of LU and GU fertilizers during the four weeks of incubation. Vertical bars on the graphs show the standard errors.
Agriculture 11 00546 g003
Agriculture 11 00546 g004 550
Figure 4. Leaching of NH4+-N (mg/kg) from Bungor (A) and Selangor (B) soils treated with different rate of LU and GU fertilizers in 10 pore volumes. Vertical bars on the graphs show the standard errors.
Figure 4. Leaching of NH4+-N (mg/kg) from Bungor (A) and Selangor (B) soils treated with different rate of LU and GU fertilizers in 10 pore volumes. Vertical bars on the graphs show the standard errors.
Agriculture 11 00546 g004
Agriculture 11 00546 g005 550
Figure 5. Leaching of NO3−-N (mg/kg) from Bungor (A) and Selangor (B) soils treated with different rate of LU and GU fertilizers in 10 pore volumes. Vertical bars on the graphs show the standard errors.
Figure 5. Leaching of NO3−-N (mg/kg) from Bungor (A) and Selangor (B) soils treated with different rate of LU and GU fertilizers in 10 pore volumes. Vertical bars on the graphs show the standard errors.
Agriculture 11 00546 g005
Agriculture 11 00546 g006 550
Figure 6. Total remaining N (%) in Bungor (A) and Selangor (B) soils applied with different rates of LU and GU fertilizers at the end of 30 days of incubation. Different letters indicate significant difference between means using least significant difference (LSD) test at the 5% significant level. Vertical bars on the graphs show the standard errors.
Figure 6. Total remaining N (%) in Bungor (A) and Selangor (B) soils applied with different rates of LU and GU fertilizers at the end of 30 days of incubation. Different letters indicate significant difference between means using least significant difference (LSD) test at the 5% significant level. Vertical bars on the graphs show the standard errors.
Agriculture 11 00546 g006
Table
Table 1. Physicochemical properties of the soils.
Table 1. Physicochemical properties of the soils.
Soil PropertiesBungor SoilSelangor Soil
Texture analysis28.44% clay, 2.28% silt and 69.28% sand68.11% clay, 29.85% silt and 2.04% sand
USDA soil texture classSandy clay loam *Clay
Moisture content at field capacity (%) 23.7427.89
pH4.936.03
Total C (%)1.413.46
Total N (%)0.070.27
NH4+-N (mg/kg)16.3110.07
NO3−-N (mg/kg)11.4127.11
CEC (cmol+/kg)5.7816.48
* [23].
Table
Table 2. Cumulative leaching loss of N (NH4+-N and NO3−-N) from applied urea.
Table 2. Cumulative leaching loss of N (NH4+-N and NO3−-N) from applied urea.
Urea Application (mg/kg)Bungor Soil SeriesSelangor Soil Series
NH4+-N (mg/kg)NO3−-N (mg/kg)NH4+-N (mg/kg)NO3−-N (mg/kg)
U020.46 * ± 0.29 f5.25 ± 0.03 f7.04 ± 0.10 f6.15 ± 0.06 g
GU30049.93 ± 0.69 d13.68 ± 0.11 d27.69 ± 0.39 c19.91 ± 0.21 d
GU40066.34 ± 0.93 b15.43 ± 0.14 b29.47 ± 0.43 b21.32 ± 0.22 b
GU50071.71 ± 1.20 a16.55 ± 0.14 a30.63 ± 0.44 a22.76 ± 0.24 a
LU30047.51 ± 0.66 e11.88 ± 0.11 e23.29 ± 0.35 e16.56 ± 0.18 f
LU40059.79 ± 0.83 c13.91 ± 0.12 d25.80 ± 0. 37 d18.63 ± 0.19 e
LU50064.58 ± 0.93 b14.82 ± 0.12 c26.98 ± 0.38 c20.74 ± 0.22 c
LSD0.052.32620.3231.07920.5748
* Different letters within a column indicate significant difference between means using least significant difference (LSD) test at the 0.05 significant level.
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Motasim, A.M.; Samsuri, A.W.; Abdul Sukor, A.S.; Adibah, A.M. Nitrogen Dynamics in Tropical Soils Treated with Liquid and Granular Urea Fertilizers. Agriculture 2021, 11, 546. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture11060546

AMA Style

Motasim AM, Samsuri AW, Abdul Sukor AS, Adibah AM. Nitrogen Dynamics in Tropical Soils Treated with Liquid and Granular Urea Fertilizers. Agriculture. 2021; 11(6):546. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture11060546

Chicago/Turabian Style

Motasim, Ahmmed Md, Abd Wahid Samsuri, Arina Shairah Abdul Sukor, and Amin Mohd Adibah. 2021. "Nitrogen Dynamics in Tropical Soils Treated with Liquid and Granular Urea Fertilizers" Agriculture 11, no. 6: 546. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture11060546

APA Style

Motasim, A. M., Samsuri, A. W., Abdul Sukor, A. S., & Adibah, A. M. (2021). Nitrogen Dynamics in Tropical Soils Treated with Liquid and Granular Urea Fertilizers. Agriculture, 11(6), 546. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture11060546

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop