Best management practices toBest management practices to improve fertilizer N use efficiency in Argentinean agriculturein Argentinean agricultureFernando O. Garcia and Fernando SalvagiottiFernando O. Garcia and Fernando SalvagiottiIPNI Southern Cone and EEA INTA Oliveros

fgarcia@ipni.net - fsalvagiotti@correo.inta.gov.ar

Boliviac

Oce

an Grain production in Argentina

22º S

na

Paci

fic

•Approximately 90% of grain cropsharvested area is located in the Pampas‐

ArgentinaChaco

entin Uruguay

le

pChaco region, in the east‐central plains ofArgentina.

S il f th P d fi i t i

Pampas

Arg

e

Chi

l •Soils of the Pampas are deficient innitrogen (N), phosphorus (P), and sulfur(S).

40º S

c O

cean

Country Area 2780 km2Population 41 million

•65% of the cropping area is under no‐tillage

A i t l 50% f th t t l d

Atla

ntic

p•Approximately 50% of the total croppedland is under annual leasing conditions

Field crops at ArgentinaField crops at ArgentinaProduction from 1990 to 2009Production from 1990 to 2009Production from 1990 to 2009Production from 1990 to 2009

100000

Others

80000

nnes)

Sunflower

Wheat

Soybean

60000

thou

sand

 to Soybean

Maize

40000

Prod

uctio

n (t

20000

P

Elaborated from information of MinAgri

0

1991 1993 1995 1997 1999 2001 2003 2005 2007 2009

N fertilizer consumption in Argentina 1993 20091993-2009

1000

N) Other N fertilizers

800

on (t

onne

s N Other N fertilizers

DAP & MAPAmmonium nitrate+CANUANUrea

400

600

cons

umpt

io Urea

200

400

N fe

rtiliz

er c

01993 1995 1997 1999 2001 2003 2005 2007 2009

N

Source: MinAgri and Fertilizar AC

N Balance by Crop y pArgentina 2009/10

3000

2500Removal

Fertilizer application (+BNF in soybeans)

1500

2000

nnes

of N

0.51/

1000

Ton Application/Removal ratios

0

500 0.72 1.38 0.64

Soybean Maize Wheat Sunflower

Fate of N fertilizer applied to wheat and maize crops in the Pampas region of Argentina

Sink Range References

p p g g

Plant 35 to 80%Melaj et al. 2003; Portela et al. 2006; Rilloand Richmond 2006; Rimski-Korsakov et

al. 2008

Organic matter 7 to 29% Sainz Rozas et al. 2004; Portela et al. 2006 ; Rimski-Korsakov et al. 2008;

Videla et al., 1996; Garcia et al. 1999; Volatilization 1.1 to 30% Sainz Rozas et al. 2004; Rimski-Korsakov

et al. 2007a

D it ifi ti 0 13 t 6 9%Palma et al. 1997; Picone et al. 1997;

Denitrification 0.13 to 6.9% Sainz Rosas et al. 2001; Ciampitti et al. 2008

Leaching <0.01 to 23% Sainz Rozas, et al. 2004; Portela et al. 2006 ; Aparicio et al 2008g 2006 ; Aparicio et al. 2008

Adapted from Lavado et al. (2007)

Soybean inoculationSoybean inoculationAA PerticariPerticari -- INTAINTA InocularInocularA. A. PerticariPerticari INTA INTA InocularInocular

19941994--20042004

102 102 trialstrials 180 180 trialstrials

Biological N fixation provides up to 75% Biological N fixation provides up to 75% of the N accumulated by the cropof the N accumulated by the crop

Right N rate for wheat and maize crops

Soil testing for nitrate-N at planting (0-60 cm)

Partial N budgets

N mineralization indices (Nmin, POM)

Sap nitrate concentration in stems

Crop simulation models

Sap nitrate concentration in stems

Crop canopy sensors (Minolta SPAD 502 or p py (remote sensors such as Greenseeker)

Critical levels of available N at planting (NO3--N, 0-60 cm

depth) for wheat and maize in different areas of the Pampas with different expected yields

AreaCritical level 

(NO ‐ N 0 60 cm Expected yield ReferenceArea (NO3 ‐N, 0‐60 cm + fertilizer)

Expected yield Reference

‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ kg ha‐1 ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐

Wh tWheatSE Buenos Aires 125 3500 González Montaner et al., 1991

SE Buenos Aires 175 5000‐5500 González Montaner et al., 2003

Central and South Santa Fe 92 3500‐4000 Salvagiotti et al., 2004b

Southern Santa Fe and Córdoba 100‐150 3200‐4400 García et al., 2006

MaizeNorthern Buenos Aires 150 9000 Ruiz et al., 2001

Northern Buenos Aires 150‐170 10000 Alvarez et al., 2003

C t l d S th S t F135 < 9500

S l i i l 2004Central and South Santa Fe162 > 9500

Salvagiotti et al., 2004c

Southern Santa Fe and Córdoba 150‐200 10000‐11000 García et al., 2006

Available N at planting and maize grain yield

AAPRESID-Profertil 2001 INTA C. Gomez 2000 INTA C. Gomez 2001AAPRESID-INPOFOS 2000 CREA 2000 CREA 2002CREA 2003 CREA 2004

