Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Nitrogen recommendations for Upland cotton ( Gossypium hirsutum L.) in the western USA are based on spring soil NO − 3 –N tests. In‐season monitoring of plant N status is another approach. Our primary objective was to test spectral reflectance and chlorophyll meter measurements as in‐season N decision aids for irrigated cotton, and to compare these with soil test‐based N management. The secondary objective was to determine the fate of 15 N as affected by N management and irrigation modes. Urea ammonium nitrate was applied with low energy precision (LEPA) center‐pivot, surface drip, and subsurface drip irrigation. Microplots received 3 atom% 15 N. Soil test N application was based on 0‐ to 60‐cm soil NO − 3 –N and 1400 kg lint ha −1 expected yield. Thirty‐four kilograms of N per hectare was applied when green vegetative index (GVI) or chlorophyll meter readings relative to well‐fertilized plots were <0.95. Lint yield responded to N at Lubbock in 2000 and 2001, but not at Ropesville. Nitrogen applied with in‐season monitoring in 2000 at both sites was 34 to 101 kg N ha −1 less than soil test N application of 134 kg ha −1 , with similar yields. In Lubbock, 2001 lint yields were near the expected yield, and in three of four cases, N applications with in‐season monitoring equaled soil test N applications of 101 kg ha −1 Nitrogen‐15 recovery in plants ranged from 19 to 38%, and was affected by N management in two of three site‐years, but not by irrigation. This study indicates that basing N applications on in‐season monitoring can reduce N applications in low yielding seasons and match the yield potential in high‐yielding seasons.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Chua et al. (2003) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: