Naresh gohil

70
WEL COME TO SEMINAR SERIES 2014-15 1

Transcript of Naresh gohil

Page 1: Naresh gohil

WEL COMETO

SEMINAR SERIES2014-15

1

Page 2: Naresh gohil

Seminar Presentation on

2

Co-Guide,Dr. N. N. GudadheAssistant Professor

Department of AgronomyN. M. College of Agriculture,

N. A. U., Navsari

Speaker, Mr. Gohil Naresh B.

M. Sc. Student Reg. No:- 2010113027

Dept. of Soil Sci. and Agril. Chem.NAU, Navsari.

Fate of Nitrogenous Fertilizer in Submerged Soils

Major Advisor,Dr. D. P. Patel

Assistant ProfessorDept. of Natural Resource Management

ASPEE college of Horticulture and Forestry,N. A. U., Navsari

Page 3: Naresh gohil

INTRODUCTION3

Page 4: Naresh gohil

Submerged soils are soils that are saturated with water for a sufficiently long time in a year to give the soil distinct soil properties, because of oxidation-reduction processes (Brady and Weil, 2010).

Rice is the only major food crop that can be grown under various degrees of submergence.

Nitrogen is one of the essential nutrient for plants and it is widely recognized as the most limiting nutrient for production in submerged soil.

Poor efficiency of N fertilizers in rice can be attributed to it's improper management by farmers who have only limited understanding about the fate of N in submerged soils that is highly prone to nitrogen loss in different ways viz. Volatilization, Denitrification and leaching. (Savant and Stangel, 2008).

Besides, the majority of Indian soils are low in available soil nitrogen; the efficiency for utilization of nitrogen fertilizers in most of the crops has been rather low, particularly in submerged conditions.

4

Page 5: Naresh gohil

Upland rice frequently use 40-60 per cent of the applied N, whereas submerged rice crop typically use only 30-40 per cent (Bulbule et al., 2002).

Hence, it is essential to know fate of nitrogenous fertilizers and factors affecting it in submerged soils which will helps us to increase nitrogen use efficiency (NUE) by minimizing the losses of nitrogen from the root zone.

Furthermore, this will also help us to identify soil management practices that are climate change compatible by reducing green house gases such as CO2, CH4 and N2O.

5

Page 6: Naresh gohil

Nitrogen: a primary essential element Nitrogen is one of the most important

primary nutrient because of is larger requirement by the plants (1.0 to 5.0 percent) and its wide spread deficiency across the world.

Nitrogen is taken up by the plant from the soils in the form of nitrate (NO3

-) and ammonium (NH4

+) ions. It occurs in the atmosphere, lithosphere and

hydrosphere. 78% nitrogen present in atmosphere but

plant is enable to utilize it. Soils contains nitrogen in the range of 0.02

to 0.4 % on weight basis. It is a highly mobile nutrient in the soil as

well as plant. 6

Page 7: Naresh gohil

FORMS OF NITROGEN IN SOILS

SOIL NITROGEN

Organic (92-98 %)

Hydrolysable-N

Amino sugar

Amino acid

Acid soluble humin

Non-Hydrolyzable-N

Inorganic (2-8 %)

Ionic

e.g., NH4+

NO3-

NO2-

Gaseous

e.g., N2

N2O NO

NO3

NH3

7

Page 8: Naresh gohil

Functions of NitrogenNitrogen is a basic constituent of plant.

It is an integral part of chlorophyll.

It is indispensable part of genetic material viz. DNA.

It improves the protein quality of the plant.

Excessive supply of nitrogen develops excessive succulence which results harmful effects

8

Page 9: Naresh gohil

Nitrogen deficiency in plant Chlorosis: Due to high mobility of N in the

plants, its deficiency symptoms first appear on the older leaves in the form of light green to pale yellow coloration.

Stunted growth: Stunted growth may occur because of reduction in cell division.

Quality: Reduced N lowers the protein content of seeds and vegetative parts. In severe cases, flowering is greatly reduced.

Early maturity: N deficiency causes early maturity in some crops, which results in a significant reduction in yield and quality.

9

Page 10: Naresh gohil

Sources of

Nitrogen in soil

Fertilizers

Organic manures

Crop residues

Biofertilizers

Green manures

Rain water

Sources of Nitrogen in soil

10

Page 11: Naresh gohil

NH4 NO3

Nitrification

Plant uptake

Leaching

DenitrificationVolatilization

NH3

N2O N2, N2O

Nitrogen loss by different process in soil

11

Page 12: Naresh gohil

Why to fertilize the soils with Fertilizers

More losses of nitrogen from the soils than the natural sources

Depletion of SOM (Soil organic matter) in arid and semi arid regions

To maintain the soil fertility as well as productivity

Fertilizers

Organic Inorganic

12

Page 13: Naresh gohil

Type of Inorganic Nitrogenous FertilizersNo. Name of fertilizers Nitrogen Content %

Nitrate (NO3-) fertilizers :

1. Sodium nitrate (NaNO3) 16

2. Calcium nitrate [ Ca(NO3)2] 15.5

Ammonical (NH4+- N) containing fertilizers:

1 Ammonium sulphate 20

2 Ammonium chloride 24 - 26

3 Anhydrous ammonia 82

Nitrate and ammonical (NO3--N) containing fertilizers:

1. Ammonium nitrate (NH4NO3) 33 -34

2. Calcium ammonium nitrate 26

3. Ammonium sulphate nitrate 26

Amide (Both NH4+ and NO3-) forms:

1 Urea 46

2. Calcium cynamide (Ca CN2 ) 2113

Page 14: Naresh gohil

Source: IFA, 2010

Fig. 1: Fertilizer consumptions

14

Page 15: Naresh gohil

Source- https://npk101.wordpress.com/category/nitrogenous-fertilizers/ (2010)

Fig. 2: Nitrogen Fertilizer Products (105 million tones nutrients)

15

Page 16: Naresh gohil

Source: IFA, 2010

Fig 3: World Nitrogen Fertilizer Use By Crop

16

Page 17: Naresh gohil

Characteristics of Submerged soils Greater amount of soil solution. Reduced oxygen level. Low aerobic microbial activity. Altered chemical status of the soil (Reduction processes).

Submerged soils Submerged soils are soils that are saturated with water for a sufficiently long time in a year to give the soil distinct gley horizons resulting from oxidation-reduction processes.

17

Page 18: Naresh gohil

Aerobic soil

Anaerobic soil

18

Page 19: Naresh gohil

Dominant forms of elements in submerged versus aerated soil

1919

Page 20: Naresh gohil

Fig. 4. A schematic diagram of N transformations in a submerged soil.

Buresh et al. (2008) 20

Page 21: Naresh gohil

Nitrogen Transformation in Submerged SoilMineralization and Immobilization

+2H2O +O2 +1/2 O2

Organic N R – NH2 OH- + R- OH + NH4

+ 4H+ + energy + NO2- energy + NO3

-

(Amine) (Ammonium) (Nitrite) (Nitrate)21

Page 22: Naresh gohil

In aerobic soil layer: mineralization microbial oxidation microbial oxidation organic form NH4

+ NO2- NO3

-

of nitrogen ammonification

In submerged soil :mineralization : stops at this pointsOrganic form NH4

+ : . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .of nitrogen

22

Page 23: Naresh gohil

A. Aminization: (Aerobic /anaerobic) heterotrophicProteins R – NH2 + CO2 + energy + other additional (Combined microorganisms (Amines) organic productsWith minerals)

Organic N + 4C2H5COOH + H2O 4CH3COOH + CO2 + 3CH4 Propinate Acetate Carbon Methane dioxide

B. Ammonification R – NH2 + HOH NH3 + R – OH + energy

+ H2O NH4

+ + OH-

23

Page 24: Naresh gohil

Nitrification - Denitrification

24

Page 25: Naresh gohil

Volatilization

(NH4)2SO4 2NH4

++ SO4-

2NH4+ + 2 OH- 2NH3 +2H2O

25

Page 26: Naresh gohil

Leaching Losses

26

Page 27: Naresh gohil

Urea Hydrolysis

27

Soil (NH2)2 CO + 2H2O (NH4)2 CO3 Urea Water Urease Ammonium Carbonate (NH4)2 CO3 + 2H+ 2NH4

+ + CO2 + H2O Ammonium Ammonium Carbon Water Carbonate dioxide gas

Page 28: Naresh gohil

Factors affecting N transformation

1. Composition of Organic matter

2. C : N ratio of organic matter

3. Moisture content in soil

4. Soil temperature

5. Soil aeration

6. Soil reaction

28

Page 29: Naresh gohil

1. Composition of organic matter

Fig 5.- Nitrogen mineralization or immobilization

with organic residues based on

C:N ratio.

Source : R. Weil (2010) 29

Composition of organic matter Rate of decomposition

Sugars, and simple proteins Rapid decomposition

Crude proteins

Hemi cellulose

Cellulose

Fats and waxes

Lignins and phenolic compounds Very slow decomposition

Page 30: Naresh gohil

2. C : N ratio

Fig 5 - Effect of mineralization and immobilization based on C:N ratio.

Source : N.C.Bredy (2010) 30

2. C : N Ratio

Page 31: Naresh gohil

Fig 6 - Effect of moisture on cumulative N mineralization.

Source : Aghera and Warncke (2005) 31

Incubation time (week)

3. Moisture content

Page 32: Naresh gohil

Fig 7 – Rates of nitrification, ammonification and denitrification are closely related to microbial activity and water filled pore space.

Source : Bateman and Baggs (2005) 32

Page 33: Naresh gohil

Heavy rains resulted in nitrogen loss by denitrification and leaching.33

Page 34: Naresh gohil

Fig 8 - Effect of temperature on cumulative N mineralization.

Source : Aghera and Warncke (2005) 34

4. Temperature

Page 35: Naresh gohil

Fig 9 – Relationship between O2 and N2.

Source : John et al. (2014) 35

5. Soil aeration

Page 36: Naresh gohil

Fig 10 – Ammonia volatilization is affected by temperature and pH.

Source : Glibert et al. (2006) 36

6. Soil reaction

Page 37: Naresh gohil

Location Methane (kg/ha) No. of observations Average (kg/ha)Nadia, West Bengal 108-290 3 158

Cuttak, Orissa 7-103 44 91

Bhubaneshwar, Orissa 140-186 2 163

New Delhi 10-221 68 39

Allahabad, U.P. 5 1 5

Trichur, Kerala 37 1 37

Trivandrum, Kerala 90 1 90

Kasindra, Gujarat 120 1 120Pant Nagar, Uttarakhand 54-114 4 79

Karnal, Haryana 64-100 2 81

Raipur, M.P. 4-109 6 34

Ludhiana, Punjab 452-1650 5 875

Table 1 : Seasonal methane emission from rice fields at different locations in India.

IARI, New Delhi Pathak et al. (2010) 37

Page 38: Naresh gohil

N losses can be minimized by following ways from the submerged soils

Use of slow release N fertilizers

Use of nitrification inhibitors

Selecting appropriate source and rate of N fertilizers

Adopting the diffident methods of fertilizer application

Other agronomical measures i.e. Methods of rice plantation

38

Page 39: Naresh gohil

Review of Research Work

Page 40: Naresh gohil

Use of slow release N fertilizers

Page 41: Naresh gohil

N sourceInitial N content

(mg/plot)

N content after the rice harvest

(mg/plot)

N leached% of N applied

% of N lost through other

mechanism

Control 4200 4079 - -

Sod. Nitrate 4660 4111 64.5 21.8

CAN 4660 4149 18.5 49.2

Am.sulphate 4660 4192 13.7 31.2

Urea 4660 4176 11.5 42.8

NSU 4660 4219 9.1 19.9

NCU 4660 4203 9.8 24.8

SCU 4660 4254 7.1 15.0

USG 4660 4124 12.6 18.2

S. Ed - 3

LSD (P=0.05) - 6

Table 2: Apparent N balance sheet for rice as influenced by N- carriers

IARI, New Delhi Rao and Prasad (1980)

