Managing nitrogen for sustainable crop production with reduced hydrological nitrogen losses under a winter wheat–summer maize rotation system: an eight-season field study

Excessive nitrogen (N) application in wheat–maize cropping systems was adjusted towards more sustainable practices to reduce hydrological N losses while maintaining crop yield. In comprehensive quantification of N management effects on crop yield, N use efficiency (NUE), hydrological N losses, and soil nitrate residual across eight seasons, we have added to growing evidence of strategies beneficial for sustainable crop production with lower hydrological N losses. The results show that adjusted N practices enhanced crop yield and NUE, as compared to farmer’s practices, but benefits varied with N rates and types. Optimized N treatment (OPT, 180 kg N ha-1 in both maize and wheat seasons) with or without straw returning produced the most crop yield. They increased maize yield by 5.5% and 7.3% and wheat yield by 6.2% and 3.2% on average, as compared to farmer’s practice with huge N application (FP, 345 kg N ha−1 and 240 kg N ha−1 in maize and wheat). Regulation of N release through amendment with controlled release urea at a rate of 144 kg N ha−1 crop−1 (CRU treatment) obtained 4.4% greater maize yield than FP, and sustained a similar wheat yield with less N input, resulting in the highest crop NUE. Additionally, CRU was most effective in mitigating hydrological N loss, with 39.5% and 45.5% less leachate N and 31.9% and 35.9% less runoff N loss than FP in maize and wheat seasons. Synthetic N input correlated significantly and positively with runoff and leachate N losses, indicating it was one of the dominant factors driving hydrological N losses. Moreover, compared to OPT, additional straw returning (STR) or substituting 20% of the nutrients by duck manure (DMS) further reduced runoff N discharges due to the fact that organic matter incorporation increased resilience to rainfall. N over-application in FP caused considerable nitrate accumulation in the 0–90-cm soil profile, while the adjusted N practices, i.e., OPT, STR, CRU, and DMS treatments effectively controlled it to a range of 79.6–92.9 kg N ha−1. This study suggests that efforts using optimized N treatment integrated with CRU or straw returning should be encouraged for sustainable crop production in this region. Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:

Autor*in:	Li Wang [verfasserIn] Lei Ma [verfasserIn] Yan Li [verfasserIn] Christoph-Martin Geilfus [verfasserIn] Jianlin Wei [verfasserIn] Fuli Zheng [verfasserIn] Zhaohui Liu [verfasserIn] Deshui Tan [verfasserIn]

Format:	E-Artikel
Sprache:	Englisch

Erschienen:	2023

Schlagwörter:	nitrogen management nitrogen leaching nitrogen runoff nitrogen use efficiency wheat-maize rotation system

Übergeordnetes Werk:	In: Frontiers in Plant Science - Frontiers Media S.A., 2011, 14(2023)
Übergeordnetes Werk:	volume:14 ; year:2023

