| Literature DB >> 31892258 |
Ke Zhang1,2,3,4, Xiaojun Liu1,2,3,4, Yong Ma1,2,3,4, Rui Zhang1,2,3,4, Qiang Cao1,2,3,4, Yan Zhu1,2,3,4, Weixing Cao1,2,3,4, Yongchao Tian1,2,3,4,5.
Abstract
Accurate estimation and monitoring of crop nitrogen can assist in timely diagnosis and facilitate necessary technical support for fertilizer management. Four experiments, involving three cultivars and six nitrogen (N) treatments, were conducted in southeast China to compare the two leaf-clip meters (Dualex 4 Scientific+, Force-A, Orasy, France; Soil and Plant Analyzer Development (SPAD) meter, Minolta Camera Co., Osaka, Japan) for their ability to measure nitrogen nutrient-related indicators. The results indicated that Chl had a better monitoring accuracy for chlorophyll in per unit leaf area as compared to SPAD value, and there was no saturation to appear under high leaf chlorophyll concentration status. Flavonoids (Flav) presented the advantage of early diagnosis of rice N nutrition status (about one day as compared to SPAD value). As a reliable N nutrient diagnosis indicator, it also improved the estimation accuracy compared with the classical SPAD-based method. The other Dualex value also obtained good monitoring results. Flav was positively correlated with N deficiency, and with higher R2 in panicle initiation and booting stages with low RMSE, respectively; whereas SPAD value was negatively correlated with nitrogen deficiency. Therefore, the Flav-based nitrogen application model was found to provide an early rice nitrogen fertilizer application approach, especially in the panicle initiation and booting stages.Entities:
Keywords: flavonoid; grain yield; nitrogen balance index; nitrogen nutrient; nitrogen regulation
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31892258 PMCID: PMC6983203 DOI: 10.3390/s20010175
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sensors (Basel) ISSN: 1424-8220 Impact factor: 3.576
Basic infor.mation of N fertilizer rates used in the experiments.
| Number of Experiment | Location | Transplanting/Harvest Date | Cultivar | Treatment (kg·hm−2) | Sampling Date | Soil Classification |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Day/Month | ||||||
| Experiment.1 2015 | SiHong | 14 June | WYJ-24, NJ-4, LJ-7 | N0 = 0 | 23 July, 30 July | Lime concretion blacks soil |
| 25 October | N2 = 120 | 6 August, 13 August | Total N = 1.28 g kg−1 | |||
| N3 = 240 | 19 August, 24 August | Olsen P = 27.6 mg kg−1 | ||||
| N5 = 360 | 12 September | Available K = 75.2 mg kg−1 | ||||
| Experiment.2 2015 | Huai’An | 22 June | WYJ-24, NJ-4, LJ-7 | N0 = 0 | 25 July, 1 August | Yellow-brown soil |
| 1 November | N2 = 120 | 8 August, 15 August | Total N = 1.35 g kg−1 | |||
| N3 = 240 | 21 August, 28 August | Olsen P = 32 mg kg−1 | ||||
| N5 = 360 | 10 September | Available K = 85.3 mg kg−1 | ||||
| Experiment.3 2016 | SiHong | 25 June | WYJ-24, NJ-4, LJ-7 | N0 = 0 | 22 July, 4 August | Lime concretion blacks soil |
| 26 October | N2 = 120 | 15 August, 22 August | Total N = 1.28 g kg−1 | |||
| N3 = 240 | 28 August, 10 September | Olsen P = 27.6 mg kg−1 | ||||
| N5 = 360 | Available K = 75.2 mg kg−1 | |||||
| Experiment.4 2016 | RuGao | 18 June | WYJ-24, NJ-4 | N0 = 0 | 16 July, 25 July | Loam soil |
| 22 October | N1 = 100 | 2 August, 11 August | Total N = 1.66 g kg−1 | |||
| N4 = 250 | 21 August, 26 August | Olsen P = 13.6 mg kg−1 | ||||
| N6 = 400 | 21 September | Available K = 92.6 mg kg−1 |
Note: “WYJ-24” is “Wunyunjing-24”, “NJ-4” is “Ningjing-4”, “LJ-7” is “Lianjing-7”; “N0–6” means the different nitrogen fertilizer rates.
Figure 1The relationship between leaf flavonoids content and Dualex values.
Figure 2Scatterplot between SPAD values and leaf chlorophyll or Chl values (Dualex meter’s values). (a) Represents the relationships between meter’s values and chlorophyll content; (b) the relationship between SPAD value and Dualex value.
Figure 3Variation of flavonoid (Flav) value or SPAD value between before and after fertilization under different varieties. (A–D) Shows the changes of Flav value in two varieties; (E–H) represents the trends of SPAD values before and after fertilization.
Figure 4Changes of Dualex values. (a,b) Flav; (c,d) Chl; (e,f) NBI; (g,h) SPAD values under different N fertilizer rates. (a,c,e,g) Trends of NJ4 (Ningjing-4); (b,d,f,h) represent the changes of WYJ24 (Wuyunjing-24).
