Welcome to Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology! Today is Share:

Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology ›› 2018, Vol. 29 ›› Issue (10): 3267-3274.doi: 10.13287/j.1001-9332.201810.029

• Research paper • Previous Articles     Next Articles

Effects of the reduction of controlled-release urea application on nitrogen leaching in double cropping paddy field

TIAN Chang1,2, ZHOU Xuan3, LIU Qiang1,2, XIE Gui-xian1,2, RONG Xiang-min1,2, ZHANG Yu-ping1,2*, HUANG Si-yi1, PENG Jian-wei1,2   

  1. 1College of Resources and Environment, Hunan Agricultural University/National Engineering Laboratory for Efficient Utilization of Soil and Fertilizer Resources, Changsha 410128, China;
    2Southern Regional Collaborative Innovation Center for Grain and Oil Crops in China, Changsha 410128, China;
    3Hunan Institute of Soil and Fertilizer, Changsha 410125, China
  • Received:2018-03-02 Online:2018-10-20 Published:2018-10-20
  • Supported by:
    This wok was supported by the National Key Research and Development Program (2016YFD0200800), the Hunan Provincial Key Research and Development Program (2016NK2112) and the Hunan Provincial Education Department Platform Project (16K040)

Abstract: Nitrogen (N) leaching is a major pathway of N losses in paddy fields. Here, an experiment was conducted to assess the effects of the reduction of controlled-release urea application on grain yield and N leaching in a double-cropping paddy field. Fertilization treatments included zero-N (CK, control, 0 kg N·hm-2), conventional urea (CU, 180 kg N·hm-2), and four polymer-coated urea fertilization levels, i.e., 1.0CRU, 0.9CRU, 0.8CRU, 0.7CRU, which represented 0, 10%, 20% and 30% reduction of fertilizer inputs relative to CU, respectively. Leachate was collected at the soil depth of 60 cm using field leakage pool method. Nitrogen leaching peaked shortly after fertilization, implying that measures should be taken to prevent N leaching in the early period. Nitrogen losses from leaching were 42.3 kg N·hm-2 for 0.8CRU, and by 37.7 kg N·hm-2 for 0.7CRU, significantly lower than the leaching in CU (53.9 kg N·hm-2). Nitrogen leaching in 0.7CRU was significantly lower than that in 1.0CRU (51.3 kg N·hm-2). 11.9%-13.5% of the fertilizer N was lost via leaching across the six treatments with comparable N loss rates. Rice yields, N utilization efficiency and N harvest index were significantly higher in 0.8CRU and 0.7CRU relative to CU. Our findings suggested that the use of CRU would permit a reduction in N application by 20%-30%, which could maintain the rice yield and obtain a reduction in N leaching.