Links:	Link aufrufen Link aufrufen Link aufrufen Journal toc

DOI / URN:	10.3389/fpls.2023.1274943

Katalog-ID:	DOAJ091090318

Internformat


LEADER	01000caa a22002652 4500
001	DOAJ091090318
003	DE-627
005	20240413073105.0
007	cr uuu---uuuuu
008	240412s2023 xx \|\|\|\|\|o 00\| \|\|eng c
024	7		\|a 10.3389/fpls.2023.1274943 \|2 doi
035			\|a (DE-627)DOAJ091090318
035			\|a (DE-599)DOAJ85acdd9f7cbe432ab0645b42d3a82cc2
040			\|a DE-627 \|b ger \|c DE-627 \|e rakwb
041			\|a eng
050		0	\|a SB1-1110
100	0		\|a Li Wang \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
245	1	0	\|a Managing nitrogen for sustainable crop production with reduced hydrological nitrogen losses under a winter wheat–summer maize rotation system: an eight-season field study
264		1	\|c 2023
336			\|a Text \|b txt \|2 rdacontent
337			\|a Computermedien \|b c \|2 rdamedia
338			\|a Online-Ressource \|b cr \|2 rdacarrier
520			\|a Excessive nitrogen (N) application in wheat–maize cropping systems was adjusted towards more sustainable practices to reduce hydrological N losses while maintaining crop yield. In comprehensive quantification of N management effects on crop yield, N use efficiency (NUE), hydrological N losses, and soil nitrate residual across eight seasons, we have added to growing evidence of strategies beneficial for sustainable crop production with lower hydrological N losses. The results show that adjusted N practices enhanced crop yield and NUE, as compared to farmer’s practices, but benefits varied with N rates and types. Optimized N treatment (OPT, 180 kg N ha-1 in both maize and wheat seasons) with or without straw returning produced the most crop yield. They increased maize yield by 5.5% and 7.3% and wheat yield by 6.2% and 3.2% on average, as compared to farmer’s practice with huge N application (FP, 345 kg N ha−1 and 240 kg N ha−1 in maize and wheat). Regulation of N release through amendment with controlled release urea at a rate of 144 kg N ha−1 crop−1 (CRU treatment) obtained 4.4% greater maize yield than FP, and sustained a similar wheat yield with less N input, resulting in the highest crop NUE. Additionally, CRU was most effective in mitigating hydrological N loss, with 39.5% and 45.5% less leachate N and 31.9% and 35.9% less runoff N loss than FP in maize and wheat seasons. Synthetic N input correlated significantly and positively with runoff and leachate N losses, indicating it was one of the dominant factors driving hydrological N losses. Moreover, compared to OPT, additional straw returning (STR) or substituting 20% of the nutrients by duck manure (DMS) further reduced runoff N discharges due to the fact that organic matter incorporation increased resilience to rainfall. N over-application in FP caused considerable nitrate accumulation in the 0–90-cm soil profile, while the adjusted N practices, i.e., OPT, STR, CRU, and DMS treatments effectively controlled it to a range of 79.6–92.9 kg N ha−1. This study suggests that efforts using optimized N treatment integrated with CRU or straw returning should be encouraged for sustainable crop production in this region.
650		4	\|a nitrogen management
650		4	\|a nitrogen leaching
650		4	\|a nitrogen runoff
650		4	\|a nitrogen use efficiency
650		4	\|a wheat-maize rotation system
653		0	\|a Plant culture
700	0		\|a Li Wang \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
700	0		\|a Li Wang \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
700	0		\|a Lei Ma \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
700	0		\|a Yan Li \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
700	0		\|a Christoph-Martin Geilfus \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
700	0		\|a Jianlin Wei \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
700	0		\|a Fuli Zheng \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
700	0		\|a Zhaohui Liu \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
700	0		\|a Deshui Tan \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
773	0	8	\|i In \|t Frontiers in Plant Science \|d Frontiers Media S.A., 2011 \|g 14(2023) \|w (DE-627)662359240 \|w (DE-600)2613694-6 \|x 1664462X \|7 nnns
773	1	8	\|g volume:14 \|g year:2023
856	4	0	\|u https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2023.1274943 \|z kostenfrei
856	4	0	\|u https://doaj.org/article/85acdd9f7cbe432ab0645b42d3a82cc2 \|z kostenfrei
856	4	0	\|u https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpls.2023.1274943/full \|z kostenfrei
856	4	2	\|u https://doaj.org/toc/1664-462X \|y Journal toc \|z kostenfrei
912			\|a GBV_USEFLAG_A
912			\|a SYSFLAG_A
912			\|a GBV_DOAJ
912			\|a GBV_ILN_11
912			\|a GBV_ILN_20
912			\|a GBV_ILN_22
912			\|a GBV_ILN_23
912			\|a GBV_ILN_24
912			\|a GBV_ILN_39
912			\|a GBV_ILN_40
912			\|a GBV_ILN_62
912			\|a GBV_ILN_63
912			\|a GBV_ILN_65
912			\|a GBV_ILN_69
912			\|a GBV_ILN_70
912			\|a GBV_ILN_73
912			\|a GBV_ILN_74
912			\|a GBV_ILN_95
912			\|a GBV_ILN_105
912			\|a GBV_ILN_110
912			\|a GBV_ILN_151
912			\|a GBV_ILN_161
912			\|a GBV_ILN_170
912			\|a GBV_ILN_213
912			\|a GBV_ILN_230
912			\|a GBV_ILN_285
912			\|a GBV_ILN_293
912			\|a GBV_ILN_602
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2003
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2014
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4012
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4037
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4112
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4125
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4126
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4249
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4305
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4306
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4307
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4313
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4322
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4323
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4324
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4325
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4338
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4367
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4700
951			\|a AR
952			\|d 14 \|j 2023