Figure 5Trends of leaf nitrogen content, SPAD value, and Flav value under different N fertilizer rates. (a) Trend of leaf nitrogen concentration; (b) represents the changes of SPAD value; (c) shows the trends of flavonoid content.
The relationship between Dualex values, SPAD readings, and the different N indicators.
| N Indicator | Meters’ Indicator | Growth Stage | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Tillering | Stem Elongation | Panicle Initiation | Booting | Heading | Flowering | Total | ||
| LNC | FLAV | 0.52 ** | 0.77 ** | 0.83 ** | 0.75 ** | 0.71 ** | 0.62 ** | 0.79 ** |
| Chl | 0.49 ** | 0.67 ** | 0.80 ** | 0.72 ** | 0.64 ** | 0.49 * | 0.73 ** | |
| NBI | 0.47 ** | 0.69 ** | 0.72 ** | 0.67 ** | 0.67 ** | 0.45 * | 0.75 ** | |
| SPAD | 0.35 ** | 0.76 ** | 0.74 ** | 0.63 * | 0.73 ** | 0.61 ** | 0.70 ** | |
| PNC | FLAV | 0.59 ** | 0.74 ** | 0.76 ** | 0.74 ** | 0.70 ** | 0.56 ** | 0.69 ** |
| Chl | 0.53 ** | 0.61 ** | 0.74 ** | 0.71 ** | 0.70 ** | 0.43 * | 0.52 ** | |
| NBI | 0.55 ** | 0.62 ** | 0.73 ** | 0.77 ** | 0.72 ** | 0.54 ** | 0.68 ** | |
| SPAD | 0.51 ** | 0.73 ** | 0.72 ** | 0.69 ** | 0.63 ** | 0.48 * | 0.60 ** | |
| NNI | FLAV | 0.68 ** | 0.73 ** | 0.79 ** | 0.82 ** | 0.79 ** | 0.72 ** | 0.73 ** |
| Chl | 0.66 ** | 0.68 ** | 0.79 ** | 0.76 ** | 0.68 ** | 0.72 ** | 0.66 ** | |
| NBI | 0.63 ** | 0.58 ** | 0.84 ** | 0.82 ** | 0.73 ** | 0.56 ** | 0.69 ** | |
| SPAD | 0.58 ** | 0.62 ** | 0.79 ** | 0.72 ** | 0.71 ** | 0.58 ** | 0.67 ** | |
| NSI | FLAV | 0.53 ** | 0.76 ** | 0.84 ** | 0.78 ** | 0.72 ** | 0.66 ** | 0.78 ** |
| Chl | 0.60 ** | 0.62 ** | 0.76 ** | 0.68 ** | 0.65 ** | 0.34 * | 0.70 ** | |
| NBI | 0.57 * | 0.61 ** | 0.67 ** | 0.84 ** | 0.64 ** | 0.42 * | 0.74 ** | |
| SPAD | 0.45 ** | 0.66 ** | 0.76 ** | 0.67 * | 0.70 ** | 0.64 ** | 0.65 ** | |
| AND | FLAV | 0.72 ** | 0.73 ** | 0.73 ** | 0.71 ** | 0.66 ** | 0.72 ** | 0.71 ** |
| Chl | 0.65 ** | 0.64 ** | 0.55 ** | 0.61 ** | 0.61 ** | 0.66 * | 0.63 ** | |
| NBI | 0.68 ** | 0.71 ** | 0.63 ** | 0.62 ** | 0.58 ** | 0.72 * | 0.69 ** | |
| SPAD | 0.55 ** | 0.64 ** | 0.65 ** | 0.68 * | 0.62 ** | 0.68 ** | 0.65 ** | |
| Grain yield | FLAV | 0.58 ** | 0.53 ** | 0.56 ** | 0.48 * | 0.64 ** | 0.63 ** | 0.49 * |
| Chl | 0.56 ** | 0.52 ** | 0.53 ** | 0.12 | 0.52 ** | 0.62 ** | 0.41 * | |
| NBI | 0.58 ** | 0.50 ** | 0.48 * | 0.30 * | 0.49 * | 0.61 ** | 0.46 * | |
| SPAD | 0.49 ** | 0.61 ** | 0.44 * | 0.49 * | 0.53 ** | 0.64 ** | 0.47 * | |
Note: * Indicating significant difference at 0.05 probability level; ** indicating significant difference at 0.01 probability level.
Figure 6Relationships between accumulated nitrogen deficit (AND) and grain yield during vegetative growth period under varied N rates.
Figure 7Relationships between measured and predicted grain yield values of three Japonica rice (NJ-4, Ningjing-4; LJ7, Lianjing-7; WYJ24, Wunyunjing-24) at booting (BT) and panicle initiation (PI) stages.
Figure 8Relationships between Flav values and accumulated nitrogen deficit (AND) during vegetative growth period.
Figure 9Time series changes of thresholds Flav values (TI: tillering, SE: stem elongation, PI: panicle initiation, BT: booting, HD: heading, FL: flowering).