CAN- calcium ammonium nitrate, NSU- N-serve blended urea, NCU- neem cake coated urea, SCU- sulphur coated urea, USG- urea super granules

41

Page 42: Naresh gohil

Source of N Days after nitrogen application

1 3 10 20 30

Control 0.02 0.05 0.16 0.41 0.41

Sod. Nitrate 0.38 0.93 1.64 2.54 3.00

CAN 0.14 0.32 1.03 2.53 2.53

AS 0.03 0.54 3.64 10.07 10.30

Urea 0.03 0.33 2.45 7.14 7.30

NSU 0.06 0.85 2.06 4.28 4.28

NCU 0.04 0.98 2.79 5.38 5.82

SCU 0.06 1.00 1.52 2.31 2.31

USG 0.03 0.24 0.81 1.68 1.78

Table 3: NO2-N (mg N) in leachates (cumulative values) as influenced by sources of N applied.

IARI, New Delhi Rao and Prasad (1980)

CAN- calcium ammonium nitrate, NSU- N-serve blended urea, NCU- neem cake coated urea, SCU- sulphur coated urea, USG- urea supergranules

42

Page 43: Naresh gohil

Treatment Nitrogen applied (kg/ha)

Volatilization loss of NH3 – N (kg/ha)

N volatilized as NH3 (%)

USG (all basal) 76 2.2 2.9

PU (basal, 50%) 38 1.9 5.0

PU (top dress, 50%) 38 2.23 5.8

GCU (all basal) 76 1.8 2.5

PU (all basal) + ECC 76 2.0 2.6

UNP (19-19-0) (all basal) 76 2.9 3.8

UNP (27-9-0) (all basal) 76 1.4 1.8

Table 4: NH3 – N volatilization loss from rice plots following application of urea based fertilizers.

IARI, New Delhi Mishra et al. (1995)

USG- urea super granule, PU- Prilled urea, GCU- gypsum coated urea, ECC- encapsulated Calcium carbide, UNP- urea nitro phosphate

43

Page 44: Naresh gohil

Treatments

Grain yield (q/ha)Mean NUE (kg

grain/kg N)

Soil available N kg/ha after rice

First year Second year

First year Second year

Prilled urea 26.2 28.1 11.9 238 230

Lac coated urea (LCU) 30.9 36.6 20.1 285 274

Rock phosphate coated urea 26.7 28.5 12.4 247 235

Karanj coated urea (KCU) 29.0 32.3 16.2 265 260

Neem coated urea (NCU) 29.2 32.8 16.7 280 271

CD (0.05) 1.6 3.3 -- 13 10

Table 5: Effect of different slow release N fertilizers on grain yield and Nitrogen use efficiency of rice.

BAU, Ranchi . Singh et al. (1999) 44

Page 45: Naresh gohil

Table 6: Effect of Neem coated urea on yield, N uptake and Apparent N recovery of rice.

Sources Grain yield (q/ha)

Straw yield (q/ha)

N uptake (kg/ha)

Apparent N recovery (%)

Prilled urea 38.8 43.7 71.1 26.9

Neem coated urea 43.0 48.6 85.9 43.8

10% neem oil emulsion coated urea 41.1 46.1 78.2 39.1

20% neem oil emulsion coated urea 42.0 46.9 81.2 38.2

CD (0.05) NS NS 7.1 8.7

IARI, New Delhi. Shivay et al. (2001) 45

Page 46: Naresh gohil

Use of nitrification inhibitors

Page 47: Naresh gohil

Table 7: Effect of nitrification inhibitors on denitrification losses and rice grain yield in a submerged soil.