Indexfelder

author_variant	l w lw l w lw l w lw l m lm y l yl c m g cmg j w jw f z fz z l zl d t dt
matchkey_str	article:1664462X:2023----::aaigirgnossanberprdciniheuehdooiantoelseudrwnewetumraz
hierarchy_sort_str	2023
callnumber-subject-code	SB
publishDate	2023
allfields	10.3389/fpls.2023.1274943 doi (DE-627)DOAJ091090318 (DE-599)DOAJ85acdd9f7cbe432ab0645b42d3a82cc2 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng SB1-1110 Li Wang verfasserin aut Managing nitrogen for sustainable crop production with reduced hydrological nitrogen losses under a winter wheat–summer maize rotation system: an eight-season field study 2023 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Excessive nitrogen (N) application in wheat–maize cropping systems was adjusted towards more sustainable practices to reduce hydrological N losses while maintaining crop yield. In comprehensive quantification of N management effects on crop yield, N use efficiency (NUE), hydrological N losses, and soil nitrate residual across eight seasons, we have added to growing evidence of strategies beneficial for sustainable crop production with lower hydrological N losses. The results show that adjusted N practices enhanced crop yield and NUE, as compared to farmer’s practices, but benefits varied with N rates and types. Optimized N treatment (OPT, 180 kg N ha-1 in both maize and wheat seasons) with or without straw returning produced the most crop yield. They increased maize yield by 5.5% and 7.3% and wheat yield by 6.2% and 3.2% on average, as compared to farmer’s practice with huge N application (FP, 345 kg N ha−1 and 240 kg N ha−1 in maize and wheat). Regulation of N release through amendment with controlled release urea at a rate of 144 kg N ha−1 crop−1 (CRU treatment) obtained 4.4% greater maize yield than FP, and sustained a similar wheat yield with less N input, resulting in the highest crop NUE. Additionally, CRU was most effective in mitigating hydrological N loss, with 39.5% and 45.5% less leachate N and 31.9% and 35.9% less runoff N loss than FP in maize and wheat seasons. Synthetic N input correlated significantly and positively with runoff and leachate N losses, indicating it was one of the dominant factors driving hydrological N losses. Moreover, compared to OPT, additional straw returning (STR) or substituting 20% of the nutrients by duck manure (DMS) further reduced runoff N discharges due to the fact that organic matter incorporation increased resilience to rainfall. N over-application in FP caused considerable nitrate accumulation in the 0–90-cm soil profile, while the adjusted N practices, i.e., OPT, STR, CRU, and DMS treatments effectively controlled it to a range of 79.6–92.9 kg N ha−1. This study suggests that efforts using optimized N treatment integrated with CRU or straw returning should be encouraged for sustainable crop production in this region. nitrogen management nitrogen leaching nitrogen runoff nitrogen use efficiency wheat-maize rotation system Plant culture Li Wang verfasserin aut Li Wang verfasserin aut Lei Ma verfasserin aut Yan Li verfasserin aut Christoph-Martin Geilfus verfasserin aut Jianlin Wei verfasserin aut Fuli Zheng verfasserin aut Zhaohui Liu verfasserin aut Deshui Tan verfasserin aut In Frontiers in Plant Science Frontiers Media S.A., 2011 14(2023) (DE-627)662359240 (DE-600)2613694-6 1664462X nnns volume:14 year:2023 https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2023.1274943 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/85acdd9f7cbe432ab0645b42d3a82cc2 kostenfrei https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpls.2023.1274943/full kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/1664-462X Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 14 2023
spelling	10.3389/fpls.2023.1274943 doi (DE-627)DOAJ091090318 (DE-599)DOAJ85acdd9f7cbe432ab0645b42d3a82cc2 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng SB1-1110 Li Wang verfasserin aut Managing nitrogen for sustainable crop production with reduced hydrological nitrogen losses under a winter wheat–summer maize rotation system: an eight-season field study 2023 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Excessive nitrogen (N) application in wheat–maize cropping systems was adjusted towards more sustainable practices to reduce hydrological N losses while maintaining crop yield. In comprehensive quantification of N management effects on crop yield, N use efficiency (NUE), hydrological N losses, and soil nitrate residual across eight seasons, we have added to growing evidence of strategies beneficial for sustainable crop production with lower hydrological N losses. The results show that adjusted N practices enhanced crop yield and NUE, as compared to farmer’s practices, but benefits varied with N rates and types. Optimized N treatment (OPT, 180 kg N ha-1 in both maize and wheat seasons) with or without straw returning produced the most crop yield. They increased maize yield by 5.5% and 7.3% and wheat yield by 6.2% and 3.2% on average, as compared to farmer’s practice with huge N application (FP, 345 kg N ha−1 and 240 kg N ha−1 in maize and wheat). Regulation of N release through amendment with controlled release urea at a rate of 144 kg N ha−1 crop−1 (CRU treatment) obtained 4.4% greater maize yield than FP, and sustained a similar wheat yield with less N input, resulting in the highest crop NUE. Additionally, CRU was most effective in mitigating hydrological N loss, with 39.5% and 45.5% less leachate N and 31.9% and 35.9% less runoff N loss than FP in maize and wheat seasons. Synthetic N input correlated significantly and positively with runoff and leachate N losses, indicating it was one of the dominant factors driving hydrological N losses. Moreover, compared to OPT, additional straw returning (STR) or substituting 20% of the nutrients by duck manure (DMS) further reduced runoff N discharges due to the fact that organic matter incorporation increased resilience to rainfall. N over-application in FP caused considerable nitrate accumulation in the 0–90-cm soil profile, while the adjusted N practices, i.e., OPT, STR, CRU, and DMS treatments effectively controlled it to a range of 79.6–92.9 kg N ha−1. This study suggests that efforts using optimized N treatment integrated with CRU or straw returning should be encouraged for sustainable crop production in this region. nitrogen management nitrogen leaching nitrogen runoff nitrogen use efficiency wheat-maize rotation system Plant culture Li Wang verfasserin aut Li Wang verfasserin aut Lei Ma verfasserin aut Yan Li verfasserin aut Christoph-Martin Geilfus verfasserin aut Jianlin Wei verfasserin aut Fuli Zheng verfasserin aut Zhaohui Liu verfasserin aut Deshui Tan verfasserin aut In Frontiers in Plant Science Frontiers Media S.A., 2011 14(2023) (DE-627)662359240 (DE-600)2613694-6 1664462X nnns volume:14 year:2023 https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2023.1274943 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/85acdd9f7cbe432ab0645b42d3a82cc2 kostenfrei https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpls.2023.1274943/full kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/1664-462X Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 14 2023
