Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-mwx4w Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-19T22:44:54.545Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

RELATIVE PERFORMANCE OF BORON, SULPHUR AND ZINC COATINGS ONTO PRILLED UREA FOR INCREASING PRODUCTIVITY AND NITROGEN USE EFFICIENCY IN MAIZE

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 June 2017

VIJAY POONIYA ,
YASHBIR SINGH SHIVAY ,
MADAN PAL  and
RADHIKA BANSAL
VIJAY POONIYA
Affiliation:
Division of Agronomy, ICAR-Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi 110012, India
YASHBIR SINGH SHIVAY*
Affiliation:
Division of Agronomy, ICAR-Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi 110012, India
MADAN PAL
Affiliation:
Division of Agronomy, ICAR-Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi 110012, India
RADHIKA BANSAL
Affiliation:
Division of Agronomy, ICAR-Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi 110012, India
*
§Corresponding author. Email: ysshivay@hotmail.com
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Deficiencies of micro (Zn, B) and secondary (S) nutrients are well-documented in soil as well as in cereal crops, leading to decreased crop yields and low nutritional quality of food. We evaluated the effects of coated urea on maize yield, N and Zn uptake, and input cost relationships. Field experiments were conducted on maize to test boron-coated (BCU), sulphur-coated (SCU) and zinc-coated urea (ZnCU) during 2013 and 2014. On the basis of 2 years’ average data, the highest grain yield was achieved with 0.5% BCU, 5% SCU and 2.5% ZnCU as zinc sulphate hepta hydrate. These treatments increased yields by 5.4, 12.8 and 9.9% over prilled urea (PU), respectively. Application of 0.5% BCU (supplying 1.4 kg B ha−1), 5% SCU (supplying 14.1 kg S ha−1) and 2.5% ZnCU (supplying 7.05 kg Zn ha−1) registered the highest N concentrations and uptake in grain and stover. Total N uptake (grain + stover) was increased by 7.6, 16.7 and 17.1% with BCU, SCU and ZnCU treatments over PU. As compared to PU, Zn concentration in maize grain was significantly higher and total Zn uptake (grain + stover) increased by 32.4% with 2.5% ZnCU. Coated urea materials also enhanced the partial factor productivity (PFPN), agronomic efficiency (AEN), recovery efficiency (REN) and harvest index (HIN) over those of PU. From the economic viewpoint this study suggests that coating of urea with 0.3% boron, 5% sulphur or 2% zinc gives maximum net returns and benefit-cost ratio. Our data indicate that coating of B, Zn and S onto urea increases maize yield, profitability and nitrogen use efficiency in the western Indo-Gangetic plains of India.

Type
Research Article
Information
Experimental Agriculture , Volume 54 , Issue 4 , August 2018 , pp. 577 - 591
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2017 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Alloway, B. J. (2008a). Micronutrient Deficiencies in Global Crop Production, 353. Heidelberg, Germany: Springer, Dordrecht.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alloway, B. J. (2008b). Soil factors associated with zinc deficiency in crops and humans. Environmental Geochemistry and Health 31:537–538.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berger, K. C. and Troug, E. (1939). Boron determination in soils and plants. Industrial and Engineering Chemistry – Analytical Edition 11:540–545.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Biswas, B. C., Sarkar, M. C., Tanwar, S. P. S., Das, S. and Kalwe, S. P. (2004). Sulphur deficiency in soils and crop responses to fertilizer sulphur in India. Fertilizer News 49:13–33.Google Scholar
Black, R. E., Allen, L. H., Bhutta, Z. A., Caulfield, L. E., de Onis, M., Ezzati, M., Mathers, C. and Riviera, J. (2008). Maternal and child health consequences. Lancet 371:243–260.Google Scholar
Borlaug, N. E. (2003). Feeding a world of 10 billion people: The IFDC/TVA Legacy. Travis P. Hignett memorial lecture. 14 March, Muscle Shoals, AL: Int. Fertil. Dev. Cent.Google Scholar
Cakmak, I., Pfeiffer, W. H. and McClafferty, B. (2010). Biofortification of durum wheat with zinc: Agronomic or genetic biofortification. Cereal Chemistry 87:1–17.Google Scholar