TreatmentsRice Yield

(kg/ha)

Denitrification (g N ha-1 hr-1) on days after fertilization

2 4 6 8 10

Urea alone 4660 27.3 81.3 52.0 87.0 62.0

Urea + DCD 5360 10.4 15.9 16.7 10.8 12.5

Urea + ECC 6130 7.8 3.5 5.0 2.0 2.0

CSU,Fort Collins,Colorado Banerjee et al.(1999)

DCD = Dicyandiamide ECC =Encapsulated calcium carbide

47

Page 48: Naresh gohil

Nitrification inhibitor Mitigation (%)

Dicyandiamide 13-42

Neem Cake 10-21

Neem oil 15-21

Nimin 25-35

Coated Ca-carbide 12-29

Thiosulphate 15-20

Table 8: Efficiency of nitrification inhibitors in mitigating nitrous oxide emission in rice- wheat system.

IARI, New Delhi Pathak et al. (2010)

48

Page 49: Naresh gohil

Source and rate of N fertilizer

Page 50: Naresh gohil

Rate of nitrogen applied (kg/ha)

Quantity of N applied mg/400 g

soil

Quantity of NH3 – N lost (mg)

Percent loss NH3 – N

0 0 - -

50 9 0.840 9.33

100 18 2.160 12.0

200 36 4.300 11.94

300 54 5.940 11.0

400 72 7.056 9.80

Table 9: Effect of different rates of N application on the ammonium volatilization losses from submerged soil.

GAU, Navsari Boraniya (1982) 50

Page 51: Naresh gohil

Nitrogenous fertilizer

Quantity of N applied mg/400 g

soil

Quantity of NH3 – N lost (mg)

Percent loss NH3 – N

Urea 18 2.390 13.27

Ammonium sulphate 18 1.296 7.20

Table 10: Effect of different nitrogenous fertilizers on the ammonium volatilization losses from submerged soil.

GAU, Navsari Boraniya (1982)

51

Page 52: Naresh gohil

Table 11: Effect of different sources of N on grain and straw yields , NUE and N uptake.

OUAT,Bhubaneshwar Mishra et al.(1998)

Prilled Urea(PU)@60kgN ha-1in 3splits(50%basal,25%DATP,25%PI) , UB @ 60kgN/ha 15 DATP Prilled Urea(PU)@30kgNha-1in 2splits , BGA @ 10kg/ha was applied 7 DATP Azolla,water hyacinth,Gliricidia,Ipomea&Pongamia @ 10t ha-1

Treatments

Grain Yield

(qha-1)

Straw Yield (qha-1)

NUE (%)

N uptake (kgha-1)

T1 – Control 25.1 40.5 --- 50.13

T2 - 60kgN as PU 39.6 55.2 24.17 46.15

T3 - BGA(10kgha-1)+ 30kg N as PU 39.3 54.8 23.75 76.47

T4 - BGA (10kgha-1)+Azolla (10tha-1) 37.4 52.6 20.58 66.78

T5 - Urea briquette(60kgNha-1)+30kgN as PU 43.2 58.4 30.17 85.22

T6 - Water hyacinth(10tha-1)+30kg N as PU 40.6 56.2 25.83 79.18

T7 - Azolla(10tha-1)+30kg N as PU 46.4 59.8 35.50 92.34

T8 - Glyricidia(10tha-1)+30 kg N as PU 41.7 58.8 27.67 82.85

T9 - Ipomoea(10tha-1) +30 kg N as PU 37.5 53.7 20.67 68.95

T10 - Pongamia (10tha-1)+30 kg N as PU 38.9 54.4 23.00 72.38

CD (0.05) 5.2 7.8 --- 11.23

52

Page 53: Naresh gohil

Treatment Treatment N recovery (%)

15 N recovery (%)

N loss (%)

Plant Soil

Application to wet soil (conventional method)

28 25 29 46

Application to dry soil (alternate method)

76 57 24 19

Table 12 : Effect of urea N application (100 kg N /ha) to wet saturated and dry soils on N Use Efficiency by lowland rice.

PAU , Ludhiana Katyal and Gadalla (1999)

53

Page 54: Naresh gohil

Table 13: Effect of different sources of N application on losses of fertilizer N from rice field.

