Ball, James D.

Kissel, D. E.

Maddux, Larry D.

Kansas State University

Kansas Agricultural Experiment Station Research Reports Volume 0 Issue 12 Keeping up with Research Article 62 1974 How Nitrification Inhibitors Perform in Kansas Larry D. Maddux James D. Ball D. E. Kissel This report is brought to you for free and open access by New Prairie Press. It has been accepted for inclusion in Kansas Agricultural Experiment Station Research Reports by an authorized administrator of New Prairie Press. Copyright 1974 Kansas State University Agricultural Experiment Station and Cooperative Extension Service. Contents of this publication may be freely reproduced for educational purposes. All other rights reserved. Brand names appearing in this publication are for product identification purposes only. No endorsement is intended, nor is criticism implied of similar products not mentioned. K-State Research and Extension is an equal opportunity provider and employer. Follow this and additional works at: https://newprairiepress.org/kaesrr Recommended Citation Maddux, Larry D.; Ball, James D.; and Kissel, D. E. (1974) "How Nitrification Inhibitors Perform in Kansas," Kansas Agricultural Experiment Station Research Reports: Vol. 0: Iss. 12. https://doi.org/10.4148/2378-5977.7299 How Nitrification Inhibitors Perform in Kansas Keywords Keeping up with research; 6 (May 1974); Kansas Agricultural Experiment Station contribution; no. 36; Nitrification; Inhibitor; Kansas; Fertilizer Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License. This research report is available in Kansas Agricultural Experiment Station Research Reports: https://newprairiepress.org/kaesrr/vol0/iss12/62 Agricultural Experiment Station Kansas State University Manhattan 66506 Keeping Up With Research 47 July 1980 Publications and publ ic meetings by the Kansas Agricultural Experiment Station are available and open to the public regardless of race, color, national origin, sex, or religion. 7-80- 3M July 1980 How Nitrification Inhibitors Perform in Kansas* L.D. Maddux, JD. Ball, and D. E. Kissel Nitrogen fertilizers are used extensively to in-crease crop yields. Crops often recover less than 50 percent of the applied nitrogen during the year of fertilizer application. The lower nitrogen recov-eries can stem from the loss o f nitrate nitrogen from the soil by leaching and denitrification. Most nitrogen fertili zers contain ammonium or ammonium-forming types of nitrogen. In the soi l, ammonium nitrogen generally is adsorbed onto clay and organic matter where it resists leach-ing and denitrificat ion. However, at soi l tempera-tures above 50° F, ammonium nitrogen is con-verted to nitrate nitrogen by a two-step process called nitrification. The ammonium nitrogen is first converted (oxidized) by Nitrosomonas bacteria to nitrite which is relatively unstable in soil and is rap-idly converted by Nitrobacter bacteria to nitrate nitrogen. Nitrate nitrogen is not adsorbed by t he soil but remains dissolved in the soil solution where it moves freely with the flow of water and is taken up *Contribution 80-312-s, Agronomy Department, AES, KSU, Manhattan, 66506 AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION Kansas State University, Manhattan Floyd W. Smith, Director This publication from Kansas State University Agricultural Experiment Station and Cooperative Extension Service has been archived. Current information: http://www.ksre.ksu.edu.by plant roots. Too much moisture from rain or irrigation causes water to move below a crop's root zone and carry some nitrate with it. Nitrate moved below the root zone is considered to be lost by leaching. Nitrate also may be lost by denitrifica-tion, especially under extremely waterlogged con-ditions. The percentage of the nitrogen fertilizer used by crops can be increased by reduc ing nitrogen losses. One method is to apply nitrogen when the crop needs it - by sidedressing or through irrigation (fertigation). Another met hod to reduce losses would be to apply an ammoniacal form of nitrogen and maintain it in this form as long as possible or until the plant uses it. This latter method could be accomplished by incorporating a nitrification in-hibitor with the ammoniacal fertilizer to delay the nitrifi cation process (s low conversion to nitrate). Nitrification inhibitors prevent or retard the first step of nitrification of ammoniacal nitrogen by the Nitrosomonas bacteria. The only product now available for this use is nit rapyrin, 2-chloro-6-(tri-chloro-Methyl) pyridine (N-SERVE). Other products, such as etradiazole (DWELL), are currently being studied for labeling as nitrification inhibitors. RESULTS OF KANSAS RESEARCH Our research on Eudora sandy loam soil at the Kansas River Valley Experiment Field, Rossville, showed that N-SERVE inhibits nitrification, so that anhydrous ammonia remains in the ammoniacal form longer into the growing season (Table 1 ). A higher ammonium nitrogen level was maintained in the soil up to the tassel stage of growth (6-29-78 and 7-12-79) both years. Results in 1979 at the Sandy-land Experiment Field, St. John, on a Pratt loamy fine sand and at the North Central Experiment Field, Scandia, on a Crete silty loam were similar. Field evaluation on corn, wheat and grain sorghum have been conducted in Kansas with N-SERVE from 1975 through 1979 and wit h DWELL from 1977 through 1979. The five-year results (Ta-ble 2) show more sites with no response than sites with increases. Although we occasionally included N-SERVE and DWELL in the same study, they are listed as separate sites for each inhibitor. CORN Corn, which uses more nitrogen than wheat or sorghum, has been most responsive to nitrification inhibitors. All corn-yield increases attributable to This publication from Kansas State University Agricultural Experiment Station and Cooperative Extension Service has been archived. Current information: http://www.ksre.ksu.edu.Table 1 . Soil ammonium levels after application of anhydrous ammon ia on a Eudora sandy loam, Rossville, 1978 and 1979. 150 lb N/a N·SERVE Ammonium Per Acre in Top Foot of Soil, ppm' Applied lbs ai/a 4/26/78 5/11/78 6/7/78 6/29/78 6/11/79 7/12/79 Fall 0 93 31 Spring 0 219 269 81 45 44 15 Fall 0.5 192 66 Sprin g 0.5 297 290 202 74 305 67 'Samples taken directly over the applicator knife and 1 inches to each side were combined for analysis. Table 2. Effects of N-SERVE and DWELL on yields of corn, wheat and grain sorghum on all soil types in Kansas, 1975-1979. Number of Responses No Crop Inhibitor Increases Response Decreases Corn N-SERVE 7 14 0 Corn DWELL 1 5 1 Wheat N -SERVE 4 25 2 Wheat DWELL 0 6 0 Sorghum N-SERVE 2 15 0 Sorghum DWELL 1 1 0 N-SERVE or DWELL w ere on coarse textured (sandy} soils where leaching of nitrate nitrogen could be expected (Table 3). Even on coarse soi ls, yield responses (from 9-22 bu/a, Table 4) were ob-tained less than half the time - probably because weather conditions were not conducive to leaching some years. However, of the twelve sites listed as not responsive, three of nine N-SERVE sites and one of three LL sites on coarse textured soi ls showed a t rend, though not statistically significant, of 7, 10, 16, and 9 bushels increase per acre, respec-tively . In most cases, increased y ields correlated with higher ni trogen uptake by plants. Higher phosphorus uptakes also were observed at some sites. N-SERVE and DWELL usually performed sim ilarly at sites where both were evaluated. Table 3. Effect of N-SERVE and DWELL on corn yield in Kansas, 1975-1979. Number of sites with yield: Soil No Texture Inhibitor Increases Response Decreases Coarse N-SERVE 7 9a 0 Coarse DWELL 1 3a 0 Silt Loam N-SERVE 0 5b 0 Silt Loam DWELL 0 ,b 1 Silty Clay Loam N-SERVE 0 2 0 Silty Clay Loam DWELL 0 1 0 a Three of nine N-SERVE sites and one of three DWELL sites with no statistically significant y ield response had increases of 7, 10, 16, and 9 bushels per acre, respectively. bThree of five N-SERVE sites and t he DWELL site with no statistica lly significant yield response had decreases of 5, 4, 7, and 15 bushels per acre, re-spectively. DWELL decreased yields on silt loam at the Tribune Branch Experiment Station by 16 bushels per acre in 1978. The same trend, although not significant, was also observed with DWELL in 1979 (15 bushels decrease per acre) and with N-SERVE in 1979, 1978 and 1976 (5, 4, and 7 bushels decrease per acre, respectively). We have no logical explana-tion for these yield decreases due to nitrification in-hibitors on this silt loam soil. This publication from Kansas State University Agricultural Experiment Station and Cooperative Extension Service has been archived. Current information: http://www.ksre.ksu.edu.WHEAT Nitrification inhibitors have had rel atively little effect on wheat yields in Kansas (Table 5). One significant yield increase w as observed with DWELL on a sandy soil in 1979, but only at one nitrogen rate and one inhibitor rate. Excessively wet conditions favoring nitrogen losses were con-sidered responsible