Assessment of productivity, nutrient uptake and economic benefits of rice under different nitrogen management strategies

• Main Authors: Guoying Yang, Hongting Ji, Hongjiang Liu, Yuefang Zhang, Liugen Chen, Jianchu Zheng, Zhi Guo, Jing Sheng
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Published: PeerJ Inc. 2020-07-01
• Series: PeerJ
• Subjects: Organic–inorganic compound fertilizer; Crop productivity; Nutrient use efficiency; Economic benefit; Principal component analysis; Sustainability
• Online Access: https://peerj.com/articles/9596.pdf

Background Integrating a chemical nitrogen (N) fertilizer with an organic fertilizer and using slow-release mechanism are important N management strategies to increase the N utilization efficiency (NUE) and grain yield of rice. However, the performances of both N management strategies on the productivity, the nutrient absorption and utilization efficiency, and the economic benefits of rice have not yet been comprehensively evaluated. Methods A 2-year field experiment was conducted with seven N management strategies without fertilizer (control), 100% conventional N fertilizer (conventional compound fertilizer and urea) (N100), 75% conventional N fertilizer with 25% organic–inorganic compound fertilizer (N75+OICF25), 50% conventional N fertilizer with 50% organic–inorganic compound fertilizer (N50+OICF50), 100% organic–inorganic compound fertilizer (OICF100), slow-release compound fertilizer with urea (SRCF+U), compound fertilizer with sulfur-coated urea (CF+SCU). The responses of the productivity, the nutrient absorption and utilization efficiency, and the economic benefits of rice to the different N management strategies were evaluated. Results CF+SCU performed comparably or better than N100, judging by the grain yield (GY), the N, phosphate (P) and potassium (K) agronomic efficiency (NAE, PAE and KAE), and the apparent N, P and K recovery efficiency (ANRE, APRE and AKRE). SRCF+U significantly increased the GY by an average of 7.7%, the NAE and the ANRE by 23.8 and 26.7%, the PAE and the APRE by 90.6 and 109.3%, and the KAE and the AKRE by 74.2 and 57.7%. The higher GY and nutrient utilization efficiency when using SRCF+U were attributed to the higher total biomass and total nutrient absorption. N75+OICF25 and N50+OICF50 produced a comparable grain yield than N100, whereas a significant yield reduction was observed when using OICF100. Compared with N100, N75+OICF25 resulted in a comparable or higher fertilizer use efficiency (0.3 and 4.7% for NAE and ANRE, 0.3 and 3.2% for PAE and APRE, 0.3 and −2.8% for KAE and AKRE). However, the fertilizer use efficiency when using N50+OICF50 and OICF100 were lower than with N100. The highest net return (NR) (5,845.03 yuan ha−1) and benefit to cost (B:C) ratio (0.34) were obtained when using SRCF+U. The NR and the B:C ratio when using N75+OICF25 were slightly higher than when using N100. However, N50+OICF50 and OICF100 significantly decreased the NR and the B:C ratio compared with N100 by 14.5 and 12.1% and by 35.1 and 29.0%, respectively. Conclusions SRCF+U and CF+SCU enhanced the crop productivity, the nutrient uptake and utilization efficiency, and the economic benefits compared with N100. The comprehensive performance of SRCF+U was better than that of CF+SCU. N75+OICF25 produced almost similar productivity, nutrient uptake and use efficiency compared with N100. It demonstrated that N75+OICF25 stabilized the grain yield production of rice and reduced the input of chemical N fertilizer.