Treatment N applied as Urea (kg ha-1)

Total loss(kg ha-1)

Percentage of fertilizer N

applied

Ammonia Volatilization loss (NH3-N)

Urea 120 15.26 12.7Urea + CCC 120 21.32 17.8Urea + FYM 60 7.84 13.1Denitrification loss (N2 + N2 O-N)

Urea 120 3.80 3.2Urea + CCC 120 0.87 0.7Urea + FYM 60 1.02 1.7Leaching losses NH4

+-N + NO3-N

Urea 120 1.04 0.9Urea + CCC 120 0.36 0.3Urea + FYM 60 0.55 0.9

Bandyopadhayay and Sarkar (2000)

CCC : Coated calcium carbideNew Delhi 54

Page 55: Naresh gohil

Table 14: Effect of integrated N management on yield, N content and Total N uptake of rice.

TreatmentYield (kg/ha) N content (%)

Total N uptake (kg/ha)Grain Straw Grain Straw

T1 6161 6642 0.576 0.320 56.65 T2 5806 6057 0.677 0.266 54.65 T3 6390 5326 0.590 0.266 52.04 T4 6307 6370 0.616 0.288 57.40 T5 6475 5534 0.621 0.457 65.62 T6 8082 9502 0.758 0.492 107.69 T7 7519 8062 0.958 0.372 101.95 T8 6266 6224 0.700 0.324 63.60 T9 6349 5764 0.772 0.364 69.53 T10 7978 7895 1.001 0.341 107.32 T11 7185 6913 0.825 0.401 87.37 T12 7686 6746 0.590 0.372 70.36

CD (0.05) 1197 1142 NS NS 20.84GAU, Navsari. Anonymous (2002) 55

Page 56: Naresh gohil

Treatment Details

T1- FYM (100% N)T2 - FYM (75 % N)+ Castor cake (25 % N)T3 - FYM (50 % N)+ Castor cake (50 % N)T4 - FYM (25 % N)+ Castor cake (75 % N)T5 - Castor cake (100 % N)T6 - Organic fertilizer (25 % N of which 50 % N each from FYM and Castor cake)+ Inorganic ferti.(75% N)T7 - Organic fertilizer (50 % N of which 50 % N each from FYM and Castor cake) + Inorganic ferti.(50% N)T8 - Organic fertilizer (75 % N of which 50 % N each from FYM and Castor cake) + Inorganic ferti.(25% N)T9 - FYM (25 % N) + Poultry manure (25 % N) + Castor cake (50 % N)T10 - FYM (25 % N) + Poultry manure (25 % N) + Inorganic ferti.(50% N)T11 - Inorganic fertilizer (100 % N) as per soil test (120 – 25 – 0 )T12 - Inorganic fertilizer (100 % N) as per recommended dose (120 – 30 – 0 )

56

Page 57: Naresh gohil

Nitrogen treatments

NH3-N NO3-N TN

Loss (kg/ha)

Percentage (%)

Loss (kg/ha)

Percentage (%)

Loss (kg/ha)

Percentage (%)

N0- Control 0.57 - 0.38 - 1.04 -

N1- 90 kg N/ha as urea (50% of TNAR) 2.91 3.23 1.25 1.38 4.57 5.07

N2- 180 kg N/ha (the TNAR) 4.07 2.26 1.14 0.63 5.73 3.18

N3- 270 kg N/ha (150% of TNAR) 5.21 1.93 1.73 0.64 7.62 2.82

N4- 360 kg N/ha (double TNAR) 11.22 3.11 2.20 0.61 14.75 4.10

Table 15: Nitrogen loss from paddy field in treatments with different N fertilizer applications.

Bangladesh Iqbal (2011)

TNAR- typical nitrogen application rate

57

Page 58: Naresh gohil

Different method of fertilizer application

Page 59: Naresh gohil

Table 16: Effect of application methods for N fertilizer (Basal treatment) in rice.