for the 5.6 bushel increase per acre with N-SERVE at the Osage County silty clay loam site in 1978 (Table 6). Two yield decreases of 7.3 and 2.2 bushels per acre were observed at the Sandyland Experiment Field in 1976 and 1978, respectively . Recent research indicates that apply-ing N-SERVE before planting winter wheat lets much of it degrade before spring, so it would be less effective in reducing spring nitrogen losses. Yield increases from placing nitrogen in the same band as phosphorus fertilizer is thought to be a result of N-SERVE maintaining the nitrogen in the ammoniacal form for a longer period of time, thus having a greater effect on phosphorus uptake than without N-SERVE. However, an additional yield ad-vantage with N-SERVE has not been observed at every location where dual placement has resulted in increased yields. GRAIN SORGHUM As shown in Table 2, only three of the nineteen sites showed an increase in sorghum yield with N-SERVE or DWELL. N-SERVE gave a four bushel per acre increase at the Colby Branch Station in 1976 and 24 bushels per acre at the Sandyland Ex-periment Field (coarse soil) in 1977. An 11 bushel per acre increase was obtained with DWELL at the Sandyland Experiment Field in 1977. Most of the sorghum studies have been on medium to fine tex-tured soils. SUGGESTIONS FOR USE Research has shown that. under excessive rain-fall, maintaining applied nitrogen in the ammo-niaca l form could benefit c rops on sandy soils sub-ject to leaching losses of nitrate nitrogen and possi-bly on fine textured or claypan soils sub ject to de-nitrification. Corn grown on coarse textured soi l is more responsive to nitrification inhibitors than corn on fine textured soil. Present recommendations for corn on coarse textured soil include sidedressing ni-This publication from Kansas State University Agricultural Experiment Station and Cooperative Extension Service has been archived. Current information: http://www.ksre.ksu.edu.Table 4. Yields of corn at sites responsive toN-SERVE and DWELL in Kan.sas, 1975-1979. Corn yield, bu/a @1 5.5% Wit hout With Year County Inhibitor Inhibitor Inhibitor Change 1976 Sedgwick N-SERVE 133 148 + 15 1976 Stafford N-SERVE 97 114 +17 1977 Stafford N-SERVE 91 106 +15 1977 Gray N-SERVE 95 109 +14 1978 Greeley DWELL 121 105 -16 1978 Shawnee N-SERVE 94 103 + 9 1978 Stafford' N-SERV E 99' 113 +14 1978 Stafford' DWELL 99 114 +15 1979 Shawnee1 N-SERVE 142 164 +22 'One study area with N-SERVE and DWELL as separate t reatments. 2At 75 lb N/a only. Table 5. Effect of N-SERV E and DWELL on wheat y ields in Kansas, 1975-1979. Number of sites w ith yield: Soil No Texture Inhibitor Increases Response Decreases oarse N-SERVE 0 3 2 Coarse DWELL 1 1 0 Silt Loam N-SERVE 0 13 0 Silt Loam DWELL 0 1 0 Silty Clay Loam N-SERVE 1 2 0 Dual placement of nitrogen and phosphorus Silt Loam N-SERVE 2 6 0 Silt Loam DWELL 0 1 0 Silty Clay Loam N-SERVE 1 1 0 Silty Clay Loam DWELL 0 1 0 trogen or applying it with irrigation. A nitrification inhibi tor might be an alternative, but there is I ittle research in Kansas to indicate whether corn y ields obtained by sidedressing or fertigating can be equaled by the application of preplant nitrogen plus a nitrification inhibitor. Wheat and grain sorghum have shown l ittle response to nitrification inhibitors. However, many Table 6. Yields of wheat obtained at sites respon-sive toN-SERVE in Kansas, 1975-1979.' Wheat yield, bu/a Without W it h Year County Inhibitor Inhibitor Change 1976 Stafford 34.3 29.0 7.3 1978 Osage 59.6 65.2 + 5.6 1978 Stafford 31.0 28.8 2.2 Dual placement of nitrogen and phosphorus 1977 Reno 35.2 46.7 +11.5 1977 La bette 42.3 48.6 + 7.3 1978 Osage 48.9 57.5 + 8.6 'No responses were obtained in 1975 or 1979. of the sorghum studies were on si lt loam soils not usually susceptible to nitrogen losses, so a nitrifica-tion inhibitor might be warranted in some cases. If the past history of a fie ld ind icates losses of ap-plied nitrogen in years of excess ive moisture, a ni-trification inhibitor might be a good investment. This publication from Kansas State University Agricultural Experiment Station and Cooperative Extension Service has been archived. Current information: http://www.ksre.ksu.edu.

How Nitrification Inhibitors Perform in Kansas (1980)

https://newprairiepress.org/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=7299&amp;context=kaesrr

How Nitrification Inhibitors Perform in Kansas (1974)

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Kansas State University