allfields_unstemmed	10.3389/fpls.2023.1274943 doi (DE-627)DOAJ091090318 (DE-599)DOAJ85acdd9f7cbe432ab0645b42d3a82cc2 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng SB1-1110 Li Wang verfasserin aut Managing nitrogen for sustainable crop production with reduced hydrological nitrogen losses under a winter wheat–summer maize rotation system: an eight-season field study 2023 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Excessive nitrogen (N) application in wheat–maize cropping systems was adjusted towards more sustainable practices to reduce hydrological N losses while maintaining crop yield. In comprehensive quantification of N management effects on crop yield, N use efficiency (NUE), hydrological N losses, and soil nitrate residual across eight seasons, we have added to growing evidence of strategies beneficial for sustainable crop production with lower hydrological N losses. The results show that adjusted N practices enhanced crop yield and NUE, as compared to farmer’s practices, but benefits varied with N rates and types. Optimized N treatment (OPT, 180 kg N ha-1 in both maize and wheat seasons) with or without straw returning produced the most crop yield. They increased maize yield by 5.5% and 7.3% and wheat yield by 6.2% and 3.2% on average, as compared to farmer’s practice with huge N application (FP, 345 kg N ha−1 and 240 kg N ha−1 in maize and wheat). Regulation of N release through amendment with controlled release urea at a rate of 144 kg N ha−1 crop−1 (CRU treatment) obtained 4.4% greater maize yield than FP, and sustained a similar wheat yield with less N input, resulting in the highest crop NUE. Additionally, CRU was most effective in mitigating hydrological N loss, with 39.5% and 45.5% less leachate N and 31.9% and 35.9% less runoff N loss than FP in maize and wheat seasons. Synthetic N input correlated significantly and positively with runoff and leachate N losses, indicating it was one of the dominant factors driving hydrological N losses. Moreover, compared to OPT, additional straw returning (STR) or substituting 20% of the nutrients by duck manure (DMS) further reduced runoff N discharges due to the fact that organic matter incorporation increased resilience to rainfall. N over-application in FP caused considerable nitrate accumulation in the 0–90-cm soil profile, while the adjusted N practices, i.e., OPT, STR, CRU, and DMS treatments effectively controlled it to a range of 79.6–92.9 kg N ha−1. This study suggests that efforts using optimized N treatment integrated with CRU or straw returning should be encouraged for sustainable crop production in this region. nitrogen management nitrogen leaching nitrogen runoff nitrogen use efficiency wheat-maize rotation system Plant culture Li Wang verfasserin aut Li Wang verfasserin aut Lei Ma verfasserin aut Yan Li verfasserin aut Christoph-Martin Geilfus verfasserin aut Jianlin Wei verfasserin aut Fuli Zheng verfasserin aut Zhaohui Liu verfasserin aut Deshui Tan verfasserin aut In Frontiers in Plant Science Frontiers Media S.A., 2011 14(2023) (DE-627)662359240 (DE-600)2613694-6 1664462X nnns volume:14 year:2023 https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2023.1274943 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/85acdd9f7cbe432ab0645b42d3a82cc2 kostenfrei https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpls.2023.1274943/full kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/1664-462X Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 14 2023
allfieldsGer	10.3389/fpls.2023.1274943 doi (DE-627)DOAJ091090318 (DE-599)DOAJ85acdd9f7cbe432ab0645b42d3a82cc2 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng SB1-1110 Li Wang verfasserin aut Managing nitrogen for sustainable crop production with reduced hydrological nitrogen losses under a winter wheat–summer maize rotation system: an eight-season field study 2023 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Excessive nitrogen (N) application in wheat–maize cropping systems was adjusted towards more sustainable practices to reduce hydrological N losses while maintaining crop yield. In comprehensive quantification of N management effects on crop yield, N use efficiency (NUE), hydrological N losses, and soil nitrate residual across eight seasons, we have added to growing evidence of strategies beneficial for sustainable crop production with lower hydrological N losses. The results show that adjusted N practices enhanced crop yield and NUE, as compared to farmer’s practices, but benefits varied with N rates and types. Optimized N treatment (OPT, 180 kg N ha-1 in both maize and wheat seasons) with or without straw returning produced the most crop yield. They increased maize yield by 5.5% and 7.3% and wheat yield by 6.2% and 3.2% on average, as compared to farmer’s practice with huge N application (FP, 345 kg N ha−1 and 240 kg N ha−1 in maize and wheat). Regulation of N release through amendment with controlled release urea at a rate of 144 kg N ha−1 crop−1 (CRU treatment) obtained 4.4% greater maize yield than FP, and sustained a similar wheat yield with less N input, resulting in the highest crop NUE. Additionally, CRU was most effective in mitigating hydrological N loss, with 39.5% and 45.5% less leachate N and 31.9% and 35.9% less runoff N loss than FP in maize and wheat seasons. Synthetic N input correlated significantly and positively with runoff and leachate N losses, indicating it was one of the dominant factors driving hydrological N losses. Moreover, compared to OPT, additional straw returning (STR) or substituting 20% of the nutrients by duck manure (DMS) further reduced runoff N discharges due to the fact that organic matter incorporation increased resilience to rainfall. N over-application in FP caused considerable nitrate accumulation in the 0–90-cm soil profile, while the adjusted N practices, i.e., OPT, STR, CRU, and DMS treatments effectively controlled it to a range of 79.6–92.9 kg N ha−1. This study suggests that efforts using optimized N treatment integrated with CRU or straw returning should be encouraged for sustainable crop production in this region. nitrogen management nitrogen leaching nitrogen runoff nitrogen use efficiency wheat-maize rotation system Plant culture Li Wang verfasserin aut Li Wang verfasserin aut Lei Ma verfasserin aut Yan Li verfasserin aut Christoph-Martin Geilfus verfasserin aut Jianlin Wei verfasserin aut Fuli Zheng verfasserin aut Zhaohui Liu verfasserin aut Deshui Tan verfasserin aut In Frontiers in Plant Science Frontiers Media S.A., 2011 14(2023) (DE-627)662359240 (DE-600)2613694-6 1664462X nnns volume:14 year:2023 https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2023.1274943 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/85acdd9f7cbe432ab0645b42d3a82cc2 kostenfrei https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpls.2023.1274943/full kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/1664-462X Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 14 2023