T1=Broadcasting of 50%N & full dose of P at TP.T2=Broadcasting 50% N & full dose of P at 7-10 DATPT3= Spot application 50% N & full dose of P at 7-10 DATPT4= Broadcasting of 50%N & full dose of P + castor cake @5q/ha at TPT5= Spot application of 50%N & full dose of P + castor cake @5q/ha at 7-10 DATPT6 = Broadcasting of 50%N & full dose of P + Neem cake @5q/ha at TPT7= Spot application of 50%N & full dose of P + Neem cake @5q/ha at 7-10 DATPT8= Broadcasting of 50 % N in the form of AS &full dose P at TPT9= Spot application of 50 % N in the form of AS &full dose P at7-10 DATP

TreatmentsYield (kg/ha) N content (%) N uptake (kg/ha)

Grain Straw Grain Straw Grain Straw

T1 6439 7702 0.92 0.438 59.3 33

T2 6086 6540 0.83 0.479 50.5 31.4

T3 6667 8384 0.77 0.473 51.2 39.6

T4 7576 8914 0.812 0.438 61.6 39.1

T5 8232 9823 0.850 0.448 70.0 44.1

T6 7348 8889 0.810 0.457 59.5 40.7

T7 7879 9218 0.802 0.438 63.1 40.3

T8 6894 8217 0.790 0.455 54.4 37.5

T9 6944 8662 0.790 0.444 54.8 38.4

CD (0.05) 302.6 543.0 NS NS NS 5.55 GAU, Navsari Anonymous (2002)

59

Page 60: Naresh gohil

Table 17: Effect of split application of N fertilizers in rice.

Treatments Grain yield (kg/ha)

Straw yield (kg/ha)

N uptake Kg/ha

Nitrogen Use Efficiency (NUE)%

N1 3095 3714 52.6 ----

N2 5095 5881 75.3 33.97

N3 4048 4452 60.4 26.99

N4 4381 4857 63.1 29.21

N5 4869 5310 69.8 32.46

N6 5726 6333 85.5 28.63

N7 5817 6476 85.2 23.05

CD(0.05) 120 266 0.78 ---

N1=Control [0 Kg N /ha]N2=150 Kg N /ha [3 equal splits at Basal (B),Active Tillering(AT)& Panicle Inition(PI)]N3=150 Kg N /ha [3 equal splits at B, AT, PE(penicle emergence)]N4=150 Kg N /ha [3 equal splits at B, PI, PE]N5=150 Kg N /ha [3 equal splits at AT, PI, PE]N6=200 Kg N /ha [4 equal splits at B, AT, PI, PE]N7=256.7 Kg N /ha [4 equal splits at B, AT, PI, PE]

TNAU, Madurai Balasubramanian (2002)

60

Page 61: Naresh gohil

Level (mg/g soil) Water depth (cm) Cumulative losses (%)

750 33.215 24.82

10 18.01

1500 30.635 22.25

10 19.85

2250 20.015 16.93

10 13.53

Table 18: Effect of N levels and water depth on ammonia volatilization losses (%) from urea.

CCS HAU, Hissar Kumar & Kumar (2005)61

Page 62: Naresh gohil

Treatment Grain yield (kg/ha)

Straw yield (kg/ha) N uptake (kg/ha)

T1 : Control 2067 3264 30.22

T2 : 57 kg N ha-1 as PU (3splits) 2962 3956 43.85

T3 : 57 kg N ha-1 as NCPU (basal) 3157 4013 50.13

T4 : 76 kg N ha-1 as PU (3splits) 3208 4172 50.25

T5 : 57 kg N ha-1 as USG at 7 DAT 3738 4578 68.25

T6 : 76 kg N ha-1 as USG at 7 DAT 3738 4641 68.91

T7 : 57 kg N ha-1 as USG at 7 DAT + 19 kg N ha-1 as PU at PI 3994 5053 70.69

LSD (0.05) 242 458 -

Table 19: Effect of different doses and methods of application of PU and USG on yield and N uptake of rice.

