| Literature DB >> 28303142 |
Alveiro Salamanca-Jimenez1, Timothy A Doane2, William R Horwath2.
Abstract
Nitrogen (N) is the most limiting nutrient for coffee production in Colombia. An adequate supply is especially important during the vegetative period of growth, since any deficiency during this short period is known to have lasting effects on subsequent coffee bean production. Urea fertilizer is commonly applied on the soil surface since steep slopes hamper incorporation into soil, a practice which increases the risk of N volatilization. Little information is available on N recovery during early growth stages under different fertilizer application practices. The aim of this study was therefore to provide a comparison of 15N uptake during the early vegetative growth stage under surface-applied and incorporation practices at two contrasting locations. The highest proportion of plant N derived from fertilizer (Ndff) occurred 60 days following application at the site with greater precipitation and soil organic matter, where surface application also increased the Ndff in roots and stems after 120 days. Although fertilizer N supplied approximately 20-29% of total plant N after 4 months, this fertilizer-derived N corresponded on average to only 5% of the total application, indicating that very little fertilizer (relative to how much is applied) reaches plants during this time. Apart from the difference in Ndff observed at the wetter site, there was no effect of application method on dry weight and macronutrient content in different plant components, root to shoot ratio, and leaf 13C content. However, site effects were registered for most of these measurements, with the exception of total nutrient uptake. Similarly to Ndff trends, lower root/shoot ratio and higher concentrations of N, K, and Mg in aboveground biomass were found in the site with higher rainfall and soil organic matter, likely resulting from higher soil water and N availability. These findings provide new information useful as a direction for further research looking toward increasing NUE during the vegetative stage in Colombian coffee crops.Entities:
Keywords: Coffea arabica; fertilization; incorporated; labeled urea; surface applied
Year: 2017 PMID: 28303142 PMCID: PMC5332390 DOI: 10.3389/fpls.2017.00223
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Plant Sci ISSN: 1664-462X Impact factor: 5.753
Soil properties for the experimental sites.
| Naranjal | 4.8 | 49 | 32 | 19 | 11.3 | 23 | 0.11 | 0.6 | 0.2 | 2.4 | 2 |
| Paraguaicito | 5.2 | 54 | 27 | 19 | 7.1 | 13 | 0.34 | 1.7 | 0.3 | 1.7 | 12 |
OM, Organic matter; CEC, Cationic exchange capacity.
Adapted from Leal et al. (.
Figure 1Climatic conditions registered on a daily basis at Naranjal (solid line) and Paraguaicito (dotted line) during the evaluation period.
Pr > .
| Ndff | 0.2942 | 0.8189 | 0.6878 | 0.7683 | |||
| Leaf 13C | 0.1285 | 0.6971 | 0.9275 | 0.9872 | 0.6061 |
Bold values indicate significant effects.
Pr > .
| Site | 0.0510 | 0.2741 | 0.1520 | 0.5652 | 0.0325 | 0.1830 | 0.0678 | 0.9578 | |
| Method | 0.7383 | 0.3195 | 0.8712 | 0.3446 | 0.3118 | 0.7101 | 0.3026 | 0.1361 | |
| Site*Method | 0.7113 | 0.2767 | 0.2086 | 0.3234 | 0.1210 | 0.1300 | 0.2590 | 0.3784 | 0.2961 |
Bold values indicate significant effects.
Pr > .
