Abstract
Problem Statement: Ammonia loss significantly reduces urea-N use efficiency in crop production. Efforts to reduce ammonia loss are laboratory oriented, as such limited in reflecting actual field conditions. This paper reports the effects of urea amended with triple superphosphate (TSP) and zeolite (Clinoptilolite) on soil pH, soil nitrate, soil exchangeable ammonium, dry matter production, N uptake, fresh cob production and urea-N uptake efficiency in maize (Zea mays) cultivation on an acid soil in actual field conditions. Approach: The treatments evaluated were: (i) Normal N, P, K application (74.34 g urea, 27.36 g TSP, 24.12 g KCl) (T1), (ii) Urea-TSP mixture (74.34 g urea+27.36 g TSP)+24.12 g KCl (T2), (iii) 74.34 g urea+27.36 g TSP+9.0 g zeolite (T3), (iv) 74.34 g urea+27.36 g TSP+13.5 g zeolite ( Note, the same amount of 24.12 g KCl was used in T3 and T4 plots. Standard procedures were used to determine the selected chemical properties of zeolite, soil, TSP and urea. The pH of the urea, zeolite, soil and TSP were determined in a 1:2.5 soil: distilled water suspension and/or 0.01 N CaCl 2 using a glass electrode. The CEC of the zeolite was determined by the CsCl method. Soil CEC was determined by leaching with 1 N ammonium acetate buffer adjusted to pH 7.0 followed by steam distillation. Soil samples at harvest were analyzed for pH using the method previously outlined. Exchangeable ammonium and nitrate at harvest were extracted from the soil samples by the method of Keeney and Nelson and the amount determined using a LACHAT Autoanalyzer. Total N of the plant tissues (stem and leaf) was determined by the Micro-Kjeldhal method. Results: Urea amended with TSP and zeolite treatments and Urea only (urea without additives) did not have long term effect on soil pH and accumulation of soil exchangeable ammonium and nitrate. Treatments with higher amounts of TSP and zeolite significantly increased the dry matter (stem and leaf) production of Swan (test crop). All the treatments had no significant effect on urea-N concentration in the leaf and stem of the test crop. In terms of urea-N uptake in the leaf and stem tissues of Swan, only the treatment with the highest amount of TSP and zeolite significantly increased urea-N uptake in the leaf of the test crop. Irrespective of treatment, fresh cob production was statistically not different. However, all the treatments with additives improved Urea-N uptake efficiency compared to urea without additives or amendment. Conclusion: Urea amended with TSP and zeolite has a potential of reducing ammonia loss from surface-applied urea.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by. Read at the source ↗
The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.
Claims 6
Claim · model-written summary
Urea amendments did not have a long-term effect on soil pH or accumulation of soil ammonium and nitrate.
- Treatment
- Urea amended with TSP and zeolite treatments and Urea only (urea without additives)e0
- Outcome
- soil pH and accumulation of soil exchangeable ammonium and nitratee0
- Direction
- did not have long term effecte0
Zea maysNot reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Urea amended with TSP and zeolite treatments and Urea only (urea without additives) did not have long term effect on soil pH and accumulation of soil exchangeable ammonium and nitrate.”
t0“Maize (Zea mays)”
Claim · model-written summary
Higher TSP and zeolite amounts increased Swan stem and leaf dry matter.
- Material
- Swane0
- Treatment
- Treatments with higher amounts of TSP and zeolitee0
- Outcome
- dry matter (stem and leaf) productione0
- Direction
- increasede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Treatments with higher amounts of TSP and zeolite significantly increased the dry matter (stem and leaf) production of Swan (test crop).”
t0“Maize (Zea mays)”
Claim · model-written summary
Treatments had no significant effect on Swan leaf and stem urea-N concentration.
- Treatment
- All the treatmentse0
- Outcome
- urea-N concentration in the leaf and steme0
- Direction
- no significant effecte0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“All the treatments had no significant effect on urea-N concentration in the leaf and stem of the test crop.”
t0“Maize (Zea mays)”
Claim · model-written summary
Only the highest TSP and zeolite treatment significantly increased leaf urea-N uptake in Swan.
- Treatment
- the treatment with the highest amount of TSP and zeolitee0
- Outcome
- urea-N uptake in the leafe0
- Direction
- increasede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“only the treatment with the highest amount of TSP and zeolite significantly increased urea-N uptake in the leaf of the test crop.”
t0“Maize (Zea mays)”
Claim · model-written summary
Fresh cob production did not differ statistically among treatments.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Irrespective of treatment, fresh cob production was statistically not different.”
t0“Maize (Zea mays)”
Claim · model-written summary
Additive treatments improved urea-N uptake efficiency relative to unamended urea.
- Treatment
- all the treatments with additivese0
- Outcome
- Urea-N uptake efficiencye0
- Direction
- improvede0
- Comparator
- urea without additives or amendmente0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“all the treatments with additives improved Urea-N uptake efficiency compared to urea without additives or amendment.”
t0“Maize (Zea mays)”
The same questions in other papers
other · nutrient: content · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
106 papers in the same direction as this paper · 9 in the opposite direction · 3 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- positive
- negative
115 papers more in this group
See all 119 papers →phosphorus · nutrient: content · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
189 papers in the same direction as this paper · 50 in the opposite direction · 4 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- no effect
- negative
240 papers more in this group
See all 244 papers →other · yield · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
220 papers in the same direction as this paper · 26 in the opposite direction · 6 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- positive
- no effect
249 papers more in this group
See all 253 papers →nitrogen · nutrient: content · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
85 papers in the same direction as this paper · 403 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- positive
- positive
485 papers more in this group
See all 489 papers →phosphorus · yield · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
548 papers in the same direction as this paper · 69 in the opposite direction · 9 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- no effect
- no effect
623 papers more in this group
See all 627 papers →Claims are grouped by organism, treatment and what was measured or targeted. A paper counts as positive when any of its claims in the group is positive.