Chesnin, L. and Yien, C. H. (1950). Turbidimetric determination of available sulphates. Soil Science Society of America Proceedings 15:149–151.Google Scholar
Dick, W. A., Kost, D. and Chen, L. (2008). Availability of sulphur to crops from soil and other sources. In Sulphur: A Missing Link between Soils, Crops and Nutrition–Agronomy Monographs, vol. 50, 59–82 (Ed Jezed, J.). Madison, WI: American Society of Agronomy.Google Scholar
Flinn, J. C., Marmaril, C. P., Valseo, L. E. and Kaiser, K. (1984). Efficiency of modified urea fertilizers for tropical agriculture. Fertilizer Research 13:209–221.Google Scholar
Gibson, R. S. (2006). Zinc: The missing link in combating micronutrient nutrition in developing countries. Proceedings of the Nutrition Society 65:51–60.Google Scholar
Gomez, K. A. and Gomez, A. A. (1984). Statistical Procedures for Agricultural Research (second ed), An International Rice Research Institute. New York: Wiley–Inter–Science Publication, John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
Gupta, S. P., Singh, M. V. and Dixit, M. L. (2008). Deficiency and management of micronutrients. Indian Journal of Fertilizer 3:57–60.Google Scholar
Hanway, J. J. and Heidel, H. (1952). Soil Analysis Methods as used in Iowa State College Soil Testing Laboratory, Bulletin 57, 131. USA: Iowa State College of Agriculture.Google Scholar
Hocking, P. J., Pinkerton, A. and Good, A. (1996). Recovery of field grown canola from sulphur deficiency. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture 36:79–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
IRRI (2006). Bringing hope, improving lives: strategic plan 2007–2015. International Rice Research Institute, Manila, Philippines, pp 61.Google Scholar
Katyal, J. C. and Rattan, R. K. (2003). Secondary and micronutrients–research gaps and future needs. Fertilizer News 48 (4):14–20.Google Scholar
Kiekens, L. (1995). Zinc. In Heavy Metals in Soils, 284–305 (Ed. Alloway, B. J.). London: Blackie Academic and Professional.Google Scholar
Lindsay, W. I. and Norvell, W. A. (1978). Development of DTPA soil test for zinc, iron, manganese and copper. Soil Science Society of America Journal 42:421–448.Google Scholar
Malkouti, H. J., Bazbordi, A., Lotfalahi, M., Shahabii, A. A., Slavoshi, K., Vakil, R., Ghadari, J., Keshavarz, M. H., Ghazemzadeh, M., Ghanberpouri, R., Dashadi, M., Babakari, M. and Zaynalifard, M. (2008). Comparison of complete and sulphur coated urea fertilizers with pre-plant urea in increasing grain yield and nitrogen use efficiency in wheat. Journal of Agricultural Science and Technology 10:173–183.Google Scholar
Messick, D. L. (2003). Sulphur fertilizers–A global perspective. In Proceedings TSI/FAI/IFA Workshop on Sulphur in Balanced Fertilization, 1–7 (Eds Sarkar, M. C., Biswas, B. C., , S. Das, , Kalwe, S. P. and Maity, S. K.). New Delhi: The Fertilizer Association of India.Google Scholar
Mhaskar, N. V. and Thorat, S. T. (2005). Effect of nitrogen levels on NPK uptake and grain yield of aromatic rice varieties under Konkani condition. Journal of Soil and Crops 15:206–209.Google Scholar
Morris, R. J. (2007). Sulphur in agriculture–international perspective. In Proceedings TSI/FAI/IFA workshop on sulphur in Balanced Fertilization, 1–7 (Eds Tewatia, R. K., Choudhary, R. S. and Kalwe, S. P.) 4–6 Oct 2006. New Delhi: The Fertilizer Association of India.Google Scholar
Olsen, S. R., Cole, C. V., Watanabe, F. S. and Dean, L. (1954). Estimation of Available Phosphorus in Soil by Extraction with Sodium Carbonate. Washington: USDA, Conc 933.Google Scholar
Oo, N. M. L., Shivay, Y. S. and Kumar, D. (2007). Effect of nitrogen and sulphur fertilization on yield attributes, productivity and nutrient uptake of aromatic rice (Oryza sativa). Indian Journal of Agricultural Sciences 77:772–775.Google Scholar
Pooniya, V. and Shivay, Y. S. (2013). Enrichment of basmati rice grain and straw with zinc and nitrogen through ferti–fortification and summer green manuring crops under Indo–Gangetic Plains of India. Journal of Plant Nutrition 36:91–117.Google Scholar