allfieldsSound	10.3389/fpls.2023.1274943 doi (DE-627)DOAJ091090318 (DE-599)DOAJ85acdd9f7cbe432ab0645b42d3a82cc2 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng SB1-1110 Li Wang verfasserin aut Managing nitrogen for sustainable crop production with reduced hydrological nitrogen losses under a winter wheat–summer maize rotation system: an eight-season field study 2023 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Excessive nitrogen (N) application in wheat–maize cropping systems was adjusted towards more sustainable practices to reduce hydrological N losses while maintaining crop yield. In comprehensive quantification of N management effects on crop yield, N use efficiency (NUE), hydrological N losses, and soil nitrate residual across eight seasons, we have added to growing evidence of strategies beneficial for sustainable crop production with lower hydrological N losses. The results show that adjusted N practices enhanced crop yield and NUE, as compared to farmer’s practices, but benefits varied with N rates and types. Optimized N treatment (OPT, 180 kg N ha-1 in both maize and wheat seasons) with or without straw returning produced the most crop yield. They increased maize yield by 5.5% and 7.3% and wheat yield by 6.2% and 3.2% on average, as compared to farmer’s practice with huge N application (FP, 345 kg N ha−1 and 240 kg N ha−1 in maize and wheat). Regulation of N release through amendment with controlled release urea at a rate of 144 kg N ha−1 crop−1 (CRU treatment) obtained 4.4% greater maize yield than FP, and sustained a similar wheat yield with less N input, resulting in the highest crop NUE. Additionally, CRU was most effective in mitigating hydrological N loss, with 39.5% and 45.5% less leachate N and 31.9% and 35.9% less runoff N loss than FP in maize and wheat seasons. Synthetic N input correlated significantly and positively with runoff and leachate N losses, indicating it was one of the dominant factors driving hydrological N losses. Moreover, compared to OPT, additional straw returning (STR) or substituting 20% of the nutrients by duck manure (DMS) further reduced runoff N discharges due to the fact that organic matter incorporation increased resilience to rainfall. N over-application in FP caused considerable nitrate accumulation in the 0–90-cm soil profile, while the adjusted N practices, i.e., OPT, STR, CRU, and DMS treatments effectively controlled it to a range of 79.6–92.9 kg N ha−1. This study suggests that efforts using optimized N treatment integrated with CRU or straw returning should be encouraged for sustainable crop production in this region. nitrogen management nitrogen leaching nitrogen runoff nitrogen use efficiency wheat-maize rotation system Plant culture Li Wang verfasserin aut Li Wang verfasserin aut Lei Ma verfasserin aut Yan Li verfasserin aut Christoph-Martin Geilfus verfasserin aut Jianlin Wei verfasserin aut Fuli Zheng verfasserin aut Zhaohui Liu verfasserin aut Deshui Tan verfasserin aut In Frontiers in Plant Science Frontiers Media S.A., 2011 14(2023) (DE-627)662359240 (DE-600)2613694-6 1664462X nnns volume:14 year:2023 https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2023.1274943 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/85acdd9f7cbe432ab0645b42d3a82cc2 kostenfrei https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpls.2023.1274943/full kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/1664-462X Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 14 2023
language	English
source	In Frontiers in Plant Science 14(2023) volume:14 year:2023
sourceStr	In Frontiers in Plant Science 14(2023) volume:14 year:2023
format_phy_str_mv	Article
institution	findex.gbv.de
topic_facet	nitrogen management nitrogen leaching nitrogen runoff nitrogen use efficiency wheat-maize rotation system Plant culture
isfreeaccess_bool	true
container_title	Frontiers in Plant Science
authorswithroles_txt_mv	Li Wang @@aut@@ Lei Ma @@aut@@ Yan Li @@aut@@ Christoph-Martin Geilfus @@aut@@ Jianlin Wei @@aut@@ Fuli Zheng @@aut@@ Zhaohui Liu @@aut@@ Deshui Tan @@aut@@
publishDateDaySort_date	2023-01-01T00:00:00Z
hierarchy_top_id	662359240
id	DOAJ091090318
language_de	englisch
fullrecord	<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">DOAJ091090318</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20240413073105.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">240412s2023 xx \|\|\|\|\|o 00\| \|\|eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.3389/fpls.2023.1274943</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)DOAJ091090318</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-599)DOAJ85acdd9f7cbe432ab0645b42d3a82cc2</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="050" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">SB1-1110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Li Wang</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Managing nitrogen for sustainable crop production with reduced hydrological nitrogen losses under a winter wheat–summer maize rotation system: an eight-season field study</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2023</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Excessive nitrogen (N) application in wheat–maize cropping systems was adjusted towards more sustainable practices to reduce hydrological N losses while maintaining crop yield. In comprehensive quantification of N management effects on crop yield, N use efficiency (NUE), hydrological N losses, and soil nitrate residual across eight seasons, we have added to growing evidence of strategies beneficial for sustainable crop production with lower hydrological N losses. The results show that adjusted N practices enhanced crop yield and NUE, as compared to farmer’s practices, but benefits varied with N rates and types. Optimized N treatment (OPT, 180 kg N ha-1 in both maize and wheat seasons) with or without straw returning produced the most crop yield. They increased maize yield by 5.5% and 7.3% and wheat yield by 6.2% and 3.2% on average, as compared to farmer’s practice with huge N application (FP, 345 kg N ha−1 and 240 kg N ha−1 in maize and wheat). Regulation of N release through amendment with controlled release urea at a rate of 144 kg N ha−1 crop−1 (CRU treatment) obtained 4.4% greater maize yield than FP, and sustained a similar wheat yield with less N input, resulting in the highest crop NUE. Additionally, CRU was most effective in mitigating hydrological N loss, with 39.5% and 45.5% less leachate N and 31.9% and 35.9% less runoff N loss than FP in maize and wheat seasons. Synthetic N input correlated significantly and positively with runoff and leachate N losses, indicating it was one of the dominant factors driving hydrological N losses. Moreover, compared to OPT, additional straw returning (STR) or substituting 20% of the nutrients by duck manure (DMS) further reduced runoff N discharges due to the fact that organic matter incorporation increased resilience to rainfall. N over-application in FP caused considerable nitrate accumulation in the 0–90-cm soil profile, while the adjusted N practices, i.e., OPT, STR, CRU, and DMS treatments effectively controlled it to a range of 79.6–92.9 kg N ha−1. This study suggests that efforts using optimized N treatment integrated with CRU or straw returning should be encouraged for sustainable crop production in this region.