A comparison of two nitrogen credit methods: traditional vs. difference
Cereals and other nonlegumes typically require less fertilizer N when grown following a legume. Nitrogen credits for a previous legume crop often are used to reduce fertilizer N recommendations in combination with other site-specific information. Researchers continue to use two methods of determinin...
Saved in:
Published in | Agronomy journal Vol. 87; no. 4 |
---|---|
Main Authors | , , |
Format | Journal Article |
Language | English |
Published |
01.07.1995
|
Subjects | |
Online Access | Get more information |
Cover
Loading…
Abstract | Cereals and other nonlegumes typically require less fertilizer N when grown following a legume. Nitrogen credits for a previous legume crop often are used to reduce fertilizer N recommendations in combination with other site-specific information. Researchers continue to use two methods of determining N credits, the traditional and difference techniques, which often produce unequal estimates. Our objective was to clarify when each method provides accurate N credit estimates. The traditional method compares yield of a nonfertilized nonlegume crop grown in rotation to the fertilizer N response curve of the continuously cropped nonlegume. This approach assumes that fertilizer N compensates for all benefits of rotation. The difference method compares the economic N rate of the nonlegume crop grown in rotation with that of the continuously cropped nonlegume. We use examples from the literature to demonstrate that when non-N rotation effects are present, N credit estimates from the two methods will differ. The difference method is more accurate and should be used unless it has been demonstrated that non-N rotation effects are not present |
---|---|
AbstractList | Cereals and other nonlegumes typically require less fertilizer N when grown following a legume. Nitrogen credits for a previous legume crop often are used to reduce fertilizer N recommendations in combination with other site-specific information. Researchers continue to use two methods of determining N credits, the traditional and difference techniques, which often produce unequal estimates. Our objective was to clarify when each method provides accurate N credit estimates. The traditional method compares yield of a nonfertilized nonlegume crop grown in rotation to the fertilizer N response curve of the continuously cropped nonlegume. This approach assumes that fertilizer N compensates for all benefits of rotation. The difference method compares the economic N rate of the nonlegume crop grown in rotation with that of the continuously cropped nonlegume. We use examples from the literature to demonstrate that when non-N rotation effects are present, N credit estimates from the two methods will differ. The difference method is more accurate and should be used unless it has been demonstrated that non-N rotation effects are not present |
Author | Lory, J.A. (USDA-ARS, Univ. of Nebraska-Lincoln, Lincoln, NE.) Peterson, T.A Russelle, M.P |
Author_xml | – sequence: 1 fullname: Lory, J.A. (USDA-ARS, Univ. of Nebraska-Lincoln, Lincoln, NE.) – sequence: 2 fullname: Russelle, M.P – sequence: 3 fullname: Peterson, T.A |