Orissa Jena et al. (2008)

PU- Prilled urea, NCPU- Nimin coated prilled urea, USG- Urea super granule, PI- panicle initiation

62

Page 63: Naresh gohil

Ultivation N rates Basal fertilizer

Tillering fertilizer

Booting fertilizer Total NH3 loss

TF

N0 (control) 1.02 a 0.80 a 0.32 a 2.14 a

N1 (80 kg/ha) 3.77 b 1.58 b 1.08 b 6.44 b (5.37)

N2 (160 kg/ha) 4.91 c 3.03 c 1.84 c 9.78 c (4.77)

N3 (240 kg/ha) 6.33 d 4.19 d 2.61 d 13.13 d (4.58)

SRI

N0 (control) 1.38 a 1.03 a 0.72 a 3.14 a

N1 (80 kg/ha) 4.22 b 1.98 b 1.67 b 7.88 b (5.93)

N2 (160 kg/ha) 6.06 c 3.65 c 2.48 c 12.19 c (5.66)

N3 (240 kg/ha) 7.78 d 5.04 d 3.41 d 16.23 d (5.45)

Table 20: Ammonia volatilization losses after N fertilizer application at basal, tillering and booting stages (kg N ha-1).

China Zhao et al. (2010)

SRI- system of rice intensification, TF- traditional floodingNotes: Values followed by the same letter within one column are not significantly different by LSD at the 0.05 level under the same cultivation system. The number in parentheses indicated the percentage of the amount of applied N.

63

Page 64: Naresh gohil

Other agronomical measures

Page 65: Naresh gohil

Fig 12 - Global Warming Potential of transplanted and direct seeded rice.

Jalandhar, Punjab Pathak et al. (2009)65

Page 66: Naresh gohil

Fig 13 : Global warming potential of conventional continuously flooded and mid-season drainage technologies in rice.

Jalandhar, Punjab Pathak et al. (2009)66

Page 67: Naresh gohil

Table 21 : Cumulative CH4 and N2O emission during the rice cropping season from land preparation to harvest as affected by residue management and season (Values are means of four fallow management treatments).

Residue management

CH4 emission (g/m2) N2O emission (mg/m2)

2011 WS 2012 DS Difference 2011 WS 2012 DS Difference

With residue 55 33 22*** 23 21 2 ns

Without residue 26 17 9* 49 71 - 22 ns

Difference 29*** 16*** -26 ns -50 ns

LSD 6 - - 54 - -

ns = not significant at P ≤ 0.05.WS = wet season, DS = dry season.*** Significant at P ≤ 0.001.* Significant at P ≤ 0.05.

Philippines Sander et al. (2014) 67

Page 68: Naresh gohil

Table 22: Cumulative CH4 emission N2O emission during the rice cropping season from land preparation to harvest as affected by fallow management and season (Values are means of two residue management treatments).

Fallow management

CH4 emission (g/m2) N2O emission (mg/m2)

2011 WS 2012 DS Difference 2011 WS 2012 DS Difference

Flooded 72 a 47 a 25** 35 a 44 a -9 ns

Dry 21 c 16 b 5 ns 79 a 45 a 34 ns

Dry + tillage 25 c 14 b 11* 17 a 75 a -58 ns

Dry and wet 44 b 23 b 21*** 13 a 19 a -6 ns

LSD 11 - - 78 - -

In a column, means followed by a different letter are significantly different according to LSD test at alpha = 0.05.ns = not significant at P ≤ 0.05.WS = wet season, DS = dry season.*** Significant at P ≤ 0.001.* Significant at P ≤ 0.05.Philippines Sander et al. (2014)

68

Page 69: Naresh gohil

The unique condition of submerged soils promotes N - losses through denitrification, ammonia volatilization and leaching which not only to decreases in nitrogen use efficiency but also leads to water and atmospheric pollution to a greater extent.

Oxidized layer at soil water interface, sources and composition of N fertilizer, soil reactions, soil temperature etc. are influence the N transformation in the soils.

The yield of rice, N use efficiency and N uptake in submerged soil can be improved by adopting the proper techniques of N management like adequate level of N, Split application of N at critical stages and sources of N (Ammonium sulphate).

Other than this, use of slow release N fertilizers (USG, LCU), N inhibitors (NCU), spot application and deep placement of USG near root zone and integrated N application can also reduce the losses of N and ultimately increase the NUE under submerged conditions.

69

CONCLUSION

Page 70: Naresh gohil

Thank You

70