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">nitrogen management</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">nitrogen leaching</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">nitrogen runoff</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">nitrogen use efficiency</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">wheat-maize rotation system</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="653" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Plant culture</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Li Wang</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Li Wang</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Lei Ma</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Yan Li</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Christoph-Martin Geilfus</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Jianlin Wei</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Fuli Zheng</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Zhaohui Liu</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Deshui Tan</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">In</subfield><subfield code="t">Frontiers in Plant Science</subfield><subfield code="d">Frontiers Media S.A., 2011</subfield><subfield code="g">14(2023)</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)662359240</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)2613694-6</subfield><subfield code="x">1664462X</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:14</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2023</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2023.1274943</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/article/85acdd9f7cbe432ab0645b42d3a82cc2</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpls.2023.1274943/full</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="2"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/toc/1664-462X</subfield><subfield code="y">Journal toc</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_DOAJ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_11</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_20</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_23</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_24</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_39</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_40</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_62</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_63</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_65</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_69</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_70</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_73</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_74</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_95</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_105</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_151</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_161</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_170</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_230</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_285</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_293</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_602</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2003</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2014</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4012</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4037</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4125</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4126</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4249</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4305</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4306</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4307</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4313</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4322</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4323</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4324</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4325</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4338</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4367</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4700</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">14</subfield><subfield code="j">2023</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
callnumber-first	S - Agriculture
author	Li Wang
spellingShingle	Li Wang misc SB1-1110 misc nitrogen management misc nitrogen leaching misc nitrogen runoff misc nitrogen use efficiency misc wheat-maize rotation system misc Plant culture Managing nitrogen for sustainable crop production with reduced hydrological nitrogen losses under a winter wheat–summer maize rotation system: an eight-season field study
authorStr	Li Wang
ppnlink_with_tag_str_mv	@@773@@(DE-627)662359240
format	electronic Article
delete_txt_mv	keep
author_role	aut aut aut aut aut aut aut aut aut aut
collection	DOAJ
remote_str	true
callnumber-label	SB1-1110
illustrated	Not Illustrated
issn	1664462X
topic_title	SB1-1110 Managing nitrogen for sustainable crop production with reduced hydrological nitrogen losses under a winter wheat–summer maize rotation system: an eight-season field study nitrogen management nitrogen leaching nitrogen runoff nitrogen use efficiency wheat-maize rotation system
topic	misc SB1-1110 misc nitrogen management misc nitrogen leaching misc nitrogen runoff misc nitrogen use efficiency misc wheat-maize rotation system misc Plant culture
topic_unstemmed	misc SB1-1110 misc nitrogen management misc nitrogen leaching misc nitrogen runoff misc nitrogen use efficiency misc wheat-maize rotation system misc Plant culture
topic_browse	misc SB1-1110 misc nitrogen management misc nitrogen leaching misc nitrogen runoff misc nitrogen use efficiency misc wheat-maize rotation system misc Plant culture
format_facet	Elektronische Aufsätze Aufsätze Elektronische Ressource
format_main_str_mv	Text Zeitschrift/Artikel
carriertype_str_mv	cr
hierarchy_parent_title	Frontiers in Plant Science
hierarchy_parent_id	662359240
hierarchy_top_title	Frontiers in Plant Science
isfreeaccess_txt	true
familylinks_str_mv	(DE-627)662359240 (DE-600)2613694-6
title	Managing nitrogen for sustainable crop production with reduced hydrological nitrogen losses under a winter wheat–summer maize rotation system: an eight-season field study
ctrlnum	(DE-627)DOAJ091090318 (DE-599)DOAJ85acdd9f7cbe432ab0645b42d3a82cc2
title_full	Managing nitrogen for sustainable crop production with reduced hydrological nitrogen losses under a winter wheat–summer maize rotation system: an eight-season field study
author_sort	Li Wang
journal	Frontiers in Plant Science
journalStr	Frontiers in Plant Science
callnumber-first-code	S
lang_code	eng
isOA_bool	true
recordtype	marc
publishDateSort	2023
contenttype_str_mv	txt
author_browse	Li Wang Lei Ma Yan Li Christoph-Martin Geilfus Jianlin Wei Fuli Zheng Zhaohui Liu Deshui Tan
container_volume	14
class	SB1-1110
format_se	Elektronische Aufsätze
author-letter	Li Wang
doi_str_mv	10.3389/fpls.2023.1274943
author2-role	verfasserin
title_sort	managing nitrogen for sustainable crop production with reduced hydrological nitrogen losses under a winter wheat–summer maize rotation system: an eight-season field study
callnumber	SB1-1110
title_auth	Managing nitrogen for sustainable crop production with reduced hydrological nitrogen losses under a winter wheat–summer maize rotation system: an eight-season field study