BookMark | eNotkE1LAzEYhINUsK3-AU85etn1zXfirRRthYIHLXgr2XzULW0iyaL-fLfoYZgZeJjDzNAk5RQQuiPQUsL4vd2XnA7EGNECACVGUgCtxsxHqZ8LNCWciQYkFxM0PTPNGbpCs1oPAIQYTqZotcAunz5t6WtOOEc8fGec-qHkfUjYleD7AZ_C8JF9fcBDsWPvc7JH_FVb7PsYQwnJhWt0Ge2xhpt_n6Pt0-Pbct1sXlbPy8WmcYyK94Y70TnvFVNUxwBUddzqLipQWnvHJWOSKWkCpUFYGw1nRHaSWEO1Nl4rOke3f7vR5t34QV9321cjJFUa6C9myE_e |
CitedBy_id | crossref_primary_10_1094_CM_2007_1005_01_RV crossref_primary_10_1007_s10705_015_9696_3 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_biortech_2004_05_015 crossref_primary_10_1111_j_1475_2743_1999_tb00062_x crossref_primary_10_1016_j_jclepro_2020_122712 crossref_primary_10_1002_agj2_20213 crossref_primary_10_1016_S1573_5214_01_80026_9 crossref_primary_10_1017_S0021859618000631 crossref_primary_10_2134_agronj2013_0362 crossref_primary_10_1002_agj2_21320 crossref_primary_10_1007_s10533_021_00793_9 crossref_primary_10_2134_agronj14_0385 crossref_primary_10_2134_agronj2001_932396x crossref_primary_10_1111_sum_12246 crossref_primary_10_2134_agronj2018_10_0652 crossref_primary_10_2136_sssaj2015_05_0200 crossref_primary_10_2134_agronj2016_05_0288 crossref_primary_10_1016_S0378_4290_98_00086_0 crossref_primary_10_1007_s10705_017_9875_5 crossref_primary_10_1002_agj2_20561 crossref_primary_10_1007_BF02871963 crossref_primary_10_1007_s10705_009_9280_9 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_scitotenv_2020_144313 crossref_primary_10_1002_csc2_20185 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_jclepro_2018_06_172 crossref_primary_10_1016_S1161_0301_01_00115_0 crossref_primary_10_1080_00103620009370495 crossref_primary_10_2134_agronj2012_0214 crossref_primary_10_1002_eap_2241 crossref_primary_10_1097_ss_0b013e318154b551 crossref_primary_10_2134_agronj14_0212 |
ContentType | Journal Article |
DBID | FBQ |
DOI | 10.2134/agronj1995.00021962008700040007x |
DatabaseName | AGRIS |
DatabaseTitleList | |
Database_xml | – sequence: 1 dbid: FBQ name: AGRIS url: http://www.fao.org/agris/Centre.asp?Menu_1ID=DB&Menu_2ID=DB1&Language=EN&Content=http://www.fao.org/agris/search?Language=EN sourceTypes: Publisher |
DeliveryMethod | no_fulltext_linktorsrc |
Discipline | Agriculture |
EISSN | 1435-0645 |
ExternalDocumentID | US9562780 |
GroupedDBID | -~X .86 .~0 0R~ 186 1OB 1OC 23M 2WC 33P 3V. 5GY 6J9 6KN 7X2 7XC 88I 8FE 8FG 8FH 8FW 8G5 8R4 8R5 AABCJ AAHHS AANLZ ABCQX ABCUV ABEFU ABJCF ABJNI ABRSH ABUWG ACAWQ ACCFJ ACCZN ACGFO ACGOD ACIWK ACPOU ACQAM ACXQS ADFRT ADKYN ADZMN ADZOD AEEZP AEIGN AENEX AEQDE AETEA AEUYR AFFPM AFKRA AFRAH AI. AIDBO AIURR AIWBW AJBDE ALMA_UNASSIGNED_HOLDINGS ALUQN AMYDB ATCPS AZQEC BCR BCU BEC BENPR BES BFHJK BGLVJ BHPHI BLC BPHCQ C1A CCPQU D0L DCZOG DROCM DWQXO E3Z EBS ECGQY EJD F5P FBQ GNUQQ GUQSH HCIFZ HF~ L6V L7B LAS LATKE LEEKS LPU M0K M2O M2P M7S MEWTI MV1 NEJ NHAZY NHB O9- P2P PATMY PEA PQQKQ PROAC PTHSS PYCSY Q2X QF4 QM4 QN7 ROL RPX RWL S0X SAMSI SJFOW SJN SUPJJ TAE TR2 TWZ U2A VH1 VOH WOQ WXSBR Y6R YYP ZCG ~02 ~KM |
ID | FETCH-LOGICAL-c325X-4c5bcdd73728fe027b4a8bf70788dc463363769e22e5aaf94316b61a92889d872 |
ISSN | 0002-1962 |
IngestDate | Wed Dec 27 19:17:20 EST 2023 |
IsPeerReviewed | true |
IsScholarly | true |
