SSSAJ Grow Your Career with SSSA
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


Published in Soil Sci Soc Am J 51:124-128 (1987)
© 1987 Soil Science Society of America
677 S. Segoe Rd., Madison, WI 53711 USA
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Hargrove, W. L.
Right arrow Articles by Urban, W. J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Hargrove, W. L.
Right arrow Articles by Urban, W. J.
Agricola
Right arrow Articles by Hargrove, W. L.
Right arrow Articles by Urban, W. J.

Comparison of a Forced-draft Technique to Nitrogen-15 Recovery for Measuring Ammonia Volatilization Under Field Conditions1

W. L. Hargrove, B. R. Bock, R. A. Raunikar and W. J. Urban2

ABSTRACT

Reliable field measurements of NH3 volatilization are necessary for evaluating N-fertilizer efficiency for sod crops and conservation crop production systems. This study was conducted to compare NH3 loss measurements under field conditions using a forced-draft technique and recovery of urea-15N. Measurements were made from urea solution applied at a rate of 100 kg N ha–1 to a bare or mulched Cecil sandy loam soil (Typic Hapludult). In an adjacent area, microplots were established to which urea enriched with 15N was added. Ammonia losses from the bare and mulched soil were 49 and 72% of the applied N by the forced-draft technique, and 14 and 46% of the applied N by 15N recovery. The air flow rate with the forced-draft technique was shown to exceed the actual wind speed near the soil surface 10 and 50% of the time for bare and mulched soil, respectively. These results raise serious questions about the validity and accuracy of the forced-draft technique. The usefulness of the forced-draft technique may be limited to relative comparisons of N sources, N rates, and various management practices.


NOTES

1 Contribution from the Agron. Dep., Georgia Agric. Exp. Stn., Experiment, GA 30212, and the Agric. Res. Branch, National Fertilizer Development Center, TVA, Muscle Shoals, AL 35662. Supported by Hatch and State funds allocated to the Georgia Agric. Exp. Stn. and by funds allocated to TVA.

2 Associate Professor, Agron. Dep., Georgia Station; Research Soil Chemist, NFDC, TVA; Laboratory Assistant and Graduate Research Assistant, Agronomy Dep., Georgia Station, respectively.

Received for publication May 21, 1986.





HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
The SCI Journals Agronomy Journal Crop Science
Journal of Natural Resources
and Life Sciences Education
Vadose Zone Journal
Journal of Plant Registrations Journal of
Environmental Quality
The Plant Genome
Copyright © 1987 by the Soil Science Society of America.