abstract	Excessive nitrogen (N) application in wheat–maize cropping systems was adjusted towards more sustainable practices to reduce hydrological N losses while maintaining crop yield. In comprehensive quantification of N management effects on crop yield, N use efficiency (NUE), hydrological N losses, and soil nitrate residual across eight seasons, we have added to growing evidence of strategies beneficial for sustainable crop production with lower hydrological N losses. The results show that adjusted N practices enhanced crop yield and NUE, as compared to farmer’s practices, but benefits varied with N rates and types. Optimized N treatment (OPT, 180 kg N ha-1 in both maize and wheat seasons) with or without straw returning produced the most crop yield. They increased maize yield by 5.5% and 7.3% and wheat yield by 6.2% and 3.2% on average, as compared to farmer’s practice with huge N application (FP, 345 kg N ha−1 and 240 kg N ha−1 in maize and wheat). Regulation of N release through amendment with controlled release urea at a rate of 144 kg N ha−1 crop−1 (CRU treatment) obtained 4.4% greater maize yield than FP, and sustained a similar wheat yield with less N input, resulting in the highest crop NUE. Additionally, CRU was most effective in mitigating hydrological N loss, with 39.5% and 45.5% less leachate N and 31.9% and 35.9% less runoff N loss than FP in maize and wheat seasons. Synthetic N input correlated significantly and positively with runoff and leachate N losses, indicating it was one of the dominant factors driving hydrological N losses. Moreover, compared to OPT, additional straw returning (STR) or substituting 20% of the nutrients by duck manure (DMS) further reduced runoff N discharges due to the fact that organic matter incorporation increased resilience to rainfall. N over-application in FP caused considerable nitrate accumulation in the 0–90-cm soil profile, while the adjusted N practices, i.e., OPT, STR, CRU, and DMS treatments effectively controlled it to a range of 79.6–92.9 kg N ha−1. This study suggests that efforts using optimized N treatment integrated with CRU or straw returning should be encouraged for sustainable crop production in this region.
abstractGer	Excessive nitrogen (N) application in wheat–maize cropping systems was adjusted towards more sustainable practices to reduce hydrological N losses while maintaining crop yield. In comprehensive quantification of N management effects on crop yield, N use efficiency (NUE), hydrological N losses, and soil nitrate residual across eight seasons, we have added to growing evidence of strategies beneficial for sustainable crop production with lower hydrological N losses. The results show that adjusted N practices enhanced crop yield and NUE, as compared to farmer’s practices, but benefits varied with N rates and types. Optimized N treatment (OPT, 180 kg N ha-1 in both maize and wheat seasons) with or without straw returning produced the most crop yield. They increased maize yield by 5.5% and 7.3% and wheat yield by 6.2% and 3.2% on average, as compared to farmer’s practice with huge N application (FP, 345 kg N ha−1 and 240 kg N ha−1 in maize and wheat). Regulation of N release through amendment with controlled release urea at a rate of 144 kg N ha−1 crop−1 (CRU treatment) obtained 4.4% greater maize yield than FP, and sustained a similar wheat yield with less N input, resulting in the highest crop NUE. Additionally, CRU was most effective in mitigating hydrological N loss, with 39.5% and 45.5% less leachate N and 31.9% and 35.9% less runoff N loss than FP in maize and wheat seasons. Synthetic N input correlated significantly and positively with runoff and leachate N losses, indicating it was one of the dominant factors driving hydrological N losses. Moreover, compared to OPT, additional straw returning (STR) or substituting 20% of the nutrients by duck manure (DMS) further reduced runoff N discharges due to the fact that organic matter incorporation increased resilience to rainfall. N over-application in FP caused considerable nitrate accumulation in the 0–90-cm soil profile, while the adjusted N practices, i.e., OPT, STR, CRU, and DMS treatments effectively controlled it to a range of 79.6–92.9 kg N ha−1. This study suggests that efforts using optimized N treatment integrated with CRU or straw returning should be encouraged for sustainable crop production in this region.
abstract_unstemmed	Excessive nitrogen (N) application in wheat–maize cropping systems was adjusted towards more sustainable practices to reduce hydrological N losses while maintaining crop yield. In comprehensive quantification of N management effects on crop yield, N use efficiency (NUE), hydrological N losses, and soil nitrate residual across eight seasons, we have added to growing evidence of strategies beneficial for sustainable crop production with lower hydrological N losses. The results show that adjusted N practices enhanced crop yield and NUE, as compared to farmer’s practices, but benefits varied with N rates and types. Optimized N treatment (OPT, 180 kg N ha-1 in both maize and wheat seasons) with or without straw returning produced the most crop yield. They increased maize yield by 5.5% and 7.3% and wheat yield by 6.2% and 3.2% on average, as compared to farmer’s practice with huge N application (FP, 345 kg N ha−1 and 240 kg N ha−1 in maize and wheat). Regulation of N release through amendment with controlled release urea at a rate of 144 kg N ha−1 crop−1 (CRU treatment) obtained 4.4% greater maize yield than FP, and sustained a similar wheat yield with less N input, resulting in the highest crop NUE. Additionally, CRU was most effective in mitigating hydrological N loss, with 39.5% and 45.5% less leachate N and 31.9% and 35.9% less runoff N loss than FP in maize and wheat seasons. Synthetic N input correlated significantly and positively with runoff and leachate N losses, indicating it was one of the dominant factors driving hydrological N losses. Moreover, compared to OPT, additional straw returning (STR) or substituting 20% of the nutrients by duck manure (DMS) further reduced runoff N discharges due to the fact that organic matter incorporation increased resilience to rainfall. N over-application in FP caused considerable nitrate accumulation in the 0–90-cm soil profile, while the adjusted N practices, i.e., OPT, STR, CRU, and DMS treatments effectively controlled it to a range of 79.6–92.9 kg N ha−1. This study suggests that efforts using optimized N treatment integrated with CRU or straw returning should be encouraged for sustainable crop production in this region.
collection_details	GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700
title_short	Managing nitrogen for sustainable crop production with reduced hydrological nitrogen losses under a winter wheat–summer maize rotation system: an eight-season field study
url	https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2023.1274943 https://doaj.org/article/85acdd9f7cbe432ab0645b42d3a82cc2 https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpls.2023.1274943/full https://doaj.org/toc/1664-462X
remote_bool	true
author2	Li Wang Lei Ma Yan Li Christoph-Martin Geilfus Jianlin Wei Fuli Zheng Zhaohui Liu Deshui Tan
author2Str	Li Wang Lei Ma Yan Li Christoph-Martin Geilfus Jianlin Wei Fuli Zheng Zhaohui Liu Deshui Tan
ppnlink	662359240
callnumber-subject	SB - Plant Culture
mediatype_str_mv	c
isOA_txt	true
hochschulschrift_bool	false
doi_str	10.3389/fpls.2023.1274943
callnumber-a	SB1-1110
up_date	2024-07-03T18:22:30.248Z
_version_	1803583173692489728