Pooniya, V., Shivay, Y. S., Rana, A., Nain, L. and Prasanna, R. (2012). Enhancing soil nutrient dynamics and productivity of basmati rice through residue incorporation and zinc fertilization. European Journal of Agronomy 41:28–37.Google Scholar
Prasad, R. (2005). Rice–wheat cropping systems. Advances in Agronomy 86:255–339.Google Scholar
Prasad, R. (2006). Zinc in soils and in plant, human and animal nutrition. Indian Journal of Fertilizers 2:103–110, 113–119.Google Scholar
Prasad, R. (2013). Fertilizer nitrogen, food security, health and the environment. Proceedings of Indian National Science Academy 79:997–1010.Google Scholar
Prasad, R., Rajale, G. B. and Lakhdive, B. A. (1971). Nitrification retarders and slow–release nitrogen fertilizers. Advances in Agronomy 23:337–383.Google Scholar
Prasad, R., Shivay, Y. S. and Kumar, D. (2014). Agronomic biofortification of cereal grains with iron and zinc. Advances in Agronomy 125:55–91.Google Scholar
Prasad, R., Shivay, Y. S., Kumar, D. and Sharma, S. N. (2006). Learning by Doing Exercise in Soil Fertility – A Practical Manual for Soil Fertility, 68. New Delhi: Division of Agronomy, IARI.Google Scholar
Rashid, M., Bajwa, I. M., Hussain, R., Naeemuddin, M. and Rahman, R. (1992). Rice response to sulphur in Pakistan. Sulphur in Agriculture 6:3–5.Google Scholar
Raun, W. R. and Baretto, H. J. (1992). Maize grain yield response to sulphur fertilization in Central America. Sulphur in Agriculture 16:3–5.Google Scholar
Rego, T. J., Sahrawat, K. L., Wani, S. P. and Pardhasaradhi, G. (2007). Widespread deficiencies of sulphur, boron and zinc in Indian semi-arid tropical soils: on farm crop responses. Journal of Plant Nutrition 30:1569–1583.Google Scholar
Shivay, Y. S., Pooniya, V., Prasad, R. Pal, M. and Bansal, R. (2016). Sulfur-coated urea as a source of sulfur and an enhanced efficiency of nitrogen fertilizer for spring wheat. Cereal Research Communications 44 (3):513–523.Google Scholar
Shivay, Y. S., Kumar, D., Prasad, R. and Ahlawat, I. P. S. (2008). Relative yield and zinc uptake by rice from zinc sulfate and zinc oxide coatings onto urea. Nutrient Cycling in Agroecosystems 80:181–188.Google Scholar
Shivay, Y. S., Kumar, D., Prasad, R. and Pal, M. (2014). Effect of cosavet fertis WG and bentonite sulphur pellets on growth, yield attributes, productivity and sulphur use efficiency in basmati rice. Indian Journal of Fertilizers 10:32–38.Google Scholar
Shivay, Y. S. and Prasad, R. (2014).Effect of source and methods of zinc application on corn productivity, nitrogen and zinc concentrations and uptake by high quality protein corn (Zea mays). Egyptian Journal of Biology (https://doi.org/10.4314/ejb.v16i1.10) 16 (1):72–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Singh, M. V. (1999). Experiences of AICRP on micro and secondary nutrients and pollutant elements in soils and plants. Fertilizer News 44:63–82.Google Scholar
Singh, M. V. (2008). Micronutrients in crops and in soils of India. In Micronutrient Deficiencies in Global Crop Production, 93–125 (Ed Alloway, B. J.). Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer.Google Scholar
Singh, M. V. (2013). Efficiency of boron fortified NPK fertilizer in correcting boron deficiency in some cereal and oilseeds crops in India. XVII International Plant Nutrition Colloquium 19–22 August & Boron Satellite Meeting 17–18 August, 2013, Istanbul, Turkey.Google Scholar
Subbiah, B. V. and Asija, G. L. (1956). A rapid procedure for assessment of available nitrogen in rice soils. Current Science 25:259–260.Google Scholar
Trenkel, M. (1997). Controlled–Release and Stabilized Fertilizers in Agriculture. Paris, France: International Fertilizer Industry Association.Google Scholar
Walker, C. L. F., Ezzati, M. and Black, R. E. (2009). Global and regional child mortality and burden of disease attributable to zinc deficiency. European Journal of Clinical Nutrition 63:591–597.Google Scholar
Walkley, A. J. and Black, I. A. (1934). An examination of the Dagtjareff method for determination of soil organic matter and a proposed modification of the chromic acid titration method. Soil Science 37:29–38.Google Scholar