کد مقاله | کد نشریه | سال انتشار | مقاله انگلیسی | نسخه تمام متن |
---|---|---|---|---|
4479987 | 1316468 | 2009 | 7 صفحه PDF | دانلود رایگان |
![عکس صفحه اول مقاله: Effects of partial root-zone irrigation on the nitrogen absorption and utilization of maize Effects of partial root-zone irrigation on the nitrogen absorption and utilization of maize](/preview/png/4479987.png)
To investigate the dynamic change of plant nitrogen (N) absorption and accumulation from different root zones under the partial root-zone irrigation (PRI), maize plants were raised in split-root containers and irrigated on both halves of the container (conventional irrigation, CI), on one side only (fixed partial root-zone irrigation, FPRI), or alternatively on one of two sides (alternate partial root-zone irrigation, APRI). And the isotope-labeled 15N-(NH4)2SO4 was applied to one half of the container with (14NH4)2SO4 to the other half so that N inflow rates can be tracked. Results showed that APRI treatment increased root N absorption in the irrigated zone significantly when compared to that of CI treatment. The re-irrigated half resumed high N inflow rate within 5 days after irrigation in APRI, suggesting that APRI had significant compensatory effect on N uptake. The amount of N absorption from two root zones of APRI was equal after two rounds of alternative irrigation (20 days). The recovery rate, residual and loss percentages of fertilizer-N applied to two zones were similar. As for FPRI treatment, the N accumulation in plant was mainly from the irrigated root zone. The recovery rate and loss percentage of fertilizer-N applied to the irrigated zone was higher and the residual percentage of fertilizer-N in soil was lower if compared to those of the non-irrigated zone. The recovery rate of fertilizer-N in APRI treatment was higher than that of the non-irrigated zone but lower than that of the irrigated zone in FPRI treatment. In total, both FPRI and APRI treatments increased N and water use efficiencies but only consumed about 70% of the irrigated water when compared to CI treatment.
Journal: Agricultural Water Management - Volume 96, Issue 2, February 2009, Pages 208–214