fullrecord_marcxml	<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">DOAJ091090318</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20240413073105.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">240412s2023 xx \|\|\|\|\|o 00\| \|\|eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.3389/fpls.2023.1274943</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)DOAJ091090318</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-599)DOAJ85acdd9f7cbe432ab0645b42d3a82cc2</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="050" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">SB1-1110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Li Wang</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Managing nitrogen for sustainable crop production with reduced hydrological nitrogen losses under a winter wheat–summer maize rotation system: an eight-season field study</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2023</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Excessive nitrogen (N) application in wheat–maize cropping systems was adjusted towards more sustainable practices to reduce hydrological N losses while maintaining crop yield. In comprehensive quantification of N management effects on crop yield, N use efficiency (NUE), hydrological N losses, and soil nitrate residual across eight seasons, we have added to growing evidence of strategies beneficial for sustainable crop production with lower hydrological N losses. The results show that adjusted N practices enhanced crop yield and NUE, as compared to farmer’s practices, but benefits varied with N rates and types. Optimized N treatment (OPT, 180 kg N ha-1 in both maize and wheat seasons) with or without straw returning produced the most crop yield. They increased maize yield by 5.5% and 7.3% and wheat yield by 6.2% and 3.2% on average, as compared to farmer’s practice with huge N application (FP, 345 kg N ha−1 and 240 kg N ha−1 in maize and wheat). Regulation of N release through amendment with controlled release urea at a rate of 144 kg N ha−1 crop−1 (CRU treatment) obtained 4.4% greater maize yield than FP, and sustained a similar wheat yield with less N input, resulting in the highest crop NUE. Additionally, CRU was most effective in mitigating hydrological N loss, with 39.5% and 45.5% less leachate N and 31.9% and 35.9% less runoff N loss than FP in maize and wheat seasons. Synthetic N input correlated significantly and positively with runoff and leachate N losses, indicating it was one of the dominant factors driving hydrological N losses. Moreover, compared to OPT, additional straw returning (STR) or substituting 20% of the nutrients by duck manure (DMS) further reduced runoff N discharges due to the fact that organic matter incorporation increased resilience to rainfall. N over-application in FP caused considerable nitrate accumulation in the 0–90-cm soil profile, while the adjusted N practices, i.e., OPT, STR, CRU, and DMS treatments effectively controlled it to a range of 79.6–92.9 kg N ha−1. This study suggests that efforts using optimized N treatment integrated with CRU or straw returning should be encouraged for sustainable crop production in this region.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">nitrogen management</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">nitrogen leaching</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">nitrogen runoff</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">nitrogen use efficiency</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">wheat-maize rotation system</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="653" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Plant culture</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Li Wang</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Li Wang</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Lei Ma</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Yan Li</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Christoph-Martin Geilfus</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Jianlin Wei</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Fuli Zheng</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Zhaohui Liu</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Deshui Tan</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">In</subfield><subfield code="t">Frontiers in Plant Science</subfield><subfield code="d">Frontiers Media S.A., 2011</subfield><subfield code="g">14(2023)</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)662359240</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)2613694-6</subfield><subfield code="x">1664462X</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:14</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2023</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2023.1274943</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/article/85acdd9f7cbe432ab0645b42d3a82cc2</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpls.2023.1274943/full</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="2"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/toc/1664-462X</subfield><subfield code="y">Journal toc</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_DOAJ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_11</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_20</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_23</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_24</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_39</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_40</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_62</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_63</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_65</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_69</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_70</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_73</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_74</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_95</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_105</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_151</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_161</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_170</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_230</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_285</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_293</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_602</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2003</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2014</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4012</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4037</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4125</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4126</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4249</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4305</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4306</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4307</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4313</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4322</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4323</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4324</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4325</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4338</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4367</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4700</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">14</subfield><subfield code="j">2023</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
score	7.4017286

Nicht das Richtige dabei?

Schreiben Sie uns!

Managing nitrogen for sustainable crop production with reduced hydrological nitrogen losses under a winter wheat–summer maize rotation system: an eight-season field study

Nicht das Richtige dabei?

Zugang & Verfügbarkeit

Vorhandene Bände

Nicht das Richtige dabei?