Issue | 4 |
Language | English |
LinkModel | OpenURL |
MergedId | FETCHMERGED-LOGICAL-c325X-4c5bcdd73728fe027b4a8bf70788dc463363769e22e5aaf94316b61a92889d872 |
Notes | 9562780 F04 F08 |
ParticipantIDs | fao_agris_US9562780 |
PublicationCentury | 1900 |
PublicationDate | July‐August 1995 |
PublicationDateYYYYMMDD | 1995-07-01 |
PublicationDate_xml | – month: 07 year: 1995 text: July‐August 1995 |
PublicationDecade | 1990 |
PublicationTitle | Agronomy journal |
PublicationYear | 1995 |
SSID | ssj0011941 |
Score | 1.6458026 |
Snippet | Cereals and other nonlegumes typically require less fertilizer N when grown following a legume. Nitrogen credits for a previous legume crop often are used to... |
SourceID | fao |
SourceType | Publisher |
SubjectTerms | ABONOS ABONOS NITROGENADOS CULTIVO CONTINUO CULTIVOS CULTURE CONTINUE DOSE D'APPLICATION DOSIS DE APLICACION ENGRAIS ENGRAIS AZOTE EXIGENCE DES PLANTES GLYCINE MAX GRAIN GRANOS LEGUMINEUSE LEGUMINOSAS NECESIDADES DE LAS PLANTAS PLANTAS DE COBERTURA PLANTE DE COUVERTURE PLANTE DE CULTURE RENDEMENT DES CULTURES RENDIMIENTO DE CULTIVOS ROTACION DE CULTIVOS ROTATION CULTURALE TRIFOLIUM INCARNATUM ZEA MAYS |
Title | A comparison of two nitrogen credit methods: traditional vs. difference |
Volume | 87 |
hasFullText | |
inHoldings | 1 |
isFullTextHit | |
isPrint | |
link | http://utb.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwnV3fT9swELYKk9D2gBhjYmNMftjDpMohcdzE2VtgMIQAbUClvjE7cVBhaqQm_ND--t05bpJNSGx7iSJLtRvf5_Pd5_MdIR80D0yUq5ipQICDojLJdMA1k0kUCyHCUBsk9E9Oo8OxOJqMJoPB917U0m2tvezno_dK_keq0AZyxVuy_yDZtlNogHeQLzxBwvD8KxmnLoTclREc1vflEJbovIRfDDEV6LR2JaJt4Fs9V_nUcX93ldcWR8l-CwdKr-b2osOw_xcwZKdsTtyPvNSzTO3555SlZzb0D8M7PEs-4Dl0daPYMWZ9-DFzbv_i9XTf61EPZ7dVhecGlpT1vnZaurZugIWSl3a8RHPPO17wEp2uhfXd6FrTqFcwzhhmyOvrX7fhTjty4U-1jlnncM_C77_GsTDrJMe-MaOebxWRHz90W1obaDg-B_-Px9JfIkuxRA14sPutPWUKEhEs3CPsbYV8dKPtPDUWmCKF6psiF2tk1fkQNG0A8ZIMzGydvAC5uTwq5hX5ktIOGrQsKECDLqBBG2hQB41PtAcMCsCgHTA2yPhg_2LvkLmaGSwL-WjCRDbSWZ5j8SFZGJ_HWiipC8zpJPNMRGEYwZaSGM7NSKkiwUwIOgpUwqVMchnz12R5Vs7MJqFg6oUqKvxcm1BESaZFIAqw58AHhnnT_huyDlNwCTM1rS7biX77aOsWed5h5B15VsAKNNtgztX6vZXJL61VQoc |
link.rule.ids | 786 |
linkProvider | FAO Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations |
openUrl | ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info%3Aofi%2Fenc%3AUTF-8&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fsummon.serialssolutions.com&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=A+comparison+of+two+nitrogen+credit+methods%3A+traditional+vs.+difference&rft.jtitle=Agronomy+journal&rft.au=Lory%2C+J.A.+%28USDA-ARS%2C+Univ.+of+Nebraska-Lincoln%2C+Lincoln%2C+NE.%29&rft.au=Russelle%2C+M.P&rft.au=Peterson%2C+T.A&rft.date=1995-07-01&rft.issn=0002-1962&rft.eissn=1435-0645&rft.volume=87&rft.issue=4&rft_id=info:doi/10.2134%2Fagronj1995.00021962008700040007x&rft.externalDocID=US9562780 |
thumbnail_l | http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/lc.gif&issn=0002-1962&client=summon |
thumbnail_m | http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/mc.gif&issn=0002-1962&client=summon |
thumbnail_s | http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/sc.gif&issn=0002-1962&client=summon |