000111636 001__ 111636
000111636 005__ 20220322110621.0
000111636 0247_ $$2doi$$a10.1016/j.eja.2020.126043
000111636 0248_ $$2sideral$$a117170
000111636 037__ $$aART-2020-117170
000111636 041__ $$aeng
000111636 100__ $$aIsla, R.
000111636 245__ $$aComparison of different approaches for optimizing nitrogen management in sprinkler-irrigated maize
000111636 260__ $$c2020
000111636 5060_ $$aAccess copy available to the general public$$fUnrestricted
000111636 5203_ $$aThe gap between scientifically sound nitrogen (N) fertilizer application rates and the actual rates used by farmers in maize is still significant. The improvement of nitrogen use efficiency in such a highly N-demanding crop is necessary to decrease the negative effects of N fertilization. The objective was to compare the performance of different N management treatments in maize grown under semiarid Mediterranean sprinkler-irrigated conditions to the standard farmer practice. We compared an agronomically sound fixed rate of N fertilizer (FR) with a variable N rate obtained based on a soil mineral balance at pre-planting (SB) or based on a portable chlorophyll meter readings (CM) made just before tasseling. Additional treatments were a N control, without fertilizer (T0), and a non-limiting N (NL) treatment wich was typical of the current farmer practice. The study was replicated at 5 sites in one-year experiments and under 3 pre-planting soil mineral nitrogen environments (SMN, Low, Medium, and High). The results demonstrate the potential to reduce N rates from zero to 236 kg N ha-1 compared to the NL in irrigated maize fields without compromising yields in most of the situations with a subsequent increase of NUE. Averaging over sites, the use of fine-tuning N fertilizer strategies that considered field-specific conditions (SB and CM) reduced N rates (38 %) compared to the reductions under the FR strategy (26 %) relative to the NL conditions, which is the treatment closest to a typical farmer`s application rate.
000111636 536__ $$9info:eu-repo/grantAgreement/ES/MICINN/AGL2009-12897-C02-02
000111636 540__ $$9info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess$$aby-nc-nd$$uhttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/es/
000111636 590__ $$a5.124$$b2020
000111636 591__ $$aAGRONOMY$$b8 / 91 = 0.088$$c2020$$dQ1$$eT1
000111636 592__ $$a1.683$$b2020
000111636 593__ $$aAgronomy and Crop Science$$c2020$$dQ1
000111636 593__ $$aSoil Science$$c2020$$dQ1
000111636 593__ $$aPlant Science$$c2020$$dQ1
000111636 655_4 $$ainfo:eu-repo/semantics/article$$vinfo:eu-repo/semantics/acceptedVersion
000111636 700__ $$aValentín-Madrona, F.
000111636 700__ $$aMaturano, M.
000111636 700__ $$0(orcid)0000-0002-0351-3026$$aAibar, J.$$uUniversidad de Zaragoza
000111636 700__ $$aGuillén, M.
000111636 700__ $$aQuílez, D.
000111636 7102_ $$15011$$2705$$aUniversidad de Zaragoza$$bDpto. CC.Agrar.y Medio Natural$$cÁrea Producción Vegetal
000111636 773__ $$g116 (2020), 126043 1-9$$pEur. J. agron.$$tEUROPEAN JOURNAL OF AGRONOMY$$x1161-0301
000111636 8564_ $$s756569$$uhttps://zaguan.unizar.es/record/111636/files/texto_completo.pdf$$yPostprint
000111636 8564_ $$s1053366$$uhttps://zaguan.unizar.es/record/111636/files/texto_completo.jpg?subformat=icon$$xicon$$yPostprint
000111636 909CO $$ooai:zaguan.unizar.es:111636$$particulos$$pdriver
000111636 951__ $$a2022-03-22-09:59:19
000111636 980__ $$aARTICLE