Abstract
To address knowledge gaps around enhanced efficiency urea fertilizer efficacy for nitrogen (N) management, a study was designed to improve integrated nutrient management systems for western Canadian winter wheat producers. Three factors were included in Experiment 1: (i) urea type [urea, urea + urease inhibitor—Agrotain®; urea + urease and nitrification inhibitor—SuperU®, polymer-coated urea—Environmentally Smart Nitrogen®(ESN®), and urea ammonium nitrate (UAN)], (ii) application method (side-band vs. spring-broadcast vs. 50% side-band: 50% spring-broadcast), and (iii) cultivar (AC Radiant hard red winter wheat vs. CDC Ptarmigan soft white winter wheat). The Agrotain®and CDC Ptarmigan treatments were removed in Experiment 2 to allow for additional application methods: (i) fall side-band, (ii) 50% side-band — 50% late fall broadcast, (iii) 50% side-band — 50% early spring broadcast, (iv) 50% side-band — 50% mid-spring broadcast, and (v) 50% side-band — 50% late spring broadcast. CDC Ptarmigan produced superior grain yield and N utilization over AC Radiant. Grain yield and protein content were influenced by N form and application method. Split applications of N usually provided the maximum yield and protein, particularly with Agrotain®or SuperU®. An exception to the poor fall-application results was the SuperU®treatments, which produced similar yield to the highest-yielding treatments. The results suggest that split applications of N might be most efficient for yield and protein optimization when combined with an enhanced efficiency urea product, particularly with urease or urease + nitrification inhibitors, and if the majority of N is applied in spring.
Highlights
Gains in N use efficiencies and consumption might involve altering timing and dose strategies but disagreement exists on how that is best achieved
The N management treatment included the following urea types: 1) uncoated urea (46-0-0), 2) Ammoniacal N stabilized with a urease inhibitor N-butyl thiophosphoric triamide (NBPT) (Agrotain®), 3) Super-granulated urea with increased N stability derived from urease and nitrification inhibitor (SuperU®), 4) polymer-coated urea – Environmentally Smart Nitrogen® (ESN®), and 5) urea ammonium nitrate (UAN; 28-0-0); only included at Lethbridge
Summary and Conclusions The wide range of environmental conditions (Table 1 and Fig. 1) resulted in a fairly diverse set of site-years that was representative of growing conditions for winter wheat in western Canada
Summary
Gains in N use efficiencies and consumption might involve altering timing and dose strategies but disagreement exists on how that is best achieved. With ammonium nitrate removed from the marketplace in Canada, subsequent studies shifted to urea and enhanced efficiency fertilizers. A yield advantage of up to 10% in canola was observed in 6 of 20 site-years by substituting urea with ESN (Blackshaw et al 2011) Give that these responses were observed in an array of environmental conditions across multiple crops in the northern Great Plains, https://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/cjps-pubs enhanced efficiency fertilizers could be more widely adopted in modern cropping systems. Multiple forms of enhanced efficiency fertilizers (EEF) are available to producers, additional information is lacking regarding changes to EEF efficacy when timing and placement of N is modified to suit specific N management strategies in winter wheat systems. The objectives were to 1) identify fertilizer management practices that maintain yield and improve protein content to increase the frequency of achieving Select grade (min. 110 g kg-1) of high-yielding winter wheat, and 2) determine if N management practices differ when trying to optimize yield and starch characteristics in soft white winter wheat for use as an ethanol feedstock
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