14000

/ha) Applying 80 kg N Applying 80 kg N 10000 kg grain10000 kg grain

(29 kg grain per kg N(29 kg grain per kg N))

10000

12000

eld

(kg/

( g g p g( g g p g ))

Grain yield = 1800.1 N 0.3398

8000

rain

yie

7700 kg/ha 7700 kg/ha yR 2 = 0.493

n=834000

6000G

70 kg N70 kg N

0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400N at planting, 0-60 cm + fertilizer N (kg/ha)

Right time: N losses by leaching and denitrification for two different applicationdenitrification for two different application times in wheat

50 50

40

50

(kg

ha-1) Leaching

Denitrif icationMdP 2003

40

50

(kg

ha-1) Leaching

Denitrif icationMdP 2005

20

30

gen

loss

es (

20

30

gen

loss

es (

Planting Tillering

Planting

Tillering

0

10

0 75S 125S 175S 75T 125T 175T

Nitr

og

0

10

Nitr

og

g

0 75S 125S 175S 75T 125T 175T

N rate (kg ha-1)0 60S 120S 60T 120T

N rate (kg ha-1)

Barbieri et al., 2008

Right time: Grain yield under two different

9000a) FP *

application times in wheat

Planting

600070008000

ld(k

g/ha FP

FT

**

**

PlantingTillering

300040005000

grai

n yi

e **

010002000

Whe

at g

MdP02

MdP03

MdP04

MdP05

Balc02

Balc04

Balc05

Tand02

Tand03

Tand04

Location and year

Barbieri et al., 2008* denotes significant differences between treatments

Right source and place: Maize yield under different N sources and placement at centraldifferent N sources and placement at central Santa Fe

0 0 4

7110 78

40

7902 89

50

7650 85

25

7995 89

60

7642 85

60

8000 89

44

8000

10000

g/ha

)

4000

6000

e yi

eld

(kg

2000

4000

Mai

ze

Urea CAN UAN

Broadcast Incorporated0

40 80 40 80N Rate (kg/ha)

Broadcast Incorporated

( g )

Fontanetto, 2004

Current work looking at Enhanced-Efficiency Nitrogen Sources: Urease and nitrification inhibitors

UreaseUrease Inhibitors in MaizeInhibitors in MaizeFontanettoFontanetto, , BianchiniBianchini et al., 2007/08et al., 2007/08

Treatment NH3‐N Losses Grain yield NUE% kg/ha kg grain/kg N

Check ‐ 7334 ‐Urea 70N 10 8381 15

Urea 70N + NBTPT 4 9166 26Urea 140N 25 9623 16

U 140N NBTPT 6 10368 22Urea 140N + NBTPT 6 10368 22

Wheat: N use efficiency without and with P applicationCompiled from Senigagliesi et al. (1987) and other authors (1998‐2007)

25

19.420

25

y  ed N) Check With P

14.2

10.715

efficiency

/kg ap

plie

8.4

5

10

N use 

kg whe

at/

0

INTA Pergamino (80‐85) Several authors 1998‐07

(k

INTA Pergamino (80 85) Several authors 1998 07

Nitrogen use efficiency (NUE), N Recovery efficiency (RE) and N Internal efficiency (IE) of wheat crops fertilized only with N (N100) and N +wheat crops fertilized only with N (N100) and N + S (N100+ S20)

Variable Units N100 N100 +S20

NUE kg grain per kg applied N 8.4 10.7NU kg grain per kg applied N 8.4 0.7

REkg N uptake per  kg 

applied N0.35 0.47

pp

IE kg grain per kg N uptake 22.7 22.5

S l i tti t l 2009Salvagiotti et al., 2009

HairyHairy vetchvetch as as winterwinter cropcrop supplyingsupplying N N forfor maizemaize (J. (J. RomagnoliRomagnoli. 2007/08). 2007/08)

5000 kg DM 5000 kg DM 130 kg/ha N130 kg/ha N

Final considerationsRight N management for increasing the overall production of grainRight N management for increasing the overall production of grain

crops and cropping system effectiveness and efficiency, and simultaneously avoiding negative effects on the environment Tools for deciding the right rate source time and placement ofTools for deciding the right rate, source, time, and placement of

fertilizer N have been developedFuture research should be oriented at exploring causes that may

increase NUE: grain yield gaps and constraints for grain production in different cropping

systems Nutrient recommendations should be based in more mechanistic approaches

It is also important to look for the impact of N management on the whole system effectiveness not only in the short- but also in the o e syste e ect e ess ot o y t e s o t but a so t elong-term by watching the direct effects of nutrient addition, and also the indirect effects through increasing organic matter in soils

ThankThank youyou!!!! fgarcia@ipni.netwww.ipni.net/lasc