| Site | 0.4547 | 0.0173 | ||||||
| Method | 0.3801 | 0.3789 | 0.3046 | 0.6160 | 0.5982 | 0.5962 | 0.4173 | |
| Site*Method | 0.4281 | 0.4806 | 0.5102 | 0.7915 | 0.3540 | 0.7777 | 0.9244 | 0.6240 |
| Site | 0.1351 | 0.2054 | ||||||
| Method | 0.1292 | 0.7287 | 0.3924 | 0.8945 | 0.6392 | 0.4038 | 0.4810 | |
| Site*Method | 0.3688 | 0.8930 | 0.1748 | 0.2653 | 0.5664 | 0.4598 | 0.6480 | 0.8596 |
| Site | 0.2427 | 0.0261 | 0.0574 | 0.6730 | ||||
| Method | 0.0321 | 0.4968 | 0.3685 | 0.7557 | 0.4057 | 0.2197 | 0.3039 | 0.7117 |
| Site*Method | 0.7878 | 0.3768 | 0.2717 | 0.0766 | 0.6619 | 0.2764 | 0.1942 | 0.9109 |
| Site | 0.3941 | 0.7396 | 0.5043 | 0.9461 | 0.5517 | |||
| Method | 0.0698 | 0.8992 | 0.2695 | 0.2595 | 0.6544 | 0.0517 | 0.5990 | 0.9267 |
| Site*Method | 0.7608 | 0.2243 | 0.2178 | 0.9215 | 0.9108 | 0.2513 | 0.5853 | 0.4101 |
| Site | 0.1220 | 0.1734 | 0.7132 | 0.6302 | 0.1477 | |||
| Method | 0.0338 | 0.8305 | 0.3427 | 0.4698 | 0.5283 | 0.0929 | 0.2084 | 0.9656 |
| Site*Method | 0.7997 | 0.2732 | 0.1739 | 0.2807 | 0.7496 | 0.2317 | 0.1680 | 0.5576 |
Bold values indicate significant effects.
Figure 2Effect of fertilizer application method on percent of coffee plant N derived from fertilizer (Ndff) through time at two contrasting sites, as indicated by the first fully expanded leaves from the top. Bars show standard errors.
Figure 3Effect of fertilizer application method on percent of coffee plant N derived from fertilizer (Ndff) and recovery of N from fertilizer (NUE) after 120 days in different components and the whole plant (WP) grown at two contrasting sites. For Ndff, WP corresponds to the weighted average of all components, while for N recovery, WP corresponds to the sum of all components. Bars show standard errors.
Figure 4Effect of fertilizer application method on biomass allocation and total mass (WP) in coffee plants grown at two contrasting sites. Bars show standard errors.
Figure 5Root to shoot ratio in coffee plants fertilized by two methods at two contrasting locations. Bars show standard errors.
Macronutrient uptake in terms of concentration (%) and total accumulation (g) in coffee plant components, aboveground biomass (AG) and whole plants (WP) after surface-applied and incorporated N fertilizer for both experimental sites.
| Naranjal | Root | 1.53a | 0.17 | 0.08b | 0.01b | 0.89b | 0.10b | 0.54b | 0.06b | 0.27 | 0.03b |
| Stem | 1.14a | 0.16a | 0.09 | 0.01a | 1.01a | 0.14a | 0.33a | 0.05 | 0.12a | 0.02a | |
| Branch | 2.12a | 0.14a | 0.18a | 0.01 | 2.42a | 0.16 | 0.50 | 0.03 | 0.26a | 0.02 | |
| Leaf | 3.31a | 0.46 | 0.15b | 0.02 | 2.18 | 0.30 | 1.10 | 0.15 | 0.48a | 0.07 | |
| AG | 2.19a | 0.76 | 0.14 | 0.05 | 1.87a | 0.60 | 0.65 | 0.23 | 0.28a | 0.10 | |
| WP | 2.02 | 0.93 | 0.13 | 0.05 | 1.62 | 0.70 | 0.62 | 0.29 | 0.28 | 0.13 | |
| Paraguaicito | Root | 1.36b | 0.24 | 0.10a | 0.02a | 1.34a | 0.23a | 0.75a | 0.13a | 0.34 | 0.06a |
| Stem | 0.75b | 0.09b | 0.08 | 0.01b | 0.82b | 0.10b | 0.27b | 0.03 | 0.06b | 0.01b | |
| Branch | 1.25b | 0.10b | 0.14b | 0.01 | 2.01b | 0.16 | 0.48 | 0.04 | 0.15b | 0.01 | |
| Leaf | 2.83b | 0.44 | 0.20b | 0.03 | 2.17 | 0.32 | 1.07 | 0.17 | 0.30b | 0.05 | |
| AG | 1.61b | 0.63 | 0.14 | 0.05 | 1.67b | 0.59 | 0.61 | 0.24 | 0.17b | 0.07 | |
| WP | 1.55 | 0.87 | 0.13 | 0.07 | 1.58 | 0.81 | 0.64 | 0.37 | 0.21 | 0.13 | |
For nutrient concentration, AG and WP correspond to the weighted average of their respective components, while for g, AG and WP corresponds to the sum of their components.
Values with different letters indicate statistical differences among sites per each plant component (LSD test, p < 0.05).
Figure 6Leaf . Bars show standard errors.